When の follows particles


What is the significance of the usage of の in these nominals?

  1. 東京からの手紙

  2. 東京から手紙

The latter is how I was taught to formulate this nominal form, but I came
across a source that uses the first form. I'm unsure if there is nuance I am
missing, or if these are just different ways of saying the same thing.

**EDIT:** This is from the textbook ("Basic Connections: Making Your Japanese
Flow", pg. 21) which brought this to my attention:

"When の follows a noun and a particle, it is generally not translated. Note
that a phrase with a particle or with a -て form is considered to be a noun
phrase."

I don't know from the examples how the -て form factors into this, as it only
uses から, まで and へ.

Thank you!




Why the の is not translated has more to do with English grammar than Japanese
grammar.

Consider the following two sentences in Japanese:

> (A) 友達から手紙はぬすまれた。
>
> (B) 友達からの手紙はぬすまれた。

The first one can be translated "The letter was stolen from my friend".

The second one can be translated "The letter from my friend was stolen."

The の allows 友達から to modify 手紙, otherwise there is nothing to connect the two
--essentially 友達からの is a relative clause modifying 手紙. Without the の, 友達から
cannot be construed as modifying 手紙.

In English we can get away with saying "The letter from my friend" and
everyone understands that we mean "The letter which is from my friend". If you
speak (or read) French, you'll be aware of the degree of parsimony English can
get away with and expect to still be understood. Similarly in Japanese, if we
want a _prepositional phrase_ to modify a noun, we have to create a relative
clause. (I wrote _prepositional phrase_ in italics because I think it's a bad
idea to conflate Japanese particles with prepositions in English; they don't
really behave the same way though they are often similar.)




Why the の is not translated has more to do with English grammar than Japanese
grammar.

Consider the following two sentences in Japanese:

> (A) 友達から手紙はぬすまれた。
>
> (B) 友達からの手紙はぬすまれた。

The first one can be translated "The letter was stolen from my friend".

The second one can be translated "The letter from my friend was stolen."

The の allows 友達から to modify 手紙, otherwise there is nothing to connect the two
--essentially 友達からの is a relative clause modifying 手紙. Without the の, 友達から
cannot be construed as modifying 手紙.

In English we can get away with saying "The letter from my friend" and
everyone understands that we mean "The letter which is from my friend". If you
speak (or read) French, you'll be aware of the degree of parsimony English can
get away with and expect to still be understood. Similarly in Japanese, if we
want a _prepositional phrase_ to modify a noun, we have to create a relative
clause. (I wrote _prepositional phrase_ in italics because I think it's a bad
idea to conflate Japanese particles with prepositions in English; they don't
really behave the same way though they are often similar.)

