# FR: I had eaten before you arrived



## daisxyx

Hi 

I'm trying to translate this sentence into French:
I had eaten before you (pl f) arrived.

Can anyone help?

My attempt:
J’avais mangé avant que vous soyez arrivées.

Thanks in advance xxx


----------



## Franglais1969

Hmm, Wouldn't the English ordinarily be:

*I ate before you arrived.

*I personally don't see a need to use the pluperfect here. 

*J'ai mangé..*


----------



## daisxyx

It's in my French textbook! I agree with you that it sounds odd. But notwithstanding..


----------



## Franglais1969

In that case, J'avais mangé would appear to be correct.


----------



## daisxyx

(Thinking about it

I ate when you arrived - sounds like you ate at the time that they arrived
I'd eaten when you arrived - makes it clear that you'd already eaten at the time that they arrived
I'd eaten before you arrived - is that like overkill?

xxx


----------



## Franglais1969

At the same time I would say: I was eating when you arrived.

You used before not when, so it should be: I ate before you arrived.


----------



## daisxyx

Yeah, that's what I meant - the pluperfect is fine with when: 'I had eaten when you arrived'; but it's not preferable with before: 'I had eaten before you arrived'. 

But 'I was eating when you arrived' is different to 'I ate when you arrived'. One of them is impolite!


----------



## Franglais1969

Oh I see what you mean; sorry, yes, "I had eaten when you arrived" makes a lot more sense.


----------



## timpeac

As has been pointed out above, the original sentence of "I had eaten before you arrived" could also be written "I ate before you arrived". My question is two-fold - can you also chose between the pluperfect and perfect tense in the same was as in English in French and can you use the present subjunctive instead of the past for the second half. In other words - which of the following sentences are correct?-

J'avais mangé avant que vous ne soyez arrivées.
J'ai mangé avant que vous ne soyez arrivées.
J'avais mangé avant que vous n'arriviez.
J'ai mangé avant que vous n'arriviez.

If more than one can be correct, is there any difference in meaning?


----------



## Oluc (Yvon)

@timpeac
La première traduction est fausse et superfétatoire.
La deuxième est boîteuse et inutile.
La troisième est bonne.
La quatrième est équivoque et futile.

Pourquoi pas "I had eaten when you arrived" donc "J'avais mangé quand vous êtes arrivés" ?  Pourquoi se compliquer l'existence avec des constructions alambiquées ?  Why in the world should we stifle ourselves with convoluted phrasings ?


----------



## timpeac

Ouch, calm down Oluc!! The original phrase to translate is good English - I can't speak for the French but in English there is certainly a difference between "I had eaten before you arrived" and "I had eaten when you arrived".

What do others think of the options?

If it makes you any happier - I thought the third was also the best but didn't want to influence the answers, particularly since it hadn't been offered at that point. Note that you contradict French speakers above by your dismissal of some of the answers.


----------



## Oluc (Yvon)

I didn't mean to hurt you, timpeac, but pray tell what the difference is between "I'd eaten before you arrived" and "I'd eaten when you arrived"?
You see, if in English both are idiomatic, in French the latter is more colloquial than the former.


----------



## timpeac

Oh you didn't - but this difference isn't the one I'm interested in since the thread is about the original English sentence which is what it is. In short terms the first sentence stresses the timing of the events.

Anyone can answer my original question please?


----------



## James Chandler

They are all correct. I had eaten before you arrived would be 'J'avais mangé avant que ne vous soyez arrivées'... it is saying that, before they arrived, he/she had eaten. The Pluperfect is used to describe an event that happened BEFORE the past event, so the past past.


----------



## timpeac

James Chandler said:


> They are all correct. I had eaten before you arrived would be 'J'avais mangé avant que ne vous soyez arrivées'


In English, yes - but not in usual French. They seem to prefer the present subjunctive where the past would be found in the dependent clause in English. See sentence 3 in post 9 - j'avais mangé avant que vous n'arriviez.


----------



## Maître Capello

This is an old but quite interesting discussion! The tense of the main verb in French should be exactly the tense you'd use in English: it is not useful to indicate any anteriority with a pluperfect tense for the main verb when the conjunction makes it clear already. In other words, to convey the appropriate meaning in this context, the pluperfect is mandatory with "when/_quand_" but not with "before/_avant que_" since the right sequence is implied by the conjunction itself. With _avant que_, the tense of the main verb is more a matter of nuance and style, and it also depends on the full context.

_J'ai mangé *quand* vous êtes arrivées._  ↔ I ate *when* you arrived. (This would imply (pseudo) simultaneity and is therefore not appropriate here. )
_J'avais (déjà) mangé *quand* vous êtes arrivées._ ↔ I had (already) eaten *when* you arrived. (The pluperfect is required in this context.)

_J'ai mangé *avant que* vous n'arriviez._ ↔ I ate *before* you arrived.
_J'avais mangé *avant que* vous n'arriviez._ ↔ I had eaten *before* you arrived.

That last sentence may sound weird as a standalone sentence, but it would be quite natural if referring to another past event, e.g., in an indirect speech:_Je lui ai dit que j'avais mangé *avant que* vous n'arriviez._ ↔ I told him I had eaten *before* you arrived.​
Now, regarding the tense of the subordinate verb after _avant que_, since in common speech and writing we only use the present and past subjunctives, and since the past subjunctive implies completion, it doesn't make much sense to use it here. You should definitely use the present subjunctive.

_J'avais mangé *avant que* vous n'arriviez._ ↔ I had eaten *before* you arrived. 
_J'avais mangé *avant que* vous ne soyez arrivées._ ↔ I had eaten *before* you had arrived. (sounds weird )


----------



## timpeac

Maître Capello said:


> _J'avais mangé *avant que* vous n'arriviez._ ↔ I had eaten *before* you arrived.
> _J'avais mangé *avant que* vous ne soyez arrivées._ ↔ I had eaten *before* you had arrived. (sounds weird )


Ah that makes sense. Although I of course know that the present subjunctive replaces the imperfect subjunctive in most contexts, but I hadn't thought of the fact that therefore the perfect subjunctive would be interpreted as a pluperfect subjunctive (and the pluperfect indeed would sound odd).

So, just to confirm, would you use the perfect subjunctive (standing in for the pluperfect subjunctive) where the time line is important? 

For example - j'avais peur que tu ne sois déjà arrivé. I was afraid that you had already arrived.


----------

