Telephones

Bonjour tout le monde, in lesson 4.3 the following sentence “où l'on peut vous joindre” is 

translated as “where you can be contacted” or “where one can contact you”.  The translation 

seems straight forward except for the “l” befor “on”.  I don't understand why it's there. I'm sure 

there's a good reason for it but at the moment I don't see it.

Merci

Bonjour Charles.

Good for you for your conviction that it doesn't seem to mean anything - which it doesn't. It's there only for phonaesthetics. Without the l', one is left with où on, which sounds especially awkward to the French ear. You will also see que l'on used instead of qu'on, since the former is preferred by some for reasons that aren't entirely clear.

The same applies to instances like a-t-il assez d'argent  (does he have enough money?). The t is meaningless. It only separates the sound of the a and the i. Same with y a-t-il  (is/are there?). 

Your insistence that things make sense when you're grappling with a translation will be really helpful going forward.

Bonne chance.

Robert

Merci Robert,

I thought it might be something to do with pronunciation. I find "où on" and "qu'on" easy to say and easier to understand so I'll stick with those. 

Bon soir, Charles (Il est 21:58 en Angleterre)

Charles,

Just because the l' doesn't mean anything doesn't mean it's optional. où on  would be a clear case of mispronunciation in the same way that y a il  would be wrong. And fyi, I've read that the preference for que l'on has something to do with some people finding the sound of qu'on distasteful, but as long as you know they mean the same thing.

Robert

Thank you for raising the issue with ‘l’on'- I had wondered myself, but hadn't got round to asking. There was another sentence in the same lesson which also left me puzzled - ‘Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver DE table'. I would have expected UNE table. It's not important,  but all the same wondered if there is a reason to use DE here.  Thank you.

Sarah,

Contrary to my original response below,  Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver de table  means I don't have time to reserve any table.  Not sure why it's phrased that way, but it's an explanation.  It has to do with the way some (des)  is changed to any (de) when negated. I don't think you will have encountered that in your lessons yet.

-----

The only explanation I can think of is that the audio is actually saying, la table,  and that the text is wrong. It sounds like de table,  but I don't know if the verb, réserver,  would ever be followed by de for any reason. (As opposed to the noun, réserve de  meaning a reserve of).

It's not inconceivable that the audio is also wrong. I'm still waiting for a response to a question I raised in which, so far as I can tell, the audio and text are both wrong.

Robert

It is shown in the lesson vocabulary as de table and it is because it is a negative sentence.  

See lesson 4.5

In a negation the definate article changes from un or une to de. Partitive articles des, de la, du and de l' also become de or d'. 

Example: J’ai un vélo, mais je n’ai pas de voiture, I have a bicycle but I don't have a car.

Example: Vous avez un chat ? Je n’ai pas de chat, you have a cat? I don't have a cat.

So: J'ai le temps de réserver une table but: J'ai n'ai pas le temps de réserver de table. 

Tricky this French isn't it

Actually, Charles, what is particularly confusing (in my mind anyway) about the original sentence:

Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver de table

is that table is the direct object of réserver,  and réserver  isn't actually being negated. There isn't even any clear indication that a table isn't being reserved. As such, I didn't even see it as being a “negative sentence”, and honestly, I'm not so sure this is a valid application of this grammar. As opposed to say:

je n'ai pas réservé de table (I didn't reserve a table); 

je ne réserve pas de table (I'm not reserving a table); 

So, to me, that original sentence is like taking one of your examples (je n’ai pas de voiture) and changing it to, je n'ai pas assez d'argent pour acheter UNE voiture,  which is correct.

I believe that Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver UNE table  is not only a legitimate alternative, it may be preferred. 

Robert

Robert, I agree with what you say and I'll offer another alternative:

 Je n’ai pas de temps de réserver une table.

Charles

Charles, one aspect of the rule is that is does not apply to the definite articles, le, la les. They remain unchanged. So, Je n'ai pas le temps …  is correct. 

I have looked forever for a broader definition of this rule that explains how it affects partitive/indefinite articles in sentences with multiple verbs and only one negated., but every discussion I've seen only uses the base case of one verb followed by the partitive/indefinite article. 

Robert

Oops you're right about the definate article!  So we still have the uncertainty about de table or une table. 

Maybe Rocket could pick up this thread and tell us which is correct or are they both acceptable.

Charles

Charles,

nous avons des devoirs.  (we have (some) homework.)  correct.

nous n'avons pas de devoirs. (we don't have any homework.)  correct

From Lesson 21.5:

Je ne crois pas qu’on ait des devoirs.  (I don’t think that we have any homework.)  correct

Why isn't des changed to de in the last sentence?

It seems to me that the article in question needs to directly follow the negated verb in order for it to be affected by the rule.  The notion of “negative sentence” is too vague.

Robert

Maybe that's why we can't find an explanation anywhere, we're looking for an expanation for 

some thing that doesn't need an explanation i.e. the article doesn't change and the 

translation Je n’ai  pas le temps de réserver de table is incorrect.

Charles

But I would like to know what the robust rule is regarding sentences with multiple verbs. There has to be one but every explanation I've seen, and there are a dozen out there, limits the examples to sentences with only one verb. This has surely been discussed on the internet before but I haven't been able to phrase a search in a way that gets it to pop up.

Robert

Bonjour!

Yeah, this is a bit of tricky one. I'm going to do my best to explain it robustly.

The rule states that partitive (du, de la, de l', des) and indefinite (un, une, des) articles are reduced to de in a negative construction. A base example as you noted is as follows:

“J'ai une voiture” becomes “je n’ai pas de voiture”.

A) Construction: A construction refers to a single construction or clause. This clause may be a full sentence in itself or one clause within a sentence:

1) J'ai une voiture. (This is one clause, one construction, one sentence)

2) Je ne crois pas qu’on ait des devoirs. (This is one sentence, but two clauses separated by qu')

Based on this definition, then des in example #2 could never be reduced to de because it is not part of a negative construction or clause, it is part of a positive, subjunctive clause. Je ne crois pas is a separate negative clause that is not in the subjunctive but rather the indicative. Thus the rule does not apply.

B) Number of verbs: The rule states that the reduction occurs in a negative construction (clause), therefore it is essentially irrelevant how many verbs there are the clause and thus which verb is directly being negated. For example:

1) Je ne vais pas lire de livres. Lire is not being directly negated, however the rule still stands.

2) Je ne vais pas voir d'ami. Voir is not being directly negated, however the rule stile stands.

That distance from the directly negated verb is elongated in our example sentence, however it remains a single negative construction:

Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver de table.

C) The difference between de and un/une: Un or une can be kept if we want to emphasise the concept of “not one single”. For example (in order of degree):

1) Je n'ai pas de voiture. (I don't have a car.) 

2) Je n'ai pas une voiture. (I don't have a single car.) - more emphasis, greater degree

3) Je n'ai pas une seule voiture. (I don't have a single car (at all).) - even greater emphasis / degree

Une could be kept in our example sentence, however it would technically change the meaning of the sentence. For example:

1) Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver de table. (I don't have time to reserve a table.)

2) Je n’ai pas le temps de réserver une table. (I don't have time to reserve a single table.)

In the example used by RobertC106: je n'ai pas assez d'argent pour acheter une voiture. This technically means that I don't have enough money to buy one single car. But you could equally say, je n'ai pas assez d'argent pour acheter de voiture, which means I don't have enough mony to buy a car.

D) The difference between the two is simply stress and emphasis. I think this is largely where the confusion lies and I think there are two points to be made:

1) The further the article and object are from the directly negated verb in the construction, the more unclear the rule feels, even for native speakers. 

2) You can actually use either de or un/une, however they change the degree and emphasis. Both options being grammatically correct introduces a level of confusion.

For these two reasons, you will probably hear both forms being used interchangeably in spoken French, as people don't pay much attention to the nuance. However, in written they should technically be clear.

That is quite a long winded reponse, but I hope I have managed to break it down and build it back up in a way that makes sense.

I hope this helps,

   -   Mitchell

Thank you Mitchell, for a detailed and well written explanation.