Because understanding how to use these two tenses is so tricky, and perhaps because there's a certain amount of overlap in their meaning, some myths have developed about the differences between them and they can be misleading. Don't believe them. Myth #1 You may hear that the imparfait is used for events that happened a long time ago, and the passé composé for more recent events (or the other way round). This is complete baloney. The following story is very recent:
The following story took place over 2000 years ago:
(Gaul was the name of the area of Europe that corresponds to modern-day France) Myth #2 You may hear that the imparfait is used to talk about events that last a long time, whereas the passé composé is used for events that are over quickly. This idea, too, should not be given the time of day.
Myth #3 Sometimes people say that the passé composé is used for completed actions, whereas the imparfait is used for actions that are still going on in the present. This idea is not as wrong as the previous myths, but it's not very correct either. The difference is not that the passé composé is used for completed actions and the imparfait for uncompleted actions. It is more that the passé composé tells you that an action has been completed, whereas the imparfait doesn't concern itself with telling you if an action has been completed or not. The action may, at a later point in time, have been completed. Or it may not. It's left up in the air. (If you ask a passé composé if the action has been completed, it's response will be 'yes'. If you ask an imparfait if the action has been completed, it's response is not 'no', but 'no comment'.)
And furthermore, if you want to talk about an action that started in the past and is (for sure) still going on in the present, you don't use the passé composé, and you don't use the imparfait, you use the present tense, with depuis.
For an explanation of the differences between the imparfait and the passé composé, move forward through the following seven pages...
|