What's new

出てしまうというところで vs 出たところで

zuotengdazuo

Sempai
8 Dec 2019
830
19
28
折紙は短く答えると、そのまま教室の外に歩いていった。
狂三は数秒の間逡巡するようにあごに指を当てていたが、折紙が廊下に出てしまうというところで、慌てた様子で席を立ってきた。

Context: 折紙 asked 狂三 to go to the corridor to discuss something with her.

Hi. What is the difference between 出てしまうというところで and 出たところで, which means "after 折紙 walked to the corridor"?
Thank you.
 
折紙 didn't completely go out to the corridor yet in 出てしまうというところで, thus, she was on the process of going out, but still in the classroom (for instance, she was just about to cross the doorway). On the other hand, she already went out to the corridor, and was there in 出たところで.
 
Thank you again.
"in a situation/scene she was about to go out".
I know "verb (dictionary form)+ところ" can mean "somebody was about to do something", as in 今、風呂に入るところなので、あとでこちらから電話します。
So doesn't 出るところで already mean "in a situation/scene she was about to go out"? What meaning or nuance do the しまう and という add to the 出るところで respectively?
 
The action 出る has a range. It can refer to the moment she has started to move or she has already finished the action, i.e., somewhere between the starting point and the finishing point of the action depending on the context. 出るところ indeed can work in your example, but 出てしまうというところ can identify the situation as "the moment she was just about to cross the doorway" or the like.
 
Thanks again.
but 出てしまうというところ can identify the situation as "the moment she was just about to cross the doorway" or the like.
So to express "the moment she was just about to cross the doorway" or the like, are しまう and という both necessary? Can we use 出てしまうところで or 出るというところで for that meaning?
 
Have you never learned ~てしまう? You've come across so many という, no?
 
Have you never learned ~てしまう? You've come across so many という, no?
Well, I know the usage of ~てしまう and I've asked about lots of という. I'm just less familiar with ~てしまうというところで than "verb (た/る/ている form)+ところ".

Edit: I'm just asking for confirmation: this ~てしまう is necessary but という can be omitted without changing the nuance because the という is just like "that" (like introducing a content clause), right?
 
Last edited:
The meaning is the same, but I don't think the "nuance" is the same. It's just hard to translate/explain it.
 
Back
Top Bottom