status of 跟

[Pedroski]

I would like to hear, or rather, read, your opinions on the status of 跟 here。

 

你跟不跟他一起去？

 

Someone said it is a preposition, others say it is a verb. Maybe Chinese draws no distinction? Maybe there is no distinction?

 

It is a verb because we could write '你跟着他一起去？‘ and I suppose we could write '你跟着不跟着他一起去？‘ Apparently, you can't add '着‘  to a prepo. There is the problem here of 'following together'. If you are '一起‘ = ’together‘， that does not count as following, at least in English, but Chinese may see that differently.

 

It is a preposition, because it often is and I could write， with exactly the same meaning, '你和不和他一起去？‘ I don't think you can '和着‘ 。Also, I could write '你跟他一起去不去。although there seems to be a subtle change of meaning there which eludes me.

[Tiana]

Some call it a "co-verb", but I don't see any problem in seeing it as a preposition, if this helps in the learning.

There is some limited usefulness in tracing a word back to its earlier origin but don't attempt to see every of them as arriving at Rome through the same route. They may have very different origins and historical development.

[anonymoose]

跟 has more than one function.

 

One is a coverb meaning "together with", as in 你跟他一起去吗？

 

One is a verb meaning "follow", as in 你总是跟着他。

[Demonic_Duck]

Different functions, different meanings.

 

Noun: heel

 

Verb: to follow (as in “跟着”)

 

Verb: (of a woman) to marry

 

Preposition: something like "with"

 

Conjunction: equivalent to “和” (seems to me like “跟” is used much more commonly in this function in Taiwanese Mandarin, whereas “和” is used much more commonly on the mainland).

[Pedroski]

Thanks for the input. In this particular sentence, what would you say 跟 is?? Are you saying, it is a preposition until we add 着， then it becomes a verb??

 

It is nice to give things labels, such as 'coverb', but what does that mean??

 

I was thinking, the people who say 跟 is a verb in 你跟不跟他一起去 mainly say  so because we can add 着 to it. Conversely, as far as I know, the combination 去着 never occurs in Chinese. Does this then prove 去 is not a verb?

[imron]

Are you saying, it is a preposition until we add 着， then it becomes a verb??

Here's a sentence in English:

 

On your birthday I will present you with your present.

 

Is present a noun or a verb in this sentence?

 

Well, it is both.  Not because you add anything to it, but because when you use it as a verb it's a verb and when you use it as a noun it's a noun.  Same thing with 跟.  Use it as a verb and it's a verb (not because you added 着 to it).  Use it as a co-verb/preposition and it's a co-verb/preposition.

[Pedroski]

The syntactical relations in your sentence indicate the roles played by 'present'. 'your' as a possessive pronoun indicates the following present2 is a  noun. I will 'do sth.' indicates 'present1' is part of a verbal construction and I is not a possessive pronoun, so even without 'will' we cannot interpret ‘I present‘ in the same way you could possibly in Chinese 我（的）礼物.

 

So, your take on 跟 in '你跟不跟他一起去？‘ is what exactly? It is a prepo, a verb, both, neither or it cannot be categorized here? Not that this is very important, it just interests me.

 

Also, I would say present1 as second tone, whereas present2  would be more like fourth tone.

[anonymoose]

As a verb meaning "follow", 跟 must have an object.

 

In your sentence, if 跟 is interpreted as a verb, then 他 must be the object. If 他 is the object of 跟, then what does 一起 refer to? Together with whom/what?

 

If 跟 is a coverb (and by the way, 跟...一起 is a frequently used collocation), then it makes perfect sense because 跟他一起 means "together with him".

[Demonic_Duck]

Also, I would say present1 as second tone, whereas present2  would be more like fourth tone.

 

Stress is not the same as tone, and if pronounced them as "présént" and "prèsènt" your English would sound extremely weird...

[imron]

The syntactical relations in your sentence indicate the roles played by 'present'.

And likewise the syntactical relations in your sentence indicate the roles played by '跟'.

[Pedroski]

You don't want to say what you think 跟 is, do you? It is not clear to me what 跟 is, and by what syntactical relations I might deduce this. Maybe you could simply tell me??

 

The gf immediately said 跟 in my sentence  means 'with'. The question is, can you 'with着'。Alternatively, we have 2 sentences whose meanings are  identical and whose compositions are nearly identical. 你跟不跟他一起去？ and 你跟着不跟着他一起去？

 

Coverb seems to mean 'we can't say if it is a verb or a prepo'.  Then it must be a coverb!

 

English like Spanish would only stress one vowel in any given word I think, so we would not say présént, but presént, not prèsènt but presènt. The result, wherever the stress correctly lies, is 2 different words spelt the same.

 

If you read 一起 as together, it can complement 跟 howsoever you interpret 跟。To me that does not seem to say what 跟 is.

[anonymoose]

Why don't you just get a grammar book? I recommend "Basic Chinese: A Grammar and Workbook" by Yip and Rimmington. It will explain this to you, as well as many other grammar points that you waste your and other people's time arguing in circles over.

[imron]

You don't want to say what you think 跟 is, do you?

Sorry, not trying to be evasive.  I just thought it had already been answered in the second (and several subsequent) posts and didn't see the need to repeat that.  It's a coverb.

 

Coverb seems to mean 'we can't say if it is a verb or a prepo'.  Then it must be a coverb!

For someone who seems to be so fixated on grammar, I'm not sure why you can't accept that different languages may have grammatical constructs that aren't fully explained by the constructs of another language.  I agree with anonymoose's suggestion about the Yip and Rimmington book.

 

The question is, can you 'with着'

For fear of going round in circles, 'with' is but one usage/meaning of 跟.  Usages with '着' are a different usage and different meaning.  It's counterproductive to see them as 'with'.

[陳德聰]

I think Tiana answered your question immediately. Your example shows a coverb, and whether you decide to create your own definition of coverb rather than learning what it actually means is up to you.

[Pedroski]

I suppose, if we make the definition of 'coverb' vague enough, it can be used to cover all eventualities! Dictionaries covered by onelook.com do not have any entry for coverb, except for wiki. I wonder how much acceptance 'coverb' finds in the wider world? There are names of things, and then there are explanations for things. These are not necessarily synonymous. A bit like the word 'gravity'. A simple word, but what is it actually?

 

Wiki "Coverb is a grammatical term which can have several different meanings, but generally denotes a word or prefix that in some way resembles a verb or operates together with a verb."

 

Which meaning of coverb do you mean?

[anonymoose]

A word that operates together with a verb. This is explained in the grammar book I mentioned above.

[imron]

I wonder how much acceptance 'coverb' finds in the wider world?

Probably not a lot except for people wanting to use a name to describe something commonly used in Chinese that doesn't have a good match with existing English grammar terminology.

[OneEye]

No, everything must match with English perfectly.

[陳德聰]

Isn't "a word or prefix that in some way resembles a verb or operates together with a verb" precisely what 跟 in your question is doing? If it quacks like a duck, can science explain gravity?