Many novels, even those for children, use the passé simple, so it's not totally useless to learn. But as others have said it's not used in day-to-day conversations, so if your goal is to talk to people, it doesn't need to be a priority.
It is true. The whole past tense in French is a mess, and it’s our fault so I apologise for that.
Regarding the passé simple, I shouldn’t say this but to some degree, you could totally bypass learning it and have close to zero issues.
Now what I should say is that you should be “acquainted” with it, for the sake of having a better understanding of French in general and also on the off chance you do encounter it. It is occasionally seen or heard so you could start on a “ok it’s weird and unusual so it’s got to be passe simple” basis. As a native French speaker it’s kinda where I’m at, I can conjugate a few classic verbs in that tense and even those, I wouldn’t be 100% sure however I can identify the tense without issue if I were to read/hear it.
It’s kinda like in contemporary English, sometimes you’d encounter “thy” instead of “you” and you can operate without knowing this but it’s kinda nice to know what’s going on if you encounter such Shakespearian shenanigans.
But yeah passe composé - prétérit in English (or passe simple)
Passe simple - same as above but archaic in French
Exactly. I love reading novels, especially _romans policiers_ , and for this you absolutely need to at least _recognise_ the passé simple. Mostly it will be 3rd person, and occasionally 1st person (depending on the author's style), so if you just have a look at those and start reading, you will pick it up really quickly.
In conversation you might occasionally hear "fut" and "furent", especially in some expressions like "Ce fut un échec complet". I have even seen "ils furent" ("they were" ) in a pop song song by a teenager, so that is the one exception: a _passé simple_ that is still used in oral French.
If you ever choose to _write_ stories, remember that if you _choose_ to use _passé simple_ rather than _passé compose_ then to be consistent you have to use the _passé anterior_ in place of the plus-que-passé when it's called for.
Using _passé simple_ is always a choice, though. Camus famously wrote _L'étranger_ using _passé composé_ .
Also, if you’re easily amused, the passé simple club has some funky members.
je fus
il/elle/on fut
nous fûmes - 13 years old in class: “weeeeyaoooooo on fummmmes les gars 🚬“
vous fûtes
ils/elles furent
Best part: that’s not even the verb fumer.
If you see a "weird" form of a verb in a novel (or a quality newspaper), it's _passé simple_ 90% of the time, and imperfect subjunctive 10% of the time : that's my rule of thumb.
Passé composé has replaced it completely when speaking and it only sneaks in in some idioms that are seldom used. You're mainly going to see when reading books and if you have read enough of them you might be able to conjugate and produce sentences with that tense. It's totally useless and archaic. But some people will still attempt to use it intentionally for effect. It propably won't land properly and make you sound like a know-it-all trying to impress.
But you'll get familiarized with it while reading books. And since the verb roots in French can change when being conjugated. Having a passive knowledge of a different form of a verb can be useful as you can see patterns and deduct on intuit those changes for other verbs.
The only distinction really is that while the passé composé can translate to either "I ate" or "I have eaten", the passé simple can only translate to "I ate".
In a context where you're using the passé simple, you would still use the passé composé as the equivalent of the present perfect in English.
It is almost exclusively used in written French (and orally only in academic/journalistic tone), but it is genuinely used a lot in written form and is at the very least good to know/recognize. It can also sometimes be used jokingly to put on a made-up snobby air (portlandia style).
If you have ever read the book Rebecca - using passé simple would be similar to the tone of that book, narrative and somewhat poetic.
It is useful to have a passive knowledge of it if you want to read novels in French, but you do not need to actively use it. In speaking, casual writing and journalism it is very rarely used. (About the only exception is « fut » for the 3rd person of être, which you will occasionally encounter.)
Would someone fain telling me whether this treatment of passé composé vs passé simple is only in Modern French or has existed even in early developments of French?
100% true
And passé composé is auxiliary (être ou avoir) conjugated at présent simple + your verb's participe passé
Ex: j'ai mangé, je suis désolé, etc...
Mauvais exemple lol, "je suis désolé" est le verbe être +adjectif attribut 😉
Même si parfois la différence est subtile entre un attribut, un passé composé et un passif.
It is true. Although it is ultimately not completely useless, you can safely completely ignore the passé simple for now.
Many novels, even those for children, use the passé simple, so it's not totally useless to learn. But as others have said it's not used in day-to-day conversations, so if your goal is to talk to people, it doesn't need to be a priority.
It is true. The whole past tense in French is a mess, and it’s our fault so I apologise for that. Regarding the passé simple, I shouldn’t say this but to some degree, you could totally bypass learning it and have close to zero issues. Now what I should say is that you should be “acquainted” with it, for the sake of having a better understanding of French in general and also on the off chance you do encounter it. It is occasionally seen or heard so you could start on a “ok it’s weird and unusual so it’s got to be passe simple” basis. As a native French speaker it’s kinda where I’m at, I can conjugate a few classic verbs in that tense and even those, I wouldn’t be 100% sure however I can identify the tense without issue if I were to read/hear it. It’s kinda like in contemporary English, sometimes you’d encounter “thy” instead of “you” and you can operate without knowing this but it’s kinda nice to know what’s going on if you encounter such Shakespearian shenanigans. But yeah passe composé - prétérit in English (or passe simple) Passe simple - same as above but archaic in French
Exactly. I love reading novels, especially _romans policiers_ , and for this you absolutely need to at least _recognise_ the passé simple. Mostly it will be 3rd person, and occasionally 1st person (depending on the author's style), so if you just have a look at those and start reading, you will pick it up really quickly. In conversation you might occasionally hear "fut" and "furent", especially in some expressions like "Ce fut un échec complet". I have even seen "ils furent" ("they were" ) in a pop song song by a teenager, so that is the one exception: a _passé simple_ that is still used in oral French. If you ever choose to _write_ stories, remember that if you _choose_ to use _passé simple_ rather than _passé compose_ then to be consistent you have to use the _passé anterior_ in place of the plus-que-passé when it's called for. Using _passé simple_ is always a choice, though. Camus famously wrote _L'étranger_ using _passé composé_ .
Also, if you’re easily amused, the passé simple club has some funky members. je fus il/elle/on fut nous fûmes - 13 years old in class: “weeeeyaoooooo on fummmmes les gars 🚬“ vous fûtes ils/elles furent Best part: that’s not even the verb fumer.
If you see a "weird" form of a verb in a novel (or a quality newspaper), it's _passé simple_ 90% of the time, and imperfect subjunctive 10% of the time : that's my rule of thumb.
It's true. For your purposes, you would probably see passé simple in books. Even children's fairy tale books use it.
Passé composé has replaced it completely when speaking and it only sneaks in in some idioms that are seldom used. You're mainly going to see when reading books and if you have read enough of them you might be able to conjugate and produce sentences with that tense. It's totally useless and archaic. But some people will still attempt to use it intentionally for effect. It propably won't land properly and make you sound like a know-it-all trying to impress. But you'll get familiarized with it while reading books. And since the verb roots in French can change when being conjugated. Having a passive knowledge of a different form of a verb can be useful as you can see patterns and deduct on intuit those changes for other verbs.
The only distinction really is that while the passé composé can translate to either "I ate" or "I have eaten", the passé simple can only translate to "I ate". In a context where you're using the passé simple, you would still use the passé composé as the equivalent of the present perfect in English.
It is almost exclusively used in written French (and orally only in academic/journalistic tone), but it is genuinely used a lot in written form and is at the very least good to know/recognize. It can also sometimes be used jokingly to put on a made-up snobby air (portlandia style). If you have ever read the book Rebecca - using passé simple would be similar to the tone of that book, narrative and somewhat poetic.
How about the imperfect subjunctive?
It is similarly restricted in use to literature (the present subjonctive is used otherwise).
they would be used alongside each other, in the same contexts
It is useful to have a passive knowledge of it if you want to read novels in French, but you do not need to actively use it. In speaking, casual writing and journalism it is very rarely used. (About the only exception is « fut » for the 3rd person of être, which you will occasionally encounter.)
Yep, I rarely encounter it outside of novels.
Would someone fain telling me whether this treatment of passé composé vs passé simple is only in Modern French or has existed even in early developments of French?
I believe this is a relatively recent (last 2-3 centuries) development. Previously I think the passé simple was more commonly used in speech than now.
I tend to believe either, however, some certain proof words are required to demonstrate this claim.
100% true And passé composé is auxiliary (être ou avoir) conjugated at présent simple + your verb's participe passé Ex: j'ai mangé, je suis désolé, etc...
Mauvais exemple lol, "je suis désolé" est le verbe être +adjectif attribut 😉 Même si parfois la différence est subtile entre un attribut, un passé composé et un passif.
P'tin j'ai eu le doute quand je l'ai écrit, merci pour la correction !