question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52343",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Are 普通形 and 辞書形 different? If so, how do they differ? I would appreciate an\nexample.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T07:52:17.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52342",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-08T19:54:52.703",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-08T19:54:52.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "25419",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "普通形／じしょ形 (Futsuu Kei / Jisho Kei)",
"view_count": 22179
} | [
{
"body": "I am not 100% sure but I would guess that what you refer to as 普通形 is what in\nEnglish is often translated as \"casual\" or \"standard\" conjugation as opposed\nto 丁寧形{ていねいけい} that is the \"polite\" form instead. [This\nlink](http://www.coelang.tufs.ac.jp/mt/ja/gmod/contents/card/038.html) seems\nto prove me right.\n\nOn the other hand, 辞書形｛じしょけい｝ is the so-called dictionary form and it's called\nthis way because it is the form in which the verb is found in dictionaries.\n\nTo give a concrete example:\n\nVerb: 買う｛かう｝- to buy\n\n**普通形** : 買う (positive and non past. In this case this is the same as the\ndictionary form), 買わない (negative-non past), 買った (positive-past), 買わなかった\n(negative-past).\n\n**丁寧形** : 買います (positive-non past), 買いません (negative-non past), 買いました\n(positive-past), 買いませんでした (negative-past).\n\n**辞書形** : It's just 買う. This is how you find the verb \"to buy\" in any\ndictionary. You can see it as a non-conjugated basic form as it could be the\ninfinitive in English (in dictionaries you find \"buy\", not \"bought\" for\nexample).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T08:13:17.647",
"id": "52343",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T03:24:17.583",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T03:24:17.583",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "52342",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "辞書形, in fact, is part of 普通形, which consists of four different forms,\nincluding the 〜た form (past affirmative), the 〜なかった form (past negative), the\n~ない form (nonpast negative) and finally the root form, a.k.a. 辞書形 (nonpast\naffirmative). For example, what the root form, 辞書形, is for a verb is much like\nwhat \"be\" is for \"is\", \"are\", \"was\", etc. You can find more detailed\nexplanation\n[here](https://www.coscom.co.jp/japaneseverb/japaneseverb01-jpr.html) and\n[here](https://iskk.net/teinei-kei-and-futsuu-kei).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-06-03T07:45:12.233",
"id": "68639",
"last_activity_date": "2019-06-03T07:45:12.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34240",
"parent_id": "52342",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "From what I understand:\n\n * 辞書形 (dictionary form) is your usual 行く, 買う etc,\n\n * 普通形 (plain form) includes all present+past, positive+negative, noun+verb+adjective plain forms; e.g.\n\n * iku: 行く 行かない 行った 行かなかった\n * genki: 元気だ 元気だった げんきだった 元気じゃなかった\n * ii: 良い 良くない 良かった 良くなかった\n * hana: 花だ 花だった 花じゃない 花じゃなかった\n\nYou use the dictionary form for forms such as:\n\n * 行くこと (make a verb into a noun)\n * 行くことができます (I can go)\n * 行く前に、～ (before going, ~)\n\nYou use the plain form for forms such as:\n\n * 行かないと 言います (~ said not going)\n * 元気だったと 思います (I think ~ is healthy)\n * 便利だし、忙しくないし、面白い人行くし、安いです (~ is convenient, not busy, interesting people go, and cheap)\n\nNotice how in these examples you can use nouns/adjectives/verbs in their\npositive/negative and present/past forms.\n\nThe dictionary form is just for verbs. You could say that the plain form for\nverbs is:\n\n * the dictionary form for the present;\n * the ta-form for the past\n * the nai-form (without i) for the negative present\n * the nai-form (without i) +katta for the past\n\nAnd similar rules exist for i/na adjectives and nouns.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-07-08T09:13:55.990",
"id": "95317",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-08T09:13:55.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "51872",
"parent_id": "52342",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52342 | 52343 | 52343 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52351",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For example this one: <http://jisho.org/search/yorokobu>\n\nIt appeared in this sentence:\n\n> 「両親{りょうしん}が生{い}きていたら、孫{まご}の誕生{たんじょう}をとても喜{よろこ}んだだろう。」\n\n\"If my parents had still lived, I think they would have been very pleased by\nthe birth of their grandchild.\"\n\nAre these verbs suitable for both transitive and intransitive use? And do they\n\"prefer\" certain particles, or is that mostly determined by context? In this\nparticular case, I'm a bit confused by the use of を since it is in most cases\nreserved for the direct object, and at least in my attempt at translation,\nthis isn't reflected at all...^^",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T08:47:09.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52345",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-21T15:35:52.583",
"last_edit_date": "2017-09-21T15:35:52.583",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What about these words without transitive/intransitive mark?",
"view_count": 316
} | [
{
"body": "> 両親が生きていたら、孫の誕生をとても喜んだだろう。 \n> ↓ \n> 両親が生きていたら、( **両親は** ) 孫の誕生をとても喜んだだろう。 \n> ↓ \n> 両親が生きていたら、（両親は）孫の誕生をとても喜んだと **私は思う** 。 \n> ↓ \n> 私は「両親が生きていたら彼らが孫の誕生をとても喜んだ」と思う。\n\nもとの文の基本は次のように簡単な文章になります。\n\n> 彼らが/は孫の誕生 **を** 喜ぶ\n\n「喜ぶ」は他動詞（transitive verb）であり、「孫の誕生」が目的語（object）です。\n\nとても簡単な構文です。\n\nPlease think in Japanese, not in other languages.\n\n* * *\n\n# 回答の追加（１）「喜ぶ」の品詞\n\n質問者の例文が、「～を喜ぶ」でしたので、当然「喜ぶ」を他動詞だとして回答しました。\nその後、narutoさんの回答やChocolateさんのコメントで紹介する説明を見て、そういう用法もあるのだと、改めて知りました。\n\nしかし、narutoさんの説明にあった「彼は孫の誕生に喜んだ。」と「彼は孫の誕生を喜んだ。」がどちらも同じ意味（たぶん日本語として大丈夫と言う意味）であるとの説明を見て、少し疑問を感じました。「彼は孫の誕生に喜んだ。」は、意味は分かるがどうも変な日本語だなあとの印象が拭えません。\n\n更に疑問を持ったものは、narutoさんが BCCWJ で見つけてきた「～に喜ぶ」の用例です。 「に」と「を」を置き換えて何度も読んでみました。\n日本語としてどれも意味は分かりますが、何だか日本語としてみたとき違和感があります。\n以下の文に付けた〇、△、×の印はいずれも私の直観です。〇は違和感なし。×は違和感大です。普通の人が感じる以上に１ランクずつ _厳しめに見ている_\nとご理解ください。\n\n * × 実験の成功に喜ぶ圭介の腕に思いがけず抱きしめられ...\n\n * △ 実験の成功を喜ぶ圭介の腕に思いがけず抱きしめられ...\n\n * × 水の出た井戸に喜ぶ、アフガンの子どもたち\n\n * × 水の出た井戸を喜ぶ、アフガンの子どもたち\n\n * × 新米のプレゼントに喜ぶ姿が見られました。\n\n * △ 新米のプレゼントを喜ぶ姿が見られました。\n\n * × スケートに誘われ、久しぶりのデートに喜ぶ…のも束の間、...\n\n * △ スケートに誘われ、久しぶりのデートを喜ぶ…のも束の間、...\n\n * × 写真は開催地決定の報に喜ぶ北京の学生たち。\n\n * × 写真は開催地決定の報を喜ぶ北京の学生たち。\n\n「～に喜ぶ」と「～を喜ぶ」の使い分け以上に、「～を喜ぶ」という文でも不自然な日本語だと感じるものがあるのには正直に驚きました。\n\nそこで、「彼は孫の誕生に喜んだ。」と「彼は孫の誕生を喜んだ。」とで実験してみました。\n\n * × 彼は孫の誕生に喜んだ。\n * △ 彼は孫の誕生を喜んだ。\n * × 彼は誕生した孫に喜んだ。\n * △～× 彼は誕生した孫を喜んだ。\n\n改めて居心地の良いと感じる日本語に対する私の許容度は低いとは思いますが、上記の実験から判断すると、どうも「～に喜ぶ/～を喜ぶ」の前の\n**名詞の種類（性質）**\nによって居心地の良さが変わることが何となく分かってきました。この件に関しましては、narutoさんが引用した５つの例文と合わせて、どうすれば居心地の良い日本語に変身できるかも現在見つけつつあります。まとまったら、また、紹介したいと思います。\n\nさて、「喜ぶ」が自動詞か他動詞かの本題に戻ります。\n何気なく調べておりましたところ、日本語の他動詞、自動詞の判定が相当にいい加減であるという情報を見つけました。\n\n日本語教師と名乗る方の文で、[自動詞・他動詞](http://niwasaburoo.hatenablog.com/entry/2015/08/30/174017)、\n[自動詞・他動詞（２）](http://niwasaburoo.hatenablog.com/entry/2015/09/14/130122)、\n[自動詞・他動詞（３）](http://niwasaburoo.hatenablog.com/entry/2015/09/21/212716)にあります。\n\nかいつまんで言いますと、「～を喜ぶ」「～に喜ぶ」の他動詞/自動詞の判断も辞書（辞書編集者？）によって違うようです。「～を喜ぶ」自体を自動詞にしている辞書もあります。これには私も初耳で、奥が深いというか何なのでしょうかと言う感想です。ぜひご覧ください。\n\n今後日本語の拠り所をどこに置くのかなと思うと、偉そうに日本人面して回答しておれないところです。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T10:12:08.827",
"id": "52347",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T04:13:48.387",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "Yes, 喜ぶ has both transitive and intransitive usages. The following sentences\nare both grammatical and mean the same thing.\n\n> * 彼は孫の誕生 **に** 喜んだ。\n> * 彼は孫の誕生 **を** 喜んだ。\n>\n\nHere, に is the case particle which can denote a reason/cause (e.g., ～に戸惑う,\n～に驚く, ～に悲しむ).\n\nI feel the transitive usage (～を喜ぶ) is more common, but ～に戸惑う is not uncommon\nat all. Here the first five examples of ～に喜ぶ I found on BCCWJ. These are\nsafely interchangeable with ～を喜ぶ.\n\n> * 実験の成功 **に** 喜ぶ圭介の腕に思いがけず抱きしめられ...\n> * 水の出た井戸 **に** 喜ぶ、アフガンの子どもたち\n> * 市内に転入した方へあさか舞をプレゼントし、新米のプレゼント **に** 喜ぶ姿が見られました。 (あさか舞 is a brand name of\n> rice)\n> * スケートに誘われ、久しぶりのデート **に** 喜ぶ…のも束の間、...\n> * 写真は開催地決定の報 **に** 喜ぶ北京の学生たち。\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T12:21:52.030",
"id": "52351",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T12:21:52.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52345 | 52351 | 52351 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52352",
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "What does \"neeeeee\" (ねー) mean when 2 friends are talking? That is, one is\ntalking, talking, talking and the other will occasionally reply \"neeeeee\" to\nhim? Is this just the ordinary \"so da ne\" or does it have another connotation\nin this case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T10:11:16.140",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52346",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T23:49:25.513",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-15T23:40:52.770",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25265",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particle-ね",
"casual"
],
"title": "What does the long \"neeeeee\" (ねー) mean when 2 friends are talking?",
"view_count": 1385
} | [
{
"body": "I dunno exactly, but If you tell me that is \"a reply\", I suppose that is a\nshort form of そうだね。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T10:42:01.180",
"id": "52348",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T10:42:01.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25405",
"parent_id": "52346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> What does the long “neeeeee” mean when 2 friends are talking?\n\nIf the pronunciation is a long \"ねー\", it means \"そうだねー\". There are times when\nyou agree with the speaker or sometimes between people who hear what the\nspeaker says. In these times, people who agree with each other will say \"ねー\"\nwith nodding slowly at the same time with watching each other's eyes to show\nthe deep agreement.\n\nThis way of expressing consent is often done between young women or between a\nmother and her child.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T11:06:36.870",
"id": "52349",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T23:39:23.227",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-15T23:39:23.227",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Elongated ねー (pronounced \"neeh\" rather than \"knee\") is simply a word of\nagreement, \"Yeah.\" or \"You can say that.\" It's relatively mild or feminine.\nそうだね can mean the same thing, but it often means something slightly different,\n\"That's right\" or \"That's correct.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T12:05:07.063",
"id": "52350",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T12:05:07.063",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "This sounds like it is related to the sentence ending particle ね。This\nparticle, as you probably well know means something like: `isn't it, right?!,`\nhowever sometimes it will be translated into English as an emphasizer, or an\nexplanation point.\n\nExamples:\n\n> そうですね。(You're right! OR That's correct!)\n>\n> 今日あついね。(It's hot today, isn't it?)\n\nDon't confuse this with the よ particle. There is a distinct difference between\nthe two, even if they occasionally crop up in similar circumstances. You can\nread more about the ね particle\n[here](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/japanese-particle-ne/).\n\nSo, when we extend the ね to be ねー or ねーー、 I would say that an English\nequivalent would be extending `right?!` to `riiiiight?!` In other\ncircumstances where `right` won't work as a translation, just realize that the\nspeaker is emphasizing something more.\n\nExample:\n\n> あのね、私はね、デートよ！今晩。(Yeah, _I_ have a date! It's tonight.)\n>\n> あのねー、私はねー、デートよ！今晩。(Hey, get this, _This girl_ has a date. It's tonight.)\n\nI think this example is pretty feminine though.\n\nLastly, ねーー on its own is pretty much a replacement for そうですね, as the other\nanswers have explained.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T13:10:09.033",
"id": "52352",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T01:33:11.803",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "52346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "ねー is sometimes used as \"heeey\" like if you're talking to your friend and say\nsomething along the lines of \"heeey, what's that?\" (ねー、なにこれ？) or another\nexample of ねー from the top of my head is when in anime 2 friends are like\n\"something + だよねー！\" would be -isn't itttttt? in my opinion it sounds more\nenthusiastic than just \"だよね。\" or \"isn't it.”",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T17:31:09.517",
"id": "52465",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T23:49:25.513",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T23:49:25.513",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25468",
"parent_id": "52346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52346 | 52352 | 52350 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52360",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Imagine that I live alone. Occasionally when I get home, I still want to\nannounce that I'm home (such as with a text message) because perhaps my\nparents are making sure I got home safely or perhaps an online friend wants to\ndo stuff together.\n\nWould ただいま still be an appropriate announcement here? Or is there some other\nway to announce that I'm home to someone who is not physically present in the\nhouse?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T16:29:21.920",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52359",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T04:37:57.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25116",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage"
],
"title": "Use of ただいま to others who are not physically present",
"view_count": 153
} | [
{
"body": "I would use 今家に着いたよ or something along those lines.\n\nYou do occasionally see (for example, in novels), a person say ただいま to an\nempty room to emphasize the speaker's lonesome state, such as if he's lost a\nloved one, or that he's simply feeling lonely, etc. but you won't be saying\nただいま to someone who you're in conversation with.\n\nA more modern youngster might well prefer something like 帰宅なう though... or is\nthat already too old?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T16:34:42.613",
"id": "52360",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T04:37:57.673",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T04:37:57.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25280",
"parent_id": "52359",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "If I were you, I would text to them\n\nto your friend\n\n\"たった今、家に着きました。\"\n\nI have arrived home just now.\n\nたった今 means just now\n\nsafety confirmation to your parents\n\n無事に家に着きました。\n\nI have arrived home safely\n\n無事に means safely\n\nHope it helps.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T16:37:22.763",
"id": "52361",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T16:50:14.730",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-15T16:50:14.730",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52359",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52359 | 52360 | 52360 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52364",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "下記の文では、「のに」のかわりに「ので」が使えるでしょうか。使える場合、その意味は同じでしょうか。違うでしょうか。\n\n> みんなが頑張っているのに、私が頑張らないわけにはいきません。\n\nお答え、ありがとうございます。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T17:02:15.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52363",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T02:43:33.327",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-15T18:14:23.943",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "25423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "「のに」と「ので」の使い方についての質問です。",
"view_count": 1821
} | [
{
"body": "> 1. みんなが頑張っているのに、私が頑張らないわけにはいきません。\n> 2. みんなが頑張っているので、私が頑張らないわけにはいきません。\n>\n\nYes, these two sentences are both correct, and mean the same thing.\n\nWhy? In Sentence 1, everything before わけ modifies わけ. In Sentence 2, only\n私が頑張らない modifies わけ, and the clause before the comma is independent.\n\n> 1. [みんなが頑張っているのに、私が頑張らない]わけにはいきません。 \n> There is no way [that I won't do my best _although_ everyone is doing their\n> best].\n> 2. みんなが頑張っているので、[私が頑張らない]わけにはいきません。 \n> There is no way [that I won't do my best], because everyone is doing their\n> best.\n>\n\nLastly, if you're concerned about this comma, please [read\nthis](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/23782/5010).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T18:13:49.657",
"id": "52364",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T02:43:33.327",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T02:43:33.327",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52363 | 52364 | 52364 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57970",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "One of the options in LastPass.com is \"Offer to generate a secure password\".\nIn Japanese version it is translated as \"安全なパスワードを生成する **ように** 提案\". Is the\nusage of ように here delivers the meaning of \"offer to do something\"? Would it be\nmore accurate to translate it as \"安全なパスワードを生成することを提案する\"?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T18:56:49.530",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52365",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-16T22:58:55.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3371",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"pragmatics"
],
"title": "Is usage of ように appropritate in \"Offer to do something\"?",
"view_count": 511
} | [
{
"body": "In your context,\n\n> するように \n> to make it a point to do (something)\n\nis more commonly used as an instruction.\n\n> 明日忘れずに先生に宿題を渡すように。 \n> Tomorrow, do not forget to submit your homework to the teacher.\n\nSo to answer your question, no it can hardly be used to \"offer to do\nsomething\" as you are rather instructed to do so.\n\nBonus:\n\n> 安全なパスワードを生成するように提案\n\ndoesn't really make any sense. If I had to correct it,\n\n> 安全なパスワードを生成するよう、お願いいたします。 \n> Please generate a secure password. (in Japanese humble wording)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T09:38:16.290",
"id": "52417",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T09:38:16.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "52365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> Offer to generate a secure password\n\nI have a problem with the English word choice -- I believe this is a feature\nthat suggests a secure password for you by generating it and presenting it to\nyou for use. Therefore, I think the translation is not the problem here but\nthe language source is.\n\nConsider this: If the function generates a password then offers it to you, it\nshould not \"offer to generate a secure password\" because that would\nsemantically happen before the password is generated. What's happening here is\nthe system suggests to the user a secure password. Therefore, it should be\n\"Secure password suggestion\". I think this is what the Japanese is\ntranslating:\n\n> 安全なパスワードを生成するように提案\n\nSo, in your question, you are asking about the use of ように as delivering the\nmeaning of \"offering\". Let's break this sentence down a bit:\n\n> [ 安全{あんぜん｝なパスワードを生成｛せいせい｝する][ **ように** ] [ 提案｛ていあん｝ ] \n> 安全なパスワード生成する = Generate a safe password \n> **ように** = Perform by (lit. in the manner of) \n> 提案 = Suggestion\n\nHere, **ように** is delivering the idea of \"doing something in a specific\nmanner\". The phrase is not grammatically correct as a complete sentence but as\na modified noun it should be generally understood, much like \"Secure password\nsuggestion\" would be understood in English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T18:44:02.890",
"id": "52468",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T18:54:59.357",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T18:54:59.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "21684",
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "52365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "## Short answer\n\n「ように」does not contribute to the meaning of \"offer\" or \"propose\" 「提案」. In the\nexpression in question, the word that most closely corresponds to 「ように」is\n\"to\".\n\n## Details\n\nIn the expression \"Offer to generate a secure password\"\n\n * 「提案」translates to \"Offer\" or \"Propose\"\n * 「安全なパスワード」translates to \"a secure password\" (included here for completeness)\n * 「生成ように」translates to \"(in order) to generate\".\n\n「ように」roughly means \"in order to\", \"in order that\", \"in hopes that\", \"in the\neffort to\", \"with the goal of\", etc.\n\n「安全なパスワードを生成するように（パスワードを）提案（する）」here can be translated to \"with the goal of\nhaving a secure password created, (make a) proposal (for a password)\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-04-16T22:58:55.513",
"id": "57970",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-16T22:58:55.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29590",
"parent_id": "52365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52365 | 57970 | 57970 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52367",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English we describe the affection you have for your parents and siblings as\n\"love\", however this is vary different from the feelings of romantic love,\nthings like limerence and sexual arousal, which (unless something's gone\nhorribly wrong) you most definitely do not feel for your parents and siblings.\n\nThus I must ask; how is this expressed in Japanese? Not only in terms of\nwhether they equate this affection with love or not, but also in terms of the\nterminology and set phrases most commonly used to express it.\n\nYou know, in English we equate this affection with romantic love, and use\ngeneric phrases like \"I love you mommy!\", with any more complex or poetic way\nof expressing it being incredibly rare, unlike with romantic love, where such\npoetic confessions are quite common.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T19:06:46.447",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52366",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T21:28:31.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"set-phrases",
"culture",
"terminology",
"kinship-terms"
],
"title": "How do you tell your parents and siblings you love them?",
"view_count": 1809
} | [
{
"body": "> How do you tell your parents and siblings you love them?\n\nI've never heard that someone especially tells their own parents and siblings\nthey love them in my country and culture, which is Japanese.\n\n> In English we describe the affection you have for your parents and siblings\n> as \"love\", however this is vary different from the feelings of romantic\n> love, things like limerence and sexual arousal, which (unless something's\n> gone horribly wrong) you most definitely do not feel for your parents and\n> siblings.\n>\n> Thus I must ask; how is this expressed in Japanese?\n\nThe translation of English 'love' is 愛｛あい｝ and I think I've never noticed any\ndifference in the definition between Japanese and English.\n\n> Not only in terms of whether they equate this affection with love or not,\n> but also in terms of the terminology and set phrases most commonly used to\n> express it. \n> You know, in English we equate this affection with romantic love, and use\n> generic phrases like \"I love you mommy!\", with any more complex or poetic\n> way of expressing it being incredibly rare, unlike with romantic love, where\n> such poetic confessions are quite common.\n\nWe don't have that tradition. We would choose to express _**gratitude**_ to\nour parents. A young parents might teach their small children to tell them\nおかあさん、 **すき** 、おとうさん、すき, but ...well, I don't know, but I don't think many\npeople successfully keep them saying that to them for so long. Rather, I think\nwe teach them to thank them; おとうさん、おかあさん、 **ありがとう**. To our siblings... I\nthink we don't have any fixed expression that is commonly used.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-15T21:28:31.087",
"id": "52367",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-15T21:28:31.087",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22422",
"parent_id": "52366",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 52366 | 52367 | 52367 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52371",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "意味がわからない I know can mean, 'I don't understand', and, 'This makes no sense to\nme.' But in what circumstances can you use this to say something equivalent\nto, 'I don't agree with that'?\n\nI realise this is dealt with in another post but it wasn't the main topic of\ndiscussion, so I would like to address the question directly here. Can anyone\npoint to any dictionary entries etc. that support this translation, 'I don't\nagree with that'?\n\nThe reason I ask is I went with this translation in a text and a professional\ntranslator corrected it to, 'This makes no sense to me'.\n\nI am curious about which translation is appropriate in which circumstances.\nThank you.\n\nEdit:\n\nThis page <http://eikaiwa.dmm.com/uknow/questions/1107/> for example gives 'I\ndon't agree' as a possible translation. Also, in a previous thread in this\nexchange the same suggestion was made.\n\nI realise this post might come across as egotistical. But my purpose is to\nunderstand the Japanese phrase, not to support a justification of my\ntranslation. I apologise for the poor wording of my question. I will be more\ncareful in future.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T00:30:32.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52368",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T22:23:02.503",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T00:55:31.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "21868",
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "意味がわからない when can this be used to say 'I don't agree with that'?",
"view_count": 1864
} | [
{
"body": "Haha, I think I can answer it.\n\nIt depends on the context. Your translation can be possible in the context, in\nwhich \"it makes no sense to me\" means \"I don't agree with it.\"\n\n\"I don't know what you're talking about \" has, for example, the same\nphenomena, right? The literal translation is one thing and what is implied is\nanother. :)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T00:55:10.493",
"id": "52370",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T01:07:14.613",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T01:07:14.613",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52368",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> 意味がわからない\n\n# 日本語\n\nこれは、主に、 \n「話し相手」の取った態度（言った言葉を含む）が全く納得できないあるいは全くの想定外であるときに不快感をもって若干「独り言風に」言います。\n\n# English\n\nThis is mostly said almost in a monologue manner to express your deep\ndiscomfort or disgust to the attitude (including the words uttered) which you\ncannot accept or be convinced or to the unexpected one by the person you are\ntalking to.\n\n# 日本語\n\n解説：\n\n# English\n\n_Note:_\n\n# 日本語\n\n * 主に「話し相手」と言いましたが、会話に参加していない人の態度に対して言うこともあります。\n\n# English\n\n * This phrase could be said to the attitude of a person also not participating in the conversation.\n\n# 日本語\n\n * 「独り言風に」言うと言いましたが、不快感を投げつけるために相手に聞こえるように言うこともあります。\n\n# English\n\n * It could be said to the partner also in a loud voice to express your deep discomfort strongly.\n\n# 日本語\n\n * この言葉は主に若い女性が言います。\n\n# English\n\n * Young women use this phrase mainly.\n\n# 日本語\n\n * **追加** 若い女性の言葉に限定すると、「意味わかんないし！」あるいは landoneppsさんのコメントにあった「意味わかんない」の方が私が説明した「意味がわからない」という気持ちをもっと若い女性が表現するのに更に向いているように思います。\n\n* * *\n\n## 追加\n\n# English\n\n * **EDIT** : As only for young women, 意味わかんないし！ or 意味わかんない which is introduced by landonepps's comment is more suitable than 意味がわからない to express the feeling of younger women to express the meaning in my answer.\n\n* * *\n\n## EDIT\n\n# 日本語\n\n「意味がわからない」を、次のように理解すると本質的な意味が理解できると思います。\n\n# English\n\nIf you intepret \"意味がわからない\" as the following sentences, you could understand\nthe intrinsic meaning of it in Japanese better.\n\n# 日本語\n\n> なんであなたがそのようなことを言うのかあるいはそのような態度をとるのか私には「意味がわからない」。私はあなたの言葉や態度が全く理解できません、いや、\n> **理解したくありません** 。\n\n# English\n\n> I don't understand why you say such a thing or take such an attitude. I\n> cannot understand your words or attitude at all, no, **I do not want to\n> understand them!**.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T01:00:25.310",
"id": "52371",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T22:23:02.503",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52368",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 52368 | 52371 | 52371 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52373",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I ran into ～んとする the other day and I think I get the hang of how it works and\nwhat meaning it conveys, but it seems eerily similar to that of ～うとする.\n\nI know Japanese have a lot of different ways to say the same thing, so I\nwonder if there's no other difference apart from conjugation between these\ntwo. In other words, I wonder if the following examples mean the same:\n\n> 見る → 見らんとする \n> 見る → 見ようとする",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T01:35:51.867",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52372",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-18T00:56:02.437",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-18T00:56:02.437",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25409",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "What is the difference between ～んとする and ～うとする?",
"view_count": 1358
} | [
{
"body": "* 見んと (<見むと) is more literary/archaic and can be more bookish than 見ようと. \n(You don't say 見らんと)\n\n * 見んとする (<見むとする) * consists of: み (未然形, imperfective form of 見る) + archaic volitional auxiliary ん (む) + particle と + verb する \n* You might also encounter an archaic verb す used instead of する , as in 見んとす.\n\n * 見ようとする consists of: み + volitional auxiliary よう + particle と + verb する \n\nA few examples:\n\n> せんと, 送らんと, 書かんと, 言わんと... ← literary \n> しようと, 送ろうと, 書こうと, 言おうと... ← modern",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T02:09:21.247",
"id": "52373",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T01:13:42.993",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T01:13:42.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52372",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 52372 | 52373 | 52373 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52426",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm reading the university journal article\n[『カタカナ英語{えいご}と和製英語{わせいえいご}：最近{さいきん}の傾向{けいこう}を中心{ちゅうしん}として』](https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110009935033),\nand the following sentence came up.\n\n> 以下{いか}は日本語{にほんご}と英語{えいご}では意味{いみ}が **微妙{びみょう}に大{おお}きく**\n> 異{こと}なる和製英語{わせいえいご}である\n\nMy reading of this would be:\n\nBelow is waseigo where the English and Japanese meaning is very different (in\na complicated/doubtful/tricky way?) The juxtaposition of 微妙 and 大きく is\nconfusing since they seem to carry opposite meanings (big and small/subtle).\nCan someone give me a better explanation/translation so that I can understand\nthis sentence.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T03:42:17.350",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52374",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-18T23:34:29.223",
"last_edit_date": "2017-12-18T23:34:29.223",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "微妙に大きく problem translating/understanding",
"view_count": 459
} | [
{
"body": "> 以下は日本語と英語では意味が **微妙に大きく** 異なる和製英語である｡\n\n「マイブーム」の質問があったのと同じ論文で、しかも同じ副題「３）日英で異なる意味の和製英語 」の中の文章ですね。\n\n「微妙に大きく異なる」は、 \n意味は「大きく異なる」が、各々の意味が属している分野は「似ている」という程度の意味です。\n例えば「ブックカバー」は、英語と日本語とでは違うものを指していますが、所属する分野は本、書籍なので同じです。 \n_The meaning of \"微妙に異なる\" is \"very different\" but what are meant have the same\npoint such as belonging to the same field. For example, \"book cover\" and\n\"ブックカバー\" refer to something different between English and Japanese, but each\none belongs to the same field of books_.\n\n「微妙に大きく異なる」を別の言葉で言うと「全｛まった｝く違｛ちが｝うとは言｛い｝い難｛がた｝い」でしょうか。\n\n> 参考掲載：\n>\n> ３) 日英で異なる意味の和製英語 **以下は日本語と英語では意味が微妙に大きく異なる和製英語である｡**\n> 例えば､｢デッドヒート｣は英語では日本語のように｢激しい競り合い｣を意味するものではなく、｢同直で勝ち負けが成立しない試合またはレース｣の意味である｡また｢ベビーカー｣は日本語のような｢赤ん坊を寝かせて運ぶもの｣の意味は英語にはなく｢小型自動車｣の意味である｡以下その他の実例である｡\n>\n> * ブックカバー(book wrapper, (dust)jacket) (英語で言えば｢表紙｣の意味)\n> * マイブーム((temporary) personal obsession) (英語で言えば｢私のにわか景気｣ の意｡\n> * デノミネーション[100円を１円にするような通貨の呼称単位の切り下げ] ((currency) redenomination\n> [revaluation]; dropping [trimming, lopping] 《two》zeroes 《from the yen》;\n> [通貨の呼称単位の変更] renaming a monetary unit; (a) redesignation [change] of the\n> name of a monetary unit (英語で言えば単に｢貨幣の単位｣の意味で､日英で別のものを指す)\n> * ベビーカー(baby carriage; pram) (英語で言えば｢小型の車｣\n> * ミキサー(blender) (英語で言えば｢大型工業用ミキサー｣\n> * フェミニスト[女性崇拝者] (admirer [adorer] of women; ladies' [lady's] man; [女に甘い男]\n> man who is unusually kind [obliging] to women; chivalrous [gallant] man\n> (英語で言えば｢女権拡張論者｣)\n> * バイキングsmorgasbord; all-you-caneat buffet (英語では８～11世紀に活躍した北欧人)\n> * クレームcomplaint; objection (英語では｢請求・要求・主張｣)\n> * カンニングcheating (in an examination) ; cribbing (英語で言えば｢狡猾な｣)\n>\n\n* * *\n\n# EDIT\n\n@ǝʇɐןoɔoɥƆさんのコメントを見て、日本人にも「微妙に大きく異なる」の意味は、それを理解するのが難しいのだろうと判断しました。まして、ＯＰが理解するのはかなり難しいのでしょう。\n\nどうしたら、少しでも理解いただけるか似た表現である「微妙に異なる」も登場させて説明してみます。少しでもニュアンスをつかんでいただけたらありがたいと思います。\n\n「微妙に異なる」：似ているが何となく違う（＝異なる）。 \n「微妙に大きく異なる」：大変違う（＝大きく異なる）が何となく似ている。\n\nなぜこのような意味になるのでしょうか。\n\n「微妙に」によって、「異なる」あるいは「大きく異なる」と言い切るのを少しためらっていると考えるとどうでしょう。\n\n「微妙に異なる」：→「異なる」と言い切るには「微妙」である→「異なる」と言い切るのを「ためらう」→では同じかと言うと、同じだというには少し違う。→何故なら、似ているが何となく違う（＝異なる）。\n\n「微妙に大きく異なる」：「大きく異なる」と言い切るには「微妙」である→「大きく異なる」と言い切るのを「ためらう」→何故なら、大変違う（＝大きく異なる）が何となく似ている。\n\n「微妙に大きく異なる」に関しては別の解釈の仕方がある。「微妙に」+「大きく」+「異なる」なので、「微妙に大きく」だけを考える。\n「微妙に大きく」は、「大きく」と言い切るには「微妙」であると言う意味になり、結局、「異なることは異なる」が「大きくとまでは言い切れない」となる。言い換えると、「大きく異なる」と言い切るには「少しは似ているところがある」のでちょっと言い切るのはやめてというような感じである。\n\n結果として、 「微妙に大きく異なる」は、大変違う（＝大きく異なる）が何となく似ている。 \n私の答えでは、「ブックカバー」と「book\ncover」を例に出して、基本的に違うものだが、分野が同じということで「完全に違うと言い切れない」ような説明をしたつもりです。",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T05:37:46.330",
"id": "52376",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T14:09:13.060",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52374",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "微妙 is an overused word recently, and it may mean something as simple as \"\n**kinda** \". To me, 微妙に大きく異なる sounds like \"there are kinda large differences\".\nSo it basically expresses the uncertainty; he may have felt 大きく was an\noverstatement.\n\nThis usage of 微妙に is slangy, and should definitely be avoided in serious\narticles like this. Therefore I would say his wording here is a\n\"非常に[微妙な](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3346/5010)表現\"! (非常に微妙, meaning\nsomething like \"highly questionable\", is another slangy and disputed\nexpression that seems contradictory :D)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T12:22:39.443",
"id": "52426",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T13:30:20.827",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T13:30:20.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52374",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 52374 | 52426 | 52426 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52419",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: in [this manga](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Tube) the\nprotagonist, a cameraman that likes to film scenes of real violence and\nhomicides, is saying that he dislikes video of people filming themselves while\ncommitting suicide:\n\n> 死にたがりが勝手に死ぬ動画なんて… ただの自慰【オナニー】じゃないか。他人の自慰【オナニー】ほど観るに堪えないものはないよ。\n\nI don't understand why the term 自慰 was used here and I don't know how to\ntranslate it. The Daijirin has two meanings for 自慰:\n\n**1**. 自分で自分を慰めること。 **2**. 手淫(シユイン)。 オナニー。\n\nSince the word has the オナニー furigana, the only possible meaning in this case\nis the second one, `masturbation`, but I think it doesn't fit in the sentence.\nCould it be interpreted as something similar like `self-complacency`, or self-\nsatisfaction? My translation attempt:\n\n> Someone wanting do die and making a video of his death... is just self-\n> complacency, right? I can't stand watching other people self-complacency.\n\nOther than suggesting a translation for 自慰, could you also explain what you\nthink the general meaning of the sentence is? Let me know if you need more\ncontext. Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T04:06:37.023",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52375",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T10:49:18.617",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T04:14:21.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "17797",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"words",
"manga"
],
"title": "Meaning and translation of 自慰 in the following sentence",
"view_count": 2074
} | [
{
"body": "This is a common (and vulgar) metaphor in Japanese. Even though they do not\nexplicitly say \"～のようだ\", \"～みたいだ\" or \"～同然だ\", listeners can understand what it\nimplies. It literally means masturbation, but yes, it figuratively means self-\nsatisfaction in this context.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T10:49:18.617",
"id": "52419",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T10:49:18.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52375 | 52419 | 52419 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52382",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For full context, see here: \n<https://www.docdroid.net/dEbqqGI/img-20170816-0001-new.pdf>\n\nThe sentence in question is from line 13-14:\n\n> ほかにいいの、ありませんか。\n\nIn context of this dialogue, there's a high amount of uncertainty on my side\nabout the possible meaning of this sentence. xD \nI could imagine that it's something like \"Don't you have one which is good\nbesides that/good in other aspects as well.\" Something along these lines. This\nほかにいいの is just too cryptic for me...^^",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T11:36:47.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52378",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T14:34:04.200",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T14:34:04.200",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "What does this expression mean in this context?",
"view_count": 108
} | [
{
"body": "The first half of your guess is pretty much correct. \nI can also see the implied \"in other aspects\" since the flow suggests he wants\nsomething with better examples.\n\nI might make a direct translation to \"Do you have any other (product)\nsuggestions?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T13:17:24.837",
"id": "52381",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T13:17:24.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25280",
"parent_id": "52378",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This is a fun one. For added context, I read the example that you had from\nbeginning to where you had issues. I'm going to include the whole quote here\njust so that we can have be on the same page.\n\n> でも、そのフラット社のは例文が少ないですね。意味の説明だけじゃなくて、例文がたくさん載っているのが欲しいんです。ほかにいいの、ありませんか？\n\nMy translation:\n\n> But this dictionary doesn't have very many example sentences. I want one (a\n> dictionary) that has not just the meaning, but also lots of example\n> sentences as well. Do you have any other suggestions?\n\nHere's how I broke it down:\n\n**ほかに：** `Other`\n\n**いい：** `good`\n\n**の：** I understood this as a shortened form of のやつ or `thing/unit`\n\nPutting these together, I understood `ほかにいいの、` to mean `other good units.`\n\n**ありませんか：** `Don't you have?`\n\nLiterally translated, you have:\n\n> Don't you have any other good units?\n\nIt makes sense in context, but I think that a better translation is either\nwhat I had above, or this:\n\n> Do you have any other good units that would fit my needs?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T13:28:39.003",
"id": "52382",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T13:28:39.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "52378",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52378 | 52382 | 52382 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 例文ですか。入っている辞書の数はこれより少なくてもかまいませんか。([source: line\n> 15](https://www.docdroid.net/dEbqqGI/img-20170816-0001-new.pdf))\n\nI have a strong feeling that lots of information in this sentence has to be\nextrapolated from the context. First, a translation as literal as possible:\n\n> Examples? Concerning the Number of entered dictionaries, is few from this\n> okay?\n\nHere, my main issue already surfaces: 入っている辞書の数 \nWith the meanings provided by jisho, I can’t make a meaningful expression out\nof this. If they are talking about the number of entries of dictionaries into\nwhatever-thing, then I don’t know what this whatever-thing is. If they are\ntalking about “entries inside the dictionary”, then I dare not making the\nassumption all on my own that 入っている辞書 means exactly this.\n\nNext is これより. I think it relates to the topic of this sentence, but since I\ncan’t interpret the topic in the first place, I can’t be sure. However, if one\nof my interpretations of the topic was correct, “from this” still lacks a\nreference value. What is “the number of dictionary entries” or “entered\ndictionaries”? No “number” was mentioned before.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T12:36:42.110",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52379",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-12T00:22:00.620",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-12T00:22:00.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "例文ですか。入っている辞書の数はこれより少なくてもかまいませんか",
"view_count": 89
} | [
{
"body": "So, the item ミラー is trying to purchase is a 電子辞書 - an electronic dictionary. \nFirst he is offered product that allows the user to write characters on the\nscreen to search for it, as well as jumping between dictionaries for the same\nentry, such as between the Japanese dictionary to a Japanese to English\ndictionary, etc. However, ミラー says that it doesn't provide a lot of example\nsentences, and asks the teller if there's any dictionary that provides a lot\nof example sentences, to which the teller responds: \n\"Let's see, more examples...... would it be alright if the product offers a\nsmaller variety of dictionaries (such as the Japanese dictionary and the J->E\ndictionary in the previous product)?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T13:04:29.617",
"id": "52380",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T13:11:42.433",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T13:11:42.433",
"last_editor_user_id": "25280",
"owner_user_id": "25280",
"parent_id": "52379",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52379 | null | 52380 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a famous phrase from the Battle of Tsushima in the Russo-Japanese war.\nIt is used in modern times such as by Shinzo Abe after he called a snap\nelection a couple of years ago.\n\nYou can research it and get more examples I am sure.\n\nAnyway, I am having difficulty in finding the original Japanese. I can guess\nit would be something like\n\n```\n\n 今日の天気はいいですけど、なみが高いです\n \n```\n\nbut I bet it is more poetic than my child's Japanese :)\n\nDoes anybody know it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T13:33:47.713",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52383",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-20T21:08:35.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4071",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"phrases",
"culture"
],
"title": "\"weather today fine but high waves\" - what is the Japanese for this?",
"view_count": 1926
} | [
{
"body": "According to these pages\n([1](http://englishmaxims.seesaa.net/article/430181878.html),\n[2](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E6%B5%B7%E6%B5%B7%E6%88%A6#.E9.80.A3.E5.90.88.E8.89.A6.E9.9A.8A.E5.87.BA.E6.92.83)),\nit seems like the original Japanese is:\n\n> 本日天気晴朗ナレドモ浪高シ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T02:32:46.020",
"id": "52515",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T02:32:46.020",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52383",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52383 | null | 52515 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52388",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've encountered sentences like this several times:\n\nたしかに村での戦闘の直接の原因はその……ギアが不時着したことかもしれない\n\nThe literal translation would be: \"Certainly, the direct cause of the battle\nin the village might be......that Gear that made an emergency landing\". But it\ndoesn't make sense. It's either \"certainly\" or \"might be\". How should I\ntranslate this?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T13:49:33.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52385",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T14:59:15.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "たしかに and かもしれない in one sentence",
"view_count": 418
} | [
{
"body": "Though it doesn't make sense in English, but it is used in Japanese. I think\nit is used when a speaker has a confidence in the guess.\n\nFor example, 確かに彼はそう言ったかもしれない.\n\nAnd I found some examples in a dictionary, which are 確かにいるかも知れないな(Certainly\nthere might), 確かに、顔は隠せるかもしれない(It might indeed be possible to cover my face.).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T14:22:38.447",
"id": "52387",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T14:59:15.590",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T14:59:15.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "52385",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "「確かに」 can be used (often in colloquial speech) to mean \"It is true that...,\n(but...)\" (≂「確かに～だけれど...」) \"You're right, ...\" \"You may be right, ...\"\n\"Indeed, ...\" (≂「あぁ、確かに、...」「なるほど、...」) or \"Now that you mention it...\"\n(≂「確かに、言われてみれば（その通り）、...」)\n\n> たしかに村での戦闘の直接の原因はその……ギアが不時着したことかもしれない\n\n\" _You're right, / Now that you mention it, / It is true that_ the direct\ncause of the battle in the village might be......that Gear made an emergency\nlanding.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T14:26:22.507",
"id": "52388",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T14:40:01.893",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T14:40:01.893",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52385",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52385 | 52388 | 52388 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52390",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From the novel The Old Man and the Sea.\n\nJapanese translation on Aozora: \n<http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/001847/files/57347_57224.html>\n\n> 「食ったほうがいいか？」 \n> 「そう言ってるじゃないか」少年は優しく答えた。 \n> 「サンチャゴの用意ができてから蓋を **開けたかったんだ** 」\n\n''Should we eat?'' ''I've been asking you to,'' the boy told him gently. ''I\nhave not wished to open the container until you were ready.''\n\nIs かった an aux verb or just part of the 開ける conjugation that I'm not familiar\nwith?\n\nThanks a lot in advance :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T16:17:05.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52389",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T17:04:37.683",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T17:04:37.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "What does 開けたかった mean?",
"view_count": 279
} | [
{
"body": "You're on the right track, but lets break it down a little bit more.\n\n**開ける:** to open\n\n**開けたい:** want to open\n\n**開けたかった:** wanted to open\n\n**んだ/(のです):** \"It is that~\", \"the case\", \"the situation\" or \"the fact\" see:\n[What is the meaning of\n～んです/～のだ/etc?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5398/22352)\n\nSo you're looking at a conjugation of the 〜たい grammar (want to verb). In this\ncase 〜たい acts like an い-type adjective. That means that you can conjugate it\nto have past and negative tenses.\n\nNow we've got that out of the way lets do a translation:\n\n> 「サンチャゴの用意ができてから蓋を開けたかったんだ」\n>\n> \"Its just that I wanted to open the lid after Santiago has finished his\n> preparations\"\n\nIt's implied that the speaker has a container of food, if that helps the\nsentence make more sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T16:34:13.720",
"id": "52390",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T16:41:14.243",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "52389",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52389 | 52390 | 52390 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52393",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "According to [List of jōyō\nkanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_j%C5%8Dy%C5%8D_kanji) and\n[jisho.org](http://jisho.org) 思, 考 and 侖 mean think. Is there any difference\nin meaning and usage in them?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T18:03:50.193",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52392",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T12:38:30.213",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T00:17:10.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Is there any difference among 思, 考 and 侖?",
"view_count": 679
} | [
{
"body": "> According to List of joyo kanji and jisho.org 思 , 考 and 侖 mean think. Is\n> there any difference in meaning and usage in them?\n\nWe don't use each character alone. We say 思{おも}う to mean _think_ or _think of_\nand 考{かんが}える to mean _intentionally think about something._\n\nThe two together make a noun, 思考｛しこう｝, which means 'thought.' Also each\ncharacter creates many words combined with other characters.\n\nWe don't use 侖 except as a part of some kanji characters, and so I have no\nidea what it is. For the proof,\n[デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/all/%E4%BE%96/m1u/) doesn't have\nany entry for it, and neither does my printed kanji dictionary.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T19:32:21.027",
"id": "52393",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T23:42:01.253",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-16T23:42:01.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "22422",
"parent_id": "52392",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "**思**\n\nThis is think as in believe. For example:\n\n> I think she is mad.\n>\n> 彼女は怒っていると思う。\n\nThis kind of think isn't a pondering type of thought, it's spur of the moment\nthinking.\n\n* * *\n\n**考**\n\nThis is a kind of thinking where you take time. It's what you do when you do\nhomework, or try to work it out in your mind. For example:\n\n> Hold on, I'm thinking about it.\n>\n> ちょっとまって、考えています。\n\n* * *\n\n**侖**\n\nI know nothing about this character. Jisho.org does not have any words using\nthis character. My suspicion is that it's used for names more than it is used\nfor anything else. You'll likely never see this in daily usage.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T19:37:44.493",
"id": "52394",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T21:52:50.833",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "52392",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "> **思と考の違い。Difference between 思 and 考**\n\n他{た}の人｛ひと｝の回答｛かいとう｝でほぼすべて説明｛せつめい｝は尽｛つ｝くされていますが、一｛ひと｝つだけ不足｛ふそく｝している情報｛じょうほう｝を足｛た｝します。\n_Almost all explanations were given in answers by other people, but I'll add a\nmissing information_.\n\n「思」と「考」の本質的｛ほんしつてき｝な違｛ちが｝いはどこで think するかだと思｛おも｝います。 \n_I think that the essential difference between \"思\" and \"考\" is the place where\nyou think something._\n\n> To get straight to the point, **\"思\" thinks \"with emotion\", while \"考\" thinks\n> \"in the brain\"***.\n\n「思う」は「心{こころ}で思う」、「考える」は「頭｛あたま｝で考える」と言います。 \n\"思｛おも｝う _to think_ \" is used in \"心｛こころ｝で思｛おも｝う _lit. to think with the heart_\nor _to think with mind_ \", while \"考｛かんが｝える _to think_ \" is used in\n\"頭｛あたま｝で考｛かんが｝える _lit. to think with the head_ or _to think with the brain_ \".\n\n人間の「思考｛しこう｝」は心臓｛しんぞう｝ではなく、脳｛のう｝の機能｛きのう｝ですから科学的｛かがくてき｝にはいずれも「頭で思う」と「頭で考える」と言うのが正｛ただ｝しいのでしょう。しかし、日本語では、「心｛こころ｝で思う」と言い「頭で思う」あるいは「脳で思う」と言いません。逆に、「心で考える」とも余｛あま｝り言いません。 \n_Human \"thinking\" is not the function of the heart but that of the brain,\ntherefor it is scientifically correct to say \"頭で思う\" instead of saying \"心で思う\"_.\n\n「心｛こころ｝」は、感情｛かんじょう｝の動｛うご｝きに伴｛ともな｝って心臓｛しんぞう｝の鼓動｛こどう｝が変化｛へんか｝します。すなわち、「心」は「感情」の存在｛そんざい｝する場所｛ばしょ｝と考｛かんが｝えられています。一方、「頭」あるいは「脳」は「知識｛ちしき｝」あるいは「知性｛ちせい｝」の存在する場所です。 \n_As for the \"heart\" of a person, the beating of the heart changes as the\nemotion fluctuates_. _In other words, \"heart\" is considered to be the place\nwhere \"emotion\" exists. On the other hand, \"head\" or \"brain\" is the place\nwhere \"knowledge\" or \"intelligence\" exists_.\n\n> ## 侖{ろん}\n\nNormal Japanese may have seen this character, but they don't know the correct\nreading and its meaning, because this character is not [_Jōyō\nkanji_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Dy%C5%8D_kanji).\n\nAmong _kanji_ s having the meaning of \"to think\", 侖 has a profound meaning. \nThe physical etymology of this _kanji_ is the ligature of \" ~~ヘ~~ \", which is\nthe original character of \"集\" representing \"collection\" and \"冊\" representing\n\"book\". The etymological meaning of 侖 is \" _to think the right way of life or\nthe righteous path of humanity according to the Scriptures of Buddhism_\n経典に照らして人の道を考える\".\n\nAccording to a Chinese dictionary 侖 means 条理 _reason_ ，秩序 _order, well-ordered\nstate_ ，筋道 _reason, logic, method_ ，順序 _order; sequence; procedure_ ．\n\nYou can see the shape of 侖 in \"倫理 _ethics_ \", \"論理 _logic_ \", \"輪廻｛りんね｝\n_reincarnation_ \" or \"五輪 _the (five‐ring) Olympic emblem_ \".\n\nSince 侖 is not listed as _[Jinmeiyō\nkanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinmeiy%C5%8D_kanji)_ (人名用漢字, lit.\nChinese characters for use in personal names), you can't use it now as a\ncharacter in the name to register.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T05:13:50.777",
"id": "52409",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T12:38:30.213",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T12:38:30.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52392",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52392 | 52393 | 52394 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52404",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I had someone ask me what the difference between these two are, presumably\nbecause Google Translate said \"was crying\" for both 泣【な】いていた and 泣きしていた.\n\nMy attempt to answer his question involved how the first is the informal past\ncontinuous conjugation, and the second one is made up of two words. I see 泣き,\ntaken from 泣く, since it's a 五段【ごだん】 verb, and I also see していた as the informal\npast continuous form of する.\n\nSo, what I told him was that the first is \"was crying\" and the second is \"was\nhaving tears\", though they could both be used as \"was crying\".\n\nMy question is did I explain the meanings correctly? It was quite a shot in\nthe dark for me, just googling grammar. Thanks in advance!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T20:08:02.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52395",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T00:03:06.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "泣いていた vs. 泣きしていた",
"view_count": 892
} | [
{
"body": "> > \"was crying\" for both 泣いていた and 泣きしていた.\n>\n> the first is the informal past continuous conjugation, and the second one is\n> made up of two words. I see 泣き, taken from 泣く, since it's a 五段ごだん verb, and\n> I also see していた as the informal past continuous form of する.\n>\n> So, what I told him was that the first is \"was crying\" and the second is\n> \"was having tears\", though they could both be used as \"was crying\".\n\n泣いていた is correct and means \"was crying\", but we don't consider 泣き alone as a\nnoun, so, I guess it's not much the logic or grammar, but simply we don't say\n泣きしていた.\n\nBut you can say 夜泣｛よな｝きしていた, or すすり泣きしていた, or もらい泣きしていた, or etc. Your \"was\nhaving tears\" could be 涙｛なみだ｝していた. All of these are [a noun + していた].\n\nしていた is not really formal nor informal, but just the standard form to express\nthe _**state**_ or _**continuation**_ in the past.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T00:38:51.287",
"id": "52400",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T00:38:51.287",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22422",
"parent_id": "52395",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "You're right that 泣いていた is the informal past continuous conjugation (\"I was\ncrying\"), and that していた is the informal past continuous form of する as well.\n\nAnd you're also right that 泣き is the noun form of the verb 泣く, derived from\nits continuative form (連用形):\n\n> なき【泣き】 **〘名〙** \n> 泣くこと。また、泣くほどつらいこと。「泣きを入れる（＝泣いて頼む）」「泣きを見る（＝泣くほどつらい目に合う）」... \n> (明鏡国語辞典)\n\nIt's marked as just〘名〙, not as 〘名・自サ変〙. It means 泣き is a noun, but cannot be\nused as a する-verb. So you cannot say 泣きする, 泣きした, or 泣きしていた.\n\nCompound nouns with ～泣き, such as うれし泣き, 男泣き, うそ泣き, 大泣き, 悔し泣き, 夜泣き, すすり泣き,\nしのび泣き etc. are サ変 verbs and can be used as a する-verb, as in うれし泣きする, 男泣きする,\nうそ泣きする etc.\n\nAs an aside, same goes for many other verbs. You can say: \n[大笑]{おおわら}いする, but not 笑いする, \n[早歩]{はやある}きする, but not 歩きする, \n[小走]{こばし}りする, but not [走]{はし}りする, \n[早食い]{はやぐ}する, but not [食]{く}いする, \n[夜逃]{よに}げする, but not 逃げする, \n[二度寝]{にどね}する, but not 寝する, \netc...",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T02:20:01.760",
"id": "52404",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T00:03:06.693",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T00:03:06.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52395",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52395 | 52404 | 52404 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52407",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have heard the word 付き合う used to mean \"interact with/hang out with\" but I\nhave heard it more often to mean steadily dating someone. How can you tell the\nmeaning from context and how could you say that you interact with someone in a\nway that's clear you're not dating them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T20:41:46.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52396",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T03:55:47.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22133",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Usage of 付き合う in context",
"view_count": 2355
} | [
{
"body": "I think the context is drawn from other components of the sentence. Think how\nin English it is possible to say \"I'm seeing Sara\" and \"I'm seeing Sara at the\npark in 20 minutes\" and also \"I'm seeing Sara over there all by herself\" and\nsuddenly \"seeing Sara\" means three different things.\n\nThe thing you want to focus on is the emphasis and word choice for the\nsentence that accompanies 付き合う as 付き合う definitely means \"to get together, hang\nout, interact\" but in a specific context and word choice the implication is\nthat you're \"getting together, hanging out, interacting\" (exclusively) with a\nspecific person. Consider the following:\n\n> 映画館の前で友達と **付き合います** 。 \n> I'm getting together with my friends in front of the movie theater.\n>\n> 今 **付き合ってる** 人はいません。 \n> Right now I'm not dating anybody.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T21:39:58.890",
"id": "52399",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-16T21:39:58.890",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "52396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In general Japanese usage (in most everyday situations), 付き合います used with a\nperson that is not outright understood to be a relative or superior from a\nstatement meant for a third party-listener most likely almost immediately\nimplies some form of romantic relationship with the said person.\n\n> to you: サラさんと付き合ってます。 I'm going out with Sara. (Unless you know that to the\n> speaker, Sara is a relative or a mere colleage.)\n>\n> to you: 客先にサラさんに付き合います。 I'm going to the client's place with Sara. (It's\n> explicitly mentioned a work affair.)\n>\n> to you: 病院まで付き合いますよ。 I'll go with you until the hospital.\n\nIn the first place, the speaker will unlikely make such statement unless there\nis some level of familiarity with the listener.\n\n[This](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E4%BB%98%E3%81%8D%E5%90%88%E3%81%86)\nshould help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T03:55:47.410",
"id": "52407",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T03:55:47.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "52396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52396 | 52407 | 52399 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've seen this a few times now near the end of light novels, \"接続章\", I'm not\nquite sure what it's supposed to mean? Literally it seems to translate as\n\"connecting chapter\". Is it supposed to be referring to a chapter that bridges\none volume of a novel to the following one in a series of novels?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T20:52:34.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52397",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T10:36:39.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25440",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "What is \"接続章\" supposed to mean in novels?",
"view_count": 185
} | [
{
"body": "> Is it supposed to be referring to a chapter that bridges one volume of a\n> novel to the following one in a series of novels?\n\nYes, it is.\n\n予備知識： \n小説の構成の単位は、大きい順に 編 > 章 > 節\nだとして説明します。本は適当な厚さでないと取り扱いにくいので一つの小説でも複数の本に分割する（＝分冊する）ことがあります。その場合の単位は「巻」で、これはvolumeに対応する用語だろうと思います。分冊することと、「編」「章」「節」とは直接の関係はありません。\n\n「接続章」という漢字の並びから、 \n何となく意味は分かりますが、質問者が「I've seen this a few times now near the end of light novels\n小説の終わり近くに見かける」とありますので、「接続章」の理解で合っているのかなと思った位の私の認識です。私の理解からは、「接続章」という言葉あるいは用語は、日本語でまだ意味が定着していないと思います。\n\n「接続章」の役割として、 \n「bridge」という解釈は非常にうまいと思います。私が小説家なら、この「接続章」には、この「編」のまとめと、次の「編」への「伏線を置く to lay an\nunderplot」だろうと思います。\n\n「最終章」という言葉があります。\n「接続章」と似ていますが、日本語としては確立しており、小説でも使われます。「最終章」という表現を採用する作家は小説の最後の章としてこの章を配置します。この「最終章」から類推しますと、「接続章」は、質問者の想定するとおり、ある「編」の最後に配置される「章」と解釈して良いように思います。\n\nインターネットで「接続章」を調べましたが、きちんとした説明や辞書の掲載はありませんでした。かろうじて、小説での[実例](http://ncode.syosetu.com/n2119bm/)が見つかりました。\n\nしかし、この実例を見ますと、第２編に当たる部分の最初に「接続章」とあります。作者は「Ｒ・グレイ」となっていますが、この小説は外国語からの翻訳小説ではなく、日本人である「Ｒ・グレイ」が書いたものだと思われます。\n\n従ってＲ・グレイさんは質問者の解釈と違って、 \n「Brumaire」という題名の小説の「運命の別れ道 」という「編」の最初の「章」に「接続章」という用語を使っています。\n内容を十分読んでおりませんが、一般にこの位置に「接続章」を置くなら、前編を思い出していただくための簡単な説明と本編を期待さすための導入的な内容になるのでしょう。\n\n「接続章」に対する私の全体の感想として、 \n質問者の解釈は合っていると思います。また、その配置すべき位置は、Ｒ・グレイさんのBrumaireと違いますが、ある「編」の末尾の方がふさわしいように思います。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T03:42:22.900",
"id": "52406",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T04:35:57.247",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T04:35:57.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52397",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "接続章 is not a common word at all. Probably you will not see the word 接続章 again\noutside the story you're reading. Some Japanese light novels series use unique\nchapter names, and 接続章 should be one of these. Some other unique chapter names\nI've seen are:\n\n * インターミッション (literally \"intermission\")\n * 行間 (literally \"between the lines\")\n * 幕間 (literally \"between the acts/performances\", [Entr'acte](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entr%27acte))\n\nRegardless of the name, the purpose is basically the same. From what I\nunderstand, they are generally short, do not contain \"dynamic\" episodes, but\nare used to conclude several chapters (or one volume) before them. In this\nsense, it is similar in purpose to epilogues, except that they do not close\nthe entire series. Sometimes they have catchy scenes/lines at the end, which\nattract readers to the next volume/chapter (effectively working as \"a\nbridge\"). Sometimes chapters that have unique names like these may contain\nside stories totally irrelevant to the main story.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T10:36:39.770",
"id": "52418",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T10:36:39.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52397",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52397 | null | 52418 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52425",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[From this\narticle:](http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10011094771000/k10011094771000.html)\n\n> ＮＨＫは６月〜７月、１８歳と１９歳の人に平和についてどう考えているか(*)聞きました。 \n> Between June and July NHK asked 18 and 19 year olds what they thought about\n> peace. \n> この日を知っているか **と** 聞くと、... \n> When they were asked if they knew this date ...\n\nI don't understand why と is absent in the place I marked (*) in the first\nsentence, but is required in the second sentence.\n\nI thought I was happy with the idea of embedded questions with verbs like 知る\nthat don't use と, but I'm a bit confused about when I should use と with verbs\nwhere it can be used.\n\nHow would the meanings of both sentences change with and without と?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-16T21:32:03.073",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52398",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T21:22:25.623",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"questions",
"particle-か"
],
"title": "When should an embedded question take と?",
"view_count": 113
} | [
{
"body": "The version without と only functions as a **kind of** ~~direct~~ indirect\nquote, as the comment says. On the other hand, the one with と can be either\ndirect or indirect.\n\nIn this specific example, both seem an indirect quote. In that sense, it\ndoesn't change either way.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T11:52:56.583",
"id": "52425",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T21:22:25.623",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T21:22:25.623",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "52398",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52398 | 52425 | 52425 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52428",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I consider myself \"introverted\". So, in Japanese I've always said:\n\n> 私の人柄は引っ込み思案、というか保守的です。\n\nIn my opinion, the nuance of \"introverted\" is neutral (while \"shy\" is a\nnegative). So, I don't want any negative connotation in my Japanese.\n\nSo, how does that sound? \nAre \"引っ込み思案\" and \"保守的\" even comparable?\n\nAlso, are \"人柄\" and \"性格\" comparable? Both mean \"personality\"? Should I have\nsaid \"性格\"?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T04:33:44.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52408",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T14:07:29.247",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T04:52:48.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "22062",
"owner_user_id": "22062",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Better to say my 人柄 is 保守的 or 引っ込み思案?",
"view_count": 113
} | [
{
"body": "I think you're referring to 性格(seikaku, personality) in this context.\n\nTo answer your question, I think it's safe to go with 内向的(naikou-teki, adj.),\nwhich is introverted or inward-looking.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T05:53:02.947",
"id": "52410",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T05:53:02.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "52408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "人柄 tends to have a positive connotation (it can mean \"a good and friendly\npersonality\" on its own). Using 人柄 was not wrong, but if you want to describe\nyour character objectively, 性格 is the safer choice.\n\n保守的 is more like _conservative_. 内向的 is the word closer to \" _shy_ without\nnegative connotation.\" 引っ込み思案 is a negative word, although it's not impossible\nto introduce yourself as 私は引っ込み思案です.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T13:01:31.090",
"id": "52428",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T14:07:29.247",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T14:07:29.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52408 | 52428 | 52428 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context, see\n[here](https://www.docdroid.net/dEbqqGI/img-20170816-0001-new.pdf).\n\nThe sentence in question from line 22:\n\n> そうですか。そのトップ社ので、ほかの色はありませんか。\n\nので in sense of \"because\" wouldn't work here I think. \nInstead, I think it is the particle の + (の中)で. \nHere's a literal translation which I hope reflects what I mean:\n\n> \"I see. Out of these トップ社 products, do you have other colors?\"\n\nOr is it something else?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T07:05:50.920",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52411",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T10:31:51.627",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T10:31:51.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "What about this ので",
"view_count": 142
} | [
{
"body": "That is correct. In this case 「ので」 is the short version of 「の物で」 or 「の商品で」 as\nyou translated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T07:13:04.123",
"id": "52412",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T07:13:04.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1814",
"parent_id": "52411",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52411 | null | 52412 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52421",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/bv19a5D/img-20170817-0001-new.pdf> It is in the very\nfirst 5 lines (paragraph 1, example)\n\nそれでしたら、こちらのがよろしいんじゃないでしょうか。\n\nI guess the customer simply agrees to buy the recommended bag, but this time I\nwanted to ask what exactly this huge appendix ...じゃないでしょうか means. It probably\nis some kind of reaffirmation, I'd like to have some more information on this\n^^",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T07:17:43.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52413",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T11:01:35.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "What does this phrase mean?",
"view_count": 234
} | [
{
"body": "It's a form of a question that elicits some form of confirmation.\n\n> お寿司は日本の代表的な料理だと言えるんじゃないでしょうか。 \n> Sushi is the delicacy that best represents Japan, wouldn't you say?\n\nYou may not have the full proof to back up the statement you are posing and\nhence you are seeking some form of confirmation from your listener/reader.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T09:32:21.993",
"id": "52416",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T09:32:21.993",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "52413",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> それでしたら、こちらのがよろしいん **じゃないでしょうか** 。\n\nI would interpret \"それでしたら\" as \"それがお好{す}きなら/それがお好｛この｝みでしたら\" or\n\"そのようなものがお好｛す｝きなら/そのようなものがお好｛この｝みでしたら\", then the part will be interpreted into\nlike \"If your preference is like that\".\n\nThe huge appendix is changed gradually as:\n\n 1. こちらのがよろしい **ん** じゃないでしょうか。euphonic change from 1 to 2 \n 2. こちらの方がよろしい **の** じゃないでしょうか。 \nこちらの方がよろしいの **じゃ** ないでしょうか。euphonic change from 2 to 3\n\n 3. こちらの方がよろしいの **では** ないでしょうか。 \nこちらの方がよろしいのではない **でしょうか** 。 polite form 3 to normal form 4\n\n 4. こちらの方がよろしいのではない **か** 。 \n= こちらの方がよろしい + **の** + ではないか (let's do (something) )。 \n**の** in 4 is a particle used to nominalizes verbs and adjectives\n\nThe whole sentence will be like: \n_If your preference is like that, I think that this one is better, don't you\nthink so?_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T11:01:35.453",
"id": "52421",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T11:01:35.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52413",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52413 | 52421 | 52421 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context, see\n[here](https://www.docdroid.net/bv19a5D/img-20170817-0001-new.pdf).\n\nIt is in paragraph 2, example:\n\n> 同じ色で違うサイズのシャツを探す。 \n> => \"Someone looks for a shirt of different size and being the same color\"\n\nI interpreted it as the continuative form of です, but in this case, at least\nfrom a conceptual perspective, it could just as well be the particle で.\n\n> \"Someone looks for a shirt of different size with the same color.\"\n\nThat's why I wanted to ask for confirmation whether I'm right or not.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T08:02:20.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52414",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T13:31:39.870",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T13:31:39.870",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-で",
"copula"
],
"title": "What function does this で have",
"view_count": 311
} | [
{
"body": "The most straightforward interpretation is the continuative form of だ, as you\nsay. (Technically, that of です is でして.)\n\nThat said, you can also interpret it as particle で in the sense of \"under the\ncondition of the same color (one looks for)\".\n\n\"With\" as in \"a shirt of different size with the same color\" directly modifies\nthe noun \"shirt\" but particle で doesn't work that way without の. However,\nthere's a room to interpret that it indirectly modifies シャツ through ちがう, which\nreceives 色で and modifies サイズ, which modifies シャツ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T11:34:38.513",
"id": "52424",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T11:34:38.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "52414",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52414 | null | 52424 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52422",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the book that I'm reading and a few other occasions, I saw the も…ば…も\nsentence structure.\n\nFor example:\n\n> 俺には特殊な力もなければ秘められた才能もない。\n\nI searched ば on jisho.org and it says that も…ば…も means \"and\". This is not very\nhelpful because there are other constructs that also means \"and\". This, for\nexample:\n\n> 俺には特殊な力がなく秘められた才能もない。\n\nDoes the も…ば…も structure sound more literary/archaic/cool?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T10:50:51.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52420",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T11:12:02.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"syntax"
],
"title": "What nuances do the も…ば…も structure carry?",
"view_count": 302
} | [
{
"body": "You cannot find an explanation for a pattern like this on a dictionary. It's\nout of the scope of dictionaries. Instead, try articles like this (I just\ngoogled \"も ば も\"):\n\n * [Learn JLPT N2 Grammar: も～ば～も (mo~ba~mo)](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-jlpt-n2-grammar-%E3%82%82%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%B0%EF%BD%9E%E3%82%82-mobamo/)\n * [JGram - も～ば～も [も～ば～も] (mo-ba-mo)](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=mo-ba-mo)\n\nThis pattern is not particularly literary, archaic, difficult nor poetic.\nStill, it's relatively uncommon in the most casual real conversations. You\nwill find this pattern mainly in written sentences and fictional\nconversations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T11:12:02.300",
"id": "52422",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T11:12:02.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52420",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52420 | 52422 | 52422 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52430",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: in a manga, a video of a person filming himself with a smartphone\nwhile committing suicide jumping in front of a train has the following title:\n\n> 早朝にガチの電凸してみた\n\nAs far as I understood from the [Wikipedia article for\n電凸](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B%BB%E5%87%B8), they are complaint\nphone calls or emails towards companies, mass media, government, etc. Why was\nthe word used in the context I explained above? Does it have any relation to\nsuicide? Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T12:54:30.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52427",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T14:40:20.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"slang",
"internet-slang"
],
"title": "Meaning of 電凸 in suicide context",
"view_count": 420
} | [
{
"body": "Looks like it's a kind of pun, or rather,\n[釣り](http://www.paradisearmy.com/doujin/pasok_tsuri.htm)タイトル.\n\nThe slang word 電凸 usually means 電話で突撃 as the Wikipedia article says, but in\nthis video, this title actually means something like 電車に突入. (凸 is a [slangy\nkanji replacement](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/44255/5010) of 突 used\namong some net users.) ガチの means \"real\", \"serious\". Everyone will understand\nwhat 電凸 actually means in this video only after clicking the title and see him\njumping in front of a train.\n\n(Or maybe this was intended to be a camouflage; a title like 自殺してみた would have\nbeen immediately blocked, but 電凸してみた would look like just another joke video.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T13:48:40.880",
"id": "52430",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T14:40:20.780",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T14:40:20.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52427",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 52427 | 52430 | 52430 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "All these kanjis have word that contain aspect of hiding or concealing in\ntheir meaning: 隠、 忍、 匿、 潜. My head is spinning. Some are used in verbs others\nare used in compound words. Why do we need so many characters for the same\nidea?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T17:36:02.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52431",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T23:15:39.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3441",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Why do so many kanjis express idea of \"hiding\": 隠、 覆、 忍、 匿、 潜?",
"view_count": 173
} | [
{
"body": "Kanji are just a representation for (Old Chinese) words, so your question\nwould be \"Why were there so many Chinese words for hiding/concealing\"?\n\nLooking up the characters on wiktionary, their meanings are given as (just a\nselection):\n\n * forbear, stifle, hold back\n * hide, conceal\n * cover\n * shield, cover up\n * shelter\n\nWhy are there so many English words for hiding/concealing? ;)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T18:53:55.370",
"id": "52433",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T18:53:55.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19012",
"parent_id": "52431",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "This is part of the beauty of the Japanese writing system (and Chinese too).\nThe kanji are able to represent a wide array distinctions that may or may not\ncome across in the spoken word. I recommend seeing this as a particular kind\nof elegance that is possible in the written word in Japanese.\n\nIn these cases where you seem to find a profusion of words meaning the _same_\nthing, I would recommend digging deeper. As a first such step, gather as many\nexample sentences using these words and study them. You may begin to discern\nsubtle differences between them (think of the difference between the English\n_cache_ and _hidey hole_ ). As a later step, I would just recommend chucking\nthe Japanese-English dictionary. More often than not, I've found them\npotentially better designed for native speakers of Japanese trying to learn\nEnglish; and, even the more recent dictionaries aimed at learners of Japanese\nstill seem aimed too low. Get a decent Japanese dictionary designed for native\nspeakers of Japanese. 漢和辞典 are often very good at comparing and contrasting\nsuch characters. As a learner of Japanese interested in learning to read\nkanji, possibly the best such dictionaries are ones aimed at school age\nlearners of kanji.\n\nMy 漢和中辞典 lists 蟄 as yet another kanji meaning to hide or conceal. It lists the\nreadings of this character as チツ (on'yomi) かくれる (kun'yomi) and then explains\nsome of its nuances: 虫などが土地にかくれていること. The dictionary then lists a variety of\nwords formed using this character.\n\nOne of these listed words is 蟄伏{ちっぷく}. [Denshi\nJisho](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A1%E3%81%A3%E3%81%B7%E3%81%8F) rather\nunceremoniously defines this word to be _hibernation; staying home or in\nplace_. My 漢和中辞典 gives as the first definition of this word 虫などが地中に冬ごもりすること,\nclearly a rather more nuanced meaning than _hibernation_ alone conveys.\n\nAnother fascinating word related to 蟄 is\n[蟄居{ちっきょ}](http://jisho.org/word/%E8%9F%84%E5%B1%85), my dictionary elaborates\non this as follows: 江戸時代に武士に課した刑で、自家の一室にとじこめて外出させぬこと. Now just imagine this:\nyes, it does just mean _house arrest_ , but how boring. The kanji evokes a\ndeeper, more confining meaning--imagine how a bug crawled away into the earth\nto sleep away the winter is deprived of physical freedom, access to food, and\nmost other enjoyments of life. You might say, \"that's clear enough from _house\narrest_ itself.\" But, then I think you're missing the beautiful imagery here.\n\nNow you might be responding to this by saying, \"I don't need to know such\nwords like 蟄伏 and 蟄居. I'm neither a biologist (or entomologist) nor someone\ninterested in the miserable lives of samurai under house-arrest.\" That's fine.\nYou're interests are what they are. But I still recommend digging into a kanji\ndictionary meant for native speakers and you'll discover how the nuances of\nthese various words distinguish themselves.\n\nKeep in mind that like my example above regarding _cache_ and _hidey hole_ ,\nEnglish is replete with many words having very similar meanings--here are some\nmore that all have uses similar having a _hiding_ place: hideout, cover,\nrecess, niche, dugout, coverture, stash, cubbyhole.... and the list could go\non. So, try to think of these various ways of saying _hide_ in Japanese--or\nwhatever the next such kanji is (みる is another word with numerous ways of\nbeing expressed in kanji)--try to think of these as an enrichment of the\nlanguage and an opportunity to plumb deeper into the meaning of these words.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T19:43:46.357",
"id": "52437",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T23:15:39.180",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T23:15:39.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "4875",
"owner_user_id": "4875",
"parent_id": "52431",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52431 | null | 52433 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While I have seen なる being used a lot, that is not so for なす。 What is the\nusage of なす? The two have similar meaning which in its most simplest form\nmeans \"to become\" i.e change in state of something.\n\nNow here is a line, that I am having trouble dissecting:\n\n```\n\n 大いなることをなすには犠牲は付き物だ。\n \n```\n\nIt uses なる、then なす then it uses は twice. It appear to be rather strange from\ngrammatical perspective.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T17:54:32.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52432",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T03:30:54.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3441",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What is the difference between なる ｖｓ なす?",
"view_count": 254
} | [
{
"body": "なす(成す) is a verb and it has several meanings, as you can see in\n[デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/164006/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%99/). \nThis なす means \"to achieve (a great thing)\". No 2 in the dictionary.\n\n大いなる is an adnominal adjective which means \"great\" but a little old‐fashioned\nword, so 大いなることをなす means \"To achieve a great thing\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T19:38:44.693",
"id": "52435",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T03:30:54.290",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T03:30:54.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "52432",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52432 | null | 52435 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52440",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "大丈夫だ、この程度……\n\nMy guess is - It's okay, I know my limits……\n\nContext:\n\n「いい加減寝たらどうだ？ カレル……。 一咋日からずっとなんだろう？ 体がもたんぞ。\n\n「大丈夫だ、この程度……",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T19:02:42.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52434",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T22:58:16.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does この程度 mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 638
} | [
{
"body": "> > 大丈夫だ、この程度……\n>\n> My guess is - It's okay, I know my limits……\n>\n> Context: \n> 「いい加減寝たらどうだ？ カレル……。 一咋日からずっとなんだろう？ 体がもたんぞ。 \n> 「大丈夫だ、この程度……\n\nWell, good guess, they are similar, but 'limit' would be 限界{げんかい}, and 程度｛ていど｝\nis nothing more or less than ' _ **degree**_ ' or ' _ **level**_ ' or ' _\n**amount**_ ' of something as any dictionary should say. He's saying something\nlike \"I'm all right with _this much of_ thing\" or \" _This is not much_ to me,\nor _this amount of hardship is not much_ to me.\n\nIt's synonym to この位｛くらい｝or これ位｛くらい｝. Mm... but we don't say ~~これ程度~~.\n\n大丈夫だよ、この程度（のこと）、これ位（のこと）、これしきのこと (might be old-fashioned or literary)、等々。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T22:58:16.910",
"id": "52440",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T22:58:16.910",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22422",
"parent_id": "52434",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52434 | 52440 | 52440 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52438",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the correct pronunciation of the word 胸突き as used in martial arts? In\nJapanese sources, it seems to be むなつき. However, in several Martial arts in the\nUS, it seems to be called \"munetsuki\" when speaking in English.\n\nAre both な and ね sounds correct here? Is there some connotation of one versus\nthe other?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T19:39:50.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52436",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T01:21:13.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"readings"
],
"title": "Proper reading of 胸突き term as used in martial arts",
"view_count": 80
} | [
{
"body": "I believe the reading depends on the school, but むなつき is more common (I read\nthe kanji that way as well). [胸突き{むなつき}八丁{はっちょう}](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/mu/munatsukihattyou.html) is a known phrase to mean the \"hard\npart\", coming from the last climb on Mt. Fuji (八丁) making you breathless (as\nif you've been struck in the chest, thus 胸突き).\n\nI've also seen むなづき in my searches, but that doesn't seem all that common.\nPerhaps one reason it become \"munetsuki\" in English could be from someone\ntranscribing the technique being unaware of this possible reading (むな), and\ntherefore defaulted to むね.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T20:14:55.150",
"id": "52438",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T01:21:13.470",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T01:21:13.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "52436",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52436 | 52438 | 52438 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52445",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am wondering as to why で was used after 間 instead of に as I would expect\nbecause it is talking about popularity being present. What is the general\ndefinition for this usage of で？\n\n> そのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちの **間で** 人気がある。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T22:47:44.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52439",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-22T14:07:08.443",
"last_edit_date": "2017-12-22T14:07:08.443",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "13622",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"particle-で",
"に-and-で"
],
"title": "Why is で used instead of に alongside ある？",
"view_count": 438
} | [
{
"body": "> I am wondering as to why で was used after 間 instead if に as I would expect\n> because it is talking about popularity being present. What is the general\n> definition for this usage of で？\n>\n\n>> そのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちの間で人気がある\n\nI think we native speakers are also confused about things like this because we\nare using them without knowing the grammar, but I feel the same way as you do.\nI feel it will sound better if it's \nそのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちに人気がある。 \nそのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちの間に人気がある。 \nそのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちの間で もてはやされている。 \nそのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちの間で人気が出ている。\n\n**[場所]で** is to say a location of a _**happening;**_ どこそこ **で行う.**\n（花火大会｛はなびたいかい｝が広場｛ひろば｝ **である** means a happening.） \n**[場所]に** is to say a location of an _**existence;**_ どこそこ **にある.**",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T23:52:41.337",
"id": "52442",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T23:52:41.337",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22422",
"parent_id": "52439",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> そのホテルは安くて清潔なので、旅行者たちの間 **で** 人気がある。\n\nThe sentence sounds perfectly natural with で.\n\n旅行者たちの間 is not the place 人気 exists. Actually, 人気 is present in そのホテル. Compare:\n\n> * その歌手は人気がある。 \n> _lit._ As for the singer, there's popularity. / The singer has popularity.\n> → The singer is popular.\n> * その選手は見込みがある。 \n> _lit._ As for the player, there's prospect. / The player has prospect. →\n> The player is promising.\n> * 彼は人望がある。 \n> _lit._ As for him, there's popularity/trust. / He has popularity/trust. →\n> He is popular/trusted.\n> * 彼は才能がある。 \n> _lit._ As for him, there's talent. / He has talent. → He is talented.\n>\n\nYou can say:\n\n> その歌手はフランス **で** 人気がある。 The singer is popular in France.\n\nbut not その歌手はフランス **に** 人気がある。Here, フランス is the place where the phenomenon\nその歌手は人気がある is occurring, not the place where 人気 exists / is present. So you\nuse フランスで, not フランスに here.\n\nYour example そのホテルは...旅行者たちの間 **で** 人気がある literally means \"As for the hotel,\nthere's popularity among tourists.\" → \"The hotel is popular among tourists.\"\nYou use で not に here, since 旅行者たちの間 is not the place where 人気 exists, but\nexpresses among what kind of people, or in what group of people, the\nphenomenon そのホテルは人気がある is occurring.\n\nIn そのホテルは旅行者たち **に** 人気がある, you use に. The に means \"with\", as in \"The hotel is\npopular with tourists\", indicating 対象/target.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T07:16:52.480",
"id": "52445",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T07:16:52.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52439",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52439 | 52445 | 52445 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52443",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Which is correct, はがいたい or はがいたむ? I want to talk to my dentist.\n\n> 昨日あなたが掘った歯は今でもまだ傷ついています。\n\nDoes this make sense?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-17T23:48:58.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52441",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T02:19:23.100",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T02:00:48.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "23871",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "はがいたい or はがいたむ?",
"view_count": 195
} | [
{
"body": "痛む is a rather unusual word in modern Japanese - it comes out every once in a\nwhile, but sounds less than colloquial. 痛み, the nominalised form, is the form\nyou're most likely to see in a conversation. 痛い, on the other hand, is a\nperfectly normal and common word. 歯が痛い is much, much more natural.\n\n> 昨日あなたが掘った歯は今でもまだ傷ついています。\n\nThere's a couple of small issues with this sentence. I'm not sure about 掘る for\nteeth (it could be perfectly natural, I'm not a native speaker), so anyone who\nwants to comment about it is free to. あなた is an odd way to refer to a doctor,\nand could be construed as insufficiently respectful; I'd say 先生. (Normally in\nJapanese, you use titles or names even in places where English uses 'you'.)\n今でもまだ all together also sounds like you're going out of your way to emphasise\nhow long it's been, maybe because you're surprised that it's lasted this long\n- 今も or まだ alone sounds a bit more neutral.\n\nThe main problem is with 傷つく - this means 'to be wounded', so you're saying\n'my tooth is still injured today'. This sounds odd for two reasons. First, it\nsounds like your tooth has actually been damaged in an accident or fight or\nsomething, which you may not intend to imply if it's just hurting on its own.\nSecond, 傷つく is very much an action verb rather than a state verb, so even with\n傷ついている referring to the resulting state, it sounds odd to say まだ傷ついている. If\nit's injured and out of commission, there might be a better way to phrase the\nsame idea; but considering this is a tooth and not a limb or something, what\nyou probably want to say is just that it still hurts. I'd replace まだ傷ついています\nwith まだ痛いです.\n\nSo as a whole, I might rephrase it this way:\n\n> 昨日先生が掘った歯はまだ痛いです。\n\nStill, depending on your circumstances, that might not be the exact sentence\nyou want.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T00:35:19.573",
"id": "52443",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T00:35:19.573",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "52441",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "> Which is correct, はがいたい or はがいたむ? I want to talk to my dentist.\n\nBoth are correct. As a complaint, 歯{は}が痛｛いた｝い is the natural utterance for\nanyone of any age. However, I won't surprise if an adult man says 歯｛は｝が痛｛いた｝む\ninstead. We make a dentist appointment saying 歯が痛いんですが／歯が痛むんですが 診｛み｝てもらえますか？\n\nWe would use 痛｛いた｝み as 痛みがある；背中｛せなか｝に痛みがあります.\n\n> 昨日あなたが掘った歯は今でもまだ傷ついています。Does this make sense?\n\nYes, it can be understood, but do you mean it's still hurt by saying 傷ついています?\nWe address a dentist as 先生｛せんせい｝. I think 掘｛ほ｝る can be colloquially an\nexcellent choice, it sounds nicely humorous to me, but I've never said that in\nmy life, I think it's rather an old-fashioned expression. So, I like the\nSjiveru's version, but we would usually say 昨日、診ていただいた歯がまだ痛むんですが…。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T02:13:41.333",
"id": "52444",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T02:19:23.100",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T02:19:23.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "22422",
"owner_user_id": "22422",
"parent_id": "52441",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52441 | 52443 | 52443 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52447",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the video game by Sega named Alien: Isolation, a certain room is named\n“Left Hemisphere Overview,” and the corresponding Japanese text is 「 左ウィング・上x\n」. The x symbol represents a kanji that I am having trouble identifying. Can\nsomeone please provide the missing kanji? Here is the image:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/E08p4.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T08:03:37.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52446",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T08:07:04.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25429",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "“Left hemisphere (wing) overview” — 「 左ウィング・上x 」",
"view_count": 50
} | [
{
"body": "It's 階{かい} that means floor (storey of a building). Coupled with the kanji\n上{うえ} which means \"above/up\" etc is read 上階{じょうかい} and means \"floor\nabove/upstairs\". See all about it [here](http://kakijun.jp/page/1271200.html).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T08:07:04.280",
"id": "52447",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T08:07:04.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "52446",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52446 | 52447 | 52447 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52449",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Overwatchっていうゲームでヒローがよく使う言葉は「敵を食らう」でも、普通の命令形はどうしを最後に「え」を変わります。「食らう」って特別ですか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T09:07:19.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52448",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T07:22:44.083",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19159",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "「食らう」と「食え」の違いは何ですか。",
"view_count": 992
} | [
{
"body": "食らう is either an informal way to say 食う \"eat\", or a different verb that means\n\"take (trouble or damage)\". For example, パンチを食らう \"take a punch\".\n\n食らえ \"take!\" is thus the imperative form of 食らう. So the iconic phrase by the\nOverwatch character Genji, 竜神の剣を食らえ means \"take the sword of the god of the\ndragon!\" (please excuse my terrible literal translation).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T09:23:39.040",
"id": "52449",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T09:23:39.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3110",
"parent_id": "52448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "[1] 食らう is not 動詞の命令形.\n\n食べる is also too.\n\n「食らう」 が 「食べる」 より意味が多いです。\n\n[2] 食らう【くらう】meaning\n\n(1) 食べる【たべる】、飲む【のむ】\n\n(2)迷惑などを身に受ける\n\n「攻撃を食らう」\n\n→means smilar「攻撃を受ける」\n\np.s:changed example sentence.\n\nReference <https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/63348/meaning/m0u/>",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T09:34:06.027",
"id": "52450",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T17:22:53.503",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T17:22:53.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "25450",
"owner_user_id": "25450",
"parent_id": "52448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Yes, [in this video](https://youtu.be/pYC44YPb_5k?t=322), the game character\nsays in the last part of this trailer as:\n\n> 龍{りゅう}が我｛わ｝が敵｛てき｝を喰｛く｝らう！\n\n[Here](https://hinative.com/ja/questions/85315) is an exact answer I think as:\n\n> yes, it means the dragon will eat my enemy. i'm not sure, but it seems game\n> character's line. you can hear the line in the last part of this\n> trailer(5:22).\n\nIn this scene it is natural that this character instructs the dragon to eat\nenemies, but in the actual lines it is said that \"the dragon eats enemies\" in\na dictionary form rather than in an imperative form.\n\nI'm going to answer in detail the question of the questioner (= OP) from now.\n\nAt first I'll explain _kanji_ s in 我が **龍** が敵を **喰** らう. \nIf you write it in _[Jōyō\nkanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Dy%C5%8D_kanji)_ , it should be\nwritten as 我が竜が敵を食らう. As for [龍 and\n竜](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/51991/should-i-\nuse-%E7%AB%9C-or-%E9%BE%8D), here are several answers. \nAs for 喰 and 食, 喰 in 喰らう is a formal _kanji_ , but since 喰 has become out of a\n_Jōyō kanji_ , it is substituted by 食 which is _Jōyō kanji_. Since 喰 has\nvulgar, rude or crude nuances appropriate to express struggle scenes in\nanimated films, authors would prefer using 喰らう to 食らう.\n\nAs others have answered, \"喰らう\" has two quite different meanings. They are \"\n_to eat vulgarly_ \" and \" _to receive or get a punch, an attack, etc_ \".\n\nIn the last part of the trailer, the character instructed his dragons to eat\nhis enemies with an order of \"我が龍が敵を喰らう\". Why didn't he use an imperative\nform?.\n\nI said above that 喰らう has another meaning beside \" _to eat vulgarly_ \".\nAnother meaning is often used to express a boxer getting a punch in his face.\nIn such a case, the boxer's second would say \"Guard the face. Don't get\npunches! パンチを喰らうな！\" instead of saying \"Get punches! パンチを喰らえ！\" to the boxer. \nIf the character in the film turns towards his dragons and instructs them as\n\"敵を喰らえ！\" in an imperative form of \"敵を喰らう\", the nuance of \"敵の攻撃を喰らえ！ _Get\nenemies' attack!_ \" from the analogy of boxing could be implied to viewers. \nFor fear of this analogy, I think, the author of the film avoided using the\nimperative form with \"敵を喰らえ\".\n\nTherefore it is natural that OP got confused.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/R4J1z.jpg)\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9IuT9.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T14:59:35.853",
"id": "52459",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T07:22:44.083",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T07:22:44.083",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52448 | 52449 | 52449 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Not sure whether it's や or ないや that's the changed part anyone have more info\non using this?",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T11:53:38.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52451",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T15:49:05.917",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25465",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why use ないや instead of ない?",
"view_count": 218
} | [
{
"body": "If it's Osaka dialect instead of New Tokyo dialect just spoken in Osaka, you\nprobably misheard ないんや{LHL} or なんや{LHL}？ (I'm not familiar with pitch pattern\nof Kansai dialects, so I might have mixed some of them), which corresponds\nwith ないんだ{HL} and 何だ？ respectively.\n\nThe combination of ない and dialectal copula や is ungrammatical.\n\nIf it's really ないや{HL}, i.e ない with sentence ending particle や, it can't be an\nOsaka dialect, which would be ないわ then.\n\nSentence ender や stands for casual feel in giving up something. e.g やっぱ…いいや\n(No, thanks, after all...)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T15:30:12.550",
"id": "52461",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T15:49:05.917",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T15:49:05.917",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "52451",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52451 | null | 52461 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I found this in textbook.\n\n> チェックインタイムが18.00からだから安いお得なプラン！\n\nI think I can translate it to this:\n\n> \"Get special deal if you check in after 18.00\"\n\nbut I don't get it, why would textbook use \"だから” after から",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T12:06:05.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52452",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-28T15:22:15.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10010",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "what does this mean? から+だから？",
"view_count": 538
} | [
{
"body": "You should think like this \"Because you check in after 18.00, you get a good\nbargain plan\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T13:12:41.910",
"id": "52454",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T13:12:41.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "52452",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The first から is after a noun and represents the **beginning of a point in\ntime**.\n\nThe second から is after a sentence and creates a subordinate clause indicating\n**reason (since/because/so).**\n\nYou're checking in (your check-in time is) after 18.00 so you get the good\nvalue plan.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T13:20:55.453",
"id": "52456",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T14:05:07.867",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T14:05:07.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "3296",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"parent_id": "52452",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "質問に付されている原文は親しみ易くかつ簡潔であることから（すなわち、広告用のフレーズであると推測される）、固い言い方（店が客に口頭で伝える丁寧な言い方）に直した一例は「チェックインタイムは18：00からとなっております。そのため、お得なプランとさせていただいております。」となります。原文の「だから」は言い直し文の「そのため」に相当します。滞在時間が長ければその分お金を払わされるのではという感覚が我々にはあるから、13：00チェックインなどと比べると滞在時間が短いわけですから、安くあるべきことを客側は期待していることに対して、広告フレーズでアピールしている一文に思えます。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T15:03:30.813",
"id": "52498",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T15:03:30.813",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25471",
"parent_id": "52452",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I'd parse it this way:\n\n> ［チェックインタイムが18.00からだから（価格が）安い、］［お得な］プラン！ \n> \"(This is) a [bargain] plan, [where the price is low because the check-in\n> time is after 18:00].\"\n\n... with both the relative clause 「チェックインタイムが18.00からだから（価格が）安い」 and the na-\nadjective 「お得な」 modifying the noun プラン. The subject of 安い is not a プラン.\n\nA プラン is not low-priced/安い. The 価格/値段 is 安い in that プラン.\n\nRather than:\n\n> ［チェックインタイムが18.00からだから、］安いお得なプラン！ \n> \"[The check-in time is after 18:00], so (this is) a low-priced bargain\n> plan.\"\n\nThe から in 「18:00 **から** 」 is a case particle (格助詞) and means \"after (a point\nin time)\". The から in 「～だ **から** 」 is a conjunctive particle (接続助詞), indicates\nreason, and translates to \"because~~\" or \"~~so\", as @G-Cam has said.\n\nThe copula, or the assertive auxiliary (断定の助動詞) 「だ」 is here because the second\nから is a conjunctive particle and needs to follow the terminal form of a\nconjugatable word (活用語の終止形).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-01-08T05:13:48.103",
"id": "55756",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-28T15:22:15.630",
"last_edit_date": "2018-01-28T15:22:15.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52452",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52452 | null | 52456 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52457",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I do not get how としてしまう is used in the following sentence. If the meaning\nofとして = as, for; not even and しまう = to finish doing (something), what do they\nmean together? (assuming I have split the phrase correctly).\n\n> 男性がイラッ!! としてしまう!? [女性の言いがちワード]",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T12:57:51.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52453",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T13:33:10.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10476",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"pragmatics"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of としてしまう in the following sentence",
"view_count": 367
} | [
{
"body": "This is not the として meaning as/for, but a simple conjugation of the する verb\nイラッとする, meaning \"to feel annoyed\". In addition, the しまう here isn't being used\nin the sense of \"finish doing\", but rather the more common sense where it\nindicates the preceding verb is an unfortunate occurrence.\n\nSo 男性がイラッ!!としてしまう!? as a whole means \"Guys will feel annoyed?!\"\n\nIncidentally, this sentence is loosely linked to the following phrase in the\nstyle of a relative clause, so the whole thing could be translated as if it\nwas one sentence:\n\n男性がイラッとしてしまう女性のいいがちワード\n\nThis would mean \"Words girls tend to say that make guys feel annoyed\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T13:33:10.747",
"id": "52457",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T13:33:10.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "52453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52453 | 52457 | 52457 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52463",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 新しい発明をした場合、特許を取っておかないと、すぐにその アイデア を使われてしまう。\n\nThe problem stems from the fact that I can't handle some elements in this\nsentence and therefore also have issues determining the exact meaning of the\nconditional phrase. First, my attempt at translation:\n\n> \"When you've made a new invention, if you don't patent it, this idea will be\n> used immediately.\"\n\nFirst, in the conditional clause, おかない is an issue for me. I've learnt that\nて-form + おきます expresses:\n\n> 1. A necessary action is performed until a certain point in time \n> 旅行の前に、切符を買っておきます。\n> 2. A necessary action is performed so you can use X the next time. \n> 鋏を使ったら、もとのところに戻しておいてください。\n> 3. You let something remain in its current state: \n> 明日会議がありますから、いすはこのままにしておいてください。\n>\n\nI think that in this case, it should be in the function of 1). \nHowever, I always feel a bit unsure about this, so I wanted to confirmation\n\nSecond, しまう. \nて-form しまいました was introduced as indicating regret.\n\n> 試験は失敗してしまいました。\n\nHowever, if I remember correctly it can also express that something was\nfinished. \nStill, I just don't really know what it adds to this sentence, especially\nsince it isn't in past tense, which makes it harder for me to coax the\n\"finished\" meaning into it.\n\nThird, the overall mood of the sentence. \nThe sentence as it stands strongly suggests an unreal meaning in my opinion. \nIn English, this would be expressed the conjunctive mood. However, I learned\nsome constructions for unreal expressions, but these aren't here.\n\n> \"If you make a new invention, if you don't patent it, the idea would/could\n> immediately be used.\"\n\nI guess it's mostly because I don't feel very sure about my interpretation of\nthe elements I mentioned before, that I feel like something is lacking.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T15:10:25.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52460",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-12T00:06:54.600",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-12T00:06:54.600",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "新しい発明をした場合、特許を取っておかないと、すぐにその アイデア を使われてしまう",
"view_count": 428
} | [
{
"body": "I'm an amateur myself, but I think you are more or less right. Don't beat\nyourself up too hard :)\n\n[ておく](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%BD%AE%E3%81%8F%E3%83%BB%E6%8E%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%83%BB%E6%93%B1%E3%81%8F-219310#E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.9E.97.20.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.89.E7.89.88)\n(6㋓) あとに起こる事柄を予想して、前もって…する意を表す。 (Predicting something happening in the future,\nand doing something in advance to prepare for that)\n\nWhen it comes to 使われてしまう it simply means it will regretably be used as you\nsaid, so my interpretation is \"If you make an invention and don't patent it\nimmediately, other people will unfortunately use it (the idea).\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T16:08:44.867",
"id": "52462",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T16:08:44.867",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25454",
"parent_id": "52460",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "You've basically got it right. The sentence presents a counterfactual, and\nthere are a couple of words/constructions that are there simply to denote a\nregretful situation.\n\n特許を取っておかない is simply the negative of 特許を取っておく、which means \"get a patent.\" The\nておく construction is there to imply \"get a patent in advance to prevent misuse\nof your invention.\" おかない just means to fail to do that. The following と is the\nconditional と, meaning the following clause represents an inevitable result.\n\nFinally, 使われてしまう。This is a combination of the \"suffering passive\" (使われる),\nimplying \"will be used, to my disappointment/disadvantage,\" and しまう just\nintensifies that. So overall, in colloquial English:\n\n\"If you don't patent your invention, someone's going to steal your idea right\naway and you'll be screwed.\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T16:10:16.153",
"id": "52463",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T16:10:16.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "52460",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 52460 | 52463 | 52463 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52477",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So these lyrics are from a song and the official translation I found was\n\"Today's homework is about my basic self\". I have a couple of problems with\nthis namely that 無個性 is made up of 無 meaning nothing, and 個性 meaning\nindividuality. So what I get from that is 無個性 should be translated as \"Lack of\npersonality\". こと means \"mater of\" saying this is a matter of 僕の (my)\npersonality or as I remake it \"Matter of the lack of being myself\". Using\nthis, if I am correct shouldn't the translation be along the lines of \"Today's\nhomework is about the lack of being myself/ my individuality\"? So to sum up is\n1.) My translation correct and 2.) Did I make any mistakes in the above\ncomments? 3.) What exactly does 「な」 mean as it is used in 本日の宿題は 無個性な僕のこと」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T18:23:37.450",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52467",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T03:31:59.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22617",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "Proper translation for 本日の宿題は無個性な僕のこと",
"view_count": 180
} | [
{
"body": "I think your interpretation of 無個性 is generally correct, as that is an\nadjective that means something along the lines of \"someone who has a lack of\nindividuality/personality\" (see\n[this](http://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%E7%84%A1%E5%80%8B%E6%80%A7%E3%81%AA)).\nThe な is because this word is being treated as a \"na-adjective\", just like\nwords such as 素敵 and 立派 can be.\n\nHowever I think your translation, while close, is a little bit off. I believe\nthe grammar implies something more like this:\n\n> Today's homework is about me, who has a complete lack of individuality\"\n\nBy the way, doing a google search with a portion of this translation, I found\nsomeone saying \"me, who has no personality\"\n[this](https://www.wattpad.com/story/71075717-personality) which is another\ngood translation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T22:03:12.293",
"id": "52471",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T22:03:12.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "52467",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> 1.) Is my translation correct?\n\nExactly!\n\n> 2.) Did I make any mistakes in the above comments?\n\nNo.\n\n> 3.) What exactly does 「な」 mean as it is used in 本日の宿題は 無個性な僕のこと」?\n\n無個性 is a noun. 無個性な is a na-adjective.\n\n豊富 (abundance) is a noun. 豊富な (abundant) is a na-adjective.\n\n有名 (fame) is a noun. 有名な (famous) is a na-adjective.\n\nTherefore, \"na\" is the na-adjective making particle.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T03:31:59.937",
"id": "52477",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T03:31:59.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52467",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52467 | 52477 | 52471 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52473",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "The following exchange occurs in Volume 3, Chapter 51 of the manga ReLife.\n\nThe sequence of events is: A girl told a guy that she saw him a year or two\nago and it was love at first sight. She describes seeing him being nice to a\ncustomer during his work. Then she asks him if he has a girlfriend. He says no\nand she continues below:\n\n> あたしが新太{あらた}君の彼女になりたいです・・・って言ったら \n> アリ・・・ナシ？\n>\n> 今すぐの話じゃなくてもいいの \n> 可能性の話でもいいの\n\nI'm having difficulty with the second part. My current understanding is\nsomething like:\n\n> **Literally:** \n> It's fine if you don't have a response right now. \n> It's fine if the response is that there is a possibility.\n>\n> **Figuratively:** \n> You don't have to answer right now. Just letting me know there's a\n> possibility is good enough.\n\nI'm interested in the use of 話 above. I've seen 話 used like this quite often\nand have never fully understood it. **Is 話 a synonym for 答え in this case or\ndoes it mean something else** (perhaps it implies that two people are talking\nrather than just one person answering...)? Also, I'm surprised to see 話\nmodified directly by 可能性の. I would have expected something like 可能性のことの話 (I'm\nnot sure why). **Is that incorrect or unnatural?**\n\n**I'm also confused about 今すぐの.** As far as I understand, 今すぐ is a 副動詞\n(adverb) and describes when a 動詞 (verb) occurred. Here, it seems to be being\ntreated as a 名詞 (noun) and is modifying 話. **Am I missing something here?**\n\nAlso, as if to simply further my confusion, the fan translation is essentially\nopposite what I expected:\n\n> **Fan Translation** \n> I'd like to hear your answer as soon as possible. \n> I'd like you to decide now.\n\nIs that a valid translation? Thank you for reading through all these\nquestions.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T20:27:14.837",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52469",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T11:32:39.410",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T00:25:49.577",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-の",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Questions about 話 and ＜副動詞＞の",
"view_count": 247
} | [
{
"body": "The first two lines seem rather blunt to me. I might be misconstruing that\npart. It would make more sense to me if this were her own private inner\nthoughts. But, I'm inclined to agree more with your take on the matter than\nthe fan translation (your approach seems more faithful to the Japanese).\n\nNevertheless, I would construe 話 as \"something to talk about\". So, the final\ntwo lines I would translate as\n\n> [This] isn't something [that needs] to be talked about right now. \n> Even if it were just a conversation about the possibility, would be fine.\n\nNotice that I've put [square brackets] around the parts where I've embellished\nthe translation a bit. Though probably a more faithful translation of the\nfirst line would be:\n\n> It's fine if we don't talk about it right now.\n\nWhat I'd like to point out that, even in English, it's still clear that she\nwants an answer. We don't have to force the translation of 話 into \"response\"\nor \"answer\" to understand what's at the core of what she's saying.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T21:08:40.657",
"id": "52470",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-18T21:14:02.793",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-18T21:14:02.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "4875",
"owner_user_id": "4875",
"parent_id": "52469",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "According to the website [国語文法 (under the heading\n連体修飾語になる)](https://www.kokugobunpou.com/%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8%E3%81%AE%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E8%87%AA%E7%AB%8B%E8%AA%9E/%E5%89%AF%E8%A9%9E-1-%E6%80%A7%E8%B3%AA%E3%81%A8%E5%83%8D%E3%81%8D/),\n【副詞】 (adverbs) can modify 【体言】 (non-inflected words, i.e nouns) in some cases.\nThis is called 【連体修飾語】(modifier of an uninflected word), and can happen when\nthe adverbs are in isolation or before 【の】.\n\nAdverbs don't only modify verbs in English either. However, they modify noun\nphrases (i.e \"I saw **only** _the mailman_ \") and similar grammatical\nstructures in these cases, and not nouns by themselves (\"I saw **only**\n_mailman_ \", which is not correct).\n\nTo follow this, I think it's important to remember that there isn't always a\none-to-one conversion between languages and therefore we assume our adverb is\nthe same as 【副詞】, which isn't really the case. This is **one** example of\nthat, but another one is the [concept of\nの-adjectives](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/2771/25454) (縦じまのシャツ ➡\n\"vertical-striped shirt\"), where some nouns are erratically listed as\n\"の-adjectives\" under some dictionaries and not others, when there really is no\nsuch thing. It's just one of the _functions_ of の and works with any nouns as\nlong as it, _in essence_ , makes sense for the noun to describe the other noun\nin some way.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-18T22:18:49.160",
"id": "52472",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T11:32:39.410",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T11:32:39.410",
"last_editor_user_id": "25454",
"owner_user_id": "25454",
"parent_id": "52469",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "First, that fan translation is (mostly) wrong.\n\n話 is not a synonym for _response/reply_ , but it refers to the whole\ndiscussion that is taking place. ～の話じゃない means \"We are not talking about ～;\nThis is not a matter of ～\", and ～の話じゃなくていい means \"We don't have to talk about\n～; This conversation doesn't necessarily have to be about ～.\"\n\n今すぐ is a standalone adverb, but it also works as a plain no-adjective (in\nother words, [a plain noun](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2770/5010)).\nMany words work similarly. For example, 突然言う = to say suddenly, 突然の発言 = sudden\nstatement, 絶対違う = absolutely wrong, 絶対に違う = absolutely wrong, 絶対の自信 = absolute\nconfidence.\n\nSo 今すぐの話じゃなくていい means \"We don't have to talk about doing something\nimmediately,\" \"I'm not asking you to do something immediately,\" \"You don't\nhave to decide right now,\" \"It's not urgent,\" or something similar.\n\"彼女になりたいですって言ったらアリ?\" sounds like an obvious 告白 (See: [_Kokuhaku_ : Japan's\n\"Love Confessing\" Culture](https://www.tofugu.com/japan/kokuhaku-love-\nconfessing-japan/)), and this normally means she is asking for him to be in an\nexclusive relationship immediately. This is clearly too much in this situation\nwhere the guy even does not know who she is. By 今すぐの話じゃなくていい, she's saying she\ndoesn't want such an important decision right now. She does want to talk with\nhim right now, does want some answer, but his answer could be whether there is\nany chance in the future. Your figurative translation seems perfect to me,\nafter all.\n\n可能性の話, literally \"matter of possibilities\", makes perfect sense, and 可能性のことの話\nsounds fairly awkward to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T00:16:42.517",
"id": "52473",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T00:16:42.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52469",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52469 | 52473 | 52472 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52478",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I found a sign on a door that says\n\n> 非常時{ひじょうじ} 以外{いがい} 開放{かいほう} 厳禁{げんきん}\n\nThe door leads to the staircase outside of the building. \nHere's what doesn't quite make sense to me: unless the case of emergency, am I\nprohibited from:\n\n 1. opening the door (Opening it will get you in trouble) or\n 2. leaving the door open? (Going through it is acceptable?)\n\nI'm kind of scared to go through that door, to be honest.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T02:14:47.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52474",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T14:31:47.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "「開放禁止」 Can I open the door?",
"view_count": 777
} | [
{
"body": "EDIT: **I stand corrected.** See other answers for details.\n\n* * *\n\nTL;DR - It means **the latter.** However, it looks like some Japanese confuse\nthe meaning.\n\n* * *\n\nI personally was confused with this phrase. This is because \"開放\" was\naccompanied with \"厳禁\" (strictly prohibited.) This raised a feeling that\nopening it would get me in trouble.\n\nOne of the results in my googling shows me that \"開放厳禁\" [indeed means\nboth.](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E9%96%8B%E6%94%BE%E5%8E%B3%E7%A6%81)\nHowever, from the point of the meaning of each word, it _should not_ mean the\nformer.\n\nI looked for \"開放\" in dictionaries and found that \"開放\" means \"to **leave**\nsomething open\" (It does not mean \"to open something.\" The entry is found in\n[デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/36962/meaning/m0u/).) Hence the\nmeaning is the latter - \"Strictly don't leave it open unless in the case of\nemergency.\"\n\nI did a further search on other Q&A sites and found that if the person who put\nthe sign _really_ didn't want someone to open that door, it should've said\n\"締切,\" which means \"Keep it (like windows or doors) shut,\" or \"立ち入り禁止.\"\n\nP.S. I went through the door after that because it didn't have any security\nmeasure (something like in naruto's answer.) I asked this because I saw that\ndoor sometimes used by somebody who doesn't seem to be a worker there.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T02:14:47.123",
"id": "52475",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T04:44:16.633",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T04:44:16.633",
"last_editor_user_id": "13662",
"owner_user_id": "13662",
"parent_id": "52474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It's a set phrase, meaning: EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY.\n\n\"Do not open (this door) except in emergencies.\"\n\nIn my opinion, there is no doubt about the meaning among the native Japanese\npeople because it's a set phrase of \"signs.\" You can think of the\ninterpretation of the Japanese phrase linguistically, but it's non sense in\npractical life in Japan. You should learn the meaning of traffic signs and\nthis kind of signs just mechanically.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jupSL.jpg)\n\nIt is another thing that Japanese people obey/follow these signs. For example:\n\n> 非常時以外駐車厳禁\n\nYou may see there are cars parking in the area, although it is not in an\nemergency.\n\n> Only for the handicapped\n\nYou may see non handicapped people may park in the place with the sign.\n\n> 駐停車禁止\n\nYou may see cars stopping and parking in that area.\n\nIt's more like common courtesy and common sense to follow signs, in my humble\nopinion.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T02:47:31.533",
"id": "52476",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T03:18:28.530",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T03:18:28.530",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This is technically ambiguous because 開放 means both 開け放つ and 開けっ放しにする, but I\npersonally feel this 開放 just means \"to open\" rather than \"to leave open.\" Thus\nthe sign should mean \"emergency exit only.\"\n\n * [ドア開放事故](https://www.itarda.or.jp/itardainfomation/info114.pdf) or ドア開き事故 is a term that refers to an accident caused by _sudden_ opening of a door of a car.\n * This [ドア開放マニュアル](http://www.tokyo-horei.co.jp/shop/goods/index.php?12766) describes how to forcibly break locked doors in an emergency.\n * Some examples on BCCWJ clearly shows this verb can mean just \"to open.\" \n\n> * コンダクターがキャビンの扉を開放した。\n> * 操縦区画につづく水密扉が開放されて、淡い光が射しこんできた。\n> * ときにはその扉は開放されたままで看守係は場内と仮眠室を行き来するのに関心を持った。\n\nBut the biggest reason is, \"非常時以外はすぐドアを閉めろ\" makes very little sense as a sign,\nfrom the security standpoint. I have seen many doors in Japan that are\nnormally locked but can be manually unlocked in case of emergency. The sign OP\nsaw is technically ambiguous, but I assume it refers to the same thing as\nthis.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4E48z.png)\n\nNote that 開放 usually means liberation or opening to public (garden, etc.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T04:01:51.863",
"id": "52478",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T14:31:47.523",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T14:31:47.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52474 | 52478 | 52478 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52483",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I’m trying to understand the following sentence: \nこの世界に生きて命を惜しいと思ったことなど一度もないが、訳も分からずやられるのはごめんだ\n\nI don’t have any context as this is the first sentence in the story.\n\nSplitting the sentence and parsing it:\n\n> この世界に生きて命を惜しいと思ったことなど一度もないが\n>\n> この世界に生きて命 – Living life in this world \n> 惜しいと思ったことなど – Felt disappointed with things like \n> 一度もない – Not once\n>\n> I’ve never once felt disappointed with life in this world\n>\n> 訳も分からずやられるのはごめんだ\n>\n> 訳 – Reason \n> 分からず – Without knowing \n> やられる – was done/given to \n> ごめんだ – ???\n>\n> The reason also(?) without knowing what was done is ???\n\nMy questions are: \n1. Does も mean “also” or something else in the second part of this sentence? \n2. Does の in のは turn 分からずやられる into a noun like explained [here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/12024/22593)? \n3. What does ごめんだ mean here? Online dictionaries give ごめん as sorry, your pardon, declining or dismissal but none of them seem to fit.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T07:23:36.973",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52479",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T09:59:13.117",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22593",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Question regarding も and ごめんだ",
"view_count": 393
} | [
{
"body": "Firstly, your parsing of the first sentence is a bit off.\n\n「生き/て」and「命」 does not connect. The first sentence includes 「命が惜しい」(or\n「命を惜しいと思う」) which means \"(one's) life is dear,\" or even better, \"one doesn't\nwant to die.\" So the correct parsing will be:\n\n> この世界に生きて/「命を惜しい」と思ったことなど/一度もないが\n\nand the translation\n\n> Living in this world, I have never wanted not to die, but...\n\n(very free translation):\n\n> Living in this world, I have always risked my life for anything, but...\n\n* * *\n\nNow about your question:\n\n> Does も mean “also” or something else in the second part of this sentence?\n\nIt doesn't quite mean \"also.\" I believe this も's closest meaning is \"even.\" So\n'訳も分からず' translates to\n\n> Not knowing even the situation\n>\n> Does の in のは turn 分からずやられる into a noun like explained here?\n\nYes, but it modifies all the previous words. (from \"訳も\" to \"やられる\")\n\n> What does ごめんだ mean here? Online dictionaries give ごめん as sorry, your\n> pardon, declining or dismissal but none of them seem to fit.\n\nSee the entry for ごめん(御免)\n[here.](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/82251/meaning/m0u/) The third meaning\nis the best fit. It says \"the word to express rejection in disgust.\"\n「----は御免{ごめん}だ」 simply means \"I never want {sth / to do sth} / I'll have none\nof sth / I've had enough of sth.\"\n\nAnd for the look of things, 'やられる' probably means 'being defeated.'\n\nSo the translation should be:\n\n> I never want to be defeated without knowing even the situation.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T07:55:07.713",
"id": "52480",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T07:55:07.713",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "13662",
"parent_id": "52479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "> この世界に生きて命を惜しいと思ったことなど一度もないが、訳も分からずやられるのはごめんだ\n\nこの世界に生きて＝この世界に生まれてから＝この世界に生きている間で＝for my life in this world, since I was born\nin this world\n\nやられる＝the colloquial expression for 殺される＝being killed\n\nごめんだ＝御免だ＝御免である＝嫌だ、嫌である（嫌で拒否する気持ちを表す語）\n\n**_I have never been afraid of death for all my life in this world, but I do\nnot want to be killed without even knowing the reason._**\n\n> My questions are: 1. Does も mean “also” or something else in the second part\n> of this sentence? 2. Does の in のは turn 分からずやられる into a noun like explained\n> here? 3. What does ごめんだ mean here? Online dictionaries give ごめん as sorry,\n> your pardon, declining or dismissal but none of them seem to fit.\n\nAnswer to your questions:\n\n 1. 訳もわからず is a set phrase, meaning \"even without knowing why.\" You had better think the も is different from \"also\" in this context, and it is not related to the second part. You may just remember \"訳も分からず\" as a set phrase. You can think the も as \"even\" in this context.\n\n 2. Exactly. 訳も分からずやられる **の** ＝訳も分からずやられる **事** ＝ **to** be killed without knowing why.\n\n 3. The ごめん is different from \"sorry\" in this context. ごめんだ means \"I want to avoid ~~ing.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T09:36:39.407",
"id": "52483",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T09:59:13.117",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T09:59:13.117",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52479 | 52483 | 52480 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "\n\nHello just wanted to know what this means on the phone. Didn't want to walking\naround not knowing what the characters mean and have it be insensitive.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T08:57:55.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52481",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T09:54:43.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25470",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What does this say in the picture ( insert below)?",
"view_count": 95
} | [
{
"body": "初がつお= the first bonito, the firstly-taken bonito of the year\n\n初＝the first, for the first time\n\nかつお＝bonito (fish)\n\nSome people who like something new would like to get and eat \"初がつお,\" just like\nthey would like to get and drink \"Beaujolais nouveau.\"\n\n\"The first bonito\" would be a symbol of something happy, or new, or a good\nfortune.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T09:19:44.927",
"id": "52482",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T09:54:43.390",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T09:54:43.390",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52481",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52481 | null | 52482 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52487",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading the book _Spice and Wolf_ and I saw a sentence like this:\n\n> …尻尾を左右に振っていたのだった。\n\nI have never seen this kind of \"double past tense\" before. All the past tense\nsentences I have seen that uses the のだ grammar _always_ end in のだ, not のだった.\n振っている is already turned into past tense 振っていた, so why use だった instead of だ?\n\nIn other words, what is the difference between the above and the below?\n\n> …尻尾を左右に振っていたのだ。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T10:14:21.913",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52484",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T11:02:33.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"tense"
],
"title": "Isn't the った part unnecessary in …たのだった?",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "The two versions mean the same thing, and I don't realize any significant\ndifference between them. Maybe, the first one emphasizes that the time is the\npast. I mean, the first sentence emphasizes the past tense. However, as you\nmentioned, the second one is perfectly fine in this context.\n\nBy the way, I've encountered what you called the \"double past tense\" so many\ntimes in Japanese so far. I don't think it's ungrammatical or weird. You will\nsee it quite often, I believe.\n\nNow my concern is the style of the novel. If the novel is written in the\n\"narrative mode,\" I mean the total sentences are basically written in the\npresent tense, it would be natural to choose the present tense at the end of\nthis sentence as well. However, if the total sentences are basically written\nin the past tense, you may think it's more natural to choose the past tense in\nthe end of the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T10:36:36.380",
"id": "52487",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T11:02:33.520",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T11:02:33.520",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52484",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52484 | 52487 | 52487 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52490",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can someone explain me the difference in nuance of these words? Both of them\nmean \"weapon\", but while I was reading the manga where I got these words from,\nmost of the characters used 武器 and then there's just one character that used\n兵器. \nI also want to mention that the furigana for 兵器 was ぶき and not へいき. \nI found a similar question on a Japanese site but I couldn't understand very\nwell...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T11:34:08.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52488",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-07T04:12:42.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 武器 and 兵器",
"view_count": 683
} | [
{
"body": "武器 means generally \"weapons which are as little as you can hold like swords or\nguns.\n\n兵器 means generally \"weapons for war which are big like tanks or fighter\naircrafts\" and is used for generic name of weapons of war like 化学兵器(chemical\nweapon).\n\nWe call adding different furigana for a kanji 当て字. In this case, the author\nwillfully made this 当て字. We commonly don't read 兵器 ぶき. I am not sure about the\nauthor's intention but he might describe it as between 兵器 and 武器.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T13:07:39.547",
"id": "52490",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-07T04:12:42.550",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-07T04:12:42.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "52488",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52488 | 52490 | 52490 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52502",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know what へろへろ means \"spineless\" or \"limp\", but what is へろへろぷ?\n\nContext - これならソラリスの連中だって、 一擊で、へろへろぷ～、ですよ！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T12:50:26.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52489",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T15:13:40.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "What does へろへろぷ mean?",
"view_count": 152
} | [
{
"body": "Many characters in manga and anime have their own unique way of talking, such\nas adding words and sounds to the end of words and sentences. I think this is\none of those cases, both because of the sentence itself and because of the\nadded \"～\".\n\nEssentially it's just へろへろ (力のないさま, powerless), which roughly translates as\n\"With this, even the Solaris gang is going to be rendered useless in one\nattack\" in this case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T15:39:16.343",
"id": "52502",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T15:13:40.340",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T15:13:40.340",
"last_editor_user_id": "25454",
"owner_user_id": "25454",
"parent_id": "52489",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52489 | 52502 | 52502 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I recently came across this expression「〜わりに（は）」 An example:\n\n> りんごは、安い **わりには** 美味しい。([source](http://www.imabi.net/considering.htm)) \n> Apples are delicious, **considering how** cheap they are.\n\nWhat I don't understand is **why**?\n\nThe dictionary entry for わり brings up the following definitions (thanks\njisho.org):\n\n> 1. rate; ratio; proportion; percentage\n> 2. profit\n> 3. assignment\n> 4. 10%; unit of ten percent\n> 5. match; schedule of matches\n> 6. diluted with (of drinks); mixed with\n> 7. Wari (place)\n>\n\nIn the example above, わり modifies 安い, and I just can't understand how to\ntranslate it literally?\n\nOne interesting thing is that I found this definition in a J-J dictionary:\n\n> ５ （「…わりに」の形で）ある事から予想・推測される程度。…に応じた程度よりは。「値段の割りに品物がよい」「若い割りには礼儀正しい」\n\nWhich loosely translates to:\n\n> (In the form of わりに): More than expected/guessed.\n\nSo I'm wondering whether this is just an additional definition to わり (like an\nexception the applies in this specific form), or there is some historical\nreason, or perhaps a literal translation that makes sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T13:42:19.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52492",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-27T21:03:50.420",
"last_edit_date": "2022-02-25T20:12:52.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "2977",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"definitions"
],
"title": "Grammar justification for 「〜わりに（は）」",
"view_count": 241
} | [
{
"body": "I think the わり means the # **1: rate, proportion**. In my opinion, \"\n**rather** \" can work as well.\n\n> リンゴは安い割りには、美味しい：\n\n_Apples are delicious, considering that it **is rated as** \"inexpensive\" of\nthe three categories: \"inexpensive,\" \"reasonable,\" and \"expensive.\"_\n\n_Apples are delicious, considering that they are **rather** cheap._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T15:29:38.907",
"id": "52501",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T15:35:27.133",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T15:35:27.133",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52492",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "ご質問に付されている原文中の「わりには」の意味に対して、質問者様が提示されているものの中でマッチするのはJ-J dictionaryの５の意味です。\n\n> ５ （「…わりに」の形で）ある事から予想・推測される程度。…に応じた程度よりは。「値段の割りに品物がよい」「若い割りには礼儀正しい」\n\n最近スーパーでフルーツの値段を見ていないので大雑把に記載しますが、国産リンゴ１個は１００円前後で売られているとしたら、輸入マンゴー１個は３５０円、国産マンゴー１個はなんと２０００円ぐらいかと。（日本の国産マンゴー生産量は少ない。）ここで例として、仮に、マンゴーがかなり美味しいと思っているとしたときに、さらにマンゴーとリンゴの美味しさが似たようなものだと思うのならば、１００円ぐらいで手に入るその他のフルーツに一般的に期待される味よりおいしいものが買えるというわけです。（何もフルーツ同士で比較する必要はないですが、例としてフルーツ同士でここでは比較しました。）原文は、価格を基準にしてその他のものと比べた結果、（原文の話者は）リンゴは（相対的に）美味しいと伝えていると考えます。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T15:39:59.063",
"id": "52503",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-26T19:16:49.267",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-26T19:16:49.267",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "25471",
"parent_id": "52492",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52492 | null | 52501 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52500",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I thought intransitive meant there is no actor/the thing is happening like on\nits own. But playing is done by a person, right? Yet the dictionary says it is\nintransitive...\n\nI believe there are other examples of such verbs which would seem transitive\nto me but actually work as intransitive verbs. I'm confused. Do you have an\nexplanation for these?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T14:36:48.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52495",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T15:39:24.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20379",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Why is 遊ぶ intransitive?",
"view_count": 535
} | [
{
"body": "For a really good answer, please see\n[this](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/transitive-intransitive-verbs/) site.\nMy answer comes from it as well as the answer to\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/48246/is-%E5%A3%8A%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B-%E3%81%93%E3%82%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B-already-\nin-pasive-form-%E5%8F%97%E8%BA%AB%E5%BD%A2/48247#48247) question. Transitive\nand intransitive verbs can be hard so research is always the best course of\naction.\n\nTransitive verbs take someone to do then. They do not happen on their own.\nThere is a subject doing the action, and an object that receives it. Here are\nsome examples:\n\n> I broke my phone.\n>\n> I moved the car.\n\nIntransitive verbs do not have an object. There is, of course a subject, but\nthese verbs happen on their own since there is not an object. For example:\n\n> The car moved.\n>\n> My phone broke.\n\n* * *\n\nSo why is 遊ぶ intransitive? You do that on your own. To play, you don't\nnecessarily need an object. Sure, you can play with the ball, but play is\nstill intransitive here. If we were to use play as a transitive verb, it would\nbe:\n\n> I play the ball.\n\nThat is a transitive usage of play, and it doesn't make sense in English. In\nJapanese, there is no transitive counterpart for 遊ぶ because it wouldn't make\nsense even if it did exist.\n\nJust as a side note, playing an instrument (like the piano) is a different\nword in Japanese, ひく。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T15:24:32.207",
"id": "52500",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T15:39:24.580",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "52495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52495 | 52500 | 52500 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52499",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently started to learn japanese, and I'm having trouble to distinguish\nsome of it's phrase structures. I learned that だ is often used in informal\nsituations representing the です form and か is used to represent a question.\n\nWhat I really like to know is if the なんだこれ can be used as an answer for\nこれわなんだか. For example:\n\nこれわなんだか - What is this? \nI don`t know, なんだこれわ.\n\nI'm sorry if it sounds a noobie question, but I get a hard time figuring out\nhow it's structures, because there isn't always a pattern, for instance, I\nknow about SOV fundamentals, I just don't get the other possible combinations.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T14:38:04.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52496",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T15:16:28.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25472",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "これわなんだか and なんだこれ?",
"view_count": 1543
} | [
{
"body": "First, わ is written as は in your context because the は（wa) is the\nsubject/topic indicating particle.\n\nこれはなんだか cannot mean \"what is this?\"\n\n\"What is this?\" should be これはなんですか。or これはなんだろうか。\n\nこれはなにか。is also grammatically correct, meaning \"what is this?\" But it's too\nimpolite, offensive and demanding. So we usually don't use it in our daily\nlife.\n\nこれはなんだか means something completely different: \"Oops! This seems rather...\"\n\nなんだこれ＝なんだこれは＝これはなんだ＝\"What is this?\" In some contexts, it means, \"I don't know\nwhat this is.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T15:16:28.080",
"id": "52499",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T15:16:28.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52496",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52496 | 52499 | 52499 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52514",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It's a conversation from video game, people live in a flying saucer-like city\n(Shevat).\n\nContext - これは、プラントシェルだよ。このなかでシェバトで必要な 野菜やら果物やらを育ててるのさ。今は大切な降土期だから、\n関係者いがい立ち入り禁止さ。人間は、バイ菌のかたまりだからね。\n\n土 is soil, earth.\n\n降 is descend, fall.\n\nSo maybe 降土 means something like \"planting\"?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T17:14:42.690",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52505",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T01:18:13.290",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-19T18:02:17.650",
"last_editor_user_id": "25396",
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 降土 mean?",
"view_count": 115
} | [
{
"body": "降土 is not a word ordinary people use. It's a made-up word, but it can\ninstantly be understood as the 土 version of 降雨 (\"rainfall\") or 降雪\n(\"snowfall\"). Thus \"soilfall\" or something like that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T01:18:13.290",
"id": "52514",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T01:18:13.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52505",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52505 | 52514 | 52514 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52507",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I just randomly thought of something to write and this popped up. My\nthought process behind it is that 「天使」 means angel and angels are the ones\nperforming the liking so I put 「が好き」 to get \"Angels like\". Then Angels are\nalso the ones doing the looking so 「を見る」 or \"to look\". Then followed by 「人間は」\n\"Humans\". In all from my rough understanding of Japanese and particles I think\nthis should mean along the lines of \"The Angels like to look at [the] humans\".\nIs this correct or would it at least be understood? Also could you please\ncorrect any mistakes with the reasoning behind them. Thank you!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T17:31:01.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52506",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T17:44:11.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22617",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"sentence"
],
"title": "Does 「天使が好きを見るで人間は。」 mean \"Angels like to look at humans\"",
"view_count": 138
} | [
{
"body": "You're trying to map English grammar onto Japanese in a way that doesn't make\nsense. The は particle never comes at the end of a sentence, and 好き is not a\nverb. Here's what you're after:\n\n天使は人間を見るのが好きだ。\n\nDepending on the context, this could also mean that angels like to look after\nor keep an eye on humans. If you mean that they enjoy gazing upon the human\nform, you might consider 眺める or 見つめる rather than 見る.\n\nIf you're interested in a primer on Japanese grammar, check out\n[Imabi.net](http://imabi.net/) or [Tae Kim's\nguide](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T17:44:11.163",
"id": "52507",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T17:44:11.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "52506",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 52506 | 52507 | 52507 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52511",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Google translate gives: \"Please be careful not to get your hands caught in the\ndoor opening and closing and pulling your hand into the door closet.\" but I'm\nvery doubtful on the second part of the sentence. Wtf is a door closet in a\ntrain?\n\nThanks if anyone can answer this question!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T21:27:14.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52510",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T23:16:26.093",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25479",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "What does ドアの開け閉めの時に手を挟まれなり戸袋に手を引き込まれないようご注意下さい。mean?",
"view_count": 322
} | [
{
"body": "If we go by,\n\n> ドアの開け閉めの時に手を挟まれたり戸袋に手を引き込まれないようご注意下さい。\n\nIt means:\n\n> Please keep your hands away from the door so you do not get stuck when it is\n> opening and closing.\n\n\"Door closet\" could refer to 戸袋, which means when the door is open, you can\nget caught, like in the picture below:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/elRyB.gif)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T22:57:46.560",
"id": "52511",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T22:57:46.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16159",
"parent_id": "52510",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52510 | 52511 | 52511 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I am trying to describe what my pet looks like. Let's say her name is 'inu'. I\nknow how to say inu is big. You would say; inu wa ookii desu. You could say\nwhat she is by putting a different adjective where ookii is. But how would I\nsay; Inu has floppy ears. Because I basically need to know how to say my dog\nhas a characteristic rather than my dog is something. Thankyou",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T02:37:54.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52516",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T02:52:56.950",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T02:52:56.950",
"last_editor_user_id": "25480",
"owner_user_id": "25480",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"adjectives"
],
"title": "How to say a pet/human has a characteristic rather than 'it is something'- How to say something has (adjective)",
"view_count": 44
} | []
| 52516 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52518",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to say to my friend \"don't eat\". What's the difference between these\ntwo:\n\n```\n\n 1)\n \n tabenai de \n 食べないで\n \n```\n\nand\n\n```\n\n 2)\n \n taberu na\n 食べるな\n \n```",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T03:13:58.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52517",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T03:30:19.257",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T07:30:56.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "25265",
"owner_user_id": "25265",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"casual"
],
"title": "2 ways of saying \"don't do\" to my friend - difference?",
"view_count": 307
} | [
{
"body": "Taberuna (食べるな）is rather a masculine wording and tabenaide (食べないで）is rather a\nfeminine wording.\n\nThe two are both impolite and rude in formal settings. In informal settings,\nfor example, to your very close friends, you can use them.\n\nedit) 食べるな may sound still rude. I advise you to use 食べないで or 食べないでね to your\nfriends, even if you are a man.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T03:24:14.730",
"id": "52518",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T03:30:19.257",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T03:30:19.257",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52517",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52517 | 52518 | 52518 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52520",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "If I wanted to say something like \"He looks like his brother,\" I might say\n「彼はお兄さんみたいです。」or 「彼はお兄さんのようです。」\n\nBut what if I wanted to say that he looks \"a little\" like his brother? Would I\nsimply add a 少し to the above sentences? (E.g., 彼は少しお兄さんのようです。) Is that\ngrammatical, seeing as there is no verb or adjective for 少し to modify?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T06:58:17.393",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52519",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T01:53:45.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "How do you say \"a little like...\"",
"view_count": 481
} | [
{
"body": "If you mention \"His face looks like his brother\", you should say\n彼はお兄さんに似ている(or 彼はお兄さんにそっくりだ). If you want to add \"a little\", it would be\n彼は少し(ちょっと)お兄さんに似ている.\n\n彼はお兄さんみたいです and 彼はお兄さんのようです would be interpreted as \"He seems to be\n(someone's) elder brother\" or \"His existence(or character) is like a elder\nbrother\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T08:52:49.653",
"id": "52520",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T09:16:13.590",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T09:16:13.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "52519",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> (1) 彼はお兄さんのようです。\n\nIf you want to add a meaning of \"a little\" to the given sentence, it will\nbecome as:\n\n> (2) 彼は **少し** お兄さんのようです。\n\nSo, your attempt is perfect in the sense of adding a little to (1). \nBut, for the given sentece, we usually say 彼はお兄さんに似ている or 彼はお兄さんにそっくりだ for \"He\nlooks like his brother\" as is said in Yuuichi Tam's answer.\n\nAnd if you want to add a nuance of \"a little\" to them, you can say 彼はお兄さんに\n**少し** 似ている but you can't say 彼はお兄さんに **少し** そっくりだ.\n\n> Is that grammatical, seeing as there is no verb or adjective for 少し to\n> modify?\n\nYes, that is grammatically correct.\n\nこの時｛とき｝の「少し」は転成｛てんせい｝名詞｛めいし｝と呼｛よ｝ばれる「名詞｛めいし｝」ですから、修飾｛しゅうしょく｝するものがなくても問題｛もんだい｝なしです。 \n_No verb or adjective is needed to modify for 少し in this case, because it is\nconsidered to be a **noun** , more precisely a \" **転成｛てんせい｝名詞｛めいし｝**\n**transformed noun** \"_.\n\nBy the way, transferred noun is what I translated literally, not an\nestablished term.\n\n転成名詞とは、他｛た｝の品詞｛ひんし｝の単語｛たんご｝が変化｛へんか｝してできた名詞。 \n_A \"Transformed noun\" is a noun made by changing a word of other part of\nspeech_.\n\nAs for 少し, if \"少し\" is a noun it is literally interpreted like \"a small\ndegree\".\n\n「少し」は次｛つぎ｝の例｛れい｝のように修飾する対象｛たいしょう｝の有無｛うむ｝により、「副詞｛ふくし｝」と「名詞」の二通｛ふたとお｝りの品詞になります。 \n_\"少し\" becomes an \"adverb\" or a \"noun\" depending on whether there is an object\nto be qualified like in the following examples._\n([Source](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q13141321258))\n\n * 「この服｛ふく｝は少し大｛おお｝きい」⇒副詞 adverb\n * 「車｛くるま｝を少し動｛うご｝かす」⇒副詞 adverb\n * 「少しの間{あいだ}待｛ま｝っていてください」⇒名詞（転成名詞） noun\n * 「少しはできるようだな」⇒名詞（転成名詞） noun",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T12:37:37.737",
"id": "52527",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T01:53:45.640",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T01:53:45.640",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52519",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52519 | 52520 | 52520 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52718",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "大人のためのモダンな時間をあなたに……。バーテンも惡くないですな！\n\nMy version is - \"A modern pastime for mature persons, that is what I offer\nyou......\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T09:25:02.673",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52521",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-27T00:08:24.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does モダンな時間 mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 100
} | [
{
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hhTk1.jpg)\n\nI don't know how semantically モダン shifted from English \"Modern\".\n\nProbably they want to make stylish ambiance which is playing Jazz and have the\ncustomer enjoy the time.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-27T00:08:24.723",
"id": "52718",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-27T00:08:24.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52521",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52521 | 52718 | 52718 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52523",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was talking to someone about the etymology of the word \"emoji\" recently, and\nhow it comes from\n[絵文字](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%B5%B5%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97) in Japanese.\n\nI knew that [絵](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%B5%B5#Japanese) means\n\"picture\", and that\n[文字](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97#Japanese) means\n\"character\", but I was unable to explain why the\n[文](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%96%87#Japanese) kanji is necessary when\n[字](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%AD%97#Japanese) also means \"character\"\nby itself.\n\nAre 字 and 文字 interchangeable, or do they have different connotations/usage\npatterns?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T10:27:56.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52522",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T10:27:56.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9212",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"synonyms"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 字 and 文字?",
"view_count": 1209
} | [
{
"body": "It appears that this question has already been answered on\n[Quora](https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-\nbetween-%E5%AD%97-and-%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97), so - as per [this meta\nquestion](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/q/754/9212) - I'll provide\nan overview of what I've learned here:\n\n * 字 and 文字 are, on their own, generally interchangeable. \n * Compare \"phone\" and \"telephone\" in English.\n * However, this may not be the case with compounds. \n * For example, 漢字 is fine, but 漢文字 sounds strange.\n\n**Trivia:** According to\n[Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuowen_Jiezi), these kanji were (and\nmaybe still are?) used to make a distinction between characters with a single\nradical and those with multiple radicals in Chinese:\n\n> The title of the work draws a basic distinction between two types of\n> characters, wén 文 and zì 字, the former being those composed of a single\n> graphic element (such as shān 山 \"mountain\"), and the latter being those\n> containing more than one such element (such as hǎo 好 \"good\" with 女 \"woman\"\n> and 子 \"child\") which can be deconstructed into and analyzed in terms of\n> their component elements.\n\nHowever, I do not believe that this applies to modern Japanese (if it ever\napplied to Japanese at all).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T10:27:56.357",
"id": "52523",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T10:27:56.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9212",
"parent_id": "52522",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52522 | 52523 | 52523 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52531",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It's a pep talk of commander before the important operation.\n\nとにかく勝ち目のない無茶はなしだ！ 誰も犬死になんかさせたくない！\n\nI think 無茶はなし= 無茶はない, so the sentence would be\n\n\"Anyway, they don't stand a chance, that's for sure!\"\n\nBut maybe 無茶はなし= 無茶(な)話?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T11:15:30.207",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52524",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T14:27:34.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is 無茶はなし here?",
"view_count": 143
} | [
{
"body": "無茶 here is a noun that refers to unreasonable/reckless/extreme things. This\nはなし is the topic marker followed by [this\n無し](http://%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%97%E3%81%A0%20is). ～はなしだ means\n\"No ～!\" or \"Don't ～!\". 無茶はなしだ means \"No reckless actions!\" or \"Never do\nreckless things!\".\n\n勝ち目のない modifies 無茶 as a (gap-less) relative clause.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T14:27:34.847",
"id": "52531",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T14:27:34.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52524",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52524 | 52531 | 52531 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52529",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので絶対買います！ソフトはクリスタしかありませんが。\n\nI'd like to understand this better. The context is an artist announced that he\nis releasing a book about painting digital backgrounds and the above line is\none of the comments made by another user. From what I can understand, the\ncomment seems to mean:\n\n> I'm very interested about how backgrounds are painted so I'm definitely\n> buying (the book). I only have Clip Studio Paint（クリスタ）software though.\n\nI'm confused because from my understanding, `ありません` means \"does not\nhave/exist\" and I'm wondering if the commenter wanted to write\n`ソフトはクリスタしかありますが` instead. And if not, I'd like to understand why it is so.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T12:36:44.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52526",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T02:35:38.193",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T13:30:11.017",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25259",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-しか"
],
"title": "Is using「ありませんが」correct here?",
"view_count": 900
} | [
{
"body": "> 1. ソフトはクリスタしか **ありません** 。 \n> I'm confused because from my understanding, ありません means \"does not\n> have/exist\"\n>\n\n 2. I only have this software. (or I have only this software.)\n 3. I don't have any software but this one.\n\nI know that sentece 2 and 3 have a same meaning in English, and we call 1 an\naffirmative sentence and 2 a negative sentence.\n\nThe given sentece 1 is written in a negative sentence, so you got confused.\n\nIf you want to rewrite 1 into an affirmative sentence, it would become like:\n\n> 4.1 ソフトはクリスタ **だけ** があります。 \n> 4.2 ソフトはクリスタ **だけ** です。\n\n4.2 is more commonly used than 4.1 \nYou can use 1 and 4.2 safely, and I prefer 1 to 4.2 for the meaning of 2 or 3.\n\n# EDIT\n\n> To clarify, the line I posted was from another person who commented on the\n> artist's/seller's book announcement post. I edited my original post to\n> reflect this.\n\nOP edited the original post according to my answer, so I'll delete all the\nfollowing answer.\n\n~~> The context is an artist announced that he is releasing a book about\npainting digital backgrounds...~~\n\n~~If your explanation is correct, don't you think the following sentence is\nillogical, because the seller says \"I'll buy it\"?~~\n\n~~> 背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので絶対買います！~~\n\n~~If I read it logically, it may imply by supplementing the omitted part\nlike:~~ \n~~> 背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので **もしあなたが私なら** 絶対買います！ _I'm very interested\nabout how backgrounds are painted so, **if I were you** , I'm definitely\nbuying (the book)_. ~~",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T12:51:43.717",
"id": "52528",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T02:35:38.193",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Your translation is perfect. ～しか...ない is a very common pattern to express \"not\n... but ～\" or \"only ～\".\n\n * [Learn JLPT N4 Grammar: しか～ない (shika~nai)](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-japanese-grammar-39/)\n * [しか～ない - JLPT N4 grammar](http://www.tanos.co.uk/jlpt/skills/grammar/sentences/?grammarid=495)\n\nKeep in mind that しか is always used with negative expressions. ソフトはクリスタしかあります\nis ungrammatical. For more information, [see this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/16060/5010).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T13:23:56.820",
"id": "52529",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T13:23:56.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This is a kind of the reversed word/phrase/clause order, 倒置法.\n\n> 背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので絶対買います！ソフトはクリスタしかありませんが。\n\n＝背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので、 **ソフトはクリスタしかありませんが** 、絶対買います！\n\n＝背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので **絶対買います** ！ソフトはクリスタしかありませんが **絶対買います！** （This\nis another interpretation, the abbreviation of the same expression coming\nagain.)\n\n＝I will buy your software because I'm interested in your drawing technique!\nAlthough only the software, \"Crysta\" is available here.\n\n＝I will buy your software because I'm interested in your drawing technique,\nalthough only the software, \"Crysta\" is available here!\n\n～～しかない=nothing but ~~\n\nUsing the negative form is the rule for the ~~しかない expression. ～～しかある doesn't\nmake sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T13:43:57.563",
"id": "52530",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T13:51:25.490",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T13:51:25.490",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52526 | 52529 | 52529 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52595",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "フェイ、まだ、そうと判明した訳では。違う原因かもしれない。\n\nIs it short for 訳ではない?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T17:29:08.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52533",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T06:58:06.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 訳では mean in the end of sentence?",
"view_count": 189
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, this means そうと判明した訳ではない.\n\nYou may know the omission of ない can happen frequently with [negative polarity\nitems](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/16060/5010) such as ちっとも, 決して,\n少しも, and どこにも. Likewise, people know 訳では is almost always followed by a\nnegative predicate (i.e., ない), and thus the predicate can safely be omitted in\ncasual conversations. Note that this は is critically important to indicate\nsomething negative will follow. See: [Why is the topic marker often used in\nnegative statements (ではない,\n～とは思わない)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1077/5010)\n\nExamples:\n\n> * ハサミ? それでは…。 Scissors? I doubt it helps...\n> * 明日はちょっと…。 Tomorrow is, well, ... (inconvenient for me...)\n> * 「見たい？」「そ、そんなことは！」 \"Wanna see it?\" \"N-No, I...!\"\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T06:22:01.283",
"id": "52595",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T06:58:06.147",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T06:58:06.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52533",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52533 | 52595 | 52595 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52593",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 稲が病気になってい **ないかどうか** いつもチェックして... \n> Always check whether or not your rice plants are diseased and ...\n\nThis is the first time I've seen かどうか come after a negated predicate. Is this\nusual? How does the meaning/nuance change if I just say なっているかどうか?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T18:19:56.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52534",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T03:46:57.660",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "かどうか after a negated predicate",
"view_count": 154
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, this usage of ないか is very common.\n\n病気になっていないかどうか implies the speaker is expecting the ～ない pattern (病気になっていない is\nwhat the speaker is expecting). 病気になっているかどうか is neutral, but it can imply the\nspeaker is expecting the positive pattern (病気になっている), depending on the\ncontext.\n\n> * 宿題をやったか聞いた。: natural\n> * 宿題をやっていないか聞いた。: odd\n> * 宿題をやり忘れたか聞いた。: usually odd, okay when asking objectively\n> * 宿題をやり忘れていないか聞いた。: natural\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T03:40:34.687",
"id": "52593",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T03:46:57.660",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T03:46:57.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52534",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 52534 | 52593 | 52593 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In a non creepy way maybe?\n\n(additional question, how would I respond to that claim with 'it turned out to\nbe someone else')",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T18:32:24.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52535",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-25T22:08:48.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25485",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How do I say I saw you",
"view_count": 1711
} | [
{
"body": "I believe the feeling you're trying to convey would best be expressed with\n\"見かける\". \"見る\" is literally \"to see\". \"見かける\" is more like \"to happen to see\" or\n\"to catch sight of\". Of course saying \"あなたを見ました\" makes sense, but to a native\nspeaker it sounds so literal--sort of like saying \"I saw the signpost.\" I\nthink you should say \"X-さんを見かけました\". If this person is an acquaintance or\nfriend, you should use the more informal past tense form of \"見かける\" and say\n\"X-さんを見かけた\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-25T16:24:07.027",
"id": "52698",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-25T16:24:07.027",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25534",
"parent_id": "52535",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Adding to Ura's great answer:\n\nIf you want to say you thought you saw someone but it turned out to someone\nelse you could say something like\n\n> Xーさんを見かけたと思ったが間違いでした\n>\n> I thought I saw so-and-so but I was mistaken (lit. it was a mistake).\n\nThen you could say\n\n> 実はXーさんでした\n>\n> It was actually so-and-so",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-25T22:08:48.187",
"id": "52702",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-25T22:08:48.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22133",
"parent_id": "52535",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52535 | null | 52698 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52548",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "日本語の文法では五段動詞の方が一段動詞より多いです。文法が変化すると、一段動詞が五段動詞に変化する可能性がありますか？\n\n私は日本語を練習したいです。上手くなければすみません。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T19:03:04.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52536",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T04:29:35.367",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T01:42:38.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"linguistics",
"godan-verbs",
"ichidan-verbs",
"language-evolution"
],
"title": "一段動詞が五段動詞に進化できますか？",
"view_count": 193
} | [
{
"body": "A few evidences may show people are inclined to use godan verbs more often.\n\nら抜き言葉 refers to making a \"wrong\" potential form from ichidan verbs as if they\nwere godan verbs.\n\n * [What's is the difference between these two forms?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36120/5010)\n * [食べられる (taberareru) vs 食べれる (tabereru)？ The phenomenon of ら抜き (ra-nuki) in Japanese](http://selftaughtjapanese.com/2015/02/27/%E9%A3%9F%E3%81%B9%E3%82%89%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B-taberareru-vs-%E9%A3%9F%E3%81%B9%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B-tabereru%EF%BC%9F-the-phenomenon-of-%E3%82%89%E6%8A%9C%E3%81%8D-ra-nuki-in-japanese/)\n\nRecent verbs coined from loanwords or onomatopoeia are usually godan verbs.\n\n * [What are the principles behind turning foreign language words into verbs?(e.g. ググる and サボる)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24351/5010)\n * [How do Japanese people infer if a verb is a ichidan verb or a godan ending in ru?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43214/5010)\n\nIn addition, some people on the net like to jokingly use the wrong imperative\nform for ichidan verbs as if they were godan verbs. On sites like 2ch you may\nfind people saying よく見れ or やめれ instead of よく見ろ or やめろ. (Note that these are\nstill jokes like \"All your base are belong to us.\")\n\nThese may indicate ichidan verbs may become unpopular _far_ in the future.\nStill, I'm not aware of any ichidan verb that was turned into godan\ncompletely. Except for the ら抜き, the conjugation rule for ichidan verbs are\nwell preserved, and no one say 見らない or 食べります, for example.\n\n**EDIT:** According to [this\nentry](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E8%B9%B4%E3%82%8B), 蹴る was an ichidan\nverb in archaic Japanese, but somehow merged into the godan verb family in\nmodern Japanese. [Many people are still confused with the imperative form of\n蹴る](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1139286106).\nNevertheless, such a conversion seems to be very rare in the history.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T01:40:14.807",
"id": "52548",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T04:29:35.367",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T04:29:35.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52536",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52536 | 52548 | 52548 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52540",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "**Examples of what I'm asking-**\n\n'Teeth made of gold'\n\n'Ball made of rubber'\n\n'House made of wood'",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T19:40:23.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52537",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T21:14:11.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25485",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How would I say something's made of something?",
"view_count": 3025
} | [
{
"body": "金でできている歯。ゴムでできている玉。木でできている家\n\nBe careful of a couple of things, though. \"Ball made of rubber\" sounds\nunnaturally wordy in English, and similarly in Japanese you'd be more likely\nto say ゴムのボール. There's a word 木製(の) meaning \"wooden.\" And when the materials\nused to make something are less obvious than a gold tooth, you're more likely\nto use から instead of で. For example: 糊{のり}は牛乳からできることもあります。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T21:14:11.273",
"id": "52540",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T21:14:11.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "52537",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52537 | 52540 | 52540 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So recently I came across these two answers to two very interesting questions,\nand related: [one](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/12641/2977) and\n[two](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/19700/2977).\n\nBoth mention the following form:\n\n> (連用形{れんようけい} of something) + (optional 係助詞{かかりじょし}) + (ない or ある)\n\nI do understand the difference in nuance (between 悪くない vs 悪くはない, for example),\nbut I don't understand why it is acceptable grammatically.\n\nCorrect me if I'm wrong but は here emphasizes and contrasts 悪く, but what is\n悪く, really? It translates into 'badly', which is an adverb that is usually\nsupposed to modify a verb or connect to another adjective. With that logic in\nmind, the overall (literal) translation would be 'There is no badly', which is\njust weird.\n\nI feel like I'm missing something about conjugations they don't usually teach\nyou in textbook Japanese, which is why I'm after the historical reasoning\nbehind it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T20:10:30.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52538",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T04:26:07.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "2977",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"renyōkei",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "Grammar justification for 連用形 ＋ 係助詞「は」＋（ない・ある）",
"view_count": 222
} | [
{
"body": "As the other answers say, 悪く is a **連用形** (\"continuative form\") of 悪い. This\nform can work as an adverb on its own, but here it's merely a form that\nprecedes ない. As a rule, whenever you want to use ない with an i-adjective, you\nmust use this 連用形 form. 悪くない just means \"not bad\".\n\nFor convenience, in some beginner materials, 悪くない is often described simply as\n\"negative-form / nai-form of i-adjectives,\" and 悪く as \"adverb form\", as if\nthey were totally different. You may be already familiar with these terms.\nHowever, 悪くない is actually two words (i.e., the 連用形 of an adjective followed by\nan auxiliary ない). That's why the contrast marker は can be inserted between 悪く\nand ない. As you learn Japanese grammar (especially using monolingual\nresources), you'll see the term 連用形 more and more often.\n\nUnfortunately, one verb/adjective can have up to two 連用形. The 連用形 of 悪い are\n`悪かっ` and `悪く` (see [this\nchart](https://www.kokugobunpou.com/%E7%94%A8%E8%A8%80/%E5%BD%A2%E5%AE%B9%E8%A9%9E-2-%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8/)),\nand the 連用形 of 書く are `書き` and `書い`. This is not a big problem for native\nJapanese speakers, but can be a huge problem for learners. I think this is one\nof the reasons the word 連用形 is not popular for beginners. See also: [Does \"te-\nform\" of a verb always include て/で?\nWhy?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36310/5010).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T04:26:07.877",
"id": "52555",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T04:26:07.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52538",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52538 | null | 52555 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know all the separate meanings/translations of the sentence but I can't\nthink of a translation which makes sense.\n\n> 「贅沢{ぜいたく}を言{い}わなければ。」\n\nI thought of: \"Must tell luxury\"?\n\nThe whole sentence is:\n\n>\n> 「一流{いちりゅう}の売{う}れっ子作家{こさっか}には程遠{ほどとお}いけれども、贅沢を言わなければどうにか食{く}っていけるだけの仕事{しごと}はある。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T20:19:28.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52539",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T13:30:02.257",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-22T13:30:02.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "9112",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Meaning of 贅沢を言う",
"view_count": 333
} | [
{
"body": "贅沢 means \"extravagance\". \n贅沢を言う means \"to ask/expect too much\".\n\n～なければ can be short for ～なければならない, \"must do\" \"have to do\", but here in your\nexample it's used in its literal sense: \"If not\".\n\nPut together:\n\n> 贅沢を言わなければ \n> \"If (I) don't ask/expect too much\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T01:41:40.713",
"id": "52549",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T01:41:40.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "52539",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 52539 | null | 52549 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52542",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How can I interpret できた in this paragraph:\n\n>\n> 昨日、リング上でも言いましたが、最高の空間を作って下さった会場のお客様に、感謝しますよ。まあ、最終戦の13日・両国大会に限らず、全大会、素晴らしい雰囲気の中、素晴らしい空間の中で試合が\n> **できた** と思いますし、過去最高の『G1 CLIMAX』だったんじゃないかなとボクは思ってます。 \n> Naito ‘I said as much in the ring last night, but I’m honestly grateful for\n> all the fans for the atmosphere they all created in Ryogoku. But that’s not\n> limited to the last match yesterday. This G1 I was able to put on amazing\n> matches in front of amazing audiences every night. I think this was the best\n> G1 Climax of all time.\n\nI don't know if the subject is the public (会場のお客様) that produced the ambience\nfor the matches, or the event itself (全大会) that produced the matches. Or\nshould I interpret できた as \"ended\" like in:\n\n> The matches ended with a wonderful atmosphere for the whole event",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T21:27:06.070",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52541",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T23:45:59.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17515",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"interpretation"
],
"title": "How to interpret できた",
"view_count": 266
} | [
{
"body": "> 全大会、素晴らしい雰囲気の中、素晴らしい空間の中で試合ができたと思います\n\n=全大会 **において、我々は（or私は）** (素晴らしい雰囲気の中、素晴らしい空間の中で）試合 **をすることが** できたと思います\n\n我々は試合ができた＝we were able to play the matches\n\n**_I think we were able to play the matches in an awesome atmosphere, in an\nawesome environment for all the matches, let alone the final match._**\n\n↑This is my literal translation, and the meaning is exactly you mentioned:\n\n> The matches ended with a wonderful atmosphere for the whole event\n\nHope this helps!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T23:06:51.523",
"id": "52542",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T23:45:59.050",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T23:45:59.050",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52541",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52541 | 52542 | 52542 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading a Digimon novel, but I have problems with this sentence.\n\n>\n> デジタルワールドにも東西南北という方向性が存在する。地球上の四方は人間が生活するために便宜上その概念を使用しているものだが、デジタルワールドではその世界が成り立つ時に東西南北を起点としたグリッドを使用していたのかもしれない。\n\nI don't understand what the second sentence says, but I think it is something\nlike: \"at first, the four cardinal points were a great place to live in, but\nthen it was divided into different areas.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T23:19:45.287",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52543",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T01:11:39.497",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-17T01:11:39.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "25486",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "A problem with this sentence 地球上の四方は人間が生活するために便宜上その概念を使用しているものだが、デジタルワールドではその世界が成り立つ時に東西南北を起点としたグリッドを使用していたのかもしれない。",
"view_count": 202
} | [
{
"body": "**_In the Digital World also, there are all four points of the compass, north,\nsouth, east and west._**\n\n**_In the earth, in our actual world on the surface of the globe, (there are\nno such points actually, but) we use them for the convenience for humans to\nlive on._**\n\n**_In the Digital World, however, the grid that starts from north, south, east\nand west might have been settled in advance when the world was created._**\n\nIn my opinion, the latter part of the sentence was not well written in\nJapanese. So there is no wonder for Japanese learners to have difficulty to\nunderstand it. I don't like the sentence because it seems illogical from a\nscientific viewpoint. But I can understand what the writer was trying to say.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T06:54:09.527",
"id": "52558",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T06:59:15.917",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T06:59:15.917",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52543",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52543 | null | 52558 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52550",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Is there a noun form for the word love in Japanese?\n\nI know saying すき(suki) or だいすき(daisuki) can be interpreted as \"I love/like\nyou\" but I am not sure if these are also nouns and if so how to use in a way\nthat would not be misinterpreted?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-20T23:47:51.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52544",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-23T18:20:42.467",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T01:55:22.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "16159",
"owner_user_id": "25485",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Noun for 'love'?",
"view_count": 915
} | [
{
"body": "The noun for \"love\" is 愛（あい）(ai).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T00:34:09.637",
"id": "52546",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T00:34:09.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52544",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Possible candidates include but aren't limited to (also, I marked the する verbs\nand な adjectives):\n\n> [愛]{あい}(する) love; to love\n>\n> [恋]{こい} romantic love\n>\n> [好]{す}き(な) liked; fond of; love\n>\n> [大好]{だいす}き(な) very liked; very fond of; loving a lot\n>\n> [愛好]{あいこう}(する) love; adoration; to love; to adore\n>\n> [恋愛]{れんあい}(する) love; love-making; passion; emotion; affection; to love; to\n> make love; to be passionate; to be emotional; to be affectionate\n\nI'm not a native speaker, so sorry if I messed up some of the nuances of each.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T01:43:13.190",
"id": "52550",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-23T18:20:42.467",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"parent_id": "52544",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "There are two words. [愛]{あい} is for any kind of love, romantic or not (though\nmostly romantic); [恋]{こい} is for romance specifically.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T03:54:54.997",
"id": "52552",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T03:54:54.997",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "52544",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52544 | 52550 | 52550 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52556",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Recently I sent an email to a game's support channel and the first paragraph\nof their reply email contains this sentence \"XX GAME お客様サポート係 横井でございます\". \n \nI tried Google translate \"横井\" but it only shows \"Yokoi\" (the Japanese\npronunciation). \n \nI also learnt about \"でございます\" is a polite form from this forum. \n \nMay I know what is the meaning of \"横井\"? Does it refer to the name of support\npersonnel? \nAnd does \"係\" refer to \"is\" ? \n \nThanks.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T04:04:24.623",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52553",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T05:30:01.687",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T05:30:01.687",
"last_editor_user_id": "25488",
"owner_user_id": "25488",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji"
],
"title": "The meaning of \"XX GAME お客様サポート係 横井でございます\"",
"view_count": 115
} | [
{
"body": "横井 is his/her family name.\n\n～～係 means \"the staff of ~~ division.\"\n\n> “XX GAME お客様サポート係 横井でございます”\n\n**_This is Yokoi, a staff member of XX Games Customer Support._**\n\n(Partially quoted from _Wataru 'Watson' Subridge_ 's comment)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T05:15:48.900",
"id": "52556",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T05:21:18.847",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T05:21:18.847",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52553",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52553 | 52556 | 52556 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52557",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know what \"no da\" and \"n da\" are for. When I hear the question something\nlike \"nani wo shite iru no?\" from a friend, I wonder: can the question \"nani\nwo shite iru n da?\" be used instead? Do they mean exactly the same meaning or\nis there **any difference in connotation**?\n\nor\n\n```\n\n doko e iku no? --> doko e iku n da?\n \n```\n\nIn other words, can \"(na) no?\" always be replaced with \"(na) n da?\" **in a\nquestion** when talking to friends? Will this soound a bit more direct and\nmasculine?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T04:06:49.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52554",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T09:48:31.663",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T04:13:15.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "25265",
"owner_user_id": "25265",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"questions",
"casual"
],
"title": "Question ending with \"no?\" -- can I use \"n da?\" instead, among friends?",
"view_count": 243
} | [
{
"body": "> In other words, can \"(na) no?\" always be replaced with \"(na) n da?\" in a\n> question when talking to friends? Will this sound a bit more direct and\n> masculine?\n\nYes. Exactly. It sounds a bit more direct and masculine.\n\nIf you are a man, you can almost always exchange each other.\n\nOn the other hand, if you are a woman, you had better not replace \"(na) no?\"\nwith \"(na) n da?\". It sounds weird.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T06:34:43.400",
"id": "52557",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T09:48:31.663",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T09:48:31.663",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52554",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52554 | 52557 | 52557 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52564",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For Full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/5vuuiCe/img-20170821-0002-new.pdf>\n\nThe problem is in this sentence (line 1):\n\n> 「\"KARAOKE\"は、今では \"JUDO\" や \"TSUNAMI\" と並ぶ世界共通語になっている。」\n\nHere's my attempt at translation: \"'Karaoke' nowadays is becoming lined up\ncommon world language with 'Judo' and 'Tsunami'etc. .\"\n\n並ぶ seems to be an attribute to 世界共通語. That's why I think of it as [ **X** =\nsubject] [ **is becoming** = predicative] [ **lined up common world language**\n= object/copula-object or what it is called in english terminology]. This\nmakes little sense in my opinion, but I can't see another way of linking these\nelements.\n\nThen there is the thing with と and や. や marks an unfinished list/enumeration.\nThe enumeration can't end with と, since this marks a finished list. と as a\nmarker for quotation doesn't really work here as well, same goes for\nconditional phrase particle. The only way I can think of is that と marks the\nrelation between KARAOKE and \"the unfinished list\". So \"Karaoke is becoming...\n**with** 1,2 etc.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T07:12:49.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52559",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-21T14:27:50.267",
"last_edit_date": "2017-09-21T14:27:50.267",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What about this combination of と and や",
"view_count": 284
} | [
{
"body": "> \"KARAOKE\" は、今では \"JUDO\" や \"TSUNAMI\" と並ぶ世界共通語になっている。 \n> _Karaoke_ , along with _judo_ and _tsunami_ , has now become an\n> international common word.\n\nThis 並ぶ is _to rank with_ , _to rival_ or _to match_. This と is not quotative,\nbut a particle that can often correspond to English _with_. Practically, you\nneed to remember which verb takes と. Here are some verbs that take non-\nquotative と:\n\n * 彼と別れる to part _with_ him\n * 英語と比べる to compare _with_ English\n * 敵と戦う to fight _with_ enemies\n * 高さで富士山と並ぶ to rank _with_ Mt. Fuji in height\n * 日本語と異なる to differ _from_ Japanese\n\nThis ている is not the progressive form, but it refers to a \"continuation of\nstate\". See: [When is Vている the continuation of action and when is it the\ncontinuation of state?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T09:01:14.543",
"id": "52564",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:01:14.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52559",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52559 | 52564 | 52564 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52568",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/5vuuiCe/img-20170821-0002-new.pdf>\n\nThe sentence in question (line 5): 井上さんは神戸で **客が歌うのに** 合わせて演奏をするしごとをしていた。 My\nattempt at translation: \"Mr. Inoue had a job in Kobe where he did musical\nperformances matching what the customers sang.\"\n\n客が歌うのに is of special interest here. As I translated, I think that の is like こと\nhere and it literally nominalizes the verbal phrase 客が歌う into \" 'the customer\nsing' thing\". However, I might be wrong, and here is why I think so. I could\nalso imagine the phrase being 歌う客に合わせて...: \"...job where he did musical\nperfomances matching the singing customer.\" Ultimately, both phrases mean the\nsame, but they are still different from a grammatical perspective. Since I\ndon't feel very sure about my interpretation, I wanted to ask for\nconfirmation.\n\nIn case my first interpretation should be correct, would the second\nconstruction I thought up be grammatical?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T07:43:46.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52560",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:46:17.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How is this nominal phrase meant",
"view_count": 139
} | [
{
"body": "You were close, but の here is a pure nominalizer, and 客が歌うの refers to the\naction of singing itself by the customers, not what they sing (i.e., the name\nof the song, lyrics...).\n\nSo 客が歌うのに合わせて演奏をする literally means \"to do musical performances in time to\ncustomers' singing,\" and the 歌う客に合わせて演奏をする literally means \"to do musical\nperformances in time to singing customers.\" Both are grammatical, and I think\nthey roughly mean the same thing in this context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T09:19:27.540",
"id": "52565",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:19:27.540",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52560",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think you're correct.\n\n客が歌うのに合わせて＝客が歌うこと に 合わせて ＝ synchronizing the act/thing of customer's singing.\nThis is a reasonable interpretation, I think.\n\nHowever, if you think の＝こと＝声＝voice, it becomes easier to translate:\nSynchronizing costumer's singing voice. This is an interpretation in which the\nの is a pronoun like \"it\" or \"one.\" And the \"it/one\" could mean their \"voice.\"\n\nBesides, your version, 歌う客に合わせて演奏していた, is perfectly fine and grammatical. And\nI agree with your point. This sentence has a different syntax grammatically,\nalthough the meaning is the same.\n\n> 井上さんは神戸で客が歌うのに合わせて演奏をするしごとをしていた。\n\n**_Mr. Inoue had a job to play the musical instrument synchronizing customer's\nsinging voice._**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T09:41:11.910",
"id": "52568",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:46:17.283",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T09:46:17.283",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52560",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52560 | 52568 | 52565 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52567",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For full context see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/5vuuiCe/img-20170821-0002-new.pdf>\n\nThe sentence in question (line 6-7): 音の高さ速さをその人に合わせて録音してあげたら、喜んでくれた。\n\nThe main issue lies in determining wether Mr. Inoue or the customer is the\nsubject of the verbal complex 喜んでくれた. First, here's my attempt at translation:\n\"When he (Mr. Inoue) did the favor of making a record matching the pitch and\nspeed of the man, he (???) gave the favor of being pleased much/pleasing\nmuch/accepting very gratefully.\" I think considering the difference between\nくれる and あげる in terms of courtesy could help here. By context, Mr. Inoue must\nbe the subject of the sentence preceding あげたら, so the text assumes that Mr.\nInoue positions himself lower than the customer, which makes sense. くれる is\nneutral as far as I know, so considering the pretext, this would fit the\ncustomer. Still, since all this is narrated by an external narrator, I feel\npretty unsure about my interpretations. So I think the sentence should\nmean:\"..., the customer gave the favor of being very pleased.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T08:44:07.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52561",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:33:00.423",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Subject of this たら...た construction",
"view_count": 221
} | [
{
"body": "This is a slightly unusual usage of くれる.\n\nIn the vast majority of cases, when a verb is suffixed with くれる it refers to a\nfavour done _for the speaker_. This is quite a strict rule, to the point that\nit would be grammatically incorrect for a speaker to use くれる to refer to their\nown actions. However, since the speaker (the writer of the article) in this\ncase is not involved in the situation, this can't be the case here.\n\nAs such, this must be the extended usage of くれる to refer to a favour done for\nsomeone who the speaker/writer is _putting themselves in the position of_. For\ninstance, if you're talking about something a stranger did for your brother,\nyou would often use くれた even though the favour wasn't done for you personally,\nbecause being close to your brother, you naturally empathise with him in this\nsituation (and may be relating the story from your brother's perspective).\n\nSo then the question becomes \"who is the writer empathising with in this\nsentence?\", and the answer is clearly Mr Inoue due to a couple of points.\nFirstly, this whole paragraph is about Mr Inoue and is presented as an\nanecdote from his perspective, so it makes much more sense to put yourself in\nthe position of Mr Inoue than the customer who was brought up afterwards. And\nsecondly, as you pointed out, an あげる form was used earlier in the same\nsentence to refer to something Mr Inoue did, which would make no sense if the\nspeaker was identifying with the customer (since あげる always refers to a favour\nfor someone _other than_ the speaker).\n\nIn addition to the above points, the use of たら also points to the customer\nbeing the one who 喜んでくれた. One of the unique functions of the たら form compared\nto other linking constructions is that it's often used to lead into something\nthat the subject discovers _in response to_ or _as a result of_ another action\n(as in sentences such ドアを開けたら、家が燃えていた \"I opened the door to discover the house\non fire\"). Or to put it a different way, the construction \"Aしたら、B\" can imply a\nsubtle hint of suspense after the action \"A\", as the subject waits to find out\nthe outcome \"B\".\n\nThis same nuance applies here - Mr Inoue performed the favour of 録音してあげる for\nthe customer, and then the たら implies that slight suspense as he waited to\nfind out the outcome of his favour (what the customer would think of it).\nTherefore the following action 喜んでくれた naturally has to refer to the customer's\nresponse.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T09:30:27.467",
"id": "52566",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:30:27.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "52561",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The subject of 録音してあげた is 井上さん, and the subjec of 喜んでくれた is その人 (or 店の客).\n\n> **井上さんが** 音の高さ速さをその人に合わせて録音してあげたら、 **その人は** 喜んでくれた。\n\nThe contrast of あげた and くれた is enough to determine the implied subjects here.\n\"He (the customer) gave Inoue the favor of being pleased\" may not be the most\nnatural sentence, but the gist is that the customer was pleased (\"喜んで\"), and\nthat fact in turn pleased Inoue-san (\"くれた\").\n\nあげる/くれる can be safely used when the narrator says something from someone\nelse's standpoint. The main character of this essay is Inoue-san, so the\nnarrator is using あげる/くれる from Inoue-san's point of view.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T09:33:00.423",
"id": "52567",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T09:33:00.423",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52561",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52561 | 52567 | 52567 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> それをヒントに井上さんは演奏だけが履いている「8ジューク」という機会を作り、1971年にレストランや喫茶店に貸し出す会社を始めた。([source:\n> line 7-8](https://www.docdroid.net/5vuuiCe/img-20170821-0002-new.pdf))\n\nFirst, my attempt at translation:\n\n> ??? Inoue constructed a device which was called '8 Juke', which only\n> contained the musical performance, and in 1971, he started a business which\n> rented out to restaurants and cafés.\n\nThe main issue lies with **それをヒントに** 井上さんは. I feel like something was omitted\nwhich would otherwise explicitely connect それをヒントに and 井上さん but I can't really\nextrapolate it on my own. This is also because I struggle with this に after\nヒント. I have no idea which verb (I think it probably will be a verb) could\nfollow it here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T08:53:46.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52563",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-22T08:10:44.983",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-22T08:10:44.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "What does this phrase それをヒントに... mean?",
"view_count": 257
} | [
{
"body": "There are instances where Japanese use pronoun word blocks to pertain to\nsomething already stated in an earlier sentence to avoid word repetition, thus\nthe use of それを in line 7.\n\nそれをヒントに is equally directed to\n\n「ある日、店の客の一人が...音の高さや速さをその人に合わせて録音してあげたら、とても喜んでくれた。」\n\nSo translating それをヒントに to something that will work as a pronoun or replacement\nfor the stated sentence above will be appropriate.\n\nFor example:\n\nThe encounter/said event/happening served as an inspiration for Mr. Inoue to\ncreate...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T10:01:51.673",
"id": "52600",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T10:07:54.170",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T10:07:54.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "25499",
"owner_user_id": "25499",
"parent_id": "52563",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52563 | null | 52600 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52572",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Form full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/5vuuiCe/img-20170821-0002-new.pdf>\n\n_Note: While writing this question I noticed that there is a second way to\ninterprete カラオケに合わせて. The reason I didn't settle for this second version,\nwhich seems much more correct from a grammatical perspective, is that it\nsounds odd to me \"to match Karaoke\". I must add now that I'm not very familiar\nwith Karaoke and that I regard Karaoke not as \"music\" (which you could\n\"match\") but as a form of leisure activity in which music plays a major role._\n\nThe sentence in question: 世界中の町で、子供からお年寄りまで、家族や仲間と、 **カラオケに合わせて** 楽しそうに歌っている。\n\nFirst, my first attempt at translation: \"In cities around the world, from\nchildren to senior folks, with the family and friends, one sings happily...\n...joined in Karaoke (?)\n\naccording to <http://jisho.org/search/awaseru> is a transitive verb. It's\nsemantical spectrum seems to be situated around the concept of \"coming\ntogether\", \"being together\" etc.. Basically, I interpreted カラオケに合わせて in an\nadverbial function to the predicative 楽しそうに歌っている. My problem with this is that\n合わせる is transitive, and I can't help but think that I used 合わせる in an\nintransitive manner here :/ If it was in passive, 合わせられて, I wouldn't mind it,\nbut since it is still in its active form I fear that did something wrong...^^\n\nSecond, my second attempt at translation: \"In cities around the world, from\nchildren to senior folks, with the family and friends, one sings happily...\nmatching Karaoke.\"\n\nAs mentioned previously in my note at the beginning of this post, this seems\nto solve the problem of my first attempt by simply using 合わせる in a transitive\nmanner. However, I'm not sure wether this translation is legit since it\nrequires a certain concept of the term \"Karaoke\" of which I can't say wether\nit is common or not.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T10:08:57.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52569",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T11:42:42.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does this カラオケに合わせて mean here",
"view_count": 1326
} | [
{
"body": "it's the same phrase in your previous question. :)\n\n> 井上さんは神戸で客が歌うの **に合わせて** 演奏をするしごとをしていた。\n>\n> 世界中の町で、子供からお年寄りまで、家族や仲間と、カラオケ **に合わせて** 楽しそうに歌っている。\n\nIf you remember the previous question's sentence, you may notice that they are\nvice versa. :)\n\n_**In towns all over the world, people from children to the elderly are\nsinging happily, synchronizing karaoke's music.**_\n\nIn the dictionary you showed, 合わせる means #1, \"to match.\"\n\n_**They are singing to match the rhythm and melody of karaoke.**_\n\n> Second, my second attempt at translation: \"In cities around the world, from\n> children to senior folks, with the family and friends, one sings happily...\n> matching Karaoke.\"\n\nI think this interpretation is correct.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T11:37:33.073",
"id": "52572",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T11:42:42.880",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52569",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52569 | 52572 | 52572 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52571",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/5vuuiCe/img-20170821-0002-new.pdf>\n\nThe sentence in question (last line): 今、カラオケは単なる機械ではなく、日本が世界中に誇る文化 **なのである** 。\n\nFirst, my attempt at translation: \"Now, Karaoke is not (just) a mere machine\nand japan is a culture holding proud in the world.\"\n\nI just translated the sentence as if なの wasn't present in the respective\nphrase because I don't know what to with it here. I also must say that I\nwonder wether my interpretation of the second part of this sentence (\"Japan\nis...\") is correct at all. It seems a bit far fetched to me to make Karaoke\nrepresentative of the whole japanese culture xD At least this sentence sounds\nto me like it does so...^^ That said, maybe japanese people themselves think\nso. I don't know, I don't have that much insight into japanese people's heads\n:D",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T10:36:18.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52570",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T11:20:27.183",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does this なのである do in this sentence?",
"view_count": 377
} | [
{
"body": "The なの is just a case of the \"explanatory の\" which adds a slight explanatory\nnuance to the sentence but doesn't directly affect the meaning much, so it's\nfine to leave it out in the translation.\n\nHowever, I think you're interpreting the grammar of the rest of the sentence a\nlittle wrong. The subject (topic) of the second part of the sentence isn't\nJapan - it's still カラオケ, the same topic established in the first half of the\nsentence. So it can be rephrased as カラオケは日本が世界中に誇る文化なのである。\n\n日本が世界中に誇る is a relative clause modifying 文化, so the whole thing means\nsomething like \"Nowadays, karaoke is not a mere machine, but a culture for\nJapan to proudly display to the whole world.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T11:20:27.183",
"id": "52571",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T11:20:27.183",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "52570",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52570 | 52571 | 52571 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have came across 必 and wanted to learn how to write it. Though there are\nmajor differences between how it looks digitally and how it looks on paper.\nHere is the link I used : <http://jisho.org/search/%E5%BF%85%20%23kanji>\n\nWhich one should I follow when writing on paper?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T12:10:35.193",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52573",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T19:31:41.610",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T13:57:37.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "21656",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"handwriting"
],
"title": "Which kanji writing should i follow when writing on paper, digital or non-digital?",
"view_count": 485
} | [
{
"body": "When you practice writing kanji, use the form in the video or under \"stroke\norder\".\n\nTypical Japanese serif fonts are called 明朝体, and sans-serif fonts are called\nゴシック体. They are very common, but do not necessarily reflect how you should\nwrite characters by hand. (By the way, this is not specific to Japanese; many\nEnglish serif fonts use \"[double-story\ng](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G#Typographic_variants)\", which is not what\npeople typically write by hand.)\n\nThere is a font called 教科書体 (literally \"textbook font\"), which is used in\nchildren's textbooks and reflects how people should handwrite characters. For\nmore information, see: [Is there an \"official\" font or other writing standard\nthat should be used when teaching\nkanji?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18782/5010)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bXF2Y.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T19:04:03.127",
"id": "52583",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T19:31:41.610",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T19:31:41.610",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52573 | null | 52583 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52575",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "まだ慣れなくってずっとああさ。\n\nIs it roughly \"all the way like that\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T12:32:17.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52574",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T13:11:17.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does ずっとああ mean?",
"view_count": 132
} | [
{
"body": "> まだ慣れなくってずっとああさ。\n\n＝まだ慣れなくて、ずっと、ああ さ。＝まだ慣れなくて、ずっと、あの様さ。＝まだ慣れなくて、ずっと、あの様子なのです。\n\n**_\"I'm not accustomed to it yet. So my behavior is always (awkward) as\nsuch.\"_**",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T13:11:17.633",
"id": "52575",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T13:11:17.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52574",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52574 | 52575 | 52575 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52592",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I wonder if is it okay to use all the below structures in a conversation? Is\nthere any structure I should avoid using? The phrase in this case is `I ate\nfried chicken`.\n\n> わたしは フライドチキンをたべた。 \n> “I fried chicken ate.”\n>\n> たべた、フライドチキン。 \n> “Ate, fried chicken.”\n>\n> フライドチキンたべた、わたし。 \n> “Fried chicken ate, I.”\n\nWhich of the above structures you guys use the most? And in what given\nsituations you apply each structure?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T15:29:33.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52576",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-04T01:39:49.350",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-04T01:39:49.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25472",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-order"
],
"title": "Which phrase structure is okay to use?",
"view_count": 200
} | [
{
"body": "It depends on contexts.\n\nThe first わたしは フライドチキンを たべた is an answer to a question \"What did you do/eat?\".\nは after わたし implies presence of plural \"you\" here. However, if the question is\n\"What would you do?, it's enough possible that singular \"you\" is asked.\n\nThe second たべた。フライドチキン。 is an answer to \"Did you eat something?\", in which you\nfirst tell an information that is asked and add supplementary one.\n\nThe third フライドチキンたべた。わたし is one to \"What did you eat?\" or \"How did it go?\"\n(Presence of additional わたし makes it lean to this side, and under this\nquestion, わたし could take が if it's unexpected for わたし to do so).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T01:40:17.673",
"id": "52592",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T20:43:21.640",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T20:43:21.640",
"last_editor_user_id": "25472",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "52576",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> わたしは フライドチキンをたべた。This is correct. This is the correct word order of a\n> Japanese sentence.\n>\n> たべた、フライドチキン。 This is wrong and weird. You should avoid using this.\n>\n> フライドチキンたべた、わたし。This is wrong and weird. You should avoid using this.\n\nIt depends on on what level your Japanese are. However, its obvious that an\nadvanced learner of Japanese would never ask this question. Therefore, I think\nmy answer was simple and said it all for the beginners. In case that you're an\nadvanced learner who asks this seemingly-very-basic question for some special\nintention, feel free to ask again!\n\nIf Yoda from the movie STAR WARS were Japanese, he might use the second and\nthe third sentence. ; )",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T07:25:31.183",
"id": "52597",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T07:31:25.577",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T07:31:25.577",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52576",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52576 | 52592 | 52592 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In many beginner material, が is said to be a subject marker. ([For example\nthis one](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese/Grammar/Basic_Particles))\nHowever, my teacher who learnt Japanese in Japan said he has never heard such\na saying.\n\nAnd in his teaching, it is very clear that が is really not a subject marker.\nIn many cases it is marking object instead. For example:\n\n> 私は妹がいます \n> I have **a sister / sisters**.\n>\n> テーブルの下に猫がいます \n> There is a **cat** under the table.\n>\n> 私は料理が苦手です \n> I am not good at **cooking**\n>\n> 私は日本語が大好きだ \n> I love **Japanese**\n\nThese examples are just beginner level examples, right? Of course there are\nalso cases that が is marking the subject, but with so many cases that it is\nactually marking the object instead, I wonder why there is a saying that が is\nan subject marker?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T15:38:07.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52577",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T17:06:51.933",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T17:06:51.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "18433",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"は-and-が"
],
"title": "Why が is said to be a subject marker?",
"view_count": 716
} | [
{
"body": "The particle が is referred to as a subject marker because that's what it is.\nIt marks the subject of a sentence. That's its primary purpose.\n\nEven in two of the four sentences you provided, it's quite clearly marking the\nsubject of the verb います. Don't get confused because the \"sister\" and \"cat\" are\nboth objects in the most natural English translation of those sentences - the\nbasic meaning of います is \"exist\", and the sister/cat are clearly the subject of\nthat action. A very literal English rendering of the two sentences would be\n\"As for me, a sister exists.\" and \"Beneath the table, a cat exists.\" - in both\nof which the noun marked by が is the subject.\n\nIt's true that there are a handful of adjectives such as 苦手 and 好き which use が\nin an unusual way which could be called an object role (though depending on\nthe analysis, you can consider even these to be subjects), but these are an\nexception rather than the rule, and should be learned as such. In its standard\nusage, が unambiguously marks the subject of the sentence.\n\nThe main reason why calling が the \"subject particle\" can confuse people is\nbecause there's already another particle, は, which ends up marking the subject\nin most sentences. However, it's important not to learn は as a simple subject\nmarker, because the \"topic\" is a more flexible concept which can actually\nfulfil numerous roles in a sentence. It's just that in the majority of cases,\nthe topic doubles as the subject (and so the actual subject marker が is\nomitted).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T16:28:17.953",
"id": "52580",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T16:28:17.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "52577",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 52577 | null | 52580 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> もうそんな寒さかと島村は外を眺めると、鉄道の官舎らしいバラックが山裾に寒々と散らばっているだけで、雪の色はそこまで行かぬうちに闇に呑まれていた。\n\nI understand the meaning of dake and the te form; that is not my problem. My\nproblems has to do with how dake de in this case can connect to what follows.\nHow do you put this into a single sentence in English? Perhaps you can't,\nwhich is why the translation of the text I have makes two sentences here. So\nmy question deals not with the grammar (or the meaning of dake and te) but the\nsense of how the Japanese connects these two elements.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T15:58:08.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52578",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-03T19:24:39.260",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-23T10:46:34.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "25491",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Can someone explain the use of だけで in this sentence from Kawabata?",
"view_count": 391
} | [
{
"body": "This で is a simple connector. You may know [te-form can be a reason\nmarker](http://www.learn-japanese-adventure.com/japanese-particle-de-cause-\nreason.html), but this で is nothing more than simple _and_. The sentence\nbasically says Shimamura only saw a few shacks, snow and darkness when he\nlooked out of the window. At least in this case, I think the translator could\nhave translated this sentence naturally without splitting it into two. But\nwhen to split a sentence is basically at the discretion of each translator,\nand there are times splitting a sentence can be a reasonable option. Japanese\nsentences can be incredibly long if multiple で and\n[だが/けれど](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/32826/5010) are used.\n\n* * *\n\n**Original Answer:**\n\nThe full context (from 雪国 by 川端康成):\n\n> 向側の座席から娘が立って来て、島村の前のガラス窓を落とした。雪の冷気が流れ込んだ。娘は窓いっぱいに乗り出して、遠くへ叫ぶように、\n> 「駅長さあん、駅長さあん。」 \n> 明りをさげてゆっくり雪を踏んで来た男は、襟巻で鼻の上まで包み、耳に帽子の毛皮を垂れていた。 \n> もうそんな寒さかと島村は外を眺めると、鉄道の官舎らしいバラックが山裾に寒々と散らばっているだけで、雪の色はそこまで行かぬうちに闇に呑まれていた。\n\nだけ means \"only\", and this で is the continuative form (or te-form) of the\ncopula だ. In this context, it means all he could saw was バラック's (or shacks).\nSimilar examples:\n\n> * 見ているだけです。 I'm just watching.\n> * 聞いただけで、信じてはいない。 I only heard about it, I don't believe it.\n> * この部屋には椅子があるだけで、他には何もない。 In this room, there is only a chair, nothing\n> else.\n>\n\nPlease don't clip a sentence unless you absolutely know what you're doing.\nIt's hard to explain the true meaning of this だけで without the part you\nclipped.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T05:58:58.720",
"id": "52594",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-24T00:37:09.153",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-24T00:37:09.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52578",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52578 | null | 52594 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52585",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: there are two professor that are talking to each other; one is a long\ncareer professor while the other is a novice professor. This one lack of\ndignity, seriousness.\n\nThe long career professor say to the novice professor:\n\n> \"私は」いつまでたっても教師の貫禄が出ないあなたに戸惑っています。\"\n\nNow, in this sentence I can not figure out the meaning of \"貫禄が出ない\". Maybe it\nis similar to \"貫禄がない\"?\n\nMay be the translation something like \"Is your incorrigible lack of dignity as\nteacher that leave me perplexed (about you).\"?\n\nEDIT: Or \"No matter how much time passes, (your) dignity as teacher will not\ncome out, so I have perplexities about you/your request\" (note: see the\ncomment below).\n\nThk U in advance.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T16:17:33.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52579",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T20:28:00.267",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T20:28:00.267",
"last_editor_user_id": "25405",
"owner_user_id": "25405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"expressions"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of \"...が出ない \" in this sentence?",
"view_count": 164
} | [
{
"body": "出る (\"come/go out\") comes with many different (but closely-related) shades of\nmeaning (as does its English counterpart), and I think \"develop\" nicely\ncaptures the sense of the word as used here.\n\n貫禄 is something like a \"dignified air\" about a person. It's generally a good\nthing to have, if having authority and commanding respect matter anything to\nyou, but often it's something that only comes with experience. (Excepting the\nrare cases of naturals. They somehow exude the look and feel of many years of\nexperience and accomplishment from the very start. Damn those naturals.)\n\nSo anyway, 貫禄が出ない means \"a dignified air does not develop\" (or \"someone does\nnot develop a dignified air\"). 貫禄がない means \"there is no dignified air (about a\nperson)\" (or \"someone have no dignified air about them\"). They mean similar\nthings, yes. The speaker probably could have used 貫禄がない instead of 貫禄が出ない with\ntheir point remaining intact.\n\nWith a bit of trimming and smoothing, the quote goes like this:\n\n> I'm quite baffled that you, after all this time, still haven't shown any\n> sign of developing that dignified presence and air of a teaching\n> professional.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T20:27:22.517",
"id": "52585",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T20:27:22.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "52579",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52579 | 52585 | 52585 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52582",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "ギアをチューンナップしようにも肝心の“G”がなけりゃ **よう** せっかくの俺のギアも弱いまま。\n\nMy translation - \"I can't even tune up Gear without essential 'G', so my\nprecious Gear has to stay wimpy for now.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T18:25:01.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52581",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T02:19:36.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of よう in this sentence?",
"view_count": 119
} | [
{
"body": "This よう is [a filler meaning\nnothing](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14924/5010). It's used in the\nsame way as さあ, なあ, のう, etc. If I'm not mistaken, this one is used mainly in\nKanto district. Among similar fillers, this one sounds masculine and a bit\nrough.\n\n**EDIT:** You may have seen a sentence-end よ or よぅ, which is a mild and gentle\nparticle safely used by girls and children. But as a mid-sentence filler, よ\nsounds fairly differently.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T18:37:53.443",
"id": "52582",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T02:19:36.120",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T02:19:36.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52581",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52581 | 52582 | 52582 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "当然といやぁ当然なんだが……\n\nI guess it's colloquial form of といえば?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T19:49:26.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52584",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T19:49:26.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "What is といやぁ here?",
"view_count": 127
} | []
| 52584 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52590",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 国の研究によると、今年日本の近くの海に来るさんまは、 **今まででいちばんとれなかった** 去年より少なくなりそうです。 \n> According to the country's research, the amount of sanma coming to the seas\n> near Japan this year seems to have decreased compared to last year where ???\n\nI assume 今まででいちばんとれなかった is a relative clause modifying 'last year' but I'm\nstruggling to make sense out of it.\n\nLiterally I translate it as \"up until now most not harvested\". So overall I\nthink the message is that last year they caught the least number of fish ever,\nand this year is predicted to be worse. Is this correct?\n\nI think I normally see いちばん with an adjective (rather than a verb) so I'm\nfinding it a little confusing. Could you please provide a few simple examples\nof いちばん used with a verb so I can get a better feel for its use? Does it only\nwork in relative clauses?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T21:47:42.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52587",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-24T02:04:57.543",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T23:08:14.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "25454",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "一番 with verbs rather than adjectives",
"view_count": 399
} | [
{
"body": "I'd translate it as something like...\n\n> 今年...今まででいちばんとれなかった去年より少なくなりそうです \n> This year fewer samma appear to have been caught than last year for which\n> the catch had been worst of any previous year.\n\nA few points to note here.\n\n * I've treated 今までで as \"any previous year\"\n * I use the noun **catch** where the Japanese uses the verb とる, and I've ignored the potential, which I think just sounds weird in English, though it makes sense in the Japanese.\n * I translate いちばん as \"worst\" (capturing the negative from とれなかった\n\nEssentially I find いちばんとれなかった difficult to translate somewhat literally\ndirectly into English: hence my \"worst catch\".\n\nTechnically 今までで means \"up until now\". But in this context, we looking at\ncatches per year, and the year which this phrase is coupled with is 去年. So,\nthat would make it essentially \"up until last year\". Again, we're talking\nabout _catches **per** year_, thus I boil this idea down to \"any previous\nyear\". Perhaps a bit of stretch, it's definitely not literal, but I think it\npreserves the spirit of the Japanese.\n\nAnother possibility, since I've noticed a number of native speakers commenting\non my misreading of adverbially clauses and their scope, the 今までで could be\nreferring to \"Up until now\" of this year rendering the translation as\n\n> This year's catch, up until now, looks like it's going to be smaller than\n> last year's catch which had been the worst",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T23:07:24.060",
"id": "52588",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T23:13:03.537",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-21T23:13:03.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "4875",
"owner_user_id": "4875",
"parent_id": "52587",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Your sense of seeing 一番 + adjective is not completely incorrect, and the\ngeneral gist of your understanding is correct. The pattern that applies to 一番\n+ adjective also applies to 一番 + noun, and what you're seeing here is not\nnecessarily 一番 + verb, but rather 一番 + modified noun:\n\n> いちばんとれなかった去年 \n> Worst year for catch last year\n\nSo, applying this sort of meaning to this modified noun:\n\n> 国の研究によると、今年日本の近くの海に来るさんまは、今までで **いちばんとれなかった去年** より少なくなりそうです。\n>\n> According to the country's research, this year (so far) is seeing less catch\n> in Sanma in the seas near Japan, even less so than **the worst catch (on\n> record) of last year.**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T23:14:30.393",
"id": "52589",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-21T23:14:30.393",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "52587",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Your interpretation about the message is correct.\n\n[一番 is actually an **_adverb_** in this situation, and it is modifying the\nverb\n取る.](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%B8%80%E7%95%AA-433597#E3.83.87.E3.82.B8.E3.82.BF.E3.83.AB.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.B3.89)\nIn many other situations however, you often find it modifying an adjective\ninstead, i.e \"一番いいサッカーゲーム\" hence why it might be confusing.\n\nHere are some examples:\n\n\"いまいちばん行きたい国は、日本です。\" from [j-nihongo.com](http://j-nihongo.com/ichiban/)\n\n\"一番乗りたい車\" (self made)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-21T23:22:28.603",
"id": "52590",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-24T02:04:57.543",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-24T02:04:57.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "25454",
"owner_user_id": "25454",
"parent_id": "52587",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52587 | 52590 | 52588 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52599",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Actually, this has been lingering for sometime in my mind about how Japanese\nconvey a sentence which has both the living and non-living things. Will\nJapanese use いる or ある? or whichever comes first? or both are acceptable? or\nJapanese will prefer to use **いる** instead of **ある** when both are combined?\nSince the concept of **living/non-living things** in Japanese language is\ndifferent compared to its English counterparts. They make it distinctive which\nis which. So, if the concept is combined, **which is preferred**?\n\nFor example:\n\n> Once upon a time, there was a man, a woman, a tree. They were all doing\n> fine. \n> 昔々、男、女、木があった。or 昔々、男、女、木がいました。 \n> 彼らはすべてうまくいっていた。 or 彼らはすべてうまくいっていました。\n\nMy question:\n\n 1. Which one is **the most natural Japanese**? (aka 'considered correct by natives?')\n 2. If we combine 'they' as one concept which consist of living things and non-living things, which is used more often? The living part or the non-living part? ( **彼ら?彼女ら?彼ら? or with たち**? or **それら/あれら**?\n\nThis brings me another question i.e.:\n\n 3. If they both consist of male and female-types mixed with(combined with) living and non-living things, which ' **pronoun** ' will be preferred? or is/are there any 'neutral' type(s) which cover(s)g **both male/female and living/non-living things**?\n\nAny thoughts, comments and answers are greatly appreciated! (You may post your\nown example to elaborate your answer!) ありがとうございます。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T07:08:18.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52596",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-01T12:12:12.293",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-01T12:04:50.810",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10323",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"english-to-japanese",
"pronouns",
"gender"
],
"title": "Usage of いる/います and ある/あります in combined words and sentences",
"view_count": 1566
} | [
{
"body": "If you want to personify 木 (say, it's a tree that can talk and walk), feel\nfree to use いる and 彼ら.\n\n> * 昔々、おしゃべりな木と、男と女がいました。彼らはとても仲良しでした。\n>\n\nOtherwise, both sentences using いる and ある are unnatural, and you have to\nrephrase them in some way or another.\n\n> * 昔々、大きな木の近くに、男と女が住んでいました。\n> * 昔々、大きな木がありました。その根元には、男と女が住んでいました。\n>\n\nI'm not sure when you have to treat living things and nonliving things as one\ngroup. Words like 彼ら or それら are far less common than English _they/them_ , and\nyou can usually construct a sentence without using those pronouns at all. If\nyou absolutely need a pronoun, something like それらの人と物 (literally \"those people\nand things\") should work. But this somehow depends on the context. For\nexample, if you're playing a strategy game where tanks and infantry are\ntreated in the same way, それら(のユニット) may work just fine. そいつら is another\npronoun which can refer to both living and nonliving things, but this can be\nderogatory if used inappropriately.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T08:14:07.457",
"id": "52598",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-01T12:12:12.293",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-01T12:12:12.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52596",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "**Note:** I had left my answer halfway because I needed to do something else\nand when I came back at it Naruto had already given an answer. Although the\nanswer is very similar I will post it anyway as maybe reading it written in\ndifferent ways might give better insight (and deleting it would be quite a\nwaste of typing too :p).\n\n* * *\n\nIt's an interesting question so I asked a Japanese and the answer to \"if we\ncombine living an non-living things which prevails, いる or ある?\" was quite\nsurprising: none. Or, from a different point of view, both!\n\nWhich means that basically none of the examples you provided would actually\nwork. You would have to rephrase your \"man-woman-tree\" example in some other\nway.\n\nFor instance, you could say:\n\n> 昔々、男と女がいて木がありました.\n\nAlthough the above might sound weird, it's just a way to show that you should\nuse both いる and ある.\n\nIf you want to say 木がいました, there is nothing wrong with that provided that you\nare giving the tree a sort of personification, meaning that it would make the\nreader think that that tree has emotions.\n\nAnother example the person I was speaking with provided to show this\ndifference in use is the following:\n\n> 机の横に植木鉢が置いてあって、その横にイタリア人がいる。\n\nWhich means \"Next to the table there are a a plant pot and an Italian man\". As\nyou can see, the sentence is structured in order to use both いる and ある\nalthough in English the plant and the man are \"grouped together\".\n\nI am not sure I understand your second point about grouping plural object.\nContrarily to other languages Japanese words do not have a gender \"per se\", so\nsaying something like これら、それら etc referred to a group containing both \"male\"\nand \"females\" should not really be a problem. After all when you refer to a\ngroup of people you generally use 彼ら and the gender of the people making up\nthat group doesn't really matter I guess. Besides, in Japanese such pronouns\nare really not as commonly used as in English so you probably would/could\nconstruct the sentence in a different way anyway.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T09:03:11.500",
"id": "52599",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T09:03:11.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "52596",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52596 | 52599 | 52598 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When saying\n\n> 文学の好きな人はいますか？\n\nI was corrected to\n\n> 文学が好きな人はいますか？\n\nWhy aren't both possibilities correct? I thought that ga can always be\nreplaced by no in phrases that are used attributively.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T10:11:59.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52601",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T10:55:37.997",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T10:16:01.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "12239",
"owner_user_id": "12239",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Why is 文学**の**好きな人 ungrammatical?",
"view_count": 230
} | [
{
"body": "> 文学の好きな人はいますか？\n\nI think this sentence is okay.\n[BCCWJ](http://pj.ninjal.ac.jp/corpus_center/bccwj/) has a number of similar\nexamples, 歌の好きな人, マージャンの好きな人, 仕事の好きな人, お茶の好きな人, ...\n\nAfter all, you can use が, の and even を interchangeably:\n\n> * 文学が好きな人はいますか？\n> * 文学の好きな人はいますか？\n> * 文学を好きな人はいますか？\n>\n\nI personally prefer が or を here, but I expect people have different\npreference.\n\n* * *\n\nHowever, you have to pay a special attention when a noun representing a person\ncomes in place of 文学.\n\n> 太郎の好きな人は誰ですか？\n\nFor some reason, this sentence almost always mean \"Who is the person Taro\nlikes?\", not \"Who is the person who likes Taro?\"\n\n * 太郎が好きな人: **ambiguous.** the person Taro likes / the person who likes Taro\n * 太郎のことが好きな人: the person who likes Taro\n * 太郎のことを好きな人: the person who likes Taro\n * 太郎の好きな人: the person Taro likes (!)\n * 太郎を好きな人: the person who likes Taro\n\nWell, there can be exceptions; 子どもの好きな保育士を探しています is usually taken as \"I'm\nlooking for a nurse who likes children\". But almost all examples of Aの好きな人\nfound on BCCWJ, where A refers to a person, mean \"the person A likes\". Please\ndon't ask me why...\n\nRelated:\n\n * [が in subordinate clauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/30171/5010)\n * [Usage of ～を好き outside of embedded clauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/26005/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T10:44:57.783",
"id": "52603",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T10:55:37.997",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T10:55:37.997",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 52601 | null | 52603 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 好きな本を教えてください。僕のは春の雪です。\n\ngot corrected to\n\n> 好きな本を教えてください。僕の好きなのは春の雪です。\n\nWhy is it not possible to replace all of 好きな本 by の、given that the context\nmakes the intended meaning obvious?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T10:23:13.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52602",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T12:04:21.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12239",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-の",
"ellipsis"
],
"title": "Why can't I shorten 僕の好きな本は to 僕のは？",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "You could have said 僕は春の雪です instead, although this is colloquial and some\nteacher might still want to correct it, depending on their stance or your\nlevel of Japanese. This type of sentence is sometimes referred to as うなぎ文\n(\"eel sentence\").\n\n * [Are possessive particles implied in a conversation?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44053/5010)\n * [Overall syntax of this sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48986/5010)\n\n僕のは is wrong because 僕の refers to a thing that belongs to 僕. 僕のは春の雪です would\nsound like \"My book is 春の雪.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T11:03:12.477",
"id": "52604",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T11:08:20.967",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T11:08:20.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52602",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "好きな本を教えてください。\n\n１．「春の雪」です。This is good.\n\n２．「春の雪」が好きです。This is good.\n\n３．私は「春の雪」です。This is possible, as うなぎ文, but I don't like this. If I were a\nteacher, I would correct this if this is a person-to-person dialog. If there\nare plural people and they take turn to answer to the same question, this\nsentence is perfectly fine. It depends on the background.\n\n４．私のは「春の雪」です。This is weird and unnatural, even though it seems not bad\nlogically.\n\n５．私の好きなのは「春の雪」です。This is okay. But I might prefer 6.\n\n６．私が好きなのは「春の雪」です。 This is okay.\n\n７．私が好きな本は「春の雪」です。 This is fine, but some people might say it's a little\nredundant.\n\n８．「春の雪」が私の好きな本です。This is good.\n\n９．「春の雪」が私は好きです。This is good.\n\n１０．「春の雪」が私の好きなのです。This is weird, although it seems okay logically.\n\n１１．「春の雪」が私のです。This is weird, although it seems logically okay.\n\nI like the answers: 1, 2, (5), 6, (7), 8, 9.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T12:04:21.267",
"id": "52609",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T12:04:21.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52602",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52602 | null | 52604 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52607",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was watching this video about conversations in Japanese. There's a couple\ndiscussing about what apartment they should buy...\n\n> Wife: そうねえ、じゃ、これはどうかしら？\n>\n> Husband: なかなかいいんじゃない。これ見に行ってみるか。\n>\n> W: あ、ちょっと待って。でも、これ、クローゼットがちょっと狭いわね。\n>\n> H: 確かに。う～ん。なかなか、いいのがないなあ。\n\nSo, here lies my question, Why the first one using いいじゃない。sounds like\nrhetorical no, therefore an \"Yes\"? But the second sounds like a negative (I'll\nput the translation given by the video)\n\n> Husband: **なかなかいいんじゃない。** Yeah that's nice. (isn't it)\n>\n> H: **いいのがないなあ。** There doesn't seem to be the one that is perfect.\n\nSo Why the first is a positive answer and the second a negative? Maybe because\nthe first sounds like a question? I'd say that there is an question intonation\nto it, but in the writting there's no indication if it's was supposed to be a\n\"question\"(rhetorical) or not...\n\nSource: <https://youtu.be/xVsOB9LiV7A?t=1m55s> 1 minute 55 seconds",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T11:09:32.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52605",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T16:28:22.987",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"intonation",
"rhetoric"
],
"title": "いいじゃない。vs いいのがない。",
"view_count": 2308
} | [
{
"body": "> So Why the first is a positive answer and the second a negative?\n\nIt's because the first one is a set phrase. It cannot be negative. It's a kind\nof an \"idiom.\" So there is no confusion among native speakers.\n\n> Maybe because the first sounds like a question?\n\nYou're correct. It is also expressed as ”いいじゃないか”。or ”いいじゃないか？” or \"いいではないか”.\n\n> I'd say that there is an question intonation to it, but in the writing\n> there's no indication if it's was supposed to be a \"question\"(rhetorical) or\n> not...\n\nEven in the writing, native speakers almost simultaneously or instinctively\ncan understand that it's rhetorical. Because it simply doesn't make sense and\nweird if one interprets it as a usual negative sentence. It should be\nsomething like: 良くない（ね）。いいとは言えない（ね）。\n\nNative speakers would choose different sentences to mean negative. So there is\nno confusion. Hope this helps!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T11:31:42.123",
"id": "52606",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T11:31:42.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52605",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "There's not really any way of interpreting なかなかいいじゃない as anything but a\nrhetorical negative. Firstly, you would never ordinarily make いい negative by\nsuffixing じゃない - it would always change to よくない. So this makes it clear that\nthe じゃない is a rhetorical feature affixed to the sentence more generally rather\nthan a negation of いい. And secondly, なかなか generally has a positive nuance, so\nit wouldn't tend to be used with an actual negative.\n\nThere are indeed similar constructions that would be legitimately ambiguous -\nfor instance, if the phrasing was 素敵じゃない, it could be interpreted as either an\nactual negation \"it's not lovely\" or a rhetorical tag question \"isn't it\nlovely\" depending on the tone of voice. In that case, you'd have to rely on\nthe surrounding context to determine which meaning is intended in a written\ndialogue.\n\nIn practice, though, this would be quite easy to distinguish, since a negative\n素敵じゃない would only be used if someone had just suggested that the house was 素敵\n(and would often be preceded with a まったく or similar), whereas the much more\ncommon positive 素敵じゃない would generally be the first mention of 素敵 in the\nconversation (since it would be strange to follow up \"it's lovely\" with \"isn't\nit lovely!\"), and might be preceded with positive expressions like へ～ or なかなか.\n\nAs for いいのがないなあ, this can't really be interpreted as a tag question, because\nthe ない is a stand-alone verb meaning \"there isn't any\" rather than a じゃない, and\nthe なあ makes it clear that this isn't a question. If it was intended with a\npositive meaning, you'd see something like いいのがあるじゃない。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T11:45:48.790",
"id": "52607",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T11:45:48.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "52605",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 52605 | 52607 | 52607 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "55210",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 「……っしゃ！ ずらかるぞ！！ ……ん！？」\n\nIs it a colloquial form of 「よっしゃ」?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T11:53:03.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52608",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-16T02:56:06.017",
"last_edit_date": "2017-09-14T23:43:44.150",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "What is っしゃ here?",
"view_count": 272
} | [
{
"body": "It is just an abbreviation of 「よっしゃ」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-12-15T19:06:45.503",
"id": "55210",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-15T19:06:45.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26973",
"parent_id": "52608",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Probably ninjas or thrives completed their duties and didn’t want to show\ntheir acclamation in order to break out swiftly. That’s why they said っしゃ as\nexplained in the other answer.\n\nAs a side note, I’ve never seen った as やった in the same vein. It might sound\nlike ouch, however.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-12-16T02:56:06.017",
"id": "55214",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-16T02:56:06.017",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52608",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52608 | 55210 | 55210 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I learned that one way to form a \"must\" sentence is \"negative verb +\nconditional + ダメ・ならない・いけない\":\n\nI mainly see two kinds of conditional used - the 仮定形 and と. For example\n\n> 食べないとダメだ。\n>\n> 食べなければダメだ。\n\nThen I thought, since と expresses a conditional that 100% will happen, like\n\"if you drop an apple, it falls\", does this mean that \"must\" sentences created\nwith と express a stronger \"must\" than those created using the 仮定形?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T12:14:15.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52610",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-28T10:04:35.427",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Is ないとダメ a stronger \"must\" than なければダメ?",
"view_count": 647
} | [
{
"body": "It's not really whether one is \"stronger\" than the other, but instead a more\n\"standard\" form. I find the following:\n\n> 〜なければ（なりません）\n\nto be more common in instructional or written text, than say:\n\n> 〜ないと（ダメ）\n\nPart of the reason perhaps is prudence because it is quicker to say or\nunderstand, especially when you immediately need to call the listener's\nattention.\n\nAs a side note, I've seldom encountered the phrase\n\n> なければダメ",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-28T06:32:53.677",
"id": "52769",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-28T06:32:53.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "52610",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 52610 | null | 52769 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "「いくらか」と「若干」の違いは何ですか。ただ「いくらか」は話し言葉で「若干」は書き言葉ですか。正しいですか。もし、正しかったら、他の違いがありますか。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T13:49:03.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52612",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-26T21:07:00.690",
"last_edit_date": "2018-07-23T16:45:07.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "25501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"words",
"usage",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "「いくらか」と「若干」の使い分けを教えていただけないでしょうか。",
"view_count": 566
} | []
| 52612 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52615",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is the first time I have seen this and I don't know its meaning or what\ndoes in the sentence\n\n> 素質はなんとなく **あったかもね**\n\nBest Regards",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T15:45:40.180",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52614",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T16:44:01.993",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T16:44:01.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "23928",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of あったかもね?",
"view_count": 139
} | [
{
"body": "あった is just the past tense of the common verb ある, to exist. In this case, it's\npart of the expression 素質がある, meaning to \"have the potential\" for something.\n(eg. 彼は科学者の素質がある \"He has the makings of a scientist!\")\n\nかも is a short form of かもしれない, the common way of expressing possibility. It can\nusually be translated as \"maybe\", \"perhaps\", \"might have\" etc.\n\nAnd ね is the common sentence-ending particle indicating a \"tag question\" or an\nexpectation of agreement. It can be often be translated as something like\n\"right?\" or \"you know\" (if it needs translating at all). When used together\nwith かも, it often indicates the speaker is tentatively agreeing with a point\nsomeone else has made.\n\nSo to put it all together, the sentence means something like \"Maybe he did\nsort of have the potential.\" (What exactly he had the potential for - and\nindeed whether the subject is actually a \"he\" at all - is a mystery without\nmore context.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T16:09:35.370",
"id": "52615",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T16:09:35.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "52614",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 52614 | 52615 | 52615 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52617",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Would I be correct in reading things like 私には or 個人的には as being \"to me\"? Like\nin the following:\n\n> 私には寿司が美味しいって！To me sushi is tasty!\n\nOr\n\n> 彼には女性が誰よりきれいです。To him she is better than anyone.\n\nWould I be right in reading it like this? Interpreting には as a bit of grammar\nthat is often times used to explain what a scene is from a certain persons\nperspective? Or would this be to unreliable?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T16:39:58.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52616",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-26T01:54:00.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"interpretation"
],
"title": "Would I be right in reading 「私には...」as 「to me it's ...」？",
"view_count": 890
} | [
{
"body": "私には is 私に followed by the topic/contrast marker は. So yes, it can mean \"to me\"\nor \"personally\", but 私にとっては is often used for this purpose, too. See: [Help\nwith には and にとって](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4141/5010)\n\n * Use 彼女 (\"she\") instead of 女性 (\"woman\"). I suppose it's a mere typo :)\n * In the first sentence, you probably have to use は instead of が, because this sentence describes a general fact rather than [what you've just perceived](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43213/5010). In the second sentence, you can use both が and は after 彼女, because が has the 'exhaustive-listing' function (i.e., \"among many women\").\n * って at the end of a sentence after the dictionary form of a verb/adjective sounds like you're trying to strongly convince someone; e.g., 本当だって! ≒ But it's true!; 行くべきだって! ≒ Hey, you have to go there!\n\nThe corrected version would be:\n\n> * 私には寿司は美味しいです。 (acceptable)\n> * 私にとっては寿司は美味しいです。 (recommended)\n> * 彼には彼女が誰より綺麗です。 (acceptable)\n> * 彼にとっては彼女が誰より綺麗です。 (recommended)\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T17:40:23.450",
"id": "52617",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-23T02:33:26.000",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-23T02:33:26.000",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "52616",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "The other answers including the past answers quoted are grammatically and\nlogically correct, but the examples and their explanations are, I think, not\nsufficient, so I am going to add some information to correctly tell the nuance\nof Japanese.\n\nThough \" **にとっては** \" or \" **としては** \" is not exactly correspond to \" **to**\nsomebody or **to** something\", they are generally used formally like in \"日本\n**にとっては** 憂慮{ゆうりょ}すべき事態｛じたい｝である。 _It is a matter of concern to Japan._ \" or in\n\"日本 **としては** 核兵器｛かくへいき｝の存在｛そんざい｝は看過｛かんか｝できない/見過｛みす｝ごせない。 _As Japan we cannot\noverlook the existence of nuclear weapons_.\", so they are too formal to be\nused in a daily conversation, especially such as in the given sentence about\ntalking about sushi taste and things like that, furthermore in a sentence with\nan exclamation mark.\n\nExamples of \"にとっては\" from\n[here](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_result)\n\n * プラハの人々 **にとっては** 、愛する都のイメージとして、石畳はプラハとは切り離しがたいものとなっている。 \n_For the people of Prague, as an image of the city they love, cobblestones are\nhard to separate from Prague._\n\n * みたい場所＝フィールドと、（中略）期待＝マインドの一致が行動を方向づけるようになっていった。どちらが欠けても自分 **にとっては** 意味がない。 \n_Whichever one of the place (= field) I want to see and the expectation (=\nmind) of mine lacks, it makes no sense for me._\n\n * 財産は、生活の安定を切望する堅気 **にとっては** 、ほとんど自分と一体のものです。 \n_Property is almost integrated with himself for an honest person who aspires\nfor the stability of life._\n\n * 勤労にいそしむ市民一般 _にとっては_ さらに大事な条件であることをも告げてくれるのである。 _It also tells us that it is even more important condition for citizens who are diligent at work._\n * 「知らなければ知らないだけ、あなた **にとっては** いいのよ」と言っていた。 \n_\"The less you know it, the more it's good for you\" they said._ \n**note** : This is an example in which \"にとっては\" is used in a conversation, but\nthe context of the conversation is serious so the use of it is natural or no\nproblem.\n\n * 新刊書の広告は当時の高級紙 **にとっては** 、抜群に重要な地位を占めていたのである。 \n_For the high-class coated paper of the time, the advertisement of the new\npublication occupied an outstandingly important position._\n\nExamples of \"としては\" from\n[here](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_result)\n\n * 生活保障 **としては** 私は全く不十分だと、このように考えております。 \n_As a living security, I think it is totally inadequate_.\n\n * 投資効果 **としては** 非常に高いものがあります。 \n_As an investment effect, it is highly effective_.\n\n * 社会的な解決方策 **としては** 、ある程度のルールができたのではないかという気がします。 \n_As a social solution strategy, I feel that some rules have been created_.\n\n * 私 **としては** 引き続き、Ｄ社との交渉をやってくれるとありがたいな。 \n_As for me, I would appreciate it if you continue to negotiate with D\ncompany_.\n\n * 自分 **としては** 、別に、笑いをとろうと思って恋愛をしてきたわけではないからだ。 \n_As for me, I have been in love not because especially I wanted to get a\nlaugh_.\n\n> Would I be correct in reading things like 私には or 個人的には as being \"to me\"?\n> Like in the following: \n> 私には寿司が美味しいって！To me sushi is tasty! \n> Or \n> 彼には女性が誰よりきれいです。To him she is better than anyone.\n\nYour reading for \"to me\" in the above two sentences are somewhat correct. \n私には and 個人的には are both correct, but I prefer 私には to 個人的には in the given\nsentences because 私には is used in more informal situation. If you want to\nexpress \"to me\" somewhat formally, you are better to use 個人的には rather than\n私には.\n\nBut, \"個人的には _personally_ \" and \"私には _to me_ \" are slightly different in\nmeaning besides formality, and they seem not always interchangeable when I\nexamine the following example sentences.\n\nExamples of \"私には\" from\n[here](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_result)\n\n * **私には** 詩とそのコスチュームがなんとなく合わないような違和感があった。 \n_There was a strange feeling for me that poetry and that costume would not fit\ntogether_.\n\n * **私には** 動くことが必要だった。 \n_It was necessary for me to take action_.\n\n * **私には** まだ余裕すらあった感じがした。 \n_I felt I could still afford to do/accept something else_.\n\n * たいしたものではないという樹氷が **私には** 不思議であった。 \n_It was strange to me that the rime on trees (look like ice monsters) are not\na big deal_.\n\n * 彼の姿が消えてからも、 **私には** すべてが見えていた。 \n_Even after he disappeared, everything was visible to me_.\n\n * より多くほしがっている **私には** 、乞食者となる権利がない。 \n_There is no right to become a beggar for me who always wants more_.\n\nExamples of \"個人的には\" from\n[here](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_result)\n\n * ミクロの世界で考えるのと反対に、一方でマクロの世界でも **個人的には** 理解できないことがたくさんあります。 \n_Contrary to thinking in a microscopic world, there are many things that can\nnot be understood personally even from a macroscopic standpoint_.\n\n * この種の奇跡の方が **個人的には** 好きだ。 \n_I personally like this kind of miracle_.\n\n * **個人的には** 、とても好きな人達が多い。 \n_Personally, there are many people I like very much_.\n\n * 三浦 **個人的には** 入っていただくのに賛成です。 \n_I, my name is Miura, personally agree that he will take part_.\n\n * **個人的には** 社会で働きつづけたい。 \n_Personally I want to keep working in society_.\n\n * **個人的には** モハメド・アリが嫌いだというエドマンド・フラーがこの見方を代表している。 \n_The viewpoint of Edmundo Fuller who personally hates Muhammad Ali is the\ntypical one of this kind_.\n\n * 私は、 **個人的には** 日本に親しみを覚えている。 \n_Personally I am familiar with Japan_.\n\nThere is an expression \"私的{わたしてき}には _privately_ \" that is resembles \"私には _to\nme_ \". And, there is a fixed word as \"私的｛してき｝ _private_ \" as the antonym of\n\"公的｛こうてき｝ _public_ \". \n\"私的｛わたしてき｝\" and \"私的｛してき｝\" use the exact same _kanji_ s, but how they are used\nis largely different. \"私的｛わたしてき｝\" has been used these days mainly in young\nwomen. This word is not a very well-behaved word, but it could be used safely\nin a daily conversation between young women like talking about the taste of\nsushi like saying \"私的｛わたしてき｝には、お寿司は美味しいわ！\"\n\n> To me sushi is tasty!\n\nBefore thinking about how to express the English sentence in Japanese, I would\nlike to point out that this sentence is unnatural semantically. When you read\nthis sentence, it implies that whether sushi is tasty or not depends on\npeople, but in fact in Japan, there are premises that many people think sushi\nis tasty.\n\nAnd this sentence also implies that the partner in the conversation seems to\nhave said that \"sushi isn't tasty\".\n\nTherefore, it is natural that in the correct interpretation we would place\nsome comments against the partner's taste for sushi at the first half of the\nsentence, and also the interpretation should not be made for sushi in general,\nbut for the sushi put in front of me and the partner. So the natural\ninterpretation for the given sentence in Japanese will be like:\n\n * Answer by men: 「えっ、寿司まずい！ 俺には、 **この** 寿司美味しいけどなあ。」\n * Answer by women: 「 **この** お寿司全然まずくないけど。私には、美味しいわ！」\n\nHowever, as we are studying Japanese now, let's put these subtle and detailed\ninterpretations aside.\n\n> \"To me sushi is tasty!\"\n\n * 私には、寿司美味しいですよ！ (recommended)\n * 俺には、寿司美味しいけどなあ！ (recommended)\n * 私には、お寿司美味しいわ！ (recommended)\n * 私には寿司が美味しいって！ (acceptable but unnatural)\n * 個人的には寿司が美味しいって！ (acceptable but unnatural)\n * 私には寿司は美味しいです。 (grammatically correct and standarad but lacking in emotion, because it does not express the nuance of an interrogation mark) \n * 私にとって寿司は美味しいです。 (same as the above sentence. Better than 私にとっては寿司は美味しいです。)\n * 私にとっては寿司は美味しいです。 (same as the above sentence. It sounds like a machine translation.)\n\nLastly, a simple and natural interpretation in Japanese for the given sentence\nin English is like:\n\n> 寿司って美味しいけど。or 寿司って美味しいですけど。 _Sushi is delicious/tasty, though_.\n\nIn this translation, \"to me\" is omitted, and \"though\" is added, because, in\nnatural Japanese, \"私 _I_ \" that is the substantial subject of the sentence is\nomitted, and the speakers intention would not be expressed decisively.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-23T13:58:28.660",
"id": "52634",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-26T01:54:00.280",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-26T01:54:00.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "52616",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52616 | 52617 | 52617 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52621",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "## Background\n\nI'm aware that the ~たい form of a verb indicates _wanting_ to do something,\nthough - until recently - I hadn't thought about how I could say that I\n_didn't_ want to do something.\n\nA quick internet search lead me to [this\npage](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/complete/desire_volition) of Tae\nKim's guide, with the following example:\n\n> 3. 怖い映画は、見たくないよ。 \n> (I) don't want to watch (a) scary movie.\n>\n\nI also came across [another site](http://www.brighthubeducation.com/learning-\njapanese/37489-tai-verb-structure-want-to-do-not-want-to/), which mentions\npast-tense variants for both the positive (~たい) and negative (~くない) forms:\n\n> Any Japanese -tai form verb conjugates just like an -i adjective does, so\n> here is an example with miru (to see):\n```\n\n> Present Tense | Present Tense Neg. | Past Tense | Past Tense Neg.\n> \n> mitai | mitakunai | mitakatta | mitakunakatta\n> \n```\n\n>\n> You can see those conjugations as \"want to,\" \"don't want to,\" \"wanted to,\"\n> and \"didn't want to\" in English.\n\nHowever, I was confused about how, say, 飲む would be made negative - some of\nthe guides I came across were rather vague, and seemed to indicate that I\nshould replace the ~ む with ~くない (or perhaps just the ~u, with ~akunai),\ngiving either 飲くない or 飲まくない. Neither of these seemed correct; I believe that\nit should actually be 飲んだくない.\n\n### The answer(?)\n\nMy understanding is that I can derive the past/present and positive/negative\n~たい variants of a verb as follows:\n\n * **Present (Positive):** The formal, positive-present conjugation with ~たい instead of ~ます.\n * **Present (Negative):** The plain, positive-past conjugation with ~くない on the end.\n * **Past:** As above, but with ~かった in place of ~い.\n\nHere are some examples, based on the above:\n\n * 飲む \n * 飲みます → 飲み(たい) → 飲みた(かった)\n * 飲んだ → 飲んだ(くない) → 飲んだくな(かった)\n * 黙る \n * 黙ります → 黙り(たい) → 黙りた(かった)\n * 黙った → 黙った(くない) → 黙ったくな(かった)\n * 話す \n * 話します → 話し(たい) → 話した(かった)\n * 話した → 話した(くない) → 話したくな(かった)\n * 食べる \n * 食べます → 食べ(たい) → 食べた(かった)\n * 食べた → 食べた(くない) → 食べたくな(かった)\n * する \n * します → し(たい) → した(かった)\n * した → した(くない) → したくな(かった)\n * 来る \n * 来ます → 来(たい) → 来た(かった)\n * 来た → 来た(くない) → 来たくな(かった)\n\n### tl;dr\n\nDo the \"rules\" above correctly describe how verbs are modified to indicate\n(not) wanting to do something, in both the past and present tense?\n\nAlso: Is adding です afterwards the correct way to make a variant more polite,\nregardless of whether it is past/present or positive/negative? For example,\nare 飲みたい **です** / 飲んだくない **です** / 飲みたかった **です** / 飲んだくなかった **です** all\nacceptable?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T20:35:36.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52620",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T21:49:46.577",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9212",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "How can the ~たい form of a verb be modified for past/present or positive/negative use?",
"view_count": 6790
} | [
{
"body": "【たい】follows 【連用形】 (the continuative form, masu-form, i.e 飲み, 食べ, 歩き) so you\ncan't attach it to 【過去形】 (past tense, but other stuff as well). Instead you\nconjugate 【たい】 to the correct tense to indicate you wanted to do something in\nthat time period.\n\nExample of positive ~たい:\n\n飲みたい (I want to drink)\n\n飲みたかった (I wanted to drink)\n\nExample of negative ~たい:\n\n飲みたくない (I don't want to drink)\n\n飲みたくなかった (I didn't want to drink)\n\nYou are spot on about 【です】, however. It's the polite version of 【だ】.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T21:18:23.607",
"id": "52621",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T21:49:46.577",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-22T21:49:46.577",
"last_editor_user_id": "25454",
"owner_user_id": "25454",
"parent_id": "52620",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52620 | 52621 | 52621 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52623",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am reading Tobira and came across this sentence:\n\n日本の国土は、北海道、本州、四国、九州 **と呼ばれる** 四つの大きい島と６０００以上の小さい島でできています。\n\nIs と呼ばれる similar to the usage of と言う? I could not find \"toyobareru\" on the web\nor in a grammar book. And if so, would the translation be \"called\"? Also why\nis 呼ぶ in its passive form?\n\nThanks for your help!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T22:34:15.270",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52622",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T23:37:52.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25505",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How is と呼ばれる used?",
"view_count": 1376
} | [
{
"body": "+1 for using Tobira, that's chapter 1 I'm sure. :)\n\nThere is nothing special about と呼ばれる. Basically that's simply the particle と\nplus the verb 呼ぶ that, conjugated in the passive form, becomes 呼ばれる.\n\nThe verb 呼ぶ has several meanings and usages, the most common being \"to call\nout (to) / to call / to invoke / to summon (a doctor, etc) / to invite.. and\nsome others. Therefore, in the passive form we can translate it as \"to be\ncalled\".\n\nThe particle と is used simply because the verb 呼ぶ, when used to indicate how\nsomething is named, requires the particle と. That particle is no different\nthan the と you see in と思う basically.\n\nFor example: 友達は私をトミーと呼ぶ means \"my friends call me Tommy\".\n\nOr, if you want to use passive, 私は友達にトミーと呼ばれている, for example (I'm being called\nTommy by my friends.. although in English you would hardly construct the\nsentence this way).\n\nSo to get to your sentence, that simply is:\n\n> The country of Japan is made of four big islands **(that are) called**\n> Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyuushuu, and over 6000 other small islands.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-22T23:37:52.233",
"id": "52623",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-22T23:37:52.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "52622",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 52622 | 52623 | 52623 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52625",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "According to the dictionary on my MacBook Pro, ありあまる means \"be [have*] more\nthan enough\". I was thinking about the song by\n[ゲスの極み乙女:ロマンスがありあまる](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsFJgNQfwcg) when I first\nheard the word/expression.\n\nThe question boils down to if I can use ありあまる as a positive expression\n\n`ロマンスがありあまる I have lots of romance, and that is a good thing`\n\nor a negative expression\n\n`ロマンスがありあまる I am fed of with romance, and that is a bad thing`\n\nOr maybe it is context dependent? \nThe dictionary also provides me with two examples\n\n▸ 精力が有り余っている have too much [an excess of] energy.\n\n▸ 彼には有り余るほどの金がある He has more money than he can spend.\n\nBut I still do not know if they are meant as negative or positive.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-23T06:19:51.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52624",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T22:43:17.903",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-23T07:34:00.687",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19159",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "Is the meaning of ありあまる negative or positive?",
"view_count": 290
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think the English expressions, \"too many,\" \"too much,\" and \"more than\nhe can spend\", are negative, grammatically. I believe that they are\naffirmative expressions.\n\nHowever, I agree that they would mean something that has a **_bad_**\nconnotation.In other words, a **_negative_** connotation. And I believe that\nyou're asking about this point. In that case, I'd say, \"It depends on the\ncontext.\"\n\nA \"精力がありあまっている\" guy may have a lot of girlfriends and tend to have immoral\nlove affairs. So I think it would mean something bad, when I think of the\nmoral.\n\n> 彼は精力がありあまっていて生き生きしている。実にうらやましい。\n\nIn this sentence, however, the writer apparently envies him. So they probably\nthink that it's a good thing for him or for them.\n\n> 彼には有り余るほどの金がある。\n\nIn this case, I envy him, and I personally don't think it's bad thing to be\nrich for him.\n\nIn short, it depends on the context and you cannot decide which grammatically.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-23T07:13:47.280",
"id": "52625",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-23T07:19:12.167",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-23T07:19:12.167",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "52624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think the translation, in the context of the song, and put into natural-\nsounding English, is along the lines of:\n\n\"There must be love for me somewhere...\"\n\nWhen you google \"ari-amaru\", there's one link that shows translations from\nmundane documents...\n\n[https://www.linguee.com/japanese-english/translation/ありあまる.html]\n\n...and it's clear from the examples that although in English we end up using\nthe single word \"have\", the meaning in Japanese is more emphatic. \"You must\nhave third-party insurance coverage if you buy a car in Australia...\";\n\"Diabetes is almost always a co-morbidity when a person has cardiovascular\ndisease...\"; etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-28T03:48:28.240",
"id": "78834",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-28T03:48:28.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39818",
"parent_id": "52624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Update to the above: looks like I got it backwards.\n\n\"Ari-amaru\" is \"I have lots of...\"; see this translation of the song:\n\n[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OelvXQZGuC0 ]",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T22:43:17.903",
"id": "79906",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T22:43:17.903",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39857",
"parent_id": "52624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 52624 | 52625 | 52625 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "52630",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is a character, an older male, in this manga that I'm reading who uses\nthis phrase twice \nしないとな and the two lines are like this： \n\n> 1. お礼をしないとな \n>\n> 2. お別れをしないとな \n>\n>\n\nThe first line, he is referring to himself ( **I** should show my\ngratitude)-->I understood it more like \"It wouldn't do if I don't show my\ngratitude\" \"I have/must...(among these ideas). It was more clear when the\ncharacter said his 2nd line which I interpreted as: Say your goodbyes/Say\nfarewell (note, he was directing this to another character that was with him). \nI hope I made sense...What exactly is the usage of と here? What does it\nexpress? And does the 1st line sound okay with the interpretations I gave? \nThank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-23T09:55:28.687",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "52627",
"last_activity_date": "2019-07-20T16:09:43.613",
"last_edit_date": "2019-07-20T16:09:43.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Am I understanding this correctly? しないと",
"view_count": 173
} | [
{
"body": "This しないと is a omission of しないといけない. It means \"must\", \"have to\".\n\nI think you understand it correctly.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-23T12:03:21.527",
"id": "52630",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-23T12:03:21.527",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "52627",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 52627 | 52630 | 52630 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.