La traduzione, come metodo di esercizio nell’apprendimento di una lingua, farà sicuramente parte della vecchia scuola, però, inserita in un contesto più vario di apprendimento, soprattutto con feedback in tempo reale, può sempre essere un utile esercizio di allenamento.
Consiglio una partecipazione attiva e visibile postando la tua versione tra i commenti in fondo a questa pagina. In questo modo riceverai un mio commento o suggerimento in tempo più o meno reale. Ma per chi non se la sente, si può semplicemente annotare la propria versione e controllarla attraverso i miei commenti lasciati per gli altri.
Ricorda l’importanza di immaginare un contesto reale nel quale la frase in questione avrebbe senso, prima di procedere con la traduzione.
Ecco la nuova frase:
Bob di solito non criticava la gente per come si vestiva, ma nel caso di Tom sapeva di dover dire qualcosa prima dell’arrivo dei prossimi ospiti.
Buon divertimento!
Hi Tony how are you? here I am, trying to make up for lost time. I have a question for you and i hope this doesn’t bother you.
Io ho usato to be used to —-> bob wasn’t used to criticizing
Perché significherebbe “Bob non era abituato a criticare” (gli risultava strano farlo), ma in questo caso aveva dovuto dovuto.
is this wrong?
Hi Giovanna, welcome back!
Your question is very valid.
Basically, the meaning is the same. The only real difference is a shift of emphasis.
“Bob didn’t usually criticise the way people dressed…” – the past simple is more factual and sticks more to the general narrative.
“Bob wasn’t used to criticising the way people dressed…” – the ‘used to’ form is more descriptive, it tries to tell us more about the kind of person Bob is.
The difference is very subtle and not important for the final meaning.
🙂
Perfect, I’m happy.
Perfect, I’m happy. It’s hard to start over, I have a lot of material to review.. Tanks a lot.😊
Take your time and, above all, enjoy it! 🙂
Hi,
very hard this time:
Bob usually did not criticized how people dressed, but in the case of Tom he knew to have to say something before next guests arrive.
Thank you very much
Well, the general flow is all right but there are a number of imprecisions:
🙂
Bob di solito non criticava la gente per come si vestiva, ma nel caso di Tom sapeva di dover dire qualcosa prima dell’arrivo dei prossimi ospiti.
Bob usually didn’t criticise how people dressed, but in Tom’s case he knew he had to say something before the next guests arrived.
All good, Paolo. I would change the beginning a little:
“Bob didn’t usually criticise the way people dressed….”
Got it, Tony.
Bob di solito non criticava la gente per come si vestiva, ma nel caso di Tom sapeva di dover dire qualcosa prima dell’arrivo dei prossimi ospiti.
Bob didn’t usually criticise the way people dressed, but in Tom’s case he knew he had to say something before the next guests arrived.
😀👍
Bob didn’t usually cricize people for how they dressed, but in Tom”s case he knew he has to say something before the next guests arrived
Happy Sunday
Hi fede. There are just two things that I would change in your version, one because it sounds better and one because it’s necessary:
🙂
it’s true, I hadn’t noticed
Thanks
😀👍
Bob did not usually criticise people for what they were wearing but, in Tom’s case, he realised he had to say something before the next guests arrived
I wrote so many different alternatives I did not know which one to choose
Well, I think you made the right choice, Carla. The only thing I would consider changing is “for what they were wearing”. I think there I would say, “for what they wore” or “for the way they dressed.”
🙂
Bob di solito non criticava la gente per come si vestiva, ma nel caso di Tom sapeva di dover dire qualcosa prima dell’arrivo dei prossimi ospiti.
Bob doesn’t usually criticise people for the way they dressed but about Tom he knew to have to say something before the coming of the next guests.
Some verb tense problems here, Dany. Have a good look at the original and then try again. Bear in mind that “about Tom” doesn’t work and nor does “the coming”.
Ti aspetto!
Bob didn’t usually criticise people for the way they dressed but in the case of Tom he knew to have to say something before the arrival of the next guests.
Much better, Dany, but…
🙂
So, in the sentence ‘arrived’ is a past tense used as a noun
No, Dany, it’s used as a conjugated verb which in English, in this context, sounds a bit more natural than the noun “arrival”.
Good morning prof,
Bob didn’t usually criticize the way people got dressed but in Tom’s case(as for Tom)he knew he had tò Say something before next guests’ arrival.
Very good, Roby. There are just a couple of things that could improve it a little.
First of all “to get dressed” refers to the actual act of putting clothes on which isn’t the case here. So in this case I would just say, “the way people dressed”.
Then at the end, you either need the article: before the next guests’ arrival, or, possible more natural here, “before the next guests arrived.”
🙂
ok,thanks prof.
😀👍
Bob didn’t usually criticize people for how they dressed, but he knew he had to say something to Tom before the next guests arrived.
That’s a very good version, Daniele. Well done.
The only slight improvement I can suggest is: “for the way they dressed”, but your version is fine. 🙂
I appreciate your comment, Tony. Thank you!
😀👍
Bob di solito non criticava la gente per come si vestiva, ma nel caso di Tom sapeva di dover dire qualcosa prima dell’arrivo dei prossimi ospiti.
So Tony 1 ” Bob wouldn’t knock people for their outfit/for what kind of clothes they put on, but as to Tom, he knew/felt he had to say something before (the) next guests came in.”
Tony, just a couple of things, I left out the adverb in the first clause because I used “would”, I want your feedback in this context (mi chiedo, essendo negativa la frase, posso usare would?). Secondly, I’m not sure about the article “the” before “next guests”, (to be honest I can’t remember this rule)
2 “Bob usually didn’t knock people for what kind of clothes they put on, but as to Tom, he knew/felt he had to say something before the next guests came in.
I don’t really see this as a “used to/would” situation but more as a “usually” in the past. In any case, I would tend to avoid the “would/wouldn’t” formula for past habits in everyday speech. It’s more typical in written English as a way of avoiding too much repetition of the “used to” formula. For me, the obvious solution here is: “Bob didn’t usually criticise people…” But I think “Bob didn’t use to criticise people…” is a possible alternative.
“Put on” is not a good choice here as it refers to the actual act of putting clothes on which isn’t the case here. So in this case I would just say, “the way people dressed” or “the kind of clothes they wore”.
Why “as to Tom”? Why not simply “in Tom’s case”?
Why “came in” (entrare) and not “arrived” (arrivare)?
Or, if you really don’t like “arrived”, how about, “got there”?
Hi Tony, Thanks for all. I’m just trying to use as many phrasal verbs as I can in order to get used to them. Maybe I should just give up.
Don’t give up, Toni. It’s probably not a bad policy. But you need to see if a more standard alternative is not actually ‘neater’ or more appropriate in the given circumstances.
😉
Good evening, Teacher
Bob di solito non criticava la gente per come si vestiva, ma nel caso di Tom sapeva di dover dire qualcosa prima dell’arrivo dei prossimi ospiti.
Bob usually didn’t use to criticize the way people got dressed, but in order to Tom he knew he should say something before next guests arrival
I’m afraid this is all a bit approximative, Anita, but let’s look at it carefully.
a) Bob didn’t use to criticise the way…
b) Bob didn’t usually criticise the way…
b) the arrival of the next guests
c) the next guests arrived (my choice)
🙂
Bob didn’t used to criticize people for how they dressed but in the Tom’s case he knew he had to say something before the next guest’ coming.
A good effort, folks. But…
If you use the “used to” formula in the past and in the negative, it should be “didn’t use to”. Secondly, I would say, “for the way they dressed”.
🔴 …in Tom’s case (no article before proper names)
Perhaps, “the next guests’ arrival” would be better, although I would probably conjugate the verb and say, “before the next guests arrived”.
ciao!
Bob didn’t usually criticise the way people got dressed but,in the case of Tom,he knew he was supposed to say something before the arrival of the next guests.
Hi Davide.
Your version is all right but we can make a few improvements on it. First of all “to get dressed” refers to the actual act of putting clothes on which isn’t the case here. So in this case I would just say, “the way people dressed”. Next, you could perhaps have used a Saxon genitive for “in Tom’s case”.
But, perhaps the most important point here is that use of “he was supposed to say”. This somehow implies a kind of external obligation (moral/social) while I think that here it is an obligation that he feels within himself. Consequently, I would use a standard “he knew he had to say something”. Does that make sense?
Lastly, but this is just an alternative: “before the next guests arrived”. It’s perhaps a bit more ‘standard’ in everyday English.
🙂