If understanding the meaning is the whole point of this program, DL ought to accept many more solutions in the English translation. I think I use more energie trying to remember the English translation than I use on learning the French. And why do we write so many English sentences anyway. We ought to write more French.
Learning the language is the point of Duolingo, proving you understand the French is the point of translating into English. We do write more French than English in this (at least if listening exercises are turned on). a but the thing is, being writing in a language over than the target one
I am sorry, but I don't understand what you mean here. I am now doing the reverse French, and that is much better. I write French much more than English. I did the listening exercises when I did the French tree, and I'm quite sure I wrote more English than French even with them. I counted. When I refreshed a lesson, I wrote more French. It's the opposite in the reverse tree, so I don't do many refreshing lessons, to avoid writing English most of the time.
Yes, you pretend being French learning English. You just choose French as your own language and English as the language you want to learn. I turned off the sound because I didn't want to hear the English voice. I am here learning French and I found the reverse French much better than the normal French course. I suppose you can do that with most of the languages you are learning, if you get fed up writing English all the time.
This really is idiomatic. Vive qqc, hooray for smthg, no longer bears a strong link with vivre, to live. I'd even say that long live is a little too literal a translation. WordReference proposes Go France!. Note that the verb vive is subjunctive, hence there is a hidden que, that is, Que vive la France, which may be translated as May France live.
I wrote "Horray for France" because that's almost exactly the way we say it in Portuguese, the words look the same, the structure's the same so I assume the meaning must be "horray" too as in Portuguese ("Viva a França").
But Duo doesn't see it this way apparently... :-)
You'd need to know how to translate it if you wanted to explain it's French origin and what it means in that language.
Besides, nothing's more embarrassing than claiming you speak French, someone coming up to you, asking you what an extremely common expression taken over from French into English means, and you standing there unable to give a proper answer.
Don't make of yourself a fool, translate idioms.
(That's my new slogan. )
(..OOH! I just translate it into a subjunctive French expression...)
Good ole subjunctives. From Wiki:
"The subjunctive is an irrealis mood (one that does not refer directly to what is necessarily real) [ ... ] Subjunctives occur most often, although not exclusively, in subordinate clauses, particularly that-clauses."
So in this case, it's not that France is living currently (as "Vivre la France" suggests); the sentence is expressing a desire for France to live. From what I'm gathering, in French, that requires the subjunctive form, requiring 'vive': 'Vive la France' - 'that France may live'.
Not really ... although it can help to think of it that way. Subjunctive mood doesn't require que though verbs that follow it are essentially always going to be in that mood. The true conjugation is without the que but French textbooks have been teaching it that way for some time, it seems. It helps to avoid confusion where forms are similar between subjunctive mood and indicative mood.
Years ago when I (unwillingly) learned Latin, there was something called the 'jussive subjunctive' in which the subjunctive, which normally conveys a sense of uncertainty, actually expresses a command. As French is a Romance language I have always assumed the same applies in this phrase. So there doesn't have to be a 'que' understood. The simple subjunctive here could be translated literally as 'May France live' or 'Let France live'.
There's another famous example of the subjunctive being used in a jussive way: the French form of 'Let them eat cake' which Marie Antoinette (apparently never) said is 'Qu'ils mangent de la brioche'.
I guess (I don't know) that the Que construction is needed to show that it is the jussive subjunctive because the 3rd person plural of manger in the present tense (mangent) is the same in the indicative and subjunctive. Without Que it would simply be a statement that they are eating cake.
No such possible confusion with 'vive la France'. Vive is a purely subjunctive form and its position at the start of the phrase makes it obvious that it's being used as an imperative directed at everyone and no-one. (The use of the normal imperative of 'vivre' -- Vis la France! -- would presumably be an instruction directed towards France, if it meant anything at all).
Countries, like all French nouns, are designated as masculine or feminine. Since France is a feminine country it uses 'la'. One trick to telling whether a country is masculine or feminine is that most countries ending with an 'e' are feminine and all countries not ending with an 'e' are masculine.
Just realised that this can't directly translate to English. In Tagalog language, this is directly translatable to "Mabuhay ang Pransya" so I was able to figure the meaning out.
Haha, how about because it's promoting Life? Which sentences show up in which skill sections are, I believe, sometimes misassigned because they have a word in them that may have more than one meaning or application - one appropriate to the sentence and a different one appropriate to the skill set. I've seen it happen, but, of course, at the moment I can't think of an example.