Very difficult parts to hearIt seems the speaker is saying "l'impact de gigantesque." I understand that a "de" here would be incorrect, but that is what I hear. I presume this is because she is actually emphasizing the end of the word as in "l'impACT gigantesque." Nevertheless, the emphasis on the end of the word seems over done.
Later, it sounds as if she is saying "cette décision était facile." I understand, too, that this would be incorrect grammatically, but nevertheless it is almost impossible for me to here clearly "ait été."
Perhaps the lesson here is that one should not go by what one thinks one hears, but figure out what would be grammatically correct. I guess that is probably what we do when listening to English. We "sort of" listen but actually are just following the flow of the idea being transmitted and fill in the precise details only as needed.
I thought I’d sorted this out already but evidently not. I believe that the answer I gave in the heading is, according to the lecture notes, correct. Correction welcome. So why was it marked wrong and the correct answer given as “je suis avec cinq minutes d’avance”? I’m fine with this answer too but why was my answer marked as incorrect?
Small mis-spelling.
“and I set the table with colourful plates.”
“et j'ai mis la table avec des assiettes multicolres.”
-> “multicolores”
I understand the lesson as it is taught above.
In the lesson for future antérieur (Conjugate vouloir/pouvoir/devoir in the future perfect in French (Le Futur Antérieur)) there are sentences like "Nous aurons voulu le revoir". Why not Nous le aurons voulu revoir?
Is there another rule applicable when using future antérieur?
It seems the speaker is saying "l'impact de gigantesque." I understand that a "de" here would be incorrect, but that is what I hear. I presume this is because she is actually emphasizing the end of the word as in "l'impACT gigantesque." Nevertheless, the emphasis on the end of the word seems over done.
Later, it sounds as if she is saying "cette décision était facile." I understand, too, that this would be incorrect grammatically, but nevertheless it is almost impossible for me to here clearly "ait été."
Perhaps the lesson here is that one should not go by what one thinks one hears, but figure out what would be grammatically correct. I guess that is probably what we do when listening to English. We "sort of" listen but actually are just following the flow of the idea being transmitted and fill in the precise details only as needed.
Is it always incorrect to write "vingtième siècle" rather than "XXe siècle" ?
I get caught out by the punctuation in the listening exercises, partly because modern English writing has now dropped so many of the commas that we used to have, and partly because it’s difficult to know from the audio what punctuation is needed. A lesson on this would be useful.
"Pronunciation Note:
When plus has a negative meaning (no more), you never pronounce the final -s."Does that mean that the final -s is always pronounced if the meaning is positive? Is that how French people distinguish between 1) J'ai plus du temps and 2) J'ai plus de temps (where 2 is really Je n'ai plus de temps with the ne omitted as it often is in conversation). How do native French listeners tell the difference?
Writing as someone whose education didn’t include instruction in all the tenses - or, more truthfully, I just wasn’t paying attention - I’d like to know when to use subjunctive present instead of plain ordinary present. I suppose I could just Google it but I’d rather find it in Kwiziq. This is more an observation than a question. Thanks for your time.
We don’t know if ‘theirs’ applies to a single car they own or if they both own a car (assuming just two people), because we don’t know the context. So, I’d have thought that ‘les leurs’ is as legitimate an answer as ‘la leur’.
I have been taught that lui refers to both male and female but in the exercise they are conceptualized differently.
Find your French level for FREE
Test your French to the CEFR standard
Find your French level