Analisi logica is the Italian school exercise in which you take a sentence apart and name the job each piece does: subject, predicate, object and the different complements. It is also where many Italian pupils first meet grammar that really matters. This article is written for anyone studying Italian at that level, and its examples are Italian sentences with an English translation.
Two weeks into the school year, in Year 1 of Italian high school, Italian lessons are still mostly revision: morphology, a few dictations, the first reading comprehension. The first real grammar topic arrives in October, almost always analisi logica — before narratology, before epic poetry. It is not completely new, because you met it in middle school. But in October it turns up twice in the same week: as a topic in its own right in the Italian test, and as a tool in the first Latin translations (and Greek ones, at the classical high school). That is where gaps that were tolerable until now become visible.
It is not a conceptually hard chapter. The complements that count in a Year 1 test are about ten, not the forty on the full list in the textbook. Mistakes come from one precise cause: you learn the list instead of the method for applying it. And once a mistake is learnt, it stays for years. The student who confuses object and specification in October will still do it in Year 4 on an argumentative text, and the same confusion comes back when the right case turns up in a Latin translation.
Here you will find the order in which to work, the five confusions that cost the most marks in real tests, and three sentences analysed in full, from the simplest to a genuine trap.
Why it counts double if you study Latin or Greek
In Italian, getting a complement wrong costs you a correction in red pen. In Latin and Greek it costs you a wrong translation, because those complements become cases, and every case has a different ending. If you cannot tell a termine (the “to whom” complement, roughly an indirect object) from a fine (purpose), then in front of a Latin sentence you do not know whether a word goes in the dative or is introduced by a preposition with the accusative. You end up guessing from the Latin ending instead of reasoning in Italian, where the reasoning is easier.
The correspondence is direct:
| Logical function in Italian | Case in Latin |
|---|---|
| Subject (soggetto), predicate nominative (nome del predicato), subject complement (predicativo del soggetto) | nominative |
| Direct object (complemento oggetto) | accusative |
| Specification complement (complemento di specificazione, the “of” complement) | genitive |
| Complement of termine (to whom, the recipient) | dative |
| Complements of means, manner, cause, agent or efficient cause | ablative |
Ancient Greek has no ablative case of its own: means and cause go through the dative or the genitive with a preposition, depending on the construction. That is one more reason to decide in Italian which complement you are dealing with before you look for the ending, not while you are looking for it.
The confusions that cost you marks
Direct object or specification?
This is the most common confusion, and it starts with nouns that come from a verb: racconto (account, story), timore (fear), lettura (reading), studio (study), amore (love), paura (fear). Take raccontare la sconfitta (“to recount the defeat”). It has a direct object: raccontare is a transitive verb and la sconfitta completes it without a preposition. But il racconto della sconfitta (“the account of the defeat”) has a specification complement. The word now depends on a noun, racconto, not on a verb, and a noun carries its complement with di (“of”), never without a preposition.
The test is not the meaning, which stays the same. It is the word the complement depends on. Practical rule: in front of a di, ask yourself whether the word before it is a verb or a noun. If it is a noun, it is specification, almost without exception.
Complement of termine or of fine?
The termine is who receives the action; the fine is the purpose for which the action is done. They seem far apart, but they can use the same preposition in the same sentence. Ho scritto una lettera al preside (“I wrote a letter to the head teacher”) has a termine (al preside: the person who receives it). Ho scritto una lettera per chiarire l’equivoco (“I wrote a letter to clear up the misunderstanding”) has a fine (per chiarire l’equivoco: the reason I wrote it).
Quick test: if you can rephrase the complement as allo scopo di… (“for the purpose of…”) without changing the sense, it is a fine. If it shows who receives the action, it is a termine. This is the kind of pair that an oral test (interrogazione) uses on purpose, to see whether you recognise the difference or only the preposition.
Agent or efficient cause?
These exist only with a passive verb, and both are introduced by da (“by”). They differ in one thing only: who or what comes after it. Il ponte fu distrutto dai soldati (“The bridge was destroyed by the soldiers”): behind the action there is a person, so it is a complement of agent (complemento d’agente). Il ponte fu distrutto dall’alluvione (“The bridge was destroyed by the flood”): behind the action there is a natural force with no will of its own, so it is an efficient cause (causa efficiente).
The typical mistake is not mixing the two up with each other. It is looking for them where they do not exist: with an active verb, that da almost always introduces motion from a place or an origin, not an agent.
Subject complement or predicate nominative?
This is the trickiest confusion, because it hides behind the verb essere (“to be”). The student sees è, fu, furono (“is”, “was”, “were”) and always concludes nome del predicato, the predicate nominative. That is wrong. The predicate nominative exists only when essere is a pure copula, that is, when it simply links the subject to a noun or an adjective: Il capitano è forte (“The captain is strong”) — forte is the nome del predicato.
As soon as the verb is no longer plain essere — sembrare (to seem), diventare (to become), or the passive form of nominare, eleggere, considerare, chiamare (to appoint, elect, consider, call) — the noun that refers to the subject is called the predicativo del soggetto. Cesare fu eletto console (“Caesar was elected consul”): console is a predicativo del soggetto, because the verb is fu eletto, the passive of eleggere, not essere as a copula.
The right question is not “is there a verb essere?” but “is this essere the whole predicate on its own, or is it part of a verb with a meaning of its own, like eleggere or sembrare?”
Analysing by question: the mistake behind all the others
The four confusions above share one root: looking for the function from the question or from the preposition, instead of from the verb or noun the complement depends on. Telefono a Marco (“I phone Marco”) and Vado a Milano (“I am going to Milan”) both answer a chi / a che cosa? (“to whom / to what?”) with the same preposition a. But the first is a termine (Marco receives the call) and the second is motion to a place (Milan is the destination), because telefonare and andare are verbs of a different nature, and that difference matters more than the preposition.
The question is a final check, useful when you have already decided the function and want to verify it. Used as a first step, without looking at the verb, it is the shortcut that produces half of all analisi logica mistakes.
The method, step by step
Put in order, the procedure is short. It works for a sentence in an Italian test, and it works the same way for a Latin or Greek translation when you have to decide how to translate a complement.
- Find the verb and decide the type of predicate: verbal (verbale), if it has a complete meaning on its own; nominal (nominale), if it is essere introducing a noun or an adjective that completes it (the nome del predicato).
- Find the subject — who performs the action, or who the statement is about — remembering that it can be understood but not written: Studio ogni pomeriggio (“I study every afternoon”) has the understood subject io (“I”), which you recover from the verb.
- If the predicate is verbal and the verb is transitive and active, look straight away for the direct object: it answers chi? che cosa? (“who? what?”) with no preposition, and it is the only complement that always depends on a verb, never on a noun.
- For every other complement, first ask what it depends on, not which preposition stands in front of it: a verb or a noun? A noun introduces almost only specification; a verb can introduce termine, means, manner, cause, purpose, place or time, depending on its meaning.
- Keep agent and efficient cause for passive verbs introduced by da only, and the predicativo for the cases where a noun or an adjective refers to the subject or the object through a verb other than essere as a copula.
Here is a map of what really counts, to keep at hand in the first few weeks:
| Complement (Italian name) | Answers | Depends on |
|---|---|---|
| Direct object (oggetto) | chi? che cosa? (who? what?, no preposition) | a transitive active verb |
| Specification (specificazione) | di chi? di che cosa? (of whom? of what?) | a noun, an adjective or a pronoun |
| Termine (recipient) | a chi? a che cosa? (to whom? to what?) | a verb (or an adjective, e.g. utile a, “useful to”) |
| Means (mezzo) | con/per mezzo di che cosa? (with what? by means of what?) | a verb |
| Manner (modo) | in che modo? come? (in what way? how?) | a verb |
| Cause (causa) | per quale motivo, già reale? (for what reason, already real?) | a verb |
| Purpose (fine) | per quale scopo, da raggiungere? (for what aim, still to be reached?) | a verb |
| Place (luogo) | dove? da dove? per dove? (where? from where? through where?) | a verb |
| Time (tempo) | quando? per quanto tempo? (when? for how long?) | a verb |
| Agent / efficient cause (agente / causa efficiente) | da chi? da che cosa? (by whom? by what?, only with a passive verb) | the passive verb — a person: agent; a thing: efficient cause |
| Subject complement (predicativo del soggetto) | referring to the subject, through which verb? | a verb other than essere as a copula (sembrare, diventare, nominare, eleggere, considerare, chiamare…) |
Three sentences analysed in full
The difficulty rises. In the third there is the most common trap of this chapter.
1. The homework handed in class
Ieri il professore ha consegnato i compiti agli studenti in aula. (“Yesterday the teacher handed the homework to the students in the classroom.”)
| Item | Function | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Ieri (yesterday) | complement of definite time | answers quando? (“when?”); it gives the exact moment of the action |
| il professore (the teacher) | subject | he is the one performing the action expressed by the verb |
| ha consegnato (handed) | verbal predicate | a verb with a complete meaning, it needs no noun to complete it |
| i compiti (the homework) | direct object | answers che cosa? (“what?”) with no preposition; it completes a transitive verb directly |
| agli studenti (to the students) | complement of termine | answers a chi? (“to whom?”); they are the recipients of the handing-over |
| in aula (in the classroom) | complement of place (stay in place) | answers dove? (“where?”); the place where the action happens |
2. The appointment to the team
Con grande impegno, il giovane atleta fu nominato capitano della squadra dai compagni per la sua costanza. (“With great commitment, the young athlete was appointed captain of the team by his teammates for his consistency.”)
| Item | Function | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Con grande impegno (with great commitment) | complement of manner | answers in che modo? (“in what way?”); it describes how the result was reached |
| il giovane atleta (the young athlete) | subject | he is the grammatical subject of the passive sentence, even though he undergoes the action |
| fu nominato (was appointed) | verbal predicate (passive form) | it is the passive of nominare, not the verb essere as a copula: what follows is not a nome del predicato |
| capitano (captain) | subject complement (predicativo del soggetto) | it refers to the subject atleta through a verb of appointing, not through essere |
| della squadra (of the team) | specification complement | it specifies which captain is meant; it depends on the noun capitano, not on a verb |
| dai compagni (by his teammates) | complement of agent | answers da chi? (“by whom?”); they are people, living beings who perform the action |
| per la sua costanza (for his consistency) | complement of cause | answers per quale motivo, già reale? (“for what reason, already real?”); it is the reason for the appointment, not a future aim |
3. The story and the trap
Il racconto della sconfitta commosse i compagni di squadra, e Luca lo raccontò anche al professore per ottenere un voto più alto. (“The account of the defeat moved the teammates, and Luca also told it to the teacher in order to get a higher grade.”)
| Item | Function | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Il racconto (the account) | subject | in this first clause it is the account, not Luca, that performs the action of moving |
| della sconfitta (of the defeat) | specification complement, not object | the trap: it depends on the noun racconto, not on a verb. Raccontare la sconfitta would have an object, but here racconto is a noun |
| commosse (moved) | verbal predicate | a transitive active verb |
| i compagni (the teammates) | direct object | answers chi? (“whom?”) with no preposition; it depends on the verb commuovere |
| di squadra (of the team) | specification complement | it specifies which teammates; it depends on the noun compagni, the same function as della sconfitta, although here there is no ambiguity with the object |
| Luca | subject | in the second clause he is the one who performs the action of telling |
| lo (it) | direct object | a pronoun that replaces il racconto della sconfitta; it answers che cosa (raccontò)? (“what (did he tell)?”) |
| raccontò (told) | verbal predicate | a transitive active verb |
| al professore (to the teacher) | complement of termine | answers a chi? (“to whom?”); he is the recipient of the telling |
| per ottenere un voto più alto (to get a higher grade) | complement of purpose (fine) | answers per quale scopo? (“for what aim?”); it is Luca’s goal, not the recipient — not to be confused with al professore just above |
E (“and”) is a coordinating conjunction and anche (“also”) an adverb. They are not complements and have no logical function of their own: they only link or reinforce.
How we work on this in lessons
With students who meet analisi logica for the first (or second) time, we work in three phases, in the same order as this post.
The first is putting the method back in order: predicate first, then subject, then object, and only at the end everything else — looking at what the complement depends on, never at the preposition alone. We do it on the sentences from the student’s own textbook, because those are the ones the teacher will use in the test.
The second is rapid-fire training on the five confusions: ten sentences, and for each one only the function of the underlined complement. It makes the criterion automatic before the timed test.
The third, for those who also study Latin or Greek, is linking every complement to its corresponding case: the table in this post becomes an oral exercise, not just something to look up.
Lessons are online and one-to-one, an hour at a time. You will find up-to-date rates and packages on the pricing page — a single lesson or a 10-hour package. If you have never had a lesson with us, we start with a free 30-minute introductory call. Payment is offline: bank transfer, Satispay, PayPal, card, Apple Pay or Revolut.
There is no analisi logica practice test on the site yet. If you also have maths or physics to keep up at this time of year, you will find the same format we use here — a mock test with a score per topic — in the maths and physics tests for high school: fifteen questions in fifty minutes, like a real test. The correct answer is free and needs no registration; the guided step-by-step solution is unlocked with the first lesson.
If the problem is not only analisi logica but the Latin built on top of it, we have also talked about it in the post on the third declension. For the other humanities subjects in the first two years — Italian, history, geography — the overall picture is on the humanities subjects page; for the specific work on Latin, on the Latin page.
When analisi logica comes to you without thinking, the next step is clause analysis (analisi del periodo), which is done in Year 2: the same method, longer sentences. Those at the classical high school will meet it again straight away in the Latin translation.
If the first test arrives in October and you honestly want to know where to start, write to us: we look together at your notebook and at your class’s syllabus, not only at the grade of your last test.
