Translation:We send money to our children.
Honestly, every language I speak would say "We send money to our kids" in that order. I still have no idea why the "les" is there, and other such forms. Can someone explain it, because natives always tell me "it's just more natural like that" it's far from natural to me, and it seems uncomfortable to say.
Hi Cumeon. If it makes you feel any better, some English forms seem unnatural or redundant to non native speakers. For instance, the word ”do” seems unnatural to them in the sentence, “I do not like green eggs.” And of course, we would understand anyone who said, “I not like them” but it just wouldn’t sound right.
It seems to be the way Spanish is built.
Maybe if you think of it as "We send money TO THEM (LES)... / we talk TO THEM (LES)..... / we give it TO HIM (LE).... " and then, the last bit, an identifier, to whom? "...our kids / the teachers / the dogcatcher" , it might help.
It's natural for Spanish speakers, if you keep trying to make word-for-word translations you're going to have a bad time learning languages. This is called pronominal reduplication, it's used in different languages for different purposes such as Albanian, Macedonian, Bulgarian, Greek, Persian, Romanian, and Portuguese, just to name a few.
I'm not sure where the idea that indirect object pronouns are always strictly necessary is coming from, but they are not. The RAE explains in the DPD entry about personal pronouns, in section 5.2 a) that indirect object pronouns are often used, but optional in most cases. Where they need to be used is:
If the indirect object appears in front of the verb: A nuestros hijos les mandamos dinero.
If the indirect object is only a pronoun: Les mandamos dinero a ellos.
With gustar-like verbs: ¿Le gusta a mamá tu regalo?
With verbs where the indirect object is not a "receiver", like verbs of affection (molestar, divertir, ...) or verbs of perception (parecer, resultar, ...).
Leaving out the indirect object pronoun in this sentence and just saying "Mandamos dinero a nuestros hijos" is fine.
I was taught that it's not optional when the indirect object is after the verb, as it is here. I know I wasn't the only one taught this. I'm not sure what rule they are sighting, but I've never seen it skipped in writing in a sentence like this.
I'll check my grammar books when I get home.
I can see why learners of Spanish would be taught this. It's easier to just always use the IOP (which is always correct to do) than having to decide whether you can leave it out or not. Additionally, it usually sounds better to leave it in.
But using the IOP is grammatically not necessary in the majority of cases.
Thank you, Daniel and Ryagon! Your discussion explains why my 50-year-old Spanish-learner hackles were raised a few lessons ago when Duo kept insisting on NO indirect object pronoun in sentences like Quiero enseñar música a mi hija. I kept wanting to put a le in there but, I guess, the pronoun is no longer so necessary in that kind of sentence. The trick will be figuring out what "that kind of sentence" is with Ryagon's "rule 4"!
I understand the construction but i still fail to see the use of adding the le/les in the sentence. What is the added value of the pronoun? And is the sentence without le/les wrong? Can anybody explain?
Nosotros les mandamos dinero a nuestros hijos. Nosotros mandamos dinero a nuestros hijos.
It kinda depends. According to the RAE, it's optional in some cases, but mandatory in others. But according to the Spanish Ministry of Education: "El uso del pronombre de objeto indirecto es obligatorio para la 3ª persona, a menos que el objeto indirecto sea nombre propio. Ejemplos: Le entregué la composición al profesor. Entregué la composición al Sr. Durán." Basically, they say the use of the indirect object pronoun is mandatory in the third person, except when the indirect object is a proper name.
Probably safer to use it than to leave it out if you want to be completely correct, especially since it's never wrong to include it.
Including the object pronoun doesn't add anything to the sentence, maybe except for the confirmation that you're dealing with an indirect object here. (Since direct objects also tend to use the preposition a if they're people, that distinction might be helpful.)
English uses a "do" auxiliary in questions and negative statements, which doesn't serve any purpose either. Redundancy does happen in languages. :)
When you have an indirect object in your sentence (usually a receiver of some sorts), it's customary in Spanish to add the respective object pronoun, even if the indirect object is already mentioned.
For this sentence it means that les and "a nuestros hijos" refer to the same grammatical object - the children, the receivers of the money. You can leave les out here if you want, but it usually sounds better when it's added.