I have some sentence translations which I use with my students and one part always causes a mini-revolution. Here are the French sentences with the translations:
1. Etienne conduit un taxi depuis 20 ans - Etienne has driven/has been driving a taxi for 20 years. I explain the nuance between the simple form emphasising the notion of a complete 20 years and the continuous form emphasising the duration. This seems to be understood.
2.Jean dort depuis plus de 12 heures, je suis inquiet - Jean has been sleeping for more than 12 hours, I am worried. Continuous form because the activity of sleeping for a long time is the reason for my concern. It is not important if the activity is finished or not.
3.Sophie n'a pas dormi depuis 2 jours - Sophie hasn't slept for 2 days. Simple form as 2 days are finished.....
and herein lies the problem. The students can't see why example no 3 cannot be the continous form. I have tried all sorts of explanations but they can't get it - even to the extent of pointing out that in French, the negative form takes the passé composé ad not the present, as in the positive sentence. Can anyone shed any light on this?
Thanks
Top answer
Anonymous and one part always causes a mini- revolution Ah, well, that's to be expected. They are French, after all! I don't think there is a magic bullet that will quell the revolution.
— CalifJim
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.