now let us look at less extremely dialectal cases. for the majority of educated speakers in spain and parts of latin america, neither of the two tendencies (a or b) is enough on its own to justify the use of "le/les"; but "together" they are. thus, speakers who would reject sentences like "le vi" for "i saw it" and "le vi" for "i saw her" would nevertheless accept and use "le vi" for "i saw him". indeed, this use of "le" to mean "him" is so common in an area of central spain that some would call the use of "lo vi" to mean "i saw him" an example of "loísmo/laísmo", i.e. the dialectalism whereby "lo" is overused. the real academia's current line is that "le" for "him" is officially "tolerated".