# Use of conjunctions



## Grammar Fan

When I write (TRY to write!) Chinese, should I keep sentences short and avoid conjunctions? I hear that some younger Chinese are using (in conversation) long sentences with lots of conjunctions, as in English.  Is it true that Chinese is better understood (at least in conversation) through short, conjunction-less sentences? I eagerly await your comments on this fascinating subject.  Xie xie ni.


----------



## AVim

Grammar Fan said:


> When I write (TRY to write!) Chinese, should I keep sentences short and avoid conjunctions?


Without an instance, what I could say is "it depends". But, in my opinion, making the meaning clear should be the one true important thing to notice, no matter how many conjunctions you are trying to use.



> Is it true that Chinese is better understood (at least in conversation) through short, conjunction-less sentences?



That's not true. You know, the Chinese Grammar is usually more than fascinating,  that is sometimes short sentences can be really powerful while, sometimes they can also be very ambiguous.


----------



## Grammar Fan

fei chang xie xie ni for your reply. I had read a China Daily columnist who was upset that younger Chinese were using such long sentences with many conjunctions.  He said that they were copying English grammar.  It's most interesting to learn that you disagree with his viewpoint.  I now have more food for thought whenever I try to write a Chinese sentence.


----------



## samanthalee

Perhaps we don't have to keep sentences short but I usually keep to short clauses, peppering my sentences with commas (and sometimes semi-colons) wherever possible, which is different from what I do with my English sentences where I drop puncutations when it doesn't lead to ambiguities.

And I just realised that the above paragraph was written in a single English sentence... Ahem... The above paragraph would have been 3 sentences if I had written it in Mandarin. I concur with the China Daily columnist; it is common for English to have long sentences, but not for Mandarin.


----------



## AVim

Grammar Fan said:


> fei chang xie xie ni for your reply. I had read a China Daily columnist who was upset that younger Chinese were using such long sentences with many conjunctions.  He said that they were copying English grammar.  It's most interesting to learn that you disagree with his viewpoint.  I now have more food for thought whenever I try to write a Chinese sentence.



Well, I just find that I misunderstood you. I guess that the columnist probably meant the long-sentence craze among the younger people, for example, something like 


> 整天看书看日剧看电视看电脑并不幸中了推理小说的毒满脑子都是凶杀案以至于一点玩的欲望也没有变成了一个彻头彻尾的宅女。



I agree that it's not good to write things in this way, but the younger people, you know, sometimes like to play with the words, to show off their ideas and personalities...


----------



## Grammar Fan

AVim said:


> Well, I just find that I misunderstood you. I guess that the columnist probably meant the long-sentence craze among the younger people, for example, something like
> 
> 
> I agree that it's not good to write things in this way, but the younger people, you know, sometimes like to play with the words, to show off their ideas and personalities...


 Thanks so much for the update.  I had no idea that some younger Chinese say (or write) such long sentences.


----------



## shivasprogeny

I'm not sure I agree with the idea that written Chinese has shorter sentences than English.  I find that Chinese frequently uses commas where we would use a period in English.  Here's an example I just quickly pulled from an article on xinhuanet:

武广铁路客运专线公司13日对外公布，根据国家发改委、铁道部批复，将于12月26日正式开通运营的京广高速铁路武广段，武汉至广州南高速动车组列车实行试行运价，一等车票价为780元，二等车票价为490元。

These long winded sentences in Chinese media seem to be fairly common.  In English this could easily be two or three sentences.


----------



## YangMuye

The meaning of the word "sentence" is a little different.
In Chinese, a “。” indicate a ending of an idea. “，” means a period.



> 武广铁路客运专线公司13日对外公布，根据国家发改委、铁道部批复，将于12月26日正式开通运营的京广高速铁路武广段，武汉至广州南高速动车组列车实行试行运价，一等车票价为780元，二等车票价为490元。


Chinese trends to divide a long sentence into many short clause. 



> 整天看书、看日剧、看电视、看电脑，并不幸中了推理小说的毒，满脑子都是凶杀案，以至于一点玩的欲望也没有，变成了一个彻头彻尾的宅女。



The position of verbs and particles may help you. Usually, a sentence only have one subject, one verb, one object. Subject and object are nouns, “的” can only exist before a noun. Words like “以至于”  “因爲” “所以” “但是” “而且” are usually followed by a sentence... 

Many Chinese don't use more than one “。” in a paragraph. Since Ancient Chinese don't use such Punctuations at all. They sometimes mark a circle (just like “。”) called “句逗”, which means “a sentence, or a short stop”.
Chinese usually omit subjects and objects if it can be derived from context. That's why we don't use “。”.
In the example above, The full version is: 她整天看书。她整天看日剧。她整天看电视。她整天看电脑。她并不幸中了推理小说的毒，她的满脑子裏都是凶杀案。以上事實以至于她一点玩的欲望也没有。以上事實以至于变她成了一个彻头彻尾的宅女。
A subsentence itself may does not make sense at all. That's why we don't like to use punctuations.

On the other hand, Chinese usually talks about “虛詞”(virtual word) and “實詞”(real word)。實詞 is a noun, verb, adjective, adverb... 虛詞 does not have any meaning by itself. prepositions, conjunctions, auxiliaries, particles are 虛詞. Chinese trends to use 實詞. A sentence full of 虛詞 is considered 言之無物（to be just empty verbiage）. Written Chinese have less 虛詞 than spoken. Some conjunctions likes “所以、然後、於是、而且”.. may be almost useless because they can be derived from context. Some (和、或、何況、寧可...) can not be avoid.
In the example “整天看书、并且看日剧、并且看电视、并且看电脑，并不幸中了推理小说的毒，所以满脑子都是凶杀案，以至于一点玩的欲望也没有，而且以至于变成了一个彻头彻尾的宅女。”
Only “並” and “以致於” are conjunctions.
The last “並” tells us the implied conjunction before “满脑子都是凶杀案” is not “並”, so I think it should be the the subsequence of “中了推理小说的毒”.
“以至于” is not omitted, so the following sentence “一点玩的欲望也没有” is not subsequence of “中了推理小说的毒” but “整天看书、并且看日剧、并且看电视、并且看电脑，并不幸中了推理小说的毒，所以满脑子都是凶杀案，以至于一点玩的欲望也没有”。
Conjunctions before “变成了一个彻头彻尾的宅女。”is omitted, so the “而且” is implied. The “了” after “變成” implies “result”.


----------



## Grammar Fan

Dear YangMuye: Thank you so much for the wonderful explanation about the use of conjunctions in Chinese.  You have taught me so much.  I shall carefully study your words. I am very grateful that you took so much time to help me better understand your beautiful language.


----------



## YangMuye

My pleasure.
Even though sentences with less conjunction sound better, I still strongly suggest you use them. It hard to master even for native Chinese. Using conjunction in each sentence is verbose but safe.
I think you don't need to learn it. It's just “Instinctive Feel for the Language”.


----------



## bearsq

Grammar Fan said:


> fei chang xie xie ni for your reply. I had read a China Daily columnist who was upset that younger Chinese were using such long sentences with many conjunctions.  He said that they were copying English grammar.  It's most interesting to learn that you disagree with his viewpoint.  I now have more food for thought whenever I try to write a Chinese sentence.



*I*f he's talking about Xu Zhiyuan, former chief editor of Economic Observer, arguably the best business journal of China, it might be true. But Xu's style does not represent "Chinese youth" at all. At least *I* am never a big fan of his.

*I* would say in modern business Chinese writing, we tend to follow the style *yo*u mentioned, sort of the The-Elements-of-Style one, i.e., as concise as possible, as formal as possible. Other than that, you will enter an extremely color world... *I* don't know anyone who can summarize for you.

cheers


----------



## huangqiaoying

you can arrange your sentences by using conjunctions, and make them sound coherent.


----------



## Grammar Fan

I wish to express my gratitude to the latest posters who have responded to my question about the use of conjunctions in Chinese.  Your advice has greatly helped me.  No, bearsq, I was not referring to that particular journalist.  Again, fei chang xie xie nimen.


----------



## WiIIaM

Muye's idea has some problems about ancient Chinese, but anyway, 句读,not 逗.
Chinese emphasize 留白 i.e. "leaving blanks(for you to imagine or deduce)". In my study I sadly find that we are talking and writing Chinese more like English, with clear logic, direct meaning, even English sentence order.
Don't fall in love with conjuctions~


----------



## YangMuye

WiIIaM said:


> but anyway, 句读,not 逗.



*讀*：《釋文》徐*音豆*。(the pronunciation is dou)又《增韻》*句讀*，凡經書成文語絕處謂之句。(It's the end of a sentence(“句”) if you don't have further things to say.)語未絕而點分之以便誦詠，謂之讀。(A sentence is not finished, but you can put a mark(逗) so that it's easy to read.)今祕省挍書式：凡句絕，則點於字之旁讀（put a “。” at the end of a sentence），分則微點於字之中閒。（put a “、” when you need a short stop）　又《韻會》通作*投*。(The same as 投)《馬融·長笛賦》察度於*句投*。《註》說文曰：逗，止也。(逗 means a stop)*投與逗古字通，音豆*。(投 and 逗 are the same, are pronounced “豆” )投，句之所止也。(投 is where the sentence ends)○按此則*讀與逗通*（According to this, 讀 逗 are interchangeable）。*逗又與投通*。(so do 逗 and 投).

I think it's easier for foreigner to understand it's meaning when using 逗.
When talking with an Chinese, I will of course use “句讀”, or “句投” and laugh at his ignorance if he can't read it in the right way. 
开個頑笑，沒有冒犯的意思。


----------

