"You only made pasta for lunch?"

Translation: Tu n'as préparé que des pâtes pour le déjeuner ?

[stupefaite]

What about:

au dejeuner

[Lng52-._]

stupefaite: I believe that one could say: "au dîner" (at dinner) and "au déjeuner" (at lunch).

[stupefaite]

plus au petit-dejeuner for sure

[Atervanda]

I believe that would mean you're making pasta during lunch, not in preparation of lunch. You can eat pasta « au déjeuner ».

[stupefaite]

Yes, that's the point.

[Weirdokek]

N'as tu préparé que des pâtes pour le déjeuner ? Also correct.

[pbt.hodges]

Why not "tu n'as que préparé des pâtes pour le déjeuner"

[Nathan173901]

The construction ne... que ("only") is not a negation, hence it doesn't follow the pattern of ne... pas, ne... jamais, ne... personne etc. that insert the second part (pas, jamais etc.) between the auxiliary verb and the past participle in compound tenses.

[Hazhan1]

why is it like that?

[Jojo553168]

What is your question exactly ?

[Lng52-._]

Hazhan1: I think I know what you are asking. "que des" means "only".

[Fitniac]

This is odd. The 'only' really modifies the object of the verb (pasta) not the verb (made). The "correct" English would be "you made only pasta for lunch".

[Kevin968039]

@Fitniac

Historically speaking you are correct. That's been the correct scholastic form. Conversationally speaking, however, the structure Duo is using has gained popularity over decades of use. People, like languages, change over time. Words get retired and words get added. Likewise, sentence structures may also change~ as well as their acceptance among scholars and teachers.
A lot of those changes are our fault (writers), but the majority of language evolution occurs naturally in all cultures.
(not always for the better.)

[BaroldThe1]

❤❤❤ - is this supposed to be a joke? Get rid of this horrible voice.