1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "Io lo lascio perdere."

"Io lo lascio perdere."

Translation:I let it go.

July 20, 2013



I'm surprised nobody has referenced Frozen yet.


It's fine, I'm here, the girl who learnt Italian by watching Frozen in Italian more times than in English and translated the Serena Autieri version of Let it Go (All'Alba Sorgero) back into English as a translation exercise :) May have a slight obsession...


how effective was that? seriously considering it! and where can one find frozen in italian?


awesome idea....i am going to try that!


Frozen was actually the first thing that crossed my mind, but let's just let it go


Why are both lascio and perdere used together? Isn't that redundant?


i wished someone would answer your question. I dont understand why Lascio (Lasciare = "to leave") and Perdere (to lose) are used together. It seems redundant to me also. I am confused.


"Lasciare" also means "to let", and "lasciar perdere" is an expression that means "to let go", but only in the sense of "let it go, forget about it, I don't care anymore". "Let him go (somewhere)" for example would be translated literally, "lascialo andare".

Instead of "lascia perdere" one can also say "lascia stare" ("leave it alone", "leave it be").


If I was more crafty I would make you a "superman" type logo'd shirt with DL (for DuoLingo) on it. You always come in and save the day, DuoFaber. Thank you very much for your easy-to-understand explanations. I have noticed that you seem to clear up many of these questions. I appreciate it.


Oh wow, this is probably the nicest comment I've ever received here on Duolingo. Thank you! Glad to be of help :)


I've also heard my Italian relatives say "lascia aperta," literally, leave it open, but meaning leave it be.


lasciar(e) perdere is an expression. It may not make sense if translated literally but everything does not have a one-to-one translation :-)


io and lo look very similar


Could use "l'ho" instead of "io lo" ?


Not really.
L'ho (= Lo ho) means 'I have it/him' both as possession and in compound tenses like L'ho visto ('I have seen him').
io Lo and Lo ho (I'm using capital 'L' here to avoid confusion with capital 'i') are as different as 'I (see) him' and 'I have eaten'.


Hmm. I tried it in Google Translation: "I let it go" gave me "L'ho lasciato andare". I accepted this as a literal translation to "I have let it go". Is this wrong then?


The english phrase "I let it go" could be used in either past or present tense, but it is more commonly used in the past tense. And, given that Italian often uses present perfect tense where English would use past tense, I would think that "l'ho lasciato" should be acceptable here.

The Italian phrase "Io lo lascio perdere" is in the present/ future tense, so DL may not accept the present perfect (l'ho lasciato) if the programming only knows the English phrase to be in present tense.

I'm not a native Italian speaker, however, so if I'm wrong, someone please chime in. :)


I've also noticed the choice of font makes me misread sometimes


Who or what is Frozen?


Oh my.... Ask that question, phrased just like that, to any group of girls, mothers with children, etc... and I'll bet you 10:1 they start singing you the answer.

[deactivated user]

    It's an animated Disney movie.


    Frozen is a recent Disney movie which has a song titled "Let it go"


    If "lascio perdere" means let it go. Why is the "lo" necessary. Would "la lascia perdere" be let her go?


    yes, that would be correct.
    Also: "li lascia perdere" (m.plurale) and "le lascia perdere" (f. plural)


    Wouldn't it be... "Lasciala perdere!"


    How about "I let him lose", would that be correct as well? Thanks!


    I wrote that and it was wrong. Can someone tell me how one would say "I let him lose (the game)"?


    I wrote that, too, and it was wrong


    What is wrong with "I let go of it"?


    il freddo non mi ha mai infastidito comunque.


    Would "Io lo lascio andare" mean the same thing? Or something a little different? Or would it just plain be wrong? Thanks!


    "(Io) lo lascio andare" means "I'm letting him go (somewhere)". So it's correct, but it means something different :)

    "Lascio perdere" is just an expression that means "I'm letting it go, I don't care anymore" (what's "it" in this case? usually a discussion, or something you were interested in just moments ago). It's more common to hear someone say that to someone else, "lascia perdere!" (or "lascia stare!", same thing), meaning "forget about it!", "leave it be!".

    When referring to someone, "lascialo perdere" would mean something like "forget about him, don't give him any attention, it's not worth it", while "lascialo stare" would mean "leave him be, leave him alone". And again, "lascialo andare" would be translated literally as "let him go (somewhere)", or even "let him leave". I hope this explanation wasn't too confusing.


    Thank you so much! That is very helpful!


    What would make this "I let HIM go" ?


    I think it does say that. Lo could mean him or it.


    Io gli lascio perdere


    I think gli is wrong as it's an indirect object, so it would mean I let to him go.


    How can "I let him forget it" when "lascio...perdere" is given as to "let forget"? Maddening!


    Seriously, how in the world can "lascio perdere" become "let ... be" lasciare = leave perdere = lose

    Please explain it to me. Thanks beforehand.


    Lipofefeyt, English has a close idiom involving 'lose', namely 'get lost' which granted doesn't mean exactly the same thing, but it shows that words have multiple meanings, some literal, some figural. The idea in this one is, "I let it go' in the sense that if it gets lost, I don't care. Bottom line, don't expect literal, word for word equivalents when dealing w/ a foreign language and one's own.


    Thanks for the explanation, but i must say you're wrong about you're assumption on me. In my native language (portuguese), in fact "lo lascio perdere" means "deixo-o perder-se", which stands exactly for "i let him get lost", so what you said.

    Since i'm quite experienced with languages and i've been learning a lot of them over the years, i assumed that this would not be the case of a literal translation (because usually in english it is not), so i assumed the contrary. My assumption was wrong indeed, but no need to tell me that literal translations don't work mate.

    Thanks again.


    Lipofefeyt: Sorry if you were offended, but I stand by my observation about literal translations -- they rarely work. In over 40 yrs of teaching German at the university level the students who never 'got it' were those too timid or stubborn to get away from the idea that they could open a dictionary and simply plug in one word after another for the original and come up with anything that made sense. The result was usually something that either made no sense whatsoever or simply sounded awkward. Of course simple straightforward sentences can be approached that way, but language is far too complex and idiomatic to do that effectively in the long run.


    Expressions rarely make sense if translated literally. 'let it be' itself doesn't mean 'stop interfering with someone or something' if translated literally.


    See my answer to Germanlehrerlsu below. In any case, Duolingo makes a lot of mistakes, so i was also considering this another one.



    "Io" and "lo" ..... my eyes are hurting now :P


    Fyi, this sentence shows the printing diffetence between "Io & lo" -- nice eample! The "l" shows a miniscule lip at lower end of the down stroke. The capital "I" has no lip anywhere. (It won't give me no lip.)


    "I let him lose" a stupid sentence, probably is any language. It is very difficult to believe that such a sentence means literally what is says. It's pointless to give people sentences like this to translate.

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