88923
I don't understand how to use the right particle after ほか.

Are these examples correct? If yes, what are the differences or nuances
between these examples?

What else did you eat? :

>   * ほかに何を食べましたか。
>   * ほか何を食べましたか。
>   * ほかには何を食べましたか。
>

I didn't eat anything besides pizza.

>   * ピザのほかに何も食べませんでした。
>   * ピザのほかは何も食べませんでした。
>   * ピザのほかには何も食べませんでした。
>
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-07T09:52:15.977
86974
2021-08-16T07:31:37.510
2021-08-15T02:25:36.853
43676
39148
question
particles
What particle to use after ほか
Yes, your six examples sentences are all correct.

ほか followed by no particle works as a conjunction. ほかの works attributively
(i.e., modifies the following noun). This difference is important:

  * ほか、牛がいる。  
In addition, there is a cow. / Besides, there are (some) cows.

  * 猫のほか、牛がいる。  
In addition to the cat(s), there is a cow.

  * ほかの牛がいる。  
There is another cow. / There are other cows.

  * × 猫のほかの牛がいる。 (nonsense: "cows other than cats")

ほかに is tricky and it can work like both ほか and ほかの. There tends to be a small
pause or a comma when it works as a conjunction.

は in your examples is just a topic/contrast marker, and it's often optional
(see [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/74759/5010) and
[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/28082/5010) for similar examples).
It's particularly [common in negative
sentences](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1077/5010). It adds a slight
emphasis, but doesn't change the overall meaning of the sentence.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-07T12:17:55.370
86976
2021-06-11T14:20:43.390
2021-06-11T14:20:43.390
5010
5010
86974
answer
The difference is very subtle, and I don't think using ほかに/は/には gives much
nuance by themselves. It is rather that using one might be more natural than
others due to the emphasis put by は.

Suppose Alice is asking Bob for the list of things he ate. Alice already knows
he ate pizza.

  * ほかに何を食べましたか？ is neutral, just asking anything else he ate.
  * ほかは何を食べましたか？ sounds like Alice knowing that Bob must have eaten something other than pizza.
  * ほかには何を食べましたか？ sounds the same as ほかは.

As an answer in the situation above,

  * ピザのほかは何も食べませんでした。
  * ピザのほかには何も食べませんでした。

sound (slightly) more natural due to は of contrast. To think in the opposite
direction, the presence of は suggests Bob knows Alice knows that he ate pizza.

In a different situation where Bob was just found barely surviving in a snow
mountain, and Alice asks _did you eat anything?_ , then as Bob's answer,

  * チョコレートひとかけのほかに何も食べてません

would sound more natural because は in the others emphasize that he did eat
something (a piece of chocolate), which is not really important in the given
situation.

Note that these are a bit artificial, and the uses are not really exclusive
(actually likely to be interchangeable in most cases).

**[Edit]**

I came up with an example where only ほかは is acceptable. But again, this is not
about nuance but the grammatical function of は (or of absence of に).

Suppose Alice is checking Bob's composition. She has pointed out several
mistakes, and in order to say _the rest is fine_ , Alice can use only

  * ほかはOKです.

ほかには or ほかに cannot replace the ほかは above. This would be because (1) に means an
addition to the previously mentioned (mistakes in this case) and (2) は
indicates a subject.

On the other hand, to say _there is no other mistake_ , all three can be used
(phrases in parentheses are implicit).

  * ほかに（間違いは）ありません
  * ほか（の間違い）はありません
  * ほかには（間違いは）ありません

The first (ほかに) might sound a little strange but should be understood. Note a
comment in naruto's answer that は is frequent in negative sentences.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-08-15T04:38:03.413
88923
2021-08-16T07:31:37.510
2021-08-16T07:31:37.510
45489
45489
86974
answer