"Sentiti" agrees with the direct object (plural) pronoun "vi." This agreement is actually optional, except in 3rd person direct object pronouns. A more advanced Italian speaker should explain this more thoroughly, however I can give an example of why this is often necessary for clarity: L'ho sentita. I heard her, vs. L'ho sentito: I heard him.
I believe the agreement of the past participle with the direct objet pronoun is mandatory in the third person singular and plural (la-lo-li-le), and optional for the other direct object pronouns (mi-ti-ci-vi).
Are you saying that "l'ho sentito" could translate to 1) I heard him 2) I felt him 3) I smelled him? Wow!
Think of it more as "I sensed him." If the writer or speaker wants to make it less ambiguous, they'll give you more context.
I had it as well. I think 'sentiti' implies that the 'vi' is a plural masculine 'you'
This can also be translated: "I heard you." Why was that translation considered incorrect?
My problem with "Vi ho sentiti (or sentite)" is that I understood that when the auxilliary "avere" is used in the passato prossimo conjugation, the past participle is invariant. The only exception I know to this rule is when the gender of the object has to be disambiguated, e.g. as in "l'ho sentita" where the "l'"is feminine or "l'ho sentito" when the "l'" is masculine. I thought that maybe the "Vi ho sentiti." was a similar construction. Is someone able to clarify this for me? Thanks!!
This is the rule as I have read/observed: with a direct object pronoun in the third person, the participle must change to agree. With any of the other pronouns (mi, ti, ci, vi), the participle can be changed, but this is optional.
Yes. I stand corrected. In further readings. I found exactly. What you write here. That. After. Mi. Ti. Ci. And vi. The change. Is not mandatory. Thank. You for. This. Mmseiple and mikescolaro.
"Vi ho sentite" means that referentially the "vi" is a plural feminine; "vi ho sentiti" means either that "vi" is a plural masculine or a plural mixed.
"You" is not the subject. "Vi" is the direct object for the verb "ho sentito" (I heard, felt, etc.). You have to look at the form of the verb to see what the subject is.
Can I say "Vi sono sentiti?" If so, in which cases am I supposed to use essere instead of avere?
Avere = to have. Essere = to be. Maybe I'm not understanding your question, but when I read your sentence above, I thought "I am heard you", rather than "I have heard you."
When translating from English both should be accepted, but they have different meaning:
- ti ho sentito = I have heard you (singular, masculine or feminine)
- ti ho sentita = I have heard you (singular, feminine)
- vi ho sentito = I have heard you (plural, masculine or feminine or mixed)
- vi ho sentiti = I have heard you (plural, masculine or mixed)
- vi ho sentite = I have heard you (plural, feminine)
"Vi" means that the "you" here is plural "you guys, y'all, all of you" "Ti" means that the "you" here is singular "you."
The pronunciation of the word VI is not clear. It sounds rather like Li or Gli.