<p>一点 makes 有 valid.  According to dictionaries, one of the usage of 有 is to describe <em><strong>extent</strong></em> (how large, how big, how severe, etc.).  E. g.  他有两米高.  (not 他有高).  In your case, 他有一点儿严厉 makes sense, whilst 他有严厉 does not because it doesn't specify the <em><strong>extent</strong></em>(一点儿).</p>
<p>是 + adj is used for <em>emphasis</em>, denoting the sense of <em><strong>really or indeed</strong></em>.  E. g. 他是严厉(he's indeed strict)。他是聪明(he's indeed smart)。We put an emphasis on 是 when we say those sentences, or they might sound wrong.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T05:01:57.650Z
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been [moved to chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/111946/discussion-on-answer-by-dan-using--vs--to-describe-an-object).
Becky 李蓓
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-18T03:55:08.393Z
2020-08-19T00:15:14.400Z
2020-08-19T00:15:14.400Z
dan
<p>@fefe's answer about 有一点 as a set is correct. It is of course colloquial only.</p>
<p>There is one more thing.</p>
<p>When you compare 是 to the English <em>be</em>, 是 is only used in predicative statement. (Such as the exact one I just used.) 是 is not used as the universal linking verb before a descriptive adjective.</p>
<p>&quot;He is strict&quot; in English attaches the adjective &quot;strict&quot; to the object in question &quot;he&quot; as a linking verb. 他是一点儿严厉 breaks up the colloquial word phrase 有一点儿。But moreover, 严厉 is not used as an adjective that requires linking verb. (严厉 is a descriptive quality. But that does not make it adjective in the same style as in English. Semantic does not mandate syntax.)</p>
<p>是 is indeed used for emphasis as @fefe mentioned. That often places 是 in the same place as the English &quot;be&quot; even when the function of 是 is not as a linking verb. For example, 他是严厉 is used by Chinese speakers and is better translated as &quot;that he is strict&quot; or &quot;he is indeed strict&quot; depending on the context to give emphasis or affirmation.</p>
<p>In short:</p>
<p>有一点 is colloquially almost as if &quot;is a little&quot; in English -- ie. containing an inferred linking verb. That explains 他有一点儿严厉</p>
<p>是 is not a universal linking verb for adjective. 是 is not used for comparative adjectives. It is comparable to the English &quot;be&quot; only in 1) predicative statements, 2) for special emphasis, 3) as linking verb for words modified into adjective using ...的.</p>
<p>有 vs 是 are not comparable per se. (Though the usage of 是 deserves considerations and clarifications along the line of this thread. So good question.)</p>
<p>EDIT: incorporated user21820's comment.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T00:15:56.087Z
严厉 indeed is an adjective, while 严厉的 is not.  So, both 他是严厉 and 他是严厉的 are correct.  However they demonstrate different usages of 是.  The former is for emphasis, and the latter is for linking usage.
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T13:28:59.197Z
@dan: If it is for emphasis only, it is not adjective the same way in English. In English, adjectives are -- in almost every instance -- words that can be used to decorate a noun, usually before the noun and before the adjective people use an article (e.g. the).  You cannot use 严厉 to decorate a noun the same way many other descriptive words can in Chinese.
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T14:55:04.987Z
You got exactly right! That's why I strongly encourage to not use English grammar to interpret/understand Chinese. But the fact is that many people do that way including many of native Chinese speakers.
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T16:03:41.123Z
@dan: ya good point. I think native speakers are not the natural authoritative source of grammar unless they happen to study linguistics. Only when studying a second language, you would attempt to summarize grammar and attempt to use proposed grammar to predict legible sentences. It is that process that makes someone acutely aware of the underlying grammar. So instead, I'd rather see what an English or other language speaker say about Chinese grammar.
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T16:09:10.750Z
@dan: In the earlier example, 严厉的 can be used to decorate nouns. e.g. 他是位严厉的父亲. 严厉 itself cannot be. The 是+quality phrase in Chinese is probably something else different from be + adjective in English. We see 是+adjective (I think we do?) and we also see perhaps 是+noun for emphasis.
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-18T17:25:33.947Z
2020-08-18T20:32:40.360Z
2020-08-18T20:32:40.360Z
Argyll
<p>// Non-native</p>
<p>In Chinese there are verbal adjectives.</p>
<p>I am tall. 我高。not 我是高。</p>
<p>高 is a verbal adjective here. It does not mean ''tall'', it means ''to be tall''. So the verb 是 is not used with verbal adjectives.</p>
<p>Here are some other examples.</p>
<p>我严厉。我饿。我累。我胖。 Get the idea ?</p>
<p>Now , in Chinese to say ''a little'' is 有点儿 or as you've put it 有一点儿。</p>
<p>我有点儿严厉。我有点儿饿。我有点儿累。我有点儿胖。</p>
<p>The 是 is built into the verbal adjective 严厉, and 有 is part of the 点儿 structure.</p>
<p>If you want to say ''I am indeed something'' in Chinese then you would add the 是 and emphasise it when speaking.</p>
<p>I am indeed tall. 我是高 or 我是很高。</p>
<p>I am indeed a little bit stern. 我是有点儿严厉。</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-18T20:25:39.360Z
FYI out of 我严厉。我饿。我累。我胖, only 我饿 and 我累 are likely to be used. Someone else may propose a better theory. But a difference is that 严厉 and 胖 are never used as verbs while 饿 and 累 can be.
As for the idea of verbal adjectives, if anything, non-verbal adjectives in Chinese are the rare cases (and more of a modern construct), aren't they?
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T03:24:44.067Z
@Argyll: I have never heard "我饿" or "我累" as complete sentences from native speakers. People instead say "我饿了" and "我累了".
user21820
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T13:25:19.767Z
@user21820: I agree "我饿了" and "我累了" and when describing an immediate situation simply "饿" or "累" are the usual style of speech. But I can see "我饿" or "我累" being said -- as a native speaker. I cannot see 我严厉 or 我胖 being said in any context.
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T14:37:51.117Z
@Argyll: Actually I change my mind. I think all can be said, but only in response to an inquiry: (1) "谁饿？我饿！"; (2) " 理由主要有三： 1、 [...] 2、 [...] 3、我胖，个还不高，脸大。" (from [Chinese Internet Corpus](http://corpus.leeds.ac.uk/cgi-bin/cqp.pl?searchstring=%E6%88%91+%E8%83%96&corpuslist=INTERNET-ZH)).
user21820
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T15:25:24.377Z
@user21820: Nice example. 我胖，个还不高，脸大 makes me giggle. haha. I agree, this example concludes the natural use of 我胖. I am less certain about grammatical categorization. Since last commenting, I've been thinking about 我严厉. 严厉 may be either a noun or not even a word. You can probably say something like 三分严厉，七分诱导 -- parodying 90% diligence 10% wit. In that case, 严厉 is a noun. I can't think of any example where 严厉 is used independently as an adjective which by definition either decorates noun or if such special usage exists -- it does in Chinese -- via linking verb describes a subject pronoun.
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T15:25:43.610Z
@user21820: In 很严厉 or 严厉的, 严厉 is not separate the same way word stems are not separate words in English like separat is not a word out of separation.
Argyll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-19T16:43:07.597Z
@Argyll: Yea this notion of "occurring in isolation" is something that I observed to be relevant to this issue. I said more [in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/111946/discussion-on-answer-by-dan-using--vs--to-describe-an-object), and you're welcome to add your views there.
user21820
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-18T19:38:22.463Z
2020-08-18T19:38:22.463Z
Kantura
<p>有(一)点 as a set can use to mean &quot;a little <em>too</em>...&quot;. See this <a href="https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Expressing_%22a_little_too%22_with_%22you_dian%22" rel="noreferrer">Chinese Grammar Wiki page</a>.</p>
<p>Some examples from the page:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>我 有点 饿 。<br />
I'm a little hungry.</p>
<p>这个 菜 有点 辣 。<br />
This dish is a little too spicy.</p>
<p>昨天 有一点 热 。<br />
Yesterday it was a little too hot.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>是 does not have this usage, so 他是一点儿严厉 is wrong.</p>
<p>However, you can say 他是有一点儿严厉, where 是 is used for emphasis.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-18T03:46:39.063Z
2020-08-18T03:46:39.063Z
fefe
<p>I created a sentence earlier today stating &quot;他是一点儿严厉,&quot; but I was told that it was better if I say &quot;他有一点儿严厉”。They didn't really know why, but just that it made more sense - could someone elaborate when to use 有 vs 是 in the sense of describing objects with adjectives? Hopefully what I'm saying makes sense :)</p>

<word-choice>
Using 有 vs 是 to describe an object
# Using 有 vs 是 to describe an object

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-08-18)

I created a sentence earlier today stating "他是一点儿严厉," but I was told that it was better if I say "他有一点儿严厉”。They didn't really know why, but just that it made more sense - could someone elaborate when to use 有 vs 是 in the sense of describing objects with adjectives? Hopefully what I'm saying makes sense :)

**Tags:** word-choice


---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2020-08-18. Score: 11 | Accepted answer

有(一)点 as a set can use to mean "a little *too*...". See this [Chinese Grammar Wiki page](https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/Expressing_%22a_little_too%22_with_%22you_dian%22).

Some examples from the page:

> 我 有点 饿 。  
> I'm a little hungry.
>
> 这个 菜 有点 辣 。  
> This dish is a little too spicy.
>
> 昨天 有一点 热 。  
> Yesterday it was a little too hot.

是 does not have this usage, so 他是一点儿严厉 is wrong.

However, you can say 他是有一点儿严厉, where 是 is used for emphasis.


---

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-08-18. Score: 5

一点 makes 有 valid. According to dictionaries, one of the usage of 有 is to describe ***extent*** (how large, how big, how severe, etc.). E. g. 他有两米高. (not 他有高). In your case, 他有一点儿严厉 makes sense, whilst 他有严厉 does not because it doesn't specify the ***extent***(一点儿).

是 + adj is used for *emphasis*, denoting the sense of ***really or indeed***. E. g. 他是严厉(he's indeed strict)。他是聪明(he's indeed smart)。We put an emphasis on 是 when we say those sentences, or they might sound wrong.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been [moved to chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/111946/discussion-on-answer-by-dan-using--vs--to-describe-an-object).  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2020-08-18. Score: 2

@username_6's answer about 有一点 as a set is correct. It is of course colloquial only.

There is one more thing.

When you compare 是 to the English *be*, 是 is only used in predicative statement. (Such as the exact one I just used.) 是 is not used as the universal linking verb before a descriptive adjective.

"He is strict" in English attaches the adjective "strict" to the object in question "he" as a linking verb. 他是一点儿严厉 breaks up the colloquial word phrase 有一点儿。But moreover, 严厉 is not used as an adjective that requires linking verb. (严厉 is a descriptive quality. But that does not make it adjective in the same style as in English. Semantic does not mandate syntax.)

是 is indeed used for emphasis as @username_6 mentioned. That often places 是 in the same place as the English "be" even when the function of 是 is not as a linking verb. For example, 他是严厉 is used by Chinese speakers and is better translated as "that he is strict" or "he is indeed strict" depending on the context to give emphasis or affirmation.

In short:

有一点 is colloquially almost as if "is a little" in English -- ie. containing an inferred linking verb. That explains 他有一点儿严厉

是 is not a universal linking verb for adjective. 是 is not used for comparative adjectives. It is comparable to the English "be" only in 1) predicative statements, 2) for special emphasis, 3) as linking verb for words modified into adjective using ...的.

有 vs 是 are not comparable per se. (Though the usage of 是 deserves considerations and clarifications along the line of this thread. So good question.)

EDIT: incorporated username_5's comment.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: 严厉 indeed is an adjective, while 严厉的 is not.  So, both 他是严厉 and 他是严厉的 are correct.  However they demonstrate different usages of 是.  The former is for emphasis, and the latter is for linking usage.  
> **username_3**: @username_1: If it is for emphasis only, it is not adjective the same way in English. In English, adjectives are -- in almost every instance -- words that can be used to decorate a noun, usually before the noun and before the adjective people use an article (e.g. the).  You cannot use 严厉 to decorate a noun the same way many other descriptive words can in Chinese.  
> **username_1**: You got exactly right! That's why I strongly encourage to not use English grammar to interpret/understand Chinese. But the fact is that many people do that way including many of native Chinese speakers.  
> **username_3**: @username_1: ya good point. I think native speakers are not the natural authoritative source of grammar unless they happen to study linguistics. Only when studying a second language, you would attempt to summarize grammar and attempt to use proposed grammar to predict legible sentences. It is that process that makes someone acutely aware of the underlying grammar. So instead, I'd rather see what an English or other language speaker say about Chinese grammar.  
> **username_3**: @username_1: In the earlier example, 严厉的 can be used to decorate nouns. e.g. 他是位严厉的父亲. 严厉 itself cannot be. The 是+quality phrase in Chinese is probably something else different from be + adjective in English. We see 是+adjective (I think we do?) and we also see perhaps 是+noun for emphasis.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-08-18. Score: 0

// Non-native

In Chinese there are verbal adjectives.

I am tall. 我高。not 我是高。

高 is a verbal adjective here. It does not mean ''tall'', it means ''to be tall''. So the verb 是 is not used with verbal adjectives.

Here are some other examples.

我严厉。我饿。我累。我胖。 Get the idea ?

Now , in Chinese to say ''a little'' is 有点儿 or as you've put it 有一点儿。

我有点儿严厉。我有点儿饿。我有点儿累。我有点儿胖。

The 是 is built into the verbal adjective 严厉, and 有 is part of the 点儿 structure.

If you want to say ''I am indeed something'' in Chinese then you would add the 是 and emphasise it when speaking.

I am indeed tall. 我是高 or 我是很高。

I am indeed a little bit stern. 我是有点儿严厉。

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: FYI out of 我严厉。我饿。我累。我胖, only 我饿 and 我累 are likely to be used. Someone else may propose a better theory. But a difference is that 严厉 and 胖 are never used as verbs while 饿 and 累 can be. As for the idea of verbal adjectives, if anything, non-verbal adjectives in Chinese are the rare cases (and more of a modern construct), aren't they?  
> **username_5**: @username_3: I have never heard "我饿" or "我累" as complete sentences from native speakers. People instead say "我饿了" and "我累了".  
> **username_3**: @username_5: I agree "我饿了" and "我累了" and when describing an immediate situation simply "饿" or "累" are the usual style of speech. But I can see "我饿" or "我累" being said -- as a native speaker. I cannot see 我严厉 or 我胖 being said in any context.  
> **username_5**: @username_3: Actually I change my mind. I think all can be said, but only in response to an inquiry: (1) "谁饿？我饿！"; (2) " 理由主要有三： 1、 [...] 2、 [...] 3、我胖，个还不高，脸大。" (from [Chinese Internet Corpus](http://corpus.leeds.ac.uk/cgi-bin/cqp.pl?searchstring=%E6%88%91+%E8%83%96&corpuslist=INTERNET-ZH)).  
> **username_3**: @username_5: Nice example. 我胖，个还不高，脸大 makes me giggle. haha. I agree, this example concludes the natural use of 我胖. I am less certain about grammatical categorization. Since last commenting, I've been thinking about 我严厉. 严厉 may be either a noun or not even a word. You can probably say something like 三分严厉，七分诱导 -- parodying 90% diligence 10% wit. In that case, 严厉 is a noun. I can't think of any example where 严厉 is used independently as an adjective which by definition either decorates noun or if such special usage exists -- it does in Chinese -- via linking verb describes a subject pronoun.  
> **username_3**: @username_5: In 很严厉 or 严厉的, 严厉 is not separate the same way word stems are not separate words in English like separat is not a word out of separation.  
> **username_5**: @username_3: Yea this notion of "occurring in isolation" is something that I observed to be relevant to this issue. I said more [in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/111946/discussion-on-answer-by-dan-using--vs--to-describe-an-object), and you're welcome to add your views there.  

---

