# FR: savoir - passé composé / imparfait



## samlyon

could somebody please put me out of my misery and give me a few examples/contexts <je savais> and <j'ai su>? 
In my opinion, IMPOSSIBLE to translate from what we say in english, I never choose the right one.

Merci d'avance

*Moderator note: *multiple threads merged to create this one


----------



## ytuped

Quand j'étais malade, j'étais très entourée (continuous action)
J'ai été malade la semaine passée (one point in time determined by "la semaine passée")

Je savais que ça allait mal se passer
J'ai su que j'étais condamné quand j'ai vu le scanner


----------



## Sunspot

Knowing something is an action that endures some time...does that mean that in practice "il a su" is not used and is always replaced by "il savait"?


----------



## pointvirgule

Why, no. Examples:
_Il a su tout de suite que c'était faux._ (he realized/knew right away)
_Il a oublié tout ce qu'il a déjà su._ (everything he used to know)
_Il a su créer un chef-d'œuvre à partir de presque rien._ (he was able to)
_Quand il a su qu'elle serait là, il en fut tout content. _(when he learned/heard)


----------



## Sunspot

Thank you.

I understand "Il a su tout de suite..." and "Quand il a su qu'elle serait là..." (They are sort of the beginning of knowing - one-off actions.)

But your second and third examples are a bit harder to understand, because the knowing takes place over a longer time and feels (wrongly, I suppose) like it should be the imperfect savait. (It's not helped by having been told that "used to do" is usually the imperfect.)


----------



## Welshie

"il a su créer" refers to a single creation. "Il savait créer" would imply that during a long period he was able to create these things (probably more than one).

"Il a oublié tout ce qu'il savait" is possible as well for 2. With "ce qu'il a déjà su" it's more like the English "forgotten everything he had ever learned" whereas with "savait" it's "everything he knew".


----------



## Maître Capello

_Il a su créer_ also implies that there is an impact on the present in this case, similarly to the English present perfect.

As for _ce qu'il avait su_, I would never say that; I would only say _ce qu'il savait_…


----------



## Amy10027

Il a su : it is about something that took place in the past and and has an effect on the present. However, il savait: it is about something that took place in the past and finished in the past.


----------



## pointvirgule

Sunspot said:


> But your second and third examples are a bit  harder to understand, because the knowing takes place over a longer time  and feels (wrongly, I suppose) like it should be the imperfect savait.  (It's not helped by having been told that "used to do" is usually the  imperfect.)


I kind of boobed in my explanation there; let me rephrase it:
_Il a oublié tout ce qu'il a déjà su._ (everything he used to know once knew)

It is true that, as Welshie said, the imparfait can also be used here: _tout ce qu'il savait_, but I feel that the tone is slightly different, the imparfait doesn't feel as irrevocable as the passé composé used with _déjà_. (Personal feeling; YMMV.)

This sentence might be clearer:
_Il a déjà su comment extraire une racine carrée, mais il a oublié avec le temps._ (he once knew how to)

At any rate, I think the point has been made that_ il a su_ is possible in certain contexts.


----------



## tatoearashiga

Hier il _savait_ que tu avais téléphoné

I was thinking why ''_savait_'' is used here or more appropriate instead of passé composé ''_a su_''?

Because I think the action is not habitual, and it is a point in time in the past, that I suggest passé composé to be used.


----------



## Line2001

It depends on the context. If yesterday, he already knew that you had called, then imparfait is right. However, if he learned yesterday that you had called, then passé composé would be more appropriate.


----------



## jann

See also FR: pouvoir, vouloir, savoir, penser - past tenses


----------



## Catullus91

This is from Assimil's "Le Sanskrit."

Une fable célèbre raconte comment les oiseaux, qui *ont su* se construire un nid douillet pour se protéger des attaques de la mousson, s'étonnent que les singes (...) n'aient rien bâti.

Why is the bolded *ont su* instead of savait?


----------



## Nawaq

it's in the passé composé, not the imparfait, I think it's because the action is over already... Maître Capello will answer better, I'm really not good at it 


Bonsoir


----------



## Oddmania

Hi,

The verb _savoir _is one of those verbs whose meaning changes quite a lot depending on the tense you use.

"...qui savaient" would mean that they *knew *how to build a nest, but it doesn't tell us whether they did build it or not.
"...qui ont su" really means that they *were able to* build a nest / they *managed *to build a nest, because they were clever or crafty enough.

_♦ Il a su rester modeste_ → He managed to remain modest.

_♦ Je n'*ai *pas *su *la réconforter_ → I wasn't able to comfort her → this is an action (or rather an inaction -- an action that you didn't manage to perform).
_♦ Je ne *savais *pas comment la réconforter_ → I didn't know how to comfort her → this is some sort of "state of mind" (a piece of background information about your thoughts).​


----------

