(だ)と。When to use だ?

Japanese
#1

So I know that you’re supposed to use them after nouns and な-adjectives.

However, after peaking through several grammar points that use this particle I find that it’s use and not use are really inconsistent.

For example, だと appears as expected for all と思う sentences but not at all for と言う (for quotations). Although that might be because they’re aren’t any example sentences where it’d be necessary. However, the rule isn’t mentioned on the grammar point either.

Then on と聞いた even though the rule isn’t mentioned it’s used and on と言われている it’s sometimes used and sometimes not.

Is there some rule that I’m missing that explains why some of these seeming very similar or related grammar points have different conjugation rules?

Perhaps these grammar points need to have the conjugation patterns better explained?

1 Like
#2

I think I just came across this on the new とされている grammar point as well, where one of the reviews’ answers appended to an い-adjective, and cycling through various possible answers showed だとされている. I left a report on it though, so that should be cleared up quickly :upside_down_face:

You’ve got a good point though; grammar points that begin with (だ)と～ should have a blurb on their respective grammar pages about when だ should or shouldn’t be used.

 
Speaking of which, I’ve noticed that I frequently want to answer questions using ～と思う, like 大丈夫だと思う, but I’m wondering if it’d sound weird if I dropped だ here? As I understand it, I think it’s technically “necessary” to be grammatically complete, but it feels… kind of clunky :man_shrugging:

So… does anyone know I sound like a textbook by saying 大丈夫だと思う, or would it sound like broken Japanese if I only say 大丈夫と思う (without だ) instead?

2 Likes
#3

Might be useful to you

#4

Not quite what we’re talking about. We’re discussing the use of だ+と after nouns and な-adjective.

Like

大丈夫だと思う

#5

Many na adjectives are essential nouns without a na. I think with without a verb "だ”, you essential have a na-adjective turning into a noun giving a clunky feel with some exceptions. I believe that is why there just a few na-adj exceptions can turn into a noun via さ・み. I asked a native on whether I could be a lazy omitting だ in spoken but it didn’t pass. An example such as 大事だと思う (I think it’s serious) vs a broken 大事と思う (I think serious)…doesn’t sound right. It’s the same reason why i-adjective plain is a predicate (secret だ inside) that these sentences function as they do and can act alone as a sentence.

From my understanding, all you need is a complete sentence or phase + と思う・言う・聞く・考える・etc. Aren’t we were just doing extra practice on the same original と grammar point? I don’t think there are any more elaborate rules here.

1 Like
#6

@s1212z

See that’s what I thought but for some reason the use of だ with と is very inconsistent across these related grammar points.

So would you say that’s an error on Bunpro’s part and I should go back and report those inconsistencies?

1 Like
#7

My 2 cents, I’m seeing two distinct usages:

  1. The aforementioned plain phrase/sentence + と + quotation verb

  2. Relative clause-like usage, much like the original N3 L1.8 という where you have clauses behaving like an adjective (N+という+N).

In the といわれている, I’m see だ after nouns and na-adjectives that weren’t there yesterday. @Pushindawood, was this updated today?

I think だ can be used or not used depending if it’s phase/quote using a complete plain form sentence or if you want a relative clause-like noun modifier. Then it seems other sentences, it sort of mixed where the inflection only is slightly altered but still passable. Is this why the orange だ is highlighted on these example sentences @Pushindawood or do you agree?

There are a lot of という grammar points, just look at these. @Johnathan-Weir, were there particular examples you didn’t agree with?

1 Like
#8

@s1212z

image

Taking an example from one of my most recently learned grammar points. と考えられている

The first sentence ends in a noun but has no だ but then the third sentence also ends in a noun but does have だ.

I’m also seeing those additional notes being added.

1 Like
#9

From my resource, they said the だ is optional for these instances so perhaps the orange だ is necessary. I still suspect this is a nuance difference in quote-like statement or a relative clause-like usage for the more advanced とgrammar points. I kinda accepted “phrase” as open ended in the description but this is a good topic to bring up for clarity.

Actually, they took issue some for other grammar areas that were non-related. Perhaps context? Thought these were extracted from native material.

2 Likes
#10

@s1212z

Yeah, looking through the grammar points again I’m starting to see that when quoting something that seems read or said that だ seems to be optional.

I’m glad that they’re adding the extra notes on its usage. I know that a lot of stuff is usually dropped Japanese but I’m of the opinion that, for learners, having stuff written out and being told it’s dropped (even if it’s almost all the time) saves a lot of time and headache trying to figure it out. (This post being a great example. wwww)

5 Likes
#11

Right, but for example ～とされている’s grammar page shows that だ is apparently optional after nouns and な-adjectives, with no mention or explanation as for why this is, or what the difference is, etc.

I asked elsewhere and was told that だ is not optional for a phrase like 大丈夫だと思う, which actually does seem to line up with @Johnathan-Weir’s saying that dropping it happens exclusively when quoting something. (Edit: But, come to think of it, this would mean that だ should be required before ～とされている!)

It’d be nice for this sort of information to be readily available on the grammar pages themselves, though :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#12

I don’t believe these are direct quotes for this grammar point. I think they are presenting quotes to show this is coming from a written work which is a bit confusing. So I personally would put this in the predicate category which would make だ negotiable depending on the situation.

1 Like
#13

@Johnathan-Weir, @s1212z, and @Kai Thank you for your discussion on this topic.

The basic construction is Noun/な-Adjective + だ + と思う・と聞く・と言う.

だ can be omitted after nouns, even more so after proper nouns, though if a clause is longer than just one word, だ is usually present. With longer passages, a comma after と is used to make reading easier (“、と”).

Omitting だ after な-adjectives sounds less natural. However, だ will often be dropped in casual speech, especially in some common expressions like 大丈夫と思う。Basically, if you hear the expression often, you can assume it is safe to use it. That being said, な-adjectives like そんな, どんな, 静か, and 豊か must include だ.

Since だ is an affirmative auxiliary it can also be used to stress or emphasize the speaker’s statement or show confidence. Therefore, the speaker would omit だ when they wish to soften what is being said, they are less confident, or they lack sufficient proof to back what they say.

As a general rule, omitting だ is considered to be less formal, but for certain grammar points (e.g. と言っても、とあって、と言えば), だ is omitted quite often.

-Co-written by @mrnoone

4 Likes
#14

Thank you for the clarity @Pushindawood, these seem to be the dark arts of grammar where they are not necessarily encouraged but do exist. Just a heads up on the wasabi reading link for と思う, they were not negotiable for these specific quotation-like situations. Not sure about all other links but this seems to align with what many of us have been originally taught. Come to think of it, I’ve probably omitted だ out of ignorance/laziness in conversation many times for something like 大丈夫と思う with little feedback, now I know why.

1 Like