question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45236",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The way I understand it, 何{なん}でもない and 別{べつ}に are both ways of saying \"It's\nnot important\", \"It's nothing\" i.e. brushing off the question being asked.\nDoes this mean that they are interchangeable? Or are there certain contexts\nwhere 何でもない is used and 別に cannot be and vice versa?\n\nFor example, in episode 19 of Revolutionary Girl Utena, the character Wakaba\nis asked by another character \"Why do you keep accusing me of [being a\nplayer]?\" to which she starts to reply, but then decides against it, saying\n\"別に...何でもない\" and turns away. In this context, she uses both, which makes me\nthink that she uses both as a way of reinforcing \"It's not important\", which\nmakes me think that both expressions have similar meaning and are therefore\ninterchangeable.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T18:50:40.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45235",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T15:58:27.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18852",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Are 何でもない and 別に interchangeable?",
"view_count": 553
} | [
{
"body": "別に is an adverb and 何でもない is an adjective expression. They can both be used on\ntheir own to mean something that an English speaker understands from \"it's not\nimportant\".\n\nThey are not interchangeable though, first of all for their part of speech\ndifference and their meaning also changes with context. 「 **別に** いい」 means\n\"it's okay\" and 「完璧でも **何でもない** 」 means \"not perfect or anything\".\n\nIn 「別に…何でもない」 their meaning can reinforce each other, but it depends on\nintonation and pauses what was actually meant. In 別に the meaning of something\nnot being important is only implied, so it is possible that 何でもない confirms the\nimplication.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T19:04:33.137",
"id": "45236",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T19:16:11.947",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-04T19:16:11.947",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "45235",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 45235 | 45236 | 45236 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45242",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm not sure if should use で or に in this sentence\n\n> 最近新しい医学の論文をアメリカの雑誌 で/に 読みました。\n\nI would go with に, do you agree?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T19:10:09.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45237",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T19:43:27.143",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-21T19:43:27.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20522",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Should I use で or に in 「最近新しい医学の論文をアメリカの雑誌 で/に 読みました」?",
"view_count": 408
} | [
{
"body": "> 「最近{さいきん}新{あたら}しい医学{いがく}の論文{ろんぶん}をアメリカの雑誌{ざっし} で/に 読{よ}みました。」\n\nThat should be 「で」 for nearly all occasions today.\n\nUsing 「に」 there would make it sound unnecessarily \"literary\" and/or \"quaint\".\nUnless you can write the whole composition, essay, etc. in that style, I would\nnot recommend writing only one of the sentences like that.\n\nDo the whole piece in your particular style and your readers will recognize\n(and appreciate) it as a style. Do it sporadically and they will only think\nyou made mistakes. The difference is huge.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T23:12:20.680",
"id": "45242",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T09:16:05.953",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T09:16:05.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45237",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 45237 | 45242 | 45242 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45240",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So I was listening to this song and practing a bit while doing so. When trying\nto translate this line the results I got so far were:\n\n> そう信じてこれから生きていけたらどれだけ素敵なんだろう\n>\n> _**So believe me/it, from now on ... how wonderful it is, right?**_\n\nMy problem here is with:\n\n> 生きていけたら it feels like it is the te form of 生きる + the pothential form and\n> conditional form of some verb which I don't know.\n\nCould it be something like 行けたら? But since it is along with the te form of\nanother verb it is in hiragana instead of kanji.\n\nThanks in Advance, if any other points in my sentence or logic are wrong,\nplease help me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T20:08:06.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45238",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T21:37:55.260",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"て-form",
"conditionals",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "What 生きていけたら means here?",
"view_count": 603
} | [
{
"body": "V〜ていく comes from 行く as you assumed and means that you continue on doing the\nprefixed verb. In this case, 生きていけたら, means something like \"if (I) continue on\nliving\". It is common for this kind of suffixed compounded verbs to be written\nin hiragana. Another example is the ending V〜てみる where みる comes from 見る, and\nchange the meaning to \"attempt V\".\n\nAs for your translation, it is off.\n\n```\n\n そう信じてこれから生きていけたらどれだけ素敵なんだろう\n How wonderful isn't it if (I) can continue on (living and) believing that\n \n```\n\nThe first part, そう信じて, refers to the an act of the subject, \"Believing that\".\nIt is combined in the simple way using て form with the following parts of the\nsentence. For your interpretation to make sense, there would have to be some\nkind of break in between そう信じて and これから, such that they are two different\nsentences. In that case 信じて might refer to the imperative form instead.\n\n*Note: I put \"I\" in paranthesis since it isn't clear from the sentence who the subject is",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T21:17:01.170",
"id": "45239",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T21:17:01.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "45238",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "You're right - it's the て form of 生きる、生きて, plus いく, \"go\", in its potential\nform いける plus the conditional suffix たら . 生きていく means \"live into the future\",\n\"go on with my life\". So そう信じてこれから生きていけたら means \"If I could go on with my life\nfrom now on believing that (how wonderful it would be)\". くる , \"come\" and いく ,\n\"go\", are often used after the て form of a verb (but not nowadays written with\nkanji because they are auxiliaries, not full verbs) to indicate that an action\nproceeds towards or away from the location of the speaker - in space or time.\nWhen it's space it's straightforward: 入っていった , \"he went in\" (speaker is\noutside) vs 入ってきた, \"he came in\" (speaker is inside); 帰っていった \"she went home\"\n(after our date: boyfriend is speaking) vs 帰ってきた \"she came home\" (after her\ndate: mother is speaking). When it's a matter of time, it's perhaps not quite\nso obvious. Consider: 19世紀の半ばごろから発達してきている \"It has been developing since about\nthe mid-19th century\" [from the past towards the present moment] vs\nこれから早く発達していくだろう \"It will probably proceed to develop quickly from now on\"\n[away from the present moment]\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-04T21:37:55.260",
"id": "45240",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T21:37:55.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20069",
"parent_id": "45238",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45238 | 45240 | 45240 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45247",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "What would the Japanese equivalent to ASAP be?\n\nWould「急ぎでお願いします」be appropriate? 「すぐに」、「即に」just don't seem right.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T00:52:54.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45244",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T09:56:48.623",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Japanese equivalent to ASAP",
"view_count": 2719
} | [
{
"body": "I think there are quite a few acceptable ways to say it. \nHere are a few of them I can think of.\n\n> * 大至急\n> * できるだけ早く lit. as soon as possible.\n> * 出来る限り早期に lit. as soon as possible.\n> * 今すぐ used at my company as a status for tasks that have the highest\n> priority.\n> * できる限り早く lit. as soon as possible.\n> * 一日も早く\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T00:58:02.763",
"id": "45246",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T06:37:28.353",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-14T06:37:28.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18142",
"parent_id": "45244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "If you are looking for a slang term used in business that actually **feels\nlike \"ASAP\"** , we have:\n\n> 「なる早{はや}」\n\nwhich is short for 「なるべく早く」. You can say:\n\n> 「なる早でお願{ねが}いします。」\n\nor just\n\n> 「なる早で！」\n\n",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T01:08:56.970",
"id": "45247",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T01:16:35.500",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T01:16:35.500",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
},
{
"body": "Another possibility to consider is 次第\n\n> as soon as; immediately (upon)often after the -masu stem of a verb\n\n(source: jisho.org)\n\nE.g.\n\n> 受け取り次第\n>\n> (Immediately) after receiving\n\nwhich would definitely be a more appropriate thing to use in say, a business\nsetting and with less strong demand-like emphasis than なる早 or なるべく早く",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-14T06:28:49.230",
"id": "46561",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T06:28:49.230",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19790",
"parent_id": "45244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 45244 | 45247 | 45247 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45254",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When looking up the terms \"Employee retention\" and \"Employee turnover\" on\nGoogle Translate I get the following:\n\nEmployee retention: 従業員保持\n\nEmployee turnover: 従業員の売上高\n\nI'm fairly certain that the translation for \"employee turnover\" is not what\nI'm looking for. So what would be the correct term/phrase to use?\n\nLike how would the following statement be said in Japanese: Company X's high\nturnover rate could imply they have a problem with employee retention.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T02:48:31.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45248",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T04:32:58.657",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T03:39:49.420",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Employee turnover in Japanese",
"view_count": 909
} | [
{
"body": "I think the best word for your context would be 離職率{りしょくりつ}.\n\n> 従業員の離職率は高いです。 \n> The employee turnover rate is high.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T04:19:55.597",
"id": "45252",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T04:19:55.597",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "45248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The primary translation for _retention_ is indeed 保持, but this word is not\nused with humans. Better words used in the human resource or marketing field\nwould be (人材)確保(のための施策), (顧客)関係の維持, つなぎ止め, etc. A katakana word\n[リテンション](http://www.elite-network.co.jp/x/dictionary/bizwords/retention.html)\nis also used in this sense.\n\nTurnover is 転職率/離職率/移動率 when you want a technical term. 入れ替わり is also common\nalthough this sounds less formal/technical.\n\n> Company X's high turnover rate could imply they have a problem with employee\n> retention. \n> X社の高い離職率は、この会社が人材の確保や維持に問題を抱えている可能性を示している。\n\nCasually, you can say: X社は人の入れ替わりが激しい。社員をつなぎ止めるのに苦労しているんだろう。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T04:32:58.657",
"id": "45254",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T04:32:58.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "45248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 45248 | 45254 | 45252 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This has always confused me a bit and the answer might just end up being \"it\ndepends,\" but I was wondering if there's a way to properly evaluate this.\n\nFor example if I wanted to ask \"Is this a shared PC?\" I might say `このPCは共有用？`\nand I'm not sure if that means `共有されている` or `共有している`。I almost always think\nされている sounds better but as for whether `共有する` is transitive or intransitive or\nnot - I don't know. As for which sounds stranger to Japanese people I get the\nimpression that in the case of 共有 leaving out する and its conjugations all\ntogether is better.\n\nI know that for intransitive verbs its simply the stative form of it, for\nexample \"It's been decided\" is `決まっている` rather than `決められている`, but the\ndifferences in nuances of those two I think has to do with how direct you want\nto be, and whether the agent of the action is knowable. Obviously I might be\ntrying to apply logic to this that doesn't work but...\n\nAnother example that confuses me:\n\n\"Is this applicable to everyone?\"\n\n> みんなには適用している・されている？ 当てはまっている？\n\nMy intuition tells me that using される vs している means that there is some agent in\nthe background or contextually that had an influence, whereas している just\nimplies that it is a certain way. What's a good way to think about this?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T03:49:42.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45251",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T17:51:12.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10300",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "されている vs. している for certain objective verbs",
"view_count": 2379
} | [
{
"body": "First, 共有している doesn't mean \"it's shared\" but \"someone shares it\", i.e. 共有する is\ntransitive only.\n\nSecond, if you are to use 決められている over 決まっている, the former sounds more like as\nif you are vulnerable to the one who has decided it.\n\nThird, 適用する is transitive only and みんなには適用している？ means \"Do you apply it to the\nrest of us?\". (適用される is different from 当てはまる but that's irrelevant to this\nquestion.)\n\nEdit: Among the verbs you listed, there's no ambiguity between their する and\nされる forms. When it comes to verbs whose transitive version and intransitive\none share the same form and have little preference in use, the される version\nfeels like you can't control it and are excluded from the issue. This is\nparallel to the difference between 決まっている and 決められている.\n\n * e.g. 計画が発動した vs 計画が発動された (the plan gets activated)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T17:27:19.020",
"id": "45271",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T17:51:12.003",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T17:51:12.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "45251",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45251 | null | 45271 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45255",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Looking up the words \"standard\" and \"conventions\" in Google Translate gives me\nmultiple translations (as both words do have multiple meanings I pretty much\nexpected that).\n\nUsing the following definitions of standard and convention, what kanji(s) are\nused:\n\nStandard: something established by authority, custom, or general consent as a\nmodel or example\n\nConvention: a way in which something is usually done, especially within a\nparticular area or activity.\n\nHow would you say/write \"coding standard\" or \"coding conventions\"? (Am aware\n\"coding\" is just \"コーディング\". lol)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T04:24:29.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45253",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T05:19:34.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"phrases",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Standard/Conventions in Japanese",
"view_count": 199
} | [
{
"body": "The primary word for _standard_ is 標準 and the primary word for _convention_ is\n慣習. But there are many possible expressions.\n\n * コーディング標準: This refers to established, widely-known, authoritative and named standards. 標準 is a word that sounds highly technical. HTML Standard is HTML標準.\n * コーディングスタンダード: The same as 標準. In the programming field it's often best to leave many words untranslated, you know :)\n * コーディング規約: This can include more local ones like \"Coding Style of XYZ Project/Company\". Still this sounds you have to consider it a rule.\n * コーディングスタイルガイド: Sounds less strict than 規約; it's not a rule but a guideline. How strictly you have to follow the guideline depends on the project.\n * コーディングの慣習: Coding convention, which may even be undocumented.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T04:56:06.467",
"id": "45255",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T04:56:06.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "45253",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "> Standard coding = 標準的記述法 \n> Conventional coding = 慣例的記述法\n\ne.g. regex is translated 正規表現",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T05:19:34.163",
"id": "45257",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T05:19:34.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45253",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 45253 | 45255 | 45255 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It just comes across as odd to me to say 'koto to'. Is it grammatically\ncorrect to use と after こと as seen in the example below?\n\nおんがく と かくこと と ねこ が 好き です！\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T07:36:54.830",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45259",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T09:44:21.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14211",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "Is it correct to use と directly after こと when listing?",
"view_count": 82
} | [
{
"body": "It is correct. This こと is used for nominalization.\n\nFor example, 歩くことと読書が好きです (I like walking and reading).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T08:26:04.920",
"id": "45261",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T09:44:21.293",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T09:44:21.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "45259",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 45259 | null | 45261 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45262",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Just a simple question, which one has the closest meaning of soulmate,\n**運命の人** or **心の友**? Are they interchangeable in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T08:22:47.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45260",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T09:52:23.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18464",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Closest meaning of Soulmate, 運命の人 or 心の友?",
"view_count": 13640
} | [
{
"body": "運命の人 is used exclusively to refer to a romantic partner or (future) spouse\nwith a lifelong bond with you. 心の友 is used to refer to a close friend,\ntypically of the same sex, as the kanji suggests. They are not interchangeable\nat all in Japanese.\n\n運命の人 is a relatively common phrase. On the other hand, 心の友 is rare except that\na manga character\n[ジャイアン](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Doraemon_characters#Takeshi_Goda)\nuses this often. When I hear 心の友, I can't help recalling the character, and I\nbelieve many native Japanese speakers are like me. See [image search results\nfor\n心の友](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=sfp_as&aq=-1&oq=&ts=1942&p=%E5%BF%83%E3%81%AE%E5%8F%8B&meta=vc%3D).\nSome online glossaries define this as a ジャイアン語 (\"Jaian-ese\") term.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T08:43:07.957",
"id": "45262",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T09:52:23.153",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T09:52:23.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "45260",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45260 | 45262 | 45262 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I first heard ノートパソコン I was a bit confused and thought they were\nreferring to a PC brand or something.\n\nNow that I think of it, it's a pretty appropriate term for a portable PC\n(laptop).\n\nWas just curious where the term came from?\n\nOn that note (pun intended); laptop is starting to sound like a weird name, I\ndon't think I have ever put a \"laptop\" on my lap... lol",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T09:11:50.413",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45263",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T12:28:26.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Where did the term ノートパソコン come from?",
"view_count": 1216
} | [
{
"body": "The Japanese word for paper _notebook_ is not ノートブック but\n[ノート](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%83%8E%E3%83%BC%E3%83%88) (Hence\n[デスノート](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Note), by the way). ノートブック was\nsimply too long for Japanese people. Therefore, notebook PCs are naturally\ncalled ノートPC, ノートパソコン or simply ノート in Japanese. From my understanding,\n_laptop_ is no longer common today also in English and it has been almost\nreplaced by _notebook_.\n\nWe almost never use ノートブック to refer to paper notebooks, but when referring to\nnotebook PCs, ノートブック(PC/パソコン) is common as well as ノート(PC/パソコン).\n\n**EDIT:** Hmm, seeing the comments here, it appears that _notebook_ (PC) is\nnot yet widely used among native English speakers, although [manufactures\nstopped calling their products laptops long\nago](http://www.webopedia.com/DidYouKnow/Hardware_Software/laptop_notebook.asp).\nHere in Japan, ノートPC has already replaced ラップトップPC almost completely, even\namong ordinary people. Maybe that's because ノート is far easier for us to\nunderstand :)",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T09:38:29.590",
"id": "45264",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T12:28:26.087",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T12:28:26.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "45263",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45263 | null | 45264 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45267",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My gf loves me wearing striped shirts, as I'm not a skinny person (Japanese\nstandard skinny, stateside I'm skin and bone) they naturally make me look fat!\n\nShe always says \"ボーダーが好き\" and I always think \"No, I hate the the\n(Mexican/Canadian/Any border! ...Tijuana is dope though!)\n\nWhy ボーダー？ Why not ストライプ or something?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T13:54:05.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45265",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T23:24:41.357",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T00:51:46.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese",
"connotation"
],
"title": "「ボーダー」... What border?",
"view_count": 690
} | [
{
"body": "ストライプ vs. ボーダー\n\n=\n\nVertical Stripes vs. Horizontal Stripes\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/o5ReH.jpg)\n\nUntil about two decades ago, both were called 「ストライプ」. Then, the fashion\nindustry people invented the name 「ボーダー」 to refer to \"horizontal stripes\" as a\nbuzzword to make it popular and did they ever succeed!",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T14:37:43.830",
"id": "45267",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T15:03:15.063",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T15:03:15.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45265",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
},
{
"body": "[ボーダー](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%9C%E3%83%BC%E3%83%80%E3%83%BC%E6%9F%84)\nis a strange word used for a _trend_ fashion among of jevenile, young and\nmiddle age generations.\n\nAnd I have no idea why this is also a border dress... [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pa3RD.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T23:24:41.357",
"id": "45302",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T23:24:41.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45265",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 45265 | 45267 | 45267 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to translate a tweet from a Japanese account but I'm not able. I\nknow almost all the words, but can't understand the sense.\n\nMy Japanese teacher didn't understand it very well neither and she couldn't\ngive me a correct translation into my language (Spanish).\n\n> ゲーム業界のパイの喰い合いに本気出す **よりも** 、 **可能なところ**\n> はみんなで人類みなゲーマー目指したほうがハッピーだと思うけど、最終的にその世界人口にも限りはあるから **数十手先**\n> まで関連する以上何が正しいか判断付かない。\n\nThese are the main problems I have (but not the only):\n\n * What does よりも mean here?\n * 可能なところ: Possible place?\n * Is みな the same as みんな?\n * I think 数十手先 is any kind of chess term, but I'm not sure.\n\nMy translation:\n\n> More than getting serious on eating together the pie of the games industry,\n> I think the possible place is all the humanity trying to be a gamer to be\n> happy, but finally, as there are limits for the population of that world,\n> there's no correct relationship more than see ten turns ahead",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T14:36:34.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45266",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T19:44:49.050",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-21T19:44:49.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20594",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"translation"
],
"title": "Help to translate a tweet: よりも, 可能なところ, みな, 数十手先",
"view_count": 233
} | [
{
"body": "You can understand よりも as _rather than_. So, ゲーム業界のパイの喰い合いに本気出すよりも means\n\"Rather than eating each other parts of the game business\". (パイ is verbatim\nfor _pie_ and 喰い合う is _eat each other sth_ )\n\nみんな and みな are the same thing. Except that almost nobody uses みな anymore. But\nhere is an exception 人類みな～ is a play on 人類みな兄弟 (All people are brothers and\nsisters).可能なところは means _a possible thing to do_.\n\nAll together, ゲーム業界のパイの喰い合いに本気出すよりも、可能なところはみんなで人類みなゲーマー目指したほうがハッピーだと思うけど means\n\"Even though I think it would be better if we first think about gamers rather\nthan trying to conquer each other parts of the game business\".\n\n手 means _move_ as a move in chess, go, othello or any strategy game. So _n_ 手先\nmeans _n_ moves ahead.\n\n何が正しいか判断付かない means \"can't decide what is right\" and 数十手先まで関連する以上 means \"from\nwhat we can read from some dozens of move ahead\".\n\nWhen we put all pieces together:\n\n>\n> ゲーム業界のパイの喰い合いに本気出すよりも、可能なところはみんなで人類みなゲーマー目指したほうがハッピーだと思うけど、最終的にその世界人口にも限りはあるから数十手先まで関連する以上何が正しいか判断付かない。 \n> Even though I think it would be better if we first think about gamers\n> rather than trying to conquer each other parts of the game business, since\n> at last the world population is finite we can't decide what is right from\n> just reading what happens some dozens of moves ahead.\n\n* * *\n\nNevertheless, \"we can't decide what is right from just reading what happens\nsome dozens of moves ahead.\" sounds a bit funny as a conclusion (according to\nwhat comes before) so I might have misunderstood something.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T16:39:26.760",
"id": "45269",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T16:59:34.133",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T16:59:34.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "4216",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "45266",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "**Context:** The person who said this works in the game industry, and this is\na comment on a certain Japanese pro-gaming team that apparently is in trouble.\nSadly, professional gaming is not yet widely recognized in Japan.\n\n* * *\n\n * ～するよりも means \"(rather) than doing ～\"\n * 人類みなゲーマー is a parody of a famous phrase 人類みな兄弟 (\"All human beings are siblings\"). みな is, yes, みんな. So 人類みなゲーマー(を)目指す literally means to try to achieve the everyone-is-a-gamer situation.\n * 数十手先 is a chess/go/shogi term. \"(what happens in) several dozens of moves ahead\".\n * 可能なところは in this context means \"where possible\". It means either 可能な会社 (companies that may try to achieve 人類みなゲーマー) or 可能な分野 (fields where people can try to achieve 人類みなゲーマー).\n * This `verb + 以上` is not \"more than\" but a conjunction meaning \"since ～\" or \"so long as ～\". See [this](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=ijou).\n\nI think I understand what this guy is trying to say, but the following\n\"translation\" may be very rough due to my limited English skill.\n\n> ゲーム業界のパイの喰い合いに本気出すよりも、 \n> Rather than scrambling for a piece of the game industry pie,\n\n→ Rather than competing hard in the existing game industry,\n\n> 可能なところはみんなで人類みなゲーマー目指したほうがハッピーだと思う \n> wherever possible, I think it's happier to strive together for the world\n> where everyone is a gamer.\n\n→ if the situation permits, it's probably better to try to increase the number\nof gamers itself.\n\n> けど、最終的にその世界人口にも限りはあるから \n> However, ultimately, there is a limit to the world population, \n> 数十手先まで関連する以上何が正しいか判断付かない。 \n> and since things in dozens of moves ahead are concerned, I cannot judge\n> what is correct.\n\n→ But the number of potential/future gamers are limited anyway, and you cannot\nexpand the game market forever. Since predicting the long-term future is very\ndifficult, I don't know what is the correct strategy.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T19:14:13.010",
"id": "45274",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-05T19:25:12.020",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T19:25:12.020",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "45266",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 45266 | null | 45274 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45272",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a document in an old version of a template, and I'm moving the contents\ninto a newer version of the template. I typically describe this process as\n\"upgrading\" the document.\n\n[Jisho](http://jisho.org/search/upgrade) suggests `バージョンアップ`, but I'm hoping\nto find a native term, something that's not technology-specific but rather\ndescribes the more general process of moving content from an old format to a\nnew format, which I assume is an action that would have been defined in\nJapanese bureaucracy long before the introduction of digital word processing.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T17:02:05.963",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45270",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T04:44:06.093",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20597",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"loanwords",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "Is there a native Japanese word for upgrading a document to a new format?",
"view_count": 154
} | [
{
"body": "Usually, [更新{こうしん}](http://jisho.org/search/%E6%9B%B4%E6%96%B0) is used to\nmean _update/upgrade_.\n\nFollowing l'électeur's remark you might be interested in\n[改{あらた}める](http://jisho.org/search/aratameru) which is not sino-loanword but a\nnative Japanese word as far as I know.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T17:28:11.103",
"id": "45272",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T04:44:06.093",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T04:44:06.093",
"last_editor_user_id": "4216",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "45270",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45270 | 45272 | 45272 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45293",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My friend correct one of my essay sentences from:\n\n> 大学を卒業した後で、日本へ帰ってJLPT1を取るために勉強します。\n\nto\n\n> 大学を卒業した後は、日本へ帰ってJLPT1を取るために勉強します。\n\nWhat is the difference between them and why is は better? Is it used for\nemphasis and if so why?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T18:59:32.493",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45273",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T13:03:10.773",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11827",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why は instead of で？",
"view_count": 212
} | [
{
"body": "In the first sentence, 大学を卒業した後（で） is not marked with は, which means that part\nis a new information or the focus of the remark, in other words, it's like an\nanswer to question \"when do you go back to Japan and study for JPT1?\". If you\nexplicit it, you can express it as \"it's after I graduate from my college that\nI go back to Japan and study for JPT1\".\n\nIn the second sentence, 大学を卒業した後 is marked with は*, which means it's a shared\ninformation or a precondition for the new information (日本へ帰って…勉強する), and you\ncan think of it as a kind of answer to a question \"what will you do after\ngraduating from your college?\".\n\n*. More accurately, the point is it being the topic of the sentence. Being marked with は is only one of several ways to express that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T12:57:35.287",
"id": "45293",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T13:03:10.773",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T13:03:10.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "45273",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 45273 | 45293 | 45293 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45278",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know there are adverbial forms of:\n\n * adjectives ( _Adj_ ), 形容詞{けいようし} (連用形{れんようけい} - 早い→早く); \n * adjectival nouns ( _AdjN_ ), 形容動詞{けいようどうし} (連用形{れんようけい} - 上手だ→上手に). \n\nAre there adverbial forms of nouns (名詞{めいし}) and verbs (動詞{どうし})? If they do\nexist (regardless of semantics), is there a generic rule like _Adjs_ 's and\n_AdjNs's_ or not? How can they be constructed?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T21:10:55.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45276",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T14:01:02.863",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-05T22:18:14.243",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "20599",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"adverbs",
"nouns",
"adverbial"
],
"title": "Do the adverbial forms of verbs and nouns exist?",
"view_count": 882
} | [
{
"body": "## Verbs\n\nI don't think that the て-form and the continuative form verbs qualify as an\n\"adverbial\" form, but at least they add meaning to the following verb just\nlike adverbs.\n\nCompare these:\n\n> **流れて** いる (流れる, an ichidan verb, in the て-form)\n>\n> ご飯を **食べて** 寝る* (食べる, an ichidan verb, in the て-form)\n>\n> *everything preceding the て-form verb is included in the \"adverbial\" clause\n>\n> **ゆっくり** 話す (just an adverb for comparison)\n>\n> **決して** 忘れない (This is an interesting one. It is an actual adverb, but\n> clearly based on the verb 決する.)\n>\n> **抱き** しめる* (抱く, a godan verb, in the continuative form)\n>\n> *maybe it is the other way around here, しめる adding meaning to 抱く\n>\n> **早く** 寝る (早い, an i-adjective from your example)\n\nIt should be noted that these verb forms have many other uses in addition to\nmodifying following verbs. For example, the continuative form is used create\nthe て-form:\n\n> ichidan: 流れ(cont.)+て\n>\n> godan: 抱い(alternative cont.)+て)\n\nIt attaches to a noun to create another kind of meaning:\n\n> やり(cont.)+方\n\nThe て-form can also be used in various ways that don't resemble adverbs in my\nopinion.\n\n## Nouns\n\nAs Igor Skochinsky pointed out in comments, you can actually add -的 to nouns\nto make them adjectival nouns and as you said in the question, it will become\nan adverb when you add -に. The resulting adverbs aren't guaranteed to make\nsense, but that wasn't a requirement. Other ways to use nouns as adverbs\ndepend on the noun in question. Some examples below:\n\n * Temporal nouns like 今年 can be both adverbs and nouns without adding anything, and nouns like 後 can be turned into adverbs by adding に or で in addition to being an adverb on their own in some situations.\n\n * Any noun that works as a verb with する can be used with the て-form (して) like ichidan and godan verbs in the examples. Like the examples, this isn't an adverb but something resembling it.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-05T22:53:32.930",
"id": "45278",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T14:01:02.863",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "45276",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45276 | 45278 | 45278 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Using Google Translate I get the following translation\n\nEnglish Japanese\n\n\"bloatware\" ⇒「bloatware」\n\n\"crapware\" ⇒「クラップウェア」\n\n\"craplets\" ⇒「馬鹿」(whether that's the translation or they're just trying to tell\nme something I don't know).\n\nHow would I say these words in Japanese?\n\nWould a Japanese person (someone with a basic knowledge of PC's) understand:\nIt's the「ブロートウェア/クラップウェア/馬鹿」that's eating up all your resources. (Full\nsentence said in Japanese of course)\n\n**EDIT**\n\nBloatware, crapware, craplets are pretty much all referring to the same thing\n(unwanted, RAM hogging, resource draining pre-installed crap software/apps),\nI'm not necessarily looking for a translation for each, but just a term/phrase\nthat conveys a similar connotation.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T02:25:43.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45282",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T05:51:31.810",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T05:51:31.810",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese",
"terminology",
"connotation"
],
"title": "Bloatware (¿ブロートウェア?), crapware (¿クラップウェア?), craplets (¿馬鹿?) in Japanese",
"view_count": 147
} | [
{
"body": "Maybe it is just me, but I do not know why you would use Google Translate for\nthese or anything else for that matter.\n\n\"bloatware\" = 「水{みず}ぶくれソフト」、「肥大化{ひだいか}ソフト」\n\n\"crapware\" = 「迷惑{めいわく}ソフト」、「くそソフト」\n\n\"craplets\" = 「がらくたアプリケーション」、「がらくたソフト」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T04:54:30.667",
"id": "45286",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T04:54:30.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45282",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 45282 | null | 45286 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I have two different versions:\n\nMarilou: マリル \nSargado: サーガド\n\nor\n\nMarilou: マリルー \nSargado: サルガド\n\nWould appreciate some advice on which Katakan best matches the names. Thanks\nin advance",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T04:29:55.063",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45284",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-05T12:41:56.433",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T08:30:38.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20607",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"katakana"
],
"title": "Looking for some English to Katakana advice for the name Marilou",
"view_count": 337
} | [
{
"body": "I am not sure how you pronounce your family name, but you might want to also\nconsider the following.\n\n> サーガード \n> サルガード\n\nThe most likely choice might be\n\n> マリルー サーガード\n\nAlthough slightly unfortunate, most people seems to katakanize names with the\neasy way out and just prolong easy sounds instead of the harder to pronounce\nsounds.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T04:36:20.910",
"id": "45285",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T04:36:20.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18142",
"parent_id": "45284",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "If you are Spanish\n\n> マリル サルガード\n\nIf you are French\n\n> マリルー サーガド\n\nWould be close to the original sounds, but any of them telling the difference\nof Marilou マ **リ** with the **R** and **ル** with the **L**.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T05:11:08.927",
"id": "45287",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T05:11:08.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45284",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It all depends on the correct pronunciation of your name, according to you.\n\nFor example if the Mari part is pronounced 'may-ree' then メアリールー would be\nbetter. But if the Mari part is pronounced like 'marry' then マリルー is good.\n\nI would say that サルガード is a better choice as it's closer to the way Japanese\ntend to render 'r' sounds into katakana. So my suggestion is:\n\nメアリールー・サルガード (for a 'may-ree' pronunciation) マリルー・サルガード (for a 'marry'\npronunciation)\n\nHope that helps.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T10:44:42.330",
"id": "45291",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T10:44:42.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20608",
"parent_id": "45284",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 45284 | null | 45287 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45289",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I was fixing some code (because someone thought they were smart enough to\nstart using multiple inheritance and I guess \"Kernighan's lever\" came into\neffect) and I want to add a comment \"Remember kids multiple inheritance is the\nmother of all f##k ups!\" (I know it's usually \"Assumption is the mother of all\nf##k ups!\")\n\nIs there a similar phrase in Japanese? If not; how would I write this to\nconvey the same connotation?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T07:50:19.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45288",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T09:07:44.670",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-06T08:11:55.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese",
"connotation"
],
"title": "A phrase similar to \"...is the mother of all f##k ups!\"",
"view_count": 705
} | [
{
"body": "「諸悪｛しょあく｝の根源｛こんげん｝」 , a very common phrase (but without any profanity), is\nfairly close to \"mother of all xxxx-ups\" both in meaning and feeling. Thus,\nyou could say:\n\n> 「Noun + こそ + 諸悪の根源である。」\n\n\"Multiple inheritance\" would be 「多重継承{たじゅうけいしょう}」.\n\n\"Assumption\" would be 「決{き}めつけ」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T09:07:44.670",
"id": "45289",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T09:07:44.670",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45288",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 45288 | 45289 | 45289 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have read so many posts, asked so many times to friends and people on forum\nbut still I don't get how to use さすがに without sounding a weirdo. I know that\nit doesn't have anything to do with さすが！ and it can be translated as\n\"understandably\". However, in some cases it's still wrong. Please help.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T11:31:33.530",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45292",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T14:49:24.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19600",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"expressions"
],
"title": "How is さすがに (sasugani) used?",
"view_count": 5169
} | [
{
"body": "（Quoted from Kōjien）\n\n> さすがに\n>\n> 1.そうは思うものの、やはり。そうではあるが。伊勢物語「—哀れとや思ひけむ」。「—そこまでは言えない」\n> 2.すぐれただけあって。評判だけあって。何といってもやはり。後撰和歌集秋「秋風の吹けば—わびしきは」。「—名人だけのことはある」\n> 3.他とは違って。他はともかくも。謡曲、羅生門「—羅生門は都の南門ならずや」\n\nExplanation:\n\nBriefly speaking, there are three adverb usages, and could only be subtly\ndifferentiated in my opinion…\n\nThe first one is like \"despite that, …\"\n\nThe second one usually implies compliments, and as I see it, it's similar with\nさすが, while this one with に gives me an impression that it is more of a adverb,\nwhich is used to qualify verb or adjectives.\n\nThe third one sounds pretty much like the second one to me as well, but it\nseems to be sort of obsolete.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T14:54:21.533",
"id": "45297",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T14:54:21.533",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20612",
"parent_id": "45292",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The easiest way is to begin with `さすがに` and followed by something i.e. an\nadjective. The sentence might not make sense by itself, since it only tells\nthe effect without any cause.\n\n> **さすがに** 疲{つか}れます・疲れました。\n>\n> **As expected** , [I] become tired/am tired;\n>\n> [I] become tired/am tired **for sure**.\n\nFor individual sentences, the sentence containing `さすがに` is usually preceded\nby another sentence that has the cause, or may be used after the first\nconversation as a reply.\n\n> 家から駅まで 歩いて３０分。 **さすがに** 疲れます。\n>\n> It takes 30 minutes by walking from [my] house to the station. [I] become\n> tired **for sure**.\n>\n> Q: 初めてのマラソンは どうでしたか？\n>\n> Q: How was [your] first time doing the marathon?\n>\n> A: **さすがに** 疲れました。\n>\n> A: **As expected** , [I] am tired.\n\nFor combined sentences, the part containing `さすがに` may be found at the\nbeginning of sentence or somewhere in the middle of sentence.\n\n> **さすがに** 地元{じもと}の有名{ゆうめい}人だけあって、 近所{きんじょ}で 話題{わだい}になる。\n>\n> **As expected** of being a local celebrity, [the celebrity] becomes the\n> popular topic of conversation in the neighbourhood.\n>\n> 日{にち}曜日は 休{きゅう}日{じつ}でも、 **さすがに** 誰{だれ}もが休{やす}める 訳{わけ}ではない。\n>\n> Even Sunday is a rest day, **certainly** that does not mean anyone could\n> just take rest.\n\nBased on above sentences, the following patterns can be reused.\n\n * さすがに ○○ます・ました。\n\n * さすがに ○○だけあって、 ○○。\n\n * ○○も、 さすがに ○○ない。\n\nThis answer includes only few examples to get started. Note that these\nexamples are limited to `さすがに`, and other forms of `さすが` such as `さすがの` and\n`さすがは` will _not_ be covered here.\n\n> 「さすが」に合う例文{れいぶん}を 全部 書きとめるのは、 **さすがに** 一苦労{ひとくろう}。\n>\n> [One] is **certainly** to have a hard time for writing down all example\n> sentence that fits well with \"さすが\".\n\nThe last example concludes this answer with pun intended.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T14:49:24.677",
"id": "46388",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T14:49:24.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45292",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 45292 | null | 46388 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45299",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "The two kanji radicals from the image are supposed to be 2 different kanji\nradicals, one meaning \"mouth\", and the other meaning \"enclosure\". I'm not sure\nif they are supposed to look different or not. The one above seems to have\nsome very small lines continuing the box, but may be it's just my imagination.\n\nI noticed one of them is used in kanjis where a drawing goes inside it, and\nthe other doesn't have any drawing inside it. Is that supposed to be the\ndifference between them or they look barely different somehow?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vlarx.jpg)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T20:17:06.703",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45298",
"last_activity_date": "2019-10-03T11:31:59.587",
"last_edit_date": "2019-10-03T11:31:59.587",
"last_editor_user_id": "9878",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 17,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"handwriting",
"radicals"
],
"title": "Is there a difference in drawing between the \"mouth\" and \"enclosure\" kanji radicals?",
"view_count": 5169
} | [
{
"body": "In printed form, they are the same except for their size. Mouth is smaller\nthan enclosure. Enclosure _encloses_ other radicals or kanji, but mouth never\ntakes anything inside it.\n\nSome common kanji enclosed by enclosure:\n\n> 国 四 回 団 図 園 因\n\nNotice how 「回」 has both 囗 (enclosure) and 口 (mouth).\n\nIn 楷書 (regular script), they look almost the same. They are drawn with the\nsame strokes, but the second stroke of 囗 (enclosure) can be a bit longer than\nin 口 (mouth) and the final stroke of 囗 (enclosure) is drawn after the enclosed\npart. In regular Japanese handwriting, the stroke length difference might be\nless noticeable or not there at all. See this stroke order animation of 「回」 in\nregular script:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MkCMZ.gif)\n\nIn 行書 (running script, semi-cursive script), a fairly common and well-\nunderstood calligraphy style, they look different. See this image of 「回」 in\nrunning script:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/945l5.gif)\n\nIn addition, there are other calligraphy styles that use historical radicals\nor simplify the radicals as seen fit for a particular character. See\nEarthliŋ's answer for more details about historical forms of 囗 and 口.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T20:52:17.933",
"id": "45299",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T09:25:36.153",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T09:25:36.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "45298",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
},
{
"body": "The two radicals 口 and 囗 are indeed different, even though they are hard to\ndistinguish in modern scripts/fonts. This \"standardization\" of unifying the\nlooks of unrelated elements is somewhat intentional (presumably to make the\nscript more homogeneous). You can see the same thing happening with 月 and 肉\n(see [Is there any reason a lot of body parts use the Month/Moon\nradical?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44763/1628)) and the radical ⺍\nunifying various elements such as the top parts of 學、螢、巢、…\n\nBack to the difference between 口 and 囗.\n\nAs you noticed, 口【くち】 is a Chinese character.\n\n囗 【くにがまえ】 is not a (traditional) Chinese character, but only appears as an\nelement (signifying \"enclosure\") in characters such as 国・國、圓、図、…\n\nThe difference is visible in historical scripts (screenshots from Wiktionary\nfor [口](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%8F%A3) and\n[囗](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%9B%97))\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TELUH.png)\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zApon.png)\n\nas well as in handwriting.\n\nThe next pictures show them \"in action\" as part of a different character:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1T99k.png)\n\nThe top row is a standard _Minchō_ font, the middle row a _Kyōkashotai_ font,\nand the bottom row are their historical renderings taken from\n<http://www.chineseetymology.org/>.\n\nAs 囗 くにがまえ has something inside them, the vertical strokes are parallel also\nin handwriting, whereas the vertical strokes in 口 くち are slightly angled.\n\n* * *\n\n_Note._ 口 and 囗 should not be confused with _katakana_ ロ _ro_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T20:57:44.323",
"id": "45300",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-06T21:36:41.397",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "45298",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
},
{
"body": "Unfortunately, there's a bit of confusion on this page. The distinction\nbetween「口」and「囗」is not how they're drawn, but the functional role they play in\ncharacters.\n\n * While「囗」does indeed mean _enclosure_ , the purpose of this component is not, in fact, to enclose other components in characters, but to provide a semantic hint of _enclosure_ in characters to do with surrounding/enclosing something. There are other characters which use「囗」for which「囗」doesn't actually enclose any component at all.\n\n * There are several other unrelated components which evolved into squares or rectangles in the modern form, which means that categorising square or rectangular looking components into「口」or「囗」in a binary manner is, to say the least, _unhelpful_. Things that contain rectangles don't necessarily either have something to do with _mouth_ or _surround_.\n\n* * *\n\n「口」is commonly used for two functions:\n\n 1. The meaning _mouth_ , extended for _actions done with the mouth_\n 2. As a _distinguishing mark_\n\n(1) is common knowledge, so I'll focus on (2). There has been a long history\nof creating _derived characters_ (Chinese: 分化字) by differentiation from\nexisting ones, as you can only represent so many concepts with pictograms. One\nof the methods in creating new characters is by adding _distinguishing marks_\n, and「口」is one of the more common marks used.\n\n## Examples:\n\n**「喪」from「桑」** (phonetic loan; both **そう** )\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jqAPD.png)\n\n**「古」from「盾」** (Semantic extension. The meaning _old_ for「古」is a phonetic\nloan;「古」originally meant _solid, sturdy_ , now represented by「固」, hence the\nusage of a _shield_ 「盾」to bring out this meaning)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dzDW2.png)\n\n**「商」** (Character is borrowed for the name of the [Shang\nDynasty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shang_dynasty). Original meaning\n_measure > divide/quotient, commerce/trade_ ; original character\nobsolete,「商」now takes on both the name and the meanings.)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hUx4r.png)\n\n**「周」** (Name of the [Zhou\nDynasty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhou_dynasty). Original meaning\n_arrangement of fields > perimeter_ ; original character obsolete.)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Clr0b.png)\n\n**「曹」from「㯥」** (Name of the [State of\nCao](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cao_\\(state\\)). Original meaning _pair >\nkind, group_ , as can be seen from「㯥」which is a picture of a pair of bags.\nOriginal character「㯥」is obsolete. Note that「口」further changed to「曰」.)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EX0Q3.png)\n\n* * *\n\n「囗」originally depicted _fortifications/walls surrounding a settlement_\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PyS1R.png)\n\nFrom this, there were two words that it represented:\n\n * One with the meaning _city walls_ > Chinese: _city_ , Japanese: _fortifications/castle_. The word is now written「城」, but the character evolved into「丁」, which is actually found in「城」: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/X6OaL.png)\n\n * One with the meaning _surround_ , now written「圍」(Shinjitai:「囲」).\n\nThe meaning _city walls_ , apart from in「城」, features most prominently in the\ncharacters「正」and「邑」.\n\n * 「正」originally depicted marching (feet「止」) towards a city「囗」, indicating the meaning _military expedition_ [now written「征」], extended to mean _govern_ [now written「政」], and further extended to mean _correct_ ). The sound similarity between「城」,「丁」, and「正」is not a coincidence, and「丁」doubles as a sound component in「正」.\n\n * 「邑」originally depicted a person kneeling outside a city. As a character component, it is written as「阝」exclusively on a character's right hand side, and is ubiquitous in characters to do with city/towns (都鄉邦郵郡). In fact, there are a myriad of proper nouns in Chinese containing「阝」, which were largely names of (ancient) towns.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vjhcR.png)\n\n> Do not get「正」confused with「足」; in the latter, the rectangle originally\n> depicted a person's buttocks, which later graphically became detached.\n>\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7JsJ1.png)\n\nThe meaning _surround_ , apart from several characters listed elsewhere\nalready (「國」「圖」「園」), features prominently in a few characters containing「韋」,\nwhere「囗」is located in the centre of「韋」.「圍」is already noted to be the modern\nform of the word (note that it added another「囗」), but we also have「衛」(\n_protect_ ) and「韓」( _fence_ , phonetically borrowed for _Korea_ ). For the\nword representing _surround_ , feet were added to「囗」to emphasise this meaning,\ndepicting a city being patrolled.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9gA0i.png)\n\n* * *\n\nAnother very common component which now looks like a square or rectangle was\noriginally drawn as a circle「〇」. This component commonly provides the meaning\nof _circle_ and/or sound **えん/げん/がん**.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GFNrk.png)\n\nNote,「員」originally meant _circle_ , now represented by「圓」(Shinjitai:「円」).\n\n* * *\n\nFinally, some incorrect descriptions regarding「四」and「回」. These are **not**\nwritten using「囗」no matter how you look at it; they are always wider than they\nare tall, whereas「囗」is always taller than it is wide (when it is used to\nenclose other components). They also have nothing to do with _mouth_ ,\n_surround_ , or _city wall_ , and neither shape came from「〇」.\n\n「四」originally depicted _breathing out_ , and contains a picture of a nostril.\nThe _nose_ meaning is preserved in characters like「泗」( _snot_ ) and「呬」(\n_breathe out_ / _rest_ , differentiated from「四」with the addition of a _mouth_\nsemantic「口」. The character representing this word is now written as「息」). The\nmeaning _four_ is a phonetic loan.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lWiZI.png)\n\n「回」originally depicted eddying currents in water, resembling a whirlpool (now\nwritten「洄」).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yjmH4.png)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-07-24T14:25:07.830",
"id": "60353",
"last_activity_date": "2018-07-24T17:32:51.227",
"last_edit_date": "2018-07-24T17:32:51.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "26510",
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "45298",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 45298 | 45299 | 45300 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Reading [Is there a difference in drawing between the \"mouth\" and \"enclosure\"\nkanji radicals?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/45298/is-there-\na-drawing-difference-between-these-2-kanji-radicals) made me think: does `囗`\n(enclosure) _have_ to be the outermost radical? Apparently the answer is \"no\"\nsince we have this (incomplete) list of exceptions: `烟姻廻咽個恩悃迴`. It also seems\nto happen with other \"enclosure type\" radicals, e.g. `厂`->`板` or `广` -> `俯`,\nbut are there any radicals that can only be in a specific position in the\nkanji and nowhere else?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-06T21:43:30.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45301",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T02:11:02.330",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"radicals"
],
"title": "Are there any radicals with immutable position in kanji?",
"view_count": 169
} | [
{
"body": "It's an interesting question. My first idea was that as a general rule a\nradical could appear everywhere, except when it comes in some \"contracted\nform\" (think of つちへん（土偏） such as in 地) where it has to be in a specific place\n(left in this case). Of course this is just a graphical distinction but we are\ntalking always of the same kanji, that is, 土. If you look at all kanji where\nthis is the radical, when written as 土偏 it's always and only on the left.\n\nAnyway, I think\n[Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%83%A8%E9%A6%96#.E9.83.A8.E9.A6.96.E3.81.AE.E5.9E.8B.E3.81.A8.E4.BD.8D.E7.BD.AE)\nalso provide interesting insights:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AIeXi.png)\n\nAccording to this it seems that there is not a general rule for the position,\nand a radical could indeed appear everywhere.\n\nMy guess that in some particular forms (like earth on the left as I mentioned\nabove) they always appear in the same place still remains though. As I said I\nfailed to see a kanji where the contracted form of 土 is not on the left, but\nyet again, although it graphically looks different it is always 土.\n\nAnyway I guess that in general the answer to your question is no, and the key\nsentence in the article above is the following:\n\n> [...] 部首は、原則として文字のグループに共通する意味を表すので、部首のつく位置は必ずしも一定していない.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T02:11:02.330",
"id": "45307",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T02:11:02.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "45301",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 45301 | null | 45307 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Recently, I was replying to a comment on YouTube. I wrote this:\n\nでも、「 ラットが死んだ」と「レッド・パージ！！！」が知名そうです\n\n(But, Rats Died (a particular song) and Red Purge!!! (another song title) seem\nto be well-known.)\n\nWhat I really wanted to say was that only those two songs were well-known. Is\nit okay to just do this:\n\nでも、「 ラットが死んだ」と「レッド・パージ！！！」だけが知名そうです\n\nor is that not correct? And what other ways can you say \"only /a list of\nobjects/\" instead of only just one thing?\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T00:21:48.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45303",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T01:37:51.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19870",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Use of だけ with と for saying \"only /this/ and /this/\"",
"view_count": 133
} | [
{
"body": "As far as grammar is concerned, it is perfectly grammatical to say:\n\n> 「A **と** B **だけ** が～～～です。」\n\nYou might, however, want to remember that native speakers do not use 「だけ」\nnearly as often as Japanese-learners do to say these things. The sentence\npattern that is commonly used by native speakers would instead be:\n\n> 「A と B **しか / だけしか / 以外{いがい}は** + negative expression」\n\nThe first expression using 「だけ」 could sound \"translated\", meaning that it\ncould sound unnatural at times if not always.\n\n(Funny thing is that a sentence using 「しか」, which must be followed by a\nnegative expression, would often sound more positive as a sentence than a\nsentence using 「だけ」 followed by an adjective, verb, etc. with a very positive\nmeaning.)\n\nThe mistake in your sentence that actually stands out even more is the phrase\n「知名{ちめい}そうです」, which makes little to no sense. Again, it was \"translated\", was\nit not? The phrases I might suggest would be\n「有名{ゆうめい}なようです」、「よく知{し}られているようです」, etc. If you used 「しか」, those phrases would\nneed to be turned into their negative forms.\n\nThe sentence I would recommend would be:\n\n> 「でも、『ラットが死んだ』と『レッド・パージ！！！』 **しか** あまり知られていないようです（ね）。」\n\nThe sentence that is 100% grammatical but would not necessarily be\nrecommendable would be:\n\n> 「でも、『ラットが死んだ』と『レッド・パージ！！！』 **だけ** が有名なようです（ね）。」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T01:37:51.047",
"id": "45306",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T01:37:51.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45303",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45303 | null | 45306 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45305",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don’t remember that. Thanks in advance.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T01:29:03.103",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45304",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T01:44:34.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18124",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -4,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology"
],
"title": "What is the kanji for いもうと?",
"view_count": 188
} | [
{
"body": "Is that word \"妹\"?\n\nThat's mean younger sister.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T01:36:24.157",
"id": "45305",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T01:44:34.750",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T01:44:34.750",
"last_editor_user_id": "5411",
"owner_user_id": "5411",
"parent_id": "45304",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 45304 | 45305 | 45305 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "The scenario is a group of friends trying to figure out what to eat. One\nperson says: 決を採ります！ 洋食焼き[どど]がいい人ー？！\n\nFriends respond: はあーい\n\nHe then says: 次に和食定食[めんぼう]がいい人ー！\n\nResponse: はあーい\n\nI feel like I'm overthinking this but are (どど) and (めんぼう) supposed to be the\nnames of eateries, and if so why use いい人 to describe something that isn't a\nperson? If someone could enlighten me I would appreciate it, thank you.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T02:21:49.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45308",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T06:08:11.370",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T05:59:16.137",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "19275",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Confusion over the use of いい人",
"view_count": 1263
} | [
{
"body": "\"Objecct がいい人\" stands for the asked person to prefer Object. \"いい\" means like,\ngood, prefer, want for asked friends on that situation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T02:34:06.603",
"id": "45309",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T02:34:06.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20567",
"parent_id": "45308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "I am not sure I am getting the context right, but could it be he was proposing\ntwo different alternatives and asking something like \"Who's up for this? Who's\nup for that?\"?\n\nIn this sense いい could be just meaning \"good\" in the sense of \"be OK for\".\nLike \"For whom (人) is どど good (いい)?\" And similarly in the other case.\n\nSo the point is that いい does not refer to 人 as in the sense of \"good person\",\nbut rather \"(In this group of people) who are the people for whom this or that\nkind of food is OK\"?\n\nOf course as I said, this depends on the context. As I interpreted it, one guy\nis asking to a group of friends questions and among these people some reply\n\"hai\" to the first while some other reply \"hai\" to the second (as if someone\nis taking votes to choose the most suitable option). If I got it wrong please\nlet me know.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T02:37:18.347",
"id": "45310",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T02:37:18.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "45308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "いい人 can be confusing if you don't know how to use it.\n\nIn a way, it can mean \"good person\". \nBut in this case it means \"person who chooses XX\". Especially during such\nvotes. \nIt's in a way a very abridge and casual way to say :\n\n> 「これ」の方がいいと思っている人はいますか？\n\nIt is also something me and probably many people do with their young children\nfor fun. Ask \"おいしい人！\"、\"もう一回やりたい人！\"、\"アイスクリームが食べたい人！\", etc. and the kid will\nraise his hand with a big smile and say \"はーい！\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T02:38:17.660",
"id": "45311",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T06:08:11.370",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T06:08:11.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18142",
"parent_id": "45308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "In this case いい isn't a standalone part modifying 人. You can break it up as\n[洋食焼き\"どど\"がいい][人], or \"people for whom [どど] is acceptable (say yes).\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T03:46:52.943",
"id": "45313",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T03:46:52.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20619",
"parent_id": "45308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 45308 | null | 45311 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When do I use から and when 以来? For example,\n\n> 私はここで1:00以来働いています。\n\nor\n\n> 私はここで1時から待っています。\n\nDoes it matter? Does it ever matter (provided から is being used to mean \"since\na given time\")?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T03:05:41.837",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45312",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-29T06:52:36.657",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T07:22:54.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "18954",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference in から and 以来",
"view_count": 730
} | [
{
"body": "Yes it matters, they are two different things. It also depends if you are just\nasking about から or ～てから.\n\nThe first one by itself (in the context of time) means \"from/after\" so\n\n> 1時から = From 1 o'clock\n\n～てから means \"after doing\" something and I could see more the question of the\ndifference with 以来 in this case. For example:\n\n> 日本に来てからずっと仕事を探しています.\n\nOn the other hand, て以来 means\n\n> since /ever since \n> 「Ａて以来、Ｂ」 B should be a continuous action, current circumstances, or a\n> habit. It cannot express the future. (See more\n> [here](https://hinative.com/en-US/questions/1370819))\n\nSo for example in the following sentences in the first you could use 以来 but in\nthe second and third you could not:\n\n> ・去年離婚して以来、ずっと独身です。\n>\n> ・来週（×以来 ○以降）ずっと雨が降るらしい\n>\n> ・来週×以来 ○以降ずっと雨が降るらしい\n\nMore on ～[てから](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-japanese-grammar-\nflashcard-18/). More on [以来 and 以降](http://jn2et.com/JLPT/ta-teiraiN2.html)\n(that as you notice is what you should use in those cases).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T05:19:00.617",
"id": "45314",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-29T06:52:36.657",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-29T06:52:36.657",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "45312",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45312 | null | 45314 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45319",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was reading the internet today and noticed someone said that the kanji `获`\ndoes not exist.\n\nThis character is very commonly used in Chinese and can be found in the\nUnicode CJK Unified Ideographs (Han) block at code point\n[U+83B7](http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=83B7).\n\nThe statement that the kanji didn't exist got me wondering, in Japanese, how\nwould one refer to a Chinese Character that isn't used in the Japanese\nlanguage? Would it not still be referred to as kanji?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T09:50:43.360",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45317",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-15T08:38:30.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15690",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Referring to Chinese Characters that are not used in Japanese",
"view_count": 2034
} | [
{
"body": "获 is the simplified form of 獲 and thus only used in simplified Chinese. The\nJapanese word for simplified Chinese characters is 簡体字{かんたいじ}.\n\n獲 on the other hand is a commonly used character in Japanese that is taught in\nschools.\n\nGenerally, characters not in 常用漢字 (regular-use kanji) or 人名用漢字 (name kanji)\nare referred to as 表外字 (\"characters outside the table\"). That doesn't mean\nthey can't be used, though. 糞{くそ} for one is a character that is a 表外字 but is\nstill commonly used and most Japanese people know it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T10:00:29.507",
"id": "45318",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T10:25:45.547",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T10:25:45.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "45317",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "They're still kanji, for _kanji_ is the Japanese reading of 漢字 \"Chinese\ncharacter\". The same reason we call comics from everywhere _manga_ , unlike in\nEnglish.\n\n> _how would one refer to a Chinese Character that isn't used in the Japanese\n> language?_\n\nThere are two scenarios:\n\n * the kanji is theoretically usable, or historically attested in Japan, but rarely used in Japanese due to linguistic differences or whatever reason\n\nWe can call them:\n\n> （日本では）珍しい漢字 \n> （日本では）（あまり）使われない漢字\n\n * Japan and other countries have different standards for the kanji, so that (the specific form of) it never occurred in Japanese writing\n\nWe can call them:\n\n> 外国の漢字 _or_ [country name]の漢字 \n> 日本の漢字じゃない\n\nIn your case, 获 is the Simplified form in PRC corresponding to 穫 and 獲 in\nJapanese orthography.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T10:29:18.323",
"id": "45319",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-07T10:35:15.117",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T10:35:15.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "45317",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45317 | 45319 | 45318 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As a French I've always heard that Songohan's name comes from _gohan_ meaning\n_meal_ / _cooked rice_. The English Wiki says the same and even mentions ご飯.\n\nBut I don't understand why, since the names in the family are like this:\n\n * 孫悟空 _Songokū_\n\n * 孫悟飯 _Songohan_\n\n * 孫悟天 _Songoten_\n\nSo it seems only the last kanji changes between the characters, and since 飯\nalone already means _meal_ / _cooked rice_ , and 悟飯 alone doesn't mean\nanything, why do we focus on _gohan_ and not only _han_ to explain the name of\nthe character?\n\n* * *\n\nEDIT: after reading your answers, I realized my mistake was to read 飯 alone as\n_han_. That's why I didn't understand people saying \"the name means _meal_\nbecause of _go + han_ \" since to me _han_ alone already meant _meal_.\n\nI'm sure noone understands what I mean but thank you, it's clear now.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T11:34:29.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45320",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-23T08:36:54.887",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-10T09:21:51.123",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "19507",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"names",
"manga",
"anime",
"puns"
],
"title": "孫悟飯 - Songohan, why non-Japanese say it comes from \"gohan = meal/cooked rice\"?",
"view_count": 1274
} | [
{
"body": "It's a pun. In fact, many, many of Dragonball's characters are puns on food\n(or food-related) items:\n\n * サイヤ人 _Saiyajin_ from [ヤサイ]{野菜}人 \"vegetable people\"\n * ベジータ _Vegeta_ from ベジタブル \"vegetable\"\n * ウーロン _Oolong_ from 烏龍 (type of tea)\n * ピラフ _Pilaf_\n * ランチ _Lunch_\n * ヤムチャ _Yamcha_ from 飲茶【やむちゃ】 (snacks & tea)\n * カリン塔【とう】 _Korin Tower_ from 花林糖【かりんとう】 (type of sweets)\n * バーダック _Burdock_ from 牛蒡【ごぼう】 \"burdock root\"\n * カカロット _Kakarrot_ from 人参【キャロット】 \"carrot\"\n * ギニュー _Ginyū_ from 牛乳【ぎゅうにゅう】 \"milk\"\n * バータ _Butta_ from バター \"butter\"\n * リクーム _Reacoom_ from クリーム \"cream\"\n * ジース _Jheese_ from チーズ \"cheese\"\n * フリーザ _Freezer_ from \"freezer\" (like \"fridge\")\n * etc.\n\nFor a full list see [Dragonball Wiki's Origins of character\nnames](http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/Origins_of_character_names), which I\nfound via [this question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/46145) on Anime.SE\n\nSo, 孫悟飯 doesn't literally mean \"(cooked) rice\", but it certainly alludes to\nit, like the names of so many other Dragonball characters.\n\nBy the way, you need _gohan_ (here 悟飯) to make the pun work. 飯 by itself is\nread _meshi_ and 飯【はん】 is not a word.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T13:14:48.320",
"id": "45321",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-23T08:36:54.887",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-23T08:36:54.887",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "45320",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 19
}
]
| 45320 | null | 45321 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45329",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have some notes from many years back when I began to do Japanese. As you\nmight expect, I am suspicious of my understanding at the time and of what I've\nwritten.\n\nI have two verbs for \"to give\" and would like to check what the differences\nare.\n\n```\n\n 上げる give\n 与える give\n \n```\n\nI also have\n\n```\n\n あげる do a favour (not 'I' but 'they')\n \n```\n\nbut I don't know what I meant by my english explanation. Does anybody\nrecognise あげる as \"doing a favour\"?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T13:30:59.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45322",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T00:13:44.383",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T13:48:23.233",
"last_editor_user_id": "13677",
"owner_user_id": "4071",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "Difference between 上げる and 与える",
"view_count": 3264
} | [
{
"body": "上げる is used generally and it is also polite. If you want to say the same\nmeaning in not polite way, you say やる（遣る）. 与える is used only when the upper\nrank person gives something to the lower one/ones. For example, a king gives\nsomething to the vassal/retainer.\n\nあげる used in （し）て＋あげる is used in doing somebody a favor in doing something.\nI'll show you some examples; ごみを出すのを手伝ってあげる。I would help you take out the\ngarbage. 苦労話を聞いてあげる。I would hear your hard-luck stories.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T15:04:50.197",
"id": "45329",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T00:13:44.383",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-08T00:13:44.383",
"last_editor_user_id": "20623",
"owner_user_id": "20623",
"parent_id": "45322",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 45322 | 45329 | 45329 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45328",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "(I cannot think of a good title for this question, sorry!)\n\nI was watching the anime 氷菓 episode 8. At the start of the episode, there was\nthis online chat thingy going on:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/sebcF.jpg)\n\nBasically, this person with the user name \"L\" made a few typos (like 取っ手も楽しみ)\nand he/she corrected them in the messages that follow. Then \"名前を入れて下さい\" said\nthat \"L\" does not have to correct the typos and added that \"そのままENTERを押せば\"\n\nHere is where I got confused.\n\nI think \"そのままENTERを押せば\" literally translates to \"If you just press enter\nimmediately\", right? I don't really understand why an unfinished conditional\nclause is being there on its own, out of nowhere. I have a few guesses for the\nreason:\n\n 1. \"名前を入れて下さい\" is telling \"L\" to just send the message by pressing enter without caring about typos. This would mean that this is an inversion. The actual order would be \"そのままENTERを押せば、変換はしなくても構わない\".\n 2. This is another one of those cases where things are omitted in a sentence, something around the lines of \"誰にもわかる\" is omitted\n 3. \"名前を入れて下さい\" is telling \"L\" how to use the IME correctly - just press enter (as opposed to space + enter which will select the next choice and cause a typo).\n\nFor context, this is the next part of the conversation:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/T3bis.jpg)\n\n\"L\" seems to have made another typo and suddenly understands something\n(ああ、ほんとですね, It really is so!)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T13:47:12.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45323",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T03:49:06.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Can you explain this conversation?",
"view_count": 136
} | [
{
"body": "This is likely an inverted sentence, as your suggestion #1.\n\n> 変換はしなくても構わない、そのままENTERを押せば。\n\nThis kind of inversion isn't deemed good grammar outside real-time piece-by-\npiece conversations like this scene. This typically happens when a speaker is\nnot quick enough to say the phrase in time and adds it as an afterthought,\nwhich is very common in daily conversation, I guess.\n\nA more minor possibility is that the writer wanted to continue another clause\nafter it, but taken over by another member before it and lost the opportunity\nto post their sequel. In this case nobody knows what would exactly succeed.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T14:51:46.990",
"id": "45328",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T03:49:06.807",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T03:49:06.807",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "45323",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 45323 | 45328 | 45328 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When is the use of correct particle (を or が) on the direct object of a\ntransitive verb, for example:\n\n * shigoto o owarimasu\n * shigoto ga owarimasu\n\nWhat is the exact meaning in each other, please.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T22:15:21.543",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45334",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T11:29:34.683",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-07T23:18:29.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "20629",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"particle-を",
"nouns",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "use of particles on direct object",
"view_count": 3097
} | [
{
"body": "Many Japanese verbs [have transitive and intransitive\nversions](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14861/5010). Basically, 終わる\n(owaru) is an **intransitive** verb. 終える (oeru) is the transitive equivalent.\nSo here are the most basic usages:\n\n> * 仕事が終わります。 Shigoto ga owarimasu. ( **intransitive** ) \n> The task finishes.\n> * 仕事を終えます。 Shigoto o oemasu. ( **transitive** ) \n> I finish the task.\n>\n\nIn plain and active sentences like your example, the direct object of a\ntransitive verb is always marked with を. In potential and passive sentences\nthere are a lot more to know.\n\n * Potential: [The difference between が and を with the potential form of a verb.](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/609/5010)\n * Passive: [Passive form - The exact difference between を and が](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11025/5010)\n\nSo, these are the generic rules.\n\nBut in case you have seen ～を終わる before, please read on.\n\n* * *\n\nHowever, 終わる (owaru) happens to have an exceptional transitive usage, too.\nSee: [When is 終わる used as a transitive\nverb?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5043/5010) It's the fourth\ndefinition of [this dictionary\nentry](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/34223/meaning/m0u/%E7%B5%82%E3%82%8F%E3%82%8B/).\n\n> * 今日の授業 **を** 終わります。 \n> That's all for today's class.\n>\n\nExceptional transitive usages are seen in limited contexts in some\nintransitive verbs. I think this transitive usage of 終わる is limited to \"That's\nit/all (for today)\" as a closing word of a lesson/meeting/etc. In such\ncontexts 今日の授業 **が** 終わります sounds highly unnatural (it sounds the class closes\non its own). For other meanings, you have to use ～が終わる or ～を終える following the\ngeneral rule above. For example, you cannot say 食事を終わる nor 宿題を終わる. If you want\nto say \"Let's have a party when you have finished with the novel\":\n\n> * その小説が終わったら、パーティーを開きましょう。: OK\n> * その小説を終えたら、パーティーを開きましょう。: OK\n> * [×] その小説を終わったら、パーティーを開きましょう。: ungrammatical\n>\n\nThere is another exception regarding 終わる; when this is used as an auxiliary\nverb (i.e., when it follows a stem of another verb and forms a compound verb\nthat means \"finish ～ing\"), `verb + 終わる` works as a both transitive-and-\nintransitive verb. In this case, を and が are interchangeable.\n\n> * その小説 **を** 書き終わったら、パーティーを開きましょう。: OK\n> * その小説 **が** 書き終わったら、パーティーを開きましょう。: OK\n> * その小説 **を** 書き終えたら、パーティーを開きましょう。: OK\n>\n\nSee also:\n\n * [In what contexts can \"始{はじ}める\" be an intransitive verb?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/28919/5010)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T00:30:17.093",
"id": "45338",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T11:29:34.683",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "45334",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 45334 | null | 45338 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45339",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the difference between the particles に、and まで? And what does it mean\nwhen combined to make までに?\n\nI've been quite confused as to what these two mean. And I was hoping someone\ncould compare the two to help me understand.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-07T23:57:31.427",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45336",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T06:00:24.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-に",
"particle-まで"
],
"title": "Difference between に and まで?",
"view_count": 274
} | [
{
"body": "First I guess it would be good to plainly lay out what the two mean.\n\nに can be used to mean \"to (a destination)\", the precise time of an even (３時\n**に** **at** 3 o'clock) attached to a verb in stem form to mean \"to do that\nthing (見 **に** 行った went (there) **to** watch (it)) as well as some other\ncases.\n\nSo, it's something like \"to\" or \"at\" or \"in\" etc.\n\nまで is a little simpler. It basically means \"until\". Whether it's talking about\n_until_ a certain time, or _until_ a certain state.\n\nWhen they are combined I believe in most situations it is just that they are\nbeing attached to the same word at the same time.\n\nその日 **までに** 提出してください。 Please submit it **by** that day.\n\nIt's like saying \"up to and on that day\", or maybe \"up to and including\".\n\nIn this case, it just so happens we can translate it as one word, \"by\".\n\nThis can be done with other particles too. では には にも かも までも etc.\n\nThese can also often be translated as a single word.\n\nIn some cases, the second particle makes the first unnecessary so it gets\ndeleted essentially. You wouldn't say 私がも just 私も for example.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T06:00:24.673",
"id": "45339",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T06:00:24.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "45336",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 45336 | 45339 | 45339 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45341",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm confused. When I look at jisho.org it seems to give the kanji for this as:\n\n一昨年\n\nbut it has two hiragana versions.\n\nCan someone explain to me what Kanji would normally be used for this and why\nare there two different hiragana.\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T07:16:38.450",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45340",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T07:32:14.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20633",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "year before last - いっさくねん or おととし",
"view_count": 1090
} | [
{
"body": "Both readings are correct even though it is perfectly valid to write 「おととし」 in\nhiragana.\n\n「おととし」 is less formal and is used heavily in our daily lives.\n\n「いっさくねん」 is more formal and business-like; therefore, it is used less often\nthan 「おととし」 is.\n\n「おととし」 is the original Japanese word (if you could tell from its \"softer\"\nkun'yomi sounds) and 「いっさくねん」 is the \"Chinese-like\" reading of the word. 「いち」,\n「さく」 and 「ねん」 are all on'yomi.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T07:32:14.377",
"id": "45341",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T07:32:14.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45340",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 45340 | 45341 | 45341 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46353",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between\n\n * (verbて) しまう (in it's \"do completely\" meaning),\n * ( verbStem) きる,\n * (verbStem) ぬく (if any)?\n\nIn examples for しまう for this meaning it didn't seem to overlap with the \"do\nwith regret\" or \"do inadvertently\" meaning.\n\nきる based on dictionary has loads of meanings, so it's difficult to guess.\n\nぬく is new for me and its common meaning of \"remove/extract/omit\" seems\nactually contradictory to this one, so I don't know.\n\nIf there are similar verbs/suffixes please feel free to expand the list, thank\nyou!",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T08:33:14.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45342",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-20T14:31:23.543",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-20T14:31:23.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "9719",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "\"Do completely\" suffixes (〜しまう, 〜きる, 〜ぬく) or verbs and their differences",
"view_count": 1298
} | [
{
"body": "しまう、きる、 and ぬく are more or less similar, but there are subtle differences.\n\n[しまう](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/100617/meaning/m0u/): I assume you mean\ndefinition 6ア in the link, or definition 4. in\n[Jisho](http://jisho.org/word/%E4%BB%95%E8%88%9E%E3%81%86). しまう puts more\nemphasis on the _end state_ than the _actor or action_ , being a word that\nsignifies the end of a state transition. (Those familiar with Chinese will\nfind that しまう having an (admittedly rare) alternative kanji reading of 了う\nshould see a connection.) See these example phrases in the dictionary entry:\n\n * 「[早]{はや}く[食]{た}べてしまいなさい」: The speaker is ordering a transition from the food being not eaten to the food being eaten (with an implicit subject of the 2nd person).\n * 「あきれてしまう」: The speaker is describing a transition from not being あきれている to being あきれている (with an implicit subject of the 1st person). The adjective is tricky to translate but means something like a combination of bewilderment and dismay. Or \"the facepalm feeling,\" whichever you prefer.\n\nぬく、きる: See [Difference in usage of きる and ぬく attached to verb\n連用形](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/41380/difference-in-usage-\nof-%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8B-and-%E3%81%AC%E3%81%8F-attached-to-\nverb-%E9%80%A3%E7%94%A8%E5%BD%A2)\n\nWith regards to [ぬく](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/169219/meaning/m0u/), my\nparticular online dictionary doesn't mention if 貫く is a proper spelling when\nattached to a verb's 連用形. It does say that 抜く is correct. (Definition 15) That\nbeing said, I can attest that the definition where 貫く is considered correct,\nDefinition 10 (\"To pass through to the other side, to connect one place to\nanother\"), is the nuance given by adding ぬく to a verb's 連用形. We essentially\nwant to break through a metaphorical wall that stands between the \"action is\nnot complete\" state and the \"action is complete\" state, and ぬく is the verb by\nwhich we punch through the wall to the \"other side.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T16:15:57.730",
"id": "46353",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T16:15:57.730",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20380",
"parent_id": "45342",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 45342 | 46353 | 46353 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am confused about the 'double/compound verbs' when used in a sentence. For\nexample in the following phrases...\n\n> 1. 自分をファーストネームで呼んでもらいたい...\n> 2. ルーカスさんが車でアパート探しに連れて行ってくれた。\n> 3. ルーカスさんの知人の家のパーティーに連れて行ってもらった。\n> 4. 電話番号をもらっておいた。\n>\n\nI am confused why these verbs exist. What I thought about is a much simpler\nway, like\n\n> 2. ルーカスさんが車でアパート探しに連れてた。\n> 3. 電話番号をもらった。\n>\n\nI have heard native Japanese speak with these compound verbs. But what\nmistakes/connotations/nuances am I making if I just used the 'simple' verbs?\n\nYour insights would be great.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T08:43:26.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45343",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T10:24:49.090",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-08T09:17:23.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11033",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"compound-verbs"
],
"title": "\"compound verbs\" in the following sentences",
"view_count": 318
} | [
{
"body": "It could help to think of the chained verbs as a series of actions or if you\nare familiar with Japanese adverbs, think of the final verb in the compound as\nthe actual action and the verbs preceding it in て-form as an adverbial\ndescribing _how_.\n\n> ルーカスさんが車でアパート探しに **連れて行って** くれた。\n\nThink of 「 **連れて** 行く」 as \"to go (somewhere) **leading** (somebody)\" (i.e. to\ntake somebody along).\n\n> ルーカスさんが車でアパート探しに連れて行って **くれた** 。\n\nNow think of the previous verb as an adverbial describing how 「くれる」. \" **To\ndo** (something) **for** (somebody) going (somewhere) leading (somebody)\".\nSomebody can refer to oneself.\n\n> Mr. Lucas, with a car, to apartment hunting, **did the favor of taking\n> _himself_ along**.\n\nOr in more natural English:\n\n> Mr. Lucas joined me in my hunt for an apartment with his car.\n\nYour sentence:\n\n> ルーカスさんが車でアパート探しに **連れてた** 。\n\nIt is the colloquial form of 連れていた and has a completely different meaning from\n連れて行ってくれた. I'll assume you meant 連れた.\n\n> Mr. Lucas, with a car, to apartment hunting, led (something or somebody).\n\nThis is much more ambiguous from when 行く and くれる are used. First of all, it\ndoesn't mean taking somebody along but only leading something. The omission of\nくれる also leaves it unclear what was done to what.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T09:47:44.857",
"id": "45346",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T10:24:49.090",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-08T10:24:49.090",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "45343",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 45343 | null | 45346 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Here's the sentence :\n\n> 僕とした事が忘れてたよ。\n\nWhat is the role of とした ?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T09:10:09.320",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45345",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T09:10:09.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "とした in this sentence?",
"view_count": 54
} | []
| 45345 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45348",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I’m currently reading a Japanese text about political philosophy, but I can’t\nput my head around the term **二系列の交叉点**. It comes up in the following sentence\nand is frequently used afterwards.\n\n人類と社会の未来と俺の未来、普遍への自己犠牲的献身と私的環境の中での現在のエゴイズム、この **二系列の交叉点** に立ってどちらかの択一を強制されている。\n\nAll possible translations I came up with didn't quite fit. Can anyone help me\nout?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T13:18:37.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45347",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-17T11:50:04.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20636",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 二系列の交叉点 mean?",
"view_count": 115
} | [
{
"body": "系列A：人類と社会の未来＝普遍への自己犠牲的献身。 \n系列B：俺の未来＝私的環境の中での現在のエゴイズム。\n\n二系列の交叉点とは系列Aと系列Bの交叉点。\n\nNow you are standing at the center of the crossing of two ways: A and B. You\nare forced to select one of the ways of living between A and B. To live for\nthe contribution to others or to live for your selfish way is the question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T13:43:03.787",
"id": "45348",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-17T11:50:04.823",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-17T11:50:04.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "45347",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Here is my interpretation. So you have only 1 choice: the green or the red.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7fMI8.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T18:32:04.803",
"id": "46355",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T18:32:04.803",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12367",
"parent_id": "45347",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 45347 | 45348 | 45348 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46371",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> (1) 本はどこですか。\n>\n> (2) 本はどこにありますか。\n\nUnless I'm mistaken, both those sentences mean something like \"where is the\nbook\", what's the difference between using です and あります to indicate position?\n\nI wouldn't have said (2) for \"where is the book\" but in an exercise where the\nquestion was \"where is the switch\" and the answer \"next to the door\", the\nanswer used にあります so I assumed it was also in the question. It made me wonder\nwhen it was better to use どこですか instead of どこにありますか.\n\n(Also, if there's an error in my sentences don't just correct them, also give\nan explanation to my question please)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T15:17:00.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45349",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T18:58:58.713",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20551",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"questions",
"copula",
"pronouns"
],
"title": "Difference between どこですか and どこにいますか/どこにありますか?",
"view_count": 5727
} | [
{
"body": "The verb ある is translated \"be located\", so there's usually little semantic\ndifference between どこですか？ and どこにありますか？ This rule can be further extended to\nXはYにあります = XはYです for a thing X and location Y.\n\n> 本は机の上にあります。 = 本は机の上です。 _The book is on the desk._\n>\n> ジョンは秋葉原にいます。 = ジョンは秋葉原です。 _John is in Akihabara._\n\nHowever, of course, the extended form ～にあります is required when it's not obvious\nthat Y is a location name in this construction.\n\n> ロナルドはマクドナルドです。 _Ronald is McDonald. / Ronald is at McDonald's._ \n> → ロナルドはマクドナルドにいます。 _Ronald is at McDonald's._\n\nNow, the pronoun どこ, unlike English _where_ , can indicate not only a location\nbut also a **group, community or organization** (as well as ここ・そこ・あそこ), thus\nalso affected by the ambiguity in some context.\n\n> 出版社はどこですか？ _Who is the publisher? / Where is the publisher?_ \n> → 出版社はどこにありますか？ _Where is the publisher?_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T04:43:49.003",
"id": "46371",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T18:58:58.713",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T18:58:58.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "45349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
]
| 45349 | 46371 | 46371 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "45352",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SbaBy.jpg)\n\nIn [this NHK video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqpnYjxRqqA&t=114s), あいちゃん\nseem to be demonstrating some cooking skills, while a cat named にゃんちゅう seems\nto be praising her by her side. I understand most of what he says, but there\nare 3 places ( **bolded** below) in his speech where I cannot catch what he is\nsaying even with a dictionary, and even by slowing down the video.\n\nHis speech starts 0:42, and ends 1:57. **The 3 places I have problems with\nhave timestamps 0:54, 1:21 and 1:51**. My attempts, after many listens, are\nbelow. In addition, I suspect 0:54 is a variation of ～でなくてなんであろう, but I am not\nsure what it is. Could I receive some help for these three areas?\n\n> にゃんちゅう：もんにちは！今日はあいちゃんが日頃より鍛えたお料理の腕前をお見せします！では、あい先生、どうぞ！\n>\n> あいちゃん：こんにちは！今日は私の得意料理を皆さんにお教えしたいと思います。 助手のにゃんちゅうくん、よろしくね。\n>\n> にゃんちゅう：はい、先生。では、おこちらに、先生に腕を振るっていただく、材料。すでに用意されております。ハハ。よろしくお願い致します！\n>\n> あいちゃん：よろしくおねがいします。\n>\n> にゃんちゅう：おっと！いきなり豆腐を持った！おっ、これを包丁で切るんだにゃ！包丁が入った！繊細な手の動き、いかがでしょう、みにゃさん！神経がすみずみに\n> **まぜいきわたった包丁＿＿＿、これを芸術＿＿＿** (0:54) なんと申しましょうか！できたぞ！これは、さいの目切りだ。お見事です！\n>\n> にゃんちゅう：さ、そして、つぎのお料理に参りましょう。二品目はいったい、なんでしょうか？二品目は、おっ！これだにゃ、これは、日本が\n> **運が世界の一品嘔吐、** (1:21)\n> 納豆！では、お願いします！おっ！ごらんください！このしなやかな手の動き、納豆をねばねばに掻き回しております！そして、おっと！なめらかなこの回転、回転技だ！さすがの納豆も、あい先生に混ぜてもらい、\n> **さくやうれさによろこびのかいをあげてる** (1:51) にちがいありません！以上！\n\nEdited: ちょっと to おっと, before いきなり",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T15:37:50.570",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "45350",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T17:34:26.763",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-08T17:34:26.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"listening"
],
"title": "What is にゃんちゅう saying here?",
"view_count": 836
} | [
{
"body": "「神経がすみずみに **まぜ** いきわたった包丁＿＿＿、これを芸術＿＿＿ (0:54) なんと申しましょうか！」\n\n↓\n\n> 「神経がすみずみに **まで** 行きわたった包丁 **さばき** 、これを芸術 **と言わずして** なんと申しましょうか！」\n\n「日本が **運が** 世界の一品 **嘔吐** 」 Why would he say \"barf\" here?\n\n↓\n\n> 「日本が生{う}んだ世界{せかい}の一品{いっぴん}、おーっと、」 「おーっと」 is an exclamation.\n\n「 **さくや** うれ **さ** によろこびの **かい** をあげてる 」\n\n↓\n\n> 「 **さぞや** 嬉{うれ}しさに喜{よろこ}びの声{こえ}をあげている」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T15:55:25.620",
"id": "45352",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T16:00:54.173",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-08T16:00:54.173",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "45350",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "神経が隅々にまで行き渡った包丁さばき、これを芸術と言わずして何と申しましょうか～！？\n\nこれは、日本が生んだ世界の一品・・・おっと！納豆！\n\nさぁぞぉや（さすが？？？Maybe. Or maybe さあ、後は）嬉しさに喜びの声を上げているに違いありません。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T16:14:27.683",
"id": "46352",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T16:14:27.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "45350",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 45350 | 45352 | 45352 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "sorry, I am curious about what does this Japanese symbol represents. It's from\nthe latest Kong's movie, Skull Island , and I believe it is taken from the\nfight airplane of a Japanese pilot during second world war.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/z7lJQ.jpg)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T16:27:00.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46354",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T19:41:52.480",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-21T19:41:52.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "21638",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji"
],
"title": "What does it mean this kanji from Kong movie?",
"view_count": 347
} | [
{
"body": "It is not a Japanese symbol or character including Katakana, Hiragana and\nKanji. I think that the movie producer wanted to express Japanese exoticism\nand independently designed the symbol or character similar to Japanese\nimaginary symbol or character.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T01:24:33.943",
"id": "46364",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T01:24:33.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "To me it looks like the symbol む (mu) which could be relevant if it was on a\nfighter plane. I say this because 'mu' also 無 which represents 'nothingness'\nin buddhism seems to me something a Japanese pilot may have written on their\nplane in the war. Not very well explained but I hope you get my gist.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T01:54:10.993",
"id": "46367",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T01:54:10.993",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21644",
"parent_id": "46354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 46354 | null | 46364 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46378",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What's the meaning of ポンポンしている in the following sentence? Context: a girl is\ntouching his friend's boxing gloves and then says:\n\n> へーなんかポンポンしててカワイー\n\nOf all the meanings I found on dictionaries (cheerleaders' pom-poms as a noun,\nbang-bang, one after another, outspokenly as adverbs/onomatopoeia) none seems\nto fit the context. Could it mean that they are soft like cheerleaders' pom-\npoms, and therefore cute (even though I don't think boxing gloves are that\nsoft)? Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T21:16:48.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46357",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T14:45:26.960",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T11:44:37.720",
"last_editor_user_id": "9971",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "Meaning of ポンポンしている",
"view_count": 1070
} | [
{
"body": "ポンポン is pong-pong or pompon.\n\nIt's one of [onomatopoeia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onomatopoeia) and\nmimetic words like ping-pong or ding-dong or tick-tack.\n\nSounds like bouncy like\n[this](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=bouncy&newwindow=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj76LCj_JXTAhXIvbwKHfeSD1oQ_AUICCgB&biw=1366&bih=610).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T23:06:25.433",
"id": "46358",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-08T23:06:25.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21642",
"parent_id": "46357",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "In this context, 「ぽんぽん/ポンポン」 would mean \" ** _plump_** \". It has absolutely\nnothing to do with \"pom-poms\".\n\n「ポンポンしている」＝「ふくれている」 or 「ふっくらしている」\n\n「ぱんぱん」 would be a synonym.\n\nTo comment on your question title, we do not really say 「ポンポンする」; We\nsay「ポンポンしている」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T06:55:04.313",
"id": "46378",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T14:45:26.960",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T14:45:26.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46357",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 46357 | 46378 | 46378 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46362",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: the speaker was in a bad situation but got out of it, and has the\nexpectation that the other party is going to scold him for his carelessness.\n\n> あれだけ注意したのに、まんまと **二次遭難** してバカだと思ってるんだろ？ ほんと、その通りだよ\n\nWhat is the meaning of 二次遭難{にじそうなん} here? Dictionary defines 「二次」 as\n\"secondary\" and 「遭難」 as \"accident\" or \"being stranded\". Being stranded would\nsomehow describe the nature of the situation, but I don't get the \"secondary\"\npart.\n\nIf the word has uses in other contexts, I would like to know about them, too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-08T23:54:40.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46359",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-17T12:03:15.183",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"compounds"
],
"title": "Meaning of 二次遭難{にじそうなん}",
"view_count": 235
} | [
{
"body": "「二次遭難{にじそうなん}」 is an accident that could happen to you while you are trying to\nrescue another that has already been in a (different) accident. It is\n**derivative** in nature.\n\n「二次」 here means \"secondary\" only in the sense that it takes place **_after_**\nthe original accident.\n\nUnless the story you are reading is about an accident in mountain climbing,\n「遭難」 is being used figuratively, which is quite common.\n\nA far more comon word would be 「二次[災害]{さいがい}」.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T00:58:26.880",
"id": "46362",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T00:58:26.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46359",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "> 二次{にじ}遭難{そうなん}\n\nとは、\n\n遭難{そうなん}した人{ひと}の救助{きゅうじょ}に向{む}かった者{もの}／人{ひと}が再{ふたた}び遭難{そうなん}すること。\n\n**【English】**\n\n> 二次{にじ}遭難{そうなん}\n\nis;\n\nThose (=A) who rescue those (=B) who were distressed at the (first) accident\nagain (secondary) could be distressed at the related accident. The first\naccident may be pure accidental, but the second accident could be expected. So\nthose who rescue should take care more than that of those who were didtressed\nat the first accident. If those who rescue take the same care as that of the\nfirst ones and got ditressed, they could be said \"バカ silly/stupid/foolish\" for\ntheir carelessness.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T01:05:56.687",
"id": "46363",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-17T12:03:15.183",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-17T12:03:15.183",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46359",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46359 | 46362 | 46362 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46361",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In spanish, the subject is \"a syntactic function, the element of the sentence\nthat matchs in number and gender with the verb\". In japanese, verbs arent\naffected by the subject (in number or gender) . As a spanish speaker, I really\ndont like the spanish definition because it doesnt help to understand the\nlanguage at all, moreover, it seems to justify some sentence constructions\nthat after comparing them with other languages you start to find odd and in\nsome senses non-sensicals, and that over-complicate the language. When we were\nin primary school, we were introduced to another , now obsolete or perhaps\nalways considered wrong definition of subject that made more sense and helped\nto understand languages. So my question is, what's the definition of subject\nin japanese? I would like to see if it is something more congruent with the\nidea most people have of what's the subject of the sentence and not something\nlike our official spanish definition",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T00:26:42.043",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46360",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T00:37:47.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subjects"
],
"title": "What's the definition of \"subject\" in japanese?",
"view_count": 539
} | [
{
"body": "In Japanese, the subject is something that precedes the subject-marker\nparticle が, and is the thing or person described by the predicate. However,\nthe subject is not the most important part of a sentence. Japanese is a topic-\nprominent language, and the **topic** , marked by は, is often what we really\ncare about; this is also why sometimes が and は are interchangeable (i.e. when\nthe topic is the subject).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T00:37:47.987",
"id": "46361",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T00:37:47.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19346",
"parent_id": "46360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46360 | 46361 | 46361 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46368",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The phrase \"doko kara kimasu\" is translated as \"where do you come from\" . I\nsuppose this a short version of \"anata wa doko kara kimasu ka\" . If I want to\nask where does he come from? I suppose I should say \"kare wa doko kara kimasu\nka\" . Can in this sentence the pronoun also be omitted if the context makes\nthe \"kare\" understandable (let's suppose it was already stated in a\nconversation we were talking about _him_ ), or only anata can be omitted? In\nwhich cases pronouns can be omitted in questions?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T01:25:41.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46365",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-10T06:15:39.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"questions",
"pronouns"
],
"title": "In which cases pronouns can be omitted in questions?",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "In case the pronoun is already known between/among those who are making a\nconversation, the pronoun is omitted almost all the cases. If not, everybody\nfeels the question is tedious.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T01:34:33.573",
"id": "46366",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-09T12:57:45.027",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-09T12:57:45.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> In which cases pronouns can be omitted in questions? \n> 1. doko kara kimasu. どこから来｛き｝ます？ \n> 2. anata wa doko kara kimasu ka. あなたはどこから来｛き｝ますか？ \n> 3. kare wa doko kara kimasu ka. 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛き｝ますか？\n\nI edited my former two answers totally and post them as a \" **Revised answer**\n\" written below.\n\n* * *\n\n**Original answer 1**\n\nIn case the pronoun is already known between/among those who are making a\nconversation, the pronoun is omitted almost all the cases. If not, everybody\nfeels the question is tedious.\n\n* * *\n\n**Original answer 2**\n\nAs \"where are you from?\" could be exist in daily conversation but \"Where do\nyou come from?\" could not, so \"anata wa doko kara kimasu ka\" could not exist\nbut \"anata wa doko no shusshin desukaha\" could.\n\nWhen the pronoun is known actually, possible expressions are like; - どこから来たの？\n\"doko kara kitano?\" - どこから来たのですか？ \"doko kara kita no desu ka?\" - どこから来られましたか？\n\"doko kara korare mashita ka? You should know that the sentences are all in\npast not in present tense, besides the pronouns are omitted.\n\n* * *\n\n**Revised answer**\n\n> In which cases pronouns can be omitted in questions?\n\nWhen the pronoun is \"you\", the partner in the conversation, it is omitted in\nalmost all the cases. If not, everybody feels your question is tedious.\n\nAs for the pronoun \" _kare_ 彼｛かれ｝\" , when it is used in the context where he\nis understandable or you guys were talking about him in the conversation, the\nnoun of him also could be omitted.\n\nBut, you are better not to omit it in your question even in this context,\nbecause it may cause two possible undesirable situations like:\n\n * The partner may possibly be misled into thinking that you changed the topic of the conversation abruptly. \n\n * The partner may be confused without knowing that about whom you are asking the partner by the question. \n\n> １ doko kara kimasu. どこから来｛き｝ます？\n>\n> ３ kare wa doko kara kimasu ka. 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛き｝ますか？\n\nYes, the sentence 1 is the short version of 3. Whereas, let's think about the\nsentence 3 where 彼｛かれ｝ _kare_ is not omitted in order to avoid the possible\nunclearness.\n\nExcept for the meaning of \" _where is he from?_ \", the sentence 3 could have\nvarious situational interpretations like:\n\nCase 1: You want to know his intended place of departure to come here.\n\n * Case 1.1 You know the partner knows the answer.\n\n * Case 1.2 You don't know if the partner knows the answer. \n\n * Case 1.3 Both you and the partner are interested in the answer.\n\nCase 2: You want to know the route he will take to come here.\n\n * Case 2.1 You know the partner knows the answer. \n\n * Case 2.2 You don't know if the partner knows the answer. \n\n * Case 2.3 Both you and the partner are interested in the answer. \n\nBesides the various cases, each case has various ways of expression depending\non the degree of politeness.\n\nTo avoid showing too many expressions meaning the sentence 3, I'll show you a\nfew typical expressions for each case: in polite (P), normal (N), friendly (F)\nand rude (R) form. I recommend you should not use them in a rude form.\n\n> 3. kare wa doko kara kimasu ka. 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛き｝ますか？\n>\n\nCase 1. Asking the place of departure:\n\nCase 1.1 You know the partner knows the answer of the place. \nP: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛こ｝られますか？ \nN: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛き｝ますか？ \nF: 彼｛かれ｝、どこから来｛く｝るの？ \nR: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛く｝るか？\n\nCase 1.2 You don't know if the partner knows the answer of the place. \nP: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛こ｝られると思｛おも｝います（か）？ \nN: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝いますか？ \nF: 彼｛かれ｝、どこから来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝う？ \nR: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝うか？\n\nCase 1.3 Both you and the partner are interested in the answer of the place. \nP: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛こ｝られるのでしょうか？ \nN: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛く｝るのでしょうか？ \nF: 彼｛かれ｝、どこから来｛く｝るかな？ \nR: 彼｛かれ｝はどこから来｛く｝るか？\n\nCase 2. Asking the route\n\nCase 2.1 You know the partner knows the answer of the route. \nP: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通{とお}って来｛こ｝られるのですか？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどちらから来｛こ｝られるのですか？ \nN: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝るのですか？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどちらから来｛く｝るのですか？ \nF: 彼｛かれ｝、どこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝るの？ \n彼｛かれ｝、どっちから来｛く｝るの？ \nR: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝るか？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどっちから来｛く｝るか？\n\nCase 2.2 You don't know if the partner knows the answer of the route. \nP: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛こ｝られると思｛おも｝います（か）？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどちらから来｛こ｝られると思｛おも｝います（か）？ \nN: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝いますか？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどちらから来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝いますか？ \nF: 彼｛かれ｝、どこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝う？ \n彼｛かれ｝、どっちから来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝う？ \nR: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝うか？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどっちから来｛く｝ると思｛おも｝うか？\n\nCase 2.3 Both you and the partner are interested in the answer of the route.\n\nP: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛こ｝られるのでしょうか/ね？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどちらから来｛こ｝られるのでしょうか/ね？ \nN: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝るのでしょうか/ね？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどちらから来｛く｝るのでしょうか/ね？ \nF: 彼｛かれ｝、どこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝るかな/かね？ \n彼｛かれ｝、どっちから来｛く｝るかな/かね？ \nR: 彼｛かれ｝はどこを通｛とお｝って来｛く｝るか？ \n彼｛かれ｝はどっちから来｛く｝るか？",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T02:04:29.760",
"id": "46368",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-10T06:15:39.430",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-10T06:15:39.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46365 | 46368 | 46366 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "To say the phrase, \"Teacher has arrived.\"\n\n> A 先生が来られました\n\nand\n\n> B 先生がお越しになりました\n\nIt should have an order or a rule to compare A and B.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T04:12:03.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46369",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-17T12:14:54.530",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T08:09:22.397",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"politeness",
"keigo"
],
"title": "How do I know which sentence is more polite?",
"view_count": 319
} | [
{
"body": "I think the politeness oder is shown below;\n\n先生がお越しになられました＞先生がお越しになりました＞先生が来られました\n\nBut, sorry to say, I don't know how I think so.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T04:25:19.760",
"id": "46370",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-17T12:14:54.530",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-17T12:14:54.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46369",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Generally speaking, dedicated sonkeigo verbs and お～になる sound politer than\n～られる.\n\n * いらっしゃる・おいでになる・おこしになる ＞ こられる\n * 召し上がる・お食べになる ＞ 食べられる\n * ご覧になる ＞ 見られる",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T06:00:57.563",
"id": "46375",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T06:00:57.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46369",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Thanks ;)\n\nIn my textbook \"Japanese Demystified\" by Eriko Sato, it says \"Another way of\ncreating an honorific verb form is to use the same verb form as the passive\nform (られる etc.). However, the degree of politeness expressed by this form is\nlower than that expressed by the honorific form with お...になる...\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T08:22:20.277",
"id": "46380",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T08:22:20.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "46369",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46369 | null | 46375 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46373",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The usage seems straightforward in such cases as:\n\n> ドラマやアニメでは悪役として登場する事が多く、この場合は **憎々しいまでの演技と性格づけ**\n> が重要となる。[1](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%82%AF%E3%82%BD%E4%B8%8A%E5%8F%B8)\n\n↑ the performance is so good that the bad character appears almost 「憎々しい」.\n\nBut sometimes I feel kind of uncertain of its nuance as in:\n\n> 力石は死んだのではなく、見失われたのであり、それは七〇年の時代感情の **憎々しいまでの的確な反映**\n> であるというほかはないだろう。[2](http://www.osk.3web.ne.jp/~nanten/syowa/text/rikiishi.html)\n\n↑ How can the reflection be so to the point that it feels even 「憎々しい」?\n\n> 本日の天気は快晴、雲一つない **憎々しいまでの晴天**\n> だ。[3](http://www.pixiv.net/novel/show.php?id=5324901)\n\n↑ How can the weather be so good that it is almost 「憎々しい」?\n\n> 好きな食べ物は？ **憎々しいまでの肉** ！[4](http://profile.ameba.jp/xxx-madhead-ad2xxx/)\n\n↑ You like the meat so much that it turns 「憎々しい」?\n\nTo wrap it up, can 「憎々しいまでの」 be used as a generic emphasizer even when there\nare actually no real 「憎々しい」 feelings involved? That is, similar to the\nMandarin phrase 「[要死](http://www.zdic.net/c/1/162/360177.htm)」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T04:49:51.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46372",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T10:24:32.043",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "On the use of 「憎々しいまでの」",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "[憎々しい](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/166558/meaning/m0u/) in a dictionary:\n\n> いかにも憎らしい。非常に憎らしい。\n\nSo let's jump to [憎らしい](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/166585/meaning/m0u/):\n\n> **２** 気にさわるほどすばらしい。にくい。\n\nSo \"vexingly excellent\" (or practically, _astonishingly excellent_ ) is the\nmeaning. 憎い and its derivatives including 憎らしい, 憎たらしい and 小憎い all share this\ndefinition. Your example #2 is explained in this way.\n\nBut for your #3:\n\n> 本日の天気は快晴、雲一つない憎々しいまでの晴天だ。 **やけにうっとうしい日差しが肌を焼く。**\n\nHe's complaining about the scorching-hot sun, so he probably literally \"hates\"\nit.\n\nAnd your #4:\n\n> 憎々しいまでの肉\n\nreads にくにくしいまでのにく. Yeah, it's a pun. This is a slang also written as\n[肉肉しい](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%E8%82%89%E8%82%89%E3%81%97%E3%81%84)\nto describe a meal contains a lot of juicy meat, or\n\"[meatful](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=meatful)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T05:35:39.543",
"id": "46373",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T05:48:59.010",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T05:48:59.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "46372",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "＃日本語 \n「憎々しいまでの的確な反映であるというほかはないだろう。」 \nこの評論家はこの作品の欠点を指摘して評論家として自己の価値をアピールしたいのに、この作品が非の打ちどころもないほど的確なので、すなわち欠点を見いだせないので憎たらしい。よって「憎々しい」と表現したと思われます。ただし、この評論家はこの作品を大変好意的にほめていると思います。\n\n「憎々しいまでの晴天だ。」とは、日本語ではあまり言ったり（、聞いたり、書いたり）しません。また、「憎々しいまでの肉」は語呂合わせとしてはおもしろいですが、絶対に言いません。「憎々しいまでおいしい肉」という表現は「憎々しいまでの晴天だ。」と同程度で表現が許されるかもしれませんが、このような表現で肉のおいしさを形容することはほどんどなく、私なら、別の形容詞を使います。\n\n後半の２つの例文に関して、「憎々しい」という形容詞を使わないと言いましたが、それは、「憎々しい」という形容詞は、人に関わる状況を皮肉って表現するのには適しているが、天気や食べ物といった自然物を形容するのに向いていないと思うからです。\n\n# English\n\n「憎々しいまでの的確な反映であるというほかはないだろう。」 \nAlthough this critic wants to appeal his own value as a critic by pointing out\nthe drawbacks of this work, this work is so precise as not to be impatient,\nthat is, it is hateful because he can not find any fault at all. Therefore it\nseems that he expressed as 「憎々しい hatred」. However, I think that this critic\npraises this work very favorably.\n\nI don't say/hear/write much in Japanese as 「憎々しいまでの晴天だ」. Although the\nexpression 「憎々しいまでの肉」 is interesting as a play on words or a pun, I'll never\nsay that. Although the expression 「憎々しいまでおいしい肉」 may be allowed to be expressed\nat the same degree as 「憎々しいまでの晴天だ。」, it is not possible to express the\ndelicious taste of the meat with such expression as 「憎々しい」. I would use\nanother adjective instead.\n\nAs for the latter two senteces, I said the adjective 「憎々しい」don't match them. I\nthink that the adjective 「憎々しい」has nuance of a cracking joke relating to the\nthings of human, therefor it does not match expressing natural things such as\nclimate or food.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T13:54:16.010",
"id": "46387",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T10:06:51.293",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46372",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46372 | 46373 | 46373 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46377",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I think it's a good question given the season.\n\nI was watching the petals of cherry flowers falling down in the typical \"pink\nshower\" after the full bloom and wondered: is there a word that expresses\nexactly this phenomenon of cherry petals \"raining down\"? After all it is such\na typical \"Japanese scene\" that I would be surprised otherwise. However, I\nasked a Japanese person who didn't know (and if such word exists I figured it\nwould be so common everyone would answer immediately).\n\nPs I know 桜が舞う、桜の舞。 I was curious about a single word.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T06:09:40.070",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46376",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T06:24:05.210",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T06:15:43.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "14205",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"culture"
],
"title": "Is there a word to express \"the rain of sakura petals\"?",
"view_count": 3140
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, but we take it as snow rather than rain.\n\n**[桜吹雪【さくらふぶき】](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/87191/meaning/m0u/)**\n\n> 桜の花びらが風に乱れ散るようすを吹雪にたとえていう語。 \n> _a word describing cherry petals whirling down in the wind by analogy with\n> snowstorm_\n\n* * *\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NR30A.jpg)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T06:13:06.863",
"id": "46377",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T06:24:05.210",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T06:24:05.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "46376",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 46376 | 46377 | 46377 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In Ryunosuke Akutagawa's short story \"In a Grove\", the monk talks about the\ngirl on the horse wearing a type of hat called a 牟子 with the furigana むし.\nHowever, this word is not in the dictionary. But I have seen other readings of\nit as ぼうし。 Could this be the origin of the word 帽子? Or, perhaps 帽子 just\novertook 牟子.\n\nI did find the word 眸子 read ぼうし, but it means 瞳孔.\n\nIs there any real connection between these words? Since, 眸子 is written\nsimilarly to 牟子 and has the same pronunciation as 帽子. And, both 帽子 and 牟子\nbasically mean \"hat\" or at least a type of hat.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T09:20:29.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46381",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T15:07:23.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"old-japanese"
],
"title": "Etymological Connection Between 帽子, 眸子 and 牟子",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "牟子(むし) is a conical hat of straw or reeds with a gauze veil hanging from the\nbrim. The veil is the defining feature: in the story the priest says\n「女は牟子を垂れて居りましたから、顔はわたしにはわかりません」 \"The woman was wearing a hat with a veil, so I\ndon't know what she looked like\". Note that instead of the verb かぶる , which\nyou would expect with headgear, he uses たれる , [transitive] \"hang down\", which\ncan only apply to the veil. The breeze which momentarily lifts the veil,\naffording the bandit Tajomaru a glimpse of the woman's face, triggers the\naction of the story - whatever that may be! I don't think this mushi is\nrelated to 帽子 , but in the story the woman's husband is wearing an 烏帽子 (えぼし)\n\"raven hat\", so called because it is lacquered black, the colour of the raven",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T15:07:23.333",
"id": "46390",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T15:07:23.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20069",
"parent_id": "46381",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46381 | null | 46390 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46385",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How do you say \"I'm learning dancing\" or \"I take dancing classes\"?\n\nIs this correct?\n\n> watashi wa dansu wo benkyou desu",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T13:01:07.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46384",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T14:10:11.790",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T13:19:42.487",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21652",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to say \"I take dancing classes\" or \"I'm learning dancing\"",
"view_count": 1080
} | [
{
"body": "\"watashi wa dansu wo benkyou desu\" is not correct.\n\nAs for \"I take dancing classes\", you say in Japanese; watashi wa dansu\nkyoushitsu ni kayotte imasu. \n私はダンス教室(class)に通っています。\n\nAnd, for \"I'm learning dancing\", you say; watashi wa dansu wo naratte imasu. \n私はダンスを習っています。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T13:14:59.987",
"id": "46385",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T14:10:11.790",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T14:10:11.790",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46384 | 46385 | 46385 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46466",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Taikutsu wa ishi ni naru , \"boredom becomes a stone\". is this an expression or\nit's wrongly translated? What is it supposed to mean?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T16:52:07.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46393",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T10:19:38.423",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T07:27:44.847",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "is 退屈は石になる an expression or it's wrongly translated?",
"view_count": 563
} | [
{
"body": "# 日本語\n\n 1. 結論{けつろん}として、\"Taikutsu wa ishi ni naru\" 「退屈{たいくつ}は石{いし}になる」は、日本語として不完全{ふかんぜん}とまでは言{い}いませんが、不自然{ふしぜん}だと感じました。従{したが}って、「退屈は石になる」の英訳｛えいやく｝文\"boredom becomes a stone\"を吟味｛ぎんみ｝して、この英訳文作成者{えいやくぶんさくせいしゃ}である質問者｛しつもんしゃ｝が日本語の原文｛げんぶん｝の意味｛いみ｝を正｛ただ｝しく理解｛りかい｝しているかどうかを判断｛はんだん｝することはあまり重要｛じゅうよう｝でないと思います。\n\n 2. この表現{ひょうげん}をインターネットで探{さが}すとhttp://anond.hatelabo.jp/20170213160617で見つかりました。日本語の文章{ぶんしょう}として初{はじ}めて表現{ひょうげん}された文章かも知れません。 インターネットの例{れい}は （woo-hoo）退屈は～ （woo-hoo）石になる～ 重くてー落ちちゃうー前に～ と３行{ぎょう}の詩{し}のようになっており、行の配置{はいち}全体{ぜんたい}を通{つう}じて倦怠感{けんたいかん}（フランス語のアンニュイennui）を表{あらわ}そうとしていると思われます。\n\n 3. インターネットの例ではなく、「退屈は石になる」の文章を考えてみます。「ＡはＢになる」は、文法的{ぶんぽうてき}に日本語として正{ただ}しいと思います。例えば「蛹{さなぎ}は蝶{ちょう}になる」は、「蛹は羽化{うか}して蝶になる」という意味の文章の中｛なか｝の「羽化して｛うかして｝」という部分｛ぶぶん｝を省略{しょうりゃく}したものと言{い}えます。この例では、ＡもＢも実態{じったい}のある物{もの}（生物{せいぶつ}も含{ふく}む）です。しかし「退屈は石になる」の例では、Ｂ（＝石）は物ですが、Ａ（＝退屈）は物ではありません。Ａ、Ｂのいずれも物の場合{ばあい}は、「ＡはＢになる」は日本語として自然{しぜん}ですが、Ａ、Ｂのいずれか一方{いっぽう}が物でない場合は不自然です。しかし、作家{さっか}など、文章の表現{ひょうげん}に優{すぐ}れた人が、例{たと}えば自分{じぶん}の感情{かんじょう}を的確{てきかく}に表{あらわ}したくて比喩法{ひゆうほう}を使{つか}った場合には、やや不自然な日本語ですが、Ａ、Ｂのいずれか一方が物でない場合でも存在{そんざい}し得{う}る文章かも知れません。\n 4. 最初{さいしょ}にこの文章を見たとき私は、偉大{いだい}な作家である夏目漱石{なつめそうせき}が自分のやるせない倦怠感｛けんたいかん｝を表して、「退屈{たいくつ}嵩{こう}じて石になる」とつぶやいた情景{じょうけい}を思{おも}い浮{う}かべました。なお、「退屈嵩じて石になる」は、私が「退屈は石になる」を基{もと}に書{か}き直{なお}した独自{どくじ}の表現{ひょうげん}です。もちろん夏目漱石はこの文章を書{か}いておりません。「退屈嵩じて石になる」という文章に私が込｛こ｝めた意味｛いみ｝は次｛つぎ｝のとおりです。「ああ、退屈｛たいくつ｝だ。何｛なに｝をするのも面倒｛めんどう｝だ。少｛すこ｝しも動｛うご｝きたくない。そう思｛おも｝って動かないでじっとしていると、まるで石のようだ。そうだ。いっそのこと、人間｛にんげん｝をやめて石になったら、退屈なんてつまらないことも感｛かん｝じなくてよいし、楽｛らく｝になるだろう。」\n\n 5. 【訂正{ていせい}】 上記{じょうき}の３．で説明{せつめい}した「ＡはＢになる」は日本語{にほんご}として自然{しぜん}ですが、Ａ、Ｂのいずれか一方{いっぽう}が物{もの}でない場合{ばあい}は不自然{ふしぜん}です。という部分{ぶぶん}は、次{つぎ}の例{れい}（２）が見{み}つかりましたので訂正{ていせい}します。 （１）具象物{ぐしょうぶつ}が具象物{ぐしょうぶつ}になる例{れい}：「蛹{さなぎ}は蝶{ちょう}になる。」「その男{おとこ}は医者{いしゃ}になる。」 （２）具象物{ぐしょうぶつ}が抽象概念{ちゅうしょうがいねん}になる例{れい}：「その医者{いしゃ}は幸福{こうふく}になる。」 （３）抽象概念{ちゅうしょうがいねん}が具象物{ぐしょうぶつ}になる例{れい}：「退屈{たいくつ}は石{いし}になる」。 \n\n# English\n\n 1. As a conclusion, I don't dare to say that the sentence \"Taikutsu wa ishi ni naru\" is incomplete as a Japanese one, but I felt it unnatural. Therefore I don't think it has effective meaning to judge whether Mr. Publo understands the meaning of the original Japanese sentence correctly by means of judging the translated English sentence \"boredom becomes a stone\" by him.\n 2. When I searched on the Internet for this sentence \"taikutsu wa ishi ni naru,\" I found the similar one in <http://anond.hatelabo.jp/20170213160617>. It may be expressed for the first time as a Japanese phrase or sentence. The expression on the Internet is like a poem constructed in three lines; \"(woo-hoo) taikutsu wa ～\" \" (woo-hoo) ishi ni naru ～\" \"omoku te ― ochichau ― mae ni\", and it seems to try to express boredom (ennui in French) by the whole arrangement of the lines.\n 3. Let's consider not the poem-like phrase in the Internet but the sentence \"taikutsu wa ishi ni naru\" given by the questioner. I think the sentence which has a structure \"A becomes B.\" is grammatically correct as a Japanese sentence. For example, \"A pupa becomes a butterfly. (Sanagi wa chou ni naru)\" can be said as a grammatically correct Japanese sentence. The sentence \"a pupa becomes a butterfly\" is considered to be made by omitting the part \"to molt\" in the sentence \"a pupa molts and becomes a butterfly (Sanagi wa uka shite chou ni naru.)\" In this case, A and B are both physically concrete objects (including creatures.) But in the topical sentence \"taikutsu wa ishi ni naru (Boredom becomes a stone)\", although B (= stone) is a concrete object, A (= boredom) isn't concrete. When both of A and B are concrete objects, a sentence \"A becomes B (= A wa B ni naru)\" is natural as a Japanese sentence, but when one of A or B isn't a concrete object, the sentence is unnatural. But I think only when a literally talented person such as an excellent author/writer would like to show his/her feeling in an expression of sentences accurately and he/she uses a metaphorical way, even when one of A or B isn't a concrete object, the unnatural Japanese sentences may be allowed to exist.\n\n 4. When I saw this sentence by the questioner, firstly I imagined a scene where Soseki Natsume, a great and famous Japanese writer, murmured \"boredom grows on and becomes a stone (taikutsu kouji te ishi ni naru)\" expressing his disconsolate lassitude of himself. \"Boredom grows on and becomes a stone\" is my original expression that I rewrote based on \"a boredom becomes a stone\". Of course Soseki Natsume did not write this sentence. The meanings that I put in the sentence are as follows; Oh, I am bored. Whatever I do is troublesome. I do not want to move at all. When I think and feel like that and keep still without moving, I feel I'm totally like a stone. Well, if I resign as a human being and become the stone, I need not feel that boredom is dull, and I will become rather comfortable instead.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T04:10:17.803",
"id": "46429",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T02:01:47.317",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T02:01:47.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46393",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I visited the site: \n<https://www.letras.com/kiyoshi-hikawa/limit-break-x-survivor/> \nand I found the following lyrics; \n(Woo-hoo) taikutsu wa \n(Woo-hoo) ishi ni naru \nOmokute ochichau mae ni (let's fly high)\n\nNow I got the meaning of the \"taikutsu wa ishi ni naru\". In this lyrics, the\nexpression \"The boredom becomes a stone.\" may be allowed, though having some\nunnatural tone as a Japanese language. \nI paraphrased the lyrics of this song as follows; \nWe are flying in the sky. We feel bored very much. Our boredom is heavy like a\nstone. Yes, \"the boredom becomes a stone.\" It is becoming heavier and heavier\nso as not to be able to fly. If we keep bearing the boredom, we are threatened\nto fall onto the ground by the heaviness. Let's shake off the boring feeling,\nand let's fly up high in the sky before falling onto the ground.\n\nI thought that the lyrics are full of hope and give it to the person who sings\nthe song of them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T01:23:05.023",
"id": "46466",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T10:19:38.423",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T10:19:38.423",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46393",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46393 | 46466 | 46429 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46481",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to learn Japanese but I'm the kind of person who can't really learn\nif they don't understand some of the mechanisms. I'm stuck when learning\nvocabulary because I can't just be like \"OK this one is strange but whatever,\nit must be an exception, I'll learn it that way\".\n\nWhat slows me down are the many ways of pronouncing _kanji_. I don't want to\nlearn the whole story from the beginning but I just want to know the different\ncases about why sometimes the main rules about _kanji_ aren't followed.\n\nThe point of my topic is to understand every case I can encounter when\nlearning Japanese words, so I won't be stuck trying to figure why a word has a\nstrange pronunciation.\n\nSo here is what I have gathered, I'd like you to correct me or to add some\nthings, please. I'm interested in knowing the appropriate terms for the\nphenomenons, I've written them in **_italic and bold_** for the first use in\nmy message.\n\n* * *\n\n### BRIEF HISTORY\n\n(helps understand some cases)\n\nJapanese people had a language without writing system. They then discovered\nChinese writing and used the **_kanji_** with their own Japanese pronunciation\n( ** _kun'yomi_** ) and the Chinese - simplified - pronunciation ( **\n_on'yomi_** ).\n\nThey then used the _kanji_ for their phonetic value only ( ** _man'yôgana_**\n), which leads to creating **_katakana_** (a part of a _man'yôgana_ to show\nthe pronunciation of a _kanji_ in a text, something like what **_furigana_**\nare nowadays) and **_hiragana_** (a simplified _man'yôgana_ when written\nfast).\n\n* * *\n\n### MAIN RULES\n\n1) a _kanji_ alone uses _kun'yomi_ reading.\n\n2) a combined word uses _on'yomi_ readings of each _kanji_ (with sometimes\nlittle alterations).\n\nEx:\n\n> 火 = ひ\n>\n> 山 = やま\n>\n> 火山 = カザン\n\n**Question 1: why is that so? Is it because Japanese didn't really mix words\ntogether before getting _kanji_? They didn't have a word for a volcano?**\n\n* * *\n\n### OTHER CASES\n\n(breaking the main rules)\n\n1) a _kanji_ alone has no _kun'yomi_ reading because the word didn't exist in\npure Japanese:\n\n> 菊 = キク\n\n**Question 2: does this phenomenon has a name?**\n\n2) a combined word has a _kun'yomi_ reading for each _kanji_ because Japanese\nhad already orally created combined words. They've then combined the correct\n_kanji_ of each _kun'yomi_ reading:\n\n> 名前 = なまえ\n>\n> 小山 = こやま\n\n**Question 3: does this phenomenon has a name?**\n\n3) a _kanji_ alone has a combined _kun'yomi_ reading because a unique _kanji_\nexisted in Chinese for a word made up of two words in Japanese. It doesn't\nbreak the main rules but we can see sort of a \"orally combined word\" on a\nunique _kanji_ :\n\n> 鶏 = にわとり\n\n**Question 4: does this phenomenon has a name?**\n\nFunny: the word たまご has two writings corresponding to point 2 (玉子) and 3 (卵).\n\n4) a combined word with two _kanji_ , the first one in _on'yomi_ reading and\nthe second one in _kun'yomi_ reading ( ** _jûbakoyomi_** ):\n\n> 曜日 = ヨウび\n\n5) a combined word whose reading is neither the _kun'yomi_ readings or the\n_on-yomi_ readings of the _kanji_ , because the word existed in Japanese and\nthe _kanji_ are used for their meaning only ( ** _jukujikun_** ):\n\n> 山羊 = やぎ\n>\n> 大人 = おとな\n\n**Question 5: was the combined writing of a _jukujikun_ only created by\nJapanese to suit the meaning of the word, or could it have existed in\nChinese?**\n\n6) a _katakana_ word combined with a _on'yomi_ reading of a _kanji_ to create\na new word:\n\n> フランス人\n\n7) a word using _kanji_ for their pronunciation only ( ** _ateji_** ). It can\nbe the _on'yomi_ reading ( ** _shakuon_** ) or the _kun'yomi_ reading ( **\n_shakkun_** ). They tend to be written with kana only:\n\n> 誤魔化す = ごまかす\n>\n> 合羽 = カッパ\n\n8) a word using two purely Japanese readings because it's a repetition (often\nwritten with the repetition sign 々):\n\n> 時時 = ときどき\n\n* * *\n\nApart from my questions, I'd be glad to read every information and correction\nyou can offer. Thank you.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T16:59:10.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46394",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T19:52:55.010",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T17:49:02.467",
"last_editor_user_id": "19507",
"owner_user_id": "19507",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings",
"orthography",
"linguistics",
"semantics"
],
"title": "Rules and phenomena about reading/writing words with kanji",
"view_count": 4686
} | [
{
"body": "> Question 1: why is that so? Is it because Japanese didn't really mix words\n> together before getting kanji? They didn't have a word for a volcano?\n\nAs you already wrote in the following part of your question, there are many\nstraightforward kun-kun compounds, including 竹箒, 緑色, 花火, 夜空 and 岩山.\n\nThe number of on'yomi compounds is larger because recently-coined terms, many\nof which are technical terms, generally use on'yomi. Many yamatokotoba have\nbeen replaced by on'yomi compounds or katakana loanwords. Pure yamatokoba will\nnot increase any longer, while many new sino-Japanese (kango) words and\nkatakana loanwords are still being introduced every day.\n\nIn addition, on'yomi noun-verb or verb-verb compounds are still two-kanji\ncompounds (e.g., 転職 (v+n), 飲酒 (v+n), 競争 (v+v)), but kun'yomi noun-verb\ncompounds are usually mixture of kana and kanji (e.g. 火遊び, 語り草, 飲み物) with a\nfew exceptions (e.g., 船出, 見境). Kun'yomi verb-verb compounds are merely called\n[compound verbs](http://vvlexicon.ninjal.ac.jp/db/), which of course are\nmixture of kana and kanji.\n\n> Question 2～4: does this phenomenon has a name?\n\nNo I don't think so, at least in laypeople's vocabulary. There are so many\ncommon kun-kun compounds that I had never thought we need a special name for\nit. By the way I think most Japanese people cannot tell with confidence\nwhether 菊【きく】 is on'yomi or kun'yomi.\n\n> Question 5: was the combined writing of a jukujikun only created by Japanese\n> to suit the meaning of the word, or could it have existed in Chinese?\n\nAs the literal meaning of 熟字 **訓** (\"character-combination(-based)-kun'yomi\")\nsuggests, it's the word used to refer to certain _Japanese_ words. I don't\nknow if similar exceptional hanji readings exist in Chinese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T15:12:37.833",
"id": "46481",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T16:04:08.857",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T16:04:08.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46394",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "### Overview\n\n> _What slows me down are the many ways of pronouncing kanji. I don't want to\n> learn the whole story from the beginning but I just want to know the\n> different cases about why sometimes the main rules about kanji aren't\n> followed._\n\nWhen people say they don't know how to pronounce it, they actually don't know\nwhat word the written form refers to. In most cases, they don't know the word.\nSo, if you find you don't know what the given characters read, try\ndictionaries, ask Google.\n\nThat a kanji has multiple pronunciations are actually that the kanji\npersistently represents multiple series of synonyms. If a kanji could be read\nboth _autumn_ or _fall_ , what decides which to read? The unpredictability of\nkanji readings are, in fact, that of lexicon. Generally, synchronic (i.e. a\ncertain time-slice of) inventory of vocabulary has little rule in relation to\ngrammar. English demonyms are good examples: _English_ , _American_ ,\n_Japanese_ , _Iraqi_ , _Argentine_ , _Cypriot_ , but not _Englese_ or\n_Japanish_. Each suffix ( _-ish_ , _-an_ , _-ese_...) could have possibility\nto attach to more words, but those words just don't exist in the actual\nlanguage.\n\n* * *\n\n> _1) a kanji alone uses kun'yomi reading._\n\nThis may be not a bad guess on a frequency basis, though not a rule. Try think\nnot in pronunciation way but word, as the standalone on'yomi and kun'yomi\nwords may have different meanings.\n\n * 金: キン (gold) ←→ かね (money; metal)\n * 文: ブン (sentence) ←→ ふみ (letter (mail))\n * 剣: ケン (sword, basic word) ←→ つるぎ (sword, poetic)\n\n> _2) a combined word uses on'yomi readings of each kanji (with sometimes\n> little alterations)._\n>\n> _**Question 1: why is that so? Is it because Japanese didn't really mix\n> words together before getting kanji? They didn't have a word for a\n> volcano?**_\n\nThere is a great number of multi-kanji words imported from China as is, or\ncreated in Japan imitating the format (like neologisms in many European\nlanguages that use Greek and Latin elements). They are of course read in\non'yomi, while words that made of two kun'yomi words are of course kun'yomi.\nSo the truth is that despite they share the same kanji, カザン is not made of ひ +\nやま, no more than _helicopter_ is made of _whirl_ + _wing_ (even though that's\nwhat it means!).\n\n> _1) a kanji alone has no kun'yomi reading because the word didn't exist in\n> pure Japanese:_\n>\n> _2) a combined word has a kun'yomi reading for each kanji because Japanese\n> had already orally created combined words. They've then combined the correct\n> kanji of each kun'yomi reading:_\n>\n> _8) a word using two purely Japanese readings because it's a repetition\n> (often written with the repetition sign 々):_\n\nThose statements are no more valid since what is said above, alongside the\nquestions.\n\n> _3) a kanji alone has a combined kun'yomi reading because a unique kanji\n> existed in Chinese for a word made up of two words in Japanese. It doesn't\n> break the main rules but we can see sort of a \"orally combined word\" on a\n> unique kanji:_\n\nにわとり _is_ one word as much as _blackboard_ is. That's proven by the accent:\nにわとり{LHHH} < にわ{LH} + とり{LH}. The true \"a kanji alone has a combined kun'yomi\nreading\" examples only appear in documents of oldest times.\n\n> 五に曰く、餮【あぢはひのむさぼり】を絶ち、欲【たからのほしみ】を棄て……（十七条憲法 (604)）\n\nI'm not sure if they're kun'yomi in proper sense, though.\n\n> _**Question 5: was the combined writing of a jukujikun only created by\n> Japanese to suit the meaning of the word, or could it have existed in\n> Chinese?**_\n\nIf it doesn't exist in Chinese, it's called _ateji_ by definition.\n\n> _6) a katakana word combined with a on'yomi reading of a kanji to create a\n> new word:_\n\nNot true: 南【みなみ】アフリカ \"South Africa\", ノイマン型【がた】 \"von Neumann type\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T19:52:55.010",
"id": "46482",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T19:52:55.010",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "46394",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46394 | 46481 | 46482 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46397",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Some adjectives are used like this:\n\n * [次]{つぎ}の[世界]{せかい} \"tsugi no sekai\" (next world)\n * [黄色]{きいろ}の[車]{くるま} \"kiiro no kuruma\" (yellow car)\n\nand others are used liked this: かわいい[車]{くるま} \"kawaī kuruma\".\n\nThough kiiro can also be used thus: [黄色]{きいろ}い[車]{くるま}\"kiiroi kuruma\".\n\nWhen can I use an adjective with \"no\"? Is it always or only in some special\ncases?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T17:05:59.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46396",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-13T03:46:34.200",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-31T00:44:27.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"adjectives"
],
"title": "When can adjectives be used with the particle \"no\"?",
"view_count": 1700
} | [
{
"body": "Grammatically, you can _never_ use an adjective with の. You can only use の\nwith nouns. Your confusion arose because the parts of speech do not always\ncorrespond between English and Japanese: 次 is a noun, but \"next\" is an\nadjective.\n\nSimilarly, all colors in English are adjectives, but all colors in Japanese\nare nouns (except for six that have adjective counterparts, namely 赤い, 青い, 白い,\n黒い, 黄色い, and 茶色い). You can't say 灰色い because it only exists as a noun, not as\nan adjective (a fact you just have to memorize).\n\nYou can use nouns to modify other nouns in English, too (and this is probably\ntrue of most other languages). _Health Department_ (or _Department of Health_\n) is an example in English: \"health\" modifies \"department\" and specifies the\nkind of department.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T17:47:05.623",
"id": "46397",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-12T21:09:01.823",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-12T21:09:01.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "46396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "In Japanese the specific grammatical classification of a word sometimes has\nmore to do with how it is conjugated than with what semantic role it fulfills.\n\nThe two main types of adjectives are `形容詞` (i-adjectives) and `形容動詞` (na-\nadjectives). You can call both of those \"adjectives\" but that doesn't get you\nanywhere in terms of figuring out how to actually use them in a sentence,\nwhich turns out to be quite different.\n\nThen there are no-adjectives like `黄色`. I see these in Daijirin dictionary on\nWeblio marked as `名 ・形動`, meaning \"noun and/or adjective\".\n\nAnd there are a number of other types of adjectives as well, such as なる and たる\nadjectives, but those pop up pretty rarely.\n\nSo I would say the concept of \"adjective\" is not that useful in Japanese,\nbecause it's not specific enough and doesn't tell you how to use the word.\nInstead of asking \"how should I use this adjective\", I would suggest asking\n\"is this an i-adjective, a na-adjective, or a no-adjective (or something\nelse)?\" and once you figure that out, you can use the relevant rules for that\ntype of word.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-31T02:09:01.627",
"id": "80413",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-31T02:09:01.627",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10407",
"parent_id": "46396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "While の role as a dependent indefinite pronoun is crucial, の also plays other\npivotal roles in the Japanese language.\n\n * **Possessive Particle** : This is perhaps the most common use of の. It shows a relationship of possession or belonging between two nouns, equivalent to 's or \"of\" in English. For example, 彼の本 translates to \"his book\", where の signifies possession.\n * **Attributive Particle** : の is also used to modify a noun with another noun, acting like an attributive particle. For instance, in 日本の音楽, meaning \"Japanese music\", の links 日本 (Japan) and 音楽 (music), attributing the music to Japan. You can also think of this as a \"limiting\" particle. It limits the information: it isn't just any music, but \"Japanese\" music.\n * **Sentence-Ending Particle** : In informal speech, の can be used at the end of sentences to indicate a question or explanation, making the sentence sound more explanatory or inquisitive. For example, それは何なの means \"What is that?\"\n * **Nominalizer** : の can turn a verb or an adjective into a noun. For instance, in 走るのが好き, meaning \"I like running\", の nominalizes 走る (to run).\n\n<https://thejapanesepage.com/do-you-know-%e3%81%ae-using-the-japanese-\ndependent-indefinite-pronoun-to-mean-one/>\n\n<https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/nominalizers-koto-and-no/>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2023-05-13T03:46:34.200",
"id": "99610",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-13T03:46:34.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "56522",
"parent_id": "46396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -4
}
]
| 46396 | 46397 | 46397 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46422",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In this question [When can adjectives be used with the particle\n\"no\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/46396/when-the-adjectives-\ncan-be-used-with-the-particle-no) I was taught that \"next\" in Japanese is a\nnoun. In English, the definition of adjective is \"A describing word which\nqualifies a noun, a noun phrase or a pronoun\". As far as I can tell, \"next\" in\nthe phrase \"tsugi no sekai\" is qualifying a noun, so it seems either there are\nsome other different definitions of adjective in English, or the definition of\nadjective in Japanese is different than the English one. Which is the\ndefinition of adjective in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T18:32:38.307",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46398",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-12T22:31:38.380",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-12T21:36:53.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"adjectives",
"parts-of-speech"
],
"title": "What is the definition of adjective in Japanese?",
"view_count": 315
} | [
{
"body": "The definition of adjective varies from linguist to linguist, from textbook to\ntextbook. First, not every \"describing word which qualifies a noun\" is called\nan adjective, even in English. Just because you can say \"credit card\" and\n\"phone number\" doesn't mean \"credit\" and \"phone\" are English adjectives.\n\nIn traditional Japanese grammar taught in _Japanese_ schools, 次 is a noun, and\nの is an independent linking particle similar to \"of\" in English. As a native\nspeaker of Japanese, I had never thought 次 could be an adjective before I\nstarted visiting this site. In other words, 次の世界 is structured more like \"book\nof chemistry\" rather than \"next book\". (Can you call \"of chemistry\" an\nadjective even though it modifies a noun?)\n\nHowever, many people who learn Japanese as a second language like to treat 次の\nas an adjective, calling it a **no-adjective**. The concept of no-adjective is\nactually very \"foreign\" to native Japanese speakers. Nevertheless, [jisho.org\ncategorizes 次 as a no-adjective](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%AC%A1), and you can\nsay so, too. Some color names such as 緑 are other typical examples of no-\nadjectives.\n\n * [So-called の-adjectives - how does の *really* work?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2770/5010)\n\nMoreover, you will soon come across articles that say \"Na-adjectives are not\nadjectives but actually nouns\" or even \"There are no true adjectives in\nJapanese; only verbs and relative clauses exist\" (like\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/43249/5010)). Certainly confusing\nat first, but this [post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/1016/5010) from\na structural linguist is worth taking a look at. You don't have to wonder [why\nだ is not used with\ni-adjectives](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43244/5010) once you accept\nthey are actually verbs.\n\n* * *\n\nTo summarize:\n\n * i-adjectives (赤い, 美しい): Safely considered as adjectives both by average English and Japanese speakers. However a few experts say it's technically a verb. 形容詞.\n * na-adjectives (簡単, ハンサム): As a Japanese learner you can usually safely call them adjectives. But some say it's technically a noun. 形容動詞.\n * no-adjectives (緑, 次): As a Japanese leaner you may call them \"so-called no-adjectives\", but most Japanese people believe it's a noun. Even some western people dislike this concept.\n * attributives (大きな, 色んな): They definitely modify nouns, but don't call them adjectives if you want to avoid confusion. 連体詞.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T03:30:02.613",
"id": "46422",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-12T22:31:38.380",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-12T22:31:38.380",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46398",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 46398 | 46422 | 46422 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46400",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know it has to deal with something about books or some type of writing, but\nwhen I looked it up, all that came up were scrolls and cheat sheets of some\nsort. I'm guessing it's something \"___ for dummies\" or maybe even a \"crash\ncourse?\" Also, if it's published, is it more like a scroll or a book format?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T18:40:47.417",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46399",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T20:28:44.747",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T20:28:44.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "20348",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji"
],
"title": "What does 虎の巻 mean?",
"view_count": 177
} | [
{
"body": "According to デジタル大辞泉, 虎{とら}の巻{まき} has three meanings.\n\n> 1. 兵法の秘伝書。Book of war strategy secrets. (Original meaning)\n> 2. 芸道などの秘事・秘伝を記した書。A document that covers secrets of an art or skill.\n> (First figurative use)\n> 3. 講義などの種本。また、教科書にある、問題の解答などが書いてある参考書。あんちょこ。とらかん。Book that lectures are\n> based on. Also, a reference document for textbook question answers\n> (especially something that's easy to understand). Crib notes or cheat sheet.\n> Alternative words: 「あんちょこ」、「とらかん」\n>\n\nSo in a school setting, the third definition is probably the correct one.\nFirst one is only needed in history or fantasy settings. Not sure if the\nsecond one gets any use nowadays when you talk about \"tricks of the trade\" or\nsuch.\n\nYour \"for dummies\" matches definition 3. Not sure about crash course.\n\nThe kanji 巻 here doesn't refer to a scroll in definition 2 or 3, they are just\nfigurative use of the first definition.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T19:18:43.140",
"id": "46400",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T19:18:43.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "46399",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46399 | 46400 | 46400 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46410",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm looking at Lake & Ura's _Learn to Read in Japanese_ page 37-102\n\n> 危険な場所に行こうとする彼を、みんなが引き止めた。\n\nis translated as\n\n> On the \"to-a-dangerous-place-he-will-try-to-go\" him, everyone detained.\n\nin the book, and\n\n> Everyone stopped him trying to go to a dangerous place\n\nby Google Translate. The google translation seems a lot more idiomatic, but I\ncan't tell if it's correct because I don't understand the second half of the\nfirst clause: \"とする彼を\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T19:35:57.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46401",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T21:47:32.417",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19509",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Translating とする彼を",
"view_count": 50
} | [
{
"body": "To make it simpler first you can cut out the first part of the sentence.\n\n彼をみんなが引き止めた。 This is simply \"everyone stopped him\"\n\nThe first part we cut out is all just describing the \"him\" that everyone\nstopped.\n\nthe he who 危険な場所に行こうとする.\n\nIn English we'd just say something like \"they stopped him from going to a\ndangerous place.\" Or \"They stopped him, as he was trying to go to a dangerous\nplace.\" might be closer.\n\nAnyway, (危険な場所に行こうとする) is basically one big adjective describing 彼.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T21:47:32.417",
"id": "46410",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T21:47:32.417",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "46401",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46401 | 46410 | 46410 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a bit unsure about phrasing these sentences in Japanese:\n\n> 1. I didn't know how to eat with chopstick until yesterday.\n> 2. I was wondering how people ate before chopsticks was invented.\n>\n\nThe challenge is that I don't know how to phrase a sentence with several\nverbs. (in sentence 1:to know+ to eat, in sentence 2: to wonder+ to eat+ to\ninvent) I have gone through genki 1 and genki 2 but none seem to help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T20:07:53.673",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46403",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T22:27:50.007",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-09T22:27:50.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "21656",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Involving 2 verbs in a sentence",
"view_count": 2696
} | [
{
"body": "It still holds true that the verb comes at the end of the sentence, but you\nhave to create what is known as an embedded sentence. You put one sentence\ninside another.\n\nSo, for your example \"I didn't know how to eat with chopsticks until\nyesterday\" you can view \"I didn't know ( )\" as one sentence with the thing you\ndidn't know in the (). In this case though, rather than one word it is an\nentire sentence in the (). That sentence being \"how to eat with chopsticks\nuntil yesterday\".\n\nThe Japanese would then become something like 昨日まで箸をどうやって使ったらいいか分かりませんでした。\n\nActually this particular example would really only need one verb in Japanese,\n昨日まで箸の使い方が分かりませんでした。 since 使い方 is technically a single noun here. This way is\nmore natural I think but I tried to keep two verbs in the translation above.\n\nAnyway, 昨日まで箸をどうやって使ったらいいか is a whole sentence in and of itself, then you tack\non the other verb after the first verb (which has to be in plain form).\n\nAs for your second example, I've created a bit more complicated embedded\nsentence 箸がやってくるまで何が使われたのでしょうか？\n\n箸がやってくるまで Until chopsticks were invented (came about)\n\n何が使われた What was used\n\nのでしょうか sort of wraps the whole sentence together.\n\nSo a sort of literal translation would be something like \"What do you think /\nI wonder what was used before they invented chopsticks.\"\n\nEmbedded sentences are created often with の / こと and と\n\nThe の and こと basically turn the verbs they are attached to into a noun so you\ncan attach another verb to that as normal.\n\nと can be used when quoting something as well as some other cases.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T21:09:26.383",
"id": "46404",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T21:09:26.383",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "46403",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46403 | null | 46404 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading someone's blog and I've come across this sentence. I feel as if I\nshould know what づくし means here, but I just can't get my head around it.\n\n> そんな分からないづくしの世界と今自分がよく知っている世界…\n\nIf someone could give an explanation of づくし or however it is naturally\nconjugated, that'd be really appreciated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T21:35:39.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46408",
"last_activity_date": "2021-03-01T05:26:49.677",
"last_edit_date": "2021-03-01T05:26:49.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "19278",
"owner_user_id": "20535",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"words",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "What does this ～づくし mean?",
"view_count": 441
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's 尽くし which means a bunch of something.\n\n分からないづくし世界 A world of nothing but things I don't understand.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-09T21:39:29.977",
"id": "46409",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-09T21:39:29.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "46408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46408 | null | 46409 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a well known haiku: Meigetsu ya Ike wo megurite Yo mo sugara\n\nI cannot understand the meaning and grammatical form of \"sugara\". Is it from\n\"sugaru\" (to finish)? Why does it end in \"a\"?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T00:25:14.303",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46412",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T01:44:04.547",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T01:44:04.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "21660",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"suffixes",
"haiku"
],
"title": "Word in haiku - sugara",
"view_count": 158
} | [
{
"body": "In this context,\n[すがら](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/117460/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%99%E3%81%8C%E3%82%89/)\nroughly means \"throughout\". Therefore,\n[夜{よ}もすがら](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/228442/meaning/m0u/) means something\nlike \"throughout the night\" or \"all night long\".\n\nSo, the subject of the haiku was walking around the pond the entire autumn\nnight.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T00:45:29.103",
"id": "46415",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T00:45:29.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "46412",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46412 | null | 46415 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46417",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: two people are walking on a street and a tramp says to them:\n\n> はにゃせー、バカヤロー\n\nI'm not sure if it's はにゃせ or はにやせ, because it is written in small fonts, I am\nattaching an image so you can tell. Could it be a Korean greeting? Thank you\nfor your help!\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pLgQd.jpg)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T00:34:12.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46413",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T01:30:28.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"greetings"
],
"title": "Meaning of はにゃせ or はにやせ",
"view_count": 202
} | [
{
"body": "Two possibilities (besides the Korean theory).\n\n「はにゃせ～～」 would be the drunk and/or sleepy man's pronunciation of\n\n1) 「離{はな}せ！」 = \"Leave me alone!\", \"Let me go!\", etc.\n\n2) 「話{はな}せ！」 = \"Tell me!\"\n\nThe first interpretation would be more likely, but that is just speculation\ngiven the limited context.\n\n「はにやせ」 with the normal-size 「や」 would make no sense at all.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T01:30:28.807",
"id": "46417",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T01:30:28.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46413",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46413 | 46417 | 46417 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In mails and documents I see the phrases「下記に表します」、「以下に表します」or\n「下記の件。。。」、「以下の件。。。」.\n\nI know they're both saying \"the following (see below, etc)\", but are there\ncases when you should use one over the other or are they pretty much always\ninterchangeable?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T02:00:21.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46418",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-10T07:05:05.453",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T02:08:09.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "「下記」vs 「以下」usage",
"view_count": 1027
} | [
{
"body": "Let me start by saying that 下記｛かき｝can only be used with the meaning of\n\"below\", \"hereafter\", whereas 以下｛いか｝has many other meanings, most notably\n\"less than\", \"not more than\", \"not exceeding (some amount)\".\n\nWhen talking about text that will follow the current sentence, both can be\nused. There is however a subtle difference, that shouldn't matter much outside\nof formal contexts:\n\n * When using 以下, the following text should be on the same line / in the same paragraph, i.e. follow immediately without changes in appearance.\n * Using 下記 means that the follow-up text will occupy a whole text unit, i.e. a full paragraph, or maybe a bullet-point list. It can also refer to some bibliography item or attached document.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T05:49:06.750",
"id": "46433",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T05:49:06.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"parent_id": "46418",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In this context, 以下 just means \"(something) below\" whereas 下記 is \"(something)\nwritten below\". You can say 以下に述べます, 以下に記します or 以下に記載, but 下記に述べます, 下記に記します or\n下記に記載 would look like a weird\n[重言](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%87%8D%E8%A8%80) to me. In reality you\nmay occasionally see them, though.\n\n以下 and 下記 are interchangeable in sentences such as 以下をご覧ください/下記をご覧ください,\n以下の件/下記の件, 以下の通りです/下記の通りです and 以下参照/下記参照.\n\nIn vertical writings 下記 becomes 左記.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T06:13:05.237",
"id": "46435",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T06:13:05.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46418",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 46418 | null | 46433 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Is there a term for \"love-hate relationship\" in Japanese?\n\nLike my gf asked me \"日本どう?\" and I wanted to reply \"I have a love-hate\nrelationship with it\".\n\n(NOT ツンデレ!!! lol)\n\n**EDIT**\n\nCame across the term「愛憎関係」, could this phrase be used in this scenario?\n\nGF: 日本どう?\n\nMe: 愛憎関係だね\n\n(Would that sound wrong?)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T02:34:15.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46419",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T04:27:05.340",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T04:41:11.623",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"phrases",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "A term in Japanese like \"love-hate relationship\"",
"view_count": 2325
} | [
{
"body": "No, I think that would not sound wrong. In fact I think 愛憎関係{あいぞうかんけい} is just\nwhat you are looking for.\n\nIf you look [here](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/love-hate+relationship) for\nexample you can see there are a few examples that should fit perfectly in your\nsituation. Like this:\n\n> フロイトは、親子間の愛憎関係をエディプス・コンプレックスとして展開しました。\n\nAccording to the same link, it seems that you could as well say\n愛{あい}と葛藤{かっとう}:\n\n> この映画はアナとエルサという２人のプリンセスの姉妹の愛と葛藤の物語だ。",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T06:08:14.330",
"id": "46434",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T06:08:14.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "46419",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Probably 愛憎関係 is a good way to express love and hate, but if you'd like to\nsound more casual about it, you could try saying 好きか嫌いかあまりわからない (I don't\nreally know whether I like it or hate it) or something to that effect.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T21:21:52.187",
"id": "46458",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T21:21:52.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "46419",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "愛憎関係 is not a common 四文字熟語; apparently only some English-Japanese dictionaries\nuse this term as a literal translation of love-hate relationship. 愛憎 itself is\na literary but common word. Seeing [real-word examples of\n愛憎](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/928/example/m0u/), it often vaguely refers\nto complex human feelings regarding human relationships in general.\n\nIn stiff written documents you can say 愛憎相半ばする関係, 愛憎こもごもな関係 or 愛憎入り交じる関係.\n\nIn casual conversations, you can pick up one of [these similar\nexpressions](http://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%B3%E3%83%93%E3%83%90%E3%83%AC%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E3%81%AA%E5%BF%83%E6%83%85),\nor you may have to describe it, for example, \"好きでもあるし、嫌いでもある.\"",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T04:27:05.340",
"id": "46469",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T04:27:05.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46419",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46419 | null | 46469 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46421",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How to interpret **ないって** in the following sentence?\n\n> アイスには賞味期限がないって本当ですか？\n\nがない looks like negative form of ある, but what is って then? Can it be a\ncontraction of quoting particle と?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T02:45:25.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46420",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T03:15:03.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3371",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"contractions"
],
"title": "How to interpret ないって",
"view_count": 103
} | [
{
"body": "You are parsing this incorrectly. It is ない + って following after. In this case,\nthe って is a contraction of というのは, and the ない goes with 賞味期限が.\n\nSo the whole sentence parses like this:\n\n> (アイスには賞味期限がない）って本当ですか？ → Is it really true that ice cream doesn't have an\n> expiration date?!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T03:08:32.217",
"id": "46421",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T03:15:03.967",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T03:15:03.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "46420",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46420 | 46421 | 46421 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46432",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Recently went to buy some shirts to wear at work, I exercise a lot (cardio,\nweight-training and calisthenics) so I have pretty large shoulders and a\n(smaller? regular?) waist.\n\nI tried explaining that I'm an \"inverted triangle\" body type and was told\nsomething called \"Y体\", at first I thought it made sense but when I tried them\non, the ones that fit my waist I couldn't even get my forearms into, and the\nones that fit my shoulders and arms were like 1.5 times the size of my waist,\ncame to the conclusion that this \"Y体\" is just a \"rectangle\" body type (why\nit's called \"Y\" beats me...).\n\nHow would I explain an \"inverted triangle\" body type in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T03:30:53.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46423",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T23:19:52.217",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T23:19:52.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "How to explain to the 店員 that I'm an \"inverted triangle\" body type?",
"view_count": 161
} | [
{
"body": "The literal translation, 逆【ぎゃく】三角形【さんかっけい】(型【がた】)(の体型/ボディー) makes perfect\nsense ([`逆三角形 体型` on Y! image\nsearch](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=sfp_as&aq=-1&oq=&ts=3177&p=%E9%80%86%E4%B8%89%E8%A7%92%E5%BD%A2%E3%80%80%E4%BD%93%E5%9E%8B&meta=vc%3D)).\n\nI have no idea what a Y型のボディー is (it may be jargon used by someone, though).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T04:28:56.793",
"id": "46432",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T04:28:56.793",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46423",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46423 | 46432 | 46432 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46431",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Both 預金{よきん} and 入金{にゅうきん} can mean **deposit**. Is there any difference in\nthe usage of these terms?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T03:31:59.413",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46424",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-06T09:00:50.377",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-06T20:11:45.163",
"last_editor_user_id": "3371",
"owner_user_id": "3371",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"pragmatics"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 預金 and 入金?",
"view_count": 249
} | [
{
"body": "入金 is a suru-verb that refers to the individual transactions of putting money\ninto a bank account. The antonym is 出金. In daily conversations (お金を)預ける or\n(お金を)入れる might be more common.\n\n預金 usually refers to the money (already) in an account. It occasionally works\nas a suru-verb, but when it does, it refers to the long-term state of having\nmoney in a bank account.\n\nIn other words, if you do 入金, your 預金 will increase.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T04:17:42.330",
"id": "46431",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T04:41:22.353",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T04:41:22.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46424",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "> Difference between 預金 and 入金\n\nBoth of them have the same meaning of deposit.\n\nLiterally, you have to 入金する in order to 預金する.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-05-07T00:05:23.307",
"id": "47127",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-07T00:05:23.307",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46424",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "入金する means \"put money into **a** bank account\" (as 入 means \"put in\") and 預金する\nmeans \"put money into **your own** bank account\"\n([預](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/4172/meaning/m0u/) means \"leave something\nto be kept\"). Thus you can 入金 into your account or your eBay exhibitor's (in\nanother word, 振り込む \"transfer\"), but only able to 預金 to your own one.\n\nIn noun form, 預金 tends to refer to \"deposit(ed money)\", while 入金 only stands\nfor \"(act of) depositing\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-01-06T09:00:50.377",
"id": "55726",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-06T09:00:50.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "46424",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46424 | 46431 | 46431 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "61147",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am trying to understand why both 弟 and 第 kanji have the same 音読み\npronunciation ダイ/テイ? The common element\n[弔](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%BC%94) is a variant of\n[吊](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%90%8A#Chinese) - is its Chinese\npronunciation close to ダイ/テイ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T03:51:13.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46426",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-27T14:10:57.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3371",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Why both 弟 and 第 kanji have the same 音読み?",
"view_count": 461
} | [
{
"body": "So [弟](http://jigen.net/kanji/24351) is actually a 象形{しょうけい} (pictograph) and\nit is pronounced ダイ (among others of course).\n\nOn the other hand [第](http://jigen.net/kanji/31532) is a 形声{けいせい} (kanji in\nwhich one element suggests the meaning and one the sound) and from the link\nyou can see that the pronunciation comes just from 弟. So I guess you should\nreally look at 弟 as the phonetic part rather than 弔.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T07:42:32.767",
"id": "46439",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-27T14:10:57.387",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-27T14:10:57.387",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "46426",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "They have the same _on'yomi_ because「弟」and「第」were originally the same\ncharacter, representing a word to do with _sequence_ or _order_ ; _younger\nbrother_ is an extension of this meaning (via _ordering of male siblings_\n).「第」was created from「弟」by corrupting「丷」to「⺮」. In Mandarin Chinese, the two\ncharacters also sound identical ([\n**dì**](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Zh-d%C3%AC.ogg)),\nand bears distant similarity to **ダイ/テイ**.\n\nDespite「弔」looking like it shows up in「弟」and「第」, they are unrelated.\n\n> For reference,「弔」depicts a person「人」wielding a bird-capturing device; the\n> device is comprised of an arrow attached to a very long rope, and is the\n> original character of「/繳」.\n>\n> # `[商](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shang_dynasty) \n> [甲](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_bone_script) \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I6Crs.png) \n>\n> [甲](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/JiaguwenReference)1870 \n> [合集27738](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/jgwhj/?bhfl=1&bh=27738&jgwfl=)`` \n> [篆](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_seal_script) \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/td3KC.png) \n> [說文解字](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuowen_Jiezi) \n> ``現代 \n> [楷](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_script) \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eQfxc.png) \n> \n> `\n\n* * *\n\n「弟」is comprised of a handle of a pole-arm weapon「必」and a depiction of binding\nrope inscribed in an「Ｓ」shape. It originally represented an ordered bundle of\nweapon handles, extended to mean _order_ , then _ordered male siblings_ >\n_younger brother_.\n\n# `商 \n甲 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/i18VH.png) \n[乙](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/JiaguwenReference)8818 \n``秦 \n簡 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zIbng.png) \n[睡](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuihudi_Qin_bamboo_texts)ㆍ[日甲](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/QinwenziReference)2 \n``現代 \n楷 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JXR5x.png) \n \n`\n\n> 「必」is not related to「心」!「必」was originally「戈」([ _dagger-\n> axe_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger-axe)) with the blade part\n> omitted, leaving the handle part. The modern meaning _certain_ is a phonetic\n> loan.\n>\n> # `商 \n> 甲 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SLz39.png) \n>\n> [乙](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/JiaguwenReference)3069「必」 \n> [合集14034](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/jgwhj/?bhfl=1&bh=14034&jgwfl=)``商 \n> 甲 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0acal.png) \n>\n> [甲](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/JiaguwenReference)622「戈」 \n> [合集33208](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/jgwhj/?bhfl=1&bh=33208&jgwfl=)`\n>\n> The handle part of the weapon is now written as「柲」. Later on, decorative\n> marks were added to the character, leading to the modern form.\n>\n> # `[西周](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Zhou) \n> [金](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_bronze_inscriptions) \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qhNXX.png) \n> 南宮乎鐘 \n>\n> [集成181](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/yzjwjc/?bh=181&jgwfl=)``[秦](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qin_dynasty) \n> [簡](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_and_wooden_slips) \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uAblp.png) \n>\n> 睡ㆍ[秦](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/QinwenziReference)98 \n> ``現代 \n> 楷 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fk5qY.png) \n> \n> `\n>\n> Compare「心」, which depicts a heart with the heart chambers becoming\n> exaggerated, then later heavily abbreviated.\n>\n> # `商 \n> 甲 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/H1lfh.png) \n>\n> [甲](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/JiaguwenReference)3510 \n> [合集6](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/jgwhj/?bhfl=1&bh=6&jgwfl=)``西周 \n> 金 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qHnlc.png) \n> 史墻盤 \n>\n> [集成10175](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/yzjwjc/?bh=10175&jgwfl=)``[楚](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chu_\\(state\\)) \n> 簡 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nFbEM.png) \n>\n> [包2](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/ChuwenziReference).218 \n> `` \n> 篆 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vk9d3.png) \n> 說文解字 \n> ``[魏](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cao_Wei) \n> [隸](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_script) \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KxOB4.png) \n> 上尊號奏 \n> ``現代 \n> 楷 \n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1hYCB.png) \n> \n> `\n\nThe「丷」part of「弟」was an eventual detachment from the main body of the handle.\nIn some variants,「丷」was corrupted into「艹」, [then again corrupted\ninto「⺮」](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/42827/what-is-the-\ncharacter-etymology-of-%E7%9D%80?noredirect=1&lq=1), leading on to the modern\nform of「第」, which preserves the meaning _order_ or _sequence_ and is not used\nfor the meaning _younger brother_.\n\n# `秦 \n簡 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zIbng.png) \n睡ㆍ日甲2 \n``[西漢](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_dynasty#Western_Han) \n \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hCNBP.png) \n御食官鼎 \n``[東漢](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_dynasty#Eastern_Han) \n隸 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DCQRD.png) \n魯峻碑 \n``現代 \n楷 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yh29B.png) \n \n`\n\n* * *\n\n# References:\n\n * 季旭昇《說文新證》\n * [小學堂](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/)\n * [國學大師](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-27T13:17:08.487",
"id": "61147",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-27T13:30:42.547",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "46426",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46426 | 61147 | 46439 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46445",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The song in question can be found [here](https://youtu.be/eOfaBZ1LohA). For\nexample:\n\n> いっぽんでもニンジン\n\nWhile I do know that でも means 'but', I also know that most particles have\nmultiple meanings.\n\nSince 'but' wouldn't make much sense as a translation here, I am confident\nthat でも is used here to mean something else. That's what my question is about.\n\nWhat does the sentence structure ＡでもＢ mean as it is used in the song?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T07:22:09.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46437",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T00:22:47.480",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T07:30:00.717",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21667",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particles"
],
"title": "What does the sentence structure ＡでもＢ mean in this song?",
"view_count": 1397
} | [
{
"body": "The song is meant to teach kids counter words. In every number from 1 to 10,\nthere is an example of a number + counter for that kind of concept, then でも,\nand then the actual word that needs the counter that was used.\n\nIf you look at the example word given for each number+counter word carefully,\nyou will notice that it resembles the next number.\n\n> * 一本{いっぽん} でも **に** んじん\n> * 二足{にそく} でも **サン** ダル\n>\n\nand so on.\n\nSo I don't see why でも couldn't mean \"but\". The actual meaning is vague,\nthough, because the song doesn't have a real grammatical structure. It's just\na list of `amount+でも+item`.\n\nSome possible interpretations of the function of でも here:\n\n * There is a cylindrical thing, **but** it's (called) a carrot.\n * The thing is called a ninjin (that sounds like 2), **even though** it is cylindrical (and is referred to as something that sounds like 1).\n * Whatever sounds logical. It would ruin the meaning of the song to say that there is only one correct interpretation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T07:42:42.820",
"id": "46440",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T09:46:56.723",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T09:46:56.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "46437",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "The でも in the song is conditional/hypothetical \"even if\" (indicating 逆接の仮定条件),\nrather than the conjunction (接続詞) でも, \"but\", which usually comes at the\nbeginning of a sentence.\n\nThe でも here consists of で (the continuative form (連用形) of the copula だ) +\nbinding particle も.\n\nSo 「AでもB（だ/です）」 means \"(It's) B, even if it's A.\"\n\n> １本 **でも** ニンジン _lit._ (It's) ninjin, even if one. \n> → It's called [ni]{2}njin, even if there's one piece (of carrot).\n>\n> ２足 **でも** サンダル _lit._ (They're) sandaru, even if two pairs. \n> → You call them [san]{3}daru, even if you've got two pairs (of sandals).\n\n* * *\n\nExamples of this でも:\n\n> * 雨 **でも** 行きます。 I'll go even if it's rainy.\n> * 難しい仕事 **でも** やります。 I'll do even if it's a difficult task.\n> * ２個100円。３個 **でも** 100円。 Two for 100 yen. It'd still be 100 yen even if\n> you bought three.\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T09:21:38.457",
"id": "46445",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T00:22:47.480",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T00:22:47.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "46437",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 46437 | 46445 | 46445 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Back to basics: I was certain the pronunciation of えい (like in せんせい) was \"ee\"\n(except in few cases like in スペイン), I've read that everywhere.\n\nBut in one of the few French reference books for learning Japanese, they say\nit's pronounced \"e-i\" like the English words \"say\", \"may\", \"day\".\n\nSo I was wondering if it is a HUGE mistake of that book, or if it's more\nsubtle than that?\n\nAnd maybe the same happens with おう?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T09:07:29.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46443",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T09:07:29.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19507",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Pronunciation of えい",
"view_count": 95
} | []
| 46443 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46447",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am on ch.82, pg.19 of Yotsubato! manga. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pGhIf.jpg)\nSource: <http://raw.senmanga.com/Yotsubato!/82/19>\n\nWhat does 「やりすぎなほど」mean here ?\n\nFrom what I know, 「ほど」 is used to express the extent of something and 「やりすぎ」\nmeans overdoing/excessive etc., Does this translate to something like\n\"Awesome!\" ? Or does the literal translation mean something else?\n\nAlso, is the usage of「な」 here unconventional ? I have never really seen 「な」\nused after noun so far (I am a beginner).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T11:02:03.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46446",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T13:48:50.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18021",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage",
"colloquial-language",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does やりすぎなほど mean on this page of Yotsubato!",
"view_count": 678
} | [
{
"body": "> **よつば** : あのなー キツツキみたよ！You know what? I saw a woodpecker!\n>\n> **葉介** : へー どんなだった？Really? What was it like?\n>\n> **よつば** : きーつついてた！やりすぎなほど！It was pecking wood! Way too much (lit. to an\n> extent that could be called overkill)!\n\nThe 「きーつついてた」 part, meaning the same as 「木をつついてた」, is a pun on 「キツツキ」.\n\n「やりすぎなほど！」 is an additional comment to the previous pun. やりすぎ (overkill) is\nused as an adjective while it normally is just a verb-derived noun (do + too\nmuch). There is a similar question about the use of な after nouns\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1547/using-%e3%81%aa-\nparticle-after-common-nouns-non-na-adjectives).\n\nNote that it's perfectly grammatical to use な with na-adjectives like in ジョジョの\n**奇妙{きみょう}な** 冒険{ぼうけん} (JoJo's **Bizarre** Adventure).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T11:30:25.487",
"id": "46447",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T13:48:50.410",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "46446",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46446 | 46447 | 46447 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46461",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My Chinese name in Kanji is 王元劭 (Wang Yuan Shao). I've heard there are many\ndifferent readings I can use for each kanji, am I allowed to use whichever\nreading I like? Also, apparently the character 劭 is a hyogai Kanji, which\nmeans I can't use it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T11:48:12.667",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46448",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T22:42:42.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21671",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"names",
"chinese"
],
"title": "Can I use my Chinese name and if so, how do I say it?",
"view_count": 499
} | [
{
"body": "The way I usually see foreign names written in Newspapers etc is that Kanjis\nthat are not hyougai are used, with the original pronunciation transliterated\nas furigana, and instead of the hyougai kanji, katakana is used. An example is\nthe Go player 李世乭, where 乭 isn't used in Japanese. The way his name is usually\nwritten is thus 李｛イ｝世｛セ｝ドル",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T13:21:57.343",
"id": "46450",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T13:21:57.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "46448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "We are supposed to call your name おう・げんしょう unless you challenge it. If you\nwant to be called differently, go ahead and offer it. In that case, you'd use\nkatakana like ワン・ユァンシャオ.\n\np.s. I'm Japanese but I haven't heard that one cannot use hyogai kanji.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T22:37:38.273",
"id": "46461",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T22:42:42.977",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T22:42:42.977",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "46448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46448 | 46461 | 46461 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'd like to ask whether my writing is correct or not; I'm trying to write a\nformal email following up my previous email in regard of topic X. The way I\nwrite it is like this :\n\nXデモ依頼について,メールをお送りします.\n\nI was wondering if this is the correct way to say it - it make sense in\nEnglish but seems awkward in Japanese.\n\nIn general this is what I'm trying to write :\n\nXデモ依頼について,メールをお送りします. 突然のメール失礼いたします。\n\n先日送らせていただいたメールですが,ご確認いただけましたでしょうか。\n\nXに関連するご質問がございましたらお気軽にお問い合わせください。\n\nお返事をお待ちしております.\n\nAny suggestions to improve my awkward email is very much appreciated,\nthankyou!",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T13:15:28.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46449",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T02:58:57.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21672",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"email"
],
"title": "How to write 'I'm emailing you in regard of [topic]'",
"view_count": 807
} | [
{
"body": "You can use:\n\nWatashi ha [topic] ni tsuite meeru wo kaiteimasu. (私は[topic]についてメールを書いています)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T01:23:27.853",
"id": "46491",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T01:23:27.853",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21706",
"parent_id": "46449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You can omit \"突然のメール失礼いたします。\". This sentence is normally used when you have\nnever sent the email before.\n\nWith regard to the first sentence, Xデモ依頼 **の件に** ついてメールをお送り **しています** 。\nwould sound more natural.\n\nAll the other parts are perfect.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T02:48:11.220",
"id": "46495",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T02:58:57.003",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T02:58:57.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "18949",
"owner_user_id": "18949",
"parent_id": "46449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46449 | null | 46495 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Apologies for the blurry image, I've been trying to identify a location in a\nrelatives photo and this sign appears to be the only hint I have at it. I'm\nafraid my grasp of written Japanese isn't quite strong enough to understand it\nthough, would anyone here be able to decipher it for me?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DjIlc.png)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T14:29:39.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46451",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T21:39:34.727",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-10T21:39:34.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "21675",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"words",
"readings"
],
"title": "Need help understanding the embedded image",
"view_count": 132
} | [
{
"body": "It says:\n\n> 天大橋{てんだいばし}\n>\n> 昭和{しょうわ}５９年{ねん}１２月竣工{がつしゅんこう}\n\nmeaning:\n\n\"Tendai Bridge\"\n\n\"Completed in December, Year 59 of Showa\" ← That is 1984.\n\nThe bridge seems to be located in the City of Satsuma-Sendai in Kagoshima\nPrefecture unless there is a bridge with the same name somewhere else.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T14:56:37.143",
"id": "46452",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T15:02:01.827",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46451",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46451 | null | 46452 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46457",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a sentence from page 39-108 of Lake and Ura's _Learn to Read in\nJapanese_.\n\n> 食べてばかりいないで少し運動したほうがいいですよ\n\nThe book gives a somewhat inscrutable:\n\n> Eating only not being, it would be better to do a little exercise, for sure.\n\nGoogle Translate gives the translation as:\n\n> You do not have to eat, you had better exercise a little\n\nThe second half of the sentence (運動したほうがいいですよ) is pretty straightforward; as I\nunderstand it from\n[here](http://maggiesensei.com/2013/07/02/%E3%81%B0%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8A-bakari/),\nthe first half of the sentence describes habitual eating. I don't know how it\ninteracts with いないで.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T15:41:48.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46453",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-16T04:33:51.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19509",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"particle-ばかり"
],
"title": "Translating て-form + ばかりいないで",
"view_count": 1374
} | [
{
"body": "[～て + ばかりいる](http://learnjapanesedaily.com/japanese-\ngrammar-%E3%81%B0%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8A%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-bakariiru.html) A verb\nin ～て form or a noun followed by ばかり means to do only that action or thing, or\ncontinuously do it, or to always (verb). This phrase is often used to\ndisapprove of something.\n\n```\n\n 勉強してばかりいる To do nothing but study.\n 走ってばかりいる To do nothing but run.\n \n```\n\n[ないで](https://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-\njlpt-n4-grammar-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%A7-naide/) means please do not\n(verb).\n\nTo combine both meanings:\n\n勉強してばかりいる + ないで => 食べてばかりいないで\n\nWhich means, \"please don't always just eat\" or \"please don't eat constantly.\"\n\nFor the record, ばかり could also be written\n[ばっかり](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%B0%E3%81%A3%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8A-602309)\nwhich means the same thing (but with more emphasis), and if it follows a verb\nin past tense, then it means that you have just finished doing that action.\n\n食べたばかり・食べたばっかり = I just ate. (I just got done eating)",
"comment_count": 15,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T18:24:20.250",
"id": "46457",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-16T04:33:51.747",
"last_edit_date": "2018-10-16T04:33:51.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "7478",
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "46453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46453 | 46457 | 46457 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: a boy tells to a trainer that he wants to become a boxer, so the\ntrainer starts testing the boy's skills. After seeing that he's strong, the\ntrainer says \"なっちゃねェな\". I think it is a contraction of \"なんてことはない\", but even\nso, I don't understand the meaning in this context. Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T16:22:44.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46454",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T18:07:09.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"contractions"
],
"title": "Meaning of なっちゃねぇ",
"view_count": 1095
} | [
{
"body": "It is actually a contraction of\n[「なって（い）ない」](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\nwhich means \"to be no good\". So in your situation, the trainer is saying that\nthe boy's boxing is no good. Note that is used to say \"no good\" as in \"someone\nis not good at something\", and not that \"someone himself is a good-for-\nnothing\".\n\nOn a side note, 「なんてことはない」 in the same speech pattern as the trainer would be\nsomething like「なんてこっちゃねぇ」 or 「なんてこたぁねぇ」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T17:21:30.787",
"id": "46455",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T17:21:30.787",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "46454",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "There are a couple of things it could be a contraction of.\n\nになっては（ない）ね\n\nor\n\nになっちゃ（う）ね ＞＞ になっちまう which is a contraction itself of になってしまう.\n\nThe ちゃ is a contraction of ては usually like じゃ from では. You also have なきゃ in\nthe same vein coming from なくては. ～ては（いける・いけない） and ～てしまう are common phrases so\ncan be shortened. してはいけない、しなくてはいけない、してしまう become しちゃ、しなきゃ、しちゃう etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T18:07:09.057",
"id": "46456",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T18:07:09.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20531",
"parent_id": "46454",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 46454 | null | 46455 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46468",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "## Facts\n\n 1. The noun はなし can be written 話 or 話し.\n 2. In colloquial contexts, you can omit 「を」 from 話{はなし}をする, making it 話{はなし}する.\n 3. There is also a 五段 verb, 話す{はなす}.\n 4. The continuative (連用形) form of both 話する and 話す can look like 話し.\n\n## The problem\n\nFrom the facts, you can collect 3 words that look exactly the same but have a\ndifferent meaning (grammatical function). You can probably rule out the noun\n話し with the help of context, but you still have either 話し{はなしし} or 話{はな}し.\n\n## The question\n\nHow can I know when which one is meant? Or does it make such a big difference\nthat I should even care?\n\nSome examples:\n\n> * 話しながら…\n> * 何人に話した？\n> * 明日お話します。← This must be する because of お-?\n> * 彼は大声で話した。\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T21:52:34.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46459",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T17:50:10.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"verbs",
"nouns",
"godan-verbs"
],
"title": "Distinguishing 「話し」 する and 五段 usage",
"view_count": 222
} | [
{
"body": "In modern standard Japanese, はなし as a noun is always written as 話, without し.\nThis rule is taught at school today and is fairly strict, although you may see\nexceptions in old documents. As a verb, はなす is written with okurigana.\n\n話 is not a suru-verb. You usually need a direct object marker を when it's used\nwith する.\n\n> シンデレラの話【はなし】 **を** する。 (話 is a noun)\n\nはなしして and はなしした can appear in two situations:\n\n 1. When はなし is a noun and the following を is omitted because it's a casual sentence.\n\n> ママ、シンデレラの話【はなし】して！ (話 is a noun)\n\n 2. As part of a humble expression `お + masu-stem + する`.\n\n> 本日は、世界の童話についてお話【はな】ししていきます。\n\nTo distinguish, first note that omission of を after 話 can appear only in\nfairly casual conversations. And looking at the modifiers will usually tell\nwhether it's used as a noun or a verb. Unless 話 is clearly modified by an\nadjectival expression in a casual conversational sentence, you can assume\n話して/話した is a verb. In your examples, 「話しながら」「何人に話した」「彼は大声で話した」 are\ntheoretically ambiguous, but you can usually assume these はなし are verbs.\n\n> * 先生が楽しい話【はなし】してるよ！ (a noun follows after 楽しい)\n> * 先生は楽しく話【はな】している。 (a verb follows after 楽しく)\n>\n\nHumble おはなしします should be written as お話しします, because 話す is a verb in this\nconstruction (cf. お預かりします, お持ちしましょう). That means your third expression is\ngrammatically wrong, although this mistake is found even among native\nspeakers.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T02:55:24.980",
"id": "46468",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T17:50:10.260",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T17:50:10.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46459",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46459 | 46468 | 46468 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46473",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: some guys are beating up a high-school girl to extort money from her.\nThen she says(in a defiant tone I think):\n\n> 今時かつあげ？チャラいわりにやるコトは古いのね\n\nI checked [this question about\nチャラ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5094/what-\ndoes-%E3%83%81%E3%83%A3%E3%83%A9-mean), but I didn't find a meaning that fits\nthe context. Also, I am not sure about the actual meaning of わり here. Thank\nyou for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T22:24:46.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46460",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T07:14:32.437",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"colloquial-language",
"katakana"
],
"title": "Meaning of チャラいわり",
"view_count": 639
} | [
{
"body": "I think here you should actually look at わりに, that means rather/fairly etc.\nYou can look it up [here](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=warini).\n\nIn case you have AわりにB, usually this means that B does not meat the\nexpectations of A. So in this case I think a possible (free) translation would\nbe:\n\n> You extort money now? Quite an obsolete move for a charai. (Or similarly:\n> For being charai that's quite an old/outdated move)\n\nI left on purpose \"charai\" in Japanese as it could have different meanings\ndepending on the context, but usually it's used as \"playboy/player\".\n\nSo my first idea was that the girl could be trying to get back at them by\nsaying that they are using an outdated move to hit on her.\n\nEDIT: However, as pointed out in a comment, _チャラい has a connotation of \"being\neasily affected by fashion\" or \"hip\"_ , and so the contrast is in the fact\nthat extorting money is outdated for someone who looks fashionable.\n\nI think I might have been misled by the context that maybe was not clear\nenough. So maybe a more correct translation (always free) would be:\n\n> Extortion? So outdated for someone who tries to/wants to look so\n> fashionable.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T00:24:38.663",
"id": "46463",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T04:49:20.707",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T04:49:20.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "14205",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "46460",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "...わりに means \"for ...\" or \"considering ...\" as in \"You look young _for_ your\nage\". So basically the girls is saying \"Ha, you're doing an old thing in spite\nof your チャラい appearance.\"\n\nThis means she believes カツアゲ is an outdated act, and チャラい people do not\nusually commit カツアゲ. Well, I also think this is a general tendency.\n\nIn school dramas/manga, カツアゲ is usually considered as a delinquent action\ncommitted by people like this:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3IHBi.png)\n\nThis is a stereotype which is typically referred to as 昭和の硬派な不良 (lit. \"Hard-\nfaction delinquent of the Showa era\") today. They are characterized by\nstubbornness, dignity, violence, hierarchical relationships and resistance to\nadults. This type of 硬派な不良 is almost dead now, but the word カツアゲ is still\nassociated with this type of school boys.\n\nToday, the word チャラい refers to the opposite of this, characterized by\ntalkativeness, frivolousness, women-chasing, opportunism, sensitivity to\nfashion/music, and fast-living attitudes. The antonym for 硬派 was 軟派, but [it\ncame to mean \"to pick up a\ngirl\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/40216/5010), and today チャラい\n(i-adjective) has become widespread. (Of course the actual appearance of\n軟派/チャラい people will vary from time to time; no one looked like Fujimori Shingo\n40 years ago.) While チャラい people may be generally considered by many to be\nsuperficial and lacking patience, they seldom take a risk and resort to brute\nforce.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T07:14:32.437",
"id": "46473",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T07:14:32.437",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46460",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46460 | 46473 | 46473 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46471",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The verb [調べる](http://tangorin.com/general/%E8%AA%BF%E3%81%B9%E3%82%8B) means\n\n> to examine; to investigate; to check up; to sense; to study; to inquire; to\n> search\n\nThe 連用形 [調べ](http://tangorin.com/general/%E8%AA%BF%E3%81%B9) means\n\n> 1. investigation; inspection; examination\n> 2. tune; note; melody\n>\n\nIn this case, why does 連用形 have meanings (tune, note, melody) that are not\nrelated to 連体形?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-10T22:52:54.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46462",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T10:26:25.307",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10476",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"morphology",
"semantics"
],
"title": "Does 連用形 always reflect the meaning of 連体形 of a verb?",
"view_count": 217
} | [
{
"body": "This is a very good question. I'm a Japanese, but I didn't know the answer. I\nsearched on the Internet for your question. At last I found a proper answer at\nthe URL site:\n<https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q11112790666> \nI'll show you what it is as follows with adding furigana to kanji. Sorry to\nsay, but I know this is a long answer and only in Japanese. So I recommend you\nto read the last part of the answer where there is the conclusion of it.\n\n* * *\n\n**Question** \n音楽{おんがく}で使{つか}う「しらべ」の語源{ごげん}は？\nよく歌{うた}や音楽{おんがく}の世界{せかい}で「調{しら}べ」という言葉{ことば}を耳{みみ}にしますが、この言葉{ことば}にも語源{ごげん}はあるのでしょうか？\n普段{ふつう}一般的{いっぱんてき}に使{つか}われている「調{しら}べる」とは全{まった}く違{ちが}う意味{いみ}なのに、同{おな}じ漢字{かんじ}を使用{しよう}しているところに何{なに}か理由{りゆう}があるのかと思{おも}いまして。\n調{しら}べてみても語源{ごげん}が見{み}当{あ}たらなかったので、どなたかご存知{ぞんじ}の方{かた}がいらっしゃいましたらご教授{きょうじゅ}の程{ほど}お願{ねが}い致{いた}します。\n\n* * *\n\n**Answer** \n古語{こご}辞典{じてん}などで「しらべる」(古形{こけい}は「しらぶ」)という単語{たんご}を見{み}ると、平安{へいあん}時代{じだい}以前{いぜん}は「楽器{がっき}を調律{ちょうりつ}する」「楽器{がっき}を鳴{な}らす」と言{い}う用法{ようほう}がほとんどです。「調査{ちょうさ}する」というような意味{いみ}で使用{しよう}される例{れい}は、中世{ちゅうせい}にならないと出{で}てきません。\nこのことからもわかるように、「調{しら}ぶ」「調{しら}べ」は、元来{がんらい}、「楽器{がっき}の調子{ちょうし}を整{ととの}える」という意味{いみ}だったと考{かんが}えられます。「調子{ちょうし}を整{ととの}える」と言{い}う意味{いみ}から「いろいろなネタを照{て}らし合{あ}わせて吟味{ぎんみ}する」と言{い}う意味{いみ}が派生{はせい}し、「調査{ちょうさ}する」という意味{いみ}を持{も}つようになった物{もの}でしょう。\n以上は、ヤマトコトバの世界{せかい}。次{つぎ}に、これが漢字{かんじ}の世界{せかい}と出会{であ}ったときに何{なに}が起{お}こったかを見{っみ}ておきます。\n「調{ちょう}」という漢字{かんじ}は、元来{がんらい}、「しらべる」よりも「ととのう」「ととのえる」というニュアンスが強{つよ}い漢字{かんじ}と思{おも}われます。漢和{かんわ}辞典{じてん}で「調{ちょう}」という漢字{かんじ}を引{ひ}くと、「ととのう」「全体{ぜんたい}のバランス」と言{い}うような意味{いみ}や、そこから派生{はせい}した意味{いみ}がたくさん載{の}っており、「しらべる」を圧倒{あっとう}しています。「調{ちょう}」を含{ふく}む熟語{じゅくご}（調整{ちょうせい}・調理{ちょうり}・調和{ちょうわ}・調度品{ちょうどひん}…）などを見{み}ても、大部分{だいぶぶん}は、「ととのう」「ととのえる」という意味{いみ}です。「調査{ちょうさ}」と言{い}う熟語{じゅくご}があるにはありますが、「調査{ちょうさ}」の「色々{いろいろ}材料{ざいりょう}を吟味{ぎんみ}・判定{はんてい}する」という意味{いみ}は、むしろ、漢字{かんじ}「査{さ}」に由来{ゆらい}する物{もの}と見{み}ることができそうです。\nそして、大昔{おおむかし}の日本人{にほんじん}は、「調{ちょう}」という漢字{かんじ}に出会{であ}ったとき、「調{ちょう}＝ととのう」と言{い}う意味{いみ}が、ヤマトコトバの「しらぶ」「しらべ」に一致{いっち}すると考{かんが}え、「調{ちょう}」の訓{くん}読{よ}みに、「しらぶ」「しらべ」を当{あ}てたのでしょう。\n\n* * *\n\nまとめると、 \n「しらべる」は、「楽器{がっき}の調子{ちょうし}を整{ととの}える」こそが本来{ほんらい}の意味{いみ}であり、「調査{ちょさ}する」はそこから派生{はせい}した意味{いみ}なのです。「音楽{おんがく}」「調子{ちょうし}の整{ととの}った音色{ねいろ}」という意味{いみ}の「しらべ」は、本来{ほんらい}の意味{いみ}を強{つよ}く残{のこ}した表現{ひょうげん}と言{い}えます。\n\n**Free translation** At first, the word 「verb しらぶ（old Japanese\npronunciation）」had a meaning of \"to tune a musical instrument\", and 「nounしらべ」\nhad a meaning of \"sounds made by a tuned musical instrument.\" After that,\n「しらぶ」 got a meaning of \"to compare various materials and examine them closely\"\nderived from the original meaning of \"to tune a musical instrument.\" And at\nlast, it has come to have a meaning of \"to investigateしらべる\".\n\n* * *\n\n参考：日本国語大辞典・岩波古語辞典・改定新版漢字源",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T05:59:01.787",
"id": "46471",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T10:26:25.307",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T10:26:25.307",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46462",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 46462 | 46471 | 46471 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46467",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "`素の部分時系列ではなくて方向データを考えるのは、一般に時系列データにつきもののノイズを抑制すると言う観点で実用上理にかなっています`\n\nIn the above sentence I am unable to understand the `理にかなっています` phrase. Does\nanyone know what this means? Please help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T00:47:21.233",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46464",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T01:50:01.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Unable to understand 理にかなっています meaning",
"view_count": 156
} | [
{
"body": "理にかなう is a set phrase that means _is reasonable_ , _to make sense_ , etc.\n\n理 is _reason_ , and [かなう](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/26257/5010) is\n_to match_ , _to accord_. The kanji for かなう in this context is 適う, but it's\nusually written in hiragana.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T01:50:01.580",
"id": "46467",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T01:50:01.580",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46464",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46464 | 46467 | 46467 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have a really hard time understanding the connotation of the\nterm「まじめじゃない」or「まじめな人」, I know the denotation is \"a serious person\".\n\nPhrases like「まじめに仕事する人 (A person who works hard/takes their job seriously)」are\neasy to understand, but when it comes to the other 2 phrases they seem\nsubjective, where the connotative meaning is in the eye of the beholder.\n\nLike, most girls in Japan say「まじめな人がいい」but ask them what their definition of\na「まじめな人」is and you'll probably get varying answers.\n\nJust going by the denotation I \"think\" I would qualify as a「まじめな人」and\nsometimes I'm told「まじめだね」, but mentioning this to my girl and I get a reply\nof「お前まじめじゃねぇ」, and I want to yell \"WHAT IS A「まじめな人」THEN?\" lol\n\nIt seems everyone has a different notion of what they perceive to be\na「まじめな人」or「まじめじゃない人」。",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T01:13:40.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46465",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T08:36:26.883",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T04:04:37.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "20413",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"connotation"
],
"title": "Are「まじめじゃない」、「まじめな人」subjective terms",
"view_count": 654
} | [
{
"body": "I think the definition of 「まじめな人」is a person whose way of life is faithful in\nthe light of your sense of values. Because the sense of values of life varies\nin each person, the definition of 「まじめな人」will be so.\n\n* * *\n\nWhat is your connotation of a 美人｛びじん｝`beauty`? It may be in the eye of the\nbeholder, as is said 「蓼食｛たでく｝う虫｛むし｝も好｛す｝き好｛ず｝き」, and so is the word 「まじめな人」.\n\n* * *\n\n * There is no accounting for taste.\n\n * Not two people have the same likes and dislikes, or do things in the same way, so it is a waste of time to argue about it. \n\n * Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.（美｛び｝は見｛み｝つめる人｛ひと｝の目｛め｝の中｛なか｝にある。）\n\n * Every man to his taste.（全｛すべ｝ての人｛ひと｝にそれぞれの好｛この｝みがある。）\n\n * One's man's meat is another man's poison.（ある人｛ひと｝の肉｛にく｝は別｛べつ｝の人｛ひと｝の毒｛どく｝。）\n\n * There is no disputing about tastes. (人｛ひと｝の好｛この｝みは論議｛ぎろん｝できない。)\n\n * So many men, so many opinions.（たくさんの人がいれば意見｛いけん｝も様々｛さまざま｝だ。）",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T04:49:43.817",
"id": "46470",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T04:49:43.817",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46465",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I would say that まじめ includes the ideas of being responsible, doing your best,\nbeing serious-minded, well-intentioned, well-meaning, etc, often with the\nimplication of being more serious-minded, responsible, etc, than the situation\ndemands and that you may be acting against your own interests. Consider the\nexpression バカまじめ、 \"well-meaning to an unreasonable degree\". The Japanese Post\nOffice ran (is still running?) a series of ads for the ゆうパック delivery service\nwhich shows staff members doing things like running a considerable distance\nthrough city streets and up a huge flight of steps to ensure that a package is\ndelivered to someone who has just moved from the place to which it was\naddressed. The slogan was 「バカまじめ」 . In the 1960s there was a TV series called\nまじめ人間 (starring the great actor Nakado Hiroyuki 長門裕之), which was about the ups\nand downs in the life of a lower-middle-class salaryman doing his best in the\nface of the difficulties that faced him. The jaunty theme-song included the\nline 「まじめ人間、バカ人間」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T08:36:26.883",
"id": "46474",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T08:36:26.883",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20069",
"parent_id": "46465",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 46465 | null | 46470 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46477",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: a boy will soon take the test to become a pro-boxer. After a training\nmatch, his trainer says to him:\n\n> まだひきつけられる。まだ寸歩踏み込める。紙一重の域はまだ遠いな。\n\nI found on dictionaries that 〜にひきつけられる means \"to be drawn, attracted, charmed\nby something\", but that something is not present here (maybe it's something\nimplicit?), so I thought it could simply mean \"to get distracted\". Is my guess\ncorrect?\n\nI would also appreciate if you could help me with the rest of the sentence. My\ntranslation attempt:\n\n> You still get distracted. You can still step a little closer. Your are still\n> far from reaching your limit.\n\nThank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T11:52:22.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46475",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T14:39:47.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"verbs",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Could ひきつけられる mean \"to get distracted\"?",
"view_count": 202
} | [
{
"body": "\"You can still step a little closer.\" is correct.\n\n「まだひきつけられる。」は、「（ボクシングの相手｛あいて｝を）まだ（自分｛じぶん｝のそばに）引｛ひ｝き付｛つ｝けられる。」という意味｛いみ｝だと思｛おも｝います。すなわち、相手｛あいて｝が自分｛じぶん｝に近｛ちか｝づいてきたとき怖｛こわ｝がらずに後｛うし｝ろに下｛さ｝がるなという意味｛いみ｝でしょう。\n\n「紙一重｛かみひとえ｝の域｛いき｝」も理解｛りかい｝が違｛ちが｝うと思｛おも｝います。 \n「紙一重｛かみひとえ｝」とは、双方｛そうほう｝のパンチが相手｛あいて｝に届｛とど｝く近距離｛きんきょり｝で戦｛たたか｝っているときに、攻撃｛こうげき｝してきた相手｛あいて｝のパンチを紙一枚｛かみいちいまい｝の厚｛あつ｝さ程度｛ていど｝のギリギリのところで上手｛じょうず｝に避｛さ｝ける様子｛ようす｝を形容｛けいよう｝しています。 \n「域｛いき｝」とは相手｛あいて｝の攻撃｛こうげき｝を上手｛じょうず｝に避｛さ｝けることができる「技能｛ぎのう｝を修得｛しゅうとく｝していること」を意味｛いみ｝しています。\n\nI was taught this interpretation of「紙一重｛かみひとえ｝」 by Mr. Naruto who is the\ndifferent respondent for this question.\n\n* * *\n\nIf you do not withdraw behind when the opponent steps forward, you can draw\nhim nearer to you. And, you can step forward still closer. You couldn't do\nboth of them. Now, you are far from the acquirement of the skill that can\navoid the attack of the partner at a hair's breadth.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T12:02:41.330",
"id": "46476",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T14:39:47.470",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T14:39:47.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46475",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "First, this 引きつけられる is in the potential form (\"to be able to 引きつける\"). You can\nforget any definitions based on passive 引きつけられる (\"to be\nattracted/charmed/distracted/etc\").\n\n引きつける literally means \"to attract\". In this context, 引きつける means \"to allow the\nopponent/attacks to get closer\", and that's what you need to do when you try\nto achieve 紙一重 (\"paper-thin margin\"). I think 紙一重 here refers to efficient\ndodging moves (eg swayback), not the overall distance between you and your\nopponent. If your dodging technique is bad, you have to keep a distance from\nthe opponent and to dodge early and largely, wasting your stamina and losing\nchances to counterattack. The sentences basically say the boy should correct\nsuch inefficient moves.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T12:14:36.517",
"id": "46477",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T13:18:23.540",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T13:18:23.540",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46475",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46475 | 46477 | 46476 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46480",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have seen\n\n> お掛けください\n\nfor \"please take a seat\". But previously I have been using\n\n> お座りください\n\nto mean the same thing.\n\nAre these the same or is there a difference?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T12:48:31.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46478",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T07:36:12.517",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-11T21:17:17.540",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "4071",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between お座り お掛け ください",
"view_count": 1604
} | [
{
"body": "**【Original】**\n\nThey are almost the same, but there is a little difference. When you want to\nsay \"please take a seat\" to a standing person, they are the same. But, when\nyou want to say \"sit down, please\", you can say 「お座りください」, but you can't say\n「お掛けください」.\n\n**【Edited】**\n\nThey are almost the same and effective phrases in your use situation, but\nthere is an important difference between them. \nThe difference is not in courteousness or politeness, but an essential one\ncaused by the words 「座{すわ}り」 and 「掛{か}け」.\n\nIf you are interested in the courteousness or politeness of the two phrases,\nrefer to l'électeur's answer. **I would tell you only the essential difference\nbased on the two different words: 座{すわ}り and 掛{か}け.**\n\nお座{すわ}りください＝お＋「座{すわ}り」＋ください \nお掛{か}けください＝お＋「掛{か}け」＋ください\n\n「座{すわ}り」の原形{げんけい}→座{すわ}る The original form of 座{すわ}り is a verb 座{すわ}る. \n「掛{か}け」の原形{げんけい}→掛{か}ける The original form of 掛{か}け is a verb 掛{か}ける.\n\n**A list of difference:**\n\n1) 座{すわ}る is an intransitive verb （自動詞{じどうし}） while 掛{か}ける is a transitive\nverb （他動詞{たどうし}）. \nFrom this difference, the word 掛{か}ける needs an object（目的語{もくてきご}） while 座{すわ}る\nneeds no object. In your context, 腰{こし}を掛{か}ける is the formal form and 腰{こし} is\nomitted, and the omitted form is usually used. Very interestingly, the noun of\n「腰{こし}を掛{か}ける」 is 「腰掛{こしかけ}」 which means a seat, a bench, a chair or a stool. \nSimilar expressions using 掛{か}ける are: 帽子{ぼうし}を掛{か}ける, （ハンガーに）服{ふく}を掛{か}ける.\n\n2) They are different in meaning. \n座{すわ}る is to lower the body by bending the knees. \n掛{か}ける is to hang/put something on something. \nFrom this difference, you can say both 「椅子{いす}に座{すわ}る」 and\n「椅子{いす}に腰{こし}を掛{か}ける or 椅子{いす}に腰{こし}かける」. But, although you can say\n「畳{たたみ}に座{すわ}る」 you can't say 「畳{たたみ}に腰{こし}を掛{か}ける」.\n\n3) Antonyms（反対語{はんたいご}） are different. \nThe antonym of 「座{すわ}る」 is 「立{た}つ」 while the antonym of 「掛{か}ける」 is 「外{はず}す」\nnot 「立{た}つ」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T13:04:37.883",
"id": "46479",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T07:36:12.517",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T07:36:12.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46478",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "There certainly is a difference.\n\nTo mean \"Please take a seat.\", the better speakers' phrase choice will\nunquestionably be 「お掛{か}けください。」.\n\n「お座{すわ}りください。」, depite its use of both 「お」 and 「ください」, does not even sound all\nthat polite, let alone sounding refined. **It still uses the plain and non-\npolite verb 「座る」**. In case you did not know, we say 「お座り！」 to make dogs sit.\nAngry moms also say it to make their small kids sit. That is why this phrase\nwould not sound very refined if said to human guests.\n\nThe honorific form of 「座る」 is 「掛ける」, which the phrase 「お掛けください」 correctly\nuses. As you know, not every verb has an honorific form, but when one does, it\nwould always make you sound more polite and proper to use the honorific\nversion of the verb.\n\nAdding the \"external\" politeness elements such as 「お」,「ください」, etc. would not\nhelp much in sounding genuinely polite or respectful.\n\nFor instance, 「お食{た}べください」 will never sound politer or more respectful or more\nrefined than 「お召{め}し上{あ}がりください」. In fact, 「お食べください」 does not sound polite at\nall; It just sounds \"funny\". It is like someone tried hard to use keigo and\nfailed a big time.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T13:18:51.540",
"id": "46480",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T13:18:51.540",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46478",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 46478 | 46480 | 46480 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46485",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In 漢文, why is the レ used for レ点? Is it purely a graphic representation of\nreturning to an earlier point in the text, or does レ stand for some word?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T20:44:51.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46483",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-12T22:01:22.990",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-12T22:01:22.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"classical-japanese",
"chinese",
"symbols"
],
"title": "Name of レ点 in 漢文",
"view_count": 216
} | [
{
"body": "The レ点 means first read the next character (that is the character below since\nit was written from top to bottom at that time) then read the previous\ncharacter.\n\nEx: 帰ル（レ点）国ニ should read 国に帰る.\n\nBefore, the レ点 was called [雁金点]{かりがねてん} because it looks like a goose which is\nflying (雁{かり}が飛ぶ姿) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/OsLCf.gif).\nYou can see that first the symbol is going down then going up. That means\nfirst read one character below then go back and read the character above.\nThat's the whole purpose of the レ点.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T22:12:53.940",
"id": "46485",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-11T22:12:53.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "46483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 46483 | 46485 | 46485 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So recently I was commenting about how a song was related to a book, and I\nsaid that there were names of certain characters in the song. Then I wanted to\nsay that when I looked up the names, I found out that they were from the book,\nThe Plague. But I couldn't figure out how you would say that. I ended up doing\nthis:\n\n「ペスト」のキャラクターを見つけ出します！\n\nSo how would you say \"from /a book/?\" Using from in that way seems like a\nparticular English expression. Is there an equivalent one in Japanese? Or can\nI just use に? \"「ペスト」に\" made the most sense to me, but then how would I use\nthat with を, for 見つけ出します?\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-11T21:51:12.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46484",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-23T03:59:09.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19870",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "How to say \"From /a book/?\"",
"view_count": 363
} | [
{
"body": "**I made a big mistake in the original answer.** I'll show you an edited\nanswer.\n\n**【Original】**\n\n> * 「The Plague」という名前は、本で見つけました。\n> * 「The Plague」って、（私が読んでいる「＊＊＊＊」）という本で見つけたの。\n> * 「The Plague」の出典は「＊＊＊＊」という本です。\n>\n\n>\n> 最初の２つの文は、主語がIで、過去の事実を述べているので過去形で書くのが普通です。 \n> 「ペスト」のキャラクターを見つけ出します！ \n> →「ペスト」のキャラクターを見つけました! または、「ペスト」のキャラクターを見つけた！\n\n**【Edited】**\n\n> 「ペスト」のキャラクターを見つけ出します！\n\n * 「ペスト」という題名{だいめい}の本{ほん}でキャラクターの名前{なまえ}を見{み}つけました！ \n * 「ペスト」っていう本に載{の}ってたよ！ \n * キャラクターの名前{なまえ}、「ペスト」からなんだ！ \n\nIt is natural for you to write the first two sentences in a **past tense**\nbecause they are the past facts that you did or experienced by yourself.\nHowever, I recommend you to write the last sentence in a **present tense**\nbecause it tells only a fact not having to do with you.\n\n【 **Additional information and an illustration** 】\n\nI considered to make it clear how prepositions に, で and から should be properly\nused in a Japanese sentence which has the same meaning of English \" **I found\nthe names of the characters from the book, The Plague**.\"\n\nI'll show you the consideration by the **illustration** drawn below.\n\nIn conclusion, the following sentences are acceptable:\n\n * 私は「＊＊＊」という登場人物（＝キャラクター）の名前を「ペスト」という題名の本（/本の中）で見つけました。 \n\n * 私は「＊＊＊」という登場人物（＝キャラクター）の名前が「ペスト」という題名の本（/本の中）にあることを見つけました。 \n\n * 私は「＊＊＊」という登場人物（＝キャラクター）の名前が「ペスト」という題名の本からだということを見つけました。 \n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6YxOl.jpg)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T00:09:45.713",
"id": "46488",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-23T03:59:09.047",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-23T03:59:09.047",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46484",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "You could say:\n\n> 「[Actual Name(s)] は小説{しょうせつ}『ペスト』から来{き}ていることがわかった。」\n\nor\n\n> 「[Actual Name(s)] は小説『ペスト』の登場人物{とうじょうじんぶつ}の名前{なまえ}であることがわかった。」\n\nThe first sentence is more informal in word choices and structure.\n\nYour sentence:\n\n> 「『ペスト』のキャラクターを見つけ出します！」\n\nmakes little sense. At least it does not mean what you want to say this time.\n\n「見つけ出します！」 can only mean \" **I'm going to find ~~!** \" when, in reality, you\nhave already found something. It talks about near future, not immediate past.\n\nWhile I would not call your word choice of 「キャラクター」 incorrect, 「登場人物」 would be\na way more common word for this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T15:13:06.363",
"id": "46533",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T15:24:52.127",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T15:24:52.127",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46484",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46484 | null | 46533 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46490",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: a boy has had a troubled life. His father used to beat him up, but\nthen committed suicide. Then he was almost killed by his mother's yakuza\nboyfriend. His mother is now in prison and doesn't want to see him. The boy is\nnow basically alone, but has just joined a boxing gym. His boxing trainer\ntells him (the sentence is split into two separate balloons, see the [whole\npage here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Mdx0r.jpg)):\n\n> 他の生き方は半端でもクソでも / いくらでも命の保証あるんだぞ？\n\nFirst, I don't understand if 半端 and クソ refer to 他の生き方 or to 命の保証. And what is\nthe meaning of 命の保証? \"Life certainties\"?\n\nAlso, I don't understand the actual value of 他. \"Another way of life\" compared\nwhat? To the one he had before?\n\nI think the trainer is trying to cheer the boy up after he has been rejected\nby his mother. My translation attempt:\n\n> Do other ways of living have any certainties? Even shitty or imperfect ones?\n\n[Here's the previous page too](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TKiad.jpg) for more\ncontext.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T00:04:40.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46487",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T09:47:12.777",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T14:19:42.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "17797",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"words",
"manga"
],
"title": "Meaning of 命の保証",
"view_count": 343
} | [
{
"body": "> 「他{た・ほか}の生{い}き方{かた}は半端{はんぱ}でもクソでも / いくらでも命{いのち}の保証{ほしょう}あるんだぞ？」\n\n「命の保証」 means \" **guarantee of your safety** \" and it is used fairly often in\nfiction.\n\n> I don't understand if 半端 and クソ refer to 他の生き方 or to 命の保証.\n\nIt is the former.\n\n> \"Another way of living, how shitty and incomplete it might be, will (at\n> least) fully guarantee your safety.\"\n\nThe question mark used in the original expresses the speaker's intention of\nasking the listener to choose between the present way of living and another.\nYou as a reader is expected to employ a rising intonation at the end of the\nsentence even though it is not a question grammatically.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T00:28:22.147",
"id": "46490",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T06:39:36.260",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T06:39:36.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46487",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 46487 | 46490 | 46490 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46493",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Examples include: 建速須佐之男命, 月読尊, and 神倭伊波礼琵古命/神日本磐余彦尊 (Here, I've been unable\nto merely identify the set of characters I'm to use, which is unfortunate.)\nSo, what would this ~のみこと happen to mean?\n\nAnd, does it work in any sort of fashion similar to modern names, id est, it\nsignifying the first name? Or is it merely title?\n\nToo, are all of these names merely that, one name, or do they have both a\nsurname and a given name?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T01:34:35.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46492",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T02:29:40.600",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T01:52:17.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "21707",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Unable to determine the meaning behind ~のみこと at the end of certain names",
"view_count": 84
} | [
{
"body": "の is a possessive particle.\n\n[尊{みこと}](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/211287/meaning/m0u/) is an honorific\ntitle/referral to a deity or a noble person:\n\n> ［名］上代、神や人の呼び名の下につけた敬称。「…のみこと」の形で使う。「小碓 (おうす) の―」\n\nUnless you were referring to a member of the Imperial family, みこと wouldn't be\nused.\n\nDeities do not have family names. The Emperor neither.\n\nWhat comes before is a proper name. Sometimes open to an interpretation,\nsometimes not.\n\nIn some cases みこと is translated as \"the god who ...\", in other \"the god of\n...\" depending on the aforementioned meaning. The use of the full names of\ndeities is pretty rare and limited to mythology or religious explanations of\nthe name itself.\n\nIn case of human, \"Lord\" seems like a suitable English counterpart.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T01:50:08.997",
"id": "46493",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T02:29:40.600",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T02:29:40.600",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "46492",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46492 | 46493 | 46493 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was at the gym and they have these bottles of disinfectant to clean after\nyou've used the equipment, I started thinking about the kanji's and started\nwondering why the 2nd kanji used is 「毒」 (poison).\n\nWhy the kanji for poison? Why not use something like 「消」 and 「菌」? Curious...\n\n(I do know there's also 殺菌.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T09:17:34.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46496",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T09:55:17.073",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T12:11:06.423",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Etymology of 「消毒」",
"view_count": 202
} | [
{
"body": "It is a good question. \nI thought about your question sincerely. And I led the following answer. This\nmay have nothing to do with studying Japanese language (lol). \nYou know all germs or bacteria may not necessarily have a bad influence on\nhuman beings. I think that among bacteria or germs, there are some ones that\nhave substance having poisonous influence on human beings but others have not. \nThe old clever person would think that it was more effective to put out the\npoisonous substance of bacteria or germs to protect human beings than to put\nout or kill all kinds of bacteria or germs. So they would coin the word\n\"消毒{しょうどく}\" rather than \"消菌{しょうきん}\" and named the disinfectant\n\"消毒{しょうどく}\"剤{ざい}.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T10:33:19.947",
"id": "46497",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T10:50:48.247",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T10:50:48.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46496",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "* 消毒 = _disinfection_\n * 殺菌 ≈ _sterilization_ (more accurate term for it is 滅菌)\n\n> [**Disinfect vs.\n> Sterilize**](http://www.diffen.com/difference/Disinfect_vs_Sterilize)\n>\n> Disinfection and sterilization are both decontamination processes. While\n> **disinfection** is the process of eliminating or reducing _harmful_\n> microorganisms from inanimate objects and surfaces, **sterilization** is the\n> process of killing _all_ microorganisms. That is the main **difference\n> between sterilizing and disinfecting**.\n\n毒 in 消毒 should be understood as \"harm\". It doesn't refer to chemical\nsubstances here.\n\n消菌 sounds quite funny to me. Since 消 chiefly means \"make vanish\", it reminds\nme of some kind of tile-matching game where germs of same color suddenly pop\nwhen adjacent to others.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mb8sS.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T10:45:37.277",
"id": "46498",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T09:55:17.073",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "46496",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46496 | null | 46498 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Could you please explain the difference in meaning between 職務 ｛しょくむ｝ and\n業務｛ぎょうむ｝? In which context are each of them the most suitable?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T13:29:55.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46499",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T19:21:22.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9364",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 職務 and 業務",
"view_count": 186
} | [
{
"body": "職務 refers to your **personal** responsibility/duty as a businessperson. 職務 is\nsomething assigned to each employee. For example \"dereliction of duty\" is\n職務怠慢, not 業務怠慢.\n\n業務 is _business_ ; everything your company does as a whole to earn money. For\nexample Amazon's 業務 is online retailing and cloud computing. In the legal\nlanguage 業務 means something much broader, but that's another story.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T19:11:24.713",
"id": "46505",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T19:11:24.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46499",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "[事業{じぎょう}](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E4%BA%8B%E6%A5%AD) means business or\nindustry.\n\n[業務{ぎょうむ}](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%A5%AD%E5%8B%99) means work done\nin reference to a business.\n\n[職務{しょくむ}](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E8%81%B7%E5%8B%99) means duties in\nreference to one's job or position.\n\nTo break it down, 事業{じぎょう} is what your company does, 業務{ぎょうむ} is what your\ndepartment does, and 職務{しょくむ} is what you do.For example, if you worked in a\nvideo game company, the 事業{じぎょう} is the production and sales of video games.\nWithin the company, you have departments like production, sales and marketing;\nwhat they do falls under 業務{ぎょうむ}. And within sales, you have people with\ntheir own 職務{しょくむ}, like salesmen, people writing the invoices, people in\ncharge of the inventory, etc.\n\nNote that 業務 is often used to mean \"business\" or \"commerical\" like\n業務連絡{ぎょうむれんらく} (business page) and 業務用冷蔵庫{ぎょうむようれいぞうこ} (commercial\nrefrigerator.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T19:21:22.697",
"id": "46508",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T19:21:22.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "46499",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46499 | null | 46508 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could you please explain the difference in meaning between 設計｛せっけい｝ and\n提案｛ていあん｝? Could they be interchangeable to mean \"to suggest\"? Thank you in\nadvance.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T13:47:12.940",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46500",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T18:48:00.437",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T16:30:47.687",
"last_editor_user_id": "9364",
"owner_user_id": "9364",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 設計 and 提案",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "提案 is _to suggest_ in the sense of _to make a proposal_. You always need\nanother person (for example your business client) to do 提案. In another word,\n提案 refers to saying \"Let's do ～\". Note that 提案 never means _to suggest_ in the\nsense of _to imply/say/remind_ (as in \"The lion suggests bravery\" or \"The\nletter suggests he's angry\").\n\n設計 is _to design_ (a product, a building, software, etc.) or _to engineer_. As\nlong as you have a good engineering skill, you can finish 設計 all by yourself\nwith a pen and paper, or CAD software. I don't know when this means _to\nsuggest_. 設計 always refers to engineering design which does not require a\nsense of beauty. Graphic design, interior design, dress design and such are\nusually called デザイン.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T17:52:20.663",
"id": "46504",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T18:48:00.437",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-12T18:48:00.437",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46500",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46500 | null | 46504 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen many different dictionaries and such, and many have a name section\nwhere you may put in any kanji. Because I have a Taiwanese origin, I have\nChinese characters that can be used as kanji: 王元劭. Are the dictionaries\ncorrect and can I choose any reading? These readings don't seem to be kunyomi\nor onyomi.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D2DVB.png)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T14:03:50.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46501",
"last_activity_date": "2018-06-24T15:31:54.113",
"last_edit_date": "2018-06-24T15:24:20.437",
"last_editor_user_id": "3786",
"owner_user_id": "21671",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"names",
"chinese"
],
"title": "Are there many ways to read kanji for names?",
"view_count": 898
} | [
{
"body": "Many names in Japanese that are written with kanji can have different\nreadings. That is not to say that they DO have different readings, however.\n\nI used to live in a place called Nogata, but when I was first given the name,\nI was told I was going to Nakata. The Japanese person who told me had no idea\nthat the reading was different.\n\nHowever, no one in Nogata would say that the town was Nakata.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T04:19:53.933",
"id": "46519",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T04:19:53.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6575",
"parent_id": "46501",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 46501 | null | 46519 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46503",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ArjgU.png)\n\n[This](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oy-3KI2eHi4) is a fan-made Japanese\nversion of an English song on a children's show, LazyTown.\n\nI'm trying to find out what the (second) villain was saying (second line) at\n0:03. The English translation of the line is above.\n\n> My attempt:\n>\n> 「おまえら本当の悪{あく}党{とう}か？」\n>\n> 「 **まあ、____にいうと** 、いや。」 (0:03)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T15:16:40.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46502",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T15:22:23.857",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"nouns",
"listening"
],
"title": "Translation of \"technically speaking\" / What is this villain saying?",
"view_count": 493
} | [
{
"body": "He says 「まあ、厳密{げんみつ}に言{い}うと、いや。」\n\n\"Well, strictly speaking, nope.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T15:22:23.857",
"id": "46503",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T15:22:23.857",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46502",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 46502 | 46503 | 46503 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "\n\nI'm in the middle of my painting and I don't want the name to be wrong cause\nthe whole thing takes me days. Please help if you can :)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T15:02:19.580",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46506",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T10:06:50.403",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T10:06:50.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"typesetting"
],
"title": "Is this the right way to write Sailor Pluto in Japanese?",
"view_count": 351
} | [
{
"body": "If those vertical bars with a concave outline are supposed to be 「ー」, then\nthis is technically correct if the reader can guess how they should be read.\n\nUsually vertical writing is top-to-down and right-to-left, though, so this\nlooks as weird as\n\n```\n\n wr\n it\n ing\n \n```\n\n(okay you got the point) like this.\n\nHere is an example of how (manga) sound effects are normally written:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Wmxfb.gif)\n\n> * どきっ\n> * ワーッ\n> * ザー\n> * ドドーン\n> * ざわざわ\n> * ガキィンッ\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T19:39:32.887",
"id": "46510",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T19:39:32.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "46506",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "As Logan mentions in the comments, your sketch seems to be missing the `ー`\n([chouonpu](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%8Donpu)). It's important and\nshould not be omitted (though it sometimes happens in informal writing). Note\nthat in vertical writing it is [also written\nvertically](https://www.slideshare.net/Accura/vertical-layout-in-katakana).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T19:43:34.833",
"id": "46511",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T19:43:34.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "46506",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "No, this looks horribly odd to me. This is as bad and cryptographic as this:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NHl2K.png)\n\nVirtually everyone who is fluent in Japanese _will_ misread this at first\nsight, although perhaps most will eventually notice what is the intended\nmeaning if her picture were with this.\n\nThis is how the characters should normally be aligned in case you didn't know:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SiCc2.png)\n\nAs a design work, you can move the positions of the characters like this while\nmaintaining readability:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/OVhCi.png)\n\nReal-world good examples would be [this](http://www.smashbros.com/jp/) and\n[this](http://g-tekketsu.com/). But don't let those vertical bars come\ncompletely beside the preceding characters.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T00:34:04.410",
"id": "46518",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T00:55:20.910",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T00:55:20.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46506",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 46506 | null | 46518 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46531",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I came upon the following sentence and its English translation in a collection\nof parallel short stories in Japanese and English.\n\n> あるとき、夜中にふと目が覚める。\n>\n> Sometimes, just like that, in the dead of night, I wake up.\n\nWhat confuses me is the translation of あるとき as \"sometimes\". My dictionary\ntranslates あるとき as \"once; on one occasion; at one point\" which would imply\nthat the sentence describes **one occurrence** of an event. In contrast, the\n\"sometimes\" of the English translation implies **multiple occurrences**.\n\nCan あるとき refer to multiple occurrences or is the translation somewhat removed\nfrom the original sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T19:38:37.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46509",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T13:59:22.157",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does あるとき mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 664
} | [
{
"body": "In Japanese, there is [no grammatical\nplural](http://www.japaneseprofessor.com/lessons/beginning/nouns-pronouns-and-\nplurals/), so this とき can be singular (\"one time\", \"certain time\") or plural\n(\"sometimes\"). Depending on the overall context, both variants could work\nhere.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T20:00:58.943",
"id": "46512",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T20:00:58.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "46509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "As you have gathered, ある時{とき} should only refer to a single time. Sometimes\nshould be 時々{ときどき}, 時{とき}には or たまには. The sentence you provide would translate\nto:\n\n> One time, I just happen to wake up in the middle of the night.\n\nThis use of （と）ある can be seen elsewhere all in reference to singular entities,\nsuch as とある人物{じんぶつ} (a certain person), ある日{ひ} (one day), ある団体{だんたい} (a\ncertain group).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T21:58:38.617",
"id": "46514",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-12T21:58:38.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "46509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> あるとき、夜中{よなか}にふと目{め}が覚{さ}める。\n\nI'm a Japanese. If Japanese use this phrase, such as in a book as a novelist,\nthe event could occur multiple times, because the phrase is written in a\npresent tense not in a past tense. And, if the phrase is written in a past\ntense, the event occurred only once.\n\n> 【An example of multiple times】 \n>\n> あるとき、夜中{よなか}にふと目{め}が覚{さ}める。なぜだろう。理由{りゆう}は分{わ}からないが、少{すく}なくとも彼{かれ}と別{わか}れる前{まえ}にはそんなことはなかった。このところ、こんなこと（＝夜中{よなか}にふと目{め}が覚{さ}めること）が度々{たびたび}ある。\n>\n> 【An example of single time】 \n>\n> あるとき、夜中｛よなか｝にふと目｛め｝が覚｛さ｝めた。頭｛あたま｝の中｛なか｝に何桁｛なんけた｝かの数字｛すうじ｝が残｛のこ｝っている。急｛いそ｝いで書｛か｝き留｛と｝めた。その時｛とき｝の数字｛すうじ｝を今｛いま｝こうして見｛み｝ている。いまだにこの数字｛すうじ｝が何｛なに｝を意味｛いみ｝するのか分｛わ｝からない。\n\nI know the sentence 「頭{あたま}の中{なか}に何桁{なんけた}かの数字{すうじ}が残{の}こっている。」in the example\nof single time should be written in a past tense in English, but in this\ncontext, the sentence is more natural when written in a present tense than in\na past tense in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T13:43:31.850",
"id": "46531",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T13:59:22.157",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T13:59:22.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46509 | 46531 | 46531 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46516",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have two examples:\n\n> 噂に違{たが}わぬと言ったところか. -- Then, he really lives up to the rumor! \n> この建物の建設にかかる費用はおおよそ100億円といったところか -- That would mean that we need 10 million\n> to build this building!\n\nI would bet that か here is used in the following sense 驚きや感動の気持ちを表す。(that is\nhow I translated it above). Is it really so?\n\nRelated question: Ending a sentence like that may seem blunt. How it is\npossible to keep the tone of surprise (as long as I have guessed right) but\nwith a softer ending?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-12T21:49:01.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46513",
"last_activity_date": "2019-06-08T17:22:37.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"particle-か"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of か in といったところか",
"view_count": 1258
} | [
{
"body": "> I would bet that か here is used in the following sense 驚きや感動の気持ちを表す。(that is\n> how I translated it above). Is it really so?\n\nI am afraid that is not the case.\n\n「～～といったところか」 simply means \" ** _I would say ~~~_** \". It implies that the\nstatement would at least be fairly accurate if not 100% accurate.\n\nThis is a way of talking as much to yourself as to your listeners/readers. It\nis a way of avoiding clear declaration as well. It softens the tone of the\nstatement compared to sentence endings such as 「～～である」、「～～だ」, etc.\n\nIt seems that you were thinking of the 「か」 used as in:\n\n「このメロンは二万円{にまんえん}もするの **か** ！」 = \"What? This melon costs 20,000 yen?!\"\n\nThat 「か」 would certainly express 驚{おどろ}きや感動{かんどう}の気持{きも}ち.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T00:19:22.860",
"id": "46516",
"last_activity_date": "2019-06-08T17:22:37.633",
"last_edit_date": "2019-06-08T17:22:37.633",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46513",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 46513 | 46516 | 46516 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Thinking about the events concerning everyone's \"favorite\" airline United, I\nstarted to wonder what the Japanese word for \"re-accommodate\" was and 'oogle\nTranslate wasn't much help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T05:00:12.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46520",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T10:09:30.487",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Japanese word for \"Re-accommodate\"",
"view_count": 162
} | [
{
"body": "According to [weblio](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/accommodate) accommodate\ncan be translated in various ways depending on the context.\n\nI think you are interested in the first definition:\n\n> 〈施設・乗り物などが〉〈人を〉収容する，乗せる，泊める.\n\nI am not sure if there is a single word that includes the idea of\n\"re\"-accommodate, but one possibility in your case would be:\n乗客{じょうきゃく}を再{ふたた}び収容{しゅうよう}する。\n\nPs. I'm trying to stay close to the context in your question and to give an\nanswer as literally close as possible. Honestly though, I am not sure if in\nreal life in that specific situation Japanese people would pick the word\n\"accommodate\" at all.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T05:18:59.777",
"id": "46521",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T05:58:24.103",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T05:58:24.103",
"last_editor_user_id": "14205",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "46520",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "In the UA context, how about ご乗客様の選択なさった便を変更させていただきました？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T06:29:57.390",
"id": "46522",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T06:29:57.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20069",
"parent_id": "46520",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Though I couldn't find the exact translation, how about these?\n\n> re-accommodation 振替｛ふりかえ｝／振替｛ふりか｝え／振｛ふ｝り替｛か｝え, re-accommodate\n> 振｛ふ｝り替｛か｝える／振替｛ふりか｝える\n\nThis is an example using 振替｛ふりかえ｝.\n\n> (事故｛じこ｝のとき) 振替輸送｛ふりかえゆそう｝をする \n> let passengers use alternative means of transportation without charge\n\nThe United Airlines may insist that;\n\n>\n> この度｛たび｝の件｛けん｝では、ユナイテッド航空｛こうくう｝は、単｛たん｝に、お客様｛きゃくさま｝に振替便｛ふりかえびん｝へのご搭乗｛とうじょう｝をお願｛ねが｝いしただけです。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T07:17:21.197",
"id": "46523",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T10:09:30.487",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T10:09:30.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46520",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46520 | null | 46523 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46525",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 基底 **ないし** パターンの数ｍは、5.3.3項で説明した方法を使ってデータごとに求めるべきパラメータです\n\nI am unable to understand the use of \"ないし\" phrase in the head of the above\nsentence after the \"基底\". This phrase is a form of the adjective \"ない\", meaning\nno/is not, which is mainly used when the speaker wants to continue after the\nnegation. So why is this being used in the head of the sentence ?\n\nIf necessary, this sentence is speaking about a machine learning algorithm and\nits tuning.\n\nPlease help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T09:20:00.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46524",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-28T04:49:17.483",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-28T04:49:17.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "20385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"phrases"
],
"title": "”ないし”-Unable to understand the use of this phrase here",
"view_count": 1675
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's the conjunction\n[乃至{ないし}](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%B9%83%E8%87%B3-587098), meaning \"or\"\nhere, and \"from ... to\" in other contexts.\n\n> 基底 **ないし** パターンの数ｍは…\n>\n> The (amount?) of bases **or** patterns, `m`, ...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T09:46:49.853",
"id": "46525",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T09:46:49.853",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19206",
"parent_id": "46524",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I think you are studying something about DCT(discrete cosine transform). \n「基底ないしパターンの数ｍ」 means \"m number of bases (plural form of basis) or patterns\",\nand the meaning of 「ないし」 is \"or\" that is described in siikamiika's answer.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T10:33:51.367",
"id": "46526",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T10:50:43.550",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T10:50:43.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46524",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "[ないし](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/162407/meaning/m0u/) is a conjunction\nthat has two meanings:\n\n 1. range of numbers\n\n> 二年ないし三年 _from two to three years_ ; _two up to three years_\n\n 2. \"and/or\" with some nuance of \"by extension\", such as...\n\n> 母ないし親として _as a mother, or more generally, a parent_ \n> 新幹線ないし特急で _by shinkansen or (if failed) express train_ \n> 日本ないし韓国 _Japan, and (even) also Korea_\n\nI don't know what relation lies between 基底 \"basis\" and パターン \"pattern\" in your\ncontext, but logically it only means OR in any case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T10:40:27.397",
"id": "46527",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T23:41:28.710",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T23:41:28.710",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "46524",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 46524 | 46525 | 46527 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46529",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 人間の目は、 _観察しようとする_ **面の中央** より少し上の方を自然に見る **そうである**\n> 。([source](https://www.docdroid.net/847v2dg/img-20170413-0001-new.pdf.html))\n\nI think I pretty much understand this sentence, it says that the human eye\ntends to prefer the upper center of a visual medium (for context, see the\nattached image). However, _観察しようとする_ **面の中央** poses a serious problem.\n\n> Concerning the human eye, the center of the surface (which) it makes an\n> effort to observe,...\n\nIn this case, I used \"観察しようとする\" as an attribute to \"面の中央\", but I'm not sure if\nthat's okay or not.\n\nI also don't know whether そうである modifies the whole sentence or just the second\nhalf after より. The most literal translation of the whole sentence I can muster\nwould be this:\n\n> Concerning the human eye, it seems that it looks a bit more natural at the\n> upper direction (of the surface...) than at the center of the surface\n> (which) it makes an effort to observe.\n\nI put the brackets in to make clear to what I'm referring. I'm not sure if\nthese reference points are correct in this sentence, that's why I feel unsure\nabout my understanding of the whole sentence. I think that in the above\nstanding version, そうである modifies the whole sentence, but I don't know if\nthat's correct, as I already said.\n\nFor some reason I still feel notoriously insecure about the use of より... I\napologize if I should've made a mistake on that one too, but it's hard for me\nto research it because the examples in my textbook were very bad and the texts\nonly rarely bring up comparisons at all.\n\nEDIT from 04-14-2017: I still have problems understanding the construction.\n\nMy problem mostly revolves around 面の中央 and its modifier 観察しようとする. Strictly\nspeaking, that which the human eye \"wants to observe\" is not the page, but the\ncenter of the page here, right? After all, 面 is an attribute to 中央 here. I\nmight overinterpret things now, but wouldn't this mean that the text basically\nsays \"The human eye doesn't observe just **the center** of the page, but only\nthe **part slightly above** the center of the page\"? What I want to say is\nthat it sounds like the sentence gives us two negative statements about the\nhuman eye, because only perceiving the very center of a map isn't much better\nthan just perceiving an area slightly above the center of a map. However, I\nfeel like the sentence actually wants to say that the assumption that the\nhuman eye perceives the WHOLE map is wrong, because it only perceives the said\narea.\n\n> It seems that the human eye does naturally look at the area a little up from\n> the center of **the page** it wants to observe\n\nI mean, in this case it's relatively easy for me to just go with the option\nwhich makes more sense. But are there any other \"hard\" criteria in the syntax\nof this whole sentence or in the structure of the phrase 観察しようとする面の中央 which\nmake it clear that A and not B is meant:\n\n> A: The center of **the page** it wants to observe \n> B: The page's **center** it wants to observe",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T10:47:19.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46528",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-12T00:21:08.093",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-12T00:21:08.093",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"relative-clauses",
"parsing"
],
"title": "人間の目は、観察しようとする面の中央より少し上の方を自然に見るそうである",
"view_count": 240
} | [
{
"body": "> 人間の目は、 _観察しようとする_ **面の中央** より少し上の方を自然に見る **そうである** 。\n\nI visited the site. Yes, the article is very interesting.\n\n> 観察しようとする面\n\nIt is not the surface that makes an effort to observe, but the man, who has\nthe observing eyes, makes an effort to observe the surface. \nIn this context, 「しようとする」is not \"to make an effort\", but \"be going to.\"\n\n> 面の中央より少し上の方\n\nより means \"from\". So this phrase means \"a little upper part from the center of\nthe surface (of the map)\".\n\n> そうである\n\nそうである modifies the whole sentence. The author is not sure of the contents of\nthe sentence, because he/she didn't find the fact by himself/herself.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T11:22:26.370",
"id": "46529",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T06:32:12.170",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-14T06:32:12.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46528",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I would break it down as follows: \n\n人間の目は、 the human eye , \n観察しようとする面 viewing a surface (page) \nの中央より少し上の方 slightly above the centre \nを自然に見る naturally looks (tends to focus on) \nそうである。seemingly \n\n\"Seemingly, the human eye, when viewing a surface (page), naturally looks\ntoward the area slightly above the centre\". \n\nI'm not convinced about the use of \"surface\" for 面 here, so I included \"page\"\nas an alternative in this specific case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T11:55:22.563",
"id": "46530",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T11:55:22.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20608",
"parent_id": "46528",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 46528 | 46529 | 46529 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46569",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[From Hirameki Hatsume-chan Vol 1, chapter\n7[1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6g2Az.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6g2Az.jpg)\nHow does the sentence in the third panel translate, and who is doing what to\nwhom? Is it a potential and the どうぐ is \"enabling\" him to have good dreams or\nis it passive and the 見る verb used to mean \"show\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T15:09:50.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46532",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T14:56:54.157",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-14T11:27:17.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "21729",
"owner_user_id": "21729",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"passive-voice",
"relative-clauses",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Parsing potential phrase modifying a noun",
"view_count": 191
} | [
{
"body": "> How does the sentence in the third panel translate? \n> いい夢{ゆめ}を見{み}られる道具{どうぐ}か・・・\n\nWell, this is an instrument that enables you to have good dreams...\n\n> who is doing what to whom?\n\n道具 is enabling the person who uses/possesses the 道具 to have good dreams.\n\n> Is it a potential and the どうぐ is \"enabling\" him to have good dreams or is it\n> passive and the 見る verb used to mean \"show\"?\n\nIt is a potential and the どうぐ is \"enabling\" him to have good dreams.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-14T12:17:35.893",
"id": "46567",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T12:17:35.893",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "46532",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> ［（私が/人が）いい夢を見られる］道具 \n> A tool [with which (I/people) can see a good dream]\n\nいい夢を見られる is a relative clause modifying 道具. \nIts non-relative equivalent would be:\n\n> 道具 **で** （私が/人が）いい夢を見られる。 \n> With a tool, (I/people) can see a good dream.\n\nSo the 見られる is potential. Its subject can be \"I\", \"we\", \"you\" or \"people\" who\nwill have a good dream using that tool. The particle で goes missing when you\nturn the sentence into the relative clause.\n\nCompare:\n\n> * 私がペン **を** 使った。-- I used the pen. \n> → ［私が使った］ペン -- the pen that I used (を goes missing)\n>\n> * 道具 **で** 火を起こす。 -- (I) start a fire with a tool. \n> → ［火を起こす］道具 -- a tool with which (I) start a fire (で goes missing)\n>\n> * 筆 **で** きれいな字が書ける。 -- (I) can write beautiful characters with a brush. \n> → ［きれいな字が書ける］筆 -- the brush with which (I) can write beautiful characters.\n> (で goes missing)\n>\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-14T13:45:17.510",
"id": "46569",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T14:56:54.157",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-14T14:56:54.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "46532",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 46532 | 46569 | 46569 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46535",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this phrase but I can't find in the internet what it means. At\nfirst I thought 全中制覇 is an idiom but there was no result when I tried\nsearching for it in the net.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T15:51:48.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46534",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T06:27:38.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20375",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"idioms"
],
"title": "What does 全中制覇 means?",
"view_count": 196
} | [
{
"body": "「全中{ぜんちゅう}」 is short for\n[「[全国]{ぜんこく}[中学校]{ちゅうがっこう}[体育]{たいいく}[大会]{たいかい}」](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%A8%E5%9B%BD%E4%B8%AD%E5%AD%A6%E6%A0%A1%E4%BD%93%E8%82%B2%E5%A4%A7%E4%BC%9A),\nwhich is like all-Japan championship meets for **junior high school**\nathletes.\n\nThus, 「全中制覇{ぜんちゅうせいは}」 would mean \"winning/becoming a champ at the 全中\".\n\nFor the advanced learners, the **high school** version of 「全中」 is commonly\ncalled\n[「インターハイ」](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%A8%E5%9B%BD%E9%AB%98%E7%AD%89%E5%AD%A6%E6%A0%A1%E7%B7%8F%E5%90%88%E4%BD%93%E8%82%B2%E5%A4%A7%E4%BC%9A).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T16:04:20.923",
"id": "46535",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T06:27:38.377",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-14T06:27:38.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46534",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46534 | 46535 | 46535 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46558",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've been learning japanese for quite a few weeks but I'm still pretty new to\nit so maybe this question will sound silly, if that's the case, I'm sorry.\n\nBecause I really love the way it sounds and looks, I tryed learning japanese.\nAnd now, I'd like to get myself a tattoo.\n\n\"Look at the sky\" (which is one of the last things someone told me before\npassing away).\n\nThen again I'm learning with books (not the best way, is it?) so I'm running\ninto a doubt.\n\nWould you rather spell it :\n\n空を見て - Sora o mite\n\nor\n\n空を見上げて - Sora wo miagete\n\nI'm having a hard time figuring out the difference (as I'm still a newbie in\njapanese) and as it's an important decision (the tattoo I mean) I'd really\nlike if someone could explain the difference.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T16:26:06.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46536",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T04:43:32.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20519",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Proper way to say \"Look at the sky\"",
"view_count": 2877
} | [
{
"body": "空を見て is \"Looking at the sky,\" and 空を見上げて is \"Looking up at the sky\". Both are\ngrammatical and make perfect sense as a Japanese sentence.\n\nThey are reasonable choices for a book title or a line in a poem, for example.\nThis may also be acceptable on a souvenir T-shirt, a mug or a fan. However, I\nhave to say such a tattoo looks weird and funny to the eye of Japanese people\nfor several reasons.\n\nFirst of all, [Japanese people are very wary of tattoos in the first\nplace](https://travel.stackexchange.com/q/3631/28968), and [traditional\nJapanese tattoos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irezumi) do not have any\nreadable character. But I won't go into detail about cultural things for now.\nEven if we accept the idea of readable character tattoos, this sentence may\nnot be suitable as the design of a tattoo. People usually expect something\nthat looks cool and exotic in a tattoo. However 空を見(上げ)て is a very plain,\ncasual and easy sentence even a 3-year-old Japanese kid can make. In general\nhiragana has [a cute and/or childish image as a design\nelement](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15108/5010), which is probably\nnot what you want for a tattoo. If you used this sentence, it might end up\nlooking as if it were a tattoo in [Comic\nSans](http://comicsansproject.tumblr.com/) to those who can actually read it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-14T02:48:05.737",
"id": "46558",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T02:48:05.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46536",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "A good word/verb for \"Look up\" is 仰(ぐ) [(see\nhere)](http://jisho.org/search/%E4%BB%B0) You could try a combination like 空仰\nor 天仰. They are not words that I can find in a dictionary though. Would like\nto know what native Japanese speakers think of this.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-14T04:43:32.137",
"id": "46559",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T04:43:32.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17841",
"parent_id": "46536",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -2
}
]
| 46536 | 46558 | 46558 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46539",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm taking a sentence from page 49-138 of Lake and Ura's _Learn to Read in\nJapanese_\n\n> ブラジルに行く準備ができて後は飛行機に乗るだけです。\n\nThe first part of the sentence (ブラジルに行く準備ができて) and last part of the sentence\n(飛行機に乗るだけです) seem pretty straightforward, but I'm not sure where 後は fits in\nwith those. If it's associated with the first part of the sentence, it seems\nlike it could mean\n\n> After the plans to go to Brazil are finished, there's nothing to do but get\n> on the plane.\n\nbut if it's associated with the second half of the sentence, it might mean\nsomething more like:\n\n> The plans to go Brazil have been finished; later there's nothing to do but\n> get on a plane.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T16:32:27.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46537",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T20:38:31.643",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T20:38:31.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "19509",
"owner_user_id": "19509",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Translating the set phrase 後は～～だけ",
"view_count": 88
} | [
{
"body": "> 「ブラジルに行{い}く準備{じゅんび}ができて後{あと}は飛行機{ひこうき}に乗{の}るだけです。」\n\n＝\n\n> 「ブラジルに行く準備ができて、後は飛行機に乗るだけです。」\n\nYou seem to be concerned about whether 「後は」 is associated with the first part\nor the last part of the sentence. It is both, actually.\n\nIMHO, what is more important here is whether or not you are looking at the set\nphrase 「 **あとは～～だけ（だ/です/である, etc.）** 」. So, **you can pretty much forget about\n\"later\" or \"after\"** here.\n\n> 「 **あとは～～だけ（だ/です/である, etc.）** 」 = \"all that is left to do is ~~\"\n\nThus, the sentence means:\n\n> \"My preparations for going to Brazil are finished and/so all that is left to\n> do is to get on the plane.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T17:27:27.543",
"id": "46539",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T17:27:27.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46537",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46537 | 46539 | 46539 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46556",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "そこで、マッカーサーが自分で作って見た **のが** 地図Aである。\n<https://www.docdroid.net/847v2dg/img-20170413-0001-new.pdf.html> The sentence\nis from Line 5 in the above linked text.\n\nthe problem lies with のが. I don't really understand why it is there. I usually\nwould expect the sentence to be like this: そこで、マッカーサーが自分で作って見た地図Aである =>\n\"Therefore, the map A is there, which McArthur tried to craft by himself.\" or\n\"Therefore the McArthur tried to craft by himself map A is there\" in a more\nliteral way.\n\nIn this very chapter, my textbook taught me that a sentence element further\ndetermining another sentence element can be marked through both が and の, like\nhere: 留学生 が/の 描いた絵を見ました。\n\nBut nowhere has it been said that both can be used at the same time xD So,\napart from the fact that I really don't see why が or の have to be there at\nall, I understand even less why both of them are there...^^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T17:10:20.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46538",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T07:47:46.893",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Problem with のが in this sentence",
"view_count": 267
} | [
{
"body": "This の is an \"empty\" noun - a noun in form and function but with no\ncontent/meaning. It is always modified by a sentence (of theoretically any\nlength, from a single word up) and takes on the meaning of that modifying word\nor sentence. To put it another way it turns what modifies it into a noun,\nwhich can then serve as a subject, an object etc. Here, the sentence\nマッカーサーが自分で作って見た, \"MacArthur tried making one himself\" or \"MacArthur made it\nhimself as an experiment\", becomes a noun, which can be rendered into English\nas \"The thing MacArthur tried making himself\", or \"What MacArthur tried making\nhimself\". This noun phrase is marked with が as the subject of the verb である.\nThe whole therefore means, in an over-literal translation, \"What MacArthur\ntried making himself is Map A\". In this sentence it is the first part that the\nwriter regards as new information for the reader. The reader clearly knows\nthere is a Map A because it is (presumably) there on the page, and the writer\nis supplying the new information that what this map represents is MacArthur's\nown effort at making a map of whatever-it-is. I would render this\nstraightforwardly as \"Map A represents MacArthur's own draft\" or \"MacArthur's\nown draft is shown as Map A\".\n\nConsider:\n\n> バスに乗る [Somebody] gets on a bus\n>\n> バスに乗るのを見た I saw [somebody] get on a bus\n>\n> きのう、駅の前で田中さんがバスに乗るのを見た I saw Tanaka-San get on a bus in front of the station\n> yesterday\n>\n> きのう、駅の前でむかし英語を習った田中先生がバスに乗るのを見た I saw my old English teacher Tanaka-San get\n> on a bus in front of the station yesterday\n\nAnd so on.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T18:35:41.997",
"id": "46544",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T06:20:32.503",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20069",
"parent_id": "46538",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This type of sentence is called a [_cleft\nsentence_](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/19204/5010). This の works as a\nplaceholder just like \"it\" in English cleft sentences. This is a very common\npattern. See the link for details and lots of similar examples (linked under\n\"Related\" section).\n\n> マッカーサーは地図Aを作ってみた。 \n> McArthur tried making Map A.\n>\n> マッカーサーが作ってみた **のは** 地図Aである。 \n> **It is** Map A **that** McArthur tried making.\n>\n> マッカーサーが作ってみたの **が** 地図Aである。 (exhaustive-listing _ga_ ) \n> It is Map A (among others) that McArthur tried making.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-14T00:51:58.817",
"id": "46556",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-14T00:51:58.817",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "46538",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 46538 | 46556 | 46556 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "46542",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 少なくとも十ドルはすると思います。\n\nI didn't get why it is here. Could I rewrite the sentence without する?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T17:34:13.390",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "46540",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T17:50:53.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17380",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"syntax"
],
"title": "What does する mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 402
} | [
{
"body": "> 「(amount of money) + する」\n\nmeans:\n\n> \"~~ costs (amount of money)\"\n\nThat is probably the most common way of describing what a thing costs.\n\n> \"I think it would cost at least 10 dollars.\"\n\nYou **_could_** say just about the same thing without using 「する」, but **it\nwill not sound nearly as natural**. For instance, you could say:\n\n「少なくとも１０ドルだと思います。」\n\n「少なくとも１０ドルは取{と}られると思います。」\n\nI would be shocked if they did not teach 「(amount of money) + する」 in Japanese-\nas-a-foreign-language, seriously. It is an expression we use on a daily basis.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-04-13T17:50:53.987",
"id": "46542",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-13T17:50:53.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "46540",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 46540 | 46542 | 46542 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.