<blockquote>
  <p>陈叶可以直接拿跟胡灵阳的钥匙</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The 跟 doesn't look quite right in the sentence.  It implies that 陈叶 and 胡灵阳 share the keys. That's not what you intended to mean according to your English sentence.  On the other hand, it's not a good sentence.  </p>

<p>So, it should be removed: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>陈叶可以直接拿胡灵阳的钥匙</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-29T12:34:37.710Z
2020-02-29T12:40:18.210Z
2020-02-29T12:40:18.210Z
dan
<p>It is a typo.</p>

<p>I think your teacher meant 根 which could be a counter(量词) for nouns.</p>

<p>But 钥匙 usually use 个。
Anyway, 拿跟 is not a valid word no matter what is before or after it.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-03-02T15:31:04.697Z
2020-03-02T15:31:04.697Z
sfy
<p>To me it doesn’t sound very natural, but the meaning of “跟” is “that belongs to” in this case. </p>

<p>It’s a bit awkward to translate, and my attempt is as follows:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Chen Ye can directly take (of which it belongs to) Hu Lingyang’s keys</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-29T12:24:37.857Z
2020-02-29T12:24:37.857Z
Axel Tong
<p>I think this is not a correct sentence, since 拿 is before 跟 in this example.</p>

<p>跟 means to.</p>

<p>To fit your need. you can use Chen Ye 可以直接拿 Hu Lingyang 的鑰匙。</p>

<p>To form a correct sentence. If you want to use 跟, Chen Ye 可以直接跟 Hu Lingyang 拿她的鑰匙。 If you don't want to use 跟, Chen Ye 可以直接拿 Hu Lingyang 的鑰匙。</p>

<p>Consider the meaning of Chen Ye 可以直接跟 Hu Lingyang 拿她的鑰匙。. It means Chen Ye can directly ask key from Hu Lingyang. This doesn't suit your need.</p>

<p>Consider the meaning of Chen Ye 可以直接拿 Hu Lingyang 的鑰匙。. It means Chen Ye can directly take Hu Lingyang's key. This suit your need.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-03-02T05:57:59.233Z
2020-03-02T05:57:59.233Z
000
<p>I wrote this:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>...陈叶可以直接借她的钥匙。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I intend for it to mean "<em>Chen Ye can directly borrow her [Hu Lingyang's] keys</em>", as in, he doesn't need to ask---the keys were on the table, and he just took them and walked off (they're good friends and trust each other).  My teacher changed it to the following (I think):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>...陈叶可以直接<strong>拿跟胡灵阳</strong>的钥匙。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I don't understand why 跟 is in here, and I feel it should be deleted.  This may be my misunderstanding, as I'm looking at corrections I made from a WeChat conversation from a while ago.  Although maybe I'm missing something.</p>

<p><strong>Question</strong>: Why is 跟 in 陈叶可以直接拿跟胡灵阳的钥匙?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-29T12:31:33.580Z
Agree with you; what did your teacher say?
Ziyuan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-29T12:35:00.763Z
It was too long ago for me to remember.  I'm reviewing what I've written which was based on what she said via WeChat, but it is possible I made a mistake somewhere, or misheard something.
Becky 李蓓
<usage><meaning-in-context>
Why is 跟 in 陈叶可以直接拿跟胡灵阳的钥匙?
# Why is 跟 in 陈叶可以直接拿跟胡灵阳的钥匙?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-02-29)

I wrote this:

> ...陈叶可以直接借她的钥匙。

I intend for it to mean "*Chen Ye can directly borrow her [Hu Lingyang's] keys*", as in, he doesn't need to ask---the keys were on the table, and he just took them and walked off (they're good friends and trust each other). My teacher changed it to the following (I think):

> ...陈叶可以直接**拿跟胡灵阳**的钥匙。

I don't understand why 跟 is in here, and I feel it should be deleted. This may be my misunderstanding, as I'm looking at corrections I made from a WeChat conversation from a while ago. Although maybe I'm missing something.

**Question**: Why is 跟 in 陈叶可以直接拿跟胡灵阳的钥匙?

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

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Agree with you; what did your teacher say?  
> **username_0**: It was too long ago for me to remember.  I'm reviewing what I've written which was based on what she said via WeChat, but it is possible I made a mistake somewhere, or misheard something.  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-02-29. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

> 陈叶可以直接拿跟胡灵阳的钥匙

The 跟 doesn't look quite right in the sentence. It implies that 陈叶 and 胡灵阳 share the keys. That's not what you intended to mean according to your English sentence. On the other hand, it's not a good sentence.

So, it should be removed:

> 陈叶可以直接拿胡灵阳的钥匙


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2020-03-02. Score: 1

It is a typo.

I think your teacher meant 根 which could be a counter(量词) for nouns.

But 钥匙 usually use 个。
Anyway, 拿跟 is not a valid word no matter what is before or after it.


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-02-29. Score: 1

To me it doesn’t sound very natural, but the meaning of “跟” is “that belongs to” in this case.

It’s a bit awkward to translate, and my attempt is as follows:

> Chen Ye can directly take (of which it belongs to) Hu Lingyang’s keys


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2020-03-02. Score: 1

I think this is not a correct sentence, since 拿 is before 跟 in this example.

跟 means to.

To fit your need. you can use Chen Ye 可以直接拿 Hu Lingyang 的鑰匙。

To form a correct sentence. If you want to use 跟, Chen Ye 可以直接跟 Hu Lingyang 拿她的鑰匙。 If you don't want to use 跟, Chen Ye 可以直接拿 Hu Lingyang 的鑰匙。

Consider the meaning of Chen Ye 可以直接跟 Hu Lingyang 拿她的鑰匙。. It means Chen Ye can directly ask key from Hu Lingyang. This doesn't suit your need.

Consider the meaning of Chen Ye 可以直接拿 Hu Lingyang 的鑰匙。. It means Chen Ye can directly take Hu Lingyang's key. This suit your need.


---

