This example sentence from the adverb 丸ごと in Wanikani threw me off a bit:
マンゴーをケース丸ごともらった
I remember seeing on Satori Reader that the “を” particle can be used to describe an area that is travelled along, but this looks a bit different to that. I would have thought マンゴーケース would have sufficed.
As I understand, it’s not connectiong too nouns here.
The sentence is マンゴーをもらった。
ケース丸ごと is just the quantifier.
マンゴーを一個もらった。
マンゴーを二個もらった。
マンゴーを三個もらった。
マンゴーをケース丸ごともらった。
(I don’t remember if 個 can be used for apples, but I think it can; anyway, that’s not the point – the point is that quantifier goes between を and the verb).
Writing feeling wise I feel like the を emphasises alongside the 丸ごと, it highlight that it’s a whole case of mango. In multi sentences context it can be used to mark that this fact is something to keep in mind.
I think this is maybe a bit of your imagination. The を is just there for the もらう like trunklayer said. ケーキをもらった、アドバイスをもらった、手紙をもらった
Since word order is important in English, there’s occasionally a tendency among English-speaking learners to treat particles as conjunctions. But they’re not, they’re postpositions - they define the function that the word before them plays in a sentence or clause. The sentence is not a chain of words and particles that all connect one after the other (i.e. A connects to B connects to C connects to the verb), but rather a collection of words, with particles attached, which all connect to the sentence’s main predicate (A and B and C all relate to the verb).
Trunky discovering apples:
But yes, you can use 個 for apples. Mangos too.
I think what may cause the confusion here is also that, in English, the grammatical object of the sentence is not “mangoes” but “a full case of mangoes” but in Japanese it’s only mangoes with “full case” being used adverbially.
If we translate the Japanese structure extremely literally it becomes something like “I received mangoes in a full case fashion”
I actually wonder if マンゴーのケースを丸ごともらった could be acceptable as well, if maybe less idiomatic, or if it sounds entirely broken. That’s actually how I would have intuitively phrased it myself…
I think this sentence is a bit odd, or at best too conversational to be used as a learning example.
If we go with the theory that ケース is a counter, then the sentence is missing the amount (1 box):
マンゴーを１ケース丸ごともらった。
I got 1 whole case/box of mangoes.
If it’s not a counter, then what is ケース grammatically then? It’s not an adverb, it needs a particle. Making it the object would make sense:
マンゴーのケースを丸ごともらった。
I got a whole case/box of mangoes.
Or one could get rid of 丸:
マンゴーをケースごともらった。
I got the mangoes (amount would be inferred from context) including the case.
In any case 丸ごと has the nuance of the whole unit being unmodified. There was a box full of of mangoes, and I just picked up the whole box.
I could be wrong about it, but I struggle to find an example similar to WK’s sentence.
I suspect this is an instance of the bane of my Japanese grammar experience: enumeration not taking a particle. adding “1” as @Ka5 suggests would probably be closest to keeping the sense.
It seems I made a similar confusion with a different sentence and basically asked the same question about the same situation with the same EXACT particle (you also answered in that thread.)
It’s funny how I still have the same issue with understanding how flexible Japanese can be with grammar. I like your answer for the bigger picture. Thanks again!
Yes, I always want to think of literal translation from Japanese, but I always try to understand what Japanese is trying to tell me in Japanese before doing that and it can be very difficult at times (such as this.)
I am very sure マンゴーのケースを丸ごともらった would be perfectly fine. It sounds a bit less conversational I think though?
How did you figure out the “fashion” part of it? It seems that the を particle can also capture a singular type of form of that object (prior to it and the particle) rather than operating as a possession (or acting like a preposition as with English.) These aspects of Japanese can be so confusing at times haha.
