I was reviewing some concepts about the use of ということ in relative sentences,
and there's something I still can't quite understand.

Looking at the sentence:

> パンジーが食べられる花だということは知っている (I know that pansies are edible flowers.)

Is the ということ here necessary? Since the first clause ends in the noun 花,
doesn't something like this has similar meaning?

> パンジーが食べられる花は知っている
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-17T06:27:38.687
100683
2023-08-18T02:23:32.703
45590
question
grammar meaning nuances
About omitting ということ in relative sentences
> パンジーが食べられる花だということは知っている

This more literally means: "I know **the thing that** pansies are flowers whom
(somebody) can eat.".

こと ("the thing") is direct object of 知っている, and という can be translated as
"that".

> パンジーが食べられる花は知っている

After dropping of だということ, 花 becomes direct object of 知っている, so this sentence
could mean e.g.:

"I know flowers whom pansies can eat."

"Pansies know flowers who are eaten."

"Pansies know flowers who can eat."
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-17T07:35:43.453
100685
2023-08-17T07:45:52.560
2023-08-17T07:45:52.560
56758
56758
100683
answer
Yes, ということ is necessary. Alternatively, you can use other nominalizing or
quotative expressions and say パンジーが食べられる花 **なのは** 知っている or パンジーが食べられる花 **だとは**
知っている, but you definitely need one of these expressions.

Without ということ, 花は知っている would mean "I know (at least) the flower", but this is
not what you want to say. What you know is the whole idea described by the
sentence ("pansies are edible"), not just some kind of flower, so you need to
either use と or nominalize the whole sentence using ということ.

Your suggestion:

> パンジーが食べられる花は知っている

This is actually an ambiguous sentence that could have several meanings
including "I know the flower pansies can eat", "I know the flower that can eat
pansies" and "Pansies know edible flowers", but all of them are nonsense.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-18T02:23:32.703
100695
2023-08-18T02:23:32.703
5010
100683
answer