"I have to go now; I'm letting you go."
Translation:Je dois y aller maintenant, je te laisse.
24 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Yes, you include the y if you're not specifying the destination. It's like j'y vais, on y va.
I agree. I have to go there now. Where? If somewhere why not say where? It must be another of those quirky French idioms.
elsewhere in this section duo translates I'm letting you go as: Je te laisse partir. why drop the 'partir' this time? some consistency would be good!
This time it's the speaker that's leaving, not the listener!
Adding "partir" would be confusion, not consistency.
I have to go there now would be a better translation right? Or skip the "y" for this to be accurate?
You must put a location (destination) after aller. The pronoun y stands in for the destination, which is not further specified.
It doesn't have to be translated because English doesn't require a destination after "go".
"Il faut que j'y aille maintenant; je vous laisse." Why is this wrong? I wish Duo would let us know where the problem is. I assume you can say "vous" instead of "te" and can use "il faut". Perhaps I am wrong in those assumptions.
I will know I have succeeded in learning French when these sentences come naturally
"je te laisse" is "I'm letting you" (or "I let you"), but not necessarily "I'm letting you GO". Non? ... I note that a few other people have also commented on this point.
I believe that it's an abbreviation of "je te laisse à tes occupations" => "I'll leave you to it." or "I'll let you get on." or "goodbye now".
When on the phone, it's an alternative to "Je raccroche.", "I'm hanging up.".
I don't understand "I have to go now; I'm letting you go." Is it one person speaking or two? If two, then it's something like "I have to go now / OK, go in peace." BUT if only one person is speaking, I would translate "Je dois y aller maintenant, je te laisse" as "I have to go now; [so] I'm leaving you (for a while)". Otherwise we have very strange meaning like "I have to go now; and you are not obliged to stay here and may go as well."
Or it's a phone call and he's telling the listener that he's going to end the call.
A long (more than two syllables) adverb often goes to the end of the clause so it doesn't separate the two verbs as much.
Because that's not what the sentence says. "Maintenant" is in the first clause, not the second. He's going now, not letting him go now (according to him).