Re: Doubt in Concordance des Temps

Question

Past of the past - Le Plus-que-parfaitBonjour Madame Cécile !J’avais dû en racheter un nouveau après que Patrick avait cassé le mien.This sentence is an example from a lesson. Here, plus-que-parfait has been used in both the verbs. Though the action of breaking took place first and then came the necessity to buy a new one.Would you like to explain how these two cases can be both Le plus-que-parfait ? Here, one action precedes the other so can one be in Passé Composé and other in Le Plus-que-Parfait ?

Accepted Answer

Hi Shrey
You could say :
'J'ai dû en racheter un nouveau après que Patrick avait cassé le mien.' 
J'ai dû  = I had to  
and 
J'avais dû = I'd had to  
If you are telling a story in the past -
'J'avais un nouveau portable, j'avais dû en racheter un après que Patrick avait cassé le mien.'
is correct in the context of the story .
Hope this helps!

Answer

Merci Madame Cécile pour votre réponse-In this sentence (from a lesson):Après qu'elle lui avait avoué ce qu'elle ressentait, elle avait rougi.Can we also say - elle rougissions ? (L’Imparfait)

Answer

Hi Shrey,
In that sentence it would be -
...elle avait rougi.
'elle rougissait'  would be wrong .

Answer

Merci Madame !But could you please explain why L’Imparfait is wrong in the example ?

Answer

Hi Shrey,
The action of ‘blushing’ ( subordinate clause) is the result of the ‘confession’ ( main clause) making the two actions almost simultaneous.
Furthermore the verb ‘rougir’ represents a fleeting action which doesn’t sit well in the imperfect. It would translate as ‘she was blushing’ rather than ‘she had blushed’ which wouldn’t make any sense in English either.
Hard to explain...

Answer

Merci Madame Cécile ! The two actions are almost occurring simultaneously and that’s why Le plus-que Parfait seems elegant.Bonne journée !

Answer

Bonjour Madame Cécile !Three sentences are given in the following lesson -https://french.kwiziq.com/my-languages/french/review/4528/26873041.J'étais sorti de la voiture quand je les ai entendus.-> I'd got out of the car when I heard them.2.Elles étaient allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu.-> They had gone to eat an ice cream when the thief came.3.Nous étions très surpris de les voir, car ils n'étaient pas venus ici depuis trois ans.-> We were very surprised to see them, for they hadn't come here for three years.What does the use of Le plus-que-Parfait signify about the sequence of events happening in the sentences ? Does it connote an action getting completed or finished prior to another or simultaneous actions occurring in the past ?Merci beaucoup Madame pour votre réponse.Bonne journée!

Answer

Bonjour  Madame Cécile !Sorry for posting another follow-up to this discussion (although I could have added it in my previous reply) but the case I ask now is somewhat different from the previous query.A sentence provided from this lesson reads -https://french.kwiziq.com/my-languages/french/review/4706/2687304Après que j'ai vu ce film, j'étais bouleversé. -> After I saw that film, I was overwhelmed.Here, I would like to question the nuance between the sentence mentioned above and that which I provide below-Après que j'avais vu ce film, j'étais bouleversé.-> After I had seen that film, I was overwhelmed.What is the subtle difference in these sentences ?J'apprécierais vraiment votre aide.Merci encore !Bonne journée!

Answer

Hi Shrey,
I would say for the second sentence-
Après qu'il avait vu ce film, il avait été bouleversé 
Hope this helps!

Answer

Bonjour Madame Cécile !After reading your answer several times, I understand that you mentioned “avait été” because once he ‘had seen’ the film , then he ‘had completely got shattered’ which happens immediately as the film finishes; making the actions almost simultaneous.Hence, the use of le plus-que Parfait is recommended.So in response to my previous query where I ask->What does the use of Le plus-que-Parfait signify about the sequence of events happening in the sentences ? Does it connote an action getting completed or finished prior to another or simultaneous actions occurring in the past ?It can also be used to signify an action getting completed prior to another however, the time interval between the two actions in the past should be a longer one .As in the sentence-Nous étions très surpris de les voir, car ils n'étaient pas venus ici depuis trois ans.-> We were very surprised to see them, for they hadn't come here for three years.The action of “not coming there” got finished three years ago and the result of this action is that ‘they were surprised to see them when they returned’J'étais sorti de la voiture quand je les ai entendus.-> I'd got out of the car when I heard them.The action of “getting out of the car” was finished long back . He was already out when he heard their sound.Elles étaient allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu.-> They had gone to eat an ice cream when the thief came.Here, the sentence emphasises on the point that the girls were not at home (they had already went out) when the thief entered. [LONGER TIME GAP]If one writes it as - Elles sont allées manger une glace quand le voleur est venu. This will imply that the action of the girls going to the ice cream parlour happened in close proximity to the action of the thief entering the house. [SHORTER TIME GAP] which makes the case less elegant.Is my justification correct ? Again, thanks for spending time to respond.À bientôt!