WonkoTheSane
先輩
- 12 May 2013
- 1,335
- 311
I was wondering if that version (Parallel text) of book was available on line as a PDF etc?I'm reading 'In A Grove' in parallel text (Japanese on the left page and English translation on the right) and I'm having trouble with how a sentence is being translated. The sentence is part of the 旅法師's statement concerning the crime.
あの男は馬に乗った女と一しょに、関山の方へ歩いて参りました。
The translation is:
"The man was walking in the direction of Sekiyama leading a woman on a horse."
I read it as "The man and a woman were riding a horse together in the direction of Sekiyama."
Neither the sentences before nor after this sentence described the man being on or off the horse, so I think this sentence must be expressly stating that the man is not riding, but I'm not sure how. I thought perhaps the verb would be a clue, but from my (admittedly limited) Googling, 歩く appears to be a verb which can be used for a horse. Then I thought perhaps 一しょに in this instance is not the same as 一緒に but this page at Weblio doesn't appear to support that. So, my final thought is that と一緒に encompasses the entirety of 馬に乗った女, as in "Together with a woman on a horse, the man was walking in the direction of Sekiyama." which makes grammatical sense, but I still don't see how it expressly draws a distinction between the man being on the ground and the woman being on the horse, and especially how the translator got the "leading a woman on a horse" part. I doubt it's consequential to the story, I just wonder if I'm misunderstanding something grammatically which will come back to haunt me if I don't get it straight now.
Any insight would be appreciated!
女と一緒に馬と一緒に乗って関山の方へ
I was wondering if that version (Parallel text) of book was available on line as a PDF etc?
Bloody hell I mangled that one up. Try
女と一緒に馬に乗って関山の方へ
The whole thing hinges on 馬に乗った vs 馬に乗って
The former limits the modification to the woman. The latter would tell us it was the man in the horse, while being unclear about the woman's mode of transit.
Also, eliminate the filling and the essential bit of the sentence tells you 男は歩いて参りました, so it is clear the guy is "riding Shank's mare".
1. Missing that you wouldn't expect to find a past tense verb there in the middle of the sentence if it applied to the guy.... meaning it can't be talking about him.
Not yet, perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself.Have your classes/lessons covered this sort of modifying phrase yet?
Not yet, perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself.
Thanks much!
It is grammatically odd, but 馬に乗って歩いて行った is actually used as "I went there on a horse (the one who is walking is the horse, not "I")" customarily.
This might be really confusing, but other than the difference between 乗った and 乗って, the position of 一緒に also can be the key. あの男は一緒に馬に乗った女と、関山の方へ歩いて参りました means the man and woman rode a horse together. However, it's ambiguous whether they are riding a house now or not in this sentence, so the meaning can be completely different. (For instance it can mean A man and woman, who had once ridden a horse together previously, walked toward Sekiyama.)
You're welcome. I'm afraid I wrote my reply based on the assumption that you had already learned this construction. In a nutshell, what we do with relative clauses in English is done in Japanese by placing a clause immediately before the noun it modifies. One of the handiest constructions you will learn when it comes to expressing the sort of ideas that you have no doubt wondered how they get handled by the simple construction you have encountered before.
As you will notice, the は topic marker particle is always at the top level of the sentence; it can never be in a subclause. When you notice that 乗った is at the end of a subclause (by seeing that it is followed by a noun, which it modifies) and backtrace to see where this subclause starts, you can never go past は. Other stop indicators are masu-stems (when used for loosely connecting sentences as opposed to the tight connection made with the て-form) and commas.Ok, this makes sense, though it brings to the forefront the fact that I'm never quite sure of how much of the preceding sentence is modified by things like こと, 一緒に, and particles.
Yes, and the latter one also can mean "The man and the women were riding a horse towards Sekiyama."So@Majestic's:
あの男は女と一緒に馬に乗って関山の方へ歩いて参りました。
Is not ambiguous about whether the man and woman are currently riding on a horse?
"The man and the women were riding a horse towards Sekiyama."
Whereas:
あの男は一緒に馬に乗った女と、関山の方へ歩いて参りました.
Could be more like:
"The man and woman, who were riding a horse together, were walking towards Sekiyama."
Am I understanding?