# FR: arrêter le bus / arrêter de fumer - COD ?



## Music22

[…] Another question on the topic of direct/ indirect objects... I can understand that "J'arrête le bus" would be a transitive verb as the bus is the direct object, however I don't understand why in the phrase "j'arrête de fumer" arreter is also considered a transitive verb?


----------



## Jeanne75

Hi,

A verb is generally either transitive or intransitive - at least for each various meanings it has.

If you have a doubt ...

The same rule applys, just think of the question:
*Qu'*est ce que j'arrête / J'arrête *quoi *? De fumer. COD

*De quoi* ne-puis je pas m'empêcher / Je ne peux pas m'empêcher *de quoi *? De fumer. COI.

The "*de*" that is important is the one in the related question - not the one that might in this case be in the answer.
"De fumer" is an entity.


Cheers


----------



## Music22

But I thought that a transitive verb had to take a direct object? Does that mean that a verb can also be a direct object e.g. fumer is the direct object?


----------



## Jeanne75

Exactly!

A verb in its infinitve form can be ca COD, a COI, a subject:
Il arrete de fumer / il ne peut pas s'empêcher de fumer / fumer tue.


----------



## Music22

Why is il arrete de fumer the COD but  il ne peut pas s'empêcher de fumer is the COI?


----------



## Jorōgumo

Arrêter *quoi *? De fumer. → COD du verbe _arrêter_.
S'empêcher *de quoi* ? De fumer. → COI du verbe _s'empêcher_.


----------



## Music22

Thanks for your help, can I ask what your definition of a transitive/ intransitive verb would be as I continue to get different responses from internet sources?


----------



## Jeanne75

There is only one answer and it is exactly the same in French as in English.

A transitive verb is a verb that CAN have a COD (complément d'objet direct).

Arrêter can have a COD. You can "arrêter quelque chose" (to stop something) => transitif.
Mourir can never ever have a COD=> You cannot "mourir quelquechose" (to die something) => intransitif.

Empêcher is transitive, but here its COD is "s'" : Il empêche *qui *? lui-même (s'). Il empêche lui-même (COD) *de quoi *? de fumer (COI);


----------



## Music22

Sorry to be so picky, but how come we write "arrêter de fumer" instead of "arrêter fumer", if the phrase is "arrêter quelquechose?" Thanks a lot for your help


----------



## Jeanne75

That is a very good question and unfortunately I don't have the answer, actually it sounds natural for a native... Hope someone else will be able to help you on that one.

You would say : arrêter la cigarette but say arrêter de fumer, obviously both are CODs.


----------



## Jorōgumo

J'espère que cette page saura t'aider.


----------



## Music22

Jeanne75, I notice in the post you said that a transitive verb is a verb that can have a COD and that this is the only definition, however on this webpage http://www.laits.utexas.edu/tex/pr/vti1.html#variable it states 
*"Transitive verbs by definition have an object, either a direct object or an indirect object. Intransitive verbs never have objects. "

Therefore does that mean that a transitive verb can have both a COD and a COI?
*


----------



## Jeanne75

Yes absolutely. Transitivity is defined only by the possibiliy of a COD. The COI have nothing to do with transitivity and this is very very usual to have also a COI:
Paul donne quelque chose à Pierre... 

I never even mentioned the word COI in the definition of transitivity:
*A transitive verb is a verb that CAN have a COD (complément d'objet direct).
*End of it... no COI thing involved there.

Put it the other way round, which means exactly the same, I quote you:* Intransitive verbs never have objects.
*
And moreover we have already seen this case where there were a COD and a COI:
Empêcher is transitive, but here its COD is "s'" : Il empêche *qui *? lui-même (s'). Il empêche lui-même (COD) *de quoi *? de fumer (COI)


----------



## Maître Capello

As a matter of fact, *infinitives* used as *direct objects* are often preceded by a preposition, which is typically _de_! The definition of direct objects being those that don't take any preposition is only valid for *noun* objects.


			
				Le Bon Usage said:
			
		

> L’opposition entre objet direct et objet indirect est fondée sur la construction des syntagmes nominaux. L’infinitif objet direct peut être introduit par une préposition : _Il craint de s’endormir_. Ce n’est pas une vraie préposition, mais une sorte de marque de l’infin., un introducteur de l’infin.


----------



## Jeanne75

Merci Maître Capello !


----------



## jann

Music22 said:


> Sorry to be so picky, but how come we write "arrêter de fumer" instead of "arrêter fumer", if the phrase is "arrêter quelquechose?" Thanks a lot for your help


Maître Capello has given you your answer: 


Maître Capello said:


> As a matter of fact, *infinitives* used as *direct objects* are often preceded by a preposition, which is typically _de_! The definition of direct objects being those that don't take any preposition is only valid for *noun* objects.


When students of French first learn about direct and indirect objects, all of the examples are nouns.  This keeps things simple.  When the noun doesn't need a preposition to link it to the verb, it's a direct object.  When it does need a preposition, it's indirect.

But at some point you need to move to the next leve, because there are times when we don't have a simple noun acting as the object.  Sometimes we need an infinitive instead, to represent an action instead of a thing.  The infinitive is often introduced by _de_ (and note that in English we usually use a nominal -ING form instead, as in "I can't stop smoking").  

You can still figure out the basic structure of the verb by replacing whatever that object is (noun or verb) with the word_ quelque chose_, "something."

Since the structure is "stop something," _arrêter quelque chose_, it doesn't matter whether that _quelque chose _is _le bus_ or _de fumer_.  Either way, it's a direct object.


----------

