Ange-Romain - I totally agree with you and I give you a lingot - for some people it may always be time for cake, but here it shows up a special moment for a special cake and not only for "a cake" but "il momento d e l l a torta" which means to me "it is the moment of "the cake"! If we were to talk not of a cake but of a magician one could say "it is the moment "of the", and not only "of a" magician, as in both cases it would be something special and not every day stuff.
I am never sure when to put in "the" when translating from Italian; it seems a rather arbitrary decision. I put "it is the time for the cake" as both are in the Italian. It was marked as correct, but the two sentences surely have a different nuance - we always have cake at 3 o'clock, so now it is time for cake as opposed to it is the time for the cake (that you all have been waiting so long for).
Beethoven.21 - I don't see how your comment could result in "71 down-votes". And I also have to agree with you, that sometimes DUO changes the tranlations given before and then some comments following do not make the same sence any more, as in this very case. Originally the translation was "It is the moment for the cake". And if by any chance the "downvotes" were somewhat offending - I would just blow them away ! Ciao - have a nice day!
di+definite article can serve as partitive article, translated as "some":
Mr. shark, sorry if I take advantage of...this "moment" to clarify my reply (that you didn't understand). about the indef. article. Let put the things in such a way: Italian has two main indef. articles: "un" for the masculin, "una" for the feminine. Keeping in mind that my language tries to avoid the hiatus (vowel + vowel in two adjacent syllables) if the f. noun begins with a vowel, "una" looses the last vowel and, in "memory" of it, an apostrofe is added: Una + amica = un'amica. What do I drop in "un" (that DOES exit for itself), if I write: "un bar", "un momento", un "daino"? NOTHING. What have I to drop if the noun starts with a vowel? NOTHING, because is not the vowel of the noun which requires the apostrofe, but the fact that TWO vowels are one after the other. The 3rd indef. article (uno) is used ONLY in the specific list (a COMPLETE list!) that I have already given to you which does not contain nouns with a vowel's start, so " un' + masculine noun cannot stand. For your satisfaction, many Italian make the same mistake in their primary school: it is (perhaps it WAS...) sufficient to be defeated. Regards
You are missing my point: Masculine articles are
not consistent between indefinite and definite articles - there is an apocopic version only of the definite article:
before s+consonant, z, ps, pn, gn, y+vowel, i+vowel
Feminine articles are consistent between indefinite and definite articles - there are apocopic versions of both the indefinite and the definite article:
If un can be used before a vowel instead of apocopic version of uno, then why do we need to use apocopic version of lo, when we can simply use il? This is the inconsistency I am talking about. I know that languages are not always consistent and I have no problem with that. I am just stating the fact. Please, do try to understand what I wrote, because I don't know how to explain it better. Just take it or leave it.
What you are not willing to understand is that an "apocopic version of uno" does not exist, because there is not the NEED to cut away a vowel from "uno" (apocope, from Greek ἀποκόπτω = I cut away) when there is a relevant article for this purpose. In other words, the usage of the apostrophe (which indicates that there, there was a vowel), is not the usage of a special form of a particle. For me is unclear what this "apocopic" (non-existent adjective in the Webster's dictionary) version should signify. If you know French, you'll find similar rules that do exist not for "logic" but for euphonic reasons, as we can find in any language, but not the same in each of them. In Japanese, for instance, "te" is hand, "kami" is paper. When they put together the two words, te+kami becomes "tegami" (letter), because for them "teka" is not euphonic and it is changed in "tega". Full stop. We read "Istambul", as before b and p we cannot have an "n". But the old Bysantium has an "n", non an "m" . And it is still for euphony that we use "lo" instead of "il" (and, at the plural, "gli" instead of "i") Only a deaf man, in Italy, would say "il scoppio" or "i scoppi". Guido Guinizzelli wrote "lo padre mio e de li altri miei miglior", but almost 800 years ago. For my ears (and for my logic) sentences like "it's me" are nonsense, a wrong mixture among subject, complement, verb. But surely is not a nonsense for a Brit. I don't know which is your language, but, please! don't try to change mine: for that, there is already a lot of uncultivated Italians people
The fact is that "momento" is not "time", or better, it's a very short time (verrà a momenti = he will come in few "moments"). So the expression is not "formal": it's signifies that - as in a flash - the cake appears and the photo does not catch "time", but that particular "moment"
I just translated the answer as "It is the time for the cake" which was accepted. Other choices like "time for cake" (excited interjection), It's the cake's moment"(personifying our cake), it is the moment of the cake (suggesting a rather grand entrance in a period film), etc. were rejected--makes no sense to me as a native English speaker. Duolingo sometimes tries to make me believe I can be cute, and at other times insists on strict adherence to literal translation---sigh!
In English, we eat commonly eat tarts and tortes, depending on the recipe the name changes. In the previous example, the natural English word could have either been "tart" or "torte". I chose torte, and got it wrong because it was supposed to be "tart". In this example, I chose to use "tart" because of the prior error, and in this case, the correct answer is "cake". So, for consistency, the translation of "torta" should include cake or tart or torte as possible answers, because they are all correct in English.
Someone please explain if I am going wrong somewhere: It's time for the cake -> E(accent) il momento per la torta It's time for some cake -> E(accent) il momento della torta (courtesy: past lessons in Duo) never is it mentioned anywhere that per and della is interchangeable. If native speakers can shed some light on this and tell me that "it indeed is", I am ready to accept the answer. Thanks & Cheers
I think that in any language there are sentences that, correct in themselves, mean nothing if they are taken out from the contest. What can I explain "è il momento della torta"? I imagine a wedding dinner, where (at least in Italy) a huge cake is cut by the married couple at the end of the meal. Normally these dinners last never-ending hours. Well, if someone would say, looking at the coming cake: " è il momento della torta!" everyone would be able to understand the"translation": Thanks to God, the dinner is finished!
Basically, you cannot literally translate the sentence from English to Italian like that. I'm not a native, so I cannot tell you why it's like that, but I think it's simply more natural to use "della" (of the) rather than "per la" (for the).
Literally translated, the Italian sentence reads like so: "it is the moment of the cake." In English, this is nonsensical, so "it's time for cake" is the best translation.