分开来谈

[Konstantinos]

“知识” 两个字我始终认为它是要分开来谈的，“知” 就是知感，“识” 就是认识。

This is from the Standard Course Book of HSK5, section 22. How to translate the 分开来谈？

分开(to seperate)来(?)谈(to discuss)

I cannot make it make sense.

 

[yuechu]

I think it means that the two characters in the word are to be talked about separately. (and then the person goes on to analyze each of the two characters)
Let's see if someone else has a better translation!

 

[Konstantinos]

Hi yuechu. This I mean, why 分开来谈 is used? Why not 分别地谈 or 分开地谈？

I know that 分开 is a verb meaning to seperate. I don't know what 来 means. Why 分开来 is an adverb that means separately?

 

[Lolo zhang]

Hi yuechu. This I mean, why 分开来谈 is used? Why not 分别地谈 or 分开地谈？

I know that 分开 is a verb meaning to seperate. I don't know what 来 means. Why 分开来 is an adverb that means separately?

Personally, I think 分开来谈 has the same meaning as 分开谈（来 emphisize the meaning of separation). You can also say 分别去谈，分开去谈. But it's weird to say 分别(开)地谈.

来 : In this context, "来" functions as a directional complement. Directional complements in Chinese are used to indicate the direction or manner of an action. In this case, "来" adds a sense of coming or moving in the direction of separation.

分开(别)地谈 : This could also work to some extent, but "分开(别)来谈" is a more idiomatic and commonly used phrase when you want to emphasize discussing things separately or individually.

 

[Konstantinos]

Thank you Lolo zhang for your answer.

Another question in the same sentence: Why 它是要? Why not 它们是要？ The 知识 has two characters. So, the 它是要 is singular either because the 它 is referred to the word 知识 (not to the characters 知,识) or it is like "it is raining" in English: 它是要 = it needs: used as an expletive subject of an impersonal verb that expresses a simple condition or an action without implied reference to an agent.

I am right?

 

[skating-in-bc]

Syntax #1: 分開 + (來/去) VP ==> 來/去 is optional
失踪的那個小孩 大家分開(=分頭) (來/去)找 Let's search for the missing kid separately.
失踪的那個小孩 大家一起 (來/去)找 Let's search for the missing kid together.
失踪的那個小孩 大家慢慢 (來/去)找 Let's search for the missing kid in a leisurely manner.
"知識"這個詞 咱們分頭 (來/去)研究 Let's split up and conduct a research on the word "knowledge" separately.

把深衣(跟淺衣) 混在一起 (來/去)洗 to wash the dark-colored clothes together (with the light-colored ones).
把深衣(跟淺衣) 分開 (來/去)洗 to wash the dark-colored clothes separately (from the light-colored ones).

"來", as well as "去", can serve as a particle (助詞) BEFORE a verb (e.g., 找, 研究, 洗, 談) to add an emphatic tone (加強語氣, 表示動作意願). It can be deleted without changing the meaning of the sentence.

Syntax #2: 分開 + 來/去 VP ==> 來/去 is mandatory for disambiguity
建檔時, 把非婚同居夫妻分開, 虛增了在檔戶數 ==> "虚增了在檔戶數" is the outcome of "把非婚同居夫妻分開". However, we don't know if the outcome is intended or not.
建檔時, 把非婚同居夫妻分開 來/去虛增在檔戶數 ==> It becomes clear that the outcome is intended because the syntax clearly indicates that "虛增在檔戶數" is the purpose of "把非婚同居夫妻分開".

咱們把"知識"這個詞分開, 討論它的每個詞素 Let's break down the word "知識" and discuss each of its morphemes.
咱們把"知識"這個詞分開, 來/去討論它的每個詞素 Let's break down the word "知識" to discuss each of its morphemes.

"來", as well as "去", can serve as a purposive marker BEFORE a verb phrase to indicate purpose (目的). It functions somewhat like English "to" or "in order to".

Syntax #3: 分開來 + VP ==> "來" cannot be substituted with "去"
把苦瓜(跟豬骨) 合起來 煮 to combine and cook the bitter melon together (with the pork bones).
把苦瓜(跟豬骨) 合起去 煮
把他(跟其他戰犯) 綁起來 砍了 to tie and behead him (together with the other war prisoners).
把他(跟其他戰犯) 綁起去 砍了
他們把粉圓(跟奶茶) 分開來 吃了 They separated the tapioca balls (from the milk tea) and ate them.
他們把粉圓(跟奶茶) 分開去 吃了

咱們 把西瓜切開來 吃 (= 咱們把西瓜切開來 + 咱們吃) Let's cut open the watermelon and eat it.
西瓜是要切開來 吃的 (= (1) 西瓜是須要切開來 + 才吃的, that is, 吃西瓜, 是得把它切開來的; (2) 西瓜是打算要切開來的 + 西瓜是要吃的): (1) To eat the watermelon, we are supposed to cut it open. (2) The watermelon is meant to be cut open for consumption.
咱們 把它拆開來 談 (= 咱們把它拆開來 + 咱們談) Let's break it down into parts and discuss it. Let's discuss it by separating it into parts.
它是要拆開來 談的 (= 它是要拆開來 + 才談的, that is, 談它, 是得把它拆開來的) To discuss it, we are supposed to break it down into parts.
戀愛和婚姻 是要分開來 看的 (= 看待戀愛和婚姻, 是得把他們分開來的) Love and marriage shall be viewed as two separate issues.
"知識"這個詞 是要拆開來 談的 (= 談論"知識"這個詞, 是得把它拆開來的) To discuss the word "知識", we are supposed to break it down into parts.

When "來" is part of a phrasal verb (e.g., 合起來, 打開來, 切開來, 分開來), it cannot be substituted with 去 due to lexical restriction of collocation. In this case, "來" functions somewhat like English "up" as in "open up" (敞開來). To be more specific, it functions as an adverb to indicate intensity or completion of a movement to a position that is condusive to or ready for an activity (e.g., "談" in "把它拆開來談").

Why 它是要? Why not 它们是要？

它 refers to the word "知識", which is composed of two characters (兩個字).

它是要 = it needs

"它是要...的" means "It is meant to be..."
它 = it (referring to the word 知識)
是 = is
要 = meant to
是...的: adjectivization, changing from an action into a state (e.g., action: 我愛你 "I love you." --> state: 我是愛你的 "I AM in love with you.")

要: (1) 打算要 intend to, (2) 須要 ought to, need to
be meant to: (1) be intended to; (2) should, ought to

苦瓜是要跟豬骨一起煮的 The bitter melon is meant to be cooked together with the pork bones.
苦瓜是要跟豬骨分開煮的 The bitter melon is meant to be cooked separately from the pork bones.
它是要跟其他事項分開談的 It is meant to be discussed separately from other matters.

分开来谈 has the same meaning as 分开谈（来 emphisize the meaning of separation). You can also say 分别去谈，分开去谈.

You seem to be describing Syntax #1: 分開 + (來/去) VP ==> 來/去 is optional. In this structure (i.e., 分開|來談 or 分開|去談), "來" emphasizes 談, not 分開.

来 emphisize the meaning of separation...来 : In this context, "来" functions as a directional complement. Directional complements in Chinese are used to indicate the direction or manner of an action. In this case, "来" adds a sense of coming or moving in the direction of separation.

You seem to be describing Syntax #3: 分開來 + VP ==> "來" cannot be substituted with "去". While 分開來|談 is idiomatic, 分開去|談 is not. (While 站起來|說 is idiomatic, 站起去|說 is not.)

“知识” 两个字我始终认为它是要分开来谈的...How to translate the 分开来谈？

"知"、"識"(這)兩個字是要分開(來/去)談的 ==> Syntax #1.
"知"、"識"(這)兩個字, 我始終認為 它們是要分開(來/去)談的 Speaking of the two morphemes "知" and "識", I always think they are meant to be discussed separately. ==> Topicalization of the phrase "知識兩個字".

However, your sentence actually is:
"知識"--(含)兩個字--我始終認為 它是要分開來 談的 Speaking of the word「知識」, which is composed of two characters, I always think to discuss it we are supposed to separate it into parts. ==> Topicalization of the word "知識".
It is transformed from: "知識"--(含)兩個字--是要分開來 談的 ==> Syntax #3.

Why 它是要? Why not 它们是要？

Essentially you are asking why the speaker wants to topicalize the word "知識" rather than "知、識兩個字". The reason is very straightforward: The topic of the discourse is intended to be about the word 知識, not about 知 and 識 as separate, independent entities.

 

[Konstantinos]

Thank you skating-in-bc for your detailed answer.

One more general question about the 它. In some Indo-European languages, including Greek and English the "it" is used as an expletive subject of an impersonal verb that expresses a simple condition or an action without implied reference to an agent. For example we say "it is raining", without caring who is this "it". It is not the sky or the cloud.

What about Chinese? Is there this choice? Something like 它正在下雨 or 它下雨。No?

 

[skating-in-bc]

Mandarin does have expletive pronoun constructions (e.g., 管它下不下雨我都會去 I will go no matter it rains or not). However, the pronoun subject (它) of your sentence is referential, not semantically empty. The interpretation of an expletive subject is not a plausible option in this case.