# FR: information that we or our clients provide



## Valosh

Most information and material we or our clients supply to you will be of a confidential nature ...

My translation:
La majorité des informations et matériels que nos clients ou nous-mêmes vous fournirons/fourniront (?) sera à caractère confidentiel ...

I am confused here...

Help!!

*Moderator note:* this discussion was split from a separate thread.


----------



## floise

[...] 

Also, should it be fournirons to go with nous-mêmes or fourniront to go with nos clients?


From the same source:
    - avec deux sujets appartenant à des personnes grammaticales différentes,     l'accord se fait au pluriel avec la personne qui a la priorité (la 1re l'emporte sur la 2e, la 2e sur la     3e):_Toi et moi *sommes invités* à la fête._
_Vous et vos enfants *êtes* une famille remarquable._
_Mes frères et moi *sommes* de grands sportifs._I think this means that your version is correct.


Floise


----------



## mogador

concerning fourniront/fournirons, i am sorry to disagree with floise;I would go with fournirons : _nos_ clients ou _nous is _2nd plural

In floise's examples : toi et moi = nous, donc 1e pluriel sommes
vous et vos enfants = vous, donc 2e pluriel
mes frères + moi = nous, donc sommes

In your case , nos clients ou nous is still 2nd plural


----------



## Missrapunzel

I agree with you, mogador : I think it should be nos _clients ou nous fournirons_.
But isn't it what Floise also said? So we all agree!


----------



## mogador

actually, "nos clients" alone would be fourniront ; "nos clients _et_ nous" : fourniron*s*, but "nos clients _ou_ nous" introduces an alternate subject and I can't be positive about fourniront/s.


----------



## Valosh

Well in that case I better post the rest of the phrase as there is a 'fournis' again a bit further down.. So is it 'fournis' or 'fournit'????????

La majorité des informations et matériels que nos clients ou nous-mêmes vous fournirons sera à caractère confidentiel et vous traiterez toute information et matériel fournis par nos clients ou nous-mêmes comme étant confidentiels à moins d’une certitude que ces informations ou matériels font partie du domaine public.


----------



## floise

Hi again,

_Quoting from post 4:  But isn't it what Floise also said? So we all agree!

_Yes, MissRapunzel, that's what I had said.

But I don't understand Mogador's statement that the combined 'nos clients ou nous' = 2nd plural. 2nd plural would be vous.

I am still baffled by what to do when the _ou _comes between two subjects of different persons. I will research further on this grammatical point.

Floise


----------



## mogador

fournis.
And the rest of the sentence seems right to me


----------



## mogador

sorry,of course nous is 1st plural



Mogador


----------



## floise

Valosh,

It would not be 'fournit'. The only past participle possibilities would be fourni/fournie/fournis/fournies. Since you have to make the agreement with a combined subject, which has one feminine and one masculine item, you make the agreement with the masculine. I believe fournis would be correct.

Floise


----------



## Valosh

Of course! Thank you Floise!


----------



## mogador

Quoting from post 2 :I don't understand the reference to a priority :to me, there is no priority between toi et moi ; it's just toi + moi = nous, that makes it 1st plural. Priority would be between genders : "le masculin l'emporte sur le féminin" in a group of people


----------



## floise

Mogador,

Your point is good, and the explanation using priorities is just one way of showing how to find the right person for a combined subject. I believe that you can just as easily say 'je + ton frère = nous' or 'tes cousins + nous = nous' or 'toi + ma mère = vous'. Using the priority rule (in post 2) will give the same results. 

The problem here, however, is the connecting of the two subjects by _ou_. It requires a different rule. I've looked in Grévisse and a few other French grammar books and have not found exactly the same situation. 

Floise


----------



## floise

Hi everyone,

I think I've found the rule:


> *Accord du verbe avec  plusieurs sujets*
> 
> En règle générale, il faut  savoir si les sujets s'ajoutent ou ne s'ajoutent pas. Avec les  coordinations qui habituellement ajoutent un terme à l'autre (*et,  virgule)* l'accord se fait au pluriel (aux réserves près,  ci-dessus). Mais la coordination ne comporte pas toujours cette  idée *d'addition*, en particulier avec :
> 
> - les coordinations "*ou,  ni*". Lorsque les antécédents s'ajoutent, l'accord se fait sur les  deux. Lorsqu'ils ne s'ajoutent pas, on fait l'accord *avec  le dernier.*


source: http://www.synapse-fr.com/manuels/MULT_SUJ.htm

In the situation that is presented to us in Valosh's sentence, the two subjects do not combine. It's either _our clients_ or_ us _who do the supplying. So, the second rule above applies; i.e., the agreement is made with the subject closest to the verb. In this case, it is nous, so the verb is 'fournirons'.

Floise


----------



## Maître Capello

You end up with the correct conclusion but with the wrong reasoning. In French, _ou_ is not exclusive. Here the meaning of the sentence makes it clear that *both* _our clients_ and _ourselves_ will – or at least *may* – provide information. In other words the two subjects add up to each other and you agree with them both.


----------



## Ziggurat

Because it is 'perfectly clear' to you does not mean this is the way everyone interpreted it. The first time I read his sentence I thought the 'or' was exclusive. It could be that EITHER the clients OR 'we' will supply the material. In that case, it is always better to ask exactly what the author meant in the original text.


----------



## Maître Capello

Again you misinterpreted what I meant. Of course the context will provide the best answer! What I meant is that *by default* in French the conjunction _ou_ is inclusive. Hence, *by default*, this inclusion is *obvious*.


----------

