Answers
Jan 01, 2013 - 07:41 PM
I'm not as far as you, but I had a similar question a few months ago. Pull up the French threads and you'll see it discussed. Someone gave a helpful reply. I remember the answer having to do with the fact that as English speakers we translate 'aller' as 'to go' but French seems to add a lot more prepositions than English in many instances, so here 'pour' is acting as a word to mean 'for the purpose of'. I still struggle with this too, but thinking like this has helped me a bit.
Jan 01, 2013 - 08:05 PM
I have been tripped up by that one myself, I'm currently towards the end of level 2. Like you I don't recall these being explained anywhere. I have however come up with my own explanation, which may or may not be correct but has worked for me in the lessons.
In English we read "time to go", in that context is communicating how we are using the time. Said another way, we could day in English we could say "time for going" and it would meaning would remain the same. In French we have learned that aller means "to go" but it's not a literal translation to the two English works, it's really the act of "going." So in my, often twisted, way of thinking, to say "temps aller" is saying "time going" which doesn't quite explain how the "time" is being used. But if you insert the "pour" in there, you now have "time for going" or "time to go."
.
In English we read "time to go", in that context is communicating how we are using the time. Said another way, we could day in English we could say "time for going" and it would meaning would remain the same. In French we have learned that aller means "to go" but it's not a literal translation to the two English works, it's really the act of "going." So in my, often twisted, way of thinking, to say "temps aller" is saying "time going" which doesn't quite explain how the "time" is being used. But if you insert the "pour" in there, you now have "time for going" or "time to go."
.
Jan 02, 2013 - 06:55 AM
I think this has come up before. This is how I remember it. The problem is our concept of the word "to." In French (and Spanish also), when "to" means "for the purpose" or "in order to" you translate it as "pour." The "to" which we include in our translation of an infinitive does not fulfil this purpose. In French, the infinitive has several translations in English. If the sentence has a "to" plus verb, but you can substitute the gerund, then you only need the infinitive, not "pour." For example, "He likes to talk" can be also stated as "He likes talking." So, just "Il aime parler", you wouldn't need "pour." In the sentence in your example, "to" clearly means "in order to" or "for the purpose of." If it had been simply "You wanted to go see your parents" you wouldn't use "pour."
Jan 02, 2013 - 01:12 PM
Thanks everyone for the input. Mr. Putney, your take on the matter seems very reasonable. It certainly gives one a grammatical "key" to look for in that if the gerund could be substituted in context with the translation then "pour" is not needed, and if the gerund cannot be substituted, then insert "pour". It seems to work for the other examples I have run across as well. I am still curious if there are any other opinions on the matter though, so if anyone else still has a thought please share. Thanks again everyone!
Jan 09, 2013 - 06:32 PM
As an aside, if you say "Tu as" then "your parents" refer to "Tu" so that would be "Tu as un peu de temps pour aller voir tes parents?". If you were to use the formal You, then "Vous avez un peu de temps pour aller voir vos parents?". Mixing "tu" and "vos" sounds like you are talking to one person (tu) but make reference to other brothers and sisters that may be in the room because you use "your (plural) parents". I't s a bit odd !
Jan 18, 2013 - 01:20 PM
You are correct, Fabrice. I hadn't seen my error but it is now corrected. Thanks!