What's new

思ってる / って

eeky

先輩
8 Jun 2010
2,431
22
48
Hi,

1. 「それじゃ、あいつ、ダームストラングが自分に合ってただろうって思ってるわけね?」

How do we tell whether the subject of 思ってる is あいつ or the speaker? Do we know it's あいつ because the speaker wouldn't question her own thoughts with ね? Are there other clues in the wording?

2. 「『ヨーロッパにおける魔法教育の一考察』によると、あそこは『闇の魔術』にそうとう力を入れてるんだって」

I suppose って at the end is quoting, is it, indicating that 「あそこは『闇の魔術』にそうとう力を入れてるんだ」 is what the investigation concluded? I guess I feel unsure because によると already seems to express this meaning, so って seems superflous...
 
1)
See my explanation in the following thread.

筆者は友人と話... / 自分はなぜ... / も / 玲姉

あいつ、(=あいつは)「ダームストラングが自分に合ってただろう」って思ってる
This is the same structure as "彼は「話ができて良かった」と思っています(he)".

2)
~によると…だそうだ/らしい is a common structure to show an information (hearsay or the one not by the speaker's observation) and its source. って is a colloquial version of it.
 
To add on, this is a form of normalisation/normalization. You will come across other such similar usage too.
 
To add on, this is a form of normalisation/normalization. You will come across other such similar usage too.
Could you explain what you mean by "this" and what you mean by "normalisation". I understand the general meaning of the word "normalisation", but I do not understand its relevance to either of my questions.
 
Could you explain what you mean by "this" and what you mean by "normalisation". I understand the general meaning of the word "normalisation", but I do not understand its relevance to either of my questions.

Should have been nomalisation (without the "r"). Sorry.

Anyways, quick Google result:
JLPT N4 Grammar: Battle of the Nominalizers (no and koto) 1 of 2

Apparently nomalisation appears in JLPT N4 grammar. That means you will see such grammar forms more if you are going to continue studying Japanese.

The って in sentence 1 with「だろうって思ってる」 is used as a nominaliser

The と in Toritobe's sentence with 「思っています」 is used as a nominaliser.

Thought knowing the term might help with organising your learning.
 
Those are not the nominalizers. Those are the partices for quotation, which eeky-san no doubt knows.

EDIT:
Yeah, we seem to post at the same moment.:)
 
Last edited:
Should have been nomalisation (without the "r").
Um, there is no word "nomalisation". However, from the rest of your post, I gather that you mean "nominalisation".

I am familiar with the concept in Japanese, e.g with の or こと, but I did not realise that と and って were termed nominalisers.

(Toritoribe got there before me!)
 
I can see that the second sentence is not a case of nominalisation but the first one is a close call. On closer look, the first one is not too.

Please just ignore my comments. They were just quotations.
 
Back
Top Bottom