83223
Hi I would like to know if わけない is the shortened version of わけがない / わけはない (it
is not possible that)

I am pretty sure it is but it would be nice if I had some confirmation. I
would like also to know what nuances it bring (if any)

> おい、アクア、金ってもってる？
>
> あんな状況でいきなり連れてこられて、持ってる **わけない** でしょう？
>
> Hey, Aqua, you got any cash ?
>
> What do you think ? As I had time to grab my wallet when you dragged me off
> here !
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-21T18:28:55.020
83200
2020-12-23T01:45:52.533
2020-12-21T18:34:03.680
37097
37097
question
grammar
Is わけない the shortened version of わけがない?
According to Tae Kim (of course, not always the best of sources) and Jisho it
is.

Tae Kim (from [Hypothesizing and
Concluding](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/reasoning)):

> 中国語が読めるわけがない。
>
> There’s no way I can read Chinese. (lit: There is no reasoning for [me] to
> be able to read Chinese.)
>
> Under the normal rules of grammar, we must have a particle for the noun 「わけ」
> in order to use it with the verb but since this type of expression is used
> so often, the particle is often dropped to create just 「～わけない」.

[Jisho](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%82%8F%E3%81%91%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84):

> 訳無い
>
> [...] 2. there's no way that ... (​Usually written using kana alone, See
> also わけがない, contraction of わけがない)

Also, Imabi uses it interchangeably in his (their?) [Wake + Negation
article](https://www.imabi.net/wakenegation.htm):

>   20. 英語えいごはおろか、中国語ちゅうごくごも学まなべる **わけない** でしょう。
>
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-23T01:45:52.533
83223
2020-12-23T01:45:52.533
41089
83200
answer