Eminent Grammar 1 - DoJG, Imabi, Pomax - Sentence Based
This item is large, and may take some time to download.
Sample (from 221 notes)
|grammatical concept||と (1)|
|usage||A particle which lists things exhaustively.|
|expression_en||Mike and Dick are students.|
|example 1_en||I speak English and Japanese.|
|example 2_en||Mr. Mills is planning to go to Germany, France and Spain next year.|
|example 3_en||We eat steak with a knife and fork.|
|example 4_en||Mr. Yamamoto and Mr. Smith are playing tennis.|
|imabi||There is a lot to know about the particle と. However, this lesson will only focus on the case particle と. If you don't quite remember what a case particle is, don't worry. These particles simply show basic grammatical relationships in a sentence. The Case Particle と Noun＋と＋Noun(と） と's basic meaning is "and" when placed in between nominal phrases. If you want to use something else, it has to become a noun first. と can't be used at the beginning of a sentence. In that case, you should use something like そして. When listing more than two things, consecutive と may be omitted, and this is usually the most natural thing to do. と is typically not used after the last item, but it can be in older language.1a. 私は日本人と医者です X 1b. 私は日本人で医者です。 〇 I am Japanese and a doctor. Grammar Note: Again, this meaning is for when と is between two or more nouns! 1a is wrong because this rule is violated in a more complicated way. In English "I am Japanese and a doctor" is technically short for "I am Japanese and I am a doctor." Here it is clear that you are actually connecting two predicate phrases, not two simple noun phrases. If you wanted to say that "X and Y are doctors," you would use と.2a. すばしっこいと茶色の狐(きつね)はのろまな犬を飛(と)び越(こ)える。 X2b. すばしっこい茶色の狐はのろまな犬を飛び越える。〇 The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. Example Note: 2b is grammatically correct, but because it is a translation of a sentence in English that has each letter of the alphabet in it, the Japanese sounds somewhat like a direct translation. For instance, this sentence has an unnecessarily lengthy subject. In Japanese, such lengthy subjects tend to sound unnatural. Examples 3. リンゴとブドウがテーブルの上()にあります。 There are apples and grapes on the table. 4. これとそれは同じです。 This and that are the same. 5. ノートと教科書(きょうかしょ)と辞書(じしょ)を持ってきてください。 Please come with your notes, textbook, and dictionary. 6. 犬()と猫()がいる。 I have a dog and a cat; there is a dog and a cat. 7. 犬()と猫()を飼(か)っている。 I have a dog and a cat. 8. 日本語()のクラスにはアメリカ人()と、イギリス人()と、カナダ人()がいます。 There are Americans, English, and Canadians in (my) Japanese class. 9. 朝()と夜()はちょっと寒()いです。 Morning and night are a little cold.|
|pomax||This particle is a nicely complex one. The grand unifying role that it plays is, actually, unification, but the way in which it does it is usually experienced as doing completely different things. We already saw と being used to create an exhaustive noun list in chapter 2 in the section on noun particles, but this role extends not just to things, but to people as well. In the same way that [X]と[Y]と[Z] is an exhaustive noun list (i.e., the unity of all these things), if we use people instead of Xs and Ys, we end up with a unified group: 本田ほんださんと榊さかきさんが映画えいがを見みに行いく。 "Honda and Sakaki are going to go see a film." In this sentence, the "noun list" 本田さんと榊さん exhaustively lists all the members of the group of people that will go see a film.An interesting feature is that と can unify a group of people, or a group of things in general, leaving the central, contextually obvious noun implied. For instance, examine the following sentence: 木村きむらさんと東京とうきょうに行いきました。 In this sentence, 東京に行きました means "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) went to Tokyo", and 木村さんと looks like an incomplete noun list. However, this is one of those aspects of Japanese where context is important: we can leave off a contextually obvious "thing" in a noun list, and expect people who understand Japanese to fill this in themselves: in this case, the most obvious interpretation is that 'I' or 'we' went to Tokyo with Kimura. However, just because it is the most obvious, that does not mean it's the only interpretation possible. If, say, we're discussing what a mutual friend of ours has been doing over the holiday, without that friend present, and one of us utters the phrase 木村さんと東京に行きました then the contextually omitted person would be our mutual friend, rather than either of us.There are several ways to make the omitted 'thing' explicit. One of these is to use the disambiguation particle, は: 石田いしださんは木村さんと東京に行きました。 "Ishida (rather than someone else) went to Tokyo with Kimura." However, this only makes sense if the sentence would otherwise be ambiguous. If instead we only want to reiterate the person's identity, we would use が: 石田さんが木村さんと東京に行きました。 "Ishida went to Tokyo with Kimura." In this sentence, 石田 has been explicitly mentioned as primary verb actor, and because he's already been mentioned, can be left implied in the と listing that follows.Finally, we can do the most unnatural thing possible, and form a 'proper' exhaustive list without any implied nouns or people: 石田さんと木村さんが東京に行きました。 "Ishida and Kimura went to Tokyo." I say unnatural, because if someone has already been established as contextual subject or actor, you either leave them implied, or you mention them as actual subject or actor. If this was an opening sentence in a conversation, however, this sentence would be fine, as no context will have been established yet.Being able to tell whether a noun listing has any implied items is rather simple: if it ends on と, instead of on a noun, it has an implied item. It doesn't matter how long the noun list is for this; if it ends on と, something has been left off: 石田さんと木村さんが東京に行きました。 "Ishida and Kimura went to Tokyo." 石田さんと木村さんと東京に行きました。 "Ishida, Kimura and (I, you, he, she, it, us, they) went to Tokyo." Of course this explanation so far has focussed on people, but the same goes for plain old object nouns: カードと買かった。 "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) bought (it) with (a) credit card." So it doesn't really matter what category the nouns are; as long as you're using と for exhaustive listing, a full list is always of the form: [X]と[Y](と[Z]と[...]) And a list with an implied item is always of the form: [X]と([Y]と[...]と) With this list explicitly ending on と. However, make sure to add direct object particles when using 他動詞たどうし verbs (or rather, when using verbs in a 他動詞 role, taking direct objects): オレンジと買った。 "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) bought (it) with oranges." This sentence is not incorrect, but it says that we bought something in a place where oranges are considered a currency. This is probably not what we meant to say, and instead we wanted to say this: オレンジとを買った。 "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) bought (it) along with (the) oranges." Note the を in this sentence, which leads to a normal phrase "(something)を買った", where the "(something)" is our list with implicit items.There are more things that と can do, and some of these involve a [noun]と construction, so try to remember that just because an exhaustive listing with an implied item has the form [X]と, not everything that fits the pattern [X]と has to be such an exhaustive listing with implied item. In fact, looking at further roles of と this becomes immediately obvious.In addition to noun listing, と can be used in combination with sound or state words, properly called 擬音語ぎおんご, onomatopoeia, and 擬態語ぎたいご, mimeses respectively, to form adverbial constructions. For instance, if it was a starlit night and we wanted to say that all the lights were causing the lake to sparkle, we would say something like the following: 池いけがきらきらとした。 "The lake sparkled." In this sentence, the word きらきら is a state description word (called 'mimesis' in English), which paired with と becomes an adverb to the verb する. Literally, then, this construction would say that the lake is 'doing' きらきら. Sound description words (called 'onomatopoeia' in English) are treated in the same way: 雨あめがザーと降ふってきた。 "The rain came pouring down." Here, the onomatopoeic word ザー is not found in the translation, because in English — as in most Western languages — we do not use such words to any serious degree. In Japanese, however, these words are an essential part of natural sounding language: the translation states that rain came "pouring down", because ザー is the sound that rain pouring down makes. Before you now go thinking up all kinds of onomatopoeia yourself, Japanese has been in use for centuries, and virtually any onomatopoeia you might come up with already exists, in a very specific form. There are in fact 擬音語・擬態語 dictionaries which will list all of them by category and meaning (you may find one online on www.nihongoresources.com, for instance), so you're not free to come up with your own; there are several hundred well established onomatopoeia and mimeses, each typically with at least a handful of interpretations depending on what they relate to, leading to well over a thousand different uses. It is not surprise, then, that a mastery of onomatopoeia and mimeses is typically seen as having mastered conversational Japanese.In fact, this adverbial marking of things using と extends beyond just the 擬音語 and 擬態語, and through this extending becomes a bit more complex too: a popular way to explain this is to call と the quoting particle, and give an example such as the following to illustrate this: 「今いま行いく」と言いいました。 "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) said (I, you, he, she, it, we, they)'ll be coming over right now." This clearly demonstrates a quote being recited, but things are not quite that simple; と will work with a much wider variety of things than just quotes, as the following examples should illustrate: 車くるまを買かおうと思おもいます。 "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they)'re thinking about buying a car." 弱点じゃくてんを力ちからと考かんがえましょう。 "Let's think of (my, your, his, her, its, our, their) weakness(es) as (one of my, your, his, her, its, our, their) strength(s) (instead)." 趣味しゅみは仕事しごととしています。 "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) consider (my, your, his, her, its, our, their) hobby (my, your, his, her, its, our, their) work." What と is actually doing is marking all these things — the quote 「今行く」, the volitional act 車を買おう, the concept 力, and the activity 仕事 — as somehow being adverbial to the verbs in question; 言う, 思う, 考える, and する. The actual interpretation of what と is doing depends entirely on the interpretation of what's being marked as adverbial, and the interpretation of the verbs used. For instance, 言う means 'to say', but it can also mean 'to call'. As such, we can actually translate our first sentence in two radically different ways: 「今行く」と言いました。 "He said he'd be right over." "He was called Imaiku." The second translation sounds quite unlikely, but if we replace 今行く with 谷村さん, we get exactly the same possible translations: 「谷村たにむらさん」と言いました。 "He said 'Tanimurasan'." "He was called Tanimura." Suddenly the first translation sounds quite unlikely, although nothing really changed.So how does と differ from を, the direct object marker? Actually, sometimes we can use either, but for some verbs the meaning changes radically when we use と, as opposed to when we use を. A good example of this is the verb なる, which we looked at in chapter 2, in the section on important verbs. This verb changes its meaning from "to become" to "to be" when we use と rather than を, so there is an important choice to be made about which particle suits our need best. Another example is the verb 考える, which means "to think" when used with を, but "to think about" when used with と.Hopefully you spotted what happens here: rather than the verb and the direct object being distinct things, using と unifies the verb and thing it works with into something that means something different from the sum of the parts. For instance, you cannot split up "to be [X]" into "to be" and "X" without changing the meaning of the verb. The same goes for "to think about [X]", or "to consider [X] something", or "to dream about [X]". While it is easier to explain と as a series of separate things for all these different verbs, it's really doing the exact same thing for all of them, even though there is no simple rule in Western grammar that we can map it to so that it makes sense given what we know from our own every day language use.To make matters even worse, we're not there yet. One more thing that と does is act as a logical consequence. We already saw か acting as logical 'or', and と is basically the logical 'and' equivalent. If we want to express that two things are simultaneously the case, we would use と: 飛行機ひこうきは遅おくれると乗のれません。 "With aeroplanes, the idea is that if you're late, you can't board." literally: "for aeroplanes (rather than something else): if you're late, you can't board." It is easy to mistake what happens in this sentence for just an "if A, then B", so let's look at what this sentence is doing before illustrating this use of と with a more drastic example. Aeroplanes, with their strict schedules, have a very simple rule, being that if you are late for the flight, then too bad for you. The plane doesn't wait for people. As such, "being late" and "not being allowed on the plane" are simultaneously true. The moment you are late, immediately and irrevocably you are also unable to board. We can make this more obvious with the promised more drastic example: 友達ともだちが首くびになると辞職じしょくします。 "If my friend gets fired, I quit." Here, it is crucially important to notice the と, and realise that we're talking about simultaneous actions. This sentence does not say "if my friend gets fired, I shall put in my resignation", it says that right there and then, the moment he gets fired, you're quitting. It also doesn't leave any ambiguity, because you're asserting a fact. Since と is acting as a logical 'and', statements involving と don't concern opinion, hearsay, or guesswork, they state plain and simple true fact, so the following is correct use of と: 雨あめが降ふる。今いま行いけば傘かさがないと濡ぬれる。 "It's raining at the moment. If you go out now, you'll get wet without an umbrella." But this next sentence is simply wrong: 雨が降ふるとぬれる。 "If it rains, we'll get wet." The reason this second sentence is wrong is because と expresses a universally true fact. However, if you have an umbrella, or you're indoors, or you might be in any one of a number of situations in which it is raining but you don't get wet, this sentence is simply false, and as such stating it as a universal fact is plain wrong. Usually students will mistakenly use と in this way when what they really want to say is something pertaining to a particular, specific situation. For instance, if you're looking out the window, and you know you have no umbrella with you, you might want to say "if it starts raining now, I'll get wet", with the implication that this will happen if you go outside, not that you'll magically get wet inside if it starts to rain outside. Instead of using と, these kind of musings require the use of ば or たら conditionals: たら: 雨が降ったらきっとぬれます、ねえ。 ば: 雨が降れば、ぬれる、なあ。 "I guess if it starts raining I'll get wet" with the なあ/ねえ endings signalling that you're saying something rhetorical, but you'd like whoever is listening to acknowledge you anyway.This factual consequence is also found in unfinished sentences such as the following: 今いま行いかないと。 literally: "Not leaving now (means...)" meaning: "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) have to go." そうしないと。 literally: "Not doing so (means ...)" meaning: "(I, you, he, she, it, we, they) have to do so." These sentences are unfinished in the sense that they omit the — contextually obvious — generally negative consequences of the "not doing" of something.|
After the file is downloaded, double-click on it to open it in the desktop program.
At this time, it is not possible to add shared decks directly to your AnkiWeb account - they need to be added from the desktop then synchronized to AnkiWeb.