Relative question


I was reading this

[How to unambiguously express sentences with lots of relative
propositions?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2955/how-to-
unambiguously-express-sentences-with-lots-of-relative-propositions?rq=1)

And I started having doubts.

> 月曜日には昨日妹さんにあった飼い主がいる私が作っていたケーキを食った犬が去勢手術を受ける。

translated as

> On Monday, the dog that ate the pudding that I cooked and whose owner's
> sister I met yesterday will be castrated.

shouldn't it be translated as

On monday, the sister who yesterday met the owner which is me who made a cake
which the dog ate,is getting castrated

Where am i translating this wrong?

My analysis is

I tought that everytime there is a verb a relative ends and modifies the noun
that follows it.

月曜日には, [[[[昨日妹さんにあった]>飼い主がいる]>私が作っていた]>ケーキを食った]>犬が去勢手術を受ける。

Isn't

妹さんにあった飼い主

the relative of

飼い主が妹さんに会った ?

Has it something to do with the invertion they spoke of?

[相手の日本人 or
日本人の相手?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2943/%E7%9B%B8%E6%89%8B%E3%81%AE%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E4%BA%BA-
or-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E4%BA%BA%E3%81%AE%E7%9B%B8%E6%89%8B)

I am getting all kinds of confused here.

Can something like this work as a relative?

> 僕が手で林檎を食べた I ate an apple with my hands
>
> A. 手で林檎を食べた僕 I who ate an apple with my hands
>
> B. 僕が林檎を食べた手 The hands with which I ate an apple
>
> C. 僕が手で食べた林檎 The apple which I ate with my hands

I have doubts regarding B since it does seem unnatural to me but reading

[Relative clauses distinguishing whom/with
which/that](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14541/relative-
clauses-distinguishing-whom-with-which-that)

> I wrote with the pen 私はペンで書いた
>
> The pen with which I wrote 私が書いたペン

It's supposed to be correct.

Sorry if it is really long




Similarly to the [answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/29941) which I
posted recently to another question about a sentence with a complicated
modification structure, it is useful to break the sentence like this into
bunsetsu. Then the original intention is represented as the following diagram.

![The bunsetsu tree of the sentence
月曜日には昨日妹さんにあった飼い主がいる私が作っていたケーキを食った犬が去勢手術を受ける](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1xSePbXrfAQCvYEH32j5pcqexGeRzx_v_z_SZF80yJK4/pub?w=800)

But this sentence is complicated not just because of this diagram has a
complicated shape.

As you probably know, a relative clause is constructed by taking out one part
of a sentence as its head. For example, if we have a simple sentence

> 飼い主が妹さんに会った。 An owner met a sister.

and make a noun phrase by taking out its subject 飼い主 as a head, we obtain

> 妹さんに会った飼い主 the owner who met a sister.

However, we can take out some of the other parts of a sentence as a head. If
we start with

> 飼い主の妹さんに会った。 I met the owner’s sister.

and take out 飼い主, it becomes

> 妹さんに会った飼い主 the owner whose sister I met.

The resulting form in Japanese is the same as before, but it means a different
thing! In English, “which/who,” “whose,” “whom,” “to whom” and so on
distinguish the grammatical role of the head in a relative clause. In
Japanese, this distinction is not made explicitly. To recover the omitted
particle for the head of a relative clause, we have to consider the meaning.

In the sentence above, the original form from which each relative clause was
constructed is:

  * 昨日妹さんに会った飼い主: 昨日飼い主 **の** 妹さんに会った。
  * ……飼い主がいる犬: 犬 **に** ……飼い主がいる。
  * 私が作っていたケーキ: 私がケーキ **を** 作っていた。
  * ……ケーキを食った犬: 犬 **が** ……ケーキを食った。

I think that this sentence is fairly unambiguous, but other interpretations
are probably possible if we assume less likely contexts. For example, if 私 is
a personified animal, then 飼い主がいる私 might be interpreted differently.




Similarly to the [answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/29941) which I
posted recently to another question about a sentence with a complicated
modification structure, it is useful to break the sentence like this into
bunsetsu. Then the original intention is represented as the following diagram.

![The bunsetsu tree of the sentence
月曜日には昨日妹さんにあった飼い主がいる私が作っていたケーキを食った犬が去勢手術を受ける](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1xSePbXrfAQCvYEH32j5pcqexGeRzx_v_z_SZF80yJK4/pub?w=800)

But this sentence is complicated not just because of this diagram has a
complicated shape.

As you probably know, a relative clause is constructed by taking out one part
of a sentence as its head. For example, if we have a simple sentence

> 飼い主が妹さんに会った。 An owner met a sister.

and make a noun phrase by taking out its subject 飼い主 as a head, we obtain

> 妹さんに会った飼い主 the owner who met a sister.

However, we can take out some of the other parts of a sentence as a head. If
we start with

> 飼い主の妹さんに会った。 I met the owner’s sister.

and take out 飼い主, it becomes

> 妹さんに会った飼い主 the owner whose sister I met.

The resulting form in Japanese is the same as before, but it means a different
thing! In English, “which/who,” “whose,” “whom,” “to whom” and so on
distinguish the grammatical role of the head in a relative clause. In
Japanese, this distinction is not made explicitly. To recover the omitted
particle for the head of a relative clause, we have to consider the meaning.

In the sentence above, the original form from which each relative clause was
constructed is:

  * 昨日妹さんに会った飼い主: 昨日飼い主 **の** 妹さんに会った。
  * ……飼い主がいる犬: 犬 **に** ……飼い主がいる。
  * 私が作っていたケーキ: 私がケーキ **を** 作っていた。
  * ……ケーキを食った犬: 犬 **が** ……ケーキを食った。

I think that this sentence is fairly unambiguous, but other interpretations
are probably possible if we assume less likely contexts. For example, if 私 is
a personified animal, then 飼い主がいる私 might be interpreted differently.

