INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What's the difference between 最後 and 最終?
While reviewing my , I noticed that for "last", I have (at least) two words, either {} or {}. I was wondering, is there any difference in usage, or can I use them equivalently?
|
> : most; extreme
>
> : later; latter
>
> : end
**** is used as a noun or a -adjective. (e.g. , ) In the form of **Verb+/+** , it means _once_ (e.g. ... _Once_ he goes out...)
**** is used as an adjective right before noun. (e.g. , )
When they are adjectives, they are usually interchangeable. (e.g. is interchangeable with )
However, while means to just happen after all other things, often implies that it is the end of things and that it will never happen again. For example, is just a last game of championships on which someone will be a champion; is the final game for someone.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 13,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
What does 当然 mean in this context?
I'm trying to translate this video -> link and I got stuck at the last bit, where the speaker mention " **** "
so this is the transcription,
>
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
I search the meaning on Jishou and I still couldn't really grasp the meaning of it in his speech.
Translation attempt; **This is wrong BTW**
> ****
= Because of the original manga, I think there are people, who are **certain(?)** about that.
> ****
= For me, this " **certainty** " is the most wonderful and it's truly the greatest thing.
> ****
Thank you for letting me be in this wonderful **place(?)** <\- like I said I'm so confused with this...
|
This just means "natural consequence", "necessity", "inevitability", "unsurprising fact", etc.
> ()
> Because it (=stage play of Haikyu!!) has an original manga, well, I think some will think that (=the fact that the stage play will continue) is natural/unsurprising, but...
>
>
> I think this "being unsurprising" is a really wonderful and great thing.
The last sentence is tricky and somewhat poetic, but (literally "this wonderful unsurprising-ness") refers to what was said in the previous sentence. So basically what he wants to say is "thank you for letting me participate in this play, and for the wonderful fact that the play continues to the next sequel without trouble."
**EDIT:** is usually not a positive-sounding word, so you may call this an example of oxymoron.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
The interplay of this two verbs
The following sentence: ****
This **** followed by irritates me. I know of several specific patterns where form is directly succeeded by another verb like but I don't know of any such case with . I've little idea how to understand this phrase.
|
There's no grammatical problem here. I would translate this as
> This garden's large rock and the lake were made to give the impression of Mt Fuji and the sea.
Even in English there is a mixture of passive and active, but there's nothing awkward or ungrammatical about this.
I wouldn't lump this in with constructions like The form there is a fixed grammatical form. There are other uses of the -form of verbs which can express reason or purpose. For example,
> {}{}{}{}
>
> Having studied hard, I passed the exam.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, て form"
}
|
What is the difference between 今 and 今の？
What is the difference between and For instance:
> - This word does not exist to me now.
>
> - This word does not exist to me now.
I hear a lot in musics and tv shows, but I could not get when I should use it over , what are the different nuances it brings to the sentence and so on.
Also I'm not quite sure if it is possible to say:
> - I will eat breakfast now.
>
> - I will eat breakfast now.
Thanks!
|
Let's just follow the basic grammar. is an adverbial expression and thus modifies a verb or adjective that follows (in this case, it's omitted after ()). is an adjectival expression and modifies a noun that follows ( in this sentence). means "current me/self", "what I am today", "me in this state" etc. In this case, implies he is currently in some special situation. Maybe he is in trouble.
here is "unacceptable", "no good", "impossible", etc. It's the same as in the second sense here.
> ()
>
> (lit.) Saying those words to me now is unacceptable.
> How dare you say such a thing to me in this situation?
The difference between the two sentences is not large in thise case.
is grammatical, but implies is in some special situation and has some special reason to eat breakfast at this specific time. In ordinary and simple contexts, use the adverbial .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
Confusion about usage of ordinal numbers
I came across this sentence:
It was an example sentence in a Japanese children's book for learning Kanji, so there's not any context. Because of I took it to mean "this is the second time that I ride a boat."
How could I switch the subject around to say "I'm riding a boat for the second time."? I would guess: . Is it correct to use as an adverb "for the second time" or is there any other (more natural/common) way?
|
"For the second time" = /
cf. "For the first time" = /
"For the third time" = / "
You can use it like this:
> * ****
> I saw Kinkaku-ji Temple when I went to Kyoto _for the second time_.
> * ****
> (Someone) gave me his number when I met him _for the second time_.
>
So your sentence "I'm riding a boat for the second time" can literally translate to:
> ← You'd usually say this before riding the boat
> ← You'd say this while you're on the boat
These are grammatically correct and natural, but we'd usually say it more like ///or
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, adverbs"
}
|
How Are Titles Written In Japanese?
In English, titles are written with all words being capitalized with exception of certain noteworthy function words. Given this, what are the rules for Japanese titles? I know they exist, titles are clearly written differently; but what exactly are these rules?
Also, if you could give some example titles where these rules are being applied, that would be greatly appreciated. :)
PS. Someone told me that title rules are used when writing news articles as well, like in the body itself; is this true?
|
There is almost no rule specific to titles.
* A period is not used because a title is not a sentence.
* If English characters appear in the title, it's typically capitalized just like English titles, although this is not really an ironclad rule.
* If the title is long, typesetters try to avoid breaking a word into two lines. In main text, as you know, you can break words almost freely.
* Word usage itself can also differ. See what is the name of the abbreviated writing style used in newspapers?
Of course there are also differences of graphic design. For example, Japanese people love to decorate titles with fancy borders or frames with an illustration.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "nuances, syntax"
}
|
Is this translation of "When are you going to that person's house?" correct?
>
Is that correct or natural?
Some people translate it as
>
or:
>
I have trouble using ``, is there any rule to it? you can put it in any part of a sentence?
|
>
I would say it as **** ****
This sounds like "When is it that you're going to that person's house?" rather than "When are you going to that person's house?"
* * *
>
>
Both sound fine to me, and their fundamental meanings are the same (though they might have different nuances or focuses). You would still be understood if you said it as . In Japanese, the word order is often flexible (the verb comes at the end in normal sentences though) as long as you're using the right particles for the right words.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word order"
}
|
Alternative ways to say "what's that?"
What does the character say in this video? It's translated as "what's that?" . I would expect him to say, nanda kore, nani kore,nanda kore wa, sore wa nan desu ka, , kore wa nan desu ka or something like that but what I hear is
"nanda (unintelligible word) wa"
<
|
He says "". It's the same meaning as '', ''. '' means 'this', '' means 'that' (something not nearby).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
is this sentence gramatically correct? "ano ko ga futteita makka na sukaafu"
This phrase from a song "ano ko ga futteita makka na sukaafu" is gramatically correct? shouldnt be
ano ko ga makka na sukaafu o futteita ?
BTW, ko is translated as "girl" . Ko has many meanings, but I dont remember any of them being "girl". Shouldnt be "kid" here?
|
To add to psosuna's answer, it's worth noting that the line in question is not a sentence, grammatically speaking. It is a noun phrase, with as the main or "head" noun and the preceding portions all describing the scarf. English makes use of relative clauses, with _"that"_ used to coordinate, whereas Japanese allows modifying phrases to directly modify nouns.
Direct translation of the Japanese:
>
> _ano ko ga futte ita makka na sukāfu_
> that girl [subj] waving was pure-red [adj] scarf
An idiomatic English rendering, keeping the structure as a noun phrase:
> the pure-red scarf that that girl was waving
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "relative clauses"
}
|
Conversation in barbershop
How to say " I'll leave it to you " and "make it little shorter" to barber/hairdresser in barbershop/salon. Thank you
|
To ask nicely to make it a little bit shorter would be :
>
I will leave it up to you would be :
>
I suppose you come sum it up with something like :
>
Which would basically translate to something like :
> Please make it slightly shorter, I will leave the details to you.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Did I analyze the structure of this sentence correctly?
For more context, see the full text: <
It is from line 13-14:
"When the self of concrete ideals comes up in the mind and you switch the position you are standing on, in other words in the inside of the image of now, you are face to face with your past self."
The placement of for example confused me because at least from my foreign perspective its like its just thrown into the clause it belongs to xD Also, I feel unsure about my understanding of the clause ranging from to and its integration into the surrounding. I didn't really know what to make of the particle in this particular context, and I think my rather bumpy translation reflects this, because the image (pun intended) that comes to mind when reading this part seems overly complicated to me...^^
|
is summing up what has just been said. It seems to me like you've got it perfectly right. I'd translate the sentence a bit differently, but I think you've done a decent job. Here's how I'd approach it.
> If in your mind you can concretely imagine your ideal self, swap the place where you are standing, **in other words** in this imagining the you who you are now is facing the you who you were in the past.
If I wanted this to sound a bit more fluid in English then I might take greater liberties with the translation and render it as
> Once you've managed to imagine your ideal self, swap places. In other words, you imagine that you are now your future self facing your current self.
I think part of what you might be struggling with is are the relative clauses and . You could think of "” as being "of", but I think it's much better in this context to think of it as a particular form of ”” used to modify a following noun.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why does this phrase use "de" and not "o" "te wo furu hito ni egao de kotae"?
This phrase "te wo furu hito ni egao de kotae" is translated as "Smiling back to the people who waves their hands"
"te wo furu hito ni" I suppose it's "to the people who waves their hands" , kotae is "to respond" and "egao" is "smile". Then why it's "egao de kotae" and not "egao o kotae" . With "egao de kotae" isnt it trying to say "respond a smile" or the literal translation would be another? Does this verb simply work with "de" instead of "o" or is there any other explanation and I'm getting it all wrong?
|
{} is not the object of , instead it's showing the manner in which the answer was given, "with a smile", hence the use of the particle . I don't believe that is a transitive verb in Japanese. You can use it with either or such as
> She answered "yes".
or
> She answered the questions.
But I don't believe it's grammatically correct or natural to say
> **
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, particle を"
}
|
Is there any word for stars only?
AFAIK , hoshi means both star and planet (except for the sun and the moon), when means only planet. is there any word to refer to stars only?
|
Even the word "star" in English can embrace _planets_ (and other objects such as in "falling _star_ ") too, after all planets have in the past also been called wandering _stars_. In fact, the etymology of _planet_ is to _wander_.
There is a term which, in Japanese, refers to _fixed stars_ , {}. This is probably the term you are then looking for. I suspect (I'm not a native speaker) that this is a somewhat Intechnical term. But, I also believe that when one says{}, what comes to mind for most listeners will be just what we think of as "star".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Meaning of って in レニーって男が来て脅されたんだよ
Does the in the refer to Lenny being the party who threatens the man?
Lenny is a thug
I think the sentence reads Lenny threatened a man who came.
|
>
We'd normally interpret it as...
( _lit._ ) "A man called Lenny came, and I was threatened (by him)."
→ "A man called Lenny came and threatened me."
The is a colloquial version of .
**** = ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
Meaning of 「メリハリ」
So was getting my haircut and told them to cut it like the image below, the beautician said something likeand I was wondering what it means...
I did online searches and while the definition (in Japanese) is there, I guess I don't really " **get it** "...
. Etymologically, () referred to a low-pitched sound and () referred to a high-pitched sound. A kango equivalent of is , but is more often used figuratively.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Using adjective's て form as "and"
I know that your can connect to adjectives with the form, for example,
My girfriend is beautiful and kind
but can you follow that with a continuation of the sentence, for example,
My girlfriend is beautiful, and despite my being ugly, she likes me.
|
Yes, you can. For example, . However you may omit .
And () would be more natural.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, syntax, て form"
}
|
Difference between 夫 and 主人?
The words []{}and []{} both mean "husband".
What's the difference between them?
|
The meaning is basically the same as you said: husband.
According to this website the main difference is in the situation in which you use these words.
Simply put:
**:** You can use it in most situations.
**:** Mostly used when talking with superiors or people you're not very familiar with.
**BONUS:**
**{}:** Is used when you are speaking with people you are familiar with.
To be even more precise it seems that is used as the opposite word of {} (wife). On the other hand bears a bit more the meaning of "house chief" or "master" (of the house).
I can expand more maybe later (I gotta go back to work now :p ).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, kanji, nuances"
}
|
What is this を doing here?
For full context, see the document: <
The sentence in question: **** I understand it as follows: "I do on my own
my successful self with a journalist from a magazine"
I set the second part apart because I didnt use any connective structures in my translation now. I did it because there are none in the japanese original and I don't know which extrapolation might be correct here.
I interpreted the part before the bold basically as one sentence element, which on the level of the complete sentence would be the direct object of . However, this probably would require some other elements in the sentence right? Maybe someone could show me what would have to be put in?^^
Here's how I think the sentence could be translated as well: "I do/act on my own **as if** my successful self was with a journalist of a magazine."
|
>
"I play the roles of both my successful self and the journalist of a magazine, on my own / just by myself."
The here means , "play the role of..." "act as..."
* * *
> this probably would require some other elements...
The sentence makes perfect sense by itself, but if you want to make it clearer, you could rephrase it as...
> ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
}
|
Stumped translating 女の戯言を真に受けられちゃ迷惑だって
A man has fallen in love with a mobster’s girlfriend and it’s mutual. Though threatened by the mobster’s minions, he refuses to let go of her. For the sake of his safety, the mobster’s girlfriend has to break it off with him by telling him she does not love him – which she does after the following 2 lines (which are spoken by someone urging her to do it):
>
I translate this as: You have to say it.
>
I’m not quite sure what to make of this, but I think it’s something like: He has to believe a woman’s bullshit story. (which doesn’t look right at all!)
|
I think she is saying : "It's bothersome for you to believe I was being serious with my fooling around".
Or more accurately in English by reading between the lines :
> You thought I was serious with you? I was just fooling around! Don't be such an annoyance and leave me alone already!
That is just my guess though, I might be wrong.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
How to read 箕 (mi/mino）? Are these just different readings or is there a meaning difference?
Why is transcribed as in this sentence while according to the dictionary (with the meaning of winnow; winnowing basket; winnowing fan) it is read as ?
> ****
|
Usually, refers a winnowing basket made of bamboo. / refers to a straw raincoat. In this context, this obviously refers to the latter.
![*mi* and *mino*](
But I'm not sure if it's an outright typo. As proper nouns, a person called and a station called exist. So in the old days when kanji usages were not standardized, might have been also used to refer to a raincoat.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, readings"
}
|
横書きと縦書き Is there a preference for usage?
Is there a preference for usage? I noticed that Japanese is written horizontally and vertically.
|
I prefer reading horizontal writing! :)
Right. Based on a cursory look at the books on my wife's bookshelf, as well as what I generally encounter in day-to-day life, my observation is that vertical writing is more prevalent for long-form printed material -- novels, manga, newspapers, and the majority of magazines all use .
On the other hand, flyers, (school or company) handouts, and notices predominantly use .
And then there's the best (or worst) of both worlds: both in the same publication. This is pretty common in magazines, where the main article will be in , with picture captions, some headlines, and quotes from the article will written horizontally, an approach also found in a lot of non-fiction books, especially those that rely on a lot of visuals.
For handwritten notes, horizontal writing is pretty much the norm unless you're using or doing calligraphy.
Those are just trends I've noticed, however, and I don't have any hard numbers to back them up.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "usage, orthography"
}
|
Can タコ be an offensive word?
In a manga I found the following sentence:
The person to which the word refers to is a secondary character that rarely appears. His name was never mentioned before. Since the person that is talking is a quite rude old man and since the word is written in katakana, I am wondering if is just the name of the secondary character or if it is an offensive word like or Thank you for your help!
EDIT: Since there were conflicting answers, I decided to provide more context. **Here** you can see the two pages where I found the term. They are from a manga about boxing called "", where Riku is the name of the main character. In the first page the secondary character is worried about Riku starting the 2nd round, since he almost got ko in the 1st, at which point the old man, which is Riku's trainer, tells him "". The second page is right after the end of the match. It looks like the unnamed secondary character is the trainer's helper.
|
is sometimes used as an offensive word like , .
This would be an offensive word like that. Person's names including of aren't many.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "words, katakana, names, manga, offensive words"
}
|
ni tsuite 「について」 vs ni yoreba 「によれば」
What is the difference between ni tsuite and ni yoreba, because the meaning is seems the same, regarding and according to. If its different when or what situation I can use it. Thanks
|
If you search for both terms in the dictionary, you will find out that they are quite different:
> means about, concerning.
> means according to.
Just like in English, these similar phrases are not interchangeable:
> {}[]{}
> **According to** the weather report, there will be snow tonight.
>
> I know nothing **about** the weather report.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Potential following の that follows a noun
> ...
I wonder how this is translated as '(to) someone that cannot see their faces'. I thought at first that , as a modified noun, is connected to with to mean 'someone that cannot see of faces', which is weird...
I have never seen this pattern before and my research ends to no avail.
|
In relative clauses is frequently used to mark the subject of the clause in lieu of using .
So, as a stand-alone sentence, the clause would just be.
> -> I cannot see their face.
But then the becomes when used as a relative clause.
> -> Someone whose face I cannot see
There are various restrictions on when this can and cannot be done. One such circumstance when cannot be substituted like this is when there is both an object marked by and a subject in the relative clause.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, potential form"
}
|
What is the term for two kanjis, that when written in the reverse order, have the same meaning?
What is the term for two kanjis, that when written in the reverse order, have the same meaning? For example, "northeast". I have seen this situation occasionally.
|
There is no widely-known specific term for this.
There is a website maintained by a Japanese amateur kanji fan, where you can find the list of kanji compounds that makes sense when written in the reverse order (not necessarily the same meaning). The owner of the site calls such words , literally "opposite word". But normally means _antonyms_ such as / and /, and he owner admits this is his own definition of which is usable only on his site. He just could not find a better specific word, and ended up borrowing the word for his own purpose.
Yoshinori Sakai, another amateur kanji researcher, published a book called in 2004, where , literally "reversible word" appears to be defined as a kanji compound that still makes sense when written in reverse order (again, not necessarily the same or similar meaning). But apparently almost no one have accepted this term after this book.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words, kanji"
}
|
What do these expressions mean?
For full context see this document, exercise two (bottom of the page): <
I don't know what the following expressions mean exactly:
>
>
This in sentence 1 irritates me. Shall it mean "the woman, what/how does she wish from the clerk to do?"
In sentence 2 I just dont recognize the phrase and Im somehow able to get through it bit by bit ^^
|
As pointed out in the comments, I misread as . Much of what I said about the later still applies, but it's not really inscrutable. Essentially, means "What, did something happen?"
Meanwhile, is one of those expressions that seem inscrutable. For me it reminds me of how in English we sometimes say things like, "What's up?" I used to hate being asked that question because it felt like I'd have to say something like "The sky is up"; it just felt odd to reply "I'm doing well" because it didn't really seem to be answering the literal meaning of the sentence.
Here is just expressing concern and essentially means "What's the matter?" or "What's going on/happening?"
I've already answered regarding in response to another question of yours.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "set phrases"
}
|
What does this な at the end of the sentence mean?
> ****
I'd translate the sentence like this:
> I want to enter/ride in a car that makes 'tatata'.
I don't think it's the colloquial version of , so I think it is plus . But in this case, I don't know what it supposes to mean.
What is this at the end?
|
This `` is different from `` used in orders (e.g. `` or ``) and is usually considered to be a stronger/masculine version of `` (but with a more wishful nuance). Sometimes it also occurs in the emphasized version ``, similar to ``.
Probably the most used expression with it is `()`, expressing envy over something which happened to someone else but you'd like to experience yourself.
See also answers to Identifying different ending - s
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle な"
}
|
首 when fired from a job: etymology?
First question ever here. :D
So, I hear a lot in media, when someone is fired from a job, normally they refer to as being fired, or firing someone, and might sometimes make the gesture of getting their head cut off with their hands.
What is the etymology behind that? I am not super familiar with history, but was it that if you were discharged from your position it'd be done by a beheading? Or what is the background for why as "head" or "neck" came to also mean "dismissal from a job or post"?
|
It bears noting that this kind of expression is not limited to Japanese. Have you never heard the phrase _"heads will roll"_ in English, in reference to people likely to lose their jobs due to some scandal or other? It is not a far stretch to make the analogy of losing one's head for losing one's livelihood.
### Additional detail
Shogakukan's and the Daijirin dictionary both give similar sense details. From Shogakukan:
> **5** ①‐②
Daijirin's is visible here as sense 6, giving essentially the same information.
Both dictionary entries essentially trace the meaning from "to lose one's head" to "to lose one's livelihood".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "etymology, colloquial language, history"
}
|
where does this word go in this sentence?
Doing practise questions for JLPT, need to fill the blanks with the given words in the correct order. The answer tells me the position of one of them but I can't work out the rest.
>
|
The correct order is 2-3-4-1. The third blank should be 4, not 2. Please double-check.
The sentence is:
>
> (literally) If I think "In what feeling did they buy it?", only by it, tears go out.
> I get teary just by thinking about how my parents were feeling when they bought it for me.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, jlpt"
}
|
Can なんて be a negating factor?
Three siblings have been abandoned by their parents and are to be split up and placed in different homes. They are understandably distraught and an adult family friend is trying to console them. He says:
(You can defeat this by remembering all the happy times.)
(Even I had lots of misfortune (?), but I wasn’t defeated.)
I have put my attempt at translation in brackets.
Question: In the second sentence, it seems like should be something like misfortunes or unfortunate things (from the context) but shouldn’t that be ? Or is a negating factor here (even though seems neutral and is positive)?
|
You're mixing (; happiness) and (; hard, bitter, painful). They look similar but are totally different characters.
( makes no sense, because is not even an i-adjective although it happens to end with . **** would mean "happy time". is also a na-adjective and is wrong. Anyway, there should be no kanji in the first place.)
is a word that is used to make light of what follows. See: Usage of and as emphasis
Also note that has another reading (; spicy hot).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
Extrapolating the contents of this phrase
unfortunately, this sentence stands in isolation, so one really has to deduce everything from that which follows:
I feel petty confused about the part before the comma xD I have a strong feeling some stuff was omitted there ^^
I only dare to make an attempt at translation this far: "..., I came to understand the value of family."
|
means "becoming very recent", "arriving at the recent past", or simply "very recently".
means "finally", "at last", "eventually".
means, as you say, "I came to understand the importance of family".
Put them together and you get "At last, very recently, I came to understand the importance of family". More idiomatically, "It was only very recently that I came to understand the importance of [the] family".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why is there て form at the end of the sentence? 先生もいっしょにいらっしゃらないかなと思いまして
> ****
Why is it there? And does it make any difference in meaning compared to dictionary form for example?
|
According to :
>
> ……… **** **** **** ****
The in your example is used to express a cause, reason or explanation/vindication.
> ****
"Tomorrow we're going to see cherry blossoms and I'm (we're) wondering if you'd like to join us ( _and that's why I came to you / that's why I'm calling you / that's why I just asked if you'd be free tomorrow, etc._ )"
→ indirectly/politely inviting "Would you like to join us?" (as pointed out in the comment)
* * *
**** would just be a statement to say that you wondered/thought of that.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "grammar, て form"
}
|
Meaning of モロ in boxing
An ex boxer punches a man and then says:
> … ?
The man that was punched manages to stand up. At this point, a friend of the puncher says:
> … **** …
I think that the sentence roughly translates as `"Unbelievable... he is still standing after receiving a punch by Tokorozawa..."`, but I can't understand the exact meaning of . Does it have a special meaning in boxing? Or it simply indicates a punch given with all one's strength? I know there's another question about , but in that case it is used as an adverb, while here I think it is used as a noun. Thank you for your help!
|
The answer from the question you linked applies to your question as well.
So to put it into the translation, it means the boxer took a direct, unguarded hit.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, words, slang, katakana, sports"
}
|
Is 最愛の神さん the proper way to write "Dear God?"
Say, you're writing a love letter to God. Is this the right thing to write on the envelope?
>
(I'm writing a short story featuring that theme.)
**EDIT:**
Maybe this is better grammar?
|
In the many Japanese versions of the Bible (including Old and New Testaments) and of Jewish and Christian prayers, hymns, etc, God is usually referred to simply as . When addressing God directly, the usual usage is . , "Our Father", and (), "Lord", are also used. But it sounds as though your story might be looking for a particular effect (perhaps comic?), so you'd have to take that into account before deciding what form to use.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "usage, honorifics"
}
|
協力する particle usage
> ****
> ****
> Please cooperate with me.
Is there any difference in meaning/usage/nuance when choosing or to go with the verb ?
If I had to guess maybe I'd say that **** would mean "please let's work equally together". Whereas **** would be "please give your cooperation to me". So would sound a bit more gentle, maybe?
A google search shows that is more common but I suspect that might be because of adverbs ending in .
How about this sentence:
>
Does this read more like "cooperate with" or "contribute to"? Can I replace with here?
|
The difference between and is small, and they are usually interchangeable. While the latter is simple "please help me", the former does sound more like "let's do it _together with_ me", although saying "equally" would be a bit too much.
In , you cannot replace this with , because you won't do something together with the itself.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, particle に, particle と"
}
|
Use of より in this sentence
> ****
Using aluminum foil, (?) to make it hemispherical, a rubber hammer was repeatedly tapped.
If not for comparison, what is the purpose of ?
|
It's an aluminium bowl () rather than aluminium foil ().
Having said that, the usual pattern for is "AB[]" - "B more than A", "B rather than A". But can simply stand as an adverb before an -adjective or a verb to make a comparative, as in , "bigger". That's what's going on here: is modifying , "cause to approach". means "cause to approach more", "bring nearer". is the indirect object. So this part of the sentence means "Used a rubber hammer to bring it nearer to a hemisphere", "went on beating it with a rubber hammer to make it more hemispherical in form".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Structure behind 気になってはいても
>
I guess its something along the lines of
(we) were concerned but no one touched on the subject.
How does work and how does it differ from ?
thanks
|
There are two differences between and :
* The use of , which is a contrast maker here. Here the contrast is made between and . **** is interchangeable with **** . This is grammatically optional, but dropping it would make this sentence sound unnatural.
* The use of , which indicates this phrase refers to something actually ongoing.
is translated as "if" or "though/although" depending on the context (see this question), but it's "though" in this case. (i.e., the phrase means roughly the same thing as .)
So the sentence is translated as:
> Even though we were concerned, no one has touched on the subject.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, particle は"
}
|
What is the difference between 市, 都市, 都会 and 市街
And in which context are used. Why are so many words for city in japanese T.T
|
* refers to cities in the sense of metropolitan/urban areas as opposed to rural areas. It's also the umbrella term for large municipalities in any country.
* is roughly the same as in the sense of metropolitan areas, but sounds more colloquial and less technical. In conversation you will hear more often than .
* is one of the categories of municipalities, and it corresponds to "(XYZ) city" in English. Its friends are "(XYZ) village" = , "(XYZ) town" = , etc. For example, The New York City is . See: Cities of Japan
* is more like "(main) urban district" or "downtown" in a city.
For example, special wards of Tokyo are not technically . But people living in these areas are safely called ("city people") although there is no kanji in their addresses.
And as you can see, there are many words also in English (metropolitan, urban, city, ...) :D
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "meaning, word choice"
}
|
What does おり mean in this sentence?
Is it from the verb ? If it's so, why is not it ?
> ****
|
In very short: it is the humble form of .
To give a typical example, is mostly used when talking about your own actions and trying to be humble (for example when talking to a superior such as your boss at work, to a customer, etc). Find something about this topic here or check the wiki about Japanese honorific speech.
In your specific example, I believe the sentence continues with something you haven't written here. In fact, is in the "pre-masu" form which is often used in written language to connect to the next sentence. Refer to this answer for more details on this.
EDIT: So I made some research and I think your full sentence is in fact:
> ...
Is it correct?
So I think we can translate this as (until the comma): _the damage due to the (less literally, left by) the mysterious person (monster? Not sure what is depending on the context) is expanding at an unprecedented scale_.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
Help understanding 警察犬をクビになったわんこ
I ran across this article on newsinslowjapanese, and the title is: ``. The article translates this in English as "Police Dog Fired For Being Too Friendly", but why is "dog" mentioned twice? (i.e. and ?) (police dog) is the direct object of , which forms an adjective phrase that modifies (dog). If it were just ``, or ``, it would seem to make sense. But `` looks like it reads "Dog that fired a police dog for being too friendly".
Why is "dog" mentioned twice in the same noun phrase?
|
Consider the comment by @jogloran
and are not necessarily identical. If we were to _literally_ translate , then we would have something along the lines of "dog that became fired from being a police dog." Dog is not necessarily mentioned twice, but a task and an animal are mentioned. That is, "police dog" and "dog" are mentioned.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "syntax, relative clauses"
}
|
Is きれいそう a mistake?
In class we had some sentences with intentional mistakes to fix. One of them was "something". The mistake was that you don't say that because if you're looking at something, you can tell if it's , so you wouldn't say it "seems" . Is it really something people would never say?
|
When you are directly seeing some beautiful thing in front of you, you cannot say something like . Saying always involves a speaker's guess/speculation, so if you already know that it's beautiful or not, you cannot use this expression.
An analogous case is ("Looks yummy"). You can say this before eating something, but saying after actually eating it will sound very strange. (Because it no longer _appears_ to be yummy but in fact is yummy or not).
For this very reason, as @Chocolate mentioned, in situations where you are not directly seeing something, saying is perfectly fine. When you have heard how beautiful something is, you can safely say ("Sounds beautiful.")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Parsing of 外国人が車を運転して起こす事故
> ****
> On the new road signs, in order to reduce the number of incidents caused by foreigners driving cars, rather than just Japanese, English will also be written.
I had a little trouble parsing the part in bold. On first reading I saw "foreigners driving cars and !!!!" and then suddenly it stopped making sense.
In the end I decided that must be the subject of rather than . Then I treated as a kind of "by means of" clause in the same way that seems to work. So this clause is "Incidents that foreigners cause by means of driving cars".
Is this the correct way to analyse this grammar? Is there an alternative way that might enlighten me further?
|
is the subject of and . Essentially, "Foreigners are driving and causing accidents". In context, I would translate it as "accidents caused by foreign drivers" (technically, "foreigners driving cars").
For the entire sentence, I'd translate it as
> The new highway signs will be written in not just Japanese, but also English in order to minimize accidents caused by foreign drivers.
I've taken a number of liberties here. The biggest liberty is that I've translated as though it were a passive to make the English sound more natural, and I've treated as if it were the subject. To be more faithful to the Japanese grammar will just result in clunky English (or perhaps shows my weakness as a translator)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, parsing"
}
|
Meaning of 味を増した
What is the meaning of in the following sentence? Context: Two boxers meet after a long time, but Boxer A isn't in a good mood because is worried about his imminent qualifying match. So Boxer B has the following thoughts (I divided the sentence as it is in the manga):
> / … / ****
My rough translation of it would be `What a shame, now that we met again. Did he get an opponent even stronger than him?`, but I don't understand the exact meaning of . I am also not sure about being a comparative there, it is strangely placed in the sentence and there's a little space after it. Thank you for your help!
|
Fermented food like _natto_ , _miso_ and _cheese_ will gain stronger taste and smell over time. (literally "taste increases") figuratively refers to this phenomenon. It means to grow old but experienced and mature as a veteran. is simply "more" here (see: Use of in this sentence). For example refers to a good-looking middle-aged actor.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, expressions, manga, comparative constructions"
}
|
しろ vs. せよ imperative forms
While browsing Youtube, I came across a comment which said the following:
>
My question is about the ending. I understand that is an imperative form of just like . However, I was wondering what difference, if any, this makes to the meaning of the phrase?
I found an explanation on another forum saying that is more literary-sounding, and is used in exams. However, I wouldn't have thought that a Youtube commenter would use particularly formal language, so I wonder if there's more to it than that.
Apologies if I've made any mistakes in how I asked the question, this is my first time posting!
|
is the imperative form of the verb , which is an archaic verb meaning in modern Japanese. This archaic imperative is still found in modern Japanese, typically in examinations at high school and university. It generally looks highly stiff, blunt and authoritative.
In this case, however, this is used more or less jokingly, to make this message look as if it were a military telegraph in the mid-20th century, or a message from a boss in a spy movie (e.g., ". This message will self-destruct in five seconds."). Plainly saying would have been too rude, but would sound like the listeners were given a critical "mission", which might make them excited.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "imperatives"
}
|
Do you understand what is written in this paper?
I can't recognize any of the characters, can somebody read it?
 at the (Center Office?)
* * *
Room #654
Mr. Berardi(?) José Luis
We have left/entrusted the mail/parcel for you at the Center Office.
Please pick it up.
Amagasaki-Kita Post Office
(Hotta)*
* Name of the deliverer
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, kanji, handwriting"
}
|
Meaning of 文句 in the following dialogue
A ex kick-boxer that now switched to boxing owes money to the yakuza. The following is a dialogue between him and the yakuza man that comes weekly to collect the money (). is the name of a boxing tournament for rookies.
> Yakuza man: …
>
> Ex kick-boxer: **** …
I think that what the ex kick-boxer says could be translated into:
> You don't have any objection about me winning (climbing up) the tournament, do you? Since boxing is easy as they only use punches as weapons...
If I read the question alone I think I understand what it means, but there's in the second part of the sentence and I don't understand why the first part should be a consequence of the second. What I would find a natural consequence of the second part would be "It will be easy for me to win, right?", but it is too far from the meaning of . Does refer to an objection by the yakuza man or to something else I am not getting here? Thank you for your help!
|
is a contraction of . See `eba` to `ya` contraction. This refers to what was just said by the .
Perhaps you failed to read between the lines. He implies:
> You don't have to fuss (about the money and my seemingly bad behavior) _if_ I win the tournament (because the champion can get a lot of money), huh? (And I will certainly be the champion) because boxing is easy as they only use punches as weapons.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning, words"
}
|
usage of と in this sentence
> ****
once we came back, chinami was the first to run up to (us).
how does this sentence change without the after ? Doesn't seem to quotatitive or conditional.
thank you
|
This is "the optional " that attaches certain adverbs. In your case, dropping does not change the meaning of the sentence.
See:
* What role does play in this sentence?
* What is the purpose of adding ?
* What does adding after an adverb do?
is a set phrase meaning "striving to be the first". It does not necessarily mean Chinami was actually the first one.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle と"
}
|
What is the difference between dayo and desu?
What is the difference between dayo and desu? I was participating in a chat and a person said genki dayo. I am assuming that dayo and desu mean the same thing and can be used interchangeably. Thank you.
|
is polite form. is casual and friendly. You shouldn't use them interchangeably.
If you use to your boss or unfamiliar people, they would think you are rude.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
What is the difference between 失礼します and すみません?
and Is one form more polite or does it depend on the amount of time involved before someone leaves a situation? It seems like is used in preparation for leaving and is used when actually leaving. I want to be polite when leaving a conversation, and excusing myself. Thank you.
|
> It seems like is used in preparation for leaving and is used when actually leaving.
and have different usage.
is a phrase that could be used in this situation. Because, it basically means "Excuse me!", but it has also meanings like: "Goodbye!", "I'm leaving.", "I have to go.", "I hate to run, but...", or "I've got to go."
But, means only as "Excuse me!", so it needs an additional phrase meaning the reason to leave the situation in order to use it in this situation like:
*
*
*
*
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, word usage"
}
|
I don't understand what's the te-form purpose in here
>
I understand the message in this "But, my umbrella had a hole in it so my hair got wet"
But I don't quite get what it's the te-form in **** is doing, is it the te form of compound sentence meaning "and" so the literal translation would be:
"But the umbrella had a hole in it **and** my hair got wet."
Also a friend of mine told me the quote could become:
>
So it confused me a bit because it made it seem that he is saying that, that te-form is the same as ...
also, could be ?
Thanks.
|
>
is the cause and is the result. Therefore, the te-form functions as rather "because", "since," and "as" than "and."
> "But the umbrella had a hole in it **and** my hair got wet."
This is not bad. However,
> "But my hair got wet **because** the umbrella had a hole in it."
This is a better interpretation if this is a Japanese exam. Personally, however, I don't care much whether the conjunction, te-form, is "because" or "and" in this context. They do not change the meaning. They are more or less the same.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "て form"
}
|
Difference between 始終 and 終始?
Amusingly enough, it seems like by swapping the kanji in you can get a slightly different word. What is the difference between the two of them? I found some answers on Japanese sites but reading them I feel like I'm just going through a bunch of synonyms and very similar descriptions. An English answer would really help...
|
is relatively rare in modern Japanese, except that a four-kanji compound is common. Standalone mainly appears in stiff literary works as an adverb meaning "all the time". If I heard in conversation, I might not understand it.
is much more common than . It can also mean "all the time" or "always", but I think it tends to mean "from beginning to end (of a certain event, etc)" more often. is also a suru-verb. is a common phrase meaning "to do only from beginning to end."
>
> The meeting was in a good mood from beginning to end.
>
>
> In his speech, he entirely focused on making excuses.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Is the construction 'Verb + adjective + noun' possible?
I saw a scan of an official manga that's to be released, however the first speech bubble's grammar confused me.  !!
or as
> 2) !!
(1) makes question if a construction allows for a relative clause to modify a noun which is already modified by an adjective. Perhaps this is exclusive to colloquial Japanese? (2) seems unlikely due to the stylistic choice of katakana before , but makes more sense to me.
However, this may all be due to me misinterpreting how vertical Japanese is meant to be read?
|
First, / is an idiomatic expression.
Grammatically speaking, modifies as a relative clause. A noun can safely take more than one modifiers. One noun can be even modified by two relative clauses simultaneously, directly or indirectly (see the last part of this answer for examples).
By the way, if I simplified this phrase a bit, does make sense to you? If not, this is called a _head-less relative clause_ , which is explained in detail in this answer. This is not limited to colloquial Japanese.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, i adjectives, modification"
}
|
why に can mean "and"?
I think I've only seen this usage in anime and manga so not sure how common it is in real life. Sometimes seems to be used as "and", usually (always?) with people, e.g. something like:
!
Well, if it isn't Tanaka and Kuroda!
Is this one of the inherent (but uncommon) meaning of , some remnant of old grammar like / reversal, or something else altogether?
|
This usage of is not limited to people.
I think expresses a combination or a meaningful set rather than a simple list. For example, by itself can imply "Natto goes well with (cooked) rice", whereas is simply "(It's) rice and natto." In other words, saying implies the list is somehow incomplete without the remaining unsaid part. In 's case, the sentence slightly emphasizes the fact they came in a twosome, which might be strange or surprising to the speaker. Maybe it's like slightly adding the nuance of "what's more" in English.
I don't think this usage of is particularly archaic. It sounds rhythmical and emphatic, though. This construction used to emphasize a verb may be relevant.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, particle に"
}
|
Problem with 傷つく: who is hurt in this dialogue?
Context: in a manga a girl kisses a boy. He is so scared that he pushes her away. Then the girl says (I divided the sentences as they are divided in the balloons):
> … **/** **** … **/**
I know that is an intransitive verb, but I don't understand who is the subject here. Which of the following translations is the correct one?
1. If you get so scared, it means you are wounded (inside)... Did you have a bad experience with sex?
2. I feel hurt that you got so scared... Did you have a bad experience with sex?
|
The subject of ("to get hurt") is the girl herself, and your second interpretation is correct. here is so-called , which is another hint that the girl feels hurt.
To say "you are wounded", at least is needed because is a punctual (instant state-change) verb. "()()()" or something similar would mean the first one.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs, subjects"
}
|
use of ようから in this sentence
>
Even if (i) consider how the rumours spread , (I) can't help but agree with Asuka's comments.
What is the function of , and how does it differ from
Thank you.
|
`masu-stem + ` forms a noun phrase, "the way/manner of `verb`", "how something `verb`".
**** is incorrect because "the quotative " marks the content of your thoughts itself. It's equally incorrect to the following sentence in English:
> [×] I think, "The way rumors spread".
Note that "think something" and "think _about_ something" is different. In this case, you need to say:
> I think _about_ how the rumors spread.
To say something like this, is not an option. Instead, use the following expressions:
> **** …
> **** …
These would perfectly fit in your example sentence, too.
**** is less common, but it means something like "to think based on ", "to think from 's perspective" or "to think with as a starter", depending on the context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What is this specific way of announcing court orders called?
What is the Japanese word for the action of announcing court orders to the public, by running to the journalists and expanding a piece of rolled paper with the verdict written on it (like here)?
In a casual conversation, I wanted to compare a business situation when no details were given to the interested party but the final verdict, and while my description was clear, I still think there must be a proper term for this phenomenon.
|
*
> **** ****
*
>
> ”””””””” ” **** ”” **** ”
*
> ...
> ()
>
> ( **** **** )
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word requests"
}
|
Question concerning ヶ in 一ヶ月
is an outdated version of
The in this case is not the katakana but a shorthand for the kanji: **and** therefore does not produce the "ke" sound.
I got this idea because kind of looks like the bamboo radical in the top left. Is my assumption correct? Are there other characters that have the same function as ? What are these **shorthands** called?
Thanks!
|
The (Chinese) abbreviated form of the kanji is . The handwritten form of this looks rather like , so came to be used in Japanese.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, words, usage, kanji"
}
|
Is the honorific postfix -氏{し} usually used towards men?
Is using the honorific postfix -{} usaged biased towards men or is it equally appropriate to be used for women as well?
Building from this excellent answer about honorifics: What does mean after a name, how is it different from or ?
|
There used to be a clear bias toward men, but today you can safely use for women as well. If you read articles written in the Meiji or Taisho period, you'll probably see used for men and for women with a high social status. I found an example here. Note that horizontal sentences were written from right to left in those days.
Today, has almost fallen out of use, and has become almost completely gender-neutral.
That said, tends to be preferred for a person with a higher social status. You may find a recent interview article where is used for a male CEO and is used for his wife and daughters.
Here's a relevant explanation on Wikipedia (From ):
> ###
>
> ****
>
> ###
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "honorifics"
}
|
What does this に do in this sentence? And this わ in the following?
> A: **** ...
> B: ****
They are printed in bold. I dont really have problems understanding the sentence. But I wouldn't know what nuances are brought in by the elements in question.
|
The first just indicates existence/possession in this case. I think that grammatically this kind of construction is called something like _passive periphrastic_ (EDIT: no it's not. See comments). For example, literally you would translate it as "to me is (not) money", which means of course "I don't have money".
Consider also this simple example:
>
Which means obviously means "I have a girlfriend" although literally it would be "To me is a girlfriend".
So, to recap, you can think of as usual as a "pointer". And do you remember the general rule that when indicating existence with these verbs want the particle ? It's the same thing here as you are basically stating that "there is (not) money", where? "to you".
Regarding , it is just something similar to that as you knows adds emphasis to the sentence. The difference is that if I'm not wrong is used mostly by females. Also, I think it is quite used in Kansai dialect.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particle に"
}
|
Is this irony here?
I'm a bit confused about the following dialogue:
> A:
> B:
=>
> A: Did you hear that he is entering medical studies?
> B: I can't believe that he is becoming doctor or the like. Though he can't even make fish/He can't even make fish after all...
The comparison that is done here seems quite unusual to me, that's why I'm asking for confirmation.
|
I have not seen something similar, either, but yes it's obviously an ironical statement. in this context implies either (1) he is terribly clumsy, or (2) he is afraid of touching gross things like dead fish.
Note that "doctor or the like" is not what this sentence is saying. This refers to the action of as a whole, and it's explained here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "nuances"
}
|
Why does the aikido teacher spell 一 as "yetch"?
Please watch this video first, and carefully hear what the teacher said.
Why does the aikido teacher spell as "yetch"? Or I have to clean my ears?
|
Spell? Where does the teacher spell anything?
Perhaps that's how you hear the pronunciation, but that's definitely not what he's saying. He's emphasizing saying (one), but stretching out the first syllable (mora) quite a bit. The second syllable is a voiceless "i". If you're a native English speaker, I can see why you think he's saying "yiitch", but that's just your English ear interpreting his exaggerated voicing of "ichi".
His pronunciation is well within acceptable range for the context in which he's speaking. However, if you tried to pronounce it as you seem to be hearing it and spoke it that way in regular discourse--that is, if you said "yich" instead of "ichi"--a native speaker would hear the difference because invariably you'll overdo the production of "y" to a point a native Japanese would most likely not duplicate.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "pronunciation"
}
|
"だなんだと" meaning
> (song lyric)
(then it goes like: )
More specifically, I cannot decide which character belongs to where in "". Is it the expression or is it a form of "" (even though I didn't know this was possible after a ).
|
It's actually "{}", and here works as a stand-in for things that you want to avoid mentioning, or that you think are not worth mentioning, by name. So no, it's not a form of "".
More relevantly, we can think of "XXX{}" as a set phrase meaning something like "XXX and whatnot".
The "" right after it is a quotative/complementizer "", indicating "{}" is what the song repeats (though the substitution of {} is by _our_ songwriter), and the whole "{}{}" is a relative clause modifying "{}".
Thus we may translate "{}{}{}" to "(the) song that keeps on about it being the Holy Night and all that stuff". (The "" that comes after it is a conjunction: "and")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, set phrases, song lyrics"
}
|
Can the honorific o be used in front of all nouns?
Can the honorific o be used in front of all nouns? I was thinking of sentence structures and wondering if o could be placed in front of all nouns. Thank you.
|
The Ministry of Education's guidance is (or used to be) that honorific prefixes should only be used where their usage was well-established by custom, and that as a rule should be used before Japanese words and () before "kango" (Chinese or Chinese-style words). Thus, and () but and . Honorific prefixes shouldn't be used before (non-Chinese foreign imports). I seem to remember that they particularly disapproved of and . But you will hear this rule disregarded ten times (well, maybe twice) a day. The best advice is :listen to the usage of native-speakers whose Japanese you are happy to take as a model and follow their example.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "honorifics, prefixes, bikago"
}
|
Meaning of "...のもなんと"?
Sorry for the bother. I'm in the middle of translating some notes from a musician on their newest album's tracks, and I ran into such a weird looking phrase that I don't know what to do with.
Here's the context:
****
The translation I have for it is pretty weak...right now, it says, "and so, this piece was somehow the first song we sang (for the album)."
The sentences before and after it have seemingly nothing much to do with the sentence, though I can post it if asked...I know what means on their own but all of them strung together like that is making me crazy. I can't find anything on weblio or google, so if anyone can help me, I would appreciate it very much!
|
is a sort of introductory exclamation indicating that the speaker/writer expects the following bit of information to be surprising or impressive to the hearer/reader. Here, it means something like "And the first song I sang was - Whaddya know! - this song" I'd go for "was none other than this song".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
「ら」 in 「平たいら」meaning
What does means in word based on word ? Word taken from anime "Non non biyori Repeat" and means the names of Triops (animals): .
|
can be read a few different ways. is a common _kun'yomi_. Another one is , more commonly spelled with the as _okurigana_. The reading itself derives from prefix - (as in ) + . The - prefix is described in some dictionaries as simply ("adjusts the tone"), but it might come from as the oldest known reading for ("hand").
Both and mean "flat". Combining the two into a name could suggest something very flat. I'm not familiar with the anime _Non non biyori Repeat_ , but Triops is also known in English as a "tadpole shrimp", and this appears to be in standard Japanese. These look a bit like a cross between a horseshoe crab and a shrimp or lobster.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, nuances"
}
|
What does なきゃ mean in this situation?
Due to some circumstances a guy brings a girl to a hotel in order to loose some pursuers. In there they get swept away by the situation and end up doing some foreplay. The girl ends up fainting halfway and after she wakes up they leave the hotel and the guy apologized for getting carried away. Then the girl responds with this (the 3 hours below is the time she lost consciousness)
What I don't understand how the used in this situation
|
is one of the countless casual abbreviations that can be used for saying Which basically mean "have to do" or more directly "It is not acceptable to not do ...".
In your sentence, I believe that what was said is something like.
> I didn't do anything weird while you were unconscious that would require you to kick my *** as retribution.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "colloquial language, contractions"
}
|
How does ように work in this sentence?
****
I usually would interprete like that: "to reach A, I do B"
Here I'm a bit confused because the verb follows the clause. "To reach A, I wish to become."
Obviously this doesnt work. So are there any omitted phrases I'm missing or is in a different function here?
|
My easy way to interpret it is this.
means similar to X.
In your case, it is referring to the situation where you can talk and write well. So you want your current situation to become similar to the situation where you would be proficient in in talking and writing.
It has a slightly more broad meaning than just using by it self.
For example, you could use for saying I want to become a soccer player.
But you would use for saying I want to become able to play soccer.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Furu meaning in sentences
Kaze ga furu and Ame ga furu. The wind is blowing and the rain is falling. Are the two sentences written correctly? TYVM.
|
Perhaps you mistook _fuku_ for _furu_ about the wind?
Usually, it is _fuku_ () for wind and _furu_ () for rain.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Difference betweenすればいい and すれば
>
I thought that only stood for the conditional form, how come does it bear the same meaning as ?
|
>
In speech, this is a perfectly valid question, and semantically it means exactly the same thing as "(())?" The last part is omitted because it's obvious.
To make the first sentence sound valid and natural, all you have to do is use the rising intonation at the end of the sentence to indicate it's a question. Maybe this could sound slightly blunt, cold or business-like if said in a non-urgent situation. But this would largely depend on how the character usually speaks.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
Weird usage of dakuten
Reading manga, I came across this speech bubble:
![enter image description here](
* * *
Then, I changed the font, and I got a different result:
![enter image description here](
* * *
The moral of the story is you're noticing different font styles! For further information on why the font styles differ, look at the other answer.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "meaning, usage, manga, typesetting"
}
|
Ｗhat does っていうんだ mean?
I came across the following sentence:
>
which was translated as "What am I supposed to be frightened of?"
I know that the first part means "what am I afraid of?"
I just can't see how adding that could change the meaning in that way.
I'm assuming that it's the same as but I still can't figure out how it affects the meaning of the sentence.
Could it be a mistranslation on the author's part?
|
> ****
It's a rhetorical question (/). It's not really a normal _question_ that asks for an answer/reply. It means/implies "What would I be afraid of? -- No, I would be afraid of nothing!"
Examples:
> *
> "Who knows? (Nobody knows.)"
> *
> "How could I forget? (I could never forget.)"
> * *
> "What would it matter? (It doesn't matter!)"
> * *
> "What do they care for but money? (They only care for money!)"
>
The latter two examples are taken from Weblio.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, meaning, rhetorical questions"
}
|
ごめんなさい How do I say that I am sorry in a deeply apologetic manner?
Recently, I posted content concerning questions and answers from this website to another without providing proper attribution to the posters and commenters. I want to say that I am sorry, but also convey a deeper sense of apology. Are there additional words or phrases that can be used to express a deeper remorse? Thank you.
|
A standard formal apology would be , which can be made more formal as . For an extremely formal apology (for example, a CEO making a public apology for their company's misconduct), might be good. Optionally, you could say or before either of them.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
ねぇ、ちゃっと寄ってかない! Is the sentence written correctly?
I mistakenly typed the statement with a question mark. It was actually written with an exclamation point. ! I am thinking that the phrase should be ended with a ka or no, and be phrased as a question. Apparently, the sentence can be written both as a statement and as a question.
|
> Is the sentence written correctly?
If you mean "just a little" "just a moment" or "for a little while" by the , then it should be a typo for , as in:
If you mean "a chat room" by the , then it's _usually_ written in Katanaka, as in: ()
> Should this phrase be ended with ka or no, as a question?
No, as pointed out in the comments, you don't need a or in a question, especially in casual conversation.
would make sense too. It would sound masculine and maybe a bit blunt.
has a nuance that the speaker is/was expecting the hearer to drop by somewhere, like "Oh, so you won't drop by (although I thought you would)?"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": -5,
"tags": "syntax"
}
|
What is the difference between のちがいい and あとがいい？
I want to say "Is later okay?" Is there a specific difference between the two terms? A friend of mine routinely uses the first term, I have been using the second term. TY.
|
If you want to ask "Can I do it later (even though you want me to do it now)?" by "Is later okay?", you need **** ?
**** and **** are critically different in Japanese.
* What is the difference between and here?
implies it's the ideal first choice, whereas implies it's acceptable but not an ideal one.
**** ? means "Do you rather want to me to do it later?" (i.e., "You don't want me to do it now, right?")
You can use an _optional_ time marker after . Don't confuse this with the described above.
Therefore:
> * ? = ? = Do you (rather) want me to do it later?
> * ? = ? = Can I do it later?
>
is not usually followed by /.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, phrases"
}
|
Is カンニングペーパー a good translation for 'cheat-sheet'?
It's kindof silly, but my understanding of is that it has a negative connotation, particularly cheating/plagiarism. I understand it to mean that a is something used to cheat (not allowed). Am I wrong for understanding it this way?
I ask because, cheat-sheet in English does not carry a negative connotation, even though the 'cheat' in cheat-sheet actually comes from the verb 'cheat' (i.e. break the rules). In English cheat-sheets are typically something that a teacher/professor allows the student to have.
Because of this subtle difference between my understanding of and 'cheat-sheet,' I feel the need to ask if this is really a good translation. So, is it a good translation? Is there a better translation for the cheat-sheet I just described above?
|
has already become a widely-accepted term among professional IT workers. For example, there is a Git.
and are mainly used in product documentations for ordinary people. Telephones 20 years ago had no LCDs but had large instead.
is another safe and neutral word usable in most cases, although it may not sound as "cool" as .
does have a negative connotation, and is never acceptable in examinations. (The correct spelling is , not .) If there is no risk of misunderstanding, is occasionally used in the sense of cheat-sheet. Palm cards used when making an oral presentation is sometimes (half-jokingly) called , too.
The etymology of is the English word _cunning_ but with a meaning much closer to _cheating_ (like cheating on a test) rather an a type of wisdom at trading. It's a term.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "translation, words"
}
|
Why should I use わけだ and not ものだ in this sentence?
_______
1. 2.
The answer is 1.
But I think the last phrase is a statement of fact, which fits 's usage.
|
for "cold fact" is used like this:
> *
> *
> * 5
> *
>
(Some of these were taken from this page)
is used to show an unavoidable, uncontrollable fact everyone should be aware of. Whether you like it or not, the speaker believes it's the truth of this world. That's why the same construction also expresses an obligation.
But "" is not really a piece of information of which everyone should be aware. It's no more than his own catchy way of explaining the aforementioned information. In addition, by using and , he indicates it's a "temporary" fact. In such a case, is not appropriate.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why is intentional form used in 「カラオケに行こうと誘われました」?
> ****
I can easily understand what this sentence wants to tell me, but I don't really understand why intentional form is used here. I usually would just use plain form .
|
The form with _-ō_ isn't just for intentions (the intentional mood). It's also for invitations, i.e. an encouragement to do something together (the **cohortative mood** , like English "let's").
To understand the sentence, first we have to consider that the clause before is a quotative argument. X means "I was invited to 'X'", where I put quotes around 'X' to emphasize how the particle works; it takes complete sentences and treat them as quotations. That isn't done as often in English, but the structure is parallel to: "A neighbor invited me, like, 'let's go to the karaoke!'." – except in Japanese it doesn't sound casual or slangy; it's just a normal, unmarked way of expressing the idea.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, conjugations, volitional form"
}
|
Problems with the function of に and the meaning of 失礼
Why is used here? And what function does take?
>
First, I have no idea how the meaning „impoliteness“ should fit into this, with which jisho.org provides me <
Second, the “excuse” meaning was till now always connected to the verb suru „“.
Third, I don’t know how to meaningfully connect the phrase „“ to the verb „“ via the particle . It makes little to no sense in my opinion should take the meaning of „refuse“.
„To inform“ could work, but I can’t remember that I would ever have seen the particle used in this way in such a context. Maybe „please inform (him/her) in the impolite details“ ?
I don’t know, I can’t beat sense into it.
I think I know what the sentence wants to tell me, but I can’t properly translate the sentence and therefore have no idea whether my vague interpretation is correct or not…
|
As pointed out in the comments section, the in your sentence means , not .
> ****
"You don't really like Karaoke. ( _lit._ Please turn down the invitation in such a way that there won't be rudeness/impoliteness ⇒) Please turn down the invitation in such a way that you won't sound rude/impolite."
( (or)) consists of: particle + i-adjective + auxiliary ( is its continuative form/), and means "so that there won't be..." "in such a way that there won't be..." The is a noun here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, semantics"
}
|
How to say "I think studying English is easier for Brazilians than for Japanese"
I wanna say "I think that for Brazilians, studying English is easier than it is for Japanese"
I know how to make simple comparisons like
>
but I am having trouble coming up with that sentence, specifically because the only place I can check if it is right is Google translator, but I know it is not reliable... my attempt is:
>
Thanks!
|
I think your attempt is a literal translation. I translate it as ().
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, comparative constructions"
}
|
（来る）んだったなって = should have (come)?
****
Furthermore, if i were able to see this kinda of bonus (sunset) , honestly, i (should have?) came here to play when i was a kid.
There is an entry for meaning "to do" as a suffix, but how does it convey the meaning that i think it conveys in this sentence?
should have = ?
|
> > ****
>
> Furthermore, if i were able to see this kinda of bonus (sunset) , honestly, i (should have?) came here to play when i was a kid.
>
> should have = ?
As A.Ellett says, it's [].
It's a contraction of . It's the same as , so you guessed right and it's saying "I should have come to play here when I was a kid."
And we never really say these, but I think this is representing , 'things'.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How to use しっくり
> ****
> = I arrived too early at the place selling chopsticks, and ended up squatting outside. Completely .... not come?
I went there at the wrong time? I didn't go appropriately? What's the meaning of the second sentence here?
|
by itself is an adverb meaning something like "nicely", "perfectly", describing how something fits well with something. But it's almost always used in combination with , anyway.
() after certain adverbs is something like "comes off to me as ", "strikes me as ", "It occurs to me that ", etc. It's the fifth definition of :
>
So literally means "it does not strike me as perfect" or something similar. It's a set phrase, and possible translations would be "I feel something is wrong", "I somehow feel uneasy", "It's kinda out of place", "It seems a bit off", etc. As mentioned in the comment, the cause of such a feeling is not mentioned in your excerpt.
means "No later than ", "As soon as ".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words"
}
|
what does なってしもう mean?
>
My unsure translation: "House , I become **** a body who can't go on living without you".
whats going on with the Is it a casual/conversational version of ? Also what's that doing in there?
|
I believe you're translating a bit of Kansai dialect there. <
means "I" in this context, and yes, according to the page above, becomes with Kansai dialect. - also becomes -.
Your translation isn't too far off. I think it would roughly be, "I've become someone who can't live without you."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "colloquial language, dialects, conversational, casual"
}
|
Why is vegetable 野菜 and not just 菜?
Whenever I see _vegetable_ translated, it seems to always be as {}. But doesn't by itself mean vegetable? If so, why add the extra character?
I've noticed this in a couple of other cases as well, such as {} being used for _language_ even though by itself also means language (such as in ).
Are these combinations done just for historical reasons, or is there a logic behind this that I'm missing?
|
Well, this isn't totally a Japanese problem, but a nature of Chinese vocabulary.
You said " by itself mean vegetable", but more exactly speaking, means:
* "edible plant": , , etc.
* "dish (cooked food other than grain)": , , etc.
A single kanji is often polysemous, and the most of those kanji are only viable within compounds, being interdependent with other characters to specify their meanings.
In modern Japanese, is the only way to refer to "vegetables", and doesn't exist as an independent word.
Similarly, only roughly means "act of speaking", that is "language" (, ...), "word, term" (, ...), or "speech, talk" (, ...). does have a standalone usage, but it's linguistic term of "word", instead of "language".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words, kanji, etymology, compounds"
}
|
When to use te form vs. で
So means "I go to work by bus." Yet, also means "I go to work by bus."
Do these two sentences convey the exact same meaning, or is there some kind of nuance that exists when using instead of te form (for this kind of situation in general)?
|
> 1.
> 2.
>
Indeed, the two sentences virtually mean the same thing, but I can't generalize anything here. # **1** literally says "I get on a bus, **and** go to the office," and the # **2** literally says "I go to the office **by** bus."
(te-form) is the form to continue the sentence. is like conjunction 'and'.
has many usages, but basically indicates a means, like the preposition 'by'.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles, て form"
}
|
What is the way 召されなば is conjugated?
In a bit old Japanese, the phrase:
> {}{}
means "if you (talking to a superior) put on the straw sandals" (I assume from the context).
Where does the conjugation of come from?
|
> ****
[][][]
This should be of .
is treated as a compound word in the linked dictionary page, and means "having done (something) ~".
I'm no good at old Japanese, but I think it says that when (someone) has put on (grass/straw) sandals, in polite language.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "conjugations, keigo, classical japanese"
}
|
Is tonai (都内）only used for the Tokyo metropolitan area specifically?
I was having a chat conversation and used the word to comment on a profile. The person chatted that there are different words used depending on where the person is from, so if a person is from the Sendai metropolitan area, tonai is not used. Please advise.
|
> Is tonai (only used for the Tokyo metropolitan area specifically?
Yes. We have only one []{} in Japan: []{}.
[]{} _lit._ within the prefecture of Tokyo ⇒ in/within Tokyo
Compare:
[]{} -- in/within Hokkaido ()
[]{} -- in/within Osaka or Kyoto (We have two 's: and )
[]{} -- in/within the prefecture (other than the four above)
> if a person is from the Sendai metropolitan area, tonai is not used.
No, isn't used to refer to or .
Sendai ([]{}) is in Miyagi Prefecture ([]{}). You'd say to mean "within Miyagi Prefecture" and to mean "within Sendai City".
[]{} -- in/within the []{}/city
[]{} -- in/within the []{/}/town
[]{} -- in/within the []{}/village
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
When do you use の to join nouns and colours/adjectives?
When do you use to join nouns and colours? I know that green pencil is {} but I'm not sure if it's the same for other colours or adjectives.
|
> When do you use to join nouns and colours/adjectives?
Adjectives are made to modify a noun, so they don't need : ex. .
Nouns basically need to be connected to another noun: ex. .
For colours, it's something hard to tell if we don't know, but this page is affirming that we have only limited colours that can be used as adjectives.
Only four of type: , , , , and two of type: , .
Ex: , , etc.
Other colors are nouns and always need to connect to another noun.
Ex: , , , , , etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particles, particle の"
}
|
Function of に in this phrase?
>
>
> I have my own way of thinking.
I knew has some basic usage in:
1. Location of Existence
2. Direction and Destination
3. Destination
4. Result of Change
5. Object of Verb
6. Source
7. Specific Time
8. Notion of Per
But I couldn't figure out the use of "" in this sentence.
Can the literal translation of the above phrase be: "To me, I have my own way of thinking"?
|
> ****
The is closest to #1 on your list: Location of existence.
According to :
>
> ① (1) **** **** 3 ****
The indicates the location of existence or the possessor/owner of something.
So your sentence would _literally_ translate to: "In me, my own idea exists." ⇒ "I have my own idea."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Use of どうも in this sentence
>
It seems that he visited the lookout to meet her
In terms of , the person in question has already visited her several times and there really isn't much difficulty in doing so. So the somehow/no matter what definition is hard to apply here.
thank you
|
That or are a kind of adverbs called (guiding adverb), which alone doesn't really work but leads a certain type of predicates according to each word, in this case, conjecture through observation like … or ….
Even without , the meaning of the sentence doesn't change.
, , or so are this kind too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What are paper humans called?
In anime paper humans are shown frequently. When there is bad weather, people (in anime) do some angels (I think) from paper and post it on the window. What is it called?
|
I think you might be looking for the word teru teru bōzu.
From English Wikipedia:
> A teru teru bōzu (Japanese: , lit. "shine shine monk") is a small traditional handmade doll made of white paper or cloth that Japanese farmers began **hanging outside of their window by a string**. In shape and construction they are essentially identical to ghost dolls, such as those made at Halloween. This talisman is supposed to have magical powers to **bring good weather and to stop or prevent a rainy day**. Teru is a Japanese verb which describes sunshine, and a bōzu is a Buddhist monk (compare the word bonze), or in modern slang, "bald-headed"; bōzu is also used as a term of endearment for addressing little boys.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word requests"
}
|
約 得 recognition and translation
![enter image description here]( I've got a problem with translation of #8 and #9. I'm not confident if recognised #9 correctly and if these kanji go together of separately.
They may mean "Seems like understood" but please correct me if I'n wrong.
|
You recognized #8 correctly, but #9 is actually .
The word is read {} and I think it's something close to a "sound effect" of the character realizing that somebody knew (Kazushige?).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, kanji"
}
|
How to say "artistic composition"?
The word _composition_ has several meanings in English, and from looking at dictionary entries, it seems it also can be translated several different ways in Japanese.
**When referring specifically to composition in the context of visual arts, what term would be used in Japanese?**
Surprisingly, the Wikipedia entry for composition) currently has no Japanese translation.
The closest word I am aware of in Japanese is []{}, but to me that feels closer to "composite". The idea of combining in the sense of layering data more than in the sense of layout or balancing of visual elements.
|
I believe the word is .
> ****
It specifically gives a translation "composition".
Also I think you can use the broader concept , which is not limited to visual arts.
> ****
**EDIT**
refers to the "result of composition", for the "act of composition" you should use or .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, definitions, word requests"
}
|
Is the Japanese word "pan" (パン) related in its origins to the Spanish word "pan"?
"Pan", in both Japanese and Spanish means bread. Is this purely coincidental, or do they have the same origin?
|
According to jisho.org **** has its origins from the Portuguese word “pão”, and was originally written as or before being written as like it is today.
> Is this pure coincidence or do they have the same origins?
Seeing as how both Spanish and Portuguese are Latin-based languages, I think it's not a stretch of the imagination to say that the origins are related.
**EDIT:**
Using the information from the comments below, I have an updated etymology for you.
1) _Panis_ is the Latin word for bread. The Spanish _pan_ , the Portuguese _pão_ and French _pain_ derive from this Latin root. (@ToddWilcox)
2) was introduced to Japan by Portuguese Missionaries. (see answer below, as well as this Wikipedia article compliments of @leoboiko)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 35,
"question_score": 27,
"tags": "etymology, loanwords"
}
|
What is this 連用形+ゆる grammar? How is it different from the potential form?
I have come across this grammar a lot lately:
> +
For example, in this comment,
> ****
I've also heard . Judging from the context I think that this grammar is similar to the potential form. So is basically and is .
Am I right? How do the two grammars differ?
|
is an archaic verb meaning in modern Japanese. is the attributive form () of .
* /
In modern Japanese, there is no verb that ends with , but in archaic Japanese some verbs ended with .
* (= in modern Japanese)
* (= in modern Japanese)
Etymologically, yes, was an archaic auxiliary verb which was used similarly to /. See (as a ) in a .
is still occasionally used in titles and such (example), but sounds to me like a strange mixture of modern and archaic Japanese.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, classical japanese, potential form"
}
|
How to speak about "one" thing in Japanese?
In short, what I mean is, how can I mention about one certain thing (not one thing in amount) in Japanese?
For example "one morning" in the following sentence:
> As Gregor Samsa awoke _**one morning**_ from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.
I come across some usages like " **** X". For instance:
* One morning -> ****
* One day -> ****
Is this **** may be what am I looking for?
|
> > As Gregor Samsa awoke **_one morning_** from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.
>
> One morning ->
>
> Is this may be what am I looking for?
I can confirm it is the one, as a native speaker.
The kanji version is , but more often it appears in : …, , , etc.
We also sometimes say : (with rather a feel of popular literature).
is yet another possibility, in the same manner: ex. , {}, , etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "expressions, prefixes"
}
|
I need help with this sentence! 居るなら居ると言ってくれればいいのにと誰にともなく唇をとがらせる。
> A:
>
> B:
>
> ****
My translation is "...if you're here, I wish you would say 'I'm here'..."
I don't understand after …
means "doing something without thinking", correct?
Please help me understand this!
|
With some punctuation:
>
* Here is used as a sentence-end particle. Your translation of this part is fine. See: What does mean at the end of this sentence?
* is a quotative particle. Here or something similar is omitted after it.
* / is a set phrase meaning "to no one in particular". `interrogative + ` is a common pattern. You may have seen (="out of nowhere") before.
* / is an idiomatic phrase, "to pout", "to shoot out the lip".
Without , the sentence would mean the speaker actually said to their mother. implies that the person only thought this (or said this in a small voice to themselves).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Usage of に in this sentence
****
Asuka _gathered(?) many (photographs) of Mare via his camera_ ??
Aside from the odd use of , why did they use over in this sentence?
Thank you
|
I think this may be similar to how in English we can say we "caught" something in our camera. The idea being that the film is in the camera and film captures the image. In this case, makes sense as the location of where the image is (as opposed to how the image was captured).
There is an on-line thesaurus for which a web search of shows up.
And this web site explains as follows:
>
>
>
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle に"
}
|
A complex structure: Xが～するYについて、～する者は
So I'm reading the One Punch Man manga to learn some vocabulary. I have the Portuguese translation and I compare it with my translation.
But I read something that I think is wrong in the Portuguese translation or I lost the Japanese way of expression:
A little context. So this guy is a genius and everyone praises him.
The next text is:
>
I translated like "he doesn't care about people ideas."
The Portuguese translation is like "people don't agree with his ideas."
I'm lost.
|
>
> The portuguese translation is like "people doesn't agree with his ideas"
The translation is correct.
> I translated like "he doens't care about people ideas"
It's
> **** {} **** ** ** {} ****
The main clause is
is an adverbial phrase to ; and this is an adjective to .
* * *
When you see **** , try thinking of it as an **_alarm_** for you to know the existence of a **_subordinate clause_** or a modifying clause.
I can't generalize here, but at least I can tell you that _the sentence subject could be indicated later in the sentence with _.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing, reading comprehension, は and が, subordinate clauses, modification"
}
|
What's the difference between 記号 and しるし？
I know that is translated as 'symbol' or 'code' while is 'mark' or 'sign' but I can't seem to figure out when to use the appropriate one.
What's the difference between these sentences?
|
**** ("symbols") on a map typically look like this (See List of Japanese map symbols):
, (zodiac symbols), (alchemical symbols) and so on. So each has been designed by someone and has its own relatively complex meaning.
On the other hand, a **** ("mark") on a map is usually something like this:
![enter image description here]( ![enter image description here](
is just a _mark_ ; it's an indicator that tells something noteworthy is there, but it may not convey something more complicated than "No", "Look", "Important", etc. Common Japanese people use are (; arrow), (; circle), (; cross), (; star). Its shape is often unimportant when it's used merely as a .
**EDIT:** A doesn't even have to be drawn on paper or a screen. A stone dropped on the ground can work as a marker/.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "definitions, word usage"
}
|
Is this で a particle or the connective form of copula? Or something else?
> ****
I would translate it like this:
"Concerning yesterday, there being terrible rain and thunder dropping it was terrible."
In this case I assumed that represents the connective form of /.
|
You're right. Literally, "Yesterday, it was terrible rain and there were claps of thunder and it was awful." Since the basic sentence is , you could make "yesterday" the subject of "was awful" in an English translation: "Yesterday was awful - there was terrible rain and claps of thunder".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.