Can only be used on their own.... This wording has been very confusing to many people in this forum. I’ve read through the comments and still remain very confused about what the author is trying to convey when he/she states these clauses can only be used on their own. Could someone please explain to a Native American English speaker what this actually means? When I read this I am thinking literally “they can only be used on their own” either separated entirely from the phrase using some sort of punctuation OR by using a preposition such “de”. However that doesn’t seem to always be the case which then seems to contradict “used only on their own”. 1st example: “Il a été relâché le jour suivant son arrestation.”
2nd example: “J’y suis allée le jour d’après.”
3rd example: “Le jour précédent leur premier rendez-vous, ils étaient très nerveux.”
Alors, aidez-moi de comprendre, s’il vous plaît. Qu’est-ce que le auteur essaie de dire? Je ne comprends toujours pas. J’ai besoin de quelqu’un m’aider, s’il vous plaît.
Aussi, je pense qu’il faudrait réfléchir à la reformulation de cette phrase pour clarifier de la signification.
Merci beaucoup!
Hi - I see from a previous discussion that the meaning of a verb (e.g. commencer à/ commencer de) can slightly change depending on whether it is followed by à or de. Is this also true for continuer à / continuer de?
Are there also slight differences in meanings with the verbs mentioned above?
Thanks - Tammy
I'm wondering why it's not correct to say "me présenter à d'autres gens"? I thought that présenter was followed by the preposition à.
Is this using the passive voice or is 'assis' an adjective?
'que les gens me donnent' - was the answer for 'have been giving me'. I thought that the French here meant (in your answer) - 'that the people 'are' giving me'.
The guidance says 'any object is placed between the de and the infinitive' so I'm puzzled as to why the example given doesn't end 'avant d'une solution trouver' instead of the given 'avant de trouver une solution'. Merci!
If heard that in spoken french the ne is often dropped, so would c´est pas be a correct way of saying it isn´t?
I would love to be able to REPLAY short segments of this piece so well delivered by Gruff. This way, I can practice words and shorter sections at a time until I gain confidence with both pronunciation and meaning. I was disappointed to find, that I was committed to hearing the play in its entirety (which is quite long), with only pauses available.
Thanks Kwiziq for ending my search for reading and listening material online.
This wording has been very confusing to many people in this forum. I’ve read through the comments and still remain very confused about what the author is trying to convey when he/she states these clauses can only be used on their own. Could someone please explain to a Native American English speaker what this actually means? When I read this I am thinking literally “they can only be used on their own” either separated entirely from the phrase using some sort of punctuation OR by using a preposition such “de”. However that doesn’t seem to always be the case which then seems to contradict “used only on their own”. 1st example: “Il a été relâché le jour suivant son arrestation.”
2nd example: “J’y suis allée le jour d’après.”
3rd example: “Le jour précédent leur premier rendez-vous, ils étaient très nerveux.”
Alors, aidez-moi de comprendre, s’il vous plaît. Qu’est-ce que le auteur essaie de dire? Je ne comprends toujours pas. J’ai besoin de quelqu’un m’aider, s’il vous plaît.
Aussi, je pense qu’il faudrait réfléchir à la reformulation de cette phrase pour clarifier de la signification.
Merci beaucoup!
What is the conjugation of two derivatives of "venir", "parvenir" and "convenir" in Le Passé Composé?
Why is « ils sont passées »correct when one says « They passed the morning bringing eggs.. » Isn’t « to pass the morning » or « to pass the weekend » a transitive use of the verb, therefore « avoir »?
Find your French level for FREE
Test your French to the CEFR standard
Find your French level