If you just say 'de' isn't that like saying "the hat of boy is black'? 'Du' is 'of the'...so you are saying 'the hat OF THE boy is black'. At least that's what I'm thinking.
Yes! we can say le chapeau de le garçon = le chapeau du garçon "du" = de le (it's its contraction)
'Du' is used when someone or something uncomfortable. Here only one boy then how it's du
It's just pulling dictionary definitions. Generally, if cap is meant, casquette will be used.
because "cap" is not the same as "hat". some people might think that you are referring to a lid of a jar for instanse
I am wondering why "The hat of the boy's is black" is incorrect. Is it because the possessive follows "of the", despite the translation having the boy be possessive?
In English: The double possessive construction [... is] extremely helpful, for instance, in distinguishing between "a picture of my father" (in which we see the old man) and "a picture of my father's" (which he owns). http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/possessives.htm
I don't think English needs the double possessive here; either "of the" or "boy's" will serve. And certainly there's only one possessive in the French.
De+le=du So you can say ( le chapeau de le garçon) or ( le chapeau du garçon) They arz all correct :-):-):-)♥♥♥♥♡♥
Only one boys here then how we can use plural artical it sould be un or le
I read this as "the hat of the boy is black". Is this a correct literal translation, but one of those things you'd understand to be different?
That is the correct translation, but if you were to switch some words around but keep the same meaning, it would be "The boy's hat is black"
Ok I need help here..... I thought "du de" was "some". Here used before garçon is some boy???
The most literal translation for du/des is "of the". So "le chapeau du garçon" meaning "the hat of the boy" is the literal case. Sometimes we translate this as some, e.g. "je suis du riz" means "I have of the rice" where you imagine "the rice" refers to all the rice in existence, but in English this is better rendered as "I have some of the rice" or just "I have some rice".
Correct, "J'ai du riz." The main difference of am and have is that am refers that you are something as in a permanent characteristic of you and have is a possession or a transient being meaning you only have something for a period of time. You aren't rice so it would be "J'ai du riz" instead of "Je suis riz."
Noir - Masculine nouns (My cat is black - Mon chat est noir) Noire - Feminine nouns (My skirt is black - Ma jupe est noire)
the French concept of gender is very different from English, very unnecessarily complex! even non living objects can be considered as female without any particular logic, so the adjectives get an extra e at the end to make them pointlessly look feminine even though it will never be pronounced which adds to even more irrational complexity!
Although "on the boy" is not really incorrect, that's not what the sentence translates to. "du" means "of the" here, so the sentence should be either "the boy's hat" or "the hat of the boy". However, the former is better and sounds more natural.
The boy has a black hat - Le garçon a un chapeau noir
The boy's hat is black - Le chapeau du garçon est noir
No, they each have their own word in French. Le chapeau = 'The hat', and la casquette = 'The cap'.
i typed in "the boys hat is black" and it said it was incorrect. i understand their was incorrect grammar, but does it really have to be that picky?
I don understand I mean I would if chapeau and garcon changed. Le chapeau du garçon est noir. Because what i got was, the hat's boy was gloomy. Please, i need some help on this.
the English word "cap" was etymologically originated from French chapeau, so why is DL not accepting cap as an alternative answer?
Consistently, the recording time is too short - about 1/2 second. Is there any option to afford more time? Even when I am ready and begin speaking immediately, I rarely finish before I am marked 'wrong'
I don't get it. I answered " the boys hat is black " and that is counted as wrong.