11 The subjunctive, modal verbs, exclamatives and imperatives

11.1 The attitude of the subject to events: the subjunctive

The subjunctive is expressed by a particular set of forms which verbs can typically take only in subordinate clauses (but see 11.4.4 for an exception). Verb forms that are not those of the subjunctive (e.g. the simple present, imperfect, simple past, compound past, and so on) are traditionally called the indicative. This distinction is used in this chapter for expository purposes. The selection of the subjunctive in a subordinate clause (rather than the normal indicative) is always determined by the nature of the clause on which it is dependent.

It should be noted that in many cases there is no choice about whether to use the subjunctive or indicative: certain types of main clause ALWAYS select the subjunctive in a dependent subordinate clause; others ALWAYS select the indicative. However, some main clause constructions are ambiguous, and allow the verb in a dependent subordinate clause to be either subjunctive or indicative: the choice of one or the other produces different meanings.

The majority of main clause constructions which select the subjunctive have a general property in common, and it is useful to consider the subjunctive from this perspective. The subjunctive is selected in a subordinate clause where the subject of the main clause views the event described in the subordinate clause with a significant degree of personal interpretation. This notion of ‘personal interpretation’ can be broken down into three types, which are illustrated below:

(a) The subject judges an event to be more towards the ‘unlikely’ end of a scale going from ‘probable’ to ‘unlikely’.

(b) The subject projects his or her personal desires or feelings on to an event.

(c) The subject cannot present an event as probable from his or her point of view, because it is in some way conditional on other events, is hypothetical, is unknowable or is simply vague.

Subjunctive: dependent on the subject's belief that an event is unlikely to occur

Where the subject of the main clause expresses a belief in the relative probability of an event’s occurring (whether in the past or the future), the indicative will be used. For example, expressions like the following give rise to the indicative in dependent subordinate clauses:

In the case of impersonal subjects – il est certain que, il est probable que, etc. – or with verbs where the subject is in the first person – je crois que, j’imagine que, etc. – it is the speaker of the sentence who expresses a belief in the probability of an event’s occurring and this equally gives rise to the indicative:

BUT where the main clause expresses the subject’s belief that an event is unlikely to occur or to have occurred, the subjunctive is required. For example, where the above expressions are negated or questioned, or when other terms suggesting less certainty are used, the event becomes more ‘unlikely’ than ‘probable’. This gives rise to the subjunctive in dependent subordinate clauses:

Subjunctive: dependent on the subject's attitude to an event

Where the construction which introduces the subordinate clause inherently presents the event as simply a matter of fact, the indicative will be used. For example, after the verb savoir que ‘to know that’ the indicative will always be used because savoir que states the subject’s view of an event as a matter of fact, uncoloured by a significant degree of personal interpretation:

BUT where the construction which introduces the subordinate clause inherently expresses the subject’s personal desires or feelings, the subjunctive will be required. For example, after the verb regretter que ‘to be sorry that’, the subjunctive will always be used because regretter places the event in the context of an emotional, personal interpretation by the subject:

Thus, where a subject places a particular personal interpretation on an event described in a subordinate clause, the subjunctive is likely to be used – even if the factual reality of the event is not in doubt. It is the attitude towards the event, the way the subject wishes it to be seen, which is more important than the reality or otherwise of the event. For example, Josette Alia, writing in the Nouvel Observateur in 1990 about the beginning of the feminist movement wrote:

To have written the following, equally grammatical, sentence would have changed the meaning in an important way:

In using the subjunctive Josette Alia does not lay the stress on the concept that there actually was a scandal (although she certainly thinks that there was) because that, from her point of view, is not what is important: she wishes to stress that the important thing was for the early feminists (with whom she identifies herself) to have created one – hence the subjunctive.

Subjunctive: dependent on the subject's view of an event as conditional, hypothetical, unknowable or vague

In cases where the idea of conditionality is expressed overtly through the conditional word si, the indicative is always used (for tenses with si see 10.8):

BUT certain expressions introducing dependent clauses place a condition on an event; the subject can then only present it as something which, from his or her point of view, is possible in certain circumstances, but no more than that. Therefore with expressions such as à condition que ‘on the condition that’ and à moins que ‘unless’, the subjunctive is obligatory:

When time constraints make the outcome of events unknowable by the subject, references to events in an unknown time scale tend to be in the subjunctive: avant que ‘before’ and jusqu’à ce que ‘until’ must be followed by the subjunctive:

When subjects are confronted with a degree of vagueness which means that they do not know enough about the situation to be certain of anything they say, the subjunctive is used: quoi que, quel(le(s)) que ‘whichever, whatever’ must be followed by the subjunctive:

SUMMARY
Contexts which give rise to the subjunctive
(a) The subjunctive is used mainly in subordinate clauses (but see 11.4.4).
(b) The subordinate clause is dependent on constructions which express a significant degree of personal interpretation of events: these interpretations present events as more unlikely than probable, and/or in a way which is coloured by the desires or feelings of the subject, and/or as conditional, hypothetical or unknowable.

NB: (i) As noted earlier, in the great majority of cases where the subjunctive is used, there is no choice: it is required after the relevant expression. However, in some limited subordinate contexts there is a genuine choice between using the indicative and the subjunctive because the construction on which the subordinate clause is dependent can be used with more than one meaning. This is the case in the example from Josette Alia used above. It is also the case in the following examples (the first from Judge and Healey, 1983:131).

A speaker trying to find a student who speaks Chinese might say:

This would be used if the speaker is reasonably sure that there is such a student in a known group (i.e. ‘I know one of the students speaks Chinese – I’m looking for that student’). By contrast, if the speaker said:

he or she would be expressing reservations about whether such a student is likely to be available (i.e. ‘I’m looking for any student who speaks Chinese – I don’t know whether any of them do’).

An irate parent waiting for a teenager who is coming in late might say:

The indicative is used because the parent wants to express his or her certainty about what excuses are likely to be offered.

By contrast, an insurance agent wanting to sell holiday insurance to a client might say:

Here the whole issue is hypothetical. Hence the subjunctive.

(ii) Although the subjunctive is typically marked in verbs in subordinate clauses introduced by que, not every subordinate clause introduced by que requires the verb to be in the subjunctive – in fact most of them don’t! It is only when the subordinate clause is dependent on a construction which expresses a significant degree of subjective interpretation of the event along the lines described above, usually through the use of one of the specific ways of introducing the subordinate clause, that the subjunctive is used.

11.1.1 Forms of the subjunctive

The conjugation of verbs in the subjunctive is described fully in Chapter 7. Here is a brief summary of the way that regular verbs form the subjunctive in the various tenses (but see Chapter 7 for irregular verbs).

Present subjunctive

For many verbs, take the third person plural, present tense form of the indicative, delete -ent:

for example:

(ils) parlent → parl-
finissent → finiss-
dorment → dorm-
vendent → vend-
reçoivent → reçoiv-

and add the endings:

for example:

NB: The stem reçoiv- changes when the ending does not begin with - e: reçoive, reçoives, reçoive, recevions, receviez, reçoivent.

Imperfect subjunctive

For many verbs, take the first person singular, simple past tense form of the indicative, delete the last letter: for example:

(je) parlai → parla-
finis → fini-
dormis → dormi-
vendis → vendi-
reçus → reçu-

and add the endings:

for example:

Compound past and pluperfect subjunctive

The compound past subjunctive is formed from the present subjunctive forms of avoir or être, as appropriate, followed by the past participle. The pluperfect subjunctive is formed from the imperfect subjunctive of avoir or être, as appropriate, followed by the past participle. (See Chapter 7 for details.)

11.1.2 Which tense of the subjunctive should be used?

In formal written French it is still possible to use all of the tenses of the subjunctive: present, imperfect, compound past and pluperfect. In such cases the tense to use is determined in a broadly similar way to the choice of tenses with indicative forms of the verb (see Chapter 10). The only difference is that because there is no future or conditional subjunctive, the present tense form of the subjunctive is normally used in contexts where the future or conditional would be appropriate.

However, in less formal written French, and generally in spoken French, only the present tense and the compound past tense of the subjunctive are used. In this case, the present tense forms of the subjunctive typically cover all cases where present, imperfect, simple past, future or conditional tenses of the indicative would be used. For example:

The compound past tense forms of the subjunctive typically cover all cases where compound past, pluperfect, compound future or compound conditional tenses of the indicative would be used. For example:

11.1.3 Subjunctive after verbs, adjectives and nouns which express the personal desires, orders, expectations, fears, regrets or other emotional states of the subject in relation to the event

Verbs and adjectives

Verbs and adjectives of wishing, ordering, expressing fears and other emotional states are normally followed by subjunctive subordinate clauses. The verb in subordinate clauses dependent on the following verbs is almost always in the subjunctive:

aimer que to wish that
attendre que to wait for
s'attendre à ce que to expect that
avoir envie que to really want that
commander que to order that
consentir que to agree or to accept that
être content que to be pleased that
craindre que to fear that
demander que to ask that
désirer que to wish that
être désolé que to be sorry that
être dommage que to be a pity or to be regretted that
douter que to doubt that
s'étonner que to be surprised that
exiger que to require that
être heureux que to be happy that
insister pour que to insist that
ordonner que to order that
permettre que to allow that
avoir peur que to be afraid that
préférer que to prefer that
être ravi que to be delighted that
regretter que to regret that
se réjouir que to rejoice that
souhaiter que to wish that
être surpris que to be surprised that
tenir à ce que to be anxious that
être triste que to be sad that
veiller à ce que to be careful that
vouloir que to want that

(For the use of non-negative ne in subordinate clauses see Chapter 16.16.)

Nouns

The subjunctive is normally required in clauses dependent on nouns which express similar meanings to the verbs listed above, i.e. wishing, ordering, being pleased, sad, surprised, etc.: l’attente que, la crainte que, le désir que, l’ordre que, la peur que, le souhait que:

NB: Where the subject of the main clause is unspecified, as in a passive, or is the same as the subject of the subordinate clause, the subjunctive can be avoided by the use of an infinitive with la crainte de, le désir de, la peur de, l’ordre de etc.:

11.1.4 Subjunctive after verbs of saying, thinking and believing in negatives and questions

Verbs of saying, thinking and believing – affirmer que ‘to state that’, croire que ‘to believe that’, déclarer que ‘to declare that’, imaginer que ‘to imagine that’, penser que ‘to think that’, trouver que ‘to find that’, and so on – normally present an event simply as a fact and, where they are followed by a dependent subordinate clause, the verb in this clause is in the indicative:

But when such verbs are negated or questioned, this introduces uncertainty about the likelihood of the event occurring, and verbs in the dependent clause are in the subjunctive:

Similarly, when verbs of saying, thinking and believing are used to introduce hypothetical cases, verbs in clauses dependent on them will be in the subjunctive:

NB: Note that espérer que ‘to hope that’ does NOT give rise to the subjunctive in a dependent clause, even when negated or questioned:

11.1.5 Subjunctive after impersonal verbs expressing the belief that an event is unlikely as opposed to probable

Some impersonal verbs and expressions present the occurrence of events described in dependent subordinate clauses as probable: verbs in these clauses are in the indicative. Examples of such cases are: il est certain que ‘it is certain that’, il s’ensuit que ‘it follows that’, il est évident que ‘it is obvious that’, il est probable que ‘it is probable that’, il me semble que ‘I think that’, il est vrai que ‘it is true that’:

But others present the events as less probable, only possible or even impossible; these require the subjunctive in dependent clauses: il n’est pas certain que ‘it is not certain that’; il est douteux que ‘it is doubtful that’; il est impossible que ‘it is impossible that’; il est invraisem-blable que ‘it is unbelievable that’; il se peut que, il est possible que ‘it is possible that’; il est peu probable que ‘it is unlikely that’; il n’est pas sûr que ‘it is not sure that’; il n’est pas vrai que ‘it is not true that’.

Note particularly the following contrasts:

il est certain que + indicative il n'est pas certain que + subjunctive
il est probable que + indicative il est peu probable que + subjunctive
il est sûr que + indicative il n'est pas sûr que + subjunctive
il est vrai que + indicative il n'est pas vrai que + subjunctive

Some impersonal constructions express the subjective desires or feelings of the speaker of the sentence: il faut que ‘it is necessary that’ (often equivalent to ‘must’); il est important que ‘it is important that’; il est nécessaire que ‘it is necessary that’; il est regrettable que ‘it is regrettable that’; il semble que ‘it seems that’; il est temps que ‘it is time that’; il vaut mieux que ‘it is better if’.

NB: Note in particular the contrast:

il me semble que + indicative Il me semble que l'ennemi est mieux préparé
I think that the enemy is better prepared
il semble que + subjunctive Il semble que l'ennemi soit mieux préparé
It seems that the enemy is better prepared

11.1.6 Subjunctive after certain conjunctions

Some subordinating conjunctions introduce hypothetical situations or establish conditions: these are normally followed by verbs in the subjunctive in the subordinate clause:

afin que in order that
pour que
en attendant que whilst waiting for
non que not that
ce n'est pas que
à moins que unless
à supposer que supposing that
supposé que
en supposant que
en admettant que
bien que although
quoique
encore que
malgré que
de façon que so that, in such a way that
de maniere que
de sorte que
si bien que
de peur que for fear that
de crainte que
pour peu que si peu que however little that
pourvu que provided that
à condition que
sans que without
soit que whether
tel que such as

The conjunctions de façon que, de manière que, de sorte que, si bien que ‘so that’ have two distinct meanings. On the one hand they express a wish that something which has not yet happened might happen. With this meaning they have the force of ‘creating the conditions for another event to occur’ and are followed by the subjunctive:

On the other hand, they can describe a causal effect of one event on another. With this meaning they have the force of ‘with the result that’ and are followed by the indicative:

(See also Chapter 17.3.8.)

11.1.7 Subjunctive after time conjunctions

With the time conjunctions: avant que ‘before’ and jusqu’à ce que ‘until’ the subjunctive is always used:

avant que can be replaced by avant de when the subject of the verb in the subordinate clause is the same as that in the introducing clause:

The conjunction après que ‘after’ is normally followed by the indicative and not the subjunctive:

However, presumably by analogy with avant que, you will often hear people using the subjunctive after après que. (See also Chapter 17.3.1.)

(For the use of non-negative ne in dependent clauses see Chapter 16.16, and for non-negative ne in clauses dependent on conjunctions see Chapter 17.3.8.)

11.1.8 Subjunctive in clauses dependent on expressions which claim a unique status for an entity

Verbs in clauses which are dependent on superlatives, on nouns modified by one of the adjectives dernier, premier, seul, unique, or on personne or rien, are in the subjunctive if the sentence makes the claim that the entity referred to is ‘peerless’ (i.e. is the biggest, best, worst, first, last, only one of its kind ever):

However, where there is no claim about the ‘peerless’ quality of the entity (e.g. when it is described as the biggest, best, worst, first etc. of a particular set, but there may be other bigger, better, worse, etc., entities in the world) the verb is in the indicative:

There is nothing peerless about this. It is simply the assertion of a fact. Other people see their first film as well. But compare with:

This was a ‘peerless’ first, and so the subjunctive is used. Similarly, compare:

Other examples of non-peerless cases:

(See also Chapter 15.11.3.)

11.1.9 Use of the indicative in clauses introduced by an adverb

When an adverb, such as peut-être que ‘perhaps’, heureusement que ‘luckily’, certainement que ‘of course’, apparemment que ‘apparently’, is used in the first part of a clause, despite the fact that they often express the meanings which in other clauses give rise to the subjunctive, the subjunctive is NOT used:

NB: This construction is more frequent in informal than formal French.

11.1.10 Use of the subjunctive in hypothetical clauses coordinated by et que

When a hypothetical clause introduced by si is extended by a coordinated clause, the second clause is introduced by que and the verb is usually in the subjunctive:

(See also Chapter 17.5.)

A related construction is an adverbial clause introduced by que which also requires the subjunctive, and is translated by ‘whether . . . or’ in English:

11.1.11 Subjunctive in subject clauses

When a clause, rather than a noun phrase, is the subject of a sentence, the verb in that clause is in the subjunctive:

The subjunctive is also used when such subject clauses are introduced by le fait que ‘the fact that’, or l’idée que ‘the idea that’:

Note that the subjunctive is required in subject clauses even with verbs and adjectives which normally require the indicative when subordinate clauses are not in subject position. Compare:

11.1.12 Use of the subjunctive in clauses dependent on indefinite expressions

Verbs in subordinate clauses following the indefinite expressions qui que ‘whoever’, quoi que ‘whatever’, où que ‘wherever’, quelque + [noun] que ‘whichever, whatever [noun]’, quel que ‘whatever’, quelque/si/aussi/pour + [adjective] que ‘however [adjective]’ are in the subjunctive:

Note that in this last example quelque does not agree with rares or pierres. (For more on these constructions see Chapter 15.10 and 15.11.1.)

More generally, where a subordinate clause is dependent on an indefinite expression which describes a hypothetical, rather than real, state of affairs, the verb in the subordinate clause is likely to be in the subjunctive:

Compare with:

(See also Chapter 15.11.2 and 15.11.4.)

11.2 The use of devoir, pouvoir, savoir, falloir

The modal verbs devoir, pouvoir, savoir and falloir enable a speaker to express a number of attitudes about events and the participants in events: the likelihood of an event occurring; the ability of a participant to perform some action; how obligated a participant is in an event. Modal verbs are also used in granting permission and in formulas expressing politeness.

In this section we describe the various uses of these four verbs. Then in 11.3 we take a different perspective and describe how the English modals ‘would’, ‘should’, ‘could’, ‘may’, ‘might’, ‘ought to’ and ‘must’ are rendered in French.

11.2.1 devoir

devoir expresses four main meanings:

  1. something which the speaker sees as very probable, usually because it is logical;
  2. something which the speaker sees as a moral obligation;
  3. something which the speaker thinks of as planned or agreed;
  4. something which the speaker thinks of as an act, usually in the past, which was a necessary outcome of events.

Probability (logical necessity)

Moral obligation

A planned event (usually which did not or will not happen)

A necessary outcome of events

11.2.2 pouvoir

pouvoir expresses five main meanings:

  1. The granting or refusing of permission by the speaker;
  2. An indication that the speaker believes someone else is capable of doing something;
  3. An indication that the speaker feels that something is probable in the future;
  4. A general assertion by the speaker about what may happen;
  5. An expression of politeness by the speaker.

The granting or refusing of permission by the speaker

An indication that the speaker believes someone is capable of doing something

An indication that the speaker feels that something is quite probable in the future

A general assertion by the speaker about what may happen

An expression of politeness by the speaker

11.2.3 savoir

savoir expresses two main meanings:

  1. ‘to know’ in the sense of ‘to possess knowledge about’;
  2. ‘to know’ in the sense of ‘to know how to do something’.

'to know' (possess knowledge)

'to know' (know how to . . .)

NB: There can be confusion between pouvoir and savoir in this area. Savoir is ‘to know how to in principle’ and pouvoir is ‘to be able to do it in a particular situation’:

If people were feeling threatened in some way, they might say:

to indicate that they have necessary skills (karate, boxing, a willingness to fight etc.). In a situation where they may have to make use of these skills, they would say:

to indicate that they think they will be able to apply these skills in these circumstances.

11.2.4 falloir

falloir (impersonal) expresses one main meaning: it is equivalent to English: ‘must’, or ‘ought to’:

11.3 The French equivalents of the English modal verbs: 'would', 'should', 'could', 'may', 'might', 'ought to' and 'must'

As can be seen from the translations in the preceding section, devoir, pouvoir, savoir and falloir can be translated in a number of ways depending on the context. The most frequent translations are ‘would’, ‘should’, ‘can’, ‘could’, ‘may’, ‘might’, ‘ought to’, and ‘must’. The problems which arise in this area for English speakers are mainly to do with errors in establishing how these forms relate to the English modal verbs which express many of the same meanings.

The English modal verbs also, however, express a number of other meanings. For correct usage, it is essential that learners should be able to distinguish the meanings of the English modals in order to know which French forms to use. In some cases one of the French modal verbs is appropriate; in other cases, a sentence with si, a conditional tense, an imperfect tense, a present or future tense or a subjunctive may be the appropriate form.

11.3.1 'would'

‘would’ has three main meanings:

(a) ‘would’ may be used in English to express possible future behaviour which is dependent on some condition. It will usually be rendered by the conditional form of the verb in French:

(b) ‘would’ may be used to indicate something which is desired or not desired. In this case it is often rendered by a form of the verb vouloir:

(c) ‘would’ may also indicate an habitual action in the past. This is generally rendered by the imperfect form of the verb in French:

(The imperfect tense is used to indicate an habitual action in the past – see Chapter 10.3.1.)

11.3.2 'should'

’should’ has four main meanings:

(a) ‘should’ may indicate a moral obligation. This is usually rendered by the use of devoir:

Note also that the English ‘should have’ is rendered by aurait dû plus an infinitive and not by a participle form of the main verb:

falloir is also possible here:

(b) ‘should’ may convey a conditional. This is usually rendered by a conditional form of the verb in French:

(c) ‘should’ may express a probable future action. Depending on the degree of probability, this may be rendered by a form of devoir or by a future tense:

These three sentences indicate an increasing degree of probability going from top to bottom.

(d) ‘should’ can also indicate a chance event. This may be translated by some means of expression other than the verb:

Sometimes a simple present tense will convey the meaning of ‘should’:

Where one wants to stress the improbability of the chance event occurring, a form of devoir can be used:

(For more on the use of tenses with si see Chapter 10.8 and Chapter 17.3.6.)

11.3.3 'could'

‘could’ has four main meanings:

(a) ‘could’ may be a simple past tense of the verb ‘can’ i.e. ‘was able to’. This is particularly frequent in reported speech. There is little difficulty here in using pouvoir:

and in reported speech:

(See Chapter 10.7.)

(b) ‘could’ may indicate a possibility. This will normally be a conditional or a form of the impersonal verb il se peut que:

(c) ‘could’ may indicate that permission has been given. This may be rendered by the use of pouvoir or by another verb, such as permettre:

(d) ‘could’ may imply that something should be done or should have been done: this can be rendered by a suitable tense of pouvoir:

11.3.4 'may'

‘may’ has four main meanings:

(a) ‘may’ indicates something which is simply envisaged. Sometimes, especially in informal speech, an adverb will suffice. Or the impersonal forms cela se peut, il se peut que + subjunctive:

The subjunctive on its own is used very often when possible consequences are feared:

(b) ‘may’ can indicate permission. This is most often rendered by the use of pouvoir:

(c) ‘may’ can be a kind of blessing. This will normally be rendered by a subjunctive in the main clause:

(d) ‘may’ can indicate an open-ended possibility. This is often rendered by a subjunctive:

11.3.5 'might'

‘might’ has three main meanings:

(a) ‘might’ is sometimes simply a past ‘may’ as in giving permission in indirect speech. In this case a form of pouvoir is to be expected:

(b) ‘might’ indicates something which is envisaged. The French equivalents are the same as for ‘may’ (see 11.3.4.(a)). Sometimes, especially in informal speech, an adverb will suffice. Or the impersonal form il se peut que + subjunctive may be used. Or the subjunctive on its own may be used when possible consequences are feared:

(c) ‘might’ can be a polite form. This usually corresponds to a form of pouvoir, or a use of permettre:

11.3.6 'ought to'

’ought to’ conveys one main meaning:

‘ought to’ expresses a moral obligation. It is usually rendered by devoir, often in a conditional form:

falloir is also possible:

11.3.7 'must'

‘must’ has two main meanings:

(a) ‘must’ can express moral obligation. This usually requires devoir or falloir:

(b) ‘must’ can indicate a logical possibility/certainty. This is usually rendered by devoir:

11.4 Exclamatives

Exclamatives are the direct expression of a speaker’s surprise, disgust, anger, fervour and analogous emotions:

Comme elle a grandi! How she's grown!
Que de monde! What a lot of people!
Que le diable l'emporte! The devil take him!
Vive la France! Long live France!

There are four types of exclamative in French.

11.4.1 Exclamatives formed with comme or que + the indicative

Sentences can be turned into exclamations simply by putting comme or que in front of them, and without changing word order. The verb remains in the indicative:

Pierre a changé Comme Pierre a changé!
Pierre has changed Que Pierre a changé!
How Pierre has changed!
Il se plaignait Comme il se plaignait!
He used to complain Qu'il se plaignait!
How he used to complain!
C'est dégoûtant Comme c'est dégoûtant!
It's disgusting Que c'est dégoûtant!
How disgusting it is!
Elle parle vite Comme elle parle vite!
She speaks quickly Qu'elle parle vite!
How quickly she speaks!

NB: In informal French, ce que and qu’est-ce que are common alternatives to comme and que: Ce que Pierre a changé! Qu’est-ce qu’il se plaignait!, etc.

When exclamations are reported – that is when they follow verbs like savoir, raconter, dire, and so on – comme/que are replaced by combien:

11.4.2 Exclamatives formed with quel

Exclamations can bear specifically on nouns. French uses quel to perform this function. Where a sentence is involved, the quel-phrase is placed at the beginning of the sentence and quel agrees in gender and number with the noun:

Quel vent! What a wind!
Quelle surprise! What a surprise!
Quels progrès ces étudiants ont faits! What progress these students have made!
Avec quelle adresse il a résolu le problème! With what skill he solved the problem!

When the direct object is the focus of the exclamation, in formal French it is possible optionally to invert the subject and the verb (in an operation known as ‘stylistic inversion’ – see Chapter 14.3.7), providing that there is no other material following the verb:

11.4.3 que de + noun meaning 'what a lot of X!'

que de followed by a noun is used to create an exclamative of the form ‘what a lot of X!’, or ‘so much/so many X!’:

Que de monde! What a lot of people!
Que de difficultés! So many difficulties!
Que de problèmes on doit affronter! What a lot of problems we have before us!

11.4.4 The subjunctive used in two kinds of main clause exclamative

Although the subjunctive normally only occurs in subordinate clauses, it can be used in main clause exclamations like:

Vive la Bretagne! Long live Brittany!
Dieu soit loué! Praise God!
Sauve qui peut! Every man for himself!
Puissiez-vous réussir! May you succeed!

and also those headed by que:

Both of these types of exclamation are remnants from an earlier period in the history of French, and are rather formal and archaic. Only Vive X! and Qu’il/elle/ils/elles V! are used productively in modern French (Vive les vacances! ‘Long live the holidays!’, Vive la révolution! ‘Long live the revolution!’; Qu’il m’attende! ‘Let him wait for me!’, Qu’elle cherche ailleurs! ‘Let her look elsewhere!’, etc.).

11.5 Imperatives

Imperatives in French are used very much as they are in English to give orders, express encouragement, give advice, and so on:

Asseyez-vous Sit down
Allez la France! Come on, France!
Allons-y Let's go
Fais attention! Watch out!

11.5.1 Form of imperatives

Imperatives are formed from the second person, singular and plural, and the first person plural of the present tense forms of verbs. Delete the subject and the final s of any verb that ends in es or as:

tu parles → parle speak
vous parlez parlez speak
nous parlons parlons let's speak
tu vas → va go
vous allez allez go
nous allons allons let's go
tu ouvres → ouvre open
vous ouvrez ouvrez open
nous ouvrons ouvrons let's open
tu finis → finis finish
vous finissez finissez finish
nous finissons finissons let's finish
tu dors → dors sleep
vous dormez dormez sleep
nous dormons dormons let's sleep
tu reçois → reçois receive
vous recevez recevez receive
nous recevons recevons let's receive

There are four verbs with irregular imperative forms:

être avoir
sois be aie have
soyez be ayez have
soyons let's be ayons let's have
savoir vouloir
sache know veuille (used almost exclusively to mean please - see 11.5.5)
sachez know veuillez
sachons let's know —

Verbs which double a consonant in their present tense singular forms (like appeler – tu appelles, jeter – tu jettes) or change a vowel (like acheter – tu achètes, espérer – tu espères, nettoyer – tu nettoies) carry this change over to the imperative: appelle!, jette!, nettoie!, etc. (See Chapter 7.4 for these changes.)

The final s which disappears from the second person singular of verbs ending in es or as reappears when the verb is followed by y or en:

parle speak parles-en speak about it
va go vas-y go on

The equivalent of English contrastive imperatives like ‘you go (instead of me)’, ‘you shut up (instead of me)’ are the forms vous-même, toi-même: Allez-y vous-même, Tais-toi toi-même.

11.5.2 Pronominal verbs in imperatives

Pronominal verbs like se lever ‘to get up’, se réveiller ‘to wake up’, se servir ‘to help (serve) oneself’, se taire ‘to shut up’, etc., drop their subjects in the imperative, but keep their object pronouns:

tu te lèves → lève-toi get up
vous vous levez levez-vous get up
nous nous levons levons-nous let's get up
tu te sers → sers-toi help yourself
vous vous servez servez-vous help yourself
nous nous servons servons-nous let's help ourselves

11.5.3 Location and order of pronouns with imperatives

In affirmative imperatives, direct and indirect object pronouns, and the pronouns y and en, come immediately after the verb which governs them. The pronouns me and te become the stressed forms moi and toi. Pronouns are linked to their governing verb in written French by hyphens (see also Chapter 3.2.5):

Prends-les Take them
Suivez-nous Follow us
Ecoutez-moi Listen to me
Tais-toi Shut up

NB: Pronouns governed by an infinitive following an imperative are NOT linked to the imperative by a hyphen:

Monte les chercher Go up and look for them
(les is the object of chercher)
Courez lui téléphoner Run and phone him
(lui is the indirect object of téléphoner)

When more than one pronoun is present the order is:

moi and toi become m’, t’ if they are followed by y or en:

Donne-le-moi Give it to me
Donnez-le-lui Give it to him
Donne-m'en Give me some of it
Accroche-t'y Hang on to it

(See also Chapter 3.2.31.)

In negative imperatives pronouns precede the verb and the order is the same as in simple non- imperative sentences (see Chapter 3.2.5 and 3.2.31):

Ne me le donne pas Don't give it to me
Ne le lui donnez pas Don't give it to him
Ne m'en donne pas Don't give me any
Ne t'y accroche pas Don't hang on to it

11.5.4 Compound imperatives

Compound imperatives are formed from the imperative of avoir or être, as appropriate, and a past participle. They are used to express orders to be fulfilled in the future:

11.5.5 Toning down imperatives

Orders can be toned down by the use of veuillez, which is an equivalent of s’il vous plaît:

Asseyez-vous Sit down
Veuillez vous asseoir Please sit down
Asseyez-vous, s'il vous plaît Sit down, please

or by the use of a non-imperative declarative sentence with a future tense:

11.5.6 Infinitives used as imperatives

Infinitives can be used in French as imperatives when the addressee is non-specific (e.g. in road signs addressed to all road users, or in instructions addressed to the purchasers of a food product):

Ralentir Slow down
Ouvrir doucement Open carefully

(See also Chapter 12.10.)

11.5.7 Third person imperatives

Third person imperatives which are formed in English by the use of ‘let’ are formed in French by the use of que + a verb in the subjunctive (see 11.4.4):

Qu'il s'asseye Let him sit down
Qu'elle descende me commander une bière Let her go down and order me a beer
Qu'ils te le donnent Let them give it to you