Direct Object Pronouns and Indirect Object Pronouns

Direct Object Pronouns and Indirect Object Pronouns

DIRECT OBJECT PRONOUNS

me me
you te
her la
him le
it lo
us nos
you (plural) os
them las, les, los
A direct object receives the action of the verb.

INDIRECT OBJECT PRONOUNS

* (problem here--this is more sophisticated than my current explanation)
to me me
to you te
to him, her, it le
to us nos
to you (plural) os
to them les
* If your sentence has both a direct object and an indirect object, the the indirect object comes before the direct object.
o Juan Marco tiene el lápiz, pero no me lo da.
o John Mark has the pencil, but he won't give it to me.\

An indirect object is used for the person to whom something is told, given, or sent.
Why are indirect objects confusing? I'm not a linguistics expert. I suspect that our definition of a direct object (see above) is a part of the problem. For sentences with more than just a noun and a verb, I think (I could be wrong) that there should be a direct object. After all, if an action is committed, it has to be received by something, right? (I could be wrong.)
There are quite a few sentences we use that you could argue the direct object is implicit.
"I told him." (the direct object might be 'the story', 'the truth', 'the tale', etc.)
"I asked her."
So far, it appears to me that indirect objects are used for transferring objects and information. Now, just to be sure, we're going to look at examples. To contrast direct and indirect objects, we need a female person, so that we'll have a distinct difference:
o 'la' for direct object
o 'le' for indirect object
Lestat made his mother, Gabrielle, into a vampire the night she was dying (she's feeling much better now...)
1. "¿Oyes eso?" Le pregunté.
"Do you hear that?" I asked her. (Lestat asks Gabrielle.)
The book used dashes instead of quote marks but my html translater can't handle that so I will default to quotes. Sorry for the inconvience. :( Y allí la sostuve entre mis brazos y le hablé mientras sucedía.
2.
And there her I held up between my arms and to her I spoke (sentences) while it happened.
The word 'sentences' was inserted into the English version because it is thought to be the implicit direct object. Se deslizó entre mis brazos y la conduje lejos de su victima.
3.
She slipped into my arms and I guided her away from her victim. "Por esta noche, es suficiente. Tenemos que regresar a la torre" le dije.
4.
"For tonight, it is enough. We should return to the tower," I told her. Deseaba enseñarle el tesoro.
5.
I wanted to show the treasure to her. Le hablé con detalle de la torre.
6.
I told her all about the tower. De nuevo, los espasmos agónicos la asaltaban.
7.
The death spasms assaulted her again. "Tengo que beber", le expliqué.
8.
I have to drink," I told her. Le acerque mis labios de nuevo y no me rechazó.
9.
I went to kiss her again, and she didn't stop me.
Acercar- to bring closer, nearer (I brought my lips to her again...) "Guarda silencio," le susurré. Noté cómo la dominaba el pánico.
10.
"Keep still", I whispered (a warning) to her. I noted how the panic dominated her.
(They were sleeping under the alter in the church and when they woke there was a night time church service going on. Gabrielle was uncomfortable with the situation.) La inocencia de las víctimas no le preocupaba en absoluto.
11.
The innocence of the victims didn't bother her at all.
Perhaps it is possible to have a sentence that lacks a direct object, but has includes an indirect object. I can't explain this one.