It is perfectly OK to say he works at court. As...he is at court, he is in court.
"Courthouse" would be "palais de justice". "Tribunal" refers to the system, concept, or jurisdiction, not the physical building. There's a similar difference in English. "He needs to appear in court" is said rather than "in/at the courthouse". The implications are different as well. "He works for the court" could mean a judge or lawyer, but not a janitor. "He works for the courthouse", could certainly mean a janitor but less likely a judge.
Larousse and WordReference both seem to feel that un tribunal could be either a court or a courthouse.
"He works at the courthouse" is now accepted, btw.
What's wrong with "He works in court"? I had it corrected to "He works in THE court". I understand the article is included in the "au", but is that really the sense of the French; that we are specifying a particular court?
since "au" = (en+ le/la) you have to use the article THE. "au" = "at the" here.
No you don't. The direct translation is not always the correct one. If it were that easy, we could all just use Google Translate and it would work perfectly - haha!
A 'tribunal' in UK is an event, a hearing of evidence. One appears as a witness at a tribunal, or one works on a tribunal. However, one does work at a court, which can be a building.
Why is the feminine "travaille" used here instead of the masculine "travail"... after all, "il" indicates that the subject is masculine so shouldn't the verb be masculine as well?
Thanks. Yes I do know that now but at the time the "lle" had confused me since it can indicate that an adjective is feminine.
Dl refused to accept at the courts. Courts is one of those words that like the baths is always plural in UK English unless you mean the royal court