The thing is "Io sono" is singular, "Loro sono" is plural. The specification is given for the article "pesci" for plural, or "pesce" for singular.
Is there such a thing as a feminine word for fish? I thought it was like in Portuguese where the word 'peixe' is common for both genders.
Yeah, it's: 1st person singular: io sono 3rd person plural: loro sono
You can skip the "io" or "loro" if it's clear which person is meant.
Io sono, tu sei, lui è, lei è, noi siamo, voi siete, essi sono. I am, they are.
Si, essi è poco usato, più nel sud Italia. Yes, essi is use a few, more in South Italy.
No, not exactly. "Loro" is usually used for persons while "essi" is more used for animals or things.
In italian Language there are not difference by animals or persons, essi sono-they are, loro sono magri-they are slim, (loro) sono gatti - they are cats." Essi" it was more used 30 years ago. Bye
Just look at "Pronome personale in italiano" in Wikipedia where it speaks about lui/lei, egli/ella, esso/essa, loro, essi/esse
Egli, ella, esso, essa, essi, esse, nella lingua parlata si usano molto poco, perlopiù nel sud Italia.
Ahahaahahah it seems so difficult but is simple:
"Sono" in italian is like "Are" in english- so:
I am = Io sono You are= Tu sei He/She/It is= Lui/Lei/Esso è We are= Noi siamo You are= Voi siete They are= Loro sono
'They are fish'??? Who or why would anyone ever say that? The only reason I can think that somebody would say this sentence would be if somebody was asking what a group of people have dressed up as for a fancy dress party, and the other person answers 'They are fish'.
Being a hunter and fisherman it does seem that your statement would be correct. However, I have met many people that have never left the big city and when they see pictures of what I catch, I occasionally get the question as to what are those. The reply is "They are fish". Some people just don't understand or realize that the salmon, tuna and other fish they order at a restaurant or grocery store do not come from nature already skinned and gutted.
I translated to I am fishes because there wasn't a signifier. Normally I think that if the first instance of the subject talking about other people you would start with "loro", for example, and from then on wards you can remove "loro" from speak/text. Is this a fair assumption?
I agree that the subject must be known to the audience, but I wouldn't be so categorical as there are other ways of sharing knowledge of the subject. Since duolingo provides no context, everything goes, but it's awkward associating a singular pronoun such as I with a plural name; on the other hand, the sentence could be translated as "I am pisces", as in the astrological sign.
I translated it as "I am pisces" and was told that was incorrect. Frustrating because it makes sense out of context.
Well "sono" is not just a singular pronoun... it also means "they are" (3rd person plural)
No you can remove the subject (io, loro, etc) from the start. You only have to specify if it's unclear.
In this situation you would actually have to specify the subject if the subject was io. Why? Because when someone says "sono pesci" it is much more likely that they are trying to say "They are fish."
ie. What are they? They are fish.
I am fishes is a much more unlikely sentence for someone to say. (Under what circumstances would you say that..?) So if you did actually want to say it you would say io sono pesci otherwise people would assume you are saying the more common one - "They are fish"
In real life there's a lot more context to go on - gestures, facial expressions,the surroundings - in Duolingo there's not a lot of context. Therefore if in doubt, you should assume it's the more likely sentence.
Hope that helps.
While I agree that it is ridiculous to say 'I am fishes" it does make it difficult when something is out of context...also Duolingo has a reputation for putting strange things together i.e. the animal section? Something about monkeys reading the newspaper. It's hard not to expect a weird answer when there is already a history of strange answers.
In Italian, just as in Spanish it's very common to skip the subject, because if you use it in every single sentence, like you do in English, in those languages turns out being rather redundant, hence, the only times when you must use the pronoun, is when the subject of the sentence is unclear
Well, the plural of "fish" is "fish" and not "fishes". Also because it is plural I don't think you can use "I am" but rather "they are".
Are you sure about that one ? Cause fishes sounds fine to me. ie: These are fishes, is correct. Seems both are accepted as a plural which is quite weird. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fish#English I'd personally use fishes and not fish seems more correct grammatically speaking.
I'm pretty sure; English is my first language. I did find a rare instance when you would use the word "fishes" if you're talking about multiple species of fish. http://grammarist.com/usage/fish-fishes/
The link you provided says the same thing: "The collective plural of fish is always fish... When referring to two or more kinds of fish, the plural is fishes."
I am wishes would be incorrect. Because "I" is singular and "fishes" is plural.
If pesci is the noun version of fish then how do you say the verb version as in "to fish"?
"To fish" is pescare; io pesco, tu peschi, lui/lei pesca, noi peschiamo, voi pescate, loro pescano. Currently not taught by this course.
I saw so many people who can't find the difference between "io sono" and "loro sono" . I am italian so I know it. "Io sono" is "I am" so we must use the singular form : "Io sono un pesce" - "I am a fish". Instead "Loro sono" means "they are" and we must use the plural form: "Loro sono dei pesci" - "They are fishes." If you want a help you remember the plural and singular form: Io sono un pesce (singular form) Loro sono dei pesci (plural form)
If you did actually want to say "I am fish" you would say io sono pesci including the io - otherwise people would probably assume you are saying the more common sentence "They are fish"
I belive that you would actually want to say "io sono pesce", so that it is "i am (a) fish" instead of "i am fish(es)". Since in English fish is singular and plural, it makes it sort of confuzing. :)
It would be I am fishes and yes, that would indeed sound kind of silly :)
I am as the fishes? as a poem. i am the trees in the forest, the fishes in the water and these angels in the heaven...
you can't translate "sono pesci" to "i am fishes", since plural first person must use "we" instead of "i", so it must be "we are fishes", or in italy "siamo pesci" but still, sounds silly
"sono" = "I am" or "they are". How confusing. "I am fish" vs "They are fish". I'm not a fish so it must be they(them).
Hello everybody. Tell me please. How may we guess what prounoun is used in the sentence when it is omitted. For instance "Sono pesci" This auxilary verb is used with pronoun "io" and "loro".
"pesci" is plural, for the plural the personal pronoun is "loro"
singular io-tu -lui/lei plural noi-voi-loro
You can say neither "io sono pesci" because io is singular and pesci is plural, nor "io sono pesce" because you have to put an article before "io sono un/il pesce" *I'm a/the fish", the article is necessary because you define what you are.
hey, sono is both for "I am" and "they are" :) here it just makes sense. plus, pesci is plural
I am a Hindi and English language speaker. In Hindi as well, we have gender for everything. The gender of fish in Hindi is feminine. While in italian it is masculine. So it is kind of confusing at times to my mind. Nothing wrong in any of the languages, it is just how things are defined in each language. But it will take some time to remember those things. is there any trick to remember which of the object is masculine and which is feminine in Italian?
Totally sounds like he is saying "pesce" "e" and "i" make different sounds... grrr!
Duolingo tranlated this as "I'm pisces". It's obviously illogical because it's off the topic of plurals… but is it correct? Now I'm in doubt. 0.o
Omg, pesci is also Pisces? So this phrase could mean I am Pisces or they are fish? So confusing, lol!
"Pisces" is a latin name for the 12th zodiac sign, which, indeed, means "fish" or "pesci" in Italian. It has to do with the "Greek world", mythology and astrology.
In this case, it sounds to me a confusional matter of word formation. But, this statement is a very very weird one, if not in a poetical sense.
Hope this helps! ;)
If we're supposed to complete plural exercises and the italian word is "pesci", so amid the English given words must be "fishes" and not only "fish". It doesn't make any influence at the results (I know), except memorizing correctly
Why is it telling me that this sentence should be i am pesche - what in the world is pesche in English!
I think that the correct answer should have been "are fish" because in order for it to be "THEY are fish" the sentence was supposed to be LORO sono pesci.
I know what they want me to write, but it isn't correct, and it isn't appropriate.
really? right after we do food??? my translation said Pices like the zodiac sign!!
I have given you 4 correct answers, you cannot understand, I will not use this Medium anymore. You have marked me wrong on all occasions. I give up.