Structure: thing を numeral (or numeral and counter) ください


My first question is, are counters always required when counting things? Can't
I just slap a number in front of the noun? For example,「いちりんご」for one apple?

Secondly, in Lesson 5 of the Japanese For Busy People I textbook, there is
this sentence structure with no grammatical explanation:

> thing を numeral (or numeral and counter) ください。

Since it gives no explanation, is this a valid sentence structure, like XはYです
and noun 1 の noun 2? Can someone explain this sentence structure to me? Why
does **numeral (or numeral and counter)** come after the particle を? If it is
part of the "thing", why is it not on the other side?




  1. The following Wikipedia article on [Japanese counter word](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_counter_word) explains well about how the counter words or counters (josūshi 助数詞) work in Japanese.

> In Japanese, as in Chinese and Korean, numerals cannot quantify nouns by
> themselves (except, in certain cases, for the numbers from one to ten; see
> below). For example, to express the idea "two dogs" in Japanese one could
> say 二匹の犬 ni-hiki no inu (literally "two small-animal-count POSSESSIVE dog"),
> or 犬二匹 inu ni-hiki (literally "dog two small-animal-count"), but just
> pasting 二 and 犬 together in either order is wrong.

Therefore, you have to use _リンゴ一つ_ or _一つのリンゴ_ to express _one apple_.

  2. "リンゴをください" means "Please give me an apple". This sentence doesn't specify how many applies you want. If you want to specify it, you have to insert the counter between リンゴを and ください as in "リンゴを **一つ** ください." which means "Please give me **one** apple."

The link further explains:

> Grammatically, counter words can appear either before or after the noun they
> count. They generally occur after the noun (following particles), and if
> used before the noun, they emphasize the quantity; this is a common mistake
> for English learners of Japanese. For example, to say "[I] drank two bottles
> of beer", the order is ビールを二本飲んだ bīru o nihon nonda (lit. "beer OBJECT two-
> long-thin-count drank"). In contrast, 二本のビールを飲んだ nihon no bīru o nonda (lit.
> "two-long-thin-count POSSESSIVE beer OBJECT drank") would only be
> appropriate when emphasizing the number as in responding with "[I] drank two
> bottles of beer" to "How many beers did you drink?".




Think like this:

All nouns in Japanese are uncountable. You can't count apples any more than
you count water or light. Thus under Japanese grammar you always have to say
"two 'objects' of apple", "four 'sticks' of banana" and "seven 'bodies' of
dog", as if they are "two bottles of water" or "four rays of light" etc.

> りんご **一つ／一個** _an object of apple = an apple (fruit)_  
>  りんご **一山** _a lot/pile of apples_  
>  りんご **一年分** _a year's worth of apples_  
>  りんご **一本** _a stick of apple = an appletree_

The only exception is a few words represent shapes, (abstract) groupings, unit
of measure etc. that could be used as counter words as well.

> 三試合 _three matches/games_  
>  十世帯 _ten households_  
>  三十メートル _thirty meters_

* * *

> _Why is the **numeral(or numeral and counter)** after the particle を? If it
> is part of the **thing** , why is it not on the other side?_

Because they are adverbs, unlike English, where numerals are used like
adjectives. We prefer saying "give me apples in three" or "kids are playing in
three", instead of "give me three apples" or "three kids are playing". They
can basically appear **anywhere after the base word and before the verb** (but
can be restricted by context, such as nesting or other countable words).

> ペンを **三本** ください。  
>  ペンが **三本** あります。  
>  ペンが机の上に **三本** あります。  
>  ペンを **二本** は太郎くんと次郎くんに、花子さんには **三本** あげてください。

`[numeral] の [noun]` type of expression does exist too, but it only sounds
natural in some limited settings. Generally, it's able to be translated as "
_the_ [numeral] [noun]s" such as:

> 三匹の子ぶた _The Three Little Pigs_

But in many cases when this expression would be valid, you'd only see a
numeral (and counter) alone rather than its full form, because in such cases
the base word is very likely to be stated already, thus simply omitted for
that time.

