<blockquote>
  <p>在这个项目的研究上</p>
</blockquote>

<p>If you treat 目的 as a noun, then 项 has to be a classifier. But there's already a classifier 个 before it, (项 is not the right classifier for 目的 anyway), therefore, we can eliminate the possibility of "目的" in this sentence being a noun. Which mean 项 is not a classifier but a part of the compound word 项目 (item)</p>

<p>It  all make sense, because we know "个" is a classifier for "项目" (item)</p>

<p><em>"项" itself is a classifier, but it doesn't work with "目的"(goal) (the classifier of 目的 is 个)</em> </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>在这个项目(的)研究上 = about the study on this item</p>
</blockquote>

<p>的 is an adjective marker that turn 这个项目 into an adjective phrase "这个项目的" for the noun 研究 (study) - <em>what study? this item's study</em></p>

<p>Lenny wrote:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>is there a more ambiguous kind of sentence? surely there must be, that's more of what I'm trying to get at</em> </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Yes, for example, the following sentence can be interpreted differently depend on where you slight pause between words</p>

<p>"是個 人用的 工具" = "是個 (is a)  人用的 (for human use) 工具 (tool)" = "is a tool for human use"</p>

<p>"是 個人用的 工具" = "是" (is) 個人用的 (for personal use) 工具 (tool)" = "is a personal used tool"</p>

<p>Both examples are grammatically correct,  you have to listen to how it is read to determine it is "是個 . 人用的" or "是 . 個人用的"</p>

<p>Or you can look for hints in the context to determine the correct interpretation</p>

<p><em>One fun one, but it has to do with punctuation marks:</em></p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>下雨天留客天留人不留</em></p>
</blockquote>

<p><em>1. 下雨天留客, 天留人不留 (It is raining as if the heaven wanted to keep the guest here, but the host doesn't keep the guest even the heaven does)</em></p>

<p><em>2. 下雨天, 留客天, 留人不? 留! ("It is a rainy day, it is a day to keep the guest, do you keep the guest?" "Yes I do!"</em> </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-15T01:06:07.310Z
is there a more ambiguous kind of sentence? surely there must be, that's more of what I'm trying to get at but I appreciate your answer. thank you for taking the time to do it!
Lenny
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-15T01:32:30.100Z
@Lenny yes, just read my edition at the bottom
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-15T06:01:06.293Z
Thank you very much, you are amazing. You deserve lots of points.
Lenny
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-14T23:41:45.247Z
2018-09-15T02:20:59.907Z
2018-09-15T02:20:59.907Z
Tang Ho
<p>There is no ambiguity of your sentence. All least in 简体中文 for Mandarin, one character will never be used by two words (It might happen as rare case in spoken language, but is often considered as mistakes(lazyness?) and definitely wrong in the writing system ).</p>

<p>According to this rule, does 这个|项|目的|研究上 make any sense to you? As a native speaker, I don't think it make any sense.</p>

<p>So the rule of word group, if it makes sense, then it works. For ANY human language. And yes, ambiguity can happen (in ANY human language) as you can see in other answers, but not like this.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-15T03:21:52.113Z
2018-09-15T03:21:52.113Z
炸鱼薯条德里克
<pre><code>sample sentence:

在这个项目的研究上
</code></pre>

<p>the words that could be ambiguous are</p>

<p>项目: the project</p>

<p>目的: the goal, purpose, aim, intent</p>

<p>how can this be resolved?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-14T23:04:50.150Z
depends  on which grouping ("parsing") makes sense, 这个｜项｜目的 does not seem to make sense, b/c there already is CL 个，so 项 would have an attributive meaning, which seems implausible, incidentally ［项］［目的] raises the question whether 项 can be used as CL of 目的，but e.g. 小马词典 has 个 as CL, presumably 种 would also be acceptable, but 项 sounds unusual, anyhow there already is 个 and there cannot be 2 CL in a row for the same noun
user6065
<sentence-structure>
is there a way to know which words are grouped?
# is there a way to know which words are grouped?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-09-14)

sample sentence:

在这个项目的研究上

the words that could be ambiguous are
项目: the project
目的: the goal, purpose, aim, intent
how can this be resolved?

**Tags:** sentence-structure

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: depends  on which grouping ("parsing") makes sense, 这个｜项｜目的 does not seem to make sense, b/c there already is CL 个，so 项 would have an attributive meaning, which seems implausible, incidentally ［项］［目的] raises the question whether 项 can be used as CL of 目的，but e.g. 小马词典 has 个 as CL, presumably 种 would also be acceptable, but 项 sounds unusual, anyhow there already is 个 and there cannot be 2 CL in a row for the same noun  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-09-14. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

> 在这个项目的研究上

If you treat 目的 as a noun, then 项 has to be a classifier. But there's already a classifier 个 before it, (项 is not the right classifier for 目的 anyway), therefore, we can eliminate the possibility of "目的" in this sentence being a noun. Which mean 项 is not a classifier but a part of the compound word 项目 (item)

It all make sense, because we know "个" is a classifier for "项目" (item)

*"项" itself is a classifier, but it doesn't work with "目的"(goal) (the classifier of 目的 is 个)*

> 在这个项目(的)研究上 = about the study on this item

的 is an adjective marker that turn 这个项目 into an adjective phrase "这个项目的" for the noun 研究 (study) - *what study? this item's study*

username_0 wrote:

> *is there a more ambiguous kind of sentence? surely there must be, that's more of what I'm trying to get at*

Yes, for example, the following sentence can be interpreted differently depend on where you slight pause between words

"是個 人用的 工具" = "是個 (is a) 人用的 (for human use) 工具 (tool)" = "is a tool for human use"

"是 個人用的 工具" = "是" (is) 個人用的 (for personal use) 工具 (tool)" = "is a personal used tool"

Both examples are grammatically correct, you have to listen to how it is read to determine it is "是個 . 人用的" or "是 . 個人用的"

Or you can look for hints in the context to determine the correct interpretation

*One fun one, but it has to do with punctuation marks:*

> *下雨天留客天留人不留*

*1. 下雨天留客, 天留人不留 (It is raining as if the heaven wanted to keep the guest here, but the host doesn't keep the guest even the heaven does)*

*2. 下雨天, 留客天, 留人不? 留! ("It is a rainy day, it is a day to keep the guest, do you keep the guest?" "Yes I do!"*

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: is there a more ambiguous kind of sentence? surely there must be, that's more of what I'm trying to get at but I appreciate your answer. thank you for taking the time to do it!  
> **username_2**: @username_0 yes, just read my edition at the bottom  
> **username_0**: Thank you very much, you are amazing. You deserve lots of points.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-09-15. Score: 2

There is no ambiguity of your sentence. All least in 简体中文 for Mandarin, one character will never be used by two words (It might happen as rare case in spoken language, but is often considered as mistakes(lazyness?) and definitely wrong in the writing system ).

According to this rule, does 这个|项|目的|研究上 make any sense to you? As a native speaker, I don't think it make any sense.

So the rule of word group, if it makes sense, then it works. For ANY human language. And yes, ambiguity can happen (in ANY human language) as you can see in other answers, but not like this.


---

