"Bien sûr, il y avait des mouvements dangereux à éviter."

Translation:Of course, there were dangerous movements to avoid.

October 1, 2017

This discussion is locked.


What a weird sentence!!


"Certainly" seemed an appropriate interpretation.


Yeah, I tried putting down different things for that, but it would only let me do "Surely".


Certainly and Surely are exact synonyms. I'm not sure, but I believe DL requires the moderators to tabulate every possible response (with just a little automation in the contractions), or it won't be accepted. So the only explanation is that they just haven't gotten around to it yet (or it hasn't been reported).


Yeah, you really need to report it if you think it's worthwhile. No editors read this forum, it's just for us users, who can't do anything about it. But they do read the reports from the lessons, so be sure to flag it.


What would the context of such a sentence be? Is this about dangerous political movements or is it about teaching workplace ergonomics or gymnastic movements? - or all of the above?


Just letting you know that 'surely' is not used in this context in UK English. It doesn't mean 'certainly'. Ironically enough, it tends to be used when someone is unsure of a situation: e.g. "Surely she knew you didn't take sugar?" - i.e. the speaker is pretending that this is the case for the sake of gossip. Otherwise it turns up in stock phrases such as 'slowly but surely'. Thanks


I put There were SOME dangerous movements to avoid. Why is this marked wrong?


I think the given statement is stronger than that. If it wanted to say "some dangerous movements" it would probably have been worded "quelques mouvements dangereux". But, as the plural of un mouvement is des mouvements, hence the absence of the word "some". I hope that makes sense.


It wasn't marked wrong for me.


of course there were dangerous moves to avoid was not accepted


Quand j'étais jeune, il y avait toujours du danger quand je travaillais dans les égouts.


Why is it important if it's "Surely" rather than "Sure thing"?


Of course, there have been dangerous movements to avoid was not accepted. Surely 'there have been' and 'there were', mean the same thing?


Why not 'There were dangerous actions to avoid'?


'Surely' is not the same thing as 'Of course'.


My attempt to translate this was "Sure, there have been dangerous movements to avoid". It marked both "Sure" and "there have been" wrong.

Here's what I think. If "avait" is the imparfait, "were," that means that the action has continued to the current time. My translation would have been correct if it were "il y a eu des mouvements...". That would mean, "there have been dangerous movements but are no longer." That's because passé composé indicates the action is completed. Is that correct?


As far as I can tell, the two accepted answers for "Bien sûr" here are "Surely" and "Of course," and not "Sure" or "Fine."

"Of course" would be someone confirming that yes, there were dangerous movements. "Of course" means the same as those two rejected options to me.

Meanwhile, "Surely" implies this is one person insisting that another person confirm that there were indeed dangerous movements. It is nearly a question when "Surely" is used.


My thoughts exactly, you ask "surely it is...". You state the fact by saying "sure" or "of course".


I had a very productive visit to the vet. Of course there were dangerous movements to avoid.


Learn French in just 5 minutes a day. For free.