"Nous mangeons son riz."
Translation:We eat his rice.
73 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
no, i disagree. i think \song.Ri sounds very different than \su.Ri (or \soo.ree in English spelling). one has the IPA vowel \o with a nasal n while the other has the IPA vowel \u without a nasal n (i can't bother to find and copy-paste IPA symbols, sorry), let alone the difference between the pronunciations of "-ons" and "un" and the inequivalence of syllables (look at the pronunciations, \jong.song.Ri vs \jong.UN.su.Ri see the difference?). if you can't differentiate between those (except noticing the extra syllable "un", in that case i'm afraid it's much more serious), i think you have a lot of listening AND speaking work to do in order to grasp French phonetics well. Keep it up the work my friend, peace!
1479
Well, it wouldnt be correct grammatically since there is no modifier for "souris" , un, des, les etc.
41
Starving dogs eat anything. In Poland in the villages no one buys dog food. They eat potatoes and scraps of meat
340
So depending on context, the sentence could mean "his" or "her" rice? If so, make that a point of note to the learner!
I understand the French meaning perfectly well. But we aren't translating to French, we're translating to English here. We don't know any specific information on the gender of the owner of the rice in this situation. Rather than assuming (correctly or incorrectly) that they are either male or female, English speakers frequently use "they/their/them" as a singular gender neutral. I realize in French the default tends to be assume male if it's unspecified (IE, using ils when talking about an unknown large group of people, even though they could be all female). It's polite to use singular they whenever you are unsure of the gender. French doesn't have this ambiguity with possessives because the possessives carry the gender marker of the object they describe (son chien vs sa chienne would both translate to his/her/their dog in English, depending on the gender of the owner of the dog).
Here's an example: Quelqu'un a oublié son livre sur la table. Would be best translated as: Somebody forgot their book on the table. Unless you knew who it was that had left their book.
@JaggerMcCo:
Duo proposes all sentences in rotation: written/dictated, French to English / English to French, multiple choice.
Therefore, not all variants can be available and an English sentence with "his/her" should not translate to "leur", nor "their" to "son/sa".
The priority here is to show the "right" French, even if it means to get back to single and explicit genders in English.
Therefore, when Duo proposes "son riz", you can pick "his rice" or "her rice" but not "their rice".
No, I mean, since the gender of the owner is not stated, it could be anything when you TRANSLATE it-- you go from gendering an inanimate object to someone who actually /does/ have a gender identity, and you don't want to go stepping on that person's toes by misgendering them. If the owner is actually male, it'd be rude to call him a she (her rice), or if it's actually a girl, it'd be weird to call her a him (his rice); or if the owner is outside the binary, you wouldn't use he/she/his/her at all. So you'd go with something more neutral-- singular "they". (And since it's possessive here, it'd be "their". Their rice.)
"They/their" is the most commonly used pronoun when someone's gender is ambiguous and is not always plural (depending on the context), which is why I think it should be accepted as a translation if someone's gender isn't explicitly stated :I
That I understand perfectly, but it is irrelevant here. When you translate a French sentence to English, you have to demonstrate that you have understood the grammar of the French sentence. Duo offers all variants (his/her/its) which match 3rd person singular in French. Using a plural for a singular or vice versa in French is simply wrong.
Well it would always be son riz because riz is masculine. Because the owner's gender is never explicitly stated why don't we state the gender of the object? If we used 'their' every time then everything would be meaningless.
Also, this is French, not English. I'm pretty sure 'their' is reserved for plurals, and singular they is simply unnecessary.
That doesn't seem to be related to my point. I will remember by answering other sorts of questions. What I'm saying is, if you pay a professional to translate that text to you from french to english and they (not he or she, since i'm being generic) randomly choose a gender to use, they could be changing the meaning of the text; therefore, it wouldn't be a good translation. I'm sorry to insist on that, but it makes a lot of difference to me to learn the best correspondance between two languages.