1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "We have not paid for the chiā€¦

"We have not paid for the chicken."

Translation:Noi non abbiamo pagato il pollo.

August 7, 2013



Wouldn't "Non abbiamo pagato il pollo" translate "We have not paid THE chicken" (vs. "per il pollo", "FOR the chicken")?


You can say it either way


Very helpful, thanks!


Okay... So I should think should think if it as "We have paid [some amount of money to someone] for the chicken", where [some amount of money to someone] has not been spoken/specified. "Noi gli abbiamo pagato il pollo cinque dollari." "We have paid him $5 for the chicken."


pagare can be translated as to pay for. as is comprare to buy. posso pagare I biglietti or posso comprare I biglietti. the word for is understood. It took ME awhile to understand the "for" is not necessary


why is it abbiamo pagato and not pagati? When is it appropriate to pluralize the past participle


'abbiamo pagato' (we have paid) because the auxiliary verb is 'avere'

'siamo andati/andate' (we have been) because the auxiliary verb is 'essere'

The auxiliary 'avere' keeps the past participle the same, whilst with 'essere' it changes according to gender and plurality, apart from with the following exception:

'l'abbiamo vista' (we have seen her) vistA because we need to specificy it is a girl rather than a boy (la->vista, il->visto, as both contact to l'abbiamo)


pagammo or non abbiamo sounds a little like splitting hairs. "We have not paid..." sounds to me as if the transaction is still going on at the checkout counter so how could either be correct for the statement? It's not like "we HAD not paid..."


I put "i polli", as this could be considered plural and singular. Will Report it.


Way to dine and dash

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