62928
> a) 日光は運動場いっぱいでした。  
>  b) 日光は運動場 **が** いっぱいでした。  
>  c) 運動場は日光でいっぱいでした。  
>  The sports field was filled with sunlight.

a) is the original sentence from my book. I've been warned that the author is
a bit loose with his grammar so I'm suspicious about this sentence. Is a)
grammatically correct? Is it colloquially acceptable? Or is it just weird? I
expected to see a が like in b).

Also I wouldn't have gone with either a) or b). I'd have constructed sentence
c). Is this correct? Does it feel different?

I wonder if it might be important to note that the sports field was being
discussed in the previous sentence. There was no previous discussion of
sunlight.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-18T18:13:37.577
62904
2018-11-19T14:53:42.277
7944
question
grammar
Usage of いっぱい in this sentence
First of all, neither a) nor b) is correct. Those two just make no sense. If
you want to say "The sports field was filled with sunlight", c) is
grammatically correct, but sounds unnatural. When you use でいっぱい, while it is
natural to say "会場は観客でいっぱいでした" for "The hall was filled with audience." , we
don't usually use "日光でいっぱい" as a meaning of "filled with sunlight". If you
want to say the above sentence, it would be "運動場には日光がいっぱい降り注いでいました".

But, is there any possibilities that 日光 is used as a meaning of a name of a
city in that context? You might have already know but 日光 is a famous city in
Japan. If so, b) comes to make sense while it is still not grammatically
perfect. In this case, it means "日光 had a lot of sports field." I'm not sure
the city actually did so, though...
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-19T14:39:43.673
62927
2018-11-19T14:53:42.277
2018-11-19T14:53:42.277
15967
15967
62904
answer
If we look at an online dictionary:
<https://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%B8%80%E6%9D%AF-434512>

We can notice one thing, when いっぱい is used without a particle, it is used as a
noun.

> ４ 金1両。 「祝儀は女郎へ、壱分を二三十粒、宿へ三歩あるいは金―」〈浮・元禄大平記・五〉
>
> ５ 名詞の下に付き、接尾語的に用いて、限度ぎりぎりまで、の意を表す。「精一杯働く」「時間一杯考える」「腹一杯食べる」 > This one

So in combination with another noun, it forms what we can translate as an
adverb/expression. It basically means "until the limits", so we could
understand the first sentence as:

> 日光は運動場いっぱいでした。: sunlight was playground-full

It doesn't make much sense said this way, but basically, what is being
described in the sentence is 日光, and what we say about it is that it was いっぱい
_until the limits_ of the 運動場.

Whereas your sentence B:

> 日光は運動場がいっぱいでした。

Describes 日光, but what was いっぱい is not the 日光, but rather the 運動場, so the
particle が completely changes the meaning of the sentence, and it doesn't make
much sense anymore. (at least to me)

Note that we could maybe turn this sentence into something by assuming that 日光
is the name of a city, and not the word for "sunlight".

As for your third sentence:

> 運動場は日光でいっぱいでした。: The stadium was full of light

It is correct, but as you can see it doesn't really mean the same thing as the
two other sentences. Here what is being described is the 運動場 and not the 日光
itself.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-19T14:44:46.670
62928
2018-11-19T14:44:46.670
62904
answer