"Am fost în Franța pentru două luni."
Translation:I was in France for two months.
6 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Is this the most natural way to say this?
I'm asking because using "pentru" here seems a bit weird to me, I would have expected "Am fost în Franța timp de două luni" or "Am fost în Franța două luni" to be the standard way to say this.
In particular, in French "pour" (~ "pentru") is typically not used to refer to lengths of time, but it acceptable if they are in the future. I thought this would be the same in Romanian.
I'm leaving for two months / Plec pentru două luni / Je pars [pour] deux mois
I stayed [for] two months / Am stat [timp de] două luni / Je suis resté [pendant] deux mois
Am I correct in assuming that the situation here is similar to French and that "Am fost în Frața pentru două luni" is not the most natural way to say this? If not, why isn't the sentence "zburăm pentru treizeci de minute" (from the same lesson) accepted?