"You come in the restaurant" is very dirty. Say "you come into the restaurant" to avoid sounding like a sexual deviant in English
True; I was immediately reminded of that famous bit in the film 'When Harry Met Sally'... A pretty dumb sentence, this!
The phrasal verbs “to come in” and “to go in”, both meaning “to enter”, are intransitive; they cannot take a direct object. For example: “I'm coming in.”; “You went in.”.
The phrasal verbs “to come into” and “to go into”, likewise both meaning “to enter”, are transitive; they must take a direct object. For example: «Io vengo nel ristorante.» = “I'm coming into the restaurant.”; “Tu sei andato nel ristorante.» = “You went into the restaurant.”.
The simple verb “to come”, whether meaning “to move nearer” or “to cum|orgasm”, is also intransitive.
All of these can take prepositional phrases with the preposition “in…”, for example:
• “I'm coming in in a wheelchair.”
• “You went in in a wheelchair.”
• “I'm coming into the restaurant in a wheelchair.”
• “You went into the restaurant in a wheelchair.”
• “I'm coming in a wheelchair.”
• “in” and “into” in the phrasal verbs are verb particles, not prepositions
• “the restaurant” is the direct object of the phrasal verb “to come|go into”
• “a wheelchair” is the object of the preposition “in”.
LOL, they REALLY need to fix this, or not, as it's freaking hilarious and always makes me smile :D
I cannot stop laughing. This is why Duolingo makes learning so i teresti g and fun!
Who has the dirty mind?
Yes I agree, in english it is quite offensive. Duo Please change this to come into the restaurant
Wow, this is the first time I hear about this meaning, but this should be very informal.
Yes, but it does not accept the translation "You come to the restaurant." It only accepts "You come in the restaurant." which is not a proper sentence.
Well they each have a slightly different meaning but they are both proper sentences if you're having a convo over the phone. You could currently be at your house, leave and make your way to "come TO the restaurant" and when you finally get there "you come IN the restaurant."
If you have a scene where a couple argues over the phone, one says "come out the restaurant to talk" and the other says "no, you come in the restaurant!"
Btw, I wrote the combination into "You're coming into the restaurant" and that was accepted
Yes, what you say is true. The difficulty for us is to distinguish between a usage which means exactly the same in both languages and a usage used in Italian, but not in English. Without the kind of context you've just provided I think it's almost impossible
No you don't. Yes, you can "come to" the restaurant, but the better English phrase would be to "come upon" the restaurant, as in discover it (by accident). You GO to the restaurant and you go/come into the restaurant. You can say "I/we/you/he etc WILL come in" but not (I/we/they etc) will come in the restaurant. It's just gibberish!
"Comes to" is approximately equal to "arrives at". You come or go INTO somewhere. In the case of the restaurant, if the intention is to dine, you would meet me AT the restaurant and I would come INTO the restaurant.
I wouldn't think so Jennifer. The 'nel' very specifically means 'in the'. However, I think that in English we would say 'into' rather than 'in'.
I don't disapprove on general principles, only if it interferes with the enjoyment of my food!
Yes, in English that's correct. However, the translator for this lesson disagrees. It also disallows "arrives at" the restaurant, which should be okay.
Both phrases imply that the person has gone into the restaurant, in English.
No one would say "He comes in the restaurant"...at least not very often.
I originally thought it was You arrive at the restaurant as well, but didn’t report it because I thought I was wrong.
You can come in a restaurant as in "You come in the restaurant through the front doors". I'm a native English speaker, and it makes sense to me.
Of course, English has many variants from region to region, so I'm not going to argue the point. I'm just interested to learn that you would use it. I think the general consensus is that 'into' is more usual.
I think the issue is that the 'correct' sentence has a sexual connotation and is therefore not preferable.
That is a really special case, and still I would be more likely to use into. The single word in does not require there be movement from one place to another. When you come (or go) in a restaurant it would be quite simple to assume you are doing the action while you are in the restaurant. Into indicates the movement. I think that is why a simple in is a bad translation here. Especially since come (and go) mean something totally different then what they intend in that situation.
Even so, to be strictly correct one should say "You come into the restaurant...... " Better or less clumsy English would be to simply say " You enter the restaurant........... "
Come into is correct English in this context. Period. The phrase 'come in' is used properly when inviting someone to enter...
No it's definitely wrong. You come INTO the restaurant through the front door!
"In," and subsequently the contracted form of "nel" found here, means "in" or "on." It doesn't "to." If you hover over the preposition, the drop down menu even tells you blatantly your options. "To" is not there.
The point is your translation says something different from what is there in the original statement. In Italian if you were to say "come to the restaurant," the nuance is that you arrive outside and wait outside. You call your buddy and say, "I came to the restaurant, but I don't see you (outside)."
The sentence translation, given above, is sufficient, because it is grammatically correct. However, it could be slightly more correct. In English, we would use "into" more frequently in this situation. Lo and behold, it is one of the options in drop down menu for translations of "nel." However, we do have the grammatical usage in English of "come in." We use it mostly with the imperative, such as: "come in from the rain" or "come in here right now."
The rule of thumb is to use the preposition TO when you move towards a specific destination and IN when you are already there. (IN usually indicates 'static location' (She was IN the house) and INTO, 'motion to or towards' some place (She went INTO the house), However, the verb 'arrive' is followed by AT (ex. the station, airport, work...) or IN (ex. a city, a country). The preposition INTO is used when you go/move from one place to another (ex. when moving/going from outside to inside of a house/room, you would say 'I am coming into the house/room...) or simply 'I am entering the house/room...' , since the verb 'enter' doesn't need/use any preposition.
It would be go into the restaurant. Which one is mush more likely to say than come into the restaurant in my experience. But it is not the verb they are looking for.
It would be more correct to use 'to the restaurant', to avoid that hilarious double meaning.
You come into would be a better (but still not quite correct) English idiom. What's the difference here between vieni nel and entrate in this case?
I find this comment very inappropriate. Please leave this site immediately. BEFORE I EXTERMINATE YOU THOT,
Pronunciation is killing me. She sounds like she's saying nella but its nel. How do you tell
restaurant. is that so hard to spell? Yes. It took me three tries to spell it with it right in front of me.
'Vieni' means 'you come', while 'viene' means 'he, she or it comes'. In other words, 'vieni' is second person singular and 'viene' is third person singular. Got it?
I put 'you arrive in the restaurant'. Although this is a littke awkward in english, it is correct.
The main translation doesn't seem right. I think "into the" should be used as the first-choice translation. In any case, it would be an akward sentence in English.
I think 'into' is better. 'To' does not necessarily mean that you went in. For example, you might go to a restaurant to meet a friend outside and then go on to do your shopping. I don't mean at all that you are wrong, because you could say to a friend, 'Let's go to a restaurant' meaning that you want to go there to eat. However, I think 'into' is the preferable translation for this particular sentence.
Now why is it introducing the concept of "nel" and "nello", when I'm in the Present Tense Verbs section? I've been learning about those for a long while now.
I think that: "you come TO the restaurant" and then you'll be IN the restaurant.. because.. if you are COMING, is because you are out.. doesn't it?
No, one doesn't. One comes across a restaurant. One goes to a restaurant, One arrives at a restaurant. One dines/eats at/in a restaurant. One goes/comes into a restaurant. One exits from a restaurant. These distinctions are very important in English.
What exactly does this sentence mean in Italian? Does it mean that you are entering the restaurant, that you are already in the restaurant? I'm assuming this is not a command since we haven't learned the imperative yet.
I would use this sentence to mean are you coming to the restaurant i.e. a question not a demand.
It's not necessarily a question, but neither is it necessarily a command - it could just be a statement of fact.
I really don't understand this sentence, it really has a meaning? It would not be better to say: "You come FROM the restaurant"?
I answered "You GO into the restaurant" and it wasn't accepted (because of the verb, not the preposition). Why?
I answer to Z.Alon, just in case this appears somewhere else: Because if the speaker uses "come into the restaurant" he must be or think of himself as being already in the restaurant, but if the speaker says "go into the restaurant" then the speaker is outside the restaurant and telling somebody to go into it. (I am Spanish, not English, but I am quite sure of what I have just said)
Yeh, it's not necessary to use the pronoun 'you' in English...unless it's to organise people and instruct them to do different things. 'You come to the restaurant and (someone else) e.g. .... you go and pick up the birthday cake and we'll meet you there.
I spelled one thing wrong and got in a 0. I dont think thats fair. Give me lingots pls
I didn't know much, so when I let my younger sister do this, she peeked and it said, I quote "You come in in the restaurant," now, if you say things like this, you are strange. But I am confused on why it says It twice. If you have any reasons please let me know.
Come in the restaurant should be accepted as an answer without the word you the you is implied why must you make this so absolutely frustrating I stopped doing it for several months exactly for that reason you just make it so frustrating
Why isn't "you arrive in the restaurant" a better translation since arrive is a meaning?
Actually 'cum' simply means 'with'. I know it has been hijacked as slang for climaxing sexually, but I'm pretty sure that that word is also spelled 'come'. Still, I know where you're coming from and I like it. I hope this comment is acceptable to you and to Duo.
Wouldn't this be "you come TO the restaurant"? I know it doesn't translate word-by-word, but i think that's the use Italians give to that type of phrase
Didn't Boris Becker come in a restaurant once, be paying for that 'meal ' till she's 18.
I'm not a native English speaker, so I'm not actually sure what the correct translation would be (I assume "you come in the restaurant" is not considered good English). In Italian, does this sentence mean "you come into the restaurant" or "you come to the restaurant"?
DL, please use "arrive at" or "come into" or instead of "come". It is almost impossible for me ever to say "You come in the restaurant." Otherwise please replace this sentence with a less uncomely one.
'You come in the restaurant' makes no sense. I cannot think of a situation where you would make the demand 'you come to the restaurant'. True also, it can sound smutty. Altogether, pretty useless sentence.
It doesn't seem correct to me to say "you come" when referring to a restaurant and "vieni" can also mean "you arrive" which sounds a lot better. Doesn't it? "You ARRIVE in the restaurant"?