Pronominal verbs or “verbes pronominaux” also called reflexive verbs hold an important part in the French language. They are always used with reflexive pronouns that replace the subject only. These are me, m’, te, t’, se, s’, nous, vous. Throughout this chapter we will explore the use, the form and the types of the pronominal verbs. We will also learn how to conjugate the pronominal verbs into the present simple, the passé composé, the imperfect tense, the future simple, the subjunctive, the imperative, and the present and past conditional.
A verb in the pronominal form when conjugated into the past conditional always uses the auxiliary “être”.
Let’s conjugate the verb se conduire into the past conditional and the verb conduire and see the difference between the two verbs in terms of the form.
You notice that for the verb “se conduire” we used the auxiliary “être”, whereas for the verb “conduire” we used the auxiliary “avoir”. Notice also that when the auxiliary “être” is used, the past participle agrees with the subject because “se conduire” is a transitive verb that requires a direct object which in this case is the reflexive pronoun.
Let’s take simple examples using the verbs “conduire” and “se conduire” so you understand the difference between the two in terms of the meaning.
Elle aurait conduit ses enfants à commettre un crime.
She apparently drove her children to commit a crime.
Elle se serait très mal conduite.
She apparently behaved very badly.
In the first example, the verb “conduire” which conjugates with the auxiliary ‘avoir” in the past conditional is a transitive verb that needs a direct object and in this case the direct object is “ses enfants”. As you already know, there is no subject/verb agreement between the subject and the verb when we use the auxiliary “avoir” unless the direct object precedes the verb.
In the second example, the verb “se conduire” which always conjugates with the auxiliary “être” in the past conditional is also a transitive verb and in this case the direct object and the subject are both “elle”.
Remember: Not all pronominal verbs are transitive and not all transitive verbs require a direct object. Many of them require an indirect object.
Let’s take the following example:
La vitre se serait cassée.
Apparently, the window broke.
Notice that “se casser” in the example above is a transitive verb and the direct object is “la vitre” expressed by the reflexive pronoun “se”. That’s why the subject and the past participle agree.
Elle se serait cassé la jambe.
I heard that she broke her leg.
Notice that in the second example there is no agreement between the subject and the past participle. This is because she didn’t break herself; she broke her leg.Therefore, the function of the reflexive pronoun here is not of a direct object as it’s the case in the first example.
Let’s take another example:
Elles se seraient offert un voyage aux Antilles.
I heard that they offered themselves a trip to the West Indies.
You notice that in the example above there is no subject/ past participle agreement. This is because “s’offrir” here requires an indirect object. It’s as if we say:
Elles auraient offert à elles mêmes un voyage aux Antilles.
They apparently offered “to” themselves a trip to the West Indies.
“Elles auraient offert un voyage à elles”. So “se” in the example is not used as a direct object but as an indirect object, and as you know there is no subject/past participle agreement when the verb requires an indirect object.
The “est-ce que form: To ask questions using the “est-ce que form” with pronominal verbs in the past conditional, we simply add “est-ce que” to the question.
For example:
Est-ce que vous vous seriez quittés si vous aviez découvert que vous n’étiez pas faits pour vivre ensemble ?
Would you have left each other if you had known that you were not made to live together?
The inversion form: Let’s take the following example: se pardonner. “Pardonner” is an intransitive verb that requires an indirect object not a direct object. Therefore, there is no agreement between the past participle and the subject. We say: pardonner à.
As for the intonation, we just keep the same sentence and add the interrogation mark at the end when we write or we add the intonation of a question when we talk.
For example:
Tu te serais entendue avec lui ?
Would you have got along with him?
The negative form of a pronominal verb in the past conditional is obtained by putting the reflexive pronoun + the auxiliary “être” between “ne” and “pas” then adding the past participle.
A verb in the pronominal form when conjugated into the past conditional always uses the auxiliary “être”.
Let’s conjugate the verb se conduire into the past conditional and the verb conduire and see the difference between the two verbs in terms of the form.
se conduire | conduire |
| Je me serais conduit(e) | J’aurais conduit |
| Tu te serais conduit(e) | Tu aurais conduit |
| Il se serait conduit | Il aurait conduit |
| Elle se serait conduite | Elle aurait conduit |
| On se serait conduit | On aurait conduit |
| Nous nous serions conduit(e)s | Nous aurions conduit |
| Vous vous seriez conduit(e)s | Vous auriez conduit |
| Ils se seraient conduits | Ils auraient conduit |
| Elles se seraient conduites | Elles auraient conduit |
You notice that for the verb “se conduire” we used the auxiliary “être”, whereas for the verb “conduire” we used the auxiliary “avoir”. Notice also that when the auxiliary “être” is used, the past participle agrees with the subject because “se conduire” is a transitive verb that requires a direct object which in this case is the reflexive pronoun.
Let’s take simple examples using the verbs “conduire” and “se conduire” so you understand the difference between the two in terms of the meaning.
Elle aurait conduit ses enfants à commettre un crime.
She apparently drove her children to commit a crime.
Elle se serait très mal conduite.
She apparently behaved very badly.
In the first example, the verb “conduire” which conjugates with the auxiliary ‘avoir” in the past conditional is a transitive verb that needs a direct object and in this case the direct object is “ses enfants”. As you already know, there is no subject/verb agreement between the subject and the verb when we use the auxiliary “avoir” unless the direct object precedes the verb.
In the second example, the verb “se conduire” which always conjugates with the auxiliary “être” in the past conditional is also a transitive verb and in this case the direct object and the subject are both “elle”.
Remember: Not all pronominal verbs are transitive and not all transitive verbs require a direct object. Many of them require an indirect object.
Let’s take the following example:
La vitre se serait cassée.
Apparently, the window broke.
Notice that “se casser” in the example above is a transitive verb and the direct object is “la vitre” expressed by the reflexive pronoun “se”. That’s why the subject and the past participle agree.
Elle se serait cassé la jambe.
I heard that she broke her leg.
Notice that in the second example there is no agreement between the subject and the past participle. This is because she didn’t break herself; she broke her leg.Therefore, the function of the reflexive pronoun here is not of a direct object as it’s the case in the first example.
Let’s take another example:
Elles se seraient offert un voyage aux Antilles.
I heard that they offered themselves a trip to the West Indies.
You notice that in the example above there is no subject/ past participle agreement. This is because “s’offrir” here requires an indirect object. It’s as if we say:
Elles auraient offert à elles mêmes un voyage aux Antilles.
They apparently offered “to” themselves a trip to the West Indies.
“Elles auraient offert un voyage à elles”. So “se” in the example is not used as a direct object but as an indirect object, and as you know there is no subject/past participle agreement when the verb requires an indirect object.
Interrogative form
As you know there are three ways of asking questions in French:| The est-ce que form: Standard form The subject/verb or auxiliary inversion: Formal form The intonation: Colloquial form |
The “est-ce que form: To ask questions using the “est-ce que form” with pronominal verbs in the past conditional, we simply add “est-ce que” to the question.
For example:
Est-ce que vous vous seriez quittés si vous aviez découvert que vous n’étiez pas faits pour vivre ensemble ?
Would you have left each other if you had known that you were not made to live together?
The inversion form: Let’s take the following example: se pardonner. “Pardonner” is an intransitive verb that requires an indirect object not a direct object. Therefore, there is no agreement between the past participle and the subject. We say: pardonner à.
| Me serais-je pardonné ? Te serais-tu pardonné ? Se serait-il pardonné ? Se serait-elle pardonné ? Se serait-on pardonné ? Nous serions-nous pardonné ? Vous seriez-vous pardonné ? Se seraient-ils pardonné ? Se seraient-elles pardonné ? |
As for the intonation, we just keep the same sentence and add the interrogation mark at the end when we write or we add the intonation of a question when we talk.
For example:
Tu te serais entendue avec lui ?
Would you have got along with him?
The negative form
Let’s conjugate the verb ne pas se salir in the past conditional.| Je ne me serais pas sali(e) Tu ne te serais pas sali(e) Il ne se serait pas sali Elle ne se serait pas salie On ne se serait pas sali Nous ne nous serions pas sali(e)s Vous ne vous seriez pas sali(e)s Ils ne se seraient pas salis Elles ne se seraient pas salies |
The negative form of a pronominal verb in the past conditional is obtained by putting the reflexive pronoun + the auxiliary “être” between “ne” and “pas” then adding the past participle.