# topicalization and word order



## Nino83

Hello everybody.

In my native language (like in other European languages) we can put a direct/indirect or prepositional object at the beginning of the sentence in order to make it the topic of the sentence (using a different intonation).
I'd like to ask you if the Japanese translation is right, i.e if it's the common way Japanese speakers speak.

Il gelato (ice-cream, direct object) ha mangiato (ate) Paul (subject). *アイスクリームは*ポールさんが食べた
Mary (direct object) ha visto (saw) Paul (subject). *メアリーちゃんは*ポールさんが見た
A Mary (indirect object) ha scritto (wrote) una lettera (a letter, direct object) Paul (subject).  *メアリーちゃんには*ポールさんが手紙を書いた

Thank you


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> we can put a direct/indirect or prepositional object at the beginning of the sentence in order to make it the topic of the sentence


In the first one (the ice-cream one), yes, topic-focusing.

About the ice-cream, Paul ate it.

_Il gelato (ice-cream, direct object) ha mangiato (ate) Paul (subject). *アイスクリームは*ポールさんが食べた
Mary (direct object) ha visto (saw) Paul (subject). *メアリーちゃんは*ポールさんが見た
A Mary (indirect object) ha scritto (wrote) una lettera (a letter, direct object) Paul (subject).  *メアリーちゃんには*ポールさんが手紙を書いた_

In the second one, that is just subject+verb+object, but
ポールさんはメアリーちゃんを見た。 This is a usual SVO formation, but
メアリーちゃんをポールさんが見た。　This is possible, too. This is just a matter of word order.

メアリーちゃんにポールさんが手紙を書いた。 is a matter of word order, too. But does this emphasise メアリーちゃん, the indirect object? I can't say yes or no. Or it may be so slightly. どうでしょうね？


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> Il gelato (ice-cream, direct object) ha mangiato (ate) Paul (subject). *アイスクリームは*ポールさんが食べた
> Mary (direct object) ha visto (saw) Paul (subject). *メアリーちゃんは*ポールさんが見た
> A Mary (indirect object) ha scritto (wrote) una lettera (a letter, direct object) Paul (subject). *メアリーちゃんには*ポールさんが手紙を書いた


What are these 'ha' in your Italian?

All your three Japanese sentences are working fine, perfect, though the second one is  unclear without context, and メアリーちゃん*のこと*はポールさんが見た is the complete sentence.


----------



## Nino83

karlalou said:


> What are these 'ha' in your Italian?


It's the present simple, third person singular of _avere_ (to have), literally _*ha* mangiato = (he/she) *has* eaten, *ha* visto = *has* seen, *ha* scritto = *has* written_ (but sometimes, in some cases, we use the present perfect while English speakers use the simple past tense).

What I was wondering is if the semantic difference between アイスクリームはポールさんが食べた and アイスクリームをポールさんが食べた is the same of that between "*Paul* ate that ice-cream" and "Paul ate *that ice-cream*/*that ice-cream* Paul ate" in English (where the focus is on the "ice-cream"), or if they are the same in Japanese.

in English:
"*Who* ate that ice-cream?" => "*Paul* ate the ice-cream", "it's *Paul* who ate the ice-cream", "*Paul* is the one who ate the ice-cream", "that ice-cream, *Paul* ate it"
"*What* did Paul eat?" => "Paul ate an *ice-cream*", "*that ice-cream* Paul ate"

in Italian (the same as in English):
"*Chi* ha mangiato il gelato?" => "*Paul* ha mangiato il gelato", "è *Paul* che ha mangiato il gelato", "*Paul* è colui che ha mangiato il gelato", "il gelato *l*'ha mangiato *Paul*"
"*Che cosa* ha mangiato Paul?" => "Paul ha mangiato *il gelato*", "*il gelato* ha mangiato Paul"

The parts in *bold* are pronounced with an higher pitch.

How do you (all) answer these questions (I'll hope my translation is correct)
誰はアイスクリームを食べたか？(Who ate the ice-cream?)
何をポールが食べたか？ (What did Paul eat?)

Thank you


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> "*Who* ate that ice-cream?" => "*Paul* ate the ice-cream", "it's *Paul* who ate the ice-cream", "*Paul* is the one who ate the ice-cream", "that ice-cream, *Paul* ate it"


For these, the Japanese version is （あの）アイスクリームはポールさんが食べた. (I think it's more common for us to say this with あの.) 
The translation for the question is 誰*が*（あの）アイスクリームを食べたの（ですか）・食べましたか・食べた（んだ）？

and also （あの）アイスクリームを食べたのはポールさんです works fine.



Nino83 said:


> "*What* did Paul eat?" => "Paul ate an *ice-cream*", "*that ice-cream* Paul ate"


This question is 何をポールさん*は*食べた（の）？, or ポールさん*は*何を食べたの？
and the answer is *ポールさんが食べたのは*アイスクリームです or ポールさん*は*アイスクリームを食べた.

アイスクリームをポールさんが食べた doesn't sound very much like an answer to a question, but just a simple statement.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, karlalou


----------



## karlalou

A situation to say アイスクリームをポールさんが食べた came to my mind.

A: ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べたよ。(Paul ate ice cream.)
B: え？何をポールさんが食べたって？／ポールさんが何を食べたって？(What did you say? Paul ate what?)
A: アイスクリーム（だよ）。アイスクリームをポールさんが食べたんだよ／ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べたんだよ。(Ice cream. Paul ate ice ream.)

In this case, ポールさん*が* sounds just the right.

(So, I say *は* like ポールさん*は*アイスクリームを食べる is the basic. は is to say a basic statement.
and we use *が *to say something with a different nuance like when we want to emphasize it.)


----------



## frequency

Rather than by word order, by using a particle or 連語 we do topicalization.
について（は） is called 連語.

アイスクリームはポールが食べた。　　アイスクリームについてはポールが食べた。
ポールが食べた、アイスクリームについては。　　ポールが食べた、アイスクリームは。
They're all still topicalization, despite order-switching.



Nino83 said:


> 誰はアイスクリームを食べたか？(Who ate the ice-cream?)
> 何をポールが食べたか？ (What did Paul eat?)


We say
ポールが食べた。1
アイスクリームを食べた。2
No topicalization.

は・については can topicalize. Therefore,


> （あの）アイスクリームを食べたのはポールさんです


 
（あの）アイスクリームはポールが食べた。3
（あの）アイスクリームについてはポールが食べた。4
These are topicalization and the ice-cream is the topic. Not Paul. Even more they are getting stronger topicalization because of あの. (1 and 2 are the answers required. 3 and 4 do not work fine as good answers as 1 and 2 because you obviously see the repetition of the topic/object that is already known between them: ice-cream.)


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> ポールが食べた。1
> アイスクリームを食べた。2


Thank you very much! 
So, I understand that when we want to emphazize the new information we use が (for the subject, if the question is "who did it?") and を (for the object, if the question is "what did he do?"), while for the known information (the object in "who did it?" and the subject in "what did he do?") we use は, but this part is redundant and it is likely to be omitted in the answer.  

So, while in English and in Italian we change word order and intonation (or sentence structure), in Japanese you simply change the particle. 

Very interesting!


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> So, I understand that when we want to emphazize the new information we use が (for the subject, if the question is "who did it?") and を (for the object, if the question is "what did he do?"),


Yes, I think so too.



> while for the known information (the object in "who did it?" and the subject in "what did he do?") we use は, but this part is redundant and it is likely to be omitted in the answer.


Umm..sorry, I'm not sure は can be used for known information, but when you say　アイスクリームについては、
this is like a declaration that you're going to stay focused on the ice-cream or you're going to talk about the ice-cream. If so, ポールが食べた is associated and necessary information for the declaration.

I think you'll understand this point soon in the future lol.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> but when you say　アイスクリームについては、this is like a declaration that you're going to stay focused on the ice-cream or you're going to talk about the ice-cream


It is very similar to the Indo-European theme. You set it as the theme of discussion, and then it can be omitted in the successive sentences. 

*Gelato* (topic/theme) is the Italian word for ice cream, commonly used, in English, for ice cream made in an Italian style. *It* is made with a base of  milk, cream, and sugar, and flavored with fruit and nut purees and other flavorings. *It* is generally lower in fat, but higher in sugar, than other styles of ice cream. 

*Gelato* (tema) è la parola italiana per _ice cream_, usato comunemente, in inglese, per gli _ice cream_ fatti in stile italiano. *È* (= is) fatto con una base di latte, crema, zucchero, e aromatizzato con frutta e crema di nocciole e altri gusti. *È* (= is) generalmente meno ricco di grassi, ma più ricco in zuccheri, rispetto ad altri stili di gelato.


----------



## Nino83

Another question. 

Can I reply simply like this?  
誰が アイスクリームを 食べたの?=> ポールさん です  omitting アイスクリームを食べたのは  
何を ポールさんは 食べたの? => アイスクリーム です omitting ポールさんが食べたのは


----------



## karlalou

Sure you can.

Ａ：　誰がアイスクリームを食べたの？
Ｂ：　ポールさん（です）。

Ａ：　何をポールさんは食べたの？
Ｂ：　アイスクリーム（です）。

It's pretty common to omit even です in casual conversation.


----------



## Nino83

So I have, more or less, three choices: repeat the verb ポールが食べた, use the "desu" type of answer ポールさんです, and omit "desu" ポールさん. 
If the question ends with のですか・のだ？ I can reply with  そうです・そうだ or そうではありません・そうではない, isn't it?
ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べたのですか・のだ？ => そうです・そうだ; そうではありません・そうではない 
Another question.
When one asks something using the plain form of the verb, is it sufficient to use a rising intonation in speech and put a simple "?" in writing or the particle の is necessary? I heard that the particle の is used by women in questions, is it right?


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> So I have, more or less, three choices: repeat the verb ポールが食べた, use the "desu" type of answer ポールさんです, and omit "desu" ポールさん.


Right.
Ａ：　誰が（あのアイスクリーム）食べた（の）（ですか）・食べたんだ？
Ｂ：　ポールさんが食べた・食べました／ポールさん（だよ・です）



Nino83 said:


> If the question ends with のですか・のだ？ I can reply with そうです・そうだ or そうではありません・そうではない, isn't it?
> ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べたのですか・のだ？ => そうです・そうだ; そうではありません・そうではない


Ａ：　ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べたの（ですか）・食べたんだ（ね）？
Ｂ；　そうです・そうだ（よ）・そう／そうではありません・そうではない／ちがいます・ちがうよ




Nino83 said:


> Another question.
> When one asks something using the plain form of the verb, is it sufficient to use a rising intonation in speech and put a simple "?" in writing or the particle の is necessary? I heard that the particle の is used by women in questions, is it right?


Ａ：　これ食べる？（⤴ rising intonation） [sounds like inviting to eat]
Ｂ：　うん。ありがとう。／食べる！ありがとう！／食べない・いらない。（ありがとう）

Ａ：　これ食べるの？（⤴ rising intonation） [asking about the plan already made]
Ｂ：　うん・そう（だ）よ。（なんで？）／食べるよ。／食べないよ。

Ａ：　映画見に行く？（⤴ rising intonation） [suggesting to go]
Ｂ：　うん、行こう！

Ａ：　映画見に行くの？（⤴ rising intonation） [asking about the plan already made]
Ｂ：　うん、そうだよ。一緒に行く？

Actually '?' is foreign to Japanese, though nowadays almost everybody use it and it's almost like a necessity. So you are correct if you don't put ？ at the end of an interrogative sentence in Japanese.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, karlalou


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べたのですか・のだ？ => そうです・そうだ; そうではありません・そうではない


Nino, this is just a yes/no question. And all
そうです・そうだ; そうではありません・そうではない are okay. (But the latter two may sound stiff a bit.)



> So I have, more or less, three choices: repeat the verb ポールが食べた, use the "desu" type of answer ポールさんです, and omit "desu" ポールさん.?


This is when you answer "Paul". In the politeness level, they are: ポールさんです・ポールです・ポール*.
Regarding the repetition of a verb, it can make the whole sentence clearer. （誰がアイスクリームを食べたのですか？ポールが食べた。）
* You see these many variations in answering and in other various cases; they are a really annoying issue.



> If the question ends with のですか・のだ？ I can reply with  そうです・そうだ or そうではありません・そうではない, isn't it?


That depends and it's your choice. But そうではない is too stiff in daily conversation.



> When one asks something using the plain form of the verb, is it sufficient to use a rising intonation in speech and put a simple "?" in writing or the particle の is necessary? I heard that the particle の is used by women in questions, is it right?


 
ポールが食べた？With rising intonation? Yes, okay and we often do so. You're asking whether Paul ate or not. You don't ask what Paul ate.
ポールが食べたの？ Okay for both women and men. But exactly the use of の can make the question sound soft.

The use of の in writing? Indeed, it's not good in formal writing.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> 誰が アイスクリームを 食べたの?=> ポールさん です  omitting アイスクリームを食べたのは
> 何を ポールさんは 食べたの? => アイスクリーム です omitting ポールさんが食べたのは


 
Q: 誰がアイスクリームを食べたの？
A: アイスクリームを食べたのはポールさんです。
In this question and answer set, this answer is too lengthy and roundabout.
The speaker and hearer have already known that there is an ice-cream eaten by somebody, so you can omit アイスクリームを食べたのは in this answer.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> *Gelato* (topic/theme) is the Italian word for ice cream, commonly used, in English, for ice cream made in an Italian style. *It* is made with a base of  milk, cream, and sugar, and flavored with fruit and nut purees and other flavorings. *It* is・・・


 
Nino, yesterday I talked with my coworker that we did not have some screenshot images of a software user interface translated into English. He was going to use the images of the Japanese-version UI, instead of them, in our document. He said:

ないものについては、日本語版を使います。
_About/for the screenshot images that we do not have, I'm going to use those of the Japanese version (instead)._

We have some images including English and Japanese ones, but he is going to talk about the English-version images that we don't have _only_. In this way, a hearer can easily understand on which topic he's going to focus. Am I answering your question?


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> Nino, this is just a yes/no question. And all そうです・そうだ; そうではありません・そうではない are okay.


So, if I understand, also if the yes/no question doesn't end with the "のだ" construction, I can answer simply "はい、そうです".
ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べた？・たべたの？・たべましたか。 => はい、そうです


frequency said:


> (But the latter two may sound stiff a bit.)


Is it bebtter to use いいえ、違います or いいえ、そうじゃない instead of そうではありません・そうではない?


frequency said:


> In the politeness level, they are[...]Regarding the repetition of a verb, it can make the whole sentence clearer.


thank you!


frequency said:


> ポールが食べたの？ Okay for both women and men. But exactly the use of の can make the question sound soft.


Ah, ok, now I got the difference.


frequency said:


> The use of の in writing? Indeed, it's not good in formal writing.


So in formal writing it's better to use たべましたか。instead of たべたの？, is it right?


frequency said:


> Am I answering your question?


Yes, thanks.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> if the yes/no question doesn't end with the "のだ" construction.


Sorry, I didn't mention this one. We don't say ポールが食べたのだ？(question).



> ポールさんがアイスクリームを食べた？・たべたの？・たべましたか。 => はい、そうです。


Great!



> いいえ、違います or いいえ、そうじゃない instead of そうではありません・そうではない?


The most normal ones would be いいえ。 or いいえ、違います。  いいえ、そうじゃない sounds to me stronger nagation. そうではありません。 and そうではない。 would never be wrong, but they are as formal and literary expressions as I'm surprised when I hear in speech.



> So in formal writing it's better to use たべましたか。instead of たべたの？, is it right?


Great!


----------



## Nino83

Thank you very much! 
I learned something new about questions and answers.


----------

