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?
I think DL's suggested translation here is too loose. My response (which was accepted) was "We just said that to him." I'm never sure how picky DL is going to be about every "le" and "celui" they include.
I think it's a mistranslation because it drops the direct object le. I prefer "I just told it to him."
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.
Can someone explain this sentence? We are you using 'we come' to mean 'we just?'
It's a phrasal verb, "venir de." When saying someone just did something, the literal translation from French is "they are coming from doing something"
I just drank milk -> I come from drinking milk -> Je viens de boire du lait.
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!
Venir used with 'de' doesn't mean come. Venir +de =means just. Je viens de voir cela (I just saw that)...
Venir de + infinitive is an expression meaning "someone has just..." Its English equivalent would be the present perfect/simple past tense. This will be explained later on lesson "Present 3"
In Ireland you hear the English "I'm (just) after doing that" meaning "I have just done/I just did that."
1) We just told it to her seems to me better. How can we account for the le otherwise. 2) If we suppose we were already talking about this it before she came into the room, can we us, would it be better to us, en in place of le here?
I have a question of the use of "de le." I know that "le" indicates "it" or a direct object, but shouldn't it contract to "du"? Or does that rule not apply in this case?
«du» is the contraction «de + le», where «le» is an article.
In our sentence «.... de le lui dire», the «le» is a pronoun. («what we have just told him/her») . You are not allowed to contract this «de le»
"Le" and "lui" are both referring to "him" or "her?" I don't understand that. Why two pronouns? Also, the correct answer given is "We just told her." Why is it "le" if it's her?
«Le»: direct object. In this case, WHAT we said to him/her.
«lui» : indirect object. The person TO WHOM we said something (him / her)
Sorry if my explanation is not very clear, I am not a native speaker
That makes sense, but if that is the case why is "le" not part of the answer. I translated "le" to "it" and got it wrong.
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.
I think that english people don't usually mention the direct object pronoun when using the verb «to tell».
I said you it
I told you
I told you so
Anyway, it is just my feeling. I can be wrong
The confusion is Duo's fault for using a faulty translation. It should be understood as "We just told it to him." Subject - verb phrase - direct object - indirect object.
Perhaps it's more of an an American structure, but I imagine many people on the British side of the pond would choose to express the direct object, as in the French le, by writing and saying We have just told her it (or "that")" or "We have just said it/that to her".
I do not understand the need of ‘le’ in this sentence! Any ideas out there? Thanks
"le" is the direct object pronoun for "dire". It is what was told to him/her.
In English, we wouldn't always include "it", but "dire" is a transitive verb in French, it must have a direct object.
"We just told him/her"
"We just (said/told) (that/it) to (him/her)"
Any of the above combinations is correct also. DL may not have every possible correct answer in its system's options.
Jan 16th. 2019.
Fixed. In French, "dire" is a transitive verb (it requires an object) but in English this expression is said almost always without any reference to a direct object. The "it" is implied. "We just told her" is correct and the most natural translation.
Considering how one chooses to use "parler" or "dire", this makes perfect sense... merci!
Parler = The act or ability to speak.
Dire = The act of communicating something.
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.
Go tell it on the mountain. Tell it to the man. Tell it like you mean it.
It is very common to use the direct object "it" with "tell" and it should be accepted.
"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.
If "it" was referring to something mentioned just before between the people having a conversation, using the word it might be helpful. Q: "Have you told John what is happening?" A: "I already told him about it."
the “correct” answer was “we have just told him about it.” I said ”We have just told him of it.” What’s he difference. And how are we to know that lui means her and not him. I’m confused.
- "Lui" is the indirect object for "him" or "her"; it can mean both.
- The problem with what you said is that native English speakers wouldn't say that. We would say, "we just told him about it" or "we just told it to him" before we would say, "we just told him of it"
It is possible to say "We just told him it," when emphasizing the direct object (it).
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).
«I spoke» translates into «j'ai parlé» ou «Je parlai» . while here we said (or told) something.
It is not correct because the verb "parler" is not used in the original sentence; the verb used is "dire". the meaning of the sentence is "we just told it to him/her".
Is lire one of those verbs that can't exist without a COI, even if it's not translated? Otherwise, this sentence should be "we just told it to her."
Pretty sure "dire" needs a direct object and that's why the "le" is there
I put "We just told her it" because I didn't know what to do with the "le." It was not accepted. I knew it was a terrible sentence in English, but I couldn't figure out where to put the "le." Can someone explain it to me, please?
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 have a lot of trouble distinguishing dire from lire on the “type what do hear. Can’t it be made clearer?
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".
I don't think it does. I'm pretty sure that "dire" requires a direct object, so you have to include the "le", even though the English equivalent allows for the simplification of removing the "it".
It is impossible to discern the "le" in the fast version of this statement.
As ruziskey2283 states, "lui" as an indirect pronoun is both masculine and feminine.
You may have been thinking of tonic pronouns in which "lui" is masculine and "elle" is feminine.
"Lui" acts as the indirect object for the third person, singular. This means that it refers to both "him" and "her". It's like how you use "le" to refer to general ideas since ideas don't have gender, in addition to referring to masculine things
See ruziskey2283's answer to Rebecca45229's question elsewhere on this page.
Nous = We. Venons de = just. Le = it. Lui = to her (or him). Dire = told.
We just told (it to) her.