# FR: le pire / le plus mauvais



## sun-and-happiness

The superlative of mauvais is always either le pire or le plus mauvais. But while you may say 'la plus mauvaise université' or 'la pire université,' you may only say 'les pires ploucs,' 'les pires catastrophes,' 'les pires crimes' etc. Why? Because 'plouc,' 'catastrophe,' 'crime' are already negative and it would be redundant to use 'mauvais' or its superlative, 'le plus mauvais,' in front of them.

Est-ce qu'il y a des autres adjectifs qui sont déjà negatifs comme plouc, catastrophe et crime? Y-a-il une liste? Merci à tous!


----------



## Jet Lewis

Le pire = Le plus mauvais

They're just synonyms 

See (le) plus mauvais / (le) pire for more details


----------



## Krom le Barbare

Il faut faire attention, ce ne sont pas des adjectifs (comme "catastrophique") mais des noms.
Tu en as quelques-uns ici : http://www.linternaute.com/dictionnaire/fr/usage/pejoratif/1/

C'est la liste des mots _péjoratifs_.
Les mots _négatifs_ sont les mêmes qu'en anglais, je pense : tu ne dirais pas "a bad calamity".

En ce qui concerne le plus mauvais/le pire, le plus simple est d'utiliser "le pire", c'est ce qu'on dit le plus souvent, et il peut se dire dans tous les cas.
Ce que l'article explique, c'est que les mots comme "catastrophe" sous-entendent (_imply_) déjà l'idée que c'est mauvais.

À mon avis, l'anglais a le même raisonnement : tu ne diras jamais "it's a bad calamity", "it's a bad murder". Il suffit que tu te demandes si tu peux ajouter l'adjectif "mauvais" avant un nom (en comparant avec l'anglais, au besoin).

Ainsi : 
- catastrophe => calamity => a bad calamity => la pire catastrophe
- université => university _or_ college => a bad college => la plus mauvaise université

(red=W, green=R ...)


----------



## marget

My reference grammar states that (le) pire and (le) plus mauvais are often interchangeable as comparative and superlative forms.  It goes on to say that (le) pire occurs more often in literary than in spoken language and that (le) pire tends to be restricted to abstract nouns.  It gives the following examples "Votre attitude est pire que la sienne", "le pire danger"_ but_ "Ce vin est plus mauvais que l'autre".  

Are these distinctions valid or archaic?


----------



## Krom le Barbare

Hmm ... your examples are a bit funny, because when you say "ce vin est plus mauvais que l'autre", you talk about the taste, and then there is no doubt at all. ("Pire" doesn't refers to the taste feature.)
Nevertheless, we would say "ce vin est trop acide, et celui-là est encore *pire*", so ...


----------



## timpeac

sun-and-happiness said:


> The superlative of mauvais is always either le pire or le plus mauvais. But while you may say 'la plus mauvaise université' or 'la pire université,' you may only say 'les pires ploucs,' 'les pires catastrophes,' 'les pires crimes' etc. Why? Because 'plouc,' 'catastrophe,' 'crime' are already negative and it would be redundant to use 'mauvais' or its superlative, 'le plus mauvais,' in front of them.


Hi. You're quoting a grammar book there I think? While they might be right about the examples they give I wouldn't give too much credence to their "explanation" as to why there is a difference between the usage of these phrases. "Le pire" means "le plus mauvais", they are equivalent in sense (although as you know not necessarily in usage). It makes no sense to say that you can't use "le plus mauvais" before "plouc" because it is already "negative" but that you can use "le pire" (since "le pire" means "le plus mauvais"!).

I think it would be better to abandon that explanation (which really seems nonsense to me) and simply try to ascertain in which situations you use "le plus mauvais" in which you use "le pire" and in which you can use both.



marget said:


> My reference grammar states that (le) pire and (le) plus mauvais are often interchangeable as comparative and superlative forms. It goes on to say that (le) pire occurs more often in literary than in spoken language and that (le) pire tends to be restricted to abstract nouns. It gives the following examples "Votre attitude est pire que la sienne", "le pire danger"_ but_ "Ce vin est plus mauvais que l'autre".
> 
> Are these distinctions valid or archaic?


It sounds right to me. I was always taught that verbs of taste always use "plus mauvais". Taste verbs often seem to call for special grammar - ça sent bon ! Il est bon ce gâteau ! etc (pas "bien").


----------



## Krom le Barbare

> It makes no sense to say that you can't use "le plus mauvais" before "plouc" because it is already "negative" but that you can use "le pire" (since "le pire" means "le plus mauvais"!).


Who said French made sense? No, she (he?) 's right, there IS a difference. Believe me.
cf. my explanations.


----------



## timpeac

You have misunderstood me - I'm not saying there isn't a difference, I know there is. It is the explanation that it is these "negative words" which causes the difference which I'm saying is nonsense, not the fact that there is a difference.


----------



## Krom le Barbare

Well, I think it's true, in fact. I quite agree with this theory, but in fact I had never think about it.
Do you have any counter-examples?


----------



## timpeac

Again, I think you have misunderstood me. I am not saying that the examples are not true (and I said in my message "While they might be right about the examples they give...) It is the extrapolated "reason" that "le plus mauvais plouc" would be pleonastic where as "le pire plouc" wouldn't be and that is why the usage is different that I disagree with. They are both either pleonastic or both not. Perhaps such phrases are felt to be more pleonastic and so avoided but there's nothing in the grammar or sense to make it so. Perhaps I was too harsh to call it "nonsense" - it might be a useful guide to usage, but the reasoning seems faulty to me.


----------



## Pierre Simon

Bonsoir à toutes et à tous

Je suis ce fil avec beaucoup d'intérêt. C'est fascinant. Dans le fil cité ci-dessus par Jet Lewis, il y avait deux posts (d'itka et de Fred C) qui semblent suggérer que 'le pire' peut être toujours employé, que le nom suivant soit «negatif» ou non. Êtes vous d'accord ? Est-ce qu'il y a un consensus sur çela ?

Edit : Au moment où j'ecrivais, je n'ai pas encore vu la dernière intervention de Timpeac.  Alors il n'y a pas bien sûr de consensus


----------



## Chimel

I think Fred C's explanation (in the other thread) is crystal clear, so I'll quote him:


Fred_C said:


> "Le plus mauvais" est le superlatif de l'adjectif "mauvais", alors que "le pire" est le superlatif de n'importe quel adjectif pas vraiment déterminé qui a le sens de "mauvais".



That's why you say _la pire catastrophe_ and not _la plus mauvaise:_ because you don't refer to _mauvais_ ("cette catastrophe-là était mauvaise, mais celle-ci est encore plus mauvaise" is nonsense), but to another negative adjective, like _grave_, _terrible_, _dramatique... _

What you have to do is to ask yourself: can I use this word with the adjective _mauvais_? (In most cases, the answer will be the same as for _bad_ in English, I agree with Krom on this). If not, then certainly use _pire._

If you can, then _le plus mauvais_ is definitely safer, but in some cases, _pire_ is also possible (this is a matter of language feeling)!
For instance:
_C'est le plus mauvais prof / le pire prof que je connaisse._


----------



## itka

I completely agree with Chimel (and FredC) : "_le plus mauvais_" can always be replaced by _"le pire"_ but _"le pire"_ is not always _"le plus mauvais"_.


----------



## Nicomon

Hi everyone,

I also agree with Chimel and FredC.

I'll only add as confirmation these details, that I extracted from the BDL under *Pire* :


> Même si _pire_ est l'adjectif comparatif de _mauvais_, _pire_ et _plus mauvais_ ne peuvent pas toujours être employés indifféremment pour autant. Ainsi, seul l'adjectif _pire_ est possible avec les noms qui évoquent une idée de mal (_détresse_, _douleur_,_ erreur_,_ mal_,_ malheur_,_ souffrance_, etc.)


 


> Comme il comporte en lui-même une valeur de comparatif (_plus mauvais_) ou de superlatif (_le plus mauvais_), _pire_ n'admet pas de variation de degré. Il ne peut donc pas être précédé des mots de comparaison _plus_, _moins_ ou _aussi_.On ne saurait donc écrire _moins pire_, qui correspondrait à _moins plus mauvais__,_ ni _aussi pire_, qui correspondrait à _aussi plus mauvais_, ni _plus pire_, considéré comme un pléonasme.


----------



## Pierre Simon

Merci Chimel, itka et Nicomon.  Je vous suis très reconnaissant de votre aide.


----------

