<p>I think both are modal 了, in the form of &quot;subject + verb + (noun) + 了&quot;, indicating a change of state.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>她和一个不太熟的男人领证了。(The act, 领证, has changed her marriatal status)</p>
</li>
<li><p>秦以恒出差了。(The business trip, 出差, has changed his whereabout)</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>It would be the perfective aspect 了 (action completion), if they change to</p>
<ul>
<li><p>她和一个不太熟的男人<strong>领</strong>了证。</p>
</li>
<li><p>秦以恒<strong>出</strong>了差...。</p>
</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T00:46:35.527Z
2024-12-02T00:46:35.527Z
r13
<p>If 了 is just a meaningless &quot;particle&quot;, how could it have modal and perfective forms?</p>
<p>The thing about if clauses is, whatever is described has not happened. It has no place in space or time. If clauses are pure speculation. However, she has married the man, she has 领取了结婚证. She just has not told her mum yet. Bad girl!</p>
<p>领证了：领取了结婚证<br />
熟：熟悉: 了解某事或某人。<br />
熟：熟悉: understand something or someone</p>
<p>This is incomplete:</p>
<p>这要是突然告诉她妈，她和一个不太熟的男人领证了。</p>
<p>It is an &quot;if clause&quot; without a “result clause”, like: 妈妈不得气死.</p>
<p>这要是突然告诉她妈，她和一个不太熟悉的男人领证了, 妈妈不得气死。<br />
If she tells her mother, out of the blue, that she has married a man whom she hardly knows, her mother will be furious.</p>
<p>Also incomplete:</p>
<p>主要: (the) main reason</p>
<p>主要秦以恒出差了。</p>
<p>Try this as a reply to a question about &quot;Why can't I see 秦以恒先生?&quot;:</p>
<p>主要是因为秦以恒出差了。<br />
The main reason is,  秦以恒先生 has gone on a business trip.</p>
<p>modal: from mode: a way or manner.</p>
<p>Thus a modal descriptor tells us <em>how</em>: how something is done or how its manner is. 了 cannot do this.</p>
<p>perfective: from perfect via the Latin participle perfect passive: perfectus: per: completely + facere: make = completely made, finished.</p>
<p>The above meaning of perfect is basically the meaning of 了 liǎo。了 liǎo tells us, something is finished. Somehow it got confused in spoken language with 了 le。</p>
<p>了 liǎo： 完结，结束：完了。了结。</p>
<p>My advice: forget confusing and hazy terms borrowed from Western Grammar, like <em>modal</em> and <em>perfective</em>, or at least, do not try to make them fit Chinese!</p>
<p>And maybe find better examples of Chinese!</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T19:35:00.147Z
I actually found these sentences in a book I'm reading. With perfective 了 I mean this: https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Expressing_completion_with_%22le%22 with modal 了 I mean this: https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Change_of_state_with_%22le%22
ZICX
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T19:43:50.980Z
Also, its often called modal 了 since it's often categorized as a modal particle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_particle . It has nothing to do with the way something is done.
ZICX
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-03T06:26:58.550Z
Yes, I see a lot of self-contradicting confusion in your links. Do you ever wonder how the authors know the things they write? Do you ever suspect that what you read may not all be true?  An action in the future has, by definition, not been completed, so how can they talk about a completed action in the future? This is the imposition of Ancient Greek ideas on Chinese syntax.
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-06T00:10:19.153Z
了 doesn't mark past, it marks the perfective aspect. And there can be completed actions in the future. E.g. 我回家了就吃饭 - I will eat after I come home. What are the other contradictions that you have seen in the links? I can help you understand them if you'd like.
ZICX
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-06T06:31:42.107Z
OK, and thanks for your reply. Here is how I view your little sentence: I will eat: Obviously, you have not yet eaten. You have the intention to eat at a certain time. That time is: after I come home: Obviously, you have not yet come home. perfective, from its Latin origins, means complete. If you understand perfective to mean "have the intention to do something", then yes, that is perfective. But nothing has happened yet, with regard to your eating or coming home. Neither is complete. You may die en route! I am interested to hear your point of view should you wish to continue a dialogue.
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-07T04:00:55.917Z
When I eat the meal, I will have completed the action of coming home. There seems to be nothing wrong in calling this 了 a "perfective" aspect marker. Without it, you would have to rely on other means to express the same temporal dependence.
tuo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-07T07:02:12.730Z
"When I eat the meal, I will have completed the action of coming home." I agree! You have changed the reference time to "when I eat". But, what was said is: "when/after I get home I will eat" The reference time is "after I get home" which indicates: not now. 我到家就吃饭 I get home then eat You are simply using the term "perfective aspect" to mean: "at some time in the future, after A, then B". Neither A nor B are completed. Neither A nor B are perfect at the time of speaking.
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-07T14:18:20.447Z
Whether the action has completed at the time of speech is irrelevant
as we are talking about aspect, not tense.
tuo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-07T15:04:31.013Z
aspect: how you look at something, or, how something looks. But you are imagining A is complete. That is not how A looks. That is imagination.  A has not happened, or you would never say this. Call it "imaginative perspective" if you wish, but it is not the aspect which A presents at the time you say "when/after I get home".
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T16:34:16.893Z
2024-12-02T16:34:16.893Z
Pedroski
<p>How to differentiate between the modal 了 (change of state) and the perfective 了 (completed action)?</p>
<p>E.g. here:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>这要是突然告诉她妈，她和一个不太熟的男人领证了。</p>
</li>
<li><p>主要秦以恒出差了。</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Is it the modal 了 or the perfective one?</p>
<p>AFAIK the modal 了 comes at the end of every type of sentence and the perfective only after action verbs/after objects of action verbs.</p>
<p>But in the previous example sentences, the action verb is at the end, so if it's the perfective 了 it's position would still be at the end.</p>
<p>Is there a better way to differentiate?</p>
<p>Thanks in advance!</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T15:16:00.943Z
FYI, not all linguists accept that modal 了 and perfective 了 are in fact different things and differentiate their different interpretations on other factors.  Also, your examples may not be the best, since arguably in neither case do the sentences actually end in verbs, but rather in separable noun complements.  A better example might be something like 他们来了, which is susceptible to two different interpretations.
Vegawatcher
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T15:36:35.247Z
了, when used as perfective, can also come after objects if they are unmodified and short. https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Advanced_%22le%22_after_an_object That's why I thought both interpretations could be possible
ZICX
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T19:43:34.440Z
我认为，这个作者并不是一个好的汉语写作的榜样。他的语句很奇怪。
PdotWang
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-02T19:59:46.063Z
Without other words describing the situation, "我上课了" is quite vague, as it can be interpreted as "我(要)上课了" or "我上(過)课了", which lacks the certainty as "我上了课" (上了 = went and finished/completed).
r13
<grammar><particles>
Differentiating modal 了 and perfective 了
# Differentiating modal 了 and perfective 了

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-12-01)

How to differentiate between the modal 了 (change of state) and the perfective 了 (completed action)?

E.g. here:

1. 这要是突然告诉她妈，她和一个不太熟的男人领证了。
2. 主要秦以恒出差了。

Is it the modal 了 or the perfective one?

AFAIK the modal 了 comes at the end of every type of sentence and the perfective only after action verbs/after objects of action verbs.

But in the previous example sentences, the action verb is at the end, so if it's the perfective 了 it's position would still be at the end.

Is there a better way to differentiate?

Thanks in advance!

**Tags:** grammar, particles

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: FYI, not all linguists accept that modal 了 and perfective 了 are in fact different things and differentiate their different interpretations on other factors.  Also, your examples may not be the best, since arguably in neither case do the sentences actually end in verbs, but rather in separable noun complements.  A better example might be something like 他们来了, which is susceptible to two different interpretations.  
> **username_0**: 了, when used as perfective, can also come after objects if they are unmodified and short. https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Advanced_%22le%22_after_an_object That's why I thought both interpretations could be possible  
> **username_2**: 我认为，这个作者并不是一个好的汉语写作的榜样。他的语句很奇怪。  
> **username_3**: Without other words describing the situation, "我上课了" is quite vague, as it can be interpreted as "我(要)上课了" or "我上(過)课了", which lacks the certainty as "我上了课" (上了 = went and finished/completed).  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2024-12-02. Score: 1

I think both are modal 了, in the form of "subject + verb + (noun) + 了", indicating a change of state.

* 她和一个不太熟的男人领证了。(The act, 领证, has changed her marriatal status)
* 秦以恒出差了。(The business trip, 出差, has changed his whereabout)

It would be the perfective aspect 了 (action completion), if they change to

* 她和一个不太熟的男人**领**了证。
* 秦以恒**出**了差...。


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2024-12-02. Score: -1

If 了 is just a meaningless "particle", how could it have modal and perfective forms?

The thing about if clauses is, whatever is described has not happened. It has no place in space or time. If clauses are pure speculation. However, she has married the man, she has 领取了结婚证. She just has not told her mum yet. Bad girl!

领证了：领取了结婚证  
熟：熟悉: 了解某事或某人。  
熟：熟悉: understand something or someone

This is incomplete:

这要是突然告诉她妈，她和一个不太熟的男人领证了。

It is an "if clause" without a “result clause”, like: 妈妈不得气死.

这要是突然告诉她妈，她和一个不太熟悉的男人领证了, 妈妈不得气死。  
If she tells her mother, out of the blue, that she has married a man whom she hardly knows, her mother will be furious.

Also incomplete:

主要: (the) main reason

主要秦以恒出差了。

Try this as a reply to a question about "Why can't I see 秦以恒先生?":

主要是因为秦以恒出差了。  
The main reason is, 秦以恒先生 has gone on a business trip.

modal: from mode: a way or manner.

Thus a modal descriptor tells us *how*: how something is done or how its manner is. 了 cannot do this.

perfective: from perfect via the Latin participle perfect passive: perfectus: per: completely + facere: make = completely made, finished.

The above meaning of perfect is basically the meaning of 了 liǎo。了 liǎo tells us, something is finished. Somehow it got confused in spoken language with 了 le。

了 liǎo： 完结，结束：完了。了结。

My advice: forget confusing and hazy terms borrowed from Western Grammar, like *modal* and *perfective*, or at least, do not try to make them fit Chinese!

And maybe find better examples of Chinese!

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I actually found these sentences in a book I'm reading. With perfective 了 I mean this: https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Expressing_completion_with_%22le%22 with modal 了 I mean this: https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Change_of_state_with_%22le%22  
> **username_0**: Also, its often called modal 了 since it's often categorized as a modal particle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_particle . It has nothing to do with the way something is done.  
> **username_4**: Yes, I see a lot of self-contradicting confusion in your links. Do you ever wonder how the authors know the things they write? Do you ever suspect that what you read may not all be true?  An action in the future has, by definition, not been completed, so how can they talk about a completed action in the future? This is the imposition of Ancient Greek ideas on Chinese syntax.  
> **username_0**: 了 doesn't mark past, it marks the perfective aspect. And there can be completed actions in the future. E.g. 我回家了就吃饭 - I will eat after I come home. What are the other contradictions that you have seen in the links? I can help you understand them if you'd like.  
> **username_4**: OK, and thanks for your reply. Here is how I view your little sentence: I will eat: Obviously, you have not yet eaten. You have the intention to eat at a certain time. That time is: after I come home: Obviously, you have not yet come home. perfective, from its Latin origins, means complete. If you understand perfective to mean "have the intention to do something", then yes, that is perfective. But nothing has happened yet, with regard to your eating or coming home. Neither is complete. You may die en route! I am interested to hear your point of view should you wish to continue a dialogue.  
> **username_5**: When I eat the meal, I will have completed the action of coming home. There seems to be nothing wrong in calling this 了 a "perfective" aspect marker. Without it, you would have to rely on other means to express the same temporal dependence.  
> **username_4**: "When I eat the meal, I will have completed the action of coming home." I agree! You have changed the reference time to "when I eat". But, what was said is: "when/after I get home I will eat" The reference time is "after I get home" which indicates: not now. 我到家就吃饭 I get home then eat You are simply using the term "perfective aspect" to mean: "at some time in the future, after A, then B". Neither A nor B are completed. Neither A nor B are perfect at the time of speaking.  
> **username_5**: Whether the action has completed at the time of speech is irrelevant as we are talking about aspect, not tense.  
> **username_4**: aspect: how you look at something, or, how something looks. But you are imagining A is complete. That is not how A looks. That is imagination.  A has not happened, or you would never say this. Call it "imaginative perspective" if you wish, but it is not the aspect which A presents at the time you say "when/after I get home".  

---

