"Si allena sei giorni la settimana."
Translation:He trains six days a week.
41 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
1971
Hi..
☆ The italian sentence seems almost a dialectal form..?!!
Si allena sei giorni "alla" settimana. (Non; la settimana)
● The definite article. ( il / lo / la.. ), together with the preposition "a" is used with measurements of "weight, time, price", etc ..
☆ " al secondo, al minuto, all’ora, al chilo, al giorno, al mese, alla settimana, al metro."
_ Ti vedo due volte al giorno.( Non, due volte il giorno).
_ Giochiamo a tennis quattro volte al mese. (Non, quattro volte il mese).
_ Si allena sei volte alla settimana. ( Non, sei volte la settimana)
_ I giorni della settimana. ( Non, la settimana.)
- 439
"alla settimana" means literally "per week" (http://www.wordreference.com/enit/week). But I think it should be fine for this usage.
But here is even the usege "Otto giorni a settimana" (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Days_a_Week)... Maybe some native speaker can make this more clear?
We would need an impersonal sentence to translate "one trains six days a week" like "Ci si allena sei giorni a settimana". Since the "si" here is already related to the subject, you have to add "ci" to make the sentence impersonal.
Therefore, "One trains six days a week" is not a valid translation for "Si allena sei giorni a settimana", because "allenarsi" is a reflexive verb, and here the "si" is referred to "Lei" or "Lui".
To train = allenarsi
- 849
But how do you tell which person it's in? It does not look like it is third person, so I tried, 'I train 6 days a week', which of course was marked wrong. I see nothing to indicate that it's he or she as opposed to I or they.
Why not "he practices six days a week," since practices is one of the definitions for this verb?
Me too, marked wrong for using she trains... but where is the gender indicated?
Could someone answer Gordon's question, why is it not 'sei giorni alla settimana'
Because allena is a reflexive verb. I have no idea what a reflexive verb is or why iy matters, so I guess this is yet another one I'll have to memorize as it comes up. I looked it up, but I still don't know what a clitic is.
This isn't a strict definition of reflexive verbs, but: when the verb is applied to the subject (so the action is done to the same object as has already been stated (stated here from the verb form later in the sentence)) a reflexive pronoun is required. (The reason this isn't a strict definition is because this isn't always true, but it's a useful definition and I often prefer useful to strict.)
Here si is the reflexive pronoun. In English, the equivalent is himself/herself/itself etc..
In English, he trains does not leave ambiguous who is being trained. We know it is the he who is getting trained. So in English, it isn't really reflexive. However, whether he is training himself, or whether he is being trained by someone else is ambiguous.
Anyway, adding himself/herself/itself doesn't actually break the English meaning. I think there is a strong case for including it in an alternative answer.
The only reason not to include it as an alternative answer, in my opinion, would be if the Italian Si allena leaves ambiguous who is doing the training. Not being a native speaker of Italian, I am unsure whether that is left ambiguous, so although I might think there is a strong case, I could be wrong. I very much think it's not ambiguous, but I don't know for sure.
Any native speakers want to comment?
Allenare = to train somebody; (you're a trainer, for instance) Allenarsi = to train yourself (myself, himself, herself, itself etc.) (reflexive verb).
I agree (and realise how stupid the question sounds) but from a translation perspective I just want to know if I am on the right track. From a pragmatic perspective it may not even matter as I too can only think of very obscure situations where it would train itself.
Is si a reflexive pronoun that always matches the verb in person, so that it can mean each other (when they're kissing) or himself (when he's training)?
