I have a problem with the following sentence:

> 君は、持っているものに気づかれなかったのか、元から持っていないのか、どっちだ。

The sentence was translated as: "Did they not notice what you had, or wasn't
it yours from the beginning, which is it?"

Based on the passive 気づかれなかった shouldn't it be more like: "Weren't you noticed
by what you had...", but that would imply the person was noticed by the things
he had with him which doesn't really make sense.

Basically, I want to know how 君は、持っているものに気づかれなかった works. Can it also mean that
he was noticed by others through the things he had with him? Or is the
translation correct that the things were not noticed, even though 気づかれなかった is
passive (and it's most likely not the polite passive) ?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-18T16:58:49.503
44580
2017-05-21T03:30:04.273
2017-03-18T17:04:20.930
19819
19819
question
meaning passive-voice
君は、持っているものに気づかれなかったのか、元から持っていないのか、どっちだ。Meanining passive
This 気づかれない is not "to be noticed" (passive) but "to be able to notice"
(potential). So 持っているものに気づかれなかったのか is "is it that you could not notice what
you had?"

Of course 気づく is a consonant-stem verb and thus has the distinct potential
form (気づける) which is far more common. But we occasionally see the れる-form used
in the potential sense (especially in older documents, I think).

See: [Passive usage of 「済まされない」 in
sentences](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14065/5010)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-19T06:15:17.813
44603
2017-03-19T06:15:17.813
2017-04-13T12:43:44.863
-1
5010
44580
answer
The given translation "Did they not notice what you had" is correct.

First, Xに気づく means "to get aware of / to notice X". So, 人が（君が）持ってる物に気づく means
"people notice what you have".

Now, you can make the sentence passive with 君 being the subject as below.

  * （君が、人に）持っているものに気づかれる.

The past negative interrogative version (plus noda form) of the above is the
example sentence.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-04-18T12:40:34.493
46681
2017-04-18T12:40:34.493
4092
44580
answer
I don't know the whole context of this sentence but it may be using the
passive form as an honorific, indirect statement. [Reference
here](http://www.laits.utexas.edu/japanese/joshu/grammar/glist/y2/ch6/gl_y2_ch6_honorificpassive.php
"Reference here"). This kind of verb is used often to show honor and respect
to the doer without overusing other honorifics. If this is what the writer
intended (and it very well may not be at all), then the verb would be active
(as you have translated) and not passive.

(Again, I'm not totally certain. More context would be necessary).
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-18T14:37:21.133
47557
2017-05-18T14:37:21.133
22133
44580
answer
I don't agree with the translation. Here's why:

> 君は、持っているものに気づかれなかったのか、元から持っていないのか、どっちだ。

持っているもの = Something you have with you  
気づかれない = To not have been able to notice  
持っていない = "don't have"

I read this, with a bit of "absent" context, that it should read like this:

> "So, which is it? That they didn't notice what you had with you, or that you
> didn't have it with you from the start?"

I feel that this interpretation makes more sense, because the focus seems to
be on the item that is missing.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-19T22:49:12.397
47594
2017-05-21T03:30:04.273
2017-05-21T03:30:04.273
9831
21684
44580
answer