転落 / 日 / という / 金払えって / と

eeky

先輩
Joined
8 Jun 2010
Messages
2,431
Reaction score
22
Hi,


1. 屋根にのぼって雪おろしをしているうちに、誤って足を すべらせて転落、命を失う場合もあるという。

Translation given: "There are even incidents of people who mistakenly slip, fall, and lose their lives when climbing a roof to remove accumulated snow."

The way I'm reading this, 足をすべらせて is one unit, and 命を失う is another, and I don't really see how 転落 connects with either. It would make sense to me if it meant 転落を失う + 命を失う, but does 転落を失う make sense? Failing that, I would expect something like ...足をすべらせて転落して、命を失う...


2. その日は東風にあおられて市の中心部を焼き尽くした。

Translation given: "The fire, driven by an east wind, destroyed the center of the city."

Is 日 just a typo for 火 (someone typed "hi" and accidentally accepted the wrong kanji)?


3. 洪水で何百という畑が冠水した。

Translation given: "Hundreds of fields were submerged in the flood."

In this case does という impart a sense of "so it's said"?


4. 「いいから金払えっての」「さっさとマネーよこせネ」

Translation given: "Just pay up already, I'm saying." / "Hand over the money, Yo!"

What is the grammar of 金払えって?


5. 目的はりっぱだが、能力の限界を考えるとね。

Translation given: "The objective is fine, but I have to think of the limits of my ability."

What is the meaning of と here? For the meaning "I have to think", I think I would expect 考えないと.
 
1)
Right. 転落 is a verb, as in the translation "fall"(slip, fall, and lose). Although I think 足をすべらせて indicates the cause of 転落する(fall by slipping).

2)
Probably so, judging from the given translation. But その日は is also possible in a context.
e.g.
山火事が起きても住宅地にまで被害が及ぶことは滅多にないが、その日は東風にあおられて市の中心部を焼き尽くした。

3)
3 数量を表す語に付いて、…に達する、…にも及ぶ、などの意を表す。「八千メートル―高所」「何万人―観光客」
という - goo辞書

何百という畑 = 何百もの畑 = hundreds of many fields

4)
Isn't that さっさとマネーよこせ?

That's べらんめえ調 as same as みてえな.
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/江戸言葉
ってえの = ってんだよ = って言うんだよ(a strong order)

5)
考えるとできないね/向かえないね/踏み切れないね

考えないと also can be used as the omitted version of 考えないといけないね.
 
Thank you.

1) Is the original sentence good Japanese? If 転落 actually means 転落する, then can we just drop the する part? Is this a general rule?

4) The original has ネ, but of course it could be an error.

I'm sorry, I still don't understand 金払えっての. Is って a quoting particle or part of a verb inflection? If the former then what is 金払え? If the latter then is there a verb 金払える? Also, if this is べらんめえ調, then what would it be in standard Japanese? And did you intentionally change っての to ってえの? Do they mean the same?

5) OK, I understand 考えるとできないね to mean "If I/one thinks about (the limits) then it is not possible", but I'm not sure of the relevance of 向かえないね and 踏み切れないね. Do you mean that 能力の限界を向かえないね and 能力の限界を踏み切れないね mean the same thing?
 
1) Is the original sentence good Japanese? If 転落 actually means 転落する, then can we just drop the する part? Is this a general rule?
It's quite common for -suru verbs, except for single kanji stems(e.g. 愛する, 律する, 達する).

4) The original has ネ, but of course it could be an error.
Probably so. さっさとマネーよこせネ doesn't make sense.

Is って a quoting particle or part of a verb inflection?
The former.

If the former then what is 金払え?
The strong imperative form of 払う.

Also, if this is べらんめえ調, then what would it be in standard Japanese?
金払えって言うんだよ/言ってるんだよ, as I wrote.

And did you intentionally change っての to ってえの? Do they mean the same?
ってえの is another form which is more close to the original って言う.

5) OK, I understand 考えるとできないね to mean "If I/one thinks about (the limits) then it is not possible", but I'm not sure of the relevance of 向かえないね and 踏み切れないね. Do you mean that 能力の限界を向かえないね and 能力の限界を踏み切れないね mean the same thing?
No. That's 考えると(それに)向かえないね/踏み切れないね "I hesitate to do it if I think about the limits of my ability" or like that.
 
The strong imperative form of 払う.
Yeah, thanks, I realised this just as I was falling asleep! I rarely see this imperative in the textbooks I use, so it is not so familiar. Based on the みたい -> みてえ transformation in the other post, I was thinking that the え was a vowel change due to べらんめえ調.
 
Exactly.

早くしねえと遅れるぞ = 早くしないと遅れるぞ
 
But the え in 金払えっての is not specifically anything to do with べらんめえ調, but is just the standard strong imperative, right?
 
Thanks Toritoribe, I think I got there in the end!
 
Back
Top Bottom