象鼻子很长

[rtf]

各位好：

 

I would appreciate it very much if native speakers explained to me how they feel about sentences like

象鼻子很长 and他进步很快.

 

1.    {noun + noun + predicate}:

象鼻子很长 -  Should it be considered as  ‘Elephants – nose – long   (‘Topic + Comment’  theory) , or  “Elephants` noses are long (a short version of象的鼻子很长)”, or  ‘In elephants – noses are long (象 being kind of 状语)’. 

 

 

2.    As 进步 can also be a verb, the pattern also might be  {noun + verb + adverbial modifier of manner – ‘how?’}. So,他进步很快 might be just a short version of 他进步得很快

 

 

谢谢。

[daxu]

Hi,

I have to say that your Chinese is better than most so called native speaker already (consider your question).

象鼻子很长 should be “Elephants` noses are long.

The reason: It is rare that you see N+N+Verb or N+N+predicate in Chinese language and when that happens, the two Nouns will have some kind of relationships. In this case, 象 being kind of 状语 is the perfect answer.

 

他进步很快is just a short version of 他进步得很快. Why? 得 is just a character that doesn't have any meaning.

[davoosh]

As far as I know, both 象鼻子很長 and 象的鼻子很長 are acceptable. I think the usual European-framed linguistic terminology applied rigidly to Chinese is not that beneficial. Both can be considered topic + comment:

 

象，鼻子很長

象的鼻子，很長

 

The first implies the topic is elephants in general. Similar to "As for elephants, their trunks are long". According to Li & Thompson Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar, the first example contains a topic as well as a subject; 象 being the topic, and 鼻子 as the subject

 

Of course, in actual usage the difference does not seem very great between both sentences (native speakers comments on this?).

 

We can consider another very common type of sentence:

 

中國我只去過北京和上海 "I've only been to Beijing and Shanghai in China"

 

Here 中國 is the topic of the whole utterance, and the rest is a comment. In European languages, we wouldn't normally 'topicalise' China here. This shows just how prevelant the topic-comment structure is in Mandarin.

[Kenny同志]

象鼻子很長。

他進步很快。

 

Both sentences are fine. You should note, however, that when you say 象鼻子很長, you should insert a short pause between 象 (topic) and 鼻子 or it may sound slightly odd, though I wouldn’t go so far as to say it's wrong.

 

他進步很快。

vs

他進步得很快。

 

Again both sentences are correct.

 

It is obvious that the construction of the second sentence is subject + predicate (i.e. 進步得很快). In this sentence, “進步” acts as a verb – this can be known by the presence of “得”, and “得很快” the adverbial adjunct.

 

As for the first sentence, the construction is not so clear to me. You can treat it either as topic + comment or subject + predicate because it makes sense whether you consider 進步 a noun or a verb.

 

Just my two cents.

[somethingfunny]

Originally I though daxu had been downvoted for the old condescending "Wow, you asked a question about Chinese grammar, you're amazing."  That is until I saw this:

 

"得 is just a character that doesn't have any meaning."

 

Just so we're all on the same page, and for anyone that maybe isn't as well versed in Chinese grammar, this is absolute garbage and should be ignored.  No, I wouldn't necessarily say that the OP has better Chinese than most native speakers (maybe she does, I don't know) but I think we can safely say that we shouldn't be taking grammar lessons from you.

[L-F-J]

The way I would naturally read these sentences, they do not mean the same. But grammatically, it is a bit more ambiguous. Perhaps context would add some clarity.

 

The way I would naturally read them:

 

象鼻子很长 = Elephants' trunks are very long. -or just- Elephant trunks are very long.

象的鼻子很长 = The elephant's trunk is very long.

 

他进步很快 = His progress is very fast.

他进步得很快 = He's progressing very quickly.

 

Given context, the last two might even indicate present perfect tense (has been). And as Kenny said, 进步 in the first one could be understood as a noun or verb, but at first read that's how I would understand it.

[rtf]

Thanks,everyone,for your contribution!

 

Thanks, Kenny同志,your two cents were very helpful. Now I have no questions about sentences like 他進步很快 being either {topic + comment} or {subject + predicate}. But I`m still confused about象鼻子很長,to speak the truth.And as to me this phenomenon is fundamental,I have to ask you this (if you don`t mind,of course):

 

1.From one point of view (daxu) “象鼻子很长 is a short version of 象的鼻子很长  - “Elephants` noses are long”. (L-F-J) 象鼻子很长 = Elephants' trunks are long (all elephants ),象的鼻子很长 = The elephant's trunk is very long (this specific elephant). Then there should be no pause after 象,I suppose.

2*.From another (daxu)  “in {N+N+Verb} or {N+N+predicate} patterns the two Nouns will have some kind of relationship”. In this case, there`s an overtone to象 of a kind of 地点状语 -  ‘In elephants – noses are long’.

3.Or is it象，鼻子很長 - ‘Elephants – noses are long’. There should be a pause after 象,I suppose.

4.Or is it  象，鼻子很長 - ‘As for elephants - (their) noses are long’. There should be a pause after 象,you said.

 

 

*  ‘I have a dog’ would be rendered into Russian as ‘in my possession (there) is a dog’  (‘У меня есть собака’).It`s roughly  在我这儿有一条狗. I guess you,guys, have this in 他有病，‘in him there (is) a disease’, or in 他生病 ‘in him came into existence/arose a disease’, both 他`s here being a kind of地点状语 – the idea,by the way,suggested by some Chinese native speakers at another forum.

 

Would appreciate your thorough answer!

[Messidor]

I agree with davoosh, Kenny and L-F-J on the explanation for your questions on 象... & 进步..., but I disagree with daxu that 象 being a 状语

if we parse the sentence（it may be parsed in two ways）:

象鼻子很长                        象(的)鼻子很长

|--|----------|主谓                |------------|-----|主谓

    |----|-----|主谓        定心 |-------|----||--|--|状心

          |--|--|状心

 

the 象 is a noun (and subject) in the first parsing and it's used adjectively in the second one (though the second parsing seems a little awkward to me if proper context is absent *). In either case 象 is not adverbial.

As with the semantic role of 象 in the first parsing (I'll leave the second one out since 象 is not the theme), I guess it's proper to take 象as the theme, or rather 系事** in Chinese, even there is no 是(is) in the sentence. If we translate it into Japanese it may be easier to understand 象は鼻が長いだ。

 

 As with 他有病 and 他生病(了), I guess the proper translations into English may be he is mad and he's got disease (he is ill). Because 有病 is a single (colloquial) word that means mad. In both cases, 他 is a pronoun (and the subject of that sentence).

I've come up with two pertinent examples: 1)他身上发生了奇怪的变化 ；2) 在他身上发生了奇怪的变化

let's parse:

他身上发生了奇怪的变化                            在他身上发生了奇怪的变化

|--|---------------------------| 主谓                    |----------|----------------------| 状心

   |-----|---------------------| 状心      介词结构 |--|-------||-------|-------------| 述宾

          |-------|--------------| 述宾                 ……

……

In the first case the 状语 is 身上；in the second case 状语 is the prepositional phrase 在他身上. In neither case is 他 used adverbially.

 

------------------------

* for example, the context can be : ...象腿很粗，象鼻子很长，象牙也很长.... Therefore 象 is used adjectively here

** the typology of semantic role is hotly debated issue, and I'm not a specialist at all, so I hope there'll be much better expalnation in this thread

[daxu]

Hi somethingfunny,

 

I don't know if you are a native Chinese speaker or not, but please do not mess up how Chinese language works and how you think Chinese language works.

 

In the context of this sentence: 他進步很快。他進步得很快

得 doesn't have any meaning other than just a connector word. You put that word there, it is ok. If you don't want, great for you as well.

 

If you ever got some understanding on how Chinese grammar evolves, you will know that it is quite different from western language. Current Chinese grammar is almost a foreign species that got introduced by some extremely smart professors to match with Western languages.

 

It worked in lots of time, but in other cases, it just doesn't make any sense to understand grammar meaning unless you are a phd student in Chinese Grammar.

 

For sentence like this: 他進步很快。他進步得很快. Some scholar may say there are differences. But that difference will be like the different personal feelings you get when reading a poem. You may say that this poem is about a flying bird and I may say it is about a delicious fried chicken and we both can be right.

 

We do not teach our native kids Chinese Grammar this way in China and we do not teach our kids Chinese Grammar this way in Western country either.

 

If you want to learn Chinese, then you need to know the basic rules in Chinese grammar (just knowing is enough), don't get hooked into it. If you want to be a professor in Chinese language, that will be a different question (as we actually need to start with the question on current Chinese grammar ever exist or not).

 

How do I know that? My mom was a Chinese teacher in Beijing, my aunt was a  Chinese teacher in Beijing, my brother is a Chinese teacher and I graduated from one of the best uni in China and volunteer in a Chinese school in UK as well.

[davoosh]

@Daxu, somethingfunny hasn't messed anything up. 得 in this sentence may not have much lexical meaning, but it certainly has a function which is well-defined and consistently used throughout Mandarin. That is why people get annoyed when you say things such as "It doesn't have any meaning", because in reality, foreigners learning Mandarin do need to understand how 得 is used and the rules behind it. You certainly cannot just throw 得 in a sentence wherever you like.

 

I (and I am guessing most others) strongly disagree with your comment that "We actually need to start with the question on current Chinese grammar ever exist or not" - if Chinese "had no grammar" we would be able to throw words together in any way we like and still be as correct as a native (also, a language with no grammar is impossible as all languages need a base structure to allow communication).

 

Chinese may not have a grammar like that of European languages which involves lots of tenses, genders and inflections, but it certainly does have grammar which needs to be learnt like any other foreign language. Some examples: Why 們 can't be used as a general plural marker? Why 了 is not just a past-tense particle? Why does 把 bring the object before the verb? Why do we need measure words? And so on.

 

@Rtf,

 

"3.Or is it象，鼻子很長 - ‘Elephants – noses are long’. There should be a pause after 象,I suppose.

4.Or is it  象，鼻子很長 - ‘As for elephants - (their) noses are long’. There should be a pause after 象,you said."

 

3 & 4 are the same thing (and probably the best way of viewing the structure). Both English translations here are just slightly different ways of saying the same thing. In English, it sounds more natural to say "As for..." to introduce the topic, but in Chinese this is unnecessary and as others have said just make a slight pause after the topic (象）.

[daxu]

@davoosh,

 

Long article short. Chinese language dramatically changed in this 100 year. If you apply current grammar to how Chinese people speak before, it will be a fantastic fail.

 

As Chinese grammar is a foreign species introduced, the best it can do is to adapt. So some really smart professors (as smart as the ones who invented pinyin) summarised the rules as best as they can from Chinese people. That is why we can try to understand "Why does 把 bring the object before the verb?Why 了 is not just a past-tense particle?", as some generic rules can exist.

 

If we are talking about a very high and abstracted academic level, it is totally arguable if Chinese Grammar exists. But that arguments will be pure theoretical and it is only for some professors (as it needs to go back more than 100 years to examine how Chinese language evolve, then argument comes on whether Chinese Grammar ever existed or had any significant impact).

 

If we are talking about to learn a foreign language, Chinese grammar certainly exists. You should respect the basic rules, but please do not over spend your time in it.

[Messidor]

得 is a mark of complement, which means there should be a verb, therefore 进步 should be taken as a verb in 他进步得很快.

 

==========================

 

Chinese, be it classical Chinese or putonghua or many dialects, certainly has rules. The problem is NOT that whether there is sth like the grammar of Chinese, but is whether it is possible (or not) that there can be consensus on the grammar of Chinese.Some scholars even argue that grammar is another cognitive category, like fruit or bird, that is not, and cannot, be clearly delimited or definitely applied.

 

 

Also noticeable is that the colloquial Chinese represented in the many novels 200 years ago is very similar to the putonghua today.

[davoosh]

@Daxu, I don't really understand what you're trying to say, to be honest.

 

If you mean descriptions of Chinese grammar might have not existed 100 years ago, then perhaps. But this doesn't mean the language operated without grammar. The two statements are very different, and you seem to be confusing them (and possibly confusing others).

Also, every language has changed over the last 100 years, most people here are not trying to learn Mandarin from the 1800s. (Although it's probably changed less than you think, considering most educated natives can read works like 三國演義 without much problem).

 

The rules about 了，得, and other grammatical features aren't just generic, they're actually quite specific. In some contexts you can use them, and in others they would sound wrong. This isn't just 'purely theoretical' or 'abstract', it's actually quite practical.

 

Finally, this is the grammar section of a Chinese language-learning forum, obviously most posts are going to be about grammatical topics looking for specific answers.

[daxu]

@davoosh,

 

Are you a native Chinese? as my knowledge is almost 100% different from you (as I believe these grammar regarding 了，得 are actually very generic, and all the thing you need to do is know some basic rules and then in most other cases, it doesn't matter how you use it, it is correct anyway). Bit curious on where you learned these grammar knowledge from. 

 

This is a grammar forum and quite possibly lots of people here teach or learn Chinese grammar as a career choice? You may not want to know that there are lots of different opinions on Chinese grammar.

[daxu]

@davoosh

 

Also never realised that people can be so passionate about Chinese language or Chinese Grammar before. Good thing to know anyway.

[davoosh]

@Daxu, regardless of whether there are differing opions, certain grammatical uses are acceptable while others are not. People aren't discussing abstract linguistics theories here, they're looking to see how these structures are used. This is why telling learners things like 得 "dont' have any meaning" or 了 "is just generic and you can use it how you like" are confusing and misleading.

[daxu]

If we talk about that,

 

in this sentence 他进步得很快, 得 "certainly doesn't have any meaning". Whoever says it actually presents any meaning is both misleading and 100% wrong. Please go back and get "Chinese Grammar" re-trained.

 

If you are a native speaker, please go back to your Junior school or middle school teacher. If you are a foreign speaker, most likely you need a different Chinese teacher.

[Kenny同志]

1.From one point of view (daxu) “象鼻子很长 is a short version of 象的鼻子很长  - “Elephants` noses are long”. (L-F-J) 象鼻子很长 = Elephants' trunks are long (all elephants ),象的鼻子很长 = The elephant's trunk is very long (this specific elephant). Then there should be no pause after 象,I suppose.

 

 

You are welcome, RTF.

 

I disagree with daxu on this. I would say 象，鼻子很長 and 象的鼻子很長 mean the same thing and basically use the same sentence pattern, i.e. topic+comment, but still they are quite different.

 

象，鼻子很長。

topic (象)+ comment (鼻子很長)

Elephants, (their) noses are long.

 

象的鼻子很長。

topic (象的鼻子) + comment (很長)

Elephants’ noses, (they) are long.

 

I don’t think 象 functions as a 地點狀語 in either sentence.

 

 

*  ‘I have a dog’ would be rendered into Russian as ‘in my possession (there) is a dog’  (‘У меня есть собака’).It`s roughly  在我这儿有一条狗. I guess you,guys, have this in 他有病，‘in him there (is) a disease’, or in 他生病 ‘in him came into existence/arose a disease’, both 他`s here being a kind of地点状语 – the idea,by the way,suggested by some Chinese native speakers at another forum.

 

 

Similarly, I don’t think 他 is a 地點狀語 in 他有病. This is fairly easy to understand: 他有車 does not mean there is a car in or on him.

[daxu]

@Kenny,

Are you talking about Grammar difference for 象鼻子很長, 象的鼻子很長?

 

If talking about chinese grammar as a set of rules that we try to map to, yes, there can be differences. But if talking about in Chinese language (i.e. do 象鼻子很長, 象的鼻子很長 have any meaning difference), then no, there is no difference.

[Kenny同志]

得 in this sentence may not have much lexical meaning, but it certainly has a function which is well-defined and consistently used throughout Mandarin. 

 

 

Hmm, I think this may be what daxu was trying to say. Obviously, 得 is a typical 虛詞 having little lexical meaning. : )