1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "Non l'ho fatto io, l'ha fatt…

"Non l'ho fatto io, l'ha fatto lui."

Translation:I didn't do it, he did it.

May 26, 2014



Can't you just say non l'ho fatto? Why do you add the subject io at the end of the phrase?


Adding the pronoun at the end of a sentence stresses it. Translate it like this,"I didn't do it, HE did it."


In French, one uses a cleft construction: Ce n'est pas moi qui l'ai fait, c'est lui. Syntactically, the Italian construction differs, but it has the same emphatic effect.


I hope I never get scammed in Italy, but if I do, I'm going to say this.


Doesn't "fatto" have a "lui" form?


The part of the phrase that relates to 'lui' is 'ha'. Like in English the past participle (done-fatto) stays the same:

I HAVE done it He HAS done it

Io l'HO fatto Lui l'HA fatto

(you can move position of 'io' and 'lui' for emphasis, like Duo has done)


I wrote "I didn't do it, he did." This was not accepted. In spoken English, with emphasis on I and he, it makes perfect sense. Is it necessary to repeat "it" in Italian?

[deactivated user]

    You are translating a sentence, not just interpreting it. Since the it is explicitly shown here by the l', i'd say you have to repeat it.


    should be.....big boy done it 'n run away.


    I translated it with the meaning of fare as make: I have not made it, he has made it. DL marked it as wrong. I thought to do and to make is the same verb in italian. Is fatto not a form of to make/to do?


    I did that, too. Maybe it's a bit idomatic?


    It accepted that for me 3/18/21


    Lui sure gets into trouble


    Where does the "it" come from at the end of the phrases? The way I read the sentence was: "I did not, he did." I also couldn't figure out where the "io" was supposed to fit into the sentence.


    Non l'ho fatto io, l'ha fatto lui.

    L' is short for "lo" and it means "it". I believe, "I did not" would be "non ho fatto".


    Why is 'make' not accepted?


    Snitches get stitches!


    I didn't do it myself, he did it seemed closer to the Italian


    Ok, thus the io - Thanks!


    Why not "I did not do this, he did this"?


    They would have used a different word: 'lo' means 'it', whereas 'questo' is 'this'


    Answer now says "I have not done it, he has done it". Same thing? Also, hint under 'fatto' says "run". So couldn't it also be I have not run it (as in a race, I guess), he has run it?


    Either this is completely wrong in the first place or it is the most convoluted sentence yet.


    I have not done ...Why Duo say it is wrong?


    "I have not done it" should be accepted.


    A more natural English translation is: "I didn't do it; he did," with the subject pronouns stressed.


    am I correct in this: fare can also use essere (è fatto), but it uses avere here because of the direct object pronouns?


    I wrote: "I didn't made it, he did." This wasn't accepted. Why not? Doesn't fatto means also made?


    Am I the only person who gets confused when reading Io (capital io) and lo (capital Lo) words?


    I'm so confused. Why does the first part end with "io"? Isn't that understood in the first person form of "ho"? Io looks like an object here.


    It's stated explicitly at the end of the phrase for emphasis, as is the "lui" at the end. (At least that's my understanding.)

    Non l'ho fatto, l'ha fatto. == I didn't do it, he did it.

    Non l'ho fatto io, l'ha fatto lui. == I didn't do it, HE did it.

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