1

集められた魔力、剥離された精神が残留し、山は禿げ山の如く訪れたモノを食らうだろう

Gathered Magic, The separated souls stay behind, The mountain eats those that visit, just like a bald mountain.

I have trouble understanding 如く.
I know it's an adverb and it means=Similar But, I do not think it's modifying 訪れたモノ.
I think that it could be rewritten like this:

山は,禿げ山の如く,訪れたモノを食らうだろう。

Am I wrong?

6
  • I think it's modifying 訪れたモノを食らう.
    – Keita ODA
    Feb 8, 2016 at 19:16
  • How would I translate it though?
    – Splikie
    Feb 8, 2016 at 19:27
  • 1
    I would translate 如く as "just like" as you did.
    – A.Ellett
    Feb 8, 2016 at 20:45
  • As an adverb, 如く modifies the verb -- so, just as you surmise, it can't modify 訪れたモノ, since that's a noun. FWIW, 如く is the adverbial form of adjective 如き (the classical attributive form that attaches to a noun, like modern -い adjectives), and it's also sometimes seen with the classical terminal ending (end-of-sentence ending) 如し. Kinda like べく・べき・べし, this is a kind of -い adjective that has fossilized (remains in use in the modern language, but with older forms). Feb 8, 2016 at 22:57
  • What? Why is 訪れたモノ a noun? I mean, Why does not modify 訪れた which modifies モノ?
    – Splikie
    Feb 9, 2016 at 7:30

1 Answer 1

2

「[如]{ごと}く」 is an auxiliary verb, not an adverb, but since it is in the [連用形]{れんようけい}, it functions adverbially. (The dictionary form is 「如し」, of course.)

「~~の如く」 means 「~~のように」, expressing how similar one thing is to another.

「山は[禿]{は}げ山の如く[訪]{おとず}れたモノを[食]{く}らうだろう」

= "The mountain, just like a bald mountain, will devour all who visit it."

「禿げ山の如く」 modifies 「食らう」 here.

"I think that it could be rewritten like this:

山は,禿げ山の如く,訪れたモノを食らうだろう。

Am I wrong?"

It could be if you insisted, but why would you? Basically, no one would be confused by this sentence without the commas.

2
  • Could it in no way modify 訪れた? Is it just because it makes no sense or because of other reasons?
    – Splikie
    Feb 9, 2016 at 7:32
  • I know that JA-JA dictionaries list 如し as a 助動詞, but do you have any idea why? I find this categorization quite curious. In terms of conjugation, it's a classical し・き・く adjective. Feb 17, 2016 at 20:21

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .