Is Dead vs. Has Died

[dylanG3893]

Ciao!
Because the past participle of 'morire' is morto, and morire is an auxiliary verb, how would one differentiate "Is dead" from "Has died".

In literality, they are both:

Is dead = È morto(a)
Has died = È morto(a)

How would you communicate the difference?

 

[Paulfromitaly]

Ciao!
Because the past participle of 'morire' is morto, and morire is an auxiliary verb, how would one differentiate "Is dead" from "Has died".

In literality, they are both:

Is dead = È morto(a)
Has died = È morto(a)

How would you communicate the difference?

You can't differentiate, unless you use a more formal verb:

That dog seems to be dead.
Quel cane sembra morto.

My dog has died 5 minutes ago.
Il mio cane è deceduto 5 minuti fa.

 

[Never Got a Dinner]

My response to that is: in English you have

I walked.
I have walked.
I did walk.

In Italian, don't try to differentiate between the three. It's frustrating because we all want to translate exactly. But take my advice: if you try to differentiate between "he has gone" and "he did go," you'll lose your cervello.

 

[venice]

My response to that is: in English you have

I walked.
I have walked.
I did walk.

In Italian, don't try to differentiate between the three. It's frustrating because we all want to translate exactly. But take my advice: if you try to differentiate between "he has gone" and "he did go," you'll lose your cervello.

Hi,
I walked = camminavo/ camminai
I have walked = ho camminato
I did walk = ? è un rafforzativo? = ho proprio camminato/ camminai davvero.How can I translate it?

 

[dylanG3893]

Yes, I do agree with you Nevergotadinner. And it would be very hard to translate that, venice.

I walked could be camminavo/camminai/or ho camminato, it depends on the circumstances so I walked is really broadly covering past tense in it's whole.

I did walk, is also the same thing as I just stated, only that it putting emphasis on the fact that the action was done truely.

I have walked is probably Ho camminato and
I had walked is probably Avevo camminato.

Past tense does make me perdere il mio cervello :/

 

[TrentinaNE]

How did this thread go from dying to walking?

Please let's keep the examples related to the vocabulary of the original question.

Grazie!
Elisabetta

 

[venice]

Yes, I do agree with you Nevergotadinner.

I have walked is probably Ho camminato and
I had walked is probably Avevo camminato.

Yes, for me they aren't probably right. When I find such a verbal form, I never translate 'camminai', but always as you wrote them.

 

[venice]

How did this thread go from dying to walking?

Please let's keep the examples related to the vocabulary of the original question.

Grazie!
Elisabetta

Oh... we're sorry. It was an oversight.Bye

 

[stella_maris_74]

Ciao!
Because the past participle of 'morire' is morto, and morire is an auxiliary verb, how would one differentiate "Is dead" from "Has died".

In literality, they are both:

Is dead = È morto(a)
Has died = È morto(a)

How would you communicate the difference?

Hi Dylan!
Fist off, "morire" is not an auxiliary verb
With strict reference to "è morto", in Italian it indicates both a condition (he is dead) and a change of state (he has died/ he passed away).
For "has died" you could use some common synonims:
si è spento (spegnersi)
è spirato (spirare)

Examples:
He's dead! = è morto!
He has died (he passed away) at 10.15 am = è morto / è spirato / si è spento alle 10.15 di mattina.

Does this help?

ciao

dani

 

[dylanG3893]

Grazie, stella.
Allora un verbo ausiliare è qualche verbo che usa "avere (participo)" ed un verbo che non usa "avere" ma usa "essere e il participo" è un verbo che non è ausiliare??

Ma grazie a tutti di rispondere la mia domanda

 

[stella_maris_74]

Grazie, stella.
Allora un verbo ausiliare è qualche verbo che usa "avere (participio)" ed un verbo che non usa "avere" ma usa "essere e il participio" è un verbo che non è ausiliare??

Ma grazie a tutti di rispondere la mia domanda

Ciao Dylan,
no, i verbi ausiliari sono "avere" ed "essere". Just like in English!

dani

 

[Murphy]

Grazie, stella.
Allora un verbo ausiliare è qualche verbo che usa "avere (participo)" ed un verbo che non usa "avere" ma usa "essere e il participo" è un verbo che non è ausiliare??

Ma grazie a tutti di rispondere la mia domanda

No, "avere" and "essere" are the auxiliary verbs, just as "have" and "be" are in English. Auxiliaries are followed by participles (past and present) in compound tenses.

 

[sdon]

Riprendo questo topic per chiedervi se sia meglio tradurre:

Il papaveri sono un simbolo per ricordare i soldati morti in guerra

Poppies are a symbol of remembrance for the soldiers died in War

oroppies are a symbol of remembrance for the dead soldiers in War

Questa cosa non mi è mai stata molto chiara....

 

[pandinorombante]

I'd go for the second option... in my humble opinion the first one is not correct, you should say "for the soldiers who died in war.." (Why War? If you don't specify it which one, you shouldn't use the capital letter).

Let's see what natives suggest..

 

[cavillous]

Poppies are a symbol of remembrance for fallen soldiers.

What do you think of it?

 

[brian]

...for fallen soldiers.
...for soldiers fallen in war.

...for dead soldiers.
...for soldiers who died in war.

"Dead soldiers" è un po'.. ehm.. esplicito. Come ha suggerito cavillous, meglio dire "fallen." "Who died" però va bene pure.

 

[kan3malato]

Hi Dylan!
Fist off, "morire" is not an auxiliary verb
With strict reference to "è morto", in Italian it indicates both a condition (he is dead) and a change of state (he has died/ he passed away).
For "has died" you could use some common synonims:
si è spento (spegnersi)
è spirato (spirare)

Examples:
He's dead! = è morto!
He has died (he passed away) at 10.15 am = è morto / è spirato / si è spento alle 10.15 di mattina.

Does this help?

ciao

dani

Ciao.
Are you sure stella you can use present perfect with specific time expressions?

 

[Leo57]

Ciao.
Are you sure stella you can use present perfect with specific time expressions?

Hi there
We use the present perfect to say that an action happened at an unspecified time before now. (The exact time is not important.)

He has died (he passed away) at 10.15 am
My dog has died 5 minutes ago

Let's take a look.

You are very sad today, what's up?
My dog has died.
When did he die?
He died at 10.15 this morning.

It was written two years ago though so I expect everyone has learned something since then!

Ciao
Leo

 

[kan3malato]

Hi there
We use the present perfect to say that an action happened at an unspecified time before now. (The exact time is not important.)

He has died (he passed away) at 10.15 am
My dog has died 5 minutes ago

Let's take a look.

You are very sad today, what's up?
My dog has died.
When did he die?
He died at 10.15 this morning.

It was written two years ago though so I expect everyone has learned something since then!

Ciao
Leo

Tenkiù Leo
My doubts were right then...

 

[stella_maris_74]

Ciao.
Are you sure stella you can use present perfect with specific time expressions?

It was written two years ago though so I expect everyone has learned something since then!

Yes indeed
I managed to learn more about the use of English tenses in the meantime.
Thank you for correcting me so the thread isn't misleading!