In America, a "railroad" station and a "railway" station are exactly the same thing. The former is actaully used far more often.
why is si necessary here?
Something is done from that bridge. Without "si" the bridge sees the train station, but you have to remove "dal" too. They come together in the sentence.
E.g. Dalla mia finestra si vede la Luna. La mia finestra vede la Luna.
Where is the "can" in the Italian sentence?
Why is 'the train station is seen from the bridge' wrong? Not a literal but it avoids using 'can' which is not in the Italian and therefore not literal either.
Is this wrong?
"The railway station is seen from the bridge"
"the railway station can be seen from the bridge" should be ok?
I agree with this. We don't use 'one' in English unless we're the queen! We would make the sentence passive to sound natural.
The point is that although the use of the third person 'One' a gender neutral pronoun is not often used in English....it is often used in Italian. One must learn from one's mistakes.
Absolutely! 'one' is very uncommon in British English and pretty formal as others have said
"One" is very common indeed. I literally never use it but most of my wife's family do and loads of people I have worked with.
It gives clarity instead of using "you" in a generic sense.
Why do I need the one formulation? Why can't I use: The trainstation is visible from the bridge? It seems more natural for me as la stazione is the subject of the sentance.
Why can't it be translated as "From the bridge, one sees the railway station."
This is so idiotic why is railroad station wrong
Why not "From the bridge, he can see the railway station."?
Finally, someone who translated it about the same way I did! It would be nice to hear a response from someone.