question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53774",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just stumbled across this word today, and was baffled to find that a thermos\nis a \"magic bottle\"? What reason is there for the kanji chosen? Was it a\ndecision by a company who introduced/manufactured the first thermoses in\nJapan?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-12T14:44:45.380",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53770",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-12T20:49:41.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18391",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Why is a thermos called a 魔法瓶?",
"view_count": 563
} | [
{
"body": "We had not understood the reason why a thermos is called 魔法瓶, but Mr.Awazu,\nwho was a director of 魔法瓶 memorial house, found out the reason a few years\nago.\n\nHe found out a oldest newspaper article which was written the word 魔法瓶 at\nOctober 11th in 1907. The article said that in his interview about hunting, a\nperson referred to the high performance and convenience of a thermos, which\nhad been just imported to Japan at that time, and quoted 魔法瓶(Magic Bottle) in\nAesop’s Fable. His words were used in the oldest advertisement of a thermos in\nJapan and he was decided to be the author of 魔法瓶.\n\nHowever 魔法瓶(Magic Bottle) isn't in Aesop’s Fable and it seems to be his\nmisunderstanding.\n\nThis is the source.\n<http://blog.livedoor.jp/blog_channel-0004/archives/27866247.html>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-12T20:40:21.337",
"id": "53774",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-12T20:49:41.533",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-12T20:49:41.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "53770",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 53770 | 53774 | 53774 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53777",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can に対して be replaced with に比べて sometimes?\n\nFor comparing things. Taishite seems to have other comparison uses that are\nmore specific but kurabete seems more flexible for general comparison use?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-12T19:57:57.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53773",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T01:17:48.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"sentence"
],
"title": "Can に対して be replaced with に比べて sometimes?",
"view_count": 369
} | [
{
"body": "Prescriptively speaking, no, but descriptively speaking, yes. It happens\n**informally/colloquially and in certain contexts**.\n\nSo, in what contexts? That is when 「～～に対{たい}して」 is used to describe a\n_**contrast**_ between two (or more) facts/things. When it means \" _\n**towards**_ \", however, it could never be replaced by 「～～に比{くら}べて」.\n\nExamples:\n\nYou would see/hear:\n\n> 「日本人男性{にほんじんだんせい}の平均靴{へいきんくつ}サイズが25センチであるの **に比べて** 、オランダ人男性のそれは29センチである。」\n>\n> \"The average shoe size for Japanese men is 25cm. In contrast with that, that\n> for Dutch men is 29cm.\"\n\nGrammarians might prefer seeing/hearing 「に対して」 there instead, but who speaks\nto please grammarians in his daily conversations?\n\nYou would _**not**_ see/hear:\n\n> 「あの先生{せんせい}は学生{がくせい} **に比べて** とても厳{きび}しい。」\n>\n> \"That teacher is very strict with his students.\"\n\nThat sentence is just out of the question. You must use 「に対して」 there.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T01:17:48.000",
"id": "53777",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T01:17:48.000",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53773",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53773 | 53777 | 53777 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53797",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a meeting, I heard this word バーター many times.\n\nThe conversation was like below: バーターを含めると売り上げが上がっていますが、含めない場合、下がります。\n\nWhat I understood from the context is that word is related to accounting\n(business)\n\nI tried searching in dictionary also still couldn't understand.\n<http://jisho.org/search/%E3%83%90%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BF%E3%83%BC>\n\nCould someone please help me to understand the meaning of this word, and where\nit is used?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T01:34:46.413",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53778",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T01:54:07.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"katakana"
],
"title": "What does バーターmean?",
"view_count": 275
} | [
{
"body": "バーター has two major meanings:\n\n * _barter_ or 物々交換, as described in English Wikipedia article [barter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barter)\n * _cross-selling_ , _tying arrangement_ , _packaged deal_ , バンドル商法 or 抱き合わせ as described [here](http://www.excite.co.jp/News/column_g/20160120/B_chive_bartar-towa-nanika.html) and [here](http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/6418773/). Etymologically it's **an anagram of 束** (たば, \"bundle\").\n\nPersonally, I'm rather familiar with the _latter_ sense because it's fairly\ncommon in gossip columns. If you work in the showbiz industry, it's almost\ncertainly the latter. I think I have seen バーター used in the latter sense\noutside of the showbiz industry a few times.\n\n* * *\n\nSome examples of バーター in the latter sense on the net (most are about 芸能人, but\nI picked examples outside the 芸能界 here):\n\n> ### [EMOBILE LTE -\n> Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EMOBILE_LTE&oldid=62325838)\n>\n> Nexus 7 (2013)…Cellularモデルについては、イー・アクセスからの発売はされず、Google\n> Playでの購入か、MVNO提供プロバイダからの提供により使用可能。販売店によっては、Wi-Fiモデルについて、\n> **データ端末とのバーターで販売された** ケースも散見された。\n>\n> ### [誰かの落し物\n> 第2話](https://kakuyomu.jp/works/1177354054881180235/episodes/1177354054882068321)\n>\n>\n> 並んで待って、5分ぐらいで列は進んで自分の番が回ってくる。見ると、明太子がこれでもかと詰められた容器が狭しと並んでいる。その隣には、「今だけ１００円！」と銘打った燻製のイカまで。やはり大阪人、\n> **抱き合せ、バーター商法** にも弱い。明太の形が整って、量の多そうな容器を選んで店員さんに「イカも一緒に」と言って手渡す。\n>\n> ### [ECCビジネススクール 販売単価アップを成功させる３つの方法](http://ecc-\n> business.jp/2016/10/06/post-465/)\n>\n> まず第一がクロスセルです。これは **バーター**\n> 商法といって古くから行われているスキルです。つまり『ついで買い』を誘導する方法になります。駅弁屋さんがお茶やミカンを一緒に販売している、あのやり方です。これは注文の品だけをお出しするのではなく、それに関連する商品・サービスをもう一つお勧めする方法で、単価の安いファーストフードでお馴染みでしょう。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T01:26:29.523",
"id": "53797",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T01:54:07.283",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53778",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53778 | 53797 | 53797 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why I-keiyoushi is used more in reduplicated words than na-keiyoushi?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T02:45:49.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53779",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-04T18:00:40.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25631",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"i-adjectives",
"na-adjectives",
"reduplication"
],
"title": "Reduplicated words",
"view_count": 299
} | [
{
"body": "The usages of those \"reduplicated words\" vary.\n\n * 仰々しい, 苦々しい, 馬鹿馬鹿しい: works only as an i-adjective\n * 高々, 渋々, 延々, 脈々, 飄々, 黙々, 泣く泣く, ワンワン, ピューピュー, じゃんじゃん: works only as a standalone adverb (some are followed by と)\n * 様々: works only as a na-adjective\n * 直々: works only as a no-adjective\n * 喧々諤々, 明々白々: works both as a na-adjective and a no-adjective\n * 色々: works both as a na-adjective and a standalone adverb\n * ピカピカ, バリバリ: works both as a no-adjective and a standalone adverb\n * 軽々(しい): works both as an i-adjective and a standalone adverb\n * 楽々: works as a na-adjective, a no-adjective and a standalone adverb\n\nNote that adjectives can of course conjugate into their adverbial form and be\nused adverbially, too (eg 仰々しく, 様々に, 直々に).\n\nAmong these, probably the largest category is \"only as a standalone adverb\",\nbecause most onomatopoeia and mimetic words fall into this category. As you\ncan see, even many kanji reduplicated words refuse to accept all of しい, な and\nの (we don't say ×飄々しい, ×飄々な, ×飄々の).\n\nTo answer your question, I'm not sure which is statistically larger in number.\nIs it really the fact backed up by some existing research? If reduplicated na-\nadjectives are really relatively less common than reduplicated i-adjectives,\nthat's probably because many words are used as **no** -adjectives instead of\nna-adjectives.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T01:00:34.430",
"id": "53796",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T01:07:07.237",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-14T01:07:07.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53779",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53779 | null | 53796 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "From what I read earlier, **君【きみ】** can be used for \"you\". But in many\ninstances over the Internet, I have seen **キミ** being used instead of\n**君【きみ】**. What is the usage difference between the two?\n\nIf I take the following sentence for example\n\n> ちょっと、そこのきみ！\n\nwhich means \"Hey, you there!\"\n\nCan it be written as both\n\n> ちょっと、そこの君！\n>\n> ちょっと、そこのキミ！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T05:46:19.777",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53780",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-14T02:03:58.373",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-14T02:03:58.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"second-person-pronouns"
],
"title": "Difference between the usage of 君 and キミ",
"view_count": 4017
} | [
{
"body": "> Difference between the usage of 君 and キミ\n\nIt depends where they are used. \nIn Japanese, there are several ways of writing a word like in _hiragana_ ,\n_katakana_ and _kanji_ as is asked by the questioner for the way of writing\n\"kimi\". The type of characters depends largely on in what kind of sentences\n\"kimi\" will be written. The closer to the formal sentence the less freedom of\nchoice becomes, and in that case \"kimi\" is usually written as \"君\" in kanji.\n\nNext, in case of personal sentences used in the network or sentences of\nnovelists where the expression method is free, the type of characters depend\nlargely on that placed before and after \"kimi\" rather than how to express the\nwriter's intention by them.\n\n> (1) ちょっと、そこのきみ！\n\nAs you know, there is no space between words in written Japanese sentences,\nunlike English. Therefore, it is most important for the writer to properly use\nthe type of characters so that the reader can easily parse the sentence\nwithout misreadings as is intended by the writer.\n\nIn this sense, the sentence with (1) would not be evaluated highly in\nselecting the type of characters for expressing \"kimi\" because for even a\nnative speaker of Japanese, it is not easy to parse \"そこのきみ\" of 5 characters in\n_hiragana_ in a moment.\n\n> (2) ちょっと、そこの君！ \n> (3) ちょっと、そこのキミ！\n\nFrom the viewpoint of recognizing the word \"kimi\" in the phrase, both (2) and\n(3) are much better than (1). \nIn general, \"ちょっと、そこのkimi！\" is not used so much because it has a nuance that\nthe speaker of the phrase seems arrogant or bossy.\n\nI have an impression that (2) is more common and (3) is like an expression\nused within friends. Therefore, I think it is reasonable for the questioner to\nsay that he/she has seen キミ many times on the Internet.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T13:24:49.703",
"id": "53783",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T13:24:49.703",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53780",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The difference is very small, and this is basically up to the writer's taste.\nI somehow feel キミ tends to be preferred in some recent \"light\" novels, but\nthis is far from a rule.\n\nSee: [Why are katakana preferred over hiragana or kanji\nsometimes?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1930/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T06:30:17.450",
"id": "53895",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T06:30:17.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53780",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Choice of script in Japanese writing is often a stylistic attempt by a writer\nto convey some non-standard subliminal meaning. There have been some\ninteresting analyses on this topic done over the years. Just to give you an\nidea of some of the findings, one study found that certain characteristics\nwere often attributed to script usage, as follows:\n\n**Hiragana:** feminine, soft, smooth, round, tender, simple, childish, lovely,\nelegant, etc. \n**Katakana:** novel, foreign, emphasizing, hard, fake, male, futuristic,\nsharp, jarring, angular, etc. \n**Kanji:** scientific, rigid, masculine, formal, hard, difficult,\nintellectual, visual, substantial, etc.\n\nIt’s clear that 君 is usually written in kanji, so a writer’s decision to use\nキミ would definitely be an attempt to inject something different into the\n‘tone’ of the word. In your example, perhaps it is an extra sense of\nirritation that the writer is trying to express. Or maybe a sense of urgency.\nThe point is, deciding to use a script which is not conventional is a way to\ninfer different layers of meaning. What that meaning is can depend on things\nlike the writer's intention, the context, the characters, etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-26T13:27:28.530",
"id": "57544",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-26T13:27:28.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53780",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53780 | null | 57544 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53782",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the difference between 重{じゅう}責{せき} and 責{せき}任{にん}? They both have\nalmost identical meanings - \"Heavy responsibility\" and \"Responsibility\". I\nfound at [goo](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/104005/meaning/m0u/) even this\nexample:\n\n> 重大な責任。「重責を果たす」",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T06:00:52.303",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53781",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T07:28:57.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 重責 and 責任?",
"view_count": 309
} | [
{
"body": "責任 is _responsibility_ , 重責 is _huge responsibility_.\n\nThis happens because many Sino-Japanese compounds are [made by combining two\nsimilar (or closely-related) kanji to reduce the number of\nhomophones](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15111/5010). The kanji 責 on\nits own has the meaning of _responsibility_ , but it's too short and people\nusually use 責任 in sentences (責 is occasionally used as a standalone word,\nthough). In words with more complex meanings, 責 is enough.\n\nSimilar examples:\n\n * 病気【びょうき】 (disease) vs 重病【じゅうびょう】 (severe disease)\n * 結婚【けっこん】 (marriage) vs 重婚【じゅうこん】 (bigamy/polygamy)\n * 岩石【がんせき】 (rock) vs 巨岩【きょがん】 (huge rock)\n * 帝王【ていおう】 (emperor) vs 女帝【じょてい】 (empress)\n * 幸福【こうふく】 (happiness) vs 不幸【ふこう】 (unhappiness/misfortune)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T06:30:29.460",
"id": "53782",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T07:28:57.330",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-13T07:28:57.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 53781 | 53782 | 53782 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53849",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found the word [グギイイ](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cZNUY.jpg), while reading a\ncomic and I'm having trouble figuring out its meaning. The only thing I can\nthink of is that \"グギ\" could be a sfx for \"popping veins\", seeing as the\ncharacter is getting angry at his friends for being lazy; but the word is not\nlisted on <http://thejadednetwork.com/sfx/> and it's written inside a speech\nbubble, making it look like the character is shouting it. This is my first\npost, so I hope I'm not violating any rules. Thank you very much for whatever\nhelp you'll provide!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T16:18:28.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53786",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T14:42:14.907",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-13T23:59:07.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "26128",
"owner_user_id": "26128",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "Is グギイイ a sound effect?",
"view_count": 387
} | [
{
"body": "Onomatopoeia are infamously difficult to translate, since there are around 3\ntimes as many of them in Japanese as in English. They can also vary from\nregion to region in Japan, and even from person to person.\n\nIn general, when the onomatopoeia uses voiced consonants (with dakuten like\nぐぎ) it is denoting something forceful. Remember that voicing a consonant means\nyou have to vibrate your larynx, and it is this extra vibration which is said\nto provoke an impression of force or intensity in the listener. Some typical\nexamples: \nころころ something small rolling **vs** ごろごろ thunder, purring \nさらさら silky **vs** ざらざら rough\n\nSo I'd say from the context it is likely to mean something forceful, something\ngutteral, something strong or powerful, something which is intended to convey\nintensity.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T14:42:14.907",
"id": "53849",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T14:42:14.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53786",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53786 | 53849 | 53849 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53788",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A question came up recently that made me wonder how this form is for the verb\nです.\n\nI know that です has a ～たら form that is conjugated as だったら。But, does it have a\n～れば form? Is it でれば？ (I don't think so because that's more likely 出れば。) Is it\nだれば？ Or is it であれば？ (from である rather than です）\n\nIf it is であれば, why is that so?\n\nI know that once I knew this but I seem to have forgotten. Help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T16:24:58.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53787",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T16:43:00.757",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "「～れば」 form for 「です」",
"view_count": 210
} | [
{
"body": "It **is** 〜であれば. This is because です is really just a contraction of であります。 So\nyou simply take the 〜れば form of あります, which is あれば.\n\nSimilarly, the だったら you mentioned is also just a contraction of であったら, and you\ncan see あったら is just the 〜たら form of あります.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T16:35:46.997",
"id": "53788",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T16:43:00.757",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-13T16:43:00.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "53787",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53787 | 53788 | 53788 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "when a rocket is launched during a take-off... what sound does it make and how\nis it written in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T16:55:02.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53789",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T21:19:14.660",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-13T21:19:14.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "26129",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-requests",
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "What is the sound of a rocket going off in Japanese?",
"view_count": 124
} | [
{
"body": "The sound I think of is ゴォォォォォーーーー.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T17:53:47.647",
"id": "53791",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T17:53:47.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "53789",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53789 | null | 53791 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53792",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: a character of a manga is being interviewed in the extra section at\nthe end of the manga. She receives a question about a chapter in which she had\nsex with another character after talking to him.\n\n> 第１７話のあの時ですが… ぶっちゃけ感じてました？\n\nI know that `ぶっちゃける` means `to speak frankly`, but what is the meaning of\nぶっちゃけ感じてました? Are they asking her if she felt that the boy was sincere/honest?\nOr is it a question about her own sincerity? Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T17:12:36.727",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53790",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T19:32:55.167",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-13T18:39:35.140",
"last_editor_user_id": "17797",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"verbs",
"colloquial-language",
"manga"
],
"title": "Meaning of 感じる in sexual context",
"view_count": 1057
} | [
{
"body": "When 感じる is used in having sex, it means \"to feel sexual stimulation\", \"to\nfeel good (sexually)\".\n\nSo it means \"Frankly, were you feeling good?\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T18:16:57.843",
"id": "53792",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-13T19:32:55.167",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-13T19:32:55.167",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "53790",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53790 | 53792 | 53792 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can 自己{じこ} mean _self_ in the sense that someone does something for herself?\nOr does it mean ego? I was thinking about using the word in a make-your-own\nart business. Does that make sense?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-13T20:21:18.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53793",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T02:05:12.590",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-14T04:06:20.270",
"last_editor_user_id": "25960",
"owner_user_id": "26132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "true meaning of \"jiko\"",
"view_count": 2660
} | [
{
"body": "I will explain \"自己\" by comparing with words similar to it.\n\nIn the definition said in psychology,\n\n> 自分 is \"generarized existence of myself, or whole existence of me\". \n> 自我 is \"subjective self, or myself which I feel that way\". \n> 自己 is \"objective self, or myself that is seen from others\".\n\nWith this answer, I understand that it would not be useful for the application\nassumed by the questioner, so I'll give him/her a specialized answer for that\napplication.\n\n> I was thinking about using the word in a _**make-your-own**_ art business.\n\nー\n\n> ### EDIT\n>\n> 自己 and 自我 are not suitable to be used in your new business, because they\n> have a nuance of terms used in philosophy or/and psychology. Only 自分 could\n> be used for \"self\" in your buisness. But it is obvious that \"自分\" which means\n> \"self\" or \"me\" alone cannot be used for business, so I'll show some examples\n> assuming that \"自分\" is used in a context like \"my preference\", because the\n> questioner did not clarify how \"self\" would be used more concretely than\n> \"make-your-own art business\".\n\nIf you want to find a proper word to express \"make-your-own\" with having\nfashionable nuance for your new art business, I would say it will be \"\n**自分{じぶん}好｛ごの｝み** \" which means _**one's taste**_.\n\n自分好み is a noun, and 自分好みの and 自分好みに are an adjective and adverb respectively\nderived from 自分好み.\n\nIt will be used in a sentence like:\n\n> 私｛わたし｝の部屋｛へや｝の壁紙｛かべがみ｝を **自分好みに** 合｛あ｝わせて変｛か｝えたいと思｛お｝っている。 \n> _I want to change the wallpaper of my room **to my taste**._\n\nAs another option, I think that \" **自分｛じぶん｝流｛りゅう｝** \" which means _**one's own\nway**_ , _**one's own style**_ or _**one's own fashion**_ can be used for the\nbusiness you are planning.\n\n**EDIT** : 自分流 is a noun, and 自分流の and 自分流に are an adjective and adverb\nrespectively derived from 自分流.\n\nIt will be used in a sentence like:\n\n> しかし、能力{のうりょく}が成熟{せいじゅく}するに至{いた}れば、 **自分流{じぶんりゅう}のやり方{かた}で**\n> 経験{けいけん}を利用{りよう}し、解釈{かいしゃく}するのは、人間{にんげん}の特権{とっけん}であり、本来{ほんらい}の状態{じょうたい}なのです。 \n> _But it is the privilege and proper condition of a human being, arrived at\n> the maturity of his faculties, to use and interpret experience **in his own\n> way**_. - - John Stuart Mill\n\n### EDIT\n\nI'll add some examples using 自分流.\n\n> •(言葉を) **自分流に** 用{もち}いる _to use words **in one's own** non-standard way_\n>\n> •おにぎりや寿司｛すし｝はきゅうりや海草｛かいそう｝、かにかまなどを使｛つか｝って **自分流** にアレンジしている。 _They make\n> **their own kinds** of rice balls and sushi using ingredients such as\n> cucumbers, seaweed or crab sticks_.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T14:03:26.603",
"id": "53804",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T02:05:12.590",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53793",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53793 | null | 53804 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53800",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Sorry for the weird question, as I don't know the proper title for my\nquestion. So, my problem is, how I read the kanji after the word 「アイテムを。。。」.\n\nHere's the image of the text I read.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KWeIm.png)\n\nIt was really hard to read the kanji on the back. I've been using KanjiTomo to\nhelp me decipher the kanji, but it was still hard to catch the meaning of the\nkanji. All of the result given completely out of context on regards with first\nfew words at front.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qk3ra.png)\n\nBTW, I'm a complete newbie on Japanese so please don't be to hard on me. :)\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T05:14:51.133",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53799",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T05:24:27.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26137",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Is it a correct kanji 「渡せ」?",
"view_count": 129
} | [
{
"body": "It's 渡せ, which is the imperative form of 渡す (わたす, \"to pass, to hand, to\ngive\"). The sentence says \"Pass the item (to me, to someone, to the statue in\nfront of you, etc.).\" See the second line of your search results, and you'll\nfind a more relevant definition.\n\n渡る is an intransitive version of 渡す.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T05:24:27.770",
"id": "53800",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T05:24:27.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53799 | 53800 | 53800 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Hi everyone this is my first post so I'm sorry if I wrote the post incorrectly\nbut my question is this. How would I say near in this sentence: \"Does anyone\nlive near (city name)?\" Would it be 近く？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T06:40:02.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53801",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T11:29:00.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26138",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "How would I say 'near' as in, \"Does anyone live near (city name)?\"",
"view_count": 1439
} | [
{
"body": "You are close, but 近く usually means \"in the near future\". To say \"nearby\", you\ncan use (～の)近く **に**.\n\n> * 私は東京の近くに住んでいます。 I live near Tokyo.\n> * 誰かこの近くに住んでいますか？ Does anybody live nearby?\n> * (compare: 近く東京に行きます。 I will go to Tokyo soon / in the near future.)\n>\n\nHere, 近く is a lexicalized **noun** meaning \"nearby place\". You can find the\nlist of similar nouns that look like the ku-form of i-adjectives in this\nquestion: [Is anything implied, but not written, in this nominalization\n\"遠くを見つめる\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/27286/5010)\n\nAlternatively, you can say 近いところに, although this is a bit wordy.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T11:29:00.460",
"id": "53802",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T11:29:00.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53801",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53801 | null | 53802 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53820",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The 1993 4級 test had this vocabulary question:\n\n> ちちは いま、しんぶんを ＿＿＿＿ いって います。\n>\n> １ ぬぎに ２ よびに ３ ききに ４ かいに\n\nAm I right to say that the answer is 4, かいに, with the sentence as **My dad\nwent to buy a newspaper** (Now, he is in the process of going to buy a\nnewspaper)?\n\n**If so, would it be the same as saying ちちは いま、しんぶんを かいに いきました。?**",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T13:36:10.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53803",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T13:13:24.230",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"particle-に",
"tense",
"aspect",
"verbs-of-motion"
],
"title": "行っています versus 行きました",
"view_count": 1695
} | [
{
"body": "いっています is the polite progressive conjugation of 行く which is \"to go\". This is\ndifferent from いきました, which is the polite past, in that it is saying that the\naction is ongoing as opposed to having been already completed. If I were to\nsay かいにいきました, it would mean \"went to buy\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T14:47:14.887",
"id": "53806",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T15:31:12.207",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-14T15:31:12.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "26142",
"owner_user_id": "26142",
"parent_id": "53803",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The correct answer would certainly be 「買{か}いに」. The sentence would make\npractically no sense with any of the other three phrase choices.\n\nSo we have:\n\n> 「父{ちち}は今{いま}、新聞{しんぶん}を買{か}いにいっています。」\n\nWhat does this sentence mean (and imply) exactly? It is saying:\n\n> \"My father went out some time ago to buy a newspaper **_and he has not\n> returned yet_**.\"\n\nThe last part in bold is what is implied by 「いっている」 and it is what the English\nsentence \" ** _My Daddy went to buy a newspaper_**.\" does not necessarily\nimply.\n\nThe Japanese sentence above with no further words or context \"says\" without\nfail that Daddy has **_not_** returned at the time of utterance.\n\nThe English sentence feels different in that it can mean daddy has already\nreturned. At the time of utterance, for that matter, this may even be about\nDaddy's action from weeks or years ago.\n\nThis may be a very small difference but my understanding is that SE is a place\nto discuss subtle differences.\n\n> Would it be the same as saying 「父は今、新聞を買いにいきました。」?\n\nThis sentence is closer in meaning to the one using 「いっています」 than the English\nsentence is because it uses 「今」. It is, however, still unclear whether or not\nDaddy has returned at the time of utterance. It would be completely natural if\nyou said that Japanese sentence **_after_** your daddy has returned home.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T13:13:24.230",
"id": "53820",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T13:13:24.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53803",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53803 | 53820 | 53820 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53808",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm sorry I can't provide a more specific headline, but it's the overall\nmeaning or the structure of the sentence that I'm struggling with.\n\nIt's from a manga (Plunderer, vol. 4). Here's the context:\n\nLicht, the hero, is regarded as a deserter. First lieutenant Jail is hunting\nhim. A lot of things happen and Jail actually ends up helping Licht. In doing\nso he violates military regulations. He hides Licht, but his superior finds\nout. On returning to their hideout, Jail tells Licht that he has to take him\ninto custody. He doesn't actually tell him why, but Licht seems to know and\nsays the following:\n\n> Bubble 1: さしあたりボクを連行すればボクを信頼させるため止{や}むをえずということにできるとかで...\n>\n> Bubble 2: 部下たちの命は助けられるって言われた...\n>\n> Bubble 3: って所かな...？\n\nNow, I think that all of this is one sentence which reads as \"You were told\nthat the lives of your subordinates could be saved by/if you [whatever bubble\n1 means], or something along those lines, right?\"\n\nI thought that bubble 1 must mean something like \"If you take me into custody\n[for now] in order to regain your superior's trust\", but that doesn't seem to\nbe the case after all. The parts seem to be there, but they just don't fit\ntogether (also, why \"ボクを信頼させる\"? I feel like I'm missing something here) and\nthen it's all enclosed by \"ということにできる\". I'm at a loss and I hope that someone\ncan shed light on this issue.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T16:13:22.023",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53807",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T01:36:38.767",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Can't wrap my mind around this sentence",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "First, さしあたり doesn't modify 連行すれば but って所かな (\"maybe / I guess\") and it means\nhow the speaker guesses is just hypothetical.\n\n~~Edit: I'm thinking it's more natural to interpret さしあたり modifies ということにできる\ninstead.~~ (This interpretation would mean they may punish Jail later, after\nall.)\n\nボク(Licht)を信頼させる means that Jail lets Licht believe him.\n\n…ということにできる is the potential form of …ということにする, which is \"to regard it as …\".\n\nSo, the first sentence means, \"with an excuse that they (Jail's boss) can\nregard it (Jail having hidden Licht) as an inevitable action to let me (Licht)\nbelieve him or so\".\n\nWith the second sentence, which is \"he (Jail) was told that they could save\nsubordinates' lives\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T17:56:10.830",
"id": "53808",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T01:36:38.767",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-17T01:36:38.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "53807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53807 | 53808 | 53808 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53816",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand what おまかせ means in the context of a sushi restaurant, where you\nlet the chef decide what's to be served, but I've also seen it pop up a few\ntimes in Japanese games.\n\nFor example, the most recent Mario Kart uses it to say you want to let the\ncomputer pick which course is gonna be played on next, and is thusly referring\nto random selection. Is this a common practice? As I can't find enough\ninstances of it to tell given my limited selection of Japanese translated\ngames.\n\nAnd if it is, what are the nuances of it? And is it meant as a pun by\nreferring back to it's original meaning and extrapolating from that to fit\nit's new context, or is that not the case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T19:23:30.717",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53809",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T07:44:14.797",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Can おまかせ be used to mean \"random\" in things like video games?",
"view_count": 642
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, おまかせ implies you let the chef choose the sushi according to the chef’s\npreferences, normally just for fun. On the other hand, if you let the computer\nchoose, you're allowing the computer to use their algorithm to choose a\ncourse. But this time, because video games are the entertainment, the term\nおまかせ is chosen to emphasize the game rather than to emphasize the randomness\nor mathematical model.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T01:00:14.113",
"id": "53816",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T07:44:14.797",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T07:44:14.797",
"last_editor_user_id": "17968",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53809",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53809 | 53816 | 53816 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53813",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I read in [this\nfile](http://www.mlcjapanese.co.jp/Download/Adjectives_Kana.pdf) (p. 7) the\ntwo statements :\n\n> すくない+[noun]は あまりつかいません\n>\n> おおい+[noun]は あまりつかいません\n\nNo translation being given, I'm wondering what the meaning of these sentences\nis. Maybe \"I don't use XXX very much.\" (?) Do they have the same meaning ? Can\nyou give an example ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T19:52:30.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53810",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T22:09:23.640",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-14T20:22:25.783",
"last_editor_user_id": "4550",
"owner_user_id": "4550",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "おおい / すくない+[noun]は あまりつかいません",
"view_count": 89
} | [
{
"body": "As @l'électeur said, those are explanations.\n\nIt is saying that, in general:\n\n> People don't use **すくない + [noun]** or **おおい + [noun]** (in sentences, etc.)\n> very often.\n\nThat's all.\n\nYou should notice their use of 「」quotes to show this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T21:10:45.823",
"id": "53813",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-14T22:09:23.640",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-14T22:09:23.640",
"last_editor_user_id": "16159",
"owner_user_id": "16159",
"parent_id": "53810",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53810 | 53813 | 53813 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53818",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm studying kanji right know and I found this verb with the kanji 別 and its:\nわかれる. It is an intransitive verb and it means to be divided. Then I found out\nthat to divide is 分ける but it has a different kanji. I did a little research\nand I found in a book that the intransitive form of 分ける is 分かれる which has the\nsame pronunciation as 別れる but it uses a different kanji too and it has another\nmeaning.\n\n> * 分ける = To divide (Transitive)\n>\n> * 別れる = To be divided (Intransitive)\n>\n> * 分かれる = To branch (Intransitive)\n>\n>\n\nCan someone explain this to me? For me it makes more sense that 別れる is the\nintransitive form of 分ける.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-14T21:29:50.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53815",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T19:16:16.663",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19322",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"orthography",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Is 別れる the intransitive form of 分ける?",
"view_count": 1827
} | [
{
"body": "> Is 「別{わか}れる」 the intransitive form of 「分{わ}ける」?\n\nNo, it is not. Instead, 「分かれる」 is the intransitive form of 「分ける」.\n\n「別れる」 means \" ** _to part from another person_** \" or to put it simply, it\nmeans \" ** _to say good-bye (to someone)_** \".\n\n「分ける」 means \" ** _to divide (into smaller units)_** \".\n\nFor that rather huge difference in meaning, 「別れる」 and 「分ける」 could not\nlogically form a transitive-intransitive verb pair.\n\n「分かれる」, however, means \" ** _to branch off_** \", \" ** _to split into_** \",\netc. and that makes it good enough to be the intransitive form of 「分ける」.\n\nAs a side note, 「分かれる」 and 「別れる」 originally were the same word when Japanese\nwas a spoken language. Since we started to write Japanese, two different kanji\nwere assigned to fit the two different usages of the verb \"wakareru\", which\nwould end up giving Japanese-learners a hard time 2,000 years later.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T06:38:22.503",
"id": "53818",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T06:38:22.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53815",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "The intransitive of わける is indeed わかれる. However, transitive–intransitive verb\npairs always use the same _kanji_ , so the intransitive of 分ける would be 分かれる.\n\nIn fact, transitive–intransitive pairs are a good way to recall the\n_okurigana_ of a verb. (For example, you can't assign a consistent reading to\n伸 if you were to write *伸る・*伸す for 伸びる・伸ばす.)\n\nEtymologically, 分かれる and 別れる are the same (intransitive) verb わかれる \"to\nseparate\", \"to split\". However, as with many, many other verbs (a prime\nexample being みる), _kanji_ have been used to differentiate different meanings.\nEven though 別れる is intransitive, you can tell from what I said above that it\ndoesn't have a transitive twin in modern Japanese, since its _okurigana_\ndoesn't accommodate a reading of 別 for わける.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T09:37:04.460",
"id": "53819",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T19:16:16.663",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-15T19:16:16.663",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "53815",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53815 | 53818 | 53818 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53822",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading some youtube comments and one of them were saying:\n\n> 日本語で他の動画を作成してください\n\nI wonder why use の in this phrase? Since it generally means possession or\ngives to a certain object some characteristic, like:\n\n> それが岡さんの車です or これの県大会はあこじゃない",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T13:38:35.070",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53821",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T13:21:37.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25472",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Why use の in this phrase?",
"view_count": 148
} | [
{
"body": "You are right to recognize that this usage of の is not the possessive use of\nthe particle.\n\nIn Japanese, when we study adjectives, we usually are taught that there are\ntwo types of adjectives: い-type and な-type. For the vast majority of\nadjectives, this is true, but there is yet another type of adjective that you\nwill encounter in your studies: の-type adjectives.\n\nAccording to jisho.org, [他 is a の-adjective.](http://jisho.org/word/%E4%BB%96)\nGiven the context of a YouTube comment, `他の動画` means `other video.` The person\nwho left the comment is saying the following:\n\n> Please make another video in Japanese.\n\nSo you might wonder, \"What should I know about the の-adjective?\" Well, there\nare quite a few resources on the internet. I have answered a question about\nthe の-adjective before, and you can find the information\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/48587/22352). The part in that\nanswer that will be useful to you is in the pictures, where you will find a\ngood explanation about how の and な adjective are related, and how they are\ndifferent.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T14:59:45.933",
"id": "53822",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T13:21:37.237",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T13:21:37.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "53821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53821 | 53822 | 53822 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm a little lost on which one to use for monster. Is there a different\nmeaning between the two? Which one is better to use for monster; [怪物]{かいぶつ} or\n[化]{ば}け[物]{もの}? Thank you in advance! :)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T15:40:23.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53823",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-06T10:18:28.793",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-18T01:23:52.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "26155",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Monster/Kaibutsu question: 怪物 or 化け物",
"view_count": 2225
} | [
{
"body": "WWWJDIC indicates 化物 as \"goblin; apparition; monster; ghost; phantom; spectre;\nspecter\" while a search for 怪物 returns just \"monster\". So going by these\ndefinitions, the first would be a more general term that you can apply to all\nsorts of fantastic and/or paranormal creatures, whereas the latter would seem\nto describe a more specific type of being.\n\nThis coincides with my personal opinion. When I hear or read 怪物, I think of a\nmore or less large...well, monster...with animalistic traits or body parts\nlike fangs, fur, etc. Also, I would imagine it as not being very intelligent.\nAs I already said though, this is very subjective.\n\nNow, 化物 is the term that I come across way more often than 怪物 in Manga, Anime,\nGames, Movies, etc. As stated above, it's used for all sorts of creatures.\nNote that people can also be called 化物, for example if they are particularly\ncruel, have superhuman powers, etc.\n\nAlso, there's the term 怪獣 for huge monsters like Godzilla and King Kong. 怪獣映画\nis it's own gerne of film and I think they also call the monsters in the\nPacific Rim franchise 怪獣.\n\nSo in the end, it depends on the context, as it often is the case in Japanese,\nbut I think you are almost always safe to use 化物.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T17:44:48.507",
"id": "53853",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T17:44:48.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26131",
"parent_id": "53823",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "化物 is more of a supernatural entity, like a ghost or spectre with ethereal\nform.\n\n怪物 is more of a terrestrial monster type of creature with physical form.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T14:20:13.083",
"id": "53874",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-06T10:18:28.793",
"last_edit_date": "2017-11-06T10:18:28.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53823",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "We need to clarify what kind of monsters you are dealing with. I think the\nsafest catch-all, neutral term for monsters is simply モンスター if we don't have\nany context.\n\n化け物 tends to refer to Japanese _yokai_ or has a fairly negative/derogatory\nconnotation. 怪物 tends to refer to large and strong creatures like dragons and\ngriffins.\n\n_Pikachu_ and _Cookie Monster_ are safely called モンスター, but I hesitate to call\nthem 化け物/怪物.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T08:37:09.033",
"id": "53896",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T08:37:09.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53823",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53823 | null | 53874 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53827",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The narrator says that he has a life flying around the world as a pilot, and\nthen says:\n\n> そんなふうに生きてきた **なかで** 、僕はいわゆる有能な人たちと、ずいぶんつきあってきた。 _Living in this way_ , I\n> have come to associate with many people who are supposedly capable people.\n\nI don't think I've got the first clause correct, because I think I could\ntranslate 'Living in this way,...' simply as 「そんなふうに生きて、...」\n\nMy other guess is that it means \"among the people who are living like this...\"\n, but wouldn't that be そんなふうに生きてきた **人の** なかで? It seems a bit far-fetched to\nomit 人.\n\nSo, I don't know what なかで is doing here and I've also failed to get the\nauxiliary verb きた into my translation.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T19:03:29.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53824",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T07:06:22.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "なかで after past tense verb",
"view_count": 687
} | [
{
"body": "I believe that the usage of 中 here is perhaps similar to that of the following\nsentences.\n\n> 今まで生きてきた **中** で、一番幸せです。I am happier than I have ever been in my life.\n>\n> 本日はお忙しい **中** （お越し下さって）ありがとうございます。Thank you for coming today (even though\n> you/you all are so busy).\n\nAs you can see, it can be used to denote not just a spatial center, but also a\nspan of time or circumstances surrounding a person.\n\nJim Breen's JDIC also lists \" **during; while** \" as a definition of 中.\n\n> 中 【なか】 (n) (1) inside; in; (2) among; within; (3) center (centre); middle;\n> (4) during; while\n\nSimilarly,\n\n> そんなふうに生きてきた **なか** で、僕はいわゆる有能な人たちと、ずいぶんつきあってきた。\n\nHere, what the author means is \"while in .. situation (of living this way)..\"\nor \"while living this way..\"\n\nIt may be difficult to comprehend at first, but it is not an uncommon pattern.\nYou should be able to find plenty of other examples as well.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T21:57:17.960",
"id": "53827",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T22:03:43.460",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9838",
"parent_id": "53824",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "質問者および回答者の提供する「なか/中」を含む文の「なか/中」の部分を別の表現に置き換えて「なか/中」の意味の理解に供したいと思います。\n\n * そんなふうに生きてきた **なかで** 、僕はいわゆる有能な人たちと、ずいぶんつきあってきた。 \nそんなふうに生きてきた **過程で** 、僕はいわゆる有能な人たちと、ずいぶんつきあってきた。\n\n * 今まで生きてきた **中で** 、一番幸せです。 \n今まで生きてきた **時間の中で** または **境遇の中で** 、一番幸せです。\n\n * 本日はお忙しい **中** （お越し下さって）ありがとうございます。 \n本日はお忙しい **状況/事情にも関わらず** （お越し下さって）ありがとうございます。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T07:06:22.270",
"id": "53836",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T07:06:22.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53824",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53824 | 53827 | 53827 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53872",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am reading _The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time_ by Mark\nHaddon in Japanese.\n\nTowards the end of chapter 67, Christopher is talking to Mrs Alexander, trying\nto find out who killed Wellington the dog.\n\nI noticed that Christopher started off by speaking politely, using です and ます,\nbut then he says something that ends in る. I am very confused by this.\n\nHere is part of the conversation. Note that I removed all the other non-\ndialogue text and C for Christopher and A for Mrs Alexander.\n\n> A: あなたのうちには犬はいないでしょ？\n>\n> C: ええ\n>\n> A: あなたはきっと犬が好きなのね？\n>\n> C: ネズミを飼って **います**\n>\n> A: ネズミ？\n>\n> C: トビーという名前 **です**\n>\n> A: おや\n>\n> C: 大概の人はネズミを **嫌がります**\n> 、なぜかというとネズミは腺ペストをうつすと思っているから。でもそれは彼らが下水管に住んでいたり、珍しい病気のある外国からやってくる船にこっそり乗り込んでくるせい\n> **です** 。でもネズミはとても清潔 **です** 。トビーはいつも自分の体をきれいにして _いる_ 。それからトビーをわざわざ散歩に連れて行く必要も\n> _ない_ 。ぼくの部屋にはなして走りまわらせて、運動させるだけで _いい_ 。それからときどきぼくの肩に座ったり、巣穴のつもりでぼくの服の袖に隠れたり\n> _する_ 。でもネズミはかならずしも巣穴には **住みません**\n>\n> A: なかに入ってお茶を飲まないこと？\n>\n> C: 他人の家には _入らない_\n\nI have made all the polite forms bold and all the plain forms italic.\nChristopher is starting with ネズミを飼って **います** and then changes to plain form\nhere: トビーはいつも自分の体をきれいにして _いる_. He then continues with the plain form until\nthis: でもネズミはかならずしも巣穴には **住みません**. And then changes to plain form again here:\n他人の家には _入らない_.\n\nNote that I understand that plain forms should be used in a relative clause\nlike 珍しい病気のある外国からやってくる船, I'm talking about why he ends his sentences with\nplain forms.\n\nI have never seen this kind of thing before. Characters in other books I read\ndon't seem to do this. The forms they use seldom change and changes are few,\nand never more than twice in a single dialogue! Why does Christopher switch\nbetween the two politeness levels?\n\nMy guess is that this is a symptom of Christopher's autism. Because he is\nautistic, he mixes up the two forms.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T19:34:11.143",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53825",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T14:13:59.613",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"politeness"
],
"title": "Why would one change from using polite form (です/ます) to using the plain form in the middle of a conversation (and change back later)?",
"view_count": 282
} | [
{
"body": "It's quite natural to mix forms. While we are taught as beginners that there\nis just a change in register, there's a lot more going on. E.g. the plain form\ncould in some contexts be more formal than the desu/masu form as it\n_increases_ distance between the speaker and the listener. The cat in 吾輩は猫である\nsounds pompous for this reason.\n\nHowever, the plain form can also be more emotive. Desu/masu implies a more\nfactual statement, and the plain form can be used for things closer to the\nspeaker.\n\nLook at the sentences with desu/masu: \nでもネズミはとても清潔です But mice are very clean \nでもネズミはかならずしも巣穴には住みません But mice do not necessarily live in holes \nThese are statements of fact not directly related to Christopher. \nIn contrast, look at the plain form sentences: \nトビーはいつも自分の体をきれいにしている Toby is always cleaning himself. \n他人の家には入らない I don't go into other people's houses. \nThese are all things that are closer to Christopher.\n\nPlain and desu/masu forms carry far more nuance that just degree of\npoliteness.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T14:13:59.613",
"id": "53872",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T14:13:59.613",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26174",
"parent_id": "53825",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53825 | 53872 | 53872 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53830",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Many Japanese-English dictionaries define \"ところで\" as something similar to \"by\nthe way\" or \"incidentally\", but is it also used with statement-type sentences\nas well? If not, what would be the most appropriate phrase to use?\n\nI am looking to say something along the lines of:\n\n> By the way, I ran into Alan at Starbucks the other day.\n\nHere are some of the examples I have seen listed, but I am having trouble\nfinding examples that are not questions.\n\n 1. > ところで例の件はどうなりましたか。\n\n 2. > ところで、今日はおひまですか\n\n 3. > ところでよ、そのおめーのおとうさんはどこにいんのさ？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T21:34:58.727",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53826",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T22:57:02.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9838",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Can ところで be used with statements as well?",
"view_count": 222
} | [
{
"body": "「ところで」 is used to make statements all the time. There is nothing strange or\nunnatural about it.\n\nTo borrow your own example, you could easily say:\n\n> 「ところで、この前{まえ}スターバックスでばったりアランに会{あ}ったよ。」\n\nIn more casual conversations, you might hear us use 「それはそうと」、「あっ、そうそう」, etc.\ninstead of 「ところで」, but that is **_not_** to say that 「ところで」 sounds very\nformal.\n\nところで、なかなかいい質問{しつもん}をしますね。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T22:57:02.693",
"id": "53830",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-15T22:57:02.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53826 | 53830 | 53830 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53952",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know these both are used a delimiters when things are listed in a way\nimplying the list is not necessarily limited to the things explicitly\nmentioned, but when would one be used over the other?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T22:24:28.657",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53828",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T07:47:44.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What's the difference between や and やら?",
"view_count": 514
} | [
{
"body": "I am going to take your question literally and discuss only the difference\nbetween 「や」 and 「やら」 as **parallel markers** and _**not**_ as other types of\nparticles.\n\n> 「や」 is used to juxtapose _**nouns**_ and _**nominalized words**_ only.\n>\n> 「やら」 is used to juxtapose not only nouns but also adjectives and verbs.\n\n**For that very reason, the two words are not always interchangeable**.\n\nExamples:\n\n> Nouns:\n\n〇「日本{にほん}に行{い}ったら、スシ **や** たこやき **や** すきやきなどを食{た}べてみたい。」\n\n〇「日本に行ったら、スシ **やら** たこやき **やら** すきやきなどを食べてみたい。」\n\n> Adjectives:\n\n✖「もうすぐ卒業{そつぎょう}。うれしい **や** かなしい **や** 、複雑{ふくざつ}な気持{きも}ちです。」\n\n〇「もうすぐ卒業。うれしい **やら** かなしい **やら** 、複雑な気持ちです。」\n\n> Verbs:\n\n✖「プールに行く **や** 、ゲームをする **や** で、忙{いそが}しい夏休{なつやす}みだった。」\n\n〇「プールに行く **やら** 、ゲームをする **やら** で、忙しい夏休みだった。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T07:47:44.927",
"id": "53952",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T07:47:44.927",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53828",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53828 | 53952 | 53952 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53832",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm thinking the former is slightly more hard/archaic, and for written style\njapanese, where was the latter is more conversational? But they both seem to\nhave the same meaning.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-15T22:27:03.253",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53829",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-04T22:58:03.837",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-04T22:58:03.837",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "When would you use 相互 as opposed to お互い？",
"view_count": 589
} | [
{
"body": "> I'm thinking the former is slightly more hard/archaic, and for written style\n> japanese, where was the latter is more conversational? But they both seem to\n> have the same meaning.\n\n * 相互 is slightly more hard: yes.\n * 相互 is slightly more archaic: no.\n * 相互 is for written style: yes\n * お互い is more conversational: yes. \n * they both seem to have the same meaning: yes.\n\nJisho.org defines them as:\n\n> [相互{そうご}](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%9B%B8%E4%BA%92) \n> Noun, No-adjective \n> 1. mutual; reciprocal\n>\n> [お互{たが}い](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%8A%E4%BA%92%E3%81%84) \n> Noun \n> 1. mutual; reciprocal; each other \n> Polite form of 互{たが}い\n>\n> [互{たが}い](http://jisho.org/search/%E4%BA%92%E3%81%84) \n> Noun \n> 1. mutual; reciprocal\n\nAccording to the above definitions, 相互 and お互い/互い seem to have the same\nmeaning and be interchangeable except for 相互 having No-adjective as a part of\nspeech and except for お互い being polite.\n\nHowever, their actual use or nuance is slightly different, and they are not\nalways interchangeable.\n\nAs for **お互いに** / **互いに** and **相互に** which are the adverbial forms of お互い/互い\nand 相互 respectively, they have the same meaning as \" _mutually; with each\nother; reciprocally; together_ \", and are almost interchangeable.\n\nBut, as for **お互｛たが｝い様{さま}** which is often used in a conversation or in\nsalutation meaning \" _we are of equal status in this regard_ \",\n**お相互｛そうご｝様{さま}** or **相互｛そうご｝様｛さま｝** doesn't make sense at all.\n\nI think the biggest difference between 相互 and お互い/互い is that the former can\nmake compound words as follows, while the latter cannot.\n\n * 相互作用{そうごさよう} _interaction_\n * 相互理解{そうごりかい} _mutual understanding_\n * 相互交流{そうごこうりゅう} _mutual exchange_\n * 相互運用性{そうごうんようせい} _interoperability_\n * 相互扶助{そうごふじょ} _mutual aid_\n * 相互協力{そうごきょうりょく｝ _bilateral cooperation_\n\nThe difference in the nature of both largely comes mainly from the word where\nthey were born. お互い/互い are _[Yamato\nkotoba](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamato_kotoba)_ (大和言葉) or _Wago_ (和語),\nwhich are native Japanese words, while 相互 is _Kango_ (漢語) or [Sino-Japanese\nvocabulary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Japanese_vocabulary), which\nrefers to that portion of the Japanese vocabulary that originated in Chinese\nor has been created from elements borrowed from Chinese.\n\nThe major difference between _Wago_ and _Kango_ reflected in お互い/互い and 相互, in\ngeneral, is that the former has a comprehensive meaning, is not official, is\nsuitable for colloquial use and has emotional nuance, whereas the latter has a\nrelatively strict meaning, is suitable for official usage and written\nlanguage, and has a descriptive nuance.\n\nA related article: [What are the differences between わけ and\n理由?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/53673/what-are-the-\ndifferences-between-%E3%82%8F%E3%81%91-and-%E7%90%86%E7%94%B1/53690#53690)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T05:36:24.867",
"id": "53832",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T09:46:22.127",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T09:46:22.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53829",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53829 | 53832 | 53832 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've recently started writing in a genkouyoushi notebook for practice and I've\nbeen writing furigana along with it to reinforce the reading. I was wondering\nhow Japanese writers typically write furigana for jukugo or other multi-\ncharacter words. Do I write the entire word out first, then write the furigana\nfor all of the characters in the word, or do I write the furigana for each\ncharacter as I write that character, even in the middle of writing a word?\n\nAt first it seemed most straightforward to write the furigana immediately as I\nwrite each character, but I found myself saying in my head the reading of\nindividual characters twice and it became hard to think about, so I thought\nmaybe it was better to write the whole word and then come back and write the\nfurigana.\n\nIs there a best practice? Or is it \"just do what works for you\"?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T06:25:28.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53833",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-08T11:26:57.263",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25116",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"handwriting",
"furigana",
"genkōyōshi"
],
"title": "Ordering of writing furigana in multi-character words",
"view_count": 510
} | [
{
"body": "**I would prefer kanji first** as they pop into my mind when I write. Furigana\nis just an afterthought for the convenience of others. But I'm Chinese.\n\nOn the other hand, if you're used to the **sound as the identifier of a word**\n, I supposed you'd write that first for your convenience as well.\n\nI'm not sure why people want to write kanjis then kana then kanji then kana. I\nsee you find it a bit disrupting as well.\n\nEither way, since the result is the same for others to see (unless we're\ntalking about ink and **smudges** ), you should feel guiltless for doing\nwhatever you want.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T23:37:03.573",
"id": "53884",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T23:37:03.573",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6610",
"parent_id": "53833",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Yes, there is a \"best\" (of course, what is best is in this case subjective)\nway of writing furigana, like this: 振{ふ}り仮{が}名{な}の書{か}き方{かた}.\n\nOther methods are sometimes used in real scenarios (e.g. Newspapers), and then\nI've seen the furigana written in parenthesis after the whole word, even if\nthe word consists of two kanji split by some okurigana.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T14:34:30.377",
"id": "53900",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-08T11:02:45.783",
"last_edit_date": "2017-11-08T11:02:45.783",
"last_editor_user_id": "20305",
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "53833",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 53833 | null | 53884 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53859",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In [this question on the Travel\nSE](https://travel.stackexchange.com/q/103754/53124) OP is asking about\nこみ収集ステーション that he has seen, and provided this image of a notice on one of\nthose from Higashidori, Aomori:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3hE29.png)\n\nThe pic is blurry, but not so bad that a missing 濁点 could be attributed to the\nquality of the pic. Why is it 「こみ」 instead of 「ごみ」 here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T06:45:49.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53834",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T14:17:48.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18189",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"dialects"
],
"title": "Is this use of 「こみ」 instead of 「ごみ」 in 「ごみ収集ステーション」 accidental or a variation?",
"view_count": 551
} | [
{
"body": "It's likely a typographical error, or the 濁点 is incredibly illegible in the\nimage. こみ収集 doesn't make sense enough that my keyboard auto-corrects to\nkatakana (doesn't make sense either).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T07:55:14.850",
"id": "53838",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T07:55:14.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "53834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I've [found a box that shows the\ndakuten](https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@41.1332027,141.3908915,3a,15y,102.99h,89.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBsvu7wkLKYPh05rpJtOQRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en),\nit's barely visible but it's there.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BP5wt.png)\n\nTo confirm this, I did a bit of digging around and double checked on the\n[Higashidori government\nwebsite](http://www.vill.higashidoori.lg.jp/sub02/cat200037.html) where it\nuses 'ごみの収集'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T22:23:31.033",
"id": "53859",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T22:23:31.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19278",
"parent_id": "53834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Either blurred or a typo. It's definitely ごみ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T14:17:48.053",
"id": "53873",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T14:17:48.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 53834 | 53859 | 53838 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53839",
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "I'm learning Japanese and decided to pick up some manga in Japanese to improve\nmy reading. I found a preview of a manga I'll be receiving and had a look\ninside. I found the following character, and everything tells me it's a そ, but\nI'm not sure. Is it a weird font? Is it a certain common stylization?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GIsuc.png)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T07:04:42.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53835",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-05T11:34:56.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "24000",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"manga",
"hiragana"
],
"title": "Is this character a そ?",
"view_count": 4169
} | [
{
"body": "そう!! It's just the way the computer font is styled but it definitely is a そ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T07:11:54.333",
"id": "53837",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T07:11:54.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "53835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Sure it is, there's two legit ways to write そ in Japanese.\n\nTwo strokes so\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1U9Dp.gif)\n\nOne stroke so\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MdEfb.gif)\n\nI suspect that the two strokes version is historical but usage made the one\nstroke version more common. It is definitely not a weird font, just one you\ndidn't encounter yet.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T08:24:11.423",
"id": "53839",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T08:30:52.473",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T08:30:52.473",
"last_editor_user_id": "20342",
"owner_user_id": "20342",
"parent_id": "53835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 16
},
{
"body": "Both are the same characters. It's just a different font.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T10:10:30.583",
"id": "53842",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T11:47:43.440",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T11:47:43.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "26160",
"parent_id": "53835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "The 2 stroke version is the original. It’s still taught in many books this\nway. The one stroke version is derived from writing in cursive but is widely\nused. This is also the case for ゆ and ふ for example.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T11:00:30.413",
"id": "63253",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T11:00:30.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14608",
"parent_id": "53835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "By the way, hiragana was derived from kanji via cursive style of writing kanji\n(e.g. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiragana#History)). The kanji\nfrom which そ was derived had/has two dots on top. From there you have the two-\nstroke variant, from that the one-stroke variant. It is basically writing with\nbrush with different levels of \"precision\" and \"speed\".\n\n[![Hiragana origin; by Pmx \\[CC BY-SA 3.0\n\\(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-\nsa/3.0/\\)\\]](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vKPeR.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vKPeR.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-12-05T11:34:56.080",
"id": "73360",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-05T11:34:56.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19686",
"parent_id": "53835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53835 | 53839 | 53839 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53841",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: a mangaka is talking about a character of a manga who is a\npsychopathic killer called Crazy Rascal.\n\n> そのネーミングに関しては、僕が個人的に尊敬している、とある“プロ”の方のあだ名？からいただきました。ご本人は当然こんなに **ぶっ壊れていません**\n> のでご注意を。\n\nWhat is the meaning of ぶっ壊れている in this context? Does it mean \"to be crazy\",\n\"to have something wrong in the head\"? If my interpretation is correct, why is\nthere ご注意を at the end even though the verb is negative? My translation\nattempt:\n\n> About that name, I took it from the nickname of a certain \"professional\" I\n> personally respect. This person is not that crazy of course, so be careful\n> (?).\n\nAlso, could you explain why is there a question mark before から? Thank you for\nyour help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T08:25:50.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53840",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T09:02:09.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"verbs"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 壊れる when referring to a person?",
"view_count": 286
} | [
{
"body": "Your understanding is correct. 「壊{こわ}れる」, when used to talk about a person,\nmeans \" ** _to break down mentally_** \", \" ** _to go bonkers_** \", etc.\n\n「ぶっ」 is an emphatic and manly verb prefix, which is exlained here:\n\n[What does the word\n「ぶったてる」mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/24577/what-does-\nthe-word-%e3%81%b6%e3%81%a3%e3%81%9f%e3%81%a6%e3%82%8b-mean/24578#24578)\n\n「ご注意{ちゅうい}を」, in this context, does not really mean \"Be careful!\". It should\nbe interpreted as a light kind of \"Please be advised.\" One could even say that\nthe phrase is used almost as light humor rather than a serious warning.\n\nFinally, the question mark following 「あだ名{な}」 would suggest that the name in\nquestion may or may not actually be called his \"official\" nickname. The author\nis using the word 「あだ名」 loosely here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T09:02:09.887",
"id": "53841",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T09:02:09.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53840 | 53841 | 53841 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53844",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "First of all I am going to explain the context :\n\nSomeone has opened a letter and ask someone in an other room to come here.\n\nThe other person asks what is happening. And this is the answer :\n\n> 大塚さんにこういうのもらったんだけど…なんだっけ これ？\n\nI'm guessing this means :\n\n> Ootsuka san gave me this, what is it ?\n\nBut I'm actually lost on the meaning of こういうの in the middle of the sentence. I\nknow it means _such as, like this_ but I don't see how I should translate it\nhere. I almost feel like it is superfluous. Does it reference the letter\nitself ? If yes I don't know exactly how I should translate it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T10:15:55.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53843",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T14:23:57.767",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T10:49:32.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "16081",
"owner_user_id": "16081",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"syntax",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "こういうの in the midddle of a sentence",
"view_count": 489
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, こういうの refers to the letter itself. Literally, it means \"something like\nthis\" or \"this kind of thing\", and it serves the purpose of prompting the\nlistener to look at the object itself to see what the speaker is talking about\n(usually because there's something about it they find difficult to describe in\nwords).\n\nI agree that there doesn't seem to be much need to include it in an English\ntranslation, since in English \"something like this\" would usually indicate\nthat they're talking about a _different_ similar object, and at any rate the\n\"this\" together with asking \"what is it?\" already conveys essentially the same\nthing. Depending on the context, using something like \"this thing\" or \"this\nweird letter\" might help to convey more of the implied \"not sure how to\ndescribe it\" nuance, though both of those sound a bit more distinctly informal\nthan the Japanese usage.\n\nOn a side note, I think there's a typo in your sentence - なんでっけ should\nprobably be なんだっけ.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T10:36:59.500",
"id": "53844",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T10:36:59.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53843",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53843 | 53844 | 53844 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "仕事を抱え込んでしまって困った山田さんが、「なにを作るかよりも、いかに新しい作り方をするかです」と言ったって、説得力がない。\n\nThis means; Yamada who dived into a new job and got in trouble said \"its less\nwhat your make, but in what new way you make it\", which was very unconvincing.\n\nIs that right? im confused by the question followed by desu.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T12:21:55.670",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53845",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T04:29:51.957",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does question followed by です mean?",
"view_count": 190
} | [
{
"body": "It's not a question. While one of the main functions of か is to mark a direct\nquestion, it has other functions too. In this case to _indicate_ a question or\nhypothetical instance, in other words an either/or situation. So, either the\nquestion of what you make (なにを作るか）or the question of the new way you make it\n(いかに新しい作り方をするか) is up for discussion in the quote.\n\n食べるか話すかどちらにしなさい。\"Just do one thing, eat or talk\" \nIn this case, it's like saying \"decide on the question of eating or talking\".\n\"Decide on whether you're going to eat or talk\". The function of か here is the\nsame as in your example, namely to indicate an either/or situation. Especially\nwhen you see two clauses both ending with か it is very often a way to compare\nthese two clauses in some way.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T14:09:32.240",
"id": "53846",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T14:09:32.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53845",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 「 **なに** を作{つく}る **か** よりも、 **いかに** 新{あたら}しい作り方{かた}をする **か** です」\n\nThe part preceding the final 「です」 above is **_not_** a question even though it\ncontains \"elements\" of a question -- 「なに」、「いかに」 and 「か」.\n\n> 「Interrogative word + verb phrase + **か** 」\n\nin this context, as it often does, functions as a **noun phrase** just as in\n\"I don't know **_what to eat_**.\" in English.\n\nMoving on to my next point..\n\n> 「A + より（も） + B + です/だ/である」\n\nmeans:\n\n> \"B is more important than A.\", \"B is more desirable than A.\", etc.\n\nNotice that there is no word needed in the expression that directly means\n\"important\", \"desirable\", etc.\n\nThus, the whole sentence means:\n\n> If Yamada, who himself is in deep trouble with too much work on hand, said\n> \"It is more desirable to think about new (and more efficient) ways to\n> produce than to (just) think about what to produce.\", it would not be\n> convincing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T03:14:28.133",
"id": "53902",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T04:29:51.957",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-19T04:29:51.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53845",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53845 | null | 53902 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm writing a short text and I got stuck because I wanted to write that my\nparents, who are now at home not working seeing that they retired from work,\nseem to be unhappy. Can I say something like: 両親は働かないで嬉しくなさそうです?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T15:17:35.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53850",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T19:09:33.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18269",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How can I say that someone doesn't seem happy for a specific reason?",
"view_count": 304
} | [
{
"body": "I'm gonna say, \"両親は定年になってからというもの、毎日つまらなさそうにしています．\"\n\nIt literally means \"Ever since my parents retired from their work, they look\nmiserable.\"\n\nOr respecting your original words, I would revise as \"両親は働いていないので、楽しくなさそうです.\"\n\nHope it helps.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T16:13:18.413",
"id": "53852",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T16:13:18.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26121",
"parent_id": "53850",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I would use 〜みたいです。みたい can be used to express your opinion or assumption based\non what you have seen first hand. “It looks like”/ “It seems like”. そう I\nbelieve is more commonly used for things you've heard.\n\n。。。毎日つまらないみたいです。\n\n[More from Maggie Sensei](http://maggiesensei.com/2015/11/11/how-to-\nuse-%E3%81%BF%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84-mitai/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T19:09:33.620",
"id": "53854",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T19:09:33.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53850",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53850 | null | 53852 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm looking for slang that means something like \"tough guy\" in a complimentary\nway. If someone did something awesome like fight off a robber or save someone,\nto the point where women envy him and men want to be him... so now people\nmight refer to him with this term when discussing him, or even yell it at him\non the street.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T15:41:55.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53851",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T02:09:25.547",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-16T16:11:36.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "26165",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"slang",
"word-requests",
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "How to say \"Tough guy\"",
"view_count": 950
} | [
{
"body": "How about 親分(おやぶん)、大将(たいしょう).\n\n清水次郎長\n\nExcerpt from article of Japan times:\n<https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2008/01/17/national/robin-hood-yakuzas-\nlegacy-sours-in-shizuoka/> **Yamamoto Chogoro (1820-1893), popularly known as\nShimizu Jirocho, is commonly regarded as a Robin Hood figure who helped the\nweak by crushing the strong as a yakuza chieftain in the twilight years of the\nEdo Period.**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T23:03:18.750",
"id": "53881",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T23:03:18.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53851",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "「タフガイ」 would probably be the most common word even though I know from\nexperience that katakana words sometimes seriously disappoint the questioner\nas an answer to this type of question.\n\nOthers with similar meanings would include:\n\n・熱血漢{ねっけつかん}\n\n・熱血[男児]{だんじ}\n\n・腕{うで}っぷしの強{つよ}い男{おとこ} ← Not even a single word obviously but quite a common\nphrase\n\nOnes with underworld connotations:\n\n・ごろつき\n\n・ならず者{もの}\n\n・無頼漢{ぶらいかん}",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T02:09:25.547",
"id": "53901",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T02:09:25.547",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53851",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53851 | null | 53901 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53862",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "An example `Because of the noise, she became startled/surprised.`\n\nWould it be something like `おとから、かのじょはおどろきになった.`? Where I use `から` for\nbecause.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T20:17:46.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53855",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T09:50:18.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Using because when the reason isn't a sentence?",
"view_count": 212
} | [
{
"body": "Noun + から (not a real sentence) can be used to show the noun is the cause of\nbasis for what comes after, used in sentences like:\n\nちょっとした不注意から大きな事故になることも少なくない。(big accidents are often caused by just a little\ncarelessness)( example taken fromニューアプローチ中上級日本語 p165)\n\nSo it is used for cause and effect, but more for showing the basis of\njudgement, or describing phenomena in general. I think for a simple kind of\n'she was surprised by the noise/because of the noise' type situation it may be\nmore natural to use で instead",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-16T21:28:07.420",
"id": "53858",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-16T21:28:07.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"parent_id": "53855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "No, you can't compose it like that. Since おと itself is a mere object and not\n~~an event or~~ nature of something, the combination with から doesn't mean\nreason.\n\nInstead, it should be おと（の せい）で びっくりした.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T09:50:18.460",
"id": "53862",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T09:50:18.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "53855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53855 | 53862 | 53862 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This came about from [my answer on martial\nart](https://martialarts.stackexchange.com/a/7922/82) about Aikido and Karate.\ntwo diferent styles are called Shodokan and Shotokan. The kanji are as follow:\n\n * 昭道館 for Shōdōkan\n * 松濤館 for Shōtōkan\n\nI have always understood 昭道館 to mean \"open way\" but I could be wrong.\n\nWhat do they mean? What is their etymology?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T08:15:26.110",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53861",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T12:31:35.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6910",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"kanji-choice"
],
"title": "The meaning of 昭道館 vs 松濤館",
"view_count": 196
} | [
{
"body": "Both styles are named after the dojo where they originated. The 館 (\"kan\") in\nboth names means a type of building and is commonly suffixed to the names of\ndojos.\n\nLooking at the name of the Shodokan dojo, the 道 (\"do\") is the same \"do\" used\nin the names of various Japanese arts including aikido itself. It does indeed\nmean \"way\" as in \"the way of X\". The 昭 (\"sho\") is a little more complicated -\nthe founder of the style, Kenji Tomiki, cited it as being derived from the\nname of the Showa era (1926-1989, the reign of Emperor Hirohito) during which\nthe dojo was founded.\n\nThe kanji of Showa are 昭 (\"sho\", which has meanings such as \"shining\", \"glory\"\nand \"enlightenment\") and 和 (\"wa\", which generally means either \"peace\" or\n\"Japan\"). The name of the Showa era is officially derived from a quote from\nclassical Chinese literature, 百姓昭明 協和万邦, which means something along the lines\nof \"If all men are open about their intentions, the world can achieve peace\".\nIn his speech at the founding of the dojo, Kenji Tomiki referenced this quote\nas reflecting the spirit of cooperation that the dojo represents.\n\nThe Shotokan dojo, on the other hand, is essentially simply named in honour of\nits founder - 松涛 (\"Shoto\") is a pen-name that Funakoshi Gichin had been using\nsince his youth. If that pen-name itself has any significant meaning, it's\nless clear. The characters themselves literally mean \"pine waves\", and there's\na district of Shibuya in Tokyo that has this name, so it's probably just\nderived from the placename one way or another.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T12:31:35.830",
"id": "53863",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T12:31:35.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53861",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53861 | null | 53863 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53876",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "My question is: has anyone else ever experienced the following situation?\n\nSeveral times I've used Japanese words or phrases that I learned from movies\nin actual conversations with Japanese people, but they either correct me or\nlook confused. When I hear a word in a movie that I don't know, I assume it is\nsomething most native speakers use, so I learn that word. For example, I\nlearned the word 完全主義者 in a movie recently, and I tried using it in\nconversations with two different Japanese people. Both of them corrected me\nwith 完璧主義者. As far as I can tell, both words essentially mean 'perfectionist'.\nOf course I know that the normal word is 完璧主義者 but why would they actually\ncorrect me if both words mean the same thing?\n\nHas this ever happened you? Do you think there is a difference between movie\nJapanese and real conversational Japanese?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T12:33:39.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53864",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T14:15:13.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "'Movie Japanese' vs Real Japanese",
"view_count": 668
} | [
{
"body": "Let 完璧 be used when one is ideal for a situation and 完全 be used when one\nfulfills a requirement.\n\nI think the words can be interchangeable in the meaning. However 完全主義者 sounds\nreferring to a really meticulous person in slightly negative way such as a\nperson checking every procedures all the time and 完璧主義者 sounds referring to a\nreally meticulous person in positive way such as a person trying to finish an\nwork in detail.\n\nI think 完璧主義者(perfectionist) is more common than the other but it’s subtle.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T13:22:29.323",
"id": "53868",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T13:22:29.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53864",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I am not 100% sure on this, but what I have researched is that it seems the\nuse of 完全主義者 has a negative meaning. I found it used on a psychology site that\nused the word in reference to point out that someone suffers from an illness\nof perfectionism and the person is obsessive in a negative manner. The other\none, (完璧主義者) from what I looked up shows more positive meaning such as you did\nthat flawlessly.\n\nHere is an example sentence I found: 君は完璧な仕事をしてくれた。- You've done a perfect\njob.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T13:28:03.807",
"id": "53869",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T13:28:03.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26155",
"parent_id": "53864",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "> For example, I learned the word 完全主義者 in a movie recently, and I tried using\n> it in conversations with two different Japanese people. Both of them\n> corrected me with 完璧主義者.\n\nあなたの知っている日本人が「完全主義者」を「完璧主義者」に訂正した理由は、前者がnegativeの度合いが強いからなどの理由ではないと思います。 \n単純に、同様の意味なら「完全主義者」と「完璧主義者」とを比べると、「完璧主義者」の方が普及しているので、あなたが使った「完全主義者」という言葉に違和感を感じて比較的聞きなれている「完璧主義者」の使用を勧めたものだと思います。\n\nこの判断において構成要素である「完璧」と「完全」の詳細な意味を比較してもあまり意味がないと思います。\n\n因みに、「完全主義者」を調べると「完璧主義者」と同じで、その意味は「＊＊＊＊」であって、余り度が過ぎると「他人から嫌われる」のような説明になっています。\n\n両者は単純に使用頻度の差ですので、映画と実社会との使用の比較も無意味だと思います。\n\n質問者がperfectionistの意味で使う時には、日本人が聞きなれている「完璧主義者」の使用を勧めます。\n\n* * *\n\n# EDIT\n\n「完全主義者」と「完璧主義者」とで、何故「完璧主義者」の方が同じperfectionistの意味として多く使われ、従って聞きなれているのか自分なりに考えてみました。\n\n辞書等で、「完全主義」あるいは「完全主義者」の意味を調べてみますと、「完璧主義」あるいは「完璧主義者」と同じである、あるいは、「完璧」という言葉を使って説明している場合が多いが、逆の場合、すなわち、「完全主義者」で「完璧主義者」を説明しているケースは、皆無に近いことが分かります。これは、概念的に同じなら、「完璧主義」あるいは「完璧主義者」が、日本語として「完全主義」あるいは「完全主義者」に対して身近な表現として理解されていることの現れだろうと推察します。\n\nこれにより、「完璧主義者」の方が優先していることの実態はある程度分かりますが、何故「完璧主義者」の方が優先しているのかという理由にはなりません。\n\n> この判断において構成要素である「完璧」と「完全」の詳細な意味を比較してもあまり意味がないと思います。\n\n私の最初の回答の中で私は上のように書きました。\n\nしかし、「完全」と「完璧」とでは、使用上で何らかの違いがあることを私自身感じていますので、この違いを明らかにすると、何故「完璧主義者」がより多く使われているのかが分かるものと思い、調べてみました。\n\nインターネットで見つかった「[『完全』と『完璧』の違いってなんですか?](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1024890320)」のベストアンサーを見ますと次のようになっております。\n\n> 完全とは簡単に言えば単に「100%」ということで、ポジティブなニュアンスでもネガティブなニュアンスでも使います。 \n> 完璧とは本来「欠点や不足が全くなく、非常に立派なさま、完全無欠、遺漏なくやってのける」の意味で、ポジティブなニュアンスのみです。\n\nこれでも、「完璧主義者」の優先度が高い理由が分かりません。\n\n的確な答えを探せませんでしたので、私が感じている「完全」と「完璧」の違いを列記します。\nこれはあくまでも私見ですので、人によって理解が違うことは十分考えられます。\n\n> ### 「完全」\n>\n> * 機械あるいは計測器による測定の結果、期待する数値、水準に完全に一致している。\n> * 「完全」であることの判断は、ほぼ人に依らないで一致する。\n> *\n> 機械的、学問的、数学的、ディジタル的、静的、即物的である。「完全衝突⇔×完璧衝突」「完全円⇔×完璧円」「完全水平⇔×完璧水平」「完全零位置⇔完璧零位置」\n>\n\n>\n> ### 「完璧」\n>\n> * 期待する状態に完全に到達していることの人による評価あるいは判断。\n> *\n> 「完璧」であることの判断は、判断する人によって変わる。ある人は「完璧」と判断しても別の人は「完璧ではない」と言うかもしれない。また、「完璧」と言った人の満足感が感じられる。\n> * 情緒的、アナログ的、動的、属人的である。\n>\n\n実際のシーンを想定して「完全」と「完璧」のニュアンスの違いを感じていただきたいと思います。\n\n> 上司から頼まれていた仕事がようやく完成した部下が、上司に完成品を持って終了報告に来た。 上司は「完全だね！」あるいは「完璧だね！」と言った。\n> この場合は、「完全だね！」と言った上司は、完成した品物の完成度が非の打ちどころがないと言っているように私は感じます。一方「完璧だね！」と言った場合、完成した品物の完成度への高い評価はもちろんですが、完成品を手にした上司の満足感と、「よくやったね、ご苦労さん！」という部下に対するねぎらいの言葉もあわせて感じられます。\n\n上記のように両者の意味は似ているかも知れませんが、ニュアンスがかなり違いますので、使われ方に大きな差が出るものと思われます。特に、perfectionistのように機械的に判断できない「人」に対する表現では、明らかに「完璧」という言葉が持っている「完全」にないニュアンスが反映される「完璧主義者」の方が自然に聞こえるのだと思われ、従って使用頻度も自ずと高くなっているものと思われます。",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T14:44:07.220",
"id": "53876",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T14:15:13.330",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53864",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 53864 | 53876 | 53876 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53866",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am reading the visual novel known as Kanon.\n\nI'll include some context, but the final sentence is where my question is:\n\n> 片隅には、白い羽の生えたリュックがあった。\n>\n> (In a corner, the rucksack with white wings sprouting out the back)\n>\n> あゆは、確かに存在していた。\n>\n> (Ayu existed).\n>\n> たとえそれが、どんな奇跡の上にあったとしても、俺はこの街であゆと再会した。\n>\n> (???) Even though it was more than a miracle, I had met her again in this\n> town.\n\nSo is 「それが」 in this context referring to the 「存在していた」in the previous sentence\nor 「再開した」 later on in the same sentence? Also, why is it using が rather than は\nin this context?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T12:53:55.570",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53865",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T13:19:27.083",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14607",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"は-and-が"
],
"title": "What does それが mean here?",
"view_count": 610
} | [
{
"body": "The それ here is referring forward to the event referenced later in the sentence\n- the fact that 「俺はこの街であゆと再会した」. The use of が rather than は is because the\nwhole たとえ～としても clause is subordinate to the main sentence. Just like in\nrelative clauses, you don't usually use a topic marker in subordinate clauses\nlike this, because topics are generally defined at the sentence level or\nhigher.\n\nIncidentally, I think your translation of this clause (\"Even though it was\nmore than a miracle\") seems a little off. I'd translate it loosely as\nsomething like \"No matter what kind of miracle may have made it possible...\"\n(The の上に is not referring to a comparison in scale, but rather about the\nmiracle being a foundation which was necessary for these events to occur -\nthey were metaphorically \"built upon\" this miracle. It's the same usage as in\nexpressions like ～の上に成り立つ.)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T13:19:27.083",
"id": "53866",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T13:19:27.083",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53865",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53865 | 53866 | 53866 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53871",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I learned a word \"バイキング\". The meaning of this word in the dictionary includes\nboth \"smorgasbord\" and \"all-you-can-eat buffet\". However, as I know, there are\nsome differences between the two English word.\n\nI also find an example sentence: 朝食はバイキング形式だって。\n\nCan anyone suggest what this word refers to. Can I call all the kinds of\n\"serve-yourself\" food as バイキング? Besides, how does this word get the meaning\nlike this while it should be \"Viking\" in English?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T13:22:15.207",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53867",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T14:34:02.543",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-17T13:27:54.163",
"last_editor_user_id": "18471",
"owner_user_id": "18471",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"definitions"
],
"title": "Japanese word バイキング",
"view_count": 542
} | [
{
"body": "It may sound kind of funny, but at least one of the reasons is it comes from\nthe idea of vikings eating large amounts at feasts etc.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T13:29:23.830",
"id": "53870",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T13:29:23.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"parent_id": "53867",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I checked this one before when I researched the semantic shift of loanwords\nfor the question here. From my memory, when in 1950s a Japanese restaurant\nowner watched an American movie which describes Vikings are eating what they\nwant as much as they want, he wanted to import the eating style to Japan but\nit’s hard for Japanese to pronounce smorgasbord. Therefore he named all you\ncan eat buffet “バイキング”.\n\nI often see 食べ放題 or ビュッフェ is more often than バイキング for all-you-can-eat style\nrecently.\n\nI think There are similar posts about dramatic semantic shift of loanwords in\nthis site(ex: マイブーム).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T13:35:11.983",
"id": "53871",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T13:48:20.013",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-17T13:48:20.013",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53867",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "食べ放題 is \"all-you-can-eat\" (regardless of whether a waiter servers your food to\nyour table), and セルフサービス is \"self-service\" (regardless of whether your food is\nprovided at a fixed fee). バイキング usually means both 食べ放題 and セルフサービス. As far as\nI know, バイキング is almost the same as _buffet_ in English. As many people began\nto recognize バイキング is a weird 和製英語, recently I'm seeing ビュッフェ more often,\nespecially in classy restaurants.\n\nFor the etymology, see other answers.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T14:34:02.543",
"id": "53875",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T14:34:02.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53867",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53867 | 53871 | 53871 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following excerpt is an instruction from my textbook for a composition:\n\n> 近所の人に苦情を言われました。事情を説明して謝ってください。そして、どうすれば迷惑をかけずに **生活が続けられるか** 、近所の人と相談してください。\n\nBefore I show you my attempt at translation, I must add that I also had some\nminor issues with どうすれば. I basically only know it in the set phrase\n\"どうすればいいか。\" However, I think I got it right, I just wanted to point it out to\nyou in case my interpretation in this context seems off:\n\n\"A neighbor has complained to you (=By a neighbor you were told a complaint).\nPlease make an excuse explaining the reasons. Then, please discuss with the\nneighbor how (=どうすれば?) daily life continues (=is continued) without causing\ntrouble.\"\n\nMy main issue lies with the use of passive in the bold part. \nI'm not sure if I analysed its use correctly, but in my opinion it seems to be\nthis new kind of passive my textbook just taught me about in this (last! :))\nchapter. My textbook calls this passive \"indirect passive\" either with\n\"transitive\" or \"intransitive\" verbs. \nI'll type down some examples for you from the various uses my textbook lists\nin this chapter:\n\n> 1) 私は今日雨に降られて。 \n> 2) あなたにそこに立たれると、前が見えません。 \n> 3) 私は父に急に死なれて、大学に行けなかった。 \n> 4) こんなところに信号を作られて、車が渋滞するようになってしまった。 \n> 5) 私の家の前にごみを捨てられて困っています。\n\nThe biggest issue I have with these new passive constructions is that it kind\nof lacks a proper equivalent in my language(s)...^^ It's also not really\npossible to paraphrase it, so I usually end up using either a standard passive\nor standard active construction. \nThere is a rather colloquial \"form\" of passive in my language which kind of\nresembles this one, but it isn't suitable for all cases and often sounds\npretty odd in my translation...^^\n\nDue to these \"losses\" in translation, it is hard for me to distinguish whether\na construction is this new form of \"indirect\" passive or a \"normal\" passive. \nWhen an intransitive verb is used, this problem is usually eliminated because\nI haven't learned about any other case where the passive mood is applied to an\nintransitive verb. But for transitive verbs, the problem persists...^^ \nI also don't really feel very comfortable with \"bulldozing\" the nuances\nbrought in through these indirect passives by just translating plain passive\nor active. But as of now, I kind of lack the creativity to come up with a\nsolution for this problem...^^",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T17:20:11.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53877",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T01:51:32.593",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-19T01:51:32.593",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "How do I have to interprete this passive?",
"view_count": 168
} | [
{
"body": "For the verb 続{つづ}ける the passive and the potential forms are the same. In your\ntext the potential form is what is being used and the translation is thus:\n\n> そして、どうすれば迷惑{めいわく}をかけずに生活{せいかつ}が続{つづ}けられるか、近所{きんじょ}の人{ひと}と相談{そうだん}してください。\n>\n> And then, discuss with him how you **can continue** living there without\n> causing troubles.\n\nAlso, note that the word \"neighbor\" is with a short \"o\", きんじょ, and not きんじょう,\nas you wrote, giving you a completely different set of kanji. Furthermore you\nare using the wrong kanji for apologize:\n\n> 謝{あやま}る, apologize \n> 誤{あやま}る, do a mistake\n\nI understand that it is tempting to use a lot of kanji when typing on a\ncomputer, but please make sure that you only use kanji that you actually know.\nIn Japanese there are a lot of homonyms only distinguished by their respective\nkanjis, or the context in spoken language, and they can change the meaning\ncompletely. There are also a lot of kanji pronounced the same with roughly the\nsame meanings, but slightly different nuances. A good way for identifying them\nis to Google, e.g. \"変{か}える 替{か}える 代{か}える 換{か}える 使{つか}い分{わ}け\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T14:12:52.490",
"id": "53899",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T15:04:55.803",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "53877",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53877 | null | 53899 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53886",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm translating a song and I have a problem with one part. I know that きりひらく\nmeans \"open up\" or \"clear\", but what is the object here? Or maybe it has\ndifferent meaning in this situation? Full song lyrics if more context is\nneeded: <https://mojim.com/usy108340x11x6.htm> \nAnd here's the fragment:\n\n> だってふぉーちゅんぜんぶ 輝かせてあげる \n> グレイシー！ スパイシー！ **きりひらく** あたし 勝利の女神!!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T17:21:08.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53878",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T02:27:00.623",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-18T01:40:28.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "26180",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"words",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "Word \"切り開く\" / \"きりひらく\"",
"view_count": 136
} | [
{
"body": "切り開く (or sometimes 切り拓く) often takes objects like 道を, 未来を, 運命を, 人生を, 展望を, 時代を,\n可能性を, and such. 運命を切り開く is a set phrase that means something like \"to carve\none's destiny\".\n\nIn this case, the whole lyrics are filled with words like 女神, 未来 and ミラクル, so\neven without an explicit object, people can safely feel the positive nuance of\nthe verb. I think \"move forward\" or something similar will do the job.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T02:27:00.623",
"id": "53886",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T02:27:00.623",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53878",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53878 | 53886 | 53886 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53907",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm curious now since I read in [Tae Kim's\nGuide](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/teform) that ておく means to\nprepare/do something for the future.\n\nSo for example, if one is currently in the progress of studying for the future\nwould it be this?\n\n> 勉強しておいている",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T18:23:35.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53879",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T12:49:02.520",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-19T12:49:02.520",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26181",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations",
"て-form",
"aspect",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "Is it possible ～ておく in continuous state (～ている)?",
"view_count": 248
} | [
{
"body": "「勉強{べんきょう}しておいている」 sounds fairly wordy, awkward and unnatural. IMHO,\npractically no native speakers would actually use it.\n\nIf anyone ever said it, it would sound as if he were unsure if a test would\nactually take place at all. Even in that situation, it would still sound quite\nunnatural.\n\nIt should just be just 「勉強している」 or 「勉強しておく」.\n\nFor the phrase 「Verb + て + おいている」 to sound natural, the verb would generally\nneed to describe an instantaneous action and the おいている part would usually need\nto mean \"to keep\" or \"to stock\". In other words, both the verb and おいている would\nhave to describe two different and independent actions.\n\nFor example, it is simply natural to say:\n\n・～～を買っておいている \"to buy ~~ and stock it\"\n\n・～～をメモしておいている \"to write ~~ down and keep it\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T23:21:57.627",
"id": "53882",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T23:21:57.627",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53879",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Though there is no hard rule to prohibit using ておく and ている together, it'd\nsound as unnecessarily mouthful as saying \"have been being\" in English. Even\nwhen you utter it, you cannot make this ている have \"progressive\" sense, but only\n\"perfect\".\n\n> 勉強しておいている ≈ _I have had my study (for future) done_\n\nておく is a part of grammar that carries resultative aspect, and you cannot focus\nits result and process at the same time.\n\n> _So for example, if one is currently in the progress of studying for the\n> future_\n\nyou should instead use the word that means \"in advance\":\n\n> あらかじめ勉強している",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T12:46:56.877",
"id": "53907",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T12:46:56.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "53879",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53879 | 53907 | 53882 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53885",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The narrator explains his way of talking to adults, and then:\n\n> するとそのおとなは、自分と同じように趣味のいい人間と知り合えたと感じて、ごきけんになるわけだ.... \n> And that adult feels that he has been able to get to know a person with\n> good hobbies like his own, and ????\n\nI can't understand the last part (ごきけんになるわけだ).\n\nFirstly, I assume the adult wouldn't put ご on a word referring to himself so I\nguess ごきけん is the narrator. So maybe I can translate it as:\n\n> surely he (the narrator) will become a distinguished person.\n\nBut I'm doubtful. Isn't it a bit self-serving for the narrator to assume that\nadult would add the honorific ご? These things confuse me a lot. Maybe my\ntranslation isn't even close. I have no confidence about this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T20:17:14.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53880",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T00:38:55.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"honorifics"
],
"title": "Meaning of ごきけんになるわけだ",
"view_count": 139
} | [
{
"body": "Judging by the context, I believe the original text is \" **ごきげん** \" with a\n**げ** rather than **け** , and the most fitting translation is \" **... gets\ninto a good mood** \", which would make perfect sense as something that would\nhappen when someone meets someone else with a good taste of hobbies.\n\nThis would also answer your second question -- It's **his/her** (the adult,\nnot the narrator) mood, hence the **ご**. The narrator is being polite when\ntalking about the adult.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-17T23:24:28.873",
"id": "53883",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-17T23:24:28.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6610",
"parent_id": "53880",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": ">\n> 「するとそのおとなは、自分{じぶん}と同{おな}じように趣味{しゅみ}のいい人間{にんげん}と知{し}り合{あ}えたと感{かん}じて、[ごきけん]*になるわけだ。」\n\nFirst, the word should be 「ごき **げ** ん」 and not 「ごき **け** ん」. In kanji, it is\n「ご機嫌{きげん}」.\n\n> Firstly, I assume the adult wouldn't put ご on a word referring to himself so\n> I guess ごきけん is the narrator.\n\nSorry but you look very confused here. Or is it just several typos on your\npart? I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.\n\n**It is the adult that is \"becoming happy\" (= ごきげんになる) in the\nnarrator/speaker's assumption**.\n\nThe core of this sentence is 「するとそのおとなはごきげんになるわけだ。」. The middle part\n「自分と同じように趣味のいい人間と知り合えたと感じて」 simply provides the reason for そのおとな to become\nごきげん.\n\n**「自分」 here refers to 「そのおとな」**.\n\n「趣味のいい人間」 refers directly and originally to the narrator, but also indirectly\nand secondarily refers to the adult because the adult thinks that he , too,\nhas good taste.\n\nThe sentence, therefore, could be rewritten as:\n\n> 「すると、自分と同じように趣味のいい人間と知り合えたと感じて、そのおとなはごきげんになるわけだ。」\n\nMy own mostly literal TL:\n\n> \"Then, upon feeling that he has been able to meet a man of good taste just\n> as himself, the adult gets to become really happy.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T00:38:55.593",
"id": "53885",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T00:38:55.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53880",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53880 | 53885 | 53885 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53890",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the same meeting, I heard people talking about\n[性能試験](http://wa3.i-3-i.info/word13744.html), and then about\n[強化試験](https://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/bote_bote163/470804.html), like it was a\ntotally different thing.\n\nMy understanding is that both are software performance tests. What are the\ndifferences or nuances in usage between the two?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T03:20:59.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53887",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T04:43:22.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"business-japanese",
"computing"
],
"title": "Differences between 性能試験 and 強化試験",
"view_count": 259
} | [
{
"body": "性能試験 is simply performance test, and is used widely in many fields related to\nengineering, including software engineering.\n\nI don't think 強化試験 is a common term, but judging from usages found on the net,\nit seems to refer to additional tests to ensure something (performance,\nconformance, stability, etc) You may need to ask your colleagues what 強化試験\nactually refers to in your company.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T04:04:40.760",
"id": "53890",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T04:04:40.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53887",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Like you mentioned, 性能試験 is a performance test. If it's a server side,\nchecking how many connections can be handled or how long it takes to return a\nresponse. Mainly focusing to know its performance. But the case of 強化試験, It's\nfor finding bugs. And it's not a regular test like unit tests nor integration\ntests. It simply means a additional test for finding bugs. in another way to\nsay, it is a test of 強化(quality enhancement)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T04:43:22.397",
"id": "53892",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T04:43:22.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10088",
"parent_id": "53887",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53887 | 53890 | 53890 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53897",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So far I learned that these three words mean \"below\" or \"bottom\", is it right?\nIf so, are they interchangeable? Could you give me some example and preferably\nsome explanation about how to use them?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T03:22:45.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53888",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T08:39:08.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25472",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Examples of how to use した, しも and もと for 下?",
"view_count": 896
} | [
{
"body": "下{した} is the more common of the three by a huge margin, and what you'll want\nto use at least 99% of the time. It's a completely basic word for \"down\", and\nhas a huge variety of uses. It's the counterpart of 上{うえ}, the common word for\n\"up\".\n\n下{しも} is a much, much rarer word, and I find it's mostly encountered in a\nsmall handful of set expressions, such as 風下{かざしも} \"downwind\", 川下{かわしも}\n\"downstream\" and 下{しも}ネタ \"dirty jokes\" (as in \"jokes about the _lower part_ of\nthe body). It's the counterpart of 上{かみ}.\n\n下{もと} is also restricted to certain specific uses, and is perhaps the furthest\naway from the basic meaning of \"down\". It's a variant of 本{もと} or 元{もと}\nmeaning \"origin\", and generally refers to a location rather than a direction.\nIts uses include indicating the \"root\" or \"base\" of something (eg. 桜の木の下{もと}に\n\"at the base of the cherry tree\"), referring to a person as a location (eg. in\nthe expression 親の下{もと}を離れる \"to move home away from your parents\") and\nreferring to a higher power that one exists \"under the authority\" of (eg.\n厳重な監視の下{もと}に置く \"to place under strict surveillance\"). This one doesn't have\nany \"up\" equivalent that I can think of.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T08:39:08.210",
"id": "53897",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T08:39:08.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53888",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53888 | 53897 | 53897 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Does 態々 derived from 態と? And does 態と derived from waza 「業 」and case-marking\nparticle 「と」?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T03:46:23.450",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53889",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T10:24:32.700",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25631",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-と",
"adverbs",
"reduplication"
],
"title": "Reduplication and words form",
"view_count": 148
} | [
{
"body": "**In modern Japanese** , わざわざ and わざと are different adverbs. わざわざ mainly means\n\"to bother to do ～ (although it's not necessary); to take the trouble to do ～;\nall the way; specially\", whereas わざと means \"do ～ on purpose (knowing it's\nusually a bad thing to do it); intentionally for a reason\". But わざわざ sometimes\nmeans \"intentionally\", and in this case the two are interchangeable (e.g.\n\"わざわざ/わざと聞こえるように悪口を言う\").\n\n**In archaic Japanese** , according to [a\n古語辞典](https://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%8F%E3%81%96%E3%81%A8) and [this\narticle](http://www.urayasu.meikai.ac.jp/japanese/meikainihongo/8/sasaki.pdf),\nわざと meant something closer to わざわざ in the sense of \"to bother to do ～\". This\nsense of わざと is obsolete now. However the word わざわざ(し) also existed in archaic\nJapanese and it meant \"contrived; artificial\". I could not find the direct\nsource that describes when and how わざわざ was coined, but they are probably not\nin a simple \"original-derived\" relationship as you might expect. Both existed,\nbut there was a large shift in meaning.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T10:19:17.817",
"id": "53898",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T10:24:32.700",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-18T10:24:32.700",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53889",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53889 | null | 53898 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53894",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "the english version of the material Im reading says \"that's a mean god\", and a\nfriend told me that means \"there is a bad god ,isn't it?\" , but I don't\nunderstand why. I know ひどい神 (bad,cruel, God) I guess the もんだ its a contraction\nof ものだ , but I still don't get it , what is もいた? , can someone explain all of\nthis in detail please.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T05:04:56.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53893",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T17:11:13.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26112",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"set-phrases",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "why ひどい神もいたもんだ means \"that's a mean god\"?",
"view_count": 381
} | [
{
"body": "It's (酷い + 神) + も + 居た【いた】 + (もん + だ).\n\nもんだ at the end is a contraction of ものだ, and this type of ものだ carries the sense\nof exclamation or surprise. So the sentence means something like \"Wow, a bad\nGod exists!\" or \"I'm surprised at the fact that such a cruel god exists!\"\n\nRelated:\n\n * [Meaning of こともあるもんです](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/28809/5010)\n * [Function of に and meaning of ものだ in this sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17616/5010)\n * [The meanings of ものだ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43083/5010)\n\n**EDIT** : For this \"past tense\" いた, please see [Usage of plain i-adjectives\nor た form (悪かったｖ悪い、良かったｖいい\netc）](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21347/5010) and\n<https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/40888/5010>\n\n**EDIT 2** : For this も, please see: [Odd use of も has me\nstumped](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32886/5010) All in all, this is\na combination of three (mild) exclamatory expressions!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-18T05:20:31.457",
"id": "53894",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-18T17:11:13.560",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-18T17:11:13.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53893",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53893 | 53894 | 53894 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When someone - my friend - says \"neeee\" to me, what does it mean? It's not\nwhen I say something and they respond \"neeee\" or \"sou da yo neee\". It's when\n\"neee\" is used either by itself, or instead of my name or before my name, for\ninstance \"neee, Maiku, doushita no?\" or \"neeee, choytto matte\".\n\nWhat does \"neee\" mean in such situations?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T11:21:20.453",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53904",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T11:41:18.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"idioms",
"casual"
],
"title": "\"Neee\" instead of one's name or before his name -- what does this mean?",
"view_count": 754
} | [
{
"body": "ねえ said in isolation is an interjection that means one of the followings:\n\n * Yeah; That's right; I agree; You can say that (pronounced ねえ{HH} with a flat tone) \n * [What does the long \"neeeeee\" (ねー) mean when 2 friends are talking?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/52346/5010)\n * Hey; Listen; Say (ねえ{HL}; sometimes repeated ねえねえ{HLHL}) \n * [Is interjection ねえ、ねえ gender agnostic?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/47343/5010)\n * Please; Come on (ねえ{HL})\n\nIn your case, it's the second usage as a simple attention drawer.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T11:41:18.347",
"id": "53905",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T11:41:18.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53904",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53904 | null | 53905 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53908",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> **果たして** 、遺産を独り占めするためだけに、それだけのことを兄さんがやってのけるのか、わしも確信は持てん。\n\nI'll translate it roughly as \"I don't think he will go that far just to have\nthe inheritance for himself.\" However, I don't understand the 果たして part: it\nseems that it can be a way of saying \"as expected\", but since they're\ntheorizing, it seems odd to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T12:39:20.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53906",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-15T17:49:16.310",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-15T17:49:16.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Meaning of 果たして?",
"view_count": 1049
} | [
{
"body": "The most prevalent meaning of this word today that you should learn is \"...at\nall?\" to emphasize the depth of doubt in question, although it's quite distant\nfrom its etymology.\n\n> [**はたし‐て【果（た）して】**](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/176658/meaning/m0u/)\n>\n> **３** （下に疑問を表す語を伴って）いったい。「果たして誰が栄冠を手にするか」\n\n* * *\n\n> 果たして……兄さんがやってのけるのか\n>\n> _Does my brother dare to do such ... **at all**?_ \n> _**Could** my brother **really** dare to do such ... ?_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T13:01:17.230",
"id": "53908",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T13:16:26.037",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "53906",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "While \" ** _as expected_** \" is surely one of the meanings of 「果{は}たして」, it\nwould **not** work in this context vey well. That meaning works only in a\nclear and declarative statement describing the expected result of an event.\n\nThe sentence in question, as its ending would indicate, talks about the\nspeaker's uncertainty regarding the outcome of his brother's action. It is no\ndeclaration; In fact, the speaker is very unsure.\n\nSo, in this context, 「果たして」 means something along the lines of \" ** _really_**\n\" or even \" ** _Would there be an answer (to this question)?_** \"\n\n> \"Whether or not my brother will really be able to pull off a job like that\n> just to inherit everything, I have no idea.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T13:29:35.083",
"id": "53909",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T13:29:35.083",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53906",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "”果たして” originally meant \"as a consequence\" or \"eventually\", but it is used in\nthe sense of \"if at all\" to stress a certain doubt. For examples:\n\n**果たして** 彼が志望校に入れるかどうか、疑問だ - It's uncertain (at all) whether he can enter the\nschool (university) he desires to enter.\n\n**果たして** これが事件の決め手になるか、どうか？ - It's questionable (at all) if this can be a\ndecisive clue to settle the case.\n\n**果たして** イランは約束を守るか、どうか? - No one can tell whether Iran will keep their\npromise.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T02:02:20.963",
"id": "53929",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-15T17:48:53.643",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-15T17:48:53.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "53906",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53906 | 53908 | 53908 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between\n\n> 私はあなたの鉛筆でこの手紙を書きました。\n\nand\n\n> この手紙はあなたの鉛筆で書きました。\n\nDo the two sentences have the same meaning? I'm trying to say:\n\n> I wrote this letter with your pen.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T16:19:29.793",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53910",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T03:17:36.357",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-21T03:17:36.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "26067",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-は",
"word-order"
],
"title": "私は or この手紙は that means I wrote this letter",
"view_count": 166
} | [
{
"body": "It's basically the same meaning. They both mean \"I wrote this letter with your\npencil\" (not pen).\n\n> 私はあなたの鉛筆でこの手紙を書きました。\n\nThis one has \"I\" at the beginning.\n\n> この手紙はあなたの鉛筆で書きました。\n\nThis one doesn't have \"I\". That's ok. You can often leave out 私は in Japanese\nbecause it's clear from context. The other difference is, 手紙 became the topic\nof the sentence, so its particle を changed to は.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T19:00:57.203",
"id": "53917",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T01:37:35.540",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T01:37:35.540",
"last_editor_user_id": "902",
"owner_user_id": "902",
"parent_id": "53910",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53910 | null | 53917 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53957",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is a test passage I came across that made me suspect that my perceptions\nof formality and politeness were wrong. In this passage, we are required to\nselect the options we think are correct ( **bolded** below). I am confused\nabout the last question.\n\n**Why can the last blank be filled with 日本人にもかかわらず when おおやさん has been\nspeaking casually all along?**\n\n* * *\n\n> おおや：キャロルちゃん、今日も元気だね。\n>\n> キャロル：ありがとうございます。毎日楽しいですから。みんな小川さんやおおやさんの{a. せいです b. ためです **c. おかげです** }。\n>\n> おおや：ハハハ、おせじも上手になったね。で、どうだった、日本語のスピーチは。\n>\n> キャロル：う～ん、{ **a. けっこう** b. なかなか **c. かなり**\n> }まちがえたんですが、無事終わりました。ああ、私の日本語はまだまだなので、{a. もっと練習すべきだと思います。 **b.\n> もっと練習するべきだったと思います。** **c. もっと練習しないといけないと思います。** }\n>\n> おおや：すごいねえ。私は{a. 日本人のくせに **b. 日本人なのに** **c. 日本人にもかかわらず**\n> }漢字が書けなくなってきちゃったよ。としをとっちゃったのかなあ。",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T17:09:21.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53911",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T16:59:19.277",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"politeness",
"formality",
"conversations",
"conversational"
],
"title": "Japanese concepts of formality and politeness (with a close passage)",
"view_count": 204
} | [
{
"body": "> すごいねえ。私は{a. 日本人のくせに b. 日本人なのに c. 日本人にもかかわらず}漢字が書けなくなってきちゃったよ。としをとっちゃったのかなあ。\n\nWhile 「日本人にもかかわらず」 may sound a little more formal than 「日本人なのに」, the former is\nnot particularly formal in and of itself. It can and will appear in contexts\nthat are slightly informal as this conversation.\n\n「日本人なのに」 might well be considered the \"best\" answer by many, but it would be\nnitpicking to call 「日本人にもかかわらず」 an incorrect answer.\n\n「日本人のくせに」, however, sounds fairly self-degrading, so that it might not be as\nfitting as the other two. If the landlord used it jokingly and purposely,\nhowever, it could not be called an incorrect phrase choice. On a test like\nthis, though, I doubt that the examinee would be required to think of a rather\nspecific situation like what I just mentioned regarding the speaker's mood or\ncharacteristics.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T16:59:19.277",
"id": "53957",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T16:59:19.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53911",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53911 | 53957 | 53957 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following is an instruction for writing a small composition:\n\n> 日本に来て、または外国に行って、次のようなことでカルチャーショックを受けたことがありますか。 \n> 1) それまで聞いたことがない音を聞いて、びっくりした。 \n> 2) 国でよく聞いていた **音がほとんど聞かれないので** 、 **不思議に思った** 。\n\nFirst, my attempt at translation:\n\n\"Have you experienced culture shock from the following things while coming to\njapan or going to a foreign country? \n1) Hearing a sound you haven't heard so far, you were surprised. \n2) Because\n\n...you mostly don't get to hear sounds you often hear in your country... \n...sounds which you often heard in your country mostly aren't (to be) heard...\n\n...you think it's strange. \n...you think strangely (like \"feel\" strange?).\n\nSo, obviously my problem lies with the two bold parts.\n\nI think the passive construction could be an indirect passive? I asked about\nthe indirect passive before but I still feel very insecure about it. I also\ndon't know whether I translated it correctly, should it be an indirect passive\n(version 1 of my translation shall represent the case where I assumed that it\nis an indirect passive.).\n\nSecond, the 不思議に思った gives me a little headache because I'm not sure what\neffect 不思議に has in this case ^^ It could mean that \"I think of something as\nstrange\" (which I think is very likely here) or it could mean that \"I think\nstrangely\", which would be the most direct/closest relation between the adverb\nand the verb here, but I think it isn't very likely that this is the case\nhere.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T17:45:30.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53912",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T04:08:12.003",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T04:08:12.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How is this passive and this 不思議に思った meant?",
"view_count": 120
} | [
{
"body": "You basically have the right ideas! Think of the passive this way:\n\n> 日本以外の国ではノリがほとんど食べられない。\n>\n> In countries other than Japan, Nori isn't eaten much.\n\nIt really is just a normal passive. Just like sentences such as \"Sounds aren't\nbeing heard\", \"Snakes are rarely seen\" and so on. You could put this sentence\nin active form as\n\n> ... 聞いていた音を耳にしないので、...\n\nBut the passive form sounds a little nicer (at least to me).\n\n> 不思議に思う\n\nThis is a set phrase meaning you think something is strange, perplexing,\nbewildering or unusual. So basically your first guess was correct!",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T01:37:14.163",
"id": "53927",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T01:37:14.163",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18881",
"parent_id": "53912",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 53912 | null | 53927 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "ビルの工事の騒音で、電話がよく聞こえません。 =>\"With the noise of the multi-floor buildings\nconstruction work, you can't hear the phonecall well.\"\n\nWhat is meant with \"noise\" here? I guess it is the interference of the steel\nconstructions with the radiowaves of the mobilephone? Since there is no 携帯電話\nhere and since there is no explicite reference to noise in sense of\ninterference with electromagnetic waves, I wanted to ask for your opinion. It\nseems very unlikely to me that actual sonic noise caused by the buildings\nstructure is meant. Because in that case, I would assume that the building is\nabout to collapse...^^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T18:01:31.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53913",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T19:05:49.757",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What is meant with 騒音 here?",
"view_count": 96
} | [
{
"body": "This 騒音 isn't electric noise. It means noise of building a building. For\nexample, the sound of hammering something, heavy machines working and\nconstruction workers speaking loudly, etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T18:24:46.970",
"id": "53915",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T19:05:49.757",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-19T19:05:49.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "53913",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53913 | null | 53915 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53950",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "Apparently it means \"bad/unlucky day\", but several dictionaries I've consulted\n(both J->E and J->J) also say that it's also a Taoist term, as well as\nreferring to a farmer's bad luck with weather. Is this a commonly used word at\nall? Or is it more specialized? Or none of the above?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T18:10:50.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53914",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T06:18:25.507",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-19T19:41:46.893",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "18391",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "How common is the word 厄日【やくび】？",
"view_count": 246
} | [
{
"body": "I can partially answer your question by saying that this word is not common at\nall.\n\nI just searched several corpora for the term, and it doesn't show up in the\ntop 20,000 most frequent words in newspapers, nor does it show up anywhere in\nthe top 45,000 most frequent words used on the internet.\n\nI don't know anything about the word, but I can tell you that it's seldom seen\nin commonplace language-usage situations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T19:12:25.270",
"id": "53918",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T19:12:25.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Yes it's a commonly used word (slang) for \"unlucky day\".\n\nAnd yes, as you said, it originates from special term that means \"day of ill\nomen (i.e. for activities)\" in some schools of divination. This definition\nalso survives today, but I can hardly imagine people use it in this sense\nexcept explicitly under such fields of topic.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T19:25:52.457",
"id": "53919",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T19:25:52.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "53914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "「厄日」という言葉自体は、小さな子供でもなければ知っている言葉です。 しかし、古めかしい言葉ではあるので、誰もがよく使う言葉というわけでもありません。\n主に中年以上の人が使いがちですが、若い人でもわざと年寄り臭くして使うこともあります。地域性とか社会階層にもよるので一概には言えませんが。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T06:05:56.300",
"id": "53933",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T06:05:56.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25777",
"parent_id": "53914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "* I can hardly imagine a native speaker who doesn't understand the word 厄日. I think average Japanese people encounter 厄日 once a year or so. Obviously it's not a common word on newspapers, but if you like reading novels, you may see this word more often.\n * Today, 厄日 has very little to do with some specific religion, belief or tradition. It just means one's unlucky day that comes randomly. Its typical usage today is like [this](http://gigazine.net/news/20100514_having_a_bad_day/). This word is also used to half-jokingly comfort yourself or someone who encountered an unlucky event. \"Don't worry, it was just your 厄日, you didn't deserve it.\" \"Oh no, what the hell is this? Maybe it's my 厄日 today?\" In this sense, I don't think this is an old-fashioned word.\n * [厄年](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakudoshi) looks quite similar, but it's a fairly religious concept to me. A large shrine often has a signboard that tells your 厄年, and they offer some 厄払い services/goods.\n * You may probably say [仏滅/赤口 in 六曜](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_calendar#Rokuy.C5.8D) are also 厄日, but 厄日 is a more unspecific term. All the examples of 厄日 found on BCCWJ are clearly unrelated to the concept 六曜.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T06:18:25.507",
"id": "53950",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T06:18:25.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53914 | 53950 | 53919 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53926",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 生きるか死ぬかの問題だった。 \n> It was a question of life or death. \n> 飲み水が、一週間分あるかどうかだった。 \n> It was _a question of_ whether or not there was a week's worth of water.\n\nThe only way I can make sense of this structure is to assume that 飲み水 is the\nsubject of ある. I'm parsing it like this:\n\n> [ _問題は_ ] [飲み水が、一週間分あるかどうか] [だった]\n\nThe comma, and the lack of the topic is making me think that 飲み水 should pair\nup with だった, but I can't make a meaningful parsing if that is the case.\n\nI know it is common to omit the topic and I also know that commas don't serve\nthe same grammatical purpose as they do in English. I'd just like to check\nthat my understanding of this sentence is correct.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T20:16:12.673",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53920",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T07:47:32.673",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-21T07:47:32.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Understanding ～かどうかだ",
"view_count": 641
} | [
{
"body": "> 生{い}きるか死{し}ぬかの問題{もんだい}だった。\n>\n> 飲{の}み水{みず}が、一週間分{いっしゅうかんぶん}あるかどうかだった。\n\nOverall, you have a good understanding of the passage.\n\nThe first sentence tells us right away that there was a rather serious issue\nand the second explains exactly what the degree of the problem was.\n\nThe comma in the second sentence is completely optional. It is not needed as\nfar as grammar. IMHO, the author used the comma to make the sentence look more\ndramatic by \"forcing\" a short pause there.\n\n「飲み水が」 modifies 「あるかどうか」 and not 「だった」.\n\nThe omitted topic is 「問題」 here, which is already mentioned in the first\nsentence.\n\nMy own TL:\n\n> \"It was a matter of life or death.\"\n>\n> \"It was at the level of whether or not (our) water supply would last a\n> week.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T00:01:44.990",
"id": "53923",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T00:01:44.990",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53920",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Conclusion first, the _grammatical_ topic of the second sentence is **not**\n問題(は). I know this is unusual, but in this case, adding 問題は at the beginning\nof the sentence will dramatically change the meaning of the original sentence!\n\n> 1. 飲み水が一週間分あるかどうかだった。 \n> There was at most only a week's worth of drinking water. / There was\n> drinking water that might or might not last for a week. / There was some\n> drinking water, but I was not sure it would last even for a week.\n> 2. **問題は** 飲み水が一週間分あるかどうかだった。 \n> The problem was whether or not there was a week's worth of drinking water.\n>\n\nI think you already know how the second interpretation works. ～かどうか forms an\nembedded question, \"whether or not ～\". I was initially unaware of this, but\nthe second interpretation would also be perfectly valid in a certain context.\nFor example, if he knows he will be rescued after a week, and if he has\neverything to survive other than drinking water, then the only problem left is\nwhether or not there is enough water for the next seven days.\n\nBut the actual story is not like that, and that's why you asked this question,\nright? :) Perhaps he had no idea when he would be rescued; he might have to\nwait much longer than a week. Thus the correct interpretation is **1** , and\nyou must not add 問題は at the beginning for this sentence to work. You have to\nbe able to interpret this sentence as-is, without adding 問題は.\n\nSo, how does the first sentence work?\n\n～かどうかだ or ～かどうかです has a usage that is a bit different from \"whether or not ～\".\nThis is a little colloquial and I don't know how to normally translate this,\nbut the basic idea is something like \"may or may not\", \"fifty-fifty chance\",\n\"not certain yet\", \"depends on chance\", \"on the borderline between success and\nfailure\", or such.\n\nSome examples:\n\n> * ここから富士山は見えるかどうかです。 \n> From here, you can see Mt. Fuji if you are lucky. / Sometimes we can barely\n> see Mt. Fuji from here. / There is a chance we can see Mt. Fuji from here.\n> * 彼は合格できるかどうかです。 \n> He is on the borderline between pass and fail.\n> * 急いでいるが、間に合うかどうかだ。 \n> I'm in a hurry, but I may or may not be able to arrive on time.\n>\n\nSorry for the loose translation, but I hope you now understand how to\ninterpret the original sentence without adding an imaginary topic.\n\nFinally, if we do need to start this sentence with 問題は without largely\nchanging the original meaning, we can say this:\n\n> 問題は[飲み水が一週間分あるかどうか **だということ** ]だった。 \n> The problem was the fact that I had only a week's worth of drinking water\n> (at most).\n\nI simply enclosed the \"かどうか\" part with a nominalizer(?) だということ.\n\n* * *\n\n(EDIT history: Rewrote almost everything, but my opinion is the same. I hope I\nhave explained this issue better now.)",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T00:51:31.457",
"id": "53926",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T16:07:31.067",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T16:07:31.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53920",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "# English\n\n> (1) 生きるか死ぬかの問題だった。 \n> _It was a question of life or death_. \n> (2) 飲み水が、一週間[分]{ぶん}あるかどうかだった。 \n> _It was a question of whether or not there was a week's worth of water._\n\nIf OP thinks that \"the only way I can make sense of this structure of (2) is\nto assume that 飲み水 is the subject of ある. I'm parsing it like this: [問題は]\n[飲み水が、一週間分あるかどうか] [だった] _It was a question of whether or not there was a\nweek's worth of water_ \", I think OP interprets (2) as\n\"１週間分の水があれば助かる、それより少なければ助からない _If there was a week's worth of water I would be\nsaved and if there was water less than that I would not be saved._ \" I also\ninterpreted it as OP did for a moment and thought that it was correct that the\nOP added \"問題は\" at the beginning of (2).\n\nHowever I think it's impossible that such a sentence as (2) could exist\nlogically under actual circumstances. \nThe interpretation of OP is valid only if you know that the relief team will\narrive in a week or if you can reach some place where there is sufficient\nwater within a week. \nDo you really measure whether the amount of water at hand is a week's worth\nwhen you are in a situation \"生きるか死ぬかの問題だった _It was a question of life or\ndeath_ \" as the sentence of (1) says? \nThe meaning of \"飲み水が、一週間分あるかどうかだった\" is not \"It was a question whether or not\nthere was a week's worth of drinking water\" but I think \"Only sure thing was\nthat there was at most a week's worth of drinking water at hand.\"\n\nAs the conclusion, the whole meaning of (1) and (2) is that \"It was a question\nof life or death. Only sure thing was that there was at most a week's worth of\ndrinking water at hand. Nothing other than that was sure.\" or \"It was a\nquestion that I had to live only with the amount of water worth for a week or\nso at hand when I was neither sure whether a relief team would come or not nor\nsure whether I could reach/found the place where there was plenty of water\nbefore the water at hand was consumed.\"\n\n# 日本語\n\n> (1) 生きるか死ぬかの問題だった。 \n> (2) 飲み水が、一週間分あるかどうかだった。\n\n質問者は(2)を「１週間分の水があれば助かる、それより少なければ助からない」と解釈しているように思います。 \n私も、一瞬そのように思い、(2)の最初に質問者が「問題は」を補ったことは正解だと思いました。\n\nしかし、どう考えてもそのような文は論理的に存在しないような気がします。 \n水が１週間分あれば助かるとは、１週間後に救援隊が来ることが分かっている場合あるいは、１週間あれば水のあるところにたどり着ける場合の論理です。(1)の「生きるか死ぬかの問題」である時に、水が１週間分あるかどうかを計測しますか。\n\n「一週間分あるかどうか」は、whether or notではなく、「水が **約** 一週間分ある _there is about one week's\nworth of water_ 」という意味だと思います。\n\n結論として、 \n(2)を含む全体の意味は、「手許{てもと}にあるのは、水が約１週間分の分量あるという事実だけだ。これだけで果たして生き延びられるだろうか。救援隊が来るかどうか（、あるいは水のあるところにたどり着けるかどうか）は全くわからない。それが問題である。」\n\n(2)の文の冒頭に言葉を足すなら、「問題は」ではなく「手許｛てもと｝にあるのは」だと思う。",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T07:13:20.517",
"id": "53934",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T15:00:57.130",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53920",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53920 | 53926 | 53926 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53922",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a lyric from a song:\n\n> もし、今手が届かない\n\nThe translation I found is:\n\n> Even if I can't reach my goal now\n\nI understand that 手 means \"hand\", but what is its purpose here in the\nsentence? Shouldn't this also work?\n\n> もし、今届かない\n\nDoes 手 here mean \"goal\" instead?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T23:28:49.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53921",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T23:37:05.337",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-19T23:37:05.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "11935",
"owner_user_id": "11935",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "What is the purpose of 手 here?",
"view_count": 95
} | [
{
"body": "It more of less depends on the context, but [手が届く is a common set\nphrase](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%89%8B%E3%81%8C%E5%B1%8A%E3%81%8F)\nthat means \"to be able to reach\", \"to afford\", \"to become possible (to achieve\nsomething)\", etc. Since it's a set phrase, a physical hand is not very\nimportant. I don't know where the word \"goal\" came from by just seeing this\nline.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-19T23:36:53.407",
"id": "53922",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-19T23:36:53.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53921",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 53921 | 53922 | 53922 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53925",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the sense of 'mildly offended/annoyed'. Is there a single word expressing\nthis, or would it just be 少し + adjective?\n\nExample sentence:\n\n> I'm miffed that he suddenly hung up yesterday.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T00:41:34.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53924",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-07T02:50:18.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "What is the equivalent of 'miffed'?",
"view_count": 140
} | [
{
"body": "You would hear us say:\n\n・むかついた\n\n・むっとした\n\n・むっときた\n\n・しゃくにさわった\n\nYou could, if you wanted, insert 「ちょっと or 少{すこ}し」 in front of any of those\nexpressions.\n\nThe first three sound colloquial and slightly slangy and the last one, not at\nall.\n\n「むっ/ムッ」 is an onomatopoeic word describing a light kind of anger or annoyance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T00:49:38.377",
"id": "53925",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-07T02:50:18.233",
"last_edit_date": "2020-02-07T02:50:18.233",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53924",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 53924 | 53925 | 53925 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "HTTPリクエストについての書類を翻訳している。（和ー＞英） ここにはGETのために「要求」とPOSTのために「通知」を利用されている\n\n英語ではGETとPOSTは両方は\"Request\"だけど「要求」はRequestとして翻訳している\n\n質問は「通知」はどうやって翻訳したらいい？ 「Submission」？？\n\nI am trying to translate a document regarding HTTP operations from japanese to\nenglish. Here they use 要求for GET and 通知for POST I am translating 要求as request\n(although both are requests) but I can't figure it out how to translate 通知\nautomatic translation gives \"Notification Report\" but that does not sound\nnatural\n\nHow about \"Submission\" for「通知」?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T01:55:01.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53928",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T05:08:10.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26207",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "技術的な質問(HTTP) Technical question",
"view_count": 120
} | [
{
"body": "The straightforward literal translation of 通知 is _notification_ in IT\ncontexts. For example, see [Notification\nAPI](https://developer.mozilla.org/ja/docs/Web/API/notification) of browsers.\n通知する is _to notify_. I recommend you stick to _notification_ as long as it\nmakes sense. \"Print data notification\" should be fine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T05:08:10.940",
"id": "53932",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T05:08:10.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53928",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53928 | null | 53932 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "55660",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I notice that 衣 as a kanji component is sometimes written without the third\nstroke. For example, in 壌, 衣 is written with strokes 13 through to 16: below\nthe horizontal line there are 4 strokes. But in kanji like 展, below the line\nthere are three strokes, starting with a straight レ and missing the first\nstroke after the horizontal line.\n\nWhy is this? Is it the same component written slightly differently for\nhistorical reasons? Are they different components? Are they interchangeable in\nhandwriting or is using the 'wrong' version considered wrong?\n\n_(Note: My initial questions incorrectly referred to the kanji components as\nradicals, which was corrected by various answerers below.)_",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T02:21:23.577",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53930",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-13T19:52:13.123",
"last_edit_date": "2018-01-10T23:14:30.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "10361",
"owner_user_id": "10361",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"radicals",
"stroke-order"
],
"title": "Why is there two different ways of writing the 衣 component?",
"view_count": 1343
} | [
{
"body": "This will only be a partial answer.\n\nFirst off, neither of the two Kanji you named seem to have 衣{ころも} as their\nradical (部首{ぶしゅ}), but only as a part. The radical of 展 is 尸{しかばね} [1] and\nthat of 壌 is 土{つち} [2]. [Here](http://kanji.jitenon.jp/cat/bushu06017.html) is\na list of Kanji with 衣 as their radical.\n\nOn a side note, 衤 is actually the same radical as 衣. I'm sure you have seen\nplenty of Kanji with that part/radical!\n\nIn those Kanji with 衣 as their radical, the lower part (see bottom of 褎 褏) of\nthe radical seems to be fully included (albeit sometimes modified like in 裹)\nin all Kanji.\n\nI haven't yet found a list with all the Kanji that have 衣 as a part and am not\nsure whether slight variations would influence the meaning. My intuition tells\nme that you probably want to avoid diverging from the currently common way to\nwrite them, but I cannot say with confidence that it would necessarily be\nwrong.\n\nThis is a very interesting question and I will research it more and add to my\nanswer if I can find out anything else!\n\n[1] <http://kanji.jitenon.jp/kanjib/953.html> \n[2] <http://kanji.jitenon.jp/kanjid/1758.html>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T03:24:05.770",
"id": "53931",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T04:31:16.650",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T04:31:16.650",
"last_editor_user_id": "18881",
"owner_user_id": "18881",
"parent_id": "53930",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "**Edit:** Please read [this later\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/55660/26242) which corrects much\nof the mistakes that the Japanese sources (that I used) have with more recent\nand accurate Chinese information. I'll keep this answer around so that it can\nbe seen what was actually corrected.\n\n* * *\n\n### Short answer:\n\nWhile the relevant set of strokes in 壌 is indeed a version of 衣, the lower set\nof strokes in 展 should not be considered as such. Thus, IMO you should not use\nthem interchangeably.\n\n* * *\n\n# Long Version:\n\n**Before we start:** I am no scholar of this subject, just an enthusiast that\ndid some research for this answer, so read this more as an informed opinion\nrather than the ultimate answer. Especially, when it comes to 漢字 there might\nbe differences depending on the person you are asking. Furthermore, I am\nbasing myself mostly on internet resources. They might well be wrong, or the\nconclusions I am making might be wrong, but I thought I might as well just\nshare the insights I have gotten from my little research.\n\n## Classifying 漢字 by their parts\n\nNow, as has been pointed out in a previous answer you have to differentiate\nbetween the 部首 (radicals) and auxiliary parts of the 漢字. The character 衣 you\nare referring to, when appearing in other characters, is referred to as ころもへん.\nAnd you can consult in [this](https://kakijun.jp/bushu/bushu145.html) and\n[this](http://kanji.jitenon.jp/cat/bushu06017.html) list that characters\ncontaining ころもへん as 部首 will always have the ''complete'' character in it. I.e.\nthe one not ''missing'' any strokes. In particular, you will notice that 展 is\nnot part of that list (as pointed out by the previous answer, since the\nradical is 尸).\n\nNow you might ask yourself, why does it look so similar and what is its\nrelation to other 漢字 with the same parts such as 長 or 喪. And I think it's\nworth to take a little time to differentiate things that don't belong\ntogether.\n\nAs you might have guessed by the chapter title or the last paragraph, there\nare ways to classify 漢字 by the parts they are using and what function they\nhave for the character. I think, the most popular one is\n[[六書]{りくしょ}](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%85%AD%E6%9B%B8-148521). It contains\nthe following distinctions (of which there is a nice readup on\n[here](https://okjiten.jp/kanji1.html)):\n\n 1. [象形]{しょうけい} - characters that originate from the looks of what they mean (i.e. hieroglyphs), e.g. how 水 looks a bit like flowing water.\n 2. [指事]{しじ} - characters which represent an abstract idea, e.g. 三 which represents the concept of the number three by three lines.\n 3. [会意]{かいい} - combination of multiple meaningful parts, e.g. 男 which has 田 for (rice) field and 力 for power and suggests the imagery of a strong man working in the fields.\n 4. [形声]{けいせい} - combination of meaningful and purely phonetic characters, e.g. [晴]{せい} which means clear skies and is made up of 日 for sun indicating good weather and [青]{せい} for it's reading. 85% of japanese characters are made up like this ([source](https://okjiten.jp/kanji1.html)), which is why you can usually try to guess reading based on the contained parts.\n 5. [転注]{てんちゅう} - apply extended meaning to a character, e.g. 楽 comes from 音楽 for music, but since listening to music is pleasant it has also become used in as one way of writing [楽]{たの}しい, which means something like fun or pleasant.\n 6. [仮借]{かしゃく} - borrowing characters with similar sound to convey a certain term (more known under the name of [当]{あ}て[字]{じ}), e.g. writing アジア (Asia) as 亜細亜 completely ignoring the original meaning.\n\nNote that the latter two are more about usage (使用法) of characters than their\nconstruction (構成法). Now that the vocabulary is down, let us get to some\nexamples.\n\n## Examples\n\nI feel the need to first cover 長 and 喪 to emphasize that the bottom part is\nnot just a sloppily written ころもへん. Then I will quickly go over 壌. And lastly\n展, which will be the most ambiguous section since there seems to have been a\nshift in its classification.\n\n### Disclaimer\n\nAll images below are from [okjiten](https://okjiten.jp/index.html) a great\nsource for this kind of material and it gives a great read, albeit I do not\nknow it's sources so read with that in mind. Another great resource is the\n[説文解字](http://kanji-database.sourceforge.net/dict/swjz/index.html) database\nwhich gives you access to the book of the same name, which is the oldest\nsource that splits the 漢字 into their respective radicals. It is written during\nthe late han-dynasty by a certain [許慎]{きょしん} who was a Chinese that settled\nover to Japan apparently. I do think that okjiten bases itself on this. But I\ncan't read Chinese so I can't confirm the information.\n\n### 長\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/WmdDb.gif)\n\nThe characters meaning is _long_. As the image depicts, 長 is a 象形文字 (class 1\ncharacter). It originally depicted a person with long hair and transformed\ninto the character it is today. No relation at all to 衣.\n\n### 喪\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0llZd.gif)\n\nThe characters meaning is usually something along the lines of _mourning_. As\nthe image depicts in old writing there was a dog with upright ears (象形文字 class\n1), two mouths (象形文字 class 1) and a corpse at the bottom (象形文字 class 1). This\nis a prime example of a 会意文字 (class 3 character). You have the dog with the\ntwo mouths (nowadays 哭 for wailing). The wailing dog is used to convey the\nimage of wailing people at the sight of the dead person. So it is using the\nmeaning of all the sub-parts. Again no direct link to 衣.\n\n### 壌\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hGMM2.gif)\n\nAs you can probably guess from the use cases of this kanji (mostly connected\nto soil) this is a 形声文字 (class 4 character) which retains it's meaning of soil\n土 and borrows the reading from [襄]{じょう}. For what it's worth, the image is\nstill explaining that originally this character is made up of symbols\ndepicting the stashing away of some dirt amulet in your _clothes_ to protect\nyou from evil, and this is why one has the 衣 and thus the correct writing of\nit, since it was an integral part to the meaning of the character.\n\n### 展\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JeEQk.gif)\n\nAccording to the figure above the interpretation is that there is a corpse (尸)\nwith its arms and legs outstretched (象形文字 class 1). The 㠭 below it is imagery\nfor heavy weight (象形文字 class 1) and finally the bottom part is an old form of\n_clothes_ or at least some parts of them (the collar to translate exactly) on\nwhich all this weight is placed. The character is figuratively depicting the\nplacing of weight onto clothes to stretch them wide (伸ばし広げる). This meaning of\nstretching is still retained in the character today albeit not in connection\nwith clothes. You might notice that the concept of _clothes_ itself is not as\nprevalent as in the previous character (which might be the reason it is not\ncontained nowadays). The character can be found in 説文解字 [here](http://kanji-\ndatabase.sourceforge.net/dict/swjz/v15a.html).\n\nNow this is where it becomes weird. If we take a look at [this question\ndealing with exactly your problem with this\ncharacter](https://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/5944209.html) there are citations from\ndictionaries from way back that read like the following\n\n> 尸（からだ）と、音符●テン（×・△はその省略形。ころがる意→転）とから成り、人がからだをころがして寝返りをうつ意……\n>\n> などという説明があります。\n> この「音符●」の「●」は、何やら漢字になっていない記号のようなもの（象形文字？）で、「△」は「展」の「尸」を除いた部分、「×」は「展」の「尸」を除いた部分と少し形の異なる字（？）です。\n\nTo give a quick summary (the characters from the dictionary could not be\ncopied over, since they are not actual japanese characters, so placeholders\n●,×,△ have been inserted). The dictionary explains that this is a pure 形声文字\n(class 4 character) in which the meaning is largely conveyed through [尸]{からだ}\nand the part inside it is just [音符]{おんぷ}, i.e. the phonetic addendum to give a\nway to read the character. So no relation at all to ころもへん which is also what\nChocolate commented on the question with his findings in his 漢和辞典.\n\nBut [okjiten](https://okjiten.jp/index.html) has connected the character with\nthe meaning of _collar_ and thus somehow to 衣 and thus classifies it not only\nas a 形声文字 (class 4 character) but claims that the middle part also plays a\npart in the meaning (which it does, if you follow their reasoning) and thus\nclassifies it as\n[[会意形声文字]{かいいけいせいもじ}](https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%BC%9A%E6%84%8F%E5%BD%A2%E5%A3%B0%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97),\nwhich is a combination of class 3 and class 4. This means that the (previously\nbelieved to be purely) phonetic part actually carries some of the original\nmeaning of the character. As the link explains it was added because most of\nthe time characters classified purely as 形声文字 (class 4 characters) actually\ncould also be classified as 会意文字 (class 3 character), as well.\n\nTo sum the story up for this character, there doesn't seem to be a consensus.\nAnd I can most certainly not tell you whether the dictionaries are old or\nwhether the internet is taking some artistic liberties (some native/scholar\nopinion would be needed). Though I would personally tend towards the former.\nWhich does not change the fact that the _collar of clothes_ part mutated into\nsomething which is the bottom part of the unrelated 喪 and has grown completely\nunrelated, in meaning and writing, to 衣.\n\n## Conclusion\n\nI hope this has shed a bit of light onto this very niche topic for you. I\nwonder if anybody kept themselves motivated to read until this point over the\nquestion of one little line that most people probably don't even actively\nnotice. In any case, I hope my point is clear. While the characters might be\nsimilar, **they are not the same**. It seems that this particular stroke order\njust naturally evolved from a plethora of different base characters, rather\nthan being based on one single characters like radicals usually are.\n\nWhile there does seem to be the occasional historical reference to 衣, it is\nprobably better to consider it non-existent if it is not the exact ころもへん in\nthe kanji. It might hint at the fact that the meaning probably evolved, or the\nrelation to 衣 was not strong enough to begin with, to keep that ころもへん in the\ncharacter.\n\nWhile it is nice to take a look into history like this, a good baseline is not\nto diverge from what you learned and keep to consensus.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T20:50:33.537",
"id": "54046",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-09T17:14:01.587",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26242",
"parent_id": "53930",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "So, the general spirit of the question has been answered - the key ideas being\nthat _radicals_ (dictionary headers) are not the same as generic _components_\nthat are found in characters, and thus in different characters what appears to\nbe somewhat similar components should be clearly differentiated and written\ndifferently. The general advice given by the other answers are correct, so as\nlong as the advice is taken, the rest of this answer is extra information and\ncan be safely ignored.\n\nHowever, I gather that the OP (and maybe some other readers) is still\ninterested in a more coherent set of information, and there is much\nconflicting and incorrect information given by the other answers about the\norigins of the characters mentioned in the questions and answers on this page.\nIn general, characters that are not\n[_kokuji_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanji#Kokuji) were first created for\nChinese words, and thus require explanations which include data from Chinese\nphonological information (e.g. reconstructions from [Baxter-\nSagart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructions_of_Old_Chinese#Baxter%E2%80%93Sagart_\\(2014\\))),\nwhich unfortunately many Japanese dictionary explanations, even famously\northodox ones, do not do a very good job of taking into account of.\n\nSince there is a large discussion on this page about character classification\nand origins, in light of the potential confusion that this may cause in the\nfuture, the following is a list of statements on this page that the rest of\nthis answer will hopefully address, for the problematic ones:\n\n 1. `The bottom parts of 展 and 喪 derived from something other than 衣.`\n * True for 喪\n * Not true for 展\n 2. For 長: `It originally depicted a person with long hair and transformed into the character it is today. No relation at all to 衣.`\n * Largely correct. Not going to address this character.\n 3. For 喪: `As the image depicts in old writing there was a dog with upright ears (象形文字 class 1), two mouths (象形文字 class 1) and a corpse at the bottom (象形文字 class 1)`. \n * This [ojikten](https://okjiten.jp/index.html) explanation, while very good for a mnemonic, is ultimately incorrect, and appears to be parroted from _Dai Kan-wa Jiten_ , whose explanation is taken straight from [_Shuowen Jiezi_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuowen_Jiezi) (`喪，亾也。从哭从亾。會意。亾亦聲。`).\n * The most obvious reason why both _Dai Kan-wa Jiten_ and _Shuowen Jiezi_ are incorrect is that 喪, which was first attested in oracle bone script, appeared much earlier than 哭, which was first attested during the Warring States period, so 喪 cannot have come from 哭.\n 4. For 襄, the original right hand side component of 壌: `...the image is still explaining that originally this character is made up of symbols depicting the stashing away of some dirt amulet in your clothes to protect you from evil...`\n * This ojikten explanation is incorrect. The right hand side is purely phonetic.\n 5. For 展: `the interpretation is that there is a corpse (尸) with its arms and legs outstretched (象形文字 class 1). The 㠭 below it is imagery for heavy weight (象形文字 class 1) and finally the bottom part is an old form of clothes or at least some parts of them (the collar to translate exactly) on which all this weight is placed. The character is figuratively depicting the placing of weight onto clothes to stretch them wide (伸ばし広げる). This meaning of stretching is still retained in the character today albeit not in connection with clothes.`\n * Explanation of 尸 is incorrect. As a component forming a part of another character, 尸 depicts a squatting person, not a corpse.\n * Explanation of 㠭 is incorrect.\n * The character did in fact contain 衣, but it was inseparable from 㠭.\n 6. Also for 展: `尸（からだ）と、音符●テン（×・△はその省略形。ころがる意→転）とから成り、人がからだをころがして寝返りをうつ意……などという説明があります。 この「音符●」の「●」は、何やら漢字になっていない記号のようなもの（象形文字？）で、「△」は「展」の「尸」を除いた部分、「×」は「展」の「尸」を除いた部分と少し形の異なる字（？）です。`\n * Overall, largely correct.\n * 尸 as **からだ** is a much better interpretation than _corpse_.\n * 「△」is [this](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian?kaiOrder=44766) character, which only takes a phonetic role in 展.\n * In reality, neither 㠭,「×」, nor「△」have been conclusively shown to exist independently from 展. They all seem to have been cut off from the original form of 展, and in the case of 㠭, it is identical in meaning and sound to 展.\n * All other conflicting information should be seen as incorrect.\n 7. `In those Kanji with 衣 as their radical, the lower part (see bottom of 褎 褏) of the radical seems to be fully included (albeit sometimes modified like in 裹) in all Kanji.`\n * 裹 does not have a modified version of 衣. It is simply 果 inside of 衣.\n\nWith this list out of the way, let's begin.\n\n* * *\n\n**イ. Glyph origin of 喪.**\n\nAll three of the following\n\n * **喪** ( _mourning_ )\n * **咢** (various meanings)\n * **噩** ( _startling/shocking_ )\n\nwere originally the same character:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xNx4s.png)\n\nIn fact, this character was originally a phonetic loan from **桑** ( _mulberry\ntree_ ), and was graphically differentiated from 桑 via the addition of a bunch\nof mouths ( **口** ). For reference, the original form of 桑 was [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/erVoN.png)\nand the original form of 口 was [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZIfJh.png).\n\nFurther evidence for the relation between 喪 and 桑 comes from their phonetic\nreconstructions. Their Old Chinese reconstructions, as given by Baxter-Sagart,\nare:\n\n * 喪: /*s-mˤaŋ/\n * 桑: /*[s]ˤaŋ/\n\nIn both Mandarin Chinese and Japanese, they have actually become homophones (\n**sāng** , **そう** ).\n\nNote that the number of 口 in later forms was quite variable, and various parts\nof the character morphed into different shapes (see\n[this](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian?kaiOrder=2482)), but it\neventually settled on two 口. The bottom portion of the character\ndifferentiated from its pictographic tree origins to become **亾** , which is a\nvariant of **亡**. An important note: the original meaning of 亡 was to do with\n_losing (something)_ ; _die_ is an extended meaning that only arose later.\n\nAs for etymology, 喪 is thought to be cognate with **忘** ( _to forget_ ), 亡,\n**無** ( _without_ ), among others [all originating from Proto-Sino-Tibetan\n*ma](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Sino-Tibetan/ma)\n(meaning _not_ ). This is a very important point, as all these characters are\nrelated in meaning.\n\nFinally, **哭** does not appear anywhere in the historical forms of 喪. For\nreference, the original glyph of 哭 looked like [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/k27DM.png),\nwith the central portion being **犬** ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PPfTq.png)).\n\n* * *\n\n**ロ. Glyph origin of 襄.**\n\nDespite being graphically well documented, the evolution's a bit of a mess:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QhE1M.png)\n\nAlthough it started off simple, with something like **U** on top of **人**\n([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vCtMU.png)),\nseemingly random components (土，攴) were added on, 人 became **卩** , the top\nU-shape morphed into two 口, 卩 became **己** , 攴 became two **又** , and finally\nyou end up with something like the shape in box 14.\n\nThis is one of those (quite rare!) situations where the character is a\nmystery; there is no written evidence of any concrete meaning for this\ncharacter, and modern characters [e.g. **讓** ( _allow/permit/yield/concede_ ),\n**壤** ( _soil/ground/land_ ) **囊** ( _bag_ )] which use it do not appear to be\nconnected in meaning at all. The ojikten explanation is probably related to 囊\n(maybe interpreting it as an assortment of random objects in a bag).\n\nNote that the appearance of **衣** ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/iYvKs.png))\nis either a directed or coincidental change or from the original components,\nand 衣 did not appear anywhere in the original form.\n\nAt this point in time, scholarship asks for patience while more evidence can\nbe gathered.\n\n* * *\n\n**ハ. Glyph origin of 尸.**\n\n**尸** is simply a depiction of a squatting person:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yb8DT.png)\n\nAs mentioned before in Point 6, viewing 尸 as からだ may be helpful, in many\nsituations, in remembering characters. For example:\n\n * **居** ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aVTFM.png)), phono-semantic compound with phonetic **古** and 尸 (a person), indicating the meaning _place of residence_ ;\n * **尾** ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I4SbS.png)), a person with an appendage on the backside, indicating the meaning _tail_ ;\n * **尿** ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zHVtX.png)), a picture of someone urinating;\n * **屍** ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2n2E6.png)), compound ideogram of a body (尸) that's dead ( **死** ), indicating the meaning _corpse_.\n\n* * *\n\n**Conclusion**\n\nI hope that, from these examples, it has become very clear that character\nforms are actually very well documented, and their original meanings and\nsounds are quite well preserved. There has been a quite pervasive myth that's\nbeen going around for a long time about the obscurity and chaos of where the\ncharacters came from, which is not helped by many standard reference\ndictionaries providing conflicting explanations with little consistent\nresearch. However, the reality is that opaque characters like 襄 are quite\nuncommon, and consensus is strong among scholars in the field about the\norigins of a majority of commonly used characters.\n\n* * *\n\n**References**\n\n * 季旭昇《說文新證》. Although in Chinese, I'm giving an extremely high recommendation for this reference for character origins. Very accessible, with plain language, and requires no specialist knowledge.\n * 李學勤《字源》\n * [小學堂](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/), excellent website to check for archaic variants, and where the majority of the character forms in this answer have been taken from.\n\n**Further Reading and Useful Resources**\n\n * [Multi-function Chinese Character Database](http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/), good website for character explanations, but in Chinese.\n * Qiu Xigui, [_Chinese Writing (Early China Special Monograph Series, No. 4)_](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1557290717)",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-01-03T22:19:00.203",
"id": "55660",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-09T19:10:13.430",
"last_edit_date": "2018-01-09T19:10:13.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "26510",
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "53930",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 53930 | 55660 | 55660 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53938",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 信用ほど、積み上げるのに苦労して、\n\nSo first, I have trouble understanding ほど here. I suppose that のに here means\n\"in order to\" so I would say it means \"It's hard to build up trust\".\n\n> 失う時が一瞬なんて\n\nYou can lose it in an instant.\n\n> 割の合わない投資はない\n\nI have no idea what 割の合わない means. I usually have a hard time understanding 合う\nanyway.\n\nThe whole sentence :\n\n> 信用ほど、積み上げるのに苦労して、失う時が一瞬なんて、割の合わない投資はない。\n\nI'd like to know what ほど means here since it doesn't seem to be the one I\nusually see, and I'd like to understand the \"logic\" behind 割の合わない.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T12:46:55.363",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53935",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-23T19:34:52.173",
"last_edit_date": "2022-03-23T19:34:52.173",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "信用ほど、積み上げるのに苦労して、失う時が一瞬なんて、割の合わない投資はない。",
"view_count": 187
} | [
{
"body": "That's a tough one, and I'm certainly open to correction on this, but to me\nthe ほど here is like \"amounting to\". And the 割の合わない投資 is an investment which\ndoesn't fit the bill, which falls short of the mark somehow. In other words,\nactions or behavior which fall short of the mark will not amount to trust,\nbecause it takes time to build that trust, and it can be lost in an instant.\nIt's like saying there's no half-measures when it comes to building trust.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T13:47:52.727",
"id": "53936",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T13:47:52.727",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53935",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "First of all, about 割の合わない - 割に合う is a set expression meaning \"to be worth\nit\". Literally I think it's derived from the use of 割 to refer to \"profits\",\nso it essentially means \"to match up to the reward\", but it's easiest to just\nthink of it as a set phrase since it comes up far more often than this use of\n割 in any other context.\n\nAs such, something that _doesn't_ 割に合う, ie. a 割に合わないもの or 割の合わないもの, is\nsomething that \"isn't worth it\" - the reward isn't sufficient to be worth the\neffort expended.\n\nNow for the ほど, this should be easier to understand if we remove all the fluff\nin the middle of the sentence. The basic sentence we're looking at here is\n信用ほど割の合わない投資はない。 This is a case of the common usage of ほど which takes the\nbasic form XほどYなものはない, meaning \"there's nothing as Y as X\" (eg. 自然ほど美しいものはない,\n\"there's nothing as beautiful as nature\").\n\nIn this case もの is replaced by the more specific 投資 meaning \"investment\", so\ninstead of \"there's no **thing** as Y as X\" it's more specifically \"there's no\n**investment** as Y as X\". The X is straightforwardly 信用 \"trust\", and the Y is\n割の合わない, making the whole thing mean literally \"there's no investment as not-\nworth-it as trust\". But that's not very natural English, so let's flip it\naround a bit and say \"Trust is the most unwise investment of all.\"\n\nAs for the bits inserted in the middle of this sentence\n(積み上げるのに苦労して、失う時が一瞬なんて), they're just elaborating on _why_ the author thinks\ntrust is such an unwise investment - because \"it takes hard effort to build\nup, but you can lose it in an instant\". You can think of this whole phrase as\nloosely modifying 割の合わない投資. It's the same usage of なんて as in something like\nあんないい仕事を辞めるなんて、馬鹿なやつだ。 (\"What an idiot, quitting such a good job.\") The whole\nphrase preceding なんて is commenting on the negative context that justifies the\nfollowing statement.\n\nHonestly, I don't think this is a very grammatically satisfying sentence,\nbecause the なんて clause is completely disconnected grammatically from the ほど～ない\nexpression that it's embedded in. It would look a lot neater to me if the なんて\nclause was moved to the beginning of the sentence to avoid breaking up the\nrest (ie. 積み上げるのに苦労して、失う時が一瞬なんて、信用ほど割の合わない投資はない。) But at any rate, that's how\nthe sentence fits together.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T14:51:39.910",
"id": "53938",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T14:51:39.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53935",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": ">\n> 「信用{しんよう}ほど、積{つ}み上{あ}げるのに苦労{くろう}して、失{うしな}う時{とき}が一瞬{いっしゅん}なんて、割{わり}の合{あ}わない投資{とうし}はない。」\n\nThe core of the sentence is:\n\n> 「信用ほど割の合わない投資はない。」\n\nThe entire middle part 「積み上げるのに苦労して、失う時が一瞬なんて」 just adds more information to\nthe core. **It would not change the basic meaning of the sentence one bit**.\n\nSo, let us examine the core now. Notice that ほど is paired up with ない. The core\nsays:\n\n> \"There is no 投資 as 割の合わない as 信用.\"\n>\n> = \"There is no investment as not-worth-the-candle as trust.\"\n\nIn other words, it is saying that trust can be really rip-offy. But why, you\nwonder. That is where the middle part comes in telling us how it can be so\nrip-offy.\n\n> 「積み上げるのに苦労して、失う時が一瞬なんて」\n>\n> \"(as/because) one struggles much to build up (trust) yet one can lose it in\n> a flash\"\n\nI hope I don't have to combine the two parts into one English sentence. I\nshall leave it to you as it is your language, not mine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T15:01:53.877",
"id": "53939",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T15:01:53.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53935",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53935 | 53938 | 53938 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've heard this:\n\n> ありがとう お腹すいてたんだ\n\nWhy \"-te\" form? And is て there at all? It looks to me ungrammatical.\n\nWhy not this?\n\n> ありがとう お腹すいたんだ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T14:36:27.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53937",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T20:26:31.457",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T20:26:31.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "26200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"aspect"
],
"title": "An additional て for some reason",
"view_count": 156
} | [
{
"body": "～てた is an extremely common casual contraction of the past continuous ～ていた (in\nthe same way that the present continuous ～ている is commonly contracted to ～てる).\n\nSo the difference between お腹がすいた and お腹がすいてた is the same as the difference\nbetween their present-tense equivalents お腹がすく and お腹がすいている. The former means\n\"I become/became hungry\" and the latter means \"I am/was hungry\".\n\nIn practice, お腹すいたんだ would usually be taken as meaning \"I'm starting to get\nhungry right now\" (because the plain past tense of a verb that indicates a\nchange in state is commonly used to indicate that that change has just\noccurred), whereas お腹すいてたんだ indicates that the speaker has been hungry for a\nlittle while.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T15:08:17.617",
"id": "53940",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T15:08:17.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53937",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53937 | null | 53940 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53944",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 今日は、日本で長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様に **おいで**\n> いただきました。一番長い方は15年、短い方でも6年はいらっしゃるそうです。その間のご苦労や嬉しかったことなどを伺いたいと思います。([source](https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf))\n\nSo first, I have some issues with 長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様. I think 奥様 is modified by\nthe parts before, which I would separate into 長く and お暮しの４人の外国の. I would\ninterpret 長く as the connective form of 長い with the meaning \"long (time)\".\nThen, I have issues mustering a meaningful interpretation of the phrase\nお暮しの４人の外国の. Therefore, I also can't say how 長く and 長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様 stand in a\nmeaningful relationship.\n\nHere's my attempt at translation of the full sentence\n\n> 今日は、日本で長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様に **おいで** いただきました。\n>\n> => \"Today, we received the favor of married women being here.\"\n\nThis is the short version to show how I basically understand this sentence. As\npointed out, I can't make much sense of the attributes for \"married women\".\n\n> \"Today, we receive the favor of four foreign country people's married women\n> being here.\"\n\nThis is as far as I can make it. When I try to add 日本で長くお暮しの it all becomes\ngibberish.\n\n> \"Today, we receive the favor of long in Japan and life circumstances four\n> foreign country people's married women being here.\"\n\nI must also add here that おいで in おいでいただきました still confuses me a bit. \nI'm pretty sure that it is a honorific/respectful form, especially since there\nis [this entry on jisho](http://jisho.org/search/oide). \nBut since it is categorised as a noun or expression there, I feel very unsure\nabout the way I interpreted it. I interpreted おいでいただきました like \"verb て form +\nいただく\", but for おいで to be classified as a verb it would require なる as in\nおいでになる. Maybe the way I translated it here is still legit since いただく \"to\nreceive\" can probably also be used in combination with a noun and thereby\nunfold a very similar meaning \"receive NOUN\" = \"receive ACTION\". But as I\nsaid, I feel very unsure about this interpretation of mine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T16:59:48.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53942",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-12T00:05:40.973",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-12T00:05:40.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"keigo"
],
"title": "今日は、日本で長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様においでいただきました",
"view_count": 174
} | [
{
"body": "I think the main thing slipping you up here is that semantically verbal forms\ncan often take the form of grammatical nouns in honorific language. As a\ngeneral rule, most basic sonkeigo forms of verbs take a noun form (usually\npreceded by お or sometimes ご) followed by になる. However, the noun form on its\nown can also be treated as sufficient to represent the verb in a number of\nconstructions.\n\nFor instance, let's take the ordinary verb 忘れる. This takes the regular\nsonkeigo form お忘れになる (and the corresponding kenjougo form お忘れする). However, in\na number of honorific constructions, the verb can be (and usually is)\nexpressed by お忘れ on its own:\n\n> お忘れください \"Please forget.\" \n> (equivalent to the much rarer お忘れになってください)\n>\n> お忘れいただきたい \"I would like you to forget.\" \n> (equivalent to the much rarer お忘れになっていただきたい)\n>\n> お忘れのもの \"The thing you forgot\" \n> (equivalent to the much rarer お忘れになったもの)\n\nThis is the reason for the おいでいただきました form that was confusing you - it's\nessentially equivalent to おいでになっていただきました, just with the shorter noun form used\ninstead of including the whole になる conjugation. So the literal meaning of this\npart is, as you surmise, something like \"We had the pleasure of [them] joining\nus here\", or in more natural English simply \"We are joined today by...\"\n\nI think this same verb-as-noun phenomenon is also what was slipping you up in\nthe first part of the sentence, because you weren't recognising お暮し as an\nhonorific **verb** form. 日本で長くお暮しの…奥様 is equivalent to 日本で長くお暮しになっている奥様, or in\nplain terms 日本で長く暮らしている奥様 \"ladies who have lived in Japan for a long time\".\nAdd in the extra descriptors, and the full phrase 日本で長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様 simply\nmeans \"four foreign ladies who have lived in Japan for a long time\".\n\nOne easy way of recognising that this お暮し is simply a verb taking a nominal\nform (rather than an actual semantic noun) is that it's being modified by 長く,\nwhich is an adverb and so can't modify actual nouns. If お暮し were being treated\nas a noun, we could talk about 長いお暮し (or perhaps even お長い暮し), but we can only\ntalk about 長くお暮し when お暮し is a verb conjugation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T17:43:36.853",
"id": "53944",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T17:43:36.853",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53942",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53942 | 53944 | 53944 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53945",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'd like to know which way is the proper way to say **あなたたちは早行きました** 。 The\ncorrect pronunciation of this phrase would be:\n\n> anata tachi ha sou ikimashita or anata tachi ha hayai ikimashita",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T17:35:09.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53943",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T17:56:32.157",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T17:56:32.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "25472",
"owner_user_id": "25472",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "The correct pronunciation of this phrase?",
"view_count": 122
} | [
{
"body": "There isn't a correct pronunciation for this phrase, because 早行きました is not a\ngrammatical expression. Perhaps what you want to say is 早{はや}く行{い}きました.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T17:47:54.303",
"id": "53945",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T17:47:54.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "53943",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 53943 | 53945 | 53945 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53948",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "The bold part is the sentence in question, the rest is for context:\n\n> 今日は、日本で長くお暮しの４人の外国の奥様においでいただきました。 **一番長い方は15年、短い方でも6年はいらっしゃるそうです。**\n> その間のご苦労や嬉しかったことなどを伺いたいと思います。\n\nThe full text can be viewed\n[here](https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf).\n\nFirst, my attempt at translation:\n\n> \"The longest time person shall be here for 15 years, but the shortest time\n> person shall be here for 6 years.\"\n\n1) Is は in\n\n> 一番長い方は\n\nand\n\n> 6年は\n\nin a contrastive way here?\n\n2) The positioning of でも is a bit unusual compared to what I've seen so far. \nIt seems almost like a suffix to 方, although it surely isn't. However, does\nthis position have any consequence on its meaning? Does it become nuanced in a\ndifferent way?\n\n3) I still feel a bit uncomfortable translating \"一番長い方\" into \"the person who\nhas lived (here) the longest.\" I know there is very strong contextual support\nhere, but it still feels like I'm adding too much xD So I just wanted to know\nif this is a common way to express this? Or do I have to be cautious in cases\nwhere the context isn't as strong as it is here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T18:15:28.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53946",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T14:07:59.883",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-21T03:08:52.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "Uncertainties about this sentence: 「一番長い方は15年、短い方でも6年はいらっしゃるそうです。」",
"view_count": 226
} | [
{
"body": "1) The は in 一番長い方は is meaning 'is' or 'has been'. But は in 短い方でも6年は is meaning\n\"at least she has been\" or \"in spite of the fact she is the shortest resident\nin 4 persons here, she's been in here 6 years long\". (To me as English learner\ndifference between \"shall be\" and \"has been\" is not clear. I used 'has been'\nbased on my instinct. Please fix it if it was inappropriate as English.)\n\n**EDIT**\n\nThe usage of は in 短い方でも6年は is meaning 'at least'. Here is example of same\nusage of は.\n\n> 「駅まで行くのに１時間 **は** かかる」(It takes at least 1 hour to go to station.)\n>\n> 「給料として毎月25万円 **は** 欲しい」(I want at least 250000 yen per month as salary.)\n\n2) The 方 here is meaning 'person'. And でも is meaning 'but' or 'in spite of the\nfact'. 短い方でも6年はいらっしゃる is meaning 'The shortest resident in 4 persons here has\nbeen in Japan for 6 years long in spite of the fact she is the shortest of 4'.\n\n3) Your interpretation is correct.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-20T19:11:12.703",
"id": "53947",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-20T19:17:14.227",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-20T19:17:14.227",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "1) No. The first は before \"15年\" is not necessary contrastive and it can be\ntaken as a simple topic marker. The second は is a variant of the contrastive\nusage of は and means _at least_ or _no less than_. See: [Does は mean 'at\nleast' in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29438/5010)\n\n2) This でも is _even_ , not _but_. \"even the person who has lived the shortest\n...\" See: [\"Even a crab\" - Japanese proverbs\n(?)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23957/5010) / [What does でもわかる mean\nand what does あって+か do?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/25367/5010) /\n[いくら＋pronoun＋でも\nusage/meaning](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42188/5010)\n\n3) 彼は日本に来て(から)長い is a perfectly normal way to say \"It's been long since he\ncame to Japan.\" (Notice the difference in subjects; `It` in the English\nversion is what's called a [dummy\nsubject](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/25668/5010)). So 日本に来て(から)長い方 is\nalso perfectly fine, and if there is enough context, even 長い方 is okay in the\nsame vein.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T01:19:11.977",
"id": "53948",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T01:41:52.293",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-21T01:41:52.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "As for 1) and 2), noruto's answer is perfect. I'll only give an explanation of\n3).\n\nThe complete sentence for \"一番長い方は\" is, I think, \"日本に来てからの生活が **一番長い方は** _the\nperson who has lived for the longest time since coming to Japan_ \".\n\nIn Japanese language, as you also know, what is already commonly understood\namong people involved is generally omitted. Before the phrase with \"一番長い方は\",\nthe narrator has already introduced the four foreign wives who have lived long\nin Japan. Therefore, the part with \"日本に来てからの生活が _the life after coming to\nJapan_ \" of \" **日本に来てからの生活が** 一番長い方は\" is generally omitted.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T07:30:03.640",
"id": "53951",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T14:07:59.883",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-21T14:07:59.883",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53946 | 53948 | 53948 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53954",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "To say it will probably be enough, one might say 「十分でしょう」. But what if you\nwanted to refer to something in the past? でしょう or だろう cannot be inflected to\nindicate any temporal information, can it? How does one say \"It _was_ probably\nenough\"? I thought of 「十分でしたでしょう」, which I'm prety sure is incorrect, and\n「十分であったでしょう」, which I'm not too sure of.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T10:58:39.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53953",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T11:58:23.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "How does one say \"It was probably enough\"?",
"view_count": 503
} | [
{
"body": "You have already answered your question, there's no problem with putting でしょう\nafter a past such as でした、だった、であった。\n\nMy tip for you is to google a set phrase, in quotation marks, when you're\nuncertain and see if it is used or not. Then you can also see examples of in\nwhat situations which expression is the better.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T11:58:23.760",
"id": "53954",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T11:58:23.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "53953",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53953 | 53954 | 53954 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53956",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "```\n\n うわ！ ととと……\n \n```\n\nIs it something like \"oh oh oh\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T12:21:55.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53955",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-07T02:57:34.097",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What is ととと in this sentence?",
"view_count": 196
} | [
{
"body": "The whole phrase just means \" ** _oops_** \", \" ** _uh-oh_** \", \" ** _sorry_**\n\", etc.\n\nIt is the emphatic (and/or comical depending on the context) version of the\ncommon exclamation 「おっと」, which is the \"dictionary\" form.\n\nIf you are interested in pronunciation, 「おっと」 and 「夫{おっと} (\"husband\")」 are\npronounced differently.\n\n「おっと{HLL}」: \"Uh-oh\"\n\n「おっと{LHH}」: \"husband\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T12:35:34.740",
"id": "53956",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-07T02:57:34.097",
"last_edit_date": "2020-02-07T02:57:34.097",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53955",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 53955 | 53956 | 53956 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53961",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 台風が近くに来ると、 **沖縄県から本州の広い場所で** 、とても強い雨がたくさん降る心配があります。 \n> If the typhoon comes near then, **from Okinawa to the wide place of\n> Honshuu** , there is a worry that there will be a lot of very strong\n> rainfall.\n\nI'm not convinced about my translation of the bold part. What on earth is\n本州の広い場所?\n\nI've also noticed a few times in reading the NHK easy news that they write\nAからBで where I would have expected to see AからB **ま** で. Am I wrong to think\nthis should be まで? What is the difference between the two constructs?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T20:29:05.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53959",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T07:30:41.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-で",
"reading-comprehension",
"particle-まで"
],
"title": "Difference between AからBで and AからBまで",
"view_count": 179
} | [
{
"body": "You are parsing the sentence incorrectly:\n\nThe first part is: 沖縄県{おきなわけん}から本州{ほんしゅう}（まで）の // second part: 広{ひろ}い場所{ばしょ}で\n\nTranslation: from Okinawa prefecture to Honshuu // in a wide area\n\nPutting it together, the full translation would thus be: As the typhoon\napproaches, there is a worry that there will be a lot of heavy rain **in a\nwide area from Okinawa prefecture to Honshuu**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T21:30:24.390",
"id": "53961",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T21:30:24.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "53959",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vA7oi.jpg)\n\nI think they would use まで to describe the course of typhoon rather than using\nで to describe the coverage of typhoon. If I see this image, from Osaka up to\nTokyo is direct path of the typhoon since the predicted path colored by red\nseems cover the areas. So, I think they would say 大阪から東京まで暴風域に入ります。 On the\nother hand, 本州から沖縄で強い雨が降る心配がある. as you say, I think at this time, they want to\ndescribe that it will rain a lot in most area from Okinawa to Honshu since the\narea is not in the strom area though but at least covered with the typhoon.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T03:32:26.247",
"id": "53966",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T03:32:26.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53959",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> OP: (1) 沖縄県から本州の広い場所で \n> bjorn: (2) 沖縄県から本州（まで）の // 広い場所で\n\nbjornさんの回答｛かいとう｝は大変｛たいへん｝良｛よ｝い（+1）と思｛おも｝います。\n\nbjornさんの回答に加｛くわ｝えて、(1)をもとにいくつか応用｛おうよう｝例文｛れいぶん｝を示｛しめ｝します。\n\n * (1)では「広い **場所** で」となっていますが、「広い **範囲{はんい}** で」という表現｛ひょうげん｝も良く使｛つか｝われます。むしろ「広い範囲で」の方が一般的｛いっぱんてき｝だと思｛おも｝います。 \n(3) 沖縄県から本州の **範囲** で \n(4) 沖縄県から本州までの **範囲** で \n(5) 沖縄県から本州の広い **範囲** で \n(6) 沖縄県から本州までの広い **範囲** で\n\n * 「範囲で」の代｛か｝わりに「範囲 **内｛ない｝** で」とも表現されます。しかし、(1)の「場所で」の代わりに「場所 **内** で」とは言｛い｝いません。 \n~~(7) 沖縄県から本州の場所 **内** で~~ \n~~(8) 沖縄県から本州までの場所 **内** で~~ \n~~(9) 沖縄県から本州の広い場所 **内** で~~ \n~~(10) 沖縄県から本州までの広い場所 **内** で~~ \n(11) 沖縄県から本州の範囲 **内** で \n(12) 沖縄県から本州までの範囲 **内** で \n(13) 沖縄県から本州の広い範囲 **内** で \n(14) 沖縄県から本州までの広い範囲内で\n\n * 台風と違｛ちが｝って竜巻｛たつまき｝のように非常｛ひじょう｝に狭｛せま｝い範囲で被害｛ひがい｝が発生｛はっせい｝する場合｛ばあい｝には、「広い」の代わりに「 **狭い** 」が用｛もち｝いられます。 \n(15) この度｛たび｝の竜巻ではＡ町｛ちょう｝から隣｛となり｝のＢ町の **狭い** 範囲で被害｛ひがい｝があった。 \n(16) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの **狭い** 範囲で被害があった。 \n(17) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町の **狭い** 範囲内で被害があった。 \n(18) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの **狭い** 範囲内で被害があった。\n\n * 非常に狭い範囲を強調｛きょうちょう｝する場合｛ばあい｝には、いろいろな表現があります。 \n(19) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの **非常に** 狭い範囲で被害があった。 \n(20) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの **非常に** 狭い範囲内で被害があった。 \n(21) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの **ごく** 狭い範囲で被害があった。 \n(22) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの **ごく** 狭い範囲内で被害があった。 \n(23) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの狭い範囲に **限{かぎ}って** 被害があった。 \n(24) この度の竜巻ではＡ町から隣のＢ町までの狭い範囲内に **限{かぎ}って** 被害があった。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T07:30:41.633",
"id": "53968",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T07:30:41.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53959",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53959 | 53961 | 53961 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53962",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "```\n\n 俺は手加減してたぜ？\n それが判らねぇたぁ、\n お前、割とぬるいねぇ。\n \n```\n\nIs it colloquial form of 判らなかった?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T20:29:34.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53960",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T22:08:47.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25396",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "What is ねぇたぁ in 判らねぇたぁ?",
"view_count": 101
} | [
{
"body": "> それが判らねぇたぁ\n\nThis is a colloquial form of それが判らないとは.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-21T22:08:47.170",
"id": "53962",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-21T22:08:47.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53960",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53960 | 53962 | 53962 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53965",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "なお、参考までに反対に成功した場合の原因帰属を括弧の中に書いておく。\n\n= roughly: The cause-association for the case where things conversely went\nwell is written in the brackets.\n\nDoes the madeni mean' before the reference here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T01:47:59.200",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53963",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T02:59:28.497",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "what does までに mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 249
} | [
{
"body": "参考までに means \"just for reference\".\n\n* * *\n\nAccording to 明鏡国語辞典, the までに is:\n\n> まで ㊁〘副助詞〙 \n> ➌㋐ 事柄を軽いものとして示す。 \n> （表現）「ご参考 **までに** お送りします。」などは、これを慣用的に使ったもの。「ほんの…として、」の意。\n\n* * *\n\nExample:\n\n> ご参考 **までに** ここに過去５年間の統計があります。 \n> Just for reference [your information], here are statistics for the past\n> five years. \n> (from _Progressive Japanese-English Dictionary_ )",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T02:47:31.743",
"id": "53965",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T02:59:28.497",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-22T02:59:28.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "53963",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 53963 | 53965 | 53965 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54532",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is the difference between following sentences?\n\n> できるかどうか分かりません \n> できるかどうか **が** 分かりません\n\nBoth seem to have about similar amount of hits on google for an exact phrase.\n\nWhen reading about embedded sentences they don't tend to mention が to follow\nthem, so it's probably not が would be grammatically required. If that is so,\nwhat is its function?\n\n[This](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/13038/9719) mentions that を can be\nused, but no mention of が\n\n[This](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/25361/9719) asks about と, which\nseems to make it a quote, but don't know if it necessarily changes the meaning\n\n[This post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/39320/indirect-\nquestion-marked-with-%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8C) seems close but the answer bottom\nmakes it seem like が is required by the nature of 分かる while other sources\nteach it without it.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T12:20:15.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53970",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-12T00:21:43.260",
"last_edit_date": "2022-03-12T00:15:39.997",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9719",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"embedded-question"
],
"title": "How to treat embedded questions and が",
"view_count": 516
} | [
{
"body": "In our daily conversation, we tend to omit が and を. For example, we write ケーキ\n**を** 食べますか？ but we say ケーキ食べますか？\n\nIt is the same for できるかどうか分かりません and できるかどうか **が** 分かりません. The former is\ncasual and the latter is for former writing.\n\nを is used because of 知らない. Please memorize を+知らない and が+分かります. This is\nstandard grammar.\n\nFor these sentences 雨がいつ降るかと大変楽しみにしていましたが、なかなか雨が降りません。and\n雨が降ることを大変楽しみにしていましたが、なかなか雨が降りません。The former gives me a feeling that the person\nis looking forward to the rain more. As another user has mentioned- more\nexcited to the rain.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-11-16T01:27:29.257",
"id": "54525",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-12T00:21:43.260",
"last_edit_date": "2022-03-12T00:21:43.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "26501",
"parent_id": "53970",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The が here emphasises what comes before it. You could imagine it as a response\nto a question:\n\n> Speaker A: 何かが分かりませんか。\n>\n> \"Is there something that you don't understand?\"\n>\n> Speaker B: できるかどうかが分かりません。\n>\n> \"I don't understand whether I can do it or not.\"\n\nIt emphasises that Speaker B is unsure about _that_ specific thing, the\nimportant part of the sentence being not that Speaker B is unsure of\nsomething/anything, but that Speaker B is _specifically_ unsure of whether or\nnot he/she can do it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-11-16T06:20:36.510",
"id": "54532",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-16T06:20:36.510",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26436",
"parent_id": "53970",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 53970 | 54532 | 54525 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How do you guys read these kanji 年々 in a sentence? I've found on Japanese\ndictionary websites that it can be read both 'nen-nen' and 'toshi-doshi' and\nit means 'year by year'. So which one use in a sentence by those mean?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T12:59:07.743",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53971",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T03:34:38.093",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-22T15:37:09.717",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25631",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"readings",
"reduplication"
],
"title": "How do you read these kanji 年々?",
"view_count": 780
} | [
{
"body": "# 日本語\n\n### 年年{ねんねん} or 年々｛ねんねん｝\n\n * 庭に植えた木は **年々{ねんねん}** 大きくなっています。 \n * 庭に植えたバラは **年々{ねんねん}** きれいな花を咲かせます。 \n**年年{ねんねん}** あるいは **年々｛ねんねん｝**\nは、「毎年徐々に」、あるいは、「毎年のように」のように、毎年状態が一定である、あるいは一定の傾向であるような意味で扱う時に使う.\n\n### 年年｛としどし｝\n\n * 庭に植えたバラは **年年{としどし}で** 花の咲き具合が違います。 \n**年年｛としどし｝** は、各々の年が特徴ある個別のものであるとして扱う時に使う。\n\n* * *\n\n# EDIT\n\n「年々｛ねんねん｝あるいは年々｛ねんねん｝」と「年年｛としどし｝」とは使っている漢字は同じですが、意味や用法がかなり違います。\n\n * 「ねんねん」は、「毎年｛まいとし｝」あるいは「年が進｛すす｝むごとに」とほぼ似た意味をもっており、相互に置き換えても余り違和感がありません。また、「としどし」は、「[年毎]｛としごと｝」とほぼ似た意味を持っており、これも相互に置き換えても余り意味が変わらないように思います。\n * Chocolateさんが紹介した辞書に書かれているとおり、「ねんねん」と「としどし」とは品詞が違います。「ねんねん」は副詞であり、文章の中でそのまま使えます。一方、「としどし」は名詞であり、「としどし **に** 」、「としどし **で** 」あるいは「としどし **の** 」のように助詞を付けて初めて文章の中で使えます。品詞の違いおよび助詞の必要性については、類似の単語として上に挙げた「毎年｛まいとし｝」および「年毎｛としごと｝」についても同様のことが言えます。すなわち、「毎年{まいとし}」は副詞であり、そのまま文章の中で使えます。また、「年毎｛としごと｝」は「[年毎]｛としごと｝ **に** 」「[年毎]｛としごと｝ **で** 」あるいは「[年毎]｛としごと｝ **の** 」のように助詞を付けて初めて使えます。\n * 上記辞書に記載されている意味を比べますと、「としどし」に助詞をつけて「としどしに」あるいは「としどしで」とすれば「ねんねん」と同様の意味の副詞となり、相互に置き換えられるように読み取れますが、普段使っている実際の用例で考えますと、私の最初の回答の例文にあるように文が持つ意味がかなり違うので実際には置き換えられないように思います。 すなわち、「年年｛ねんねん｝」あるいは「年々｛ねんねん｝」と「年年｛としどし｝」とは品詞が違うだけでなく、意味も違うように思います。従って上記辞書の定義は十分でないように思います。\n * 上記辞書に挙がっている例文も適切とは言い難いように思います。「 **ねんねん** 輸入が増加する」は問題ありませんが、「 **としどしに** さびれてきた祭事」とは余り言わないように思います。「ねんねん」の意味として上記辞書が定義している文言に必要に応じて助詞の「に」を付けて副詞化した文言を使って、「 **年を追うごとに** さびれてきた祭事」あるいは「 **ねんねん** さびれてきた祭事」のような表現の方が一般的であるように思います。特に最後の「 **ねんねん** さびれてきた祭事」が自然に聞こえるのは、一般に「さびれる」あるいは「衰退」というのは「年毎｛としごと｝」に変わる現象ではなく、長い期間一定の傾向がある現象ですので、「 **としどしに** さびれる」という表現は例文として適していないと判断できます。\n\n# English\n\n**年年{ねんねん}** or **年々｛ねんねん｝** \n- 庭に植えた木は **年々{ねんねん}** 大きくなっています。 _The trees planted in the garden are gradually growing year by year_. \n- 庭に植えたバラは **年々{ねんねん}** きれいな花を咲かせます。 _Roses planted in the garden bloom beautifully every year_. \n**年年{ねんねん}** あるいは **年々｛ねんねん｝**\nは、「毎年徐々に」、あるいは、「毎年のように」のように、毎年状態が一定である、あるいは一定の傾向であるような意味で扱う時に使う。 **ねんねん** _is\nused when treating every year in a meaning that the state is constant every\nyear or the tendency of change is constant like \"like every year\" or\n\"gradually year by year\" or It is used such as year by year; annually;\ngradually year by year_.\n\n**年年｛としどし｝** \n- 庭に植えたバラは **年年{としどし}で** 花の咲き具合が違います。 _The roses planted in the garden bloom differently depending on the year._ \n**年年｛としどし｝** は、各々の年が特徴ある個別のものであるとして扱う時に使う。 **としどし** _is used when treating\neach year as having a distinctive feature_.\n\n* * *\n\n# EDIT\n\n\"年々｛ねんねん｝ or 年々｛ねんねん｝\" and \"年年｛としどし｝\" use the same kanji, but there are some\ndifference between them.\n\n * \"ねんねん\" has almost similar meaning to \"毎年｛まいとし｝ _every year_ \" or \"年｛とし｝が進｛すす｝むごとに _every time the year advances_ \", and even if they are replaced with each other, there is not much difference in meaning. On the other hand, \"としどし\" has almost similar meaning to \"年毎｛としごと｝ _each year_ \", and I think that the meaning does not change much even they are replaced with each other.\n\n * As it is written in the dictionary introduced by Chocolate, \"ねんねん\" and \"としどし\" are different in \"品詞｛ひんし｝ _part of speech_ \". \"ねんねん\" is an adverb and can be used as it is in sentences. On the other hand, \"としどし\" is a noun and it can be used for the first time in a sentence after attaching a particle such as \"としどし **に** \", \"としどし **で** \" or \"としどし **の** \". The same can be said to the similarly words with \"毎年{まいとし} for ねんねん\" and \"年毎{としごと} for としどし\" listed above. That is, \"毎年{まいとし} \" is an adverb and can be used as it is in sentences, and \"年毎｛としごと｝\" can be used only after adding a particle such as \"としごと **に** \", \"としごと **で** \" or \"としごと **の** \".\n\n * When you compare the meanings of the two words written in the above dictionary, it should be said that if you add a particle to \"としどし\" and make expressions like \"としどし **に** \" or \"としどし **で** \", they become adverbs in the same meaning as \"ねんねん\". So it also should be said that the adverb made from \"としどし\" and the adverb \"ねんねん\" could be interchangeable. But thinking in the actual examples that we usually use, I think that the meaning of the sentence containing the above adverbs is considerably different from each other as is written in the example sentences in my original answer, therefore I think they cannot be interchangeable. The difference between the two is not only different in part of speech, but also in meaning. So I think that the definition of the above dictionary is insufficient.\n\n * I think that the example sentence of the above dictionary is also inadequate. Looking at the example sentences, there is no problem with \"ねんねん輸入が増加する\", but I think we don't say much like \" **としどしに** さびれてきた祭事\". Instead we would say like \" **年を追うごとに** さびれてきた祭事\" or \" **ねんねん** さびれてきた祭事\" that are made from using the definitions of \"年年｛としどし｝\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T14:01:07.400",
"id": "53972",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T03:34:38.093",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T03:34:38.093",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53971",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "明鏡国語辞典 says としどし is a 名詞 and ねんねん is a 副詞.\n\n> としどし【年年】〘名〙年を追うごと。年ごと。ねんねん。「ーーにさびれてきた祭事」\n\n> ねんねん【年年】〘副〙年とともにだんだん。年ごとに。「ーー輸入が増加する」\n\nSo..\n\n> How do you guys read these kanji 年々 in a sentence?\n\nI'd read it as ねんねん when it's functioning as a 副詞(adverb) by itself, and as\nとしどし when it's used as a 名詞(noun), followed by a case particle.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T14:18:49.720",
"id": "53974",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T14:18:49.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "53971",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 53971 | null | 53974 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53977",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The first sentence below is just for context.The second is where my problems\nlie.\n\n> 日産は、工場から日本の店に車を出すのをしばらく止めると発表しました。 \n> Nissan announced that, for a while, it will stop sending cars, from the\n> factories _where the safety inspectors are unqualified_ , to Japanese shops. \n> そして、車の検査をする場所には資格がある人以外 **入る** ことができないようにする **など** 、同じ問題が起こらないようにする方法を考えます。 \n> And, they will make sure that no one who isn't qualified can enter the\n> places where the cars are inspected など they are thinking of ways to make\n> sure that the same problem won't happen.\n\nI have three problems with my translation of the second sentence. Point 1 is\nmy main problem but I'm uncomfortable about the other two points.\n\n 1. I Have no idea how など is supposed to link these two parts. Is this a bit like たり?\n 2. 入る has no subject. Am I right to assume it is just an implied 'no one', or have I mis-parsed the clause?\n 3. The final clause feels incomplete. I would expect words like 'again' or 'in the future'.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T14:10:49.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53973",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T21:04:31.167",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"reading-comprehension",
"particle-など"
],
"title": "など after verb phrase",
"view_count": 596
} | [
{
"body": "> 「そして、車{くるま}の検査{けんさ}をする場所{ばしょ}には資格{しかく}がある人以外{ひといがい} **入る** ことができないようにする\n> **など** 、同{おな}じ問題{もんだい}が起{お}こらないようにする方法{ほうほう}を考{かんが}えます。」\n>\n> 1. I Have no idea how など is supposed to link these two parts.\n>\n\n「など」 is used to give an example of the 「同じ問題が起こらないようにする方法」.\n\nTo translate that sentence, therefore, you would need to _**drastically**_\nchange the word order into something like:\n\n\" **To make sure that the same problem won't happen, Nissan will consider\nmeasures, such as allowing no one who isn't qualified to enter the places\nwhere the cars are inspected**.\"\n\n> Is this a bit like たり?\n\nOnly in the sense that both 「など」 and 「たり」 can be used to exemplify things,\nyes. 「たり」, however, is far more informal than many J-learners seem to think.\nIn addition, the two words follow two different verb forms -- 「～～ **する** など」\nand 「～～ **し** たり」. Thus, the two words are _**not**_ interchangeable.\n\n> 2. 入る has no subject. Am I right to assume it is just an implied 'no one',\n> or have I mis-parsed the clause?\n>\n\nIt has a _**clear**_ subject in 「資格がある人以外」= \"those who are not qualified\". So,\nyour TL is fine there.\n\n> 3. The final clause feels incomplete. I would expect words like 'again' or\n> 'in the future'.\n>\n\nIt is complete for the Japanese-speaking brain. The use of 「同じ」 suggests that\nit happened once. \"Again\" or \"in the future\" is implied here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T21:04:31.167",
"id": "53977",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T21:04:31.167",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53973",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53973 | 53977 | 53977 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53978",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was going through a JLPT grammar practice book and am confused on a\nquestion:\n\n「一郎、まだ起きているかな。」\n\n「部屋の電気が消えているから、もう＿＿＿＿＿よ。」\n\nI choose 寝そう since ～そう is often used to make conjectures based on visual info\n(Ichiro's light is off). But the answer key says 寝たよう is better. Any thoughts\non why?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T20:19:08.693",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53976",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T12:44:03.373",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-22T22:58:28.923",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25783",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"jlpt",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "Why 寝たよう instead of 寝そう in this example",
"view_count": 636
} | [
{
"body": "「寝{ね}そう」 = \" _ **It looks like someone is about to go asleep**_ \" The person\nis still awake, officially.\n\n「寝たよう」 = \" _ **It seems one has just gone asleep/gone to bed**_.\" As far as\nyou can tell, the person is already asleep.\n\nThus, the two phrases describe very different situations.\n\n> 「一郎{いちろう}、まだ起{お}きているかな。」 \"Would Ichiro be still up?\"\n>\n> 「部屋{へや}の電気{でんき}が消{き}えているから、もう＿＿＿＿＿よ。」 \"_______ because the room lights are\n> off.\"\n\nThe correct answer should clearly be 「もう寝たようよ」.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-22T21:25:23.280",
"id": "53978",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-22T21:36:21.327",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53976",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "I think l'électeur's answer is perfect.\n\nIf I could add some information for bjorn's comment with \"... at other times\nmeans more like the action of falling asleep or going to sleep\" I would give\nthe following question to OP. In this question OP could use 寝{ね}そう as a\ncorrect answer.\n\n> 「一郎、まだ起きているかな。」 \n> 「部屋｛へや｝の電気｛でんき｝が（今{いま}）消｛き｝えたから、もう＿＿＿＿＿よ。」\"＿＿＿＿＿because the lights of the\n> room have just gone out.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T08:15:30.477",
"id": "53985",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T12:44:03.373",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-23T12:44:03.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53976",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53976 | 53978 | 53978 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Is there a reason why [新聞]{しんぶん} is often romanized as \"Shimbun\" instead of\nthe \"Shinbun\" its supposed to be? I ask as I've found that even brands like\n毎日新聞 do this; romanizing their name as \"Mainichi Shimbun\".\n\nHow did this all start? And is it actually the correct romanization? Or is it\njust a miss-romanization that people've just gone with?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T00:26:41.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53979",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T00:26:41.993",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"rōmaji"
],
"title": "Why do people romanize 新聞 as \"Shimbun\"?",
"view_count": 146
} | []
| 53979 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53984",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "Trying to say \"her eyebrows furrowed\" but cannot find the right expression. I\nrecall there being a similar expression (which warranted a different English\ntranslation), but can't remember what it was...",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T05:11:28.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53980",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T21:25:14.977",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-23T06:30:51.333",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "9132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-requests",
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "What is the word for \"to furrow\" in terms of eyebrows?",
"view_count": 1465
} | [
{
"body": "The closest expression is probably:\n\n>\n> [眉{まゆ}を寄せる{よせる}](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E7%9C%89%E3%82%92%E5%AF%84%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8B)\n>\n> 不快の念などから眉の寄ったような表情をすること。「眉根を寄せる」「眉をしかめる」「眉を顰める」「眉をひそめる」などとも表現する。\n\nFor example:\n\n> 彼女は眉を寄せた。\n\nPassive voice seems not to be very common though, unlike in English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T06:18:15.753",
"id": "53982",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T06:29:35.043",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "53980",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "To add to 「[眉]{まゆ}をしかめる」「眉をひそめる」 given in the other answer, I think you could\nalso use...\n\n> [眉間]{みけん}にしわを[寄]{よ}せる",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T06:57:59.083",
"id": "53984",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T06:57:59.083",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "53980",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "To add to the other answers, way back in some early 20th century novel (I\ndon't remember exactly which one) I saw another expression. So if you want to\ngo a bit more indirect and literary you could say\n\n> [八]{はち}の[字]{じ}を[寄]{よ}せる\n>\n> 眉 (まゆ) を八の字にして眉間 (みけん) にしわを寄せる。顔をしかめる。「―・せて考え込む」\n> ([source](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/176935/meaning/m1u/))\n\nThis is meant figuratively that you arrange your brows in a way that looks\nlike the sign for eight (八). If you want to make the opposite you could also\nsay\n\n> [逆]{ぎゃく}[八]{はち}の[字]{じ}を[寄]{よ}せる\n>\n> If somebody could clear me up whether its ぎゃくはち or さかはち, I'd be grateful.\n>\n> Edit: As pointed out in the comments, the 逆 is in relation to 八の字 as a\n> complete expression and thus read as ぎゃく and not as さか.\n\nAs is stated [in the answer to this question\nhere](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q12130702332).\nI presume the answering person is a native speaker, but I personally have\nnever seen that expression in novels.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T11:03:58.863",
"id": "53988",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T14:08:16.153",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26242",
"parent_id": "53980",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I suspect the word you're looking for is 'to frown', 悩む",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T21:25:14.977",
"id": "53995",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T21:25:14.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26248",
"parent_id": "53980",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 53980 | 53984 | 53984 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "53990",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm facing some Language encoding problem in Ubuntu 15.04 Chrome 60.0.3112.90\n(Official Build) (64-bit) and I use ibus-anthy as my IME ([added as this\nblog](https://menukablog.wordpress.com/2017/08/11/how-add-japanese-ime-to-\nubuntu-16-04-japaneses-anthy/)). I have faced similar incidents previously.\nThe Below kanji which you can see like this in\n[http://jisho.org](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%9B%B4%20%23kanji)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AmMhN.png)\n\nLooks like below in Google Translator,\n\n<https://translate.google.com/#ja/en/%E7%9B%B4>\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LNMyd.png)\n\nI'm beginner in Japanese so I wonder whats wrong in Encoding. Is there a way\nto fix this? ありがとうございます",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T06:38:49.907",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53983",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T17:05:47.460",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-23T17:05:47.460",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "15859",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji",
"orthography"
],
"title": "Language Encoding difference in Chrome",
"view_count": 256
} | [
{
"body": "See snailplane's link in the comments: [How to find alternative writings of a\nkanji in electronic\nform?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/29832/how-to-find-\nalternative-writings-of-a-kanji-in-electronic-form). There's nothing at all\nwrong with the **encoding** -- what you're observing is purely a **font**\nissue in how the browser (or other app) **renders** the character encoded in\nthe source HTML.\n\nThis is vaguely similar to how the same \"letter\" in English might have\ndifferent glyphs (i.e. specific symbol shapes). Compare **a** and **ɑ**\n(lower-case **A** with a hook on top, or just rounded), or **g** and **ɡ**\n(lower-case **G** with a double loop, or just a single loop and a hook on\nbottom). In my example letters here, I've used different Unicode characters\n(`U+0061` and `U+0251` for the **A** variants, and `U+0067` and `U+0261` for\nthe **G** variants), and depending on your browser and font settings, the\nbrowser might render different Unicode codepoints the same way (both **A**\nvariants might appear the same, and/or both **G** variants might appear the\nsame).\n\nFor the Japanese character **直** , you're running into a different but related\nissue, where a single Unicode codepoint (`U+76F4`) might be rendered in\nmultiple different ways depending on browser and font setup.\n\nTechnically speaking, the version with three joined boxes under a cross and\nthe extra line on the left border is the Japanese simplified version (新字体 or\n_shinjitai_ ), while the version with four joined boxes under a cross and a\nlong bottom line is the Chinese version. It is possible that your browser is\nguessing the language of the individual character and choosing a different\nfont based on that. Either way, to fluent readers of Chinese and Japanese,\nboth glyphs (specific symbol shapes) are recognizable as indicating the same\nthing and they could be considered the same character, same as the different\n**A** shapes or **G** shapes.\n\nSee the [Shinjitai article on\nWikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinjitai) and the [直 entry on\nWiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%9B%B4) for more detail.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T17:03:26.807",
"id": "53990",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T17:03:26.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "53983",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 53983 | 53990 | 53990 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The full text can be viewed here: じゃあるまいし\n<https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf>\n\nThe sentence in question is from line 8:\n\n> おかしなことですが、実は、日本へきて受けたカルチャーショックの一つは、子供のサンダル **ややかん** のピーピーなる音だったんです。\n\nMy attempt at translation:\n\n> It is a weird thing but, well, concerning one culture shock I received\n> coming to Japan, it was \"peep peep\" ringing sound of the sandals of the\n> children.\n\nIn my translation, I simply left out ややかん since I have no idea what it could\nmean.\n\nI couldn't find anything for ややかん, since I guess the first や is the\nenumerative particle. However やかん didn't render any useful results on jisho as\nwell, at least not from my perspective on the full sentence. So maybe someone\ncould solve this riddle for me?^^",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T17:41:00.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53991",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T19:23:18.903",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-23T19:23:18.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Could someone help me with this word (や)やかん please?",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "You are correct about や . Looking at jisho.org, it gave me the definition I\nwas looking for, so I'm not sure you looked hard enough.\n\nやかん is a kettle, and the \"peeping\" sounds are the kettle whistling.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T18:05:28.710",
"id": "53992",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T18:05:28.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "53991",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 53991 | null | 53992 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54002",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "For full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf>\n\nThe sentence in question, taken from line 9 -11: マンションのドアを開けたり閉めたりする音や\n**鳴りっぱなしの踏切** 、しゃべる自動販売機、つけっぱなしのテレビ、駅のアナウンスなどが、初めは本当にうるさくてたまらなかった。\n\nMy attempt at translation: \"Concerning the first time, it truly was annoying\nand unbearable, the opening and closing the condominium sound (=the sound of\nopening and closing the condominium) and not-stopping-to-ring railroad\ncrossings, talking vending machines, non-stop engaged televisions and\nannouncements of stations (=announcements on stations).\"\n\nI just learned about the っぱなし constructions and still struggle a little to\ntranslate them into well readable english. However, my main \"issue\" lies with\nthe bold 鳴りっぱなしの踏切. Is my translation of this phrase correct? I've never been\nto japan, do the railroad crossings really constantly ring there? Or do they\nemit another type of signal, like \"blinking\"?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T18:07:09.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53993",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T06:20:38.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Is \"railroad crossing\" meant with 踏切 here?",
"view_count": 422
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, it means railway crossing.\n\nWhen a train approaches, a rhythmic ringing sound like a chime is emitted from\nthe crossing, and the gates come down automatically. The sound keeps going\nuntil the train has passed and the gates lift. In Japanese, people often\ndescribe the sound as こんこん to mimic the rhythm of the ringing/chiming sound.\n\nBy the way, the translation of 鳴りっぱなしの踏切 as \"not-stopping-to-ring railroad\ncrossings\" is strange. Better just to say something simple like \"the constant\nringing of the railway crossing\" or \"the non-stop chiming of the railway\ncrossing bell\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-23T19:28:15.630",
"id": "53994",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-23T19:28:15.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "53993",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "# English\n\n> Is “railroad crossing” meant with 踏切｛ふみきり｝ here?\n\nYes, but if I say exactly the meaning of \"踏切｛ふみきり｝\" in \"鳴｛な｝りっぱなしの踏切｛ふみきり｝\",\nit is \"踏切｛ふみきり｝の警報音{けいほうおん} _sound of the warning signal of the railroad\ncrossing (of Japan)_ \".\n\n> マンションのドアを開｛あ｝けたり閉｛し｝めたりする音｛おと｝や **鳴｛な｝りっぱなし**\n> の踏切｛ふみきり｝、しゃべる自動｛じどう｝販売機｛はんばいき｝、つけっぱなしのテレビ、駅｛えき｝のアナウンスなどが、初｛はじ｝めは本当｛ほんとう｝にうるさくてたまらなかった。\n\nWhen I read the [original\ntext](https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf) presented by\nthe questioner (OP), I can say that the above sentence posted by OP was told\nby a wife from a certain quiet country who had been living in the city of\nJapan for a somewhat long time.\n\nThe sentence presented by OP is an impression of a person who had come to\nJapan from abroad this time, but this expression is similar to the body of a\nnovel which is expressed as summarized as \" **都会｛とかい｝の喧騒｛けんそう｝** _the hustle\nand bustle of a city_ or _the characteristic noises of big cities_ \", where\npeople express the feeling being disgusted to the urban life at the noise.\n\nWhen interpreting \"鳴りっぱなしの踏切\" literally, it becomes \"a railroad crossing where\nthe alarm does not stop ringing\" because the trains go continually just like\nthe crossing called \"開かずの踏切 _a railroad crossing whose gate never to open_ \"\nintroduced by naruto's comment. However, judging from the whole sentence\npresented by OP, it is not literally like \"the railroad crossing where the\nalarm sounds forever\", but I think it is \"the railroad crossing where the\ntraffic of the trains are so frequent that the alarm sounds constantly or so\noften but you feel as if the alarm sounded forever.\"\n\n# EDIT\n\n> I've never been to japan, do the railroad crossings really constantly ring\n> there? Or do they emit another type of signal, like \"blinking\"?\n\nSeparately from the answer about \"っぱなし\" in \"鳴りっぱなし\", I noticed that I did not\nprovide information on railroad crossings in Japan to OP. So, I will explain\nabout railway crossings in Japan based on the sources written at the end of\nthe explanation and my experience along with the explanation using a picture.\n\nFor better understanding of the explanation, I recommend you to look at the\npicture below at first, then watch the video and read my explanation.\n\nGrade crossing signals are installed at railway crossings also in Japan. They\nare the electronic warning devices for road vehicles.\n\nThe basic signal consists of flashing red lights, a crossbuck and a bell,\nattached to a mast. Furthermore, except for crossings with a small traffic\nvolume, striped barriers for the gates are installed. At most crossings, the\nsignals will activate about 40-50 seconds before the train arrives and about 7\nseconds before the gates start to be lowered.\n\nThe gates will be fully lowered 15 to 20 seconds before the train arrives. The\ngates will rise or the signals will shut off once the end of the train clears\nthe island circuit.\n\n> ### [Level crossing in Japan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_crossing)\n>\n> According to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism,\n> there are in total about 33,300 level crossings (踏切 _fumikiri_ ) in Japan as\n> of 2016. These are easily identifiable with their yellow and black\n> crossbucks mounted adjacent to the crossing, and newer crossings are often\n> paved in green asphalt for easy recognition. Most of these are protected\n> with electronic signals (踏切警報機 _fumikiri keihouki_ ) usually equipped with\n> alternating flashing red lights, a bell (note: bell is edited by me) and\n> yellow-and-black-striped barriers. Many signals are also equipped with signs\n> with red LED arrows that indicate the direction of approaching trains.\n>\n> Similarly to United States school buses, but unlike many other countries,\n> all cars and bicycles must stop before proceeding over any level crossing in\n> Japan, regardless of whether there are electronic signals, as required by\n> the Road Traffic Act. The only exception is if the crossing is additionally\n> controlled by a traffic light, called a _fumikiri shingo_ (踏切信号); in this\n> case, if the light is green, it is not necessary to stop at the level\n> crossing.\n>\n> On some busy rail lines, especially in urban areas like in Tokyo, Osaka and\n> Nagoya, so many trains pass through some level crossings that they are\n> almost always closed to vehicular traffic. In some cases, such as the Chūō\n> Main Line, more than 50 trains pass in an hour, which equates to only two\n> minutes in which vehicles can cross the tracks during that interval, causing\n> serious traffic congestion and inconvenience. Many such crossings, known in\n> Japanese as _akazu no fumikiri_ (開かずの踏切 _a railway crossing whose gates\n> never to open_ ; note: the translation is made by me), have been eliminated\n> by grade separating rail lines, generally by moving them onto viaducts\n> (高架化{こうかか}) or underground tracks (地下化｛ちかか｝).\n\nSources:\n\n * [Railroad crossing video in Japan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9zJO_OouRk)\n * [Grade crossing signals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_crossing_signals) and [踏切警報機｛ふみきりけいほうき｝](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%B8%8F%E5%88%87%E8%AD%A6%E5%A0%B1%E6%A9%9F)\n * [Level crossing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_crossing) and [踏切｛ふみきり｝](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%B8%8F%E5%88%87)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GUoHh.jpg)\n\n# 日本語\n\n> Is “railroad crossing” meant with 踏切｛ふみきり｝ here?\n\nはい。しかし、「鳴｛な｝りっぱなしの **踏切｛ふみきり｝**\n」の「踏切｛ふみきり｝」の意味｛いみ｝を正確｛せいかく｝に言｛い｝うと、「踏切｛ふみきり｝の警報音｛けいほうおん｝です。\n\n> マンションのドアを開｛あ｝けたり閉｛し｝めたりする音｛おと｝や **鳴｛な｝りっぱなし**\n> の踏切｛ふみきり｝、しゃべる自動｛じどう｝販売機｛はんばいき｝、つけっぱなしのテレビ、駅｛えき｝のアナウンスなどが、初｛はじ｝めは本当｛ほんとう｝にうるさくてたまらなかった。\n\n質問者｛しつもんしゃ｝が提示｛ていじ｝した[原文｛げんぶん｝](https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf)を読｛よ｝むと、上記｛じょうき｝の質問｛しつもん｝の文｛ぶん｝は、何｛なん｝らかの理由｛りゆう｝で静｛しず｝かな国｛くに｝から日本｛にほん｝に移｛うつ｝り住｛す｝むようになって相当長｛そうとうなが｝く、しかも都会｛とかい｝に住｛す｝んでいる奥｛おく｝さんの話｛はなし｝だと分｛わ｝かります。\n\n> ### EDIT(文末から移動)\n>\n>\n> 質問者｛しつもんしゃ｝が提示｛ていじ｝した冒頭｛ぼうとう｝の文｛ぶん｝は、今回｛こんかい｝は外国｛がいこく｝から日本｛にほん｝に来｛き｝た人｛ひと｝の感想｛かんそう｝ですが、「\n> **都会｛とかい｝の喧騒｛けんそう｝**\n> 」に嫌気｛いやけ｝が差｛さ｝した人｛ひと｝が使｛つか｝う感情｛かんじょう｝の表現｛ひょうげん｝として小説｛しょうせつ｝の中｛なか｝によくありそうな表現｛ひょうげん｝です。\n\n「 **鳴｛な｝りっぱなし**\nの踏切｛ふみきり｝」をそのまま解釈｛かいしゃく｝すると、narutoさんが「開｛あ｝かずの踏切｛ふみきり｝」として紹介｛しょうかい｝している踏切｛ふみきり｝のように、列車｛れっしゃ｝の往来｛おうらい｝が絶｛た｝えないので、「警報音｛けいほうおん｝が鳴｛な｝りやまない踏切｛ふみきり｝」となります。しかし、提示｛ていじ｝された文全体｛ぶんぜんたい｝から判断｛はんだん｝すると、文字通｛もじどお｝りの「いつまでも警報音｛けいほうおん｝が鳴｛な｝りやまない踏切｛ふみきり｝」ではなく、\n~~「絶えず（または「しょっちゅう」）警報音が鳴っているように感じるほど列車の往来が頻繁な踏切」~~\n「列車｛れっしゃ｝の往来｛おうらい｝が頻繁｛ひんぱん｝なので警報音｛けいほうおん｝が鳴｛な｝りっぱなしと感｛かん｝じるほど絶えず（または「しょっちゅう」）警報音が鳴っている踏切｛ふみきり｝」という意味｛いみ｝だと思｛おも｝います。\n\n~~質問者が提示した冒頭の文は、今回は外国から日本に来た人の感想ですが、「 **都会の喧騒** _the hustle and bustle of a\ncity_ or _the characteristic noises of big cities_\n」に嫌気が差した人が使う感情の表現として小説の中によくありそうな表現です。~~",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T04:43:07.910",
"id": "53997",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T06:20:38.153",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "53993",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "鳴りっぱなしの踏切 means \"a railway crossing that keeps on ringing\" or \"a railway\ncrossing with never-ending ringing sound.\" See [your own previous\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/53711/5010) for the grammar.\n\nSimply, this is an example of exaggerated expressions like\n[these](http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-hyperbole-for-\nkids.html). Like many other countries in the world, Japanese railroad\ncrossings ring only when a train is approaching. They also use blinking red\nlights. However, a few railway crossings in Japan are almost always closed in\nthe daytime due to the heavy train traffic. (Known as an 開かずの踏切 problem. See\n[this article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_crossing#Japan)).\n\nEven the most crowded 踏切 in Japan opens for at least a few minutes per hour,\nand in this period it does not ring. So technically speaking, saying 鳴りっぱなし\nwithout saying ほぼ (\"almost\") is incorrect. But 鳴りっぱなしの踏切 totally makes sense\nas an exaggerated expression for those who have a basic knowledge of Japanese\n踏切. 開かずの踏切 (\"unopened 踏切\") is also an exaggerated expression because it\nsometimes opens.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T10:54:19.050",
"id": "54002",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T01:38:00.260",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T01:38:00.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "53993",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 53993 | 54002 | 53994 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54001",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "For this question, the correct answer is choice 2. While I've already known\nthe meaning of \"いいかげんにしなさい\" is \"enough!\" and \"act properly!\", I still have no\nidea about the reason that choice 1 is incorrect.\n\nI looked up for some example sentences of \"えんりょ\"\n\nAs what I know, both \"しなさい\" and \"ください\" have nearly the same meanings. (They\njust differ in the expressions and the strength of emotion.)\n\nIf \"おタバコはご遠慮ください\" is correct, then \"おタバコはご遠慮しなさい\" also seems to be correct for\nme.\n\nCan anyone explain the usage of \"遠慮\" in details for me?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xyKoD.jpg)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T08:08:03.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "53998",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T01:26:34.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18471",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"definitions",
"sentence"
],
"title": "Is ”えんりょしなさい” correct",
"view_count": 218
} | [
{
"body": "By ください the speaker is generally asking the listener for a favor. しなさい on the\nother hand is more of a stern order.\n\nIn most Japanese situations this phrase is used to ask customers or audience\nto refrain from something. Unless you are in the position to be commanding\nothers then you would be seeing\n\n> （タバコ歩きは）ご遠慮ください。 Please refrain (from smoking while walking).\n\nrather than\n\n> もっと遠慮しなさい。 Hold back more (won't you).\n\nas the speaker will more often use the humble form of speech (to hopefully\nelicit a favorable response).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T09:31:29.790",
"id": "53999",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T09:31:29.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "53998",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In adding to keithmaxx's answer, 遠慮する means \"to refrain from doing by taking\nsomeone into consideration\".\n\nFor example, when you are invited out to eat by your friend and the friend\nsays that he will treat you, if you order many expensive cuisines, you would\nbe said ちょっと遠慮しろよ.\n\nいいかげんにしなさい would be more natural in this case because the person who said that\nseems to just want him to stop doing a game.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T10:29:02.750",
"id": "54001",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T11:20:30.370",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T11:20:30.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "53998",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think Keithmaxx, bjorn and yuiichi tam’s answers’ are accurate.\n\nIn addition to that, the former sentence is “まだゲームをしているの？” which could imply\nyou were already requested/advised to stop playing the video-game before.\nTherefore the correct answer in the book can be いいかげんにしなさい. which is more\nimperative than 遠慮しなさい。and more effective to notify that you are already\nbeyond the limit.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T00:13:19.887",
"id": "54020",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T01:26:34.827",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T01:26:34.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "53998",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 53998 | 54001 | 53999 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54003",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm assuming that the first ん, after て, stands for る. However, I simply cannot\nparse the ねん that comes afterward. How exactly does \"what the hell are you\nsaying\" become 何を言うてんねん, or if my first assumption is correct, 何を言うてるねん?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T10:19:02.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54000",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T11:49:28.213",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"contractions"
],
"title": "What's the un-contracted form of 何を言うてんねん?",
"view_count": 335
} | [
{
"body": "This is a sentence in Osaka dialect and means \"What are you saying?\" The \"un-\ncontracted\" form would be 何を言っているねん (I know this sounds weird; see below).\n\n * 言うて is an equivalent of 言って, the te-form of 言う. It's widely used in western part of Japan, including Osaka. It's pronounced as ゆーて.\n * ん is a sound change of る, which is a contracted form of いる. See [this chart](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/18159/5010). This る can be turned into ん in very casual Japanese. In particular, this る almost always turns into ん before ねん.\n * ねん is a contraction of nothing. ねん is ねん, a sentence-end particle which is almost specific to Osaka dialect. It's like よ, のだ, のか, のです or のですか depending on the sentence. See: [ねん in the Kansai dialect](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/19799/5010) and [Usage of ~まんねん (関西弁)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9966/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T11:33:43.547",
"id": "54003",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T11:49:28.213",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T11:49:28.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54000",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 54000 | 54003 | 54003 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54005",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 結果はホームページ **において** 発表されます。\n>\n> 結果はホームページ **で** 発表されます。\n\nBoth of these sentences seem to translate into \"As for the result, homepage on\nwill be posted,\" or more naturally, \"The result will be posted on the\nhomepage.\" What does において actually add to the sentence compared to when で is\nused?\n\nAnother example is shown below.\n\n> ロンドン **における** 国際会議が行われた。\n\nThis sentence translates into \"The international conference took place in\nLondon.\" Can't the sentence be written just as well as \"ロンドン **で** 国際会議が行われた\"?\nAgain, what does おける add to the sentence?\n\n(Example sentences taken from this\n[link](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-\njlpt-n3-grammar-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8A%E3%81%84%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8A%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B-ni-\noiteni-okeru/).)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T14:30:28.587",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54004",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T13:28:11.743",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T13:28:11.743",
"last_editor_user_id": "23869",
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words"
],
"title": "Why are において・における necessary?",
"view_count": 708
} | [
{
"body": "I think that using おける give a bit stiff, formal and literary impression. So it\nis often used in speeches and articles.\n\nI think ロンドンにおける国際会議が行われた is unnatural, and ロンドンにおいて国際会議が行われた or\nロンドンで国際会議が行われた would be natural.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T15:16:29.933",
"id": "54005",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T15:16:29.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "54004",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "To add to Yuuichi Tam's answer, において・における are taking on the role that で would\nnormally fill in these sentences, not に. The particle で is used when you are\nmarking the location where an action takes place. However, において・における are more\nflexible than で, in that they can also be used for \"non-physical\" locations,\nlike \"in Japanese politics\" or \"in anime.\" So it is a flexible, formal way to\nplay the role of marking the location of an action. It's common to see it on\nWikipedia.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T23:44:28.243",
"id": "54018",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T23:44:28.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20479",
"parent_id": "54004",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 54004 | 54005 | 54005 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54007",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> テープレコーダーを使った放送に **加えて** 、駅員が同じことを言ったりして、同じことを3回ぐらいアナウンスする。([source line\n> 21-22](https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf))\n\nMy attempt at translation:\n\n> Adding up in a broadcast using a prerecorded tape, the station attendant\n> says the same thing and announces the same thing 3 times.\n\nFirst, I decided for 加えて to be the て-form of the verb instead of the\nconjunction because I couldn't make any sense of this first part\nテープレコーダーを使った放送に **加えて** without a verbal expression. I might've overlooked\nsomething, but I just couldn't find a solution for this approach.\n\nSecond, the way I translated and integrated テープレコーダーを使った放送に **加えて** seems kind\nof wrong. The following _駅員が同じことを言ったりして、_ **同じことを3回ぐらいアナウンスする** already\nrepeats that the same information is given (italic part) and is given multiple\ntimes (bold part). This in itself feels redundant. Then, in addition, I give\nthe information that this information is \"adding up\" (stacked?) in a\nprerecorded tape.\n\nIf I translated the part 駅員が同じことを言ったりして、同じことを3回ぐらいアナウンスする。 a bit more\ncreatively, I could make it into something like:\n\n> The station attendant says the same thing and the same 3 times over.\n\nThe repetition of \"the same thing\" in the full sentence could be interpreted\nas a way to mimic the repetitive character of these announcements. However, if\nthat should be the case, I'm having a very hard time to put enough trust into\nthis interpretation of mine since it renders a good portion of the full\nsentence \"redundant, repetitive\" information.\n\n(Note: I left out the additional アナウンスする on purpose in this second\ntranslation, since the intent of this translation was to show what I deem to\nbe the essence of this construction of repetitive expressions).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T17:56:58.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54006",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-12T00:23:19.427",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-12T00:23:19.427",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Repetitive patterns in テープレコーダーを使った放送に加えて、駅員が同じことを言ったりして、同じことを3回ぐらいアナウンスする",
"view_count": 92
} | [
{
"body": "加{くわ}えて is the て-form of 加{くわ}える, but it works as a conjunction.\n\nxに加{くわ}えてyもする literally means \"Adding to (doing) x, we also do y\", or more\nnaturally in English, \"in addition to x, we also do y\"\n\nAs for the second part of your questions, I interpret the second 同{おな}じ to\nrefer to the announcement in general whereas the first 同{おな}じ means that the\nstation attendant says the same thing as the tape recorder. There are two\nreasons for this,\n\n 1. The part directly following the conjunctive verb belongs to the part directly before it (i.e., the clause 駅員が同じことを言ったりして is connected to テープレコーダーを使った放送)\n 2. The first part is still lacking an action, which is given by the last part (アナウンスする) \n\nMy full translation would thus be:\n\nIn addition to using a tape recorder, the station attendant also repeats the\nmessage, such that the announcement is done three times.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T18:26:39.380",
"id": "54007",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T18:41:58.057",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T18:41:58.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "20305",
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "54006",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 54006 | 54007 | 54007 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54009",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf#page=2>\n\nThe sentence in question is taken from line 24-26:\n\n> でも、日本のアナウンスははっきりわかるので役に立つし、「お忘れ物ございませんように」と丁寧な話し方から、日本語のいい勉強にもなります。\n\nMy attempt at translation:\n\n> However, because I clearly understand the Japanese announcement, it is\n> useful and because **_it_** ??「お忘れ物ございませんように」 ?? is a courteous way\n> speaking, it becomes a good lesson in Japanese.\n\nSo, I basically can't make any sense of this 「お忘れ物ございませんように」in this context xD\nBy browsing jisho for ございます I found out that it is the teneigo for \"to be,\nexist\". How this ございます relates to ように and お忘れ物 I have no idea. The \"it\" in my\ntranslation is actually redundant, I think. I put it there to make my\ntranslation more comprehensible, it shall be a dummy for the for me\nincomprehensible 「お忘れ物ございませんように」 . But since I'm so utterly clueless about\n「お忘れ物ございませんように」 , I might've used my dummy \"it\" in an inappropriate way\n(syntactically). If that's the case, I'm sorry ^^",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T18:36:39.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54008",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T23:32:43.377",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T20:28:03.613",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"set-phrases",
"phrases"
],
"title": "What is this 「お忘れ物ございませんように」",
"view_count": 192
} | [
{
"body": "「ございません」 is the respectful form of 「ありません」. So it's equivalent to\n「お忘れ物ありませんように」. The 〜ように here is \"so/such that\", and is omitting any number of\nacceptable verbs, e.g. (注意)する.\n\nSo overall it is just\n\n> (Please) make sure there are no forgotten items → (Please) make sure you\n> don't leave anything behind\n\nThis is a common phrase to hear on trains/subways/etc. in Japan when the\nvehicle is approaching the next station or stop.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T18:55:11.010",
"id": "54009",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T23:32:43.377",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T23:32:43.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "54008",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 54008 | 54009 | 54009 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54015",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context, see here:\n<https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf#page=2>\n\nThe sentence in question is taken from line 31-32: チャイム?あっ,\n発車ベルのことですね。少しうるさいところもあるかもしれませんが、日本の乗り物には、安全性があると思います。\n\n=> \"chime? Ah, the departure bell. It probably is a bit of an annoying thing,\nbut don't you think that it is for the japanese transport to have safety?\"\n\nI never before saw ところ in the meaning of \"thing\" in my textbook so far, but it\nis there in the entry on jisho. However, it is in the category \"noun,suffix\"\nso I'm a bit hesitant about my interpretation.^^ Maybe you could confirm my\ntranslation or tell me how to do it right :D\n\nBesides, why didn't the speaker just say \"すくしうるさいかもしれませんが...\"? Is it \"a matter\nof style\", like, is the alternative with ところ more formal for example?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T19:24:10.520",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54010",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T21:54:27.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Does this ところ bear the meaning of \"thing\" here?",
"view_count": 152
} | [
{
"body": "The meaning of this ところ is somewhat different from that of \"thing\".\n\nWe use 「Adjective + ところ」 or 「Verb Phrase + ところ」 to talk about one of the\ncharacteristics of people or things.\n\nThe sentence can be translated like this (The part in bold corresponds to\n「少しうるさいところ」.):\n\n> Though there may be **the characteristic of being a bit noisy/annoying** ,\n> don't you think there is safeness in Japanese transportation?\n\nHere the speaker says that 「少しうるさいところ」 is one of the characteristics of\nJapanese transportation, the one of slight noisiness/annoyingness exemplified\nor single-handedly embodied by the departure bell, not that the departure bell\nis an noisy/annoying thing.\n\nI don't think the choice between 「少しうるさいところもあるかもしれませんが」 and 「少しうるさいかもしれませんが」\nis a matter of style or formality. A relevant difference might be that the\nimplication of other characteristics someone/something has is stronger\nwith「(Xは)Yところがある」than with「(Xは)Y」. The use of 「ところがある」 may be partially\nmotivated by this factor, as a kind of foreshadowing, since the speaker then\ngoes on to mention another characteristic of Japanese transportation, namely\nthat of safeness.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T21:46:10.103",
"id": "54015",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T21:54:27.447",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T21:54:27.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "54010",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 54010 | 54015 | 54015 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> ええ、ありますね。かならずしもうるさいチャイムやベルのおかげだとは思いませんけど。([source](https://www.docdroid.net/XIK9pCk/img-20171020-0001-new.pdf#page=2))\n\nI think that the person here basically wants to say\n\n> because of the chime and announcement, I don't always do not think it is\n> annoying.\n\nMy biggest problem though is that おかげで/おかげだ is used. I just learned in my\ntextbook that this is used when CAUSE X has lead to POSITIVE RESULT Y. I get\nthat the speaker, in case I understood this correctly, wants to conceal\nhis/her negative opinion. But I feel very very unsure about this\ninterpretation of mine ^^ Since I learned that おかげで/だ is used in positive\ncontexts, I fear that it won't possible to use it inside a negative statement,\nunless irony is at play here. But I've no experience with irony in Japanese so\nfar.\n\nHere's my full translation: (Very literal)\n\n> Yes. It sure is. But I do not always not think that (=\"that\" due to と思います)\n> because annoying chime and announcement.\n\n(more paraphrasing)\n\n> Yes. It sure is. But I do not always not think so (= \"I sometimes don't\n> think of it in its function as a safety measure\" see the pretext) due to the\n> annoying chime and announcements.\n\nI couldn't find a way to integrate the THAT in \"I think that...\". It never\nworks because the clause it relates to is a causal clause at the same time. At\nleast if I understood おかげで/だ correctly.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T19:52:39.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54011",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-11T23:55:51.533",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-11T23:55:51.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How does おかげで/おかげだ work in ええ、ありますね。かならずしもうるさいチャイムやベルのおかげだとは思いませんけど?",
"view_count": 180
} | [
{
"body": "You have to look on the context, what she is actually talking about. This is\ngiven by the question asked to her in the sentence before.\n\nチャイム？あっ、発車ベルのことですね。少しうるさいところもあるかもしれませんが、日本の乗り物には安全性があると思いませんか？\n\nええ、ありますね。必ずしもうるさいチャイムやアナウンスのおかげだとは思いませんけど。\n\nTranslating gives: Chime? Ah, the departure bell. It might have the property\nof _(ところ, here could refer both to physical places, or to more abstract\n\"places\", that is \"parts\"/\"properties\" of the chime itself)_ being a bit loud,\nbut don't you think that there is safety _(meaning safety is good, in Japanese\nyou literally say there is a property of safety, 安全=safety, 性=property,\nある=there is)_ in Japanese transportation?\n\nYea, there is. But I do not necessarily think it is (only) thanks to the loud\nchimes or announcements.\n\nAs you can see, the answer refers to the question regarding safety in Japanese\ntransportation.\n\nLet's split the sentence up: 必ずしもうるさいチャイムやアナウンスのおかげだとは思いませんけど。\n\n=>\n\n1 必ずしも - not necessarily\n\n2 うるさいチャイムやアナウンスのおかげ - thanks to loud chime/announcement\n\n3 だとは - topic marker\n\n4 思いません - do not think\n\n5 けど - but\n\n5 and 4 should be straight forward, gives the start of the sentence in\nEnglish: But, I do not think\n\nNext, 3 comes directly after 2, meaning that 2 is the topic of the sentence,\nwhich we understand must be an object. If we for a moment ignore 1, we thus\nhave the sentence: But, I do not think thanks to the chime\n\nWhat we are missing is the context. Since we were just asked a question we\nknow what the context is: there is safety in Japanese transportation, if we\ndenote this as \"it\" as one does in English, contrary to Japanese where it is\njust implied, we thus get: But, I do not think it is thanks to the chime\n\nThe last part is to add the \"uncertainty\" 1 (not necessarily) in the sentence,\n=> But, I do not necessarily think it is thanks to the chime\n\nThe phrase 必ずしも ｡｡｡ V~ない comes in this form, such that the sentence opens with\n\"not necessarily\" and then ends with a negative verb to which it is connected.\n\nEDIT I would also like to point out that there is no actual double negation in\nthe sentence. 必ずしも is used in negative contexts and that is probably why the\ntranslation of it adds a \"not\", but the actual negation will come from the\nverb in the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T20:21:05.490",
"id": "54013",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-24T21:52:49.667",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-24T21:52:49.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "20305",
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "54011",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 54011 | null | 54013 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I'm looking for either an adjective or a noun, that describes lines like\n\n> 僕は死ぬまであなたのことを忘れない！\n>\n> 僕は永遠に君のことを愛してる！\n>\n> 僕はずっとここで待ってる！\n\nYeah, you know, these over-melodramatic lines in dramas with sad violin music\nplaying in the background at the end of the script.\n\nA dictionary tells me （ド）派手 , but the example sentences only show it being\nused to describe flashy clothes.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T19:57:33.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54012",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-14T13:33:12.517",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-requests"
],
"title": "What would be a correct term to describe a \"cheesy\" line?",
"view_count": 491
} | [
{
"body": "How about...\n\n> * [臭]{くさ}い・くさい・クサい\n> * クサい[台詞]{せりふ}\n> * くっさー！ (← Is this Kansai dialect?)\n>\n\nor...\n\n> * [安]{やす}っぽいセリフ\n> * [陳腐]{ちんぷ}なセリフ\n>\n\n... maybe?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T23:46:23.313",
"id": "54019",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-14T13:33:12.517",
"last_edit_date": "2017-12-14T13:33:12.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "54012",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "You could say the above lines sound affected or unnatural and are deliberately\ngoing for dramatic effect, in which case わざとらしい is a good fit. I first\nencountered this phrase in Saga no Gabai baachan, where the author describes a\ntearjerker scene in a drama that is put there on purpose to make the viewers\nbreak down and sob.\n\nOtherwise, if you think the lines are uncool or cheesy, psosuna's suggestion\nof ダサい and 格好悪い is a nice one, especially if you're describing the feeling and\nemotional reaction it elicits.\n\nChocolate's is also very good, I think.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T01:04:28.860",
"id": "54022",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T01:04:28.860",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"parent_id": "54012",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I'll add to the choices already out there.\n\n歯の浮くようなセリフ is a phrase that comes to mind. Literally it means a \"line that\nmakes one set one's teeth on edge\", or how I would put it, a \"line that is\ncringe-worthy\".\n\nOr maybe something even simpler, like 恥ずかしいセリフ \"a line that's embarrassing\n(note the embarrassing is referring to the line itself)\" or 痛い \"so embarrasing\nit's hard to bear (this is a bit slangy)\". 寒い is another word you can use to\ndescribe, meaning dull or corny.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T08:48:03.463",
"id": "54030",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T08:48:03.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "54012",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Just to add to the options that have already been raised, the first option\nthat came to my mind was something along the lines of ベタすぎるセリフ (literally \"an\nexcessively cliched line\").\n\nI think a lot of the options that have been raised so far sound a bit more\novertly negative than \"cheesy\" (which is usually disparaging but in an\naffectionate way); ベタ seems perhaps a bit closer to \"cheesy\" in that respect\nfor me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T10:01:02.980",
"id": "54032",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T10:01:02.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "54012",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 54012 | null | 54019 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is from a scene in the movie クリーピー 偽りの隣人. In the scene, the wife has made\na nice meal and it is laid out on the table. The husband sees it and says\n「お！すごい。こってるな。」and the subtitle translation is \"Wow, you really went to town!\".\n\nIs this the verb 凝る？It seems it has the meaning of \"to be devoted\" or \"to be\nabsorbed\" as well as the more common meaning of \"to grow stiff\". So I'm\nguessing it's his way of saying that she really devoted herself to making a\ngreat meal.\n\nCan someone provide a few more examples of this usage of the verb 凝る? （if I am\ncorrect in assuming it is 凝る)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T21:28:47.237",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54014",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-28T15:24:01.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "usage of 「こってるな」",
"view_count": 199
} | [
{
"body": "yeah, 凝っている is used when you want to describe something is sophisticated,\nelaborate, intricate, artistic and so on. It’s normally giving a compliment\nwhen someone puts so much energy into specific part of something. As for the\nmeal, probably wife’s meal is well-decorated rather than just serving the\nmeal.\n\nI think you can say [凝りに凝っている](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1856/78).\nSay for me I have a lot of music collection whose total minutes are more than\n1 year in my laptop and was especially fond of punk rock, hard rock and heavy\nmetal and have a lot of stuff in the genre. I think it is regarded as\n凝りに凝っている趣味 since it’s maniac and not so many people do that.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T22:09:23.010",
"id": "54016",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-28T15:24:01.760",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-28T15:24:01.760",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "54014",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 54014 | null | 54016 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54024",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> そんなことを言われたら、怒る **もの、もっとも** です。\n\nThere seems to be a pattern of dictionary form verb + mono + comma +\ndescription.\n\nAny good references for this with 例文？",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-24T22:19:04.537",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54017",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-16T01:49:58.903",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-16T01:49:58.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "16132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does this type of sentence structure (Verb- dictionary form+のも（は）もっともだ) mean",
"view_count": 206
} | [
{
"body": "It's not もの but のも (nominalizer-の, followed by\n[exclamatory-も](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32886/5010) working as a\ntopic particle). This means \"no wonder ～\".\n\nSee:\n\n * [Learn JLPT N2 Grammar: のももっともだ (no mo motto mo da)](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-jlpt-n2-grammar-%E3%81%AE%E3%82%82%E3%82%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82%E3%81%A0-no-mo-motto-mo-da/)\n * [\"もっともだ\"を含む例文](http://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%22%E3%82%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82%E3%81%A0%22)\n\n尤も【もっとも】 by itself is a na-adjective that means _natural_ , _reasonable_ or\n_legitimate_. Not to be confused with 最も【もっとも】 ( _most_ ).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T02:09:18.257",
"id": "54024",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T06:03:20.973",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T06:03:20.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54017",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 54017 | 54024 | 54024 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54025",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I was reading the global warming article on the Japanese wikipedia and got\nstuck on this phrase\n\n> 世界の年平均気温の偏差の経年変化\n\nI looked up the last two words individually, which lead me to an\ninterpretation of: 'world change [i.e. increase] of average temperature\ndeviation over the years'. Is this correct?\n\nI think, from what I've understood in my previous reading, temperature\ndeviation is the difference from a baseline average temperature [pre-1950's\nfrom memory]. But as this is the first time I've encountered 偏差 and 経年変化, I'm\nworried I might be jumping the gun.\n\nAny help would be appreciated. Thanks :-)\n\nEdit: I found out later the baseline temperature is the 1981-2010 average, not\nthat of 1891-1950, as I originally presumed. The caption in the article\ndoesn't explicitly identify this average, which led to a lot of confusion on\nmy part. It would have been helpful if the Japanese article didn't leave this\ninformation out.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T00:39:06.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54021",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-28T03:50:57.140",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T04:51:30.737",
"last_editor_user_id": "21868",
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "世界の年平均気温の偏差の経年変化 meaning",
"view_count": 406
} | [
{
"body": "> [①世界]の[②年平均気温]の[③偏差]の[④経年変化]\n\nJust reverse the order and you can get the basic literal translation:\n\n> [④annual change] of [③the deviation] of [②the annual average temperature] of\n> [①the world]\n\nTechnical phrases can usually be translated rather literally. I don't think\n\"world change\" is a good translation although it may mean something.\n\n偏差 roughly means \"some difference from some representative value (mean,\nmedian, mode, etc) of the population\". It's often a shorter synonym for 標準偏差\n([standard deviation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation)), but\nit can be a simple arithmetic difference from some average value. If you are\nseeing [this](http://www.data.jma.go.jp/cpdinfo/temp/an_wld.html), the\n\"difference\" is simple arithmetic difference, and the baseline \"representative\nvalue\" is \"世界の年平均気温の1981〜2010年平均\", the mean of the world temperature in\n1981-2010.\n\n経年変化 is just ~~\"annual change\"~~ \"change over the years\".",
"comment_count": 32,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T02:34:28.557",
"id": "54025",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T09:33:47.307",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-26T09:33:47.307",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54021",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "# English\n\n> 世界の年平均気温の偏差の経年変化\n\nThe above phrase means as a whole \"the transition of the average temperature\nin the world.\" To put it in detail, \"it is a plot of the world's annual\naverage temperature (one representative point per year) for a hundred and\ndecades and shows the transition of the temperature as a graph.\" \nHowever, since we want to see only the state of change, they don't use the\nreal temperatures, but a graph that moves the zero point of the Y-coordinate\nusing the appropriate average temperature value (average value of 1981-2010). \nIn short, \"it is what makes only the change (ripple) of the temperature\ntransition easy to see, where the unit of X-coordinate plot is year.\"\n\nThe words with \"偏差\" and \"経年変化\" are somewhat exaggerated and have an atmosphere\nof mathematical terms, but they don't have the particularly difficult\nmeanings, which can be rewritten in easier words as mentioned above.\n\nThey already use the word \" **年** 平均気温\" in this phrase, so they didn't need to\nuse the word with \"経 **年** 変化\" where \"年\" appears again, but they used it. So I\nthink that the respondents to this question and people who made comments were\nconfused and a lot of comments were posted endlessly.\n\nFor the interpretation other than \"経年変化\", naruto seems to be correct (+1), and\nfor \"経年変化\", macraf seem to be correct (+1 for the comment) from the beginning.\n\n# 日本語\n\n> 世界の年平均気温の偏差の経年変化\n\n上記の意味は、 \n基本的には世界の平均気温の推移です。少し詳しく言うと、世界の１年間の平均気温（１年に１つの代表点）を百数十年分プロットしてグラフにして気温の推移/変化を表したもの。但し、変化の様子だけを見たいので実気温ではなく、適切な平均気温値（1981-2010の平均値）を用いて座標移動をしたグラフです。要するに気温推移の変化分（リップル）だけを見やすくしたものです。プロットの単位は年。\n\n「偏差」とか「経年変化」という意味はなんだか大げさで数学的な匂いはしますが簡単に言い換えることができる上記のように特にむずかしい意味を持っていません。もっと簡単な普通の言葉に言い換えられそうです。\n\n既に、「 **年** 平均気温」と言ってますので「年」が再び登場する「経 **年**\n変化」という言葉を使ったので皆さんが混乱し、大量のコメントが往来しているのだと思います。\n\n「経年変化」以外の解釈はnarutoさん（+1）、「経年変化」の理解は、macrafさん(コメントに+1)が最初から合っているように思います。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T06:32:09.207",
"id": "54055",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T10:47:22.030",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "54021",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I think probably the confusions arise from this is discrete time-intervals and\nthey are fixing the deviation value. Therefore, I think \"Annual change\" which\nis the translation of **経年変化** sounds unfit since they are not really\nmonitoring the phenomena all the time but just pick up the value they already\ncollected and plot it on the sheet. However, Naruto already picking up the\nterm \"change over the years\" for **経年変化** , I think it can avoid the\nconfusion.\n\nI think this is called Time-Series Analysis. They have data of average\ntemperatures and have prepared deviations and want to analyse the\nmodel(ex:find a trend of the data,how much volcano eruption affects the data)\n\nHorizontal axis is arranged for a discrete equal time intervals by 1 year\nmeasurement. Vertical axis is arranged for a deviation value calculated for\neach year. Then, they prepared the regression line for a trend as below.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/E5CYf.png)\n\nReference:\n\n**長期変化傾向（トレンド）の解説**\n\n<http://www.data.jma.go.jp/cpdinfo/temp/trend.html>\n\n**CSV データ 世界の年平均気温**\n\n<http://www.data.jma.go.jp/cpdinfo/temp/list/an_wld.html>\n\n**Python Code**\n\nimport pandas as pd import csv import pprint import numpy as np import\nmatplotlib.pyplot as plt df=pd.read_csv('\\an_wld.csv', sep=',',header=None)\ndf.values x = df[0] y = df[1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/E5CYf.png) z =\nnp.polyfit(x, y, 1) p = np.poly1d(z) plt.plot(x, y, marker = \"o\") xp =\nnp.linspace(1890, 2016, 120) plt.plot(xp, p(xp)) plt.show()",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-28T03:50:57.140",
"id": "54097",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-28T03:50:57.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "54021",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 54021 | 54025 | 54025 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54027",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In my dictionary app, they both translate to \"suspension\".\n\nWhat is the difference between 「中止」and 「停止」?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T03:41:51.727",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54026",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T04:29:16.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 「中止」and 「停止」?",
"view_count": 691
} | [
{
"body": "中止 is when something is cancelled. Like a concert being cancelled due to bad\nweather. 停止 is when something is stopped. Like a train being stopped due to\nmechanical issues.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T04:29:16.327",
"id": "54027",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T04:29:16.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19665",
"parent_id": "54026",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 54026 | 54027 | 54027 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54029",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm confused at the use of 投げ槍 here. There are definitely no javelins/spears\nin this scene, so wouldn't 投げ遣り be correct?\n\n> アクアの、面倒臭そうな **投げ槍** なその態度に、流石に俺もカチンときた。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T06:10:00.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54028",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T06:27:37.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15801",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "should 投げ槍 be used or 投げ遣り？",
"view_count": 81
} | [
{
"body": "This なげやり clearly means _perfunctory_ , _indifferent_ , _irresponsible_ , etc.\nデジタル大辞泉 explicitly says using the kanji 投げ槍 in this sense is wrong. (But this\nalso means 投げ槍 is a very common mistake even among native speakers.)\n\n> ###\n> [投げ遣り](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/163803/meaning/m0u/%E6%8A%95%E3%81%92%E3%82%84%E3%82%8A/)\n>\n> ［名・形動］物事をいいかげんに行うこと。成り行きまかせにすること。また、そのさま。「投げ遣りな態度」「商売を投げ遣りにする」 \n> **[補説]この意味で「投げ槍」と書くのは誤り。**\n>\n> ###\n> [投げ槍](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/163802/meaning/m0u/%E6%8A%95%E3%81%92%E6%A7%8D/)\n>\n> 敵に投げつけるために用いる柄の短い槍。\n\nWhen in doubt, use hiragana, which is always safe :)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T06:27:37.120",
"id": "54029",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T06:27:37.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54028",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 54028 | 54029 | 54029 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54033",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The phrase in question comes from the Japanese global warming article.\n\nその一方で太陽放射等の自然要因による変化の寄与量は人為的な要因の数%程度でしかなく、自然要因だけでは現在の気温の上昇は説明できないことが指摘されている\n\nI think I understand the gist of 数%程度でしかなく. My reading is, '[accounts for]\njust a few percent [of the change]'. However, I've never encountered 数 used as\na prefix like this before to represent a small change. Can someone clarify the\nmeaning of this phrase? Thanks.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T09:38:29.633",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54031",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-29T08:27:08.300",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-29T08:27:08.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"phrases",
"prefixes"
],
"title": "What does 数% mean in 数%程度でしかなく?",
"view_count": 199
} | [
{
"body": "Your interpretation is correct, used as a prefix 数{すう}パーセント 数{すう}ケルビン, etc the\npronunciation is すう and not かず and it means \"a few\", so in my examples \"a few\npercent\" or \"a few Kelvin\".\n\nThe 程度{ていど} afterwards means \"order of\", so \"on the order of a few percent\"\n\nThe full translation is thus:\n\n> Meanwhile, the contribution of the main natural causes such as Solar\n> radiation, is only on the order of a few percent of the artificial main\n> causes. Thus the increase in temperature that we are seeing now can not be\n> explained by natural causes alone.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T10:10:30.303",
"id": "54033",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T10:10:30.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20305",
"parent_id": "54031",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 54031 | 54033 | 54033 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54035",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm stumped on this sentence.\n\n一度環境中に増えた二酸化炭素などの長寿命な温室効果ガスは、能動的に固定しない限り、約100年間（5年–200年[9]）にわたって地球全体の気候や海水に影響を及ぼし続けるため、今後20–30年以内の対策が温暖化による悪影響の大小を大きく左右することになる[10]\n\nMy best attempt at this so far is. (If anyone could improve on this, it would\nbe a big help.)\n\nGreenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide with a long lifetime in the atmosphere,\nonce released, will continue to have an effect on the climate and sea level\nover approximately 100 years until their emissions are limited. For this\nreason, the action taken on climate change in the next 20-30 years will have a\nbig influence on the degree of their harmful consequences.\n\nEdit:\n\nI have updated the translation to accommodate the comments and answer below.\n\nGreenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide with a long lifetime in the atmosphere,\nonce released, will continue to have an effect on the climate and the oceans\nover an approximately 100 year period unless actively fixated. For this\nreason, the action taken on climate change in the next 20-30 years will have a\nbig influence on the degree of such harmful consequences.\n\nEdit 2:\n\nSorry; this is a reading comprehension question, not a translation question. I\nwasn't looking for the right translation or for proofreading. 能動的に固定しない限りwas\nthe main barrier to my understanding, since it involved very technical\nJapanese and my dictionary wasn't very helpful.\n\nHowever, my question was answered.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T10:10:48.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54034",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T02:32:00.033",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-26T02:32:00.033",
"last_editor_user_id": "21868",
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "Clarifying another sentence from the global warming article",
"view_count": 104
} | [
{
"body": "能動的に固定しない限り is \"unless actively fixated\". In this context, 固定 (\"to fixate\")\nrefers to actively removing CO2 from the air using [something like\nthis](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-reusable-materials-pull-\nco2-from-air/) or\n[this](http://tenbou.nies.go.jp/science/description/detail.php?id=26).\n\nThe excerpt says CO2 is \"gas with a long lifetime\", not \"gas with an unlimited\nlifetime\". Doesn't that mean the author thinks CO2 will eventually disappear?\nI think the cited article [9] explains where \"100年\" came from.\n\nLastly, although this is a minor problem, 温暖化による modifies 悪影響, not 対策.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T11:03:53.530",
"id": "54035",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T11:12:36.227",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T11:12:36.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54034",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 54034 | 54035 | 54035 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54037",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, someone who was born without an arm, or has an extra leg and\nwants to be able to express this in words. Or perhaps in a fantasy setting\nhave retractable wings, and wants to tell people this.\n\n\"I have wings\" \n\"I have an extra arm\" \n\"I only have nine fingers\" etc.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T11:24:45.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54036",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T12:07:19.360",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T11:33:03.450",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "26263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "How do you say that you have/do not have a body part",
"view_count": 99
} | [
{
"body": "> （何に）手・足・胃・頭・鼻 がある。 (X has) a hand/leg/stomach/head/nose.\n\nshould be sufficient.\n\nIf you need to quantify, you could say\n\n> 狼男には耳が２つある。 A werewolf has two ears.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T12:07:19.360",
"id": "54037",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T12:07:19.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "54036",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 54036 | 54037 | 54037 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The title of the film _害虫_ (2001) was literally translated into English as\n\"Harmful Insect\".\n\nIt is clear to me that the original title is a figure of speech. Is it a\nestablished metaphor (and how would you translate it?), or did the creators of\nthe film just use that word creatively?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T12:36:45.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54038",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T14:18:14.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26264",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Metaphorical use of 害虫",
"view_count": 110
} | [
{
"body": "It's not an established idiomatic expression. It does not have any surprising\nconnotation unique to the Japanese language, such as\n[大根](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%A4%A7%E6%A0%B9) (\"radish\" → unskilled actor /\nham actor) and [鳥頭](http://jisho.org/word/%E9%B3%A5%E9%A0%AD) (\"birdhead\" → a\nperson who forgets things soon).\n\nIt's not really a \"creative\" metaphor unique to this film, either. I believe\nharmful/useless people have been referred to as 害虫(のような人間) hundreds of times\nin works by various novelists and lyricists. For what it's worth, I checked\nthe first 200 hits of 害虫 on\n[BCCWJ](http://pj.ninjal.ac.jp/corpus_center/bccwj/en/), and two of them were\nfigurative. And here are [the results of 害虫 on Uta-Net](https://www.uta-\nnet.com/user/index_search/search2.html?frm=ichiran&kw=%E5%AE%B3%E8%99%AB), a\nlyrics search engine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T13:37:39.567",
"id": "54043",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T14:18:14.030",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-25T14:18:14.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54038",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 54038 | null | 54043 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54054",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Is it more correct to say:\n\n> 勉強のつもり \n> or \n> 勉強するつもり?\n\nEDIT: \nI take it 'I plan not to study' would be 「勉強しないつもり」. Unless it's something\nelse like 「無勉強のつもり」 which I highly doubt. Am I correct in saying this?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T12:56:52.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54039",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T09:14:22.587",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-26T00:47:27.917",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "26263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "How would you use つもり with する verbs? のつもり or するつもり?",
"view_count": 601
} | [
{
"body": "You'd use するつもり. However, keep in mind that つもり is used to express intent. For\nexample, 明日日本語を勉強するつもりです is acceptable if you mean to express intent to \"study\nJapanese tomorrow\". But, this sets the precedence that it's a do-or-die\nsituation, as opposed to something you're casually planning to do.\n\nYou might say 明日日本語を勉強するつもりです if you mean to say that all of your volition is\nbehind studying tomorrow and for good reason. You may not say that about\ngrabbing pizza with friends in the afternoon, though:\n\n> 今日３時ごろ友達とピザを食べるつもりです。 << This is wrong! It's too strong a tone.\n\nInstead, try:\n\n> 今日３時ごろ友達とピザを食べる **予定{よてい｝があります。**\n\nApologies in advance for bad examples. I seem to be particularly lacking in\nthat department...!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T21:39:05.797",
"id": "54047",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-25T21:39:05.797",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "54039",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "つもり has mainly two meanings. The one means \"be going to do\" and the other\nmeans \"intention that you consider something as real something, though they\naren't real or not doing in real\".\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/148367/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%A4%E3%82%82%E3%82%8A/>\n\nA plain form of a verb + つもり means the former one. For example, 私は明日勉強するつもりです\n(I am going to study tomorrow).\n\nA noun or a progressive form of a verb + つもり means the latter one. For\nexample, when you pick up a broom, you can say \"これはギターのつもり\" and then you can\npretend to play the guitar, while you say \"ギターを弾いているつもり\". And they also mean\n\"I intend that I am doing (something as something)\", for example,\n私は彼とけんかしているつもり would be translated as \"I intend that I am quarreling with\nhim.\"\n\n勉強のつもり means the latter one. 勉強しないつもり is natural and we don't say 無勉強のつもり.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T06:00:57.297",
"id": "54054",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T09:14:22.587",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-26T09:14:22.587",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "54039",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 54039 | 54054 | 54047 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54044",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, as in はい and ます, I think は and ま each happen to have a long sound\nin addition to a nasal sound. Is it real?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T13:07:55.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54041",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-28T00:23:38.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26265",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Is a phoneme nasalized when it has long sound?",
"view_count": 177
} | [
{
"body": "# English\n\nBefore answering the questioner's (or OP's) question I would like to define\nthe term of **phoneme**. \nAccording to Wikipedia a phoneme is defined as \" _one of the units of sound\nthat distinguish one word from another in a particular language. ... Phonemes\nare normally conceived of as abstractions of discrete segmental speech sounds\n(vowels and consonants)_ \". I understand it as **音素{おんそ}** which has \"\n**母音｛ぼいん｝** _vowel_ \" and \" **子音｛しいん｝** _consonant_ \" in Japanese language. \nI'm going to answer only OP's question. The core of the question is, I\nunderstand, how \"母音 _vowel_ \" and \"子音 _consonant_ \" of Japanese language are\npronounced, so I reject the comment about other than Japanese language to my\nanswer including about the meaning of phoneme.\n\n> I think は and ま each happen to have a long sound in addition to a nasal\n> sound. Is it real?\n\n * As for a long sound, the answer is yes. \nWe pronounce は like \"ha\" and \"h **aa** \" where \" **aa** \" is meant a long\nvowel. And we pronounce ま like \"ma\", \" **mm** a\", \"m **aa** \" and \" **mmaa** \"\nwhere \" **mm** \" is meant a long consonant. \nAs you know vowels could be pronounced elongated. As for consonants, \"h\" sound\nis a [stop consonant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_consonant) also known\nas a plosive or oral occlusive, so you couldn't elongate the sound of \"h\",\nwhile \"m\" sound is a [nasal\nconsonant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasal_consonant), so you could\nelongate it.\n\n * As for a nasal sound, the answer is no except for \"m\" sound which I explained above. \nBut some people like Eiko Segawa who is a famous Japanese female singer could\npronounce all vowels in nasal sound. \nListen to her sing a song,\n[here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eo74quyZTo). \nSo は and ま each happen to have a nasal sound when pronounced by Ms. Segawa.\n\n# 日本語\n\n> I think は and ま each happen to have a long sound in addition to a nasal\n> sound. Is it real?\n\n「マ行」と「ナ行」とは日本語では鼻音になります。日本語の「m」と「n」の音が鼻音だからです。一方「ハ行」は鼻音になりません。すなわち、日本語の「h」の音が鼻音でないからです。\n\nさて、質問者が提示した「はい」の「は」と「ます」の「ま」について見ます。\n\n * 最初は長音化（long sound）について考えます。 \n「は ha」の内の「h」の音は破裂音ですので伸ばせません。母音である「a」は「は～い」のようにいくらでも伸ばせます。 \n「ま\nma」の内の「m」の音は子音ですが鼻音ですので口を閉じたまま鼻から息を出しながら「ム～」とうなるように音を出せば伸ばせます。当然母音である「a」の音は伸ばせますので、「ま～」「ム～ま」「ム～ま～」のように３通りの方法で長音化できます。\n\n * 次に鼻音化（nasal sound）について考えます。 \n「は ha」の「h」も「a」も鼻音にはなりませんので「は」は鼻音になりません。「ま\nma」の「m」が鼻音になることは既に言いました。しかし母音である「a」は鼻音になりません。 結局「ま」の最初の「m」だけが自然に鼻音になります。 \n「a」の音は、一般に鼻音にならないと申しましたが、歌手の瀬川瑛子さんのように母音を鼻にかけて発声する人の場合は鼻音になります。長音でない場合にも鼻音になりますが、長音になると鼻音としてはっきり聞こえますので確認しやすくなります。 \n瀬川瑛子さんの持ち歌である「[命くれない](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eo74quyZTo)」で確認してください。\n\n回答にあたって参考にした以下で示す説明は、[ここ](http://blog.livedoor.jp/ichiro6491/archives/36627822.html)から引用したものです。\n\n>\n> 鼻音が目立つのは瀬川瑛子さんで、鼻にかかる独特の歌唱ですが、これが彼女の魅力になっています。代表曲「命くれない」ですが、この曲は瀬川さんのためにあるような曲です。\n>\n> 誰でも「マ行」と「ナ行」を発音しますと鼻音になります。歌詞に「生まれる前から結ばれていた」とありますが、「う **ま** れる」の「ま」、「 **ま**\n> えから」の「ま」、「 **む**\n> すばれていた」「む」と、最初のフレーズに3回ｍ音（鼻音の一種）が出て来て、韻を含んだようなリズムを奏でております。これが、彼女独特の歌唱と結びついて個性になっております。瀬川さんの物まねをする場合は、このｍ音とｎ音を鼻にかかるように歌うと似て来るでしょうね（笑）。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T14:14:45.923",
"id": "54044",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-28T00:23:38.990",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "54041",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 54041 | 54044 | 54044 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "65202",
"answer_count": 6,
"body": "I am training at a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu academy, and their use of the word\n\"Oss\" is ubiquitous.\n\nI have asked and also answered the question [What is the etymology and meaning\nof Oss?](https://martialarts.stackexchange.com/questions/7928/what-is-the-\netymology-and-meaning-of-oss) in the Martial Arts StackExchange forum.\nHowever, I wanted to see if I could further clarify my answer by understanding\nthe Japanese to a greater degree. I would be grateful for any further\nreferences.\n\nWhat is the etymology and meaning of \"oss\"?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-25T18:18:24.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54045",
"last_activity_date": "2021-03-21T11:59:36.753",
"last_edit_date": "2019-07-22T13:47:03.427",
"last_editor_user_id": "26272",
"owner_user_id": "26272",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"etymology"
],
"title": "The etymology and meaning of Oss, Osu, Ossu",
"view_count": 18766
} | [
{
"body": "You've pretty much provided an elaborate answer to your question, but I'd at\nleast offer one of the more accepted explanation of its origin: an\nabbreviation of the standard morning greeting,\n\n> おはようございます → おはよっす → おわーす → おす → 押忍\n\nas offered [here](http://gogen-allguide.com/o/ossu.html) and\n[here](https://www.wikiwand.com/ja/%E6%8A%BC%E5%BF%8D) (Japanese).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T05:38:39.840",
"id": "54051",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T05:38:39.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "54045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "Here is what I was able to discover on my own:\n\n## The Meaning of Oss\n\n * [persevering when pushed](https://www.attacktheback.com/what-does-oss-mean/)\n * [to push and to suffer](http://www.minrec.org/wilson/pdfs/Language%20-%20The%20%27oss%27%20greeting.pdf)1\n * [to keep the faith](http://www.minrec.org/wilson/pdfs/Language%20-%20The%20%27oss%27%20greeting.pdf)1\n * [the equivalent of a warm-handshake](http://www.minrec.org/wilson/pdfs/Language%20-%20The%20%27oss%27%20greeting.pdf)1\n * [hello, yes, or I understand](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm), ([additional reference](https://www.bjjee.com/articles/the-meaning-of-oss-or-osu/))\n * [acknowledging an opponent's good, hard technique, or, their skill](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm), ([additional reference](https://www.bjjee.com/articles/the-meaning-of-oss-or-osu/))\n * [the absolute and unfaltering devotion needed to \"scale the cliff\" of a martial art discipline](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm)\n * good job, rad, or kewl brah2\n\nFrom Kyokushin Karate:\n\n> [This strength of character develops in hard training and is known as Osu no\n> Seishin 押忍の精神 (the Spirit of Osu). The word Osu comes from Oshi Shinobu\n> 押し忍ぶ, which means \"to persevere whilst being pushed\". It implies a\n> willingness to push oneself to the limits of endurance, to persevere under\n> any kind of pressure.](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm)\n\nFrom Carlson Gracie's philosophy of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu:\n\n> [In BJJ, Carslon Gracie introduced the use of the word “Oss” and it rightly\n> fits the mentality of Carlson Gracie Jiu-Jitsu: Brave, determined, strong,\n> smashing. It’s a bit similar to the war cry “Hoo-ah” that you will hear U.S.\n> Marines use.](https://www.bjjee.com/articles/the-meaning-of-oss-or-osu/)\n\n## The Etymology of Oss, Osu, and Ossu\n\n### Oshi Shinobu\n\n * [押し :: Oshi meaning \"Push\"](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm)\n * [忍ぶ :: Shinobu meaning \"to Endure\"](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm)\n * [to persevere whilst being pushed](http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm)\n\nMeaning, patience, determination, and perseverance.\n\n### Onegaishimasu\n\n * [おねがいします :: Onegaishimasu or Onegai Shimasu meaning \"Please\"](https://www.bjjee.com/articles/the-meaning-of-oss-or-osu/), ([additional reference](https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-the-difference-between-kudasai-and-onegaishimasu-3572604))\n\nMeaning, a polite or honorific way of requesting something from another, of\nsaying \"please\".\n\n### Ohayossu, Ohayoosu, and Oossu\n\nFrom Jesse Enkamp of [Karate by Jesse](http://www.karatebyjesse.com), who\nquotes Dr. Mizutani Osamu3:\n\n * [オハヨス :: \"Ohayossu!”, “Ohayoosu!”, “Oossu!” meaning \"Hey ya!\"](http://www.karatebyjesse.com/meaning-oss-osu-japanese/)\n\nMeaning, \"hey ya\", by male runners in the midst of jogging, responding in\nrougher, masculine ways to Dr. Mizutani's greeting to them of \"Ohayo\ngozaimasu!\" (good morning).3\n\nSo it seems that the term **oss** , which is derived from **osu** or **ossu**\n, has a variety of interpretations and meanings.\n\nHowever, there also seems to be a common essence shared among them all.\n\n\"Oss\" seems to mean having humility and an acknowledgement of respect for the\nperson to whom it is being spoken; to have a perspective of strength and\nperseverance towards a challenge that is being addressed, or, that is to be\nendured; in more general or colloquial contexts, it operates as an affirmative\nacknowledgment, a greeting, or a polite request.\n\n1FEY, B.R., 1994, _To oss or not to oss: that is the question_ , _Dojo\nMagazine_ , Winter 1994, p. 80-81 \n2These are general impressions from training, class, and, sigh, bro-jitsu\nexperiences. \n3Mizutani, Osamu, _Japanese: The Spoken Language in Japanese Life_ , Tokyo,\nSotakusha, Inc., 1981, p. 59-60",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T17:19:58.253",
"id": "54066",
"last_activity_date": "2019-07-22T13:45:49.723",
"last_edit_date": "2019-07-22T13:45:49.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "26272",
"owner_user_id": "26272",
"parent_id": "54045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I've researched a little online and stumbled upon a few interpretations of the\norigins of _oss_ but most of them seem to tackle it the wrong way. There are\nactually two separate words that seem to be mingled into one but that most\nJapanese seem to differentiate.\n\nThe _oss_ mostly used in martial arts is actually said differently from the\nother word _'ss_. _'ss_ starts with a muted exhaling sound instead of an open-\nmouthed \"o\" use in the _oss_ followed by the same dragging \"ss\".\n\n### osu → oss\n\n_Oss_ , as explained in other articles comes from 押忍, as used in sports in\ngeneral (baseball students or any other team that trains seriously tend to use\nit here in Shikoku island) starts with an open mouth sound and finishes with a\ndragging \"ss\".\n\n### ...masu → mss → 'ss\n\nThe other similar word _'ss_ comes from an abbreviation of other words. Those\nwords can be shortened differently depending on the situation and urgency or\nroughness. Roughness usually equates to determination for men/boys who shorten\n_osu_ or the other words and is always said with conviction. I've never heard\na half-assed _'ss_ or _oss_... yet ;)\n\n * Onegaishimasu → Onuhashmass → uhmass → mss → 'ss\n * Arigato gozaimasu → agmassu → agmss → mss → 'ss\n * Ganbarimasu → ganbamassu → gamss → mss → 'ss\n * Yoroshiku onegaishimasu → yoroshknegaishmass → yoshmass → mass → 'ss\n\nP.S.: I was surprised that no articles mentioned the word _ganbarimasu_ that\nis widely used all around Japan and shortened the same way.\n\nCompared to the _osu_ , two of those words are often used in the past tense\nand that's where they become easy to differentiate since there is no past\ntense for _oss_.\n\n * arigato gozaimashita, ganbarimashita → ... [various shortened versions] ... → 'shta* \n*Quite a few other words are shortened to _'shta_ since it's the common past tense conjugation.\n\n## Context\n\nStudents and teachers using _oss_ everyday sometimes replace the common\n_'ss/'shta_ with an _oss_ in many situations but not in all of them. People\nnot using _oss_ would normally _'ss_ or _'shta_ unless they want to show\nultimate determination by borrowing the _oss_ from competitive sports. It is\nthen a little out of place, since people around would know that the person\nisn't involved in an activity usually using _oss_ , and would have a stronger\nimpact.\n\nI guess it's a risky thing to use _oss_ for someone not able to \"read the\nmood\" and the _oss_ might be perceived as a joke instead of determination if\nnot said with enough seriousness.\n\nI think that Japanese can put up with a lot of misuses of the language as long\nas it's not overused or continuous. I don't think that the general public\nwould take any offense in using _oss_ but since it's usually serious business,\nthe best thing is to look at the Japanese people present while saying it and\nsee if they look irritated. Once would be fine anywhere... but Japanese expect\npeople to realize it when they are annoying; reading body language/facial\nexpression is a necessity in Japan.\n\nI hope my input helps to clarify the origins of _oss_ and its close neighbour\n_'ss_. I am sure that if you start to listen carefully you'll \"see\" the\ndifference quite fast.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-01-31T03:24:27.270",
"id": "65202",
"last_activity_date": "2019-07-20T11:21:52.843",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "32783",
"parent_id": "54045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In a military context, おっす is used in the same way as お疲れ様です. So when passing\nanother soldier on base you greet them with either おっす (which sounds like\n'ossss') or お疲れ様（です）. I actually thought おっす was a contraction of お疲れ様です until\nreading some of the other replies here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-02-01T09:38:40.933",
"id": "65228",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-01T09:38:40.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7760",
"parent_id": "54045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The word Oss most likely came from the Japanese Kyokushin Karate schools that\nwould say \"Osu no Seishin.\"\n\nIn this phrase, Osu means _to push_ and Seishin means _to endure_ so the\nentire meaning is something like pushing and enduring, which is interpreted\napproximately as **combat spirit**.\n\nEventually this was shortened into just _Osu_ , and this morphed into the\n_Oss_ we all hear on the Jiu Jitsu mats daily.\n\n(reference: [What does Oss Mean?](https://themmaguru.com/what-does-oss-mean/))",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T03:58:29.983",
"id": "77817",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T04:05:32.297",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-05T04:05:32.297",
"last_editor_user_id": "39258",
"owner_user_id": "39258",
"parent_id": "54045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The word Oss or Osu is used in Brazilian Jiu-jitsu (or BJJ) by practitioners\nwho usually transfer from Eastern martial arts. Oss is not a usual term and\nyou can avoid using it altogether, nobody is going to blink an eye.\n\nBut maybe it's best to just ask for the etiquette, you want to blend it :)\n\nSource: [The Meaning of “OSS” or “OSU” (and when NOT to say it!)\n](https://bjjbear.com/meaning-of-oss-osu/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T13:55:06.213",
"id": "79924",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-02T13:55:06.213",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39872",
"parent_id": "54045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 54045 | 65202 | 54051 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54050",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The wikipedia global warming article has this sentence.\n\nただし、AR4においてはそのような不確実性も考慮した上で結論を出しており、信頼性に関する情報として意見の一致度等も記載されている[11]。\n\nMy reading is thus:\n\nHowever, in AR4, this uncertainty was taken into account before the\nconclusions were published, and the paper describes how the opinions agree on\nthe information pertaining to the reliability.\n\nNot the best translation, to be sure. But I just want to make sure I've\nunderstood the sentence correctly. Have I got it right? Specifically, I had to\npause over 信頼性に関する情報として意見の一致度等も記載されている[11] before interpreting this part.\n\nEdit: I'm not looking for a definitive translation, nor am I asking for\nproofreading. I apologise if my poor wording suggested otherwise. I just want\nto know what the sentence means exactly. (Please let me know if I've\nduplicated an existing discussion or if I'm breaching the etiquette of this\nforum. I'll be more careful in future if I have.) The main point I'm\nstruggling with is 情報として意見. It reads like opinion as information. If this is\nnot right, please tell me how it should read.\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T01:31:27.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54049",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T09:55:21.930",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-26T02:01:19.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "21868",
"owner_user_id": "21868",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "Verify meaning of sentence",
"view_count": 115
} | [
{
"body": "意見の一致度 means \"the level of agreement/concordance of opinions (from various\nexperts/sources).\" 度 is _degree_ , _level_ , _index_ , etc. 信頼性に関する情報として (\"as\ninformation regarding reliability\") adverbially modifies 記載されている. A low level\nof agreement means there are different opinions and the information may be\nunreliable. 意見の一致度 is often assessed quantitatively using statistical methods\n(see [Inter-rater reliability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-\nrater_reliability)), but AR4 is treating this idea rather qualitatively. See\npage 27 of the full report available\n[here](https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_synthesis_report.htm):\n\n> **Treatment of uncertainty** \n> Where uncertainty is assessed qualitatively, it is characterised by\n> providing a relative sense of the amount and quality of evidence (that is,\n> information from theory, observations or models indicating whether a belief\n> or proposition is true or valid) and the **degree of agreement (that is, the\n> level of concurrence in the literature on a particular finding)**. This\n> approach is used by WG III through a series of self-explanatory terms such\n> as: _high agreement_ , _much evidence_ ; _high agreement_ , _medium\n> evidence_ ; _medium agreement_ , _medium evidence_ ; etc.\n\nI think you have correctly understood the remaining part.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T02:16:13.387",
"id": "54050",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T09:55:21.930",
"last_edit_date": "2017-10-26T09:55:21.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "54049",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 54049 | 54050 | 54050 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "54053",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How would one write a range of dates in vertical format? For instance, 2017-18\nor 2017-2018.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T05:45:22.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54052",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T10:03:26.093",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26276",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"copywriting"
],
"title": "Writing a date range in vertical format",
"view_count": 1564
} | [
{
"body": "I've tried looking for the proper way of writing date ranges vertically in\nJapanese but haven't found any specific ones, but if you're going to express\njust the year then you could write:\n\n> 2 \n> 0 \n> 1 \n> 7 \n> 年 \n> 1 \n> 2 \n> 月 \n> 3 \n> 0 \n> 日 \n> | \n> 2 \n> 0 \n> 1 \n> 8 \n> 年 \n> 1 \n> 月 \n> 5 \n> 日\n\nSee [here](https://www.benricho.org/kanji/kansuji-tate.html) (in Japanese).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T06:00:26.753",
"id": "54053",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T06:00:26.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "54052",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "There are several ways to write it (See [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/17450/9831) for detail), but I\npersonally usually write like...\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IzBRT.png)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T10:03:26.093",
"id": "54059",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T10:03:26.093",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "54052",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 54052 | 54053 | 54059 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "I posted about loving airports and when someone agreed with me I wanted to\nrespond with \"いいでしょ？\" but I'm not sure it's the right response.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T09:19:17.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "54057",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-27T13:38:22.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26138",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "How would I say \"It's nice, right?\" In Japanese?",
"view_count": 9511
} | [
{
"body": "That's just right. If you want to be a bit more polite, you could instead say\n\n> いいですね？\n>\n> 素敵ですね？ It's beautiful, isn't it?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T09:25:32.903",
"id": "54058",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T09:25:32.903",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "54057",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I would say...\n\n> いいですよねー！ \n> いいよねー！ ← casual",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T10:22:05.467",
"id": "54061",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T10:22:05.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "54057",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Kansai-ben answer:\n\n> （めっちゃ）え〜やろッ！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T14:23:43.797",
"id": "54063",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T14:23:43.797",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "54057",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I would say いいですねー。(iidesune) which translates to 'It's good, right?' Just\nsaying, いいです！(iidesu) Would translate to 'That's good' as a statement, but by\nadding ね (ne) this creates the '-right?' part of, eliciting or encouraging a\nresponse of agreement from the listener.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-26T20:34:09.093",
"id": "54068",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-26T20:34:09.093",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25348",
"parent_id": "54057",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "depends on how u want it to sound いいじゃないか",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-10-27T13:38:22.617",
"id": "54089",
"last_activity_date": "2017-10-27T13:38:22.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26296",
"parent_id": "54057",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 54057 | null | 54061 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.