Ils se sont parlé hier soir au téléphone.Hello,
I am having trouble understanding why "Ils se sont parlé hier soir au téléphone." is the correct orthography.
Bescherelle explains that there are three cases (https://www.bescherelle.com/faq/comment-accorder-le-participe-passe-dun-verbe-pronominal/):
1. Lorsque le verbe est essentiellement pronominal (c’est-à-dire qu’il se construit toujours avec un pronom réfléchi), le participe passé s’accorde avec le sujet.
2. Lorsque le verbe est occasionnellement pronominal, le participe passé s’accorde avec le COD si celui-ci est placé avant le verbe.
3. Il ne s’accorde pas s’il n’y a pas de COD ou si celui-ci est placé après le verbe.
Obviously case 1 does not apply because parler normally takes a direct object. But everyone seems to put "Ils se sont parlé" into case three. How is "se" not the direct object? They're talking to each other. Why is it "Ils se sont brûlés." but "Ils se sont parlé."? These two seem like they should be in the same category to me. Is it just that "se parler" is a special case, or am I completely misunderstanding?
Sorry if this was already answered somewhere but I haven't found it in my searches if so.
Thank you for your help.
Hello,
I am having trouble understanding why "Ils se sont parlé hier soir au téléphone." is the correct orthography.
Bescherelle explains that there are three cases (https://www.bescherelle.com/faq/comment-accorder-le-participe-passe-dun-verbe-pronominal/):
1. Lorsque le verbe est essentiellement pronominal (c’est-à-dire qu’il se construit toujours avec un pronom réfléchi), le participe passé s’accorde avec le sujet.
2. Lorsque le verbe est occasionnellement pronominal, le participe passé s’accorde avec le COD si celui-ci est placé avant le verbe.
3. Il ne s’accorde pas s’il n’y a pas de COD ou si celui-ci est placé après le verbe.
Obviously case 1 does not apply because parler normally takes a direct object. But everyone seems to put "Ils se sont parlé" into case three. How is "se" not the direct object? They're talking to each other. Why is it "Ils se sont brûlés." but "Ils se sont parlé."? These two seem like they should be in the same category to me. Is it just that "se parler" is a special case, or am I completely misunderstanding?
Sorry if this was already answered somewhere but I haven't found it in my searches if so.
Thank you for your help.
Hi, if I was to say ‘I have been learning French since I was in school’, would I say: ‘J’apprends français depuis j’étais à l’école’ or ‘j’apprends français depuis je suis à l’école’? I am no longer in school so I’m thinking it may be the former however I’m not sure if the whole sentence needs to be in the present tense. Thanks
In the example sentence "Le meilleur élève parle mieux français que moi." it really sounds to me like parle mieux becomes par lemieux, with the lemieux being very distinct. I've seen that before. Is there a reason for it?
In another French course, some years ago, I was given the sentence :
"Ça fait trois ans que je l'ai, et je n'ai pour ainsi dire pas eu d'ennui avec."
This appears to end with a preposition. Is it wrong?
Can one use 'une pénalité' for 'penalty' or is that just used in rugby as opposed to soccer?
This was a great exercise. Just wanted to flag that sometimes after submitting responses, no corrections displayed and I was therefore unable to mark myself.
Hi,
Not related specifically to the direct subject of this lesson, but I'm interested in the grammar in the sentence "Vous comparaissez devant le tribunal pour conduite..." I would have used "pour conduire...". Is this covered in a lesson somewhere?
Thanks.
I’m not familiar with the rule of ‘re’ bring added to ‘grossir’ in order to say someone is doing something again. Is this a general rule?
Find your French level for FREE
Test your French to the CEFR standard
Find your French level