1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "Lei non lo vedeva da anni."

"Lei non lo vedeva da anni."

Translation:She had not seen him in years.

November 26, 2013



if a correct solution is "She had not seen him in years", then what would be the translation of "lei non l'aveva visto da anni"?


i'm wondering the same thing. i put present perfect in my answer (has not seen), which was wrong. could imperfetto be translated into present perfect as well?


I thing so!


Great question - I can't figure this out either. Calling an Italian perhaps, or Mr Ant, or Sandra


Except for one thing, I would agree with crbratu's translation to Italian because to convey the meaning of "had not seen" is the job of the past perfect tense, whereas DL seems to be stretching grammar by trying to make it the job of the imperfect tense. However, isn't the past perfect form "Lei non l'aveva veduto da anni"?


How about "She would not see him for years" in the sense that he'd disappear for years, then she'd see him again, then he'd disappear again, then reappear. I think this is the right tense for that situation.

If it were, "He was leaving, and she knew she would not see him for years", then a different tense is required.


You mean "see" not "seen"?


yes. I'll correct that. thanks for pointing it out.


Yeah, that's exactly how I read it: "she used to not see him for years" especially because the previous questions set us up with "used to".

TOTALLY different from the meaning they have given us.

Their context and translations are not very consistent...


Now I am lost. imperfetto translated to present perfect?


Past perfect, actually, but it's normal with "da" indicating a stretch of time: http://italian.about.com/library/fare/blfare156a.htm


On this link I don't see any sentence with the past perfect.


thanks a lot. It does make sense. I was in trouble making sense to the sentence without translating into present or past perfect.


Surely it should be d'anni if there are 2 vowels next to eachother...?


You can only shorten di to d'. Shortening da is not allowed. So di anni -> d'anni but da anni -> da anni.


THANK you, Maurits! I've been so confused by that! Ellisions are trickier than I'd realized.


I have this question, too!


Couldn't "She has not seen him in years" be correct?


Why don't you accept "you" for "lei"? Reported!


I have a serious problem with the elision. Why "da anni" both words starting with the same letter "a" does not have elision? Could DL please explain?


The imperfetto may also indicate for how long or since when something had been going on.

Da quanto tempo lavoravi? = How long had you been working?

Lavoravo da due mesi. = I had been working for two months.

Quanto tempo era che lavoravi? = How long had you been working?

Erano due mesi che lavoravo. = I had been working for two months.

The indicativo presente accompanied by (da + a time expression) indicates an action or state that began in the past and continues in the present; it indicates for how long or since when something has been going on. (Da expresses both for and since). English uses the present perfect tense [I have worked, I have been working] to express this idea.

Da quanto tempo lavori? = How long have you been working?

Lavoro da due mesi. = I have been working two months.

Da quanto tempo conosci Marco? = Conosco Marco da un anno.

Da quanto tempo non andate in ferie? = How long has it been since you haven't taken a holiday?

Non andiamo in ferie dal 2016. = We haven't taken a holiday since 2016.


=> Lei non lo vedeva da anni. = She hadn't been seeing him for years.

Which is what I answered but was marked as incorrect. Reporting.


What's wrong with "She has not seen it for years"?


"da" means from, doesn't it?

  • 1583

Idiomatically, "she has not seen him for years" is equivalent.


I think the correct solution is wrong. The Italian sentence as written implies "She used to see him regularly, but now she HAS NOT seen him in years." The solution implies "She HAS seen him recently AFTER not seeing him in years." In order for the "correct solution" to be right, we need more context.


"she wouldn't see it in years" is wrong?


I wish there was a table with all possible correspondences of verb tenses...


Just when I thought I was catching on (sigh) got the verb form right but thought I should contract da anni to d'anni because of the double vowel (apparently I was wrong ) :'(


I'm a native Portuguese speaker so I guess I understand Italian more. Latin languages don't have the present perfect instead we use the past perfect because it is a completed action that happend some time ago and don't happen now.


If this apparently imperfect sentence translates into pluperfect, how do you say in Italian "she has not seen him in years" which was marked wrong?


Why none the past perfect comes into the picture? Up to now it was: simple past, past continuous, conditional, and used to. Where are the rules?


Why not "haven't seen" as an alternative answer? It includes the past condition as well. And the "correct answer" is quite alternative too...


That doesn't work because the subject is "she". "Haven't" is used for "I" and "you" only.

I think what you mean to ask is "hasn't seen" (3rd person singular). There is some debate in the comments here about whether this is right, but it sounds OK to me.


Ohhh yeah, I see. That's exactly what I meant. Thanks!


This is supposed to be past imperfect. The translation to English of this sentence is in the pluperfect. Am I missing something?


She had not seen him FOR years!


The English translation is wrong, there should be "for years" not "in years"


The accepted translation is NOT imperfetto!!!


Could someone tell me why the present perfect cannot be used as a translation here?


Could you write "d'anni" ? DL marked it wrong.


so confusing. why not use past tense here. I put she wasn't seeing him for years.


Thank you for this coment


"She wasn't seeing him for years" makes perfect sense in English if applied in the context of a relationship.


No. That makes no sense in English. You'd say "She hadn't seen him for years" or "She hadn't been seeing him for years". You could say "She wasn't seeing him at the time". But it doesn't work with "for years".


It absolutely does make sense. Here's a conversation example for you:

A: Are they back together?

B: I'm not sure. I know that she wasn't seeing him for years after they broke up but it seems like they are back together.

Anyway, I'm an English teacher so you shouldn't bother to argue with me on this one.


I would say that your English example is a trifle awkward as written, though it could work when spoken with meaningful emphasis. This 2nd language thing is difficult!


I am not an English teacher, but I agree with this point. I don't see how you get from past imperfect in Italian to past perfect in English, or at other times simple past. There must be something about the Italian sense of time I don't yet understand,

Learn Italian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.