12032
For example, if I want to say "(this food has) become not tasty", would the
correct way to say that be "おいしくなくなりました"? How would this be distinguished from
おいしく亡くなりました, "died tastily", however meaningless that may be? Is there some
more idiomatic way to say the former, and can I expect ない to behave perfectly
like a 形容詞?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-06-02T00:58:21.087
12031
2013-06-02T02:41:19.837
2960
question
words usage
~くなりました with ない
> For example, if I want to say "(this food has) become not tasty", would the
> correct way to say that be "おいしくなくなりました"?

Yes, this would be a correct way of saying "(this food has) become not tasty".

> How would this be distinguished from おいしく亡くなりました, "died tastily", however
> meaningless that may be?

Context. Precisely because it's meaningless, and because it's a common grammar
point, and in writing due to the lack of kanji for 亡くなりました. The same way
おいしくなりました is not likely to be おいしく鳴りました, "rang tastily".

> Is there some more idiomatic way to say the former

おいしくなくなる is fine, but you could phrase it positively like まずくなる

> can I expect ない to behave perfectly like a 形容詞?

I think this ない is classified as 助動詞, while the ない in something like ケーキがない is
a 形容詞 (Sources: [goo
dictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/162271/m0u/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/),
[goo
dictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/162263/m0u/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/),
[oshiete!goo](http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/5686906.html)). But I believe you
can just think of it as an i-adjective in terms of conjugations.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-06-02T02:29:53.630
12032
2013-06-02T02:29:53.630
3010
12031
answer
I think homophones are generally distinguished by:

  1. Syntax. If a homophone is ungrammatical, it's not considered as a possibility.
  2. Semantics. Whichever homophone makes more sense is more likely.
  3. Pragmatics. The distinction between semantics and pragmatics is a bit fuzzy, but I'll define it this way: whichever makes sense _in the larger context_ is more likely.

I think that's true of all languages, but Japanese has a fourth way, which
applies only to the written language: you can write something with a
particular kanji to specify a particular homophone.

In this case, I don't think they're distinguished syntactically, so you're
left with semantics and pragmatics. Devoid of context, "died tastily" is
basically nonsense, so I think you'd need a very exceptional context for
anyone to interpret it that way. (You could use the kanji to specify 亡くなる, but
unless you came up with a context where it made sense, I think readers would
assume it was a typo.)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-06-02T02:41:19.837
12033
2013-06-02T02:41:19.837
12031
answer