〇个人？

[DaveR]

I've been practicing using measure words and wondered if they can be used to say "zero" of something. Like "there were zero people in the line for tickets". I know in English you typically say something more like "there was nobody in the line" , or "there was no one in line", but sometimes we might say "there were zero people...", can you say that in Chinese too:  〇个人 ?

[Demonic_Duck]

Yep, you can use it like that. Similar to English, it's more common to use other ways of saying it (没有人 etc.)

 

Here's an example of "0 个" in the wild (word count in an empty MS Word document)‌:

 

[xinoxanu]

10 minutes ago, Demonic_Duck said:

Here's an example of "0 个" in the wild (word count in an empty MS Word document)‌:

 

But isn't that just how UI's generally work? AFAIK this is just the easiest way to program a counter since you only code for "X number"+" word" and let the system only alter "x".

 

That said, I don't think I've ever heard 零个人 before. @Demonic_Duck, in which real-life context have you heard this?

[Demonic_Duck]

1 hour ago, xinoxanu said:

But isn't that just how UI's generally work? AFAIK this is just the easiest way to program a counter since you only code for "X number"+" word" and let the system only alter "x".

 

Sure it's easiest, but it only adds a trivial amount of work to detect the zero case and display another message. But what would be a better message here? "没有字" would just be kinda awkward and probably make it more confusing. I guess you could have something like "无内容", but again, why? "0 个字" is already grammatically correct and the meaning is very clear.

 

1 hour ago, xinoxanu said:

I don't think I've ever heard 零个人 before. @Demonic_Duck, in which real-life context have you heard this?

 

我在〇个实际场景下听过这个说法。

 

But that's not really the point - the question was "is it grammatical", not "is it a common way of saying it".

[889]

This is one of those instances where we can always Google away and find wierd examples. But the basic answer is it's no more used in Chinese than in English.

 

Good Chinese, like good English, means above all not sounding wierd. And never arguing "But it's grammatically correct!" when a native speaker says it sounds wierd.

 

Never blindly follow "the rules." You know, like the one that goes, "i before e except after c."

[roddy]

“My angry fence swore wetly” is grammatically correct, and in a few minutes will be on Google, if that helps. 

[Lu]

12 hours ago, DaveR said:

can you say that in Chinese too:  〇个人 ?

Perhaps you can, but the Chinese don't, so you shouldn't either. 没有人 is what you need.

[abcdefg]

12 hours ago, xinoxanu said:

That said, I don't think I've ever heard 零个人 before.

 

Pretty sure I've never heard it either. I think it would be a mistake for a beginner, like the original poster, to practice expressing the concept like that. 

[DaveR]

Thanks all for your input. As I suspected 〇个 isn't something I would expect to hear much if ever, though I suspect if I said it people wouldn't look at me as strangely as they might if I said "My angry fence swore wetly". 

 

And don't worry, I don't intend to go around talking about zero people when I could just say mei you ren. 

[If_IwasaLinguist]

I would like to explore the situational difference between "zero people" and "nobody", which may help figure out how to use the above arguable expression. 

 

As a second language user of English, the feeling of using "zero people" is to emphasize there is really no people, and it can be translated into 那里一个人都没有 (There is not even one person). By using "nobody", it seems to generally describe the situation of no one standing there, which is less emotional. The translation of "nobody" should be 那里没有人 (There is no one). 

 

Then back to Chinese. If you use 0个人, you may draw one's attention by using a unfamiliar expression, which is grammatically correct but weird in daily life. If you use 没有人, you are objectively describing a situation. 

[markhavemann]

3 hours ago, If_IwasaLinguist said:

which is grammatically correct but weird in daily life.

Just because something follows an accepted pattern doesn't mean it is grammatically correct. Weird can equal wrong. 

 

You can't argue that "eated" is grammatically correct because so many verbs like walk->walked add an "ed" for the past tense. I'm no linguist but I think exceptions are part of grammar, aren't they? (if I understand correctly that grammar is the "rules" of how words of a language change and are put together).

 

So just like in English  eat->eats is regular, while eat->ate is not, maybe 没有人 is a similar irregular pattern, making "零个人" as ungrammatical as "eated". 

[roddy]

Weird usage from a native speaker might be taken as a joke or inventive. From a learner, it's more likely to be seen as a mistake. 

[DaveR]

6 hours ago, If_IwasaLinguist said:

I would like to explore the situational difference between "zero people" and "nobody",

 

In English I would use it to emphasize literal meaning. It's common to 'exaggerate' with the use of "nobody", for example if you go to the mall and there are quite a few less people there than normal you might say "omg, there's nobody here!", even though there are in fact some people. If there were truly no one there you could also say "There is not even a single person here", but I can't recall myself using that phrasing in casual conversation, it sounds more like something you'd read in a story (i.e. written rather than actually spoken). I would be more likely to say "omg, there are zero people here!". But I suppose that could just be my own idiosyncratic preference.

 

[DaveR]

4 hours ago, markhavemann said:

You can't argue that "eated" is grammatically correct because so many verbs like walk->walked add an "ed" for the past tense. I'm no linguist but I think exceptions are part of grammar, aren't they? (if I understand correctly that grammar is the "rules" of how words of a language change and are put together).

 

Yes exactly, an exception defines 'eated' as incorrect. Otherwise, I would assume that anything that follows the pattern is grammatically correct. 

 

4 hours ago, markhavemann said:

So just like in English  eat->eats is regular, while eat->ate is not, maybe 没有人 is a similar irregular pattern, making "零个人" as ungrammatical as "eated". 

 

I wouldn't assume that the existence of an alternative pattern makes "零个人" ungrammatical. In English there are many alternatives (nobody, no one, not even a single person, etc.), but there is no rule stating that you can't say 'zero people'.

[markhavemann]

12 hours ago, DaveR said:

I wouldn't assume that the existence of an alternative pattern makes "零个人" ungrammatical. In English there are many alternatives (nobody, no one, not even a single person, etc.), but there is no rule stating that you can't say 'zero people'.

Agreed, but the fact that native speakers view it as wrong would mean that it's ungrammatical, and that the alternative is grammatical, even though it does follow the otherwise accepted pattern, just like eated would.

 

To a Chinese speaker, 零个人 sounds about the same as eated does to an English speaker. I mentioned this to a native speaker and without even a moment of hesitation they said "no way".