"Il commence à réviser dix mois avant les examens !"

Translation:He is starting to study ten months before the exams!

July 15, 2020

This discussion is locked.


"to revise" is a better translation (UK Eng). To study can suggest he starts his course then. réviser/to revise is going back over work you've already studied to remind yourself/ improve.


Right. When you revise for an examination, you read things again and make notes in order to be prepared for the examination.


Absolutely agree. Surely this is not just in UK English, but would be universal.


I have never heard revise used to mean review. In North America we say review. Revise means to change or update something. Its interesting to learn about English in a French lesson!


Yes. If you read my comment below you will find that I have discovered that the use of the two words 'review' and 'revise' are not the same in North America as they are elsewhere.


Steve, Duo isn't using the word "revise" even though that is the meaning of the French word. So the UK usage is not favoured...


Can this be the singular instance in which Duolingo favors U.K. word usage over U.S. usage?!


Steve286496, what usage are you referring to?


In American English, we would say 'review'.


I'm American, and I say study. I study for exams by reviewing my notes or the text or doing practice exercises. I would never say I reviewed for an exam. It must be regional usage.


Good to hear Alex. Thanks for that information. Cheers from Australia where we study for exams. :-)


We study to learn that which we do not know, we revise to reinforce that which we have already studied (but perhaps have forgotten). Also Australian.


Of course revision (or review) can also be described as study, as study is a more general word. However this sentence is specifically talking about the kind of study that is revision (review).


Thank you for clarifying the nuance.
And confirming, in my (southern American) usage, I study to review material I should already know AND to learn new material.


Not in my experience. When I was at school and university we always said we were studying for exams. (Melbourne Victoria). However I agree that we also study things we do not know. (He is studying to be a doctor)


I'm also American, and I would also say 'study for exams', but we aren't being asked to translate 'study for exams' (that would be 'preparer des examens', I believe).


This sentence is saying that he is "revising for his exams" ten months in advance, which is the point being made. Studying well in advance is normal, revision is usually done only days or weeks before the exam.


Sorry, that's no help. As stated many times above, revising isn't used in this context in America, so I am not getting the nuance. Study early or study late, it's the same thing. Revising to me means editing or changing something.
Reviewing notes or material is one of the activities we might undertake whilst studying.


Then what is this sentence saying? It seems to say that he is studying for the exams ten months in advance. What else could it possibly mean?


It means that he started his "crash" revision program ten months before the exam instead of days/weeks before the exam like a normal human.


So Alex, how do you distinguish between the studying which you do before you start to "réviser" and the studying which you do after you start to "réviser"?

This exercise is describing the latter, and specifically NOT the former.


The difference would be clear from context. "I studied mechanical engineering at Auburn University" and ""I studied for the exam during the hour before class" would be understood to be different activities. I would only be more specific about the "revising" type of studying if someone asked how I studied. ""Oh, I reviewed my notes, did a couple of practice problems, and made a formula sheet."

I can't say revised (this usage is new to me) because that means edited, and would cause confusion. But I'm glad to have learned this is a thing elsewhere.


B_adger I am not being obtuse, and since you resort to insults, this will be my final comment here and I will unsubscribe from this thread. (My pronoun is she, if that helps you judge me.)

Review can be used, but it is not CONMONLY said. Cram would not work in this sentence. Study is the most common word. We don't need two different verbs since CONTEXT makes it obvious, like every other word that have multiple meanings!!!! I have given clear examples, I have polled my family, others have provided references.
It's time to move on from this.
Study (US, primary), review (US alternate more specific), and revise (elsewhere) should all be accepted answers.


From similar discussions in this thread and elsewhere it seems there is significant regional variation on how we describe the difference between studying something for the first time and going over it again in preparation for an exam. In the UK the latter is commonly referred to as "revising", however it seems clear that that term is not used in the USA. Do you used "cramming" at all as an alternative?


Martyn, yes "cramming" is used in the US. It implies a bigger knowledge gap or insufficient time allotted than routine studying.


Then, in my opinion, "cramming" would be a better translation of this sentence than "studying", because "réviser" does not mean "studying".


Then my explanation wasn't clear. I do know what cramming means, and that term is used in the US, but it's a specific (desperate) type of studying, and I never did it. I studied for exams. I quizzed my daughter, to confirm across generations, and she said that she also studied for tests. That is still the (or a) correct translation of this sentence in the US. We understand you use a different word than study. But we use study.


Then I repeat, how do you communicate to us the distinction between when you "étudier" and when you "réviser" ?

Because the rest of the world considers it an important enough distinction to require two verbs.

Since you say that you don't have a verb for it, how do you communicate the distinction?

If you don't want to use "cram" how would you say that this guy started to cram for his exams nine months earlier than everybody else?

Because I can assure you, "study" doesn't cut it!


But Alex, you seem to feel that "cram" gives the wrong impression and that "study" gives the right impression, which is the opposite of what the French sentence says.

The French sentence is implying that "il" is deranged.


Graeme, Alex has already stated he/she (and North America) uses the word "review" to mean to look at material again, but not "revise". It seems he/she is just being obtuse and argumentative in insisting that the broader term "study" would be used here.


But I don't think that "He is starting to review ten months before the exams!" would be understood to mean "cram" either, do you?

Certainly not outside the US, and I don't think throughout the US either.

So if I am correct, that would also be a mistranslation.


Hmm. Interesting. My understanding of 'review' is along the lines of this definition from the web: to review: A formal assessment of something with the intention of instituting change if necessary. However, if I go to dictionary.com one of the meanings is: the process of going over a subject again in study or recitation in order to fix it in the memory or summarize the facts....which supports what you said. So the UK meaning is not universal. Sorry.


No need to apologize...on the other hand, I wasn't aware of the British/Commonwealth usage of 'revise'. Here is a pretty comprehensive discussion of the two terms as they are used in different varieties of English: https://www.myenglishteacher.eu/blog/what-are-the-differences-between-revise-and-review/ And this answers a question that had arisen in my mind, which is whether we Yanks had inflicted our corrupt usage on our neighbors to the north: "Review as a verb (transitive, US, Canada):

"To look over again (something previously written or learned), especially in preparation for an examination." (from https://diffsense.com/diff/review/revision)


Apparently Canadians have not totally succumbed to American usage. My wife (who is an academic) tells me that a Canadian-born colleague typically uses 'revise' where Americans would use 'review'.


It would appear that Larousse:


and Reverso:


(and others) neglected to consult Duolingo when they wrote their translations for 'réviser'.


My old Cassell doesn't give 'study' as one of the translations of 'reviser', either. See also:

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-french/revise https://www.linguee.com/french-english/translation/réviser.html https://en.bab.la/dictionary/french-english/réviser

Linguee is the only place I can find that mentions 'study' as a possible translation, with the notation 'less common':



My French dictionary and my French friends tell me that the better translation is "revise" - literally to see again. My French friends also tell me that they would use réviser to mean to revise as oppose to study.


Do you mean 'revise' in the BrE sense of 'study again', i.e. 'review' (which is a cognate of 'revise') in AmE? See https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/french-english/réviser


etudier - to study ( with acute accent) Reviser - to revise


As was discussed in considerable detail above, 'reviser' also means to study in BrE.


A true nerd!


I don't see how this can be present tense i.e. "is starting". Either he has started or he hasn't.


Ne faut-il pas prononcer DI (dix mois) au lieu de DIS ? qu 'on entend? (Puisqu'il y a après dix une consonne)


Je pense que si, oui.


exact, on prononce "di" et non pas "disse"...qu'on se le dise!


"He starts to study ten months before the exams" was accepted.


Unfortunately, perhaps, revise and review have several meanings in English, some of which are similar and some rather different. From the extensive discussion here there is clearly also a transatlantic difference in how they are used. I looked up the origin of "revise" and found this: https://www.etymonline.com/word/revise - from which it's clear that the original meaning in French was "to look at again". From the same source here is the origin of "review": https://www.etymonline.com/word/review Some differences and some similarities! What seems to be the consensus here is that either "to revise" or "to review" should be acceptable but simply "to study" should not.


Thank you for the research. It is interesting. However, the conclusion can't be that "study" is unacceptable, because that is the only thing I (and many others) would say in this context. All three should be accepted. Revise means something very different here (to edit or change). I would understand "review" if someone said it, but I would only use it if I was asked to explain the details of my studying... There are multiple ways to study for a test, for me personally reviewing my notes is low down the list of likely activities. I might read, I might do practice exercises, I might flip through a textbook. But for me, the main verb for all types of activities to prepare for an exam is "to study".


I understand your point, but that may not be Duo's intention here. The statement is given with an exclamation mark. This implies surprise that he is doing something a lot longer before his exams than might be expected - in this case "revising/reviewing" what has been taught/learned. In my experience from school & uni a course of study lasting, say 2 academic years (6 terms/semesters) would cover the syllabus in about about 5 terms, leaving a period dedicated to going back over the whole syllabus (revision/review) immediately before the exams. "Study" is a more generic term applying to all elements of the learning process. Similarly in preparing for any other type of test you would learn stuff, do all the exercises etc and then if you have time, go back over it before the test. The last bit is the revision/review.


The nuances are real. However, we simply don't say "review" this way. I've confirmed this with my husband who has a liberal arts education. I wondered if my engineering path gave me a different perspective since preparation for math/science tests is different than in the humanities courses. But I hear you: review/revise is more precise. And we have learned something about the nuance in French and that there are different words for studying and reviewing in French. But, they are unlikely to remove study as the default translation, because that's what we commonly say. ... But it does make the reverse translation trickier.


In Canada we say "to review" To study the notes again.


Although, as I said above, there is at least one Canadian (a colleague of my wife) who uses 'revise'.


My sister is soing GCSEs and she started 12 months ago


Duo, and here you have not to pronounce the "x" of "dix" ... that's french ;-)

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