<![CDATA[Comments on: Fog or Smog?]]> 2010-04-27 18:00:00 <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> In the Expansion sentence:

我爷爷以 前是一名海 军。(Wǒ yéye yǐqián shì yì míng hǎijūn.)  My grandfather used to be in the navy.

Doesn't this say 'My grandfather used to be the navy" ?

]]> In the Expansion sentence:

我爷爷以 前是一名海 军。(Wǒ yéye yǐqián shì yì míng hǎijūn.)  My grandfather used to be in the navy.

Doesn't this say 'My grandfather used to be the navy" ?

]]> <![CDATA[By: Tal]]> No, because 名 here is a measure word for persons, so from the context the meaning is clear that the grandfather was a navy person.

]]> No, because 名 here is a measure word for persons, so from the context the meaning is clear that the grandfather was a navy person.

]]> <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> I guess I had already kind of reluctantly accepted that. But can we say:

我爷爷以 前是一名学校。(Wǒ yéye yǐqián shì yì míng xuéxiào.)

to mean "My grandfather used to work in a school" ?

If so, does it imply he was a teacher, or any school worker?

If not, under what circumstances can we use this construct?

]]> I guess I had already kind of reluctantly accepted that. But can we say:

我爷爷以 前是一名学校。(Wǒ yéye yǐqián shì yì míng xuéxiào.)

to mean "My grandfather used to work in a school" ?

If so, does it imply he was a teacher, or any school worker?

If not, under what circumstances can we use this construct?

]]> <![CDATA[By: Tal]]> 呵呵，I'm almost certain you can't say your suggested example sentence.

The navy is a military service isn't it, (also the army and airforce.) So I'd say that the expansion sentence is good.

学校 is a different kind of thing altogether, right? It's a place.

]]> 呵呵，I'm almost certain you can't say your suggested example sentence.

The navy is a military service isn't it, (also the army and airforce.) So I'd say that the expansion sentence is good.

学校 is a different kind of thing altogether, right? It's a place.

]]> <![CDATA[By: JasonSch]]> The measure word 名 here indicates a person. So, a direct (albeit a bit unnatural) translation of 我爷爷以 前是一名海 军 would be "My grandfather used to be a sailor/officer [in the navy]."

]]> The measure word 名 here indicates a person. So, a direct (albeit a bit unnatural) translation of 我爷爷以 前是一名海 军 would be "My grandfather used to be a sailor/officer [in the navy]."

]]> <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> So are you saying that, since an army is a collection of people, we can use 名 to mean just of of those people?

Could you say 一名人群 (yī míng rénqún) to mean 'one person in the crowd' ?

]]> So are you saying that, since an army is a collection of people, we can use 名 to mean just of of those people?

Could you say 一名人群 (yī míng rénqún) to mean 'one person in the crowd' ?

]]> <![CDATA[By: shoondool]]>

If I may, I'd like to offer an alternative translation for the ninth expansion sentence ( just for the heck of it).

我爺爺以前是一名海軍. My translation: "My grandfather used to be a navy man" OR "My grandfather used to be a naval officer".

And FYI, the pop-up for 海軍 shows "navy" , but in this context it should probably be either "navy man" or "naval officer".

]]>

If I may, I'd like to offer an alternative translation for the ninth expansion sentence ( just for the heck of it).

我爺爺以前是一名海軍. My translation: "My grandfather used to be a navy man" OR "My grandfather used to be a naval officer".

And FYI, the pop-up for 海軍 shows "navy" , but in this context it should probably be either "navy man" or "naval officer".

]]> <![CDATA[By: Tal]]> I'm not saying the army/navy is a "collection of people", I'm saying it is a service, an organization which serves the state, an entity. I'm not an expert on Chinese grammar of course, but I think it's right to say that in this kind of example (possibly few others) it's OK to use 一名 to indicate that one individual is being spoken of, followed by the noun for navy, to convey the meaning of 'a navy person'.

]]> I'm not saying the army/navy is a "collection of people", I'm saying it is a service, an organization which serves the state, an entity. I'm not an expert on Chinese grammar of course, but I think it's right to say that in this kind of example (possibly few others) it's OK to use 一名 to indicate that one individual is being spoken of, followed by the noun for navy, to convey the meaning of 'a navy person'.

]]> <![CDATA[By: Tal]]> Sounds good!

]]> Sounds good!

]]> <![CDATA[By: changye]]> I think it's short for “一名海军（军人/士兵）”. The same is true for “一名公安（人员）”. They are idiomatic usages.

]]> I think it's short for “一名海军（军人/士兵）”. The same is true for “一名公安（人员）”. They are idiomatic usages.

]]> <![CDATA[By: JasonSch]]> The problem with adding officer is that an 'officer' is a specific type of person in the navy. (海军军官). That is, not everyone in the navy is an officer.

While 'navy man' works, I felt that 'in the navy' was a more natural way of expressing it in English.

As for the pop-up, I left it 'navy' intentionally so that people wouldn't confuse the word 海军 with 'person in the navy', and could see through the sentence level translation that 一名海军 means 'someone in the navy' or, 'sailor [in the navy]'.

]]> The problem with adding officer is that an 'officer' is a specific type of person in the navy. (海军军官). That is, not everyone in the navy is an officer.

While 'navy man' works, I felt that 'in the navy' was a more natural way of expressing it in English.

As for the pop-up, I left it 'navy' intentionally so that people wouldn't confuse the word 海军 with 'person in the navy', and could see through the sentence level translation that 一名海军 means 'someone in the navy' or, 'sailor [in the navy]'.

]]> <![CDATA[By: dropped_chopstick]]> 哦。。。我真爱听B的声音。。。

敦促你们多用他。。。

谢谢

]]> 哦。。。我真爱听B的声音。。。

敦促你们多用他。。。

谢谢

]]> <![CDATA[By: catherinem]]> A man of many talents, he's on the tech team and is usually busy maintaining our servers... We'll let him know how much you liked his acting! :)

]]> A man of many talents, he's on the tech team and is usually busy maintaining our servers... We'll let him know how much you liked his acting! :)

]]> <![CDATA[By: bluevwspotting]]> I am a naval officer, and I've heard another Chinese person speaking to another shorten it to call me a "haiguan" (sorry, my computer doesn't have chinese input at work).

]]> I am a naval officer, and I've heard another Chinese person speaking to another shorten it to call me a "haiguan" (sorry, my computer doesn't have chinese input at work).

]]> <![CDATA[By: bluevwspotting]]> Also, on another note, at a shakespeare play in Hong Kong recently, sailor was translated in the subtitles as "shuishou" or "water-hand"

]]> Also, on another note, at a shakespeare play in Hong Kong recently, sailor was translated in the subtitles as "shuishou" or "water-hand"

]]> <![CDATA[By: cnyisover]]> Regarding the sentence 打开窗闻闻

I've been told that it's rare to say 窗 and not 窗户.  Is this a Shanghai thing?  Is either OK?

]]> Regarding the sentence 打开窗闻闻

I've been told that it's rare to say 窗 and not 窗户.  Is this a Shanghai thing?  Is either OK?

]]> <![CDATA[By: bababardwan]]> I noticed in the exercises for this lesson the distractors in the multiple choice were better than I remember them being previously.Apart from one or two other lessons it's been a long time since I've done the exercises,so this may have been the case for some time,or maybe this is a one-off.The point being that good distractors improve the quality of the test.When the distractors are obviously wrong it's not a true test.Has this been a conscious implementation of CPod? Anyone else notice this?

]]> I noticed in the exercises for this lesson the distractors in the multiple choice were better than I remember them being previously.Apart from one or two other lessons it's been a long time since I've done the exercises,so this may have been the case for some time,or maybe this is a one-off.The point being that good distractors improve the quality of the test.When the distractors are obviously wrong it's not a true test.Has this been a conscious implementation of CPod? Anyone else notice this?

]]> <![CDATA[By: dropped_chopstick]]> I also liked the way the lesson had a 'grammatical' theme. In this case how to describe degrees (weather,change,pollution). I would like more of this emphasis on grammar as they make very strong and useful lessons. Thanks!

]]> I also liked the way the lesson had a 'grammatical' theme. In this case how to describe degrees (weather,change,pollution). I would like more of this emphasis on grammar as they make very strong and useful lessons. Thanks!

]]> <![CDATA[By: connie]]> Both 窗chuāng and 窗户chuānghu are commonly used.

]]> Both 窗chuāng and 窗户chuānghu are commonly used.

]]> <![CDATA[By: chocky]]> hehe

]]> hehe

]]> <![CDATA[By: chocky]]> hehe

]]> hehe

]]> <![CDATA[By: Tal]]> Perhaps it's also worth noting that 名, used as a measure word for people, is used especially for those with a specific occupation or position.

e.g.

一名军人 = a soldier

两名学生 = two students

]]> Perhaps it's also worth noting that 名, used as a measure word for people, is used especially for those with a specific occupation or position.

e.g.

一名军人 = a soldier

两名学生 = two students

]]> <![CDATA[By: dropped_chopstick]]> thank you Catherine!

Al the CPod voice actors are very good, but this guy is quite special.

If he has time, I have a server he's welcome to come and maintain!

]]> thank you Catherine!

Al the CPod voice actors are very good, but this guy is quite special.

If he has time, I have a server he's welcome to come and maintain!

]]> <![CDATA[By: John]]> It's a very conscious implementation! Our team has put many, many hours into exercise editing. The system can generate a randomized list of possible answers in the exercises for any lesson, but it's not yet sophisticated enough to generate really good distractors. So our teachers need to go over the exercises and edit all the distractors to make sure they're up to snuff.

Trust me, good changes don't happen without conscious effort... :)

]]> It's a very conscious implementation! Our team has put many, many hours into exercise editing. The system can generate a randomized list of possible answers in the exercises for any lesson, but it's not yet sophisticated enough to generate really good distractors. So our teachers need to go over the exercises and edit all the distractors to make sure they're up to snuff.

Trust me, good changes don't happen without conscious effort... :)

]]> <![CDATA[By: John]]> Glad you liked it (and noticed it)! We're definitely doing this more in Elementary, but we'll keep it up in other lessons as well.

]]> Glad you liked it (and noticed it)! We're definitely doing this more in Elementary, but we'll keep it up in other lessons as well.

]]> <![CDATA[By: orangina]]> I also like this very much. I liked how the different ways of expressing degree was worked (quite naturally) into the dialog, not just discussed in the explanation. It really helps learn the framework and thought process of the language, and not just isolated phrases.

]]> I also like this very much. I liked how the different ways of expressing degree was worked (quite naturally) into the dialog, not just discussed in the explanation. It really helps learn the framework and thought process of the language, and not just isolated phrases.

]]> <![CDATA[By: bababardwan]]> I suspected so.Good job then. I thought you should know then that it hasn't gone unnoticed and that I think that it's a very worthwhile exercise that's appreciated on the user end.Thankyou :)

]]> I suspected so.Good job then. I thought you should know then that it hasn't gone unnoticed and that I think that it's a very worthwhile exercise that's appreciated on the user end.Thankyou :)

]]> <![CDATA[By: John]]> You're very welcome.

We're well aware that good distractors are essential for good multiple choice tests, and so far humans are still the best at that.

]]> You're very welcome.

We're well aware that good distractors are essential for good multiple choice tests, and so far humans are still the best at that.

]]> <![CDATA[By: zhenlijiang]]> I tend to think there are quite a few things only humans are any good at, probably because I'm old school (and a tech dummy) ...

Of course there's been so much else going on these past few weeks, but did you have plans to announce this important improvement (not sure how long it's been this way now)? I think many of us would have liked to know. Thanks Baba for bringing it up.

In any case it's great, that the multiple choice questions are better now (so the placement tests are also improved I guess?). I look forward to doing the exercises more often.

]]> I tend to think there are quite a few things only humans are any good at, probably because I'm old school (and a tech dummy) ...

Of course there's been so much else going on these past few weeks, but did you have plans to announce this important improvement (not sure how long it's been this way now)? I think many of us would have liked to know. Thanks Baba for bringing it up.

In any case it's great, that the multiple choice questions are better now (so the placement tests are also improved I guess?). I look forward to doing the exercises more often.

]]> <![CDATA[By: joeborn]]> My apologies if this is too far afield, but I have a question about the pronunciation of 厦 in general.  Apparently, its pinyin is sha4 when it's used in 高楼大, gao1lou2da4sha4, it's xia4 in 厦门 Xia4men2.  So far, so good. 

But, for 厦's stand-alone definition, MDBG gives not only "tall building" and "mansion" but also "rear annex" and "lean-to," and it gives not only sha4 for the stand-alone pronunciation but also xia4 as an alternative. 

So the question is, does any native speaker know whether the alternative, xia4 pronunciation applies to all of those stand-alone definitions or only to, say, "lean-to"?

]]> My apologies if this is too far afield, but I have a question about the pronunciation of 厦 in general.  Apparently, its pinyin is sha4 when it's used in 高楼大, gao1lou2da4sha4, it's xia4 in 厦门 Xia4men2.  So far, so good. 

But, for 厦's stand-alone definition, MDBG gives not only "tall building" and "mansion" but also "rear annex" and "lean-to," and it gives not only sha4 for the stand-alone pronunciation but also xia4 as an alternative. 

So the question is, does any native speaker know whether the alternative, xia4 pronunciation applies to all of those stand-alone definitions or only to, say, "lean-to"?

]]> <![CDATA[By: changye]]> Hi joeborn

All my Chinese dictionaries, including ancient words dictionaries and character dictionaries, say that 厦 (xia4) is for 厦门 (xia4men2), and not for “lean-to”. Furthermore, the dictionaries say the meaning "lean-to" (厦, sha4) is a dialect usage, but I don't know where it is..... (in Beijing?) In any case, I guess most native speakers don't know the meaning "lean-to".

]]> Hi joeborn

All my Chinese dictionaries, including ancient words dictionaries and character dictionaries, say that 厦 (xia4) is for 厦门 (xia4men2), and not for “lean-to”. Furthermore, the dictionaries say the meaning "lean-to" (厦, sha4) is a dialect usage, but I don't know where it is..... (in Beijing?) In any case, I guess most native speakers don't know the meaning "lean-to".

]]> <![CDATA[By: joeborn]]> ありがとうございます.

Good point about "lean-to"; it's probably something of a stretch for a non-native English speaker--except. apparently, for you.

"All my Chinese dictionaries, including ancient words dictionaries and character dictionaries." changye, you must be quite the scholar. I am unworthy :-)

Thanks again.

]]> ありがとうございます.

Good point about "lean-to"; it's probably something of a stretch for a non-native English speaker--except. apparently, for you.

"All my Chinese dictionaries, including ancient words dictionaries and character dictionaries." changye, you must be quite the scholar. I am unworthy :-)

Thanks again.

]]> <![CDATA[By: changye]]> どういたしまして。Actually I love using (and buying) dictionaries very much because they enable you to act as if you were "know-it-all", hehe.

]]> どういたしまして。Actually I love using (and buying) dictionaries very much because they enable you to act as if you were "know-it-all", hehe.

]]> <![CDATA[By: jianxuexi]]> In the following sentences from the expansion tab, I assume the placement rules for verb and time period don't apply.  Is that because you're using the time period as an adjective?

来中国以 前，我学过一年的中文。

那是很多年前的事，我不记得了。

Thanks, jan

]]> In the following sentences from the expansion tab, I assume the placement rules for verb and time period don't apply.  Is that because you're using the time period as an adjective?

来中国以 前，我学过一年的中文。

那是很多年前的事，我不记得了。

Thanks, jan

]]> <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> Regarding the first sentence: In time duration phrases, the duration always comes after the verb, whether or not there is a 的 in the sentence.

]]> Regarding the first sentence: In time duration phrases, the duration always comes after the verb, whether or not there is a 的 in the sentence.

]]> <![CDATA[By: John]]> Well, the issue is that not every single exercise is up to standard yet. We're still working on getting to that state.

]]> Well, the issue is that not every single exercise is up to standard yet. We're still working on getting to that state.

]]> <![CDATA[By: yangzijiang]]> Those two are right, however we don't always use "," if this is a formal using sentence, which means it is OK in chatting. What's more, the time periods are not adjectives but attributives, they are a kind of preposition attributive in Chinese.

]]> Those two are right, however we don't always use "," if this is a formal using sentence, which means it is OK in chatting. What's more, the time periods are not adjectives but attributives, they are a kind of preposition attributive in Chinese.

]]> <![CDATA[By: yangzijiang]]> the duration always comes after the verb,

Maybe it's right in some situation, but most time the time phrases are following the subjuect.

]]> the duration always comes after the verb,

Maybe it's right in some situation, but most time the time phrases are following the subjuect.

]]> <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> Sorry, but time DURATION phrases come at some point AFTER the verb. By time duration, I mean a description of how long (for what length of time) that verb has been performed for. This also applies to time FREQUENCY phrases (how many times the verb has been performed). It is time LOCATION phrases (WHEN something happened) that come before the verb.

As you appear to be Chinese, I assume you simply didn't understand what I meant by 'duration'.

]]> Sorry, but time DURATION phrases come at some point AFTER the verb. By time duration, I mean a description of how long (for what length of time) that verb has been performed for. This also applies to time FREQUENCY phrases (how many times the verb has been performed). It is time LOCATION phrases (WHEN something happened) that come before the verb.

As you appear to be Chinese, I assume you simply didn't understand what I meant by 'duration'.

]]> <![CDATA[By: epdchina]]>

哪些城市有最大的污染？What are the cities with the largest pollution problem?

城市cheng2shi4 city

污染的最大的问题是什么？比如，损害肺还是引起癌症? What is the biggest problem of pollution? For example, harmful to lungs? Causes cancer?

损害sun3hai4 harm

肺fei4 lungs

引起 yin3qi3 cause

癌症 ai2zheng4 cancer

我们怎么停止污染？How can we stop pollution?

停止ting2zhi3 stop

]]>

哪些城市有最大的污染？What are the cities with the largest pollution problem?

城市cheng2shi4 city

污染的最大的问题是什么？比如，损害肺还是引起癌症? What is the biggest problem of pollution? For example, harmful to lungs? Causes cancer?

损害sun3hai4 harm

肺fei4 lungs

引起 yin3qi3 cause

癌症 ai2zheng4 cancer

我们怎么停止污染？How can we stop pollution?

停止ting2zhi3 stop

]]> <![CDATA[By: epdchina]]> 顺便，如果可以的话。。。By the way, If possible...

  • 顺便 shun4bian4 by the way

我想你们回答我的问题 (用中文还有英文)。 I want you all to answer my questions (using Chinese and English).

  • 回答 hui2da2 answer

让我们讨论一下这三个问题吧！Let's discuss these questions!

  • 讨论 tao3lun4

你们也可以做一个词汇表 you can even add a vocab list

  • 词汇 ci2hui4 vocabulary
  • 表 biao3 list

这样也是一个方法让你复习你的中文.This is also a way to practice your Chinese.

  • 复习 fu4xi2 review
]]> 顺便，如果可以的话。。。By the way, If possible...

  • 顺便 shun4bian4 by the way

我想你们回答我的问题 (用中文还有英文)。 I want you all to answer my questions (using Chinese and English).

  • 回答 hui2da2 answer

让我们讨论一下这三个问题吧！Let's discuss these questions!

  • 讨论 tao3lun4

你们也可以做一个词汇表 you can even add a vocab list

  • 词汇 ci2hui4 vocabulary
  • 表 biao3 list

这样也是一个方法让你复习你的中文.This is also a way to practice your Chinese.

  • 复习 fu4xi2 review
]]> <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> Regarding the expansion sentence:

以前北京的空气污染很严重，现在好多了。 (Yĭqián Bĕijīng de kōngqì wŭrăn hĕn yánzhòng, xiànzài hăo duō le.)  In the past, Beijing's air pollution was very serious. It's much better now.

Doesn't 好多 mean 'very many' or 'a lot of'? How does this lead to the translation 'much better now' ?  It sounds like they are saying there is still a lot of pollution.

]]> Regarding the expansion sentence:

以前北京的空气污染很严重，现在好多了。 (Yĭqián Bĕijīng de kōngqì wŭrăn hĕn yánzhòng, xiànzài hăo duō le.)  In the past, Beijing's air pollution was very serious. It's much better now.

Doesn't 好多 mean 'very many' or 'a lot of'? How does this lead to the translation 'much better now' ?  It sounds like they are saying there is still a lot of pollution.

]]> <![CDATA[By: JasonSch]]> 好多了 is an expression that means that something is, 'much better now'.

For example,

A: 你的肚子还疼吗？Does your stomach still hurt?

B: (现在)好多了 It's a lot better (now).

好多 as in, 'very many', isn't followed by a 了. (太, however, is: 太...了)

]]> 好多了 is an expression that means that something is, 'much better now'.

For example,

A: 你的肚子还疼吗？Does your stomach still hurt?

B: (现在)好多了 It's a lot better (now).

好多 as in, 'very many', isn't followed by a 了. (太, however, is: 太...了)

]]> <![CDATA[By: go_manly]]> Thanks Jason. So 了is the key. That's a relief. I was dreading I was going to be told that the key is context.

]]> Thanks Jason. So 了is the key. That's a relief. I was dreading I was going to be told that the key is context.

]]> <![CDATA[By: zhenlijiang]]> Nothing further to add to Jason's answer, but I remembered this discussion we had a few weeks ago.

]]> Nothing further to add to Jason's answer, but I remembered this discussion we had a few weeks ago.

]]> <![CDATA[By: changye]]> “好多” (very many) and “好多” (much better) have different grammatical structures.

“好多” (very many) = 好 (very, adverb) + 多 (many, adjective)

“好多” (much better) = 好 (good, adjective) + 多 (much more, adjective)

]]> “好多” (very many) and “好多” (much better) have different grammatical structures.

“好多” (very many) = 好 (very, adverb) + 多 (many, adjective)

“好多” (much better) = 好 (good, adjective) + 多 (much more, adjective)

]]> <![CDATA[By: JasonSch]]> No prob. Yeah, it's all about the 了 here. You can think of it as marking a change of state: from bad to better, or 'the 好 has 多了ed' if that makes any sense. :)

And thanks Changye for a more a more succinct grammatical explanation!

]]> No prob. Yeah, it's all about the 了 here. You can think of it as marking a change of state: from bad to better, or 'the 好 has 多了ed' if that makes any sense. :)

And thanks Changye for a more a more succinct grammatical explanation!

]]> <![CDATA[By: hanks]]> Joe, you mentioned Mansion and I know this is a bit far from the topic but it has always perplexed me when I see buildings in China called "something mansion" on its name plate on the front. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't Mansion a large residence with no commercial use at all?

]]> Joe, you mentioned Mansion and I know this is a bit far from the topic but it has always perplexed me when I see buildings in China called "something mansion" on its name plate on the front. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't Mansion a large residence with no commercial use at all?

]]>