"Beaucoup de Français ont un travail en Suisse."

Translation:Many French people have a job in Switzerland.

March 29, 2018

This discussion is locked.


Why not many French - no need for the word people?


At least in American English, it is more proper and common to use the country as an adjective placed before a noun, such as, French people/man/woman/child/friends, etc. An exception would be when speaking of all French people, in general, in which you could say the French.

You can say, simply, many French but it wouldn't be common or as proper.

This is not true for all countries, though. If you're curious, you can check this link for a decent rundown: https://www.ef.edu/english-resources/english-grammar/nationalities/


Why is "have jobs" not acceptable?


That sounds as though individual French people are working multiple jobs in Switzerland whereas many French people have a job (singular) in Switzerland → they have one job each.


Hmm; I would actually say the contrary! To my ear, "Many French people have a job" sounds vaguely like all the French people working in Switzerland are working the same job, while "Many French people have jobs" sounds more normal. ("Many French people work" is least stilted, though and what Google produces -- although it round-trips to the imparfait and never the passé compose.)

Consider the pluralization of the object of "to have" with a plural subject. For example, the singular subject/singular object "He has a cat", versus the plural subject options 1) "He and his brother have a cat" and 2) "He and his brother have cats".

In case one, "he and his brother have a cat", sounds very unambiguously in English like they share a single cat. Meanwhile, case two is ambiguous on whether or not they each have a single cat or multiple cats, but there is no concern that they had a messy situation where they must share custody of a cat. (Alternatively, perhaps they live together and share the singular cat in situ.)

Considering the feline example above, I suggest more strongly that "have jobs" is a better English translation than "have a job".


In French, a singular object owned by multiple subjects means one each.


Yes, I learned that on Duolingo! Which would point strongly to "have jobs" as the appropriate English translation. And why is "Frenchmen" not acceptable?


Because French women are included.


I think cats and jobs are hardly a fair comparison. ;) It's a different kind of having, the cat you "own", which you can't really say about a job (if anything, I'd say your employer owns the job, you only "have" it because they give it to you).

That said, both "have a job" and "have jobs" are acceptable here, so both will henceforth be accepted.


Thanks; I also concede that both 1) the sense of "to have" in the cat vs job cases are different (and let's not even get into cats vs dogs), and that 2) the French singular ownership is unambiguous (but the English is not). :-)


As a British native, I would say that both are used regularly. 'A job' is slightly more specific as it means that each of the many only has one job in Switzerland whereas 'jobs' is openminded as to how many jobs each has, it could be one or it could be twenty-seven!


Frenchmen should be accepted.


"Mini French people"? Really, Siri! Made me laugh though.


I certainly understand why "Many French people have a job in Switzerland" is a preferred translation.

I am curious why the straight/literal translation "A lot of Frenchmen have a job in Switzerland" is disallowed.

It is not irrational to assert that I might be writing an Econ paper about gender-specific employment trends. In which case, I would be referring to "men" and not "people".

It is odd to disallow the gender specific translation. Reported 2018-04-28

Edit: My apologies to Trofaste. I forgot to take a screen shot. Will do next time.


If you were writing something gender specific, you could use Frenchmen. However, you are translating something that isn't gender specific so you need to use French people. If the person who wrote the French sentence had wanted it to be gender specific, he/she would have modified the sentence to include gender.


Only "Frenchman" shows up under the hints, NOT "French people". Don't reject "Frenchmen" then, what a disgusting lie.

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