<p>An important question in Western Grammar is: In a passive sentence, is the subject the object?</p>

<p>I was injured. </p>

<p>Traditionally, 'I' is the subject of the verb 'was'. However, 'I' did nothing. 'I' was 'done to', by person or persons unknown. The one that is 'done to' is defined as the object. However, apart from 'I', there is no other thing mentioned here, so 'I' should be the 'subject'.
Also, the 'verb be' is not normally associated with any case except nominative case, the 'subject' case. </p>

<p>That aside, Chinese has no Relative Clauses. Chinese is conceptually simpler, more straightforward and more logical than, say, English.</p>

<p>Adjectives are not essential. They can be omitted.</p>

<p>东西都找到了。
The things have all been found. </p>

<p>If we render the Chinese directly: Things all found. (Is 'Things' subject or object? If 'Things' is not the subject, what is?)</p>

<p>孩子们丢的东西都找到了。<br>
The things (which) the children lost have all been found. or<br>
All the things (which) the children lost have been found.</p>

<p>If we render the Chinese directly:
'children lose' 的 things all found.</p>

<p>Except 'children lose' is not a suitable adjective in English, it will mess up the meaning, so it has to be put in a Relative Clause.</p>

<p>When you translate Chinese to English, any complex adjectival phrases will require a Relative Clause in English.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T08:10:28.757Z
Thank you so much! ✨
Agnes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T02:13:47.853Z
2019-04-14T02:13:47.853Z
Pedroski
<p>The subject in the sentence "孩子们丢的东西找到了" is not "孩子们" but "东西"。</p>

<p>It translate to "That thing the kids lost has been found."</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T03:57:11.113Z
'things' that was found should be the object, the subject is omitted (it doesn't mention who found those things )
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T08:12:06.220Z
Thank you for your help!!!
Agnes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T03:32:29.417Z
2019-04-14T03:55:12.157Z
2019-04-14T03:55:12.157Z
John Z. Li
<pre><code>孩子们丢的东西都找到了
</code></pre>

<p>means “Things lost by kids have been found.”</p>

<p>A very similar sentence could be </p>

<pre><code>孩子们都找到了丢的东西
</code></pre>

<p>means “Kids have found the lost things.”</p>

<p>The difference is purely about the emphasis. In first sentence, the emphasis is "lost things" and in the second one, the emphasis is "kid have found". Depends on what is your main argument, these sentences may deliver different attitudes.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-03-22T01:55:03.803Z
2020-03-22T01:55:03.803Z
Xxx
<blockquote>
  <p>孩子们丢的东西都找到了</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li><p>The object is "东西"</p></li>
<li><p>东西都(被)找到了 - things have all been found (<em>被 omitted</em>)</p></li>
<li><p>孩子们丢的 is an adjective phrase that describes the object </p></li>
</ul>

<p>"things? what things?" </p>

<p>"Things <strong>that was lost by the kids</strong>" (<strong>孩子们丢的</strong>)</p>

<p>you can use 的 to turn any sentence into an adjective phrase</p>

<p>Example:</p>

<p>美国进口 - American import</p>

<p>美国进口的 - that is American imported</p>

<p>美国进口的牛肉 - beef that is American imported </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-13T17:25:38.213Z
Thank you! Anyway, I want to ask one more question :) why does the sentence use 到 instead of 着 as a resultative as a resultative complement here? This sentence appeared as an example sentence for resultative "着", but instead of using "着", it uses "到"...
Agnes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-13T17:37:11.433Z
@Agnes 着 is a verb particle that indicates the verb is in 'on going or continuous state'; 到 as a resultative complement indicates  the verb is 'successfully carried out'
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-13T22:09:27.950Z
I think @Agnes is asking about zháo, not zhe.  https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Using_%22zhao%22_as_complement
Ben Jackson
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T03:51:32.680Z
In this case 西都都找着了 and  东西都找到了 virtually mean the same -->  "things have all been found". It is more common to use  找到 than 找着
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T08:11:24.303Z
@BenJackson you are right! That's what I mean ^^ thank u!
Agnes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-14T08:11:44.550Z
@TangHo thank you for your explanation! You helped a lot!
Agnes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-04-13T17:16:01.910Z
2019-04-13T17:24:24.193Z
2019-04-13T17:24:24.193Z
Tang Ho
<p>I saw this sentence :</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>孩子们丢的东西都找到了</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Why is the object (丢的东西) placed between the subject and the verb here???</p>

<sentence-structure>
Why is 丢的东西 placed in the middle of 孩子们丢的东西都找到了?
# Why is 丢的东西 placed in the middle of 孩子们丢的东西都找到了?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-04-13)

I saw this sentence :

> 孩子们丢的东西都找到了

Why is the object (丢的东西) placed between the subject and the verb here???

**Tags:** sentence-structure


---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-04-13. Score: 5 | Accepted answer

> 孩子们丢的东西都找到了

* The object is "东西"
* 东西都(被)找到了 - things have all been found (*被 omitted*)
* 孩子们丢的 is an adjective phrase that describes the object

"things? what things?"

"Things **that was lost by the kids**" (**孩子们丢的**)

you can use 的 to turn any sentence into an adjective phrase

Example:

美国进口 - American import

美国进口的 - that is American imported

美国进口的牛肉 - beef that is American imported

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you! Anyway, I want to ask one more question :) why does the sentence use 到 instead of 着 as a resultative as a resultative complement here? This sentence appeared as an example sentence for resultative "着", but instead of using "着", it uses "到"...  
> **username_3**: @username_0 着 is a verb particle that indicates the verb is in 'on going or continuous state'; 到 as a resultative complement indicates  the verb is 'successfully carried out'  
> **username_5**: I think @username_0 is asking about zháo, not zhe.  https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Using_%22zhao%22_as_complement  
> **username_3**: In this case 西都都找着了 and  东西都找到了 virtually mean the same -->  "things have all been found". It is more common to use  找到 than 找着  
> **username_0**: @username_5 you are right! That's what I mean ^^ thank u!  
> **username_0**: @username_3 thank you for your explanation! You helped a lot!  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-04-14. Score: 3

An important question in Western Grammar is: In a passive sentence, is the subject the object?

I was injured.

Traditionally, 'I' is the subject of the verb 'was'. However, 'I' did nothing. 'I' was 'done to', by person or persons unknown. The one that is 'done to' is defined as the object. However, apart from 'I', there is no other thing mentioned here, so 'I' should be the 'subject'.
Also, the 'verb be' is not normally associated with any case except nominative case, the 'subject' case.

That aside, Chinese has no Relative Clauses. Chinese is conceptually simpler, more straightforward and more logical than, say, English.

Adjectives are not essential. They can be omitted.

东西都找到了。
The things have all been found.

If we render the Chinese directly: Things all found. (Is 'Things' subject or object? If 'Things' is not the subject, what is?)

孩子们丢的东西都找到了。  
The things (which) the children lost have all been found. or  
All the things (which) the children lost have been found.

If we render the Chinese directly:
'children lose' 的 things all found.

Except 'children lose' is not a suitable adjective in English, it will mess up the meaning, so it has to be put in a Relative Clause.

When you translate Chinese to English, any complex adjectival phrases will require a Relative Clause in English.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you so much! ✨  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-04-14. Score: 3

The subject in the sentence "孩子们丢的东西找到了" is not "孩子们" but "东西"。

It translate to "That thing the kids lost has been found."

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: 'things' that was found should be the object, the subject is omitted (it doesn't mention who found those things )  
> **username_0**: Thank you for your help!!!  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-03-22. Score: 1

```
孩子们丢的东西都找到了

```

means “Things lost by kids have been found.”

A very similar sentence could be

```
孩子们都找到了丢的东西

```

means “Kids have found the lost things.”

The difference is purely about the emphasis. In first sentence, the emphasis is "lost things" and in the second one, the emphasis is "kid have found". Depends on what is your main argument, these sentences may deliver different attitudes.


---

