<p>[活] and [话] are completely different word and cannot be used interchangeably. "他活说得好快" is not a correct sentence.</p>

<p>I think the reason you thought these 2 word can interchange is because of some common typos. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T02:45:19.983Z
there was no claim that they can be used interchangeably, not even that they both function as words of the same type, 活 can be verb,adjective, adverb or noun, merely whether 他活说得好快 is grammatical, it certainly seems highly uncommon, but e.g. 活说着 exists, of course followed by 得好快 (instead of 着, or just by itself?) makes it sound very strange
user6065
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-03T18:28:05.137Z
2017-05-03T18:28:05.137Z
Gugg
<p>I've been collecting memo sentences to distinguish between 活 and 话. The root  phrase is <a href="http://ce.linedict.com/#/cnen/example?query=%E4%BB%96%E8%AF%9D%E8%AF%B4%E5%BE%97%E5%A5%BD%E5%BF%AB%E3%80%82" rel="nofollow noreferrer">他话说得好快</a> and I know it's grammatical, because it's given in a courpus.</p>

<p>What interests me is the grammaticality of another phrase, which we can get by changing (occasionally or intentionally) 话 into 活. </p>

<p>So my question will be, do native speakers understand the phrase 他活说得好快 as a grammatical utterance and, if yes, what would it mean in English?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-03T17:18:48.667Z
uncommon combination, what is it supposed to mean? It seems 活 would have to function as adverb, jukuu: 活 a. living alive active lively ad. simply exactly ichacha.net:Ⅲ副词
(真正; 简直) exactly; simply
短语和例子
活像 look exactly like; be the spit and image of
bkrs has 活说着 условно говоря, примерно сказать, conditionally, approximately speaking,
user6065
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-03T19:14:16.867Z
possible  replacement:  做 instead of 说, in which case 活 functions as noun (like 话 in the other sentence) ,"work,job", enter 活做
into jukuu and get 100 samples
user6065
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-03T23:02:14.177Z
Why are you having trouble distinguishing these totally unrelated words? If it's just because of the written similarity, I'm not sure why example sentences would be helpful. The distinction in sound and meaning is not subtle :)
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T00:53:38.633Z
who is this addressed to? Who is having "trouble distinguishing these totally unrelated words"? Comment #2 merely suggests a substitute differing in only one character (no claim that characters are similar or in any way related), but at least replacement has same grammatical structure, with 活 meaning a noun, unlike in 活说 where if the phrase makes any sense at all it would function as adverb. Reference to jukuu merely to confirm relatively high usage frequency of 活做 (therefore possibly at same level of usefulness as 话说, besides user also asked for meaning)
user6065
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T03:28:48.867Z
@user6065 My comment was addressed to the questioner. If I had addressed it to you, I would have @-ed you. @-ing the OP is pointless, as they get notified regardless. Sorry for the confusion.
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T14:18:28.237Z
@Stumpy Joe Pete I think you are having trouble distinguishing my request and your perception of it. Because my question is about the meaning and the grammaticality with text combinatorics (that is, it goes like 'I'm sure that with this character it means that; would it have any meaning with this character replaced by that?', not 'how to distinguish these two characters').
Manjusri
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T16:38:18.107Z
What do you imagine that it would mean? Randomly swapping characters in sentences for other characters usually won't result in grammatical or semantically meaningful sentences. I guess I'm having difficulty seeing the point of this exercise. Is there a higher level goal you're trying to accomplish? I (mistakenly) believed your higher goal was to distinguish the two characters, which is why I left that comment.
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T19:15:42.593Z
@Stumpy Joe Pete I don't understand the intention of your question and I don't like the tone you use.
Manjusri
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T21:34:25.170Z
I'm not trying to be mean. I'm trying to improve your question and help you learn Chinese. Both Gugg and I misunderstood your question in exactly the same way. The short answer to your question is "that sentence sounds weird and Chinese people would probably not know what you meant".
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-04T23:25:19.813Z
If you know 話 got simplified into 话, and 話 and 活 are not similar in shape, you would not ask this question. Similarly characters does not work interchangeably. It is just like changing from "came" to "cane" in a sentence and ask one it is meaningful in English.
OmniBus
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-05T05:28:02.533Z
@OmniBus Man, my question is not about the interchangeability of these characters. It's about combinatorics and the meaning of the phrase. Your example is also irrelevant because the English words represent different parts of speech, while in Chinese speech parts are defined positionally.
Manjusri
<grammar><characters><syntax>
Is phrase 他活说得好快 grammatical?
# Is phrase 他活说得好快 grammatical?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-05-03)

I've been collecting memo sentences to distinguish between 活 and 话. The root phrase is [他话说得好快](http://ce.linedict.com/#/cnen/example?query=%E4%BB%96%E8%AF%9D%E8%AF%B4%E5%BE%97%E5%A5%BD%E5%BF%AB%E3%80%82) and I know it's grammatical, because it's given in a courpus.

What interests me is the grammaticality of another phrase, which we can get by changing (occasionally or intentionally) 话 into 活.

So my question will be, do native speakers understand the phrase 他活说得好快 as a grammatical utterance and, if yes, what would it mean in English?

**Tags:** grammar, characters, syntax

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: uncommon combination, what is it supposed to mean? It seems 活 would have to function as adverb, jukuu: 活 a. living alive active lively ad. simply exactly ichacha.net:Ⅲ副词 (真正; 简直) exactly; simply 短语和例子 活像 look exactly like; be the spit and image of bkrs has 活说着 условно говоря, примерно сказать, conditionally, approximately speaking,  
> **username_1**: possible  replacement:  做 instead of 说, in which case 活 functions as noun (like 话 in the other sentence) ,"work,job", enter 活做 into jukuu and get 100 samples  
> **username_2**: Why are you having trouble distinguishing these totally unrelated words? If it's just because of the written similarity, I'm not sure why example sentences would be helpful. The distinction in sound and meaning is not subtle :)  
> **username_1**: who is this addressed to? Who is having "trouble distinguishing these totally unrelated words"? Comment #2 merely suggests a substitute differing in only one character (no claim that characters are similar or in any way related), but at least replacement has same grammatical structure, with 活 meaning a noun, unlike in 活说 where if the phrase makes any sense at all it would function as adverb. Reference to jukuu merely to confirm relatively high usage frequency of 活做 (therefore possibly at same level of usefulness as 话说, besides user also asked for meaning)  
> **username_2**: @username_1 My comment was addressed to the questioner. If I had addressed it to you, I would have @-ed you. @-ing the OP is pointless, as they get notified regardless. Sorry for the confusion.  
> **username_0**: @username_2 I think you are having trouble distinguishing my request and your perception of it. Because my question is about the meaning and the grammaticality with text combinatorics (that is, it goes like 'I'm sure that with this character it means that; would it have any meaning with this character replaced by that?', not 'how to distinguish these two characters').  
> **username_2**: What do you imagine that it would mean? Randomly swapping characters in sentences for other characters usually won't result in grammatical or semantically meaningful sentences. I guess I'm having difficulty seeing the point of this exercise. Is there a higher level goal you're trying to accomplish? I (mistakenly) believed your higher goal was to distinguish the two characters, which is why I left that comment.  
> **username_0**: @username_2 I don't understand the intention of your question and I don't like the tone you use.  
> **username_2**: I'm not trying to be mean. I'm trying to improve your question and help you learn Chinese. Both username_4 and I misunderstood your question in exactly the same way. The short answer to your question is "that sentence sounds weird and Chinese people would probably not know what you meant".  
> **username_3**: If you know 話 got simplified into 话, and 話 and 活 are not similar in shape, you would not ask this question. Similarly characters does not work interchangeably. It is just like changing from "came" to "cane" in a sentence and ask one it is meaningful in English.  
> **username_0**: @username_3 Man, my question is not about the interchangeability of these characters. It's about combinatorics and the meaning of the phrase. Your example is also irrelevant because the English words represent different parts of speech, while in Chinese speech parts are defined positionally.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2017-05-03. Score: 3

[活] and [话] are completely different word and cannot be used interchangeably. "他活说得好快" is not a correct sentence.

I think the reason you thought these 2 word can interchange is because of some common typos.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: there was no claim that they can be used interchangeably, not even that they both function as words of the same type, 活 can be verb,adjective, adverb or noun, merely whether 他活说得好快 is grammatical, it certainly seems highly uncommon, but e.g. 活说着 exists, of course followed by 得好快 (instead of 着, or just by itself?) makes it sound very strange  

---

