I've studied Japanese for quite a few years - at 3 different universities, here in Australia and Japan. I also collect textbooks for different explanations of the same grammar and for different example sentences. You are the first to introduce the concept of the zero pronoun and it suddenly makes so much sense!! ぴんと来ました！
I doubt I'm going to get an answer after so much time but I might as well give it a try. Referring to the last example, where の was used as a nominalizer for the preceding sentence, using a 0が does seem to make sense on its own, but how do you explain the fact that you could just substitute の with こと (or a similarly functioning word)? I guess using こと doesn't change the meaning of the whole sentence, but with it you can't use の's "possessive" (/"belonging"/...) property for the following 0 pronoun anymore, so isn't the function of の an actual nominalization?
Yes, it's a little tricky to digest at first. I think the simplest way may be to see that the nominalizing の bundles everything before it into itself, so の means "everything that went before の". It's actually very convenient because we can then manipulate a big clause in various ways because we have packed it all up into a little の. It does take a little while to understand but it is a fundamental part of how Japanese works so it's well worth taking the time to digest. As another commenter mentions, it is very close in function to こと.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 ありがとう先生! I have been struggling with a のは construction (笹を食べながらのんびりするのは最高だ) and being able to think of it as 'speaking of の it is 最高' is so much clearer than something like 'の(Øもの）は(Øが）最高だ'.
I am studying Japanese in Japan but have found this area quite difficult to grasp. Having it explained like this is very helpful. Thank you! Also nice to find that Vtubers were a thing 7 years ago! Although that word probably didn't exit back then...
Kyua Dorii-sensei! After describing the usage of 'null' /∅ in computer programming and mathematics, and comparing it to Japanese 'zero pronouns', I did a little search and found out something interesting, and perhaps useful: If you enter the English word 'null' into Google Translate or jisho org, the loan-word is ヌル. So Japanese has already absorbed this concept of 'null', probably from math and computer science I imagine. Also, the native Japanese verb ぬる means 'to paint' or 'to spread', while the adjective ぬるい means 'lukewarm; tepid', but can also mean 'lenient' (more commonly ゆるい, though*). Putting it all together, you could refer to the invisible elements as 'null' / ヌル / ∅ elements, with the mnemonic implication that they take on (are painted) whatever background 'colour' is implied by the context, that they are 'leniently' defined to be 'whatever makes sense' in the situation, that you 'spread' them onto the sentence syntax structure wherever they are needed, and even that their meaning is not clearly 'hot' nor clearly 'cold', but 'lukewarm', and essentially defined by the context. * As a side note, ゆるい also means 'loose' or 'gentle', where you could say that ヌル / ∅ elements fit 'loosely' within the context of the sentence, and thus make Japanese grammar 'gentle' for the user. 😉 [And, incidentally, the verb ゆる means 'to rock (cradle)' and 'to swing' (also, 'to sway', based on sentence usage it seems to me), besides the more vigorous 'to shake' and 'to jolt' meanings), so even ぬるい's less-common-but-more-apt usage as 'lenient' is sort-of-supported by lenient's translation of ゆるい both as adjective and the similar-sounding verb ゆる.] Anyway, all of this is 'just an idea!', as I often say! (My mind is a brainstorming type of mind at its core, so ideas like these just come to me, more or less at random. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't; I don't judge them because I can never really tell 'what's good' vs. 'what seemed good at the time', myself. I just post them as food for thought for others and let them decide whether the ideas suit them or not.) Feel free to use or not use as it suits you. Just because I wrote this all out doesn't mean I have any expectations about it, so please don't feel the slightest bit 'obligated' to try to use it. Sincerely. 😊 BTW: I'm getting SOOOO much out of your videos. I wish I could do more to support you, but unfortunately don't have much in the way of financial means. Instead I will do my best (がんばる) to recommend your channel by word of mouth. Cheers! 😁💖
This is very interesting! I usually refer to it as a "zero pronoun" because that is what the few scholars who recognize its existence call it. However I use the null sign for it because it isn't in fact a "zero" but a null to which a value can be assigned and to which in practice some value always is assigned. Zero is accurate only in the sense that it "isn't there" in a visible or audible manner. Another reason for using the term is that the word is easily recognizable. If I said "null pronoun" I have a feeling that not everyone would understand what I was saying - especially as some people still find my enunciation a bit weird. Please don't worry that you can't support me financially. By commenting liking and subscribing you ARE supporting me. One of the things I love about Patreon is that I can receive financial support without needing to put up any pay walls or do anything to prevent people who need my material but can't buy it from using it. To me that is very important. I have benefited from so much material that I could never have bought that I want to give back to everyone who can benefit from my work
It's hard to be a Brazilian learning Japanese by english, i have to really focus to understand what you say. Great class anyway, i've been studying japanese for 1 month and 15 days now, and i cant really grasp this concept yet, like in this phrase 宏子の家に行くったことある? I can see that this probably means "Have you ever gone to hiroko's house?" But i can't actually understand why the ことある is used. Thank you very much for this class anyway, one day i will grasp this im sure
This sentence is incorrect. It should be: 宏子の家に行ったことがある The が is sometimes ungrammatically omitted. 行くった is wholly ungrammatical. So what does the correct sentence actually mean? It means "The fact (こと) of gone-to-Hiroko's-house exists". In other words, "(someone) has gone to Hiroko's house". With a rising intonation this could be a question. This is an example of the "こと-box”, which is closely related to the "の-box". Please see this article - it is open to the public: www.patreon.com/posts/52089494
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 OMG I SEE, NOW I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND IT, thank you so much, i knew the ことがある but i thought this was like another way of using it, now i know this is wrong, thank you very much, i'm starting to understanding の as a nominaliser only because of you. I think i get it, の puts everything that came before it into a box so that we can modify this box as we desire right? Thank you very much. I will read the article, by the way sorry for my bad english.
I'm late to you being late, just starting these videos myself. But from my vague recollection of my previous attempt to master grammar, your question refers to a contraction of what they call the explanatory no. I believe having it at the end of the sentence implies that your giving an explanation in some way. Been a bit since I've looked at it, could be wrong. And you could already have a solution by now. But it didn't seem right that this didn't have a reply lol
Greetings, sensei! I'm asking for your wisdom and knowledge again. I run into phrase 七夕のこと教えてって言ったのパンダくんでしょう？ and I'm pretty confused of such usage of の particle. My guess that here は after の have been omitted. Am I right or it's some other grammar? In case it's needed it's Shirokuma cafe episode 13, timing 03:57
You are right. The omission of は happens sometimes. Other particles (not all) can be omitted from time to time in casual speech, So this is saying literally "The one who is tell-explaining about Tanabata, is that you, Panda-kun?". S this is the regular nominalizing の and a very regular のは construction used much more in Japanese than English. Constructions like "(the thing) she saw when she entered the room was..." where English would be more likely to say "when she entered the room she saw..." are very usual in Japanese. So usual that abbreviating them a bit also happens. So this sentence in English would probably be "Who'se explaining Tanabata here, you or me?" - (incidentally that is incorrect grammar because it should be "you or I", but that is what most English speakers would actually say).
Just for completeness and clarity, can the ∅ be explicitly rendered, such as "anime wo miru no mono ga tanoshii" or does this sound wrong/unnatural? Also, would there be any real difference (even if subtle) between "miru no mono" (or "miru no ∅") vs. "miru koto" (as I've been drilling on bunpro jp)?
もの doesn't refer to an activity like watching anime so that has to be こと. Also verb phrases directly modify nouns without any need for の (in fact all three sentence engines can modify nouns on their own as I show in this video: th-cam.com/video/iyVZlaEqU24/w-d-xo.html so if we did use もの it would be アニメをみるもの but in fact の works as a word similar to both もの and こと which is why I don't find the concept of の being short for のもの fully satisfactory. のもの can't be substituted for the "nominalizing" の much of the time.
こんばんは、キュアドッリ先生！もう一同日本語に関する質問お願いします。 Shirokuma Cafe Episode 008 at 15:18 Polar Bear says 明日からのしろくまカフェのランチグリズリー君にかかってるんだから. I'm confused with の after 明日から here. I know about からの usage in things like 友達からのプレゼント, but here we have time expression before から.. And could you also help to get the meaning of かかる verb here? Thanks a lot in advance!
から means "from" here too, and in this case it actually has the same two meanings as in English. So 友達からのプレゼント means "from-friend present" and 明日からのランチ means "from-tomorrow lunches". Presumably the implication is that Grizzly-kun will supply enough fish for several days' lunches, or perhaps even that he is permanently employed as lunch-getter (probably somewhat jocular in either case). かかる here means "hang" in the sense of "depend" (depend literally means "hang down") so the same metaphor is active in both languages. So we have "Because from tomorrow Shirokuma Cafe's lunches are dependent on you, Grizzly-kun".
The meaning wouldn't change, but the structure and nuance changes slightly. The second one is using 明日から as a time-statement prefacing and locating the entire statement, whereas the in the original, 明日からのしろくまカフェのランチ, 明日からの is specificaly modifying the lunches. Note that your second version can have a comma after 明日から, while the original version can't. We should also note that there is an omitted が or は after ランチ (and a logical が if it is は). Note your second version can have a comma after 明日から, while the first one can't. We should also note that while you have it as a run-on sentence there is in fact a spoken pause and two separate subtitles in the original. So to make it clear in print, a comma would be better. It is like 私、さくら。A very informal introduction where the は (and in this case also the copula) is dropped.
Hello Sensei, What is the difference between のが which you covered in this video, and のは and のを? When would I know when to use either one? For example: テレビ ゲームをしたり, サッカーをしたりするのは楽しいです Since you used のが in the sentence アニメを見るのがたのしい, I was wondering why のは was used in the above example alongside the same adjective, たのしい. Thank-you
This is not a set of magical formulas. The logical particles attach to nouns to tell us their function in a sentence. They do exactly the same thing when a verb or clause is nominalized by の to make it a quasi-noun. One needs to look at it that way instead of treating "combined particles" as entities with special rules that have to be learned. You may find this video on particle combinations useful th-cam.com/video/iPiLVZoYhfM/w-d-xo.html
Hi Dolly Sensei, I have encountered 'koto' as a sort of alternative form to this nominalizing 'no', as in, アニメを見ることが好きです。I understand that 'koto' here is a noun itself, whereas 'no' is not, and アニメを見る would be modifying 'koto'. But practically speaking, would there major differences between using either 'no' or 'koto'?
Yes こと "nominailizes" in the same way that の does. Both of them are in practice nouns (or rather pronouns). The particle の is of course a particle, but when it is extended to mean "one" as in 赤いの (the red one) it has effectively become a pronoun. That is why it is able to "nominalize". It is also why we can attach logical particles to it as in 赤いのが好きだ - only nouns (including pronouns) can have the five main logical particles attached th-cam.com/video/dwcTI9qvO-U/w-d-xo.html ) The main difference between the two is that こと tends to handle "situations" and "actions" while tends more to handle の relatively concrete "things" - but this is not absolute. For practical purposes at beginner level you can regard こと when used as a "nominalizer" as pretty much the same as の.
So, I have ran into a sentence that brought me back to this video. Something I find myself doing quite often these days. The sentence is, この大 きい茶碗はだれのですか. Everything before the non logical は is the topic and can be thrown to the side for now. For だれのですか, would this be a だれの (0 が)ですか? The 0 が being our topic correct? At first, I thought this may be a case of nominalizing の but that doesn't seem to be the case. All we got before the 0 が (topic excluded) is だれの, meaning whose . I have a sneaking suspicion in the back of my mind that the のです may indeed be explanatory though since だれですか is an A is B sentence (in question form) so the speaker may be asking for an explanation. As for the large bowl, whose is it (explain/tell me)? ughh. I feel like a teeter totter on this question. Constantly switching sides on what is right. Some assistance would be greatly appreciated.
hmmm. perhaps this is a case where both reasons are valid? I believe the zero が to be absolutely certain. Hmmm but I think it may be grammatical to say, この大 きい茶碗はだれの大 きい茶碗ですか. Even though that sounds wrong, I think it is correct and it is not explanatory. The sentence would have to be この大 きい茶碗はだれの大 きい茶碗のですか in order to be explanatory. That way of thinking, if correct, makes me think that this is not a sentence with の being used for explanatory purposes.
The secret here is that the nominalizing の doesn't get doubled. Which is actually evident from the beginning. さくらの means Sakura's one (just as in English "Sakura's" can mean "Sakura's one"). So just as さくらの means "Sakura's (one)", だれの means "whose (one)". So the sentence simply says "This big tea-bowl speaking-of, whose-is?" Or in natural English , "whose is this big tea-bowl". So it is a n A is B sentence in question form. Just as だれですか is "who is (it)?" だれのですか is "whose is (it)?"
I have a question. In the expression "こころのやさしい" what's the function of the の here? I saw that in a book, a character is described as: まずしいけれど、こころのやさしい げんきなわかいものでした。
In adjectival clauses (only), が is often replaced by の. I talk about the basic logic of this here: th-cam.com/video/wxX6poiuyAI/w-d-xo.html but it is used very commonly even where the original logic is more or less forgotten.
For the fun I tried to translate your very long example to see if I got it : "Watching anime on a warm summer afternoon when the sun is just starting to go down and you had a few drinks is fun." => 「何杯か飲んだあとで」「暖かい夏の」「夕暮れ時に」「アニメを見る」のが楽しい。 Is it correct ? :D
Sensei, I have two cuestions. Why is it アニメを見るの(もの)が楽しい instead of アニメを見るの(こと)が楽しい? What's the difference between using mono and koto? From what I understand, mono is used to talk about more material things (like a flower, a desk, a book), and koto is used with abstract things (like a thought, an implied idea...). I'm probably wrong, but wouldn't it be more normal to use koto instead of mono? My second question is about the use of の and it's difference with こと. I've been said it's the same (and that no is a shorter for koto in this cases), but I don't quite get it. I'm sorry if my english is not that good. I'm actually a spanish native speaker. Apart of all this, I want to thank you for doing these videos. I can't express how grateful I am for all the help you brought to this comunity of people who's trying it's best to learn japanese. You make it so easier. I wish someday the spanish comunity could reach those explanations too.
You are exactly right about もの vs こと. Although Japanese (for Japanese children) textbooks sometimes say that this kind of の stands for のもの that is a bit of an oversimplification. It covers the concepts of both のもの and のこと. By the way I talked about the もの/こと distinction in one of the earlier videos in my main structure course on TH-cam th-cam.com/video/pSvH9vH60Ig/w-d-xo.html
私は本を買った 本は早くてやさし The book was easy it croaked....... Google translated this. 本は早くて読みやすかった If I want to say the book was quick and easy to READ, instead of just quick and easy. How do I know the word ordering? （Referencing the book you wrote fyi)
You can't join adjectives by just putting them together. You need to use the て-form. "The book was quick" does not really work in English "the book was quick to read" is actually not strictly correct English (though colloqially understandable). You were quick to read the book. You could say 本を早く簡単に読んだ "I read the book quickly and easily"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 "You can't join adjectives by just putting them together. You need to use the て" 早い --> 早くて? why did you make it just 早く. Is it because both are forced to be in adverb form? LEARNING FEELS SO GOOD. Thank you!
Konbanwa sensei. Shitsumon ga arimasu. May I know which is correct. 1.テニス を みる のは おもしろい です。 2. テニス を みる のが おもしろい です。 Kindly also explain the difference between the two. Arigatou gozaimasu.
Both are correct. The first means "As for playing tennis, it is fun". The second means "Playing tennis is fun". The first translation is clumsy but the best English can manage, because English does not have grammatical topic. So the real difference is something you can only learn from experience. For more on grammatical topic, please see this: th-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/w-d-xo.html
I may be way off here, but could be this be conceptualized as "it" can be in English? For example, "Anime watching (it) fun is". The Øもの, the thing, the it of watching anime is fun. I had this sentence while immersing, 売り切れていたのなら見つけるまで探す！They were talking about a sold out soda. I had a really hard time wrapping my brain around how the の particle is functioning, because there is no direct object explicitly stated. But if I translate this as, "Sold out was getting, if it ("it" being the Øもの or the soda in this case), until found, search!" now it all seems to make sense. However, I wonder if I may be misunderstanding something grammatically. Thank you for all you do! ありがとうございます！
Thanks for your vids sensei. I have a question about this, in this sentence there is no ha or ga, it is still nominalizing what comes before the no-nominalizing particle? Im having trouble translating this... 嫌なら次から入れるのやめようか？
Sentences this out of context are difficult to interpret. But it is "nominalizing" 入れる - why don't we/you stop (the thing of) putting "it" in. (which will be the ∅が). This is the best I can do unless you tell me what we are talking about.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thanks!, and sorry. It is a conversation between a mother and her son. He asks her why in their curry are corns, and she thinks he doesn't like corns
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 btw afer that, he says that he likes corns in his curry, then he asks for another plate and her mother answers: むしろ好きでしょ？コーン よそはよそうちはうちよ I cant grasp what よそはよそうちはうちよ actually means...
@@pazispeace Literally "that which is inside is inside, that which is outside is outside", This rests on the whole concept of うち vs そと (here よそ) which we discuss here: th-cam.com/video/56sy0qfY0Js/w-d-xo.html The usual meaning of this phrase is "We have our ways/rules, others have theirs" - this is how we do things. It doesn't matter what other households (etc.) do. Probably something in the context makes the reason for saying this clearer.
1. の, as explained in the video, also acts as a pronoun. So 赤いの can mean "the blue one". 2. Any adjectival can qualify the pronoun の (telling us what it is). In the example above we used the adjective 赤い red. 3. Any logical clause can act as an adjectival. So さくらは犬を買った means "Sakura bought a dog" but if we say さくらは犬を買った日 we are saying "(the) sakura-bougt a dog day" which means "the day Sakura bought a dog". As you see the whole sentence さくらは犬を買った has now become an adjectival telling us about 日. More on this here: th-cam.com/video/T5PD1lORiwk/w-d-xo.html 4. の (which as we know can work as a pronoun) can be defined by a logical clause (sentence) working as an adjectival. So さくらは犬を買ったの means the "thing" or "fact" of Sakura buying a dog. So this whole clause is now a pronoun that we can use like a noun in a larger sentence. For example: さくらは犬を買ったのを 知っていなかった = "Sakura bought-dog-thing (I) did not know" or in more natural English "I did not know that Sakura bought a dog". Notice that "that Sakura bought a dog" is also working as a noun in the EnglishルIt could be seen as standing for something like "the fact that Sakura bought a dog". Similarly, さくらは犬を買ったの can be seen as standing for something like さくらは犬を買ったのこと. Much of the time we do not say のこと or "the fact that" but simply use の or "that" to turn a clause into a noun-like entity that we can say more about. Another way of explaining this is that の acts like a "box" in these cases. So we are putting the whole clause before it into the "no-box" so we can then use it as a noun. Does this make sense? If not, it should help to watch the video linked above.
It is just like Mandarin and Cantonese. The entire thing "watch anime" can be treated as a noun without adding ing to the verb "watch". English is a very restrictive and primitive language that REQUIRES some kind of SVO structure. "Watch anime" is an action whether you add ing to it or not. LOL BTW, you can stack as many verbs in the same sentence in Cantonese too. In English, you can only stack at most 2 verbs by using "to". In Cantonese, you can stack as many verbs as you want as long as these verbs follow some "logical" sequence. LOL LOL
Recently I found the following sentence : 杉の間から向うの 山襞の限るのが見えた。And I have a very hard time analyzing it in the way you showed in this video. Could you shed some light at what's going on in this sentence ?
This is a difficult sentence, a little more advanced than what I was describing. Really the only difficult part about it though is the の after 向かう. What it means (depending on context, but most likely) is: "Facing (out) between the cedars, the The limit (boundary?) of the mountain folds could be seen" Literally "That which limited the between-the-cedars-(we-were)-facing mountain folds was visible". I think you can see that the other のs are straightforwardly what I have talked about. The one after 向かう is used because while 向かう can modify 山襞 directly without a の, the meaning would be different. It would mean "the facing-(out)-from-between-the-cedars mountain folds". But what is happening here is that the の is nominalizing the logical clause ∅が杉の間から向かう making it "the (we-were)-facing-from-between-the-cedars mountain folds". Does this clarify and work in context?
Thanks for the answer ! First, I'm sorry I made a mistake while transcribing. It's not 向かう but 向う (so could be also potentially 向こう?) About the context, it's from the book Exploring Japanese Literature, 雪国 story, two characters are sitting in a cedar forest on the mountain side. So It's not very clear, but they are probably looking at the scenery through the cedars. About this part : 山襞の限るのが見えた If I understand correctly we should think of it as (山襞)の(限るのØ/もの）が見えた ? Btw the quite English translation given is "Through the cedars they could see the folds of the mountains off in the distance as they darkened" (I'm not sure where they get the "as they darkened" part)
@@azer84 Well 向こう does change the structure because it is a noun, and so we can scratch the part about nominalizing a logical clause! However, it doesn't make a huge difference to the sense (because 杉の間から向うの山襞 means beyond-between-the-trees mountain folds). Are you sure it was 限る (かぎる) and not 陰る (かげる)? This would mean darken. The 向こう version is much less convoluted and better Japanese! So yes 向かう is possible but a bit messy. The real thing is much better!
....... It's 陰る..... 恥ずかしい ;_; Sorry for the ruckus, I was so troubled by the sentence structure I got my thought stuck and couldn't notice the obvious reading mistakes. And 向う＝向こう is indeed much simpler. Thanks for the help, it's perfectly clear now, and the actual sentence is much less daunting that I thought !
In those cases it is working essentially as a pronoun encapsulating the phrase. In later videos I depict it as a "の-box" that contains and enables us to easily manipulate the phrase that preceded it.
Please clarify for me . I'm confused what the zero pronoun is in " anime wo miru no". Are you saying that the no particle turns it into " the thing of watching anime " so that the zero pronoun is then " the thing of" ?
A zero pronoun is necessary in a logical clause (A is B or A does B clause) where a necessary logical element is "missing" (が is always necessary to any logical clause, so if it is "missing" it must be attached to a zero pronoun). However アニメ を みるの is not a logical clause so it does not have a が-marked subject. "The thing of watching anime" - all of it - is functionally a noun. To make a logical clause with it we have to say something about it. For example アニメ を みるのが すきだ. As you see we now have a が-marked actor and a logical clause. Now if we were to leave off the の, then アニメ を みる is not functioning as a noun and _is_ a logical clause. So this is ∅が アニメ を みる I (or whoever context tells us is ∅) watches anime.
Its "nominalizing" function is rooted in its possessive function. So the first の here is nominalizing in the same way as さくらの (=さくらのもの Sakura's thing). The sentence you quote was out of context and incorrect. It actually reads 公園で殺されたの、同級生らしいの。 Notice that comma. In casual speech such a pause can be used to imply は Modeled structurally it is 公園で殺されたのは、∅が同級生らしいの。 "(as for) the one who got killed in the park, that was one of my classmates". The last の is emphatic and ultimately related to のだ endings: th-cam.com/video/lYvIOi8Q3I8/w-d-xo.html
And thank you for your kind appreciation. More on the subject of the video here: www.patreon.com/posts/52089494 It is open to the public like all my important teachings.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.15 (3/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IVwR87OH0_A/mqdefault.jpg)
I've studied Japanese for quite a few years - at 3 different universities, here in Australia and Japan. I also collect textbooks for different explanations of the same grammar and for different example sentences. You are the first to introduce the concept of the zero pronoun and it suddenly makes so much sense!! ぴんと来ました！
Thank you. The zero pronoun is so crucial isn't it? Without it we have a whole mess of vagueness and guesswork! ぴんと来る瞬間は最高ですね。
Hah, ain't it the truth? I have a considerable language library as well having more books didn't make me a better speaker.
I doubt I'm going to get an answer after so much time but I might as well give it a try. Referring to the last example, where の was used as a nominalizer for the preceding sentence, using a 0が does seem to make sense on its own, but how do you explain the fact that you could just substitute の with こと (or a similarly functioning word)? I guess using こと doesn't change the meaning of the whole sentence, but with it you can't use の's "possessive" (/"belonging"/...) property for the following 0 pronoun anymore, so isn't the function of の an actual nominalization?
watching this is like a brain work out. this concept is a bit confusing for me. going to have to watch this a few more time.
Yes, it's a little tricky to digest at first. I think the simplest way may be to see that the nominalizing の bundles everything before it into itself, so の means "everything that went before の". It's actually very convenient because we can then manipulate a big clause in various ways because we have packed it all up into a little の. It does take a little while to understand but it is a fundamental part of how Japanese works so it's well worth taking the time to digest. As another commenter mentions, it is very close in function to こと.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 ありがとう先生! I have been struggling with a のは construction (笹を食べながらのんびりするのは最高だ) and being able to think of it as 'speaking of の it is 最高' is so much clearer than something like 'の(Øもの）は(Øが）最高だ'.
I am studying Japanese in Japan but have found this area quite difficult to grasp. Having it explained like this is very helpful. Thank you!
Also nice to find that Vtubers were a thing 7 years ago! Although that word probably didn't exit back then...
Cure Dolly was actually inspired by Kizuna AI, the original vtuber (virtual youtuber I believe is what is was called back then) :D
thanks for your clear and straight forward explanation Cure Dolly!
And thank you for taking the time to comment.
Kyua Dorii-sensei! After describing the usage of 'null' /∅ in computer programming and mathematics, and comparing it to Japanese 'zero pronouns', I did a little search and found out something interesting, and perhaps useful: If you enter the English word 'null' into Google Translate or jisho org, the loan-word is ヌル. So Japanese has already absorbed this concept of 'null', probably from math and computer science I imagine. Also, the native Japanese verb ぬる means 'to paint' or 'to spread', while the adjective ぬるい means 'lukewarm; tepid', but can also mean 'lenient' (more commonly ゆるい, though*). Putting it all together, you could refer to the invisible elements as 'null' / ヌル / ∅ elements, with the mnemonic implication that they take on (are painted) whatever background 'colour' is implied by the context, that they are 'leniently' defined to be 'whatever makes sense' in the situation, that you 'spread' them onto the sentence syntax structure wherever they are needed, and even that their meaning is not clearly 'hot' nor clearly 'cold', but 'lukewarm', and essentially defined by the context.
* As a side note, ゆるい also means 'loose' or 'gentle', where you could say that ヌル / ∅ elements fit 'loosely' within the context of the sentence, and thus make Japanese grammar 'gentle' for the user. 😉 [And, incidentally, the verb ゆる means 'to rock (cradle)' and 'to swing' (also, 'to sway', based on sentence usage it seems to me), besides the more vigorous 'to shake' and 'to jolt' meanings), so even ぬるい's less-common-but-more-apt usage as 'lenient' is sort-of-supported by lenient's translation of ゆるい both as adjective and the similar-sounding verb ゆる.]
Anyway, all of this is 'just an idea!', as I often say! (My mind is a brainstorming type of mind at its core, so ideas like these just come to me, more or less at random. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't; I don't judge them because I can never really tell 'what's good' vs. 'what seemed good at the time', myself. I just post them as food for thought for others and let them decide whether the ideas suit them or not.) Feel free to use or not use as it suits you. Just because I wrote this all out doesn't mean I have any expectations about it, so please don't feel the slightest bit 'obligated' to try to use it. Sincerely. 😊
BTW: I'm getting SOOOO much out of your videos. I wish I could do more to support you, but unfortunately don't have much in the way of financial means. Instead I will do my best (がんばる) to recommend your channel by word of mouth. Cheers! 😁💖
This is very interesting! I usually refer to it as a "zero pronoun" because that is what the few scholars who recognize its existence call it. However I use the null sign for it because it isn't in fact a "zero" but a null to which a value can be assigned and to which in practice some value always is assigned. Zero is accurate only in the sense that it "isn't there" in a visible or audible manner.
Another reason for using the term is that the word is easily recognizable. If I said "null pronoun" I have a feeling that not everyone would understand what I was saying - especially as some people still find my enunciation a bit weird.
Please don't worry that you can't support me financially. By commenting liking and subscribing you ARE supporting me. One of the things I love about Patreon is that I can receive financial support without needing to put up any pay walls or do anything to prevent people who need my material but can't buy it from using it. To me that is very important. I have benefited from so much material that I could never have bought that I want to give back to everyone who can benefit from my work
omg I needed this so bad. I kept seeing this usage of のが when reading VNs and I was so confused.
It's hard to be a Brazilian learning Japanese by english, i have to really focus to understand what you say. Great class anyway, i've been studying japanese for 1 month and 15 days now, and i cant really grasp this concept yet, like in this phrase
宏子の家に行くったことある?
I can see that this probably means "Have you ever gone to hiroko's house?" But i can't actually understand why the ことある is used. Thank you very much for this class anyway, one day i will grasp this im sure
This sentence is incorrect. It should be:
宏子の家に行ったことがある
The が is sometimes ungrammatically omitted. 行くった is wholly ungrammatical.
So what does the correct sentence actually mean? It means "The fact (こと) of gone-to-Hiroko's-house exists".
In other words, "(someone) has gone to Hiroko's house". With a rising intonation this could be a question.
This is an example of the "こと-box”, which is closely related to the "の-box". Please see this article - it is open to the public: www.patreon.com/posts/52089494
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
OMG I SEE, NOW I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND IT, thank you so much, i knew the ことがある but i thought this was like another way of using it, now i know this is wrong, thank you very much, i'm starting to understanding の as a nominaliser only because of you. I think i get it, の puts everything that came before it into a box so that we can modify this box as we desire right? Thank you very much. I will read the article, by the way sorry for my bad english.
Late to the party but so glad I found this. VERY helpful. Does the "n" seen before desu after some verbs represent "no"?
Very late actually! The doll passed away a month ago!
I'm late to you being late, just starting these videos myself. But from my vague recollection of my previous attempt to master grammar, your question refers to a contraction of what they call the explanatory no. I believe having it at the end of the sentence implies that your giving an explanation in some way. Been a bit since I've looked at it, could be wrong. And you could already have a solution by now. But it didn't seem right that this didn't have a reply lol
A great explanation, thank you.
Greetings, sensei! I'm asking for your wisdom and knowledge again.
I run into phrase 七夕のこと教えてって言ったのパンダくんでしょう？ and I'm pretty confused of such usage of の particle. My guess that here は after の have been omitted. Am I right or it's some other grammar?
In case it's needed it's Shirokuma cafe episode 13, timing 03:57
You are right. The omission of は happens sometimes. Other particles (not all) can be omitted from time to time in casual speech, So this is saying literally "The one who is tell-explaining about Tanabata, is that you, Panda-kun?". S this is the regular nominalizing の and a very regular のは construction used much more in Japanese than English. Constructions like "(the thing) she saw when she entered the room was..." where English would be more likely to say "when she entered the room she saw..." are very usual in Japanese. So usual that abbreviating them a bit also happens. So this sentence in English would probably be "Who'se explaining Tanabata here, you or me?" - (incidentally that is incorrect grammar because it should be "you or I", but that is what most English speakers would actually say).
Just for completeness and clarity, can the ∅ be explicitly rendered, such as "anime wo miru no mono ga tanoshii" or does this sound wrong/unnatural? Also, would there be any real difference (even if subtle) between "miru no mono" (or "miru no ∅") vs. "miru koto" (as I've been drilling on bunpro jp)?
もの doesn't refer to an activity like watching anime so that has to be こと. Also verb phrases directly modify nouns without any need for の (in fact all three sentence engines can modify nouns on their own as I show in this video: th-cam.com/video/iyVZlaEqU24/w-d-xo.html so if we did use もの it would be アニメをみるもの but in fact の works as a word similar to both もの and こと which is why I don't find the concept of の being short for のもの fully satisfactory. のもの can't be substituted for the "nominalizing" の much of the time.
Thanks
Thank you so much.
こんばんは、キュアドッリ先生！もう一同日本語に関する質問お願いします。
Shirokuma Cafe Episode 008 at 15:18 Polar Bear says 明日からのしろくまカフェのランチグリズリー君にかかってるんだから.
I'm confused with の after 明日から here. I know about からの usage in things like 友達からのプレゼント, but here we have time expression before から..
And could you also help to get the meaning of かかる verb here?
Thanks a lot in advance!
から means "from" here too, and in this case it actually has the same two meanings as in English. So 友達からのプレゼント means "from-friend present" and 明日からのランチ means "from-tomorrow lunches". Presumably the implication is that Grizzly-kun will supply enough fish for several days' lunches, or perhaps even that he is permanently employed as lunch-getter (probably somewhat jocular in either case). かかる here means "hang" in the sense of "depend" (depend literally means "hang down") so the same metaphor is active in both languages. So we have "Because from tomorrow Shirokuma Cafe's lunches are dependent on you, Grizzly-kun".
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly so here if it would be 明日からしろくまカフェのランチグリズリー君にかかってるんだから. The meaning wouldn't change at all?
The meaning wouldn't change, but the structure and nuance changes slightly. The second one is using 明日から as a time-statement prefacing and locating the entire statement, whereas the in the original, 明日からのしろくまカフェのランチ, 明日からの is specificaly modifying the lunches. Note that your second version can have a comma after 明日から, while the original version can't. We should also note that there is an omitted が or は after ランチ (and a logical が if it is は). Note your second version can have a comma after 明日から, while the first one can't. We should also note that while you have it as a run-on sentence there is in fact a spoken pause and two separate subtitles in the original. So to make it clear in print, a comma would be better. It is like 私、さくら。A very informal introduction where the は (and in this case also the copula) is dropped.
Hello Sensei,
What is the difference between のが which you covered in this video, and のは and のを? When would I know when to use either one? For example:
テレビ ゲームをしたり, サッカーをしたりするのは楽しいです
Since you used のが in the sentence アニメを見るのがたのしい, I was wondering why のは was used in the above example alongside the same adjective, たのしい.
Thank-you
This is not a set of magical formulas. The logical particles attach to nouns to tell us their function in a sentence. They do exactly the same thing when a verb or clause is nominalized by の to make it a quasi-noun. One needs to look at it that way instead of treating "combined particles" as entities with special rules that have to be learned. You may find this video on particle combinations useful th-cam.com/video/iPiLVZoYhfM/w-d-xo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you very much!
Hi Dolly Sensei,
I have encountered 'koto' as a sort of alternative form to this nominalizing 'no', as in, アニメを見ることが好きです。I understand that 'koto' here is a noun itself, whereas 'no' is not, and アニメを見る would be modifying 'koto'. But practically speaking, would there major differences between using either 'no' or 'koto'?
Yes こと "nominailizes" in the same way that の does. Both of them are in practice nouns (or rather pronouns). The particle の is of course a particle, but when it is extended to mean "one" as in 赤いの (the red one) it has effectively become a pronoun. That is why it is able to "nominalize".
It is also why we can attach logical particles to it as in 赤いのが好きだ - only nouns (including pronouns) can have the five main logical particles attached th-cam.com/video/dwcTI9qvO-U/w-d-xo.html )
The main difference between the two is that こと tends to handle "situations" and "actions" while tends more to handle の relatively concrete "things" - but this is not absolute. For practical purposes at beginner level you can regard こと when used as a "nominalizer" as pretty much the same as の.
So, I have ran into a sentence that brought me back to this video. Something I find myself doing quite often these days. The sentence is, この大
きい茶碗はだれのですか. Everything before the non logical は is the topic and can be thrown to the side for now. For だれのですか, would this be a だれの (0 が)ですか? The 0 が being our topic correct? At first, I thought this may be a case of nominalizing の but that doesn't seem to be the case. All we got before the 0 が (topic excluded) is だれの, meaning whose . I have a sneaking suspicion in the back of my mind that the のです may indeed be explanatory though since だれですか is an A is B sentence (in question form) so the speaker may be asking for an explanation. As for the large bowl, whose is it (explain/tell me)? ughh. I feel like a teeter totter on this question. Constantly switching sides on what is right. Some assistance would be greatly appreciated.
hmmm. perhaps this is a case where both reasons are valid? I believe the zero が to be absolutely certain. Hmmm but I think it may be grammatical to say, この大
きい茶碗はだれの大
きい茶碗ですか. Even though that sounds wrong, I think it is correct and it is not explanatory. The sentence would have to be この大
きい茶碗はだれの大
きい茶碗のですか in order to be explanatory. That way of thinking, if correct, makes me think that this is not a sentence with の being used for explanatory purposes.
The secret here is that the nominalizing の doesn't get doubled. Which is actually evident from the beginning. さくらの means Sakura's one (just as in English "Sakura's" can mean "Sakura's one"). So just as さくらの means "Sakura's (one)", だれの means "whose (one)". So the sentence simply says "This big tea-bowl speaking-of, whose-is?" Or in natural English , "whose is this big tea-bowl". So it is a n A is B sentence in question form. Just as だれですか is "who is (it)?" だれのですか is "whose is (it)?"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Ahh clear as day now. Thank you for taking the time to answer my question. Much appreciated
I have a question. In the expression "こころのやさしい" what's the function of the の here? I saw that in a book, a character is described as:
まずしいけれど、こころのやさしい げんきなわかいものでした。
In adjectival clauses (only), が is often replaced by の. I talk about the basic logic of this here: th-cam.com/video/wxX6poiuyAI/w-d-xo.html but it is used very commonly even where the original logic is more or less forgotten.
For the fun I tried to translate your very long example to see if I got it :
"Watching anime on a warm summer afternoon when the sun is just starting to go down and you had a few drinks is fun."
=> 「何杯か飲んだあとで」「暖かい夏の」「夕暮れ時に」「アニメを見る」のが楽しい。
Is it correct ? :D
bro she dead
Sensei, I have two cuestions.
Why is it アニメを見るの(もの)が楽しい instead of アニメを見るの(こと)が楽しい? What's the difference between using mono and koto? From what I understand, mono is used to talk about more material things (like a flower, a desk, a book), and koto is used with abstract things (like a thought, an implied idea...). I'm probably wrong, but wouldn't it be more normal to use koto instead of mono?
My second question is about the use of の and it's difference with こと. I've been said it's the same (and that no is a shorter for koto in this cases), but I don't quite get it.
I'm sorry if my english is not that good. I'm actually a spanish native speaker.
Apart of all this, I want to thank you for doing these videos. I can't express how grateful I am for all the help you brought to this comunity of people who's trying it's best to learn japanese. You make it so easier. I wish someday the spanish comunity could reach those explanations too.
You are exactly right about もの vs こと. Although Japanese (for Japanese children) textbooks sometimes say that this kind of の stands for のもの that is a bit of an oversimplification. It covers the concepts of both のもの and のこと.
By the way I talked about the もの/こと distinction in one of the earlier videos in my main structure course on TH-cam th-cam.com/video/pSvH9vH60Ig/w-d-xo.html
PS your English is very good!
私は本を買った 本は早くてやさし
The book was easy it croaked.......
Google translated this.
本は早くて読みやすかった
If I want to say the book was quick and easy to READ, instead of just quick and easy. How do I know the word ordering?
（Referencing the book you wrote fyi)
You can't join adjectives by just putting them together. You need to use the て-form. "The book was quick" does not really work in English "the book was quick to read" is actually not strictly correct English (though colloqially understandable). You were quick to read the book. You could say
本を早く簡単に読んだ
"I read the book quickly and easily"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
"You can't join adjectives by just putting them together. You need to use the て"
早い --> 早くて? why did you make it just 早く. Is it because both are forced to be in adverb form? LEARNING FEELS SO GOOD. Thank you!
@@かえる77 Yes that's right (sorry not to explain) 早く makes the adverbial form which I used because it modifies the verb 読んだ not the noun 本.
Konbanwa sensei. Shitsumon ga arimasu.
May I know which is correct.
1.テニス を みる のは おもしろい です。
2. テニス を みる のが おもしろい です。
Kindly also explain the difference between the two. Arigatou gozaimasu.
Both are correct. The first means "As for playing tennis, it is fun". The second means "Playing tennis is fun".
The first translation is clumsy but the best English can manage, because English does not have grammatical topic. So the real difference is something you can only learn from experience. For more on grammatical topic, please see this: th-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/w-d-xo.html
I may be way off here, but could be this be conceptualized as "it" can be in English? For example, "Anime watching (it) fun is". The Øもの, the thing, the it of watching anime is fun.
I had this sentence while immersing, 売り切れていたのなら見つけるまで探す！They were talking about a sold out soda. I had a really hard time wrapping my brain around how the の particle is functioning, because there is no direct object explicitly stated. But if I translate this as, "Sold out was getting, if it ("it" being the Øもの or the soda in this case), until found, search!" now it all seems to make sense. However, I wonder if I may be misunderstanding something grammatically. Thank you for all you do! ありがとうございます！
Thanks for your vids sensei. I have a question about this, in this sentence there is no ha or ga, it is still nominalizing what comes before the no-nominalizing particle? Im having trouble translating this...
嫌なら次から入れるのやめようか？
Sentences this out of context are difficult to interpret. But it is "nominalizing" 入れる - why don't we/you stop (the thing of) putting "it" in. (which will be the ∅が). This is the best I can do unless you tell me what we are talking about.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thanks!, and sorry. It is a conversation between a mother and her son. He asks her why in their curry are corns, and she thinks he doesn't like corns
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 btw afer that, he says that he likes corns in his curry, then he asks for another plate and her mother answers:
むしろ好きでしょ？コーン
よそはよそうちはうちよ
I cant grasp what
よそはよそうちはうちよ actually means...
@@pazispeace Literally "that which is inside is inside, that which is outside is outside", This rests on the whole concept of うち vs そと (here よそ) which we discuss here: th-cam.com/video/56sy0qfY0Js/w-d-xo.html
The usual meaning of this phrase is "We have our ways/rules, others have theirs" - this is how we do things. It doesn't matter what other households (etc.) do. Probably something in the context makes the reason for saying this clearer.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
I saw the video just before you answered and it made a lot of sense, thank you very much for your help and your videos
Hello, I'm a little confused at despite having "no" as a "logical particle" ( which suppose to link "nouns" ) have to do with clauses.
1. の, as explained in the video, also acts as a pronoun. So 赤いの can mean "the blue one".
2. Any adjectival can qualify the pronoun の (telling us what it is). In the example above we used the adjective 赤い red.
3. Any logical clause can act as an adjectival. So さくらは犬を買った means "Sakura bought a dog" but if we say さくらは犬を買った日 we are saying "(the) sakura-bougt a dog day" which means "the day Sakura bought a dog". As you see the whole sentence さくらは犬を買った has now become an adjectival telling us about 日.
More on this here: th-cam.com/video/T5PD1lORiwk/w-d-xo.html
4. の (which as we know can work as a pronoun) can be defined by a logical clause (sentence) working as an adjectival. So さくらは犬を買ったの means the "thing" or "fact" of Sakura buying a dog. So this whole clause is now a pronoun that we can use like a noun in a larger sentence. For example:
さくらは犬を買ったのを 知っていなかった = "Sakura bought-dog-thing (I) did not know" or in more natural English "I did not know that Sakura bought a dog".
Notice that "that Sakura bought a dog" is also working as a noun in the EnglishルIt could be seen as standing for something like "the fact that Sakura bought a dog". Similarly, さくらは犬を買ったの can be seen as standing for something like さくらは犬を買ったのこと.
Much of the time we do not say のこと or "the fact that" but simply use の or "that" to turn a clause into a noun-like entity that we can say more about.
Another way of explaining this is that の acts like a "box" in these cases. So we are putting the whole clause before it into the "no-box" so we can then use it as a noun.
Does this make sense? If not, it should help to watch the video linked above.
It is just like Mandarin and Cantonese. The entire thing "watch anime" can be treated as a noun without adding ing to the verb "watch". English is a very restrictive and primitive language that REQUIRES some kind of SVO structure. "Watch anime" is an action whether you add ing to it or not. LOL BTW, you can stack as many verbs in the same sentence in Cantonese too. In English, you can only stack at most 2 verbs by using "to". In Cantonese, you can stack as many verbs as you want as long as these verbs follow some "logical" sequence. LOL LOL
done
Recently I found the following sentence : 杉の間から向うの
山襞の限るのが見えた。And I have a very hard time analyzing it in the way you showed in this video. Could you shed some light at what's going on in this sentence ?
This is a difficult sentence, a little more advanced than what I was describing. Really the only difficult part about it though is the の after 向かう. What it means (depending on context, but most likely) is: "Facing (out) between the cedars, the The limit (boundary?) of the mountain folds could be seen" Literally "That which limited the between-the-cedars-(we-were)-facing mountain folds was visible". I think you can see that the other のs are straightforwardly what I have talked about. The one after 向かう is used because while 向かう can modify 山襞 directly without a の, the meaning would be different. It would mean "the facing-(out)-from-between-the-cedars mountain folds". But what is happening here is that the の is nominalizing the logical clause ∅が杉の間から向かう making it "the (we-were)-facing-from-between-the-cedars mountain folds".
Does this clarify and work in context?
Thanks for the answer !
First, I'm sorry I made a mistake while transcribing. It's not 向かう but 向う (so could be also potentially 向こう?)
About the context, it's from the book Exploring Japanese Literature, 雪国 story, two characters are sitting in a cedar forest on the mountain side. So It's not very clear, but they are probably looking at the scenery through the cedars.
About this part :
山襞の限るのが見えた
If I understand correctly we should think of it as (山襞)の(限るのØ/もの）が見えた ?
Btw the quite English translation given is
"Through the cedars they could see the folds of the mountains off in the distance as they darkened"
(I'm not sure where they get the "as they darkened" part)
@@azer84 Well 向こう does change the structure because it is a noun, and so we can scratch the part about nominalizing a logical clause! However, it doesn't make a huge difference to the sense (because 杉の間から向うの山襞 means beyond-between-the-trees mountain folds). Are you sure it was 限る (かぎる) and not 陰る (かげる)? This would mean darken.
The 向こう version is much less convoluted and better Japanese! So yes 向かう is possible but a bit messy. The real thing is much better!
....... It's 陰る..... 恥ずかしい ;_; Sorry for the ruckus, I was so troubled by the sentence structure I got my thought stuck and couldn't notice the obvious reading mistakes. And 向う＝向こう is indeed much simpler. Thanks for the help, it's perfectly clear now, and the actual sentence is much less daunting that I thought !
@@azer84 I'm glad that's all clear now. Without the typos it is a much cleaner and clearer sentence!
Hello Sensei, I know I‘m quite late, but I need to ask what no really does, Is it describing the アニメを見る or what does it
bro she dead
She passed away a year ago, she can't answer you anymore.
What ‘kind’ of particle is の then in the case where it follows a verb-phrase?
In those cases it is working essentially as a pronoun encapsulating the phrase. In later videos I depict it as a "の-box" that contains and enables us to easily manipulate the phrase that preceded it.
Please clarify for me . I'm confused what the zero pronoun is in " anime wo miru no". Are you saying that the no particle turns it into " the thing of watching anime " so that the zero pronoun is then " the thing of" ?
A zero pronoun is necessary in a logical clause (A is B or A does B clause) where a necessary logical element is "missing" (が is always necessary to any logical clause, so if it is "missing" it must be attached to a zero pronoun). However アニメ を みるの is not a logical clause so it does not have a が-marked subject. "The thing of watching anime" - all of it - is functionally a noun. To make a logical clause with it we have to say something about it.
For example
アニメ を みるのが すきだ.
As you see we now have a が-marked actor and a logical clause.
Now if we were to leave off the の, then アニメ を みる is not functioning as a noun and _is_ a logical clause. So this is
∅が アニメ を みる
I (or whoever context tells us is ∅) watches anime.
Okay, の still have its possessive function anyway... So what is happening here:
女:
公園で殺されたの同級生らしいの
Its "nominalizing" function is rooted in its possessive function. So the first の here is nominalizing in the same way as さくらの (=さくらのもの Sakura's thing).
The sentence you quote was out of context and incorrect. It actually reads
公園で殺されたの、同級生らしいの。
Notice that comma. In casual speech such a pause can be used to imply は
Modeled structurally it is
公園で殺されたのは、∅が同級生らしいの。
"(as for) the one who got killed in the park, that was one of my classmates".
The last の is emphatic and ultimately related to のだ endings: th-cam.com/video/lYvIOi8Q3I8/w-d-xo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Once again, thank you very much!
my mom looked at me weird as I watched this video
😢 she passed away a year ago..
Very good again, thank you. Again the zero pronoun.
And thank you for your kind appreciation. More on the subject of the video here: www.patreon.com/posts/52089494 It is open to the public like all my important teachings.
Couldn't understand at all...