A Cinecittà stanno investendo una montagna di soldi

theartichoke

Senior Member
English - Canada
Hi everyone,

I'm hoping this will be a straightforward question. It's 1950 and a young man is saying he wants to get into the movie-making business in Italy. He says A Cinecittà stanno investendo una montagna di soldi. Il cinema è l'industria del momento."

Exactly who is investing the money? Is the point that Cinecittà is investing a ton of money into making new movies, or that someone (i.e., the government) is investing a ton of money into Cinecittà?
 
  • Fooler

    Senior Member
    Italian (Italy)
    It can be understood in every way: the government, the institutions, the producers (locals or from abroad) and so on.
    My suggestion
     

    Starless74

    Senior Member
    Italiano
    By saying "a Cinecittà" he's clearly referring to the studios themselves and/or to the movies industry based in there, IMHO. ("People at Cinecittà are investing..." etc.).
    If he referred to public investments he would probably have said: "stanno investendo una montagna di soldi in Cinecittà".
     
    Last edited:

    theartichoke

    Senior Member
    English - Canada
    :thumbsup: A ton of money/loads of money is being invested in Cinecittà.
    Flipping it into the passive voice is a pretty good option. I realize that the point is that money's being invested, but the agent doing the investing is important when it comes down to wording the sentence in English. I suspected that it meant what Starless has confirmed: a Cinecittà refers to the people at Cinecittà themselves. But to say Cinecittà is investing a ton of money or At Cinecittà they're investing a ton of money or The people at Cinecittà are investing a ton of money sounds strange to me -- if you're investing money into your own business / industry, then it seems to me you can't use "investing" without completing it with into something. Otherwise, "investing" has the sense of "saving [for interest]" rather than "spending [for the sake of future gains]". Maybe something like Cinecittà is investing a ton of money into making new movies.

     

    Starless74

    Senior Member
    Italiano
    if you're investing money into your own business / industry, then it seems to me you can't use "investing" without completing it with into something.
    I understand the absence of "something to invest into" in the Italian phrase sounds odd once literally translated into English,
    if this is so, I think your suggestion Cinecittà is investing a ton of money into making new movies can be a good solution.

    Edit: in case you don't want to limit the "investment" to "making new movies", I believe you may also choose something vaguer, like into their business.
     
    Last edited:

    rrose17

    Senior Member
    Canada, English
    But to say Cinecittà is investing a ton of money or At Cinecittà they're investing a ton of money or The people at Cinecittà are investing a ton of money sounds strange to me
    Maybe it's a little vague but doesn't sound all that strange to me. "Cinecittà is putting up a ton of money" followed by the next phrase, especially, I think is completely understandable
     

    theartichoke

    Senior Member
    English - Canada
    Maybe it's a little vague but doesn't sound all that strange to me. "Cinecittà is putting up a ton of money" followed by the next phrase, especially, I think is completely understandable
    "Putting up" works better than "investing," if we're not going to add "into" something. Or if I wanted to be loose and colloquial (probably fine in this context), There's a ton of money floating around Cinecittà these days. :)
     

    london calling

    Senior Member
    UK English
    Flipping it into the passive voice is a pretty good option. I realize that the point is that money's being invested, but the agent doing the investing is important when it comes down to wording the sentence in English. I suspected that it meant what Starless has confirmed: a Cinecittà refers to the people at Cinecittà themselves. But to say Cinecittà is investing a ton of money or At Cinecittà they're investing a ton of money or The people at Cinecittà are investing a ton of money sounds strange to me -- if you're investing money into your own business / industry, then it seems to me you can't use "investing" without completing it with into something. Otherwise, "investing" has the sense of "saving [for interest]" rather than "spending [for the sake of future gains]". Maybe something like Cinecittà is investing a ton of money into making new movies.
    A Cinecittà stanno investendo una montagna di soldi.

    The sentence in Italian doesn't specify who's investing money in Cinecittà.

    But to say Cinecittà is investing a ton of money or At Cinecittà they're investing a ton of money or The people at Cinecittà are investing a ton of money sounds strange to me.

    Well yes, given that you've misunderstood what it means in Italian. It means "A ton of money/loads of money is being invested in Cinecittà". Cinecittà isn't investing anything.
     

    theartichoke

    Senior Member
    English - Canada
    Well yes, given that you've misunderstood what it means in Italian. It means "A ton of money/loads of money is being invested in Cinecittà". Cinecittà isn't investing anything.
    So you disagree with Starless in post #3?

    By saying "a Cinecittà" he's clearly referring to the studios themselves and/or to the movies industry based in there, IMHO. ("People at Cinecittà are investing..." etc.).
    If he referred to public investments he would probably have said: "stanno investendo una montagna di soldi in Cinecittà".
     

    Starless74

    Senior Member
    Italiano
    OK, I guess I need to rephrase #3 and #7 a bit. :)
    Regardless of the fact that the object of the investment is not specified, and that this may be a greater issue in English,
    the italian phrase as it is means that people at Cinecittà are investing money into whatever.
    It doesn't mean that somebody from outside is investing money into Cinecittà.
    (Which, I believe, answers theartichoke's original question).
    Whether the author meant otherwise, I have no idea of course; If they did, they didn't choose the best form possible, IMHO. :)
     
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >
    Top