# questions with わけ



## John_Doe

> 1
> なんか俺に恨みでもある*わけ*？
> 
> 2
> A: 本気で全国行けると思ってたの？
> B: あんたは悔しくない*わけ*？
> (The brass band A and B play in got ダメ金 at some competition.)
> 
> 3
> ていうか なんでいつも悪い方向にしか考えないわけ？



I'm considering possibilities as to why わけ is attached to these questions (and not only these ones, but in general, too), but I don't know for sure. Could you help me with that?

So, my questions:
 1. Does わけ necessarily convey a negative, or, more precisely, critical attitude of a speaker? At least, the examples above sound like that.
2. Does わけ necessarily indicate that the contents of a question was inferred, i.e wasn't directly observable?
3. Is such usage of わけ optional?
4. Is it used by a general population or can we attribute it to a smaller group (like "used only by the youth" or something).

Thank you in advance.


----------



## frequency

Well..
1. Not necessarily. See this is enough understandable if omitted: なんか俺に恨みでもある? あんたは悔しくない? They are fully okay, and なんか俺に恨みでもあるの? あんたは悔しくないの? are as well.
Ummm....I think they work like simple additions as you see in の in these cases..
Then why we add わけ？It's like emphasis, like _'Do you mean that..?'

>critical attitude of a speaker?
_Yes, a little bit.

Sorry I might need little more some rehab for this forum lol. I'll answer your further questions.


----------



## John_Doe

> Then why we add わけ？It's like emphasis, like _'Do you mean that..?'_


So, can we say that わけ indicates guessing and/or a surprising discovery? あんたは悔しくない*わけ*？ = I expected you to be frustrated but you are seemingly not, so I'm asking you about that / I'm expressing my indignation about that. Does this explanation work?

Besides, あんたは悔しくないというの（か）？ would mean the same as the original phrase?


----------



## frequency

John_Doe said:


> I expected you to be frustrated but you are seemingly not, so I'm asking you about that / I'm expressing my indignation about that. Does this explanation work?


Yes nice. But if indicating guessing and/or a surprising discovery? That depends on the context, and the speaker in the story seems to be guessing or surprising, that's it.



John_Doe said:


> Besides, あんたは悔しくないというの（か）？ would mean the same as the original phrase?


Yes. Regardless to say, this sounds more softly. 
というの？というのか？わけ?, etc are eventually additions.
John_Doe, see that あんたは悔しくない?, the plainest form, is already complete even in this form. This is the main idea. Therefore, the three are additions.

Hierarchy tree:
Addition
|------Emphasis or confirmation
                                                      |--------------guessing, surprising or more

This わけ could be like 'hell' used for emphasis in English. Let me hear from you native speakers?


----------



## John_Doe

Another example conveniently came up.



> あんさ～あんたら一体 何してる*わけ*？ あんま 海老名にちょっかい出すのやめてくれる？


Since the question lacks specific details, I guess it's... not guessing? Maybe it implies suspicion? Like "Well, I do know you guys are up to something, but what exactly"? What would you say, *frequency*?



> というの？というのか？わけ?, etc are eventually additions.


Anyway, I'm just trying to figure out which is applicable in what situations. わけ definitely is not used as frequently as の, so it more should have more restrictions, shouldn't it?


----------



## frequency

というの？というのか？ are almost the same, To the latter one, か is just added. Light, soft confirmation as you know.

Indeed, in yours あんたは悔しくないわけ？, it shows guess, surprise, and even accusation toward the hearer. So he or she says so by adding わけ？Why? I sense that the speaker wants to know the reason, as わけ literally means 'reason' lol. The speaker wants to know why the speaker isn't regretful. Demand of 100%? Not actually, and I slightly sense confirmation in it, too.

When you compare というの？というのか？and わけ？ They are soft confirmation vs reason demanding; they work for a different purpose. No restrictions especially―well, soft confirmation is more frequent, don't you think?

>あんさ～あんたら一体 何してるわけ？
This sounds to me reason demanding as well.
I give you another example:　どうして猫を飼ってるわけ？
This is reason demanding and at the same time emphasises どうして.

Welcome more questions!


----------



## John_Doe

> >あんさ～あんたら一体 何してるわけ？
> This sounds to me reason demanding as well.


Just in case: can we say that the speaker is actually aware of what they've been doing? And what she actually asks is something like "どうしてそんなことしているわけ？".


----------



## frequency

When do you demand a reason? You want to know in more detail. She can't find a reason and wants to know _what_ they've been doing.

どうして focuses on the reason why, because どうして is why. As I mentioned, どうして＋わけ helps emphasis on reason demanding. Whereas あんたら一体何してるわけ？focuses on _what_ they are doing. Confusing? It's why vs what.


----------



## John_Doe

I don't understand what you're trying to say. Every reason is about "why" ("for what purpose"), not "what". If you ask for the reason for something, you should know what that "something" is. If you don't know anything about it, you can't ask about the underlying motive. So what "reason" does she ask about if she doesn't even knows what's going on (assuming she doesn't know, but I suppose she must know something)?


----------



## Flaminius

John_Doe said:


> Another example conveniently came up.
> 
> 
> 
> あんさ～あんたら一体 何してる*わけ*？ あんま 海老名にちょっかい出すのやめてくれる？
Click to expand...

The intent of question is not so much as finding out what exactly those bullies are doing to Ebina than accusing their action; it's a rhetorical question.  The speaker is criticizing them how [find an adjective you like; insensitive, cruel, fooling] these girls are to do what they are doing.


----------



## frequency

Cool down. わけ？doesn't dominate or control a sentence, because it's just an addition.
See the main ideas again:
あんたは悔しくない？
あんたら一体何してる？

Asking, asking. Interrogation. This comes first. He or she just wants to know, so is asking. Plus, わけ is added to convey a feeling of surprise, guess, and accusation, leading to reason demanding. Like asking (80) + reason demanding (20) or 90/10? No, the proportion makes no sense lol.



John_Doe said:


> If you don't know anything about it, you can't ask about the underlying motive.


This is your idea. Not you, what the speaker is doing there? Asking.


----------



## 810senior

To boil down to the simple thing, わけ is close to "I wonder" or "I doubt" in English.

For examples:
あんたは悔しくないわけ？ I doubt if you don't seems regretful. (＝あんたは悔しいと思わないの？) the speaker feels upset to the listener who don't think it's regretful.
何かいいことでも思ってるわけ？ I wonder if you have kinda good idea. (＝何かいいことでも思っているの？) the speaker thinks the listener should have a good idea.

In Japanese, this expression can be replaced with ～というの？ or ～というのか？, even ～の？.
Whether to use which expression is up to the person who actually try to use so there is no certain answer.


----------



## frequency

Nah, I wonder ~(かなと思う） is very very different from direct interrogation.


----------



## John_Doe

*Flaminuius*, thanks for the clarification. Makes more sense now. Anyway, does わけ always sound like that or are there cases when わけ would sound neutral (indicating "explanation seeking" or something)? That returns us back to my 4 original questions, to which, alas, no one bothered answering properly.

*810senior*, I don't think so. "I doubt" doesn't fit to all example sentences. And it should work in the opposide way with 悔しい: I doubt if you are (even) frustrated (= you don't seem to be so). "I wonder" is a self-directed question or an indirect question for politeness' sake.

*frequency*, about the "reason" thing, which was your idea. Yours. If you say she's demanding the reason, then the reason for what? Well, I think describing the usage as "explanation-seeking" is more appropriate than "reason demanding". Like, "I want an explanation from you. Explain your behaviour". At least, it covers not only questions with どうして. As I said, it doesn't make sense to ask about the reason for 何.


----------



## frequency

John_Doe said:


> then the reason for what?


The speaker just wants to know. 
In あんたは悔しくないわけ？, this sentences could be as an alternative 'What is the reason that doesn't make you regretful?' 'Do you have a reason that you are not regretful?' (They are among possibilities.) Therefore, I sense reason demanding.
Again, don't forget that the speaker is asking first: Aren't you regretful? Plus, a feeling/addition accompanies―'do you have a reason (for that)?' 
I don't understand why you don't understand. Don't think, feel lol.




John_Doe said:


> "explanation-seeking" is more appropriate than "reason demanding".


They are almost the same. So,


John_Doe said:


> "I want an explanation from you. Explain your behaviour". At least, it covers not only questions with どうして. As I said, it doesn't make sense to ask about the reason for 何.


Oh yes, that is possible, too.


----------



## frequency

I forgot to say,

あんたは悔しくないわけ？, this can be あんたは悔しくないわけがあるのか？, and this is very natural one. So this led me to the examples (What is the reason, Do you have a reason) in the preceding post.

BTW, my explanation of あんたら一体何してるわけ？doesn't connect to the Ebina's thing. Handle it stand-alone. Sorry, if connecting with the Ebina's thing, Flam said better.


----------



## John_Doe

frequency said:


> I don't understand why you don't understand. Don't think, feel lol.


It's not that I didn't understand your explanations in general. No problem with the example with 悔しい. I was just confused about 何 and わけ being in one sentence, that's all.

By the way, I have a feeling that your explanation and Flaminus's are just two different levels of the description. Yours is sort of technical and literal, while Flaminus's deals with pragmatics (what message the speaker is really trying to convey).



> あんたは悔しくわけがあるのか？


It seems to me, in this particular example the speaker actually negates any possibility of not being 悔しい. In other words, "How can you NOT TO BE 悔しい (when we've got ダメ金)?". Is it right?


----------



## Flaminius

Johannes,

_Wake_ is often used for paraphrasing.  E.g.:
A: Tomorrow A, B, C, D are coming.
B: じゃあ、四人来るわけですね。

This is a logical equivalence but it can be used for other types of inference.
君たち、海老名に何をしてもいいと思っているわけ?
This infers from the bullies' behaviour their inward attitude.

I think 何やってるわけ is an irregular, casual construction for the above and the accusatory tone comes from _wake_'s function to disclose the ugly heart of the bullies.


----------



## John_Doe

At first I started wondering who the hell is that Johannes )



> This infers from the bullies' behaviour their inward attitude.


Ok, I got it.

However, I don't understand why my initial questions are being just brushed off. I asked about it in the very first post, by the way. 


> 2. Does わけ necessarily indicate that the contents of a question was inferred, i.e wasn't directly observable?


So does it or does it not? Can I get my questions answered? You guys are explaining me things as if I never mentioned critical attitude, inference and other stuff. I appreciate your help, but it is directed in a slightly different way than I imagined it to be.


----------



## Flaminius

I don't understand why speaking about inference like I did is brushing off a question if "the question was inferred."  To begin with, you are asking about points that are not dealt with in grammar books; otherwise, you wouldn't be here.  Native speakers are good at judging whether or not a sentence is correct, but don't expect them to dictate Article 23-4-2b from an Otto Jespersen.

Speaking about grammar in absolute terms strikes me as odd as linguistic rules are full of exceptions.  I hoped examples cast light on your understanding of わけ.  Take up 四人来るわけ again.
1. It's a paraphrase of what the previous speaker has said.  There is no accusatory negative tone here.
2. It is an "explanation seeking" question?  No, just a light request for confirmation. Then, if the content isn't directly observed? necessarily?  One may be such a pedant as to answer the question by an affirmative, saying that the foregoing sentence does not mention any numbers.  I don't know.

Let's mention the other questions.
3. This is a logical opposite to number 2.  Can't count it as a separate question.
4. No, it's not limited to any particular groups.  In politer conversations, it assumes forms such as わけですね, わけですか, わけであります.  Look it up in corpora.  You will find it in minutes of the Diet.


----------



## John_Doe

> 1. It's a paraphrase of what the previous speaker has said. There is no accusatory negative tone here.



The thread is titled "questions with わけ", not "random  sentences with わけ used in various meaning". There have been other  threads about that. The topic is, like, more limited, isn't it? So why  did you use a paraphrasing statement as a model to answer my  questions then? Does my examples from 1-3 include paraphrasing? No. But  they all happened to carry a negative attitude, so I naturally assumed  that there might be a rule for that.



> Native speakers are good at judging whether or not a sentence is  correct, but don't expect them to dictate Article 23-4-2b from an Otto  Jespersen.



That's precisely why I ask several questions when I begin a new  thread -- in order to figure out "Article 23-4-2b" myself. It somewhat  differs from "I want you to give me a super elaborated theory of using  わけ just out of nowhere", doesn't it?


----------



## Flaminius

Jan, calm down.



John_Doe said:


> The thread is titled "questions with わけ", not "random sentences with わけ used in various meaning". There have been other threads about that. The topic is, like, more limited than that, isn't it?
> So why did you use a paraphrasing statement as a model to answer my questions then?


My example,


Flaminius said:


> A: Tomorrow A, B, C, D are coming.
> B: じゃあ、四人来るわけですね。


is a question whose intent is paraphrasing.  Person A would answer to B, そうだよ or いや、まだ他にも来る人がいるはずだ.



> Does my examples from 1-3 imply paraphrasing? No. But they all happened to carry a negative attitude, so I naturally assumed that there might be a rule for that. Of course, your point may hold in a case with questions, too.



I quote the sentences from the previous page.


John_Doe said:


> 1
> なんか俺に恨みでもある*わけ*？
> 
> 2
> A: 本気で全国行けると思ってたの？
> B: あんたは悔しくない*わけ*？
> (The brass band A and B play in got ダメ金 at some competition.)
> 
> 3
> ていうか なんでいつも悪い方向にしか考えないわけ？
Click to expand...

They carry negative attitudes and they are not paraphrasing previous statements.  Your original question was:


John_Doe said:


> 1. Does わけ necessarily convey a negative, or, more precisely, critical attitude of a speaker? At least, the examples above sound like that.


My 四人来る example is an exception to your hypothesis that questions with わけ "necessarily convey a negative (...) attitude of a speaker."  If you reject it as an example, you have been failing to explain the criteria by which you collect examples.



> That's precisely why I ask several questions when I begin a new thread -- in order to figure out "Article 23-4-2b" myself. It somewhat differs from "I want you to give me a super elaborated theory of using わけ just out of nowhere", doesn't it?


To continue the example, in order to discuss Article 23-4-2b, you have to get 24-4-2 and 23-4 under your belt.  I don't see a common understanding on those points among the posters here.  Look how native speakers are divided on how わけ-questions are different from の-questions, for instance.  We seem to need more patience for one another.


----------



## John_Doe

(I reverted my previous post into its original state as you said, so I'll post the new part in my new post.)

Ok, we can exclude paraphrasing questions with わけ from our discussion and proceed to discuss other types of questions.

1) Apart from paraphasing, do general questions, i.e. yes-no questions, with わけ always include a  conjecture or a realization of some fact? I suppose we can't just ask これは花わけ？if it's obvious that it's  a flower in front of us.

2) Does the pattern どうして～わけ sound neutral or is it used primarily to blame someone?


----------



## Flaminius

John_Doe said:


> 1) Apart from paraphasing, do general questions, i.e. yes-no questions, with わけ always include a  conjecture or a realization of some fact? I suppose we can't just ask これは花わけ？if it's obvious that it's  a flower in front of us.


これは花わけ is ungrammatical but これが花なわけ is grammatical and it is used as a rhetorical question.  Yes, there is a lot of accusatory tone in here.  If a boy asks a girl out and gives a bunch of chrysanthemums, the girl is entitled to scream this at him.  花 here should be taken not as a botanical definition but as the boy's idea of flowers; i.e., his conception that chrysanthemums are good flowers to give to a date.  You might want to put 花 in quotation marks.



> 2) Does the pattern どうして～わけ sound neutral or is it used primarily to blame someone?


It is very good that you brought this up again.  I previously assumed that a _wh_-question with わけ entails accusation:


Flaminius said:


> I think 何やってるわけ is an irregular, casual construction for the above and the accusatory tone comes from _wake_'s function to disclose the ugly heart of the bullies.



Well, not always.  If you see a 13-year-old girl carrying a book titled analytical dynamics, you would exclaim;
『解析力学』?　どうして中学生の君がそんな本よんでるわけ?
There is no accusatory tone here, just a simple amazement at a genius.


----------



## John_Doe

Flaminius said:


> これは花わけ is ungrammatical but これが花なわけ is grammatical and it is used as a rhetorical question.



Is これが花なわけ possible in a situation like this? Suppose we ask a little kid what she's drawing.
We: Is it an elephant?
Kid: No, it's a flower.
We: Oh, so it was a flower?! (= これが花なわけ？)


----------



## Flaminius

Yes, and you can say that without an accusatory tone.


----------



## frequency

John_Doe said:


> It's not that I didn't understand your explanations in general. No problem with the example with 悔しい. I was just confused about 何 and わけ being in one sentence, that's all. By the way, I have a feeling that your explanation and Flaminus's are just two different levels of the description. Yours is sort of technical and literal, while Flaminus's deals with pragmatics (what message the speaker is really trying to convey). It seems to me, in this particular example the speaker actually negates any possibility of not being 悔しい. In other words, "How can you NOT TO BE 悔しい (when we've got ダメ金)?". Is it right?



Okay lovely. Mine is technical? Very nice, this is what I always want to be. Thank you.

There are some people. They've got ダメ金 yes. (The gold medal for no good players?) Most of them feel regret, but there is a person who doesn't seem to be regretful. So somebody is asking the person.
あんたは悔しくないの？
あんたは悔しくないわけ？
あんたは悔しくないわけでもあるのか？
They are roughly the same. Asking with anger or surprise because he or she doesn't look regretful, although they are supposed to be no good players...the point is that あんたは悔しくないわけ？sounds stronger than あんたは悔しくないの?→this is soft confirmation.

Umm...negating any possibility of not being 悔しい?　Umm..other members just don't know why the person doesn't look regretful. So they're asking: Aren't you regretful? Do you have any reason that you are not regretful? 
I wonder if my answer fits your question?


----------

