French 2 Quiz: Near Future For Plans And Predictions
9 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Near Future For Plans And PredictionsQuestion 1 of 9

Amélie writes in her journal: « Ce soir, ma sœur et moi allons regarder un film, mais d'abord je vais finir mes devoirs. Mon ami Karim va sûrement nous rejoindre plus tard — il dit qu'il va apporter de la pizza. Si tout va bien, on va passer une super soirée ! »

Amélie's journal entry contains five uses of the futur proche. Which of the following analyses of those uses is most accurate?

All five uses are grammatically correct, but the phrase 'si tout va bien' is not a true futur proche — va here is the present tense of aller used as a full verb meaning 'goes well,' while the other four instances are genuine futur proche constructions.
All five expressions are identical in function — each represents a personal plan Amélie has made — and none can be classified as a prediction since journal entries only record intentions.
The phrase 'il va apporter de la pizza' is incorrect because Amélie is reporting what Karim said, and reported speech about future events requires the conditionnel rather than the futur proche.
The phrase 'on va passer une super soirée' is grammatically incorrect because on cannot be the subject of the futur proche when it refers to a group that includes the speaker.
← Back to quizzes

French 2 Quiz

French 2 Quiz: Near Future For Plans And Predictions

Practice Near Future For Plans And Predictions in French 2 with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Near Future For Plans And Predictions, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for French 2.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

Amélie writes in her journal: « Ce soir, ma sœur et moi allons regarder un film, mais d'abord je vais finir mes devoirs. Mon ami Karim va sûrement nous rejoindre plus tard — il dit qu'il va apporter de la pizza. Si tout va bien, on va passer une super soirée ! »

Amélie's journal entry contains five uses of the futur proche. Which of the following analyses of those uses is most accurate?

  1. All five uses are grammatically correct, but the phrase 'si tout va bien' is not a true futur proche — va here is the present tense of aller used as a full verb meaning 'goes well,' while the other four instances are genuine futur proche constructions. (correct answer)
  2. All five expressions are identical in function — each represents a personal plan Amélie has made — and none can be classified as a prediction since journal entries only record intentions.
  3. The phrase 'il va apporter de la pizza' is incorrect because Amélie is reporting what Karim said, and reported speech about future events requires the conditionnel rather than the futur proche.
  4. The phrase 'on va passer une super soirée' is grammatically incorrect because on cannot be the subject of the futur proche when it refers to a group that includes the speaker.
Explanation: When analyzing uses of aller in French, you need to distinguish between two completely different roles the verb can play: aller as an auxiliary (forming the futur proche with a following infinitive) versus aller as a full verb meaning "to go" or, in expressions like aller bien, "to be going well." This question tests exactly that distinction. Answer A is correct because four of the five constructions genuinely follow the futur proche formula — aller (conjugated) + infinitive: allons regarder, vais finir, va rejoindre, and va apporter. The fifth instance, si tout va bien, is different: here va is a standalone present-tense verb meaning "goes well." There is no infinitive following it. It's a conditional clause about the current state of things, not a future construction at all. Answer B is wrong because it conflates intention with prediction. Il va sûrement nous rejoindre and on va passer une super soirée are clearly predictions about someone else's behavior and the evening's outcome — not personal plans Amélie controls. The futur proche can express both intentions and predictions depending on context. Answer C is wrong because it misapplies a grammar rule. Reported speech in French does not require the conditionnel simply because someone is relaying another person's statement. The conditionnel is used in reported speech only when the original statement was in a past tense context. Since Karim apparently said this recently, the futur proche is perfectly natural. Answer D is wrong because on is a completely valid subject for the futur proche. French uses on routinely to mean "we," and it takes third-person singular conjugation — on va passer is grammatically standard. Your study tip: always ask whether aller has an infinitive after it. No infinitive? It's not futur proche.

Question 2

Contexte : Luc et Sophie discutent de leurs vacances. Luc dit : « Sophie et moi, on va partir en Espagne le mois prochain. » Sophie ajoute : « Oui, et nos amis Thomas et Élodie vont nous rejoindre là-bas. » Puis Luc corrige Sophie : « Non, seulement Thomas va venir — Élodie ne va pas pouvoir venir parce qu'elle a un examen. »

Based on the passage, which of the following statements about the use of the futur proche is accurate?

  1. The phrase 'ne va pas pouvoir venir' is incorrectly formed because you cannot stack two infinitives after a conjugated form of aller in the futur proche.
  2. The phrase 'on va partir' should be 'nous allons partir' because on cannot be used as the subject of the futur proche in formal written French.
  3. All uses of the futur proche in the passage are grammatically correct, including the double-infinitive construction 'ne va pas pouvoir venir,' which is standard in French. (correct answer)
  4. The phrase 'vont nous rejoindre' is incorrect because object pronouns cannot appear between the conjugated aller and the infinitive in the futur proche.
Explanation: When you see a question about the futur proche, ask yourself two things: Is the conjugated form of aller correctly matched to its subject? And are the infinitives that follow it properly structured? This passage tests both of those instincts. The futur proche follows the pattern aller (conjugated) + infinitive. When that infinitive is itself a modal verb like pouvoir, devoir, or vouloir, it naturally takes its own infinitive after it — creating a "stacked" construction. So ne va pas pouvoir venir breaks down as: va (conjugated aller, negated) → pouvoir (first infinitive) → venir (second infinitive). This is completely standard French grammar. Answer C is correct: every futur proche construction in the passage is well-formed. A is wrong because it describes a rule that simply doesn't exist. French regularly chains two infinitives together (je vais pouvoir finir, il va vouloir partir), and this is considered normal and correct. B is wrong because on is perfectly acceptable as a subject for the futur proche — in both spoken and written French. While nous may be preferred in very formal registers, on va partir is not grammatically incorrect; it's just more informal in register. D is wrong because object pronouns are required to appear between the conjugated verb and the infinitive in French — vont nous rejoindre is exactly where nous belongs. Placing it after the infinitive would actually be the error. Study tip: Remember that stacking infinitives (futur proche + modal + infinitive) is a common and correct French structure — don't let "double infinitive" constructions trick you into thinking something is wrong.

Question 3

Marie parle à son amie Chloé de ses projets pour le week-end. Elle dit : « Ce week-end, je   (aller) au marché avec ma mère, et ensuite nous   (préparer) un grand dîner pour toute la famille. » Chloé répond : « Super ! Mon frère et moi, on   (regarder) le match de football samedi soir. »

In the passage above, which sequence correctly fills in all three blanks using the near future (futur proche) with appropriate subject-verb agreement?

  1. vais aller — allons préparer — allons regarder
  2. vais aller — allons préparer — va regarder (correct answer)
  3. vais — allons préparer — allons regarder
  4. irai — allons préparer — va regarder
Explanation: When using the futur proche in French, you combine the conjugated form of aller with an infinitive. The critical skill here is matching aller to its subject — each blank has a different subject, so you need a different conjugation each time. Let's walk through the three blanks. First, "je   au marché" — the subject is je, so aller becomes vais, giving you vais aller. Second, "nous   un grand dîner" — the subject is nous, so aller becomes allons, giving you allons préparer. Third, "mon frère et moi, on   le match" — this is the tricky one. In spoken French, on is commonly used to mean we, but grammatically it always takes a third-person singular verb, just like il or elle. So aller becomes va, giving you va regarder. That makes B the correct sequence. Choice A fails on the third blank — it uses allons regarder, treating on as if it were nous, which is a very common mistake. Choice C fails immediately on the first blank: vais alone is not futur proche — you need the infinitive aller after it to complete the construction. Choice D uses irai in the first blank, which is the simple future (futur simple), not futur proche — a completely different tense. Your takeaway: always remember that on = third-person singular verb, even when it means "we." When you see on as a subject, reach for va, not allons.

Question 4

Read the following short dialogue:

Professeur : Qu'est-ce que vous allez faire après les examens ? Étudiant A : Moi, je vais chercher un stage dans une entreprise internationale. Étudiant B : Nous, on va probablement voyager un peu avant de commencer à travailler. Étudiant C : Et moi, je vais me concentrer sur mes études supérieures — je vais peut-être faire un master.

Which of the following observations about the use of the futur proche in this dialogue is incorrect?

  1. The word probablement in Étudiant B's response is incompatible with the futur proche because this tense only expresses definite plans, not probable ones. (correct answer)
  2. Étudiant C's use of peut-être alongside futur proche (je vais peut-être faire) is grammatically and pragmatically acceptable in French.
  3. The futur proche in Étudiant A's sentence expresses a personal plan or intention rather than a prediction about an external event.
  4. The construction 'avant de commencer à travailler' in Étudiant B's sentence is not in the futur proche; it is an infinitive clause introduced by the preposition avant de.
Explanation: When a question asks you to identify an incorrect observation about a grammar concept, your job is to spot the false rule — the one that misrepresents how the tense actually works. Here, the focus is the futur proche (aller + infinitif), which expresses near-future intentions, plans, and even possibilities. The incorrect observation is A. The futur proche is not limited to expressing definite plans — it's entirely natural to combine it with words like probablement, peut-être, or sûrement to soften certainty. Saying on va probablement voyager is perfectly normal French. The tense signals future orientation; adverbs then calibrate how confident the speaker is. Claiming futur proche only works with definite plans is simply a false rule. B is correct (and therefore not the answer). Je vais peut-être faire un master is grammatically and pragmatically fine — peut-être modulates the degree of certainty without breaking any rule about futur proche. C is also correct. Étudiant A's sentence (je vais chercher un stage) clearly expresses personal intention — a classic, textbook use of futur proche. This observation accurately describes what's happening. D is correct as well. Avant de commencer à travailler is not futur proche at all — it's an infinitive clause using the fixed prepositional construction avant de + infinitif. Recognizing that not every infinitive in a sentence belongs to the futur proche structure is an important distinction. Study tip: Watch for answer choices that assign overly rigid rules to flexible tenses. French adverbs of probability (probablement, peut-être, sûrement) pair freely with futur proche — memorizing a few examples will help you immediately flag false restrictions like the one in A.

Question 5

A student is conjugating the sentence "You all (formal/plural) are going to answer his questions carefully." into French using the futur proche. The student produces: « Vous allez répondre soigneusement à ses questions. » Which of the following best evaluates this sentence?

  1. The sentence is incorrect because répondre à requires the indirect object pronoun lui to replace ses questions, and a futur proche sentence is only complete when all noun objects are pronominalized.
  2. The sentence is incorrect because répondre governs the preposition de rather than à in standard French, so the phrase should read répondre de ses questions.
  3. The sentence is incorrect because long adverbs of manner like soigneusement must precede the conjugated verb allez rather than follow the infinitive répondre in futur proche constructions.
  4. The sentence is correct; allez is the proper conjugation of aller for vous, répondre is correctly used as the infinitive, and the adverb and prepositional phrase are appropriately placed. (correct answer)
Explanation: When evaluating a French sentence in the futur proche, you need to check four things: the conjugation of aller, the infinitive form of the main verb, the correct governing preposition, and adverb placement. Running through each element systematically will prevent you from falling for distractors that sound technical but are factually wrong. The sentence « Vous allez répondre soigneusement à ses questions » holds up perfectly under scrutiny. Allez is the correct vous form of aller. Répondre appears as a bare infinitive, exactly as futur proche requires. Crucially, répondre does govern the preposition à — répondre à quelque chose is standard French. Finally, the adverb soigneusement is placed between the infinitive and the prepositional phrase, which is a natural and accepted position. Answer D is correct. Now, let's dismantle the distractors. A is wrong on two counts: there is no rule requiring objects to be pronominalized for a futur proche sentence to be "complete," and nothing here demands lui replace ses questions — pronominalization is optional unless explicitly instructed. B is factually incorrect; répondre takes à, not de. Confusing governing prepositions is a common trap, but répondre de means "to be accountable for," a different meaning entirely. C invents a grammar rule that doesn't exist. French adverbs of manner can follow the infinitive in compound tenses and futur proche constructions — there is no strict rule banishing long adverbs before the conjugated verb. As a study tip: when answer choices cite specific "rules," verify whether those rules actually exist in French grammar — exam distractors often sound authoritative while being completely fabricated.

Question 6

Julien tells his roommate: « Je pense que l'avion va atterrir en retard à cause de la tempête. » A classmate claims this sentence is grammatically incorrect because Julien is expressing a prediction about a future event rather than a personal plan, and therefore the simple future (futur simple) must be used instead. Which of the following best evaluates the classmate's claim?

  1. The classmate is correct; the futur proche can only express personal plans that the speaker controls directly, not predictions about external events such as weather-related delays, for which the futur simple is required.
  2. The classmate is partially correct; while futur proche can sometimes express predictions, it requires an explicit time marker such as bientôt or ce soir in the clause for the prediction reading to be grammatically acceptable.
  3. The classmate is incorrect; the futur proche (aller + infinitive) is grammatically valid for both near-term predictions about external events and personal plans, making Julien's sentence correct as written. (correct answer)
  4. The classmate is correct; when the grammatical subject is an inanimate noun such as l'avion, the futur simple must be used in place of the futur proche, regardless of the speaker's intent.
Explanation: When you encounter questions about French future tenses, the key is understanding what each tense can do, not just what it's most commonly used for. A frequent misconception is that the futur proche (aller + infinitif) is restricted to personal plans the speaker controls, while the futur simple handles everything else — but this oversimplifies French grammar significantly. In reality, the futur proche is grammatically valid for expressing both near-term personal plans and predictions about external events, including things entirely outside the speaker's control. Julien saying « l'avion va atterrir en retard » is perfectly correct French — he's using futur proche to express his prediction about an imminent event, which is one of its core, standard uses. Answer C captures this accurately: futur proche works for near-term predictions about external events, making Julien's sentence grammatically sound. Answer A is wrong because it invents a rule that doesn't exist in French grammar — the futur proche is not limited to events the speaker personally controls. Answer B introduces a false requirement: futur proche predictions do not need an explicit time marker like bientôt or ce soir to be grammatically acceptable; the construction itself implies nearness. Answer D is completely fabricated — there is no grammar rule in French requiring futur simple when the subject is inanimate. L'avion va décoller, la pluie va tomber, and similar constructions with inanimate subjects are entirely standard. As a study tip, watch out for answer choices that state absolute restrictions on the futur proche — this exam frequently tests whether you know that both future tenses overlap in usage, and that context, not rigid rules, often guides the choice.

Question 7

A student wants to say "We are not going to forget to call them tomorrow." in French using the futur proche. Which option correctly translates this sentence, paying attention to negation placement, pronoun placement, and verb forms?

  1. Nous n'allons pas oublier de les appeler demain. (correct answer)
  2. Nous allons ne pas oublier de les appeler demain.
  3. Nous n'allons pas oublier de leur appeler demain.
  4. Nous n'allons pas les oublier d'appeler demain.
Explanation: When translating a negative sentence in futur proche, you need to juggle three things simultaneously: negation placement, object pronoun placement, and the correct pronoun choice (les vs. leur). In futur proche, the structure is subject + aller (conjugated) + infinitive. Negation (ne...pas) wraps around the conjugated verb — aller — not the infinitive. So the correct frame is: Nous n'allons pas + [infinitive phrase]. This gives you option A: Nous n'allons pas oublier de les appeler demain. The object pronoun les (them, direct object) sits directly before appeler, the verb it belongs to, which is standard pronoun placement with infinitives. Option B places ne pas around the infinitive (ne pas oublier) rather than around allons. This is a classic negation trap — in futur proche, you negate aller, not the action verb. Option C uses leur instead of les. This is a critical pronoun error: appeler quelqu'un takes a direct object, so you need les (direct object pronoun). Leur is an indirect object pronoun used with verbs like téléphoner à or parler à. Since the verb here is appeler, leur is incorrect. Option D misplaces the pronoun les — it attaches it to oublier (les oublier) rather than to appeler, changing the meaning entirely to "not forget them" rather than "not forget to call them." Study tip: Always ask two questions with object pronouns: (1) which verb does the pronoun belong to? and (2) does that verb take a direct or indirect object? Getting both right is essential for French-2 pronoun questions.

Question 8

Consider the following two sentences: (I) « Je vais me lever tôt demain matin. » and (II) « Je me vais lever tôt demain matin. » A student argues that both sentences are equally acceptable in standard French because the reflexive pronoun me belongs to the subject je and can therefore appear either before or after vais. Which response best addresses this argument?

  1. The student is correct that both are acceptable; word order with reflexive pronouns in futur proche is flexible and depends on stylistic preference.
  2. The student is incorrect; only sentence (I) is correct. In futur proche with reflexive verbs, the reflexive pronoun must be placed before the infinitive, not before the conjugated aller, because it belongs to the infinitive, not to aller. (correct answer)
  3. The student is incorrect; only sentence (II) is correct. The reflexive pronoun must immediately follow the subject and precede all other verb forms, including conjugated aller.
  4. The student is partially correct; sentence (II) is standard in spoken French, while sentence (I) is only acceptable in formal written registers.
Explanation: When working with reflexive verbs in the futur proche, you need to think carefully about which verb the reflexive pronoun actually belongs to. The futur proche is constructed with a conjugated form of aller + an infinitive. The reflexive pronoun is not a satellite of aller — it belongs to the reflexive infinitive itself (e.g., se lever). This means the pronoun must stay attached to its infinitive, placed directly before it. That makes B correct. In « Je vais me lever tôt demain matin », the pronoun me sits immediately before lever, which is exactly where it belongs. The structure is: [subject] + [conjugated aller] + [reflexive pronoun] + [infinitive]. This mirrors how object pronouns work in futur proche as well — you'd say Je vais le faire, not Je le vais faire. A is wrong because word order with pronouns in French is not stylistically flexible — it follows strict grammatical rules. Treating it as a matter of preference reflects a fundamental misunderstanding. C is wrong because it inverts the correct logic. Placing me before vais would make the pronoun belong to aller, which is a non-reflexive verb. French speakers never say « Je me vais lever » in standard usage. D is wrong because it fabricates a spoken/written register distinction that doesn't exist here. Sentence (II) is ungrammatical in all registers, not just formal writing. As a study tip: whenever you see a reflexive verb in futur proche, ask yourself which verb owns the pronoun — it always belongs to the infinitive, so keep them together.

Question 9

A French-2 student is asked to rewrite the sentence « Demain, il fait beau et nous sortons en vélo. » (currently in present tense used for future meaning) into the futur proche to make the future meaning explicit. The student writes: « Demain, il va faire beau et nous allons sortir en vélo. » A classmate says this rewrite changes the meaning because the futur proche implies the speaker has control over the weather, which the present tense did not imply. Which of the following best evaluates this claim?

  1. The classmate is correct; the futur proche implies the subject has agency or control over the event, so it is inappropriate for weather predictions where the speaker has no control.
  2. The classmate is partially correct; the rewrite should instead use the futur simple for both clauses to maintain the predictive, non-agentive meaning of the original present-tense-for-future construction.
  3. The classmate is partially correct; using futur proche for 'il va faire beau' is unusual and would more naturally be replaced with the futur simple 'il fera beau,' though 'nous allons sortir' is acceptable.
  4. The classmate is incorrect; the futur proche does not require the subject to have control or agency over the event. It can express predictions about impersonal events such as weather just as validly as plans, and the rewrite is appropriate. (correct answer)
Explanation: When you see a question about French future tenses, focus on what each tense actually expresses grammatically — not assumptions about who controls what. The futur proche (aller + infinitif) expresses events seen as imminent, planned, or anticipated from the speaker's current perspective. Crucially, it carries no requirement that the subject have agency or control over the event. The student's rewrite — « il va faire beau et nous allons sortir en vélo » — is perfectly natural French. Native speakers regularly say « il va pleuvoir » or « il va faire chaud » for weather predictions all the time. The futur proche simply signals that the speaker views the event as connected to the present moment, whether it's a personal plan or an impersonal forecast. D is correct because the classmate's "agency" claim is a false rule with no grammatical basis. Here's why the other choices fail: A repeats the classmate's misconception and treats it as valid, which it isn't. The futur proche works perfectly for impersonal and uncontrollable events. B claims the futur simple is necessary to preserve a "non-agentive" meaning — but again, this agency distinction doesn't exist between these two tenses; both can describe weather events neutrally. C is the trickiest distractor: while « il fera beau » is indeed common and slightly more formal for weather, saying « il va faire beau » is not incorrect or unnatural — so calling it "unusual" overstates the case and still implies a false rule. Your study tip: don't invent rules French doesn't have. The futur proche vs. futur simple distinction is about imminence and certainty, not about subject control.