From what I can make out from my F/E dictionary, 'reposer' (used as intransitive vb.) means 'to rest'. Past participle = reposé, takes aux. vb. avoir.
Pay attention to this kind of verbs that can go pronominal... When they are pronominal, they go with être, when they're not pronominal, they go with avoir.
Je me suis reposé = I rested
J'ai reposé mes yeux = I rested my eyes
« rester » is in the infinitive. This sentence is in the past tense, so you must say « il est resté »
No, it's not a construction that works at all.
The English sentence "He is to stay in the hotel" can actually have two quite different meanings.
He is going to stay in the hotel: "The ambassador was not hurt in the explosion. He is to stay in the hotel until the embassy is repaired." Il va rester dans l'hôtel.
He must stay in the hotel: "It is too dangerous for our agent to be seen in the city. He is to stay in the hotel until I return to escort him to safety." Il doit rester dans l'hôtel.
yes, fr. 'rester' can also mean 'to remain', but Duo's sentence isn't written in the present tense, right?
I am confused why "he has stayed in the hotel" is correct, but "he had stayed in the hotel" is not. In English these sentences equate to the same thing. Although 'has' and 'had' generally have two very different meanings in English (e.g. 'has a toy' vs 'had a toy'), in this case the meaning doesn't change. Is it because 'had stayed' is redundant in English and should just be 'stayed'? Or should this translation also be accepted? I am going to propose it, but I feel like I'm missing something fundamental since I keep making this mistake. Learning French is making me question my English :-)
I'm sorry, but "he has stayed" and "he had stayed" are NOT the same thing in English. They are two different verb tenses and mean different things.
Also, in French, "he had stayed" would be "Il était resté"
I really must protest your equating the two verb tenses. We use the past perfect ("had stayed") to refer to events that are further in the past than some other event.
He has stayed in the same hotel every year.
He had stayed in the same hotel every year, but then it was torn down.
I am out of sugar; I have used it all.
I was out of sugar; I had used it all.
Verb 'rester' takes 'étre' as an auxiliarry in passé composé NOT 'avoir'.Hope this helps.
is + past participle is the passive form (he is heard by the police).
the present perfect would be has + past participle and could be a possible translation for the French sentence.
Here you have to remember that we French use passé composé (which goes as the present perfect in its form) as a way to replace the passé simple (simple past) as it has grown obsolete. HTH
Using "did" in this fashion stresses the fact of staying, and there's no such stress in the French sentence. If you wanted to express this sentence in French, you would use "bien".
Ex. Il est bien resté dans l'hôtel.
With the auxiliary "être", the participle must agree with the subject in gender and number.
So, "Il est resté..." = "He remained...."
"Elle est restée..." = "She remained..."
It is not "optional" which one you use. Either might be appropriate, depending on the context.
Your sentence is completely different, which is why it's wrong. The meanings may be similar, but otherwise they're different.
In English you can say you stayed at a hotel or in a hotel, I don't see why this shouldn't be the case in French too.
In French, you "rester" dans l'hôtel. That doesn't mean that you have to say "in" in English, however.
"Stood" is not the past tense of "stay", it is the past tense of "stand". There is a common little English joke you may have heard, where someone says, when he's having a frustrating day, "I should have stood in bed". It's a joke because it is a mistake.
(I live in fear of running afoul of such jokes in French - Haha)
Is this also the correct translation of "he has stayed inside the hotel" too or would that differ in French as well?
In French, "on est resté dans l'hôtel". But in English, we do not say "we stayed INSIDE the hotel", but "we stayed IN (or) AT the hotel".
I was thinking for example "We heard something so we went to check it out, while Yves stayed inside the hotel". Would it still be "[il] est resté dans l'hôtel ?"
Yes, and you can say "in" or "inside" in English in that context, although using "inside" limits the interpretation to the circumstance you describe. Using "in" allows it to work both ways, just as the French "dans l'hôtel". In the common sense of "il est resté dans l'hôtel", English speakers would not say "inside the hotel".
Why is "he was staying in the hotel" not accepted but "he has stayed" is? Is there some sort of discrepancy between the two? Also I thought it was "was" because "est" is a conjugation of être, not avoir.
"He was staying" and "He has stayed" are different ideas.
"He was staying" is the past continuous tense:
and is best translated with the imparfait - "Il restait"
"He has stayed" is present perfect tense
and is best translated with the passé composé - "Il est resté"
As for using "was" because of the auxiliary "est", this is a deceptively logical idea, and you are certainly not the first to be misled by it. However, whether a verb in the passé composé is one of the few that call for être, or the many that call for avoir, there is no difference whatever in the form of the translation into English. They are exactly the same.
"He is staying" is present tense. Note that French doesn't have progressive tenses, so "He stays in the hotel" and "He is staying in the hotel" would both be translated as "Il reste dans l'hôtel".
"Il est resté" is past tense, specifically passé composé. Do not be misled by the auxiliary verb "est". The form is precisely the same as, for example, "Il a mangé" ("He ate," or "he has eaten"); the only difference is that some few French verbs use être instead of avoir to construct this tense - but the translation into English takes exactly the same form with either.
As you become more adept at recognizing the past participle in French, you will see that it will take that form in English as well. I.e., the past participle of rester is resté and will be translated as "stayed". Just like the past participle of manger is mangé and will be translated as "ate" (or "eaten", depending on which tense you use in English, present perfect or simple past).
Why not 'it has stayed in the hotel'? I'm confused about when il can be used to mean it.
It depends on the context.When "il" describes a person,then you translate it as "he".That is why here we translate it as he.But when "il" is part of an impersonal expression,then we translate it as "it".For example "Il fait froid"="It's cold","il est nécessaire de(faire quelque chose)"="it is necessary to(do something)".If you wanted to say "he is cold",then you would say "Il a froid".So every time that you see this pronoun(il) think;it is an impersonal expression or it describes the actions,feelings or general condition of a person?
To simplify it a lot, it takes the place "avoir" would have in most passé composé sentences. Its closest English equivalent would be "has" as in "he has stayed".
Au contraire. "He's" means both "he is" and "he has". The latter is correct for this sentence.
Two caveats to bear in mind:
- Contractions are rather informal in English, so you have to judge if it's appropriate in this context.
- Sometimes duo doesn't accept contractions or just screws them up.
Why etre and not avoir? Il a reste dan lhotel. I thought etre is only used for movement verbs and reflexive verbs