Why You Should Never Say "Nous" in Spoken French (Improve Your Fluency)
Spoken French has its own set of unwritten rules. Don’t use “nous” is one of them. Find out why, in today’s French fluency lesson.
💾 Read, save and/or print the full written lesson here (free): www.commeunefrancaise.com/blo...
🎓 Join my Everyday French crash course (free): www.commeunefrancaise.com/wel...
Did you first learn French in high school or college? If so, you probably focused on written French. Now that you’re having French conversations or watching French television shows, you’ve probably noticed that spoken French often doesn’t match what you learned in the classroom.
There’s an easy explanation: spoken French follows a different set of (unwritten) rules than written French. One of these rules is that we almost never use “nous” in spoken French. In today’s lesson, I’ll tell you a little bit more about why we do this, what to use instead, and some other advice for boosting your fluency.
0:00 - Intro
0:31 - 1) “Nous” vs “On”
2:58 - 2) How to use “on” : conjugation & other uses
7:12 - 3) Actually, French people do use “nous” !
9:22 - 4) Practice Makes Perfect!
13:35 - Outro
Take care and stay safe.
😘 from Grenoble, France.
Géraldine
We were taught that "On" in French meant "One" in English. As in "One has to wash their hands before eating..." . In everyday English, most people would say "you" instead of "one". As in "you have to wash your hands before eating" and sometimes even qualify it by then saying "as in one, not you" if you felt the person you were talking to thought you literally meant them.
Yes - the upper classes here (in England, anyway) get it from the ruling classes who were of course...French.
C'est vrai! "on" is also the equivalent of "one" in English. But it is a different use of the word. That use is often considered formal, pretentious and patronizing!
It’s quite funny how a lower order French word like On became a higher order very formal English word. We also used to have our equivalents of Tu and Vous. Thou was dropped in favour of You, as Thou was thought to be too informal. Although Thee and Thou are still used in rural parts of Yorkshire.
@DMC888 It's not strange if you think about it; "one" is just normal French-speak, and nothing to do with poshness or the upper social classes. But the French were the ruling class here and they used "one" all the time. Incidentally, "thou" rhymed with "you", though I'm sure you already knew that.
@@Otacatapetl it is interesting how a word can sound posh, not because of the word itself but because of who uses it. I’ve also noticed the upper classes (The Norman ancestors) use French words in their English sentences. Eg. I’ve heard Boris Johnson use the word essaye (essayer) when talking English.
On aime beaucoup de vidéos de Géraldine
I am a 69 year old Frenchman (who lives in the US). I love your video. In my opinion, there has not been much change in the use of "nous" and "on". Since my youngest age, I was taught that "nous" is formal, and should be used in formal circumstances. "On" was always the preferred option in every day's French although our"purist" French teachers preferred having us using the "nous" form". I grew up in an educated family, and I was known to have a very good spoken and written French. Yet, I seldom used "nous", and this is true to this day. This was true for all my friends and acquaintances growing up. By the way, I also think it is easier for foreigners to use "on" than "nous". There are cases when "nous" cannot be avoided. For example the English sentence "what about us?" would be in French "et nous alors?" One of the commenters below alludes to the fact that "on" can also be "undefined" as is "one" in English. This is another use of "on" of course.
Tous est corect mais votre accent un anglais est terible.
I think "nous" is (slightly) simpler, because (slightly) it's more consistent. But I'll try to use "on" more, now that I know it!
@@tadeuszk6677... et votre orthographe français est terrible!
@@tadeuszk6677. Haaaaaa! The pot calling the kettle black! Have you checked your grammar and spelling?
orthographe Française 🙂
I was always taught that first, you learn the proper grammar of a foreign language. Once you are fluent, you can learn to speak colloquially.
"On y va" said the friendly policeman in the morning when we had to leave Bois de Boulogne where we had been illegally camping. This is how I learned it in 1981. 😄But still I think "on" lacks the element of togetherness.🤔
I wish I had these videos when I studied French in college. I am still embarrassed after all these years since I earned a degree in French that I could never hold a decent conversation. Now I know why. All book learning. No informal conversation ever.
Just shows that degrees mean nothing apart from wasted years. Had you spent the same time living in France, you'd be fluent now !
@@mirvids5036 My father had died and there was no money to send me abroad or to allow me to spend a summer living in the "French house" on campus. I had to work for tuition money instead. My student jobs gave me my career though, so I can't complain. My book learning gives me a foundation for enjoying these videos.
@@mirvids5036I understand your point, but degrees have plenty of merit. Absolutes on the other hand...
I studied French for four years and then I started working with a chef from Metz. I immediately realized that you can't really learn a foreign language in school. French is my fourth language, but I haven't practiced it lately, and that's too bad. I like it a lot.
Thank-you for this lesson, very helpful! 😊 Just to clarify in Canada we would never say y'all. It's very much a southern usa slang. Just to let you know.
Same in Australia.
Y'all is the shortened form of you-all. (plural form of you)@@steelcrown7130
We don’t use y’all in the uk unless in a joking kind of way. However it is actually a useful grammatical construction because it gives a difference between you(singular) and you(plural)
@@MrBlaxjax or youse in Liverpool
@@MrBlaxjax But of course English already has the handy pre-existing "thou" singular and "ye" or "you" plural. I always prefer a revival to a neologism, and I hope thou agreest.
Leçon bien faite à propos d’un sujet qui fait bien trébucher les étudiants étrangers et dont le titre - un peu “clickbait” d’ailleurs - m’avait intrigué. J’ose me permettre certaines observations que je souhaite vous être utiles. @4:52 Il faudrait préciser que cet exemple fait référence à un groupe féminin (‘prêtes’). @5:43 Pour expliquer le cas du ‘on’ impersonnel aux anglophones, il suffit de le traduire par “one”, ainsi que d’autres en ont déjà fait la remarque : “In Spain, one goes to bed late.” “When one has but love…” Cependant, en anglais, cet usage est d’un style plutôt soutenu et même hautain. @8:20 Dans le pléonasme des pronoms sujets pour renforcer ou exprimer l’opposition, tel que « Nous, on est prêts » (ici, en passant, l’accord est correct), « moi, je suis… toi, tu es… » on peut imaginer une préposition elliptique qui force le pronom objet: « Quant à nous, on est prêts. » On peut aussi illustrer l’usage semblable en anglais : “Me, I am ready.” @9:09 Attention ici, deux fautes grammaticales: 1° il faut écrire: « on nous a vus » (pluriel par accord du participe passé qui suit ‘avoir’ : ‘nous’ est l’objet direct et précède; un exemple où l’ouïe sert de bon guide : « nos vacances, on les a prises ») ; 2° il faut : « on s’est vus » (pluriel par accord du participe passé avec verbe pronominal réciproque et pronom objet direct, par syllepse grammaticale). Exemple littéraire : « On ne se serait jamais rencontrés. » (Sartre)
I heard once the use of "on" isn't used in all french speaking countries as in France. Is that true?
You make it sound as though those of us who learned in a classroom didn't learn "on," but one of the first questions we learn to ask is, "Comment dit-on ..."
This was fascinating! I wish any of my native-French-speaking high school teachers had bothered to teach us this rule. Maybe they didn't want to confuse us? I will say, though, that the "y'all" comparison could have been left out of this lesson. Y'all is just one regional example of the many ways English speakers around the world address the problem of English no longer having a distinct second-person plural pronoun. Avoiding the "nous" form is not plugging a similar hole in the French language.
Y’all is singular. The plural is “all y’all”.
One thing that interests me is how different generations speak differently. I am a 63yo Briton and I know that I speak English differently to someone who is much younger than me. When I speak french I want to speak the same french as a French person my age would - how a french person would expect someone my age to speak. For example, I'm happy to say "on y va au cinema?", but I'd never ever say "wanna go to the cinema".
I agree with you. I am a 60-year-old South American whose native language is Spanish. Out of love/interest in Italian and British art and history I learned both languages (I am of Italian descent; therefore, it was much easier to learn the former). I have always tried my best and therefore I have been complimented by my Italian and English. I am sure you will agree with me that people much younger than us (let's say, under 30) speak very poorly. I recently had an argument with a British imbecile who, being unable to counter my arguments (we were discussing military history) told me that my English "was dated" SO? 😆😆Let's stick to and preserve the high standards of the past. Let's leave to the fools who want to sound "cool and fashionable" their pathetic "modern" vocabulary and pronunciation. Regards = Cordialement = Saluti 😁😁
@@arslongavitabrevis5136 Well said! So much of our culture is being lost as universities become prep schools for techies.
@@JohnKaman That's right John, worst of all, is that most of them are awfully conceited and think the world owes them a living! Have nice weekend!
Younger people tend to talk at 100mph too.
@@mirvids5036 The worst part of it is that they usually do not have anything interesting to say. 😂😂😂
I just love listening to your explanations 😘
You are a very good teacher! Thank you for this lesson :)
This is helpful!
❤ me encanta todo tu estilo y la manera de explicar todo Hace años que te sigo y me han servido muchísimo tus lecciones Además practico mi inglés 😅 Muchas gracias
Crazy that I knew this before starting to watch the video!!! I'm tickled with myself. I learned this in high school French back in the late 1970s.
I agree with you that academic and spoken French are quite different. However if you use nous French people will understand and simply conclude you are not French.
No. They'll think that you speak French correctly.
Often she emphasizes the N in 'on' as if it's - on n' --- ie the negative. 🤷♂️
@@micade2518there is nothing particularly correct about speaking more formally than the context demands.
@@u4tiwasdead ???
@@hamishanderson6738Do you notice it when “on” is followed by a word that starts with a vowel?
J'ai aimé bien l’exercice de la fin de cette vidéo💞
On in French is a colloquial way to say Nous ! Je suis Francais
Merci beaucoup!! 😃
I've always wondered why I have trouble understanding french people, but at the same time understanding africans speaking french is so easy. now I realize the difference is french people speak a whole different language than us who learned it at school.
French speaker here: I ALWAYS try to avoid "On" and use "nous"! "Nous allons..." sounds so much nicer than "on va..."! But, obviously, bad habits are difficult to eliminate! So, while you are correct to warn foreign speakers to the unfortunately popular "on" form, you should never say "never say"! The correct form is clearly "nous"!
It's popular and has grammar rules. I'd say that's "correct" too. I wouldn't be proud of imposing unnecessary rules on yourself. Obviously, it's your choice, but language is about being understood, not shaming or controlling others. "Nous" supremacy wasn't on some Ten Commandments of French Grammar. Might wanna let this one go. Put your feet up, have a baguette or something.
@@KaiOpaka I agree that the "on" form is grammatically correct... which does not make it euphonic, quite at the contrary. The French language has the pretension to be euphonic... to have its "letters"... and not to be merely a vehicular language! Having said this, I also use the "on" form, I only try not to abuse it! By the way, I am not French...
@@KaiOpaka I don't know about that. There IS the Académie Francaise, after all . . . . I suspect that distinguished institution regards this use of "on" with great dismay.
Thank you! "Nous arrivons demain" et " On arrive demain"
The modern English equivalent is "you", applied indirectly, e.g., "You must follow the rules". A more formal, older style, uses the word "One", which can either refer to the speaker themselves (e.g., "One does not wish to complain", where "One" = "I"), or more generally (e.g., "One should comply with etiquette", where "One" = "Everyone", "We" or "People")
I heard the song about the Pont 'Avignon containing the phrase 'on y danse' when I was very young but it was many years before I learnt about the use of 'on' and 'y.'
I'm afraid that while this advice might be correct for some parts of the world (like France itself), there are many parts of la Francophonie that still use "nous" liberally in speech (in this case, Franco-Manitoban French, in Canada). Notre langue évolue plus lentement, ici, que dans la Métropole, donc nous continuerons à utiliser « nous », merci bien!
"This is the end of the nous."
Merci beaucoup pour cette nouvelle thème du debut de fin de semaine et debut de samedi dans le matin
No idea how you popped into my KZhead feed but am pleased. I learnt French to A level in school in England but never knew this. I struggle now to speak it as I live in Spain and Spanish comes into my mind if I try to speak French.
Funny you say that. I lived in Denmark for a few years, then France. My default replies were automatically in Danish for the first week or so. Confused the hell out of the French. And me.
For the Portuguese speakers: "on” is the same as “a gente”.
Except when it means "we" 😊
This is such a good lesson
Too bad it's so wrong!
WHY? @@micade2518
MERCI
Nous is almost never used in casual french when it is the subject of the sentence. But there is no alternative to nous in many other sentence structures or expressions.
Working in France for more than a year and found my language drifted to using on all the time - I didn’t have formal lessons just learned from spoken language around me
Thank you so much. This is great
Formidable!
Funny. In Spanish, the equivalent “Uno” is used instead of “we” but it’s a very particular distant “we”. , very impersonal. Sometimes it’s more like a “you” in English for phrases like “Mira, uno no sabe que va a pasar mañana” -> “look, we/you don’t know what going to happen tomorrow”.
This is really close to how English can use “one”. “You see, one doesn’t know what will happen tomorrow”. But in English it can sound a bit stilted, formal, or even condescending.
Je comprends qu’en français parlé, on substitue “on” pour “nous”. Je le ferais en France, mais grammaticalement, je pense que la traduction littérale de “on” en anglais est “one”, comme l’utilisent les Anglais, mais pas les Américains. C’est à dire, grammaticalement, “on” est singulier, même si un peuple choisissent d’utiliser “on” au lieu de “nous” dans la langue parlée. Merci Géraldine pour m’aider à pratiquer le français régulièrement. Au prochain samedi.
Oui, sauf qu'elle a tout faux ! "On" est un pronom impersonnel.
Non les américains utilisent « one » aussi. Pas tous bien sûr mais pas tous les anglais l’utilisent non plus.
Arrêtez d'écouter ces youtubeurs ignares si vous voulez progresser en français. Ils ne promeuvent que la médiocrité de leurs contemporains.
Merci beaucoup Géraldine ! Une bonne leçon ! Hier soir on a bu tout le vin !🍷À la vôtre ❤
Yes, but your example can have two very different meanings, depending on context of course: (1) Last night we got really sloshed on wine! 👍🏻... OR (2) Last night, someone drank all our wine! 👎🏻
Love these lessons ❤
Thank you this is super helpfull. It's interesting we have the same concept in my language (but with an undefined group of more than one person) and there has been a push to eliminate the use. So we are using it less instead of more. I also think the grammar becomes easier in French when you use 'on' and that's probably one of the reasons why it has become more popular.
What's your language?
Very well done from start to finish. Merci!
Yes, but wrong!
During our first six months (1975) living and working in provincial Auvergne, my wife and I had had advanced just enough in our French lessons to feel confident when adventuring out. The first time I recall having heard "On" in the place of "Nous" was when we encountered a special character who spontaneously invited us to his country farm. After seeing the cute baby lambs and other animals he said, "On bois (boit?) un cannon," which meant, "Let's have a glass of 'rouge,' i.e. red wine." It was a special moment and a special introduction to the use of "On." I do hope I got this right because I have been a big fan of "On" ever since.
Grace a toi je comprend maintenant que "le chouette vert" essaye a moi apprendre pour utilise le mot "on". Merci! Je le comprende suffit, mais je ne sait vraiment pourquoi il vous devez utiliser un mot où l'autre. (personne dit moi mon grammaire est nul, seulement si tu veut explique avec ma erreur avec beaucoup de patience. Merci. J'espere on rira ensemble si je lis ca l'année prochaine.)
I moved to Luxembourg nearly five years ago and the first thing my father-in-law told me about learning french was 'use on as much as you can and it will be much less complicated'.
This is an excellent example of lingual oddities should be explained rather than, let's say, a video that "documents" a person's claim that French can be learned quickly on a high-carb diet with baguette-shaped books...Very informative!
As shown at 4:40, it is important to note that while "on" is a 3rd person singular pronoun it still (usually) represents a plural subject. So "On est beaux" or "On est belles" depending on the implying gender but plural adjective anyway. On est perdu(e)s , On s'est perdu(e)s, ... On can also represent a second person singular or even a first person singular but those uses are somewhat ironic. "Alors, on ne s'est pas lavé les dents ce matin ?" ( So, one didn't brush his teeth this morning ?) lavé and not lavés because here it represents a singular subject.
Very interesting! I have an unrelated question based on your "on aime Paris" example. In a language app I am using, I learnt to use "adorer" when talking about anything other than people. So "J'adore le gateau" but "J'aime ma mère". So is Paris in the same category as people, or is the rule more complicated than the app implies?
J'adore will feel more natural, even if in some circumstances j'aime can also be used (for instance when replying to someone who says "j'aime pas Paris" you may say "moi j'aime Paris")
While it is the opposite way around in English (as for which is formal and posh), we have we are going to the cinema we go to the cinema vs one is going to the cinema one goes to the cinema or at least that is how I tend to think of it.
This has shocked my universe to learn that you need the plural form of the adjectives with “On est……”. I think it must also apply to “Tout le monde est……”.
As a speaker of faux/fou Francais (patchy education, guessing in between and possibly autistic), i gravitated to on because (1) it's valid and (2) pronunciation guessing is easier for the rest of the sentence, you just throw yourself at the third person and hope. French people wonder where the hell i learned my French, but with context and gesturing it's effective 😁
How about reflexive verbs? Je me souviens. Tu te souviens. Il/Elle se souvient. On se souvient? On nous souvient?
I just saw in the linked lesson that one would use "On se souviens" when referring to ourselves.
She very briefly did a reflexive verb at 9:07.
The two forms On se souvient, nous nous souvenons are valid. But in this case, there is a tiny difference in academic French between the two forms. One would be preferred to the other, depending on the context, the intention, what we want to convey and also if it is written or spoken language.
'On nous souvient' doesn't work. (Perhaps you wanted: On se souvient de nous.) Otherwise, 'on se souvient' works in both senses, the context indicating the meaning: (impersonal 'on') On ne se souvient pas toujours du passé. (personal 'on' = 'nous') On se souvient de nos vacances l'an dernier. The second example might be avoided in very formal settings, in favor of a 'nous' construction.
Wow. It's amazing how heated the responses are to this video! It's in the great French tradition of argumentation!
Very interesting! Also, would you also use "nous" in an exclusive sense, that is, "us but not you"? (Some languages, like Cherokee, make this distinction.)
It would be very useful to have an "inclusive we" = me and you and possibly others, and an "exclusive we" = me and others but not you. As you say, some languages (I think Filipino is another one) have this. As far as I know, French and German have the same problem as English.
@@usvalve Clusivity FTW. I've read that some languages (not sure which) have _four_ versions of "we": me and you, me and one other person who is not you, me and a bunch of people including you, me and a bunch of people not including you.
@@beeble2003 Bloody hell
in Quebec there is "nous autres" ("we others")
"On" was always the default when I lived in Brussels, and went to the local Athenée.
There are times you should use "nous". If you want to stress "on", you say "nous, on". As in, "Eux, ils ne veulent pas y aller, mais nous on veut bien".
Theres a vaguely similar word in english which I assume English "borrowed" from french and that is to use "One". Its quite vague, and contrary to French, sounds more formal. One might use it in a number of ways when one is being vague about who is speaking. It might be used to infer "the general public" or more simply "people". People would say ... one would say... are effectively the same. However, if one were to use to say "One is going to the cinema", you would a) sound very posh albeit dated (and probably pretentious), and b) would be implying just you. So similar, but not quite the same.
Your are absolutely right!
I call this the "academic one" as it's used in academic situations as a substitute for "I"
"One" used as an indefinite 3rd person pronoun in English (One speaks to one's colleagues; one must speak clearly.) is both from Anglo-Saxon (Old English) and from Norman-French usage, combined into Middle English, more so a French borrowing, but French may have been influenced by Saxon English, as a cross-borrowing. But its usage in English is more formal. Yes, in everyday speech, we tend to say "you? instead, or we soften "one? to someone, anyone, and so on. In spoke English, one" as a pronoun tends to sound more formal or archaic. The use of "they? as a singular indefinite (gender neutral or undetermined) form actually dates back to Chaucer and Shakespeare at least, so it's very old and now becoming regarded by some as not so unusual, even though in formal textbook English, it was/is frowned upon, compared to "one."
I knew it! The teacher insisted that "nous" is correct but it's so unwieldy I didn't believe them. Unless that changed in the last 30 years.
As a quebecois, I thought using "on" in place of "nous" was a Quebec phenomemom. On est plus semblables que je ne le pensais. :)
I have been saying, "Nous avons un changement de plan". Should I say, "On avons un changement de plan?" or is there something else wrong with it - like avons? -Noel LaChance
As a kid my dad would always say "on est un con" when I used "on" instead of "nous". And that's the issue I have with your video, while yes, most french people use "on" a lot and so do I, "nous" is still the correct way of saying it and I don't think that anyone should unlearn a proper way of speaking. It's not like a contraction (je suis / I am-> j'suis / I'm). It's like the french speakers that always use "que". It's not because a lot of locals do it that it's not a mistake. Also, "nous" is only formal when used instead of "je" (Comment vas-tu ? Je vais bien. -> Comment allez-vous ? Nous allons bien.) which nobody does.
Perfectly true. I personally use « nous » very commonly. If I speak about the life of my family with a third, I would say « Nous avons voyagé en France, nous aimons courir », never « On a voyagé, on court » which would sound very childish.
Now would you use Tu for a older person or use vous out of respect for the elder person. It also depends on the French your speaking since Quebec French is not the same as French from France. Like Canadian English American English and English from England there are differences.
I wonder of the English use of the term one comes from the french on?
Is this different in the north or south? I was in the south and heard nous. I honestly stay far away from Paris and learn the rules change as soon as you get out of there. Thank you for the lesson.
But, on aime Paris! The video told us so! 🤣
Always told to use "Nous" when you were not in close relationship with the person being addressed. - it is in part similar in English.
That's absolutely not the distinction between "we" and "one" in English. "We" means a group of people that includes me; "one" means people in general. Nothing at all to do with the closeness of any relationship. "We made love" is just as correct as "We have never met before".
'On' seems to equate to 'one' in English as in: "one goes to the cinema" - although this has a slightly different meaning I bet it came from the word 'on'.
"One goes to the cinema" has a completely different meaning to the one described in the video -- it means that people in general go to the cinema. "On" in French can have that meaning, but the meaning described here is just an informal version of "we". According to the OED, the British "one" is related to the German "ein" (as in, the number one), even when used as a pronoun. It's only been recorded in English since the 14th century.
@@beeble2003 AH!
J'ai été élevé avec la notion que "on" est le "pronom personnel impoli" et durant la majeure partie de mes 83 ans de vie je me suis toujours efforcé d'éviter de prononcer ce vocable
La langue a changé, depuis le temps... Toujours plus de "on", toujours moins de "ne", toujours moins de liaison à l'extérieur des groupes de mots, toujours plus de différentiation entre le "plus" au sens positif et le sens négatif (souvent prononcés "pluss" et "plu"), toujours plus de futur composé (je vais faire, etc), toujours moins d'inversion interrogative ("vient-il", etc)...
A french native told me not to use "on" but "nous". he considered "on" as most likely improper slang.
Theres a saying in french "On" exclu la personne qui parle. Make of That what you Will but using "on" opens the Door to people telling you That what you just Say doesnt include yourself
I have no problem using "on" pour "nous", mais... I have been corrected by a French teacher when I used "on" to designate "one". He led me to believe that "on" ONLY means "nous". ergo: confused.
Perhaps someone has already pointed this out, but what about questions where "we" is the subject, but the verb comes first, as in "Quel jour sommes nous"? How would you say, "Are we [whatever]"?
wow, I had no idea about this. This is certainly not what I was taught in school.
... and I always thought of _"on"_ as déclassé!_
Fun fact: in Dutch, we Dutchmen use mostly "wij" (pronounced as "wy") for the French "nous" / "on" or the English "we". But older and rural dialects say "ons" as in "ons gaat" (singular!) instead of "wij gaan" (plural!) for "we go" (English). See the resemblance? My guess is that in this rare case French borrowed from Dutch! English uses this also: "Let us go!" See what I mean? The languages always borrow from each other! This keeps languages alive, let's agree?
In my experience the Dutch don't use "wij" that much, but rather use "we" (homograph, but no homophone of English "we") instead, ien tout mem, as they say on Texel.
Unfortunately French "on" is derived from Old French "hom", the nominative form of "man". While the modern "homme", derived from the same word, is based on the oblique form "home". However, the use of "on" as a pronoun is because of influence from Germanic languages that have used "man" as a way to say "one( does something)". Exactly how it started being used for "we" is hard to say, but we can at least say that it most likely doesn't come from Dutch "ons"(side note, many norwegian dialects will also use the oblique form of the 1st person plural pronoun as the subject form as well "oss fer(we go)" as opposed to "me/vi fer").
Je pense que la difference entre "nous" et "on" en le français orale est generational. Quand je restais en normandie, mon hoste qui etait plus vielle que moi dit "nous." Cependant toutes mes amies francaises qui est meme age comme moi diriais "on."
The English translation is wrong. The last word is 'on' not 'nous'.
But why should I want to speak exactly like a native speaker when speaking French? If I got the pronunciation and grammar right, that's good enough for me.
But how do you add possession to that? My wife and i are taking the ferry with our truck. On va au traversier avec son / notre camion? Which is it?
...avec le camion.
Could anyone please tell me what the alternatives are that are discussed at about 10:20? I can’t hear what the difference is yet. Thanks!
The liaison between “est” and “au”. Phonetically written: On eh o … On eht o … In one case, the t at the end of est is silent and in the other case, the t is pronounced and creates a bridge between est and au.
@@AT-27182 ah! Illumination! Thank you, I can hear it now.
@@jenntuomala6259 With pleasure !
I think there is a difference between on in French and Ya'll in English. Ya'll is short for You all and it doesn't include the speaker. I think "on" is more like the Dutch word "men" in the sentence "men gaat naar de bioscoop" (Dutch translation of "on va au cinema") where men stands for "people in general" or "the people/person involved" which can include the speaker. (although in the Netherlands this is not a normal everyday way of speaking)
Also, y'all is pretty strictly Southern. Different areas of the country use different circumlocutions: you guys, youse, y'inz, but even then they aren't all strict equivalents. Youse and y'inz are pretty much a mark of the blue collar (working class) world, whereas y'all and you guys are used by pretty much everyone in their respective regions.
Ive heard American speakers use "a person" in similar circumstances. As in "how is a person supposed to fit into this dress" Any comments?
Spoken is so difficult but not because nous or any other word is not used. It is about pronunciation. I can understand a recent crimi Black spot serie subtitles but almost never audio. It just does not match. Ar least 70 percent sentences spoken do not map into their subtitles... and it is not about that they both never use ne ..pas but just pas. I wonder how kids learn to write .. many typos?The sixth sense of ear intuition is probably trained by francophone immersion...
It seems this French "on" is used a bit like English "one" as in "One gets confused while learning about spoken French."
*"Spoken French has its own rules"* ... Like Czech language. I study Czech here in Prague, and after a year, our Czech teacher announced "Oh, by the way, _nobody_ speaks like this. This is "written Czech", and only the newsreaders speak like this. Spoken Czech is completely different. Oh no .... ha ha
I don't speak French, but I thought "nous" meant "we" and "on" meant "one" (both descended from Latin, "nōs" and "hōmo", respectively).
"Yes, that's tricky: It's French." 😄
We had a French teacher in the UK with a horrendously English accent whenever he tried to teach us something. We learnt that "on" can only mean "one" as in "one eats a sausage with mayonnaise..." Now I know the real way French people use it. If I had answered his question: "que fais-tu ce soir?" with "on va au cinéma" he would have slapped my knuckles with his ruler.
Interesting! I'm Canadian, not from a majority French speaking province, and we were taught about on only as an pronoun for an unknown person. Is this also the pronoun that would be used by someone who does not wish to be gendered, like singular they users in English?
Say nous, embrace your nous and never let darkness invade it,
rather like how one used to make use of 'one' as "one eats three times daily." a construction I am finally learning _not_ to use.
"Never say nous" is a bit extreme. Obviously "on" is used most of the time but there's still a place for "nous."
I'm a bit confounded by the advice here. I'm an American non-native French speaker; I learned in high school and college. We were taught tht nous was the word for we, while on was the word for one used as an indefinite and formal third-person singular pronoun. (Quand on parle du loop, on en volt le queue. -- When one speaks of the wolf, one sees its tail. The English proverb is actually, Speak of the devil (and you see his tail.) ) So that on in French was rather formal, just as it is in English. If used as a substitute for nous, then on sounds similar to a passive-voice construction in English: The bird was seen by the lady. The word was given by the captain. If on is genuinely used in everyday spoken French rather than nous, then that just seems unusual to me. What about vous, is that also disappearing in favor of another word, along with the vous verb forms? And yes, I know to use the 3rd person singular verb forms with on. :) I'm puzzled at what seems like a spoken register difference. (Righter used here as a linguisticss term fro speech level, formal or informal or other qualities of usage.) Thanks!
"Nous" should never be replaced by "on" which has a specific use as you perfectly understood it. The sad part is that nowadays 99,9% of French people, even the most educated ones, use "on" instead of "nous" which has totally vanished from the spoken language, except when used as an object (e.g. Elle nous attend = she's waiting for us). Even worse, the French often add "nous" before "on" followed by a verb conjugated both to singular and plural form, making an absolute grammatical nonsense : e.g. Nous, on est tous partis à 8 heures = We all left at 8. I'm appalled by this kind of video that promotes mediocrity on the premise that speaking bad French would make you sound smarter as you would sound as bad as a native French speaker.
@@the64Kquestion Wah, wah, wah, the language is changing and change is baaaaaad.
@@beeble2003 There are two types of changes : one is progress, the other is regression. Which one do you think it is here?
@@the64Kquestion Why do you believe that every change must be either good or bad? Neutral is an option. People communicate just as effectively using "on" as "nous" so what's wrong with it? Other than "I don't like it"?
@@beeble2003For what it's worth, I mostly agree with you. If people don't like the prevailing usage, they are perfectly free to speak as they prefer and rail against it if they must. But it's ultimately futile. Most of all, the idea of progress and regression in language change is patently pointless. Even if a language were to lose precision or clarity or consistency or whatever you want to call it, it would almost certainly find new ways to re-establish clarity where it's needed. If the change only erodes distinction but not clarity, maybe the traditional distinction has outlived its purpose.
Shouldn't On nous a vu and On s'est vu be written On nous a vus and On s'est vus ?
Good question 👍. I was thinking that myself.
Yes sir! I go into it in detail (but in French) in a lengthy comment: kzhead.info/sun/e5eyhbaupWiAZqs/bejne.html&lc=Ugxn5FCiQPnIS-v6uAh4AaABAg
So to learn french I have to learn English first ????
Nous vivons ensemble, nous nous conaissons maintenant.
Rien à voir avec la vidéo, mais j'aime bien le truc avec les oreilles derrière toi
Fun fact: The French word _nous_ contains the English word _us._ No, us is in nous, it's true!
Okay, if [ we are | one is ] going to pick on sayings, be advised that "you all" is contracted as "y'all," not "ya'll." 😛
OK! You a French woman or a Quebecer? Makes a big difference!!!
1:27 that’s the most French thing ever
Faut-il utiliser "On y va" au lieu de "Allons-y?" Aussi, on ne devrait pas dire "On adore Paris?"