# 消せやしない



## Nino83

Hello everyone.

What does it mean 消せやしない?
I couldn't find this form of the verb.
I've found the verb 消す (to turn off, to extinguish).

もう 動き出した明日へ消せやしない  Flame of heart  そう　I'll go the distance

The sentence is taken from the song Distance of the Japanese former ska band Long Shot Party. 
Here the text in Japanese script Long Shot Party:Distance 

My try: starting from tomorrow I won't extinguish the flame of heart, so I'll go the distance.

(As you can see the song is written in both Japanese and English, so sometimes I don't know if they follow the Japanese or the English word order).

Thank you


----------



## wind-sky-wind

"消せ" is the continuative form of "消せる," which is a potential verb coming from "消す."
The continuative form is te-form minus "te."
(Actually, the continuative form plus "te" is te-form)

Verb や (particle) しない shows emphatic negative.

And "消せやしない Flame of heart" is an inversion, which means:

Flame of heart を消せやしない。


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, wind-sky-wind.


wind-sky-wind said:


> And "消せやしない Flame of heart" is an inversion


Are such types of inversion common in song lyrics? 
The omission of particles and a reversed word order can be tricky in Japanese (for example "消せやしない Flame of heart" could be a relative clause, "the flame of heart that I can't extinguish").  

Here there is another sentence:
これで 見納めの funny days *飛び立つ future* *目指した go far* 心の dream of 
Is there another inversion here?
My try: here/now (in this), the funny days of the last look, the future that jumps/starts up, I wanted to go far, the dream of the heart.


----------



## wind-sky-wind

Your idea and mine don't make a big difference, because in both, the flame of heart is the object of "消す."

"消せやしない Flame of heart を"
This is certainly an inversion.
Without "を," it could be a relative clause, to be sure,
but I think this is an inversion.

This pattern is very common, especially in lyrics.

As for another sentence, I think it's just like words are arranged from left to right.
With Japanese and English mixed, it sounds cool, but I don't catch what it means clearly.

Just the relationship between "消す" and "the flame of heart" is clear, so I think it's an inversion.


----------



## Nino83

wind-sky-wind said:


> This pattern is very common, especially in lyrics.


Thanks


wind-sky-wind said:


> As for another sentence, I think it's just like words are arranged from left to right. With Japanese and English mixed, it sounds cool, but I don't catch what it means clearly.


Ah, ok. Do you think my translation makes any sense?
これで 見納めの funny days 飛び立つ future 目指した go far 心の dream of 
here, the funny days of the last look, the future that starts up, I wanted to go far, the dream of the heart. 
Is it the future that starts up or I that jump up into the future?  
It's difficult for me to understand the right order when Japanese and English words without case postpositions are arranged one after the other.


----------



## Nino83

Ah, now I've found this old thread where it is said that "in lyrics, emphasised nouns can be taken out of the usual position in the sentence and placed at the end". 
Now many sentences of this song make sense. 
Thank you all


----------



## frequency

wind-sky-wind said:


> With Japanese and English mixed, it sounds cool, but I don't catch what it means clearly.


Nino, Wind is right. The writer is just mixing Japanese and English.


Nino83 said:


> これで 見納めの funny days 飛び立つ future 目指した go far 心の dream of


_これで 見納めの funny days 飛び立つ future_
It's still reasonable and understandable.


> the funny days of the last look, the future that starts up,


Yes.

_目指した go far 心の dream of
_
It's getting less understandable.

Go as far as I aimed/intended
or this could be 目指した心の夢 + going far.
I suspect this 心のdream would be 心の夢. _Of_ is redundant, but I guess the writer wants to add it without apparent purpose.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, frequency.
When English and Japanese are not so mixed, like in the refrain, sentences are more understandable.


> You're my friend　あの日の夢今でもまだ忘れてないんでしょ You're my dream　始まったばっか君のOne Longest Way　今旅立つよ
> You're my friend, the dream (を omitted) of that day even now you still don't forget, don't you?  you're my dream, your longest way (は, が omitted)  has just begun, now let's go/start (this trip)


But when the two languages are strongly superimposed things get a little more difficult.
I'm relieved that this sentence is not so clear also to Japanese speakers.
I've found a translation here where the sentence "これで 見納めの funny days 飛び立つ future 目指した go far 心の dream of" is translated as "*I'll jump to the future*, I've aimed to go far, dreaming of your heart ".
Now, if it is correct (is it?), in this case the particle に would be omitted? 飛び立つ future  < (私は) future に 飛び立つ (like in a relative clause, the future where I'll jump to)?
It can happen, in speech, that, to reply to 彼はどこにいますか one says, 行った映画館 instead of 映画館に行った (with inversion and the omission of に)?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> "これで 見納めの funny days 飛び立つ future 目指した go far 心の dream of" is translated as "*I'll jump to the future*, I've aimed to go far, dreaming of your heart".


That's fine, but the point is that the relationship between _目指した go far_ and _心の dream of_ is somewhat mysterious lol. So you can interpret it freely.

I know we can find "You're my dream" at the beginning of the song, but it's difficult for me to judge "dreaming of your heart" is right. I rather imagined that I go far according to what my dream tells me. Well, this is just a matter of individual recognition



Nino83 said:


> 飛び立つ future  < (私は) future に 飛び立つ


As you thought, this should be 私はfuture に飛び立つ.

I suppose _(私は) future に 飛び立つ_ is too long to fit with the melody. So _飛び立つ future_ does better for the song, and the writer may have supposed that it's cooler. This kind of thing often happens to lyrics.

Thus,
彼は映画館に行った is the correct answer for the question.
行った映画館 is The theatre he went to. (This can't be the answer)

When you say 行った映画館, you and the hearer obviously know who went there, you can omit the subject who did. If not and you want to mention, add the person who did so. A person's name is okay, too: ぼくが行った映画館・Flamが行った映画館.


----------



## Nino83

And what about omitting some "case" particle, does it happen in speech (at least with subjects and direct objects, like in the refrain of the song)?
For example: Flam新しい本買った.


frequency said:


> I suppose _(私は) future に 飛び立つ_ is too long to fit with the melody. So _飛び立つ future_ does better for the song, and the writer may have supposed that it's cooler. This kind of thing often happens to lyrics.


So, it happens in song lyrics but it doesn't in "normal" speech. Song lyrics can become a bit complicated in Japanese. 
Thank you very much!


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> what about omitting some "case" particle, does it happen in speech (at least with subjects and direct objects, like in the refrain of the song)?For example: Flam新しい本買った.



Surprisingly, this is possible. In your example there are one person and one action, so a hearer can easily understand who did what
When we say as you suggested, we like to: Flam 新しい本買った―between Flam and 新しい, we give as short pause as 0.5~1 sec.

Flam は/が 新しい本買った。is also a preferred style.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> Flam 新しい本買った―between Flam and 新しい, we give as short pause as 0.5~1 sec.
> Flam は/が 新しい本買った。is also a preferred style.


Thanks for the info. 
So を is the first particle to be dropped. I find it often in direct speech (the subject is often followed by suspension points, for example Flam...新しい本買った). Probably because direct objects are most of the time placed right before the verb. 
Good to know!


----------



## frequency

Good! You know,

Flam＿新しい本買った。
You can put either は or が. And も and に are okay, too. The use of に can greatly change the meaning.

Flamは/が新しい本＿買った。
を and も are okay, but others such as の、に、で・・are all no good. Yes, the range is much narrower.

This narrower range allows you to omit を there. If you need to choose も, say も


----------



## Nino83

Oh, good explanation! 
Thanks


----------

