Timeline for だ and か, Can they be used together?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 29, 2021 at 21:44 | comment | added | Eddie Kal | @snailplane Welcome back! | |
| Jan 29, 2021 at 21:34 | comment | added | user1478 | @EddieKal Yes, thank you for the edit and comment, that was a mistake on my part. | |
| S Jan 28, 2021 at 21:12 | history | suggested | Eddie Kal | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
I think it is better to use "main clause" here instead of "matrix clause". They are not synonymous. See this https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/38201/is-matrix-clause-synonymous-with-main-clause-what-exactly-is-a-matrix-claus
|
| Jan 28, 2021 at 18:55 | comment | added | Eddie Kal | @Earthliŋ Actually, those two terms are not synonymous. A matrix clause is a clause with at least one embedded clause but it doesn't have to be a main clause, and vice versa, a main clause doesn't have to be a matrix clause either. I think here it is better to use "main clause" as opposed to "matrix clause", because 「本当だか*」if standalone is a main clause but not a matrix clause and is ungrammatical with「だか」. Please see this and this Linguistics SE Q&A. | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 18:43 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 28, 2021 at 21:12 | |||||
| Nov 27, 2013 at 1:57 | comment | added | Kafka Fuura | @snailboat It really was an unnecessary comment in the first place because it's really all just speculation and what-ifs. すいません。 | |
| Nov 27, 2013 at 1:56 | comment | added | Kafka Fuura | @snailboat The syntactic distinctions the result of their divergence. :) - Just like you can't substitute really substitute 勝った for 勝ちてあり/勝ちてある - Also how だろう／でしょう became an inexplicable monster full of exceptions to make up for the lack of clarity in using just ～う. | |
| Nov 27, 2013 at 1:51 | comment | added | user1478 | @KafkaFuura I would say instead that there are grammatical distinctions between the two. See this paper for some discussion of である vs だ. | |
| Nov 27, 2013 at 1:49 | comment | added | Kafka Fuura | @snailboat I meant more that they came from the same source than that they were the same. The reason they don't have the same distribution is because of course they have been used more commonly in this or that situation and so have diverged a bit. | |
| Nov 27, 2013 at 1:46 | comment | added | user1478 | @KafkaFuura Your reasoning is not correct, though. であるか and だか don't have the same distribution, even though the latter is a contracted form of the former. | |
| Nov 27, 2013 at 1:45 | comment | added | Kafka Fuura | I would say that strictly grammatically it probably -could- be allowed everywhere, but common usage has restricted it to subordinate clauses. My reasoning for this is that だか is of course short for であるか, and であるか is valid anywhere. I would say this restriction is similar to how だ accepts -some- particles that require 連体形, but not all - the others requiring なの. | |
| Nov 22, 2013 at 3:37 | comment | added | Darius Jahandarie | This is the only answer that gives the actual rule for when this is allowed. Other answers are misleading because they make it sound like it's always allowed. | |
| Nov 21, 2013 at 13:55 | comment | added | Earthliŋ♦ | @rintaun It's a synonym for main clause (or independent clause) as opposed to subordinate clause (or dependent clause, or indeed embedded clause). | |
| Nov 21, 2013 at 11:15 | comment | added | rintaun | What is a matrix clause? I understand based on context, but I've never heard the term. | |
| Nov 21, 2013 at 8:39 | history | answered | user1478 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |