"I removed this object, which wasn't used for anything."
Translation:J'ai enlevé cet objet qui ne servait à rien.
18 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
1049
The action goes on continuing in the past; it has not ended yet. In other words, the completion of the action is not defined with respect to time(for the clause). In such cases, imparfait takes over passé composé.
Bonus point: If it were, ".... qui n'a servi à rien", it will explicitly state that the action is completed/ended/finished in the past and no longer continues. Also, one point to note is that habitual actions generally make use of imparfait.
- 1331
My view, actions in imparfait tense must have ended before the present time. That is the basic meaning of "imperfect" in grammar.
Actions in passé composé tense may (or may not) continue into the present time, effectively a present "perfect" tense.
I don't know the grammar rules and terms for it, but from an earlier lesson I learned that 'qui' is used before verbs (even when 'ne' is used) and 'que' is used before people (je, tu, il, vous, etc.).
- 1067
J'ai énlevé cet objet, qui ce n'été sert à rien. This is difficult and I think there are many ways to say it. Please have some interest in correcting us. We are not learning anything this way.
- 1331
Most of us are learning. Maybe you need to do more levels of preceding modules so you will understand better. Obviously you're running along a little too fast.
- 1373
That would be, "I removed this object that wasn't using anything." That is not what the sentence in this exercise says.
That comma isn't supposed to be there, eh?
Isn't the rule that each phrase on either side of the comma should make a grammatically correct sentence minus the subordinating conjunction?
I removed this object. Wasn't used for anything. That isn't grammatically correct.
