CE QUI/QUE VS QUI/QUE.This question is not re the use of qui(subject) vs que(object) in relative clauses.
It is the concept as the lesson stated of "If it refers to the whole part of the sentence, the whole idea, then it will be ce que/ce qui."
The examples in the lesson are pretty straightforward.
But does the grammar rule "If it refers to a noun (expressed before), then you will use que/qui...TRUMP the 'concept' guidance.
In the sentence,"the oil,which was supposed to burn for a day, burned for eight days. ** Note the commas please **. The 'which' clause is not really further describing the oil. It is not similar to "the oil which(that) I used". It is pertinent to the entire miraculous situation/idea . What was incredible was that the oil burned for eight days.. nothing about the OIL itself was incredible.
Even in writing this question, the thought process gets tangled up between grammar rules and context. And here the context seem to defy the grammar rules.
"X loves his mum". aime is right and aime beaucoup isn't. Why? Your explanation doesn't make a distinction. How the hell is aime beaucoup wrong?"
Why is "de" necessary before "l'or" in this sentence since we're speaking of gold in a general sense?
Also, the prompt asked for "At night" but my translation "La nuit" was corrected to "Le soir". Shouldn't this be for "In the evening"? Thank you for your help!
Est-ce que créer un verbe transitif? (to create something)
Pourquoi y a-t-il un "de" apres "créer" dans la phrase?
Im wondering what the d represents in d'être. Also, to 'be late' is it always 'metre en retard' or can I say "je suis en retard"
Merci!
This strikes me as strange phrase. Can you explain a little how the parts semantically make up the whole? Thanks!
This question is not re the use of qui(subject) vs que(object) in relative clauses.
It is the concept as the lesson stated of "If it refers to the whole part of the sentence, the whole idea, then it will be ce que/ce qui."
The examples in the lesson are pretty straightforward.
But does the grammar rule "If it refers to a noun (expressed before), then you will use que/qui...TRUMP the 'concept' guidance.
In the sentence,"the oil,which was supposed to burn for a day, burned for eight days. ** Note the commas please **. The 'which' clause is not really further describing the oil. It is not similar to "the oil which(that) I used". It is pertinent to the entire miraculous situation/idea . What was incredible was that the oil burned for eight days.. nothing about the OIL itself was incredible.
Even in writing this question, the thought process gets tangled up between grammar rules and context. And here the context seem to defy the grammar rules.
Whereas partitive articles du, de la, de l', des and indefinite articles un, une become de or d' in negative sentences [See Du, de la, de l', des all become de or d' in negative sentences (partitive articles) and Un, une become de or d' in negative sentences (indefinite articles)], this rule doesn't apply to definite articles le, la, l' or les which remain the same in negative sentences
Find your French level for FREE
Test your French to the CEFR standard
Find your French level