。。。したのではないのだから、。。。The different of the two の


> あなたがけがをしたのではないのだから、何もそんなに泣かなくていいでしょう

What is the difference between the first の and the second の？

Currently I understand it this way. The first one is a nomalizer, turning
けがをした into けがをしたこと。 Is that correct? Also what about the latter one?

Thanks




The difference is

  * あなたは けがを しなかったの*だから: because you didn't get hurt
  * あなたが けがをしたのではない のだから: because **it's not that** you ~~didn't get~~ got hurt

And, this nominalization can't be rephrased as こと.

(* It needs のだ form here because how you didn't get hurt is justification for
suggestion of not crying, or in general, background information for
judgement/conjecture. **Edit;** In this case, the fact that the listener
didn't get hurt is a shared information that the listener himself knows well
too, which is regarded as a back ground information for judgement of not being
worth crying. It's like difference between 'since' and 'because' here. If the
sentence was あなたがけがをしたのではないから そんなに泣かなくてもいい **の** でしょう？, it means the speaker
judges that it's the fact that you didn't get hurt that saves you crying so
badly.)

**Edit**

Nominalization means turning a clause into a noun phrase, i.e.

  * けがをした: you got hurt → けがをしたの: that you got hurt

And you can treat the whole clause as a noun like the below

  * けがをしたのは よくない: That you got hurt is not good
  * けがをしたのを 見た: I saw that you got hurt (I saw you get hurt)

Whether you can replace の with こと depends on nature of the verb and the
position of the nominalized clause, which is really complicated. For example,
けがをしたことはよくない is okay while …したことを見た means a completely different thing i.e. "I
considered that you would..".

  * 見ることは信じることだ: To see is to believe

If you ignore a minor problem, you can somehow rephrase it as 見るのは信じることだ. Now
what if you change the predicate likewise?

  * 見るのは信じるのだ: ???

Unfortunately, this doesn't work as was expected. Nominalization at the
position of the predicate of a sentence is saved for a special usage so called
Explanatary の.

  * けがをしたの **だ** : It **is** that you got hurt

Roughly saying, we use that form when we explain things. In addition, you can
express partial negation like this.

  * けがをしたの **ではない** : It **is not** that you got hurt




The difference is

  * あなたは けがを しなかったの*だから: because you didn't get hurt
  * あなたが けがをしたのではない のだから: because **it's not that** you ~~didn't get~~ got hurt

And, this nominalization can't be rephrased as こと.

(* It needs のだ form here because how you didn't get hurt is justification for
suggestion of not crying, or in general, background information for
judgement/conjecture. **Edit;** In this case, the fact that the listener
didn't get hurt is a shared information that the listener himself knows well
too, which is regarded as a back ground information for judgement of not being
worth crying. It's like difference between 'since' and 'because' here. If the
sentence was あなたがけがをしたのではないから そんなに泣かなくてもいい **の** でしょう？, it means the speaker
judges that it's the fact that you didn't get hurt that saves you crying so
badly.)

**Edit**

Nominalization means turning a clause into a noun phrase, i.e.

  * けがをした: you got hurt → けがをしたの: that you got hurt

And you can treat the whole clause as a noun like the below

  * けがをしたのは よくない: That you got hurt is not good
  * けがをしたのを 見た: I saw that you got hurt (I saw you get hurt)

Whether you can replace の with こと depends on nature of the verb and the
position of the nominalized clause, which is really complicated. For example,
けがをしたことはよくない is okay while …したことを見た means a completely different thing i.e. "I
considered that you would..".

  * 見ることは信じることだ: To see is to believe

If you ignore a minor problem, you can somehow rephrase it as 見るのは信じることだ. Now
what if you change the predicate likewise?

  * 見るのは信じるのだ: ???

Unfortunately, this doesn't work as was expected. Nominalization at the
position of the predicate of a sentence is saved for a special usage so called
Explanatary の.

  * けがをしたの **だ** : It **is** that you got hurt

Roughly saying, we use that form when we explain things. In addition, you can
express partial negation like this.

  * けがをしたの **ではない** : It **is not** that you got hurt

