"I have it already."

Translation:Ce l'ho già.

July 26, 2013

This discussion is locked.


I was wondering if "L'ho già" would also be acceptable. Is the "ce" necessary?


I just gave "L'ho già" as my response and it was accepted with "Ce l'ho già" given as an alternative correct answer.


Ce non e necessario.


Necessario ;-)


Totally not understanding the sentence structure


They have suddenly chucked in Pronomial Verbs! "ce l'ho" is from avercela - to have but also commonly, to be angry with.

It's actually easier that the other bits of this module I think. Avercela is Avere with the pronouns CE and LA added to it. CE comes first, then LA, then Avere - i have, you have, we have....

Ce l' ho - I have it. Ce l'ho con lei - I've had it with her! I'm angry with her.


seeing as this comment was left almost over a year ago, is there anything that you've learned that you can use to explain the sentence structure to me? because i'm a bit stuck at the moment :)


About how "ce" is used in this sentence, I found a good discussion on this forum: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1883864


In one of the threads of the above-mentioned discussion -- supposedly a native speaker -- writes that 'avercela' is always used when one wants to express 'I possess' instead of merely using 'avere' and saying 'I have'.

That helped me make better sense of 'avercela'. Would be grateful for a further confirmation by another native speaker.


not a native, not sure if this is that case, it could be, or it could be a necessary "ce" in front of lo/la (and sometimes li/le) + ho/hai/ha, as is wonderfully expained here, by a native, i presume:


in short, the ce is needed for emphasis because "l'ho" and the like sound too weak


Just like "lie down" in English. "down" is technically redundant, but almost everybody would say "lie down" informally instead of "lie", because that might mean "tell a lie".

The same goes for l'ho, which sounds the same as lo. "Ce l'ho" is like "right now" or "lie down".


I already started ignoring it before i read this. I wonder if it is just in thete for a sound in some locales?


Why is suddenly compulsory to abbreviate the pronoun? I'm sure in previous questions 'la ho' or 'lo ho' was accepted.


I hope you reported it because the use of the contracted form is not compulsory.


also question given no context why feminine "it" or "la" is not accepted


I believe when a word ends in a vowel and the next word begins in a vowel or has a vowel sound it is made a contraction or changed tuo fix it. "Some water" could be 'della acqua' but is changed to "dell'acqua". Or "and bear" could be 'e orso' but becomes "ed orso". In this case though "ho" doesn't start with a vowel but SOUNDS like it does so 'la ho' is contracted to "l'ho".


Sorry I cannot explain as well as the others but it has something to do with using avere with Direct Object Pronouns. When you have such a sentence the LO and LA attach to the conjugated form of avere. So, instead of saying "Ce lo ho gia", you shorten it to "Ce l'ho gia". This shortening does not happen with the other direct objects + avere only LO and LA.


same question here


I don't think so, but if you see one like that, you should probably report it.


But doesn't the "ce" make the "lo" redundant or vice-versa?


I once heard a theory that over time, people speaking a language tend to simplify and simplify the way they speak to the point that they become difficult to understand. Even the best listeners don't catch every word that is said -- thinking about something else, etc. Imagine l'ho being said in a noisy room of chattering people with motorcycle noise from the street outside. So then people speaking these simplified languages start introducing redundancy to make things clearer, so that it isn't absolutely necessary to her every word or syllable clearly. "Ce l'ho" or "ce l'ho gia" has this kind of redundancy. (Sorry, Duolingo no accent on my keyboard)


indeed, that seems to be the function of the ce here, which is not so much redundant (because it doesn't actually repeat the meaning of lo) but added for emphasis. corroborated beautifully here: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/15615165

  • 2380

Not understanding why you need both ce and l'. Isn't that redundant - "I already have that it"


Help what is ce for in this sentence?


Grazie!! I have been so confused about ci/ce and this link really, really helped!!! =]


I understand why it should be 'ci', but when did 'ci' turn into 'ce'? It wasn't anywhere in the tips in the beginning of the lesson


Has the l in l'ho been shortened from lo?


Can somebody please explain why it is L'ho .....why the apostrophe?


Once again, and this is turning into a catchphrase for clitics, but...

there is nothing to piece the correct answer together


Why ce rather than ne?


Why not "ancora ce l'ho"


Why "Ce l'ho" and not "lo ho" or "ho lo"?

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