"Veo al maestro."
Translation:I see the teacher.
I'm having a hard time understanding why 'al' is used here. Why wasn't it just 'Veo el maestro"? I understand that 'al' is a + el, but it still doesn't make since.
I see to the teacher. I see upon the teacher. I see on the teacher.
So, if the verb applies to an object, for example a glass, would the correct answer be 'Veo el vaso'?
Then why is it al for an animal, like the bear? Or is it different for listening rather than seeing? Thank you very much for helping to explain! I am struggling with recognizing when I should use "al" and this explanation is helping!
I thought the personal a was only for a, not al? But it does make sense now. Thanks!
Another way to think about it is "I look at the teacher " or "I look to the teacher", if that helps
How come the "personal a" isn't used when talking about doctor, but it is used when talking about teacher? "Tengo una cita con el doctor" is what it taught for "I have an appointment with the doctor". Why wasn't the "personal a" used in this instance?
Because watch the teacher has no subject and would be imperative thus using ve, not veo. However if you meant "I watch the teacher" that could be a translation, although Mirar (to look at or watch) is the verb you'd use if you meant watch more than see. I hope that helps
Thanks again ajabrams.
I took a short cut in my question. ´I watch the teacher ( as in this sentence ) wouldn
t be imperative. My problem is that I am looking for something useful. I myself might say ´I watch the teacher (suggesting at what the teacher is demonstrating) but seldom ´I look at the teacher` ( the teacher in person). Because, how often do we do that?
There again, I might look at the dog or at the baby when it is they who are the object of my interest. Perhaps these teachers are particularly good looking :)
I hear 'el' instead of 'al'. By the way, is there any difference between al and el? Thanks ^^