The Unaccusative Hypothesis states that intransitive predicates are of two types: unaccusatives and unergatives. As formulated originally within the framework of Relational Grammar, the argument of an unergative predicate is at the deepest syntactic level a subject while that of an unaccusative predicate is direct object. Although considerable cross-linguistic evidence has been amassed in favor of the Unaccusative Hypothesis, no detailed analysis of French intransitive predicates has been carried out though many analyses of French have assumed that some verbs are unaccusative while others are unergative. Nine arguments are presented here in support of recognizing two formally distinct classes of intransitives in French. These arguments are based on object raising, croire constructions, participial equi and absolute, reduced relatives, cliticization of the embedded indirect object in causative faire constructions, parallel transitive structures, auxiliary selection, nominalizations, and stativity. The present study concludes that it is possible to formulate a necessary and sufficient condition for unaccusativity in French.