3 ms·

I speak French and studied Latin. We have so many language oddities (and of course 'exceptions confirm the rule') that we're not so quick to judge English. The

by pm3003 4y ago

I speak French and studied Latin. We have so many language oddities (and of course 'exceptions confirm the rule') that we're not so quick to judge English. The case of 'naître' is interesting. Naître is mostly used in the past (I/he was born). The direct translation is also in French its common past form 'Je suis né', which would also be the same as a passive voice, though in the present ('I am born' but the meaning wouldn't make much sense in French). In the end, 'I was born' appears very logical to young French students (typically 9 to 12 years old depending on school and chosen language). It's usually taught at first as idiomatic. Follow-up question for German speakers: I was sometimes asked 'When were you born?' as 'Wann bist du geboren?' which would be a word-for-word translation of the English. Is 'Wann wurdest du geboren?' with the passive auxiliary the only really correct form?

mrkeen 4y ago
As a French speaker, do you feel that 'manquer' is the wrong way around (subject and object reversed)? Or does English have it backward? It's easy enough to just flip subject and object when translating, but I never gave much thought to how it would work in the passive voice. I tried a few examples with Google Translate, but perhaps it's even more confused than I am: I miss him. => Il me manque. He misses me. => Il me manque. I am missed by him => Il me manque. He is missed by me. => Il me manque.
- mmarq 4y ago
  I don't speak French, but in Italian you can't have intransitive passive verbs. `manque` is intransitive, `me` in not a direct object. I'd expect French and Italian to be similar here.
- pm3003 4y ago
  'Manquer' translates well to 'miss' when you miss the bus or a target, you're lacking something ('cette veste manque un bouton') or a quality ('il manque de courage'). Manquer has also a passive meaning (Pierre manque -> Pierre is missing) but Google's problem here is different. >'Il me manque' = 'he's missing to me' This seems logical to me. The French 'me' in this case is a dative or 'indirect object' form. >He's missing me (while shooting at me) = il me manque The French 'me' in this case is an accusative or 'direct object' form. The passive voice 'Je suis manqué par lui' = 'I am missed by him' /'Il est manqué par moi' = 'He is missed by me' would be unusual in French and necessarily 'directly transitive', so referring to missing someone with a pistol for example. The difference between the two can be made by using the 3rd person or the indirect complement. >Il me manque (I long for him) => Il lui manque (he/she misses him, the dative 'lui' being epicene) >Il me manque (He missed me, as with a pistol) => il le manque (he misses him, as with a pistol) 'Il me manque' (I long for him) can be developed into 'Il manque à moi' (he's missing to me). 'Il me manque' (he misses me while shooting at me) cannot. This intuitive trick is taught to children so they can make the difference in more complicated cases, but it doesn't work well with second language students.
- wazoox 4y ago
  Weird translations... I miss him => Il me manque. He misses me => Je lui manque. Passive forms aren't used. However you may use the quite old-fashioned "languir" as an alternative form: I am missed by him => Il se languit de moi. He is missed by me => Je me languit de lui.
Mlller 4y ago
“Follow-up question for German speakers: I was sometimes asked 'When were you born?' as 'Wann bist du geboren?' which would be a word-for-word translation of the English. Is 'Wann wurdest du geboren?' with the passive auxiliary the only really correct form?” Both “bist geboren” and “wurdest geboren” are in wide-spread use, some German speakers prefer the one, some the other variant – e.g. https://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThread=980247&lang=en https://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThrea... – but not under all circumstances: - “wurdest geboren”: the passive with an auxiliary form of “werden” is called “Vorgangspassiv” ≈ ‘passive expressing an event’. - “bist geboren”: the passive with an auxiliary form of “sein” is called “Zustandspassiv” ≈ ‘passive expressing a state’. A minimal pair: - “Die Tür wird geöffnet” = ‘The door is opened’. - “Die Tür ist geöffnet” ≈ ‘The door (has been opened and) is open’ (There is also “Die Tür ist offen” = ‘The door is open’). So “wurdest geboren” and “bist geboren” offer two different perspectives (with a difference that often doesnʼt really matter): - “Wann wurdest du geboren?” focuses on the past event of having been born at a certain time. - “Wann bist du geboren?” focuses on the personʼs property to be now a person that was born at a certain time (a property, in the end, like age or weight maybe). So the latter is rather not used for dead persons: “Kant wurde 1724 geboren” is much preferred over “Kant ist 1724 geboren”. (If students of the German language donʼt want to memorize much here, they can, as often with German, happily apply the postmodern motto “anything goes”, plus there is probably some dialect anyway in which the form you use is the right one since the middle ages :-)

by pm3003 4y ago

mrkeen 4y ago

As a French speaker, do you feel that 'manquer' is the wrong way around (subject and object reversed)? Or does English have it backward? It's easy enough to just flip subject and object when translating, but I never gave much thought to how it would work in the passive voice. I tried a few examples with Google Translate, but perhaps it's even more confused than I am: I miss him. => Il me manque. He misses me. => Il me manque. I am missed by him => Il me manque. He is missed by me. => Il me manque.

mmarq 4y ago
I don't speak French, but in Italian you can't have intransitive passive verbs. `manque` is intransitive, `me` in not a direct object. I'd expect French and Italian to be similar here.
pm3003 4y ago
'Manquer' translates well to 'miss' when you miss the bus or a target, you're lacking something ('cette veste manque un bouton') or a quality ('il manque de courage'). Manquer has also a passive meaning (Pierre manque -> Pierre is missing) but Google's problem here is different. >'Il me manque' = 'he's missing to me' This seems logical to me. The French 'me' in this case is a dative or 'indirect object' form. >He's missing me (while shooting at me) = il me manque The French 'me' in this case is an accusative or 'direct object' form. The passive voice 'Je suis manqué par lui' = 'I am missed by him' /'Il est manqué par moi' = 'He is missed by me' would be unusual in French and necessarily 'directly transitive', so referring to missing someone with a pistol for example. The difference between the two can be made by using the 3rd person or the indirect complement. >Il me manque (I long for him) => Il lui manque (he/she misses him, the dative 'lui' being epicene) >Il me manque (He missed me, as with a pistol) => il le manque (he misses him, as with a pistol) 'Il me manque' (I long for him) can be developed into 'Il manque à moi' (he's missing to me). 'Il me manque' (he misses me while shooting at me) cannot. This intuitive trick is taught to children so they can make the difference in more complicated cases, but it doesn't work well with second language students.
wazoox 4y ago
Weird translations... I miss him => Il me manque. He misses me => Je lui manque. Passive forms aren't used. However you may use the quite old-fashioned "languir" as an alternative form: I am missed by him => Il se languit de moi. He is missed by me => Je me languit de lui.

Mlller 4y ago

“Follow-up question for German speakers: I was sometimes asked 'When were you born?' as 'Wann bist du geboren?' which would be a word-for-word translation of the English. Is 'Wann wurdest du geboren?' with the passive auxiliary the only really correct form?” Both “bist geboren” and “wurdest geboren” are in wide-spread use, some German speakers prefer the one, some the other variant – e.g. https://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThread=980247&lang=en https://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThrea... – but not under all circumstances: - “wurdest geboren”: the passive with an auxiliary form of “werden” is called “Vorgangspassiv” ≈ ‘passive expressing an event’. - “bist geboren”: the passive with an auxiliary form of “sein” is called “Zustandspassiv” ≈ ‘passive expressing a state’. A minimal pair: - “Die Tür wird geöffnet” = ‘The door is opened’. - “Die Tür ist geöffnet” ≈ ‘The door (has been opened and) is open’ (There is also “Die Tür ist offen” = ‘The door is open’). So “wurdest geboren” and “bist geboren” offer two different perspectives (with a difference that often doesnʼt really matter): - “Wann wurdest du geboren?” focuses on the past event of having been born at a certain time. - “Wann bist du geboren?” focuses on the personʼs property to be now a person that was born at a certain time (a property, in the end, like age or weight maybe). So the latter is rather not used for dead persons: “Kant wurde 1724 geboren” is much preferred over “Kant ist 1724 geboren”. (If students of the German language donʼt want to memorize much here, they can, as often with German, happily apply the postmodern motto “anything goes”, plus there is probably some dialect anyway in which the form you use is the right one since the middle ages :-)