Is と a non-logical particle?


Consider

> もしたくさんの遺産が **あったとしたらど** のように使うのですか？
>
> Say if it so happened that you had a lot of inheritance, how would you use
> it?

I was under the impression that と is a logical particle, meaning it is a
particle placed after nouns to indicate grammatical relationships with other
nouns. But here, と is being placed after a clause/non-noun (あった).

**Question:** Is there an implicit の[こと] being dropped before the と here? Or
is と not considered a logical particle?




I'm not sure what you mean by "(non-)logical particle", but this と is
essentially a quotative-と, which naturally takes a clause that ends with a
verb (見た **と** 思います), an adjective (赤い **と** 思います) or a copula (学生だ **と**
思います). This する is a verb meaning "to let/assume" (see the 5th definition [on
jisho](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%82%BA%E3%82%8B)), and `sentence + とする` is a
set phrase meaning "assume that ～". There is no fundamental grammatical
difference between 遺産があったと思う and 遺産があったとする.

と can directly take a noun, too, in which case it's a different type of
particle that typically means "with ～" (as in 彼と働く "to work with him") or
"and" (as in リンゴとバナナ "apples and bananas"). Let's not mix them.




I'm not sure what you mean by "(non-)logical particle", but this と is
essentially a quotative-と, which naturally takes a clause that ends with a
verb (見た **と** 思います), an adjective (赤い **と** 思います) or a copula (学生だ **と**
思います). This する is a verb meaning "to let/assume" (see the 5th definition [on
jisho](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%82%BA%E3%82%8B)), and `sentence + とする` is a
set phrase meaning "assume that ～". There is no fundamental grammatical
difference between 遺産があったと思う and 遺産があったとする.

と can directly take a noun, too, in which case it's a different type of
particle that typically means "with ～" (as in 彼と働く "to work with him") or
"and" (as in リンゴとバナナ "apples and bananas"). Let's not mix them.

