I have a little question concerning the usage of 而 in this sentence: 今天下午當我走在台南市,迎面而來一位阿伯. I get the whole expression 迎面而來 in MDBG Chinese dictionary as “directly / head-on (collision) / in one’s face (of wind) ”, but I guess there is a more grammatically meaning behind it. In my other dictionary, only 迎面 is written, translated as “head-on, face-to-face”. So I wonder what the 而 does there. Can anybody explain this to me?
阿伯 is an elderly man. In Mandarin it is pronounced A-Bo2, but in Taiwan writing it often represents the Taiwanese word A-Peh (p in IPA Voiceless bilabial stop).
而 here modifies 迎面 into a adverb to describe the verb 來. Similar to what -ly does in English.
I have to say this grammar is not that common in daily Mandarin except for modifying 來 and 去. And doing so will make you sound like you are trying to be Shakespearean or something.
Ah, ok, great, thanks. I had this slight feeling that it would be something to turn it into an adverb, but I was not really sure. Is there some difference to 得? Could I also write 迎面得來 without a change in meaning?
Reason being 得 modifies a verb (跑得快) or a comparable adjective when it is showing a degree (快樂得跳了起來), whereas 迎面 here is a non-comparable adjective.
Other examples would be 滿載而歸 (return with a full load) or 豐收而回 (returns bountifully), where 滿載 and 豐收 are both adjectives here.
For these two example, you can also say more casually with:
滿載的歸來 or 豐收的回來. but 迎面的來 sounds odd still… maybe it isn’t wrong… just odd. people say 正面的交手 or something similar though.
There are many other usage of 而 (and still pretty classical):
If I have this thread open, its maybe a good opportunity to ask for a comprehensive grammar book? My Chinese has many small gaps and some stuff I use incorrectly, so it would be good to be able to look it up. I have many textbooks here, but I don’t really need the text-stuff in between. I would just like to have a nicely sorted grammar book, especially one which also covers the little more advanced stuff (like the 而 mentioned above).
I don’t care so much if it is in simplified or traditional (although I am more versed in traditional), the quality of the explanations is more important.
[quote=“Hellstorm”]I would just like to have a nicely sorted grammar book, especially one which also covers the little more advanced stuff (like the 而 mentioned above).
I don’t care so much if it is in simplified or traditional (although I am more versed in traditional), the quality of the explanations is more important.[/quote]