象鼻子很长

[davoosh]

@Daxu,

 

Notice I said it does not have any lexical meaning, but it still serves an important function. (If this is what you were trying to say, then I agree.)

 

In this particular sentence, it can be ommitted without much change in meaning:

他進步得很快

他進步很快

 

This is because 進步 may be a verb or a noun in this case and made into a topic+comment type sentence.

 

However, let's consider another example where 得 may not be ommitted:

哲學太難學了，學得我吃不下飯了。

 

If what you say is true, and 得 actually serves no purpose, please explain why it must be used in this case?

[rtf]

谢谢大家回复。 Guys, thank you ever so much indeed for the info that I `m taking  out from this thread. China is quite a large country, and  for me it comes as no surprise that people (from different parts of the country)  have there own way to express their ideas, and they have their own understanding of the principles of the language they`re using. And they`ve been doing so for centuries. Take the English-speaking world,for example,the English in the USA,in the UK,in Australia and so on.English in each  country has its peculiarities.Moreover, every person within a country feels,sees and uses the language  in his/her own way.For me the evident proof of that is your,guys, point of view at one single structure  象鼻子很长. I have now at my disposal three different understanding of it by native speakers, and,mind you,from learned people. It means that they view this structure in their own way,and each and every one of them is right,because  they`ve been taught so,because their parents and grandparents spoke so.And it`s all within the frame of one Chinese grammar. Someone said ‘… linguistic analyses should not ignore what is happening in the real world.’ So the only way for us foreigners to understand the language is ‘to summarise the rules as best as we can from Chinese people’,and that`s exactly what I`ve been doing at this forum thanks to you J. Good luck!

[Kenny同志]

@daxu

 

I think I know what you mean, but there's a lot more to a sentence than meaning and we cannot conclude that there is no difference between A and B just because they mean the same. For example, 鄭先生, 小鄭, 姓鄭的, 鄭某, and 鄭姓男子 can all be used to refer to the same person, but I am sure no one would say that these 稱呼 are completely the same. 

 

Edit:

 

One more example, both 他小時候家裡經濟條件不好 and 他幼時家貧 mean his family was poor when he was a child but I wouldn't say these two sentences are the same.

[L-F-J]

 

 

For sentence like this: 他進步很快。他進步得很快. Some scholar may say there are differences. But that difference will be like the different personal feelings you get when reading a poem. You may say that this poem is about a flying bird and I may say it is about a delicious fried chicken and we both can be right.

 

进步 in 他进步很快 can be taken as a noun (His progress is/has been very fast). Can we say the same about the second sentence? Can 进步 still be taken as a noun if 得 follows it? No? Then we have ourselves a difference in meaning, haven't we?... 

 

By the way, your logic doesn't even make sense. A fried chicken cannot fly, and even a living chicken's skill in flight is nothing to write a poem about.   In any case, it sounds like one bizarre poem if we can both be right!

[daxu]

他進步很快。他進步得很快.

 

他 is a noun, 進步 is a noun.

 

with or without 得, they are still two nouns together. Nothing can change that.

 

得 is just a connector, why it is needed? Is it because when we say this kind of sentence, some people found that it is difficult to say without taking a breath. So that is why words like 得, or 的 gradually showed up. 

[L-F-J]

 

 

with or without 得, they are still two nouns together. Nothing can change that.

 

http://dict.baidu.com/s?wd=%E5%BE%97&ab=12

 

得 [de]

 

1. 用在动词后表可能：要不～。拿～起来。

2. 用在动词或形容词后的连接补语，表示效果或程度：跑～快。香～很。

 

Clearly, our example here falls under the #2 usage, linking a verb and adverb to express degree. 得 [de] is not used after nouns. Its presence marks 进步 as a verb and changes the meaning of the sentence.

 

This is very basic Chinese grammar. I believe you are a troll coming to mislead the "foreign species" in order to 不让他们进步.

[daxu]

他進步得很快.

Are you seriously suggesting  進步 is a Verb and the reason is you or someone put 得 ?

 

Word like 進步, it can be a Noun or verb or even other types. It is determined by the context, not by some connector character 得.

 

Where you learned your Chinese from? ??

[L-F-J]

Is it a noun and nothing can change that, or is it determined by context? Can it remain a noun when followed by 得?

 

One would ask you the same question. Either you are a troll or very uneducated on your own language. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just go with troll...

[realmayo]

Kenny:

 

象的鼻子

象，鼻子

 

I undertand what you're saying with the differences here,  particularly the pause which indicates to the listener which type of topic+comment sentence is being used.

 

However I want to ask about 象鼻子 where there is no pause. And also no 的. Does the following make sense to you:

 

I was taught that often, if you don't use a 的, then the listener thinks you're referring to a 'special case' or 'special category". I can't remember the examples that I was given. But for instance, 红包 has a specific, 'special' meaning, different from 红的包。 it doesn't usually refer to an envelope that is red. It refers to a type of red envelope used for specific purposes. I think there are plenty of other examples. The point being that adjective + noun with no 的 makes people think: special case, special category. 我国 vs 我的国家. [Edit: actually 红包 isn't a great example because it's not noun+noun. What's a better example? Certain in English there's millions windowsill, table leg etc etc.]

 

Does 象鼻子, with no 'pause', sound natural to you?

And would something like "马鼻子" sound less natural?

Elephants are famous for their noses. So ... it's almost a 'special category', doesn't sound strange. But there's nothing special about horses' noses. So 马的鼻子 sounds much better than 马鼻子?

 

In which case 象鼻子, with no 'pause', might sometimes be better translated as "elephant noses" rather than "elephants' noses"?

 

 

Edit: surely somewhere in China there is a local speciality of braised horse nose? In which case, 马鼻子 with no 的 would refer to the dish's name!

 

Also: 马鼻 sounds a bit rude. But I think the above is still true for 羊鼻子 vs 羊的鼻子 and so on.

[realmayo]

As for the meta comments about grammar, I suspect daxu was trying to be helpful and gave a simplified answer to the OP. However for other people reading, that answer was too simplified. Naturally people pointed that out. Naturally daxu got defensive and started talking about foreigners not understanding Chinese grammar because, well, people do get defensive under those circumstances. Daxu probably knows more about English grammar than most English native speakers. But correspondingly, most Chinese people don't know much about Chinese grammar. Obviously they do know how to use it correctly though.....

 

I have to admit, I was familiar with the daft (and plain wrong) "Chinese has no grammar" idea, but I didn't know it had moved on to "foreigners can't understand Chinese grammar, ordinary Chinese can't understand Chinese grammar, only Chinese professors can understand Chinese grammar".

[Kenny同志]

No problem, Mayo. But I am working on a task. I will get back to you within two days. : )

[realmayo]

不见不散！

[somethingfunny]

I feel like I may have started all this commotion.  I just find it exceedingly unhelpful to read comments like daxu's in a forum where the majority of people are here to learn Chinese.  It's like walking into a classroom of people learning Chinese and shouting "Guys, don't worry about tones, people will be able to work out what you mean."

 

Perhaps a moderator could tidy this up so that the intended discussion isn't swamped by all the general Chinese grammar unpleasantness.

[daxu]

Learn grammar is nothing wrong, but you need to know where Chinese grammar comes from, not just keep a blind eye. Then Chinese grammar may actually be something even useful for you.

 

I was quite surprised by the attitudes that lots of your guys have on grammar. Come on, it is not an untouchable holy rules.

 

To learn Chinese, the best is to learn in a Chinese way, not a way that won't even fit for most Chinese native speakers. Have you ever see they teach Chinese in this way to own Chinese children?

[realmayo]

Have you ever see they teach Chinese in this way to own Chinese children?

 

Daxu, if someone asked, why is the word "in" used in this sentence, do you think "the word 'in' is just a word that doesn't have any meaning" is a good answer? Most people would want to understand when you can and when you can't use that word. Same with 得.

[davoosh]

The way native speakers are taught the grammar of their own language, and the way foreign learners are taught grammar are usually quite different. That's nothing new or unexpected.

 

Nobody said grammar is untouchable, as we know languages change, and the best we can do is describe a language as accurately as possible and try to draw reasonable conclusion on what constitutes to 'grammatical acceptable' constructions.

 

However, I'm of the opinion daxu is a troll or just confused. A few posts ago apparently 進步 is only a noun and 'nothing can change that', but then in the next post it suddenly depends on context. Not to mention that any linguistic field-study on this would quickly determine that 得 is usually preceded by words that have verb-like qualities - and I'm talking about descriptive linguistics here, not 'grammar' in the traditional sense, so don't give me any native vs non-native vs 100 years ago stuff.

[daxu]

 進步 is a Noun in that sentence and admit or not, nothing can change that (with or without your lovely 得).

 

Then in different context,  進步 can be a Verb  (with or without your lovely 得).

 

This is the beauty of Chinese language, love it or not.

[davoosh]

Daxu, I do not disagree with you, but I'm afraid that is not what you said. You stated that 進步 is only a noun and "nothing can change that", then you said (and I quote)

"他進步得很快. Are you seriously suggesting  進步 is a Verb and the reason is you or someone put 得 ?" But now you write that it may be both, in both circumstances.

 

 

Admin, please feel free to clear up my posts as I realise I've digressed from OPs questions, and it seems we are talking to the metaphorical brick wall...

[somethingfunny]

I'm with davoosh on this one.  It's comments like this:

 

"you need to know where Chinese grammar comes from, not just keep a blind eye"

 

after telling people that:

 

"得 is just a character that doesn't have any meaning"

 

which shows how truly unhelpful this has become.

[daxu]

In that sentence, "得 is just a character that doesn't have any meaning".

 

That is the fact. Unfortunately nothing can change that.