# 今天(是)很晚才吃的午饭



## viajero_canjeado

[今天很晚才吃的午饭]
上面這句話出現於另一個thread裡面。因沒遇到過這種講法，所以以為是人家打錯了。居然不是!



Ghabi said:


> No, it's not a typo I believe. The structure is very common (and not a recent innovation), but perhaps not used in Taiwan?



嗯，沒錯。我詢問了幾位native speakers, 果然他們的感想跟我差不多：在台灣人們很少會運用此字眼。 那麼我的問題是：習慣用這個結構的地區，會把它當成較為口語的說法，還是已經可以列為正式語言範圍之內?



Ghabi said:


> 我是昨天買的票=我是昨天買票的



這句句子我會解釋為廢話，因為對我來說是 I _am_ the ticket that was bought yesterday 的意思 !


----------



## Ghabi

Yes, I think it does have a tinge of colloquial flavor. It's not really part of the written Chinese we were taught in Hong Kong when I was a kid, if my memory serves me.

The 是 is usually optional, I suppose. For example, 他們上個月才結的婚,現在就鬧著要離了! How would you understand this utterance?


----------



## viajero_canjeado

Ghabi said:


> 他們上個月才結的婚,現在就鬧著要離了! How would you understand this utterance?



Prior to becoming aware of this usage, I would have thought that the 的 was merely typed accidentally instead of 了。Either of the following would have seemed more natural to my ears:
他們是上個月才結婚[的]...
他們上個月才結了婚...

結的婚 still sounds a mite awkward to me, but I'll take your word for it


----------



## jennyjq

“今天很晚才吃的午饭”，“他们上个月才结的婚”，这类用法在北方很普遍，主要还是用于口语中。
至于“我是昨天买的票”这句，说成“我昨天买的票”更顺耳些。但无论哪种用法，在口语中都没错。


----------



## YangMuye

我记得我翻《红楼梦》“的”字的用例的时候，没有看到类似这样的用法。
似乎在《红楼梦》的年代，“的”主要还是作为“表示修饰的助词”。

但现在，“的”字已经发展成了“表示动词时间性的助词”，出现在另一个表示动词时间性的助词“了”相同的位置。很多语法书上把他们称为“动态助词”

所以
“他们上个月结*了*婚。”
“他们(是)上个月结*的*婚。”
应该是标准用法。

同时
“他们上个月结婚*了*。”
“他们(是)上个月结婚*的*。”
“了”和“的”出现在句尾时，语气词的色彩比较强。

不过我想“他们(是)上个月结婚*的*”总是可以代替“他们(是)上个月结*的*婚”。反之则不然。


----------



## Kevin70s

我(是)昨天買的票 places more focus on "yesterday" (It was yesterday that I bought the ticket), as opposed to the more general expression 我昨天买了票/买票了.  
他們上個月才結的婚,現在就鬧著要離了!  Again, the focus is on the relatively short time since they got married.


----------



## kareno999

Kevin70s said:


> 我(是)昨天買的票 places more focus on "yesterday" (It was yesterday that I bought the ticket), as opposed to the more general expression 我昨天买了票/买票了.


Indeed.  There are some nuanced differences between 我昨天买了票 & 我昨天买的票。


viajero_canjeado said:


> 這句句子我會解釋為廢話，因為對我來說是 I _am_ the ticket that was bought yesterday 的意思 !


这个跟日文的うなぎ文是一样的结构。僕はウナギだ doesn‘t mean you are an eel. The “是”or“は” here simply indicates a comparison with someone else (hidden in the context). Maybe someone else can explain it better than I do. 
In English, you probably need to use passive voice (My ticket was bought yesterday) or use intonation (I bought MY ticket YESterday).


----------



## 南島君

Re: 我今天是很晚吃的午饭 *It was very late that I had lunch today.*



viajero_canjeado said:


> 上面這句話出現於另一個thread裡面。因沒遇到過這種講法，所以以為是人家打錯了。居然不是!
> 
> 嗯，沒錯。我詢問了幾位native speakers, 果然他們的感想跟我差不多：在台灣人們很少會運用此字眼。 那麼我的問題是：習慣用這個結構的地區，會把它當成較為口語的說法，還是已經可以列為正式語言範圍之內?
> 
> 這句句子我會解釋為廢話，因為對我來說是 I _am_ the ticket that was bought yesterday 的意思 !



Hi v_c. 

你所詢問的句式，劉月華（2010[2001]:762-771）《實用現代漢語語法》稱作「是...的」句第一類型，它的功能正如 Kevin70s and kareno999 提的：是突出/聚焦（focus）表達重點，是一種表現「對比焦點」的手段，cf. 
（一）對比焦點是作爲狀語
　　(1) 他是在外語學院學的英文。
　　(2) 那本教科書是1985年寫的（，不是2000年寫的）。
（二）對比焦點是施事
　　(3) 這鬼主意是誰出的？
　　(4) 桌上是李媽做的飯（，不是我做的飯）。
（三）對比焦點是全句主語
　　(5) 是你阿姨讓我進來的。
　　(6) 是你引誘我的（，不是魔鬼引誘我的）！
（四）對比焦點是受事
   　　(7) 老大是學的歷史，老二是學的化學。
　　(8) 昨天晚上我是吃的餃子（，不是吃的米飯）。
以上(1)-(8)的例句，「是」是焦點標記，標記它後面的成分是全句表達的焦點（除了受事成分似乎有點不一樣）。

一般這種句式不是用作引入新信息，而是在特定語境下強調（舊信息中）某個焦點成分；因此「是」時常可以省略，卻很少在實際會話中引起究竟是聚焦哪個成分的歧義：
  　　(9) 我(是)今天很晚才吃的午飯。
  　　(10) 我今天(是)很晚吃的午飯。
  　　(11) 我今天很晚(是)吃的午飯。

[*關於「對比焦點」：*漢語句子的信息的編排其實是遵循從舊信息到新信息的原則，越靠近 句末信息内容就越新。句末成分通常稱作句末焦點，這種焦點成分也稱作「常規焦點」。反之，如果一個成分不用作引入新信息，而是説話人出於對比目的才著意強 調上下文或語境裏已經直接或間接的引入了的成分，這就是「對比焦點」。（方梅 1995）]

延伸閲讀：
劉月華 2010[2001]。《實用現代漢語語法》。北京：商務印書館。頁762-771。 
方梅 1995。〈漢語對比焦點的句法表現手段〉。《中國語文》。1995年第4期。 
_________________________________________________________________________________


關於你的疑惑，似乎確實是如此，這種表達方式臺灣比較少那麽說，但也不是完全沒有，也許你會覺得「他是什麽時候結的婚？」、「A:這書是你的麽？B:不，我是從圖書館借的書」、「你是什麽時候打的電話？我沒接到」之類的例句比較熟悉？不過我還必須再說的是：一、臺灣國語對於「我是昨天買票的」的 preference 高於 「我是昨天買的票」；二、對於（四）受事成分的對比焦點，在臺灣國語似乎是不合語法的（?），至少在我個人的語感裏，這種表達對我來説是完全 opaque 的。

現在，我好奇的是：這「是...的」句第一類型是否有什麽區域性的差別？


----------



## SuperXW

I can only say 
今天很晚才吃的午饭 我是昨天買的票=我是昨天買票的
are all idiomatic, and even grammatical in Beijing and northern China.
Consider it in this way: 
今天很晚才吃的。 ——补充：吃的什么——> 今天很晚才吃的午饭。 （将“午饭”当作句子的补充成分。）
我是昨天買的。——补充：买的什么——>我是昨天買的票。（将“票”当作句子的补充成分。）
加上"是"字，起强调作用。


----------



## kareno999

南島君 said:


> （四）對比焦點是受事
> (7) 老大是學的歷史，老二是學的化學。


I don't think your number 4 is acceptable in the mainland either.
老大學的是歷史，老二學的是化學。is better.


----------



## SuperXW

kareno999 said:


> I don't think your number 4 is acceptable in the mainland either.
> 老大學的是歷史，老二學的是化學。is better.



I think:
老大是学历史的 or 老大学的是化学 are all good.
老大是学的历史 is understandable when you consider 学的历史 as the real verb phrase, with a 是 emphasizing it.
老大 是（的确是） 学的历史。


----------



## 南島君

Yes, thank you both kareno999 and SuperXW, it is this fuzziness I am looking for. 

It seems to me that 「（四）對比焦點是受事」 taken from 劉月華（2010[2001]） is not acceptable in TW mandarin and at least for kareno999, but it is quite colloquial in beijing mandarin (and thus being implemented in the standard Mandarin). While waiting for natives (and Mandarin as second language learner) from different regions to give us some more feedback, i'll copy down a few more examples taken from 劉月華（2010[2001]） relating to 「（四）對比焦點是受事」, as reference:

(12) 每個同學都給牆報投了稿，有人是做的詩，有人是寫的散文，還有人是畫的漫畫。 (pg. 766)
（13） A:昨天你們倆都去看京劇了嗎？  B:沒有，他（是）看的京劇，我（是）看的電影。 (pg. 768)
（14） 老太太生日你（是）送的什麽？ (pg. 769)
（15） 你是投的贊成票，還是投的反對票。 (pg. 769)
（16） 上星期我們去野餐，每個人帶一樣食品。我是帶的沙拉，小楊是帶的水果，小周是帶的香腸和麵包。 (pg. 783)


----------



## kareno999

^These examples are actually okay to me, but they are strictly colloquial. "是" in these examples are unstressed (轻声).


----------



## 南島君

kareno999 said:


> I don't think your number 4 is acceptable in the mainland either.
> 老大學的是歷史，老二學的是化學。is better.





kareno999 said:


> These examples are actually okay to me, but they are strictly colloquial. "是" in these examples are unstressed (轻声).



By "strictly colloquial" you are suggesting..... not in China Mainland or.... ?


----------



## kareno999

^It's certainly used in the Mainland, but quite informal, I would say.


----------



## Skatinginbc

是...的 has two distinct functions:
1. *Adjective marker*: 的 in this type of structures is a  結構助詞 serving to adjectivize the preceding phrase.  Thus we have:  那本教科書是1985年寫的(書), 老大是學歷史的(人), 这张票是昨天买的(票), 他的博士是在国外读的(学位), 你们俩都是在国外读管理的(学生), 這鬼主意是誰出的(主意), 他的英文是在外語學院學的(英文), 他們的婚姻是上個月才結的(婚姻), etc.  Since an  adjectival alone can serve as the subject complement without the need  for a noun, the nouns shown in parentheses in the above sentences, though redundant, are to demonstrate the function of 是 (an equational/partitional copula, and therefore Noun1 ⊆ Noun2, e.g., 博士 ⊆ 学位, 你 ⊆ 人). 
2. *Focus marker*: 的 in this type of structures is a 動態助詞  (like 了).  For instance, 他是在外語學院學的英文 (他 ≠ 英文), 他們是上個月才結的婚 (他們 ≠ 婚),  你们俩都是在国外读的管理 (你们 ≠ 管理).  The sentence 我是昨天买票的 is structurally ambiguous because it can be interpreted as "It was yesterday I bought the ticket" or 我是昨天买票的(人) "I'm the one who bought the ticket yesterday".  The focused element, which is the new information, of the 是...的 structure is what falls within 是…的, especially the phrase immediately following 是, except for the phrase broken up by 的 (e.g., 读, the head of the verb phrase 读管理, is not part of the focus in 你们俩都是在国外读的管理).  The main reason that the speaker chooses not to focus on the verb phrase (e.g., 读管理) is "已然预设", something that already occurred (therefore the association with the past tense) and is presumed to be known to the listener.  As a result, 上小学 in 我是在北京上的小学 is "已然预设", something that already happened in the past, whereas it is not necessarily so in 我是在北京上小学的, which is structurally ambiguous, either "It was in Beijing that I attended my elementary school" or 我是在北京上小学的(人) "I'm the one who attended/is attending elementary school in Beijing".   
是...的 is not the only construction for expressing focus/contrast.    Other focus-oriented structures include 老大學的是歷史 “What the eldest  majors in is history” and topicalization (e.g., 票我是昨天买的, 行李我是上午包的).


南島君 said:


> It seems to me that 「（四）對比焦點是受事」 taken from 劉月華（2010[2001]） is not acceptable in TW mandarin and at least for kareno999



Indeed, in Taiwan Mandarin 老大是學的歷史 and 昨天晚上我是吃的餃子 are considered  ill-formed because what falls within 是...的 is the focus, and in these  two cases they are 學 and 吃, not 歷史and 餃子, and thus would cause confusion  in comprehension. They do not fit in to the type of adjectivation either  because 老大 is not a subtype of 歷史, nor 我 a subtype of 餃子. Interestingly,  他們是上個月才結的婚 and 我是下午买的票 are perfectly fine. The reason is obviously the  inclusion of a complete temporal phrase (e.g., 上個月,下午) within 是...的.  Without it, there is no legitimate element to place emphasis upon (結婚  and 买票 are “broken” by 的 and therefore cannot receive the focus).


南島君 said:


> 臺灣國語對於「我是昨天買票的」的 preference 高於 「我是昨天買的票」


It  may be true; it may be not; I don't know.  All I know is, as a native  speaker of Taiwan Mandarin, I use "的 + Noun2" structure for a reason:  The discourse that follows will be related to Noun2.  For instance, 我是昨天买的票, 不知是否能够退(票)?  金瓶梅:  娘原是气惱上起的病，爹請了太醫來看(娘的病)，每日服藥，(娘的病)已是好到七八分了; Ghabi in Post #2: 他們上個月才結的婚,現在就鬧著要離(婚)了! In contrast to: 我是昨天买票的, 你说会不会太迟?  他們是上個月才結婚的, 怎么現在就生了孩子?


----------



## stellari

kareno999 said:


> I don't think your number 4 is acceptable in the mainland either.
> 老大學的是歷史，老二學的是化學。is better.



This statement is generally correct, unless 是 itself is stressed. In that case, it's used as a confirmation and is similar to 'does' as in "He _*does *_study history". As such, this structure is acceptable as an answer to question such as: "Does the elder son study history?"(but less so when used to answer "What does the elder son study?")
Other than that your analysis is amazingly thorough and accurate.


----------



## Skatinginbc

南島君 said:


> (9) 我(是)今天很晚才吃的午飯。(10) 我今天(是)很晚吃的午飯。(11) 我今天很晚(是)吃的午飯。


It seems to me that only (10) is acceptable in Taiwan Mandarin. 
There is a simple transformation test, that is, moving the object to the subject position, for instance,   
 我是從圖書館借的書 ==> 我的書是從圖書館借的.   
我是昨天買的票 ==> 我的票是昨天買的.
我是在北京上的小学 ==> 我的小学是在北京上的.
 你们是在国外读的管理 ==> 你们的管理是在国外读的.
我是今天很晚才吃的午飯 ==> *我的午飯是今天很晚才吃的 
 我今天是很晚才吃的午飯 ==> 我今天的午飯是很晚才吃的 
我今天很晚是吃的午飯 ==> *我今天很晚的午飯是吃的 
Among the three, only 我今天是很晚才吃的午飯 can pass the transformation test.


----------

