#Gryphus (Corrigez-moi svp!)
slate cedar
fair snow
It depends whether there's already a "de" in the base expression.
"Perdre" is followed by a direct object:
- Je perds [quelque chose]
So if that "quelque chose" is an undefined quantity of something (like "du poids"), you can use it as is, as the direct object: - Je perds [du poids]
When referring to the loss of something, you need a "de" after "la perte" to indicate possession. A "de" that means "of".
- La perte de [quelque chose]
And it is a rule of French grammar that partitive articles (du/de la/des) disappear entirely when they appear after "de". - La perte de [du poids] ==> apply the rule ==> La perde de [poids].
Mind you, "la perte du poids" is grammatically correct, but because of the underlying "de", it would mean that the word "du" is the mandatory contraction of "de le".
La perte de [le poids] ==> La perte du poids
Which would mean "the loss of the weight" and not "the loss of weight"
Compare the following:
- Je veux du riz - I want rice
- Je veux le riz - I want the rice
- Je rêve de riz - I dream of rice
- Je rêve du riz - I dream of the rice
It always depends on whether there's an underlying "de"
mystic remnant
When du/de la/des isn't preceded something that requires "de", it's called the partitive article and I recommend reading about it here: https://www.lawlessfrench.com/grammar/partitive-article/
so in perdre du poids, that "du" is the partitive article because "perdre de" isn't a fixed expression, you can perdre un or perdre le. but "perte de" is a fixed expression in that you can't have a "perte un poids"
for the former, the de is added to form the partitive article, and for the latter, the de is part of the preceding construction.
It's kind of like "la perte de du poids" but the "de du" cancels out into just "de".
versed owl
mystic remnant
je t'en prie 