Grammar #3 的得地

[xuechengfeng]

I think I may have seen a topic on this before, not sure though.

Can we get an explanation between..

的

得

地

[Claw]

You can usually figure out which one to use by using one of these patterns... they're not hard-and-fast rules, but they apply most of the time (parentheses indicate parts that are optional if they are understood in context):

used to link a descriptive phrase with a noun: descriptive phrase - 的 - (noun)

used to indicate the result or the potential of a verb: verb - 得 - adjective

converts an adjective into an adverb: adjective - 地 - (verb) [the adjective is sometimes duplicated, especially if it's only one character]

Note that it is never correct to substitute one for the other. Although they are all pronounced /de/ in Mandarin, in other dialects they are not homonyms (for instance in Cantonese, they are /dik1/, /dak1/, and /dei2/, respectively).

[cutty]

I think I read an article before, there is a tendency to use 的 to replace 得 and 地. I think many native speakers also don't care about this in un-official context. Of course, it's always good to use it right.

[skylee]

I agree with Claw.

[BeijingSlacker]

I heard the Chinese government had eliminated the grammatical differences between these 3 characters for the National College Entrance Examination. They can be used interchangeably now on the exam.

[Claw]

I heard the Chinese government had eliminated the grammatical differences between these 3 characters for the National College Entrance Examination. They can be used interchangeably now on the exam.

That is unfortunate if it is indeed true... it's akin to saying that you can use two, to, and too interchangeably in English.

[BeijingSlacker]

it's akin to saying that you can use two, to, and too interchangeably in English.

I am not sure about this analogy.

[xuechengfeng]

Thank you for the responses, would it be possible to give some of the most common resultative verbs, and do you use 得 with V de shihou?

I will be back with a few more questions about 的

[Claw]

would it be possible to give some of the most common resultative verbs

I don't know what you mean by "resultative verbs" but here are some examples of 得 being used to show the result of a verb:

他吃得很飽: he eat 得 very full = He was full as a result of eating.

我的衣服洗得很乾淨: my clothes wash 得 very clean = My clothes are clean as a result of washing.

Besides being used in a resultative construction, 得 can also be used as an adverbial construction.

他吃得很快 = He eats very fast.

我跑得很慢 = I run very slowly.

The last way 得 can be used is as a modal expressing the potential of a verb. However, in Mandarin this usage is very idiomatic and generally appears in phrases like 得到. Other dialects like Cantonese have more flexibility with this usage.

我看得到 = I am able to see.

do you use 得 with V de shihou?

No, the /de/ in "V de 時候" is 的, not 得. The verb V is describing what you are doing at that time (時候). This fits with the first pattern: descriptive phrase - 的 - (noun)

吃飯的時候: eat 的 time = time of eating (or "when eating")

[kentsuarez]

Claw's description of the difference is good. I, too, like to preserve the difference between the three, and once you learn it, it's really rather easy. The distinction helps clarify the difference in usage, and makes it a little easier to read, in my opinion.

But Claw also wrote: "That is unfortunate if it is indeed true... it's akin to saying that you can use two, to, and too interchangeably in English."

To this I must protest. 的, 得, and 地 are all originally phonetic loans anyway, and throughout the history of Chinese, phonetic loans have often been quite interchangeable - - a phenomenon which has not occurred in English. So using this English analogy, while technically correct in one way (both are merely phonetic representations of spoken words), is really an overstatement and a bad analogy: in English, such spellings are not interchangeable, and so comparison to this set of English words makes it seem as if such substitution in Chinese would be equally objectionable. It is most certainly not. Many native speakers do use them interchangeably, especially with 的 used for all three, as has been mentioned.

的 originally probably meant 'bright', and is cognate with 灼 zhuo2. The 白 bai2 'white' on the left was originally 日 ri4 'sun', roughly synonymous with the 火 huo3 'fire' in its counterpart. The 勺 shao2 'ladle' on the right of both is their phonetic. The pronunciations de, shao and zhuo, although it is hard to imagine now, were once the same, as is demonstrated in phonetic reconstructions of ancient Chinese. The earliest recorded pronunciation of 的 I could find (using the Hanyu Da Zidian) was in the 廣韻 Guangyun, as di4; the earliest meaning, 明; 鮮明 'bright; distinct', in 禮記 Liji; other early meanings include 'white; bullseye; far' etc.. As for grammatical particle use, the earliest definition as 'definitely' appear to have been in the Ming Dyn. 正字通 Zhengzitong dictionary (by Zhang Zilie, ca. 1671); earlier usage as such dates to the Jin to Song. The earliest use for adjectives I found was in Shui Hu Zhuan, probably early 14th century. If anyone finds better info or can correct any of this, pls. do so, as I'd love to get a more definitive answer.

Similarly, 得 de2 meant 'to obtain', and 地 meant 'land; place' much earlier. These I've not traced back as carefullly yet, but I doubt you'll disagree.

Since none of these originally had as its primary meaning the grammatical uses for which they are now borrowed, it is hard to make a 'purist' argument that they must be used distinctly. 的 has pronunciations of de and di in Mandarin (which is the dialect we are discussing; usage in other dialects is not relevant, for me anyway), so it covers all three usages.

But again, I do still prefer to see the distinction made. I'm just pre-empting any possible purist argument for it.

[Claw]

To this I must protest. 的, 得, and 地 are all originally phonetic loans anyway, and throughout the history of Chinese, phonetic loans have often been quite interchangeable...

Okay... I accept your explanation. Thanks for making it clear. Phonetic loans or not, I think the distinction should be preserved since there actually are differences in their usage in addition to the fact that their pronunciations in other dialects differ.

[HashiriKata]

I don't know what you mean by "resultative verbs" but here are some examples of 得 being used to show the result of a verb:

他吃得很飽: he eat 得 very full = He was full as a result of eating.

我的衣服洗得很乾淨: my clothes wash 得 very clean = My clothes are clean as a result of washing.

Besides being used in a resultative construction, 得 can also be used as an adverbial construction.

他吃得很快 = He eats very fast.

我跑得很慢 = I run very slowly.

Claw, I agree with most of what you said but the quoted bit needs a small correction, so please don't feel offended :

All these four sentences should belong to the same category and the adjectives at the end are called "complements of degree" (程度补语). I think the English translation of the above sentences may have misled you into thinking that they are different (they all describe some degree of an action, with 很 giving the clue).

There is indeed something called "resultative complements/ complements of result" (结果补语)，but they're not in those 4 sentences. Here are some simple sentences with a "resultative complement" (expressing the result of an action):

我听见了

他没有看懂

你用完了吗？

你找到工作了吗？

[Quest]

The only two that should confuse you are 2 and 3.

1. immediately before nouns after adjectives, use 的 (adjectival)

珍贵的邮票

今天的天气很好

可爱的小狗

2. immediately before verbs after adverbs, use 地 (adverbial)

匆匆忙忙地走了

专心地听老师讲课

拼命地工作

3. immediately before verbs after adjectives, use 得 (degree/result)

伤心得哭起来

高兴得跳起来

闷得要发疯

4. immediately before adjectives after verbs, use 得 (degree)

笑得很大声

写得不清楚

表演得很精彩

now try a drill: 花园里有很多美丽[ ]花儿。

陈光趁大家没注意，偷偷[ ]溜了出去。

小花唱歌唱[ ]非常好听，大家不禁鼓起掌来。

叔叔跑[ ]满身都是汗。

客人来了，我们很热情[ ]招待他们。

婆婆自言自语[]说：“我[ ]钱包哪儿去了？"

他把桌子上[] 东西收拾[ ]干干净净，然后才放心[ ]离开。

[xuechengfeng]

Quest:

Although I have a general understanding between these 3 constructions, I was mostly posting this question to put under the "All Simple Grammar Rules" sticky up top http://chinese-forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=3338

and I may have a small understanding, but I don't believe I'm at liberty to explain Chinese grammar when I barely know it myself.

[HashiriKata]

Although I have a general understanding between these 3 constructions, I was mostly posting this question to put under the "All Simple Grammar Rules" sticky

Most people understand and appreciate your intention , and the topics you raised are interesting (to me at least, as they often get me into thinking).

By the way, if you add 不 or 得 to a resultative construction (the examples I gave above), you'll change it into a potential construction:

我听(不/得)见

他看(不/得)懂吗

你找(不/得)到工作吗？

[ced1zh]

Quest's exlpanation is definitely clear Nothing I can do better

[xiaocai]

按照大陸的語文課本的標準來區分的話﹕

“的”用在定語(attribute)的後面﹔

“地”用在狀語(adverbial modifier)的後面﹔

“得”用在補語(complement)的前面。

不知道這樣是不是比較合理的解釋。

[tanhql]

i just want to explain the use of 的 and 地 before anybody(especially beginners) gets confused with them.

的 is possessive, similar to 's in english, or の in japanese.

地 as a noun means ground, and is pronounced as di4. but as a particle, it is pronounced as de, same as 的. it connects a manner (of how an action is executed) with the action, like:

1)他慢慢地走回家。 manner - 慢慢(slowly); action - 走回家(return home)

2)医生小心翼翼地替病人动手术。 manner - 小心翼翼(very carefully); action - 替病人动手术(operate on the patient)

but there's one case where both 的 and 地 are side by side, and that's 目的地, which means destination. it's pronounced as mu3 di4 di4. this is the ONLY exception. so be careful when reading it embedded with other 的 or 地, like:

我们的目的地在哪儿？

where's our destination?

if you read it wrongly, it'll (roughly) mean: 'where's the land of our eyes?' which is nonsensical.

[莱米西]

Both "的" and "地" can be used as auxiliary word in the endocentric phrase (偏正短语).

The endocentric phrase contains a head word, which is the single obligatory element in the phrase, and one or more optional words subordinating to the head. The optional word is called attribute when before a noun head or called adverbial when before a verb or an adjective head. An auxiliary word "的" might be inserted between the head and its attribute and an auxiliary "地" might be inserted between the head and its adverbial.

For examples,

有趣的故事 (interesting story) ---- adj + n head

我的书 (my book) ---- pron + n head

愉快地工作 (work happily) ---- adj + v head

十分地正确 (completely correct) ---- adv + v head

[JonasL]

In fact I think 得 的 and 地 WERE interchangeable for a short while, but they are differenciating between them again.

I don't think it's important anyway, Mandarin could easily do without the 3 different characters for the same pronunciation, I don't really rely on grammar all that much so I wouldn't mind if they'd drop 得&地 & replace them with 的.