Reading opinion texts in Japanese: the claim and what it assumes

Level B2

Reading opinion texts in Japanese: the claim and what it assumes

By the end of this lesson, you can read a short opinion text in Japanese and say what it argues. The central idea is this: ask what job each sentence does (claim, example, limit, conclusion), report it with 筆者は…と述べています (hissha wa … to nobete imasu, “the writer states that…”), and keep three things apart: what the text says, what it seems to assume and what you think yourself.

Recap: the pieces this lesson uses

This lesson uses the pieces below, each explained here in case they are new to you. と思います (to omoimasu, “I think”) closes an opinion, and 例えば (tatoeba, “for example”) opens a concrete case. 一方で (ippō de, “on the other hand”) brings in another side of what was said. 必ずしも (kanarazushimo) with わけではありません (wake de wa arimasen) means “it doesn't necessarily mean that”; before them, the ても (te mo) form means “even if”. ようです (yō desu) gives a conclusion drawn from a clue. And before と言っていました (to itte imashita, “said”) comes the plain form: 行く (iku), not 行きます (ikimasu).

The words: reading a text

筆者 (hissha) is whoever wrote the text you are reading. It says nothing about gender or profession, and it belongs to writing and to talk about texts. 述べる (noberu) means to set out a view or a fact, in writing or in formal speech. 文 (bun) is a sentence, and 文章 (bunshō) is a whole text. 主張 (shuchō) is the claim the writer defends: the thesis. 例 (rei) is an example; it has the kanji of 例えば with another reading. 結論 (ketsuron) is the conclusion. ただし (tadashi) opens a limit. These kanji belong to texts: each card gives the reading, and here you only need to recognize them, not write them by hand.

Model: a short opinion text

Here is a short opinion text: four sentences, one per line. Listen once without reading. Then read it looking for one thing only: what the writer wants. As with a notice, you don't have to stop at every word to find what matters.

Support words: 開いている (aite iru) is “to be open”, and 開けてみる (akete miru) is “to try opening”. 仕事をしている人 (shigoto o shite iru hito) is “people who work”, 昼 (hiru) is “daytime”, and 行けません (ikemasen) is the negative potential of 行く, “can't go”. まず (mazu) is “first”, 週に二回 (shū ni nikai) is “twice a week”, and ほうがいい (hō ga ii) marks what is better.

Four questions, four jobs

Ask each sentence a question. What is the writer defending? That is the claim, 主張, here in the first sentence, which ends in と思います. What concrete case is given? That is the example, 例, opened by 例えば. Where does the writer limit what was said? That is the limit, opened by ただし. Where does the writer end up? That is the conclusion, 結論, opened by ですから (desu kara, “so”). It doesn't just repeat the claim: opening at night has become a first step, two nights a week.

The four sentences below say where each part is. 最初 (saisho) is “first”, 二番目 (nibanme) and 三番目 (sanbanme) are “second” and “third”, 最後 (saigo) is “last”, and …にあります (ni arimasu) is “is in…”. The third sentence quotes ただし itself: unlike 主張, 例 and 結論, the limit has no noun here.

These signal words help, but they aren't a guarantee: a text can keep its claim for the end, do without 例えば or make its limit with でも (demo, “but”). So the job of the sentence decides, not the word it uses.

The limit: ただし

ただし adds a limit or an exception to what was just said, and what was said still stands. In the first line, the library really does open every day; Mondays just have shorter hours. The text works the same way: the writer still wants the library open at night, but warns that this doesn't guarantee visitors.

Compare the last two lines. With ただし, the café is noisy only on Saturdays: the second sentence narrows the first. With 一方で, nothing is narrowed: noise is simply another side of cafés, set beside their convenience.

The translations say “that said”. In Japanese, ただし is found mostly in writing and careful explanations; in conversation, でも is more common. まで (made) is “until”, and 七時 (shichiji) is “seven o'clock”.

図書館は毎日開いています／このカフェは便利です。ただし、月曜日は七時までです／土曜日はうるさいです。

Reporting what the writer states

To report a position, use the frame 筆者は…と述べています. What the writer says goes before と in the plain form, as it does before と言っていました: 行けません becomes 行けない (ikenai), and わけではありません becomes わけではない (wake de wa nai). After a noun or a な adjective, です becomes だ: you will see 必要だ (hitsuyō da) in the last section.

In the first and last sentences, …ほうがいいと思います becomes …ほうがいいと述べています: と思います drops out, because 述べています already gives the idea to the writer. In these reports, 例えば, ただし and ですから drop out too. The ている form presents the position as something that is there in the text, much like the present tense in “the writer states”. Reporting this way doesn't say whether the writer is right.

述べる suits texts and formal speech. For what a friend said, stay with 言っていました, as in the sentence about Leo.

筆者(ひっしゃ)は、夜も開いているほうがいい／行けない／人が来るわけではないと述べています。

Stated, assumed or absent

When you report, keep three cases apart. 述べています is for what is in the text. An assumption is something the writer doesn't write but the argument needs: the example only supports the claim if people who work want to go to the library, and the text never says so. Since that is your own conclusion from a clue, use ようです, as in the first sentence below, and be ready to point to the clue. 行きたい (ikitai) is “to want to go”, and 考える (kangaeru) is “to think, to consider”.

述べていません is for what doesn't appear: the text says nothing about cost. お金 (okane) is “money”, and …のこと (no koto) is “about”. Pointing out a gap is different from filling it: don't write what the writer would think about money.

And stop there. この文章だけでは (kono bunshō dake de wa) is “from this text alone”, and どんな人か (donna hito ka) is “what kind of person”. Understanding a position doesn't require guessing who the writer is or all their intentions: what the text supports is enough.

Understanding isn't agreeing

Understanding a position is not agreeing with it. You can report it accurately and then give your own: …と述べていますが (“states…, but”), followed by 私は…と思います. そう (sō) points back to what was said, and が (ga) here means “but”. 分かります (wakarimasu) is “I understand”, and 賛成ではありません (sansei de wa arimasen) is “I don't agree”. The reverse holds too: agreeing with a text doesn't excuse you from reporting it properly.

Your turn: a new text

Now a new text, about meetings. Listen, then label each sentence: claim, example, limit or conclusion. Think too about how you would report the first one, and what the writer assumes. The answers are in the next section.

Support words: 会議 (kaigi) is “meeting”, 短い (mijikai) is “short”, 三時間 (sanjikan) is “three hours”, …のあと (no ato) is “after”, 疲れて (tsukarete) is “tired”, and できません (dekimasen) is “can't”. 話し合い (hanashiai) is “discussion”, 必要 (hitsuyō) is “necessary”, 長くても (nagakute mo) is “even if long”, so “at most”, and 一時間にする (ichijikan ni suru) is “to make it one hour”.

Check and summary

The order is the same as in the first text: claim, example, limit, conclusion. Notice that the second sentence has no 例えば: it is the example because of the job it does, a concrete case. And this limit doesn't use 必ずしも: ただし is enough. The first two sentences below report what is in the text, and 必要です has become 必要だ. The third is an assumption: the writer caps meetings at an hour and also says discussion needs time, so an hour seems to be enough for them, which is why it takes ようです. できる (dekiru) is “can”, and でも (demo) after 会議 is “even”. The fourth is your own opinion, kept apart from the writer's: そう (sō) here points to the one-hour limit, which the text states, not to the assumption in the line before it, and 二時間でもいい (nijikan demo ii) is “two hours is fine too”.

In short: ask what job each sentence does; report it with 筆者は…と述べています, in the plain form; use ようです for what the text seems to assume and 述べていません for what it doesn't say; and give your opinion separately. Signal words help, but the job of the sentence decides.

Practise this lesson

Next lessons