Lesson 8.8 - Sono sposato da cinque anni

In Lesson 8.8 we learn that there are two  constructions that we can use when talking about a length of time that started in the past but is currently ongoing.  They are:  (i) [present action] + da + [length of time] and (ii), essere + [length of time] + che + [present action].

When lesson 8.8 asks us to translate, “I have been married for five years,” however, Rocket gives the answer using a construction with passato prossimo + da + length of time . . . “Sono sposato da cinque anni.”  

Why does this sentence use a past tense with “da” for a currently occuring action that started in the past???  Shouldn't the answer be, “Sposo da cinque anni"?

Hi Charles W30

I know that this doesn't answer your question. I am finding the grammar really hard going and have resorted to book learning. Some of the concepts I have just not managed to get my head around, so now just treat them as increasing my vocabulary and  hopefully it will all make sense at the end. Well that is what I am counting on

A presto

Sebongela

Ciao Sebongela,

Thanks for your encouragement.

I took Italian in college several decades ago,  so grammer rules haven't been too extremely tough on me.  I'm definitely rusty with them, though.

My bigger problem is when Rocket presents us with a grammer rule in a lesson, and then includes a sentence in that very lesson that doesn't conform to the rule.  In other words, it's the exceptions to the rules that are driving me crazy.  Rocket doesn't even identify these “snuck in” sentences as being exceptions, much less tell us when, why and how these exceptions should be applied.

-Carlo

I know CharlesW30 

I agree, drives me a bit crazy too. I see you sign as Carlo. Are you Spanish? My husband is Portuguese, I speak Portuguese, but not grammatically correctly. But am fairly fluent.

Ciao Sharon

Ahhh.  Thank you, caterina-rocket-italian-tutor.  

I thought that “sposato” was being used as an auxilery verb in the passato prossimo; but as you implied, it isn't being used as a verb at all, but as an adjective.  That makes much more sense!

Thanks again,

Carlo/Chuck