Nuance when the subject is moved to the end of the phrase


I've been plugging away on novel translations for years now and figure I
should ask more questions about it around here, since the freelance life does
not make it easy to network with people.

My question today regards when the subject of the sentence is moved to the end
of a phrase. Take the following sentence (taken from the novel I'm currently
working through):

>
> ロンドン市内{しない}で『騎士派{きしは}』の連中{れんちゅう}を踏{ふ}み潰{つぶ}すべくゴーレム＝エリスを放{はな}ったシェリーだったが、どこかで意識{いしき}が途絶{とだ}えていた。

Obviously, the subject of this sentence is シェリー (Sherry), as it is her doing
the action in the first phrase, and the second phrase is regarding her.
However, instead of writing it in a more standard way:

> シェリーはロンドン市内で『騎士派』の連中を踏み潰すべくゴーレム＝エリスを放ったが、どこかで意識が途絶えていた。

the author opts to place シェリー at the end of the phrase. My question is, what
sort of nuance does this have? For example, I'm familiar with this type of
inversion of action and subject:

> ロンドン市内で『騎士派』の連中を踏み潰すべくゴーレム＝エリスを放った **のは** シェリーだったが、どこかで意識が途絶えていた。

In that case, the emphasis is on **who** exactly was the one who did the
action, as though it was a question the author is answering. This works much
the same as the equivalent grammatical structure in English.

However, I'm not sure if what the author wrote is different from that, and if
it is, how it's different. My gut instinct is to translate this in the same
way as the のは construction:

> Sherry had been the one to...
>
> It was Sherry who had...

But I'm not honestly sure this would properly communicate the nuance involved.
Obviously it would depend on context. What I'm getting from the sentence is
that she knew that logically she had performed this action, but she wasn't
conscious for the whole thing.

This author tends to use this construction very frequently, much more
frequently than other authors I've read. (In fact, I counted about 10
instances of it for just the protagonist's name in this one book.) I also
frequently see it simply to end a sentence, such as in:

> ほとんど窒息{ちっそく}しそうになり、生命{いのち}の危機{きき}を回避{かいひ}するために仕方{しかた}なく咀嚼{そしゃく}を始{はじ}めるシェリー。

I believe this is the same construction. What's the nuance here?




>   1. シェリーはゴーレムを放ったが、…
>   2. ゴーレムを放ったのはシェリーだが、…
>   3. ゴーレムを放ったシェリーだが、…
>

Sentence 2 is a plain old [cleft
sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/19208/5010), I think you
understand it well.

Sentence 3 is a "体言止め-like" expression which is basically more vivid and
dramatic than 1. Grammatically speaking, it's just a long relative clause that
modifies シェリー. By definition, 体言止め refers only to ending a whole sentence with
a noun, but a similar construction happens before だが/が/けど/etc. This is a very
common rhetorical device in Japanese. Lyrics of some songs are written almost
exclusively with 体言止め (for example,
[this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furusato_\(children%27s_song\))).

  * [what exactly is "体言止{たいげんど}め"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14524/5010)
  * [Grammatically, is a 体言止めの文 a "Japanese sentence"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48863/5010)

The difference between 2 and 3 is small, but some "contrasted" clause about
シェリー tends to follow after Sentence 2 because it has は. (e.g.,
"ゴーレムを放ったのはシェリーだが、そのシェリーがゴーレムに殺されたのだ。")

To translate 体言止め, I think you can treat it as an ordinary sentence in many
cases, especially when an author/lyricist tends to use it everywhere. You can
use "Sherry, the one who unleashed..." or "It was Sherry who have
unleashed..." when appropriate, but IMHO that can often result in awkward
English sentences. For example, the first part of
[残酷な天使のテーゼ](http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/%E9%AB%98%E6%A9%8B%E6%B4%8B%E5%AD%90:%E6%AE%8B%E9%85%B7%E3%81%AA%E5%A4%A9%E4%BD%BF%E3%81%AE%E3%83%86%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BC)
is often translated like this:

> 蒼い風がいま 胸のドアを叩いても  
>  私だけをただ見つめて微笑んでるあなた  
>  A blue wind is now knocking at the door to your heart, yet  
>  You are merely gazing and smiling at me

(The literal translation is "You, the one who is gazing and smiling at me even
if a blue wind is...")




>   1. シェリーはゴーレムを放ったが、…
>   2. ゴーレムを放ったのはシェリーだが、…
>   3. ゴーレムを放ったシェリーだが、…
>

Sentence 2 is a plain old [cleft
sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/19208/5010), I think you
understand it well.

Sentence 3 is a "体言止め-like" expression which is basically more vivid and
dramatic than 1. Grammatically speaking, it's just a long relative clause that
modifies シェリー. By definition, 体言止め refers only to ending a whole sentence with
a noun, but a similar construction happens before だが/が/けど/etc. This is a very
common rhetorical device in Japanese. Lyrics of some songs are written almost
exclusively with 体言止め (for example,
[this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furusato_\(children%27s_song\))).

  * [what exactly is "体言止{たいげんど}め"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14524/5010)
  * [Grammatically, is a 体言止めの文 a "Japanese sentence"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48863/5010)

The difference between 2 and 3 is small, but some "contrasted" clause about
シェリー tends to follow after Sentence 2 because it has は. (e.g.,
"ゴーレムを放ったのはシェリーだが、そのシェリーがゴーレムに殺されたのだ。")

To translate 体言止め, I think you can treat it as an ordinary sentence in many
cases, especially when an author/lyricist tends to use it everywhere. You can
use "Sherry, the one who unleashed..." or "It was Sherry who have
unleashed..." when appropriate, but IMHO that can often result in awkward
English sentences. For example, the first part of
[残酷な天使のテーゼ](http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/%E9%AB%98%E6%A9%8B%E6%B4%8B%E5%AD%90:%E6%AE%8B%E9%85%B7%E3%81%AA%E5%A4%A9%E4%BD%BF%E3%81%AE%E3%83%86%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BC)
is often translated like this:

> 蒼い風がいま 胸のドアを叩いても  
>  私だけをただ見つめて微笑んでるあなた  
>  A blue wind is now knocking at the door to your heart, yet  
>  You are merely gazing and smiling at me

(The literal translation is "You, the one who is gazing and smiling at me even
if a blue wind is...")

