Why do I find has, have, etc. in every sentence? I think "We arrived" is correct too. Does it have something to do with French grammar?
Maybe to make the translations more literal, or to avoid confusion whether to use passé composé or imparfait. If you type we arrived, it will be accepted, as it should.
Because literally translated the passé composé always uses has/have, j'ai mangé, i have eaten, but in english, I have eaten and I ate or interchangeable
They're not always interchangeable in English. We arrived is simple past, a finished action. Usually used in sentences with 'yesterday', 'ago', 'last' etc. We have arrived is present perfect - for something that happened in the past but has a connection to the present moment. In this case either could be used as there is nothing more in the sentence.
we had arrived is pluperfect = nous étions arrivés (auxiliary in imperfect + past participle)
If 'sommes' means are, then why does this translate to we are arrived?? Why do the french say we are instead of we have? Very confusing, thanks.
Google Mrs. van de Tramp, you will find lists of the verbs that use etre rather than avoir.
Nous y sommes arrivés could be correct, but there is a side meaning (no context here) which is "we made it" in the sense of "we were successful".
Ah, perfect, you answered my question already. Merci beacoup!
In English, to say "I/ we have arrived" is an idiom, meaning "we've made it/ were successful", as you say. It is interesting that this is the case in French too.
Agree with Sitesurf. Another translation of "nous Y sommes arrivés" could be "we have arrived THERE". But here, I guess the only meaning is that we arrived, we do not know WHERE we arrived or HOW we arrived.
One meaning of "arriver" is "to manage". So could "We have managed" be another correct translation?
"To manage" can translate to "arriver à":
- Nous y sommes arrivés.
- Nous sommes arrivés à faire cela.