60 Comments
You are not wrong because it might mean the same. However, this sentence is meant to teach you how to match the English construction "to be going to + infinitive" with the French one "aller" + infinitive.
That means "to be on the verge of doing something" = "être sur le point de faire quelque chose".
It expresses an immediate future.
I think that if a French person would mean "you go to eat chocolate?", he/she would say: "vous allez là-bas pour manger du chocolat ?".
Wow, that is super interesting that such an idiomatic way to express the future would be found to be the same in both English and French. Do you know of any historical linguistic connection, like maybe English got it from French?
Many western languages use the present tense of verb "to go" - as an auxiliary verb - followed by an infinitive verb. English: "I am going to talk"; French: "Je vais parler"; Spanish: "Yo voy a hablar"; Portuguese: "Eu vou falar". English is a little bit different because it uses gerund, but it's still present tense.
That is very likely a possibility since the French Normans conquered England in 1066. That's why there are so many French-based words in English today.
Interesting. I always thought that future tense form was an English 'oddity', thanks.
I'd say that 'you go to eat' is questionable English. One could say 'you go and eat...' (two instructions - go and eat), 'you are going to eat...' (will happen soon) or 'you went to eat...' (it has happened)
"You are" is sometimes perfectly fine English, particularly if it's a matter of surprise or clarification. A: "I'm going to eat chocolate" B: "You are going to eat chocolate? (Really? Did I hear that correctly?)" If you had instead replied "Are you..." it would come across that you didn't even hear them at all!
Agree; so if it's a proper question - invert, if you are expressing your surprise - not so necessary to invert.
the difference is though that in French, lack of inversion is much more common; VERY rare en anglais :)
I really like this site, but....come on! It's very annoying sometimes! In other situation like this one I had put "to + verb" and was wrong. Now I didn't used "to" and was wrong too. And "You are going to eat chocolate?"? Is this correct? Starting a question with "You are"??? English is not my first language and I am not fluent on it, but I never learned something like this.
That's perfectly fine English, particularly if it's a matter of surprise or clarification. A: "I'm going to eat chocolate" B: "You are going to eat chocolate? (Really? Did I hear that correctly?)"
I'm not sure what other situations you're talking about but I'm guessing it was incorrect before because you tried to translate something that wasn't infinitive as an infinitive. Here there is an infinitive (manger) and so "to" is correct.
the format proposed here is the one that people use in usual conversations, rather than the formal "allez-vous... ?"
Yes, du is the contraction of de+le. But that means "a certain quantity of", that in English translates in (some) chocolate.
article partitif : (du (+ noun mas), de la (+ noun fem), de l' (+ noun mas/fem)
That's unfair. How are supposed to detect the plural forms when we weren't taught them yet?
I get the impression that as things ramp up at higher levels, losing hearts is part of the learning process. But you should also be drowning in lingots to spend on new hearts.
1746
I presume you got the audio version since you mentioned detecting the plural form. If so, you would hear "vous allez". It sounds different than "Tu va". If you do not know how to conjugate the present indicative tense of at least a few simple verbs to start with, être, avoir, aller, manger, then it's time to learn. Click here: an adventure awaits you. http://www.conjugation-fr.com/conjugate.php?verb=aller
Why is "do you go to eat chocolate?" wrong? Technically it should be right, right? Or am I missing something?
I wrote the same. English is not my native language, so it might be that this form is never used in an English sentence, and that's why it's marked as wrong. So I learn French and a bit of English here, then :D
That's pretty much it. You would have to search far and wide, I imagine, to find an English speaker who would say it this way.
- 385
So, what is the difference between: "Vous allez manger du chocolat?" and "Vous mangerez du chocolat?"...? please =)
it's the same difference as: "Are you gonna eat chocolate?" and "Will you eat chocolate?"
In this case, the English is in the relaxed form, so the French should be as well...
Dear Anna, I appreciate that and I suggest as a side comment that both in English and French, we can ask fake questions, when we are puzzled, surprised, bewildered.... Then we can use a statement form, together with an intonation which can be both interrogative and exclamative.
Like:
- What? You are going to eat chocolate? I just can't believe it!
- Quoi ? Tu vas manger du chocolat ? Je ne peux pas le croire !
Now, you may tell me that the use of a question mark might be highly debatable...
you are going to...? = vous allez/tu vas... ? (relaxed)
are you going to...? = allez-vous/vas-tu... ? (formal/standard)
Dear Sitesurf, all I'm saying that in English (relaxed or not) we don't use 'you are going to' if we mean it as a question. Exclamation - yes. Statement - yes. A question needs an inversion, i.e. Are you going to...
I understand that your examples are to illustrate the situation in French, where it's possible to indicate that fact that we are asking a question purely with our intonation, without changing the word order.
It's perfectly possible to ask a question in English "purely with our intonation, without changing word order."
"mangé" and "manger" are pronounced alike.
But "mangé" is the past participle which is exclusively used after an auxiliary: j'ai mangé (I have eaten) or il est mangé (it is eaten)
Is it necessary to put a space between the last word and the question mark/exclamation point?
i.e., "Vous allez manger du chocolat ?" as opposed to "Vous allez manger du chocolat?"
Yes, and the same rule applies to other punctuation signs:
- mot : mot
- mot ; mot
- mot !
- « mot »
It's a question, so we have to do "Are you going to eat chocolate?" or "Will you eat chocolate?".
- 1309
How important is "are" when the context is the same in my answer "You going to eat chocolate?" I received an incorrect?
In French, especially in speech, you can ask questions built as statements with your voice raising on the last syllable. Like: What? you're eating chocolate?!
How about "are you going to eat any chocolate?" (That's a rejected answer.) Doesn't "any" mean the same thing as "some" here?
