<p>飽飽 and 小朋友们 should be treated as single words, but the segmenting is reasonable</p>

<p>飽 (full) and 小朋友(child/children) are single words. 飽飽(really full) is a modified form of 飽; 小朋友们(the children) is a modified form of 小朋友, so yes, you can treat them as single words, The segmenting software just separated the modification elements '<strong>reduplication</strong>' and '<strong>plural suffix</strong>' from the general word <strong>飽</strong> and <strong>小朋友</strong> </p>

<p>I think it does that to finely segment the word itself, not just segmenting the sentence into words and clauses.</p>

<ul>
<li><p>飽飽 is <a href="https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Reduplication_of_adjectives" rel="nofollow noreferrer">reduplication</a> of 飽</p></li>
<li><p>小朋友们 is general term 小朋友(child/ children) followed by plural suffix 们 which indicate plural</p></li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
  <p>們 <a href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%80%91" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%80%91</a></p>
  
  <p>Suffix indicating plural for pronouns, some animated nouns and personifications.</p>

<pre><code>   我們 / 我们  ―  wǒmen  ―  we
    孩子們 / 孩子们  ―  háizimen  ―  children
</code></pre>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-09T23:17:05.303Z
Do you mean "should be"?  You call it a "suffix" but say it should be a separate word?
伟思礼
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-09T23:42:47.933Z
飽 (full) and 小朋友(child/children) are single words, 飽飽(really full) is a modified form of 飽; 小朋友们(the children) is a modified form of 小朋友, so yes, you can treat them as single words, The segmenting software just separated the modification elements from the general word
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-10T21:27:12.880Z
?? I don't see the word "edit" but I somehow read it differently before.  Makes sense as currently written, although I think the segmentation is an error in that each _can_ be a separate word, but in these examples they are not.  Segmentation AFAIK can't consider meaning.
伟思礼
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-09T22:22:01.873Z
2017-12-09T23:51:01.830Z
2017-12-09T23:51:01.830Z
Tang Ho
<p>Doesn't your dictionary also mention, 'machine segmenting is never 100% accurate'?? If it doesn't, remember that anyway!</p>

<p>山羊喜欢青草， goats like new grass,<br>
肚子饱饱才回家。 only go home when their bellies are full,<br>
小朋友们别学它， little friends don't be a goat,<br>
努力做个好宝宝。 try hard to be a little darling.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-10T21:28:54.783Z
If I thought machine segmenting was 100% accurate, I wouldn't have asked if it were wrong.  But I appreciate the translation—it's slightly better than the one I came up with.
伟思礼
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-09T23:03:28.120Z
2017-12-09T23:03:28.120Z
Pedroski
<p>Should 飽飽 and 小朋友们 be treated as single words in</p>

<pre><code>山羊喜欢青草，
肚子饱饱才回家。
小朋友们别学它，
努力做个好宝宝。
</code></pre>

<p>?</p>

<p>Segmenting software that I use splits 飽飽 and separates 们.</p>

<usage><word>
Segmenting question
# Segmenting question

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-12-09)

Should 飽飽 and 小朋友们 be treated as single words in
山羊喜欢青草，
肚子饱饱才回家。
小朋友们别学它，
努力做个好宝宝。

?
Segmenting software that I use splits 飽飽 and separates 们.

**Tags:** usage, word


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-12-09. Score: 0 | Accepted answer

飽飽 and 小朋友们 should be treated as single words, but the segmenting is reasonable
飽 (full) and 小朋友(child/children) are single words. 飽飽(really full) is a modified form of 飽; 小朋友们(the children) is a modified form of 小朋友, so yes, you can treat them as single words, The segmenting software just separated the modification elements 'reduplication' and 'plural suffix' from the general word 飽 and 小朋友 
I think it does that to finely segment the word itself, not just segmenting the sentence into words and clauses.

飽飽 is reduplication of 飽
小朋友们 is general term 小朋友(child/ children) followed by plural suffix 们 which indicate plural


們 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%80%91
Suffix indicating plural for pronouns, some animated nouns and personifications.
   我們 / 我们  ―  wǒmen  ―  we
    孩子們 / 孩子们  ―  háizimen  ―  children

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Do you mean "should be"?  You call it a "suffix" but say it should be a separate word?  
> **username_1**: 飽 (full) and 小朋友(child/children) are single words, 飽飽(really full) is a modified form of 飽; 小朋友们(the children) is a modified form of 小朋友, so yes, you can treat them as single words, The segmenting software just separated the modification elements from the general word  
> **username_0**: ?? I don't see the word "edit" but I somehow read it differently before.  Makes sense as currently written, although I think the segmentation is an error in that each _can_ be a separate word, but in these examples they are not.  Segmentation AFAIK can't consider meaning.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2017-12-09. Score: 1

Doesn't your dictionary also mention, 'machine segmenting is never 100% accurate'?? If it doesn't, remember that anyway!

山羊喜欢青草， goats like new grass,  
肚子饱饱才回家。 only go home when their bellies are full,  
小朋友们别学它， little friends don't be a goat,  
努力做个好宝宝。 try hard to be a little darling.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: If I thought machine segmenting was 100% accurate, I wouldn't have asked if it were wrong.  But I appreciate the translation—it's slightly better than the one I came up with.  

---

