<blockquote>
  <p>Maybe "他讲英语讲得很好。"? And the explanation is that the first 讲 is just left out?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Exactly this.<br></p>

<p>The grammatical rule here is pretty simple, but sometimes overlooked: <br>
with <strong>complements of grade</strong> (得 + verbal phrase) the <strong>main verb is doubled</strong>, in order to keep the strong bound between verb + object and between verb + grade particle, so your example would be actually written:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>他<strong>讲</strong>英语<strong>讲</strong>得很好 <br></p>
</blockquote>

<p>Then, the first occurrence of the main verb (the one before the object) <strong>can be omitted</strong>, so you end up with:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>他 (subject) <br>
  <s>讲 (main verb)</s> <br>
  英语 (object) <br>
  讲 (verb doubled) <br>
  得 (grade particle) <br>
  很好 (verbal phrase)</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-23T09:38:34.073Z
2017-02-23T10:06:30.583Z
2017-02-23T10:06:30.583Z
blackgreen
<p>Let's use x-bar theory to examine the grammar of this sentence:</p>

<p><code>
S---他英语讲得很好
 |
 |--Noun Phrase---他
 |--Verb Phrase---英语讲
               |--Noun---英语
               |--Verb---讲
 |--Prepositional Phrase---得很好
                    |--Preposition---得
                    |--Complement---很好
                                 |--Adverb---很
                                 |--Adjective---好
</code></p>

<p>Notice that this sentence has a SOV structure and there is a prepositional phrase that explain the relationship between the verb and object.
In most cases mandarin follows a SVO structure so here it's an inversion.
This inversion is quite common.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-23T08:30:19.490Z
2017-02-23T08:30:19.490Z
Lucius Hu
<p>I was doing a sentence rearranging exercise and came across this:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>他英语讲得很好。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Could someone explain the structure of this sentence?  I feel like it would be more properly written as:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>他会说英语说得很好。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I was confused thinking that 英语 is the object of 讲 and so then would go after the verb. Could I say "他讲英语。"? Maybe "他讲英语讲得很好。"? And the explanation is that the first 讲 is just left out?</p>

<p>Why can't it be "他讲得很好英语。"? Is it just weird to have the adverbial phrase before the language being spoken?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-23T01:16:07.447Z
他英语讲得很好  with fronted object (英语) and complement of degree (程度补语）得很好 fronting object has the advantage that the verb need not be repeated, if object follows verb , then verb 讲 must be repeated as in 他讲英语讲得很好
user6065
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-23T03:06:12.317Z
Aha! Ok, I think that makes sense. So then I could say "我饭做很快了。" for I quickly cooked a meal? Is "我做饭了做很快。" grammatically correct also?  I assume there are probably instances where putting the object in front of the verb is ok and other instances when it is not ok. Is there a Chinese term for this "fronted object"? 谢谢您！
jdods
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-23T05:39:17.147Z
fronted object 前置宾语（外国人实用汉语语法）从结构上看，谓语前边或后边常带状语或补语 structually,the predicate is usually preceded by an adverbial adjunct or followed by a complement 例如：我这些文章能看懂。我上海去过，南京也去过。他们那个展览会已经参观了。他英语，汉语说得很好。Alternative suggestions: 我饭做得很快（了）。我做饭了做得很快。
user6065
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-23T11:46:29.540Z
Thank you very much! I did indeed leave out the "得" accidentally.
jdods
<grammar><sentence-structure><adverbs>
Why is 讲 where it is in 他英语讲得很好?
# Why is 讲 where it is in 他英语讲得很好?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-02-23)

I was doing a sentence rearranging exercise and came across this:

> 他英语讲得很好。

Could someone explain the structure of this sentence? I feel like it would be more properly written as:

> 他会说英语说得很好。

I was confused thinking that 英语 is the object of 讲 and so then would go after the verb. Could I say "他讲英语。"? Maybe "他讲英语讲得很好。"? And the explanation is that the first 讲 is just left out?

Why can't it be "他讲得很好英语。"? Is it just weird to have the adverbial phrase before the language being spoken?

**Tags:** grammar, sentence-structure, adverbs

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: 他英语讲得很好  with fronted object (英语) and complement of degree (程度补语）得很好 fronting object has the advantage that the verb need not be repeated, if object follows verb , then verb 讲 must be repeated as in 他讲英语讲得很好  
> **username_0**: Aha! Ok, I think that makes sense. So then I could say "我饭做很快了。" for I quickly cooked a meal? Is "我做饭了做很快。" grammatically correct also?  I assume there are probably instances where putting the object in front of the verb is ok and other instances when it is not ok. Is there a Chinese term for this "fronted object"? 谢谢您！  
> **username_1**: fronted object 前置宾语（外国人实用汉语语法）从结构上看，谓语前边或后边常带状语或补语 structually,the predicate is usually preceded by an adverbial adjunct or followed by a complement 例如：我这些文章能看懂。我上海去过，南京也去过。他们那个展览会已经参观了。他英语，汉语说得很好。Alternative suggestions: 我饭做得很快（了）。我做饭了做得很快。  
> **username_0**: Thank you very much! I did indeed leave out the "得" accidentally.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2017-02-23. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

> Maybe "他讲英语讲得很好。"? And the explanation is that the first 讲 is just left out?

Exactly this.

The grammatical rule here is pretty simple, but sometimes overlooked:   
with **complements of grade** (得 + verbal phrase) the **main verb is doubled**, in order to keep the strong bound between verb + object and between verb + grade particle, so your example would be actually written:

> 他**讲**英语**讲**得很好

Then, the first occurrence of the main verb (the one before the object) **can be omitted**, so you end up with:

> 他 (subject)   
> ~~讲 (main verb)~~   
> 英语 (object)   
> 讲 (verb doubled)   
> 得 (grade particle)   
> 很好 (verbal phrase)


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2017-02-23. Score: 0

Let's use x-bar theory to examine the grammar of this sentence:

`S---他英语讲得很好
|
|--Noun Phrase---他
|--Verb Phrase---英语讲
|--Noun---英语
|--Verb---讲
|--Prepositional Phrase---得很好
|--Preposition---得
|--Complement---很好
|--Adverb---很
|--Adjective---好`

Notice that this sentence has a SOV structure and there is a prepositional phrase that explain the relationship between the verb and object.
In most cases mandarin follows a SVO structure so here it's an inversion.
This inversion is quite common.


---

