Hot answers tagged

4

Yes, 這個故事在上個世紀末發生 is grammatical and sensical. It appears that the adverbial phrase 在上個世紀末 can act as both 狀語 (a preceding adjective or adverb) and 補語 (a succeeding adjective or adverb). It is a matter of style to put the adverbial phrase (arguably the most important piece of information in this sentence) at the very end of the sentence to intrigue readers. ...


4

1-这个故事发生在上个世纪末. I wonder if 发生 could be placed after 在上个世纪末. Shouldn't time be placed before a verb? 昨天,明天,一小時前,or 十分鐘後 are 'time particles' that indicate when the verb occurs. 在昨天,在明天,在一小時前,or 在十分鐘後 are noun phrases indicated by the preposition 在 (in/at), refers to a unique period of time, not unlike 在上个世纪末 or 在五四運動時期. Both (在)上个世纪末 and (在)五四運動時期 are ...


3

a. 你不配。 b. 你也配? c. 你也配! All of the above express the same meaning: you are not qualified (for something or to do something). Of course sentence a. is the most straightforward option. I'd say sentences b. and c. are rhetorical (hence the lack of negation), with sentence c. being much stronger than b., bordering on irony. We should not look at sentence c. as ...


3

也 means even 你也配? (even you are worthy?) is a rhetorical question, it is in fact, a statement for "你不配" (you are not worthy) (the standard hasn't sunk so low that even people like you are worthy/ qualified) 你配嗎? (are you worthy/qualified?) is another way to ask this rhetorical question. It too means "你不配" (you are not worthy) More ...


3

To keep things simple, there are two things to note when using 同樣是⋯⋯: The sentence pattern is for contrast. What that is same for the groups (≥2) is mentioned first, only to be followed by a transition. What immediately follows 同樣是⋯⋯ can be the subject, the object, or the predicate, as long as it is common for the groups (to be contrasted). 同樣是主食,南方人吃米,...


3

我们一起吃饭呢? This sentence is probably grammatical, but why would we ask ourselves the question? 呢 is usually used in a wh- question, such as what, when, where, etc. E. g. 你干什么呢? 你什么时候去的呢?你在哪里找到他的呢? 我们一起吃饭呢。 This sentence is correct. It expresses we are currently eating. Somehow, this use of 呢 suggests the progressive tense. E. g. 我们看书呢 suggests 我们正在看书呢。 The ...


3

她的脾气不好, (她)经常不知道为什么突然就生气了 The above are two independent sentences in a comment sentence 1: [她的脾气]不好 (她的脾气 is the subject) sentence 2: [她]经常不知道为什么突然就生气了 (她 is the omitted subject) The subject 她 in sentence 2 is omitted because both sentences are the comment of an implied topic '她' (both sentences describe '她') topic: 她 (implied) comment 1: 她的脾气不好 comment 2: (...


3

他演讲得很精彩 sounds unnatural because we mainly use 演讲 as a noun for 'speech'. It is also possible to use it as a verb for 'to make a speech' in some context, e.g. 明天要上台演讲 (have to go on stage to make a speech tomorrow) Use 演讲 as a noun and say "他的演讲很精彩" is the most natural way to phrase it. If you must use 演讲 as a verb, it is more natural to say ...


3

之(N) = of(N) 在 X 之余 (at the outside of X) = outside of X 在 X 之前 (at the before of x) = before X 在 X 之后 = (at the after of X) = after X 在 X 之時 = (at the time of X) = during/ when X 在 X 之际 = (at the moment of X) = at the moment of X Example: 在工作之余 = outside of work 在工作之前 = before work 在工作之后 = after work 在工作之时 = during/ when work 在下班之际 = At the moment of ...


3

之 is like 的 ('of') here. We use 之, not 的, to match with the monosyllabic words 餘/前/後/際. Construction Literal meaning Translation 在~之餘 at the residual of ~ besides ~ 在~之前 at the front of ~ (temporal) before ~ 在~之後 at the rear of ~ (temporal) after ~ 在~之際 at the moment of ~ at the time/moment of ~ 在 is optional unless when pinpointing a specific / exact ...


2

Yes, it is correct. 演讲 can function as either a verb or a noun. 他演讲得很精彩 He speaks brilliantly. 演讲(verb) to speak in public/ orate/ give a speech 精彩 (adverb) brilliantly, wonderfully 他的演讲很精彩 His speech is brilliant. 演讲(noun) speech/ oration 精彩 (adjective) brilliant, wonderful


2

In terms of grammar, it is correct. 演講 can be either a verb ('to lecture') or a noun ('lecture'); here it is a verb. It means 'He lectures wonderfully'. Personally I would phrase it like 他的演講很精彩 ('His lecture was wonderful'). Although nominalisation is a feature of westernised Chinese (歐化中文), it is okay when used sparingly and properly. That is to say this ...


2

I object to the existing answers explaining it as "她的脾气不好,(她)经常不知道为什么突然就生气了"。 This exactly violates the grammatical rule because it contains two sentences calling for two different subjects, while the original sentence only has one subject of 她的脾气。 I think the latter part of this sentence is a clause trying to further explain/complement the first ...


2

So I checked Cihai and it specifically says 上課 goes both ways: 教師講課或學生聽課 To teach a class, or to attend a class The subject is 'Professor Wang' (王教授). The verb is 'to teach' (上, note: only makes sense when seeing 上課 together), the direct object is 'a lesson' (課), and the indirect object is 'those students' (那兒的學生), which in Chinese is marked by a second ...


2

她朋友打电话来了. 来 here implies that her friend's call is towards her. 她朋友打电话了 just means her friend made a phone call, no direction indicated. Compare 我一会打电话过去 to 我一会打电话过来. Both 过去 and 过来 suggest the direction of the call. Btw, 了 just denotes the completion.


2

Verbs in Chinese don't have past tenses. 她朋友打电话来了 -> Her friend called. Or she received a phone call from her friend.


2

Of course you are right in saying 她 is not the subject for the verb 知道 here. But to me, 不知道為什麼 ('for some reason; god knows why') is adverbial-like, and has weakened to become almost subjectless. That is also to say, there is another verb/comment in the sentence that corresponds to 她: 生氣 ('to be mad') (she gets mad, not her temperament gets mad). The latter ...


2

If the question 我们一起吃饭呢? is meant to suggest, then the response 我们一起吃饭呢。 is wrong, no matter what tone is applied on the second 呢.This suggestion can be made with several endings. In term of the strength of suggestion, from strong to weak: 我们一起吃饭吧?/!(Strong suggestion, with request) 我们一起吃饭呀?(Suggestion) 我们一起吃饭呢(呐)?(Suggestion) 我们一起吃饭吗?(Only asking, with ...


2

In here, 也 means "too", or "also". For example - 那些人都是英雄. (你算老幾,) 你也配!? "All those people are heroes. Who the hell you are that thinking of yourself qualifies as one too!?" 你也配 is a frequently used phrase when one wants to show contempt for somebody's qualification/capability to be a character of high quality through a negative ...


2

The dialogue would make better understanding if a question mark is included, as, 你也配?, which actually questions someone's "qualification or worthiness" rather than affirming it. Saying, 你也配? ( "You are qualified / worthy"?) rather than, say, "你配吗"?, ("Are you qualified / worthy"?) which unmistakably questions the ...


1

Eventually, it all boils down to how precise the location needs to be. Case 1: Precision is not required 這座城市發展迅速。Regarding this city, it is developing really quickly. *這座城市裡發展迅速。 I don't really need to localise where in the city is developing really quickly. It just is as a whole. It's a generic description requiring no localisers. Case 2: Precision is ...


1

The first example doesn't need a localizer to specify it is 'in' a location 今年夏天我在北京学习中文。- it doesn't need a localizer to indicate it is in Beijing -- no one would think it is in front of or above the city The second two examples also stating an unspecified location 我刚到美国的时候只能在餐馆打零工 - It can be any restaurant; no one would think it is in front of or ...


1

开车 can actually be seen as a "verb-object" phrase, causing it sensible to add 过 between them. This also applies to: 我开着车 ~ (while) I am driving a car 我开了车 ~ I drove a car 我开不了(liǎo)车 ~ I am not able to drive a car 关上 and 打开 are "verb-complement" phrase, which uses different rules. 关上了 ~ closed 关不上 ~ be not able to close (seems no be ...


1

It's not about how many syllables there are, but what kind of syllables they are. Interestingly enough, your three examples 關上 and 打開 (both verb + result complement) vs 開車 (transitive verb + object) behave differently. In summary, 關上 打開 開車 了 after 1st syllable No No Yes 了 after 2nd syllable Yes Yes Form exists but is not perfective 過 after 1st syllable ...


1

Seriously speaking, there is nothing wrong with either 这太棒了!, 这是太棒了! or 这真是太棒了! If we consider the three sentences/phrases below, the middle one seems incomplete as one would wonder "what is too good?", while the other two are simply arbitrary exclamations without the need to address "what is (是). However, this argument is weak, so your friend'...


1

This is a really good question. I assume you have already known that 了 is a sign of perfect aspect/tense. Although it is still controversial among grammarians whether Chinese languages have tenses or aspects, from a learner’s perspective, it is the easiest way to understand it. So what you are asking is, why there is another verb 来 in this sentence. 来 is a ...


1

To me it's sound like past continuous tense. Without 来了: Her friend called her at the dinner. With 来了:The call came when she was having the dinner.


1

I don't think you should regard 来了 as necessarily belonging together. Nor does 了 always indicate the past. 她来了,绕过拐角过来了。 She's coming, (she's) just coming round the corner now. 公共汽车来了。 Here comes the bus. 她吃晚饭的时候她朋友打电话来了。 While she was eating supper her friend called. 她吃晚饭的时候她朋友打来电话了。 While she was eating supper her friend called. Languages tend to like ...


1

I feel this phrase is a metaphor for 戴绿帽子(wear green hats), which means a man has become a cuckold because his wife cheats on him and sleeps with other men. (This is also why Chinese men usually don't wear green hats and would get impressed when they first see people celebrating the St. Patrick's Day.) 她给她老公戴了绿帽子。 她让她老公戴了绿帽子。 (She made her husband wear ...


1

Let me put it in this way: 他们要到上海了。 They are about to (要) arrive in Shanghai. This sentence means "they" are already on their way to Shanghai, instead of meaning they are going to Shanghai or they are planning to go to Shanghai. Moreover, this is just a statement of fact, and it doesn't require/imply any relationship between the speaker and the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible