1

In the following conversation:

A: 小湖,这几天你怎么没来下棋呀?

B: 为了搬家我忙得焦头烂额。哪儿有时间下棋呀?

A: 你可以委托搬家公司呀?

B: 搬家公司只管大件,小东西还我亲自动手。

I'm sure the 得 here means "have to ~" or "must" (so it is dei, not de). However, the subject is likely 我, not 小东西.

So why is place of 得 not after 我 in this sentence? Is it OK and if that is the case, how can I know in what case should I put 得 before the subject?

1
  • Just think about Modal verb.
    – mootmoot
    Feb 2 '18 at 15:57
3

Is it OK and if that is the case, how can I know in what case should I put 得 before the subject?

This is OK. You can change the order of words for the purpose of emphasis; note that the object being emphasized changes according to the position of 得. e.g.

我还得亲自动手(搬)小东西。

小东西我还得亲自动手(搬)。 => for emphasizing the object, i.e. 小东西

小东西还得我亲自动手(搬)。 => not only emphasizes the object but also the subject, i.e. 我

BTW 得 is not the verb; as you said it means "need", "have to" or "must", the verb is 搬 which is omitted. This is a kind of 宾语前置 (object fronting), i.e. change from S-V-O structure to O-S-V structure.

4
  • Thanks but even in these cases I usually see the sentence keeps S + V + O structure, IIRC. So I wonder why this sentence puts V before S...
    – Blaszard
    Feb 2 '18 at 14:46
  • @Blaszard Answer revised.
    – user4072
    Feb 2 '18 at 14:55
  • Thanks and that makes sense! Are these types of inversion common in Chinese as well?
    – Blaszard
    Feb 4 '18 at 13:40
  • @Blaszard Yes, that's why there's a special term "宾语前置" for it. For this case "得" has involvement then makes it a little complex.
    – user4072
    Feb 4 '18 at 13:55
0

搬家公司只管大件,小东西还得我亲自动手。

搬家公司只管大件,小东西我还得亲自动手。

These two sentences mean the same. If you don't understand the grammar of the first one, you can think about this sentence:

小东西(他们)还得 我亲自动手。

Where 我 is the indirect object of 让 and virtual subject 他们 could be 搬家公司. So, the whole translation can be "For those things small, (they) have to let me to handle".

2
  • This seems to be quite different answer from the one by @songyuanyao♦...
    – Blaszard
    Feb 3 '18 at 13:12
  • @Blaszard, just another way to explain it. The goal is to help you to understand. Sometimes, a Chinese sentence can be understood in a few different ways from the grammar standpoint, but the meaning will remain the same. The way I show you for this sentence is based on the way you usually comprehend. Songyuanyao's answer is correct too, but it seems that you were quite struggling with that.
    – dan
    Feb 4 '18 at 0:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.