# Passive Form in Japanese + GA/WA



## graz71

Hello

I'm learning at the moment the passive form in japanese. everything is fine so far until I stumble upon the GA particle (my nightmare).

Here are sentences from Minnha no Nihongo I don't get the structure very well:



GA/WA
- furansu de mukashi no nihon no e GA hakkensaremashita
*why not: -----> mukashi no nihongo no e WA furansu DE hakkensaremashita*


- nihon no kuruma wa sekaijuu e yuushutsushimasu
*why not: -----> nihon no kuruma GA sekkaiju  e yuushutsushimasu*


- osaka de kokusaikaigi ga okonawaremasu
*why not: -----> kokusaikaigi WA osaka DE okonawaremasu*


what's the difference between these 2 sentences? I can't feel the difference although they look alike.

- kaigi WA koube DE hirakaremashita

- osaka DE tenrankai GA hirakaremasu


masu/teimasu

I know "teimasu" is like the english "ing" for verbs, so I'd like to know if that's the same thing here or if there is something  more when translated because of the passive form?

- nihon no kuruma wa iroiro na kuni e yushutsuSARETE IMASU
- sentakuki wa kono kôjô de kumitateRARETE IMASU





Thank you!


----------



## tricheur

Hello,



graz71 said:


> - furansu de mukashi no nihon no e GA hakkensaremashita
> *why not: -----> mukashi no nihongo no e WA furansu DE hakkensaremashita*



One of the basic function of 「は」WA  is to refer to the already known information, while 「が」GA is used to give a new information. In your example, since "mukashi no nihon no e" (昔の日本の絵） is something new to the reader, here you must use GA. As for the order of words, both examples will do (=you can also say "mukashi no nihon no e GA furansu DE hakkensaremashita).



> - nihon no kuruma wa sekaijuu e yuushutsushimasu
> *why not: -----> nihon no kuruma GA sekkaiju  e yuushutsushimasu*


In this example, 「は」WA has a somewhat different function. It is used to to propose a new subject. We can translate the phrase something like: "As for the Japanese cars, they are exported all over the world". (Isn't the last part "yushutsu saremasu/sareteimasu"?)

I think I can explain this also by the first function. Since "the Japanese car" is not entirely a new information, WA is preferable.



> - osaka de kokusaikaigi ga okonawaremasu
> *why not: -----> kokusaikaigi WA osaka DE okonawaremasu*


Since "kokusaikaigi" is new to the reader, you use "GA". (An international conference will be held in Osaka).
If you use "WA", the reader should be already informed. (The international conference [ex. you mentioned] will be held in Osaka.)



> what's the difference between these 2 sentences? I can't feel the difference therefore they look alike.
> 
> - kaigi WA koube DE hirakaremashita
> 
> - osaka DE tenrankai GA hirakaremasu


Both are grammatically correct.

The first one can be translated as: 
The conference [we are talking about] was held in Kobe.
As for the conference, it was held in Kobe.

The second one:
An exhibition will be held in Osaka.

I suppose there are many other (more rigorous) ways to explain the difference, but I hope this also helps.


----------



## graz71

Hello!

Thank you for your answer! It does help a lot as I see the GA particle under another light (a nightmaaaaare, erk!). And yes you were right, it's indeed "yushutsusareteimasu", sorry and thanks for pointing out the mistake. I'm sure your answer will help a lot other peope having the same difficulty in grasping the subtlety between the two of it like I do.


----------



## graz71

Hello again!



Here is another question regarding my first post. I do understand that GA is used when a new information is given but what about this sentence given as an example in my book that makes me doubt again:

Q:Furansu de mukashi no nihon no e WO hakkenshimashita
A:---> furansu de mukashi no nihon no e GA hakkensaremashita

The only difference is the passive form so:
1. Why not using GA instead of WO in the first sentence 
2. and and why not using WA in the second one instead of GA



Thanks again!


----------



## tricheur

Hello again,



graz71 said:


> Q:Furansu de mukashi no nihon no e WO hakkenshimashita
> A:---> furansu de mukashi no nihon no e GA hakkensaremashita


The original Japanese sentence (フランスで昔の日本の絵を発見しました / On a trouvé un ancient tableau japonais en France) is a bit strange.

In the circumstance like this, we usually only use the passive voice. So the second sentence (フランスで昔の日本の絵が発見されました / Un ancien tableau japonais a été trouvé en France) sounds much more natural (I imagine in French it would be contrary).

That said,


> 1. Why not using GA instead of WO in the first sentence


WO is used before the direct object of the verb. So if you use GA instead of WO, it will make no sense.



> 2. and and why not using WA in the second one instead of GA


This is because "mukashi no nihon no e" is totally a new information to the reader.
(I think I explained this in the previous post. Do I misunderstand your new question?)


----------



## graz71

Argggh...

No no, sorry. You did well, don't worry, it's me who doesn't understand. I'm sorry if I am a bit confusing but I really try to be as clear as possible.

I do understand that WO is used when you need to point "the direct object of the verb", but the 2nd sentence as well should use WO, shouldn't it?
1st on a trouvé WHAT (quoi) --> un tableau
2nd il a été trouvé WHAT (quoi) --> un tableau
unless I don't translate properly the seconde sentence. like 
"un tableau a été retrouvé" instead of "il a été retrouvé un tableau..." ? Then yes WO cannot be used. am I right? *begging*

Thanks again for all your explanation, it's really useful!



Ps: And sorry for the sentence, blame it on Minnha no Nihongo!^^


----------



## tricheur

Hello!

I wrote:


> WO is used before the direct object of the verb.


Sorry, WO is used "after" the word, to indicate the direct object of  the verb.



> Q:Furansu de mukashi no nihon no e WO hakkenshimashita


So, in this case, "mukashi no nihon no e" is the direct object of the verb "hakken suru". (The subject is omitted here.)



> A:---> furansu de mukashi no nihon no e GA hakkensaremashita


And, in the passive voice, "mukashi no nihon no e" becomes, by definition, the subject of the sentence. So there is no place to put "WO" (since there is no direct object of the verb here).

Honestly I am not really sure if I understood your question well... Don't hesitate to ask again if my answer is not sufficient.


----------



## YangMuye

Firstly, apologies for my poor English. 

The usage of は and が can write a book.

ha is called topic marker, which is usually used to introduce a topic.(commonplace?)

When using は, there is a strong constraint on your comment, that is your comment must be relevant to the topic. が and を do not have such constraint. 
This point is very important. When you say "A は B", your listener will never think that B involves something other than A. So ha can be concluded as:
1. The comment only applies to the subject. This may get a contrastive interpretation.
2. The topic must be specific. unknowing or knowing is not so important, but the listener must know what you want to talk about. 誰、何など can not be a topic, otherwise it seems that you do not know what you are talking about.

It's important every sentence has a topic. A topic is what you expect to say. Without a topic, people will find it hard to catch your idea. If the topic is the same as the last one, it can be omit.

 When you want say "something happens", then you should not use any topic "は", because you are going to talk about the event and the consequence, rather than the object itself.

You may see the difference:

フランスで昔の日本の絵が発見されました。
昔の日本の絵はフランスで発見されました。
The first one is: I want to tell you the fact/event that ....
The second one is: about 昔の日本の絵, ...
Here 昔の日本の絵 is not a specific thing cann't be followed by ha, so it is interpreted as a general conclusion "all 昔の日本の絵" or "昔の日本の絵 usually". Since the object 昔の日本の絵 is not specific but the concept 昔の日本の絵 is specific.
Of course, given the context, 昔の日本の絵 may also be a specific object.

日本の車は世界中へ輸出されています。
日本の車が世界中へ輸出されています。
Both sentences are correct. 
If you are to talk about Japan(the topic is Japan), the use of ha may be interpreted as "contractive ha". Then you may talk about something not "世界中へ輸出されています".

大阪で国際会議が行われます。
国際会議は大阪で行われます。
The first sentence is an example of something happening.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The usage of される can also write a book.
Japanese される is not simple passive form. AがBをCする≠BがAに・で・によってC される。
Basically, BがCをDされる usually means something CをDする will happen to B and will have influence on B. You can add Aに which means A let, or Aで・によって which means by A or through A. に is used to show who(intentionally) made you change. で does not have intention.
Generally, when the B is an object with no life, you can not use Aに. (There is an exception: When A has no life,  Aに=Aで)
There are two special case(or normal case?): ①B=C, C is not used　②C=BのC。② is needed when Aに is used, which can make the person B as the subject.

フランスで昔の日本の絵が発見されました means the 絵 are discovered and can be seen by all.
フランスで昔の日本の絵を発見しました seams that the topic someone is omitted, フランスで is just a place/tool.
フランスに昔の日本の絵を発見されました I think it is also possible, if French means French people. e.g. you hid it somewhere and didn't want anyone to find it.


----------



## graz71

Thanks both for your answers and the additionnal explanations. A lot to think about.^^


----------



## Dheara

Hello! I just want to add something. YangMuye is right: there are books about the correct usage of WA and GA, even Japanese natives have moments of hesitation, taking a 2 seconds break to decide which is more appropriate.

So... don't worry, there is a long way to go! Maybe even 5 years later there will be moments when you'll still wander which one to use in certain contexts...


----------



## Dheara

Anyway, there are basic rules, and have been discussed on the forum some  time  ago.

  The most important rule, as YangMuye and mentioned above:

  WA- topic marker; marks the old information - the safest translation of  WA for a beginner is "TALKING ABOUT~", "AS FOR~" 
  GA- Subject marker; marks a the subject of a new information

GA- with WH-words (=interrogatives) like: DARE? Dochira? Doko?...
WA never marks a WH-word, because is a topic marker.    

  WA- when we ask a question (exception: WH words) (and the answer will also be with WA, because  is the topic of the conversation).
  GA- when we give someone a new information out of the blue.

WA- when we or make a _categorical judgment_ about the subject,  namely state the _generic property_ of something,
- we use it to mark generic names (like hito, kuruma, ie, neko), or  uniquely identifiable names or concepts (like taiyou, hoshi, sora, hi  (fire); kyoufu (fear))  .  
    Sora wa aoi. (the generic property of the sky is being blue)- we can  say this even when the sky is cloudy!!! 
    Chikyuu wa marui. (the generic property of the Earth is being round)

If we say 
    Sora ga aoi= we say it while looking at the sky, because
GA- when we talk about something while looking at it (_thetic  judjment)_=> descriptive sentence.

GA- when we specify something, when we try to distinguish that only one  element (person), or certain elements (persons) have a certain quality.  Usually, the question includes a WH-word, trying to identify an  element/certain elements:
   Dare GA gakusei desuka? (GA because DARE is an interrogative word  (WH-word), not a Noun).
   Tanaka san GA gakusei desu.= Tanaka san DAKE is a student. (ONLY  Tanaka).

    GAkusei WA dare desuka? (use WA because we make a question and  because Gakusei is a NOUN.) 
    Gakusei WA Tanaka desu.

WA-When we offer an explanation. For this, we have the most basic  Japanese phrase, which is a standad phrase:
         A wa B desu. = A is B. 

In Subordinate Clauses we don`t use WA to mark the subject.

WA- used to mark the contrast:
    Kono hon WA omoshiroi desu ga, sono hon WA omosirokunai desu.

There are many things to say about it....

Anyway, oe more thing:
When you translate a setence, first of all look for WA (if you have a WA  in the sentece).
GA is connected only to the (main) verb, while
WA says something about the entire sentence = WA is what the sentence is  about.

Well, I gathered these information from various materials; you can't  find the information in a single book.

Good luck!


----------



## graz71

Wouah thank you! Really good work!  I'm glad I raised the HA/GA question. Listing all the differences will really help a lot of people like me. But I know I might ask other questions about it, that's for sure.


----------



## Ume

Dheara said:


> Anyway, there are basic rules, and have been discussed on the forum some time ago.
> 
> The most important rule, as YangMuye and mentioned above:
> 
> WA- topic marker; marks the old information - the safest translation of WA for a beginner is "TALKING ABOUT~", "AS FOR~"
> GA- Subject marker; marks a the subject of a new information
> 
> GA- with WH-words (=interrogatives) like: DARE? Dochira? Doko?...
> WA never marks a WH-word, because is a topic marker.
> 
> WA- when we ask a question (exception: WH words) (and the answer will also be with WA, because is the topic of the conversation).
> GA- when we give someone a new information out of the blue.
> 
> WA- when we or make a _categorical judgment_ about the subject, namely state the _generic property_ of something,
> - we use it to mark generic names (like hito, kuruma, ie, neko), or uniquely identifiable names or concepts (like taiyou, hoshi, sora, hi (fire); kyoufu (fear)) .
> Sora wa aoi. (the generic property of the sky is being blue)- we can say this even when the sky is cloudy!!!
> Chikyuu wa marui. (the generic property of the Earth is being round)
> 
> If we say
> Sora ga aoi= we say it while looking at the sky, because
> GA- when we talk about something while looking at it (_thetic judjment)_=> descriptive sentence.
> 
> GA- when we specify something, when we try to distinguish that only one element (person), or certain elements (persons) have a certain quality. Usually, the question includes a WH-word, trying to identify an element/certain elements:
> Dare GA gakusei desuka? (GA because DARE is an interrogative word (WH-word), not a Noun).
> Tanaka san GA gakusei desu.= Tanaka san DAKE is a student. (ONLY Tanaka).
> 
> GAkusei WA dare desuka? (use WA because we make a question and because Gakusei is a NOUN.)
> Gakusei WA Tanaka desu.
> 
> WA-When we offer an explanation. For this, we have the most basic Japanese phrase, which is a standad phrase:
> A wa B desu. = A is B.
> 
> In Subordinate Clauses we don`t use WA to mark the subject.
> 
> WA- used to mark the contrast:
> Kono hon WA omoshiroi desu ga, sono hon WA omosirokunai desu.
> 
> There are many things to say about it....
> 
> Anyway, oe more thing:
> When you translate a setence, first of all look for WA (if you have a WA in the sentece).
> GA is connected only to the (main) verb, while
> WA says something about the entire sentence = WA is what the sentence is about.
> 
> Well, I gathered these information from various materials; you can't find the information in a single book.
> 
> Good luck!


 
"学生なのは誰ですか。学生なのは田中です。" sounds much more natural to me.
If あの, この, or ～している is in front of the 学生, delete なのは.


----------



## Dheara

Ume said:


> "学生なのは誰ですか。学生なのは田中です。" sounds much more natural to me.
> If あの, この, or ～している is in front of the 学生, delete なのは.



　
I never used this "formula" (Nounなのは、誰ですか？） 
Maybe I should pay more attention to Japanese ladies when they speak.


----------



## Ume

間違えました。
「・・・delete なのは」ではなく、「・・・delete なの」です。

Dhearaさん、
Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。
日本人男性ではダメでしょうか。


----------



## almostfreebird

Ume said:


> 間違えました。
> 「・・・delete なのは」ではなく、「・・・delete なの」です。
> 
> Dhearaさん、
> Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。
> 日本人男性ではダメでしょうか。



I can't understand your language.


----------



## Ume

almostfreebird said:


> I can't understand your language.


 
That's Japanese.


----------



## Dheara

Ok...
Ume,when do you use 「Nounなのは、…か」, and when do you use 「Nounは、…か」？
When do you say 
「学生なのは誰？」 
and when do you simply say 
「学生は誰？」
My level is Nihongo nouryoku shiken 3 kyuu. I'll try to attend 2 kyuu this year... So, I still have a lot to study...
Thank you!


----------



## almostfreebird

Let me explain a little bit, if you don't mind.



大切な*の*はたくさんの人々と話すことです。
The important thing is to talk with a lot of people. 

夜中に騒ぐ*の*は近所迷惑です。
To make a lot of noise at midnight disturbs the neighborhood

The "の" in "のは" has a function to nominalize adjectives and verbs.

"大切な" is nominalized into "大切なの"(same as 大切な事）
"騒ぐ" is nominalized into "騒ぐの"(same as 騒ぐ事)

If the "の" was attached to something like this: 私の目標なのは俳優になることです(My goal is to become an actor)。 This sentence sounds awkward because "目標な" is not an adjective, in the first place there is no such word as "目標な".

"私の目標は俳優になることです(My goal is to become an actor)。" is correct.

Of course there're people who use "なのは" incorrectly like that.(including me)

So likewise, "学生なのは田中です。" sounds a little awkward, because there's not such word as "学生な".

Some comedian might say "学生な人" meaning "学生のような人", to get a laugh.


----------



## Ume

almostfreebirdさん、こんにちは。

なの
・*あの人学生なのよ*
He's a student, you know.
[ プログレッシブ和英中辞典　提供：JapanKnowledge ] ​「学生」の後ろに*なの*とありますが、これは誤りでしょうか。


----------



## almostfreebird

Ume said:


> almostfreebirdさん、こんにちは。
> なの
> ・*あの人学生なのよ*
> He's a student, you know.
> [ プログレッシブ和英中辞典　提供：JapanKnowledge ] ​「学生」の後ろに*なの*とありますが、これは誤りでしょうか。



"あの人学生なのよ"

In this case, according to your dictionary,

this "なの" has a function to assert the statement calmly.


----------



## Dheara

Almostfreebird, thank you for your explanations! 

Ume, I red in A dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar that the nominalizer の is attached to Nouns by using な…
先生なの・先生だったの ＝ that s.o. is/ was a teacher
but there is not even a single example with Nounなの…

I also red a little about the structure 「～のは～だ。」
先生なのは～だ。　it is ~ who is a teacher.
But here also, there was no example... 

Ume, in that example (from Yahoo jisho), I think that なのよ （なのだ）in

・*あの人学 生なのよ* is the explanatory ～のだ… used when you give an explanation and so on

I'll write later


----------



## Ume

almostfreebirdさん、ご返信ありがとうございます。

"I heard one of them is a student. Who is the student?"

【質問１】上の英文を「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、学生なのは誰ですか」という日本語に訳せますか。
【質問２】赤字部分が変な日本語であるなら、何と言うのが正しいでしょうか。

ご回答をお待ちしております。


----------



## almostfreebird

Ume said:


> almostfreebirdさん、ご返信ありがとうございます。
> 
> "I heard one of them is a student. Who is the student?"
> 
> 【質問１】上の英文を「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、学生なのは誰ですか」という日本語に訳せますか。
> 【質問２】赤字部分が変な日本語であるなら、何と言うのが正しいでしょうか。
> 
> ご回答をお待ちしております。



Like I said before, Of course there're people who use "なのは" incorrectly like that.(including me)



Let me explain a little bit, if you don't mind.



大切な*の*はたくさんの人々と話すことです。
The important thing is to talk with a lot of people. 

夜中に騒ぐ*の*は近所迷惑です。
To make a lot of noise at midnight disturbs the neighborhood

The "の" in "のは" has a function to nominalize adjectives and verbs.

"大切な" is nominalized into "大切なの"(same as 大切な事）
"騒ぐ" is nominalized into "騒ぐの"(same as 騒ぐ事)

If the "の" was attached to something like this: 私の目標なのは俳優になることです(My goal  is to become an actor)。 This sentence sounds awkward because "目標な" is  not an adjective, in the first place there is no such word as "目標な".

"私の目標は俳優になることです(My goal is to become an actor)。" is correct.

Of course there're people who use "なのは" incorrectly like that.(including me)

So likewise, "学生なのは田中です。" sounds a little awkward, because there's not such word as "学生な".

Some comedian might say "学生な人" meaning "学生のような人", to get a laugh.


----------



## Ume

almostfreebirdさん、ご返信ありがとうございます。

*彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、学生なのは誰ですか。*​almostfreebirdさんは、*学生なのは誰ですか*の*なの*を誤用だとお考えですね。では、*学生なのは誰ですか*を何と言うのが正しいとお思いでしょうか。


----------



## almostfreebird

colloquial expression, maybe.


----------



## Ume

almostfreebirdさん、ご返信ありがとうございます。

*学生なのは誰ですか*を colloquial expression だとお考えであるなら、formal の場では何と言うべきでしょうか。

ご回答をお待ちしております。


----------



## almostfreebird

I'm sorry I don't know(@_@)

Everyone has their own style to speak or express.

I'm not a dictator.


----------



## Wishfull

Ume said:


> almostfreebirdさん、ご返信ありがとうございます。
> 
> *学生なのは誰ですか*を colloquial expression だとお考えであるなら、formal の場では何と言うべきでしょうか。
> 
> ご回答をお待ちしております。



こんばんは。
almostfreebirdさんと同意見の一人です。

*学生なのは誰ですか*　は　colloquial であり、　formal　で言うと、
*学生である人物は誰ですか*
または
*学生は誰ですか*

じゃないかなあ、と思うんですが。

な＝である
の＝人、者、人物

てな感じで・・・・　どんな塩梅ですかね、梅さん。

LMに変わるかもしれないWishfullより。


----------



## rukiak

Dhearaさんのを見て思ったのですが、

「あの人学生なのよ」は、＝あの人は、学生なのよ、つまり「なのよ」の部分は「だ」とか「です」のような機能があるのは明白です。

さて、「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、学生なのは誰ですか。」の「学生なのは誰ですか」では、もしも「なの」を上記の様に置き換えるとすると、
　「学生だは誰ですか」／「学生ですは誰ですか」
となり、これは日本語としてあり得ない構文になってしまいます。

ですから、このような構文の中では「なの」は使えないのでは。

（ちなみに、「好きなのはどれですか」のように、形容詞が来る場合はokです。形容詞と名詞は性質が別物ですから、その「なの」の機能が違います。）


----------



## graz71

Argh! I know it's a japanese forum but some people are trying to learn from it so please try to put some english in your text/answers or at least hiragana/translated kanjis. For example I don't understand the last post at all or some of the previous ones...


----------



## Dheara

Thank you for your explanations! 
I'm still confused, though...
This morning I asked my husband if 学生なのは誰？is right or not, and he said is right, but *only* in examples like:
彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いた*のですが、学生なのは誰ですか。*
Well, he said he will try to explain after returning home...

Ume-san,don't you think it would be nice if you tried to explain for everyone, and not just challenge us to read between the lines?
Thank you!


----------



## almostfreebird

""just challenge us to read between the lines""

That's exactly what I thought.

僕は　そういうのって　性格が悪い　と　思います。(Bokuwa sôiunotte seikakugawarui to omoimasu)


----------



## almostfreebird

#1: 「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、学生なのは誰ですか」

#2: 「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、それは誰ですか」

#3: 「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、それなのは誰ですか」

#1 is OK, but a little redundant and clumsy to me.

I like #2.


----------



## almostfreebird

I was thinking a bit more about this sentence, and it doesn't have to do with "なのは" here.

"I heard one of them was a student. Who is the student?"
"彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞きました。　その学生は誰ですか？"
"彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞きました。　学生なの(学生である人物)は誰ですか?"

Imagine some detective is asking about a group of people and says "I heard one 

of them was a student. Who is the student?"(彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞きました。　その学生/学生である人物 は誰ですか？)

It seems to me the detective is trying to identify, establish the identity of the student.(その刑事は、その学生の身元を確認しようとしている様に思えます。)

On the other hand,

Assuming the detective sees a picture in which supposedly there is only one student among all the people. And now he want to know which one in the picture is the student. 

How would he ask in Japanese if he want to know which one in the picture is the student?

#1: "彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞きました。　学生なの(学生である人物)は誰ですか?"
#2: "彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞きました。　どの人が学生ですか？"

I would choose #2.


----------



## rukiak

「彼らの中に学生が１人いると聞いたのですが、学生なのは誰ですか。」だけを議論するのもいいですが、実用性を考えるなら、一般論の方も考慮した方がいいと思います。

「学生」の部分、「なのは」の後に続くフレーズ、それを変えても問題ないのか？

「雌が一匹いると聞いたのですが、雌なのはどれですか？」
「特売品があると聞いたのですが、特売品なのはどれですか？」
「アフリカから来た人がいると聞いたのですが、アフリカから来た人なのは誰ですか？」
「子犬が一匹いると聞いたのですが、子犬なのはどれですか？」

「名詞＋なのは」は使わないと覚えた方が無難だと思います。


----------



## shiremono

Hello,

Basically I approve [noun]+[_na no ha_].
It could be correct and even necessary depending on the context.
The examples by rukiak are fine.
Then how about these?

もらったヒヨコが雌*なのは*うれしかった。
I'm glad the chick I've got is female.
こちらが特売品*なのは*理由があります。
There is a reason of its special price.  
彼女の出身がアフリカ*なのは*知っている。
I know that she is from Africa.
あの子の一番のお気に入りが子犬*なのは*無理もない。
No wonder her favorite is the puppy.

Is it that [noun]+[_na no ha_] and [_dore_/_dare_] are ill matched then?
I don't think so.
Just let's not conclude in haste.


----------



## rukiak

こんにちはshiremonoさん。
いい反証ですね。
（It's good arguing.）

確かに"「名詞＋なのは」は使わないと覚えた方が無難だと思います。"は、誤解を招きますね。

私がいいたいのは、「あの人学生なのよ」と同じロジックで「なの」を使い回すことはできない、ということです。　
それと、後半の議論で挙ってきているような、「である物/人」という意味で「なの」を使う場合があります。私もそういう使い方をしますが、それは全て、別のいい方で代用できますから、使わないで済む、ということです。そのことで、ミスを犯す確率が減ります。

「アフリカから来た人がいると聞いたのですが、アフリカから来た人なのは誰ですか？」
などは、私の意見では、どう聞いてもおかしな日本語だと思います。

Umeさんの例と#36の４例は、すべて名詞（or 修飾語+名詞）を「なのは」が受けています。
その文の意図を訳せば、「（名詞）である物は」となります。
しかし、前の文節で言われていることを復唱しながら「である物」などとわざわざ言わなくても、「は」だけでもいいのではないかと思います。または、代名詞「それは」で受けて「それはどれですか？」とするか、または主語を省略して「どれですか？」だけで十分です。

一方、#37の反例4つは、文を「なのは」がうけています。文を名詞のように扱うには名詞化が必要不可欠ですから、#37の４例の「なのは」が正しいのは文法的に明らかです。
逆に、#37で「なの」を取って「は」だけにすると、おかしな日本語になります。

( In my opinion, [noun] + [na no ha] can be replaced by another phrase, and [noun]+[na no ha], like examples in #25 and #36, sometimes sounds bizarre for me.
But on the other hand, [sentence] +[na no ha], like four examples in #37, sounds natural and apparently has no problem, I think.)


----------



## shiremono

Thank you, rukiak.

My initial statement "Basically I approve [noun]+[_na no ha_]" was improper.
You have pointed out that the structure of my examples is [clause(sentence)]+[_na no ha_].
You are right and you also explained why the examples in #37 are grammatically correct:
The clauses are nominalized with [_no_].
You have made it clear.

I have one more point.
The sentence in #15 seems to me perfectly correct:
"Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。"
Is it simply because part of the noun clause is omitted?
The complete sentense should be:
"会話に注意してみるというのが Japanese ladies ［だけ］なのは、どうしてでしょうか。"


----------



## rukiak

Only #15 sounds natural for me. And that is surely the structure of [noun] + [na no ha] in appearance.

>Is it simply because part of the noun clause is omitted?
 You may be able to say that.

Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。
=そこがJapanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。

-->""そこがJapanese ladiesだ"という文の名詞化"　＋　は、どうしてでしょうか。

なのではないでしょうか。


----------



## almostfreebird

quote:
D: Maybe I should pay more attention to Japanese ladies when they speak.

Ume: Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。:unquote

This "なの" has the same function as in "あの人学生なのよ", which assert the statement:

あの人は学生です----->あの人学生なんです（あの人学生なのよ）

This sentence "Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか" is surely incomplete and maybe a little puzzling. Complete sentence would be:

あなたが、もっと注意してちゃんと聞くべきなのがJapanese ladiesなの（なんですというのは）はどうしてですか。


Now which would you choose?

(1)Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。(I don't know why, but sounds condescending. なのeffect?)

(2)どうして　Japanese ladies　なんでしょうか。

I like (2).


----------



## shiremono

> Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。
> =そこがJapanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。


I would make it, 
=*それ*がJapanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。

But it is trivial.

The point is this sentence itself.
問題なのは、この文です。

There seem to be a few nouns such as _mondai_ which are rather adjective like. They are well matched with [_na no ha_], hence the famous misuse of [_mondai na_]+[noun]. 
「問題」に代表される、形容動詞に近い名詞がいくつか存在するようにおもいます。それらは「なのは」との相性がよく、それゆえ有名な「問題な」+「名詞」の誤用も生じたのではないかとおもいます。

Apart from this exception, I can accept your opinion.
この例外をのぞけば、rukiakさんのご説明で納得できそうです。


----------



## shiremono

Hi, almostfreebird

(1) and (2) are both OK.
I might choose (1).

(1)［Japanese gentlemenではなく］Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。

It doesn't sound condescending.


----------



## rukiak

有名な誤用というのは知りませんでしたが、まあ、そういう表現に関しては、私自身もしているかもしれませんね。

鈴木：予算が足りないのが、目下の問題です。
田中：△問題なのは人員不足です。／○問題はむしろ、人員不足の方です。／○一番の問題は人員不足です。／○いえ、問題は人員不足です。

△のような返答を私自身、しているかもしれません。はっきりと記憶にあるわけではありませんが。


----------



## almostfreebird

shiremono said:


> Hi, almostfreebird
> 
> (1) and (2) are both OK.
> I might choose (1).
> 
> (1)［Japanese gentlemenではなく］Japanese ladiesなのは、どうしてでしょうか。
> 
> It doesn't sound condescending.



In the context between #13 and #15,

it certainly sounded condescending, arrogant, or maybe snooty, if it wasn't meant to be so. 

And I'm sure it wasn't meant to be so. 

It was just flippant, I think.(^_^)


----------



## shiremono

Most [noun]+ [_na no ha_] sentences seem to be understood as omitted [clause]+[_na no ha_] sentences in certain contexts.
（Exception　example: _mondai nanoha_） 
（「問題なのは」などの例外をのぞき）［名詞］＋［なのは］の文は、ある文脈において［なのは］にかかる節の大部分を省略したものとして理解できそうです。

They are context dependent statements. 
If the contexts are not clear, they sound insufficient and puzzling.
こうした文は文脈に依存しています。
もしもその文脈が明白でなければ、舌足らずな言い方になり相手をとまどわせることになります。

These expressions may be "colloquial"(#26, #29), but they are not wrong usages.
こうした表現は、日常会話的だとしても、誤用とはいえません。

Context dependent statements are natural in Japanese.
Example: _Boku ha_[_wa_]_ unagi da._
文脈に依存した表現は、日本語においては自然なものです。
例： 僕はウナギだ。

It is safe not to use them to avoid misunderstanding, though.
ただし、誤解を生まないためにそうした表現を用いないのがたしかに無難です。


----------

