三点才回的家

[gato]

Does not 回得家 clearly mean "can return home?"

You are thinking of "回得了家" (hui de liao jia).

[jiangping]

As far as I know putting 的 before the object in 是...的 constructions is considered standard, ie:

我是昨天買的票 I bought the ticket yesterday.

The only time you wouldn't do this is when the object is a pronoun, in which case 的 goes at the end.

[gato]

One question is whether 家 is an object here.

Or is 家 more like 来 of 回来?

You would not say 是三点才回的来 instead of 是三点才回来的.

[Hofmann]

Is 是-dropping common in long 是...的 constructions?

[Glenn]

One question is whether 家 is an object here.

That's been my question since the beginning. It seems more dative than accusative, which makes me feel it doesn't really work like an object (well, not a direct one... not sure if there's a difference between those and indirect ones).

[jiangping]

Umm, that's a good point. I think the basic structure is this:

(是) verb 的 (noun)

and the last noun may be omitted depending on the sentence. I guess it doesn't have to be an object in the strict sense that the verb impinges on it somehow, but just that it is a nominal complement to the verb. That would explain why ...回的家 is ok, whereas ...回的來 is not, since 來 is not a noun.

I wonder whether the 的 would split common verb-object structures like 吃飯 or 睡覺?

[aristotle1990]

Yes. All of the following are acceptable (according to that original Chinese person):

今天我12点才起的床

我3点才吃的饭

凌晨5点才睡的觉

7点才回的家

[Daan]

If you have a good university library nearby, see if they have a copy of Ekaterina Y. Chirkova's In Search of Time in Peking Mandarin. There's a whole chapter on de and its many meanings.

I think in this particular instance, we're looking at de as a neutral-tone realisation of the verb dào 'to arrive', which Chirkova has documented in recording sessions with native speakers of Peking Mandarin. Here's an example sentence from her corpus (p. 60):

Cóngqián a, tā kāi de cháguǎr yě shi zài Dōngzhímén nàr, nàr chāi le, chāi le yǐhòu gěi tā bān de zhèr lai.

In the past his teahouse was in Dōngzhímén too. Then it was pulled down there. After it was pulled down, it was moved to this place.

There's more interesting stuff on de in Peking Mandarin, including de between a verb and its object. Here are two example sentences she quotes on p. 82:

ta shi zuotian mai shu de

a He is the one who bought books yesterday.

b It is yesterday that he bought books.

ta shi zuotian mai de shu

It was yesterday that he bought books.

Chirkova argues the de in mai de shu above has an aspectual meaning. She says that in Peking Mandarin, wó xiě de shī can either mean "the poem that I wrote" or "I wrote a poem."

Judging from these examples, de and le may appear similar. Chirkova says (p. 86) that there's a difference, however:

The difference between sentences with the particle de used between a verb and its object and the particle le in the same position, as reported by my consultants, is as follows: while the former confirms an event, the latter reports it. The particle de signals a situation which results from an event that precedes the narrated time. The perfective particle le denotes the change of one situation into another as a result of an event.

Edit: You can read a bit more on de in Peking Mandarin in this paper by Chirkova.

[Master Rakoczi]

Happy to see a discussion about this construction.

Here is one case I encountered in QQ (written by a Beijinger):

今天我和我的前男朋友和他的一个朋友一起吃的火锅。

I was extremely confused of the 的 at first and asked about it and if you can leave it out.

Here's the answer I got:

"For me it sounds like something that I've already done

一起吃饭，一起吃的饭

The first one doesn't show the time, it can be before or after, but the second one does show the past time."

[Hofmann]

Thanks Daan. That clarifies it for me.

[creamyhorror]

今天我和我的前男朋友和他的一个朋友一起吃的火锅。

Am I right in thinking the last 的 should be 了 in Standard Mandarin? And that the more flexible usages of 的 quoted by Daan are essentially regional?

[treesrock]

To detect the “是……的”structure in which“是” often omitted, it also helps to see it from the translation（especially there’s a“才”indicates “not… until…）: He didn’t get back home until three o’ clock. It’s an emphatic sentence pattern after all.

Apart from the “是……的”structure, I think lots of the confusions arise from a special kind of word in Chinese--离合词 separable (verb-object)verbs. For these words, you can split it under certain circumstances. And they are kind of between strict words (like 喜欢，发现，讨论。。。) and loose verb-object phrases（吃火锅，锻炼身体…）. There can also be other insertions:

回了一趟家，睡了个午觉，买了两本书，下了晚班，考了两天试，唱首歌，开下门。

他（是）昨天晚上三点才回的家。

From my personal viewpoint (not theoretically grounded), they are used this way because in certain contexts these objects can be omitted to obey the rule of economy in language usage.

--他昨天晚上什么时候回的家？

--（他昨天晚上）三点才回的（家）。

Sometimes “是……的”structure does indicate time:

你什么结婚？VS 你什么时候结婚的？

Hope this helps.

[semantic nuance]

Am I right in thinking the last 的 should be 了 in Standard Mandarin?

It really depends on the context. If you use 了 instead of 的 at the end of the sentence, it is ok, but the meaning is a bit different.

When you use 了, the whole sentence is to stress 吃火鍋這件事. That is, the action of eating a hotpot is done.

But when you use 的, the whole setnece is to stress the participators in the event of eating a hotpot. Who are you with in the eating a hotpot?

For example:

A: 妳今天是跟誰去吃的火鍋? B: 今天我跟我前男友和他的一個朋友一起吃的 (火鍋).

A: 妳今天吃了嗎? B: 吃了, 吃了. 今天我跟我前男友和他的一個朋友一起吃了火鍋。

[Erbse]

Does not 回得家 clearly mean "can return home?"

You are thinking of "回得了家" (hui de liao jia).

My book says, 了 is not neccesary in such case. 回得家 itself can already be correct compliment of possibility.

[semantic nuance]

My book says, 了 is not neccesary in such case. 回得家 itself can already be correct compliment of possibility

Can you please list the example from your book? Then we'll see what the context is.

[Erbse]

Book: "Chinesisch für Deutsche 1"

example sentences for this pattern:

这课的练习不多，我今天做得完。 (I can finish it today)

这课的练习太多，我今天做不完。 (I can't finish it today)

图书馆已经开门了，你进得去。 (You can go in)

For comparison the book offers this， they should be equal in meaning:

这间教室能坐下五十个人。

这间教室坐得下五十个人。

这间教室能坐得下五十个人。

edit: typo corrected

[gougou]

But you have other complements instead of 了 in all cases - 完，去，下。

PS: I used that book as well, and I loved it!

[Erbse]

Now that you point it out this makes much more sense. Grammar has always been a mystery to me and anything less than a foolproof explaination is not going to cut it for me.

[creamyhorror]

For example:

A: 妳今天是跟誰去吃的火鍋? B: 今天我跟我前男友和他的一個朋友一起吃的 (火鍋).

A: 妳今天吃了嗎? B: 吃了, 吃了. 今天我跟我前男友和他的一個朋友一起吃了火鍋。

@semantic nuance: Thanks for the reply. I understand the implication of 的 when used as part of the “是……的” structure. What I was asking about was whether the 'B' sentence in

A: 你今天去了哪里？

B: 今天我去吃的火锅。

is a valid sentence in Standard Mandarin. Because to me, it isn't. But I think it might be valid in Beijing Mandarin, based on what Daan and Master Rakoczi posted:

She says that in Peking Mandarin, wó xiě de shī can either mean "the poem that I wrote" or "I wrote a poem."

i.e. 我写的诗 = 我写了诗

[semantic nuance]

A: 你今天去了哪里？

B: 今天我去吃的火锅。

@creamyhorror: sorry to miss your point. As for this sentence, it's imcomprhensible to me. We don't say that in Taiwan, but is it true that this sentence is validly spoken in Beijing?