Take the 2-minute tour ×
Japanese Language Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for students, teachers, and linguists wanting to discuss the finer points of the Japanese language. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In the book I'm reading, I came across the following sentence:

あたしは[怒]{おこ}るに[怒]{おこ}れなくなった。 (furigana added by me)

My translation is something like "I couldn't stay angry [at him]". ("My anger melted away.")

I don't actually understand the grammar, though. The phrase 「怒るに怒れない」 has what appears to be particle-に following the dictionary form of a verb. It sounds contrastive. I can't seem to find this pattern in my dictionaries, though, so I feel unsure.

I'm interpreting it as 「怒る(の)に怒れない」, with a zero-nominalizer after the verb. Is this correct?

Is this a set phrase preserving old grammar of some kind?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

This is a common pattern that means "even if I wanted to V, I cannot V" or "no matter what, I cannot V". As such, in your sentence, it means " I could not get mad even if I wanted to.".

As for the grammar, this is a conjunctive particle (接続助詞). Rather than attaching to the "dictionary form" (終止形), though, it attaches to the attributive (連体形). That is why there is no need for a (zero-) nominalizer.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.