why is it - le ciel est couvert de nuages and not
le ciel est couvert des nuages? since nuages is a noun and not an adj. shouldnt it be des?
The 'de' here is a preposition normally would translate as of or from but here it is with, in English.
La table est couverte de jolie vaisselle = The table is covered with pretty china
Le devoir est rempli de fautes = The homework is full of mistakes
Hope this helps!
“Être (adjective/past participle) de” is the structure here. Effectively “is covered with (some) clouds. De + partitive article - no contraction, so remains “ de nuages”. See link :
You have here a verbal construction which requires "de". In this case you leave of the partitive article, it is implied. If you did add the article, it would be interpreted not as a partitive article but as a definite article, as if you were talking about some specific clouds (whatever that means).
Le ciel est couvert de nouages. -- The sky is covered with clouds.Le ciel est couvert des nouages. -- The sky is covered with the clouds.
Sign in to submit your answer
Don't have an account yet? Join today
Test your French to the CEFR standard