"Siamo senz'acqua."

Translation: We are without water.

[mia.ratinckx]

In written language both versions are grammatically correct: "Siamo senz'acqua" and "Siamo senza acqua"

[708]

Is this synonymous to "we don't have water"?

[cami.sandru]

why can't "we run out of water" be a solution too?

[ChristelDK]

Because when you have no water, you don't RUN out, you HAVE run out! :-)

I wrote we lack water and that wasn't accepted.

Sometimes one has to write rather primitive and even incorrect English to have one's answer approved. But this software programming only has a limited amount of variables, it seems. That's fair enough.

[Ariaflame]

"We have no water" and "we are without water" and even "we lack water" may convey the same meaning, but they are linguistically distinct and when learning a new language one must be very careful with idiom and gist translations since I at least base new learning on patterns I've learned before. And not all languages use verbs in the same places as other verbs.

[Armusj]

An insightful tip! Thanks.

[hopefully2]

In a test I wrote Siamo senza acqua . but the correct answer was Stiamo senza acqua - please could somebody explain the different. thanks

[Dalubwika]

I think the English translation is somewhat wrong