What is a resource for learning the meaning and use of Chinese metadiscourse words?

[Friday]

Nouns and verbs are relatively easy to learn. But I find many words in the HSK 4 lists that appear to be used just for meta-discourse or to give the text structure. Reading the dictionary definitions does not help me to understand the meaning and use.

 

Here are some examples of words I've seen, but can never quite understand:

• 如此
• 除了
• 仍然
• 然而
• 因而
• 为此
• 此外
• 因此

Most of the Chinglish I read seems in relation to this kind of language, so I will guess that this is not easily translated to English.

 

Can anyone recommend any book or reference material that focuses specifically on these types of words and gives some good explanation or examples in clear English telling the form, meaning, and use?

[Gharial]

Most of the items you've listed appear in a book I have called Han Ying Xuci Cidian 汉英虚词词典 A Chinese-English Dictionary of Function Words (Sinolingua, Beijing 1994), which has concise, reasonably functional Chinese and English explanations followed by several or more authentic examples (drawn mainly from fiction, but with a few from newspapers and magazines) given in hanzi and Pinyin (but with no translation of said examples) for each usage listed. I'll type up some of an example entry in a bit to give you an idea of what it's like. Might be what you're looking for. A similar, somewhat less comprehensive but much easier book though (with translations for each example) is Jiaying Howard's 汉语虚词学习手册 A Student Handbook for Chinese Function Words (The Chinese University Press, Hong Kong 2002). Then again, Pleco usually has at least an example or two replete with translations, so...

[imron]

Reading the dictionary definitions does not help me to understand the meaning and use.

For these types of words, I personally find it far more instructive to read the definitions in a Chinese-Chinese dictionary.  They will often highlight nuance and explain things more clearly than an English dictionary.

[Guest realmayo]

many words in the HSK 4 lists that appear to be used just for meta-discourse or to give the text structure

 

You're right to pay particular attention to these: I found that moving from kind-of-knowing what these words do, to really-knowing, made a big really increase to the comfort and speed of reading. And there are plenty of similar words you'll encounter beyond HSK 4 too.

[Gharial]

OK, here are the entries for 然而 from each book I mentioned:

 

Sinolingua:

 

然而 rán'ér (连词)

 

同 "但是", 但有书面语意味。"然而" 后可以有停顿：

Same as 但是 (however), but sounds more literary. There may be a pause after it:

 

A 同 "但是" B, 所引出的语句意思和前面的语意是相对的：

Same as 但是 B, introduces a statement which has a contrary meaning to what proceeds it:

 

1. 他的医术，并没有精通过人，只能算是最普通的，~ 他的名声远近都知道。 （吴浊流《先生妈》）

Tā de yīshù, bìng méiyou jīngtōng guò rén, zhǐ néng suàn shì zuì pǔtōng de, ~ tā de míngshēng yuǎn jìn dōu zhīdào.

 

2. 上课的时候，他虽然坐在全班学生的中间，~ 总觉得孤独得很。 （郁达夫《沉沦》）

Shàng kè de shíhou, tā suīrán zuò zài quán bān xuésheng de zhōngjiān, ~ zǒng juéde gūdú de hěn.

 

3. 他是在饥饿与皮鞭下长大的，~ 他的身体却生长得非常魁伟，筋壮力强。 （鄂华《自由神的命运》）

Tā shì zài jī'è yǔ píbiān xià zhǎngdà de, ~ tā de shēntǐ què shēngzhǎng de fēicháng kuíwěi, jīn zhuàng lì qiáng.

 

4. 院子门平常很少上门闩的，总是用根扛子顶住，用力一揎就会推开。~ 这晚上不仅定了，不仅上了门闩，还特别关得紧。 （沙汀《风浪》）

Yuànzi mén píngcháng hěn shǎo shàng ménshuān de, zǒngshì yòng gēn gàngzi dǐngzhù, yòng lì yi xuān jiù huì tuīkāi. ~ zhè wǎnshang bùjǐn dǐng le, bùjǐn shàng le ménshuān, hái tèbié guān de jǐn.

 

B

Same as 但是 A. What precedes 然而 and what follows it are not contrary to each other; what follows serves as a supplement to what goes before.

(4 examples)

 

Compare 然. [Which the book says is the same as 然而 LOL - Gharial]

 

 

Howard:

 

然而 ránér [Conjunction] [Note the lack of an apostrophe in the Pinyin - Gharial]

 

# Yet, but, however

 

下着大雪，然而并不很冷。

Xià zhe dà xuě, ránér bìng bù hěn lěng.

It is snowing, but not very cold.

 

双方谈判了很久，然而没有达成协议。

Shuāngfāng tánpàn le hěn jiǔ, ránér méi yǒu dáchéng xiéyì.

Both parties negotiated for a long time, but did not reach an agreement.

[Friday]

Thanks very much for your detailed examples! I will probably buy the first book, as the English descriptions are better, although the example sentences are far too difficult for me to read, so I'll have to compile my own sample sentences for each word.

 

The second book's definition "Yet, but, however" means little to me, as, even in English, the concepts are perhaps too abstract. I use "yet" very often in English writing, but trying to explain and understand it is tricky. I use "但是" in Chinese quite naturally, with no problem at all, because I hear it so often, but I couldn't explain to anyone how to use it. Does being able to explain these concepts to others help oneself to gain greater fluency? Or is it enough to simply practice these and not think too much about the meaning?

 

I wonder why many Chinese reference books use "~" to replace the word instead of use bold? Does that provide some study advantage for students? Or just save the authors pages?

[TheBigZaboon]

Gharial seems to have given you two excellent recommendations that, at least in my opinion, go a long, long way toward addressing your problem.

 

But in your reply, you seem to have included a little quirk of logic that I have yet to be able to understand. You choose the book with examples you cannot read in order to understand the use of "meta-discourse" words the usage of which you cannot currently comprehend . The second book (that of Jiaying Howard) admittedly has more terse actual definitions, but includes two examples each, with both simplified and traditional characters, pinyin, and idiomatic and accurate English translations. I don't know how things could be made any more convenient or accessible. And I would think that is just what you need.

 

I have both of the books Gharial recommends, but I tend to go to Howard first because it's so easy to use, and has about 500 or so entries. It doesn't have everything, but when it does have the entry I want, I find I seldom have to look any further. So Howard has all the markings and the creases in the spine, while the other has the place of honor at the end of the shelf where its primary responsibility is to anchor the row so the more frequently used books don't topple over.

 

In any case, there are a number books out there that meet the criteria of including explanations and examples that are far too difficult for you to understand, but instead of listing those, I will introduce you to a book that will give you exhaustive explanations that should satisfy your need to know how these words work, and give you plenty of examples to boot. This book is truly exhausting in its thoroughness. So much so, that I cannot find it on my bookshelf to check on whether it has pinyin and whether the examples are translated. I just don't use it that often. But when I really haven't a clue, it is truly the English-friendly reference of last resort. But, I warn you, this guy is not for the faint of heart...

 

Dictionary for Readers of Modern Chinese Prose: Your Guide to the 250 Key Grammatical Markers in Chinese (Far Eastern Publications Series) First Edition Edition

by Stanley Mickel (Author)

 

http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Readers-Modern-Chinese-Prose/dp/0887101933/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1455778767&sr=1-2&keywords=mickel+stanley

 

Sorry for the bold and caps, but I cut and pasted the entry from Amazon. (And I can't guarantee the late Professor Mickel didn't use "~"s.)

 

Anyway, just my two rupiah. Hope it helps.

 

TBZ

[Gharial]

I can see both sides - apparently "terse" definitions don't exactly tell you how they were logically arrived at (though they'll doubtless be in the ballpark, just around behind the nets maybe LOL), while extra detail, certainly in the length and potential complexity of genuine as opposed to likely at least partly-invented examples, especially when they're more reflective of writing than speech per se, can be a bit overwhelming at times. And I didn't necessarily mean either book as an absolute recommendation (I haven't used them that much myself yet! Though FWIW I can get the gist of all the examples quoted, and don't have much of a problem with the Howard ones or Sinolingua's number 2), but more just to give a taste of what such books may have (or not?) to offer beyond a good general dictionary or two. Overall I'd caution to not conflate definitionese with actual usage (too many EFL teachers for one conflate the two, with the result that they rarely if ever contextualize the language that convincingly, as they are always far too busy "explaining" rather than "simply" showing).

 

That is, the blocks to understanding (at least receptive understanding) may not have so much to do with function words, but more to do with content words (the "concrete" lexis) and context generally. I don't know if you've heard of Stephen Krashen or buy into his theories of more unconscious acquisition versus more conscious learning etc, but he did say something once that seems quite relevant here: "When students travel, they don't carry grammar books, they carry dictionaries" (presumably with the proviso of "After hopefully completing a decent basic language course[book] or two first"). And of course, nowadays they carry smartphones with Pleco and whatever else than lug piles of books around.

 

I'd certainly like to have a look at more recent offerings though, such as the one that TBZ mentions. There wasn't as much available back when I was in Chinese book-buying if not studying mode (and had more money to spare!), plus the more you buy, the more you end up with to wade through anyway!

 

Lastly, regarding the use of swung dashes as opposed to bolded hanzi, in the Sinolingua it's not just a matter of space (though often the missing hanzi or two could've been inserted without the text wrapping round onto a new line), but rather the smallish size of the font that's the issue. It's not quite ABC dictionary small, but if it was bolded it could start to affect legibility (in the way that the bolding in say Routledge's A Frequency Dictionary of Mandarin Chinese is sometimes an issue), plus it's just the convention in lexicography. The Howard in contrast has big enough characters and page size/white space devoted generally that the bolding works and isn't an issue.