～か～ないかのうちに vs. 次第


According to my references, both of these are used in situations where one
thing happens immediately after another. Here are some example sentences:

  1. （火事を見た人の話）ドーンという音がして、１分たつかたたないかのうちに火が出てきました。
  2. 彼は、５時のベルが鳴るか鳴らないかのうちに手を止め、工場を飛び出した。
  3. （ニュース） 先ほど、関東地方で地震がありました。詳しい情報が入り次第、お伝えいたします。
  4. すみません、もう少しお待ちください。分かり次第、お知らせしますので。

In all four cases, could you simply switch to the alternate construct with no
change in meaning? Are there some examples where one or the other doesn't
work, or perhaps a slightly different nuance between the two?




With `次第`, the latter event that is to happen has to be done with volition. It
cannot be a natural event. It has the nuance of 'having waited for the former
event to end'. Your first example cannot be used with '次第' because fire is a
natural event. The second one can be, because leaving the factory is a
volitional event.

> * ドーンという音がして、１分たち次第、火が出てきました。 [Ungrammatical]
>
> 彼は、５時のベルが鳴り次第手を止め、工場を飛び出した。

`A か A ないかのうちに` literary means 'within the time span where it is not even
clear whether A had happened or not', or 'at around the moment that A is/was
to happen'. It does not necessary mean that A has happened yet. Your examples
3 and 4 thus cannot be turned into this construction without the meaning being
changed.

> # 詳しい情報が入るか否かのうちに、お伝えいたします。
>
> 'We will let you know about it at around the moment we receive detailed
> information.' [It is strange. You cannot tell anything before knowing about
> it.]
>
> # 分かるか否かのうちに、お知らせしますので。

By the way, as I gave in the examples above, `A か A ないかのうちに` is usually
shortened to `A か否かのうちに`. `否` (ina) means negation. This construction is
comparable to the English `whether or not` construction. In English, suppose
you have the following example:

> whether **A** or not **A**

You can avoid repeating the redundant `A` by putting the negation, the
disjunct `or` and `whether` altogether, and omitting one of the **A** s:

> = whether or not **A**

Similarly, in Japanese, instead of repeating **A** as in:

> **A** か **A** ないか

you can put the disjunct `か`, negation and `か` 'whether' altogether. The only
difference being that you have to use the negation `否` (ina) instead of the
negation `ない`:

> **A** かないか ==> **A** か **否** か

If you acknowledge the difference of word order between Japanese and English,
you can see that this precisely corresponds to the English phrase word-by-
word:

> **A** か **否** か
>
> A or not whether




With `次第`, the latter event that is to happen has to be done with volition. It
cannot be a natural event. It has the nuance of 'having waited for the former
event to end'. Your first example cannot be used with '次第' because fire is a
natural event. The second one can be, because leaving the factory is a
volitional event.

> * ドーンという音がして、１分たち次第、火が出てきました。 [Ungrammatical]
>
> 彼は、５時のベルが鳴り次第手を止め、工場を飛び出した。

`A か A ないかのうちに` literary means 'within the time span where it is not even
clear whether A had happened or not', or 'at around the moment that A is/was
to happen'. It does not necessary mean that A has happened yet. Your examples
3 and 4 thus cannot be turned into this construction without the meaning being
changed.

> # 詳しい情報が入るか否かのうちに、お伝えいたします。
>
> 'We will let you know about it at around the moment we receive detailed
> information.' [It is strange. You cannot tell anything before knowing about
> it.]
>
> # 分かるか否かのうちに、お知らせしますので。

By the way, as I gave in the examples above, `A か A ないかのうちに` is usually
shortened to `A か否かのうちに`. `否` (ina) means negation. This construction is
comparable to the English `whether or not` construction. In English, suppose
you have the following example:

> whether **A** or not **A**

You can avoid repeating the redundant `A` by putting the negation, the
disjunct `or` and `whether` altogether, and omitting one of the **A** s:

> = whether or not **A**

Similarly, in Japanese, instead of repeating **A** as in:

> **A** か **A** ないか

you can put the disjunct `か`, negation and `か` 'whether' altogether. The only
difference being that you have to use the negation `否` (ina) instead of the
negation `ない`:

> **A** かないか ==> **A** か **否** か

If you acknowledge the difference of word order between Japanese and English,
you can see that this precisely corresponds to the English phrase word-by-
word:

> **A** か **否** か
>
> A or not whether

