omitting 'le'

[freefall]

What would happen if I omitted the 'le' from this sentence:

"zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wanr le" ?

Would it be considered incorrect? I noticed that the 'le' can be omitted if the action is negative:

"zuotian wanshang wo meiyou ting yinyue"

so obviously the past-nature of the action is determined by the 'zuotian' adverb and the le is not absolutely needed to convey the meaning of the first sentence.

[HashiriKata]

What would happen if I omitted the 'le' from this sentence:

"zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wanr le" ?

Without le, the sentence is still grammatical and you'll still be understood but that's not the way a Chinese would communicate here. The le here is to signal to the hearer "I'm updating your knowledge with this piece of information", relevant in the context where the hearer didn't expect or didn't realize that you've been to Xiao Gao's.

An easy example to remember is: someone knew that you smoked and offered you a cigarette. You said: "Wo bu zhouyan le" (I no longer smoke), and that is how you update someone knowledge with new information.

Look in the sticky of this section, you may find more information on the use of "le".

[Quest]

What would happen if I omitted the 'le' from this sentence:

"zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wanr le" ?

Omitting "le" would make the sentence sound more natural? Who came up with the original sentence? The main verb is "qu" , so the "le" should follow "qu". If you put "le" after "wan", then the sentence would sound incomplete ---- wan le shenme? wan le duojiu?

The correct way to say it should be:

zuotian wanshang wo qu le xiao gao jia wan.

or

zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wan le yi zhen zi.

or just

zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wan.

[HashiriKata]

Who came up with the original sentence? The main verb is "qu" , so the "le" should follow "qu".

You seem to be thinking about a different le from the one in the original sentence, Quest ?

(Anyway, what do I know! )

[heifeng]

"zuotian wanshang wo meiyou ting yinyue"

so obviously the past-nature of the action is determined by the 'zuotian' adverb and the le is not absolutely needed to convey the meaning of the first sentence.

mei + le is just grammatically incorrect anyway, right? anyone? yeah, I should just look in a book to verify this...hmmm

[anonymoose]

le signifies the completion of an action, so for something that did take place in the past, le is often used in association with the verb:

zuotian wanshang wo qu le xiao gao jia wan.

For something that didn't take place in the past, by definition the action wasn't completed, and that's why le is not used in these sentences:

zuotian wanshang wo meiyou ting yinyue.

However, le is a very complicated character with many functions and nuances, and it's impossible to come up with a simple set of rules that covers all possible uses. You'll probably find that in some situations, even Chinese people can't agree where, when or whether le should be used.

[anonymoose]

heifeng

mei + le is just grammatically incorrect anyway, right? anyone? yeah, I should just look in a book to verify this...hmmm

As an aspect marker le is not used together with mei (see my previous post).

EDITED POST BECAUSE WHAT I WROTE WAS JUST WRONG

[heifeng]

A 04:37:06

如果本来要去一个地方但是后来没去,你可以说'我没有去了' 吗?

B 04:38:06

不可以

A 04:41:22

为什么?

B 04:38:33

我没去　！　这个就可以

A 04:42:07

那么如果你要强调你本来要去但是没有,怎么说呢?

B 04:40:07

我本来要去，但是没去成！

A 04:44:07

所以你就根本不能说 我没有去了, 我没有吃了,他没有去找小姐了。。。

B 04:41:18

对　没错

A 04:44:36

好的!确定了吗?

B 04:41:59

确定了　

A 04:45:19

好的, 谢谢老大

B 04:42:18

但也会有例外比如说！　

这些天没有风了

我没有烟了

A 04:47:20

那么怎么不可以说 没有去了

B 04:44:13

去　是一个动词　后面不可以＋了

A 04:48:21

好的.... 谢谢啦,你真是我的呕像!!!哈哈

terry 04:46:01

你看我举　例子　了　前面的词都是名词

靠！哼！

~time passes~all this le questions continue to torment me...oh no

A 05:28:15

如果加上一个宾语的话你也不能说‘我没有吃饭了‘

B 05:25:25

对！

A 05:28:38

你可以说：

我没有吃饭呢

我没有吃饭啦

吗？

B 05:34:19

我没有吃饭呢　可以！　

我没有吃饭啦　　台湾人　比较喜欢再后面加个啦！　呵呵　但是　也可以这么说

A 05:37:51

你会怎么说？

B 05:35:02

我还没有吃饭呢！　

(不要加‘了‘ )

A 05:39:01

好嘞 !

Ok, maybe this helps....even if it's 'gramatical' , I don't think a native speaker will say mei + verb + le and now that I think about it I distinctly remember being told this long long ago by another native speaker, but then again this could just be a point of non-agreement....

[anonymoose]

heifeng, OK then, if you got that from the horse's mouth...

(Nice use of 靠 at the end of the conversation.)

[Quest]

You seem to be thinking about a different le from the one in the original sentence, Quest ?

No.... "zuotian wo qu xiao gao jia wan le." doesn't sound natural no matter what "le" it is. That's like saying "Yesterday I go to xiao gao's house to played."

and, "wo mei qu le" is definitely not right, unless like said above if it's Taiwanese: "我没去了啦”, in which case "le" doesn't function in the same way.

[Altair]

I found the following interesting and surprising use of 没 and 了 in a dictionary:

"They attempted to rob the bank." 他們(想)要搶銀行,可是沒槍了.

Here 了 was given the reading liǎo, not le. Is this sort of usage perhaps an exception to the prohibition against using 沒 mei and 了 le in the same phrase?

[HashiriKata]

First, there's a tiny typo in your sentence. It should be:

他們(想)要搶銀行,可是沒搶了.

Back to the question: regardless the origin of 了, the 了(read liǎo) in this sentence can be regarded as an independent lexical item with its own meaning (as opposed to the 了(read le) as a grammatical item). You can see this liǎo very often in this combination:

verb + 不/得了= can't accomplish/ can accomplish something。

PS: I've just thought of a sentence which seems to demonstrate the independent existence of the 2 le's quite well: 我做不了了！(= I can't do it!)

[freefall]

"zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wanr le" was indeed taken from a textbook:

Integrated Chinese, 2ed, level 1, part 1

[HashiriKata]

Thanks for your last post, freefall!

No.... "zuotian wo qu xiao gao jia wan le." doesn't sound natural no matter what "le" it is.

Quest's reply reminds me of an example by Yip Po-Ching and Don Rimmington:

那个人是男的了！

So, all I can say is this: the kinds of sentences that can be affixed with le is only limited by our imagination of the contexts.

[Quest]

"zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wanr le" was indeed taken from a textbook:

Does not change a thing, does it? wan le shenme? wan le duojiu? Are you sure that's the full sentence written in the book? What about the stuff before and after it?

[nipponman]

Does not change a thing, does it? wan le shenme? wan le duojiu? Are you sure that's the full sentence written in the book? What about the stuff before and after it?

Quest, isn't this 'le' the sort of particle that shows new information? As such, it could be a reply to such a question as, "Why didn't you call me yesterday?" But if that is not possible, than the error obviously lies with the text. Often times sentences in these books are not generated (at least not in my book) by native speakers but by a special technique that I can't remember the name of (it begins with a 'p'). As such, this may be why Quest doesn't agree with the sentence: it truely doesn't exist.

[Quest]

Quest, isn't this 'le' the sort of particle that shows new information? As such, it could be a reply to such a question as, "Why didn't you call me yesterday?"

nipponman, it's hard to explain. If the question was 为什么你昨天晚上不打给我? Then, the answer "因为我去小高家了” would sound ok. Or, ”妈，我去玩了！“ would sound ok as well. But, 昨天晚上我去小高家玩了 by itself as a sentence just sounds incomplete. I think it may be because of the 昨天晚上 signalling past tense and with 去 being the main verb, or the transitive nature of 玩, or the presentation of the sentence by itself, it's hard to frame your mind to interpret it as a complete sentence. Maybe some before and after context would help. Others care to comment? After repeating the sentence again and again in my head trying to make it sound ok, I think I have developed a bias. Maybe a fresh look from another native speaker would give more insight.

[Altair]

Would the sentence be acceptable if it were framed as 昨天晚上我去小高家玩去了?

[HashiriKata]

I believe that the sentence is intended to be complete as it is. So, let me suggest a context:

Supposing that there was previously a talk about A wanting to visit Xiaogao's family (perhaps to see how beautiful Xiao Gao's sister is ), and yesterday the visit took place. Can A now use the sentence to tell others about it, to update them of the development:

昨天晚上我去小高家玩了

(= zuotian wanshang wo qu xiao gao jia wanr le)

? ?

If this context is at all appropriate for the sentence, then please look again at what I wrote in my first reply to this thread about the function of this le (post #2).

[Quest]

HK, again I know what you mean, but it still doesn't change the fact that 昨天晚上我去小高家玩了。does not sound natural no matter how hard I try to make it so. Whenever I come to the 了, the questions shenme? duojiu? would pop right up.

I think both 昨天晚上我去了小高家玩了。(still somewhat awkward) and Altair's suggestion 昨天晚上我到小高家玩去了。 would eliminate the problem. Maybe when you are using two verbs to talk about the past, 了 just can't comfortably be used in the "update information" sense when the past aspect particle 了s are being omitted.

人都到哪去了？你们觉得这句子通顺吗？

My take:

昨天晚上我去小高家玩，玩了三个小时才走。(ok)

昨天晚上我去小高家玩了三个小时才走。(ok)

昨天晚上我终于去了小高家玩。(ok)

昨天晚上我去（到）小高家玩去了。(ok)

昨天晚上我去了小高家玩。(ok)

昨天晚上我去小高家玩游戏机了。(ok)

昨天晚上我去小高家玩了。(sounds like its missing something, maybe 语法没错但语感有点像这个)

明天晚上我就要去小高家玩了。(ok)

我现在要去小高家玩了。(ok)