This doesn't mean it's necessarily the end of the story. The artist has been doing days out of Kagami's life. post #197592 is the end of Tuesday, this one is just the end of Saturday.
Although this artist is also doing the KonaxKasa comic as well.
Please explain your your interpretation of the last line. 見なきゃ="Have to see" or "Must see" and よかった="glad" or "happy". If it were negative (not glad or not happy) it would be よくなかった, wouldn't it?
幸せな夢だったけど、見なきゃよかったな。 見なきゃ is a contraction, in this case of 見なければ, I believe so the negative is in the 見なきゃ therefore 'it would have been better if I had not seen it'
見なきゃ is indeed a contraction (or more like an abbreviation) of 見なければ, but it was my understanding that the second part is だめ or いけない or ならない, and is automaticallly implied by the use of the neagtive potential form of the verb. http://www.guidetojapanese.org/haveto.html#part4
That said, your version does make more sense and was probably what was intended, but I think the author might be using bad grammar.
My above explanation may not have been very good; I don't have any formal training in linguistics. Jim Breen's suggests that 見なきゃ is a contraction of 見なくては, though I don't know what's correct here.
Reading Wikipedia indicates that this is an example of agglutination, or verb modification to include 'negation, passive voice, past tense, honorific degree or causality' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agglutination
But it's clear to me that 見なきゃ in this usage is not 'have to see it' but instead 'if I had not seen it'.
The discrepancy lies in whether ならない can be left out or not. According to you, and to the entries on WWWJDIC, using なきゃ does not automatically imply ならない. According to my alternate grammar resource at Tae-kim's, the ならない *is* automatically implied.
Wow. It's hard to tell who's worse between Tae Kim and Jim Breen. Seabook is correct, なきゃ is a contraction of なければ, and you can't have an implied apodosis when there's an explicit one (よかった).
BTW, the contraction of なくては is なくちゃ. Also, while the regular verb construction itself is agglutinative, these additional spoken contractions have nothing to do with agglutination.
Based on some further searching, there seem to be two distinct cases of 見なきゃ that can arise. I think it makes sense to me now. The case above: (if I had not seen) 見なければ → 見なきゃ
And the second case: (have to see) 見なくてはならない → 見なきゃならない → 見なきゃ Which is also sometimes written: 見なくてはならない → 見なくちゃならない → 見なくちゃ
So it doesn't seem to be an issue of ならない being implied or not. Instead it's just a case of two different phrases with potentially the same contraction.
LaC said: Also, while the regular verb construction itself is agglutinative, these additional spoken contractions have nothing to do with agglutination.
Good to know, I was grasping for straws looking for an explanation at that point.
seabook said: Based on some further searching, there seem to be two distinct cases of 見なきゃ that can arise. I think it makes sense to me now. The case above: (if I had not seen) 見なければ → 見なきゃ
And the second case: (have to see) 見なくてはならない → 見なきゃならない → 見なきゃ Which is also sometimes written: 見なくてはならない → 見なくちゃならない → 見なくちゃ
So it doesn't seem to be an issue of ならない being implied or not. Instead it's just a case of two different phrases with potentially the same contraction.
That is incorrect. The issue is that ならない might be omitted, but not because 〜なきゃ includes it, but by the simple implication of it standing for the most common construction with 〜なければ, namely 〜なければならない. So it is indeed the implied part that gave problems here.
LaC said: BTW, the contraction of なくては is なくちゃ. Also, while the regular verb construction itself is agglutinative, these additional spoken contractions have nothing to do with agglutination.
〜なきゃ is very much subject to agglutination in precisely the same way 〜なければ is, of which it is a drop-in replacement. The fact that colloquial speech allows dropping ならない from the construct in which the contraction is present is completely orthogonal to whether it agglutinates.
葉月, you're an idiot, and I'm very disappointed in you. Who said, or even hinted, that なきゃならない is not used? What I'm saying is that it doesn't come from なくてはならない. Try searching for なければならない instead.
As for agglutination, do you even know what it means? Building a word like 見+な+けれ+ば is agglutination. Contracting the sound なければ into なきゃ is not (in fact, it could be said that it brings an originally agglutinative language a bit closer to a fusional one).
NO U. I understood perfectly what you said about it not coming from なくてはならない. If you read my response to seabook, you'd see that it's in perfect agreement with yours (although it highlights a different aspect of the matter). And FYI, yes, I'm very well aware of what agglutination means. If, instead of bashing me, you stopped for a second to read what I wrote, you'd have realised that your statement could be read in at least two ways, and that I commented on a different one that you intended. Not my fault, but at best the English language's ambiguity, at worst yours for phrasing it in a way that gave rise to multiple interpretation. BITCH.
<LaC> 葉月: I thought "additional" was enough disambiguation <葉月> LaC: I read it as "those additional contractions do not aggluginate" (which is marked by my usage of "whether it agglutinates" in the reply), whereas you apparently meant "those additional contractions are not the result of agglutinative processes", which is of course correct <LaC> I meant "additional" as in "those sound contractions that take place in spoken japanese 'in addition' to, and on top of, the underlying agglutinative construction" <LaC> I'll be clearer next time <葉月> LaC: aha, yeah, I'll try to catch those multiple meanings as well
Moral: if you feel the need to hit someone with a Google search for something you know he's seen a million times before, stop and consider whether "there's a misunderstanding somewhere" isn't a more likely explanation than "his brain suddenly leaked out his nose." :)
葉月 said: The issue is that ならない might be omitted, but not because 〜なきゃ includes it, but by the simple implication of it standing for the most common construction with 〜なければ, namely 〜なければならない.
This was indeed the source of confusion. I was under the impression that ~なきゃ included ならない. As I have now learned, that is not the case. ならない is merely implied unless otherwise explicitly stated, and in this case よかった explicitly replaces ならない. Everything else is tl;dr.
"昨日は確かに4月1日ですたが、特に嘘は言ってないです。" "Though yesterday was indeed April 1st, I haven't particularly told any lies."
Also: "まあ嘘じゃないですが、都合に合わせて嘘にできるから、ああいうのは4月1日に投下するのが良いと思ってました。" "Though it's not a lie, I thought dumping it on April 1st would be good since, depending on your circumstances, you could consider it a lie."
Because Konata already killed herself (succesfully). Meeting her after a failed suicide attempt was part of the dream. Reality is that she was succesful.
Dr_Fine_Rolo said: Because Konata already killed herself (succesfully). Meeting her after a failed suicide attempt was part of the dream. Reality is that she was succesful. Duh.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if that's the next turn this story takes.
Hey, Konata?it would have been better if I hadn't seen it...*sob*Hiiragi Kagami's Saturday. End. ......Konata?Was it justa dream?Konata..You really hate being alone, don't you, Kagami?I'm actingKonataa...It wasn't real?*grasp*like an idiotIt was a happy dream, butKonata...Konata!