What does なら mean in this sentence? I don't understand

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP












4















I just got genki 2 and I don't understand what it means about なら. I heard it meant "if" from Tae Kim but it says




A statement of the form "noun A なら predicate X" says that the predicate X applies only to A and is not more generally valid. The main ideas of a なら sentence, in other words, are contrast (as in Situation 1) and limitation (as in Situation 2)




I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It makes me feel like I don't speak english.




Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




So I guess thats supposed to be the one where it contrasts. I understand the second situation because it is just "if" but I don't understand the point of it in this one.



Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil? Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?










share|improve this question

















  • 2





    Related: japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29655/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21371/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44193/9831

    – Chocolate
    Jan 27 at 13:48






  • 1





    Perhaps the book should have started with the simpler case of 'A: ブラジルなら行ったことがあります。': 'talking about Brazil...' ('if [it is] Brazil...'), before the one meaning 'if [it were] Chili...'. This thread also has such a simpler example.

    – Mathieu Bouville
    Jan 27 at 17:02















4















I just got genki 2 and I don't understand what it means about なら. I heard it meant "if" from Tae Kim but it says




A statement of the form "noun A なら predicate X" says that the predicate X applies only to A and is not more generally valid. The main ideas of a なら sentence, in other words, are contrast (as in Situation 1) and limitation (as in Situation 2)




I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It makes me feel like I don't speak english.




Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




So I guess thats supposed to be the one where it contrasts. I understand the second situation because it is just "if" but I don't understand the point of it in this one.



Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil? Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?










share|improve this question

















  • 2





    Related: japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29655/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21371/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44193/9831

    – Chocolate
    Jan 27 at 13:48






  • 1





    Perhaps the book should have started with the simpler case of 'A: ブラジルなら行ったことがあります。': 'talking about Brazil...' ('if [it is] Brazil...'), before the one meaning 'if [it were] Chili...'. This thread also has such a simpler example.

    – Mathieu Bouville
    Jan 27 at 17:02













4












4








4








I just got genki 2 and I don't understand what it means about なら. I heard it meant "if" from Tae Kim but it says




A statement of the form "noun A なら predicate X" says that the predicate X applies only to A and is not more generally valid. The main ideas of a なら sentence, in other words, are contrast (as in Situation 1) and limitation (as in Situation 2)




I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It makes me feel like I don't speak english.




Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




So I guess thats supposed to be the one where it contrasts. I understand the second situation because it is just "if" but I don't understand the point of it in this one.



Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil? Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?










share|improve this question














I just got genki 2 and I don't understand what it means about なら. I heard it meant "if" from Tae Kim but it says




A statement of the form "noun A なら predicate X" says that the predicate X applies only to A and is not more generally valid. The main ideas of a なら sentence, in other words, are contrast (as in Situation 1) and limitation (as in Situation 2)




I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It makes me feel like I don't speak english.




Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




So I guess thats supposed to be the one where it contrasts. I understand the second situation because it is just "if" but I don't understand the point of it in this one.



Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil? Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?







grammar meaning






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Jan 27 at 10:36









かつおぶしかつおぶし

234




234







  • 2





    Related: japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29655/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21371/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44193/9831

    – Chocolate
    Jan 27 at 13:48






  • 1





    Perhaps the book should have started with the simpler case of 'A: ブラジルなら行ったことがあります。': 'talking about Brazil...' ('if [it is] Brazil...'), before the one meaning 'if [it were] Chili...'. This thread also has such a simpler example.

    – Mathieu Bouville
    Jan 27 at 17:02












  • 2





    Related: japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29655/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21371/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44193/9831

    – Chocolate
    Jan 27 at 13:48






  • 1





    Perhaps the book should have started with the simpler case of 'A: ブラジルなら行ったことがあります。': 'talking about Brazil...' ('if [it is] Brazil...'), before the one meaning 'if [it were] Chili...'. This thread also has such a simpler example.

    – Mathieu Bouville
    Jan 27 at 17:02







2




2





Related: japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29655/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21371/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44193/9831

– Chocolate
Jan 27 at 13:48





Related: japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29655/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21371/9831 / japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44193/9831

– Chocolate
Jan 27 at 13:48




1




1





Perhaps the book should have started with the simpler case of 'A: ブラジルなら行ったことがあります。': 'talking about Brazil...' ('if [it is] Brazil...'), before the one meaning 'if [it were] Chili...'. This thread also has such a simpler example.

– Mathieu Bouville
Jan 27 at 17:02





Perhaps the book should have started with the simpler case of 'A: ブラジルなら行ったことがあります。': 'talking about Brazil...' ('if [it is] Brazil...'), before the one meaning 'if [it were] Chili...'. This thread also has such a simpler example.

– Mathieu Bouville
Jan 27 at 17:02










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4














I am afraid my answer will be a bit clumsy.




Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




Yes, this conversation could make if ~ sentence.




Q Have you ever been to Brazil? A : If it is Chile, Yes. but I have never been to Brazil.




I think what you are missing or seem to be confused at is the existence of the conjunctive particle, が,whose function reverses or changes the former statement.



So, here, with the conditional type of the auxiliary だ ( = なら ) and together with the conjunctive particle が、the sentence is making If **** Chile, but not been to Brazil. ( As mentioned above. )



And




Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil?




Yes, it is.



And




Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?




You can replace なら with the combination of particles such as には、or auxiliaries combination such as であれば。 For instance,




チリには行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。( same meaning )
( Here the conjunctive particle が strongly affects the sentence. )



チリであれば行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。
 ( Also here the conjunctive particle が strongly is affecting. )




Please give me a feedback should you not understand mine.



Thank you.






share|improve this answer
































    10














    Without なら in that sentence, literally it still means "I have been to Chile, but not Brazil." But, the other party will be confused and think to himself, "I'm not asking about Chile, I'm asking about Brazil".



    If you add なら, it adds the nuance or context that Chile is somehow related to Brazil in some way. Maybe because the culture or language is similar?



    It also means, if you asked me about Chile, then yes I have been there. But, I've never been to Brazil.



    Sorry, if my explanation is not based on grammatical correctness, but that's the function of なら in that sentence.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 6





      +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

      – l'électeur
      Jan 27 at 14:07











    • It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

      – Kentaro Tomono
      Jan 27 at 18:51






    • 1





      The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

      – Jesse Armand
      Jan 27 at 18:58












    • @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

      – Kentaro Tomono
      Jan 27 at 19:02







    • 1





      @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

      – Jesse Armand
      Jan 27 at 19:04


















    3














    なら is the informal, conversational contraction of ならば. And that is simply the conditional form of the verb/copula だ. Much like 食べれば is to 食べる. Well, that is a simplification because it's a connecting word that has a life of its own. Considering the relationship to だ, even if it is only historic, is helpful.



    Xだ。 → It is X.



    Xなら(ば)、Y。 → if it is X, Y.



    That speaker is conveying something like "If it were Chile (you had asked me about), then yes, but Brazil, no."



    なら applies no nominalized clauses as well.



    Xのだ。→ It is the case that X.



    Xのなら、Y。 → If it is the case that X, Y.



    The の usually disappears:



    愛してるなら、行かないで。If (it is really the case that) you love me, don't go.



    Speaking of だ and conditionals; there is a ~たら form of だ also, which is simply だったら, following the usual pattern of the past tense + ら. So there arises a similar question between choosing なら(ば) and だったら as between the えば and たら of any verb. Sometimes they can be interchanged. In this case, that person could have answered チリだったら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。






    share|improve this answer
























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "257"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fjapanese.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f65104%2fwhat-does-%25e3%2581%25aa%25e3%2582%2589-mean-in-this-sentence-i-dont-understand%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      4














      I am afraid my answer will be a bit clumsy.




      Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




      Yes, this conversation could make if ~ sentence.




      Q Have you ever been to Brazil? A : If it is Chile, Yes. but I have never been to Brazil.




      I think what you are missing or seem to be confused at is the existence of the conjunctive particle, が,whose function reverses or changes the former statement.



      So, here, with the conditional type of the auxiliary だ ( = なら ) and together with the conjunctive particle が、the sentence is making If **** Chile, but not been to Brazil. ( As mentioned above. )



      And




      Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil?




      Yes, it is.



      And




      Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?




      You can replace なら with the combination of particles such as には、or auxiliaries combination such as であれば。 For instance,




      チリには行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。( same meaning )
      ( Here the conjunctive particle が strongly affects the sentence. )



      チリであれば行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。
       ( Also here the conjunctive particle が strongly is affecting. )




      Please give me a feedback should you not understand mine.



      Thank you.






      share|improve this answer





























        4














        I am afraid my answer will be a bit clumsy.




        Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




        Yes, this conversation could make if ~ sentence.




        Q Have you ever been to Brazil? A : If it is Chile, Yes. but I have never been to Brazil.




        I think what you are missing or seem to be confused at is the existence of the conjunctive particle, が,whose function reverses or changes the former statement.



        So, here, with the conditional type of the auxiliary だ ( = なら ) and together with the conjunctive particle が、the sentence is making If **** Chile, but not been to Brazil. ( As mentioned above. )



        And




        Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil?




        Yes, it is.



        And




        Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?




        You can replace なら with the combination of particles such as には、or auxiliaries combination such as であれば。 For instance,




        チリには行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。( same meaning )
        ( Here the conjunctive particle が strongly affects the sentence. )



        チリであれば行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。
         ( Also here the conjunctive particle が strongly is affecting. )




        Please give me a feedback should you not understand mine.



        Thank you.






        share|improve this answer



























          4












          4








          4







          I am afraid my answer will be a bit clumsy.




          Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




          Yes, this conversation could make if ~ sentence.




          Q Have you ever been to Brazil? A : If it is Chile, Yes. but I have never been to Brazil.




          I think what you are missing or seem to be confused at is the existence of the conjunctive particle, が,whose function reverses or changes the former statement.



          So, here, with the conditional type of the auxiliary だ ( = なら ) and together with the conjunctive particle が、the sentence is making If **** Chile, but not been to Brazil. ( As mentioned above. )



          And




          Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil?




          Yes, it is.



          And




          Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?




          You can replace なら with the combination of particles such as には、or auxiliaries combination such as であれば。 For instance,




          チリには行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。( same meaning )
          ( Here the conjunctive particle が strongly affects the sentence. )



          チリであれば行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。
           ( Also here the conjunctive particle が strongly is affecting. )




          Please give me a feedback should you not understand mine.



          Thank you.






          share|improve this answer















          I am afraid my answer will be a bit clumsy.




          Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。




          Yes, this conversation could make if ~ sentence.




          Q Have you ever been to Brazil? A : If it is Chile, Yes. but I have never been to Brazil.




          I think what you are missing or seem to be confused at is the existence of the conjunctive particle, が,whose function reverses or changes the former statement.



          So, here, with the conditional type of the auxiliary だ ( = なら ) and together with the conjunctive particle が、the sentence is making If **** Chile, but not been to Brazil. ( As mentioned above. )



          And




          Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil?




          Yes, it is.



          And




          Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?




          You can replace なら with the combination of particles such as には、or auxiliaries combination such as であれば。 For instance,




          チリには行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。( same meaning )
          ( Here the conjunctive particle が strongly affects the sentence. )



          チリであれば行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。
           ( Also here the conjunctive particle が strongly is affecting. )




          Please give me a feedback should you not understand mine.



          Thank you.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jan 27 at 18:40

























          answered Jan 27 at 13:09









          Kentaro TomonoKentaro Tomono

          1




          1





















              10














              Without なら in that sentence, literally it still means "I have been to Chile, but not Brazil." But, the other party will be confused and think to himself, "I'm not asking about Chile, I'm asking about Brazil".



              If you add なら, it adds the nuance or context that Chile is somehow related to Brazil in some way. Maybe because the culture or language is similar?



              It also means, if you asked me about Chile, then yes I have been there. But, I've never been to Brazil.



              Sorry, if my explanation is not based on grammatical correctness, but that's the function of なら in that sentence.






              share|improve this answer




















              • 6





                +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

                – l'électeur
                Jan 27 at 14:07











              • It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 18:51






              • 1





                The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 18:58












              • @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 19:02







              • 1





                @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 19:04















              10














              Without なら in that sentence, literally it still means "I have been to Chile, but not Brazil." But, the other party will be confused and think to himself, "I'm not asking about Chile, I'm asking about Brazil".



              If you add なら, it adds the nuance or context that Chile is somehow related to Brazil in some way. Maybe because the culture or language is similar?



              It also means, if you asked me about Chile, then yes I have been there. But, I've never been to Brazil.



              Sorry, if my explanation is not based on grammatical correctness, but that's the function of なら in that sentence.






              share|improve this answer




















              • 6





                +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

                – l'électeur
                Jan 27 at 14:07











              • It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 18:51






              • 1





                The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 18:58












              • @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 19:02







              • 1





                @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 19:04













              10












              10








              10







              Without なら in that sentence, literally it still means "I have been to Chile, but not Brazil." But, the other party will be confused and think to himself, "I'm not asking about Chile, I'm asking about Brazil".



              If you add なら, it adds the nuance or context that Chile is somehow related to Brazil in some way. Maybe because the culture or language is similar?



              It also means, if you asked me about Chile, then yes I have been there. But, I've never been to Brazil.



              Sorry, if my explanation is not based on grammatical correctness, but that's the function of なら in that sentence.






              share|improve this answer















              Without なら in that sentence, literally it still means "I have been to Chile, but not Brazil." But, the other party will be confused and think to himself, "I'm not asking about Chile, I'm asking about Brazil".



              If you add なら, it adds the nuance or context that Chile is somehow related to Brazil in some way. Maybe because the culture or language is similar?



              It also means, if you asked me about Chile, then yes I have been there. But, I've never been to Brazil.



              Sorry, if my explanation is not based on grammatical correctness, but that's the function of なら in that sentence.







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited Jan 27 at 12:59

























              answered Jan 27 at 12:49









              Jesse ArmandJesse Armand

              24617




              24617







              • 6





                +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

                – l'électeur
                Jan 27 at 14:07











              • It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 18:51






              • 1





                The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 18:58












              • @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 19:02







              • 1





                @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 19:04












              • 6





                +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

                – l'électeur
                Jan 27 at 14:07











              • It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 18:51






              • 1





                The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 18:58












              • @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

                – Kentaro Tomono
                Jan 27 at 19:02







              • 1





                @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

                – Jesse Armand
                Jan 27 at 19:04







              6




              6





              +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

              – l'électeur
              Jan 27 at 14:07





              +1 for the insightful content of the second paragraph. 「なら」 fits in because both countries are in South America. One would NOT say 「中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。」 as those two countries have very little in common.

              – l'électeur
              Jan 27 at 14:07













              It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

              – Kentaro Tomono
              Jan 27 at 18:51





              It would depend upon the case. If 2 are talking about BRICs, then one would might say "中国なら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルには行ったことがありません。". I actually did say "シンガポールには行った事がありますが、イタリアには行った事有りません” when I was asked where I had been for a trip. Singapore and Italy has almost nothing at all "in common."

              – Kentaro Tomono
              Jan 27 at 18:51




              1




              1





              The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

              – Jesse Armand
              Jan 27 at 18:58






              The question was “Have you been to Brazil?” I personally could just answer a short “No”. But, why would I say. “No, but I have been to Italy”. Then, the other person would think. “Okay.. but I didn’t ask you about your Euro trip.”

              – Jesse Armand
              Jan 27 at 18:58














              @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

              – Kentaro Tomono
              Jan 27 at 19:02






              @JesseArmand So I am saying it's all about context. Brazil and Chile has one clear common thing together. They are both on the South American continent.

              – Kentaro Tomono
              Jan 27 at 19:02





              1




              1





              @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

              – Jesse Armand
              Jan 27 at 19:04





              @KentaroTomono Yes. That was my emphasis :) the context. To be honest these kind of examples are silly and not realistic

              – Jesse Armand
              Jan 27 at 19:04











              3














              なら is the informal, conversational contraction of ならば. And that is simply the conditional form of the verb/copula だ. Much like 食べれば is to 食べる. Well, that is a simplification because it's a connecting word that has a life of its own. Considering the relationship to だ, even if it is only historic, is helpful.



              Xだ。 → It is X.



              Xなら(ば)、Y。 → if it is X, Y.



              That speaker is conveying something like "If it were Chile (you had asked me about), then yes, but Brazil, no."



              なら applies no nominalized clauses as well.



              Xのだ。→ It is the case that X.



              Xのなら、Y。 → If it is the case that X, Y.



              The の usually disappears:



              愛してるなら、行かないで。If (it is really the case that) you love me, don't go.



              Speaking of だ and conditionals; there is a ~たら form of だ also, which is simply だったら, following the usual pattern of the past tense + ら. So there arises a similar question between choosing なら(ば) and だったら as between the えば and たら of any verb. Sometimes they can be interchanged. In this case, that person could have answered チリだったら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。






              share|improve this answer





























                3














                なら is the informal, conversational contraction of ならば. And that is simply the conditional form of the verb/copula だ. Much like 食べれば is to 食べる. Well, that is a simplification because it's a connecting word that has a life of its own. Considering the relationship to だ, even if it is only historic, is helpful.



                Xだ。 → It is X.



                Xなら(ば)、Y。 → if it is X, Y.



                That speaker is conveying something like "If it were Chile (you had asked me about), then yes, but Brazil, no."



                なら applies no nominalized clauses as well.



                Xのだ。→ It is the case that X.



                Xのなら、Y。 → If it is the case that X, Y.



                The の usually disappears:



                愛してるなら、行かないで。If (it is really the case that) you love me, don't go.



                Speaking of だ and conditionals; there is a ~たら form of だ also, which is simply だったら, following the usual pattern of the past tense + ら. So there arises a similar question between choosing なら(ば) and だったら as between the えば and たら of any verb. Sometimes they can be interchanged. In this case, that person could have answered チリだったら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。






                share|improve this answer



























                  3












                  3








                  3







                  なら is the informal, conversational contraction of ならば. And that is simply the conditional form of the verb/copula だ. Much like 食べれば is to 食べる. Well, that is a simplification because it's a connecting word that has a life of its own. Considering the relationship to だ, even if it is only historic, is helpful.



                  Xだ。 → It is X.



                  Xなら(ば)、Y。 → if it is X, Y.



                  That speaker is conveying something like "If it were Chile (you had asked me about), then yes, but Brazil, no."



                  なら applies no nominalized clauses as well.



                  Xのだ。→ It is the case that X.



                  Xのなら、Y。 → If it is the case that X, Y.



                  The の usually disappears:



                  愛してるなら、行かないで。If (it is really the case that) you love me, don't go.



                  Speaking of だ and conditionals; there is a ~たら form of だ also, which is simply だったら, following the usual pattern of the past tense + ら. So there arises a similar question between choosing なら(ば) and だったら as between the えば and たら of any verb. Sometimes they can be interchanged. In this case, that person could have answered チリだったら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。






                  share|improve this answer















                  なら is the informal, conversational contraction of ならば. And that is simply the conditional form of the verb/copula だ. Much like 食べれば is to 食べる. Well, that is a simplification because it's a connecting word that has a life of its own. Considering the relationship to だ, even if it is only historic, is helpful.



                  Xだ。 → It is X.



                  Xなら(ば)、Y。 → if it is X, Y.



                  That speaker is conveying something like "If it were Chile (you had asked me about), then yes, but Brazil, no."



                  なら applies no nominalized clauses as well.



                  Xのだ。→ It is the case that X.



                  Xのなら、Y。 → If it is the case that X, Y.



                  The の usually disappears:



                  愛してるなら、行かないで。If (it is really the case that) you love me, don't go.



                  Speaking of だ and conditionals; there is a ~たら form of だ also, which is simply だったら, following the usual pattern of the past tense + ら. So there arises a similar question between choosing なら(ば) and だったら as between the えば and たら of any verb. Sometimes they can be interchanged. In this case, that person could have answered チリだったら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Jan 28 at 8:16

























                  answered Jan 28 at 8:11









                  KazKaz

                  1,682613




                  1,682613



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Japanese Language Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fjapanese.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f65104%2fwhat-does-%25e3%2581%25aa%25e3%2582%2589-mean-in-this-sentence-i-dont-understand%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown






                      Popular posts from this blog

                      How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                      Displaying single band from multi-band raster using QGIS

                      How many registers does an x86_64 CPU actually have?