is Vてはじめて it's own grammar construction or simply something made up to help Japanese learners?


The Vてはじめて、construction is generally taught as its own grammar point to mean
"not until X", "only after X". However from what I've been told by other
learners as well as natives, this is not a special construction with no
special meaning and is instead simply just the て form of a verb followed by
はじめて which then acts as an adverb on the next verb.

Example:

> 家に帰ってはじめて、財布がなくなっていることに気がついた

"only after I returned home did I realise that I lost my wallet" This follows
the definition of はじめて given by weblio

> （「…てはじめて」の形で）さまざまな経過を経てようやくその状態になるさま。やっと。

I'm told though that it should be interpreted as

> 家に帰って、はじめて財布がなくなっていることに気がついた

"I returned home and for the first time I realised I lost my wallet". Where
はじめて is "linked" to 気がついた and not 帰る

The meaning in that second version is similar but not the same. "For the first
time" vs "not until X". The emphasis in the former is on the realising while
in the latter it's on the action of returning home and the subsequent change.

If this is correct that てはじめて is not a grammar point then the following
questions arise,

  * Does the position of はじめて matter in the meaning of the sentence?
  * Why do dictionaries and resources present it as something different?
  * How would you express the idea of "Not until X did Y happen"? the closest I can think of is てから




はじめて usually means "for the first time". However, when you use the ～してはじめて
construction, the nuance of this はじめて is closer to "at last" or "finally"
rather than "for the first time". Compare the following sentences:

  * 京都に行って、はじめて本物の仏像を見た。  
I went to Kyoto, and saw a real Buddha statue for the first time.

  * 京都に行ってはじめて本物の仏像を見た。  
I was not until I visited Kyoto that I saw a real Buddha statue (although I
have long wanted to see one).  
I visited Kyoto and saw a real Buddha statue at last.

The comma is not unimportant, but the correct translation will depend mainly
on the context, i.e., his level of interest in Buddhism. In my opinion, the
nuance of "at last" in the latter sentence cannot be easily inferred from the
basic meaning of はじめて ("for the first time"). This is why people treat this as
a special construction.

> 家に帰って、はじめて財布がなくなっていることに気がついた

We cannot translate this sentence naturally using "for the first time". This
sentence is not about how many times he has lost a wallet in his life. If
that's the case, we should treat this usage of はじめて as something a bit
different.




はじめて usually means "for the first time". However, when you use the ～してはじめて
construction, the nuance of this はじめて is closer to "at last" or "finally"
rather than "for the first time". Compare the following sentences:

  * 京都に行って、はじめて本物の仏像を見た。  
I went to Kyoto, and saw a real Buddha statue for the first time.

  * 京都に行ってはじめて本物の仏像を見た。  
I was not until I visited Kyoto that I saw a real Buddha statue (although I
have long wanted to see one).  
I visited Kyoto and saw a real Buddha statue at last.

The comma is not unimportant, but the correct translation will depend mainly
on the context, i.e., his level of interest in Buddhism. In my opinion, the
nuance of "at last" in the latter sentence cannot be easily inferred from the
basic meaning of はじめて ("for the first time"). This is why people treat this as
a special construction.

> 家に帰って、はじめて財布がなくなっていることに気がついた

We cannot translate this sentence naturally using "for the first time". This
sentence is not about how many times he has lost a wallet in his life. If
that's the case, we should treat this usage of はじめて as something a bit
different.

