"Si è messo" is the near past (passato prossimo) of "mettersi" (or indossare), literally "to put on oneself" (reflexive); the non reflexive form "mettere" would be "ha messo", with no real difference in meaning if used intransitively. English only has "to put on" (or to wear), so it's "he put on" or "he has put on".
Far past (passato remoto) doesn't use auxiliaries, although trapassato does... Anyway, reflexive form of verbs always uses essere as auxiliary, and transitive form always uses "avere". I'll list a few examples with both mettere (transitive) and mettersi (reflexive):
- Present: Metto la giacca / Mi metto la giacca
- Near past: Ho messo la giacca / Mi sono messo la giacca
- Imperfect: Mettevo la giacca / Mi mettevo la giacca
- Pluperfect: Avevo messo la giacca / Mi ero messo la giacca
- Far past: Misi la giacca / Mi misi la giacca
I'll spare you the "trapassato remoto" (used to described something that happened before another action that happened in the far past); I mostly wanted to point out the difference in auxiliary between the two forms.
dude you always got something constructive helpful and productive to say I appreciate ya , are u native italian ?
Ciao Ferdinando, just a little note to say that i appreciate your assistance with difficulties i sometimes have and also appreciate that i am not alone when viewing others comments.
Isn't this lesson about present perfect? many DL solutions are not in this tense
It's implied in Italian when it refers to items of clothing etc. I suppose you'd have to specify if it was someone else's jacket.
Sorry, that should say "if it WERE someone else's...". I should probably get the grammar right in my native tongue at least! ;)
i think "he wore" would be 'lui indossava' which is a different action from putting one on , right ?
put on is active and wear can be active too,even when native english do not use it that way..