为什么会有星星 - help me understand 会有 in this sentence.

[webmagnets]

为什么会有星星.

Does this mean "Why do stars exist?"?

I am having particular trouble with 会有.

[renzhe]

I'm getting a feeling that your approach to learning is a bit too random.

会 and 有 are the two most basic and important verbs you will learn. Your textbook should have explained them at great length. 有 means "there is", and 会 indicates possibility.

为什么 = why?

为什么会 = how can it be? what is it that?

Basically, you can't drop 会 in this sentence because it would be incomplete.

[webmagnets]

I am attempting to use Barry Farber's technique where you take a paragraph of chinese and look up every word you don't know. Then you try to make sense of it.

I do know what 会 and 有 mean, but I don't understand them together.

What does 为什么会有星星 translate to in English? "Why is it possible that stars exist?"?

[jbradfor]

A technique that will stop working when renzhe starts to charge you for being your Chinese tutor.

[webmagnets]

I try to look something up online and in all of my books. When I am unsuccessful I bring it to this forum.

Do you know of a better way?

[renzhe]

I am attempting to use Barry Farber's technique where you take a paragraph of chinese and look up every word you don't know. Then you try to make sense of it.

I really don't think it's a very good approach.

Chinese is a language, not a collection of words. And in Chinese, you often can't even tell what constitutes a word unless you know it already. Characters like 会, 来 and 有 can combine with dozen others, and have dozens of meanings. Sometimes they are verbs, sometimes they indicate a state, and sometimes they are complements modifying other words. Understanding why it means one thing in certain contexts and not in others is what learning grammar is about.

I think that reading sentences (and whole books, once you can do so) is really important, but you really need to get your head around the very basic concepts first.

What does 为什么会有星星 translate to in English? "Why is it possible that stars exist?"?

Actually, it means exactly "Why are there stars?". It's the Chinese way to say it, and you can't translate it by translating individual characters and piecing them together.

I really can't think of a suitable translation for 会 here, only for the whole phrase.

[webmagnets]

Do you feel that I am abusing the forum if I continue with this method?

Should I find somewhere else?

I ask this with all due respect.

Edited October 7, 2009 at 09:09 PM by webmagnets

[renzhe]

Not really, but I think that 1) people get tired of answering too many questions and 2) you won't get far with this method.

I don't know what other material you are using to study, but I strongly recommend working your way through a textbook and understanding the material in it first. By the time you get to intermediate lessons, you will be able to pick out complements like 起来 and 到, etc. and you can concentrate on the actual vocabulary that's new.

[HashiriKata]

Do you feel that I am abusing the forum if I continue with this method?

Should I find somewhere else?

No' date=' you're doing fine. It's normal to have questions and [i']adult learners [/i]of a language should naturally have a lot of questions.

Anyway, your translation in your opening post is fine too. That's what 为什么会有星星 means.

[muyongshi]

You are not abusing the forums but my guess is that you are going to get tired of our responses to your questions since we don't think as Renzhe said your method will be very fruitful. Our responses are probably going to frustrate you since once again like has been pointed out Chinese is a language not a collection of words and while you can understand some things through this approach it is not effective for learning the language as a whole.

[webmagnets]

How can you say that Barry Farber's method isn't very useful? He speaks over 25 languages and Chinese was one of the first ones he learned.

When you say that Chinese isn't a collection of words, but a language, are you trying to distinguish Chinese from other languages? I learned Spanish fluently and this was one of my principal methods. Are you trying to say that Chinese is different than other languages? Are you saying that Spanish is more like a collection of words?

If there is something I am missing about how Chinese is different, then I need to know.

p.s. - I didn't say that the above mentioned method is my only method. I am using a few different methods right now, including reading a grammar book.

[muyongshi]

Nope- our implication is that all languages are languages and not collections of words. Glad the method is working for you. However, our responses to the types of questions you are asking are not very likely to change just so you know.

[anonymoose]

I learned Spanish fluently and this was one of my principal methods. Are you trying to say that Chinese is different than other languages? Are you saying that Spanish is more like a collection of words?

I'm going to guess that your native language is English. The reason why this method worked for Spanish, is because to a large extent, the main difference between English and Spanish is vocabulary and not grammar (and even a lot of the vobabulary is similar). Thus, by working out the meanings of the individual words, your sunconcious feeling for grammar (derived from English) allows you to put the words together to form a coherent sentence. Unfortunately Chinese is a completely different kettle of fish, and you'll have to get to grips with the grammar before you can start deciphering sentences knowing just the meanings of the words.

[jbradfor]

How can you say that Barry Farber's method isn't very useful? He speaks over 25 languages and Chinese was one of the first ones he learned.

I have a feeling his success in languages is due to natural ability and not his "method".

[renzhe]

Besides, different methods work for different people. Just because it worked for him, it doesn't mean it will work for everybody, or that it will be the most efficient method.

I learned German by memorising a grammar book, and then running around with a pen and writing down every new word I heard. It was quite painless, as it's a European language, many words from Latin, it has basically the same grammatical concepts as Latin (only the endings are different), etc.

After 5 years of trying to do the same with Chinese, I gave up and started following a textbook and learning vocabulary and grammar in a more organised fashion. The original, unstructured approach had worked with very simple conversations and a couple of hundred of everyday words, but then it stopped working for me.

Some of the sentences you're posting are very difficult to explain grammatically even for people with a degree in Chinese. At the very least, you should scale down the difficulty of your reading material significantly. Only after you're very comfortable with simpler readings, you can advance to more complicated things. That's why a textbook is useful.

[webmagnets]

I guess I wasn't looking for a detailed analysis. The kind of answer I was looking for was: "your translation is correct. The 会有 part means there is a possibility of existing."

Thanks for your help.

[HashiriKata]

Besides, different methods work for different people.

If this is what we actually believe in, why don't we allow webmagnets to pursue a method that may work for him, even if we're ourselves not convinced of such a method?

[Artem]

Personally, I don't think I'd ever want to read a grammar book regardless of what language I am learning. Lots of input is the best way to absorb the grammar points (obvious exception is learning to write articles, papers, etc).

I don't think a textbook is required by any means. A reference grammar book and a dictionary should be sufficient for looking up parts of sentences that are unclear.

Sorry, a little off topic, but the OP question has already been answered.

[animal world]

How can you say that Barry Farber's method isn't very useful? He speaks over 25 languages and Chinese was one of the first ones he learned.

The remark that he speaks over 25 languages made me suspicious and i clicked on the link in your earlier post. There, it says that Farber has knowledge of 25 languages. That is NOT the same as speaking 25 languages, let alone being fluent in them!

If you really want to follow his method, get married ... and again ... and again. Three of his treasure trove of 25 languages were acquired through marrying women of foreign countries. Who knows how much he actually speaks of his 25 languages and to what degree he truly understands them. He probably knows the word "alimony" in lots of languages ;)

[Hofmann]

Rote learning has taught literacy to Chinese people for a long time. It works. Why don't I like it? Because there are better options. Perhaps brute force and trial and error could eventually get one fluent in a language, but there are quicker and less frustrating ways to learn.