# FR: imparfait / passé simple



## Whodunit

What’s the correct French saying for:

Toy with the idea of going home.

Is there a different usage of the “imparfait” and “passé simple”?
That the make-up is different, I know; but what about the usage? Both of them are past tenses.

*Moderator note: *Multiple threads merged to create this one. See also FR: passé composé / imparfait.


----------



## Ashura

'imparfait' is used for actions that last some time, for repetitive actions, and for descriptions. It's used both in written and spoken language.

'passé simple' is used for short actions, or actions that are done just once ; but it's only a tense used in written language - 'passé composé' is used instead when speaking.


Examples :

I was walking on the street. Suddenly, I heard someone calling me.
=> "Je marchais dans la rue. Soudain, j'entendis quelqu'un m'appeler."
First action is a long one, so 'imparfait'
Second action is a shorter one, so 'passé simple'

He went to the pool everyday.
=> "Il allait à la piscine tous les jours."

not very nice examples... Hope it helps though ^^;


----------



## Focalist

[…]

For "imparfait"/"passé simple", see also the thread "She gave it to me".

"Imparfait" : unfinished, incomplete, ongoing events.

E.g. Il lisait le journal (quand je suis arrivé) / Il lisait le journal (tous les soirs)

"Passé simple" *: completed and finished actions.

E.g. Il lut le journal pour la première fois.

You can also look at it as background ". . . . ." (imparfait) and event " | " (passé simple)

Alors qu'il reposait (. . . .) sur un lit, il lut ( | ) le journal, mangea ( | ) une pomme, puis fuma ( | ) une cigarette.

Diagrammatically:  . .|. .|. .|. .

(* In ordinary spoken discourse the "passé simple" is replaced by the "passé composé")

F.


----------



## Becky85

Other questions! Sorry but French is difficult! Especially the grammar!

When should we use the past historic (by the way, is this the same as the passé simple in French?!) and when should we use the imperfect?

For example:

Je *(prends)* le train qui *(partir)* pour Lille.

Here I have to decide whether to use the past historic or the imperfect forms of the words in brackets.

Is it 'Je *pris* le train qui *partait* pour Lille' or is that completely wrong?!

I'm confused...again!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## fetchezlavache

no it's quite correct, although you can also say 'chaque jour,je prenais le train qui partait pour lille', implying a notion of repetitive action. 

whereas if you say 'je pris le train qui partait pour lille', that would almost mean 'ce jour-là je pris le train'.

so what your sentence will be depends entirely upon, once more, the context !

mais en général l'imparfait c'est pour une action qui perdure, ou qui se répéte(chaque matin elle se levait de bonne heure), et le passé simple est plutôt destiné à décrire une action unique et spécifique.


----------



## moomoocow125

hi, I'm writing an essay for French using passe simple and imparfait. I want to say "Nocturnes were invented..."

Should it be

Les nocturnes furent inventé
or
Les nocturnes étaient inventé


----------



## Primal

I would use the imparfait (était) but you should probably wait for some more answers.


----------



## coolchick

Having the whole sentence would help to get the exact meaning you are seeking. Also, remember that with the verb 'etre' in French, which is what you have in both sentences, you must conjugate 'invente' with the subject, so if nocturnes is masculin (I don't have it in my dict) and plural then add 's' to invente... if it is feminine then add 'es'.


----------



## cappuccino&chocolate

I looked in the GDT and nocturne as a noun is feminine; however, it would be important to know the whole context (what Nocturnes refers to) make.  

A thing can be invented only once; (after that, it is reinvented) so I would use the "passé simple".

Just my thoughts on it.


----------



## Spiderkat

The term _nocturne_ can be either an adjective or a noun (masculine or feminine) depending on the context. 
But since here you're talking about music then _nocturne_ is masculine, both _passé simple_ and _imparfait_ can be used and only what comes next will help to decide which tense is better.


----------



## moomoocow125

ok thanks for replying, guys 

the next part is "The nocturned was invented by John Field in the early 19th century."

I think that would be passe simple, right?


----------



## DearPrudence

Yes, it should be the passé simple (because it's a precise event in the past. Not really convinced by my explanation)
Wow, I've just learnt it's "*un nocturne*"!  Gosh, I had always said "une nocturne" (well, most of the time I say "des nocturnes" so that's fine   )


----------



## ker23

i'm translating a text using the passé simple, but i'm having trouble trying to understand when the imperfect is used rather than the passé simple.  for example, would this sentence :

Having said it, she was not sure why.

translate as:

Après l'avoir dit, elle n'était pas certaine de savoir pourquoi

or

Après l'avoir dit, elle ne fut pas certaine de savoir pourquoi

anyhelp would be greatly appreciated!!


----------



## Darco

Salut 
Les 2 sont corrects, ça dépend du contexte.
Le passé simple ne s'emploie plus tellement à l'écrit et plus jamais à l'oral.
C'est très littéraire...


----------



## ker23

c'est un text littéraire en anglais, et le prof nous a dit, qu'il faut utiliser le passé simple, mais j'ai lu que les deux temps s'emploient ensemble...

i mean that there are points in a text, even if the majority of the text is written in the passé simple, where the imparfait is used. maybe i'm completely wrong!?


----------



## Darco

When you write a story that happened in the past, you must use the both tenses.
Imparfait for during actions and passé simple for a breaking action.

ex : Il lisait quand quelqu'un entra. He was reading when somebody came in.


----------



## ker23

ah ok just like when using it with passé composé, non?  think ive got it, thanks for the help!


----------



## Maître Capello

ker23 said:


> Après l'avoir dit, elle n'était pas certaine de savoir pourquoi
> or
> Après l'avoir dit, elle ne fut pas certaine de savoir pourquoi



Both sentences are correct although the former is the one that comes more naturally to mind. The imparfait indicates that she thought about it for some time. On the other hand the passé simple emphasizes the posteriority of the main clause (succession of events) and suggests that it just occurred to her but that she didn't dwell on it.


----------



## Franglais14

Am I right in thinking that the passé simple of être (fus, fut etc) is quite rare?

I am writing an essay on Charles de Gaulle's activity during World War II. I have used some passé simple (eg. il alla en Angleterre, il réussit à...) and some imparfait. I am wondering how often you see être in the passé simple tense. Does it tend to remain in the imparfait?

Here are a few examples:

1. La decision de signer l'armistice *fut/était* une des plus grandes décisions.....
2. Au moment de son arrivée en Angleterre, la position de De Gaulle *fut/était* très faible....
3. Le territoire national *fut/était *intact..

Hope this makes sense. In my opinion they should all be 'était'. Am I right??!!

Merci d'avance...


----------



## atcheque

Bonjour,

The use of _passé simple_ is rare for each verb. It is a *literary use*.
In an essay you may use it, especially for the 3rd person.


----------



## Lacuzon

Bonjour,

Passé simple is less rare for être verb than for other verbs.

I would go for
1. fut
2. était
3. depends on the end of your sentence.

You should wonder whether to use passé simple or passé composé, not whether to use passé simple or imparfait.


----------



## Franglais14

Thank you. Have just consulted a grammar book which suggests that for biographical details the passé simple or imparfait (depending on whether it is a completed action) can be used. While for past events that might have a connection to the present, the passé composé can be used.

So my final question, is it ok to use the passé simple and passé composé alongside each other.

For example would the following be correct

De Gaulle s'échappa de la France au moment de la défaite, ce qui a démontré une détermination à poursuivre la guerre à l'étranger

Thanks for your help!


----------



## Lacuzon

Your grammar book is right. Meanwhile, both can be used together. If so, passé composé implies something that is still connected to the present (as present perfect does) whereas passé simple does not.

About your sentence, your choice of tenses may be right because s'échappa is what he did whereas a démontré is what you're thinking of what he did.

Which tenses would you use in English?


----------



## TrinityStudent

Bonjour,

Which (l'imparfait or passé simple) would be more appropriate to use in the following sentence? 

Tout en dansant, je surveillais/ surveillai discrètement inconnu.

I have a feeling that both are appropriate but I would appreciate another opinion 

Merci à vous.


----------



## Oddmania

Hi,

_Je surveillais_ → I was watching...
_Je surveillai _or _J'ai surveillé_ → I watched...


----------



## TrinityStudent

Great, so both make sense depending on the context, yes?


----------



## Oddmania

Yes, but the Imparfait sounds more natural to me, as you added _Tout en dansant._


----------



## TRANS-LTR

Hello everyone!

I need help before I start shooting French grammarians! (Just kidding, LOL. Now seriously, guys, you're safe.)

I can't figure out which tense is more correct here. My instincts are telling the passé simple but from what I have learned scouring every forum online is that it's now often relegated to literary usage and that it sounds kind of awkward. Below is the text. It's a test actually and I expect this particular point to be of great consequence, so I need all the help I can get.

Think back to Pat Buchanan's 1992 convention diatribe. His list of objections to Bill Clinton comprised the latter's support for legal abortion, gay rights and women in combat, and his supposed use of a pro-choice litmus test for Supreme Court justices, "discrimination against religious schools" and draft-dodging. Mr. Buchanan also fulminated against "the raw sewage of pornography that pollutes our popular culture" and the LA riots. His speech was the highlight of that convention. It energized the masses. Four years later Mr. Buchanan was at it again.

[…] Son discours était le point culminant de cette convention. Il mobilisait les foules. Quatre ans plus tard, M. Buchanan était de retour.

OR

Son discours fut le point culminant de cette convention. Il mobilisa les foules. Quatre ans plus tard, M. Buchanan fut de retour.

What do you guys think?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Maître Capello

The first two verbs should be in the passé simple: _Son discours *fut* le point culminant de cette convention. Il *mobilisa* les foules._ As to the last one, it depends on the sentence that goes after it…


----------



## TRANS-LTR

Hello Maître Capello,

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Here's some more context to help you determine the last one.

Four years later Mr. Buchanan was at it again. "They hear the shouts of the peasants from over the hill," he shouted at a rally in Nashua. 

Quatre ans plus tard, M. Buchanan fut de retour. "Ils entendent les cris des paysans par-delà la colline", a-t-il crié à un rassemblement à Nashua. 

Thanks


----------

