French language Q&A Forum
Questions answered by our learning community with help from expert French teachers
14,634 questions • 31,719 answers • 958,019 learners
Let me take a look at that...
Questions answered by our learning community with help from expert French teachers
14,634 questions • 31,719 answers • 958,019 learners
At the end of the exercise, I would find it helpful to view my full (botched) transcript of the exercise alongside Kwizbot's. It could be toggled on or off from viewing.
Bonjour à tous!
Le substantif "science fiction" s'écrit-il avec ou sans tiret? Dans mon dictionnaire Larousse, c'est écrit avec un tiret. C'est un petit détail, mais je préfère être certain. Merci!
I saw "paraître" followed by the past participle and not the infinitive in A Day In The Countryside.
"qui paraissaient occupés" was the answer while I had offered "qui paraissaient s'occuper"
Can you advise ?
Hello!
Just a question regarding the usage of venir vs. être when saying where one is from:
This lesson notes " To say which city you are from in French, you will use the following expression: Je viens de + [city]". One example given is "Je viens de Londres / I am from London". (And no alternative to "venir de" is mentioned in the lesson).
However, a related lesson (À = To/in and De = From/of with cities in French (French Prepositions of Location)) gives an example using "être" to say where one is from: Je suis de La Rochelle / I'm from La Rochelle.
It seems there is a subtle difference in meaning (I am from vs. I come from), however in both of the above cases the translation given is "I am from".
Could someone clarify if venir and être are interchangeable in this context, or if there are specific uses for each?
The final segment of this exercise to translate is, "my choice was long made!" . I don't understand this phrase, does it mean "my choice was long ago made" or "my choice was made long ago?"
so would Tu la joues be wrong or just another way to say the same thing?
In the question...
________ retarde le train, c'est la grève.What delays the train is the strike.... I wrote "Cela qui". Why is "cela" not acceptable?
Pourquoi la phrase"Et puis, aujourd'hui...." commence avec "Et". En anglais on ne commence jamais un phrase avec "And", on utilise "and" pour la continuation d'une phrase.
Elles auraient eu un chien si elles avaient pu
They would have had a dog if they could have.
If I'm not mistaken:
auraient eu -> Conditional past "would have"
avaient pu -> Pluperfect "had been able to"
1. What happens to the rule about "Si" + imperfect in this case? Does it only apply to Imperfect + Conditional present?
2. Shouldn't "avaient pu" be something like "auraient eu"?
I can see why you could use the pluperfect for "They would have had a dog if they had been able to". But "... could have" seems to call for the conditional past (although I agree that the meaning is the same).
What am I missing here?
Thanks
I consulted Reverso for the translation of two propositions from this lesson:
1. Dinner will be served within an hour
2. Dinner will be served in an hour's time
Both produce the same french phrase:
Le dîner sera servi dans une heure
My question: why Kwizbot showed error to my translation into English that read “Dinner will be served within an hour”
Find your French level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your French level