Word order in French sentences

[Gänsefüßchen]

I'm a bit confused about the word order in French. Could someone please tell me whether these sentences are correct:

1) Dans un mois il part pour l'Australie.
Il part dans un mois pour l'Australie.
Il part pour l'Australie dans un mois.

2) Le Centre de sécurité sociale a fermé jeudi dernier avant l'heure.
Jeudi dernier, le Centre de sécurité sociale a fermé avant l'heure.

3) Nous avons reglé notre facture hier.
Hier, nous avons reglé notre facture.

Is a comma always necessary if there is some adverbial construction in the beginning?

[guyome]

1) All three sentences look natural enough to me. Although the placement of "dans un mois" may mean that they are answers to slightly different questions, or that the emphasis differs (but maybe that's just me).

2) I prefer sentence #2 (as well as "Le Centre de sécurité sociale a fermé avant l'heure jeudi dernier."). I'm not sure exactly why. Maybe because "jeudi dernier avant l'heure" gives me the impression that closing on Thursday is what constituted closing early (as if it should have closed on Friday).
But, to be fair, I problably wouldn't notice it in normal conversation.

3) Both are fine. But, like in 1), I feel they would answer different questions:
- Qu'avez-vous fait hier ?
- Hier, nous avons réglé notre facture.

vs.

- Quand avez-vous réglé votre facture ?
- Nous avons réglé notre facture hier.

Is a comma always necessary if there is some adverbial construction in the beginning?

I think so.

[Cainntear]

Is a comma always necessary if there is some adverbial construction in the beginning?

It's about it being out of its grammatical place.
In English, we do this a lot... cf. We do this a lot in English.

1) All three sentences look natural enough to me. Although the placement of "dans un mois" may mean that they are answers to slightly different questions, or that the emphasis differs (but maybe that's just me).

2) I prefer sentence #2 (as well as "Le Centre de sécurité sociale a fermé avant l'heure jeudi dernier."). I'm not sure exactly why. Maybe because "jeudi dernier avant l'heure" gives me the impression that closing on Thursday is what constituted closing early (as if it should have closed on Friday).
But, to be fair, I problably wouldn't notice it in normal conversation.

3) Both are fine. But, like in 1), I feel they would answer different questions:
- Qu'avez-vous fait hier ?
- Hier, nous avons réglé notre facture.

vs.

- Quand avez-vous réglé votre facture ?
- Nous avons réglé notre facture hier.

The shift of emphasis is caused by some of the subtle rules that are very rarely discussed.

Many languages like to start with known information to give context to new information. (Which is the case in both English and French.)
eg
Where's you mother?
Mum [known information] is at work [new information].

So
"Yesterday, I went to Paris" implies that yesterday is only information that gives context
"I went to Paris yesterday" implies that yesterday is not simple context, but important information.

[Gänsefüßchen]

[...]
2) I prefer sentence #2 (as well as "Le Centre de sécurité sociale a fermé avant l'heure jeudi dernier."). I'm not sure exactly why. Maybe because "jeudi dernier avant l'heure" gives me the impression that closing on Thursday is what constituted closing early (as if it should have closed on Friday).
But, to be fair, I problably wouldn't notice it in normal conversation.[...]

Thanks for your response. It came up in an exercise where I had to translate a single sentence (without any context). It makes sense that the preferred way of saying it would depend on the specific question asked (it basically works the same in German). The problem is, that I don't know whether my answers, if they differ from the answers in my textbook, are a perfectly possible alternative, unidiomatic or perhaps already dysgrammatical.

[Gänsefüßchen]

Is a comma always necessary if there is some adverbial construction in the beginning?

It's about it being out of its grammatical place.
In English, we do this a lot... cf. We do this a lot in English.

Thank you for your response. I'm not sure what you mean by "grammatical place"? It's as if you're saying that only the predominant word order is grammatical?

The shift of emphasis is caused by some of the subtle rules that are very rarely discussed.

Many languages like to start with known information to give context to new information. (Which is the case in both English and French.)
eg
Where's you mother?
Mum [known information] is at work [new information].

So
"Yesterday, I went to Paris" implies that yesterday is only information that gives context
"I went to Paris yesterday" implies that yesterday is not simple context, but important information.

I know this by the name Thema - Rhema. I guess it is called "Topic and comment" in English?

[Cainntear]

Is a comma always necessary if there is some adverbial construction in the beginning?

It's about it being out of its grammatical place.
In English, we do this a lot... cf. We do this a lot in English.

Thank you for your response. I'm not sure what you mean by "grammatical place"? It's as if you're saying that only the predominant word order is grammatical?

No, not that, but it's kind of messy.

The problem is that this pattern of "fronting" (bringing the thing to the front of the sentence) is actually the most common loofah for some adverbs, so it's hard to use terms like "predominant".

There are grammatical "slots" where there is a natural place for the word to sit. When you move the word elsewhere in a sentence, you're still applying grammar, so it's not ungrammatical. It gains *more* meaning by being moved, and that's all within the rules of grammar....

That probably wasn't very clear... I'll try to come back to this after getting some sleep....

[Gänsefüßchen]

I have another somewhat related question: do I need to repeat the subject if there are two finite verbs that go with it?

E.g. Is it possible to say:
Marion joue de la guitare et chante très bien. (Or only ...et elle chante très bien.)
And how about :
Pendant les vacances, je lis beaucoup et me repose. (Or only ...et je me repose.)

[Le Baron]

I have another somewhat related question: do I need to repeat the subject if there are two finite verbs that go with it?

E.g. Is it possible to say:
Marion joue de la guitare et chante très bien. (Or only ...et elle chante très bien.)
And how about :
Pendant les vacances, je lis beaucoup et me repose. (Or only ...et je me repose.)

You can say e.g: 'Elle compose, chante et joue de la guitare', without repeating the subject. The repetition of the subject depends on the links between the verb list. In the case you give there's no loss of context so it's possible to say: 'Le dimanche elle danse, elle chante et elle cuisine' or le dimanche elle danse, chante et cuisine.'

In the second case you can also omit the subject, but might choose not to:

- Elle est venue me souhaiter un Joyeux Noël et elle m'a aussi apporté une bonne bouteille de vin.
- Elle est venue me souhaiter un Joyeux Noël et m'a aussi apporté une bonne bouteille de vin.

In general it's not obligatory, but style might dictate it. Say if you wanted to give a rhetorical flair: 'Elle est compositrice... elle est guitariste... et elle est chanteuse. Elle a donc du talent!'

Or in a sentence which is not just like a list of verbs related to the subject you can distinguish:

'Tu as peur des chiens et donc tu ne veux pas les caresser..'

[Gänsefüßchen]

Thank you for your response, it was very helpful.

[...]
In general it's not obligatory, but style might dictate it. Say if you wanted to give a rhetorical flair: 'Elle est compositrice... elle est guitariste... et elle est chanteuse. Elle a donc du talent!'

Or in a sentence which is not just like a list of verbs related to the subject you can distinguish:

'Tu as peur des chiens et donc tu ne veux pas les caresser..'

It's a general impression that I have: French sentences seem like speeches with the repetitions, the pronoms toniques and all those est-ce que. But it's difficult for me to feel the border between style choice and grammatical necessity.