"She eats neither chicken nor fish."
Translation:Lei non mangia né pollo né pesce.
"(Lei non mangia) (né pollo né pesce)" =
"(She does not eat) (not chicken not fish)" (as dual negotiations are Ok in italian) =
"She does not eat chicken or fish" / "She neither eats chicken nor fish"
"(Lei mangia) (né pollo né pesce) = "(She eats) (not chicken not fish) = Not valid italian!
"Lei né scrive né legge" = "She not write not read" (Ok italian) = "She neither writes nor reads"
"Non né X nè Y" = "Not not X not Y" =
Not a valid construction, - neither in italian nor in english!
"Non" must be used with "né"
In positive sentences we use "sia..sia" or "sia..che"
Lei odia sia il pollo che il pesce.
In Italian we have DOUBLE NEGATION pretty often.
Something regarding double negation in Italian. http://italian.about.com/library/fare/blfare141a.htm
it will be an adverb when fish will be an adjective and eat a conjuction. but WHY?! :(((
try these examples: https://www.fluentsimple.com/sia-ne-italian-grammar/
In which film?! :DDD
and it's not ne, but né, those are two different words with different meanings ;)
the sentence is perfect.
This is inconsistent with another example in this exercise: "Ne leggo ne scrivo," "I neither read nor write." The "non" was not required in that sentence. Can someone place explain the difference? I suppose the difference might be that the neither/nor is referring to the verb in one case, and a noun in the other... If I were to say, "Ne mangia pollo ne beve birra," would that be correct?
Why has Duolingo not commented on or fixed this!? I got these exact 2 almost in a row in the exercise just now. Can any native Italians help? Does it make a difference that it's first person vs not? There is an answer from awhile ago that says you would Never use the "non" in front of the "ne"s, so is that correct and this is just one of those (many) instances where DL has it wrong?
See what POVS above said on this. So, "è", meaning "is", would be pronounced as "eh" and "perché", meaning "why" would be pronounced as "perkay". BTW, I may be wrong but I think there is a word "perchè" which means "because", and the positioning of the accents is the only way to distinguish between them in writing though not, of course, in speech.
This seems like an antiquated way of saying it to me -- rather than saying "[subject] does not do [verb] to neither [object1] nor [object2]", you could simply say "[subject] does not do [verb] to [object1] or [object2]". If the non is required for the former, why would you ever use this way of saying it?
I believe that a lot of people need to understand that a language belongs to the society that originated it and that just because certain aspects are different from one's native tongue has no meaning. Double, triple, quadruple negatives. Meh! Language is learned, shared behavior. I don't think that it changes simply because foreigners criticize it. Dive in, learn how they do it. The standard is whether it works in their society.
It is obvious that you understand. Some constructions are more difficult, like the “positive negative” something like”aspetto fino Che lui non arrivi” “I wait until he arrives” I have been searching for an explanation. It is the same in Spanish “Espero hasta que non venga “