1

Which of the following are used in practice, or make sense, even if they are rare or literary?

If all of them may be used, do they all mean different things, even if the differences are subtle, or are some of them in fact equivalent?

I've tried to offer my best attempt at translations that show the (sometimes subtle) differences, the way I think they are, but it seems to me that at least some of them must be functionally equivalent, for example 3 and 8, or 5 and 10.

But I'm very unsure about many of them, so perhaps someone with a better grasp of French tenses and aspects may help make sense of them.

  1. Il vient de pleuvoir (It just rained)
  2. Il venait de pleuvoir (It had just been raining)
  3. Il vint de pleuvoir (It had just rained)
  4. Il viendra de pleuvoir (It will just be raining)
  5. Il viendrait de pleuvoir (It would have just rained)
  6. Il est venu de pleuvoir (It has just rained)
  7. Il était venu de pleuvoir (It has just been raining)
  8. Il fut venu de pleuvoir (It had just rained)
  9. Il sera venu de pleuvoir (It will have just rained)
  10. Il serait venu de pleuvoir (It would have just rained)
Improve this question
15
  • 1
    Your question is too vague. Venir de+ inf (recent past) will not be used with any tense, the difference between one tense or another can at times be straightforward but at others very subtle, the use of one tense or another depends on the context. Your question needs to be more detailed, for example give a sentence with a precise context and if you are using the wrong tense or there's an error in your sentence we can tell you and explain. Give more details. Please visit the Help centre on how to ask questions.
    – None
    Commented Jun 13, 2022 at 11:55
  • @None If I could give a precise context for all 10 sentences, I would already have my answer, so I honestly don't see how I could make my question more precise. Also, if "venir de+inf will not be used with any tense" is true, then that answers my question, as that means "only #1 is used, none of the others are ever used".
    – S.T. Veje
    Commented Jun 13, 2022 at 12:10
  • Not only #1 can be used. To tell you which tenses can be used and which can't requires to make up sentences in different contexts. What you are asking is a lecture on venir de and this is not the point of FL.
    – None
    Commented Jun 13, 2022 at 12:18
  • 1
    No, that's wrong. It has been raining a lot recently. is merely: Il pleut beaucoup recemment. You don't translate every continuous with être en train de. You only do that when there is an ambiguity in the French.
    – Lambie
    Commented Jun 13, 2022 at 17:04
  • 1
    Yes, that's what I meant by "if at all"
    – S.T. Veje
    Commented Jun 13, 2022 at 17:05

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

Il vient de pleuvoir (It just rained) ✔
Il venait de pleuvoir (It had just been raining) ✔
Il vint de pleuvoir (It had just rained) ✘
Il viendra de pleuvoir (It will just be raining) ✔ (rare)
Il viendrait de pleuvoir (It would have just rained) ✔ (rare)
Il est venu de pleuvoir (It has just rained) ✘
Il était venu de pleuvoir (It has just been raining) ✘
Il fut venu de pleuvoir (It had just rained) ✘
Il sera venu de pleuvoir (It will have just rained) ✘
Il serait venu de pleuvoir (It would have just rained) ✘

See De la défectivité de aller et de venir dans les périphrases d’ultériorité (il va pleuvoir) et d’antériorité (il vient de pleuvoir) proches à l’indicatif, Jacques Bres, 2015.

Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    Merci beaucoup. The link answers my question perfectly.
    – S.T. Veje
    Commented Jun 14, 2022 at 7:07

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.