Application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation of bị and được into english

HANOI PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY N02
FOREIGN LANGUAGE FACULTY

TRAN THI THU PHUONG

APPLICATION OF FORMAL AND DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE TO
THE TRANSLATION OF “BỊ”AND “ĐƯỢC” INTO ENGLISH

(SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS IN ENGLISH)

SUPERVISOR: NGUYEN VAN DEN, M.A

Hanoi, 2013

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to take this chance to express my greatest
gratitude to Mr. Nguyen Van Den, M.A., my supervisor, for invaluable support and
masterful guidance as well as indispensable suggestions throughout the process of
writing the thesis.
Besides, I wish to thank all the lectures at Hanoi Pedagogical University
Number 2, especially the lecturers in the Foreign Language Faculty for their
dedicated instructions during my years of university work.
I also wish to thank my brother, who is Dinh Van Diep, for his materials in
relation to Vietnamese passives and my close friends for their enthusiasm and
kindness in helping me collect valuable reference documents and conducting the
survey.

Last, I owe a debt of gratitude to my beloved family, for their whole –
hearted encouragement and endless support.

ii


ASBTRACT

It is understandable that words in Vietnamese shoulder diversity of
semantics as well as of syntactic structures. One word can possess more than one
meaning and can serve more than one grammatical function. This is absolutely true
for the case of bị and được. In different contexts, these words may have different
functions and meanings, thus making it possible for speakers to express different
meanings in different syntactic roles. As a consequence, learners tend to make
errors concerned with translation of bị and được into English.
Therefore, this research work entails studying the functions and meanings of
bị and được and structures formed by bị and được as well as conducting a survey
for error analysis. Besides, it is essential to find out the application of formal and
dynamic equivalence to get clear methods in translation of bị and được in certain
types of structures.
Based on the results of the survey, the types of errors and causes have been
found. Solutions to the problems have been suggested.

iii


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
Title: Application of Formal and Dynamic Equivalence to the Translation
of “Bị” and “Được” into English
(Graduation paper submitted in partial fulfillment of

the Degree of Bachelor of Arts in English)

I certify that no part of this report has been copied or reproduced by me from
any other person’s work without acknowledgements and that the report is
originally written by me under strict guidance from my supervisor.

Date submitted: May 2013

Student

Supervisor

Tran Thi Thu Phuong

Nguyen Van Den, M.A.

iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................. i
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... ii
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP .................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................... iv

PART ONE
INTRODUCTION
I. Rationale ........................................................................................................... 1
II. Research presupposition ................................................................................. 2
III. Research objectives ........................................................................................ 2

IV. Research scope ............................................................................................... 3
V. Research tasks ................................................................................................. 3
Vi. Research methods ........................................................................................... 3
VII. Significance of the proposed research ......................................................... 4
VIII. Design of the research work ....................................................................... 4

PART TWO
DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION THEORY
I.1. Literature review in brief .............................................................................. 6
I.2. Overview of translation theory ..................................................................... 7
I.2.1. Translation definition .................................................................................... 7
I.2.2. Translation methods and procedures ............................................................. 8
I.2.2.1. Word – for – word translation .................................................................... 8
I.2.2.2. Literal translation ....................................................................................... 8
I.2.2.3. Free translation........................................................................................... 8
I.2.2.4. Idiomatic translation................................................................................... 8
I.2.2.5. Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 9
I.2.2.6. Loan word translation................................................................................. 9
v


I.2.3. Translation strategies .................................................................................... 9
I.2.4. Translation equivalence............................................................................... 10
I.2.4.1. Dynamic translation ................................................................................. 11
I.2.4.1. Formal translation .................................................................................... 12
I.2.4.3 Modification of dynamic equivalence and formal correspondence ............ 13

CHAPTER TWO: GRAMMATICAL FEATURES AND MEANINGS
OF BỊ AND ĐƯỢC

II.1. Verbs in Vietnamese................................................................................... 14
II.1.1. Dependent and independent verbs .............................................................. 14
II.1.2. Transitive and intransitive verbs ................................................................ 15
II.2. Grammatical features of bị and được ........................................................ 15
II.2.1. Bị and được play a necessary role in forming passive constructions........... 16
II.2.2. Bị and được act as real verbs ...................................................................... 19
II.2.3. Bị and được act as modal verbs ................................................................. 20
II.3 Meanings of bị and được ............................................................................. 21
CHAPTER THREE: COMMON ERRORS IN THE TRANSLATION OF
BỊ AND ĐƯỢC INTO ENGLISH
III.1. Survey ........................................................................................................ 24
III.1.1. Purpose of the survey ............................................................................... 24
III.1.2. Population of the survey ........................................................................... 25
III.1.3. Type of the survey .................................................................................... 25
III.1.4. Construction of the test ............................................................................. 25
III.1.5. Preparation of the survey .......................................................................... 26
III.1.5.1. Tests items ............................................................................................. 26
III.1.5.2. Arrangement of the test items ................................................................ 26
III.1.6. Administration of the try – out.................................................................. 27
III.1.6.1. Preparation of the try – out .................................................................... 27
III.1.6.2. Try – out ................................................................................................ 27
III.1.7. Methods of data analysis .......................................................................... 27
vi


III.1.8. Results of the survey ................................................................................ 27
III.2. Common errors and causes ...................................................................... 28
III.2.1 Common errors in the translation of sentences in which bị and được act as
real verbs .................................................................................................... 28
III.2.2 Common errors in the translation of sentences in which bị and được act as

modal verbs ................................................................................................ 29
III.2.3 Common errors in the translation of sentences in which the word được
denotes results ............................................................................................ 30
III.2.4 Common errors in the translation of sentences in which bị and được act as
auxiliary verbs ............................................................................................ 31
III.2.5 Common errors in the translation of sentences in which bị and được appear
in special expressions ................................................................................. 32

CHAPTER FOUR
APPLICATION OF FORMAL AND DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE TO THE
TRANSLATION OF BỊ AND ĐƯỢC INTO ENGLISH

IV.1. Application of formal equivalence to the translation of bị and được into
English ................................................................................................................ 33
IV.1.1. Application of formal equivalence to the translation of sentences in which
bị and được act as functional words in passive constructions...................... 33
IV.1.2. Application of formal equivalence to the translation of sentences in which
bị and được act as real verbs ....................................................................... 35
IV.2. Application of dynamic equivalence to the translation of bị and được
into English ......................................................................................................... 37
IV.2.1. Application of dynamic equivalence to the translation of sentences in
which bị and được act as function words in passive constructions .............. 37
IV.2.2. Application of dynamic equivalence to the translation of sentences in
which bị and được act as real verbs ............................................................ 40

vii


IV.2.3. Application of dynamic equivalence to the translation of sentences in
which bị and được act as modal verbs ........................................................ 41

IV.2.4. Application of dynamic equivalence to the translation of sentences in
which bị and được appear in special expressions ....................................... 42
IV.2.4.1. References to được ................................................................................ 42
IV.2.4.2. References to bị ..................................................................................... 43

PART THREE
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION................................................................................................... 45
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 47
APPENDICES .................................................................................................... 50

viii


PART ONE
INTRODUCTION

I. RATIONALE
People’s life is changing day by day. Exchange and learning from each other
are essential culture demands of human beings. One of the methods to satisfy these
demands is studying foreign languages. There are thousands of different languages
to choose from, but at the top of the list is English. As it is spoken all over the
world and people learn it as their first or second language. Thanks to English the
distance between people and countries is becoming shorter and shorter.
Realizing the importance of English most people nowadays have been
learning English. However, few of them deeply understand this language as well as
its cultural characteristics through the meaning of words. As they do not realize
that behind a word there are many things to discuss. So, sometimes they are
surprised by the diversity in the meaning of a word in communication and
academic writing.

It is certain that one of the most effective ways to understand the expression
in one language of what has been expressed in another is translation. Thus through
translation, highly advanced international communities can be created despite their
differences or similarities in culture and their level of civilization and superiority.
As Vietnamese students who are learning English, we would like to research
into the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation of bị and
được in Vietnamese into English. Actually, we chose these words as we think that
behind these words there must be many interesting structures and expressions,
especially those relating to culture. Moreover, bị and được play many roles in
forming sentences. They can act as ordinary verbs or modalities in simple
sentences or auxiliaries in passive constructions. That is why English learners have
to face many difficulties in translating bị and được in Vietnamese into English. For
example:

1


Nam bị một con hai.
Nam was received a two.
Furthermore, as a prospective translator, I would like to make a contribution
to English translation in Vietnam. For the reasons above, this study is conducted
which focuses on common errors in the translation of bị and được into English and
the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to translation of bị and được
into English.

II. RESEARCH PRESUPPOSITION
With regard to the error quoted above, the problem is with translation. The
correct versions could be:
Nam got a two [for his math].
Some questions are raised:

1. What are the semantic and syntactic structures that the words bị and được
possess?
2. What kinds of errors in translating bị and được into English are made by the
third – year English majors at Hanoi Pedagogical University N02?
3. What is the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation of
bị and được into English?

III. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The study is aimed at the following goals:
1. To find out the semantic and syntactic structures that the words bị and được
possess.
2. To find out the kinds of errors in translating bị and được in Vietnamese into
English made by the third – year English majors at Hanoi Pedagogical University
N02.
3. To find out the causes of the errors in translating bị and được in Vietnamese into
English made by the third – year English majors at Hanoi Pedagogical University
N02.
2


4. To find out the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation
of bị and được into English

IV. RESEARCH SCOPE
The general research area of this study is translation.
The phenomenon is the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to
the translation of bị and được in Vietnamese into English. The errors in translating
bị and được in Vietnamese into English made by the third – year English majors at
Hanoi Pedagogical University No2 are also briefly mentioned.
The population involved in the study is 60 students of K36A at Hanoi

Pedagogical University No2.

V. RESEARCH TASKS
The study involves fulfilling the following tasks
1. To study the semantic and syntactic structures that the words bị and được
possess.
2. To conduct a survey to find out the error types and causes. On the basis of the
findings, possible solutions to the problems are sought to minimize the students’
errors.
3. To find out the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation
of bị and được into English

VI. RESEARCH METHODS
To achieve the objectives of the study, the following methods have been
applied:
1. Collection of documents from books listed in the references
2. Consulting the supervisor, experienced teachers and friends
3. Defining words and meanings
4. Conducting a survey and analyzing the results

3


VII. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPOSED RESEARCH
Translation is the replacement of a text in one language with an equivalent
text in another language. However, this process is not an easy one. Therefore, it is
essential for translators to have better treatment to anticipate errors. After the
research, it is hoped that the result will be helpful to provide:
1. Input for learners of English in order to minimize their errors in translating bị
and được into English.

2. Input for translators with information on error types and solutions to the
problems so that they can have good methods of translating bị and được into
English.
3. Application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation of bị and được
into English is also presented.
This study is also beneficial to anyone who is interested in Vietnamese – English
translation.

VIII. DESIGN OF THE RESEARCH WORK
The research work has three main parts, namely Introduction, Development,
and Conclusion. The part “Development” consists of four sections. Chapter one is
entitled “Overview of translation theory”. It consists of two sections. Section one
review literature in brief. The second one deals with things related to translation
theory such as translation definition, translation equivalence, translation methods
and procedures.
Chapter two is named “Grammatical features and meanings of bị and được”.
This chapter has two sections. Verbs in Vietnamese is the section one. Section two
explains the grammatical features of the words bị and được. Section three presents
the meanings of the words bị and được.
The third chapter is called “Common errors in the translation of bị and được
into English”. It has three sections. Section one is devoted to the survey. The
second deals with error types and causes.

4


Application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the translation of bị and
được into English is presented in the fourth chapter. Section one illustrated the
application of formal equivalence to the translation of bị and được into English.
The second one displayed the application of dynamic equivalence to the translation

of bị and được into English.

5


PART TWO
DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION THEORY

I.1. LITERATURE REVIEW IN BRIEF
As components in the Vietnamese grammatical system, bị and được have
various functions in sentences. They have sufficient properties of a normal verb
and possess all the features of a verb. They also act as modalities or auxiliaries in
passive constructions. Due to the diversity of semantic and syntactic structures that
the words bị and được possess, there are a great number of researchers who have
been concerned about the components bị and được. Generally, they focus their
attention on the lexical meaning and grammatical status of the words bị and được.
Some others concentrate on translating one kind of structure which contains bị and
được (passive voice).
In the book Ngữ Pháp Việt Nam, Ban (2009) offers a formula for
Vietnamese passive constructions in which he considers bị and được as elements
forming passive structures. However, he also states that bị and được also can act as
modalities and ordinary verbs.
Cổn and Diên (2004) in the article Dạng bị động và vấn đề câu bị động
trong tiếng Việt state that the affected patient in passive sentences is the agent in
the active counterpart; and the verb in active counterparts becomes the verb of
passives with an addition of the auxiliaries bị and được. They also claim that, in
different contexts, these words may have different functions, thus making it
possible for speakers to express different meanings in different syntactic roles.

Thản (1977) in the book Động từ trong tiếng Việt concludes that bị and
được still keep their full meanings and grammatical characteristics of main verbs
and not those of function words, and the subsequent constituents are all their
complements.
6


In the article Các Phương thức Chuyển dịch Câu bị động tiếng Anh sang
tiếng Việt (Diên, 2005) shows some common modes of translating English passive
sentences into Vietnamese. She also shows some equivalent structures in English
to those which include bị and được in Vietnamese.
In short, much research has been done on the semantic and syntactic
structures that bị and được possess. However, translating bị and được in
Vietnamese into English is a new aspect. Therefore, it is essential to have a
comprehensive study of the application of formal and dynamic equivalence to the
translation of bị and được in Vietnamese into English.

I.2. OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION THEORY
I.2.1. Translation definition
Translation has a very wide range of connotations. Different linguists have
put the definition in various ways. And obviously, it is a real challenge to give a
precise one. The difficulty is not the fact that they are conflicting but as Nida
(1982) who is recognizably the leading scholar of translation, says that their
focuses are different. In order to have the relatively overall picture of translation,
outstanding figures’ names in translation studies should be put forward. Cartford
(1965) sees translation as “the replacement of a text in one language (Source
Language) (SL) by an equivalent text in another language (Target Language) (TL).
Equivalent text is defined in greater detail “translation is the expression in another
language (or TL) of what has been expressed in another, SL, preserving semantic
and stylistic equivalence”. Hatim & Mason (1990), however, focus more on the

communication purpose of translation rather than the semantic and stylistic
features: Translation is a communicative process which takes place within a social
context”. Meaning is the emphasis in Nida’s definition (1964): “Translating
consists of producing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent to the
message of the SL, first in meaning and second in style.”
In spite of the differences in the expressions, the above definitions share a
common feature, which is to find equivalence that best preserve the features of the
7


original by the choice of appropriate TL’s semantic, lexical, grammatical
structures, cultural context or even communication situations.
I.2.2 Translation methods and procedures
The central problem of translating has always been whether to translate
literally of freely. Newmark (1988) points out that the differences in the emphasis
(SL or TL) have resulted in a variety of translation methods and procedures.
Due to the time constraint and within the framework of the thesis, the author
presents only translation methods, procedures and strategies that match the content
of the study, or can serve as a firm foundation for the research according the study
of Newmark (1988).
I.2.2.1 Word – for – word translation
This is often demonstrated as interlinear translation, with the TL
immediately below the SL words. The SL word – order is preserved and the words
translated singly by the most common meanings, out of context. Cultural words are
translated literally. The main use of word – for – word translation is either to
understand the mechanics of the SL or to construe a difficult text as a pre –
translation process.
I.2.2.2 Literal translation
The SL grammatical constructions are converted to the nearest TL
equivalents but the lexical words are again translated singly, out of context. As a

pre – translation process, this indicates the problems to be solved.
I.2.2.3 Free translation
Free translation reproduces the matter without the manner, or the content
without the form of the original. Usually it is a paraphrase much longer than the
original, a so – called ‘intralingual translation’, often prolix and pretentious, and
not translation at all
I.2.2.4 Idiomatic translation
Idiomatic translation reproduces the ‘message’ of the original but tends to
distort nuances of the meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms where
these do not exist in the original.
8


I.2.2.5 Abbreviations
Abbreviations have always been a common type of pseudo – neologism.
I.2.2.6 Loan word translation
Loan word translation is the process of transferring a SL word to TL text as
a translation process.
I.2.3 Translation strategies: Domestication and Foreignization
In translation studies the two basic strategies are domestication and
foreignization, which are in practice exclusive. Domestication refers to the target –
culture oriented translation strategy by which unusual expressions to the TL are
abandoned and turned into some familiar ones so as to make the translated text
intelligible and easy for the target readers. Foreignization is a source – culture
oriented translation strategy that strives to preserve the foreign flavor as much as
possible in order to transfer SL and source culture into the target ones.
The selection of translation strategies is not decided by which one is superior
but by various factors operating at different levels where both strategies have their
respective advantages. They respectively serve different translation purposes and
meet the needs of different types and readerships. Therefore, given different factors

influencing the translator’s selection of translation strategies, the objective
existence of cultural and linguistic differences and indispensable role respectively
played by either domestication or foreignization in cultural communication and
exchange, a dialectical and complementary relationship should be established
between domestication and foreignization.
I.2.4 Translation equivalence
The term equivalence in translation has been discussed for a long time. It has
sometimes been said that the overriding purpose of any translation should be to
achieve equivalent effects, i.e. to produce the same effect on the readership of the
translation as was obtained on the readership of the original.
Translation defined by many scholars from different points of view. Some of
the translation scholars defined their theory as source–oriented theory, others
regarded it the target –oriented theory. There are also theories choosing a place in
9


between; however, all translation theories are related to the notion of equivalence
in one way or another. Hence, equivalence plays a crucial role in translation.
Jackobson (1959) makes a contribution to the theoretical analysis of
translation. He introduces the concept of equivalence in difference. He suggests
three kinds of equivalence known as:
- Intralingual ( within one language, i.e. rewording or paraphrase)
- Interlingual ( between two languages)
- Intersemiotic ( between sign systems)
Baker (1992) defines four kinds of equivalents as follows:
- Equivalence that can appear at word level and above word level, when
translating from one language into another.
- Grammatical equivalence, when referring to the diversity of grammatical
categories across languages.
- Textual equivalence when referring to the equivalence between a SL text

and a TL text in terms of information and cohesion.
- Pragmatic equivalence, when referring to imprimaturs and strategies of
avoidance during the translation process.
Nida (1964) argues that there are two different types of equivalence, namely
formal equivalence – which in the second edition by Nida is referred to as formal
correspondence and dynamic equivalence. Formal correspondence focuses
attention on the message itself, in both form and content, unlike dynamic
equivalence which is based upon the principle of the equivalence effect. This part
gives a critical review of Eugene.A. Nida’s translation theory of dynamic
equivalence and formal equivalence with special reference to the translation
between English and Vietnamese, for the purpose of confirming the applicability
of dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence to Vietnamese- English
translation, to be more specific, in the translation of bị and được into English.

10


I.2.4.1 Dynamic Equivalence
A dynamic equivalence, as defined by Nida (1982), is to reproduce “in terms
of the degree to which the receptors of the message in the receptor language
respond to it in substantially the same manner as the receptor in the source
language. This response can never be identical, for the cultural and historical
settings are too different, but there should be a high degree of equivalence of
response…”
Nida (1982) thus categorizes the kernel sentences of a language into seven
types, in other words, the surface structure of any language is the logic
organization of those kernel sentences, which justifies the possibility of dynamic
equivalence between different ways of expression within one language. He,
therefore, concludes that all languages have the same capability of expressing by
saying: "Anything that can be said in one language can certainly be said in another

language…", (Nida, 1982, p.64) with reasonable accuracy by establishing
equivalent points of reference in the receptor's culture and matching his cognitive
framework by restructuring the constitutive elements of the message.
So it can be concluded that the essence of dynamic equivalence is the
receptor's response, in Nida's own term, "the degree to which the receptors of the
message in the receptor language respond to it in substantially the same manner as
the receptors in the source language" (Nida and Taber, 1982: 68). The reaction or
response is based on the comprehensive reception of the message, not only
understanding the meaning or content, but also feeling in the way the original
readers do. By laying stress on the receptor's response, he underlines the
improvement to the source text by the receptor's subjectivity and aesthetic sense.
In other words, the dynamic approach advocates a more readable approach
that does not provide an exact rendering of the text, but rather focuses on
communicating the meaning of the original. It is a thought-for-thought, meaning
driven translation that attempts to produce the same response in the contemporary
reader that the original did on its audience. Dynamic equivalence translations
generally use shorter words and sentences. Difficult theological terms are
11


expressed in easy to understand phrases rather than complicated words. (An
example is using “set right with God” in place of “justification.”) Dynamic
equivalence translations do what the very earliest translators did, put the text into
the “vernacular,” the common language of the reader.
By far, the strongest argument against the dynamic equivalency approach
relates to interpretation. By definition, the translator using the dynamic approach
has to interpret the meaning of the original. This can open the door to all sorts of
errors, including misunderstanding, influence of the current culture and translator
bias. This last one often shows up in denominational bias.
I.2.4.2 Formal Equivalence

Nida (1982) puts forward dynamic equivalence in opposition to formal
correspondence. In speaking of naturalness, he is strongly against translations formal fidelity, with resulting unfaithfulness to the content and impact of the
message. Basically, a formal equivalence translation, as Nida (1982, p.165) states,
is source-oriented, which is designated to reveal as much as possible the form and
content of the original message, that is, to match as closely as possible the formal
elements like grammatical units, consistency in word usage, meanings in terms of
the source context, just to name some.
A formal equivalence translation, strictly speaking, is impossible, because of
the differences between linguistic structures and socio-cultures. As Saussure points
out that there is no essential link between the signified and the signifier, and such
arbitrariness determines that languages, particularly those of different language
families, differ greatly in form. In many instances, certain formal elements of the
source language, as mentioned by Nida (1982), cannot be reproduced, like puns,
chiasmic orders of words, instances of assonance, or acrostic features of line-initial
sounds.
It is impossible to achieve equivalence on all formal levels — the absolute
formal equivalence and, on usual occasions, semantic equivalence should be given
priority while other levels, especially phonetic, lexical, morphological, syntactical
equivalence, etc., are given attention only to achieve special translation effects.
12


In other words, using formal equivalence the translator attempts to render as
literal a translation of the original text as possible. A long sentence in the original
will produce a long sentence in the translation. As much as possible, the translator
will retain the word order and grammatical structure as possible.
Formal equivalency retains much of the writing style and beauty of the
original scripture as well as retaining often difficult theological terminology. While
some interpretation is always necessary, the formal equivalency approach
minimizes the “commentary” or translator bias in the translated text. However, the

case against formal equivalency is simple. The translation may be so literal that the
rendered text does not truly communicate the meaning of source language to the
reader.
I.2.4.3 Modification of Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Correspondence
Aware of the defects in his dynamic equivalence theory, Nida (1982)
continues to modify and perfect his theories, including those concerning formal
correspondence. He acknowledges that any element in connection with receptor
language text is meaningful, including the form: "For effective impact and appeal,
form cannot be separated from content, since form itself carries so much
meaning…"(Nida, 1982, p.5). If form is sacrificed, meaning is damaged as well, so
he cautions the translator not to easily change the form and asks them to achieve as
much formal correspondence as possible, which marks a shift from total neglect of
form to attaching certain importance to formal elements.
Finally, it should be noted that these two methods are not absolute
techniques but rather general orientations. In fact, what experienced translators
seem to do most of the time is to resort to a formal kind of equivalence initially,
reconsider the decision in the light of a range of factors, and ultimately make a
choice between formal or dynamic equivalence.

13


CHAPTER TWO
GRAMMATICAL FEATURES AND MEANING OF BỊ AND ĐƯỢC

II.1 VERBS IN VIETNAMESE
The classification of verbs in Vietnamese is not agreed among linguists.
Under the influence of such languages as English, French, linguists have classified
Vietnamese verbs into transitive and intransitive. However, there are some verbs in
the middle positions, such verbs as ‘học’, ‘khóc’ in the following pairs of sentences

cannot be classified into intransitive or transitive verbs:
Nó học

(intransitive) – Nó học toán

(transitive)

Cô ta khóc (intransitive) – Cô ta khóc bạn (transitive)
Linguists have not agreed on the verb classification. Based on the semantic
and grammatical factors, Biên (1991) classifies Vietnamese verbs into two groups:
independent verbs and dependent verbs.
Thản (1977) in the book Động từ trong tiếng Việt based on the verb
influence on the object, classifies Vietnamese verbs into three types: namely,
transitive verbs, middle verbs and intransitive verbs. The difference in Thản’s
concept is the meaning of these labels compared to those in flectional languages.
Having the same term, the objects in his concepts include not only the ones
changed by the verb but also the ones targeted by the verbs. Some examples are
con in trông con (keep an eye on the baby), tiền (money) in được tiền (get money),
có tiền (have money) and other examples.
The following concepts are to be analyzed: independent – dependent verbs,
transitive – intransitive verbs.
II.1.1 Dependent and independent verbs
According to Biên (1998) in the book Từ loại tiếng Việt hiện đại, stated that
Vietnamese verbs can be classified into independent verbs and dependent verbs.
Independent verbs are the verbs having the meaning themselves. Moreover, these
verbs can stand independently without the support of other verbs. The independent

14

verbs are sub – classified into action verbs, receptive verbs, causative verbs,
emotional verbs, verbs of movement, existential verbs and postural verbs.
Dependent verbs, on the other hand, do not have full lexical meanings and
these verbs are often accompanied by independent verbs. Dependent verbs can
include modal verbs and linking verbs. Modal verbs include verbs showing
necessity like “nên, cần, có thể” and “ không thể” (should, need, can, cannot).
Verbs showing expect, hope like “định, toan, mong” (hope, intend) and verbs
showing suffering “bị, phải, được” (must, suffer). Linking verbs consist of
comparative verbs “giống, khác, tựa” (similar, different), transformational verbs
“hóa ra, trở thành” (turn out to be, become).
II.1.2 Transitive – intransitive verbs
Another way of verb classification is based on the object – governing
capability. This type of classification is influenced by western languages, which
includes intransitive and transitive verbs.
Intransitive verbs do not govern objects. Meanwhile a transitive verb does
govern at least one object. Biên’s definitions somehow coinside with Lộc’s (2000).
Biên suggests transitive verbs do affect objects such as eat (ăn), write (viết), read
(đọc). These types of verbs always need objects. Some examples are: ăn bánh (eat
cake), đọc thư (read letters).
Intransitive verbs do not influence any other objects. Some examples are ngủ
(sleep), tắm (have a bath), cười (smile)…
In short, verb classification in Vietnamese is based on 2 categories: meaning
and grammar. These classifications somehow overlap with others.

II.2 GRAMMATICAL FEATURES OF BỊ AND ĐƯỢC
It is understandable that words in Vietnamese shoulder diversity of semantic
as well as of syntactic structures. One word can possess more than one meaning
and can serve more than one grammatical function. This is absolutely true for the
case of bị and được. In different contexts these words may have different

15


functions, thus making it possible for speakers to express different meanings in
different syntactic roles.
II.2.1 Bị and được play a necessary role in forming passive constructions.
The first point of view is that bị and được play a necessary role in forming
passive constructions. Ban (2009) offers a formula for Vietnamese passive
constructions in which he considers bị and được as elements forming passive
structures. The formula of passive sentences has the following pattern:

Subject1

Auxiliary: bị / được

(passive/

Passive-forming

Subject2

Verb

patient)

Element

(active/agent)

(transitive)

Predicate (of the embedded clause)
Object

The sentence “Thư được Giáp gửi cho Tí” is analyzed as follows:
Thư

Subject 1

được

Giáp

gửi

Passive

Subject2

Predicator2

cho

Tí

Indirect object

function word

Take others for example, in the sentence below, “con đường” (the road)

plays the role of the patient, being affected by the verb “đào” (to dig):
1. a. Con đường đó vừa bị đào lên.
(That road has just been dug up.)
b. Con đường đó vừa được đào lên.
(That road has been dug up.)
In the example, the agent that carries out the action is not present the patient,
“the road” suffers from the action “dig”, it does nothing but is affected as a
consequence of the action. Bị and được in these sentences indicate the presence of
passive structures.
Cổn and Diên (2004) offer there formulas for passive structures in which bị
and được play a necessary role on forming this type of construction:

16


2. a. N – được / bị - V. ( N: affected patient; V: verb)
b. N1 – được / bị - N2 – V. (N1: affected patient; N2: agent; V: verb)
c. N1 – được / bị - V – bởi (by/ due to) – N2.
Cổn and Diên state that the affected patient in passive sentences is the agent in
the active counterpart; and the verb in active counterparts becomes the verb of a
passive with an addition of auxiliaries bị and được. The subject of active sentences is
often omitted in passive sentences, or is preceded by the preposition bởi (due to, by).
Thản (1977) suggests the following types of passive constructions including
bị and được:
The first sentence construction is Subject + bị/ được + noun. For example:
Anh ấy bị tù.
(He was imprisoned.)
The second sentence type is Subject+ bị/ được+ intransitive verb. For
instance:
Nhật bị tan rã.

(Japanese enemy has been destroyed.)
The third is Subject + bị/ được + transitive verb. This is an example:
Làng bị đốt.
(The village has been burnt.)
The fourth is Subject + bị/ được + verb + noun. The following sentence acts
as an example:
Máy bay bị hỏng máy.
(The air plane has its engine broken.)
The fifth is Subject + bị/ được + subject – predicate relation. For instance:
Nó chưa được bố nó yêu.
(He is not loved by his father.)
Anh ấy được cơ quan bầu làm đội trưởng.
(He was voted the leader by his office members.)
Tôi được Bộ cử đi học.
(I was chosen by the Education Ministry to continue the study.)
17