What's new

Some practice sentences I'm not sure about.

For example おかしい and 変. I assume 変 does have a feeling of "odd" or "weird", while おかしい also can mean strange, but more in an amusing way.
The nuance behind おかしい becomes clear when written with kanji: 可笑しい.
 
For example おかしい and 変. I assume 変 does have a feeling of "odd" or "weird", while おかしい also can mean strange, but more in an amusing way.
Yes, your understanding is correct.

Like something in the park was broken and had to be fixed/repaired. I can imagine that the choice of words is strange though. Guess I can exchange some of the words, since I'm mainly interested in the grammar here:
車が直しっぱなしだったのでここに車でこられた。
Because (Someone) left the car in a repaired state (I) was able to come here using the car.
Then 直す is the correct choice of the word. Actually, I thought so, but I was confused because of the logic that you were able to visit the park because the park was left in a fixed state. Usually, you can't go to the park if it's in a fixed state, no? The same goes to the case of the car in a repaired state since you can't use it. I believe the negative form should be used for the main clause (I wasn't able to visit/come). Anyway, ~っぱなし is hardly used for those cases. Instead, 直している would be used.

How about this sentence?:
もし自動のを買うなら割引で買える。
If by any chance (you) would buy and automatic one(assuming they where talking about an electric tool or something like that), (you) could buy with a discount.

I assume that a sentence like that in reality would be formulated in honorific language, but I have yet to repeat honorific and humble language... Well I'm not sure if "automatic one" can be done like that. I have always wondered what "no-adjectives" are, are they maybe used exactly like that?
It's understandable, but I would say more simply 自動の方なら値引できます in that case.
 
The nuance behind おかしい becomes clear when written with kanji: 可笑しい.
Thanks for that hint. I didn't check the Kanji, because Jisho says "Usually written using kana alone" and I on purpose learn new words, where that is the case, without learning the Kanji.

Then 直す is the correct choice of the word. Actually, I thought so, but I was confused because of the logic that you were able to visit the park because the park was left in a fixed state. Usually, you can't go to the park if it's in a fixed state, no? The same goes to the case of the car in a repaired state since you can't use it. I believe the negative form should be used for the main clause (I wasn't able to visit/come). Anyway, ~っぱなし is hardly used for those cases. Instead, 直している would be used.
I think I got it now. The grammar guide uses examples like "leaving the TV turned on overnight" and "Leaving the window open so the cat can jump out". In both cases the Object in question is left in a state and basically not touched anymore, which is different in my examples, since I try to use the Objects that are supposed to be left unchanged.
Does that sound about right?

It's understandable, but I would say more simply 自動の方なら値引できます in that case.
OK so the grammar is basically correct, that is good :emoji_grin:
I think I don't get the first part. I can imagine that 方 is read as ほう and then I would translate it as "In case it is and automatic type, (you) can get a price reduction" I am kinda confused though, because there is no verb and also no だ in the first part of the sentence.
 
Thanks for that hint. I didn't check the Kanji, because Jisho says "Usually written using kana alone" and I on purpose learn new words, where that is the case, without learning the Kanji.
For now you can do that, but eventually you'll have to learn the kanji anyway :). Not just novels, but also video games and manga can and will use kanji even for common words. 成程, 流石, 洒落, 筈, 殆ど, 僅か... Authors don't hesitate one bit to use these.
 
I think I got it now. The grammar guide uses examples like "leaving the TV turned on overnight" and "Leaving the window open so the cat can jump out". In both cases the Object in question is left in a state and basically not touched anymore, which is different in my examples, since I try to use the Objects that are supposed to be left unchanged.
Does that sound about right?
Sorry, I finally realized that I misunderstood "fixed". ~っぱなし can't be used for 直す, anyway, though. Actually, 直しっぱなし means more likely "leaving/continuing the theme park in a fixing/repairing state", not "fixed/repaired", i.e, the park or car is still repairing. That's why I said "you can't go to the park" or "you can't use the car" in that state. 直してある, 修理してある or 直っている is used for "fixed/repaired".

I think I don't get the first part. I can imagine that 方 is read as ほう and then I would translate it as "In case it is and automatic type, (you) can get a price reduction" I am kinda confused though, because there is no verb and also no だ in the first part of the sentence.
Yes, you got the meaning correctly.
なら can be attached to nouns directly. It's an adverbial particle (副助詞) in this case. (Incidentally, なら for conditional, e.g. 晴れるなら, is a conjunctive particle (接続助詞).)
e.g.
彼ならできる(= 彼だったら)
晴れなら行こう(= 晴れだったら/晴れたら)
 
For now you can do that, but eventually you'll have to learn the kanji anyway 🙂:. Not just novels, but also video games and manga can and will use kanji even for common words. 成程, 流石, 洒落, 筈, 殆ど, 僅か... Authors don't hesitate one bit to use these.
Hmm I guess I will learn them, but write them in brackets then. That way I will know them, but I will also know that the word is usually written in kana.

Sorry, I finally realized that I misunderstood "fixed". ~っぱなし can't be used for 直す, anyway, though. Actually, 直しっぱなし means more likely "leaving/continuing the theme park in a fixing/repairing state", not "fixed/repaired", i.e, the park or car is still repairing. That's why I said "you can't go to the park" or "you can't use the car" in that state. 直してある, 修理してある or 直っている is used for "fixed/repaired".
Oh well it seems my example sentence was kinda weird, but one way or the other I understood the grammar and that was the main point of the exercise.
I don't know what else to say here, but thanks for explaining it!

Yes, you got the meaning correctly.
なら can be attached to nouns directly. It's an adverbial particle (副助詞) in this case. (Incidentally, なら for conditional, e.g. 晴れるなら, is a conjunctive particle (接続助詞).)
e.g.
彼ならできる(= 彼だったら)
晴れなら行こう(= 晴れだったら/晴れたら)
Oops it seems I mistook the grammar rules of なら for the rules of the と conditional where a だ must be attached for non conjugated nouns and na-adjectives.
Your examples make sense. However the emphasis of 晴れなら and 晴れだったら should be a bit different in the way that the second one is focuses on the part that comes after the ら right?



Even though this is a thread about sentences I wrote myself, I would like to post a sentence I have a question about even though I did not write it myself. If hope that is OK. I don't think (and hope) that it will present that much work.

この教科書は多くの人に読まれている。
This textbook is being read by a large number of people.

I am wondering about the 多くの人 here. Wouldn't it be simpler to use 多く directly as an i-adjective like 多い人 here?
 
Last edited:
Your examples make sense. However the emphasis of 晴れなら and 晴れだったら should be a bit different in the way that the second one is focuses on the part that comes after the ら right?
In my examples, those three sentences are almost the same in meaning.

Even though this is a thread about sentences I wrote myself, I would like to post a sentence I have a question about even though I did not write it myself. If hope that is OK. I don't think (and hope) that it will present that much work.
No problem, of course.

この教科書は多くの人に読まれている。
This textbook is being read by a large number of people.

I am wondering about the 多くの人 here. Wouldn't it be simpler to use 多く directly as an i-adjective like 多い人 here?
多い is hardly used alone as an attributive. 多くの is used instead. When 多い is the predicative in a modifying clause, it's valid.
e.g.
〇多くの人 many people
△多い人
〇友達の/が多い人 a person who has many friends

Interestingly, 少なくの doesn't have this usage. Instead, 少しの is used for the attributive, and confusingly, 少ない is used in a modifying clause.
e.g.
×少なくの人
〇少しの人 (a) few people
△少ない人
〇友達の/が少ない人 a person who has few friends
 
多い is hardly used alone as an attributive. 多くの is used instead. When 多い is the predicative in a modifying clause, it's valid.
e.g.
〇多くの人 many people
△多い人
〇友達の/が多い人 a person who has many friends

Interestingly, 少なくの doesn't have this usage. Instead, 少しの is used for the attributive, and confusingly, 少ない is used in a modifying clause.
e.g.
×少なくの人
〇少しの人 (a) few people
△少ない人
〇友達の/が少ない人 a person who has few friends

Oh well it might only be me, but since for both predicative usages i-adjectives are used, that is the only part that seems regular to me.
What really confuses me is that jisho.org tags 多く as a の-adjective, but 少し not...

Now I wonder if many i-adjectives should not be used as attributives or if those two are just special cases.


In my examples, those three sentences are almost the same in meaning.
I guess I can live with that, since having more choices to say the same thing is easier to remember than having to remember different rules for each grammar type.


Here is another of my self written sentences:
富士山が登れたのが信じにくいよ.
富士山が登れたというのが信じにくいよ.
It is hard to believe that (you) where able to climb Mount Fuji.

I think both of those sentences have about the same translation.
I am not sure though if the というの is necessary here or if a の is sufficient.
Also I have read that for the potential form が is used instead of を and that's also a point I am not sure about.
 
Oh well it might only be me, but since for both predicative usages i-adjectives are used, that is the only part that seems regular to me.
What really confuses me is that jisho.org tags 多く as a の-adjective, but 少し not...
I don't recommend believing the classification "no-adjective" in (non-Japanese) dictionaries. See the following threads.

The adverb 一々(いちいち)- ichiichi | Japan Forum
"no" adjectives | Japan Forum

As I wrote there, they often use the term without clarifying the correct definition. Japanese dictionaries don't use it. For instance, 多く is a noun and adverb, and 少し is an adverb, which can have a nounal usage.

Now I wonder if many i-adjectives should not be used as attributives or if those two are just special cases.
The -ku form of almost all i-adjectives can't be treated as a noun. The exceptions are not so many. The most common ones are 遠く and 近く, but unlike 多く, 遠くの and 近くの are not the same in meaning as 遠い and 近い, respectively. 遠くの/近くの is only used for "spatially distant", but 遠い/近い also can be used for "relational closeness". For instance, 遠くの親戚 only means "relative(s) living far away", but 遠い親戚 can mean "distant relative(s) in relation (e.g. second cousin)". (Or rather, 遠い親戚 only used for this meaning in most cases.) Similarly, 大学の近くの学校 only means "a school located near by the university", but 大学に近い学校 can mean "a school whose function is close to university".

Here is another of my self written sentences:
富士山が登れたのが信じにくいよ.
富士山が登れたというのが信じにくいよ.
It is hard to believe that (you) where able to climb Mount Fuji.

I think both of those sentences have about the same translation.
I am not sure though if the というの is necessary here or if a の is sufficient.
Also I have read that for the potential form が is used instead of を and that's also a point I am not sure about.
が can't be used to indicate the object of 登れる, since に, not を, is usually used for 登る. が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる. Indeed 山を登る is acceptable, but the nuance is a bit different from 山に登る. See the following thread.

富士山に登ったことがあります | Japan Forum

~のが/というのが is understandable, but ~と(いうの)は信じられない/信じがたい is more natural.
 
I don't recommend believing the classification "no-adjective" in (non-Japanese) dictionaries. See the following threads.

The adverb 一々(いちいち)- ichiichi | Japan Forum
"no" adjectives | Japan Forum

As I wrote there, they often use the term without clarifying the correct definition. Japanese dictionaries don't use it. For instance, 多く is a noun and adverb, and 少し is an adverb, which can have a nounal usage.
Oh well that certainly helps! I remember that when I started learning Japanese about two month ago I read that I should not pay that much attention to the idea of "no-adjectives". For a long time I did exactly that, but now that I was confronted with i-adjectives used like ~くの I am glad that you explained it.

The -ku form of almost all i-adjectives can't be treated as a noun. The exceptions are not so many. The most common ones are 遠く and 近く, but unlike 多く, 遠くの and 近くの are not the same in meaning as 遠い and 近い, respectively. 遠くの/近くの is only used for "spatially distant", but 遠い/近い also can be used for "relational closeness". For instance, 遠くの親戚 only means "relative(s) living far away", but 遠い親戚 can mean "distant relative(s) in relation (e.g. second cousin)". (Or rather, 遠い親戚 only used for this meaning in most cases.) Similarly, 大学の近くの学校 only means "a school located near by the university", but 大学に近い学校 can mean "a school whose function is close to university".
Before you mentioned it I didn't even know that i-adjectives can be used like that with the く ending. I will keep those two exceptions in mind and again thank you for explaining it in such a detailed level!
So there is no huge difference in meaning for most i-adjectives, when using them in the ~i form and using them in with the ~くの ending are compared?

が can't be used to indicate the object of 登れる, since に, not を, is usually used for 登る. が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる. Indeed 山を登る is acceptable, but the nuance is a bit different from 山に登る. See the following thread.

富士山に登ったことがあります | Japan Forum

Now I am kinda confused...This is a copy from Tae Kims grammar guide:
The potential form indicates that something is possible but no actual action is actually taken. While the potential form is still a verb, because it is describing the state of feasibility, in general, you don't want to use the direct object 「を」 as you would with the non-potential form of the verb. For example the following sentences sound unnatural.
  1. 富士山登れた。
  2. 重い荷物持てます。
Here are the versions using either 「が」 or 「は」 instead:
  1. 富士山が登れた。
    Was able to climb Fuji-san.
  2. 重い荷物は持てます。
    Am able to hold heavy baggage.
Well at least that's what the grammar guide says and now as you can imagine I am a bit worried that there could be more things taught wrong in that guide...
Could it be that he mistook the potential form for the passive form in his guide? Since both have the same ending, at least for ichidan-verbs.
Or could it be that for some potential-form-verbs the object is actually indicated by が, but for others not?

~のが/というのが is understandable, but ~と(いうの)は信じられない/信じがたい is more natural.
Well here is another passage from that guide:
「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions while 「がたい」 is usually reserved for less physical actions that don't actually require movement.

Don't get me wrong, I do not try to question you here, but rather I am worried that I learn a lot of wrong stuff in that guide... In this case it is only about naturalness, but the other case is kinda scary...
 
Last edited:
So there is no huge difference in meaning for most i-adjectives, when using them in the ~i form and using them in with the ~くの ending are compared?
Not really. The i-adjectives whose -ku form can perform like a noun are not so many, or more likely very few. The rest I can think of now are just only two; 早く and 遅く, and moreover, these two are rarely used as 早くの and 遅くの alone. They are mostly used in compound word forms, for instance, 朝早くの起床 early-morning waking up or 夜遅くの仕事 late-night work. You can think almost all -ku forms can't be treated as a noun, and 遠くの/近くの are the exception of exceptions since 遠くの/近くの could be different from 遠い/近い in meaning.

Could it be that he mistook the potential form for the passive form in his guide? Since both have the same ending, at least for ichidan-verbs.
Or could it be that for some potential-form-verbs the object is actually indicated by が, but for others not?
Hmm, I checked a corpus and got a result that が doesn't indicate the subject.

滝の左側が登れそうだった
(the left side of the fall seemed able to climbed)
丹沢夜話 ハンス・シュトルテ著

This sounds natural since 滝の左側 "the left side of the fall" is the location of transfer as same as 空を飛ぶ vs. 空が飛べる. So, I have to accept that my previous statement "が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる" was wrong. It's not always at least. Sorry for that.
However, 富士山が登れた sounds awkward to me, because 富士山に登る is the most common and 富士山を登る has a different nuance from it, as I wrote in the thread linked above. For instance, 富士山が登れるような装備 (equipment you can climb Mt.Fuji with) would be acceptable since there is a nuance of purpose/aim in this expression. Anyway, I recommend using the most common expression 山に登れる instead of 山が登れる.

Well here is another passage from that guide:
「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions while 「がたい」 is usually reserved for less physical actions that don't actually require movement.

Don't get me wrong, I do not try to question you here, but rather I am worried that I learn a lot of wrong stuff in that guide... In this case it is only about naturalness, but the other case is kinda scary...
~がたい is used only with volitional verbs, and often expresses "want to do so emotionally, but the situation is hard or impossible to do so". It's often used with the verbs such like 信じる, 許す, 耐える, etc. The point is that it has a nuance of "impossible", so 信じがたい has almost the same nuance as 信じられない, as I wrote in my previous thread. The same goes to 許しがたい vs. 許せない or 耐えがたい vs. 耐えられない.
On the other hand, ~にくい means "hardly to do" with volitional verbs, and "hardly to happen" with non-volitional verbs. The main nuance is "hard to do comfortably/easily" or "hard to do than usual". For instance, わかる is non-volitional, so わかりにくい is OK, but わかりがたい is odd.
The meanings are overlapping, so it's really confusing. I think you would be able to get the nuance gradually.
 
Not really. The i-adjectives whose -ku form can perform like a noun are not so many, or more likely very few. The rest I can think of now are just only two; 早く and 遅く, and moreover, these two are rarely used as 早くの and 遅くの alone. They are mostly used in compound word forms, for instance, 朝早くの起床 early-morning waking up or 夜遅くの仕事 late-night work. You can think almost all -ku forms can't be treated as a noun, and 遠くの/近くの are the exception of exceptions since 遠くの/近くの could be different from 遠い/近い in meaning.
OK in that case I more or less just have to keep 遠い, 近い, 遅い, 多い and 早い in mind and of those especially the first two. And for most others adjectives I don't have to worry about that stuff. I was a bit scared that I would have to learn tons of special meanings for adjectives with く endings and now I'm glad that it is not like that. Well that certainly was a loong explanation... And I wrote I expect it to be rather short hahaha...
But now I know for sure why 多くの was used in that sentences!

Hmm, I checked a corpus and got a result that が doesn't indicate the subject.

滝の左側が登れそうだった
(the left side of the fall seemed able to climbed)
丹沢夜話 ハンス・シュトルテ著

This sounds natural since 滝の左側 "the left side of the fall" is the location of transfer as same as 空を飛ぶ vs. 空が飛べる. So, I have to accept that my previous statement "が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる" was wrong. It's not always at least. Sorry for that.
However, 富士山が登れた sounds awkward to me, because 富士山に登る is the most common and 富士山を登る has a different nuance from it, as I wrote in the thread linked above. For instance, 富士山が登れるような装備 (equipment you can climb Mt.Fuji with) would be acceptable since there is a nuance of purpose/aim in this expression. Anyway, I recommend using the most common expression 山に登れる instead of 山が登れる.
OK I got it. Since the に particle is more natural in case of climbing a mountain it does not make a difference that for the potential form the を particle becomes が. And this is because When we talk about 富士山に登る we have a specific location as a goal and are not "running over a street" for example like 道を走る, where the street is not the goal. Does that sound about right?

~がたい is used only with volitional verbs, and often expresses "want to do so emotionally, but the situation is hard or impossible to do so". It's often used with the verbs such like 信じる, 許す, 耐える, etc. The point is that it has a nuance of "impossible", so 信じがたい has almost the same nuance as 信じられない, as I wrote in my previous thread. The same goes to 許しがたい vs. 許せない or 耐えがたい vs. 耐えられない.
On the other hand, ~にくい means "hardly to do" with volitional verbs, and "hardly to happen" with non-volitional verbs. The main nuance is "hard to do comfortably/easily" or "hard to do than usual". For instance, わかる is non-volitional, so わかりにくい is OK, but わかりがたい is odd.
The meanings are overlapping, so it's really confusing. I think you would be able to get the nuance gradually.
Oh well it seems I didn't think the things through correctly. What I though was that にくい was modifying the physical action of climbing, but that was just a mistake in my head since it is modifying the non physical action of believing right?...
But that can't be all to it, since even though わかる is a non physical action it is still modified by にくい. In that sense your explanation distinguishing "seems impossible" and "hard to do comfortably" seems to be more accurate. But since it is also more complicated, I guess the physical and non-physical explanation can be kept as some kind of "rule of thumb".


This time the whole thing got quite complicated, but at the same time I feel like it helped me a lot in understanding. Especially since discussing it here in the forum makes me think about it much deeper and at the same time I can feel safe that I don't learn the stuff wrong, since it is supervised. Anyway I will wait for you checking my reproduction, to make sure it is correct, before posting new stuff, since it was quite a lot this time.
 
Last edited:
OK in that case I more or less just have to keep 遠い, 近い, 遅い, 多い and 早い in mind and of those especially the first two.
Right. That's the best choice.

OK I got it. Since the に particle is more natural in case of climbing a mountain it does not make a difference that for the potential form the を particle becomes が. And this is because When we talk about 富士山に登る we have a specific location as a goal and are not "running over a street" for example like 道を走る, where the street is not the goal. Does that sound about right?
Yes, your understanding is correct.:emoji_thumbsup: You can think that 山 mostly refers to the summit of the mountain in 山に登る. That's why the particle for the destination に is used here instead of を. Now, you can see why 崖登る is common for "to climb a cliff", not 崖登る, right? :emoji_wink: (And needless to say, 崖が登れる is also common.)

I guess the physical and non-physical explanation can be kept as some kind of "rule of thumb".
Hmm, there are so many exceptions for "physical vs. non-physical" classification (e.g. 考えにくい, 理解しにくい, おぼえにくい, 捨てがたい, 近寄りがたい, 離れがたい, etc.), so I don't recommend it. I think the reason "「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions" is just from the meaning "hard to do".

Especially since discussing it here in the forum makes me think about it much deeper and at the same time I can feel safe that I don't learn the stuff wrong, since it is supervised
That's exactly a merit to use forums like here JREF, which is far better than self-teaching, I believe.🙂:
 
Hmm, there are so many exceptions for "physical vs. non-physical" classification (e.g. 考えにくい, 理解しにくい, おぼえにくい, 捨てがたい, 近寄りがたい, 離れがたい, etc.), so I don't recommend it. I think the reason "「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions" is just from the meaning "hard to do".
OK, I will refrain from using the physical/non-physical rule then and will use your's instead.:emoji_thumbsup:

Hmm there was less stuff to answer than expected this time. I will post another two of my sentences then.
1)
A:明日はどうして行かないの?
Why not got tomorrow?
B:寒くなるそうだし雨が降るそうだから。
Because (I) heard that it will be cold and because (I) heard it will rain (with the nuance that there may be other reasons).

Here I am not sure if it is correct to use そうだ two times in one sentence like that. I can imagine another way would be to combine the two reasons using the て form like that:
寒くなって雨が降るそうだから。
But I am kinda curious if the first one is also possible. Also I think the second one sound more direct, since there is no nuance that there could be other reasons.
2)
まだ聞かないような話を聞いた。
(I) heard a story like (I) did not hear yet.
Well the examples the grammar guide was using with this ような grammar where simpler so I guess there is a chance that this does not work. But I cannot think of another way to express something like that.
 
1)
Both work fine. 雨も sounds more natural because of the meaning "too/also" of も. As for the nuance that other reasons exist, it's the best to use し also for the last example, i.e., 寒くなるそうだし雨も降るそうだし / 寒くなって雨も降るそうだし. (It's obvious that this is the "reason" from the context even without から at the end.)

2)
まだ聞いていない/聞いたことが(or の)ないような話を聞いた。
This ~ている/~たことがある expresses "experience".
 
1)
Both work fine. 雨も sounds more natural because of the meaning "too/also" of も. As for the nuance that other reasons exist, it's the best to use し also for the last example, i.e., 寒くなるそうだし雨も降るそうだし / 寒くなって雨も降るそうだし.
What about something like this?
寒くなるそうな上に雨も降るそうだし。

Of all the N2 grammar I've been studying, I'm still trying to figure out what's used only in writing vs. conversation.
 
The hearsay ~そう can't be attached to 上に. (There is no problem with そう as "to seem/look like", e.g., 寒くなそうな上に.) 寒くなる上に雨も降るそうだし works fine. そうだ can cover also 寒くなる here.
上に can be used in casual conversation, but could sound a bit stiff. I would use 寒くなって雨も降るそうだし.
 
The conversational version you wrote is more natural/intuitive for me (most of my Japanese usage is currently casual conversation on a daily basis), but I mainly wasn't sure about the combination of hearsay ~そう with 上に. Now I understand that in such case, the そうだ at the end can cover both before and after 上に. Thank you!
 
1) I understand that the も-particle makes sense here. I tend to forget the existence of the も-particle particle quite often and think only in terms of わ and が then. I should practice the usage of the も-particle a bit so I get more familiar with it I guess...
I did not know that し can "substitute" for から to produce the "possibly more reasons" nuance, but I will keep it in mind.
I also thought about the 上に grammar since it presented itself right in front of my eyes. It does not seem that difficult to use and even if it may a bit early to start learning jlpt2 grammar, it cannot harm. In the very end I want to know all of the grammar anyway :emoji_grin:

2)
まだ聞いていない/聞いたことが(or の)ないような話を聞いた。
This ~ている/~たことがある expresses "experience".
OK, I am already familiar with those types of grammar and now that you made me think about it, I can see why they are necessary here. Also I am glad that this combined with ような works the way I intended it to work.

Even if it is not directly related to this sentence. Now that I think about it, since it is possible to omit the い in ~ていない to get ~てない, wouldn't it be difficult to distinguish it from the negative form of ~てある? Or does ~てある not have a negative form maybe?


Here is a another sentence I wrote:
周りがいつもうるさいから寝坊することがありえない。
周りがいつもうるさいから寝坊出来ない。
周りがいつもうるさいから寝坊することが出来ない。
Because the surroundings are always noisy, I cannot oversleep.

Well I don't know which of those sentences are actually correct and there may even be more possibilities. (Exchanging が's for は's or not putting する before the こと)
Is there a difference in what those sentences mean?
 
Last edited:
2)
Indeed the negative form of ~てある and the contraction of ~ていない are seemingly the same. You need to interpret it from the context, but it's usually obvious.
e.g.
A: 机の上に財布置いてある?
B: ううん、置いてないよ。別の場所に置いたんじゃないの?
A: いや、他には置いてないはずなんだけど。

B's 置いてない in the second line is the negative of 置いてある. This is a description about non-existence of the wallet. On the other hand, A's 置いてない in the third line is the contraction of 置いていない since this is the negative of A's volitional action. The difference in meaning is often subtle, anyway.

3)
Only the first one can be correct. 寝坊することはありえない is more common, though. You can omit すること there, thus, 寝坊はありえない is also correct.
The problem in the second and last sentences is that the object in the construction ~だから…できない must be an aim, a purpose or positive thing. 寝坊(する) is not your purpose there, that's why those are wrong. There is no problem with, for instance, 周りがいつもうるさいから熟睡(することが)できない。 or 周りがいつもうるさいから勉強(することが)できない。.
Incidentally, 明日は試験だから、寝坊できない "Because I have an exam tomorrow, I can't oversleep" is valid. As you can see, this できない actually means "shouldn't/mustn't". Can you see the difference from 明日は試験だから、緊張して眠れない "Because I have an exam tomorrow, I'm nervous and can't sleep"?
 
A: 机の上に財布置いてある?
B: ううん、置いてないよ。別の場所に置いたんじゃないの?
A: いや、他には置いてないはずなんだけど。
Well the first two sentences are good to understand, but the third sentence is a bit hard. Does it mean something like: "What the...I expected I was not putting it somewhere else"?
The なんだけど confused me a bit, but it is just kind of a filler giving the sentence a cursing intonation right?

Incidentally, 明日は試験だから、寝坊できない "Because I have an exam tomorrow, I can't oversleep" is valid. As you can see, this できない actually means "shouldn't/mustn't".
OK I think I got it.
ありえり/ありうる and it's negative simply describe the possibility (it can/can not exist) of something.

できる and it's negative are restricted to things one aims for.
できる is used to say that a person can do something (the person is either good at something or expects/is expected to be able to do something).
できない means the person is not good at something or expects/is expected not to be able to do something. But the negative can also mean that the person tries not to do something?
 
Well the first two sentences are good to understand, but the third sentence is a bit hard. Does it mean something like: "What the...I expected I was not putting it somewhere else"?
The なんだけど confused me a bit, but it is just kind of a filler giving the sentence a cursing intonation right?
なんだけど is used to soften the nuance of the sentence, like "..." at the end of the sentence in written language. The rest is OK.

ありえり/ありうる and it's negative simply describe the possibility (it can/can not exist) of something.
Right. ~ことはありえない is the negative potential of "the present form of verbs + ことは/がある", meaning "it's possible to ~" or "sometimes".
e.g.
あの店に行くと彼女に会うことがある。
When I go to the shop, it's possible to see her (= I sometimes see her).

Thus, ~ことはありえない means "it never happens".

できる and it's negative are restricted to things one aims for.
できる is used to say that a person can do something (the person is either good at something or expects/is expected to be able to do something).
できない means the person is not good at something or expects/is expected not to be able to do something. But the negative can also mean that the person tries not to do something?
Yes, your understanding is basically correct, but できない expresses more likely "their will or duty not to do" rather than "trying not to do".
 
なんだけど is used to soften the nuance of the sentence, like "..." at the end of the sentence in written language. The rest is OK.
Yes, your understanding is basically correct, but できない expresses more likely "their will or duty not to do" rather than "trying not to do".
I'm glad that those are mostly correct, since I was not completely sure there.
Guess with that I got a good idea of those types of grammar, thanks again :emoji_grin:

あの店に行くと彼女に会うことがある。
When I go to the shop, it's possible to see her (= I sometimes see her).
So what would be the difference if one would put ありえる at the end of the sentence
instead?


Here is another sentence:
私の頭のおかげでたくさん勉強せずに試験に合格した。
Thanks to my head I passed the exam without learning a lot.

Actually I wanted to to make it "Thanks to my good head", since I came across the expression "頭がいい" a few time already, but I did not know how to fit いい in there.
Anyway the new grammar type that was new to me here is the せず and I think I could have also used しないで instead of せずに.
Since this grammar is new to me and the sentence is rather long, I wanted to make sure it is correct.
 
Probably you want 能力 instead of 頭. Even in English it sounds odd. In English you can say "he has a good head" but you don't say "Thanks to his good head, he passed." But I suppose you could say 頭がいいから勉強せず(に)試験を合格しました。
 
So what would be the difference if one would put ありえる at the end of the sentence
instead?
The probability of ありえる is less than ある, but the meaning is basically the same.

Here is another sentence:
私の頭のおかげでたくさん勉強せずに試験に合格した。
Thanks to my head I passed the exam without learning a lot.

Actually I wanted to to make it "Thanks to my good head", since I came across the expression "頭がいい" a few time already, but I did not know how to fit いい in there.
Anyway the new grammar type that was new to me here is the せず and I think I could have also used しないで instead of せずに.
Since this grammar is new to me and the sentence is rather long, I wanted to make sure it is correct.
おかげ performs as a noun, so the attributive form (short form of verb/i-adjective, the stem of na-adjective + な, noun + の) is used to modify it.
e.g.
彼がいたおかげで仕事が早く済んだ。
値段が安いおかげでたくさん買えた。
部屋が静かなおかげでよく眠れた。
彼女のおかげで助かった。

The problem of 私の頭がいいおかげ is that it sounds rather arrogant. Even if the subject is not the speaker, e.g., 彼は頭がいいおかげで, it could sound sarcastic. As mdchachi-san used, から or ので is more appropriate in your example.
e.g.
彼は頭がいいので、あまり勉強せずに試験に合格した。
彼は頭がいいので、あまり勉強しないで試験に合格した。
彼は頭がいいので、あまり勉強しなくても試験に合格した。
(This も means "even".)

As for ~ずに vs. ~ないで, the following thread might be somewhat helpful.
V~ず and V~ずに | Japan Forum
 
Back
Top Bottom