<blockquote>
<p>那本书找了很长时间也没找到。</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Tang Ho's answer is right.  Strictly speaking, the subject should not be omitted, especially in writing in this case.</p>
<p>However, I'd also like to point out that colloquially the sentence might be ok to say when you could apply correct emphasis to it.  I think most of non-native speakers could not make it.</p>
<p>As an exercise for identifying and correcting errors, we would consider that it's missing the subject.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T11:27:22.763Z
+1 As a native Cantonese speaker, I often talk like this. e.g. I sometimes say something like 那套餐根本吃不飽 whereas saying 那套餐根本不夠吃 would have been the correct sentence. It seems like intrinsically, Chinese users allow for such ambiguity in our speech, which I just realized. But of course, it may just be me that speaks like this.
Daniel Cheung
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T11:58:12.993Z
@DanielCheung 那套餐根本吃不饱 indeed sounds very natural to my ear.  haha
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T12:43:27.680Z
we omit subject or object all the time, but only when it is strongly implied the subject or object is known 那套餐根本吃不饱-- 當然是人吃不饱 (吃不饱人)
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T12:53:40.917Z
@TangHo 同理: "那本书找了很长时间也没找到" ~ 当然是人找书啦，书怎么会找人呢？
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T12:56:11.053Z
但不知是誰在找書，餐吃不吃得飽就不管是誰也一樣
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T13:05:35.210Z
@TangHo 是谁找书可以不用管，这句话所表达的意思是: 找这本书很困难，花了很多人力都没找到。说话的人本意不是想表达到底是谁花的时间去找。
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T09:01:39.503Z
2020-07-06T09:01:39.503Z
dan
<p>To correct a sentence, is a basic training in our chinese lesson. keep in mind the basic structure:</p>
<p>主语(subject)  + 谓语(predicate) + 宾语 (object)</p>
<p>so, <code>那本书找了很长时间也没找到</code> is not match the above pattern.</p>
<p>after simplification, its meaning is: <code>那本书没找到</code>.</p>
<p>and we can easily find:</p>
<p>那本书 is the object   ( in fact 书 is the object, 那本 is 宾语)
没找到 is the predicate.  ( in fact 找 is the predicate, 没, 到 are the 副词)</p>
<p>so, final question: who has a action of finding the book? (你?我?她?)  it's missing in the original sentence.</p>
<h1>so the corrected sentence is:</h1>
<p>我找了那本书很长时间,也没找到.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-12T02:20:54.187Z
2020-07-12T02:20:54.187Z
Siwei
<p>You can also correct it by adding 疼爱它的妈妈 at the end.</p>
<p>Just to set the scene:</p>
<p>从前，在幻想世界的书国，一本书宝宝和它的妈妈去散步。母亲在路上碰到它的老朋友，便停下来跟她聊了一会儿天。书宝宝正等得无聊，突然看见一只美丽的蝴蝶，便去追蝴蝶了。也不知道追了多久，停下来才发现，周围是一片森林，妈妈已经不在身边，它也不知道要怎么找到回去的路。</p>
<p>那本书找了很长时间也没找到<strong>疼爱它的妈妈</strong>。<br />
That book searched for a long time, but couldn't find its mother, who loved it so dearly.</p>
<p>妈妈救我！</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-13T01:00:06.457Z
2020-07-13T01:00:06.457Z
Pedroski
<p>A subject in the sentence is missing</p>
<p>The following sentences would all be correct:</p>
<p>那本书<strong>我</strong>找了很长时间也没找到.</p>
<p>那本书<strong>他</strong>找了很长时间也没找到.</p>
<p>那本书<strong>大卫</strong>找了很长时间也没找到.</p>
<p>We omit subject all the time in dialogues, but only when it is strongly implied the subject is known</p>
<p>Example:</p>
<p>A: &quot;我找到了不少作家X 未成名之前寫的書。&quot;</p>
<p>B: &quot;那作家X用不同筆名寫的那本你也找到了嗎？&quot;</p>
<p>A: &quot;那本书(我)找了很长时间也没找到。&quot;</p>
<p>In this dialogue, B knows the subject in the last sentence is A himself. therefore omitting 我 is acceptable on B's point of view. Nonetheless, 那本书找了很长时间也没找到 is still ungrammatical</p>
<p>Note: You can replace 很长时间 with 很久. The meaning will not change</p>
<p><em>The above answer is based on Standard Written Chinese (SWC)</em></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T08:43:56.390Z
Yes，without a definite subject, it is not clear who exactly  is looking for the book.
Wayne Cheah
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T10:25:32.317Z
Please let me point out a small mistake in your analysis: 那本书 is the *theme*, and it's the *object* of the whole sentence (it's what is being searched). What is missing is the *subject* (who performs the search) *before* the verb 找
blackgreen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T10:28:58.777Z
@blackgreen I said "It sounds like, but it is not true" -- "那本书找了很长时间也没找到我" would make 那本书 the subject
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T10:33:09.330Z
@TangHo allow me to insist. the *subject* of a sentence is what does or is something. In case of a transitive verb as 找, it's the agent. In this sentence 那本书 is not an agent. It's the *theme*, whereas 我/他/大卫 is the actual agent of the search.
blackgreen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T10:36:17.217Z
Ok, I understand what you're saying. I suggest to change this sentence *(It sounds like the subject is 那本书. All it needs is an object after the verb 找到 to make it true)* to *In this example, it sounds like the subject is 那本书)*. The second part looks confusing to me
blackgreen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-07T10:54:43.097Z
@TangHo I'm not too familiar with this aspect in Chinese grammar though. Going through the Hong Kong education system, I've been told that omitting the subject in a sentences other than imperative forms a grammatically wrong sentence 病句. Do you have any sources on whether doing such is acceptable, (in prescriptive grammar in the edu. system)? I'm quite curious. Because this answer does seem a bit hand-wavy.
Daniel Cheung
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-07T11:10:45.200Z
@Daniel Cheung I didn't say it is acceptable. I said omitting the subject (我/他/大卫) would leave the topic 那本书 in the position of the actual subject
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-07T11:46:47.887Z
@Daniel Cheung,  I edited my answer, does it seem less confusing to you now?
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-07T12:59:16.290Z
@TangHo I see. Never mind then. I was seriously interested if you know if there are sources/guidelines for educators saying in Standard Chinese, subjects must not be omitted in sentences except for imperatives. (I can't find any official documents.) I was told leaving subjects out creates 病句, which would be mistakes in an exam and marks are deducted. As a native speaker, I find omitting subjects completely acceptable in regular speech, and I use it for the convenience or to intentionally add ambiguity, (e.g. to avoid embarrassing situations or to withhold information).
Daniel Cheung
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T08:17:21.453Z
2020-07-07T23:51:03.257Z
2020-07-07T23:51:03.257Z
Tang Ho
<p>This sentence comes from my homework.</p>
<pre><code>   那本书找了很长时间也没找到. 
</code></pre>
<p>(1) What's wrong with this sentence?</p>
<p>(2) How can this sentence be corrected?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T08:04:23.253Z
Sorry but I don't see why it's wrong.
Toosky Hierot
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T08:21:36.013Z
Would it be possible to include your own thoughts on this problem please?
Becky 李蓓
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T08:32:54.770Z
The question asked: *"How can 那本书找了很长时间也没找到 be corrected?"* Meaning she thinks it isn't correct. It would make the question better if she points out why she thinks so.
Tang Ho
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-06T17:30:33.380Z
Hi all, it is in my corect-the-sentence homework.
Jenny
<grammar><sentence-structure>
How can 那本书找了很长时间也没找到 be corrected?
# How can 那本书找了很长时间也没找到 be corrected?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-07-06)

This sentence comes from my homework.

```
   那本书找了很长时间也没找到. 

```

(1) What's wrong with this sentence?

(2) How can this sentence be corrected?

**Tags:** grammar, sentence-structure

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Sorry but I don't see why it's wrong.  
> **username_2**: Would it be possible to include your own thoughts on this problem please?  
> **username_3**: The question asked: *"How can 那本书找了很长时间也没找到 be corrected?"* Meaning she thinks it isn't correct. It would make the question better if she points out why she thinks so.  
> **username_0**: Hi all, it is in my corect-the-sentence homework.  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2020-07-06. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

A subject in the sentence is missing

The following sentences would all be correct:

那本书**我**找了很长时间也没找到.

那本书**他**找了很长时间也没找到.

那本书**大卫**找了很长时间也没找到.

We omit subject all the time in dialogues, but only when it is strongly implied the subject is known

Example:

A: "我找到了不少作家X 未成名之前寫的書。"

B: "那作家X用不同筆名寫的那本你也找到了嗎？"

A: "那本书(我)找了很长时间也没找到。"

In this dialogue, B knows the subject in the last sentence is A himself. therefore omitting 我 is acceptable on B's point of view. Nonetheless, 那本书找了很长时间也没找到 is still ungrammatical

Note: You can replace 很长时间 with 很久. The meaning will not change

*The above answer is based on Standard Written Chinese (SWC)*

> **Comments:**
> **username_8**: Yes，without a definite subject, it is not clear who exactly  is looking for the book.  
> **username_9**: Please let me point out a small mistake in your analysis: 那本书 is the *theme*, and it's the *object* of the whole sentence (it's what is being searched). What is missing is the *subject* (who performs the search) *before* the verb 找  
> **username_3**: @username_9 I said "It sounds like, but it is not true" -- "那本书找了很长时间也没找到我" would make 那本书 the subject  
> **username_9**: @username_3 allow me to insist. the *subject* of a sentence is what does or is something. In case of a transitive verb as 找, it's the agent. In this sentence 那本书 is not an agent. It's the *theme*, whereas 我/他/大卫 is the actual agent of the search.  
> **username_9**: Ok, I understand what you're saying. I suggest to change this sentence *(It sounds like the subject is 那本书. All it needs is an object after the verb 找到 to make it true)* to *In this example, it sounds like the subject is 那本书)*. The second part looks confusing to me  
> **username_5**: @username_3 I'm not too familiar with this aspect in Chinese grammar though. Going through the Hong Kong education system, I've been told that omitting the subject in a sentences other than imperative forms a grammatically wrong sentence 病句. Do you have any sources on whether doing such is acceptable, (in prescriptive grammar in the edu. system)? I'm quite curious. Because this answer does seem a bit hand-wavy.  
> **username_3**: @username_5 I didn't say it is acceptable. I said omitting the subject (我/他/大卫) would leave the topic 那本书 in the position of the actual subject  
> **username_3**: @username_5,  I edited my answer, does it seem less confusing to you now?  
> **username_5**: @username_3 I see. Never mind then. I was seriously interested if you know if there are sources/guidelines for educators saying in Standard Chinese, subjects must not be omitted in sentences except for imperatives. (I can't find any official documents.) I was told leaving subjects out creates 病句, which would be mistakes in an exam and marks are deducted. As a native speaker, I find omitting subjects completely acceptable in regular speech, and I use it for the convenience or to intentionally add ambiguity, (e.g. to avoid embarrassing situations or to withhold information).  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-07-06. Score: 2

> 那本书找了很长时间也没找到。

username_3 Ho's answer is right. Strictly speaking, the subject should not be omitted, especially in writing in this case.

However, I'd also like to point out that colloquially the sentence might be ok to say when you could apply correct emphasis to it. I think most of non-native speakers could not make it.

As an exercise for identifying and correcting errors, we would consider that it's missing the subject.

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: +1 As a native Cantonese speaker, I often talk like this. e.g. I sometimes say something like 那套餐根本吃不飽 whereas saying 那套餐根本不夠吃 would have been the correct sentence. It seems like intrinsically, Chinese users allow for such ambiguity in our speech, which I just realized. But of course, it may just be me that speaks like this.  
> **username_4**: @username_5 那套餐根本吃不饱 indeed sounds very natural to my ear.  haha  
> **username_3**: we omit subject or object all the time, but only when it is strongly implied the subject or object is known 那套餐根本吃不饱-- 當然是人吃不饱 (吃不饱人)  
> **username_4**: @username_3 同理: "那本书找了很长时间也没找到" ~ 当然是人找书啦，书怎么会找人呢？  
> **username_3**: 但不知是誰在找書，餐吃不吃得飽就不管是誰也一樣  
> **username_4**: @username_3 是谁找书可以不用管，这句话所表达的意思是: 找这本书很困难，花了很多人力都没找到。说话的人本意不是想表达到底是谁花的时间去找。  

---

### Answer by username_6 on 2020-07-12. Score: 0

To correct a sentence, is a basic training in our chinese lesson. keep in mind the basic structure:

主语(subject) + 谓语(predicate) + 宾语 (object)

so, `那本书找了很长时间也没找到` is not match the above pattern.

after simplification, its meaning is: `那本书没找到`.

and we can easily find:

那本书 is the object ( in fact 书 is the object, 那本 is 宾语)
没找到 is the predicate. ( in fact 找 is the predicate, 没, 到 are the 副词)

so, final question: who has a action of finding the book? (你?我?她?) it's missing in the original sentence.

# so the corrected sentence is:

我找了那本书很长时间,也没找到.


---

### Answer by username_7 on 2020-07-13. Score: 0

You can also correct it by adding 疼爱它的妈妈 at the end.

Just to set the scene:

从前，在幻想世界的书国，一本书宝宝和它的妈妈去散步。母亲在路上碰到它的老朋友，便停下来跟她聊了一会儿天。书宝宝正等得无聊，突然看见一只美丽的蝴蝶，便去追蝴蝶了。也不知道追了多久，停下来才发现，周围是一片森林，妈妈已经不在身边，它也不知道要怎么找到回去的路。

那本书找了很长时间也没找到**疼爱它的妈妈**。  
That book searched for a long time, but couldn't find its mother, who loved it so dearly.

妈妈救我！


---

