So, I’ve been studying Japanase for well over a year now. Genki I is childplay, but I struggle with ~のが. Even my Japanse friend couldn’t help me with it. I use Ankii for Genki I. Simple translations of sentences. By often ~のが pops up and I have absolutely zero clue!
e.g.: ジェームスさんは人話すのが苦手です。
I would translate it as: Jim has trouble speaking with people(/strangers). But what part does ~のが fill in grammaticly? Thanks in advance WK Buddies!
That’s called nominalization. It’s basically turning a topic or subject phrase into a noun. This page has a pretty good explanation of how it (and こと) works:
が is a subject marker. It doesn’t mark indirect objects in sentences. The definition of an indirect object is something that is affected by an action. Example: My dad gave a present to me. In this case “me” is the indirect object, “present” is the direct object, and “dad” is the subject. This example can easily be translated to Japanese: 父がプレゼントを(私に)くれた。
However with talking about preferences, abilities and such in Japanese, the logic cannot flow nicely into English. This can be seen in the OP’s example
ジェームスさんは人と話すのが苦手です。
“James is bad at speaking with people.” “at speaking with people”= a complement for “bad”
But the Japanese literally means: “As for James, speaking with people is a weak point [for him].” In this case “speaking with people” is the subject.
For obvious reasons, this wording is not natural for English speakers to say.
Does that article even mention the construction ~ことができる? I have never heard anyone say that ~のができる is interchangeable with it (or that it even exists, to be honest). Where did you see that?
ことができる isn’t just a slapping together of nominalization + できる, it’s its own grammatical construction. But if you can find something that says のができる can be used, I’d be interested to see it.
ことができる is a set contruction by itself, and の can not just be substituted. In fact there is only a single result when Googling it, and that looks like it’s because of というの
I meant just that. I was just done working a 11-hour shift, so maybe that explains my brainfart a little bit. I really have to read more about the normalisation of the ~の particle. Perhaps there is something in my Grammar Dictionary about it.
Going along with @MichielElshout 's question, it’s probably because in both those sentences, while の is very unnatural, it can still be understood. And that’s a big place where natives just won’t usually correct you.