遠い / 生 / 形をとった / ぶつけて

[eeky]

Hello,


1. 遠くの山がぼんやり見えます。

Translation given: "A distant mountain can be seen dimly."

Would it be possible to write 遠い山 instead of 遠くの山? What is the difference?


2. 生教材以外の「読み物」

I'm assuming this basically means "teaching materials other than the reading materials", but what does 生 mean in this context?


3. 今回の改訂版では、マグロインが改訂作業全般を担当し 、三浦がそれに目を通すという形をとった。

I think I get the gist of most of this, but I don't really understand how 目を通すという relates to 形をとった, or how 形をとった relates to the rest of the sentence (for example, is the subject of とった mentioned?).

How does this last part work grammatically?


4. ボールをぶつけて、ガラスを壊してしまいました。

The translation given is "[My] ball struck the window and broke it". How does this work, given that the ball appears to be the object of ぶつけて?

 

[Toritoribe]

1. 遠くの山がぼんやり見えます。
Translation given: "A distant mountain can be seen dimly."
Would it be possible to write 遠い山 instead of 遠くの山? What is the difference?

遠くの＝遠くにある/いる

遠い親戚: distant relative(s) (in relation)
遠くの親戚: relative(s) living far away

近くの公園: a nearby park

2. 生教材以外の「読み物」
I'm assuming this basically means "teaching materials other than the reading materials", but what does 生 mean in this context?

生教材以外の「読み物」
the reading materials other than raw teaching materials

3. 今回の改訂版では、マグロインが改訂作業全般を担当し、三浦がそれに目を通すという形をとった。
I think I get the gist of most of this, but I don't really understand how 目を通すという relates to 形をとった, or how 形をとった relates to the rest of the sentence (for example, is the subject of とった mentioned?).
How does this last part work grammatically?

The core of the sentence is 今回の改訂版では、形をとった. The clause マグロインが改訂作業全般を担当し 、三浦がそれに目を通す is modifying 形.

We took the form that ~ in this revised edition.

As for という, the following thread might be somewhat helpful.(This case is the outside relation.)
koto & to iu in "to iu koto", "to iu imi", "to iu no wa" etc

4. ボールをぶつけて、ガラスを壊してしまいました。
The translation given is "[My] ball struck the window and broke it". How does this work, given that the ball appears to be the object of ぶつけて?

Both ぶつける and 壊す are transitive verbs. The subject is "I" (or maybe someone else when obvious from the context).

 

[eeky]

遠くの＝遠くにある/いる
遠い親戚: distant relative(s) (in relation)
遠くの親戚: relative(s) living far away
近くの公園: a nearby park.

Thanks for your reply, Toritoribe. Are you saying that 遠い and 近い cannot be directly used to say something is spatially close or distant, but can only be used for more figurative senses (like distant relatives)? Do 遠い山 and 近い公園 mean anything, or are they nonsensical?

the reading materials other than raw teaching materials.

Oops, I got the sense of "other than" the wrong way round, which was bad! Yes, I found "raw" as a possible meaning, but "raw teaching materials" means nothing to me in this context. Not to worry.

Both ぶつける and 壊す are transitive verbs. The subject is "I" (or maybe someone else when obvious from the context).

So, do you agree that the translation I quoted is not very accurate? I originally thought that the sentence meant something like "I struck (hit with a bat / kicked / etc.) the ball and broke the window". Do you agree with that revised translation?

 

[Toritoribe]

Are you saying that 遠い and 近い cannot be directly used to say something is spatially close or distant, but can only be used for more figurative senses (like distant relatives)? Do 遠い山 and 近い公園 mean anything, or are they nonsensical?

No, it's rather that 遠く/近く is used only for "spatially." So 遠い山 is acceptable(遠くの山 sounds more natural, though).
FYI, 遠く/近く acts like a noun, similar to 遠い/近い場所.

○遠い町
○遠くの町

○遠い昔
×遠くの昔

駅に近い公園（公園は駅に近い。）
駅の近くの公園（公園は駅の近くだ。）

So, do you agree that the translation I quoted is not very accurate? I originally thought that the sentence meant something like "I struck (hit with a bat / kicked / etc.) the ball and broke the window". Do you agree with that revised translation?

You can think it as ボールをガラスにぶつけて、ガラスを壊してしまいました, literally, "I hit the window with the ball, and broke it." The transitive verbs ぶつける and 壊す suggest the existence of the doer ("someone did it"), comparing to the intransitive verbs' one; ボールがぶつかって、ガラスが壊れてしまいました.

 

[eeky]

You can think it as ボールをガラスにぶつけて、ガラスを壊してしまいました, literally, "I hit the window with the ball, and broke it."

Wouldn't that literally mean "I hit the ball with the window"?

Similarly, in the original ボールをぶつけて、ガラスを壊してしまいました, does ボールを not mean that the ball is the direct object of some verb? And if the verb is ぶつけて, does that not mean that the ball, not the window, is the thing that is struck, or hit? I can't seem to get my head around this.

 

[Glenn]

First you hit the ball, then the ball broke the glass. Does that make sense?

 

[eeky]

First you hit the ball, then the ball broke the glass. Does that make sense?

Yes, that makes perfect sense. It differs, though, from the original translation (from a dictionary) and also from Toritoribe's explanation, both of which have the window as the object of "hit". This is what is confusing me.

 

[Toritoribe]

OK, another non-literal but more appropriate translation

ボールをガラスにぶつけた: I threw the ball at the window.
the direct object: the ball
the target: the window

ぶつける doesn't mean that the ball is hit by something(e.g. by bat) in this case. Does this make sense?

 

[Glenn]

You know what, I was wrong. You aren't hitting the ball. It looks like, as I first suspected but changed my mind then went back to then changed my mind again and am now back to, ぶつける acts like 当てる does. That especially seems the case in light of the definition and example sentence in 大辞林:

(1)投げて当てる。
「杭に石を―・ける」

So, you're using the ball to hit the window, and you break the window. In the above example you use the stone to hit the nail. Actually you're throwing it, too. So you throw the ball and it hits the glass, and you break the glass. Glass isn't mentioned in the first part, but if it were, it would be like the above formulation: ガラスにボールをぶつける.

Now, let's wait for Toritoribe to come back (or some other NSoJ to come along) and let us know which is right, because as of now, my confidence isn't very high.

Sorry for confusing the issue.

[Edit] So it seems we don't have to wait. Well, there you have it anyway.

Sorry for confusing the issue.

[Edit] So it seems we don't have to wait. Well, there you have it anyway.

 

[Toritoribe]

Sorry, I was in the lunch time.

The key of the confusion, I think, is the particles.

バットをボールにぶつける＝バットでボールを打つ: to hit a ball with a bat

The core concept of AをBにぶつける is "hit B with A (by throwing/kicking/hitting with bat, intentionally/accidentally)". So "to throw the ball at the window" would be most common for ボールをガラスにぶつける, but you can also use the example sentence in your book when you accidentally hit the window with the ball and broke it while carrying the ball in your hands. (Probably you're carrying a very hard one, like a ball made from stone.)

 

[eeky]

Thanks to everyone, but, sorry, I still do not understand this at all. Please tell me at which step I am going wrong:

1. In ボールをぶつけて、ガラスを壊してしまいました, the word ボール is the direct object of the verb ぶつけて.

2. ぶつける means "hit" or "strike". (This is the definition from the dictionary, in the same entry that gives the example sentence quoted.)

3. In English, therefore, the word "ball" is the direct object of the verb "hit" or "strike".

4. The meaning of the relevant part of the sentence is therefore "I (or someone) struck, or hit, the ball".

 

[undrentide]

I think it's more like "I made the ball hit against the window".

 

[eeky]

I think it's more like "I made the ball hit against the window".

Using the words ボール and ぶつける, how would you write "I hit the ball"?

 

[Toritoribe]

OK, the word "object" also seems to make you confusing. The thing you hit is NOT the ball BUT the window. You hit THE WINDOW with the ball or you are using the ball to hit the window, as Glenn-san wrote.
If the sentence is ボールにぶつける, it means you hit the ball (with something).

You need to pay attention to the difference of the function of particles among different types of verbs.
e.g.
"to hit a ball with a bat"

バットをボールにぶつける/当てる(に indicates the one you hit.)

ぶつ・ける

［1］ 投げて当てる。

・ 杭に石を―・ける

［2］ 自分の体や所有物を、他の物に打ち当てる。

・ 柱に頭を―・けてこぶを作った

「ぶつける」の検索結果 - Yahoo!辞書

バットでボールを打つ/叩[たた]く(を indicates the one you hit.)

たた・く 【▼叩く・▼敲く】

［1］ 手や手に持った固い物で、物や体に強い衝撃を与える。打つ。目的は、破壊、音を出す、攻撃、注意を喚起、確認、その他いろいろある。

・ クルミを金づちで―・いて割る

「たた」の検索結果 - Yahoo!辞書

 

[eeky]

e.g.
"to hit a ball with a bat"
バットをボールにぶつける/当てる(に indicates the one you hit.)

Hi Toritoribe, I'm sorry to keep going on about this, but it is causing me great confusion and I would very much like to get to the bottom of it. I would be most grateful to you if you could answer these questions:

1. Do you agree that を usually marks what in English would be the direct object, and that に usually marks what in English would be the indirect object?

2. Do you agree that if these usual rules were applied to バットをボールにぶつける, the translation would be "hit a bat with a ball".

3. Is the reason why the translation is "hit a ball with a bat" and not "hit a bat with a ball" because of the special properties of the verb ぶつける?

 

[Glenn]

I'd say yes to those. I'm pretty sure the reason the particles are the way they are is because of the verb. 当てる is similar in this regard (and semantically as well...). For instance: 罪人に鞭を50回当てる. This means to hit the criminal 50 times with a whip. Something about the verb is what makes the particles what they are (and I really don't know what it is to be honest). ぶつける is in the same category.

Think of this sentence using "hit": "I hit my head on the table." Here (to my surprise) "hit" acts a lot like ぶつける in definition 2 -- 自分の体や所有物を、他の物に打ち当てる。 Here's another similar example: "I hit the wall (with my car)." I guess it has to do something with movement in all cases. For example, you're moving the ball towards and into the glass in your example, the stone towards and into the stake in the dictionary example, your head into the table in the above example, and your car into the wall in the last one. In this sense, what you're moving gets marked with を, because that's what's being acted upon, and what's getting hit gets marked with に because it's the destination.

OK, so maybe that's what about these words causes the particle choice. And not to get too personal, but it's kind of amazing what one can think of in the shower.

 

[eeky]

Think of this sentence using "hit": "I hit my head on the table."

That seems like a really helpful example, Glenn. Perhaps I can think of バットをボールにぶつける as meaning "hit a bat against a ball", which is close enough to Toritoribe's "hit a ball with a bat".

 

[Toritoribe]

I guess it has to do something with movement in all cases. ... In this sense, what you're moving gets marked with を, because that's what's being acted upon, and what's getting hit gets marked with に because it's the destination.

completely agree with this interpretation. You can think that を indicates the object of 動かす, "to make move."

ボールを動かしてガラスにぶつける
"to make the ball move and hit the window"

バットを動かしてボールにぶつける
"to make a bat move and hit a ball"

 

[eeky]

Thanks everyone, it is a little clearer to me now.