1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: French
  4. >
  5. "Les poches des vêtements"

"Les poches des vêtements"

Translation:The clothing's pockets

December 20, 2012



"The clothing's pockets". Who would ever say that - it sounds ridiculous.


'The clothes' pockets' is also a correct solution and would be used in regular conversation ("Where are my keys?" "I don't know, check the clothes' pockets.").


This is the most sensible interpretation, but even still, I've never heard someone say "the clothes' pockets" in any context. People either say, "the pockets" or they say, "the trouser pockets" or " the jacket pockets" etc.


My wife tells me to check my clothes pockets every time I put something in the laundry


I'll bet she does. Haha!

[deactivated user]

    I wrote "The clothes' pockets." but it said that that is wrong!


    I wrote it too and said it was correct, but that i should have written "clothes pockets" instead of "clothes' pockets"


    thts what i am saying..


    Un vêtement refers to a single article of clothing, and it's incorrect to translate it as "clothes", which is plural and refers to a collection of clothing. This would have to be des vêtements.



    Yes agree I went with the more than one as it states des so some ???


    I agree with you on this point


    I would say that it makes sense in Canada


    Why is "des" translated in "the"? I wrote "the pockets of some clothes", but it said that correct answer was "the pockets of the clothes"


    "De les" (of the) becomes "des."


    Yes.. that is more precise.. but in all prior lessons "des" could be translated as "some".. so why not here? I am also confused..



    "Des" can sometimes translate as "some". Other times it translates as "of the"

    "Des" = "some" when it refers to an unspecified amount of something.

    "Des" = "of the" when it refers to something belonging to something/someone.

    We can see which it should be by trying to fit either "some" or "of the" into the sentence - see which one works.

    "The pockets some clothes"

    "The pockets of the clothes"

    In this case we can see that "some" does not work but "of the" fits nicely.

    Try a different example- "Je manges des pommes"

    "I am eating of the apples"

    "I am eating some apples"

    Here we see that "some" fits nicely but "of the" makes no sense.

    Important to remember - although "des" can sometimes be "some" and other times it can be "of the" these are two entirely different meanings - do not combine them - "des" never translates as "some of the". This is a mistake that many learners make.


    thank you Patrick: very well explained!


    This is very helpful.


    The pockets of some clothes=Les poches DE certaines vêtements.


    Yes, that is more precise.. but in all prior lessons "des" could be translated as "some".. so why not here? I am also confused..


    It's a context thing. "Des" is a contraction of "de" and "les," so it could literally translate to "of the." However, sometimes, it is used in the same way that you might use the word "some" in English. Many basic words in English (e.g. for, what, to, that) will have many different meanings depending on the context, same for French.

    In this particular example "The pockets some clothing" would not make sense whereas "The pockets of the clothing" does. More naturally, it could be translated as "the clothing's pockets," since the only way to explain possession in French is to say " blank of the blank." For example "Le jouet du garçon" means "The boy's toy" even though it literally translates to "The toy of the boy."


    "Some" would have to be du, de la, or de l' depending on gender... You use these three when you don't know how much of and item you have. For example, saying "Je mange des/une pizza(s)" would be saying "I'm eating pizzas" or "I'm eating a pizza". Sounds ridiculous right? You're not eating a WHOLE pizza by yourself, right (I hope)? Des goes along with the un and une articles. If you want to say "I'm eating (some) pizza", you'd say "Je mange de la pizza". Now, if my four years of French are correct, I'm pretty sure this applies to clothing as well, and is not particular to food. Correct me if I am mistaken.


    Well we know they're not women's clothing.


    vetements is plural. so surely it would be the clothings' pockets, showing that there is plural clothes and also showing possesion, as opposed to the clothing's pockets which I thought would imply singular clothing :)


    Clothing is only plural in English. You cannot have 'a clothing', only 'some clothing' (several items) or 'a piece of clothing'


    Ok, thanks - this clears it up - the phrase " clothings' " is never correct in English because the word clothing is already plural - so the "women's dresses" is correct - while the "womens' dresses" is incorrect


    But just to confuse things, clothing is treated as a collective noun - so you say "The clothing is expensive", but not "The clothing are expensive". You use 'are' if you want to say "The clothes are expensive".


    I think the confusion is partly because the hover-dictionary meaning given is "clothes" among other reasons like not telling us about des having the possible meaning "of the"


    not "The pockets of some clothes?"


    You've learned that there's a word « des » that can be translated as "some," but if you translate it as such here, then where can "of" come from? Therefore, you have to logically conclude that this isn't the partitive article « des » but the combination of « de + les ».


    poches is feminine. Why is there "les?"


    Hi Wallace. La and Le when addressing a plural noun (Vetements=plural) both default to Les.


    Oh! Thank you so much, that makes sense now!


    How am I supposed to differentiate between "le poche" and "les poches"?


    Hi again Christian. As I've explained to you on another thread, The Singular Le s/l Luh, La s/l Lah (as in Doh, Ray, Me, etc) but the plural Les s/l Lay. The trick is always in the Article not the noun.


    Jackjon or anyone, what is the meaning of (s/l) ?


    Hello Dar. s/l=sounds like.


    Why is "the clothes' pockets" incorrect?


    it would be awkward but correct to put an apostrophe after clothes as the clothes' pockets


    Doesnt giving us an uppercase at the start of the sentence sorta give it away what the first of the sentence is? Not really helpful when youre learning


    wHAT? .........Danielli


    Wait, so 'des' means= some (plural of un or une). In this sentence des is being using as the plural of de, which means of in English. So basically, de=of in the plural 'des', Right?



    "Des" can be the plural indefinite article - the plural of un/une as you say.

    It can also be a contraction of "de+les" (of the).

    So in this particular exercise "des" = "of the".


    The pockets on the clothes. If you allow the clothing's pockets then surely this is ok?


    To be valid, a translation not only has to connote the same idea. It also has to survive the process of back-translation. That does not.


    No, LM. "The pockets ON the clothing= Les poches SUR les vetements"


    Corret me, someone, if am wrong, but, could this not also be translated as " The pockets of the clothes"? If not, please explain.


    Yes it can, Luminescent.


    "The clothing pockets" should also be accepted here.


    when we hear this it does not sound like this


    vetements means clothes.. then why cant it be..

    the clothe's pockets


    In English "the pockets" is more common than "the clothes' pockets", it's an over specification in my opinion.


    Hi The Dutch. Here we start a little debate. How many Pockets are there in the world? A small bag or pouch sewn into a garment (like in this task)? One's financial resources? A small, isolated patch, group or area? An opening on a billiards/snooker table for balls to fall into to score points? A protected area behind the line of scrimmage in A.F from which the quarterback throws a pass? The hollow in a baseball mitt in which the ball is caught or held ? (Nouns). Adjectives; Of a suitable size, fit for purpose, as in "Pocket Dictionary"? As a Verb; To put into one's pocket? Take for oneself, especially dishonestly? In Billiard and Snooker; to drive a ball into a pocket, as in "He pockets the Blue."? Or in Usage; To be in someone's pocket, as Under Their Influence? Or closely involved with someone? Or lost/gained through a transaction as in Out Of or In Pocket ? It just goes on and on. You see, The Dutch, French is specific and as we are Learning, isn't it best that we agree to be taught?


    I would say "the clothing pockets".


    Wouldn't work Anna. The sentence clearly indicates that the pockets Belong to the clothing. Anyroad, "The Clothing Pockets" is incorrect English. Needs a possessive


    this is a really weird sentence>:)


    This is a really weird sentance.


    Weird aids memory, Joya. It's either clever or stupid, either work to remember.


    It accepted single-garment as an answer - isn't vetements plural? So the pocket of the garments? Also, it accepts a non-apostrophe possessive plural 'garments'. Possessive and plural would be garments'.


    It says that pouches is female yet we have got a "les" before it as le corresponds to male: isn't is fishy?


    No, because the plural definite article is « les » for both « le » and « la ». (Also, it's "feminine", not "female".)


    This is definitely a weird sentence. I would never refer to 'my clothing's pockets'. Is this the most accurate translation? Could I use this phrase to refer to 'the pockets of/in my dress' for example?


    I thought that when de is used to describe something it can't change into des.


    You would never say that in English. You would say the pockets in the clothing....


    Really, Catherine? When you say "You" I think you mean to say "I" because I certainly would and have used such a structure as a recorded songwriter and poet of some 58 yeas.


    Sometimes they do this in spanish. My dad says that its like talking backwards, but i dont belive it. HELP?


    Hi Ansley. The Clothing's Pockets / The Pockets Of The Clothing. Both work but for me, it is an "Unfortunate" sentence. It has drawn so much debate which may be a good thing. The debate centres around plural/singular and the use of the apostrophe which is really very tricky and as you point out, the inversion of the structure. There is so much going on in this sentence and so early on in the course which, in itself, is only basic. This sentence isn't! I hear your call for HELP! but I can't swim! (I LOVE your icon. It's as complex as this task sentence.) Respect, JJ.


    Why is clothing OK in one sentence and not another? The garments pockets is equally stupid


    that's just stupid


    "The clothing's pockets" doesn't register for me but "The garment's pockets" does? What's the difference?


    I used "the clothing pockets" but was told it should have been "garments", a word I haven't seen offered in this discussion.


    I don't know what's happening with Duo recently David. It seems to have its knickers in a twist. I looked at Duo's own solution at the top of this page and it uses Clothing's, not Garment's. to be fair, you did miss out the apostrophe in Clothing's. Also, you will be offered words that you haven't come across before. That is how any language is learnt by anyone, Native or otherwise. We don't know a single word to start with, we just "Picked Them Up" as we went along the learning curve. Didn't we? We weren't born knowing our language, every word was new.


    From "les" sound, we can know it's puches. But how did we know it's vêtements, noy vêtement.


    Hiya Carol. Always note the article. Here it is Des so the following noun will be plural.


    THIS IS STUPID, I'm doing it all correct and it's marking wrong


    For me it said "the pockets in clothes". But I don't see "en" anywhere... go figure.


    "the pockets of the clothes" is correct answer too. So, des=of the


    I got this one as a listening exercise. How was I supposed to know that it was plural?


    you can hear: "les" and "des". both are plural


    I know they're both plurals, but if I need to know the difference between "le" and "les" and "poche" and "poches", how am I going to spot it?


    Hiya Piano. The clue is in the articles. Le (singular) s/l Luh. Les (plural) s/l Lay. Du/De La+ D' are all singular and Du s/l Dyoo, De La s/l Duh Lah and D' s/l D+the noun's vowel sound. Les, plural s/l Lay, plural and Des, s/l Day is plural.


    Oh, thank you. I couldn't really hear that. "Merci" :P


    I disagree with everything about this sentence ngl


    Well now, Georgia; everybody is allowed their own opinion but when it comes to things like Maths or Grammar it is set and if you are going to learn them, then you learn them. You are already inventing your own language, I mean, what does ngl mean On A French Language Learning Course Please?


    The translation it gave me before, is simply ridiculous. Who says "the pockets of the clothing"? Even "the clothing's pockets" make more sense, though it's supposed to be the "clothings'"...


    Hiya Thalia, the apostrophe can be tricky. Sometimes it indicates a missing letter, sometimes missing letters, sometimes to indicate possession as it does here, and sometimes it is left out although there is possession. (Eg: The dog is eating it's dinner and wagging its tail. Tricky!) Duo have the correct use of the possessive apostrophe here. So, as there is only the one possession and Clothing already indicates a plural; ending Clothing with "s" without the apostrophe is a double plural and incorrect. There are many writings on the subject and there appears to be "Schools Of Though" around it and reading them all tends to lead to confusion rather than increased clarity. I've read through 17 grammarians on the subject, all professors, and this post is a precis of their work. I have found the work of Bernard Lott, OBE, MA, PhD, formerly Controller, English Language Teaching, the British Council the clearest for the lay folk like me.


    typing it correct but not being accepted


    It said my answer was wrong twice


    OK Quidditchpotter, let me guess; your answer was The Bus Is Pink. No? OK , was it I have 28 Toes? No? Alright it must have been He Walks Backwards Up The Staircase. No? Oh, dear. Surely it was The Crow Lives In The Barrel, Fight Is Its Fancy. No? Well this is getting difficult. I give in. Please tell us what your answer was and maybe then we may be of some help. Strange that Duo answers twice; that's a fox also.


    I put the clothes' pockets and it counted it as wrong


    It tells me that i should have written 'the clothes pockets' instead of 'the clothes' pockets'. Duolingo, you need to learn your apostrophe rules!


    Hazel, although I agree with you, the apostrophe is so tricky and changes between True English and Noah Webster's American "English." Look at this for example as a correct use of the tricky apostrophe: The Dog Is Eating It's food (apostrophe) and wagging its tail (no apostrophe where one may think there should be one?) With respect JJ.


    It shouldn't be eating "it's" food. An apostrophe is only used as a contraction and never as an indicator of possession for "it". And in cases such as "piano", in the possessive case an apostrophe would be used before the "s" for one piano, or after the "s" for multiple pianos. I.E. The piano's keys, the pianos' placements. For always-plural words or others that end in "s", the post-"s" apostrophe is appropriate.


    Is saying "the pockets on clothing incorrect"? I wrote that and apparently the right answer is "the pockets of clothing"...this is such a small difference


    Hiya Grantland. The pockets ON the clothing is different from The clothing's pockets both in French and in English. In French the pockets ON the clothing=Les poches SUR les vetements. The clothing's pockets may well be pockets that are yet to be sewn onto the clothing. Additionally Duo gives the solution with an apostrophe (see top of this page) and DES translates to Of The/Some, not just Of. With respect, JJ.


    So today the correction for "The pockets, clothes" is "The pockets in clothes" I admit it sounds better than other options, but the hover meanings did not announce that des in this case is indicating possession. "The pockets of the clothes" is probably the best translation as long as the possessive meaning is listed as an option for des.


    I wrote les poches de vêtements Would i not get it right


    Two things, Naomi, and a hello to you. The article in French always agrees with the noun. If the noun is singular then the article is also. Here the noun is plural and so the article will be in plural form too; so "De" won't do, it is "Des." Second thing, on a language-learning site we need to keep our grammar and structure correct. "I" (first person singular) is always written in higher case; "I" not "i". Well worth noting. With respect, JJ.


    Am I the only one who heard "Les vaches des vêtements"?


    I literally wrote "the clothing's pockets, the pockets of the clothes" and they still counted that wrong... are you kidding me? Does capitalization really matter that much??


    Hiya Jakob, no, capitalization (if you mean higher case) does not seem to matter to Duo. Certainly articles do. However writing something twice when Duo has only written it the once would, I think, count as a mistake. We need to remember that the programme is just that and as such, being only a computer programme will not accept a repetition where none is in their given task may well result in a negative from their pre-programmed computer.


    Although an ugly and unwieldy sentence I wrote exactly that, and Duo marked it wrong , sigh :[ No option to report it in this instance.


    [and I am NOT enjoying the new Crown system....mind-numbingly boring]


    That doesnt translate very well!


    the clothing pockets....is correct in English


    no-one in english refers to ..clothing's pockets...that's laughable!


    Make sure to check the clothes' pockets before putting them in the washing machine!


    Clothing is a collective noun and therefore does not require an apostrophe 's' to make the plural

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