# EN: Vous vous êtes vus hier soir ?



## Dilibop

Hi everyone,

Hope your weekend went well !!!

I would like to know wich form is correct to translate:

_"Vous vous êtes vus hier soir?"_

> *Have you seen each other yesterday evening? *(He wanted to use this form)

or

> *Did you saw each other yesterday evening?*

Maybe both are wrong. Many thanks.

Regards,
Fab


----------



## tpettit

On dirait plutot dans ce cas-là, *Did you see each other yesterday evening?*
*Have you seen each other *est gramaticalement correct, mais comme l'action se passe à un moment précis du passé (hier soir), on préfère le prétérit.
*Did you saw*


----------



## Bléros

The first sentence should probably be '*Did* you *see* each other yesterday evening', and the second one should be 'Did you *see* each other yesterday evening'. Remember when you have 'did + verb', the verb is always in its simplest form.


----------



## dragonfly37

It's fairly likely this is just my own experience/location, but I've rarely heard people use "yesterday evening."  It's pretty much always "last night," whether or not it's the evening or 2 in the morning.


----------



## s3ct0r3

tpettit said:


> On dirait plutot dans ce cas-là, *Did you see each other yesterday evening?*
> *Have you seen each other *est gramaticalement correct, mais comme l'action se passe à un moment précis du passé (hier soir), on préfère le prétérit.
> *Did you saw*




Exactly:

Using "have you ..." in that sense would _only_ work if you said something like: "Bob, have you seen Margie at all?" ... « Bob, est-ce que tu as vu Margie de tout? »


----------



## jeffp44

dragonfly37 said:


> It's fairly likely this is just my own experience/location, but I've rarely heard people use "yesterday evening." It's pretty much always "last night," whether or not it's the evening or 2 in the morning.


 
Agreed.


----------



## patuliac

dragonfly37 said:


> It's fairly likely this is just my own experience/location, but I've rarely heard people use "yesterday evening."  It's pretty much always "last night," whether or not it's the evening or 2 in the morning.





jeffp44 said:


> Agreed.



yep, I agree: "yesterday afternoon" runs into "last night."  
Similarly, I would say "two nights ago" rather than "two evenings ago" or "two days ago in the evening."


----------



## itka

s3ct0r3 said:


> Exactly:
> 
> Using "have you ..." in that sense would _only_ work if you said something like: "Bob, have you seen Margie at all?" ... « Bob, est-ce que tu as vu Margie de tout? »





> « Bob, est-ce que tu as vu Margie de tout? »


 ??? What do you mean ?

Can you please explain (or give some examples) ? Is it correct or not to ask :
"Bob, have you seen Margie at all ?" 

Thanks !


----------



## Jocaste

Est-ce que "*Did you meet last night ?*" conviendrait ?


----------



## patuliac

Jocaste said:


> Est-ce que "*Did you meet last night ?*" conviendrait ?


bien--mais "meet"... c'est plutôt pour des associations que'un ami. 

So for this case maybe "Did you see her/him last night?"   

Or actually... with a small difference... (hah, language is funny, I don't pretend to understand *why* English is as it is) 
"Did you meet up with him/her/them last night"  would refer to a casual meeting among friends.


----------



## patuliac

itka said:


> ??? What do you mean ?
> 
> Can you please explain (or give some examples) ? Is it correct or not to ask :
> "Bob, have you seen Margie at all ?"
> 
> Thanks !



"Bob, have you seen Margie at all?"  that's correct
"Bob, have you seen Margie?" means the same thing, which is have you seen her without being precice about a particular time.

If you want to know if he's seen her at a *particular time* (i.e. last night) then, just like the imparfait/plus-que-parfait in french, you can't use "have seen" (≈ « vous vous étiez vu ? » is that right?) but must use something like "did see" (≈ « vous vous êtes vus hier? »).


----------



## itka

Je n'arrive pas à comprendre clairement la réponse à la question initiale...

Pourriez-vous me dire quelle est la phrase correcte pour traduire :
"Est-ce que vous vous êtes vus, hier soir ?"

Les propositions étaient :

*Have you seen each other yesterday evening ? *

*Did you see each other yesterday evening ?

*Merci !


----------



## DearPrudence

Si je résume bien ce qui a été dit, je dirais :
*"Did you see each other last night?"*

"last night" being better than "yesterday afternoon"


----------



## Rouleau

Itka, whenever you use the perfect sense of a verb ("Have You/Has He/Have We"; "You Have/He Has/We Have," etc.) it implies that some action--in this case, two or more people seeing each other--was accomplished at least once.  (Hence, success; hence, the idea of the action being "perfect.")

Now, consider: There's nothing "special" about two or more people seeing each other "last night."  If you were to say _Have you seen each other yesterday evening_, therefore, you would not be wrong.  You would, however, be overstating a common event.  (What's so "perfect," what's so "accomplished," about this rather ordinary _fait accompli_?  Rien.)

So therefore, the "do" form of the question is correct, not because your perfect form is incorrect, or because no one would understand what the heck you meant, but because it's...excessive.  Especially if you're young (and in the EU), you might even say, "Did you hook up last night?"

Hope this helps.


----------



## trench feature

Rouleau said:


> Itka, whenever you use the perfect sense of a verb ("Have You/Has He/Have We"; "You Have/He Has/We Have," etc.) it implies that some action--in this case, two or more people seeing each other--was accomplished at least once.  (Hence, success; hence, the idea of the action being "perfect.")
> 
> Now, consider: There's nothing "special" about two or more people seeing each other "last night."  If you were to say _Have you seen each other yesterday evening_, therefore, you would not be wrong.  You would, however, be overstating a common event.  (What's so "perfect," what's so "accomplished," about this rather ordinary _fait accompli_?  Rien.)
> 
> So therefore, the "do" form of the question is correct, not because your perfect form is incorrect, or because no one would understand what the heck you meant, but because it's...excessive.  Especially if you're young (and in the EU), you might even say, "Did you hook up last night?"
> 
> Hope this helps.



I have always thought that if one uses the present perfect, a specific point in past time cannot be mentioned.  "Have you seen each other recently, today, yet... seems fine, but "yesterday evening/last night" sounds incorrect to me.


----------



## Rouleau

Yes, it _is _incorrect to use a specific time with the perfect tense; and I should have made that clear.  

I was trying to emphasize that English-speaking people would not be at a loss to understand what was meant if Itka or Dilibop used the perfect tense in this situation.  I was also trying to convey (what apparently is a tricky nuance even for native speakers) that the perfect tense implies a sense of accomplishing a significant action.

But you are absolutely right, and I was wrong, not to make clear that *the perfect tense is never used to indicate or refer to a specific time.*

Thanks for the head's up!


----------



## DearPrudence

So just a quick question (hoping I'm not hijacking this thread )
Would it be possible to say:
*"Hey, funny you should talk about John, I have just seen him last night" ?*
Well I suppose in American it would be even more wrong than in British English


----------



## marget

DearPrudence said:


> So just a quick question (hoping I'm not hijacking this thread )
> Would it be possible to say:
> *"Hey, funny you should talk about John, I have just seen him last night" ?*
> Well I suppose in American it would be even more wrong than in British English


 
It doesn't sound right to my American ears, but I found an interesting site regarding the Present Perfect here


----------



## Rouleau

I also was going to post a URL, but I don't think it's allowed.  And yes, DearPrudence, according to English/American grammar, that would be incorrect because it refers to a specific time.  "I have just seen him" *OR* "I just saw him _last night_."


----------



## itka

Thank you all for your answers and explanations...

It's hard to me to understand very well this difference between the two tenses, but I keep your messages and I'll be trying to use correctly these tenses correctly !


And thanks for the link, marget !


----------



## Jocaste

J'ai moi aussi lutté pendant un certain temps avec ces deux temps jusqu'à ce que l'on me donne une explication vraiment très simple.
La voici  :

*On choisit le temps du verbe en fonction du message que l’on veut faire passer.*

A partir de là, si tu sais quel message fait passer tel temps, tu n'auras plus aucun problème normalement :
- avec le _present perfect_, on veut exprimer le *résultat* d'une action passée qui a des conséquences au moment d’énonciation. Il exprime un changement d’état = passage d’un état à un autre ;=> en utilisant ce temps, on insiste sur le résultat de l’action;   
ex : _I have lived here for 20 years_
   => résultat : je vis ici depuis 20 ans, et c'est toujours le cas. C’est pourquoi je connais très bien cet endroit.

- avec le _preterit_, on veut exprimer la *réalisation*, c'est-à-dire "j'ai fait quelque chose". Il y a une réelle rupture, un décalage avec le moment d’énonciation = décrochage (c’est totalement révolu);   
ex : _I lived here for 20 years_
   => j’ai vécu là pendant 20 ans = _réalisation_ d’un projet, on explique l'action “vivre ici pendant 20 ans”.

Voilà ! J'espère que ça t'aidera itka


----------



## itka

Oui, merci Brother !
Je crois en effet que c'est bien simple et qu'on cherche midi à quatorze heures ! Ta phrase en rouge est éclairante  et merci pour ton explication 

Je vais refaire les exos sur le site de Marget... Je n'ai obtenu qu'un minable 33 % de réussite, mais là, je sens que je vais y arriver !


----------



## Jocaste

itka said:


> Oui, merci Brother !


Sister 
Eh bien de rien ^^


----------



## Rouleau

I hope I don't get in to trouble for pasting this, but everyone here seems so interested in the subject that I'll try (and apologize if I have done something  wrong): http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/presentperfect.html


----------



## timpeac

DearPrudence said:


> So just a quick question (hoping I'm not hijacking this thread )
> Would it be possible to say:
> *"Hey, funny you should talk about John, I have just seen him last night" ?*
> Well I suppose in American it would be even more wrong than in British English


Sounds strange to my British ears too - eventhough, I believe, in British English we use the perfect more often than the Americans.

For the above I'd say "I saw him just last night" (rather than "I just saw him last night" as even "last night" seems a bit too long ago to talk of having just happening to my ears).

I'd never really thought about it before, but I think I agree with the "rule" given above that you don't use the perfect tense in English with a punctual time reference (possibly because the whole point of the perfect tense is to link a past action firmly to the present, making a punctual time reference (which firmly anchors it in the past) a contradiction).


----------



## DearPrudence

Thanks for the confirmation 
It's what I thought & it's even easier to remember it this way.

It's just that because I wanted to write to someone who had talked to me about a film & who had just sent me a mail after quite a long time:
"Hey, funny you've written as I've just seen the film you talked about (to me ?)" & after I thought I would add the precise time & then I realised that I had to change the tense!


----------



## timpeac

DearPrudence said:


> Thanks for the confirmation
> It's what I thought & it's even easier to remember it this way.
> 
> It's just that because I wanted to write to someone who had talked to me about a film & who had just sent me a mail after quite a long time:
> "Hey, funny you've written as I've just seen the film you talked about (to me ?)" & after I thought I would add the precise time & then I realised that I had to change the tense!


Yes - I think it's far from impossible that you'll hear phrases such as "I've just seen the film you told me about last night", but I do think that it sounds a bit odd (but then we all say slightly odd things from time to time). I'd definitely avoid it in writing.

Actually "I've just seen the film you told me about last night" is a fine sentence - but only if you mean that the person told you about the film last night (and the watching occurred at some point since) rather than it was the watching of the film that happened last night!


----------



## itka

I thought a lot about all this thread, and I hope I've got it...

When I say :
_Have you seen him  ? _
Does it mean :
_Have you *ever* seen him ? _(_ever_ would be here replacing the precise indication of the time)

And then, the sentence becomes :
_- Yes, I saw him last night.
_
Please, am I right ?


----------



## calembourde

Yes itka, that's right.  

"Have you seen him" is also likely mean "have you seen him *recently*" as in, "have you seen Joe? I thought he was around here but I can't find him/I haven't seen him since we arrived" (I am not really only asking whether you have seen him, I want to know when and where because I am trying to find him myself.)
"Yes, I saw him by the buffet"/"Yes, I saw him five minutes ago"

In fact, when "have you seen him" means, "Have you *ever* seen him" you sometimes can reply with "Yes, I have seen him", e.g.

"Have you [ever] seen Nicolas Sarkozy in the flesh?" (Here I am only asking whether you've seen him, I don't care when or where)
You can answer either:
"Yes I have seen him"
or 
"Yes, I saw him last Friday" (or whenever)


----------



## timpeac

itka said:


> I thought a lot about all this thread, and I hope I've got it...
> 
> When I say :
> _Have you seen him ? _
> Does it mean :
> _Have you *ever* seen him ? _(_ever_ would be here replacing the precise indication of the time)
> 
> And then, the sentence becomes :
> _- Yes, I saw him last night._
> 
> Please, am I right ?


It's one possibility - "Have you seen the Mona Lisa?" = "Have you ever seen the Mona Lisa?" or "Have you seen the Mona Lisa yet?".

However, another is the sense of "recently" "I have just seen the Mona Lisa and it was great!".

I'm reticent to make up rules as I go along (as surely someone will come up with some counterexamples) but I can't think of a sentence involving the perfect where you could not add either "yet" or "ever" or where it makes a direct link to the present as in "I've been working on that problem all morning and still I can't solve it!" or the phrases involving "for", "I've lived here for 4 years (and still do)".


----------



## Maître Capello

When you ask _Have you *ever* seen the Mona Lisa?_, isn't there the sense of _ever *in your life*_? On the other hand, when asking _Have you seen the Mona Lisa *yet*?_, it seems to me you don't have that notion.

Hence I would use the former to ask whether the person has ever seen it in his life. And I would use the latter if I want to know if the person has seen it _recently_ (e.g., while visiting the _Musée du Louvre_).

Any suggestion?



			
				timpeac said:
			
		

> However, another is the sense of "recently" "I have just seen the Mona Lisa and it was great!".


If you add _just_, it seems obvious there is the sense of _recently_…


----------



## timpeac

Maître Capello said:


> When you ask _Have you *ever* seen the Mona Lisa?_, isn't there the sense of _ever *in your life*_? On the other hand, when asking _Have you seen the Mona Lisa *yet*?_, it seems to me you don't have that notion.
> 
> Hence I would use the former to ask whether the person has ever seen it in his life. And I would use the latter if I want to know if the person has seen it _recently_ (e.g., while visiting the _Musée du Louvre_).
> 
> Any suggestion?


Yes, this is absolutely correct - I didn't mean that phrases involving "yet" or "ever" were synonymous, they are not - I meant that two of the uses of the perfect could be exemplified by "yet" or "ever" (depending on the context). Your interpretation of the first being in the context of "in your life" and the second that you are actually in the Louvre is exactly the nuance.



Maître Capello said:


> If you add _just_, it seems obvious there is the sense of _recently_…


Again - exactly what I meant - because "just" obviously adds the sense of "recently" that's exactly why I chose a phrase involving it to illustrate my point that one use of the perfect is to refer to the recent past.


----------



## Maître Capello

Understood! Sorry for bothering you, Tim, but I needed to make sure my understanding was correct… 

Cheers!


----------



## timpeac

I'm going to try to illustrate what I meant above -

Conversation on mobile phone -

- Have you ever (in your life) seen the Mona Lisa?
- Yes, actually I'm in the Louvre right now and I've just seen it (a moment ago).
- Have you seen "l'origine du monde" yet?
- Yes I've been looking at it for 5 minutes now.


----------



## timpeac

Maître Capello said:


> Understood! Sorry for bothering you, Tim, but I needed to make sure my understanding was correct…
> 
> Cheers!


Oh, no problem - on reflection what I wrote wasn't the clearest. Hopefully the dialogue I've added will show better what I meant by example rather than explanation!


----------



## Maître Capello

timpeac said:


> I'm going to try to illustrate what I meant above -
> 
> Conversation on mobile phone -
> 
> - Have you ever (in your life) seen the Mona Lisa?
> - Yes, actually I'm in the Louvre right now and I've just seen it (a moment ago).
> - Have you seen "l'origine du monde" yet?
> - Yes I've been looking at it for 5 minutes now.


What you probably didn't know is that mobile phones are forbidden in the _Musée du Louvre_…   But I got your point!


----------



## timpeac

Maître Capello said:


> What you probably didn't know is that mobile phones are forbidden in the _Musée du Louvre_…  But I got your point!


And thinking about it nor is L'origine du monde - let's say this dialogue is for didactic purposes only, not based on reality!


----------

