And adverbs. It's taking me ages to get through this lot.

You have to remember the phrase. "Il faut" means "it is necessary", where "il" means the impersonal "it", not "he". So when you translate it to English, you may want to personalize it, according to context, with "we" or "you"..

In addition to Sitesurf's explanation, I want to add that what helped me was to remember that if "il" refers to "he" the verb will be "doit" not "faut".

We can't know. Il faut simply means "it should be so", or "one should" (like 'on doit'), without specifying who: it depends on the context. Most commonly though, it's used for "us"... (which is actually somewhat similar to what you mean with "one should")

Yes. Sitesurf clearly says "obligation" above. There is a "need" or a "must" component. "..have to eat..." "need to eat" or something like that.

Okay, this: "haf to" reference made me laugh. But seriously, you are right about the tendency pronounce these meanings differently. (Not right about the "oo" in "have to" though. A typographical error, I'm thinking.)

I think that it would be purely context (and perhaps a change in intonation) that would differentiate between the two meanings that you describe.

Yes, this confused me as well. The phrase is not asking what are the available options for eating, it is asking what must be eaten.

My kids ask me that every day, "What do we have (in the house) to eat then?"

It should be. If anything it's the more natural English translation

From a learning point of view I agree, its been the most difficult so far. In reply to your question: Firstly, there's a lack of context here, which doesn't help understanding.

Secondly, English has similar examples. E.g. Imagine you're a hungry kid coming home from school. Mom, or Dad, has cooked dinner. You, being nosy, go up to them & ask "What's to eat?".

In this context, the meal is perhaps being prepared for the family, justifying the context of "We". The rest is sort of self-explanatory.

"Que" means it's a question, "faut-il" determines it's impersonal & defined by context (i.e. "we, you, I, they" etc).

"Ensuite"... I don't even really know if this is necessary but it is easy to understand in this context. And Sitesurf suggests it makes the sentence a bit more casual in nature.

Restermen, Try this link about the verb "falloir" : http://french.about.com/od/grammar/a/falloir.htm

I consult it when I am confused by "must" and "have to" phrases. Eventually I will get it and I am sure you will too.

1.With "what" we can ask about the subject then we don't have to use inversion. For example, What is on the table? A vase. The vase is on the table.2. We can ask about the object we have to use inversion., What is it necessary to eat after? It is necessary to eat some cake after. (some cake is object direct)

Hello, I'm French and honestly I don't know where the we come from. The person could speak for himself, for a group of people that doesn't include him, or as a "we", but we don't know that for sure. But in that case, I guess they're using we like that doesn't necessarily include the person speaking.

no, because it does not reflect the "obligation" contained in "il faut/faut-il"

yes, "que doit-il manger ensuite [space] ?"

Not really. The first sentence is asking what sorts of foods are available for eating. The second sentence is asking what are you required to eat (per doctor's/dietician's orders, for instance).

My guess is "What is there to eat then?" would be "Qu'est-ce qu'il y a pour manger alors?" (I use "alors" because of the reasoning giving in this discussion: http://lawlessfrench.boards.net/thread/223/question-translating-que-faut-manger?page=1scrollTo=1271)

My 'instinct' made me translate it with "faut-il", so you were not only lucky!

The essence of "must we" or "is it necessary" in this context implies to me that the question isn't simply one of the food's availability (i.e. "what do we have?") but I see a context wherein food is scarce or unavailable. So an alternative form of the question could be something like "we need to eat something, so what can we find to eat?" At least, this is what my imagination tells me.

Its kind of an implied "we" here, implied by the meaning of the more literal version. So, in the case of "what is it necessary to eat then?" you can imagine this as a response to a statement saying "we don't have much food left". In this context, the "we" becomes apparent and the sentence is better translated as "what do we have to eat then?".

I've clearly used some artistic license here, but only to demonstrate why some of these Duolingo questions require context and imagination to get the possible meanings (I believe there is more than one correct translation for this phrase).

It's been explained here umpteen times, yoav1997!

Its understandable to ask this question. But... look up... a little bit further in the discussion thread. If you read it, you will find this comment as part of the discussion:

"You have to remember the phrase. "Il faut" means "it is necessary", where "il" means the impersonal "it", not "he". So when you translate it to English, you may want to personalize it, according to context, with "we" or "you".."

Also, its a long thread. Assuming you've read the responses, did you not find any clues to answer your question?

I vote for option 3.

Also il fault has a lot of flexibility in certain context. "Must" is only one option. "Necessary" I think is closest to the sentiment. So, imo its more like saying "we need to eat, so what is there to eat then?" Necessity comes from needing to eat. And ensuite is referring to whatever is left/available/next in line.

I vote for options 2 and 3:

• option 2 with "alors" (= consequently)
• option 3 with "ensuite (= next)

In addition, "il faut" or "on doit/nous devons" are quite vague in terms of degree of obligation or need.

Maybe just the placement of next. If you said "Next, it is necessary to eat what?" I'm confident this is more suitable grammatically.

I generally agree with you but here, the context/placement of "ensuite" can give a slightly different meaning. I've rationalised "next" as implying a subsequent factual act, par exemple "I studied chemistry. Next, I worked for the government".

Whereas, in this context, ensuite almost seems to have a conditional use, i.e. "If this is what's in the fridge, what [then] can we eat?" (Note: adverb can be placed before the verb in this context).

Whether Duolingo strictly deems your usage to be incorrect or has some other rationale, I can't really say. But I think there's a subtlety to the difference in meaning. Maybe a francophone can tell you whether or not this is truly incorrect.

I believe it is. If not I think it should be, so should be reported.

"it is necessary to eat" -> "it" is impersonal, equivalent to "human beings need to eat" or "eating is necessary" or the like.

"what is it necessary to eat ?" -> ditto, but formulated as a question about what kind of food has to be eaten

@Huf91, you seem to have the same trouble I was having, but after asking a handful of people I considered quite good in English Grammar, it turned out that "what is it necessary to eat?" is correct and it is a questions asking about the type of food one is to eat. On the other hand, the question you and I prefer "what is necessary to eat?" apparently leads most to think we are asking about the tools necessary to eat.

What is it necessary to eat then? It is necessary to eat foods high in iron like dark green veggies

What is necessary to eat? Cutlery, a plate, and perhaps serving spoons, assuming of course there is food in dishes before you.

Sometimes it helps to read the thread before asking a question as you will often find that someone else already asked the question you have and an answer has already been provided.

Il faut means "it is necessary"...so anytime you see it, you should know it is impersonal, just like il pleut which means it is raining. In both cases il does not mean he.

First, I was told the correct question is "what is IT necessary to eat..." because if you don't put IT then it is asking about the cutlery necessary to use for eating, while the original question is about the food.

Secondly, I believe the sentence "it is necessary to do something" usually can be understood to mean "you have to do something" or "we have to do something". Imagine a group of students discussing what is needed to be eligible to attend classes. One says "It is necessary to register by noon tomorrow to be considered students." In essence he or she has said "We must register by noon tomorrow to be considered students" or "You need to register by noon tomorrow to be considered students."

As someone a little further down the line from you, trust me when I say that its really important to get your head around the general idea of an impersonal expression. Put aside this particular phrase for a second. What should be grasped is that impersonal expressions in English and French are those without a personal subject. On the surface, its as simple as that!

What this means is that impersonal expressions won't relate to a particular individual or group - i.e. Me, You or Us (as in the people in this thread). It would be incorrect to use an impersonal expression to refer to any of the above.

The next step is to consider that impersonal expressions are typically used when giving general advice or offering a considered opinion: "It is good oral hygiene to brush your teeth regularly". The your here is impersonal, as it relates to no-one in particular but has a more general tone which could apply to anyone.

Next, the verbs. To complete impersonal expressions you have the impersonal subject - in this case Il - and the verb - Falloir. The significance of falloir is that it seeks to impose an obligation. So, other similar verbs work in the same way - e.g. 'Faire', when referring to the weather or 'Agir' when used reflexively... "Il s'agit de la biere"

And finally, we come to "il faut" which has its own meaning implying necessity (in general). We express this concept in English in many more ways than the French. That's why this thread is one of the longest on Duolingo. It's because English speakers find it more difficult to equate the idea of the personal 'You' or 'We' with the impersonal 'one' or 'it'. So you have to think to yourself that wherever its possible to use 'You' or 'We' impersonally in English (e.g. "We must brush our teeth regularly for good oral hygiene"), the same opportunity exists in French. Its just that, when it comes to necessity, the French only need one construction rather than 4. And that is "il faut".

If you can grasp what I and all the contributors have said here, it will become a lot easier to use and recognise in time.

Oh... almost forgot. We have is not expressing possession - like "we have a ball" - but is expressing obligation "we have / we must". Again, its "il faut" which pervades the idea of obligation.

This is just to back translate the examples given by MèreDesChats and RonnieJA:

• Your example: What is necessary to eat later? = Que faut-il pour manger après ? (cuttlery)

• "It is necessary to register by noon tomorrow to be considered students." = Il faut s'enregistrer demain à midi pour être considéré(e)s comme étudiant(e)s.

• "We must register by noon tomorrow to be considered students" = Nous devons nous enregistrer... / On doit s'enregistrer...
• "You need to register by noon tomorrow to be considered students." = Tu dois t'enregistrer / Vous devez vous enregistrer...
• "It is good oral hygiene to brush your teeth regularly" = Pour une bonne hygiène bucale, il faut se brosser les dents régulièrement.
• We must brush our teeth regularly for good oral hygiene" = Nous devons nous brosser les dents... / On doit se brosser les dents...

Note: both "se brosser" et "s'enregistrer" happen to be reflexive/pronominal.

Hi Johan.debr:

Did you write "What is necessary to eat then?" Because if you did, then you have the same issue I had. I even got into a long debate to defend the correctness of "our" sentence and to argue that IT made the sentence absurd. I still struggle a bit with this supposedly correct answer, but everyone I have asked in America, whose authority on English I trust, has told me that it is correct with IT in there. That without IT, the question seems to ask about the tools needed to eat (and I can see that too). I suppose it is easy to accept this "awkward sounding" sentence (awkward to us) when you think of the response as being "IT is necessary to eat...." Hence the question, "What is IT necessary to eat then?"

If you look at this thread, you will see the debate I had on this and the sources I found and others shared to support the correctness of the given sentence. For my own sanity, I will stick to the translation "What must one eat then/next?" or "What does one have to eat then/next?" preferring "next" to "then" because it just makes better sense to me as a translation for "ensuite". I would translate "alors" as "then".

Perhaps "What then is IT necessary to eat?" would be accepted.

When I first encountered this sentence, I gave an answer similar to yours but was informed that your question is asking about the tools necessary to eat while the original question is asking about the food.

Q: What then is necessary to eat? A: Cutlery, a plate,...

Q: What then is it (that is) necessary to eat? A: Dark green vegetables, carrots, salmon....

"qu'est-ce qu'on a à manger, là ?" would be my understanding of your sentence.

This cannot work because "here" is spacial and "ensuite" is temporal.

Neither. It means "after the appetizers, what do we have/need to eat next?"