Override tendency of particles

cheshire

Senior Member
Catholic (Cat-holic, not Catholic)
ネコ送る。(ネコを送る。)
(1)ネコをも送る。
:cross:はもある。
:cross:はを切る。
:cross:はしかない。
:cross:しかはない。
(2)六本木にもある。
(3)六本木でもある。
(4)六本木ある。


Some particles can be placed side-by-side. Some can't. In that case, the ones with "stronger" meaning override the weaker.

As for (1), we'd better avoid (1), and might as well say ネコも送る。 But (1) is used in literature or in politician's speech. This is not wrong. It's a bit stilted.

You can say in colloquial way (4) for either (2) or (3), but you better avoid it in formal situations. Still, you can let も override に or で.

It's exactly like ionization tendency (イオン化傾向) how one particle is more prone to such override than others.

Please put your thought on this intriguing grammar.
 
  • Flaminius

    coclea mod
    日本語 / japāniski / יפנית
    I haven't still come up with my own conclusion but I have a question for your "stronger particles replace weaker ones" account.
    One may be able to conclude that -mo is stronger than -ga (hereafter mo > ga) from the following evidence:
    猫がいる。
    猫もいる。
    :cross:猫がもいる。

    A similar reasoning can attest to wa > ga:
    猫がいる。
    猫はいる。
    :cross:猫がはいる。

    It is hard to determine the relative strength of -mo and -wa. Yet, those two clearly cannot be used together:
    :cross:猫もはいる。
    :cross:猫はもいる。

    What do you think of it? :)
     

    I_like_my_TV

    Senior Member
    Tongan
    cheshire said:
    Some particles can be placed side-by-side. Some can't. In that case, the ones with "stronger" meaning override the weaker.
    How can you tell which ones are stronger than which? Without first asking yourself this question, I'm afraid you won't go very far.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top