Hobbes (corrigez-moi)

[queen sable]

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.

[flat patrol]

It’s natural

In French, when you’re asking an existential question – that is, you’re asking about a thing, whether it is real or not, etcetera – you’d say « Qu’est-ce que c’est ? ». To add information to the thing being asked, you add that information either as a dislocated noun (1) or after « que » (2). For example, if I wanted to ask about Formula 1, I can say:
(1) Qu’est-ce que c’est, Formula 1 ?
(2) Qu’est-ce que c’est que Formula 1 ?

Now, why can’t I just say « Qu’est-ce que Formula 1 est ? » or « Qu’est-ce que Formula 1 ? »
Well, the first one is grammatically wrong for reasons that I don’t know (I suspect it’s because a noun in front of être is too heavy) whereas the second is correct but seen as more ‘formal’.

« Qu’est-ce que c’est » and « C’est quoi » are both fixed expressions so replacing « ce » with the noun in question just seems… weird?

[elfin flax]

Qu'est-ce qu'un divorce ? Is perfectly correct, but uses simple inversion and is thus rather formal:
Qu'est ce que c'est qu'un divorce is of intermediate formality made by sliding an "est-ce que" in the middle of the initial phrase.