<p><strong>Verb + Directional Complement</strong></p>

<p>The direction verb immediately following the verb and indicating the direction of the action, is called the direction complement.</p>

<p>If the object is a thing, it can be placed as:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>他**带**了一份合同**回来** (Tā dài le yí fèn hétóng huílái)</p>
</blockquote>

<p>or</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>他**带回**一份合同**来** (Tā dài huí yí fèn hétóng lái)</p>
</blockquote>

<p>[Source: 当代中文 (Dāngdài Zhōngwén) Book 2, 2nd Edition, 2006]</p>

<p>You can Google directional complement to find more information as well as quizzes, so you can learn more about it and test yourself.</p>

<p>P.S. if you are teaching beginners, with pinyin only, this sentence construct is beyond them.</p>

<p><strong>EDIT:</strong> sorry I realise I only answered via inference. To be clear, the reason why we don't say it your second way: because grammar, that's why. An arbitrary set of rules that all (read: most) people agree upon :)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T03:25:28.647Z
Allsetlearning calls 起来 a result complement not a directional complement. Could the difference between the two sentences be that we are not interested in the result of the action with:请拿起我的笔?
Mike Butler
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T03:26:15.413Z
In this instance we are only interested in the direction the 笔 moves. Right?
Mike Butler
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T03:50:28.957Z
Google directional complement, you'll find 起来 there, because it's a directional complement, not a result complement (见, 到, etc.) The difference between your two sentences is that the first is grammatically correct, the second is not.
Ming
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T04:59:18.143Z
You confirmed that the second is not grammatically correct. Still, if it is a directional complement it "should" work. Is something else working in the background?
Mike Butler
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T05:08:03.003Z
Syntax: where the directional complement is supposed to go in relation to the subject, verb, and object. As you can see from the two examples above, it tells you where the directional complement is supposed to go (after the object, or cleaved in two with the object in between.) It's just something you need to remember. As with pretty much all grammar, there is no good answer to the question **why**, the reason is simply that everyone agrees it should be like that.
Ming
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T00:19:00.187Z
2014-04-15T00:38:30.867Z
2014-04-15T00:38:30.867Z
Ming
<p>In both situations my pen is now on a table. Speaking to another person, why do we say:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>1) Qing3 na2 qi3 wo3 de5 bi3. 请拿起我的笔。</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>Not:</strong></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>2) Qing3 na2 qi3 lai2 wo3 de5 bi3. 请拿起来我的笔。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>How does the addition or deletion of lai (来) change this sentence?</p>

<p>++Yet this seems O.K.++</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>3) Qing3 ni3 ba3 bi3 na2 qi3 lai2. 请你把笔拿起来.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-14T14:36:48.307Z
What does that even mean? Edit: please pick up my pen?
Mou某
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-14T14:43:59.903Z
Yes, it means. Please pick up my pen.
Mike Butler
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-14T14:47:34.093Z
Your profile says that you are `in the midst of creating a Chinese teaching program`. I am curious how are you able to do it without being able to type in Chinese :P
杨以轩
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-14T14:51:22.947Z
Teach only with pictures and pinyin. Excellent question! You are really on the ball.
Mike Butler
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-14T17:18:37.353Z
Anyway I edited this post by adding Chinese ... it's painful for native speakers to read bare pinyin.
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-14T23:11:38.600Z
Just a tip, if you don't know how to add tones to the pinyin vowels, you can use numbers to indicate the tone. e.g., 请 - qing3. Toneless pinyin is next to useless.
deutschZuid
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T00:42:11.863Z
Neutral tones should be 5 not 0
Mou某
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T03:17:21.727Z
Thanks Stan and all the rest. I will add characters in the future to all my questions. I have been working in Pinyin for so long I got into bad habits:-)
Mike Butler
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T03:43:21.953Z
请拿起我的笔 means you pen lies in ur desk, you put it up
请拿起我来的笔 may be your pen on the ground?
user4370
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T22:05:16.207Z
请拿起我来的笔? That makes even less sense than the second example in the question.
deutschZuid
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-15T22:09:48.740Z
@user3306356 I stand corrected.
deutschZuid
<grammar><meaning><meaning-in-context>
What is the difference between qi3 and qi3 lai2?
# What is the difference between qi3 and qi3 lai2?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-04-14)

In both situations my pen is now on a table. Speaking to another person, why do we say:

> 1) Qing3 na2 qi3 wo3 de5 bi3. 请拿起我的笔。

**Not:**

> 2) Qing3 na2 qi3 lai2 wo3 de5 bi3. 请拿起来我的笔。

How does the addition or deletion of lai (来) change this sentence?

++Yet this seems O.K.++

> 3) Qing3 ni3 ba3 bi3 na2 qi3 lai2. 请你把笔拿起来.

**Tags:** grammar, meaning, meaning-in-context

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: What does that even mean? Edit: please pick up my pen?  
> **username_0**: Yes, it means. Please pick up my pen.  
> **username_2**: Your profile says that you are `in the midst of creating a Chinese teaching program`. I am curious how are you able to do it without being able to type in Chinese :P  
> **username_0**: Teach only with pictures and pinyin. Excellent question! You are really on the ball.  
> **username_3**: Anyway I edited this post by adding Chinese ... it's painful for native speakers to read bare pinyin.  
> **username_4**: Just a tip, if you don't know how to add tones to the pinyin vowels, you can use numbers to indicate the tone. e.g., 请 - qing3. Toneless pinyin is next to useless.  
> **username_1**: Neutral tones should be 5 not 0  
> **username_0**: Thanks username_3 and all the rest. I will add characters in the future to all my questions. I have been working in Pinyin for so long I got into bad habits:-)  
> **username_5**: 请拿起我的笔 means you pen lies in ur desk, you put it up 请拿起我来的笔 may be your pen on the ground?  
> **username_4**: 请拿起我来的笔? That makes even less sense than the second example in the question.  
> **username_4**: @user3306356 I stand corrected.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2014-04-15. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

**Verb + Directional Complement**

The direction verb immediately following the verb and indicating the direction of the action, is called the direction complement.

If the object is a thing, it can be placed as:

> 他\*\*带\*\*了一份合同\*\*回来\*\* (Tā dài le yí fèn hétóng huílái)

or

> 他\*\*带回\*\*一份合同\*\*来\*\* (Tā dài huí yí fèn hétóng lái)

[Source: 当代中文 (Dāngdài Zhōngwén) Book 2, 2nd Edition, 2006]

You can Google directional complement to find more information as well as quizzes, so you can learn more about it and test yourself.

P.S. if you are teaching beginners, with pinyin only, this sentence construct is beyond them.

**EDIT:** sorry I realise I only answered via inference. To be clear, the reason why we don't say it your second way: because grammar, that's why. An arbitrary set of rules that all (read: most) people agree upon :)

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Allsetlearning calls 起来 a result complement not a directional complement. Could the difference between the two sentences be that we are not interested in the result of the action with:请拿起我的笔?  
> **username_0**: In this instance we are only interested in the direction the 笔 moves. Right?  
> **username_6**: Google directional complement, you'll find 起来 there, because it's a directional complement, not a result complement (见, 到, etc.) The difference between your two sentences is that the first is grammatically correct, the second is not.  
> **username_0**: You confirmed that the second is not grammatically correct. Still, if it is a directional complement it "should" work. Is something else working in the background?  
> **username_6**: Syntax: where the directional complement is supposed to go in relation to the subject, verb, and object. As you can see from the two examples above, it tells you where the directional complement is supposed to go (after the object, or cleaved in two with the object in between.) It's just something you need to remember. As with pretty much all grammar, there is no good answer to the question **why**, the reason is simply that everyone agrees it should be like that.  

---

