<p>The classifier is still before the noun in this case</p>
<p>我们两个 is 我们两个人 with the noun 人 omitted</p>
<p>The reason 人 can be omitted is that the speaker is a human, you can presume the &quot;two&quot; refers to two people, not two dogs, not two cats</p>
<p>Similarly, if someone says 他们两个, you can presume they are also humans unless a specific noun is stated, for example, 他们两个傻瓜 = those two fools)</p>
<p>两个我们 Would mean &quot;two us&quot; implying there are two sets of us, similar to  两个我 (two me)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-22T03:24:49.387Z
2024-07-22T03:32:12.280Z
2024-07-22T03:32:12.280Z
Tang Ho
<p>I like this from Becky:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So we don't use 两个我们 to mean &quot;the two of us&quot; because it means &quot;two
us-es&quot;.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The more the merrier!</p>
<p>Linguists have a habit of taking phrases in isolation and pondering over them, which only leads to misinterpretation. Nobody just says 我们两个 on its own, language always has a context. Within their given context phrases can change their meaning. It is not so that  我们两个 always means  我们两个人, only the context will inform us.</p>
<p>只给了我们两个星期排练。<br />
They only gave us two weeks for rehearsal.</p>
<p>我们两个都不愿意出去。<br />
We two both didn't want to go out.</p>
<p>那你能给我们两个备胎吗？<br />
So can you give us two spare tires?</p>
<p>不过我们两个都错了。<br />
But we were both wrong.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-22T06:06:09.530Z
2024-07-22T06:06:09.530Z
Pedroski
<p>The usual usage of</p>
<blockquote>
<p>两个 + [noun]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>is to specify there is two of the noun, such as in 两个人 = &quot;two people&quot;, 两个西瓜 = &quot;two watermelons&quot;, or 两个星期 = &quot;two weeks&quot;.  So the natural interpretation of 两个我们 is &quot;two us-es&quot; (the plural of &quot;us&quot;).</p>
<p>This kind of phrasing can actually arise, such as in the <em>HSK6 Standard Course</em> (上册, Ch.8, p.74), which raises a philosophical question about whether &quot;past you&quot; is the same as &quot;current you&quot;; it includes phrases like:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>始终只有一个你。  (There's always only one you.)<br />
有多少个不同的你？  (How many different &quot;yous&quot; are there?)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So we don't use 两个我们 to mean &quot;the two of us&quot; because it means &quot;two us-es&quot;.</p>
<p>I suppose it would be technically correct to say 两个人的我们, but the usual phrase is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>我们两个（人）</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(and there's also 我们俩).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-22T03:23:39.817Z
2024-07-22T03:23:39.817Z
Becky 李蓓
<p>Only a countable noun can be placed after the quantifier and classifier,</p>
<ul>
<li>我们两个(人) - 人(person), which is a quantifiable noun (one person...ten persons), can be ignored without confusion because the subject &quot;we(我们)&quot; is the pronoun for &quot;person&quot; in plural form.</li>
</ul>
<p>&quot;我们&quot; is not a quantifiable noun/pronoun, thus it can't be put behind the quantifier or classifier. Therefore, it is wrong to say &quot;两我们&quot; or &quot;两个我们&quot;. (Note, in modern writing, you may encounter the phrases &quot;两个你/他&quot; but never &quot;两个你们/他们&quot;.</p>
<p>two of us both share the same dream.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-23T20:32:35.447Z
2024-07-23T20:32:35.447Z
r13
<p>Your question is not about classifiers, measure words or word order reversal. The noun measured by 两个 is 人, not 我们. 人 and can be omitted and left implicit, but otherwise it would go after the classifier, just as you expect.</p>
<p>Your question is about the normal word order for a &quot;<strong>modifier</strong>+modified&quot; construction. &quot;我们&quot; &amp; &quot;两个(人)&quot; are two nominal phrases, the former <strong>modifying</strong> the latter.</p>
<p><strong>Modifiers</strong> always precede what they modify. Modifiers are there to give context to what follows, often indicating a relation of possession or location among other things.</p>
<p>The logical structure is as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>我们</strong> + 两个(人) = the two + <strong>of us</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Compare:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>中国</strong> + 人民 = the people + <strong>of China</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>班里</strong> + 最好的学生 = the best student + <strong>in the class</strong></p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-22T10:20:59.910Z
2024-07-22T11:32:47.177Z
2024-07-22T11:32:47.177Z
Sanchuan
<p>Whenever the rules of classifiers are explained, it seems like the rule for nouns is that they go after the classifier. A phrase like 两个人 follows this rule. However, it seems like the most common way to say &quot;The two of us&quot; is 我们两个, which has the order reversed. I couldn't find anything written on why the order is reversed in this case. Is this just a special phrase, or is there another rule guiding this?</p>

<grammar><measure-word>
Why is 我们两个 said instead of 两个我们
# Why is 我们两个 said instead of 两个我们

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-07-22)

Whenever the rules of classifiers are explained, it seems like the rule for nouns is that they go after the classifier. A phrase like 两个人 follows this rule. However, it seems like the most common way to say "The two of us" is 我们两个, which has the order reversed. I couldn't find anything written on why the order is reversed in this case. Is this just a special phrase, or is there another rule guiding this?

**Tags:** grammar, measure-word


---

## 5 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2024-07-22. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

The classifier is still before the noun in this case

我们两个 is 我们两个人 with the noun 人 omitted

The reason 人 can be omitted is that the speaker is a human, you can presume the "two" refers to two people, not two dogs, not two cats

Similarly, if someone says 他们两个, you can presume they are also humans unless a specific noun is stated, for example, 他们两个傻瓜 = those two fools)

两个我们 Would mean "two us" implying there are two sets of us, similar to 两个我 (two me)


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2024-07-22. Score: 2

I like this from username_3:

> So we don't use 两个我们 to mean "the two of us" because it means "two
> us-es".

The more the merrier!

Linguists have a habit of taking phrases in isolation and pondering over them, which only leads to misinterpretation. Nobody just says 我们两个 on its own, language always has a context. Within their given context phrases can change their meaning. It is not so that 我们两个 always means 我们两个人, only the context will inform us.

只给了我们两个星期排练。  
They only gave us two weeks for rehearsal.

我们两个都不愿意出去。  
We two both didn't want to go out.

那你能给我们两个备胎吗？  
So can you give us two spare tires?

不过我们两个都错了。  
But we were both wrong.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2024-07-22. Score: 2

The usual usage of

> 两个 + [noun]

is to specify there is two of the noun, such as in 两个人 = "two people", 两个西瓜 = "two watermelons", or 两个星期 = "two weeks". So the natural interpretation of 两个我们 is "two us-es" (the plural of "us").

This kind of phrasing can actually arise, such as in the *HSK6 Standard Course* (上册, Ch.8, p.74), which raises a philosophical question about whether "past you" is the same as "current you"; it includes phrases like:

> 始终只有一个你。 (There's always only one you.)  
> 有多少个不同的你？ (How many different "yous" are there?)

So we don't use 两个我们 to mean "the two of us" because it means "two us-es".

I suppose it would be technically correct to say 两个人的我们, but the usual phrase is

> 我们两个（人）

(and there's also 我们俩).


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2024-07-23. Score: 0

Only a countable noun can be placed after the quantifier and classifier,

* 我们两个(人) - 人(person), which is a quantifiable noun (one person...ten persons), can be ignored without confusion because the subject "we(我们)" is the pronoun for "person" in plural form.

"我们" is not a quantifiable noun/pronoun, thus it can't be put behind the quantifier or classifier. Therefore, it is wrong to say "两我们" or "两个我们". (Note, in modern writing, you may encounter the phrases "两个你/他" but never "两个你们/他们".

two of us both share the same dream.


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2024-07-22. Score: 0

Your question is not about classifiers, measure words or word order reversal. The noun measured by 两个 is 人, not 我们. 人 and can be omitted and left implicit, but otherwise it would go after the classifier, just as you expect.

Your question is about the normal word order for a "**modifier**+modified" construction. "我们" & "两个(人)" are two nominal phrases, the former **modifying** the latter.

**Modifiers** always precede what they modify. Modifiers are there to give context to what follows, often indicating a relation of possession or location among other things.

The logical structure is as follows:

> **我们** + 两个(人) = the two + **of us**

Compare:

> **中国** + 人民 = the people + **of China**

> **班里** + 最好的学生 = the best student + **in the class**


---

