18

The Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte wrote on Twitter in French, German, and Dutch:

restez chez soi, bleib zuhause, blijf thuis

Is the French phrase restez chez soi grammatically correct? Here restez would be the second person plural imperative, but then shouldn't the pronoun be vous rather than soi (restez chez vous), which would appear to be the infinitive (rester chez soi)? Why is it (not) correct?

gerrit
  • 283
  • 1
  • 8

3 Answers3

18

Your analysis is fine. It is grammatically incorrect. It should be "Rester chez soi" (infinitive), or "Restez chez vous".

LPH
  • 1
  • 3
  • 17
  • 56
Ouch42
  • 438
  • 3
  • 8
  • 2
    You might want to add that all other pronouns would also have been correct (but with different meanings): Restez chez moi, restez chez toi, restez chez elle, restez chez lui, restez chez nous, restez chez vous, restez chez elles, restes chez eux**. – jlliagre Dec 17 '20 at 13:22
  • 2
    @jlliagre What would restez chez toi would mean? "You [formal] stay with you [informal]"? Is there a context in which this would make sense? – gerrit Dec 17 '20 at 13:54
  • 1
    @gerrit No, that would be: You (plural) stay at your (singular, informal) home. (You all, stay at thy home). – jlliagre Dec 17 '20 at 14:10
  • 6
    e.g.: Toi avec tes virus, restez chez toi ! – jlliagre Dec 17 '20 at 14:23
  • 3
    An important point is that "rester chez soi" and "restez* chez soi" are pronounced the same in French, making this spelling error understandable. – WaterMolecule Dec 17 '20 at 22:39
  • Is the grammar at all changed by the sentence being an order? – Mast Dec 18 '20 at 07:56
  • @Mast : I am not sure to understand your question, but "rester chez soi" being infinitive, can't be an order. So "restez chez vous!" would apply, in order to be an order. – Ouch42 Dec 18 '20 at 08:57
  • @Ouch42 it was meant as an order, so that's the first problem then. Thanks. – Mast Dec 18 '20 at 15:52
  • @Mast I touched upon this in another answer. – Relaxed Dec 18 '20 at 15:53
  • @jlliagre: I would assume the third person would be wrong here as the message is to not visit others. – Flater Dec 18 '20 at 19:12
  • @Flater Indeed, the reason why I wrote "but with different meanings". I was talking about grammatical correctness, not about accuracy. – jlliagre Dec 18 '20 at 21:26
  • (analyse → analysis (analyse is a verb)) – Peter Mortensen Dec 19 '20 at 14:31
6

It's technically grammatically incorrect but I think that's failing to see the forest for the trees. This tweet is part of a cross-border campaign and, as the whole context shows, the French phrase is apparently lifted from the video and the subtitles in the Belgian prime minister's contribution rather than something the Dutch prime minister wrote out of the blue.

In this context, the most striking thing linguistically is that “rester chez soi” is not a good translation for “blijf thuis” or “bleib zuhause”. If it was, the “z” would only be a small typo or transcription error. As others have pointed out, “rester” and “restez” sound exactly the same in French so the spelling mistake doesn't make the whole sentence feel agrammatical.

In fact, the closest French translation would be “reste à la maison”. A less literal but possibly more idiomatic translation would be “ne sortez pas”. Incidentally, both of these refer to one's home (as opposed to the whole/country region as “thuis” or “zuhause” might in Dutch or German).

If you consider that officials typically use a more formal register in France than in the Netherlands (not necessarily true when comparing Belgium and Germany), it could be “restez chez vous” (German: “bleiben Sie zuhause”, which is what Laschet — but not De Croo or Rutte — says in the video). That's also the plural form in French (German: “bleibt zuhause”). This discrepancy in tone and meaning is the main reason why that phrase feels improper and presumably hasn't been produced by a native French speaker.

Relaxed
  • 1,127
  • 5
  • 6
  • 1
    I did notice the German form was inappropriate as well (it's not grammatically wrong, but it addresses a single person informally). – gerrit Dec 18 '20 at 14:17
  • @gerrit why shouldn't a Prime Minister address people informally? – user253751 Dec 18 '20 at 20:32
  • @user253751 One can discuss formal or informal (in Germany and I believe France too politicians would always address voters with the formal form), but in this context using the singular form is simply not right. – gerrit Dec 18 '20 at 22:01
  • Re: "‘rester chez soi’ is not a good translation for ‘blijf thuis’ or ‘bleib zuhause’": Could you explain why this is? Is rester chez soi inherently awkward in some way, or is it just that the German and Dutch differ from it in some way, or something else? (Sorry if this is a stupid question -- I don't know German or Dutch, so I may be missing something obvious.) – ruakh Dec 19 '20 at 21:27
  • @ruakh "Rester chez soi" just means something quite different, closer to English "staying home", German "zuhause bleiben", Dutch "thuis blijven". – Relaxed Dec 20 '20 at 08:48
  • @Relaxed: Thanks for your reply, but what do blijf thuis and bleib zuhause mean? How are they different from rester chez soi? (Could you adjust your answer so that it doesn't assume knowledge of German and Dutch?) – ruakh Dec 20 '20 at 08:57
  • @ruakh I have the feeling I already explained that in the answer and do not assume knowledge of German or Dutch, will see if I can clarify further. What's your native language / the one you want to use as a reference? Is the difference between rester chez soi et reste chez toi clear to you? Bleib zuhause = reste chez toi = stay home / zuhause bleiben = rester chez soi = staying home. – Relaxed Dec 20 '20 at 12:21
  • @Relaxed: My primary language is English. I also speak French fairly well. And I think I now understand your objection, thank you: I think you're saying that an infinitive like « rester chez soi » can't be used as an order? But I don't think that's true in general; for example, signs like « ne pas fumer » ("no smoking") and « ne pas stationner » ("no parking") are commonplace. It's a kind of officialese used when addressing the public. – ruakh Dec 20 '20 at 18:55
  • @ruakh I am basing this on my intuition as a native French speaker who is also fluent in German and has some knowledge of Dutch. I am not trying to infer a rule from it or claim it's true in general but I am positive that “rester chez soi” is not an order and not a good translation for the Dutch/German sentences, even if you're right that an infinitive can be as in “attendre ici”. It's not uncommon in cookbooks either but I feel it would be odd to use “rester chez soi” in that way or as a complete sentence (something like “rester chez soi est recommandé” would be more acceptable). – Relaxed Dec 20 '20 at 22:15
  • 2
    @Relaxed Dans une liste de choses à faire/ne pas faire ce serait possible d'avoir l'infinitif; ça reviendrait à la même chose que ton « ...est recommandé ». – Thélée_Lavoie Dec 20 '20 at 22:55
  • @20goto10 Oui j'ai songé à ça après avoir mentionné les livres de cuisine, ce serait possible. Ça reste un exemple un peu artificiel et assez éloigné du contexte d'origine. Ça fonctionne d'ailleurs de la même manière en allemand, on écrit généralement une recette de cuisine à l'infinitif mais là les phrases d'origine sont bien à l'impératif. – Relaxed Dec 20 '20 at 22:58
  • Oui, je réagissais seulement aux commentaires, indépendamment du contexte de la question. – Thélée_Lavoie Dec 20 '20 at 23:54
-3

rester chez soi is grammatically correct in my opinion. As an example you would say « stay at your own place is better than staying at your mother’s place ». Rester chez soi est mieux que chez sa mère But hey, this is one man opinion

lucTiber
  • 149
  • 4