# coordination and "case" markers



## Nino83

Hello everybody.

I'd like to ask you if it's correct to put only one "case" marker after two nouns in these cases.

My and your car: 私とあなたの車 Watashi to anata *no* kuruma
My or your car: 私かあなたの車 Watashi ka anata *no* kuruma

Thank you


----------



## Flaminius

In both examples, the latter nouns do not need か or と.  They can work as binominal operators very much like logical conjunction (AND) and disjunction (OR, XOR) symbols.

In fact, 私とあなたとの車 sounds very strange.  There are exceptional instances where と can be repeated for every component, but,  to play it safe, consider か or と on the second or the last term not an optional component but unnecessary.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you Flaminius.
Are these examples right?
I bought a pen and a book. 私はペン*と*本*を*買いました.
Do you want a pen or a book? あなたはペン*か*本*を*したいですか?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> My and your car: 私とあなたの車 Watashi to anata *no* kuruma
> My or your car: 私かあなたの車 Watashi ka anata *no* kuruma


 
Good. But see,
私とあなたの車 usually means one car shared by the two people. Do you mean two cars: my car and your car? If so, 私のとあなたの車 is much better.
Therefore,
if you mean my car or your car, 私のかあなたの車 is fine. But this 私かあなたの車 happens in _poor_ speech or writing.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> If so, 私のとあなたの車 is much better.
> Therefore, if you mean my car or your car, 私のかあなたの車 is fine.


Thank you, frequency.
Does this doubling happen only with personal pronouns, or also with proper names?
John's or Patrick's car. JohnのかPatrickの車 or JohnかPatrickの車?
I read sentences like 明日ローマへあなた*か*彼*と*いっしょに行きます, "tomorrow I'll go to Rome with you or with him", where there is only one "と", あなた*か*彼*と*.
Do you say イタリア*と*イングランド*へ*行きます or イタリア*へと*イングランド*へ*行きます?


----------



## Flaminius

frequency said:


> If so, 私のとあなたの車 is much better.


Ellipsis in Japanese prefers a different structure from English.  I find 私の車とあなたの more natural.


----------



## Flaminius

Nino83 said:


> I bought a pen and a book. 私はペン*と*本*を*買いました.
> Do you want a pen or a book? あなたはペン*か*本*を*したいですか?


The former is okay but the latter isn't.

You *could* say あなたはペンか本がほしいですか but this  means that the listener would accept a pen OR a book OR both.  If your context excludes the last possibility, you cannot use this construction.  For an exclusive disjunction (XOR), I would say:
あなたはペンがほしいのですか、本がほしいのですか。

If this sounds redundant, the following works too:
あなたはペンと本のどちらがほしいのですか。


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> John's or Patrick's car. JohnのかPatrickの車 or JohnかPatrickの車?


Both are okay, because I don't see confustion in the two.



> I read sentences like 明日ローマへあなた*か*彼*と*いっしょに行きます, "tomorrow I'll go to Rome with you or with him", where there is only one "と", あなた*か*彼*と*.


Good! Similarly, you're selecting either one: the person who can go to Rome with you is only one. You or him.



> Do you say イタリア*と*イングランド*へ*行きます or イタリア*へと*イングランド*へ*行きます?


難しいなｗ
The first one is better. It's obvious that you'll go to the two countries, and you're collecting them in batch by using と..
Well, in the second one I see you go →Italy and →England. I mean I just see two arrows and you needn't say them so separately.


----------



## frequency

Flaminius said:


> I find 私の車とあなたの more natural.


私の車とあなたのが必要です。
私のとあなたの車が必要です。
Both are okay. More accurate would be 私の車とあなたの車が必要です, and this is not especially doubly.


----------



## Nino83

Flaminius said:


> For an exclusive disjunction (XOR), I would say:
> あなたはペンがほしいのですか、本がほしいのですか。
> あなたはペンと本のどちらがほしいのですか。


Thank you, Flaminius. 
Why do you add the particle "の" before "desu"? 


frequency said:


> Both are okay, because I don't see confustion in the two.


Ah, ok, so it is a matter of possible confusion, ambiguity, not a grammatical matter. 


frequency said:


> Well, in the second one I see you go →Italy and →England. I mean I just see two arrows and you needn't say them so separately.


Now it's clear, thank you.  
I asked this because I'm wondering how these particles work. They are more similar to postpositions than to suffixes.


----------



## Flaminius

frequency said:


> 私の車とあなたのが必要です。
> 私のとあなたの車が必要です。
> Both are okay.


I don't deny that.  Perhaps it is just a matter of personal liking, but how about a longer list?  The full form Xの車 is surely redundant for a list of four or five elements.  Which of the following do you prefer?  Or you don't have any preference at all?

a. 私の車とあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんのが必要です。
b. 私のとあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんの車が必要です。




Nino83 said:


> Why do you add the particle "の" before "desu"?


For questions with few options to answer, のですか is more natural than ですか.


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> Flaminius said:
> 
> 
> 
> あなたはペンがほしいのですか、本がほしいのですか。
> あなたはペンと本のどちらがほしいのですか。
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you add the particle "の" before "desu"?
Click to expand...

This の is hard to explain but seems to have some important role in making smooth Japanese sentences. With or without の changes the nuances:
ペンがほしいのですか、本がほしいのですか is correct when someone came to you and said to you something, but it was not clear to you, so you needed to ask back to make it clear.
Without の, ペンがほしいですか、本がほしいですか is correct when you want to give one of them to someone.
Here this の seems like adding 'will' or 'intention'. I believe it's also an application of 'explanatory のだ'.



Flaminius said:


> a. 私の車とあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんのが必要です。
> b. 私のとあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんの車が必要です。


Definitely, (a) is the one. Unless already it's the topic of conversation, no one starts it abruptly 私のと because the hearer don't get what you are talking about.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> Why do you add the particle "の" before "desu"?


ペンが欲しいか？
ペンが欲しいのか？

か and ですか are often used with の, a connector.

See の is 'wrapping up' the clause ペンが欲しい, and connecting to か or to ですか.
By using の, ペンが欲しい can be like a block (fragment) and is connected to か or to ですか.

We can omit の, so the first one is okay but sounds a bit less polite and less soft.

That の becomes ん in a casual form, as we've seen in the Larris's case.



Flaminius said:


> The full form Xの車 is surely redundant for a list of four or five elements.
> a. 私の車とあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんのが必要です。
> b. 私のとあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんの車が必要です。


 
Good question.
Both are okay, but in this case b is more natural.
What do we need? A car. So when 車 is closer to 必要です, the sentence would become more understandable.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> We can omit の, so the first one is okay but sounds a bit less polite and less soft.


Now it's clear, thank you very much!


----------



## frequency

You're welcome!


> We can omit の, so the first one is okay but sounds a bit less polite and less soft.


I've found that I need to add a bit more explanation.

ペンが欲しいか？
ペンが欲しいのか？
They do not sound polite, in the first place. I meant the first one is worse.

ペンが欲しいですか？
The use of ですか makes the whole politer; this is fully polite.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> The use of ですか makes the whole politer; this is fully polite.


Of course, thank you again!


----------



## Schokolade

Flaminius said:


> I find 私の車とあなたの more natural.


So do I.


frequency said:


> 私の車とあなたの車


Yeah I think I might go with that, too.



karlalou said:


> Flaminius said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which of the following do you prefer?
> a. 私の車とあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんのが必要です。
> b. 私のとあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんの車が必要です。
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely, (a) is the one. Unless already it's the topic of conversation, no one starts it abruptly 私のと because the hearer don't get what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

I agree with @karlalou; I would go with (a), too.


----------



## frequency

Schokolade said:


> I would go with (a), too.


 
By setting 車 closer to 必要です, we can get this fragment:
私のとあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんの

The information is arranged equally in the possessive cases. They're equal in quality and function. See it is working like a list, too.
And they all can modify 車, so that the arrangement makes the whole more understandable. This is good in a _writing_ technique.

In 私の車とあなたのと田中さんのと勝田さんのと村川さんの,
the 車 is somewhat interrupting the arrangement.

Setting a relevant word closer to its relevant word (in this case, 車―必要) is a useful and well-known technique. I recommend you to memorise this.
See #13 有名な犬 vs 有名な文字.


----------

