Lost in Translation • 7

Hmmm… sto sbagliando qualcosa?

[ intermediate ]
Se pensi che ci sia qualche errore, scrivi la tua versione nei commenti.
Non tarderò a rispondere.


Author: Tony

Born and raised in Malaysia between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. Educated at Wycliffe College in Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, England. Living in the foothills of Mount Etna since 1982 and teaching English at Catania University since 1987.

32 thoughts on “Lost in Translation • 7”

    1. Ah! I had a feeling there was something wrong. Thank you, Roberta!

      N.B. You’re wrong / You’ve made a mistake

          1. oh my God !!!! I’ve always said “to do it on p..” but today NO ,today I had to say it wrong!!!!!

  1. I’m sorry.
    We didn’t have to wait for long.
    I confused with the past perfect.

  2. we haven’t had to wait for so long. Or we didn’t to wait for so long.

      1. Hi Antonino. Well, both forms are possible but I think the simple past is much more probable in this kind of construction. The present perfect variation would only be possible if the person speaking is still in the place where the waiting happened and the waiting has just finished.

            1. Hi Tony, and speaking of “dovere” I’ve just found out another form of conditional other than “should” that is “where to”. Have you already discussed it?

                    1. se non ho capito male si traduce “dovesse” ma non ho capito se si coniuga o meno o quando si usa.

                1. Thank you very much Tony. (comunque lo trovo spesso usato dai giornalisti, credo anche che devo aumentare i gradi dei miei occhiali)

                2. quindi è una contrazione giornalistica di be going to (The Prime Minister is to make a further visit to..) Oppure si usa per dare ordini formali (credo che sia una attenuazione di must) oppure nelle if clause. Le forme passive Be to + passive infinitive o be to + perfect infinitive le ho lasciate perdere troppo avanzate per me adesso. Grazie di tutto Tony.

                  1. Non è prettamente giornalistico, ma in realtà forse viene sfruttato maggiormente in quel campo. Come he detto non si usa quasi per niente nell’inglese parlato. È un modo di riferirsi formalmente ad un ordine senza fare riferimento alla fonte dell’ordine. “Have to” fa lo stesso lavora ma è informale.

    1. Good work with the verb, Sandro. However, “for long” is used a lot in negative and interrogative sentences.

Partecipa anche tu!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: