缺了

[Pedroski]

Does this sentence need 2 了s? Can I Ieave the first one out? Or the last one? Or is the last one 呢？

 

请问您这个职位缺了多久了？

[陳德聰]

Doesn't it make more sense to ask "what is the function of the first le? the last one?"?

 

Sentences with both verb-le and sentence-le are a dime a dozen.

 

So to answer your question, if you want it to still mean what it means, then yes. And no it is not 呢.

[OneEye]

I don't understand the point of Pedroski's posts. He seems to think he knows better than the native speakers who write these sentences.

 

I agree with 陳德聰. It doesn't do any good to ask "Shouldn't it be Y?" Instead, ask "why is it X?" The assumption should be that your own understanding of the language is inadequate, not that native speakers are somehow doing it wrong. When you encounter evidence (language use by native speakers) that's incompatible with your current understanding, it's your understanding that needs to change, not the language.

[Pedroski]

Well, thanks for the useful comments!

 

That much vaunted entity 'native speakers' tell me, that:

 

1. 请问您这个职位缺了多久了？

2. 请问您这个职位缺多久了？

3. 请问您这个职位缺了多久？

 

all mean the same, although with 3. you would have to watch your tone at the end. Just wanted to compare with what you guys say.

 

I would like to know what difference in meaning you perceive between 1., 2. and 3. 

[skylee]

1 and 2 and 3 all mean the same to me. I think I would use 1 but as I don't really speak in Mandarin any more it is hard to say. I would prefer 1 and 2 to 3 as 3 sounds quite abrupt. I tend to prefer putting 了 at the end.

Which brings me to a question of mine. I seem to be seeing a lot of people putting 了 at the middle, eg 把金粉灑在了紙張上 vs 把金粉灑在紙張上了. While they mean the same to me, I found the former awkward. But it seems that so many people are doing it this way, so I wonder if it is now the proper way/ standard to do so. Views?

[imron]

That much vaunted entity 'native speakers'

Vauntedness depends on the situation. Native speakers will generally be good at *using* the language correctly (though there are plenty of exceptions), but might not be as good at *explaining* their language.

So it can hold that both OneEye is correct that you should be asking why something is used rather than assuming the native speaker is incorrect, and that you are correct that the native speakers you asked weren't very helpful on explaining things.

[jonibol]

I had the same question just a few days ago. One chinese told me, the second 了does not change the meaning of the sentence. It just adds some feeling tone like anger. But it's not necessary to put the second one at the end.

[Tiana]

Since I don't want complications, I'll just say something about sentence 1 which is the OP's original question: the two "了" here are to help indicating that the state/ action referred to by the verb is on-going at the moment of speaking, such as in these statements: "I've been learning Chinese for 3 years", "How long has this position been vacant?". If you drop one of the 了, this meaning may be lost (but not necessarily so to some speakers. See the posts above).

[Pedroski]

I don't believe I made any assumptions about the correctness or otherwise of the original sentence. I'm sorry if you feel I have slighted the Chinese, or the Chinese language, but there is nothing in my original post (Does this sentence need 2 了s?) which may be so interpreted. It is innocence in action! What is going on in your head is another matter, not of my concern.

 

Which bit of meaning, exactly, is lost when I remove 了1 or 了2? You mean a total shift, or just a nuance? I thought something ongoing was indicated by '着‘，not '了’。

 

请问您这个职位缺了多久了？ = May I ask you how long this position has been vacant?

[ZhangJiang]

Here is my two cents. Yes, there is difference, and yes just nuances.

 

1. 请问您这个职位缺了多久了？

2. 请问您这个职位缺多久了？

3. 请问您这个职位缺了多久？

 

When you ask question 1, it implies the position was once taken and then became vacant and now it's still vacant.

When you ask question 2, it doesn't imply the position was once taken (so often used to refer to the position that has always been vacant since created) and now it's still vacant.

When you ask question 3, it doesn't imply the position is still vacant (so often used to refer to the position which was vacant but not any more).

 

I believe there are others that agree with me. Cheers.

[陳德聰]

100% agree with #10.

Often, people who don't have the tools to explain language differences will look at sentences that have the same general meaning and consider them functionally the same.

I think this is also a problem of not bothering to look up the extensive posts on this same subject before posting a question. This happened in a thread not long ago where OP didn't bother to learn what the actual function of the key character in the sentence was before suggesting that it was actually supposed to be a different one. The question wouldn't have been such a silly question if it was one that OP had after he had done his homework and tried to understand it first.

Here have some le threads:

http://www.chinese-forums.com/index.php?/topic/3383-grammar-4-%E4%BA%86/

http://www.chinese-forums.com/index.php?/topic/550-how-to-use-%E4%BA%86%EF%BC%9F/

http://www.chinese-forums.com/index.php?/topic/19670-using-%E4%BA%86-with-duration-time-phrases/

[imron]

I'm sorry if you feel I have slighted the Chinese, or the Chinese language, but there is nothing in my original post (Does this sentence need 2 了s?) which may be so interpreted

No one said you did.

 

I don't believe I made any assumptions about the correctness or otherwise of the original sentence.

Really?  How about

Does this sentence need 2 了s?

Or is the last one 呢？

 

Compare with say a question like "Why does this sentence have 2 了s?

[Pedroski]

I see your problem now: you think 'Does this sentence need 2 了s?' means 'Does this sentence need 2 了s to be correct?' Wrong assumption!

 

Tricky language English!

[Angelina]

”Or is the last one 呢”

You probably want to ask if the second 了 functions as a modal marker.

I would recommend you to read more about grammar. Unfortunately, rote learning is still popular in China and Mandarin teaching is not an exception. For example, all these particles are extremely important, but you might not have found the right textbook or teacher to teach you the rules of their use.

Another suggestion, instead of making assumptions, you can just ask why are two 了s being used in the same sentence. If you make an assumption, other people might think you are pretentious. You don't know how to construct grammatically correct sentences better than native speakers do.

Good luck with Mandarin! Don't be discouraged to ask questions, just make sure you formulate them better next time.

[OneEye]

I see your problem now....Wrong assumption!

 

I think the problem is your own. Try being a little clearer and a little less snarky.