French language Q&A Forum

is it [ju suisanglez] or [ju sui anglez]? why?

In the sentence, ”She would probably have preferred for us to stay home.”, the latter part is translated by "...qu’on reste à la maison ”.  Must we use ’à la maison’ instead of ’chez nous’ because of the pronoun, ’on’?  In other words, does the use of ’on’ dictate the use of ’à la maison’, thereby prohibiting ’chez nous’ ?

To me it looks like "la plupart" (singular) is the subject rather than "des gens" (plural), so why is the rest of the sentence in the plural?

How do you know if a word requires avoir or être in passé composé like for eg finir how do we know if it requires avoir or être when you see the word 

In the translation of ” and I'm skint [US: broke] because of all the gifts that I must buy”, they use the expression ”à cause de” for because of.  I was wondering if "en raison de" could be substituted for "à cause de".  I tried it but it wasn't accepted.  Is there a subtle difference that I don't understand? 

In the translation of ” and I'm skint [US: broke] because of all the gifts that I must buy”, they use the expression ”à cause de” for because of.  I was wondering if "en raison de" could be substituted for "à cause de".  I tried it but it wasn't accepted.  Is there a subtle difference that I don't understand? 

Could one also use « la facture «  as well as « la note »?

The asks to translate Nigeria's population is more than one hundred million people.

The answer given was ‘milliards de’. But isn’t milliards used for billions?

Is there any difference in meaning between the use of faire and etre contextually? Or, are they freely interchangeable? 

I guess my main concern is, is there an example of a time when faire would be chosen over etre and vice versa?