French language Q&A Forum

I tried to use the latter and I believe that it was not accepted.  Is there a distinction such that it's usage in this context would be inappropriate?  Thanks.

My reflexive response to translation of 'We opened the windows out of fear there might be a gas leak.' was 'Nous avons ouvert les fenêtres de peur qu'il ne puisse y avoir une fuite de gaz.' given that there is a sense of conditional pouvoir in the translation ('there could be or 'might be', rather than the softer 'we're not sure' sense of avoir in the subjunctive. Any thoughts?

How come the "dix" was pronounced like "di"? I thought the "x" was pronounced at the end.

Thank you!

Please: could someone please explain why the "de" is necessary in the following sentence:

"Il avait trop bu la veille de l'accident. "

I don't understand the need for the "de" following "la veille."

Thanks in advance!

Kalpana 

Are there other verbs who follow this same pattern: ie. they can be conjugated in the past tense using either 'etre' or 'avoir'? The verb that comes to mind is:

'Paraitre'?

Merci

Si j'ai bien compris, la prouesse peux s'exprimer au pluriel. C'est undifference idiomatique entre le francais et l'anglais.

I searched ‘Dix-neuf heures et demie’ on Google, and they said you can say it, but it is the informal way. Can you tell me why it still can be used, but it was not accepted as a correct answer? Thanks so much for your understanding.

I know that with living beings we have the choice between "à qui" vs. "auquel/à laquelle/auxquels/àuxquelles". Is there any nuance in terms of formality or elegance between the use these two options?

For the passe simple of "luire", I used "luisit" and was marked wrong.  When I went back to the lesson, however, at the bottom of the page, it appears to me to say that form of conjugation is considered correct.