# 亦未深加追究



## bankei yotaku

大家很好! I put as object of this thread “亦未深加追究”, because it is the clause presenting more issues for me here. Not that others do not, but they are a bit more clear to my eye. This is the context: *二妹走后，三叔虽不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究，但是他在陈克家面前丢了脸，心中非常不痛快，他常发脾气，身体也不及从前了。*In 亦未深加追究 of course the issue for me is _who _exactly investigated _what_.

1) the missing subject in 亦未深加追究 might be either “我” or “三叔”; how do I tell exactly whether is one or the other?

2) if it is “我” then _what_ is investigated could be either “此事” or the reason why “(三叔)对外发表” that matter “虽不愿”;

3) if it is “三叔” then _what _is investigated could be either “此事”, or more generally the reasons for its happening; because there is 亦 I would be inclined to think it is this latter, but it maybe should be understood as “(I) too ...” in the sense of “for my part...”.

4) Another issue tightly connected to this is, _what is _exactly “此事”? Because the expression has a demonstrative it should be something of which both the reader and the writer are aware, that is something that already came up before: it is _definite_ and so it is in pre-verbal position marked by 将 as direct object of the main verb, “发表”. I think then that “此事” could be either the fact that “二妹走” or what the narrator has reported about “姑母” in the preceding period, about which there are this and this thread. Certainly, if 亦未深加追究 is taken as parenthetical with the preceding one, “此事” should be 二妹走, otherwise it should be the facts regarding “姑母”. In this latter case I would interpret 但是 as “but, yet” instead that as “however”.

The main issue with the rest of the sentence, then is of course, 5) simply _to whom _the narrator is referring with “他”? Later on the author uses also “她”, but I read that this character used to be a variant of 姐 “sister”, before being borrowed in modern times for the specific meaning “she, her”. This book is from 1955, was this use already affirmed back then? However if 他 is to be read as “he”, this should then be necessarily “三叔”, and the author uses 他 exactly to stress that the person he’s talking about is now “third paternal uncle”, and not “姑母” of which he was speaking in the preceding lines.

The following is of course just a tentative interpretation, with some of the alternative readings:

*二妹走后，三叔虽不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究，但是他在陈克家面前丢了脸，心中非常不痛快，他常发脾气，身体也不及从前了。

After my second younger sister left - (I know this because) my third paternal uncle, though (he) was not willing, let notice of this matter seep out, and also (I) have not deeply investigated (why he did that although unwilling) - however (s)he lost face in front of financial difficulties in managing the household, and became in the heart especially not joyful, (s)he now often loses temper, and h(er) health also is not as good as before.
*
Many thanks in advance to everyone.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

To be frank, It's very funny and thought-provoking to read such an analysis about a usual Chinese sentence. Much of what you said never comes into my head.

陈克家 is a man's name. 陈 is a common family name and 克家 is a common pattern of a name. The current premier of China is 李克强.

虽（然）……但是……  a pair of associated words 
他虽然来了，但是没说话。
He said nothing though he came here.



二妹走后，三叔虽不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究，但是他在陈克家面前丢了脸，心中非常不痛快，他常发脾气，身体也不及从前了。
So this sentence could be divided to two parts, or three parts.

①二妹走后，
②三叔虽不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究，
③但是他在陈克家面前丢了脸，心中非常不痛快，他常发脾气，身体也不及从前了。

The ③ clause is composed of two loosely related parts. The comma after 不痛快 could be replaced with a period.


----------



## bankei yotaku

retrogradedwithwind said:


> It's very funny and thought-provoking to read such an analysis about a usual Chinese sentence.



 well glad to hear, my threads are not boring!

Of course, yes, I did not took into account the possibility of personal names, and that's something that never comes into my mind...

From what you say I conclude that 他 is 三叔, then.

But does my interpretation of 三叔虽不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究 has any sense, even though references be mixed up? 
*
my third paternal uncle, though (he) was not willing, let notice of this matter seep out, and also (I) have not deeply investigated (why he did that although unwilling)
*
Thanks a lot.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

In classic Chinese, it could happen that the actor or subject of a verb is not the closest person but the farther one, the latent "我I", or someone else. but that hardly happens in modern Chinese.

The person who didn't investigate and didn't want that thing exposed should be 三叔.


----------



## bankei yotaku

retrogradedwithwind said:


> The person who didn't investigate and didn't want that thing exposed should be 三叔.



Your remarks very useful. I made this guess:

*After my second younger sister left, my third paternal uncle - although not willing to let notice of this matter seep out, (matter which) he had also not deeply investigated - however lost face in front of Chen Kejiā, and became in the heart especially not joyful; he now often loses temper, and his health also is not as good as before.*

where I understand that 虽 extends its scope to the whole clause 不愿将此事对外发表. That is, 三叔 indeed didn't let 此事 seep out, because that would have meant 丢了脸 with 陈克家, evidently a relative of 陈姨太, the one whose words upset 姑母 the year before. The issue nevertheless became known, so that  ... (但是) ...  

Of course, then, 此事 would be what the narrator has spoken about in the first period.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

②三叔虽不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究，
③但是他在陈克家面前丢了脸，心中非常不痛快，他常发脾气，身体也不及从前了。

All words from 不愿 to 追究 are what is in the scope of 虽, and all words from 他在 to 不痛快 are what in the scope of 但是.

三叔 didn't want to expose that matter and to investigate it deeply, but he lost face before 陈克家 ( because of it) and felt upset.


----------



## Skatinginbc

追究: (1) to pursue investigation, (2) to pursue liabilities (to hold someone liable for something), or (3) both (to pursue investigation and liabilities).
三叔不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究  Third Uncle did not want to disclose this matter (i.e., her runaway, 二妹离家出走) to the public, nor did he pursue it further (e.g., to hold someone liable for her running away from home).


bankei yotaku said:


> the missing subject in 亦未深加追究 might be either “我” or “三叔”


No.  It is unambiguously 三叔 due to the existence of a coordinator (i.e., 亦).  If the second subject is different from the first (i.e., 三叔), it has to be explicitly specified (e.g., 三叔不愿将此事对外发表，我亦未深加追究 ==> 我 cannot be omitted).


bankei yotaku said:


> The main issue with the rest of the sentence, then is of course, 5) simply _to whom _the narrator is referring with “他”?


Again, it is unambiguously 三叔.  
二妹走后，三叔不愿将此事对外发表，亦未深加追究 ==> 二妹 appears in the subordinate clause (i.e., "After 二妹 ran away") and 三叔 in the main position, so any subsequent pronoun (他) in the sentence would refer back to 三叔.  If the subject is someone other than 三叔, it has to be explicitly specified.


----------



## bankei yotaku

I'm very obliged to both of you. 



Skatinginbc said:


> nor did he pursue it further (e.g., to hold someone liable for her running away from home).



I had thought something of the kind where I would understand 亦 as "nor", in reverse, like "even" in negative sentences in English, because otherwise I couldn't make it fit, understand the sentence, with the 未 that follows.



Skatinginbc said:


> It is unambiguously 三叔 due to the existence of a coordinator (i.e., 亦).



Yes--the coordinator indeed made me suspicious...! 



retrogradedwithwind said:


> 亦未深加追究



Could you please tell me what is the function of 加 here?



Skatinginbc said:


> this matter (i.e., her runaway, 二妹离家出走)



Ok, you let the cat out of the bag ......nevertheless: it is to signal that it is 二妹走后 the fact referred to, that 此事 is placed in pre-verbal position with 将 as marker, or that's only because it is definite?


----------



## Skatinginbc

bankei yotaku said:


> Could you please tell me what is the function of 加 here?


加 = 施以某种动作 take action, take the action of...(e.g., 不加考虑 literally "not to take the action of 考虑", that is, "do not take it into consideration").
深加追究 literally "to take the action of 追究 further", that is, "to pursue it further".


----------



## bankei yotaku

Thanks


----------



## WangFei1983

Before coming to this forum, I worried about my English(ah, happier & simpler times), now i feel i should add Chinese to the list...
HELP!


----------



## bankei yotaku

WangFei1983 said:


> i feel i should add Chinese to the list...



Chinese language is indeed very challenging to me.



bankei yotaku said:


> 此事 is placed in pre-verbal position with 将 as marker, or that's only because it is definite



The writer could have also put 此事 as topic in place of 三叔, to spell it definite. But maybe it should have put the whole clause in sentence-initial position to mean the facts reported earlier, and the temporal phrase after it (?)


----------

