<p>I think you need 'witness' = ‘见证’</p>

<p>朝鲜战争见证了美国与中国之间的战斗。</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T05:41:07.407Z
I'm marking this one as correct in keeping most with the original text. No one else has taken any objection to it. Thanks!
user9657
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T03:33:30.967Z
2015-04-06T03:33:30.967Z
Pedroski
<p>From your sentence and according to the Chinese grammar, yours isn't a right saying. "朝鲜战争" is an object of no life, which cannot have organs to "see" or "sense".  We can say this better below:</p>

<p><strong>透过</strong>朝鲜战争<strong>我们</strong>看到了美国和中国之间的战斗。(We see the REAL battle between China and USA <strong>through</strong> the Korean War).</p>

<p>In fact, the sentense you mentioned above has missed a subject. And it's ONLY used in the oral Chinese. We also have such things (This also occurs in English sometimes):</p>

<p>水壶开了！(The kittle is boiling).</p>

<p>实际上，是水壶的水开了（In fact, it's the WATHER in the kittle boiling!）</p>

<p>这种省略了许多主语和其他谓词的语法被成为“主题句”。</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T05:11:19.713Z
I see. So is this type of abstraction non-existent in Chinese? What about the answer given by @Pedroski, is that correct?
user9657
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T05:27:47.213Z
The sentence provided in this answer roughly translates to "From the Korean War we see the conflict/ fighting between America and the PRC." It is very different from the OP's sentence, which is "The Korean War saw fighting between America and the PRC."
monalisa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T08:14:27.620Z
Mona, o thee of enigmatic smile, thou mayst replace 'saw' with 'witnessed' in the aforementioned sentence, not one jot of a nuance of a meaning thereby changeth.
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T03:48:38.720Z
2015-04-06T03:48:38.720Z
xqMogvKW
<p>I'm trying to accurately translate an abstract use of "saw."</p>

<p>Example: the Korean War saw fighting between America and the PRC.</p>

<p>朝鲜战争看到了美国与中华人民共和国之间的战斗。</p>

<p>Now, I have no idea if that sentence is correct or not, but it demonstrates what I'm trying to get at. Is this an acceptable use of "saw" in Chinese? Is there another word to demonstrate this abstract use? Or do I need to find a more concrete way to say this?</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T03:21:22.220Z
Very interesting question, have an upvote! I'm working on it, I have my own translation, but I am alone today, so I want to check it first with someone Chinese and they are all sweeping tombs! This use of 'saw' = 'During ...........there was' so maybe you could just use '有了，有过‘， but that's not what you are after, right?
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T03:30:50.150Z
Right, I was considering something along those lines as a more concrete way of phrasing it. I'm just interested to find out if this abstraction carries over from English, since I've never really encountered it. Happy Qingming. :)
user9657
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-06T05:37:45.907Z
appears to be a dictionary question，i。e。 answered by online dictionaries （confirming answer ＃１：见证 ）s。e。g。iciba：see： 9. VERB 目睹;经历;见证 If a period of time （or a person） sees a particular change or event, it takes place during that period of time （or while that person is alive）
user6065
<translation><grammar><mandarin>
Chinese use of abstract "saw?"
# Chinese use of abstract "saw?"

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-04-05)

I'm trying to accurately translate an abstract use of "saw."

Example: the Korean War saw fighting between America and the PRC.

朝鲜战争看到了美国与中华人民共和国之间的战斗。

Now, I have no idea if that sentence is correct or not, but it demonstrates what I'm trying to get at. Is this an acceptable use of "saw" in Chinese? Is there another word to demonstrate this abstract use? Or do I need to find a more concrete way to say this?

Thanks.

**Tags:** translation, grammar, mandarin

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Very interesting question, have an upvote! I'm working on it, I have my own translation, but I am alone today, so I want to check it first with someone Chinese and they are all sweeping tombs! This use of 'saw' = 'During ...........there was' so maybe you could just use '有了，有过‘， but that's not what you are after, right?  
> **username_0**: Right, I was considering something along those lines as a more concrete way of phrasing it. I'm just interested to find out if this abstraction carries over from English, since I've never really encountered it. Happy Qingming. :)  
> **username_2**: appears to be a dictionary question，i。e。 answered by online dictionaries （confirming answer ＃１：见证 ）s。e。g。iciba：see： 9. VERB 目睹;经历;见证 If a period of time （or a person） sees a particular change or event, it takes place during that period of time （or while that person is alive）  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2015-04-06. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

I think you need 'witness' = ‘见证’

朝鲜战争见证了美国与中国之间的战斗。

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I'm marking this one as correct in keeping most with the original text. No one else has taken any objection to it. Thanks!  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2015-04-06. Score: 0

From your sentence and according to the Chinese grammar, yours isn't a right saying. "朝鲜战争" is an object of no life, which cannot have organs to "see" or "sense". We can say this better below:

**透过**朝鲜战争**我们**看到了美国和中国之间的战斗。(We see the REAL battle between China and USA **through** the Korean War).

In fact, the sentense you mentioned above has missed a subject. And it's ONLY used in the oral Chinese. We also have such things (This also occurs in English sometimes):

水壶开了！(The kittle is boiling).

实际上，是水壶的水开了（In fact, it's the WATHER in the kittle boiling!）

这种省略了许多主语和其他谓词的语法被成为“主题句”。

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I see. So is this type of abstraction non-existent in Chinese? What about the answer given by @username_1, is that correct?  
> **username_4**: The sentence provided in this answer roughly translates to "From the Korean War we see the conflict/ fighting between America and the PRC." It is very different from the OP's sentence, which is "The Korean War saw fighting between America and the PRC."  
> **username_1**: Mona, o thee of enigmatic smile, thou mayst replace 'saw' with 'witnessed' in the aforementioned sentence, not one jot of a nuance of a meaning thereby changeth.  

---

