2

narrator depicting a defloration scene

深々と肉棒の打ち込まれたAの股間からは、彼女がついさっきまで純潔だった事を示す赤い血が、傷口からあふれ出して太ももにまで垂れていた。

しかし、Aの感じている痛みは、外からも見える傷口だけではない。むしろ苦痛という点では、処女膜が裂けた痛みなど無いも同然だった

However, the pain that A was feeling, wasn't only a outwardly visible wound, but rather the matter regarding her suffering was, without question, that there was was no pain from having her hymen split.

this is cannot be correct has she has already said that it hurts like hell, but it is how this sentence seems to read.

Thank you

4

Where did that "without question" come from? ないも同然 is a set phrase that means "virtually nonexistent". など here is similar to なんか, a way to make light of something. The sentence implies she is feeling some stronger pain, which is making her physical pain almost negligible.

処女膜が裂けた痛みなど無いも同然だった。
The (physical) pain of torn hymen was virtually nonexistent (as compared to her psychological pain).

  • ほぼ同じであること or ほとんど違いがないこと was the definition for 同然, and the latter felt like it fit better. So "undoubtedly" no pain(...痛みなど無い) . if we are saying "The (physical) pain of torn hymen was virtually nonexistent (as compared to her psychological pain)." , would "~だけではない。むしろ苦痛という点では..." be be closer to "not exactly ~ but rather it was ... " than "not only ~, but rather..." ? – charu Jan 5 at 2:36
  • @charu A rough interpretation: "Her physical wound was not the only pain she is feeling; rather, her physical wound was almost the same as 'nonexistent' (as compared to the other type of pain she is feeling)". Read this むしろ like "no, what I've said was an understatement". 同然 is "nearly/virtually/effectively/almost", not "undoubtedly" nor "without question". For example 死んだも同然 means "virtually dead (although technically alive)", not "undoubtedly dead". – naruto Jan 5 at 2:52
  • I'm still find Xだけではない。むしろY in this situation hard grasp. Xではない。むしろY or Xだけではない。Yも... would be easier to read. In [Her physical wound was not the only pain she is feeling; rather, her physical wound was almost the same as 'nonexistent' ], it feels like Y is going on a different tangent and what was to follow "not only X, ..." was skipped? A bit weird to read. – charu Jan 5 at 3:12
  • @charu Do you understand, by むしろ, the author is trying to correct his previous statement? Read it like "I said Xだけではない, but that was a bad way of describing this situation! In fact, X is trivial. X is nothing. Y is far more important! Y is the only thing that matters to her." (X is her physical pain, of course). – naruto Jan 5 at 3:19
  • 1
    The author initially tried to say there were two types of pain ("not only X but also Y"), but at this point he realized that was still a bad description. So he said むしろ, and amended his previous statement. The final sentence is clearly indicating "X is actually nothing; there is virtually only one type of pain, which is Y (psychological pain)". – naruto Jan 5 at 3:29

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.