On the whole 'e' is the more common version of 'and' used. However, almost always when the 'e/ed' separates two identical vowels you use 'ed' instead of 'e'. So for lui ed io it is because there is an i before and after the ed. Apart from that I'm afraid that when ed is used instead of e the best answer is 'when it sounds better'.
No. Him and I would be incorrect English. It is He and I. However, this sentence is basically a bad example. In English it would be more natural to say we would both like a beer please (it is unlikely you would ever hear He and I want a beer - and additionally this is a very rude way to speak in English!!). In UK you would probably hear people saying please at least a few times! : )
Him and I is something that a young English child might say but would be strange to hear from an adult. In written English it would also be awkward and clumsy.
If you and a friend were together then saying he and I is awkward and clumsy. It is more natural to say We would like a couple of beers please.
If you are in a crowd it would be natural to say 'He and I would like a beer' the unspoken implication is that each of you would like a beer. You could also say He and I would like a beer each. Two beers for us please.
Grammatically, 'I and he want a beer' is correct. It sounds awfully 'wrong' only because as the original poster realizes, it is polite to put yourself second/last when you are speaking of yourself and another person or persons (Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice and I all want beers).
If you would say, 'I want a beer and he wants a beer,' then grammatically, there's nothing wrong in saying, 'I and he want a beer.' You are using the subject-form of the pronouns in both cases.
It's just not considered polite to 'put yourself first.' The reason it sounds 'awfully wrong' to you is possibly that you are either well-brought up and surrounded by well-mannered people, or well-educated and surrounded by people who are attuned to the differences between how a laborer/uneducated person speaks and how an educated person speaks. You've acquired the idiom of the educated class without knowing that there was a 'rule' involved - the rule of good manners, not of grammar.
No, they are not. They are two different verbs, so they are grammatically different, and they are two different registers - 'would like' being more polite/formal than 'want' in this context.
They aim at the same end: getting a beer. But that does not make them the same, any more than a sword and a pistol are the same if they aim at the same end of killing an enemy.
We want tea now but would wait if getting the tea now inconveniences you.
Imagine this scenario where you are at the table with a group of people and you are speaking to the waiter who is taking your order.
So the order to the waiter could go like this :-
The lady in the red dress wants a Tequila Pop and a Marigrita. The lady in the black dress wants a Pina Colada and the guy with a bow tie wants a Martini Dry. These three ladies want a stout. This dude wants a whiskey. He and I want a beer.
It is more polite to put the ladies' request first, then the men's and lastly oneself's.
Ok, now the fun part is to make that request in Italian! Hehee
'Me and him would like a beer' is incorrect in English, because you would never say 'Me would like a beer' or 'Him would like a beer,'unless you were perhaps 3 years old and still learning the language. You have to use the same pronouns you would use with a single subject: 'I would like a beer.' 'He would like a beer' = 'I and he would like a beer', or, to be polite, 'He and I would like a beer.'
'Me and him' or 'him and me' as a subject is like fingernails on the blackboard - and a definite sign that the speaker is low-class and/or very poorly educated.
If you want a job as a garbage collector, say 'Him and me want to collect garbage.' If you want a job that uses your brain, not your back, say 'He and I want to work in your office.'
Many non-native speakers of English read these forums, and it's better not to tell them that something is OK or natural in English when in fact, it's incorrect, non-standard, or indicative of a class of speaker they may not wish to be associated with. (A Russian doctor does not want to sound like a street cleaner from the Bronx when he speaks English, for example.)
I think you overstate your case. This is the comment section (where people are presumably allowed to express their own opinion) of a course for Italian not English. Not everybody wants to be a strict grammarian. There's nothing wrong with being a garbage collector. Having an officejob isn't the highest level of awakening. Speak however you like, but don't presume I want to speak that way. Hugs & Kisses
PS, here is an excerpt from Merriam-Webster: (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/me) me or i? Me is used in many constructions where strict grammarians prescribe I. This usage is not so much ungrammatical as indicative of the shrinking range of the nominative form: me began to replace I sometime around the 16th century largely because of the pressure of word order. I is now chiefly used as the subject of an immediately following verb. Me occurs in every other position: absolutely who, me? , emphatically me too , and after prepositions, conjunctions, and verbs, including be. come with me you're as big as me it's me Almost all usage books recognize the legitimacy of me in these positions, especially in speech; some recommend I in formal and especially written contexts after be and after as and than when the first term of the comparison is the subject of a verb.
Here's one the disjunctive nature of the English pronoun: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjunctive_pronoun)
I thank you so much for your kind reply, that leaves me with more questions than before. My curiosity about the pressure of the words order remains intact, but now you introduce another topic: why to learn another language. What the linkage with a personal point of views about your language? And why should I forget my language if I try to learn well a language that is not mine? I think that the language (which is not a dialect, an everyday speech, a jargon) is something that does not belong to us, because inside it there is the story of our country, the beauty of our poets and writers, the way to express, clearly and possibly without ambiguities, what we mean to say. In DL, for instance, I detest the continuous, exclusive usage of "lui/loro" where "egli/essi" should be used. It's a sloppy system of speaking, it's a way to say to the foreign learner:"Too difficult to teach you the differences: come on! They (we) will understand you anyway". Of course, you are not obliged to write reports, editorial, etc: I would like to know the reactions of your "supervisors". What you call avoidance, often, is due simply to the not-knowledge of the reasons for which persons (more expert than you) have chosen a form instead of another. Often "the updated language" is only an easier, also if ugly, language.
Interesting. But I would like to ask you: "Did you send your children to school? There, they should have learned what the (strict or large) "grammarians" say, shouldn't they? And why this effort and these expenses when one way or the other is admitted and both receive the benediction of the Merriam-Webster, "American company that publishes reference books"? (By the way, I didn't know that the word order has a pressure, but this surely depends on my poor knowledge of your language). Your reply would be greatly appreciated.
I suppose it's a cultural issue. English has its own poetry like any language. Are we all to speak the same? Why bother learning Italian? Maybe we should all just speak English? Should the Italians forget Italian? Perhaps your language has irregularities. Does somebody try to pressure, guilt, trick you out of using them? Children should to learn not to take everything at face value and how to apply what they learn critically. The strict grammarian has three tools in their tool box: reason, passion and avoidance. Their reason sometimes fails. I have my own passion. And avoidance. Avoidance leaves an incomplete education. And who is hurt the most, the non native learner. The strict grammarian's very own posterchild. Is the non native English learner taught which subject to use "she and she", "her and she" or "she and her" No, because the answer is the unmentionable "she and her". We'll teach them the answer is "they". Avoidance!
I completely agree, because there are two manners to speak a language: a good one and a bad one. "To be equally understood" or "it could be said" are not good reasons to give poor examples in teaching languages, and we can only thank mother language people that spend their time to help us and also fellow countrymen that, for misfortune, poverty or (let me add it!) for scarce willpower didn't have or didn't follow their teachers at school, teachers paid with the money of all the community. Unfortunately today everything must be easy and, possibly, free. But in my old language, Latin, they said "Nihil ab nihilo": nothing comes from nothing.
I got the "write what you hear" lesson. I listened in the slow mode several times and finally put "vera" because it didn't sound at all like a "b" to me. Even after seeing the answer (which had occurred to me, but I dismissed it, because "v" is what I kept hearing), I can't hear "birra." I'll go with it, though. I checked here to see if anyone else had that issue with listening, but looks like I'm the only one out on that limb. So must be my hearing.
I am UK English speaker and agree that 'want' is a bit crude if you are asking for something. Interestingly I was thinking about it and realised it's different if you are giving or offering something to a close friend or a child it seems perfectly reasonable to ask 'Do you want a cup of tea, do you want a beer, do you want some chocolate'. It is more formal and respectful to ask 'would you like' so we would probably say "Would you like...beer/chocolate/cup of tea?".
I got told you try to bounce off the double consonants. So you say the r at the end of the first syllable and then the second as the first of the next syllable. I have no idea if this makes any sense to you but I find thinking of the word a bit like a trampoline you're bouncing off of at the double consonant works for me.
Because that would be the conditional, vorremmo https://www.thoughtco.com/conjugate-the-verb-volere-in-italian-4052436 for full conjugation of this verb.
And I want is not the same as I would like. There's a different sort of level of politeness. Certainly when I was young if I said 'I want' to my mother rather than 'I would like' I would get a very different response.
Would you say 'Him want a beer'? Or 'He wants a beer'?
It's the same reason you use 'and I' and not 'and me' because 'me wants a beer' is not good grammar.
In the end it's want rather than wants a beer because now that there is both he and and I there are now two of us and you'd use the conjugation that goes with we. We want a beer.
Unless you're being facetious, because HE wants A beer and I want A beer, so we both want A beer, each.
One could say - in English, anyway - 'He and I want beers.' It would be more likely in the context of placing several orders: 'They will have whiskeys, she wants a gin, and he and I would like beers.' The listener would understand that each person wants one drink of the type named.
I am guessing because there is no word for 'we' in the original sentence? I know that the verb already implies the pronoun and 'noi' is not needed with 'vogliamo,' but in this case since the 'lui ed io' are already specifically included, the 'noi' would have to be, too, to be part of the English translation I would think.