のだった

thetazuo

Senior Member
Chinese - China
士道とのデートはとても楽しい。二人で歩いているだけで、喋っているだけで、本当に時間を忘れてしまうような感覚を得ることができる。
でも、いや、だからこそ---------士道がいなくなってしまったあとの寂しさは、より強くなってしまうのだった

Hi. What is the function of the のだった at the end of the second sentence? If we change it into のだ, how will the nuance change?
Thank you.
 
  • MKwhale

    Member
    Japanese
    Hello again thetazuo-san,

    the difference between のだ and のだった simply lies in the tense. You can make it clearer by changing this blunt style to politer ones, namely のである and のであった respectively.
    Therefore, nuance changes following the general rule of 'dramatical present' and 'descriptive past'. One gives vivid, involved, subjective impression; while the other leads to calm, perspective, objective state of mind.

    cheers.
     

    thetazuo

    Senior Member
    Chinese - China
    Therefore, nuance changes following the general rule of 'dramatical present' and 'descriptive past'. One gives vivid, involved, subjective impression; while the other leads to calm, perspective, objective state of mind.
    Hi. Does this rule also apply to the verb form adopted at the end of a sentence in the narrative part of a novel?
    For example,
    来禅高校の屋上は今、影に覆われていた
    ……
    だというのに、五河士道がいるその場所は、まるでそこだけが辺りの景色から切り取られたかのように、薄暗い色が蟠っていたのである。
    This rule applies to both the ていたs in red, which are 'descriptive past' and are used to describe the scene objectively.
    Am I on the right track?
    Thank you.
     

    MKwhale

    Member
    Japanese
    thetazuo-san,

    sorry for the late response.
    You have submitted, without intention, various themes to think of.

    1) Why do you think so-called historical present may not apply at the end of a narrative sentence? I cannot think of any idea. There can be a case where a writer use the past tense at the end to show that the preceding descriptions are about the events that occurred in the past. Even in such cases, the objective effect of the past tense works automatically; and this does not mean you must not replace the past with HP (historical present) in preference for holding subjective effect.

    2) 屋上は今、影に覆われていた。Yes, I think this is a typical descriptive past.

    3) 薄暗い色が蟠っていたのである。The writer closes the verbal part in present; so this is HP; and ていた is perfect tense.

    As I said before, た showing past in written form is made from たり used traditionally for perfect tense. This was done rather artificially at about 150 years ago. Since then た has been used both for past and perfect, which makes Japanese language logically fragile or misleading.

    4) In the days of た’s debut, efforts were also made to secure the language style which were more stable logically. The style was called 擬古文体 (pseudo-traditional form), a mixture of spoken language and the traditional written form. 擬古文体 was used in formal descriptions such as laws, contracts, scholarly books, etc. till we lost it when we lost the War.

    This is why I once recommended 森鷗外’s 即興詩人 to you who loves grammar.

    5) Back to the theme of historical present, I can introduce a paper below to you.

    「英語における “Historical Present”と日本語における“歴史的現在”の比較」written by 都 竹 恵 子 (つづく けいこ) at
    佛教大学論文目録リポジトリ

    Here, I have quoted a part of her conclusion which might be interesting for you too.

    「HPの生起の仕方は、それぞれの言語で違いがある。英語の HPは、一度、HPが現れると、複数の HP文が続き、HPが過去形の間に挟まれるような「サンドイッチ型」で生起する。一方、日本語では、文尾が「タ」形ばかりで終わるのを避けるために、英語より頻繁に HPが生起する。このように生起の仕方に違いはあるが、どちらの言語でも、話し手/書き手が HPを用いる目的は、同じであると言えよう。聞き手/読み手に彼らの熱い思いを伝えるためである。」

    Below is the starting paragraph of 杜子春 which ends with HP; written by 芥川龍之介.

    ある春の日暮です。
     唐の都洛陽の西の門の下に、ぼんやり空を仰いでいる、一人の若者がありました。
     若者は名を杜子春といって、元は金持の息子でしたが、今は財産をつかい尽して、その日の暮しにも困る位、あわれな身分になっているのです。

    cheers.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top