Rule to form Le Subjonctif PrésentIf you say the stem has to be the stem of the infinitive, then yes, you'll find lots of irregular verbs. But there's a much better rule, and I'd say the few verbs that don't follow it could be called irregular in the Subjonctif Présent.
- je/tu/il/elle/on/ils/elles: the stem is the Indicatif Présent third person plural, minus -ent
- nous/vous: the stem is the Indicatif Présent second/third first plural, minus -ons
Examples:
aimer -> ils aiment -> aim-
venir -> ils viennent -> vienn-
tenir -> ils tiennent -> tienn-
prendre -> ils prennent -> prenn-
...
There are not that many exceptions to this rule. Some important ones:
- avoir -> aie/aies/ait/ayons/ayez/aient
- être -> soi- (turns into soyons/soyez making ii into y)
- faire -> fass-
- pouvoir -> puiss-
- savoir -> sach-
- aller -> aill- / all-
- valoir -> vaill- / val-
- vouloir -> veuill- / voul-
NOTE: where there are two stems, the second one is for nous/vous, the first one is for all others.
hi. is there a subtle difference between the words 'pétantes' and 'pile'? Should you use one in certain circumstances?
If you say the stem has to be the stem of the infinitive, then yes, you'll find lots of irregular verbs. But there's a much better rule, and I'd say the few verbs that don't follow it could be called irregular in the Subjonctif Présent.
- je/tu/il/elle/on/ils/elles: the stem is the Indicatif Présent third person plural, minus -ent
- nous/vous: the stem is the Indicatif Présent second/third first plural, minus -ons
Examples:
aimer -> ils aiment -> aim-
venir -> ils viennent -> vienn-
tenir -> ils tiennent -> tienn-
prendre -> ils prennent -> prenn-
...
There are not that many exceptions to this rule. Some important ones:
- avoir -> aie/aies/ait/ayons/ayez/aient- être -> soi- (turns into soyons/soyez making ii into y)
- faire -> fass-
- pouvoir -> puiss-
- savoir -> sach-
- aller -> aill- / all-
- valoir -> vaill- / val-
- vouloir -> veuill- / voul-
NOTE: where there are two stems, the second one is for nous/vous, the first one is for all others.
Les deux loup garous regardèrent l´un l´autre longtemps, avant d'attaquer !
Why is this answer wrong? I understand we can use "se regarder", which is the accepted answer, but I don't understand why this other option is not accepted (it's from a dropdown where options both were present).
Just curious...
Are there realistic examples with verb-y-en?
Is it valid (or possible) to have three pronouns in a row?
The suggested answer is "nos", and my answer "ses" was marked wrong. I understand the underlying rule. However, in this case it feels really odd to say "chacun nos provisions"... Is this really natural in French? Is "chacun ses provisions" really wrong in this particular phrase?
There are a couple of examples where it says "aller faire les ...". Is this really needed, or at least natural in French? Would it make a difference to say "Je dois faire les courses", or "J'ai besoin de faire les courses"?
In all your examples, the two subjects are different. But what happens when they are the same? Can you just use the infintive?
For example
Unless I want to buy something, I only need my house key.
À moins que JE veuille acheter quelque chose, JE n'ai besoin que de ma clé de maison.
À moins de vouloir acheter quelque chose, je n'ai besoin que de ma clé de maison.
Quelle est la différence entre très, vraiment, vachement, terriblement?
Find your French level for FREE
Test your French to the CEFR standard
Find your French level