Tumgik
#french conjugation
er-cryptid · 1 month
Text
Encourager Conjugation
J'encourage = I encourage
Tu encourages = You encourage
Il encourage = He encourages
Elle encourage = She encourages
Nous encourageons = We encourage
Vous encouragez = You encourage
Ils encouragent = They encourage (m)
Elles encouragent = They encourage (f)
.
Patreon
11 notes · View notes
svtskneecaps · 10 months
Text
i find it so cool to notice that like non-native speakers making mistakes in their second language tells you about the grammar and vocab of their native language like that's so cool to me.
like i can only pull up confident examples from french bc i learned that one but like etoiles saying "watch the chests" instead of "look at/in the chests" is because in french i imagine he'd use the verb "regarder" which does translate to "to watch" but also can be used when we in english would say "to look"!!!!!! that's cool!!!!! and sometimes i'll hear the french saying along the lines of "wait me" bc that's the grammar for it in french!!! "attends-moi" is "wait for me" they just don't say "for" it's cool!!!!!! wow!!!!! i fucking love that i think that's so fucking neat bc i know that I MADE that mistake in the other direction, bc on an assignment i wrote "attendez pour moi" bc we say for in english!!!!!!!! and it was wrong!!!! and it's cool!!!!!! it's cool that i can pick up things about other languages even when they're not speaking the other languages!!!!!! wow!!!!!!!!! like when spanish speakers start english sentences with "is" bc that's how it works in spanish!!!!!! that's so cool!!!!!! they don't need "it" in spanish and hearing y'all say that is like wow!!!! i'm learning things about how spanish sentences work even though it's not even in spanish!!!!! holy shit!!!!!!!
i know i've noticed more things from the other languages too but i can't remember any of them now bc my spanish is "69 days on duolingo" and my brazilian portuguese is "meu deus" but if anyone else has noticed please!!!!! tell me!!!!! it's so cool!!!!!!
(as an aside this is not to knock or mock anyone for being bad at a second language i just think it is FUCKING FASCINATING i am giggling i am kicking my feet i think it is so cool it is so fucking dope language and language learning is so cool)
768 notes · View notes
gayvampyr · 1 year
Text
multilingualism poll because im curious
& feel free to specify in the notes which ones!
edit: i meant to write *and, not “or”
948 notes · View notes
sayitalianolearns · 2 months
Text
Diary entry 383 ho visto questo esercizio sui verbi e m'è piaciuto per cui voglio provare con un multilingual post (anche perché i verbi in spagnolo: non pervenuti per me -ma pure in francese ormai... dispersi) ENG - ITA - KOR - FRA - ESP
verb: to eat, mangiare, 먹다, manger, comer
I eat Io mangio 저는 먹어요 Je mange Yo como
I ate Io ho mangiato/mangiai 저는 먹었어요 J'ai mangé/mangeai Yo he comido/comí
I will eat/I am going to eat Io mangerò/sto per mangiare 저는 먹을 거예요 Je mangerai/vais manger Yo comeré/voy a comer
I am eating Io sto mangiando 저는 먹고 있어요 Je suis en train de manger Yo estoy comiendo
I was eating Io stavo mangiando 저는 먹고 있었어요 J'étais en train de manger Yo estaba comiendo
I want to eat Io voglio mangiare 저는 먹고 싶어요 Je veux manger Yo quiero comer
I can eat Io posso mangiare 저는 먹을 수 있어요 Je peux manger Yo puedo comer
I have to eat Io devo mangiare 저는 먹어야 해요 Je dois manger Yo tengo que comer
Tumblr media
32 notes · View notes
olde-scratch · 1 year
Text
would akechi speak multiple languages? cause at this point its basically canon that he soaks up information like a sponge. would he go all out and get dictionaries and textbooks and pronunciation guides or would he be able to learn just from watching shows in the target language?
im asking bc i wanna know if he would memorize every single verb tense in french. 99% of them are unnecessary, useless, needlessly specific, and so similar to like five others. but would akechi be able to use them properly.
135 notes · View notes
coquelicoq · 1 year
Text
the great thing about reading the french dictionary cover to cover is that now whenever someone says a word i don't know i can be like "no spoilers please! i'm still in the A's!!"
115 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
Claude Jade, Domicile conjugal, François Truffaut, 1970.
10 notes · View notes
Text
nothing interesting here it's the exact same scene i just like seeing it
15 notes · View notes
forever70s · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media
Jean-Pierre Léaud in "Domicile Conjugal" (1970)
49 notes · View notes
tara-the-star · 11 days
Text
'voulez-vous coucher avec moi?' cat youre so right
9 notes · View notes
er-cryptid · 1 year
Photo
Tumblr media
31 notes · View notes
svtskneecaps · 5 months
Text
today may be a weird day for this bc i'm HOPING there won't be much of a trash fire in the tag, comparatively, but if discourse, neg, or server happenings get you stressed, pro tip!! THAT MEANS IT'S DUOLINGO TIME!!!!! channel your gamer rage and viewer stress into SICK NASTY LANGUAGE LEARNING
47 notes · View notes
drinkthemlock · 1 month
Text
crawling home from french class after being repeatedly beaten over the head by the passé composé
7 notes · View notes
nouvellecine · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Jean Pierre-Léaud and Claude Jade in Domicile conjugal/ Bed and Board (1970) dir. François Truffaut
11 notes · View notes
carcarrot · 9 months
Text
would you all still love me if i learned french
18 notes · View notes
strixcattus · 4 months
Text
I want to make a list of everything that needs to agree with something in the time travel conlang, just to get my thoughts organized.
The guiding principle here is: Everything that might have cause to agree with something, does so. A Watsonian explanation for this would probably be something like, "there are a lot of ways time distortion could drop information or cause someone to miss it, and they would really like to know whether they're talking about their friend or an evil future version of their friend." The Doylist explanation is absolutely that I think it would be funny and fun and also I've never done any sort of agreement in a conlang before and have a lot to make up for.
The numbers this conlang inflects for are: —Singular (needs no explanation) —Monogender plural (a given group of one gender) —Multigender plural (a given group of multiple genders) —General plural (used for blanket statements that may or may not have exceptions, such as "stars give off heat" or "cats have fur")
The grammatical genders of this conlang are: —Null (always and exclusively used for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th person) —Former (past variant of myself, you, or a familiar 3rd person entity) —Future (future variant as above) —Alternate (alternate-timeline variant with a branch point in the past) —Split (alternate-timeline version of a future variant, with a branch point in the future) —Dopple (they're not a past or future version, our lives are identical, but somehow we exist separately at the same time and I need to gender them somehow)
(The distinction between 3rd and 3.5th person can get complicated. If I'm friends with someone named, say, Alice, and her future self travels back in time to now, then regardless of whom I'm speaking to, Alice is referred to in 3rd person and future-alice as Future 3.5th. If, however... let's say Nikola Tesla. If Tesla were to time-travel to 2023, and I met him, I would refer to him in 3rd person, because he would be the only Tesla I am familiar with and the only Tesla in this time frame.
On the other hand, if my grandfather were to travel through time as a young adult, and we met in the present, I would refer to him in 3.5th person, because I already know my grandfather as someone else. However, if I did the time-travelling, and met my grandfather in the past, I'd refer to him in 3rd person, and the version of him who is my grandfather in 3.5th... unless I happened to bring my present grandfather with me, in which case my present grandfather would be referred to in 3rd person and the past version in 3.5th.
Get it? By default, the native version of a person in the current time frame is referred to in 3rd person and all interlopers in 3.5th... unless they do not exist in that time frame, in which case the one with the greatest familiarity to the speaker is referred to in 3rd and all others in 3.5th, or if the speaker is travelling with the native version of that person to their time frame (or another person native to the same time frame who also knows the person), in which their native version is referred to in 3rd and all others in 3.5th.
As a sidenote: If my young grandfather (3.5th) time-travelled to a point after his death, but within my life, I would be well within my rights to refer to him in 3.5th person, even if he is the only version of himself in the current time. Those who did not know my grandfather at his current age, but met my time-travelling grandfather, would be well within their rights to refer to him in 3rd person and my present-day grandfather in 3.5th (future gender—or alternate, if my present-day grandfather didn't do any time travel in his own life).
(I don't know what you would do if Nikola Tesla showed up in 2023 in his time machine, then took you back in time to meet his self from a few years later in that self's native time. Leave it as exercise for the reader, I guess.)
—Adjectives agree with gender of the nouns they modify, by way of suffixes. If they need to agree with multiple genders, the suffixes are stacked in a set order. They're also inflected for number and for person, because you can expect to have an adjective attached to a 1.5th, 2.5th, 3rd, 3.5th, or 4th person noun/pronoun (e.g. in 1.5th person, "the evil me").
—Adverbs agree with the verbs they modify in terms of objective tense, again by way of a suffix.
—All persons of noun and pronoun that have multiple genders inflect for gender and number.
—Verbs are conjugated first for tense in objective time, then affixes are attached (these can be prefixes or suffixes) which encode person, gender (if applicable), and subjective tense for the subject and object. The positioning of these affixes is fluid, but they each point towards the nouns they're agreeing with.
—"No tense" is a valid objective tense for a verb whose objective tense is unknown, but whose subjective tense is known. For instance, if I know I'm going to mail you a letter, but I'm not sure when in time I'll be when I do so, I can refuse to inflect the verb for tense.
—A particle (which may act as an adjective or an adverb) can be constructed to indicate objective and/or subjective time for something not normally indicated. For instance, it might be attached to the noun "his texts" to indicate that the texts have not been written yet, or that whoever "he" is hasn't written them yet, but the texts themselves exist already, or to a verb to indicate that some third party (with which it agrees in number, gender, and person) has already experienced an event which is in the future for all other players in the sentence.
Verb objective tense conjugations tend to indicate the subject's person in some way. Some objective tenses lump 1st person with 1.5th person and so on, and others distinguish between them. I haven't decided yet, but this may be dependent on the base form of the verb. Like French! But worse.
11 notes · View notes