#reena7998

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

sturdy sparrowBOT
#
Please be patient

Our volunteers look into many questions every day; sometimes it takes them a little while to answer.

Pro tip: you can rename the thread title with `.tr <thread name>`

Make it descriptive, including relevant context, but also to the point. This way you improve your chances of getting a more relevant and specific answer.

sharp spire
#

another question. Is it “ce sont les photos des fleurs” or “ce sont des photos de fleurs”?

#

I really don’t know and my teacher refuses to help me with such minor mistakes

maiden bluff
#

ce sont des photos de fleurs

#

ce sont les photos = these are the photos

limpid apex
#

When asking these questions, ask yourself: Is this describing the noun or is this describing what the noun possesses or has? Each answer has its own follow-up, so let’s go through them one-by-one.

  1. It is describing the noun
    Okay, so this means that it’s often describing the number/amount of this noun, which is the partitive. The partitive consists of the preposition « de » plus the articles « le, la, les » which creates our partitives: « du, de la, des ».
    The follow-up question is: is this noun countable or not? Countable means that it’s its a unit and you can count. An example is usually real objects, say a chair. A chair is a unit because you can’t subdivide it and you can count it: you can have one chair, two chairs, etc. If it’s countable, it’s going to be « des ». An uncountable object would be coffee: coffee is not a unit and you can’t count like one coffee, two coffees; there’s no defined boundary for that like a coffee can be as small as a mug and as large as a bottle. In that case, it’s either « du / de la », the choice depends on the gender of the noun. Coffee « café » is masculine so « du café », food « nourriture » is feminine so « de la nourriture ». Exception, if it’s a noun starting with a vowel, it’s « de l’ » regardless of gender.
  2. It’s describing what the noun possesses
    This means that it describes something related to the noun, what the noun contains or has or possesses, and not the noun itself. Here, you can have the bare preposition « de » or the preposition with the articles like « du, de la, des ».
    The follow-up question here is: is the thing possessing the noun general or specific?
    Specificity means that the noun contains a set that is known and well-defined. Say you have a photo filled with students: Are these students specific (say it might contain your friends or students from a specific alma mater) or just students in general (say it has a mix of students and it doesn’t matter as long as they’re students).
#

If it’s general, you can just put the bare preposition « de » but if it’s specific, you can put « du, de la, des ». The choice of which depends on what the thing possessed or contained is countable or uncountable which I covered before in 1).

#

So, we have two nouns: « Ce sont … photos (a) … fleurs (b) ». Given the structure, we can guess that (a) contains (b) because pictures can have flowers but not the other way around. This means that (a) uses the first thing (article describing noun) and (b) uses the second (article describing what is possessed). Let’s look at (a) first. Fortunately, « une photo » is countable; a picture is a unit and you can count it (une photo, deux photos, etc). Therefore, you put « des ». If it’s uncountable, you’d need to find the object’s gender but that’s fine. So that’s one filled: « Ce sont des photos … fleurs ». Move to (b).
Now with (b), either answer is acceptable, it just depends on what you mean. Is « fleurs » a specific group of flowers or just flowers in general? Are you expecting a bunch of flowers regardless of kind or are you expecting two lilies, one rose, and one peony? The former is general; the latter is specific. So either one is fine.

limpid apex
#

Regarding « c’est / ce sont », it depends on the element after the verb. The verb « être » is a copula here which basically means it’s an equals sign (=). Equals sign means that the left has to equal the right. So, if the right is plural, the pronoun « ce » has to be plural as well. What is the third person present plural of « être » ? That’s right, « sont ». It’s just that « ce » can be either singular or plural.

#

This trait becomes clearer when you change that subject pronoun. « Ils sont … (grand) ». Left is plural masculine so the right must be? That’s right, plural masculine too: « grands »
So we have « Ils sont grands. »

sharp spire
#

another question

#

is it "elle est bleu" or "c'est bleu" if im talking about my headphones / ma casque

sharp spire
#

"ce sont des photos de fleurs" would be correct then? but why isnt the de before the fleurs not "des"

#

its so confusing

limpid apex
sharp spire
#

oh

#

i thoguht it was feminine because the e in casque lol

#

its an exception

limpid apex
limpid apex
#

For the most part you should memorise words with the article

sharp spire
limpid apex
#

un casque

sharp spire
limpid apex
#

Has « ne … pas »

sharp spire
limpid apex
#

Also the verb here is « être » which doesn’t have that change

sharp spire
#

but im not talking about any negatives

#

its about the "ce sont des photos** de** fleurs"

limpid apex
#

OH

#

I misread sorry

sharp spire
#

its okay

#

dw

limpid apex
#

I thought you meant « des photos » bit

#

well « de fleurs » or « des fleurs » are correct, it just depends on if this is describing a general set or a specific set

sharp spire
#

its multiple photos of flowers

#

like fuchsia image, peony image, iris photo

limpid apex
#

« des photos de fleurs »
implies that each photo has flowers and it doesn’t matter which ones: one could have peonies, one could have roses, etc

« des photos des fleurs »
implies that each photo only has peonies or only roses, etc

sharp spire
#

idk if its general or specific 😭

sharp spire
#

THANKS

#

this makes a lot of sense

#

so in this case its actually the 1st example

#

because theres different images. its not the same flowers in multiple phtoos

limpid apex
#

Right

sharp spire
#

i have a hard project presentation for french on tuesday 😭

limpid apex
#

The distinction becomes clearer if I put a subordinate clause:
« Ce sont des photos de fleurs »
« Ce sont des photos des fleurs que j’ai plantées »

The first is general because they just contain flowers and it doesn’t matter what kind as long as they’re a type of flower.
The second is specific because it’s just the ones I’ve planted, not flowers in general. So if I planted only peonies, I would expect photos full of peonies, not peonies with roses and because I didn’t plant them.

sharp spire
#

ok understood, ty!

#

another question.. how to say "i received from my mom on Christmas"? is it "j'ai recu par ma mere à Noel"

#

is it par?

limpid apex
#

par means by

#

Also, received what?

#

You’re missing a direct object there

sharp spire
#

casque

limpid apex
#

You should put that

sharp spire
#

what can i use for "from"

#

from my mom

limpid apex
#

de

sharp spire
#

oh ok

#

thanks

#

bro my french teacher went through my work and she didnt even correct the words

#

i made so many mistakes

#

its actually so overwhelming i hate this

#

how do i say "pandora bracelet"

#

"bracelet de pandora" or does that sound like pandora gfited me the bracelet 😭

limpid apex
#

Bracelet from Pandora

limpid apex
sharp spire
#

i mean the pandora like brand

#

gucci bag or chanel bag

#

pandora bracelet, though

limpid apex
#

Besides a better translation for gift would be « Pandora m’a donné le bracelet (Pandora gave me the bracelet) »

limpid apex
#

In English ‘Pandora’s bracelet’ can also mean a bracelet from Pandora (a store called Pandora) or a bracelet belonging to Pandora (someone named Pandora)

sharp spire
#

when u think of it, technically i am getting it from pandora. it doesnt matter if its store or person cuz im still getting it from pandora. i totally get what u mean now, thank you.

limpid apex
#

Besides you can always clarify

sharp spire
#

yes a la magasin

#

pandora

limpid apex
#

C’est un bracelet … (It’s a bracelet…)
… que j’ai acheté à Pandora (that I bought at Pandora)
… que Pandora m’a donné (that Pandora gave me)

limpid apex
#

magasin is masc

sharp spire
#

ohh

#

i had no idea "a la" was for feminine actually

#

its like de la is for fem. and theres du for masc.

#

au for masc. a la for fem.

#

how about "j'aime untiliser mon casque persque tous les jours pour ecouter a la musicque de mes artistes preferees"

#

does** de** work here too?

#

or is it par

limpid apex
#

« par » needs a verb there like « fait (made) »

sharp spire
#

made by my favourite artists

limpid apex
#

« la musique de mes artistes préférés (the music of/from my favourite artists) »
« la musique faite/créée par mes artistes préférés (the music made/created by my favourite artists) »

sharp spire
#

ohh

limpid apex
sharp spire
#

i prefer the first one in this case

sharp spire
limpid apex
#

Oh and « préférés » not « préférées »; masculine plural not feminine plural

sharp spire
#

musicque is masc??

limpid apex
#

The masculine plural describes an exclusively masculine group or a mixed group whereas the feminine plural only describes an exclusively feminine group

limpid apex
sharp spire
#

oh

limpid apex
#

Say you like 5 artists
artistes préférés = 5 male artists or mixed group of male and female artists
artistes préférées = 5 female artists

sharp spire
#

ohh

#

most likely the first one in most cases

#

i like only like 2 male artists but it works still

#

"chaque jour, j'aime voir les fleurs fleurir"

#

is this one right? im trying to say it present but idk if its l'imparfait

limpid apex
#

It’s good

#

Imparfait would mean that you used to love it, but now you don’t

sharp spire
#

ohh

#

"Ensuite, quand je aurai plus vieille, je aimerais voyager a beaucoup des pays. Inclus: au Japon, en Grece, au Chene, et plus. Je aimerais voir les nouvelles, essayer les nouvelles nourritures, et porter les nouvelles modes."

#

what do you think?

limpid apex
#

quand je serai plus vieille, because it’s an adjective

#

j’aimerais, contractions are mandatory in French

sharp spire
#

the adjectivie is the vieille?

sharp spire
limpid apex
#

beaucoup de pays, expressions of quantity work a lot like possessive « de »

limpid apex
sharp spire
#

then its avoir

limpid apex
#

Yup

sharp spire
#

but for this its etre?

limpid apex
#

You got it

sharp spire
#

cuz adjective

#

but is age an adjective too?

#

no its noun

limpid apex
#

Je serai plus vieille demain
J’aurai 24 ans le mois prochain

limpid apex
sharp spire
limpid apex
sharp spire
#

oh nno i mean pays as country

limpid apex
#

« J’aime beaucoup de pays »
means I love a lot of countries, that’s it, regardless whether or not I’ve visited them

« J’aime beaucoup des pays que j’ai visités »
Means I love some of the countries I’ve visited, not them in general

sharp spire
#

its not when i become older i will love a lot of countries tho

#

its that i can visit when im older

#

trying to say "I will love to visit many countries"

#

possibly the beaucoup is wrong in this case then?

limpid apex
#

no beaucoup is right

#

It just depends on whether or not « pays » is a general or a specific set

sharp spire
#

umm kinda general?

#

but then i give examples but i put etc

#

japan, greece, china, etc

limpid apex
#

Right but that’s just you mentioning a few, you didn’t mention that these are just the ones you want to visit

#

« J’ai visité beaucoup de pays comme la Chine et la France »
implies that China and France are two examples of the general group of countries

« J’ai visité beaucoup des pays que j’aime comme la Chine et la France »
implies that China and France are two examples of the more specific set of countries (the countries you loved)

sharp spire
#

ohh

#

how can i say "i would love to visist many countries"??

limpid apex
#

plusieurs pays / beaucoup de pays

sharp spire
#

its futur tense too

limpid apex
#

no

#

future would be ‘I will love’

#

this is the conditional ‘I would love’

sharp spire
#

oh

#

i have trouble understanding the difference

#

"We use the future simple to express future actions with a degree of certainty, whereas we use the conditional to talk about hypothetical situations." - google

#

i got it

#

i would say its conditional too because its a hypothetical situation

limpid apex
#

Exactly

sharp spire
#

j'aimerais voyager a beaucoup de pays

limpid apex
#

Nice

sharp spire
#

Je aimerais voir les nouvelles endroits, essayer les nouvelles nourritures, et porter les nouvelles modes.

#

this nice too?

limpid apex
#

J’aimerais* (contractions are mandatory remember)
les nouveaux endroits (endroit is masc)

sharp spire
#

oops

#

yes

limpid apex
#

I mean, I’m a lot more partial if you used the partitive (de nouveaux endroits, de nouvelles nourritures, de nouvelles modes) since the definite articles « le/la/les » imply a specific thing and so « les nouveaux endroits » means literally every new place

sharp spire
#

oh but im referring to the places in the countries i would visit

limpid apex
#

Yeah using the definite instead of the partitive would mean everything in those countries

sharp spire
#

which one do i use

limpid apex
#

« de nouveaux endroits (some new places) »
« les nouveaux endroits (the new places) »

sharp spire
#

the first one i prefer

limpid apex
#

I’d go with the first

#

Because you’ve not specified anything so using the definite is a bit meh

sharp spire
#

I would see some new places (museum, gardens, tourist attractions)

sharp spire
#

im not including the places though

limpid apex
#

Also I forgot to say that « du/de la/des » become « de » when an adjective comes between the article and the noun, it just happens

#

« de nouveaux livres »
« des livres géniaux »

#

Sorry

sharp spire
#

because u said "des livres" so it didnt become de

#

OH]

#

I READ WRONG

#

the adjective comes BEFORE then its DE

#

kk

#

makes sense

limpid apex
#

It’s only with the partitive though

sharp spire
#

whats a partitive

limpid apex
#

so « ce sont des photos des nouvelles fleurs que j’ai achetées » works

#

because the « des » in « des nouvelles fleurs » is a possessive « de » and thus describes what a noun possesses

limpid apex
#

(1) of that thing way back in the beginning

sharp spire
limpid apex
#

countable/uncountable stuff

sharp spire
limpid apex
sharp spire
#

so the livres is partitive? but fleurs is posesisve?

limpid apex
#

Mmhm

sharp spire
#

why though

limpid apex
#

because livres is the noun whereas fleurs is what that noun possesses

sharp spire
#

i thought its the subject posesses

#

what noun i possesses? i dont get it

limpid apex
#

Going back to our example of « Ce sont des photos de fleurs », the main object here is « photos », what you have is a bunch of photos

#

« fleurs » is what the noun, « photos », possesses; there's flowers IN the photos

#

the flowers aren't the main object, they're what exists in the main object

#

This is what I mean by descriptive de (the partitive article) and the possessive de

#

Descriptive « de » is about the main object, the noun, the thing you're talking about, whereas possessive « de » talks about what exists within said main object/noun

#

« Ce sont des livres. »
What do you have? BOOKS.

« Ce sont des livres de fleurs. »
What do you have? BOOKS.
What is in the books? FLOWERS.

sharp spire
#

ohh

#

what if it was books on the shelf

#

then livres est possessive aussi?

limpid apex
#

« Une étagère de livres »

sharp spire
#

is it because it would need to be apart of something?

#

but theres no posesser like a shelf

#

which is why des livres geniaux is des

#

if there was a shelf then itll be "une etagere de livres geniaux"

#

why doesnt geniaux have an s added?

limpid apex
#

It’s its own thing, it’s not a part of something else like the possessive

limpid apex
sharp spire
#

but its rly the shelf that is possessing the item and the the livre is partive of the processe.. idk .. i might need to think more

sharp spire
limpid apex
limpid apex
sharp spire
limpid apex
#

Adding -s is the most common way to pluralise nouns and adjectives but not the only one

sharp spire
#

this one has a ton of mistakes

#

“je serai gentil auxs les animauxs”

#

I feel like the auxs or les is removed but idk which one

limpid apex
#

les

#

the preposition à (to) becomes au, à la, aux when they meet the definite articles le, la, les

#

so « aux animaux »

limpid apex
# sharp spire

Do you want corrections on this? If so, could you type it out? Not kinda keen on tilting my head

sharp spire
#

Dernièrement, quand je serai plus vielle, je veux deviendrai une vétérinaire, un couturier, et une photographe. Je serai gentil auxs les animauxs et la propriétaire. Je serai designer auxs vêtement et de robes. Enfin, je prendrai de belles photos en tant que photographe

#

I switched the le to une/un

limpid apex
#

Ah okay

#

Well first off « je veux deviendrai » won’t work because you can’t have two conjugated verbs in a clause like that. May I ask, is your native language English?

#

Second, in French, professions act like adjectives so you don’t use the article at all; to translate, ‘I am a doctor’, you say « je suis médecin », not « je suis un médecin ». You can read this article and scroll down to the next section after the final entry of the table (writer/écrivain).

#

Third, I already corrected auxs les so I’m not going to repeat that, but French actually tends to repeat the preposition so that preposition and article need to appear again. As an example, comparing English and French:
‘I’m speaking to Mark and Jack’
(The preposition ‘to’ is only written once and it’s implied in the second object after ‘and’)
« Je parle à Marc et à Jacques »
(The preposition is written explicitly twice, once for Marc and one for Jacques because the preposition applies to each.)

#

Fourth, you use « de » to describe what it is a profession does like ‘designer of X (dessinateur.trice de X)’. It’s a possessive « de », describing what the profession possesses (as in what it does)

sharp spire
#

it is

#

i just struggle with these verbs. I thought it would be like "I would want to be" when translated "je veux deviendrai"

#

but i think the deviendrai probably is already "would want to be" by itself if it cannot be 2 conjugated verbs

limpid apex
# sharp spire yes

Okay here’s a question, which one is correct:
a) ‘He wants drinks coffee’
or
b) ‘He wants to drink coffee’

sharp spire
#

b

#

i see why people stuggle to learn english now

#

bro im sturggling with french the same

limpid apex
# sharp spire b

Right and English obeys this rule pretty well, you only conjugate once

sharp spire
#

yea

#

sometimes i feel like because its french then itll work even if it looks grammarically incorrect just cuz its not my first language but then again, it does obey similar rules to english

limpid apex
#

See it now? You conjugate once per clause

sharp spire
#

yes

limpid apex
#

So what should you write?

#

Since « vouloir » is already conjugated, « devenir » doesn’t have to be

sharp spire
#

oh?

#

wait so i can use both vouloir and devenir in one sentence

limpid apex
#

Yup

sharp spire
#

even in conditional?

#

in anything?

limpid apex
#

Of course

sharp spire
#

ohh

#

"je veux deviendrai"
work?

limpid apex
#

Nuh uh

sharp spire
#

i want to become

#

oh

limpid apex
#

« deviendrai » is conjugated

sharp spire
#

je veux devenir

#

devenir

limpid apex
#

devenir*
But hey, that works!

sharp spire
#

yes

#

but my teacher wanted me to use condditonal for this part of my work

limpid apex
#

« Je veux devenir X (I want to become X)’

limpid apex
#

Take the simple future in English and French. In English, you insert the modal verb ‘will’ and then the original verb becomes an infinitive because remember you only conjugate once. In French however, the future is expressed by its own tense with its own ending.

#

He becomes -> He will become
Il devient -> Il deviendra

#

This applies to the conditional as well with the modals ‘would, should, could’ being expressed in French in the conditional tense.

#

She helps him -> She would help him
Elle l’aide -> Elle l’aiderait

sharp spire
#

yea i understadn the endings

limpid apex
#

So let’s go back to the original sentence, « je veux devenir ».

#

All you need to do is change « vouloir » from the present to the conditional, and Bob’s your uncle.

sharp spire
#

bobs my uncle?

limpid apex
#

It’s a British thing, means ‘you got it/there you go’

sharp spire
#

je voudrais devenir

sharp spire
limpid apex
sharp spire
#

kk

sharp spire
#

< 3

limpid apex
#

‘I would want to become’

sharp spire
#

yes

#

or want? similar ig

#

no its WANT

#

like is aimer

limpid apex
#

like is another verb, aimer

sharp spire
#

yea

#

je aimerais devenir

sharp spire
sharp spire
limpid apex