What does なら mean in this sentence? I don't understand


I just got genki 2 and I don't understand what it means about なら. I heard it
meant "if" from Tae Kim but it says

> A statement of the form "noun A なら predicate X" says that the predicate X
> applies only to A and is not more generally valid. The main ideas of a なら
> sentence, in other words, are contrast (as in Situation 1) and limitation
> (as in Situation 2)

I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It makes me feel like I don't
speak english.

> Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A:
> チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。

So I guess thats supposed to be the one where it contrasts. I understand the
second situation because it is just "if" but I don't understand the point of
it in this one.

Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil? Does
it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?




I am afraid my answer will be a bit clumsy.

> Situation 1 - Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか。Have you ever been to Brazil? A:
> チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。

Yes, this conversation **could** make if ~ sentence.

> Q Have you ever been to Brazil? A : If it is Chile, Yes. **but** I have
> never been to Brazil.

I think what you are missing or seem to be confused at is the existence of the
conjunctive particle, が，whose function reverses or changes the former
statement.

So, here, **with the conditional type of the auxiliary だ ( = なら )** and
together with the conjunctive particle が、the sentence is making If **** Chile,
but not been to Brazil. ( As mentioned above. )

And

> Is it supposed to emphasise that he's only been to Chile and not Brazil?

Yes, it is.

And

> Does it make that much of a difference if the なら isn't there?

You can replace なら with the combination of particles such as には、or auxiliaries
combination such as であれば。 For instance,

> チリには行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。( same meaning ) ( Here the conjunctive
> particle が strongly affects the sentence. )
>
> チリであれば行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。 ( Also here the conjunctive particle が
> strongly is affecting. )

Please give me a feedback should you not understand mine.

Thank you.




Without なら in that sentence, literally it still means "I have been to Chile,
but not Brazil." But, the other party will be confused and think to himself,
"I'm not asking about Chile, I'm asking about Brazil".

If you add なら, it adds the nuance or context that Chile is somehow related to
Brazil in some way. Maybe because the culture or language is similar?

It also means, if you asked me about Chile, then yes I have been there. But,
I've never been to Brazil.

Sorry, if my explanation is not based on grammatical correctness, but that's
the function of なら in that sentence.

