Learn Hardcore French: Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux pendant toute la séance. - I find it strange that Paul remains silent during the whole session.

je trouve que + indicative
- Used for facts, neutral opinions:
- Je trouve que Paul a raison. – I think Paul is right.
je trouve + adjective + que + subjunctive
- Used when you judge something with an adjective expressing emotion or appreciation (étrange, bizarre, normal, étonnant, regrettable, etc.).
- Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux. – I find it strange that Paul stays silent.

So je trouve étrange que is the pattern “I find it + adjective + that …” and it triggers the subjunctive in the following clause.

Why is it reste and not reste? How can I tell this is the subjunctive?

In this sentence, reste is the present subjunctive, 3rd person singular of rester.

The problem: for rester, the indicative and subjunctive forms are identical in the present for je / tu / il / elle / on / ils / elles:

Indicative: il reste
Subjunctive: qu’il reste

You know it’s the subjunctive here because of the structure before it:

je trouve étrange que → expressing a judgment/emotion → this pattern calls for the subjunctive.

There’s no spelling difference; only the grammar pattern and context tell you it’s subjunctive.

Why does je trouve étrange que require the subjunctive? It sounds like just an opinion.

French distinguishes between:

Opinion / belief stated neutrally:
→ Je trouve que… / Je pense que… / Je crois que…
→ normally followed by the indicative because they present something as true or likely.
Judgment / emotion / appreciation about a situation:
→ Je trouve étrange que… / Je suis content que… / C’est dommage que…
→ followed by the subjunctive, because the focus is the speaker’s reaction, not the bare fact.

Étrange is an adjective of judgment / evaluation. The structure trouver + adjective + que is one of the classic “subjunctive triggers”:

Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux.
I find it strange that Paul stays silent.

So here, grammar follows the category of the adjective (étrange), not just the verb trouver itself.

Could I say Je trouve que Paul reste silencieux pendant toute la séance instead? What would change?

Yes, and the nuance changes:

Je trouve que Paul reste silencieux…
- More like: I think / I notice that Paul stays silent…
- Neutral statement of opinion or observation.
- Indicative after je trouve que.
Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux…
- Emphasizes your reaction: I think it’s strange that…
- Carries a stronger emotional or evaluative tone.
- Requires the subjunctive.

So:

with que directly after trouve: neutral opinion → indicative.
with étrange between trouve and que: judgment → subjunctive.

In English we say “I find it strange that Paul…”. Where is the “it” in French?

English needs a dummy “it” in this structure (I find it strange that…).
French doesn’t need a dummy pronoun here; it simply uses:

Je trouve étrange que…
literally: I find strange that…

You could make a structure with ce or ça, but it changes slightly:

Je trouve ça étrange que Paul reste silencieux.
Very colloquial, a bit heavy; many speakers would actually avoid ça directly before que here.

More natural options are:

Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux.
Je trouve ça étrange que Paul reste silencieux pendant toute la séance, quand même. (colloquial, with a pause after étrange in speech)

But you do not need to insert an “it”-like pronoun as in English.

Could I say Je trouve étrange que Paul soit silencieux instead of reste silencieux?

Yes, and both are correct, but they’re slightly different:

reste silencieux (from rester = to stay/remain)
- Highlights the idea of remaining silent over a period.
- Fits very well with pendant toute la séance (for the whole session).
soit silencieux (from être = to be)
- Describes a state: that Paul is silent.
- Still compatible with pendant toute la séance, but it focuses less on the continuation and more on the quality/state.

Nuance:

Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux…
→ Focus on him continuing to be silent throughout.
Je trouve étrange que Paul soit silencieux…
→ Focus on the fact that he is (generally / at that time) a silent person.

In this specific sentence, reste silencieux sounds very natural and precise.

Why is it silencieux and not silence?

Because in French, you need an adjective to describe the subject Paul, not a noun:

silencieux is an adjective: silent.
le silence is a noun: silence.

So:

Paul reste silencieux. – Paul remains silent.
(adjective describing Paul)

You could use the noun silence with a different verb:

Paul garde le silence. – Paul keeps silent.
Paul observe le silence. (more formal)

But once you choose rester, you naturally follow with an adjective, hence silencieux and not silence.

Why does silencieux look the same in the singular and in the plural? Shouldn’t there be an extra -s?

Silencieux is one of those adjectives that have the same spelling in masculine singular and masculine plural:

Masculine singular: un homme silencieux
Masculine plural: des hommes silencieux

Feminine forms change:

Feminine singular: une femme silencieuse
Feminine plural: des femmes silencieuses

In your sentence, Paul is singular and masculine, so:

Paul est silencieux.
Paul reste silencieux.

There’s no extra -s because the masculine singular form already ends in -x.

What exactly does séance mean here? Is it like “session,” “class,” or “meeting”?

Séance is a fairly flexible word; its meaning depends on context. It can be:

a session / sitting / meeting (therapy session, work session),
a class / lesson (sports class, cinema showing: une séance de cinéma),
or any kind of scheduled period of activity.

In your sentence, pendant toute la séance simply means “during the whole session/meeting/class”, depending on the context the learner has already been given. The French word itself doesn’t specify exactly what kind of event it is; the situation tells you.

Why is it pendant toute la séance and not pour toute la séance?

French usually uses pendant to express duration over which something actually happens:

pendant deux heures – for two hours
pendant toute la nuit – all night long
pendant toute la séance – during the whole session

Pour can also express duration, but it’s more common for:

planned or intended duration in the future:
- Je pars pour deux semaines. – I’m leaving for two weeks.
expressing purpose:
- C’est pour toi. – It’s for you.

In your sentence, we’re describing what actually happens during that time span.
So pendant toute la séance is the natural, neutral choice.
Pour toute la séance would sound unusual and not idiomatic here.

Could I say durant toute la séance instead of pendant toute la séance?

Yes. Durant and pendant are very close in meaning:

pendant toute la séance – the most common, neutral form.
durant toute la séance – a bit more formal or literary in tone, but perfectly correct.

So:

Je trouve étrange que Paul reste silencieux durant toute la séance.

is grammatically correct and just slightly more formal than the original with pendant.