1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Italian
  4. >
  5. "Da dove arrivava?"

"Da dove arrivava?"

Translation:Where was she arriving from?

August 14, 2013





cmp82: Don't know where you're coming from, but no one says 'whence' unless they're a Shakespearean actor.


Hence: "Whence".


Jeffrey...The only one who says that very much is old King Wenceslas.


Whence is an English word in current use.


Tony...in current use...where? Certainly not in the States. Which is fine. And says nothing about where it is still currently used. You'll just never hear it here.


I could think of millions of words you would never hear in the States!!! Doesn't mean they don't exist or are never used. English is the language of England, and you will still occasionally hear an Englishman say whence.


Tony, as I said 'that's fine'. I was simply trying to point out to non native speakers of English, trying to learn it using DL, that some words and phrases are unique to either the British Isles or to the States, to prevent their sounding foreign or unnatural, if used "out of place."


Not exactly everyday English. In fact it is used very rarely.


What is wrong with "where did he arrive from";can anybody help? Thanks in anticipation


I put the same. He arrived is an action distinct point in time so would be perfect tense e' arrivato


I'm waiting for the same answer.


Is "Where did he come from?" a possible translation here?


How can "Where were you coming from?" not be right? That was one of the possible translations...


no 'come' is 'venire'; they are similar but not the same. We also have the verbs 'come' and 'arrive' in English; they are similar but not the same; you cannot usually just swap them in a sentence and get a good result.


"Coming" and "arriving" are often used as exact synonyms as least in colloquial American English, however, I could say "I was coming from Paris; my jet had a lay-over in Iceland, so I was arriving from Reykjavik." I don't think you could switch the two words in that sentence.


It is just that we have two distinct words in both languages: come/arrive & venire/arrivare. Both words have similar meanings and are often interchangeable, but can also have some specific nuances. If 'arrivare' is used in Italian, then it is best to translate it as 'arrive' in English, even though 'come' would probably fit in most instances.


It largely depends on the intent and nuances of both languages.

If "arrive" and "arrivare" are exact synonyms, you should use the English/Italian word which most closely follow the Italian/English word in spelling and sound (i.e., you're translating the word), even if another word might more accurately reflect what's going on (if you change the word, you're editing as well as translating).

But then, all good, readable translations require good editing as well, if only to avoid repetitiveness: "He's arriving from Paris, but not coming here" reads better, IMO, than "He's coming from Paris, but not coming here." Unless there's a reason for the repetition, which is a question of aesthetics.


Jeff...I don't see why not, other than using 'coming' twice would be a bit redundant or repetitive and would need some eddaing. :-)


I base my judgment on a degree in English literature and decades of reading English-language texts. "Arriving from" connotes coming directly from a place with little interruption in the time it takes to travel; "coming from" allows for any number of intermediate stops with an indeterminate amount of time taken to travel. "Arriving" also focuses on both the beginning and the end of the trip: "arriving (here) from (there)", while "coming from" focuses on the place you left without regard to where you arrive. In my example, you'd be both "coming from" and "arriving from" Paris, but you'd only be "coming from Moscow".

None of this is written in stone. It's just a question of idiom. You'll have more clear communication if you write this way in American English, although you'd likely be understood either way. Also, that idiom might not exist in the UK or India or other English-speaking places.


"to come" should be a valid translation of "arrivare" in this context. See http://context.reverso.net/traduction/italien-anglais/arrivare However Duo does not usually include the formal/polite "you" conjugation in its list of correct answers, so would not normally consider "you" as a correct translation with "arrivava". You could report it, but it is usually just easier to translate the third person singular as just that and avoid the issue. In this case it is hard to say whether it was your "coming" translation or the "you" translation that Duo didn't like.


"Wit's End," is my guess.


arrive and come isn't the same thing?


"He was coming from Moscow, but his plane stopped in Paris, so he was arriving from that city."


Jeffrey...Then he was detained by TSA agents at JFK and has never been heard of since.


A long time ago, I flew from Haiti on a jet that had originate in Bogota, Colombia. While in Haiti, I'd picked up a cold, so my nose was all red and dripping, and I was sneezing like crazy. When I got to Miami, I spent a lot more time going through customs than I was used to.


Can anyone explain why dov'arrivava is wrong please?


"Where did she arrive from?" isn't correct???????????


The "a" on "arrivava" is there because it's third person, imperfect tense. An "a" means feminine only when a past participle is used as in "Da dove è arrivato (or) è arrivata." I appreciated your "Wit's end" comment very much!


Yet as you say "arrivava" is still third person, imperfect tense - possibly translated as "he arrived", "she arrived", "it arrived".


so how would you say 'where did she arrive from?'


I believe it'd be: Da dove e' arrivata?


why isn't 'from where did it arrive" correct?


I am confused, I thought this tense was more a pattern of something done in the past.. because frequently I see it translated as "used to" ..s o if that is the case, why is this "arriving from?" why isn't it "from where would she arrive" or "from where would she used to arrive?" or is that a different verb? In English there is a difference between "what airport was he arriving from" (he is late, what airport is he arriving from?) vs. "what airport would she arrive from" (when she used to regularly make trips to New York)


"would arrive" is a subjunctive construction as e.g., "what airport would she arrive from, ...if her flight had been cancelled (which it wasn't or if it were to be cancelled, which it might be). "Where was she arriving from?" is a factual question requiring an indicative tense.


The problem is with English. "Would" has two different meanings - one makes a verb conditional; the other has to do with customary action in the past. If I say, "As a little girl I would sit on my mother's lap," I mean that when I was little I often sat on her lap. If I say, "If I weren't grown up, I would sit on my mother's lap," I mean I don't sit on her lap, although I would like to.


Really good examples!


How about "where did she used to arrive from?"


It would be correct if it were "Where did she use to arrive from" although it's a bit clumsy, the simple past (or here, the continuous one) is better :)


i wrote "where did he use to arrive from" but DL didn't accept it.


cekay1: I see nothing wrong with it and can envision any number of scenarious where you'd hear that. "Where did he use to arrive from?" Ans: "Well, whenever he returned from overseas, he always used to arrive from Dover AFB."


I suspect that the word USE instead of USED might be part of the problem. It's Duo, so...


cekay1 is correct. When coming after the auxiliary "did" the correct form is "use to" rather than "used to" as the "did" already indicates the events happened in the past. See http://www.grammar.cl/rules/used-to-use-to.htm However Duo has had problems with that in the past.


I put "Where did you arrive from", thinking it would be applicable to the formal you, but Duo didn't accept my answer. Could someone please explain why?


Unsure, but out of context I think you'd have to include the pronoun Lei to make your meaning clear, otherwise it'd generally be taken to refer to a 3rd person s/he.


Why did they translate it using the gerund?


Patricia.101 I understood that this tense is used to say how things were in the past, or talk about events that happened often, or that carried on over a long period of time. In English, we often use words and phrases such as: was, were and used to. But... we don't always use these phrases. Eg. vivevo con due amici - I lived with two friends. But the Imperfect tense must be used in Italian.


"I lived" is the simple past or imperfect in English too.


Fix this immediately. I put 'Where were you arriving from?' and it was not accepted, 'Were were you arriving from?' being offered as a correct response.

'Were were you arriving from?' is not even proper English, Duo! :/


can,t we say : "da dove era venuta?"


No, that'd be a tense further back in the past and would translate as "Where had she come from" not "Where was she coming from". They refer to two different time frames.


I don't know the word whence in english. And what's, wrong with "where from"?


Ilana: "where from' needs to be separated: Example: Where are you from? You wouldn't say: Where from are you? Also 'whence' is very archaic - you would only hear/read it in poetry, as e.g. Shakespeare.


Would someone please help me. I am not getting any feedback from Duo. I am on level 16, politics and half way through there is a triple answer question. The green box is partially covered by the answer and wont let me click in. I have tried several times and I am stuck there, SOOOO frustrating I cant move on.


Can't you skip the question? Allowing you to continue? Or submit an answer you know to be incorrect, but which will allow you to go on to the next question?


Thanks for your answer. I have tried this also, but a answer partially covers the green check box and wont allow me to click on it. Even the "skip" box on the left wont light up to allow me access. and clicking on "quit" just takes me out altogether. I so hope that the Duo. team can see this and help me to move on,


Da dove è arrivata - where was she arriving from. Correct?


whence?? A word I have never used in English. Where is she coming from?


Whence, As in the New Webster Dictionary. From what place, from what or which source, origin, premises, principles, facts. " The lady returned from whence she came"


Whence? Who uses whence in English nowadays?


Whence ??? doesn't that a word concerining time?


Note for DL as I cannot comment elsewhere. As a British person I find it very unusual, even wrong, to say where was she arriving from. Normally, we would ask "where was she coming from"


StephenCoates: I think that if the context involves someone arriving by train, plane, or ship rather than someone coming from the supermarket or theater, then not only is 'arriving' correct, but in my opinion the more appropriate and more accurate verb to use. To emphasize my point, you need only consider the standard terms used at airports around the world: Departures and Arrivals. Departures and Comings? I don't think so!


'Where was she coming from?' sounds more natural


From where was she arriving? Do not end a sentence with "from".


My answer matched with yours and no points


from where was she arriving is also a good translation!


what a lousy sentence that makes in english


Pat...see my earlier comment. "Whence" may be common in British English, but you'll never hear it in American English. That's not to say it's incorrect. I'm trying to qualify where it's appropriate.


Its hardly ever used in English (Australian) either. Its almost only used in a poetic context.


Thanks for the clarification/confirmation. Appreciated.


"Whence cometh thou and whither goest?" despite some comments above, whence is almost never used in common English either in England or, indeed in the rest of the world.

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