I read this question and the first sentence has been bothering me:

1) 今日はお酒を飲むので、私は車で行かなかったが...
Today I will drink so I didn't go by car, but ...

I would have expected either:

2) 今日はお酒を飲むので、私は車で来なかったが...
Today I will drink so I didn't come by car, but ...
3) 今日はお酒を飲んだので、私は車で行かなかったが...
Today I drank so I didn't go by car, but ...

So, I understand 行く and くる to be motion relative to the speaker's current location. I think the original sentence is strange because with 行かなかった the 'going' is finished. The fact that he will later drink alcohol is irrelevant. Whereas with 来なかった the 'coming' is complete and he is now at the place where he will drink.

Does sentence 1) make sense? If so where is the speaker when he is saying it? Can you please explain any misunderstanding I have?


It's possible if the speaker says it after returning from the place where they drank beer. And I believe the English translation should be "I didn't go by car (but by another means) because I would drink some alcohol today".

  • But isn't that sentence 3) rather than 1)? 'drink' is in past tense. – user3856370 May 14 '17 at 12:10
  • Ah, is this the, tense of subordinate clause is relative to tense of main clause, thing? The going is complete but the drinking is still to happen. "I didn't go by car because I was going to be drinking". – user3856370 May 14 '17 at 12:19
  • Yes........................... – user4092 May 14 '17 at 14:15

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.