"Il y a du brouillard."
Translation:It is foggy.
"Brouillard" is my ex-girlfriend's last name and it kinda all makes sense now!
You will have to learn these idiomatic phrases little by little, with their constructions.
"Il y a" states what you can sense: il y a du brouillard (fog), de la pluie (rain), de la neige (snow), de l'orage (storm)... These require the partitive articles "du, de la, de l'" when the noun is uncountable and indefinite articles when the noun is countable: il y a des nuages (clouds), des averses (showers)
"Il fait" is followed by an ordinary adjective: il fait chaud, froid, bon, doux, humide...
When the adjective is weather-specific, you will use "le temps est" instead: le temps est pluvieux (rainy), nuageux (cloudy)...
"Il est" or "c'est" is not much in use with the weather, which means that you will not be able to rely on a direct translation from "it is foggy, rainy, snowy, hot, cold, fine, mild..."
Also remember that "it is Verb-ing" as a continuous verbal form does not exist in French, and, therefore, you will have to use a present tense to translate, for instance:
- it is raining = il pleut
- it is snowing = il neige
However, you can often use "le temps est + adjective" (the weather is) when the English has "it is + adjective".
Voila qu'il dit tout pour moi Ripcurlgirl (I'm trying to say - That sums it up for me).
Sometimes, it's not all that cut-and-dried. For example, you can say "Il y a du soleil" and "Il fait soleil". Isn't that right? Il y a du vent and il fait du vent.
"Il fait du vent" is considered acceptable along with "Il y a du vent". It depends on the person's preference. I have seen both. I would probably say "Il y a du vent" would be more common.
Proverbes (Il fait) un vent à décorner, à écorner les bœufs. Petite pluie abat grand vent.
Il fait du vent/brouillard... was used in 1739 then, good to know. It nevertheless sounds a bit rural to my ears.
Of course, you will easily find French speakers and natives who say it (and a lot of other ugly and improper things). However, people with higher education tend to lose their local jargons and regional accents.
I'll try to give you a better answer once I have checked with the powers that be (l'Académie Française).
In the meantime, can you use "Il y a du vent" or "Le temps est venteux"?
"Il fait du vent" is not accepted here because it is not the proper way to say it.
However, you can find other proper sentences, like "Il fait un vent glacial".
I checked online. Several French speakers said it is acceptable. It appears Il y a du vent is more common, but it is not grammatically incorrect to say "Il fait du vent". I checked on several forums, as well. One user also said it depends on the region in France. As I have said, I have seen it in books. Anyway, I don't want to argue, but I was just trying to point out that there is more than one way to say "It's windy". And maybe even "Il vente" would fit the bill. Anyway, this link to an old dictionary does list it. I don't have a current Petit Robert to check if it is acceptable now, but I have seen books and websites include it is all I am saying.
This old dictionary lists both "Il fait vent" and "Il fait du vent".
Isn't "foggy" = brumeux/brumeuse? Therefore "Il y a du brouillard" should be "- some fog? Would it be correct to say, "Le temps est brumeux"?
Well, they are both very similar and are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference. "Il y a du brouillard" means "It is foggy", and Il y a de la brume/Le temps est brumeux mean it is "misty". It is a question of visibility. With "Il y a du brouillard", your visibility is 1000 meters or less. When it is misty, "Il y a de la brume/Le temps est brumeux" the visibility increases from 1000 to 5000 meters.
On parle de brouillard lorsque la visibilité horizontale est inférieure à 1000m.
Lorsque la visibilité horizontale varie entre 1000 et 5000 mètres, on parlera de brume.
En général, la visibilité est plus faible lorsque l’air est saturé de vapeur d’eau (mais des pluies intenses ou des chutes de neige peuvent aussi fortement la diminuer). C’est le refroidissement de l’air qui est responsable de la formation de brouillard.
... and "brouillard" does not have an adjective.
We sometimes use "brouillasseux" but it is not in the dictionary!
So, let me get this straight... "Il y a" means "there is" and "brouillard" means "fog," so I wrote "There is a fog" but Duolingo marked it as incorrect. Hmmm... I know I got it wrong somewhere but I can't quite put my finger on it...someone help?
I'm not a native English speaker, but I think that fog is uncountable, so you'd have to say "There is fog" instead of "There is a fog".
Native English geezer here I think you can say a fog:
“there is a fog upon LA And my friends have lost their way We’ll be over soon they said Now they’ve lost themselves instead.”
From blue jay way by the Beatles Groovy baby
I think the phrase is used in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde : “a fog rolled over the city” this is if memory services correctly from my gcse English , an example of pathetic fallacy what ever that may be?
Native English speaker here, and that's correct. "It's foggy" was also accepted for me.
I think sitesurf has explained it brilliantly... however.... one just would not say in English there is a fog... I don't think you would say there is fog..either. although one would comprehend what you were trying to say....in English it is just that.... it is foggy... and you need to remember the French for that " Il y a du brouillard ... but English is not my native tongue.
Native English Speaker (who lives in a foggy place). We say "There's a fog coming." Or "We had a fog last night." While it's not totally common to say "There is a fog" I wouldn't at all say it is incorrect, and I'm pretty sure it's grammatically correct as all.
I also put "there is a fog" as a translation for "Il y a du brouillard". Kinda bummed it marked me as incorrect lol
Same question previously occurred as "There is some wind," which was accepted, and then the preferred answer was "It is windy." This is because (i believe) all translations secondarily seek to 'naturalize (and simplify) what is actually being said." There is some fog implies further reason for stating it, so adds complexity, but it is not wrong. The extra lesson here is showing that real French is often not a direct/base translation, unless you are returning an English translation back to French (which essentially is where the original direct/base translation begins). -Further; and for the French original translation (reverse), my take is that the French embed/include how an occurrence occurs (often using à or de to that effect), where properly, one cannot just verb or adjective something in French (here the weather/environment idiom also uses a paired article to state the occurrence), as definitive, then doubly definitive, and something to be foundationally aware of.
Perhaps French bullet-points and less proper speech formations can get away with breaking the requirement though ? :)
Also, the extra extra lesson here, as it further dawned on me, is that the reason the best English translation divergence often occurs is simply... "The English begin reading a sentence and often start to say the sentence before they reach the end of the sentence (especially in the modern impatient era)! Hence, if you start with 'There' you are going to make the sentence fit that start." This forces a less than complete (final perfect/naturalized) answer. The French; however, read their sentences to completion before they apply/make the full meaning assessment (generally), and therein apply the best understanding and translation. They (The French) are figuratively 'the glass is half empty' thinkers vs. The English 'the glass is half full' thinkers which increases their capacity for thorough/simpleness, if you will.
-I am reporting this in the hope that DUO will perhaps invent a tier correctness/incorrectness system that shows this answer as accurate but not the most correct, therefore a 'secondary answer to the actual preferred answer/translation.' I don't expect such an improvement though, as DUO has done so exceedingly well in it's excellent platform creation to date.
Duolingo is an excellent platform. I am very grateful to all who worked to make it better and continue to do so.
When I first learnt french, were drilled as de la and du = some. And that has stuck with me. There was some fog where I live this morning. So it seemed perfectly natural to me to write it as such, just as it "it was foggy" would be.
Yes, "du" and "de la" mean "some", but you don't need to translate the French partitive articles to "some".
I understand and don't automatically translate "some" in certain sentences, Sitesurf. But in this case. it should be accepted.
Yes I think it would be perfectly Ok in English to say... there is some fog... but you would not say... there is a fog and I am uncomfortable to say.... there is fog....Duo tries to seek the best translation....
well, your comment is amazing.. true, I think and very philosophical....
I find it so hard not to see this as "there is some fog". Is there a way of knowing when to interpret this as "it is foggy"?
"There is some fog" is an accepted translation but not the preferred one because "it is foggy" seems more common.
I put "it's foggy" instead of "it is foggy" and got it wrong. Is that a glitch?
But it is on the list of accepted answers. Are you sure you did not misspell something?
Should accept "It is foggy out" which, in English, means the same thing as "It is foggy"
It's always a guessing game on whether DL insists that we translate to 1.) the "practical application" of what a sentence means (how the sentence might most often be articulated in another language having essentially the same meaning) or 2) to the hard and fast word for word application. It is rarely clear to me which way to go.
we have to remember that the course is programmed... Duo is still the best, I have compared it with other courses on line. They are by far not as good and acceptable as Duo and the moderators here are so super helpful... But I agree at times it is frustrating, when you think you typed in the correct answer and it is rejected... when that happens I do some more research and I usually find out whether or not I was right or wrong.
How does one say misty?
Le temps est brumeux or perhaps Il y a de la brume.
Thanks for that
Note that "la brume" and "brumeux" are less thick than fog/foggy. It is just that "brouillard" does not have a matching adjective.
What can’t one just make a noun into a ajectve or a verb for that matter? ie egg - noun; egg the pudding - verb- eggy faced adjective. That’s what happens in English, it’s what Shakespeare’s is famous for - the first recorded use of the verb to drug is in Macbeth: “I have drugg’d their possetts that death and nature do contend about them...” Act 2 Scene 2. Prior to that only a noun. Can’t you do the same in French?
Yes we do! No language is static it’s a big sloshy pond of a thing it’s organic. I know there is, in France a government department to maintain the standards of the French language but I feel this is misguided it should be allowed to develop organically. Trying to halt this is to say the least Canutian ( see what I did there)?
The English language ( I understand that some linguists argue that it’s not actually a language, rather a pidgin) gone through huge changes the old dialects have all but disappeared the master tongue was for most of the century American. Now With the spiralling growth of South East Asian trade American is being replaced with a new lingua franca - Engrish! This one is definitely a pidgin.
Let’s roll with it and enjoy the ride.
So am I correct in guessing that in French, the weather is usually described as "There is some [rain/sun/fog/etc]"?
Or is that just duolingo?
When you have completed the whole unit, you will try to remember a few trends when it comes to describing the weather in French:
"Il fait + adjective" is used when the adjective has other meanings than describing the weather: il fait beau, mauvais, frais, froid, chaud, doux...
With adjectives solely related to the weather, you can use "le temps": le temps est ensoleillé, nuageux, orageux, venteux...
"Il y a" is used with countable and uncountable nouns from the weather vocab: il y a du vent, de la pluie, de l'orage, des averses, un beau soleil, de gros nuages...
I don't think you can translate it exactly like that. If you say "Il y a du vent", you're describing the kind of weather there is. You are not saying "There is some wind". I am not a translator, but I don't translate it like that in my head. Il y a du soleil or Il fait soleil both mean "It's sunny". Anyone else want to chime in?
I wish when you put the cursor over the word you need to know it didn't tell you the whole phrase. I want to try it on my own!
How would say the idiom foggy refering to things such as memory? E.g. My memory is foggy.
I don't think that French has the same idiomatic meaning of foggy. You could use the idiom "avoir une mémoire de lièvre" ("I have the memory of a hare"), or just an adjective like "faible".