100475
Lately I've been looking up some entries in "A Dictionary of Intermediate
Japanese Grammar". Under the entry for にもかかわらず (p. 257), it describes the
formation rules for な-adjectives as:

> (iii) Adj (na) stem **{なの/である(の)} / だった(の) / であった(の)}** にもかかわらず

Note 2 also says:

> The verb (i.e. Vinf) and Adj(i)inf can be connected directly with _ni mo
> kakawarazu_ , but **Adj(na) has to be nominalized before it is connected
> with the conjunction** , as shown by KS(D) and Ex.(h). However, if the
> Adj(na) is followed by _de aru_ , use of the nominalizer _no_ is optional.

Yet, under the entry for くせに on page 155, the book states under "Related
Expressions" #2:

> _Ni mo kakawarazu_ expresses an idea similar to _noni_ and _kuse ni_.
> However, _ni mo kakawarazu_ is a highly formal and bookish expression and it
> expresses no emotion. Therefore, it cannot be used in highly emotive
> situations as in Ex.(g), (3), and (4). **Note that the formation rules are
> different from those of _kuse ni_ , as in [1]**.  
>  [...]  
>  (ii) **{Adj(na)stem / N} {∅ / だった} にもかかわらず**  
>  Examples :  
>  **{不便 / 不便だった} にもかかわらず**  
>  {子供 / 子供だった} にもかかわらず

This seems to suggest that the stem of な-adjectives can be directly connected
to にもかかわらず, even though the book itself contradicts this under the entry for
the latter. So now I'm thoroughly confused. Is **不便にもかかわらず** grammatically
correct?

I also searched various web resources for the grammar rules, but many of them
flatly state that you should add である to な-adjectives, which seems to be an
oversimplification (according to ADoIJG at least...)
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-31T21:08:02.727
100465
2023-08-01T15:07:00.700
48341
question
grammar na-adjectives
Rules for にもかかわらず with な-adjectives
According to my textbook, 上級へのとびら, lesson 9, you can attach a noun (名詞) or a
na-adjective (形容動詞) to にもかかわらず directly without である, being である also possible.

Quoting an example sentence from the grammar explanation in the book (note the
**brackets to denote "optional"**):

> 彼女は **外国人** (である) **にもかかわらず** 、日本人より日本の文化を愛している。

The book does not provide an example sentence with a na-adjective, but it does
say that they conjugate like nouns for this grammar. In the book, the grammar
is of "Type 3", which means that Nouns and adjectives connect to that grammar
point with ∅ / だった / じゃない / じゃなかった:

[![Grammar point
explanation](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvOaf.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvOaf.jpg)

[![Grammar connections
table](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eLwNY.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eLwNY.jpg)

As you can see at the third row (Type 3) of the second table where grammar
connection types are shown, they use 不便 as an example, so 不便にもかかわらず should be
possible.

I would say it is grammatically correct but of course your textbook note is
pretty clear on the need for a nominalization and after all, it does **not**
provide an example sentence with an actual na-adjective. In the end, I backed
my answer using _another textbook_ as a source, so take it with a grain of
salt.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-31T21:29:43.513
100466
2023-07-31T21:49:59.313
2023-07-31T21:49:59.313
32952
32952
100465
answer
> Adj(na) has to be nominalized before it is connected with the conjunction

If "nominalize" in this passage only refers to nominalization by の, this
statement is indeed less accurate. Putting にもかかわらず directly after the na-
adjective stem is actually grammatical.

As you may know, na-adjectives are just nouns followed by copula in their
origin. Thus, stem of a na-adjective is syntactically a noun, and reverting it
back to the bare stem is, in a sense, nominalization. However, in the
meantime, they are semantically already adjectives as a whole, so the bare
stem usually has no explicable "meaning" on its own (unlike the stem of suru-
verbs can be used as verbal noun by itself). Its only practical role is being
component of some expressions or compounds, one of which is にもかかわらず.

That being so, I still argue that ～なのにもかかわらず is felt more natural (flowing
smoothly) as a native speaker. 不便にもかかわらず does not sound very bad, but it is
perhaps because 不便 can be a noun "inconvenience" as well. I mentally try to
parse what comes before にもかかわらず as noun by default. Using na-adjective stem
directly sounds as if wearing an extra academic or journalistic flavor seeking
terseness.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-01T15:07:00.700
100475
2023-08-01T15:07:00.700
7810
100465
answer