#joknoew
lethal sequoia
ornate turret
First off, do you know how the relative pronouns work?
I.e. qui, que, dont, any preposition + lequel ?
« La femme qui me parlait est ma voisine »
« On voit l’homme que la police cherche »
« Il a fait les tâches dont je devais m’occuper »
« Pourquoi est-ce que tu détestes la république pour laquelle tu te bats ? »
Any of these ring a bell?
rugged urchin
Yea, qui and que. Not too familiar with don't and laquelle
rugged urchin
Yea, cool. Take ur time. Thank you for helping
south burrow
bertiebear smort
rugged urchin
Ok, could you maybe give more examples. What does these directly translate to in English. Or does it not translate well.
ornate turret
It doesn't translate well because English operates on a different system
The French system operates on function – whether something is a subject or object – whereas the English system operates on animacy – whether something is living or not
« L'homme qui t'a vu est mon professeur. »
« La fenêtre qui t'intéresse m'appartient. »
As you can see here, we have two nouns – one animate (l'homme) and one inanimate (la fenêtre) – which are replaced by « qui » because they are acting as subjects in the subordinate clause.
« L'homme que tu as vu est mon professeur. »
« La fenêtre que tu veux m'appartient. »
Again, we have the same two nouns but now they use « que » because they are acting as objects in the subordinate clause.
If I put in the English translations, it'll be clearer
« L'homme qui t'a vu est mon professeur. »
'The man who saw you is my teacher.'
« La fenêtre qui t'intéresse m'appartient. »
'The window that is interesting to you belongs to me.'
« L'homme que tu as vu est mon professeur. »
'The man who you saw is my teacher.'
« La fenêtre que tu veux m'appartient. »
'The window that you want belongs to me.'
However with that difference in mind, if we're talking about indirect relative pronouns « dont/lequel », we can have a closer comparison
The key difference here is that in French, the preposition MUST precede the noun/pronoun whereas in English, we can either have it stick or most commonly separate them
ornate turret
I'll do the example with (3) and (4)
« L'ordinateur avec lequel j'ai des problèmes appartient à mon père. »
'The computer with which I have (some) problems belongs to my father.'
That's a valid sentence but English speakers will tend to go for this:
'The computer that/which I have some problems with belongs to my father.'
rugged urchin
I can already tell this is going to get some time getting used to. In terms of 1 and 2, then - it would be auxquelles.
Par exemple: la bataille auxquelles (with/which) je participe sont sauvages
ornate turret
yeah
well
« participer » takes « à » in French but its English equivalent takes 'in'
« Les batailles auxquelles je participe sont sauvages. »
'The battles in which I participate are wild/fierce.'
Prepositions don't cleanly translate so that's also something you have to keep in mind
rugged urchin
So just thinking off the top of my head to make a sentence. If I wanted to say. (Le magasin ont beaucoup) (je suis allé au magasin)
It would be--- le magasin lequelle je suis allé avoir beaucoup?
ornate turret
auquel
Also, you didn't conjugate
You can think of it as inserting
Le magasin a beaucoup de choses + Je suis allé au magasin
Okay, what noun do we have in common? Le magasin, note that
What sentence do we want as the main clause? Okay, it's « le magasin a beaucoup de choses »
This main clause is the backbone of our new sentence, we don't think about it much
Let's look at the second sentence, our subordinate: Je suis allé au magasin
This is an indirect object, au magasin, so we replace the noun with lequel
Do note that lequel will agree with the noun so if we had had « à la boulangerie », we would've had « laquelle »
Anyway, it's lequel since magasin is masculine and singular
à + lequel = auquel
Thus we have « Je suis allé auquel »
We move that object, the whole thing, to the front: Auquel je suis allé
Now, we put this whole thing right after the noun we have in common
Since it's « magasin », we put this whole clause afterwards
Le magasin [auquel je suis allé] a beaucoup de choses
Remember, we don't change a thing in the main clause; our sole attention is just to the subordinate clause
It's literally the same principle as que, we just have a preposition added
rugged urchin
I think i see what you mean, but I'm just trying to make sentences off the top of my head and its hard to wrap my head around at the moment.
(La voiture que je conduis est très rapide) (j'ai achèté la voiture)
EX: la voiture à laquelle j'ai achèté est très vite?
ornate turret
No no no
« J'ai acheté la voiture » has no preposition
« La voiture que j'ai achetée est très rapide. »
rugged urchin
Ok, let me think of a better example that I can do
- J'ai mangé beaucoup des plâts aux étas-unis
- Les étas-unis ont beaucoup de les norritures.
Could I do it with these 2?
rugged urchin
Les étas-unis [auxquelles j'ai mangé beaucoup des plâts] ont beaucoup de chose.
ornate turret
Close, it's auxquels because « les États-Unis » is masculine
Do note that for locations using « où » is also possible and perhaps more preferable
If you want to make some examples with prepositions, consult this page:
https://www.lawlessfrench.com/grammar/verbs-with-prepositions/
Use the verbs here for practice
rugged urchin
. And does où have its own rules or change?
ornate turret
It functions just like « que »
It can replace any preposition that has the connotation of going to/staying at some place
Le marché est intéressant
+
Je suis dans le marché
=> La France où je suis est intéressant
=> La France dans lequel je suis est intéressant
But anyway
You can use the verbs there
La loi est inutile
+
Je m'oppose à la loi
=> La loi à laquelle je m'oppose est inutile
La femme est ma copine
+
Je me fâche contre la femme
=> La femme contre laquelle je me fâche est ma copine
La piscine est froide
+
Je m'immerge dans la piscine
=> La piscine dans laquelle je m'immerge est froide
Le bureau se compose de gens gentils
+
Je travaille pour le bureau
=> Le bureau pour lequel je travaille se compose de gens gentils
Le garçon est gentil
+
Je m'occupe du garçon
=> Le garçon dont je m'occupe est gentil
rugged urchin
Ok, then it brings me back to the original question of how it fits in with ce que and ce qui. Is it similar in its usage?
ornate turret
Yes but there’s a key difference: reference
In the examples above, the subordinate clause is replacing the same noun that is present in the main clause, right?
All of those are what we call definite relative pronouns because we know that there is a noun that we replace
However, there are cases where we don’t have a noun and thus we have the indefinite relative pronouns
Since we don’t have a noun to replace, what we do is we put « ce » before each relative pronoun
« ce que, ce qui, ce dont »
For lequel, because there’s no object to agree to, we switch it for quoi
« ce à quoi, ce sur quoi, ce pour quoi »
Ex: « Cette chose que nous voulons est ça. »
We can deconstruct that into two clauses: « Cette chose est ça » and « nous voulons cette chose »
To make it indefinite, we simply remove « cette chose » and replace it with « ce »
Ce que nous voulons est ça
La chose qui te dérange est ça
–> Ce qui te dérange est ça
Notice how the translation also changes the pronoun
« Cette chose que nous voulons est ça. »
‘This thing that we want is this.’
« Ce que nous voulons est ça. »
‘What we want is this.’
rugged urchin
Would this work for ce que for example --- je sais pas ce que dire.
ornate turret
What are you trying to say
Answer is no by the way
If you’re trying to say, ‘I don’t know what to say’
« Je ne sais pas quoi dire »
Ce que doesn’t work here because you need a clause here
rugged urchin
Ok, sounds good, thankyou. I'm going to continue to practice this
Wait, do you mind if I check one more example with you actually
Les étudiants à laquelles je travaille sont gentiles.
ornate turret
Les étudiants à laquelles je travaille sont gentiles.
Nope, AFAIK you either use « pour (for) » or « avec (with) »
Even if it is à, remember that it has to contract with lequel
auquel, à laquelle, auxquels, auxquelles
rugged urchin
What's AFAIK mean? And what would the correct version be?
ornate turret
I’ve just said the prepositions
It’s up to you to correct it
With the stuff I explained above
ornate turret
What's AFAIK mean? And what would the correct version be?
AFAIK = As far as I know
rugged urchin
Les étudiants à laquelles je travaille sont gentiles.
Les étudiants avec auxquelles je travaille sont gentiles?
ornate turret
Remember that the aux in auxquelles is a contraction of the preposition « à » and « lesquelles »
just like how « à + les pommes » becomes « aux pommes », « à + lesquelles » becomes « auxquelles »
rugged urchin
So I would get rid of the avec. And just have the auxquelles.
Les étudiants auxquelles je traaille sont gentiles.
ornate turret
No
You were already on the right track with avec
You just need to remove aux because that’s another preposition
rugged urchin
isn't étudiants plural so we need to have the relative plural even with avec
ornate turret
isn't étudiants plural so we need to have the relative plural even with avec
Yes but again auxquelles already has a preposition
It’s that preposition that you need to delete
It’s literally midnight so I’m heading out
Here’s the answer : avec lesquels
lesquels because étudiants is masculine plural