Translation:I thought they would have gotten a cake.
No, "prendere" is more "to get something from somewhere" than "to bring something somewhere." I would interpret this sentence as what one would say if a group of people walked into a grocery store with birthday party hats and bought a bag of apples. Or what one would say if that group then showed up at the party with the bag of apples ("I thought they would have gotten a cake [at the store].").
Sorry, I should have said 'WE Brits' - I'm British. A tired, old Brit.
I think you've been misled about our attitude to 'get'.
Even as a child, back in the early 60s, we would talk about getting something for Christmas, get me something from the shop ... etc.
We should ask Estelle for confirmation, but I think we have two issues here. GET is a catch-all verb used out of laziness when more precise verbs are available - buying the paper, fetching the paper, and so on. The objection there is one of style.
There is a separate issue on 'gotten' - we use 'get, got, got'.
I would have got the paper if I had known you wanted it.
No problem. Not Shakespeare, perhaps a little ambiguous, but basically OK.
However: 'I would have GOTTEN ...' counts as an error in grammar in a British school.
I hesitated to reply because I seem to be quibbling a lot this week, but it didn't seem right to leave you misinformed.
Have a super day. I'm off to agree with someone - anyone, really - on another course.
Ah, okay. I had seen both issues here, but it seemed like the confusion was stemming from people using (or wanting to use) verbs other than "to get" and thus misinterpreting the Italian sentence. The variation with "have got" is already in the system; it's just not the default translation.
There's no need to apologize for not agreeing with people. Feel free to quibble away. : ) I like to see that people are arguing grammar points - it shows that they're trying to think things through and process them. If you have questions, don't hesitate to post them on my page.
I think the problem is the word "gotten", which is quite bad English and can mean brought or bought or taken. I think this sentence should be replaced with "I thought they would have brought/bought/taken a cake", whichever the intention is. We certainly shouldn't be teaching "gotten" to learners of English!
Here in the US, "gotten" is the most commonly used participle for "to get," which is the meaning of "prendere" here. It is not bad English here. This is a regional difference. You should find that "taken" is accepted, as well as "got," however. If not, let me know so I can add it.
As far as I know, "gotten" is the standard participle for "to get" throughout the US, though I suppose it's possible that there are parts of the US where it is not. It is a big country, after all. I grew up in PA and am now in VA, and would say that in both places they say "gotten." Outside of the US, the standard participle is "got":
May I ask where you are from?
I've lived in New York state, Florida, California and Oregon, and I've heard "gotten" used frequently in all those places.
What intrigues me is that I've also heard "have got" and the two tend to be used in slightly different senses. "I've got a car" means you have one, while "I've gotten a car" implies you just now or recently got it.
Sei sicura? (Apologies if that sounds arrogant.)
I've seen many examples where future perfect and conditional perfect are not translated that way in English.
Pensavo che sarebbe venuto -> I thought he would come.
If you look in Context Reverso, there are many, many examples like this.
I ask because I'm struggling to internalize it myself.
It's true that sometimes where in English we use the simple tenses (future and conditional), Italian requires the perfect tenses. This means, where in English "I thought he would come" sounds more natural than "I thought he would have come," in Italian the opposite is correct. This is why you get examples like this when consulting Reverso, since they are actual translations and not exercises to learn a certain tense. Also, you have to take those with a grain of salt. Looking up "avrebbero preso" on Reverso, a couple of the translations of this in the conditional appear to be Italian translations from subtitles of dialogue where a character is speaking broken English, which is then corrected in the Italian. I don't see any examples where the conditional perfect would not work just as well as the conditional translation.
It's good that you're thinking about this, and the perfect tenses in Italian do sometimes work in weird ways, but I would encourage you to translate the tenses literally here if it is possible and makes sense. In the real world, you might not do this, but for the sake of learning the conditional perfect I would translate it as the conditional perfect in English on Duolingo.
Hi, me again.
So ... I thought they would get a cake - is not actually wrong?
I offer it because it gets you out of the 'gotten' problem that distresses the Brits so much.
I know CR is flawed, like every tool out there - to be used with caution. Still very useful, though.
I am actually past the stage of learning how the conditional perfect is formed - I'm trying to internalize how it's used, how it relates to what we would say in real-life English. So, thanks for the advice, but I think I shall persevere with trying to go beyond literal decoding of the text. Io mi spingo oltre!
It's the verb "to get" in itself that the Brits don't like, which I'm afraid does not have a good solution. I just meant to use a literal translation on here - not everyone is as advanced and I think that adding different tenses to the Duolingo translations when the original tense does work in English runs the risk of confusing beginners.
If you're trying to work out the subtleties of the way the tenses work, you might try focusing more on Immersion here (and perhaps you already do this) or just reading without translation (the best way, to me). I find the added context helps a lot.
Okay, I understand; however this sentence will cause problems for non American English speakers - as per the comments, interpreting the sentence as " ...brought a cake" and using the Italian verb portare instead of the intended prendere. It's annoying to get something wrong because of a different interpretation of the English sentence. Of course, these issues will crop up from time to time - I'm not complaining and I'm grateful for the work you've done/are doing :-)
I'm sorry, unfortunately we have to pick something as the default translation. The best I can do is add alternate translations so that you're not being marked wrong. I am trying to add the non-American alternatives when I see them, so make sure that you report them when they are not accepted.
The Italian sentence here could not. "Prendere" means "to get" in the sense of taking something into your possession. If you were translating the English sentence "I thought they would have gotten a cake," you could certainly translate that as "Pensavo che avrebbero ricevuto una torta" ("I thought they would have received a cake."), since that is another meaning of "get" in English ("get" is kind of a slippery verb in English and means many different things). You cannot literally translate the sentence "They would have been given a cake" in Italian, though, because in Italian the passive would only work for the thing being given (i.e. "A cake would have been given to them."). This is a weird structure in English (using an indirect object as the subject of a passive sentence) that doesn't work in Romance languages in general.
I think this sentence would make more sense to people if you understand the phrase:
To get a coffee = Prendere un caffe'
This is just another form of that expression, hence why the past participle of "get" is being used. Unfortunately the past particle of "get" has a lot of variation in English.
My feeling exactly - until I started reading Bill Bryson's interesting and entertaining book, "Mother Tongue," in which he points out that many apparent Americanisms are actually archaic English words which have fallen into disuse in Britain, but were taken across to America by the early settlers and retained.
As has been said above, "gotten" is the original form, which went out of use in Britain in the 18th century, being replaced by "got", but continued being used in America. (That would make it the form that more people use, rather than "no-one".) Interestingly, I've heard it coming back to Britain - a lot of young people use it now. I've even seen it a few times in articles on the BBC website.
Then stop using an American company to learn Italian. I'm an American, I shudder when I hear "I would have got a cake" To me, the verb is get, got, gotten, when it does not refer to possession. I do use I have got or I've got for present simple possession of something or when expressing necessity (I've got a cake, I've got to go).
But, as Professor Higgins said "I don't know what to say about America, really - they haven't spoken English for years."
Seriously, American English is the standard on this website simply because Duolingo is an American company.
Merriam Webster's Dictionary of English Usage includes "gotten" as a past participle (ironically the American publisher is now owned by a British company). If Duolingo were a British company, British English would be the standard and all of the Brits would be impatient with the Americans endlessly whinging about "colour" instead of "color"; why can't we say "gotten", etc.
The program does try to include your "proper British" spelling and grammar as acceptable answers but it is quite simply an American-based program.
Di conseguenza, è quello che è. It is what it is.
Gotten in american i understand is to "have had" whereas in the text it says "preso" which is surely "taken" or "took" where does "got" or even "gotten" (yuk) come into this. I have heard people say in modern slang "can i get this" when they really mean "can i buy this" or "can you give me this" but never "gotten"
Just to add my two pennies worth: Portare most commonly means either to bring, to carry, to bear, or to wear.
In no self-respecting Italian-English dictionary have I seen the verb Portare translated into that most ugly of verbs "to get", which should only be used sparingly and in very particular contexts, such as: "I would like to get this" or "I got it" and even then there are better alternatives.
One thing DL has brought home to me is just how many differences there are in usage between British English and US English - and how heated people become when they discuss those differences. Personally, I think we should obsess a bit less about them: after all, we're trying to learn Italian, not English.
Good point. I think - or perhaps I merely hope - that the DL English course is managed by different people and that they understand the nuances of English usage, and are able to navigate the student through the niceties of the language as it's spoken in different parts of the world. Or then again...
In American English, there is a subtle distinction between got and gotten as past participle. I can say I have gotten six mosquito bites in the last hour, meaning that in that period of time, I received those bites, or I can say I have got six mosquito bites, meaning that six mosquitoes bit me, but I don't know when. British English has lost this distinction over the past 400 plus years since the founding of Jamestown and Plymouth. American English retained it.
Actually in British English, although 'got' might be the standard participle, it is strongly discouraged. "Don't say 'got'" my grandmother always used to tell me. eg "I've got a cake" - "no, you HAVE a cake" or "I got a biscuit"- "no, you TOOK a biscuit". The use of the word 'got' was often an indicator of the level of education (or lack thereof). I think this has changed somewhat now, although I still cringe when the word accidentally slips from my mouth.
Howzit, Estelle! ❤❤❤ gaan dit?
(Pom living in the Cape.)
English is changing so fast I can't keep up.
I can remember being chastised for asking 'can I?' instead of 'may I?', but no-one seems to mind very much these days. I learned 'I shall' but 'you will' ... which makes me dinosaur, apparently. 'Gotten' sounds so strange to me (apologies to our American friends) - but 'got' .... I've heard it so often now that I use it myself.
'Strongs' to you for fighting the good fight.
Lekker dag. :)