"C'est très peu efficace."

Translation:It is very inefficient.

6 years ago

36 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/Peregrine405

I used Learn! It's not very effective!

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/acid.h

Duolingo used HEARTKILL. It's SUPER EFFECTIVE!

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/fradway

j'utilise apprendre! C'est très peu efficace. I came here looking for a pokémon joke and I found one. Have a linot.

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/henrylee1202

me too ><

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Eser

Folks I suspect this is a mistranslation. This is very little effective/efficient doesn't make sense in english. You could say "it has very little effect" or "it's not very efficient" in the negative. But "very little effective/efficient" doesn't make sense in english.

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/n6zs
Mod
  • 25
  • 1590

You have all the right words but haven't tried a combination that works. The drop-down hint shows that "très peu" is "not very". Two of the ways "efficace" can be used are "effective" or "efficient". So "This (It) is not very effective/efficient" is a perfectly good translation. Change up the "not...effective/efficient" to "This is very ineffective/inefficient" and it still works just fine. Especially with expressions like "très peu", there are a number of perfectly good ways to translate this, not just the one shown above.

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/BrainyPirate
Plus
  • 18
  • 16
  • 15
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 13
  • 13
  • 12
  • 11
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 7
  • 6
  • 6
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 113

I used "has very little effect" and it did not accept it

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/prwh
  • 11
  • 11
  • 9
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 4
  • 3

I would think that something (e.g. a medicine) could be slightly effective (peu efficace?) or very slightly effective (très peu efficace?). At this time, "very slightly effective" is not considered a correct translation.

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/nijuniro

'it is not very efficient' is also accepted but it has quite different meaning as for me. Which one gives more accurate meaning of 'tres peu'?

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/livnil
  • 13
  • 13
  • 10
  • 2

Don't pair tres with peu. Tres=very and peu efficace=inefficient

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/E.Orduna

I was literally about to note down "trés peu" as not very in my notes, thank you!

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Joan223152
  • 25
  • 25
  • 25
  • 23
  • 21
  • 21
  • 11
  • 1111

What? Sorry, guys, but once again your English does not scan! 'It is very little efficient'??? Please!

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/AnnaTall

hm... there is a difference between 'being very inefficient/' and ' being not very efficient'. Which one is this one, please?

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/CJ.Dennis
  • 25
  • 17
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14

I would use both phrases interchangeably. It could be more efficient but it works. What is the difference for you?

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/AnnaTall

Hm... for me: 'very inefficient' is stronger than 'not very efficient', so i suspect the latter is a closer translation for the French ' C'est tres peu efficace .'

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/CJ.Dennis
  • 25
  • 17
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14

I see. I think of it as having a stronger emphasis, rather than being different in meaning. I would still use them interchangeably. Sort of like: How are you? I'm not bad. vs How are you? I'm good. They both mean the same thing but the version with "not" is a weaker way of saying it. How was the movie? It wasn't very good. (Actually, I hated it! But I might offend you if I put it that way!)

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/walcfra
Plus
  • 25
  • 22
  • 14
  • 6
  • 4
  • 44

Why not "this is..." since that translation is accepted in other places on Duolingo?

6 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/managerx
  • 25
  • 14
  • 10
  • 6
  • 6
  • 5

"This is not very effective." i wrote this an it was correct

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Burkey0
  • 13
  • 9
  • 6
  • 2

Coup critique! CHUCHMUR est K.O.!

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Joelinguo
  • 13
  • 10
  • 10
  • 6
  • 5

Très peu. Very little. Good to know!

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/ag3n7_z3r0
  • 17
  • 13
  • 11
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 9
  • 7
  • 6
  • 6
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 2
  • 2

I had a hard time coming up with a translation for this one... went with, "It's hardly effective," and it was accepted.

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/id416

So from these comments I gather that my accepted answer of "it is not very efficient" is actually not the correct answer here. Am I right in hearing that "peu efficace" is a French idiom for the actual English word: inefficient? Making the real translation "very inefficient," which really has a separate meaning.

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/dflee53
  • 18
  • 12
  • 4

Would "Ce n'est pas tres efficace" be an acceptable alternative?

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/M.Eskan

ok. "this is very inefficient" and "this is not very efficient" are two different sentences, but both are accepted here. what does this sentence exactly mean? somebody!

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/cband5

"It is very little effective" is NOT correct English

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/BenFrommherz

'That is very little efficiency' is rejected, while at the same time the system suggests 'That's very little efficiency'. I feel I am starting to lose the joy of learning French...

9 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/LindaSheri3

Just for reference, Duo accepted 'It is barely efficient.'

6 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Onoszko
  • 15
  • 6
  • 3
  • 2

So, is it effective or efficient? The two English words are NOT synonyms.

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Veekhr
  • 19
  • 18
  • 15
  • 14
  • 11
  • 6
  • 5

There are nuances between the two, but my thesaurus does list them as synonyms. I'd go with "efficient" in this case, as there is a good word for "effective" in French, "effectif"

5 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/elayne42

The translation you gave is "It's very little efficient" is not correct and is never used. One could say, "It is not very efficient" or "It is rarely efficient" which was my answer.

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/cogges
  • 25
  • 19

How do you know when "c'est" is "it is" and when it is "he/she is"? I put "He is very rarely efficient."

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/manicstreetpeter

It's very rarely efficient should be accepted

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/cynsanity
  • 25
  • 13
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2

it is very rarely efficient should be accepted

2 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/AzaleaJamie

"It is very inefficient." would be "C'est très inefficace."

("inefficient" = "inefficace")

2 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/SeanFogart4
  • 14
  • 13
  • 10
  • 22

If you can say least effective/efficient, and much less effective/efficient, you should also be able to use the positive form very little effective/efficient. Every other way is saying something different. Whatever happened to basic English grammar?

3 days ago
Learn French in just 5 minutes a day. For free.