bob, I think it’s time you take a deep breath and look at the issue from your wife’s perspective. She’s Chinese, so she’s well acquainted with zi4 字. Zi4 has many meanings, but in general, it can take on these three:
a Chinese character
a word in a foreign language
a letter of a particular alphabet
The confusion comes from zi4=“character” and zi4=“word in a foreign language”. Ci2 詞 in Chinese typically denotes a multi-character (multi-zi4) unit; thus, as the logic goes, ci2 must also mean a multi-word unit in a foreign language. And what does one call a multi-word unit? Phrase, of course. Thus, ci2=phrase in her mind.
It’s actually quite logical but you have to think from her point of view. From your point of view, what you are arguing is that “word” can be ci2 or zi4. She’s never learned it that way and thus, finds your argument puzzling as you do hers. It’s kind of like asking whether “ice cream” is one or two words. I suspect most would say that it is two words but linguists would call that one (compound) word.
Using Yingwen as an example may not clear things up either. Yingwen can be literally translated as “England(English) language”, which just means plain old “English”, but “English language” is two words, ain’t it?
The fundamental problem, I think, is that you are trying to ask her for translations of technical linguistic terms when she’s probably never learnt them in either Chinese or English. Thus, it’s really an argument between a layman and a pedant. Best to consult a dictionary IMHO.
But if you put them together you don’t get “dirt ball.” you get “earth.” You don’t think the earth is a dirt ball do you? It’s “blue” for heaven’s sake. Dirt balls aren’t blue.
It’s sadomasochistic actually. I am the masochist and she is the sadist of course.
Anyway, what I was really looking for was a translation of the definition of “phrase.” Grammatical phrase as in noun, adjective, adverb and verb phrase.
Grammar of phrase of function is passive marker use come use as become part of speech of among them only one.
Or if that doesn’t make sense…
A grammar phrase is a group of words that functions as one part of speech.
So far I think we have done pretty well. I am kidding about the sadomasochistic thing. I’ll try looking at it from her point of view. I won’t admit that a character is a “word” in either language however. Some “words” are one, two, three or four characters. Is there such a thing as a five character “word” I wonder?
bob, I suggest you take this to the Learning Chinese forum. You’ll probably get better answers there. With regards to di4qiu2, di4 means “ground” as in the ground that you walk on and qiu2 in its most general sense means “sphere”. Thus, di4qiu2 is “ground sphere”, not “dirt ball”. Di4qiu2, like many (if not most) other Chinese words, is a compound word.
Thanks sjcma. I have been thinking about starting a “talking about English grammar in Chinese” thread for some time (actually I may have already started one a long time ago) but honestly I don’t think they like me much in the Learning Chinese forum, not since I said that the Chinese writing system was evil.
Anyway, this bit you wrote above was dead on…
[quote=“sjcma”] The confusion comes from zi4=“character” and zi4=“word in a foreign language”. Ci2 詞 in Chinese typically denotes a multi-character (multi-zi4) unit; thus, as the logic goes, ci2 must also mean a multi-word unit in a foreign language. And what does one call a multi-word unit? Phrase, of course. Thus, ci2=phrase in her mind.
It’s actually quite logical but you have to think from her point of view. From your point of view, what you are arguing is that “word” can be ci2 or zi4. She’s never learned it that way and thus, finds your argument puzzling as you do hers. It’s kind of like asking whether “ice cream” is one or two words. I suspect most would say that it is two words but linguists would call that one (compound) word. [/quote]
I remember when I was going to China to work on that factory video (still working by the way) and I needed help on all manner of obscure stuff and you were one of the people who really helped me. In that kind of situation I think it is perhaps natural to speculate about what kind of person you are talking to.
Here’s how I imagine you…
You were born in an English speaking country but spoke Chinese (probably Cantonese) with your parents. You are perfectly bi-lingual; however, you didn’t really make an effort to learn the Chinese writing system till you went to university and majored in linguistics with a minor in Asian studies.
That’s all I got. How’d I do? Probably a mile off.
Anyway, my impression is you know what you are talking about…
My dictionary lists two meanings for phrase, ci2zu3, which is the one I use beacuse it checked out better with the people I asked, and duan3yu3 which has the following example ming2ci2 duan3yu3 (noun phrase) and “should” therefore be correct.
I’ve been bumbling along using wen2fa3 de5 ci2zu3 but I am beginning to wonder if I am screwing up. Ci2zu3 is more like “hurry up” or “thank you” actually. And recently I am realizing that I want to be able to say:
The short answer to a “who” or "what’ question is often a noun phrase.
The short answer to a “where” or “when” question is often a prepositional phrase.
The short answer to a why (for what purpose) question is often an infinitive phrase.
The answer to a “how” (by what means) question is often a by + gerund phrase.
To make yes/no questions you take the first word of the verb phrase and put it at the beginning of the sentence.
Etc.
I can muddle through this pretty easily in Chinese (I’ll come back and give it a go here later) but I’d like to know I have it exactly right.
Whatever comments you have to make would be appreciated. Or if you like to try translating those sentences before I get back that would be even better.
No characters though, please. I know about a hundred characters and I’m sure it’s none of these.
[quote=“bob”]Here’s how I imagine you…[/quote]Uh…sounds like phone sex foreplay…not that I’d know of course…
[quote=“bob”]You were born in an English speaking country[/quote]-- Nope.
[quote=“bob”]spoke Chinese (…) with your parents.[/quote]-- Yup.
[quote=“bob”](probably Cantonese)[/quote]-- Nope.
[quote=“bob”]You are perfectly bi-lingual[/quote]-- Nope.
[quote=“bob”]however, you didn’t really make an effort to learn the Chinese writing system till you went to university[/quote]-- Not true.
[quote=“bob”]and majored in linguistics[/quote]-- Oh gosh, no.
[quote=“bob”]with a minor in Asian studies.[/quote]-- Maybe one day.
[quote=“bob”]That’s all I got. How’d I do? Probably a mile off.[/quote]-- Not a whole mile, maybe just a kilometre.
[quote=“bob”]Anyway, my impression is you know what you are talking about…[/quote]Impressions can be deceiving.
Duan3yu3 短語 (literally, short speech) is the technical linguistic term while ci2zu3 詞組 or pian4yu3 片語 are more layman’s terms. While all three are interchangeable, note that pian4yu3 is used more often in Taiwan while ci2zu3 is used more often across the strait.
[quote=“bob”]I’ve been bumbling along using wen2fa3 de5 ci2zu3 but I am beginning to wonder if I am screwing up. Ci2zu3 is more like “hurry up” or “thank you” actually. And recently I am realizing that I want to be able to say:
The short answer to a “who” or "what’ question is often a noun phrase.
The short answer to a “where” or “when” question is often a prepositional phrase.
The short answer to a why (for what purpose) question is often an infinitive phrase.
The answer to a “how” (by what means) question is often a by + gerund phrase.
To make yes/no questions you take the first word of the verb phrase and put it at the beginning of the sentence.
Etc. [/quote]
Actually, I didn’t know what you meant by “grammar phrase”. Then again, I only know enough grammar to use it, not to teach it. But now I see where you’re coming from. I don’t think wen2fa3 de ci2zu3 makes much sense in Chinese; it’s too much of a literal translation. I’m not sure of the level of the students that you are teaching or the goals of your lessons, but on the surface, all this seems overly technical. Terms like gerund and infinitive, even when translated into Chinese, means little to a student because these are language constructs which are totally foreign to a Chinese speaker. Of course, if you are teaching someone that’s more advanced, it’s important to be able to put labels to concepts. I dunno really, I’m not an English teacher so I’m shooting from the hip here.
Here’s a suggestion, scrap wen2fa3 de ci2yu3 altogether and go with pian4yu3 instead of ci2yu3. Then explain that “there are many types of pian4yu3”, some of these are “ming2ci2 pian4yu3” (noun phrase), “jie4ci2 pian4yu3” (prepositional phrase), “bu2ding4ci2 pian4yu3” (infinitive phrase)", “dong4ming2ci2 pian4yu3” (gerund phrase), “fen2ci2 pian4yu3” (participial phrase), etc. Give examples afterwards.
Well it’s kind of like me telling you that background is not a word. It must be two words because back is a word on its own and ground is a word on its own.
Chinese is just made up of more(a whole lot) compound words, that’s all. If you wouldn’t call blackboard or foresight phrases, why would you call any multi-character Chinese word a phrase?
[quote=“sjcma”] Duan3yu3 短語 (literally, short speech) is the technical linguistic term while ci2zu3 詞組 or pian4yu3 片語 are more layman’s terms. While all three are interchangeable, note that pian4yu3 is used more often in Taiwan while ci2zu3 is used more often across the strait.
…
Here’s a suggestion, scrap wen2fa3 de ci2yu3 altogether and go with pian4yu3 instead of ci2yu3. Then explain that “there are many types of pian4yu3”, some of these are “ming2ci2 pian4yu3” (noun phrase), “jie4ci2 pian4yu3” (prepositional phrase), “bu2ding4ci2 pian4yu3” (infinitive phrase)", “dong4ming2ci2 pian4yu3” (gerund phrase), “fen2ci2 pian4yu3” (participial phrase), etc. Give examples afterwards.[/quote]
I was taught/ figured out that pian4yu3 meant opaque metaphorical idiom, or pure idiom but I think that was likely wrong. I’ll call a pure idiom a bi3yu3 de pian4yu3 to be sure.
I am beginning to think that you are right that a lot of the problems I’m having come from my students not knowing the terms I’m using, but also from the fact that we are trying to use Chinese terms to describe English. I won’t give up though, it must be possible to talk about English in Chinese with some precision.
I’ll check Shrampfer (the one with the grammar bits translated into Chinese).
Sorry I got your history so scrambled. For my part I am a burnt out old git with no relevant education, but an interest in languages.
Do you mean bi3yu4? Bi3yu4 is an analogy, so bi3yu4 de pian4yu3 would be an analogous phrase.
You can certainly talk about English in Chinese with precision, but the heart of the problem is the concept, not the terminology. Even with correct Chinese terminology, if the students have never heard of the terms nor the concepts before, you’ll still get lots of blank stares.
Well, I’m on my way to being a burnt out old git with an interest in languages. Actually, as a former ESL student, I have a healthy disdain for the English language. The only reason I’m on this forum at all is to look for ideas to teach English to my own kids. TPRS sounds like a method I’d like to try.
TPRS is the absolute bomb. Ironlady is the one who really knows about it and she says she NEVER teaches grammar. I break ranks a bit on that obviously but not so much as it might appear. I try to teach grammar in Chinese partly because it saves them time learning English grammar terms.
Yup. biYu. Thanks.
Analogous with what?
Just kidding. I was getting waaay ahead of myself back there. Check out the link. I think it’s all coming together.
Good Gravy!~ I haven’t logged on in a couple days and there are six pages of this! I want to get through finals week before taking this up again. My last final is Thursday. Not sure if I can respond to six pages, so I hope this is all fairly simple stuff. :s
[quote=“Fox”][quote]I don’t think you understand what I am saying. A linking verb + like has to be followed by a noun. Linking verbs are followed by adjectives functioning as adverbs.
[/quote]
That’s my point too.
It’s not an adverbial participal phrase, it is a gerund. Like is a preposition that must be followed by a gerund.
The whole phrase: “like banging your head against a wall” is adverbial.
He works like a man possessed.
“Like a man possessed” would be an adverb.
It answers: How does he work?
However “a man possessed” is a noun and an adjective which as a phrase is the object of like. Objects are nouns or pronouns.[/quote]
Bob and Fox, you are both right. I was tripping over my own grammar!
The whole phrase: “like banging your head against a wall” is adverbial.
Yes. I think I tried to say that as some point. I used a bad example with the linking verb. Yet again, I’ve caused mayhem by trying to post intelligently when I simply don’t have the time to think it through. But the Semester is over so I can breath a little now. I might still not achieve intelligence though.
I have to say, Bob, I’ve been watching your posts for a while after reading some things that made my head ache tring to figure them out. I’ve come to think that there is some kind of method to your maddness and to respect your language study and learning a great deal.
:s