Verb Valency?

[hashamyim]

Hey All,

I am learning Mandarin and, having learnt a few European languages, can't help but feel that something is missing...! In Indo-European languages, verbs have valency, i.e. they can be extended in meaning but, in order to do so, specific words have to be used. So, for example, the verb 'to wait' can become 'to wait for/with/on someone/something' but you can't wait 'about/to/off/...' as these prepositions can't be used with that verb. Of course, when learning an Indo-European language, you get huge long lists of these: to wait for, to believe in, to succumb to, to relish in, to find out about, etc etc.

However, no matter how hard I look, I can't seem to find this sort of list for Chinese. I know that verbs take prepositions, for example 我给他借我书 or 我对我朋友说话  but no list of verbs and their prepositions seems to exist.

Is this a simple case of nobody ever having bothered to list them out, or is there a deeper reason why such a list couldn't exist in Chinese that I've failed to realise?!

Your input would be greatly appreciated!

[Kamille]

These are called phrasal verbs and aren't an "Indo-European" characteristic. Just try to find any latin language that has them, for example. Wish you luck.

 

我给他借我书 is incorrect, by the way. Try 我把書借給他 or something of the like.

 

By the way, have you never felt that something was missing in English? I personnaly find it very weird that you can't open a word to put other words inside, like "you com what about plain" instead of "what are you complaining about". Definitely something is missing in English :-/ ...

[Shelley]

I suggest you have a read of this http://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Verbs and this http://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Verbs_with_gei

 

Verbs in Chinese are not like verbs in any indo-european language that I am aware of.

 

My advice would be not to expect the Chinese use of verbs, nouns etc to be like any other language you have learnt.

 

 

[anonymoose]

Chinese belongs to a totally different language system from Indo-European languages, so it is not very fruitful to try to find parallels where they don't (and have no reason to) exist.

 

Nevertheless, I'll try to answer your question at face value.

 

In the examples you gave, such as "believe in" or "succumb to", the "in" and the "to" don't have any concrete meaning (at least in modern English), so you just have to remember them as integral part of the phrases.

 

On the other hand, 给 and 对 are independent words with their own meaning, and though used in conjunction with verbs, are not integral parts of them. Therefore, a list of such combinations would be arbitrary, otherwise you could make an open-ended list of any two-word combinations.

 

So to answer your question, the number of co-verbs in Chinese is relatively small. Once you get used to their meanings and usages, it should be fairly obvious which one to use, without having to memorise by rote as you may in Indo-European languages.

[hashamyim]

Ah right anonymoose - I see what you mean. So, because all the 'prepositions' (if we permit ourselves to call them that) have a meaning of their own, it is normally quite obvious which one to use with which verb, or at least, which one will convey the meaning that you're wanting to express? I suppose in that regard, it means that a list would be very possible, but somewhat obvious. Would be good to have a list though, so that I can get a feel for which 'preposition' to use in which scenario, i.e. their meanings. (nice profile name, I might add!).

 

Kamille - sorry, I wasn't suggesting that Chinese is an Indo-European language (that would be foolery!), however I was just expressing where I was coming from. As for splitting verbs in English, you are sort of right. From a historical perspective, English verbs come in two types: Germanic and Romantic. The romantic verbs come from the Norman influence and indeed cannot be split, however the germanic verbs can often be split to an extent (though not to the extent that can be achieved in other germanic languages, such as German): for example, I took off my shoes vs. I took my shoes off (compare this with the romatic-verb equivalent: I remove my shoes, I re- my shoes -move!). However, it is indeed true that we don't have 'default objects' such as 买东西，写字，说话，看书 or 睡觉.

 

Hey Shelley - thanks for the links. I will give them a read - alas, although I am not expecting them to behave like other verbs, that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm able to work out how to express certain constructs :-( Unless Chinese people don't ever wait for someone (I'm unable to say whether this is true or not!), then the likelihood is that they will have a way of being able to say this - just need to know what that is :-)

 

Thanks all!

[anonymoose]

I suppose in that regard, it means that a list would be very possible, but somewhat obvious. Would be good to have a list though, so that I can get a feel for which 'preposition' to use in which scenario, i.e. their meanings.

 

All you need for that is to just look at some example sentences.

[陳德聰]

I think any such list would be redundant as the prepositions can be used with many different verbs.

 

1a. 我給你說

1b. 我對你說

 

2a. 我給你說話 X

2b. 我對你說話

 

The above is probably as good an example as any:

給 denotes that its object is the recipient of the verb's direct object (as if it were given like a gift) or the recipient of the verb's result (as if it were given as a favor).

對 denotes that its object is the target of the verb or the verb's direct object. It denotes more directionality that anything.

 

That is why 2a. is no good and 2b. is fine, because the listener is not the recipient of 話 because one can't give someone 話.

 

But then consider:

 

3a. 給我閉嘴

3b. 對我閉嘴 X

 

This should seem more obvious, since you're not directing your mouth at a person when you're shutting it (3b), but you can be shutting it for someone (3a).

[Guest123]

 

 

Is this a simple case of nobody ever having bothered to list them out, or is there a deeper reason why such a list couldn't exist in Chinese that I've failed to realise?!

The deepest reason that there is nothing to list   Mandarin functions in a different way than indo-european languages. 对 and 给 in fact are not really prepositions, even if in some sentences their function can be similar to european prepositions. They are coverbs.

I'd say from experience (I'm a language teacher) that those who keep comparing the language they want to learn with their mother tongue or other languages they have already learnt, the progress in learning gets slower. You can often feel you don't understand something, but in fact it's not that you don't understand, you simply can't find the anaolgous scheme in your head, you block yourself by comparing. It's much more effectif to "forget" other languages and make aquaintance with this one without any "prapared ideas". Of course, understanding differences is a good thing. But, you see waht I mean? You knowledge of one language is not necessary what can help to learn well another one, it might complicate things.

If you want better understand chinese grammar and its difference froms european languages. Wikipedia artical is quite good:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_grammar