owen (corrigez-moi svp)

[lunar spear]

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.

[tawdry mauve]

Like why not just say impliqué

[jagged knot]

Both are correct.

However it feels like there is a slight nuance if you use "de".

You could replace that "d'" by "qui soit".

"à moins qu'il n'y ait de la thaumaturgie qui soit impliquée".

It's a common construction in french when you have an adjectif or participe passé used with a noun introduced by de or de la.

For instance:

"*Il n'y a pas de solution **d'*envisagée pour l'instant" = "Il n'y a pas de solution qui soit envisagée pour l'instant." = "There's no solution that is considered at that time".

But you could also say "There's no solution considered at that time".

The second form feels more direct.

[lofty pilot]

Oui il est dur à expliquer celui-là

C'est le même que dans "une place de disponible" "trois places de vendues"

j'ai aussi l'impression que c'est le même que dans "un concert de plus"

il a pris trois pommes de plus que moi

le vendeur aurait pu dire "il y a eu trois pommes de prises/de vendues ce matin"

[cursive yarrow]

comme j’ai dit dans le derière, « so ill start by translating bc thatll let me explain it better. the latter half of the sentence says “there is involved thaumaturgy”. so the “de” here is almost used as “that is”. so “there is thaumaturgy that is involved”. its describing a trait of the thaumaturgy »

[muted panther]

thanks guys very helpful