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?
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 :)
lasciar(e) perdere is an expression. It may not make sense if translated literally but everything does not have a one-to-one translation :-)
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?
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.
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)
I wrote that and it was wrong. Can someone tell me how one would say "I let him lose (the game)"?
"(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.
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.
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.