1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Spanish
  4. >
  5. "Llévate a tu hija."

"Llévate a tu hija."

Translation:Take your daughter.

June 2, 2013



Why "te" here? I would expect "le" ("llévale") or something else which refers to the daughter.


Llévate means "take something with you". If you use only "Lleva" you would need to explicit the place to where you are going to take the girl. i.e: Lleva tu hija a tu casa. The added "te" changes the meaning to "take your daughter with you" (it does not matter the destination).


muchas gracias hvmelo... muy claro.


Are there any other verbs like that?


The problem you have is that you are looking at it like the direct object pronoun, instead of the reflexive pronoun. "te" actually is both. In this case, it is reflexive. If the sentence was he/her instead of you, it would be "se" instead of "lo/la" and that would not be ambiguous.


What about the personal a? Wouldn't it have to be "Lleva a tu hija a tu casa"?


Since the "te" is referring to the person to whom you are speaking, is this then informal? If I were speaking to, say, my mother-in-law, would I then use "Llévale"?


you would use "llévese." lleva is an informal command, lleve is a formal command. Also using llévese is like saying "take your daughter with yourself" whereas using "llévele" is like saying "take your daughter to...(insert name of someone else)" se is the reflexive pronoun. le is the indirect object pronoun. I hope that kinda makes sense


Great explanation. Many thanks.


'Llévale' would mean something more like 'take something to him/her'. For example: 'Llévale esta manzana a tu hija' means 'Take this apple to your daughter'


How about "Pick up your daughter"?


That was my first answer, not accepted still 5-31-17

  • 1676

Would "bring your daughter" not be ok if llevar means take with you.


the correct translation for 'to bring' is 'traer' and not 'llevar'. Llevar is to take something to someplace, traer is to bring something here. So 'bring your daughter' would translate to 'traiga tu hija'.


I wrote, "Carry your daughter" but it was marked incorrect. Doesn't that have the same implication as take?


No. Carry would be to literally pick her up and transport her there with your body. But if you take her, you could just bring her in a car, or have her accompany you.

At least, that's what I would think if I heard it.


The implication may be different but the translation would still be the same, wouldn't it?


In parts of the southern US, "carry" is used in this sense of take or transport. Example: "I can carry you to the shop" means "I can take you to the shop (in my car)"


Just "carry" (or take/carry someone/something to some place) would be using "llevar". Taking someone/something with you (destination is not part of the equation) is using "llevarse" (as in the case of our sentence here).

"Take your daughter with you" is also accepted.


'Take' has stricter implications than 'bring.' If someone tells you to 'take' your daughter somewhere it implies that your daughter has no choice in the matter. If someone tells you to 'bring' your daughter somewhere, then it seems that she doesn't have to go if she chooses not to go. Aslo, 'take' can imply that you wouldn't be going to your destination if not for the object that you're taking. 'Bring' would normally mean that you are going to go to your destination whether you have the object with you or not.

Example: "I know you would rather sleep, but take your daughter to the movies." vs. "You are planning to go to the movies; bring your daughter."

After typing all of that, I realize that this is a comment based entirely on the implications of the English words 'take' and 'bring' and I don't know if the Spanish words 'llevar' and 'traer' have the same implications. So "Bring your daughter" doesn't necessarily mean the same as "Take your daughter" in English, but I'm not sure if that rules out "Bring your daughter" as a correct translation for "Ll'evate a tu hija."


Bring suggests towards me and take suggests away from me. Bring me a cup of coffee and take my plates away. Take your daughter to the movies and bring her home by midnight. In some regions of the US the distinction is not made.


Yes. Bring and take (come and go) can signal the location of the speaker. In linguistics, this type of thing is part of "deixis". Interesting topic :)


We English speakers have the same rules for take and bring. We just don't use them.


I agree WimXL - I think in this case 'bring' and 'take' amount to the same.


In my part of the U.S. (Arkansas), bring and take are not the same at all. You bring here and take there.


Hey folks. In this sentence the verb llevar is used reflexively to draw attention to the point of departure. Similarly this can be done with many verbs of motion such as ir, traer, volver etc. The best discussion of this is in the text: A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish, chapter 26. section 26.6., by John Butt & Carmen Benjamin. ¡Peace!


Just wondering, what dialect is this? I have heard that Argentinians says their ll's like z's, but this is more of a ch.


I think it's meant to be more like a j sound. That's how it sounds to me and is a fairly common pronunciation


I hear it as "chiabate" which I found totally confusing.


I can't tell you which dialect it might be, nor how many Argentinians pronounce it like you say, but I found an Argentinian pronouncing it on forvo and it sounds very much like a Y.



I thought it was reflexive. Take yourself to your daughter. How would this be said?


I think "llévate" IS reflexive here. I looked up imperative reflexive verbs and there it was, "llévate". The grammar book says that with the imperative form of reflexive verbs,the pronoun ("te") MUST be attached to the verb (as here). The dictionary says this reflexive verb means "to take away, to carry away". Seems to fit. I think translating this sentence as "take" or as "take with you", as suggested above, is consistent with this analysis. ("a" is just the "personal a") imho.


I agree.. In the part of Central Mexico where I live that is what most would say it wanted to say.


Not sure, but to say "Take yourself to your daughter" might be "Llevate a su hija." I imagine it would then need the "a". But I'm guessing. If any native speaker could clarify this, that would be great.


Any reasons why there is an acute over the e in llévate?


Yes. With no accent over the "e" the stress would be on the "a" (stress on penultimate syllable when word ends in a vowel or n or s) ... which would not be the correct pronunciation.


By default, whenever a word ends in a vowel, the stress goes on the 2nd-to-last syllable. An acute tells us if the stress goes somewhere else.

profesora = pro-fe-SO-ra ✔️ (no acute needed)

llévate = LLE-va-te ✔️ llevate = lle-VA-te ❌

América = a-ME-ri-ca ✔️ America = a-me-RI-ca ❌

manatí = ma-na-TI ✔️ manati = ma-NA-ti ❌


That was my first thought as well. I think you would say it exactly the same, though it is an odd thing to say. Wouldn't be a first on duo, anyway.


What is a subjunctive? What happened to Duo Lingo giving you a brief little rundown before they throw you to the wolves? I have no idea what any of this means, or why you use any of it or when.


Can someone explain to me this lesson? I'm pretty confused especially when the commands are taking a different person than what I'm used to. Duo does not have a chart at the beginning either. For example why is it not Lleva a tu hija.


Because the verb where "llévate" came from is "llevarse".

• (From llevar)
"¡Lleva a tu hija [al dormitorio]!"
= "Take/Carry your daughter [to the bedroom]!"

• From llevarse
"¡Llévate a tu hija!
= "Take your daughter (with you)!"


Hi, i'm still confused by the uses of "a". Can someone explain to me how it's used, particularly in this case? I know the 'most basic' use of it is to mean 'to' but it seems to be used in multiple ways. Sorry for probably quite a silly question.


Not a silly question at all!

The "a" that means "to" is different from this one, and just as olgaz007 says, it is called a "personal 'a'". It is not translatable to English. It is used when the direct object of a verb is a person or an animal whom the speaker has personal connection with (respect included), like -- but not limited to -- a "pet". An example is one of Duo sentences:

"Amo/Me encantan a los animales" ("I love animals")

-- The speaker is talking about animals in general, not his pet, yet the "personal 'a'" is used. This is the same with people: "Necesito jardinero" = "I need a gardener" (there's no personal "a" since this is about any gardener, not anyone that someone knows. But "Yo ví al jardinero" = "I saw the gardener" (this is a specific gardener).


"take yourself to your daughter" in the sense of "go to your daughter" is how I read the sentence. Am I way off base or is this a possible interpretation?


"Go to your daughter" would be "Vete a tu hija" ("vete" means "go away," but it's not always aggressive- like "go find her" or "go to sleep.")


"Llevate, llevale" - I cannot find the words in dictionary. I checked under "llevar" under conjugation etc and nada. Can some please clarify usage in this subjuntive/imperative context. Gracias! Estoy perdido


For example: 'llévate esto contigo.' a mother giving something to her son who is leaving the house. 'Llévale esto a tu hermana' the same mother asking to her son to take something to her daughter.


So: The subjunctive is used in many ways. One is the imperative The imperative for ustedes and usted is the subjunctive Vengan! Also the negative imperative No vengas!


why isn't it llévete? mos of these commands are subjunctive


It is an informal command. If it were formal it would be llévese a su hija.


If this were a 'formal' command, would 'Llévase su hija' also be correct?


Formal command: Llévese a su hija.


What about "lleve tu hija"?


I thought the sentence meant, take yourself to your daughter, not, take to yourself your daughter. So tricky.


This has already been asked but not answered. Could it also mean "take yourself to your daughter" (as in an emphatic way of saying - go to your daughter)? If not, how would you say that?


Vete a tu hija.


No, go to your daughter would be "Ve/vete donde tú hija"


I was trying to figure out why the accent for a word that comes from llevar would be on the 'e'. But I realized in the tú imperative "lleva" the stress is on the first vowel which carries over to this construction I assume


Your assumption is correct. Also remember that this is a "palabra esdrújula", which has the accent in the third for last syllabus and always should have the marked accent (tilde)


what is llevate? it is not conjucated from llevar (at least not according to SpishDict) ... what am I missing?


objects can come before or after a verb. when they come after, without an intervening preposition, they attach to the verb. The tilde may become necessary for spelling when this occurs. It does not otherwise change the meaning of the object.

An object with a trailing "a <>" specifies which specific object is meant, such as "le ... a ella" indicating that the personal pronoun in question refers to a topical woman.


Llévate is the imperative for "llevar", 2nd person, singular.


What is wrong with carry your daughter?


Why the accent on the e?


In Spanish, the words stressed in the third from last syllable are called "esdrújulas". These words always have the accent (tilde). Llévate is esdrújula word, which by the way, is also esdrújula. I hope it helps.


I just answered a phrase "eat faster" and tried to add the "te" ending and it did not work. Why is there no similar construction for "comer?"


Cómetelo más rápido is okay, but what it really says is ´eat it all up faster´. The te puts emphasis on the fact you are eating it all....


Okay but "take to your daughter" sounds very caveman like. Take it or this to your daughter???


Aliens are invading and they took out the cell tower. My car runs but it has to flat tires. "We got a pizza problom! Tell me we have cheese?" No.


..what? can i get some of whatever you're on?


Why llevar here and not tomar. How do you get take from this verb?


Take your daughter 'WHAT." This is a very incomplete thought. Translating DL's 'statement' I get "Take your daughter." But, if I use the same translator and translate the English "Take your daughter." I get "Lleva a tu hija." Why is the subjunctive used? It seems that would change the meaning of the statement. I still think this is a very incomplete statement! AND (Note to DL) most of the comments are very old and obviously you have made some changes because these old comments are using different words than those in the current statement,


Horrible pronunciation. Ll does not sound like ch.


It depends on regional accents and dialects. In some Spanish-speaking countries, "Ll" would sound like "ch," or a soft "j."


"Take your daughter" I think you want be careful with this one


Why is 'a' in the Spanish sentence, and what does it translate to in the English?


This is called personal a. It doesn't translate to English.



Accent in wrong place. Too harsh.


I'm a native Spanish speaker and I hear the correct pronunciation.


No, it's correct.


Why is the emphasis on the te? Shouldn't it be on the lle where the accent is??


The pronunciation is correct. Llévate.

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