Si le vent devient plus fort, il faudra que nous mettions la tente derrière la voiture, près du pare-chocs.

After si for a real future possibility, French normally uses the present tense, not the future.

So the standard pattern is:

si + present, then future in the main clause

That is exactly what you have here:

Si le vent devient plus fort, il faudra...

This works like English If the wind gets stronger, we will have to..., not If the wind will get stronger...

So devient is correct because it is inside the si clause.

Devient is from devenir, which means to become or to get.

So le vent devient plus fort means the wind becomes stronger or gets stronger.

In everyday English, gets stronger is often the most natural match, but in French devenir is a very normal verb here.

Because vent is a masculine singular noun: le vent.

The adjective fort has to agree with vent, so it stays masculine singular:

• le vent devient plus fort
• la tempête devient plus forte

Even though fort comes after devient, it still describes le vent, so agreement still happens.

Il faudra is the simple future of falloir.

Falloir is an impersonal verb that usually appears only as il faut, il fallait, il faudra, etc. It means to be necessary or, in many contexts, to have to.

So:

• il faut = it is necessary / we have to
• il faudra = it will be necessary / we will have to

In this sentence, il faudra means something like we will have to.

It does not refer to a person or thing. This il is impersonal.

It is like the it in English expressions such as it is necessary or it is raining. It is just there because French needs a subject.

So in il faudra, il does not mean he.

Because falloir que is a structure that normally requires the subjunctive.

So:

• Il faudra que...
  • subjunctive

That is why the sentence has:

il faudra que nous mettions

and not:

il faudra que nous mettons

The idea is not just a plain statement of fact; it is something necessary or required, and that kind of expression often triggers the subjunctive in French.

Mettions is the present subjunctive of mettre for nous.

The present subjunctive forms of mettre are:

• que je mette
• que tu mettes
• qu'il / qu'elle mette
• que nous mettions
• que vous mettiez
• qu'ils / qu'elles mettent

So que nous mettions means that we put in a subjunctive structure.

Yes. Both are correct, but the structure is slightly different.

• Il faudra mettre la tente... = We will have to put the tent...
• Il faudra que nous mettions la tente... = It will be necessary for us to put the tent...

The version with que nous mettions explicitly names the subject nous. The version with the infinitive mettre is a bit more compact.

So the sentence you were given is not the only possible phrasing, but it is perfectly normal.

Derrière means behind.

So derrière la voiture means behind the car.

There is no contraction here because derrière is followed directly by the noun phrase la voiture. It works much like:

• devant la voiture = in front of the car
• derrière la voiture = behind the car

Because près is used with de:

• près de = near

When de is followed by le, they contract:

• de + le = du

So:

• près de le pare-chocs becomes près du pare-chocs

This is a very common French contraction.

Because pare-chocs is one of those French compound nouns whose spelling often stays the same in the singular and the plural.

So you can have:

• le pare-chocs = the bumper
• les pare-chocs = the bumpers

This looks strange to English speakers, but it is normal. The final -s is part of the word’s standard spelling here, not necessarily a plural marker.

It adds a more precise location.

• derrière la voiture = behind the car
• près du pare-chocs = near the bumper

So the full phrase tells you more exactly where the tent should be placed: not just somewhere behind the car, but specifically near the bumper.

This kind of stacked location detail is very natural in French.