you’re right, firstly, と can’t be used on its own like that to mean “and”, then 我の is not a thing, it’s 我が but really it should have been 僕の or something
and I think it should have been either 明かすな or 明かさないで, 明かさない is just plain negative
Right! It’s like someone who knows what keigo is but otherwise has a very basic understanding of japanese grammar and compensated for that with google translate.
For the single と, I think they could’ve used a そして right?
I also tried to read that outloud and choked on the 我の. I first pronounced it like “wa no” then realized it was weird and went with “ware no” but something was still off. The weirdest part for me was that he literally quoted himself apologizing to the daimyo instead of using reported speech.
My japanese is still very basic, I had to use a dictionary for 浮気 and 公衆. I guessed what 明かす meant (idk of that’s the right infinitive) based on the kanji, then confirmed.
you’re right, firstly, と can’t be used on its own like that to mean “and”, then 我の is not a thing, it’s 我が but really it should have been 僕の or something
and I think it should have been either 明かすな or 明かさないで, 明かさない is just plain negative
Right! It’s like someone who knows what keigo is but otherwise has a very basic understanding of japanese grammar and compensated for that with google translate.
For the single と, I think they could’ve used a そして right?
I also tried to read that outloud and choked on the 我の. I first pronounced it like “wa no” then realized it was weird and went with “ware no” but something was still off. The weirdest part for me was that he literally quoted himself apologizing to the daimyo instead of using reported speech.
My japanese is still very basic, I had to use a dictionary for 浮気 and 公衆. I guessed what 明かす meant (idk of that’s the right infinitive) based on the kanji, then confirmed.