I heard "C'est grande poche" but that can't be as it is lacking the article (+ noun/adjective order is reversed): "C'est une poche grande"
Me, too. Tant pis. Burned by the grammar of what I typed/heard: "c'est grande poche." That sounds just like the correct answer, "Ses grandes poches," but I, too, failed to note that my sentence lacked a necessary une or la.
I think that "c'est", "ces" and "ses" are all pronounced the same, but "ce" is pronounced differently.
No. The 'e' in 'ce' sounds like the one in 'je'. It's rounded. In 'ses', 'ces' and 'les', however, the 'e' isn't rounded. 'Ses' and 'ces' sound the same, btw
There are at least 6 spellings for that pronunciation.
Though S's can change to sound like Z's in certain circumstances
C'est and ses sound very similar. How do you tell which one is which?????
I don't think you can tell the difference.. It seems as the top commenters (now) that it would have an "un, une, la or le" if it were supposed to be "C'est (une) grande poche.."
Good question, from perspective that colloquial English speakers often use "their" as a gender-avoidance alternative to "his" or "her." If I had to guess, Duolingo wants to make sure that we know the difference between the singular and plural possessives. So you should be glad to know that you could translate as "his big pockets" or as "her big pockets," and both would be equally correct. While my guess is that Duolingo only wants "their big pockets" in response to "leurs grandes poches."
Because "poche" means "pocket". Only in some parts of France do some people use "poche" to refer to a paper or plastic bag.
well why does duolingo have it as a translation if you check what the (new to me) word means...
mn but I meant in the sense of a singular gender neutral pronoun.
For example: 'Doctor, the patient is waiting outside' 'Well let them in'
still singular, but just without gender
That is an accepted use of the so-called singular "they". But there is no reason to apply it here.
See, here's what I understand..... on another comment, I saw that someone had asked what the difference was between 'grande' and 'grosse' and someone else had answered that 'grande means 'long' , so, does that mean that this person's pocket is long? or could they have used the word 'grosses' instead????
There are several words in French which are translated as "big" but they carry different connotations:
- grand(e) : "big" or "tall" (in reference to a person). It can also mean great or grand in an appropriate context and can change meaning when placed before or after the noun it modifies.
- large : "big" in the sense of wide or broad; it is not used to describe a person
- gros(se) : means big or large (in volume), broad, fat
"une poche" is a plastic or paper bag in the south of France. Others use "un sachet" or "un sac (en papier/plastic".
How can it be known if "see grandees poches" means "his big pockets" or "her big pockets"?
from context. otherwise you would not know, and both should be correct.
In any other cases before I used to know how to distinguish the plural from singular in speaking. But in this case I don't bloody know how to know (in speaking) is it: "her/his big pocket", or "her/his big pockets". Anyone to explain?
In French, the possessive adjective takes the form (agrees with) the gender and number of the thing possessed, not the thing/person possessing, i.e., sa grande poche = his/her/its big pocket. Ses grandes poches = his/her/its big pockets.
Ses grandes poches : His big pockets , ,,, Her pockets are big ? ? !! why not this one/translation,,, am i missing something ? Thank you :) <3
From the plural "ses grandes poches", you cannot know the gender of the thing possessing those big pockets without context (which we don't have here). So it could be either "his big pockets" or "her big pockets". But not "his/her pockets are big. That is a different expression. Ses poches sont grandes.
could you translate this as his/her deep pockets. in english there is an idiom to have deep pockets is to a have a lot of money but also willing to spend it when necessary, rather than a miser keeping hold of it all.
deep = profond(e)(s).
to have deep pockets = avoir les poches profondes.
Are you saying that "avoir les poches profondes" is a French idiom meaning the same thing as the American idiom, "he has deep pockets" or are you just giving us a literal translation?
I gave you the literal translation that some French people speaking English use with the same meaning. But I am not sure that French people who don't speak English may immediately understand it.
We usually describe people with deep pockets as "il est riche comme Crésus", "il est plein aux as", "il a les moyens", "il a de la thune", "il est blindé"...
"son, sa and ses" are possessive adjectives. Like all adjectives, they agree in gender and number with the noun they modify.
his/her/its pocket = sa poche: "une poche" is feminine
his/her/its coat = son manteau: "un manteau" is masculine
his/her/its gloves and socks = ses gants (masculine plural) et ses chaussettes (feminine plural)
I used 'Their', the system corrected me as 'Her' and here I see 'His' and when I click on 'Ses' I get 'Her, His, Its'. WHICH? How do we know which to use, please, if the gender of the object is unrelated to the gender of its owner?
"son, sa, ses" is the translation for "his" or "her" or "its". So you can't know the nature or gender of the owner.
"son" is used of the possession is masculine and singular, "sa" if it is feminine and singular and "ses" if it is plural. "son" is also used if the possession is feminine and starts with a vowel sound, to avoid the vowel sound conflict.
Translating "son, sa or ses" to "their" is not an option here, since all sentences have to translate both ways and "their" would back translate to "leur, leurs".
In English, "their" can also be used when referring to a singular person whose gender is either not known or not important. This sentence is, in fact, a sentence fragment and so there's no way of knowing who or what it is referring to. If it were referring to "Someone who has their hands in their big pockets" then those "their"s would not (I don't think) translate to "leur" because the antecedent was a singular person and not multiple people.
In cases like this where no antecedent is present singular "their" should be accepted.
This is exactly the reason why we don't accept "their" as a translation for "son, sa, ses". As soon as possible, you have to "think French", then you won't be tempted to translate from English to French, which is a recipe for errors.
So then do you agree that it is a possible translation but that Duolingo just doesn't accept it?
This is a sentence (fragment) that's being translated from French to English and not the other way around but even in that case "their big pockets" could (I think) translate to either "leurs grandes poches" or "ses grandes poches" because there would be no indication of whether "their" was referring to a person or to people.
I don't see what "thinking in French" has to do with anything here. If thinking in French is the goal (and I agree that it should be) then there should be fewer sentence fragments like this one and more complete/complicated sentences which demonstrate more of the language.
This sentence fragment is just confusing, especially when proper English translations are dismissed as "not French enough" (or whatever).
"Son, sa and ses" are a clear indication that the owner is a single person, animal or thing.
The English "their" is possible in context, for instance when you use "anyone" or "someone" as a subject, like "someone has money in their big pockets".
Otherwise, there is nothing preventing you from translating "son, sa, ses" to "his, her, its".
Would "Ses grandes poches." be a correct response to:
"Où est-ce que cette personne a son argent?"
Or is there something wrong with this?
This is correct, yet I would add "dans" before the answer "ses grandes poches".
I thought that He has big pockets would make sense/be similar to his big pockets. is it just me?
the French version is a fragment and you translated it to a sentence:
he has big pockets = il a de grandes poches (with a verb)
his/her/its big pockets = ses grandes poches (no verb)
What about "ces poches?" That is what I thought it was. Isn't that a possible correct usage?
"Ses" (his/her/its) and "ces" (these/those) are homophones, so without context and in dictation, you cannot know which it is.
The system cannot accept a sentence which is not listed as a correct translation for the original written sentence. To have homophones accepted, we need to report them to the developers who then apply a specific filter to the dictation exercise and in the meantime, we disable the "type what you hear" exercise.
Why is this "His big pockets"? Wouldn't that be "Ses grands pochs". Isn't "Her big pockets": "Ses grandes poches"? How would I say "Her big pockets"
"Une poche" is a feminine noun, whatever happens, and all determiners and adjectives related to this noun have to agree in feminine: "une/la/sa/cette grande poche".
"Ses" translates to "his, her or its" when the object possessed is in plural, masculine or feminine.
Therefore "ses grandes poches" can translate to "his/her/its big pockets". All three versions are accepted.
"Ses" can also mean "It's" for this sentence, but not according to duo. Come on Duo, be consistent with probable answers please.
No, sorry, "ses" never means "it's" because "it's" is the contraction of "it is".
The possessive "its" is accepted as a translation for "ses" in this sentence.