Yes, because when a verb is used as an attribute of a noun in Japanese, it comes in front of it as though it’s an adjective.
It’s literally like saying “I-don’t-know-person” but we don’t say that in English, so that’s why the word order changes.
As others were saying above, it’s not as though there are translation rules, there are just grammar rules in both languages. Imagine you just had a way to run an identical scene two times, once with Japanese speakers, and once with English speakers. They wouldn’t be translating each other, they’d just be saying what comes naturally to them.
guys there clearly are certain times in a Japanese sentences where it has to be ordered a certain way other wise it don’t make sense. although it’s not that strict you know there are. and you know what Im getting at, but it feels like your just looking for ways to make me look stupid.
No one is saying there aren’t word order rules. They just aren’t “translation rules”. The framing of it as a translation process is what was objected to.
Your original question was about why the structure of an English translation didn’t match the structure of the original Japanese, and we answered that it often won’t match and that’s ok. If you have any questions regarding the structure of the Japanese sentence and why it means what it means, everyone here will be happy to help. No one wants to make you look stupid.
but as this video is a bit basic I was looking for a deeper explanation of sentence order when it comes to more complex sentences like the one I posted containing clauses. in English the order is SVO for example. .
I could swear I’ve heard anime characters say 安心しないで to mean “don’t worry about it” or something like that, when it seems counterintuitive. Maybe I’m getting it confused with 気にしないで but I think I’ve heard both of these translated as “don’t worry”.
I don’t think people are trying to be mean or harsh in any way. It’s just that we’re talking about two different things here.
You have grammar rules - rules that dictate the construction of a sentence in a language. For example, English is a SVO (subject verb object) language, while Japanese is a SOV (subject object verb) language. This dictates the ordering of parts of speech within a sentence. And there are many, many other rules.
When it comes to translation, because the languages differ so much, there is no one-to-one formula for going from Japanese to English. When translating you want to capture the original sentence’s meaning and nuance to the best of your ability, while also adding any additional info as necessary that may relate to the person speaking it (in terms of tone, peculiar speech tendency, etc.) This leads to people having multiple interpretations of how a sentence should be translated - something that’s totally fine, because like I said, there’s no one-to-one formula (except for some basic sentences).
Some of the synonyms are alternative ones, but not that many. It maybe because the Taekim site has been updated with a few changes here and there. or The person who made the Anki deck changed some synonyms. The Slang section is missing from that deck, and also a few sentences, maybe about 10 or so in total?
Well, it doesn’t seem particularly worthwhile to spend much time thinking about a translation from Tae Kim that isn’t the one that Tae Kim has on their site.
An amalgam is the same as a mixture is it not?
So why does it make a difference? also I double checked everything on the site and in the deck, and reference both When I’m studying, and added any missing content.
If you are interested in the grammar of that sentence, you may want to look into what a relative clause is. The clause describes the noun. Your translation not only does not make sense naturally in English, but it is a poor translation because you are translating a relative clause as an independent clause.
In Japanese, there aren’t strict rules about the order of objects, etc, because they use case markers to assign roles. A few of the only requirements for structuring a sentence is that subordinating clauses cannot come last, verbs go at the end of any clause (terminal or attributive), and binding markers go at the beginning of a sentence.
They’re not wildly different, but you seem to want to dissect it down to the level of individual words, and since it’s different at that level from what Tae Kim is publishing, it seems like just leaving it alone makes the most sense.
The sentence that starts with “Mixture” and not “A mixture” seems like a typo at the very least.