# new French verb conjugator



## mkellogg

Hi everyone,

I have put together a French verb conjugator for WordReference. 

Please test it and let me know if you find any errors.  You can either follow the links on the page to the "Contact Us" form (which will send me a message) or write your thoughts in this thread.

Thanks,
Mike


----------



## Whodunit

It seems to work perfectly. 

The only - and a really, really negligible - error is the 2nd plural in the compound tenses. The "s" should not be in parentheses for verbs that take "être", because you have to add an "s" like in the other plural forms (nous, ils, elles).


----------



## MtlTouristFromUSA

Wow! This is excellent. I have been looking for a website that can do something exactly like this.  Thanks Mike!  I have already added it to my 'IE Favorites'.


----------



## Agnès E.

Bonjour Mike ! 

A minor observation: we usuallly display the imperative form with an exclamation mark (as we write it with an exclamation mark when we use it in some text).

Example (for the verb _manger_) :

*Mange !*
*Mangeons !*
*Mangez !*

Note: (there is always a space between a word and the following exclamation mark in French typography).


----------



## timpeac

Whodunit said:
			
		

> It seems to work perfectly.
> 
> The only - and a really, really negligible - error is the 2nd plural in the compound tenses. The "s" should not be in parentheses for verbs that take "être", because you have to add an "s" like in the other plural forms (nous, ils, elles).


Do you mean the "vous" form? If so that's not right - "vous" can refer to a single man or a single woman (polite form) in which case the past participle of an être verb would be nothing or "e" respectively.


----------



## Víctor Pérez

Congratulations *Mike* for this new tool and for the site in general. You are really doing a very good job.

*IMPERATIVE FORM*
It is true that in some sentences in the imperative form, we add an exclamation mark. As in every language, we do this when we give an order to somebody, raising even our tone of voice. But very often we use the imperative form in a smooth way. For instance, to ask a child to eat we would use the imperative form but we would certainly say it softly: *eat, *without raising our tone of voice. In French, of course, it's exactly the same. 
So, in opposition to what *Agnès E.* said, I would not display at all the exclamation mark in the imperative form in the conjugator. 
Regards


----------



## Whodunit

timpeac said:
			
		

> Do you mean the "vous" form? If so that's not right - "vous" can refer to a single man or a single woman (polite form) in which case the past participle of an être verb would be nothing or "e" respectively.


 
Oh you are right. I didn't think of the polite forms. 

Mike, please don't feel bothered by my wrong complaint.


----------



## malinche

Impressed, again!


----------



## englishman

How tricky would it be to provide reverse conjugations ? I often want to go from a verb form to its infinitive (e.g. to answer a question like: "to which verb does _furent_ belong ?"). I guess you're generating the conjugations on the fly, so reverse lookup would be difficult ?


----------



## Agnès E.

I just tried to launch a search in WR Fr-En dictionary with several examples of conjugated verbs. I got the result for the infinitive verb.
For instance:
Marchons 

Mangera 

Boive


More interesting: faille gives both faillir and falloir.


----------



## french4beth

Fantastic, Mike!  Another welcome addition!

I also like the way you have included similar verbs, etc. - very helpful! It's also very convenient to have the infinitive, the participle, and the past participle at the top of the page - other conjugators have them buried at the bottom of the page.

Nice!


----------



## mkellogg

In a few weeks, I'll take it a step further and provide tense information in the dictionary like I currently do for Spanish. 
http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=camina


----------



## englishman

Agnès E. said:
			
		

> I just tried to launch a search in WR Fr-En dictionary with several examples of conjugated verbs. I got the result for the infinitive verb.



I guess you're replying to my posting - if so, thanks for that. I didn't know that worked. However, it would be nice to go directly to all of the conjugated forms for the verb, so you could see that e.g. _furent_ was in the passé simple of _être_


----------



## mkellogg

Yes, englishman, I'll incorporate the same thing into the conjugator as well, so when you type "va" into the conjugator, you'll get the conjugation of aller.


----------



## englishman

mkellogg said:
			
		

> Yes, englishman, I'll incorporate the same thing into the conjugator as well, so when you type "va" into the conjugator, you'll get the conjugation of aller.



Mike, that would be very useful - maybe you could highlight the precise word in the conjugation, if that isn't too tricky.

Thanks.


----------



## zaby

Hello,

I have an observation concerning the conjugation of pronominal verbs : I think they should be displayed as the verbs conjugated with the auxiliary "être" are, i.e., for the compound tenses, an optional 'e' plus a 's' for the plural. (like for example partir)

For instance, I think the "passé composé" of _s'amuser_ should be
je me suis amusé(e)
tu t'es amusé(e)
il,elle s'est amusé(e)
nous nous sommes amusé(e)s 
vous vous êtes amusé(e)(s) 
ils, elles se sont amusé(e)s 

I know that there is not always an agreement with pronominal verbs ("_nous nous sommes aperç*us*."_ vs "_nous nous sommes aperç*u* de notre erreur."_) but it seems to me more logical to add the agreement in the conjugation tables. What do you think ?


----------



## timpeac

You're right Zaby - I'm surprised it's not like that already because it is for non reflexive être verbs such as "aller" http://www.wordreference.com/conj/frverbs.asp?v=aller.

Verbs like s'amuser must have been missed. http://www.wordreference.com/conj/frverbs.asp?v=s'amuser


----------



## Whodunit

zaby said:


> il,elle s'est amusé(e)
> ils, elles se sont amusé(e)s


 
It would be better if it were displayed like this:

il, elle s'est amusé, amusée
ils, elles se sont amusés, amusées

Otherwise, one would think that "il s'est amusée" and "ils se sont amusées" be correct as well.


----------



## Víctor Pérez

I would like to insist that in imperative form there is no need to put the exclamation mark.


----------



## timpeac

Whodunit said:


> It would be better if it were displayed like this:
> 
> il, elle s'est amusé, amusée
> ils, elles se sont amusés, amusées
> 
> Otherwise, one would think that "il s'est amusée" and "ils se sont amusées" be correct as well.


Who - have you seen how much space all the options already take up in the "aller" link?

Unless we are going to start opening peoples books, sitting their exams and wiping their noses as well I think the "aller" options are perfectly clear.


----------



## mkellogg

Thanks for catching that Zaby   I'll change it soon.

Mike


----------



## mkellogg

It should be set up correctly now. s'amuser Thanks.

I do have a couple of questions:


> nous nous sommes amusé(e)s
> vous vous êtes amusé(e)(s)
> ils, elles se sont amusé(e)s
> 
> I know that there is not always an agreement with pronominal verbs ("_nous nous sommes aperç*us*."_ vs "_nous nous sommes aperç*u* de notre erreur."_) but it seems to me more logical to add the agreement in the conjugation tables. What do you think ?


So would this be better with all s's in parentheses?:
nous nous sommes amusé(e)(s) 
 vous vous êtes amusé(e)(s) 
 ils, elles se sont amusé(e)(s) 



> I would like to insist that in imperative form there is no need to put the exclamation mark.


I am hearing conflicting answers as to what I should do here.


----------



## Víctor Pérez

> mkellogg;1499748]It should be set up correctly now. s'amuser Thanks.
> 
> I do have a couple of questions:
> So would this be better with all s's in parentheses?:
> nous nous sommes amusé(e)(s)
> vous vous êtes amusé(e)(s)
> ils, elles se sont amusé(e)(s)


No Mike, the way *zaby *suggested is perfect:
Remember you can say *"vous vous êtes amusé**(e)(s)"* to *one *or to *several *persons, that's why the (s) has to be between parenthesis. In the other cases, "nous" and "ils", it's always plural so you would always have the "s".





> I am hearing conflicting answers as to what I should do here.


Further to my insistation to suppress the exclamation mark in imperative form, I just remind that you can use these form softly, without shouting or ordering, for instance *inviting *or *suggesting*. In this last cases -which are very commun- you  would'nt use the exclamation mark (see here).
I would like other foreros to give their opinion on this point.


----------



## zaby

Mike,

thank you for this fast fix 

I think what you did is just fine. It's a conjugator, not a grammar book 

Actually, I don't think it is possible to be more precise than that. 
I said that in some sentence structures, you mustn't agree the past participle but, that's not true with every pronominal verb. For example with "s'amuser", the past participle always agrees with the subject, so writing "nous nous sommes amusé(e)(s)" may be confusing since the 's' _is_ mandatory.
As the agreement rule for pronominal verbs is complex (French native speakers often make mistakes too), its subtlety cannot really be included in the conjugator. So let's stick to the general rule aplying to all pronominal verbs, as you've done : the past participle agrees with the subject.


About the exclamation mark, well, to be honest, I don't care  
At first I was surpised to see it, because I think it is usually not present in conjugation tables, but then, I thought it can help people remember when to use the imperative form (even if, as Victor observed, it is not always used in exclamative sentences). The only point I see is the inconsistency between the Spanish and the French conjugators. I'd put exclamation marks in both or in none


----------



## timpeac

I think that verb tables sometimes put ! after the imperatives simply to underline the fact that these are the imperative forms since they are often identical to other parts of the verb form. Personally it wouldn't worry me either way.

As for the times pronominal verbs don't agree - it's basically when there is no idea of reciprocity at all and the pronominal form has no meaning at all - such as "s'apercevoir de quelque chose" "to notice something" (there's no way that the "se" can be thought of as a direct object there (which is what causes the participle to agree)) or "s'approcher de quelque chose" "to approach something" as opposed to something like "s'amuser" where the meaning might be "to have fun" but you can see the basis for considering the "se" as a direct object "to amuse yourself".

So, for the verbs where the "se" has no real meaning at all the partciple shouldn't agree. However, since these verbs are much less numerous and in the vast majority of cases the participle does agree I wouldn't worry about this personally. Paraphrasing Zaby - you can't please all of the people all of the time.


----------



## timpeac

Actually - having just written the above, there is another common time when pronominal verb participles don't agree - when the reflexive pronoun is viewed as indirect such as "elle s'est cassé la jambe" literally "she to herself has broken the leg". Here since it is clear that "la jambe" is the direct object, "se" cannot also be considered a direct object and is therefore considered an indirect one. Since it is only direct objects preceding the auxiliary verb which cause the participle to agree in these cases it doesn't.

Hmmm, nevertheless in the majority of cases pronominal verbs are like "s'amuser" and always agree. Short of literally going through and splitting all pronominal verbs into two categories one where they will always agree and one where they may or may not agree I can't see how you could reflect this all in the conjugator. If you suggest "nous nous sommes amusé" is ever an option that is incorrect. If you suggest that the "aperçu" of "nous nous sommes aperçu de notre erreur" should have either "s" or "es" then that is wrong (although it may well - "nous nous sommes aperçus" - literally "we noticed each other".

I think I'd leave it as is - it will be correct most of the time and most people will find it much more useful to be reminded that the "s'amuser" type must agree than those with deeper knowledge of the grammar will be offended by seeing that "nous nous sommes aperçu" isn't an option.


----------



## Thomas1

If I may chime in and give a comment from a learner’s standpoint. 

When I first tested the conjugator I was slightly taken aghast seeing _!_ right after the imperative form. I must admit that I had never seen something like that before and I think people who are the very beginners would think that you always have to use _!_ with the imperative form in French as such suggestion comes to mind, maybe the _!_ in parenthesis would rule out such possibility. 

As for the reflexive verbs issue I like it the way it is now since I think there are more advantages of this layout than disadvantages. First of all, it’s quite transparent and making another divisions could blur it up. There is also a possibility of confusing not-so-advanced learners by making such division as usually you first acquire the very basics and than go into subtleties (and if someone is really probing I think they will discover on their own how the verbs in question are used). If someone would need to use the verb _casser_ in non-reflexive sense IMO he is very likely to know that the reflexive pronoun doesn’t agree with the verb—as this is usually taught after gaining some basics by a student.

My two cents’ worth. 

Tom


----------



## ordequin

*Awesome, Mike!!!*
Thank you so much!

I was looking for a tool like this one for a long time. I think this is going to encourage a lot of people to take part in french forums, by being helpfull to get over one's shyness. (I'm talking about myself. That's my case!)

Préparez vous mes chers amis des forums français,...j'y arrive!

Thanks again, Mike. Your goog job increases our happyness.
Un aplauso.


----------

