Why do Spanierds use Le & Les

Anyone care to explain why Spanish speakers from Spain use Le & Les?

And when are Le & Les supposed to be used?




For example:

Latin America: Lo/La Amo

Spain: Le Amo (for both)



Latin America: Los/Las vi bailar

Spain: Les vi bailar

Es cierto que los latinoamericanos utilizan correctamente Lo/La, pero la mayoría de los españoles simplemente sustituimos "Lo" por "Le", pero no "La" por "Le". Es lo que se denomina "Leísmo".
Así decimos "Le vi bailar" de forma incorrecta, pero "La vi bailar" correctamente.
Al contrario, el "laísmo" consiste en sustituir "Le" por "La". Así decimos "La dije que viniera" incorrectamente, en lugar de "Le dije que viniera".

Cierto, por lo menos fuiste sincero, y admitiste que el "Leismo" es incorrecto, a diferencia de otros compatriotas que tratan de negarlo, saludos.

P.D. No creo que nadie en ningun pais hispanoparlante diga "La dije que viniera", chao.

<<And when are Le & Les supposed to be used?>>

Los pronombres Le & Les deben ser usados cuando su función es la de "complemento indirecto", mientras que Lo/s & La/Las se utilizan como "complemento directo" de la frase

Le/Les como complemento indirecto, no podemos saber el sexo de la/s persona/s sin un contexto:

Le dije que viniera
Les compré dos helados

Lo/La & Los/Las como complemento directo:

Lo vi/La vi

Los encontré/Las encontré

Les is used properly when it refers to plural indirect complement:

Les di un regalo ( I gave a gift to several people).

le di un regalo ( I gave a gift to just one person)

This is the way I use Les, and I'm Spaniard too. Les is not properly used when it is used as direct complement: Les vi bailar*.

Les is just the plural form of le, just like them is plural of him/her.


<< P.D. No creo que nadie en ningun pais hispanoparlante diga "La dije que viniera", chao.

>>

Sí, en España se dice, pero en algunas partes sólo.

Anyways the incorrectness of leismo is not completely true. In the past it was considered incorrect, but nowadays RAE accepts leismo . It's the same as yeismo, once a mistake becomes widespread, it is no longer wrong. Como dice el refrán, Dios se pone de parte de los malos cuando éstos son más numerosos que los buenos.

Well, as you most likely already know, the Spanish language evolved from Latin originally in the North of Spain, in a soil that I think then belonged to the kingdoms of Castile and Navarra. Later on, the language spread all over Spain and crossed the Ocean to the Americas, but it continued evolving inside Castile, as it also evolved in other places, especially the Americas. One of the biggest innovations, that has never become standard outside Castile and not even inside, was a shift in the way stressed pronouns are used. In standard Spanish, as I think it was in Latin, you choose the object pronouns primarily depending on grammatical function, whereas the nature of the object doesn't matter too much. It does matter only in the case of direct objects, and you only distinguish between masculine and feminine. In the new system grammatical function doesn't count and like in English, you only consider the nature of the object: animate or inanimate, masculine or feminine.

So people say le amo because it's a person what you love. If it was a thing they'd say lo amo.

I meant unstressed pronoums like le, lo, la and so on.

Si, pero es que la cosa no acaba ahí. El leismo tendría sentido si fuera tan coherente como dices, es decir, un nuevo paradigma de uso de los pronombres objeto en el cual se usase le para objetos animados y lo para objetos inanimados, sin embargo las personas leistas usan LE para referirse a objetos inanimados también, por ejemplo "traemele (ese libro)".

is Leismo obrigatory in Castillian Spanish?
Will saying this like ''Lo vi'' (instead of ''Le vi'') raise strange looks?

No, in Castilian Spanish leismo is incorrect too, but it's widespread and somewhat accepted.

It's a pity.

<<Anyways the incorrectness of leismo is not completely true. In the past it was considered incorrect, but nowadays RAE accepts leismo >>

That's because nowadays it's spread like bushfire in Spain. If most Spanairds started saying "Aqua" instead of Agua, then eventually the RAE would have to accept it as well.

<<That's because nowadays it's spread like bushfire in Spain. If most Spanairds started saying "Aqua" instead of Agua, then eventually the RAE would have to accept it as well. >>

It could not be otherwise. It's people who decide the evolution of the language they speak, not RAE.

So.. should the RAE accept Caribbeans saying "Comel", "Puelto Lico", "Amol" etc.?