"Eu vou mostrar para você."

Translation:I will show you.

April 21, 2013



So could we say 'Eu vou te mostrar'?

January 4, 2016


Yes, also right.

July 6, 2016


So 'show me = Mostra-me' or is it 'Mostra para me'?

November 4, 2016


After prepositions, use "mim": Mostre-me = Mostre para mim.

November 4, 2016


Ok got it thanks. Is 'mostre-me' correct as well or is it only 'Mostre para mim' in this case

November 4, 2016


Both of them are equally right ;)

November 4, 2016


Why not "I will demonstrate for you"?

December 23, 2017


The missing direct object (it) could be a physical object (o carro, a cozinha) discussed before, when I think the full sentences would be Eu vou o/a mostrar para você → I will show you it / show it to you. However, in English, you often hear I will show you in connection with some earlier criticism or doubt about a quality of the speaker e.g. perseverance, resilence, capability etc and it expresses a determination to prove the critics / doubters wrong - or to exact revenge in the extreme. I am not sure if the very subtle Portuguese language also allows this meaning, but I would not be surprised.

August 7, 2018


In Brazil, we would prefer to put the object near the preposition, so: "Eu vou mostrá-lo/la para você". And yes, "eu vou te mostrar" can have this idea of proving some point. "Você vai ver" is much more common, though.

August 13, 2018


I'm assuming "voce vai ver" means, "you"ll see." Right?

July 23, 2019


'eu vou te mostrar' could be an alternative. I don't think 'você' could replace 'te' the same way.

July 5, 2013


Te mostrar = mostrar para ti
Lhe mostrar = mostrar para você

Ti and você are perfect synonyms, no difference at all. It's way too common to use "te" in the same senteces that contain "você", which is a mix of persons, but it can go virtually unseen.

June 10, 2015


Why can't we say “I will show to you”? Am I missing something here?

November 27, 2014


English needs an explicit object with a transitive verb in this case it. The direct object comes before the indirect object. I will throw the ball at the wall. I will throw it at the wall. Never i will throw at the wall.

July 2, 2015


Where are you from? In my English (USA), we would not use this form.

May 10, 2015


From France, English is not my native language.

I understand the transitivity of the verb “to show”, but I don’t understand why we couldn’t make it implicitly intransitive and add the corresponding preposition “to” to emphase on the action. I’m not saying that “I will show you” is not correct (it is), I just don’t understand why “I will show to you” isn’t, if it isn’t :-)

May 10, 2015


• I will show you the ball.
• I will show the ball to you.

Show allows a construction with 2 objects: noun + verb + indirect object + direct object.

Native speakers generally use #1, but # 2 is used when you want to emphasize the receiver of the action, the indirect object.

July 8, 2016


Martin, we might say "I will show it to you". I am not a grammar professional, so to explain in grammatical terms, I cannot. I can only explain that we do not use that format.

May 10, 2015


Thanks! :-) I’ll avoid using this form, then :p

May 11, 2015


Enslish has some verbs that are transitive only. These must have an object, we can't make them intransitive.

July 8, 2016


Upon reflection, this is actually a very strange verb. If we change ‘show’ to ‘hand’, then we can say ‘I will hand you the ball.’, ‘I will hand it to you.’, or ‘I will hand the ball to you.’, but not ‘I will hand you.’ or ‘I will hand to you.’; and this is all normal: the indirect object is ‘you’, which can be replaced by the prepositional phrase ‘to you’ but cannot appear alone in either form.

However, with ‘show’, in addition to ‘I will show you the ball.’, ‘I will show the ball to you.’, and ‘I will show it to you.’, you can also say ‘I will show you.’. You still can't say ‘I will show to you.’, but somehow the indirect object ‘you’ can be reinterpreted as a direct object when it appears alone, and I really don't understand why that is allowed!

October 27, 2017


Individual verbs in all languages are actually quirkier than we think (-:

September 12, 2018


"If you want to know how to make that soup, I'll show you."

"Show" functions as an intransitive verb (no need for a direct object) in the above sentence.

February 27, 2019


I really am getting lost! I just got hit for saying "I will not miss this time" for leaving out the word 'it' (I will not miss IT this time) even though we would not require it in English. Now you say that with the word 'para' after the verb, no IT is used? Doesn't the word 'para' in this sentence mean 'to' and wouldn't it be wrong to say 'I will show to you' without an 'it' to make sense in the English?

December 23, 2014


'I am going to show IT to you' is accepted as a translation for 'Eu vou mostrar para você' even though a word for the direct object 'it' is missing from this Portuguese sentence also. As far as I know, 'para você' is one way of identifying the indirect object (the person who is going to be shown 'it'). AdrianoMai1 has given us the usage for this verb elsewhere on this page. I agree that reducing the expected translation to 'I will show you' has complicated the issue.

July 5, 2016


Why is Para there if we don't use it?

March 8, 2015


Why should it be? Portuguese is not a mere translation of English so it has different structure and rules.

Verb "mostrar" usage goes as follows : mostrar algo para/a alguém. You have to memorize it. Examples: "Eu mostrei o livro para o estudante" / "Ela mostrou você para a platéia"

In Portuguese the sentence "Eu mostro você" means something like "I show yourself" (or in a passive form "you are showed by me").

When it comes to pronouns it gets a little harder since they can be the same for direct and indirect objects. But at this point, try to memorize how the IDEAS are expressed in Portuguese.

March 9, 2015


If I could, I would give you a lingot every time I read this post.

October 6, 2017


Por que não precisa do "show to you"?

November 1, 2016


Quando a pessoa vem logo após o verbo, você não precisa usar o "to":

  • I'll show you.
  • I'll show my house to you.
November 1, 2016


Is it "pra" a contraction of "para"? For instance, in this sentence, could one say: eu vou mostrar pra você?

December 27, 2016


Yes, it is informal, so you can't use it for formal writing.

December 28, 2016


Why is 'para' needed?

June 20, 2019


Can this also mean that I'll show an offensive international sign to you? (With my anular...)

July 31, 2019


Would "eu vou você mostrar" be an alternative way to write this in portuguese?

May 9, 2013


No. It could be "Eu vou lhe mostrar" or "Eu vou mostrar para você" if you are using "você". But if you are using "tu", then it could be "Eu vou te mostrar" or "Eu vou mostrar para ti". In Brazil, it is much more common to prefer "te" than "lhe" in spoken language, even though the speaker is actually using "você". Ex: "Você é meu amigo mas não vou te contar meu segredo" (You're my friend but I won't tell you my secret). It is not grammatically correct but it is very common.

February 11, 2014


I also think that "I will show to you" should be accepted as a correct response.

January 26, 2015


i think if you want to use "to" you need an object.

September 11, 2015
Learn Portuguese in just 5 minutes a day. For free.