Learn Hardcore French: Paul trouve ce goût amer ridicule, mais il sait que le médicament aide à guérir. - Paul finds that bitter taste ridiculous, but he knows the medicine helps to heal.

Ce goût est ridicule. → This taste is ridiculous. (simple description)
Paul trouve ce goût ridicule. → Paul finds this taste ridiculous. (his opinion)

Using trouver adds the idea that this is Paul’s personal judgment, not an objective property of the taste.

What exactly is the structure of trouve ce goût amer ridicule?

Breakdown:

Paul → subject
trouve → verb
ce goût amer → direct object (COD)
ridicule → attribut du COD (predicative adjective of the object)

So the pattern is:

[subject] + trouver + [direct object] + [adjective describing that object]

Examples with the same pattern:

Je trouve ce film intéressant. → I find this film interesting.
Nous avons trouvé la décision injuste. → We found the decision unfair.

Here, amer belongs inside the noun phrase (ce goût amer), while ridicule is the predicative adjective added by trouve.

Why is it ce goût amer ridicule and not something like ce ridicule goût amer?

Two different things are happening:

amer (bitter) is a descriptive / physical adjective. It normally comes after the noun:
- un goût amer → a bitter taste
ridicule here is not another simple adjective in the noun phrase. It is the adjective linked to trouve (Paul’s judgment).

The real internal structure is:

Paul trouve [ce goût amer] [ridicule].

So we have:

Noun phrase: ce goût amer (this bitter taste)
Predicative adjective: ridicule (he finds it ridiculous)

If you wrote ce ridicule goût amer, that would mean:

this ridiculous bitter taste (the taste itself is already labelled “ridiculous” in the noun phrase, not as Paul’s reaction)

The original sentence focuses on Paul’s judgment, not on an inherent label of the taste.

Could we also say Paul trouve ridicule ce goût amer? Is that correct?

Yes, that is grammatically correct:

Paul trouve ce goût amer ridicule.
Paul trouve ridicule ce goût amer.

Both mean essentially the same thing: Paul finds this bitter taste ridiculous.

The difference is only a matter of emphasis and style:

Paul trouve ce goût amer ridicule. → neutral, very common.
Paul trouve ridicule ce goût amer. → slightly more emphasis on ridicule (putting the judgment first).

Why is it ce and not cet or cette before goût?

Ce / cet / cette are all forms of “this/that” and they depend on:

gender
first sound of the next word

Rules:

ce → before a masculine noun starting with a consonant
- ce goût (masc., starts with consonant g)
cet → before a masculine noun starting with a vowel or mute h
- cet homme, cet esprit, cet hiver
cette → before any feminine noun
- cette idée, cette boisson

Since goût is masculine and starts with a consonant, we must use ce goût.

Why isn’t amer written amère with an -e at the end?

Because adjectives in French agree with the gender and number of the noun, not with the abstract idea.

goût is a masculine singular noun.
So its adjective must also be masculine singular: amer.

Forms of amer:

Masculine singular: amer → un goût amer
Feminine singular: amère → une boisson amère
Masculine plural: amers → des goûts amers
Feminine plural: amères → des boissons amères

Here we have ce goût amer → masculine singular, so amer.

Why do we say il sait que... and not il connaît que...?

savoir and connaître both translate as “to know”, but they’re used differently.

savoir + clause (que...) or savoir + infinitive
- Il sait que le médicament aide à guérir.
  → He knows that the medicine helps to heal.
- Je sais nager. → I know how to swim.
connaître + noun / pronoun
- Je connais ce médicament. → I know this medicine (I’m familiar with it).
- Elle connaît Paul. → She knows Paul.

You cannot say ✗ il connaît que le médicament aide...
After que with a full clause, you must use savoir, not connaître.

What is the role of que in il sait que le médicament aide à guérir?

Here, que is a subordinating conjunction meaning “that” (often dropped in English but required in French):

il sait que le médicament aide à guérir
literally: he knows that the medicine helps to heal

This que:

does not mean “who/whom/which” here
is just introducing a content clause (what he knows)

In English you might say:

He knows (that) the medicine helps you get better.

In French, you must keep que; you cannot omit it.

Why is it le médicament and not un médicament or just médicament without an article?

French almost always needs an article before a singular countable noun.

le médicament → the medicine / the drug
- Refers to a specific medicine already known from context or situation.
un médicament → a medicine / a drug
- Introduces it as one (unspecified) medicine among others.

Using no article (∅ médicament) is generally not possible in standard French in this position.

The sentence suggests Paul and the listener know exactly which medicine is being discussed, so le médicament is natural.

Why is médicament used instead of something like la médecine?

un médicament → a medicine / drug / pill / treatment product (a concrete item you take)
la médecine → medicine as a field (medical science) or sometimes medical practice

Here, we are talking about something you take that helps you heal, so le médicament is the correct term.

Examples:

Ce médicament est très efficace. → This medicine is very effective.
Elle étudie la médecine. → She studies medicine (at university).

Why is it aide à guérir and not just aide guérir or aide pour guérir?

The normal pattern is:

aider à + infinitive

So:

Le médicament aide à guérir.
→ The medicine helps (you) to get better / to heal.

Compare:

Il m’aide à comprendre. → He helps me to understand.
Un dictionnaire t’aide à écrire correctement. → A dictionary helps you write correctly.

Other options:

aider quelqu’un à faire quelque chose
- Ce médicament l’aide à guérir. → This medicine helps him/her to recover.

✗ aide guérir is incorrect in standard French.
aide pour guérir can occur in some contexts, but aider à + infinitive is the standard, neutral structure here.

Why isn’t it aide à se guérir if “heals himself” is meant?

guérir can be:

intransitive: to get better, to recover
- Il va guérir. → He will recover / get better.
transitive: to cure someone
- Ce médecin l’a guéri. → This doctor cured him.

In Le médicament aide à guérir, guérir is used intransitively, in a general sense:

helps (people) to recover
subject is “people who take it”, understood from context, not stated.

If you say:

Le médicament aide à se guérir.

it sounds like “helps to heal oneself”, which is possible but less natural and more reflexive/psychological in tone. For a general medical statement, aide à guérir is the normal idiomatic choice.

How is the “present tense” being used here? Is it only about now?

The présent de l’indicatif in French is used both for:

What is happening now
- Paul trouve ce goût amer ridicule. → right now, as he tastes it.
General truths / habitual facts
- Il sait que le médicament aide à guérir.
  → He knows (generally) that the medicine helps you get better (whenever it is taken).

So in the second part, the present describes a general, timeless truth about the medicine, not just a single moment.

Is the comma before mais obligatory in ..., mais il sait que...?

In French, a comma before mais is very common and usually recommended when it links two clauses:

Paul trouve ce goût amer ridicule, mais il sait que le médicament aide à guérir.

You will also sometimes see it without a comma in informal writing, but:

In careful or formal French: comma + mais is the norm.
In English, you can write “..., but he knows that...” similarly.

So, in this sentence, the comma before mais is correct and stylistically good.