Can “dès que” imply simultaneity ?When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de?The meaning and...

My Project Manager does not accept carry-over in Scrum, Is that normal?

Magneto 2 How to call Helper function in observer file

What's the next step in this Unequal (Futoshiki) puzzle?

Co-Supervisor comes to office to help her students which distracts me

How do pilots align the HUD with their eyeballs?

What Secular Civic Space Would Pioneers Build For Small Frontier Towns?

Does HTTP HSTS protect a domain from a bad-actor publically-trusted-CA issing a illegitimate valid certificate?

What is the need of methods like GET and POST in the HTTP protocol?

Why did UK NHS pay for homeopathic treatments?

Is "ln" (natural log) and "log" the same thing if used in this answer?

Is it true that, "just ten trading days represent 63 per cent of the returns of the past 50 years"?

Examples of "unsuccessful" theories with afterlives

Cut a cake into 3 equal portions with only a knife

Writing a letter of recommendation for a mediocre student

Can an integer optimization problem be convex?

Is it impolite to ask for an in-flight catalogue with no intention of buying?

Is it really necessary to have a four hour meeting in Sprint planning?

I reverse the source code, you negate the input!

How do I set a custom order for folders on Windows 7 and 10?

1, 2, 4, 8, 16, ... 33?

Basic digital RC approximation filter in python (Micropython)

To what extent is it worthwhile to report check fraud / refund scams?

Should the average user with no special access rights be worried about SMS-based 2FA being theoretically interceptable?

How to justify a team increase when the team is doing good?



Can “dès que” imply simultaneity ?


When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de?The meaning and etymology of “histoire de” / “histoire que”?Quelle est la différence entre les trois conjonctions « alors que », « pendant que » et « tandis que » ?Can “depuis” stand alone?To mean “whereas”, is it acceptable to use “pendant/cependant que” instead of “tandis/alors que”?Can “tellement” serve as a conjunction, meaning “because … so much”?Can you use “comment” like “que” (that)?When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de?Accord : « tel que » ou « telle que »« Mais que » (avec valeur temporelle : quand, dès que) en français parlé du Québec etc. : précisions ?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







1















In English, "as soon as" means that one event comes right after the other. It can only (ambiguously) indicate simultaneity in some specific contexts when used with some specific verbs, such as "to go". Reference: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/225391/does-as-soon-as-imply-simultaneity



I thought that "dès que" behaved identically in French, but I have been told recently that "A dès que B" does not necessarily imply that A begins right after B is complete; supposedly, it is possible that both events will take place at the same time. Is that right? Example:




Il parlera dès qu'il finira de manger.




I have read in When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de? that "dès que" can be used for simultaneous events, but the example presented there has 2 events which are sequential, although they seem simultaneous.










share|improve this question



























  • " conjugating "finir" in the "futur simple" tense would ... imply simultaneity of eating and speaking" and "the subject will start to speak while he finishes eating in that sentence" mean the same thing, so your question is not clear at all. And why would it be "wrong" to speak and eat at the same time? finir de manger does not mean finir d'avaler And you're mentioning only part of my answer where I said it was a question of vocabulary. That's why I chose different examples.

    – Laure
    8 hours ago











  • @Laure I think the question was clear, but it was indeed wordy. I have summarized it. There is nothing wrong in speaking and eating at the same time, I just have the feeling that it is unlikely that the subject of the French sentence above will start speaking what he has to say before fully finishing his meal (which would make the 2 actions sequential) and therefore the sentence with the "futur simple" sounds odd, but I may be wrong. The purpose of this question is simply to obtain the opinion of others. Thanks for the help anyway!

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago




















1















In English, "as soon as" means that one event comes right after the other. It can only (ambiguously) indicate simultaneity in some specific contexts when used with some specific verbs, such as "to go". Reference: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/225391/does-as-soon-as-imply-simultaneity



I thought that "dès que" behaved identically in French, but I have been told recently that "A dès que B" does not necessarily imply that A begins right after B is complete; supposedly, it is possible that both events will take place at the same time. Is that right? Example:




Il parlera dès qu'il finira de manger.




I have read in When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de? that "dès que" can be used for simultaneous events, but the example presented there has 2 events which are sequential, although they seem simultaneous.










share|improve this question



























  • " conjugating "finir" in the "futur simple" tense would ... imply simultaneity of eating and speaking" and "the subject will start to speak while he finishes eating in that sentence" mean the same thing, so your question is not clear at all. And why would it be "wrong" to speak and eat at the same time? finir de manger does not mean finir d'avaler And you're mentioning only part of my answer where I said it was a question of vocabulary. That's why I chose different examples.

    – Laure
    8 hours ago











  • @Laure I think the question was clear, but it was indeed wordy. I have summarized it. There is nothing wrong in speaking and eating at the same time, I just have the feeling that it is unlikely that the subject of the French sentence above will start speaking what he has to say before fully finishing his meal (which would make the 2 actions sequential) and therefore the sentence with the "futur simple" sounds odd, but I may be wrong. The purpose of this question is simply to obtain the opinion of others. Thanks for the help anyway!

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago
















1












1








1








In English, "as soon as" means that one event comes right after the other. It can only (ambiguously) indicate simultaneity in some specific contexts when used with some specific verbs, such as "to go". Reference: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/225391/does-as-soon-as-imply-simultaneity



I thought that "dès que" behaved identically in French, but I have been told recently that "A dès que B" does not necessarily imply that A begins right after B is complete; supposedly, it is possible that both events will take place at the same time. Is that right? Example:




Il parlera dès qu'il finira de manger.




I have read in When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de? that "dès que" can be used for simultaneous events, but the example presented there has 2 events which are sequential, although they seem simultaneous.










share|improve this question
















In English, "as soon as" means that one event comes right after the other. It can only (ambiguously) indicate simultaneity in some specific contexts when used with some specific verbs, such as "to go". Reference: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/225391/does-as-soon-as-imply-simultaneity



I thought that "dès que" behaved identically in French, but I have been told recently that "A dès que B" does not necessarily imply that A begins right after B is complete; supposedly, it is possible that both events will take place at the same time. Is that right? Example:




Il parlera dès qu'il finira de manger.




I have read in When to use dès que, depuis que and à partir de? that "dès que" can be used for simultaneous events, but the example presented there has 2 events which are sequential, although they seem simultaneous.







conjonctions






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 8 hours ago







Alan Evangelista

















asked 9 hours ago









Alan EvangelistaAlan Evangelista

59110 bronze badges




59110 bronze badges
















  • " conjugating "finir" in the "futur simple" tense would ... imply simultaneity of eating and speaking" and "the subject will start to speak while he finishes eating in that sentence" mean the same thing, so your question is not clear at all. And why would it be "wrong" to speak and eat at the same time? finir de manger does not mean finir d'avaler And you're mentioning only part of my answer where I said it was a question of vocabulary. That's why I chose different examples.

    – Laure
    8 hours ago











  • @Laure I think the question was clear, but it was indeed wordy. I have summarized it. There is nothing wrong in speaking and eating at the same time, I just have the feeling that it is unlikely that the subject of the French sentence above will start speaking what he has to say before fully finishing his meal (which would make the 2 actions sequential) and therefore the sentence with the "futur simple" sounds odd, but I may be wrong. The purpose of this question is simply to obtain the opinion of others. Thanks for the help anyway!

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago





















  • " conjugating "finir" in the "futur simple" tense would ... imply simultaneity of eating and speaking" and "the subject will start to speak while he finishes eating in that sentence" mean the same thing, so your question is not clear at all. And why would it be "wrong" to speak and eat at the same time? finir de manger does not mean finir d'avaler And you're mentioning only part of my answer where I said it was a question of vocabulary. That's why I chose different examples.

    – Laure
    8 hours ago











  • @Laure I think the question was clear, but it was indeed wordy. I have summarized it. There is nothing wrong in speaking and eating at the same time, I just have the feeling that it is unlikely that the subject of the French sentence above will start speaking what he has to say before fully finishing his meal (which would make the 2 actions sequential) and therefore the sentence with the "futur simple" sounds odd, but I may be wrong. The purpose of this question is simply to obtain the opinion of others. Thanks for the help anyway!

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago



















" conjugating "finir" in the "futur simple" tense would ... imply simultaneity of eating and speaking" and "the subject will start to speak while he finishes eating in that sentence" mean the same thing, so your question is not clear at all. And why would it be "wrong" to speak and eat at the same time? finir de manger does not mean finir d'avaler And you're mentioning only part of my answer where I said it was a question of vocabulary. That's why I chose different examples.

– Laure
8 hours ago





" conjugating "finir" in the "futur simple" tense would ... imply simultaneity of eating and speaking" and "the subject will start to speak while he finishes eating in that sentence" mean the same thing, so your question is not clear at all. And why would it be "wrong" to speak and eat at the same time? finir de manger does not mean finir d'avaler And you're mentioning only part of my answer where I said it was a question of vocabulary. That's why I chose different examples.

– Laure
8 hours ago













@Laure I think the question was clear, but it was indeed wordy. I have summarized it. There is nothing wrong in speaking and eating at the same time, I just have the feeling that it is unlikely that the subject of the French sentence above will start speaking what he has to say before fully finishing his meal (which would make the 2 actions sequential) and therefore the sentence with the "futur simple" sounds odd, but I may be wrong. The purpose of this question is simply to obtain the opinion of others. Thanks for the help anyway!

– Alan Evangelista
8 hours ago







@Laure I think the question was clear, but it was indeed wordy. I have summarized it. There is nothing wrong in speaking and eating at the same time, I just have the feeling that it is unlikely that the subject of the French sentence above will start speaking what he has to say before fully finishing his meal (which would make the 2 actions sequential) and therefore the sentence with the "futur simple" sounds odd, but I may be wrong. The purpose of this question is simply to obtain the opinion of others. Thanks for the help anyway!

– Alan Evangelista
8 hours ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5
















Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit aura sonné (B) ;-)



I'll answer right after the last DONG! A starts after B is achieved.



Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit sonnera (B)



I'll answer as soon as I can notice the bell ringing.
That is between the first and the last DONG! process A starts during process B. Some kind of simultaneity. Approximative simultaneity.



You could well argue that I can't tell if it's midnight before having counted the last DONG!
All right so, let's take some characteristic ring instead of midnight : l'angelus, le glas...



From that, you'll understand that we do can use dès que in order to mean simultaneity as far as we accept some approximation.




I could have found other examples such as Je rentrerai dès qu'il aura neigé (snowing is finished)/ je rentrerai dès qu'il neigera (I'll come back after the first flakes, that is to say while it's still swnowing)

From these examples, You might incidentally notice that :



A dès que B + futur antérieur => References to the END of processus B



A dès que B + futur simple => References to the BEGINNING of processus B






share|improve this answer




























  • The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago



















-1
















In the absolute there is an inconsistency in this sentence, the reason being that "dès que" is the indication of a point in time. It's made flagrant by an amplification.




  • L'hymne sera diffusé dès que le vaisseau fera son trajet de la Terre à Mars. (Le trajet prend quelque chose comme 200 jours.)


As from the first to the last of the 200 odd days the spaceship is accomplishing its trip, we have a multitude of points of reference, we don't understand.



You can only specify an action that occurs at an absolute point in time or a point idealised as such, or the end of an action. There is not much of a margin for diverging from this absolute.




  • Dès que l'engin aura explosé un gaz nocif commencera à se diffuser dans l'atmosphère.


In the example above, although an explosion is rather a point action by most standards, it is better to use "aura explosé" than "explosera", although this latter choice is acceptable.



As the action "finir de manger" is not at all of the sort that occurs at an absolute point in time but is an action that takes definitely some time, for example in a meal it could be the time taken for the dessert, the inconsistency of the formulation is also present, although one might not feel that as sharply because of the verb and the context.



If we consider a point action simultaneity is the norm but only in that case.




  • L'explosion sera amorcée dès que le contact sera fait.


Here the use of the future in both clauses sounds right.



The start of the explosion and the coming into existence of the contact are not yet perfectly simultaneous but for most practical purposes they can be considered to be.



There are however perfect examples but they imply point actions or states since "dès que" implies a point in time; one finds them for instance in the domain of astronomy where the realisation of certain angular measures correspond to simultaneous phenomena.



All of this indicates that either you must say



"Il parlera dès qu'il aura fini de manger."



because "avoir fini de manger" describes a state and not an action as does on the contrary "finir de manger" and there is no simultaneity of action, or you must say



"Il parlera pendant qu'il finira de manger.",



and in this case there is simultaneity.






share|improve this answer




























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "299"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });















    draft saved

    draft discarded
















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ffrench.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39598%2fcan-d%25c3%25a8s-que-imply-simultaneity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5
















    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit aura sonné (B) ;-)



    I'll answer right after the last DONG! A starts after B is achieved.



    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit sonnera (B)



    I'll answer as soon as I can notice the bell ringing.
    That is between the first and the last DONG! process A starts during process B. Some kind of simultaneity. Approximative simultaneity.



    You could well argue that I can't tell if it's midnight before having counted the last DONG!
    All right so, let's take some characteristic ring instead of midnight : l'angelus, le glas...



    From that, you'll understand that we do can use dès que in order to mean simultaneity as far as we accept some approximation.




    I could have found other examples such as Je rentrerai dès qu'il aura neigé (snowing is finished)/ je rentrerai dès qu'il neigera (I'll come back after the first flakes, that is to say while it's still swnowing)

    From these examples, You might incidentally notice that :



    A dès que B + futur antérieur => References to the END of processus B



    A dès que B + futur simple => References to the BEGINNING of processus B






    share|improve this answer




























    • The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

      – Alan Evangelista
      8 hours ago
















    5
















    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit aura sonné (B) ;-)



    I'll answer right after the last DONG! A starts after B is achieved.



    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit sonnera (B)



    I'll answer as soon as I can notice the bell ringing.
    That is between the first and the last DONG! process A starts during process B. Some kind of simultaneity. Approximative simultaneity.



    You could well argue that I can't tell if it's midnight before having counted the last DONG!
    All right so, let's take some characteristic ring instead of midnight : l'angelus, le glas...



    From that, you'll understand that we do can use dès que in order to mean simultaneity as far as we accept some approximation.




    I could have found other examples such as Je rentrerai dès qu'il aura neigé (snowing is finished)/ je rentrerai dès qu'il neigera (I'll come back after the first flakes, that is to say while it's still swnowing)

    From these examples, You might incidentally notice that :



    A dès que B + futur antérieur => References to the END of processus B



    A dès que B + futur simple => References to the BEGINNING of processus B






    share|improve this answer




























    • The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

      – Alan Evangelista
      8 hours ago














    5














    5










    5









    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit aura sonné (B) ;-)



    I'll answer right after the last DONG! A starts after B is achieved.



    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit sonnera (B)



    I'll answer as soon as I can notice the bell ringing.
    That is between the first and the last DONG! process A starts during process B. Some kind of simultaneity. Approximative simultaneity.



    You could well argue that I can't tell if it's midnight before having counted the last DONG!
    All right so, let's take some characteristic ring instead of midnight : l'angelus, le glas...



    From that, you'll understand that we do can use dès que in order to mean simultaneity as far as we accept some approximation.




    I could have found other examples such as Je rentrerai dès qu'il aura neigé (snowing is finished)/ je rentrerai dès qu'il neigera (I'll come back after the first flakes, that is to say while it's still swnowing)

    From these examples, You might incidentally notice that :



    A dès que B + futur antérieur => References to the END of processus B



    A dès que B + futur simple => References to the BEGINNING of processus B






    share|improve this answer















    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit aura sonné (B) ;-)



    I'll answer right after the last DONG! A starts after B is achieved.



    Je vous répondrai (A) dès que minuit sonnera (B)



    I'll answer as soon as I can notice the bell ringing.
    That is between the first and the last DONG! process A starts during process B. Some kind of simultaneity. Approximative simultaneity.



    You could well argue that I can't tell if it's midnight before having counted the last DONG!
    All right so, let's take some characteristic ring instead of midnight : l'angelus, le glas...



    From that, you'll understand that we do can use dès que in order to mean simultaneity as far as we accept some approximation.




    I could have found other examples such as Je rentrerai dès qu'il aura neigé (snowing is finished)/ je rentrerai dès qu'il neigera (I'll come back after the first flakes, that is to say while it's still swnowing)

    From these examples, You might incidentally notice that :



    A dès que B + futur antérieur => References to the END of processus B



    A dès que B + futur simple => References to the BEGINNING of processus B







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 8 hours ago

























    answered 8 hours ago









    aCOSwtaCOSwt

    6,2061 gold badge5 silver badges27 bronze badges




    6,2061 gold badge5 silver badges27 bronze badges
















    • The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

      – Alan Evangelista
      8 hours ago



















    • The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

      – Alan Evangelista
      8 hours ago

















    The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago





    The "approximate simultaneity" definition and the example with the snow made the matter clearer. Now I understand it.

    – Alan Evangelista
    8 hours ago













    -1
















    In the absolute there is an inconsistency in this sentence, the reason being that "dès que" is the indication of a point in time. It's made flagrant by an amplification.




    • L'hymne sera diffusé dès que le vaisseau fera son trajet de la Terre à Mars. (Le trajet prend quelque chose comme 200 jours.)


    As from the first to the last of the 200 odd days the spaceship is accomplishing its trip, we have a multitude of points of reference, we don't understand.



    You can only specify an action that occurs at an absolute point in time or a point idealised as such, or the end of an action. There is not much of a margin for diverging from this absolute.




    • Dès que l'engin aura explosé un gaz nocif commencera à se diffuser dans l'atmosphère.


    In the example above, although an explosion is rather a point action by most standards, it is better to use "aura explosé" than "explosera", although this latter choice is acceptable.



    As the action "finir de manger" is not at all of the sort that occurs at an absolute point in time but is an action that takes definitely some time, for example in a meal it could be the time taken for the dessert, the inconsistency of the formulation is also present, although one might not feel that as sharply because of the verb and the context.



    If we consider a point action simultaneity is the norm but only in that case.




    • L'explosion sera amorcée dès que le contact sera fait.


    Here the use of the future in both clauses sounds right.



    The start of the explosion and the coming into existence of the contact are not yet perfectly simultaneous but for most practical purposes they can be considered to be.



    There are however perfect examples but they imply point actions or states since "dès que" implies a point in time; one finds them for instance in the domain of astronomy where the realisation of certain angular measures correspond to simultaneous phenomena.



    All of this indicates that either you must say



    "Il parlera dès qu'il aura fini de manger."



    because "avoir fini de manger" describes a state and not an action as does on the contrary "finir de manger" and there is no simultaneity of action, or you must say



    "Il parlera pendant qu'il finira de manger.",



    and in this case there is simultaneity.






    share|improve this answer






























      -1
















      In the absolute there is an inconsistency in this sentence, the reason being that "dès que" is the indication of a point in time. It's made flagrant by an amplification.




      • L'hymne sera diffusé dès que le vaisseau fera son trajet de la Terre à Mars. (Le trajet prend quelque chose comme 200 jours.)


      As from the first to the last of the 200 odd days the spaceship is accomplishing its trip, we have a multitude of points of reference, we don't understand.



      You can only specify an action that occurs at an absolute point in time or a point idealised as such, or the end of an action. There is not much of a margin for diverging from this absolute.




      • Dès que l'engin aura explosé un gaz nocif commencera à se diffuser dans l'atmosphère.


      In the example above, although an explosion is rather a point action by most standards, it is better to use "aura explosé" than "explosera", although this latter choice is acceptable.



      As the action "finir de manger" is not at all of the sort that occurs at an absolute point in time but is an action that takes definitely some time, for example in a meal it could be the time taken for the dessert, the inconsistency of the formulation is also present, although one might not feel that as sharply because of the verb and the context.



      If we consider a point action simultaneity is the norm but only in that case.




      • L'explosion sera amorcée dès que le contact sera fait.


      Here the use of the future in both clauses sounds right.



      The start of the explosion and the coming into existence of the contact are not yet perfectly simultaneous but for most practical purposes they can be considered to be.



      There are however perfect examples but they imply point actions or states since "dès que" implies a point in time; one finds them for instance in the domain of astronomy where the realisation of certain angular measures correspond to simultaneous phenomena.



      All of this indicates that either you must say



      "Il parlera dès qu'il aura fini de manger."



      because "avoir fini de manger" describes a state and not an action as does on the contrary "finir de manger" and there is no simultaneity of action, or you must say



      "Il parlera pendant qu'il finira de manger.",



      and in this case there is simultaneity.






      share|improve this answer




























        -1














        -1










        -1









        In the absolute there is an inconsistency in this sentence, the reason being that "dès que" is the indication of a point in time. It's made flagrant by an amplification.




        • L'hymne sera diffusé dès que le vaisseau fera son trajet de la Terre à Mars. (Le trajet prend quelque chose comme 200 jours.)


        As from the first to the last of the 200 odd days the spaceship is accomplishing its trip, we have a multitude of points of reference, we don't understand.



        You can only specify an action that occurs at an absolute point in time or a point idealised as such, or the end of an action. There is not much of a margin for diverging from this absolute.




        • Dès que l'engin aura explosé un gaz nocif commencera à se diffuser dans l'atmosphère.


        In the example above, although an explosion is rather a point action by most standards, it is better to use "aura explosé" than "explosera", although this latter choice is acceptable.



        As the action "finir de manger" is not at all of the sort that occurs at an absolute point in time but is an action that takes definitely some time, for example in a meal it could be the time taken for the dessert, the inconsistency of the formulation is also present, although one might not feel that as sharply because of the verb and the context.



        If we consider a point action simultaneity is the norm but only in that case.




        • L'explosion sera amorcée dès que le contact sera fait.


        Here the use of the future in both clauses sounds right.



        The start of the explosion and the coming into existence of the contact are not yet perfectly simultaneous but for most practical purposes they can be considered to be.



        There are however perfect examples but they imply point actions or states since "dès que" implies a point in time; one finds them for instance in the domain of astronomy where the realisation of certain angular measures correspond to simultaneous phenomena.



        All of this indicates that either you must say



        "Il parlera dès qu'il aura fini de manger."



        because "avoir fini de manger" describes a state and not an action as does on the contrary "finir de manger" and there is no simultaneity of action, or you must say



        "Il parlera pendant qu'il finira de manger.",



        and in this case there is simultaneity.






        share|improve this answer













        In the absolute there is an inconsistency in this sentence, the reason being that "dès que" is the indication of a point in time. It's made flagrant by an amplification.




        • L'hymne sera diffusé dès que le vaisseau fera son trajet de la Terre à Mars. (Le trajet prend quelque chose comme 200 jours.)


        As from the first to the last of the 200 odd days the spaceship is accomplishing its trip, we have a multitude of points of reference, we don't understand.



        You can only specify an action that occurs at an absolute point in time or a point idealised as such, or the end of an action. There is not much of a margin for diverging from this absolute.




        • Dès que l'engin aura explosé un gaz nocif commencera à se diffuser dans l'atmosphère.


        In the example above, although an explosion is rather a point action by most standards, it is better to use "aura explosé" than "explosera", although this latter choice is acceptable.



        As the action "finir de manger" is not at all of the sort that occurs at an absolute point in time but is an action that takes definitely some time, for example in a meal it could be the time taken for the dessert, the inconsistency of the formulation is also present, although one might not feel that as sharply because of the verb and the context.



        If we consider a point action simultaneity is the norm but only in that case.




        • L'explosion sera amorcée dès que le contact sera fait.


        Here the use of the future in both clauses sounds right.



        The start of the explosion and the coming into existence of the contact are not yet perfectly simultaneous but for most practical purposes they can be considered to be.



        There are however perfect examples but they imply point actions or states since "dès que" implies a point in time; one finds them for instance in the domain of astronomy where the realisation of certain angular measures correspond to simultaneous phenomena.



        All of this indicates that either you must say



        "Il parlera dès qu'il aura fini de manger."



        because "avoir fini de manger" describes a state and not an action as does on the contrary "finir de manger" and there is no simultaneity of action, or you must say



        "Il parlera pendant qu'il finira de manger.",



        and in this case there is simultaneity.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 7 hours ago









        LPHLPH

        17.5k1 gold badge8 silver badges35 bronze badges




        17.5k1 gold badge8 silver badges35 bronze badges


































            draft saved

            draft discarded



















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to French Language Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ffrench.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39598%2fcan-d%25c3%25a8s-que-imply-simultaneity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Taj Mahal Inhaltsverzeichnis Aufbau | Geschichte | 350-Jahr-Feier | Heutige Bedeutung | Siehe auch |...

            Baia Sprie Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Demografie | Politică și administrație | Arii naturale...

            Nicolae Petrescu-Găină Cuprins Biografie | Opera | In memoriam | Varia | Controverse, incertitudini...