1

As far as I know when the topic and the object are the same we drop the object from the sentence to avoid redundancy. For example the following sentence is not correct:

ラーメン は もう ラーメン を 食べました。

Correctly:

ラーメン は もう 食べました。

But when I surfed on the internet I saw the をば combination which seems another way to avoid redundancy.

ラーメン をば もう 食べました。

My question is: Is をば an abbreviated version of XはXを? If yes then: Is there a difference between the two correct sentences besides that をば is used in old Japanese and some dialects?

a20
  • 2,193
  • 6
  • 23
ZeroProcess
  • 349
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
    Can you cite a source for 「ラーメン をば もう 食べました」? I don't think that's a natural locution, at least not in modern Japanese. – Eddie Kal Oct 15 '21 at 18:27
  • 2
    Broadly, **no**, 「をば」 is not a contraction or abbreviation of 「XはXを」. The ば here is indeed a form of は, but it is used as a kind of emphasis. Consider 「に」 versus 「には」, 「と」 versus 「とは」, 「へ」 versus 「へは」, etc. – Eiríkr Útlendi Oct 15 '21 at 18:44
  • @EiríkrÚtlendi I now find a wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particles_of_the_Kagoshima_dialects which say: "The particle をば oba or ば ba marks a topicalized direct object." Then what is mean the topicalized direct object? – ZeroProcess Oct 15 '21 at 18:48
  • @EddieKal I didn't save the page where I found the をば. – ZeroProcess Oct 15 '21 at 18:59
  • 2
    It's not that you **drop** the direct object to avoid redundancy. You turn it into the topic by changing the particle. ラーメンは in your sentence is also such a *topicalized* direct object. – aguijonazo Oct 15 '21 at 22:29
  • 1
    Highly related: https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/23875/what-does-the-word-%e3%81%b0%e3%81%82-mean/23878#23878 –  Oct 16 '21 at 00:03
  • Okay, I accept what you say. So the をば is just emphasis version of を and does not mark both topic and object in the same time. – ZeroProcess Oct 16 '21 at 07:19

0 Answers0