question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56627",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 今回の原稿 **を以って** きっと、私以外にも真実に至る者が必ず現れる。\n\nWhat does this part mean? I guess it would be \"by means of\" or something like\nthis, but just in case I'd like confirmation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T12:38:09.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56624",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T13:06:21.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Meaning of を以って",
"view_count": 519
}
|
[
{
"body": "As far as meaning is concerned:\n\n> 「～～を以{も}って」＝「～～で」\n\nIt means:\n\n> \"with ~~\", \"by means of ~~\", etc.\n\nSo, the sentence would roughly mean:\n\n> \"With the (new) manuscript this time, others besides me will certainly reach\n> the Truth as well.\"",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T13:06:21.537",
"id": "56627",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T13:06:21.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56624
|
56627
|
56627
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "```\n\n く‥、邪悪な気が強くなっている‥\n \n く‥‥好むと、好まざるとまわりをまきこみおし流してゆく‥\n \n```\n\nAre these く the same as くっ?\n\n(1) SFX for \"damn it\" like a silent curse;\n\n(2) Mumble under the breath when in a difficult situation;\n\n(3) When one tries to hold in their voice or is trying to hold back pain or\npleasure.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T13:05:42.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56626",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T13:05:42.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27689",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of く here?",
"view_count": 92
}
|
[] |
56626
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56632",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Does it make sense to use 上京 in a fantasy setting where the geography is\ntotally different from our world? In my mind this word is very strongly\nassociated with Tokyo. I know that according to some dictionaries it can\ntechnically refer to moving to any capital city, but still I can't help but\nfeel that it sounds slightly odd in other contexts. Did I get the wrong\nimpression?\n\nHere is a [scene](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7Hp1b.png) from ハクメイとミコチ that\ninspired this question.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T16:08:22.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56629",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T20:29:33.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12271",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Is 上京 appropriate in a setting where Tokyo doesn't exist?",
"view_count": 231
}
|
[
{
"body": "In countries where there is a definite, singular seat of government, power,\nand influence, I cannot see why 上京 couldn't be used to mean 'going to the\nCapitol'.\n\nWhen used to refer to events that took place before 1868, 上京 would mean going\nto the then-capitol of Kyoto. It is not so bound to Tokyo that it cannot be\nused to refer to another current capitol city, fictional or otherwise (Emerald\nCity, Manila, etc).\n\nAs you likely know, this only refers to traveling from within said country to\nthat country's capitol.\n\nExamples of usage referring to places other than Tokyo:\n\n<https://togetter.com/li/331132>\n<http://s.webry.info/sp/kalayaan.at.webry.info/200908/article_4.html>\n<https://ameblo.jp/grieketto08/entry-11090399498.html>\n\nAs your story would supposedly take place in a setting which does not include\nTokyo, there should be no conflict or confusion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T19:10:29.370",
"id": "56632",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T20:29:33.717",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-13T20:29:33.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56629",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56629
|
56632
|
56632
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between various ways of saying ”I have heard that”. \nらしい んだって とか（言っていた） ということだ。\n\n> A: 田中さん、今日は休み？ \n> B: さっき電話があって、熱がある **とか** 。大丈夫でしょうか？\n\n> 義理の兄と情を通じていた **ということだ** 。 I have heard that/It's said that/rumor has it that\n> she's been having an affair with her brother-in-law.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T16:12:10.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56630",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T21:02:15.307",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T15:42:05.963",
"last_editor_user_id": "18134",
"owner_user_id": "18134",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "difference between らしい んだって とか ということだ。",
"view_count": 664
}
|
[
{
"body": "> ~らしい\n\n * This means that you heard the information from another source.\n\n> ~だって\n\n * This means that you are just repeating what someone said.\n\n> ~とか\n\n * This means \"among other things\", or informally \"and stuff\".\n\n> ~ということだ\n\n * This means \"rumor has it\" or \"it appears as if\" or \"how I understand it\".\n\n> ~言っていた\n\n * This means something was said by a subject.\n\nThere are subtle differences between them, and you will notice that some are\nmore commonly used. \"~だって\" or \"~言っていた\" for the most informal situations.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T01:28:44.273",
"id": "56637",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T01:34:54.670",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T01:34:54.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "27614",
"owner_user_id": "27614",
"parent_id": "56630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56630
| null |
56637
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is the difference between\n\n> バス **で** スマホを忘れてしまいました\n\nand\n\n> バス **に** スマホを忘れてしまいました?\n\nI vaguely remember there being a nuance difference between these two sentences\nbut I forgot what it was... Please help me",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T18:40:37.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56631",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T06:17:38.207",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-13T22:27:04.520",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27713",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"particle-に",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Difference between バスに and バスでスマホを忘れてしまいました",
"view_count": 204
}
|
[
{
"body": "Simple answer since this seems to be a possible duplicate...\n\nバスで忘れた focuses on where you did the forgetting (action).\n\nバスに忘れた focuses on where the item was forgotten (location).\n\n'On the bus, I forgot my phone.' vs. 'I forgot (lost) my phone inside the\nbus.'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T21:33:11.850",
"id": "56633",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T21:33:11.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56631",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "While I think the distinction between `で` and `に` in the general sense has\nbeen addressed in other questions, I don't think there's any harm in\nexplaining how it works for `忘れる` specifically.\n\n> バス **で** スマホを忘れてしまいました\n\n\"I forgot my phone on the bus\". The `で` here is emphasizing that the action of\nforgetting your phone happened on the bus.\n\n> バス **に** スマホを忘れてしまいました\n\n\"I left my phone in the bus\". The `に` here is emphasizing that the bus is the\nplace where the action - forgetting your phone - was directed. You forgot\nsomething into the bus, if you will, and consequently that's presumably where\nit still is (unless someone moved it).\n\nTo really drive this home, let's look at one more sentence:\n\n> バスで席の下にスマホを忘れてしまいました\n\n\"I left my phone under my seat on the bus\". This sentence is talking about\nperforming the action of leaving your phone under your seat, and that action\nwas performed on the bus. This might be an unnatural level of specificity, but\nhopefully it drives home the difference between particles.\n\nAnecdotally, I see `忘れる` used primarily with `で`.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T06:17:38.207",
"id": "56696",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T06:17:38.207",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "56631",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56631
| null |
56696
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this piece of sentence in a jlpt n2 practice book.\n\n\"一度はあきらめたが、まだ可能性はあるような気がしてならなかったので、もう一度やってみることにした\"\n\nWhich translates as this \"Though I had initially given up, I still felt there\nwas a chance so I decided to go ahead and give it another try\"\n\nI can't seem to understand why is ならない used nor its function in this\nparticular sentence. \"一度はあきらめたが、まだ可能性はあるような気がしたので、もう一度やってみることにした\" should have\nthe same meaning right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T22:27:30.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56634",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T00:52:33.260",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-13T22:42:50.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "26849",
"owner_user_id": "26849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"て-form"
],
"title": "\"ならない\" usage in this sentence",
"view_count": 361
}
|
[
{
"body": "I don't think your revision means the same thing as what's being conveyed in\nthe original example, though the general gist is the same.\n\n> 一度はあきらめたが、まだ可能性はあるような **気がした** ので、もう一度やってみることにした \n> I had given up once before, but I **felt that there might** still be a\n> possibility, so I decided to give it another try.\n\nHowever, the original example reads more like this to me:\n\n> 一度はあきらめたが、まだ可能性はあるような **気がしてならなかった** ので、もう一度やってみることにした \n> I had given up once before, but I **felt like there must** still be a\n> possibility, so I decided to give it another try.\n\nSubstituting the 気がした for 気がしてならなかった in this case gives off the implication\nthat the belief towards assurance that there is a way is leaning on the side\nof believing in the possibility rather than simply stating that there might\njust be one, much like in English you'd say \"I think it's possible\" versus \"It\nmust be possible.\"\n\nI might not be explaining in the best way possible, but that's my\nunderstanding of it.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-13T22:55:23.957",
"id": "56635",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-13T22:55:23.957",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "56634",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56634
| null |
56635
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "女&男 both seem age specific since there is a の子 ver for both. So is it safe to\nsay 女性/男性 are what I would say if I was referring to the entire sex regardless\nof age? Is that would would be put in officials bills concerning diff sexes?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T01:03:46.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56636",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-21T04:05:19.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What is the official way to call females/males in the sex sense?",
"view_count": 340
}
|
[
{
"body": "The concept, 'sex,' in Japanese would be 性別(せいべつ). The Japanese [Wikipedia\narticle](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%80%A7%E5%88%A5) on the topic says:\n\n> 性別（せいべつ、sex）とは、男性と女性の別。オスとメスの別。\n\nSo, depending on what you are referring to, it could be 男性 and 女性 or オス and メス\nrespectively. The article has a section that specifically addresses human sex.\nI'll quote it here:\n\n> 人間の場合はそれぞれを「男性」「女性」あるいは「おとこ」「おんな」や「男子」「女子」などと呼ぶ。\n\nFrom this sentence, it would appear that 男性・女性, as well as おとこ・おんな and 男子・女子\nare all acceptable for differentiating sex.\n\nHowever, since you're asking what pair of words would be used on official\nforms and the like, and for that it would be 男性・女性. For example, see this\nonline [Visa correction form](https://japan2.usembassy.gov/j/visa/tvisaj-form-\nvisacorrection.html).\n\nYou'll notice that item #4 性別 gives the options 男性 and 女性. I've also seen them\nabbreviated to just 男 and 女 to save space on the page.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-04-21T04:05:19.733",
"id": "58065",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-21T04:05:19.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10047",
"parent_id": "56636",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56636
| null |
58065
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Let's say you want to ask a sort of reverse hypothetical question, in which\nyou don't construct a scenario, but rather you define the result, and ask the\nlistener if they can imagine any scenario that would produce that result.\n\nHere are some examples of this type of question in English:\n\n * Would you wear a polka-dot tie? \n * Would you move overseas? \n * Could you ever give up eating meat?\n\nHow do you construct a question of this sort in Japanese (feel free to\ndirectly translate the three examples above), and what tense/conjugation\nshould be used?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T01:38:24.230",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56638",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T08:23:10.130",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T05:54:53.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7094",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "How to ask a \"would/could you ever\" question?",
"view_count": 853
}
|
[
{
"body": "> Would you wear a polka-dot tie? \n> Would you move overseas? \n> Could you ever give up eating meat?\n\nI would probably say like...\n\n「水玉(模様)のネクタイなんて、つけようと思う？」 \n「水玉(模様)のネクタイをつけたくなることなんて、あると思う？」\n\n「海外に住みたく(or引っ越したく)なることって、あると思う？」 \n「海外に住みたい(or引っ越したい)と思うことって、あると思う？」\n\n「肉(を)食べるの(を)やめることって、できると思う？」 \n「肉(を)食べるの(を)やめられることって、あると思う？」\n\nOr maybe...\n\n「(あなたは)水玉(模様)のネクタイをつけようと思うでしょうか？」 \n「(あなたは)海外に住もう(or引っ越そう)と思うでしょうか？」 \n「肉を食べるのをやめられるでしょうか？」\n\nThere should be several other ways to say these.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T03:01:16.330",
"id": "56641",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T08:23:10.130",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T08:23:10.130",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56638",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56638
| null |
56641
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56645",
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "I am a programmer and I recently wrote two browser extensions, one will\ntranslate English text to \"pronunciation\" replacing all words founf on a web\npage, and another will replace all Chinese characters with their Pinyin-with-\ntone-marks counterparts. Now I am thinking if something similar is possible to\nJapanese? If yes, what would be the approach? Anything can be done\nalgoritmically or you can only use dictionary? Or even dictionary is not\nkeeping in mind that the same characters can sound differently based on\ncontext? In other words can you do this conversion without actually attempting\nto do a machine semantic translation?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T02:49:34.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56640",
"last_activity_date": "2021-02-12T18:23:52.000",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T01:38:48.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "27719",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"readings",
"rōmaji"
],
"title": "Is it possible to algorithmically convert Japanese text to Romaji?",
"view_count": 2823
}
|
[
{
"body": "When considering where you might find such functionality (full text to\nhiragana with disambiguation) it's worthwhile considering where the demand is.\nSimply rendering hiragana for display is probably not that much in demand,\nexcept possibly for automatic addition of hurigana above text. Text to speech\nfunctionality however is very much in demand - a quick search turned up this\nsite: <http://voicetext.jp> which appears to be run by Sharp. You can enter\ntext with kanji and even romaji and get disambiguated voice. It would seems\nthat arbitrary text to hiragana text functionality would be a subset of the\ntotal text to voice functionality. But it doesn't seem sufficiently in demand\nto be listed on that home page as one of the functions they supply.\n\nThey do offer an API for their text to voice.\n\nThe voicing is really good.\n\nMaybe they be convinced to offer a arbitrary-text to hiragana API, and/or an\narbitrary text to original-text-plus-hurigana API. Or at least offer some\nadvice.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T04:24:57.587",
"id": "56644",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T04:24:57.587",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14250",
"parent_id": "56640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Basically this is very difficult.\n\nReal Japanese sentences on the net are mixture of kanji, hiragana, katakana\nand English alphabet. See [Japanese writing\nsystem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_writing_system) on Wikipedia.\n\nAmong these, hiragana and katakana are almost \"pronunciation symbols\"\nthemselves. You can replace them into romaji [using this\ntable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiragana#Table_of_hiragana) and you're\n80% done. The remaining 20% is a bit tricky but they can be handled\nalgorithmically. Still, there are [various romanization\nsystems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Japanese#Modern_systems),\nso you have to make a wise decision. There are also some \"[extended\nkatakana](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/19201/5010)\" which may not be\ntransliterated straightforwardly.\n\nKanji is the difficult part. Character-based replacement makes no sense\nbecause [one kanji can be read differently in different\nwords](http://www.tofugu.com/japanese/onyomi-kunyomi/), and there are many\n[jukujikun](http://www.japanesewithanime.com/2017/12/jukujikun-reading-\nmeaning.html)'s. So you absolutely need a dictionary of some sort, but even\nwith a dictionary, they are difficult for some reasons.\n\n 1. Japanese sentences are written without any spaces, so you cannot determine word boundaries with simple regular expressions. You need a dedicated morphological analyzer for this purpose, for example [this](https://github.com/ikawaha/kagome) and [this](https://github.com/WorksApplications/Sudachi) (I have not tested them). Note that analyzers are not perfect.\n 2. Sometimes the exact same word or phrase can be read differently depending on the context, although English has a similar problem, e.g., \"minute\", \"read\", \"wind\". See: [Difference between こんにち and きょう](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17752/5010)\n 3. Some uncommon words (especially proper nouns) are not on any dictionaries, but you still have to make a \"reasonable guess\" on them. Of course English has the same problem in this regard, but the algorithm for doing this in Japanese might be more complicated.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T05:07:14.667",
"id": "56645",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T05:39:21.757",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T05:39:21.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
},
{
"body": "Naruto has addressed why this is difficult in great detail, so I am not going\nto talk about that. Attempting to build your own solution from scratch is\nprobably not the right way.\n\nHowever, Yahoo Japan has an API for producing the readings of words, which can\nbe seen\n[here](https://developer.yahoo.co.jp/webapi/jlp/furigana/v1/furigana.html)\n(though the documentation is entirely in Japanese). Once you have the kana for\na word, moving to romaji should be trivial, as all you are doing is mapping\nphonetic characters.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T00:29:44.263",
"id": "56657",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T01:12:49.817",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T01:12:49.817",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "56640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "If you insist on creating something on your own, you might try doing a parser\nby character that considers the \"next\" few characters in the char array, and\nattempts to match the given character and its \"nextChars\" to words in a\ndictionary.\n\nIn light pseudocode fashion:\n\n```\n\n array kanjiArray = readChars();\n if (kanjiArray.hasNext()){\n // [i+1]\n if (kanjiArray.hasNext().hasNext()){\n // [i+2]\n string dictSearch = kanjiArray[i]+kanjiArray[i+1]+kanjiArray[i+2];\n } else {\n \n }\n }\n \n if (dictSearch in dictionary){\n string translit = getTranslit();\n } else { \n \n // shave off chars from the end here?\n \n if (dictSearch == \"\"){\n // this shouldn't happen because you should always be able to return at least 1 romanization per char, even if the char is already romanized, so return error if you get here\n } else if (dictSearch in dictionary){\n string translit = getTranslit();\n } else {\n // recursion? until you have something readable\n }\n \n }\n \n // shave the defined chars from the start and continue along the sentence/text\n \n```\n\nWhat this should do is hopefully this, for example:\n\n> 漢字すら読めない\n\n 1. Reads the whole sentence as 漢字すら読めない\n 2. Attempts to recognize the whole phrase as a dictionary term\n 3. Fails, shaves off the い\n 4. Continues to fail and shave from the end until it matches the word 漢字\n 5. Transliterates 漢字 from dictionary into Kanji\n 6. Shaves off 漢字 from start and repeats process with すら読めない\n 7. (optional?) Reads すら as hiragana and transliterates directly\n 8. Shaves off すら from start and repeats process with 読めない\n 9. Recognizes 読めない as a word from dictionary and transliterates as yomenai\n\nProvided that this is pseudocode, the logic is not perfect. There's of course\nmore things to consider, but hopefully this is a starting mental template upon\nwhich you'd build. ;)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T01:19:14.847",
"id": "56660",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T01:19:14.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "56640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "naruto's points about difficulty are valid; building a romaji converter is\nmuch more complicated than a pinyin converter, but it's certainly possible to\nbuild a system that does this. I wrote a library called\n[cutlet](https://github.com/polm/cutlet) that does the conversion. You can try\nout the [online demo](https://share.streamlit.io/polm/cutlet-\ndemo/main/demo.py).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-02-12T18:23:52.000",
"id": "84167",
"last_activity_date": "2021-02-12T18:23:52.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3206",
"parent_id": "56640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
56640
|
56645
|
56645
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a story, a hated character comes into the room. The narrator says\n嫌{いや｝なところ見｛み｝られた The literal translation doesn't make much sense, as I can't\nsee what \"bad place\" she's talking about. I tried to research it, and it seems\nto be some sort of colloquialism. My best guess is that it could translate to\n\"I just stepped into hell,\" or \"this is like hell.\" Of course, I would like to\nbe certain. Thank you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T04:08:56.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56642",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T05:52:25.920",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27720",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "the colloquial meaning of 嫌なところ見られた",
"view_count": 122
}
|
[
{
"body": "ところ has [many abstract\nmeanings](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93%E3%82%8D). This ところ is\nnot a physical place but a \"situation\" or \"scene\", or more concretely, what\nthe narrator was just doing. It's not a colloquialism. See: [A bunch of\nquestions about ところ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/27541/5010)\n\nThis 嫌な (\"bad\") just refers to the fact that the narrator did not want the\nother character to see what he was doing. The whole sentence roughly means \"I\nwas seen at a bad time.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T05:52:25.920",
"id": "56646",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T05:52:25.920",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
56642
| null |
56646
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56648",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm searching for the word for this, a kind of cat collar accessory [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NDDse.jpg)\nI've searched everywhere, ask to many people but just found it in Korean but\nnot in japanese.\n\nThank you for you help",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T07:00:34.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56647",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T07:29:01.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27726",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-requests"
],
"title": "Looking for the japanese word for \"cat collar\"",
"view_count": 498
}
|
[
{
"body": "首輪(kubiwa) is the name of a regular collar (to restrain and identify).\n\nWhat you have shown a picture of is a neck decoration, or 首飾り(kubikazari).\n\nIf you search for\n[猫の首飾り](https://www.google.com/search?q=%E7%8C%AB%E3%81%AE%E9%A6%96%E9%A3%BE%E3%82%8A&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS734US734&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=lFfJ2b5YlQ132M%253A%252CgZWP_0_mM0JzzM%252C_&usg=__z1LHrKIgEuLZKQULqMsnK80h7wQ%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwin4bOe7aTZAhVF8GMKHRweAIkQ9QEILTAB#imgrc=m0gdKii2vFsTjM:)（neko\nno kubikazari) you'll find loads of results.\n\nIn the future, if you ask a question here, please try to show some prior\nresearch and your best attempt at a translation. Otherwise, your post will\nlikely be flagged.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T07:15:27.340",
"id": "56648",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T07:29:01.493",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T07:29:01.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56647",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56647
|
56648
|
56648
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56651",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 小休止に出た人間が戻らないので、大人たちが客間へ行ったところ、扉が内から閉ざされて開かなかった。\n\n\"When the adults went to the parlor because the others didn't come back during\nthe break, the door was locked from the inside and they couldn't open it.\"\nWould be my translation, but I'm not sure if that is correct. Does that に mean\n\"during\" or am I completely wrong?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T12:54:47.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56650",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T13:25:49.260",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T13:06:59.053",
"last_editor_user_id": "20501",
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Does this に mean \"during\"?",
"view_count": 548
}
|
[
{
"body": "This に does not mean \"during\"; it indicates the reason why those people left.\nSo I would translate that part as something like \"The people who had gone\n**for** a short break weren't coming back\".\n\nIf the intended meaning was \"during\", a phrasing like 小休止中に or 小休止の間に would be\nused instead (though with the current word order this would still probably\nrefer to the timing of when they _left_ , not when they didn't return).",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T13:25:49.260",
"id": "56651",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-14T13:25:49.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "56650",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56650
|
56651
|
56651
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56676",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So I find the pattern `Negative verb/ i-adjective + なる` very convenient,\nbecause, at least I think, it shows the change from a state into another.\n\nFor instance:\n\n> それをもうしないと約束するなら、怒らなくなる。\n\nFor me it puts emphasis in the actual state of being angry and the change that\nmight come to a different state. While just using `怒らない` would just mean that\nyou won't be angry.\n\nNow my question is, **can we do that with positive verbs? And if we can, is it\ncommon/natural to do so?**\n\nI don't know exactly how that could be done, but my attempt would be something\nlike this:\n\n> それをすれば、怒るようになる。 - If you do that, I'll change from my \"not angry\" state, to\n> an angry state.\n\nor maybe:\n\n> それをすれば、怒ってなってくる。\n\nThanks in advance! Also, besides grammar, if any of my assumptions are\nincorrect, please let me know.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T16:14:37.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56652",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T03:08:05.800",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-14T18:38:47.410",
"last_editor_user_id": "16104",
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Can I use なる with positive verbs?",
"view_count": 1264
}
|
[
{
"body": "While I did find a couple examples that appear to follow the same construction\nthat you are asking about (て＋なる）, but they are very few and only\ncoincidentally linked. The alternatives which already exist and are in common\nuse (which have been mentioned by yourself) would be the best forms to use.\n\nAs verbs such as 怒る and 喜ぶ already have the meaning of ‘to enter a state of\n____’ implicit, it would seem redundant to place なる directly next to them.\n\nFor this reason, the alternatives: 「怒るようになる」 & 「怒ってくる」 would be best:\n\n> 怒るようになる / 怒るようになってくる - ‘Enter a state of getting angry (become angry).’.\n\n.\n\n> それをすれば、怒ってなってくる。\n\nWhile I do not find the above difficult to understand or implement, I think\nthat most native speakers would avoid using such a form, as it just doesn’t\nsound as natural or grammatical.\n\nMaybe someone will be able to provide a better, more grammatical explanation\nthan mine.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T22:15:27.953",
"id": "56656",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T03:29:26.280",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T03:29:26.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56652",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You seem to misunderstand 怒るようになる or おこらなくなる. It doesn't mean state change\nfrom being not angry to being angry or vise versa, but to acquire furious\ntendency or so.\n\nIf you combine with an adjective, you can use 腹立たしい → 腹立たしくなる. However, it\ndoesn't give the effect you wanted. It rather softens or blurs the boundary.\n\nWhat you wanted will be （そう しないと約束したら）もう怒らない (recommended) / 怒るのをやめる and （そう\nしたら）おこる.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T03:01:25.947",
"id": "56676",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T03:08:05.800",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-16T03:08:05.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "56652",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56652
|
56676
|
56676
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Like for Eg. I know 写真を取って頂けますか is correct. I am only aware of て+もいいfor\nstandard verbs like 行ってもいい and not for receiving like もらう or 頂く so is\n写真を取って頂いてもいい fine?\n\nAny difference in meaning?\n\nAlso another question. Would 写真を取って頂けませんか be considered pushy and thus rude?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T19:23:19.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56654",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-19T03:03:15.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Can you use 頂いてもいいinterchangeably with 頂けますか？",
"view_count": 186
}
|
[
{
"body": "With the polite suffix, yes. Most people will find とって頂いてもいいですか politer and\nsafer as to the point you said than とって頂けませんか, (though I personally find it\nless intuitive than とって もらっても いいですか).\n\nIf you find the former more or less wordy, 写真をおねがいしてもいいですか will work instead.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T09:55:05.887",
"id": "56682",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T09:55:05.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "56654",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
56654
| null |
56682
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56662",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "## The Problem\n\nCurrently reading a passage where a Goblin's sword and the Main Protaganist's\nDagger just clashes together and it gives this sentence:\n\n> 鎧{よろい}ゴブの剣が **ザガガッと** ダガーの刃の上を走って、鍔{つば}でも止められない、etc...\n\nThe Offical Translation has it as\n\n> There was a scream of metal on metal as the... etc\n\nI can understand from the translation that the **ザガガッと** is a sort of\nonomatopoeia for whats happening but I can't find out where it's from / based\noff.\n\n* * *\n\n## The Question\n\nWhere does this originate from or what is it based off of?\n\nThanks,\n\nArchie ♥",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-14T22:05:05.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56655",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T07:08:42.800",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20407",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "What is this ザガガッと sound based off?",
"view_count": 256
}
|
[
{
"body": "This ザガガ should be a combination of\n[ザッ](http://thejadednetwork.com/sfx/browse/za/)/ザザッ and\n[ガッ](http://thejadednetwork.com/sfx/browse/ga/)/ガガッ, both of which describe\n\"hard\" sounds of mechanical impact. It expresses a little longer sound (or\nsounds in rapid succession) because it has three kana. I think you don't have\nto remember this because this combination is fairly rare.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T04:46:46.867",
"id": "56662",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T07:08:42.800",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T07:08:42.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56655
|
56662
|
56662
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56661",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "よろしくねがいする as opposed to よろしくおねがいします.\n\nThis is, at this point, probably outside of my level.\n\nI would like to know if よろしくねがいする:\n\n * is used and correct, and \n * has the same nuance and context.\n\nWhile not completely memorized and understood, I noted that the kenjougo [the\nお- and the -します stem] is used to make it more formal/polite. But how that\naffects the overall use, I'm not sure.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T01:16:47.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56659",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-25T01:22:09.133",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T06:46:01.807",
"last_editor_user_id": "5464",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"keigo"
],
"title": "What's the difference between よろしくねがいする and よろしくおねがいします?",
"view_count": 2396
}
|
[
{
"body": "> (1) よろしくお願{ねが}いします \n> (2) よろしく願｛ねが｝いする\n>\n> (3) よろしくお願｛ねが｝いする\n\n(1) is an ordinary expression used when asking something to others. It is\ncommon sense to use polite expressions when asking for something to others. It\nseems that polite words/expressions such as \"お願い\" for \"願い\" and \"します\" for \"する\"\nare used in (1). \n\"します\" for \"する\" is certainly a polite form, but concerning \"お願い\", which I'll\nexplain later, can not be said so in (1). \nWe don't use (2), but use (3). \n(3) is used when the person who is higher in position or status like the\ncompany's superior asking something to the person like his subordinate.\n\nAs for 願いする in (2), it is not a Japanese expression. As you know する sometimes\nmakes a noun a verb like お願いする（お願い+する）, but 願い cannot become a verb by being\nadded する. Therefore the expression with (2) is not used or is not a Japanese\nsentence because 願いする doesn't make sense.\n\n# EDIT\n\nI'll provide more information on the difference between 願い and お願. \nRegarding the basic form of a sentence using \"願い\" is like \"願いが\nかなう/実現｛じつげん｝する/成就｛じょうじゅ｝する _wishes come true_ \". Furthermore, when the basic\nform is modified, it'll become like \"「私」の「日本語が上手になりたいという」願いが 実現する/成就する/かなう _My\nwish that I want to be good at Japanese language comes true_ \". \nOn the other hand, regarding \"お願い\", though \"よろしくお願いします\" is often used, it is\nnot a complete sentence. \"「Aさん」に「Ｂ」をよろしくお願いします\" is a complete sentence\ncomposition. In general, Aさん is often \"you\", so omitting \"you\", there are many\ncases that we use \"Ｂをよろしくお願いします\". Furthermore, as B is often clear in the\nconversation as a context, \"Bを\" is omitted and the expression with\n\"よろしくお願いします\" is commonly used. \nTherefore, simply the phrase with \"よろしくお願いします\" means \"「私たちがいままで話してきたこと _what\nwe have been talking about_ 」 を 「あなた」によろしくお願いします\".\n\nYou can use 願い and お願い at the same time to create the following sentence.\n\n> 私は神様{かみさま}に私の **願い** が実現｛じつげん｝するように **お願いする** 。\n\nHowever, it is incorrect to say \"私は神様に私の **お願い** が実現するように **願いする** \"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T04:22:29.117",
"id": "56661",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T14:54:33.767",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "56659",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "よろしくお[願]{ねが}いします is a very common phrase, and its お願いします part consists of:\n\n> Continuative/Pre-masu form 「[願]{ねが}い」+ Humble expression (謙譲語)「お～～する」\n\nします is the polite form of する.\n\n願い is the continuative/pre-masu form (連用形), or the noun form, of the verb 願う.\nAnd here it's used in the sense of:\n\n> ねがう【願う】〘動五〙 \n> ➌他人に対して、こうしてほしいと頼む。「寄付を **願う** 」「協力を **願います** 」 \n> (表現)...「願い上げます」「 **お願いします** 」「お願い致します」「お願い申し上げます」 \n> （明鏡国語辞典）\n\n* * *\n\nA few examples of the humble form 「お・ご～～する・します」:\n\n> 「 **お** [聞]{き}き **する** 」「 **お** [送]{おく}り **する** 」「 **お** [知]{し}らせ **する** 」 (\n> _generally_ , お is used with native Japanese words) \n> 「 **ご** [案内]{あんない} **する** 」「 **ご** [報告]{ほうこく} **する** 」「 **ご** [提案]{ていあん}\n> **する** 」 ( _generally_ , ご is used with Sino compounds)\n\nFor more on regular honorific and humble forms, [this\nthread](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/54417/9831) might be of some\nhelp.\n\n* * *\n\n「ねがいする」「ねがいします」 would be incorrect because **ねがい is not a する-verb (サ変名詞)**.\n\nIf you want to just convey \"I ask a favor of you\" without using the 「お～する」\nform, you could instead use [頼]{たの}む, as in 「(よろしく)[頼]{たの}みます。」 or just\n「(よろしく)[頼]{たの}む。」, but not 「[願]{ねが}いします。」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T04:56:02.047",
"id": "56663",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-25T01:22:09.133",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-25T01:22:09.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56659",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
56659
|
56661
|
56663
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56666",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is\n\n> べんきょう **を** いそぎます。\n\na proper sentence construction? Are there others way to use いそぎます in a\nsentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T06:26:49.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56665",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T19:37:45.060",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T19:37:24.823",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17669",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Can いそぐ be used transitively, as in べんきょうをいそぎます?",
"view_count": 118
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, 急ぐ【いそぐ】 is a transitive verb and safely take を like this. You can also\nsay 建物【たてもの】の完成【かんせい】を急ぐ, 書類【しょるい】の作成【さくせい】を急ぐ and so on.\n\n急ぐ is also an intransitive verb, and you can express the same thing as\n急いで勉強【べんきょう】します which is closer to \"I study in a hurry\". I think this form is\nmuch preferred in speech.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T07:13:58.530",
"id": "56666",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T07:13:58.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56665",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
56665
|
56666
|
56666
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56673",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I encounter this question in my problem set.\n\n> Reizoko ni kudamono ____ (_____) _____ _____ ga arimasu\n>\n> 1. ga 2. mittsu 3. to 4. gyuunyuu\n>\n\nI see in the solution that the answer for word in parentheses is (2. mittsu).\nWhat is the complete sentence? What is the meaning of the sentence?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T12:12:51.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56668",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-08T05:24:10.170",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27746",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Listing two different object",
"view_count": 319
}
|
[
{
"body": "The correct sentence is:\n\n> 冷蔵庫に果物が3つと牛乳があります。 \n> Reizoko ni kudamono ga mittsu to gyunyu ga arimasu.\n\nWhich means \"There are three pieces of fruit and milk in the fridge.\"\n\nTo correctly answer this question, you need to know:\n\n * How to use と ( _to_ ) to list two or more nouns\n * [Two ways to count things](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17816/5010) and how to use it in combination with と\n * 果物 is always \"countable\" with つ/個 ( _tsu/ko_ ), while 牛乳 is not counted like this.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T01:14:58.740",
"id": "56673",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T01:43:03.880",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-16T01:43:03.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56668",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56668
|
56673
|
56673
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56672",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "While reading a JP children's book, I found this sentence:\n\n顔は、ところどころ、味噌を **つけたよう** に **まだら** で、くちばしは、平たくて、耳まで **さけています** 。\n\nwhich I roughly understand as:\n\n[As for its] face, here and there, [it has ] spots/speckles like pickled miso,\n[as for its] beak [it is] flat up to [its] ears [and is] dividing the spotted\nappearance.\n\nI don't fully understand the relationship between the bolded nouns/adjectives\nand the verb.\n\n**(1)** Is 味噌をつけたようにまだらで read as:\n\n 1. \"Appearance of pickled miso spots\"\n 2. \"Appearance of pickled miso **in** spots (places)\"\n 3. \"Spotted appearance **of** pickled miso\"\n 4. \"Spots **like (similar to)** pickled miso\" << My reading\n 5. \"Spots like [it was] **covered** in miso << Alternate verb 付ける instead of 漬ける\n\n**(2)** What's the relationship between まだら **で** , つけたよう **に** and さけています?\nShould it be read as:\n\n 1. \"Dividing the spotted appearance\"\n 2. \"Dividing the appearance **with** spots\"\n 3. \"Dividing the spots **in/of** the appearance\"\n\nFor the record, I'm familiar with what で and に _are_ (as particles), but I'm\nstill inexperienced with their real-world use. (This is only my 3rd book).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T21:26:23.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56669",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T00:57:06.457",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-15T22:11:57.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "27592",
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particles"
],
"title": "Could someone please explain the correct translation of this sentence?",
"view_count": 156
}
|
[
{
"body": "Some quick thoughts to try to help guide you.\n\n * Miso itself is not something that one pickles. Miso is already pickled, in a sense, as it is created by fermenting and mashing soybeans (and/or rice and other grains).\n * The で in the middle could be interpreted here as the conjunctive or て form of the copula だ / です. This construction basically means _\"[thing before] is, and ...\"_ , as a means of connecting two sentences.\n * After the で in the middle, there's a comma, and then the next noun phrase is marked by a new instance of は -- introducing a new topic. Consequently, the final verb さける applies to this new topic -- in this case, to the くちばし.\n\nSee if the above gives you any insight into how to understand your sample\nJapanese sentence, and let us know how it goes.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T22:52:43.213",
"id": "56671",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-15T22:52:43.213",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "56669",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> 「顔{かお}は、ところどころ、味噌{みそ}をつけたようにまだら **で** 、くちばしは、平{ひら}たくて、耳{みみ}までさけています。」\n\nFirst, the sentence structure. This sentence talks about two features of a\ncreature.\n\n1) its face\n\n2) its beak\n\nThus, the 「で」 right in the middle is the 連用形{れんようけい} (\"continuative form\") of\nthe auxiliary verb 「だ」. This 「で」 is **_not_** a particle. The 連用形 is being\nused because the sentence still continues after talking about the first of the\ntwo features that the author intends to talk about. For translation, a plain \"\n** _and_** \" should work nearly every time.\n\nNext, the vocabulary.\n\n「 **つける** 」 here is 「付ける」 and not 「漬ける」, so there is no mention of \"pickled\nmiso\" in the sentence, I assure you. 「付ける」, in this context, would be best\ntranslated as \" ** _smear_** \". So, we have \" ** _smeared with miso_** \".\n\n「 **さける** 」 in this sentence is 「裂ける」. 「耳までさけている」 thus means \"(the beak)\nextends from ear to ear\".\n\nPut it altogether, my own TL would be:\n\n> \"Its face has spots here and there as if smeared with miso and its beak is\n> flat and it extends from ear to ear.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T00:57:06.457",
"id": "56672",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T00:57:06.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56669",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56669
|
56672
|
56671
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I am looking for a list of the most common idioms in Japanese, and ideally I\nwant the list to be frequency-based. In other words, it should be based on a\nlarge corpus.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-15T21:33:59.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56670",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T01:46:24.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"idioms"
],
"title": "Searching for idiom frequency list",
"view_count": 139
}
|
[] |
56670
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56675",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "ご存じの通り\n\n知りのように 知りの通り Are those correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T02:04:15.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56674",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T02:50:35.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "What could be the casual version of this expression?",
"view_count": 93
}
|
[
{
"body": "「知りのように」「知りの通り」 would be incorrect. I would say:\n\n> 「知っての通り」 \n> 「知っている通り」 \n> 「｛あなたも/XXさんもetc｝知っているように」 \n> 「｛あなたも/XXさんもetc｝知る通り」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T02:32:32.350",
"id": "56675",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T02:50:35.387",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-16T02:50:35.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56674",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56674
|
56675
|
56675
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56688",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this sentence (from the Core 1000 material of iknow) while\nlearning vocabulary:\n\n> 彼女は青い目をしています。 She has blue eyes.\n\nDoing some searching I found [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/23234/use-\nof-%e3%81%99%e3%82%8b-to-describe-ones-colour/23235#23235) explaining that\n～をする can mean 'to have some characteristic'.\n\nBefore that, I only knew of the following construction to express such:\n\n> ～は～が～。 彼女は目が青いです。 She has blue eyes.\n\nIs there any difference in meaning/implication between these two different\nstructures? Or can I use them interchangeably in any circumstance?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T05:02:18.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56677",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T17:45:50.960",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-16T05:36:54.480",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"possession"
],
"title": "Is there any difference between ～～をする and ～が～",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "They are almost the same. However, when they mean that her eyes happen to be\nunusually blue in the moment, the latter 目が青い is more likely to be used.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T17:45:50.960",
"id": "56688",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T17:45:50.960",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "56677",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56677
|
56688
|
56688
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the meaning of the dot (.) in Japanese dictionaries?\n<http://tangorin.com/general/%E8%A1%A8>\n\nFor example:\n\n[あらわ.]{arawa.}す{su}",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T06:29:41.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56679",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T16:22:13.167",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-17T16:22:13.167",
"last_editor_user_id": "27774",
"owner_user_id": "27756",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"punctuation"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of the dot (.) in Japanese dictionaries?",
"view_count": 836
}
|
[
{
"body": "This is the first dictionary I've seen use this particular notation, but it\nappears to be a delimiter between the part of the word composed by the kanji\nreading and the [okurigana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okurigana).\n\nSee how for both of the words on the example page you gave, the dot appears\nimmediately before the okurigana begin.\n\n> 表{あらわ}すー＞あらわ.す\n>\n> 表{あらわ}れるー＞あらわ.れる\n\nSearching for another word,\n[焼ける](http://tangorin.com/general/%E7%84%BC%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B), gives me the\nsame results.\n\n> 焼{や}ける -> や.ける",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T06:37:39.593",
"id": "56680",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T06:37:39.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "56679",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] |
56679
| null |
56680
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "When can _desu_ be omitted? Is it needed for every single sentence? Also, can\nI add sentence ending particles to the end of any word? Such as, \"学校ね？\" as in\n\"school, right?\" Thanks.\n\nEdit: I'm still a bit confused on the topic. To my understanding, you need\nsomething that acts like a verb at the end of a sentence like です/だ. I was\ntaught that です wasn't needed after an i-adjective, but was needed after an na-\nadjective? Is that true, if so, why? Does an I-adjective act like a verb? This\nalso is a bit off topic, but when can you use だ instead of です and when can't\nyou? I've currently been living in Japan for a while now, and I still can't\nget this basic concept down which is why it's worrying me. I've also read a\nbit, but still struggle. Thanks for your help!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T09:17:41.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56681",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-05T10:06:08.650",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-17T00:36:24.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "27757",
"owner_user_id": "27757",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"politeness",
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "Is desu needed at the end of every single sentence? Also, can you add end particles at the end of every word/sentence?",
"view_count": 18674
}
|
[
{
"body": "**Edit** : I'm speaking about the form of a noun directly followed by another\nparticle. As for omission of です that ends a sentence, that can happen. Please\nlook at answers by other users.\n\nIn standard Japanese, you can't omit da or desu, or it sounds like a slang or\na dialect called feminine language.\n\nApart from that, the form of 学校ね？ itself can appear in standard Japanese too.\nThis time, it's a combination with filler (or interjectional particle) ね\ninstead of the sentence ending one, and it can be used when you add sentence\nfragments to the previous sentence, or when you repeat or confirm what you\nthink you heard or the opponent meant in the moment. Incidentally, this filler\nね can take です in no relation to verbs.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T10:27:35.757",
"id": "56683",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T17:11:15.593",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-16T17:11:15.593",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "56681",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "です is certainly not needed at the end of every single sentence. But if writing\nor speaking in polite style ですます体 _desu masu tai_ or 丁寧語 _teineigo_ ,\nsentences usually end in some form of です or ～ます.\n\nDon't forget that there are other forms of です and ～ます including past\n(でした、～ました), negatives ～ません, volitional (でしょう、～ましょう), etc.\n\nThe reason is of course that sentences usually end with a form of the copula,\nor a 終止形 _shūshikei_ of a verb or adjectival verb ( _i_ -adjective). In 丁寧語\nthis is (some form of)\n\n * です as a copula,\n * ～ます as the ending for verbs, and\n * です again for adjectival verbs (this time not as copula, but merely as politeness marker).\n\n* * *\n\nIn plain style, the situation cannot be summarized as neatly as ですます体 for\nthere are many more forms that could appear:\n\n * だ (or である) as copula\n * verb endings ～る、～く、～ぐ、～す、～つ、～ぬ、～ぶ、～む and their past forms\n * adjectival verb ending ～い and its past form ～かった\n\n* * *\n\nSentence final particles can be added to any of the above endings, because\nthey are _sentences_. (In traditional grammar, a predicate — [noun phrase +\ncopula] or [verb] — is enough as a sentence.) However, 学校 by itself is _not_ a\ncomplete sentence, so in traditional grammar 学校ね is _not_ allowed. (ね as\nsentence final particle should attach to sentences.) Of course, rules are bent\nin colloquial language, where 学校ね could be considered natural.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T11:45:13.767",
"id": "56684",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T11:52:27.870",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-16T11:52:27.870",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "56681",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Semantically, です is like English \"be\" (or its inflected forms, \"am\", \"are\",\n\"is\", etc). Whenever you're saying sentences like \"This _is_ a book\" or \"I\n_am_ a student\" in polite Japanese, you'll be using です at the end of each\nsentence. But not all Japanese sentences need it, just as not all English\nsentences have \"be\". In addition, です is a polite form, which means it's\ncommonly used in business settings, but you won't be using です often when\nyou're talking to your family members or close friends. If you're a beginner\nwho has learned only a few sentence patterns, just keep learning Japanese and\nyou'll soon encounter many sentences that don't have です.\n\nGrammatically speaking, it's true that ね can be added at the end of almost any\nsentence. But ね has its own meaning, and saying ね improperly will make your\nsentence sound very weird.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T11:47:04.340",
"id": "56685",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T11:47:04.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56681",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56681
| null |
56684
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56697",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Katakana can represent many foreign sounds that do not exist in native\nJapanese words, either by using special characters such as ヴ or by using\nspecial katakana combinations such as フュ. They are collectively called\n\"[extended katakana](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/19201/5010)\",\nalthough few native speakers know this term. Thanks to them, young Japanese\npeople can learn to pronounce foreign words more or less closely to their\noriginal pronunciation. Although they may not be perfect, フューチャー is a lot\nbetter than ヒューチャー and レモンティー is a lot better than レモンチー. Few Japanese people\nmistake 'Venus' as 'Benus' because it is commonly spelt as ヴィーナス in katakana.\n\nHowever, I am not aware of any previous attempts to distinguish, for example,\nEnglish 'read' and 'lead' using modified/extended katakana. Come to think of\nit, this seems strange to me. Japanese people have invented special kana to\nexpress [Okinawan\nsounds](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinawan_scripts#Basic_syllables_and_kai-y%C5%8Don_\\(palatalized_syllables\\)),\n[Ainu\nsounds](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainu_language#Special_katakana_for_the_Ainu_language)\nand\n[bidakuon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakuten_and_handakuten#Phonetic_shifts),\nso I think there must have been similar attempts also for the English sound\npairs that are known to be difficult to Japanese speakers.\n\nQuestions:\n\n 1. Historically, were there any attempts to distinguish \"L\" and \"R\", \"S\" and \"TH\", etc., using katakana? How commonly were they used? It could be special katakana like \"ラ with (han)dakuten\" or \"small ラ\", and it could be special combinations like \"ゥラ\".\n 2. If there were such attempts in the past, why were they all unsuccessful despite obvious advantages? I doubt \"because they looked unnatural\" is a good reason here, because ティ and ヴ should have looked equally unreasonable and unnatural at first.\n\nI know some recent English dictionaries targeted at Japanese middle school\nstudents [use **hiragana** らりるれろ/さしすせそ to denote the sound of R and\nTH](http://bloge-de-english.com/newhorizon). I also found [this 2ch\nthread](http://viper.2ch.sc/test/read.cgi/news4vip/1507467565/), which was not\nreally helpful.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T16:20:36.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56687",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T07:45:40.227",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-17T07:20:53.777",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"katakana",
"orthography",
"loanwords",
"history"
],
"title": "Attempts to distinguish English \"L\" and \"R\" sounds using (extended) katakana",
"view_count": 1096
}
|
[
{
"body": "[This PDF](http://www.geocities.jp/newkatakana/newkatakana.pdf) has the\nfollowing proposal, using the existing diacritic _handakuten_ to create\n\n> * a modified ラ行 (ラﾟリﾟルﾟレﾟロﾟ) and modified _chōonpu_ ーﾟ indicating R //r//,\n> leaving the usual ラ行 representing L //l//\n>\n\nas well as\n\n> * a modified サ行 (サﾟシﾟスﾟセﾟソﾟ) representing unvoiced TH //θ//\n>\n> * a modified ザ行 (ザﾟジﾟズﾟゼﾟゾﾟ) representing voiced TH //ð//\n>\n>\n\n(as well as a few other conventions).\n\nExamples would be\n\n> * フライ ↔ フラﾟイ\n> * フリー ↔ フリﾟー\n> * サーﾟヴィス\n> * スﾟルﾟー\n>\n\nIt has the advantage that\n\n 1. it uses existing typography and can already be implemented using U+FF9F HALFWIDTH KATAKANA SEMI-VOICED SOUND MARK ` ﾟ`, and\n\n 2. these are almost \"backwards compatible\" to the usual _katakana_ representation — in most cases you can simply ignore the _handakuten_.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T23:12:48.613",
"id": "56695",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T23:12:48.613",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "56687",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "> _If there were such attempts in the past, why were they all unsuccessful\n> despite obvious advantages? I doubt \"because they looked unnatural\" is a\n> good reason here, because ティ and ヴ should have looked equally unreasonable\n> and unnatural at first._\n\nご質問の中で挙げられていた「フュ」「ティ」「ヴ」などのような仮名の拡張と、問題になっている「L/R」「S/TH」を区別するための拡張は、同列には扱えないように思えます。\n\n参考のために、国語審議会の「[外来語の表記](http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/nc/t19910207001/t19910207001.html)」の付表を掲げます。\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/McVqK.jpg)\n\nこの表の左半分がいわゆる伝統的な五十音表、右側が「拡張」された音節1に当たると思いますが、それらも外来音に応じて自由自在に作れるわけではなく、\n**五十音表に含まれる現代（共通語）発音における子音の音声と母音の音声、およびその直拗音、清濁の操作を組み合わせて生成可能な音節**\nしか作られていないことがわかります2。五十音表の並びは活用などの文法的な交替をよく説明しますが、一方でよく知られているように、例えばタ行と呼ばれるタ\n([[t]])・チ ([[tɕ]])・ツ ([[ts]])・テ ([[t]])・ト\n([[t]])には音声的に相当異なった子音が混在しています3。上図右欄にあるような音節は、それらの子音を独立した音素とみなして母音との対応表を作った時に、既存の五十音では書き表せない「穴」を埋める位置に存在しています4。つまり現代日本語では音韻論的な音節構造はすでにこれらの拡張を許容する形に組み換えられつつあり、形態論の想定する音節構造と乖離し始めているために、五十音表側からみると「拡張」した音節ないしは表記があるように見えるということができます。\n\nここで最初に挙げた例を見ると、\n\n * **ティ** ：「テ」の子音 //t// + 「イ」 //i//5\n * **フュ** ：「フ」の子音 //ɸ// + 拗音 //j// + 「ウ」 //u// （→実質的に「フ」の拗音）\n * **ヴ** ：「フ」 //ɸu// の濁音 //βu// \n（補足：ヴは英語などの [[v]]\nを表すものと考えられがちですが、フと同様、実際は唇歯音で発音されません。またこの音はバ行が語中で弱化した発音に近くなるため、バ・ヴァ行の弁別が不十分になることも、この綴りの許容度が弱い原因だと思われます）\n\nとして一応「日本語の音韻論の範囲内」で説明可能です。\n\nまた、アイヌ語仮名や新沖縄文字についても言及されていました（他にも[ケセン語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B1%E3%82%BB%E3%83%B3%E8%AA%9E)の[仮名](http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Umihotaru/comment/20110924)や[台湾語仮名](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E8%AA%9E%E4%BB%AE%E5%90%8D)、[八重山方言用仮名](https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16354-kana-\nsmall-ltr.pdf)などもあります）が、これらは先ほどの例とはまた別枠で、いわば\n**仮名文字の社会言語学的威信が強い範囲内でありながら、対象言語を忠実に書き表すために（標準）日本語話者への理解度を度外視して策定されたもの**\nだと思います。つまりこれらの大胆な仮名の拡張が行われる背景には、その言語の正書法を仮名で記すことが「当然」だと思われるほどの社会的な状況が必要だということです。\n\n以上を踏まえて、L/RやS/THの区別について考えると、\n\n 1. //l//, //r// や //s//, //θ// を区別するような子音の対立が日本語の本土方言に存在したことは有史以来確認されていないし、現存もしない。したがって一般の日本語話者にとっては「ティ」などのように母語の音素を応用して自然に生成される音とは認知されない。\n\n 2. 戦前を含め、日本の支配が及んだ領域に //l//, //r// や //s//, //θ// を区別する言語が乏しく6、正書法として分けて書き表す需要が生じなかったために、公的・私的にこれらの音を区別するような仮名の拡張が行われなかった。\n\nというような感じだと思っています。\n\n* * *\n\n1: 右欄は第1表に属するものと第2表に属するものがありますが、右上にあるものは「 **ちぇ** すとー」や「おとっ **つぁ**\nん」など本土日本語の範疇で使われることがあって外来の音節と切り捨てることができなかったものだと思われます（ただし共通語ではまれ）。 \n2:\n例えば英語は子音だけではなく、日本語よりもはるかに多くの母音も区別しますが、それらを表すために母音の段を増やした表記を作った、という例は寡聞にして知りません。日本語の母音体系自体には何ら手が加えられていないということです。 \n3:\n厳密にいえば音声的にはタ・テ・トそれぞれの子音も調音位置が異なります。\"ti\"のような音を表すのに「タィ」や「トィ」ではなく「ティ」が選ばれているのもテの子音がイ段に一番近いからと思われます。 \n4:\nクァ・グァ行は現代の発音から導くのは困難ですが、この発音自体はア段に限っていえば「[合拗音](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%8B%97%E9%9F%B3#%E5%90%88%E6%8B%97%E9%9F%B3_2)」として19世紀まで残存していました（cf.\n[怪談](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%80%AA%E8%AB%87_\\(%E5%B0%8F%E6%B3%89%E5%85%AB%E9%9B%B2\\))）。 \n5:\nイ段の母音は直音か拗音か微妙なところであり、直拗音の区別がない、あるいは両系統共用の母音と解釈することもできます。ただし「スィ」と「シ」のような例もあります。 \n6: 一般に東～東南アジアの言語で //θ//\nを持つ言語はまれで（[ミャンマー語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%93%E3%83%AB%E3%83%9E%E8%AA%9E)にはあり）、日本が統治した地域ではわずかに台湾先住民族の[サオ語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B5%E3%82%AA%E8%AA%9E)にあるようです。また同範囲で[流音](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B5%81%E9%9F%B3)を複数持つ言語は、[満州語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%BA%80%E5%B7%9E%E8%AA%9E)や旧委任統治領の[パラオ語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%91%E3%83%A9%E3%82%AA%E8%AA%9E)や[マーシャル語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%9E%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%83%AB%E8%AA%9E)などに限られており、当時の研究資料が少なく仮名表記策定にまで至っていなかったものと思われます。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T07:30:42.193",
"id": "56697",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T07:45:40.227",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-17T07:45:40.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "56687",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
56687
|
56697
|
56697
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In my Japanese class, we are writing haikus on Japanese American history, and\nI decided to write about the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs. In the third line,\nI wanted to leave し as the hiragana because jisho.org shows し as having many\ndifferent meanings. Many of the first meanings listed have interesting\ninterpretations I thought of, but my Japanese teacher says it wouldn't make\nsense to a native speaker if I do this, that they'll just think it was a\nmistake rather than being left for interpretation.\n\nTLDR: Can I leave the し in the third line of this haiku as hiragana to leave\nit open for interpretation, or is that not an option in the Japanese language?\n\n原爆や / 夕立が落下 / 極暑のし\n\nNuclear Bombs / Evening Rain Falls / Intensely Hot Death/City/Poetry",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T18:25:20.310",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56690",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T18:56:30.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27763",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"interpretation",
"semantics"
],
"title": "Can you leave a kanji as hiragana in a haiku?",
"view_count": 422
}
|
[
{
"body": "After pushing aside questions about why you would doubt your teacher’s\nexplanation and whether you are asking for a bad grade, I have decided to\nsimply provide some information from [this\nsite](https://momoinstitute.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/%E5%BD%93%E3%81%A6%E5%AD%97/).\n\nKanji has (specific) meaning.\n\nRecently, ‘sparkling’ names (intentionally unusual names) are all the rage,\nbut in ages past ateji wasn’t used. For example, ‘しんゆう’ can mean ‘close\nfriend’, but also ‘confidante’ and ‘trusted friend’. In the world of haiku,\nthis is prohibited. Rather than using words which only you know the true\nmeaning of, haiku is meant to communicate precisely what you want to say. As a\npart of Japanese culture, ‘thinking of others’ enters into this, use of\nunpopular ateji is not recognized.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T18:56:30.610",
"id": "56691",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-16T18:56:30.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56690",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56690
| null |
56691
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56751",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found that it means \"awkward, clumsy\". I was wondering if it may has other\nmeanings? I would also appreciate giving examples on how the word is used.\n(The more, the better.) Thank you\n\nedit: Can it be used to say that a person is hard to deal with?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T19:21:24.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56692",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T07:08:48.340",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-18T19:54:59.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "27764",
"owner_user_id": "27764",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 不器用で (Bukiyōde) when describing a person?",
"view_count": 346
}
|
[
{
"body": "不器用な人 can mean two things depending on the context:\n\n 1. a person who is not good at detailed work (cannot properly handle knives or drivers, drops things often, etc)\n 2. a person who is not good at communicating with others or managing human relationships (especially in romantic contexts) **EDIT** : Basically 不器用な人 is a negative word, but it may refer to an honest and straight person who does not rely on frivolous communication skills.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T05:03:52.657",
"id": "56751",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T07:08:48.340",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T07:08:48.340",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56692
|
56751
|
56751
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Consider the following sentences:\n\n 1. 子供は本を読む。\n 2. 母は子供[に]{LL}本を読ませる。\n\nSince 読む is a transitive verb (i.e.: 本を読む), に is used to mark the _causee_\n(i.e.: 子供) for its causative form 読ませる.\n\nNow, consider the following sentences (not sure whether they are correct):\n\n 3. 子供は読む。\n 4. 母は子供[を]{LL}読ませる。\n\nEven though, 読む is a verb that accepts a direct object, it's not taking one.\nTherefore, を is used to mark the _causee_ 子供 for its causative form 読ませる.\n\nIt seems that, what determines whether to choose を or に for marking the\n_causee_ in a causative verb, is not the verb per se, but actually **how** the\nverb is used in the sentence. Of course, if the verb is intransitive it will\nbe always を, but for a transitive verb it may be either に or を.\n\nAm I missing something?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-16T21:52:13.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56693",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T07:16:28.787",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-17T07:16:28.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "25194",
"owner_user_id": "25194",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"causation"
],
"title": "Choosing に over を in 使役形 depends not solely on the verb",
"view_count": 213
}
|
[] |
56693
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56703",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "To my understanding, ”いいですね” means something along the lines of \"that's good\"\nor \"that's fine.\" However, the ending particle ”ね” is used to prompt a\nresponse from the listener. As I've seen it used in my textbook, ”いいですね” does\nnot anticipate a response. So, what is the function of \"ね”?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T08:24:38.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56698",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T19:04:25.043",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27628",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-ね"
],
"title": "reason for the ね in いいですね。",
"view_count": 200
}
|
[
{
"body": "You'll find lots and lots of resources online about how to use ね. However, the\nshort answer to your question is that ね is a [discourse\nmarker](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Discourse_marker) used to manage the\nrelationship between speaker and listener. If you listen to how people use ね\nin conversational Japanese, it's used to establish, maintain, and emphasize\nagreement between participants in the conversation. It's not primarily\ngrammatical, and its use can't be separated from other ways of managing\ndiscourse such as aizuchi and body language.\n\nTo understand the difference between いいです and いいですね, imagine this conversation\nin English:\n\n> S1: Hey, I saw Black Panther. It's so good.\n>\n> S2: Yes, it's good.\n\nSpeaker 2's utterance is totally grammatical and understandable, but it\ndoesn't fit the social context. It's sort of failing to catch the ball that S1\nhas tossed. Every language has lots of tools to manage discourse in this way,\nand ね is one of the most frequently used in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T19:04:25.043",
"id": "56703",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-17T19:04:25.043",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "56698",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56698
|
56703
|
56703
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is the following sentence O.K.?\n\n> そのようなブラシ付モーターが、 \n> 高い回転数領域では、確かに、優れた出力性能は発揮しますが、 \n> 惜しい事に、定常作動に於いては、結局、十分な静的性能は発揮しないという結果となります。\n\nI am using for times \"は\" as contrast marker to indicate two contrasts.\n\n> 1. Contrast: 高い回転数領域では versus 定常作動に於いては\n>\n> 2. Contrast: 優れた出力性能は発揮します versus 十分な静的性能は発揮しない\n>\n>\n\nIs such a sentence construction possible?\n\nGreetings,\n\nKenny",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T09:41:05.710",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56699",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T01:21:35.177",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20328",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-は"
],
"title": "4x\"は\" as Contrast Marker",
"view_count": 223
}
|
[
{
"body": "As for 1. Contrast: 高い回転数領域で **は** versus 定常作動に於いて **は** , I think you're\ncorrect.\n\nAs for 2. 優れた出力性能は発揮します versus 十分な静的性能は発揮しない, I think the は is used to\ncontrast **出力** 性能 versus **静的** 性能.\n\nI think it might also be fine if it was 優れた出力性能 **を** 発揮します.\n\nIn 十分な静的性能 **は** 発揮しない, the は also marks the scope of negation. This is\npartial negation (部分否定), where 十分(な) is negated: \"not ~~ enough/fully ~~\".\n\nSo.. to answer your question \"Is such a sentence construction possible?\", I'd\nsay yes.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T01:08:24.453",
"id": "56708",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T01:16:54.363",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-18T01:16:54.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56699",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56699
| null |
56708
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56753",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As mentioned at the title, I would like to ask the if there is any difference\nor nuance between \"当たり\" and \"につき\" in terms of the meaning \"every ~\". Any case\nthat they cannot be used interchangeably?\n\nFor instance, do the following sentences (if they are grammatically correct)\nconvey the exact same meaning?\n\n> 卵は一人 **につき** 二つまで ＝ 卵は一人 **あたり** 二つまで\n>\n> 一ヶ月 **につき** 一回東京へ行く ＝ 一ヶ月 **あたり** 一回東京へ行く",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T10:01:31.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56700",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T06:16:06.823",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "The difference between \"当たり\" and \"につき\" in terms of the meaning \"every ~\"",
"view_count": 567
}
|
[
{
"body": "[There is a page](http://naniga-chigauno.st042.net/z425.html) that tries to\ndescribe the difference, but につき and あたり(の) seemed interchangeable to me for\nall the examples in the page :) So I think the difference is very small and\nthey are basically interchangeable. Still, there are small differences:\n\n * ～につき sounds more formal and stiff.\n * ～あたり tends to be used in relation to a total amount. In other words, if you did a mathematical division in your mind, ～あたり may be used more often. If I heard 1か月あたり1回(東京へ行く) instead of 毎月 or 月に1回, I may feel you have a big project in Tokyo.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T06:16:06.823",
"id": "56753",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T06:16:06.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56700",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
56700
|
56753
|
56753
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't really get the difference since the two of them seem to be translated\nas \"boiling\". Do we have to use them in different situations?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T17:37:03.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56701",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-28T00:16:49.893",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-04T23:26:00.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "27776",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "Difference between 沸騰する and 沸く",
"view_count": 320
}
|
[
{
"body": "**_Origin:_**\n\n「沸{わ}く」, as I hope you could tell from its kun-yomi pronunciation, is a 100%\noriginally Japanese word. The word already existed when Japanese was only a\nspoken language.\n\n「沸騰{ふっとう}」, as its on-yomi reading would suggest, is a Sino-loanword.\n\nThus, 「沸騰する」 tends to sound more formal, academic, technical, etc. than 「沸く」\ndoes as one could generally expect between a Japanese-origin word and its Sino\ncounterpart.\n\nThe fact that many \"big\" words come from somewhere else is a characteristic\nshared between Japanese and English -- Chinese for Japanese and mostly Latin\nfor English. Chat vs. converse, deep vs. profound, sweat vs. perspire, etc.\n\n**_Scope of meaning:_**\n\n「沸騰する」 means \"(of water) **to reach the temperature of 100 degrees Celsius**\n\".\n\n「沸く」, while it can mean the exact same as above, it has an extra meaning that\n「沸騰する」 does not. (This is where @Chocolate's comment above comes into play.)\n\n「沸く」 has an extra meaning of \"(of water) **reaching the desired temperature\nfor a given purpose** \". For the \"hot\" water in the bath tub, for instance, it\nwould only be around 40 degrees Celsius. It certainly would not be 100.\n\nThus, whenever the water is \"hot enough\" for a specific purpose, you can use\n「沸く」 but not 「沸騰する」.\n\nFinally, there are non-water-related meanings for both verbs, but I will not\ngo into that as I presume that is not what the questioner wanted to find out\nabout.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T10:49:18.920",
"id": "56712",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-28T00:16:49.893",
"last_edit_date": "2019-08-28T00:16:49.893",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56701",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
56701
| null |
56712
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am trying to understand this sentence.\n\n父は旅{たび}じたくをするようすもなく片{かた}手{て}にバケツを持{も}ち、”行{い}くぞ”とさけんでいる。\n\nMy guess is, it can be rewritten as\n\n父は旅{たび}支{じ}度{たく}をする様{よう}子{す}もなく片{かた}手{て}にバケツを持{も}ち、”行{い}くぞ”と叫{さけ}んでいる。\n\nI figure a translation could be \"Dad did not seem to prepare for the trip as\nhe grabbed a bucket and exclaimed: 'Let's go!'\". But I am lost as for the\nmeaning of もなく in this sentence. Also, is 持ち a casual or childish version of\n持った ?\n\nEdits\n\nThe first suggested duplicate (Chocolate) clarifies the name of the て form,\nwhich is instructive but not what my question was about. In the second one\n(Chocolate, broccoli forest), も and なく do not appear together; も expresses\n\"also\" and 少なく is the く continuative form of 少ない.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T18:16:23.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56702",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T16:19:23.157",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T16:19:23.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "27777",
"owner_user_id": "27777",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of もなく construct",
"view_count": 2088
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your sentence example is not written in the past tense, and even if it were,\nthe tense is shown with the final verb, not earlier in the sentence, so\ncomparing it to 持った would be incorrect. 持って could be substituted, however.\n\nThe stem form (持ち) is neither more childish nor more familiar. It is more\nliterary and/or formal. It is used for continuations of actions. Rather than\nthe ～て form, which suggests an order in a sequence, the stem form simply\nstrings together different actions with less emphasis on the order.\n\n```\n\n 弁当を手に持って、家を出ました。 (He) took the bento in-hand, then left the house. \n \n```\n\nis roughly equal to\n\n```\n\n 弁当を手に持ち、家を出ました。(He) took the bento in-hand, and left the house.\n \n```\n\n....\n\n```\n\n Xさんに電話をして、もう一度会う約束をする。≅ Xさんに電話をし、もう一度会う約束をする。\n \n```\n\n* * *\n\n> 父は旅支度をする様子もなく\n\n～もない （～もなく） after a noun is roughly equivalent to 'not even～' or 'without\n(even) ～'. So the translation of this bit would be 'Without the appearance of\nhaving done travel preparations...' or 'Without seeming to have done travel\npreparations...'.\n\nAs an example of commonly usage, the expression 間もなく, while often translated\nas 'soon' or 'shortly', it has a more literal meaning of 'Without delay'\n(Without an interval of time).\n\n* * *\n\nMy translation attempt, attempting to follow the same tense as the original,\nwould be as follows:\n\n> 父は旅支度をする様子もなく片手にバケツを持ち、”行くぞ”と叫んでいる。\n>\n> Without even appearing to do (have done) any travel preparations, Dad takes\n> a bucket in one hand and is shouting 'Let's go.'.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T20:04:42.567",
"id": "56705",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T00:18:47.377",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56702
| null |
56705
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56757",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Can a topic that is identified via the も particle be included in a は topic\nthat comes AFTER it? e.g. Two sequential sentences from a book I'm reading:\n\n**1st Sentence:** ほかの鳥は、もう、よだかの顔を見ただけでも、いやになってしまうという工合でした。\n\n**2nd Sentence:** たとえば、 **ひばりも**\n、あまり美しい鳥ではありませんが、よだかよりは、ずっと上だと思っていましたので、夕方など、よだかにあうと、さもさもいやそうに、しんねりと目をつぶりながら、首をそっぽへ向けるのでした。\n\n... but is ひばり (the skylark) being included in the _previous_ topic (ほかの鳥は) or\nthe _upcoming_ one (あまり美しい鳥では)?\n\n**Can も mark a topic for inclusion in an (as yet) unintroduced は topic?**",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-17T19:51:19.587",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56704",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T06:44:45.280",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-18T01:49:27.510",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-は",
"particle-も",
"topic"
],
"title": "What is the inheritance order of も and は topics?",
"view_count": 168
}
|
[
{
"body": "To me, the も in your example sentence would seem superfluous, as the skylark\nis already included in the category of 'other birds'. It would sound like:\n'Other birds, for example, including also the skylark'. This makes for an\nunnatural sentence. Furthermore, when you are using skylark as the singular\nexample, there would be no need to add も (for my one example, also the\nskylark…).\n\nIf you are trying to say ‘even the skylark’ I would use でも. It would help if\nyou provided a complete (non-fragmented) example of the English sentence that\nyou wish to convey and the nuance (is it supposed to be stilted dialogue?).\n\n> ほかの鳥は... たとえば, ひばりも, あまり鳥は...\n\nAlternate suggestions:\n\n```\n\n ほかの鳥、例えば「ひばり」はあまり…\n \n ほかの鳥、ひばり含めて、あまり…\n \n ひばりを含む、ほかの鳥はあまり…\n \n```",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T00:26:41.840",
"id": "56706",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T00:26:41.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56704",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "* **1st sentence** : ほかの鳥 thought \"よだか are ugly birds!\"\n * **2nd sentence** : ひばり are not very beautiful, _either_ , but even ひばり thought \"We look much better than よだか!\"\n\nHere ほかの鳥 refers to all birds which are not よだか. ほかの鳥 includes ひばり, which are\nrelatively ugly among ほかの鳥 but are much better than よだか.\n\nThe topic of the second sentence is ひばり, which is marked with も instead of は\nbecause there are other ugly birds mentioned in the story. あまり美しい鳥 is not the\ntopic but one of the three predicates of the second sentence: [Why is the\ntopic marker often used in negative statements (ではない,\n～とは思わない)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1077/5010)\n\nRead the second sentence like this:\n\n * **ひばりも、** あまり美しい鳥ではありません。\n * が、 **ひばりも、** 「よだかよりは、ずっと上だ」と思っていました。\n * なので、 **ひばりも、** 夕方など、よだかにあうと、さもさもいやそうに、しんねりと目をつぶりながら、首をそっぽへ向けるのでした。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T06:44:45.280",
"id": "56757",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T06:44:45.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56704",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56704
|
56757
|
56757
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was studying the difference between these two forms, that actually I cannot\nquite understand. One of the differences seems to be that ために can be used with\nvolitional forms such as たい and ろう、while ように can be used with both the\nvolitional form and the potential. Did I understand correctly?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T07:08:36.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56711",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-06T13:43:20.983",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-18T19:32:48.283",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "25880",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "ために and ように difference",
"view_count": 934
}
|
[
{
"body": "My understanding is that ように is used with potential or based on the condition\nbeing out of the speakers control, so using volitional is fine.\n\nWhereas ために implies the the speaker has control to make something happen.\nThough to echo virmaior I have never seen たい used with them.\n\nSimilar types of answers have been posted on the difference here: [Difference\nbetween ために and\nように](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12450/difference-\nbetween-%E3%81%9F%E3%82%81%E3%81%AB-and-%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB) and\n<https://www.reddit.com/r/LearnJapanese/comments/1figyo/difference_between_%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB_and_%E3%81%9F%E3%82%81%E3%81%AB/>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-06T13:43:20.983",
"id": "57117",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-06T13:43:20.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28028",
"parent_id": "56711",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56711
| null |
57117
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56716",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between me and my language\npartner: 「農業を仕事としてする農家の人頭が減っていながら、大型の農場が増えています。」 を、日本の現状からわかりやすく言い替えてみると、\n\n→全体の農家数が減る一方で、大規模農家が増えています。\n\nFor context: We were talking about her family which ran a small scale farm\nback in the day. I told her about the situation in germany, where smaller\nagricultural business are constantly on the decline, with many farmers\nreducing their work as a farmer to a sidebusiness.\n\nAbout the sentence in question: Doe anyone have an idea why the sentence just\nends in \"...替えてみると...\"? If you think she just forgot to bring the sentence to\nan end, just tell me and I'll ask her. However, if such abrupt ellipses are\ncommon in japanese, please help me extrapolating what is supposed to stand\nthere ^^\n\nAlso, what is this 模 in 大規模農家? Jisho redirects me to \"wooden printing block\"\n(形木 ) but that doesnt make much sense here Oo",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T11:36:17.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56713",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T06:21:13.540",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-18T18:28:54.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"particle-と",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "quotative と without an accompanying verb?",
"view_count": 251
}
|
[
{
"body": "（１） 基本形は次のようになります。\n\n> Ａを、日本の現状からわかりやすく **言い替えてみると** 、Ｂ **と言うことができます** 。\n\n基本形において \nＡ：「農業を仕事としてする農家の人頭が減っていながら、大型の農場が増えています。」 \nＢ：→全体の農家数が減る一方で、大規模農家が増えています。 \nそして、 \n**と言うことができます** が省略されています。\n\n「と言うことができます」の部分は「と言えます」あるいは「となります」と言い換えることはできますが、省略することはあまり勧められません。多分Ｂの最初に「→」があり、最後の部分が「増えています。」のように文が完全に終わった形式になっていますので、作者が本来必要な文言を省略しても良いと判断した、あるいは省略しても良いと錯覚したのだと思いますが、良い文章の書き方とは言えないように思います。\n\nなお、「言い **替** える」は、私は「言い **換**\nえる」と普段書いています。[ここ](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1338699383)では、「言い換える」を勧めています。\n\n（２）「大規模」はLeeboさんのコメントにある通りです。\n\n> 大規模＝大＋規模",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T14:10:10.000",
"id": "56715",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T14:10:10.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "56713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> quotative と\n\nThe と in 言い換えてみる **と** is not a quotative particle, but a conjunctive particle\n(接続助詞) meaning \"When~\" or \"If~\".\n\n> 「言い換えてみる **と** 、・・・」 = \" _If/When_ you rephrase it, ...\" \" _If/When_ you say\n> it in a different way, ...\"\n\nShe said:\n\n> 「(Original Sentence)」を言い換えてみると、→ 「(Rephrased Sentence)。」 \n> \"If you rephrase / To rephrase '[Original Sentence]': (you'll get)\n> '[Rephrased Sentence]'.\"\n\n* * *\n\nAs for 大規模... \nHow about using Rikaichan or Rikaikun?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ueU1X.png)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MAF9L.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T14:31:10.197",
"id": "56716",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T06:21:13.540",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T06:21:13.540",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56713
|
56716
|
56716
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56725",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I want to say the phrase \"I can understand about 60% of the content of this\nvideo\" in japanese. I translated it to:\n\nこのビデオの内容は６０％ぐらい分かれます。\n\nIs this correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:18:31.320",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56717",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T23:41:23.453",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-18T23:41:23.453",
"last_editor_user_id": "27569",
"owner_user_id": "27569",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Is the meaning of this phrase correct?",
"view_count": 123
}
|
[
{
"body": "分かれる is an intransitive verb meaning \"to split or divide.\" The verb わかる\n(usually written without the kanji) encompasses the meaning \"able to\nunderstand.\" If you want to emphasize \"can comprehend,\" you can use the Sino-\nJapanese word and say 理解できる。Keep in mind that 理解する, unlike わかる, is a\ntransitive verb, although this is irrelevant in your sentence because the\nobject is topicalized. There are also some nuances in meaning and formality\ndifferences between 理解 and わかる that you can read about, e.g.,\n[here](https://www.italki.com/question/156645).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:56:52.220",
"id": "56723",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T20:56:52.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "56717",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "First off your attempt:\n\n> このビデオの内容は６０％ぐらい分かれます。\n\nThis attempt is incorrect but probably comprehensible to your listener. First,\nthere is no possibility conjugation of 分かる or if you prefer 分かる like 入る\nalready includes the normal sense of possibility in it.\n\nSecond, let's think about the aspect you're stating this in. 60% means that\nyou're either measuring how much you believe you've understood (in the past)\nor you're estimating it in an ongoing fashion.\n\nThird, stating 60% by itself might sound a bit overly-precise, so it seems\nwise to use a couching expression (ぼかし表現) to make this a bit softer.\n\nSo I might suggest:\n\n> このビデオは６割ぐらいわかりました。\n\n= I understood about 60% of the video.\n\nor\n\n> このビデオの内容はほぼ６０％理解できる。\n\n= I am able to understand about 60% of the video's contents.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T22:58:51.273",
"id": "56725",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T22:58:51.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "56717",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56717
|
56725
|
56725
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "For example, 化粧 is read けしょう. When followed by を, how is it pronounced?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:31:49.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56718",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T15:28:27.103",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T07:34:53.750",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9857",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"long-vowels"
],
"title": "How is the long O sound pronounced when followed by を?",
"view_count": 348
}
|
[
{
"body": "けしょうを - Keshō o. Use google translate [link\nhere](https://translate.google.com/#auto/ja/%E5%8C%96%E7%B2%A7%E3%82%92%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E3%80%82)\nand click on audio button.\n\nYou do not want to shorten vowels. Each 'sound' has its place and should not\nbe modified.\n\nYou could potentially eliminate the particle を, but that is a separate issue.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:52:28.640",
"id": "56722",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T20:52:28.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56718",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "There are two things you should try to pay attention to when trying to listen\nto or pronouncing a long O.\n\n 1. ### Rhythm\n\nThe language is modelled on morae ( _sing._ mora) creating a rhythm. For\nexample こんにちは is different from こにちわ and a \"long O\" is either 1,2,3,... morae\nlong. (Also see [Distinguishing between んな/な, んの/の,\netc](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14213/1628))\n\n 2. ### Pitch\n\nIndividual morae can have either a low or a high pitch. A drop or rise in\npitch marks a mora boundary, so this can also help you count.\n\nFor example, 化粧を is pronounced [ケショオオ]{LHHLL}. The オオ at the end being twice\nas long tells you that the final オ should be を.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T07:29:44.693",
"id": "56729",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T07:29:44.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "56718",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Some sounds are very indistinct in nihongo, such as the U sound in です. It’s\nthere, but so barely pronounced that it’s almost silent. The same can be said\nfor words that end in ん followed by に. In this way, words that end in the o\nsound such as の or お, followed by わ, the W sound is nearly indistinguishable,\nbut is still there. So the sound should be like owo, but the W is so under-\npronounced that you can barely tell it is there in casual speech.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T15:28:27.103",
"id": "56764",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T15:28:27.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27811",
"parent_id": "56718",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
56718
| null |
56729
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56720",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example 学 - 学んで\n\n& 死 ー 死んで",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:32:29.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56719",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T20:39:25.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27787",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "How does adding んで to verb stem change it",
"view_count": 123
}
|
[
{
"body": "This is just the conjugation of verbs ending in ぶ and ぬ to create the\n[て-form](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/teform).\n\n休む - 休んで\n\n飲む - 飲んで\n\n払う - 払って\n\n寝る - 寝て\n\n話す - 話して\n\nSuggest you study the て-form conjugations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:39:25.170",
"id": "56720",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T20:39:25.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56719",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56719
|
56720
|
56720
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56747",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm finding this sentence a bit tricky.\n\n> 光{ひかり}の川{かわ}へ願{ねが}いの橋{はし}を掛{か}け奇跡{きせき}は渡{わた}るよ\n\nThis sentence is confusing me very much! I am not sure what it means. Does it\nmean:\n\n> Build a bridge of wishes over the river of light and miracles will cross.\n\nWhat does 掛け here mean? Does it mean to hoist a bridge ? And are the 奇跡\ncrossing the bridge? Sorry if my question is a bit vague!",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T20:50:49.977",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56721",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T10:17:24.660",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T01:26:27.680",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27788",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"song-lyrics",
"particle-へ"
],
"title": "Confusion with へ in a sentence",
"view_count": 224
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is important to understand that song lyrics do not follow the same\ngrammatical construction of regular sentences and are often nonsensical. The\n'sentence' in your example is actually composed of three separate fragments\n(the last of which could be considered a complete sentence).\n\n光の川へ / 願いの橋を掛け / 奇跡は渡るよ\n\nTo the shining river / build a bridge of wishes / miracles will cross\n(happen).\n\nCan be rephrased into a normal sentence. Example: 光の川へ行って、願いの橋を掛けると奇跡は渡るよ。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-18T21:13:30.840",
"id": "56724",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-18T21:13:30.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56721",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> What does 掛け here mean? Does it mean to hoist a bridge?\n\nThe 「掛け(る)」 here means \"to build / throw (a bridge over/across a river)\". \n(It's usually written as 橋を **[架]{か}ける**.)\n\nThe へ corresponds to \"over\" or \"across\". (「川へ橋を架ける」≂「川に橋を架ける」)\n\nAnd the 「 **願い** の橋を **かける** 」 here also has an implied, double meaning 願いをかける\n\"make a wish\". \n(cf: 「 **光の川へかけた願い** が、ほら、奇跡を起こすよ」) It could be Orihime and Hikoboshi's wish,\nbut it could also be 僕たち's wish; it's about Tanabata Festival where you make a\nwish on stars, write it on paper strips and hang them on bamboo leaves (cf:\n「その胸に仕舞い込んだ **望みを** 、さあ **書き留めて** 」「 **僕らは願う**...今、奇跡は起こるよ」).\n\n> And are the 奇跡 crossing the bridge?\n\nYes, I think so. I think it's metaphorically saying 奇跡 is making the lovers'\nwish come true on this day, by crossing the river that lies between them.\n\n> 光の川へ願いの橋を掛け奇跡は渡るよ \n> Does it mean: \n> \"Build a bridge of wishes over the river of light and miracles will cross.\"\n\nI would probably translate it the way you do, too.\n\nI think the line has double meanings: \n「天の川に橋を架けて、奇跡が渡る」 \n\"We build a bridge over the Milky Way, and miracles will cross the bridge /\nthe Milky Way.\" \nand \n「星に願いをかけて、奇跡が起こる/願いが叶う」 \n\"We make a wish on the stars, and miracles will happen / our wish will come\ntrue\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T03:29:45.270",
"id": "56747",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T10:17:24.660",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T10:17:24.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56721",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56721
|
56747
|
56747
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56727",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following sentences are from the JP children's book よだかの星: \n \n「ね、まあ、あのくちのおおきいことさ。きっと、かえるの親類か何かなんだよ。」 \n \nThe 2nd sentence feels like an implied question e.g. \"Surely, [he] is kin of a\nfrog _or something_.\" (implying that the speaker suspects the nighthawk\n_isn't_ the kin of a frog, but something else entirely\")\n\nBut (as far as I know) a sentence that ends in **だよ** is always\n**declarative** unless a \"question word\" is included. e.g. \"Surely, [he] is\nkin of a frog or something.\" (The speaker has no suspicions. It's simply a\nmatter of fact that the nighthawk _is_ the kin of either \"a frog\" or\n\"something\").\n\nNow since the expression 何か uses the 何 kanji (which is also used in other\ninterrogative words, like \"what\") I wondered if 何か in this context could\nfunction as a \"question word\" and carry a questioning tone. e.g. \"I am going\nto do _something_?\"\n\n* * *\n\n**Another example of the 1st tone:** \"My dog is a hound... or _something_....\" \n(this sentence isn't technically a question, but it's still **implying** a\nquestion of authenticity and a suspicion that the dog isn't _really_ a hound)\n\n* * *\n\n**Another example of the 2nd tone:** \"My dog is a hound, or something.\" \n(there are no implications in this sentence. It's just a simple matter of fact\nthe dog is either a hound or something else.)\n\n* * *\n\n**So, I guess my question has three parts:**\n\n 1. Can 何か be an interrogative word or indicate a question tone?\n 2. Does Japanese even _have_ implied questions like this?\n 3. What's the best translation of that 2nd sentence?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T00:17:52.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56726",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T05:41:46.797",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T05:15:57.703",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-か",
"embedded-question"
],
"title": "Can 何か be a question word?",
"view_count": 164
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 1. Can 何か be a question word?\n>\n\n何か here is not a question word. (「何 + か」 _can_ be a question word in different\nstructures.) \n[何]{なに}か here means \"something\". \n「～か何か」 = \"~~ or something similar\" \"~~ or something like that\" \n(The か in 親類 **か** is a parallel marker / 並立助詞.)\n\n> implying that the speaker suspects the nighthawk isn't the kin of a frog,\n> but something else entirely\n\nThe sentence means that the speaker suspects the nighthawk _is_ the kin of a\nfrog or something (like a frog / similar to a frog).\n\n> 2. Does Japanese even have implied questions (and doubt) like English\n> does?\n>\n\nAfter reading your comment below (\"I'm sure he's a frog's cousin _or\nsomething_.\" could indicate doubt or a question of authenticity. i.e. You\ndon't _really_ think he's a frog's cousin, you think he's something else.), I\ncan't think of a way to _directly_ translate/convey the sentence/meaning into\nJapanese (without sounding really _translated_ , at least.)\n\n> 3. What's the best translation of that 2nd sentence?\n>\n\nきっと、かえるの親類か何かなんだよ。 \n\"I'm sure it/he's a frog/toad's cousin or something (similar / like that / of\nthat kind).\" \n\"It/He must be a frog/toad's relative or something (similar / like that / of\nthat kind).\"\n\n(I don't know if this is the _best_ translation, but it's what it means.\nPlease modify it to what sounds natural in your language.)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T01:22:59.083",
"id": "56727",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T05:41:46.797",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T05:41:46.797",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56726",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56726
|
56727
|
56727
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Recently, I was given a copy of _Complete Course of Japanese Conversation-\nGrammar_ by Oreste and Enko Elisa Vaccari. As it dates back to 1967, I was\nexpecting at least a few things to be a bit old-fashioned – which is not to\nsay that I, as a beginner, would really notice when they are – but I am\nenjoying it so far. I like the way the authors set the lessons out, and, at\nleast to my mind, they explain the rules and features of the language in a\nvery clear and readable manner.\n\nEven so, I have a query regarding a passage from one of the earlier lessons.\nJust need some additional information, really. The authors say:\n\n> The **nominative** case is generally indicated by the particle **wa** ハ\n> (postposition) placed after the subjective word. As a rule, the syllable ハ\n> is pronounced **ha** , but when indicating the nominative, it is pronounced\n> **wa** as in the English word _waft_.\n\nIn all the Japanese learning resources I have read up to now, I have only\nencountered は as the wa-particle. Given the age of this book, am I right in\nthinking that writing は is a modern convention? Are there still some\ncircumstances in which the katakana form is preferred?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T01:26:14.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56728",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T03:00:22.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25776",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-は",
"orthography"
],
"title": "Is writing the \"wa particle\" as は a modern convention?",
"view_count": 435
}
|
[
{
"body": "this is some relevant information currently available on the wikipedia page\nfor katakana:\n\n* * *\n\nPre-World War II official documents mix katakana and kanji in the same way\nthat hiragana and kanji are mixed in modern Japanese texts, that is, katakana\nwere used for okurigana and particles such as wa or o.\n\nKatakana were also used for telegrams in Japan before 1988, and for computer\nsystems – before the introduction of multibyte characters – in the 1980s. Most\ncomputers in that era used katakana instead of kanji or hiragana for output.\n\n* * *\n\n... I realize there is a possibility that the wikipedia article is maintained\nby some of the same people who frequent this website. Hope I'm not stepping on\nanyone's toes referencing Wikipedia this way.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-04-15T12:28:11.767",
"id": "57950",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-15T12:28:11.767",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "56728",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "No, it's not a modern convention.\n\nHiragana has been in common use for over a thousand years. For example, \"Genji\nMonogatari\" was written in hiragana.\n\nWhat has changed is that Japanese has been increasingly standardised. See the\nMeiji restoration and the end of World War 2 as being events that prompted\nmoves for standardisation.\n\nBefore these events, the Japanese language was much more diverse than what it\nbecame in the subsequent decades.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-10-26T03:00:22.697",
"id": "90900",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T03:00:22.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48539",
"parent_id": "56728",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56728
| null |
57950
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56736",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 私は地震が怖い。\n\nFor me that's like saying 私は彼がきれいです. \nIt doesn't make sense putting 私 here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T11:56:34.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56730",
"last_activity_date": "2019-10-19T01:53:06.320",
"last_edit_date": "2018-06-17T03:58:54.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particle-は",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "Does 私は地震が怖い make sense?",
"view_count": 462
}
|
[
{
"body": "While it may be _redundant_ , using `私は` certainly does make sense here and\nmay even be necessary in some contexts to avoid ambiguity. A somewhat\ncontrived example:\n\n```\n\n 彼は幽霊{ゆうれい}屋敷{やしき}は苦手{にがて}、私は地震が怖い。 \n He doesn't like haunted houses, and I'm afraid of earthquakes.\n \n```\n\nYour second example is indeed somewhat nonsensical but is not equivalent to\nthe first.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T13:04:18.507",
"id": "56732",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T13:04:18.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "56730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 私は地震 **が怖い** 。 _lit._ As for me, earthquakes are scary. → I _am scared of_\n> earthquakes.\n\nYour sentence is correct and natural.\n\nが is used with several adjectives that indicate one's feelings, e.g.\n「怖い」「欲しい」「つらい」「楽しい」「恐ろしい」「悲しい」「うれしい」「うらやましい」「憎い」「愛しい」 (i-adjectives) 「好きだ」\n「嫌いだ」「いやだ」「心配だ」「面倒だ」「楽しみだ」 (na-adjectives) etc.\n\nExamples:\n\n> 「僕は自転車 **が欲しい** 。」 I _want_ a bicycle. \n> 「私は日本語の勉強 **が楽しい** 。」 I _enjoy_ learning Japanese. \n> 「山田さんはコーヒー **が好き** だ。」 Yamada-san _likes_ coffee.\n\nが is also used with the desiderative auxiliary 「～たい」. eg 「私はコーヒー **が** 飲み\n**たい** 。」 I _want to_ drink coffee.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T13:25:41.147",
"id": "56736",
"last_activity_date": "2019-10-19T01:53:06.320",
"last_edit_date": "2019-10-19T01:53:06.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "私は地震が怖い makes sense and the user \"Chocolate\" has given a very good\nexplanation.\n\nOther ways to express the fear of earthquakes could be:\n\n地震が怖いんだよ。I'm telling you, earthquakes are scary.\n\n地震は私の一番恐怖です。Earthquakes are my biggest fear.\n\n地震はとても恐ろしいと思います。I think earthquakes are very scary.\n\n地震の時パニクりた。I panicked at the time of the earthquake.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T04:46:17.377",
"id": "56749",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T04:46:17.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11369",
"parent_id": "56730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56730
|
56736
|
56736
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56733",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the sentence:\n\n> 妹に車で駅まで迎えに行かせます。\n\nThe translation from Tatoeba is\n\n> I will have my sister pick you up at the station.\n\nI've been reading \"Making Sense of Japanese: What the Textbooks Don't Tell\nYou\" just now, the chapter where he dives into causative's zero pronouns. Now\nI have doubts about the given translation.\n\nFew things I don't get here:\n\nUsage of まで particle - will she give a lift to someone to the station or pick\nup from? (why not から?)\n\nUsage of に particle - does it mean that my little sister is the target of my\ncausative verb? Or is it that the sister is the one who makes me or someone\ngive someone else a ride?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T12:49:16.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56731",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T13:10:28.327",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T13:10:28.327",
"last_editor_user_id": "3295",
"owner_user_id": "25801",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"causation",
"pronouns",
"particle-まで"
],
"title": "Please help me identify who does what in this sentence and check the translation",
"view_count": 194
}
|
[
{
"body": "The Tatoeba translation is a natural rather than a literal translation.\nLiterally it's saying more like \"I will have my sister go to the station by\ncar to meet you\". (迎える is a tricky little word that means to greet/meet\nsomeone, but often includes the implication of subsequently escorting them to\ntheir destination, so the \"pick you up\" element is also implied here.)\n\nAs such, the まで particle indicates the destination of the 迎えに行く action (the\nsister will go all the way _to_ the station to meet you). The に, as you say,\nindicates the target of the speaker's causative verb. The speaker (an unstated\ntopic) is causing the sister (marked by に) to perform the action of 迎えに行く\n(going to the station to pick up the listener, who is the unstated object).\n\nIf the speaker and listener were explicitly mentioned, the full sentence would\nread **私は** 妹に車で駅まで **あなたを** 迎えに行かせます。 But this feels a bit unnecessarily\nwordy and wouldn't usually be used.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T13:06:21.980",
"id": "56733",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T13:06:21.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "56731",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
56731
|
56733
|
56733
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "こんにちは, Im quite new to this platform and also japanese, but recently a\nquestion struck me. How do I say , \"Because I feel pain, I feel alive\" or\n\"Because I feel pain, I know that Im alive\" Which is better,\n痛みがあったから、「生きている」を感じる or 痛みがあってから、「生きている」を感じる ? If there is any better ones,\ncould some kind soul suggest it and correct me? どうもありがとう!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T13:23:05.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56735",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T13:41:18.787",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27795",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"て-form"
],
"title": "あってから usage and あったから usage",
"view_count": 726
}
|
[
{
"body": "から in 「て-form + から」 (あってから) is a case particle meaning \"after doing~~\". \nから in 「terminal form + から」 (あったから/あるから) is a conjunctive particle meaning\n\"because~~\".\n\nSo 痛みがあってから means \"after I feel/felt pain\". \n痛みがあったから means \"because I felt pain\". (あった is the past form of ある)\n\n> \"Because I feel pain, I feel alive\"\n\nI would say 「痛みがあるから、『生きている』と感じる。」 using ある and quotative と.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T13:41:18.787",
"id": "56737",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T13:41:18.787",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56735",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56735
| null |
56737
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56741",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "AFAIK compound verbs (複合動詞) are formed by prefixing 連用形 (ren'youkei, or stem\nform) of one verb to another \"full\" verb, e.g.:\n\n * 巡り合う＝巡る(めぐり）＋ 合う \n * 生み出す＝生む（生み）＋ 出す\n\nAnd so on...\n\nHowever, `引っ張る` seems to not fit this pattern and feels like it was formed by\ncombining `引く`+`張る`, and not `引き`+`張る` which would result in `引き張る`.\n\nApparently there _are_ compound verbs with `引き`, e.g.:\n\n * 引き出す\n * 引き受ける\n * 引き返す\n * 引き止める\n\nEven more interestingly, there is a verb that exists in both variations:\n`引き越す` and `引っ越す`, although I don't think I've ever seen the former outside of\nthe dictionary.\n\nSo, is `引っ張る` a compound verb? If not, is there a term for such verbs and are\nthere others?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T13:46:55.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56738",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T18:24:24.727",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"compound-verbs"
],
"title": "Is 引っ張る a compound verb?",
"view_count": 300
}
|
[
{
"body": "As you note, 引【ひ】っ越【こ】す pairs with the older 引【ひ】き越【こ】す form, which doesn't\nsee much use in the modern language. Along the same lines, modern 引【ひ】っ張【ぱ】る\nis a shift in pronunciation of older 引【ひ】き張【は】る, which more clearly shows the\nregular compound-verb structure.\n\nThis kind of sound shift is a regular feature of the language. See also the\nanswer linked at [Why is ふとんがふとんだ a\npun?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/56620/why-\nis-%E3%81%B5%E3%81%A8%E3%82%93%E3%81%8C%E3%81%B5%E3%81%A8%E3%82%93%E3%81%A0-a-pun/56621#answer-56621),\nwhich shows and links to other similar examples of regular compound verbs\n(`[VERB in the 連用形]` + `[VERB]`) that have shifted to this kind of 促音【そくおん】\n(geminate or doubled-consonant) phonology as a kind of contraction.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T18:24:24.727",
"id": "56741",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T18:24:24.727",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "56738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56738
|
56741
|
56741
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56740",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is a sentence which is highly confusing me. A character says this :\n\n> 『どうして王様は裸なの？』と無邪気な子供に指摘されるまで、恥を晒しておめおめと舞台に立っているのは、あまりにも情けない\n\nWhat does the と after the phrase in quotation mean? \nFrom what I looked up and saw,\n\n『どうして王様は裸なの？』= Why is the king naked /bare? \n無邪気な子 = innocent children \n指摘 = identification \n恥 = shame \n晒し = bleach \nおめおめ = shamelessly \n舞台 = stage\n\nBut I can't wrap my head around how they fit together. Especially in the first\npart. \nI also can't understand what amari ni mo nasakenai is , is it \"not even the\nleast bit pitiful\" or \"very pitiful\" \nWhat I thought about for the second part of the sentence is to \"to bleach our\nshame and shamelessly stand upon the stage is \"not the least bit pitiful\"( or\n)\"very pitiful \" . \nI don't know if it's correct . But I can't understand the first part of the\nsentence at all. I would be grateful for help!! Thank you!!\n\nThe source is given.\n\n",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T15:54:45.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56739",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T01:13:29.480",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T01:13:29.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27788",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji",
"particle-と",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Question regarding structure of a sentence : use of と here?",
"view_count": 93
}
|
[
{
"body": "I would fairly literally translate the full sentence as:\n\n> It is terribly pathetic to be standing brazenly on stage making a fool of\n> oneself until an innocent child points out \"Why is the king naked?\"\n\nIt is of course a reference to the well-known fable of the Emperor's New\nClothes. Let me quickly go through the parts you seem to be having trouble\nwith:\n\n * The と you mentioned in your question is simply a usage of the \"quotative と\" that is used in simple constructions like XXXと言った \"He said XXX\". In this case, rather than the verb 言う \"to say\" we have the verb 指摘する \"to point out\", but in both cases the と marks the actual content of what is being said/pointed out.\n * The verb 晒す, while it does have \"bleaching\" as one of its meanings, is more commonly seen with the meaning of \"expose\" (the link between the meanings is that I believe it originally referred to a method of bleaching materials by exposing them to sunlight). 恥を晒す (literally \"expose one's shame\") in particular is a common phrase meaning to make a fool of oneself.\n * あまりに or あまりにも is a common adverbal expression that expresses the sentiment that something is \"far too X\", \"excessively X\", \"unbelievably X\", etc. It comes from 余り meaning an excess (which itself comes from the verb 余る meaning \"to be left over\"), but it's easiest to just remember it as its own set expression.\n * Finally, you may not be familiar with the \"suffering passive\" construction that is used in the first clause. This is a form that doesn't really translate into English, but essentially instead of saying 子供 **が** 「裸だ」と指摘 **した** \"the child pointed out that 'he's naked'\", in Japanese we can say 王様は子供 **に** 「裸だ」と指摘 **された** \"The king _was pointed out_ that \"he's naked\" by the child\". By using a passive construction with the king as the subject, we indicate that the king is suffering from the effects of the child's statement. (A more basic example of this construction would be 猫が私の壷を割った \"A cat smashed my jar\" > 私は猫に壷を割られた \"I had my jar smashed by a cat\".)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T17:29:36.877",
"id": "56740",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T17:41:59.170",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T17:41:59.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "25107",
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "56739",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56739
|
56740
|
56740
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56750",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen the expression **望むところだ** twice in manga (both times spoken by a\nvery rough speaking male character). The context of the situations (the\ncharacter who spoke was just threatened or warned in both cases) leads me to\nbelieve that its meaning is similar to **\"Do as you will\"** or maybe **\"I can\ntake whatever you can dish out\"**.\n\nCould someone please explain the grammar behind that expression? I have 3\nspecific questions:\n\n**1. Who is the understood subject of 望む? \n** Basically, I'm wondering if the speaker is the subject or the listener. Is\nthe speaker talking about what _he_ desires or what the person he's talking to\ndesires?\n\n**2. What function does ところ serve? \n** I know that ところ has a wide variety of different meanings that relate to\ntime and place. Usually, when ところ follows a verb, it means that the action is\njust about to begin. That does not seem to fit here though. \"I am just about\nto want that\" doesn't really make sense to me.\n\n**3. Do my translations convey the appropriate intention?**",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-19T21:25:46.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56742",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T05:11:15.577",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T22:32:31.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "3296",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"expressions"
],
"title": "What does 望むところだ mean?",
"view_count": 1006
}
|
[
{
"body": "望むところだ is basically \"That's what **I** want\". It can be 望むところだわ, 望むところです,\n望むところじゃ and so on depending on the character.\n\n 1. The subject of 望む is the speaker.\n 2. This ところ can be understood as \"situation\" or \"thing\" depending on the context.\n 3. This phrase has become a set phrase which is used to respond to someone's provocation. You may not need a literal translation, and a literal translation may not work, either (see the example below). Your translation seems okay to me even though it's not a literal one.\n\n> ### [望むところ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/279778/meaning/m0u/)\n>\n> １ そうなってほしいと思うこと。ひそかに期待していること。「世界の平和は誰もが望む所であろう」 \n> ２ 転じて、 **相手の挑戦・挑発などに対して応じるときに発する語** 。「『かかってこい』『望む所だ』」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T04:56:01.967",
"id": "56750",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T05:11:15.577",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T05:11:15.577",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56742",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
56742
|
56750
|
56750
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I would like to know the Japanese verb for \"to flex\", but I haven't found much\ninformation and the few dictionary options I have found are a bit unclear to\nmy understanding so I think that some people here can clear this up for me.\n\n\"To flex\" one's muscles as when bodybuilders flex their biceps and compare how\nbig and ripped they look.\n\nExample sentences: He flexes his bicep to show how big it is. Bodybuilders\nflex their muscles to impress the audience.\n\nAnswers very appreciated!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T04:34:21.383",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56748",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T10:19:54.027",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T05:42:01.647",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "20088",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "What is the Japanese verb for \"to flex\" (one's muscles)?",
"view_count": 2236
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can use:\n\n * ～に力を入れる\n * ～を収縮させる\n\nFor example 上腕二頭筋に力を入れる and 大腿四頭筋を収縮させる.\n\n収縮 sounds relatively technical but it can be safely used in conversations.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T05:41:01.600",
"id": "56752",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T05:41:01.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56748",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "There's a character in _Undertale_ who is a muscle maniac and likes flexing.\nSince it got an official Japanese translation, [one of the related example\nsentences](http://ja.undertale.wikia.com/wiki/Aaron#.E3.83.95.E3.83.AC.E3.83.BC.E3.83.90.E3.83.BC.E3.83.86.E3.82.AD.E3.82.B9.E3.83.88)\nis:\n\n> Aaron is ready for your next **flex**. \n> Aaronはあなたが次に **力こぶを作った** ときに向けて準備している \n> [Flex後に中立]\n\nSo I think you can use 力こぶを作る which consists of:\n\n * 力こぶ = large biceps; well-developed biceps (from [jisho](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%8A%9B%E3%81%93%E3%81%B6))\n * を作る = to make",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T10:19:54.027",
"id": "56760",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T10:19:54.027",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5464",
"parent_id": "56748",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56748
| null |
56752
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56755",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If anyone is willing, I'd like to check my reading of the following sentence:\n\nところが夜だかは、ほんとうは鷹の兄弟でも親類でもありませんでした。\n\n\"However, for a number of nights, there is a lie that [he] is a family member\nor even a brother of the hawk, but it is not so.\"\n\nI'm reading **夜だか** as \"a number of nights\" (e.g. for a while), but I'm\nwondering if a better reading of -だか in this context would be \"all\" as in \"all\nnights\" or \"nightly\".\n\nAlso, I read **ほんとうは** as \"in contrast to the truth\" e.g. a lie. Was that\ncorrect? \n**EDIT: I found a good link explaining why this reading (as explained in the\nanswers) is wrong. Apparently, multiple は \"topics\" can be grammatically\ncorrect.** [Can we have two thematic は particles in a\nsentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5375/can-we-have-two-\nthematic-%E3%81%AF-particles-in-a-sentence)\n\n* * *\n\n**On a side note,** \nThese kind of translation questions feel a bit out of place on Stack\nExchange... since this site seems to focus more on specific grammar and word\nusage.\n\nAs I continue to read, I'd like to do more regular translation checks. Could\nanyone recommend a forum where that might be more welcome (if not here)?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T06:24:02.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56754",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T21:36:10.170",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T21:36:10.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "27592",
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-は",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "Would someone mind checking my translation of -だか and a contrastive は?",
"view_count": 174
}
|
[
{
"body": "夜だか would be 夜鷹, the nighthawk.\n\n本当 means 'truth. 本当は would be 'the truth is'. In this case, it would be 'in\ncontrast to what may be assumed/believed.\n\n> ところが夜だかは、ほんとうは鷹の兄弟でも親類でもありませんでした。\n\nAs it is, the nighthawk is, in truth, neither a sibling nor a relative of the\nhawk.",
"comment_count": 16,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T06:33:55.457",
"id": "56755",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T07:04:37.780",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T07:04:37.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56754",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56754
|
56755
|
56755
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56758",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 洗車を終えた車をふたりがかりで拭いているのを見ながら、喜一は、ああしていくうちに悦子の指のしもやけはまたもや悪化するのだろうな、などとぼんやり考えていた。\n\n洗車を終えた means finished washing the car. \n車をふたりがかりで拭いているの means two people wiping the car together.\n\n1) But I would like to know whether the subject of 洗車を終えた is 喜一? So after 喜一\nfinished washing the car, he watched two people wiping the car together? If\nnot, what is the subject of 洗車を終えた?\n\n2) This sentence looks confusing to me as if 洗車を終えた is used to modify the 車\nafter it so it reads like \"the car that has finished washing the car\". I would\nlike to know what kind of sentence structure is this? It seems that something\nis missing after 洗車を終えた.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T06:38:27.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56756",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T06:57:52.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27310",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subjects"
],
"title": "The subject in 洗車を終えた車をふたりがかりで拭いているのを見ながら",
"view_count": 57
}
|
[
{
"body": "1. Looking at this sentence alone, the people who washed the car are probably the same two people who are wiping the car now; one is 悦子, and the other is someone not directly mentioned in this sentence. 喜一 has been just looking.\n 2. 洗車を終えた車 is not \"the car that has finished washing\" but \"the car _they_ have finished washing\". It's a noun phrase with a relative clause made from 車の洗車を終えた, although this seems a bit tautological :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T06:57:52.210",
"id": "56758",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T06:57:52.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56756",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56756
|
56758
|
56758
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56763",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the regular kana text of the image ? the\ncontext:[https://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=manga&illust_id=66035643](https://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=manga&illust_id=66035643)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xjiLU.png)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T09:32:28.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56759",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T15:27:07.697",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-20T10:18:48.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "27768",
"owner_user_id": "27768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kana"
],
"title": "What is the regular kana text of the image?",
"view_count": 225
}
|
[
{
"body": "In meaning,\n\n> 「もそっ」＝「もそ」＝「もそもそ」＝「もぞもぞ」\n\nThese are the variants of an onomatopoeia used to describe the fidgeting\nand/or restless movement of a human/animal body or body part.\n\nNeedless to say, this has nothing to do with 「そもそも」, which means \"in the first\nplace\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T15:27:07.697",
"id": "56763",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T15:27:07.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56759",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56759
|
56763
|
56763
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Situation: B has asked A what she thinks of her clothes and A said 安心感がある。\n(which makes little sense to me, but seems to be quite common when Japanese\npeople talk about fashion). B's clothing is very recognizable, a fact noted by\nC. And then D comments:\n\n> 昔からずっとアレなら安心感と言うのなら流石Aさんというところ・・・\n\nSeveral things I don't quite understand:\n\n 1. Should there be a full stop after 昔からずっと? (it's a manga) Because it doesn't seem to fit into the rest of the sentence.\n 2. How do アレなら and 言うのなら play together?\n\nMy best guess about the translation is something like \"If anyone would say\nabout _that horrible outfit_ that it gives off anshinkan, it would be A-san.\"",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T15:19:07.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56762",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T01:07:23.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27499",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "アレなら and というなら in the same sentence",
"view_count": 141
}
|
[
{
"body": "1. I don't find that interpretation reasonable.\n\n 2. The writer probably wanted to express it's not sure if her clothes have been actually so, and failed to write 昔からずっとアレで安心感と言うなら (if they have always been _that_ since the past and she still says \"reliable\"). (If you want to get rid of ambiguity, you can say …アレだとして、それで安心感と…)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T19:51:30.280",
"id": "56768",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T19:51:30.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "56762",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 昔{むかし}からずっとアレなら安心感{あんしんかん}と言{い}うのなら流石{さすが}Aさんというところ・・・\n\n＝\n\n> 『昔からずっとアレなら安心感（がある）。』 **と** （Aさんが）言うのなら、「流石Aさん！」 **と** （私は）いうところ・・・\n\nThis is an informally spoken \"sentence\", which is why it might be difficult to\neven parse it unless one actually speaks natural Japanese. You would need to\nread between the lines, so to speak, as it is not the kind of sentence you\nwould encounter in a textbook. You would need to fill in the unmentioned words\nto translate.\n\n> 1) Should there be a full stop after 昔からずっと? (it's a manga) Because it\n> doesn't seem to fit into the rest of the sentence.\n\nNo, there should not. Read on to find out how it fits into the rest of the\nsentence.\n\n> 2) How do アレなら and 言うのなら play together?\n\n「アレなら」 modifies 「安心感」 and 「言うのなら」 modifies 「流石Aさん」. These function separately\nand the latter pair constitutes the core of the sentence itself while the\nformer just constitutes the statement I quoted above with 『』. Thus, the two\nconditionals can coexist within one sentence.\n\nFinally, my own TL:\n\n> If A says \"It produces a sense of security if B has always been dressed like\n> **_that_**.\", then I would have to say that A has wit.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T00:39:08.163",
"id": "56773",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T01:07:23.120",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-21T01:07:23.120",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56762",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56762
| null |
56773
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am wrestling my way through an recent article in the yomiyuri shimbun and I\ncame across this sentence:\n\n開催時期は６月から７月初旬を軸に調整する\n\nMy question is regarding this part: 軸に調整する\n\nIt really does not make sense to me, is it an expression and if so what does\nit mean?\n\nThank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T15:57:43.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56765",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T16:47:01.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27813",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Is this an expression and if so what does it mean?",
"view_count": 65
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「(specific time/date) を軸{じく}に調整{ちょうせい}する」\n\nis actually a fairly common phrase used in business, news reporting, etc.\nmeaning:\n\n> \"to schedule (something) around (specific time/date)\"\n\nIt simply means that the specific time/date mentioned is the first choice for\nthose responsible for scheduling the event.\n\n「軸に」 here roughly means \"mainly\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T16:47:01.523",
"id": "56766",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-20T16:47:01.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56765
| null |
56766
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "あなたを構う。\n\nI know that 構う means kamau, which is 'to care' or 'to look after'. Google\ntranslate is unsure of the answer. A proper translation would be great.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T21:05:46.320",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56769",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-23T00:15:44.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27818",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is the proper translation for あなたを構う 'I care about you?'",
"view_count": 1506
}
|
[
{
"body": "I would say 君のことを気にしてる, or あなたのことを気にしてます.\n\nあなたを構う is definitely not what you want to say, if it even makes sense at all.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T06:17:35.250",
"id": "56823",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-23T00:15:44.187",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-23T00:15:44.187",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5274",
"parent_id": "56769",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It depends on what you wish to express I think. When myself and my wife are\nexplaining to our kids why they can't do something dangerous, we often say\n「ＯＯちゃんのことが好きだから気をつけて欲しい」or something like that. If you provide context perhaps\nI can help further.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-04-24T11:21:07.040",
"id": "58131",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-24T11:21:07.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29682",
"parent_id": "56769",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56769
| null |
56823
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm finding the explanation of nara in Genki II very confusing..\n\nI've understood nara as a conditional (in league with tara, and ba), sort of a\nvariant of \"if this were to be\"..\n\nGenki describes it as such:\n\n> \"(noun) nara (predicate) = (predicate) applies only to (noun)\"\n>\n> \"nara introduces a sentence that says something \"positive\" about the item\n> that is contrasted.\"\n\nI don't quite understand what they mean, but they gave two examples. First\none, they label as \"contrast\" and the second they label as \"limitation\" (also\nconfusing to me..?)\n\n> 1) Q: ブラジルに行ったことがありますか？ A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。\n>\n> 2) Q: 日本語がわかりますか？ A: ひらがなならわかります。\n\nThinking back to the particle \"wa\", I learned that it sort of implies \"on the\ntopic of NOUN, something something (predicate)\". After reading some other\nexplanations that equate nara closer to \"if\", I began to understand nara to\nfunction sort of like a conditional \"wa\"...\n\n> \"Have you ever been to Brazil?\" \"If we're talking about Chile, then I've\n> been there, but I haven't been to Brazil.\"\n\nand..\n\n> \"Do you understand Japanese?\" \"If we're talking about hiragana, then I\n> understand.\"\n\nSo if we used \"wa\" then it would sound like \"On the topic of Chile, I've been\nthere\" or \"As for Hiragana, I understand.\" but using nara makes it sound\nconditional like \"IF we are talking of Chile, then I've been\" or \"If we're\ntalking about Hiragana specifically, then yes, I understand\"\n\nI'm wondering if I've got this correct, or if I'm missing the point..\n\nI also wondered if maybe there's an implication of \"only\" that comes with\nnara..\n\nExample:\n\n> \"Have you ever been to Brazil?\" \"If we're ONLY talking about Chile, then\n> I've been there, but I haven't been to Brazil (or any other place).\"\n\nand..\n\n> \"Do you understand Japanese?\" \"If we're ONLY talking about hiragana, then I\n> understand (but I don't understand any other form of Japanese).\"\n\nWhich is correct? Can someone explain the usage that Genki II is referring to\nin a simple layman way.\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-20T23:54:15.360",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56771",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T02:09:54.790",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-21T00:55:47.233",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "26432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Usage of なら as described in Genki II is confusing to me",
"view_count": 1551
}
|
[
{
"body": "You are on the right track. Here's my two cents.\n\nI would avoid relating this to the wa particle. There are definitely similar\nways to use them, but their meanings are in fact different.\n\nI like to think of なら as more of the if/then form. Using your example:\n\n> A: チリなら行ったことがありますが、ブラジルは行ったことがありません。 \n> A: If it's Chile (we're talking about), I've been there, but I have not\n> been to Brazil.\n\nWhy does the speaker bring up Chile? While it would make sense from an\nabstract point of view looking at a map, it's important to note that the\nspeaker for whatever reason thinks it is relevant. This kind of inclusion is\ncommon with the use of なら.\n\n* * *\n\n> Q: 日本語がわかりますか？ \n> A: ひらがなならわかります。\n\nIs yet another case where if/then logic works well.\n\n> Q: Do you understand Japanese? \n> A: If it's hiragana, then yes.\n\nThere is a condition here, and it is largely implied. Another translation that\nwould be more linear would be `If it is written in hiragana, then yes.` The\nanswer in this case puts a condition on the subject (Japanese in this case).\nBy connecting the subject, Japanese, to a condition, hiragana, you also imply\nthat you are talking about written language.\n\n> I also wondered if maybe there's an implication of \"only\" that comes with\n> nara..\n\nThis _could_ work in these cases, but I would suggest you think of this as a\nconditional if/then type grammar. Often there are additional implications that\ncome from the use of なら.\n\n* * *\n\nHere's another example:\n\n> Q:たまごがすきですか？ \n> A:なまならすきじゃない。\n>\n> Q:Do you like eggs? \n> A:If the eggs are raw, (then) I don't like them.\n\nHere you are making an implication about the cooking of your eggs. The\nquestion didn't ask about cooking the eggs, just if the answerer liked eggs.\nThe answer also implies that he likes cooked eggs.\n\nTranslating it as `If it's only raw eggs we're talking about, then I don't\nlike them` does get the same meaning across, but we're talking about more than\nraw eggs, we're talking about eggs in general. It's better to take the short\nanswer like `Well if the eggs are raw, then no (I don't like them).`\n\nThis is a long answer, and I'm not sure if I got all of your questions, so\nplease comment if I haven't answered all your questions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T02:09:54.790",
"id": "56778",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T02:09:54.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "56771",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56771
| null |
56778
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56787",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What's the correlation between 済む and すみません? 済む means to finish and I can't\nsee it a correlation between the two.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T00:35:36.063",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56772",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T11:50:50.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji"
],
"title": "すみません came from 済みません?",
"view_count": 307
}
|
[
{
"body": "While there are some that would dismiss this as a false correlation, there is\na connection. According to jisho.org [すみません can also be written as\n済みません,](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%B8%88%E3%81%BF%E3%81%BE%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93)\nbut there is an important note in the definition. It is usually written in\nkana. Personally, before the research I had never seen it with\n[kanji](http://jisho.org/search/%E6%B8%88%20%23kanji) before.\n\n[済む](http://jisho.org/search/%E6%B8%88%20%E3%81%99%E3%82%80) has a variety of\nmeanings, one of which is `to finish` as you have noted. However, the fourth\ndefinition, `to feel unease or guilt for troubling someone; to be sorry,` is\nmore connected in meaning to すみません (notice the subtext next to the definition\nin the link).\n\nIt also turns out that the conjugation of 済む into すまない (usually written in\nkana alone) [is also\nrelated](http://jisho.org/search/%E6%B8%88%20%E3%81%99%E3%81%BE%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\nto すみません. (See definition 3)\n\nWhen it comes to すみません, it's _best not to overthink_ these connections. No\nmatter the connection, this set phrase will _always_ mean `excuse me; (I'm)\nsorry` or `thank you` depending on context.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T01:29:26.837",
"id": "56775",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T01:29:26.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "56772",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "A better understanding of\n[済む](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/120156/meaning/m0u/) is _to be settled_\nor _be cleared off_. Thus すみません represents the sentiment that one owes a\nmental debt, something remain to be repaid. Here comes the meaning \"I feel\nguilty to you\", or \"I'm sorry\".\n\nFYI the negative of 済む as such has that lexical meaning besides this cliche.\n\n> 彼には **済まない** ことをした \n> = _I did something conscience-smitten to him_ \n> ≈ \"I regret what I did to him\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T11:50:50.690",
"id": "56787",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T11:50:50.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "56772",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56772
|
56787
|
56787
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I came across the word [市場], which means market. In google translate the\nreading is 'Ichiba' but when I played the sound it gave me the sound\n'shinjyou'.\n\nI am aware that there are two readings for a character, i.e. kun'yomi (native\njapanese) and on'yomi (from chinese).\n\nThough I am not sure which one to use when speaking/reading it, or is it ok to\nuse both interchangeably?\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T00:43:45.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56774",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T00:43:45.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27569",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "Reading/speaking of 「市場」, which one can I use kun'yomi or on'yomi?",
"view_count": 43
}
|
[] |
56774
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56785",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "たら is a grammar structure which means if...then. \nBut what does たら mean in this sentence?\n\n> この権益の擁護には真剣たらざるを得ない\n\nThe sentence means\n\n> We must be serious about defending this interest\n\nWhat is the role of たら in this sentence? \nIt seems that it does not mean if...then here.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T01:50:49.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56776",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T16:04:13.693",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T03:06:09.813",
"last_editor_user_id": "27310",
"owner_user_id": "27310",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Use of たら in この権益の擁護には真剣たらざるを得ない",
"view_count": 183
}
|
[
{
"body": "What you see is not the conditional -たら, but\n-[たる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/139292/meaning/m0u/) +\n[ざるを得ない](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/89866/meaning/m0u/).\n\n * X **たる** (\"be X; being X\") \nThis form is a vestige of an old sibling of what is now called _na-adjective_\n, which still occasionally appears in formal speech. It stands particularly\nfor state that is _acquired_ (instead of _inherent_ ), _temporary_ (↔\n_permanent_ ), _apparent_ (↔ _internal_ ), or _due_ (↔ _actually is_ ).\n\nDespite what some dictionaries say, it _does_ conjugate in the same manner as\nverbs なる or おわる (consonant-stem; type I) when needed, though most frequently\nseen in the dictionary form as an attributive to a noun.\n\n * **ざるを得ない** (\"have no choice but\") \nA fixed phrase to learn by rote, but consists of ざる ( _archaic_ \"not -ing\") +\nを (accusative) + 得る (\"be able\") + ない (\"not\"). Since it starts with a negative,\nwords that come before it must be changed into negative form:\n\n> **行か** ざるを得ない \n> **見** ざるを得ない \n> **同意せ** ざるを得ない (⚠ _suru verbs have an irregular form!_ )\n\nand\n\n> **真剣たら** ざるを得ない _cannot but assume a serious attitude_",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T11:03:07.017",
"id": "56785",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T16:04:13.693",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-20T16:04:13.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "56776",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
56776
|
56785
|
56785
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56780",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In [tatoeba](https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/228163) I found this\nsentence, that I am confused about how to express gender of animals.\n\nThe sentence is the following:\n\n```\n\n うちの猫って甘えん坊で、どこでも私のあと付いて来るのよね。\n =My cat is such a baby, she follows me around wherever I go.\n \n```\n\nThe gender of the cat is female. But I did not find it in the sentence.\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T02:01:45.797",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56777",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T01:16:50.313",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27569",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "How to tell the gender of the animal in this translation?",
"view_count": 830
}
|
[
{
"body": "So the answer to the question in your title is:\n\n> With 雄 and 雌\n\nWhich are the words used in Japanese to express the gender of animals.\n\nHowever, I think the real question here is:\n\n> Why is there information in the resultant translation that does not appear\n> to be in the original sentence?\n\nFirst of all, let me confirm that nowhere in the original Japanese sentence\ndoes it specify that the cat is female. Unfortunately, this problem (where one\nlanguage has more information than the other) is fairly common on a lot of\ntranslation sites that give individual sentences. Realistically, I think this\nhappens for one of two reasons:\n\n 1. Because adding extra information makes it more natural in the output language. In the case of your example sentence, the translator may have simply decided that because no one refers to their cat as \"it\" in English, they should arbitrarily assign it a gender. Translating from JP -> ENG without sufficient context also often results in guessing about plurals.\n 2. The sentence was translated as part of a larger body of text which contained the extra information in a nearby sentence, but that information moved around when translation happened. Consider something like:\n\n> うちの猫って甘えん坊で、どこでも私のあと付いて来る。雄なのにな。\n\nWhich is roughly\n\n> My cat is such a baby, he follows me around wherever I go. (He does this)\n> even though he's male.\n\nAny half decent translator is going to put a \"he\" in the first sentence,\ndespite the fact that there is no information about gender in the original\nJapanese until the second sentence. This is a slightly contrived example, but\nhopefully it clarifies one way this can happen when you only see one sentence\nat a time.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T03:06:52.983",
"id": "56780",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T03:06:52.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "56777",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
56777
|
56780
|
56780
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56781",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In my vocabulary learning I've recently come across the pattern of 社内、車内、体内\nand was wondering... can I apply this pattern of [something]内 to many other\nthings?\n\nFor example, if I wanted to say \"in the station\" could I say 駅内？\n\nHow about \"in the team\", would it be valid to say \"チーム内\" or is it just for\nplaces you can physically enter?\n\nIt's a hard one to Google because of how they just break it down to ない。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T02:37:44.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56779",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T06:16:40.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9249",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Usage of 内 for inside / within something",
"view_count": 370
}
|
[
{
"body": "* 駅｛えき｝ ⇒ (No) 駅内 ⇒ (Yes) 駅{えき}構内｛こうない｝ _station premises_ , _station yard_ , (Yes) 駅[中]{なか} \n駅弁{えきべん}は、「 **駅構内** で販売｛はんばい｝される弁当｛べんとう｝」を意味｛いみ｝する。 _Ekiben means \"a box lunch\nsold within station premises\"_. \n**駅中** is a newly coined word, which is a common name for commercial space\ndeveloped in railway stations located under jurisdiction by Japanese railway\noperators, and it is explained\n[here](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%A7%85%E3%83%8A%E3%82%AB). It is\nwritten as 駅ナカ, エキナカ or 駅中 etc.\n\n * チーム ⇒ (Yes) チーム[内]{ない} \n * 仲間{なかま} _members of one's group_ ⇒ (Yes) 仲間[内]{うち} \n**仲間内** の約束｛やくそく｝ごと _conventions of the buddy_\n\n * 学校{がっこう} ⇒ (?) 学校内 ⇒ (Yes) 校内｛こうない｝, (Yes) 学校[中]｛じゅう｝ \n**校内** [放送]{ほうそう} _school public address system_ ; _broadcasts aired within\nthe school_ \n彼{かれ}は学校/ **学校中** で一番｛いちばん｝背｛せ｝が高｛たか｝い。 _He is the tallest student in my\nschool._\n\n * 家庭{かてい} _family_ ⇒ (Yes) 家庭[内]{ない} \n**家庭内** [暴力]{ぼうりょく} _domestic violence_\n\n * 病院｛びょういん｝ _hospital_ ⇒ (Yes) 病院[内]{ない}, (Yes) 院内｛いんない｝, (Yes) 病院[中]{じゅう}, (No) 院中 \n**病院内** / **院内** では静粛｛せいしゅく｝にお願｛ねが｝いします。 _Please be quiet in the hospital!_ \n**院内** [感染]{かんせん} _healthcare-acquired infection [HAI]_ ; _nosocomial\ninfection_ \nＡ先生{せんせい}が看護婦｛かんごふ｝のＢさんを好｛す｝きなのは **病院中** の誰｛だれ｝もが知｛し｝っている。 _Everyone knows\nthat doctor A is into nurse B in the hospital._ \nあの火事｛かじ｝では、あっという間｛ま｝に煙｛けむり｝が **病院中** に広｛ひろ｝がった。 _At that fire, smoke quickly\nspread within the building of the hospital._",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T04:35:57.517",
"id": "56781",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T06:16:40.730",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T06:16:40.730",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "56779",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56779
|
56781
|
56781
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This sentence seems to me to be a bit convoluted and I am not quite sure what\nit means. If anyone can help me break it up, I would really appreciate it.\n\nあなたがそれを考え直して止めてもらえればと思います。\n\nAs you can see, there are multiple constructions used within this sentence (1)\nVte 止める, (2) Vte もらう, (3) (4) Potential form + provisional form (もらえれば) and\n(5) と思う\n\nAs I understand it, (1) is \"stop and V\" in a sense, and I think I can\nunderstand that part, but the combination of (2),(3),(4) and (5) which results\nin ～てもらえればと思います makes my head turn a bit. あなたが Vte もらう is, I believe, (s.o.)\nVte for you, (3) is \"can\", (4) is \"if\", (5) is \"I think\", so if I combine the\nwhole thing, I believe I'll get\n\n\"I think if (they) can reconsider for you...\"\n\nAm I correct here? If not, can you help me go through this sentence? Thank you\nfor any help in advance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T05:15:20.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56782",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T06:10:20.407",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-21T06:10:20.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "27824",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Please help me understand あなたがそれを考え直して止めてもらえればと思います。",
"view_count": 192
}
|
[
{
"body": "To break it down,\n\n * それを考え直して止める \nto reconsider and stop it\n\n * それを考え直して止めてもらう \nto reconsider and stop it **(for me)**\n\n * それを考え直して止めてもらえれば。 \n(I would appreciate) **if** you could reconsider and stop it for me.\n\n * 「それを考え直して止めてもらえれば」と思う \nI think \"I would appreciate if you could reconsider and stop it for me\"\n\nOr more naturally, the whole sentence means \"I would appreciate if you\nreconsider and stop it.\"\n\nConditional れば can be used like this (without the subsequent part) to\neuphemistically express your request or hope.\n\n> * 明日来て頂ければと思います。 Would you mind coming tomorrow?\n> * もっとお金があれば！ If only I had more money!\n>",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T05:41:42.347",
"id": "56783",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T06:03:52.667",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-21T06:03:52.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56782",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56782
| null |
56783
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56789",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am trying to find Japanese word for element (as in five elements) and so far\nI got two answers from google translate. It would be good to confirm from a\nnative speaker. One is Yoso and other is Soshi. Can someone please confirm do\nthey mean the same thing? Reverse translate of Yoso ( from Japanese to\nEnglish) says it means “some other place”. Any insights would be great.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T11:44:07.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56786",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T15:22:37.930",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-21T14:59:18.797",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "27826",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-requests"
],
"title": "Japanese word for element",
"view_count": 4338
}
|
[
{
"body": "\"Youso\" and \"soshi\" are both words that could be translated as \"element\", but\nthey probably don't fit the context you're looking for.\n\n\"Youso\" (要素, which may sometimes be transcribed as \"yoso\" in romanisation\nsystems that ignore long vowels) means a single element or factor of a larger\nwhole. \"Yoso\" meaning \"elsewhere\" (他所, with no long vowel) is a completely\ndifferent word. \"Soshi\" (素子), meanwhile, is a very technical term referring to\nan element of a mechanism.\n\nProbably the best word for what you're looking for is \"genso\" (元素), which\nrefers to the classical elements like fire and water, as well as the modern\nconcept of chemical elements. There's also the word \"zokusei\" (属性), which\nliterally means \"attribute\", but is very commonly used to refer to elemental\nalignments of the sort used in role-playing games and similar fantasy magic\nsystems.\n\nAs other commenters have said, relying on Google Translate for translations of\nJapanese, particularly for individual words with no context, is generally a\nbad idea and will lead you down the wrong path more often than not. Japanese\nis a very different language from English, and most words don't have an easy\none-to-one equivalent. You're much better off using actual English-Japanese\ndictionaries for that purpose, preferably ones that feature well-explained\ndefinitions and/or example sentences, so that you can check that the word is\nactually used in the sorts of contexts you're thinking of.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T15:22:37.930",
"id": "56789",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T15:22:37.930",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "56786",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56786
|
56789
|
56789
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56790",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm planning on going to Japan soon and one of the things I'd like to do is\nbuy a few books, but I want to get books that include the furigana for all the\nkanji. How would I ask a store associate to show me where I can find books\nthat include that. My first thoughts go to 「ふりがなの本はありますか？」 but that kind of\nsounds like \"Are there furigana books?\" which I'm not sure conveys the correct\nmeaning. Would I be asking that correctly if I said it that way or is there a\nbetter way of asking for books that include the furigana?\n\nEDIT: I'm willing to accept a more generalized answer to the question of how\nto ask about something being included in something else if that makes sense.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T14:44:03.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56788",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T01:22:12.067",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27531",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"questions",
"furigana"
],
"title": "How do I ask about books that include furigana for the kanji?",
"view_count": 505
}
|
[
{
"body": "The most common way to specify that the printed material must contain furigana\nwould be:\n\n```\n\n ふりがな付きの（本・小説・まんが・etc.）ありますか。\n \n```\n\nor\n\n```\n\n ふりがなの付いている（本・小説・まんが・etc.）ありますか。\n \n```\n\nIf you were to use the translation you listed (ふりがなの本）it might confuse the\nstore associate and they would likely ask for clarification.\n\nAs they might not have a section dedicated to books with furigana, and they\nwill likely just lead you to the 'books for kids' section, it would probably\nbe best to specify what type of book you are interested in initially.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T17:47:52.410",
"id": "56790",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T01:22:12.067",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T01:22:12.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "For \"books with _furigana_ \" you can use 「ふりがな付きの本」.\n\nOf course books come on a spectrum and all books directed at native speakers\nof a particular age group contain _kanji_ and _furigana_ appropriate for this\nage group. (So, even if you're not native, you can try to read books for\nnatives by reading books below your actual age group.)\n\nFor self study, there are also a number of parallel texts, e.g.\n講談社バイリンガル・ブックス.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T18:28:46.443",
"id": "56791",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T18:28:46.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "56788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56788
|
56790
|
56791
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56797",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Let's say I'm explaning the meaning of a word in my mother tongue to a\nJapanese.\n\n> 'Pomme' means apple in French.\n\nI have three possibilities of translating this.\n\n> ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味だ。\n>\n> ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味がある。\n>\n> ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味がする。\n\nAre those sentence all correct, and what are the differences between them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T19:30:02.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56792",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T02:29:52.833",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "15759",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words"
],
"title": "Translating the idea of the verb \"to mean\"",
"view_count": 167
}
|
[
{
"body": "> ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味だ。\n\nPomme means 'apple' in French. a = b\n\n> ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味がある。\n\nPomme has the meaning of 'apple' in French (among other meanings). a = (b + α)\n\n> ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味がする。✖\n\n⇒ポムとは、フランス語でりんごっていう意味をする。（？） Pomme takes on the meaning of 'apple' in french.\nPomme denotes (represents) apple in French. a = b ....... This would, however,\nlikely be considered an unnatural-sounding sentence.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T20:13:16.653",
"id": "56793",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T01:11:08.300",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T01:11:08.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56792",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Your first sentence is correct and natural.\n\n> ポムとは、フランス語でりんご｛っていう/という｝意味だ。\n\n\"Pomme means apple in French.\"\n\nOf course you can also say:\n\n> ポム **は** 、フランス語でりんご｛っていう/という｝意味だ。\n\n(Basically, if you use ～～ **と** は, you'd end the sentence with\n「[noun]+だ/です/である」.（「～とは」≂「というのは」）. eg: ✕「空 **と** は青い。」 → 〇「空 **と** は青いものだ。」\n〇「空は青い。」〇「空は青いものだ。」)\n\n* * *\n\nFor your second sentence, it'd be natural to use には instead of とは, as in:\n\n> ポム **には** 、フランス語でりんご｛っていう/という｝意味がある。\n\n_lit._ \"In Pomme, there is the meaning 'apple' in French.\" → \"Pomme means\napple in French.\" \n(This could imply Pomme can mean (an)other thing(s) too.)\n\n(We often omit the に and say 「～～ **は** ～～っていう意味がある」 in casual speech.)\n\n* * *\n\nFor the third, you can use the transitive suru-verb 「意味 **する** 」(\"to mean~~\")\nif you want to use する:\n\n> ポム **は** 、フランス語でりんご **を意味する** 。\n\n\"Pomme means apple in French.\"\n\nThis one sounds quite formal. To sound more casual you can say:\n\n> ポムは、フランス語でりんごのことだ。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T00:40:12.770",
"id": "56797",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T02:29:52.833",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T02:29:52.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56792",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56792
|
56797
|
56797
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56808",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "* 彼は私達に騒がないように頼んだ。\n * 彼は私達に騒がないと頼んだ。\n * 彼は私達に騒がない頼んだ。\n\nIs there any difference between those?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T21:35:20.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56794",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T03:52:39.690",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-21T23:09:03.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Any difference between these three sentences?",
"view_count": 134
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 彼は私たちに騒がないように頼んだ。◎ He told us not to be noisy.\n\nNo issues with this sentence.\n\n> 彼は私たちに騒がないと頼んだ。✘\n\nWithout the ように, we would assume that the と is functioning as a quotative\nparticle, which means that 「騒がない」would be what is being quoted. 「騒がないで」would\nbe an appropriate fix.\n\n```\n\n 彼は私たちに「騒がないで」と頼んだ。◎ He told us 'Don't be noisy'.\n \n```\n\n> 彼は私たちに騒がない頼んだ。✘\n\nUsing the simple negative form 「ない」 here would serve an adjectival function.\nTherefore, the verb should be changed to a noun (頼み）.\n\n```\n\n 私たちは彼に騒がないという頼みを受けたんだ。【～微妙～】 \n 'We received a request from him to not be noisy.\n \n```\n\nProbably best to avoid this last one as, despite being better grammatically,\nit is an unusual way to form the expression.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T21:31:22.423",
"id": "56808",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T03:52:39.690",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T03:52:39.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56794",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56794
|
56808
|
56808
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56798",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 戯れに触れれば融け行き、悪戯に払えば散りゆく。 かといって、お為ごかしに見過ごせばいずれは消えていく。\n\nFor context we're talking about snow here.\n\nFrom what I know, に when used with a verb stem indicates a purpose. So\n「戯れに触れれば融け行き、」 would translate to \"If we touch it to play it's going to melt\".\n\n「悪戯に」 is giving me more trouble. I think the に is turning it into an adverb so\nthe second part of that sentence would loosely translate to \"If we casually\ndust it off it's going to dissolve.\"\n\nI don't understand the function of the に in the third sentence. It looks like\nit means \"On the other hand, if we overlook it under the pretense of being\nkind it's eventually going to disappear.\" but what is the usage of に here?\n\nI'm pretty sure I'm making mistakes so any clarification is appreciated. Thank\nyou.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-21T23:15:08.830",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56795",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T00:42:07.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25509",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Understanding に correctly in these two sentences",
"view_count": 112
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「戯{たわむ}れ **に** 触{ふ}れれば融{と}け行き、悪戯{いたずら} **に** 払{はら}えば散{ち}りゆく。 かといって、お為{ため}ごかし\n> **に** 見過{みす}ごせばいずれは消{き}えていく。」\n\nYou state:\n\n> \"From what I know, に when used with a verb stem indicates a purpose.\"\n\nBut 「戯れ」、「悪戯」 and 「お為ごかし」 are all _**nouns**_ ; therefore, the \"Verb in\n連用形{れんようけい} (continuative form) + に\" construct you speak of is not applicable\nhere.\n\nInstead, what you need to be looking into are the basic golden rules:\n\n> 「Noun + **の** 」 functions _**adjectivally**_ and\n>\n> 「Noun + **に** 」 functions _**adverbially**_.\n\nThus, 「戯れに触れる」 means \" **to touch out of mere caprice** \" or simply \" **to\ntouch just for fun** \".\n\nLikewise, 「悪戯に払う」 means \" **to brush off mischieviously** \".\n\nAnd 「お為ごかしに見過ごす」, \" **to let pass ostensibly (for your own good)** \"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T00:42:07.147",
"id": "56798",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T00:42:07.147",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
56795
|
56798
|
56798
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "gday guys.\n\nIm looking at the nouns used in the いadj and なadj.\n\nI won't say this with 100% confidence - not by a long shot (n5 here).\n\nI'm noticing the nouns in the:\n\n*なadj are all like 'abstract nouns'. And the \n\n*adj seem to use many nouns that are closer to 'concrete nouns'. \n\nEven when similar words like \"wide\" etc\n\n*いadj appears (to me) to refer to something more physical or a thing.\n\n*なadj (to me) seems to more abstract.\n\nIs there some sense to that, at least in proper grammar terms?\n\n<https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/types-of-noun>\n\nThankyou",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T11:52:38.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56800",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-05T03:42:57.323",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-05T03:42:57.323",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"i-adjectives",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "concrete nouns and abstract nouns. いadj なadj",
"view_count": 596
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, your observation is basically correct. Most na-adjectives are based on\n[Sino-Japanese words](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Japanese_vocabulary)\n(aka _kango_ ), which are words borrowed from China along with kanji, whereas\nmost i-adjectives are etymologically truly native to Japanese ( _yamato-\nkotoba_ or _wago_ ). Naturally, many i-adjectives are simple and fundamental\nones like 大きい (\"big\"), 赤い (\"red\"), 重い (\"heavy\"). On the other hand, na-\nadjectives tend to be difficult, abstract or technical ones, because such\nwords were not necessary in ancient Japan :-)\n\nSometimes the same concept can be described using both an i-adjective and a\nna-adjective. For example an i-adjective\n[鋭い](http://jisho.org/word/%E9%8B%AD%E3%81%84) (\"sharp\") means roughly the\nsame thing as a na-adjective [鋭利](http://jisho.org/word/%E9%8B%AD%E5%88%A9)\n(\"sharp\"). In such cases the na-adjective version tends to sound more\ntechnical, stiff or formal.\n\nSimilar thing can be said for suru-verbs and \"normal\" verbs. While normal\nverbs cover most of the day-to-day verb usages (e.g., 歩く \"walk\", 食べる \"eat\"),\nmost suru-verbs are kango and can describe more advanced or abstract concepts\n(e.g., 運転する \"drive\", 保証する \"warrant\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T12:13:10.087",
"id": "56801",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T12:51:16.163",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-22T12:51:16.163",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56800
| null |
56801
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the difference between V-てばかりいる and V-てばかりだ?. I came across these\nsentences and they seem to have all the same meaning \"always/only be doing\nsomething\", but their usage and constructions appear to be different:\n\n> \"幸子ちゃんは、毎日食べてばかりです。\" \n> \"幸子ちゃんは、遊んでばかりいます。\" \n> \"幸子ちゃんは、泣いてばかりいて、何も話そうとしない。\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T15:11:39.743",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56802",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-27T00:32:09.530",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T00:51:52.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25880",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "difference between V-てばかりいる and V-てばかりだ?",
"view_count": 670
}
|
[
{
"body": "The only difference that I think might be worth mentioning is that:\n\n> 「～～てばかり+ **いる/います** 」\n\nsounds **_slightly_** more formal and/or objectively observed than:\n\n> 「～～てばかり + **だ/です** 」\n\nwhich could tend to sound **_slightly_** more subjectively observed,\nemotional, exclamatory, etc.\n\nThe difference would mostly be minimal unless these phrases are qualified by\nother words used in the context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-27T00:32:09.530",
"id": "56913",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-27T00:32:09.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56802",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56802
| null |
56913
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56804",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was doing an N5 test, and this construction came up:\n\n山田さんは大変いいひとですよ。(Context)\n\n> 何も悪いことは聞いたことがありません。(Construction in question)\n\nWhile I understand the meaning alright (Nothing bad about 田中さん was heard), I\ndo not understand the structure here. Particularly, how does は work here\nconnecting `悪いこと` and `聞いたこと`? Why not simply say\n\n`何も悪く聞いたことがありません`\n\ninstead, or is the meaning somehow different?\n\nHours of search hasn't turned up anything related. Is there any online\nresource I can refer to? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T16:33:50.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56803",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T18:46:39.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27674",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "Deconstructing this format: AことはBことがあります",
"view_count": 102
}
|
[
{
"body": "### The こと\n\nThis is a case where thinking about it in English might actually help.\n\nIn English, one says _\"I haven't heard any **thing** bad about someone\"_. The\npoint here is that we need to have a noun as the object of the verb _hear_.\n\nIn Japanese, we're not just _\"hearing badly\"_ about someone (悪く聞く), we're\n_\"hearing **something** bad\"_ about someone. That's where that first こと comes\nin (悪い **[こ]{●}[と]{●}** を聞く).\n\nThe second こと is part of the standard construction, `[VERB in た form]` +\nことがある, referring to whether someone has had any experience of `[VERB]`, such\nas _\"have you ever`[VERB]`ed?\"_\n\n### The は\n\nThe は in your sample question replaces the を. This construction uses は for\nemphasis, making the 悪いこと a kind of sub-topic within the overall topic of\n山田さん. The implication is that you haven't heard _anything bad_ , though you\nmay have heard other things. This is often conveyed in English more through\ntone of voice.\n\nFor instance, タバコ **[を]{●}** 吸いません just means neutrally that you don't smoke\ntobacco. Using は instead, タバコ **[は]{●}** 吸いません states that you don't smoke\n_tobacco_ , but it could imply that you smoke other things, just not tobacco\nproducts. As with many things in language, context is important in discerning\nthe intended meaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T18:46:39.420",
"id": "56804",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T18:46:39.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "56803",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56803
|
56804
|
56804
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56806",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "次の文は雑誌の広告写真についていたキャプションです。\n\n> 「やさしいかわ ひとに ちきゅうに」\n\n日本エコレザーの広告です。写真では、三人の子供が地球を持っています。やさしい革とは、アレルギーの原因となる金属とか有害物質のない皮革です。\n\nそれを考えると、どういう意味がありますか。\n\n> 「やさしいかわ。人に作られた。地球のために」\n>\n> 「やさしいかわ。人のために。地球のために」\n\nなど。\n\nよろしくおねがいします。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T19:07:02.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56805",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-02T00:51:23.887",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"particle-に",
"ellipsis"
],
"title": "どの言葉がなくなったのですか Which words are missing?",
"view_count": 193
}
|
[
{
"body": "例の文章は省略された言い回しのようなものですけれども、強調されている言葉は「やさしい」です。そして、「やさしい」について考えますと、「誰にとってやさしいのか、何にとってやさしいのか」という疑問が自然に頭の中に浮かんできます。この観点から見ますと、「人に\n**[作]{●}[ら]{●}[れ]{●}[た]{●}** 」のではなく、「何々 **[の]{●}[た]{●}[め]{●}[に]{●}**\n」でもなく、「何々に **[と]{●}[っ]{●}[て]{●}** （やさしい）」や「何々に **[対]{●}[し]{●}[て]{●}**\n（やさしい）」というほうが正しい解釈でしょう。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T19:22:32.457",
"id": "56806",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T01:06:31.450",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T01:06:31.450",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "56805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "たいていの人は、ぱっと見てこれは[倒置]{とうち}（inversion, anastrophe）だと認識すると思います。\n\n> 「やさしいかわ ひとに ちきゅうに」 （倒置が起こっている） \n> ← 「ひとに、ちきゅうに、やさしいかわ」（もとの語順）\n\n「人にも地球にも優しい革」、「人間にも環境にも優しい革」という意味です。\n\n「～に優しい」は、\"to be kind to (someone)\" という意味です。\n\nですから、「どの言葉がなくなったのですか」への答えとしては、語順が変わっただけで、どの言葉もなくなっていない、ということになると思います。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T00:42:29.017",
"id": "56814",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T01:42:33.677",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T01:42:33.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56805
|
56806
|
56806
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56818",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 日本の記録は **２分５３秒８９** で、オリンピックの新しい記録になりました。 \n> The Japanese result was 2 minutes 53.89 seconds and became a new Olympic\n> record.\n\nI haven't seen this way of writing a decimal number before, by putting the\nunit of measurement between the integer and fractional part. Can this be done\nwith measurements other than time e.g. can I write 1.5km as 1キロ5? Are there\nany contexts where it is more/less appropriate to write it like this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T20:06:21.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56807",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T03:08:06.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"numbers"
],
"title": "Writing the decimal part of a number after the unit of measurement",
"view_count": 134
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think that this is exclusive to milliseconds, where it is understood from\nthe context.\n\n1.5km would be 1.5キロ or 1キロ500メートル. As opposed to time measurement, the metric\nsystem is highly conducive to decimals, I don't see many situations that they\nwouldn't be used.\n\nOne mile, 400 feet, 9 inches would be 1マイル400フィート9インチ. As inches can be\nassumed, but not with the same level of certainty as the millisecond example,\nit would not be left off.\n\nTL;DR I believe it is only for time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T21:48:09.460",
"id": "56809",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-22T21:48:09.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I think this convention is almost specific to sport or racing contexts.\nOutside such contexts you should usually say 53.89秒 (ごじゅうさんてんはちきゅうびょう). Just\nto make sure, 53秒89 is read ごじゅうさんびょう **はちきゅう** , not はちじゅうきゅう, as if 秒 were\nthe decimal mark.\n\nAccording to\n[陸上競技アナウンサーのしおり（2017年度版）](http://www.jaaf.or.jp/pdf/about/resist/technical/2017announcer_guide.pdf),\nsub-meter lengths are officially written similarly but pronounced differently,\npresumably because センチメートル is a well-known unit:\n\n * 8m40 はちメートルよんじゅう (not はちメートルよんれい or よんぜろ)\n * 8m03 はちメートルさん (not はちメートルれいさん or ぜろさん)\n\nBut I personally feel the readings in parentheses are not unnatural. Again,\noutside sport contexts you should use \"8.4m\" (はってんよんメートル) or \"8m40cm\"\n(はちメートルよんじゅっセンチ), although はちメートルよんじゅう would be safely understood.\n\n> ## 記録の読み方\n>\n> ### ① 時間\n>\n> * 電気計時の秒未満の数字は一文字一文字で読む。 \n> 例) 10 秒 22……「にじゅうに」ではなく、「にいにい」と読む。\n> * 十秒、十分の単位が「0」の場合 \n> 例) 2 分 05 秒 27…… 十秒の単位を「れい 5 秒」とは言わず、分と秒の間に「一呼吸」入れて「5 秒」と言う。 \n> 例) 2 分 00 秒 00…… 秒の単位は「れい・れい」秒ではなく「れい」秒。秒単位未満は「れい・れい」と言う。 \n> 例) 2 時間 01 分 06 秒……分の単位を「れい 1 分」とは言わず、時間と分の間に「一呼吸」入れて「1 分」、秒の単位を「れい 6\n> 秒」とは言わず、「6 秒」と言う。\n>\n\n>\n> ### ② 距離や高さ\n>\n> * 「ｍ未満」の十の位が「0」の場合 \n> 例）2ｍ03………「2ｍれい 3」とは言わず、「2ｍ」の後に「一呼吸」入れて、「3」と言う（言い切る）。 \n> 例）2ｍ00………「2ｍれい・れい」「2ｍちょうど」とは言わず、「2ｍれい」と言う（言い切る）。\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T02:36:13.613",
"id": "56818",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T03:08:06.507",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T03:08:06.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56807
|
56818
|
56818
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I've been wondering around, thinking about if it would be wrong to use the\ncharacter か after the shortened phrase 元気。That is 元気 as in [ お元気ですか？]. Would\nit still mean the same if you did it like this [元気か] or would that be\ngrammatically incorrect? The point is to make certain to the person talking to\nthat it is a question and that you are not just saying \"fine\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T22:02:59.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56810",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T01:53:32.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27846",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-か"
],
"title": "The use of か [ka]",
"view_count": 87
}
|
[
{
"body": "\"元気か?\" is grammatical, but it tends to sound fairly blunt and/or haughty. In\nfiction, an old man, a stereotyped strict father or a yakuza boss may say\nthis. Usually \"元気?\" _with a rising intonation_ is used in friendly and casual\nconversations.\n\nIf such a question is not directly cast to a person, \"noun/na-adj + か\" may be\nmore acceptable. People often say \"マジか?\" or \"アホか?\" when they saw something\nunbelievable, although these still sound a little rough.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T01:53:32.343",
"id": "56816",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T01:53:32.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56810",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56810
| null |
56816
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56812",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Think of an advertisement slogan for example. What would be a short form\nexpression of \"Not just a book\" in Japanese, meaning that \"it is not only a\nbook, but more than just a book\"?\n\nIs\n\n> 本だけではない。\n\na correct and natural expression for that? I know, that\n\n> 本だけ\n\nmeans \"just a book\". However, I don't know what the correct grammatical\nexpression is, since a specific meaning is behind the phrase \"Not just a\nbook\".\n\nI look forward to your help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T22:57:09.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56811",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T01:16:42.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27847",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is「本だけではない」the correct expression for \"Not just a book\"?",
"view_count": 112
}
|
[
{
"body": "本だけではない is completely grammatical, but means \"There is a book and something\nother than a book,\" or \"A book is not the only thing that can do it\" rather\nthan \"This is something better than an ordinary book.\"\n\nTo say the latter, how about something like \"単なる本ではない\", \"本を超えた本\" or \"本以上の何か\"?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-22T23:48:23.267",
"id": "56812",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T01:16:42.723",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T01:16:42.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56811",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56811
|
56812
|
56812
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56815",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In many cultures people will make nicknames for the residents of a certain\nregion, for example Cockneys / Brummies in Britain, or Yankees / Hillbillies\nin the US.\n\nAre there any common nicknames Japanese people will call each other? I have so\nfar only found 才六{さいろく} and 東男{あづまをとこ}, but both of these seem to be quite old\nfashioned.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T00:11:39.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56813",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-12T13:55:09.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"slang",
"demonyms"
],
"title": "Japanese demonyms for each other",
"view_count": 865
}
|
[
{
"body": "We actually have **so many** , but the ones that are nationally known would\ninclude (going roughly from north to south):\n\n・道産子{どさんこ} - Hokkaido\n\n・水戸{みと}っぽ - City of Mito, Ibaraki Prefecture\n\n・江戸{えど}っ子{こ} - Tokyo\n\n・浜{はま}っ子 - Yokohama\n\n・浪速{なにわ}っ子 - Osaka\n\n・土佐{とさ}っ子 - Kouchi Prefecture\n\n・博多{はかた}っ子 - Fukuoka\n\n・薩摩隼人{さつまはやと} - Kagoshima (male only)\n\n・おごじょ or 薩摩{さつま}おごじょ - Female version of above.\n\n・うちなんちゅう - Okinawa (This is what Okinawans call themselves. They call us non-\nOkinawans やまとんちゅう)\n\nAs seen above, many demonyms use the old names of the areas rather than their\ncurrent names -- 江戸、浪花、土佐, etc.\n\nNew arrivals:\n\n・シロガネーゼ - Women of Shirokane area of Tokyo. Borrowed from \"Mila **nese** \" in\nItalian.\n\n・アシヤレーヌ - Women of Ashiya, Hyougo\n\n・ニコタマダム - Married women of Futakotamagawa, Tokyo\n\n***Answered by an 尾張{おわり}っ子 (western half of Aichi Prefecture)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T01:35:05.770",
"id": "56815",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-12T13:55:09.107",
"last_edit_date": "2020-01-12T13:55:09.107",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56813",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] |
56813
|
56815
|
56815
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> について vs に関して\n\n1a. 今から韓国に関して話してください。X\n\n1b. 今から韓国について話してください。〇\n\nWhy is Imabi saying that 1a is wrong? [Source](http://www.imabi.net/about.htm)\n\nAll sources are saying that について and に関して have the same function, with the\nlatter being more formal/literary. Imabi confirms this, but makes a\ndistinction:\n\n> Whereas ～について emphasizes the content at hand, ～に関して includes the\n> surroundings related to it.\n\nAnd proceeds to give this as an explanation for 1a being wrong:\n\n> Also, as ～について comes from the verb 付く, it is used a lot when referring to\n> things being tied to acts of communication via speaking, writing, thinking,\n> etc. As you might gather just from the few examples thus far, ～に関して is more\n> formal and stiff. **Given its nuance and formality, you should see why it\n> was wrong in the first example.**\n\n**Questions:**\n\n * Is 1a really wrong? Why?\n * Is \"Whereas ～について emphasizes the content at hand, ～に関して includes the surroundings related to it.\" correct? If so, can you compare them with examples? Imabi fails to do this.\n\nA (non native) friend pointed out this part from Imabi's quote:\n\n> as ～について comes from the verb 付く, it is used a lot when referring to things\n> being tied to acts of communication\n\nDoes this imply that に関して is really only used in literary stuff? Kinda like\n“hey, we all use について but you might find に関して in old books and stuff, just so\nyou know. The latter is more formal so yeah, go ahead and use について.” ?\n\nObservation: I asked on Hinative for help about 1a being wrong: [two natives\nsaid both are correct.](https://hinative.com/en-US/questions/6807334)\n\nObservation 2, I've just found out this: [Is this\nwhy?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15412/are-these-phrases-\ninterchangeable-%E3%81%AB%E9%96%A2%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8A%E3%81%84%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%A4%E3%81%84%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8A%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B)\n\nQuoting:\n\n> に関して \"relating to\" The character 関 indicates that the topics have a\n> connection/relationship, that they are tied/locked to one another. Can refer\n> to 1 or a collection of topics related to the subject.\n\n> について \"regarding\" The concepts of \"connections\" and relationship are still\n> there, but perhaps the situation is in flux. The kanji 就 in Chinese can mean\n> \"moving towards\" a topic, so there's a sense of fluidity, transition, or\n> motion in the conversation.\n\nWhen you're making a connection from one topic to another, に関して makes sense.\nOn the other hand, について implies a more \"moving forward\" on the topic?\n「今から韓国に関して話してください。」starts right away with 「今から」, kinda implying a change in\nthe topic? Is that why Imabi's writer said 1a is wrong?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T02:24:24.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56817",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-19T07:09:25.933",
"last_edit_date": "2022-02-19T04:39:58.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "27250",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "について vs に関して - the internet tells me they only change in formality, but Imabi disagrees?",
"view_count": 525
}
|
[
{
"body": "I'm a native speaker, and I'd say `今から韓国に関して話してください` is not wrong. Maybe just\nan uncommon combination. `韓国に関する一切の通信を禁ず` would be very natural, because it's\nformal. \nI wouldn't say it's only used in written language though. You can certainly\nsay `それに関してはコメントできない`, and it's completely natural.\n\nOverall I'd say it's not \"wrong\", maybe just uncommon because a) it is more\nformal than ついて, and it feels overly vague (why would one talk \"about\nsomething related to Korea\", why not \"talk about Korea\"?).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T17:16:33.633",
"id": "57286",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T17:16:33.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "56817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "As I've heard it used by natives and been understood when using it myself,\nに関して comes across more as \"pertaining to\", \"in regards to\", or \"concerning\",\nwhereas について feels more like \"about\". So, I'd talk 'about' Korea, rather than\n'concerning' Korea. You could, of course, if you were a politician, talk\n'concerning' [the recent developments in] Korea, but that would certainly be a\nless typical type of speech heard. I wouldn't say answer A was 'wrong' in the\nsense of being entirely incorrect, but rather not the way someone _would_ say\nit.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-01-20T02:50:21.673",
"id": "93018",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-20T02:50:21.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10907",
"parent_id": "56817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56817
| null |
57286
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56825",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was studying the words 何十/何百/何千, and I often see the\nparticles「も」and「の」after.\n\nFor example,\n\n> 彼は何十冊もの日本に関する本を持っている。\n\nOr,\n\n> 高速道路は何千もの車で渋滞した。\n\nThe「も」I think is used to emphasize that there's a large quantity, but what is\nthe purpose of 「の」?\n\nI also found some sentences with a similar pattern, but 「の」 is not used.\n\nExample:\n\n> 彼は何十冊も英語の本を持っている\n\nWhy is that the case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T03:09:00.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56819",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-04T02:44:09.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-の",
"particle-も"
],
"title": "Why is 「の」 used in 何十もの？",
"view_count": 352
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is all about grammar and nothing else.\n\n> 「(Number) + **も** 」 functions _**adverbially**_ to modify a _**verb**_.\n>\n> 「(Number) + **も** + **の** 」 functions _**adjectivally**_ to modify a\n> _**noun**_.\n\nLet us look at your example sentences:\n\n> 「彼{かれ}は何十冊{なんじゅっさつ} **もの** 日本{にほん}に関{かん}する本{ほん}を持{も}っている。」\n\n「何十冊 **もの** 」 modifies the noun 「本」.\n\n> 「高速道路{こうそくどうろ}は何千{なんぜん} **もの** 車{くるま}で渋滞{じゅうたい}した。」\n\n「何千もの」 modifies the noun 「車」.\n\n> 「彼は何十冊 **も** 英語{えいご}の本を持っている。」\n\nIn this sentence, 「何十冊も」 modifies the verb phrase 「持っている」.\n\nWhat would happen if you inserted a 「の」 following the 「も」, then?\n\nIn the new sentence:\n\n> 「彼は何十冊 **もの** 英語の本を持っている。」\n\n「何十冊もの」 will simply modify the noun 「本」 instead. The meaning of the sentence\nwill virtually stays the same. The new sentence will just have a different\ngrammatical structure.\n\nEDIT: I did not mention this, but this usage of 「も/もの」 always indicates that\nthe speaker thinks the quantity in question is rather _**large**_ as the\nquestioner stated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T07:32:28.057",
"id": "56825",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-04T02:44:09.350",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56819",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] |
56819
|
56825
|
56825
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I understand that は and が can be very different in meaning & emotion, and some\nstructures require one of them. However, are there some cases where I can use\neither of them but the sentence remains (almost) the same in meaning &\nemotion?\n\n(That is to say, given the same context, a native speaker would choose to use\neither of them to express the same idea.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T04:14:17.893",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56820",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-17T18:39:46.067",
"last_edit_date": "2023-02-17T18:39:46.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "816",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-が",
"は-and-が"
],
"title": "Are there some cases where は and が are interchangeable?",
"view_count": 320
}
|
[
{
"body": "Actually, yes.\n\nIn negative sentences は often replaces が or を. E.g.\n\n本 **は** 読まない (hon wa yomanai) I don't read books.\n\n彼 **は** 好きじゃない (kare wa suki jya nai) I don't love/like him.\n\nIn these sentences, it would also be grammatically correct to use を and が\nrespectfully, but many Japanese find は to be more natural. The rule of thumb\nis that there needs to be at least one は in negative sentences. If you add 私は\nat the beginning of the sentences above, the need for は is satisfied,\ntherefore speakers are less compelled to use は instead of が or を. In negative\nsentences it may even follow particles like に or で to satisfy this condition.\n\n英語 **では** 話したくないです. (eigo de wa hanashitakunai desu) I don't want to talk in\nEnglish.\n\nI hope this helps.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T09:33:38.690",
"id": "57183",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-09T09:33:38.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28068",
"parent_id": "56820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "This discussion is probably as old as learning japanese is, and as the comment\nmentioned, is pretty challenging to answer. You can find heaps and heaps of\nliterature on the internet about the differences between these two particles.\n\nI can't really think of a case where they don't change the meaning though.\nWhen は replaces が, it indicates a subject that is also known to the speaker,\nor a contrastive element, or indicates that the sentence is now about the\ntopic instead of what follows. Let's try some examples to try to illustrate\nthis:\n\n私は知っている \"I know\"\n\n私が知っている \" _I_ know\"\n\nAt face value these sentences look the same. The が version makes it sound like\nthe focus is on you, that is, you are the one who knows (likely, you are\ncorrecting someone).\n\nThe は version is more neutral because it simply establishes you as the topic,\nand 知っている is stating something about you.\n\nWhen が appears for transitive adjectives like 好き, or ほしい, it marks the object\nthat the adjective applies to. Specifically:\n\n私は犬が好き\n\nis natural. It simply says that I like dogs. However:\n\n私が犬は好き\n\nis... weird. It sounds like you like dogs, but not something else. This is\nbecause here, は marks a contrast with something unnamed. Transitive adjectives\nalmost always mark the object with が for this reason.\n\nThe answer is... no. There's always a difference. When が is used to mark\nsomething in the main clause, it usually places emphasis on it, as in the\nfirst example. When は is used for transitive adjectives or inside relative\nclauses, or as a second は in a clause, it marks a contrastive element, so it\nis usually understood to mean \"this, but not something else\".\n\nReferences: A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-01-22T22:19:57.847",
"id": "93077",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-22T22:30:53.457",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-22T22:30:53.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "48969",
"owner_user_id": "48969",
"parent_id": "56820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56820
| null |
93077
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Consider this sentence:\n\n> でもだからこそ強くなれたし、短期留学じゃ経験できなかったような多くのリアルな留学が経験できた。\n\nSomeone I asked translated this as:\n\n\"But that is why I was able to become strong and had a lot of experience\nthrough my realistic overseas study **that** would not be possible in a short-\nterm study program.\"\n\n* * *\n\nI don't understand how ような is translated as \"`that` would not be possible\"\n\nI've learnt that ような is used to express likeness or similarity. For example:\n\n> 彼は私が想像していたような人ではなかった。He is not the person \"like\" I imagined\n\nIt wouldn't make sense if I use ような as \"like\" in the first sentence:\n\nI read\n\n> 短期留学じゃ経験できなかったような多くのリアルな留学が経験できた。\n\nas:\n\n\"...and had a lot of realistic experiences studying abroad \"like\" I can't\nexperience when studying short-term abroad.\"\n\nI know this sentence also wouldn't make sense for the same reasons:\n\n> 実行できないような脅しはするな。Never make threats \"that\" you cannot carry out.\n\nIs there another use for ような other than \"like\"? Can someone please explain\nthis grammatical rule to me?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T04:27:15.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56821",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-25T15:10:10.943",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T04:49:52.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "27851",
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "Can someone explain how ような is used in this sentence?",
"view_count": 323
}
|
[
{
"body": "It might help to think of it as \"I had experiences that were not like ones I\nwould have had on a shorter exchange.\" In this case you can see that ような still\nhas the meaning of \"like\", and not of \"that\".\n\nEven 実行できないような脅しはするな could be thought of as \"never make threats like ones you\ncan't go through with\".\n\nI would avoid trying to make ような translate to \"that\" since it really is\nexpressing likeness in any case I can think of.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T05:53:18.140",
"id": "56822",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T05:53:18.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5274",
"parent_id": "56821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 「短期留学{たんきりゅうがく}じゃ経験{けいけん}できなかった **ような** 多{おお}くのリアルな留学{りゅうがく}が経験{けいけん}できた。」\n\nThis sentence is in the following construct:\n\n> 「Phrase (often a mini-sentence) + **ような** + Noun/Noun Phrase」\n\nwhich means:\n\n> \" ** _the kind/type of_** (noun/noun phrase) **_that_** (phrase/mini-\n> sentence)\"\n\nIf you thought that 「ような」 used in a sentence pattern as the above could neatly\nbe translated into a single English word, that would **_not_** be the case.\nTranslation between two unrelated languages does not work like that.\n\n> I've learnt that ような is used to express likeness or similarity.\n\nPrecisely. The sentence pattern above expresses exactly that. You are talking\nabout a matter turning out to be **_similar or unsimilar_** to what you had\nexpected/heard/imagined, etc. Thus, the TL by your someone is actually quite\nvalid. It succeeds in capturing the intended meaning of the original.\n\n(And \"like\" is so much related to \"similar/unsimilar\", isn't it? \"Like\" is a\ngood word in explaining what 「ような」 means. Whether or not \"like\" can be used\nall by itself in the translation, however, is a completely different matter.)\n\nUsing my own explanation above, my TL would look like this:\n\n> \"That, however, is why I was able to become a stronger person and was able\n> to have **_the many types of_** \"real\" study-abroad experiences **_that_** I\n> would not have been able to in a short-term study-abroad program.\n\nFinally, let us use my \"the kind/type of ~~ that ~~\" construct in translating:\n\n> 「実行{じっこう}できないような脅{おど}しはするな。」\n\nMy own TL of that would naturally be:\n\n> \"Never make **_the kinds of_** threats **_that_** you could not carry out!\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-25T12:56:51.960",
"id": "57527",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-25T15:10:10.943",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-25T15:10:10.943",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56821
| null |
56822
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56826",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is 'うつさい' equivalent to 'うるさい' in this context? Why?\n\nI can't find 'うつさい' in the dictionary and Google translate, so I tried\ninputting the Chinese version of the text(i.e '吵') into Google translate and\nit told me that it was 'うるさい`\n\nFri Feb 23 16:47:41 CST 2018 update{ Thank you all,[Google search for\n'うっさい'](https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&hl=en&source=hp&ei=zdSPWqzCEpLmjwPd3pGoCg&q=%E3%81%86%E3%81%A3%E3%81%95%E3%81%84&oq=%E3%81%86%E3%81%A3%E3%81%95%E3%81%84&gs_l=psy-\nab.3...9821.9821.0.10710.1.1.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1..64.psy-\nab..1.0.0....0.MjyLixA54Ys) is working. }\n\nThe whole context :\n[https://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=manga&illust_id=66989588](https://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=manga&illust_id=66989588)\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I063h.jpg)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T07:23:11.230",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56824",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T16:41:32.270",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T16:41:32.270",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "27768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"colloquial-language",
"gemination"
],
"title": "Is 'うつさい' equivalent to 'うるさい' in this context? Why?",
"view_count": 302
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's 'うっさい' in this context and it's a colloquial style of 'うるさい'.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T07:33:05.743",
"id": "56826",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T07:33:05.743",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27853",
"parent_id": "56824",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
56824
|
56826
|
56826
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56829",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've noticed that Japanese names are often made up of different words meaning\ndifferent things, creating a combination of the meaning of the Japanese name.\n\nIs it possible if I could combine two words, himitsu 秘密 (secret) and sora 空\n(sky), into one name? I'm trying to create a name meaning both \"secret\" and\n\"sky\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T12:34:55.580",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56827",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T14:35:12.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27857",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"definitions",
"names"
],
"title": "Combining two words into a name",
"view_count": 3044
}
|
[
{
"body": "> Is it possible if I could combine two words, himitsu 秘密 (secret) and sora 空\n> (sky), into one name?\n\nYes, it is. In this case, I would make up a name with 秘空{ひくう}. \nUsually we use two _kanji_ s, not three, to make up a name, so 秘空 is better\nthan 秘密空. \nAnd 秘 itself means 秘密, so you can use 秘 instead of 秘密 safely in 秘空.\n\n# BONUS\n\nAs you know, 空 has two meanings: (1) sky; (2) empty/vacant, so I recommend\nthat you would choose 天 instead of 空 for the meaning of sky. Now you would get\nthe name as 秘天｛ひてん｝. I think it's a wonderful name having the meaning with\nsecret and sky. By the way, 天 has two meanings: (1) sky; (2) heaven.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T14:35:12.150",
"id": "56829",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T14:35:12.150",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "56827",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56827
|
56829
|
56829
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56835",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 赤鍵は抜刀 **に** 許可が必要です。\n\nThis one throws me off a little bit. Does it bear the same meaning as \"には\" (in\norder to) or is it different? Or could it be another way of using the verb 許可?\n\nThe only way I could translate it would be : I need permission (in order) to\ndraw the red key, but I usually always encounter には so に alone disturbs me a\nbit.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T12:41:05.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56828",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T02:32:07.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "に in this sentence",
"view_count": 137
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「赤鍵 **は** 抜刀{ばっとう} **に** 許可{きょか}が必要{ひつよう}です。」\n\nis a grammatically perfect sentence meaning:\n\n> \"Permission is required for the unsheathing of 赤鍵.\"\n\n(I presume 赤鍵 is read あかかげ, but since I could not be certain, I left it in\nkanji. The word must be a proper noun.)\n\n「には」 cannot be used in place of 「に」 because **「は」 as a topic marker** is\nalready used in 「赤鍵は」. You cannot use it twice.\n\nAs you stated, 「～～には～～が必要」 is a common phrase and it can be used in the\nsentence in question **_only if_** the necessary alterations are made. That\nsentence will be:\n\n> 「赤鍵 **の** 抜刀 **には** 許可が必要です。」\n\nThe 「は」 in the original has been changed to 「の」 so that the topic marker 「は」\nis used only once.\n\nTo use the 「～～には～～が必要」 construct correctly, you must place either a noun or a\nverb in the dictionary form right in front of the 「には」. 「赤鍵の抜刀」 is a noun\nphrase, so it works out fine.\n\nWhat happens if you used two 「は's」 in this sentence?\n\n> 「赤鍵 **は** （、）抜刀 **には** 許可が必要です。」\n\nThis sentence is still actually correct and grammatical, but the meaning will\nchange somewhat because now the **「は」 in 「には」 will be the constrastive\nmarker**. Thus, this new sentence means:\n\n> \"Permission is required for the unsheathing of 赤鍵, ( ** _but it is not\n> required for doing something else with 赤鍵_**.)\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T01:29:11.850",
"id": "56835",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T02:32:07.317",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T02:32:07.317",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56828",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
56828
|
56835
|
56835
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56831",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "If なくちゃ is followed by another verb, is it read as \" _you must do X **or\nelse** Y will happen_\" or \" _you must do X **and then** Y will happen_\"?\n\n**Example:** \nIn this sentence (from よだかの星): \nおまえは、曇ってうすぐらい日か、夜でなくちゃ、出て来ない。\n\n**Is it:** \"As for you, it must be a dim cloudy day or night... or else you\nwon't come out.\" \n**Or:** \"As for you, it must be a dim cloudy day or night so that you won't\ncome out.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T20:13:56.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56830",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-04T11:29:53.800",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-23T21:43:02.187",
"last_editor_user_id": "27592",
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "What does the verb after なくちゃ or なくては mean?",
"view_count": 566
}
|
[
{
"body": "You are thinking of `なくちゃ` as `must`, but it's really just a contraction of\n`なくては`. `なくてはならない` and `なくてはいけない` are used to mean \"must\", and sometimes the\nfinal verb is dropped and `なくちゃ` by itself is used as a very casual way to\nimply that something must be done.\n\nHowever, especially in cases where something comes after the `なくちゃ`, it can\njust mean `なくては`. See Jisho's definition\n[here](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83), and also\na related question\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/25567/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83-is-\nthe-short-informal-\nof-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AF%E3%81%84%E3%81%91%E3%81%BE%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93-but-\nwhy-is-\nthere-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%81%84%E3%81%91%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%AE-\nrather-than-%E3%81%AA).\n\nIn short, it's\n\n> As for you, it must be a dim cloudy day or night or else you won't come out.\n\nEdit: Also see Eiríkr Útlendi's comment.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T21:03:25.500",
"id": "56831",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-23T21:03:25.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "56830",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "The existing answers aren't wrong, but I think the question hasn't been fully\nanswered yet.\n\nなくては usually means \"without\" in a broad sense. Its meaning is actually more\nneutral than the \"unless\" translation that user4092 mentioned, and is often a\nhypothetical condition. Example:\n\n辞書がなくては分からない.\n\nIt's important to distinguish also between -ては and -て:\n\n * 分からなくては心配です \"Without understanding (i.e. unless I've understood), it's a worry\"\n * 分からなくて心配です \"I'm worried about my not understanding\"\n\nIn the second example, 分からない is an actuality, not just hypothetical like in\nthe first example.\n\n> What does the verb after なくちゃ or なくては mean?\n\nMore generally, なくては means something like \"[something] not being [the case]\n(at least), what follows will/did occur/is true/is my assertion.\" This is\nactually a very broad pattern: gerund + は. See chapter 22B of JSL (which I\nlifted the above examples from).\n\nYou can also follow with an adjectival, or any other predicate: 直さなくては危ないよ！\n\nEven これじゃありません is an instance of this pattern (the gerund being で, where では is\ncontracted to じゃ): this being the case/thing under consideration, it isn't\nthat -> \"as for this, it's not\" -> \"it's not this at least\" -> \"(it's) not\nthis\".\n\nAlso, as alternates for \"must\" there are patterns with と and with the\nprovisional, which are beyond the scope of this question. See [What is と in\nthis sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/25707/what-\nis-%E3%81%A8-in-this-sentence/25714#25714) and [Difference between ~なきゃ and\n~なくちゃ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4213/difference-\nbetween-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8D%E3%82%83-and-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83/4216#4216)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-04T11:29:53.800",
"id": "57048",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-04T11:29:53.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27987",
"parent_id": "56830",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
56830
|
56831
|
56831
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56833",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm not certain why the の is in the 2nd sentence:\n\n> 「それから、おれのくちばしやつめを見ろ。そして、よくお前 **の** とくらべて見るがいい。」 「鷹さん。それはあんまり無理です。」\n\nIt seems like the meaning should be \"And then, often you are compared with\n[me] and you look good.\"\n\nBut if that's right, then the の seems unnecessary. (Shouldn't お前とくらべて = \"you\nare compared with [me]?)\n\nSo, I guess the の is saying that the comparison _itself_ belongs to お前? \n_e.g._ \n\"And then, often [there is the] comparison **of** you with [me] and you look\ngood.\" \n _or_ \n\"And then, often [there is] **your** comparison with [me] and you look good.\n\nAre either of those right?",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T21:32:55.867",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56832",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-28T00:06:54.320",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T02:06:10.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Would someone be willing to check my reading of の in this sentence?",
"view_count": 216
}
|
[
{
"body": "お前の stands on its own and means 'yours'. The の doesn't join お前 to the\nfollowing words as you seem to suggest. So お前のとくらべる is 'compare (mine) with\nyours', where 'mine' is implicit.\n\nFor the verb+がいい part have a read of [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/36714/the-meaning-\nof-%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%8C%E3%81%84%E3%81%84).\n\nverb-て見る is 'try doing verb' in this case (see @chocolate's comment below for\nwhy 見る is in kanji)\n\nFinally (unless context suggests otherwise) I'd be more inclined to think that\nよく meant 'well' rather than 'often'.\n\nMaybe I'd translate the whole thinks as something like:\n\n> You should carefully/thoroughly compare (mine) with yours.\n\nwhere よく is carefully/thoroughly, or some word that implies that the\ncomparison is done 'well'.\n\nThanks to @chocolate for helping to improve my answer.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-23T22:02:43.277",
"id": "56833",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-27T16:25:31.970",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-27T16:25:31.970",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "56832",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
56832
|
56833
|
56833
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56847",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between me and my language\npartner. For full context, I attach the full block about the topic \"Your name\n(anime)\" we were talking about at that point:\n\n>\n> 「君の名は」は、DVDを買って、家で観ました。海外での「ジブリアニメ」の定義はよくわかりませんが、日本で「ジブリ映画」というと、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画のことで、その数はそれほど多くはありません。 \n> <http://nendai-ryuukou.com/article/030.html>\n>\n> でも「君の名は」は日本でもとても評判がよく、私もよくできていると思いました。ratwimps\n> の歌を効果的に使い、テンポよく進んでいくのが良かったですね。 \n>\n> アンドレアスさんは字幕で観たのですか。私は、この映画では日本語の特性がよく表れていると思いました。男の子の一人称は「オレ」、女の子を呼ぶときの二人称は「おまえ」ですが、女の子の一人称は「私」、男の子を呼ぶときの二人称は「あなた」です。入れ替わっているとき、もちろん声や仕草でも区別がつきますが、どの人称を使うかでもすぐにわかるのです。画面に顔が映っていないときも同じです。 \n> 外見が女の子でも、「オレ・・・」とつぶやいたら、中身は男の子ですよね。 \n> 人称について話すと長くなるので、ここでやめておきます。\n\nThe sentence in question (Here she responded to my personal experience with\nthe anime \"your name\", because I told her that I first thought it was a ghibli\nanime due to the high quality of the animation.):\n\n>\n> 「君の名は」は、DVDを買って、家で観ました。海外での「ジブリアニメ」の定義はよくわかりませんが、日本で「ジブリ映画」というと、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画のことで、その数はそれほど多くはありません。 \n> <http://nendai-ryuukou.com/article/030.html>\n\nMy attempt at translation:\n\n> \"Having bought 'your name' as a DVD, I watched it at home. I don't know the\n> defintion of 'ghibli anime' in foreign countries, but in japan, speaking of\n> ghibli anime, out of the anime which studio ghibli has made, the\n> amount/number isn't many to that extent.\"\n\nSo, I'm very confused about there being the term 'ghibli anime' and the phrase\n'movie which studio ghibli has produced' in the same sentence ^^ Following the\ndescription of というと [here](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-\njlpt-n3-grammar-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%88%E3%81%B0%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-toiuto-\ntoieba-toittara/) I assumed that the sentence was built like that to introduce\nthe term 'ghible anime' first, and then explain that the number of anime\nproduced by studio ghibli isn't very high.\n\nI also had problems translating のことで. I basically used the meaning of の中で but\nit doesnt seem to fit. Furthermore, the way I translated それほど多く is supposed to\nmean \"(there are) not that many\", but I did it in this very obstructed way to\nshow that I'm very skeptical about this interpretation. I did not find それほど多く\nas an entry on jisho as a set phrase, so I put put it together from its\nisolated parts.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T07:58:54.237",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56837",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-28T13:38:54.117",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-28T13:38:54.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How does というと work here?",
"view_count": 374
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「ジブリ映画」というと、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画のことで、その数はそれほど多くはありません。\n\n「ジブリ映画」というと、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画のことで means 「ジブリ映画」の定義は、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画です。そして.\n_The definition of 'ghibli anime' is a 'movie which studio ghibli has\nproduced', and_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T08:19:15.177",
"id": "56838",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T09:06:41.737",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T09:06:41.737",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "56837",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Also, your interpretation of それほど多く・・・ありません is basically correct, albeit\nwordy. It just means \"not that many.\"\n\nAs for のこと, to add to what mackygoo said, のこと and ということ are phrases that occur\n_very_ frequently at the end of a definition. In conversational English we\nsometimes use \"a/the thing\" in a definition, e.g.,\n\n> A steering wheel is _the thing_ you use to turn a car while driving.\n\nThat's essentially what のこと means in Japanese, but it fits naturally in almost\nany definition (including, incidentally, definitions of concrete objects that\nwould be considered もの).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T15:18:33.897",
"id": "56846",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T15:18:33.897",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "56837",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> I assumed that the sentence was built like that to introduce the term\n> 'ghible anime' first, and then explain that the number of anime produced by\n> studio ghibli isn't very high.\n\nI think your understanding is correct.\n\nThe というと literally means \"If you say~~\", and ～のことで (で is the continuative form\nof the copula だ・です) means \"refers to~~\".\n\n日本でXXというと、YYのことだ/です。 \n= _lit._ In Japan, if you say XX, it refers to YY. \n→ In Japan, XX refers to YY.\n\n「それほど～～ない」 means _lit._ \"not ~~ to that extent\" → \"not so~~\" \"not very~~\". \nSo 「それほど多くありません」 means \"~~is not that many\" \"the number is not so large\".\n\n> 日本で「ジブリ映画」というと、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画のことで、その数はそれほど多くはありません。\n\n\"In Japan, 'Ghibli films' refers to the anime films created by Studio Ghibli,\nand its number is not so large (i.e. there aren't that many of them).\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T15:20:52.503",
"id": "56847",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T15:41:49.913",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T15:41:49.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56837",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56837
|
56847
|
56847
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56920",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can someone explain how だった changes the meaning when put after ところ?\n\nFrom what I understand, ところ can be used to express when an action takes place：\n\n 1. するところ - about to do [verb]\n\n> 今から家にかえるところだ。I am **about to** go home.\n\n* * *\n\n 2. しているところ - in the middle of doing [verb]\n\n> 氷が溶けているところです。The ice is in the **middle of** melting.\n\n* * *\n\n 3. したところ - just finished [verb]\n\n> 今着いたところです。 I **just** arrived now.\n\n* * *\n\n 4. していたところ - **was in the middle** of doing [verb]\n\n> あなたのことを話してたところだよ。I was in the middle of taking about you.\n\n* * *\n\nHowever I don't understand the nuance or how the meaning changes when だった is\nput after ところ.\n\n 1. するところだった - I understand this to mean \"was about to do [verb] (but it didn't happen)\"\n 2. しているところだった\n 3. したところだった - How is this different from したところ?\n 4. していたところだった\n\nI would appreciate some example sentences to help me understand the difference\nbetween ところ by itself and ところだった",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T11:33:35.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56839",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-27T16:00:22.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "How to use ところだった to express time related events",
"view_count": 829
}
|
[
{
"body": "In my own experience with Japanese-learners, it has always seemed that the\nconstruct:\n\n> 「Verb Form + ところ + **だった** 」\n\nis used incorrectly more often than one would expect. In particular, it has\nseemed difficult for them to tell whether the action in question actually did\nor did not take place.\n\nLet us examine the four patterns that you have listed:\n\n> 1) 「 **する** ところだった」 - I understand this to mean \"was about to do [verb] (but\n> it didn't happen)\"\n\nPrecisely. **_It never happened_**. This means either it almost happened or it\nwas about to happen. You might have just changed your mind or something\nunexpected happened that prevented the originally planned action from taking\nplace.\n\n「もう少{すこ}しで電車{でんしゃ}に乗{の}り遅{おく}れるところだった。」 = \"I almost missed my train.\"\n\nThe action of 電車に乗り遅れる (\"missing the train\") did **_not_** take place. You\nwere able to catch the train just in the nick of time.\n\n> 2) 「 **している** ところだった」\n\nYou were engaged in an action at the time that is being talked about in the\ncontext. You were in the middle of performing that action.\n\n「母{はは}から電話{でんわ}が入{はい}ったとき、ボクは宿題{しゅくだい}をしているところだった。」 = \"When my mother called,\nI was doing my homework.\"\n\nThe tense of the sentence, which is past tense, is expressed properly by\n「だった」. That is why using 「している」 is grammatical here as it has no effect on the\ntense of the sentence as a whole.\n\n> 3) 「 **した** ところだった」\n\nThis pattern forms the equivalent of the English **_pluperfect_** -- \" ** _I\nhad just (performed an action)_** when X happened.\" The action had already\ntaken place at the particular time that is being discussed.\n\n「雨{あめ}が降{ふ}り出{だ}したのは、試合{しあい}が始{はじ}まった（ばかりの）ところだった。」 = \"It started raining when\nthe game had just started\".\n\n> How is this different from したところ?\n\nNot too sure what you mean by that, but perhaps you are talking about a\nsentence like:\n\n「試合が始まったところで雨が降り出した。」, which is also natural and grammatical. It means\nvirtually the same thing as the example sentence above (except for the fact\nthat there is no pluperfect used in this new sentence).\n\n> 4) 「 **していた** ところだった」\n\nThis construct expresses the same thing as 2) 「 **している** ところだった」. You will\nsee/hear the two equally often.\n\nFinally,\n\n> I would appreciate some example sentences to help me understand the\n> difference between ところ by itself and ところだった\n\nI honestly have no idea what you mean by the difference between ところ by itself\nand ところだった.\n\nIn very informal speech, people say:\n\n「ちょうどアンタの話をしてたところ！」 instead of:\n\n「ちょうどアンタの話をしてたところだったの。」\n\nIf this is not what you wanted to know, please elaborate on your question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-27T16:00:22.357",
"id": "56920",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-27T16:00:22.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56839",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
56839
|
56920
|
56920
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56845",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between me and my language\npartner. For full context, I attach the full block about the topic \"Your name\n(anime)\" we were talking about at that point:\n\n「君の名は」は、DVDを買って、家で観ました。海外での「ジブリアニメ」の定義はよくわかりませんが、日本で「ジブリ映画」というと、スタジオジブリが製作したアニメ映画のことで、その数はそれほど多くはありません。\n<http://nendai-ryuukou.com/article/030.html>\n\nでも「君の名は」は日本でもとても評判がよく、私もよくできていると思いました。ratwimps の歌を効果的に使い、テンポよく進んでいくのが良かったですね。\nアンドレアスさんは字幕で観たのですか。私は、この映画では日本語の特性がよく表れていると思いました。男の子の一人称は「オレ」、女の子を呼ぶときの二人称は「おまえ」ですが、女の子の一人称は「私」、男の子を呼ぶときの二人称は「あなた」です。入れ替わっているとき、もちろん声や仕草でも区別がつきますが、どの人称を使うかでもすぐにわかるのです。画面に顔が映っていないときも同じです。\n外見が女の子でも、「オレ・・・」とつぶやいたら、中身は男の子ですよね。 人称について話すと長くなるので、ここでやめておきます。\n\nThe sentence in question: (Here she responded to my personal experience with\nthe anime \"your name\", because I told her that I first thought it was a ghibli\nanime due to the high quality of the animation.)\nでも「君の名は」は日本でもとても評判がよく、私もよくできていると思いました。\n\nMy attempt at translation: \"But I think that 'your name' having much fame also\nin japan, I also can good.\"\n\nSo, what poses the biggest problem for me is that in the part\n日本でもとても評判がよく、私もよくできている there is a lack of verbs. I assumed that a て形-copula\ncan be extrapolated in とても評判がよく, but I was absolutely clueless what to make of\n私もよくできている. \"Can do\" for できる doesnt make much sense here, but \"to appear\" \"to\nbe ready\" etc. also dont work well. Also, I think that \"I\" (meanig herself) is\nthe subject to できる here, but in this context, where we were talking about the\nmovie, I dont understand how she shall play a part in this.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T12:19:10.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56840",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T14:57:47.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Ambiguous/non-existen verbs in this sentence",
"view_count": 77
}
|
[
{
"body": "The verb できる has many meanings, one of which is \"to be made, to be built\" (#3\non Jisho). よくできている means \"well-made.\"\n\n> 私もよくできていると思いました。\n>\n> \"I, too, thought it was well-made.\"\n\nFor common verbs with many meanings (hello, かける!), even if you use the verb\nall the time, I recommend you look it up and walk through the definitions;\noften you'll come across one that is obvious in context.\n\nFinally 評判が良く doesn't mean \"lots of fame,\" it means \"has a good reputation.\"\nYou'll see the word 評判 often in the phrase 評判通り, which means \"as per its\nreputation...\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T14:57:47.290",
"id": "56845",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T14:57:47.290",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "56840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56840
|
56845
|
56845
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56842",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What character is in `X` position on the image?\n\n> まひろとアバ`X`チュール\n\nMaybe that is `アバコ`?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xOUPV.png)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T12:52:59.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56841",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T15:01:47.530",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T15:01:19.137",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "27768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji",
"kana"
],
"title": "Is \"まひろとアバ X 于ユール\" in the image? What is ' X ' in the image?",
"view_count": 137
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is 「ン」.\n\n「アバンチュール」 is the \"French-Japanese\" version of 「アドベンチャー」. Think of it as the\n\"adventure in the love department\". \"aventure\" vs \"adventure\".\n\n\" ** _Adventure with Mahiro_** \"\n\nAnother love-related \"French vs. English\" pair of katakana words you need to\nknow to be fluent in Japanese is:\n\n「アベック」vs.「カップル」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T13:02:29.833",
"id": "56842",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T13:09:04.340",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T13:09:04.340",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "That would be an ん in Katagana form: ン\n\nSo your title would be:\n\n> まひろとアバンチュール\n\nIn the font presented there the コ katagana would retain its connected-ness\notherwise it would be too similar to the ん（ン）.\n\nI know different fonts in Japanese can usually throw you off sometimes, but\ndon't worry, keep reading and exposing yourself to new formats and you'll see\nthe patterns in time.\n\n*EDIT: チュル -> チュール, my bad. Thanks @Chocolate",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T13:06:43.813",
"id": "56843",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T15:01:47.530",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T15:01:47.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "20407",
"owner_user_id": "20407",
"parent_id": "56841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56841
|
56842
|
56842
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Hi what's the difference between these three forms?. I have made some research\nbut they all seem to mean \"As if\". In the specific, とばかりに appears to mean \"As\nto say\", (と言わ)んばかりに \"As he/she wanted to say\" and かのごとく \"As if\". Can you\nexplain me how to use them correctly?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T19:12:14.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56849",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T06:34:31.040",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T06:34:31.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "25880",
"owner_user_id": "25880",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What's the difference among とばかりに, (と言わ)んばかりにand かのごとく?",
"view_count": 358
}
|
[
{
"body": "You have almost answered your question already. とばかりに follows someone's\nstatement, feeling, etc., because this と is a quotative particle. It means \"as\nif to say.\"\n\n> * やれやれとばかりに振り返った。\n> * よく聞いてくれたとばかりに話し始めた。\n> * 信じられないとばかりに目を見開いた。\n> * そのことを当然(だ)とばかりに受け入れていた。\n>\n\nYou can even use brackets with とばかりに:\n\n> 「信じられない」とばかりに目を見開いた。\n\n(まるで)～かのごとく is just \"as if\":\n\n> * バネに弾かれたかのごとく立ち上がった。\n> * 体が鉛でできているかのごとく重い。\n> * そのことを当然であるかのごとく受け入れていた。\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T21:57:29.080",
"id": "56853",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T04:44:22.000",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T04:44:22.000",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56849",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56849
| null |
56853
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56851",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There's a Japanese manga/anime series called [Nanatsu no taizai (七つの大罪,\n)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Deadly_Sins_\\(manga\\)), which is\npronounced as\n\n> ななつのたいざい\n\nas one can clearly hear in [this intro](https://youtu.be/wqEkSBiB2lo?t=25) or\nsee in its [Wikipedia\npage](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%83%E3%81%A4%E3%81%AE%E5%A4%A7%E7%BD%AA_\\(%E6%BC%AB%E7%94%BB\\)).\n\nHowever, the word 「大罪」is pronounced as「だいざい, as I've found in both a\n[dictionary](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%A4%A7%E7%BD%AA) and [Wikipedia page\nfor cardinal\nsins](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%83%E3%81%A4%E3%81%AE%E5%A4%A7%E7%BD%AA).\n\nWhy is the pronunciation in the show different?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T19:55:26.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56850",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T22:06:37.013",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T22:06:37.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "27876",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Pronunciation of 大罪",
"view_count": 160
}
|
[
{
"body": "たいざい is just an alternative reading of 大罪, and is listed perhaps in all decent\nmonolingual dictionaries.\n\n * [デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/133167/meaning/m0u/) and 明鏡国語辞典 treat たいざい as the primary reading and だいざい as an alternative.\n * [大辞林](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%A4%A7%E7%BD%AA) treats だいざい as the primary reading.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T20:11:05.190",
"id": "56851",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T20:11:05.190",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56850",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56850
|
56851
|
56851
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56854",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading a manga and I was wondering if I understood, at least the first\nsentence well. The other two...hmmm, I don't know if I translated them so\nwell, so I would need some assistance. If it helps, the context is about money\nand friendship.\n\n> 「この世の悩みのほとんどすべてはお金で解決できる」\n\nThis is the first sentence and I translated it as: The problems of this world\n(or rather society), most of them can be solved with money.\" (Have I gotten\nthe gist of it?)\n\n> 「お金で築ける友情がある」 \n> 「お金がないから築けない友情がある」\n\nIt's with these two sentences that I have problem to translate. 築く, looking in\nthe dictionary, it means \"to build, to construct, to amass\", and I think the\nsentences are saying something about making friends with money?\n\nPlease, can someone clarify them for me? Thank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T21:33:18.743",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56852",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T22:03:02.053",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-24T21:58:51.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "A little help with these sentences",
"view_count": 133
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your understanding of the first sentence is correct.\n\n> お金で築ける友情がある。お金がないから築けない友情がある。 \n> There is a friendship you can build with money. There is a friendship you\n> cannot build because you don't have money.\n\nBoth sentences say 友情がある (\"There is a friendship (of such and such a kind)\").\nお金で築ける and お金がないから築けない are relative clauses that modify 友情. 友情を築く is a set\nphrase, \"to build/establish a friendship.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T22:03:02.053",
"id": "56854",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T22:03:02.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "56852",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
56852
|
56854
|
56854
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56856",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「そこで、名前を変えるには、改名の披露というものをしないといけない。いいか。 **それはな**\n> 、首へ市蔵と書いたふだをぶらさげて、私は以来市蔵と申しますと、口上を云って、 **みんなの所をおじぎして** まわるのだ。」\n\nI have three questions about the bold characters.\n\n 1. I assume that **それはな** = **それ** + **は** + **な** , _NOT_ **それ** + **はな**. So is **な** here being used similarly to its role as a sentence-ending particle? e.g. \"If that is agreeable,\"\n 2. What does **みんなの所** mean in this context? I took it mean \"each person's place/where each person is\".\n 3. Why is **おじぎして** using **を** and not **に**? \nWouldn't \" _bowing towards each person's place_ \" make more sense than \"\n_bowing to each person's place_ \" since the subject (presumably) isn't\nliterally bowing to the _place_ , but the person who exists there? \n **EDIT: In answer to #3, be sure to read the comments and Chocolate's linked\ndiscussions.**\n\nAs always, I'd be grateful for any help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T23:27:50.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56855",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T02:53:11.957",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T02:53:11.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "27592",
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "2 Translation Questions ( な and 所), and a Question about を vs. に when using おじぎしてまわる",
"view_count": 107
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 1. それはな / それはね\n>\n\nThe な and ね usages here are softeners used for redundant confirmation in\ncasual speech, equivalent to the colloquial 'ya know' in English.\n\n> 2. みんなの所\n>\n\nTo everyone's house, place of business, etc.\n\n> 3. Why is おじぎして using を and not に?\n>\n\nIt is not. The を is modifying まわる. It could be phrased\nみんなの所を回って(人に）おじぎする。Basically it is saying that your would need to visit\neverybody to 'pay your respects' and inform them of your new name.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-24T23:50:35.857",
"id": "56856",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-24T23:50:35.857",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56855
|
56856
|
56856
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm reading a passage from a Japanese novel and happened upon an unfamiliar\npiece of vocabulary \"勢力図的な.\" When I tried looking it up in an online\ndictionary, I got the definition of \"Power relationships\" for the term 勢力図,\nhowever I am unsure what this refers to exactly, does it refer to how much\npower person A has over person B in a relationship? Or maybe something else\nentirely?\n\nIf someone could explain the meaning and in what context it might be used,\nthat would be great!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T00:01:01.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56857",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-01T01:46:01.190",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-28T09:36:07.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "Meaning and usage of the word \"勢力図(的な)\"",
"view_count": 563
}
|
[
{
"body": "勢力図 would be a 'diagram' showing the distribution of power relationships or\ninfluence, where they extend and how far, i.e. Their 'sphere/range of\ninfluence'.\n\nAs an image, [the influence of K-Pop girl groups in\nJapan.](http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/kgirl_lover-kpop123/imgs/d/0/d02c74a2.jpg)\n\nAs a sentence example.\n\n```\n\n 織田家内部の勢力図が大きく塗り変えられた。\n The power (political) influence map of the Oda family was drastically redrawn.\n \n```\n\nI think that in this case, ～的な would be akin to 'a kind of' / 'a sort of'.\n\n```\n\n 勢力図的なもの作りました。\n I made kind of a diagram of the spheres of power/influence. \n \n```\n\nEdit (Feb.26): @mackygoo's answer is helpful in understanding that this\nexpression has taken on a broader context and can be used with many visual\nrepresentations of user preference, market dominance, product trends, voting\nhabits, etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T01:24:05.933",
"id": "56859",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T19:47:25.717",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-26T19:47:25.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "56857",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "# English\n\nI think that user27280's answer regarding '勢力図的な' is almost correct. (+1) \nThe meaning I expressed as \"almost\" is that the explanation of \"勢力図\" and the\nexplanation of \"～的な\" are perfect. However, the explanation of the last example\nsentence is inadequate, so I think that those who read this answer cannot\nthink it as a satisfactory answer. Even if there is such a reason, it is\nregrettable that someone downvoted the answer.\n\nWell, I'll present my answer. \nAs a means to explain something to other people in an easy-to-understand\nmanner, there is a method of expressing something with a piece of paper using\npictures or figures. \"勢力図 _a diagram showing the distribution of (military)\npower relationships_ or lit. _power diagram_ \" is a technique that expresses\n\"power relationships\" as figures or pictures and generally with only one piece\nof paper. I think it is a very easy-to-understand method. \nI would like to explain what kind of nuance exists in \"勢力図的な\", what kind of\nsituation it is used, and how it differs from \"勢力図\". \nLet's think about the situation where you want to express something like\nsuperiority or power relationships easily and clearly. \nPeople using the phrase with \"勢力図的な\" can come up with various ways as a means\nof expressing superiorities or power relations, but none of them can be an\nexact expression method as is said in \"帯{おび}に短{みじか}し襷{たすき}に長{なが}し _There is no\nsuitable one_ \". \nAlthough none of them can be said to be exact, the better way to express the\nintention up to now is \"勢力図\". \n\"勢力図\" is superior in that \"the scope of influence of factions\" can be\nunderstood \"easily/accurately/at a glance\".\n\nSince 勢力図 is originally used to represent the power distribution in the feudal\nage, it has the nuance of bloodiness accompanying wars or battles. \nBut what you want to convey is somewhat different from the blood smelling one\nthat the word \"勢力図\" has, so you cannot use \"勢力図\" as it is. \nHowever, since the superiority as the expression means possessed by \"勢力図\"\ncannot be excluded, the author used the expression \"勢力図的な\" in the sense of\n\"like 勢力図 or 勢力図-ish\".\n\nAfter finishing the above explanation, if I read the user27280's answer once\nagain, the explanation of \"勢力図\" and the explanation of \"～的な\" are essentially\nthe same as my understanding.\n\nWhen I searched sentences using ”勢力図的な” on the Internet, the following ones\nwere found. \nAs for the phrase with \"勢力図、的な\" in the last sentence, I understand that the\nauthor wished to express an intermediate nuance between \"勢力図\" and \"勢力図的な\" so\nhe/she intentionally used a \"読点 _comma_ \" there.\n\n * 今回{こんかい}の選挙{せんきょ}の **勢力図的な** ものをお願{ねが}いします！\n * まとめページを作{つく}ってみました。 当初{とうしょ}は、ひと目{め}見{み}て分{わ}かるような一枚絵{いちまい}の **勢力図的な** ものを構想{こうそう}していたのですが、 筆者{ひっしゃ}の貧弱{ひんじゃく}なプレゼン能力{のうりょく}と技術力{ぎじゅつりょく}ではまったくもって無理{むり}でした。\n * 現在{げんざい}の **勢力図的な** ものをまとめたものです\n * 最近{さいきん}の聴{き}いてるアーティストを **勢力図的な** 感{かん}じで考{かんが}えてみた\n * 最近{さいきん}聴{き}いてる人{ひと}を **勢力図的に** 書{か}くと、\n * ユーザーさんがどんな端末{たんまつ}を使{つか}っているのか、 **勢力図的な** ものがあればいいですね。\n * リーグ戦{せん}が終盤{しゅうばん}になると今季{こんき}の **勢力図的な** ものがはっきりとするんでしょうが\n * 日本{にほん}の企業{きぎょう} **勢力図、的な** ものは、. 前職{ぜんしょく}で徹底的{てっていてき}に勉強{べんきょう}させられて、. （◯菱{びし}、◯井系{いけい}が、銀行{ぎんこう}がどうで、メーカーがこうで。。 どこのメーカーの商品{しょうひん}がどの会社{かいしゃ}で、その系列{けいれつ}で、、、）. 的{てき}なことも、宙{ちゅう/そら}でスラスラ言{い}えるくらい、身{み}についているんですが、. 外国{がいこく}のことはさっぱりわからないですね。\n\n# EDIT\n\nThe title of the question:\n\n> Meaning and usage of the word “勢力図(的な}”\n\nThe text of the question:\n\n> ... and happened upon an unfamiliar piece of vocabulary \"勢力図的な.\" \n> When I tried looking it up in an online dictionary, I got the definition of\n> \"Power relationships\" for the term 勢力図, ...\n\nInspired by naruto's comment, I re-examined what the questioner asked.\n\nWhen you see the title of the question, you can see that the questioner is\nasking about \"勢力図的な\" clearly. When you read the text of the question, the\nquestioner came across the explanation of \"勢力図\" in searching the dictionary\nfor the meaning of \"勢力図的な\". Reading the definition of \"勢力図\" written in the\ndictionary the questioner became confused, so the questioner asked the\nquestion.\n\nAccording to the Japanese dictionary, 勢力図 is explained as follows.\n\n> 勢力図（せいりょくず）とは、個人や組織などの勢力が、どれほどの範囲に対して支配力や影響力を持っているかを示す分布図のことである。 \n> _勢力図 is a distribution chart showing the extent to which a certain power,\n> such as the power of individuals or of organizations, have control and\n> influence over a range._\n\nOn the other hand, the explanation in English of \"勢力図\" obtained by the\nquestioner is as follows.\n\n> Power relationships\n\nObviously, the explanation of the Japanese dictionary I got and the\nexplanation that the questioner got in English are essentially different.\n\nIn the Japanese dictionary, the range where the power of a person with certain\npower has influence is shown as a distribution, but the relationship between\ntwo or more people with power is not mentioned as the definition of 勢力図.\n\nOn the other hand, though it is ambiguous whether \"power relationships\", which\nis explained in English obtained by the questioner, means the relationship\nbetween the ruler and the ruled people living in the controlled range, or the\nrelationship between the different controlling powers, it means a certain\npower relatonships between the parties concerned.\n\nI understand that the ambiguous explanation of English caused the\nmisunderstanding of the questioner, so I'll answer the following questions as\nfollows.\n\n> for the term 勢力図, however I am unsure what this refers to exactly, does it\n> refer to how much power person A has over person B in a relationship? Or\n> maybe something else entirely?\n\n\"勢力図\" does not explain the relationship of how much power A has over B. It\nmerely explains the range dominated by rulers such as A, B and the like by\nmeans of a chart. \nThe relationship as to whether ruler A is dominant over ruler B is to be\nevaluated by the person who sees 勢力図. In other word, 勢力図 itself does not\nevaluate the relationship of power between the rulers.\n\n# 日本語\n\n「勢力図的な」に関するuser27280さんの回答は、ほぼ正解だと思います。(+1) \n具体的に言いますと、「勢力図」の説明と「～的な」の説明は完全です。但し、最後の例文の説明が不十分ですので、回答を読んでみて、「ああそうか」とまではいかないのでしょう。それでも-1を投票した人がいるのは残念です。\n\nさて、私の回答に移ります。 \nあるものを他人に分かりやすく説明するための手段として、絵や図を用いて一枚の紙で表現する（一覧化する）方法があります。「勢力図」は、「勢力」を図としてしかも一般に一枚の紙で表現するもので、大変分かりやすい手法だと思います。\n\n「勢力図的な」には、どのようなニュアンスがあり、どのような時に使い、「勢力図」とはどう違うのかを説明したいと思います。\n\n状況的には、何かの優劣や力関係のようなものを簡単に、かつ分かりやすく伝えたいとします。 \n「勢力図的な」という表現を用いた人は、優劣や力関係を伝える方法として色々と思いつくのですが、どれも「帯{おび}に短｛みじか｝し襷｛たすき｝に長｛なが｝し\n_There is no suitable one._ 」の例え通り、的確な表現手法が見つかりません。 \nどれも的確とまでは言えませんが、今までに思いついた表現方法で一番良いものは「勢力図」です。 \n「勢力図」は、「勢力の分布」が「簡単に/的確に/一覧でわかる」点で優れています。 \nしかし、今、伝えたいテーマとなっているようなものは、「勢力図」という言葉がもっているギラギラしたあるいは血{ち}生臭｛なまぐさ｝いものとは少し違うものなので、「勢力図」とは言い切れないのです。しかし、「力関係/優劣」を「一覧的に分かりやすく」表現できる点は「勢力図」が持っている特性と今表現手段として求めているものとは大変近いと思っています。\n従って、「 **例えば勢力図のような** 」という意味合いで「勢力図的な」と表現しております。\n\n以上の説明をした後、あらためてuser27280さんの回答を見ますと、「勢力図」の説明も、「～的な」の説明も本質的に私の理解と同じです。\n\n「勢力図的な」をインターネットで調べると次のような用例が見つかります。 \n最後の用例にある「勢力図、的な」は、他の用例より「勢力図」と言い切ってしまっても良いが、それでも完全には「勢力図」とは言えないので「勢力図」と「勢力図的な」の中間的なニュアンスを持たすために「読点（、）」を用いています。\n\n * 今回の選挙の **勢力図的な** ものをお願いします！\n * まとめページを作ってみました。 当初は、ひと目見て分かるような一枚絵の **勢力図的な** ものを構想していたのですが、 筆者の貧弱なプレゼン能力と技術力ではまったくもって無理でした。\n * 現在の **勢力図的な** ものをまとめたものです\n * 最近の聴いてるアーティストを **勢力図的な** 感じで考えてみた\n * 最近聴いてる人を **勢力図的に** 書くと、\n * ユーザーさんがどんな端末を使っているのか、 **勢力図的な** ものがあればいいですね。\n * リーグ戦が終盤になると今季の **勢力図的な** ものがはっきりとするんでしょうが\n * 日本の企業 **勢力図、的な** ものは、. 前職で徹底的に勉強させられて、. （◯菱、◯井系が、銀行がどうで、メーカーがこうで。。 どこのメーカーの商品がどの会社で、その系列で、、、）. 的なことも、宙でスラスラ言えるくらい、身についているんですが、. 外国のことはさっぱりわからないですね。\n\n# EDIT\n\n質問のタイトル:\n\n> Meaning and usage of the word “勢力図(的な}”\n\n質問の本文（抜粋）：\n\n> ... and happened upon an unfamiliar piece of vocabulary \"勢力図的な.\" \n> When I tried looking it up in an online dictionary, I got the definition of\n> \"Power relationships\" for the term 勢力図, ...\n\nnarutoさんのコメントを読んで、質問者は一体何を尋ねているのかを再度考えてみました。 \n質問のタイトルを見ますと明らかに「勢力図的な」を尋ねていることが分かります。 \n質問の本文を見ますと、「勢力図的な」を辞書で探している内に、「勢力図」の説明に出くわし、そこから「勢力図」の英訳を通じて何か分からなくなったようで質問しているのでしょう。\n\n勢力図は、日本語の辞書によると、下記のように説明されております。\n\n> 勢力図（せいりょくず）とは、個人や組織などの勢力が、どれほどの範囲に対して支配力や影響力を持っているかを示す分布図のことである。\n\nしかしながら、質問者が得た「勢力図」の英語での説明は、\n\n> Power relationships \n> です。 \n> 明らかに、私が得た日本語の辞書の説明と、質問者が英語で得た説明とは本質的に違っております。 \n>\n> 日本語辞書では、（多分複数の）ある力を有している者がどこに自分たちの力を及ぼしているかを分布的に示しているのであって、他の力がある者との関係性については言及しておりません。 \n> 一方、質問者が得た、英語での説明を見ますと、Power\n> relationshipsの逐語訳では「力の関係性」ですから、支配している者と支配地域に住んでいる支配される者との力の関係なのか、異なる支配する勢力間の力の関係なのか分かりませんがそのような意味に受け取れます。\n\n私は、英語の説明が曖昧のために質問者に誤解を与えていると解釈し、下記の質問に対して次のように回答します。\n\n> for the term 勢力図, however I am unsure what this refers to exactly, does it\n> refer to how much power person A has over person B in a relationship? Or\n> maybe something else entirely?\n\n質問者が見た辞書の「勢力図」の説明である「Power relationships」は意味が曖昧であると思います。 \n「勢力図」はＡがＢに対してどれだけ力を持っているかという関係を説明するものではありません。あくまでも、支配者層ＡやＢ等がどの地域を支配しているかを図で説明しているだけです。 \n支配者層であるＡが他の支配者層Ｂに対して優勢であるかどうかの関係性は、勢力図を見た人が評価するものであって、勢力図自体ではＡ、Ｂ間の力関係を判断あるいは評価しておりません。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T05:58:20.100",
"id": "56863",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-01T01:46:01.190",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "56857",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56857
| null |
56859
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As background, I haven't really focused on learning kanji. I've mainly focused\non learning words, and just using the correct characters for those words\n(purely typing, I don't write kanji by hand). However, I want to be a little\nmore proficient with kanji, by learning a kanji and its reading whenever I\nencounter a new kanji or a new reading, by learning at least one other example\nof that kanji with the same reading.\n\nI can look up a kanji with jisho.org, and find examples of a given reading by\nclicking on a reading. For example, if I'm interested in\n[相](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%9B%B8) from the word \"結婚相談所\" and the on-yomi\n\"ソウ\", I can can click on \"ソウ\" and it takes me to [相\nそう](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%9B%B8%20%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86). However, while\njisho.org mentions which words are \"common\", I'm worried that some words given\nmight be words I should avoid at my stage of learning, because they're less\ncommon than other words with a similar meaning.\n\nAre there any resources (preferably online) that I can use to look up a kanji\nand its reading and get well curated examples of that reading being used?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T01:20:05.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56858",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-11T13:41:05.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"readings",
"dictionary",
"resources"
],
"title": "Learning kanji readings with examples",
"view_count": 407
}
|
[
{
"body": "Kanjicards has online (and printable) lists sorted by grade level, JLPT level\nor frequency of use. The lists include both types of readings, example words\nand stroke order: \n<http://kanjicards.org/kanji-lists.html>\n\nYour rep's quite a bit ahead of mine, so you might be looking for something\nmore advanced... but I've found that those lists are useful for familiarizing\nmyself with the kanji (although I remember the readings best by just...\nreading.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T03:01:45.693",
"id": "56862",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T03:01:45.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27592",
"parent_id": "56858",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "It's not an online resource, but the book よく使う順 漢字2200 presents the kanji in\nfrequency of use order and lists some of the most common words for each.\n\n<https://www.amazon.co.jp/%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E5%AD%A6%E7%BF%92%E3%81%AE%E3%81%9F%E3%82%81%E3%81%AE-%E3%82%88%E3%81%8F%E4%BD%BF%E3%81%86%E9%A0%86-%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%972200-%E5%BE%B3%E5%BC%98-%E5%BA%B7%E4%BB%A3/dp/438514074X>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-10-11T13:41:05.827",
"id": "90699",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-11T13:41:05.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25783",
"parent_id": "56858",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
56858
| null |
56862
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just try to learn Japanese from a drama, however I get stuck in figuring\nfollowing sentence:\n\n> 分かりやすすぎる\n\nwhich more or less means:\n\n> It is too easy to understand you.\n\nI know 分かり comes from the verb 分かる which means \"to understand (v)\". And やすすぎる\nwhich literally means too cheap. But I do not know how a premasu verb 分かり can\nbe an infinitive (to understand). Does every premasu verb on its own will\nbecome an infinitive? Why don't use 分かること or 分かるの to make the verb to an\ninfinitive?\n\nThank you.\n\nEDIT:\n\nWhat I mean by an infinitive is a construction like below:\n\n> to + plain verb\n\nfor example\n\n> To read, To understand\n\nHowever they are not used as a verb like below\n\n> I want to read, I need time to understand you.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T01:51:32.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56860",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T02:58:13.030",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T02:27:43.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "26309",
"owner_user_id": "26309",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "The Use of Premasu Verb + Adjective",
"view_count": 193
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are two common constructions you need to know to understand this.\n\nVmasu + やすい = easy to (verb)\n\nVmasu + にくい = hard to (verb)\n\nSo, for example, わかりにくい means “hard to understand.” And わかりやすい means “easy to\nunderstand.”\n\nThese are い adjectives, so you can negate them, add すぎる, or whatever else you\ndo with an い adjective. Therefore, わかりやすすぎる means “too easy to understand.”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T02:18:59.843",
"id": "56861",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T02:58:13.030",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T02:58:13.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "25413",
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "56860",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56860
| null |
56861
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56866",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't understand how 「いる＋寂しい」 means \"to miss something\" like in\n「君がいなくて寂しいよ。」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T11:46:33.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56865",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-16T15:05:07.640",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-16T15:05:07.640",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What's the grammar behind 〜がいなくて寂しい",
"view_count": 769
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「君{きみ}がいなく **て** 寂{さみ}しいよ。」\n\n「いなくて」 is the te-form of 「いない」. (「いない」, of course, is the negative form of\n「いる」.)\n\nOne of the functions of the te-form is to express a **_cause-and-effect_**\nrelationship. Thus, 「いなく **て** 」 in this context is pretty much synonymous to\n「いない **ので** 」 and 「いない **から** 」.\n\nCause: 君がいない (\"You are not here.\")\n\nEffect: 寂しい (\"I am sad.\")\n\nSo, the sentence literally means:\n\n> \"I am sad because you are not here.\"\n\nA freer translation would be:\n\n> \"I am missing you.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T11:59:25.197",
"id": "56866",
"last_activity_date": "2019-06-13T08:30:12.043",
"last_edit_date": "2019-06-13T08:30:12.043",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56865",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
56865
|
56866
|
56866
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56868",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The sentence 「ここでこなんことをしてられない！」comes from a book I'm reading. I have no idea\nwhere してられない comes from. My guess is that it's some colloquial potential form\nof する or something (there's a song named じっとしてられない), but I might be completely\nwrong. Can someone please help? Thank you in advance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T12:14:31.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56867",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T14:38:03.797",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27824",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What does 「ここでこなんことをしてられない！」mean?",
"view_count": 111
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, 「こなん」 should be 「こんな」 unless it is in a dialect I am unfamiliar\nwith.\n\n> 「ここでこんなことをしてられない！」\n\n「してられない」 is the informal form of 「して **い** られない」= \" ** _(I) can't be doing_**\n\". So, it is the **_negative, potential and progressive_** form of 「する」.\n\nIn informal speech, the 「い」 is often dropped from phrases such as 「～て **い**\nる」、「～て **い** た」, etc. Unless you are very new to the language, you must have\nencountered this phenomenon before.\n\nThe sentence, therefore, means:\n\n> \"I can't be doing something like this here!\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T12:30:10.373",
"id": "56868",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T14:38:03.797",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T14:38:03.797",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56867",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
56867
|
56868
|
56868
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56870",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm currently translating [this interview](https://point-\nhouse.jp/article_detail.html/?id=11698) of a Japanese actor.\n\n**直撃** was used for\n\n> 猪野君に **直撃**\n\nand\n\n> 今回は“二択”で本音を **直撃** ！\n\nAccording to [Jisho](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%9B%B4%E6%92%83), it means a\n\"direct hit\".\n\nThe word seems to be associated with a disaster like a bomb or typhoon, based\non\n[goo](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/145037/meaning/m0u/%E7%9B%B4%E6%92%83/).\n\nHowever, I noticed that similar to this article, **直撃** was often used as a\nverb for a **headline** such as\n\n[ゆき姐こと兵藤ゆきさんを直撃](http://english.cheerup.jp/article/355)\n\n[スカイプ英会話「カフェトーク」を直撃](https://hapaeikaiwa.com/2016/02/07/%E3%82%B9%E3%82%AB%E3%82%A4%E3%83%97%E8%8B%B1%E4%BC%9A%E8%A9%B1%E3%80%8C%E3%82%AB%E3%83%95%E3%82%A7%E3%83%88%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AF%E3%80%8D%E3%82%92%E7%9B%B4%E6%92%83%EF%BC%81/)\n\nI was wondering what does it mean and whether it was an abbreviation?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T13:19:01.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56869",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T02:19:49.213",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-26T02:19:49.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "19458",
"owner_user_id": "19458",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 直撃 mean in relation to an interview?",
"view_count": 635
}
|
[
{
"body": "「直撃{ちょくげき}」 is a term often used by the media meaning \" ** _(going) face-to-\nface_** \" as in interviewing a person in person instead of using telephone,\nemail, etc. You physically go to that person and ask questions.\n\nThis is why you will often encounter the term 「直撃インタビュー」. Another common term\nis 「突撃{とつげき}インタビュー」, which literally means an \"assault interview\".\n\nThese terms are preferred by the media and audience alike because they sound\n\"aggressive\", spontaneous and quite catchy to the native ear. It sounds as\nthough the interview were conducted without an appointment even though most\nare obviously conducted on appointment.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T13:51:14.793",
"id": "56870",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-25T14:41:13.690",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-25T14:41:13.690",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "56869",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] |
56869
|
56870
|
56870
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56892",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 草津町のスキー場では、噴火した所 **から近い** ゲレンデ以外では滑ることができます。 \n> In the Kusatsu ski resort you can ski on slopes other than those near the\n> place of the eruption.\n\nWhy is から used instead of に with 近い? I think I normally see に. How do I decide\nwhich particle is appropriate? Do the same rules apply with 遠い?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T16:24:08.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56871",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T06:13:17.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-から"
],
"title": "Difference between に近い and から近い",
"view_count": 648
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 草津町のスキー場では、噴火した所 **から** 近いゲレンデ以外では滑ることができます。 \n> 草津町のスキー場では、噴火した所 **に** 近いゲレンデ以外では滑ることができます。\n\nBoth sound fine to me.\n\n「～に近い」 and 「～から近い」 are synonymous, but I don't think they are always\ninterchangeable.\n\n> 「会社は駅 **に** 近いです。」「会社は駅 **から** 近いです。」「会社は駅 **の** 近 **く** です。」 -- all sound\n> fine.\n\n> 「駅は、ここ **から** 近いですか？」 (rather than 駅は、ここ **に** 近いですか？)\n\nから marks the starting point, and に the destination. So ～から has a nuance that\nyou're seeing things from the place marked with から. It also can imply\nwalking/going/starting from the place marked with から.\n\n* * *\n\nWith 遠い, you'd use ～から, and not ～に.\n\n> 「会社は駅 **から** 遠いです。」 (✕「会社は駅 **に** 遠いです。」)\n\nYou can use ～まで, too:\n\n> 「駅から会社 **まで** (は)遠いです。」 \n> 「私のうちは、学校 **まで** 遠い。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-26T04:39:34.787",
"id": "56889",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T05:25:17.077",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-26T05:25:17.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "56871",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "The use of \"から\", specifying \"噴火した所\" as a starting point, is especially\nappropriate because it reflects a certain part of reality pertinent to the\ndiscourse, namely that the hazardous emissions will spread from the point of\neruption outward, toward the surrounding area, and that consequently people\nwill conceive of the no-go zone as following this direction, though area (or\ndistance) does not have direction in itself.\n\nTo be sure, had the writer used \"に\" instead of \"から\", there wouldn't be any\nproblem at all. It would make perfect sense and sound natural in the context.\n\nBut designating 噴火した所 as the point of origin and therefore assigning an\noutward direction to the range of no-go zone by using \"から\" makes for a more\nsatisfying read, because it nicely fits our perception of the relevant part of\nthe reality. I think.\n\n* * *\n\nParticles we can make use of to talk about near-ness and far-ness with\nreference to a given location X are: から (marks X as starting point), まで (marks\nX as end point) and に (unmarked, or end point-ish?), **with the exception that\nXに遠い feels weird to me**.\n\n * Xから近い Xまで近い Xに近い \n * Xから遠い Xまで遠い ?Xに遠い ( ?Xに遠い is very uncommon and possibly ungrammatical or nonstandard) \n\nMy uneducated impression is that when the \"direction\" of distance (that is,\nstarting-point-ending-point stuff) is unimportant, we tend to use \"に\" for \"近い\"\nand \"から\" for \"遠い\" (for which \"に\" is not a real possibility). I also suspect\nthat some of the time people's choice of particles in this regard gets a bit\narbitrary or at least is not dependent on their respective meanings.\n\n* * *\n\nI looked in 現代日本語書き言葉均衡コーパス (BCCWJ), just to make sure there aren't any real\ninstances of \"Xに遠い\", to find these entries below, which all seem to be\nlegitimate cases of the construction.\n\n * **山間部や海に遠い** 地方の人たちは塩鯖で海の味を食膳に載せたのでしょう (渡辺一枝,1940) \n * わざと **自宅に遠い** 場所で投函した可能性もある。(新津きよみ,1950) \n * 太陽からの熱により気体になりやすい成分（揮発性成分という）は蒸発しているが， **太陽に遠い部分** では，固体（氷）として存在している。(from some school textbook)\n\nHow should I re-label its status? \"Out-dated, now very weird, though possibly\nnot as weird in the past\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-26T05:54:25.983",
"id": "56892",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T06:13:17.717",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-26T06:13:17.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "56871",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
56871
|
56892
|
56892
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading up on some lore in piece of Japanese fiction, and I'm finding it\nrather difficult to parse the short paragraph below due to confusion on two\nspecific points.\n\nTo add a little context, a character named レーミhas abilities/powers that can\ncause a man to collapse and lose consciousness by scoping out (観察) weaknesses\nin the opponent's エーテルのパターン (their power source) and intensifying the\nweakness, he's done this before with powerful opponents but when he tried it\non a guy named アンソニー the following happened:\n\n> だが、肝心のアンソニーに対して行おうとした結果『観察しても無駄だよ。エーテルのパターンなど秒単位で変化させるのは基本だろう』と断言されてしまう。\n>\n> 実際、変化し続けるパターンに観察が追いつかず、アンソニーがレーミの身体に仕込んだ装置による電気ショックを喰らう事となってしまった。\n\nMy questions are:\n\n(A) why is there an 肝心の~ in front of the guy's name? I've seen this in other\nwritings too but I didn't think much of it.\n\n(B) is the ~のは基本 equivalent to the word \"basically\" in this passage? Or\nsomething closer to \"it's a basic thing\", e.g. _however, as a consequence of\nattempting to use it against アンソニー , he got the assertion that \"it's pointless\nto even scope me out. It's a basic thing to make changes to things like\nエーテルのパターン in seconds.\"_\n\n(C) who is receiving the 電気ショック? I'm not sure if the subject is omitted or if\nit's アンソニー, a friend tells me the subject is omitted but I'm quite doubtful.\n\nI would be very interested to see how a more adept or native speaker\ninterprets this passage, thanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T17:44:01.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "56872",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T00:50:37.573",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27889",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"syntax",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Parsing help, (understanding 肝心の~/ ~のは基本 / target of Xを喰らう)",
"view_count": 78
}
|
[
{
"body": "(1) \"肝心の\" is there to (non-restrictively) modify \"アンソニー\". \"肝心のアンソニー\" indicates\nthat アンソニー is the real target. What truly matters to レーミ is to do his trick on\nhim and him only. The guys he/she has already knocked out, they were just some\npoor guinea pigs or fools who got in his/her way.\n\n(2) \"~のは基本\" would be similar to the construction \"[doing something] is a basic\nthing\" or \"It's a basic thing [to do something]\". So you got it right in your\ntranslation.\n\n(3) It's レーミ that gets zapped. \"アンソニーが\" is the subject in the relative clause\n\"アンソニーがレーミの身体に仕込んだ\" on \"装置\", in case that's part of the cause of your\nmisgivings. Your friend is right that the subject (\"レーミ\") for the verb \"喰らう\"\nis omitted.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-02-25T23:18:00.637",
"id": "56878",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-26T00:50:37.573",
"last_edit_date": "2018-02-26T00:50:37.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "56872",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
56872
| null |
56878
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.