As with a previous comment in this section, this form of English usage is unnatural. In English one would say "why would she have left ..." Or "why did she leave ...". It seems some verb constructions do not translate easily between languages.
Let's face it folks, friends and fans, essentially none of the sentences in this section make sense in English. They do make sense if one uses "would" instead of "will."
Or "could." Case in point, "why could she have left her husband" was just now accepted. (I think that DL probably will accept "would" in place of "could" here, especially since the former sounds better.)
They shouldn't be accepting either; the conditional tense is entirely separate and doesn't communicate the same thing.
This critique shows up on other future perfect exercises. The tense may be strange in English sentences without context, but that doesn't change its meaning. "Could" would require "potrebbe" in the Italian sentence. "Could have" would be "avrebbe potuto."
According to a native speaker, the following translation is perfect:
"I wonder why she left her husband!"
... and the following translation is almost as good:
"Why would she have left her husband?!"
Edit: As of November 24, 2018, "Why might she have left her husband" is accepted.
I think most of the sentences in this section should be understood in context as if someone tries to write a script for some soap opera. Makes it a lot easier
Can this also mean "Why will the husband have left?" I only ask because earlier in this lesson there was a sentence with the subject of the verb placed at the end of the sentence. I think it was "Avrà arrivato il nuovo giocatore?" or something like that.
No, because 'lasciare' is a transitive verb, so it needs an object, which is 'il marito' here.
Presumably "partire" would be used instead, if it were the husband who was leaving?
"Partire" literally means "to depart". So it only makes sense if you're literally talking about the person leaving the room/house/location. "Lasciare" is "to leave (something somewhere)". In this specific context, it's used figuratively to indicate splitting up/divorce.
I also did the same, remembering that earlier question, and got it marked as wrong.
For anyone still confused about this in English: Imagine the following dialogue.
A: Next year they're getting divorced. B: No, by the end of this year she will have left him. A: Why will she have left him?
Perfectly good English.
If instead B said "...she will leave him", it would talk about her act of leaving (in the future) and not necessarily the fact that her act of leaving will be completed in the future.
The future has not happened yet, and it talks about a specific thing in the future being completed already which is why it is confusing. Compound that with the fact that this sentence structure is not very common in English, and you get native speakers saying it is nonsense when actually they would have unknowingly used similar constructions in the past.
Except the natural question is "Why [do you think] she will live him before next year?"
While it's perhaps valid English, it's very stilted and unnatural. Extremely formal in a pedantic way, not something very useful in speaking or writing in normal usage.
Thanks, this is the only comment I found useful among all of these comments.
The problem is that then "lasciare" would be intransitive. I don't think that's common.
Wouldn't this fall under the use of conjectural future? I would have translated it as "I wonder why she left the husband" or "Why did she leave her husband?", at least in Spanish this type of sentence is common and used coloquially. I shall report it.
I wonder why she left her husband? was accepted for me, this is definitely conjectural future, it would be in Spanish as well.
Does political correctness apply to italian nowadays?
Would they have by now accepted, "Why will he have left his husband?"
«Perché lui avrà lasciato il marito?»
Perché avrà lasciato il marito? can be used both for male who left his husband and a woman.
I really am developing an intense dislike for the future perfect tense. IMHO, I don' t think it's used very often in English, as it sounds so stilted; and, let's face it -----downright weird. Do Italians really use it all that much or is this chapter here because we are supposed to become familiar with the verb tense?
Yes it's used daily. English is a different language; it doesn't have to make sense in English, only in Italian.
What jgierbo said is correct, but to be fair, it's because the future perfect in Italian can also be translated as the conjectural tense in English. So think of all the times you would say "must have" or "can have", and you'll probably find that it's similar to the rates at which this tense is used in Italian.
These sentences likely make perfect sense to Italians however the English translations are at best very difficult. :'(
But the thing is that sentences like the ones shown here are part of normal, everyday speaking in Italian.
Actually I have appreciated your translation of this sentence it makes more sense than the translation provided please continue to post and to report. This is the section where I have been having trouble with the Italian and the English (I am an English speaker but the English used in translating seems as foreign as the Italian).
That's true, the translations in this lesson are not as exact and understandable as they should be. When I say a sentence like this, I'm not really thinking that the action is in the fiture, it is a just a different way of portraying concern, or doubt, etc.
i tried "why will he have left his husband" but to no avail. No recognition of same sex marriage in Italian?
The ending of the participle only changes to match the gender if the verb takes "essere" or if there's a direct object pronoun in front of "avere." So it's "Lei avra' lasciato il marito," but it's "Lei sara' andata all'estero."
I am mechanically translating these sentences correctly but I cannot understand what they mean exactly.
It's a possible translation for any use of the future perfect, which can mean "will have", "must have", or "can have".
What about 'would have'? I've seen some comments in this section about conditional future, but I can't work out whether or not 'would have' is an acceptable translation (along the lines of 'must have'). I put "Why would she have left her husband" because it seemed like a reasonable way to ask the question, and far more likely to be used, but it's wrong, apparently.
That's the past conditional, which would be "avrebbe lasciato" in this sentence.
i know duolingo wants you to translate things literally, but grammatically this tense when translated back into english is like kinda nuts. they should probably change this lesson in the future. i mean they will have had been probably could change in the future. lol.
It's not the most natural English rendering of the sentence, but that is one of the ways this tense can be used.
i wrote Why will she have left her husband but as right answer was: Why will he have left her husband. How come?
The top of the page shows "Why will she have left her husband?" as the preferred answer, so you were likely marked wrong for another issue.
Phrasebooks are notoriously bad ways to learn a language.
The point is not for you to remember this exact sentence (or any exact sentence you learn in a language course). The point is to learn the underlying rules of grammar and vocabulary.
I cannot understand why DL rejected "Why would she have left the husband?" I think it should be accepted.
Because "would have" is a different tense. That would be "avrebbe lasciato."
this is a dumbest thing i have ever heard... why does DL insist on WILL with this TENSE... when WOULD make all the sense... and naturally... upon consulting them... EVEN NATIVE ITALIANS use it in that context!
This has been addressed quite a bit in the other comments. "Would have left" is "avrebbe lasciato.'
But in English the "-ould" does not always mean conditional-- it is the past tense for can and will also. In the context of these sentences the meaning is very much the same or darn close. Why did you do that? Why would you do that? Mean basically the same in conversational English. Why will she have left her husband means Why did she do it...or why would she do it, so Why would she have left her husband, or even why MUST she have left him, all make sense (or he left his husband, etc... no pronoun indication is given and same sex marriage exists)
But "would have" is unambiguously the conditional perfect and is not a substitute for "will have" in either language. Don't confuse similar meanings for interchangeable sentences. "Why did you do that?" and "Why would you do that?" imply different points in time and carry different implications about whether "that" was already done or is being planned out.
But would and could can also mean past tense in English. “When I was younger I could run faster. When I was younger, I would run all day.”
Yes. But this sentence is the future perfect tense, not the past imperfect.
'Il marito' is the husband, 'suo marito' is her husband. So when you ask 'the husband' the correct translation will be 'il marito'!
You can often drop the possessive pronoun if the context is clear enough. In this case, the subject can reasonably only be leaving their husband, so you don't need to include the possessive.
This DuoLingo translation is not the way English is spoken and is not natural, it may be technically correct but this kind of translation is not helpful for learning another language.
There is no alternative, because this is the future perfect. The tense is rarely used in English, which is why it sounds unnatural. But since it's fairly common in Italian, you need to learn it and put up with the odd translations.
You left out part of the verb. It's "will/can have." So it doesn't change based on the subject in English.
The meaning of the Italian phrase is different. The English translation is "Why did she leave her husband?"
That's incorrect. The Italian for "Why did she leave her husband," is "Perché ha lasciato il marito?" Different tense.
Why will she have left THE husband, as in- the adult daughter is irritated with her stepfather and went back to living with her mother. Legitimate meaning?
"Why can you've left the husband" the correct answer provided, does not make sense.
Duolingo's translation : " Why can you've left the husband ? " doesn't make sense in English
Do other non-native speakers of English think in such a way, that the comments of the native English speakers are really annoying? If they are so unhappy that languages other than English are different from English, then they should just leave it with English.
I think most native English speakers understand that other languages function differently; it's just that the bizarre English translations, which often lack sense to us, make it difficult to understand what is actually meant by the Italian sentence. And that is, after all, what we're here to learn. It would be better to translate the Italian sentences more idiomatically in ways that allow us to understand the acutal meaning, rather than using word-for-word translations that lack sense.
You know this is bad when google translate has no clear what this section is saying!
Google Translate is far from the best online translator, and online translators in general should not be trusted with entire sentences. This is a weird tense, but the fact that Google doesn't know how to deal with it is irrelevant.
I understand, but the vast majority of sentences in these lessons make little to no sense for a native english speaker