21339
Am I correct in thinking that these are ok without a _na_ :

> 1) 印象的 **な** 事実  
>  2) 印象的事実  
>  3) 客観的 **な** 事実  
>  4) 客観的事実

But these need a _na_?:

> 5) 明らか **な** 事実  
>  6) ＊?明らか事実  
>  7) 簡単 **な** 事実  
>  8) ＊?簡単事実

(From a quick look, Google results count seems to support this).

[According to
Daijirin](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/150874/m0u/%E7%9A%84/), _-teki_
should be making na-adjectives:

> 名詞に付いて、形容動詞の語幹をつくる。

But is it the case that these _-teki_ -adjectives (and only they) accept
dropping the _na_? If so, why is that? Influence from the original Chinese
particle?

Is there any linguistic articles on this topic?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-03T23:48:35.217
21150
2015-06-29T20:00:34.477
2015-06-29T20:00:34.477
1628
622
question
adjectives suffixes copula na-adjectives
-的 adjectives modifying nouns without な
When to drop "な" depends on the phrase. 客観的事実 is a very common set phrase, but
印象的事実 is not. You have to usually say "それは印象的 **な** 事実（でした）", unless you were
a philosopher and ready to give 印象的事実 some definition.

的 is not special; there are several kanji which can connect two nouns and help
to make longer compounds without hiragana particles.

～風 (～ style)

>   * 西洋風の建築 → 西洋風建築 _Western-style architecture_
>   * 今風の若者 → [？]今風若者
>

～用 (for ～)

>   * 開発用のソフトウェア → 開発用ソフトウェア _development software_
>   * 冬用のテーブル → [？]冬用テーブル
>

～的 (～'s, of ～)

>   * 一般的な事実 → 一般的事実 _general fact_
>   * 一般的なバナナ → [？]一般的バナナ
>

～型 (～ type, ～ shape)

>   * 朝型の人間 → 朝型人間 _morning person_
>   * ハート型の雲 → [？]ハート型雲
>

～後 (post ～), ～前 (pre ～)

>   * 出生前の診断 → 出生前診断 _prenatal diagnosis_
>   * 飲酒後のジョギング → [？]飲酒後ジョギング
>

Here, [？] indicates that expression is probably grammatical but not familiar
at least to me. Dropping particles (の/な) will make that group of words sound
as "one set phrase". Unless you really want to introduce that as an
independent idea (e.g. "after-drink jogging", "heart cloud"), dropping
particles would sound more or less strange.

As you can see, I think the similar omission happens in English, too. "Earth
axis" is one of the common set phrases you can find in every dictionary, and
saying "axis of the earth" all the time is too bothersome. But that does not
mean you can freely treat "earth" as an adjective.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-05T07:04:18.673
21166
2015-01-05T07:04:18.673
5010
21150
answer
Matt Treyvaud answered my question elsewhere, so I'm posting his answer here.

  * Yes, _teki_ -words are unlike other na-adjectives in that they can modify nouns without a _na_. The Daijirin definition was incomplete. From the _Nihon Kokugo Daijiten_ :

> 漢語について、 **直接、または「な」** をともなって連体修飾語として用いられるほか、形容動詞語幹として使われる。

  * Contrary to what I proposed above, _teki_ -words seem to be able to work as nouns, after all. A closer look on the web and Twitter found examples of _teki_ -words followed by を or subject が. Again from the _Kokugo Daijiten_ :

> 名詞、特に抽象的な意味を表わす漢語の名詞や体言的な語および句について、 **体言** 、または形容動詞語幹をつくる。

  * And yes, this is due to influence from Chinese grammar, from where the morpheme was borrowed in the first place. But Japanese _teki_ is a lot newer than I expected ( _de_ 的 isn't, after all, a Literary Chinese particle; that would be _zhī_ 之). Turns out that _teki_ -words are as recent as Meiji. In its early days, _teki_ has even seen use as a general nominalizer:

> ＊文章新論〔１８８６〕〈坪内逍遙〉「予がいふ反訳文は今の新聞紙の文体をいふ也。『豈（あに）それ然らんや』 **的**
> の文章、若しくは『アナ喧や静まらずや』 **的** の文辞をいふなり」
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-17T15:43:17.080
21339
2015-01-17T15:43:17.080
622
21150
answer