Translation:He was the first person to read the newspaper.
as an english speaker, wouldn't this sentence translate more naturally as 'he was the first person to read the newspaper' ?
"who'd" is an abbreviation of "who had" and therefore "He was the first person who had read the newspaper." should be marked as correct.
I could be wrong, but I suspect that the "who'd read" (pronounced reed here) was short for "who would read..." The imperfect can be used for something in the past that happened on a regular basis. For "who had read" (pronounced red), it would have used a different tense in Italian, "aveva letto" I think. :)
That's interesting, plausible and pretty tricky. How about: "Lui era la prima persona che leggerebbe il giornale" for "He was the first person who would read the newspaper"?
You're getting too advanced for me. I don't know if conditional can be used in the past this way in Italian. Maybe. :)
The English is incorrect. In this sentence, it would be "who". "He was the first person WHO was reading the newspaper." "That" is used for objects, not people.
No, you can use either in English. It sounds a bit strange in this sentence, but it's not wrong. What is wrong is the use of the past continuous in this sentence - "was reading" is like a snapshot in time when something happened. It should be as suggested above - "he was the first person to read this paper"
We all agree that 'leggeva' is an Italian imperfect form of the verb in the third person singular. The English imperfect can be rendered by 1. He was reading or 2. He used to read or 3. He would read. 2. and 3. mean the same thing and refer to a repeated or habitual action in the past. So, it is not unreasonable, in my opinion, to translate the sentence into English in the following manner: 'He was the first person that would read the newspaper'. You will notice that Koolkaren has hinted at this in previous posts. As usual context is king, and without it it is difficult to know if the English truly reflects the intention of the writer of the Italian. It seems to me a possibility that Duolingo trawl through texts and pick up on likely looking phrases and sentences for translation, but without any consideration to context. We need Duolingo to clarify, otherwise everyone is going around in circles, which counter-productive to the learning process. If you are in agreement with my remarks, Robin (or anyone else), maybe you could cut and paste them as a report to Duolingo. This will bring the debate to their attention and, who knows, they might address the issue.
I have to say that the DuoLingo preferred version of the English translation is of an English that no English mother-tongue person would use.
No. "Have read" is clearly a finished activity, while "leggeva" is clearly an ongoing activity.
He was the first person that used to read the newspaper. Marked as wrong.
Sorry, Tispaccolafaccia, but 'used to' does refer to a repeated or habitual actions in the past. I'll give a an example; When I was young my mother took me to the cinema every week or When I was young my mother used to take me to the cinema every week. I don't know if you are Italian-mother-tongue (as your soubriquet might suggest), but my mother-in-law, who is Italian-mother-tongue confirms to me that she would translate the English sentence 'I used to live in London' by 'Abitavo a Londra'. She comes from Puglia which is in the south of Italy, and it is possible, I suppose, that there may be regional differences in use of the imperfect and the present perfect. I guess that that we could have added to the list of things that may be translated by the imperfect 'a continuous state' eg 'I was living'. Shoot me down if you will.
Again : leggeva = imperfetto in italiano / to read = infinitivo presente!!!!!
Hi Kurzebingo, I read through the rather good guide to the subjunctive for which you provided the link. It does indeed confirm what you say that 'when preceded by a past tense verb, the imperfect subjunctive indicates an action occurring at the same time or after the main verb', but it does not say that the imperfect subjunctive is always to be used. I found a couple of examples which might be relevant to this situation ie 1) 'Cercava il primo che era entrato' and 2) 'Cercava il primo che fosse entrato'. Both examples are grammatically correct, but have a slightly different meaning. Example 1) would translate into English as 'He was looking for the first who had come in' and the second 'He was looking for whoever had come in first'. It could be that examples 1) and 2) are not relevant examples in this case. I'm not sure. I will submit our target sentence 'Lui era la prima persona che leggeva il giornale' together with your 'leggesse' variant to a native Italian speaker for comment, and revert to you.
Hi Kurzebingo, Further to my reply to you one hour ago, I have received a reply from my native Italian speaker who has provided illustrative examples as follows: 1) '(In quella casa) era la prima persona che leggeva il giornale (ogni mattina)' and 2) 'Era l'unica persona che leggesse il giornale in quella casa'.
I hope you can 'get your head around' example 2). If not I can ask for clarification. ('Unica' bothers me.)
If I were writing this (instead of placing the word bubbles) I would have used the infinitive for the second verb i.e. "Lui era la prima persona da leggere il giornale" for "He was the first person to read the newspaper". I'm still on stage 1 of this lesson so still trying to wrap my head around it. TIA for any help!