Reading the sentence, how do we know that the person being asked for marriage is female? My translation included the word "him" and was rejected, and I don't really understand why. Is it just because of a cultural assumption that the person doing the asking will always be male and the person being asked will always be female?
Hi Jumap, "Le" is used because it is the indirect object pronoun. It means to him/to her. "Les" would be used for plural "to them" "Lo" and "la" are direct object pronouns and would not be correct in this sentence. I believe you could clarify the sex by saying "le voy a pedir matrimonio a ella" (I am going to ask her to get married) or "le voy a pedir matrimonio a el" (I am going to ask him to get married).
I put the same, and it was also marked wrong. It's tough (and extremely frustrating) because Duolingo is so incredibly inconsistent with the English that is allowed.
I would probably not naturally leave "me" off the end, but I've definitely heard it that way. The Spanish "question" part doesn't give any indication that there is a "me" implicated.
Sorry guys... In spanish "Le voy a pedir matrimonio" implies the object "me". Note that I come from Spain , and there we don't say this sentence...although we understand it...we prefer to say it as in English "Le voy a pedir que se case conmigo", but of course, it is used the subjuntive present form of "to marry (que se case)" and that verbal form is quite difficult to use for students. (sorry). Le voy a pedir matrimonio (conmigo)=Le voy a pedir que se case conmigo=I am going to ask her to marry me... P.S. = are you indeed prepared for subjuntive verbal form?
Duolingo's translation: I am going to ask him to get married. Could this not be a friend/parent telling him/her it's time to get married?
Also, I think the sentence could be awkard in english because marry is on of those verbs that needs an object in most cases? Maybe it's like saying I'm going to ask her to do.
"I'm going to ask her/him for marriage" seems to be the best translation. The translation rendered at the top of this page has alternative interpretations. It could be somebody saying they will ask her/him simply to get married (to whomever), or it could be somebody saying they will ask him/her to marry them (the speaker).
I've read all the comments, but the major mystery to me is: how do we get any of all of these meanings and words out of the one, unadorned, noun 'matrimonio'? When there is an actual verb meaning "to marry, to wed" -- that being casarse. But it's a verb that sounds and looks nothing like matrimonio. ??? Is this possibly an idiomatic or shorthand way to bring up the entire subject of marriage?
Only if I use "request" as a translation of "pedir" can I make any sense out of this just from a literal translation: I'm going to request marriage [of] him. But DL seems to reject "request" as a meaning of pedir across the board and so far has only accepted "ask for" or "order" (though my verb book defines it as "to ask for, to request." In this session I've lost hearts because "request" isn't accepted.
Thanks for the input. I had answered "I'm going to ask her for marriage" (marked wrong) which seemed to make sense to me given the sentence structure. These types of statements should be under the Idiom section, not randomly assigned to other areas. Idioms rarely translate in a logical fashion.
Lo and La are direct object pronouns (the pronoun receives the action of the verb). Lo and la can mean him, her, or it.
Tengo un libro. Lo leo. I have a book. I read it.
La mesa está negra. La veo. The table is black. I see it.
Le is an indirect object pronoun. It means to him, to her, or to it.
Él es mi amigo. Le hablo. He is my friend. I talk to him.
Es el cumpleaños de Elena. Le doy un regalo. It is Elena's birthday I give her a gift (I give a gift to her).
Amo a mi perro. Le compro un juguete. I love my dog. I buy it a toy.
But it's not "I am going to ask TO him to get married" so why is this an indirect situation ie. I am going to take him, I am going to save him, etc would use direct pronoun "lo" ( lo voy a llevar, lo voy a salvar, etc.) so why is it indirect to say "I am going to ask him..."? Does "pedir" always require indirect pronouns?
Yes, I think you are asking to/for him to get married - whether married to you or to somebody else, no matter. (You are posing the question to him, asking for him to do something). The 'something' is to get married (in english, a phrase used as a noun), or matrimonio, which I believe is your direct object.. in any event, him is indirect. You are not doing something to him (loving, killing, saving, taking, etc.), you are directing something (a question) to/ for/at him. As for pediir, idk. Always is a dangerous word. But yes, it will often take an indirect object b/c of the type of verb it is. Being less literal in translations may help you to grasp concepts easier; I find it just doesn't work to try to make things for too tightly.
Hmm. And what about "casarse con"? I see regional issues here with leismo, etc., in the source materials, and I see shortsightedness in what should be accepted in some of the answers. As I've said before, not enough breadth in the source materials and not enough time in operation to accumulate alternative answers. i'm trying to test out of some of this stuff and I find myself being told that I'm wrong when I know that I'm right, and I think that a lot of it has to do with not starting at the beginning as it I knew nothing and thus not recognizing what the system likes and spitting it back.
Divalusisa, the main verb is ask. (pedir) You are right, matrimonio is a noun; It means marriage and matrimony. Matrimonio is not being used as a verb. The verb would be matrimoniar. In English, you can ask someone to marry(V) or for marriage(N) and the main verb is to ask.
The problem is the awkwardness in translation. Le voy a pedir matrimonio is literally translated as I'm going to ask him (or her) for marriage. If you were saying that you were going to ask someone to marry you, you'd say I'm going to ask him (or her) to marry me. Obviously if you weren't bound by trying to translate sentences as close as possible, you might even say I'm going to propose to him (or her.) [...and endless variants]
In English, if you don't add the me (like SLL3's example), it sounds like a third person thing (i.e. where someone is suggesting someone else get married.) However, from what I've read so far, this Spanish sentence definitely implies a person is going to propose to someone. The crux of the problem, with this sentence, is that the English and Spanish have matching verbs and nouns that can be put together in similar way, but when you do that, they have slightly different meanings. I'm going to ask him (or her) to get married matches the meaning while being as close as possible to the equivalent diction. However, when this awkwardness happens, the list of correct answers should be expanded to more options because what "sounds close" is completely subjective.
This forum link proves pedir matrimonio is best translated, as everyone has suggested, with marry me or with the verb propose: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1931400
To confuse matters:
http://www.wordreference.com/es/translation.asp?tranword=propose+marriage (proponer instead of pedir)
search for Pedir
(Pedir en matrimonio - en required between pedir and matrimonio)
As for casarse, this is the closest thing i could find:
Possibly casarse isn't used in that way?
Sorry i couldn't be more succinct.
I did not se a "me" in the Spanish so I did not include it in the English translation. I thought it was understood. I wrote, "I am going to ask her to marry" Was I really wrong or is it illogical to force "me" into the translation when it is not a part of the Spanish sentence and is understood anyway?