The original sentence is:


I think 〜者と裏付け is the abbreviation for 〜者という裏付け. And my question is: should I add a behind 〜者, so that the sentence becomes:


I think the modified sentence is more natural. Is it? Or did the original sentence just omit the ?

  • Re だ, both are ok. japanese.stackexchange.com/q/91305/45489
    – sundowner
    May 12, 2023 at 2:55
  • Regarding your doubt about (the omission of) だ after 被害者, 心臓麻痺死者 and 被害者 here refer to the same set of people, rather than a whole set and a subset. You might say 被害者の心臓麻痺死者 if you're already certain they are indeed 被害者 of the criminal you're after. と思われる works on 被害者 like "alleged." The uncertainty expressed by it is not so much about the statement 心臓麻痺死者は被害者だ with the subject specifically pointing to 心臓麻痺死者. It's more about the status of the dead people you're looking at as 被害者 and those dead people are already known to be 心臓麻痺死者. This interpretation comes more natural without だ.
    – aguijonazo
    May 13, 2023 at 5:56
  • Besides, the insertion of だ there would make it likelier for the phrase to be parsed as [今までに明らかになった被害者だ] と思われる心臓麻痺死者 when it's intended to be read as 今までに明らかになった [被害者だと思われる心臓麻痺死者]. This is because people expect だ to end a longer sentence than just one word.
    – aguijonazo
    May 13, 2023 at 5:57
  • @aguijonazo Thank you for comments! I get your points. But I still have a question: just like the relative clause in English: "the people dying of heart attacks who are alleged to be victims of the criminal" can be seen as made from "the people dying of heart attacks are alleged to be victims of the criminal", could 被害者と思われる心臓麻痺死者 be seen as made from 心臓麻痺死者が被害者と思われる? If yes, I think the 思われる acts as a passive, which means "be alleged". How do you think of it?
    – shepherd
    May 13, 2023 at 7:41
  • It's not a passive. It's called 自発形. 思う doesn't usually take a person as its direct object unless it's used in the sense of "to think of someone fondly," which clearly doesn't apply here. This means if that 思われる were a passive, it would be a suffering passive, which also doesn't make sense here.
    – aguijonazo
    May 13, 2023 at 9:49

2 Answers 2


You are right, と and という are interchangeable here. And it's generally safer to keep だ before this type of と, although it's often dropped in reality. Omission of this type of だ is sometimes called だ抜き, and some people frown upon it if it happens in formal text. See the following article from NHK.

But also note that there are similar but different cases where だ can be omitted safely. See the discussion here: Difference between だと vs と before 認める

  • Thank you for your answer! But I think the structrue of the original sentence is like 「彼は犯人という裏付けが取れました」. Do you think it's more natural to add the 「だ」:「彼は犯人だという裏付けが取れました」?
    – shepherd
    May 12, 2023 at 3:18
  • @shepherd Yes, since 彼は犯人だ is a sentence with a subject, だ should not be omitted at least in sophisticated news articles and such.
    – naruto
    May 12, 2023 at 3:25
  • In my opinion, the structure of original sentence is 「〜全ては〜者(だ)という裏付けが取れますた」. Here isn't「〜全ては〜者だ」 a sentence like 「彼は犯人だ」?
    – shepherd
    May 12, 2023 at 3:31
  • 1
    @shepherd It is. Everything before the と is a long sentence (clause), and that is exactly why it's better to keep だ before と(いう). The original sentence is still correct and natural, but it sounds a little unsophisticated to me if this is a news article.
    – naruto
    May 12, 2023 at 3:36
  • 1
    @shepherd Did you mean 思う? 死者を被害者(だ)と思う is correct regardless of if there is だ, but 死者を被害者だと思われる makes no sense unless indirect passive is intended.
    – naruto
    May 12, 2023 at 4:04

I think both are fine. When we focus on the former:


You can see that there is a construct 全ては - だった者 which is considered neat because this then allows the 裏付け to refer to that entire part. 全ては - だった者だという裏付け is fine, too but it's less compact and the reference to 全ては is arguably less clearer than the former form.

But again, both forms are fine IMO.

You must log in to answer this question.

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