# 一...就...



## ThintD

how to use 一...就...   (yī...jiù...) pattern ？
In what kind of context can you use this?


----------



## kong.zhong

1. 一看到你这个问题我就想回答它。
2. 一结婚就生孩子。
3. ......


----------



## xiaolijie

For a full explanation, you'd be better off look for "一...就... " in a grammar book but just to get you going, I'd say that it means something like "As soon as *verb1* happens, *verb2* happens". Let's look at the examples provided by kong.zhong:

1. 一*看*到你这个问题我就*想回答*它。
As soon I *saw* your question, I *wanted to reply*.

2. 一*结婚*就*生孩子*。
As soon as (they) *got married*, (they) *gave birth to a child*.


----------



## jazzphobie

And just one side note - this structure can be used in any tense, not just for describing something that happened in the past.

Ex. 她（每次）一回家就看电视。
Present: As soon as she comes back home she starts watching TV.

你一到家就给我打电话。
Future: Call me as soon as you get back home.


----------



## SuperXW

Reminder: The tone of "yi" here depends on the next character's tone, so it's usually not "yi1". 
If you haven't learnt the tone's change of "yi", I'm sure lots of books can teach you.


----------



## catamaran

这个语句是用时间上连续表达强烈的语气，比如
一看到这块怀表，我就想起我的外公  --非常怀念
一看到你我就特别来气 --非常讨厌你
你们一结婚就生孩子了？ --惊讶，太快了
这东西我一吃就吐 --强调实在是不能吃


----------



## ThintD

Thanks guys!


----------



## CatherineQiu

This pattern means "as soon as" in English


----------



## sb70012

Wǒ yī huí dàojiā, wǒ* jiù* huì fā xìnxī gěi nǐ
As soon as I get home, I will send you a message

Wǒ = I
yī = as soon as
huí dàojiā = arrive home
huì = will
fā = send
xìnxī gěi nǐ = message to you

Hello,
I cannot understand what is the red word * jiù *for. What does it mean?

Thank you.

[EDIT:]
I checked the meaning and the dictionary says that it means "as soon as". But in its English version at the second part of the sentence we don't need "as soon as" => "I will send you a message "

We have only one "as soon as" at the first pat of the sentence which is *yī *

That's why I am confused that why we have two "as soon as"? One "as soon as" at the first part of the sentence. Another "as soon as" at the second part of the sentence.

This is confusing me.


----------



## SimonTsai

我一看見蟑螂就大聲尖叫。
你一聽到槍聲就快跑。
他一哭我就沒轍。

'一 + (event) + 就 + (event)' is a set sentence structure and should be taken together.


----------



## Skatinginbc

sb70012 said:


> Wǒ yī huí dàojiā, wǒ* jiù* huì fā xìnxī gěi nǐ


Literally:
*Once I get home, I (我 wǒ) *then  (就 jiù) *will (会 huì) send you a message.
Translation:
Once I get home, I will send you a message.
I'll send you a message once I get home.

yī (一) = once, as soon as, hardly...when, no sooner...than (i.e., to emphasize how little time has elapsed before a subsequent action or reaction occurs; e.g., "一" in "一见钟情")

jiù (就) = then (i.e., to signal an action or plan contingent on a premise or condition, for example, "到家后就会发信息给你" ==> 发信息给你 is contingent on 到家后; to emphasize that an action indeed happened or certainly will happen immediately or shortly after another action, for example, "到家后就发了信息给你" ==> 发信息给你 follows 到家后; to signal a reaction in response to a stimulus, situation, or event, for example, "听了就生气" ==> 生气 is an immediate response to 听了; "看了就不爽" ==> 不爽 is an immediate response to 看了).

Note:
"一" 强调时间短暂，"*就*" 强调逻辑关系 (e.g., 因果关系, 前提結論, 时间顺序).  "得了九陰真经*就*能称霸武林" 不是立即称霸, 总得花时间练.  再速成也得花几个时辰吧!


----------



## SimonTsai

@Skatinginbc has provided an excellent explanation.

Just to make it clear, I am reiterating that generally, '一' is paired with '就', although they function differently. Most exceptions to this are idioms, such as '一發不可收拾'.

'就' in the sense of '_then_', which can mean '_after that_' or '_in that case_', may be optional elsewhere:
​ 會計師考試一次要一千八；*如果*我沒一次考過，我大概*會*被爸媽罵個半死。​ 我爸媽再三強調：考試一次一千八；*如果*沒一次考過，我*就**會*被罵個半死。​


----------



## sb70012

Thank you, everybody!


----------



## KK_Tse

People who study *jiù*（就）usually put it in contrast with *cái*（才）. For example:

1.   火车五点就到。(huǒchē wǔ diǎn *jiù* dào) - The train will arrive at five o'clock
1a. 火车五点才到。(huǒchē wǔ diǎn *cái* dào) - The train won't arrive until five o'clock

2.   他吃两碗饭就饱。(tā chī liǎng wǎn fàn *jiù* bǎo) - He needs to eat only 2 bowls of rice to be full
2a. 他吃两碗饭才饱。(tā chī liǎng wǎn fàn *cái* bǎo) - He needs to eat as many as 2 bowls of rice to be full

The idea is as follows:
Given a relation P *jiù/cái* Q, where P is a class of possible values that normally entails Q (or, as Skatinginbc mentioned, P is a premise for Q):
In the case of *jiù, *we have a minimum value of P that instantiates the relation, and in the case of *cái, *a maximum value of P.

In 1 and 2, wǔ diǎn and chī liǎng wǎn fàn are minimum values (i.e. early, a little).
In 1a and 2a, they are maximum values (i.e. late, a lot).


----------



## Skatinginbc

我是這樣想的:

房事是什麼回事, 他結了婚*才*知道。==> 言下之意是他比別人或預期的還晚知道 ("late", see #7)。
房事是什麼回事, 結了婚*才*(會)知道。==> "結婚" 是 "知道房事" 的*必要條件* (necessary condition) 或起碼條件 (minimum requirement)。不結婚就不會知道。

可是:
房事是什麼回事, 你結了婚*就*(會)知道。==> 沒有比別人或預期的還早或還晚的言下之意 (Note: 你可能現在就想知道, 因此可能會比你希望的還晚, 但這並非強調之處)。強調的是邏輯關係: 只要 "結了婚" (P) 的前提或條件滿足了，"知道房事是什麼回事" (Q) 自然會成立。P是*充分條件* (sufficient condition)，但不是唯一能使Q成立的條件，不排除其它條件也能使Q成立。

我回到家*才*會發信給你。==> 言下之意是 (1) 會比你希望或預期的還晚 ("late", see #7), 或者 (2)沒回到家就不會發信給你 (排除半路停車發信給你的可能性)。

A: 你能不能現在發信給我?
B: 我正在開車!  我回到家*就*會發信給你。==> 強調的是邏輯關係: 只要 "回到家" (P) 的前提或條件滿足了，"發信給你" (Q) 就會成立。不排除半路停車發信給你的可能性。

他吃两碗饭*就*饱。==> 两碗就*充分 *(sufficient).
他吃两碗饭*才*饱。==> 两碗是*必要* (necessary).

乘客: 誤點要誤到什麼時候?  我都等了兩小時了。
站長A: 快了.  火車五點*就* (才 ) 來。==> 等到五點左右就行了, 就足夠了 (*充分*)。
站長B: 慢慢等吧.  火車五點*才* (就 ) 來。==> 起碼必須等到五點 (*必要*)。

今天下班下得早 (early), 五點之*前**就* (才 ) 離開 ==> 五點是*頂限* (the latest, upper limit, maximum)

今天下班下得晚 (late), 五點之*後**才* (就 ) 離開 ==>五點是*低限* (the earliest, lower limit, minimum)

水加温到100度*就*會沸騰 ==> 加温到110度呢? 也會沸騰.  所以100度是*低限* (minimum).
水加温到100度*才*會沸騰 ==> 100度內不會.  更強調100度是*低限* (minimum).

My point: "頂限" (maximum) vs. "低限" (minimum) 不是區分 "就" vs. "才" 的好方法*.   *"*充分*" (sufficient; cf. 只要) vs. "*必要*" (necessary; cf. 起碼) 才是更好的方法.


----------



## KK_Tse

By "a minimum value of P" (not "the minimum value"), we mean that Pi is a value barely qualified to be a value of P. It is a plain P that we can overlook easily. In any case, it is not a "typical P".
By "a maximum value of P" (not "the maximum value"), we mean that Pj is a value of "high degree". It is not a "typical P", but "a deep P" or "a very P", if we are allowed to abuse the language a bit. 

We are working on a range of values.

When *jiù/cái* is used with an argument related to time or quantity such as "wǔ diǎn" (5 o'clock) or "liǎng wǎn fàn" (2 bowls of rice), the range of values will normally take the form of scale: ranging from low to high, small to large, or early to late.

If the argument has no dimension of measurement, then we will have just a range of values which can still have an order: from first to last if you bother to count, but it depends on at which point you start the counting.

The following example can help to illustrate this point:

A: 难怪！原来你们是双胞胎。告诉我，谁是老大？（Nánguài. Yuánlái nǐmen shì shuāngbāotāi. Gàosù wǒ, shéi shì lǎodà ?)
    No wonder! You are twins. Tell me, who is the oldest?
B: 我就是老大。（Wǒ *jiù* shì lǎodà .)
     I am the oldest. (Look no further. The first one is already the good value.)
C: 你乱讲，我才是老大。（Nǐ luàn jiǎng. Wǒ *cái* shì lǎodà .)
    You talk nonsense. It is me, the oldest. (Ignore the rest. I am the one who have the last laugh.)

Since B beat C to answer first, B uses *jiù, *and C being the last one uses *cái*.


----------



## Skatinginbc

KK_Tse said:


> Given a relation P *jiù/cái* Q, where P is a class of possible values that normally entails Q:
> In the case of *jiù, *we have a minimum value of P that instantiates the relation...By "a minimum value of P" (not "the minimum value"), we mean that Pi is a value *barely qualified to be a value of P*. It is a plain P that we can overlook easily. In any case, it is *not a "typical P"*.


A: 我去上個廁所.
B: 要快!  火車五點*就到* ==> I think 五點, as the official estimate of the arrival time, _is_ a "typical P" and perhaps also the *median* P value for 這班火車進站的時刻.  The train may come earlier or later in actuality, so I would not say it is a "minimum value" or "a value barely qualified to be a value of P".
B: 要快!  火車五點*就走* ==> I think 五點, as the official estimate of the departure time, is "THE typical P"  (the *mode*) for 這班火車離站的時刻.  In practice, the train would not depart earlier than scheduled (that is, it would depart only either on time or late), so 五點 can indeed be deemed a "minimum value".

My point:
In my mind, there is no difference in function between the 就 in 火車五點就到 and the 就 in 火車五點就走.  The logical paradigm you mentioned however suggests otherwise.  I therefore think the paradigm fails to capture the true picture of how native speakers actually process 就 in their minds.


----------



## Oswinw011

Hello, sb7002, if you have trouble understanding the meaning with "as soon as", you can take it as "if(once)...., then...". The latter part is triggered and driven by the former. The moment "if" happens, "then" follows. If I arrive home that moment, then I will send you a message.
Its an eclectic way to help you memorize the phrase. Technically, if then is a little different from as soon as.


----------

