Finally a good question

[Damicci]

I was finally able to come with a good question that I felt wasn't a waste of a post.

Here I wanted to say:
(A person riding in a "drift toy" is dragged around a building by means of a cord attached to an off road vehicle.)


I came up with this:
[建物の周りにコードでオフロード乗り物に取り付けたドリ玩具に乗ってる人を引きずっ た。]

 

[epigene]

Damicci,

Sorry I can't give you an answer because I don't understand what it's about...

Basically, I can't understand what you mean in your English sentence--probably because I don't understand "drift" and car racing. Can you explain this in greater detail?

 

[Tomii515]

Eh... I live and was born in the united states and my mother tongue is english, and I don't even understand the sentence... o_o

 

[Damicci]

????

It's exactly is it is said in english. If you read my blog on mixi maybe that would help but I am talking about a person being dragged by a vehicle while riding in toy car AKA (modified go car or power wheel).

Basically I want to know about my grammar.

 

[Damicci]

Here is the context to go with:

今日の仕事と日がちょうつまらない。別に面白い事を起こってなかった。仕事にとっては全部日ビデオを見て、プロジェクットをして、日本語を勉強してみた。でも、日本語の勉強には無理だった。(笑）
ちょっと里絵子と話したけどすぐ眠くなって、寝た。大抵お昼休みの時に伝説に行く。（伝説は車の店の名前）伝説の隣にレストランがあって、友達は 伝説の仕事をするから行く。でも、今朝にご飯を食べなかったから、仕事で早い昼ごはん食べて、伝説に行けなかった。そこで大抵面白い何かを起こってる。最 近伝説の皆はドリ玩具を作った。そしたら、建物の周りにコードでオフロード乗り物に取り付けたドリ玩具に乗ってる人を引きずった。何回その人は死ぬかもと 思ったけどとても面白かた。



Maybe this will help.

 

[Elizabeth]

I was finally able to come with a good question that I felt wasn't a waste of a post.
Here I wanted to say:
(A person riding in a "drift toy" is dragged around a building by means of a cord attached to an off road vehicle.)
I came up with this:
[建物の周りにコードでオフロード乗り物に取り付けたドリ玩具に乗ってる人を引きずった。]

I don't entirely get the set up either but I think like English, the structure of being pulled by a cord attached to the off-road vehicle (not the off-road vehicle attached by a cord) makes it much easier to read.

ドリフトおもちゃに乗っている人は、オフロード車に取り付けられたコードで建物の周りに引きずられます。

 

[Damicci]

I see I was thinking to act of dragging would need a direct object to make sense.

 

[epigene]

Damicci,

The first problem in the sentence is that you've translated "drift toy" cars directly into Japanese.
Drift cars are certainly shortened into ドリ車 , but it doesn't mean "drift toy" is ドリ玩具 .

玩具 is "toy" as a manufactured product viewed from the business/industrial standpoint. So, the word is not appropriate.

Since I know nothing about this sport, I've checked for a Japanese equivalent for the vehicle but could not find anything in Japanese about "drift toy" cars. I think you should check this out with someone.

Also, "vehicle" is 乗り物 but "norimono" points to anything a person can ride, any mode of transport including trains and airplanes. When you mean anything in the "car (on wheels)" category, you use 車（くるま・しゃ）

Coming to the structure of the sentence, it is not a simple question, since the problem lies in determining the best order of modifying phrases. I think you are getting yourself into complex sentence structure:

"A person riding in a "drift toy" is dragged around a building by means of a cord attached to an off road vehicle."
建物の周りに｜コードで｜オフロード乗り物に｜取り付けた｜ドリ玩具に｜乗ってる人を｜引きずっ た。

It can be translated into something like this:
人を乗せた（ミニチュアの）ドリ車が、オフロード車に綱（ケーブル）で引っ張られて、ビルの周りを回った。

The subject has been changed from "person" to "car" because it sounds more logical to me.

Please note that this isn't perfect, and I'd very much prefer to say it in an entirely different way to sound natural...

This is all the time I have for now!!

 

[Damicci]

Yeah I figured there quite a few mistakes.

Drift Toy there is no such thing, But guys at the shop, took a child toy vehicle and modified it for them to ride in. Using this "toy" "modified toy" they are dragged around (parking lot around a building) and the "toy car" begins to slide around.

I am trying to develop an ability to form more complicated sentences which is why I decided to write the blog. Practice makes mediocre! (really practice makes perfect but who is actually perfect?)

As for the subject. I thought that the person riding the vehicle, the clause itself could be the subject because we are talking about one larger object which includes a toy vehicle and a person.

 

[Elizabeth]

I see I was thinking to act of dragging would need a direct object to make sense.

If it was を my first instinct would be "You (or the subject) are having people riding in a drift car dragged around by a cord attached to an off road vehicle."

考えると頭痛がしそうな文ですね（笑

 

[Damicci]

If it was を my first instinct would be "You (or the subject) are having people riding in a drift car dragged around by a cord attached to an off road vehicle."

考えると頭痛がしそうな文ですね（笑

あんの、分はなんとなく言いたかった分です。 ごめん、変な文から頭が痛くなったね。

 

[Elizabeth]

あんの、分はなんとなく言いたかった分です。 ごめん、変な文から頭が痛くなったね。

私は元気です。かなりの量の酒を飲んだん。 Seriously, you don't have to worry about the direct object in passive sentences too often in Japanese. They've in the adversative passive structure ( ie 'My purse was taken by a thief) or in the case of gift sentences like 'I have been sent a gift cat.'

I get the feeling being dragged around by a rope attached to a jeep falls more in the former of these, but that too is obviously a matter of taste....

 

[Damicci]

Yes but I am not the one providing the action. I am merely and observer of an action.

 

[Elizabeth]

Yes but I am not the one providing the action. I am merely and observer of an action.

The receivers of the action and what is acted on are in a single clause, as a single unit, in this example. Therefore, I think they should act as the subject. Of course it is very possible it is not as well.