19696
For a research project in artificial intelligence, I investigated parsing
Japanese. There was major problems with ambiguity in the mentioned type of
sentence; in most cases the ambiguity is obvious to resolve, but I kinda need
the opinion of a native speaker in this case.

My theory is that the 、 is enough to disambiguate between:

> 「君の声が聞こえなくて逢えると信じる。」
>
> I believe that I would be able to [meet you without hearing your voice].
> (Perhaps meet while bound and gagged in a prison?)

and

> 「君の声が聞こえなくて、逢えると信じる。」
>
> Even without hearing your voice, I believe that I am able to meet you. (not
> hearing goes with believe, not meet)

Or maybe both sentences are wrong...they feel awkward to me :/

Am I correct in assuming the comma is crucial there?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-28T03:50:50.650
19692
2014-11-28T07:48:00.030
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
2960
question
grammar
「君の声が聞こえなくて、逢えると信じる。」
These two examples sound kind of weird, so let me add a particle も to make
them sound natural and understandable.

> A. 君の声が聞こえなくても逢えると信じる。  
>  B. 君の声が聞こえなくても、逢えると信じる。

Now the two meanings:

>   1. (I believe) **I can meet you without hearing your voice**.  
>
>   2. **I believe without hearing your voice** (that I can meet you).
>

I think in most cases B means 2. But I can't say for sure that B never means
1. Punctuation is sometimes arbitrary.

As for A, it seems completely ambiguous to me. In fact, I find this sentence
somewhat hard to understand.

In order to make it mean 1, inserting a comma like 君の声が聞こえなくても逢える、と信じる may
also be possible.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-28T07:28:26.520
19696
2014-11-28T07:48:00.030
2014-11-28T07:48:00.030
3097
7667
19692
answer