20

In English, the tense of the main clause and relative clauses is usually relative to the time at which the sentence is spoken. I waited until the bus came. You use the past tense on both verbs because both the waiting and the coming happened in the past. But while you were waiting, the bus hadn't come yet! So, relative to the action of waiting, the bus ...


8

alexhatesmil's answer isn't wrong, but I just want to supplement regarding the も and what it's doing. So first, like the above の is a nominalizer. But that means you need something to connect の blocks to the rest of the sentence. You can do so with either は or も so you could say: 育ったのは京都です。 = The place I was raised is Kyoto. The も here replaces は as ...


6

そんな梟が夜に飛び立ったのを人が知るのは、夜が明けて朝になってから(です)。 It is (only) after dawn breaks and morning comes that people (can) realize the owl has flied off at night. This is a cleft sentence where the ~から part is pulled out for emphasis. です at the end of the sentence has been omitted. The original sentence is: 夜が明けて朝になってから、人はそんな梟が夜に飛び立ったのを知ります。 People realize the owl ...


6

The only reason が is used here is because 彼女 is the subject of a relative clause. Relative clauses don't have topics, so が is used instead of は. In a main clause, the が in 彼女が would likely be exhaustive rather than neutral (because it would be weird to have a neutral が attached to something already in the "universe of discourse"), but here in a relative ...


6

田中さんは山田さんが建物はどこか知っていると言った To understand the word order in a complicated sentence like this, it is useful to break it down into parts called bunsetsu: Each arrow represents that everything before the arrow modifies the bunsetsu immediately after the arrow. For example, 建物は modifies どこか, and both 山田さんが and 建物はどこか modify 知っていると. (Two caveats: It is ...


5

As pointed out by @naruto, the の is a nominalizer. It turns the verb 避ける into a noun phrase, so that it can be the subject of the clause. あと少し避けるのが遅れていたら... To break it down: あと少し -- "a little more" 避けるの -- subject "(the/my) dodging" が -- subject marker 遅れ(ていたら) -- verb "be delayed; be late" ~ていたら -- indicates a hypothetical condition, "If... had done/...


5

The main (outermost) structure of this sentence is: ~と信じていました。 I had believed that ~. So this と is the plain old quotative particle. The remaining part (his "belief") is: 君を幸せにできるのは僕だけだ。 It is only me who can make you happy. This の is a nominalizer, but this construction has a special name called a cleft sentence. This is a typical cleft ...


5

The key here is the word order. The neutral order is “昨日肉まんを食べました”. By saying it in the order “昨日食べたのは肉まん[です/でした]”, you are already conveying a contrastive nuance. That is to say, you ate 肉まん and not something else. です/でした tends to have implications on this contrastive nuance: 昨日食べたのは肉まんです。ラーメンではなくて。 It was nikuman that I ate yesterday. Not ramen. ...


5

Yes, だ/です at the end of a sentence is often omitted. Do you know a rhetoric device called 体言止め ("noun-stop")? The omission of だ after から has the same basic effect (making the sentence compact yet vivid and dramatic). This AのはBから(だ) is a cleft sentence formed from BからA. ("A because B" → "It is because B that A") ...


4

の is being used as a nominalizer (something that turns a verb into a noun) in this case, with も meaning "as well as". So, literally, it would read something like "My being born as well as my growing up were in Kyoto." In other words, "I was born and raised in Kyoto."


4

私がではない。あれほど冷酷な魔術師だった男が、敵を助けたという事実こそが不快だった。 The が in 私が is the case particle as a subject marker. 'I did not. / It was not I (who saved my enemy).' It was the 男(=切嗣) that saved his enemy (= me = 言峰), not the other way around, and 言峰 is saying that it was 不快 to him. Source: http://www26.atwiki.jp/tmranking/pages/51.html breakdown: が= 格助詞/case particle で= ...


4

The bad news-は we don't really have an effective way to distinguish them. The good news-は in fact you don't have to distinguish them. The particle は's function could be loosely described as "singling out one thing you and I know as the current focus," that is, every usage theoretically carries contrastive overtones, as long as it has possible competitors in ...


4

I'm an 82-year-old Japanese male. I will translate the quoted part as: The reason I'm not confident of her being the same girl is that I can see only half (portion) of her face.


4

As @AeonAkechiさん hinted at in his/her comment to the OP, 私があんた(を)連れ出したの(は)なんでだと思う? is the same as 私があんた(を)なんで連れ出したんだと思う? One of the things we like to do in colloquial Japanese is leave out particles like を, が and は (in their neutral forms), and even sometimes に. It can almost always be assumed from context what particles are missing, but it can be ...


4

This is an "incomplete" cleft sentence, and that のは is part of the grammar of cleft sentences. Do you understand the following simpler example of cleft sentence used to emphasize the reason? そこに山があるから、彼は山に登る。 He climbs because a mountain is there. 彼が山に登るのは、そこに山があるからだ。 It is because a mountain is there that he climbs. And the sentence in question ...


4

腹立たしい 腹立たしい 弱者のように脅かされるのは I would read it as a rhetorical anastrophe/inversion (倒置). The normal word order would be: 弱者のように脅かされるのは 腹立たしい (腹立たしい)。 ... which would sound less emotional and emphatic, with less rhetorical effect. So it means: "It's so annoying...so annoying... to be threatened like a weakling."


4

I would use は there. The current sentence with が sounds as if it was meant to answer a question about what event characterized the year 1244, rather than stating a fact about when the name Berlin was first used in historical documents. Since the year 1244 is not mentioned earlier in the article, it sounds odd. It’s like saying: The earliest time the name ...


3

"It's so annoying...so annoying. To be threatened like a weakling" sounds adequate. "It's so annoying...so annoying. The one who should be getting threatened (or scared) like a weakling should be..." does not. If I were writing a manga and wanted to convey the latter, I would either write it out as a full sentence (弱者のように脅かされるのは[whatever the MC refers to the ...


3

You can say 私が手紙を送ったのは彼だった. This 私が is more or less important. If you omitted 私が, the sentence would become ambiguous: 手紙を送ったのは彼だった。 He is the one who sent a letter (to someone). He is the one I sent a letter to. The use of あげる cannot solve this type of ambiguity (手紙を送ってあげたのは彼だった is still ambiguous the same way). And even the following ...


3

「お母さんが頭を下げて試供品を受け取る + の + と、まる子がぴたりとさわぐのをやめる + の + は同時だった。」 The basic structure of that sentence is: 「AとBは[同時]{どうじ}だった」 = "A and B took place at the same time." A and B, in this case, both happen to be mini-sentences, don't they? A: 「お[母]{かあ}さんが[頭]{あたま}を[下]{さ}げて[試供品]{しきょうひん}を[受]{う}け[取]{と}る」 = "Mother bows as she takes the free sample" ...


3

In archaic Japanese, there was no such thing as a nominalizer. Instead, the 連体形 (or attributive form, noun-modifying form) of a verb was used to nominalize a noun. We can still see an attributive form used as a noun in proverbs and idioms, for example 逃げるが勝ち ("Running is winning") and 聞くは一時の恥 ("Asking is a one-time shame"). ~するがよい is using the same grammar. ...


3

The very basic of Japanese word order is Verbs come last. Modifiers (including subjects) should be close to modified words (including verbs). Clauses come first, phrases come second. Longer modifiers come first, shoter modifiers come second. If you want to invert them, use commas. Of course, there are exceptions. For example, topics tend to come first with ...


3

Although I know my answer has been already accepted and I still find the sentence in question to be very odd in its own context, I have been reminded that が is not totally unacceptable. As part of my attempt to understand what is going on, I have come up with a scenario where 〜が田中さんです doesn’t necessarily sound weird to people who have never heard of him. ...


3

Syntactically, this の is a noun, and everything before it is a relative clause. But I think it's best to treat this の as "some special noun working as a placeholder". It's also different from what we usually call a nominalizer (which turns 見る "see" to 見るの "seeing", etc.). Your sentence is a cleft sentence, a special construction ...


2

My suggestion is to keep using は and that is the most natural way that I can think of as a native Japanese speaker. The description of は and が by Kuno (1973) is widely used. Kuno (1973) mentions は indicates the known information and が indicates the unknown information but it is actually similar to distinguish a/an and the in English for instance if English ...


2

As Toshihiko wrote, both A and B are correct sentences in Japanese. However, they are not always interchangeable. For example, suppose that you ate nikuman yesterday, but today your coworker asked you: 昨日カレーまんを食べていましたよね。どこで買ったんですか? You were eating karēman (curry-flavored pork bun) yesterday. Where did you buy it? You can say (A) いいえ、昨日食べたのは肉まんです in ...


2

私が困っているのが is translated " what I am troubled with is" and this "の" is used in a nominalization of a sentence and verbs and so on. For example, "私が勉強しているのは、大学に行くためです"、"走るのが嫌いです"、"悲しいのが嫌です". And 私が困る of this sentence is that わたし is subject and 困る is predicate, so が is used because に isn't set behind a subject. In addition, if you want to use "に", you say 私は、...


2

The 'no' in 'nowa' can be thought of as the pronoun 'one'. Your familiar with phrases like 'aoi no ga hoshii desu' = 'I want the blue one' right? This 'one' pronoun is modified by the relative clause 'kimi o shiawase ni dekiru'. And then the whole lot is made into a topic with 'wa'. So "The one who can make you happy" is the topic of the sentence. 'kimi ...


2

This is a rather simple example of a cleft sentence. アニーは一本のなわばしごを指さしていた。 Annie was pointing to a long rope ladder. アニーが指さしているのは、一本のなわばしごだった。 It was a long rope ladder that Annie was pointing to. Grammatically speaking, だった is modifying nothing. Note: This の/it is referring to a tangible object, so in this case, it is possible to translate the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible