My interpretation was that it was a musical version of the French movie Le Retour de Martin Guerre (the one on which Sommersby is based). Therefore the translation of “Martin est Guerre” would be “Martin is War” while the translation of “Martin est guère” would be “Martin is little/small/few” which would also work.
“C’est bon mais ce n’est pas du beurre” - which translates to “It’s good but it’s not butter” whereas “C’est bon mais ce n’est pas le beurre” translates to “It’s good but it’s not THE butter”
Sounds like the translator was taking poetic license. I’m under the impression that you’re multi-lingual, so I’m sure you’re aware that there’s a pretty good debate as to whether translators should aim for the letter or the spirit of the originals. Personally, I favor the second side.
French is riddled with exceptions. I guess that’s why it’s easier for a francophone to learn English than the opposite. IANATeacher, but here it is:
Du is “some” or “of” in some cases. It’s the masculine form. The feminine form is “de la”. Now, in English when people talk of war, it’s not “some of the war” ie: a part of the war, but “the war” or just “war”. In French it would be “La guerre” for “war” or “the war” depending on the rest of the sentence.
For the butter, now… If you ask a Francophone “Veux-tu du beurre?” It means “Do you want some butter?” and if you ask “Veux-tu le beurre?” You asked them if they wanted THE butter as in passing along the butter plate. I don’t know how to explain it properly, but I can give an example: You could have: “C’est bon, mais ça ne goutte pas le beurre” where you can use le, but the sentence ends up meaning “it’s good but it doesn’t taste like butter.” I’m sorry if my explanation isn’t too clear, French is my native tongue, but some of it was learned so long ago that the “rules” are forgotten, and you end up going by feel. C’est pas du beurre, I have seen many times in print. C’est pas le beurre, just feels wrong. Like you expect him (her?) to tell you what it is. “C’est pas le beurre, c’est le …” It’s not the butter then what is it? But if it’s not butter, then it’s probably Margarine!
Not to nitpick, but… goutte is “drop”, like goutte d’eau.
You mean to say “C’est bon, mais ça ne goût pas le buerre”.
FWIW, k.os, French is my second language and since I spend so much time thinking, talking and reading in French, I am constantly having problems with English. So I’m not trying to be obnoxious, just correct a faute d’orthographe ! Besides, it isn’t every day that I get to correct a native speaker… (insert smiley here)
Wouldn’t it be “c’est bon, mais ce n’est pas de beurre,” since the de + article construction for quantity changes in most cases to only “de” in the negative? E.g.,
C’est bon, et bien sûr, c’est du beurre.
C’est bon, mais ce n’est pas de beurre.
I don’t have a grammar book to check so I might be confused on this rule.
Yes, goutte is “Drop”. Thanks for pointing that out. It should be Goûte. From the infinitive Goûter. Or for goût to be by itself, you could say, C’est bon, mais ça n’as pas le goût du beurre. I really should use accents, but like a lot of francophones who started using computers a while back (I adore my C=64!) I seem to have learned to type without accents. If im writing freehand, no problem, but if Im typing, I keep forgetting them…
Missbunny
“De” could be translated as “of”. IE: La plus belle de toutes = The prettiest of them all. De la crème de blé = Cream of Wheat. If you want to use “de beurre” you can say “C’est bon mais ça n’as pas de goût de beurre” but it changes the meaning. Now that sentence means “It’s good but it has no butter taste”. I wish I could explain it better, but besides saying that “Beurre” is masculine in french and that “Du” is what you use in this case. “De la” is the feminine, so you could say: “C’est bon, mais ce n’est pas de la margarine!” since margarine is feminine. Hope this clears this up a bit…
k.os—I had to think for a minute why C’est bon mais ce n’est pas de la margarine actually works. My first instinct was to say that it doesn’t, but I realized while I was writing the post to ask you what you were thinking when it became clear—I think. Here’s what’s in my head at the moment:
Ce n’est pas de la margarine: Celle-ci manque les qualités de la margarine. Ce n’est pas de margarine: Euh… je n’ai aucune idée, en fait. Si on dit «Il n’a pas de margarine», ça marche, mais je ne vois pas le différence entre les deux. J’ai pensé que j’ai compris quelque chose, mais s’il a eu jamais vrai, cette chose m’a échappée!
Donc, veuille essayer m’expliquer? Cela m’interesse. Quand je peux, je chercher l’explication dans mon bouquin Becherelle assez vite que je peux. Si je trouve l’explication avant, je la posterai (c’est une verbe?) ici.
Hmmmm. C’est une excellente question. Y répondre est un peu difficile car je suis porté a dire “C’est évident, c’est du beurre!” mais je vais essayer de trouver quelque chose d’autre…
Pourquoi est-ce que ça marche avec “Il n’a pas de margarine” mais pas avec “ce n’est pas de margarine”? Une réponse est que dans le cas de “Il n’a pas…” on a le verbe “avoir” tandis que dans l’autre phrase on a le verbe “être”. Dans le cas de “Il n’a pas”, la phrase parle d’une personne (“IL”) qui ne possède pas de cette chose que l’on appèle margarine. Dans la phrase “Ce n’est pas…” on parle d’une substance qui ne possède pas le caracteristiques de la margarine. Peut-être que les phrases se ressemblent, mais il s’agit en fait de deux animaux complêtement différents. Soit dit en passant, “Ce n’est pas de la margarine” fonctionne très bien, puisque margarine est féminin…
(Bon dieu que ca peut être compliqué d’essayer d’expliquer quelque chose de si simple sans dire “c’est comme ça!”:D)
A little more info: the phrase “C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre” was supposedly muttered by the French General Pierre Bosquet on seeing the charge of the Light Brigade.