Just read this question and it reminded me of something I'd been meaning to ask.


I don't remember doing such bad things but...

Is the lack of a nominaliser on してる an error in my book or is there a reason this grammar is allowed? The book seems to be written in a very colloquial style so I was wondering if it's just natural but lazy Japanese.

  • 1
    And how do you parse おぼえない?
    – macraf
    Nov 21 '15 at 13:18

You're probably confused because it looks like two verbs together, してる and 覚えない (neg. of 覚える)

But it's actually a relative clause ending in してる, modifying the noun 覚え, with a particle (は or が) colloquially being dropped between 覚え and ない.

覚え as a noun here is definition 2 in this dictionary:


So memory, recollection, etc.


私、そんなに悪いことしてるおぼえ(は)ないんだけど.. I think you parse it now.

  • Oops!!Late by 1~2 minutes.
    – xeta217
    Nov 21 '15 at 14:14
  • 2
    Don't worry! More answers are good, and the same thing being explained in different ways by different people can be helpful :)
    – Robin
    Nov 21 '15 at 14:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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