- Forum >
- Topic: Italian >
- "Noi viviamo lungo l'acqua."
59 Comments
I'm a native English speaker, and I'm fine with "We live along the water." To me, it calls attention to the fact that there is a whole community along the water. A google search for "Live along the water" shows I'm not alone.
the dictionary suggests "by" as correct translation as well, and it sounds better than "along"
83
"beside" or "next to" would be the usual ways to say this in English. I tried "beside" and that was marked correct.
It's a literal translation. Lungo does mean long, but the translation here is "along the water". I also read in another thread from a native Italian speaker that this isn't even the way you would say it normally. They specified "vicino all'acqua" (near the water)
So... lungo DOES mean along in spite of all the complaining from the natives, right? xD
It does mean along, but the sentence itself makes no sense in Italian either! If someone told me "vivo lungo l'acqua" I would say "eh?" and ask what they mean. (I'm italian)
And what would you prefer to say in Italian?
I'm not English native speaker nor Italian. Here I want to learn Italian. :-)
my problem is also the meaning of some sentences here, I am neither Italian nor British. "vivo lungo l'acqua " have no meaning to me too. I wish she could pronounce the last word properly, or clearly.
It seems that "along" is an acceptable equivalent in some dialects of English, but not others. The complaining is from people applying the faulty logic of "I wouldn't say this, therefore it must be wrong".
So can someone please supply a good Italian alternative if this sentence doesn't make much sense to a native? Viviamo dall'acqua...in acqua...sul'acqua? Thanks :-)
From what I've read, Abitare is used to refer to the place you live AT, where Vivere means being alive. e.g. Io vivo = I live = I am alive Io abito = I live (at/in/near/etc.)
I got faulty when I wrote "we are living". That is strange as "we live" is the only expected in this context.
that's because "we are living" is a different form. are utilizes a different verb than what you would use as "we live"- vivir versus essere... which is the whole point of this beginning part, to get us used to conjugating verbs in the present tense.
What is the conversational/practical usage difference between vivere and restare? in terms of inhabiting
Anyone learn the 'preposition song' in school? (Native English speaker in US, hence sung to the tune of Yankee Doodle Dandy). We were told to envision a fallen log and the words used in the song described our location in relation the log.. "About, above, across, after, along, among, around, at..." And so on. I think I made my point. It is worth looking up if anyone needs it.
The way I translate that sentence is, "we live along the water." However, it implies that we live along the entire length of whatever the body of water is. I have never heard the word lungo used as a substitute for next to or beside. In other words, the Italian sentence makes no sense.
My comment is that lungo means long in Italian. I guess it sort of makes sense that it also means a long??
Does it mean water in the sense of a river or lake, not water like drinking water??
One time lungo means "on," not "near." The next time it means "by," not "on." The inconsistencies make it difficult to figure out what the "correct" answer is!
I think that along is a better translation of lungo as it conveys an image of living along a river rather than a beach which would be by
It seems that "along the water" is slightly contentious in English. Is "lungo l'acqua" also contentious in Italian?
We live in Florida, so there is plenty of water to live "along." While I suppose there is nothing inherently wrong with the English translation given here , I have never heard anyone desribe living on the water in that way. We also have a summer house on a lake. But "on the water," is marked wrong, as I suppose "on the lake" would be. While "on the water" or "on the lake" might conjure up images of a house boat to a non-native English speaker, it is the way most Americans I know would describe such a nice home location. I would guess the expressions derived from "lakeside," "waterside," or similar words which dropped the endings, hence the "on" was literally a correct description.
I wrote " We live next to the water" as the English translation, and it said it was wrong because the correct translation is "We live near the water." I thought "near" and "next to" were the same thing. Why is my translation wrong?
I wrote next to the water. Maybe its British to say along the water but to me that sounds odd. Like a literal translation that doesn't sound right in American English. I think "by" sounds better too.
Does Noi really need to be used here seeing as viviamo implies 'we as a group' in the same way that mangiamo does and mangiamo doesnt need Noi before it?
You are correct. You can include Noi, but the verb viviamo makes it un-necessary.
So "beside the water" and "along the water" and "near the water" are all okay, but "next to the water" isn't? Those are all pretty much interchangeable in English in this context.
- 1941
"We live on the waterfront." was rejected. Dear native speakers, wouldn't that be a valid option? Thanks a lot for your opinions. (I am neither a native Italian nor English speaker.)
Your answer is correct, more correct in my opinion than 'near the water', which is less definite. Personally, I would not say that I live along the water, but this is a regional thing. Context is relevant to what expression you might use, but there is no context for DL. If you live in a small place then 'on the waterfront', 'beside the water', 'along the water' all suggest that you are directly next to the water, nothing much between you and the water. If instead you live in a seaside suburb of a town then you might be a few streets back from the water and still say that you live on the waterfront. In my part of the world (Australasia) , 'waterfront' generally (but not exclusively) refers to something a little more developed/urban e.g. I live 'on the waterfront' in my city but have a holiday house 'on' the lake- which means 'beside' the lake, not floating on the lake! Does any of this make sense? It is complicated to explain.
Why is it okay or needed to include "noi" when the conjugation tells us that it's "we?" So often, we're told not to include the preposition.
I would not know how to translate this to Dutch, while, as a Dutchman, I am supposed to live with a whole lot of water.
- 200
As a test, I tried "next to" and "on" for "along," since both mean about the same as the "correct" response and are used more frequently in conversational English. Both were considered wrong. If the verb were "andiamo" I would understand. But "viviamo" implies a dwelling place, which is usually static.
- 1936
I imagined the English translation as someone talking to someone else they've just met explaining that they live in a property further along the shoreline.
Nothing wrong with the phrase, instead what I find confusing is that in italian, the same word is used for "along" that is used for "long."
