Translation:I wanted to come get you after school.
'Passare qualcuno a prendere' means to collect someone, especially if it is children from school, or individuals from hospital. But this is possibly an English translation rather than American one. I have been knocked back with ' I was wanting to collect you after school', which should be accepted, especially as it shows the imperfect verb use accurately.
I'm trying to understand this construction. On first pass, I read this as "I wanted to pass you to take after school" which makes no sense. I think the meaning is something like "I wanted to pass by to take you after school." But then is "ti" associated with "passare" or "prendere"?
It seems to me that you can probably attach the pronoun to either if it behaves the same way as venire a prendere see http://italian.stackexchange.com/questions/1718/venire-a-prenderti-vs-venirti-a-prendere
I think that "come get you" is a phrase that is commonly spoken in the South and it is informally used in other regions of the US; however I don't think it would ever be used in formal writing. One might compare it to the use of "how come" ; one would use "why" when writing a formal letter or paper.
"I wanted to catch you after school" would be a common expression in middle America. This would be a statement made by someone to a friend indicating that the speaker wanted to meet the other person. I think it should be accepted, especially since the clues for "prendere" include "to catch."
I wish I knew what is meant by a clitic. Is it some term used in American English? I have been learning, using and teaching English grammar for nearly 60 years now, and until starting this Duolingo course, had never heard it, either in relation to my native language, nor when learning French, German, Spanish and Italian. It just seems to mean small or part words - but why this umbrella title is used, when it appears to refer to things (like contractions, indirect objects, or prefixes), I have no idea. Any help, please?
It's a very common term in linguistics (there's much literature about it), not so much in grammar; in Italian grammar they're called "pronomi atoni" (unstressed pronouns). "Clitic" means exactly that, it's a word that cannot carry any stress, and has to be pronounced together with other words: in English it mostly applies to contractions and the Saxon genitive (you can't say 'm 've or 's without another word). In Italian, contrary to Latin, where e.g. POpulus (the people) became popuLUSque (and the people), clitics can't even alter the word's stress. An unstressable word slips by unnoticed, and it's very convenient to focus the attention on the words you really wish to communicate; think of the difference in focus between "my father's house" and "the house of my father".
Thank you! So it seems a clitic isn't a grammatical term, but merely indicates a part word that is not stressed. I've never studied linguistics, but it seems odd that in none of the languages I have studied, it has never been used. Is it used more in North America, do you know? You make me feel very ignorant: I had never previously encountered the term Saxon genitive for the possessive use of the apostrophe.
Ah, that's how it's usually referred to in English teaching in Italy, but naturally many of these terms have no reason to be taught to native speakers... I first met the term clitic in my Ancient Greek classes (they invented the term after all); in my French classes we used the same terms we use in Italian. It seems that in French grammar they're considered the standard pronouns and the stressed ones are called "pronoms disjoints" (disjunctive pronouns). I don't think that the usage varies depending on the variety of English, it probably depends more on the background terminology of the book or teacher. Many resources online seem to treat them as the normal pronouns for Italian as well, and the stressed ones are called "tonic" (direct translation from Italian) or "prepositional" (because they're mostly used after prepositions - makes sense).
Linda, Wow, great. that'll give me something to do while I eat my pasta and, well, you know what, which of course could make for some strange translations, which come to think of it, could well be what's behind some of DL's odd translations -- -- Mannaggia! Finalmente so perché.....è a causa del vino! Ciao e grazie ancora una volta!
Since a few weeks i have been using that 'strengthen skills' again, but it does not work like it did in the beginning. Now i only get questions taken from the first lesson (starting from above, chronological) that needs restrengthening. When i first started to use DL it worked differently, better. When i restrengthened skills the questions were a mix of all lessons i already finished, which makes more sense. I finished the tree two times, maybe it's because of that? Or is it some preset i have to fix?
It might not be your favorite kind of English in specific contexts, understandably, but it is very much English. Any linguist or anthropologist will explain to you that the standards for what a language is (or is not) are people's actual usage, and the frequency thereof, not some idealized grammar/lexical rules.
B1126 this is a lovely tolerant site. Lets all be nice to each other. Uk english and us english have of course evolved differently. Interestingly americans have retained some words that we have dropped, eg gotten. Neither right nor wrong. I believe duo is american so understandably might miss some of the nuances of uk english, which also varies hugely area to area. Worry less about the English and focus on the Italian. After all this is free. We can all get along and help each other. You are amongst friends
I have no objections at all to American English - it's a colourful and expressive language (moreso in some respects than British English), but I do find it a bit galling when a common British English usage which is a valid translation of an Italian sentence is marked wrong by DL.
B1126: Yes it is. It may not be your brand of English and yes, it may be colloquial American English, but it is English all the same and because it's American English in your opinion, is no reason to slam it. Language evolves and just because it's now different, doesn't mean it's inferior. By the way, those American GIs who came to your country's aid in WWII, saving British lives and in the process your beloved language from the Nazis - have you forgiven them yet for desecrating your language?