沉沦 and 被

[Duomi]

I was recently corrected in my use of 沉沦。

What I thought should have been， "。。。被现代的波浪沉沦。"

Was corrected to: "。。。在现代的波浪中沉沦。"

 

Why can I not use 沉沦 with 被？

 

Thanks！

[wushucrab20]

I think its because it is already a verb that describes precisely what is happening to something, it implies a change in state. For example 死 is also a verb, but you would never say 。。。被现代的波浪死  ， but if you change it to 。。在现代的波浪中死  it makes more sense. (I know you wouldn't likely ever use 死 in this context, but hopefully the example helps to clarify the grammar).

 

Oh and one more thing. You can probably say 。。___被沉沦. It just doesn't work to say 被___ 沉沦。

[anonymoose]

沉沦 is an intransitive verb. It cannot take an object, and thus cannot be in the passive (since, by definition, a passive expresses something as being the object of an action).

[Duomi]

Thank you for the responses. Intransitive verbs - already a change of state - does not take an object. I have spent the last day thinking these ideas over, and I may be just grasping them now. Thanks for the explanation, really appreciate it! I think it is time for me to study a grammar book...

[Pedroski]

Can 沉沦 take a meaning 'pulled into' as in 'pulled down into a den of vice'?

 

In English 'sink' may be transitive or intransitive.

 

The enemy sank the ship.

The ship sank.

The ship was sunk by the enemy.

 

According to Newton's First Law, nothing 'sinks' for no reason. A force must be acting. But it seems Chinese does not see things that way.

 

船被敌人攻陷了。

船被敌人攻陷然后沉没了。

 

船被敌人沉没了 X

船被敌人沉没然后沉没了。X

 

This kind of verb is called an unaccusative verb. Whereas 'sink' in English may be transitive or unaccusative, it seems it is only unaccusative in Chinese. I wonder why that is?

[skylee]

Because Chinese is not English?