Breakdown of Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous, c’est pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
Questions & Answers about Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous, c’est pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
Ce pour quoi is a relative construction that literally means “that for which” or “what … for”.
- Ce = “that / what” (neutral pronoun)
- pour = “for”
- quoi = “which/what” (here, as part of a relative expression)
So Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous literally is:
“That for which we are all working” → more naturally: “What we are all working for”.
It introduces the topic that is then clarified by c’est pour parler librement…. This is a classic French way of emphasizing:
Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous, c’est…
“What we are all working for is…”
Pourquoi (one word) is usually:
- an interrogative: Pourquoi viens-tu ? – “Why are you coming?”
- or a relative adverb: La raison pour laquelle / pourquoi…
Pour quoi (two words) is literally “for what” (preposition + pronoun).
In this sentence, ce pour quoi is built from:
- ce (pronoun)
- pour (preposition that belongs with the verb travailler pour)
- quoi (object of the preposition)
You could, in many contexts, also say Ce pourquoi nous travaillons tous. Both are grammatically possible, but ce pour quoi makes the link with the preposition pour very explicit and is more transparently “that for which”.
This is a cleft sentence, used to emphasize information.
Structure:
Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous,
= “What we are all working for,”
(this is the emphasized topic)c’est pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
= “is to speak freely with our French friends.”
In more neutral, non-emphatic form, you could say:
- Nous travaillons tous pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
The cleft form (Ce …, c’est …) is very common in spoken and written French for focus and emphasis.
It can look repetitive to an English speaker, but in French it’s natural:
- travailler pour [quelque chose] = “to work for [something]”
- pour quoi = literally “for what”
- c’est pour parler = “it is in order to speak / it is for speaking”
So the three pour each have a role:
- Ce pour quoi → “that for which” / “what … for”
- Implied travailler pour in nous travaillons tous → “we work for”
- c’est pour parler → “is (in order) to speak”
You could reduce repetition by using a simpler structure:
- Nous travaillons tous pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
But in the original, the emphasis justifies the repetition, and it doesn’t sound wrong or clumsy to a native speaker.
You could say:
- Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous est de parler librement avec nos amis français.
This is grammatically correct, but it sounds a bit more formal and heavier. In everyday French:
- c’est pour + infinitif is much more natural:
- Ce pour quoi nous travaillons tous, c’est pour parler…
Both mean roughly the same thing. The c’est pour + infinitif pattern is common, clear, and idiomatic in speech and writing.
In cleft sentences of the type Ce …, c’est …, French almost always uses c’est, not il est, because:
- Ce is a neutral demonstrative pronoun (like “this/that” in English).
- C’est is the standard way to comment on or identify ce:
- Ce livre, c’est mon préféré.
- Ce que je veux, c’est partir.
- Ce pour quoi nous travaillons, c’est pour parler…
Using il est would sound ungrammatical here. The pattern Ce …, c’est … is fixed and very frequent.
- Travailler pour + infinitif is the standard way to express a goal or aim:
- Nous travaillons pour réussir. – “We work in order to succeed.”
- Ils travaillent pour gagner leur vie.
So nous travaillons tous (pour) → “we are all working (in order)”.
- Travailler à + noun/infinitif has a different nuance:
- travailler à un projet – work on a project
- travailler à améliorer quelque chose – work on improving something
If you said:
- Ce à quoi nous travaillons tous, c’est…
it would mean roughly “What we are all working on is…”, which is not quite the same idea as “working for (a goal)”.
French often uses pour + infinitif to express purpose:
- Je viens pour t’aider. – “I’m coming to help you.”
- Nous étudions pour réussir. – “We study to succeed.”
Similarly:
- c’est pour parler librement
= “it’s (in order) to speak freely”
If you conjugated it, like c’est pour que nous parlions librement, that would be a subjunctive clause and more formal/complex. The infinitive construction is:
- simpler,
- very common,
- and clearly expresses intention or purpose.
librement = “freely”
- without feeling blocked or inhibited
- without constraint, fear, or difficulty expressing yourself
couramment = “fluently”
- with ease and correctness in the language
- good command of grammar, vocabulary, etc.
The sentence:
- … parler librement avec nos amis français
emphasizes the feeling of freedom and ease in conversation, more than pure linguistic fluency.
If you say:
- … parler couramment avec nos amis français,
you focus on speaking French fluently from a language skill perspective. Both can be correct, but they don’t highlight exactly the same thing.
In French:
As a noun for a nationality:
- les Français = “(the) French people” → capital F
As an adjective describing a person/thing:
- des amis français – French friends
- la cuisine française – French cuisine
→ no capital letter
Here, français is an adjective describing amis, so it takes a lowercase f:
- nos amis français = “our French friends” (friends who are French)
Most adjectives of nationality in French come after the noun:
- un ami français
- un professeur italien
- une étudiante américaine
So nos amis français follows the regular pattern:
noun (amis) + adjective (français).
Only a small set of common adjectives (like grand, petit, jeune, vieux, beau, bon, mauvais, nouveau…) typically come before the noun. Nationality adjectives do not belong to that group, so they go after.
Yes, there’s a nuance:
parler avec quelqu’un
- emphasizes conversation / mutual exchange
- “to talk with someone”
parler à quelqu’un
- more neutral, can be more one‑way (speaking to someone)
- “to talk to someone”
In everyday use, both can mean “talk with”, but avec is especially natural if you want to stress a back‑and‑forth conversation with your French friends, which fits the idea of chatting freely.
Both are possible, but they feel different:
Nous travaillons tous
- most natural / standard word order
- simply means “we all work / we are all working”
Nous tous travaillons
- possible, but sounds more emphatic or marked, sometimes a bit literary or solemn
- strongly highlights nous tous (“we all, every one of us”)
In this sentence, nous travaillons tous is the normal, idiomatic choice.
Yes, a more straightforward version would be:
- Nous travaillons tous pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
This keeps the same basic meaning (the purpose of our work is to talk freely with our French friends) without the emphatic cleft structure.
Other natural rephrasings:
- La raison pour laquelle nous travaillons tous, c’est pour parler librement avec nos amis français.
- On travaille tous pour pouvoir parler librement avec nos amis français. (more informal, with on = “we”)
The original just adds emphasis with Ce pour quoi …, c’est ….