Question about understanding the right tense. Bonjour Madame Cécile !
I wrote to you regarding a nuance between the use of tenses in the Past Time a while ago.
You had provided me with this sentence ->
Après qu'il avait vu ce film, il avait été bouleversé .
After reading your answer several times, I understand that you mentioned “avait été” instead of “était” because once he ‘had seen’ the film , then he ‘had completely got shattered’ which happens immediately as the film finishes; making the actions almost simultaneous.
Hence, the use of le plus-que Parfait is recommended.
So in response to a question I had asked earlier ->
What does the use of Le plus-que-Parfait signify about the sequence of events happening in the sentences ? Does it connote an action getting completed or finished prior to another or simultaneous actions occurring in the past ?
It can also be used to signify an action getting completed prior to another however, the time interval between the two actions in the past should be a longer one .
As in the sentence-
Nous étions très surpris de les voir, car ils n'étaient pas venus ici depuis trois ans.-> We were very surprised to see them, for they hadn't come here for three years.
The action of “not coming there” got finished three years ago and the result of this action is that ‘they were surprised to see them when they returned’
J'étais sorti de la voiture quand je les ai entendus.-> I'd got out of the car when I heard them.
The action of “getting out of the car” was finished long back . He was already out when he heard their sound.
Elles étaient allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu.-> They had gone to eat an ice cream when the thief came.
Here, the sentence emphasises on the point that the girls were not at home (they had already went out) when the thief entered. [LONGER TIME GAP]
If one writes it as - Elles sont allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu.
This will imply that the action of the girls going to the ice cream parlour happened in close proximity to the action of the thief entering the house. [SHORTER TIME GAP] which makes the case less elegant.
Is my justification correct ? Again, thanks for spending time to respond.
Frankly speaking Madame, I am working really hard to get right with my tenses and your endeavour and support is crucial to hone my skills.
Bonne journée!
Is there a difference between "attendre à ce que" and "attendre que"? "J'attendrai que tu t'endormes" = "I'll wait for you to fall asleep" = "I'll wait until you fall asleep". I see no difference in meaning and the simple "que" is more elegant.
Bonjour:) Would you please review the kwiz answer I missed in the above lesson? I did not find any of the possible choices for an answer to be particularly applicable. The actual answer seemed like it was l'imparfait situation in the past so I did not choose that one. I knew "built" was not a verb used in the choice but it seemed to imply the present tense to me. Anyway, many thanks for some clarification on this question at your convenience I hope? Merci.
Il y a des petites rues, et de jolies maisons blanches.
Hi, I saw the sentence above in a book.
Why it's not de petites rues ?!
I thought when we have an adjective that comes before a noun, we should use de ! like de jolies maisons
Help please.
Bonjour Madame Cécile !
I wrote to you regarding a nuance between the use of tenses in the Past Time a while ago.
You had provided me with this sentence ->
Après qu'il avait vu ce film, il avait été bouleversé .
After reading your answer several times, I understand that you mentioned “avait été” instead of “était” because once he ‘had seen’ the film , then he ‘had completely got shattered’ which happens immediately as the film finishes; making the actions almost simultaneous.
Hence, the use of le plus-que Parfait is recommended.
So in response to a question I had asked earlier ->
What does the use of Le plus-que-Parfait signify about the sequence of events happening in the sentences ? Does it connote an action getting completed or finished prior to another or simultaneous actions occurring in the past ?
It can also be used to signify an action getting completed prior to another however, the time interval between the two actions in the past should be a longer one .
As in the sentence-
Nous étions très surpris de les voir, car ils n'étaient pas venus ici depuis trois ans.-> We were very surprised to see them, for they hadn't come here for three years.
The action of “not coming there” got finished three years ago and the result of this action is that ‘they were surprised to see them when they returned’
J'étais sorti de la voiture quand je les ai entendus.-> I'd got out of the car when I heard them.
The action of “getting out of the car” was finished long back . He was already out when he heard their sound.
Elles étaient allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu.-> They had gone to eat an ice cream when the thief came.
Here, the sentence emphasises on the point that the girls were not at home (they had already went out) when the thief entered. [LONGER TIME GAP]
If one writes it as - Elles sont allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu.
This will imply that the action of the girls going to the ice cream parlour happened in close proximity to the action of the thief entering the house. [SHORTER TIME GAP] which makes the case less elegant.
Is my justification correct ? Again, thanks for spending time to respond.
Frankly speaking Madame, I am working really hard to get right with my tenses and your endeavour and support is crucial to hone my skills.
Bonne journée!
The lesson gives the example "Elle me rappelle de Paula" to illustrate that it is not correct to use "de" in sentences like this. But I just encountered a quiz question about the imperfect with reflexive verbs in which the correct answer was "Tu te rappelais de moi." Why is "de moi" correct, but "de Paula" is not?
The fete was organized by the sisters, so that Beatrice would have been NOTRE cousine rather then MA cousine. I recognized that the exercise said "my cousin" but I figured that as they (sisters) were making it, the cousin would have been one of both of theirs. I guess I overthought what was being asked.....
I don't understand the passe compose "j'ai toujours adore" to translate "I have always loved sending letters." Seems to me the writer is describing an action from the past continuing into the present. In that case, we should use the imparfait. Using the passe compose indicates the writer completed the action in the past. At one time she enjoyed sending letters but not now. (Sorry for the missing accents. I don't know how to type them on this keyboard.)
How can you differentiate between Stepfather and Father in law? Is it just context?
I am confused about the position of adverbs because the video says they go right after the verb they are modifying but when I answered the mini quiz in that way I got 0/2
Any thoughts?
Pauline
Find your French level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your French level