晩ご飯を食べなかった人は、映画で見た銀行に行った。
-Person who did not eat dinner went to the bank she saw at movie.

The translation is roughly taken from TaeKim. I understand the first part before the comma but when I start to get to (映画で見た) it doesn't quite make sense with bank. What does seeing a movie have to do with going to the bank? Since (映画で見た) is a verb clause that should describe the bank. I am so confused with this sentence.

Here is the link:
http://www.guidetojapanese.org/subclause.html

bassxx2099 Wrote:晩ご飯を食べなかった人は、映画で見た銀行に行った。
-Person who did not eat dinner went to the bank she saw at movie.

The translation is roughly taken from TaeKim. I understand the first part before the comma but when I start to get to (映画で見た) it doesn't quite make sense with bank. What does seeing a movie have to do with going to the bank? Since (映画で見た) is a verb clause that should describe the bank. I am so confused with this sentence.

Here is the link:
http://www.guidetojapanese.org/subclause.html

TaeKim's website has some awkward example sentences probably because the author is trying to make grammar points clearer rather than to use idiomatic sentences. I'm not talking about the ridiculous English translations. You can find unusual JAPANESE sentences on the site.

Anyway, the example in question would (barely) make sense, for example, when you're talking about a group of Japanese tourists who are visiting famous places often seen in Hollywood movies. The tour guide said there was a famous bank in this city you'd seen in the movie XXX where the protagonist saved the heroine from bank robbers, but he also said you had to skip dinner at a famous restaurant where the movie YYY took place if you'd like to visit the bank because it was kind of far. If you really liked XXX, then maybe you'd have visited the bank. But you're a huge fan of YYY, so you enjoyed dinner at the restaurant with other fans and some locals. After dinner one of the locals asked, "So, where's your wife? You said you came here with her." And you reply, "People who didn't have the dinner went to the bank she had seen in the movie. We'll meet at the airport tomorrow." Apparently your wife is a fan of XXX and knows the bank where the super cool protagonist saves the heroine.

It'd make more sense if the sentence was "晩ご飯をここで食べなかった人は、映画で見たレストランに行った," which means "People who didn't have dinner here went to a restaurant they had seen in a movie."

By the way, the author says on the same page that 先週に in 先週に医者だったボブは、仕事を辞めた is part of subordinate verb clause, but it's simply wrong. 先週に is part of 仕事を辞めた。i.e., the sentence is a reordered version of 医者だったボブは、先週に仕事を辞めた. Bob quit the job last week. The speaker doesn't mean he was a doctor last week. Of course he was probably a doctor last week because he didn't quit his job yet, but what he did last week was retire.

The story you came up with took me a few minutes to understand but it does tie in things pretty nicely and helps me understand that sentence.
As for 先週に医者だったボブは、仕事を辞めた I do agree that 先週に modifies when he quit since it certainly does make more sense. Thanks a bunch!

Instead of making a new topic I'll just stick my question here. I don't quite understand what the 2nd の particle is doing. The sentence also comes from TaeKim's website. My idea is that the の particle is part of the question for an explanatory tone but then again the other examples tend to disagree. Any ideas??

Link: http://www.guidetojapanese.org/particles3.html

Example 4
アリス：　その人が買うんじゃなかったの？- Wasn't it that that person was the one to buy?
ボブ：　ううん、先生が買うんだ。- No, it is that teacher is the one to buy.
Alice: Wasn't that person going to buy? (Expecting that the person would buy)
Bob: No, the teacher is going to. (Explanatory)

When の is used as a finishing particle, it generally just adds some emotional emphasis. It can be used in almost any situation and is used TONS, so it's nothing you have to worry about. As you read more Japanese, you will get so used to it that you'll be saying it yourself without knowing why.

bassxx2099 Wrote:Instead of making a new topic I'll just stick my question here. I don't quite understand what the 2nd の particle is doing. The sentence also comes from TaeKim's website. My idea is that the の particle is part of the question for an explanatory tone but then again the other examples tend to disagree. Any ideas??

Link: http://www.guidetojapanese.org/particles3.html

Example 4
アリス：　その人が買うんじゃなかったの？- Wasn't it that that person was the one to buy?
ボブ：　ううん、先生が買うんだ。- No, it is that teacher is the one to buy.
Alice: Wasn't that person going to buy? (Expecting that the person would buy)
Bob: No, the teacher is going to. (Explanatory)

I don't quite understand what Tae Kim is talking about here, but it seems to me that the の you're wondering about is the same as the one in Example 1 どこに行くの？ on the linked page. So, if you use です form to be polite, it'd be その人が買うんじゃなかったのですか？ or その人が買うんじゃなかったんですか？. In fact, you can say その人が買うんじゃなかったん？ in informal speech. The Osaka dialect uses ん instead of の more often than the Tokyo dialect, so a person from Osaka would probably say その人が買うんじゃなかったん？ .

These examples may help understand the meaning of の:

今、彼授業中？ Is he in class now? (I don't know if he is.)
今、彼授業中じゃない？ Isn't he in class now? (I guess he is.)
今、彼授業中なんじゃない？Isn't he in class now? (I think he is. That would explain a lot.)
今、彼授業中じゃないの？ Isn't he in class now? (I think he is. That would explain a lot, don't you think?)
今、彼授業中なんじゃないの？ Isn't he in class now? (I think he is. That would explain a lot. What makes you think he is not?)

These are rough approximations and actual nuances vary greatly depending on your tone of voice, intonation and whatnot. Tae Kim says:

Tae Kim Wrote:For instance, if you want to ask, "Hey, isn't it late?" you can't just ask, 「遅くない？」 because that means, "It's not late?" You need to indicate that you are seeking explanation in the form of 「遅いんじゃない？」.

This isn't true. 遅くない？ can mean pretty much the same thing as "Hey, isn't it late?" if your tone/intonation/pronunciation/whatever indicates so.

"These examples may help understand the meaning of の:

1.今、彼授業中？ Is he in class now? (I don't know if he is.)
2.今、彼授業中じゃない？ Isn't he in class now? (I guess he is.)
3.今、彼授業中なんじゃない？Isn't he in class now? (I think he is. That would explain a lot.)
4.今、彼授業中じゃないの？ Isn't he in class now? (I think he is. That would explain a lot, don't you think?)
5.今、彼授業中なんじゃないの？ Isn't he in class now? (I think he is. That would explain a lot. What makes you think he is not?)"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it okay to translate the sentences like so since I see TaeKim doing the exact same thing?
For example 1: Now, he is in class?
For example 2: Now, he is not in class?
For example 3: Isn't he in class now?(seeking an explanation)
For example 4: Now, he is not in class? (seeking an explanation)
Well for example 5 it should be the same as 3 but with the extra の particle that seems to indicate... I don't quite understand.

Well my main problem is when you make the の particle negative just like in example 3 it seems that you got the same translation as example 2. However the response varied because of the conjugated のinto negative. Is it safe to assume example 2, 3, 4, and 5 all translate the same but illicit a different response?

bassxx2099 Wrote:Is it okay to translate the sentences like so since I see TaeKim doing the exact same thing?
For example 1: Now, he is in class?
For example 2: Now, he is not in class?
For example 3: Isn't he in class now?(seeking an explanation)
For example 4: Now, he is not in class? (seeking an explanation)
Well for example 5 it should be the same as 3 but with the extra の particle that seems to indicate... I don't quite understand.

Well my main problem is when you make the の particle negative just like in example 3 it seems that you got the same translation as example 2. However the response varied because of the conjugated のinto negative. Is it safe to assume example 2, 3, 4, and 5 all translate the same but illicit a different response?

Ah, sorry. It was confusing. The English in parentheses following each translation isn't a response. That's what the "speaker" can be implying, e.g.

A: あれ？彼どこだろう。Hey, where is he?
B: 今、彼授業中なんじゃないの？ 毎週月曜は日本語の授業じゃん。Isn't he in class now? He has a Japanese class every Monday.
A: あ、そっか。Ah, you're right.

In this dialogue, B is like "I think he is in class. Why do you think he should be here?" when he says 今、彼授業中なんじゃないの？.

If my English isn't screwed, even a very simple sentence like "he is in class" can carry a lot of different nuances depending on context, intonation and so on. In this regard, 彼授業中じゃない？ can be both "he is not in class?" and "Isn't he in class?" depending on how you pronounce the Japanese and English sentences. By the same token, you can say 彼授業中じゃない？ meaning almost the same thing as 彼授業中なんじゃないの？. Actually examples 2-5 can mean pretty much the same thing, and most of the time they can be translated as "Isn't he in class?" because this English sentence covers most of the nuances they can have.

彼授業中？ and 彼授業中じゃない？ can mean the same thing while 彼授業中？ will never be what 彼授業中なんじゃないの？ can mean, and... Gah! I don't know how learners can understand this kind of grammar by reading explanations and translations when intonation and context are more important than what Tae Kim is trying to explain. I hope the rough approximations I gave with possible implications in parentheses help you grasp the basic senses...

Well you did clear up many of my ambiguities, and I can say your English is crystal clear. I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a native and your posts. I guess what your'e trying to tell me is that context and intonation is more important than the small differences in sentences. Also I forgot to thank you for helping me clear up the は/が; your simple explanation helps a bunch!