I don't understand the response above. Why not him? And how should I handle "le" in the sentence?
I wrote "We just told him it," which seems to translate the sentence but doesn't sound natural in English (not like "we just told him the news"). Should my response have been accepted?
It is not a mistranslation. "I just told it/that to him/her", "I just told him/her it/that" and "I just told him/her" are gramatically correct sentences which express the same meaning and all of them should be accepted here. IMHO the last one is the most usual translation in English and certainly that's why it was set as the main translation.
Whether the main translation should be more literal or more usual it is a recurring controversial discussion in Duolingo. It'd probably be more productive to discuss it in a separate topic in the forum.
nevetsjy Try it this way: We use "I am going to do ----" , without necessarily GOING anywhere, to indicate an action we intend to do in the near future. The French similarly use "I am coming from --doing " to indicate an action recently completed, also not necessarily involving a physical journey. It's quite consistent, in a way!
As a native American English speaker, I can easily admit that the object would go unspoken/inferred. My concern with DL's translation here is that I'm trying to learn French, which means I need to retrain my brain to think in terms of what the French requires and not what the English will let me get away with. If French requires these sentence parts when translating my native English thoughts into French words, then I think that requirement needs to be reinforced when translating French to English.
yes, you can. Actually, french people use often it.. However, «en» and «le» are not interchangeble. I am not native speaker and it is difficult to me to explain it. Let's say that «le» (pronoun) is something concret, a whole thing, whereas «en» (pronominal adverb) is more like «about it».
Je n'ose pas te LE dire
je n'ose pas t'EN dire davantage.
Sorry, I can't do better.
"We just told it to her" is OK. It's also possible to say "We just told her it". (If it still sounds a little weird, try replacing "it" with "the story" or "the thing".) Since the French sentence uses "le" for "it" and "lui" for "her", it's good to use both in the translation if possible.
Your suggestion of "We just told her" is good, idiomatic English, but you have to remember there's an implied "it" that must be explicitly translated into French.
This is true. English allows for the simplification of removing "it" and saying "we just told him" as long as it is known what you just told him, but I believe that the French verb "dire" requires a direct object all the time, so you need the "le" here even though it can be simplified out in the English sentence. It would be great if a mod could comment
You’re getting into some subtle grammar differences . It depends if it is a “disjoint pronoun” or an “indirect object pronoun”. Sounds fun uh? The best help I can give you is to Google “When to use elle instead of lui” look for the Duolingo link from Georgeoftruth. Sorry my IT skills don’t run to attaching his links here. Good luck and enjoy it.
I think it is incorrect because it does not take the direct object 'le' into account. This le, tho not mentioned in the translation, is what we just told her: We just told it to her. The lui is an indirect object, while the le is a direct object. That is the difference between these two words in the sentence, and in F, the direct object precedes the indirect object: je le lui ai donne - I gave it to him. (Wish I knew how to use diacritical marks in these comment boxes).
Just an important point to add to your explanation. In French, that order works only with third person as indirect object.
Je le lui dit, je le leur dit (1, le, : Direct object / 2, lui, leur: indirect object)
Je te le dis, je vous le dit, il me le dit... (1, te, vous, me, indirect object / 2: le (direct object).
two translations given “we jjst told her” and “we just told her about it” I said, “We just told her of it.” Don’t understand the difference between the two “correct” translations and what’s wrong with mine. of it= about in ordinary English. At least in my part of the world.
I understand "venons de" is being used for "just" I also understand "lui" being used as the indirect object "to him/her". I also understand that there is a direct object pronoun for "it" in the sentence. Can "la" be used here instead of "le" as from what i can gather bith can nean "it"? Thanks!
I hope someone else will answer your question better than me. As in case, I'll tell you my view.
I don't think «la» could be used here as a direct object. Not with the verb «dire», given that you always have to say «something» that does not have a gender. Nevertheless, if the sentence were, for instance, «nous venons de la lui donner» (une lettre), or «nous venons de le lui donner» (un livre), «it» would work in both cases as a good translation.
Anyway, it is possible that I am wrong.
You only need to use la if your direct object is a specific female noun. When you are using your direct object refer to a whole collection of information rather than just a specific thing, then you would only use "le". If you were, however, referring to a question that someone asked or a party or a letter (all female nouns), then you would use "la". I would think that "dire" will usually only be used with "le" since you will probably be referring to a whole idea or situation rather than a specific noun. Keep in mind, though, that there are cases, such as with the statement "je vais à la fête", where you aren't using a direct object, but rather "en" or "y" to reference it, although this is usually pretty clear as the noun is an event or place and you are using "de" or "à" as a preposition to reference it. My statement above would be simplified to "j'y vais" to mean "I'm going there" or "I'm going to it" since it was "à + noun".