16230
In my JLPT practise book, there is this section of text. Sorry, it's a little
long, but I hope the question isn't overly complex.

>
> （前略{ぜんりゃく}）かつて私{わたし}たちの国{くに}では、花{はな}の美{うつく}しさというように、抽象{ちゅうしょう}観念{かんねん}によって美{うつく}しいものをとらえようとする言{い}い方{かた}も乏{とぼ}しく、したがってそのような考{かんが}え方{かた}もほとんどなかった。
> **（ ）**
> 、というようなことばや考{かんが}え方{かた}を私{わたし}たちに教{おし}えてくれたのは、やはり西欧{せいおう}舶来{はくらい}のことばであり、その翻訳語{ほんやくご}だったのである。

Not a direct translation, but my general understanding is that, "Japan
(well... "our country") didn't used to have words for abstract concepts, like
the beauty of a flower. Abstract concepts were learned from the west, drawn
from terms used in translation." Maybe. Something like that.

The question is to place one of the following two terms in the brackets:

  * `花{はな}の美{うつく}しさ`

  * `抽象{ちゅうしょう}観念{かんねん}`

I chose `抽象{ちゅうしょう}観念{かんねん}`, but the correct answer turns out to be
`花{はな}の美{うつく}しさ`.

I think where I got confused was with the very last sentence, after where it
says `やはり`. It says something like "Of course, there are words from the west,
those translation terms were there"...? I think maybe it's `だったのである` that is
throwing me off.

What would be an accurate translation for the last sentence in this text, and
how does it support the right answer for what goes in the brackets?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-30T07:02:03.560
16215
2014-05-31T13:09:05.980
2014-05-30T09:15:45.883
119
119
question
grammar
How do I make sense of this use of だったのである?
### The Translation

> （ ）、というようなことばや考え方を私たちに教えてくれたのは、やはり西欧舶来のことばであり、その翻訳語だったのである。

Breaking this down a bit:

  1. （ ）、というようなことばや考え方を  
The object: _XXX kind of word or way of thinking_  
Since this XXX could be more than just one word, maybe we'll say _wording_
instead of just _word_.

  2. 私たちに教えてくれたのは、  
The topic: _[the thing / person / etc. that] taught [1 above] to us_

  3. やはり西欧舶来のことばであり、  
One of the things that did 2 above: _I guess was the words brought over from
the West, and_  
Given the context of ...であり...だった and overall sentence structure, we can tell
that these two であり and だった clauses describe two things that both apply as
predicates to the preceding は clause. So we translate であり here as _was ...
and_.

  4. その翻訳語だった  
Second of the things that did 2 above: _[and] their translations_  
For the だった, we've already supplied the _was_ just above.

  5. のである。  
End of explanation. Could be clunkily rendered in a literal fashion as _it is
the case that [everything before the_ のである _]..._

Putting it all together into normal English,

> What taught us that XX kind of wording or way of thinking must have been the
> words brought over from the West and their translations.

### The Test Question

In terms of test-taking strategy, I see two clues for what goes in the
brackets. Both of these ultimately come from the phrase というようなことば in the
second sentence. In this phrase, XXというようなことば explicitly mentions a ことば. A ことば
isn't really a 観念, a ことば expresses a 観念; so 抽象観念 is not a good match to fill
in the XX. Then, in the preceding sentence, we have another clue in the
parallel construction:

> 花の美しさというように

So those two both point towards 花の美しさ being a good match for the XX. In free-
form writing, many other things could theoretically also replace the XX, but
presumably this is a multiple-choice test, so if 花の美しさ were presented as one
of the answer options, that's probably the best bet.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-30T19:11:20.763
16221
2014-05-31T13:09:05.980
2014-05-31T13:09:05.980
5229
16215
answer
It simply means, "it was the [translated words] that ...taught us...".

A はBだったのである

I guess we can all agree that A はBだった can be glossed for the time being as "A
was B". So what does the のである add here? It factualizes, or predicatizes, the
"A was B" conjecture. You could translate this VERY roughly as "It is the fact
that A was B", or more fluently as "We can conclude that A is/was B", or "It
turns out that A is/was B", or "The fact is that A was B", or restructuring
the sentence a bit, "A was in fact B".
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-30T19:33:46.050
16222
2014-05-31T06:27:55.000
2014-05-31T06:27:55.000
16215
answer
It is a parallel rephrasing.

> 花の美しさという(ように→ような) **言い方も乏しく、したがって** 抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえ ~~ようとす~~ る **
> ~~言い方も乏しく、したがって~~** ~~そのような~~ 考え方もほとんどなかった。

To make the sentence clearer, we can move `言い方も乏しく、したがって` to front, delete
redundant phrases, and change the `ように` to `ような` because the it modifies
`美しいものを抽象観念によってとらえる`, which at last modifies `言い方`. The sentence becomes
`花の美しさというような言い方も乏しく、したがって美しいものを抽象観念によってとらえる考え方もほとんどなかった` (Sorry if the
typesetting looks messy in your browser.)

```

    花　　　　　の　美しさ　　と　　　　いうような　言い方　も　乏しく
    ↑　　　　　　　　(ように)　　　　　　　↓　　　　↑　　　したがって　　　↓
    美しいもの　を　抽象観念　によって　とらえる　　考え方　も　ほとんどなかった
    
```

Note the word to word correspondence, as well as the clause to clause
correspondence, that is `花の美しさという←ように→美しいものを抽象観念によってとらえる` and
`～言い方も乏しい←したがって→～考え方もほとんどなかった`.

Then we can leave out the overlapping part and reduce this sentence to
`花の美しさというような言い方も、そのような考え方もなかった`, which can further converted to
`花の美しさというようなことばや考え方もなかった`, whose subject exactly matches the first noun phrase
the following sentence, which is the question.

* * *

Regarding the last part, we can again change the word order to make it
simpler.

> そういう言い方や考え方もなかった。誰かそれを私たちに教えてくれたのである。教えてくれたのは翻訳語であった。やはりそうだったのである。

教えてくれたのは翻訳語であった：It was 翻訳語 that taught us.

のである ：That is / we can conclude that / I can see that
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-30T20:14:29.740
16224
2014-05-31T07:11:33.777
2014-05-31T07:11:33.777
4833
4833
16215
answer
(I'm going to only give you tips for finding the answer to the test question
since an accurate translation for the last sentence is already provided by the
other answerers)

In the first sentence:

> かつて私たちの国では、 **花の美しさというように** 、抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする **言い方** も乏しく、したがって
> **そのような考え方** もほとんどなかった。

you can see 「花の美しさというように～～する言い方」 and
「そのような(=花の美しさというように、抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする)考え方」, so here 花の美しさ is referred to
as a 言い方 and 考え方:

> 「花の美しさ」= (抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする)言い方  
>  「花の美しさ」= (抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする)考え方

Now in the second sentence:

> **XX、というようなことば** や **考え方** を私たちに教えてくれたのは...

you can see 「XXというようなことば」 and 「(XXというような)考え方」, so 「XX」 should be a ことば and
考え方, so you go back to the first sentence and find what has been given as a
ことば(=言い方) and 考え方:

> 「XX」 = ことば (=言い方)  
>  「XX」 = 考え方

My advice is, "try to find 言い換え/paraphrases".

And, as you may have noticed, you'd need to pay attention to / read carefully
the first sentence rather than the second one to find the answer to this
question.

Good luck ^^
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-31T00:51:00.383
16230
2014-05-31T12:00:14.863
2014-05-31T12:00:14.863
16215
answer