3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBXyC7cgfVI

Eri Tokunaga:

今、自分の発言の真意、あるいは説明不足の点を言われたんだと思いますけれども、大臣、もしそうだとしたら、なぜそのペーパーを見て発言しなければいけないのか分かりません。

御自分の説明をしているんですから、御自分の言葉で答えていただきたいと思いますが、いかがでしょうか。

Here is a shoddy translation I received from a forum member on another site: Eri: I think you are now inquired upon your real intent on the comment, or criticized upon your lack of explanation, but Minister, given the such situation, why are you still have to make a statement looking at that paper? You are explaining things about yourself. I'd like to hear it from your own words. How about that?

I think it might mean: Eri: I think you've explained what you really meant, or rather, explained any misunderstandings, but Minister, if that is the case, why do you have to look at that paper to speak? If you are explaining in your own words, I would like you to answer in your own words. How about it?

Also, I'm pretty sure the 発言 all has to do with "Sakurada's remarks", since after all, the title of the video is Sakurada, minister in charge of Olympics, again withdraws statements

1

(The 言われた part is not included in the linked video, so I assume this transcription is correct.)

Your interpretations seems more likely to me. This 言われた is probably an honorific form ("you said"). But the other interpretation (passive of "someone pointed out your 説明不足 to you") is also possible depending on the previous situation. Did someone else point out something to the minister right before his previous statement?

3
  • Thanks for responding to my post! This sentence was a real headache for me, It is so advanced japanese that I knew it wasn't going to be easy. I am not an expert translator or anything, but I can tell when a sentence might not make sense, or if it needs a bit of correction. I'm just real picky when it comes to my translations, and a perfectionist in this field, so I had to get multiple opinions. I did some research and was able to find the meeting minutes online, so that helped me piece together what was said in greater detail. kokkai.ndl.go.jp/#/detail?minId=119815261X01320190325
    – SomaRise
    Aug 26 at 4:01
  • 2
    @SomaRise Okay, then I think your interpretation is correct. The only person who talked about this issue before him is Tokunaga herself, so she wouldn't have had to say "if that is the case" or "I think" if passive voice had been intended. She wanted to confirm what the minister was trying to say.
    – naruto
    Aug 26 at 5:20
  • If it the meaning were honourific, would they not have used おっしゃる? Or is that not used in real life as much as we're lead to believe?
    – istrasci
    Sep 1 at 15:50
0

I would say that the correct interpretation for the first part is "I think you just pointed out that the meaning or the explanation of what I said is insufficient/not correct". The 「言われた」part is the polite form for「言う」rather than passive as you noticed.

The clue to know why this part refers to Tokunaga rather than the Minister is the first 「自分」. Since who is talking is Tokunaga, if that part refered to the Minister (as you interpreted), it would be「ご自分」as is used after that.

1

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.