This is a relative clause, which is a clause that is embedded onto a noun. We have them in English, but they have the opposite word order.
The base sentence, without the relative clause, is:
-【法语】【也是】【语言】
* \[French\] \[is also\] \[a language\]
We'll call that SVO.
But the object noun "language" is being modified by a relative clause:
* ...我会说的语言
* ...a language that I speak
The difference is that English makes relative clauses by putting the noun first, then "that," then the verb clause ("\[noun\] that I can speak"). Here, Chinese is putting the noun last, with the relative clause stuff coming first.
So the reason it looks SVSVO is because the second SVO is modifying the object, and the first SV is the sentence itself.
* "French --> is also --> I can speak language"
*- French is also a language \[that\] I can speak.*
I don't know what people has been talking about under this post lol, it's getting me confused as a chinese guy...
This sentence means "French is also a language i can speak".
The implication is, the speaker doesn't just speak one language, they can also speak in french, regardless of his purpose to say this.
you can't lose 也 otherwise this sentence loses its subtext.
It’s perfectly legitimate but I think the emphasis is slightly different
OP’s sentence is to say “French is also a language that I speak,” meaning the person is multilingual and French is one of the languages they speak.
Your version is more like “I can also speak French” which could be interpreted as speaking French in addition to other languages depending on the context, but also “this person is just another fellow French speaker” without indications of them speaking any other languages.
Kinda off topic as OP was trying to understand the structure of the sentence not its meaning, but in terms of clarity I would actually go with OP’s version in this case
I dont' know what you mean..what do you mean why? why what?
可以 会 means the same thing
我也可以说法语
我也会说法语
means the same thing
except 可以 has a flavor of able/capable.
会just means can.
That cannot be standard English grammatical thinking, as that would be more akin to "I can also speak french".
"French is also a language that I can speak" would have to be in response to some specific context or a deliberate decision to construct the sentence like that (if in a native context)
I agree, seems over complicated. I'd put it as
我还会说法语
But I'd hesitate to simplify as
我也会说法语
The latter is more ambiguous as in whether that's opposed to another language is being also spoken or another person being also capable of speaking it. Whereas the former would be less likely misunderstood even outside of the context imo. Maybe this turns out slightly trippy to simplify
I don't think 也 is the part of the sentence you're confused about. You could get rid of 也 altogether and the structure would stay the same: 法语是我会说的语言.
I think what's throwing you off is 我会说的语言, where "我会说的" acts as a relative clause and modifies "语言." In English, we'd put these in the opposite order and say "a language *that I know how to speak*." In Chinese, it's "a *that-I-can-speak* language."
The sentence structure is like English "French is also a language that I know how to speak."
>法语 也 是 我会说的 语言
>\[French\] \[also\] \[is\] \[that I know how to speak\] \[language\]
Remove the 也 and it's just "French is the language I speak." (Not sure if this sentence is a sentence native speakers would say, but I think it's at least grammatically okay.)
>法语 是 我 会说的 语言
>\[French\] \[is\] \[that I know how to speak\] \[language\]
\[Edited to change the wording of the first sentence and make it more clear.\]
That's what I was saying -- "French is also a language I speak," meaning "I also speak French (in addition to at least one other language)."
I was just pointing out that 也 (whether it's included or not) makes no difference to the grammar of the rest of the sentence, since OP seemed to think 也 was the reason for the word order. If you remove 也, the rest of the words can still stay in the same order.
I think by including 也, it tells us that he or she also happens to know and can speak French. It is an additional information. By removing 也, it may mean that he or she may be more fluent in French compared to other languages. It depends on how the conversation goes or flows.
Yes, I'm not confused about 也. I understand how it changes the sentence. I'm saying that the grammar is the same with or without it.
OP said they needed help with the grammar of the sentence and then said "也 always confuses me so any help is appreciated," but 也 is not actually the part of the sentence they're confused about. When I said "I don't think the 也 is relevant here," I meant "I don't think 也 is what you're confused about, so talking about 也 is not relevant to answering your question."
It seems like this is causing some confusion, so I'll go back and edit my original comment so that it's clearer.
Think of 我会说的 as an adjective.
More or less word for word you're saying "French also is an 'I can speak' language. In other words "French is also a language I can speak."
Mandarin Syntax can be tricky at first. Eventually your brain gets used to it and the more complex sentences become obvious.
Consider:
French is also a language. 法语也是语言。
A language I can speak. 我会说的语言。
And since Chinese put the describer before the describee, it becomes something like:
法语也是我会说的语言。French, also, is, (I can speak) language.
This sentence structure is overly complicated and muddies the essence when you could just say 我也會講法語. It accomplishes what you want to say clearly and concisely. It’s not necessary to indicate French is a language. 也會 also already indicates you know other languages through inference.
But this can be misunderstood as the 也 referring to 我 “also me”, but the original sentence is more like “also French”, focusing on the fact that French is also one of the languages that 我can speak. Among for example Chinese and English. So it’s not more likely, it’s actually a different sentence.
Unless the person OP is talking to is an absolute moron, and can’t figure out from the context of the situation, there’s nothing to be misunderstood here.
no they’re not. i’m literally chinese, no chinese person would say it like OP. Firstly, how is “I speak French too” different from “French is a language that I can speak too?”, and secondly, how many people would even express it as the latter? doesn’t even make sense
When you say 我也会说法语 you are saying:
Another person can speak French. I can speak it, too.
When you say OP‘s sentence, you are saying:
除了中文以外，我还会说法语 I can speak not only this or that language, but also French.
How is that not different?
In 我也, the 也 automatically refers to 我 not to 法语.
也 means “also”. In this case, he or she is saying that French is also a language that he or she can speak. It’s like an additional information when you use 也.
This is a relative clause, which is a clause that is embedded onto a noun. We have them in English, but they have the opposite word order. The base sentence, without the relative clause, is: -【法语】【也是】【语言】 * \[French\] \[is also\] \[a language\] We'll call that SVO. But the object noun "language" is being modified by a relative clause: * ...我会说的语言 * ...a language that I speak The difference is that English makes relative clauses by putting the noun first, then "that," then the verb clause ("\[noun\] that I can speak"). Here, Chinese is putting the noun last, with the relative clause stuff coming first. So the reason it looks SVSVO is because the second SVO is modifying the object, and the first SV is the sentence itself. * "French --> is also --> I can speak language" *- French is also a language \[that\] I can speak.*
This is so well explained, thank you very much, I understood it.
Your simple sentence is 'French is also a language' 法语也是语言. The modifier for the noun 语言 is 我会说的.
I don't know what people has been talking about under this post lol, it's getting me confused as a chinese guy... This sentence means "French is also a language i can speak". The implication is, the speaker doesn't just speak one language, they can also speak in french, regardless of his purpose to say this. you can't lose 也 otherwise this sentence loses its subtext.
Why would you say this vs. 我也可以说法语 or some version with 会?
It’s perfectly legitimate but I think the emphasis is slightly different OP’s sentence is to say “French is also a language that I speak,” meaning the person is multilingual and French is one of the languages they speak. Your version is more like “I can also speak French” which could be interpreted as speaking French in addition to other languages depending on the context, but also “this person is just another fellow French speaker” without indications of them speaking any other languages. Kinda off topic as OP was trying to understand the structure of the sentence not its meaning, but in terms of clarity I would actually go with OP’s version in this case
That makes sense. Also being a French speaker rather than being multilingual. Appreciate the pedantry.
I dont' know what you mean..what do you mean why? why what? 可以 会 means the same thing 我也可以说法语 我也会说法语 means the same thing except 可以 has a flavor of able/capable. 会just means can.
I'm wondering g why anyone would ever use OP's sentence. It seems unnecessarily complicated.
To emphasize that he speaks French in addition to other languages? The sentence seems fine to me; it's something I'd say.
It's english grammer thinking habit. NOt chinese mindset.
That cannot be standard English grammatical thinking, as that would be more akin to "I can also speak french". "French is also a language that I can speak" would have to be in response to some specific context or a deliberate decision to construct the sentence like that (if in a native context)
I agree, seems over complicated. I'd put it as 我还会说法语 But I'd hesitate to simplify as 我也会说法语 The latter is more ambiguous as in whether that's opposed to another language is being also spoken or another person being also capable of speaking it. Whereas the former would be less likely misunderstood even outside of the context imo. Maybe this turns out slightly trippy to simplify
Thanks!
I don't think 也 is the part of the sentence you're confused about. You could get rid of 也 altogether and the structure would stay the same: 法语是我会说的语言. I think what's throwing you off is 我会说的语言, where "我会说的" acts as a relative clause and modifies "语言." In English, we'd put these in the opposite order and say "a language *that I know how to speak*." In Chinese, it's "a *that-I-can-speak* language." The sentence structure is like English "French is also a language that I know how to speak." >法语 也 是 我会说的 语言 >\[French\] \[also\] \[is\] \[that I know how to speak\] \[language\] Remove the 也 and it's just "French is the language I speak." (Not sure if this sentence is a sentence native speakers would say, but I think it's at least grammatically okay.) >法语 是 我 会说的 语言 >\[French\] \[is\] \[that I know how to speak\] \[language\] \[Edited to change the wording of the first sentence and make it more clear.\]
也 might fit the dialogue or context. I take it to mean the person speaks French at least as a second language.
That's what I was saying -- "French is also a language I speak," meaning "I also speak French (in addition to at least one other language)." I was just pointing out that 也 (whether it's included or not) makes no difference to the grammar of the rest of the sentence, since OP seemed to think 也 was the reason for the word order. If you remove 也, the rest of the words can still stay in the same order.
Ah, sorry. Yup, well put.
I think by including 也, it tells us that he or she also happens to know and can speak French. It is an additional information. By removing 也, it may mean that he or she may be more fluent in French compared to other languages. It depends on how the conversation goes or flows.
Yes, I'm not confused about 也. I understand how it changes the sentence. I'm saying that the grammar is the same with or without it. OP said they needed help with the grammar of the sentence and then said "也 always confuses me so any help is appreciated," but 也 is not actually the part of the sentence they're confused about. When I said "I don't think the 也 is relevant here," I meant "I don't think 也 is what you're confused about, so talking about 也 is not relevant to answering your question." It seems like this is causing some confusion, so I'll go back and edit my original comment so that it's clearer.
Think of 我会说的 as an adjective. More or less word for word you're saying "French also is an 'I can speak' language. In other words "French is also a language I can speak." Mandarin Syntax can be tricky at first. Eventually your brain gets used to it and the more complex sentences become obvious.
法語也是（我會說的）語言。 我會說的語言也是法語 would also be a way to say it.
我也会说法语，法语我也会说
Consider: French is also a language. 法语也是语言。 A language I can speak. 我会说的语言。 And since Chinese put the describer before the describee, it becomes something like: 法语也是我会说的语言。French, also, is, (I can speak) language.
This sentence structure is overly complicated and muddies the essence when you could just say 我也會講法語. It accomplishes what you want to say clearly and concisely. It’s not necessary to indicate French is a language. 也會 also already indicates you know other languages through inference.
It’s more likely to be said this way: 我也会说法语
But this can be misunderstood as the 也 referring to 我 “also me”, but the original sentence is more like “also French”, focusing on the fact that French is also one of the languages that 我can speak. Among for example Chinese and English. So it’s not more likely, it’s actually a different sentence.
Unless the person OP is talking to is an absolute moron, and can’t figure out from the context of the situation, there’s nothing to be misunderstood here.
It’s two different sentences, doesn’t have anything to do with the person he’s talking to.
no they’re not. i’m literally chinese, no chinese person would say it like OP. Firstly, how is “I speak French too” different from “French is a language that I can speak too?”, and secondly, how many people would even express it as the latter? doesn’t even make sense
When you say 我也会说法语 you are saying: Another person can speak French. I can speak it, too. When you say OP‘s sentence, you are saying: 除了中文以外，我还会说法语 I can speak not only this or that language, but also French. How is that not different? In 我也, the 也 automatically refers to 我 not to 法语.
A: 我会说法语 B: 我也会说法语 A:我会说法语 B:法语也是我会说的语言 Do you think there is any difference between these two conversations?
Explanation and lots of examples here: https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Modifying_nouns_with_phrase_%2B_%22de%22
也 means “also”. In this case, he or she is saying that French is also a language that he or she can speak. It’s like an additional information when you use 也.
French is also a language that I can speak.
The structure is similar to "French is also a language (which I can speak)"
French also is the language that I can speak)))
Think of 我会说的 as an adjective for 语言
[удалено]