Dans la phrase ci-dessous, comment expliquer la grammaire? Il y a le futur et le participe passé dans la même phrase. Je n'ai jamais vu ça.

Il aurait dû avoir pitié.

Pouvez-vous m'expliquer s'il vous plaît?

1 Answer 1


Cette phrase utilise le conditionnel passé. Lisez cet article qui donne une bonne explication pour en apprendre plus : Conditionnel passé.

  • 1
    He would have had pity? But then why the extra avoir at the end? Apr 17, 2015 at 15:44
  • 1
    The first use of "avoir" (as aurait) is with the verb devoir (as dû , the past participle). The second use is in the phrase "avoir pitié", which means "to have pity". Roughly, the sentence translates to: "He would've had to have pity" in English.
    – user6976
    Apr 17, 2015 at 15:50
  • 1
    Case closed. Merci beaucoup. Apr 17, 2015 at 15:51
  • @arbitrarystringofletters Good answer and nice link, but doesn't the rough translation in your comment have one too many "haves" in it; and/or couldn't "aurait dû" perhaps be better translated here as "should've",i.e., "He should've had (or shown) pity"?
    – Papa Poule
    Apr 17, 2015 at 17:16
  • 1
    Devoir is a difficult verb to translate because there are so many ways to express its meaning in English. For example, given the phrase: "je dois", you could say: "I must", "I should", "I have to", or "I need to".
    – user6976
    Apr 17, 2015 at 17:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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