からなら vs からでないと JLPT N2


I've been doing practice grammar questions and checking my answers from a JLPT
practice book, but I just can't figure this one out.

> 部長のチェックを（ ）積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ。
>
> １ 受けてからだと
>
> ２ 受けてからなら
>
> ３ 受けてからでないと
>
> ４ 受けてからでないなら

Here, I would think the answer is 3 ("We can't assertively continue this
conversation without checking with the head of the department", or something
along those lines) for that's what I thought would be a correct use of からでないと,
but the answer is apparently 2. I just don't understand at all. How do all
these forms differentiate?




> 部長{ぶちょう}のチェックを（ ）積極的{せっきょくてき}に話{はなし}をすすめてもいいよ。
>
> １ 受{う}けてからだと
>
> ２ 受けてからなら
>
> ３ 受けてからでないと
>
> ４ 受けてからでないなら

First, let us take a look at the main clause of the sentence in question. It
is 「積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ」, which means " _ **you can/may actively pursue the
matter**_ ".

Please make a mental note here that the main clause is **affirmative both in
meaning and grammar/structure**.

Now, let us have a look at how you translated the main clause, which is " _
**We can't assertively continue this conversation**_ ". You used "can't", but
it is okay because you also used "without" in translating the sub-clause --
"without checking with the head of the department". The two negative elements
cancel each other perfectly.

Thus, your translation is actually good in and of itself. I, however, suspect
your own translation using two negative elements might have confused yourself
in the end because in the Japanese sentence, we know that at least the main
clause is affirmative.

What we would need to think about here is: **What would match in Japanese the
"negative + negative" structure in English when the main clause in the
Japanese is already affirmative?**

The answer would be "affirmative + affirmative" in Japanese, would it not? A
"can't ~~ without ~~" structure would surely match a "can ~~ with ~~"
structure, yes?

This is why the choices #3 and #4 are "automatically" out because with 「ない」,
they are negative both in structure/grammar and meaning. Both 「ないと」 and 「ないなら」
must be followed by a negative phrase (grammar-wise and/or meaning wise), but
our main clause 「積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ」 is 100% affirmative.

So, we are now down to two choices -- #1 受けてからだと and #2 受けてからなら.

1「受けてから **だと** 」 should normally be followed by a phrase that is negative
either in grammar or meaning, which is why 「受けてから **だと** 話をすすめてもいいよ」 sounds
very awkward. It is not something careful speakers would say.

2「受けてから **なら** 」 fits perfectly into the sentence. " _ **If it is after
getting the manager's OK**_ , ~~" It finally gives us the "positive +
positive" sentence structure that we were looking for.

I admit that careless speakers (native speakers, I mean) might have chosen #1,
but the sentence using #1 would be corrected by every teacher or boss.

Choices #3 and #4, unfortunately, are just utterly impossible. They both need
to be followed by negative phrases.

With #3, you would be saying " _ **Unless**_ it is after getting the manager's
OK, you may actively pursue the matter." Makes practically no sense, right?

With #4, you will have "If it is **not** after getting the manager's OK, you
may actively pursue the matter." Equally nonsensical, yes?




> 部長{ぶちょう}のチェックを（ ）積極的{せっきょくてき}に話{はなし}をすすめてもいいよ。
>
> １ 受{う}けてからだと
>
> ２ 受けてからなら
>
> ３ 受けてからでないと
>
> ４ 受けてからでないなら

First, let us take a look at the main clause of the sentence in question. It
is 「積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ」, which means " _ **you can/may actively pursue the
matter**_ ".

Please make a mental note here that the main clause is **affirmative both in
meaning and grammar/structure**.

Now, let us have a look at how you translated the main clause, which is " _
**We can't assertively continue this conversation**_ ". You used "can't", but
it is okay because you also used "without" in translating the sub-clause --
"without checking with the head of the department". The two negative elements
cancel each other perfectly.

Thus, your translation is actually good in and of itself. I, however, suspect
your own translation using two negative elements might have confused yourself
in the end because in the Japanese sentence, we know that at least the main
clause is affirmative.

What we would need to think about here is: **What would match in Japanese the
"negative + negative" structure in English when the main clause in the
Japanese is already affirmative?**

The answer would be "affirmative + affirmative" in Japanese, would it not? A
"can't ~~ without ~~" structure would surely match a "can ~~ with ~~"
structure, yes?

This is why the choices #3 and #4 are "automatically" out because with 「ない」,
they are negative both in structure/grammar and meaning. Both 「ないと」 and 「ないなら」
must be followed by a negative phrase (grammar-wise and/or meaning wise), but
our main clause 「積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ」 is 100% affirmative.

So, we are now down to two choices -- #1 受けてからだと and #2 受けてからなら.

1「受けてから **だと** 」 should normally be followed by a phrase that is negative
either in grammar or meaning, which is why 「受けてから **だと** 話をすすめてもいいよ」 sounds
very awkward. It is not something careful speakers would say.

2「受けてから **なら** 」 fits perfectly into the sentence. " _ **If it is after
getting the manager's OK**_ , ~~" It finally gives us the "positive +
positive" sentence structure that we were looking for.

I admit that careless speakers (native speakers, I mean) might have chosen #1,
but the sentence using #1 would be corrected by every teacher or boss.

Choices #3 and #4, unfortunately, are just utterly impossible. They both need
to be followed by negative phrases.

With #3, you would be saying " _ **Unless**_ it is after getting the manager's
OK, you may actively pursue the matter." Makes practically no sense, right?

With #4, you will have "If it is **not** after getting the manager's OK, you
may actively pursue the matter." Equally nonsensical, yes?

