French language Q&A Forum
Questions answered by our learning community with help from expert French teachers
14,815 questions • 32,090 answers • 986,816 learners
Clever stuff happening!
Questions answered by our learning community with help from expert French teachers
14,815 questions • 32,090 answers • 986,816 learners
I think faire faire and se faire + infinitif are quite hard for English speakers to get their heads round. Is there a reason that only one of the examples is in the present tense? Even that one is ambiguous (ils se font couper les cheveux - could be they’re getting their hair cut as we speak or are just about to).
I cannot see this type of structure in the exercise examples…
Like…HÉ WILL HAVE BEEN EATING ALL DAY
Il ________ le contraire pendant quinze ans. He will have been claiming the contrary for fifteen years.(HINT: Conjugate "prétendre" (to claim) in Le Futur Antérieur)
Why wasn't on se voit used for "see you this week-end ?"
Is 'pas' missing because this is spoken French? Or is this a case where it isn't needed?
Why do some countries not have an article stated?
I must admit I often find the 'short lessons' on here a little confusing because of the coloured lines. This one is particularly bad. I cannot see if the text with green lines is supposed to relate to the text with orange lines above it or below it. Essentially, why are the coloured lines there? They only confuse. Marking explanations with one colour and examples with another is pointless; we can see what is what. What we cannot see is what pertains to what. It would be fine if you gave some examples with red lines then an explanation also with a red line, so we know it refers to the 'red lined' examples. Then, further examples with a different colour together with an explanation with the same colour. This way we know what refers to what.
often find the 'short lessons' on here a little confusing because of the coloured lines. This one is particularly bad. I cannot see if the text with green lines is supposed to relate to the text with orange lines above it or below it. Essentially, why are the coloured lines there? They only confuse. Marking explanations with one colour and examples with another is pointless; we can see what is what. What we cannot see is what pertains to what. It would be fine if you gave some examples with red lines then an explanation also with a red line, so we know it refers to the 'red lined' examples. Then, further examples with a different colour together with an explanation with the same colour. This way we know what refers to what
I am going to be fitted with hearing aids today. It is interesting that i heard surclassement as surplacement (which isn't even apparently a word). Surclassement - upgrade - is a new word to me today! Yay. I guess this level is still very easy for me. Also, I am on a Macbook Air, which means for whatever reason that I am getting both YOUR popup menu for accents, and the one that is inherent in the Mac. That's why the first part of this exercise, the accent came out wrong. I guess I need to slow down and review what I've typed, even when I think I typed it correctly. But I would like to know if I can supress your popup accent menu.
Thanks.
Entre les deux mots ces-ci, lequel est mieux?
Grosse
ou
Grande
pour décrire sa taille de quelqu'une?
I understand the grammar in this example...
Est-ce que tu sais marcher sur les mains ? - Non, je ne sais pas le faire.Do you know how to walk on your hands ? - No, I don't [know how to do that].But the lesson goes on to say...Note that in many such cases, you add the neutral verb faire to refer to an action.It would be good to have a bit more guidance on which cases require the addition of faire. Is it compulsory in some cases? Is there a rule?
Find your French level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your French level