Agreeing past participle with subject's gender and number with (+ être) verbs in Le Passé Composé

Hi Martin,

There is no "mettre" in this sentence because the verb " se maquiller" already means "to put one's make-up on". You can't say "I made myself up" in English. (Well, you could, but it would mean something completely different).

-- Chris.

Merci !!

Hi Bill, I believe there's been a useful and detailed discussion already on this subject. You should be able to find it. 

-- Chris. 

Hi Bill,

If you scroll right down in that lesson, you will find answers to this question.

Bonne continuation!

Bonjour Bill,

There is agreement with reflexive verbs only when the reflexive pronoun is the direct object.

Nous nous sommes lavés. - We washed up. The reflexive pronoun nous is the direct object: we washed ourselves -  the people doing the washing and being washed are the same.

But in nous nous sommes brossé les cheveux, the reflexive pronoun is actually the indirect object, because the direct object is les cheveux. While not grammatical, you can get a better sense of this by rewording the sentence: Nous sommes brossé les cheveux à nous. Since the direct object does not precede the verb, there is no agreement.

As this is a very tricky grammar point, Aurélie is going to address it in detail, either in this lesson or a separate one, but in the meantime you might find section 3 of this lesson helpful: Agreement with pronominal verbs

Hi Rob,

If you look at the bottom of the lesson, there is a long explanation in answer to the same question posted by Gabrielle on the 28 April.

Let me know if you still don't get it ....

 

Hi Jan - if you read the discussion below you'll see this comes up a lot...

Hi Gabrielle,

The agreement of past participles in the case of reflexive verbs is most interesting.

As they use the auxilliary verb 'être' in the perfect tense, they normally agree just as adjectives in gender and number.

This is always true of simple intransitive verbs like se coucher, s'appeler, se réveiller, s'arrêter, which don't have an object.

In the case of verbs like 'se casser.... quelque chose', 'se brosser...quelque chose', 'se laver ...quelque chose' etc. which in English translate literally and oddly to break /brush/wash (yourself ) something which clearly have an object  then we apply the agreement rules of verbs using 'avoir' in the perfect tense, and the past participle will agree only if the object precedes the verb.

Here are a few examples which might help to illustrate the point:

Ils se sont lavé les mains,( They washed their hands) but ils se sont lavés à l'eau froide (They washed  in cold water).

Elle s'est cassé une jambe (She broke a leg) but La jambe qu'elle s'est cassée aura du mal à guérir (The leg she broke will not heal well).

Elles se sont préparé une soupe (They have made (themselves) a soup) but la soupe qu'elles se sont préparée est délicieuse (The soup they made is delicious).

Nous nous sommes acheté une maison (We bought ourselves a house) but La maison que nous nous sommes achetée n'a pas de dépendances (The house we bought has no outbuildings)

Hope this helps!

Cécile, that is an enormous help. The examples you gave are really clear. Thank you very much. G

:-)

Cécile - could you explain this example more, I don't see the difference. Don't both cases have an object which doesn't precede the verb?

Ils se sont lavé les mains,( They washed their hands) but ils se sont lavés les mains à l'eau froide (They washed their hands in cold water).

Hi Alan,

Thanks for pointing this out, it is in fact a mistake . The examples should read: 

Ils se sont lavé les mains.

But

Ils se sont lavés à l'eau froide .

Will correct the text above.

 

 

Hi Paul,

You will find an excellent explanation of all possible cases along with examples here:

https://www.lawlessfrench.com/grammar/agreement-with-pronominal-verbs/

Greetings, -- Chris.

I suggest that Kwiziq leave out tests on this topic at this stage of the course. 

Why?

-- Chris

P.S.: See my reply to your later post.

Cecile and Chris, Your posts on this topic were excellent. Thank you so much. 

In addition, I want to say that I agree with the person below who said this type of sentence (with reflexive verbs where the past participle does not agree with the subject) should be left out of lessons at earlier levels, for instance Lower Intermediate, which is my level. Why? Because we already have a heavy load of things to remember and understand. The brain only holds so much new information at one time. Leave it until later. As a career teacher, I believe there is a principle of providing an appropriate level of difficulty for each student's current achievement level.

Then again, if it is thought appropriate to include it, PUT IT IN THE LESSON. Don't just throw it in during a test when we have never seen it before.

And last, if you are going to toss it into a test, at least let us know right away, that yes, the test answer given is correct. It's not so much that I needed an explanation right now. I needed someone to say, Yes, the answer we gave is correct. No, it is not an error. 

But, thank you for the clear answer you two gave.

Bravo Jan! 

Hi Pekka,

As you know, the French sentence is in the perfect tense (vous êtes devenue). And I agree with you that for the English translation the perfect tense (you have become) would be more natural.

-- Chris (not a native speaker).

Hi John,
This question has been asked before, and it seems that it is not yet covered on this site, but it is explained here:
https://www.lawlessfrench.com/grammar/agreement-with-pronominal-verbs/

Hi John,

You are correct, it ought to be, "Nous nous sommes brossés les cheveux." Or, if it is a purely female group, "Nous nous sommes brossées les cheveux."

The site Alan quotes in his reply is a good one to check.

-- Chris (not a native speaker).

Hi Chris,

No, actually it should be "Nous nous sommes brossé les cheveux", because there is a direct object "les cheveux" which comes after the verb. This is explained on the link given - case 3 1/2

There's also some discussion of this in the other Q&As for this topic.

I meant case 3. Case 3 1/2 is the exception to case 3.

Actually, no. In the case of être, the participe always agrees.

-- Chris.

Thanks to both Alan and Chris. I remember this now from previous delving into French grammar. However, I would question whether this should be at A2 level. It's more appropriate at B2/C1

Chris, please read the other Q&A on this topic or the link I provided, it's more complicated than that.

Hi Alan, that's a VERY interesting point, indeed. According to the site, there should not be an agreement of the participle. However, I asked two native French speakers, one of them a French (as a second language) teacher, and both said that the participle needs to match the subject in the example we are discussing

I did some more internet research and found confirmation the rule you found on Laura's site. So it seems I did learn something new today! Thanks!!

-- Chris (not a native speaker).

Elle s'est cassé la jambe. -- She broke her legs (no agreement).
Quelle jambe s'est-elle cassée? -- Which leg did she break? (agreement)

-- Chris (not a native speaker).

Hi all,

This is the kind of grammar which will trip up a lot of French natives and the rules are odd to say the least .

Please look at my answer to Gabrielle :

https://progress.lawlessfrench.com/questions/view/hi-i-love-the-website-i-too-am-wondering-why-we-brushed-our-hair-is-nous-nous-sommes-brosse-les-chev

which might help out....

Hi John

thanks for the link above relating to  the Laless site. It makes sense now. Krissa

Bonsoir Pryia,
Would you please clarify your post as I don't see a question posed here?

Bonsoir Pryia,
Since you have not replied to my request for clarification on your question, I can only guess at what you are having difficulty with. So here goes:
Firstly, if you are reading this in the Q&A section, you will need to go to the lesson referenced in your statement, then if you scroll down this list of questions on the lesson, you should find a couple of links provided by Gruff in response to Brian's similar concern.
Having said that, I am going to provide you with a couple of other «outside» links that also cover agreeing the past participle with the subject's gender and number when using être as the auxiliary verb in le passé composé.
http://laits.utexas.edu/tex/gr/tap3.html
https://www.francaisfacile.com/exercices/exercice-francais-2/exercice-francais-9508.php
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJCJCfKR0gA
Further, I typically do not like to use resources outside of Kwiziq but sometimes it becomes necessary to get a broader perspective on the topic.
I hope that my response is the issue you are having difficulty with and helps to clarify it for you.
Bonne chance et bonne continuation.

Ron ( un locuteur non natif)

Hi Pryia,

The rules of agreement in French can often seem infuriating as very complicated.

It might put your mind at ease to realise that often these rules only make a difference in the written language and not in spoken French as a lot of the past participles will be pronounced in the same way, e.g. allé, allée, allées ...

Hope this helps!

Hi Brian, yes. You can read more about that here: https://progress.lawlessfrench.com/revision/grammar/agree-past-participle-with-subjects-gender-and-number-with-etre-verbs-in-le-passe-compose-conversational-past

Hope that helps, Gruff

I am aware of the rules for agreement of past participles with verbs conjugated with être. Because "les mains" is a direct object, I think a different rule applies. I am very confused by this rule, but cannot find an explanation in Kwiziq. Could I please get a second opinion on this?

Hi Brian,

Ah, I think the lesson for special case(s) for direct objects that you might be thinking about is this:
https://progress.lawlessfrench.com/revision/grammar/special-cases-when-the-past-participle-agrees-in-number-and-gender-when-used-with-avoir-in-le-passe-compose-conversational-past

Note that these special cases concern when you need to agree the past participle when 'avoir' is the auxiliary. The participle must always agree when 'être' is the auxiliary.

Hope that helps!

Thanks for that Gruff, but it may not be correct. I have managed to find this which you should read,
https://www.lawlessfrench.com/grammar/agreement-with-pronominal-verbs/
You will note that Laura uses the following example: Elles se sont lavé les cheveux. Note that there is no agreement unless (like with avoir) the direct object precedes the auxilliary verb. The direct object is les cheveux, se becomes the indirect object.

Brian - I apologise I didn't know this! Laura is of course, right.

Elles se sont lavées. (Qui est lavé ? "Elles", écrit avant, accord)
Elles se sont lavé les cheveux. (Ce qui est lavé ? "les cheveux", écrit après, pas d'accord.)
Les cheveux qu'elles se sont lavés (Ce qui est lavé ? "les cheveux", écrit avant, accord.)

I'm not sure I entirely follow the logic of this, but it apparently the case!

Aurelie is away currently, but I'll make sure she takes a look too and we can have a Kwiziq lesson to deal with these cases (and there appear to be even more arcane rules on top from what I've read since.)

Thanks for pointing this out!

Cordialement, Gruff

Thank you, a lesson on this very confusing subject would be welcome.