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
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
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!
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.
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.
"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.
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)