Devoir in imparfait / passé composé In this exercise I got this tense wrong (as I usually do for the verb devoir). The linked lesson on this topic is misleading. It says that when devoir is used in the imparfait e.g je devais, it means I was supposed to do (an obligation, in most cases not met) whereas it has a different meaning in the passé composé where j’ai dû = I had to do, or I must have done (an obligation that was met, or a hypothesis on a past situation). This doesn’t seem to be correct in practice, where if it is a repeated action we would still use the imparfait.
For example, this week’s exercise asked us to translate “... that we had to develop (use nous)”. I put: “que nous avons dû développer” which is in accord with the lesson but was marked as incorrect, with one of the given options being “que nous devions développer”. Although I can see the logic in that, it appears on the surface to directly contradict what the linked lesson tells us.
(Interestingly, in the full text of the passage after the exercise, they used “qu’il fallait développer” which does get around this problem, but it is sort of cheating, as we were told to use “nous” when translating this particular phrase, haha)
In this exercise I got this tense wrong (as I usually do for the verb devoir). The linked lesson on this topic is misleading. It says that when devoir is used in the imparfait e.g je devais, it means I was supposed to do (an obligation, in most cases not met) whereas it has a different meaning in the passé composé where j’ai dû = I had to do, or I must have done (an obligation that was met, or a hypothesis on a past situation). This doesn’t seem to be correct in practice, where if it is a repeated action we would still use the imparfait.
For example, this week’s exercise asked us to translate “... that we had to develop (use nous)”. I put: “que nous avons dû développer” which is in accord with the lesson but was marked as incorrect, with one of the given options being “que nous devions développer”. Although I can see the logic in that, it appears on the surface to directly contradict what the linked lesson tells us.
(Interestingly, in the full text of the passage after the exercise, they used “qu’il fallait développer” which does get around this problem, but it is sort of cheating, as we were told to use “nous” when translating this particular phrase, haha)
"et je m'étais préparé une journée aux petits oignons."
Since the speaker/narrator is clearly a women, wouldn't the sentence be...
"et je m'étais préparée une journée aux petits oignons." ???
Hi, I was expecting to see a definite article (“un”) before rendez-vous in “J’ai rendez-vous cet après-midi”. Could you explain why this is not needed please?
In the first sentence it is votre frere andthe answer is vôtre frere???
Are the words 'LE rose' in the 1st sentence in the lesson, in the masculine gender because 'le rose' is used as a noun? If the answer is yes, are all colours used as nouns masculine?
Whilst not directly on this subject but is anyone able to explain the use of "vaut" from the example. Il vaut mieux le faire soi même.
"The main difference with qu'est-ce que is that this alternative form is never followed by the inverted form when using subject pronouns: " To reword, does this mean that 'qu'est-ce que' cannot be followed by an inversion?
Is there a lesson that helps us to understand the distinction between each of these three verbs (revenir, rentrer, retourner) and when one is used versus the other?
In the sentence which I did not get correct it was shown as:
On ne doit pas parler la buche pleine.
My question is why is "with"/avec not used?
J'aimerais savoir si le verbe rencontrer dans la phrase "Je suis désolée que vous rencontriez des problèmes..." est au subjonctif ou à l'imparfait?
Le dialogue https://progress.lawlessfrench.com/learn/reading/au-secours-je-n-ai-plus-internet?utm_source=blk&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=msg_628865
Find your French level for FREE
Test your French to the CEFR standard
Find your French level