It traumatized entire generations of schoolchildren. And still continues to poison us on a daily basis. This particularly twisted grammatical rule could see its final hours.
If the French language is renowned for its lexical richness, it is also feared for its grammatical complexity, which makes it particularly difficult to learn and, above all, to master. Plural nouns, agreement of adjectives, conjugation of verbs, invariable phrases or concordance of tenses, so many subtleties which make up both the beauty and the difficulty of our language.
Among the many rules that make up French grammar, the agreement of the past participle undoubtedly constitutes a real headache, which has given difficulty to entire generations of schoolchildren, and continues to pose a problem for many adults. And particularly when it is conjugated with the auxiliary avoir.
Indeed, the agreement of the past participle with the auxiliary avoir is a particularly tricky exercise, because of its numerous exceptions and nuances. The basic rule is already somewhat flawed, since the verb conjugated in the past participle with the auxiliary avoir is invariable, except when the direct object complement (COD) to which it applies is “anteposed”, that is- that is to say placed before him. As in the expressions “the decisions I made” or “the awards he won”.
To make matters worse, this already complicated rule can become even more tortuous, when the past participle with avoir is followed by a verb in the infinitive. In this case, the past participle only agrees if the COD is placed before it AND if it is the author of the action expressed by the verb in the infinitive. Otherwise, if the COD undergoes the action, then the past participle remains invariable.
Faced with these complexities, the Higher Council of National Education (CSEN) published, in June 2024, a report putting forward several avenues for rationalizing French spelling. And among them, one of the most striking concerns precisely the agreement of the past participle. The proposition is simple and logical: with the auxiliary avoir, the past participle is always invariable, whatever the position of the COD.
Before crying about the impoverishment of the French language and the leveling down, let’s take a moment to examine the arguments put forward in support of this proposition. First of all, the current rule of past participle agreement with avoir is an exception to the general rule of verb agreement with the subject. It therefore constitutes an inconsistency in the French linguistic system.
Then, as Gilles Siouffi, professor of French language at Sorbonne University, points out, in an interview given to the magazine VousNousNousthere are only very few cases where the agreement of the past participle with avoir provides an informational element useful for understanding a message: “It is only anecdotal cases, with a chain of antecedents – such as “the part of the cake that I ate” – which would be concerned. We also notice that the ambiguity exists in the present tense (“the part of the cake that I eat”), and that it apparently doesn’t bother anyone. »
Several studies have also shown that the majority of French speakers are insensitive to the good agreement of the past participle with avoir, both in writing and orally. Finally, the last nail in the coffin, the time devoted to learning this agreement would be 80 hours per year in primary school, for a rule mastered by barely 20% of students at the end. Precious time, which would undoubtedly be better spent studying other aspects of our language.
Like all proposals for spelling reforms, this one will certainly provoke heated reactions, which will probably be more ideological than rational. Let us draw a parallel with the IT world: programs and protocols, like languages, are human creations forged over time, by adding successive layers, which are not always coherent with each other.
Thus, programs and protocols are regularly “reformed” and “refactored”, to become more logical, more efficient and more robust. If we consider that the French language is, among other things, a system aimed at enabling understanding of the world and the exchange of information between individuals, then it is not sacrilege to want to make it evolve. Which does not prevent us from preserving its history and subtleties.