the 了 should be 的 thing - Chinese grammar confusion

[Hofmann]

Perhaps she prefers it before (what is supposed to be) 昨.

[陳德聰]

他昨天是到北京的 sounds weird, despite being able to pass for a correct sentence if you're reading fast enough and your brain automatically shifts the 是 to an acceptable position.

[realmayo]

so 他昨天是到北京的 is incorrect?

..... so confusing

Edit: Skylee always emphasises she's no grammar expert so by incorrect could be either (i) sounds wrong to a non-grammar-expert Chinese speaker or (ii) grammar-wise

[creamyhorror]

I too find the sentence slightly unnatural. My interpretation:

他昨天是到北京的 = It was Beijing that he arrived at yesterday (and not somewhere else).

他是昨天到北京的 = It was yesterday that he arrived in Beijing.

Generally the second meaning is the one intended - which is probably why skylee said 是 should be shifted.

[realmayo]

If:

他昨天是到北京的 = It was Beijing that he arrived at yesterday (and not somewhere else).

then surely the translation of the second sentence needs its own parenthesis:

他是昨天到北京的 = It was yesterday that he arrived in Beijing (and not some other day)

Isn't the same degree of emphasis present in both sentences?

To my inexpert ears 他昨天是到北京的 doesn't sound like it has to have any particular emphasis, though obviously if you stress the 到 (not 离开) or 北京 (not 上海) then you get that emphasis.

I still reckon that the main effect of the 是...的 is to show that the sentence is not commenting on 'the completion, duration and frequency' of the action.

[xiaocai]

他昨天是到北京的

I think 他昨天是到的北京 or 他昨天到的是北京 would sound (much) better, if you meant to say It was Beijing that he arrived at yesterday.

[creamyhorror]

他是昨天到北京的 = It was yesterday that he arrived in Beijing (and not some other day)

Isn't the same degree of emphasis present in both sentences?

Nah, 他是昨天到北京的 is the canonical/common form to my ears, in which 是...的 encapsulates everything but the subject. The 他昨天是到北京的 one sounds like a variant, which makes me look for a semantic reason for the shift. Maybe speakers from other regions have different perceptions, though.

[edelweis]

I thought 是 should be placed immediately before what you want to emphasize?

是他昨天到北京的 = he arrived in Beijing yesterday (to correct someone else's misunderstanding - maybe they misheard and thought that I arrived in Beijing yesterday)

他是昨天到北京的 = he arrived in Beijing yesterday (not at some other time, can also be neutral explanation of circumstances)

他昨天是到北京的 = he arrived in Beijing yesterday (to correct someone else's misunderstanding - maybe they misheard and thought that he left Beijing yesterday)

[陳德聰]

The reason I think it's so weird to say 他昨天是到北京的 is that it sounds like the emphasis is on 到, not 到北京. It sounds like yesterday somebody arrived in Beijing rather than, I don't know, ate Beijing, sang Beijing, etc. Which is weird.

[Hofmann]

Anyway, getting back on topic, is it accurate to say that this 的 shifting thing is regional and/or nonstandard, similar to English double negatives resolving to negative? Or is it completely standard and I've just never seen it before?

[edelweis]

@陳德聰

arrived rather than departed (离开) Beijing. Well, that's how I understand it anyway.

[imron]

is it accurate to say that this 的 shifting thing is regional and/or nonstandard

I can't say whether or not it's standard, but it is relatively common - at least in the north.

[raydpratt]

I hadn't listened to my Pimsleur lessons since 3-19-2013 because I had hit a major life bump, but I listened to my latest lesson again last night, and you are all correct -- I misquoted the sentence order -- which is actually given as 我是昨天到北京的。 And, thank you very much for the character corrections.

[gato]

I can't say whether or not it's standard, but it is relatively common - at least in the north.

I think it's pretty common in the south, too.

[hbuchtel]

ChrisChang wrote:

My bad,It's not Cheney,It's Quayle.Why did you spell it "Quail"?Is it a nickname or something?

No, Quail is not a nickname . . . this was another example of a 'native mistake'!