- 27 Apr 2018
- 167
- 20
- 33
Hello, friends:
I've been listening to a dialogue between two friends at a birthday party. A guest has just given the host (whose birthday it is) a present of a sweater. The host says it's a wonderful sweater, and the friend replies: "I made it myself;' 「私が作ったの」.
Now, I know that the 私が indicates that what follows is a dependent clause, and sure enough the 作ったの would seem to indicate that it's a nominal clause. I know from Toritoribe-sama that の when modified by a nominal clause (or adjective) can act as a pronoun, so の here is standing in for sweater. But this is the friend's whole statement, so the dependent clause isn't completed by a main clause. Or so I am thinking anyway.
The friends are speaking in direct style, so it's possible the copula だ has been dropped, in which case the main clause would simply be "it is." In other words: "[it is a sweater] that I've made myself"
Ok, how half-baked is my interpretation?
Thanks very much, as always!
I've been listening to a dialogue between two friends at a birthday party. A guest has just given the host (whose birthday it is) a present of a sweater. The host says it's a wonderful sweater, and the friend replies: "I made it myself;' 「私が作ったの」.
Now, I know that the 私が indicates that what follows is a dependent clause, and sure enough the 作ったの would seem to indicate that it's a nominal clause. I know from Toritoribe-sama that の when modified by a nominal clause (or adjective) can act as a pronoun, so の here is standing in for sweater. But this is the friend's whole statement, so the dependent clause isn't completed by a main clause. Or so I am thinking anyway.
The friends are speaking in direct style, so it's possible the copula だ has been dropped, in which case the main clause would simply be "it is." In other words: "[it is a sweater] that I've made myself"
Ok, how half-baked is my interpretation?
Thanks very much, as always!