# Relative Clauses as Full Sentences, or Putting Subjects at the End of Sentences



## TheNikus

A friend of mine, a fellow student of Japanese, told me that in order to "switch things" up, Japanese writers often put their subjects at the end of sentences in what I can only think of as relative clauses, such as 「…」と言った先生 ("...", said the teacher) or それから教室に入った先生 (And then the teacher entered the classroom), or something to that effect.

Unlike my friend, I don't yet feel comfortable enough reading actual Japanese literature, and I've never heard about this kind of thing before. My feeling is that he must have gotten something wrong.

Thoughts from the Wordreference community?


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

Maybe your friend is talking about the 倒置法 (the reversed word order in order to emphasize).

顔の印象は歯で変わるのよ。
--->顔の印象は変わるのよ、歯で。
--->顔の印象はかわるのよ。歯で！

無敵の王者がついに負けた！
--->ついに負けた、無敵の王者が。

元総理大臣の安倍さんが昨日暗殺された。
--->昨日暗殺された。元総理大臣の安倍さんが。


----------



## gengo

TheNikus said:


> A friend of mine, a fellow student of Japanese, told me that in order to "switch things" up, Japanese writers often put their subjects at the end of sentences in what I can only think of as relative clauses, such as 「…」と言った先生 ("...", said the teacher) or それから教室に入った先生 (And then the teacher entered the classroom), or something to that effect.



What you describe (based on the examples you have given) is not a matter of putting the subject at the end of the sentence, but rather the normal position of a modifying clause in Japanese.  Whereas in English we put a modifying clause after (to the right of) a noun (often introduced by a relative pronoun such as "that"), in Japanese we put such a clause before (to the left of) the noun.

Ex.
the man that was wearing a red hat
赤い帽子を被っていた男の人

The underlined parts are the modifying clause.  They give us more information about the noun (the man).

Your example (それから教室に入った先生) is a sentence fragment with no main verb (we don't know what action the teacher performed), and would translate to "the teacher who came into the classroom after that."  That is, 入った here is not a main verb, and is only modifying the noun.  The Japanese translation of your English sentence (And then the teacher entered the classroom) would be それから先生が教室に入った.

That said, it is common to add the subject, almost as an afterthought, at the end of the sentence as mentioned by Sola.

Another example:
するはずないじゃない、そんなこと！

The normal construction here would be:  そんなことをするはずないじゃない！


----------



## TheNikus

What about this sentence? My friend says he copied it from a paragraph in a visual novel.

流石にここまで上手くいくとは思っていなかった政夫。

According to him, this translates to "It had worked so well up until then, not even Masao had expected it." But to me, it looks like an incomplete relative clause.


----------



## gengo

TheNikus said:


> 流石にここまで上手くいくとは思っていなかった政夫。
> 
> According to him, this translates to "It had worked so well up until then, not even Masao had expected it." But to me, it looks like an incomplete relative clause.



Ah, now I see what you are asking about.  Yes, that is a very common structure in Japanese, one that is usually impossible in English because it would be an incomplete sentence (no main verb) in English.  The literal translation is "Typically, Masao, who didn't think it would work out so well."  That is, in JP it is common to use a noun modified by a clause, with no main verb.  The more natural translation would be something like "As usual / Unsurprisingly, Masao didn't think it would work out so well."  I think the さすがに implies that Masao was pessimistic about the outcome, and was surprised by how well things turned out.  Therefore, I don't agree with your friend's translation, which implies that Masao was optimistic, but even he didn't expect the result to be as good as it was.  More context might change my mind.

You'll encounter this structure often in writing, but not so often in speech.


----------



## TheNikus

Thank you. I guess he wasn't making things up then


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

I think the interpretation of the sentence is very complicated.
At least, it is not the 倒置法, which should be:
流石にここまで上手くいくとは思っていなかった*、*政夫*は。*

流石にここまで上手くいくとは思っていなかった政夫。
is an incomplete sentence, and something is abbreviated, or separated into two sentences. I think this is often appeared in the narrations of movie screenplays or scripts.

For example:
（流石にここまで上手くいくと思っていなかった政夫。にやけた顔で）
「いや～、出来すぎ、出来すぎ！」

＝
（流石にここまで上手くいくと思っていなかった政夫は、にやけた顔で言う。）
政夫：「いや～、出来すぎ、出来すぎ！」

Therefore, basically it is a noun clause, whose main part is 政夫, and 流石にここまで上手くいくと思っていなかった is modifying 政夫.


Cf) In English, some native writer may write a sentence like these:
"Masao stared at him. With his eyes wide open."
"Masao knew of that. And only too well." or something like that.

These are not grammatically correct, which would be:
"Masao stared at him with his eyes wide open."
"Masao knew of that, and he knew it only too well."
(Sorry, as I'm a non-native English speaker. If any proofread is needed, just let me know.)

The writer intentionally separated the sentences into two, for a rhetorical purpose, adopting the emphasized version or the colloquial version.

Likewise, 流石にここまで上手くいくと思っていなかった政夫 must have a rhetorical intention.
Or it is just the indicator who speaks, followed by his speech in "......" in the screenplay.

The complete context is needed to make it if you want to get the precise answer.
What is a "visual novel"?
Does your friend know the context, especially if there is 政夫's speech just after the sentence?


----------



## gengo

SoLaTiDoberman said:


> I think this is often appeared in the narrations of movie screenplays or scripts.



It is also extremely common in advertising.

Here is one example (it's difficult to search for this structure on Google).


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

@#8: Thank you very much for the very antique poster that has an intense smell of Showa Era. I miss it. (I mean Showa, not Anne. lol)

When I see it, I just think it's a noun clause because I automatically recognize it as a TITLE. "Me who won't hesitate to join when asked"

A clause title is regarded as smart or "normal." Whereas, a whole complete sentence as a title seems awful or weird.


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

Titles and itemization lists are different how to make a noun clause.

My To Do List:
１か月に１冊以上本を読む　　A sentence without maru
１か月に１冊以上本を読む。　　Controversial if a sentence with maru is okay or not.
１か月に１冊以上本を読むこと　A noun clause
１か月に１冊以上本を読む（読んでいる）私 This pattern of a noun clause cannot be used. This is just weird.

cf)
(質問）あなたの十年後の理想像は？　（「理想の私」とは？）10年後にどのようになっているあなたを想像しますか？
国際結婚して３人の子供に囲まれている私 
マラソンでサブ３を達成している私
日本語を流暢に話している私

On second thought, I'd imagine さそわれても迷わない私 as a noun clause answer to a question such as：
あなたが今求めているあなたの理想はなんでしょう？
あなたが今望んでいるのはどんなあなたですか？

What kind of yourself are you wishing for now?
(It's) Me that do not hesitate to join activities when asked!


----------

