89022
This is a sentence I've encountered in my studies:

> ウィーナーを生のまま食べました

It means something like "The sausage remained raw and I ate it." However, I'm
confused as to why it's structured like this. From what I've looked up on the
genitive case, it's supposed to affect the _following_ noun. However, in this
situation 生 seems to be modifying a _preceding_ noun. Furthermore, I think it
might not be a genitive case because the rules of using まま state that if it's
preceded by a noun you need to put a の between them. So, does that mean that
the を actually belongs to 生 and not 食べました (via marking the direct object)?
Lastly, wouldn't it make more sense to put the 生の in front of ウィーナー?
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-08-23T18:08:15.693
89020
2021-08-24T00:25:45.850
2021-08-23T18:09:43.163
78
46960
question
particle-の particle-を
Having Trouble Breaking Down The Structure Of This Sentence
The core of this sentence is

> ウインナー を食べました

which just means, "I ate the sausage".

In this context

> 生のまま

works as an adverb describing the manner in which the sausage was eaten. This
may come across a bit strange, but まま is a noun essentially meaning _manner_.
Unlike what you might expect, you can just use the bare word まま without
additional particles to get this _adverbial_ function.

Also in this case 生 is read なま. It is grammatically treated as a noun. In
particular, as a noun, it doesn't govern an object as a verb would. Thus を
cannot be tied to it; を must be tied with the verb. The only verb present is
食べました.

As a second example, you can say

> 帽子をかぶったまま部屋に入った

> They entered the room wearing their hats
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-08-23T18:40:32.120
89022
2021-08-24T00:25:45.850
2021-08-24T00:25:45.850
4875
4875
89020
answer