How to use the TRAPASSATO PROSSIMO tense

Hi everybody, I'm Luca and this is an Italian language lesson for non-native speakers.

In this video lesson I'd like to talk about the trapassato prossimo. Specifically, I'd like to talk about those sentences in which we have a verb in the passato prossimo and a verb in the trapassato prossimo.

I'm gonna give you an example right away!

"Ieri sono andato a casa di Laura e abbiamo mangiato la torta che aveva preparato sua madre".

As you can see, in the first part of this sentence we have two verbs in the passato prossimo tense, - "sono andato" and "abbiamo mangiato" - whereas in the second part of the sentence we have a verb in the trapassato prossimo tense ("aveva preparato").

Such sentence should be understood as follows: the action expressed by the verb in the trapassato prossimo tense took place before those expressed by the verbs in the passato prossimo.

So the temporal order is this: first Laura's mother made the cake, then some time passed, I went over to Laura's house and we ate the cake.

The trapassato prossimo tense clearly highlights the temporal distance between the two events, that is, on the one hand making the cake and on the other the fact that we ate the cake.

Specifically, it points out the fact that, even though both things happened in the past, one of these two things took place in a more distant past, that is, earlier.

It is likely that Laura's mother prepared the cake when I wasn't there. Then I came and we ate it.

In theory, in this sentence I could as easily not use the trapassato prossimo and use the passato prossimo instead. However, in this case the sentence meaning would change.

I could say: "Ieri sono andato a casa di Laura e abbiamo mangiato la torta che ha preparato sua madre".

In this case, like I said, the meaning is slightly different. I interpret this sentence as follows: yesterday I went over to Laura's place, her mother prepared a cake while I was there and we ate it. I mean the cake, not her mother.

So these three actions (I went over to Laura's house, she prepared a cake, we ate the cake) took place roughly in the same period, at the same time. I don't place emphasis on the temporal distance between making the cake and the moment when we ate it.

So, if I use the trapassato prossimo tense, I make it clear that Laura's mother had made the cake before I came, maybe even the day before.

By contrast, if I use the passato prossimo, I don't point out any temporal precedence. Meaning that I make it clear that these things took place roughly at the same time. Or in any case that only a short time passed between the two things.

I'll give you another example with a verb in the past perfect tense!

"Quando sono arrivato, gli altri erano andati via".

In this sentence too we have a verb in the passato prossimo (sono arrivato) and a verb in the trapassato prossimo (erano andati via).

How should you interpret this sentence?

The action expressed by the trapassato prossimo took place before the one expressed by the passato prossimo.

So this sentence should be understood as follows: first the others left, then I came. So when I arrived, I didn't find them. Why? Because they had left before I arrived.

In theory, in this sentence, in place of the trapassato prossimo, I could use the passato prossimo tense. However, in that case the meaning would change.

I could say: "Quando sono arrivato, gli altri sono andati via".

This sentence should be understood as follows: I arrived, and then, in that very moment, or not long after, the others left. So in this case you can see that the situation described is quite different.

If I use the trapassato prossimo and say "erano andati via", it means that I arrived there, and nobody was there.

By contrast, if I use the passato prossimo and say "sono andati via", I mean that I arrived there, by that time they were there, and afterwards they left.

Well, I intentionally gave you examples where, if you use the passato prossimo in place of the trapassato prossimo, the meaning of the sentence changes.

In actual fact, it's often the case that, especially in spoken Italian, the passato prossimo can replace the trapassato prossimo tense without changing the meaning of the sentence.

In some cases, some people use the trapassato prossimo, whereas other people use the passato prossimo.

Now I'm gonna give you some examples where, in theory, the version with trapassato prossimo would be more correct from a logical point of view.

Thing is, more often than not, especially in speaking, people tend to use the passato prossimo in place of the trapassato prossimo.

For example, I could say: "Ho fatto quello che mi avevi chiesto".

Alternatively, I could say: "Ho fatto quello che mi hai chiesto".

Generally speaking, there's no difference in meaning between these two sentences. Some people say "Ho fatto quello che mi avevi chiesto", whereas other people say "Ho fatto quello che mi hai chiesto".

Theoretically, from a logical point of view, the version with trapassato prossimo would be more correct, because one of these things took place in a more distant past, that is, earlier. In this kind of sentences, though, especially in spoken Italian, many people tend to use the passato prossimo.

Another example could be this: "Ho letto il libro che mi avevi dato".

I could say that, or I could say: "Ho letto il libro che mi hai dato".

They mean about the same.

Well, maybe, in this specific case, the version with the past perfect places more emphasis on the time passed between the moment you gave me the book and the moment when I read it.

For example, if you gave me the book yesterday, in all likelihood I wouldn't say "Ho letto il libro che mi avevi dato", I would say "Ho letto il libro che mi hai dato".

By contrast, if you gave me this book three months ago, I would probably say "Ho letto il libro che mi avevi dato".

But this is just a nuance in meaning, so to speak. It's likely that, for many Italians, between these two sentences there's no difference. Generally speaking, these sentences mean the same thing.

Another example with the trapassato prossimo could be this: "Marco non ha mantenuto la promessa che aveva fatto".

Well, I find that the trapassato prossimo fits more into this sentence, because one of these things took place much earlier than the other.

Meaning that these things happened in two clearly separated moments. That is, first this person made this promise, then, long afterwards, this person didn't keep their promise.

It is also true, though, that many people say "Non ha mantenuto la promessa che ha fatto".

In my opinion, in this specific case, the passato prossimo is used somewhat incorrectly. It's clear that, in speaking, people sometimes say that, but I for one think that, in this case, the trapassato prossimo is preferable.

Well, I hope that this lesson has helped you better understand the trapassato prossimo (Italian past perfect).

If you have any queries about this verb tense, please let me know in the comments below!

In general, if you learned Italian as a second language or as a foreign language, please consider subscribing to my channel!

In the mean time, I'm gonna add up here a video lesson that you might wanna watch. If you want to speak Italian naturally, please check it out!

(Channel Outro)