"Quando ero piccolo, non mi mettevo i pantaloni."
Translation:When I was little, I would not wear pants.
73 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
I wanted to put 'would' but was afraid to since it wasn't a conditional tense...
Would can also work like used to and if it doesn't work feel free to report it :)
I found understanding "would" quite challenging so perhaps my present concept may help others who read this discussion. I found it helps to appreciate the English use of "would" is used in two contexts: 1) What would happen if....(the conditional) 2) What would have happened in the past. (Imperfect) The next trick is to put this into the appropriate Italian tense.
1805
"would" is conditional, but used by americans to mean "used to". Also pants are underwear, pantaloni are trousers :+)
Not here it can't: negative would is modal. It's wrong and should be fixed.
I wrote: When I was little, I did not wear pants. It was accepted. Duo suggested another answer: when I was little, I would not wear pants.
I think you can simply take would to mean was not willing here, as in "I was not willing/refused to wear pants." It works for the English sentence, but does the Italian imperfect have that meaning??
I was not wearing pants is also correct (past imperfect, not conditional).
Duo translates it as "...I would not wear pants" -- wouldn't portare or indossare be a better verb than mettere, which would seem to indicate "put (on)"?
It counted me wrong for saying "used to", telling me to instead use "use to"...
It depends how you used this - for the negative, you can either say "used not to" or (more common) "didn't use to".
DL's translation would be extremely helpful if it were to offer us 'long' pants. Pantaloni originally meaning "long pants" or "trousers". When I was little, I did not wear long pants.
In English pantaloni are translated as 'trousers'. You need to update your answers
British English refers to long legwear as "trousers" and to underwear as "pants". American English refers to your "trousers" as "pants" and your "pants" as "underwear"
- 127
'When I used to be small, I did not wear trousers' not accepted by DL - can anyone please explain why this was not acceptable ? thanks.
Why I wasn't wearing pants is marked wrong? I want to see the rule when to use the conditional please.
Some of these sentences make me roll my eyes and some of these sentences make me roll my eyes and scream. :)
Yes, she would say 'piccola', he would say 'piccolo'. This is the case any time an adjective is used with a form of essere.
I translated "piccolo" (a masculine word in Italian) as "a little boy", which conveys the correct message in English. Even though, my answer was not accepted. I feel very sorry for that. Please duolingo, reconsider your correction! My greetings to everybody. January 22, 2017.
That sounds an odd translation in English as pants are our undergarments. I know the word came from underpants but always abbreviated now. We wear trousers..
- 955
Yep, this is definitely one where the use of US English raises an eyebrow to those who speak GB English...
- 891
If "mi" is before the verb, why is it wrong to add "myself" at the end of the sentence. This would mean that I put on trousers but that someone, mother?, helped me. If adding "myself" is wrong, why is the Italian not "i miei pantaloni"?
Quando ero piccolo, non mi mettevo i pantaloni perché mia mamma mi ha messo i vestiti.
I put, I did not put on my pants, as my interpretation of 'mi', and duo accepted that.
Addressing the second half of your question: I can't say for certain, but when translated exactly, the sentence means "I would not put on myself the pants". I imagine that it is implied that 1.) you are the one who put on the pants (or not in this sentence) and 2.) that the pants you would wear are you're own. I could be wrong though, so could someone confirm this?
The verb used here, "mettersi", is reflexive, so the literal translation is "I would wear to me the trousers." This construction, of reflexive verb plus noun with definite article, is not found in English, but it occurs in quite a number of other languages.
Neither did I - so (despite the fact I'm a girl) I was nicknamed Nicholas.....
Well I thought it meant, when I was little I couldn't put on my own trousers. I've got used to AE translation of trousers although it is still anooying
Hi Grainne from the deise - I think "usen't" might be an Irishism - not known outside this blessed Isle. Greetings from the Premier county.
The English translation means that when when this person was a child, he refused to wear pants. I don't think the Italian sentence means that.
A woman is saying this phrase in my lesson. She said: Quando ero piccolo .... I think this is wrong. DL should change the speaker or piccolo to piccola!
When it comes to wearing things, I feel like I'm seeing mettere and portare both used but not totally interchangeably? Can I use either or are they used idiomatically for certain kinds of clothes/accessories?
could be - I would not "put on" (which might imply defiance) or I used to not "put on" (which could infer that it was okay to run around in one's underwear or naked). Either way, "mi mettevo" is reflexive and interpreting it here as "wear" does not seem a reflexive use of the verb.
Mettere means to put. So, I would have thought that the translation “when I was little, I would not put my pants on” would be correct.
Question: could this also mean: when I was little, I was not putting on my pants myself? Since DL hints that 'mettere' also has this meaning.
I think that would be expressed differently, - something like *. . non mi sono messo i pantaloni da solo"