The translation of the 11th sentence of chapter 31 of Assimil "Japanese With Ease" makes me wonder about が and も


> あら, この 水色【みずいろ】 の 縁【ふち】が ついた ガウン も 安【やす】い です ね。

So the sentence is part of a dialogue in which two women are shopping. It is
translated as:

> Oh, this gown with the light blue border is cheap as well.

Since 縁【ふち】 is followed by が , I want to translate it as:

> Oh, this light blue border attached to the gown is cheap as well.

Now I do not know about womanly shopping, however, that anyone would buy just
the border not the gown seems strange to me. With my limited understanding of
Japanese grammar however, I keep translating it as the light blue border
attached to the gown being cheap, not necessarily the gown. What type of shop
lists the price of the border and the gown separately?

If I look hard and long enough, I can group it in my head as {この} This
{水色【みずいろ】 の 縁【ふち】が ついた ガウン} gown to which the light blue border is attached
{rest of sentence}, and then も being the "stronger" or "structurally more
divisively" particle for the sentence. So が just being part of a subordinate
clause and も being part of the main clause. Is that correct? Did I make up the
rule of thumb in my head that が marks the more important part of a sentence
and that is not applicable here?




> あら、この水色の縁がついたガウンも安いですね。

Your analysis is correct. The basic sentence here is:

> あら、このガウンも安いですね。  
>  Oh, this gown is also cheap, right?

This is a perfectly formed sentence in its own right.

But you want to be able to describe the gown you're talking about. The thing
that does the describing is the **relative clause** (look this up): 水色の縁がついた.
This is also a perfectly formed sentence, "A light blue hem is attached.". But
in Japanese you can use a phrase like this in the same way that you would use
an adjective, to describe a noun. So 水色の縁がついたガウン is a gown with a light blue
hem attached.

In English we use words like 'that/where/which' to describe the relationship
e.g 'gown that has a hem', 'gown which has a hem' 'gown where the hem is
blue'. These words do not exist in Japanese. Japanese is way easier in this
regard.

In a simple sentence with only one clause you might claim that が marks the
most important noun, though that is rather over-simplifying, but in a sentence
with multiple clauses you can have multiple がs, so they could only ever mark
the most important part of their respective clause. I think this が clearly
belongs to 水色の縁がついた (or at least it will become clear with a little experience
with sentences like this) so there should be no ambiguity.

By the way, it is almost a rule that you must use が and never は in a relative
clause, but I believe there are exceptions.




> あら、この水色の縁がついたガウンも安いですね。

Your analysis is correct. The basic sentence here is:

> あら、このガウンも安いですね。  
>  Oh, this gown is also cheap, right?

This is a perfectly formed sentence in its own right.

But you want to be able to describe the gown you're talking about. The thing
that does the describing is the **relative clause** (look this up): 水色の縁がついた.
This is also a perfectly formed sentence, "A light blue hem is attached.". But
in Japanese you can use a phrase like this in the same way that you would use
an adjective, to describe a noun. So 水色の縁がついたガウン is a gown with a light blue
hem attached.

In English we use words like 'that/where/which' to describe the relationship
e.g 'gown that has a hem', 'gown which has a hem' 'gown where the hem is
blue'. These words do not exist in Japanese. Japanese is way easier in this
regard.

In a simple sentence with only one clause you might claim that が marks the
most important noun, though that is rather over-simplifying, but in a sentence
with multiple clauses you can have multiple がs, so they could only ever mark
the most important part of their respective clause. I think this が clearly
belongs to 水色の縁がついた (or at least it will become clear with a little experience
with sentences like this) so there should be no ambiguity.

By the way, it is almost a rule that you must use が and never は in a relative
clause, but I believe there are exceptions.

