This is common on latin-based languages (Portuguese at least, of which I am native), in that the order of the elements is not so important, but more the intonation. You can have a question written just like a statement, where the question mark alone will determine that you expect an answer. On the other hand, in languages like German or English, the order is much more important in building the phrase.
Fwiw this isn't true in French. "Je conduis" and "Conduis-je" are both correct sentences, but the former is usually declarative ("I drive") and the latter is almost exclusively interrogative ("Do I drive?"). To emphasize that I am the driver, you would either put emphasis on it if spoken ("Je conduis") or choose a different sentence ("Je suis le conducteur", "Je vais conduire", etc).
In French, one uses a cleft construction: C'est moi qui conduis. Note that it's first-person conduis, not third-person conduit. In Modern English, one must say It is I who drives, not *It is I who drive...And it's probably more natural to use "me" as a disjunctive pronoun--and with that as the relative pronoun: It's me that drives.
Vou responder-lhe na mesma língua. Esta sintaxe ("Dirijo eu") não é estranha. Quando duas pessoas estão disputando o direito de realizar determinada ação, dependendo da natureza da ação, uma delas pode dizer: "Isso faço eu!", "Irei eu!", etc. No presente caso, a ação em disputa é a de dirigir e aí alguém se antecipa e diz: "Dirijo eu!", que é a tradução exata do italiano "Guido io". A razão para a inversão do sujeito (eu) é a mesma da língua italiana: enfatizar a figura do executor da ação. Espero ter ajudado. Saudações. Em 23.03.2016.
True. Also think of it this way: You might already know the difference between "Mia mamma" and "Mamma mia." Or "un pazzo cane" and "il cane pazzo." Or "un vecchio uomo" and "il uomo vecchio."
Switching it around makes it so much more about the who or what. This time it's just instead of an adjective like "pazzo" it's an action.
I'm thinking you could take the idea of "myself" two ways: either as an emphatic which seems to be the way most of the comments that mention it are taking it, namely "I myself am driving" in which case I think that putting the verb first accomplishes that. But "myself" can also be the direct object, as in "I'm driving myself to the hospital" - rather than having someone else drive me. In that case there's no emphasis. I'm wondering then if "Mi guido all'ospedale" would in fact be the way to say it.
"Slurs" don't just cover racially charged, biased remarks; they could include ethnic stereotyping or might simply be used to disparage someone's reputation using derogatory words. Slurs don't have to be vulgar or racially/ethnically motivated; they DO have to be disparaging, belittling...and so using the derogatory term "guido" to describe the dirtbags on Jersey Shore certainly qualifies as a slur. The fact that they're Italian-Americans makes no difference. They'd be crude and low-class regardless of whether they were Irish, Hispanic, African-American, Vulcans, or members of some other ethnic group. So don't use it to describe Italians or Italian-Americans...unless you want your legs broke, yuh gottit?
Ok, so there's a slight misunderstanding of the word 'slur' there on my side, but my point is still that in my conception of the word, 'guido' isn't a term for Italian(-American)s, but for a specific kind of trashy people (there's quite a lot of them in Holland, where I'm from, as well), whatever their ethnicity is; like you said, they could be Irish, Hispanic, whatever. So yeah, it's derogatory, but in a much less crude way. But don't worry I understand this is something you don't generally say to someone's face.
True, but learning a language is about ideas not just words or in this case grammatical tenses. The question when given the sentence in Italian should be do users know what the hell's being said, do they understand it and not, do they like Google, translate sentences exactly, word for word or in the grammatically equivalent tense. The point is it should be about meaning when going from Italian into English and not about translating a word or a verb tense exactly. That said, going from English into Italian is another matter since as you imply, different tenses will express different ideas. Apologies if this comes across as a little too tense.
I agree with you, Germanlehrerlsu. I'm going to report the mistake, but I think it's also a useful point to be here in the discussion area. Here is an example in Italian I found by searching in Google:
Torni a casa domani? [Will you go back home tomorrow?]
No, sto qui fino a venerdì. [No, I will stay here until Friday.]
There are other ways to express the English here (Are you going...? No, I'm staying...), but I wrote that example to show how present tense "Torni" and "fino" can definitely mean "You'll go?" and "I'll stay."
Though not sure, I believe you could in fact say "studio io" but you'd be emphasizing that it's YOU who is studying rather than simply stating the fact the you're studying. Switching "normal" word order (for an English speaker) is I think done for emphasis. So it'd be the equivalent of saying, e.g., "It's ME who's studying." Or maybe "It's ME, (not someone else) who's studying..."
OK, I've complained about this in the previous example in this unit, but the emphatic meaning of this particular type of inversion should have been explained in the entry. Even the answer doesn't explain it; it simply notes, incorrectly, that it's just another way of saying "I drive," with no difference between it and "Io guido." There's no way of intuiting from the entry the meaning of the inversion. This is really irresponsible and patience-testing.