Learn Hardcore French: Il soigne une vieille dame qui a de la fièvre et soigne aussi un enfant et une autre dame qui ont peur. - He treats an old lady who has a fever and also treats a child and another lady who are afraid.

In this sentence, Il soigne… = “He is treating / looking after (medically)…”
It is often used for medical care: soigner un malade, soigner une blessure.
It can also mean “to take care of” in a more general way (e.g. soigner son apparence = “to take care of one’s appearance”), but in a context with fièvre it clearly means medical treatment.

So it’s closer to “to treat (medically)” than just “to care for” in a vague emotional sense.

Why is it une vieille dame and not une dame vieille?

Most French adjectives normally go after the noun, but a common group (often called BANGS: beauty, age, number, goodness, size) usually go before.

Vieille (old) is an age adjective, so it comes before:
une vieille dame = “an old lady”

You can say une dame vieille, but it sounds more unusual or poetic and puts a special emphasis on “old” (like “a lady who is old” rather than the standard “old lady”). In everyday speech, une vieille dame is the normal order.

Why is it qui a de la fièvre and not qui a une fièvre or qui est fiévreuse?

Avoir de la fièvre is the standard idiomatic way to say “to have a fever” or “to be running a fever” in French.

Elle a de la fièvre. = “She has a fever.”
You generally don’t say a une fièvre in this sense.
Être fiévreux / fiévreuse is possible, but it’s more like “to be feverish,” sometimes more formal or descriptive.

So:

Most natural: Elle a de la fièvre.
Also possible but less neutral/common: Elle est fiévreuse.

Why is de la used in a de la fièvre?

De la is a partitive article, used for “an unspecified quantity” of something that can’t easily be counted.

de la fièvre = “some fever / a (certain) amount of fever”
It’s similar to how French says de l’eau (“some water”), du sucre (“some sugar”).

In English we just say “has a fever,” but in French the idiom is literally “has some fever,” so de la is required.

Why do we see qui twice? What exactly does each qui refer to?

There are two relative clauses introduced by qui:

une vieille dame qui a de la fièvre
→ qui refers to une vieille dame.
It means: “an old lady who has a fever.”
un enfant et une autre dame qui ont peur
→ qui refers to the whole group: un enfant et une autre dame.
It means: “a child and another lady who are afraid.”

In both cases, qui is the subject of the verb that follows (a, ont).

Why is it ont peur and not a peur in qui ont peur?

Because the subject here is plural:

un enfant et une autre dame = 2 people → plural → verb must be ont.

So:

L’enfant a peur. (“The child is afraid.”) → singular.
La dame a peur. (“The lady is afraid.”) → singular.
L’enfant et la dame ont peur. (“The child and the lady are afraid.”) → plural.

In the sentence, qui ont peur agrees with un enfant et une autre dame, so you need ont (3rd person plural).

Why is it ont peur (with avoir) and not sont peur (with être)?

In French, many feelings use avoir rather than être:

avoir peur = “to be afraid”
avoir faim = “to be hungry”
avoir soif = “to be thirsty”
avoir chaud / froid = “to be hot / cold”

So:

Ils ont peur. = “They are afraid.”
Ils ont faim. = “They are hungry.”

Être peur is simply incorrect; the natural expression is avoir peur.

Why is there no second il before soigne aussi un enfant? Can you just drop the subject like that?

Yes, in French it is very common to omit the repeated subject pronoun if it’s clearly the same subject and continues the same sentence.

Full version would be:

Il soigne une vieille dame… et il soigne aussi un enfant…

But it’s natural and more fluent to say:

Il soigne une vieille dame… et soigne aussi un enfant…

Because there is no change of subject, learners can think of the second verb as still “belonging” to the same il from the beginning of the sentence. You generally don’t do this across separate sentences, but within one sentence connected by et, it’s fine.

Why is it une autre dame and not autre une dame?

In French, autre (other / another) goes after the article, before the noun:

une autre dame = another lady
un autre enfant = another child
d’autres personnes = other people

The order autre une dame is incorrect. The pattern is: article + autre + noun → une autre dame.

Does qui ont peur refer to both un enfant and une autre dame, or only to une autre dame?

Grammatically, qui ont peur refers to both:

un enfant et une autre dame qui ont peur

Because:

The verb is ont (plural), not a (singular).
In French, when you have X et Y qui…, the qui normally refers to X and Y together.

If it were only the lady who was afraid, you would expect:

…et une autre dame qui a peur.
(and another lady who is afraid)

So as written, the child and the other lady are both afraid.

Why is the verb soigne in the simple present, when in English we’d probably say “is treating”?

French uses the simple present where English often uses the present continuous:

Il soigne une vieille dame…
can translate as:
- “He treats an old lady…” (habitually), or
- “He is treating an old lady…” (right now).

Context decides whether it’s habitual or happening now. If you really want to emphasize “right now, at this very moment,” you can say:

Il est en train de soigner une vieille dame…

But the normal, neutral choice in French is just the simple present: Il soigne…

Is there any special agreement with vieille and dame?

Yes. Vieille is the feminine singular form of vieux (“old”). It must agree with the noun:

un vieux monsieur (masculine singular)
une vieille dame (feminine singular)
de vieux messieurs (masculine plural)
de vieilles dames (feminine plural)

Here, dame is feminine singular, so the adjective must also be feminine singular: vieille.