Odd sentence structure: 单个A(怎么样)的A

[anonymoose]

On reviewing my notebook, I came across a sentence structure which I noted down several years ago. Unfortunately I didn't write down the entire sentence, so I don't know what the original complete sentence was, but the structure is like this:

 

单个国家___最多的国家

The single country with the most ___

 

I could not find a complete sentence on Google exactly matching this structure, but I guess the original sentence was something along the lines of:

 

单个国家死刑案例最多的国家是中国。

The single country with the most cases of the death penalty is China.

 

So my question is, is this a standard sentence structure, or does it seem awkward? To me, having 国家 twice in the sentence seems awkward. I would be more tempted to say something like 死刑案例最多的单个国家是中国.

 

Although I couldn't find the original sentence, I did find some other sentences with a similar structure:

 

根据聚源数据统计发现，由于换届、辞职等原因，二季度共计有275家公司发生了独立董事变动的情况，总共涉及独立董事人数531名，单家公司变动人数超过3位的公司达到80家。

 

2005年全年,中海油将有9个新油田投产,是历史上单年计划投产项目数量最多的年份。

 

 

[陳德聰]

I think your example with 国家 is a bit strange, but I can't quite figure out why.

 

I think using 单X... 的X removes ambiguity, but it seems redundant when there is no ambiguity in the first place.

 

For example, when I first read "单家公司变动人数超过3位的公司达到80家", all I could think was "单家公司 as opposed to... what?" I guess conceivably it could rule out the idea of subsidiaries being included in the restructuring count, but I don't see a lot of ambiguity in simply saying "变动人数超过3位的公司达到80家".

For "2005年全年,中海油将有9个新油田投产,是历史上单年计划投产项目数量最多的年份。" I can see the ambiguity a lot easier, though I still think it is not terribly ambiguous given the fact that 2005 is stated right in the sentence. Conceivably, "计划投产项目数量最多的年份" could be more than one year.

Back to your death penalty example, I think the reason I find it weird is that we wouldn't usually combine two country's number of death penalty cases, so it wouldn't be ambiguous as to whether you are referring to just one country or not.

Just my two cents.

[anonymoose]

Thanks for your input.

 

What I'm curious about is whether people in general would regard this as a standard structure, or whether it sounds awkward, or in other words, is considered bad chinese.

 

Regarding the last example, I would still be tempted to say something like 计划投产项目数量最多的单个年份 myself, removing the ambiguity whilst avoiding saying 年 twice.

[muyongshi]

I can see the ambiguity a lot easier, though I still think it is not terribly ambiguous given the fact that 2005 is stated right in the sentence. Conceivably, "计划投产项目数量最多的年份" could be more than one year.

Is it possible it only functions as emphasis in the sentence? It is conceivable I think in certain settings to not use it for clarity but to 强调 it such as in a news article.

I don't think it completely makes sense especially with the sentences and context given but it's an idea.

[陳德聰]

I think that emphasis usually serves a purpose though, to contrast or give new information, or just be informative? To me, both 单年 and 单家 are natural and not flag-raising, but don't really add anything super necessary to the sentences.

 

Kind of like "in a single year" vs. "in a/one year".

[skylee]

To me, having 国家 twice in the sentence seems awkward. I would be more tempted to say something like 死刑案例最多的单个国家是中国.

 

I agree it is awkward. I don't see how it is different in meaning from (世界上)死刑案例最多的國家是中國.

 

For example, when I first read "单家公司变动人数超过3位的公司达到80家", all I could think was "单家公司 as opposed to... what?" I guess conceivably it could rule out the idea of subsidiaries being included in the restructuring count, but I don't see a lot of ambiguity in simply saying "变动人数超过3位的公司达到80家".

 

I agree.

[muyongshi]

I think that emphasis usually serves a purpose though, to contrast or give new information, or just be informative? To me, both 单年 and 单家 are natural and not flag-raising, but don't really add anything super necessary to the sentences.

Kind of like "in a single year" vs. "in a/one year".

I agree with you. Emphasis was the only explanation I could come up with though that would explain its addition.