「君の声が聞こえなくて、逢えると信じる。」 For a research project in artificial intelligence, I investigated parsing Japanese. There was major problems with ambiguity in the mentioned type of sentence; in most cases the ambiguity is obvious to resolve, but I kinda need the opinion of a native speaker in this case. My theory is that the is enough to disambiguate between: > > > I believe that I would be able to [meet you without hearing your voice]. (Perhaps meet while bound and gagged in a prison?) and > > > Even without hearing your voice, I believe that I am able to meet you. (not hearing goes with believe, not meet) Or maybe both sentences are wrong...they feel awkward to me :/ Am I correct in assuming the comma is crucial there?

These two examples sound kind of weird, so let me add a particle to make them sound natural and understandable.

> A.
> B.

Now the two meanings:

> 1. (I believe) **I can meet you without hearing your voice**.
>
> 2. **I believe without hearing your voice** (that I can meet you).
>


I think in most cases B means 2. But I can't say for sure that B never means 1. Punctuation is sometimes arbitrary.

As for A, it seems completely ambiguous to me. In fact, I find this sentence somewhat hard to understand.

In order to make it mean 1, inserting a comma like may also be possible.