INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
Can I use 「さぁ…さっぱり。」 to express that I don't understand at all?
The full form should probably be …, but is it OK to omit the latter part in informal conversations and will that cause any confusion or will it sound strange? I suppose it should be OK but I just want to make sure because there seem to be multiple explanations to
Related: Way to Use (sappari) and (sukkari).
|
mainly means:
1. refreshed; neat; clean
2. (as a negative polarity item) completely (not); entirely (not); (not) at all
Please read the link. Since is an NPI like and , the latter half of the sentence including can often be omitted.
> In many cases, this signal is strong enough that you can leave out the actual part of the predicate containing the negation (as long as it can be inferred from context)
can be , or anything, depending on the context.
is not an NPI, so saying only can often be confusing. Also note that (with ) is not an NPI.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "colloquial language"
}
|
Who is the speaker in this sentence
>
is the speaker here Yamashita-san?
Does this sentence mean:
> "Yamashita-san thinks he(Yamashita-san) will see that movie"
or
> "Yamashita-san thinks I will see that movie"
Shouldn't it be for it to mean the former?
|
> Yamashita-san thinks he(Yamashita-san) will see that movie
is correct. If you want to say "He thinks I will see the movie", I think it should be
>
,
> and
These two are "basically" same. You can use both of these as same meaning in the first person. but, in the third person, it should be
>
not
>
Sometimes, they are explained like these,
> I think =
> I've been thinking =
but, unfortunately, is sometimes used as "I have been thinking"
**EDIT:**
in the third person
> A () (What do you think he wants to do?)
> B () (i think he wants to eat pizza)
There is a hidden subject
Actual subject is hidden, so it looks like that [third person]+. but it is not.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "perspective"
}
|
What's the japanese word for manual/building instruction
I want to search the internet for an instruction for building a traditional kyudo quiver (). So far my search term is " " but I "" seems to be no good translation for instruction.
|
means 'a building', not 'building' as in 'to build something'. is an order or command. is gobbledygook.
is the word for 'self-made'. Or you can use the other words that you have along with (how to make).
There are a lot of resources out there.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Interpreting 僅かばかりの生物
I have a question about the following sentence fragment.
>
Context: It's talking about a gigantic sand worm thing, that is in process of trying to eat someone. It's living in a desert with scarce greenery and life.
What I'm wondering about is the
>
I'm wondering whether means little, as in small creatures, or could it mean more along the lines of really scarce animals, since those would be more rare than scarce greenery. I'm also assuming that is here just to intensify .
I'm asking because small animals would not really gel with later comments about them devolving to cannibalism in case food is missing and it's currently trying to devour whole a human. So I don't know if this is the writer making a mistake or me.
|
never means small _size_. It always means "scarce" (small _quantity_ ) or "slight" (small _degree_ ). And yes, in this case intensifies how scarce are.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "interpretation"
}
|
Why the ta-form is used here?
The sentence: ""
The translation provided(I don't know if this translation is really correct though) :"My son failed his university exams so he's retaking them in a year."
|
means to become a . is a person who failed an entrance exam and is preparing for the exam next year, usually enrolled in some . If this sentence was said right after the son failed the first year's exams, "My son became a for a year" automatically means he _will retake_ entrance exams next year. If this sentence was said after he entered a university, the same sentence can mean "He _retook_ entrance exams after a year (and finally succeeded)". It depends on the time when this sentence was made.
Likewise, 2 would mean either "He failed twice and will give a third try next year" or "He tried three times (and finally succeeded or gave up)."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
What's the meaning of まだ知り合ったばっかりだ?
>
>
These are some lines from a game I'm currently playing. Does the second line mean "There's still a lot to find out about each other[...]", being an implicit negative? Thank you in advance.
|
Let's break this up into parts. The whole clause:
>
>
means "we met/made each other's acquaintance".
>
Adding to a verb in past tense means it just happened. So this means "only just met" (plus the copula ).
>
means "still." We've still only just met. (This is hard to translate directly into English, but it intensifies the . by itself doesn't make sense.)
Finally, the particle just means, "and/so". I would translate the whole sentence as follows:
> I mean, we've only just met, so what are you gonna do, right?
There's no negative in this sentence.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, particle ばかり"
}
|
What does this となった express?
For full context, see here.
The sentence in question:
> **** ****
I already posted a fairly similar question here.
But I cant really find out how to apply the regularities lined out in the answers can be applied to here.
So basically, I dont know how in **** is used here. I also don't really know what to do with in ****.
My attempt at translation:
> "There was intense cooldown on the 25th morning, and one side of the waterfall basin froze over (???) and concerning in the surroundings of the waterfall, there appeared icicles and the rocky area was dyed white."
To make this translation, I just jused "and" constructions to cover the parts I didnt understand, but I would definitely like to know how these parts work ^^
|
I'd like to answer just the question about . I assume you're familiar with the clause-initial phrase/word , meaning "aside from/in addition to that..." (If not, here are examples on Jisho.)
The usage in your example in the same, except that the pronoun is replaced by a concrete phrase. In short, AB means "Aside from A, B." This can be a disjunctive meaning ("Aside from the fire, it was a great party.") but it doesn't have to be, and it this case it isn't.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Meaning of 春うらら
I was reading this Haiku behind a tea bag:
>
>
>
>
>
I actually have to questions:
1. Why is it considered a haiku although the second verse has actually 8 syllables? In my understanding, except in some cases.
2. What is a good way to explain in English ? It is not in my dictionary and it seems to be a word expressing some sort of special feeling related to spring. I asked a couple of Japanese people and I get the overall idea but none of them seemed to be able to give a clear explanation.
**Edit:** answer to 1.
I think this pretty much answers question 1. Is this one of such cases? From wikipedia:
> **[]**
>
> 68
|
explains as:
>
explains as:
>
and as:
> ①
I think is a word that describes... a sunny, clear, bright, mild, lovely, happy, and peaceful spring day.
* * *
I see that you've already found the answer to your first question. Yes, it's []{}[]{}.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, haiku"
}
|
Is it correct/appropriate to write a word using katakana and hiragana at the same time?
For example:
I noticed what the name of the game Nekopara () is half-written using katakana( - neko) and half-written using hiragana( - para). I'm wondering why so. Сould you explain this to me? Maybe I'm wrong about something, I'm curious to know.
|
Yes, it would be accepted. For example, , and , though there may not be many and it may not be accepted for formal names. Only the author knows why he wrote the name like that.
Generally, katakana is used for loan‐words and onomatopoeic words, and we feel more affinity and softness for hiragana than kanji.
Names of animals and plants are generally written in katakana in the case of academic names.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "katakana, orthography, hiragana"
}
|
What makes a person カラッと?
I'm reading a manga. Two sisters have just lost their father. Sister A laments that she doesn't know what to think, and sister B is just staring into the void. Then sister A says to sister B
>
Question: what on earth does she mean? In the dictionary, I find "dry", but that doesn't make much sense. Googling around, I've also found , but sister B doesn't look happy. My interpretation would be "You look like you don't care at all." or something like that, but that doesn't fit any dictionary entry I've seen.
|
>
Your interpretation of "You look like you don't care at all." is actually spot-on.
Even though you do not seem to think that it fits the "dictionary" definitions you have found, it does to a large extent according to me.
"Dry": Sister B is not crying, correct? Dry ≒ No tears, no weeping, etc.
"{}": While B may not be being cheerful, she is not all that depressed, either, about her father's passing. B does not look like she is left in the dark. So, in that sense, she looks (too) considering the occasion.
For the beginners, here is being used affirmatively. This has already been explained multiple times here, so I will not talk about it.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
How exactly is a foreign name written on a hanko?
Is it best to simply use only the first name (in my cousin's case, Rochelle/), only the last name Stout (, I believe?)), or some sort of variation of initials? And if initials are okay, what sort of formatting is acceptable?
|
A hanko is supposed to be a unique signature, you can style it however you want as long as it's readable. Romaji, katakana or hirakana - but don't make up kanji unless you officially have that kanji registered as your by-name.
Read the part about Jitsu-in: <
> As a rule, you can only register your name as stated on your alien registration card. You can register a stamp of your family name, given name or both. The stamp should print your name in the alphabet, katakana or hiragana. You can register your name in kanji ONLY if you first register the kanji name as a by-name first. This can also be done at the citizens’ service department.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "katakana, names"
}
|
Are でしかない and にすぎない synonymous? Or is there some connotation?
For example:
>
can be swapped for
>
without changing the meaning
|
Yes, **** can be swapped for **** without changing the meaning.
In the given context, they have the same meaning as "The car is only a car.", which implies "The car is only a car unlike your life. No matter how damaged it gets, it can be compensated by such as repairing it or replacing it with a new one."
* * *
# EDIT
> ...are there instances where swapping is impossible?
Very few, but certainly there are.
There is a corpus named "" here, which collected a vast number of actual Japanese sentences. In this corpus, I searched for sentence examples with "" as a keyword, and I examined whether they can be replaced with "".
In many cases, I found they could be, but I found an example that couldn't be replaced with , which is shown below.
> ****
This sentence could be rewritten as: ****
_However, I believed that there was no one except Sakutaro whom I could depend on for the life of my old age._
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
差し入れをお届けしたいとのことで
> ****
I don't understand this part. "To do X (without you knowing it), I lent them my key" is all I can understand. I'm not satisfied with the translations I found of and (), it doesn't make sense when I try to put them together.
|
{}{} means a present (often, if not always, of food/drinks) and any free online monolingual dictionary would have it as it is a very basic and everyday kind of word.
means "I am/was told ~~~."
> "I lent (someone) the key because I was told s/he wanted to secretly deliver a present to the lord/master."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Is "-Nu" same as "-Zu"when attached to end of words to mean "without doing" the attached verb?
E.g. Makezu vs Makenu
|
Not exactly grammatically. According to Wikipedia), is while is either or . In your case if we swap them and obtain (I cannot even directly type this one out with my Japanese input) and it won't be grammatically correct. Also note the meaning of your two phrases are different. The first one means "without being defeated" while the second means "so as not to be defeated". The last thing to note is that they are all archaic forms of but still commonly used in contemporary Japanese.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, nuances"
}
|
What does 在留資格別 mean?
I couldnt find any entry on jisho, and also googling and wikipedia didnt help. From: <
|
is this. means "Categorized by ...".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words"
}
|
のは Vs. というのは What is the Difference?
What is the difference between using and in a sentence to describe a part of the sentence? I'm having a hard time telling when to use either one, because it seems you can use to describe a verb/phrase the same way you would use . Thanks!
|
The main difference is in the level of (personal) interest, excitement, etc. that the speaker wants to express regarding the subject matter.
Using helps place a particular emphasis on what the speaker is trying to convey regarding the subject matter. It tends to express a higher level of interest, emotional involvement, etc.
tends to make the statement sound quite neutral, factual and "objective" if you will. It does not carry the emphasis that does.
For this reason, using will often naturally necessitate the use of qualifiers within the sentence. In the sentence given in your comment above, that qualifier is {}, which is like the ultimate qualifier that exists.
Compare:
**** {} ("Skiing is fun.")
**** ("That thing called skiing is **_so_** much fun!")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
}
|
How to ask where I can buy something
I'm trying to figure out how to ask where I can buy something. From the lessons I've taken so far, what comes to mind is Google says this translates to "Where should I buy a ?" which would be acceptable in English, but I guess it's not conveying what I want to say exactly. Would this be the correct way to ask in Japanese or is there a better way to ask "Where can I buy [something]?"
|
Most commonly (and simply), we would say:
> X
Note that it is **** and not **** .
Also, **** would be more natural than **** for "can buy".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "questions"
}
|
What is the meaning of の here?
‥
‥
‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥
It's a monologue from the game. That's the role of in this sentence‥ ?
|
It is used to represent stuttering speech. 'No-noroi nado to...'.
Without the comma (pause-indicator) it would be more difficult to interpret it as a stutter.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
長くしました: Make long or make longer?
Regarding panda viewing times at Ueno zoo:
> ****
> The zoo has made the time when you can see the panda two and a half hours long(er) so that lots of people can see it.
From the context it's clear to me that this is supposed to be 2.5 hours **longer** rather than 2.5 hours **long** , but how would the grammar change to express a fixed period of 2 hours rather than an extension of two hours?
I guess I would have expected the current sentence to mean **long** and would have expected something like for **longer**.
|
As means 'to lengthen', I do not see any ambiguity in this phrasing.
would be used to say 'become lengthened'. By comparison to the only real difference is between direct and indirect (transitive/intransitive) usage.
could be used, but would be unnecessary, as we can already glean that inference from the context.
If, on the other hand, you wanted to say that they 'changed it to' a viewing period of (only) 2.5 hours, you would say 2.5.
To say that they 'shortened the time' by 2.5 hours: 2.5or 2.5 or 2.5.
So, ultimately, the translation should read more directly as:
>
>
> So as to increase attendance (viewership), the zoo has lengthened the hours when 'Shan-Shan' can be viewed by 2.5 hours.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, comparative constructions"
}
|
Alternative form of a Western name in Japanese
This is quite a specific question, and may make no sense out of context, but the context may be hard to explain.
If you have a name such as Tertius, which is Latin for "third son", what is an alternative to translating that name to Japanese rather than simply converting the syllables?
To put it another way, what is the Japanese equivalent of a name which means "third son"?
The closest I have got so far is "San-nan", but I'm not practiced enough to know whether this is usable as a name or merely a description.
|
Japanese already has a naming convention for the order you mention:
> - first son
>
> - second son
>
> - third son
>
> - fourth son
...etc.
I would avoid using this as your 'Japanese name' and just use katakana or , then add that it means the same as .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
How do you say 'so' in Japanese?
As in 'That cake was so good'. I know I could use or something similar but I feel like 'so' expresses a kind of excessiveness that doesn't.
|
would actually be a valid translation in that context.
Others include:
{}
{}
Informally, you could also use:
**_Very_** informally, you could use:
{}
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words"
}
|
How to say 'Just to add to that' in a meeting
In a meeting, when someone has made a point and you want to add an additional comment to what was said, is there a way to say 'just to add to that...' or 'in addition to that...'?
Would it be something like ...?
|
You will hear all of the following:
{}{}/{}{}{}
{}/{}
Note: Depending on the situation, you will need to use []{}, []{}, etc. instead of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Is 良識の府 a wordplay for 参院?
In a newspaper article about i stumbled on this phrase:
>
The context is that a bill has been passed from the Lower House of the Diet () to the Upper House of the Diet (). Passing the is the bigger hurdle, so the -matters are deemed less important.
In an japanese-german online dictionary i found the same translation for and , meaning Upper House. Since also means "good sense", is the "government of good sense", so some kind of wordplay?
|
(and ) would be an epithet for the House of Councillors (), the upper house of the Japanese Diet. (I think "the Seat of Good Sense" may be a better translation.) There doesn't seem to be any wordplay involved in it.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, nuances"
}
|
How to address readers/viewers in an article or video?
How should one address readers or viewers in a published work?
For example, it is common in English language articles and videos these days to end by asking the viewer to share their opinion in a reply or comment.
Ex. "What do you think - do you agree?" "Does this ever happened to you, and if so, how do you handle it?" "Tell us your pick for the next Batman villain" etc...
These all have a real emphasis on the "you" part though, and the concept of "you" is something I'm struggling to deal with in Japanese. I've been told to avoid pronouns like , but in a situation where you're speaking or writing to an unknown number of anonymous someones across a divide of time and space, is there an alternative?
|
You can use (or ) for readers, (or ) for viewers and (or ) for your followers in your SNS like Twitter.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "pronouns"
}
|
What does 「…間違いを覚えてしまいそう…」 mean in this sentence?
Below is a sentence from a light novel. (The context of the sentence is that a guy is traveling on a bus and the sentence is from his inner monologue about the congestion inside the bus.)
>
I couldn't understand the part ……, so I asked a friend from Japan. She did some explanation, but I couldn't understand it very well since she did it in Japanese as well. But she said that she hadn't heard it before.
I also asked this in another Q&A platform, and someone from Japan said to me "I have never heard such Japanese. You shouldn't imitate the language that stupid Japanese people use." And another Japanese person said that it may just be a typo or mistake of author.
Is this an incorrect sentence? If it is correct, what is the translation of it? And what does …… mean in this context?
Thank you.
|
{}{} would have to be called a mistake by any standards. It simply makes little to no sense in the context (or pretty much even without any context because it simply is not a good collocation).
The phrase that should have been used instead would be:
> Adjective + {}/{}
which means:
> "to experience a (adjective) feeling"
Note that does **_not_** mean "to learn" here.
That adjective would be one with a negative meaning like {} ("vicious").
Thus, we have:
>
which should satisfy the vast majority of us native speakers.
> "And before you know it, the train is so jammed as to make a frustrated and overworked 'salary man' to experience a vicious feeling that perhaps he could, by mistake or something, grope a woman."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Usage of しな particle
As I've treated it, the at the end of the sentence is just ("not only, but also")+(=). But Jisho.org says it could also mean "having just started...".
Is this true? Is there an example of this usage?
|
> Verb in {} ("continuative form") + ****
means:
> "just when (verb)ing", "on the occasion of", etc.
is a suffix in this usage.
Examples:
{} **** {}{} = Just when I was leaving, it started raining.
{} **** {}{} = I like listening to jazz just when I am going to bed.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particles, particle な, particle し"
}
|
このほど、唯一残されていた、八王子隕石のかけらではないかとされる石について、本物かどうか、最新の科学技術で分析が試みられました
> (source)
My attempt at translation:
> Lately, Concerning a stone treated as whether it is the only remaining fragment of hachioji meteorite, an analysis with latest technology was attempted.
I'm especially skeptical whether I parsed the attributes correctly or not, although the translation seems correct at least.
|
>
> Recently,
>
>
> (concerning/on) an only remaining stone which is considered (by some) as a candidate of a fragment of Hachioji meteorite,
>
> ****
> an analysis was carried out using the latest technology to determine whether or not it's a genuine one.
The analysis was to determine (whether it's a genuine meteorite fragment), not (whether it's the last one). simply modifies the following .
* XY: regard X as Y; consider X as Y
* XY: regard X as a candidate of Y; consider X might be Y
* YX: X which is regarded as a candidate of Y; X which is regarded as Y by some people
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, parsing"
}
|
Is 甲州街道沿い a relative attribute to 今の八王子市
For full context: <
The sentence in question:
My attempt at translation: "(????) around 29.12.1817, 2.p.m, in nowadays Hachioji City, which existed along Koshu Kaido and was an inntown, and in the surrounding Hinoshi and Tamashi, a thunderous roar like lightning thunder together with a rain of meteorites rained down incessantly."
I think and are both local adverbials, connected through and made local by . However, especially seems rather complex and Im not sure wether I resolved the attributes correctly.
|
On December 29th in year 14 of the Bunka period (1817), at approximately 2:00 PM, a sound akin to thunder accompanied by a hail of meteorite fell upon the town of Yadoba-cho (which was located) alongside the Koshu-kaido, (which is) modern-day Hachioji City and the surrounding cities of Hino and Tama.
> ()[December 29, 2:00 pm]
>
> [In what was Yadobacho, alongside the Koshu-kaido]
>
> [Modern Hachioji and its surrounding cities]
>
> [Thunder along with rain of meteorites]
_____ is fairly common sentence structure when describing a region which has changed names and/or boundaries. So, in that sense and are related.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, relative clauses"
}
|
How exactly does this pattern: 距離にして work?
For full context: <
The sentence in question: ****
My attempt at translation: "Concerning Hachioji meteorite, it is assumed/thought that it exploded midair (=in the middle of the fall) and in contemporary literature like diaries and essays it is written down, that in a scope of around 10 kilometers, at least not less than 10 fragments fell down."
I don't understand what exactly does here and especially I dont know how it functions. "Making it into range/distance" is how I would translate it literally. It isn't much of an obstacle for me in understanding what the sentence wants to tell me, but since it adds up with it feels redundant, since in this phrase it is already indicated that we are talking about a spatial entity.
|
is not redundant in this sentence. It is a clarifying how the 10 kilometers was measured; i.e. 'in a straight line'.
Saying 'within a range/scope of 10 km', it could be argued that the method of achieving said measurement is ambiguous. So, for clarity, they added 'as measured in a straight line'.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How to interprete this でも?
For full context: <
The sentence in question:
My attempt at translation: "However, concerning the existence of hachioji meteorite, (the place) in hachioji inner city which became the impact site is practically not known."
I don't know whether I should interprete in sense of or + ( being either the copula or the particle). I settled for the solution visible in my translation where is the particle indicating location. But this was basically just because I couldnt come up with a better solution ^^
|
> **** + ****
>
> = **** + ****
If you swap for and the sentence still makes sense, does serve as an intensifier "even".
in the sense of "though / encore que / obwohl / anche se", on the other hand, is usually placed at the beginning of a sentence (followed by a comma) to introduce a concessive subordinate clause, as in:
> ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why is this は positioned like that here?
For full context: <
The sentence in question: ****
My attempt at translation: "According to Mr.Yamada, Concerning Hachioji, He said that because it was struck with large scale fires several times and also suffered air raids during war, there not being left many old documents, the search for a meteorite from the edo area won't be simple."
I really have no idea why this in (bold) is at this very position. I also have no idea why it has to exist in this phrase at all, and therefore I also don't know what it does and just translated the sentence as if it wasn't there xD
|
here is an adverb and after it stands for partial negation:"not many, if any".
Edit: You can interpret as a noun as well. In this case, the sentence structure would be a double subject one.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle は"
}
|
What does ２世帯５人 mean in this sentence?
> ****
Is it 2 families that have no link composed of a total of 5 persons or a normal family(3 or 4 members) + the grandparent(s) (1 or 2 member(s)) ?
|
From the context of the story it can be assumed that they were from two separate households simply located in near proximity to the source of the explosion, for a total of 5 people. There is, however, no specific detail as to the makeup of these families and their relationship to one another (as this is likely not relevant to the story and in interest of privacy).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, counters"
}
|
Can Japanese words with kanji and hiragana in them start with hiragana characters? If so how common are they?
Pretty much every word I've seen so far that contain both kanji and hiragana, always starts with the kanji character(s) first Like , , and . The only exceptions I've seen so far are and , but one of them isn't even used in conversational Japanese. Do like 99% of the words have this same format to them?
|
This occurs with prefixes that have no kana or are normally written in kana:
*
*
*
*
And in compound words of kana (mainly onomatopoeias) and kanji words:
*
*
*
When the first kanji is difficult enough, it can be safely written in kana:
* ()
* ()
* ()
* ()
Such words are relatively uncommon, but not rare.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "orthography"
}
|
Meaning of いつ如何なる時も?
> …
"However, since he wouldn't surrender.... he could show resistance." I'm not sure what is supposed to mean.
|
[]{} is a literary way of saying .
( is a literary way of saying ).
means (literally) "at any time, at any situation", and it's an emphatic way of saying "at any time" "no matter when" (≂ ).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
ようとしなかった and するとしなかった
>
>
>
What's the difference?
|
Your first sentence is natural and makes sense. **Volitional** Form + indicates / (past unwillingness or refusal). A few examples:
> * ****
> I told them not to, but they would do it anyway. (from Taishukan's Genius E-J Dictionary)
> * **** ****
> He wouldn't tell the whole story. (from Obunsha's Lexis E-J Dictionary)
>
So your first sentence means:
> ****
> "The horse stopped and _wouldn't_ move."
* * *
And.. your second sentence **** sounds incorrect, I'm afraid. **Dictionary** Form + explained in this post is used in the forms such as etc. etc., meaning "I should get going (now)." "Shall we get going (now)?" "Let's start (now)." etc, but we don't use it in the negative and/or past tense form (××××× etc.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
}
|
What does でござんしょうな mean in 馬車はいつ出るのでござんしょうな
>
Does this sentence mean "When will the horse cart come out?"
But what does mean here? Should this be broken down into three parts as + + ?
I know means have. But becomes let's have?
|
is said with an accent. is a politer version of . is a sentence-end particle (the same as in ).
>
> ≒
> ≒
In accented speech, can change to , , , etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, politeness, dialects, particle な"
}
|
Usage of じゃ in 西瓜を買うと、俺もあいつも好きじゃで両得じゃ
>
means then, well then. But what does in the above context? Seems the definition of then, well then can't fit in this sentence.
|
This is a dialectal copula (linking verb) which is used instead of . This is actively used in some areas of western Japan (especially in Hiroshima), but it's also known as a typical role word of old men. You will also see instead of , instead of , instead of , and so on. in modern standard Japanese is totally different.
>
> ≒
> If I bought a watermelon, both he and I like it, so it would be win-win.
after a clause can sometimes denote a cause or a reason.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "dialects, copula, role language"
}
|
How to say "challenge" in Japanese?
I often use sentences such as "the challenges of doing...", "the challenges xx have to face" for my research. I'm trying to translate that into Japanese, but I have trouble finding a word for "challenge". and have been suggested to me, but neither seems to fit perfectly. is probably more appropriate, but the meaning of "challenge" doesn't seem to be the main one.
Eg.
What are the challenges for new organic farmers?
The challenges of starting organic farming are...
Would these be okay in my case? Is there any better option?
|
and are both fine. However you should avoid the following expressions because these are ambiguous and tend to mean something else:
* task of starting organic farming
* problems with new organic farmers (farmers themselves are troublesome)
My recommendations:
*
*
* /
basically only refers to the action of trying hard to achieve something difficult. I doubt we need this word in this context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
I need help understanding the grammar in this sentence: 自分で言うのもなんだけど
I am still in the beginning stages of learning Japanese grammar and while I understand the meaning of the kanji I don't understand what means in the context of this sentence.
> ****
|
* This is a nominalizer. = "saying it myself"
* Here is used in place of the topic marker . Doing so makes a sentence a little reserved or mild, similarly to English "well", "kinda", "a bit", "(not) quite", etc.
* here basically means "weird". More generally, can be used to avoid saying negative words directly in conversations.
See Schokolade's links for more information. Put together, literally means "Saying it myself is a bit weird, but ...". It's a set phrase used before you want to say something you should not say. "I may not be the right person to say this, but ..." or "Though I say it myself, ...".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
Are those sentences correct?
>
>
>
>
>
|
> 1) {} **** {}{}
>
> 2) ****
>
> 3) ****
Among the three sentences, only the first one is correct, grammatical and natural-sounding. It is just perfect.
Sentence #2 is incorrect for using the first as is the direct object for the verb . We must use instead.
Sentence #3 is also incorrect for using . We simply do not say . If you replaced by {}("postage"), the sentence would be acceptable.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, word choice"
}
|
How to say 'No Pressure'
How would you say 'No pressure' in a business context where you are trying to convey the lack of a need for urgency of completing a task?
Is it something like ?
|
You would often hear the following expressions:
{}
{}{}
{}
In one of the companies I have worked for, some people actually used:
beause almost everyone spoke English there.
Finally, {}{} is an incomplete sentence ending in the continuative form and it can be taken to mean " ** _You don't have to do it_**.", which you probably would not want to be saying.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Different meanings for "endurance"?
I found similar translations for "endurance" and don't know how to distinguish them:
1. [[]{}](
2. [[]{}](
3. [[]{}](
**What are the patterns to distinguish one from another and to generally find out which I should choose?**
Thanks in advance :)
|
the nature of a thing to be able to withstand external forces for an extended period. Being of inherently strong composition. Permanence. Durability. Hardiness.
Holding in an impulse and carrying on despite the impulse. Implies ‘carrying on’ despite a burden or ‘sucking it up’ despite hardship, by virtue of one’s willpower. Does not necessarily imply longevity.
Being calmly patient. Waiting is an essential part of this usage. Implies longevity.
Your pre-edit post showed that you used Takaboto.jp. Whether you use this or another site try to avail yourself of the example sentences provided in order to increase your understanding of the nuances and usages.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, word choice"
}
|
What is this character on this shirt?
A colleague came with this shirt to work. I can read the
?
but the " (approximation) I do not know.
Can you tell me the character? What could be the translation? Sell X every day? I first thought, the " could be the inch sign, but then I still do not know the .
![enter image description here](
|
This `"` is not a real Japanese character. There is a set phrase which means "sold out for today", where means "completely" or "thoroughly", but I doubt it's suitable on a T-shirt anyway. means "today".
The remaining elements look pretty meaningless, too, so I guess this was designed by someone who knows neither English nor Japanese. Or maybe someone made this intentionally as a joke.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "writing identification"
}
|
How would you say, "why don't you come over?"
I may be wrong but would translate as "Do you want to come over?" And does the Japanese language even use the word in that way?
|
means in the direction opposite the speaker but near the intended listener. Your phrasing is equivalent to saying something inconsistent like 'Come there'.
You want to use , as that would indicate the location where you are at.
The word for 'want to' is missing from your Japanese example. As in English we use the expression 'Do you wanna come over' as an invitation rather than a question as to that person's desire to do so, what you really want to translate is 'Won't you come here?', for which would be appropriate in a casual/friendly relationship.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Convert to Ta-Form when followed by a noun
Original sentence :
>
My question is, why not :
> ?
When do we need to convert the verb to `Ta-Form` ?
|
I think this Ta means "completion". The job has been stabilized.
Present form in Japanese language can mean the future things, so may be able to use for it like . In this case, also can be used.
For example, means "a person who will get married", means "a person who got married".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, tense"
}
|
Is 「インターネットはカタツムリのように速い。」a strange expression?
If I complain to the Internet Service Provider and say a sarcasm as follows
>
Is it a strange expression? Must it be rephrased directly as follows?
>
Is the former expression (with a sarcasm) used among Japanese?
How about ?
|
may be understood by some people as a tricky sarcastic expression, but usually you should say one of the followings:
*
*
*
*
Note that these refer to a general characteristic of the internet because of the use of . If you want to report a temporary status of your internet connection, you must use (e.g., ).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "expressions"
}
|
Whats the Meaning of たるみきる？
So i came across this sentence in a newspaper article
>
That I translated into
> While the ruling party together with the other parties were negotiating the revised bill,the discussions of the were [ ]
Now what exactly does mean? With meaning something along the line of "dullness" or "boredom", and having a whole lot of translation, whereby "terminating" seems to refer to discussion, what does this come out to? It seems like a fix expression, that i can not derive.
|
This is not a noun, but the masu-stem of the verb ({}) that the noun is based on. In both forms, it can indeed refer to a sense of dullness, but its base meaning is "to loosen/slacken", and this often extends to a metaphorical sense (similar to the English "slack off"). So if the is , it means that the investigation is very "loose" - in other words, not strict enough.
As for the , when used as part of a compound verb like this, it generally indicates to do something "completely" or "to the absolute limit". (eg. is to "run a race", but is to "run the race to the end".) So while on its own would mean the investigations were simply "loose", means that they were "completely loose" or "as loose as they could possibly be" - it's essentially a superlative, showing that the writer thinks this special committee is not fulfilling its duties in the slightest.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What particle (の；を) should I use between noun/verb and ～方 (買い方；歩い方 etc.)?
I'm not sure of particles in these 3 sentences, especially this particle- between noun/verb and , are they OK? (If you see any other grammar mistake, you may let me know too.)
> 1 ****
> 2 ****
> 3 ****
|
Verb(pre-masu form) + is the set form. Verb + would be wrong.
As you need to use the pre-masu form, would be wrong. would be correct.
> 1
implies a specific thing, like asking 'What is the thing that is the way of walking while wearing a kimono.'
It might be better to separate the two thus:
>
If you still want to place them in the same sentence, I would go with:
>
or, as @immateur has suggested:
>
If you were to provide the English of what you want to say it might be helpful.
> 2
I don't see anything wrong with this sentence. If you are asking about the purchasing from a machine, it would be better to say
> 3
This is fine.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles, particle の"
}
|
Is a の said after the first three digtis of 10 phone number?
Lets say my phone number is (123)456-7890.
Should I pronounce it as:
>
or
>
|
Native speakers use the 's most of the time. Without using them, the phone number will not have the **_rhythm_** that we expect it to be read out with. It just will not sound "right" without.
For keeping that rhythm, it is also important to know that we intentionally **_lengthen_** the syllables of (2) and (5) to and , respectively, to produce the same "double-length" as the other digits that are originally double-length.
Thus, the number "(123)456-7890" is pronounced:
> **** ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle の, numbers"
}
|
流すのもなんなので - Translation help
I'm currently reading through the light novel at the moment and have become stuck on this page containing the below sentence.
I've provided an image for context as I think you'll need it.
The first half of the sentence I need help with is this:
> **** ....
The official English Translation for this book translates it as so:
> It would be awkward to leave that hanging, so Haruhiro offered, "...Maybe they're in the same family?".
I know it's connected to the topic of the last paragraph, but I can't seem to fully wrap my head around its full meaning and how its deconstructed.
If someone could explain this to me like I'm 5 that would be fantastic.
Thanks,
Archie
|
In that context,
{} means {}, which means " ** _to take no notice and show no reaction_** " to what has just been said by the other person. People tend to what they think to be poor jokes, uninteresting or useless comments, etc.
here is a filler word for an actual word that is **_negative_** in meaning. In this case, that word would be {}, {}, etc.
So, would mean something along the lines of:
> "As it would not be too cool to take no notice of (what Yume has just said)"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, nuances, particles"
}
|
Can 理由 mean "logic" in this sentence?
In a manga, the characters are trying to find out the culprit of some homicides. One of the character is basically saying that if they keep thinking in a logical way, they will never find out who the culprit is. Then he says this:
> …
Could be interpreted as "logic" in the sentence above (and in general)? Translating it as "reason" or "motive" doesn't fit the context in my opinion, because they knew since the beginning that the culprit was a and there wasn't a motive for the homicides. My translation attempt:
> It's because this story has never followed any logic.
Later on they will discover that they had made the wrong assumption that another character was killed, while he actually faked his death instead. Here you can see the two pages where it is taken from for more context. Thank you for your help!
|
It appears to me that the characters are having difficulty with or are confused with the case at hand. They just can not get how the culprit could kill without a motive without a reason, it is not normal and the same situation, in reality, would cause real detectives just as much difficulty as the characters in the manga.
The translation is reason or motive, if the characters are detectives "motive". If just regular people "reason".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words, nuances, manga"
}
|
Difference between 〜に限らない and 〜に限られていない?
I'm a bit puzzled by the use of vs . Here are example sentences from a textbook:
> 1. ****
>
> 2. ****
>
>
These both mean "not limited to", and have the same sentence structure. Here are my specific questions:
1. How is being used as a passive verb here?
2. Would work?
3. Does sentence (1) have the same meaning as:
> ****
|
1. is the te-form of the passive voice of , followed by to denote the continuation of state. So the literal translation is "has not been limited". Basically focuses more on how things have been up until now rather than how things are now, but in this case the difference is not very important.
2. Of course it works. is the plain passive form of , "is not limited".
3. Yes. and have the same meaning because it works both as a transitive and intransitive verb. I think is more common and concise, though.
All in all, , , , , and can roughly mean the same thing.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, passive voice"
}
|
What are the origins of "ありがとう"?
Now I know what you may be thinking when I pose a question like this, but I do have a reason to wonder.
Work with me for a bit. When did the word "" come into use, could it have been birthed in the Yamato language? Did it come with the influx of Chinese cultural influence?
This is a question I ask my students in order to get them to think about Japanese objectively. The Portuguese arrived in Japan in 1543. How does one say thank you in Portuguese? Thank you in Portuguese is "obrigado" a slight resemblance with the Japanese expression. Is it a pure coincidence, probably. Could the foriegn influence merely have increased the popularity of "" over time? Maybe.
What is an explanation that can disprove a direct relationship between the Portuguese and Japanese expression?
|
> What is an explanation that can disprove a direct relationship between the Portuguese and Japanese expression?
If you're asking for proof that there is no indirect relationship in the popularity of usage due to Portuguese influence it would be pretty hard. As far as there being no direct relationship, the usage of a variation of can apparently be found prior to any significant Portuguese presence in the country. Early Buddhist sutras contain the expression, however, so it's link to Chinese cultural influence is highly suggested. Who knows, however, whether or not there existed a similar word previous to this influence used to convey appreciation?
The likelihood of Obrigado having an influence on the Japanese word is considered unlikely. I would suggest that this common view on the subject be accepted unless you have some substantial reason to doubt it and have a masochistic streak.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "history"
}
|
Is ます omitted here in 楽しい旅行をしていらっしゃい?
I just learned a useful phrase, but immediately I already have a few questions about its structure and grammar.
The phrase:
> !
Is this a set phrase short for:
>
If so, why is there no at the end in:
>
I'm just a beginner, so I am obviously way out of my league here, but I am really curious.
If anyone would kindly clear this up for me—or point me in the right direction—I would really appreciate it!
|
is the imperative () of the honorific verb , here standing in for .
is a valid form of . However, the imperative needed for would be ****. ( is often heard when you enter a restaurant — meaning "Please come in!", a polite imperative.)
Just to be doubly clear, the in and the in are different grammatical forms, even though they look and sound the same. The first is the imperative, the second the conjunctive ( _masu_ -stem) ().
* * *
By the way, or may be set phrases, but they are not "short for" , any more than _Safe journey!_ is short for _Have a safe journey!_. The longer versions express the same sentiment, but _Safe journey!_ could be equally "short for" _I wish you a safe journey!_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "conjugations, keigo, subsidiary verbs"
}
|
Is it more natural/popular to use ～てしまう form in a context of "finish sth completely'' or "do sth by accident''?
Is it more natural/popular to use form in a context of "finish sth completely'' or "do sth by accident''?
I mean if I said a sentence like this:
>
What would a Japanese native speaker understand it as? I've learnt that can mean both in this sentence:
> I've eaten the whole cake
or
> Oops, I've eaten this cake unintentionally (I wasn't going to do that).
What usage of form is more natural, what is used more often? Or maybe it all depends on the context?
|
I think that it would be hard to argue that you can eat a cake 'unintentionally', unless sleepwalking. I feel that, in this circumstance, the expression is used to acknowledge the fact that they know that what they did was wrong or unexpected and to show contrition or at least the appearance of contrition.
> 'I ate a slice of cake (even though I'm on a diet).'
>
> 'I had a bite of your cake (while you were turned around, couldn't control myself).'
>
> 'I ate the cake (that you're looking for in the fridge).'
All of these usages are equally valid.
As we cannot know from the context just how much cake was consumed it wouldn't be correct to assume that it meant the 'whole cake'. Also, can refer to a large cake with many servings, a single-serving of cake, or even just a bite. It would be more likely that one would say if they ate the whole thing.
The use of / is extremely context-reliant and can be used in a myriad of ways. Here is just one resource to explain various usages.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, usage, て form, subsidiary verbs"
}
|
Help with ケ in this sentence/phrase?
I'm still learning japanese, so I'd like someone to help me with this, please!
I can't understand the meaning of this phrase/expression:
>
I do understand the meaning of , but I don't know what does "" means. Thanks in advance!
|
, or , [[]{}]( is a euphemism for "interest in the same gender", "homosexuality".
E.g.
→ have an interest in the same gender
→ have no interest in the same gender
The comes from...
>
> []{}/[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}
> ()
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, sentence"
}
|
Is there a Japanese universal verb for "imply"?
Very often I want to express an idea of "X is implied in Y", e.g.
> Is "I" implied in the following sentence?
Google translate tool offers the following:
>
Three-part question:
1. Does Google translation correctly expresses the idea?
2. Is it possible to use the verb in this case?
>
3. Is there a better way to express "Is X implied in Y"?
|
I don't think is a very good translation for "Is 'I' implied in the following sentence?".
doesn't sound too good to me, either.
How about using []{}/?
> YX "Is X implied in Y?"
> YX "Does Y imply X?"
* * *
> Is there a Japanese universal verb for “imply”?
I don't think would be a universal word for "imply". I just think would fit your example here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, semantics"
}
|
Usage of なら in this context 俺相手なら なんでもいい みたいだった
I am still learning Japanese so if my translation/understanding of this sentence is wrong please let me know, but I have translated part of this sentence to mean "seemed like anything is fine" And I know that this kanji translates to I;me and this kanji translates to counterpart. But I need some help understanding the part of the sentence.
|
> {}
Without more context, it would be impossible to translate this sentence perfectly because Japanese is an extremely contextual language.
is a conditional conjunction -- " ** _if_** ", " ** _as long as_** ", etc.
So, all I could come up with would be something like:
> "It seemed anything would do as long as it were done/performed against/toward/with me."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, conditionals"
}
|
Is 雷装 a synonym for 魚雷?
During reading of some Japanese Wikipedia articles (e.g. " \(\)"), ) I encountered the compound , which I have been unable to find a definite explanation of.
In their descriptive texts you will find a lot of mentions of . However, it seems that they ( and related ships) are a different type of torpedo cruiser, since a torpedo cruiser generally gets called . The Wikipedia text on seems to indicate these were remodelled torpedo cruisers into light torpedo cruisers. Did I understand that correctly?
But that still leaves the question open: is a synonym for , maybe in a similar style how took over from ?
Any additional hints or explanations about etymology very much appreciated.
|
No, it's not a synonym.
is short for or , torpedo-attached/rigged/equipped/mounted. According to Wikipedia, Kitakami was originally built as a , light crusing ship (not torpedo cruiser). In August-September 1942, they converted it into , heavy torpedo-attached ship (removed 3 main guns, rigged with 40 torpedo launcher).
* : land mine
* : underwater bomb
* : short for , machine underwater bomb, naval mine
* : short for , fish-shaped underwater bomb, torpedo
* : by using , torpedo attack
* : equipment, (act of) equipping or equipped
* : to equip, to rig, to mount
* : short for or , torpedo-equipping or torpedo-equipped
* : bomb
* : aerial bombing
* : short for , aerial-bomb-equipping or aerial-bomb-equipped
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, words, kanji, etymology, history"
}
|
What does どうだと言うものでもない mean?
It's a dialogue from a game. Two girls talk about breast.
> :‥‥‥
>
> :‥‥ **** ‥
I know that means "how; in what way" and means "doesn't mean that; it's not (true) that; not necessarily", but what is ?
My attempt - they’re big, but it doesn’t mean anything, though..
|
>
is a fairly common colloquial phrase meaning:
> "It's nothing special.", "It's no big deal.", etc.
So, it seems you've got the gist of it.
> "Just because my boobs are big, it's no big deal, really."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
ドラゴン vs. ワイバーン vs. 竜
I've been playing some Fire Emblem recently and I noticed that the English translation for is Wyvern Rider. My initial guess that there wasn't a word for Wyvern in Japanese was wrong though as exists. So I was wondering what the nuance and difference between the two in Japanese is along with what differences there are with .
|
or the simplified both represent dragons, but not necessarily occidental ones. Since there are differences between Eastern and Western ideas of dragons (some relatively minor, some major) it is good to keep these separate.
would be a medieval European image of a dragon (LOTR, GoT). A wyvern is considered smaller, with two legs instead of four, without the intelligence or special properties normally reserved for dragons. A beastly lesser cousin of the dragon.
In Japan, the distinction between dragon and wyvern is likely unclear for most people, and the word wyvern is much lesser known. Likely for this reason the original naming chose 'dragon'. As wyvern is relatively better known among English speakers, however, the translation reflected this.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Pronunciation of 何
I would like to know the pronunciation of "" in the following clause:
Is it or ?
I am wondering because the pronunciation of can change.
|
In this case, in is pronounced .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "pronunciation"
}
|
米田さんによると、その可能性は高いものの、Ｈ５普通コンドライトは地球でもっとも多く見つかる隕石で、八王子隕石が偶然曽根隕石と同じ種類だった可能性もあるということです
> **** **** (source)
My attempt at translation:
> According to Mr. Yoneda (?), Concerning the possibilities, out of the meteorites which are discovered more abundantly on earth (??? H5 ordinary chondrite of expensive things???), there is also the possibility that hachioji meteorite is similar to the Sone meteorite type.
I am profoundly puzzled by the parts in bold. Furthermore, I'm having a really hard time parsing the **** **** part. First, there are two and while I know both the topic marker and contrastive function, I'm lacking the creativity and skill to meaningfully resolve their functions in this sentence. I chose the interpretation for in because I find a way to translate it otherwise. I also have no idea what is supposed to tell me, so tried to make the best out of it.
|
is a disjunctive. It means “but” or “however.” For whatever reason, Japanese is very rich in disjunctives!
So you’re looking at two separate clauses, and that’s why you find two s.
(sometimes written in kanji as ) is a more formal way of saying . So means “most commonly found.”
The following this clause is simply the copula in form.
Does this get you all the way to the translation?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Is this volitional +とする?
For full context: <
The sentence in question: " **** "
My attempt at translation: "Im afraid to say that concerning hachioji meteorite and the specification, though we cant do it the research group trying to continously try to tackle the elucidation of the true state of hachioji meteorite appeals to the general public for the provision of information if there is a stone like a meteorite in the house."
I don't know what to make of this . I read that "volitional+" means "to attempt to", but usually volitional form means the -forms. is also somehow volitional, but I couldnt find anything whether it can act in analogy to form+
|
How about parsing it this way:
> Sentence 1:
>
> Sentence 2:
In Sentence 2,
Subject = the research group
Verb 1 = say
Verb 2 = appeal
* * *
>
is the desiderative form (-form) of .
is quotative, and (<) means "They say...". This is often used in news reporting.
* * *
> ****
The doesn't mean "and". XXYY means "identify XX as YY", so XXYY()/ means "couldn't identify XX as YY".
"Unfortunately, they couldn't identify it (= the stone) as a Hachioji meteorite, but..."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
なかったこと in なかったことにできますよ
> ** **
May I know what bolded sentence actually means?
> My attempted translation: Do you want to erase it? If you wish to, you can do something that you have not done.
But this sounds a little bit illogical, how can one do something that he/she has not done? Did I misunderstand the sentence?
|
is something that hasn't existed or happened before.
Essentially, would be something that didn't exist. So, would mean 'to make it so that it didn't exist.'
>
Shall we erase it? If you want, we can make it so that (it is like) it was never there.
A couple examples can be found here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
～にけがをする versus ～をけがする
>
>
Are both correct?
|
They are both correct.
As you can see in this J-J dictionary entry, []{} can be _a noun_ and _a -verb_ , so you can say for example:
> **** **** (← is a noun)
> **** (← is a suru-verb)
> "He injured his arm in an/the accident."
The only difference that I can feel is... the latter sounds just a little bit more casual/less formal than the former.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, particles"
}
|
How do I address a young lady properly in person?
In real life, if I were to meet a stranger who is a young woman around my age in Japan, how would I--a man--call her without knowing her name? For instance, how should I say, "Excuse me, miss, you're up (in a queue)."
A search on the Internet turned up one result dominantly--.
However, from memory I believe I've heard another term (if not more often) in Japanese films and anime--.
Somehow I feel calling any random young lady on the street slightly off.
|
"" would work just fine, or if you are doing it for a job "" there are many ways to indirectly reference someone. The best way I have found in informal situations is to insinuate your intentions, get their attention via gesture or "", if they are busy "?", then state your intended question or start a conversation. If you wish to know their name just ask them "" and then refer to them as such.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "usage, nuances, spoken language, daily life"
}
|
Why is ふとんがふとんだ a pun?
I was reading an article about how the humour in the Yakuza games gets translated into English, and in the original Japanese a pun is made.
>
The article says it is a play on words. But I cannot find any explanation online but I do see a reference to it. I can understand "a table is a table" but this isn't really a pun, it would be equivalent to "calling a spade a spade" in English.
|
A pun is a play on words exploiting homophones or similar-sounding words.
The pun in []{}[]{} _The futon was blown off_ is that it sounds almost like _A futon is a futon_ , the latter being a complete tautology.
There are many such popular puns, including
*
_A dog is a dog_ v _The dog is gone_
*
_A dolphin is a dolphin_ v _Is there a dolphin?_
*
_Salmon roe is salmon roe_ v _How much is the salmon roe?_
* []{}
*
* etc. _ad nauseam_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 21,
"tags": "puns"
}
|
先 meaning in words
PK.FK
I wonder what is the meaning of ”“ in “PK”. Is this refer to the original table or different table?
I also find a lot in words such as and What does this means? means previous but i think it dont apply here(?)
|
The paragraph is talking about database normalization rule. There is the original table which have some redundant columns. Your task is to divide the original table into two new tables, but in practical situations such is unlikely to be happened. instead you would need to remove some columns from the original table and then create another table with those columns.
The primary keys and foreign keys are needed to tag their relations.
Now the original table is referred as and the new table is called .
divide from= divide into=
is a word. there is no such .
(saki-gaki) is an abridged version of (senkou-kakikomi) which is a direct translation of Write-Ahead Logging (WAL).
opposite of is .(preceding -> following)
These 3 usages look quite diffrent each other.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, meaning, word choice, words"
}
|
Meaning of を以って
> ****
What does this part mean? I guess it would be "by means of" or something like this, but just in case I'd like confirmation.
|
As far as meaning is concerned:
> {}
It means:
> "with ~~", "by means of ~~", etc.
So, the sentence would roughly mean:
> "With the (new) manuscript this time, others besides me will certainly reach the Truth as well."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Is 上京 appropriate in a setting where Tokyo doesn't exist?
Does it make sense to use in a fantasy setting where the geography is totally different from our world? In my mind this word is very strongly associated with Tokyo. I know that according to some dictionaries it can technically refer to moving to any capital city, but still I can't help but feel that it sounds slightly odd in other contexts. Did I get the wrong impression?
Here is a scene from that inspired this question.
|
In countries where there is a definite, singular seat of government, power, and influence, I cannot see why couldn't be used to mean 'going to the Capitol'.
When used to refer to events that took place before 1868, would mean going to the then-capitol of Kyoto. It is not so bound to Tokyo that it cannot be used to refer to another current capitol city, fictional or otherwise (Emerald City, Manila, etc).
As you likely know, this only refers to traveling from within said country to that country's capitol.
Examples of usage referring to places other than Tokyo:
< < <
As your story would supposedly take place in a setting which does not include Tokyo, there should be no conflict or confusion.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "word usage"
}
|
Looking for the japanese word for "cat collar"
I'm searching for the word for this, a kind of cat collar accessory  is the name of a regular collar (to restrain and identify).
What you have shown a picture of is a neck decoration, or (kubikazari).
If you search for neko no kubikazari) you'll find loads of results.
In the future, if you ask a question here, please try to show some prior research and your best attempt at a translation. Otherwise, your post will likely be flagged.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word requests"
}
|
Does this に mean "during"?
>
"When the adults went to the parlor because the others didn't come back during the break, the door was locked from the inside and they couldn't open it." Would be my translation, but I'm not sure if that is correct. Does that mean "during" or am I completely wrong?
|
This does not mean "during"; it indicates the reason why those people left. So I would translate that part as something like "The people who had gone **for** a short break weren't coming back".
If the intended meaning was "during", a phrasing like or would be used instead (though with the current word order this would still probably refer to the timing of when they _left_ , not when they didn't return).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
Can I use なる with positive verbs?
So I find the pattern `Negative verb/ i-adjective + ` very convenient, because, at least I think, it shows the change from a state into another.
For instance:
>
For me it puts emphasis in the actual state of being angry and the change that might come to a different state. While just using `` would just mean that you won't be angry.
Now my question is, **can we do that with positive verbs? And if we can, is it common/natural to do so?**
I don't know exactly how that could be done, but my attempt would be something like this:
> - If you do that, I'll change from my "not angry" state, to an angry state.
or maybe:
>
Thanks in advance! Also, besides grammar, if any of my assumptions are incorrect, please let me know.
|
You seem to misunderstand or . It doesn't mean state change from being not angry to being angry or vise versa, but to acquire furious tendency or so.
If you combine with an adjective, you can use → . However, it doesn't give the effect you wanted. It rather softens or blurs the boundary.
What you wanted will be (recommended) / and .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What is this ザガガッと sound based off?
## The Problem
Currently reading a passage where a Goblin's sword and the Main Protaganist's Dagger just clashes together and it gives this sentence:
> {} **** {}etc...
The Offical Translation has it as
> There was a scream of metal on metal as the... etc
I can understand from the translation that the **** is a sort of onomatopoeia for whats happening but I can't find out where it's from / based off.
* * *
## The Question
Where does this originate from or what is it based off of?
Thanks,
Archie
|
This should be a combination of / and /, both of which describe "hard" sounds of mechanical impact. It expresses a little longer sound (or sounds in rapid succession) because it has three kana. I think you don't have to remember this because this combination is fairly rare.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "onomatopoeia"
}
|
Can いそぐ be used transitively, as in べんきょうをいそぎます?
Is
> ****
a proper sentence construction? Are there others way to use in a sentence?
|
Yes, is a transitive verb and safely take like this. You can also say , and so on.
is also an intransitive verb, and you can express the same thing as which is closer to "I study in a hurry". I think this form is much preferred in speech.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "verbs, transitivity"
}
|
Listing two different object
I encounter this question in my problem set.
> Reizoko ni kudamono ____ (_____) _____ _____ ga arimasu
>
> 1. ga 2. mittsu 3. to 4. gyuunyuu
>
I see in the solution that the answer for word in parentheses is (2. mittsu). What is the complete sentence? What is the meaning of the sentence?
|
The correct sentence is:
> 3
> Reizoko ni kudamono ga mittsu to gyunyu ga arimasu.
Which means "There are three pieces of fruit and milk in the fridge."
To correctly answer this question, you need to know:
* How to use ( _to_ ) to list two or more nouns
* Two ways to count things and how to use it in combination with
* is always "countable" with / ( _tsu/ko_ ), while is not counted like this.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What could be the casual version of this expression?
Are those correct?
|
would be incorrect. I would say:
>
>
> /XXetc
> /XXetc
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
Is there any difference between ～～をする and ～が～
I came across this sentence (from the Core 1000 material of iknow) while learning vocabulary:
> She has blue eyes.
Doing some searching I found this answer explaining that can mean 'to have some characteristic'.
Before that, I only knew of the following construction to express such:
> She has blue eyes.
Is there any difference in meaning/implication between these two different structures? Or can I use them interchangeably in any circumstance?
|
They are almost the same. However, when they mean that her eyes happen to be unusually blue in the moment, the latter is more likely to be used.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "nuances, possession"
}
|
What is the meaning of 不器用で (Bukiyōde) when describing a person?
I found that it means "awkward, clumsy". I was wondering if it may has other meanings? I would also appreciate giving examples on how the word is used. (The more, the better.) Thank you
edit: Can it be used to say that a person is hard to deal with?
|
can mean two things depending on the context:
1. a person who is not good at detailed work (cannot properly handle knives or drivers, drops things often, etc)
2. a person who is not good at communicating with others or managing human relationships (especially in romantic contexts) **EDIT** : Basically is a negative word, but it may refer to an honest and straight person who does not rely on frivolous communication skills.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, usage"
}
|
reason for the ね in いいですね。
To my understanding, ”” means something along the lines of "that's good" or "that's fine." However, the ending particle ”” is used to prompt a response from the listener. As I've seen it used in my textbook, ”” does not anticipate a response. So, what is the function of "”?
|
You'll find lots and lots of resources online about how to use . However, the short answer to your question is that is a discourse marker used to manage the relationship between speaker and listener. If you listen to how people use in conversational Japanese, it's used to establish, maintain, and emphasize agreement between participants in the conversation. It's not primarily grammatical, and its use can't be separated from other ways of managing discourse such as aizuchi and body language.
To understand the difference between and , imagine this conversation in English:
> S1: Hey, I saw Black Panther. It's so good.
>
> S2: Yes, it's good.
Speaker 2's utterance is totally grammatical and understandable, but it doesn't fit the social context. It's sort of failing to catch the ball that S1 has tossed. Every language has lots of tools to manage discourse in this way, and is one of the most frequently used in Japanese.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, particle ね"
}
|
The difference between "当たり" and "につき" in terms of the meaning "every ~"
As mentioned at the title, I would like to ask the if there is any difference or nuance between "" and "" in terms of the meaning "every ~". Any case that they cannot be used interchangeably?
For instance, do the following sentences (if they are grammatically correct) convey the exact same meaning?
> **** ****
>
> **** ****
|
There is a page that tries to describe the difference, but and () seemed interchangeable to me for all the examples in the page :) So I think the difference is very small and they are basically interchangeable. Still, there are small differences:
* sounds more formal and stiff.
* tends to be used in relation to a total amount. In other words, if you did a mathematical division in your mind, may be used more often. If I heard 11() instead of or 1, I may feel you have a big project in Tokyo.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "usage"
}
|
What is the inheritance order of も and は topics?
Can a topic that is identified via the particle be included in a topic that comes AFTER it? e.g. Two sequential sentences from a book I'm reading:
**1st Sentence:**
**2nd Sentence:** ****
... but is (the skylark) being included in the _previous_ topic () or the _upcoming_ one ()?
**Can mark a topic for inclusion in an (as yet) unintroduced topic?**
|
* **1st sentence** : thought " are ugly birds!"
* **2nd sentence** : are not very beautiful, _either_ , but even thought "We look much better than !"
Here refers to all birds which are not . includes , which are relatively ugly among but are much better than .
The topic of the second sentence is , which is marked with instead of because there are other ugly birds mentioned in the story. is not the topic but one of the three predicates of the second sentence: Why is the topic marker often used in negative statements (, )?
Read the second sentence like this:
* ****
* ****
* ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "particles, particle は, particle も, topic"
}
|
quotative と without an accompanying verb?
The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between me and my language partner:
→
For context: We were talking about her family which ran a small scale farm back in the day. I told her about the situation in germany, where smaller agricultural business are constantly on the decline, with many farmers reducing their work as a farmer to a sidebusiness.
About the sentence in question: Doe anyone have an idea why the sentence just ends in "......"? If you think she just forgot to bring the sentence to an end, just tell me and I'll ask her. However, if such abrupt ellipses are common in japanese, please help me extrapolating what is supposed to stand there ^^
Also, what is this in ? Jisho redirects me to "wooden printing block" ( ) but that doesnt make much sense here Oo
|
> quotative
The in **** is not a quotative particle, but a conjunctive particle () meaning "When~" or "If~".
> **** = " _If/When_ you rephrase it, ..." " _If/When_ you say it in a different way, ..."
She said:
> (Original Sentence)→ (Rephrased Sentence)
> "If you rephrase / To rephrase '[Original Sentence]': (you'll get) '[Rephrased Sentence]'."
* * *
As for ...
How about using Rikaichan or Rikaikun?
![](
![](
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, words, particle と, conditionals"
}
|
Is the meaning of this phrase correct?
I want to say the phrase "I can understand about 60% of the content of this video" in japanese. I translated it to:
Is this correct?
|
First off your attempt:
>
This attempt is incorrect but probably comprehensible to your listener. First, there is no possibility conjugation of or if you prefer like already includes the normal sense of possibility in it.
Second, let's think about the aspect you're stating this in. 60% means that you're either measuring how much you believe you've understood (in the past) or you're estimating it in an ongoing fashion.
Third, stating 60% by itself might sound a bit overly-precise, so it seems wise to use a couching expression () to make this a bit softer.
So I might suggest:
>
= I understood about 60% of the video.
or
>
= I am able to understand about 60% of the video's contents.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
How does adding んで to verb stem change it
For example -
&
|
This is just the conjugation of verbs ending in and to create the -form.
-
-
-
-
-
Suggest you study the -form conjugations.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
Does 私は地震が怖い make sense?
>
For me that's like saying .
It doesn't make sense putting here.
|
> **** _lit._ As for me, earthquakes are scary. → I _am scared of_ earthquakes.
Your sentence is correct and natural.
is used with several adjectives that indicate one's feelings, e.g. (i-adjectives) (na-adjectives) etc.
Examples:
> **** I _want_ a bicycle.
> **** I _enjoy_ learning Japanese.
> **** Yamada-san _likes_ coffee.
is also used with the desiderative auxiliary . eg **** **** I _want to_ drink coffee.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, particle は, particle が"
}
|
Please help me identify who does what in this sentence and check the translation
Here is the sentence:
>
The translation from Tatoeba is
> I will have my sister pick you up at the station.
I've been reading "Making Sense of Japanese: What the Textbooks Don't Tell You" just now, the chapter where he dives into causative's zero pronouns. Now I have doubts about the given translation.
Few things I don't get here:
Usage of particle - will she give a lift to someone to the station or pick up from? (why not ?)
Usage of particle - does it mean that my little sister is the target of my causative verb? Or is it that the sister is the one who makes me or someone give someone else a ride?
|
The Tatoeba translation is a natural rather than a literal translation. Literally it's saying more like "I will have my sister go to the station by car to meet you". ( is a tricky little word that means to greet/meet someone, but often includes the implication of subsequently escorting them to their destination, so the "pick you up" element is also implied here.)
As such, the particle indicates the destination of the action (the sister will go all the way _to_ the station to meet you). The , as you say, indicates the target of the speaker's causative verb. The speaker (an unstated topic) is causing the sister (marked by ) to perform the action of (going to the station to pick up the listener, who is the unstated object).
If the speaker and listener were explicitly mentioned, the full sentence would read **** **** But this feels a bit unnecessarily wordy and wouldn't usually be used.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, particle と, causation, pronouns, particle まで"
}
|
Is 引っ張る a compound verb?
AFAIK compound verbs () are formed by prefixing (ren'youkei, or stem form) of one verb to another "full" verb, e.g.:
* (
*
And so on...
However, `` seems to not fit this pattern and feels like it was formed by combining ``+``, and not ``+`` which would result in ``.
Apparently there _are_ compound verbs with ``, e.g.:
*
*
*
*
Even more interestingly, there is a verb that exists in both variations: `` and ``, although I don't think I've ever seen the former outside of the dictionary.
So, is `` a compound verb? If not, is there a term for such verbs and are there others?
|
As you note, pairs with the older form, which doesn't see much use in the modern language. Along the same lines, modern is a shift in pronunciation of older , which more clearly shows the regular compound-verb structure.
This kind of sound shift is a regular feature of the language. See also the answer linked at Why is a pun?, which shows and links to other similar examples of regular compound verbs (`[VERB in the ]` \+ `[VERB]`) that have shifted to this kind of (geminate or doubled-consonant) phonology as a kind of contraction.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "compound verbs"
}
|
The subject in 洗車を終えた車をふたりがかりで拭いているのを見ながら
>
means finished washing the car.
means two people wiping the car together.
1) But I would like to know whether the subject of is ? So after finished washing the car, he watched two people wiping the car together? If not, what is the subject of ?
2) This sentence looks confusing to me as if is used to modify the after it so it reads like "the car that has finished washing the car". I would like to know what kind of sentence structure is this? It seems that something is missing after .
|
1. Looking at this sentence alone, the people who washed the car are probably the same two people who are wiping the car now; one is , and the other is someone not directly mentioned in this sentence. has been just looking.
2. is not "the car that has finished washing" but "the car _they_ have finished washing". It's a noun phrase with a relative clause made from , although this seems a bit tautological :)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, subjects"
}
|
What is the regular kana text of the image?
What is the regular kana text of the image ? the context:
![What is regular kana of the image ?](
|
In meaning,
>
These are the variants of an onomatopoeia used to describe the fidgeting and/or restless movement of a human/animal body or body part.
Needless to say, this has nothing to do with , which means "in the first place".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, kana"
}
|
すみません came from 済みません?
What's the correlation between and ? means to finish and I can't see it a correlation between the two.
|
A better understanding of is _to be settled_ or _be cleared off_. Thus represents the sentiment that one owes a mental debt, something remain to be repaid. Here comes the meaning "I feel guilty to you", or "I'm sorry".
FYI the negative of as such has that lexical meaning besides this cliche.
> ****
> = _I did something conscience-smitten to him_
> ≈ "I regret what I did to him"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, kanji"
}
|
Use of たら in この権益の擁護には真剣たらざるを得ない
is a grammar structure which means if...then.
But what does mean in this sentence?
>
The sentence means
> We must be serious about defending this interest
What is the role of in this sentence?
It seems that it does not mean if...then here.
|
What you see is not the conditional -, but - \+ .
* X **** ("be X; being X")
This form is a vestige of an old sibling of what is now called _na-adjective_ , which still occasionally appears in formal speech. It stands particularly for state that is _acquired_ (instead of _inherent_ ), _temporary_ (↔ _permanent_ ), _apparent_ (↔ _internal_ ), or _due_ (↔ _actually is_ ).
Despite what some dictionaries say, it _does_ conjugate in the same manner as verbs or (consonant-stem; type I) when needed, though most frequently seen in the dictionary form as an attributive to a noun.
* **** ("have no choice but")
A fixed phrase to learn by rote, but consists of ( _archaic_ "not -ing") + (accusative) + ("be able") + ("not"). Since it starts with a negative, words that come before it must be changed into negative form:
> ****
> ****
> **** ( _suru verbs have an irregular form!_ )
and
> **** _cannot but assume a serious attitude_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How do I ask about books that include furigana for the kanji?
I'm planning on going to Japan soon and one of the things I'd like to do is buy a few books, but I want to get books that include the furigana for all the kanji. How would I ask a store associate to show me where I can find books that include that. My first thoughts go to but that kind of sounds like "Are there furigana books?" which I'm not sure conveys the correct meaning. Would I be asking that correctly if I said it that way or is there a better way of asking for books that include the furigana?
EDIT: I'm willing to accept a more generalized answer to the question of how to ask about something being included in something else if that makes sense.
|
The most common way to specify that the printed material must contain furigana would be:
etc.
or
etc.
If you were to use the translation you listed (it might confuse the store associate and they would likely ask for clarification.
As they might not have a section dedicated to books with furigana, and they will likely just lead you to the 'books for kids' section, it would probably be best to specify what type of book you are interested in initially.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "kanji, questions, furigana"
}
|
Translating the idea of the verb "to mean"
Let's say I'm explaning the meaning of a word in my mother tongue to a Japanese.
> 'Pomme' means apple in French.
I have three possibilities of translating this.
>
>
>
>
>
Are those sentence all correct, and what are the differences between them?
|
Your first sentence is correct and natural.
> /
"Pomme means apple in French."
Of course you can also say:
> **** /
(Basically, if you use **** , you'd end the sentence with [noun]+//.≂. eg: **** → **** )
* * *
For your second sentence, it'd be natural to use instead of , as in:
> **** /
_lit._ "In Pomme, there is the meaning 'apple' in French." → "Pomme means apple in French."
(This could imply Pomme can mean (an)other thing(s) too.)
(We often omit the and say **** in casual speech.)
* * *
For the third, you can use the transitive suru-verb **** ("to mean~~") if you want to use :
> **** ****
"Pomme means apple in French."
This one sounds quite formal. To sound more casual you can say:
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, words"
}
|
Any difference between these three sentences?
*
*
*
Is there any difference between those?
|
> He told us not to be noisy.
No issues with this sentence.
>
Without the , we would assume that the is functioning as a quotative particle, which means that would be what is being quoted. would be an appropriate fix.
He told us 'Don't be noisy'.
>
Using the simple negative form here would serve an adjectival function. Therefore, the verb should be changed to a noun (.
'We received a request from him to not be noisy.
Probably best to avoid this last one as, despite being better grammatically, it is an unusual way to form the expression.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning, word choice"
}
|
Understanding に correctly in these two sentences
>
For context we're talking about snow here.
From what I know, when used with a verb stem indicates a purpose. So would translate to "If we touch it to play it's going to melt".
is giving me more trouble. I think the is turning it into an adverb so the second part of that sentence would loosely translate to "If we casually dust it off it's going to dissolve."
I don't understand the function of the in the third sentence. It looks like it means "On the other hand, if we overlook it under the pretense of being kind it's eventually going to disappear." but what is the usage of here?
I'm pretty sure I'm making mistakes so any clarification is appreciated. Thank you.
|
> {} **** {}{}{} **** {}{} {} **** {}{}
You state:
> "From what I know, when used with a verb stem indicates a purpose."
But and are all _**nouns**_ ; therefore, the "Verb in {} (continuative form) + " construct you speak of is not applicable here.
Instead, what you need to be looking into are the basic golden rules:
> Noun + **** functions _**adjectivally**_ and
>
> Noun + **** functions _**adverbially**_.
Thus, means " **to touch out of mere caprice** " or simply " **to touch just for fun** ".
Likewise, means " **to brush off mischieviously** ".
And , " **to let pass ostensibly (for your own good)** "
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning, particle に"
}
|
どの言葉がなくなったのですか Which words are missing?
>
>
>
>
|
**[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}** **[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}** **[]{}[]{}[]{}** **[]{}[]{}[]{}**
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, particle に, ellipsis"
}
|
Writing the decimal part of a number after the unit of measurement
> ****
> The Japanese result was 2 minutes 53.89 seconds and became a new Olympic record.
I haven't seen this way of writing a decimal number before, by putting the unit of measurement between the integer and fractional part. Can this be done with measurements other than time e.g. can I write 1.5km as 15? Are there any contexts where it is more/less appropriate to write it like this?
|
I think this convention is almost specific to sport or racing contexts. Outside such contexts you should usually say 53.89 (). Just to make sure, 5389 is read **** , not , as if were the decimal mark.
According to 2017, sub-meter lengths are officially written similarly but pronounced differently, presumably because is a well-known unit:
* 8m40 (not or )
* 8m03 (not or )
But I personally feel the readings in parentheses are not unnatural. Again, outside sport contexts you should use "8.4m" () or "8m40cm" (), although would be safely understood.
> ##
>
> ### ①
>
> *
> ) 10 22……
> * 0
> ) 2 05 27…… 5 5
> ) 2 00 00……
> ) 2 01 06 …… 1 1 6 6
>
>
> ### ②
>
> * 0
> 203………2 323
> 200………222
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, numbers"
}
|
Is「本だけではない」the correct expression for "Not just a book"?
Think of an advertisement slogan for example. What would be a short form expression of "Not just a book" in Japanese, meaning that "it is not only a book, but more than just a book"?
Is
>
a correct and natural expression for that? I know, that
>
means "just a book". However, I don't know what the correct grammatical expression is, since a specific meaning is behind the phrase "Not just a book".
I look forward to your help.
|
is completely grammatical, but means "There is a book and something other than a book," or "A book is not the only thing that can do it" rather than "This is something better than an ordinary book."
To say the latter, how about something like "", "" or ""?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.