# notte



## wilsocn1

I cant seem to find this word in my dictionary or in the online dictionary that I use.  I assume it means _on_ simply from context, but I cant figure out why the dictionary would leave out such a basic word which seems to be very useful.

Here is some context: Uma ni notte iru onnanoko

I understand _ni_ to be the English word _on_ in this context and im just wondering if _notte_ is necessary for that construction or if it has another purpose.

Thanks


----------



## weirdgirl

notte in this case is the te form of the verb noru meaning to ride in/on something. the te iru form is the equivalent of the present continuous (is -ing) so the sentence means: the girl who is riding a horse.

hope that helps
Maire


----------



## wilsocn1

Helps a lot.  Thanks


----------



## id:roya

NOTTE is absolutely necessary. In English you might be able to say "(A/the) girl on (a/the) horse" with no problem in English, but in Japanese, UMA NI IRU ONNANOKO would conjure up some weird image in which a girl is, hmm, in a horse? By the same token, you can't say "jitensha ni iru onnanoko (a girl on bike)". It sounds as if there's a place called "Bike", and she's right there at the place called Bike. The strange thing is, you can still say "kuruma ni iru onnanoko (a girl in the car)" although it's preferable to say "kurua ni notte iru onnanoko (a girl sitting in the car)
The word-by-word translation of the phrase would be: "Horse on ride doing girl", which in English you would have said "A girl who's riding on the horse". NOTTE is a conjugated version of the verb NORU 乗る (ride).


----------



## danr62

I'm having trouble understanding the word order for this one. Since the basic word order in Japanese is Subject Object Verb why wouldn't it be like this?

onnanoko notte ni iru uma


----------



## Flaminius

This is a noun modified by a relative clause.

[Uma ni notte iru] onnanoko
The word order here is a modifying clause followed by a modified noun, which is the regular pattern in Japanese.  The sentence talks about a girl.  A more detailed description of the girl is seen in the relative clause.

uma-ni notte-iru
onHorse ride-PROGRESSIVE
The clause assumes the same order order as a full sentence, "Onnanoko-wa uma-ni notte-iru," (The girl is riding a horse) but the subject is ellipted because it is identical with the noun that the clause modifies.


----------



## SpiceMan

because japanese is not just "the other way around" on simple phrases such as:

_ onna no ko wa uma ni notteiru_ (a girl is riding a horse)

but there also is 
_ the girl _that _is riding the horse
Uma ni notte iru * onnanoko  _

* the _that_ would be here

the difference is that the "_that_" makes it a complex sentence, a relative subordinate one actually. "the girl" has "riding a horse" as a noun modifier.

That's why it doesn't finish with a verb.


----------



## danr62

_onna no ko wa uma ni notteiru_ 

_Uma ni notte iru onnanoko _


So, in the second one, is there more of an emphasis on onnanoko than on the first one, or is it simply another way of saying the same thing?


----------



## Flaminius

No.  
"Onnanoko-wa uma-ni notteiru."
This is a sentence, "A girl is riding a horse."

"Uma-ni notte iru onnanoko"
This is a noun phrase, "a girl who is riding a horse".


----------



## luckyguy

danr62 said:
			
		

> _onna no ko wa uma ni notteiru_
> 
> _Uma ni notte iru onnanoko _
> 
> 
> So, in the second one, is there more of an emphasis on onnanoko than on the first one, or is it simply another way of saying the same thing?


 
In my opinion, the 1st and 2nd one send respectively different feeling.

The 1st one:" _onna no ko wa ...._ " is just describing a fact from a view point of 3rd party/person.
The 2nd one:"_Uma ni notte ...._" emphasizes _onnanoko_ as you thought.


----------



## Flaminius

It is not a problem of feeling.  Nor are the two examples "saying the same thing."  One is a sentence and the other is a phrase.

Luckyguy, when you said, "the 1st and 2nd one send respectively different feeling," did you mean they are no different in other respects such as parts of speach?

/* EDIT */
The former can be used in a quenstion and answer as below:
Q: (Pointing the picture of a girl on horseback) What is the girl doing?
A: The girl is riding a horse.  (Onnanoko-wa uma-ni notte iru)

The Q and A where the latter is suitable is very different:
Q: What is the picture about?
A: A girl who is riding a horse.  (umani notte iru onnanoko)


----------



## danr62

So would something like this work?

_Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu _


----------



## luckyguy

Flaminius said:
			
		

> It is not a problem of feeling. Nor are the two examples "saying the same thing." One is a sentence and the other is a phrase.
> 
> Luckyguy, when you said, "the 1st and 2nd one send respectively different feeling," did you mean they are no different in other respects such as parts of speach?
> 
> /* EDIT */
> The former can be used in a quenstion and answer as below:
> Q: (Pointing the picture of a girl on horseback) What is the girl doing?
> A: The girl is riding a horse. (Onnanoko-wa uma-ni notte iru)
> 
> The Q and A where the latter is suitable is very different:
> Q: What is the picture about?
> A: A girl who is riding a horse. (umani notte iru onnanoko)


 
I agree with the usage you gave.


----------



## Flaminius

danr62 said:
			
		

> So would something like this work?
> 
> _Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu _



Yes!


----------



## SpiceMan

yes, my daughter is the girl (that is) riding horse


----------



## Edwin

danr62 said:
			
		

> So would something like this work?
> 
> _Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu _



Or also you can say:

Uma ni notte iru onnanoko wa watashi no musume desu.

To me it is a fascinating aspect of Japanese that everything (clause or not ) which modifies a noun must precede the noun.


----------



## Captain Haddock

_Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu_ sounds to me more like:
"My daughter is a girl riding on a horse." It's grammatical but somewhat odd. Here's a better wording:

_Uma ni notte iru onnanoko ha watashi no musume desu._
"The girl riding on the horse is my daughter."

Anyone who's better at Japanese is free to correct me. 

Edit: I missed that Edwin suggested the same wording.


----------



## Flaminius

Ahoy Captain,

"Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu," is not  "My daughter is a girl riding on a horse."

In an English sentence "X is Y," the theme is the predicate noun Y.  In a Japanese sentence "X-wa Y desu," the them is the topic noun X.

To contrast, the following example pair is of use:
_English_
Q: Who is the manager of this hotel?
A: Mr. Abber is the manager.

_Japanese_
Q: このホテルの支配人は誰ですか。
   This(GEN) hotel-GEN manager-TOPIC who BE Q. 
A: 支配人は田中さんです。
   Manager-TOPIC Mr. Tanaka BE.

Note in the Japanese answer the order of the nouns are the opposite of the English counterpart.  The English order (田中さんは支配人です) is very awkward since it _assumes_ Mr. Tanaka is someone whom the hearer already knows but this is the first time for him to hear about Tanaka.  In order to retain the English order, one could say "Tanakasan-ga shihainin desu," but this _requires _that the hearer know, besides Tanaka, several from the higher staff of the hotel who are likely to be the manager.

Back to the girl on horseback, 
"Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu," is best translated as "The girl riding a horse is my daughter."

Flaminius


----------



## Captain Haddock

I understand the point about word order and familiarity with the subject, and that's actually why the one sentence sounds odd to me. The English sentence "the girl riding a horse is my daughter" means that we both already know about the girl, but we might not know the speaker has a daughter; hence starting with "Uma ni notte iru onnanoko wa…" makes sense to me. If we start with "Watashi no musume wa," it's assumed we know there's a daughter, something not implied by the English. Is that correct?

Otherwise, could we not use _ano_ or _achira_ to improve the sentence?
"Watashi no musume wa ano uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu."


----------



## Flaminius

Captain Haddock said:
			
		

> If we start with "Watashi no musume wa," it's assumed we know there's a daughter. . . . .


Yes.  With topic marker -wa, _watashino musume_ is regarded as someone whom the interlocutors can freely discuss without further introduction.  It is, therefore, assumed that there is a daughter.



			
				Captain Haddock said:
			
		

> Otherwise, could we not use _ano_ or _achira_ to improve the sentence?
> "Watashi no musume wa ano uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu."


Great improvement.  In this position _ano_ could modify _uma_ but somehow it is not the case here, perhaps because _uma_ is an unmodified noun.


----------



## toscairn

Flaminius said:
			
		

> "Watashi no musume wa uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu," is not  "My daughter is a girl riding on a horse."With due respect, I don't think so. Even though I agree with your explanation of Y in "X is Y" being a focal point in English, that doesn't preclude the possibility of Y in Japanese being one. Please note that being a topic should be distinguished from being a focal point. True, "watashi no musume" is the topic, but "uma ni notte iru onnanoko desu" can be said to be "the focal point." (NOTE: if you are employing "wa" in the sense of the contrastive "wa" then the focal should go to "watashi." For a further discussion, refer to the related discussion of Wikipedia.)
> 
> In an English sentence "X is Y," the *theme* is the predicate noun Y.  In a Japanese sentence "X-wa Y desu," the them is the topic noun X.I would say instead, "the focal point" for the same reason. e.g. Judy is a nurse working for the hospital. (Judy: the topic/a nurs working for the hospital: the focal point)
> 
> To contrast, the following example pair is of use:
> _English_
> Q: Who is the manager of this hotel?
> A: Mr. Abber is the manager.
> 
> _Japanese_
> Q: このホテルの支配人は誰ですか。
> This(GEN) hotel-GEN manager-TOPIC who BE Q.
> A: 支配人は田中さんです。
> Manager-TOPIC Mr. Tanaka BE.
> 
> Note in the Japanese answer the order of the nouns are the opposite of the English counterpart.  The English order (田中さんは支配人です) is very awkward since it _assumes_ Mr. Tanaka is someone whom the hearer already knows but this is the first time for him to hear about Tanaka.  In order to retain the English order, one could say "Tanakasan-ga shihainin desu," but this _requires _that the hearer know, besides Tanaka, several from the higher staff of the hotel who are likely to be the manager.Not necessarily so. It can be 「総記のが」(hard to translate it! How would you do it?) This type of "ga" tends to be used in response to a question.



But I'd like to add that you, Flamini, are wonderful in explaining and analyzing things based on your profound knowledge in linguistics. Please be encouraged to keep up the good work and enlighten us.


----------



## Flaminius

Toscairn (quod licet legere?), thank you for the comments.  I am very happy to have you correct me since, as you know, errare humanum est.

By the way, 総記の「が」 is exhaustive _ga_ in English.  It is in the Wiki article to which you provided the link.

Flaminius servus


----------



## toscairn

Ahi! （←これ、何語の間投詞やねん！）Exhaustive ga it is! What a name...Toscairn is a Scottish word meaning "a representative" but I didn't know it till whodoneit told me so. And your name?


----------

