I'm reading this article about new technologies that are getting introduced to monitor employees.

I am unsure about the following sentence. I do not understand why there isn't a particle or something like it between the など and the 230. Is this a typo or what is intended here?


My Translation: 230 companies are introducing new technologies, where these companies and similar places are producing software

2 Answers 2


In Nominal apposition in Japanese (2004), Rumiko Sode calls this など an "exemplifier", and considers this construction a type of apposition in which one noun phrase restates a subset of another.

Basically, you've got two noun phrases next to each other:


Which expresses that N1 is included within N2. In other words, N1 is a restatement of part of N2. It could be translated in various ways depending on context. For example:

Recently, Akitas and other large-breed dogs are becoming popular.

Here, 大型犬 includes 秋田犬 as a subset or an example, and the noun phrases are linked together by など. Nothing is missing between them.

Likewise, in your example:


The larger set is 230の会社, and ソフトウェアをつくっている会社 is some subset of those 230 companies.

  • 1
    Thanks for the explanation I did not know など has this function! Jul 16, 2018 at 21:41


Conclusion first. There is nothing missing between 「など」 and 「230の会社」. That is simply perfect grammar in formal speech.

If one had to insert a particle in between that made sense, that particle would be 「の」. It would, however, be slightly wordy because there will be another 「の」 coming soon in 「230の会社」. It would also make the sentence sound unnecessarily informal as well.

「A など B」 indicates that A is an example of B.

That is why your translation is slightly off. Not all of the 230 participating companies are software houses. There are other types of companies present as well even though the sentence does not mention what kinds of companies they are. So, the math here is:

The number of software houses + X = 230

X is the number of other types of companies participating.

  • 4
    It would also make the sentence sound unnecessarily informal as well. How so? I'm not super up to date on my formality, but I'm not seeing how it would be less formal. Would you mind explaining?
    – ajsmart
    Jul 16, 2018 at 18:41

You must log in to answer this question.

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