# EN: I broke someone's arm



## FreddieFirebird

If you broke someone's arm, would you say  "J'ai cassé le bras de quelqu'un"?  Or could is be causative faire: "J'ai fait casser son bras"?  Or something else entirely?  Thanks!

If this has already been asked, sorry to repeat the question

...or is using causative faire hiring someone to break someone's arm for you!?!?!  (just thought of that possibility!!)


----------



## RasJulien

FreddieFirebird said:


> If you broke someone's arm, would you say  "J'ai cassé le bras de quelqu'un"?  Or could is be causative faire: "J'ai fait casser son bras"?  Or something else entirely?  Thanks!
> 
> If this has already been asked, sorry to repeat the question



As you guessed,  usually faire + infinitive is used to express the notion that you made someone do a task for you. 

J'ai fait réparer ma voiture = I had my car repaired


----------



## geostan

Note that one usually says:_ casser le bras à quelqu'un,_ So in the case of _J'ai fait casser son bras_, one would usually say _Je lui ai fait casser le bras_.
 realize that this is a side issue, but I thought I'd point it out just the same.


----------



## Maître Capello

geostan said:


> Note that one usually says:_ casser le bras à quelqu'un_


Actually we say _casser le bras *de* quelqu'un_ as suggested by Freddie.


----------



## geostan

Maître Capello said:


> Actually we say _casser le bras *de* quelqu'un_ as suggested by Freddie.



So you would say _J'ai cassé son bras_ rather than _Je lui ai cassé le bras_? That goes against what I was always taught.

Or are you saying that the use of _de_ applies only when the completion is a noun rather than a pronoun?


----------



## Maître Capello

With a noun complement it is considered poor French to use *à* and you should use *de* instead (_J'ai cassé le bras *de* mon frère_). But with a pronoun, we definitely use *à* (_Je *lui* ai cassé le bras_).

You may want to have a look at the following threads:

FR: de / à pour la possession
un ami de X / un ami à lui/moi - préposition de / à (Français Seulement)
la maison de/à mes parents (Français Seulement) ← Guess who answered that one!


----------



## geostan

I don't consider the casual use of à for de to mark possession quite the same way as in the above examples.
For instance, do you say * J'ai lavé les mains de ma sœur*? If you do, then I guess I've  misunderstaood the notion, and will have to adjust my usage to conform to what you said above. It's a minor point, but still worth learning.


----------



## Maître Capello

Yes, I would say, _J'ai lavé les mains *de* ma sœur._


----------



## CapnPrep

I agree with geostan that the popular use of possessive _à_ is not the whole explanation here. There are two possible structures for _casser le bras à quelqu'un_:

°casser [le bras à quelqu'un] (where °_le bras à quelqu'un_ replaces the standard _le bras de quelqu'un_) 
[casser le bras] à quelqu'un 
The first structure can be rejected as non-standard, but the second structure must remain available, not only in order to explain _lui casser le bras, à Georges_, but also:

C'est *à *Georges qu'on a cassé le bras. (*C'est *de *Georges qu'on a cassé le bras.) 
On va casser un bras *à *Georges / **de *Georges.


----------



## Maître Capello

I agree that the structure with *à* isn't incorrect here, but still, it doesn't sound as natural to me as the structure with *de* when using the definite article. On the other hand, for some reason I'd use *à* if using the indefinite article.

_J'ai cassé *le* bras *de* X_
_J'ai cassé *un* bras *à* X_


----------



## Francobritannocolombien

I don't think Geostan's understanding of the structure had anything to do with the notion of possession. What if we had "casser la gueule" instead of "casser le bras"? I don' think anyone would find fault with the structure of the following sentences:
J'ai dit à mon frère que j'allais lui casser la gueule => je lui ai cassé la gueule => j'ai cassé la gueule _*à*_ mon frère (not "j'ai cassé la gueule _de _mon frère".)

Could it be that "casser la gueule" functions more like an indiomatic unit (similar to, say, "faire mal") than "casser le bras" does?


----------



## Maître Capello

Francobritannocolombien said:


> J'ai dit à mon frère que j'allais lui casser la gueule => je lui ai cassé la gueule


The examples with a pronoun should definitely be used with _à_ (→ _lui_). There is no question about that.



> j'ai cassé la gueule _*à*_ mon frère (not "j'ai cassé la gueule _de _mon frère".)


Actually, in that particular example, both are *equally* fine. I however admit that most native speakers would probably use _à_ in that case.


----------



## CapnPrep

It seems to me that [_casser X_] _à qqn _focuses on what happens to the person. For example, if it's some kind of figurative punishment/injury (_casser la gueule_/_la tête_/_la figure à qqn_), the important thing is that something bad happens to the person, not that their head/face actually gets broken. With an indefinite article (_casser un bras_, _un doigt_ _à qqn_), the choice of preposition is probably to a large extent syntactically determined, but there is also a sense in which the speaker is more interested in the injury to the person rather than the precise nature/location of the injury (it doesn't really matter which arm or which tooth).

In contrast, _casser _[_le X de qqn_] focuses more concretely on what gets broken.


----------



## Francobritannocolombien

CapnPrep said:


> It seems to me that [_casser X_] _à qqn _focuses on what happens to the person. For example, if it's some kind of figurative punishment/injury (_casser la gueule_/_la tête_/_la figure à qqn_), the important thing is that something bad happens to the person, not that their head/face actually gets broken. With an indefinite article (_casser un bras_, _un doigt_ _à qqn_), the choice of preposition is probably to a large extent syntactically determined, but there is also a sense in which the speaker is more interested in the injury to the person rather than the precise nature/location of the injury (it doesn't really matter which arm or which tooth). In contrast, _casser _[_le X de qqn_] focuses more concretely on what gets broken.



I think you hit the nail on the head (and I won't even begin to try to translate that as "tu as frappé la tête du/au clou!")

What you mean by "some kind of figurative punishment/injury" is what I  meant by "functioning like an idiomatic unit". Another example is the use of "casser les pieds" (or something else, depending on your level of politeness) to mean "irritate", or "casser les oreilles" to mean "deafen"

Compare:



"J'ai été puni pour avoir cassé *les pieds de ma mère* en laissant tomber mon marteau dessus". 
"J'ai été puni pour avoir cassé *les oreilles du Bouddha* en laissant tomber mon marteau dessus." 
"J'ai été  puni pour avoir *cassé les pieds*_ à_ ma mère en chantant du Mireille Mathieu toute la soirée". 
"J'ai été  puni pour avoir *cassé les* *oreilles* _à _ma mère en chantant du Mireille Mathieu toute la soirée". 

Using "à" in the first two sentences would be nonstandard, and using "de" in the last two would not sound right to me.


----------

