Would the で in というわけで be analyzed as the te-form of da or the de particle? Both of them seem like they would fit, as the de particle can indicate cause/reason (as alluded to in this similar question) but another question states that ので can be interpreted as "て form of the explanatory particle の with だ..." and indeed というわけだ is by itself a valid phrase.

  • I feel skeptical that those are really clearly different things. Do you have a good reference to explain the difference? I think you would be on firmer ground just asking somebody to clarify the meaning instead of try to explain it with such categorization. Jan 19, 2021 at 3:32
  • 1
    @TimLovell-Smith The de particle seems to come from nite which seems to be historically distinct from the te-form of the da copula the japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11357/… I don't have formal literature to cite for this, but multiple online sources seem to accord with there being a distinction between the two (at least historically)
    – 1110101001
    Jan 19, 2021 at 3:35

1 Answer 1


というわけで in the middle of a sentence is NOT interchangeable with というわけであって, というわけであり or というわけでして, so I think this type of で is a particle that marks a condition/scope.

  • Ah nice that seems like a good general test (pretty obvious in retrospect) to distinguish between the te-form of the copula vs the particle.
    – 1110101001
    Jan 18, 2021 at 3:38

You must log in to answer this question.

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