"Wo qu Zhongguo" vs. "Wo dao Zhongguo qu"

[hwangd01]

What is the difference between these two statements? I've seen both used, and I am confused. Thanks for your help in advance!

[HashiriKata]

Without further illustration or context of occurrence, the difference is hardly worth mentioning, so consider they're the same at this stage.

[Jialihai Jiejie]

'Wo qu Zhongguo' is a complete sentence; 'Wo dao Zhongguo qu' is also complete but it can be extended to include an action (verb) after the sentence.

Jialihai Jiejie

[HashiriKata]

'Wo qu Zhongguo' is a complete sentence; 'Wo dao Zhongguo qu' is also complete but it can be extended to include an action (verb) after the sentence.

那么。。。假厉害姐姐， 请问：我去中国工作，我去中国探亲，我去中国旅行，。。。都是不好的吗？

Edited October 9, 2008 at 11:45 AM by HashiriKata

[Jialihai Jiejie]

不是不好啊。都可以被接受。

Ha ha... I didn't mean that.

Hence, I mentioned 'Wo dao Zhongguo qu' is also complete.

You see, the key word here is ALSO - which means I kinda agree with you.

The difference between "Wo qu Zhongguo" & "Wo dao Zhongguo qu" can further be illustrated as below:

Wo qu Zhongguo = Subject+verb+noun (complete)

Wo dao Zhongguo qu = Subject+verb/preposition+noun+verb (complete) but can be extended.

呵呵，来来来...

让假厉害姐姐假假厉害一下。

Jialihai Jiejie

[renzhe]

But his point was that Wo qu Zhongguo can also be extended with a verb.

[wegsun]

they're almost the same. and they have the same meaning.

[Philee]

楼上说得都不太准确

answers above are not accurate

他们的意思完全相同，只是强调不同

They have the exactly same meaning but emphasizing differently.

我到中国去 emphasizing the place

我去中国 no emphasizing

至于其后是否可以接动词

as for the verb after them

他们都可以

they both can extend with a verb

i.e.

我到中国去玩

我去中国玩

[little pig]

They are the same meanings .

I am a chinese ,so i am sure about it. don't confusing

[Jialihai Jiejie]

Actually there's another slight difference...

Please allow Jialihai Jiejie to clarify.

When you say, 我到中国去玩

We assume that you are talking to someone who is in China, so that person knows you're COMING to visit China.

But when you say, 我去中国玩

We normally assume that you are talking to anyone in general who is not in China, people understand that you're GOING to visit China.

Okay, Jialihai Jiejie hope you can grasp the difference between 'come' and 'go'.

[Hanlink]

I would treat them as the same; it is tortuous to try to make any of the distinctions above, which if general rules would be better known and if they really are general rules, they are generally broken.

However, from an emphatic point of view, if you want to say "I am going (to China)" [and no-one is going to stop me], you probably would use the simpler 我去中国, but even then, it feels like there should be other fillers, much depends on your individual habit and the nuance you want to give, which can just as easily be given by intonation and word emphasis and that goes for both forms.

Bottom line - treat them as the same.

[HashiriKata]

I would treat them as the same; it is tortuous to try to make any of the distinctions above

Wise attitude, Hanlink! Just as I said right at the beginning of the thread: "Without further illustration or context of occurrence, the difference is hardly worth mentioning, so consider they're the same at this stage. "

[querido]

With full respect to the native speakers above, please let me share what I found about this. My interest was in finding a rule explaining the case when that qu is toneless. I'm guessing there must be a difference since the book I'm studying now (Chinese authored) uses both constructions.

Routledge Comprehensive section 8.6 (including footnote 15) appears to cover it, but the explanation is a little gnarly. It says "到 dào + location object + 来 lai or 去 qu" (note those missing tones) is a coverbal phrase, with 到 dào being the verb. But, in its chapter on coverbs, at 11.2.1.3 "Going to or arriving at (a destination), it gives one example with qù and one with qu, without stating the reason.

I think I gather (though I can't find it clearly stated) that in this: 到 dào + location object + 去 qù, 去 qù is the verb and the emphasis is on what was done (go, going), while when the tone is absent, "到 dào + location object + 来 lai or 去 qu", that 到 dào is a "preposition acting as a verb" (Ross Grammar), the whole phrase is a "coverbal phrase", and the emphasis is on the destination.

Fortunately, this is what I had thought... but I can't find a single rule stated clearly enough.

The cleanest explanation I've found is in the MIT online course grammar book, viewable at this link from Google, or google Nǐ dào nǎr qu? Nǐ qù nǎr? and look for Lesson 4, "5. Alternatives to the construction qù + place".

But, it continues to other cases in which qu can be toneless, that don't involve 到 dào.

My working conclusion? I have to go with this: the qu is toneless when some other word is acting as the verb. When it's 到 dào, the emphasis is on the destination with qu just a grammatical device.

So, if someone asks where you're going, and you say dào X qu, you'd be wrong to use the tone because your answer is X, or dào X. If someone asks, in effect, what you're doing, and what you're doing is "going", then qù.

[tooironic]

This is a common question amongst beginners and you can draw parallels between this and other structures such as 是...的. Grammatically speaking, the difference is indeed that of emphasis.

我去中国 - I go to China / I am going to China / I went to China (Chinese does not conjugate tense, obviously)

我到中国去 - It is China that I went to*

*Of course, even in literal translation we don't really get a sense for the difference as in English a sentence like "It is China I went to" is highly marked. This is because English does not have a similar structure to express this kind of emphasis. In most circumstances, we would treat both of them the same, both when comprehending and translating them. Hope that clarifies things further.

[phyrex]

This is how I always explained it to myself. It might be wrong, but it's served me well enough ;)

1) Wo qu Zhongguo -- is what learners of Chinese get taught first, because it's an okay construct, and resembles English sentence construction

2) Wo dao Zhongguo qu -- is what people actually colloquially say and sounds more natural ;)

[phyrex]

Wait, why the heck did querido dig out that old thread? I just saw that it is from 2008 O_O

[Shi Tong]

到 generally means to arrive. Consider this meaning and apply to the sentances.

Usually sentance 2 would include more context: "wo3 yao4(want) dao4 zhong1guo2 qu4" or "wo3 dao4 zhong1guo2 le (already)"

Sentance 1 is useful for simplicity.