Take the 2-minute tour ×
French Language Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for students, teachers, and linguists wanting to discuss the finer points of the French language. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This question already has an answer here:

C'est la dame dont j'ai parlé.

I know that the above sentence is correct, but is it incorrect to say—

C'est la dame de laquelle j'ai parlé.

C'est le monsieur duquel j'ai parlé.

If so, why?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Laure, Édouard, Kareen, Evpok Jul 23 at 17:15

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

    
I read this from about.com: What's the difference between dont and duquel? You need dont when the preposition you're replacing is de by itself. You need duquel when de is part of a prepositional phrase, such as près de, à côté de, en face de, etc. But I'm really not clear on that. –  Aerovistae Jul 22 at 18:47
    
En commençant une recherche pour répondre je suis tombée sur cette question sur FrenchLanguage mais elle ne semble pas encore avoir eu de réponse satisfaisant celui qui a posé la question. –  Laure Jul 22 at 18:55
    
Mon Dieu, Gilles ne savait pas quelquechose sur la langue francaise?? Non!!!!!!! –  Aerovistae Jul 22 at 19:09
    
quelque chose** –  Aerovistae Jul 22 at 21:09

1 Answer 1

In general in cases such as this, dont is interchangeable with duquel etc and, in the animate case, de qui. In practice, dont appears to be more common.

Principal cases where dont is strongly preferred are "neuter" cases such as ce dont j'ai besoin, or cases where dont specifies a whole clause (un homme dont les yeux sont bleus/dont il me semble que je l'ai vu quelque part). Note that informal or "popular" usage often allows a generic que in these cases.

share|improve this answer
    
I can't imagine anyone saying un homme dont il me semble que je l'ai vu quelque part it would be un homme qu'il me semble avoir vu quelque part, dont implies a "possession" relation ship. But you could say: un homme dont je crois que les yeux sont bleux. –  Laure Jul 23 at 7:15
    
Yes, it's a rarer construction. It is attested by some speakers, though. (But if that particular example doesn't work for you, presumably you still agree with the general point that "dont" specifying a clause is not interchangeable with "duquel" etc?) –  Neil Coffey Jul 23 at 13:57

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.