0

I'm used to "se" meaning "if" or "whether", but I recently came across cases where "se" can instead be translated "that" in such a way that the meaning can become the exact opposite.

I was trying to understand the answer to this Italian Driving Theory test question*:

Il conducente che può effettuare l'inversione di marcia su una strada a doppio senso deve accertarsi se la linea di mezzeria è continua.

As shown in the animated gif below, the google sheets translate function translates "se" in this sentence as "if":

The driver that can perform a U-turn on a two-way street has to make sure if the centerline is continuous

enter image description here

By contrast, google translate App and DeepL translate "se" using "that" for this sentence:

The driver who can make a U-turn on a two-way road must ensure that the center line is continuous

In this case, it is sensible to conclude from the "if" translation that the answer to the question is TRUE, while just the opposite conclusion is reached for the "that" translation.

The correct answer, by the way, is FALSE. So you can see it's important for me to learn why "se" is translated by "that" in this case. But I'd like to know a general rule, if there is one.

A reverso.net search for accertarsi se returns many examples of both "if" and "that" translations, although most are "if/whether".

*For those not familiar with it, the driving test I'm referring to is the test given to all in Italy to obtain the standard driving license. egreg, a regular contributor to this forum, mentions knowing about it. It consists of 40 True/False questions drawn from over 7000 which are widely published on the internet by driving schools, etc... For example, a google search for the phrase "deve accertarsi se" turns up mostly websites like that. .

DaG
  • 36,593
  • 6
  • 68
  • 128
Tony M
  • 381
  • 1
  • 8

1 Answers1

2

I don't know anything about this test, its answers, the site quoted or Google Translate, but a sentence saying X deve accertarsi se Y undoubtedly means "X must ascertain whether it is the case that Y (or not)". See for instance part 2. of http://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/se2/ ; you'll see that in none of the described uses, even when the context is ironic or emphatic, se can be substituted with che.

DaG
  • 36,593
  • 6
  • 68
  • 128
  • It's a true/false question and should be answered false. – egreg Sep 05 '20 at 19:49
  • @DaG Because of your initial sentence, I added a note to my post to provide more info on the driving test. It seems you are saying the translation for this question should be "if" and not "that" and you even seem to be implying the "that" translation is simply wrong. If you are right, I'm confused by all the "that" translations I found (see my post) and the fact that the accepted answer for this question falls in line with the "that" translation. I appreciate your help. – Tony M Sep 05 '20 at 20:09
  • @DaG I added my comment just for information, because you said you know nothing about the test. But it can actually affect the interpretation. If the text had been “deve accertarsi che la linea di mezzeria sia continua”, the interpretation would be the same (not the meaning, though). Anyway, it's bad Italian nonetheless. – egreg Sep 05 '20 at 20:11
  • @egreg: Indeed. Not sure how this affects my answer. – DaG Sep 05 '20 at 20:12
  • @TonyM and egreg: I am Italian and have a driving licence. I meant that the test may be misphrased, that that website may be giving a wrong question text or answer, that we don't know about the test's exact meaning (for instance, if "il conducente può effettuare l'inversione", maybe they may ignore the centerline: how knows?), and above all commenting a driving test would be OT here. – DaG Sep 05 '20 at 20:17
  • @DaG I'm open to the possibility that this is a "misphrasing" or "wrong answer". So I did my best to check, and I found at least a dozen different sites or pdf documents (some of which looked like legal documents). In every case I have found the same question phrasing and (where supplied) the same answer. On the other hand, 1 expert is worth more than 1000 internet postings. That's why I come here. Thanks again. – Tony M Sep 05 '20 at 20:42
  • From a strictly logical viewpoint, if the driver "può effettuare" l'inversione, no checking is needed; they already know the centerline isn't continuous. Anyway, that's besides the linguistic point (I may guess that the mistranslations come from the fact that accertare is most often used with che, denoting a fact that the writer already assumes is true, while se implies it's dubious). – DaG Sep 05 '20 at 20:54
  • @DaG The Treccani reference is difficult (at best) for a beginner like me. Nevertheless, I did my best to understand it, and did as you suggest, substituting 'se' with 'che' for each of the examples. Maybe it's because my understanding is poor, but it seems to me that the substitution does work in some cases there. I can't list them all here, but as examples: "se è vero? Ma è verissimo; se sono contento? Altroché!" My point is that Treccani may be wonderful if you already understand Italian, but its value to someone who doesn't is questionable. Sort of like defining a word with the same word. – Tony M Sep 06 '20 at 07:33
  • @TonyM: I see your point about Treccani if one's Italian is not already quite good: I mentioned it to substantiate my answer. As for your examples, you can't phrase a question as che è vero? or che sono contento? You might use che if, rather than as a (here, rhethorical) question you phrase it as a statement: say, certo che è vero or ti dico che sono contento. – DaG Sep 06 '20 at 09:39
  • Distinguishing "if" from "that" is key to the original question. I'll use one of the examples: In English "That it is true? But it is the most true!" makes as much sense as "If it is true? But it is the most true!" In each case the initial phrase makes no sense without context, but in the context of a conversation each makes some sense. Of course the meanings are different, with the "if" version imparting a hypothetical element. Maybe Italian is different. I am marking this as the answer and concluding that original driving question was (at best) poorly worded and (at worst) just plain wrong. – Tony M Sep 06 '20 at 14:56