Yup, the entire section bombs in the English translation. Have already requested that DL review and correct. Problem is I don't think that's the answer. I'd like Tips and Notes giving examples of Future Perfect, and demonstrating context for these. Skip the translations - they make no sense to a native English-speaker.
They make sense to me, but I seem to be one of the rare few who understands the future perfect tense in English, at least among users of Duolingo. And I do use it. And I do not recall ever being misunderstood. It's like the past perfect transposed to the future. I suppose it would be easier to just call it strange, crazy, and so forth, than to try to learn it. Why bother now, right? You've gotten along just fine without it.
EdwardDunne: Here's a possible scenario: a woman's husband/lover tells her he's unhappy and is going to leave her. But he changes his mind and stays. The woman's friend asks her one evening a few months later: "But won't you have felt lonely...all of these past months, if the s.o.b had gone through with his plans to leave you?" And she might have replied:"Not in the least. Good riddance. No, I wouldn't have felt lonely at all." Think: "The Young and the Restless" or "The Bold and the Beautiful." -- ah, daytime soaps, where the future is always perfect. :-)
Thanks, G..., and I think that "won't" is properly a contraction of "will not" as in he "won't see you" not of "would not" which would be "wouldn't". I'm no linguist but I think that "wouldn't" is the proper English subjunctive, so more correct here. I note in your example that our harassed heroine replies in the subjunctive, not with "won't". ah, daytime soaps, where the future is always perfect, but the past alas is always imperfect! . :-)
Yes, this usage is very rare for most English speakers. It would be much more common to hear "wouldn't have" (which you kind of did, in the following sentence). I think the positive is more common, e.g. "he will have broken all the pottery". The opposite would, of course, be "he won't have". I think this is a better example (if I may say so :D).
I agree with redbrickhouse. The sentences themselves are grammatically speaking mostly perfectly fine, even if somewhat rare, (I've seen maybe one or two wonky ones) assuming one knows how future perfect works in English. The actual problem are indeed the awful hints that are not only useless but also misleading. Alas, this is sadly the case with the whole of Italian for English speakers course.
the sentence is grammatically perfectly fine, but almost any native speaker would prefer to use the subjunctive 'wouldn't have' instead. it doesn't come off as unnatural, but its definitely not commonplace, and is therefore a good way to get someone's attention in a formal manner, kind of. the translation works fine, and should stay as it is, but we shouldn't ignore facts for the sake of argument. one should learn both the literal one to one translation for semantics, as well as how it would probably be said in real life for practicality, from multiple sources if possible. languages are ever changing, flexible and adaptive, learners should be as well.
I suppose one could say: By this time NEXT YEAR (since you MIGHT BE living abroad) WILL YOU NOT have felt lonely? But, I think it's a stretch. I'm assuming that Italians use this more frequently than ES. By this time next year, (If you continue on DL) won't you have learned it?
I might agree with all of the complaints below but for one thing...we are here to learn ITALIAN, not English. So the translations do allow English speakers to hear what an Italian would say. If you cannot understand the English translations, get out a textbook and refresh your tenses.
Janet...I see your point but behind my suggestions to stress or give preference to common, everyday English usage is the fact that, while we're using DL to learn Italian, Italians (& others) use it to improve their English, so it does them a disservice if the site accepts uncommon usage, even when technically correct.
Janet...Very good suggestion. On more than one occasion I've commented that it's really the idea that's important when going from Italian to English and so translations that render the meaning of the original correctly should be acceptable; I see nothing wrong with adding a qualifying phrase as you suggest if it makes that meaning clearer. Of course going from English into Italian is a different matter, since most of us can't judge with native certainty what's correct or incorrect, what's common usage, and how what we might write would strike a native Italian's ear.
My mistake. I did not mean to suggest it should literally be added to the translation. My intention was to suggest that native English speakers "think" it to themselves as a way of understanding the timing of the future perfect tense. Have a lingot on me! I see now how that may have been misconstrued. Appreciate the dialogue.
If this means the same as in portuguese "Não te terás sentido só?" I guess that the correct translation would be something like "Could it be that you had felt lonely?". I am portuguese and i am finding it difficult to understand the meaning of the DL translation to english. I wrote "Will you not have felt alone?" because I know DL accepts it but I do not understand its meaning and, moreover, it does not seem to mean the same as in italian (assuming it is similar to portuguese as I believe it is).
First, let me emphasize that I'm not saying that the sentence is merely awkward; I'm saying it's nonsense. It's so bad that Duo should treat it the same way they would treat a spelling error.
It's a good question as to what rules the English conjectural future follows. Outside of a mention of it in a Semantics class, I haven't seen anything written on it. I can say that this sentence has four things going against it: 1) it is not third-person 2) it is future perfect, not just future 3) it is negative 4) it is a question.
For example, "Won't he have felt lonely?" does work. I think the reason it doesn't work with "you" is that it sounds like I think you yourself don't know how you felt.
"Won't you feel lonely" is fine, but only as future tense; there's no conjecture in it.
"Will you have felt lonely?" is just as bad as "Won't you have felt lonely" so maybe the negative isn't as big a deal.
"You won't have felt lonely" is old-fashioned--no one would say that today--but it does make sense.
It's a real shame that this commenter has decided to use his apparently otherwise excellent English to debase and discredit a part of the language which he does not understand. This seems to be his mission, as we've heard from him over and over.
"Had you not felt lonely? "
Do you understand this sentence? Do you agree that it is good English? Transpose this into the future. Or, if you prefer, go back in time before you would have said this very sentence. Here is the result.
"Won't you [Will you not] have felt lonely?"
Yes, it is a difficult concept. But that is the future perfect tense.
This whole section is very difficult for me, because the English translations make no sense. I have been reading your comments for all of these and very much appreciate your help! Anyway, just wanted to say that Duo accepted Wouldn't you have felt alone?" That translation make much more sense to me, e.g. "wouldn't you have felt alone if he didn't come back for Christmas?" Cheers
My logic agrees with you.
I guess I'm letting myself be bothered by the fact that "Will he have felt lonely" and "Won't he have felt lonely" mean almost the same thing in English. (The first is a question and the second is a speculation, but an answer of "yes" in both cases means the same thing.)
In other words, when you negate the English "Will he have felt lonely", you do not get the expected result. In Italian, on the other hand, if you negate Si sarà sentito solo? "I wonder if he felt lonely" I think you get something more like "I doubt that he felt lonely." (Which is what you said, of course.)
falcieri: I have "won't you..." That said, I think that while technically it's grammatical: 'will you have not felt lonely" - contracted to 'will you've'', I have to agree with you that it sounds awfully awkward and not a phrasing a native speaker would choose. It sounds pretentious.
JenLovesSpanish: I tend to agree, but they don't always mean the same thing: You might be in a group of people and feel excluded - that doesn't mean you feel lonely. You might become separated from that group and suddenly feel as though you're all alone, which isn't the same as feeling lonely.