Timeline for What is 了 doing in 这个表快了+time？
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 19, 2020 at 9:45 | comment | added | Puco4 | The speakers' judgement on this question depends crucially on the nature of the message they imagine the sentence is conveying. With 了, the event is viewed as bounded and thus as specific: the subject of the sentence (他 'he') was asking for a specific list of activities in which the speaker engaged (which are bounded from the context), as if 他 'he' was a nurse in charge of making sure the speaker didn't do too much. Without 了, on the other hand, the sentence is quite neutral and implies that 他 was just making casual conversation (the context does not bound the possible activities)." | |
| Sep 19, 2020 at 9:44 | comment | added | Puco4 | In the book they say: "speakers can differ in their judgement about how much a quantified direct object serves to bound an event. For example, in the sentence 他家养了一个很可爱的小猫 'His family had a very lovable little cat', some native speakers feel that 了 is not necessary, they don't feel strongly that the quantified direct object 一个很可爱的小猫 'a very lovable little cat' renders the event bounded." Another example: "In the sentence 他问我昨天晚上做了什么？'He asked me what I did last night', out of thirty-nine speakers asked, only seven thought the 了 should be there. | |
| Sep 19, 2020 at 9:43 | comment | added | Puco4 | @小奥利奥 I can speak of what I understood from the book. I think the perfective 了 is used to emphasize a situation is "enough bounded" from the point of view of the speaker (that is, it is a sufficient but not necessary condition to indicate the perfective aspect). From the types mentioned, types 3 and 4 might be more clearer to identify with an end point and marked with 了 (as you mentioned), while types 1 and 2 might depend more on what is specified of the situation and the context. | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 21:34 | comment | added | 小奥利奥 | Funny enough, imediately after typing that comment I had an epiphany. Is it the case that 了 in the sentence "我吃完了你吃" specifies that "你吃" must occur after "我吃完" because 了 marks the action as being closed to any further description, and the interpretation that "你吃" occurs while "我吃完" would be a contradiction of this and is therefor invalid? | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 21:28 | comment | added | 小奥利奥 | I've been reading the same book as you and the section you're referencing is the only section of the book that i cant familiarize myself with. I dont understand why it is necessary to declare whether an action is bounded or not. The durative aspect in English and Mandarin both have a clear necessity whereas the perfective aspect doesn't. If you aren't using "-ing" or 在/着 then it automatically follows that you're in the perfective aspect, to mee it seems like all of the rules surrounding the use of 了 are extraneous. I understand its use as the current relevant state marker but nothing past that | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 8:11 | history | edited | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 64 characters in body
|
| Sep 18, 2020 at 8:03 | history | edited | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 64 characters in body
|
| Aug 11, 2020 at 12:26 | history | edited | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 53 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2020 at 18:31 | history | edited | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 146 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2020 at 15:23 | history | edited | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2020 at 15:05 | history | edited | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1234 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2020 at 14:25 | vote | accept | Puco4 | ||
| Aug 4, 2020 at 14:19 | history | answered | Puco4 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |