1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: French
  4. >
  5. "La fille mange la tomate."

"La fille mange la tomate."

Translation:The girl is eating the tomato.

March 20, 2013



G'day guys. Not sure if I've missed it in the hints and tips along the way, but; how can we be clear about when/whether 'mange' means 1. "is eating", or 2. "eats"?

In English there can be distinctly different contexts between the two; the first being a description of what someone is doing presently, eg. "We're in the middle of a ribs & wings festival, and she is eating soup?"

Whereas the second could be a 3rd-person non-temporal description of what someone does daily/routinely; eg. "Guess what Bernice does when the head chef is not around - she eats the soup!!".


The French tense "présent de l'indicatif" is used both for the English tense "present simple" and "present continuous". So "mange" can mean both "is eating" or "eats" depending on context.


La tomato here means 'the tomato' whereas when its la viande its just 'meat' why?


mohit- you can count tomatoes one by one but not meat, that's why


would "the daughter eats a ..." be incorrect?


Yes it's correct, "fille" can mean either "girl" or "daughter", we would need context to know which one is used, and we don't have it in this exercise.


You need "la fille de..." (a possessive) or "sa fille" (her daugher) to understand it as "the daughter" in French. A French speaker wouldn't understand "the daughter" when you say "La fille mange la soupe", you need "La fille de... mange la soupe". For instance: "La fille de Jean mange la soupe" (Jean's daughter is eating the soup)

Same thing for "femme", it always mean "woman" unless you have a possesive "La femme de..." "Sa femme..."

It can be implied. For instance, you talked about "La fille de Jean", and now, in a following sentence, you say" La fille" with "de Jean" implied, but it's very very uncommon.


"A French speaker wouldn't understand "the daughter" when you say "La fille mange la soupe", you need "La fille de... mange la soupe"."

No, a French speaker would completely understand that it's the daughter of someone as long as it's either already assumed in the conversation, or mentioned before. That's precisely why I said we need context to tell them apart. As we don't have any in this exercise, both are correct answers. Same thing for woman/wife for other exercises.


It's exactly what I said. If it's implied before (but this kind of structure is very uncommon in French). Letting learners translate "daughter" here is a bad thing in my opinion. As a teacher, I know how confusing it is for learners. Here some additionnal help about daughter/girl: http://french.stackexchange.com/questions/8820/is-there-a-distinction-for-the-words-girl-and-daughter-besides-from-context


arjo- I disagree. I would never use daughter for girl, unless I name her. I would say, ma fille, sa fille, leur fille but never la fille, or la fille de M. Armand.


That's my exact point: You can, especially when there's no context. For example, if I take the sentence "Il est incroyable.". Out of context, we don't know if "il" designates a person or an object, right? So both "it" and "he" should be accepted as an answer obviously. It's exactly the same for "fille".

Without context, we have to assume every possible case, otherwise it's just denying correct answers to the learners who know the meaning of one word, but not the other meaning, or simply those who tried a meaning slightly less common. It's unfair and incorrect.


Of course you would. I'll give you an example:

"Les enfants de Paul sont affamés. La fille mange la tomate, et le fils mange la pomme."

Of course you could use "sa", but using "la" doesn't change the meaning of "fille" in this context.

"La fille de M. Armant est la seule à avoir le droit de parler pendant le cours."

In both of these sentences, "fille" means daughter, and native French speakers wouldn't mistake it for the other meaning of "fille".


arjo- Of course I understand what you mean, but when there,s no context, you can't say daughter, but in your exemple, yes.


arjo- Your answer says all for me : when there's no context, for French people it's the girl not the daughter. I'm native and the only answer for me is the girl or the daughter of someone. But we're here to express our opinion and respect other people even when we desagree. Good luck!


Listen, you just admitted that my examples were correct. Which means that the sentence on this exercise would be potentially correct too (you can't contradict that without refusing my examples).

Now, on what basis would you refuse to accept a correct translation?

Because, just being out of context can't be a valid argument, since the sentence is also out of context for the meaning of "girl".

I understand that this sentence is MORE LIKELY to use the meaning "girl" than "daughter", but likelihood doesn't mean certainty!!!

Finally, you keep talking on the behalf of French people as if they would all use your answer as theirs, but I'm French, and I can assure you that I wouldn't necessarily use your answer as mine at all. I might, but that's not for sure.


cairnsmith- with daughter, we have to use a possessive, because she's the daughter of someone. Or we have to name it, la fille de MR........


cairnsmith- It's incorrect, because you have to translate la, which is a definite article and une /a is indefinite. Those are 2 different words.


also, daughter , you have to name her, who's daughter?


i'm still confused about this, how would i know if "mange" in a sentence means "eat" or "is/are eating"?


The French "mange" can be translated to English as either "eats" or "is eating". Both are correct grammatically. One should choose which is the best fit for the English sentence.


Is "The girl eats the tomato" grammatically correct? I would have thought "The girl ATE the tomato" would be acceptable?


Why would it be grammatically incorrect? I see no mistake in "The girl eats the tomato.".

Also, even if "The girl ate the tomato." is grammatically correct as well, the tense used is not appropriate to translate this French sentence.

"présent simple" can be changed either for present simple or present continuous.


The girl ate the tomato = past = La fille a mangé la tomate.


So, I know conjugations well from my French class, so im wondering about why it is using the conjugation for I, not you considering the context is third person. Why wouldnt it be the conjugation of you (singular)? "La fille manges la tomate"


Why is it "la fille mange la tomate" instead of " la fille est mange la tomate". I dont see how they added is when the word wasnt even suggested within the sentence.


I thought you used "Du" before food? Is "la fille mange du tomate" applicable? Why or why not?


question? tomato is it not a male gender? instead of female? in this case it shouldnt be la tomate but le tomate, am i right?


Why don't you need "de la" in this situation?

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