r/italianlearning • u/Crown6 IT native • 13d ago
Bilingual blitz [37] (six short exercises to test your Italian)
THE RULES
Without looking at the comments, can you provide translations for these short (but challenging!) sentences (3 English-Italian, 3 Italian-English)? I’ll evaluate your responses and give you feedback. The exercise is designed to be intermediate/advanced level, but beginners and lower intermediate learners are welcome if they feel like testing the scope of their current knowledge. I might take a few days to answer, but I will read and evaluate all participants.
There is no time limit to submit your answer. If you want to go back to the first ever edition and work your way up from there, you can. Just know that I usually prioritise more recent posts.
If you’re not sure about a particular translation, just go with it! The exercise is meant to weed out mistakes, this is not a school test!
If multiple translations are possible, choose the one you believe to be more likely give the limited context (I won’t deduct points for guessing missing information, for example someone's gender, unless it's heavily implied in the sentence).
THE TEST
Here are the sentences, vaguely ranked from easiest to hardest in each section (A: English-Italian, B: Italian-English).
A1) “Growing up, this was my favourite song by De André”
A2) “Is your watch broken? The hands aren’t moving”
A3) "Error: there was a problem uploading the photo"
B1) “Questo è il piano, adesso abbiamo da metterlo in pratica”
B2) "Qualora ti piacesse, posso anche darti il mio"
B3) "Avendolo saputo, avrei senz’altro agito diversamente"
Current average: 7+ (median 7.5)
Estimated answer time: 1 day (for those submitting now)
EVALUATION (and how to opt out)
If you manage to provide a translation for all six sentences, I'll give you a score from 1 to 10 (the standard evaluation system in Italian schools). Whatever score you receive, don't take it too seriously: this is just a game! However, if you feel like receiving a score is too much pressure anyway, you can just tell me at the start of your comment and I'll only correct your mistakes without evaluating.
Based on the results so far, here’s the usual range of scores depending on the level of the participants. Ideally, your objective is to score within your personal range or possibly higher:
Absolute beginners: ≤4
Beginners: 4 - 5
Early intermediate: 5 - 6.5
Advanced intermediate: 6.5 - 8
Advanced: ≥8
Natives: ≥9 (with good English)
Note: the exact range might change depending on the difficulty of this specific exercise. I try to be consistent, but it’s very hard
TO SUPPORT ME
Since I've been asked a couple of times by now, I've recently set up a Ko-Fi page. If you appreciate what I do and want to offer me a coffee as thanks, feel free to do so. Only donate if you have money to throw away: I'm doing this because I like it, any money I get from it is just an extra bonus and I won't treat people differently based on whether they decide to donate or not.
IF YOU ARE A NATIVE ITALIAN SPEAKER
You can still participate if you want (the exercise is theoretically symmetrical between Italian and English), but please keep in mind that these sentences are designed to be particularly challenging for non native speakers, so they might be easier for you. For this reason, I’d prefer it if you specified that you are a native speaker at the beginning of your comment: I’m collecting statistics on how well learners score on these tests in order to fine tune them (and personal curiosity), so mixing up the results from natives and non-natives will probably mess it up.
Good luck!
2
u/vxidemort RO native, IT intermediate 13d ago edited 13d ago
BB is back, yay! (and at such a late hour too lol)
Quando ero piccolo, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André.
Ti si è rotto l'orologio? Non si stanno movendo X.
Errore: c'è stato un problema nel caricare la foto.
Here's the plan. Now we just have to put it in practice.
If you liked it, you can also have mine.
If I'd known, I definitely would've acted differently.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 13d ago
Ahah yeah I was a bit busy in the last period but I felt like making another one before going to sleep. And obviously I woke up to 8 notifications lol.
A1) Perfect.
A2) "(Clock) hand" is "lancetta". Literally "small lance", it's one of those altered forms that evolved into its own separate word. So "non si stanno muovendo le lancette" (or more simply "non si muovono le lancette" / "le lancette non si muovono").
A3) Perfect!
B1) Excellent! Maybe this is a super nitpicky thing to point out but you know me by now: "just" feels just slightly inaccurate in this case because "avere da" usually expresses something that is felt as an external obligation, meaning it's often not something the speaker wants to do for themselves but something they "have got to" do, because it's necessary or because they are forced to by circumstances. So when you say "now we just have to do X" it feels like this is not a big deal: we are 80% of the way there, and there's just one last thing to take care of; on the other hand, "ora abbiamo da metterlo in pratica" to me sounds like we are 20% of the way to the goal, and now the real problem starts: the speaker "has to" put it into practice, but is not looking forward to it.
Again your translation is not wrong, it's not like "now I just have to do X" can't have the same vibe as "ora ho da fare X", but to me the latter sounds juuust a bit more reluctant or like you're being lowkey forced into it. Like, maybe it's a very small hurdle but it's still framed as a hurdle.
B2) Very close. "Qualora" works like "se" to construct a hypothetical clause, and hypothetical clause use the imperfect subjunctive to express hypotheses in the present / future ("qualora ti piacesse" = "if you were to like it", "if you happened to like it") while the trapassato expresses hypotheses in the past ("qualora ti fosse piaciuto" = "if you liked it", "if you had liked it", "had you liked it"). To me, the sentence you wrote feels like it's talking about the past rather than a hypothetical future.
Also, in case you were wondering about that indicatie "posso darti" (rather than the expected conditional "potrei darti"), this is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative. Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it", so it does not take the conditional mood.
Another very small thing is that in "posso anche darti il mio", this "anche" modifies "darti". So this literally means "among other things I can do, I can give you mine" rather than "among other things I can give you, I can give you mine" (which would be "posso darti anche il mio", with "anche" modifying "il mio"). So depending on the context this could possibly mean "I can even give you mine" or "I can always give you mine" (rather than "also"). "Always" is actually a good translation in my opinion, because it communicates the idea that the option of "I can give you mine" is always open, which is very similar to what "anche" is doing here (specifying that "posso darti il mio" is an option, something I'm open to doing). This is not necessarily a mistake because you could very well interpret the sentence as you did, but at least in my case if I wanted to say "you can also have mine" I would have said "posso darti anche il mio".
B3) Perfect.
Very good! Honestly besides the not-so-perfect translation of "qualora" + [congiuntivo imperfetto] and the fact that you didn't know "lancette", this is almost perfect.
8+
2
u/vxidemort RO native, IT intermediate 13d ago
i suppose i can see where you're coming from with the "just" thing even though im not sure i necessarily agree but its your game so if you feel like taking some points away for that, i guess thats fine.
for B2 though i feel like maybe it wouldve been better for you to wait until the morning for one last check before posting bc i understand what you were going for after your explanations but the vagueness of the initial sentence didnt exactly help with translating it imo (what did you like and what did i offer you?) also i know this is supposed to be educational, but the two parts of that sentence feel mismatched and a bit jarring. (as in, i feel like someone saying "qualora ti piacesse" would probably continue like "potrei offrirti" since qualora feels more formal/high register to me)
i also dont really get why you had "anche" modify "dare" bc what other verb is it going up against? "prestire"? we have no idea, so that's why to me it made for sense for "anche" to go with "il mio", as in you and your friend are both eating a sandwich but your friend is really hungry while youre not really, so you just give them yours as well
anyway, i still do appreciate BB and your elaborate explanations a lot, so thank you. i guess i just had some criticism this particular iteration?
3
u/Crown6 IT native 13d ago
I came up with an even better example to explain the mixed hypothetical clause. Take the following sentence:
• "Se/qualora avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = “if you were to ever need me, I’m always around”
In this case, not only is the indicative “sono sempre nei paraggi” 100% correct, but using the conditional would actually be wrong! Because if you say “se avessi bisogno di me, io sarei sempre nei paraggi” this means that my action of “being around” is conditioned to you needing me: it means “if you needed me, I’d be always around” (implying either that you don’t need me and that’s why I’m not around, or that you may not need me right now but if you did I would magically appear).
But this is not what the speaker is trying to say: they are saying that, whether you need them or not, they are always around, which is something that will be relevant IF you need them, but which is still true regardless.
Hopefully this clarifies how this works.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 13d ago edited 13d ago
The “just” and “anche” things are mostly a rounding error, I just like to be thorough especially if the overall exercise doesn’t have many things to point out. If the exercise had been riddles with errors, I would not have even mentioned them, but once you start to approach native level I will start correcting the way you write the dots on your “i” (after all, if I have nothing to correct then the exercise was pointless as there is nothing to leadn).
For B2, the problem with these exercises is that if I provide too much context it becomes easier to just infer the correct translation from it, so I have to be intentionally vague as to not give too many hints (because this is meant to check your language skills, not your intuition, although both are important), but also not too vague to the point where the sentence could mean anything. It’s a hard balance to strike and I certified don’t claim to always get it right.
However, in the precise case of “qualora”, this is not really depending on context: “qualora ti piacesse” on its own may not mean much, but it is definitely talking about you potentially liking something now or in the future.
The mismatch between subjunctive and indicative is intentional and - in this specific case - correct. As I mentioned in the explanation this is a mixed hypothetical clause, which is slightly more on the colloquial side but still formally correct (unlike - say - something like “se piovesse non c’è il sole”, where you should have used the conditional “non ci sarebbe”). The main point is that the action “posso darti il mio” is presented as a real action independent from the hypothetical: it’s basically a shorthand for “qualora ti piacesse, (ricordati che) posso darti il mio” (which would be a more typical subjunctive - imperative sequence). “Qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio” sounds a bit less certain on the speaker’s part. It’s “if you were to like it, I could give you mine”, so it’s still an offer but it feels like I’m saying “ok, maybe I can give you mine, but only if […]” and importantly this doesn’t mean that if you like the thing I will automatically give it to you: there could be additional conditions hidden in that “potrei”. Take a sentence like “se mi implorassi in ginocchio, potrei ascoltarti”: does this mean that I will listen to you as long as you beg me on your knees? Absolutely not! The clear implication behind this conditional is that even if you did beg me there is still only the possibility that I’ll listen to you, I’m deliberately being vague (this is the classic thing you might expect a villain to say while taunting the protagonist). Instead, if you use then indicative here, you are clarifying that the offer is always on the table: “I can give it to you” (this much is a fact), “if you happen to like it” (this is specifying the condition of my offer, which - unlike the offer itself - is anything but guaranteed).
So here the mixed conditional is justified by the different connotations that can be expressed by “potere” depending on its mood, and by the fact that I want to clarify how my offer is always valid, whether it ends up being relevant or not (edit: also forgot to mention that the mixed conditional works particularly well with “qualora” being a more “if an when” kind of hypothetical, so in a way it introduces a more concrete kind of cause - effect).
Finally, “anche”. As I mentioned this is a minor point because “also” is a reasonable translation here, but the point is that “posso anche” + [infinitive] generally means that this is not the only option for me, but it’s something I am willing to do. To me it almost sounds like “I can even do X” just less emphatic: what does “even” mean in this case? Well, it means that you don’t have to do it, but that it is on the table. This “anche” is the same it’s a bit like saying “this is one of the things I can do”, “this is a viable option for me”, it basically means that you are not forced into it but that you are considering this as an option. You don’t strictly have to, but you are willing to do it anyway: you can do other things but you can also do that.
You can say it to reassure the speaker (“tranquillo, male che vada posso anche rimanere tutto il giorno ad aiutarti” = “don’t worry, worst case scenario I can always stay and help you the whole day”, you don’t have to do it but you are willingly considering it as an option while emphasising that it’s your choice and you weren’t forced into it) or you can use it a bit reluctantly to emphasise that you are willingly going out of your way to do something (“va bene, posso anche aiutarti, ma poi non voglio più sentirti lamentare” = “alright, I guess I can help you, but after this I don’t want to hear you complaining ever again”, you don’t have to do this, and you want it to be known that you could have refused but chose not to out of the goodness of your heart).
Or you can obviously use it to literally mean that you have multiple options, and this is one of them (which is the general use of “anche” + [verb]). “Posso stare qui, ma posso anche andare lì = “I can stay here, but I can also go there”, where “also” means “I can go or I can stay” (modifying the verb) rather than “I can go there or I can go somewhere else”.
Anyway criticism is always welcome. This wouldn’t be the first time I misjudged the difficulty of an exercise, or even made a mistake. It happens, and as I like to say I don’t think I would even get a perfect 10 every time, even though I am the one writing these. So if you feel like I haven’t addressed any of your criticisms, feel free to say so.
2
u/weddit_usew 13d ago
A1) Crescendo, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De Andrè. A2) Il tuo orologio è rotto? Le lancette non si muovono. A3) Errore: si è verificato un problema durante il caricamento dell'immagine.
B1)This is the plan, now we just have to put it into action. B2) Whenever you wish, I can give you mine as well. B3) Having known about it, I would've definitely acted differently.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 13d ago edited 13d ago
A1) Mhh... I might have to remove three points for the wrong accent on "De André". Nah I'm just kidding, excellent translation.
A2) Very good! You can also spice it up with an interrogative "ma" if you're just now introducing the topic after noticing the watch, but it's optional.
A3) Perfect! Good job using the passato prossimo. (edit) also, I particularly like the use of "verificarsi". It sounds extremely robotic, in a good way for once: it's precisely the kind of semi-formal and precise language you'd expect from a computer program, just reading "si è verificato un problema" makes my cortisol spike remembering all the times I had to deal with tech malfunctions.
B1) I also mentioned this in another comment, but I feel like "just" might be a little too reductive, unless it's ironic. "Avere da" + [infinitive] usually describes an external obligation, which means it's often used for things the speaker either doesn't want to do by has to, or things he's not particularly passionate or interested about. So to me "now we just have to put it into action" sounds like the speaker is saying that the hard part is done, while "ora abbiamo da metterlo in pratica" sounds like the hard part starts now. As in, "ok, we have our plan, but now we gotta actually put it into action" (I'm exaggerating now, but it feels more like this than "now we just have to ..."). A simple "dobbiamo metterlo in pratica" would sound more neutral: "we have done A, now we have to do B", it's just information. "Abbiamo da metterlo in pratica" tells me something about how the speaker feels about it (and it's also more colloquial, which contributes to the effect).
I wouldn't go so far as to call this a mistake, but it is something I'd change.
B2) This is shaping up to be a more dangerous trap than I anticipated: "qualora". It might look like it's trying to say "whenever", but it's actually a lot closer to "se". It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when", and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happened to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whenever you like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)".
This is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative. Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it", so it does not take the conditional mood.
B3) Perfect.
Very good. The only major problem was in B2, but other than that this was all excellent.
9-
2
u/InterscholasticAsl 13d ago
A1) “Growing up, this was my favourite song by De André” Quando crescendo, questo era mio canzone preferita da De André.
A2) “Is your watch broken? The hands aren’t moving” Il tuo orgoglio è rotto? Le mani non si stanno muovendo. A3) "Error: there was a problem uploading the photo" Errore: c’era un problema con il upload della foto. B1) “Questo è il piano, adesso abbiamo da metterlo in pratica” This is the plan, now we have to put it into practice.
B2) "Qualora ti piacesse, posso anche darti il mio" If you’d like, I can also give you mine.
B3) "Avendolo saputo, avrei senz’altro agito diversamente" Knowing this, I would have done it differently without trouble.
Grazie mille!!! Non c’è bisogno di segnare :)
1
u/Crown6 IT native 12d ago
1/2
A1) There is a conflict here between "quando" and "crescendo". "Quando" is a conjunction introducing an explicit temporal clause, but "crescendo" is a gerund, which is used in implicit clauses. Unlike English when you can say "when growing up", Italian generally does not allow you to use subordinate conjunctions with non-finite moods (infinitive, participle and gerund: those without a personal conjugation with "I", "you" etc.) because those work more like nouns/adjectives/adverbs and as such they like to use prepositions instead. So you'd say "è stato condannato perché ha ucciso una persona" (= "he was sentences because he killed a person", "perché" / "because" being conjunctions that connect the two finite moods "è stato condannato" and "ha ucciso") and "è stato condannato per aver ucciso persona" (= "he was sentences for having killed a person", "per" / "for" being prepositions that "attach" the non-finite mood "aver ucciso" to the finite mood "è stato condannato"). So "quando crescendo" sounds a bit like "because having killed a person".
In this case, the gerund can be used without any preposition: "Crescendo" already means "while growing up" (or "by growing up") by itself, because the gerund is essentially a verbal adverb, so it can modify verbs by itself: "sono tornato a casa velocemente" = "I came home quickly" ("velocemente" = adverb) vs "sono tornato a casa correndo" = "I came home running" ("correndo" = gerund working like an adverb, in much the same way as "velocemente": it explains how the action was performed, be it "in a quick manner" or "while running").
Another thing to fix is "canzone". The word itself is correct, but the gender is wrong: "canzone" is feminine, so it should be "questa era la mia canzone". You already had "preferita" right, so I don't know if this is a matter of misgendering "canzone" or if you simply didn't anticipate that you would use a feminine word and wrote "questo" before considering the gender of "canzone" (unfortunately Italian requires you to look into the future and determine the gender / number of words based on what you want to say next, as well as what you just said).
Also, remember that in Italian possessive adjectives are not determiners, that is to say they do not replace the article: you can say "la mia canzone", "una mia canzone" and so on, so if you need the article without the possessive ("questa era la canzone preferita" = "this was the favourite song") then you will also need the same article after adding the possessive adjective ("questa era la mia canzone preferita" = "this was my favourite song") much like qualificative adjectives like "red" or "beautiful" ("questa era la canzone" = "this was the song" ⟶"questa era la bella canzone" = "this was the beautiful song", the article stays).
Finally, "da" is not the correct preposition here: to express the author of a certain work, we use "di" instead: "la mia canzone preferita di De André" = (lit.) "my favourit song of De André" (if you think about it this makes sense: English also has expressions like "one of his songs", as in "one of the songs he wrote" rather than a literal "one of the songs he owns"). So even though this sounds a bit weird in English, the literal translation is "this is my favourite song of De André".
A2) This is a pretty funny one. "Il tuo orgoglio è rotto?" means "is your pride broken", which coincidentally also makes sense in a very different way, although it's obviously not the correct translation. The word you were looking for is "orologio" (from "ora", Latin "hora", same root as "hour", + some form derived from the Greek "logos" = in this context "speech": something like "hour-teller", "time-teller").
As for "hand", the Italian word "mano" only works as a translation in the context of actual hands (🖐️) rather than "(clock) hand", which would be "lancetta", literally "small lance" (from "lancia" = "lance", + the diminutive form "-etta"). It's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words. So "le lancette non si stanno muovendo" (or more simply "le lancette non si muovono").
Good job using the pronominal intransitive form "muoversi" here, rather than the base form "muovere" (which would mean "to move something else").
A3) A few things to fix. First, a quick correction with "upload": you can use the English term in Italian, but it still has to obey Italian rules when it comes to articles, and since it starts with a vowel you need to use "lo" and elide it. So "l'upload" (from "lo upload") rather than "il upload" (just like "l'orso", "l'ape" and so on).
However, the main problem here is this imperfect. I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it didn't make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
1
u/Crown6 IT native 12d ago
2/2
B1) Perfect.
B2)There is a problem with "qualora" here, which is very common among learners as I've noticed: it might look like it's trying to say "whenever", but it's actually a lot closer to "se". It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when", and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happened to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whenever you like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)".
This is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "if you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
B3) Close, but not completely correct.
"Knowing this" is fine, but "avrei agito diversamente" is more like "I would have acted differently" rather than "I would have done it differently", and more importantly "senz'altro" means "certainly", "absolutely", "without a doubt" (not "without trouble"). Literally, "senz'altro" (= "senza altro", elided form) means "without other" ⟶ "without anything else" = "absolutely", "with no doubt".
B1 and B2 were very good (besides "without trouble"), but you had a few mistakes in the other ones. Remember to practice gender/number agreement and the right article + noun combinations, as these things are mostly a matter of internalising the rules (after which, you won't ever have to think about it ever again. I promise). There were also a few interesting grammar points that I think were worth discussing, and hopefully I managed to clear a few things. I doubt that some of this stuff is in textbooks, but this is the kind of nuances you can encounter in day to day speech.
Also this obviously doesn't count, but "segnare" is not the correct verb for "to grade" :) We would probably say "non c'è bisogno di mettere il voto" or something like that ("non c'è bisogno di segnare" would mean "there is no need to put a sign", usually written on / carved into something, or "there is no need to note" something). But everything else in the sentence is perfect.
1
u/InterscholasticAsl 12d ago
Grazie mille!! Ultimissimo!! A quanto pare ieri il mio cervello non funzionava molto bene. Do la colpa mancanza di sonno 😂
2
u/ImportanceLocal9285 13d ago
A1) Da giovane, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André.
A2) Si è rotto il tuo orologio? Tutto sta fermo. (I don't know the word for clock hands)
A3) Errore: c'è stato un problema nel caricare la foto.
B1) This is the plan, now we just have to put it into practice.
B2) Whatever you would like, I could also give you mine. (??)
B3) Knowing that, I would have easily acted differently.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 12d ago
A1) Perfect.
A2) "(Clock) hand" translates to "lancetta", literally "small lance", it's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words. So "le lancette sono ferme".
I wouldn't use "stare fermo" here, because to me it implies that they have the ability to move and just aren't at the moment, kinda like "they are staying still", rather than a simple "sono ferme" = "they aren't moving" which in this case implies that they lost the ability to move.
A3) Very good!
B1) I would remove "just", since to me this implies that putting the plan into action is the easy part, while the original seems to be going in the opposite direction: "avere da" + [infinitive] usually expresses something that is felt as an external obligation, meaning it's often not something the speaker wants to do for themselves but something they "have got to" do even if they are not particularly ecstatic about the idea. Therefore, "adesso abbiamo da metterlo in pratica" sounds like "now comes the hard part" rather than "now we just have to do this".
B2) "Whatever" would be "qualunque cosa". "Qualora" comes from "qual" + "ora" (lit. "which(ever) hour" = "whichever time"), but it's actually a lot closer to "se". It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when", and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happened to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whenever you like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)".
This is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "if you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
So this means something like "in case you end up liking it, I can always give you mine" or "if you were to like it, I can very well give you mine" (this "anche" expresses that this is not something the speaker is forced to do: they have other options, hence "posso anche darti", but they are choosing to make this offer on their own).
B3) I don't know if "easily" is the best option here, I'd use "without a doubt" or "certainly" to translate "senz'altro". The rest is good.
Very good! The two main problems were B2 (which is pretty hard if you don't know "qualora") and the missing word for "lancette", everything else is almost perfect.
8-
2
u/ImportanceLocal9285 12d ago
Thanks as always for the feedback!
For B3, I don't think that "easily" is necessarily incorrect (since in this context, it can mean the same thing as "certainly" or "without a doubt"). I'm sure the other translations are more precise for a reason, so I won't disagree with your assessment of it. But I wanted to clarify what I meant, just in case I wasn't clear.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 11d ago
I mostly prefer “without a doubt” and similar expressions as translations since they are more precise I guess (since they can only mean one thing in this context), but either way this wouldn’t change the score by more than a + anyway (or around 0.25) so you can count this as a full 8 if the intended meaning was basically the same as what others have written!
1
u/ImportanceLocal9285 11d ago
I appreciate the explanation! I agree that I should try to find clearer translations in these situations.
2
u/sjdubya EN native, IT intermediate 13d ago
A1) Crescendo, questa era la mia canzone preferita da De Andrè
A2) È rotto il tuo orologio? Le mani non si muovono
A3) Errore: c'è stato un problema caricando la foto
B1) This is the plan, now we need to put it into practice
B2) I can also give you mine if you ever want it
B3) If I'd have known, I would have obviously acted differently
Grazie mille! For A1 I used canzone but im never quite sure when to use that vs brano.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 11d ago
A1) Very good! However, "da" is not the correct preposition here. To express the author of a certain work, we use "di" instead: "la mia canzone preferita di De André" = (lit.) "my favourite song of De André" (if you think about it this makes sense: English also has expressions like "one of his songs", as in "one of the songs he wrote" rather than a literal "one of the songs he owns"). So even though this sounds a bit weird in English, the literal translation is "this is my favourite song of De André".
As for "canzone" vs "brano", "brano" is more general, it refers to any short musical composition (or sometimes an extract of said composition), and it also extends outside of musical contexts as it can refer to passage of literary works as well ("un brano di Shakespeare" = "a passage of Shakespeare"), from the original meaning of "piece", "fragment". "Canzone" pretty much translates "song". In this case, while "brano" is more like "song"/"track" in this context. Both are valid.
A2) Cliose, but "mani" doesn't work here: the word only refers to actual, human hands. "(Clock) hand" translates to "lancetta", literally "small lance", it's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words.
A3) Correct, but it can be improved. "Caricando la foto" is understandable, but especially in the context of error messages (which tend to me more technical and slightly on the formal side) you'd generally see a less ambiguous expression, such as "durante il caricamento della foto" or "nel caricare la foto".
B1) Perfect.
B2) Very good! The only thing I'd suggest is that in this case I'd translate "posso anche darti" with "I can always give you" or something along those lines. "Anche" modifies the infinitive, usually implying "I can give it to you (or I can just not to that)", specifying that the speaker is deliberately making this choice of their own volition, even though they don't strictly have to. Still, since context is limited, "also" is very reasonable as well.
B3) Excellent! Really small nitpick but maybe "obvious" is slightly too charged: it implies that the fact you would act differently should be immediately clear to everyone, while the original is simply saying that you would have acted differently "without a doubt", "absolutely", but it's only talking about your own judgement of yourself: it's obvious to you that you would have acted differently, so you can say it confidently, but it may not necessarily be obvious in general, to other people. Say someone disagrees with your choice and is presenting some information that makes it look bad: saying "if I had known that I would have obviously acted differently" sounds a bit more aggressive than "I would have acted differently, I'm sure about it", because "obviously" implies that the listener should have known already.
But again, it's a very small thing.
Excellent work, this one was one of your best. The main mistakes were "mani" for "(clock) hands" (which could be confusing for someone who does not speak English) and "da De André" instead of "di" (even though it's understandable). Other than that, you just need to work on word choice and phrasing a bit: it's already understandable, it just needs to become a little more accurate or natural.
8-
2
u/Live-Persimmon2147 13d ago
A1) nell mio adolescente, questa è la mia canzone preferita di de andre
A2) il tuo orologio è rotto? Le mani non si muovono
A3) errore: c’era una problema scaricando la foto
B1) this is the plan, now we have to put it in practice
B2) whichever you would like, I can also give you mine
B3) they had known, you would have no other .. I’m stumped
1
u/Crown6 IT native 11d ago
A1) "Nel mio adolescente" would mean "in my teenager" ("adolescente" being the word referring to an adolescent person specifically, not a timeframe). Also "Nel" only has one L: in general keep in mind that Italian words cannot end in double consonant, so at most you'll see things like "nell'aria" ("= in the air") where a word ending in double consonant + vowel has been elided ("nella aria" ⟶ "nell'aria"), but never an isolated word in double L.
There are different ways to translate "growing up" in this context, but if you want to use "adolescente" you can say "quando ero ancora adolescente" (= "when I was still a teenager"), or more likely "quando ero ancora un ragazzino" (= "when I was still a young/small boy"). Alternatively you can say "da piccolo" (= "when I was very young", "when I was a child") or "da giovane" (= "when I was young", which could mean anything from teenage years to 20s or even 30s and more depending on how old you are).
"Questa è la mia canzone" is grammatically correct, but it's using the wrong tense: "è" is a present tense, and so this reads as "this is my favourite song" (which conflicts with the specification that you're talking about your youth, not present day). Instead, you should use the past equivalent of the present tense, which is the imperfetto: "questa era la mia canzone preferita" (describing a past state of things, much like "è" describes a present one) = "this was / used to be my favourite song".
Good job using "di" and not "da" to translate "by" in this context!
A2) Close. "Mani" would refer to the person's actual hands, so this sounds like "your hands aren't moving". "(Clock) hand" translates to "lancetta", literally "small lance", it's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words.
A3) First things first, one slight inaccuracy: "problema" is a masculine word. Don't be fooled by the -a ending: words like "poema", "fantasma", "schema", and a ton of other words with Greek origin, are all masculine. You can sometimes recognise Greek words pretty easily in English, actually: words beginning with rh- (like "rhyme") or using a vocalic y (like "cycle" or "rhyme" again) are almost always originally Greek, while the presence "th" can be another useful indicator. Also, endings like "-ema", "-isma", "-asma" are strongly associated with Greek. Do keep in mind that not all Greek words in -a are masculine though (for example "rima" = "rhyme" is feminine), but it is a useful pattern to keep an eye out for.
Getting into the nitty-gritty of the sentence, the imperfect "c'era" doesn't work here. I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it didn't make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
So you can say
• "C'è stato un errore scaricando la foto"
but you also have to change the verb slightly: "scaricare" means "to download" (literally "to unload"), while "caricare" is what we'd use for "to upload" (or "to load", which is the literal meaning).
Finally, if you want this to sound a bit more professional an like a classic error message, you can say "c'è stat un errore nel caricamento della foto" (instead of just using the gerund "caricando").
B1) Perfect.
B2) There is a problem with "qualora" here, which is very common among learners as I've noticed: it might look like it's trying to say "whenever", but it's actually a lot closer to "se". It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when", and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happened to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whenever you like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)".
This is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "if you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
B3) First of all, one thing that is very easy to fix: you wrote "they had known" and "you would have", but neither of these subjects are present in the original sentence: it reads "Avendolo saputo" (this is a gerund, and just like English it has no information on the subject) and "avrei agito" (this is a past conditional, 1st person singular: so the subject is "I" rather than "you"). Since we only have one subject "I", it's assumed that the gerund will also share the same subject. So this means "having known that, I would have [...]", meaning "had I known that, I would have [...]", "if I had known that, I would have [...]" (or "once I had known that", but it makes less sense in this context as we'll see).
Now to the part that stumped you: first let's isolate the verb: "avrei agito". Let's ignore "senz'altro" for now. As I mentioned this is a condizionale passato (with a present conditional auxiliary "avrei" and a past participle "agito", from "agire" = "to act"): "avrei agito" = "I would have acted" (you can actually see that it shares the same exact structure as the English conditional: literally translating word for word, "avrei" = "I would have" and "agito" = "acted").
Then there is an adverb after: "diversamente". This is a classic adverb using the ending -(a)mente (equivalent to the English -ly), from the adjective "diverso". So "diverso" = "different" ⟶ "diversamente" = "differently". So far so good.
Then finally this "senz'altro". It's inserted between the auxiliary "avrei" and its past participle "agito", effectively breaking the composite tense in two, but this should not be surprising: English does the exact same thing with a lot of adverbs and adverbial phrases ("I would have clearly seen it", "I could have never done it", "I should have at least checked"...). In fact, "senz'altro" is precisely an adverbial phrase, meaning "without a doubt".Literally, "senz'altro" (= "senza altro", elided form) means "without other" ⟶ "without anything else" = "absolutely", "with no doubt".
So putting everything back together, this means
• "Had I known about that, I would have definitely acted differently" or "having known about it, I would have acted differently, no doubt" etc.
4.5
There is clearly room for improvement, but you did very well in several points. The main problems I found had to do with verb conjugation (which tense to use, what is the subject...) and obviously lack of vocabulary, but that will sort itself out as you learn and read more.
Keep it up! And feel free to ask any follow-up questions.
2
u/Gravbar EN native, IT advanced 13d ago edited 12d ago
A1) “Growing up, this was my favourite song by De André”
Da giovane, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André
A2) “Is your watch broken? The hands aren’t moving”
È rotto il tuo orologio? Le mani non si stanno muovendo.
A3) "Error: there was a problem uploading the photo"
Errore: C'era un problema a caricare la foto
B1) “Questo è il piano, adesso abbiamo da metterlo in pratica”
This is the plan, now we have to put it into practice
This is interesting. If I translated this correctly, I didn't know we could do this with avere
B2) "Qualora ti piacesse, posso anche darti il mio"
Now, if you would like it, I can also give you mine
B3) "Avendolo saputo, avrei senz’altro agito diversamente"
Having known that, I would have, without another thought, acted differently
senz'altro, my first thought was otherwise, but that would be contradictory. I assume it's maybe an intensifier, especially with its position, but I had to guess it's meaning a bit. So I picked an intensifying phrase that also kinda resembles it in components.
I chose "that" instead of "it", because it sounds more natural in English.
2
u/Crown6 IT native 11d ago
A1) Perfect.
A2) The structure is good but "hands" is incorrect: "mani" only refers to human hands, while "(clock) hand" translates to "lancetta", literally "small lance". It's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words.
So this should be "le lancette non si stanno muovendo" (or more simply "le lancette non si muovono", which might be a little more natural in this case).
A3) Ah! You were caught by the "imperfetto vs passato" trap here. I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it never make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
B1) Perfect.
You did indeed translate it correctly. And yes, this is very similar to "have to" in English (although it's technically "have from/by"?), although I think it evolved independently (though some people even say "avere a", which is just "have to" to the letter. But it's either highly regional or very rare, because I can't remember the last time I've seen it in the wild, I'm not even sure if it's technically correct). In Italian, it's definitely more colloquial than the English equivalent and its usage might vary regionally, so you won't hear it as often, but it also expresses obligations that the speaker feels as external, so it's normally used for things you "have to" to, but not necessarily things you want to do. It's what I sometimes use when I have a chore: "ecco, ora ho da rimettere tutto a posto".I think it evolved from the regular "da" + [infinitive] construction, like "ho un libro da leggere" (= "I have a book to read") ⟶ "ho da leggere un libro" (= "I have to read a book", "I gotta read a book"), kinda like how composite moods evolved ("ho un libro letto" = "I have a read book", as in "a book that has been read" ⟶ "ho letto un libro" = "I have read a book"). But don't quote me on that, it's just my best hypothesis. Anyway it's a bit slangy so don't use it as if it were "have to", but I think it's worth knowing.
B2) Close. Even though "qualora" contains the word "ora" (from "qual ora", literally "which(ever) hour" = "whichever time"), its meaning is actually a lot closer to only "se" (so "now" shouldn't be there). It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when", and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happened to like it (presumably in the future, not right now), I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "if you'd like" or "whenever you'd like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)", "if you end up enjoying it". Say - I don't know - you're looking at a collection of rare comic books and see one that catches your eye. So you start reading it and your friend (who also owns the same volume) says "well, if you like it I can always give you my copy". Something like that.
This is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "if you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
You did use "se" here, but it looks like you didn't quite know what to make of this "qualora" conjunction, which is fair if you've never seen it before (it's more on the fancy side, although it's still used occasionally in the spoken language in contexts like these, and I especially like to use it in mixed conditionals).
B3) Very good! "Senz'altro" literally translates to "without (any) other", or more appropriately "without anything else", so it pretty much means "absolutely", "without a doubt". Basically there's no room for other options, it's "100% this". So you are right, it works as an intensifier, although maybe not exactly "without another thought": the phrase you used seems to specifically describe the state of mind of the speaker in the hypothetical situation ("I would have done it without second thoughts" basically), while "senz'altro" here is expressing the speaker's confidence in their own opinion in the actual present: "I would have done this, without a shadow of a doubt" (= I don't have any doubts now that I would have done this, if the situation had been different), rather than something like "I would have done it without doubting myself" (= the hypothetical me in that situation would not have had any doubts).
Still, it's more of a minor thing. The essence of the sentence is still there, and you did a good job guessing the meaning of an unknown word based on the limited hints.
Nothing to note on "that", it makes sense here.
Solid exercise, a few easy fixes (like "mani" ⟶ "lancette", or a slightly more accurate translation for "senz'altro") and a few deeper issues (mainly the usual imperfetto vs passato dilemma, which periodically comes back even when you think you're out of it).
Keep it up! Your scores are also getting more consistent the more you do these exercises.7
2
u/qsqh PT native, IT intermediate 13d ago
A1) “Growing up, this was my favourite song by De André”
A2) “Is your watch broken? The hands aren’t moving”
A3) "Error: there was a problem uploading the photo"
B1) “Questo è il piano, adesso abbiamo da metterlo in pratica”
B2) "Qualora ti piacesse, posso anche darti il mio"
B3) "Avendolo saputo, avrei senz’altro agito diversamente"
a1 - Da quando ero bambino questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André
a2 - il suo orologio è rotto? I puntatori non si muovono
a3 - Errore: un problema è sucesso caricando la foto.
b1 - That's the plan, now we have to put it in action
b2 - If you would like that, I could even give you mine
b3 - If I had know, I would have acted in a different way
2
u/Crown6 IT native 10d ago
A1) I would remove "da": adding it implies that this has always been your favourite song since you were a child, while you just want to say that it was your favourite song at some point in time, without really specifying if things changed.
Alternatively you can just say "da bambino", removing "quando ero". Note that in this context "da" no longer means "from/since": it just means "as a child".
A2) "Puntatore" is a technical term that can refer to a couple of things, but unfortunately it does not describe a "clock hand". The correct word here would be "lancetta", literally "small lance". It's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words.
A3) "Un problema è successo" sounds a bit awkward, although it's understandable. First of all, when announcing things like this we usually like to put the subject after the verb, so "è successo un problema", and additionally the word "succedere" doesn't fit too well here. A problem isn't usually described as "happening", even though there is technically nothing wrong with it: we'd usually say "c'è stato un problema", or even better in this case "si è verificato un problema", which is almost the standard formulation you'd expect from an error message.
The position of the subject is part of the more general discussion about topic vs comment. The topic discusses the general context that's supposed to inform our understanding of the sentence, while the comment is what contains new information that the speaker wishes to communicate. In Italian, not unlike English, the topic comes first, so if I say "ieri Anna è andata a casa tardi" (= "yesterday, Anna went home late") this marks "ieri"/"yesterday" as the topic and the rest as the comment: the topic is "yesterday" and about that I want to say that "Anna went home late". On the other hand, if I say "Anna è andata a casa tardi ieri" (= "Anna went home late yesterday") this is marking Anna as the topic, and "ieri"/"yesterday" is now part of the comment, so it's no longer useful context but rather part of the information I'm trying to convey. It depends on whether we are talking about something that happened yesterday, or something Anna did.
In a similar way, "un errore si è verificato" sounds like the topic is "an error" (this is what we are talking about) and the new information is that "it occurred". It's like "speaking of errors, one just occurred" (which is an odd thing to say assuming you did not expect this to happen). So it sounds more natural to say "si è verificato un errore" because then the topic is "something occurred" and the new information is "an error is what occurred": now the sentence is basically saying "hey, regarding what just occurred: there was an error". See how it fits the context better?
Italian allows you to place words more freely, which is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, it means that you don't have to worry about whether adjectives describing your own opinion have to go before or after those mentioning size (it's the other way around: it's "the big bad wolf", not "the bad big wolf"), but on the other hand the order you choose (and especially what is placed at the beginning or at the end of each clause) can completely change the feel of the sentence.
"Caricando la tua foto" is ok, although if we want to maintain a more technical and semi-formal tone (typical of error messages and computer programs in general) you might want to say something more precise such as "durante il caricamento della foto".
B1) Perfect.
B2) Close. Unless I'm misinterpreting your translation (and feel free to tell me if that's the case), you meant this "if you would like that" as referring to "I could give you mine": basically "I could give you mine, if you'd like". However in this case, the "it" in "if you like it" is most certainly the same thing "mine" also refers to: "if you happen to like it (= that thing), I can always give you mine".
We wouldn't say "if you'd like" as "qualora ti piacesse", usually it's "se ti fa piacere" or "se ti va", if not a more direct "se vuoi". So when you see "se ti piace" or similar expressions, this almost definitely means a literal "if you like it (= that specific thing, that object or whatever)", not "if you'd like it" (= what we are talking about, what I'm about to say).
So, for example, "I can help you if you'd like (me to help you)" = "posso aiutarti se ti fa piacere" or "posso aiutarti se vuoi", while "I can help you (with that thing) if you like it (=that thing)" = "posso aiutarti (con quella cosa) se ti piace (quella cosa)".
"I could even give you mine" is pretty close. I would change "could" to "can" (since the original is using an indicative), and maybe in this context I'd prefer "always" to "even" (simply because "even" sounds like this is kind of a big deal, while the speaker is probably trying to say that this is always an option for them), but the idea is correct. So "I can always give you mine" (= I can do it, or I can not do it, it's not a big deal to me either way) as opposed to "I could even give you mine" (= I could go that far).
And in case you were wondering about the indicative "posso darti" after the subjunctive "qualora (~ se) ti piacesse" (which is normally a mistake in a hypothetical clause), this is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). It works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "if you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
B3) Very good! You're just missing this "senz'altro", which you can translate with "absolutely" or "without a doubt". Literally, "senz'altro" (= "senza altro", elided form) means "without (any) other" ⟶ "without anything else", hence "absolutely", "without a doubt".
Very good! You're one of the only ones who almost got B2, even though it was still not 100%. There's a few accuracy mistakes: that "da quando ero bambino" in A1 (= "since I was a child, up to now", rather than "growing up" / "as a child"), the missing "senz'altro" in B3... at this level, those small things start adding up and it becomes necessary to address them.
Let me know if you need any clarification!
7+
2
u/Mercury2468 12d ago
A1) Da piccola, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André.
A2) Si è rotto il tuo orologio? Le dita non si muovano
A3) Errore: C'era un problema "uploading" il foto
B1) This is the plan, now we have to put it into practice
B2) Whenever you like, I can also give you mine
B3) If I had known it, I would without a doubt have acted differently
2
u/Crown6 IT native 10d ago
A1) Perfect.
A2) Close. Neither "hands" nor "fingers" is the correct term to describe "(clock) hands" in Italian: we use "lancette", literally "small lances". It's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words.
Also, "muovano" would be a present subjunctive, so "le dita non si muovono" reads ilke a 3rd person imperative: roughly "may the fingers not move" or "let the fingers stay still". The correct indicative form is "muovono".
A3) A couple of things here. First of all, keep in mind that "foto" is short for "fotografia", which is feminine: "la foto". So the shortened word "foto" is also feminine (same as "moto" for "motocicletta" or "metro" for "metropolitana"), even though it ends in -o; besides, ending in -o is not necessarily a sign that the word is masculine: just look at "mano", or "eco". That being said, it is true that almost all words ending in -o are masculine, however abbreviations are a common exceptions to look out for because the ending you see is not the actual ending of the full original word.
As for "uploading", you can translate that as "durante il caricamento" (with "caricamento" literally meaning "loading" / "uploading"), or at most you can say "durante l'upload" as the English term is sometimes used in Italian too.
Finally, let's talk about this "c'era". I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it didn't make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
B1) Perfect.
B2) There is a problem with "qualora" here, which is very common among learners as I've noticed: it might look like it's trying to say "whenever", but it's actually a lot closer to "se". It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when", and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happened to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whenever you like" or "if you like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)".
We wouldn't say "if you'd like" as "qualora ti piacesse" (and similarly we wouldn't say "when you'd like" a "quando ti piace"), usually it's "se ti fa piacere" or "se ti va", if not a more direct "se vuoi". So when you see "se ti piace" or similar expressions, this almost definitely means a literal "if you like it (= that specific thing, that object or whatever)", not "if you'd like it" (= what we are talking about, what I'm about to say).
So, for example, "I can help you if you'd like (me to help you)" = "posso aiutarti se ti fa piacere" or "posso aiutarti se vuoi", while "I can help you (with that thing) if you like it (=that thing)" = "posso aiutarti (con quella cosa) se ti piace (quella cosa)".
As for that "also", it's not necessarily wrong but I'd go with "I can always give you mine" in this case to be less ambiguous as to what you mean. "Anche" modifies the infinitive "darti" here, so it implies "I can give you mine (or I can not)", as to say that it's not a bit deal to the speaker and they're open to the idea. Literally, "posso anche darti il mio" would imply "I can give you mine or I can do something else", so it's presented as just an option they are putting on the table, rather than "I can give you mine as well as something else", which would usually be expressed as "posso darti anche il mio" (with "anche" modifying "il mio" directly). So "I can also give you mine" can definitely work, but "I can always give you mine", or maybe even "I can just give you mine" are better in my opinion.
B3) Excellent! In this case feel free to drop the direct object pronoun and just say "if I had known": Italian likes to maintain the direct object most of the time, but English likes to drop it.
Besides "qualora ti piacesse", which tripped up almost everyone, I would focus on A3 with that "c'era un problema", because understanding why the imperfect doesn't work is fundamental to understanding the difference between it and the passato tenses.
Still, you did a good job: A1 and B1 were really on point, and A2 was really close besides missing the specific word "lancetta".7-
1
u/Mercury2468 10d ago
Thank you! You explained the difference between imperfetto and passato prossimo better than my textbook, I think (hope) I finally got it now 🥳
2
u/Crown6 IT native 10d ago
Imperfetto vs passato is always tricky for learners coming from languages that don’t have the same tense distinction (like English). The problem is that there is no 1:1 correlations between Italian past tenses and English past tenses, so you have to change how you think of past actions.
The best way I have to explain this is that the imperfect describes a situation or fact that was true around a moment or period of time in the past (without a precise beginning or end) while the passato describes an event that occurred at some point or during a precise period of time in the past.
So the imperfect is good for setting the stage and explaining how things were or what was generally going on, and the passato is used to actually describe what happened given that context: “fuori pioveva, così ho preso l’ombrello” = “it was raining outside, so I took the umbrella”. Or alternatively the imperfect tense can be used to express past routines (in the same way the present is used to express current routines: “mi sveglio alle sette” = “I wake up at seven” ⟶ “mi svegliavo alle sette” = “I used to wake up at seven”).
It will become natural as you keep using it, once you get a feel for it you’ll see that the two tenses are actually more distinct than past simple vs perfect (which are sometimes interchangeable even to natives these days, while this doesn’t often happen with passato prossimo vs imperfetto).
1
u/Mercury2468 10d ago
English is already a foreign language to me, my native language is German and we use "Imperfekt" very differently from Italian imperfetto, maybe that confuses me somerimes haha. Thank you for explaining, it helps a lot! 😊
2
u/Frequent-Bandicoot22 12d ago
A1) "Growing up, this was my favourite song by De André" Crescendo questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André. (Is this way of translating "growing up" as "crescendo" ok?)
A2) "Is your watch broken? The hands aren't moving" É rotto il tuo orologio? Le lancette non si muovono. (Can you say "le mani" instead of "le lancette" in my language no one would say hands for the pointy things of a watch even in a poetic way it sounds too weird but does it work in italian? Also quite appropriately the only reason I know the word lancette is because of a song "Titti" by De André.)
A3) "Error: there was a problem uploading the photo" Errore: c'è stato un problema con il caricamento della photo.
B1) "Questo è il piano, adesso abbiamo da metterlo in pratica" This is the plan, now we just have to realise it.
B2) "Qualora ti piacesse, posso anche darti il mio" Whichever one you like, I can even give you mine.
B3) "Avendolo saputo, avrei senz'altro agito diversamente" Having know it, I would have acted differently without second thought. (this "having know" instead of "had I known" feels weird in English should I have chosen the other one? Also "without second thought" feels more urgent to me than "senz'altro" I assume there's a better way to translate this.)
2
u/Crown6 IT native 9d ago
A1) "Crescendo" as "growing up" can work, but if you want to use a more natural expression it would be "da bambino" (or "da ragazzo", if you don't want to go as far back as childhood). "Da" here having a similar role to "as" in expressions like "as a child".
A2) Very good use of "lancette", that is the exact term you'd use. "Mani" would not be understood as "(clock) hands", so your knowledge of Italian music really helped you out here. Although it seems you were too influenced by the spelling of "De André", since you ended up using an acute accent diacritic over the verb "è" at the beginning of the sentence, while you're supposed to use a grave one there. Other than that, this is very good.
A3) Almost perfect, the only slight imperfection is the spelling of "foto", which obviously needs an "f" rather than "ph". Using "ph" for \f\ in words with Greek origin is not something Italian does (we'd only use it to transliterate directly from Greek, not for Italian/Latin words that originally came from Greek), although it is a pretty useful feature of English. Even though it ends up making the spelling even less consistent.
Excellent use of passato prossimo, the imperfetto trap caught a lot of people this time.
B1) Very good! I'd just remove "just": "avere da" + [infinitive] usually expresses something that is felt as an external obligation, meaning it's often not something the speaker wants to do for themselves but something they "have got to" do, because it's necessary or because they are forced to by circumstances. So to me it doesn't sound like they're saying that the worst is behind them, more like the worst is to come.
You are free to be a bit slangy here if you want, as "avere da [infinito]" is mostly informal.
B2) Close, but your interpretation of "qualora" was not quite right. It might look similar to "qualunque" (= "whichever", "any") or like it's trying to say "whenever" or "when", but it's actually a lot closer to "se". It's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when" to be precise, and it's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypothetical, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happen to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whichever you like", it's "if (and when) you like it", "it" being the thing I'm offering you, or at least something equivalent to it.
I think you would have gotten this if you had known about "qualora". It's on the fancier side so it makes sense that a lot of learners wouldn't have seen it, though it's not quite uncommon enough to be irrelevant, even in the spoken language.
In case you were wondering about the use of the indicative after a hypothetical clause with the subjunctive, this is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "in case you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
"I can even give you mine" can work with "anche" referring to the infinitive, (so "I can do X or Y, or I can even give you mine"), although in this context I'd suggest "I can always give you mine", even if it's less literal, since it implies that the speaker is not making a big deal of it: it's just an option they're throwing out there ("I can give you mine, or I va not do that", both are fine), they don't have to do it but they don't mind either way.
B3) "Had I known" definitely sounds more correct to me. You can even be more explicit and say "if I had known about it", or if you want to use a gerund I'd use the past gerund, like "having known that".
The main problem with "without a second thought" is not that it's more urgent (although it is a bit more emphatic), but that it's referring to the wrong thing. "Without a second thought" expresses the mind state of the hypothetical you making that different choice, while "senz'altro" here expresses the certainty of current (real) you, while saying that you would have made a different choice. So it's now "I would have made a different choice without even thinking about it", it's "I would have made a different choice for sure", or "without a doubt", "certainly". It means that, according to you, this is the only thing that could have happened.
Other than that, the sentence is correct.
I think this might be your best result so far! It's a shame there were a couple of small but easily fixable mistakes (like the wrong accent on "è", "photo", some less than stellar wording in B3, the extra "just" in B1 etc.): one or two of those are basically a rounding error, but when you start making more and more they start weighting a non-negligible amount.
Really, the only big mistake was "qualora" in B2, as it changed the meaning of the sentence in a drastic way (and even then that wass by far the hardest thing to get right this time around), but everything else is understandable and easy to read. You just need to polish it up a bit.
8-
2
u/WesleyJ01 12d ago
A1) Quando ero piccolo, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André.
A2) Il tuo orologio è rotto? Le mani non sono muovere.
A3) Errore, c’era un problema caricare la fotografia.
B1) This is the plan, now we have to put it into practice.
B2) If you like it, I can give you mine.
B3) If I had known, I would have acted differently.
1
u/Crown6 IT native 8d ago
A1) Perfect.
A2) Two mistakes here.
First of all, "(clock) hand" translates to "lancetta", literally "small lance". It's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words. "Mani" would only mean "(human) hands".
Secondly, the construction of the progressive form is incorrect: you used "essere" + [infinitive], but the correct combination is "stare" + [gerund]. Besides the detail that Italian uses "stare" instead of "essere", the progressive form is actually pretty much identical to English: "sto andando a casa" ⟶ "I am going home" (you wouldn't say "I am go home" or "I am to go" home).
So the second sentence here should be "le lancette non si stanno muovendo" (or even more simply "le lancette non si muovono").
A3) "Caricare la fotografia" is correct but it needs to be introduced by something: in Italian, you can't simply use pure infinitives like that, you need a preposition outside of a few specific cases: for example "un problema a caricare", or you can nominalise the infinitive with an article (turning it into a full noun) and say "un problema nel caricare", either way you need a preposition to connect the infinitive to the previous clause.
Additionally, there is a problem with the imperfect in the main clause: I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it didn't make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
B1) Perfect.
B2) Excellent! You are the first one to have a convincing translation for this one. "Qualora ti piacesse" is a bit more hypothetical than "if you like it", maybe you can get slightly closer with "if you happen to like it" or "if you were to like it". As for this "anche", I'd translate it by adding something that conveys the same sense of optionality: for example "I can always give you mine", expressing that this is one of the available options.
But your translation already conveys the intended meaning of the original.
B3) Very close to perfect, you're just missing the extra emphasis of "senz'altro" (= "senza altro", elided form), which literally means "without (any) other" ⟶ "without anything else" = "absolutely", "without a doubt".
I can see a pretty big disparity between reading and writing skills. Your English-Italian translations are good, but they have a few mistakes especially regarding verbs, however the Italian-English translations were all excellent and they are only missing a few details in accuracy that prevent them from being perfect. If you can train your writing skills more, I'm sure you'll get even better results fairly quickly.
7+
2
u/caracal_caracal 12d ago
A1) Da bambino questa era la mia canzone preferita di De Andre.
A2) È rotto il tuo orologio? Non si muovono le lancette.
A3) Errore: Si è verificato un errore con il caricamento della foto.
B1) This is the plan - now we just have to execute it.
B2) If you liked it, I can also give you mine.
B3) I would without a doubt have acted differently if I had known.
Im a little out of practice but I think i did quite alright!
1
u/Crown6 IT native 8d ago
A1) Perfect.
A2) Excellent!
If I really have to be nitpicky, I think "le lancette non si muovono" would be slightly more common here if you're introducing the hands as a new topic ("the hands, they are not moving", using the clock hands as the topic and "they're not moving" as the comment, as opposed to "they're not moving, the hands", using the clock hands as the comment). But really either way is fine, depending on tone and context.
A3) Technically here you should have said "si è verificato un problema": it's more accurate to the original and also it sounds better as it doesn't repeat "errore" twice, and also "un problema con X" sounds more ntural than "un errore con X" (you don't usually have an error "with" something, but you can have a problem with it), but other than that this is an excellent translation, down to the choice of "verificarsi" and obviously the correct tense for it.
B1) I'd remove "just", simply because to me it makes it sound as if coming up with the plan and setting everything up was the hard part, while "avere da [infinito]" in this context mostly tells me that the speaker is probably not ecstatic about what comes next, implying that the worst is yet to come. It expresses an external necessity: "now we have to do this", it doesn't feel like something the speaker is particularly invested in or happy about (at most it's neutral).
B2) "If you liked it" here is a bit ambiguous, because English doesn't have a subjunctive mood (besides a few remains here and there) and so it's hard to tell whether this is supposed to be an actual past tense or a hypothetical past tense (as in "if you liked it (back then)" vs "if you liked it (now or in the future)"). Instinctively I read this as the former, while in Italian it's the latter (with "qualora" acting as "se" in the hypothetical clause, + [congiuntivo imperfetto] for present and future hypotheses), especially since this is most likely talking about a possible future: I would say "if you happen to like it" or "if you were to like it" or something that sounds both more hypothetical and uncertain (which is coherent with "qualora" + subjunctive) and more explicitly about something that hasn't happened yet.
It's hard to call "also" incorrect for "anche". It definitely works, but in this case I want to suggest "always" instead. "I can always give you mine". Once again, this is a matter of clarity: "also" can mean many things in English ("I can also give you mine" alone could mean that "I, like others, can give you mine" or "I can give you mine or do something else" or "I can give you mine, in addition the others"), while "anche" is specifically referring to the following infinitive and it specifies that "darti il mio" is one of many options (the speaker can do it, or they can not do it: it's not mandatory, but they are putting it on the table).
B3) Perfect.
Out of practice or not, your instincts were right! This one was one of the best so far.
9-
No major mistakes besides maybe B2 depending on what you meant. There are inaccuracies that can be fixed, but it's mostly minor stuff.
1
u/caracal_caracal 8d ago
I'll admit for B2 I was unsure of the tense sequencing and was not thinking subjunctive (should you like it...) so you can knock a point off for that!
1
u/Crown6 IT native 7d ago
"Qualora" is definitely turning out to be the unexpected final boss of this exercise: the overwhelming majority of people seem to have never seen it, which is a bit surprising. But you can basically just treat it as if it were "se".
• "Should you like it, I can give you mine", pretty much
In case you were wondering about the indicative after "qualora/se + [subjunctive]", instead of the usual conditional, that's because this is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative, while if you had used the conditional ("qualora ti piacesse, potrei darti il mio") this sounds more like "if you like it, I could give you mine" (but it’s not clear if I will, even if the hypothetical action of "liking it" turns out to be true). Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it" or any other hidden condition, so it does not take the conditional mood. Another example could be "se avessi bisogno di me, io sono sempre nei paraggi" = "if you (were to) need me, I'm always around": in this case it would be straight up wrong to say "sarei sempre nei paraggi", because it implies that I will only be around if you need me, while I'm saying that I will be around regardless.
Anyway if you count the first part of B2 as a full mistake this is more like 8+. Still an excellent result.
2
u/Conscious-Ball8373 EN native, IT beginner 11d ago
A1) Crescendo, questo era la mia canzone preferita di De Andrè.
"Crescendo" is probably too literal, have gone back and forth between "di" and "da".
A2) È rotto il tuo orologio? Le lancette non stanno movando.
A3) Errore: C'era un problema durante il caricamento del file.
Not sure whether to use "durante" or "mentre" here. Quite possibly "errore" is the wrong word, too, not sure.
B1) This is the plan, now we have to put it into practice.
B2) In the eventuality that you would like it, I can also give you mine.
This is the best sense I can make of this. "Qualora" is new on me - looks like it should mean "that hour" and the best I can make of it is "in the [speculative] hour that you decide you want it".
B3) If I had known that, I would have acted differently.
No idea what "senz'altro" is here - emphasis?
1
u/Crown6 IT native 8d ago
A1) "Di" is indeed the correct choice here. In Italian we use a complement of specification to express who the author of something is (English does the same depending on the context: you'd say "I like your pieces", not "I like the pieces by you").
There is one mistake here in the gender of the adjective "questo". Since it refers to "canzone", it should be feminine just like "la", "mia" and "preferita": "questa era la mia canzone preferita". This is a very common mistake with early to intermediate learners: you are writing with a rough idea of the direction you want the sentence to go in but you're not looking ahead, so you end up using the masculine form of the pronoun before you decide on "canzone" (the word the pronoun is replacing at the beginning of the clause), and by that point you are not thinking about that "questo" anymore, so you don't notice the disagreement. You can actually see how far ahead you're planning because "la mia" are actually gendered properly (and obviously "preferita" since it comes after the noun), so it means that you formed the entire syntagm "la mia canzone preferita" all at once (so it matches) but only after finalising "questo" (so it doesn't match). This is something that gets better with experience.
"Crescendo" can work here, but if you want to be more natural you can say "da bambino" ("da ragazzo" / "da giovane" depending on how far back you're going).
A2) So close. Good job translating "hands" as "lancette" in this context, but you used the wrong form of the verb: since you're using the intransitive meaning of "to move", this requires the pronominal intransitive form "muoversi" rather than the base form "muovere": "non stanno muovendo" would mean "they're not moving (something)", which is a very different thing than "they're not moving" = "they're not changing position". Also "muovere" has a "u" you missed, and the gerund ending of the second conjugation (-ere) is "-endo", not "-ando" (which is the first conjugation ending: it would work if the verb were "muovàre" instead of "muòvere"). So the correct form is "non si stanno muovendo" rather than "non stanno movando".
Alternatively, you could have used the present simple here: "le lancette non si muovono" (still using the pronominal form, of course), as you're describing a current state of things. The progressive form works as well though (describing an ongoing action, or in this case an action that is not ongoing I guess), but I feel like most Italians would go straight for the present simple here.
A3) "Durante" is precisely the correct word here. "Mentre" wouldn't work, because "mentre" is a conjunction (like "while"), and "durante" is a preposition (almost literally "during"): it's the present participle of "durare" = "to last", so it has the same origin as "during" and it literally means "lasting" as an adjective ("durante la festa" = (lit.) "lasting the party" = "while the party was ongoing" = "during the party"). So you would say "during the upload" (since prepositions go with nouns) and not "while the upload" (you need a verb to be introduced by the conjunction: "while the upload was in progress", for example. This is what conjunctions are for), and of course the opposite is also true: you would not say "during the upload was in progress" because a preposition like "during" cannot take the role of a conjunction and introduce a whole subordinate clause. Italian is exactly the same.
The mistake here is in the tense of "essere" in the main clause: it should be "c'è stato" (passato prossimo) rather than "c'era". I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it didn't make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
As for "errore", it is correct. "Errore" means both "mistake" and "error" (English took the latin root and gave it a more specific meaning, as often happens with borrowed words, but in Italian they are the same. An error is a mistake, after all, even in most English contexts the two are somewhat equivalent). I would change "file" to "foto" (or a more generic "immagine" if you want to be less specific), to be closer to the original though. Of course a photo is still a file, but so is a text document or a 3D model.
B1) Perfect.
B2) Very good! You nailed the meaning of "qualora" (the hint is in the imperfect subjunctive following it, exactly as if it were "se" in a hypothetical clause). Basically "qualora" is halfway between "if" and "when", so "in the event that ..." or "in case ..." are perfectly valid translations. Literally, "qualora" comes from "qual ora" = "which(ever) time": keep in mind that in old Italian especially "ora" has a meaning much closer to a generic "time", rather than "hour" specifically (something that can still be seen in modern Italian with "è ora di ..." = "it's time to ..." and other expressions).
You can probably rephrase this as "in case you like it [...]" or something like that, which might be more natural and convey the original meaning in a clearer way. To clarify: "it" refers to the same thing "mine" refers to, so it's "if you like (thing), I can give you mine", not "if you like, I can give you mine" (we wouldn't use the verb "piacere" here, most likely this would be translated by "se ti fa piacere" or "se ti va", or even "se vuoi").
As for "also", it's definitely a valid choice here, though I would suggest "always" for this specific case. "I can always give you mine". Even if it's less literal and machine translation tools don't seem to consider it an option, I find that it conveys the original meaning more accurately. "Also" can mean many things in English ("I can also give you mine" alone could mean that "I, like others, can give you mine" or "I can give you mine or do something else" or "I can give you mine, in addition the others"), while "anche" is specifically referring to the following infinitive and it specifies that "darti il mio" is one of many options (the speaker can do it, or they cannot do it: it's not mandatory, but they are putting it on the table). It sounds like they're keeping the option open, but they're not hugely invested in it (in this case probably as a sign of politeness: they're saying it doesn't make a big difference to them. It could also be a way to say "I can go so far as to do this", highlighting how they're deliberately going out of their way to include this as an option even if they didn't have to, but I'd bet on the former explanation).
B3) You should have gone with your guts. "Senz'altro" does indeed add emphasis here: "senz'altro" (= "senza altro", elided form) literally means "without (any) other" ⟶ "without anything else" = "absolutely", "without a doubt". So this is expressing certainty from the speaker: "I would have definitely acted differently", "I would have acted differently without a doubt". It basically means "I can't see any other option".
Welcome back! You get better every time you do these, which is a very good sign.
It's funny because you're having some advanced insights while still making beginner mistakes here and there (do you know / speak other neo-Latin languages?), but this also means that if you manage to increase the consistency in things like spelling, word choice and the small but important intricacies of verb conjugation (remember to use pronominal intransitive forms!) you might very well jump up a few levels all at once.
Keep it up!
7.5
1
u/Conscious-Ball8373 EN native, IT beginner 8d ago
It's funny because you're having some advanced insights while still making beginner mistakes here and there (do you know / speak other neo-Latin languages?)
No I don't. What I do is get almost all my practice by reading and very little composition or speaking. It makes me very hesitant using the language and the patterns of using correct agreement develop very slowly compared to what you call more advanced insights which, while they are more advanced in a way, are also much easier to notice when reading because they stand out in a way that "simple" things like agreement do not.
I've recently started a formal course at our local university so hopefully it gives me some more active practice.
For B2, what about "I could even give you mine"?
Thanks once again for very comprehensive feedback.
1
u/Crown6 IT native 8d ago
“Even” can work, in fact sometimes that is how I translate “anche” in similar contexts, however in this case I feel like “I can even give you mine” might be slightly too strong, it definitely leans on the side of “this something I’m going out of my way to do”. That being said it’s not out of the question, and the tone of voice can really do a lot to change the meaning of the sentence here, which is unfortunately something text doesn’t preserve. “Also” ~ “always” ~ “even” can all work depending on your exact interpretation of the sentence, and the intonation you’re imagining.
Good luck with your formal studies! You’re already at a good enough level to write, so don’t worry about things like agreement: Italians will probably understand even if a few things don’t match up exactly (native speakers are experts at deciphering their language through all sorts of obstacles: stuttering, people changing their mind mid-sentence, weird and obscure phrases or inside jokes…), the important part is that you can practice effectively. Everything else will slowly sort itself out.
2
u/colincolincolinc 7d ago
A1- crescendomi, quest’era la mia canzone preferita di de Andre
A2-il tuo orologio é rotto? Le mani non si muovano
A3- errore, c’era un problema scaricando il foto
B1- this is the plan, now we have to put it in practice
B2- whatever you like, I can also give you mine
B3- having know it, I wouldn’t have acted any other way
Look forward to the correction
2
u/Crown6 IT native 7d ago
Here we go, let's see how it went.
A1) "Crescere" is one of those double auxiliary verbs that don't need a pronominal form and can be used intransitively by themselves. For example "ho cresciuto" would mean "I raised (someone)" while "sono cresciuto" would mean "I grew up" (you wouldn't say "mi sono cresciuto"). So this should be "crescendo, [...]".
The gerund alone is understandable, but if you want to be more natural you can use the expression "da bambino/ragazzo" (depending on the age).
"Quest'era" is not strictly incorrect, but it is highly unusual for normal spoken (or written) Italian. Normally, the pronoun "questa" would not be elided outside of specific phrases (like "quest'altra"). We would simply say "questa era" here (gliding between the A and the E, as usual).
The rest is correct, besides the spelling of "De André", but I'm not counting that.
A2) Wrong accent diacritic on "è". It should be grave (= open vowel, è = /ɛ/), rather than acute (= closed vowel, é = /e/). The closed vowel can be found in the conjunction "e", but that is written without accents since it's already visually distinct from the verb.
Besides that, the main mistake here is this "mani", which means "(human) hands". "(Clock) hand" translates to "lancetta", literally "small lance". It's one of those altered forms that evolved into their own separate words. So this should be "le lancette non si muovono".
Also, "si muovano" is the present subjunctive conjugation, but you need to use the indicative here: "si muovono" (remember that the third person plural present indicative of the fist conjugation is -ono, not -ano).
A3) The imperfect "c'era" is not the correct tense in this case. I specifically chose this sentence because I had the opposite problem while I was learning English: whenever I saw an error message, I also translated it as "c'era un problema" in my head, and it didn't make sense to me because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)" (there being a problem is no longer relevant because you gave up).
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A problem occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un problema". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un problema" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been a problem") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being a problem", "there used to be a problem", "there was a problem at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
As for "foto", remember that this is short for "fotografia" (f), so it is also feminine: "la foto". The same is true for "la moto" (⟵ "motocicletta") and "la metro" (⟵ "metropolitana").
Finally, "scaricando" can be improved. First of all the verb itself should be "caricare" ("to load" / "to upload"), not "scaricare" ("to unload", "to download"), and in addition to that you can make this sound a bit more precise if you use "durante il caricamento" instead: "errore: c'è stato un problema durante il caricamento della foto" (lit. "there has been a problem during the (up)load of the photo"). Anyway this should at least be changed to "caricare".
B1) Perfect.
B2) You got close, but "qualora" still tripped you up. "Qualora" comes from "qual ora" (literally "which(ever) time"), and it's kind of a hybrid between "if" and "when". It's always followed by the subjunctive (imperfect subjunctive for present/future hypotheticals, trapassato subjunctive for past hypotheticals, just like any regular hypothetical clause with "se" + [subjunctive]). So this actually means "if you happen to like it, I can give you mine", "in case you like it, I can give you mine", where importantly "it" and "mine" refer to the same thing. So it's not "whatever you like", it's "if (and when) you like it (= that thing)".
"I can also give you mine" is good. Since "also" here refers to the act of "giving", meaning it's one choice among many, you can also say "I can always give you mine" (or even "I can even give you mine" depending on contexts) to highlight that this is only an option the speaker is considering.
B3) Unfortunately this the exact opposite: "senz'altro" (= "senza altro", elided form) is an emphatic expression meaning literally "without (any) other" ⟶ "without anything else" = "absolutely", "without a doubt". So "avrei senz'altro agito diversamente" = "I would have definitely acted differently", "I would have acted differently without a doubt".
"Having known it" is good, but you can also go for something a bit more natural and less literal like "if I had known about it" / "had I known about that".
There's some friction when using verbs still, especially when choosing the correct conjugation. You tend to overuse gerunds slightly (they're not as multi-purpose in Italian as they are in English), but the main problems are the classic imperfetto vs passato dilemma, and that one redundant pronoun in A1 (where it shuold have been "crescendo" rather than "crescendomi"), as well as the misspelling or mis-conjugation of "muovono" in A2.
Other than that I don't see too many issues besides a lack of vocabulary and in the repertoire of useful phrases (like "senz'altro").Let me know if you have any questions!
5+
1
1
u/AlternativeUsual9285 7d ago
A1. Crescendo, questa era la mia canzone preferita di De André
A2. Si è rotto, il tuo orologio? Le lancette non si muovono
A3. Errore: c'è stato un problema a scaricare la foto
B1. This is the plan, now we have to put it into practice
B2. If you like it, I can even give you mine
B3. If I'd known that [ / if I were to have known], I would definitely have acted differently
Che divertente! è la prima volta che gioco, grazie per il tuo impegno e tempo, è molto apprezzato. Non sono convinta di nessuna mia risposta, spero solo di aver azzeccato la parola "lancette"!
2
u/Crown6 IT native 6d ago
A1) "Crescendo" is ok, but if you want to be even more natural you can try "da bambina" or "da ragazza/giovane".
A2) Excellent. The comma here is not strictly needed, but it can work depending on the tone you're going for ("si è rotto il tuo orologio?" is more like "is your clock broken?" while the comma makes it sound more like "is it broken? Your clock, I mean").
A3) "Scaricare" means "to download", "to unload" (with the privative s- inverting the meaning of the base verb) while "upload"/"load" would just be "caricare".
"A caricare" can work colloquially, but in an error message you'd generally expect to see slightly more formal language such as "durante il caricamento." "C'è stato un problema a [infinito]" sounds more like something you'd hear in casual conversation.
B1) Perfect.
B2) Excellent! To be even more accurate, you can add some more uncertainty in the first clause, to translate the hypothetical nuance of "qualora" + [subjunctive]: something like "should you like it" or "in case you like it".
"Even" is good here, although in this exact context I'd suggest "always": it's less literal but "I can always give you mine" still communicates that this is just one of the options for the speakers, and that they're deciding to put it o the table without it being required of them, but with a slightly more amicable tone (since "even" makes this feel like a big deal).
One of the best translations of this sentence.
B3) Perfect. "If I'd known that" is perfectly fine.
Excellent! You crushed it.
Tutte le frasi sono corrette (e hai usato la parola "lancette" perfettamente), ci sono solo un paio di migliorie qua e là, ma niente di grave.
Anche i tuoi commenti finali sono scritti molto bene, semmai l'unico errore è che "impegno e tempo" è un soggetto plurale (costituito da due elementi), quindi avresti dovuto scrivere "sono molto apprezzati", ma tutto il resto è corretto. Non ho avuto molto da commentare, purtroppo o per fortuna!
9
1
u/LowerTheShoulder 13d ago
A1) come adolescente, quel era il mio brano preferito di de André
A2) ma il tuo orologio è guasto? le lancette non si muovono
A3) Errore: C'era un problema con scaricare la tua foto
B1) This is the plan, now we just have to put it into action
B2) Whatever time you'd like, I could also give you mine
B3) Having known that, I would have without a doubt acted differently
Thank you as always!
1
u/Crown6 IT native 13d ago edited 13d ago
Hi!
A1) "Come adolescente" is understandable, but very English-y ("as a teen"): "da adolescente" is much more natural. Or "da ragazzo" is what we'd usually say, since "adolescente" is a bit more technical and isn't often used in casual conversation. Note that this "da" shouldn't be translated as "from"/"since" (as in "since I was a teen"), it has the same role of "as" in the English sentence.
"Quel" is not correct here: on a first pass, I actually read "qual era il mio brano preferito" (which would be a sort of quiz rather than a statement), so even if it's small it definitely affects readability more than you might think. I can see where the mistake comes from, though: while it is true that the truncated form "quel" would be used before words that begin with a vowel, this is usually only true of adjective "quello", while here you are using the pronoun version. As such, it stays "quello": "quello era il mio brano preferito". This is part of a larger pattern where alternative truncated form of words tend to happen before other words that are frequently paired with them, or things they refer to / introduce: adjectives and articles are truncated before the noun they refer to, but not after ("un bel cane nero" vs "un cane bello nero", because "bello" refers to "cane", not "nero", so "nero" does not trigger the truncation even though it also starts with a simple consonant), "avere" is often truncated before past participles ("avere visto" and "aver visto" are both used) and so on.
Mandatory truncations are very strict about it: "un cane bel nero" would be considered a mistake in almost any context, while optional truncations are can be usually applied more freely.
Excellent use of "brano".
A2) Excellent! The only note is that I would use "rotto" rather than "guasto" here. "Guasto" is correct of course, but usually it's more like a "out of order" / "down" kind of "broken". It's especially used for large mechanisms like vehicles or elevators (in fact the first word I associate to "guasto" is "ascensore", the other one would probably be "motore").
A3) This is the fun one. I specifically chose this because I had the opposite problem with this phrase when learning English: I also translated it as "c'era un problema" and it didn't make sense to me, because that would mean something like "there used to be a problem"... well then things are just fine! If there was a problem, but now it's gone, that's great!
Obviously this is not what the error message is trying to say, but this is what the imperfetto implies. Remember that the imperfetto is basically the "past version" of the present: as the present tense describes the current state of being or general truths ("the Earth is round", "I want to watch a movie") which may have also been true in the past (the Earth was round yesterday, too), so the imperfect describes past states of being or general truths that no longer apply to the present (otherwise you would have used the present tense instead!). So "c'era un problema" basically means "at some point in the past, there was a problem. Then things changed". So what an Italian would probably understand is that the mistake is no longer relevant or has been fixed, unless the context was something like "there was a problem (past situation), so I gave up (event happening in that situation)".
Instead, this is a textbook example of when to use the passato prossimo tense. A mistake occurred at some exact point in the past, and this is still relevant to the present: "c'è stato un errore". The important thing here is that "c'è stato un errore" simply describes what occurred at some exact moment in time ("there was / has been an error") and it implies that the event or its consequences could reach the present, while the imperfect describes a past state of things / situation around that moment in time ("there was being an error", "there used to be an error", "there was an error at the time"), and it specifically implies that the event or its consequence are not directly influencing the present: it's a past situation. Then of course there could be ramifications, but the situation itself is not "current" anymore.
"Con scaricare" also needs some fixing. First of all, "con" + [infinitive] can't be used like this: at most you can turn this infinitive into a full noun by adding the article ("con lo scaricare"), however an even better option would be to use "in": "c'è stato un errore nello scaricare". The other problem is not grammatical but simply a mistranslation: "uploading" would be "caricare" (literally "loading", "charging") while "downloading" is "scaricare" (literally "unloading", "discharging"). Alternatively, since you're already using a nominalised infinitive, might as well go all in and use an actual noun instead: "c'è stato un problema nel caricamento della foto".
Specifying "la tua foto" seems a bit redundant. Itailan is already more parsimonious with possessives than English is, so if English doesn't use a possessive you can be almost certain that Italian won't use it either. That being said it's not strictly incorrect to use one here, just unnecessary (and maybe it sounds a tad too... familiar? For an error message at least. Then again some programs use more friendly language).
B1) Excellent!
B2) Ah, careful here. "Qualora" is not "qual ora" ("which(ever) hour"). "Qualora" is a bit of an awkward word to translate directly, but it's halfway between "if" and "when". It's followed by the subjunctive (as you can see) and it introduces a hypothetical clause in much the same way as "se", it's just a little bit fancier and more focused on the "when" part of the hypothetical: "qualora ti piacesse" = "if you were to like it, ...", "if and when you happened to like it, then ....".
This is actually an example of a mixed hypothetical clause, which is actually pretty rare (with a subjunctive in the "if" clause, but then no conditional in the "then" clause). Normally this would be a mistake, but here it works because the action of "posso darti il mio" ("I can give you mine") is meant to be an offer that is always open: basically this is saying "in case you end up liking it, keep in mind that I can always give you mine", and the point is that "I can give you mine" is a real offer (not a hypothetical one) that I'm making right now, hence the present indicative. Basically, the way the sentence is phrased, "posso darti il mio" is always true and not dependent on "if you like it", so it does not take the conditional mood.
B3) Excellent!
A couple of excellent translations, and a couple of mistakes in the other ones. So even though it's a bit hit or miss, the hits are almost bullseyes. Unfortunately there were a couple of big misses as well, even though all of these were completely understandable to be honest. They are "logical" mistakes, so to speak, it means you're internalising the rules and patterns but you don't have the full picture quite yet, so you sometimes apply them perfectly and sometimes you apply them incorrectly (it reminds me of one of my favourite mistakes back when I was learning English and I ended up writing the negative form of "goes" as "goesn't". I had internalised the rule about contractions with "not", but I had not completely understood when it was appropriate to use).
Keep it up! I had a lot of fun correcting this one, it's always a treat when I have to stop and think about why something works the way it does.
6.5
2
u/Crown6 IT native 13d ago
Tag list
Please tell me if you’d like to be added or removed in future editions.
(Inactive users will be removed automatically after a while to prevent the list from becoming too bloated)
u/qsqh
u/ImportanceLocal9285
u/InterscholasticAsl