First, the question of “what.” If we say that the past participant is “agree,” we think that, just like a normal adjective, it changes shape depending on whether it is masculine or feminine, singular or plural. The production of the composite plural is a little more complex. We found that native speakers in the common language do not tend to enter into participatory agreements with having if they are the norm in formal writings. The same goes for reflexive verbs. For example, the formal form of this sentence has a participatory agreement passed with the direct purpose: In reality, speakers do not tend to add agreements with having in the daily discourse. They probably only make these agreements by speaking carefully and thinking about the written language when they speak. So if they don`t read in a scenario, people would generally say: if you`re already talking about something, you later call it something “it” in the position of a direct object prognosis, you have to pay special attention to sex and the number of things you`re talking about. And veiled, we have come to the end of our lessons on the agreement verb in French. There are other specific cases than the ones I mentioned here, but they are what they are: very specific cases, and I decide not to list them here.
I hope, however, that you will take this as proof that French grammar is indeed driven by importance! Don`t forget to read the second part: the agreement of the French past participants. The encirclement of the right conjugation for the French past – and all the good verbal agreements – can make the memory of past events even more painful. In fact, to say that the past of participation is true with the direct object presents itself as a better explanation. This is better because then the same rule explains what happens in some rarer cases of reflexive verbs, where the reflexive pronoun is not really the direct object. In the written form, the endings are basically simple and the same as those of normal adjectives: what is the imperfect? It`s the imperfect past. Simply put, this is the past form you use if you don`t use the compound past. In this case the leg comes before the verb and so the past participant is feminine, although the subject, it, is masculine. This is the simplest case.
In the case of normal verbs (i.e. non-reflective) that accept the role, the participatory precedent is always consistent with the theme.