# Akane-chan wa kinō tomodachi to atta. => topic ellipsis (omission) and different meanings



## Nino83

Hello everyone.

When there is a verb taking the particle と and in the following sentence the topic is omitted, is there any ambiguity or only one single interpretation is possible?

あかねちゃんは昨日友達*と*会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにパブに行った。
Akane-chan met with her friends, yesterday. After watching a movie at the cinema, *she/they went* to the pub to drink some beer.
Akane-chan si è incontrata con i suoi amici, ieri. Dopo aver visto un film al cinema, *è andata/sono andati* al pub a bere una birra.

1) Who went to the pub? She or they?

2) Does something change if we use the particle に (for example と会った for they and に会った for she as topic in the following sentence)?
あかねちゃんは昨日友達*に*会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにパブに行った。

3) Or do I have to rephrase it, putting both Akane and her friends before the topic particle は in order to avoid any ambiguity?
あかねちゃん*と*（彼女の）友達*は*会った。映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにパブに行った。


----------



## DaylightDelight

Nino83 said:


> 1) Who went to the pub? She or they?


In this case "they both" is more likely, partly because of パブ. 
If it was あかねちゃんは昨日友達と会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとでビールを買って帰った。 then they may have watched the movie together, but it is likely she bought beer and went home alone.
So, yes, there is an inherent ambiguity in this kind of construction.


Nino83 said:


> あかねちゃんは昨日友達*に*会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにパブに行った。


In this case, another possibility turns up that she only ran into her friend but did not go along after that; She ran into her friend. She watched the movie.  She went to a pub.


Nino83 said:


> あかねちゃん*と*（彼女の）友達*は*会った。


This is simply unnatural.  We wouldn't say something like this, unless maybe in some literary works.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you! 


DaylightDelight said:


> So, yes, there is an inherent ambiguity in this kind of construction.


So with this type of verbs (those taking と as complement) more interpretations are possible.


----------



## DaylightDelight

Nino83 said:


> So with this type of verbs (those taking と as complement) more interpretations are possible.


I'm not sure if this is about the "type" of verbs.  It could be just 会う that is causing the ambiguity, because it could mean either "to meet (for the first time)", "to run into" or "to spend some time together" depending on the context.

妻とは ** で会ったんです = I met my wife (for the first time) at **?
ついさっき友達と会った = I ran into my friend just now.
こんど（私と）会いましょう = Let's get together sometime (and spend some time).
So the problem with this Akane-chan's example is that we don't have enough context to decide the meaning of 会う.
Between 友達と会った and 友達に会った, 友達と会った is slightly more likely to be #3 (spent some time together) and 友達に会った be #2 (just ran into), but it is far from certain and different interpretations are quite possible.


----------



## 810senior

The effective way of avoiding such ambiguity is to add the unambiguous subject in the second sentence.


> あかねちゃんは昨日友達と会った。*あかねちゃんたち（or 彼女たち）は*映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにバブに行った。
> or
> あかねちゃんは昨日友達と会った。*あかねちゃんは（or 彼女）は*映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにバブに行った。


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> あかねちゃんは昨日友達*と*会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにパブに行った。
> 1) Who went to the pub? She or they?


It's あかねちゃん。 In this example, you're talking about あかねちゃん。 So Akane-chan and her friend(s) did.



> 2) あかねちゃんは昨日友達*に*会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲みにパブに行った。


Grammatically correct. 「に会う」 may mean that you meet somebody by chance. 「と会う」 may a planned meeting. Sorry I'm not sure very much.



> So with this type of verbs (those taking と as complement) more interpretations are possible.


Yes and no. Not clearly defined.



810senior said:


> The effective way of avoiding such ambiguity is to add the unambiguous subject in the second sentence.


Yes. And I think you're talking about 3.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you very much!
Can the following misunderstanding really happen?
A: 昨日はジョンとフランクと会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。
B: ジョンはビールを飲みますか。
A: いいえ。 ビールを飲んだのは私です。


----------



## DaylightDelight

Yes, I guess that is not impossible.


Nino83 said:


> 昨日はジョンとフランクと会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。


This sentence is likely to be understood that the speaker and the friends tagged along together.
So a careful speaker would try to speak in more unambiguous manner if that was not the case.
But the difference is very subtle so we end up saying something ambiguous from time to time.

昨日はジョンとフランクと会っ*て、* 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。
 There is almost no doubt that they all went to the movie and drank beer, because all actions are stated as a series of events.

昨日はジョンとフランクと会った。*それから*映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。
 Now it is likely that only the speaker went to the movie and drank beer, because 会った and other actions are stated as separate events.

昨日はジョンとフランクと会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> A: 昨日はジョンとフランクと会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。


Excellent. The second と can be に. Both ways are okay.

Nino, good question.
You're talking about the things you did yesterday.


> B: ジョンはビールを*飲みますか*。
> A: いいえ。 ビールを飲んだのは私です。






frequency said:


> Sorry I'm not sure very much.


I want to correct this one. _Sorry, I'm not sure if it's clearly defined or not._


----------



## Nino83

DaylightDelight said:


> So a careful speaker would try to speak in more unambiguous manner if that was not the case.


Thank you for the examples. 


frequency said:


> You're talking about the things you did yesterday.


Thanks. 
If John doesn't drink beer (i.e if he's teetotal), is 飲みますか correct? (The person is asking "*does* John drink beer?" , i.e "isn't he teetotal?")


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> If John doesn't drink beer (i.e if he's teetotal), is 飲みますか correct? (The person is asking "*does* John drink beer?" , i.e "isn't he teetotal?")


Excellent. That's why I said it's a good question.

You're talking about the past, so 「飲みましたか。」 is better, _if we want to get a natural flow_. And have a look at the second A―it says 飲み*ました*。

But you know, that question (B) isn't impossible. You want to suddenly shift to the question if John is a regular drinker or not. So you need to say something that can change the flow a bit. In that example, if I want to know whether John is so or not, I'd say,

それではジョンはビールを飲むんですか。
それではジョンはビールを飲む人ですか。
いいえ、ビールを飲むのは私です。
You're saying that you are a regular beer drinker.

You know, you can make some variations. The speaker knows that doctor said that John must not drink beer, but he or she heard John did yesterday. He asks you, ジョンはビールが飲めるんですか？


----------



## Flaminius

DaylightDelight said:


> 昨日はジョンとフランクと会った。 映画館で映画を見たあとで、ビールを飲んだ。


I find it clearly intended to mean the three all went to cinema.  It is not in the grammar but the second and the third verbs are best understood as content of the first one.  One does not just get to the physical vicinity of someone and call it a meeting.  The only version that has a single beer-drinker is the one with それから.  It assumes the meeting with the two had been over before the cinema and the beer.



Nino83 said:


> If John doesn't drink beer (i.e if he's teetotal), is 飲みますか correct? (The person is asking "*does* John drink beer?" , i.e "isn't he teetotal?")


You can use _ndesuka_ to emphasize how unexpected it was:
ジョンはビールを飲んだんですか。OR
 飲むんですか。(The non-past form has a nuance that you are suspecting it is not a one-time craze of John but he must have been surreptitiously drinking over and over.)


----------



## Nino83

Great explanation!
(I've to master the のです expression and final particles in general, んだよ!, lol)
Thank you very much!


----------

