# FR: We made the class more interactive



## ajstar

I want to know if i am using the subjunctive correctly in the following sentence.

*nous avons fait que le cours fût plus interactif et intéressant

*In english it would be : _we made the class more interactive and interesting_. Is there a better way to say this in french?
*

*


----------



## arsham

Yes yoopi at last some body caring about the rules, however I would say
Nous avons tout fait pour que le cours fût plus interactif et intéressant.
You have the right idea that is you have to use imperfect subjunctive in concert with other past tenses to show their simultaneous character but in your original sentence there is no need for a subjunctive because you're stating a fact that is the class was interesting because you made it so. The subjunctive expresses a potential, a wish or a possibility as in my sentence. so you should say "nous avons fait que le cours a
été ..." or even better "nous avons fait en sorte que le cours a été ...."


----------



## Il fuoco

Hello.
I assume you are using the imparfait du subj solely to understand its use and not because you think it would ever be used in everyday french (it wouldn't).
I think the original English does not imply at all that a second, "older" past tense should be used, since the class is still 'interactif et intéressant'. The use of 'que' and the second verb is very unexpected and unnecessary. Simply 'Nous avons *rendu* le cours plus interactif et intéressant' should suffice.


----------



## arsham

Il fuoco said:


> Hello.
> I assume you are using the imparfait du subj solely to understand its use and not because you think it would ever be used in everyday french (it wouldn't).
> I think the original English does not imply at all that a second, "older" past tense should be used, since the class is still 'interactif et intéressant'. The use of 'que' and the second verb is very unexpected and unnecessary. Simply 'Nous avons *rendu* le cours plus interactif et intéressant' should suffice.


not necessarily, your sentence is concise and correct, what I wrote with "en sorte que" is rather colloquial. And we are not talking about any remote time if that's what you mean by older past tense. Plus, nothing implies any continuity or link to the present time! So you have to use passé composé simply because it happened in the past regardless of its relation to the present time.


----------



## Maître Capello

As Il fuoco suggested, it would be much more natural to say, _Nous avons *rendu* le cours plus interactif et intéressant_. Moreover, with _faire en sorte que_, you must use the *subjunctive*.

_Nous avons *rendu* le cours plus interactif et intéressant_. — Best way to put it.
_Nous avons *fait que* le cours *fût* plus interactif et intéressant._ — Correct but the imperfect subjunctive is literary; you should definitely avoid it in both speech and standard writing.
_Nous avons *fait que* le cours *soit* plus interactif et intéressant._ — In modern French, we use the present subjunctive instead (or sometimes the past subjunctive).
_Nous avons *fait en sorte que* le cours a été plus interactif et intéressant._ 
_Nous avons *fait en sorte que* le cours *soit* plus interactif et intéressant._ — Alternative phrase, although I prefer Il fuoco's suggestion.


----------



## ajstar

Thank you all! so the original suggestions by arsham are incorrect as he used the past indicative/passé composé rather than a subjunctive? 
*
"*nous avons fait que le cours* a été ..." and "*nous avons fait en sorte que le cours* a été *


----------



## arsham

Si le cours a en effet été intéressant alors on n'a pas besoin d'un subjonctif.  On rapporte le résultat factuel de ce qu'on fait !
My original sugestion was: nous avons tout fait pour que le cours fût .... which is correct.


----------



## arsham

I agree with Maitre Capello's comments while recalling my initial suggestion with "pour que".


----------



## Nicomon

arsham said:


> Si le cours a en effet été intéressant alors on n'a pas besoin d'un subjonctif. On rapporte le résultat factuel de ce qu'on fait !
> My original sugestion was: nous avons tout fait pour que le cours fût .... which is correct.


 Je ne suis pas tout à fait d'accord. 

Pour ce qui est de _faire que _et _faire en sorte que_ - qui n'appellent pas toujours le subjonctif, bien qu'il soit plus courant - je vous réfère à *cette page* de la BDL. 





> Le verbe de la subordonnée introduite par _faire en sorte que_ peut aussi être au mode indicatif; il évoque alors une conséquence considérée comme certaine.


 Cela dit, je n'aime pas le son de « _fait en sorte que le cours a été _». 

Je vote aussi pour la solution toute simple de Il fuoco. Pourquoi compliquer inutilement les choses?

... _tout fait pour que le cours *fût*..._ est littéraire. Personne ne parle, ni même écrit, ainsi en 2012.  On dirait/écrirait : *soit. 

*Sinon, pour contourner le subjonctif, il y aurait : _Nous avons tout fait pour rendre le cours plus interactif et (plus) intéressant. 
_Mais encore là, c'est en dire plus que l'original. Ce serait en anglais : _We did everything (we could) to make...

_


----------



## ajstar

arsham said:


> Yes yoopi at last some body caring about the rules, however I would say
> Nous avons tout fait pour que le cours fût plus interactif et intéressant.
> You have the right idea that is you have to use imperfect subjunctive in concert with other past tenses to show their simultaneous character but in your original sentence there is no need for a subjunctive because you're stating a fact that is the class was interesting because you made it so. The subjunctive expresses a potential, a wish or a possibility as in my sentence. so you should say "nous avons fait que le cours a
> été ..." or even better *"nous avons fait en sorte que le cours a été* ...."



This is the example i was refering to. Which is incorrect.


----------



## arsham

I said in the previous post that I agree with Capello on this particular sentence and also indicated that my original suggestion was 
nous avons tout fait pour que le cours fût .....which is correct.
The point was to show the use of subjunctive impetfect not to find the easiest way to express the idea that some body made the class interesting!!!!


----------



## Nicomon

ajstar said:


> This is the example i was refering to. Which is incorrect.


 I know. 

However, though it sounds very awkward to my ears, it apparently is not incorrect, if I understand correctly the page I linked to and citation that I added in post #10. Here's an extract, from a different source : 





> 2- = Agir de façon que, veiller que.Lorsque le sujet est animé, on a
> 
> a- soit le subjonctif : but ou conséquence sans certitude, souhait, désir
> ._Elle pouvait faire en sorte qu'il fût (soit) toujours heureux.
> __Faites qu'une telle chose ne puisse jamais se reproduire ! (ici le sujet n'est pas exprimé à l'impératif mais c'est une personne)_
> 
> b-soit l'indicatif dans le cas où la conséquence est considérée comme certaine.
> _J'ai fait en sorte que tout le monde s'est amusé à mon anniversaire._


 The last example (and there are two in the article from the BDL) is similar to arsham's suggestion. It's like saying : 
_Les modifications (que nous avons) apportées ont fait en sorte que le cours a été... _(obvious result/consequence, rather than intention). 

My point - and that of others in this thread - is that it is too complicated, compared to the original, which does not call for subjunctive. 
That would be in English something like : _We ensured that / saw to it that the class..._


----------



## arsham

Nicomon said:


> I know.
> 
> However, though it sounds very awkward to my ears, it apparently is not incorrect, if I understand correctly the page I linked to and citation that I added in post #10. Here's an extract, from a different source :  The last example (and there are two in the article from the BDL) is similar to arsham's suggestion. It's like saying :
> _Les modifications (que nous avons) apportées ont fait en sorte que le cours a été... _(obvious result/consequence, rather than intention).
> 
> My point - and that of others in this thread - is that it is too complicated, compared to the original, which does not call for subjunctive.
> That would be in English something like : _We ensured that / saw to it that the class..._



thanks for the clarification! For most people "en sorte que" governs the subjunctive which is why the use of the indicative mood is readily regarded as incorrect and I myself started doubting my own answer. I guess for most people "en sorte que" is not the kind of phrasal conjunction one would use to report a fact!


----------

