INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What is the meaning of「私のとなりの人は」?
I am working on Genki, 1st ed., vol. 1, p. 139, F., 3. The question asks me to “Make your own sentences on the topics below using adjectives...”
Here is the “topic” it provides me to construct the sentence:
>
I Googled this phrase for its meaning, but I did not find an exact match. Instead, I found a similar phrase:
> Yamada-san wa watashi no tonari no hito desu.
which it also translates into English as,
> Mrs. Yamada is the person (who is sitting) next to me.
Anyway, does the topic I provided above thus mean “the person who is next to me”? I expected , without the between and (i.e., like ).
|
Yes, your interpretation is correct.
If I recall correctly, Genki introduces with other relative place markers (, etc). As with those, you need a between them and whatever they're modifying. If you'd like to avoid using a second , you'll have to reconstruct your sentence to something like
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Interpretation of "ならできるよう"
I have the following sentence that a character says:
>
Context: Characters fought and are about to join up. Also this character tends to not speak 100% proper default Japanese. They tend to eat the particles I think. So I'm thinking that a could have been swallowed after .
And I'm confused by the bit.
is simple "If we are able to have cooperation" / "If we are able to cooperate".
Also if the last bit is
> Something +
That would mean something along the lines of "We'll do our best to be able + something". But how all this fits together is beyond me.
For now I think this means something along the lines of **"Moreover, we should do our best if we are to be able to cooperate."** but I'm not so sure.
Basically the question is what is the actual meaning and how does this sentence split.
|
> {}{}{}{}
>
≒
>
Above is how one should parse and understand this sentence even though I must say that the **first sentence is already quite normal**. In Japanese, the use of punctuations is pretty much left to the writer's discretion.
is actually more formal than **** . The latter is more conversational.
The sentence means:
> "Moreover, if there is anything that we can cooperate with you on, we will do our best."
So, your overall comprehension was actually alright.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
}
|
A word used in fandoms "headcanon"-is there a word in Japanese for it?
I talk with a couple of Japanese users on social media and I was wondering what other words can I use to say "Oh, I have this theory", or "I imagine this and that about those characters". Up until now I mostly used the verb to say that I 'imagine" the following or saying . While talking with an user they wrote this and I was glad to know another word and I think it fits more, I believe with the term 'headcanon'. I'm gonna use the word more often, but if anyone knows other terms, please tell me! I hope at least it was informative for some, because it was the first time that I encountered the use of .
|
The most comon terms would be {} or .
{}("delusion") is an old, "regular" word; It does not have the slangy feeling or vives that the two "special" terms above or the English "headcanon" have.
You could use in explaining what a headcanon is, but it could not replace the term all by itself. The word is just too broad and {}("imagination") is even broader.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "word requests"
}
|
Is there a contracted/casual form of でないと？
as in the conditional phrase.
>
>
Never heard of it though. If there is no such thing then is even considered formal in the first place or just neutral if it doesn't have a casual/contracted form?
|
There is the (Kanto) colloquial form **** , but other than that, I don't think we have what you are looking for.
is different since it is the contracted form of **** and not of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "colloquial language, contractions, copula, formality"
}
|
Difference between「未熟練労働者」and「不熟練労働者」
I am writing an essay in Japanese and want to talk about non-skilled labor, but found two different words for the opposite of a skilled laborer: {}-and{}-+{}{}{}{}{}. I was wondering what the difference in meaning/connotation/usage is between these two words (if there is such a difference), and in any case whether there is an obvious choice between them (based on how commonly used they are, etc.) or whether they are perfectly interchangeable.
Edit:
I also found {}, which appears to be a synonym of the latter, but might also be slightly different. This doesn't change the original question, it merely adds a third point of comparison.
|
You should use , when it comes to economics or so. If you use it in the sense of those who are not yet (but expected to be) skilled, you could use . I haven't seen .
Negative prefix is used when something lacks value that's essential for what it is. e.g (shortage of quality), (irregularity). On the other hand, can simply stand for the opposite nature of what's modified. In this regard, unskilled workers are not necessarily a failure for, or a would-be, skilled ones.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice, synonyms, word usage, negation, prefixes"
}
|
using の after について・に対して
Recently I've made two similar mistakes. 1 and 2 show my original sentences while 3 and 4 are the sentences with my 's revisions added. I don't really understand why the needs to be added after a noun (I haven't been able to find similar examples online). Can someone explain?
Original:
> 1.
> 2.
>
Revised:
> 3. ****
>
> 4. ****
>
>
|
The reason is very simple. It is because the phrase before the modifies a **_noun_** in each of the two sentences. **Only can connect a modifier to a noun**.
> ****
is correct because is a noun. **Without a , the following word must be a verb** as in:
> **//** , etc.
BTW, your teacher overlooked two more mistakes.
1) You need to use another right **_after_** the as well. It is incorrect to say .
2) You should **_not_** use a on both sides of the . Drop the first one.
To sum up, here is what is correct:
Correct: **** ****
Correct:
A switch from (noun) to (verb) causes the grammatical changes above.
Moving on to your second sentence..
is, of course, a noun; therefore, you need to say **** .
Like I showed with the frst sentence, you could do away with the if you correctly changed the grammar of the sentence around. You can say:
>
Here, modifies , which once again is a verb.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle の, academic japanese"
}
|
Does it make sense to say 寝行きます?
For example, is this acceptable in Japanese?
|
As others told you is the correct structure (the normal masu for the verb, without “masu”, plus and any verb of motion like etc) It’s commonly used in Japan, I’ve listened to it and I use it commonly.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, usage"
}
|
Why the same counter word is used for cups and octopuses?
Me and my fellow coworker have been discussing the article on Japanese counter words and this particular case has caught our attention:
> [Pronunciation] hai, pai, bai; [Spelling], [Use] Cups and glasses of drink, spoonsful; cuttlefish, octopuses, crabs, squid, abalone, boats (slang)
My question would be - why such different objects like cups and octopuses logically belong to the same category, what's the etymology behind this particular counter word?
|
We normally count them, when they are living, }. When they are fished and have become products, they are called . Next article explains:
According to : 1()<
One theory explains octopuses and squids classified as shellfish of Mollusca, so they are counted as {. But they also say another theory is more prominent. That is the body of squids and octopuses looks like an urn, pot or pint glass. That's why we count non-living selling squids for {}. The shell of Abalones and Crabs look like the round shape of the container such as urn, pot, too. For me, calling beer pint glass }, for drinking, it's imaginable to count octopuses, squids, the shellfishes as {since they look like the shape of beer pint glass.
This article < also explains:
We count, when squids become or sashimi on the plate or sushi or fishing two squids at same time or, bundle up 10 quids . For me, these counting is more familiar to me. Probably I don't see the following things so often:
![](
![](
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "counters, numbers"
}
|
What is the direct translation of 深さ不明 or Fuka-sa Fumei?
I do not know very much about the language and am doing research for a story that I am writing. I intend to use Fuka-sa Fumei as the name of a submarine. I apologize if I'm breaking any rules or codes of conduct for this site. Thanks in advance for any help or advice you can give.
|
The direct translation is **unknown depths**.
> * -> depth
> * -> unknown
>
**Edited** ...
> The depth is unknown in the sense "you don't know how deep something is".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Writing "リー" in Foreign Name
Hello my question regarding transliterating foreign names in Japanese with , really anything with an "i" that is followed by a long vowel. I was wondering what might be valid transliterations . When transliterating , would "i", or "ii", or even "ee" be valid? Is the "ee" valid for the way it sounds? I fear the answer may be "it depends", but I figure I might ask for the heck of it see if there are some things to look for.
. Wonrik, Wonriik, Wonreek?
|
"It depends..."
In (English pronunciations of certain) names, the sound `/i/ ~ /iː/` is represented in a number of different orthographies:
* St **e** ven
* L **i** sa
* **Y** vonne
* Soph **ie**
* Ph **oe** be
* Lac **ey**
* L **ee**
* L **eah**
* Lou **is**
* Finl **ay**
An (mostly) unambiguous transliteration would be _ee_ , as the others are often representative of other sounds as well in English (e.g. _i, y_ `/ɪ/`, _ie_ `/aɪ/`, _ey, ay_ `/eɪ/`).
* * *
* <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Difference between やつ and こと in those sentences 不幸な事故ということだな and 不幸な事故というやつだな
Difference between and in those sentences
>
and
>
|
The only difference is that makes it sound more casual and colloquial, if not slangy, than .
The two sentences mean the exact same.
> "That is to say it is an unfortunate accident."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Do Japanese parents address their son as musuko?
In America, parents can address their son as son. For example, "Son, could you open the window for me?" Do Japanese parents address their son as ?
|
No, we basically never do that in Japanese culture, which is why it took me and my classmates by surprise to learn, in our English class back in junior high school, about that custom in the English-speaking world.
We would use the actual name or nickname of the son nearly 100% of the time.
The only time that I could think of parents (mostly fathers) addressing their sons as {} would be in very _**serious/important**_ letters or poems. In such cases, it would generally be **** instead of just .
Even on those occasions, however, many parents would still just use the actual name.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 26,
"question_score": 16,
"tags": "usage, kinship terms"
}
|
Is the meaning of 宝くじ contextual?
I encountered some sentences about , but am kind of confused. The literal definition seems to be "lottery". In the US at least you pretty much always buy a "lottery ticket", never heard someone say "I bought a lottery". Consider the sentences:
>
and
>
It sounds like the first one is specifically talking about the lottery system, and how by its nature few win. The second is talking about a specific lottery ticket being thrown away. Is the meaning of purely contextual?
|
{} can mean both:
1) the system and practice of lottery (intangible)
2) lottery ticket(s) (tangible)
So, {} means "to buy lottery tickes" and {} means "to throw away lottery tickets". Very few people would use the term {} to say those in informal daily conversations.
As you suspect, which meaning the word is being used for depends totally on the context. If that created any confusion at all, we naturally would have long been using two different terms instead.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What does ...のなんでやろ。 mean? Is that a やる verb? is の a normalization particle? If so, what is なんで？
Some Youtube comments:
> 1) **** www www
> 2)
What does ... mean? Is that a verb? is a normalization particle? If so, what is
|
(or ) is a Kansai equivalent of () which means "I wonder" or "I think." This is a nominalizer which nominalizes everything before it ().
() = () = I wonder why .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, kansai ben"
}
|
How does one say 'tried as an adult' in Japanese?
My best guess would be , but neither seems to return many results. Incidentally, what's the minimum age to be tried as an adult in Japan?
|
How about...
> []{} -- to try as an adult (active)
> -- to be tried as an adult (passive)
* * *
I think the minimum age to be tried as an adult is 14 years old...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice, words"
}
|
Topic seems unrelated to the rest of the sentence
From this article:
> ****
> [companies that run schools] Besides companies related to education, companies involved in real-estate, nursing and construction are also increasing.
I cannot parse this sentence. The topic seems to be unrelated to the rest of the sentence.
|
First of all, the cultural context that needs to be understood in order to fully comprehend this sentence is that in Japan, it is not rare for companies to start a sideline business that is totally unrelated to its original line of business. Japanese language schools are often started by non-education-related companies.
> ({}{}{})( **A** )({}{}) ( **B** )({}{}{})( **C** ){}
The basic structure of this sentence is:
> "A consists not only of B but also of C."
More specifically,
> "Among A, there is B and additionally, there is also an increasing number of C."
Thus, the topic (A) is perfectly related to the rest of the sentence.
> "Found among the companies that run the (Japanese language) schools (today), are education-related companies and additionally, an increasing number of companies involved in real estate, care for the aged, construction, etc."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing, reading comprehension"
}
|
How would you say “especially if~” in japanese?
For example, what would be a natural way of expressing a sentence like the following:
> I like to go on walks, especially if it’s raining.
|
In this context, would work best. E.g. or
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "phrase requests"
}
|
Meaning of 黙って買い
What does mean?
No definition show up in my search engine.
Examples in the wild:
>
>
> 1600 |
>
|
First, permit me to talk about the (imperative) verb form:
> {}{} ****
would pretty much mean the same thing as:
> "Just buy it! No questions asked."
The noun form **** refers to such a (great) product or service -- " ** _an absolute must-buy_** ".
These expressions are often, if not exclusively, used in gambling and investment.
(For the noun form, is generally pronounced with the voiced consonant.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, expressions"
}
|
What's the difference between these words for 'priest'?
What's the difference between these words for 'priest'?
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Thanks!
|
### Shinto
* : The head of a shrine.
* : Literally "God(-related) job", people who do various rituals of Shinto.
* : A rather casual synonym of . Practically, in many small shrines, this is the same person as a .
### Buddhism
* : A monk of Buddhism.
* : Synonym of .
* : A with high social status.
* : A friendly and colloquial synonym for .
* : The head of a temple (who is of course a , too)
* : of Zen Buddhism.
* : to enter the Buddhist priesthood (suru-verb)
### Christianity
* : A pastor.
* * *
If you need a generic term for "clergy", use , which includes everything above except .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words"
}
|
明日来る ,明日に来る, 明日で来る
good day everyone,
i'm just watching a basic Japanese video on YouTube (<
and in the quick example was expressed as "will you come tomorrow".
I was wondering if in the same context you could use to two below, or is it completely wrong?
, .
would i be able to interpret them as (tomorrow will you be here) & ( are you heading over tomorrow).
Thanks for your time, Shaun.
|
Correct:
> (A-1) Will you come tomorrow?
> (B-2)
Incorrect:
> (A-2) Will you come **on** tomorrow?
> (B-2) ****
Because tomorrow and {} are ~~adjectives~~ adverbs not nouns.
Correct:
> (C-1) Will you come **on** the day one day after today?
> (D-1) ****
Because "day" in "the day" and {} in are nouns so you need a preposition **on** in (C-1) and a particle **** in (D-1).
We don't say like (E) for (A-1).
> (E) ****
So, **** , **** are both incorrect.
> would i be able to interpret them as (tomorrow will you be here) & ( are you heading over tomorrow).
My attempts are:
(F) Tomorrow will you be here? or
(G) Are you heading over tomorrow?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "particles"
}
|
はずかぴー という意味は？教えてください
|
It's the same as but said weirdly in the hope of sounding cute or funny, in the same vein as this.
This method (adding everywhere replacing and other letters) was intensively used by Noriko Sakai almost 30 years ago (known as ), and somehow it's still used by some people. If used properly by a real young person, it may sound funny, but usually this is considered cheesy "oyaji gag" now. If you're still learning Japanese, perhaps you can make Japanese people laugh with this word, but please don't overuse it :)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "i adjectives"
}
|
Meaning of 足のつかない?
I wasn't able to find any matches through dictionaries for or .
Here is the sentence:
>
The context is thugs kidnapping people for money.
I don't understand . My impression is that it means 'not having one's feet on the ground'. But I think there's probably a more metaphorical meaning for it in this sentence.
Thank you
|
In this sentence, means "people who you would not pay attention to if they disappeared." So they're probably criminals, the homeless or someone living out of the society. Though it depends on context, I think 80 percent of the expression “” have this connotation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "meaning, idioms"
}
|
Tense of て clauses
I answered a question a while back where I translated the following:
>
>
> JR East-Japan is beginning wireless LAN service on the shinkansen and decided to make it so that passengers are able to use the internet for free. (This could obviously be worded better in English).
While reviewing, I started wondering if I had made an error in the tense of . **In the above sentence, absent of context, is the sequence of actions clear?**
In other words, I am wondering which of the following is a more accurate understanding (not translation):
1. JR Higashi Nihon began offering wireless service and then decided to make it free.
2. JR Higashi Nihon began offering wireless service and it was free from the beginning.
3. JR Higashi Nihon started installing the necessary equipment for wireless service and then decided to make it free. (This is how I interpret my translation which is why I am so hesitant.)
Original if useful: What do and express here?
|
Without taking any background knowledge into consideration, people usually read this like is applied to as a whole (i.e., "JR East decided to start wireless LAN service and enable ...").
(In fact, this article is confusing because paid wireless LAN service has been available for Tokaido Shinkansen users for a long time. The original news is about JR East's other Shinkansen lines which have had no wireless LAN service whatsoever.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, て form"
}
|
Using たい-form in qualifiers
By "qualifiers," I mean something like this:
> ****
>
> The movie **that I saw yesterday**
I understand that you cannot use -form to talk about what other people want. So, can we use -form in qualifiers? For example, can we say something like "The dog that wants to eat"?
>
Or would that just end up translating as "The dog that I want to eat"?
Alternatively, could we use to say that we think the dog wants to eat?
>
|
This grammatical structure is usually called a relative clause.
Both and can modify a noun that follows, and they can optionally have a subject marked with or . For example you can say:
> * the dish I want to eat
> * a dog who wants to eat meat
> * the meat the dog wants to eat
> * the move he wants to watch
>
As you may know, there is an important difference between and , which is described in detail here.
without any context is an ambiguous and confusing expression, but can be easily taken as "the dog which I want to eat," because _usually_ describes the speaker's own desire.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "syntax"
}
|
Can を used with だ/です? 君沢さんを犯人だと思い込む
I came across the following passage in a mystery manga. The main character is explaining that the as of yet unknown criminal intentionally made the listener think that Kimisawa was the criminal (though she is not).
> ****
> It's likely that that guy () incorporated it into his plans that you'd be under the impression that the criminal was Kimisawa. He made you smell that perfume on purpose!
Unless I am mistaken, it seems to me that the subject/complement of is denoted with which I thought was unacceptable. Could someone please explain when and if this is allowable?
|
`AB` in isolation makes little sense (although there are minor exceptions). This `` is a common pattern which appears along with various verbs for assuming, regarding, etc.
* AB to regard A as B
* AB to consider A B
* AB to assume A is B
* AB to suppose A as B
* AB to think of A as B
* AB to mistake A as B
* AB to make a wrong assumption that A is B
* AB to define A as B
* AB to take A as B
* AB to interpret A as B
So `B` is like `as B`, and these verbs can take both and at the same time.
**EDIT:** before can be omitted in many cases. (without ) and **** are equally correct. For details, see Difference between vs before and grammatical and semantic difference of "" and ""
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, usage, particle を"
}
|
Can 19日 be read as じゅうきゅうにち?
I noticed that in my dictionary 29 is read either as or but 19 doesn't have reading, only . Can 19 be read as ?
|
Most people (I would like to say "everyone" but just in case..) say:
> **** and ****
Those are how the NHK announcers pronounce 19 and 29, respectively, as well.
I am honestly perplexed to hear that your dictionry gives **** as an option.
Both **** and **** sound quite substandard to me.
When you really want to confirm an important date, however, you might first use the standard pronunciation and then confirm it by repeating the date using the version. That would be quite common but if you used the version out of the blue as if it were the standard form, quite a few people would find it a little weird.
NOTE: I was only thinking of **the 19th and 29th days of a month** in answering your question. If you were thinking of " ** _(for) 19 or 29 days_** ", then both readings would be correct and natural.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
Meaning of 一人目はやはり、君になったか。, やはり and か shenanigans
Context: people are being chosen for a task, and the speaker is awaiting the chosen two.
If this sentence was just:
>
this would just be "I expected you would be (you would become) the first person.".
It would also be fine if it was just
>
or something similar, then it would mean "Were you chosen (did you become) the first person." a kinda rhetorical question.
But I'm not sure what combining and could imply? The only idea I might have for this is:
> Did they pick you, as the first person, after all?
So he was assuming it might be her, but he is still asking rhetorically if it is her. Also given that she then answers HOW she was chosen it might imply he is incredulous? or wants to know more?
|
I think it's a little simpler than that. Think of it as a statement made question by adding something like "huh?" at the end, in the sense that all is conveyed in the statement form that you described:
>
> So the first ended up being you after all.
Therefore, now with to make it like a question:
>
> So the first ended up being you after all, huh?
**EDIT:** Thought I should clarify thanks to l'électeur's comment, since I had the right mindset but didn't finish explaining.
The end result is not a question, but rather a statement of observation. In the same vein that you're not asking in English about the fact that someone was picked first, but instead are observing that this is the case. In the end, the "question" statement actually has the same meaning as my first example, in the tone of observation, instead of stating a fact:
>
> So the first ended up being you after all.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What does お使いになられた mean
So in this game there is a line about how some object is called a dragon egg and inside it seems there are these magic items that god placed inside. The part of the sentence that I do not get is . is a messenger and is the passive form of . It sounds like the magic items became the messenger. Maybe I am misunderstanding the use of the passive verb here. Could someone clarify that section this to me?
> ****
|
Seems you are overanalyzing the phrase.
here is simply the **_honorific_** form of the past-tense verb ("used") -- nothing more, nothing less. It is 100% in the **_active_** voice. The honorific form is used because the subject of the verb is God.
does not mean a "messenger" here, either. It is the **_honorific noun form_** of the verb . "The act of using (something)", that is.
You will need to learn the common honorific verb form:
> / + Noun +
See here for more examples:
Verbs which are more frequently used to built the honorific passive forms
> "That is called the Drangon's Egg and it is said to contain within it the magical items that God used."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Difference between ”が”はじまる and ”は”はじまる
I asked my teacher why is "” instead of ””. She said "” is always put before . But she said there are circumstances that ”” is put before too. She said there are rules meanwhile couldn't clarify. Anyone can explain this? Many thanks!
|
is used to report news or information recently discovered ("neutral description ga"). So is used when you want to tell a certain event will start now.
is used to describe a general fact. is used to describe a fact that's related to the beginning of something. The described "fact" has nothing to do with what's happening in front of you.
> * **** Sesami Street starts (now).
> * **** 9 Sesami Street starts at 9:00 Sunday morning.
> * × (Makes no sense; sounds like "× Sesami Street is a thing that starts.")
>
See: Can someone explain me the use of and in this sentence?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle は, particle が"
}
|
Do 山人 and 仙人 have the same meaning of they mean different things?
I find that the compounds mean "mountain people" or "hermit". Do these words have some difference in meaning or do they actually mean exactly the same?
|
I don't typically consider these the same words, despite similar origins.
{} to me specifically refers to people living in the mountains, as hermits or in small villages.
{} implies hermit, but actually might have a meaning closer to sage, enlightened one, or wizard ("wizard" might be derived from Taoism).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "nuances, compounds"
}
|
What is the meaning of this テイル形
For context: my language partner wrote me back and she explained to me in Japanese the use and grammar behind "-form + " in the context of one's personal past.
The sentence in question (including some pretext):
>
>
> ****
My attempt at translation of the bold part:
> "Concerning what Andreas said, I think it is 'experience/personal history revealing TAIL-FIGURE'".
This "Tail-figure" doesn't make much sense, at least to me since I have no idea what it is supposed to tell me...^^
I would be happy if someone could elaborate :=)
|
> {}{}{}{} ****
↓
> in meaning
Voilà, you have the -form of the verb there!
And it certainly expresses one's " ** _experience/personal history_** " of ("working part-time teaching German to immigrant children").
"Tail-figure" is just out of the question. Users here tend to "translate" things too early, namely, before even understanding the words and phrases in question.
As a Japanese learner, you must have encountered the terms such as , etc. is just another one of those terms. Those are discussed all day every day here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What do the triangles, circles, and squares mean in the context of manga?
I was reading Crayon Shin-chan—a Japanese manga—and came across a frame where the characters' speech bubbles contain circles, triangles, and crosses where words should be. I asked a couple of my Japanese friends about what the shapes meant but none of them could tell me what they meant or why they were used.
.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "manga"
}
|
What does 「なりき」 mean in this context?
I came across the sentence KOMAin a Dragon Ball song. The context is like this:
KOMA
The song lyrics are here: <
What can possibly mean ? My first guess was that it came from a verb () or be a +Noun pattern. Or even . What do you guys think?
|
in Classical Japanese is or more informally, in Modern Japanese.
It is a past-tense affirmation/declaration.
is an affirmation auxiliary verb. is an auxiliary verb denoting the past tense. It has nothing to do with {}.
Thus, {}KOMA means:
> "The universe was a top."
Again, in Modern Japanese, that would be **** KOMA
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, song lyrics, classical japanese"
}
|
Are フィ、ファ、フェ and フォ still pronounced with a bilabial fricative or just a normal English "f"?
I know that is pronounced with a bilabial fricative, which is different from an English "f" or "h". However, in there are some words containing things like and . e.g. . Seeing there is a in there, I am wondering whether I should do a bilabial fricative or the English "f". Can Japanese people pronounce English "f"s?
|
Both sounds are allophone and recognized as the same sound but English "f" sounds a foreign accent. Even if the speaker is familiar to English sound, s/he won't pronounce it with English "f" because is Japanese.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "pronunciation, phonology"
}
|
Is [馬面]{うまづら} a facial expression or a type of face shape?
I found it translated as: `a horseface, a very long face; horse-faced, very long-faced`. Now here we call "long face" to be really sad. So in the translation, I don't know if is referring to a facial expression of the face, or to some type of odd face shape people can have. Therefore my question is, is an expression or a type of face?
|
I searched for the meaning in Japanese (googled ) and got the following:
>
From this, I feel that it is safe to assume that by 'long face' they were talking about the physical shape of the face, not the English idiom.
For more information, I'd look at the following page:
<
<
Especially with regards to the second source I've included, it should be noted that this term is considered to be a jeering comment. Not that this is part of your question, but I would **NOT** use it to describe your significant other or close friends.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation, compounds"
}
|
Using は or が instead of を cases
In a visual novel I ran into this sentence
Which according to an official translation it means
"If Kanon's death was proclaimed with the red there's no way he was alive. Therefore there is a chance that the one who attacked the group was in a disguise to make the group mistake them for Kanon"
Is the in used as replacement for
If so then why
I saw cases like (Ill protect you) where the seems to act as a replacement to .
Based on what and why do you use or instead of . Is this mainly used when referring to organic things.
However I also saw cases like this
(There is a established opinion in aerobic exercises where instantaneous force is required) where the is used instead of . (and in this case isn't used for an organic thing)
Can someone help me ?
|
Because the choice of particles depends on the choice of predicate and here the predicate is altered through the translation. In Japanese, the subject () is omitted, and is the predicate (here, is altered with in order to come before another nominal predicate . It would be easier for learners written . They say the same thing.). For easier understanding, break down the complex predicate. The core of the predicate is =in disguise. is a modifier for : in disguise because of which the attacked group would have mistake (him) for Kanon (I'm not sure of my English whether I should say "because of which", "by which", "for which", "due to which", or something). The translation use the causative verb which the Japanese one doesn't use. If you turn the translated sentence back into Japanese word by word, .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "usage"
}
|
How are scientific names (binomial nomenclatures) written in Japan, if they are?
I assume that they would use normal roman letters, but is there a way that scientific names for plants and animals to be written other than the Latin script?
|
For international understanding, Latin can be used, but in Japanese texts Japanese words are normally used either by itself or together with the Latin name (depends on context), regardless of whether or not the name has only been transliterated from other languages, or if actual Japanese words are used. From Kingdom down to Class Kanji are used, whereas from Order down to Species, katakana is used (there might be exceptions to this). Thus for the binomial nomenclature (Genus species) katakana is always used. The Latin names are referred to as {} whereas the Japanese names are referred to as {}
{} : Kingdom
{} : Phylum
{} : Subphylum
{} : Class
{} : Order
{} : Suborder
{} : Family
{} : Subfamily
{} : Genus
{} : Species
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "orthography"
}
|
Trouble comprehending a sentence with ~ように
Im currently studying with Tobira. I'm in chapter 1 right now and in the grammar section, it defines as being used when:
1. X resembles Y
2. When X is as Y shows, says, explains, etc.
3. When X does something as shown/said/explained/etc. in/by Y
One of the examples sentence written in this section, and the one I'm having trouble trying to figure out how it relates to the functions written above is:
I understood this as: "If you look at this photo, you'll know that there are various famous places in London."
This was my best guess as to what the sentence means because I don't know how factors into this.
|
This like " **as** " (your second or third definition). Try reading it like this:
> ****
> **As** you can understand if you look at this photo,
>
>
> there are various famous places in London.
Or more naturally, the first half of the sentence means "As shown in the photo, ..."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, usage"
}
|
In this particular sentence is 間 and 間に interchangeable?
I'm studying for the N3 from Kanzen textbook and I came across this question
> ( )
there are three choices:
the answer they consider it as the right one is . what was I thinking is that it might be interchangeable and both are correct because you are either spend the whole summer vacation at your friend's house or some time of the summer vacation? isn't it right?
|
> ****
**/**
> * ****
> * **{}**
>
****
> * ****
> * **** ****
>
****
> * ****
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle に"
}
|
Usage of particles in 明日、日本語のクラブがあるけど、行く？
I have this sentence:
>
which has the given translation of
> There’s Japanese club tomorrow, want to go? (lit: Tomorrow, Japanese club exists but go?)
I have two questions on this sentence. Firstly, since the sentence is referring to something occurring tomorrow, why wouldn't I have the `` after `` so it becomes this?
>
Second, what's the purpose of the `` particle? In English at least, I don't feel a need to introduce any contrasting feeling to the sentence since it's just a straight question. In short, why not this instead?
>
|
From what I've gathered through the linked posts in the comments, `` is omitted since the emphasis of the sentence is not quite on "tomorrow" but rather on "Japanese club". If included, it would imply that there's something particular about tomorrow, and maybe a bit of contrasting feeling as well.
As for ``, it seems it can also act as a "context particle" in that it provides some background before introducing the `` question.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particles"
}
|
Why isn't there の in this sentence?
>
Isn't a "no-adjective"? I would have expected the sentence to be: Are they both correct or is my version incorrect?
|
Your line of thinking is actually quite valid.
In this particular case, however, {} should be regarded as one word meaning a " ** _labyrinth_** " or " ** _maze garden_** ".
**** , therefore, would sound slightly wordy though it would be understood by every Japanese-speaker. It just sounds a little too "explanatory".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "adjectives"
}
|
What is this kanji on a Meiji era 2-sen coin?
I saw this picture of a Meiji era 2-sen coin in the 2013 game _Tomb Raider_):
* Front:
![Front](
* Back:
![Back](
The front is easily readable, and explained by the caption:
* []{}
* []{}[]{}
*
The back is bit more difficult, but I think I got all but one:
* []{}
* []{}
* []{}
What is the one kanji before the []{}? Since the rest of it reads legitimate, I believe that's an actual kanji, but it's not very clear.
|
The character looks very much like ****, which means to swap or exchange. Since exchanges for , the coin just says or 50*2 coins exchanges for 1.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji, writing identification"
}
|
Is 告らせたい passive?
I would like to ask a question about the title of the manga ****.
The seemingly accepted translation of that title is, "Kaguya-sama Wants to be Confessed To" (See MyAnimeList and Wiki). This very much confuses me as it seems quite clear that is the causative () of and that a correct translation should be:
Kaguya-sama Wants to Make Me/Someone Confess.
**Could someone please verify my understanding or correct me if I am wrong?**
I am also curious (though fairly confident that it is not so) if this title could be interpreted in reverse and mean:
"I Want to Make Kaguya-sama Confess."
|
> {}{}
So, someone translated this to:
> "Kaguya-sama Wants to be Confessed To"
**_Is that a literal translation?_** No, of course not, because while the original is in the causative format the TL is in the passive voice. The literal translation would be exactly as you said: "Kaguya-sama Wants to Make Me/Someone Confess".
**_Is that a bad translation, then?_** IMHO, no, not at all. Why not?
That is because both the original and the TL are saying the same kind of thing in the end. Both are saying that likes being (passively) confessed to by others rather than (actively) confessing to them.
A non-literal translation is not always an incorrect translation.
> I am also curious (though fairly confident that it is not so) if this title could be interpreted in reverse and mean
>
> "I Want to Make Kaguya-sama Confess."
No, it could not. The Japanese for that would be:
> **** It is and not .
As Socrates once said, studying Japanese means studying its particles.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, causation"
}
|
Is there an official Japanese dictionary?
The Indonesians have KBBI (Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia or Great Dictionary of the Indonesian Language of the Language Center) which is the official dictionary of Indonesian language. It contains the official definition of words in Indonesian. What is the equivalent for Japanese, if any?
|
There does not seem to be an 'official' dictionary. However, there are some dictionaries regarded as more comprehensive than others, and dictionary publishing in Japan remains, to this day, as a highly competitive business.
Unlike other languages, Japanese (and Chinese as well) has two main types of dictionaries:
1. Language dictionaries
2. Chinese character dictionaries
Among language dictionaries, the most comprehensive ones would probably be:
* []{}, the most complete reference work;
* []{}, regarded as the most authoritative. This one probably has the highest number of citations.
Among character dictionaries, the most famous one would be []{}; it is so comprehensive that it can somewhat double as a Chinese-language (character) dictionary too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "dictionary"
}
|
Sentence with ヒヤヒヤする and てちゃうか
Since is a verb, that I haven't really been able to find in dictionaries with English meaning. It seems to mean roughly to be nervious/anxious/afraid of something.
But that is kinda messing me up on getting the proper meaning of the following sentence.
>
Context is that two people have been sparing. And this is what one participant is saying to another.
I think the speaker is saying they were afraid anxious that they might hit the other side too hard.
At least that's how I interpret .
Although it could also be more that she was nervous because she was thinking all the time thinking "Did I hit him "fully" or unfortunately".
As of right now the provisional translation is:
> I was afraid, thinking that I could hit you for real.
Which I don't think is exactly right.
So yeah, this is rambly way of asking what would be the proper translating of the above phrase and how and work here.
|
> {}{}
First of all,
is a colloquial way of saying = "to hit unintentionally", "to end up hitting unintentionally/accidentally", etc.
**** ≒ **** = "thinking that I might hit him (too hard) unintentionally/accidentally"
Next, .
It means "to be nervous", "to be in fear", "to be on pins and needles", etc. Needless to say, it is in the famous **onomatopoeia + ** verb pattern. You will keep encountering these for as long as you study Japanese.
Putting everything together, you should have something like:
> "I was (really) nervous, thinking that I might hit him (too hard) unintentionally."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning, nuances"
}
|
How to translate「じっくり見たことなかったですよね」?
I'm trying to translate a little snippet to practice my Japanese. However the sentenceis giving me some trouble.
A friend of mine said that it would be more literal to translate it as "I've never studied you before", though it doesn't exactly make sense in the context... I think _" I've never seen you like this before"_ would make more sense in the context? I'm not exactly sure how to translate it.
Here's the whole panel:
> :
>
> :
>
> **: **
>
> :
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
|
would mean "carefully" in this context. (The more words in the pattern you learn, the more natural your Japanese will become. The second character is the small and not the regular-size .)
: What is it?
: He looks totally different without his glasses on, doesn't he?
: I'd never looked at him so carefully before.
: Stop staring at me like that!
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What is the meaning of として in this case?
> 25 **,** 35 (Death Note Ep 1)
In the above sentence, does mean "to assume that", "to consider ~" or "to view ~ as ~"? But with these definitions, the sentence's meaning is rather weird. Please explain the using of in this case. Is it necessary to have the comma after ?
|
Jisho has 'supposing that' as one of the definitions for . It appears to be linked with . It is analogous to the following sentence from Tangorin.
>
> The man was arrested as a spy.
The comma seems necessary because the sentence is broken up with another phrase that intervenes before .
A 35-year-old male, , was arrested on suspicion of assaulting and murdering a 25-year-old female whom he cohabited with.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
「限定モデル」... Limited edition? Special edition? etc
So throwing this phrase into GOOG Translate gives me "limited model", I know this phrase is used quite frequently in Japan, but thinking about it a bit realized I have never actually heard "limited model" used back stateside...
So wouldbe applicable to "limited edition" ("limited edition model"), "special edition" or something else like a nerfed edition?
|
Weblio has _limited model_ as the translation for (from JST) or _special specificaiton model for limited sales_ (from ). As these don't sound natural to me, I turned to linguee.
From
150L.U.C 1937
For Chopard’s 150th anniversary, the Manufacture launched a limited edition of the L.U.C 1937 model – a mechanical tribute to the company’s watchmaking heritage.
are essential in meeting the design and manufacturing challenges of creating Steinway custom and limited edition pianos
As these examples show, "limited edition" is a normal translation in context.
Google Translate is often unreliable and sometimes downright misleading or nonsensical. I wouldn't rely on it too much for Japanese if it can be avoided.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
How does あるのですか work in this gramatically?
A Japanese friend wrote to me: somethingsomething
1. Shouldn't she have used before ?
2. Could you just say instead of ?
|
is a perfectly valid sentence, if not very formal.
1. In formal sentences, yes, is necessary here. In casual sentences (particularly in speech), particles are often omitted. See: What are the guidelines of omitting particles?
2. This is almost mandatory because this sentence is seeking an explanation based on the previous context (which is of course "you are interested in something"). So saying instead of would sound awfully unnatural. Basically (or ) is almost always used when you ask a reason using /.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs, conjugations, questions"
}
|
Best translation of 今日も始まる
In these lyrics, I came across the following verses:
Does the particle indicate emphasis of in this case? My best guess is that the second line should be translated as "It is now that the mythology of the universe begins" (in the sense that the it starts right now, not in another situation). Translating the sentence as "The mythology of the universe _also_ starts today" sounds unfamiliar.
|
> {}{} {}{}
>
> {}{} {} ****
>
> {}
Your question has already been answered by @Chocolate above, so all I am doing would be to add my own perspective.
The second line would mean:
> "A/The mythology of the universe starts again today."
It is "today too" and not "mythology too" because generally modifies the immediately preceding word.
Why use "today" at all in the first place? IMHO, that would be because this is a theme for anime, correct? In a televised anime series, the viewers would naturally tend to expect an interesting story to take place in each episode. By saying **** , it inspires a feeling of hope that something exciting would happen _**again today**_ in the episode that one is about to watch.
In that sense, one could say that the lyrics for anime themes can be subtly " _commercially manipulated_ " like this. In other words, anime theme lyrics should not be analyzed too straightforwardly using the regular prose/composition grammar or phrasing.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "song lyrics, particle も"
}
|
Is there another cheering phase to say rather than 頑張って？
I usually followed several Japanese actors on SNS.
Sometime when they have an audition, people usually cheer them by commenting "/".
However, I learned that some of them doesn't really like this because they are already doing their best.
I was wondering if there are any other sentences that I can use? I wanna say good luck as well, but the english equivalent is also ...
The only thing I came up with it is
|
You could say:
{}
{}
{}{}
I could go all night long with this, but as you seem to know, none of these will ever be nearly as common as the plain ol' .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "phrase requests"
}
|
What are the Japanese names of the columns in a Kana chart? (Vowels, K, S, T...)
Here is a typical Kana chart presented in gojūon order:
.
How would I refer to a particular column of this chart in spoken Japanese?
If for example, I was struggling to remember a word such as '' but I could only remember the consanant part from the final consonant + vowel pair (ri,n,g—), how could I say...
> "I think the last kana was a 'g—' kana..."
|
The word you are looking for is {}.
Therefore, the columns are named , etc.
> How could I say "I think the last kana was a 'g—' kana...'?
You could say:
> {}{} **** {}
In case someone is wondering what we call the horizontal rows of kana on that chart, they are called {}. We say , etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 21,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "word requests, kana, terminology"
}
|
What is the difference between 希望 要望 志望 野望?
I'm trying to understand the difference between the those words. After looking up in a dictionary, there entries list (roughly) "to wish" . But I think, that's because they are all written with the kanji (desire?) right?
Can someone explain me those words more in detail?
Feel free to use example sentences.
|
* **** : [noun, suru-verb] wish, (abstract and beautiful) hope
* **** : [noun] (concrete) wish, will, desire
* **** : [noun, suru-verb] request (as in feature request, support request, ...)
* **** : [noun] (only used in the context of deciding one's life course) intention, wish, choice; [suffix forming a no-adjective] aspiring; would-be; wannabe
* **** : [noun] ambition
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words"
}
|
やる in interviews and other polite contexts
#
Differences in usage between and
1.
2.
3.
# English
Earlier during a job interview, this question came to mind. Often when I speak in Japanese, I use "yaru" and its variations conjugations, but my impression is that it's not as polite as "suru" or "shimasu." Also there are some cases where "suru" cannot be substituted in, in such cases is it acceptable to use "yaru"? If not, what should one use?
By the way, I looked at Differences in usage between and but it doesn't appear to be answering my question.
In short, my question is as follows:
1. Is "suru" more polite than "yaru"?
2. when there's no easy alternative to "yaru" can it be used in an interview?
3. what are some practical alternatives to saying "yaru" (should this be necessary)?
|
*
*
*
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "politeness"
}
|
What is そういう referring to in this dialogue?
> A
> B
> A
> B ****
* * *
In this exchange, when B says, what does refer to? Is she saying that she cannot keep quiet about A borrowing books, or more simply that A cannot borrow books? Is the scope of that phrase just the line immediately before or is it the situation as a whole?
Also, just so I'm clear, is short for , yes?
|
I think B is saying that Because it's the rules, they can't do it like that (stay silent). Although I mostly base it on examples. And yes, in this case is definitelly short from of and refers to the proposed "solution".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "scope"
}
|
Meaning of 尻を持ち込む
In the 4th sentence of the 3rd paragraph of is:
>
I am not sure what is meant by .
According to Weblio it means:
>
I take it to mean that asked someone (not the narrator) to empty out the well which the narrator filled. Would this be accurate? For some reason it seems a bit odd.
Thank you
|
says:
> --
So... here in your example I think it's closer to **[]{}** "demand, press", than "ask".
>
demanded the narrator (or probably his family) to empty out the well which he filled.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "definitions"
}
|
How to say "a very adult answer for a very adult question"?
I watched Vladimir Putin do Q&A with high school students. One asked him
> What event most impacted your life?
Putin gave a very genuine answer related to the collapse of the Soviet Union that went way over the head of the 16-yr old. He then apologized and said:
> Forgive me. A very adult answer for a very adult question.
Is it correct to say:
**** or ****
and would the whole translation be
|
My personal recommendation would be to use the slightly colloquial **** with in katakana.
I am sure that is not a word taught in Japanese-as-a-foreign-language, but I feel it would fit the situation well.
{} sounds way too stiff and sounds unnatural for using because President Putin actually **_is_** an adult.
> {}{}{}{}
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
~を話す to mean talk about? Confusion
**** (A)
The English translation was given as "Mary and Shoko are talking about their friend Tom."
The following two sentences I guess would mean the same.
**** (B)
**** (C)
So how does the feeling differ between (A) and (B)? Do people say (B)? Do people say (C)? How does the feeling differ between (B) and (C)? Would anything change if they were talking about say a test rather than their friend Tom?
Sorry, if this is a duplicate. Please help explain what's happening here!
|
has to be used when there is actually a concrete issue concerning Tom, and they're talking about that issue rather than Tom himself (i.e., if you want to say "Let's talk about the problem about Tom" rather than "Let's talk about something about Tom", you need to say or ). Otherwise, the difference between (A), (B) and (C) is very small, and they are all natural. You seem to know this, but is incorrect.
See also: What is the in sentences such as ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
Question about using the past form verb 「まった」 in this sentence
It is a situation that a boxing fight will begin very soon. Suddenly, a trainer of a boxer thought that his man could be knocked out very easily. He then said the following sentence. Anyway, the trainer is a middle aged man.
> ****
I would like to know why the past form is used even though the gong has not yet been rung.
|
The past tense form **** (ie, the auxiliary in ) in your example indicates **urgent request/command** (). states:
>
> **** **** ****
So your sentence practically means the same thing as or .
For more detail on this usage of , please refer to these threads:
Difference between and
Usage of doubled non-past tense ""
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs, colloquial language, manga, past"
}
|
What is the meaning of verb (te form) + くって？
>
My friend translate for me as "I know I will depart on a journey"
is te form of
is te form of
then why add ?
|
> Verb in Te-Form +
is the colloquial form of
> Verb in Te-Form +
So, = "to go on a trip"
Not to confuse you, but I will say that in the phrase:
> **** ****
The **first** is part of the te-form and the **second** is the informal version of the quotative particle .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
What is the meaning of [風]{ふう} here?
The following excerpt is taken from a conversation with my language partner.
> **[]{}**
My attempt at translation:
> "My son has asked for a camera from Santa. In Germany, in what manner do you gift Christmas?"
So, first I'm simply not sure if I interpreted correctly or not.
On jisho.org the meaning "manner, behavior" is listed when is used as a "noun/noun used as prefix"? What does this mean? That it is used as a noun in the function of a prefix, or that it can be used as a noun OR like a prefix??
There were no other meanings which would make any sense here, unless wind/breeze can be used metaphorically here.
Ultimately, .... To "gift Christmas" doesn't seem to make sense. Does it mean something along the lines of "to gift FOR Christmas"?
|
> ****
> "In Germany, _in what manner_ do you gift Christmas?"
Your understanding of the []{} is correct. I think your confusion comes from the fact that the noun has two meanings. According to :
>
> ①
> ②
In your example it's used in the sense of #1 ("celebration, act of celebrating/congratulating"), though it seems you interpreted it as #2 ("word or gift to express one's feeling to congratulate/celebrate"). So in your sentence (consisting of the polite prefix + the noun + verb , literally "do celebration") means "celebrate" (≂ ), hence the translation given by other posters: "How (In what way) do you celebrate Christmas in Germany?"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Meaning of ーたりしない
I've come across the following sentence while watching a show :
>
...which, according to the subtitles, translates as :
> [She] won't stop after coming all this way.
I had a rough idea of what this meant without the subtitles, but I'm unclear on how it works grammatically : why is the suffix used here? Why not simply use something like ?
|
In addition to the basic usage of giving examples, you can use with some "unlikely" thing and emphasize how unexpected or extraordinary it is. It can be translated in many ways.
> * **** ! _Maybe_ he is serious!
> ( is a set phrase)
> * **** ? _By any chance_ , do you have a map?
> * **** I _happen to_ be his friend.
> * **** Don't you _ever_ lose!
> (as compared to , this sounds less serious, or implies the speaker believes the listener is unlikely to lose)
>
is close to the fourth one above. This emphasizes how unexpected is in the context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
tamago o yoku tabemasu
> tamago o yoku tabemasu.
>
> kudamono wa amari tabemasen.
Why for the first sentence with tamago, the particle "o" is used where as for the second sentence with kudamono, particle "wa" is used?
|
This is why "wa" is called a _topic_ marker rather than a _subject_ marker.
> ### Topic Marker
>
> The topic marker is one of many Japanese particles. It is written with the hiragana , which is normally pronounced _ha_ , but when used as a particle is pronounced _wa_. **It is placed after whatever is to be marked as the topic.** If what is to be the topic would have had (ga), the subject marker, or ((w)o), the direct object marker, as its particle, those are replaced by . Other particles (for example: , , or ) are not replaced, and is placed after them. (emphasis mine)
marks the subject of a sentence only in, say, 80% of the cases. In your case, was replaced by because fruit is the (contrasted) topic of the second sentence. Note that this is also working as a contrast marker. Also note that is much preferred in negative sentences.
See:
* What's the difference between wa () and ga ()?
* Why is the topic marker often used in negative statements (, )?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, particle は"
}
|
Why is が used here instead of に?
The following is an excerpt out of a conversation between me and my language partner. For context: italki Skype YouTube
The sentence in question: ****
My attempt at translation: "Concerning preservation of motivation, I think it is important **for** having fun while at the same time studying."
So the problem here is that in the way I translated the sentence, I'd rather expect the particle instead of in **** . So, either I misunderstood the sentence entirely or there is something about the use of in the construction at hand which I don't know yet :D
|
To be honest your translation doesn't sound like natural English to me. "It is important for having fun"? I don't think I've ever heard that construction before. "It is important to have fun" sounds natural and is a better translation of the original Japanese, imo. As Greg suggested in the comments, I also interpreted the sentence as "I think having fun while studying is important for preserving motivation." in the sentence is marking that phrase to be the subject, so like would be "this is important", the in your sentence is marking the phrase to be defined by some adjective.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Did I translate the て-form correctly in this sentence?
I'm wondering if I translated the bolded part of the following sentence correctly due to not being 100% certain on the rules of the -form.
> ****
I managed to translate the entire sentence as the following two possible translations, the bolded words corresponding with what I bolded above:
> The knife is like a knife used by the military, **not heavy** , yet profound; it is a certain type of survival knife.
>
> The knife is like a knife used by the military, **not heavy** , with a certain thickness found in a survival knife.
According to the following link, the -form of adjectives is the equivalent negative and are created by replacing the with .
<
> Negative: Same as i-adjectives, replace with .
Seeing as how can mean ' heavy ' or ' massive ', does this mean that the te-form changes the meaning to ' not heavy ' if the -form turns the original word into a negative?
Site I use for possible translations:
|
No, form does not mean it's negative, it's rather a sort of a conjunctive form. Notice that the linked page is about verbs, and the description doesn't say form is negative, rather that negative form of verbs is formed the same way as regular form of adjectives (because negative plain form of a verb has adjectival form due to the ending -), as you can see from the sample conjugations table below the quoted part.
The bolded part is an adjective in a (not negative) form, so it keeps its positive meaning joining what follows using "and".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, て form"
}
|
What is the closest equivalent Japanese word to "melempem"?
How do you describe this state of ' **melempem** ' in Japanese?
This is the food (kerupuk) in question:
?
Thanks!
|
Judging from your description, I think the word you're looking for is (verb). You can modify a noun using this word like or . You can find many articles on the net about how to restore to its original crisp status.
makes no sense to me. is another option, but it's primarily used for towels and such.
**EDIT** : If you want mimetic words, there is a word . But this does not have a negative connotation, so you usually have to use it with , for example (), to indicate it's undesirable. also might work if it's really moist.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, words, word requests"
}
|
Unusual meaning of 考える
> ****
> A service has been made that ensures you don't get tooth decay, by informing the dentist - using the internet - of things like how often you brush your teeth. Tooth brush making company and electrical goods company _thought it up_.
I sometimes have trouble with . This is one of those times. I'm not aware that 'thought it up' is a valid translation but it's the only one I can think of that fits the context. Have I got this right?
|
{} has many meanings and in this context, it means " ** _to create something new_** ".
See definition #6 in , which says:
> ⑥ {}{}{}
So, "thought it up" is a valid translation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, reading comprehension"
}
|
Multiple actions ～たり ～たり する
All of the examples and questions I have seen are of the form A B . But is it possible to use with three or more actions, such as **A B C **?
For example, does the following sentence make sense?
>
|
Your example is correct. When listing two or more actions, you can use the form A~B~C~ like:
> / We ate, drank and spreed last night.
>
By the way, it would be better to pay attention not to write as follows:
>
>
Some Japanese people write as above and we can understand its meaning, but it is incorrect in terms of the usage of .
>
>
We shouldn't omit the from second and third action.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
May the force be with you
The official transition is:
>
Can you break it down for me? What is in this sentence?
|
* -- "the force"
* -- the case particle "with~~"
* []{} (noun + particle ) -- adverbially, "together". ≂[]{}. sounds more literary/stiff and less colloquial than .
* -- the imperative form () of the verb , meaning "to exist; to be".
So literally means:
> "(imperative) Be/Exist together with the force."
> i.e. "May you be with the force".
> ("May the force be with you" would literally be more like **** .)
(More colloquially it's like )
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
The different usages of -ため
Roughly, my textbook taught me two major usages of -:
First, in context of a final clause, it is the colloquial equivalent to - and marks that the verbal expression connected to is the "goal" one tries to achieve through the verbal expression followed by the - phrase. Example:
>
The second one is in context of causal clauses. For example:
>
Especially in this case, except for paying attention to context and the general sense of the sentence, are there any other "hard" criteria by which I can distinguish being used in a causal function and being used in a final function? For example, when was used in a final function, I think the preceding verb was always in present tense. In the case above, the preceding verb is clearly set into past tense.
|
(Fist of all, what is ? And only translates into "because you can swim", not "in order to be able to swim", which is .)
The combination with perfect aspect, adjectives or potential verbs only represents causal relationship ("because ..."). That's one.
* : because it's beautiful
* : in order to maintain their beauty (note; it's not impossible to interpret this as "because they remain beautiful")
* : you may be unable to drive because of drinking
As you say, when it represents a goal, the preceding verb must be irrealis form / imperfective aspect (what you call present tense) regardless of tense.
* : I didn't drink in order to drive (note; it's not impossible to interpret this as "because I was scheduled to drive")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Meaning of verbのに向かって
I'm having trouble understanding the meaning of in the following sentence:
> {}{} ****
I know that normally means something like "towards", but I can't figure out what that would mean with a verb.
|
, in this context, means " ** _in response to ~~_** ".
The , of course, is a nominalizer. turning the verb phrase into a noun.
> "in response to Honoka urging me with her eyes to get in the line quickly"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Using にしておいてやる to say "Let's pretend"?
>
I saw this sentence in the dialect of a videogame between character A and B.
B says this line after being defeated by A.
I think B is saying that they should pretend this (defeat) is a "tie" (Because he seems to be arrogant) but I'm not sure how the part shows some kind of preparation for the future. Would it be ok to omit form the sentence? or will change the meaning completely.
His entire speech was:
> ………
|
has several meanings, and in this case it means "to leave (status)" or "to do (something) **for now / for the time being** ". can mean both "to leave the window open" and "to open the window beforehand."
So saying here implies he is going to win eventually in the future. Dropping and saying will not largely change the meaning in this particular case, because he's already said ("for today", "for now"), which also implies the situation will be different in the future.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, future, interpretation"
}
|
A bit confused with と in ひょっこりと
> ****
This looks like it comes from the word behind, so but when looking at a dictionary I found that is not an adjective which can take . Why is placed after this adverb, then?
For instance, it is specified that is an adverb which can take the particle, however, there is no mention of that regarding .
|
definitely belongs to the "adverb taking the 'to' particle" category, which is described in the following questions:
* What role does play in this sentence?
* What is the purpose of adding ?
* What does adding after an adverb do?
* How is used here?
I don't know why jisho doesn't mention it can (optionally) take . It may be simply because this word is relatively uncommon.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "adverbs"
}
|
Confusing use of の
I'm trying to read a children's book and had some trouble with one sentence. As I understand the story so far, it's about a depressed snail. But I don't quite understand what's going on here.
> **** ****
I feel like this should say something like "the snail went to live with his friend" but the order of "friend" and "snail" in is backwards if that is the case. (It's also possible that I'm way off. This is a children's book so it has no kanji, and I've already mixed up homonyms once.)
What am I missing here with ? Is my translation even close?
|
> **** ****
The first is **appositive** and the second is **possessive**.
**** means "(his) snail friend" = "his friend who is also a snail".
In meaning, **** **** . Why so? Because the is **appositive**. The is a .
In an **appositive** AB, A = B and B = A.
_**" The snail came to his/her snail friend's place/home."**_
If there were no context at all, **** can also mean "(my) friend's (pet) snail" and **** can mean "a snail's friend". In these cases, the will be **possessive**.
In a **possessive** AB, A and B _never_ refer to the same object.
Japanese is a most contextual language, the exact same phrase can mean completely different things depending on the context it appears in. Therefore, we keep asking questioners to provide more context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "translation, particle の"
}
|
Help with ゃったって and なん
I need help to understand some grammar in this sentence
So I translated it for "no matter how many times I will try, the result will be the same. that's the truth of this world"
But there are two things that I don't understand here:
1. ? where it came from? te iru form of (to do)? Because I know there is - what do you saying
2. ? is that to explain ton or something?
Thanks, Or
|
Why is your translation spot-on if you do not understand two parts of the original?
This is the colloquial form of , which means "even if".
<
is the colloquial form of , which is a sentence-ender expressing a firm kind of declaration/affirmation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, no da"
}
|
Which part of the sentence does 関連してる modify?
> {} {} …… {} {}
>
>
As far as I understand, it should mean something along the lines of "I at least know names related to Four Symbols", however I'm not sure, because is positioned before and therefore should modify it. But in this case it doesn't make much sense to me as I don't get to what exactly is related to.
And if my interpretation is correct, shouldn't it be like?
> {}
|
"" is, as you know, Four Symbols in China, but your translation is a bit wrong. Indeed we can't figure out what they are related to from that sentence. Maybe some words are omitted before "" like:
()
I've heard about the names of "" related to (this incident).
Also, the sentence "" is something ambiguous.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
I don't understand the usage of で in this sentance
This is from the headline of a news article in NHK News Easy.
>
Can someone explain this one to me? Thanks!
|
>
"" in the above sentence is difined by jisho.org here as:
> ****
> Particle
> 2\. indicates time of action
My attempt for the given sentence is as follows.
_The population of Japan decreases. The number of babies is the smallest up to now._
* * *
# EDIT
I posted the closest one in jisho.org here as an answer, but since I got a down vote, I'll correct it.
I looked up in various dictionaries, but I couldn't find an explanation that is perfect, but I think that the next one is better.
> is a particle that indicates time range for establishing a certain fact.
The fact is "the number of babies (born over a certain period of time) is the smallest" in the given sentence.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles, reading comprehension"
}
|
I don't understand what this verb conjugation is: 見えなくなった
This is a quote from Tae Kim's Guide
> ****
Can someone explain what this form of is? It almost seems like they are trying to make a negative verb into an adverb but is that possible?
Thanks!
|
> It almost seems like they are trying to make a negative verb into an adverb but is that possible?
Certainly, it's possible. conjugates just like an i-adjective. You will see this happen all the time.
I'm not sure it's right to call it an adverb in this case but since it has the same form let's abuse the word. As you know, when you want to describe how something changes you take an adjective in the adverb form and add , e.g.
> It is hot.
> It will become hot.
If you're happy with the above then your example sentence should now be easy to understand:
> It is visible.
> It is not visible.
> It became not visible. = It disappeared.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs, conjugations, renyōkei, ichidan verbs"
}
|
（ものか）そんなばかなことがあるものか — such a stupid thing or not stupid at all?
The full sentence is:
> 30.
Does it mean "such a stupid thing" or "not a stupid thing at all"?
|
> {}{}{}30 ****
>
> Does it mean "such a stupid thing" or "not a stupid thing at all"?
The former - "such a stupid thing".
means " **there should never be** (such a stupid thing)". In other words, is a negative expression that is synonymous to , etc.
> "There should never be such a stupid thing as getting 30% of our salaries cut down because of the poor business performance of our company."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "expressions, rhetorical questions"
}
|
Why do we need to use 2 nominalizers もの and こと in the following sentence?
Why do we need to use 2 nominalizers and in the following sentence?
> 1 1 ****
|
> {}1 {}{}{}{} 1 {} **** ****
**In this sentence, neither the nor is a nominalizer**.
The here just means "the **_ones_** " or " ** _those_** " and it refers to "those/the ones among the natural numbers greater than 1 that have no positive divisors other than 1 and themselves." That, of course, is the definition of prime numbers.
To call a word a "nominalizer", it needs to be nominalizing a **_verb_**. is not nominalizing a verb here.
is a set phrase meaning "it is said that ~~~" or "it is defined that ~~". Again, is not nominalizing a verb here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "nominalization"
}
|
What is ファンクラブ here?
Here's how it was used (taken from a JLPT listening question):
A:
B: ?
So, is this not literally a fan club?
Is this implying that you get tickets from a fan club? If they're fans, why would they sell tickets? Their own tickets? How does concert ticket selling work? (I am cultural-illiterate here I guess.)
Sorry if I'm overthinking it.
|
I will try not to overgeneralize things here, but there are at least two types of for Japanese musicians, athletes, etc.
**Type 1: Official fan clubs ({}/{})**
These are often run by the management companies responsible for promoting their "celebs". These usually charge you fees to join and to maintain your membership on a yearly basis.
**Type 2: Unofficial, "privately-run" fan clubs ({})**
These are mostly run by the fans for a more purely non-business basis.
It is the Type 1 fan clubs that manage event tickets. (Type 2 simply does not possess that kind of power.) Their members, naturally, are often given priority in getting the tickets.
This is why what B states makes perfect sense in Japanese culture. The official fan club has the most up-to-date information on the ticket sales.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
I don't understand why my は was changed to a に when a native corrected my sentence
> My sentence:
>
> Correction:
I can understand the rest of the changes, but why ? All they said was that it sounded more natural but they weren't sure why. Could someone explain this to me? Thanks!
|
tl;dr: is a big no-no for the subject marker in if-clauses.
A two-step explanation will be in order here.
First, there is a big grammar rule that says " **DO NOT use as the subject marker in an if-clause. Use for that**."
Correct: **** {} ****
Incorrect: **** ****
This seems to be a very common mistake among Japanese-learners. SE is no exception at all.
Secondly, , which is used in your sentence, is a special verb that can take with the subject as in (person) + + . However, the -over- rule for the if-clauses still stands, which is why it is **incorrect** to say:
> **** ****
which is essentially what you wrote.
That is because the first part of that sentence is an if-clause as it uses . You just cannot use there. Thus, it is only **_correct_** to say:
> ****
But as I mentioned above, it is more natural to use than / with . Thus, your teacher/friend corrected your sentence that used to:
**** **** ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particle に, particle は, particle も"
}
|
What does とも mean and how to use it
On Lang-8 I wrote I a journal entry. I wrote
>
This got corrected to
> ****
What does mean here? And how do I use this particle. Does it put emphasis or does it express something else? I tried looking it up but I could not find much.
|
, in that context, means " ** _all (of)_** ".
So, {}{} means "I won all three times."
The format is:
> Number + Counter Word +
You can say 5{}("all of the 5 people")4{}("all of the 4 dogs, cats, etc."), etc.
Nothing to do with your question, but is incorrect. It is without the . "did it three times", "played three times", etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
}
|
Function of ように in this sentence
For full context: <
The sentence in question:
My attempt at translation: "An employee of the aquarium said 'After the penguins had sung with a strong voice with their muzzle pointed towards the sky, they lowered their heads. This seems like they are worshipping at the shrine.'"
I couldn't come up with an interpretation making more sense than this one. However, especially since instead of is used in , I'm not sure if my translation is legit. I'm not very good in distinguishing where instead of should be used or vice versa, but since is oftentimes used when something is newly introduced into the universe of discourse, I was surprised to see it in use here because what this points back to isn't new in this conversation.
|
As for translating , it's better to use "looks like" because the speaker is not wondering if it's a fact or not.
As for the rest, from a different angle, what if the sentence was … ?
It's a bit too long, isn't it? Why don't you split it? I mean, … **** …. See? That's the example sentence as it is.
As you see, what indicates is a new information, hence doesn't really need to be further topicalized under the primary topic .
(If you nevertheless do it, that's in general considered a bad composition because it could sound as if the topic is shifted from to something else, which feels loose or distracted. That's why we are taught to avoid it for good composition. In other words, it's so natural for native speakers that you need education to stop it. p.s In this regard, a sentence that has two primary topics can't avoid it.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
し grammar question
The following sentence appears in my textbook.
>
Is the second at the end of the sentence necessary? Does it change the meaning to omit this second ? Does the second imply that there could also be other reasons (which are not mentioned) why is a good teacher?
|
has two different functions:
1. Lists things with slight emphasis. The second must _not_ be added.
> He is tall and he can run fast.
2. Denotes a reason.
> It's already late, so let's go back.
> Well, coz I was scared.
often plays these two roles simultaneously. The second in each sentence can be replaced by , , etc.
Anyway, sentence-end is usually for denoting a reason. In your case, the final marks a reason why is a good teacher, referring to the previous sentence. Even if you dropped it, the sentence is still understandable, but it's not "optional".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Meaning of なし得ないことをなし得えられない
>
> ――
> “”“”
In this interview that I'm reading there's a part where the interviewee is trying to define the concept of "timing" in the context of two people doing a special sports performance (ala Mayweather vs McGregor) but I can't understand the structure of the sentence
>
Is a negative prefix in here or is this some kind of idiom?, also, is correctly typed or should it be ?
The translation I have for that sentence is:
> It’s timing. Just the combination of absolute best time and absolute best place to do something nobody would think possible.
|
This before is or in kanji, and means "to achieve/accomplish". is "to be able to accomplish." is not relevant.
is an obvious typo, but still sounds weird to me (two potential forms in succession, "can be able to ...(?)"). Anyway it should mean the same thing as .
The sentence is saying:
>
> You cannot achieve [what cannot be achieved unless you are at that place, at that time].
Or more simply, "(If your is bad,) You cannot achieve a thing that requires the right time and place. (That's what means.)"
As usual, please don't be deceived by the commas.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, parsing"
}
|
Meaning of 再現 in this sentence
The following is an excerpt from a conversation with my language partner. For some context, I told her about our familydinner at a restaurant during christmas eve. I wanted to tell her that you could have your meal freshly cooked right before your eyes there, but unfortunately I used some wrong vocabulary and she explained to me what I actually said :D However, I feel like I don't fully understand what she has written me:
My attempt at translation: "Concerning 'meals created in a cookery program', doesn't this say that you have reproduced meals which they have made in TV cookery program?"
Since can also mean "revive. reenact..." I'm not sure if my interpretation is still legit. If it isn't then I probably also misunderstood the whole sentence, that's why I wanted to ask aboutit here :=)
|
Having read your comment, you wrote her that they served you dishes that were made on a cooking show.
She is assuming that you did not mean that the food that you ate was prepared live on a cooking show, so she is asking you this question.
>
>
> By "dishes cooked on a cooking show", do you mean that they were reproducing a dish that was made on a cooking show?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
仕事が終わる or 仕事を終える
What are the differences in nuance between the following sentences?
A:
B:
|
They are both common, and there is no practical difference. I think even a person who can freely decide when to leave his office doesn't make a clear distinction between them.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, transitivity"
}
|
Meaning of かけられる in the following sentence or context and its corresponding Kanji
Can any one please tell me what means in the following sentence and if it has any corresponding Kanji?
>
|
> {}{}{}
here means " ** _to be put_** (up for auction)".
You might want to remember the set phrase {} **** ("to put up for auction"). Its passive voice form is **** .
for this meaning is most often written in **_kana_**. If you must use kanji for a good reason (though I have no idea what kind of reason that would be), it would be .
> "I wonder if it is going to be put up for the first auction of the year at the Tsukiji Market."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, kanji, passive voice"
}
|
How was "個" used in this sentence?
I'm currently in the middle of reading this one magazine feature, and I came across this sentence --
> " [...] **"" ** ”
I know that "" is kanji for a generic counter, but I've never encountered it being used on its own in a sentence before.
|
{}, in this context, means " ** _an individual (as an independent existence)_** " as opposed to a member/component of a group or society.
Thus, "" {}{} means:
"I wish to keep improving my skills as an individual"
or simply
"I wish to keep becoming a better person"
This is quite often used when talking about oneself (or another person) in a philosophical manner. {} would be a synonym even though sounds more philosophical.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, translation, words, usage"
}
|
Passive form of 逃げる: 逃げられた vs. 逃げられる
I was reading in Basic Japanese Grammar Dictionary about the passive voice, and it says that you use ~ form to conjugate verbs. (p33)
So []{} would be , ok.
But it is used other form, like in this example on the book:
> ****
> ( _Mr. Yamada's wife ran away from him_ )
->
What form is correct?
What are the differences if both are correct ( and )?
What is this form called?
|
Pretty simply, is the past tense of (or past-passive form of ).
For godan/consonant-stem verbs:
* plain/dictionary form "to laugh"
* passive form "to be laughed at"
* past-passive form "was laughed at"
* polite/masu form "to laugh"
* polite past-passive form "was laughed at"
For ichidan/vowel-stem verbs:
* plain/dictionary form "to close"
* passive form "to be closed"
* past-passive form "was closed"
* polite/masu form "to close"
* polite past-passive form "was closed"
**EDIT:** I don't think this is advanced at all. () conjugates just like normal ichidan/vowel-stem verbs, so you don't need a special chart for this. If you know how to conjugate normal ichidan verbs such as and , you know how to conjugate (), too. (Actually, monolingual dictionaries lists () as a distinct "auxiliary verb", not a "form" of a verb.) I think you already know this, but is an example of 'sufferer passive' explained in the link in the comment section.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "passive voice"
}
|
How do ビュッフェ形式のホテルやレストランで and 私が思いつくのは relate to each other?
The following is an excerpt from a conversation with my language partner. For some context, I told her about our familydinner at a restaurant during christmas eve. I wanted to tell her that you could have your meal freshly cooked right before your eyes there, but unfortunately I used some wrong vocabulary and she explained to me what I actually said :D
I'll post what I had written first: -
Then here is the full block which she wrote back concerning my misleading wordchoice:
Now, the sentence in question:
My attempt at translation: "Concerning what I recall out of the buffet-system hotels and restaurants, it is ."
I interpreted as the short form of here. I'm not sure wether the way I put into relation with is legit or not. With being a nominalizer, becomes "concerning that which I recall". This "that which I recall" is further detailed by , that's at least how I understood it.
|
>
> (literally) It's that I think of with 'buffer-style restaurants and hotels'.
> (interpretation) The phrase 'buffer-style restaurants and hotels' reminded me of the phrase .
I think this particle can be understood as a method/means marker. In this sentence, she is saying she recalled the word with the phrase "" as a hint/trigger. usually means "to come up with something when one is at a restaurant or a hotel", which makes little sense in this context.
Here's something worth memorizing as a set expression:
> !
> Ah, that reminds me!
Your translation is not entirely wrong, but in case you didn't, remember that this is a rather simple cleft sentence. Let's get used to this pattern before resorting to word-by-word analysis.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does this comparison express?
The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between me and my language partner. I told her that I ate a variety of different types of meat, e.g. crododile and zebra. She then replied to me the following.
I have problems with the second sentence. My attempt at translation: "I also have eaten crocodilemeat, but I haven't eaten zebra meat yet. Concerning in japan, one eats horsemeat, but it (=zebra?) surely is meat that matches horsemeat." Did she compare horsemeat to zebrameat here? I think she does, and contextwise I wouldn't have any better idea.
|
>
> (literally) Is it (=zebra's meat) meat that resembles horse meat?
> I wonder if it's like horse meat.
* Please double-check the meaning of the verb .
* is a question, and is different from without .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
お祖父さん and 祖父さん: is there a difference?
Probably a stupid question, but I would like to clear up any doubts... For a native speaker, is there a difference between the word and the word ? The first one, simply, is more honorific?
|
Yes, is "relatively" more respectful. But it's better to regard as 'plain/neutral' and as 'usually rude'. You may address an old stranger with , but you must not use unless you really want to be rude. The same is true for vs. . Some native speakers refer to their own grandpa/grandma as / in the most casual settings, but I would say there is almost no reason for a nonnative speaker to ever use /. (There are even ruder derogatory term, and , which you may see on dirty net forums)
By the way, is a relatively rare ateji. It's pefectly fine to write this with all-hiragana.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "nuances, honorifics"
}
|
What's the difference between ぬきで & ぬきの and 入りの & 入りで?
I can't find the difference and in the book that I use there is no explanation.
* * *
Context: It is about ordering food. I have two sentences:
> ****
> ****
|
Generally speaking, is always adverbial (i.e., modifies a _verb_ ), whereas always connects to the following _noun_. In English this distinction is not always clear because "with ", "to ", "in " and so on can modify both a noun and a verb.
* I ate sushi without wasabi; I ate, without wasabi, sushi.
* (sounds like an incomplete sentence fragment because there is no verb for to modify)
* I ate sushi without wasabi; I ate wasabi-free sushi.
* wasabi-free sushi (noun phrase)
When you order something, you can say, for example:
>
>
> With milk, please.
...because / is a verb. You can omit this verb and say this simply:
> ****
> With milk (, please).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles"
}
|
Use of を生きる applied to a non-living thing
I don't understand the "" being applied to a non-living thing like the time you spent with your dad.
The "" extends the first sentence into another part before I can even understand the ending of the first part?
How do you break it down?
|
> {}{}{}{}{} **** {}{}{} ****
This sentence is in a very simple construct of:
> "Phrase A + **** \+ Phrase B + // + **** \+ ///"
which means:
> "Phrase A means none other than Phrase B."
A = "making the most of my time with my dad"
B = "taking the baton of life"
**** means "to make the most of ~~". We often say {}{}, etc. A cool expression to know.
> "To make the most of my time with my dad means (none other than) to take the baton of life (from him)."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What am I told here about the use of 「所々」
The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between and my language partner. I asked her about the use of and wether particles need to be attached at the end or not. For context, this is the full block in which she replied to me concerning this topic:
> in places)
>
>
The sentence in question:
My attempt at translation: "Concerning the 3 sentences from above, although with only is entirely usable, not using the way of saying, you can use this way of saying ."
As I understood and translated the sentence, she is telling me that I can ALWAYS use without any particle attached, but if I want to attach a particle, I can always use instead of ?
|
This sentence is simpler than you might think. It's just a compound sentence made of three independent clauses, each of which has its own topic (marked with ). You can split it into three sentences.
1. ****
For all three sentences above, you can just use (without /).
2. ****
However, saying is not valid.
3. ****
Saying is okay.
* * *
As she said, is both a standalone adverb and a noun that takes ///etc. See other questions for the difference between and .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
What's the natural way to say it sounds + adjective in Japanese?
So for example:
_That sounds scary to me._
Google translates it as
Does that sound natural in Japanese?
Thanks.
|
to put it simple and basic,
**-adjectives; adjective - the last + **
for example:
* (scary) → (looks/sounds[would be] scary)
* (delicious) → (looks/sounds [would be] good)
* (heavy) → (looks/sounds [would be] heavy)
>
> This movie looks very scary!
* * *
**-adjectives; adjective + **
for example:
* (beautiful, clean) → (looks/sounds[would be] beautiful/clean)
* (vital, healthy) → (looks/sounds [would be] vital, healthy)
* (dreadful, terrible) → (looks/sounds [would be] dreadful/terrible)
>
> You seem to be in good spirit.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
}
|
Expressing want and together
To learn Japanese, I am currently using Duolingo. One of the sentences it wants me to translate is "Do you want to go to the park with me?"
The answer I am supposed to give is
I get that is meant to represent the "together" part of the sentence. I also get that represents the fact that it is more polite to say "don't you want to" instead of "do you want to".
However, nowhere does the sentence really include the want part. Would it be correct to say the following instead:
?
|
You're right. Duolingo translated it loosely. You could be more direct and ask ****
For more information on how to say want, I recommend you read this.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, nuances"
}
|
Meaning of そ、in 「そ、 そんなこと言っても……」?
I need some help understanding what "," means in the following context, in which two fighters are being forced to fight and are conversing during the fight:
> Opponent:
>
> “If you don’t want to die, then fight seriously.”
>
> POV character: ……
I managed to translate most of the Point Of View character's response; but I don't know what could mean in the above sentence. Any ideas?
|
That's just a "stutter" of the first mora of , meant to convey hesitation or a lack of confidence.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, words, definitions"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.