Timeline for Idiomatic French expressions for "That's what does it for me"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:38 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jan 13, 2017 at 19:17 | vote | accept | Con-gras-tue-les-chiens | ||
| Jan 12, 2017 at 2:03 | comment | added | jlliagre | "Vous", "veillez sur", "en permanence", and "en faire autant" are all more or less formal. If you can explain the context of this sentence and who are the people involved, I might try to reformulate it in casual or colloquial French. About the three phrases, that person has indeed likely missed the meaning, or might has just provided expressions similar to the previously answered ones. The fact "ça me botte" is suggested might be also due a regionalism. I see it more than I would have expected by googling discussion forums. | |
| Jan 12, 2017 at 1:39 | comment | added | Con-gras-tue-les-chiens | By the way, those three phrases I listed seems to have been suggested by a native French speaker. So he/she might have misinterpreted the meaning of the original English expression in the first place. | |
| Jan 12, 2017 at 1:33 | comment | added | Con-gras-tue-les-chiens | Hi. I'm curious about what makes the first two sentences sound so formal. Is it simply due to the presence of "vous", or the choice of words such as "veiller sur" and "en permanence"? | |
| Jan 11, 2017 at 21:58 | history | edited | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
[Edit removed during grace period]; deleted 160 characters in body
|
| Jan 11, 2017 at 21:42 | history | edited | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
[Edit removed during grace period]; deleted 160 characters in body
|
| Jan 11, 2017 at 13:26 | comment | added | Con-gras-tue-les-chiens | Indeed, jlliagre! As you have pointed out, "That's what I like" (without "about you") is the correct interpretation. I initially added the words "about you / en vous" solely in light of the context of the example, to make the meaning clearer. Apologies for the confusion! I should have stuck to the literal translation. The correct meaning is as shown in bold in my 1st comment. Merci. | |
| Jan 11, 2017 at 0:06 | comment | added | jlliagre | @Lambie Je pense aussi qu'il y a une erreur d'interprétation dans la question. J'ai modifié ma réponse pour prendre en compte cette éventualité. | |
| Jan 11, 2017 at 0:04 | history | edited | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 959 characters in body
|
| Jan 10, 2017 at 18:36 | history | edited | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 220 characters in body
|
| Jan 10, 2017 at 17:23 | comment | added | Lambie | @jlliagre Surfing really does IT for me. Skiing really does it for me veut bien dire: Faire du surf me branche. Je pense que That what does it for me veut bien dire: X me branche. X me satisfait (pas très jolie) mais c'est ça que l'expression veut dire. Il y avait un malentendu pour l'anglais dans la question.... | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 17:16 | comment | added | Lambie | Surfing really does IT for me. Skiing really does it for me veut bien dire: Faire du surf me branche. | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 14:53 | comment | added | jlliagre | @AnneAunyme Yes, that's an interesting nuance and I agree with you about it. | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 14:14 | comment | added | Anne Aunyme | "c'est ça qui" suggests the person you are talking to already know you like her/him, whereas "c'est ce qui" doesn't have this meaning. To me at least. | |
| Jan 9, 2017 at 22:37 | comment | added | jlliagre | @StéphaneGimenez Yes, trying to mix French conjugated verbs with English was a failure, fixed. Thanks ! | |
| Jan 9, 2017 at 22:35 | history | edited | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 24 characters in body
|
| Jan 9, 2017 at 20:56 | comment | added | Stéphane Gimenez | Duh. I was wondering whether it should be tutoies and vouvoies since you conjugate French verbs in English :-) Or… perhaps tutoyez and vovoyez? Errr. | |
| Jan 9, 2017 at 16:57 | history | edited | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 419 characters in body
|
| Jan 9, 2017 at 11:33 | history | answered | jlliagre | CC BY-SA 3.0 |