路走不走得通 or 路走得通不通?

[anonymoose]

If came across this sentence:

 

不迈出第一步你永远不知道前面的路走不走得通

 

Then I was thinking, why is it 路走不走得通 and not 路走得通不通. Indeed, a Baidu search also comes up with examples of the latter (albeit a much smaller number):

 

但这条路走得通不通，还是要看诚品是否会把这种分销模式引入大陆诚品的经营运作之中

 

So, my question is, is there any difference between these structures? Is one more natural than the other?

[Kenny同志]

The first structure is correct and I would say the second is wrong.

 

 

You can say 搬不搬得動,

but not 搬得動不動

 

You can say 忍不忍得住,

but not 忍得住不住

 

 

 

You can say 跑不跑得快¹,

as well as 跑得快不快²,

but they can mean different things* or basically the same thing#, depending on the context.

 

1. 偏向指跑的能力，即能不能跑得快，也可指實際跑的時候快慢如何。

2. 偏向指實際跑的時候快慢如何。

 

 

You can say 吃得好不好¹,

as well as 吃不吃得好²,

but they can mean different things* or basically the same thing#, depending on the context.

 

1. 指飲食質量如何。

2. 可指飲食質量如何，也可指飯菜是否夠吃。

 

You can say 住不住得慣¹,

as well as 住得慣不慣²,

and they basically mean the same thing.

 

1. 能住慣嗎？

2. 住得習慣嗎？

 

意思相近。

 

There seem to be some rules which I can't explain.

[Wen87]

个人认为，“路走不走得通”是正确且正规的用法。而“路走得通不通”较为口语化，不太正规。我不会说“路走得通不通”是错误的，但相比“路走不走得通”确实口语化和随意了一些。

[anonymoose]

Thanks for the detailed response.

[anonymoose]

@雯87 谢谢你的周到解释，你的说话风格很熟悉。

[陳德聰]

Just a little supplement to Kenny's explanation:

 

The crux seems to be in the fact that the structure A得B appears in multiple contexts. This also accounts for the blurring that is likely happening in terms of what is "correct" and feels "natural" to people.

 

Kenny's 跑得快 example is the perfect example to use to explain the difference. On its own, this is not terribly ambiguous, but can be reasonably read as the two possibilities Kenny mentioned.

 

1a. 跑得快: complement of degree (how fast/slow does he run? He runs fast.)

or

2a. 跑得快: complement of potential + degree (can he run fast? He can run fast.)

 

It becomes much more obvious when you negate/question it:

1b. 跑得不快

2b. 跑不快

and

1c. 跑得快不快

2c. 跑不跑得快

 

The part that confounds the original example of 通 is that it is a complement of result (走通), but when you add the complement of potential (走得通), it looks structurally identical to the complement of degree construction. Add to that the fact that it is possible to have a potential + degree construction, which also looks identical in structure, and you will end up with what we see now with people saying things like 走得通不通. In general, people tend to transplant rules from one construction to another totally unrelated construction when they look/sound the same.

It's still not so pervasive as to be "correct", but it certainly feels like it has a degree of acceptability/comprehensibility that it will likely enter into general speech for most people if it has not within the next while.

[tommy175]

我会说...   说第二句话的人是脑残！！   “路走得通不通”...   很奇怪的好吗！！

There must be something wrong with the mind of the writer who wrote the second sentence.  "路走得通不通" sound so awkward..

I'm a Chinese, no thanks (you're welcome)

[anonymoose]

Just a little supplement to Kenny's explanation

 

Thanks! Your explanation seems to fit exactly with the sentences that Kenny said were acceptable and not acceptable.

 

I think I get it now.