34308
> この話{はなし}が事{じ}実{じつ}に基{もと}づいている **という** 証{しょう}拠{こ}はある。
>
> _There is evidence that this story is based on facts._

Does the meaning change if I remove という so it becomes as follows?

> この話{はなし}が事{じ}実{じつ}に基{もと}づいている証{しょう}拠{こ}はある。
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-23T10:33:50.307
34305
2016-05-26T11:29:58.873
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
11192
question
grammar
Do I need to use という in 「この話が事実に基づいているという証拠はある。」?
> 1)「この話が事実に基づいている **という** 証拠はある。」
>
> 2)「この話が事実に基づいている証拠はある。」

1) feels just wholesome and complete. It is something people would actually
say and write in real life and it enters my Japanese-speaking brain without
any constraint whatsoever. Just like Matsuzaka beef, I never have to chew it
to swallow.

2), however, does not feel as natural as 1). I would not necessarily call it
incorrect or ungrammatical, but I wonder how many people actually would say or
write it.

It is not that the "meaning" will change if you remove 「という」. It is just that
one would need to spend a minute thinking of an "appropriate" situation where
one might say 2).

One situation where one might say 2) would be when the phrase 「事実に基づいている
**という** 証拠」 has already been uttered at least once or twice in a conversation
and then, the same or another person repeats the phrase without 「という」 to make
it shorter.

When you have to stop and think hard of a situation where a phrase could be
used naturally, you are usually dealing with a not-so-natural phrase to use
independently in the first place.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-23T13:28:09.480
34308
2016-05-23T13:28:09.480
34305
answer
1)「この話が事実に基づいているという証拠はある」

2)「この話が事実に基づいている証拠はある」

If I were asked which way of the above two statements I would use when I’m
demanding the evidence of a story to somebody, I would more likely use the
former.

It is felt to me the first one is saying “I have the evidence that verifies
the story is based on the fact,” and the second one is saying “This story is
based on the fact. I have the evidence.”

The difference is that the word, ‘という’ in the quote 1) links the fact that
’話が事実に基づいている’ with '証拠,’ while ‘話が事実に基づいている’ in the quote 2) functions as a
modifying clause of 証拠.

Likewise we can say either way;

1) 彼の会社が倒産したという話を聞いた – I heard a rumor that his company has bankrupted.

2) 彼の会社が倒産した話を聞いた - I heard a rumor - his company has bankrupted.

1)彼が結婚するという話は本当かい？- Is it true that he is going to marry?

２)彼が結婚する話、本当かい？- He is going to marry. Is that story true?

I’m not sure I was able to reflect the difference of the nuance of “with and
without という” exactly, nor I don’t say 2) is grammatically incorrect either,
but am positive that 1) sounds smoother, and more natural than 2), which
sounds like something lacking to me.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T05:44:31.553
34380
2016-05-26T11:29:58.873
2016-05-26T11:29:58.873
12056
12056
34305
answer