6

It confuses me a little bit where I should place it. For example if I say in English;

  1. "Someone had also eaten my porridge" or

  2. "Someone also had eaten my porridge" They both would imply that that 'someone' has eaten something else of mine, besides the porridge. Or that they had eaten 'not only your porridge but mine also'

  3. "Someone had eaten my porridge also" only in the sense of 'not only your porridge but mine also'

  4. "Also, someone had eaten my porridge" Would imply that besides something else that happened to me, someone had eaten my porridge.

What would then be the case in French? If I'll say for instance;

  1. "Quelqu'un a aussi mangé mon porridge !"

  2. "Quelqu'un aussi a mangé mon porridge !"

  3. "Quelqu'un a mangé mon porridge aussi !"

  4. "Aussi, quelqu'un a mangé mon porridge!"

I get the sense that some of them aren't even grammatically correct, but I just wanna know how to convey each of the meanings above in French.

  • 1
    Sometimes in France we use the world "aussi" to remind oneself something they've forgotten to tell. Or some information they want to add. "Les vacances en angletterre étaient génial ! Aussi, quelqu'un a mangé mon porridge !" – Kii Dec 15 '15 at 15:17
6

The four examples are correct, I will add some names to clarify the meanings.

1) This one has the same meaning than in English:

Paul says that someone ate his porridge, then Anne says "Quelqu'un a aussi mangé mon porridge !" meaning that her porridge has also been eaten by someone.

2) This "aussi" would be translated as "too". It is correct grammatically but like the English "Someone too had eaten my porridge!", it doesn't really make sense (it's possible but farfetched). If you replace "Someone" with a name it becomes clear:

Paul says that Jean ate Anne's porridge, but Anne says "Louis aussi a mangé mon porridge !" meaning that both Jean and Louis enjoyed her porridge.

3) This time it can mean both "also" or "too", with either the same meaning as 1) or:

Anne says that someone ate her apple, but notices later that someone ate not only the apple but her porridge too. "Quelqu'un a mangé mon porridge aussi !"

4) This is another meaning of "aussi". When placed at the begining of a sentence it introduces a causality link with the previous sentence, and can be translated as "therefore", "hence" or "as a consequence":

Anne says that there are three ever-hungry teenagers in the house, and she forgot her porridge on the table. "Aussi, quelqu'un a mangé mon porridge!"

However his meaning is quite formal and you will probably not hear it in casual speak.

  • Thank you so so much for clarifying this! It was confusing me for a while now and it's so satisfying to have it sorted out like that. – noam b Dec 16 '15 at 6:46
2

Only sentences #1 and #3 are grammatically correct although #1 is the most correct.

Sentence #3 is somewhat gauche but it means that "someone" whose identity is inferred has also eaten your porridge on top of something else. It's very stylistic and seems to confer a sarcastic meaning.

Sentence #2 is grammatically incorrect. Aussi is an adverb and that's simply not where you put them in French.

Sentence #4 is somewhat grammatically but does not make sense, because it is not syntagmatically correct.

  • Regrading the 4th sentence, would it make sense in the way its English counterpart does (as Kii also has suggested)? That is to say if I've just mentioned another thing that happened to me, and now I add "Aussi, quelqu'un a mangé mon porridge." – noam b Dec 15 '15 at 16:16
  • +1 , but regarding Sentence #2 and the placement of this French adverb, if the subject was more clearly identified and was one of several who had [done whatever], would it still be incorrect to place it between the subject and the verb? Like with: “Papa Poule/Ours aussi a mangé du porridge.” – Papa Poule Dec 15 '15 at 16:24
  • If you find this usage in real life, let me know. I know that Southern writers like Pagnol loved opening sentences with "Aussi, ...." It's very stylistically marked. – Charlie Mike No Shoot Dec 15 '15 at 16:41
  • Syntagmatically or syntactically? – D. Ben Knoble Dec 16 '15 at 3:01
  • 1
    sorry, but 4 answers are correct, with different meanings. even 1 and 3 are differents. no one better than other. see answer of @meristel . – guillaume girod-vitouchkina Dec 25 '15 at 13:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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