- Forum >
- Topic: Italian >
- "Erano passati sei secoli."
14 Comments
"sei secoli erano passati" and "erano passati sei secoli" are both correct, but the secon one is more frequent. It's not a rule, but usually when the sentence has just subject and verb, and you want to focus on the subject, this came after the verb: the last word in a sentence usually is the most significant.
Other examples: "l'ho fatto io" and "io l'ho fatto" both translate "I did it" but the first one answer the question "who did it?" because it focus on the subject, the second one instead is "neutral"
305
I thought that the most important aspect of a sentence would go first instead of last. Is this a general rule for all languages or Italian in particular?
442
I don't know about bad translation but it is rather an odd syntax for english. Six centuries ago would be more common to say in english
657
In the previous question, avere was used with passato rather than essere? (passed under the table I recollect). What is the rule in this case for using avere v essere with 'to pass'?
My understanding is that "passare" can be transitive as well as intransitive: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/passare When used transitively, as in your example, it is conjugated with "avere": I ragazzi hanno passato la prova. (The children passed the test.) When used intransitively, it is conjugated with "essere": Quanto tempo รจ passato? (How much time has passed?) The difference is that the intransitive verb takes no direct object. This is a good explanation: https://blogs.transparent.com/italian/transitive-and-intransitive-verbs/