の cannot be used as a pronoun meaning "one" for "highly abstract objects" but what is a "highly abstract object"?(amended)


_(Italics are used to indicate revisions to the orginal question made in
response to feedback so far)_

According to "A students' guide to Japanese grammar", by Naomi McGloin, の _is_
used as a _pronoun_ meaning "one" for tangible or intangible objects such as 車
or 意見 but not highly abstract ones such as 力 . The following three sentences
are given:

> _大きい車は高いが、小さいのは安い。correct_
>
> 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さんのはちょっと問題がある。 correct
>
> _日本の町人は経済的な力を持っていたが、政治的なのは持っていなかった_ 。incorrect

Could somebody explain/define a little bit more clearly the difference between
an intangible object and "a highly abstract" object _illustrated by these
sentences?_

_(Or in other words both are intangible but only 力 is "highly abstract":
possibly highly abstract means "subjective" (?) but if this interpretation of
"highly abstract" is correct, could anyone give a few more examples to help me
nail this down?)_




My grammar book (日本語文型辞典) says that (when used to mean "one"):

  * noun+`の` = noun+`のもの`
  * na-adjective+`なの` = na-adjective+`なもの`
  * (i-adjective/verb)+`の` = (i-adjective/verb)+`もの`

so:

  * > 大きい車は高いが、小さい **（の・もの）** は安い。  
>  A big car is expensive, but a small _one_ is cheap.

  * > 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さん **のもの** はちょっと問題がある。  
>  Tanaka's opinion is interesting, but Yamada _'s one_ has a bit of a
> problem.

Though I'm not experienced enough to be sure about about this `の`, this
sentence sounds like it might be incorrect/unnatural to me in both Japanese
and English, so I think it may well be a different usage indicating a
possessive, i.e:

> 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さん **の** はちょっと問題がある。  
>  Tanaka's opinion is interesting, but Yamada _'s_ has a bit of a problem.

  * > 日本の町人は経済的な力を持っていたが、政治的な **（の・もの）** は持っていなかった。  
>  Japanese merchants had economic power, but didn't have an economic _one_.

I think this sentence wouldn't work in either English or Japanese.

For reference, here are some of the examples it gives:

  * > この電話は壊れてますので、隣の部屋 **の** をお使い下さい。  
>  This telephone is broken, so please use the _one_ in the next room.

  * > ラーメンなら、駅前のそば屋 **の** が安くておいしいよ。  
>  If it's Ramen you're after, you can get _[some/it]_ at the soba noodle shop
> in front of the station where it's cheap and tasty.

  * > ...もっと小さくて便利な **の** を探さなくてはならない。  
>  ...(I) need to search for a smaller and more convenient _one_.




My grammar book (日本語文型辞典) says that (when used to mean "one"):

  * noun+`の` = noun+`のもの`
  * na-adjective+`なの` = na-adjective+`なもの`
  * (i-adjective/verb)+`の` = (i-adjective/verb)+`もの`

so:

  * > 大きい車は高いが、小さい **（の・もの）** は安い。  
>  A big car is expensive, but a small _one_ is cheap.

  * > 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さん **のもの** はちょっと問題がある。  
>  Tanaka's opinion is interesting, but Yamada _'s one_ has a bit of a
> problem.

Though I'm not experienced enough to be sure about about this `の`, this
sentence sounds like it might be incorrect/unnatural to me in both Japanese
and English, so I think it may well be a different usage indicating a
possessive, i.e:

> 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さん **の** はちょっと問題がある。  
>  Tanaka's opinion is interesting, but Yamada _'s_ has a bit of a problem.

  * > 日本の町人は経済的な力を持っていたが、政治的な **（の・もの）** は持っていなかった。  
>  Japanese merchants had economic power, but didn't have an economic _one_.

I think this sentence wouldn't work in either English or Japanese.

For reference, here are some of the examples it gives:

  * > この電話は壊れてますので、隣の部屋 **の** をお使い下さい。  
>  This telephone is broken, so please use the _one_ in the next room.

  * > ラーメンなら、駅前のそば屋 **の** が安くておいしいよ。  
>  If it's Ramen you're after, you can get _[some/it]_ at the soba noodle shop
> in front of the station where it's cheap and tasty.

  * > ...もっと小さくて便利な **の** を探さなくてはならない。  
>  ...(I) need to search for a smaller and more convenient _one_.

