6603
I understand from [my previous
question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/6596) on the N1 に N2
construction that it is usually a phrase with omission of a verb (eg パンにバターをぬる
makes パンにバター, which comes from パンにぬる and バターをぬる). If this is the case then how
can we apply this logic to the following sentences?:

>   1. 日本の朝食といえば、ご飯にお味噌汁でしょう When you talk about Japanese breakfast, rice and
> miso shiru must come in to the pcture.
>
>   2. 私は、家ではたいていジーンズにTシャツを着ています。 I mostly wear jeans and T-shirt around the
> house.
>
>

My text book’s explanation of both these sentences is 「N1とN2の組み合わせ」which might
work in the same way as:

> セーターとスカートを組み合わせる｜match a sweater [and a skirt / with a skirt]

But this does seem as good as パンにバターをぬる. The best I can come up with is
changing にto と in sentences 1 & 2 as follows:

>   4. 日本の朝食といえば、ご飯とお味噌汁を食べるでしょう。
>
>   5. 私は、家ではたいていジーンズとTシャツを着ています。
>
>

Reference: 総まとめ 文法 N1 p110 (I have not managed to find any other references to
this.)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-08-26T02:39:17.887
6600
2018-10-13T00:21:36.913
2018-10-13T00:21:36.913
9831
1556
question
grammar usage particle-に
Making sense of the N1にN2 construction (「パンにバター」＝「パンにバターをぬる」）
Problem: if you're already saying `N1にN2` "usually" implies the omission of a
verb, then doesn't that mean this case you're trying to apply that logic to
may not fit that case? So...maybe _don't_ try to apply that logic to those
sentences.

Your textbook seems to be describing this use of に as listing items that go
together.

The same way the classic American breakfast, "bacon and eggs", is a set, so is
"rice and miso shiru", and in Japanese, using に to list them instead of と
specifically implies that they "go together" (a la "bacon and eggs").
Likewise, "a t-shirt and jeans" is a fairly common set.

So yes, when に is used for listing, you can basically just substitute と for に,
but you're also losing a bit of nuance if you think they're exactly the same.

Edit:

The huge difference between `パンにバター(をぬる)` and `N1にN2 (=組み合わせ)` is that, in the
former, パン and バター have different roles, as the indirect object and the direct
object respectively; in the latter, both N1 and N2 have the same role (the
object, in your sample 2; I'm not sure what you call whatever comes before a
copula).

To think of it another way, in your sample sentences, you can substitute a
phrase like "these things" for `N1にN2` and the sentence remains basically
equivalent. But since パン and バター are playing different roles, you can't
substitute a single phrase for パンにバター and get an equivalent sentence.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-08-26T12:00:25.100
6603
2012-08-26T14:50:05.343
2012-08-26T14:50:05.343
1365
1365
6600
answer