1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: French
  4. >
  5. "Antoine is absolutely bad in…

"Antoine is absolutely bad in gymnastics."

Translation:Antoine est absolument nul en gymnastique.

July 16, 2020



What's the difference between nul and mal? Both seem to translate to bad.


Mal is either a noun or an adverb, not an adjective. Mauvais(e) would be the corresponding adjective, and nul is just a rather colloquial way to say mauvais.


And why isn't mauvais accepted?


Perhaps there was something else mistaken in your answer?

"Antoine est absolument mauvais en [gym. / gymnastique. / gymnastiqùe]"

are all acceptable variations using "mauvais".

  • 1703

The English sentence is poorly worded. In most English-speaking countries, the sentence would more likely be "Antoine is absolutely useless at gymnastics". I have rarely heard anyone or anything referred to as "absolutely bad".


If "useless" is inutile maybe it's "Antoine is absolutely lousy at gymnastics." It's the one that works in Google Translate so far . . .


Why can't we say absolument mauvais à la gymnastique ?


Probably the same reason why in is en for feminine country names, while au is used for masculine ones. That's not saying why, just that the reasons are probably the same! Tbh, I have no idea why. It could just be because en is quicker to say than à la, so at some point it was adopted. There's weird "just because" things in English too ¯_(ツ)_/¯


I agree. I have the same question. It's "au tennis."


What an absolutely rubbish sentence the English solution is, in fact it's not English it's gibberish!


Why "est...EN gymnastique" but "joue AU tennis"? Is this tied to the verb, or is there another reason?


Who writes this English? Absolutely bad??!!

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