Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.italiano
Titolo: Ho bisogno informazione

Io prego scusarmi, ma non posso scrivere in Italiano . So I beg your
pardon to explain my doubt in English. I have been studying Italian
all by myself in a grammar book, and I do not know when using the
verbal forms: trapassato proximo, trapassato remoto (in indicative)
and passato and trapassato (modo congiuntivo). Would someone
be so nice to explain the differences?
Vi ringrazio per il vostro aiuto.
lber...@ibm.net


 
  It's not so easy.  This verbal forms express a sort of timing in
actions and so they must follow the so called consecutio temporum.
  In general il trapassato remoto is not found in principal propositions
(I don't know if this is the right english name, but this is my first
time I write in English of such kind of problems), 'cause it is used
to specify that an action was completed before the action the principal
proposition talk about.  Not so il trapassato prossimo which in general
exprees an action which, although begone before of another one, is not
yet concluded...  This is only in general terms.  The actions this two
verbal form express temporal precedence in comparison with, must be
of past form.  For il modo congiuntivo the situation is a lot more
complicated.
  I think you can read deeply (is this a correct expression?) your
grammar
book an then try some example on this newsgroup so I (or someone else)
can
correct it.
  Forgive my English, I hope you've understood.
  Saluti
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luigi Mancinelli
Lab. Didattici
Fac. Scienze
Universita` di Trento
38050 POVO(TN)
ITALY
ma...@science.unitn.it
  Cercare di semplificare i problemi e` l'obiettivo,
 pensare che siano semplici e` la strada sbagliata (Gigi Mancinelli)


lber...@ibm.net
You're welcome.
Ciao, 
Raymot
=======
Brisbane, Australia
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[

 
  Thi example isn't completely correct.
 In italian:
  [Dopo di che'] Fui stanco perche` non avevo dormito...
 (The action extents its effects on the principal sen-
tence)
  Ma non appena ebbi dormito un po`, la stanchezza passo`
 (The action is completely conclused before the action of
the principal sentence - in the past -)
(Please Raymot would you like to translate this?  Your
English is obviously better than mine!)
   Saluti
   Gigi


 the principal sentence - in the past -)
"Essere stanco" (to be tired) is usually an action that lasts. Io sono stanco:
I am tired not only in this instant. The same for "io ero stanco" (I was
tired), with reference to the past.
However "fui stanco" refers to the instant, in the past, when I began to be
tired since I haven't slept "and" probably I've made something other; so it
doesn't sound correct in sentences like "fui stanco perche' non avevo
dormito", unless a further specification is used. E.g. "Avevo appena
cominciato e fui subito stanco perche' non avevo dormito".
Gian Carlo
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/
   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

   Gigi
Allora, fammi sapere se io capisco.
"L'azione della frase nel trapassato remoto dev'essere 
finito prima dell'azione della frase principale (nel 
passato) comincia"?
Cosi`, quale delle sotto sembrano idiomatiche?:
Quando ebbi dormito, fui pronto per il lavoro.
Quando ebbe mangiato, parti`.
Perche' non ebbi dormito la notte prima, fui stanco 
nel seminario.
(Fui stanco perche' non ebbi dormito quella notte).
Perche' ebbi dormito bene la notte prima, non fui stanco 
nel seminario.
(Non fui stanco perche' ebbi dormito bene).
Ciao, 
Raymot
=======
Brisbane, Australia
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
post and mail

 post and mail
  Saluti.
