"Je suis partie après que nous avons mangé."
Translation:I left after we ate.
The 'correct' translation I have is 'I left after we have eaten' which doesn't really make sense. The above sentence is better
"I left after we had eaten" is marked incorrect, but I feel like that at least share the same meaning, but I don't know if there's a reason why it shouldn't be accepted.
there are two types of past tenses that should be used in English. I left (imperfect) action completed... however there was an action completed before I left....so that would need to be correctly addressed... saying...I left after we had eaten.
It has been a long time since I have taken a French grammar class, so I don't know whether I will explain this clearly.
The "had" plus particle is the pluperfect tense, AKA the past perfect. If I am correct, to be translated as "had eaten," the French sentence would be "J'ai parti après que nous avions mangé."
It is unclear what you wrote. Was it "after we have eaten," "after we ate," or after we had eaten"?
Here's a quick little answer. Somebody else probabably has a better explanation. The "que" is needed to separate the two clauses, "je suis partie" and "nous avons mange." The "apres" without the "que" would have worked in "je suis partie apres le diner."
It's true that French speakers only use subjunctive with "après que", and if you use indicative you will get corrected, as it is unnatural and sounds like a mistake.
But unfortunately, this is one of several instances where the Académie decided to prescribe something that goes completely against how the language naturally works, pretending that "après que" must be followed by indicative as it describes an action that already occured.
Duolingo only accepts "proper" Académie-approved French and therefore probably won't accept subjunctive, but it's important to keep in mind that "après que nous ayons" is indeed what's used in practice.
you cannot say 'we left after we HAVE eaten' - either it's 'after we ate' or it is 'after we HAD eaten'
Yes. But experience shows me that it can take an awful long time for it to be altered in the English, first it has to overcome the American-isation of the translations!
Well, the only thing that I can think of is to hope that someone like Sitesurf reads these comments.
My translation was : I left after we had eaten. Your translation shows: I left after we have eaten. I think that have has to be had.. left is in past tense
yes , well perceived Dixie. the correct use of past tenses is not that hard... if only Duo would get it right and not confuse most if not all of learners....
The purpose of the exercise was to translate the sentence. "Nous avons mangé" means "we ate" or "we have eaten." It does not mean "we had eaten." "We left after we ate" is correct grammatical English. "We have eaten" does not make sense in this sentence and I don't know why it is shown as such on some people's screens.
I wrote ' I left after we had eaten' which is correct English. It was marked incorrect and gave the correct answer as ' I left after we have eaten' which is incorrect English and simply doesn't make sense. If they can't get the English right makes me doubt their French. Come on Duolingo get your act together
Couldn't agree more - it seems that this problem of poor/incorrect English is becoming a common theme - not a good advert for a language learning site!
Je suis partie is used if the speaker is a woman? Je suis parti for a man?
I think: I left... after we had eaten is better English grammatically. the two past tenses are not the same and in English you would make a difference... one happened after the other one. so the correct answer should be accepted and not marked wrongly in favour to an incorrect English translation.
This is a translation exercise. "Nous avons mangé" is in the passé composé tense and the word "had" is wrong in the passé composé. "I left after we ate" is completely grammatical.
The correction they gave was "I left after we have eaten" which to me, is bad grammar.
I will try. The construction "nous avons mangé" is in the passé composé tense. The correct translation is either "we ate" or "we have eaten." There are times when avoir + the past participle may be translated to a single action (ate, danced,etc.) or using have (have eaten, have danced). However, in the context of this sentence, there is only one choice: "we ate."
Rejected for missing 'e' on parti does the 'e' signify past tense ? Merci pour votre réponses
At the time that I completed this exercise a long time ago, it was simply translation. Were you required to write the French? If so, the "e" would mean a feminine subject. IMO, it should not have been marked incorrect.
"Nous avons mangé" is in the passé composé tense. It translates as either a simple action (ate) or the past participle with the verb "have" (have eaten). You have to go by the context of the sentence to determine the meaning - ate or have eaten, which in this case is "we ate." "Had" is never correct as a translation of the passé composé.
"Had eaten" is not the correct answer. The correct answer is "We left after we ate," which is a simple past action. Read my comments above.
I left after we had eaten is grammatically correct in English, whilst I left after we ate is incorrect... with this exercise I have trouble to remember the wrong English, that Duo requires
"Nous avons mangé" is in the passé composé tense. It translates as either a simple action (ate) or the past participle with the verb "have" in the present tense (I have eaten, you have eaten, he/she/it has eaten, we have eaten, they have eaten). You have to go by the context of the sentence to determine the meaning - ate or have eaten. In this case, the correct answer is "we ate." "Had" is never correct as a translation of the passé composé.
I'm not sure how to tell from the French here why 'after we ate' is accepted and not 'after we had eaten'. Both translations imply that the event (eating) is finished, so how is one wrong and one right?
The construction "nous avons mange" is in the passe compose. "Had" is not a correct translation of the passe compose. To mean "after we had eaten," the French sentence would have to be "apres que nous avions mange."
Why is it sometimes "j'ai" and sometimes "je suis" for past tense? Does it differ from verb to verb and its just something we have to memorize?
It is the same as in English with to have and to be.. Here, you don' t have any specific rule to know if it will be être or avoir, but 80% of the time, it is j' ai and not je suis
There are certain verbs that use the verb etre as an auxiliary verb, including partir. See the link below. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/french/french-i/french-i-the-passe-compose/the-passe-compose-with-etre