Shouldn't it be the case? I tend to agree with the contraction, or are there cases in which the contraction is forbidden?
Yes , it should always be contracted, and in pronunciation the emphasis is on the è to distinguish it from 'dove' where the final e gets no emphasis.
yes, maybe both dov'è and dove è should be acceptable. I have certainly see it written with the contraction more often than not.
It didn't accept my dov'è today (30th Nov 2014) even though I'm pretty sure it was the given answer last time. It's not because I didn't have a space between my dov' and my è, surely?
I don't see an answer to this in the other comments here, although it seems like the first one is hinting at it....
Can someone explain why "Da dov'è venuta?" is not an acceptable answer? I thought "dove è" always(?) contracts to "dov'è".
In this case, dove does not contract because it means "where " not " where is". The " è" is the auxillary verb that goes with venuta. So "da dove"= from where not from where is. Does this help icacc, TomBushaw?
I think it can be "it" in English.
Suppose you are sitting at a table with no trees to be seen anywhere and suddenly there is a leaf on the table. You will ask "Where did it come from?"
In Italian a leafe is either "he" or "she", I don't know, but when you translate that "venuto" or "venuta" you will have to use "it" in English.
Mostly because "venuta" is the feminine form of "venuto". I think that "it" is also technically correct, though.
Correct me if I am wrong, but i think, you do not use dov'e because that means "where is" in the sense of "where is the cat = dov'e il gatto." "Where is the house = dov'e la casa" but here the "e" is part of the verb. It's the auxillary verb. Does that make sense?
That would be ''da dove è venutO''. ''venutA'' indicates we are talking about a female.
VenutO would imply "where have I come from". The hover hints say that venutA is he/ she/ it.
Actually, in the past tense, the verb "venire" and others do change according to gender.
The auxiliary verb "è" is the one that changes in the first person. So, the correct is: lei è venuta; lui è venuto; Io sono venuto (if I am male); Io sono venuta (if I am female).
Rule of Thumb: in this past form ("Passato Prossimo"), the first verb changes with the 1º/2º/3º person, and the second verb changes with subject gender.
So, "he" is not acceptable in the translation.
Good to know that what here is called "Present perfect" in Italian is called "Passato prossimo" as near past. So, I found more information on the Wikipedia, but in Italian, somewhat understandable for me because of some words' similarity to Spanish.
The English version is said to be "Perfect (grammar)", but it is an overview of many languages"
For Spanish it is "Pretérito perfecto compuesto", but I think it's wrong, and there's a discussion...
Well, just to comment and if it's of use.
@ricky_clarkson Well I had the same problem with my post. I haven't been able to find Reply button for your answer. There had left just one thing that I hadn't mentioned in my last post. About those verbs that desribe motion. It is, let's say, 90% correct. But, there are verbs that do not describe motion and in Passato Prossimo they change according to gender. And that's a puzzle that I haven't been able to untangle :) ...yet.
It's not directly about motion as such, it's about whether the verb takes essere or avere in the passato prossimo and other tenses using the past participle. Most verbs of motion take essere, but not all (camminare and viaggiare don't for example) But (pretty much) all other intransitive verbs (eg essere, rimanere, diventare) also take essere, as do reflexive verbs (anything with a si on the end - eg lavarsi, mi sono lavato le mani) With essere the past particle has to agree with the subject of the verb, in gender and number.
That's right. The agreement is also necessary with avere when there is a third person clitic direct object pronoun, but in that case it has to agree with it, e.g. "l'ho vista" (I saw her/it), "le ho viste" (I saw them), and it's optional with the other direct object clitics, i.e. a woman could say "mi ha vista" or "mi ha visto".
As for the lack of reply button, it happens when there are too many comments and they reach the end of the page; I cleaned up a bit and removed the unhelpful or wrong comments, sorry to those involved.
And actually I think it should be, in the archaic version, 'whence DID she come?'
Probably because that's technically archaic English, though that doesn't stop me from using it. In the end, there's nothing wrong with reporting it, I think, as that's technically correct.
'Whence' would be good for some translations from historic literature, but because it's archaic, people you spoke to in the street would, worst case, not understand you, best case, laugh at you.
That would be 'di dov'è?' - present tense, verb essere, and Italian uses di not da to translate the meaning of that phrase (what's your home town) - not, "where has she come from' different verb, present perfect, different meaning ' She's (she is) from New York (home town), she's (she has) come from Boston (by plane, today).'
Just started the present perfect lesson... I'm not understanding so far. It has seemed like most of it is past tense. For this Italian - English sentence, I put "From where is she coming?" That was the hint under venuta but it's wrong. I know it's a bit uncommon, but it is grammatically correct. Can anyone help me please?!
It IS in the past tense in Italian - è venuto/a means both 'has come' and 'came’ in English. 'From where is she coming', present continuous, would usually be 'da dove viene’. The present perfect as we know it in English doesn't really exist in Italian - the tense 'è venuto, ha detto' etc is called the passato prossimo - near past. So the English translation for this Italian sentence is (depending on context) 'where has she come from' or 'where did she come from'.
So, if I understand you correctly, this tense is "just happened?" Also, just so I can get it down, why is it essere sometimes and avere other times? How do you know which one to use?
In northern Italy, they use the passato prossimo for ALL past one-off events, whether recent or not (although in writing about historic events they use the passato remoto - you'll get to that later, but don't worry about it now, you only need to recognize it because it's rare). In the south, they use the passato remoto pretty much where we in English would use the simple past (I came, he went, rather than I have come, he has gone) but will understand the northern habit of using the passato prossimo for both recent and less recent one-off past events.
There is also the imperfect, used for past recurring events, or descriptions (it was a sunny day, the sun was shining, I used to go to school every day) but you'll get to that later too.
Essere and avere - essere is used with nearly all intransitive verbs, ie those without an object, including most verbs of motion and existence - venire, andare, essere, rimanere, etc - and with all reflexive verbs (verbs with se at the end in the infinitive). Avere is used with transitive verbs, those with an object, I read the book, ho letto il libro, or potentially with an object, I read, ho letto. There are a few, like passare, or aprire, which take either essere or avere depending on whether there is an object or not, so I giorni sono passati, the days passed, but, I passed the time, ho passato il tempo; ho aperto la porta, la porta è aperta - i opened the door, The door opened). With essere, the past participle has to agree with the subject; with avere, it doen't change unless a direct object pronoun precedes the verb in which case it agrees with that preceding direct object, eg I read them (the books) Li ho letti.
It sounds complicated, but it's all fairly logical if you understand the difference between transitive and intransitive verbs.
Not really. That would be, 'di dov'è?' As for a person, see my response to Flysalot above.
If the last report I see is yours, that's because you wrote 'when did she come from'
See earlier comments. Since “da dove” go together to mean “from where” and “è venuta” go together (passato prossimo), “dove” and “è” aren’t contracted to “dov’è” here.
I got "From where's she come" as correct solution. Never heard that phrase in English. Does it make sense??
The translation above is not the same as the one given as the correct answer in the lesson. Come on DL, at least be consistent!
Would the moderator please be informed what elision means? Per rendere la frase più scorrevole, abbiamo eliminato le vocali superflue e le abbiamo sostituite con l’apostrofo. La caduta della vocale finale davanti alla vocale iniziale della parola successiva, è chiamata elisione, dal Latino : Elidere che significa rimuovere. Dove is a word that ends with a vowel and the next word the verb essere starts with the same vowel. Therefore, the words dove and è are contracted as DOV'È.
See the many answers to this question above. mariaelena256 and TomBushaw Dov'è means where is.
Between dove and è should be an elision as it has been in other sentences. Who is writing the Italian sentences?
From where has she come? is correct English. Please do not end sentences with "from" as normal sounding, and wrong as it is. Now I have to waste time to type in the wrong answer that DL wants. Peccato.
"he" would be "è venuto"; "she" is "è venuta". The passato prossimo tense is constructed from the helping verb (essere or avere, depending on the verb), which is congugated in the present (indicativo presente) plus the past participle for the verb itself. When essere is used as the "helping" verb, the past participle must agree in gender and number with the subject of the sentence. So here, the verb is venere (to come) which uses essere as the helping verb (as do most "action" verbs). "venuto" is the past participle for venere and "è" is the third person singular form of essere in the indicativo presente. The various forms of the past participle would be "venuto" (male singular), "venuta" (female singular), "venuti" (male or mixed plural, and "venute" (female plural).