Translation:I want a boat to take me far from here.
Long live the subjunctive! See? It's still alive. Now suppose it were dead. Because if it were dead, how would we phrase a condition contrary to fact? A condition contrary to fact requires that the subjunctive be used. If need be, we can invent some other construction, I guess. But, come what may, I will just continue to use the subjunctive.
Though logically one may want a ship, "barca" refers to a smaller boat. The Treccani dictionary defines it as having "dimensioni limitate": http://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/barca1/ If you search for images of "barca mare" (to weed out the pictures relating to Barcelona's soccer team), you can get an idea of what falls into this category.
I'm afraid "that take me" is an example of the moribund English subjunctive. A long time ago we used to have such a tense (technically it's a mood not a tense, but we don't really want to bother with technicalities here, do we?).
Anyway, this lovely subjunctive only exists in such expression as:
- "God bless you" (instead of "God blesses you", which would be "good" English"far be
- "Far be it from me" - instead of "It is far from me"
- "God save the Queen" - not saves
- "If it please the court" - not pleases
It's these last two that show the subjunctive's most identifiable feature - the missing -(e)s in the 3rd person present, and which explains why "I want a boat that take me far from here" can be considered perfectly acceptable (if a tiny bit old fashioned and - let's be honest - pretentious...!
Two of those seem examples of something else altogether. Isn't it a wish/request that god bless you or save the queen?
And I think the sentence in question is more "I want a boat that will/could take me far from here"; I don't think it would be 'a boat that take me far from here', under any circumstances.
(Unfortunately, I don't know any of the correct grammatical terms at all, having been taught nothing about the syntax or grammar of my own language since elementary school.)
Voglio una barca (I want a boat) che (that) mi porti (it takes me) lontano (far, far away) da qui (from here). The changes needed to 'make' it into English are: 1) 'it' is understood, 2) 'that takes me', or, 'to take me' have the same meaning in the context of the sentence, so either gives a correct translation.
That sentence uses the subjective mood and it is gramatically correct English, although it is not usual indeed. Reference: https://www.englishclub.com/grammar/subjunctive.htm
Yes, for an 'are' verb you take the 1st person of the present tense, lop off the 'o' and add an 'i' for the io, tu, lui, lei and Lei forms; then for the noi, voi and loro forms you add 'iamo', 'iate' and 'ino respectively. So for regular 'are' verbs, like portare, the present subjunctive and the present indicative are the same for the tu and noi forms.
Have a look at the subjunctive guide at Https://www.duolingo.com/comment/8783716
Hope this helps :)
This is a fascinating sentence. Is the "che" dependent on the "voglio"? If so, then this is what we used to call a "lillies of the field" construction. I.e. the subject of the subordinate clause is removed from it and made the direct object in the main clause. The name comes from the best known example of this construction in English:
Instead of "consider how the lillies of the field grow" the saying is "consider the lillies of the field, how they grow".
Is the Italian sentence such a construction, i.e. instead of "I wish that a boat take me far away" the Italian has "I want a boat, that it take me far away"?
You might look into the formal use of "which." It's actually distinct from "that," in that "which" is non-restrictive. More info from Grammar Girl: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/which-versus-that
'that' is defining. The car that is blue, means you are talking about the particular car that is blue. It distinguishes the car from other cars that are other colours, you are specifically talking about the car that is blue. The car which is blue, means you are already talking about a particular car, and now you are adding the fact that it is blue, but it doesn't determine which car you are talking about.
"Bring me" usually has the meaning of asking for something that is at a distance to be brought to you.To quote songs (not as modern as Muse Starlight above)- Bring me Sunshine, Bring me my chariots of fire. However, you could say "bring me to something" as in "it would bring me to tears"- but there is not much physical movement . I cannot think of a situation where bring me....and...from would be used, other verbs would be used to convey the movement away .Hope this helps.
Sorry-- I guess my initial post wasn't really clear. I'm a native English speaker, so I understand the use of bring in English. And while "take" is probably more exacting, I often hear (and say, myself) things like "Could you bring this over to your uncle's house?" My question with regard to the lesson is essentially why Duo has translated "portare" as "take", when there is the verb "prendere" for that. I was puzzled that, while they used "portare" they wouldn't accept "bring" as a translation. My husband is a native Italian speaker, and he thought that was odd, too, as he would have thought "bring". Oh, and I gave you a lingot for your effort to respond, but mostly for your profile photo, which I think should get some kind of award. ;-)
Technically portare in this case probably means to carry or bear, but take is an adequate synonym in this case. Bring doesn't work because you bring to but you take from. If you wanted the boat to bring you to a tropical paradise, then bring would be appropriate, but it is specifically being taken from here, the origin point is what it is relative to, so it's take, not the destination where bring would be appropriate.
It's a fine distinction, but the "would" introduces a conditional or potential aspect to the boat's ability to take you. The conveyed meaning is pretty close, but since part of the exercise of Duolingo is to match grammar to meaning, it marks this sentence incorrect.
"Would take me" would be the translation of a different sentence in Italian (Something like " … che mi porterebbe … ").
"Porterebbe" is in conditional tense ("would take"), but conditional (with its indication of potential but not certainty) is often paired with subjunctive, which indicates a hypothetical situation that may not exist.
More & better info here: https://italian.yabla.com/lessons.php?lesson_id=508