4

あなたがけがをしたのではないのだから、何もそんなに泣かなくていいでしょう

What is the difference between the first の and the second の?

Currently I understand it this way. The first one is a nomalizer, turning けがをした into けがをしたこと。 Is that correct? Also what about the latter one?

Thanks

1

The difference is

  • あなたは けがを しなかったの*だから: because you didn't get hurt
  • あなたが けがをしたのではない のだから: because it's not that you didn't get got hurt

And, this nominalization can't be rephrased as こと.

(* It needs のだ form here because how you didn't get hurt is justification for suggestion of not crying, or in general, background information for judgement/conjecture. Edit; In this case, the fact that the listener didn't get hurt is a shared information that the listener himself knows well too, which is regarded as a back ground information for judgement of not being worth crying. It's like difference between 'since' and 'because' here. If the sentence was あなたがけがをしたのではないから そんなに泣かなくてもいいでしょう?, it means the speaker judges that it's the fact that you didn't get hurt that saves you crying so badly.)

Edit

Nominalization means turning a clause into a noun phrase, i.e.

  • けがをした: you got hurt → けがをしたの: that you got hurt

And you can treat the whole clause as a noun like the below

  • けがをしたのは よくない: That you got hurt is not good
  • けがをしたのを 見た: I saw that you got hurt (I saw you get hurt)

Whether you can replace の with こと depends on nature of the verb and the position of the nominalized clause, which is really complicated. For example, けがをしたことはよくない is okay while …したことを見た means a completely different thing i.e. "I considered that you would..".

  • 見ることは信じることだ: To see is to believe

If you ignore a minor problem, you can somehow rephrase it as 見るのは信じることだ. Now what if you change the predicate likewise?

  • 見るのは信じるのだ: ???

Unfortunately, this doesn't work as was expected. Nominalization at the position of the predicate of a sentence is saved for a special usage so called Explanatary の.

  • けがをしたの: It is that you got hurt

Roughly saying, we use that form when we explain things. In addition, you can express partial negation like this.

  • けがをしたのではない: It is not that you got hurt
  • "because it's not that you didn't get hurt": Is that not one too many negatives? I thought it was more like "It's not as though you were hurt so..." – user3856370 Aug 6 '18 at 16:58
  • Thanks user4092 for your answer. But i still don't understand. Can you please explain the usage of these two の by breaking it down or giving sample sentences. – JoisBack Aug 7 '18 at 0:59
  • I think i get it now. It's like 2 'because' are strung up together. – JoisBack Aug 7 '18 at 12:17
  • @user4092 thank you for your edits, but after reading the last sentence of your explanation I got confused again. Can you help me out? So あなたがけがをしたのではない already means "it is not that you get hurt" then why would we need the second の? Can't we just omit it and say あなたがけがをしたのではないだから – JoisBack Aug 7 '18 at 16:32
  • @JoisBack Please read the (* It needs のだ form here...) part. – user4092 Aug 8 '18 at 1:10

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.