"Hablar con" implies a more collaborative or reciprocal conversation between two or more people. It suggests that there is an exchange of ideas or opinions between the parties involved. It often conveys a sense of dialogue and mutual engagement.
"Hablar a" is often used when one person is addressing another person or a group of people. It can imply a one-way communication where the speaker is conveying information or expressing thoughts without necessarily expecting a response.
You need another verb for this because "hablar" is almost always intransitive (no direct object) except when talking about languages (hablo inglés) and a couple other examples.
In any case, "Voy a hablarlo" means "I'm going to talk about/discuss it". "Voy a hablarle" means "I'm going to talk to him" and doesn't really imply any particular incompleteness as far as I can tell.
Are you a native English speaker? Maybe it’ll be clearer in English.
I say it. It = direct object pronoun. I kick the ball. I kick it.
I say it to him. Him is the indirect object here and it is the direct object pronoun, the thing you said. I kick the ball to him.
Note, that in Spanish, when you’re using indirect object pronouns for people you typically and redundantly say the person’s name or use an appropriate noun as well as the indirect object pronoun.
Le doy el libro a Fernando. A Fernando, le doy el libro. I give the book to him, to Fernando.
Le doy el libro a mi tía.
And when indirect and direct object pronouns are used together, e,g., se lo doy a mi tía (I give it to my aunt), “le” turns into “se” because of pronunciation reasons. Too hard to say “le lo” together.
The “se” that’s a reflexive pronoun is a different word. Mi tía se baña. My aunt is washing herself.
Appreciate the explanation! What's unclear to me is why is "le" necessary in these sentences?
Can't I just say "Doy el libro a Fernando" = I give the book to Fernando? Why is "le" needed if I mentioned what I'm giving (the book) and who I'm giving it to (Fernando)? "Lo doy a mi tía" = I give (Doy) it (lo) to my aunt (a mi tía)?
This sentence structure is very confusing to me as it's neither similar to English nor to my native language, which is somewhat similar to Spanish with the direct/indirect pronouns.
It’s called “redundant le.” Yes, it may seem weird but it’s the way native speakers talk.
https://youtu.be/WcsP3zHr6y0?si=FPBwKzKhadOrqqa9.
Or https://youtu.be/tug9TQNMpJs?si=bd2W20T5tQbIXf43.
https://youtu.be/RZP6fTb2Dpk?si=r3IHEf8dhbfPglmf
Maybe there’s a reason in the history of Spanish. It took me years to get used to using it and I’m sure I now overuse it!
I think "Voy a hablarlo" means I'm going to say/speak it. The use of IOP indicates who you are speaking to.
A better verb to think about IOP vs DOP might be enviar (to send) or decir (to say). The use of DOP (lo/la) refers to what is being said or sent (a letter, a piece of information, a package etc). Meanwhile IOP (me/te/le) refers to who is going to receive that direct object as a consequence of that action.
You can say "Voy a decirle" that's a complete sentence grammatically. It means I'm going to tell her/him. You can also say "Voy a decirle a él/ella" or include the name of the person for more emphasis/context.
You can say "Voy a enviarlo" to mean "I'm going to send it", and that is a grammatically complete sentence as well. You might also see, however something like "Se lo voy a enviar" which means I'm going to send it to him/her. The reason le becomes se is to avoid a le lo sound, if there were no direct object you could simply say "Le voy a enviar".
"Voy a hablarlo" makes no sense, so is not correct.
"Voy a hablar de eso" means I'm going to talk about it.
"Voy a hablarle" is an incomplete statement only if you haven't defined to whom you are goint to talk. "le" is a pronoun, and here is replacing a name you should have already mentioned.
«Voy a hablarlo» can make sense. At the end of the day, that «lo» does indicate a direct object
—Oye, ¿qué pasó con ese problema?
—Todavía no sé. Voy a hablarlo con la directora al rato.
No, hablar es un verbo intransitivo y no puedes usar un pronombre directo con él. Si tienes un problema con la directora, puedes analizarlo, discutirlo, considerarlo, estudiarlo, pero no hablarlo.
«Cuando significa 'comunicarse con alguien por medio de palabras', es intransitivo[…] No obstante, en la lengua coloquial no es infrecuente su uso como transitivo cuando el tema del que se habla se expresa mediante un pronombre.»
[RAE](https://www.rae.es/dpd/hablar)
Voy a hablarlo = I'm gonna talk about it Voy a hablarle = I'm gonna talk to him/her
Is there much of a semantic difference between habla con él vs le habla a él?
"Hablar con" implies a more collaborative or reciprocal conversation between two or more people. It suggests that there is an exchange of ideas or opinions between the parties involved. It often conveys a sense of dialogue and mutual engagement. "Hablar a" is often used when one person is addressing another person or a group of people. It can imply a one-way communication where the speaker is conveying information or expressing thoughts without necessarily expecting a response.
As much difference as talk with vs talk to.
You need another verb for this because "hablar" is almost always intransitive (no direct object) except when talking about languages (hablo inglés) and a couple other examples. In any case, "Voy a hablarlo" means "I'm going to talk about/discuss it". "Voy a hablarle" means "I'm going to talk to him" and doesn't really imply any particular incompleteness as far as I can tell.
Are you a native English speaker? Maybe it’ll be clearer in English. I say it. It = direct object pronoun. I kick the ball. I kick it. I say it to him. Him is the indirect object here and it is the direct object pronoun, the thing you said. I kick the ball to him. Note, that in Spanish, when you’re using indirect object pronouns for people you typically and redundantly say the person’s name or use an appropriate noun as well as the indirect object pronoun. Le doy el libro a Fernando. A Fernando, le doy el libro. I give the book to him, to Fernando. Le doy el libro a mi tía. And when indirect and direct object pronouns are used together, e,g., se lo doy a mi tía (I give it to my aunt), “le” turns into “se” because of pronunciation reasons. Too hard to say “le lo” together. The “se” that’s a reflexive pronoun is a different word. Mi tía se baña. My aunt is washing herself.
Appreciate the explanation! What's unclear to me is why is "le" necessary in these sentences? Can't I just say "Doy el libro a Fernando" = I give the book to Fernando? Why is "le" needed if I mentioned what I'm giving (the book) and who I'm giving it to (Fernando)? "Lo doy a mi tía" = I give (Doy) it (lo) to my aunt (a mi tía)? This sentence structure is very confusing to me as it's neither similar to English nor to my native language, which is somewhat similar to Spanish with the direct/indirect pronouns.
It’s called “redundant le.” Yes, it may seem weird but it’s the way native speakers talk. https://youtu.be/WcsP3zHr6y0?si=FPBwKzKhadOrqqa9. Or https://youtu.be/tug9TQNMpJs?si=bd2W20T5tQbIXf43. https://youtu.be/RZP6fTb2Dpk?si=r3IHEf8dhbfPglmf Maybe there’s a reason in the history of Spanish. It took me years to get used to using it and I’m sure I now overuse it!
Thank you, the videos have been very helpful! I thought I was going crazy.
I think "Voy a hablarlo" means I'm going to say/speak it. The use of IOP indicates who you are speaking to. A better verb to think about IOP vs DOP might be enviar (to send) or decir (to say). The use of DOP (lo/la) refers to what is being said or sent (a letter, a piece of information, a package etc). Meanwhile IOP (me/te/le) refers to who is going to receive that direct object as a consequence of that action. You can say "Voy a decirle" that's a complete sentence grammatically. It means I'm going to tell her/him. You can also say "Voy a decirle a él/ella" or include the name of the person for more emphasis/context. You can say "Voy a enviarlo" to mean "I'm going to send it", and that is a grammatically complete sentence as well. You might also see, however something like "Se lo voy a enviar" which means I'm going to send it to him/her. The reason le becomes se is to avoid a le lo sound, if there were no direct object you could simply say "Le voy a enviar".
"Voy a hablarlo" makes no sense, so is not correct. "Voy a hablar de eso" means I'm going to talk about it. "Voy a hablarle" is an incomplete statement only if you haven't defined to whom you are goint to talk. "le" is a pronoun, and here is replacing a name you should have already mentioned.
«Voy a hablarlo» can make sense. At the end of the day, that «lo» does indicate a direct object —Oye, ¿qué pasó con ese problema? —Todavía no sé. Voy a hablarlo con la directora al rato.
No, hablar es un verbo intransitivo y no puedes usar un pronombre directo con él. Si tienes un problema con la directora, puedes analizarlo, discutirlo, considerarlo, estudiarlo, pero no hablarlo.
«Cuando significa 'comunicarse con alguien por medio de palabras', es intransitivo[…] No obstante, en la lengua coloquial no es infrecuente su uso como transitivo cuando el tema del que se habla se expresa mediante un pronombre.» [RAE](https://www.rae.es/dpd/hablar)