"I just ate" http://french.about.com/od/grammar/a/venir.htm
Venir used as recent past. Wish I knew this before losing the heart... Is there any way for Duolingo, which seems to point to french.about.com a lot, to point to the requisite grammar lesson that would explain these concepts at the time? Mayhap, before I make the mistake??
Just a thought...
C'mon, guys! We are learning in Duolingo just the way a little kid would learn in real life. The kid who says, "Look, I drawed a flower!" gets corrected by his parents until he learns to say "...I drew..." He doesn't ask for a grammar lesson ahead of time. It's a great way to learn a language :)
You are right, that´s why there is no need to feel ashamed when you lose a heart. Just repeat the lesson as long as all hearts stay with you. That´s the point of learning. Exercise makes perfect
Mes sentiments exactement! And like a child it's good to ask many questions. It's fundamental for learning. Plus it's a sign of real interest. c:
Duolingo does not point to any other Website in particular. Remy, the Duo French expert, once in a while, gives hints with suitable links. And Duo's method is not to explain, it is to show by examples how things are said. Explanations come as answers to your questions in the Discussion section, most often given by other learners. Therefore, you may want to search by yourself on the Web where you can find help, other lessons, grammar tips, etc.
I wrote "I am not hungry, I have just come from eating." and it was marked incorrect. I realize that it's probably a little literal, but it seems that it would be correct. Just asking.
That's what I translated it as. I prefer to give the literal meaning when I answer, because that helps me to understand what is truly being said, and how sentences are formed in general. I think that both should be accepted. If someone said to me in English that they had just come from eating, I would know that they just ate. They're pretty much the same thing. It's kind of like if I asked "give me two numbers that add up to six," but I would only accept 3+3, and not 4+2, or 5+1, -11+17 etc.
The French expression "venir de" + infinitive is an idiom and must be understood as a whole, not as a word-for-word translation. This is the way idioms work. If one translates it word-by-word, it indicates that one is unfamiliar with the meaning of the idiom (I suppose we would say "FSL" for French as second language). We strive to learn the various idioms and translate them into equivalent articulate English expressions.
wouldn't it be more efficient to say "je viens de manger" instead of having to double up with "juste" as well?
I understand the references to venir + de as the recent past. So why would more emphasis be needed by adding "juste". Can you have a more recent "recent past"? Any more recent and you'd still be doing it! ;-)
I'm only striving to clarify why further emphasis is needed, whilst also understanding that this may just be how the French use this expression. Thanks
consider this: [ I have eaten = je viens de manger. ] I have just eaten = je viens juste de manger. (which is also = I just ate.)
You probably already know now but as "recent past tense" in French utilises Venir to construct it (like Aller in future proche) the function of "juste" here is to add even more emphasis to the proximity of the activity. In English it could almost be interpreted as "I only just ate"
I translated this as "I do not have hunger, I just ate". Reported as I believe this is acceptable.
That's fair. I'm used to utilizing odder patterns of speech, so "I do not have hunger" doesn't strike me as being as odd as it should be.
"I've just been eating"??? This sounds terrible to my ear. Can any other native speakers speak for their respective variants of English?
Perfectly normal in everyday conversation. "I've just been eating a banana..."
Very strange. I'd probably never seen that before this. Nothing seems to justify using the past continuous perfect here. It makes perfect sense to say "I've been eating a banana every day for the last week"; but for "I've just been eating...", I'd probably just say "I just ate..."
Thanks for your $0.02 though. :)
The only time I have used this: "I've only been eating (only activity I have been doing)", but not any other way.
"I've just had a shower"... "I'm just going to call her now"... "I'm just going to make a cup of tea first"... "I've just arrived"... "I'm just doing it now"... "I'm just being friendly".
Some fella called "Stevie" something wrote a song. The title was "I just called to say I love you". But maybe you haven't heard of him... ;-)
I love Stevie Wonder. ;)
Okay, but your examples do not quite include "I've just been...", which is the point of this discussion. Give me some-a those. ;)
I've just been eating ---- I've only been eating [since you arrived] is the only example I can come up, edit and add any verb.
I don't see how it would be used in other sentences, at least in American English.
"I've just been told the news"... "I've just been to the doctor's" (Very English expression)... "I've just been attacked"... "I've just been shot (2Pac)"... "I've just been to the hospital to see Pac" (Said Biggie, who'd also taken some flowers) etc etc.
Also, if the expression we're discussing is "Je viens de", I'm pretty sure this can also refer to "I've just / I've just [done something]":
"Je viens de vous l'envoyer" / "I've just sent it to you"
@AlexLinguist - No, I don't think it is the same. I've only and I've simply aren't expressions of time. My understanding is that venir is being used to convey recent past, so is referencing an event in time. My examples (well, some of them) convey having done something very recently - maybe minutes or a few hours, but relatively recently. This type of temporal construction is used all the time in my experience. I really see nothing at all odd in it. Even so, I've just awakened. So maybe I'll feel differently in the morning. :-)
Again, I beg to differ. Just - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/just
"All day long" is what denotes exclusivity. This analogy isn't accurate for an illustration of the word's meaning either.
Also, you need to read the thread and consider the comments made by the likes of Sitesurf who clarified my own question about the need for *"juste" here, in which case it was to add emphasis to the recent action.
@AlexLinguist: "I've just been drinking some water"... "I've just been preparing for bed"... "I've just been reading a book".
Which is the same thing as "I've only/simply been....", correct? On that, we agree.
You aren't saying "I just did that", right? It just (no pun intended) seems really awkward, is all.
I have no problem with "I've just", it's the past continuous mentioned above that I have a problem with, and take it to mean "only". :)
I have just been having a headache with this. ;)
If you read above Alex, Sitesurf confirms that "juste" here does add even more emphasis on the recency of the event. So only combined with just does indeed give that added emphasis, as if to mean "almost right now".
(P1) "Did you hear the news that Robin Williams died?"
(P2) "Yeah, I've only just heard it on the radio"
"I have just been cleaning all day long when the bell rang" is similar in meaning to "I have been cleaning all day long when the bell rang." "Just" here is not about the recency or the proximity of an action: it emphasizes the exclusivity of the action. Whereas "I just ate", or "I have just watched TV", or "I have just had lunch," here "just" emphasizes the recency of an action.
"I have just been ... " means that you have been engaged in an activity for a period of time, "Just" adds emphasis that you were not doing anything else, except for that one activity, all time long. You could translate "je viens juste de manger" as "I have just eaten" or "I have just had something to eat" or "I just ate".
No, its about the proximity or recency of the action, not the exclusivity of it.
I put "I am just coming from eating" - I don't mind getting it wrong but isn't that a more literal translation? And still means "I just ate." Trying to figure out the many ways venir works.
Maybe more literal but not very natural English. The rule? Whenever you see the conjugated form of venir + de in a sentence, it takes the meaning of conveying the recent past. You can use this formula for many other examples:
I just ran: Je viens de courir
I just called: Je viens d'appeler
He just got up: il vient de se lever.
And so on...
Why is the second part of the sentence "je viens juste de manger"(I'm coming/I come just to eat) marked WRONG?
This is the recent past tense:
"I just ate "or "I have just eaten" = Je viens (juste) de manger.
The opposite is the near future:
"I am going to eat" = Je vais manger.
Next time, please read the whole thread before posting.