1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "Vivevamo tra gli animali."

"Vivevamo tra gli animali."

Translation:We lived among the animals.

October 28, 2014



I know that feeling, my neighbors are not better


Is it just me or vivevamo is a pretty and funny word? It's fun to say it out loud... hehe


Voicing a valid opinion!


if an english motherlanguage say "vivevamo" can be funny...maybe for the vocals :-)


Duolingo needs to broaden its English vocabulary. I wrote "We lived amid the animals" and they rejected it. My dictionary includes "amid" as a meaning of "tra".


While it's technically correct, "amid" has fallen out of common usage in modern English. I'm not saying they shouldn't add it, but it wouldn't be good for English-learners to think that it's natural phrasing.


I wrote "we lived among the animals" and DL told me to change "among" to "amid"


I used "with the animals" and I now understand why it was wrong. But Duolingo told me the correct answer was "amid the animals". But it told Penbryn that "amid the animals" was wrong.

What gives?


Perhaps DL has changed its answer in the year since Penbryn posted.


Why is “between the animals” wrong?


It's not technically wrong, but it is a strange phrasing. It would mean that this person was literally living in the space between two animals, not the looser meaning that "among" gives us here.


Thanks, I get that


The usual idea of humans interacting living among or amid the animals is that they are living with the animals - not as part of the herd or pride, as a literally reading of "amid" suggests. I know of only one actual instances where someone lived "amid" the animals - "Grizzly Man", who lived in the wilderness and got close to the bears he loved. Eventually they killed him. I don't know whether they ate him or not.

Living "with" the animals implies that you're living close to the animals, but not in their midst - not as part of the pack. So, while Duo does not accept "with the animals" as an acceptable English idiomatic translation, it's actually a realistic translation, as opposed to the notion of living in the midst of a group of animals which possibly could have you for lunch. Or dinner.

This isn't a point of accurate translation, it's a point of sensible idiom. If the Italian doesn't mean actually living right in the middle of the animals, then it means "with" them.


Does nobody else notice the amongst -> among / amidst -> amid shift in English as a result of these translations?


Yes, as a BE speaker I intended to use ‘amongst’ but went with ‘among’ as this was the prompt. I believe either may be used but ‘amongst’ would be commonly used if the following word begins with a vowel. (for example: amongst us)



FWIW, I'm an Australian English speaker - so I think we are noticing the same thing


To whoever gave me the -1, for making an interesting observation ... nice one!


This is the imperfetto, shouldn't it be "We were living among the animals?"


Either works when we don't have a context. Because the period isn't defined, living is considered an ongoing state.


The imperfetto exercises have this mistake so many times...


"We would live among the animals" is not accepted. I think it should be and have reported it.


Why is "we would live among the animals" incorrect?


You'd need a little more context for that translation of the imperfect to make sense. For example, "When we were young, we would live among the animals." Without the qualifier, it sounds like you're trying to use "would" in the conditional sense.


They are equivalent. The original tra (from intra, interus) is usually preferred, but you can replace it with "fra" whenever it sounds better, for example before words starting with "tr".


'We used to live among animals' is accepted?


It should be. That is a valid translation of the imperfect tense.


Obviously this was why he was not using soap every day...


Why is 'amongst ' not accepted? Actually sounds less like you are crawling on the floor with the animals.


Didn't hear "gli" at all!

Learn Italian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.