Translation:Can this problem be solved?
"can we resolve this problem" was rejected but I think it should be accepted
Why do you add "we" into your translation? There is no context to indicate who is expected to solve the problem.
You could also ask "Why put the English sentence in the passive? There is no passive in the Chinese sentence". And in both cases the answer is "Because there is not a direct one to one mapping between Chinese and English".
Right, but I'll add that you can make the passive voice explicit with 被 bèi: “这个问题能被解决吗？” But this explicit one is not very common and people may rather say “被(by) + person” like “会 被 他们 轻易 解决吗” (will be easily solved by them?).
But 被 in Chinese is highly-marked, and adds semantic content that English passive constructions tend not to have (they usually connote a negative/adversarial sense).
被 is neutral and only has a negative connotation in specific instances as opposed to being a 贬义词 in general.
Many thanks for your input. Keep up the good work!
(And long time no see / talk, since there are no profile messages.)
You're welcome. :) I just edited my previous comment a bit to make it clearer. I mean “这个问题能解决吗” is much more common than “这个问题能 被 解决吗” in verbal conversation, especially when the listener is a helper for solving the problem (i.e. it would be like saying “这个问题 你能解决(它)吗”.).
I think "resolve" goes with "issue": Can this issue be resolved?
And as has been mentioned it is better without a "we" since any number of person(s) can be implied and the question stands fine without us 'reading into it.
That'd be more like ”你能解决这个问题吗？“ although it can be so implied and is not unacceptable.
"Can this question be solved?" seems to be a reasonable answer if the "problem" is an exam question.
Report each of these responses as correct alternate replies.
WHere is the idea of "be" coming from? The translation would be more fitting if it were Can this problem solve?
I got it right. but I have no idea why this sentence should be translated into a passive English equivalent.
Because there is no direct object after that transitive verb (“解决”) and normally we would not think a problem will solve anything. This usage dates back to ancient dynasties. But not every transitive verb can be naturally used this way, and may need a very specific context.
Similar sentences: 书给谁？书买了吗？书卖不卖？书看得开心吗？
Update: It is better to interpret such sentence in another way. Topic-Comment, e.g. 书-给谁？书-买了吗？书-卖不卖？书-看得开心吗？
So “这个问题-能解决吗？” = “This problem — (you, anyone) can solve it?”
This usage dates back to ancient dynasties.
Can you explain further? Thank you in advance!
You can do some search about 宾语前置 (preposition of direct object). Unfortunately I can't find any useful articles for English readers.
Thank you for pointing out the keywords! I found what I'm looking for (all in Chinese like you said, I'm afraid).
I think the idea of implicit passive voice also exists in English, but Chinese just goes a step further: basically, we omit 被 as long as that doesn't cause any confusion. In English although one has to use explicit passive voice in "The problem is solved" (vs. Chinese: 问题解决了), it's possible to say "This is the problem to solve" when you actually mean it is the problem to be solved (or perhaps "... we are to solve," I don't know, but you get the idea).
"Can this problem be resolved?" Despite the hover to suggesting resolved, it marked it wrong as it wanted solved instead. Even though resolved is more likely to be used in this question in English.
Where is the "can" in thjs sentance? I read it as "Is this problem solved?"