It is not the exact same usage: J'ai dormi à l'hotel (pas chez moi) is generic. I slept at the hotel is not. That has to be: I slept at the hotel (you told me about, on the corner, downtown, etc.) In English, the generic idea for the French is: I slept at a hotel, not at home.

No, I am not wrong. I slept at the hotel. in English is specific. Not generic. We do not say at the hotel for your J'ai dormi à l'hôtel is generic in French. It's just like: Je mange au restaurant à midi. I eat at a restaurant for lunch. Not: the restaurant. Je dors à l'hôtel quand je suis en voyage. I sleep at a hotel when traveling.

@Lambie "I slept at a well known hotel" --> "J'ai dormi à un hotel très réputé". This is the generic one. In French, when we say "J'ai dormi à l'hotel", we also imply "sur le coin de la rue, downtown, dont tu m'as parlé". It is the exact same usage...

The generic idea of staying or sleeping at a hotel "dormir à l'hôtel" (no adjuncts) is not "sleep at the hotel" in English. In fact, this can be a red-flag for a non-native speaker....The generic: Aller au restaurant: go to **a ** restaurant. Not: the restaurant . Same thing.

@Lambie You do realise that english people also say "We will eat at the restaurant tonight"? Where do you get the idea that "Sleeping at the hotel" doesn't work in English? You know that his question was about the preposition?

Simon, Brits may say "go to the restaurant" but they don't say sleep at the hotel unless they mean a specific one. Please do not quote ngrams at me. The generic a becomes the after a first mention: There is an apple on the table. The apple is green.

@Lambie books.google.com/ngrams/… books.google.com/ngrams/…

That ngram does not prove context. We went to London, we stayed at a hotel. The hotel was very expensive. Nous sommes allés à Londres. Nous sommes allés à l'hôtel. L'hôtel était très cher.

@Lambie You changed the verb here... Changing the verb changes the context. "We went to London, and then we went to the hotel." Isn't that a natural sentence?

We went to London, then went to the hotel **means we already know which hotel it is ** and is not in French à l'hôtel.

Simon, It's just not worth discussing it any further, for me. Advanced speakers know this thing. Why don't you know this basic, idiomatic difference?? It surprising ot me. J'aime aller à l'hôtel. I like staying in hotels. NOT the hotel.

I'm just curious, what is your background? Are you French?

Not at all. I'm a Yank. But I lived in France, went to a second university in France, and am an interpreter (French<>English) and a translator (the latter only into English)

I also taught English for seven years to business people in France....

Maybe I'm just used to both language and I'm confusing things but I'm still under the impression that you're generalizing the difference a bit too much

This was my first example

Last time I mentioned my background, someone here said I was "bragging".

It's fine I was the one to ask

Take this example, if you generalize what you said previously, this means that this response is not possible

"I slept at the hotel" would be wrong

But I'm confident english people would also say it

Without nobody knowing what hotel we're talking about

So this use is not completely "alien" to English

But in French I guess it's used more aggressively

Your missing the point here. So, we had a reservation at the Hotel Crillon. We spent three weeks in Paris. It was very expensive. But we did not spend every night at the hotel.

This is not the same context

In my example you don't have all this information.

Basically it's your wife asking "You didn't sleep home last night, where were you?" "I was at the hotel"

You would say this isn't possible?

That would be wrong. You have to say to her in English: I was at a hotel.

Right, it would not be accurate in English.

And yet, I have a feeling that most people would use "I was a the hotel" in that situation

At least in spoken English

No, no, no, not at all. In that latest example, they most definitely would not use "at the hotel.

The the/a usage in terms of French and even English can get confusing but in this case, it really isn't.

Wait but I also changed the verb

If the hotel is not known specifically to the parties, the generic statement is: to stay at a hotel, and not stay at the hotel. the hotel requires a prior understanding of a specific hotel.

Same thing with sleep ?

I slept at the hotel

wouldn't be possible

Yes, sleep at a hotel (generic)//sleep at the hotel (the one where a reservation was made, already known). it's the same thing regardless of the verb....

The thing is, you're explaining it with the grammar, but I feel like it's not true in casual English.

But there's no way to prove it here...

Simon, are you Canadian by any chance?

Yeah

Ok, are you French Canadian?

Yes

Ok, well, here's the thing, my relationship to French is different than yours. For you, it is a mother tongue, right?

Maybe as I said, we're so used to both languages here that we're using both idioms...

Ok, so, can we agree that IN FRENCH: aller à l'hôtel expresses a general idea of staying at a hotel> J'aime bien aller à l'hôtel, Ça m'amuse beaucoup. Right?

If you agree with that general statement in that sentence, there are only two ways to say it accurately in English: I like staying at hotels or I like staying at a hotel. It amuses me. The hotel or hotels would not be accurate there in English. I can assure you of that.

It's exactly like aller au restaurant: j'aime bien aller au restaurant. I like going to restaurants. Not "the" restaurant.

Generally aller à l'hôtel expresses a general idea but it can also be specific: Bon, ben salut, moi je vais à l'hôtel, on m'attend là-bas. Here the hôtel is well known.

@jlliagre Would you mind not interfering until I have finished my discussion with Simon? It will confuse me. Thanks.

No problem.

@Simon Are we good? Anything else?

I'm thinking

It's so rare that I come across going to the hotel that I'm not even sure to be fair

I guess it is

I must be confusing both idioms since I'm daily in an english and french environment

But that same idea does exist in English

so it's even more confusing

like "Going to the restaurant" as you said

No, it does not exist in English, unless the hotel is known. "I'm tired. I'm going back to the hotel. [the hotel is known].

I said the Brits may say going to the restaurant but I would have to check that out to be sure. But the hotel thing is the same in British English and AmE.

You will also never be "Going to the hotel"

Here note that we don't have an equivalent to "To" in French

The Brits do say to the restaurant, generically.

Isn't it more general, "Going to the" would work for pretty much anywhere?

"Going to the park", "Going to the cinema", "Going to the hotel"

Going to the park means you and I know which one. Going to the cinema/movies, right.

I'm talking to you about my life and I say, "This afternoon, I'll go to the park with my kids" Are you sure this doesn't work?

I said IT DOES WORK. Because you and I know which park we mean. basically.

You have no idea what park I'm talking about

In English you guys have the advantage of having "to", but we don't have it

Yes, it works but the hotel thing does not. I don't think one language has any advantage over the other. They are just different.

The restaurant also does not work.

Bear in mind that in English go to the park implies that at least you know which one. The one near where you live Because we also have: go to a park with my kids....the odd man out here is go to the cinema, which is idiomatic. So is: go to a film, go to a movie or go to the movies. :)

Ok , gotta run. Leaving for Maine in the am. Cheers, Simon.

Cheers, thanks for the discussion

@Lambie It would be a bad conclusion to say that "à l'hotel" is generic because it's not, it's a bad use of the language that is preferred in very specific cases. Note that you can't use "à l'hotel" for everything. Some context just doesn't work:

Le locataire s'engage envers Transport Canada à décorer et équiper l'hôtel comme il sied à un hôtel de première classe

When you make a generic statement like that it doesn't work

Cette notation peut évidemment faire référence à un hôtel que Proust aurait connu et que ... 1999

For example, as soon as you add an adjective, it would become "J'ai dormi à un magnifique hôtel hier soir" and not "J'ai dormi à le magnifique hôtel hier soir"

Even this: "J'ai dormi à un hôtel de luxe"

You can't translate "I slept at a luxury hotel" to "J'ai dormi à l'hôtel de luxe"

It will sound wrong

So you have to be careful

@Simon Please, Simon. You keep changing what I am saying. You have to decide whether you are speaking French or English. Write your sentence and THEN translate. There is no one-to-one equivalence like in math. aller à l'hôtel et pas chez des amis, is stay at a hotel, and not with friends. Not: the hotel. I have now repeated this about 5 times.

Not every occurrence of a sentence with à l'hotel in it is the same. LAST TIME: to stay at a hotel in French is: aller à l'hôtel, in common parlance.