1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "Per sei mesi si allena da so…

"Per sei mesi si allena da solo."

Translation:For six months he trains alone.

March 11, 2013



Why can't this be "For six months she trains alone"?


Because there is "SOLO" which is masculine.

"For six months she trains alone" would translate into "Per sei mesi si allena da sola"


Can't believe I got that right on first try! Think the Italian is finally starting to meld with my brain.


I wrote "for six months he works out alone". "He works out" was the translation for "si allena" in another answer, but was marked incorrectly on this one. Very frustrating.


In North American English we would likely say "works out" over "trains" too


"Has trained" sounds a lot better in English!


Not accepted by Duo though. :(


This sentence could be in response to the question "What does his training schedule look like" answer: "Well... For six months he trains alone, then for the next six months he trains with someone else". 'Has trained' would not be correct.


Is "For six months one trains alone" nessecarily a mistake?


I'd say "one trains alone" would be ok here!


Yes, because "allenarsi" is reflexive, so for the impersonal you would need to add "ci": "ci si allena."


Is "For six months he trains himself alone" incorrect?


In English, the "himself" is implied with the verb train.


Is there a different verb for 'coaching oneself' - as in, rather than getting a personal trainer or joining a class?


where does it show the gender is male? ; as I thought 'si' was unisex


It could also be she, so why is it wrong?

  • 2662

That would be da sola


Thank you Marziotta!


The correct answer that you give here is, in fact, grammatically incorrect in English. The grammatically correct answer in English makes use of the present perfect tense to incorporate past and present, with the expression 'for six months' . The correct answer should be: 'He has been training alone for six months'. Please correct DUOLINGO


It's actually just fine in English - it just refers to something habitual rather than something completed. So all this sentence means is that he trains alone for six months every year.


If the intention is to talk about something habitual, then the English sentence should be corrected to read: 'He trains alone for six months a year'. Otherwise, the present perfect is required.


It's not required; the sentence is not ungrammatical without it. It might be better phrased another way, but there are a lot of sentences that fall into that case and they all have their possible uses. For example, you might use this particular construction in the following way:

"Master chess player So-and-So follows an unusual training regimen, but has nonetheless risen to the top of the charts. For six months he trains alone, playing only against himself and his thoughts. During the rest of the year, he teaches the game to local seagulls. "Their wings really get in the way," So-and-So admits, adding that they "rarely seem to grasp the fundamentals unless the pieces are made of fish". Still, he credits his phenomenal success in professional chess with these unusual efforts, claiming that his own playing skills are improved through having to teach impossible students."

Sure, this is a specially constructed case, but that's fine - the question is grammar, not commonality. There are also others that feel a lot less forced. "For three months, I take classes, and the rest of the year I do fieldwork" is one example. Or, "For two hours I check my emails, and then for thirty minutes I schedule the week's meetings, and then for four hours I write code..." also works. They get across the idea of a repeating event just fine, and none of them is improperly grammared.


Actually, your examples merely prove my point. The sentence is fine within an explicit context. When the context is lacking, the reader is confused: Does the sentence mean that the person has been training alone for the last six months? Or does the person train alone for six months a year? To ensure that the reader understands the context, it is very easy to add the context to the sentence so that the user will understand which verb tense to use. Leaving the context implied and unclear means that you expect the reader to understand which context you are referring to.


Yeah, but can you really say that this is the only sentence which is unclear out of context? Duo has a LOT of sentences (in every language) that are silly or can have multiple meanings or uses - that's not really super important, as long as you can understand what the words mean and how they fit them together.

If this were teaching prose or style it'd be a terrible example. As a basic structure it's... unusual, but fine.


I agree. I find the English completely incorrect.


"For six months he trains himself alone"?


Why did I get an error on this: "She trains alone for six months"? Is there a gender indication here?


For the longest time i saw the word "trains" and could only think of the transportation! I was completely baffled. Me two minutes ago: What horrible sentence is "trains alone!?" Realization sets in "oh." Time to put Duolingo down. Haha i think my brain is feeling a little fried.


....'by himself' should be accepted as in the hints. More natural English.


Wow, he trained a lot


That's me during quarentine


The male voice ALWAYS says terra NOT per.


Why "For six months he is training alone" is wrong?


Allena is present tense, not continuous present tense (gerund) "allenando", and duolingo is particular that you maintain the tense of the verb. Also "For six months, he is training alone" could work but sounds funny, I would prefer "He is training alone for six months". My 2 cents.

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