Can't understand parts of this sentence

[Yzlot]

I've also decided to try reading books of interest, since I'm not quite sure where to proceed when it comes to learning Japanese on my own. I've been trying to make sense of this sentence for hours, and still can't come to a good conclusion of what the last part means. Here's the sentence:

ウィリアムはこちらの現状をお知りにならないから、面会を断れ、のひと言で全部済ましたおつもりなんでしょうけれど、実際に断るこちらの立場になっていただかないと。

Having trouble making out exactly what the bolded part means. This is my attempt at a translation: "Because William doesn't known the current situation here, he refuses the meetings, and plans to finish everything with a few words, but in reality, he is refusing our position here.

1. The only uses of と I've ever come across are it's use as a conjunction/coordination particle, and as a conditional. Is the purpose of と here similar to the particle も, in that it means 'too', but encompasses the entire clause and is found at the end of the sentence?

2. Is the clause that's bolded missing a particle? The reason I'm not getting it is because I've never seen an unconjugated verb in the beginning of a clause without being nomalized with の. And the verb precedes the noun. Just what exacty does that last part mean?

Any help is appreciated. This sentence has been boggling me the whole day.
Thanks!!!

 

[bentenmusume]

1. This is the conditional usage.

You can think of it as an abbreviated form of なっていただかないと（困ります）

(Incidentally, the conjunctive particle と will always follow a noun or nominalized clause, so that's one hint that that's not what you're dealing with here.)

2. No, there's no missing particle. 実際に断る is a verb phrase modifying こちら.

実際に断るこちら = "I/we (lit. this side), who will be doing the actual refusing"

The idiom こちらの立場になる (or 身になる）means to put yourself in someone else's shoes.

Another few things that seem to be tripping you up:

- 断れ is an imperative, and is part of the same clause as the の一言で that follows.
It would probably have been easier for you to parse if it had quotation marks.
ウィリアムは（・・・）「面会を断れ」のひと言で全部 済ましたおつもりなんでしょうけれど…

- It's 済ましたつもり (perfect tense) not 済むつもり.
The latter would mean "plans to". The former means something closer to "is convinced (he) did, thinks (he) did"

Put it all together and you get: (translated literally to illustrate the grammar points as clearly as possible).

William doesn't know the situation here, so he probably thinks he settled everything simply by saying "refuse the meeting", but I need him to put himself in the shoes of the one who's actually going to be doing the refusing--me.

(I don't have the context, but I'm assuming from your translation that the speaker isn't directly addressing William himself.)

Hope this helps!

 

[Yzlot]

Thanks so much, jt! It more than helped. Thanks for taking the time to catch the mistakes I made as well! I'll be adding your explanations to my list of references of mistakes I've made to look back on. I hope you don't mind me asking another question regarding the sentence above.

I had assumed something similar to your translation "but I need him to put himself in the shoes of the one who's actually going to be doing the refusing--me," but dismissed it because it wasn't in the form of 断るの.

Would "実際に断るのこちらの立場....." mean the same thing?

 

[Toritoribe]

No. It doesn't make sense. An attributive clause 実際に断る modifies a noun こちら, as in @jt_ -san's explanation 実際に断るこちら = "I/we (lit. this side), who will be doing the actual refusing".

 

[Yzlot]

Hmm...ok, I'll keep that in mind. Thanks Toritoribe.

 

[bentenmusume]

I just wanted to follow up on Toritoribe-san's explanation, since this is a pretty important point.

The reason your example is ungrammatical is because with attributive clauses modifying nouns, the plain form of the verb connects to the noun directly.

の is an indefinite noun that nominalizes the verb clause.
You can't just stick that in front of another noun.

It might be easier to grasp if we simplify the vocabulary and structure a bit:

○　昨日食べたリンゴ the apple (I) ate yesterday
○　昨日食べたの the one (I) ate yesterday
Ｘ　昨日食べたのリンゴ (ungrammatical)

Note this also holds true for adjectives and adjectival phrases:

○　赤い本 the red book
○　赤いの the red one
×　赤いの本 (ungrammatical)

You would use の to nominalize if, for example, you wanted to use the phrase as the subject/topic of a sentence, e.g.

昨日買ったのは黒い帽子です。 The one I bought yesterday is the black hat.
実際に断るのは私です。 The one who will be doing the actual refusing is me.

The structure here is (nominalized verb phrase)は(predicate).

Does this clear things up a bit?