I understand this sentence says literally “He does not have the time to pick up the bag”.
I think it’s a nice sentence using ひま as a noun (I’ve only seen it so far as an adjective) combined with a relative clause, and the negative form of ある (ない).
Page 123
させられてます
This is (If I’m not mistaken) する in causative+passive form. I’ve written down some variants in dictionary form, causative, and causative passive, to better understand the patterns. At first I had some problems because I had not realized that the subject here are the tires => this is why they use passive voice. Actually, in the dictionary and causative versions, the subject doing the action is a different one.
(だれかが) タイヤ を パンク する = someone makes the tires flat
(だれかが) タイヤ を パンク させる = someone makes (someone else) have the tires flat
タイヤ が パンク させられて = the tire “is being made (by someone)” (passive) “to be made (by another someone?)” (causative) flat
Still it looks like the causative+passive just adds some nuance of “being forced to do something”。See Tae Kim’s article about it, and this other french guide.
But with this idea, then the sentence would be translated as
The tires are/were being forced to be flat.
Which is in any case strange in my head. Maybe I just have to get used to the form… Which leads me to the question: Why not just using simple passive voice here? “The tires have been made flat”? Is the “forcing” nuance important here? Like the tires have some resistance to it?
Actually, just for the record, I’ve tried first some wrong (unless we are in front of talking tires…) sentences like these:
タイヤ が パンク する = The tires make (what?) flat
there is a missing object (を marker)
well, tires cannot get anything flat :)…
タイヤ が パンク させる = the tires make (someone else) to make (what?) flat
there is again a missing object (を marker)
again, tires cannot oblige (usually) anybody to do anything (but apparently they can resist to get flat :P)…
As far as I can tell, the causative form does not mean “force”.
You use the causative form to indicate that something that you did lead to something else happening.
This could well be a direct command or coercion, but Tae Kim even mentions that it can mean “let someone do something”, in that case your action is the giving of permission, which directly leads to something else happening.
Now for this particular case: I don’t have the book at hand, so forgive me for guessing but I suspect here the difference between the normal passive and the causative form is that the causative form implies intent.
I would suspect that, with the passive, the tires could have been flattened by a piece of glass on the road.
The causative passive implies that it was a conscious agent that deliberately made them go flat.
Of course, the latter is kind of clear in context, but the causative makes it explicit.
Thanks @aiju! Yes, what you say makes sense in the context.
This means I’ll need to go over some more complicated examples of passive and causative passive :). The one’s in Tae Kim’s guide are far too simplistic and out of context, and they do not clearly convey these kind of subtle differences…
ミミチーマウスに は = by Mimichi Mouse
にげられた = (F*** this is potential, not passive!) was able to escape
けど = however/but
美術品 は = jewlery + contrastive は
ぬすまれず に = without being stolen
ぬすむ = to steal
ぬすまれる = to be stolen by
+ ず に = without
すんだ = I guess here this is 済む, to be finished, “to merely result in something less severe than expected”
As for Mimichi Mouse, he was able to escape but the jewlery resulted not being stolen (by him => passive voce in here).
Or less literal,
Mimichi Mouse was able to escape, but without stealing the jewlery.
I’d like to see if my guts on かえしてもらえる are right
あたし、かえして もらえるのかしら?
かえして = I hope it comes from 帰す, to return home
もらえる = is used to ask for a favor, “do X for Y”
のかしら = I wonder
I wonder if they will let me go back home.
Thanks! (Or at worst I hope this is useful for somebody ^^)
The first は is contrastive as well I think.
I think the に also suggests that this is actually passive (the suffering passive).
The second passive might be a suffering passive as well if you consider that を + は becomes just は.
Something like
“Although we had Mimichi Mouse escape, we ended up not having the jewelry stolen”
cf the use of すんだ to this example I found on weblio:
日焼けせずに すんだ 。
“I went without getting sunburned.”
損をせずに済んだ。 (note: せず derives from する)
“I escaped loss”
(With the usual very liberal weblio translations)
かえす is transitive. You’re thinking of 帰る.
もらえる probably means “can have something done” or similar.
“I wonder whether I can have it returned/send back.”
(Don’t have the book right now)
Back from my hols and reading both the book and the thread like crazy to catch up!
May I ask a question about this phrase on page 123: おうんだ！
I guess it 追う, to chase after, followed by a nominalising ん (or is it an explanatory ん? I’m using words here I don’t really quite understand!!) and then the casual copula だ. And from context it looks like an order. But the imperative of 追う is 追え, so why isn’t that used?
I’m not sure that makes much sense. おうんだ would likely be understood as “(It’s that) … follows”. I’m not aware of orders being expressed that way but I can’t check context right now.
just wanted to say sorry for not being active. First I was ill and couldn’t do much besides getting better and after that life got in the way so that I couldn’ study or read anything for two weeks.
Now I have to work my way through 475 reviews
As you’re nearly finished with the book now I’ll just start the thread (and book!) from the beginning, working my way through it. If you’re going to read the second book I’l join you there (if that’s okay ).
Well I was thinking on 帰す, as a transitive verb, in the sense that “the bad guys” send “hanae” home. Something like, let her go home. And in that sense, she is the object of the verb. In my head is something like:
But the imperative does appear! The full quote is 「おえ！おうんだ！」
As for the second part, I thought about it and I wonder whether this is similar to using future tense to make very strong commands in English, i.e. “You will chase him!”
Ah yes, sorry, I assumed you meant the intransitive meaning.
Yes, your explanation makes perfect sense.
Oh yes! Of course! I am blind! When I read that, I read the おえ as just an interjection, like “oh” or “ah”! Only now that you point it out can I see the blindingly obvious! Thank you aiju!
警察のものだ。 - It’s the police. パトロールしていた - We were patrolling
ら、- as far as I can tell, this is the たら past conditional. Tae Kim says:
The past conditional is the only type of conditional where the result can be in the past. It may seem strange to have an “if” when the result has already taken place. Indeed, in this usage, there really is no “if”, it’s just a way of expressing surprise at the result of the condition.
ピストルの音が - the sound of a pistol
きこえた。- was heard
おまえたちは - お前たち - you guys + は
なにものだ？」- 何者だ - who are you? / what kind of people are you?
“It’s the police. We were patrolling and were surprised when the sound of a pistol was heard. Who are you guys?”
Am I right about ら being the たらconditional? Thank you!!
It’s called “tara” but it’s really just ら appended to the past tense. It’s だら when the past tense ends with だ (e.g. 死んだら).
It can indeed be either “if” or “when”. English has very specific rules for these two words, Japanese has different rules and “tara” doesn’t fit into either category.
Kuno lists the following rules for it:
The second part must always happen after the first part; it cannot be used to express something like “Please take me with you if you leave”.
When using tara to describe past events, there can be no “self-controllable” timing. To explain this concept consider these examples:
“When I opened the door, a cat was outside.” ← no self-controllable timing
“When I opened the door, I was startled by the cat outside.” ← no self-controllable timing
“When I opened the door, I picked up the cat outside.” ← self-controllable timing.
So the third example couldn’t use “tara” in a Japanese translation.
Also with past events, tara carries a connotation that the second event is surprising or unexpected.
As an exception to 2, past habits are considered natural courses of events.
“I always went to New York when the summer came.” ← ok with tara even though technically self-controllable timing
So considering 3 I think the best translation is something like
“We were patrolling when we suddenly heard the sound of a pistol”
In this case, reversing the “when” feels more natural in English and expresses the surprise better.
Since coming back from holiday my brain seems to have been wiped clean! It was only a few days away, but now I’m getting just 30% on my reviews (my apprentice queue is growing fast) and each page of にゃんにゃん looks like a bunch of squiggles, like I’ve never seen Japanese before. So please forgive my lack of participation over these last few days (in the last few days of the club) and the silliness of my questions. But here goes!
はたして、「ピカイチ美術」は 美術館から 絵や彫刻をぬすむ ギャングの一味だった
はたした - 果たして - sure enough
「ピカイチ美術」- the name of the shop, seen on page 97 and explained by Rowena here
は - topic particle (so we’re talking about the shop)
美術館 - works of art
から - from. I don’t understand what this is doing here.
絵や彫刻 - paintings and sculptures
を - object particle
盗む - to steal
ギャングの一味 - gang’s gang??
だった - was
“Sure enough, ‘Pikaichi Arts’ was the gang’s [cover] for stolen paintings and sculptures”.
There is so much I don’t understand about this sentence, especially the から and the ギャングの一味, and so any help much appreciated! Thank you!
).