We had already mentioned it: saying “I went to Monoprix” is as absurd as saying “I spent the winter at Intermarché”. We’ll explain why in a few lines.
To be or to go?
Let’s take our example again: “I went to Monoprix”; how would you say the same thing in the present or the future?
- Would you say “I’m at Monoprix” or “I’m going to Monoprix”?
- Would you say “I will be at Monoprix” or “I will go to Monoprix”?
If all four expressions are possible, you will note that they do not have the same meaning, but when you say “I have been to Monoprix”, what you mean is not that you have been there summer (within the meaning of be located somewhere), but you are there go (within the meaning of surrender somewhere). It is therefore appropriate to say “I went to Monoprix”.
(Editor’s note: this article is not sponsored by Monoprix: go ahead or don’t go ahead; all we ask is that you say it correctly).
Yes, but the use?
Some sites claim that according to Google, there are more occurrences in literature and in the press of “I have been” than of “I have been”. Is this not proof that usage contradicts the rule? Well no. The only thing this demonstrates is that a poorly done Google search returns incorrect results. If we look, as here, for the occurrences of “I was” and “I went”, we include in the lot all the uses corrects of “I was” (for example, “I was sick” or “I was caught short”, the meaning of which has nothing to do with “I was at Monoprix”). By adding the prepositions “à”, “au” and “chez” to “I was”, we realize that “je suis allé” is, by far, the most used turn of phrase.
OUR FRENCH LANGUAGE FILE
The pompom
If you want to win a prize in bad language, don’t say “I went to the hairdresser”, but “I went to the hairdresser”. For what ? The answer here.
