Considering 所+verb

[DrWatson]

Regarding the following phrase:

我所认识中国人

I understand that 所 has no change on the meaning of the verb and it is just a feature of written Chinese. When I see this, however, I wonder two things:

1) Does 所 add any element to the sentence that would make one pause and read it a little differently? Does it simply me "A Chinese person I know"?

2) How does one determine when to use it in his or her own writing? Is it only for very academic writing, or does it find its way into newspapers and magazines? Can one use it freely in writing, or should it be reserved for critical sentences like the thesis, title, or the like?

[Hofmann]

First learn how it's used, and then how it's misused.

所 is a nominalizer, meaning "that which..." Therefore 我所認識 means "that with which I am familiar."

我所認識中國人 means "That with which I am familiar is a Chinese person." But that looks funny without something like 也. But that's probably not what you wanted to say. If you wanted to say "The Chinese person with which I am familiar..." (incomplete sentence), then the important part is 的 and not 所, i.e. you need 我認識的中國人. In this case 所 is unnecessary.

Does 所 add any element to the sentence that would make one pause and read it a little differently?

No.

How does one determine when to use it in his or her own writing?

When it is necessary, use it. When it is unnecessary, people have their preferences. I usually aim for conciseness, so adding 所 when you don't need it is undesired and kind of pseudo-sophisticated, like the "ma" infix in English.

[dan23]

shouldn't that be"我所认识的中国人"？

[Shi Tong]

Therefore Hofmann, can you write up some examples of where 所 is properly used in a sentence and where it is essential to keep a meaning. I think I can understand how it works, but not necessarily where to use if needed.

Would this be an example of a sentence where you can use 所:

我所认识中文字是简体字

(In other words, it's a way of getting rid of 的, the usual sentence I would write would be:)

我认识的中文字是简体字

? Thanks!!

[skylee]

Would this be an example of a sentence where you can use 所:

我所认识中文字是简体字

(In other words, it's a way of getting rid of 的, the usual sentence I would write would be

我认识的中文字是简体字

No. The first sentence is incorrect.

[Hofmann]

In this case "verb 的" and "所 verb" are not quite the same thing. The "verb 的" is actually a part of "modifier 的 noun." If you say "我认识的中文字是简体字," 我認識 modifies 中文字 through 的. Therefore, it means "The Chinese characters that I recognize are Simplified characters."

If you say "我所认识中文字是简体字," it is probably incorrect without a serial comma or conjunction. A grammatically correct similar sentence would be 我所認識、中文字是簡體字. The meaning is incorrect though. A correct sentence may be 我所認識是簡體(中文)字。

[anonymoose]

You can say 我所认识的中文字是简体字, but in this case 所 is redundant, and would probably be omitted, particularly orally.

[Hofmann]

Of course "所 verb 的," the sophistimacated version of "verb 的," is probably common enough to make it into textbooks.

[vampire]

我所認識是簡體(中文)字

I dont think this sentence is correct

[trien27]

我所認識是簡體(中文)字

我所認識的....是簡體字. There's no need to put 中文in parentheses / brackets, since you're not writing in English or French, etc... Or unless there's a different definition for 簡體字 in Chinese, otherwise, it's already understood, that it's the one used in Chinese due to what's been aforementioned. You could put in a number of phrases in place of "...." above. 全部, 有一些, etc... are acceptable, depending on what you want to tell the readers / audience.

我所認識中國人 means "That with which I am familiar is a Chinese person." But that looks funny without something like 也.

我所認識的也是中國人.

Edited April 24, 2010 at 06:39 AM by trien27

[DrWatson]

Thank you for the explanation everyone.

我所認識中國人 means "That with which I am familiar is a Chinese person." But that looks funny without something like 也. But that's probably not what you wanted to say. If you wanted to say "The Chinese person with which I am familiar..." (incomplete sentence), then the important part is 的 and not 所, i.e. you need 我認識的中國人. In this case 所 is unnecessary.

Thank you for catching this. The sentence should have been 我所認識的中國人.

[Hofmann]

我所認識中國人 means "That with which I am familiar is a Chinese person." But that looks funny without something like 也.

我所認識的也是中國人.

Totally not what I was talking about.

*我所認識中國人也

[Altair]

Is 我所认识中国人（也） really acceptable in modern standard Chinese, with or without the 也?

shouldn't that be"我所认识的中国人"？

Isn't the above version required in standard modern Chinese as a translation of "The Chinese people I know" ?

As far as I know, 所 was more or less required in Classical Chinese when using relative clauses or nominalizations that focused on the object of a verb. E.g.:

所饮之洒 (wine that is drunk) or 所饮 (that which is drunk).

I think that 所 in Putonghua is never required in relative clauses, but can be used in elevated style，with 的 normally (always?) replacing classical Chinese 之. E.g.:

我所认识的人 (the people I know)

大家所提的意见 (the opinions put forward by everyone)

所 was useful in Classical Chinese because it clarified that the object of the verb was being referred to. This is no longer necessary in Putonghua, but can still indicate careful and cultured style. I leave to others with better Chinese than me whether the above two sentences would always be better written without 所 or whether 所 would be good in some styles of writing.

I think that 所 is also not uncommon in Putonghua in nominalizations that basically correspond to classical grammar and usage. In these case, it probably cannot be omitted. E.g.,

为人所笑 (be laughed at)

个尽所能 (each does to the fullest what he can) or (from each according to his ability)

所见者广 (what he sees is wide ranging) or (he has wide experience)

There are also some uses of 所 in nominalizations where Putonghua seems also to use 的. In these cases, I think 所 is unnecessary, but merely adds a classical flavor. My guess is that 的 is used because these sentences would not have been acceptable in Classical Chinese and thus need some aspect of the modern grammar to make them acceptable. E.g.,

他所创造的，我们都没想到 (We never thought of what he created)

这是我们所拥护的 (This is what we support)

Again, I leave to others as to when and if these sentences would sound or read better with or without 所. My guess is that it is okay with two-syllable verbs, but less acceptable with ordinary sounding monosyllabic verbs. E.g.

他所看的是猫 (What he saw was a cat)

The above sentence might be quite strange; but again, I could be wrong.

[Hofmann]

Is 我所认识中国人（也） really acceptable in modern standard Chinese, with or without the 也?

No. That's why I have an asterisk in front of it.

Anyway, here's how I see it. If you use "所 verb," it is clear that you're talking about the object of the verb. If you use "verb 的," it is ambiguous, but context (like an agent) solves that most of the time. When you have both 所 and 的 around a verb, one of them becomes redundant. If you have a noun that isn't "所 verb," like in "我所认识的人," then 所 is redundant. If not, like in "他所创造的," either one is redundant. I suspect, though, that having both sounds more natural to many native speakers.

[Shi Tong]

oooh.. interesting. Thanks for all the examples.

So 所 is almost a redundant word, since most sentences would be used today with 的 and then a context to put across the subject.

I'm going to have to read these examples a whole load more times to get my head around it! ;D

[renzhe]

I wouldn't say redundant, as it shows up in different contexts (cesuo ), fixed phrases, and some very formal language.

But you're unlikely to use it in colloquial speech, other than in some fixed phrases like "suoyoude".

sorry for pinyin, no Chinese input here.

[DrWatson]

I just wanted to share some more examples I've come across recently regarding this 所+V+的 structure. The following come from an article in a trade rag I try to read to build language skills in my profession: 線技術，似乎太多了一些！

我是指射頻污染、干擾，以及其他難以診斷的問題所帶來的損害，以及減少連接的可靠性和完整性。

..., as well as other difficult to diagnose problems that bring harm, ....

因此，大家都非常清楚，所謂的‘關閉’許多設備，實際上是將其設定進入睡眠模式，並不是真的關閉其電源子系統。

..., those many installations which are said to be "closed", ....

無論是重要的或是不常使用到的射頻技術，現在，它們都回過頭來，在家中或公共場所困擾我們，當我們坐在咖啡館用無線網路上網時，...

I don't know how to translate this one actually. 它們都回過頭來 - I'm not sure about this 頭 in the sentence, and there doesn't seem to be a 的 in the sentence. And would 困擾 mean "to puzzle" or "to perplex" in the context?

I'm not to sure if my translations are correct, but I think I grasp the 所 structure better. Thanks for all of your input.

[xiaocai]

I don't know how to translate this one actually. 它們都回過頭來 - I'm not sure about this 頭 in the sentence, and there doesn't seem to be a 的 in the sentence. And would 困擾 mean "to puzzle" or "to perplex" in the context?

I'm not to sure if my translations are correct, but I think I grasp the 所 structure better. Thanks for all of your input.

I think you can drop the 頭 here without affecting the meaning. It is just a way to say it even the radio frequencies don't really have "heads". And 公共場所 here is one word which means public space, so it is not part of a "所……的” structure in this example.

[atitarev]

Simply subscribing to this thread. I have a number of sentences in NPCR 5 with 所, which I found a bit difficult to translate, even after going through the basic explanations. Will post the examples later if I have a chance.

[Altair]

Quote

我是指射頻污染、干擾，以及其他難以診斷的問題所帶來的損害，以及減少連接的可靠性和完整性。

..., as well as other difficult to diagnose problems that bring harm, ....

This is an interesting one. I could be wrong, but I think "harm" is the head noun, since it follows 所. If I am correct, the translation would be: "..., as well as other harm brought on by difficult to diagnose problems.

Again, I could be wrong.