# なこと, なの, の



## Nino83

*Mod note: the discussion continues from here.*


Another question about the Japanese copula in some subordinate clauses (that-clauses, complement clauses).
If I'm not wrong, だ becomes な only before の but not also before こと, is it right?
_...that it is a book_: 本なの... 本なこと...
so, before こと I can use only である or だという (本であること, 本だということ).
While before other nouns (in relative clauses) だ becomes の (先生の人), is it right?


----------



## karlalou

Just looking at the tiny part 本なの and 本なこと, I don't see what's wrong with 本なこと.
We would say 立派な本なこともある, and it's not very smooth if it's なの here.

立派な本なことは確かだ and 立派な本なのは確かだ don't have any difference.


----------



## 810senior

Compared to 本であること, 本なこと sounds to me very colloquial and informal.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you very much.
I've found sentences like 私は彼がジャズが好き*なこと*を知っている。 and 彼が正直*なの*を知っている。 on 英和辞典・和英辞典 - Weblio辞書.
But almost all examples on weblio with なこと seem to be with _na_ adjectives.
Can I say, for example 彼が先生なことを知らなかった。 (I didn't know that he was a teacher) or 彼が先生なことが嬉しい。 (I'm happy that he's a teacher)?


----------



## DaylightDelight

Nino83 said:


> Can I say, for example 彼が先生なことを知らなかった。 (I didn't know that he was a teacher) or 彼が先生なことが嬉しい。 (I'm happy that he's a teacher)?


They sound very awkward.
先生であること, 先生だということ, 先生だってこと, and much more colloquial 先生ということ and 先生ってこと work for me.
先生なの also works here colloquially: 先生なのを知らなかった, 先生なのが嬉しい.



karlalou said:


> Just looking at the tiny part 本なの and 本なこと, I don't see what's wrong with 本なこと.
> We would say 立派な本なこともある, and it's not very smooth if it's なの here.
> 
> 立派な本なことは確かだ and 立派な本なのは確かだ don't have any difference.


立派な本なことは確かだ doesn't work for me.
立派な本なこともある and 立派な本なのは確かだ could work, though still somewhat awkward.
（本が）立派なこともある/（本が）立派なのは確かだ sound much better -- cases of -な adjectives again.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> 私は彼がジャズが好き*なこと*を知っている。 and 彼が正直*なの*を知っている。



好き and 正直 are keiyo-doushi. They use な and だ. In the textbooks for Japanese learners, keiyo-doushi is called _na_ adjectives. (Am I correct?)
I'm sorry that I don't know about katsuyo of keiyo-doushi, but I think こと needs 好きな, not 好きだ.
正直 would be as well. We say 正直なこと if you use こと.

正直な*こと*はいいことだ。
If you use と？
きみが正直だ*と*なんだかへんだね。
こと needs な, and と needs だ.



> 彼が先生なことを知らなかった。


Nino, 先生 is a noun.

彼が先生＿知らなかった。

It's a noun, so that will be different. We say,
彼が先生なのを知らなかった。
彼が先生であることを知らなかった。


----------



## Nino83

DaylightDelight said:


> They sound very awkward.





frequency said:


> It's a noun, so that will be different.


Thank you! 
So "noun + だ" becomes な only before の.
Then, before こと I should use である (more formal) or だという (and the colloquial form って with or without だ).


----------



## Nino83

So, the different forms of the copula だ  when following a *noun* are:
Mizenkei: では（ない）, じゃ（ない）, だろう (volitional)
Ren'yōkei: で
Shūshikei: だ
*Rentaikei: である, だという, (だ)って (before こと, の); な (only before の); の (before other nouns, relative clauses) *
Kateikei: なら

Is there any (historical) reason explaining why the Japanese copula has four different attributive forms (depending on which word follows), differently from other verbs and adjectives, that have only one form (-い, -な, -る・う)?


----------



## Schokolade

Nino83 said:


> *Rentaikei: である, だという, (だ)って (before こと, の); な (only before の); の (before other nouns, relative clauses)*
> 
> Is there any (historical) reason explaining why the Japanese copula has four different attributive forms



Grammatically speaking, である, だという, だって, の are not the attributive forms/連体形 of the copula (assertive auxiliary/断定の助動詞) だ. In modern Japanese grammar, the attributive form of the copula だ is just な.

● である is: 「で」(continuative form/連用形 of copula だ) + verb「ある」.
● だという is: copula「だ」+ quotative/case particle(格助詞)「と」+ verb「いう」.
● だって is a sound change (促音便) of だとて: copula「だ」+ quotative/case particle「と」+ conjunctive particle/接続助詞「て」
● の is usually seen as a particle, rather than a copula.


> before other nouns (in relative clauses) だ becomes の (先生の人), is it right?


For example, the の in 教師*の*女性（≂教師である女性） is a genitive case particle, expressing apposition (同格).
(「の」as a nominaliser, as in 正直な*の*はいいことだ。(≂ 正直なことはいいことだ。), is treated as a case particle/格助詞 or phrasal particle/準体助詞.)


----------



## Nino83

Hi, Schokolade, and thanks for your answer. 
Yes, grammatically they are different verbs/perifrastic constructions, but functionally they replace the copula in subordinate clauses. 
In other words, if one wants to put a clause with a final copula だ into a complex sentence, だ is replaced by all these different forms (we can exclude だという/だって, which is a perifrastic contruction that retains the copula だ), depending on the following word. 

You're right that the particle の has many different functions (genitive marker, nominalized clauses, subject marker in relative clauses, interrogative particle and so on), but, for example, in these cases, the particle replaces the coupla in the relative clause. 
あの本は緑（・青）だ。=> 緑・青の本
あの人は先生だ。 => 先生の人 
It's difficult for me to think them as _genitive_ relationships (possession, material (made of), partitive (a unit of), origin (something from/of), maybe only the complement of specification fits, like "a man of honour", or, an apposition that in many languages works only with proper nouns, "the city of Rome", "the city called Rome", "the city that is Rome"). 

Maybe in Japanese the apposition works also with common nouns, so 先生の人 could be similar to 先生だという人. Are they equivalent in Japanese? 
And is it possible to write 緑・青の本 as 緑・青だという本? Are they equivalent?


----------



## DaylightDelight

Nino83 said:


> 先生の人 could be similar to 先生だという人
> 緑・青の本 as 緑・青だという本


I'd perceive them as 先生である人 (one who is a teacher) and 緑・青である本 (a book that is green/blue).


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, DaylightDelight. 
So it's not totally wrong to say that the particle の is one of the possible attributive forms of the copula だ (with である and な), isn't it?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> So "noun + だ" becomes な only before の.


Maybe. I need to check more examples to make sure.



> before こと I should use である (more formal) or だという (and the colloquial form って with or without だ).


Yes, I think so roughly, too. Good.



> あの本は緑だ。=> 緑の本


You can say the names of colours in this way, ～の本. But note that some are 赤い・白い. You can't say 緑い.



> あの人は先生だ。 => 先生の人


You know, 先生 is a noun, so this is different to the way of 緑の本.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> You know, 先生 is a noun, so this is different to the way of 緑の本.


How would you describe grammatically 先生*の*人? The one/person who is a teacher? Do you think it's the relative clause of あの人は先生*だ*?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> How would you describe grammatically 先生*の*人? Do you think it's the relative clause of あの人は先生*だ*?


As I thought you're going to ask me so!

No, 先生の人 isn't the relative clause of あの人は先生だ。

If you say, _I know that man who is a teacher._
I'd say 先生であるあの男の人を知っています。

See, _I have a younger sister who is a teacher._
（私には）先生である妹がいます。 But we'd usually say 私の妹は先生です。


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> No, 先生の人 isn't the relative clause of あの人は先生だ。


What does 先生の人 mean? "The person of the teacher", "the person belonging to the teacher"?


----------



## frequency

I'd bet


Nino83 said:


> "the person belonging to the teacher"


but I think this would be the first and the last time that I said 先生の人 in my life.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> this would be the first and the last time that I said 先生の人 in my life.


Lol!
This is an example from my grammar book:
彼は英語の先生*の(・である)*彼女と結婚した。
He married her *who* is a teacher of English language.

In the book she says that in these cases both の and である can replace the copula.


----------



## frequency

Good. I think 人 and 先生の can't collocate well.



Nino83 said:


> 彼は英語の先生*の*彼女


Very strangely, this is okay


> In the book she says that in these cases both の and である can replace the copula.


Yes, it seems so. 日本猫である私の猫 can be 日本猫の私の猫. Good!


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> Very strangely, this is okay


There is another example with の: 
*父親が*ピアニスト*の*彼女は、小さいときからピアノを習った。
She, whose *father was* a pianist, learned piano since she was young. 

Does this one sound good too?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> *父親が*ピアニスト*の*彼女は、小さいときからピアノを習った。
> She, whose *father was* a pianist, learned piano since she was young.


Excellent!
If a pronoun is specific like 父親、私の猫、彼女・・, using の would be good.

（私には）先生の妹がいます。 is possible. Sorry I didn't notice it. But you know this can mean "Teacher's sister is there", too, without 私には.

先生のあの男の人を知っています。 Not good, but this may be possible, too. (This is a bit odd to me.)


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> If a pronoun is specific like 父親、私の猫、彼女・・, using の would be good.


So it's a matter of context and collocation (the choice between の and である in relative clauses).


frequency said:


> （私には）先生の妹がいます。 is possible. Sorry I didn't notice it. But you know this can mean "Teacher's sister is there", too, without 私には.


This is the other side of the coin. When の has so many functions, misunderstandings are possible.

Thank you very much for your answers!


----------



## ktdd

Hi, Nino, I think it would help to have a rough picture of how words are classified in traditional grammar.
Basically they are first divided into 自立語 (independent/freestanding words) and 付属語 (dependent/bound words). Then further divided according to whether they have inflections (活用): (comments and examples below are mine)
I. 自立語 (independent words)
　A. 活用のある自立語 (independent words with inflections)
　　用言 (words which may stand alone to be the predicate of a sentence)
　　　a. 動詞: verbs, e.g. 行く
　　　b. 形容詞: a special class of stative verbs whose 終止形 ends in し (modern い), e.g. 高し(高い)、美し(美しい)
　　　c. 形容動詞: a compound of an adjectival noun and a copula なり／たり (modern だ), e.g. 静かなり(静かだ)、堂々たり(堂々としている)
　B. 活用のない自立語 (independent words without inflections)
　　体言 (words which may stand alone to be the subject of a sentence)
　　　a. 名詞: nouns, e.g. 雨
　　　b. 代名詞: pronominal nouns, e.g. 我(私)
　　非体言 (words which may not stand alone to be the subject of a sentence)
　　　a. 副詞: adverbs, e.g. いと(大変)
　　　b. 接続詞: conjunctions, e.g. しかし
　　　c. 感動詞: interjections, e.g. まあ、はい
　　　d. 連体詞: fixed prenominal expressions that are hard to classify, e.g. ある、いわゆる、その、大した
II. 付属語 (dependent words)
　A. 活用のある付属語 (dependent words with inflections)
　　助動詞 (inflecting suffixes): e.g. たり(た)、ず(ない)、す・さす(せる・させる)、る・らる(れる・られる)
　B. 活用のない付属語 (dependent words without inflections)
　　助詞 (particles)
　　　a. 格助詞: case particles, e.g. が、を、の、に、へ、より、から
　　　b. 接続助詞: conjunctive particles, e.g. ば、が、ながら
　　　c. 副助詞: adverbial particles, e.g. さえ、など
　　　d. 係助詞: emphatic particles that require the sentence to end in a certain way (係り結び), e.g. は、も、こそ
　　　e. 終助詞: sentence particles, e.g. か、よ、ぞ
　　　(There may be more categories, some overlapping, some unique to the modern language, for example, the 準体助詞 Schokolade mentioned above, namely the nominolizer の, is not needed in classical times, because a verb phrase ending in 連体形 can be used directly as a noun phrase.)

Now you can see there is a difference between 用言 and 体言.
用言 use their 連体形 to connect to 体言. (By the way, the 連体形 of 静かなり is 静かなる, which is later shortened to 静かな.)
体言 are uninflected, they use the case particle の to connect to other 体言. The case they are supposed to be in, is simply called 連体格. It covers all the relationships you can imagine, genitive, partitive, locative, appositive, agentive, etcetera, etcetera.
So, no, の is not the attributive form of だ. It's a case particle. And no matter how you rephrase it in another language, it remains the same in Japanese.

Also I would like to point out a difference between こと and の as nominolizer.
こと has a noun (事) as its origin. (もの too is rooted in 物.) But there is no evidence as far as I know to suggest の is ever anything but a particle. They are all called nominalizers, but still I would like to think of こと・もの as abstract nouns and の as nominalizing particle or 準体助詞. Since there is a difference between 自立語 and 付属語, I would not be surprised if they have different syntax.


----------



## frequency

We say 「医者の方はここにいますか！？」. I didn't notice but _～の＋sb_ is very okay. Sorry


----------



## Nino83

Thank you for the very detailed explanation, kttd! 


ktdd said:


> The case they are supposed to be in, is simply called 連体格. *It covers all the relationships you can imagine*, genitive, partitive, locative, appositive, agentive, etcetera, etcetera.
> So, no, の is not the attributive form of だ. It's a case particle. And no matter how you rephrase it in another language, it remains the same in Japanese.


So the case particle の (from the Japanese point of view) covers a lot of relationships between two nouns (non inflectable independent words), and among these functions, it links the predicative nominal and the subject in relative clauses (which are linked, in non subordinate clauses by the copula, even in Japanese).
You're right that it is not the attributive form of だ, in general (for example, as you said, it is used to link two non inflectable words, and this doesn't correspond to a copular clause in other languages, for example _kare no sei de = because *of* him = a causa sua (*di* lui)_, genitive, _kare no okage de = thanks *to* him = grazie *a* lui_, dative) but if one restrict this to the relative clauses and seeing that in these clauses the particle _no_ is interchangeable with _dearu_, which is a copula, one could say (from a non-Japanese point of view) that it replaces the copula.
Anyway your answer was very helpful, describing の as the general particle to link two non inflectable words, denoting different relationships (genitive, partitive, appositive and so on). This is why some relative clauses can be ambiguous (and can be understood as genitive phrases).


frequency said:


> We say 「医者の方はここにいますか！？」. I didn't notice but _～の＋sb_ is very okay.


Good! 
Maybe the word _hito_ was a bit unspecific.
Can it work with proper nouns or with more "specific" nouns?
For example:
英語の先生のアキラさんはたくさんの本を読む。
英語の先生の私の友達はたくさんの本を読む。
Or are they more clear with _dearu_?
英語の先生であるアキラさんはたくさんの本を読む。
英語の先生である私の友達はたくさんの本を読む。


----------



## DaylightDelight

Nino83 said:


> For example:
> 英語の先生のアキラさんはたくさんの本を読む。
> 英語の先生の私の友達はたくさんの本を読む。
> Or are they more clear with _dearu_?
> 英語の先生であるアキラさんはたくさんの本を読む。
> 英語の先生である私の友達はたくさんの本を読む。


である versions are more precise but の versions could also work.
Repeated の in 英語の先生の私の友達 are rather tedious, though.

Also 私の友達 versions are ambiguous for a different reason.
In them, 英語の先生 can be either 私 or 私の友達:

{{英語の先生の}私の}{友達}  {{英語の先生である}私の}{友達}
{英語の先生の}{私の友達}  {英語の先生である}{私の友達}
The first interpretation is less likely, especially with 私, but still possible.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> Maybe the word _hito_ was a bit unspecific.


I agree!



Nino83 said:


> 英語の先生のアキラさんはたくさんの本を読む。
> 英語の先生の私の友達はたくさんの本を読む。
> 英語の先生であるアキラさんはたくさんの本を読む。
> 英語の先生である私の友達はたくさんの本を読む。



They're the same and very good.
As I told you yesterday, some cases would be impossible. 先生のあの男の人を知っています。isn't good very much.

I think you'll understand without detailed explanation:
正直な人
先生のアキラさん


----------



## frequency

kt,


ktdd said:


> c. 形容動詞: a compound of an adjectival noun and a copula なり／たり (modern だ), e.g. 静かなり(静かだ)


きみは静かな*人*だね。
きみが静かだ*と*なんだかへんだね。

When 静か ＋ 人, 静か needs な,  and 静か + と（接続助詞？）, 静か needs だ？


----------



## Nino83

Now it's clear. 
Thank you all!


----------



## ktdd

frequency said:


> kt,
> 
> きみは静かな*人*だね。
> きみが静かだ*と*なんだかへんだね。
> 
> When 静か ＋ 人, 静か needs な,  and 静か + と（接続助詞？）, 静か needs だ？


I'm not sure I fully understand you.
I was just citing its 終止形. You know, like in この周り、ずいぶん静かだな。
When it's before a noun, it's in 連体形. And like I said, "the 連体形 of 静かなり is 静かなる, which is later shortened to 静かな". (I imagine 静かなる人 is still understandable to some extent.)
きみが静かだとなんだかへんだね。
I don't know what's the function of と here. Is it something like 君がそんなに静かでなんだか変だね?


----------



## DaylightDelight

と in this case is a 接続助詞 representing a condition or a reason:

きみが静かだ*と*なんだかへんだね = I feel strange *because/when/if *you're so quiet.


----------



## frequency

ktdd said:


> When it's before a noun, it's in 連体形. And like I said, "the 連体形 of 静かなり is 静かなる, which is later shortened to 静かな".


Good. 静かな＋人, not 静か＋な＋人.
And I just wondered if it was 静か＋だ＋と. But that's okay. They seem to be 「静かな」・「静かだ」.



> 君がそんなに静か*で*なんだか変だね?


This is casually okay. (Some might say it's strictly not.)


----------



## ktdd

Ah I see.
Thank you guys.


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> Thank you very much.
> I've found sentences like 私は彼がジャズが好き*なこと*を知っている。 and 彼が正直*なの*を知っている。 on 英和辞典・和英辞典 - Weblio辞書.
> But almost all examples on weblio with なこと seem to be with _na_ adjectives.
> Can I say, for example 彼が先生なことを知らなかった。 (I didn't know that he was a teacher) or 彼が先生なことが嬉しい。 (I'm happy that he's a teacher)?


Weblio is basically Web based dictionary. You can feel safe when you see something there, but it doesn't mean there's no more. I even read before that they were saying their example sentences were picked automatically from the Internet and were asking the viewers to check if they were good sentences or not.

I agree that な is for adjective that when な is added to a noun, it means the noun is treated as an adjective. である style sounds just so rigid and academic that we don't use this style when we want it more accessible and freindly. Though な of なのだ is hard to think as of adjective because this の is hard to think as a noun, but they are particles added to strengthen だ. Well, before なのだ should be a noun, and adjectives won't work.. natives won't say 明るいなのだ, but 明るさなのだ. mm.. what were we talking about?

彼が先生なことを知らなかった and 彼が先生なことが嬉しい are grammatically possible and very much acceptable.  They won't be used in an academic paper, but I can almost imagine a passage from a novel with these expressions. Just there's more common ways of saying the same things.


----------



## karlalou

It's not possible for me to think of every instance, and 
I can not generalize the whole grammar, but
how about this one: そのようなもの.

When I break it into very small parts, I see a pattern, 
noun - particle - noun - particle - noun, 
そ・の・よう・な・もの.

I am not a professional writer that I can not come up with really great sentences, but I know which of these sentences we, Japanese, prefer: 立派な本*な*ことは確かだ sounds better than 立派な本*の*ことは確かだ

Depending on the context, we say,
そのような・もの／こと／の／わけ／とき／本／先生… I just can not think of all the possibilities.


----------



## karlalou

It's up to the context, and up to your needs. You don't need to force yourself to say a noun+なこと until you need to, but you'll encounter such expressions sooner or later, and I can't predict which noun will it be.

These nouns, もの、こと、わけ、とき、本、先生、明るさ are all purely nouns, plus there's の which can be replaced with もの.

We would say 立派な*本なこと*もあって, and this can be replaced with 立派な*本なの*もあって.
We would say そういう*ことなの*もあって、そういう*ものなこと*もあって、そういう*ときなこと*もあって、そういう*わけなこと*もあって、そういう*本なこと*もあって.

To say "because it's a thing(or event) regarding such a well-made book", 立派な本*の*ことだから would be the expression, but 立派な本*な*ことだから is not very good at this.


----------



## Schokolade

karlalou said:


> When I break it into very small parts, I see a pattern,
> noun - particle - noun - particle - noun,
> そ・の・よう・な・もの.



細かいことを言うようで申し訳ないのですが、その「な」は、particle(助詞)ではなく、断定の助動詞(auxiliary)「だ」の連体形かと・・・。

あと、もちろん「その」は代名詞「そ」と格助詞「の」から、「ようだ」は名詞「よう」と助動詞「だ」からきていますが、現代の日本語では、

連体詞(prenominal)「その」 + 助動詞(auxiliary)「ようだ」の連体形「ような」 + 名詞(noun)「もの」

というふうに、3語と見なされることが多いかもしれません・・・


----------

