1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Spanish
  4. >
  5. "Él lo tendrá para usted."

"Él lo tendrá para usted."

Translation:He will have it for you.

March 28, 2014



Can anyone give me an explanation of the meaning behind of this sentence?


CattleRustler explained the sentence grammatically, but I think you wanted an example of its usage, right? You leave your hat in a restaurant & you phone them. They keep your hat. The manager says, "The waiter is here until 11PM. Please come back. He will have it for you." Or You order a book. The store leaves you an email to say that is now available. They write, "Our Saturday clerk is John Jones. He will have it for you:"


Yeah, I wasnt sure which he meant, so I chose grammar. The reason I did is because i saw the object pronoun usage, and I know its often confusing when you first encounter it, so I thought maybe thats what he was asking about. Well at least between us, we covered both bases ;)


I kind of agree with that, but if it's the only possible usage, should 'he will keep it for you' not be an option?


E'l (he) lo (it - object pronoun ahead of the verb) tendra' (future indicative of tener, 3rd person(you formal) para (for) usted (you)


Shouldn't "He will hold it for you" be a valid translation? Hold/keep is one translation for tener. Does it not apply in this case?


There is no context in the sentence, so you can't say whether hold or keep would be appropriate. It's usually best to keep to the most simple translation, and 'tener' is 'to have'.


Elizabeth261736's question was whether her translation was valid. It is. That being said, I agree that the most used interpretation should be the one that is tried first.


¿porque have y no has?


English future tense does not use "has". Instead it is "will have" or "shall have" http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/shallwillglossary.htm


Why isn't the 'slower' option available for listeners?


Why " He will get it for you" is not good particularly when there is no context to consider.


Tener is to have, maybe obtener for to get, but not tener.


This the first time I have heard the male speaker say "uster" for "usted". I am used to hearing an "r" pronounced as a soft "d" but never a "d" pronounced as a soft "r". Is there a dialect where this is common?

Learn Spanish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.