Verb + à

Some verbs in French take 'a' after them, or so conventional wisdom goes. In fact, very often 'a' goes in front of a verb. Before demystifying exactly what I am saying, have a look at the following:

Elle a commencé à parler.

In the above sentence, many people will tell you that the verb "commencer" is followed by "a". This is wrong! Instead "parler" is preced by "a". You may not think right now that this is a big deal but keep reading.

Remember an earlier post about how you cannot (usually) use nouns as adjectives in French? We had to convert them from nouns into adjectives by using "a" in front, e.g. une tasse à thé. Remember The We use the same "a" to convert a verb into a noun.

Getting back to the verb "commencer", think about the English word "start" or "begin". In English you might say:.

1. We started the race.
2. She started speaking.

In sentence 2, the verb start is used to refer to a noun. The fact is, in English "start" has to be used with a noun. So, when we get to sentence 2, we encounter a problem because "speak" is not a noun. To conver it to a noun, we add, in this case, "-ing". In French, you have exactly the same situation except that the French language does not use "-ing"; it uses "a".

This is why we never say in French: Elle a commencé parler. That would be like saying in English "She started speak". We need a noun.

Let has look at another sentence:

Le professeur m'aide à apprendre.
The teacher is helping me learn.

Be careful here: in this example, we do not have to use "to learn" or "learning" in English. That does not change anything in French though. Think about the word "help". You can help a person. In other words, the verb "help" is designed to take a noun as its complement. However, "apprendre" is a verb. To solve the problem, we convert it to a noun using "a".

Here is one more example:

A faire ça, c'est impossible.
It is impossible to do that.

You cannot start a sentence with a verb. You have to have a noun or pronoun. Since we wish to start the sentence with a verb, "faire", we first have to convert it to a noun using "a".


WARNING: The word "aimer" breaks the rule about always requiring a noun. In other words, we can construct sentences such as "I like chocolate", which clearly indicates that the word "like" requires a noun. This would seem to suggest that we should say, for example, the following in French:

J'aime à parler espagnol.

While the above sentence is strictly speaking correct, nobody speaks that way. There was, however, as time when French speakers did insist on using "a" for the verb "aimer". The fact is that languages change and thus so do their rules. Usually the changes result in the number of complexities and exceptions decreasing in number. The verb "aimer" is a rare example of how an exception was actually added to a language.

'Ne' Means Nothing But Something

In French, you often find constructions with this structure:

ne + verb + word

The "ne" does not actually have any meaning. Instead it says to you "Watch out! Something is coming after the verb and that will change the meaning of the sentence".

Example 1

Je ne sais pas.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes pas.]"

"Pas" means "not". So, the sentence basically says "I know not". In other words, it means "I do not know".


Example 2

Je n'ai jamais etudié japonais.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes jamais.]"

I have never studied Japanese.


Example 3

Je n'ai aucun argent.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes aucun.]"

I have no money./I do not have any money.


Example 4

Je ne lui parle plus.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes plus.]"

I do not speak to him anymore./I no longer speak to him.


Example 5

Je n'en ai plus.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes plus.]"

I do not have any more./I no longer have any.


Example 6

Je n'ai vu personne.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes personne.]"

I did not see anyone.


Example 7

"Je ne regrette rien." - Edith Piaf
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes rien.]"

I regret nothing./I do not regret anything.


Example 8

Je n'en veux qu'un.
"Je [WATCH OUT! Here comes que.]"

I only want one.


Example 9

Il ne parle que russe.
"Il [WATCH OUT! Here comes que.]"

He speaks only Russian.


TIP: It is sometimes difficult for English speakers to get their heads around the construction "ne...que", meaning only. The reason is that in English, "only" is one word and we keep thinking that "ne que" should somehow be one word.

One way to think about this construction is to pretend that "ne" means "no" or "not" and that "que" means "but". Have a look at this example:

Je ne veux qu'un chocolat.
I no want but one chocolate.

If we improve the English translation above a bit, we have: I do not want but one chocolate, i.e. I want but one chocolate, i.e. I want only one chocolate.

A different way to think about the construction is to tell yourself that "que" means "only" and that "ne" has no meaning; instead "ne" warns us that something, in this case "que", is coming.

Aller is a Regular Verb

Did you know that "aller" is a regular verb? So is "avoir". Most verbs in French are regular. It may sound unbelievable but it is true. One of the reasons that most teachers never tell you these verbs are regular is because, to explain how they could possibly be regular, may require a lot of explanation. Another reason, and I suspect the dominant reason, is that most teachers really do believe these verbs are irregular. I would quite frankly to learn a few more rules that explain loads of so-called exceptions that learn one or two rules and then have to commit thousands of supposed exceptions to memory. As I said before in this blog, the way you look at things can make it easier or more difficult to learn.

Before I launch into a partial discussion at any rate of why these verbs are regular, I want to make you aware of a few facts about language, any language. Let me start with an example from English. In English, to malke the opposite of an adjective, we sometimes add the prefix in-. For example, "finite" becomes "infinite" and "credible" becomes "incredible". By the same logic, the opposite of "possible" should be "inpossible". However, the correct word is actually "impossible". What has happened is that there has been a sound change. When you say 'n' your lips are open but when you say 'p' your lips are closed. In language is something called economy of effort. We human beings like things to be as easy as possible and that goes for the languages we speak too. It takes more energy and effort to keep your lips apart to say 'n' and then to suddenly go straight into saying 'p' than it does to find a sound that is similar to 'n' but with our lips closed. The corresponding sound is 'm'. If you are not certain what I have just said, keep saying these words "inpossible" and "impossible" and see which one feels easier to say.

Take also the example of "credible" and "incredible". If you say "c", you feel the back of your tongue going up towards your velum (the soft palate at the back of your mouth). However, when you say "n", the tip of your tongue touches the alveolar ridge, that is the ridge just behind your teeth. To move your tongue from saying 'n' to 'c' constitutes a lot of work for your tongue. There is, however, a sound close to 'n' that is pronounced at the back of the mouth just like 'c'. That sound can be found in the 'ng' of "sing". Listen to the word "incredible". The 'n' is not pronounced like a normal 'n'.

Getting back to French, a number of changes also occur. Some of these are sound changes. Some of these involve inserting sounds where there once were none (some English speakers insert an 'r' between words where there was never an 'r').

Let us consider the present tense of the verbs "aller" and "avoir" for the pronouns nous and vous.

The word "to go" in French, if we strip away the infinitive is "a", not "all" or anything else you may may thought. It is just "a". The same applies for "avoir". The verb is simply "a". The "ll" and the "voi" were inserted to accommodate sound changes as well as to make things easier and fluent to say. Imagine always saying "a-er" or "a-ir" all the time. It does not flow.

Suppose we wish to form the present tense of aller for the pronouns mentioned. In theory, we should say:

Nous aons
Vous aez

As I said, this kind of speech is staccato. We therefore introduce a transition sound, "ll" to make the speech flow, hence forms:

Nous allons
Vous allez

We have the same problem with avoir. Again, in theory the forms should be:

Nous aons
Vous aez

However, we prefer to insert a sound just to make the speech flow. Now, if we insert "ll", how will we possibly know if we mean, for example, "we are going" or "we have". We thus use the sound "v". hence, for "avoir" we have:

Nous avons
Vous avez

You might wonder what makes "ll" and "v" so special to be chosen as the transition sounds. First, they are both produced in the front of the mouth, which is quite close to where the sound "a" is produced (kind of). Also, to say "o" or "e" in "ons" and "ez" our tongue (or part of it) needs to move higher in our mouth. Since "ll" and "v" are pronounced with the tongue higher in the mouth, it is easier to move from "a" to these sounds and then finally to "o" or "ez" rather than to go directly to these two vowels. Think of a similar situation: you are standing on the ground (where "a" is) and need to jump onto a high platform (where "e" and "o" are) but the distance is so great that a jump would be very difficult, if not impossible. However, suppose you had a middle platform you could jump onto ("ll" or "v") that you could then use to easily jump onto the higher platform. Do you see now that your tongue is for much more than French kissing?

Of course, no French or English speaker or any speaker of any language is consciously aware of any of these facts when they learn their mother tongue. These things happen naturally. Just as you would find it uncomfortable to twist your upper body too far, so your tongue has its own levels of comfort and levels where it starts working too hard.

Getting back to "aller" and "avoir", let us look at the present tense of tu, il and elle. Let us start with "avoir". Now, "avoir" is a little like "ouvrir" in the present tense, that is it does not add anything at the end of the verb for tu, il and elle. Never mind the spelling. Hence we have:

Tu as (the 's' is a spelling issue rather than a pronunciation issue.)
Il a
Elle a

Let us compare the above with "aller". Aller should theoretically be exactly the same - it is a + er after all. However, if we treat it the same, then how will anyone know if "Il a" means "he is going" or "he has". To distinguish the two, we add 'v' in front of these words in the case of "aller. We thus have the forms of aller:

Tu vas
Il va
Elle va

Let us now consider ils and elles for "avoir". In theory, the forms should be:

Ils aent
Elles aent

Bear in mind that there was a time in the French language that "ent" was pronounced like the "an" in "bilan". Thus aent was pronounced in its entirety at one time (at least the vowel parts). There is a process called "assimilation", which is present in every language, where two sounds become more like each other or even become one sound. Try saying "aent" fast and repeatedly. You might find yourself saying "ont", which is exactly what French speakers do, hence the forms:

Ils ont
Elles ont

In theory, we should have the same forms for "aller" but once again there would be confusion, hence the use of "v" to give:

Ils vont
Elles vont

And, finally, let us look at "je" and "aller:. This should in theory be:

Je ae

The 'e' was pronounced somewhere in the history of the language and somehow the two sounds melded together to become a long 'e' sound. We should thus have the form:

Je ai (according to modern spelling rules)

However, by a similar process, we can work out that the present tense for "je" of "avoir" is "je ai". So, if this were the case, we would never be able to know if someone was saying "I have" or "I am going". Once again, the 'v comes to the rescue. So, for aller, we rather say:

Je vais (never mind the spelling; listen to the sounds)

For avoir, we simply have:

J'ai (Je ai does not flow nicely.)


You can think about the future and perfect tenses of these verbs and see if you can find out why they behave the way they do. They are perfectly regular.

You may also want to ask yourself if there is any connection between the word "haber" in Latin and habvoire in French. "You take the red Linguistics pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes" (credit and apologies to "The Matrix").

Do you love me?

In French, the word "aimer" means both to like and to love, so you need to be careful how you use it. If you want to say you like or love something, it really does not matter. Thus, you might say:

J'aime parler français.          I like/love speaking French.
J'aime les macarons.            I like/love macaroons.

However, if you want to say you like a person as opposed to saying you love them, you need to weaken the verb "aimer" by adding a word such as "assez" or "bien". Thus, we have:

J'aime Pauline.                    I love Pauline.
J'aime assez Pauline.           I quite like Pauline.
J'aime bien Pauline.            I like Pauline.

Of course, I know that when you speak to me you will say "Je t'aime".

Apporter, Emporter, Amener, Emmener

Gee whiz, do these words cause pain for students of French and, quite frankly, for French speakers too. In theory they mean to take and to bring (we will get to this shortly) but because they are so similar I am hardly surprised that French speakers sometimes get these wrong.

First, let us clarify the difference between those words that contain "porter" and those that contain "mener". Think about the English word "porter". A porter is someone who carries things. Thus,  "apporter" and "emporter" are only used when referring to things. The word "mener" means to lead. One does not lead a thing but rather people and animals. Thus, "amener" and "emmener" are for people and animals.

Now let us turn to the "a" and "em" parts of the words. These are the things that caused the most trouble for me when learning these words. The way I remembered them is to say to myself that "a" means "to" and conversely "em" means "from". This is not really true but a little lie is fine if it helps the learning process. Another way to look at "a" and "em" is to realise that "a" implies leaving someone or something somewhere (you are taking someone or something to somewhere) and "em" means "with" (the thing or person stays with you).

Let us apply these to make sense of the words. "Apporter" implies moving something from here to there (where 'here' and 'there' are do not matter). Consider this sentence: "J'apporterai le livre". If we translate this badly, we could say it means "I will carry the book to (somewhere)". In other words, it means "I will take the book (to you)" or "I will bring the book (to you)". Notice how I have translated the same thing using the word "take" in one translation but "bring" in the next. Understand this well: there is no word in French exactly equivalent to "bring" or to "take (to a place)" for that matter. The moment you try to associate any of these French words with any one specific English word, you will be in trouble.

Suppose someone said "J'ai emporté le livre", it would mean, if translated poorly "I carried the book with". Translated more correctly this would mean "I brought the book (with me)".

Here is an example that helped me quite a bit: "Je l'ammène à l'hôtel". It means "I am taking him to his hotel". The idea is that I am going to a place, the hotel, and that I am leaving him there. I will not stay with him.

I once saw an advert with the words "Emmène-moi en Suisse". What do you think the advert was saying?

Upstairs Downstairs

I do not know why but I struggled for a long time to come to grips with the terms in French for saying "upstairs" and "downstairs". Quite simply, to say "upstairs", use the words "en haut" and to say "downstairs, use the words "en bas". Do not for a second think there is some other way of saying this in French. Keep it simple and you will be fine.

Examples

La chambre est en haut.          The bedroom is upstairs.
La cuisine est en bas.              The kitchen is downstairs.

A Word of Warning

The standard wisdom when learning anything new is that if we use what we already know as a foundation, we can build on that to help us understand other concepts. Thus, for example, to understand sound waves in Physics, some people refer to ripplies in water, which we are all familiar with. Analogies often help us to learn things more quickly. Unfortunately, analogies can often cause difficulties when learning languages. Unless you are an experienced language learner, I would generally discourage you from drawing analogies with English or any other language you may speak as a mother tongue. Certainly, if a teacher or another experienced language learner draws analogies, those analogies are probably valid. Remember: everyone, no matter how experienced as language learners, sometimes draw false analogies. Getting those things out of one's head can sometimes take some doing.