INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
The meaning of "XX GAME お客様サポート係 横井でございます"
Recently I sent an email to a game's support channel and the first paragraph of their reply email contains this sentence "XX GAME ".
I tried Google translate "" but it only shows "Yokoi" (the Japanese pronunciation).
I also learnt about "" is a polite form from this forum.
May I know what is the meaning of ""? Does it refer to the name of support personnel?
And does "" refer to "is" ?
Thanks.
|
is his/her family name.
means "the staff of ~~ division."
> “XX GAME ”
**_This is Yokoi, a staff member of XX Games Customer Support._**
(Partially quoted from _Wataru 'Watson' Subridge_ 's comment)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, kanji"
}
|
Question ending with "no?" -- can I use "n da?" instead, among friends?
I know what "no da" and "n da" are for. When I hear the question something like "nani wo shite iru no?" from a friend, I wonder: can the question "nani wo shite iru n da?" be used instead? Do they mean exactly the same meaning or is there **any difference in connotation**?
or
doko e iku no? --> doko e iku n da?
In other words, can "(na) no?" always be replaced with "(na) n da?" **in a question** when talking to friends? Will this soound a bit more direct and masculine?
|
> In other words, can "(na) no?" always be replaced with "(na) n da?" in a question when talking to friends? Will this sound a bit more direct and masculine?
Yes. Exactly. It sounds a bit more direct and masculine.
If you are a man, you can almost always exchange each other.
On the other hand, if you are a woman, you had better not replace "(na) no?" with "(na) n da?". It sounds weird.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, questions, casual"
}
|
What about this combination of と and や
For Full context, see here: <
The problem is in this sentence (line 1):
> "KARAOKE" "JUDO" "TSUNAMI"
Here's my attempt at translation: "'Karaoke' nowadays is becoming lined up common world language with 'Judo' and 'Tsunami'etc. ."
seems to be an attribute to . That's why I think of it as [ **X** = subject] [ **is becoming** = predicative] [ **lined up common world language** = object/copula-object or what it is called in english terminology]. This makes little sense in my opinion, but I can't see another way of linking these elements.
Then there is the thing with and . marks an unfinished list/enumeration. The enumeration can't end with , since this marks a finished list. as a marker for quotation doesn't really work here as well, same goes for conditional phrase particle. The only way I can think of is that marks the relation between KARAOKE and "the unfinished list". So "Karaoke is becoming... **with** 1,2 etc."
|
> "KARAOKE" "JUDO" "TSUNAMI"
> _Karaoke_ , along with _judo_ and _tsunami_ , has now become an international common word.
This is _to rank with_ , _to rival_ or _to match_. This is not quotative, but a particle that can often correspond to English _with_. Practically, you need to remember which verb takes . Here are some verbs that take non-quotative :
* to part _with_ him
* to compare _with_ English
* to fight _with_ enemies
* to rank _with_ Mt. Fuji in height
* to differ _from_ Japanese
This is not the progressive form, but it refers to a "continuation of state". See: When is V the continuation of action and when is it the continuation of state?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How is this nominal phrase meant
For full context, see here: <
The sentence in question (line 5): **** My attempt at translation: "Mr. Inoue had a job in Kobe where he did musical performances matching what the customers sang."
is of special interest here. As I translated, I think that is like here and it literally nominalizes the verbal phrase into " 'the customer sing' thing". However, I might be wrong, and here is why I think so. I could also imagine the phrase being ...: "...job where he did musical perfomances matching the singing customer." Ultimately, both phrases mean the same, but they are still different from a grammatical perspective. Since I don't feel very sure about my interpretation, I wanted to ask for confirmation.
In case my first interpretation should be correct, would the second construction I thought up be grammatical?
|
I think you're correct.
synchronizing the act/thing of customer's singing. This is a reasonable interpretation, I think.
However, if you think voice, it becomes easier to translate: Synchronizing costumer's singing voice. This is an interpretation in which the is a pronoun like "it" or "one." And the "it/one" could mean their "voice."
Besides, your version, , is perfectly fine and grammatical. And I agree with your point. This sentence has a different syntax grammatically, although the meaning is the same.
>
**_Mr. Inoue had a job to play the musical instrument synchronizing customer's singing voice._**
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Subject of this たら...た construction
For full context see here: <
The sentence in question (line 6-7):
The main issue lies in determining wether Mr. Inoue or the customer is the subject of the verbal complex . First, here's my attempt at translation: "When he (Mr. Inoue) did the favor of making a record matching the pitch and speed of the man, he (???) gave the favor of being pleased much/pleasing much/accepting very gratefully." I think considering the difference between and in terms of courtesy could help here. By context, Mr. Inoue must be the subject of the sentence preceding , so the text assumes that Mr. Inoue positions himself lower than the customer, which makes sense. is neutral as far as I know, so considering the pretext, this would fit the customer. Still, since all this is narrated by an external narrator, I feel pretty unsure about my interpretations. So I think the sentence should mean:"..., the customer gave the favor of being very pleased."
|
The subject of is , and the subjec of is (or ).
> **** ****
The contrast of and is enough to determine the implied subjects here. "He (the customer) gave Inoue the favor of being pleased" may not be the most natural sentence, but the gist is that the customer was pleased (""), and that fact in turn pleased Inoue-san ("").
/ can be safely used when the narrator says something from someone else's standpoint. The main character of this essay is Inoue-san, so the narrator is using / from Inoue-san's point of view.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does this なのである do in this sentence?
For full context, see here: <
The sentence in question (last line): ****
First, my attempt at translation: "Now, Karaoke is not (just) a mere machine and japan is a culture holding proud in the world."
I just translated the sentence as if wasn't present in the respective phrase because I don't know what to with it here. I also must say that I wonder wether my interpretation of the second part of this sentence ("Japan is...") is correct at all. It seems a bit far fetched to me to make Karaoke representative of the whole japanese culture xD At least this sentence sounds to me like it does so...^^ That said, maybe japanese people themselves think so. I don't know, I don't have that much insight into japanese people's heads :D
|
The is just a case of the "explanatory " which adds a slight explanatory nuance to the sentence but doesn't directly affect the meaning much, so it's fine to leave it out in the translation.
However, I think you're interpreting the grammar of the rest of the sentence a little wrong. The subject (topic) of the second part of the sentence isn't Japan - it's still , the same topic established in the first half of the sentence. So it can be rephrased as
is a relative clause modifying , so the whole thing means something like "Nowadays, karaoke is not a mere machine, but a culture for Japan to proudly display to the whole world."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does ずっとああ mean?
Is it roughly "all the way like that"?
|
>
**_"I'm not accustomed to it yet. So my behavior is always (awkward) as such."_**
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Which phrase structure is okay to use?
I wonder if is it okay to use all the below structures in a conversation? Is there any structure I should avoid using? The phrase in this case is `I ate fried chicken`.
>
> “I fried chicken ate.”
>
>
> “Ate, fried chicken.”
>
>
> “Fried chicken ate, I.”
Which of the above structures you guys use the most? And in what given situations you apply each structure?
|
It depends on contexts.
The first is an answer to a question "What did you do/eat?". after implies presence of plural "you" here. However, if the question is "What would you do?, it's enough possible that singular "you" is asked.
The second is an answer to "Did you eat something?", in which you first tell an information that is asked and add supplementary one.
The third is one to "What did you eat?" or "How did it go?" (Presence of additional makes it lean to this side, and under this question, could take if it's unexpected for to do so).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, word order"
}
|
What is the meaning of よう in this sentence?
“G” ****
My translation - "I can't even tune up Gear without essential 'G', so my precious Gear has to stay wimpy for now."
|
This is a filler meaning nothing. It's used in the same way as , , , etc. If I'm not mistaken, this one is used mainly in Kanto district. Among similar fillers, this one sounds masculine and a bit rough.
**EDIT:** You may have seen a sentence-end or , which is a mild and gentle particle safely used by girls and children. But as a mid-sentence filler, sounds fairly differently.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
一番 with verbs rather than adjectives
> ****
> According to the country's research, the amount of sanma coming to the seas near Japan this year seems to have decreased compared to last year where ???
I assume is a relative clause modifying 'last year' but I'm struggling to make sense out of it.
Literally I translate it as "up until now most not harvested". So overall I think the message is that last year they caught the least number of fish ever, and this year is predicted to be worse. Is this correct?
I think I normally see with an adjective (rather than a verb) so I'm finding it a little confusing. Could you please provide a few simple examples of used with a verb so I can get a better feel for its use? Does it only work in relative clauses?
|
Your interpretation about the message is correct.
is actually an **_adverb_** in this situation, and it is modifying the verb . In many other situations however, you often find it modifying an adjective instead, i.e "" hence why it might be confusing.
Here are some examples:
"" from j-nihongo.com
"" (self made)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What is っしゃ here?
> …… ……
Is it a colloquial form of ?
|
It is just an abbreviation of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "colloquial language"
}
|
What's the meaning of あったかもね?
This is the first time I have seen this and I don't know its meaning or what does in the sentence
> ****
Best Regards
|
is just the past tense of the common verb , to exist. In this case, it's part of the expression , meaning to "have the potential" for something. (eg. "He has the makings of a scientist!")
is a short form of , the common way of expressing possibility. It can usually be translated as "maybe", "perhaps", "might have" etc.
And is the common sentence-ending particle indicating a "tag question" or an expectation of agreement. It can be often be translated as something like "right?" or "you know" (if it needs translating at all). When used together with , it often indicates the speaker is tentatively agreeing with a point someone else has made.
So to put it all together, the sentence means something like "Maybe he did sort of have the potential." (What exactly he had the potential for - and indeed whether the subject is actually a "he" at all - is a mystery without more context.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Would I be right in reading 「私には...」as 「to me it's ...」？
Would I be correct in reading things like or as being "to me"? Like in the following:
> To me sushi is tasty!
Or
> To him she is better than anyone.
Would I be right in reading it like this? Interpreting as a bit of grammar that is often times used to explain what a scene is from a certain persons perspective? Or would this be to unreliable?
|
is followed by the topic/contrast marker . So yes, it can mean "to me" or "personally", but is often used for this purpose, too. See: Help with and
* Use ("she") instead of ("woman"). I suppose it's a mere typo :)
* In the first sentence, you probably have to use instead of , because this sentence describes a general fact rather than what you've just perceived. In the second sentence, you can use both and after , because has the 'exhaustive-listing' function (i.e., "among many women").
* at the end of a sentence after the dictionary form of a verb/adjective sounds like you're trying to strongly convince someone; e.g., ! ≒ But it's true!; ! ≒ Hey, you have to go there!
The corrected version would be:
> * (acceptable)
> * (recommended)
> * (acceptable)
> * (recommended)
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particle に, interpretation"
}
|
Is the meaning of ありあまる negative or positive?
According to the dictionary on my MacBook Pro, means "be [have*] more than enough". I was thinking about the song by : when I first heard the word/expression.
The question boils down to if I can use as a positive expression
` I have lots of romance, and that is a good thing`
or a negative expression
` I am fed of with romance, and that is a bad thing`
Or maybe it is context dependent?
The dictionary also provides me with two examples
have too much [an excess of] energy.
He has more money than he can spend.
But I still do not know if they are meant as negative or positive.
|
I don't think the English expressions, "too many," "too much," and "more than he can spend", are negative, grammatically. I believe that they are affirmative expressions.
However, I agree that they would mean something that has a **_bad_** connotation.In other words, a **_negative_** connotation. And I believe that you're asking about this point. In that case, I'd say, "It depends on the context."
A "" guy may have a lot of girlfriends and tend to have immoral love affairs. So I think it would mean something bad, when I think of the moral.
>
In this sentence, however, the writer apparently envies him. So they probably think that it's a good thing for him or for them.
>
In this case, I envy him, and I personally don't think it's bad thing to be rich for him.
In short, it depends on the context and you cannot decide which grammatically.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "expressions"
}
|
Am I understanding this correctly? しないと
There is a character, an older male, in this manga that I'm reading who uses this phrase twice
and the two lines are like this
> 1.
>
> 2.
>
>
The first line, he is referring to himself ( **I** should show my gratitude)-->I understood it more like "It wouldn't do if I don't show my gratitude" "I have/must...(among these ideas). It was more clear when the character said his 2nd line which I interpreted as: Say your goodbyes/Say farewell (note, he was directing this to another character that was with him).
I hope I made sense...What exactly is the usage of here? What does it express? And does the 1st line sound okay with the interpretations I gave?
Thank you!
|
This is a omission of . It means "must", "have to".
I think you understand it correctly.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, particle と"
}
|
What does the て and た forms look like before 音便?
I learned that the reason why and forms conjugate the way they do is because of a phenomenon known as . And I know that happens because it's easier to say the word this way.
However, _what_ is easier to say with ? For example, has been , right? S what would it have been if did not occur?
My guess is that it must be one of the six forms () + , with the and being the most probable. My guess would be something like or . Are my guesses right?
|
Please see this chart for the non- version. As you can see, this type of appears in the te/ta-form of most consonant-stem (aka godan) verbs.
Actually these non- version was commonly used in classical Japanese, and is still used as part of the polite masu-form. For example, was **** in classical Japanese (or in the historical kana orthography). This is a of . Japanese people think and are the two variations of , the latter being the version of the former. See this question for more details.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "conjugations, て form, phonetics"
}
|
What is ちゃんといた?
Is it just and , "it was perfect"?
It's from video game "Xenogears". Throne and Seraphita(villains) approach Fortress Jasper(where the heroes are) in their Gears(giant robots). First Throne, Seraphita right after her.
Seraphita says:
Throne:(answers to Seraphita) (this part refers to the heroes' plan)
|
is the perfect aspect of (to stay) here, which means to have stayed, in other words, "is there". (You use instead or when you refer to existence or presence of things that can essentially move themselves.)
is an adverb that basically means "properly" or "neatly", in this case it means how their target is there as is planed.
So it says "Throne, Throne, it's there, it's certainly there!".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
In "盛りなる御代", how do you read "盛"
"..." It's from Genjimonogatari.
My two cadidates are either ·, so "mori-naru" ro "sakari-naru".
I can tell the meaning of the word, but I'm not sure which way I should read in this context, and in this specific book.
|
is translated by jisho.org as `to prosper; to flourish,` and is `to serve/to pile up.`
The definition you want there is definitely `to prosper; to flourish` since is defined as an `imperial reign.`
Putting it together, { is a prosperous imperial reign.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "onyomi"
}
|
About which topic is this text talking? a ticket for a train, bus?
> A: 12
> B: 1
> A:
> B: (source, page 2, number 2)
In this text, they are talking about a ticket for a train, bus or something the like? The 1 suggests to me that the ticket is for public transport. means "facing in the direction of travel" in this context, am I right?
Since this text seems to make every effort not to be too specific about what these 2 are talking exactly, I merely wanted to ask for confirmation
|
refers to seats near the front-row, the stage, the screen, etc.
I think most people feel they are talking about a ticket for some stage performance, since they are talking about 1 and 2 ("the first/second floor"). Balcony seats are often referred to as 2 in Japanese. They may be talking about a bilevel/double-decker train/bus, but asking for a of a train doesn't make much sense to me.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
what is a meaning of しければ in a classical japanese?
I'm stuck with this sentence - ""
It's part of the folktale "". I know that mean to indicate end of statement in classical japanese, so does it mean to be some sort of connection word in this case?
In modern japanese it has at the end - ""
|
{}→{}({})→{}→{}({})→{} ****
is just the {}/masu stem of a verb together with the auxiliary verb in {} form, with the particle attached to it.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "classical japanese"
}
|
The meaning of てくれん in 「アギマの領地を削り取ってくれん」
I came across this line recently and don't know how to interpret it. For context, the speaker is the commander of a foreign army and his forces have just met those of the on the battlefield. He says this line to the army's commander before the battle.
>
I initially assumed was the shortened form of but that doesn't make much sense, does it? Could someone explain what is doing here?
|
This is a combination of the followings:
1. "Arrogant and derogatory ", used when the speaker does something bad to others or when someone does something bad to the speaker
* Why is used here and not (see the third example)
* Using for doing something bad
2. Archaic volitional auxiliary , which is also written as
* archaic -an conjugation
* What is the verb ending of mean?
So is an even more pompous/arrogant/old-fashioned version of or (This is used in the second sense here.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
Why is ふい written in hiragana?
I reckon that is a kango word (), but I usually see it written in hiragana, even in print. Neither of the two characters are hard, and if people are typing it shouldn't matter that is easier to write, so I wonder if there are any other reason why is usually writtein in hiragana.
|
There are two different listed in dictionaries:
* **** (jisho.org, ): sudden; abrupt; unexpected; unforeseen
* **** (jisho.org, ): coming to nothing; ending without result; total waste
The second one has nothing to do with , and has to be written in hiragana. That is, you can say but not nor .
According to this, meaning _total waste_ may be etymologically related to .
In addition, meaning _unexpectedly_ is often written in kana these days, and I think that's because this is becoming a lexicalized adverb, which should be generally written in kana. (We still can say , but I have never heard .) and are other examples of adverbs which are commonly written in hiragana.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "orthography"
}
|
In the sentence「みどりがきれいなまちです」, why is が used?
And how should the sentence be translated? "It's a beautiful green town"? "It's a beautifuly green town"? "It's a greenish beautiful town"?
|
in this sentence is not an adjective ("green", "greenish"), but a noun meaning "greenery".
is an adjective modifying the above noun.
The whole sentence reads then as "It is a town with beautiful greenery".
* * *
in effect does not connect two adjectives, but a part of relative clause. Either or can be used here, see this question.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particle が, relative clauses"
}
|
疑問詞(interrogative word) + Vば
In previous lesson, my teacher gave me this grammar. And there's an example about it:
? (*)
Generally , it can be translated as: What kind of person would you marry? But what makes me confused is:
?
Are there any differences between them? I just can't get enough with the V. Can anyone help me literally explain that (*) ? Also there're also some similar,such as: ``,...
|
I assume you already know the particle for condition ("if", "when").
You don't have to think of it as a special construction. To understand the difference, just imagine what a typical answer for each question would be. It should be a simple grammatical operation; just replace with something, and drop :
1. ?
→ If there is a kind person, I will marry him/her.
2. ?
→ I will marry a (certain) kind person.
So in the first question, the questioner doesn't have an assumption whether the other person will ever marry someone. Or the questioner may be thinking he is reluctant to marry someone (i.e., "I know you don't to want to marry anyone, but _if_ you would marry someone, what kind of person she would be?").
On the other hand, in the second question, the questioner already knows the other person will marry someone in the near future, and is just asking what kind of person he marries.
Unsurprisingly, regarding , it is used when you expect an answer like , , etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Identification of the subject of「目をそらすかと。。。」
From what I understand, the expression can be used to express the speaker thinking something might happen, as in . However in the below passage I am having trouble understanding what it means in context.
> ****
I think my biggest confusion here is who is the subject of . Is the speaker saying that she () gripped his hand tightly, as if she might look away? This doesn't seem to fit. Or is he saying that he was going to look away (from the taxi driver?) but then she gripped his hand tightly?
None of the interpretations seem to fit to me.
If someone can help me understand, I'd appreciate it.
Update: You can see this paragraph in context here.
|
So they have been looking at each other, right?
Then this implies she gripped his hand as if she were saying "Are you looking away from me? (i.e,. Don't look at the driver! Keep watching me!)" that follows would mean "so I gave up looking at the driver, and kept watching her."
If this still makes no sense, please provide a larger context.
* * *
**EDIT:** Looks like my initial interpretation was wrong. Actually the protagonist was watching the "burning letters", and gripped his hand as if she were saying "Are you looking away from the burning letters? (i.e., Stop it if you are thinking of something dangerous! All we can do now is to keep watching!)" And this seems to mean he gave up trying to go back and rescue the letters.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "subjects"
}
|
に行く grammar with 行く replaced by other verbs
I wonder if I can be more creative and replace with other verbs.
> (1)
>
> (2)
* Tony left the room to prepare coffee for everyone. (1)
* Tony left the room and prepared coffee for everyone. (2)
The first sentence sounds more natural if can be replaced with , since both Japanese verbs express direction. I want to know if I am doing it the acceptable way. Thank you.
EDIT: I meant, the meaning will change depending on the last verb used.
* : Go to do something
* : Leave (a place) to do something
A demonstrating example with even though it is irrelevant :
> (3)
* Yesterday Tony went to the library to study.
|
One of the functions of the particle is showing the purpose/goal of an action (), ie "", so you can replace , but as Chocolate helpfully corrected me in the comments, the way you express this in Japanese changes depending on whether or not the verb expresses movement.
If it is a movement verb, such as //, you use the {} form/masu stem of the action or a noun that expresses an action + + the movement verb.
Examples:
>
>
>
>
If you are using any other verb except for that, you need to add before .
Examples:
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, verbs of motion"
}
|
The meaning of 日本はどうですか
I understand that can mean a suggestion, like somebody is wondering "where should I go on vacation?" and somebody else answers "" - "maybe Japan, how about Japan?" but I tried making a sentence meaning "how do you like Japan?" or "how is Japan?" and I feel like also works.
Am I right? Could I ask to ask somebody visiting Japan what their impression of Japan is?
|
> ****
How about Japan? How about choosing Japan? How about visiting Japan?
> ****
What do you think about Japan? What is your comment/thought/impression about Japan?
You're right! There are two interpretations about
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
Meaning of いやな思い?
So, I was talking to this girl about how I like japan and she asked me that:
>
There are somethings I don't get, first the parsing...
>
>
>
>
>
Is my parsing correct?
Now for the meanings I don't get:
> Is this the that means negative/bad? so a bad feeling or bad thought?
>
> I Just don't get why there is a before
My full attempt in translating is
> **Did you have any bad impressions after coming to Japan?**
Even if my attempt is correct, can you help me clear these points?
Thank you!
|
Did you copy it as it was?
>
The `` before is a kanji , not a long vowel marker or a dash. You can confirm it by copying it to somewhere else and apply some serif font. While a dash or a long vowel marker can be typed just by pressing `-`, the kanji is unlikely to appear by a simple mistype.
So I think she really wanted the kanji . I think it's a typo for ("even once"). Maybe she typed `1` first, and then tried to correct it to ``.
>
> So, after coming to Japan, you did not experience bad things even once?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation, parsing"
}
|
How to interpret だけじゃ with negative verbs?
I'm confused by the use of in this paragraph:
> **** ****
In this first sentence:
> ****
It should be saying something like "Wrestlers alone can't produce great matches" but I'm not sure how to interpret it.
And in this second one:
> ****
It should be saying something like "I felt grateful and needed to say so" but it looks like he's saying "I don't want to say nothing to no one". So. that part is really confusing.
|
Let's fix it into the affirmative form.
**** : Only with thinking "thank you", whatever can penetrate to whomever. (Here, this is instrumental case and means cause or condition.)
When you change it to the negation form, it's **** : You can't tell anything to anyone only with thinking "thank you". (This means that the condition of thinking "thank you" is not a sufficient condition for nothing being penetrable.)
With contracted, it becomes the same as the example sentence. So, it means "you can't tell anything to anyone just because you secretly thank people".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, interpretation, negation"
}
|
Meaning of と together with トラブルになる
> ****
> When the problem of bullying occurs the law says that the school will investigate from the outset. However, when a school investigates, _the number of incidents where_ the children's parents _become troubled_ is increasing. There has also been over 20 in _the last_ 5 years.
I'm not familiar with the word . Does mean "become inconvenienced" or does it mean "get into trouble" i.e. displease someone?
I can't understand what the in is doing. I think I must be completely misunderstanding .
I'm guessing that (literally "thing that became a judgment") means 'prosecutions'. Is this a set phrase? Have I misunderstood?
|
means "get into trouble with", so means "to get into trouble with parents of children".
means "to be put on trial". It means 'prosecutions' as you said.
If the subjects are added, it would be easy to understand. It is ()()
I am translated this sentence as "However, when a school investigates, the number of troubles between schools and parents of children are increasing. The number of the troubles which was put on trial was over 20 in the last 5 years."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle と, reading comprehension"
}
|
what does わかん mean?
Someone has left the following comment on a music video on youtube: Crying End Roll
Crying end roll is the name of the album, which the song in the video is on. is a shortening of
|
is not used in modern standard Japanese. If this were explanatory-/, it requires a dictionary form of before it. / exists in some Eastern/Nothern dialects, but it sounds fairly provincial.
In fact, this is one of so-called ), an Internet meme based on a certain gay porn video series. Semantically it just means something like "That's for sure." Some words originating from this video series are quite popular among net users, and many people are using them even without knowing their origin.
Anyway, is broken as a proper Japanese expression. Use it only when you know what you are doing.
**EDIT:** As @goldbrick pointed out, there are cases where , , , and such can directly attach to , , , etc. They sound rough but not particularly dialectal. can be a sound change of both and , depending on the context. Nevertheless, sounds rare to me, presumably because it's a mixture of rough and mild expressions.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words, slang"
}
|
Is なんとかなる only for positive things?
this phrase is usually used to describe either getting through a hard situation or overcoming something considerably difficult or unpleasant; ie how will you manage to navigate without your smartphone? Basically i understand it to mean 'somehow or other'
Is it unnatural to use it for negative uses of 'somehow or other'? for example - hes really good at speaking japanese in every day life and he studies all the time, but somehow he failed. ... for that situation could you say ?
Sounds wierd to be, so if im right that it is weird, what would you use instead there?
|
No, is weird. It sounds like "I managed to fail", as if you actually wanted to fail. means "I could not manage it", "I couldn't make it, after all", etc.
"Somehow he failed" is {///}.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, words"
}
|
what does 主張し合う mean?
in a manga about management, someone says
Does this mean something like 'bring assertions together'? or come to an agreement when you have two different assertions/ideas that might not neccesarily fit together initially?
|
The phrase ... , as in , , , denotes the **_reciprocal_** nature of the action in question: "they love **_each other_** ", "they kill **_one another_** ", "they hurl abuse at **_each other_** ".
In the case of , they **_each_** (vehemently) voice their own conflicting opinions.
The phrase corresponds to " ** _s'entre_** -tuer", " ** _s'entr_** aider" in French.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words"
}
|
How do you say 'close' as in a close contest?
When I play sports in Japan I hear a lot when for example a shot is almost in, but just out, or if you just about lose a closely contested point or game.
Is there a way to say a match or game was close without including the dissapointment connotation of (dissapointing in the dictionary)?
|
close, almost (made it)
I do not think that always has the disappointment connotation. It is just the same as the English words, "close" and "almost." In many situations, however, the disappointment connotation would be involved because "it was _close_."
Other expressions would be:
****
****
****
=won the game)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "phrase requests"
}
|
Meaning of 「ブリった」
I was listening to a Japanese rap the other day, and came across the word . A comment on the video said it meant "get high". I tried searching for the meaning online, and the only answer I could find was this answer that says it's probably a contraction of .
It doesn't make a ton of sense to me, cause in context the verse is which if either one of the definitions were correct, would loosely mean "everyone got high" or "everyone was acting cute". Does anyone know definitely what this slang means and where its origins are?
|
>
>
>
>
>
<
According to the information, means "smoke weed."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, slang, song lyrics"
}
|
How to use many
110
I'm having trouble understanding and , Is it literally saying 'more than many needed to use' and 'many energy'?
|
Your understanding of the first is correct, "more than necessary for (using) the ". The second is indeed tricky, but in this context it obviously means "surplus/excess".
>
> When [it] has more water energy than what is necessary for the ,
>
> 110
> Inflicts additional 10 damage per 1 surplus water energy.
You can think is omitted before the second . In other words, this `` is not simple "much energy" but "more-than-necessary-to-use-the- energy". It can be understood in the context, but or would've been more concise.
> 110
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, usage"
}
|
Japanese term for weight gained in a loving relationship?
I came across this phrase in reading a few weeks ago, and can't for the life of me find the note I made on it.
It refers to plumpness in a positive sense, reaching a comfortable state of gained weight that you only find after a while in a really good, sweet relationship.
Hope someone else knows what I'm talking about!
|
Perhaps you're looking for (pronounced as **** due to rendaku).
This word is not particularly positive nor negative/derogatory. Gaining weight itself is not a desirable thing, but some people may see it as an enviable evidence of happiness.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 17,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "set phrases, phrases, phrase requests"
}
|
What is this な doing here?
?20 **** 21
I'd translate it as follows: "Huh? I'm sure it should be 20 participants, but 21 are here."
I interpreted "should" because to my knowledge indicates a surprise here. Using plain indicative wouldn't reflect that in my opinion.
However, the real "problem" is the bold . First, I don't know into what category falls (formation morpheme like suffix, or anything else like noun, verb etc.). Therefore it is hard for me to try to use other grammatical rules to deduce the meaning of , like after nouns in -/- constructions. And even if I knew that, I still wouldn't know what function it bears here.
|
{} is a noun that roughly means that something is expected to hold true, and the is actually the /attributive form of the particle (). It's **not** making into an na-adjective.
Basically, there _is_ an expectation "that there should be twenty participants", and it's being attributed the nominalization particle , turning it into a noun-phrase. That that follows then turns that into "despite (noun phrase)..."
Your translation is correct :)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
予定や経学が実際と違った場合を話してください
>
I intentionally left my translation in this rather desolate state because it shows my 2 problems very well. My translation:
> Please talk about a case where plans and plans practical and changed.
1. I don't really know how to convey a semantical difference between and .
2. is a noun here, but is a verb. Since is past tense, I could imagine coaxing some noun-ish semantics into it since it kind of describes a state (in the end, past suggests that something has happened/is finished already). Nevertheless, even if both were nouns I wouldn't know how to give it a meaningful interpretation, because (NOUN (subject) + + complex noun-ish phrase + ) = object of the full sentence
|
> How does this sentence work?
* AB = "a case when/if A was different from B"
B is "reality", so "a case when/if A was different from reality"
A consists of A1 and A2 connected by "or" (A1A2); as of this moment A2 contains a typo, but it doesn't influence how this sentence works
* = "tell me about", "give me an example"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
what does 病気なめんな！ mean?
"dont something illness" is the kind of feeling i get from that.. cant find a verb to match to namena though.
|
In short, the phrase says: "Don't underestimate a disease!".
is the informal spoken word for , the negate form of , which has various meanings. The intended meaning in the said phrase is the last entry of meaning:
> {}
>
> 4. to make fun of; to make light of; to put down; to treat with contempt; to underestimate
>
The informal spoken words are usually _not_ found in physical dictionaries however, words that are closest to actual word may be suggested by online dictionaries.
So you would have to trace by the written word for it.
Not sure what was the original context in question. I can only guess there was someone who have said, "To fall ill is no big deal". Then the person whom had a cold (contracted a disease) replied, "Don't underestimate a disease [as illness could get worse if not taken into care]".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, colloquial language"
}
|
What is the しき particle?
I found this in a text but I don't know its function.
> ****
|
According to , this is a particle that attaches only , and . It's used to make light of something, similarly to //.
> ###
>
> …
Many examples are listed here. This is slightly literary, and people more commonly use , , , etc., in conversation.
Because this "particle" can attach only three words, it may be better to remember , and as separate words. That's how jisho.org treats these words (, , ).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Providing Further Detail When Using そう、よう、etc
In most cases, or work fine for explaining perceptions like 'looks like'. However, in English, it's possible to be more specific, for example, using 'sounds like' instead.
This occurred to me when I could hear fireworks out the window, but couldn't see where they were. I could explain that they seem close by saying or something similar. However, I'd have thought this would imply that I can see them, and they look close.
I think direct translation would be but I'm not entirely sure that has the intended meaning, or even makes sense at all.
Is it possible to express specifically that the fireworks _sound close_ rather than looking close, or must it be explained otherwise, by saying that they sound loud, or that I can't see them?
|
You can say .... And it implies the distance between you and a sound source is close (in this case fireworks). explains you have the mental image of "the distance between I and fireworks seems close" concluded by what you actually hear it or what you see it or what you are told by someone else and so on. After or before that, you can give more opinions by saying loud or something else.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Is これはなまえをなにか correct?
If I need to ask something's name, like `how is this called?` or `what's the name of this?`, would it be okay to ask ?
I also would like to know if I should use in this type of questions? Actually my first thought was about saying instead of .
|
Remember that the thing that you are asking is the "name" so that is going to be the topic of the sentence so that should have the particle instead of , when is not the topic you should use instead. So for me It would be like.
> * : "What is the name of this thing?"
>
If you are asking "How is this called?" I think it would be something like this
> *
>
: to call : to be called. The you add the form because is an state
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What does 夢を作る mean here?
Here is the full sentence:
>
I gather that the main meaning of this sentence is "My subconscious can't fix this face into [itself/memory].", but the main question for me is what exactly mean here? A few Japanese teachers I've asked were pretty confused, saying that is not exactly a natural thing to say. This sentence is from a novel though, so no wonder it's not natural in the sense of being "ordinary". Thanks. Any help is much appreciated.
|
<
>
>
>
From the context, it's obvious that can be interpreted literally.
**_His deep psyche which is making/creating this/his/the dream cannot hold on/fix the man's face._**
making the dream, creating the dream
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, verbs"
}
|
How to interpret AとB、Cが違う
> ****
> The air conditioning's computer will check places where the temperature is different between near the walls and near the windows and can choose the perfect temperature.
I'm struggling with the part in bold. Does (on it's own) mean "the temperatures are different between the places near the walls and the places near the windows"? If so, I'm feeling a little uncomfortable about the lack of a on the end of . Would it be okay to add one?
If I'm right, then I think the computer checks the places where there is a temperature difference between the walls and the windows, but that makes absolutely no logical sense. I'm very confused.
|
You seem to have parsed the sentence a bit incorrectly. is what the computer checks. as a whole is marked with , and works as an example of .
>
> The air conditioner's computer will check ((if there is) a pair of) places where the temperatures is different.
>
> ****
> The air conditioner's computer will check (a pair of) places where the temperature is different, **such as (a pair of) window-side and wall-side places in a room.**
Note that in this sentence actually refers to a pair of two places with different temperatures. That's why and are connected using .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, reading comprehension"
}
|
The は particle following a noun's わ?
I was looking for improvements on my vocabulary and then I saw the word `telephone` which accordinly to Genki series is , but let's suppose that I want to say `This telephone is white`, is gramatically correct to say **** .
Can I say both and ? Sounding something like `kono denwa wa shiro desu`? Or should I choose another word (if there is one) to replace to not mess up the noun with the particle?
|
You would still pronounce it `wa.` You will not have to change the reading of the particle just because a noun ends in . Here's another example:
> Excuse me, but this conversation is boring.
>
>
In Japanese, repeated sounds like this are not uncommon, and should not be a reason for concern.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "particle は"
}
|
Why progressive tense (～ている) is not used in this case?
I was reading something which is supposed to mean "Why is it moving?". I would translate it as but it actually says
What's the difference between them? I think I cannot capture that nuance.
I think that it's something that it's moving at this time whereas sounds more like I'm stating that it's moving, but I find the lack of tense disturbing (maybe it's a very strong statement implying surprise).
Another question: Could I even say meaning "why was it moving?" instead of
|
~ is just a spoken contraction of ~ , so you have your continuous tense, and also a , which is sort of an exclamation mark added to the question.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, contractions"
}
|
How to express "They only think about themselves"
I am trying to come up with this sentence, but I feel like some parts of it are too literal and idiomatic, and some words I used here are new to me, so maybe I made some poor decisions when picking them. Could you help me with that?
**"Sometimes I feel like most people only think about themselves. If they need your help, they'll contact you. If they don't need it (if you're not useful to them) they won't contact you at all, like they don't care(it's not their business)"**
>
I feel like "think about themselves" is idiomatic and i'm not so sure about the usage of "useful" here.
|
How about...
Sometimes I feel like most people only think about themselves.
If they need your help, they'll contact you.
If they don't need it (if you're not useful to them) they won't contact you at all, like they don't care(it's not their business)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, words, idioms"
}
|
Is there a difference between sabita (錆びた) and sabitsuita (錆びついた)?
They both mean rusty/rusted, so is there any subtle difference between these synonyms or is one longer and that's it?
|
How you express the state of rust may vary from person to person, but I think that and are obviously different.
Because it is difficult to explain with words, I searched for images by a keyword "" on the Internet.
Since I placed the representative images and arranged them according to my feeling, please have a look.
When something is very rusty, we sometimes say "" to express it.
![enter image description here](
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
What is the meaning of ごちそうになってこうかな?
>
>
>
>
>
My attempt - So, it's your treat then?
|
The nuance is more like "I guess I'll take you up on that offer."
is the standard polite expression for eating a meal that was prepared by someone else or at someone else's expense, and it includes an element of gratitude for the favour (similar to forms). The form is a contraction of , ie. "I'll do X before I go", and the introduces a slight uncertainty, as in a "maybe" or "I guess". So the full literally means something like "maybe I'll eat here (gratefully, at your expense) before I leave".
"So, it's your treat then?" doesn't really work as a translation because there's nothing in the response that's questioning the first speaker's intent. The first speaker has already made a clear offer to provide a meal, and the second speaker is simply accepting with an "Oh, nice! I guess I'll do that, then."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Understanding the pattern "〜から、〜に耳打ちしてもらう"
I am trying to interpret the sentence:
――
You can see this in context here, but I'll describe a little of the situation in this post.
The line is said by a character named Ian to the main character. The topic is Yakt, someone who broke a tradition of their culture. Ian had just told the MC "" which I believe means "We can't keep someone here who broke our rule."
(Rafa) seems to be a young girl who appears throughout the novel, and I assume is the leader of the tribe (an older woman).
Anyway, I believe "" means "whisper". So the crux of my question is how and fit in grammatically here with ""
I am guessing this sentence means the following:
Rafa will covertly tell the village chief about Yakt leaving the village.
However I may have things reversed.
Can someone confirm my interpretation?
|
I didn't read the whole thing, so I can't confirm the "about Yakt leaving the village" part, but what I read it seems like your interpretation is pretty much correct.
is being used to convey that it'll further their purposes (in protecting the law or whatever), so a slightly more precise translation might be along the lines of " **we'll have** Rafa tell the chief XXX" depending on how/why Rafa ends up doing the telling. Additionally, depending on how Rafa is doing the telling, you could render more literally as "whisper." Again, context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle に, particle から, giving and receiving"
}
|
What is トンガリイボザル?
2
120
Is it sharp-minded colobus or colobus with something pointy?
|
pointedsomething that is long and its edge is very sharp, typically "circular cone."
=verruca
=monkey
the monkey with the coned verruca(s)
This is an imaginary animal, which is created by the writer, who seems to have created a lot of other imaginary animals as well.
, however, is a real animal that has four verrucas in its face.
<
verrucas, a wild pig
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What does なにか mean in this sentence?
> **** {}{}{} **** {}{}{}
How is used in this sentence? It is used twice, but it doesn't seem to mean "something" in this case. The sentence is from a story called ""
Thank you
|
At its most pure, on its own does mean "something/anything/whatever". However, it can also be used generally to express many forms of vagueness, typically indicated by the English marker word "some", especially when combined with the true subject of the statement. Think "some kind/sort of [thing]", and "somehow" as a lead-in.
* * *
## Example 1
John
"John bought something"
John
"John bought some book"
## Example 2
"This is incomplete somehow"
(The source also demonstrates informal/shorthand/dialect usage )
* * *
You can think of the general purpose of as the concept "[something] I can't quite put my finger on".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, words"
}
|
What does adding 思う to 申し訳ない do?
This dictionary states that a clause like means "Though I was sorry—" What I don't understand is the usage of here. itself means "sorry," does it not? What does adding do? How does that sentence differ from ?
|
The difference between and is akin to the difference between "I am sorry" and "I feel sorry" in English, i.e. there is no essential difference.
In th example you have chosen, I believe, adding in Japanese makes the phrase more subjective, allowing adding a contrasting feeling or view in a subordinate clause ("though"). For example if you were explaining the situation to a third person.
in comparison would be more apologetic.
* * *
has a broader usage than a typical "to think" interpretation. See this question.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "nuances, keigo"
}
|
あたまのいいところよ - Having ideas?
I am reading some easy manga for kids as an exercise. I am stuck on this sentence for quite some time and I would like an input on my translation :
* But how are we going to find it since we don't know where it is ? (that was easy to translate)
*
This is how I tried to translate it :
>
_the aforementioned place_
>
_my head_
>
_the good place_ (physical or I'm guessing here abstract)
So in the end I went with : _I have some ideas_. Because I thought that _the head had some good points_.
Did I interpreted __ correctly ? If I did why is there no verb ? (yes it is spoken and sometimes desu is implied but I don't know what verb should be used here)
|
>
"/" is the same as "/"; that is a set phrase meaning "someone is bright, intelligent, clever or smart"
The given phrase is very easy to understand for almost every Japanese, but it is quite difficult to rewrite it in plain Japanese in order to translate it into English.
The following sentences are my attempt rewritten in easy-to-understand Japanese.
(1)
(2) {}
(3)
My attemt in English:
(1) That's what shows/tells I'm smart.
(2) That's a proof that I'm smart.
(3) That I know where it is is a proof that I'm smart.
(3)' That I could guess where it is is a proof that I'm smart.
There is a phrase somewhat similar to the given one.
>
Literally, it will be like "That is my good point."
But the following interpretation will be the exact meaning of it.
> / _It's my advantage to be able to act like that_.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, verbs, expressions"
}
|
What is the difference between 見てない and 見たことがない?
The title says it all, what's the difference between and ?
Lately, I've seen japanese people using to express that they have never seen something, eg:
>
But I thought that would be used in the following fashion:
>
And how different it is from:
>
is the usage of a set phrase or something?
|
means "Someone has never seen something ever."
is that is omitted . has two meanings. One is progressive form and the other is result state. So means "I haven't watched this movie.", it's the later usage. in is the former usage.
For example, you can say but would be unnatural.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, set phrases"
}
|
Meaning of 寄せる in this context
I am having some trouble grasping the meaning of in this context. While the most common meaning of that I see is something akin to "to approach", it is clearly varied in meaning contextually, as I see it often and am unclear on exactly what it implies. Here's the passage:
> **** .
|
If you read the beginning of the Huffington Post article which you quoted, you can see the project consisted of a survey.
You can even find a synonym for the in the first two sentences of the article itself:
> 6 ****
>
> **** ****
The word simply means "gathered", "received".
And you can find the definition in the dictionary too:
> ――
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
kun'yomi vs on'yomi
i'm just starting kanji , and a bit confused. if onyomi is when two kanji together why is has both of the reading?when do i read the kanji kunyomi even so it's with another kanji?or do i just memorize them as words?
|
I don't think I have the right answer but in my view most _kun+on_ compound words are kind of common "set expressions" like the days of the week, some time expressions, etc. I think in the last " _bi_ " acts more like a suffix, but I'm not quite certain. My advice is, if you can, try to memorize the _kun+on_ , _on+kun_ or even _kun-kun_ kanji compounds as words, not trying to read and split their meaning and reading because they are very few compared to the _onyomi_ compounds and some are very commonly used. I hope it helps!
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji, readings, onyomi"
}
|
Can someone help me identify this onomatopoeia?
!Picture
I'm drawing onomatopoeia from JoJo's Bizarre Adventure for the fun of it, but I would at least like to know the meaning (and romaji) of what i'm trying to draw. I've been trying to identify this but these katakana only look slightly similar to some I see on Wikipedia. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
(please note that I do not have very much knowledge of Japanese)
|
>
>
> ...
Pronounced as "gan gan gan..."
It's an onomatopoeia often used for the sound of hitting something hard.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Meaning of 意識を刈りとる
Context: in a manga a man is explaining the rope-a-dope boxing technique (see wikipedia) and he uses these words:
> ****
The meaning of the first sentence is pretty clear to me, but I don't understand the second sentence. What is the meaning of ? I didn't find this collocation on dictionaries. Is it a metaphor meaning "to knock down unconscious"? My translation attempt:
> (It is a technique where) you lay on the ropes dodging the opponent's attacks, and then blow a counter-punch. It doesn't matter how many times or how strong you get hit, if the punch is unexpected, you are able to knock down the opponent.
It would be great if you could also check the rest of my translation. Thank you for your help!
|
> "you lay on the ropes dodging" → "you lay yourself on the ropes dodging."
> "How many times, how strong you get hit" → "How struck strong the opponent is?"
I think the other parts of your translation are correct.
literally means cut something with a sickle or a really sharp thing.
This time,
>
> Knock the opponent down with one punch. His punch as sharp as the sickle of the Reaper.
It should be one punch knock out.
After you land a punch, and the opponent won't wake up. No need for 10 counts. You can also google " " and check YouTube and blogs contain its usage in the sentences.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, expressions, sports, collocations"
}
|
What does しまったり mean?
In this line from a song,
>
I'm tempted to say it translates to
> As you grow older, you're growing apart (from me)
but I'm not entirely sure how to interpret . It doesn't seem to be a form of , but I can't find much explanation of either. Could someone help me understand the grammar here?
Edit: As I research more and more, I'm questioning more and more my parsing of the sentence. So if I have it completely wrong, please correct me.
|
To me, this looks like morphological building blocks being strung together.
So you have the main verb in -form: []{} ****
Then this is followed by , a construction which indicates that the action was accidental (or finished completely). So **** means either "I accidentally ate it" or "I ate it all".
In the example you gave, the is in form (create with the rule: short past form + ) which is used to mean "things like X"- in this case, "you're doing things like (totally/accidentally) growing apart from me", etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
The use of particle "de"
>
What does that sentence mean? I'm confused with the use of particle "de" there. As far as I know, "de" is used to indicate location or time of action. And is neither location nor time.
|
This is used for indicating "way","means","role". means "to join something in a role of narration".
For example, (I appeared as an extra in a movie).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "particle で"
}
|
What does 乗ろうなんてした mean here?
> ?
I think the translation is "Why did you get into the gear you can’t even ride, anyway?"
I guess here emphasizes the previous part (), but I can't really understand using of . forms volitional or presumptive verbs and it doesn't seem to work here.
|
is phonic change from . In short, is the same as or "tried to do such a thing as getting into".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
The usage of かな and かしら
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "usage, nuances, particles"
}
|
|
would you use keigo online?
I'd suppose the answer would generally be yes depending on who you're talking to but I'm a bit unsure.
Just wondering if it isn't weird to speak very casually online
|
for business (or what would normally be politely addressed eg to an estate agent, japanese teacher) emails, absolutely.
More 'anonymous' stuff like 2 chan, youtube comments etc you can be more casual.
But if its an app where youre chatting with someone you dont know well (eg language exchange, dating app etc) its worth being polite and maybe using keigo
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "politeness"
}
|
What is 心を無にする supposed to mean?
I was reading Abe Shinzo's twitter for some explainable reason, and I found a tweet where he says . It feels wonderfully _Japanese_ to me given the fact that it involves heart and doing nothing, and while I can read it, I have no idea what exactly its actually trying to say, thus I ask... what does it mean?
|
means . means distraction. A dictionary says it means "free one's mind from worldly thoughts", "shut out idle thoughts from one's mind". And it implies "to focus something by eliminating distraction".
Leaders must decide many important things and receive lots of information from others every day. There would be sometimes when they are confused with too much information. At such time, the phrase would be used.
This may be helpful.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Which clause(s) does といい modify in this sentence?
>
This is from the first reading of Tobira's second chapter. I actually have two questions:
1. Which clause or verbs does modify? Does it modify only , or does it also modify and?
2. and connected to differently; the first uses , while the second uses -form. Is this allowed? Why was this done?
|
1.Both and
2.Because connects the following phrase. It means "When you watch Japanese dramas and movies, you should observe "
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, verbs, conditionals, reading comprehension, modification"
}
|
How do I say "Is this person serious?"
Is "" correct?
Any better ways to say this?
|
> Is this person **serious**?
According to Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, there are two possible meanings for "serious" as:
(1) not joking or pretending if someone is serious about something they say or plan to do, they really mean it and are not joking or pretending
(2) quiet/sensible someone who is serious is very quiet and sensible, and does not laugh and joke much
For (1), the given sentence will be intepreted as "/" or "/", and for (2) it will be as "{}/" or "{}/".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What is the meaning of "いいのにな"?
I was just wondering what is the translation for "" in English. I'm kind of confused about that "".
|
It would be helpful if you gave the whole sentence, but you can probably take it as, 'it would good if ... but this is (unfortunately) not the case', which expresses a wish or regret.
For example,
I wish grandma was here.
The gives the sentence more feeling and makes it sound like the speaker is talking to themselves.
<
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Concatenating two verbs to describe a noun
I would like to say "Alive animals that arrive to Europe" and my attempt would be something like .." but it seems kinda wrong to concatenate the two verbs in that way. I'm not sure if by simply changing to would make any sense.
Thanks
|
> Alive animals that arrive to Europe ..
Your attempt in Japanese somewhat makes sense, but not so good.
Google translation gives me as: , but the expression isn't natural though it makes sense.
My attempt is as follows depending on the situation how the animals arrive to Europe:
> (1) or
> (2)
In (1), the animals arrive to Europe after their making great effort such as swimming across the Atlantic Ocean.
On the other hand, in (2), these animals are very weak to be carried alive, so it was very lucky this time that they could carry them to Europe alive.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
How to say I was so angry I could kill him in Japanese
I tried to translate the phrase, 'I was so angry I could kill him', but I was told by my Japanese girlfriend that, 'aitsu wo koroseru gurai okotta', was unnatural and, 'gaman dekinai gurai okotta', was better.
This is in the context of my explaining 'could' to her to express feeling or extent in English. The sentence comes from a textbook.
What is the best way to translate this sentence in Japanese?
|
I agree with your girlfriend's comment. I do not know if this translation looks like a textbook answer, but another way to translate that sentence would be (Kare wo korosou kato omou kurai okotta). Putting it more formally, (Satsui wo idaku hodono ikari wo oboeta).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
"What about X?", one more meaning
In English I can say "what about X?" to mean "why did you mention X?", "what were you going to say about X?", "what does it have to do with X?" and so on.
How can I ask the same thing in japanese? In particular, in casual speach.
Note that this is not what I'm asking about: "I like sushi. **How about** you?"
My question about this: for example, we're walking with my friend and suddenly she yells "sushi!". And then she says nothing. Strange. I don't get her and ask her "Sushi? **What about** sushi"?
|
I think the words you want are "!", "?", "!". I think there are many ways to say this.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "phrase requests, spoken language, casual"
}
|
どこにでもある or どこかにある
When I translate this sentence "The stone could be anywhere." into Japanese, How can I do that?
I asked a native English speaker this meaning, he said it means "The stone can only be in one place but the possibilities are not limited and instead include the entire universe."
A word "anywhere" in an affirmative sentence is translated as in dictionaries, so if I follow dictionaries, it would be translated as but it means "The stone could be everywhere", doesn't it? So I think it should be translated as "".
What do you think about this?
In addition context, this stone is "the Stone of Scone", on which Scotland King sat in ancient times and stolen by England.
|
" _the_ stone" 1
()
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, polarity items"
}
|
Can I say お兄さんは結婚いたしております?
Can I say
>
instead of
>
|
"" is used for what "I" (the speaker) do when the opponent is superior. It is called "". If you're talking about the brother of others, you should not use this.
If you're talking about your own brother, you may say "".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "grammar, keigo"
}
|
Verb +～そう grammar
>
What is ? Is is the contrary of ? So it would mean something like : "It's likely that you will succeed if you do it the hard way" ?
|
<
<
"" means "it seems", and "" is the negative form. More literally, your sentence would be "Doesn't it seem likely that you will succeed if you do it the hard way?", with "?" meaning "doesn't/isn't it?" here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
What is this form: Vb + あう + Noun
As I was browsing the Nintendo e-shop, I noticed a new title whose tagline is:
> RPG
(Don't judge...)
How to interpret this ? I understand that the appeal of the RPG are the (numerous) beautiful girls, but what nuance does it bring?
My dictionary only gives / as possible writings for but I am not sure how to interpret it.
|
A verb + means "to do together(each other), so means "to be attracted to each other".
modifies a noun "RPG".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, compound verbs"
}
|
Usage of beginning and end expressions in formal letters - include names?
I am new to writing formal letters in Japanese, and I am currently writing to a kind person who will be very understanding if I make small mistakes, but I would like to get as much right as possible.
Searching in a dictionary or searching online you would find that there are pairs of set phrases that roughly translate to "Dear ...," and "Sincerely, ...". One such combination would be /.
<
The part I am confused about is wether to write a name after these, as most sites explaining this don't actually include an example. And even if one does, it is hard for me to see if they are writing something that is old fashioned or otherwise seen as quirky.
Here's an example, where there is a name after , but none after , and I don't know if that is because the example ends before the name, or because you aren't supposed to write a name there.
<
|
I think you can use both and without any additional information immediately after them. You can find excellent instructional articles about it, but the most part in japanese, like this one. As you can see in red on sample image:
![enter image description here](
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "formality, email"
}
|
About ではない, のか and など
I found this on my favorite seiyuu's IG. She's talking about a book.
>
My understanding of the sentence above is despite the book is unheard of, she wants to tell us that the book (the content, the story, the feeling) is actually in our heart and we can sympathize with it. But why she chose to use there? Or is it related to or ?
Also, what's the translation of that sentence? Thanks!
|
is one phrase. It means "wonder","suspect". means "I wonder that maybe ."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "particles, learning, particle など"
}
|
Ending なくなる being positive?
I basically have two questions:
When we use we basically force the verb to be in negative so that we can replace by and then add . For example: (to become not visible). My question is, what if I want to use it in positive, meaning "to become visible"?
Second question, which is related to the first. I have the following sentence: 2/3 which I think I can translate for "Eggplants have no calories but the suck 2/3 of the frying oil". However, it is using which for me, it implies that the verb has been first converted into negative form and then replace it by . The question is, how can it have a positive meaning while having a negative conjugation?
Thanks.
|
1. That's a good question. The grammatical opposite of would be (raw verb needs unlike the negative has adjective-adverb conjugation), but it's more strongly associated with the other meaning of , "able to see". It's also natural to use in the setting "come within the scope of sight" (e.g. **** ), but for fading and emerging kind of visibility change, you could instead use "appear" or "pop up" etc.
* (A translation of _The Invisible Man_ by H. G. Wells)
2. is two phrases, "be sucked, and lost" (≈ "be soaked up"). Do not confuse it with negative-passive- form ("not (yet) be sucked"). Actually, there's no chance of confusion, because you can't attach to , since and conflict as both semantically represent aspect-like feature of a verb.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
Telling the words 口唇 and 紅唇 apart contextually
When hearing (not reading) in a sentence, should it be assumed that the speaker is saying "lips" and not "red lips" ()? If not, what cues can be used to determine which is being meant?
I know that also means red lips, and I would assume that it is used to avoid ambiguity.
|
How was pronounced when you heard it?
Anyway we **only** say for lips.
If you have a chance to read , it's correct to pronounce it as . You may have no chance to hear for lips in daily life, because the sound has a lot of homonyms like _march/parade_ , _update_ , _communication_ , etc, that are more familiar than .
I think that "{}" is a medical term used only in an oral hospital and the like apart from daily use, and in that case simply means lips and does not mean that could be understood as "red lips".
Usually we say "" or "" for "red lips", not "{}{}".
"" isn't good for expressing being red for lips but good for cheeks, like "" or "".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "word choice, kanji, synonyms"
}
|
います versus しています
In the following sentence what's the function of ""? If I exclude it, does it make sense?
Thanks.
|
No.
>
"I am studying Japanese (now)."
>
I study Japanese. or I will study Japanese.
>
This sentence just doesn't make sense.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
どこに住んでも and どこに住むのも difference
I heard in a movie and I wonder what's the difference with ?
I think nominalizer + is more formal but not sure.
Thanks
|
I think.
**You are free to choose where you live.**
**Wherever you live, you are free.**
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
What is the meaning of "もとになった"?
What is the meaning of ""?
Here is the sentence in which I find this expression:
> **** DB182.
Maybe simply, (this illustration) _originally_ was published on [...]?
For more context:
.
Given that the caption below this picture says that it was taken in the town of Kin, I presume that the sign is written in a Kunigami language variety? However, I can't seem to find any references that describe a unique kana system for this area. Would anyone be able to provide any references that list the readings for these characters (and any others that may be in use for this language variety)? Thanks!
|
In this webpage , there is the following picture:
![enter image description here](
Comparing this one with the one in your post makes me think that maybe it is just your picture is missing some paint.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "orthography, kana, ryukyuan languages"
}
|
しでかす and やらかす difference
Even by looking at a dictionary, I can't make the difference between those two words and ... What are the closest english words to translate those words? Are there situations when one is used and not the other? Is one more used than the other? (more casual etc.)
Thanks
|
IMO they are interchangeable, but is much more common. Some think if you use , the speaker is rarely angry, whereas it's more possible that the speaker is angry if is used. However, IMO both are archaic and when used, are used to an almost comical effect & is used rarely in a serious situation. E.g. one would never say or . It's used for things like or
IMO there is no difference in nuances between the two.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Passive form + くれる
For a while now I've been trying to write "[I'm happy that] X chose me", and I've come across the following:
X
X
X
Where the second option (passive + ) actually seems to have the most number of hits, despite me having never learned it and no English sites explaining it either. But I can't make sense of it. talks about the giver, while the passive form refers to the speaker/receiver. What does this structure mean?
|
A X means "I'm glad that X chose A / A is chosen by X". It indicates that compared with X, A is closer to and thanks A.
X can't mean "X chose me" unless you see the situation from a different viewpoint.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, phrases"
}
|
How to interprete 寄る in this sentence
For full context, see here: <
the following excerpt is from the very last line:
=> "Well, coming home I will try to research travel agency coming close/being close."
"Coming close" refers to the criteria mentioned by the partner in dialogue before (see link). However, I'm still not really wether I interpreted the context correctly. Furthermore, what irritates me is that in my interpretation, is the direct object of . There is no or any other particle though...
|
here should take this meaning:
> ――
On the way to some place, stop by at another place.
And is not the direct object . XXX here means "stop by XXX".
The whole sentence should be:
On my way home, I will stop by the travelling agency and check (it).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.