Oh… so because it’s passive, the に indicates the subject, not the destination/origin, making “the inside got sucked up”
I think the subject (hole) is understood in this sentence and the 中に means sorta “by the inside” since there’s a passive verb. So it’s “was sucked up by the inside” which doesn’t sound quite right in English. Maybe a better translation would be
When looking (at it), (the hole) seems like it got sucked up inside.
2 Likes
Page 53:
Missing phrases
なぜ、こんなに ふしぎな あなが、海の そこに あるのでしょう。
Why does such a strange/incredible hole (probably) exists at the bottom of the ocean?
この あなは、もともと 地上に あった どうくつが、海に しずんで できた ものなのです。
This hole, originally existed as a cave above the ground but, sank to the ocean and was build as this thing No idea what ものなのです means.
2 Likes
Was also stumped by ものなのです.
Another 出来る in that last sentence, again not translating as “to be able to do”.
I translated as:
しずんで: to sink (te form)
できた: Jisho definition 3 - to be made, to be built short past form
was made to sink
2 Likes
なのです
it is assuredly that …, can say with confidence that …
2 Likes
Page 53
I wake up every morning and all the hard work has been done overnight while I was sleeping! Amazing! Thank you everyone!
Just one question… what is the な in this なのです?
This is what I have:
海に - sea + に particle
しずんで - 沈む, to sink, in てform
できた - made
もの - thing
な -
の - explanatory particle
です - polite ending
“[the cave] sank into the sea and made this thing”
And I like your addition of “we can say with confidence that …” for the の particle @emucat.
But can anyone help with the な? Does it just link もの to の?
1 Like
used to make an assertion (at sentence-end with falling intonation)
なのです
it is assuredly that …, can say with confidence that …
1 Like
Do you have a reference on that? I’ve been searching and all I can find is basically the same as what @marcusp was saying
Tae Kim explains about the な
3 Likes
Page 53
Brilliant! Great link, thank you @Saruko!
Just don’t forget to attach the 「な」 for nouns as well as na-adjectives.
1 Like
Page 53
空から見ると、こい青のまん丸な形のあなが、海にぽっかりあいていることがわかります。
This is one of the things in Japanese that I would like to understand a bit better. How would these two sentences be translated:
-
“Seen from the sky, it becomes clear that, surprisingly, there is a perfectly circular-shaped dark-blue hole in the sea”.
-
“If seen from the sky, it is a perfectly circular-shaped dark-blue hole in the sea, but in the sea it becomes clear that, surprisingly, it’s a gaping wide open hole”.
Wouldn’t both be the same in Japanese?
Also, I have the feeling this is used here because it’s answering the なぜ of the previous sentence. So… Can it be translated as “Because bla bla bla…”?
1 Like
Here’s my translation:
From the sky, you can see a dark blue hole in the shape of a perfect circle, gaping wide in the ocean.
As in other places in this book, I’m treating the comma as an “and”, like: (not correct, see the discussion in the posts following)
こい青のまん丸な形のあながわかります。
AND
海にぽっかりあいていることがわかります。
I don’t know if that’s 100% correct; I’m interested in hearing other opinions. However, it does result in something that more easily translatable.
Another thing that makes this sentence difficult for me is their use of ぽっかり, which has the two distinctly different but both appropriate meanings: “gaping wide” and “unexpectedly”
I’m not sure how to translate your two English sentences into Japanese; I feel like there could be lots different ways for both of them…
Yes, I think so.
なぜ、こんなに ふしぎな あなが、海の そこに あるのでしょう。
How could it be that there’s such a strange hole in the bottom of the ocean?
この あなは、もともと 地上に あった どうくつが、海に しずんで できた ものなのです。
It’s because this hole was originally a cave above ground, and it was sunk under the ocean.
5 Likes
Thank you, I think your translation is better than mine.
Sorry, I my question was a little messy (as well as translations). What I meant to ask is: couldn’t both of these translations be acceptable for that sentence?
The problem is that, meaning-wise, they are kind of opposite. If one of them is wrong, what in the original Japanese sentence tells me that it’s one or the other meaning?
1 Like
Page 53
But doesn’t that ignore the が at the end of the first clause?
空から見ると、こい青のまん丸な形のあなが、海にぽっかりあいていることがわかります
I’d say
空から - from the sky
見ると、 - if you look
こい青のまん丸な形のあな - dark blue perfectly circular shaped hole
が、- but
海に - in the sea
ぽっかりあいていることが - gaping wide open thing [ie, hole]
わかります - understand
If you look from the sky it is a dark-blue, perfectly-round hole, but, from the sea you’ll understand that it is a gaping wide open thing.
1 Like
I thing the second is the right one.
You have the と for WHEN/IF
and the が for BUT
I think the problem is that there’s no verb in that clause, before the が if it were a sub-clause:
こい青のまん丸な形のあな だが…
So I was thinking that that が becomes the subject particle instead.
What do you think?
2 Likes
I’m not sure that there really is that much difference between them: either way you have a circular hole in the ocean that you’re able to see from the sky.
That’s what I was thinking…
1 Like
Yes, but one implies that when seen from another angle it changes (i.e.: it’s no longer a perfectly circular shaped dark-blue hole)?
I think that 海に is stating the location of the hole/opening, not the viewpoint of the observer.
2 Likes
Yes, I agree.
My translation was the first sentence, but I understand why there has been translations as the second sentence (it’s more literal, I guess). I was trying to clarify in my mind why the second would be “wrong”. I think the lack of the verb is the give away.
2 Likes