# FR: il s'est dirigé/se dirigeait vers la porte - temps



## taffer92

Are reflexive verbs always conjugated with etre in the past tense? and are they always the * passé compos**é * ? ie is the imparfait ever used with these verbs?


----------



## timpeac

In the passé composé and the plus-que-parfait, yes - in the imperfect no this tense is just a reflex of the verb itself, no other verb involved.

No.

These verbs are used in the imperfect tense, yes, in which case there is no need to use être.

I'm not completely sure I've understood your question - can you give examples of what you mean?


----------



## taffer92

Ok in this sentence( il (se diriger) vers la porte. Now in this sentence I would use the imperfect tense, which is why I was slightly confused when I read somewhere that you only use reflexive verbs with the passe compose.

     So is this sentence correct:  il se dirigait vers la porte?


----------



## Monsieur Hoole

il se dirig*e*ait vers la porte  is possible, it depends on the situation.  You use imparfait for an ongoing, repeated or interrupted action, or for a description.  Otherwise, use passé composé or plus-que-parfait.

M.H.


----------



## taffer92

This was definitely the imperfect for this particular sentence, but is the verb diriger an irregular verb as most imparfait verbs drop the er from the end of the verbs?


----------



## timpeac

This is a spelling change necessary to reflect the correct pronunciation. Verbs that end -ger need to keep the "e" before the imperfect "ais/ait/aient" endings because the pronunciation rules of French say that "ga" is pronounced like a hard "g" in "go". When you add in the "e" "gea" is pronounced with a soft "g" sounding like the "j" in "déjà".

All -ger verbs are like this, manger for example, so I suppose you could say they are regularly irregular!


----------



## mnewcomb71

Il se dirigeait vers la porte = He was heading for the door
Il s'est dirigé vers la porte = He headed for the door
Il se dirige vers la porte = He is heading for the door
Il s'était dirigé vers la porte = He had headed for the door
Qu'il se dirige vers la porte = that he head for the door
Il se dirigera vers la porte = He will head for the door
Il se dirigerait vers la porte = He would head for the door
Qu'il se soit dirigé vers la porte = that he head (past tense) for the door
Il se sera dirigé vers la porte = He will have headed for the door
Il se serait dirigé vers la porte = He would have headed for the door

A verb does not a tense make, but rather context doth make a verb take a tense or mood.

Which tenses am I missing?


----------



## geostan

I suppose you could add these tenses:

Il s'est eu dirigé vers la porte (le passé surcomposé)
Il se dirigea vers la porte (le passé simple)
Qu'il se dirigeât vers la porte (l'imparfait du subjonctif)
Qu'il se fût dirigé vers la porte. (le plus-que-parfait du subjonctif)

Cheers!


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Il s'est eu dirigé vers la porte (le passé surcomposé)

Surely reflexive verbs don't have surcomposé forms.


----------



## geostan

Yes, they do even if they are usually avoided. They cannot be formed the usual way. The simplest way to form them is to insert the past particple "eu" after the auxiliary verb of the passé composé.

Il s'est habillé - Il s'est eu habillé.

Cheers!


----------



## timpeac

I think Thomas is right - I know there's no logical reason why you shouldn't but I've never seen it. Have you got any examples?


----------



## geostan

I provided an example.  Je me suis eu habillé. Check some of the conjugation books like Bescherelle. I don't have a copy with me, but I'm sure you'll find examples there.

A quick search on the Internet failed to provide examples, except to say that pronominal verbs are now not conjugated in the passé surcomposé. But the example I gave is how you form it.

Cheers!


----------



## timpeac

geostan said:


> I provided an example. Je me suis eu habillé. Check some of the conjugation books like Bescherelle. I don't have a copy with me, but I'm sure you'll find examples there.


I didn't mean an example you've put together - I could do that! I meant a quoted genuine example!


geostan said:


> A quick search on the Internet failed to provide examples, except to say that pronominal verbs are now not conjugated in the passé surcomposé.


Which surely supports what Thomas said, and what is my experience.


----------



## geostan

timpeac said:


> I didn't mean an example you've put together - I could do that! I meant a quoted genuine example!
> Which surely supports what Thomas said, and what is my experience.



I guess it's because I'm a good deal older than you. In my copy of Le Bon Usage by Grevisse, I have this example "Quand je me suis eu assis..." Granted, the edition I have is from 1964, but at least it is a "genuine" example.

Actually, I'm glad I mentioned it because otherwise many people might never know that it does or did exist. And I was taught this form when I was in High School back in the 1950s.

Cheers!


----------



## timpeac

And, more importantly, what date is the quote from?


----------



## geostan

Are you asking if it is from some literary work? It isn't. As far as I can gather, Grevisse created the example as an illustration, but surely you would not discount what he said. For decades his works were the authorities most people used, and we considered his Le Bon Usage the French teacher's bible.

Also remember, that the temps surcomposés were spoken tenses, not literary tenses. 

I would be interested in knowing if native French speakers are aware of the form. It does seem that they have gone out of use, but regardless of whether you have ever seen it or not, I did not invent it; it did exist, and that is how it was formed.

What more can I say?


----------



## timpeac

geostan said:


> Are you asking if it is from some literary work? It isn't. As far as I can gather, Grevisse created the example as an illustration, but surely you would not discount what he said.


Interesting - normally quotes of usage are from outside sources, even by Grevisse, well at least we know one French speaker was happy with it.



geostan said:


> For decades his works were the authorities most people used, and we considered his Le Bon Usage the French teacher's bible.


Thank you - I'm familiar with it - I still find an example written by the person making the point a weak example


geostan said:


> Also remember, that the temps surcomposés were spoken tenses, not literary tenses.


Good point - see below, I'm not trying to claim they never existed - I just find bald assertations needing more facts.


geostan said:


> I would be interested in knowing if native French speakers are aware of the form. It does seem that they have gone out of use, but regardless of whether you have ever seen it or not, I did not invent it; it did exist, and that is how it was formed.
> 
> What more can I say?


I don't mean to suggest that it didn't exist. I was just asking for the back up. I'm very interested to learn that it may (although no one has yet provided a single example in situ) have existed (may exist). My point is not to say "I've never seen it therefore it doesn't", I wouldn't be that arrogant, but rather "I've never come across it, so what is the register, who says it existed (exists), how common is it now?" etc. After a bit of prodding you've now provided a lot more information! Thank you.

Edit

According to Petit Robert it is an error:

On ne peut construire un verbe intransitif ou un verbe pronominal à une forme surcomposée :_ il a eu été_ _venu_ ou _il *s*'*est eu* trompé_ sont des solécismes. Ces verbes ont le verbe _être_ comme auxiliaire et les formes surcomposées concernent l'auxiliaire _avoir_

If we're not allowed to question sources viewed as language bibles, how are we going to decide between Grevisse and Robert? A google fight?


----------



## itka

Etant donné le sujet de cette discussion, je pense que vous me comprendrez parfaitement si je réponds en français.



> On ne peut construire un verbe intransitif ou un verbe pronominal à une forme surcomposée :_ il a eu été_ _venu_ ou _il *s*'*est eu* trompé_ sont des solécismes. Ces verbes ont le verbe _être_ comme auxiliaire et les formes surcomposées concernent l'auxiliaire _avoir_



Je suis d'accord avec cette citation pour ce qui est des verbes pronominaux.
Par contre, je ne vois pas ce qui empêche un verbe intransitif de se conjuguer à un temps surcomposé... ni d'ailleurs de se conjuguer avec l'auxiliaire avoir...(je suppose qu'il y a une erreur de transcription de cette phrase).
Voici un exemple :
_ Quand il a eu fini de manger, mon frère est sorti.

_Comme vous voyez, il s'agit d'une phrase très simple et d'un temps qu'on emploie couramment. Ce n'est cependant pas très élégant, et on l'évite le plus souvent dans un texte écrit et soigné.

Les autres verbes qui se conjuguent normalement avec l'auxiliaire être, les verbes dits "d'état" ne se mettent pas habituellement à des temps surcomposés.  Les formes obtenues sont très lourdes et maladroites mais on les entend quelquefois dans la bouche des enfants :
_Quand tu as été parti, on a joué à cache-cache.

_En conclusion, je dirais que ces temps surcomposés (temps passés essentiellement) sont très vivants et très employés oralement, mais qu'il n'est pas recommandé de les employer dans un registre soutenu.


----------



## CapnPrep

I am reviving this old discussion to add some clarifications.



timpeac said:


> According to Petit Robert it [forming the _surcomposé_ of a reflexive verb] is an error:


The "rule" cited is not from the _Petit Robert_, but from the (anonymous?) Cabinet de curiosités website, which comes up regularly here in threads about the _temps surcomposés_. 
_
Le bon usag_e (§818, c) cites an example from spoken French from Damourette & Pichon (another "bible" of French grammar, from the beginning of the 20th century): _Quand il s’est eu embarqué, quand il l’a eu fait, il a vu…_

As far as I can tell, there is exactly one example in all of Frantext, and it's from a modern novel: 





			
				B. Bayon said:
			
		

> dès qu' on *s' **est* *eu* repérés semblables, sales gosses froncés en rupture de ban, en guerre contre tout, hostiles à tout à priori, absolument tout


 I don't know if this counts as a "quoted genuine example" (since writers are just as capable of inventing fake usages as grammarians are).


----------

