Calling all AP French Language Students

<p>Mike:
hmm.. I don't think I'm embarrassed. I just don't know what to say.
Your posts are really helpful! Thanks! I'll try some of your techniques!</p>

<p>skierdude:
Some subjunctive phrases I've learned are:
Il est necessaire que
Il est possible que
Il est impossible que
Il est essentiel que
These need two subjects though.</p>

<p>and some conjunctions w/ subj.
bien que
jusqu'a ce que
pourvu que</p>

<p>i think for si-clauses, it can follow this pattern
Si+imparfait+ conditionel
i.e. si j'etais toi, je mangerais le petit dejeuner avant de sortir. hmm does that make sense?
anyways, I always forget to use these phrases because I get nervous.</p>

<p>Hi Skier,</p>

<p>Actually, I'm kind of afraid to :) . My knowledge of French went from "pretty good" to "working" a long time ago, and I don't want to give you anything that isn't correct. I communicate with a Belgian friend and several other Francophone people, and I've travelled to France two or three times, so I can definitely communicate fine. But I've let my knowledge of the finer points go by the wayside, I think.</p>

<p>I'll tell you what I remember, though, and it should be enough to build up some ideas. I recall thinking it was a good idea to combine the subjunctive with the cardinal irregular verbs--two birds with one stone. The phrase "pour que je puisse + [infinitive]" sticks in my mind, and so does "il faut que ca soit [adjective]". But those could both be entirely WRONG. Really. In fact, it's probable :) So don't take those without checking them out. In my old French 5 textbook, there were a couple of pages with subjunctive expressions to memorize. You probably have something similar. I'd start there--pick like five of them, pair them with flexible verbs like "avoir," "etre," "faire," and "aller," and you're good to go.</p>

<p>As for the si clauses, I have a sort of "feeling" for them that I suspect may be largely correct, but I don't want to steer you wrong. If you can give me a specific example you're having problems with I can probably advise you, but I can't think of any particularly good ones off the top of my head at the moment.</p>

<p>One more thing, though, that might help with your French grammar in general: English grammar is largely derivative of French grammar (the major difference is that English doesn't normally have preceding objects, but English speakers DO understand what you mean if you use them, which further demonstrates that the idea isn't completely foreign to the English-speaking mind). So when you get lost, think about a good English sentence.</p>

<p>In fact, this type of thing actually came up in a Writing thread today. Proper English usage of "if" with the subjunctive is something like: "If I had seen it, I would have acted differently." Unfortunately for them, many modern speakers would say "If I <em>would have</em> seen it, I would have acted differently." This usage is widespread, but not popular enough to be correct yet. (Note while I'm thinking of it--a lot of teachers say English has no subjunctive. This isn't true. It can get confusing, though, because the English subjunctive is identical to the past tense in most instances. But leave that alone for now.) In French, if you translate almost directly from the proper English formulation above, you get "Si je l'avais vu, j'aurais fait quelquechose d'autre." (At least, I <em>think</em> that's what you'd say in French. Like I said, I'm rusty. At any rate, if you said that, you'd be understood.) But if you say, in French, "Si je l'aurais vu, j'aurais fait quelquechose d'autre," I'm pretty sure you'd be wrong. Much more wrong than you'd be if you said the English sentence. But check with your teacher. At any rate, what I'm trying to get at is that the modern English usage is departing from the previously established English/French usage; if you're one of those English speakers who uses the incorrect "if i would have," then it might be harder to teach yourself to use the "correct" French construction. At any rate, just a thought--if you look for analogs between French grammar and English, you'll see a lot of them, and that always helped me.</p>

<p>Sorry I can't give you any more specific ideas, but I think if you consult the sources I mentioned above you'll have plenty of your own.</p>

<p>Also, if your teacher is native, ask her for some pronunciation help. A little goes a LONG, LONG way. Work especially on the "euhhh" sound at the end of "je," the high-pitched "oo" in past participles like "vu" and "su," and the nasalized vowels like in "en" and "pain." If you want I can give some pretty detailed, mechanical advice that you should be able to follow to get good pronunciation results, but if you're not familiar with learning accents like that, nothing beats hearing a native speaker. (Course, if your pronunciation is already good, ignore all this.)</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>ps I apologize for the disjointed and rambling nature of these posts--I'm typing pretty fast and I can't organize my thoughts very well at the moment.</p>

<p>Hi guys,</p>

<p>It took me so long to write I missed m2's post. I think all those suggestions are solid, and fit with what I remember. And you're right for the si clauses--you can start with that basic framework, and then change it if you want (it's kind of like algebra--what you do to one clause has to be done to the other). So if you start with</p>

<p>si + imperfect, conditional</p>

<p>you can put them both "in the past" by changing it to</p>

<p>si + past imperfect, past conditional (or whatever those conjugations are called)</p>

<p>Also, don't forget that a lot of "stock" subjunctive phrases can be modified to avoid the subjunctive, which is also useful. For example, instead of "il faut qu'il soit intelligent," you can say "il faut etre intelligent." In context, it'll usually work.</p>

<p>m</p>

<p>awesome, thanks a ton!</p>

<p>And that French 5 textbook you speak of... my class has no textbook.
We're considered to be the "elite" french speakers in my school and our teacher is under the illusion that we're all pretty close to profficient in French yet i make ridiculous mistakes and have no clue of when I should use the tenses....</p>

<p>Here is my understanding of tenses:</p>

<p>Conditionelle:
Could he do well on that exam?</p>

<p>Imperfect:
I had been doing well on that exam until my teacher yelled "time!"</p>

<p>Future:</p>

<p>I will do well on that exam</p>

<p>Is it something like that?
I'm just not really sure on when to use conditional vs imperfect</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>I'm in AP Spanish, but I can tell you, your grasp of tenses seems to be correct. I have to learn this stuff too :(</p>

<p>I think conditional is what "could or would happen" but didn't happen yet, while imparfait is just something that happened in the past that was repeated or habitual, or state of being.</p>

<p>i.e. Si j'avais su, j'aurais etudie pour mon examen.
If I had known, I would have studied for my test.
(Si+plus-que-parfait+passe conditional)</p>

<p>l'annee derniere, j'etudiais souvent pour mes examens.
Last year, I was often studying for my exams. hmm this example may be kinda off.
(imparfait)</p>

<p>eh..i don't think posting 2 sentences would be that much of a problem as ppl post questions here all the time to get answers.</p>

<p>L'arbre sous ____ nous etions accroupis nous protegeait _____ la pluie qui commencait _____ tomber. Nous savions que ce n'etait pas l'endriot ideal _____ cas d'orage, mais...</p>

<p>you fill in the blanks. NO VERBS, and only ONE word is allowed. I don't believe adjectives nor averbs are allowed.</p>

<p>OOOOOHHHHHH. Prepositions. Somehow I totally forgot about them :)</p>

<p>These actually aren't that bad. Again, this is a place where you want to think in terms of what the English would be.</p>

<p>the answers here should be lequel, de, a', en. Hope that's right--might not be.</p>

<p>At any rate, here's how I think of it. You're not supposed to do it this way, and I wouldn't EVER recommend learning a language like this cuz it doesn't work, but . . .</p>

<p>For purposes of the French AP, translate the whole thing into English in your head.</p>

<p>(I'm making up a definition of "accroupir" cuz I never heard it, si if i'm wrong i apologize:)</p>

<p>The tree under ____ we were crouching was protecting us _____ the rain that was starting _____ fall. We knew it wasn't an ideal place ____ case of a thunderstorm, but . . .</p>

<p>Then it kind of has to be: which, from, to, in</p>

<p>Then you just translate back, thinking in terms of a few precepts of French. "Which" is the trickiest one here, but if you know your pronouns then "lequel" should be easy enough. Then you get the others following the same process.</p>

<p>Does that make sense? Sorry if the explanation is disjointed--I just crammed for and took a 4-hour test and my brain is minimally responsive.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>ok cool, when do you use "sur"?</p>

<p>also, from the barrons:
"Pour Cyrano de Bergerac, Rostand va s'inspirer d'un ______ ses maitres d'ecole ____ long nez. ____ ce soit sur les plances ou _____ les cameras de cinema et de television, le role titre de Cyrano a insipire les plus grands comediens francais de Claude Dauphin ____ Gerard Depardieu. Apres plus ____ un siecle ____ succes, Cyrano demeure dans le coeur ____ francais leur heros litteraire favori devancant d'Artagnan et jean Valjean."</p>

<p>When I did it in class, I DID NOT GET ANY OF THE ANSWERS :\ I really need help in these as the last one i gave you was one of the easier ones.
1.de
2.au
3.que
4.de
5.a
6.d'
7.de
8.des</p>

<p>L'arbre sous ____ nous etions accroupis nous protegeait _____ la pluie qui commencait _____ tomber. Nous savions que ce n'etait pas l'endriot ideal _____ cas d'orage, mais...</p>

<p>lequel
de</p>

<p>lequel, de, a', en vs. lequel, de, </p>

<p>I'm pretty sure that (s)he was right and it's en, not pour.</p>

<p>You got it.</p>

<p>Actually, there might be a better way to think of it. Don't think of "pour" as <em>meaning</em> anything. It means "pour," and that's it. French isn't just a code for English, even though there are many cases where you can translate word-for-word; French is a language unto itself. So it's better to think like this: "Wherever 'pour' appears in French, the following words might appear in the English translation . . ." This is a subtle difference, but it's an important one. If you try to think of "pour" as meaning something definite in English, it'll be harder to go back and forth between the two languages.</p>

<p>At any rate--</p>

<p>For en versus pour, I think it's "en," because "en cas de" is a common construction that means "in case of". But hey, I dunno. Does your source book not include solutions?</p>

<p>For the second one you posted, are those answers right, wrong, or mixed?</p>

<p>m</p>

<p>I think they're right as i wrote them down all in red. Nope, it's a classroom book and doesn't have solutions. </p>

<p>ok..what about "sur"? I know it's like "on" but in some cases people put it in their sentences when I think some other words were more suitable.</p>

<p>What is the difference between mal and mauvais and bon and bien?</p>

<p>For sur, I <em>think</em> it only means "on." But be careful, because there's another word "sur" (with a circumflex) that means "sure" in English. Can you give an example of a phrase somebody used that seemed weird to you?</p>

<p>The difference between mal/mauvais and bien/bon is that the first words in the pairs are adverbs and the second words in the pairs are adjectives. Adjectives describe nouns, and adverbs describe verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.</p>

<p>Does that help? I can explain more in a little bit if I need to.</p>

<p>m</p>

<p>Can't think of one on the top of my head. Also when do you use "de le" instead of "de" or "le" or "du"?</p>

<p>That's one of my problems with the answers up there. You <em>can</em> say "de le" in limited cases, but the instance up there ("de les") is not one of them.</p>

<p>You can use it in a sentence like "Il est strictement interdit de le reproduire," because here, the "le" is not an article, it's a pronoun. (The English sentence is "It's strictly forbidden to reproduce it.")</p>

<p>But up there, the "les" is definitely an article modifying "cameras," so "de les" would have to be "des."</p>

<p>That means there's a different preposition that should go with "les cameras." I'm not sure what it is. I ran a few things through google and I didn't find anything I liked, but if I were taking the test I think I'd write "sur les cameras." THAT'S PROBABLY WRONG. It's just what I'd write.</p>

<p>What about not with pronouns and using "de le" because I've asked a friend after seeing it marked like that on a test and she said there were several instances that "de le" is used instead of "du".</p>

<p>I don't know--I've never heard "de le" where "du" should be, but maybe that's becoming current usage? Still, the AP has always lagged behind the languages it tests, so I doubt they'd change that fast.</p>

<p>Which test was this marked on? I don't want to sound out-of-line, but without knowing more, I'd say my inclination is that your friend was wrong. As far as I'm aware, "de le" only exists in sentences like the one I mentioned above, where "de" is the end of a verbal phrase, le is a pronoun, and there's an infinitive afterwards.</p>

<p>Do you have an example sentence you could cite? And who graded the test you mentioned?</p>

<p>Mike</p>