French language Q&A Forum

In the case where demeurer is used to mean to physically remain in a location, does it take avoir or être? This usage doesn't seem to be a verbe d'état, because a location isn't really a state or an attribute... or is it?

Larousse uses the example « La voiture est demurée au garage ». In this case, is au garage a state? Is demeurer being used as a verb of state?

Grevisse (§814 b 4°) makes it even more fun, with « [...] en France, où j'ai demeuré quelque temps » and then « je n'étais pas [...] demeuré à Paris ». Why use avoir with the first, but être with the second?

Thanks for taking the time to shed some light on this!

Salut -

In the kwiziq glossary entry for Verbes aux deux auxiliares, it mentions that demeurer follows "the reverse pattern" to the transitive/intransitive rule.

https://progress.lawlessfrench.com/revision/glossary/verb-conjugation-group/verbs-that-can-take-avoir-or-etre-as-auxiliary

I have used that as my rule of thumb for a while now, and it was always confusing to me (as a verbe d'état, it is intransitive, yet takes auxiliary « être », so that note didn't feel right).

I just found the comments and explanations here on this page, and all is now clear - thank you Aurélie and other contributors for the information you have shared here!

It might be worth correcting that glossary page entry, too, in case others stumble across it in the future.

Cécile

I think Charmond's (and now my) question arises because of ambiguity about the section headed (Un) peu de, where it is stated that «un peu de 'used with uncountable quantities'»  etc. The impression given/gained is that this is in contrast to quelque(s) which is noted to be for countable quantities, and applies to the full section. However, on reflection, I think it means only that 'un peu de' is for uncountables, but that 'peu de' is/can be used for countables with a slight difference in meaning/translation when used instead of quelques. Please clarify - and maybe clarify in the lesson too! Thanks

From the lesson «When talking about two actions that happen simultaneously, you will use : 

en + Participe présent / Gérondif»; can you not also use imparfait and passé composé eg Je courait quand j'ai rencontré Mathilde ?  I am not suggesting the same meaning or English translation, but the sentence still describes the simultaneous occurrence of events, that could also be described using le gérondif. If that is correct, the quote from the lesson should replace 'will use' with 'can use' (and preferably reference the lesson on passé composé and imparfait being used together as another). If there are reasons to choose one over the other, worth noting as well.

Not sure where, what, why the "leur" indirect object is in this sentence..."D'où leur viennent ce nom et langage étrange." Anyone explain? 

Several conjugators of French verbs show these as alternatives.  

In the first example, "se demander" does not agree in number or gender because the reflexive pronoun "se" is an indirect object.  Why doesn't that same rule apply to "se sentir" (I feel)?  Thanks.

Bonjour forum et les experts

Mon question se réfère à la phrase 'Ça a dû être particulièrement difficile pour la pauvre Christelle' Je n'ai aucun problème  avec  le phrase. Je demande juste si c'est également possible de l'écrire, 'Ça doit avoir été particulièrement difficile pour la pauvre Christelle'?

Et si no, pourquoi?

J'apprécierai votre aide

bonjour forum et les experts 

Au sujet de la phrase suivante 'je devrais être en train de boire un expresso en (à une) terrasse

je comprends  bien la phrase, mais  je demande pour quoi on ne peux pas l'écrire avec un 'sur' en  place d'un à ou un en. N'est-ce pas aussi correct, 'je devrais être en train de boire un expresso sur une terrasse'?

Hi, I have a very similar question... with this example from the quiz...

Tu ________ me piéger mais ça n'a pas marché !