First of all, taking a small part of language out of its context is never a good idea. In context, many things become clear.
Second of all: prescriptive grammar takes no account of how people actually speak and is generally a bad idea.
For human speech is after all a democratic product, the creation, not
of scholars and grammarians, but of unschooled and ...
我觉得中文很难 (I think Chinese is hard) is the normal way to construct an SVO sentence in Chinese or English.
中文很难我觉得 (Chinese is hard I think) is ungrammatical in Chinese or English.
That answered your question
I feel (我觉得) is a transitive verb that requires an object after it
中文很难，我觉得 (Chinese is hard, I think) are two separate phrases. Saying them one after ...
About the position of a "从" structure into a "把" sentence, an interesting dissertation (in Chinese) covering almost thoroughly the subject can be found at the following link: https://m.doc88.com/p-3794976946764.html
Short answer: "搬运工人把电视机从楼上搬了下来" and "搬运工人从楼上把电视机搬了下来" are both correct.
(for details and ...
Verb clause: [搬运工人把电视机搬了下来]
Relative phrase: [从楼上](from upstairs) add information to the main clause, [从+location] stating where the verb started
The relative phrase can be inserted before or after the deposited object (object placed after 把 or 將 that marks it as a deposited object) as long as it is before the verb
Both 搬运工人把电视机[从楼上]搬了下来 and 搬运工人[从楼上]...
了 is a "change of state" particle. Some people confuse it with being a "past tense" particle, but it isn't that. It is however mostly used in sentences to convey the idea of something having happened in the past.
For example： 你吃午餐了吗？
English Translation: Have you eaten lunch?
(2) sounds more categorical or explicit.
In this kind of construction, when 是 X 的 is used, it is not just about the validation of X, but also about the possibility of "other than X" (which is discarded by virtue of the validation of X).
It is more obvious in the following examples when an adjective is used:
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'...
As a native user, I'll try my best to explain these questions.
Here should be a special grammar point in Chinese. On building a sentence to describe a none, especially to show surprise, we make something like [n + adj]. Mostly, it is unnecessary to insert a BE verb.
In the 1st and 3rd sentences, the structures are like ...
之 is like 的 ('of') here. We use 之, not 的, to match with the monosyllabic words 餘/前/後/際.
at the residual of ~
at the front of ~
(temporal) before ~
at the rear of ~
(temporal) after ~
at the moment of ~
at the time/moment of ~
在 is optional unless when pinpointing a specific / exact ...
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
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 ...
It is rather easy to determine when to use 在, 上, 下, 中, 裡 through their English equivalents.
在 - in, at
在...上(下) - on top/bottom of something. 上 is "top", 下 is "bottom".
在...中 - in between something, or among several things (在中間, 在其中). 中 is "middle".
在...裡 - inside of something (在這裡, 在那裡). 裡 is "inside".
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.
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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,
了 after 1st syllable
了 after 2nd syllable
Form exists but is not perfective
過 after 1st syllable
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 ...
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 ...
It's good to think in classical Chinese. 大 is adverbial on 出 emphasising its extent. Similar constructions include 大叫 (to yell loudly), 大敗楚軍 (to defeat utterly the armies of Chu) etc.
大出天下 feels like neo-classical Chinese to me (which is a very effective means of communication in the context of a historical exhibition). It's not an established expression ...
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)
Let's look at similar phrasing words
大赦天下 grant amnesty within China on a grand scale
大出天下 sounded like "on a grand scale, set off from Qin to conquer the rest of China".
Since Qin was preparing to unify China around that period, '出' in '大出天下' was more likely suggesting "出咸谷關" (out of Qin's border) or '出征' (send off the army)
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 ...
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 ...
I don't think you should regard 来了 as necessarily belonging together.
Nor does 了 always indicate the past.
She's coming, (she's) just coming round the corner now.
Here comes the bus.
While she was eating supper her friend called.
While she was eating supper her friend called.
Languages tend to like ...
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.
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.
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 ...
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).
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？
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。
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)
我们一起吃饭吗？(Only asking, with ...
养马: raise horses
Where do you raise horses? 草原， grassland, prairie
What colour is grass? 绿色
So we get from the phrase:
头上养马: (the top of) your head is green like a prairie
戴绿帽子: wear a green hat (said of a man whose wife seeks the company of another man)
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.)
(She made her husband wear ...
To translate 多了 literally would be confusing as it literally means "an extra or more of something", since there is only one letter attached to the pigeon's leg not an "extra" letter.
I would translate 多了 in the context of the sentence as "appears to have", i.e. "On the pigeon's leg it appears to have a letter"...
If the pigeon's leg already has letters, 多了一封信 would mean 'has an extra letter'
If the pigeon's leg didn't have anything before, 多了一封信 would mean 'there is a letter (that wasn't there before)'
If a room was occupied, 房中多了一人 would mean 'there is an extra person in the room'
If a room was unoccupied, 房中多了一人 would mean 'There is a person in the ...
多 = more, much, extra
多了一封信 = to have an extra letter
There is an extra person in our group.
In this case, the sentence can be translated to:
There is an extra letter on the carrier pigeon's leg.
Note: This sentence doesn't make sense as a single sentence. The pigeon has to be mentioned somewhere in the previous text.
是 (is, are), 有 (has, have)
说话人最可能 是 什么关系？ What is the most likely relationship between the people in the conversation?
说话人最可能 有 什么关系？ What the most likely relationship the people in the conversation have?
Note, both sentences are vague in the second subject - person or thing, and quantity of the second subject.
Without indicate the number, 说话人 is a singular ...
Let me put it in this way:
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 ...
王教授给那儿的学生上英国文学课, 他课上得非常好, 学生都很喜欢她的课。
We may need to clear up 王教授's gender!
he/his in class 得 very good
he teaches/lectures very well
There is lots of reading in class.
He strained his back in a practice session.
We dissected a frog in biology class.
他课上得非常好 = 他课教得非常好.
This is a subtle and idiomatic usage:
for students, 上课= to attend class=听课; for teachers, 上课= to teach a course=教课. Now, your example sentence is about the Professor Wang, so 上课=教课.
Yet, from the angle of teachers, Chinese usually say 上课, instead of 教课, that is, if the verb 上 or 教 is located before the word 课 (the course), we prefer ...
他们要到上海了。(Tomorrow they will arrive at Shanghai.)
(Where did you get "Tomorrow" from? 他们明天到上海。)
They will arrive in Shanghai soon.
They wanna go to Shanghai.
When are directional complements used?
When you want to indicate a direction and not a location.
去 tells you they are definitely not in 上海。
马上 tells you they are almost ...
So I checked Cihai and it specifically says 上課 goes both ways:
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 ...
When are directional complements used?
You use it when you want to indicate which direction the verb is heading to.
跳下舞台 - jump down from the stage (you cannot just say 跳舞台)
跳上舞台 - jump upon the stage (you cannot just say 跳舞台)
吸入空氣 - breathe in air (you can omit 入 and say 吸空氣 because 吸 itself is already an inward action)
吐出毒液 - spit out the ...