1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: French
  4. >
  5. "Ces expériences lui faisaien…

"Ces expériences lui faisaient aussi fait perdre la raison."

Translation:Those experiments also made her lose her mind.

April 1, 2013



"These experiences also caused her to lose her reason" Is this a reasonable translation, or would one need to use "causer" for it?


It's true that if you use "Caused" you need to translate by "Causer". But all those sentences are equivalent. The meaning remains the same.


If you want to use verb "causer", you may build your sentence as follows: "ces expériences ont causé la perte de sa raison", because you have to substitute "faire perdre qqch" by "causer la perte de qqch".


Thanks, Sitesurf. It's clearer now.


i dont understand the lui faisaient aussi here


also = aussi

made = faisaient

him = lui (to him = à-le)

lose = perdre


lui = (to) him

faisaient = made

aussi =also

perdre = lose


what really beats me is the temp,there's no corresponding concept in my native language ,and I am not able to link this messy sentence to a English one

plus,why can it have two faires


two faires?


by that I mean faissaient and fait here->made him make lose the reason...what the...


not sure, the lui here before the verb means that the person is the indirect object, so maybe this could better be translated as the:

"these experiments "that" were done on/to him, also made him lose his mind*"

*or rather caused his mind to be lost.

just my take on it though, may be wrong


I thought "lui" coud mean "him" or "her" but mine was marked incorrect when i put ".... out of his mind" :-0

In full: those experiences also made him go out of his mind (the "him" was marked as incorrect). Any ideas anyone?


yes, "lui" here is indirect object of "faisaient" (lit. to him/her = à lui or à elle).


Is the French sentence really correct? I don't understand why:

  1. it has "faisaient" and "fait" - surely only one of these is needed?

  2. The translation is in past perfect, when "faisaient" is imperfect?

Is it meant to be "ont ... fait", or just "faisaient"? Or there a nuance here I'm missing?


Duolingo seem to have decided that both preterit and present perfect could be translated either by passé composé or imparfait.

Which can work in a number of cases, but not all sentences proposed.

In the sentence proposed here, "made" can be translated to "faisaient" or "ont fait", since we have no context to understand whether the action had a certain duration in the past but is finished at the time we speak (imparfait), or whether the action started in the past and is still valid at the time we speak (passé composé).


But why does it say "...faisaient aussi fait perdre..."? Is it not enough just to say "...faisaient aussi perdre..."?


A mistake, apparently, "fait" has nothing to do here...


so the sentence should have no 'fait'? (hope so!)


I would love an explanation from s/o tied to DL of exactly how this construction works . Maybe there is some sort of idiom which I had never learned . It's a confusing situation for me . I've got lots of backround but never came across this exact thing before .


If you read the whole thread, you will see that there is a mistake in the French sentence: the word "fait" does not belong to that sentence.

For the rest of the construction:

you will notice that "lui" (meaning à+il or à+elle) is placed in front of the verb unlike in English.

and that "aussi" is after verb "faisaient" unlike in English where "also" is placed before "made".

"perdre la raison" and not "sa raison" is the way the French refers to body parts (no possessive).

note that instead of "la raison", you could use "la tête" (head) or "l'esprit" (mind)

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