question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42085",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Grandad has just promised something he is unlikely to be able to fulfil. He\nthen thinks to himself:\n\n> 「いざとなったときもし逃げたりしたらわしゃ **この年にして** 裏切り者のウソつき者じゃ。どうなるかわからんことまで言うもんじゃないのう。」 \n> If push came to shove and I were to do something like run away, I would be\n> a liar and a traitor. I shouldn't go as far as to say that I don't know what\n> will happen.\n\nI translated この年にして as 'at this age', but I don't see the relevance. If he\nfails to fulfil his promise he'll be a liar and traitor whatever his age. What\nhave I misunderstood?\n\nThe second sentence also seems unconnected. I must be missing something here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-28T18:59:26.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42079",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T00:36:11.510",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-28T19:26:11.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "Understanding この年にして in this sentence",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "> If he fails to fulfil his promise he'll be a liar and traitor whatever his\n> age.\n\nI think \"at this age\" is correct. Generally speaking, it is expected that\nolder people have more wisdom and are less likely to do such things, which is\nwhy I think it is used.\n\n> The second sentence also seems unconnected. I must be missing something\n> here.\n\nIf you break it down\n\nどうなるかわからんこと (Something which you do not know the outcome)\n\nまで (Used as emphasis)\n\n言うもんじゃないのう (Saying you shouldn't say something)\n\nSo, the speaker is showing regret for what they said. Perhaps you could\ntranslate it as \"I should never say things without fully understanding the\noutcome\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T00:10:52.510",
"id": "42084",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T00:10:52.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1217",
"parent_id": "42079",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 「この年{とし}にして」＝「この歳{とし}にして」＝ \"at this age\"\n\nThe nuance of the phrase in the context is that the speaker would not like to\nbe a liar and traitor at his old age. That is to say he does not want to be\nlike that at the last stage of his life.\n\nRegarding your TL of the second sentence, you missed the structure around the\nmiddle part of it -- 「～～ことまで言う」.\n\nThere is no equivalent of \"go as far as to say **_that_** \" in the original.\nThere is only \" ** _even_** talk about (the things you don't know)\".\n\nIt looks as though you mistook the 「こと」 for the quotative 「と」. That would make\na huge difference:\n\n> \"I shouldn't be even talking about the things I don't know would (actually)\n> happen.\" .",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T00:36:11.510",
"id": "42085",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T00:36:11.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42079",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42079 | 42085 | 42085 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42083",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As far as I can tell, both of these sentences:\n\n> 風はやって来ない。\n>\n> 風は来ない。\n\nmean:\n\n> The wind does not come.\n\nWhat does the やって (which I assume is やる in て-form) add to the meaning of the\nfirst phrase?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-28T21:56:26.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42082",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:11:07.563",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "13634",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does やって mean in やって来ない？",
"view_count": 2545
} | [
{
"body": "The やって part is 遣って when written in 漢字.\n\n遣る can be seen in words like 派遣{はけん} or 目を遣る. 遣る in these words means to\ndirect/send something in a certain direction.\n\nNow I believe you already now what 来る means. When you add やって in front of it,\nit adds the \"direction\" meaning I stated above to 来る. You can also see this in\nthe [definition of\nやってくる](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%81%A3%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B-648649):\n\n> １ こちらに向かってくる。「向こうから―・くる」\n\nSo when you add やって in your sentence, the wind is coming from some other place\n_directed/approaching_ towards the speaker. This also shows there is some\nrelative distance between the speaker and the thing coming which cannot be\nseen with just 来る (as 来る just means to come).\n\nAlso, it is not stated in the definition, but I think the やって adds some\nsignificance/importance to the thing that is coming. For example, you can say\n台風がやってきた or 春がやってきた as both of these things have significance. So in your\nexamples, the 風 has more importance when やって is used (perhaps it is\nwanted/needed for some reason).\n\nI think the above comes from the definition of\n[遣る](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%81%A3%E3%82%8B-649916) as it can mean:\n\n> １ そこへ行かせる。さしむける。送り届ける\n\nIn other words, it is a deliberate action. Going deeper you can think of the\nwind in your example as happening by \"fate\" rather than just a natural\nphenomenon.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-28T23:45:32.310",
"id": "42083",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-28T23:50:58.073",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-28T23:50:58.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "1217",
"owner_user_id": "1217",
"parent_id": "42082",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The explanation in Japanese of「やって来る」 in weblio\n\n<http://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%84%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B>\n\nIt means not just \"come\" but \"come from a long distance.\"\n\nSo, the expression of \"風はやって来ない。\" is unnatural for Japanese natives. However\nit could be a description for a situation. It depends on the context where it\nis used.\n\nWhen you lost the way and there is no rescue and you are ding, you can say\n\n\"とうとう救援はやって来なかった\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T01:26:28.607",
"id": "42086",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:11:07.563",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T08:11:07.563",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42082",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42082 | 42083 | 42083 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42148",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the meaning of calling someone \"Kozaru Shichinosuke\". I know it's the\ntitle of a [kabuki play](http://www.kabuki21.com/kozaru_shichinosuke.php) and\nthe name of the hero, however what's the linguistic connotation here?\n\nIs it a phrase used in common language now? Or is it limited to people knowing\nthe play?\n\n* * *\n\nThe situation is: person A helped person B (brought forgotten thing) and\nperson B responds with 小猿七之助だ.\n\nPerson B is very old fashioned, person A is not particularly happy with the\nresponse.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T07:31:27.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42091",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T01:25:30.843",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T08:54:20.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"culture",
"names"
],
"title": "What is the connotation of calling someone \"Kozaru Shichinosuke\"?",
"view_count": 835
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think 小猿七之助 is known to most Japanese people. Judging from the plot, I\nfelt a negative word 日和見主義者 (\"opportunist\") would describe his character. But\nI don't know if it fits the context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T01:25:30.843",
"id": "42148",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T01:25:30.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42091",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42091 | 42148 | 42148 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42096",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Do both these words mean \"thank you\"? If both mean thank you why are they\nspelled differently? Is one more formal than the other?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T10:50:14.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42093",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T01:36:02.873",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T11:56:40.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "15986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"spelling",
"compounds",
"okurigana",
"compound-verbs"
],
"title": "有り難う vs 有難う — Is this the same word?",
"view_count": 2146
} | [
{
"body": "* Yes, they're both the same.\n * It's just an alternate spelling, think `color` vs. `colour`.\n * Not to my knowledge.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T10:56:10.867",
"id": "42094",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T10:56:10.867",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7390",
"parent_id": "42093",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "Both are different spellings of ありがとう, neither is more formal, although all\nthree spellings may be differentiated by frequency (see below).\n\nありがとう \"thank you\" may be derived from ありがたい through sound change; ありがたい is a\ncompound of 有る and 難い.\n\nIn forming compounds, the first verb conjugates to the _ren'yōkei_ (= \" _masu_\n-stem\"). In compound _verbs_ , like 有り得る or 押し付ける, this is usually all that\nhappens, but for other compounds **the _okurigana_** ( _hiragana_ part of the\nverb) **are sometimes omitted** , so both 有難い and 有り難い are possible ways of\nwriting the same word. (Here り is the _okurigana_ of 有り.)\n\nThere are many other such examples:\n\n * 受け付け = 受付け = 受付 \"reception\"\n * 乗り物 = 乗物 \"vehicle\"\n\nありがとう is usually written in _hiragana_ nowadays, but it may be written with\n_kanji_ , like you suggest.\n\nHere are the frequencies of the different spellings (from Balanced Corpus of\nContemporary Written Japanese, via <http://nlb.ninjal.ac.jp> and\n<http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon>)\n\n```\n\n ありがたい 1987 (74%)\n 有難い 350 (13%)\n 有り難い 343 (13%)\n 有りがたい 17 ( 1%)\n \n ありがとう 7090 (93%)\n 有難う 420 ( 6%)\n 有り難う 102 ( 1%)\n 有りがとう 2 ( 0%)\n \n 受付 3916 (85%)\n 受け付け 633 (14%)\n 受付け 34 ( 1%)\n うけつけ 3 ( 0%)\n 受け付 1 ( 0%)\n \n 乗り物 470 (79%)\n 乗物 95 (16%)\n のりもの 16 ( 3%)\n 乗りもの 12 ( 2%)\n \n```\n\nAs you can see, 有難う is about four times as common as 有り難う, but ありがとう is by far\nthe most common.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T11:55:04.120",
"id": "42096",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T15:17:57.707",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T15:17:57.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "42093",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "> Do both these words mean \"thank you\"?\n\n_Yes_. (ありがとう,) 有難う and 有り難う are same.\n\n> If both mean thank you why are they spelled differently?\n\n有り難う is correct way of writing, and 有難う is also correct. According to\n[MEXT](http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/nc/k19730618001/k19730618001.html):\n\n> 許容 読み間違えるおそれのない場合は，活用語尾以外の部分について，送り仮名を省くことができる。\n\n_If there is no danger of misreading, excepting sentences' ending, you can\nleave out okurigana (Part of word written in Kana)._\n\n> Is one more formal than the other?\n\nI think 有り難う is formal.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T12:22:36.063",
"id": "42097",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T01:36:02.873",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T01:36:02.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "14627",
"owner_user_id": "14627",
"parent_id": "42093",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42093 | 42096 | 42096 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42101",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Im using an Anki deck to study vocabulary. It's translation for the sentence\n私が手伝いましょう is \"Can I help you?\". Im a bit confused, as I see no question marker\nin that sentence. I would guess it's meaning to be \"I (We?) will help you\n(us?)\". I'm a bit confused since the sentence starts with 私が but ends with\nましょう。Is this a common phrase or is the translation incorrect? I would\nappreciate any help in breaking down this sentence.\n\nありがとう。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T11:40:39.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42095",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T13:24:39.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19145",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"idioms",
"plurals"
],
"title": "Question about the sentence 私が手伝いましょう。",
"view_count": 162
} | [
{
"body": "Well it should really be \"lets\" or \"let me\" ,\"allow me\" when using \"ましょう\".\n\nAs in \"let me help you with that \"\n\nYou could say \"Can I help you with that?\" , \"手伝いましょうか\" and not use a question\nmark as the \"か\" indicates that it is a question. But it does not always need\nthis to imply a question.\n\nEdit: I would not say the translation is incorrect as it does need some\nclarification, but i can certainly see how it would be confusing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T12:42:14.610",
"id": "42099",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T12:49:53.873",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T12:49:53.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "14605",
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42095",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "As the translation of \"Can I help you?\", 私が手伝いましょうか? may be more accurate than\n私が手伝いましょう but they mean almost the same thing, don't they?\n\n私が～しましょう is used but 私が is often omitted because a subject is often omitted in\nJapanese language.\n\nIn addition, ～しましょう has two meanings: One is \"will\" like 私が手伝いましょう。 (I will\nhelp you). The other is \"let's\" like みんなで山に登りましょう。 (Let's climb a mountain\nwith everyone).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T12:59:47.723",
"id": "42101",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T13:24:39.133",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T13:24:39.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "42095",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42095 | 42101 | 42099 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42108",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am learning Kanji using Kanji Damage deck on Anki and I came across this\nvocabulary for 古:\n\n> [中]{ちゅう}古{こ} の XXX : used XXX\n\nIf I try to literally translate 中古:\n\n> [中]{ちゅう}(middle/central) + 古{こ}(old) = middle old ?\n\nAfter a quick search on wictionary, I found that one of the etymology for the\nword says it is Japanese invention\n([link](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%B8%AD%E5%8F%A4)).\n\n> Wasei kango (和製漢語), borrowing from Japanese [中]{ちゅう}古{こ} (chūko,\n> “secondhand”)\n\nIs there a reason why 中 is used with 古 here while [古]{ふる}[着]{ぎ} means old/used\nclothes without any need of 中 ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T12:33:02.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42098",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T05:57:13.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18021",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Is there a reason why [中]{ちゅう}[古]{こ} means used/second-hand items ?",
"view_count": 3049
} | [
{
"body": "While it does mean _middle ages_ in historical context when you pronounce it\nちゅうこ{HHLL}, the \"secondhand\" definition (read ちゅうこ{LLHH}) is unrelated to\nthat.\n\nIn this word\n[中【ちゅう】](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/142924/meaning/m0u/%E4%B8%AD/) stands\nfor \"not completely (being one side); so-so\":\n\n> **２** 程度・価値・等級・序列などがなかほどであること。良くも悪くもないこと。\n\nSo 中古 literally means \"half-old\", that is not worn down to a nub, still\nusable. Historically the reading\n[ちゅうぶる](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/143665/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%A1%E3%82%85%E3%81%86%E3%81%B6%E3%82%8B/)\nis first attested, but it's almost dying out as far as I know.\n\n> _Is there a reason why 中 is used with 古 here while 古着 means old/used clothes\n> without any need of 中 ?_\n\nThat's complicated, but mostly because it's an established word. Not so many\nwords attached by 古- actually mean \"secondhand\". 古着, 古本 and 古道具 maybe?\nOtherwise they'll mean really old.\n\n> **古本** 、 **中古** コミック、 **中古** 漫画の買取や購入は日本最大級のコミック通販サイト ネットオフをご利用ください。\n> ([Source](http://www.netoff.co.jp/index.jsp))\n\nFYI there is a derived word 新古 to mean un-used goods that aren't able to be\nsold as new stocks for some reason.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T23:25:45.710",
"id": "42108",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T23:33:42.597",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T23:33:42.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "42098",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "\"中古\" means just used but usable with or without renovation.\n\n\"中古\" is most commonly used for the used but still usable things.\n\n\"中古住宅\"、\"中古車\"、\"中古マンション（We Japanese call just コンドミニアム as マンション）\"、”中古パソコン”\n\n\"中\" of \"中古\" perhaps indicates the condition of the thing that is once used but\nstill usable.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T05:57:13.130",
"id": "42121",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T05:57:13.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42098",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42098 | 42108 | 42108 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42102",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm using the HelloTalk app. I posted a picture of my Shin Kanzen Master books\n(JLPT N3). This picture in fact.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZILcX.jpg)\n\nThen I got this response:\n\n> きっと英語圏、中国語圏むけのテキストなんですね。\n\nand this response:\n\n> 怪しい本だなぁ。表紙の漢字は日本語じゃないよ\n\n\"The book is aimed at English and Chinese speaking countries\"? \"The kanji on\nthe front page is not Japanese\"?\n\nWhy do these people think that there is some Chinese element to these books?\n\nEDIT:\n\n(Of course I know that Kanji was imported from China, I just want to\nunderstand why these comments were made)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T12:50:21.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42100",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-26T00:43:59.303",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-29T14:48:09.887",
"last_editor_user_id": "6820",
"owner_user_id": "15986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"chinese"
],
"title": "Shin Kanzen Master has a Chinese element?",
"view_count": 418
} | [
{
"body": "The kanjis at the bottom line of the front page (日本语……) are Chinese kanjis.\nThese kanjis are not used in Japanese except 日本, 能力 and 法. One line above is\nan English phrase \"JLPT Grammar.\" So they judged that the book is for English\nand Chinese speakers.\n\nBut the other part of the front page seems to be valid Japanese phrases.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T13:00:17.780",
"id": "42102",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-29T13:00:17.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42100",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "> Why do these people think that there is some Chinese element to these books?\n\nBecause 「语」「测」「试」 are Simplified Chinese. These characters are written as\n「語」「測」「試」 in Japanese.\n\nAlso, 「测试」(\"exam, test\") is 「試験」, and 「语法」(\"grammar\") is 「文法」 in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T13:10:41.087",
"id": "42103",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-26T00:43:59.303",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-26T00:43:59.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "42100",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42100 | 42102 | 42103 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42105",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From jisho.org:\n\n> # **不幸{ふこう}**\n>\n> unhappiness; sorrow; misfortune; disaster; accident; death\n> ([source](http://jisho.org/word/%E4%B8%8D%E5%B9%B8))\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> # **悲{かな}しみ**\n>\n> sadness; sorrow; grief\n> ([source](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%82%B2%E3%81%97%E3%81%BF))\n\nAfter looking at this, it seems to me that although both words mean sadness,\nthe presence of the other \"more drastic\" meanings in 不幸{ふこう} such as\n_disaster_ and _death_ contribute for the word 不幸{ふこう} to be interpreted as a\nstronger/deeper sadness. Am I correct? **Does the word 不幸{ふこう} always carry a\nheavier idea of sadness?**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T13:34:51.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42104",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:09:34.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7494",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Does 不幸{ふこう} always carry a \"stronger\" idea than 悲{かな}しみ?",
"view_count": 147
} | [
{
"body": "\"不幸\" is an event. There are various events of \"不幸.\"\n\nIf you loose your partner or child, you must be shocked and deeply saddened\n\"深く悲しむ（悲しみを覚える）\" by the death of a loved one.\n\nIf you gamble away all your money, you might get to be mad about what happened\nto you, insted of \"悲しむ(feel 悲しみ).\"\n\n\"不幸\" is an event, and \"不幸\" mostly make people feel sadness, but it depends on\nthe nature of the event of \"不幸(unhappiness).\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T14:58:29.830",
"id": "42105",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:09:34.850",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T08:09:34.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42104",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42104 | 42105 | 42105 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42109",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I could not figure it out. What does どうかしましたか mean?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T20:29:58.237",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42106",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:09:19.857",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17380",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"expressions"
],
"title": "How to understand どうかしましたか?",
"view_count": 247
} | [
{
"body": "When I find the pserson who seems badly annoyed or being in a state of\nnumbness. If I have entirely no idea about the situation or backgrand, but I\ncan't just stand by himself or herself and I'd like to get around to telling\nhim or her. I usually talk softly to the pserson \"どうかしましたか？.\"\n\nIt has very little to do with whether I konw the pserson or not.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-29T23:43:27.587",
"id": "42109",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:09:19.857",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T08:09:19.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42106",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42106 | 42109 | 42109 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42117",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "The words 海{うみ} and 海原{うなばら} both seem to mean _sea, ocean_. Is there any\ndifference between them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T00:05:44.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42110",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T06:17:52.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7494",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Is there a difference between 海{うみ} and 海原{うなばら}?",
"view_count": 278
} | [
{
"body": "According to 大辞林 published by Sanseido, “海 - sea , ocean) means\n“地球の表面のうち地球表面積の約4分の1を占める、海水をたたえた部分 - a part of the earth full of water, which\nrepresents one fourth of the surface of the earth.” ”海原” is “広々とした海、広い水面 -\nvast sea, the wide surface of the sea.”\n\nHence, “海” is the sea itself that covers 360 million km2. and reaches 11,000\nkm depth at the deepest point. ”海原” is the surface of the sea, as it implies\n“the field of sea” by verbatim in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T01:26:37.890",
"id": "42114",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T21:48:51.193",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T21:48:51.193",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "42110",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "海原 is a literary word used almost exclusively in poems, lyrics, book titles,\netc. As its kanji 原 (\"field\") suggests, it expresses the vastness of the\nsurface of the sea, not its depth. No matter how romantic you feel, don't say\n海原に行こう in conversations. It sounds really funny. FWIW, maybe I have not used\nthis word in my entire life.\n\n海 is the ordinary word that means \"sea.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T03:43:25.007",
"id": "42117",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T04:44:42.160",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T04:44:42.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42110",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "\"海\" is sea in general. \"海原\" is basically the surface of the sea.\n\n\"海面\" is the exact Japanese word for the surface of the sea.\n\n\"原\" of \"海原\" comes from \"平原(plain).\"\n\nWe can see the smooth water of the sea as the plain. With such impression, we\ncall the surface of the sea as \"海原.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T05:38:46.477",
"id": "42120",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T06:17:52.480",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-01T06:17:52.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "19219",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42110",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42110 | 42117 | 42117 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42115",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Consider the following four verbs:\n\n * 追う【おう】 - _ou_ ([view in jisho.org](http://jisho.org/word/%E8%BF%BD%E3%81%86))\n * 追いかける【おいかける】 - _oikakeru_ ([view in jisho.org](http://jisho.org/word/%E8%BF%BD%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B))\n * 追っかける【おっかける】 - _okkakeru_ ([view in jisho.org](http://jisho.org/word/%E8%BF%BD%E3%81%A3%E3%81%8B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B))\n * 辿る【たどる】 - _tadoru_ ([view in jisho.org](http://jisho.org/word/%E8%BE%BF%E3%82%8B))\n\n**They all can mean \"pursue\". What are their differences?**\n\n* * *\n\n_Note: I did read their definitions and tried to catch some nuances by myself,\nbut I am not sure about them. My thoughts was that the first three seem to\ncarry an idea of a chase that requires effort, while the fourth allows an\n\"easy\" pursue, such as following a hyperlink on the internet. But even if this\nguess is correct, the difference between the first three verbs would remain\nunknown._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T00:25:47.260",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42111",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T10:05:56.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7494",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Four verbs meaning \"to pursue\": 追う, 追いかける, 追っかける and 辿る",
"view_count": 1266
} | [
{
"body": "辿る is closer to \"to trace (a road, a wire, etc)\" and it does not mean \"to\nchase\". 追っかける is just a colloquial variation of 追いかける.\n\n追う and 追いかける are _mostly_ interchangeable. The primary meaning of 追う and 追いかける\nis \"to chase (a car, a dream, etc)\" or \"to follow (an interesting topic, a\nperson that has gone to another country, etc)\". Perhaps the biggest difference\nis the level of formality. In casual conversations 追いかける is mainly used, while\n追う sounds more formal and/or literary. In addition, only 追う means 追い立てる, \"to\ndrive (a herd of cattle, like a cowboy)\".\n\n**EDIT** : You may have seen [this\npost](http://webbinghaus.tumblr.com/post/119983281254/the-difference-\nbetween-%E8%BF%BD%E3%81%86-and-%E8%BF%BD%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B),\nbut I'm not really convinced by their explanation. In a drama, a senior police\nofficer might say \"(あの車を)追うぞ!\" with great urgency and it sounds to me more\nformal and/or dignified than saying \"追いかけるぞ!\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T01:34:39.343",
"id": "42115",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T02:52:15.163",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T02:52:15.163",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42111",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "\"追う\" is the most general word and means \"follow.\"\n\n\"追いかける\" means \"chase\", not just \"follow,\" but \"follow and catch up.\"\n\n\"妻と喧嘩した。妻は家を出ていった。私はすぐに追いかけた。\" \"I had a quarrel with my wife, and she went out\nour house. I immediately chased my wife to catch up to her.\"\n\n\"追っかける\" is rather casual. If you are a police officer, you should use the term\n\"追いかける\" not \"追っかける.\" If you are a teenager, and chase your friend, you can use\nthe term \"追っかける.\"\n\n\"辿る\": Suppose there are several points, P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 in a sequential\norder. When you follow the points from P1 to P5 in order to get P5. Your\nbehavior can be described as \"辿る.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T06:23:56.900",
"id": "42122",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T10:05:56.397",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T10:05:56.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "6820",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42111",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "追う and 追いかける - They have some difference nuances. \n追いかける is **more urgent** than 追う. (So 追いかける can mean chase. )\n\n* * *\n\n辿る is not **urgent**. This can mean 'follow'.\n\n* * *\n\n追いかける and 追っかける - They are same, but 追いかける is more formal.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T11:58:39.687",
"id": "42127",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T09:01:04.413",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T09:01:04.413",
"last_editor_user_id": "14627",
"owner_user_id": "14627",
"parent_id": "42111",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42111 | 42115 | 42115 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42113",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading a manga in which I've come across the following exchange (for\ncontext the second character, B, has just beaten up A in a fight):\n\n> A: おのれ きさまなんぞに...\n>\n> B: いいや あたしなんぞに てめーは敗れるのさ!!\n\nMy understanding of なんぞに was always that it could be used similar to \"Why\", so\nthe first comment it simply something along the lines of \"Bastard, idiot,\nwhy...\", but I've no idea how it then functions in the response from B.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T00:39:17.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42112",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T03:15:01.107",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18661",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Two different usages of なんぞに?",
"view_count": 189
} | [
{
"body": "なんぞ directly after a noun is a variation of\n[なんて/なんか/など](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=nado%3B%20nanka%3B%20nante),\nused to make light of something and express a negative/derogatory feeling. It\ndoes not contain the meaning of _why_. なんぞ sounds old-fashioned and is\ntypically heard in fictional old man's speech.\n\nIn this conversation, きさま is a derogatory word and なんぞ even strengthens it, so\nit's okay to translate きさまなんぞ as \"a bastard like you\". B repeated なんぞ to\nemphasize the irony that A was defeated by that \"bastard.\" (\"And you are\ndefeated by that bastard!\")\n\nなんぞ meant _why_ in archaic Japanese (see [examples from a\n古語辞典](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%9E)), but it's\nalmost never used in that way in modern Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T00:52:14.933",
"id": "42113",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T03:15:01.107",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T03:15:01.107",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42112",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42112 | 42113 | 42113 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42119",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Now, I've been at least trying to read 竹取物語, and in the second sentence of my\nversion it shows a odd symbol that I've yet to see.\n\n```\n\n 野山にまじりて、竹を取りつゝ、萬づの事に使ひけり。\n \n```\n\nThe symbol in question is the 「ゝ」 what does it mean? And what happens to the\nsentences translation as a result of it?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T04:21:30.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42118",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T04:39:34.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"classical-japanese",
"symbols"
],
"title": "What does「ゝ」mean?",
"view_count": 2033
} | [
{
"body": "ゝ is used to indicate previous hiragana is repeated. In your example, you can\nregard the sentence to be exactly the same as below.\n\n> 野山にまじりて、竹を取りつつ、萬づの事に使ひけり。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T04:39:34.933",
"id": "42119",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T04:39:34.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10859",
"parent_id": "42118",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42118 | 42119 | 42119 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42125",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This is from a Manga, and I don't quite understand how the soredake in the 2nd\nbubble fits into it? But maybe I am completely off with the meaning of the\nsentences as a whole - so I've put what I think they mean in italics as well.\n\nBubble 1:\n\n俺はどっちかって\n\nいうと\n\nそういうのは\n\n鈍い方だけど\n\n_I'd say I am a reserved (quiet/solemn) person, but_\n\nBubble 2:\n\nそれだけ 俺も\n\n航を見てたって\n\nことだ\n\n_I also watched Kou_\n\nDoes the soredake simply add an \"only\"? i.e. I also only watched Kou.\n\nAny pointers are much appreciated. Thank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T08:11:26.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42124",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T09:34:46.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19260",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "それだけ in this sentence?",
"view_count": 1617
} | [
{
"body": "> 「それだけ + Phrase or Mini-Sentence + って/という + こと（だ/です）」\n\nwould need to be remembered as a set phrase because it is a very common one. I\nmeans:\n\n> \"That is/proves (just) how much ~~~~.\"\n\nThus, the sentence in question means:\n\n\" ** _That is (just) how closely I was watching Kou._** \"\n\nThough there is not enough context provided, I would highly doubt that\n「鈍{にぶ}い」 means \"reserved, quiet, or solemn\" here as you stated. I would think\nit is more like \"slow\" or \"dull-witted\".\n\nFinally, regarding your translation of 「も」....\n\nI will not go into details as it is not part of your question, but you will\nneed to learn not to use \" ** _too_** \" or \" ** _also_** \" in your translation\nevery time you see 「も」 because that is not what it always means. 「も」 is an\nextremely nuanced particle.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T08:46:27.070",
"id": "42125",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T08:55:05.643",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T08:55:05.643",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Bubble 1: The speeker confessed that he (or she) is not so sensitive to\nsomething (I guess other's emotion).\n\n(I'm not sure what is the main subject in the cartoon, but I gess this even\ninsencitive person might has noticed something that is the main subject\nrelated \"航(a boy?)\". This cartoon is a love story?)\n\nThen,\n\nBubble 2: I guess, the meaning \"それだけ\" is the following,\n\nEven insencitive person like me have noticed the internal something of \"航,\"\nbecause I watched him (or her) more carfully than usual.\n\n（何かに気が付くだけ（それだけ）、俺も航を見ていた）",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T09:34:46.947",
"id": "42126",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T09:34:46.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42124 | 42125 | 42125 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42131",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was reading a joke:\n\n> [長寿村]{ちょうじゅむら}\n>\n> [旅人]{たびびと}：この[村]{むら}は[世界一]{せかいいち}の[長生]{ながい}きの村だって？\n>\n> [村人]{むらびと}：はい、[未]{いま}だに[死]{し}んだ[人]{ひと}がおりません。\n>\n> 旅人：じゃ、あの[葬儀]{そうぎ}の[列]{れつ}はなんだ？\n>\n> 村人：はい、[葬儀屋]{そうぎや}が[自殺]{じさつ}をしたんです。\n\nI understand most of the joke except the end of the second line:\n\n> 死んだ人がおりません。\n\nI see that おりません is used here and I don't understand why it is here. I checked\nthe dictionary on my Mac for the word おる and it told me to look for おりる where\nI found 下りる, 降りる. After I read the meanings, I can't find anything that would\nmake sense in this context.\n\nThen I started to think that this is a typo and it should have been いません\ninstead:\n\n> 死んだ人がいません。\n\nliterally, \"there does not exist a person who died\".\n\nQuestion: Is this a typo? If not, what is the meaning of おりません and how will\nthe meaning change if I used いません?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T12:19:19.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42128",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T13:06:08.470",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T13:06:08.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is おりません? Possible typo?",
"view_count": 562
} | [
{
"body": "It's 居{お}る as in\n[http://jisho.org/word/居る-1](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%B1%85%E3%82%8B-1) .\n\n> 死んだ人がおりません。\n\nwould be translated to\n\n> There is no dead person.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T12:26:54.513",
"id": "42130",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T12:32:13.343",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T12:32:13.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "10859",
"owner_user_id": "10859",
"parent_id": "42128",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In meaning,\n\n> 「おる」＝「いる」 and\n>\n> 「おりません」＝「いません」\n\nSo, there is no typo here as 「おる」 is a dictionary word. Think of it as a\nsomewhat old-fashioned version of 「いる」.\n\nThe line in question is uttered by a villager, so one could say that 「おりません」\nis being used as role language at least loosely.\n\n「未だに死んだ人がおりません。」 means:\n\n\" _ **No one has ever died (here).**_ \" or\n\n\" _ **There is no one who has died (here).**_ \"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T12:34:54.643",
"id": "42131",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T12:34:54.643",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42128",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 42128 | 42131 | 42131 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42134",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As far as I can tell つぶやく is invariably translated as 'to mutter/murmur' in\nbilingual dictionaries, and yet hardly ever do I see it used in a context\nwhere I feel this translation seems appropriate.\n\nThis maybe isn't the best example but it's the one that inspired me to ask.\nTwo girls have just run into a shop to escape from a dog:\n\n> 「危機一髪だった」 \n> \"That was a close call\" \n> まる子は肩で息をしながらつぶやいた \n> muttered Maruko breathing heavily.\n\nTo me mutter/murmur is something you do under you breath, probably to\nyourself. It doesn't seem to fit here.\n\nSo I'm wondering what Japanese speakers think of when they hear the word つぶやく,\nnot just in this sentence but also more generally.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T12:38:15.520",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42132",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T13:22:52.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of つぶやく",
"view_count": 217
} | [
{
"body": "To me, a Japanese-speaker, 「つぶやく」 means \" _ **to speak in low/small voice\n(mostly, but not always, to oneself)**_ \". So, I personally I have no problem\nwith the verb choice in the line in question.\n\nTo me, 「つぶやく」 is not a very special word as far as meaning and usage. It does\nnot have any subtle nuances IMHO.\n\n> 「まる子は肩で息をしながらつぶやいた。」\n\nIf I were asked to replace the verb by another in that line, I would say:\n\n> 「まる子は肩{かた}で息{いき}をしながら小声{こごえ}で言{い}った。」 or\n>\n> 「まる子は肩で息をしながら **ささやいた** 。」\n\nBut still, 「つぶやいた」 sounds best to me.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T13:22:52.143",
"id": "42134",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T13:22:52.143",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42132",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42132 | 42134 | 42134 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This sentence is about cats:\n\n> こちらからも **執こく** しないで、そっと放任して置いてやれば、猫はいよいよ猫らしく美しくなって、無言の愛着を飼主に寄せて来るのである。\n\nA number of other examples can be found\n[here](http://yourei.jp/%E5%9F%B7%E3%81%93%E3%81%8F).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T13:27:36.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42135",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T07:14:34.583",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T14:26:26.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19262",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What does the word [執こく]{しつこく} mean?",
"view_count": 161
} | [
{
"body": "しつこく is an adverbial form of the adjective しつこい meaning \"persistent\",\n\"stubborn\", \"obstinate\".\n\nAn alternative spelling is used in the examples given. See for example [Weblio\nfor しつこい](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%97%E3%81%A4%E3%81%93%E3%81%84):\n\n> しつ こ・い ［3］ \n> （ 形 ） ［文］ ク しつこ・し \n> **〔「執拗い」とも書く〕**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T00:53:09.567",
"id": "42146",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T00:53:09.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "42135",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "In this context \"執こくしない\" has the opposite meaning of \"(そっと)放任して置いてやる（放任して置く）.\"\n\n\"執こくする\" in this context is \"taking too much care of a cat too much.\"\n\nI think this phrase is also sometimes used for a girlfriend or boyfriend in\nreference to someone who is clingy.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T01:56:50.220",
"id": "42150",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T07:14:34.583",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T07:14:34.583",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42135",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42135 | null | 42146 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42139",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If I am not wrong, the literal translation should be star moon night, right?\nHow does it translate to Starry Night then? Isn't the `月` character useless in\nthat case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T16:17:34.623",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42136",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-05T22:44:01.360",
"last_edit_date": "2017-09-05T22:44:01.360",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Does 星月夜 mean Starry Night?",
"view_count": 885
} | [
{
"body": "It is a tricky word, but the 月 doesn't stand for the real moon.\n\n[**星月夜**](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/203879/meaning/m0u/)\n\n> **１** 晴れて星の光が月のように明るい夜。 \n> _(A clear night where stars shine as bright as the moon.)_\n\nThus the \"literal\" translation would be \"star-moon night\" and not \"star and\nmoon night\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T17:58:25.167",
"id": "42139",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T18:07:20.443",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T18:07:20.443",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "42136",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42136 | 42139 | 42139 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have recently come across text which adds さん to places. For example,\nbookstore is ほんやさん. Is this normal, and in what context?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T17:22:07.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42137",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-07T22:17:30.690",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-07T22:17:30.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "19146",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"titles"
],
"title": "Adding さん to places",
"view_count": 192
} | [
{
"body": "ほんやさん usually means \"bookstore owner/worker\", but CAN mean the store itself.\nAdding さん like that to a business name is a common way to refer to such. ほんや =\nbookstore, さん referring to the person.\n\nOn the other hand, mountains are often referred to, ending in さん, and still\nrefer to the place, eg ふじさん = Mt. Fuji. However, this is NOT the same さん. In\nほんやさん, the さん is the person-name-honorific さん; in ふじさん, it is 山 with a reading\nof さん. These usages are not related.\n\nEdit: Sorry, apparently, with さん it can STILL mean the place. AFAIK it does\nmore often refer to the person, but you'll have to divine it from context to\nbe sure.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T19:42:25.473",
"id": "42140",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T22:28:15.957",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T22:28:15.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "11071",
"owner_user_id": "11071",
"parent_id": "42137",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42137 | null | 42140 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42143",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I said good morning to my friend and they replied with:\n\n> 今言おうとしてたよ\n\nI understood this as,\n\n> I was just about to say the same thing\n\nHowever, I asked them if they could explain the sentence just in case. They\nsaid 言おう is not like 言いましょう so I've become confused. What does it mean in this\nsentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T17:40:34.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42138",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T19:48:51.360",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T08:10:15.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11827",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "言おう used here, I dont understand the grammar",
"view_count": 1284
} | [
{
"body": "You did understand it just fine.\n\n> 今言おうとしてたよ \n> I was just about to say the same thing\n\n_-(y)ou to suru_ is \"to be about to\" and is appended to the stem of the verb.\nThe form 言いましょう is _-(y)ou_ applied to the auxiliary _masu_.\n\nSo, 言いましょう is the polite form of 言おう, but it _can't_ be used to form something\nlike ~~言いましょうとする~~.\n\n言いましょう・言おう and 言おうとする are used completely differently. This is probably why\nyou were told they are different.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T22:01:17.740",
"id": "42143",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T22:01:17.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "42138",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "言おうとしてた is the past tense of 言おうとする。\n\n言おうとする is the volitional form of 言う. Meaning \"I want to say that\"\n\n言いましょう means \"let's say this!\" and is directed by the speaker to the listener.\n\n「言おうとしてた」and 「言いましょう」are very different in meaning!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T01:19:23.353",
"id": "42147",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T01:19:23.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19264",
"parent_id": "42138",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Sorry for adding this as a new answer. (I cannot {yet} add comments)\n@Earthliη♦\n\nWouldn't it just become 言いましょうとしていたよ in past polite?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T19:48:51.360",
"id": "42164",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T19:48:51.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17627",
"parent_id": "42138",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42138 | 42143 | 42143 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42142",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "皆さん、こんにちは！\n\nNow, I've been reading 竹取物語 and have come across (another) set of symbols that\nI've yet to understand. Given the following sentence.\n\n> かくて翁やう／＼豐になり行く。\n\nWhat does the sudden 「／＼」 mean?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T20:34:41.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42141",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-18T14:32:29.950",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T21:21:19.937",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 12,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"classical-japanese",
"punctuation",
"symbols"
],
"title": "What does 「／＼」 mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 2912
} | [
{
"body": "This is supposed to be an iteration mark.\n\nThis type of iteration mark is usually only used in vertical writing (the\ntraditional layout for Japanese writing). It looks like a big く but is twice\nas tall.\n\nIt also exists in Unicode, so I can try to produce it here, although it may\nnot render nicely:\n\n> や \n> う \n> 〱\n\n([Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%B8%8A%E3%82%8A%E5%AD%97) does a\nbetter job and has more examples.)\n\nThe characters `／＼` are often (ab)used to represent the vertical iteration\nmark in horizontal writing.\n\nSo,\n\n> やう／＼ = やうやう = ようよう = 漸う",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T21:13:31.703",
"id": "42142",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-30T21:22:28.733",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-30T21:22:28.733",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "42141",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
]
| 42141 | 42142 | 42142 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42154",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "What's the difference? How do you know when to use one vs. the other?\n\nI'm asking because I said 「話｛はな｝すことを止｛や｝める」, but was corrected to 「話｛はな｝すの...」\nand I don't understand why.\n\n_(I searched for this question but was surprised to find it doesn't already\nexist!)_",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-30T23:59:13.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42144",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T10:43:01.603",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T00:02:51.333",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6786",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"usage",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "の (no) vs. こと (koto)",
"view_count": 2512
} | [
{
"body": "This would depend on the context/situation in which either sentence is\nuttered, but if you used 「話すことを止める」 in a situation where you are only talking\nabout \"stopping talking **_for now or just momentarily_** \", it could sound a\nlittle bit strange. It is not necessarily **_incorrect_** ; It just sounds\nkind of too serious if you use 「こと」 there. In short, it could sound like you\nare saying that you will stop talking **_for good_**.\n\n「の」 is **_slightly_** more informal than 「こと」 in nuance; therefore, it would\nfit that situation that much, if not very much, better.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T00:27:35.273",
"id": "42145",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T10:43:01.603",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T10:43:01.603",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42144",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "Both is correct and has the samemeaning. However \"こと\" can be used for vast\nsituation, so I think your adviser advised you the more proper way to express\nthe same meaning. Actually \"話すのを止める\" is more smoothing Japanese expression I\nfeel.\n\nIt depends on the person, but I feel the following. \"抗議するのを止める\" is more\nsmoohter than \"抗議することを止める\"\n\n\"学校に通うのを止める\" is more smoohter than \"学校に通うことを止める\"\n\n\"こと\" also can be used for the following, \"日本語を勉強することを始める（止める）\" = \"日本語を勉強し始める\"\n\n\"実行可能な計画を策定することが重要だ\" = \"実行可能な計画策定が重要だ\"\n\nWe can make Japanese sentences without \"こと\", and at the same time we can make\nJapanese sentences with \"こと.\"\n\nJapanese sentences without \"こと\" sounds smooth for me (It depends on the\nperson.)\n\nNowasays, more and more Japanese natives use \"部分\" like the following,\n\"安全に対する配慮が不足していた部分もありますので、今後はしっかり対応したいと思います\"\n\nSome people are sensitive for the exessive use of \"こと\" and \"部分\", but most of\nJapanese don't care abut it.\n\n\"こと\"や\"部分\"が多用される日本語は、適切ではないことだと思いますが、それが今の日本で受け入れられている部分も認めなければなりません。(^^)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T02:23:27.207",
"id": "42151",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T02:23:27.207",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42144",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It doesn't make big difference concerning most verbs as other posts say, but\nsome verbs can make big difference. For example, 見る and 聞く make these\ndifferences.\n\n * 傷｛いた｝んでいるのを見た I found it rotten\n * 傷んでいることを見た I considered/expected that it would be rotten\n\n * その人がピアノを弾くのを聞いた I heard him play piano\n\n * その人がピアノを弾くことを聞いた I heard that he would play piano\n\nIn addition, since の is a pronoun, it's not impossible to interpret の as\nsubstitution for こと and that interpretation makes sentences with の ambiguous.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T08:23:58.323",
"id": "42154",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T08:23:58.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "42144",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42144 | 42154 | 42145 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42158",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「ねえねえ、このまえ本で読んだんだけど、犬に追われたら、こうやって腕を胸の前で組むと一瞬、犬が弱気になるんだって」 \n> Hey, I was reading in a book recently (but) if you're chased by a dog, when\n> you fold your arms in front of your chest like this, it gets timid.\n\nけど does not translate sensibly as 'but' in this sentence. What is happening\nhere?\n\nMy guess is that the speaker didn't have her thoughts in the right order , and\nthat this 'but' somehow introduces the missing information.\n\nIf I'd made this sentence from scratch I'd have written:\n\n> このまえ本で、犬に追われたら、こうやって腕を胸の前で組むと一瞬、犬が弱気になると読んだ\n\nbut when I read this back to myself it seemed awkward. That と seems to be\nquoting a lot of stuff and doesn't seem at all clear to my beginner level\nmind. Is this alternative sentence correct/clear in meaning? Is the\npossibility that it's messy the reason for the structure of the original\nsentence?\n\nAm I completely barking up the wrong tree (pun intended)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T12:27:12.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42157",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T13:24:54.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"conjunctions",
"quotes"
],
"title": "Confusing use of けど",
"view_count": 338
} | [
{
"body": "In this case,\n\n> 「けど」≠ \"but\"\n\nEvery single word counts in a sentence in any language, but that does not mean\nthat every word needs to or can be translated.\n\n「けど」、「けれど」、「が」、「だが」, etc. are _**frequently**_ used as conjunctions for\n_**making a prefatory remark**_ just before stating the main point. (To be\ncompletely honest with you, I find it difficult to believe that this is the\nfirst time that you have encountered these being used for the purpose I just\nexplained.)\n\nIn the sentence:\n\n> 「ねえねえ、このまえ本{ほん}で読{よ}んだんだ **けど**\n> 、犬{いぬ}に追{お}われたら、こうやって腕{うで}を胸{むね}の前{まえ}で組{く}むと一瞬{いっしゅん}、犬が弱気{よわき}になるんだって。」\n\nPrefatory remark: 「このまえ本で読んだ」\n\nMain point: 「犬に追われたら、こうやって腕を胸の前で組むと一瞬、犬が弱気になる」\n\nThus, this 「けど」, all by itself, is very difficult to translate into an English\nword, but I hope you can see that in nuance, it is much closer to \"and\" than\nto \"but\". Instead of using \"and\" or \"but\", you could simply translate it into\n\"I read in a book _**that**_ ~~~\".\n\n> My guess is that the speaker didn't have her thoughts in the right order ,\n> and that this 'but' somehow introduces the missing information.\n\nThe first half of what you said is not really correct, but the second half,\nspot-on.\n\nYour sentence:\n\n> 「 **このまえ本で** 、犬に追われたら、こうやって腕を胸の前で組むと一瞬、犬が弱気になる **と読んだ** 。」\n\nreads well and natural even though some might argue that the 「本で」 and 「と読んだ」\nare positioned too far apart. Grammatically, however, it is just perfect with\nno ambiguity anywhere.\n\nYou could change it to:\n\n> 「犬に追われたら、こうやって腕を胸の前で組むと一瞬、犬が弱気になると、 **このまえ本で読んだ** 。 」 or\n>\n> 「このまえ、犬に追われたら、こうやって腕を胸の前で組むと一瞬、犬が弱気になると **本で読んだ** 。 」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T12:57:43.587",
"id": "42158",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T13:24:54.693",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42157",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42157 | 42158 | 42158 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42184",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I came across the sentence その子は指で十数えました in writing, and I was under the\nimpression that, in written Japanese particles are not omitted. I can see that\nthat sentence means, \"That child counted to ten with her fingers\". However,\nI'm having difficulty understanding if there should be an を (or another\nparticle) after 十. I feel like 十 should be the direct object of 数えました, but\nmaybe my understanding of the verb 数えました is incorrect.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T13:56:49.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42159",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T23:13:45.117",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T23:09:56.463",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "19145",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Omitting を in 十数えました",
"view_count": 445
} | [
{
"body": "\"十数えました\" or \"十数える\" is correct. We native Japanese speakers feel comfortable\nusing this expression, so it is probably idiomatic.\n\n\"十を数えました\" or \"十を数える\" is correct and almost natural. (Some native Japanese\nspeakers might feel these expressions are unnatural.)\n\nIf you count \"人数\" or \"車の台数\", you have to use を resulting in: \"人数を数えました\" or\n\"人数を数える\", \"車の台数を数えました\" or \"車の台数を数える.\"\n\nFor native speakers of Japanese, the expressions \"人数数えました\", \"人数数える\", \"車の台数数える\"\nand \"車の台数数えました\" would be unnatural, and we would need the を.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T15:36:43.253",
"id": "42161",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T23:13:45.117",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T23:13:45.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42159",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "No particle is omitted in this sentence. We rarely say 十を数える regardless of\nit's written or spoken, in the first place. This 十 is like an adverb that\ndirectly modify a verb without any particle, and [this happens very\noften](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17816/5010).\n\nBy the way, this 十 can be read as じゅう and とお, both of which are fine but the\nformer is common.\n\nHere are some formal ways to use 数える:\n\n> 1. 五【ご】数える count five (aloud / with a finger)\n> 2. 五【いつ】つ数える count five (aloud / with a finger)\n> 3. ボールの数を数える count the number of balls\n> 4. ボールを数える count the balls\n>\n\nYou can omit を in the last two examples in casual conversations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T03:50:12.593",
"id": "42184",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:50:12.593",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42159",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42159 | 42184 | 42184 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For giving advice, what are their different nuances?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T15:14:34.710",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42160",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:07:04.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What are the differences between ～ばいい, ～たらいい, and ～たほうがいい?",
"view_count": 2182
} | [
{
"body": "\"～ばいい\": recommendation. You should do it.\n\n\"厳しいドレスコードはないよ。ネクタイをしていればいいよ。\"\n\nThere is no strict dress code. You just should wear a tie.\n\n\"～たらいい\": recommendation. You should have done it.\n\n\"Ｔシャツとジーンズじゃ、カジュアルすぎるね。せめてネクタイをしてたらいいのに。\"\n\nYour T-shirt and jeans are too casual. The least you could do is to ware a\ntie.\n\n\"～たほうがいい\" : reccomendation. You should do it.\n\n\"服装については何も言われてないけど、多分、ネクタイはしてたほうがいいよ。\" = \"服装については何も言われてないけど、多分、ネクタイはしたほうがいいよ。\"\n\nThere is no doress code cleary expressed, but probably you should wear a tie.\n\nAll are colloquial expression.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T03:07:04.640",
"id": "42181",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:07:04.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42160",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42160 | null | 42181 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42211",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've been doing practice grammar questions and checking my answers from a JLPT\npractice book, but I just can't figure this one out.\n\n> 部長のチェックを（ ）積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ。\n>\n> １ 受けてからだと\n>\n> ２ 受けてからなら\n>\n> ３ 受けてからでないと\n>\n> ４ 受けてからでないなら\n\nHere, I would think the answer is 3 (\"We can't assertively continue this\nconversation without checking with the head of the department\", or something\nalong those lines) for that's what I thought would be a correct use of からでないと,\nbut the answer is apparently 2. I just don't understand at all. How do all\nthese forms differentiate?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T16:06:40.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42162",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T03:50:43.533",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T16:27:53.953",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9536",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "からなら vs からでないと JLPT N2",
"view_count": 3948
} | [
{
"body": "NG: １ 部長のチェックを（受けてからだと）積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ。\n\nOK, an example: １ 部長のチェックを（受けてからだと）話を変更してはいけないよ。\n\nOnce you have had your boss check the proposal (or estimation, like that), you\ncan't change the basics of it.\n\nOR\n\nOnce you have had the approval of your boss for the proposal (or estimation,\nlike that), you can't change the basics of it.\n\nOK: ２ 部長のチェックを（受けてからなら）積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ。\n\nOnce you have had your boss check the proposal, you can assertively continue\nthe deal (without any changes of the basics of the deal).\n\nNG: ３ 部長のチェックを（受けてからでないと）積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ。\n\nOK: 部長のチェックを（受けてからでないと）話をすすめてはいけません。\n\nNG: ４ 部長のチェックを（受けてからでないなら）積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ。\n\nOK: 部長のチェックを（受けてからでないなら）話をすすめてはいけません。\n\nIf you don't have your boss's check (approval), you can't assertively continue\nthis conversation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T06:08:36.960",
"id": "42170",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T06:08:36.960",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42162",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> 部長{ぶちょう}のチェックを（ ）積極的{せっきょくてき}に話{はなし}をすすめてもいいよ。\n>\n> １ 受{う}けてからだと\n>\n> ２ 受けてからなら\n>\n> ３ 受けてからでないと\n>\n> ４ 受けてからでないなら\n\nFirst, let us take a look at the main clause of the sentence in question. It\nis 「積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ」, which means \" _ **you can/may actively pursue the\nmatter**_ \".\n\nPlease make a mental note here that the main clause is **affirmative both in\nmeaning and grammar/structure**.\n\nNow, let us have a look at how you translated the main clause, which is \" _\n**We can't assertively continue this conversation**_ \". You used \"can't\", but\nit is okay because you also used \"without\" in translating the sub-clause --\n\"without checking with the head of the department\". The two negative elements\ncancel each other perfectly.\n\nThus, your translation is actually good in and of itself. I, however, suspect\nyour own translation using two negative elements might have confused yourself\nin the end because in the Japanese sentence, we know that at least the main\nclause is affirmative.\n\nWhat we would need to think about here is: **What would match in Japanese the\n\"negative + negative\" structure in English when the main clause in the\nJapanese is already affirmative?**\n\nThe answer would be \"affirmative + affirmative\" in Japanese, would it not? A\n\"can't ~~ without ~~\" structure would surely match a \"can ~~ with ~~\"\nstructure, yes?\n\nThis is why the choices #3 and #4 are \"automatically\" out because with 「ない」,\nthey are negative both in structure/grammar and meaning. Both 「ないと」 and 「ないなら」\nmust be followed by a negative phrase (grammar-wise and/or meaning wise), but\nour main clause 「積極的に話をすすめてもいいよ」 is 100% affirmative.\n\nSo, we are now down to two choices -- #1 受けてからだと and #2 受けてからなら.\n\n1「受けてから **だと** 」 should normally be followed by a phrase that is negative\neither in grammar or meaning, which is why 「受けてから **だと** 話をすすめてもいいよ」 sounds\nvery awkward. It is not something careful speakers would say.\n\n2「受けてから **なら** 」 fits perfectly into the sentence. \" _ **If it is after\ngetting the manager's OK**_ , ~~\" It finally gives us the \"positive +\npositive\" sentence structure that we were looking for.\n\nI admit that careless speakers (native speakers, I mean) might have chosen #1,\nbut the sentence using #1 would be corrected by every teacher or boss.\n\nChoices #3 and #4, unfortunately, are just utterly impossible. They both need\nto be followed by negative phrases.\n\nWith #3, you would be saying \" _ **Unless**_ it is after getting the manager's\nOK, you may actively pursue the matter.\" Makes practically no sense, right?\n\nWith #4, you will have \"If it is **not** after getting the manager's OK, you\nmay actively pursue the matter.\" Equally nonsensical, yes?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T03:26:20.547",
"id": "42211",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T03:50:43.533",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42162",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 42162 | 42211 | 42211 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, what is the difference between ゆっくり and ゆっくりと?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T18:24:02.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42163",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T11:39:04.187",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-31T18:25:47.790",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particle-と",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "What does adding と after an adverb do?",
"view_count": 4112
} | [
{
"body": "Well, there is not much difference between the two. Using the と in this\ninstance really just \"Emphasizes\" ゆっくり. It is hard to quantify in English, but\nsort of has the feeling of trying to make the preceding more clearer in the\nemphatical sense.\n\nEg, these two statements are almost identical in meaning \"Study Hard\", but the\nbottom one just has that extra little bit of meaning, like you would say in\nEnglish \"Study really hard\".\n\n> しっかり勉強しなさい。\n\nand\n\n> しっかりと勉強しなさい。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T11:39:04.187",
"id": "42171",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T11:39:04.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42163",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42163 | null | 42171 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Both are counters for occurrences. Would they be interchangeable in the\nfollowing sentence?\n\nパリ行きの電車は一日に二回出発します。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T20:16:09.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42166",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:39:50.183",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17380",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"counters"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 度 and 回?",
"view_count": 614
} | [
{
"body": "The followings with the sign \"OK\" are correct and used by Japanese nateives,\n\n * OK: \"何度もチャレンジする\"\n * OK: \"何回もチャレンジする\"\n * OK: \"３度目でやっと成功した\"\n * OK: \"３回目でやっと成功した\"\n * OK: \"試しに一度やってみたら？\"\n * OK: \"試しに一回やってみたら？\"\n * OK: \"早稲田には１回で合格したが、司法試験は３回（目）でやっと合格した。\"\n * OK: \"早稲田には１度で合格したが、司法試験は３度（目）でやっと合格した。\"\n * OK: \"第67回NHK紅白歌合戦\"\n * NG: \"第67度NHK紅白歌合戦\"\n\n\"今回はリハーサルです。\" = \"This time it is the rehearsal.\" \"今回\" means \"this time\"\n\n\"次回はリハーサルです。\" = \"Next time it'll be the rehearsal.\" \"次回\" = \"next time\"\n\n\"今度はリハーサルです。\" = \"Next time it'll be the rehearsal.\" \"今度\" = \"next time\"\n\nWe never use \"次度\" at all.\n\nSome people say that \"回\" has clear time window, but \"度\" donesn't have it.\n\nI'm for it, but I feel that it is not the well-grounded explanation.\n\nFor me, the following is the best explanation for the difference between \"度\"\nand \"回.\"\n\n\"一度で済ませた。\" = \"I've got done with them at one time.\"\n\n= \"I've got done with variou tasks at one time.\"\n\n\"一回で済ませた。\" = \"I've got done with them at one time.\"\n\n= \"I've got done with the task not at several times but at one time.\"\n\n= \"I've got done with the task on the first time.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T05:42:59.553",
"id": "42169",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:39:50.183",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T03:39:50.183",
"last_editor_user_id": "14627",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42166",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "They have bit different. \nFirst, **they can sometimes be replaced**. For example:\n\n * 彼は一度(一回)だけ学校に来た\n * 一度(一回)だけ成功した\n\nBut there is unable to replaced sentence:\n\n * 第三回運動会\n * (`*`)第三度運動会\n\nIn this cases, commonly used 回. Not used 度.\n\n 1. When used 第 or 全. (第一回, etc.) (Unable to use 度)\n 2. When counting decimals. (1.5回) (Unable to use 度)\n 3. When counting the number of actions. \n 4. When counting event in a row. \n 5. When you know number of held (happened).\n\nIn this case, commonly used 度.\n\n 1. When you do _not_ know number of held (happened).\n 2. When counting event what is hard to calculate.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T00:35:55.667",
"id": "42179",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T00:35:55.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14627",
"parent_id": "42166",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42166 | null | 42169 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42175",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[ˈjanə] I was wondering if it's spelled ヤナ, or maybe because the stress is on\nthe first syllable there should be a dash board: ヤーナ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T01:14:09.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42167",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T15:38:28.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19269",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"names"
],
"title": "How to spell the name Yana?",
"view_count": 1550
} | [
{
"body": "Your first guess was correct, it would be ヤナ. If the romanized name was\nsomething like Yaana then it would be written ヤーナ to stress the longer sound.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T02:11:47.557",
"id": "42168",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T02:11:47.557",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9851",
"parent_id": "42167",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Depending on how much Japanese you already know, my answer might come as a\nsurprise. I am going to say that either 「ヤナ」 or 「ヤーナ」 would be fine so long as\n**_you_** yourself are comfortable with it.\n\nUnlike the far more commonly seen or heard katakana names such as\n「スミス」、「ジョン」、「イザベル」, etc. that are already widely recognized by the general\npublic as \"correct\", **_very_** few people (if anyone at all) would feel\nstrange upon seeing or hearing either 「ヤナ」 or 「ヤーナ」. If the \"ya\" part of\n\"Yana\" is elongated enough in your native language, then you might take the\nlatter.\n\nKatakanizing foreign proper nouns is not rocket science; It is basically\nphonetic approximation. The example I always use when talking about this is\nthe name \" **Charles** \". As an English name, we write it as 「 **チャールズ** 」 and\nas a French name, 「 **シャルル** 」. The original alphabet spelling has little to\nnothing to do with the katakanization. It is the pronunciation that actually\ncounts.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T14:57:53.787",
"id": "42175",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T15:38:28.470",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T15:38:28.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42167",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42167 | 42175 | 42168 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42174",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This particular gif shows a character blushing, with the word 「てれり」... but\nisn't 「照{て}れる」 (to be shy; to be bashful) an ichidan verb? Is てれり valid? What\ndoes it mean? (A jisho.org search for\n[**tereri**](http://jisho.org/search/tereri) doesn't show anything useful)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hSOmG.gif)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T12:52:19.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42172",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T02:54:44.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Does てれり mean \"blush\" in this gif file?",
"view_count": 4800
} | [
{
"body": "完全にアニメのオタクの言葉ですが、「照れる」と言う意味でしょう。これは正しい日本語ではないと思います。\n\nEDIT: I better translate my answer, what I am stating is that it means 'Blush'\nin the context, but is NOT valid Japanese as the question asks.\n\nAnd to address an issue with the other answer, it is definitely not a\n擬態語{ぎたいご}, [Explanation\nhere](https://pj.ninjal.ac.jp/archives/Onomatope/column/nihongo_1.html) An\nexample of them is below,\n\n> 「擬態語」：きらきら，つるつる，さらっと，ぐちゃぐちゃ，どんより等",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T13:08:02.707",
"id": "42173",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T02:54:44.753",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T02:54:44.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42172",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This is a kind of 擬態語 (phenomime) that refers to the act of becoming shy. So\n\"てれり\" can mean \"blush.\" This kind of onomatopoeia is often freely created,\nespecially in comics.\n\nてれり is one of those created in this way, so it's not in dictionaries.\n\nてれり seems to come from the verb 照れる. Though grammatical discussion is not so\nmeaningful, this can be looked at as 照れ (the 連用形 of 照れる) + り (suffix).\n\nり is a common suffix among onomatopoeia. I feel that it indicates that a small\naction was completed in a short time. The suffix り is seen in other common\nonomatopoeia, e.g. ころり, ぽろり and どろり. \"っ\" (the small つ) is another suffix that\nhas a similar meaning. Thus てれり can be replaced by てれっ here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T14:08:09.417",
"id": "42174",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-01T16:46:52.637",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-01T16:46:52.637",
"last_editor_user_id": "3794",
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42172",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 42172 | 42174 | 42174 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42178",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "皆さん、こんばんは！\n\nWhat would a good equivalent for saying \"I think, ...\" be in 日本語?\n\nLike, if you wanted to say \"I think (it's) not from here\" and started with...\n\n```\n\n ここからじゃないですな。\n \n```\n\nWhat could you do to this, or similar sentences, to add a aura of admitted\nuncertainty to it?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-01T23:43:16.200",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42177",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T00:23:29.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Equivalent of saying \"I think, ...\" for when you're not 100% sure of what you say?",
"view_count": 138
} | [
{
"body": "You could use:\n\n> 「～～ような気{き}がする/します」\n>\n> 「～～ではないか（な）と思{おも}う/思います」\n>\n> 「～～では（or じゃ）ないでしょうか」\n\nVery informally, quite a few people have been using the following patterns for\nthe last couple of decades:\n\n> 「～～、みたいな？」\n>\n> 「～～かな、みたいな？」\n\nYour sentence:\n\n> 「ここからじゃない **ですな** 。」\n\nis _**not**_ incorrect, unnatural or anything. It is a good one. With the 「です\n**な** 」- ending, however, practically all native speakers would think that\nthat would be said by _**older**_ people (and quite possibly by a fictional\ncharacter).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T00:23:29.233",
"id": "42178",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T00:23:29.233",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42177",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42177 | 42178 | 42178 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "この間もちょっと畳で爪を磨いだら細君が非常に怒ってそれから容易に座敷へ入れない。 The other day when I happened to be\nsharpening my claws on some straw floor-matting, the mistress of the house\nbecame so unreasonably incensed that now it is only with the greatest\nreluctance that she’ll even let me enter a matted room.\n\n台所の板の間で他（ひと）が顫えていても一向平気なものである。 Though I’m shivering on the wooden floor in the\nkitchen, heartlessly she remains indifferent.\n\nI'm reading through I am a cat by Soseki and I came across this use of the\nword 他 which had the reading as ひと. I'm having trouble understanding how this\nword is being used in this sentence and would appreciate some enlightenment.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T02:06:38.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42180",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-12T04:44:58.073",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T11:14:05.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"archaic-language"
],
"title": "What is the use of 他（ひと）in this sentence?",
"view_count": 363
} | [
{
"body": "「ひと」 is a literary reading of 「他」.\n\nIt means \" ** _another person_** \", \" ** _a third person_** \", \" **\n_someone_** \", etc.\n\nIn other words, 「他{ひと}」 here means the same thing as 「ほかの人」, 「誰{だれ}か」 or just\nplain 「人」.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T03:16:39.497",
"id": "42182",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:16:39.497",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42180",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This Japanese sentences are highly literary expression. These are quoted from\n\"吾輩は猫である（夏目漱石）.\" Some of them are entirely not modern expression. I can't read\n\"他\" as \"ひと\" without the furigana.\n\nWe can't find \"他（ひと）\" in modern leterature. In meiji period highly\nsofisticated perple like 漱石 wrote this kind of expression.\n\nAnyway I associate \"他人（たにん）\" with \"他（ひと）.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T03:24:48.687",
"id": "42183",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T03:24:48.687",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42180",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "There's a lot going on with the word 他｛ひと｝ here.\n\nFirst, the assigning of the reading of ひと(人) to 他 (or substitution of the\nkanji 他 for 人) is an instance of a creative author exercising his literary\nlicense.\n\nSecond, here, as he sometimes does elsewhere in the book, the Cat is (despite\nhis titular/opening declaration) describing himself as 人 (person). This is not\nso much because this sapient feline identifies himself as a homo sapience as\nbecause the word is being used loosely, to mean not a human being but any\nindividual being possessing person-ness, which he is.\n\nThird, I think this 人 can said to be an indefinite noun phrase (though the\nJapanese lacks such marking here) having a specific and identifiable referent.\nPlus, this is also a case of referring to oneself in the third person. But\nwith the word 人 it's a common practice, to which fact the presence of the\neighth definition of [人](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/185757/meaning/m0u/)\nin this dictionary attests:\n\n> ８ 話し手が自分を第三者のようにいう語。わたし。「人のことも少しは考えてくれよ」\n\nSo the quote may be more literally rendered: \"Even when a person/man is\nshivering on the wooden floor of the kitchen, heartlessly she remains\nindifferent,\" where it is clear by convention and from the context that by \"a\nperson/man\" the Cat himself is referred to. Hence their decision to translate\nthe 他｛ひと｝ as \"I\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-02-11T09:33:10.403",
"id": "43412",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-11T09:33:10.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "42180",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I'm not sure if everyone is misunderstanding the origin of this but in olden\ntimes Chinese was the language of literature.\n\nThe answer to this is nothing more than the person decided to use the (now\narchaic) way of writing it with the Chinese character. It is strange but, it\nmakes sense if you think of it in this way.\n\nIn Japanese you could read this as\n\n> ほか\n\nBut if it were Chinese this is quite obviously just\n\n> tā\n\n(he/she; singular).\n\nThe meaning as you can see is different, but so it is at times when Chinese\nand Japanese use the same kanji.\n\nIf it were an old, old text this might make more sense but I have no idea of\nthe original source you are referring to. @Sonny suggested this text was Meiji\nperiod, so some upper-class people might still be familiar with classical\nChinese.\n\n(More info about the Chinese character:\n<http://dictionary.hantrainerpro.com/chinese-english/translation-ta_he.htm> )",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-02-12T01:11:50.327",
"id": "43434",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-12T04:44:58.073",
"last_edit_date": "2017-02-12T04:44:58.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "19790",
"owner_user_id": "19790",
"parent_id": "42180",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42180 | null | 42183 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42186",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Someone lights up a fire and tells the other person (reading from the\nsituation) to get warm by the fire:\n\n> あたんなはれ\n\nんなはれ is Kansai-ben for imperative なりなさい, but where does the first part come\nfrom?\n\nIs it shortened from 暖かくなりなさい? If so why the second た of あたた is lost?\n\nOr is it another verb/word? It looks more like a shortened あたりなさい, but this\ndoes not make sense to me in the context.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T05:47:50.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42185",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T15:52:10.320",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T05:54:00.890",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kansai-ben"
],
"title": "Is あたんなはれ in Kansai-ben \"get yourself warm\"? What verb does it come from?",
"view_count": 234
} | [
{
"body": "The first part comes from 「当{あ}たる」, meaning \"to warm oneself\".\n\nWe say: 「火{ひ}に当たる」、「ストーブに当たる」 , etc.\n\nYou may have heard phrases such as:\n\n「日当{ひあ}たりのいい部屋{へや}」 (\"a sunny room\")\n\n「高{たか}いビルの北側｛きたがわ｝の日当たりの悪｛わる｝い家｛いえ｝」 (\"a house on the north side of a tall\nbuilding that gets little sunshine\")\n\nFinally, IMHO, all the important words are used in children's songs, not in\nJ-pop or J-rock. Here is a song named 「たき火{び}」, in which this 「当たる」 is used\nmultiple times.\n\n<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9wgi2SlsJA>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T05:56:03.923",
"id": "42186",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T06:29:28.890",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T06:29:28.890",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42185",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Just to clarify, I think you have things confused, あたん part does not come from\n暖{あたた}かく, but as l'électeur 「当｛あ｝たる」. So there always only one 「た」.\n\nNow onto the Kansai ben part or should I say mainly around Kyoto, 「何々しなはれ」 can\nbe used like this,\n\n> 食べなはれ ＝ 食べなさい ＝ Eat\n>\n> 寝なはれ ＝ 寝なさい ＝ Sleep\n\nUsing this 「なはれ」 表現 is a bit softer sounding than 「なさい」\n\nThis is different sort of Kansai ben, from a different region,\n\n> 食べよし ＝ 食べなさい ＝ Eat\n>\n> 寝よし ＝ 寝なさい ＝ Sleep",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T09:03:57.510",
"id": "42194",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T15:52:10.320",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T15:52:10.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42185",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42185 | 42186 | 42186 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There are some slight sound changes when referring to the dates - days,\nmonths, years, hours, and minutes. However it wasn't discussed for the former\n4 if the slight sound changes will continue or revert back to normal as it\ngoes on and rotates from 1-10 again. 31 days, 12 months, 12 hours. With span\nof time, we can surpass this limit. (The usual table used)\n\n> So for 34, 44, 54, 64, 74, etc...(ending in 4) Days, should the 4 be\n> pronounced as よっか(かん) or よ(ん) にちかん? For 120, 220, 320, etc...(ending in 20)\n> Days, should the 20 be pronounced as はつかかん or にじゅうにちかん?\n>\n> How about the 7 and 9 endings? Such as 27 months, 19 hours, and 39/37 days\n> respectively? しち or なな? く or きゅう?\n>\n> 4 endings in hours such as 14,24, etc : always よじかん? 4 endings in months\n> such as 14 months : always し?\n\nOr perhaps both can be used but may sound uncommon or unnatural.\n\nI'm pretty sure that the only slight change for year is 四年 (よねん) and will\nalways continue to be like that. 2004 is にせんよねん.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T06:02:33.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42187",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T12:33:12.537",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T12:33:12.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "15891",
"owner_user_id": "15891",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Span of time - Does the pronunciation stays the same as it rotates from 1-10?",
"view_count": 106
} | [
{
"body": "44 days :\n\nunnaturl: よんじゅうよっか間\n\nnatural: よんじゅうよんにち間\n\n(Always よっか if 4 before 日間?)\n\n4日間: よんにちかん、よっかかん Both are used, interchangeable.\n\n27 months : にじゅうしちヶ月間\n\nにじゅうななか月 is also fine.\n\n19 hours : じゅうく時間 or じゅうきゅう時間 is fine!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T07:37:48.767",
"id": "42189",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T07:37:48.767",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42187",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42187 | null | 42189 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am trying to translate this statement and understand the use of いくら:\n\n> いくら俺でも鬼じゃあるまいしアルバムまで捨てたりは...\n\nI think it means something like:\n\n> I'm not an ogre so throwing away even an album...\n\nif someone could correct my translation and explain the grammar behind the\nいくら俺でも part, I would appreciate it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T07:08:24.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42188",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T09:42:40.260",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T08:49:13.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "14627",
"owner_user_id": "19275",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "いくら＋pronoun＋でも usage/meaning",
"view_count": 923
} | [
{
"body": "\"いくら俺でも\" implicates \"みんな良く知っているように、俺は善人ではない。多少は酷いことをした奴（人間）だ。しかし、さすがにそんな俺でも\"\n\n\"いくら俺でも、鬼じゃあるまいし\" => I admit that I'm not a good person. If I were a devil, I\nthrown away the album (that is something very special for you,) but I'm not as\nbad as devil. So I never do it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T07:57:17.177",
"id": "42190",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T07:57:17.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42188",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 「いくら + (Person) + でも + Negative expression」\n\nis a common and important sentence pattern. It being Japanese, however, **_the\nnegative expression is often left unsaid_**. The non-sentence in question is a\nstereotypical example of this phenomenon.\n\n> 「いくら俺{おれ}でも鬼{おに}じゃあるまいしアルバムまで捨{す}てたりは・・・」\n\nWhat is left unsaid here (and instead \"expressed\" with 「・・・」) would surely be\na negative phrase like 「しない」、「しないよ」、「しないさ」, etc.\n\n> \"However (adjective that fits the context) (the person) may be, he would not\n> do ~~~.\"\n\nis the meaning of this sentence pattern. To apply this to your \"non-sentence\",\none would come up with a translation like:\n\n> \"However **_evil_** I may be, I am no ogre and I **_would not go so far as\n> to_** throw out an album.\"\n\nI just selected the adjective \" ** _evil_** \" and the phrase \" ** _would\nnot_** \" for the sake of translation. Clearly, those are not found in the\noriginal.\n\nThe key is to know what is left unsaid; otherwise, you will not be able to\ntranslate something like this into English or other languages.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T09:18:47.347",
"id": "42195",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T09:42:40.260",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T09:42:40.260",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42188",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42188 | null | 42195 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42193",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Apart from avoiding using personal pronouns, when speaking to royalty, would\none just use **watashi** , like in the following example:\n\n> Time: 05:32 - 05:50\n>\n> <http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x15jzz2_my-little-pony-tomodachi-wa-\n> mahou-s2e01-japanese-sub_shortfilms>\n>\n> 「お天気のことですか。生き物たちも皆おかしくなっちゃってるし、 **私** の魔法も効かないし、これって。。。」 (edited with help\n> from KyloRen)\n\nOr would one use a different pronoun in real life?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T08:08:50.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42191",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T08:34:39.523",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T08:34:39.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"pronouns",
"first-person-pronouns"
],
"title": "How would one address oneself when speaking to royalty?",
"view_count": 150
} | [
{
"body": "First things first, it was actually this,\n\n「私の魔法も効かないし、 **これって。。。** 」not 「 **これで。。。** 」\n\nYou certainly could use 私{わたし}, but you certainly could use 私{わたくし}.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T08:31:53.203",
"id": "42193",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T08:31:53.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42191",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42191 | 42193 | 42193 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "43765",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am a newbie to this language. When I was trying a paper, I have found this\nsentence.\n\n> わたしの **あげた** ほん を よむ まえに こばやしさん は ユリンさんに **かりた** ほん を **よんだ** 。\n\nIf I take your attention to bold faced words, those are verbs in dictionary\nform, which ends up with either た or だ.\n\nThe questions I have is whether this is a grammar pattern. If so, can anyone\nplease explain it briefly?\n\nWould the following be accurate for a translation:\n\n> Mr. Kobayashi read the book (that he borrowed from) Mr. Yurin, before he\n> read the book I gave.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T08:12:58.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42192",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-22T03:49:13.493",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T09:12:25.797",
"last_editor_user_id": "19276",
"owner_user_id": "19276",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Is 〜た / だ (where 〜 a verb) a grammar pattern?",
"view_count": 502
} | [
{
"body": "I think the words 'あげた', 'かりた', and 'よんだ' are not in the dictionary form.\nThose are conjugated forms of the verbs whose dictionary forms (i.e.,\n[終止形]{しゅうしけい}, ending form) are 'あげる', 'かりる', and 'よむ', attached with the\nconjugated auxiliary verbs whose 終止形 are 'た' and 'だ'.\n\nIt would be useful to remember that, in modern Japanese, the 終止形 of all verbs\nends with the '-u' sound. For example, ager'u', karir'u', and yom'u', in the\nabove verbs.\n\n'あげた' is a combination of the verb 'あげる' and the auxiliary verb 'た', which\nmakes the tense of the preceding verb to the past. The verb 'あげる' in the\nphrase 'あげた' is conjugated to [連用形]{れんようけい} (form to precede a verb, adverb,\nor auxiliary verb) 'あげ' in order to attach to the auxiliary verb 'た'. Then,\n'た' in 'あげたほん' is conjugated to the [連体形]{れんたいけい} (form to precede a noun)\n'た', which happens to have the same pronunciation as the 終止形, in order to\nattach to the noun 'ほん'.\n\nSimilar structure is also in 'かりた'.\n\n'よんだ' is a combination of the verb 'よむ' and the auxiliary verb 'だ', which also\nindicates the past tense. 'よむ' is conjugated to 連用形 'よみ' to connect to 'だ'.\nThen, 'だ' is at the end of the sentence. So, it is in the 終止形 'だ'. In the\nresulting phrase 'よみだ', the middle 'み' is modified to 'ん' for the sake of easy\npronunciation. (This is called [撥音便]{はつおんびん}.) This is how you get 'よんだ'.\n\nThat's a brief explanation. For more, learn Japanese conjugation ([活用]{かつよう})\nsystem for verbs (as well as auxiliary verbs, adverbs, adjectives, and\nothers!) as macraf wrote. Have fun!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-02-22T03:49:13.493",
"id": "43765",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-22T03:49:13.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7266",
"parent_id": "42192",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42192 | 43765 | 43765 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42197",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My friend said:\n\n> うたっちゃだめだから。\n\nIs the っちゃ a colloquial replacement for っては in this case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T09:47:42.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42196",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-24T18:44:08.550",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-24T18:44:08.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "11827",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"colloquial-language",
"contractions"
],
"title": "っては replaced with っちゃ？",
"view_count": 1981
} | [
{
"body": "Precisely.\n\nIn meaning,\n\n「ては」＝「ちゃ」, 「ちゃあ」.\n\nThus,\n\n> 「うたっちゃだめだから。」\n\nmeans:\n\n> \"You shouldn't sing (it/this song/here/now, etc).\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T09:53:25.073",
"id": "42197",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-23T14:46:00.017",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-23T14:46:00.017",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42196",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42196 | 42197 | 42197 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42200",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between **Aによると、B。** and **Aによりますと、B。**?\n\nIn the texts I'm refering to both structures seem to mean 'According to A, it\nis B'. However, the first was used in simplified articles, whereas the second\nwas used in the original articles. So, is it just the case that the second one\nis used in more formal situations than the first one or is there something\nelse to it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T13:58:35.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42198",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T16:29:45.850",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T14:47:11.490",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"politeness"
],
"title": "What is the difference between によると and によりますと?",
"view_count": 641
} | [
{
"body": "The difference is just whether it's polite or not. There is nothing more than\nthat.\n\nよりますと is politer than よると.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T15:12:54.913",
"id": "42200",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T16:29:45.850",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T16:29:45.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14627",
"parent_id": "42198",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42198 | 42200 | 42200 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Edit: I was convinced by some people that this question was caused by a\nmisunderstanding or a mishearing. However, I've managed to come across this\nodd grammar again; this time as text in a chat, along with a translation and\ncontext.\n\nWhen asked about what they would do after graduation, a Japanese friend\nreplied with:\n\n> 今を切り抜けるのに必死だから、先のことは考えたくないな\n\nOf which she translated as:\n\n> My school life is too busy, so I don't want to think about my future right\n> now\n\nAfter some probing, she explained:\n\n>\n> うーん。「先」は時間を指すだけじゃなく、場所についても使う言葉なんだ。私も無意識に使ってたけど、場所や時間において、前側の意味にもなるし、後ろや過去の意味にもなるんだよねー。\n> で、私も不思議に思って調べてみました。今いる場所や時間から、後ろを向くと、過去や後ろ側が「先」になる。今いる場所や時間から前に向かうと未来やその場所の端が「先」になる。たぶん。\n\nFrom the vague explanation, I could only understand that 先 can indeed be used\nto talk about the future, which is reflected in its dictionary entry.\n\nCould someone clarify? Without context, I would have assumed that the sentence\nmeant _I don't want to think about the things that have past._\n\n--\n\nOld question:\n\nWhen asked if he is going to some place, my Japanese host often replies with:\n\n> 先｛さき｝にいく\n\nI was always confused as to why 「先」 could refer to the future in cases such as\nthis, as I've only been aware of the usage when referring to the past.\n\nHere is an example of a conversation I remember us having:\n\n> Me: お風呂｛ふろ｝に入るの？\n>\n> Host: 先｛さき｝に入るよ\n\nIn this case, my host explained that it meant that he would go later.\n\nCan someone explain why it did not mean that he had already gone?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T14:16:53.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42199",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-17T08:41:46.693",
"last_edit_date": "2017-09-17T08:41:46.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "18309",
"owner_user_id": "18309",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why can 「先」 be used to discuss future events?",
"view_count": 393
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not sure about your question, but at leaset I can explain the example.\n\nMe: お風呂に入るの？\n\nHost: 先に入るよ。\n\nI guess, when you see your host is going to take a bath, you'd like to confirm\nit. Then you asked \"（今から、あなたは）お風呂に入るの（ですか）？\"\n\nThen, your host replid \"はい、私が先に入ります。\" = \"Yes, I'm taking a bath before you.\"\n\n\"先\" is an expression of the order. \"on ahead\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T01:49:32.550",
"id": "42269",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T01:49:32.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42199",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "「先に行く」 can only mean \"go before\", not \"go later\". It's possible that he's\nsaying something else and you are not hearing the sentence in its entirety. My\nguess is that he is saying you can go first, or asking if you'd like to go\nfirst.\n\n「先に行く？」\"Would you like to go first?\" <- In this case, he is indicating that\nyou may go first and he'll go later, which may be what is going on in your\nspecific example.\n\nI strongly suggest you ask the host to write it down for you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T02:20:01.920",
"id": "42270",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T01:36:00.953",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T01:36:00.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "18608",
"owner_user_id": "18608",
"parent_id": "42199",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
]
| 42199 | null | 42269 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42202",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A native Japanese speaker said to me \"見たことが ないから ～です。\" to mean \"because I\ndidn't watch it, ….\" (we were talking about a movie).\n\nAs I have learned the sentence structure using から is \" _[reason: informal\nsentence]_ から _[result: sentence]_ \", I felt this sentence was too\ncomplicated. So I asked her if it was possible to say \"見なかったから ～です。\", as 見なかった\nis the informal version of \"did not see\". However, she refused and said that\nwould sound strange.\n\nSo my questions are: why is the informal past negative form unnatural here?\nAre there other informal sentences that cannot be used in front of から? What is\nthe pattern? Do the same rules also apply to other compound sentences (like と\nおもう) and other situations?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T15:27:01.103",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42201",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T16:19:41.037",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18305",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"particle-から"
],
"title": "Past negative informal sentence before から",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "見たことがない and 見なかった are different in meaning. So the grammatical structure of\n〜から has nothing to do with the problem.\n\nThe meaning of 見たことがない is \"have not seen\" or \"have no experience of seeing\".\n\nOn the other hand, 見なかった is simply \"did not see (at a certain opportunity in\nthe past)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T15:33:47.917",
"id": "42202",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T16:19:41.037",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-02T16:19:41.037",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42201",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42201 | 42202 | 42202 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42205",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know there is a nuance difference between a regular verb and verb stem + は/も\n+ する but i don't quite know what the nuance difference is.\n\nsentence in question:\n\n> 言いながら、アクアは椅子に腰掛けこちらを **見もせずに** 、スナック菓子をぽりぽりと\n\nWhat i understand from it:\n\n> While saying that (what she said had said previously), aqua, seated in the\n> chair without even looking this way, munched on snacks.\n\nHow would the highlighted part be different in nuance if it was just a regular\n**「見ずに」**? or instead **「見はせずに」**\n\nIf my understanding of any other parts of the sentence is wrong, please tell\nme so that i may correct it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T17:08:28.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42203",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T18:09:54.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12353",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"nuances",
"learning"
],
"title": "「見」＋「も」＋「する」 meaning?",
"view_count": 310
} | [
{
"body": "このすばですか？ 私あの作品大好きです。\n\nYour understanding is correct. This 「も」 should be translated to \"even\" as you\ndid.\n\n> 見 _も_ せずに == without _even_ looking\n\nSo its nuance is like \"without doing even such an easy act as looking at me\",\n**which includes a slight blame to Aqua**.\n\nIf it were simply 「見ずに」 or 「見はせずに」, it would be just describing her action\n**without mentioning speaker's emotion at all**.\n\n* * *\n\nThis usage of 「も」, used together with negations, emphasizes the negation\nintroduced by 「ず」. ３-イ of [this dictionary\nentry](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/218351/meaning/m0u/) matches this usage:\n\n> 動詞の連用形や動作性名詞に付き、打消しの語と呼応して、強い否定の意を表す。「思いもよらぬ話」「返事もしない」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T18:09:54.000",
"id": "42205",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-02T18:09:54.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42203",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42203 | 42205 | 42205 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42207",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Two kids are playing 'house' ままごと. The speaker is happy. The person she is\nspeaking to has just suggested that it's pointless.\n\n> 「まったくおとうさんは現実的なんだから。さあ、テレビ **でも** 見てちょうだい。ほら、キンちゃんがでてるわよ」 \n> Good grief, it's because you're pragmatic. Come now, _please watch TV_.\n> Look キンちゃん is on.\n\nI'm either failing to understand でも or ちょうだい in this sentence. I thought verb-\nてちょうだい meant 'please do verb'. In which case I can't make sense of でも with a\nmeaning of 'even' or で+も as two separate particles.\n\nMy initial thought is that I am misunderstanding ちょうだい. If I take it to mean\n'won't you do' rather than 'please do'. Then I can have \"Won't you even watch\nTV?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-02T18:08:35.887",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42204",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-14T04:19:47.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "Meaning of でも or ちょうだい in テレビでも見てちょうだい",
"view_count": 661
} | [
{
"body": "> 「まったくおとうさんは現実的{げんじつてき}なんだから。さあ、テレビ **でも** 見{み}て **ちょうだい** 。ほら、キンちゃんがでてるわよ。」\n\nEasier item first -- 「Verb in て-form +ちょうだい」. The only thing this can express\nis a friendly request. No exceptions. \"please do ~~\"\n\nNext, the not so easy -- 「でも」. Here, it does not mean \"even\". It is used to\ngive an example (as in suggesting an action) instead of making a clear\nstatement as in an imperative or declarative. It simply means \" **~~ or\nsomething** \" rather than \"this or that\". Please know that this usage of 「でも」\nis _**very**_ common.\n\n「コーヒー **でも** 、どうですか？」 (\"How about grabbing a coffee or something?\")\n\n「ひまなら助詞{じょし}の勉強{べんきょう} **でも** したら？」 (If you have spare time, why dontcha study\nJapanese particles or something?)\n\n> 「テレビでも見てちょうだい。」 means:\n>\n> \"Why dontcha watch TV or something!\" or \"Please watch TV or something!\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T00:49:45.727",
"id": "42207",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-14T04:19:47.223",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-14T04:19:47.223",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 42204 | 42207 | 42207 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42210",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Take this sentence, for example: \"日本語がドイツ語より面白いです\" Up until now I've never\nseen より without ほう (still quite a beginner), so I'm wandering if\n\"日本語のほうがドイツ語より面白いです\" is different in any way (maybe it explains it as a choice\nbetween German and Japanese)?\n\nNext: \"車で行くほうがバスで行くより安い\" Could I somehow say this without ほう? Or do I always\nuse ほう? It is confusing because \"俺は旅行するよりうちにいたい\" does not use ほう after the\nverb.\n\nAs you can see, I'm a little confused as to when I do/do not use ほう, and would\nappreciate your help.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T02:28:43.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42209",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T04:06:48.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-より"
],
"title": "When do I use ほう with より?",
"view_count": 1237
} | [
{
"body": "「日本語がドイツ語より面白いです」and「日本語のほうがドイツ語より面白いです」 is the same meaning, but in this\nsecond instance I would say that you are slightly emphasizing the fact that\n\"Japanese is more interesting\".\n\nYou certainly could say this 「車で行く方{ほう}がバスで行くより安い」without the 「方{ほう}」.\n\n「安いのはバスより車。」\"It is cheaper to go by car than bus.\"\n\nAs for your other example,\n\n「俺は旅行するよりうちにいたい。」\"\n\nYou could word it like this.\n\n「俺は旅行するよりも家{うち}に居た方{ほう}がいい。」\"I would rather be at home than go on holiday.\"\n\nI would say it is gets things across much more clearly when using 「方{ほう}」as it\nis easier to use it when comparing. But, as long as you are getting the\nmeaning across, you could use it or leave it out as you please.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T03:19:28.987",
"id": "42210",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T04:06:48.363",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T04:06:48.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "14605",
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42209",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42209 | 42210 | 42210 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "47158",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have two questions about the famous k word in japanese.\n\n 1. I have seen this conversation between a guy and a girl and was a little bit puzzled by the girl's answer:\n\n> Guy : xxx-ちゃんはかわいいです\n>\n> Girl : xxx-さんほどではありません\n\nIs it common for a girl to call a guy 「かわいい」? Is the guy supposed to be\nflattered or is it some kind of teasing?\n\n 2. Do guys usually use the word 「かわいい」 or is it exclusively used by girls?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T04:04:53.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42212",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-07T16:42:52.060",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T05:00:55.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "18641",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"slang",
"culture"
],
"title": "Saying かわいい to a guy",
"view_count": 1194
} | [
{
"body": "Firstly ,if that girl is talking about a guy, this example sounds strange.\n\nBut, if she was talking about another girl than it would sound fine.\n\neg,\n\n> 男の人：さゆりちゃんはかわいいです。\n>\n> 女の人：花子{はなこ}さんほどではありません。\n\nAnd sometimes this can happen, where the guy could be saying to the girl that\nhe is talking to is \"cute\", but in the below situation the girl defers the\ncomplement using what is\ncalled「謙遜{けんそん}」[humility](http://japanesefile.com/Nouns/kenson_9.html). Most\nsituations like this people will not take the complement directly like it\nmight be in western cultures where the person may say \"Thank you\" to the\ncompliment\n\n> なおき：さゆりちゃんはかわいいです。\n>\n> さゆり：花子{はなこ}さんほどではありません。\n\nTo answer the **first question** , unless you (male or female) are talking\nabout a child (boy) where you might say the child is 「かわいい」or 「かわいらしい」 than\nthere are very few cases where someone would refer to a man as 「かわいい」\n\n**Second question** , it is perfectly fine for males to use the word 「かわいい」in\neveryday conversation, but like I said before, not towards another male, that\njust sounds weird.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T06:56:22.380",
"id": "42215",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T09:40:19.943",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T09:40:19.943",
"last_editor_user_id": "14605",
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42212",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "It is totally fine to use `かわいい` to male, especially boys (10s and 20s).\n\nIn general, boys who tend to be seen as `かわいい` are those who have bigger eyes,\ndouble eyelids, clear, lighter skin, little or no beard, non-short hair style,\nare thin, and/or fashionable.\n\nYou can get to see example usages on male actors. Insert whatever actors you\ndeem pretty with `かわいい` in Twitter search box. The example below is from\n[岡田将生, a famous male\nactor](https://twitter.com/search?q=%E5%B2%A1%E7%94%B0%E5%B0%86%E7%94%9F%20%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8F%E3%81%84%E3%81%84&src=typd).\n\n * 岡田将生くん かわいいって毎日言ってるけど、ほんまかわいい（定期）癒される \n無理なく俳優活動頑張って欲しいな… \n無理なくね！体調とか崩して欲しくない\n\n-- 昴 (@ka0_11)\n[2017年5月7日](https://twitter.com/ka0_11/status/861026294141640704)\n\n * 岡田将生と綾野剛の泣き顔がかわいすぎる。。 \nフランケンシュタインのCMで泣いてる綾野くんを見て思った \nまさきは、まぁ、見なくてもかわいいの想像できるね(やばい)\n\n-- HANA (@HANA59386040)\n[2017年5月6日](https://twitter.com/HANA59386040/status/860865527102689284)\n\n * 岡田将生がかっこつけて刑事役してるのちょーかわいい。\n\n-- ソー (@so_matsusita)\n[2017年5月7日](https://twitter.com/so_matsusita/status/861194357352812544)\n\nBoys might also say `かわいい` to other boys, though it is far rarer than girls\nsaying it to boys. I feel that if a boy says `かわいい` to a boy, it is usually\nreferring to himself as a sort of joking or teasing.\n\n* * *\n\nMoreover, in some cases middle-aged men might get `かわいい` here or there for his\nbehaviors. In this case, the equivalent English meaning should be more like\n`pleasant` or `charming` than `cute` or `pretty`. The examples:\n\n * お父さんってたまにかわいいところがあるよね．弁当自分で作ったのに忘れていったり．\n\n * さっき乗った電車，車掌さんが言い間違いしたのに必死でごまかそうとして可愛かった．\n\nYou rarely see any cases that people say `かわいい` to middle-aged men for his\nappearances, though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-05-07T16:42:52.060",
"id": "47158",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-07T16:42:52.060",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42212",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42212 | 47158 | 42215 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42218",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> なんて言えばいいのか分からない\n\nMeans \"I don't know what to say\" but why does it mean that?\n\nIs there an explanation into why this means that.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T05:22:05.350",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42213",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T10:23:38.097",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11827",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why does this sentence mean what it means?",
"view_count": 211
} | [
{
"body": "Firstly \"分からない（I don't know）\"\n\nthen I don't know what?\n\n\"なんて言えばいいのか\"\n\n\"言えばいいのか\" could be directly translated into \"how to say.\"\n\nbut this Japanese sntence \"なんて言えばいいのか\" menas \"何を言えばいいのか.\"\n\nWe Japanese understand \"なんて言えばいいのか\" not as \"how to say\" but \"what to say.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T10:23:38.097",
"id": "42218",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T10:23:38.097",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42213",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42213 | 42218 | 42218 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42217",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My best translation of the following sentence is\n\n関心{かんしん}ももたらずに放｛ほう｝っておきました。 Without sufficient interest, it's been neglected.\n\nMy guess is that たらず can be written as 足らず (insufficient), but I'm not sure\nwhat the も in も足らず should be. I can't find ももたらず in my usual dictionaries. The\nclosest I've come is from this site, but I didn't fully understand the\nexplanation in Japanese:\n\n<http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%82%E3%82%82%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%9A>\n\n> 百に足りない数であるところから「八十{やそ}」「五十{いそ}」に、また「や」や「い」の音から「山田」「筏{いかだ}」などにかかる。\n>\n> 出典万葉集 三八一一\n>\n> 「ももたらず八十{やそ}の衢{ちまた}に」\n>\n> [訳] たくさんの道が通じた交差点に。\n>\n> 出典万葉集 三二七六\n>\n> 「ももたらず山田の道を」\n>\n> [訳] 山田の道を。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T06:11:57.350",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42214",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T16:00:28.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7478",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "the meaning of ももたらず",
"view_count": 519
} | [
{
"body": "Put simply, the 「もも」in 「ももたらず」 means \"One hundred\" and the 「たらず」means\n「足{た}りない」. 「百{ひゃく}」can be read as 「百{もも}」.\n\n「八十{やそ}」or \"Eighty\" in English is less than 「百{もも}」\"One hundred\" hence the\n「足{た}らず」in this saying.\n\nEDIT: I should also state that this obviously just the literal translation of\nthe words, not what the meaning of the whole saying is.\n\nEDIT 2: I am not looking at the original statement, but this\n[「ももたらず八十の衢に」](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%82%E3%82%82%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%9A)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T07:16:59.673",
"id": "42216",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T10:27:07.883",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T10:27:07.883",
"last_editor_user_id": "14605",
"owner_user_id": "14605",
"parent_id": "42214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think You wrongly understand the original Japanese sentence.\n\nwrong: \"関心\"+\"ももたらず\"+\"に\"\n\nwrong: \"関心百足らず\" ？？？\n\ncorrect: \"関心\"+\"も\"+\"もたずに（持たずに）\" menas \"without interest\"\n\n< The original phrase is \"ももたらず\"\n\n\"も（強調の「も」）\"+\"もたらず\"\n\n\"もたらず\" could be typo.\n\nIt should be \"もたず\". ＞\n\n\"も\" of \"関心ももたずに\" is \"強調の「も」.\"\n\nつまり、\"関心さえ持たずに\"or\"全く気にすることもなく\"+\"放っておきました\"\n\n\"強調の「も」\"examples: 「馬鹿でもわかる」「一言もしゃべらなかった」\n\n\"even the ignorant can understand\", \"kept absolutely quiet\"\n\nI've never heard \"ももたらず（百足らず）\" for my 61 years life as a Japanese native\nspeaker.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T10:14:32.003",
"id": "42217",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T16:00:28.523",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T16:00:28.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "19219",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42214 | 42217 | 42217 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42221",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> だが、藤木{ふじき}はぼーっと空中を見た **まんまだ** 。 \n> However, Fujiki vacantly looked at the sky.\n\nLiterally \"...in a state where he looked at the sky\".\n\nI'm struggling to understand the difference between this sentence and the\nsimpler だが、藤木はぼーっと空中を見た.\n\n1) Why add まんまだ what nuances does this bring?\n\n2) I'm confused over the mixture of tenses. I understood that relative clauses\nhave a tense which is relative to that of the main clause. This suggests to me\nthat the state he is in now is a state in which he had been looking at the\nsky, but is no longer doing so. I feel certain that this interpretation is\nwrong.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T12:57:01.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42220",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T14:02:51.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "Understanding tense in 見たまんまだ",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "I'd translate as follows:\n\n> だが、藤木はぼーっと空中を見たまんまだ。 \n> However, Fujiki is still vacantly looking at the sky.\n\nThe \"is\" could be \"was\", depending on the context.\n\n* * *\n\nAs you know, 「まんま」 (== 「まま」) means that a certain state is being kept\nunchanged. So it adds the nuance of \"still looking\" in this case.\n\nIf you say 「だが、藤木はぼーっと空中を見た」, it means he looked at a sky for a while and then\nperhaps looked at another thing.\n\n* * *\n\nNext, your understanding of tenses seems correct. Here 「見た」 is a past tense\nand this is relative to the main verb 「まんまだ」. Actually, his action of\ndirecting his eyes to the sky happened in the past. He is keeping his line of\nsight to that direction, resulting in the current state where he is looking at\nthe sky.\n\nSo 「見た」 here refers to just directing his eyes to the object, rather than the\nwhole from-start-to-end action of looking at something.\n\nYou can rephrase it using present tense as follows:\n\n> ただ、藤木はぼーっと空中を **見ている** まんまだ。 \n> However, Fujiki is still vacantly looking at the sky.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T13:39:47.147",
"id": "42221",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-03T14:02:51.237",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-03T14:02:51.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "17890",
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42220",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42220 | 42221 | 42221 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42283",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am still confused with whether or not there is difference between A and B\ngiven below.\n\n> A: 結婚に年齢制限がない。There is no age limit for marriage.\n>\n> B: 結婚することに年齢制限がない。\n\nAre there any difference between N and the nominalization of Nする?\n\nThe longer the sentence is, the politer it becomes, right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T16:35:17.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42224",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T15:46:00.580",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "Are there any difference between N and the nominalization of Nする?",
"view_count": 206
} | [
{
"body": "I think there is no difference between them except the sentence is longer.\n\nFor example, 読書が好き, 読書することが好き, 読書するのが好き are the same meaning.\n\nBy the way, I feel 結婚に年齢制限はない is more natural.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T15:46:00.580",
"id": "42283",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T15:46:00.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "42224",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42224 | 42283 | 42283 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42254",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: the writer is talking about going to a cinema that has just opened\nnear her house.\n\n> 朝早く行くと、貸し切り状態なんていう時もあるのでテンションが上がります！ ただ…朝早く観に行く時は確実に徹夜明けなんですけどね（笑）最高の **贅沢**\n> です♡\n\nWhy is going to the cinema early in the morning after staying up all night a\nluxury? Does 贅沢 have a different nuance here? Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T19:05:51.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42225",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T11:04:15.383",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 贅沢 in this sentence?",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "The translation of 贅沢 as _luxury_ is not wide off the mark, but it's not\naccurate either. Sad to say, that's what you get from a Japanese-English\ndictionary.\n\nIf you look it up in a Japanese dictionary, say, the default dictionary\nprovided by Mac OSX (スーパー大辞林), you get different meanings. The first one of\nthem is \"必要以上の金や物を使うこと（さま）\", things like using money or good that is more than\nnecessary. I think this meaning would fit to the context mentioned above. The\nsecond meaning given by the dictionary indeed corresponds to the English\n_luxury_ , \"金・労力などを多くかけていること（さま）\". You may need to consider the context to\ndetermine which sense is used.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T10:04:40.227",
"id": "42252",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T10:22:44.390",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T10:22:44.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "19289",
"owner_user_id": "19289",
"parent_id": "42225",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "This 贅沢 means a luxury experience, and it seems to refer to watching the movie\nin the large theater alone as if she had rent the whole room.\n\nAs you suspect, the order of the sentences is a bit unnatural, and 贅沢です could\nhave come right after the first sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T11:04:15.383",
"id": "42254",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T11:04:15.383",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42225",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42225 | 42254 | 42254 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was trying to read this wikipedia page a little while ago and came across\nthis sentence :\n\n> またその娘であるイラストレーターの藤森玲子はいとこにあたる。\n\nHere is the link for more context, it's at the end of the first paragraph :\n<https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%A4%8E%E5%90%8D%E6%9E%97%E6%AA%8E>\n\nI am assuming, in this case, that「また」means something like \"furthermore\" or \"in\naddition to that\", but the sentence's syntaxe is puzzling enough to make me\nlose all confidence in this conjecture. It's also the first time I see\nsomething like 「にあたる」.\n\nHere is my attempt at translating it :\n\n> In addition to that, the illustrator Fujimori Akiko is her cousin.\n\nThank you for your answers.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T21:50:00.033",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42226",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T02:56:56.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18641",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"written-language"
],
"title": "また as moreover?",
"view_count": 1297
} | [
{
"body": "First, your understanding of 「また」 in this context is correct.\n\n「あたる/当たる」 here means 「相当{そうとう}する」. In describing a blood relationship:\n\n> 「A は B に + 当たる」 means \" ** _A is someone's B_**.\" with B referring to a\n> brother, uncle, daughter, niece, etc.\n\n(If I may say this, 「当たる」 is a key word in our language with 20 or so\ndifferent meanings. I answered a question recently where it meant \"to warm\noneself\".)\n\nNext, your translation attempt is OKish, but it totally neglects the\n「その娘{むすめ}である」 part. What this refers to is only mentioned in the preceding\nsentence, which is:\n\n> 「イラストレーター、ブックデザイナーの辰巳四郎は叔父。」 (\"The illustrator-book-designer Shiro Tatsumi\n> is her uncle.\")\n\n\"Her\" means \"Ringo Shiina's\" here.\n\nThus, 「その娘」 means 「叔父、辰巳四郎の娘」.\n\n> 「またその娘であるイラストレーターの藤森玲子はいとこにあたる。」\n\n, therefore, means:\n\n> \"Furthermore, the illustrator Reiko Fujimori, who is his daughter, is her\n> cousin.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T00:33:33.700",
"id": "42229",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T02:56:56.180",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T02:56:56.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42226",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42226 | null | 42229 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42258",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The kanji 原 and 源 seem to often have not only an identical pronunciation, but\nalso a very similar meaning, and I'm having a lot of trouble remembering the\nspellings of several words:\n\nUsing 原:\n\n * [[原]{げん}[因]{いん}](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%8E%9F%E5%9B%A0) - cause, source, origin\n * [[原]{げん}[始]{し}[的]{てき}](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%8E%9F%E5%A7%8B%E7%9A%84) - primitive; original\n\nUsing 源:\n\n * [[起]{き}[源]{げん}](http://jisho.org/word/%E8%B5%B7%E6%BA%90) - origin; beginning; rise\n * [[水]{すい}[源]{げん}](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%B0%B4%E6%BA%90) - fountainhead, source of a river\n\nI'm wondering if there's some shade of meaning that I am missing between these\ntwo characters, or maybe if there's some Japanese equivalent to the \"i before\ne except after c\" rule that would help me remember which is which. For the\nmost part, it does not seem that the words containing 原 have anything more to\ndo with meadows than the words containing 源.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T22:34:18.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42227",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T15:45:45.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "Remembering when to use [原]{げん} and when to use [源]{げん}?",
"view_count": 863
} | [
{
"body": "Putting etymology aside, in modern Japanese...\n\n源 means _resource_. When one can draw something useful from it, always use ○源.\nSimilarly, a place from which something is (radially) emitted is described\nusing 源.\n\n * 水源、電源、光源、熱源、財源、音源、動力源、エネルギー源、タンパク源\n * 震源、発生源、汚染源、ノイズ源\n\n原 means _cause_. When it's the cause for something, use 原. (incidentally\nEnglish uses a similar-looking suffix `-gen`)\n\n * 原因、病原体 (pathogen)、アレルギー原 (allergen)\n\n原 also means _primitive_ or _fundamental_ :\n\n * 原始、原初、原子、原理、原則、原色\n\n原 also means _atomic/nuclear_ :\n\n * 原発 (short for 原子力発電所)、原爆 (short for 原子爆弾)\n\nUnfortunately, these are still many difficult cases, especially when the word\ntranslates to \"origin(al)\" or \"source\". But you can use 原 and 源\ninterchangeably in some cases.\n\n * 原型、原作、原料\n * 源泉\n * 起源 / 起原\n * 語源 / 語原\n * 根源 / 根元 / 根原",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T13:32:42.483",
"id": "42258",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T15:45:45.907",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T15:45:45.907",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42227",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
]
| 42227 | 42258 | 42258 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42235",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This is a line of dialogue Psycho-pass movie:\n\n> 何か耳障りのいい思想でも吹き込んでやったのか？\n\nwhat means 耳障りのいい? It's a bit contradictory, I think",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-03T23:59:35.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42228",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T03:14:54.027",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13859",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "what means 耳障りのいい?",
"view_count": 229
} | [
{
"body": "It means \"sounds comfortable\", \"agreeable to the ear\". It's a phrase.\n\nHowever, there is an opinion that this is wrong, because 耳障り is used in a\nnegative way.\n\nRelated:\n[http://www.weblio.jp/content/耳障りのいい](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E8%80%B3%E9%9A%9C%E3%82%8A%E3%81%AE%E3%81%84%E3%81%84)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T00:49:21.127",
"id": "42230",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T00:49:21.127",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14627",
"parent_id": "42228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The author has mixed 耳障り and 耳触り. 障 (\"disturb\") and 触 (\"touch\") are totally\ndifferent kanji, although they may look somewhat similar.\n\n手【て】触【ざわ】り and 肌【はだ】触【ざわ】り safely mean \"feel, touch (e.g., of a blanket),\" and\nthey are used with いい. We don't say 手障り.\n\n> * 手触りがよい毛布\n> * なめらかな肌触りのマフラー\n>\n\nAs for 耳, both 耳【みみ】障【ざわ】り and 耳【みみ】触【ざわ】り exist. 耳障り means \"annoying to the\near, noisy\" and this is the traditional and normal meaning of みみざわり.\n\n耳触り is used by some people in the same way as 手触り/肌触り. So it means \"feel (of a\nsound/word)\". This word is now listed in some dictionaries, but I have seen\npeople who say 耳触り is confusing and thus should not be used. Personally, I\ntend to avoid using 耳触り, too.\n\nApparently, the author of this sentence was also confused and used 耳障り in the\nplace where 耳触り is clearly the right choice of kanji. (IMEs usually show 耳障り\nfirst, because it's far more common)\n\nSee also [「耳ざわり」は「障り」か「触り」か -\n文化部国語課](http://prmagazine.bunka.go.jp/rensai/kotoba/kotoba_004.html). This\narticle even used BCCWJ Corpus and showed 耳障りがいい is a rather common\nmisspelling.\n\n>\n> 二つの語の使い分けは十分に理解されているとは言えず，「聞いたときの感じ」の意味で用いる「耳ざわりが良い」といった表現に違和感を覚える人も少なからずいるようです。前述のように，辞書によっては，誤用としているものもありました。\n>\n> 今のところ，「聞いたときの感じ」の意味で「耳ざわり」を用いることには，慎重であった方が良さそうです。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T02:55:45.203",
"id": "42235",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T03:14:54.027",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42228 | 42235 | 42235 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42234",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does おなり mean in:\n\n> 気持に **おなり** になった\n\n> あと一カ月ぐらいして、もし君が説明してもいいというお気持に **おなり** になったら、そのときは僕たちにご連絡くださいませ、だ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T01:58:30.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42232",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T03:59:07.350",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T02:37:37.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "18199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does おなり mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 163
} | [
{
"body": "There is an honorific language pattern お〇〇になる in which 〇〇 is a verb in a\ncontinuative form ( _ren'youkei_ , e.g. お聞きになる, お帰りになる).\n\nThe verb in this sentence is なる, thus its continuative form is なり.\n\nAltogether the phrase is equivalent to 気持ちになったら* except that in a polite form.\n\nNot sure what the context is (you are likely preparing for something that will\nhappen in a month), but one of the following would probably fit: \"If you feel\nlike...\", \"If you make up your mind to...\", \"If you feel confident enough\nto...\"\n\n*By coincidence the phrase and the fixed pattern use the same verb なる. This なったら uses the verb なる (from おなり) and conditional form of the honorific expression (the other なったら).",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T02:24:21.450",
"id": "42234",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T03:59:07.350",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T03:59:07.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "42232",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42232 | 42234 | 42234 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Perhaps ーづらい is more appropriate in this case? For instance:\n\n> _I can't look (because it's unbearable)_ \n> [辛]{つら}くて見られない\n\nMaybe a more natural way to express the above?\n\n> _[it is] unbearable to look at_ \n> 見[辛]{づら}い\n\nWithout the ーづらい\n\n> _Horror films are so scary I can't watch them_ \n> ホラー映画は怖すぎて観られない",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T02:07:27.387",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42233",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T11:30:53.910",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T02:49:59.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19082",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Can you use ーられない to express that something is unbearable?",
"view_count": 195
} | [
{
"body": "辛くて見られない is okay, but when actually facing with something terrible, people\nmore commonly say 辛くて見ていられない. You can also just say 見ていられない without 辛くて.\n(辛くて)直視できない is also common in writing.\n\n見づらい is not appropriate. It usually means being physically hard to see due to\nthings like bad writing, low image quality, weak light, etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T03:56:46.367",
"id": "42237",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T10:34:15.157",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T10:34:15.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "14605",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42233",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "辛くて見られない and 見辛い don't have the same meaning. The former means \"It is so\npainful that I can't look at it\", and the latter means \"hard to see\",\n\"indistinct\".\n\nA verb + づらい means \"hard to verb\" like 走りづらい (hard to run.)\n\nIn addition, Goo dictionary says that 見辛い means 見るに耐えない (can't stand looking\nat) and gives the example 金をめぐる争いは見辛い, but I feel it isn't common.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T04:13:04.177",
"id": "42239",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T11:30:53.910",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T11:30:53.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "42233",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42233 | null | 42237 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42238",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I often come across ってなる in informal contexts, but I don't exactly know how to\nunderstand it. I think it is like となる in casual speech but it doesn't really\nmake sense in some sentences. For example :\n\n> 殺すぞ！ってなる\n\nI feel like it's pretty much the same as saying for example :\n\n> 殺すぞと言う場面になる\n\nBut in an informal way, but I would like it if someone can confirm",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T03:51:02.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42236",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T01:16:32.910",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-10T01:16:32.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "ってなる what does it mean?",
"view_count": 1662
} | [
{
"body": "The sentence means 「殺すぞという **気持ち** になる」. So this ～ってなる means something like\n\"will come to feel like ～ (because of something previously mentioned)\".\n\nI don't know whether this usage is listed in serious dictionaries, but this\nkind of ～ってなる is fairly common in casual speech.\n\nExamples:\n\n> * 夏休みが明けると、学校に行きたくない **ってなる** 。\n> * えー **ってなった** 。 It surprised me. / It turned me off. (えーっ ≒ oh no)\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T04:06:48.533",
"id": "42238",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T04:06:48.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42236",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42236 | 42238 | 42238 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42243",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am currently translating course descriptions in to English as part of my\njob, and I came across this expression in a description for an Art class which\nI found completely baffling. As far as I know, 「問う」means to ask, but to ask an\nart piece? What does this mean, and why is it said in this way? Thanks in\nadvance for your answers!\n\nEdit: My apologies, I should have included the original sentence. Here it is!\n\n「芸術家は社会の中で創作活動を行い，社会に向けて作品を問う。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T04:44:39.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42240",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T06:46:09.520",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T05:12:06.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "18608",
"owner_user_id": "18608",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "What does 「社会に向けて作品を問う」 mean?",
"view_count": 447
} | [
{
"body": "This 問う is not about asking a question, but about asking for a\nreputation/judgement from many people. What artists will get from the society\nis not answers but reputations.\n\nAccording to [a\ndictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/154854/meaning/m0u/), 問う has the\nfollowing meanings:\n\n> * 多くの人に **判断** を求める。\n> * 人の能力や物 **事の価値** などを改めて試す。\n>\n\nPerhaps \"to test\" is the closest single-word equivalent in English.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T06:09:06.813",
"id": "42243",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T06:09:06.813",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42240",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "This 問う means \"ask a judgment\". 芸術家は、社会に向けて作品を問う means \"Artists ask a judgment\nabout their art to society(people).\n\nFor example, Japanese politicians often say 選挙で民意を問いたい(I want to elicit the\npublic opinion in election).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T06:15:24.540",
"id": "42244",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T06:46:09.520",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T06:46:09.520",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "42240",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42240 | 42243 | 42243 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42343",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the episode of the anime Sora no Otoshimono linked below, the following\nexchange occurs several times (beginning at 3:06):\n\n> A: 呼んだ？ You called?\n>\n> B: 呼んでねええ No I didn't!\n\nCould someone please explain why B chose to contradict A with **呼んでいない**\nrather than with **呼ばなかった**? From my native English perspective, it seems odd\nthat B changed aspect and tense.\n\nTo cement the understanding, how (if it makes sense) would the response's\nmeaning have changed if B instead used:\n\n 1. 呼ばなかった or\n\n 2. 呼んでいなかった\n\n[Sora no Otoshimono Ep.2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9D96yKy3CY&t=3m6s). \n(watch at one's own discretion... it's not too bad but certainly not\ncompletely clean.)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T05:44:49.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42242",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T21:20:09.190",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 17,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "Why is a verb in the past (た形) contradicted with ～ていない?",
"view_count": 1613
} | [
{
"body": "Actually English is not so different:\n\n> A: Did you get any milk?\n>\n> B: No, I haven't (yet).\n\nThis is slightly unnatural without the \"yet\", but if you want to put \"yet\" in\nyou have to use the present perfect negative. Similarly, here 呼んでいない means\nthat it definitely hasn't happened yet, but could, perhaps. In contrast,\nsuppose there's a party, and we have the following dialogue (between two\nRussians):\n\n> К: ジョンさんを呼んだ？\n>\n> Б: いや、呼ばなかった。\n\n\"Did you invite John?\" \"No, I didn't.\" This is not a denial of him having been\ninvited (yet), but a finished assertion that he is not going to be. There is a\nsort of \"Aspect\" difference, but I don't know any sufficiently well-defined or\nconsistent terminology here. (For example, my English example of \"haven't\n(got)\" is present perfect tense, but seems to correspond to a sort of\nimperfective aspect.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T08:45:33.303",
"id": "42247",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T08:45:33.303",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7717",
"parent_id": "42242",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "@snailplane introduced this interesting article to me!\n\n[山下 好孝.\nテンスの「た」とアスペクトの「た」](http://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/45642/1/BISC008_001.pdf)\n(PDF)\n\n> 初級日本語教科書では「～ましたか」の質問に対して，「～ていません」と答えるのを初級の学習者に導入する時は、「もう」と「まだ」を教える時である。（略）\n> しかし、実際は、 **去年のことやもっと昔のことを開いても、「～ていません」「～てないです」という答え方をする人もいる** 。\n\nThe result of a survey in this article shows native speakers' preference\nbetween ～ていません and ～ませんでした in various situations. The result of the survey is\nworth taking a look. You may be surprised to see how often ～ていません is used...\nand at the same time, how inconsistently native speakers answer :)\n\nThere are many situations where you should reply using ～ました／～た if yes, but\nusing ～ていません／～てない if no. This is partly because ～ましたか is an expression that\ncan mean both \"Have you [ever/already] ～\" ( **present perfect** ) and \"Did you\n～\" ( **past** ). And for some reason, the use of いる is more preferred in\nnegative responses.\n\nFirst, when まだ／もう is explicitly present, it's a question using perfect aspect.\n～ました／～た (if yes) or ～ていません／～てない (if no) is the natural choice.\n\n> * A: 今日の新聞、 **もう** 読んだ？ Have you **already** read today's newspaper?\n> * A: 今日の新聞、 **もう** 読んでる？ Have you **already** read today's newspaper?\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * B: はい、もう読みました。／うん、もう読んだ。\n> * B: はい、もう読んでいます。／うん、もう読んでる。 \n> (possible but relatively uncommon)\n> * B: [×]いいえ、まだ読みませんでした。／[×]いや、まだ読まなかった。 \n> (This seems to be a [common\n> mistake](http://www.alc.co.jp/jpn/article/soudan/028.html) Japanese learners\n> make)\n> * B: いいえ、まだ読んでいません。／いや、まだ読んでない。\n>\n\nThis may seem already inconsistent to you, but according to the article, this\nis the typical case where learners learn about this \"problem\". This is how\nthis kind of question works in Japanese. \"もう読んだ？\" is not \"Did you ～\" but \"Have\nyou ～\".\n\nまだ／もう may not be explicitly present. At around 12:30 PM at some office,\nsomeone may say:\n\n> * A: お昼食べた？ Have you eaten lunch? (If no, let's go lunch together!)\n> * A: お昼食べてる？ Have you eaten lunch? \n> (Of course this can also mean \"Are you eating lunch (now)?\")\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * B: はい、食べました。／うん、食べた。\n> * B: はい、食べています。／うん、食べてる。 (relatively uncommon)\n> * B: [×]いいえ、食べませんでした。／[×]いや、食べなかった。\n> * B: いいえ、食べていません。／いや、食べてない。\n>\n\nThis is still a \"Have you _already_ \" type question.\n\nThings get trickier from here, but when asked something definitely in the past\nusing \"～しましたか？／～した？\", native speakers tend to associate the question to\nsomething at present and answer using perfect aspect:\n\n> * A: 辛そうだね。昨日またいっぱい飲んだの？ You look sick. Did you drink a lot again\n> yesterday?\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * B: はい、飲みました。／うん、飲んだ。\n> * B: はい、飲んでいます。／うん、飲んでる。\n> * B: [?]いいえ、飲みませんでした。／[?]いや、飲まなかった。\n> * B: いいえ、飲んでいません。／いや、飲んでない。\n>\n\nWhen to choose ～ていません／～てない seems to be affected by how much the action in the\npast is related to the _current_ situation, and how recent thing you are asked\nabout. In the question above, A is asking something relatively recent, and\nwhether B drank a lot yesterday is something that matters now (\"why I look\nsick now\"). This also answers why 呼んでねえ (colloquialism of 呼んでいない) was used in\nthe sentence in question. He was asked about something only a moment before,\nand whether he had called or not in the past was something important when the\nquestion was made.\n\nActually, most questions you make about the past are usually more or less\nrelated to the present situation, so you will hear ～ていません／～てない very often.\nIt's rather hard for me to think of a context where 食べませんでした is definitely\nbetter than 食べてないです. But, for example, if someone asks\n「3年前に京都に旅行に行ったとき、八つ橋は食べた？」 then people would probably answer saying\n「いや、食べなかった」 more often than 「いや、食べてない」.\n\nThere is an exception. Certain verbs that happen passively (聞こえる, 見える, 分かる,\netc) are mainly used with ～た／～なかった.\n\n> * A: 先週の先生の話は分かりましたか？\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * B: いいえ、分かりませんでした。\n> * B: [×]いいえ、分かっていません。\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T19:46:57.193",
"id": "42343",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T21:20:09.190",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-07T21:20:09.190",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42242",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 24
}
]
| 42242 | 42343 | 42343 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42249",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know that kanji are borrowed from Chinese characters but are _all_ of them\nborrowed?\n\nAs a Chinese native speaker, I am wondering the origins of modern kanjis. Most\nof them are exactly same as the Chinese counterpart, others are simplified\nversions of Chinese characters (like 聴 is a simplification of 聽 and 図 a\nsimplification of 圖) and I know that this is due to the reform after WWII. But\nthere are some kanji that I just can't figure out which hanzi they originate\nfrom. For example, 転 and 込. The former seems to come from 運 or 轉 but I'm not\nsure. Maybe I'm completely wrong.\n\nAre 転 and 込 kanjis that native Japanese made up? Not based on a hanzi? But\nafter seeing this\n[post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2159/recent-creation-or-\nadoption-of-hanzi-characters-into-japanese-kanji), this is not very possible.\nIs there a way I can find from which hanzis did these kanjis originate?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T09:16:34.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42248",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T10:55:06.910",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 19,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Does every kanji come from a Chinese character? If so, where can I find the origins of a kanji?",
"view_count": 5335
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, there are a few kanji that were invented purely by Japanese people.\nExamples are listed in\n[和製漢字](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%92%8C%E8%A3%BD%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97).\nSome kanji were reverse-imported to Chinese (see: [Japanese-coined CJKV\ncharacters used outside\nJapanese](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Japanese-\ncoined_CJKV_characters_used_outside_Japanese)). But I believe there are also\nmany Chinese-origin kanji that are in use only in Japan because they have\nfallen out of use elsewhere. So not all kanji that are unfamiliar to you are\nJapanese-coined.\n\nWiktionary has the information about the etymology of most kanji (although I\ndon't know how much they are credible).\n\n * 込 is a 和製漢字 and is included in the above list. ([Wiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%BE%BC))\n * 転 is a simplified version of 轉. ([Wiktoinary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%BB%A2))",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T09:45:48.293",
"id": "42249",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T09:45:48.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 19
},
{
"body": "_Not all_ of them were borrowed from Chinese. Some were created by the\nJapanese following the same methods (六書【りくしょ】), and are hence called\n和製漢字【わせいかんじ】 'Japanese made Kanji', also known as 国字【こくじ】.\n\n込 is indeed a kokuji. However, 転 is not a kokuji. It is a simplification of\nthe traditional Chinese character 轉.\n\nHere's an online dictionary for kokuji. Hope it is useful.\n\n<http://ksbookshelf.com/nozomu-oohara/WaseikanjiJiten/>",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T09:48:19.137",
"id": "42250",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T10:55:06.910",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T10:55:06.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "19289",
"owner_user_id": "19289",
"parent_id": "42248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
]
| 42248 | 42249 | 42249 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42256",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "**Context:** A talks about B to C. A met B while out and about. B approached A\nand talked about a painting they where looking at.\n\nAfter describing B as a rather nervous/reserved person, A says to C:\n\n> 話しかけて来そうじゃないのよ。\n\nWhich I would understand as \"It didn't seem like he came to talk.\" But he was\nthe one who actively approached (he could have avoided the other person\neasily) and they talk for a bit afterwards. So, in this context this seems\nrather strange.\n\n**Question:** _Is there a different use for \"~そうじゃない\"_?\n\nThank you for any pointers! :)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T09:50:18.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42251",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T13:05:02.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19260",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "meaning of ~そうじゃない",
"view_count": 1315
} | [
{
"body": "Judging from the context I think you have interpreted the sentence almost\ncorrectly. The sentence probably means （普段は）話しかけて来そうな人じゃないのよ, or \"He is\n(usually) not a person who is likely to come to talk with me/others,\" although\nB actually came to speak to A in that day, which surprised A. Note that the\npresent tense is used in this sentence. Maybe he was interested in the\npainting or A.\n\nNext time it would be helpful to give us a longer excerpt in Japanese, so that\nI can remove \"probably\" from my answer.\n\n* * *\n\nDepending on the intonation, 話しかけて来そうじゃないのよ can mean something like \"He seems\nto be about to come and talk with us, doesn't he?\" but I don't think it's the\ncase.\n\n * おいしそうじゃないのよ！ ≒ おいしそうじゃないんだ！ \n(Because) It doesn't seem delicious! \n(のよ≒んだ≒のだ, so-called \"explanatory の\")\n\n * おいしそうじゃないのよ！ (uncommon) ≒ おいしそうじゃないか！ \nIt looks delicious, doesn't it?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T12:14:19.840",
"id": "42256",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T13:05:02.447",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T13:05:02.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42251",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42251 | 42256 | 42256 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42315",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[Remembering when to use [原]{げん} and when to use\n[源]{げん}?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42227/10859)\n\nをみていて疑問に思った点です。例えば、「原因」の熟語には、「原っぱ」という意味は全くないにも関わらず、「原因」という熟語として成立しています。これは、何故でしょうか。語源は何なのでしょうか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T12:05:36.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42255",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T19:23:34.877",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10859",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "「原因{げんいん}」の熟語{じゅくご}の成り立ちは？",
"view_count": 972
} | [
{
"body": "「原因」だけが特別なわけではないと思います。「原」 自体に「物事のおこり、はじめ」という意味があります。\n\n> [げん【原】 の意味](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/69110/meaning/m0u/) \n> 物事のもと。起こり。始め。「原案・原因・原稿・原作・原子・原始・原色・原則・原油・原理・原料／起原・語原・根原・病原」\n\nこれらはいずれも「原っぱ」の意味ではありません。\n\nちなみに「語源」と「語原」、「起源」と「起原」に関しては、[どちらもOK](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/77782/meaning/m0u/)だそうです。個人的には語原のほうがしっくりくる気が今はしていますが、深く考えたことはないです…。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T12:27:51.327",
"id": "42257",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T12:27:51.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42255",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "語源、というより字源的には、「原」の字は山から泉が湧き出ている様子を表したものです（中の形は本来「泉」そのもの）。\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dq8BY.png)\n\nつまり「原」はもともと「源」の意味を含めた「はじまり」とか「もと」という意味を表す漢字でした。「はら」の意味に使う方が（大昔の基準で言うと）当て字です。\n\nなお、「原」が広い意味を表すようになったので、本来表していた「水源、みなもと」の意味に限って、さんずいを加えた「源」の字で書くようになりました。同様に、当て字された単語に本来の字形を乗っ取られた字として「然→燃」、「無→舞」、「景→影」などがあります。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T19:23:34.877",
"id": "42315",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T19:23:34.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "42255",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42255 | 42315 | 42315 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42260",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The younger sister is holding on to the climbing frame, trapped by a wild dog.\nThe older sister is rushing to the rescue:\n\n> 「お姉ちゃん、来ちゃダメだよ、あぶないよぉ」 \n> Sister, don't come over here. It's dangerous. \n> 私の妹なのよっ、 **はなして** っ」 \n> You're my little sister, ???\n\nI assume this はなして is from 放す = to release/to let go/to set free. I'm not\nfamiliar with the usage of this verb and I was a bit puzzled by the verb\nending. I assume the meaning is \"I will set you free (rescue you)\" and that in\nends in て because the sentence is unfinished. Would I be correct that the full\nsentence is something like 放してもらって下さい?\n\nBut I also thought that it might be an instruction to \"let go (release grip)\"\nof the climbing frame.\n\nAside from the fact that letting go of the frame would seem like a poor idea,\nare both of these interpretations possible? In a situation of panic is this\ncompletely unambiguous?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T15:19:03.197",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42259",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T18:23:54.167",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"ambiguity",
"giving-and-receiving"
],
"title": "Ambiguous use of はなして?",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "I think the elder sister is yelling this either to the dog:\n\n> 私の妹なのよっ、（妹を）はなしてっ \n> _That_ is my sister! Release _her_!\n\nOr to someone else who is trying to stop her from helping her sister:\n\n> 私の妹なのよっ、（私を）はなしてっ \n> _That_ is my sister! Release _me_!",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T15:55:04.277",
"id": "42260",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T16:22:46.940",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T16:22:46.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42259",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42259 | 42260 | 42260 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have read the \"Lost Money\" story by Hoshi Shinichi, it was in my Japanese\ntextbook.\n\nI did not understand: is there an implication that each year the company\nemployees, including the director himself, invented new and new means to steal\nthe money from the company, using the old legend as a pretext?\n\nThe question not quite suits the forum but I have no one to ask this.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T17:01:42.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42261",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T15:37:56.387",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-05T03:45:41.813",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"literature"
],
"title": "星新一 \"消えた大金\" short story: what's the point?",
"view_count": 176
} | [
{
"body": "I'm afraid but you have a misunderstanding of the story.\n\nThe company loses certain amount of money in a blind way every year. No\nmanagement and employees steal the money. You should carefully read the story\nagain.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T15:37:56.387",
"id": "42336",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T15:37:56.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42261",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42261 | null | 42336 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42265",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Yesterday, I was in a Japanese online game (囲碁) forum and before a game\nstarted an opponent asked me:\n\n```\n\n あんた、マジできる？\n \n```\n\nI only know マジ as a colloquial way of emphasis, so I couldn't figure this out.\nWas he asking me if \"I'm any good\"? It also turned out that he was very bad at\nthe game - to a degree where he probably didn't know the rules. Maybe he was\nasking me if I knew how to play?\n\nCan someone please explain how the マジ fits in there?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T18:12:32.407",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42262",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T22:14:03.337",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-04T20:43:09.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "19294",
"owner_user_id": "19294",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "Meanings of マジできる",
"view_count": 750
} | [
{
"body": "This sentence is ambiguous, and can mean both of the followings.\n\n * Can you really play go? \n(マジ means _really_ (not lying), できる means _can play_ )\n\n * Are you (in fact) a very good player? \n(マジ means _really_ (emphasis), できる means _competent/good_ )\n\nBefore you play, if an opponent doubt you know the rule, he may say this in\nthe first sense. After you showed your good go skill, the same opponent may\npraise you using this phrase in the second sense.\n\nWell, if I were in the same situation, I might ask the meaning. -- どういう意味ですか？\nルールを知っているかという意味ですか、上手かという意味ですか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T21:39:45.343",
"id": "42265",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T21:39:45.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42262",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "If you know how it is used for emphasis, you should be aware of its meaning\n\"seriously\". This dictionary\n[entry](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%83%9E%E3%82%B8) (one) has:\n\n> serious (not capricious or flirtatious)\n\nThere are two ways to interpret your line in question.\n\nOne is\n\n> Can you play seriously? (= Let's not go easy on each other)\n\nThe other is\n\n> Can you actually play? (=Do you even know how to play?)\n\nConsidering it was asked before a match, I would believe your opponent is\nasking the former, though it's not a good way of asking",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T22:14:03.337",
"id": "42267",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-04T22:14:03.337",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "42262",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42262 | 42265 | 42265 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42266",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In this sentence (psycho-pass's line):\n\n> 私は議長の身柄を押さえます\n\nThe 身柄 can be omitted and thereby result:\n\n> 私は議長を押さえます\n\nI really wonder the use of 身柄 and if it is really necessary.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T21:33:32.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42264",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T04:49:19.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13859",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning and use of 身柄",
"view_count": 150
} | [
{
"body": "～の身柄を押さえる and ～の身柄を確保する are set phrases that mean \"to take someone into\ncustody\". I don't know the story, but in general you cannot omit 身柄. If the\nchairperson is cooperative enough, this can be achieved even without touching\nhim.\n\n議長を押さえます would mean \"I will (physically) press the chairperson\" or \"I will pin\nthe chairperson (e.g. to the ground)\", which is very different.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-04T22:07:12.183",
"id": "42266",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T04:49:19.847",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-05T04:49:19.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42264",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42264 | 42266 | 42266 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42272",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Source sentence:\n\n> 日本語能力を含め社会人として、まだまだ至らぬ身であると重々承知して **は** おりますが、是非、本件について連絡を頂きたく存じます。\n\nFor saying I humbly do something, I understand it's normal to say しておる instead\nof している.\n\nI read on [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/30673/difference-\nbetween-%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AF-and-nominalizer-%E3%81%AE%E3%81%AF) that\nusing a 'ha' basically makes it a conditional thing, which makes sense to me\nconsidering してはいけない means doing (x) is forbidden/ if you do this, it's not\ngood or you can't go (いけない), but that doesn't make too much sense for me here.\n\nThe sentence as a whole says: Although I'm aware my Japanese might not be\nquite good enough to be an employee we can discuss that if you contact me..\nnot IF I understand my japanese isn't good enough to be an employee, we can\ndiscuss it if you contact me.\n\nSo can anyone explain why it's 承知してはおります instead of しております?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T02:25:40.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42271",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:01:24.140",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-は"
],
"title": "Difference between しておる and してはおる",
"view_count": 862
} | [
{
"body": "1) \"まだまだ至らぬ身であると重々承知してはおりますが、・・・\"\n\n2) \"まだまだ至らぬ身であると重々承知しておりますが、・・・\"\n\nBoth sentences are interchangeable.\n\nIf you really recongnize that you are not qualified for the job. You have two\noptions. One is to give up for the job. The other is to keep working so that\nyou can get the job.\n\nIf you choose second option, it's tactically better for you to admit your\ninadequacy and to show enthusiasm for the job.\n\nJust one word \"は\" of \"承知してはおりますが\" can convey the nuance \"even though I admit\nmy inadequancy but・・・.\"\n\nPS:\n\nThe usage of \"は of してはいけない\" is entierly different from \"は of 承知してはおりますが.\"\n\n\"歩行喫煙はいけない\" = \"歩行喫煙してはいけない\" \"盗み見はいけない\" = \"盗み見してはいけない\"\n\nThe following sentences without \"は\" are unnatural.\n\n\"歩行喫煙していけない\", \"盗み見していけない\"\n\n\"は\" here just make clear the object of \"いけない.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T03:07:19.303",
"id": "42272",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:01:24.140",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T08:01:24.140",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42271",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "This is a typical example of contrastive- _wa_ added for emphasis. Here,\ncontrast is established between:\n\n * 私は至らぬ身であると承知している → I may not be the right person to be involved\n * 連絡を頂きたい → I want to get involved\n\nSo this _wa_ effectively turns \"although I understand\" to \" **even** though I\nunderstand\" or \"although I **do** understand.\" Similar examples are found\nhere:\n\n * [what does てはいる in this sentence mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/39006/5010)\n * [Is this は or はいる: ～わかってはいるものの](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3233/5010)\n * [Te form + はいる question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23507/5010)\n * [Meaning of ~つもりではいる in that sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15455/5010)\n\nYou can move this は a bit and say 重々承知 **は** しておりますが, too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T03:12:01.227",
"id": "42274",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T04:44:05.040",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42271",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42271 | 42272 | 42274 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Bit of a long one, I know. I know that they are linked in their meanings, but\nI don't know when to use each one. Also, there are two types of そう, such as\n\n大雪が降りそう and 大雪が降るそう\n\nWhat are the differences?\n\nAlso, I hear that みたい is almost exactly the same as よう, but is more informal.\nIs this correct?\n\nI appreciate your help!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T03:09:44.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42273",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:00:25.913",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What are differences between よう, みたい, だろう, らしい, そう, and っぽい?",
"view_count": 3507
} | [
{
"body": "About a verbal auxiliary そうだ. 連用形(ます stem) of a verb + そうだ and stem of an\nadjective mean “manner“. They are close to the English word “look like“. Plain\nform of a verb and adjective + そうだ means “hearsay“. So 「 雨が降りそうだ」 is\ntranslated as “ It looks like rain” and 「雨が降るそうだ。」 is translated as “ I hear\nit will rain.” And you can omit だ.\n\nようだ is a verbal auxiliary which indicates \"analogy\" and \"guess\". For example,\nこの花は、虹のように美しい(This flower is beautiful like a rainbow), 猫は家にはいないようだ(I guess my\ncat isn't in my house.). These are other usages.\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/226613/meaning/m0u/>\n\nだろう indicates speaker's guess. みたい indicates \"analogy\" and \"unclear\npredication“. らしい indicates \"“hearsay“ and \"a valid guess\". I think っぽい can\nindicate \"analogy\", \"hearsay\", “manner“ and \"guess\", and it isn't formal.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T05:04:28.040",
"id": "42275",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T10:09:39.137",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-05T10:09:39.137",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "42273",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "\"大雪が降りそう\" = Probably we will have big snow.(conjecture)\n\n\"大雪が降るそう\" ? insufficiant. This should be \"大雪が降るそうだ(hearsay)\"\n\n\"みたい\" is a sopken and casual word.\n\nWhen you come across somebody's unreasonable attitude against you, you can say\n(but only on casual occasions) \"馬鹿みたい\" = \"It's almost foolish!\"\n\n\"パリのエッフェル塔みたい！\", \"ナイアガラの滝みたい！\" and \"みたい\" is almost always used as \"〇〇みたい.\"\n\n\"エッフェル塔のようだ\"、\"ナイアガラの滝のようだ\"\n\nWe can use \"滝のよう\" without \"だ\" in the lyrics.\n\nWe don't use \"みたい\" in business.\n\nWe can use \"ようだ、ようです\" in business. \"第一四半期に入って、原価が若干増大しているようだ。（ようです。）\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T07:04:06.487",
"id": "42276",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T08:00:25.913",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T08:00:25.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42273",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42273 | null | 42275 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42279",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "In several sources it's mentioned that a SMALL TSU doubles consonants. My\nproblem is, some websites give almost identical examples with:\n\nっ/ッ + (S, T, C, K, G, B, P)\n\nBut what about the others?:\n\nっ/ッ + (M, N, V, W ...)\n\nWhen I use some online converter (Kana>Romaji), they double all of them.\n\nSo, does a SMALL TSU double all consonants or not? And if not, in which cases?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T08:15:57.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42277",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-24T23:59:19.107",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-24T23:59:19.107",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "19301",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"hiragana",
"rōmaji"
],
"title": "Does a small tsu double all consonants?",
"view_count": 11386
} | [
{
"body": "For one thing, [v] is not a legitimate consonant in native Japanese. You may\nsee it used in loanwords, but the pronunciation varies between speakers; some\nnative speakers, especially younger generations, pronounce it as a [v], but\nsome people still pronounce it as a [b], which is what has historically been\nused in Japanese to approximate a [v] sound. So it falls into the same\ncategory as [b].\n\nFor M, っ is not used; instead a ん is used preceding it; so \"hammer\" is written\nas ハンマー, not *ハッマー. This is also the case for N. As for W, there are no native\nwords (that I'm aware of) that use a geminate [w] sound, and I actually can't\nthink of a word in any language that would end up being transcribed in such a\nway that you would need to, but I suppose it wouldn't be incorrect to use a っ\nwith it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T08:31:47.803",
"id": "42278",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T08:31:47.803",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9596",
"parent_id": "42277",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "A small tsu (sokuon) geminates (doubles) the following consonant. In native\nvocabulary, only unvoiced consonants can be geminated. This includes the さ, た,\nか, and ぱ rows. A double n as in おんな is not really pronounced the same way as\n＊おっな would be if it were a word.\n\nIn loanwords that require gemination of other consonants, N tends to use ン, M\nuses ン or ム, W uses ウ, and others use the -u form of their row. Some examples\nare:\n\n * homemade → ホームメード\n * comma → コンマ\n * whistleblower → ホイッスルブロウワー\n * role-playing game → ロウルプレイングゲーム\n\nSome loanwords do use the sokuon where native words would not, such as:\n\n * big → ビッグ\n * badge → バッジ\n\nThe important thing is that these are all loanwords. You generally won't see\nsuch examples written in hiragana, though the sokuon is used the same way in\neither writing system.\n\nYou may also see the small tsu at the end of a word or sentence. There it\nrepresents a glottal stop, an abrupt ending.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T08:48:18.353",
"id": "42279",
"last_activity_date": "2018-06-16T09:41:04.170",
"last_edit_date": "2018-06-16T09:41:04.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "19303",
"owner_user_id": "19303",
"parent_id": "42277",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "The small つ (written as っ) is used to represent a very brief pause before the\nnext consonant. These occur in the readings of Kanji and in hiragana\ngrammatical conjugations. This is Romanised as a double consonant and used to\nrepresent them (with ッ) in foreign words. The reason that つ is used is that\n\"tsu\" sounds are often replaced with pauses in compound words. This is similar\nto the voicing of second Kanji in compound words (such as [川]{river} being\nread as かわ or がわ in different words).\n\nFor example, use in grammatical conjugations:\n\n> りんごを買{か}った\n\n> I bought the Apple\n\n> 美味{おい}しかったです\n\n> It was delicious\n\n> 待{ま}ってください\n\n> Please wait\n\nUse in Kanji readings:\n\n> 出発{しゅっぱつ}\n\n> Departure\n\n> 札幌{さっぽろ}\n\n> Sapporo (City)\n\n> 北海道{ほっかいどう}\n\n> Hokkaido (Island/Prefecture)\n\nThis pause is also used for sudden stops in conversational speech:\n\n> あっ！\n\n> Aha!\n\n> えっ？\n\n> Really?\n\nSince the sound following depends on the next Kanji, not they one preceding\nit, the っ could occur before any sound that occurs native in Japanese\n(including voiced consonants G, Z, J and yoon syllables). However, notice that\nFa, Fi, Fe, C, V, and Wi do not occur natively in Japanese and are only used\nin foreign names (or very recent loanwords).\n\nNote that while っ is romanised as a double consonant, it is _often_ not\npronounced this way, although the following consonant may be stressed. See\n[this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/80634/40411) for more\ndetails.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-06-16T11:31:24.363",
"id": "59493",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-14T14:47:36.953",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-14T14:47:36.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "14608",
"owner_user_id": "14608",
"parent_id": "42277",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Tom Kelly's response is downvoted, but is actually more correct than any other\nphonologically speaking, but still not the entire story so I'll elaborate on\nit and will show an audio analysis comparing it with true gemination so that\nthe difference be visible.\n\nThe _sokuon_ in Japanese maps to what Japanese speakers perceive as a coherent\natomic unit of sound [phoneme] which is probably why it is written with a\nsingle symbol — the Japanese do not consider it merely an orthographical quirk\nbut an actual consonant of Japanese. Such a phoneme is called an\n_archiphoneme_ , a rare type of phoneme that lacks a consistent underlying\nplace and method of articulation. That is to say that Japanese speakers\nperceive it as it's own consonant, but it has no meaningful way to be\npronounced in isolation. /k/ as in the start of “ **c** oal” is a phoneme in\nEnglish, but English speakers can pronounce it in isolation on command.\nArchiphonemes are indeed quite rare in languages, and English lacks them\nentirely. This phoneme is conventionally denoted as /Q/ with a capital letter\nas conventional for denoting Archiphonemes.\n\nLike most archiphonemes, the distribution of this phoneme is very limited;\nwithin the Tokyo standard dialect it can only occur after a vowel, and before\nany of /t, p, k, s/. This phoneme however must still be _realized_ in some way\nand make a difference in pronunciation; this is where archiphonemes become\ninteresting, because they are typically realized by their effect on\nsurrounding phonemes, which is why their distribution is so limited.\n\nNow, it is often said that /Q/ is realized by geminating the following\nconsonant. This is only arguably true in the case of /s/ where for a fricative\n“geminating” is a very abstract term since fricatives can be held indefinitely\nunlike plosives; when /Q/ is followed by /s/ it is indeed realized simply by\nholding /s/ for the length of an extra mora.\n\nThe sequences of /Qt, Qp, Qk/ are not realized in Japanese by geminating the\nfollowing consonant; this is something that is repeated very often in lay\nliterature and even some specialized literature but is absolutely false and\nI'll show why. It is realized by a mora of silence in this case; this also\nmaps onto the perception of /Q/ by Japanese speakers who often claim to\nperceive it as an empty phoneme of silence for a mora. This goes back it being\na consonant; it is effectively “a consonant of silence”.\n\nOnto the audio analysis comparison:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fv0rq.jpg)\n\nThe top two are from a Japanese rendition of “ちょっと”; the speaker\nStrawberrybrown collected from\n[here](https://forvo.com/word/%E3%81%A1%E3%82%87%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8/#ja); the\nbottom two are from the Finnish word “että” collected from the speaker Koobee\n[here](https://forvo.com/word/ett%C3%A4/#fi).\n\nIt is obvious that in “että”, there is a small amplitude spike before the\n“tä” that is lacking in “ちょっと”, but that is not all, in the spectrogram there\nis also a small thin dark vertical line in the same place that is indicative\nof a plosive sound. There is no doubt that in Finnish there truly are two\nplosives, in this case two [t] sounds that occur in succession as you will\nalso find in Arabic, Latin, or any other language with true consonant\ngemination.\n\nThis is missing in Japanese, there is nothing, no fricative, no vowel, no\nplosive, there is simply a mora of relative silence before the /t/, which does\nshow the characteristic dark, then vertical band. You can verify yourself that\nthis is reproducible with any Japanese word that features /Qt, Qp, Qk/ — the\n/Q/ archiphoneme, commonly called the “moraic obstruent” if you wish to learn\nmore about it, is not realized in Japanese by doubling plosives, this is a\nmyth that is very common, even in some specialized literature.\n\nNow, onto the /Qs/ combination however for completeness' sake:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Z5GL7.jpg)\n\nThis is SPCyan's pronunciation from\n[here](https://forvo.com/word/%E3%81%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%95%E3%82%8A/#ja).\n\nAs you can see, there is no silence here; the pattern on the spectrogram shows\nthat the fricative in /aQsari/ is simply stretched and forms one long pattern\non a spectogram that is consistent with a fricative. Nevertheless, it is also\nvisible that it's a less loud and dense fricative than from where the real /s/\nstarts and more frequencies become filled in, so that's an interesting thing.\n\nBut at the end of the day, despite <っ> being conventionally romanized as a\ndoubled consonant it “doubles” no consonant; it's realized as a moral of\nsilence before /k, p, t/ and it only stretches /s/ — it cannot occur in the\nstandard dialect before any other sound but in some dialects it can occur more\nfreely where the realization becomes even more varied.\n\n_P.S._ : more I incidentally lately came across a a [piece of\nresearch](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289606717_Perception_of_the_moraic_obstruent_Q_A_cross-\nlinguistic_study) which investigates the perception of /Qs/ by Japanese native\nspeakers and concludes that they have a hard time differentiating the normal\nrealization from a true mora of silence, which provides evidence that to\nJapanese speakers, the underlying form is indeed a mora of silence, not a\ngemination.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-09-13T05:57:52.333",
"id": "80634",
"last_activity_date": "2021-04-15T12:50:53.440",
"last_edit_date": "2021-04-15T12:50:53.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "35937",
"owner_user_id": "35937",
"parent_id": "42277",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42277 | 42279 | 42279 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42299",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "> ...., これ以上ないくらい **に** 大きく目を見開いて、... \n> she opened her eyes as wide as possible ...\n\nI don't understand what に is doing here. I've seen plenty of examples where\nくらい acts adverbially without needing に. So why is it there, and what happens\nif I omit it?\n\nIf it helps, my literal understanding is to parse it as \"to the extent that\nthere is nothing more than this she widley opened her eyes\".\n\nI read [this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/35910/is-\nthe-word-%E3%81%90%E3%82%89%E3%81%84-a-noun-why-do-we-need-%E3%81%AE-\nbetween-%E3%81%90%E3%82%89%E3%81%84-and-%E3%81%AF%E3%81%9A) for particle の but\nthat doesn't seem to apply here since に cannot (as far as I know) attach to\nない.\n\nAside: does 目を見開く have some cultural significance e.g. does it represent\nconcentration for example? The subject is currently beating a dog with a\nbroom. It says that she made a 一 shape with her lips (seems like something\nyou'd do if you were concentrating) and then the above sentence. I would\nnormally associate wide eyes with fear (I don't think she's scared), but that\nwould be passive. This sentence is active.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T10:42:45.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42280",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T07:59:13.207",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-くらい"
],
"title": "Difference between くらい and くらいに",
"view_count": 2992
} | [
{
"body": "Japanese dictionary \"goo\" shows the meaning of \"位（くらい）\" as 3 patterns.\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/63287/meaning/m0u/>\n\nI show you the usage of \"に\" for those model sentences. (explanations are\nommited. See the original web site of the dictionary.)\n\n１ 「一〇歳位の男の子」「その位で十分だ」\n\nNG: 「一〇歳位に男の子」「その位に十分だ」\n\nOK: 「今はもう、１０歳くらいに（は）なるだろう」、「いい加減にしろ。その位にしておけ」\n\nOK: 「10歳くらいにはなる男の子」、「その位にはしても構わないだろう」\n\n２ 「声も出ない位びっくりした」「犬位人間に忠実な動物はいない」「目に見えない位小さい」\n\nOK: 「声も出ない位にびっくりした」「目に見えない位に小さい」\n\nNG: 「犬位に人間に忠実な動物はいない」\n\nOK: 「犬程に人間に忠実な動物はいない」＝「犬が示す程度に、人間に忠実な動物はいない」\n\n３ 「簡単に否決される位なら、提案しなければよかった」\n\nNG: 「簡単に否決される位になら、提案しなければよかった」\n\nAbout the dictionary meaning 1st and 2nd, I can say that \"位に\" indicates the\nmaximum value or degree that could be acceptable or realizable.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T02:53:58.340",
"id": "42297",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T07:59:13.207",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T07:59:13.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Both ～くらい and ～くらいに can function adverbially, and I don't see a difference in\nmeaning between:\n\n> これ以上ない **くらいに** 大きく目を見開いて・・・\n\nand\n\n> これ以上ない **くらい** 大きく目を見開いて・・・\n\nSimilar examples:\n\n> * 子供の **ときに** 京都に引っ越しました。/ 子供の **とき** 京都に引っ越しました。\n> * 子供の **ころに** よく遊んだ公園 / 子供の **ころ** よく遊んだ公園\n> * **すぐに** 伺います。 / **すぐ** 伺います。\n> * **まっすぐに** 立ってください。 / **まっすぐ** 立ってください。\n> * **しっかりと** 持つ / **しっかり** 持つ\n> * **ぼんやりと** 眺める / **ぼんやり** 眺める\n>\n\n* * *\n\n> does 目を見開く have some cultural significance e.g. does it represent\n> concentration for example?\n\n目を見開く _can_ indicate concentration, but here in your example I think it shows\n緊張 (tenseness) and/or 興奮 (agitation/excitement?) It can also be used to\ndescribe one's surprise, anger, fear, admiration, seriousness, etc.\n\n* * *\n\n(By the way, 目を[見張]{みは}る typically represents surprise and/or admiration.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T03:36:13.173",
"id": "42299",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T09:33:56.207",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T09:33:56.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "42280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I think the meaning of your sentence don't change if you omit に. I guess に is\nused to definition an adverbial function or just the emphasis.\n\nI don't feel 目を見開く has some cultural significances. When man angry or when man\nare joyful, of course when man feel fear, in various situations, they open\ntheir eyes wide.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T04:01:28.193",
"id": "42303",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T04:01:28.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "42280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I suppose they are same, because they can be replaced. For example:\n\n> * 同じくらい(に)\n> * 小指くらい(に)\n>\n\nBut くらいに is not very used. So I recommend to say くらい.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T06:16:22.930",
"id": "42304",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T06:16:22.930",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14627",
"parent_id": "42280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42280 | 42299 | 42299 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42282",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, what is the subject of the following sentence?\n\n> 八時に来るようにしてください。\n\nThe speaker or the opponent?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T10:54:03.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42281",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T13:31:27.097",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-05T13:31:27.097",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"subsidiary-verbs",
"subjects",
"giving-and-receiving",
"deixis"
],
"title": "What is the subject of sentence with ください?",
"view_count": 105
} | [
{
"body": "Hope I've understood you correctly:\n\nくださる means 'to give'.\n\n> (You) give (me) the favour of making sure to come at 8 o'clock. = Please\n> make sure to come at 8 o'clock\n\nThe person doing the giving (you) is the opponent which is the **subject** of\nくださる. The speaker (me) is the **indirect object**.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T11:09:10.077",
"id": "42282",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T11:09:10.077",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "42281",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42281 | 42282 | 42282 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42285",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Earlier on, dad said that he might run away rather than protect his daughter.\nCircumstances have forced him to claim that he has changed his mind;\n\n> 「えっ？ オレだってちゃんとしてやるさ」 \n> Eh? Even I would do the right thing.\n>\n> 「じゃあ、このまえ言ったことは取り消しだね？」 \n> So, it's a retraction of what you said earlier?\n>\n> 「おう。 **取り消してくれ** 。オレは家族を守るぞ」 \n> ??? I will protect the family.\n\nI don't understand the part in bold. Why is it imperative? It sounds to me\nlike he is instructing his daughter to retract what she just said. But I was\nexpecting him just to admit that he had retracted his earlier statement.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T16:28:00.367",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42284",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T16:38:51.957",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-05T16:38:51.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"reading-comprehension",
"giving-and-receiving"
],
"title": "Meaning of 取り消してくれ in this sentence",
"view_count": 154
} | [
{
"body": "It is indeed an instruction to his daughter to retract the previous statement.\nBut he's referring to _his own_ previous statement.\n\n> じゃあ、このまえ言ったことは取り消しだね？ \n> So, are you cancelling what you said earlier?\n>\n> おう。取り消してくれ。オレは家族を守るぞ \n> Um. Cancel it [for me], would you? I will protect my family.\n\nI'd like to translate it with \"Are you taking back what you said earlier?\" and\n\"I take it back\" but this is precisely confusing the literal meaning of ～てくれ,\nso I chose to translate it with \"cancel\" (= \"take off the record\") instead.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T16:38:11.077",
"id": "42285",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T16:38:11.077",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "42284",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42284 | 42285 | 42285 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42291",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 「わしもじゃ」 \n> 友蔵が出おくれまい **と** 言いそえた。 \n> \"Me too\" added Tomozou, not wanting to get a late start.\n\nSo I eventually figured out that まい was negative volitional (I hope I'm right)\nthen got stuck thinking that と was quotative and couldn't make any sense of\nit. The context doesn't really fit with him **saying** that he won't get at\nlate start\n\nI'm now thinking that と is actually making the previous phrase adverbial,\nresulting in my above translation. Have I got this correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T19:13:38.043",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42287",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T17:29:02.647",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T17:29:02.647",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Meaning of と in 友蔵が出おくれまいと言いそえた",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "You can think of the ～まいと as ～まいとして.\n\n～うと・～ようと ⇒ ～うとして・～ようとして \"trying to~~\" \n～まいと ⇒ ～まいとして \"trying not to~~\"\n\nExamples:\n\n> * 子供を助け **ようと** 川に飛び込んだ。⇒ 子供を助け **ようとして** 川に飛び込んだ。\n> * 涙を見せ **まいと** 背を向ける ⇒ 涙を見せ **まいとして** 背を向ける\n>",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T00:54:26.107",
"id": "42291",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T01:17:17.973",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T01:17:17.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "42287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This use of と means not _saying_ 出遅れまい, but _thinking_ 出遅れまい. You can think\n思って is omitted after the と. The \"quotative\" particle is often used this way.\nLike in this example, Even と directly before 言う can sometimes be \"...,\nthinking ..., ...\" You can tell only from the context.\n\nSee also:\n\n * [What does にと do?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/16000/5010)\n * <https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/25368/5010>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T00:55:40.657",
"id": "42292",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T00:55:40.657",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42287 | 42291 | 42291 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42289",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The scene goes like this. Takada and Tetsuya are talking about Reiko possibly\nhaving romantic feelings towards Tetsuya. Tetsuya says there is no way this is\ntrue since she flat out rejected him before (but the truth is that she\nrejected him because of her extremely ツンデレ-like character, plus she felt a\ncertain social pressure since he is a \"common man\" and she is sort of like an\nお嬢様).\n\nTakada responds :\n\n>\n> 哲也、俺お前のストレートな性格好きだよ。でもな、人の心ってのはもっと複雑なもんなんだ。麗子ちゃんだって恋する男には健気なんだと思う。それが上手く出せないだけだ。\n>\n> _(rough translation)_ Tetsuya, I like how straightforward you are. But\n> people aren't always so logical. I think even Reiko-chan is 健気 to a person\n> she's in love with. She just doesn't know how to express that love.\n\nAnd after that Tetsuya thinks to himself:\n\n> 麗子さんが健気に俺を…\n\nI'm having troubles grasping the exact meaning of 健気 here. From reading\ndefinitions and some articles I understand it has to do with her caring about\nhim very seriously (and it also means that this attitude of hers is admirable\nand worth praise?). But I'm not quite sure why Takada uses 健気 here to convince\nTetsuya, and I find difficult to put it in English words in a way that would\nsound nice.\n\nWhat would be a good way to translate 健気 here? Would I need to restructure\nTakada's speech to convey the idea better?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T22:14:31.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42288",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-31T12:51:00.977",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-31T12:51:00.977",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12271",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Understanding and translating 健気（けなげ）",
"view_count": 421
} | [
{
"body": "健気に in romantic context is often used with 尽くす and I think this usage conveys\nthe nuance well. It describes how a person selflessly devotes him/herself (but\nmainly women), and refers especially to how pure & focused the person is in\nthat devotion.\n\nE.g. when a person is being 健気, they: \n- Prioritise the other, especially their goal (over their own goals) \n- Don't complain and hide how they are struggling (especially from the other) \n- Don't lie, be malicious or manipulative etc. (i.e. be pure) \n- Endure hardship \n\nThat's the original meaning but like the phrase \"awesome\" it's been overused\nand doesn't always carry that sort of gravity - it can just mean someone is\n女らしい (because 健気 is essentially seen as the ideal behavior of women in the\ntraditional value system).\n\nIn this context I think Takada is trying to say 麗子 would also behave that way\n(i.e. 女らしく) to her SO, but can't because she has trouble showing her true\nemotions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T23:44:37.433",
"id": "42289",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-05T23:44:37.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "42288",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "この文脈では、「高圧的だったり反抗的だったりせず、おとなしい」と「真剣で、だから可愛らしい」を合わせたような感じです。やや難しい日本語だと「甲斐甲斐しい」「いじらしい」などがだいたい同じ意味です。\n\n簡単な英単語だとpure, sincere, earnest,\ngenuineあたりが近いと思いますが、あまりぴったりではないかもしれません。文脈からは普段のツンデレ的な態度の反対であることが重要なのだと思うので、sincereがいいのかもしれません。\n\nいくつかの辞書にはbrave, heroic, manly,\nvaliantなどとありますが、これらは文脈とまったく合致しません。以下の記事が参考になります。\n\n[「けなげ」と「いじらしい」を英訳すれば](http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/testamentofhope/43970653.html)\n\n> 逆境にある弱い存在が苦しみを耐え忍びながらひたすら努める、それが「けなげ」なのである。そのすがたを賞賛することばが「けなげ」なのである。\n>\n> 和英辞典の示したadmirable,\n> laudableは「けなげ」に含まれる「弱小性」「逆境性」「忍耐性」「勤勉性」という要素がすべて欠落していて、賞賛すべき理由が示されない。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-05T23:56:07.647",
"id": "42290",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T01:36:22.127",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42288",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42288 | 42289 | 42289 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42295",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Both seem to mean contest, resists. Is あらそう more about verbal protest? And\nあらがう related to action such as rebellion? Is there an overlap?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T01:58:36.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42293",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T17:47:47.727",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T17:47:47.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "19310",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between あらそう and あらがう",
"view_count": 119
} | [
{
"body": "There is a slight difference.\n\n「あらそう」 is to fight with, to compete for something,\n<http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E4%BA%89%E3%81%86>\n\n「あらがう」 is to oppose, to resist, to go against something\n<http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%82%E3%82%89%E3%81%8C%E3%81%86>\n\nSimply put, you can 「あらそう」 for 1st place, but not 「あらがう」. On the other hand,\nas a soldier, you can 「あらがう」 a direct order from your superior if you find it\nimmoral, but its's not something you can 「あらそう」.\n\nEither word can be carried out verbally or via action, so that wouldn't be the\ndefining difference.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T02:14:42.023",
"id": "42295",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T02:14:42.023",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18608",
"parent_id": "42293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42293 | 42295 | 42295 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42323",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Kishi Bashi: [\"Bright Whites\"](http://www.songlyrics.com/kishi-bashi/bright-\nwhites-lyrics/)\n\nTransliterating from the ローマ字 lyrics, (so I don't know which kanji is meant):\n\n> けや けや それや どうせね \n> けや けや それや どうせ だめだ \n> やめられない やめられない \n> どうせ だめだけど やめられない ね\n\nand then a second verse with たえられない in place of やめられない.\n\nSpecifically I'm curious about the meaning of the line\n\n> けや けや それや どうせね.\n\nGoogle translate does not seem to offer a consistent translation of this, and\nthe term けや only translates as \"things like hair\". Plus the repetition seems\nsignificant.\n\nAlso, what's the nuance of どうせ (as compared with どう by itself)?\n\nAnyway if all this is not \"standard\" Japanese, it's worth knowing.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T02:05:59.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42294",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T04:23:02.630",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T16:51:43.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "18061",
"owner_user_id": "18061",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"idioms"
],
"title": "Meaning of more Kishi Bashi lyrics: けや けや それや どうせね",
"view_count": 519
} | [
{
"body": "\"どうせ\" means \"anyway\" or \"sonner or later\"\n\n\"たえられない（耐えられない）\" is different from \"やめられない\"\n\nI'm not sure about the object of \"耐えられない\", in this lyrics,but generally it\nmeans \"I can't suffer.\" or \"I can't take it.\"\n\nThe song is probably related to male-femail relationships. So he or she can't\nstand being near his (her) significant other (lover), or finds himself\n(herself) unable to stay away drom his (her) SO.\n\n\"やめられない\" generall means \"I can't quit\" or \"I won't to be able to put it down.\"\n\nIn this lyrics, \"やめられない\" and \"あきらめられない (can't let it go)\" could be\ninterchangeable with each other. The relationship might be going fall through.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T06:21:20.450",
"id": "42305",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T06:21:20.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42294",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Google seems to have interpreted the first line as 毛や毛や (\"hairs and hairs\"),\nwhich is of course nonsense.\n\nAFAIK ケヤ means nothing. In lyrics a meaningless word that just sounds nice can\nappear (e.g., \"la la la\", \"[du bi du bi du bi du du\ndu](http://j-lyric.net/artist/a051a6d/l01a7b8.html)\",\n\"[ババンババンバンバン](http://j-lyric.net/artist/a001629/l009ffd.html)\"), so ケヤ may be\none of them.\n\nどうせ is a single word that means \"anyway\" or \"no matter what is done\", and it\nprecedes something negative/unwanted (だめ/やめられない/たえられない in this case). どう\n(\"how\") is quite different.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T04:17:59.423",
"id": "42323",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T04:23:02.630",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-07T04:23:02.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42294",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42294 | 42323 | 42323 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42300",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In this sentence:\n\n> 石の上にも三年とは、冷たい石でも三年間座り続ければ暖まる **ように** 、何事にも忍耐強さが大切だという意味です。\n\nIs it saying that even in a cold stone, if something continues to fall/sit on\ntop of it,in order to warm the stone you have to persevere in everything? \nI don't know how to interpret ように correctly in that position.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T02:51:17.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42296",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T07:04:57.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17515",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "ように at the end of a relative clause",
"view_count": 392
} | [
{
"body": "Is it saying that even in a cold stone, if someone continues to sit on top of\nit, he or she could warm the stone in three years. It values a sprit of\npatience.\n\n\"・・・暖まるように、\" = \"・・・暖まる。この例が示すように、\"\n\n---I added more-----------------------------------------------------------------\n\n石の上にも三年とは、冷たい石でも三年間座り続ければ暖まるように、何事にも忍耐強さが大切だという意味です。\n\n石の上にも三年とは、何事にも忍耐強さが大切だという意味です。 \"Perseverance preails: Staying on the stone for\nthree years\" means \"Patience is important at everything.\"\n\n冷たい石でも三年間座り続ければ暖まるように、何事にも忍耐強さが大切だ。 If someone continues to sit on top of it,\nhe or she could warm the stone in three years. (This is the meaning of\n\"石の上にも三年\")\n\nAs this Perseverance preails shows, Patience is important at everything.\n\n冷たい石でも三年間座り続ければ暖まる（と言います。この例が示すように）、何事にも忍耐強さが大切だ。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T03:04:10.167",
"id": "42298",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T07:04:57.377",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T07:04:57.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "19219",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42296",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Technically, this ように is not in a relative clause because it does not modify a\nfollowing noun. It's in an adverbial subordinate clause. For instance,\n\"because I sing\", \"if I sing\" and \"until I sing\" are adverbial subordinate\nclauses.\n\nように can mean \"in order to ～\", but it means something different here. This ～ように\nis \"as (in) ～\", \"like (in) ～\" used to present an example or something that\nresembles.\n\n> 石の上にも三年とは、[冷たい石でも三年間座り続ければ暖まるように、]何事にも忍耐強さが大切だという意味です。\n>\n> 石の上にも三年 means patience is important in everything, [just as even a cold\n> stone can be warmed if someone keeps sitting on it for three years].",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T03:43:47.570",
"id": "42300",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T03:43:47.570",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42296",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "「石の上にも三年とは、冷たい石でも三年間座り続ければ暖まるように、何事にも忍耐強さが大切だという意味です。」 \"[Three years on a\nrock] means that **just as** even cold rocks will get warm if you sit on it\nfor 3 years, persistence is important no matter what it is.\"\n\nIn this case, 「ように」 is used to mean \"just as ~\"\n\nA link for your reference:\n<http://thejapanesepage.com/grammar/chapter_five/youni>\n\nA common usage is 「～のように」, but the 「の」 is not necessary, depending on the\nstructure of the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T03:50:50.027",
"id": "42301",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T03:50:50.027",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18608",
"parent_id": "42296",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42296 | 42300 | 42300 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From what I understand 好きな人 refers to \"the person I like\". How do I express\n\"the person who likes me\"?\n\nPreferably the most naturally casual way.\n\nI want to use it in casual sentences like the following:\n\n> 今、好きな人がいないよ。笑",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T06:55:56.893",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42306",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T20:25:32.707",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-26T20:25:32.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "14624",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"usage",
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "Person I Like vs Person Who Likes Me",
"view_count": 724
} | [
{
"body": "好きな人 isn't necessarily about you. It is assumed to be since no specifics were\ngiven.\n\nThere are many ways you could express it but here are a few examples.\n\n> 好きな人がいない \n> There is no one I like.\n>\n> 好きな人がいますか？ \n> Is there a person you like?\n>\n> 私の事が好きな人がいるでしょうか \n> I wonder if there is someone who likes me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T07:03:30.153",
"id": "42307",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T09:38:35.557",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T09:38:35.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18142",
"parent_id": "42306",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42306 | null | 42307 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42310",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've been going on a Japanese course and I don't understand the grammar behind\n'dewa'. I've seen it being used in 私はおちゃとこひがすきではありません and 私はにほんじんではありません and I\ndon't completely understand its use in grammar and definition. Is it the\nnegative desu?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T07:18:33.797",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42308",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T09:45:44.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "What is 'では‘ and how is it used?",
"view_count": 2753
} | [
{
"body": "First「私はおちゃと\"こひ\"がすきではありません」should be 「私はおちゃと\"コーヒー\"がすきではありません」.\n\n「私はおちゃと\"コーヒー\"がすきではありません」= negative expression of「私はおちゃと\"コーヒー\"がすきです」\n\nTo make the sentnce negative, we change the phrase \"（すき）です\" into negative one.\n\n\"（すき）です\" + \"ない\" => \"（すき）です＋ない\" => \"（すき）ではない\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T07:38:20.313",
"id": "42309",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T07:38:20.313",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You are correct that ではありません is the negative form of です. At this stage I think\nyou should just understand it as a single unit rather than looking at では and\nありません separately. But [See this\nlink](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/23542/%E3%81%A7%E3%81%82%E3%82%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84vs-%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF%E3%81%82%E3%82%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84vs%E3%81%A7%E3%82%82%E3%81%82%E3%82%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%82%82%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84).\n\nYou will also see じゃありません (じゃ is a contraction of では) and じゃない (ない is the\ninformal form of ありません) with decreasing levels of formality.\n\nNote that it can be used to negate nouns and na-adjectives (as in your two\nexamples), but **not** i-adjectives and verbs.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T09:45:44.737",
"id": "42310",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T09:45:44.737",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "42308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42308 | 42310 | 42310 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42312",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am trying to translate the following.\n\n> 頭で覚えたことは、忘れやすく動きに時間がかかるという特徴があります。\n\nThe part that confuses me is\n\n> 忘れやすく動きに時間がかかる\n\nIf 動き means \"activity\" then 動きに時間がかかる means roughly \"it takes time for\nactivity\".\n\nNext, 忘れやすく is an adverb that is from an adjective 忘れやすい. So 忘れやすく must modify\nthe verb かかる rather than the noun 動き.\n\nIf 忘れやすい is used instead of 忘れやすく, it modifies the noun 動き.\n\nIt is hard to translate\n\n> 頭で覚えたことは、忘れやすく動きに時間がかかるという特徴があります。\n\nproperly. My attempt is as follow.\n\n> The characteristic of remembering by thinking is that the activity takes\n> time with easily to forget manner.\n\nCould you help me to translate it properly?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T11:38:09.473",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42311",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T02:50:38.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"adjectives",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Proper translation for 忘れやすく動きに時間がかかる",
"view_count": 167
} | [
{
"body": "> 「頭{あたま}で覚{おぼ}えたことは、忘{わす}れやすく動{うご}きに時間{じかん}がかかるという特徴{とくちょう}があります。」\n\n＝\n\n> 「頭で覚えたことは、忘れやすく、動きに時間がかかるという特徴があります。」\n\nThe basic structure of this sentence is:\n\n> 頭で覚えたこと has two characteristics. #1 is 忘れやすい and #2, 動きに時間がかかる.\n\nJudging from your comments and final translation, you did not grasp this\nstructure correctly.\n\n> Next, 忘れやすく is an adverb that is from an adjective 忘れやすい. So 忘れやすく must\n> modify the verb かかる rather than the noun 動き.\n\nNo and no, I am afraid. This misunderstanding cost you all the way, it seems.\n「忘れやす **く** 」 is not an adverb; It is an **_adjective_**. More specifically,\nit is the 連用形{れんようけい} (continuative form) of the adjective 「忘れやす **い** 」.\n\nThus, I used a comma above after 「忘れやすく」, hoping it might help you see the\nsentence structure better. 「忘れやすく」 here, does **_not_** modify either 「かかる」 or\n「動き」. It is pretty \"independent\" in meaning in this sentence. It is one of the\ntwo characteristics that I speak of and it is in the 連用形 because the writer\nmust go on to talk about the other characteristic.\n\nOne TL attempt by me would be:\n\n> \"The things you learn in your head have (two) characteristics -- 1) they are\n> easy to forget and 2) it takes much time for you to put them to work (in the\n> real world).\n\nYou may call this speculation, but I think it is saying that it would be\n\"better\" to learn things with your body rather than with your brain.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T13:05:59.820",
"id": "42312",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T02:50:38.090",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-07T02:50:38.090",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42311",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 42311 | 42312 | 42312 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42324",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I already know that 貴様 {きさま} is a very rude, derogatory term in japanese, and\nis practically forbidden in real life situations. However, I came across a\nsong called キモチ by Mukai Shuutoku, and it contains the following verses :\n\n> 貴様に伝えたい / 俺のこのキモチを\n\nHere is a link for a live version of the song :\n<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1BYZCU7Jxw>\n\nSo I wondered if it was meant to be sarcastic, or provocative or some form of\nartistic license?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T18:41:51.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42313",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T07:55:15.773",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T19:13:37.840",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18641",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"pronouns",
"music"
],
"title": "Using 貴様 {きさま} as a joke?",
"view_count": 372
} | [
{
"body": "\"貴様\" is sometimes used in lyrics. In the Japanese Middle Ages \"貴様\" was used as\na respectful form, actually \"貴\" means \"distinction\" and \"様\" means \"Mr. or\nSir.\"\n\nSo conversationally \"貴様\" is a very rude form.\n\n> 貴様に何が分かるか！ I bet you'll never know!\n\nHowever in the lyrics \"貴様\" is used indicating close relationship.\n\nThe most famous lyrics with \"貴様\" is \"同期の桜\" as \"貴様と俺とは同期の桜.\"\n\nThey (貴様と俺) joined together with the military and \"俺\" call my best friend as\n\"貴様\" before the air tokko \"特攻\" mission.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T00:30:05.743",
"id": "42316",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T07:55:15.773",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T07:55:15.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42313",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Yes using 貴様 can be a joke, but I believe it's not used as a joke here.\nJudging from the [whole\nlyrics](https://www.joysound.com/web/search/song/73521), I can say the\nlyricist used several \"dirty words\" intentionally for some reason.\n\n * ヘンタイ\n * 犬猫畜生\n * ブチこむ\n\nSo this 貴様 is simply there to show the person's high pride or arrogant\nattitude. Such words frequently appear especially in heavy metal music.\n\nBy the way 貴様 used to be a respectful word in _archaic_ Japanese, but you can\nforget it in this case. It's clearly meant to be dirty in this song.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T04:39:05.433",
"id": "42324",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T04:39:05.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42313",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42313 | 42324 | 42324 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm confused by the けど at the end of this sentence, I know it means 'but',\nthough the sentence is a question and when I try to translate it, I can't seem\nto make it fit.\n\n「大事な話がある、っていうのに送信先に田中ちゃんが入ってない時点で、それ以外考えられないと思うけど？」\n\nMy translation is: \"I think, even though there are important stories, in the\ntime when Tanaka chan was not in the destination, everything except that was\nunthinkable?\"\n\nThat doesn't seem right to me and I'm getting more confused by the sentence\nending as a question with kedo.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-06T19:21:13.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42314",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T00:49:40.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19314",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "What is the purpose of \"けど?\" at the end of this sentence",
"view_count": 375
} | [
{
"body": "「大事な話がある、っていうのに送信先に田中ちゃんが入ってない時点で、それ以外考えられないと思うけど？」= 「・・・、それ以外考えられないけどどうなのよ？\nor 私にはそれ以外考えられないけど、その点あなたはどう反論できるの？」\n\n\"けど？\" = \"けど・・・？\" = \"けど、どうなんですか？\" = \"xxx, but I'm afraid I have different\nunderstanding of it. How do you argue against my understanding?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T00:49:40.760",
"id": "42317",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T00:49:40.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42314",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42314 | null | 42317 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have often heard this phrase 「そりゃあまぁ、ねえ？」from my understanding そりゃあまぁ is =\nそりゃ = それは which means \"That is\" or \"very/extremely\". ねえ implies that the\nspeaker is looking for some sort of agreement from the listener.\n\nGoing by this 「そりゃあまぁ、ねえ？」could mean \"that is [the case], is it not?\" or the\none that sounds less likely \"extremely, right?\"\n\nSo Is the above an accurate translation? Or is 「そりゃあまぁ、ねえ？」 some sort of\ncolloquialism I don't know about?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T02:43:30.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42318",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T04:03:30.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19316",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of \"そりゃあまぁ\"",
"view_count": 1357
} | [
{
"body": "speaker:「僕は、ピカソと同じくらい絵が上手でしょう？」\"I'm very good at drawing as Picasso is, am I?\"\n\nListener:「そりゃあまぁ、ねえ？」That's true (but partially not totally).\n\n「そりゃあまぁ、ねえ？」means display an understanding of the speaker's idea, but at the\nsametime taking a gentle approach to question it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T03:08:47.030",
"id": "42319",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T03:08:47.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42318",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "* Yes そりゃ means \"that's\" in this context. それは/そりゃあ is often used at the beginning of a sentence, like an interjection, to indicate the speaker is trying to give some explanation (≒ \"Well, that is to say, ...\", \"Er... that's...\")\n * まあ is like \"you know\" or \"well\", and used before saying something unexpected, unimportant or something the listener may already understand. It makes the statement softer.\n * ねえ is like \"... huh?\", \"... isn't it?\" or \"you know?\" used to show a positive response is expected.\n\nPut together, そりゃまあねえ can imply something like \"Oh, that was .... expected\",\n\"Um, yeah, why not?\", \"Well...that's because...don't you know?\", depending on\nthe context. Basically, the speaker cannot (or doesn't want to) say something\nclearly, but wants the listener to understand what he/she is going to say at\nthe same time.\n\nExample:\n\n> A: あの人のことが嫌いなの？ どうして？ \n> B: そりゃまあ、ねえ…\n\nB doesn't want to state the reason explicitly, but is expecting A would guess\nit.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T04:03:30.240",
"id": "42321",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T04:03:30.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42318",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 42318 | null | 42321 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42326",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When I am learning Japanese I encounter this sentence. I think that the\nparticle が should be always used, but は was used instead. Could it be a typo?\nOr something I have not learned yet?\n\nIn other words, should this sentence be :\n\n半日のツアーがありますか。(Do you have any half-day tours?)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T04:14:34.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42322",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T05:29:45.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "\"半日のツアーはありますか。\" question",
"view_count": 110
} | [
{
"body": "I am not sure because there isn't context, but I think that は was used to\nindicate a contrast between half-day tours and whole-day tours. The は\nparticle, other than indicating the sentence topic, can be used to make a\ncontrast or to put emphasis on one thing instead of another. Example:\n\n> 「全日のツアーがあります。」 「半日のツアーはありますか。」\n\nTranslation:\n\n\"We have whole-day tours\"\n\n\"Do you have half-day tours (instead of whole-day ones)?\"\n\nFor more information on the usage of が and は see\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/40154/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AF%E3%81%82%E3%81%8A%E3%81%84%E8%BB%8A%E3%81%AF%E3%81%99%E3%81%8D%E3%81%A0-%E3%81%AF-\nas-contrast-particle-\nvs-%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AF%E3%81%82%E3%81%8A%E3%81%84%E8%BB%8A%E3%81%8C%E3%81%99%E3%81%8D%E3%81%A0)\nand [here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/22/whats-the-\ndifference-between-wa-%E3%81%AF-and-ga-%E3%81%8C).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T04:52:03.817",
"id": "42325",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T05:29:45.317",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"parent_id": "42322",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "No. In this case, 「半日のツアー **は** ありますか。」 is better.\n\nThe first thing you should learn is that the 「は」 particle can also be used to\nindicate the subject. Try searching in this site and you will find many\nanswers that describes the difference between 「が」 and 「は」.\n\nThis 「は」 is the topic marker. The topic of this sentence should be (the\nexistence of) a half-day tour, so 「は」 fits here. On the other hand, 「が」 is not\nappropriate because it sounds like introducing a certain half-day tour into\nthe context, though the speaker is not sure it exists.\n\nSo if we want to say \"they have a half-day tour\", 「半日のツアー **が** あります」 is\nbetter than 「半日のツアー **は** あります」, becuase the former brings into a half-day\ntour that we already know into the conversation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T04:57:11.010",
"id": "42326",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T04:57:11.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42322",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42322 | 42326 | 42326 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42329",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I learnt from [this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/34442/17797)\nthat 担当さん is a common Japanese expression to address someone working with/for\nyou. Does the presence of `My` and `氏` add a more specific meaning? The\ncontext is a letter from a mangaka to her fans:\n\n> My担当氏とお誕生日が近いという事で、２人でバースデイパーティーを開きました✨\n\nConsidering they are having a party alone and that she later says she received\na heart-shaped cake as a present, it could be his boyfriend, but I don't think\nthat's the meaning of My担当氏. Since the letter was handwritten, [here's the\noriginal](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AAFC6.jpg) to check if I read the\ncharacters right. Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T05:21:04.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42327",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T08:14:24.997",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "Meaning of My担当氏",
"view_count": 164
} | [
{
"body": "氏 is generally more formal (and thus less friendly) than さん, but in this case\nI don't feel she chose 氏 to show her respect or psychological distance. 氏 is\njust another common name suffix in this situation. This may or may not be\nrelated, but stereotyped hardcore otaku address everyone using 氏 and it\nactually is a friendly yet respectful suffix like くん/さん to them.\n\nThe use of _My_ is hard to explain since it's not standard nor common at all.\nMaybe she just wanted to decorate 担当さん with _My_ to make it a bit more\neccentric, cute, or whatever. It does not alter the basic meaning of the\nsentence.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T06:14:29.020",
"id": "42329",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T08:14:24.997",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-07T08:14:24.997",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42327",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 42327 | 42329 | 42329 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42330",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A question from my N5 mock test book reads:\n\n> A 「何{なん}時{じ}に うちへ 帰{かえ}りますか。」\n>\n> B 「７時{じ} ( ) 帰{かえ}ります。」\n\n１ ごろ ２ じゅう ３ まで ４ ぐらい\n\nThe answer was 1, but I've been taught that both ごろ and ぐらい are\ninterchangeable when talking about points in time (時刻), like 7時 or ４月.\n\nIs ぐらい really acceptable when ごろ should be used?\n\n(Note: I am of the impression that ぐらい and くらい mean the same, and so do ごろ and\nころ.)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T05:45:06.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42328",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T06:17:55.793",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"particles",
"time"
],
"title": "Can ぐらい be used to replace ごろ?",
"view_count": 398
} | [
{
"body": "> A 「[何時]{なんじ} に うちへ 帰 {かえ} りますか。」\n>\n> B 「７時 {じ} ( ) 帰 {かえ} ります。」\n>\n> １ ごろ ２ じゅう ３ まで ４ ぐらい\n\nThe only possible answer is 1) ごろ.\n\nHad the fourth choice been 「ぐらい **に** 」 instead of just 「ぐらい」, it would also\nhave been a correct answer. Not sure where you have been taught it was correct\nto say 「～時ぐらい帰る」, because it is not.\n\nSo, to say \"to return home around 7-ish\", you can use:\n\n「ごろ」, 「ごろに」 and 「ぐらいに」.\n\nBut you cannot use 「ぐらい」. In other words, 「～時ごろ」 can function adverbially to\nmodify the verb 「帰る」 without a 「に」. 「～時ぐらい」 cannot; It needs a 「に」 to function\nadverbially.\n\nThe following usage of 「ぐらい」, however, is correct.\n\n> A 「家に帰るの、いつも何時ぐらい？」\n>\n> B 「７時ぐらい。」\n\nThis is OK because there is no verb following in either line. You don't need\nan adverbial phrase here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T06:15:48.723",
"id": "42330",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T06:17:55.793",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-07T06:17:55.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42328",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 42328 | 42330 | 42330 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42346",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I encountered the following sentence from Jisho.org when looking up the\ndefinition of 確かめる {たしかめる}:\n\n> 窓｛まど｝が閉まって｛しまって｝いるか確かめとけ\n\nAs 確かめる is a transitive verb (according to Jisho.org at least), I was under\nthe impression that it **required** a direct object marked with を in order to\nbe intelligible. However, in this sentence, the direct object (at least by\nEnglish standards) seems to be marked with か. I assume this has something to\ndo with the fact that the object is a clause rather than a single noun.\n\nMy actual questions are:\n\n 1. Is the above form specific to 確かめる or can it be generalized to other verbs (～ているか＋transitive verb). For example, would the following be a natural/understandable sentence?\n\n> 本に書いているか止めなさい。\n>\n> Stop writing in the book.\n\n 2. Could the か have been replaced with another particle (perhaps と or maybe even ことを) and if so, would the meaning have changed?\n\n 3. Are there other valid particles that could mark an object of a transitive verb besides を and か?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T06:30:40.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42331",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T20:52:46.287",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"particles",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Transitive verbs where the direct object is a clause",
"view_count": 319
} | [
{
"body": "\"窓が閉まっているか確かめとけ\" = \"窓が閉まっているかどうかを確かめとけ\"\n\n\"か\" of \"窓が閉まっているか確かめとけ\" is the abbreviation of \"かどうかを(whether)\"\n\n\"それは本当か確かめたい\" = \"それは本当かどうか（本当か嘘か）を確かめたい\"\n\n* * *\n\n本に書いているか止めなさい。is entirely wrong!\n\n\"本に書いているか\" = \"（誰かが）本に（何かを）書いているかどうか\" = \"Whether somebody writes something in\nthe book\"\n\nSo \"本に書いているか止めなさい。\" sounds oddly \"Stop wheter somebody writes something in the\nbook\"\n\n\"Stop writing in the book.\" => \"本に書くのは止めなさい\" or \"本に書くのを止めなさい\"\n\nちなみに、\"Stop writing in the\nbook.\"は、\"本に落書きするのは止めなさい\"って意味ですか？writingの目的語が何だか分かりません。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T16:23:59.077",
"id": "42339",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T16:23:59.077",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42331",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "This structure is called [embedded\nquestions](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13034/5010).\n\n> Is the above form specific to 確かめる?\n\nNo. It's not specific to 確かめる, but used with 聞く, 考える, 見る, 知っている, 教える, and so\non.\n\n> For example, would the following be a natural/understandable sentence?\n> 本に書いているか止めなさい。\n\nNo. Because か is the question marker, that sentence does not make sense.\n\"[×]Stop whether you write something on the book!\"\n\n> Could the か have been replaced with another particle (perhaps と or maybe\n> even ことを) and if so, would the meaning have changed?\n\nIn this case, yes, but the meaning will change a bit.\n\n * 窓が閉まっているか確かめとけ。 Confirm **whether** the window is closed.\n * 窓が閉まっていると確かめとけ。 Confirm **that** the window is closed.\n * 窓が閉まっていることを確かめとけ。 Confirm **that** the window is closed.\n\nThe last two sentences strongly say the window must be closed. The first one\nstill usually implies the same thing, but basically only says you must check\nwhether the window is open or closed.\n\n> Are there other valid particles that could mark an object of a transitive\n> verb besides を and か?\n\nAs you have already said, と for quotes is a particle that works like an object\nmarker (e.g., ～と思う, ～と聞く). I don't know if it's grammatically an object marker\nin Japanese, though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T20:52:46.287",
"id": "42346",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T20:52:46.287",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42331",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42331 | 42346 | 42346 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42333",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "It is in a dialogue said by an old man to a young man during their fighting.\n\n> さあ **ぽやっと** 見てねえで 打ってきなっ わしを力石と思って 力いっぱい打ちこんできなっ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T12:37:43.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42332",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T14:06:21.870",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-08T09:45:05.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"manga",
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "What does the word 「ぽやっと」 mean?",
"view_count": 592
} | [
{
"body": "「ぽやっと」, in this context, would mean \" ** _absentmindedly_** \".\n\nIt is in the form of 「 ** _onomatopoeia + と_** 」, which functions adverbially.\n\n「ぽやっと見{み}てねえで」, therefore, means \" ** _Stop looking (at me) absentmindedly and\n~~_**.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T12:46:30.243",
"id": "42333",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-08T05:42:07.877",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-08T05:42:07.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "”力石”ときたら、間違いなく漫画の「あ〇たの〇ョー」の登場人物です。（〇（まる）は特定を避けるために日本では一般的によく使う。）私は読んだことがない漫画ですが、テレビＣＭなどによく使われることで、年齢がある程度上の（例えば昭和生まれあたり）大体の方がこの漫画を知っています。この漫画は個性の強いキャラクターがきっと魅力の一つの筈です。\n一般的に登場人物の言葉遣いをわざと標準の言葉から外すことは漫画ではよくあることですし、思春期の中学生が友達の間でふざけてそのように話すことはよくあります。\n標準語かつ丁寧な言い方に直しますと「さあ ぼけっと見てないで 打ってきなさい 私を力石と思って 力いっぱい打ち込んできなさい」になります。\n「ぽやっ」とは一般的に使われているかは私もわかりませんが、キャラクターづくりのために擬音語「ぼけっと」を「ぼやっと」などで組み合わせて作ったと想像することもできると思います。「ぽ」の音はかわいいイメージがあるので（例えば「ヒヨコはぽよぽよしている」）、「ぽやっと」していると言われた登場人物が若いとか、純朴であるとかの性質を発話者が持っていることを暗に示すことができるような気がしますので、このような言葉遣いが漫画に載っているのではないでしょうか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T14:06:21.870",
"id": "52493",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T14:06:21.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25471",
"parent_id": "42332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 42332 | 42333 | 42333 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42337",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "**Context** (although probably not relevant): Last sentence of the preface to\na short manga sidestory. The rest of the preface talks about how the mangaka\nordered rubber coasters and they didn't turn out like she wanted them to, but\npeople wanted to have them, so it's all good.\n\nIn the following sentence is the 方 used as 'かた' or as 'ほう'\n\n> このぺーパーの方が圧倒的に多いので何言ってるのか分からない方も多いと思いますが…。\n\nI think the second part means something like _\"...I think, there are many\npeople who don't know what to say...\"_ in which case 方 would be read as かた.\nBut I can't really make sense of the first part. Usually, I'd assume \"の方が\" was\nbeing used to establish that something is more than something else, but there\nis nothing in the text to compare to.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T14:48:08.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42334",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-30T23:40:07.010",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-30T23:40:07.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "19260",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"comparative-constructions"
],
"title": "Use of 方 (かた or ほう?) in このぺーパーの方が圧倒的に多いので何言ってるのか分からない方も多いと思いますが",
"view_count": 702
} | [
{
"body": "> 「このぺーパーの **方** が圧倒的{あっとうてき}に多{おお}いので何言{なにい}ってるのか分{わ}からない **方**\n> も多いと思{おも}いますが…。」\n\nStrictly speaking, you did not provide enough context. For instance, where\ndoes 「ペーパー」 come from? What \"paper\" does it refer to? So, I am going to rely\non my instinct.\n\nMy hunch is that 「ペーパー」 is the material for (many) coasters as opposed to the\nrubber ones that you mentioned as being part of the context.\n\nIf that is indeed the case, then the first 「方」 would be read 「ほう」 for\ncomparison and the second 「方」, 「かた」 for referring to people.\n\n> \"Because there exist far more paper ones, many of you (many people) might\n> not know what I am even talking about.\"\n\nWhat the author is talking about, of course, are the rubber coasters.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T15:43:19.393",
"id": "42337",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T15:43:19.393",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42334",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42334 | 42337 | 42337 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42338",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Contrarily to the abbreviated informal (if not rude) version I used in the\ntitle, the usual greeting for the New Year is quite long:\n\n> 明けましておめでとうございます。今年もよろしくお願いします。\n\nThose are two sentences, and it seems that they are usually pronounced with a\nslight pause between them. The reply is usually the same sentences:\n\n明けましておめでとうございます。 今年もよろしくお願いします。\n\nI am wondering what timing I should use to reply politely.\n\nI have the impression than when communicating in Japan it is seen as more\npolite and respectful to take time when speaking (making longer greeting\nsentences), while on the opposite in some occidental cultures it feels more\npolite to not abuse of the interlocutor's time, and keep communications brief\nand efficient.\n\nIs it okay to start replying after the first sentence:\n\n> Interlocutor:明けましておめでとうございます。 \n> Me:明けましておめでとうございます。 \n> Interlocutor:今年もよろしくお願いします。 \n> Me:今年もよろしくお願いします。\n\nOr can I wait until my interlocutor has finished saying their sentence, and\ntake time to say mine too:\n\n> Interlocutor:明けましておめでとうございます。今年もよろしくお願いします。 \n> Me:明けましておめでとうございます。今年もよろしくお願いします。\n\nAnd of course Happy New Year everyone!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T15:14:27.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42335",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-30T05:18:33.457",
"last_edit_date": "2019-12-30T05:18:33.457",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1319",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"time",
"greetings"
],
"title": "What is the recommended timing for あけおめ ことよろ?",
"view_count": 600
} | [
{
"body": "Both is OK. When you feel your interlocutor put a pause, you can reply it.\n\nThe following has no problem.\n\nInterlocutor:明けましておめでとうございます。\n\nMe:明けましておめでとうございます。今年もよろしくお願いします。\n\nInterlocutor:（こちらこそ）今年もよろしくお願いします。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T15:48:55.130",
"id": "42338",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-10T07:54:58.553",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-10T07:54:58.553",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 42335 | 42338 | 42338 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42344",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In this sentence:\n\n> わたしは、ほぼほぼ計画通りに過ごすことができた一年でした。\n\nDoes the に particle make \"計画通り\" an adverb?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T16:47:16.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42340",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-08T05:12:59.440",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-08T05:12:59.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "17515",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Is に optional in this sentence?",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "> Is に optional in this sentence?\n\nNo. It's necessary.\n\n> Does the に particle make \"計画通り\" an adverb?\n\nYes. The 「に」 particle has a lot of usages and makes a noun (or a noun-like\nphrase) adverbially connect to the verb in different ways.\n\nIn this case, No. 8 of [this dictionary\nentry](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/166083/meaning/m1u/%E3%81%AB/) the most\nmatches:\n\n> 動作・作用の行われ方、その状態のあり方を表す。「直角に交わる」「会わずに帰る」 \n> _Indicates the manner in which an act is done, an effect is made or a state\n> is being._\n\nSo 「計画通りに」 means something like \"in a manner that is 計画通り (just as planned).\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T18:10:37.730",
"id": "42341",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T18:38:43.257",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-07T18:38:43.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "17890",
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42340",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Yes it's optional. The following sentences are both correct and feel exactly\nthe same to me.\n\n> * ほぼほぼ計画通りに過ごすことができた一年でした。\n> * ほぼほぼ計画通り過ごすことができた一年でした。\n>\n\nに is not necessary in [certain standalone\nadverbs](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/41536/5010), and it's optional\nin some adverbial phrases, too. ～通り is a phrase where に is optional. E.g.,\n予定通り(に)通過する, 予告通り(に)放送する, 練習した通り(に)やる.\n\nYou should remember when に is optional to answer a question like\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42328/5010).\n\nSee also:\n\n * [Difference between くらい and くらいに](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42280/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T20:14:00.113",
"id": "42344",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-07T21:13:46.403",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42340",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42340 | 42344 | 42344 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42345",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Since Japanese is a left branching language, do you have trouble getting the\nright meaning of words or particles like the particle で in the next sentence\n(which can indicate location of action and means of action too)\n\n> ところで、みなさんは “ほぼほぼ”という言葉を 聞いたことがありますか？ 実は、この言葉は、辞書 **で**\n> 有名な三省堂が主催した今年の新語大賞に選ばれました。\n\nI assume that seeing it at first, you wouldn't know if it's talking about\n\"being in/at the dictionary\" or \"because of the dictionary\" (in this case\n\"because it makes dictionaries/famous for its dictionaries\")",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T19:06:56.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42342",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T09:24:15.933",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-08T05:33:26.577",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "17515",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particles"
],
"title": "How to get the right meaning of particles",
"view_count": 235
} | [
{
"body": "I felt there is nothing confusing in this sentence. ～ **で** 有名な is a basic set\nphrase that directly corresponds to \"being famous **for** ～,\" and you should\nbe able to interpret 辞書で有名な三省堂 as \"Sanseido, which is famous for dictionaries\"\ninstantly. Lots of examples\n[here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=famous%20for&ref=sa).\n\nIf 辞書で does not go well with something right after it, it may be modifying\nsomething distant. For example:\n\n> 辞書で聞いた単語を調べた。\n\nwould almost certainly mean \"I looked up in a dictionary the word that I\nheard\", not \"I looked up the word that I heard in the dictionary\". 辞書で\nmodifies not 聞いた but 調べた, and I can say that because 辞書で聞いた doesn't make\nsense.\n\nIn this case, 辞書で主催する and 辞書で選ばれる do not make much sense to me anyway, while\n辞書で有名 is instantly understandable.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-07T20:29:22.667",
"id": "42345",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T09:24:15.933",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T09:24:15.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42342",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42342 | 42345 | 42345 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In my grammar book, it says that てくる is used in two ways:\n\n1) It is used with verbs that indicate a process that takes time to complete\n(e.g. 太る ---> 太ってきた = started to gain weight).\n\nWhat is the difference between this and the 〜masu stem form of a verb + 〜始める?\nDon't they both mean begin?\n\n2) It is used with a non-punctual verb (I don't know what that is) to indicate\na continuation of sth. up to a current point in time e.g. 今までたくさん本を読んできました.\n\nI don't understand the difference between using 読んできました and 読んでいました. In the\nabove sentence, 読みました (read/have read) seems more fitting than either of them\n(Up to now I have read quite a few books).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T07:04:42.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42347",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-16T20:47:09.097",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-16T20:47:09.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "19357",
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the difference between てくる/ていく and 〜始める/〜続ける?",
"view_count": 761
} | [
{
"body": "「（私は）太ってきた」 means that you've got to notice you've gained more weight than\nbefore and you are still gaining weight. The change already began. It has\nattained a certain level, and is still proceeding.\n\n「（私が）太り始める」just means that you started to get more weight, and you notice it\nat an early stage. You've got just enough weight that you can notice the\nchange.\n\n「今までたくさん本を読んできました」means that I've ever read many books up to now.\n\n「来ました」lays weight on an attainment.\n\n* * *\n\n「今までたくさん本を読んでいました」means that I used to read many books up to now. This message\ncan imply now I can't read as many books as before for some reason. Or after\nthis message you can also say 「これからもたくさんの本を読み続けます」.\n\n「いました」 lays weight on experience or custom.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T09:41:47.487",
"id": "42348",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-08T17:14:22.407",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-08T17:14:22.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42347",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42347 | null | 42348 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "**Edit:** The link provided by @broken headphones has helped resolve my\nする/している problem (I think). I have one problem remaining though. Given\n@Sonny365TANAKA's answer that 彼女は長い髪の毛です **is not** grammatical, if 田中さんは神妙な顔だ\n**is** grammatical then what is the difference? Translating directly to\nEnglish, why can I say \"Tanaka **is** a meek face\" but I cannot say \"She\n**is** long hair\". Both describe a person's features and both sound strange to\nme.\n\n**End edit**\n\n> 田中さんは神妙な顔だ。 \n> 田中さんは神妙な顔をしている。 \n> Tanaka has a meek face.\n\nDescribing facial expressions confuses me. Firstly because of the use of \"is\"\nrather than \"has\" i.e. literal translation of the first sentence is \"Tanaka\n**is** a meek face\". I can live with that.\n\nIs there any difference in meaning/nuance between these two sentences. How do\nI interpret している? Is it \"is making\", \"has made\", or simply \"is/has\".\n\nDoes the way I phrase it change depending on whether I'm talking about the\ncurrent state of the face or an enduring feature. e.g.\n\n> Tanaka has a meek face (and it is always like that. It's just his character) \n> Tanaka has a meek face (because he's just done something shameful)\n\nAm I right that these issues occur with other aspects of describing a person?\nFor example I saw these two sentences in some example translations:\n\n> 彼女は長い髪の毛です \n> 私の髪は長い\n\nMy instinct tells me that the second one is incorrect even though that is how\nyou would expect to translate it.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T09:45:20.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42349",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T17:43:22.537",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T17:43:22.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Describing facial expression",
"view_count": 603
} | [
{
"body": "> Example-1 \n> 田中さんの様子はどうだ？ How are they? (focus on the shot) \n> 田中さんは神妙な顔だ。 Mr.Tanaka is on his good behavior. (on his p's.)\n>\n> Example-2 \n> 田中さんはどうしている？ Let me know how they are doing? (focus on the scene) \n> 田中さんは神妙な顔をしている。I'm not sure the proper English, but it could be \"Mr. Tanaka\n> puts his poker face.\"\n>\n> NG: 彼女は長い髪の毛です。 \n> acceptable: \"彼女は長い髪の毛の人です。\", OK: \"彼女は髪の毛の長い人です。\" or OK: \"彼女の髪の毛は長い。\"\n>\n> OK: 私の髪は長い。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T16:21:08.993",
"id": "42350",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T01:28:51.520",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T01:28:51.520",
"last_editor_user_id": "19219",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 42349 | null | 42350 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42353",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The question was to select which word would fill in the blank (x) below:\n\n> えきから たいしかんまでの（X）をかいてください。\n\nThe options to select as correct answers were:\n\n> １．しゃしん ２．ちず ３．てがみ ４．きっぷ\n\nI thought the answer was 4, with the translation being \"Please buy a ticket\nfrom the Station to the Embassy. \nHowever, it seems the answer given in the booklet was 2. \nIt seems to me that both answers are plausible, is there something in the\ntranslation that I'm missing?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T16:30:42.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42351",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T20:25:17.793",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-26T20:25:17.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "15932",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "JLPT N5 Test 「えきから たいしかんまでの（X）をかいてください。」",
"view_count": 597
} | [
{
"body": "As pointed out by @broken headphones, I was conjugating the wrong verbs. \nI was mistakenly thinking the verb was 'To Buy', when it was in fact 'To\nWrite'.\n\nThis means the sentence is actually 'Please write a (X) from the station to\nthe embassy.', for which the only valid answer would be\n\n> 2. ちず\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T17:48:54.363",
"id": "42353",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-08T17:48:54.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15932",
"parent_id": "42351",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42351 | 42353 | 42353 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "43524",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In a German newspaper article an interviewed professor says:\n\n> For a long time the Japanese didn't have any interest in clocks: Until 1871,\n> there hadn't even been a word for time and therefore no time measurement.\n\n(Original text:)\n\n> Auch die Japaner hatten lange kein Interesse an der Uhr: Bis 1871 hatten sie\n> nicht mal ein Wort für die Zeit und daher auch keine Zeitmessung.\n\n(Text available in German [here](http://www.zeit.de/2017/02/zeit-empfinden-\nuhren-stress-zeitforscher-karlheinz-geissler/seite-3).)\n\nIs it true that there was no word for time before the Meiji Restoration? Which\nword is he referring to? 時間 or the kanji 時?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T19:25:50.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42354",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-02T19:36:16.320",
"last_edit_date": "2017-02-15T02:44:50.063",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11834",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"translation",
"etymology",
"history",
"culture",
"time"
],
"title": "No word for \"time\" until 1871?",
"view_count": 3583
} | [
{
"body": "I think the word [時間]{じかん} was created in the Meiji era, but the word [時]{とき}\nis older. So it's definitely wrong that \"the Japanese didn't have any interest\nin clocks (until 1871)\".\n\nI searched in an [old-Japanese\ndictionary](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E6%99%82) and found the usage of\n「とき」 in 竹取物語:\n\n> [宵]{よひ}うち[過]{す}ぎて、[子]{ね}のときばかりに\n\nHere, the word [子]{ね}のとき refers to a certain time which is around midnight.\n\n竹取物語 was written more than 1000 years ago. So the word 「とき」 is at least 1000\nyears old.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T19:41:41.240",
"id": "42355",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-15T00:23:38.327",
"last_edit_date": "2017-02-15T00:23:38.327",
"last_editor_user_id": "4229",
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 23
},
{
"body": "## Addendum\n\nThe word 時{とき} is probably the oldest native Japanese word for \"time\". This\nterm appears in the\n[万葉集{まんようしゅう}](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB) written in\nOld Japanese and compiled from poems composed from the 300s through the 700s,\ncompleted some time after 759 CE. These are some of the oldest surviving\nexamples of written Japanese, suggesting that this term is quite ancient\nindeed. Consequently, claiming that ancient Japanese had no word for \"time\" is\npatently wrong.\n\nThe Japanese language also has the Chinese-derived _on'yomi_ term 時刻{じこく},\nalso used to refer more specifically to the concept of \"hour\", as in \"a\nspecific length of time in a day\". This term appears in the 平家{へいけ}物語{ものがたり}\ndating to the 1100s. Even prior to that, we know that the [Ritsuryō legal\nsystem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritsury%C5%8D) in place from the mid\n600s through the Nara period ending 794 made use of water clocks to track the\npassage of time during a day: definite evidence of the _Zeitmessung_ (\"time\nmeasurement\") that Professor Geißler mentions. In the traditional reckoning,\neach day consisted of 12 hours: 6 of day, and 6 of night. This meant that the\nlength of a daylight hour and of a nighttime hour changed over the course of\nthe year, with the shift of the seasons. Consequently, an argument could be\nmade that the traditional Japanese hour required a _greater_ awareness of time\nthan the western hour -- timekeepers would need to be much more intimately in\ntune with time day-by-day in order to evenly distribute the number of hours in\na day and night.\n\n[Even the western definition of \"hour\" has been known to some extent in Japan\nsince the 1500s,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_clock#History) when\nwesterners brought their own clocks as gifts. So here too, Professor Geißler's\nclaim falls through.\n\nThe term 時間{じかん} itself, though apparently extant earlier, does seem to have\nbeen repurposed in 1881 **as a specific translation of the western term \"time\"\nin reference to philosophy**. The [Daijirin entry\nhere](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%99%82%E9%96%93-72507#E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.9E.97.20.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.89.E7.89.88)\nexplains:\n\n> 〔明治初期には英語 time は「時・時刻」と訳され、「哲学字彙」（1881年）に訳語として「時間」と載る〕 \n> (The English term \"time\" was translated as 時{とき} or 時刻{じこく} at the start\n> of the Meiji period [beginning 1868; here, likely including the 1870s], with\n> the term 時間{じかん} appearing as a translation term in _Tetsugaku Jii_ (1881)\n> [\"Philosophical Dictionary\", compiled by [Inoue\n> Tetsujirō](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inoue_Tetsujir%C5%8D)])\n\nNotably, most (maybe all?) such \"translation terms\" were existing words in\nJapanese that were repurposed to express more western concepts, such as\n社会{しゃかい} \"society\", or 自由{じゆう} \"freedom, liberty\".\n\n### Key points:\n\n * The concept of \"time\" clearly existed even in ancient Japanese culture.\n * The concept of \"hour\" as a specific span of time has also existed, for essentially the entirety of recorded Japanese history. Granted, that definition might have differed from the modern western concept, but it was a specific idea of \"time measurement\".\n * The main shifts related to \"time\" in the Meiji period were: \n 1. widespread translation of western materials in an urgent and strategic push to catch up technologically, leading to the rejiggering of various cultural ideas, including \"time\", and \n 2. the promulgation of the Gregorian calendar and western-style 24-hour day, as opposed to the traditional 12-hour day, with six hours of day and six hours of night.\n\n### Conclusion\n\nYou had specifically asked:\n\n> Is it true that there was no word for time before the Meiji restauration?\n\n**No** , that is not true.\n\n> What word is he [Professor Geißler] referring to? 時間 or the kanji 時?\n\nProfessor Geißler is far enough off-base that **I don't think he's referring\nto any specific term** -- I suspect he doesn't know enough about Japanese\nhistory or the language for either term to be immediately relevant to his\nstatement.\n\nProfessor Geißler clearly got the wrong end of the stick. I note that [he is\napparently a Professor of _Wirtschaftspädagogik_ , or \"economics\npedagogy\"](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlheinz_Gei%C3%9Fler), with no\napparent work in Japanese history, culture, or language. In his defense, it is\neasy to misapprehend things outside of one's field of expertise.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-02-14T20:44:47.203",
"id": "43524",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-02T19:36:16.320",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-02T19:36:16.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "42354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 20
},
{
"body": "The installation of the Gregorian calendar was on 1872.\n\nIt doesn't mean Japanese didn't have a concept of time, they used a lunar\ncalendar (different one from Chinese).\n\nThey had [a Japanese clock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_clock)\nwhich divides a day in six and a night in six.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-01T03:43:06.793",
"id": "45107",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-01T03:43:06.793",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "42354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42354 | 43524 | 42355 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 父は弟に英語を習わせた。\n\nThis may mean \"My father made/let my younger brother learn English\". How do I\ntell which one it means when using the causative?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-08T23:35:45.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42357",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T08:36:26.733",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T06:46:31.020",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"causation"
],
"title": "How can you tell if the causative means \"let\" or \"make\"?",
"view_count": 622
} | [
{
"body": "\"父は弟に英語を習わせた\" is a causative sentence.\n\nHowever it depends on the context.\n\n「弟はフランス語か英語を習いたいと言ったが、父は弟に英語を習わせた」The last sentence is causative. Father made\nthe decision which language younger brother should learn.\n\nThe clear causative sentence is 「父は弟に英語（学習）を指示した（命じた）」.\n\n> ずっと前から弟は英語を習いたいと言っていたが、結局父は弟に英語を習わせた\n\nTranslation: the father had not allowed the younger brother to learn English,\nbut he has finally allowed him to do so.\n\nIn this context, the father's intention is not the forceful causative but the\npermissive causative.\n\nThe Japanese sentence 「父は弟に英語を習わせた」can be used for both types of intentions.\n\nIf you'd like to avoid using causative sentence, you can just express father's\npermission or accession:\n\n> 父は弟に英語学習を許可した\n\nor\n\n> 父は弟の英語学習を認めた。\n\nThe sentences above are rather stiff, but if you use the following:\n\n> 父は弟に英語を学習するように指示しました（命じました）。\n\nor\n\n> 父は弟に英語学習を許可しました。\n\nor\n\n> 父は弟に認めました。\n\nThen it will sound more casual.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T02:26:29.713",
"id": "42360",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T02:47:21.317",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T02:47:21.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42357",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Given just the sentence you propose:\n\n> 父は弟に英語を習わせた。\n\nYou cannot tell whether this is meant to be permissive (\"let\") or forceful\n(\"make\").\n\nWhat I've found is that when you see the causative (使役), you should assume\nthat it is the forceful version unless context says otherwise.\n\nAlso, there's a second way of saying it if they want to say \"let\":\n\n> 父は弟に英語を習わせてくれた。 (or 習わせてあげた。/ 習わせてやった。)\n\nIn my experience the more positive versions often end in くれた or くださった\nprecisely because this is how they make clear that this is letting someone do\nwhat they wanted rather than forcing them to do something.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T02:44:21.470",
"id": "42361",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T08:36:26.733",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T08:36:26.733",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "42357",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 42357 | null | 42361 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42371",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I want to say something like \"After thinking about it, I decided not to take\nthe class.\"\n\nWould 考えてから、授業を取らないと決めました。be an accurate translation? Or is there a better\none?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T00:47:01.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42358",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T17:54:13.787",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T07:13:58.710",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14033",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"phrases",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "How to say \"after thinking about it\"?",
"view_count": 1558
} | [
{
"body": "\"After thinking about it, I decided not to take the class.\"\n「（色々）考えたのですが、その授業は取らないことに決めました。」There is no English word relevant to 「色々(in\nmany ways)」 but in this situation I guess you'd like to express that you\ndidn't decide instantly but you made well-considered decision or you don't\nintended to deny the value of the calss but just your circumstances have you\nto decide it.\n\nLiterary style: 「色々考えた末、その授業は取らないことに決めました。」\n\n* * *\n\n「考えてから、・・・」is a little bit unnatural but acceptable (Listener can fairly\nfollow you).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T01:43:57.060",
"id": "42359",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T01:50:00.513",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T01:50:00.513",
"last_editor_user_id": "19219",
"owner_user_id": "19219",
"parent_id": "42358",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> _After thinking about it, I decided not to take the class._\n\nThe most concise and natural way to say it in Japanese IMO is:\n\n> やっぱり、その授業は取らないことにしました。\n\nThe key point is that やっぱり used with verbs meaning want/wish/decide etc., will\nbecome \"on second thoughts\". This definition is strangely missing from J-J\ndictionaries I've tried, but widely used in reality.\n\nIf you やっぱり want a more literal translation to your English, how about:\n\n> 考えた結果、その授業は取らないことにしました。 \n> 考えた結果、その授業は取らないことに決めました。\n\n～と決めました would sound like you pledged to yourself never to break. It's not that\nserious situation, I guess. Also, 考えてから would be more like saying \"I thought\nabout it, and then --\" in English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T10:47:31.470",
"id": "42371",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T17:54:13.787",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T17:54:13.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "42358",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 42358 | 42371 | 42371 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Taking 3 examples from my textbook:\n\n> 車を買う **としたら** どんなタイプがいいかしら\n>\n> お友達が来る **とすれば** ５月でしょう\n>\n> もしハワイに泊まる **とすると** 一晩だけでしょう\n\nWhat are the differences between using the above versions and using **たら** ,\n**ば** , **なら** , and **と**? My guess is that using the forms in the example\nsentences are more emphatic and emphasize the \"if\" aspect. E.g.\n\n> 車を買うとしたらどんなタイプがいいかしら \n> = If I **WERE** to buy a car, which type would be best?\n\nRight?\n\nAlso, I cannot use たら to ask for advice like this, can I?\n\n> 車を買ったらどんなタイプがいいかしら\n\nWhat can I use instead?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T03:04:44.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42362",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T09:10:51.130",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "What are the purposes of としたら, とすれば, とすると?",
"view_count": 2775
} | [
{
"body": "> * 車を買うとしたらどんなタイプがいいかしら\n> * 車を買うとすればどんなタイプがいいかしら\n> * 車を買うとするとどんなタイプがいいかしら\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * お友達が来るとしたら５月でしょう\n> * お友達が来るとすれば５月でしょう\n> * お友達が来るとすると５月でしょう\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * もしハワイに泊まるとしたら一晩だけでしょう\n> * もしハワイに泊まるとすれば一晩だけでしょう\n> * もしハワイに泊まるとすると一晩だけでしょう\n>\n\nThey are mostly interchangeable, but すると tends to sound like the action is\nlikely to happen. すると should be avoided when you are talking about things that\nare very unlikely to happen. This is analogous to the [subjunctive\nmood](http://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/subjunctive_mood.htm) found also\nin English, where \"past form\" is often employed for something unrealistic (\"If\nI buy a car\" vs \"If I bought a car\").\n\n> * もし宇宙人が地球に攻めてくるとしたら、何をするべきだろう\n> * もし宇宙人が地球に攻めてくるとすれば、何をするべきだろう\n> * **[?]** もし宇宙人が地球に攻めてくるとすると、何をするべきだろう\n>\n\n～としたら is a bit more colloquial/informal than ～とすれば, but I see no semantic\ndifference between them for now.\n\n車を買ったらどんなタイプがいいかしら sounds weird to me. Try 車を買うとしたら or 車を買うとすれば.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T09:10:51.130",
"id": "42370",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T09:10:51.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42362",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42362 | null | 42370 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42381",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I picked up the 日本語総まとめ book and I don't quite understand their explanation of\npassive.\n\nThe book says that passive can be used when you mention a fact without a\nsubject. However, in the example (below), to me the subject is the entrance\nceremony.\n\n> 入学式は、このホールで行われます。\n>\n> 昔は、その考えが正しいと思われていた。\n\nCan anyone offer a clearer explanation of this and also the usage of the te-\niru conjugation with passive?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T03:12:11.887",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42363",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-27T22:15:01.700",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19298",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "JLPT N3 Grammar - Passive form AND passive + te iru",
"view_count": 3096
} | [
{
"body": "What you have read in your textbook is equally true in English, too.\n\n> * 入学式は、このホールで行われます。 \n> The entrance ceremony will be held in this hall ( _by us_ ).\n> * 昔は、その考えが正しいと思われていた。 \n> In the past, it was thought ( _by people_ ) that the idea was correct.\n>\n\nThe original (active) versions of these sentences are:\n\n> * このホールで入学式を行います。 (omitted subject = 我々 (we)) \n> _We_ will hold the entrance ceremony in this hall.\n> * 昔は、人々はその考えが正しいと思っていた。 (subject = 人々 (people)) \n> In the past, _people_ thought the idea was correct.\n>\n\nThe book's explanation means you can omit the subject of the **original**\n(active) sentence once it has been turned to passive. See how \"we (us)\" and\n\"people\" can be omitted in the passive versions.\n\n～(ら)れている is simply the combination of passive and ている (e.g., 今、私は見られている = \"I\nam being seen now.\"; そのCDはもう発売されている = \"The CD has already been released.\"). If\nyou're not sure why you need ている in the second example, see the following\nquestions.\n\n * [思っている/言っている with third person subject?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/6538/5010)\n * [Difference between volitional +と思う and volitional+ と思っている](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40145/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T18:22:11.023",
"id": "42381",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-01T12:29:50.833",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 42363 | 42381 | 42381 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "42366",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In an N2 mock paper, the following letter was given, with a very confusing\nsentence within (bolded below). The answer was 1, but several native Japanese\npeople I asked were confident it was 2.\n\n * Which is correct?\n * What is the nuance of the bolded sentence - to change all 200 ramen cups (option 1) or only the defective ones (option 2)?\n\n> 以下は、伊{い}藤{とう}さんが取引会社に宛{あ}てて出した文書である。\n\n* * *\n\n> ２０XX 年８月１１日\n>\n> ABC食品株式会社 \n> 営業部 鈴{すず}木{き}一{いち}郎{ろう}様\n>\n> お世話になっております。 \n> さて、８月１０日に貴社より入荷の商品（食品３種類）のうち太陽カップラーメン２００個の一部に破{は}損{そん}がありました。つきましては、\n> **早急に破{は}損{そん}のあった食品の全商品の取り換えをお願い申し上げます。**\n>\n> サトーヨーカドー株式会社 \n> 仕入部 食品課長 \n> 伊{い}藤{とう}次{じ}郎{ろう}\n\n* * *\n\n> 伊{い}藤{とう}さんは鈴{すず}木{き}さんに何をしてほしいと言っているか。\n>\n> １ すぐに、太陽カップラーメン２００個を新しい商品と取り換えてほしい。\n>\n> ２ すぐに、破{は}損{そん}した全商品を新しい商品と取り換えてほしい。\n>\n> ３ すぐに、破{は}損{そん}した商品の一部を新しい商品と取り換えてほしい。\n>\n> ４ すぐに、１０日に入荷した全商品を新しい商品と取り換えてほしい。\n\nNote: the alignment of the date and sign-off has been altered (from align\nright to align left).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T04:25:26.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "42365",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T05:19:51.487",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T04:33:17.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "Nuance of request to replace ramen cups",
"view_count": 519
} | [
{
"body": "It's indeed confusing even to native speakers. So if you received a letter\nlike this, you should ask for clarification...\n\nBut as a native speaker, logically thinking, I think the option 1 is the\ncorrect answer.\n\n「破損のあった食品」 refers to 「太陽カップラーメン」, that is the name of one of the three foods.\nSo 「破損のあった食品の全商品」 is equal to 「太陽カップラーメンの全商品」, and 「太陽カップラーメン２００個」.\n\n### EDIT\n\nThe reason why I think the correct answer is 1 is totally by logical thinking.\n\nThe key is 「食品」 in 「破損のあった **食品** 」, and the letter says 「貴社より入荷の商品（ **食品**\n３種類）」. So the 「食品」 in 「破損のあった **食品** 」 should refer to one of 「 **食品** ３種類」.\n\nTo mean the answer 2, it should be 「破損のあった **商品** 」. As 「破損のあった商品の全商品」 is\nweird, it would be 「破損のあった全商品」.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T04:52:52.253",
"id": "42366",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T05:19:51.487",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-09T05:19:51.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "17890",
"owner_user_id": "17890",
"parent_id": "42365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Actually I feel the bolded sentence is ambiguous, and I don't think this is a\ngood question. But I feel the request could be much simpler if Ito-san wanted\nto get only the defective ones replaced:\n\n> * 破損のあった食品の取り替えをお願い申し上げます。\n> * 破損のあった全商品の取り替えをお願い申し上げます。\n>\n\nThe object is \"(all) the defective items\" (i.e., only some of the 200 cups).\n\nBut he says instead:\n\n> * **破損のあった食品** の **全商品の取り替え** をお願い申し上げます\n>\n\nThis somewhat lengthy phrase feels like \"complete replacement of the items in\nwhich defect was found,\" which would be likely to mean 1. In this context,\n破損のあった食品 refers not to \"defective ones out of the 200 cups\" but to \"太陽カップラーメン\nout of the three kinds of items\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-09T05:02:00.347",
"id": "42367",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-09T05:02:00.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "42365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 42365 | 42366 | 42366 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.