1

On the German Chinese web page here there is a question about the use of 把 in 我们把那张画儿挂上去吧。So I thought, just rearrange to 我们挂上去那幅画吧。to try to explain.

However, my friend, 晓云, immediately said: 笨蛋的老外，这样不行！

I asked why, she immediately said, "我们把那张画儿挂上去吧。is how we say it."

"But if I don't use 把？" I asked?

She said, " 我们挂上那幅画吧。is OK.

Now I would like to know what you think and if possible, why 我们挂上去那幅画吧。with 上去 is not acceptable, but, if I leave out the 去， 我们挂上那幅画吧。is acceptable. How are they different?

Improve this question
1
  • it sees that difference between 'doing' and 'to do'.
    – Daniel Yang
    May 31, 2018 at 1:17

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
2

[1. 我们] [2. 挂] [3. 上去] [4. 那幅画] [5. 吧]

[1. subject] [2. verb] [3. directional (verb) complement] [4. object] [5. final particle]

The problem here is, in Chinese grammar, the object should be inserted between the 'verb' and the 'directional complement'

The following is the correct structure:

[1. 我们] [2. 挂] [3. 那幅画] [4. 上去] [5. 吧]

[1. subject] [2. verb] [3. object] [4. directional (verb) complement] [5. final particle]

~

why 我们挂上去那幅画吧。with 上去 is not acceptable, but, if I leave out the 去， 我们挂上那幅画吧。is acceptable. How are they different?

The reason why "我们挂上去那幅画吧" is not acceptable has been explained above.

  • "我们挂上那幅画吧" is not technically incorrect, but the meaning is ambitious. Since the indirect object is omitted, it could mean "我们(在身上)挂上那幅画吧" or "我们(在墙上)挂上那幅画吧"

In summary:

  • Both "我们把那张画儿挂上去吧" and "我们挂那幅画上去吧" are clear and correct

  • 我们挂上去那幅画吧 is grammatically incorrect

  • 我们挂上那幅画吧 is too ambitious, it needs an indirect object

  • 我们挂那幅画吧 actually removed the ambiguity, because '挂上' is equally applicable for 'on person' and 'on the wall', while '挂' strongly implied 'to hang (on the wall)'

Example of [verb]+ [direct object] +[indirect object]

In " I give you a toy", 'you' is the indirect object, and 'toy' is the direct object

similarly, in "我们(在墙上)挂上那幅画吧", '那幅画' is the direct object, '墙'is the indirect object

Improve this answer
1
  • I am seeing a similarity here between German and Chinese. In German, we have many verbs made of [directional (verb) complement][verb]. A simple example [hinauf][gehen], hinaufgehen = go up. In a Main Clause the [directional (verb) complement] is always put at the end of the clause: Ich(I) gehe(go) die Treppe(the stairs) hinauf(up). I go up the stairs.
    – Pedroski
    May 26, 2018 at 21:26
1

I don’t know how to explain it .if you don’t use 把 that sounds weird .But it does not affect the meaning of the sentence.

Improve this answer
1

" 我们挂上那幅画吧"

The point is verb, not 收起, 扔掉 or anything else but 挂上.

我们把那张画儿挂上去.

The point is 那张(not 这张...) or 画(not 照片...).

Improve this answer
1

These sentences are correct:

我们把那张画儿挂上去吧。

那张画儿挂在墙上。

把那张画挂在墙上。

I think the point is the verb 挂. 挂 is usually followed with the location words/phrases, like 在墙上，在xxx, and it's not that natural when it's followed by the direct object, like 画，照片，etc. However, if you want to express you hang something, you might have to use the auxiliary word 把. The structure is 把...挂 (+ location phrases). For example, 把 这张画 挂 在墙上.

Improve this answer
2
  • "If a Chinese sentence contains this use of 把，it is always possible to alter the sentence and omit 把, but keep the same meaning." Would you agree or disagree?
    – Pedroski
    May 26, 2018 at 21:31
  • @Pedroski I'd say not always. But the most idiomatic expression is with 把，it's unlike in English I think.
    – dan
    May 26, 2018 at 23:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

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