question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20180306/k10011353421000.html?utm_int=news_contents_news-\nmain_001>\n\nThe sentence in question:\n新燃岳で爆発的な噴火が起きたのは、７年前の平成２３年以来で、気象庁は、噴火警戒レベル３を継続し、大きな噴石や火砕流に警戒する **よう**\n呼びかけています。\n\nI would translate the part surrounding よう as \"...they called out that one\nshall pay attention to great cinders and pyroclastic flow.\" But I never saw よう\nused in this way.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T08:29:38.530",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57180",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T10:45:39.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is this よう doing behind the verb?",
"view_count": 164
}
|
[
{
"body": "without よう it's incomplete. よう used to connect two parts of sentence like \"to\"\nin English, in \"asked to do\" form.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T10:45:39.330",
"id": "57247",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T10:45:39.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22131",
"parent_id": "57180",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
57180
| null |
57247
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57185",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider these sentences (scenario 1):\n\n 1. > （私は）公園 **に** 花を植える。(I) plant flowers IN the park. (focus on the park)\n\nvs\n\n 2. > （私は）公園 **で** 花を植える。(I) PLANT flowers in the park. (focus on planting)\n\nFirst of all, I would like to know if this interpretation is accurate:\n\nthe first sentence emphasizes the location that is the park.\n\n * This means that I will plant flowers in the park and in the park only. I won't plant anywhere else, and I won't take the flowers anywhere else. (But I could be doing other things like taking a walk, sitting on a bench etc.)\n\nThe second sentence emphasizes the action of planting.\n\n * This means that I plant flowers at the park and I'm not doing anything else. (But I could be taking the flowers to plant somewhere else other than the park.)\n\n* * *\n\nNow, following that logic (if it is correct),\n\nconsider these next two sentences (scenario 2):\n\n> （私は）オフィス **に** 電話をかける。\n\nThis can either be translated as:\n\n * (I) telephone/call the office. ✔ correct\n * (I) make a call INSIDE the office. (and nowhere else) ✘ wrong\n\n> （私は）オフィス **で** 電話をかける。\n\nThis can only be translated as:\n\n * (I) MAKE a phone call inside the office. (And I'm not doing anything else)\n\n* * *\n\nNow for my main question:\n\nWhy unlike the first scenario, I can use the に particle to say that I plant\nINSIDE the park but I can't use the に particle to indicate that I make a call\nINSIDE the office for the second case?\n\nThe only reason I could think of is because オフィス can only be treated as the\nobject the verb (電話をかける） interacts with when using に and that takes priority\nover the に particle used as an indicator of location.\n\nIs 電話をかける a special type of verb exclusive to this scenario or would there be\nother verbs that are similarly translated like that under a different context\nwhen using the に particle?\n\nI have a very similar example to the second scenario that also uses the\noffice:\n\nオフィス **に** 電話を設置する。\n\nオフィス **で** 電話を設置する。\n\nThey both mean (I) install the phone inside the office with different emphasis\non location and action like the first scenario.\n\nCan someone please explain the logic behind this use of particles?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T09:11:54.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57182",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-09T10:05:04.393",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-09T09:22:38.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "27851",
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"particles",
"particle-に",
"particle-で",
"に-and-で"
],
"title": "The difference between に and で when focusing on location vs. action",
"view_count": 360
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think you seem to be a little confused about the respective functions of に\nand で.\n\nWhile it's true that their use in the sentences you provided could be seen as\naltering the emphasis in some of the ways you suggested, this is not because\nthey have the function of providing the same meaning with different emphasis.\nNeither of them inherently add any notable emphasis to a sentence, but they do\nhave fundamentally different _meanings_.\n\nThe particle で is straightforward; it indicates where someone is located when\nthey perform an action. The particle に, on the other hand, does _not_ indicate\nthe location where an action takes place, but rather the location towards\nwhich an action is _directed_.\n\nIn the case of 花を植える, the distinction is somewhat awkward to express in\nEnglish - in order to plant flowers into a specific spot you have to be in\nthat spot yourself, so English would usually express both meanings using \"in\".\nBut in essence 公園 **で** 花を植える indicates \"I am in the park and I plant\nflowers\", while 公園 **に** 花を植える indicates \"I plant flowers into (the soil of)\nthe park\".\n\nUsing a more compact location makes the distinction clearer - 花を鉢 **に** 植える is\na normal expression meaning \"plant flowers into a plantpot\", but 花を鉢 **で** 植える\nis strange - if we interpret it as a statement of location, it indicates that\n_you_ are in the plantpot while planting the flowers, which is nonsensical, so\nwe would have to interpret it as a different meaning of で, such as \"plant\nflowers _using_ a plantpot\".\n\nThis same distinction in meaning is what separates the two 電話をかける sentences\nyou described. オフィス **で** 電話をかける indicates the location where _you_ are going\nto be when you make the phone call. オフィス **に** 電話をかける, on the other hand,\nindicates the _target_ of the action of \"calling on the phone\", in other words\nthe location of the person you're making the phone call _to_.\n\nOne natural outcome of this distinction is that while で can be used with any\nverb, に can _only_ be used with verbs that have some kind of target location.\nYou can't, for instance, say 部屋にドーナツを食べる, because the action of 食べる isn't\ndirected towards any specific location - the only location that you would want\nto specify is your own location while performing it, in which case you would\nuse で.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T10:05:04.393",
"id": "57185",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-09T10:05:04.393",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "57182",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
57182
|
57185
|
57185
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57189",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I stumbled upon [this\nvideo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xp8GylOF6Os&t=185s) and couldn't\nunderstand the subtitle at 3:07:\n\n> 「サッカークラブに迎えに行くのを母が面倒くさがり、バスケ部に入ったのは言うまでもない」\n\nI think it means something along the lines of:\n\n> 'My mum hated taking me to football club, so i joined the basketball club\n> (instead)'\n\nI specifically don't understand the use of particles in '行くのを' and the word\norder.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T12:54:21.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57187",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T01:32:11.110",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T01:32:11.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "28070",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "Verb+のを meaning",
"view_count": 2147
}
|
[
{
"body": "「行{い}く」 is a verb as you know. Here, the \"act of going someplace\" is the\nobject that the speaker's mother found bothersome.\n\nBecause 「行く」 is a verb, however, you **_cannot_** say 「行くを」 as 「を」 must always\nbe placed directly following a noun.\n\nThus, you need to turn 「行く」 into a noun form. How is that done? You can\nnominalize a verb by attaching a 「の」 or 「こと」 directly to a verb, which is like\nadding \"ing\" to a verb in English to make it a noun. This usage of 「の」 is very\nuseful just as \"ing\" is useful in English. Frankly, you could not say anything\nintelligible in Japanese without using this nominalizer 「の」.\n\nBoth 「行くの」 and 「行くこと」 are in the noun form (both mean \"going\" or \"the act of\ngoing\"); therefore, you can now safely and grammatically attach an 「を」 to form\na direct object of the verb phrase 「面倒{めんどう}くさがる」 (\"to find bothersome\").\n\nFinally, your translation is okay except for the \"taking me to\" part.\n「迎{むか}えに行く」 means \"to go and pick (someone) up\" instead. In addition,\n「言うまでもなく」 means \"needless to say\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T13:43:01.557",
"id": "57189",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T03:47:08.933",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-10T03:47:08.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57187",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
57187
|
57189
|
57189
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57190",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't understand very well the meaning and the grammar in this sentence:\n\n> 田中さんの言葉に間違い言わない！\n\nIs possibile that the its meaning is something like \"Tanaka-san is always\nright?\"",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T13:31:09.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57188",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-09T15:06:39.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"expressions"
],
"title": "...に間違い言わない - Meaning and grammar",
"view_count": 146
}
|
[
{
"body": "The character says:\n\n> 「シャリオの言葉{ことば}に間違{まちが}い **は** ない！」\n\nand not 「間違い言わない」. (「言葉 **に** 間違い言わない」 is ungrammatical, hence my comment\nabove.)\n\nThe sentence means:\n\n> \"Chariot's words are accurate.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-09T15:06:39.873",
"id": "57190",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-09T15:06:39.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57188",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57188
|
57190
|
57190
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57194",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "i'm getting confused with the で particle in this sentence. This line belongs\nto Keno.\n\nThe complete line is: こんなに単純で当たり前なことが 本当は、一番見失いがちだからね.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T00:37:00.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57191",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T03:40:12.613",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28060",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"particles",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "can someone explain the use of で particle in this sentence: こんなに単純で当たり前なこと",
"view_count": 168
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「こんなに単純{たんじゅん} **で** 当{あ}たり前{まえ} **な** ことが\n> 本当{ほんとう}は、一番{いちばん}見失{みうしな}いがちだからね。」\n\nFirst, notice (if you have not) that **_two_** na-adjectives are used to\nmodify 「こと」 in this sentence -- 「単純な」 and 「当たり前な」 to use their dictionary\nforms.\n\nTo connect multiple adjectives or verbs in one clause, all except the last one\n**_must_** be conjugated into their 連用形{れんようけい} (\"continuative form\"). Thus it\nis **_incorrect_** to say:\n\n> 「単純 **な** 当たり前 **な** こと」 using 「な」 twice\n\nYou need to turn the first adjective 「単純 **な** 」 into its 連用形. Its 連用形 is 「単純\n**で** 」. Voilà, that is the answer. The **_correct_** phrase is:\n\n> 「単純 **で** 当たり前 **な** こと」\n\nFinally, here is how na-adjective 「単純な」 conjugates.\n\n未然形{みぜんけい} (imperfective form): 単純 **だろ** （う）\n\n連用形{れんようけい} (continuative form): 単純 **だっ** （た）、単純 **で** （ある/ない） and 単純 **に**\n\n終止形{しゅうしけい} (predicative form): 単純 **だ**\n\n連体形{れんたいけい} (attributive form): 単純 **な**\n\n仮定形{かていけい} (hypothetical form): 単純 **なら**\n\n(Unlike with verbs, there is no 命令形{めいれいけい} (imperative form) for adjectives.)\n\nSo, the sentence means:\n\n> \"Things that are this simple and ordinary are actually the things that we\n> most tend to lose sight of.\"\n\nIt was on purpose that I have written a much longer answer than I should have\nbecause I keep seeing questions regarding adjective and verb conjugations\nasked when the questioners themselves do not even seem to be aware that they\nare conjugation questions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T03:08:51.173",
"id": "57194",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T03:40:12.613",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-10T03:40:12.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57191",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57191
|
57194
|
57194
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57195",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Looking at past questions I am still confused about the answers given:\n\n 1. The answer to [this post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/38796/meaning-of-%E5%AF%9D%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84) suggests that 寝る is a continuation of some state.\n\n> 昨日も全然寝てない。 \n> Yesterday I didn't sleep at all.\n\nInstead of\n\n> 昨日も全然寝てなかった。 \n> Yesterday I didn't sleep at all.\n\n 2. The answer to [this post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/47448/usage-and-meaning-%E5%AF%9D%E3%82%8D-vs-%E5%AF%9D%E3%81%A6%E3%82%8D?rq=1) suggests that 寝る is an active verb\n\n> 寝てろ Keep sleeping (keep doing the action of sleeping)\n\n* * *\n\nI want to confirm my understanding of active vs stative verbs:\n\nActive\n\n * 書いている - (I) am writing [present progressive]\n\n * 書いていない - (I) am not writing [negative present progressive]\n\n * 書いていた - (I) was writing [past progressive]\n\n * 書いていなかった - (I) was not writing [negative past progressive]\n\nStative\n\n * 帰っている - (I) have (already) came home [present progressive]\n\n * 帰っていない - (I) I have not come home (but I might be in the middle of coming home) OR I didn't come home. (also in the past?) [negative present progressive]\n\n * 帰っていた - (I) I had come home (sometime in the past I came home) [past progressive]\n\n * 帰っていなかった (I) had not come home (sometime in the past I didn't come home) [negative past progressive]\n\n* * *\n\nI especially have trouble differentiating (for stative verbs) between 帰っていない\nand 帰っていなかった。\n\nBecause of that I also cant understand why 昨日も全然寝てない。 is not 昨日も全然寝てなかった。If it\nwas a stative verb.\n\nIf 寝る is an active verb in this scenario it also wouldn't make sense at all\nbecause I would translate it as \"yesterday I am not sleeping\".\n\n[This post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/42242/why-is-a-verb-\nin-the-past-%E3%81%9F%E5%BD%A2-contradicted-\nwith-%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84) may be related but I only\nsee examples where it is used as an answer to a question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T02:28:28.063",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57193",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-15T23:38:59.940",
"last_edit_date": "2022-06-15T23:38:59.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Is 寝る a stative or active verb?",
"view_count": 1217
}
|
[
{
"body": "寝る works as both. See [the example of 溶ける in this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3140/5010). 寝ている/寝てる can mean\nboth \"is sleeping\" (present progressive) and \"have slept\" (present perfect).\n寝ていた/寝てた can mean both \"was sleeping\" (past progressive) and \"had slept\" (past\nperfect). It depends on the context.\n\nWhen you talk about something in the past, the difference between 寝た and 寝ている\ncan be sometimes blurry, and they are often interchangeable. For instance, if\nsomeone in front of you looks sleepy, you can say both \"昨日あまり寝てないの?\" and\n\"昨日あまり寝なかったの?\". But 寝ている tends to be used in relation to the _current_\nsituation, so 寝てないの may be chosen more often in this case. Likewise, before a\nboring but important event, you would usually choose \"昨日ちゃんと寝てる?\" rather than\n\"昨日ちゃんと寝た?\" See also: [Why is a verb in the past (た形) contradicted with\n～ていない?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42242/5010)\n\nImperative 寝て(い)ろ always has a progressive meaning, because making a command\nabout something in the past does not make sense (You cannot say \"Have slept!\"\nin English, either.)\n\nPast perfect 寝て(い)なかった (\"had slept\") is relatively uncommon, but it's used\nwhen you talk about it in relation to another event in the past.\n\n> * 昨日よく寝ていなかったので今朝の試験に落ちた。 \n> I _failed_ the examination in this morning because I _had not slept_ well.\"\n> * 夫は家に帰っている。 \n> My husband has arrived home. (He is at home _now_ )\n> * 私が家に帰ったとき、夫ももう帰っていた。 \n> When I _arrived_ home, my husband _had arrived_ home, too. (Where he is\n> _now_ is not important)\n>\n\n**EDIT:** Here is the basic difference between present and past perfective\naspect. The eye icon indicates what you are describing. Past perfective aspect\ndescribes a continuation of state _until some point of interest in the past_ ;\nits current status is not important. 寝ていた works just like this, too, but it\ncan also mean progressive \"was sleeping\".\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dY6BD.png)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T03:22:41.450",
"id": "57195",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T03:04:58.667",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T03:04:58.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57193",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "> I escpecially have trouble differentiating (for stative verbs) between\n> 帰っていない and 帰っていなかった。\n\nI'll answer your question because the difference between the two expressions\nis obvious.\n\nAssuming that the subject is \"he\", 帰っていない means \" _He has not come home and\n**he is not at home now**_ \".\n\n**Note: added the following three lines** \nLinguistically, 帰っていなかった is used as an expression in which the tense of 帰っていない\nis shifted one step to the past, but sometimes it is used with the nuance that\nthe state of 帰っていなかった was contrary to the expectation. In this case it is used\nas follows: \n帰っていなかった implies that \"帰っていると思ったが帰っていなかった _**I expected that he had come\nhome** but he hadn't. ~~**I don't know if he is at home now**~~_ \".\n\nBy the way, we usually say 帰ってない instead of 帰っていない.\n\n# EDIT\n\nAs 帰っている has meaning of both \"having already come home\" and present\nprogressive form with \"being coming home\", it is troublesome to distinguish\nthem even Japanese. Therefore, in the case of present progressive form, we\ngenerally say that \" **今** 帰っている **ところです/だ** \" instead of \"帰っている\".\n\nFor example, \" **今｛いま｝帰っているところだ** 。電車{でんしゃ}の中｛なか｝だよ。もうすぐ帰｛かえ｝るから待｛ま｝っていてね。\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T08:13:47.143",
"id": "57197",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T13:16:13.987",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57193",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57193
|
57195
|
57195
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "this was my email to my prospective employer\n\nご返信ありがとうございました。 今学生ビザを持っていますが、労働許可証を持っていません。 労働許可証もご所望ですか？\n\nどうぞよろしくお願いいたします\n\nI was wondering if I needed work permit to work too. his reply was:\n\nお持ちの学生ビザはアルバイト可能な条件を満たしていませんか？\n\n今後条件を満たす予定であれば、就業時期については相談可能です。\n\nよろしくお願いします。\n\nI'm not sure what he's asking here. is he asking me if I have plans to apply\nfor a work permit or I don't need it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T05:26:48.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57196",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T20:44:08.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11874",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"keigo"
],
"title": "part time job and visa vocabs",
"view_count": 125
}
|
[
{
"body": "He says:\n\nDoes your student visa not meet conditions that allow part-time jobs? **If you\nplan to satisfy the conditions in the future** , you can consult us regarding\nthe **time of your employment** (simply put, when you will start working for\nthem). よろしくお願いします。(well, I suppose you know what that means).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T20:44:08.210",
"id": "57208",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T20:44:08.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28016",
"parent_id": "57196",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57196
| null |
57208
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57202",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So to say you like something, you you could say:\n\n```\n\n 僕は[blank]がすきです。\n \n```\n\nand to say something like \"I speak Japanese\", you could say:\n\n```\n\n 僕は日本語が話します。\n \n```\n\nSo say I wanted to say I like to speak Japanese, how could I combine the two\nsentences?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T14:26:36.727",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57201",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T02:39:26.523",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T02:39:26.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "28079",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "How do I combine \"I speak Japanese\" with \"I like to ...\"?",
"view_count": 1264
}
|
[
{
"body": "You need to nominalize the verb phrase, because 好き is an adjective and can\nonly modify a noun. The way you do that in Japanese is to add a nominalizer\n(in this case, の）to the verb phrase:\n\n> 日本語を話す = I speak Japanese\n>\n> 日本語を話す **の** = the act of speaking Japanese\n\nNow you can put them together and say:\n\n> 僕は日本語を話すのが好きです。\n\nLiterally: \"As for me, the act of speaking Japanese is liked.\" Note that you\ncan only nominalize a verb when it's in a short form, not ます form:\n\n> **X** 僕は日本語を話しますのが好きです。 **ungrammatical**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T14:52:21.820",
"id": "57202",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T14:52:21.820",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "57201",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57201
|
57202
|
57202
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57207",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm currently reading 極主夫道 and I'm not sure I understand \"十力所\". Do you have\nany ideas? Is it 10 powerful people of the office or something else? Thank\nyou!\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KDEYJ.jpg)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T15:22:35.797",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57203",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T11:12:49.913",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T01:21:51.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "28080",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"counters"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of \"十力所\"",
"view_count": 247
}
|
[
{
"body": "箇所(カ所、ヶ所) means a place, a spot, a point, a part.\n\n抗争相手の事務所を十カ所潰した means \"The yakuza made ten enemy (Japanese mafia) offices\nclose\", \"The yakuza destroyed ten enemy (Japanese mafia) offices\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T17:50:45.620",
"id": "57207",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T11:12:49.913",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T11:12:49.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "57203",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57203
|
57207
|
57207
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "62024",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "And is there a way to type a narrower, English style space while in the\nJapanese IME? (Like a key combination?)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T15:40:48.940",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57204",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-07T14:36:54.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19117",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"input-method"
],
"title": "Why is the space so big/wide in the Japanese IME compared to the English IME?",
"view_count": 3708
}
|
[
{
"body": "It may wider compared to the ASCII space, but it is the same width of a full-\nwidth character.\n\nFor example if you write several Japanese characters with space between them,\nthe space has the same width as the character, so it is not wider: \nあ い う え お",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-10-07T02:10:39.160",
"id": "62011",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-07T02:10:39.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18157",
"parent_id": "57204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "As you mentioned in your own comment, a half-width space can be typed by\nShift+Space. To answer your question about full-width space in your comment:\n\nSince the Japanese characters are in squares with same width (as oppose to the\nEnglish letters with different width), it would be neat if all characters are\nwritten in the same width. Since spaces are usually used for new paragraph\nline head indent, full-width space can be used to indent the first line\nneatly, like this:\n\n>\n> 今日は２０１８年１０月７日です。天気がいいから、散歩しましょう。今日は２０１８年１０月７日です。天気がいいから、散歩しましょう。今日は２０１８年１０月７日です。天気がいいから、散歩しましょう。\n>\n>\n> 今日は２０１８年１０月７日です。天気がいいから、散歩しましょう。今日は２０１８年１０月７日です。天気がいいから、散歩しましょう。今日は２０１８年１０月７日です。天気がいいから、散歩しましょう。\n\nThis way, the characters are neatly aligned vertically character-by-character.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-10-07T12:58:25.520",
"id": "62024",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-07T14:36:54.200",
"last_edit_date": "2018-10-07T14:36:54.200",
"last_editor_user_id": "27774",
"owner_user_id": "27774",
"parent_id": "57204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57204
|
62024
|
62024
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57206",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Does is contain any romantic implications? I’ve heard it can be used as a love\nconfession or marriage proposal of some sort, but is that true? And is that a\ncommon phrase?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T16:15:57.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57205",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T17:13:44.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28066",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Question about the implications behind “私でよければ“",
"view_count": 796
}
|
[
{
"body": "All by itself without context, 「私{わたし}でよければ」 _**does not**_ contain romantic\nimplications. How could it? In fact, when I read your question, I murmured to\nmyself 「私でよければ回答{かいとう}しましょうか・・」, roughly meaning \" _ **If it's OK with you,\nI**_ would post an answer.\"\n\n「私でよければ」 simply means \"If it is OK (with you), I ~~\"\n\nEven in a romantic context, 「私でよければ」 all by itself does not really mean much.\nIt is not a complete sentence in the first place. You might use it in complete\nsentences such as:\n\n> 「私でよければ付{つ}き合{あ}ってください。」 (\"If it is OK wih you, please date me.\")\n>\n> 「（こんな）私でよければ結婚{けっこん}してください。」 (\"If you find me acceptable, please marry me.\")\n\n「私でよければ」 is an _**extremely**_ common phrase in all kinds of situations. It\nmakes you sound humble and not pushy/aggressive/impolite, etc.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-10T17:05:27.657",
"id": "57206",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-10T17:13:44.733",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57205",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
57205
|
57206
|
57206
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57210",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "その婦人たちは、両親が昼間工場で働いている子供たちの世話をしています。\n\nThe 働いている子供たち part sounds like \"working kids\" so maybe another particle could\nbe put between 働いている and 子供たち? Or a comma?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T02:10:09.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57209",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T02:48:06.003",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T02:38:17.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Could this sentence be better rephrased?",
"view_count": 105
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「その婦人{ふじん}たちは、両親{りょうしん}が昼間工場{ひるまこうじょう}で働{はたら}いている子供{こども}たちの世話{せわ}をしています。」\n\nThere is nothing wrong with this sentence. It is grammatical and natural-\nsounding.\n\nIn the relative clause construct 「両親が昼間工場で働いている子供たち」, 「両親が昼間工場で働いている」 modifies\n「子供たち」.\n\n> The 働いている子供たち part sounds like \"working kids\" so maybe another particle\n> could be put between 働いている and 子供たち? Or a comma?\n\nNo particle can be placed there and a comma would be out of the question as\nwell. I suggest that you review the Japanese relative clause because its\nstructure is **_completely_** different from that of the relative clause in\nEuropean languages.\n\nIf you had to rephrase the sentence for a good reason (though I have no idea\nwhat that reason could be), you could say:\n\n> 「その婦人たちは、両親が昼間工場で働いている **家庭{かてい}の** 子供たちの世話をしています。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T02:48:06.003",
"id": "57210",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T02:48:06.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57209",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57209
|
57210
|
57210
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57213",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> PS3のゲームソフト **買おうってなって** 悩んでいる。\n>\n> 一日仕事を終えて、おうち **帰ろうってなって**...\n\nRecently I have encountered some sentences of the form \"意向形 (volitional\nverb)＋って+なる\".\n\nI want to ask two questions: If I understand it correctly, this sentence\nstructure means \"何々をしたくなる\". Is the saying \"意向形ってなる\" fairly informal? And, can\nI replace \"って\" with other particle, such as \"と\" or \"に\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T08:40:39.657",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57211",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T09:35:28.983",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "意向形 (volitional verb)＋って+なる",
"view_count": 961
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「Verb in Volitional Form + って + なる」\n\nhas been an extremely common colloquial phrase for, I would say, the last\ndecade or two. It might get completely outdated in the near future, or it\nmight last long enough to make its way into Genki. Common words and phrases\ncome and go rather quickly in Japanese.\n\n> If I understand it correctly, this sentence structure means \"何々をしたくなる\".\n\nExactly. It means 「Verb したいっていう（気持{きも}ち/話{はなし}）になる」.\n\n> Is the saying \"意向形ってなる\" fairly informal?\n\nYes, it is very informal. We will call you out if you use it in any formal\nsituation. It sounds light and casual and it is mostly used by the younger\ngenerations.\n\n> And, can I replace \"って\" with other particle, such as \"と\" or \"に\"?\n\nGood question. Using \"と\" would be \"possible\" but since it is an informal\nphrase, 「と」 would not sound very natural.\n\nTo use 「と」 and still sound natural, you might need to use the \"traditional\"\nphrase 「～～たい **と** いう気持ちになる」 instead.\n\nUsing 「に」 would be incorrect; It just will not be grammatical.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T09:35:28.983",
"id": "57213",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T09:35:28.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
57211
|
57213
|
57213
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57218",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The company I work for has an office in Japan, and they've hosted me for a\ncouple of weeks. When that time comes to an end I'd like to thank them for\nhosting me and making me feel welcomed. What would be an appropriate way to do\nthis?\n\nお-疲れ-様 is one answer I've seen, but it I'm not sure: it seems to be used for\nsmall things and I don't want to offend by giving the impression that I\nthought their work was minor.\n\n_edit:_ I saw that other question about thanking for hospitality but asked\nanyway to ensure I found something appropriate for a business context. If that\nquestion's answer is appropriate, then this question is a duplicate.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T09:38:32.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57214",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T03:25:39.047",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T22:28:29.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "28094",
"owner_user_id": "28094",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "How to thank a group of co-workers for their hospitality?",
"view_count": 327
}
|
[
{
"body": "お疲れ様 is not appropriate for this case. \nIf you're going to thank them by speech, the answers posted by Earthliŋ, the\nlinks of which are shown by Earthliŋ in the comments, are appropriate.\nHowever, I feel that it alone is not enough as the way of giving an address of\nthanks for their hospitality for two weeks. But I think that elaborate speech\nof gratitude similar to that of ordinary Japanese seems difficult for you. \nSo, I recommend that you leave a gratitude letter in English for them, and you\nsay like\n\"皆{みな}さん、長｛なが｝い間｛あいだ｝大変｛たいへん｝お世話｛せわ｝なりました。どうもありがとうございました。日本語｛にほんご｝がへたなので英語｛えいご｝でお礼｛れい｝の手紙｛てがみ｝を書｛か｝きました。あとで読｛よ｝んでください。\n_Thank you very much for your long-term support/hospitality. Because I am poor\nin Japanese, I wrote a letter of thanks in English. Please read it later._ \"\nat the speech.\n\nBy the way, I think it is quite all right that you would read the draft in\nJapanese at the speech.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T13:31:12.597",
"id": "57218",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T03:25:39.047",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T03:25:39.047",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57214
|
57218
|
57218
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57216",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could anyone help me break down the grammatical structure in the sentence\nbelow? I understand 「~より」 indicates a superlative here, but I don’t fully\nunderstand how it combines with 「だれ 」. I am also not sure why 「なんだ」is needed\nhere as well?\n\nぼくはだれよりかのじょがすきなんだ。\n\nThank you so much for your help!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T11:08:30.517",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57215",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T12:01:41.440",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T11:48:05.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "16097",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"syntax",
"particle-より"
],
"title": "Grammatic structure だれより question",
"view_count": 171
}
|
[
{
"body": "より indicates a comparison rather than a superlative. In AよりB you are\ndescribing B with A as a reference. e.g.\n\n> AよりBがいい。 \n> Compared to A, B is good. = B is better than A. \n> AよりBが高い。 \n> Compared to A, B is tall. = B is taller than A. \n> AよりBが好き。 \n> Compared to A, B is liked. = I like B more than A.\n\nIn your sentence your making a comparison with だれ (who). So you get:\n\n> ぼくはだれよりかのじょがすきなんだ。 \n> For me, compared to who, the girl is liked.\n\nNow that translation is obviously nonsense, but I hope it isn't too much of a\nleap of the imagination to see how that would become:\n\n> I like the girl more than anyone (else).\n\nWhere だれ ends up with the meaning of 'anyone' rather than 'who'.\n\nAs for the なんだ ending, this is an example of the 'explanatory の'. There are\nloads of questions about that on this site. Have a browse.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T12:01:41.440",
"id": "57216",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-11T12:01:41.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "57215",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57215
|
57216
|
57216
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57223",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider this sentence:\n\n> 私は試験のために勉強しなかったことが残念 **に** 感じる。I feel regret that I didn't study for the\n> exam.\n\n`1.`Why is the に particle used instead of と?\n\nI have read the answer to [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/8278/is-%E6%84%9F%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B-%E3%81%8B%E3%82%93%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B-transitive-\nor-intransitive-which-particle-to-use) which considers how 感じる can be used\nwith the を, と and に particles under different circumstances. But I still have\ntrouble understanding it.\n\nIn this part of the answer:\n\n> \"4. When it appears to take に, the に particle is actually marking an adverb.\n> This happens with transitive and intransitive uses of the verb.\"\n\nI interpret this to mean that 残念に would be translated as \"regrettably\" into an\nadverb. So 残念に感じる means \"to feel regrettably\". If I translated it literally:\n\"I regrettably feel that I didn't study for the exam.\"\n\nBut why is it also wrong to use と in the sentence above if it is a \"defining\nor quotative\" particle?\n\n* * *\n\nHere is my interpretation of the answer to [the\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/8278/is-%E6%84%9F%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B-%E3%81%8B%E3%82%93%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B-transitive-\nor-intransitive-which-particle-to-use) but I am not too confident, correct me\nif I'm wrong (I numbered my questions in this section respectively):\n\n**を** can only be used in circumstances where the person has a:\n\n * physical sense: e.g. 揺れるの **を** 感じた、風 **を** 感じる\n\n * spider sense: e.g. 将来に不安 **を** 感じる、彼は生命の危険 **を** 感じた\n\n**と** is used as a \"quotation/sound or manner adverbial\" phrase\n\n(I have trouble understanding how と particle is used the most)\n\n * Used as a spider sense: 彼は何かを隠している **と** 感じた (`2.` does this mean that 彼は何かを隠しているの **を** 感じた is also correct?)\n\n`3.`But what about this sentence? Is に or を also correct in this case?\n\n> 良書を読むというも幸せ **と** 感じる。I feel content in reading good books.\n\n`4.`What are other cases where you can only use the と particle with 感じる?\n\n**に** (or i-adjectives + く) is only used as an adverb to express emotional\nsense\n\n * その時，初めて母の愛を深 **く** 感じた。\n\nと cannot be used with verbs that only express a knowledge/forgetting of facts.\ne.g. 忘れる、思い出す、知る.\n\nBut it can be used with verbs that can express feeling or belief e.g.\n分かる、信じる、思う、考える\n\nHowever, considering something from my [previous\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/57038/how-\nis-%E3%81%A8-used-in-these-sentences/57050?noredirect=1#comment98728_57050)\n\n> 私はあなたがいつも忙しい **と** 分かっています。\n\n`5.`Would it be incorrect to use the adverb rule as stated above?\n\n> 私はあなたがいつも忙し **く** 分かっています。\n\n* * *\n\nI might have answered my own question already but I am still not too confident\nof my interpretation. I would appreciate further clarification on how these\nparticles are used with these kinds of verbs, and some examples would be\ngreat.\n\nApologies for the long post, I did my best to keep it as brief and organized\nas I could. I hope this makes sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T13:05:30.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57217",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T08:40:43.097",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-11T22:31:23.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "27851",
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"particles"
],
"title": "Confusion with に、を、と particles used with verbs like 感じる",
"view_count": 2127
}
|
[
{
"body": "残念に感じる and 残念(だ)と感じる are basically interchangeable. They both mean \"to feel\nit's regrettable\" rather than \"to regrettably feel something\". This 残念に is\n\"adverbial\" in a broad sense, but it does not describe the way 感じる happens.\nJapanese \"adverbial\" modifiers do not necessarily work the same way as English\nadverbs (see [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55796/5010), too). In\nthis case, maybe you can think of this に as a rough equivalent of English\n\"as\", e.g., 候補者に選ぶ (\"to choose _as_ a candidate\"), 教師に採用する (\"to recruit _as_ a\nteacher\"), 枕によい (\"to serve well _as_ a pillow\").\n\nNote that adjectives before に感じる/思う can work in two different ways, depending\non the word.\n\n> * 奇妙に感じる, 変に感じる, 残念に思う, 遺憾に思う, 悲しく思う, ありがたく思う... \n> I feel/think it's _strange/pitiful/sad/etc..._\n> * 痛切に感じる, 強く思う, ... \n> I _strongly/deeply/etc_ feel/think ...\n> * よく思う (ambiguous) I think it's good / I often think ...\n>\n\n* * *\n\n * 本を読むと幸せに感じる and 本を読むと幸せと感じる are interchangeable.\n * 母の愛を深く感じた only means \"I _deeply_ felt mother's love\". This 深く is a simple adverbial modifier.\n * Please do not overly generalize the use of ～に感じる/～に思う. 忙しく考える only means \"to think busily/hard about something\". 忙しく分かる/信じる makes almost no sense to me.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T06:52:54.183",
"id": "57223",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T08:40:43.097",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-12T08:40:43.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57217",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
57217
|
57223
|
57223
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57220",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I started learning Japanese about 2 months ago and today, while talking with a\nfriend of mine who has been studying Japanese for about two years, he gave me\nthis example scenario about は particle and the 'contrast' it creates; and it\nconfused the hell out of me:\n\n> Imagine a group of people conversing. One of them asks the entire group what\n> are their nationalities. Half Japanese one says he is Japanese by saying:\n> 私は日【に】本【ほん】人【じん】です。And right after him another Japanese guy says the exact\n> thing too. The half Japanese guy feels offended.\n>\n> Now, the reason the second guy's answer offended the first guy is, he\n> implied that he is more Japanese than the other one. If he didn't wanted to\n> imply that, he could just use the も particle instead of は. Because after は,\n> you state something that is lacking in the previous 'topic'.\n\nBut I read in an online source that the が particle puts the focus on the the\nword it attaches (subject) while は puts the emphasis on the part that comes\nafter it. And that source, as an example, stated that if someone said これはぺンです\nwhile holding a book, you would point to a real pen and then say いいえ、これがペンです\nWhich would mean: _No, **this** is a pen._\n\nIs the example my friend gave me about は particle correct? Shouldn't there be\nが instead of は for the second guy to mean \" **I'm** the Japanese one!\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-11T22:13:53.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57219",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T00:45:07.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "28100",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "About は particle and the 'contrast' it implies",
"view_count": 2095
}
|
[
{
"body": "Native Japanese speaker here.\n\nYour friend's scenario makes no sense, period. Your own understanding of 「は」\nindeed makes far more sense.\n\nThe contrastive 「は」 works like this:\n\nLet us suppose you have recently been to three new restaurants and you have a\ndifferent impression of each. You might say:\n\n> 「Restaurant A **は** とてもよかった。B **は** まあまあだった。でも C **は** よくなかった。」\n\nmeaning:\n\n> \"Restaurant A was very good. B was okay. C, however, was no good.\"\n\nThat should sound self-explanatory, no? That is comparison and contrast. It is\nmade possible only by using the contrastive「は」.\n\nThus, in your friend's example, it would have been correct if the **second\nperson** had said:\n\n> 「私 **も** 日本人です。」 using a 「も」.\n\nUsing a 「は」 there is not something a native speaker would intuitively do\nregardless of his intention. Had he actually meant to offend the first person,\nhe would have said:\n\n> 「私 **が** 日本人です。」 ( ** _I_** 'm the Japanese.)\n\nThat sentence clearly implies that the first guy who said he was Japanese is\n**_not_** really Japanese.\n\n(The problem, however, is that quite a few Japanese-learners mistakenly use 「\n**が** 」 as if it were the default topic-marker. SE is no exception.)\n\nWhat you stated about the sentences regarding pen vs. book is, of course,\ncorrect.\n\n> Is the example my friend gave me about は particle correct?\n\nNo, not at all. You already know better than he does regarding this matter.\n\n> Shouldn't there be が instead of は for the second guy to mean \"I'm the\n> Japanese one!\"?\n\nOnly if the second guy actually intended to offend the first or to make a joke\n(about the first guy being only half-Japanese.)\n\nAs I stated above, if the second guy had neither of the two intentions\ndescribed above, he would have most naturally used 「も」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T00:45:07.203",
"id": "57220",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T00:45:07.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57219",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
] |
57219
|
57220
|
57220
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57222",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In school I was taught to write sentences, with 'I/me' or any other pronoun\nfirst-person or not, always being at the beginning of a sentence like so:\n\n> 僕はリンゴがダサいと思います。\n\nYet I frequently see sentences on this site and in \"real-world Japanese\" as:\n\n> リンゴがダサいと僕は思います。\n\n*Note: the above are sentences created by myself so they may not be entirely grammatical but real world examples will follow\n\nWhat I have noted is that in some cases it alleviates the need for certain\nparticles such as this answer to [a different grammar question I found on this\nsite](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/48387/i-think-that-she-\nthinks-that-i-think-she-is-dumb/48390#48390):\n\n> 彼女のことをバカだと僕は思っている。\n\nWhereas I would have written it as:\n\n> 僕は彼女のことがバカだと思っている。\n\nI would be most grateful to anyone willing to explain if there are rules to\nthis sort of grammar, am I using it correctly? (probs not) and whether or not\nit changes the meaning to the sentence in any way\n\nThank you kindly",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T04:05:57.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57221",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T08:46:12.063",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-12T05:07:49.463",
"last_editor_user_id": "28070",
"owner_user_id": "28070",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-order"
],
"title": "~を僕はします Question about word order",
"view_count": 217
}
|
[
{
"body": "Word order is less important in Japanese than in English, because Japanese\nuses particles (が, は, を, etc) to indicate the role of each word in a sentence.\nThis makes Japanese very flexible in terms of word order:\n\n * [Does word order change the meaning of a sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/19433/5010)\n\nThere is an \"ordinary\" word order (\"subject-object-verb\" or SOV), which you\nhave to respect when you learn to write good Japanese sentences. In your case,\n僕はリンゴがダサいと思います is the normal word order which you should firstly get used to.\nHowever, in real-life conversations, especially in casual ones, you may\nencounter sentences in loose word order. リンゴがダサいと僕は思います feels a little less\norganized, but is still perfectly acceptable in speech. Actually, even\nダサいと思いますリンゴが僕は still makes perfect sense, and sounds even realistic to me. You\nshould not try to make such sentences intentionally, but eventually you may\nhave to interpret such sentences correctly.\n\nNext, `AをBと思う`, `AをBだと思う` and `AがBだと思う` are basically interchangeable. Your\nlast attempt looks equally natural. For details, please read the following\ndiscussions:\n\n * [Can を used with だ/です](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55158/5010)\n * [Difference between だと vs と before 認める](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55990/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T05:32:01.087",
"id": "57222",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T08:46:12.063",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-12T08:46:12.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57221",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
57221
|
57222
|
57222
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "It may be a dumb question, both mean circle/round thing but 玉 is more of a\njewel/sphere/ball. Could I say \"5円丸\" instead of \"5円玉\"? Or should I just stick\nwith \"5円硬貨\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T17:37:43.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57225",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T01:47:46.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28114",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji-choice"
],
"title": "The difference between 丸 and 玉",
"view_count": 294
}
|
[
{
"body": "When I was a kid, some older people did actually called coins as:\n\n> 「[Number] 円丸{えんまる}」\n\nNow that those people are gone, I no longer encounter that usage anywhere. It\nmight have been a regional (Nagoya, in my case) and/or old way of calling\ncoins. You would look quite weird if you used it today.\n\nIn informal daily speech, we almost exclusively use:\n\n> 「[number] 円玉{えんだま}」\n\nOnly in very formal situations, we use:\n\n> 「[Number] 円硬貨{えんこうか}」\n\nMost people just do not actively use the last one much even though everyone\nknows what it means.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T00:34:05.513",
"id": "57235",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T00:34:05.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57225",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I've never heard people say \"x円丸\".\n\nIt's weird that we never refer coins as \"玉\", but we always say like \"十円玉\". You\ncould say like \"一円硬貨\", but it's like \"coinage\"; too rigid word to use.\n\nTo mention coins, we use \"小銭{こぜに}\", or more specifically \"x円玉{えんだま}\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T01:47:46.710",
"id": "57238",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T01:47:46.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28118",
"parent_id": "57225",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57225
| null |
57235
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57237",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have 2 question really: What is the に particle's job in this sentence?, And\nwhen I put this sentence on Jisho.org it identifies `焼き付いてはなれない` as 2 verbs,\nis it true?.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T22:00:10.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57228",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T01:28:42.817",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28060",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"verbs",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Can someone please explain the に particle in this sentence: 'そして急ぐ君の目に焼き付いてはなれない'?",
"view_count": 129
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this sentence \"に\" decides the place the verb occurs. So the verb\n\"焼き付いてはなれない\" happens in/at/on/to \"君の目\"(Your eyes). If you can read Japanese\nthis site would help you.\n<http://www.geocities.jp/niwasaburoo/shuyoumokuji.html>\n\nAnd the verb \"焼き付いてはなれない\" indeed consists of 2 verbs. (Or could be 3) It is\nconbination of \"焼き付く\" + \"離{はな}れる\". (The word \"焼き付く\" could be separated in \"焼く\"\n+ \"付く\")\n\n\"焼き付く\" means \"be imprinted\" and \"離れる\" means \"leave\" but in this context it's\nmore like \"come out/off\" or \"fade away\". So \"焼き付いてはなれない\" means \"it is\nimprinted and doesn't fade away\". Notice that \"焼き付いて\" ends with \"-te\" to\ncombine with the next verb.\n\n> そして And\n>\n> 急ぐ君の _目に_ _In the eyes_ of you hurries\n>\n> 焼き付いて it is imprinted\n>\n> はなれない and doesn't fade away.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T01:21:17.260",
"id": "57237",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T01:28:42.817",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "28118",
"parent_id": "57228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57228
|
57237
|
57237
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm not sure I completely understand the usage of ちょっと前に in this context:\n\n一年 **ちょっと前に** 結婚しました.\n\nDoes this mean:\n\n * \"I got married around a year ago\" (implies more or less than a year)\n * \"I got married a little over a year ago\" (implies unspecified short amount of time MORE than exactly 1 year ago)\n * \"I got married roughly a little over year ago\" (implies uncertain time MORE than exactly one year ago)\n\nMy original intention was to say: **\"I got married a little over a year\nago.\"**\n\nCan someone explain to me which is the most accurate translation, and then how\nto properly express the other two options?\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T22:04:49.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57229",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T03:43:55.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"time"
],
"title": "The Meaning of ちょっと前に",
"view_count": 260
}
|
[
{
"body": "**EDIT** : I was confused and answered wrongly. I apologize for this.\n\n「一年 _ちょっと_ 前に」 means \" _a little_ over a year ago\"\n\nTo tell \" _around_ a year ago\", we say \"一年 _くらい_ 前に\".\n\nTo tell \" **A little** over a year ago\", we say \"一年と **ちょっと** 前に\" or \"一年\n**ちょっと** 前に\".\n\nTo tell \" _Roughly_ **a little** over a year ago\", we say \"一年と **ちょっと** 前\n_くらいに_ \".\n\nSo to tell \"I got married a little over a year ago.\", we say \"一年とちょっと前に結婚した\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T02:34:16.563",
"id": "57240",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T03:08:24.187",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T03:08:24.187",
"last_editor_user_id": "28118",
"owner_user_id": "28118",
"parent_id": "57229",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "1年ちょっと前 means \" _a little over_ a year ago\", i.e., approx. 13-14 months ago.\nThis expression is unspecific, but the speaker is not uncertain. If you are\nuncertain, you can say \"1年ちょっとだか1年半だか前\", \"1年かそのくらい前\", etc. 1年と少し前 is a more\nformal equivalent. 1年ちょい前 is more casual.\n\nYou don't have to use it with 前. Examples using similar expressions:\n\n * [1万円ちょっとの無線LANアクセスポイント](http://businessnetwork.jp/tabid/65/artid/5880/page/2/Default.aspx)\n * [ゲームを1時間ちょっとでクリア](https://youtu.be/LbO7isC5oGc?t=13m2s)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T02:52:36.043",
"id": "57241",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T03:43:55.630",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T03:43:55.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57229",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57229
| null |
57241
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57232",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 宮城県と岩手県は、 **仮設住宅などには世話をする人がいないお年寄りなど生活に困っている人が住んでいることが多い**\n> ため、１人で亡くなる人が増えていると考えています。 \n> The Miyagi and Iwate prefectures think that the number of people who are\n> dying alone is increasing because there are many cases of people living in\n> temporary housing who struggle with daily life and have no one to take care\n> of them.\n\nI'm struggling to parse the part in bold in a convincing way. I'll try to\nbreak it down:\n\n> 仮設住宅などに **人** が住んでいることが多い \n> There are many cases of people living in temporary housing.\n\nWhat kind of people?\n\n> 生活に困っている人 \n> People who struggle with daily living\n\nThe part I'm stuck on is how to join all of this with\n\n> 世話をする人がいないお年寄り \n> Old people who have no one to care for them\n\nI don't understand how this fits with the rest of the sentence. At first I\nassumed that お年寄り was the subject of 困っている but then I have\n\n> **お年寄り** が生活に困っている **人**\n\nSo the subject appears twice in this clause, both as the actual subject and\nthe relativised (is that a word?) noun. This doesn't seem right.\n\nWhat am I getting wrong here?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T22:15:08.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57230",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T22:47:16.767",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-12T22:33:31.890",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"parsing",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Can the subject appear at the head of a relative clause and **in** the clause simultaneously?",
"view_count": 138
}
|
[
{
"body": "Here is how the phrase you're having trouble with breaks down:\n\n> 世話をする人がいないお年寄りなど生活に困っている **人**\n\nWhat type of 人？\n\n> お年寄りなど生活に困っている **人**\n\n\"People who struggle with daily life, such as elderly people.\" Let's refer to\nthese people as \"subj\".\n\nWhat subset of these people, in particular?\n\n> 世話をする人がいないsubj\n\nOnes who have no one to care for them.\n\n> 仮設住宅などには\n\nis not part of the relative clause, as you can tell because it contains a は\nparticle. There's no reason you couldn't rewrite it to make it a relative\nclause, however, and it was relativized in the English translation in this\ncase.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T22:47:16.767",
"id": "57232",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-12T22:47:16.767",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "57230",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57230
|
57232
|
57232
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This question is closely related to a similar question I asked not long ago:\n\n[送ってくれた : Why is both \"sending\" and \"giving\" being used together\nhere?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/57141/%E9%80%81%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%9F-why-\nis-both-sending-and-giving-being-used-together-\nhere?noredirect=1#comment98856_57141)\n\nI now understand くれた being useful as an auxiliary verb meaning \"did for\nhis/her/my (benefit)\"\n\nIn this case I wanted to express a story to my Japanese friend about how when\nI visited my girlfriend's father for the first time, he had a lot of questions\nto interrogate me with.\n\nMy friend told me to say this: 父さんはたくさん質問してくれました.\n\nI did some more research, but I don't undertand how くれました is being used here.\n\nIt seems like it should mean this: \"Her father had a lot of questions to give\nme (for my benefit)\"\n\nI also came up with this variant on my own (is it correct?):\nお父さんはたくさん質問して聞きました。 \"Her father had a lot of questions to ask me.\"\n\nAnyway, in the first case, the questions are interrogative, and thus not\nnecessarily wanted by myself, or for my benefit. Interrogative questions feel\nmore forced or imposed upon me, than \"given\" to me.\n\nAm I misunderstanding the usage here? Is there a better way to express this?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T22:45:15.753",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57231",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T19:05:20.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "auxiliary verb くれた being used in context of \"having questions\"",
"view_count": 316
}
|
[
{
"body": "This くれる is not really different from くれる in 送ってくれる you asked before. The\nsentence just means Father asked a lot of question and _that fact was\nbeneficial (to you or your friend*)_. A lot of questions mean 父さん was\ninterested in you, and that fact itself is the beneficial thing here.\n\n* I'm not entirely sure what was happening... maybe your friend and your girlfriend's father knew each other and was talking about you when you were not present?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T03:05:57.003",
"id": "57243",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T03:14:47.300",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T03:14:47.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57231",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I agree that using くれた at the end makes it sound like there was something that\nyou found beneficial in the questioning. It would be better to omit that part\nif you don't want it to sound this way.\n\n@naruto's answer is good at addressing the fact that, normally asking a lot of\nquestions to one's daughter's boyfriend, while uncomfortable, indicates that\nhe is at least willing to find out more about you: thereby demonstrating the\npossibility of acceptance, which would be beneficial to you.\n\nIf, on the other hand, you want to make it sound closer to your suggested\nmeaning/nuance, you should probably substitute 質問する for another verb clause\nlike 尋問{じんもん｝する.\n\n> 彼女のお父さんに、警察の尋問みたいに質問された。I was questioned by her father as though he were\n> performing a police interrogation.\n>\n> 彼女のお父さんに質問された ... 尋問みたいに。I was questioned by her father, like an\n> interrogation.\n>\n> 彼女のお父さんに厳しく質問された。I was questioned severely by her father.\n\nFinally, I'm not sure if using these phrases in regards to one's potential\nfuture father-in-law would be advisable and there might be better ways to\nemphasize the feeling of being 'under the spotlight'. Possibly 職質（職務質問）みたいに,\netc. Maybe someone else has a suggestion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T03:27:24.480",
"id": "57244",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T19:05:20.317",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "57231",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
57231
| null |
57243
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "Alright I've been told so many different things on how to order, specifically\nfast food and for some reason I have never gotten a straight answer.\n\nThe popular ones is to say ____をください or _____ お願いします. But when I was in Japan\nI never heard either of those, just the food item and how many they wanted, so\nI am confused.\n\nHow to actually order fast food?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-12T22:58:19.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57234",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T13:09:41.343",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T08:12:29.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "5464",
"owner_user_id": "28117",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"food"
],
"title": "How to actually order fast food?",
"view_count": 1816
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's so simple. It's just the difference between \"2 Big Macs, please\" and \"I'd\nlike Triple Cheese Burger with soda\".\n\n\"xxxをください\" = \"Please give me xxx\" (Maybe sounds weird in English, but it's ok\nin Japanese)\n\n\"xxxをお願いします\" = \"xxx, please\"\n\n\"xxxを\"/\"xxxで\"/\"xxx\" = \"xxx\" (Just itself, not so polite/formal, but everyone\ndoes anyway)\n\nAfter you tell what you want to have, the salesperson might ask you\n\"ご注文{ちゅうもん}は以上{いじょう}でしょうか？\" (Have you ordered all?). You say \"はい\" (Yes).\n\nThat's all.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T02:05:18.580",
"id": "57239",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T03:36:02.020",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T03:36:02.020",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "28118",
"parent_id": "57234",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "As @Towa_Shina has answered, there are various ways to order. People are\ngenerally not very polite to customer service people and some even treat them\npoorly. The reason that people haven't been able to answer you is because the\nmanner in which people order (interact with staff) is an individual choice.\nSome people actually feel awkward and uncomfortable using polite language in\nthese situations. There is even disagreement about whether it is okay to be\nthank [convenience store\nclerks](https://japantoday.com/category/features/lifestyle/should-saying-\nthanks-at-a-japanese-convenience-store-go-without-saying). As shocking as it\nis to Western sensibilities just barking out your order is acceptable.\n\nSo long as your order is understood, you are free to choose your level of\npoliteness/directness.\n\n> ビッグマック二つとペプシ二つください。\n>\n> ビッグマック二つとペプシ二つお願いします。\n>\n> ビッグマック二つとペプシ二つ。\n>\n> ビッグマック：二｛に｝、ペプシ：二｛に｝。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T02:56:47.193",
"id": "57242",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T02:56:47.193",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "57234",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Here are examples of what most people (including myself, a native speaker)\n_actually_ say:\n\n * チーズバーガー、1つ。 One cheese burger.\n * ウーロン茶、L。 Oolong tea, L.\n * 以上で。 That's it.\n * Suica/クレジットカードで。 With Suica (electronic money)/credit card.\n\nI usually do not even say ありがとう(ございます), so your observation in Japan was\ncorrect. That said, if you feel you took more time than usual as a foreigner,\nit might be better to say at least \"Thanks\".\n\nThere is nothing wrong if you used ください and お願いします, but they are not required\nat all in reality.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T03:37:46.993",
"id": "57245",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T03:45:31.530",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T03:45:31.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57234",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "> But when I was in Japan I never heard either of those, just the food item\n> and how many they wanted...so I am confused.\n\nYour observation is correct.\n\nWe only say the (food) item and how many we want not only at a fast-food\nrestaurant but also at various shops or stores, even at a ticket office like:\n\n * 【マクドナルドで】 A:「いらっしゃいませ！ こんにちは！ 店内｛てんない｝でお召｛め｝し上｛あ｝がりですか？」 B:「いえ、持ち帰りで」 A:「はい。ご注文｛ちゅうもん｝どうぞ」 B:「チーズバーガー１つ、コーラ小{しょう}１つ」\n * 【八百屋｛やおや｝で】 A:「何｛なに｝にしましょう？」 B:「キュウリ２本｛ほん｝とトマト３つ、それに大根｛だいこん｝１本｛ぽん｝」\n * 【飲{の}み屋｛や｝で】 B:「ビール大｛だい｝３、小｛しょう｝２、それにチューハイ２つ」\n * 【映画館｛えいがかん｝で】 B:「大人｛おとな｝２枚｛まい｝、子供｛こども｝３枚｛まい｝」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T04:11:22.293",
"id": "57246",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T13:09:41.343",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T13:09:41.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57234",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57234
| null |
57245
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "相変、人の話は聞かないな.\n\nWhat's the purpose of the final な?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T13:13:34.717",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57248",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-28T09:03:30.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22262",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"negation"
],
"title": "I understand the meaning of the sentence. I just didn't get the final \"な\": 相変、人の話は聞かないな",
"view_count": 148
}
|
[
{
"body": "Sentence ending particle な indicates that what you're saying is an impression\nformed through your observation in the moment. If you reflect it into\ntranslation, \"I see\" or \"after all\" could work.\n\nIt usually changes into ね instead when you speak something to the listener in\na more involving manner (otherwise it sounds a little too intimate).\n\nWhen you are speaking to someone who is experiencing the same context in the\nmoment, these な or ね can be translated like tag question depending on cases,\nwhich you may already know well. (In other words, it doesn't function as a tag\nquestion unless it fulfills the condition.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T21:27:43.393",
"id": "57252",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T21:41:55.477",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-13T21:41:55.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "57248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57248
| null |
57252
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm not quite sure why in this sentence was inserted と after へ. It would have\nbeen wrong to use only へ？moreover, what's the meaning of と in this sentence\nand why it is used? The sentece is: 彼女は玄関へと歩いていった。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T17:40:50.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57250",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-13T17:40:50.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25880",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Usage and meaning of へと in this sentence",
"view_count": 83
}
|
[] |
57250
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It almost seems Japanese pronounce certain syllables ending to \"-い\" the way\nChinese do. To my ear じ, し and some others sound like they are just consonants\nwith the vowel at the end left out.\n\nIn Chinese when it comes to saying syllables like shi, ri, zhi, the position\nof the tongue is of course different than that for the Japanese syllables in\nquestion. The question I am asking is about whether the ending \"-い\" in じ, し\ndiffers from the \"-い\" in say き, に, み (in which you can tell the beginning\nconsonant from the following vowel quite naturally)\n\nDo Japanese tend in real life to pronounce some syllables ending to \"-い\"\nradically shorter than the others, by just voicing and dragging out the\nconsonant sound (and not saying the vowel)?\n\nありがとうございます！",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T19:42:51.150",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57251",
"last_activity_date": "2018-07-11T09:55:45.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28128",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Do Japanese tend to pronounce some syllables ending to \"-い\" radically shorter than the others, by just voicing and dragging out the consonant sound?",
"view_count": 338
}
|
[
{
"body": "I tried to pronounce various words as much as possible and found that the key\nis the consonant of the ending letter, not the ending vowel sound. If the\nconsonant of the ending letter is either k, s, and t (か行、さ行、た行）, then people\ntend to omit the vowel. For example, あざやか、ありがとうございます、ありがとうございました.\n\nI also found there's another rule. If the intonation of the ending word is up,\nwe never omit the vowel. For example, the intonation of the word\nはし(chopsticks) is down, people tend to say like 'hush'. But for the word\nはし(bridge) which intonation is up, we never say 'hush', but like 'ha-shi'.\n\nI'm not 100% sure but I think it is applicable to the most of cases. I will\nupdate here if I find something new.\n\n(Btw this is really an interesting question. I'm a native Japanese speaker but\nI haven't noticed that until I read this question :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-05-12T08:04:18.743",
"id": "58584",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-12T08:04:18.743",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22590",
"parent_id": "57251",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57251
| null |
58584
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57255",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across the phrase which I wrote in the title while reading a manga and\nI don't get it very well. At first I thought it was actually 言い訳 and the\nauthor didn't want to use kanji but after reading a few examples when I\nsearched sentences, it's actually 良いわけない, so it would roughly translate as\n\"That's no good\"? Let me give a little bit of the context. \nIt's about two teenage boys and they have magic powers. Let's call them A and\nB. Each boy can summon a magical weapon. A is a better magic user and can\nwield his weapon very well while B is less trained, but at least he can summon\nhis weapon. B asks A to train him. \n*B summons/takes out his magical weapon and A says the following: \n\n> これ実家で保管してるやつでしょ？持ち出しちゃってよかったの？ (Is he saying \"This the thing that is kept in\n> your family, right? Isn't great that you can bring it out?\") \n>\n\nI know it's a very rough translation...And now B replies with:\n\n> いいわけないだろ。早く使い方教えろよ。 \n>\n\nSo, I get the last part (\"Hurry up and teach me how to use it!'), but the\nfirst one, I feel like he wanted to say \"this isn't good\" or even 'good\nenough'. It's just this small part that I need to know to understand something\nin regards to their powers. \nCan someone help me out, please?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T21:29:39.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57253",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T00:54:16.357",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T00:54:16.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "いいわけないだろ -- I'm not sure how to translate it properly",
"view_count": 547
}
|
[
{
"body": "So glad you have provided enough context. Look carefully the two parts in\n**bold** below because 「いい」 responds to 「よかった」.\n\n> A: 「これ実家{じっか}で保管{ほかん}してるやつでしょ？持{も}ち出{だ}しちゃって **よかった** の？」\n>\n> B: 「 **いい** わけないだろ。早{はや}く使{つか}い方教{かたおし}えろよ。」\n\nUnderstanding A's last sentence would be the prerequisite to understanding B's\nfirst.\n\nIn 「いいわけないだろう」, 「わけ」 means \"reason\", \"grounds\", etc. **You use this phrase\nwhen responding negatively (and firmly) to a statement or question that talks\nabout whether something is good or not**. Please remember that we use this\nphrase very often.\n\nThus, 「いいわけない」 means 「持ち出していいわけない」 here.\n\n_**Literally**_ ,\n\n> A: \"This is the one that's kept at your parents' place, isn't it? Was it OK\n> to take it out?\"\n>\n> B: \"There is no good reason (for doing that). Hurry up and tell me how to\n> use it!\"\n\nTo translate B's first sentence more naturally, I would use:\n\n> \"Definitely not!\", \"No way!\", \"Impossible!\", etc.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T00:12:06.570",
"id": "57255",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T00:12:06.570",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57253",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57253
|
57255
|
57255
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is the following sentence correct/natural?\n\n> The understanding for what is required of this part presupposes that one\n> knows in which upper system it is embedded.\n>\n> その部品になにが求められているのかという理解は、その部品はなんの上位システムに埋め込まれているのか知っていることを前提条件します。\n\nOr is it better to say it more simply?\n\n> その部品になにが求められているのか理解するために、その部品は、なんの上位システムに埋め込まれているのか知っている必要があります。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-13T21:44:07.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57254",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T03:37:22.387",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20328",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"embedded-question"
],
"title": "Embedded Questions",
"view_count": 121
}
|
[
{
"body": "* I know the former is more literal, but I find it a bit difficult to understand. The latter is far easier to understand, but it has completely lost the nuance of \"presuppose\".\n * Your second attempt looks a bit misleading because of the use of は and the comma after 部品. It almost looks like \"the 部品 has to know which upper system it is embedded in\". Use が and no comma.\n\nAssuming we don't have to stick to literal translation, my recommendation is\nsomething like this:\n\n> その部品になにが要求されているのか理解する前提として、その部品 **が** 何の上位システムに埋め込まれているのか(を)知っている必要があります。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T03:37:22.387",
"id": "57259",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T03:37:22.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57254",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57254
| null |
57259
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57261",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As I understand it, the phrase 「…」というラベルが付けられているもの literally translates to\nsomething like 'a thing with a label reading \"...\" attached to it'. Unlike in\nEnglish, there is no verb equivalent to 'labeled'.\n\nThat said, this phrase alone seems insufficient to cover all cases that, in\nEnglish, would use the word 'labeled', where the label is not a distinct\nobject from the thing being labeled. Some other cases have other obvious\ntranslations. For example, if the label is directly written on the object in\nquestion, something like 「…」と書かれたもの would work. For others however I cannot\nthink of an adequate translation, for example if words have been\nburned/branded onto an object.\n\nSome alternatives I've considered are 付く, which unlike 付ける seems to include\nmeanings like 'marked' or 'imprinted' as well as 'attached', and 表示する.\nHowever, I've been unable to find any examples using either in the way I'd\nlike. I have only seen 付く used to describe things as being marked without\nspecifying what the mark read, and 表示する seems to be limited to things like\ncomputer screens, when not being used to mean 'expression' or 'display' in a\nmore abstract sense.\n\nWould either of my alternatives, or some other possibility I've yet to find,\ndo the job? Or am I overthinking either 「…」というラベルが付けられているもの or 「…」と書かれたもの, and\nthinking that they are more specific in meaning than they actually are?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T01:04:29.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57256",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T04:51:41.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27504",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"phrase-requests",
"quotes"
],
"title": "Alternatives to 「…」というラベルが付けられている",
"view_count": 85
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, ～というラベルが付いている usually only means there is a physical sticker/label/plate\nattached to the object. One expression you can use more generically would be\n～の/～という印【しるし】がついている, which covers both stickers and\nwritten/imprinted/engraved/branded symbols. As long as the label is readable,\n書かれている works regardless of the method. Of course there are many specific verbs\nfor various methods (刻印されている, 焼き印が入っている, 彫刻されている, ...)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T04:51:41.293",
"id": "57261",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T04:51:41.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57256",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57256
|
57261
|
57261
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57260",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "From:\n\n今日もようやく長い一日が終わった。この屋敷で働き始めて今日で三年になるが、ここの仕事は本当に辛い。旦那様と奥様はお優しいのだが、お嬢様がとても厳しく、理不尽な方だ。気に入らないことがあればすぐに怒鳴り、殴ってくる。\n**こちらは手が出せないのをいいことにやりたい放題だ。**\n\nThe text might be a bit above my Japanese skill...I'm around N4 level.\n\nBut anyway, this chapter has been fan-translated, so I did have something to\ncheck it against. The translator translates the final sentence as: \"I’m just a\nnice maid girl who can only smile politely while receiving such abuse.\"\n\nBut I'm not sure how this connects with the original Japanese. Although, I'm\npretty sure what I'm failing to understand has something to do with the use of\nいいこと.\n\nThe best I've been able to come up with in understanding the spirit of the\noriginal Japanese is: \"As much as it would serve her right, I'm just a maid,\nso I can't raise my hand against her.\"\n\nI'm still confused as to how the first clause relates to the second clause\nthrough the を particle, though.\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T02:07:48.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57257",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T06:59:41.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"phrases",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "I don't understand こちらは手が出せないのをいいことにやりたい放題だ。",
"view_count": 262
}
|
[
{
"body": "> こちらは手が出せないのをいいことにやりたい放題。\n\nこちらは 'I'\n\n手が出せない 'can't do anything about it (can't fight back)'\n\nのを 'the fact that'\n\nいいことに 'takes advantage of'\n\nやりたい放題 'does whatever (she) wants'.\n\n> She takes advantage of the fact that I can't fight back and does whatever\n> she wants.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T02:40:37.320",
"id": "57258",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T03:19:25.410",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T03:19:25.410",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "57257",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "* If you don't know the **AをBに construction** yet, this is a great chance to learn this useful pattern. It means \"with A as B\", \"using A as B\", etc. \n * [Meaning and transitivity of ゴミ袋を手に立ち上がる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/20854/5010)\n * 手を出す: an idiomatic expression that usually means \"to start a fight\", \"to be the first to attack\", \"to be involved\", etc.\n * こちら: literally \"this side\", but it's simply \"my side\" or \"I\" in this context.\n * こちらは手が出せない **の** : a nominalized phrase, \"(the fact) that I cannot stop/interfere/retort (against her)\"\n * いいこと: literally \"good thing\".\n * ～をいいことに: an idiom that literally means \"using ～ as a good thing\", but it's usually translated as \"taking advantage of ～\".\n * やりたい放題 is a set expression that works as a no-adjective. See: [Why is やりたい放題 used as opposed to やり放題?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29894/5010)\n\n> こちらは手が出せないのをいいことにやりたい放題だ。 \n> She behaves as she pleases taking advantage of the fact that I am unable to\n> stop her.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T04:32:59.570",
"id": "57260",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T06:59:41.227",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T06:59:41.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57257",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57257
|
57260
|
57260
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57263",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm talking about some nuances that appear to make the symbols look better. I\nmean everything from small, end of simple line swoops like the KO that has two\nlines and the first line can either look like a simple flat line, or a line\nwith a small swoop downward and to the left. or for the right part of the NA,\nthe diagonal line on top can either be connected to make it look nicer or\nunconnected for simplicity. I'm just confused as to whether these decorative\nthings are part of the symbol or letter or if they're unnecessary. I also see\na similar thing on the MU character that might either be three lines or two\nfor simplicity, and if they're connected it would be to look decorative. The\nYA also looks like the small nub on the top right might connect to the\nvertical-ish line. RI also might either have two lines or they might be\nconnected for beauty and decorative purposes. also the KE might have a little\nswoop off the bottom of the left line for decorative purposes. that's all the\nhiragana that I noticed might look different depending on whether you want it\nto look simple or decorative/pretty. please let me know if the simple or\ndecorative version of the symbol is more common or if it matters which kind\nyou use. Thank you if you are willing to help me with this question",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T08:15:44.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57262",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-09T16:18:45.727",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T09:45:15.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"hiragana",
"handwriting"
],
"title": "Are hiragana letters written with their small nuances?",
"view_count": 1122
}
|
[
{
"body": "Hiragana are [made from cursive script of\nkanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiragana#History). By nature, they can\nhave decorative elements and variations, just as Latin calligraphy fonts have\nmany unimportant \"serifs\" and \"connecting lines\". Shapes of hiragana of\nJapanese fonts can look pretty inconsistent at first (see pictures in [this\npage](https://print-kids.net/column/hiragana-print-attention/)), but there are\nunderlying rules which are very important for some people.\n\nIn general, while you are a beginner, I recommend you learn the basic\nhandwritten shape of hiragana, katakana and kanji using\n[教科書体](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18782/5010) (\"textbook font\").\nCommon \"serif\", \"sans-serif\" or \"universal design\" fonts for adults may have\ncharacters that are not suitable for learners. Please read the following\nquestions (although they are about kanji).\n\n * [Which kanji writing should i follow when writing on paper, digital or non-digital?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/52573/5010)\n * [How often do single dots stick to the top of kanji?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/33687/5010)\n\nPractically, there is no single correct way to write hiragana. After\nunderstanding the underlying idea, you may even choose to write い, こ, け with\nonly one stroke. But you may also choose to ignore most of those decorative\n\"hooks\" and \"connections\". Although not necessary, understanding where those\ndecorative elements can appear will help you to write beautiful hiragana in\nthe long run.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T10:45:36.107",
"id": "57263",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-09T16:18:45.727",
"last_edit_date": "2019-12-09T16:18:45.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57262",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57262
|
57263
|
57263
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57265",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I need some help to figure out how can I translate そんなだから. \nIt must quite vague because it seems to lack a noun after そんな (such as\n時、本、etc.). If it had such nouns I could understand it like \"at this kind of\ntime, \"this kind of book\"). If I were to adapt it a little, would \"It's for\nthis reason.\" I think literally would be \"That's why\". \nThe action of this manga is that it's about saving someone from a villain. The\nones going against this villain is a group of friends, they are fighting with\nall they got in order to save their captured friend. \nそんなだから-That's why/This is our reason (for fighting), (to save our friend). \nI hope you can understand...I don't know if I explained it so well.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T12:18:28.350",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57264",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T15:21:33.460",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T15:21:33.460",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kosoado"
],
"title": "そんなだから A little help for translation",
"view_count": 201
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to [a\ndictionary](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/132095/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%9D%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA/),\nそんな/こんな is a _na-adjective_ (形容動詞). It usually works attributively (i.e.,\ndirectly modifies the following noun) and means \"such\" (そんな人 = \"such a\nperson\"). It sometimes works predicatively and means \"(... is) like\nthis/that\".\n\n> * 毎日こんなだ。 \n> Things are like this every day.\n> * へえ、もう彼はそんなですか。 \n> Oh, is he already like that?\n> * 君がそんなだと我々は勝てない。 \n> If you're like that, we won't be able to win.\n>\n\nThis こんな/そんな refers to what's mentioned in the previous context or what's in\nfront of the speaker/listener.\n\nTherefore, そんなだから naturally means \"Because it's like that\", \"Because you're\nlike that\", etc.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T14:49:39.227",
"id": "57265",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T14:49:39.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57264",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57264
|
57265
|
57265
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57267",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My kanji study book lists:\n\n辺り【あたり】 as \"surroundings, neighborhood\"\n\n周り【まわり】 as \"neighborhood, around\"\n\nI looked the words up in a few dictionaries, but I'm having a hard time\nparsing the difference and usage of each. Could someone explain or give some\nexamples?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T14:55:48.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57266",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T17:16:08.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25783",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 辺り and 周り",
"view_count": 1251
}
|
[
{
"body": "辺り refers to geographically nearby places (usually within a few meters to a\nfew hundred meters). Aの辺り includes both A and nearby places.\n\n周り means \"surrounding region/part/place\" or \"peripheral region\". Aの周り refers\nto A's surrounding areas, which does not include A itself. It can be used with\nvery large and small things.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3vWHf.png)\n\nExamples:\n\n * ディズニーランドの辺り around Disney Land; Disney Land and/or its surrounding areas\n * ディズニーランドの周り areas surrounding Disney Land (does not include Disney Land itself)\n * 辺りは森だ。 (tends to be used when you're in the middle of a forest)\n * 周りは森だ。 (tends to be used when you're in a comfortable building/town which is surrounded by a forest)\n * 地球は太陽の周りを回転している。 \nThe earth revolves around the sun.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T15:14:04.357",
"id": "57267",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T17:16:08.770",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T17:16:08.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57266",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
] |
57266
|
57267
|
57267
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57271",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Any differences between these two for the meaning of healing?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T15:40:54.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57268",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T13:14:22.773",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T13:14:22.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "28148",
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "癒やす/癒える vs 治す/治る?",
"view_count": 265
}
|
[
{
"body": "治す (transitive) / 治る (intransitive):\n\n * Matter-of-fact words that correspond to English _treat_ or _recover_.\n\n癒やす (transitive) / 癒える (intransitive):\n\n * More literary. 傷が癒えた is fine in novels, but in everyday conversations, 癒える is almost never used for real physical diseases or injuries.\n * Tends to focus on the passive self-restoration process typically prompted by relaxing, music, massage, _onsen_ , pets, etc.\n * Often assosiated with mental stress. This article about [癒やし(系)](https://japanesestudynow.wordpress.com/2011/07/09/iyashi/) seems good.\n * Closer to English _heal_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T16:55:22.773",
"id": "57271",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T16:55:22.773",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57268",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
57268
|
57271
|
57271
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57274",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't seem to wrap my head around the form verb-て+いたい\n\nIs it a conjugation of verb-て+いる, or is it its own form?\n\nAnd how is it different from verb-たい ? It seems to be translated the same.\n\nSome examples:\n\n```\n\n 食べていたい vs 食べたい \n 愛を信じていたい vs 愛を信じたい \n 壊さないでいたい vs 壊したくない \n はなれないでいたい vs はなれたくない \n 勉強していたい vs 勉強したい\n \n```",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T16:22:50.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57269",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T17:47:20.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20056",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "verb-て+いたい vs verb-たい",
"view_count": 1447
}
|
[
{
"body": "～ていたい is the combination of ～ている and ～たい (\"want to ～\"). ～ている describes [the\ncontinuation of an action (\"is doing\") and the continuation of a state (\"has\ndone\")](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010).\n\nSo 見たい is \"want to watch\", whereas 見ていたい is \"want to be watching.\" Typically\n～ていたい is used when you have already started something and want to continue\nwhat you are doing.\n\n> * テレビを見たい。 \n> I want to watch TV.\n> * もっとテレビを見ていたい。 \n> I want to keep watching TV. / I want to watch TV more.\n>\n\nThe difference between 壊さないでいたい and 壊したくない is somewhat obscure, but the former\nbasically says you want to _keep_ the current \"not-broken\" status.\n\nSometimes ～ていたい can also describe the continuation of state until some time\npoint in the future. Using a typical instant state-change verb 結婚する (\"to get\nmarried\"):\n\n> * 5年後に結婚していたい。 \n> I want to be married within five years. (literally \"I want to have gotten\n> married in five years\" i.e., I want to be in the 'married' state in five\n> years)\n> * 5年後に結婚したい。 \n> I want to marry after 5 years from now. (i.e., I don't want to marry for\n> the time being)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T17:34:02.537",
"id": "57274",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T17:47:20.943",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-14T17:47:20.943",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57269",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57269
|
57274
|
57274
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57277",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Can any one please tell me how should one understand “人ってオーラって言うじゃない” in the\nbelow sentence? What’s the role of って after 人, I know it’s a colloquial form\nof と, but it’s a quoting particle, used for quoting speech or thought, but\nhere it’s placed after 人, instead of speech or thought\n\n> ちょっとある言葉を考えたことがあって、人ってオーラって言うじゃない",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T17:43:30.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57276",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T17:48:56.973",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T17:48:56.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "22126",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"particle-って"
],
"title": "Understanding 人ってオーラって言うじゃない",
"view_count": 176
}
|
[
{
"body": "In addition to meaning と, the って particle is also commonly used to introduce a\ntopic (essentially functioning as a very casual-sounding version of は). I\nthink this usage originally comes from an abbreviation of とは, but it's used\nmuch more widely than とは itself would be. In the sentence you've provided, we\nhave both uses in succession, so it could be rephrased as 人はオーラと言うじゃない.\n\nIt's a little tricky to nail down the exact intended meaning of this utterance\nwithout further context, but it sounds to me like the person is trying to\nstart a conversation about the word \"aura\". I'd probably translate the whole\nthing along the lines of:\n\n> ちょっとある言葉を考えたことがあって、人ってオーラって言うじゃない \n> I've been thinking a bit about a certain word lately - people talk about\n> \"aura\", right?\n\nI'm not entirely confident in this interpretation, because the use of を after\nある言葉 seems a little odd for \"thinking about\" a word (something like について would\nsound more natural there to me), but this could simply be due to casual usage.\nOr I guess it could be that the ある言葉 is actually a new word that the speaker\nthought up themselves(?!), and the mention of オーラ is just leading into it?\nMaybe that's a bit of a stretch...",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T18:12:16.690",
"id": "57277",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T18:12:16.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "57276",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "There is a difference between を考える and と考える.\n\nWhen you use ～を考える you \"think about\" , i.e. using を to mark what you are\nthinking about as the direct object of your thought. In that sense it is like\nについて.\n\nWhen you use と考える you \"think that\", or \"consider that\" i.e. the と is\nfunctioning like a quotative particle which indicates the exact thought you\nare having.\n\nペットの名前 **を** 考える to think **of** a name for a pet \n環境問題 **を** 考える to think **about** environmental problems\n\nここは田舎だ **と** 考える to think **that** this is a rural area",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T12:17:57.360",
"id": "57283",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T12:17:57.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "57276",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57276
|
57277
|
57277
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57282",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a manga about boxing, the protagonist is going to fight an american boxer.\nHis trainer is telling him how he should train:\n\n白人はんは\"拳\"を鍛えてるだろうがお前は\"足\"だ。\n\nI don't understand what \"…はんは\" is. Is it a contraction of \"はのは\"? If so, what\nis its meaning? [Here is the page](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Lidt.jpg) where\nit is taken from. Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T18:19:31.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57278",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T01:49:14.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"colloquial-language",
"manga",
"contractions",
"sports"
],
"title": "Meaning of ___はんは",
"view_count": 179
}
|
[
{
"body": "はん is an uncommon dialectal name suffix similar to さん. It's widely known as a\nKyoto-ben word. I may be stereotyped, but はん is typically used by\n_maiko/geisha_.\n\nThe person who said this is not a Kyoto-ben speaker, right? Then I think he\nused it as a mild joke. はん has a old-fashioned/pre-modern overtone (Kyoto was\nan ancient capital of Japan), so using はん can imply the American opponent is\nmore advanced.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T01:22:56.647",
"id": "57282",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T01:49:14.603",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T01:49:14.603",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57278",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57278
|
57282
|
57282
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just encountered the 「~ にとって」 construction, as in: 「私にとって家族は大切です。」- \"Family\nis important to me\". I think I understand what it's supposed to mean. However,\nI couldn't find any information about the origin of にとって , and I find\norigins/literal translations helpful while learning. Does anyone know anything\nthat could help me, like where「とって」comes from?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T18:58:22.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57279",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-24T15:04:45.543",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T15:38:01.870",
"last_editor_user_id": "28148",
"owner_user_id": "28139",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Origin of 「~ にとって」?",
"view_count": 253
}
|
[
{
"body": "If you are truly interested in the origin check out a detailed Japanese\nexplanation\n[here](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q13155250113).\nMost pertinent to this usage would be [九] (1) 「ある事に引き寄せて考える。」.\n\nIf you just want to understand its usage, I would say it is closer to 'as it\nconcerns/pertains to (myself)'.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T20:32:14.360",
"id": "57280",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-14T20:32:14.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "57279",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57279
| null |
57280
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57284",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "first english is not my mothertongue, so if i make mistakes, correction are\nwelcome. i'm reading an adult light novel and have some problem translating\nand understanding precisely two sentences. First i will give the whole\nparagraph for context:\n\n> 自分の身体すらも認識することのできない、心地良い浮遊感。 _まるでゆりかごに揺られるかのように、ゆっくり **と** 、 その意識は傾いては元の位置\n> **へと** 戻る_。奇妙な感覚ではあったが、 それは決して不快ではなかった。 **\n> _すでに記憶にはない、母の胎内というのはこんな感覚なのだろうか、とぼんやりとした思考が生まれて、そして流れていく。_**\n\nThe first phrase i don't understand is this sentence:\n\n> まるでゆりかごに揺られるかのように、ゆっくりと、 その意識は傾いては元の位置へと戻る\n\nIt's not that i don't understand the vocabulary,i understand it very well.\nIt's about the two particles i marked in bold, と and へと, especially へと which\ngiving me trouble in understanding the phrase and translating it precisely in\nmy head.\n\nThe second i cannot translate it in my head at all, i don't know if it's\nbecause i got troubled with that other phrase but i really cannot understand\nthe phrase. It's the phrase which I put in bold above:\n\n> すでに記憶にはない、母の胎内というのはこんな感覚なのだろうか、とぼんやりとした思考が生まれて、そして流れていく\n\nWhy are there two は particles in the phrase? Can someone help me please?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-14T22:19:01.320",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57281",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T13:05:58.977",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T04:14:55.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "25413",
"owner_user_id": "27984",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"particles"
],
"title": "Need help with particles to understand sentences",
"view_count": 185
}
|
[
{
"body": "1. と after ゆっくり is \"the optional と\". This is a FAQ. \n * [What does adding と after an adverb do?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42163/5010)\n * [What is the purpose of adding と?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24943/5010)\n * [What role does と play in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36764/5010)\n * [usage of と in this sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/49003/5010)\n 2. と after 元の位置へ is explained in this question. \n * [Particle と with へ; ～へと](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9343/5010)\n 3. すでに記憶にはない is a relative clause that modifies 母の胎内. \"The internal of Mother's uterus, about which I no longer have memory.\" The first は is は used with negative clauses. 「すでに記憶にはない、母の胎内というのはこんな感覚なのだろうか」 is the content of his 思考. \n * [Why is the topic marker often used in negative statements (ではない, ～とは思わない)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1077/5010)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T13:05:58.977",
"id": "57284",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T13:05:58.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57281",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57281
|
57284
|
57284
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57302",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 体は睡眠状態にある。\n\nOn this [site](http://selftaughtjapanese.com/2015/07/27/expressing-state-in-\njapanese-with-ni-aru-and-ni-natte-iru/), it's explained that \"you can think of\nthis sentence as meaning the body is existing in the 睡眠 (sleep) state.\" and\nthus the sentence means \"The body is in a state of sleep.\"\n\nThe problem is that for this sentence it doesn't work because shouldn't it be\nいる instead of ある?\n\n> 両者は不可分の関係にある。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T17:14:06.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57285",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-05T01:09:32.367",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-05T01:09:32.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "25980",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "How to parse \"にある\" in this case?",
"view_count": 2551
}
|
[
{
"body": "デジタル大辞泉 distinguishes those two meanings of ある:\n\n> ### [ある](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/7643/meaning/m0u/)\n>\n> １ 事物が **存在する** 。「庭には池が―・る」「重大な欠陥が―・る」\n>\n> ３ ある事柄がはっきり **認められる** 。また、ある **状態に置かれている**\n> と認められる。「非は先方に―・る」「土地は高値安定の傾向に―・る」「大国の影響下に―・る」\n\nSo even though the third definition may be understood along the lines of\n\"exist\", they are different, and the rule regarding \"いる/ある for existence in a\nphysical place\" does not apply.\n\nSimilar examples:\n\n * 彼は絶体絶命の状況にある。 (いる is acceptable too)\n * 2人はライバル関係にある。\n * 彼はリスクを好む傾向にある。\n * 彼は王の支配下にある。\n * 2人は戦う宿命にある。\n * 彼は社長という立場にある。 (いる is fine too)\n * 彼はまだ初心者の段階にある。 (いる is fine too)\n\nThese ～にある are interchangeable with either ～が認められる (\"shows some trait\") or\n～に置かれている (\"placed in some situation\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T02:46:50.270",
"id": "57302",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T02:46:50.270",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57285",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57285
|
57302
|
57302
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why is [好]{す}き pronounced with a voiceless/almost silent U, but [隙]{すき} is\nnot?\n\nI've used 2 sound sample sources for both, Jisho and Rikai sama. They both\npronounce the first (like) with a voiceless U. However, they both pronounce\nthe second (gap) with a voiced U.\n\nI thought that if you disregard external factors like\nmood/emphasis/politeness/dialect/whatever for a second, that devoicing occurs\nwhen U and I are sandwiched between two voiceless consonants, or if there's a\nvoiceless consonant first and then nothing after.\n\nBut here 1 word takes that rule and the other doesn't. Does that mean that\nsome specific words have a voiced U where it normally shouldn't be there?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T17:37:31.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57288",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T15:02:20.793",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T08:22:52.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20228",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"phonology"
],
"title": "Why is [好]{す}き pronounced with a voiceless/almost silent U, but [隙]{すき} is not?",
"view_count": 1512
}
|
[
{
"body": "living in Japan, I have heard a variety of words containing \"su\" spoken by\nmultiple people, in many areas of the country, with mixed usage of voiced or\nunvoiced \"u\" sound. This includes most of the common words that contain the\npattern \"suki\". Words such as sukiyaki, sukima, sukiari, sukii, sukiiru, to\nname some of the most common. Sometimes the same person will say the same\nword, first one way, and then the other, during the course of a conversation.\nIt's rare to have an opportunity to hear that occur, though. If there is a\ngrammatical/phonetic rule that is meant to be applied to all words using the\n\"suki\" syllables, I have not met any Japanese people who apply it strictly.\n\nand as Eiríkr Útlendi mentioned in a comment, there are regional dialects that\nflip the rules for voiced/devoiced sounds.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-30T16:04:41.730",
"id": "57624",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-30T16:04:41.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "57288",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57288
| null |
57624
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57308",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A mid-19th century title reads _Daimotsu-no-ura ayakashi no zu_ ,\n大物の浦罔像[あやかし]の圖, which I would translate as _Picture of the 'Sea Phantoms' at\nDaimotsu-no-ura_.\n\n 1. I cannot grasp why the kanji 罔像 have been used to represent the word _ayakashi_. Preliminary research indicates that 1. 罔 can have a Goon reading of _mō_ (もう), Kan'on reading of _bō_ (ぼう), and Kun reading of _ami_ (あみ), _shiiru_ (しいる), _nai_ (ない), basic definition of \"net,\" and 2. 像 has a reading of _zō_ (ぞう, historical hiragana ざう), meaning \"image, figure, statue, picture, portrait\" and \"figure, form, shape, appearance.\" I can't find 罔像 in any online dictionaries, and originally pondered whether 罔像 might allude to some kind of \"deceptive image\" or \"deceptive figure\" given other compounds using the character 罔. Any insights?\n\n 2. The furigana あやかし in the title definitely indicates that 罔像 should be read as _ayakashi_. Wikipedia indicates that _ayakashi_ is usually seen as 妖 - which brings me to the other part of my question: how does 妖 read as _ayakashi_ when 妖 = _yo/yō_ (よう); _yao_ (やお); _aya_ (あや); but the _kashi_ is not accounted for? _Yō_ (妖) can be interpreted as \"mysterious, bewitching, unearthly,\" or \"weird.\" Zack Davisson ('What Does Ayakashi Mean in English?', and 'What Does Yokai Mean in English?'), suggests that _yō_ (妖) hints at paranormal or supernatural phenomena that are perplexing, intriguing, and enchanting, rather than phenomena that are frightening or horrifying, and is seen compounded in words such as _yoka_ (妖花), an \"ethereally beautiful flower,\" or _ayashii_ (妖しい), \"bewitching, charming.\" So why is _ayakashi_ represented by a single kanji?\n\nThe word _Ayakashi_ is said to be a collective name for _yōkai_ (妖怪, ようかい),\nghostly forms that appear above the surface of water, that is, tend to appear\nat boundaries - the places where one thing becomes another thing - the\nboundary between the ocean and the air rather than the dark depths. They might\nbe thought of, or translated as, \"strange phenomenon of the sea.\" General\nreferences indicate that _ayakashi_ are sea ghosts, apparitions, phantoms, or\nspectres: in various Japanese prefectures they are largely considered to be\n\"atmospheric ghost lights that appear above water,\" and are clearly linked to\nthe _funayūrei_ (船幽霊, ふなゆうれい, \"boat ghosts\"), for in Yamaguchi and Saga\nprefectures _ayakashi_ refer to _yūrei_ who drowned at sea and try to sink\nboats and drown swimmers either for revenge or to swell their ranks. They are\nknown to float up to the surface of the water, appearing first as _kaika_ ,\nthen transforming into figures. Zack Davisson also mentions that in Noh\ntheatre the \"male mask of a ghost or violent god is called _ayakashi_ \" though\nthe word uses particular kanji, 怪士 ( _ayaka_ , 怪, \"strange,\" and _shi_ , 士,\n\"warrior\").",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T17:42:17.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57289",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T14:04:43.370",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-16T08:31:21.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "26637",
"owner_user_id": "26637",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "How does ayakashi, あやかし = 妖 or 罔像?",
"view_count": 1522
}
|
[
{
"body": "As you've\nnoted,[「アヤカシ」](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%A4%E3%82%AB%E3%82%B7_\\(%E5%A6%96%E6%80%AA\\))\nis the name of a class of Japanese demons ( _yōkai_ ) that appear on the\nsurface of water. 「アヤカシ」is the core word that gives the meaning, regardless of\nthe kanji used to represent this word.\n\n* * *\n\nThe kanji representation「罔像」is indeed uncommon. To understand where it came\nfrom, firstly note that「像」and「象」are variants when it comes to the meaning\n_image, appearance_.「象」( _elephant_ ) was borrowed as a phonetic loan\ncharacter for this meaning ever since Old Chinese, as the word representing\n_elephant_ and _image_ were homophones (and are still homophones in modern\nChinese and Japanese on'yomi).\n\nThen, note that「罔像」is more commonly written as「罔象」.「罔象」is a complete word\nattested as early as [_Guoyu_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guoyu_\\(book\\)):\n\n> 《國語・魯語下》： “水之怪曰龍、罔象。”\n>\n> _The monsters/demons of the water are called_ 「龍」 _and_ 「罔象」.\n\n「罔象」is thought to be a variant\nof[「[魍魎]{もうりょう}」](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wangliang), maybe formed as a\nresult of dialectical corruption of some variety of Ancient Chinese languages.\nThis makes the characters「罔象」phonetic loans (characters used to represent a\nword regardless of meaning). In any case, it originally referred to a monster\nin Chinese folklore, but due to the similarity* of this monster to the\nJapanese water demon the kanji representation was sometimes borrowed for the\nlatter.\n\nThe earliest appearance of「罔象」in Japanese literature may be from the [_Nihon\nShoki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon_Shoki) for the god「[闇罔象]{くらみつは}」(\n_dark water spirit_ , alternatively rendered as 闇御津羽), so most likely the use\nof「罔像」to represent「アヤカシ」is a reference to water spirits existing back from\nancient Japanese folklore.\n\n* * *\n\n* _Note that folklore and legends also travelled around East Asia as well, where they would merge with existing traditions._",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T14:04:43.370",
"id": "57308",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T14:04:43.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "57289",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57289
|
57308
|
57308
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "It is a convention for video games made in Japan, when loading data, to\ndisplay the legend\n\n`NOW LOADING`\n\nWhereas titles made overseas generally stick with the more succinct\n\n`LOADING`\n\nIs there any linguistic reason for the addition of the word \"now\"?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T18:48:53.070",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57290",
"last_activity_date": "2018-06-11T15:43:02.050",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T19:52:26.540",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "28154",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"word-choice",
"computing"
],
"title": "Why do Japanese games say \"Now Loading\" instead of \"Loading\"?",
"view_count": 2076
}
|
[
{
"body": "Whether you are asking about games that are in Japanese or in English, I would\nassume (pure speculation here) that, as the game was likely made for domestic\nconsumers originally or by a Japanese team, ['Now\nLoading'](https://d1w8c6s6gmwlek.cloudfront.net/jokertshirt.com/products/997/135/9971359.png)\nwas easier for non-English speakers to comprehend. When overseas games\nshortened the legend the Japanese likely saw no need to do so, as there is\nreally no compelling reason to do so. Also, their Japanese customers are used\nto seeing it displayed in its entirety.\n\nThat being said, I have not noticed this particular difference that you have.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T19:10:37.680",
"id": "57291",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T19:10:37.680",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "57290",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I doubt there is a good linguistic reason for this. Probably someone happened\nto come up with \"Now Loading\", and other developers followed without thinking\nmuch about it. This is not surprising at all. After all, Japanese people have\ncoined tons of [_wasei-eigo_](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/wasei-eigo/)\nterms and kept using them without thinking about them.\n\nAnother similar example is \"Sorry, this site is Japanese only\"; around 2000,\nmany Japanese people somehow believed this was a _polite_ and natural English\nexpression, and put this sentence at the header or footer of their websites.\nNo one knows who started using this, but it did spread like an infectious\ndisease.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T08:07:24.893",
"id": "57305",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T08:31:02.913",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-16T08:31:02.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57290",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57290
| null |
57305
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57295",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ucFMO.png)\n\nIn doing a translation, I have come across a date which has the character ヨ\nwritten in brackets after the year. I found some more cases of the same usage\nin what seem to be legal texts, but I still can't figure out what they mean of\nhow to translate them. Does anyone have some insight? Do I even need to\ntranslate them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T19:22:24.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57293",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T21:24:59.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28009",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"katakana",
"law"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of the characters ヨ・行ケ・ウ・行ウ・わ・ワ when written after the date?",
"view_count": 142
}
|
[
{
"body": "The characters in brackets after the year are a special form of code which\nidentifies a legal case as belonging to a particular category. The ヨ which you\nmention indicates that the case is a civil affairs case at a district court.\n\nA more detailed list of these 事件記録符号 (case record codes) is available here:\n<http://home.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/hirano/nyumon/fugo2005.htm>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T21:24:59.730",
"id": "57295",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T21:24:59.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "57293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57293
|
57295
|
57295
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57296",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "These are part of the lyrics to a song and I just can't seem to figure out\nwhat it means and what each of the words mean. Google translates it as \"I\nguess they are all bad.\" but trying to pick it apart I can't figure out what\neach individual word means. Particularly the 「ダメダメ」 part which just translates\nto \"dame\"...\n\nI know 「全部」 means \"all\". Just a single 「ダメ」 means \"no good\". I'm just not\ngetting how all of it together means \"I guess they are all bad.\"\n\nCan someone help me by breaking this sentence down please?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T19:38:36.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57294",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T21:31:11.820",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-15T19:57:52.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "27531",
"owner_user_id": "27531",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"song-lyrics",
"sentence"
],
"title": "What does the phrase 「全部ダメダメなんでしょ？」mean?",
"view_count": 276
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, you can find every part of the sentence in a dictionary.\n\n>\n> [全部](http://jisho.org/search/%E5%85%A8%E9%83%A8)[ダメダメ](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%83%80%E3%83%A1%E3%83%80%E3%83%A1)[でしょう](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A7%E3%81%97%E3%82%87%E3%81%86)？\n\nThat said, `でしょう` [can be used in multiple\nways](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/1560/7705). The fact that there is\na question mark at the end of the sentence suggests to me that this is an\ninstance of the confirmatory usage (see #2 in the linked answer). That's also\nlikely why Google is giving you \"I guess\".\n\nAdditionally, you are simply not going to find some of words - such as `I`,\n`they`, etc. from the English translation in the Japanese text because the\ngrammatical structure of the two languages are so different.\n\nRealistically, `でしょう` by itself is likely accounting for both the verb `be`\n(`are`) and the `I guess` in Google's output translation. `全部ダメダメ` has become\n`they are all bad` because `I guess all bad` is not grammatical English.\n\nLastly, I want to caution you about taking Google translate too literally. It\nis not a native speaker, and it is certainly not always right. It ultimately\njust makes statistically informed guesses based on a lot of other translations\nit has learned from. For particularly obscure uses of language which the\nneural network is unlikely to have seen before, you can often do better with\ncommon sense and a dictionary.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-15T21:31:11.820",
"id": "57296",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-15T21:31:11.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "57294",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57294
|
57296
|
57296
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I’m a bit new to Japanese and I’m a little confused about what they are used\nfor.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T00:09:54.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57297",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-31T09:51:47.950",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-31T09:49:52.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "28156",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"punctuation"
],
"title": "What do ー, 「, and 」 mean?",
"view_count": 12926
}
|
[
{
"body": "The latter are quotation marks, equivalent to \" \" in English. For example, the\nsentence:\n\n> Mr Tanaka said \"Good morning\".\n\ncould be written as something like:\n\n> たなかさんは「おはよう」といいました。\n\nThe former may be a little different in different contexts, but one way it's\nused is to lengthen vowels when you write words in katakana. So, for example,\nthe word for Australia, \"Oosutoraria\", is written as\n\n> オーストラリア\n\nNote that when you write text vertically (as is traditional in Japanese), the\nvowel lengthening symbol is also written vertically (｜).\n\nYou can find more about these symbols in the Wikipedia articles on [Japanese\npunctuation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_punctuation) and the [List\nof Japanese typographic\nsymbols](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Japanese_typographic_symbols).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T01:34:32.433",
"id": "57299",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T02:32:16.680",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-16T02:32:16.680",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "16022",
"parent_id": "57297",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
] |
57297
| null |
57299
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've encountered sentences like:\n\n> 「皆【みんな】に足【た】りるだけの椅子【いす】がありません」and\n>\n> 「皆に足りるだけのコーヒーがありません」.\n\nIn English, we wouldn't say, \"There aren't just enough chairs,\" except perhaps\nas, \"There barely aren't enough chairs,\" in which case we are emphasizing that\nwe are just short of the necessary amount. In the context I encountered the\nforegoing uses of 「足りるだけ」, this did not seem to be the case, which made me\nwonder if this is just idiomatic language.\n\nI guess my question is why is「だけ」is being used here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T01:24:03.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57298",
"last_activity_date": "2019-07-12T15:37:47.683",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27644",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"nuances",
"idioms",
"particle-だけ"
],
"title": "Is 足りるだけ with a negative verb idiomatic?",
"view_count": 206
}
|
[
{
"body": "「足{た}りるだけ」 is hardly an idiomatic expression.\n\n「だけ」, in this context, means \" ** _as many/much_** (to be sufficient for a\ngiven purpose)\". It seems you are thinking of its other meaning of \" **\n_just/only_** \".\n\n> \"There are not enough chairs for everyone (to sit on).\"\n\nThis usage of 「だけ」 is very useful as it enables one to express ideas such as:\n\n「好{す}きな **だけ** 食{た}べなさい。」 = \"Please eat as much as you like.\"\n\n「SEでは、質問{しつもん}したい **だけ** 質問できます。」 = \"On SE, you can ask as many questions as\nyou want.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T02:02:22.347",
"id": "57301",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T03:10:10.903",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-16T03:10:10.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57298",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57298
| null |
57301
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What are the most common Japanese names with the word black and white?\n\nAccording to google \"white\" = _shiro_ and \"black\" = _kuro_.\n\nFor example white and black princess: _Shirohime_ , _Kurohime_. I'm not sure\nthough if these are valid names in Japanese.\n\nI'm looking for names with meaning as I'm currently writing a non-fictional\nstory.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T03:47:35.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57303",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T13:29:45.993",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-16T08:54:15.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "26514",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"names",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Female names containing \"black\" and \"white\"",
"view_count": 4908
}
|
[
{
"body": "Although 白 and 黒 are often used as it is as a name of a dog like シロ or クロ\naccording to the color, there are not many cases used as a woman's name as it\nis or as a part, especially for 黒. \nFor 白 that may be used, \"雪{ゆき} _snow_ \" or \"鶴{つる} _crane_ \" which is\nreminiscent of 白 is often used as it is or as part of the name. I'll show you\nrelatively common names examined\n[here](http://name.m3q.jp/list?s=%E9%9B%AA&g=2) and\n[here](http://name.m3q.jp/list?g=2&s=%E9%B6%B4).\n\n * 鶴: \nつる, 鶴{つる}, 千鶴｛ちづる｝, 千鶴子｛ちづこ｝, 田鶴子｛たづこ｝, 鶴代｛つるよ｝, ...\n\n * 雪: \nゆき, 雪{ゆき, せつ}, 雪子{ゆきこ, せつこ}, 小雪{こゆき}, 雪愛{ゆきな}, 雪愛{ゆきな}, 雪乃{ゆきの}, 白雪｛しらゆき, はゆ｝,\n...\n\nBy the way, 白雪姫{しらゆきひめ} for _Snow White_ in \"Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs\"\nis very famous in Japan.\n\n白雪{しらゆき} could be as a female name and it sounds beautifully, but I've never\nheard it as an actual name.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T06:00:05.927",
"id": "57304",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T06:00:05.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57303",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "You should distinguish\n\n 1. names that contain the reading しろ・しら or くろ, and \n 2. names that contain the _kanji_ 白 or 黒.\n\n* * *\n\nGiven the obvious associations with white (\"clarity\", \"light\", \"brightness\",\netc.) and black, black is quite rare as a given name. As for the two points\nabove,\n\n 1. As noted by @mackygoo, シロ or クロ are names often given to animals.\n\nEven the `#names` database on <http://jisho.org/> (based on\n[ENAMDICT](http://www.edrdg.org/enamdict/enamdict_doc.html)) containing over\n100,000 female given names, contains only very rare or unusual names\ncontaining しろ・しら with the meaning of \"white\" and even fewer containing くろ:\n\n> 白【しろ】、白雨【しろう】、白風【しろっぷ】、白羽【しらは】、白桐【しらぎり】、… \n> 黒乃【くろの】、黒子【くろこ】\n\n 2. There are a number of names containing the _kanji_ 白, by writing a name like あきら、きよし、ゆき with the _kanji_ 白. Essentially, 白 can stand in for 清（きよ）、明（あき）、雪（ゆき）、… as well as having an addition reading of はく (or simply は by artistic license):\n\n> 白【あきら】、白【きよし】、白【ゆき】、… \n> 白華【きよか】、白胡【あきこ】、白江【きよえ】、… \n> 彩白【いろは】、…\n\nThis second set contains more reasonable names that are loosely associated to\n\"white\", however the reading alone (say, Kiyoka) would not be enough to see\nthis association ( **白** 華).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T08:52:25.767",
"id": "57306",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T13:29:45.993",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-16T13:29:45.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "57303",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57303
| null |
57306
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "To be more specific, they have no verb at the end so it kinda seems\nincomplete. Also, I do know that verbs can modify nouns when placed before\nthem.\n\n> 自分を世界さえも変えてしまえそうな瞬間は何時も直ぐそばに。\n\nand the second one is\n\n> 心を吹き抜ける空の色香る風。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T12:38:34.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57307",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T02:19:25.663",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T02:19:25.663",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "28165",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"verbs",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "What do these sentences mean? And why are there no verbs at the end?",
"view_count": 175
}
|
[
{
"body": "When I checked the given phrases on the Internet, [here](http://www.kasi-\ntime.com/item-1.html) I found out that they were parts of the lyrics titled\nCOLORS.\n\n> (1) 自分を世界さえも変えてしまえそうな瞬間は何時も直ぐそばに。\n\nIf you write (1) according to the lyrics, it is actually (2). \n(2) has some words omitted, and if I supplement it/them, (2) will probably\nbecome (3).\n\n(3) implies (4), so the meaning of (1) is like (4).\n\n * (2) 自分を 世界さえも 変えてしまえそうな 瞬間は いつもすぐそばに・・・\n * (3) 自分を 世界さえも 変えてしまえそうな 瞬間は いつもすぐそばに **ある**\n * (4) 自分を変えてしまえそうな瞬間はいつもそばにある。 もっと言｛い｝えば、世界さえも変えてしまえそうな(とても大きな力を持った)瞬間はいつもそばにある。 _The moment that could change myself is always by my side. To put it more, the (enormousely powerful) moment that could even change the world is always by my side._\n\n> (5) 心を吹き抜ける空の色香る風。\n\n(5) is written as the last line with (9) in (6)-(9) of the last part of this\nlyrics.\n\n> (6) 自分を 世界さえも 変えてしまえそうな \n> (7) 瞬間を 感じる今ここに・・・ \n> (8) 光へと 両手を伸ばして・・・\n>\n> (9) 心を吹き抜ける 空の色 香る風\n\nThe phrase composition of (6) and (7) combined is similar to (2), but in (7)\nno word is omitted but a method of inversion is used, and in ordinary\nexpression, the phrase with (6) and (7) becomes (10) .\n\n * (10) 自分を 世界さえも 変えてしまえそうな 瞬間を 今ここに **感じる**\n\nThe 感じる is a very important word and it is the keyword to understand the\nmeaning of (5) or (9).\n\nThe interpretation of (5) is (11) or (12). (12) sounds more natural than (11).\n\n * (11) 光へと 両手を伸ばして 感じる 心を吹き抜ける 空の色 香る風\n * (12) 光へと 両手を伸ばして 私は 心を吹き抜ける 空の色を感じる そして 香る風を 感じる _By extending both hands to the light, I feel the color of the sky blowing through my heart and I feel a fragrant wind._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T14:16:08.487",
"id": "57309",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T14:16:08.487",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57307",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57307
| null |
57309
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57312",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> (1)A (2)B を表すように、二分したものがそれぞれ別々の意味になれば **こと** は簡単であるが、言葉の場合は、なかなか...\n\nUsually こと functions as a \"形式名詞\" or other grammatical roles, but this one\nseems not a \"形式名詞\" since the former part of the sentence is \"ば\"(仮定表現). How\nshould I interpret this \"こと\" in \" **こと** は簡単である\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T15:59:49.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57311",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T16:27:35.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the function/meaning of this \"こと\"",
"view_count": 114
}
|
[
{
"body": "「こと」 roughly means \" ** _the matter_** \" in that context. As you stated, it is\nnot used as a dummy noun there.\n\n> \"If each of the bisected parts had a different meaning as in \"(1)A (2)B\",\n> the matter would be simple, but as for words/language, it would not be very\n> (simple).\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-16T16:27:35.107",
"id": "57312",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-16T16:27:35.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57311",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57311
|
57312
|
57312
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57327",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Why, when saying times in Japanese, does the pronunciation for 九 (9) change? I\nrecently had to figure this out when my Siri wouldn't recognize it when I\nasked him to set an alarm for 9 o'clock, he would always misinterpret as 10.\nWhen I plugged the sentence into Google Translate and synthesized the voice,\nit replied with \"Ku-ji\"\n\nSo I used it on Siri and indeed it worked.\n\nBut why is it this way? Is there a rule to follow that I don't know about?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T00:59:31.243",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57315",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T12:16:10.710",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T12:15:58.730",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "28172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology",
"readings",
"numbers",
"time"
],
"title": "Why is 九時 (9 o'clock) pronounced \"Ku-ji\" and not \"Kyu-ji\"?",
"view_count": 3274
}
|
[
{
"body": "That is not a rule but an exception. \nSince Japanese language has been used for a long period, there are so many\nexceptions. Especially, the pronunciation of numbers (month, date, time) had\nbeen changed greatly. \ni.e. \n1日：ついたち \n2日：ふつか \n3日：みっか \n... \n20日：はつか",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T06:19:02.113",
"id": "57322",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T06:19:02.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28177",
"parent_id": "57315",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "You asked, _\"why does the pronunciation for 九 (9) change?\"_ To answer that\nfully, we're going to have to dive into history a bit.\n\n### Readings: _kun_ and _on_\n\nThe kanji 九 has the following standard readings:\n\n * きゅう -- 音【おん】読【よ】み（呉【ご】音【おん】）\n * く -- 音【おん】読【よ】み（漢【かん】音【おん】）\n * ここの -- 訓【くん】読【よ】み\n\nThe _kokono_ reading is classified as _kun'yomi_ , literally **meaning\nreading**. _Kun'yomi_ are readings based on the native Japanese word at the\ntime the kanji was borrowed, that Japanese speakers thought best fit the\nmeaning of the kanji character. _Kokono_ isn't relevant for the term 九時, so\nwe'll ignore _kokono_ for the rest of this discussion.\n\nYou'll notice that there are two readings classified as _on'yomi_ , or **sound\nreading**. _On'yomi_ are readings that were borrowed originally from Chinese\nfor their sound, hence the name.\n\n### Why there are different _on'yomi_\n\nThese borrowings happened at different times historically, which is where the\nsub-categories come from. Broadly speaking, _goon_ represent the oldest layer\nof borrowings during the 400s and 500s, coming from the dialect of the ancient\nkingdom of Wu -- spelled 呉 in Chinese, and read as _go_ in Japanese. The\n_kan'on_ came later, during the 600s and 700s. Language changes naturally over\ntime, and in addition, politics in China had changed, and so too had the\nprestige dialect. The speakers of the Chinese borrowed at this point called\nthemselves 漢 instead of 呉. This 漢 character in 漢音 is read as _hàn_ in modern\nMandarin Chinese and _kan_ in Japanese, and this is the character used as the\nname of the Han Chinese ethnic identity, reflecting that history. There's more\nabout the different kinds of _on'yomi_ [here at\nWikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanji#On'yomi_\\(Sino-\nJapanese_reading\\)).\n\n### Different readings (words) from the same root\n\nThis phenomenon, where a single character can have different readings, is\nbasically the same thing as what we call a **doublet** in linguistics: two or\nmore words (in this case, readings) that have arrived in the language from the\nsame root, but via different paths.\n\nThis has happened in English, too. The words _chief_ and _chef_ both came into\nEnglish from the same French root, but at different times historically, and\nthis is reflected in the different pronunciations and usages. (More examples\nof English doublets\n[here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublet_\\(linguistics\\)#English).)\n\n### The outcome: specific readings for specific contexts\n\nJust as _chief_ and _chef_ have different usage patterns in English, so too do\nthe different kinds of _on'yomi_ in Japanese. Certain readings are only ever\nused in certain ways, tracing back to the vagaries of how the readings came\ninto Japanese and the irregularities of how humans work with language. English\nspeakers have to learn the differences in usage between _chief_ and _chef_ ,\njust like Japanese speakers have to learn the differences in usage between\n九【きゅう】 and 九【く】.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T12:16:10.710",
"id": "57327",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T12:16:10.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "57315",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57315
|
57327
|
57327
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It is doubtless onomatopoeia, and shows up in a version of the story about a\nwoman ghost who buys candy for a child each night. What does it represent?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T01:47:09.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57316",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T02:21:20.253",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17763",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "What is 「オンギャー」?",
"view_count": 194
}
|
[
{
"body": "オギャー or オンギャー is a baby's crying sound, especially a sound at the moment when\na baby was born. We are relieved when we hear the sound at the moment because\nthe baby was born healthy. \nオギャー is used more than オンギャー.\n[Here](https://www.englishforums.com/English/BabysCryingSound/jvvgp/post.htm)\nin [here](https://nolan00267.blogspot.jp/2015/03/blog-post_50.html) you can\nfind the equivalent sound in English as \" **waa** or **waaah** \".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T02:15:29.653",
"id": "57317",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T02:21:20.253",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T02:21:20.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57316",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57316
| null |
57317
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57320",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm having trouble understanding precisely what the functions of「だと」and\n「なと」are in this sentence:「おもちゃだといいなと思う」. I did some searching here and on the\nweb, and I think the 「と」in「と思う」is the \"quote marker\" function. I'm not sure\nwhy「な」interposes「いい」and 「と」, though. I'm also not sure whether that is the\ncase for 「だと」. If so, I assume the「だ」there would be the copula. Would that\nmean this sentence has two quotes in it? I think I get the gist of the\nsentence, I just don't fully understand the grammar.\n\nThanks in advance. This site is really helpful.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T03:53:23.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57318",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T04:29:46.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27644",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Having trouble parsing 「おもちゃだといいなと思う」",
"view_count": 186
}
|
[
{
"body": "The second と is what you've correctly identified as the quotative と. Xと思う\nmeans \"I think X\".\n\nな is the sentence ending particle, which has a sort of wistful wishfulness\nmeaning. いいなと思う is similar in meaning to \"it'd be nice... I think.\"\n\nThe first と is the conditional と. To attach a noun to it, you must use a\ncopula (i.e. だ), so it becomes おもちゃだ + と + いいなと思う, which altogether means \"If\nit's a toy, that'd be nice, I think.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T04:29:46.363",
"id": "57320",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T04:29:46.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18678",
"parent_id": "57318",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57318
|
57320
|
57320
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, a person's destiny is fixed/set from birth.\n\nDon't suppose 決定 is the word?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T04:14:32.520",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57319",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T03:52:26.430",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T09:17:01.980",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-requests"
],
"title": "How do you say 'set 'or 'fixed' for this example",
"view_count": 201
}
|
[
{
"body": "guess it depends on sentences. if you wanna say 'a person's destiny is fixed/\nset from birth.' in Japanese 「人の運命は決まっている」, as such 決まっている is the way you\nwould take, but don't ask me why it is present progressive form of the verb\n決まる.\n\na verb 決定する means 'deside/ make a decision', hence it don't seem to quite fit\nthe sentence above.\n\nof course there is some words we convey the meaning of 'set/fixed'. for\ninstance, 固定する means 'fix/ set', which is basically used when some sort of\nsmaller parts are physically attached to something bigger part as in 屋根を固定する\nin Japanese.\n\ncheck out here.\n<https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E6%B1%BA%E5%AE%9A%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T07:19:16.417",
"id": "57324",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T03:52:26.430",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T03:52:26.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "22412",
"owner_user_id": "22412",
"parent_id": "57319",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57319
| null |
57324
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can someone please explain the bold grammar?\n\n> せんてんてき 【先天的】 《ダナ》生まれ **ながらにして** 持っていること",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T06:10:03.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57321",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T02:00:35.287",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T09:37:25.580",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "28175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does ～ながらにして mean?",
"view_count": 1246
}
|
[
{
"body": "I suppose \"生まれながらにして\" almost always comes together, people rarely use only\n\"~ながらにして\" with othre nouns or conjugated verb from as long as my conscious\nlife.\n<https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%86%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8C%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8C%E3%82%89%E3%81%AB%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6>\nAs the website above, \"生まれながらにして\" has more idiomatic sense as a whole.\n\nIt's an intriguing phrase, off the top of my head, \"~ながら\" itself is frequently\nused as a way of conveying the meaning 'doing something while doing something\nelse', check out this <http://www.e-japanese.jp/?p=291>\n\n–– Additional ––\n\nSo what is the sense of \"して/にして\" in \"~ながらにして\"? Well, I got the impression that\nit's almost the same meaning of 'even though/despite' in English.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T07:00:25.050",
"id": "57323",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T07:06:11.967",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T07:06:11.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "22412",
"owner_user_id": "22412",
"parent_id": "57321",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57321
| null |
57323
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57326",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to understand what I misunderstand with this sentence example from\njisho:\n\n> 彼らのコミュニケーションは我々が考えてきたものよりはるかに複雑かもしれません。\n\nI thought of it as roughly\n\n> their communication, being we have come to think its far from to being\n> difficult\n\nWhich is wrong.\n\nI think what I've got wrong is よりはるか…しれません but i'm not sure.\n\nThe translation given on jisho is\n\n> Their communication may be much more complex than we thought.\n\nI've noted より is a particle so I will start there and see what it does to\nclause etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T10:36:56.133",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57325",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T12:44:13.830",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-17T12:13:48.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particle-より"
],
"title": "Sentence misinterpretation",
"view_count": 112
}
|
[
{
"body": "Deleting はるかに\n\n> [彼らのコミュニケーション] は [我々が考えてきたもの] より [複雑] かもしれません。\n\nis roughly of the form\n\n> [A] は [B] より [C] だ \n> [A] is more [C] than [B]\n\nPutting the adverb はるかに back in and replacing だ (is) by かもしれません (might be), we\nget\n\n> 彼らのコミュニケーションは我々が考えてきたものよりはるかに複雑かもしれません。 \n> Their communication might be far more complex than we thought.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T10:55:57.547",
"id": "57326",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T10:55:57.547",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "57325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I like to think of より as the “compared to” tag (like how に comes after the\nlocation, so it is the location tag), so this sentence is “Compared to what we\nthought, it was more complex”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T12:44:13.830",
"id": "57328",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T12:44:13.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28148",
"parent_id": "57325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57325
|
57326
|
57326
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57333",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is that こう in\n\n> 何ていうかこう…\n\nThis is said by a character after being complimented. Apart from こう it's\n\n> what do I say\n\nor\n\n> I don't know what to say\n\nbasically the character is at a loss for words. But I have no idea why does he\nappend that こう at the end.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T16:30:00.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57331",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T17:07:56.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26839",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What does こう in 何ていうかこう mean",
"view_count": 256
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「何{なん}ていうか **こう** ・・」\n\nThis 「こう」 is probably one of the most-often used \"words\" that are not found in\nthe dictionary.\n\nIt is an interjection or a \"filler\" used when failing to find quickly the\nright words to describe something. The closest English counterparts that I\ncould think of would be \" ** _well_** \" or \" ** _you know_** \" used as an\ninterjection.\n\n> \"Well, you know, how should I put it...?\"\n\nor\n\n> \"How should I put it? It's like, umm...\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T17:07:56.493",
"id": "57333",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T17:07:56.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57331",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
57331
|
57333
|
57333
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to say \"During my gap year, I want to learn about severals countries,\nincluding Japan.\" ギャップイヤーの間にたくさんの国について学びたいです。(including Japan)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T16:57:40.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57332",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T17:15:58.380",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27776",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "How to say \"including\"",
"view_count": 2040
}
|
[
{
"body": "Most commonly and naturally, one would say:\n\n> 「日本{にほん}を **含{ふく}む** 多{おお}くの国{くに}」\n\nThat is:\n\n> 「X +を + 含む + 多くの + Y」\n>\n> = \"many Y's including X\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T17:15:58.380",
"id": "57334",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-17T17:15:58.380",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57332
| null |
57334
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57350",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While I was reading a text, I came across this idiom 「蜘蛛の子を散らす」but this is how\nit shows up in online dictionaries. I understood what it means and in what\ncontext can be used but it would seem that most of the sentences that I have\nfound also use ように, with the full expression being \n「蜘蛛の子を散らすように逃げる」. The sentence from the text I was reading lacked ように and\nother verbs, only 散らす being present. I don't know why the author wrote it like\nthis: \n「臆病な男蜘蛛を散らせ」 \nBecause it lacks some particles, I wondered if it would translate differently. \nWithout the use of ように and 逃げる, it couldn't sound like \"The cowardly boy\nscattered ( **in all directions like baby spiders** ). Can it be translated\njust \"The cowardly boy fled?\".",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-17T20:42:59.307",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57336",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T05:59:21.813",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"idioms"
],
"title": "蜘蛛の子を散らす-help with this idiom",
"view_count": 175
}
|
[
{
"body": "> (1) 臆病な男蜘蛛{おとこぐも}を散らせ\n\n散らせ in the above sentence is an imperative form of 散らす as is said in\nChocolate's comment.(+1)\n\n(1) implies (2).\n\n> (2) 臆病な **男ども** を散らせ！ or 臆病な **男ども** を蹴散{けち}らせ！ _Drive the cowardly men\n> out!_\n\nThe reason why they used 男蜘蛛｛おとこぐも｝ in place of 男ども in the above sentence is\nthat they imaged the idiom of \"蜘蛛の子を散らす _to go flying in all directions_ or\n_to run off all directions_ \". That is to say, I assume that they compared the\ncowardly men to baby spiders that escape as soon as they are threatened.\n\nBy the way, 男蜘蛛 is not an established word in Japanese language. Judging from\nthe context, I could understand the meaning of the usage of it, but I think\nthat it is a word promptly coined by the man/author who used the sentence with\n(1).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T05:59:21.813",
"id": "57350",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T05:59:21.813",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57336",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57336
|
57350
|
57350
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57345",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am currently trying to translate a game manual. Right now Im struggling with\nthe story part of it. Most of the grammar is at least somewhat familiar to me.\nI think my confusion may be due to the syntax. Here is an excerpt:\n\nプレイヤーの皆さんは、魔法が使える不思議な世界の住人です。強い力を秘めた瑪瑙の剣が眠っている古代都市が発見されたため、剣を手に入れようと各地から集まってきました。\n\nThe first sentence seems pretty straightforward. I translated it as \"Players,\nyou are the inhabitants of a mystical and magical world.\" It is the next\nsentence, and much of the rest of the the paragraph, that is confusing me a\nbit. I can more or less translate fragments of this sentence. For example:\n\n強い力を秘めた瑪瑙の剣- a sword of agate imbued with a strong power\n\n眠っている古代都市- a sleeping (lying dormant?) ancient city\n\n剣を手に入れようと- in an attempt to obtain the sword\n\nI am having a hard time putting them together in a coherent sentence, though.\nIn this section \"強い力を秘めた瑪瑙の剣が眠っている古代都市が発見されたため\" I'm not sure if the sword or\nthe city it the subject of \"発見された.\" Also, while I know the usual function of\n\"ため\" is to give the purpose of an action, I'm having a hard time making that\nwork here. Perhaps it's serving a different function?\n\nIn the next section \"剣を手に入れようと各地から集まってきました\" I am not sure who/what the subject\nof \"集まってきました\" is but I suspect it might be the players mentioned from the\nprevious sentence.\n\nAny help with the above points would be extremely appreciated! :-)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T00:48:59.237",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57339",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T03:55:59.260",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-18T03:43:37.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "29187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Attempting to Translate a Game Instruction Manual",
"view_count": 183
}
|
[
{
"body": "> ［（強い力を秘めた）瑪瑙の剣が眠っている］古代都市が発見されたため\n\n強い力を秘めた瑪瑙の剣が眠っている is a relative clause modifying 古代都市. So the subject of 発見された\nis 古代都市.\n\nThe ため here expresses \"reason\" (≂ ので・から), not \"purpose\".\n\n\"Since/Because an ancient city [where a sword of agate (imbued with a strong\npower) is sleeping/buried] was discovered, ... \"\n\nYou're right that the subject of 剣を手に入れようと各地から集まってきました is the players\nmentioned from the previous sentence (=「プレイヤーの皆さん」).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T03:55:59.260",
"id": "57345",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T03:55:59.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "57339",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57339
|
57345
|
57345
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Tl;Dr: These are the sentences\n\n\"これは私のためですか？” ”私は里保さんのために何か買いたいです。”\n\nHello everyone! Recently, I've been using a program to help me with my\nJapanese grammar, as I still struggle with forming sentences.\n\nHowever, I noticed that this program tends to have some phrases that I feel\nare unnatural in actual conversation, at least from what I've been told.\n\nRight now, the program is trying to teach me to use the word \"Tame\", which\nI've always considered to be \"For the sake of\" or something of equal weight.\nThis program is implying that it can be used as just a replacement for the\nEnglish word \"for,\" as in \"I bought some candy for Suzuki-san.\" or \"This is\nfor you.\"\n\nHave I been look at the word Tame wrong this entire time, or is this one of\nthose cases of \"Well, you're not technically wrong, but it's really\nunnatural.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T02:31:13.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57341",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T04:26:41.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words"
],
"title": "Would these uses of \"ため” be considered unnatural in common conversation?",
"view_count": 135
}
|
[
{
"body": "I would use に in normal/daily conversation, as in...\n\n * 「これは私のためですか？」(unnatural) → 「これ（は）、私 **に** （ですか）？」 \n * 「私は里保さんのために何か買いたいです。」(ok, but more naturally/casually) → 「私は里保さん **に** 何か買いたいです。」 \n * \"I bought some candy for Suzuki-san.\" → 「鈴木さん **に** お菓子を買いました。」 \n * \"This is for you.\" → 「これ、あなた **に** 。」「[name]さん **に** 。」 (or 「これはあなたの。」「これはあなたの分。」「はい、どうぞ。」 etc. depending on the context)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T04:26:41.143",
"id": "57347",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T04:26:41.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "57341",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57341
| null |
57347
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57348",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw an ad for Indeed today that had a couple tag lines with an あれ at the\nend, and I don't understand their use:\n\n求人募集【きゅうじんぼしゅう】にサーチあれ。\n\n仕事【しごと】、バイトさがしにサーチあれ。\n\nNormally I'd assume that あれ would be something like して, since サーチ is a n-する\nverb, but that's obviously not the case here. I know あれ has several meanings,\nbut usually it just means \"that\". Are these sentences saying \"That with which\njobs are searched,\" or is this a separate meaning or colloquialism I'm not\nfamiliar with?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T04:11:04.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57346",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-22T07:25:15.097",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-18T04:46:49.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "16049",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"puns"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of putting あれ at the end of these statements?",
"view_count": 1451
}
|
[
{
"body": "Those are pun-based catchphrases for the job search service by the name of\nサーチ.\n\nFirst of all, 「あれ」 is the _**imperative**_ form of 「ある/有る」; therefore, it is a\nverb. In case someone is wondering, this 「あれ」 has no relation to the\n「あれ」(\"that\") as in 「これ/それ/ **あれ** /どれ」.\n\nIn fact, the two 「あれ's」 are even pronounced quite differently -- 「あれ{HL}」 for\nthe verb and 「あれ{LH}」 for the demonstrative pronoun.\n\n> 「Noun + あれ」 means \"Let there be [noun]!\"\n\nOne of the nouns that are most often used in the expression above is 「幸{さち}」\n(\"happiness\"). So, for instance, 「君{きみ}に幸あれ！」 means \" _ **Wish you\nhappiness!**_ \", \" _ **Much happiness to you!**_ \", etc. To the newly weds, we\noften say 「お二人{ふたり}に幸あれ」.\n\nNow, 「サーチ」, as in searching on the internet, sounds sort of like 「幸{さち}」\nexcept for the length of the first syllable, which makes this pun work. You\nare turning the common phrase 「幸あれ」 into an advertisement catchphrase 「サーチあれ」\nfor the job search company.\n\n> \"Let there be Search for recruiting staff!\" ← 「求人募集にサーチあれ。」\n>\n> \"Let there be Search for job-hunting!\" ← 「仕事、バイトさがしにサーチあれ。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T04:41:37.123",
"id": "57348",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-22T07:25:15.097",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 19
}
] |
57346
|
57348
|
57348
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I don't understand why you're able to interchange これ in 「これはペンです」and\n「ペンはこれです」, but you can't interchange ここ in 「まどはここです」 and 「ここはまどです」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T05:39:53.560",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57349",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T07:48:10.997",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Need help with ここ and これ",
"view_count": 504
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think it's because of the topic particle. In your first sentence,「これ」 and\n「ペン」refer to the same thing. While「ここ」refers to a place; the subject is「まど」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T06:49:14.210",
"id": "57351",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T06:49:14.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29200",
"parent_id": "57349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Your assumption is not correct. In both pairs, the two sentences are **not**\ninterchangeable. は is called a **topic marker**. Basically, it marks what\nyou're talking about. Changing the topic of a sentence will usually change the\n\"feeling\" of the sentence drastically.\n\nこれはペンです and ペンはこれです are both grammatical, but are not interchangeable. The\nfollowing two sentences are very different in meaning.\n\n> * これはペンです。 (This thing? This is a pen.)\n> * ペンはこれです。 (Looking for a pen? Here, this is the pen, here you go.)\n>\n\nLikewise, まどはここです and ここはまどです are both grammatical, but are not\ninterchangeable. The following two sentences are very different in meaning.\n\n> * ここはまどです。 (Curious about this structure? This is a window.)\n> * まどはここです。 (Looking for a window? Here it is.)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T07:30:36.310",
"id": "57352",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T07:48:10.997",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-18T07:48:10.997",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57349
| null |
57352
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57355",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'd like to know how you say _Remember that you're still alive_...\n\nI found this あなたはまだ生きていることを忘れないでください with the meaning of _Don't forget that\nyou're still alive_. It's not strictly necessary the literal translation, but\nI need the sense not to change.\n\nI need it for a tattoo and I'd like it to be a single phrase but divided in 2\ncolumns, possibly the first longer than the second... I don't know if I\nexplained my self, I mean that I don't want a simple _Remember_ / _You're\nstill alive_ , but _Remember that you're still alive_.\n\nI undestand my request is a little too precise (and maybe impossibile), but,\nyou know, trying doesn't have any costs.\n\nThank you very much in advise",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T09:29:39.350",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57353",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T03:05:51.170",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T03:05:51.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "29201",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "Saying \"Remember you're still alive\"",
"view_count": 598
}
|
[
{
"body": "Remember that you're still alive...\n\n> * あなたはまだ生きていることを忘れないでください\n>\n\n * 生｛い｝きているなら 死｛し｝ぬな _Do not die, if you're still alive_.\n * 生｛い｝きているなら 生｛い｝きろ _Go on living, if you're still alive_.\n * 生｛い｝きたと言｛い｝えるまで 死｛し｝ぬな _Do not die until you have accomplished your life_.\n * 死｛し｝ぬまで 勝手｛かって｝に死｛し｝ぬな _Don't die without permission until death permits._\n * 死｛し｝ぬな、生｛い｝きろ。 _Do not die, but live._\n * 人生｛じんせい｝死｛し｝ぬまで 気｛き｝を抜｛ぬ｝くな _Don't loose your concentration until you die_.\n\n# EDIT\n\n> what if I'd want to underline the adverb of time \"still\"?\n\nI'll make the situation and conditions clear before answering about \"still\".\n\n> (1) Remember that you're still alive... \n> I found this あなたはまだ生きていることを忘れないでください with the meaning of Don't forget that\n> you're still alive. \n> (2) Don't forget that you're still alive. \n> (3) あなたはまだ生きていることを忘れないでください\n\nIt is clear that \"you\" in (1) presented by the questioner is in a life or\ndeath situation.\n\nThe heart of \"you\" is beating. \"You\" are breathing faintly. Maybe there is no\nconsciousness.\n\nIt's possible that \"you\" may die without recovering consciousness. \"You\" is\nmore serious when the word with \"still\" is needed.\n\nThe person who says (1) to \"you\" probably knows \"you\" and doesn't want \"you\"\nto die, and when he/she are calling out with (1), he/she wants \"you\" to\nrecover consciousness.\n\nThe nuances of English in (1) and (2) may be different, but for me who is a\nJapanese, there is no big difference between them with having the same meaning\nas (3). \nPlease speak (1) or (2) quickly. I will speak (3) in the same way as you.\nPerhaps (3) took time more than twice (1) or (2). \nWe wouldn't use a long phrase like (3) in such an emergency. In a situation\nwhere it is necessary to say \"still\", you have to speak to \"you\" in a short\ntime. \nIn such a case, you know the person to whom you are saying the phrase and you\ncan understand the condition of \"you\", so you need not to say \"you\" or \"still\"\nin (1). In addition, there is a reason that it takes more time to say the\nphrase without omitting them. \nI showed some Japanese translations in my original answer, but in fact the\nJapanese will actually say such expressions briefly as follows in the\nsituation.\n\n * 目｛め｝を覚｛さ｝まして！\n * 目｛め｝を覚｛さ｝ませ！\n * （私｛わたし｝/俺｛おれ｝が）分｛わ｝かるか?\n * （おい、）何｛なん｝とか言｛い｝え!\n * 死｛し｝んだらだめ（よ/だ）！\n * 死｛し｝ぬな（よ）！\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6uM2N.jpg)",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T12:56:43.937",
"id": "57355",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T02:04:57.373",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57353",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57353
|
57355
|
57355
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57364",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context, person A has complimented B on their looks. B replied that it's just\nbecause they had good teachers (possibly hinting that it was A). A tried to\nsweep that asside by saying it's all actually down to the B's efforts. B\nreplies:\n\n> してなくてもキレイ～なズッコい人もいるけどね…\n\nCurrently I have it pegged as:\n\n> Even without it (without hard work), there was (also) a beautiful and\n> cunning person around (to help me).\n\nOf course \"to help me\" bit is not there but it is implied IMO and sentence\nwouldn't make as much sense in English.\n\nIn any case I'm pretty sure してなくても is \"even without doing\" or \"even without\nworking hard at it\", but I have also gotten proposals that it might be more \"I\ncouldn't have done it without (beautufill and crafty...)\".\n\nSooo, what is the actual meaning of してなくても here?\n\nEDIT: Additional context, preceding text:\n\n> A: 可愛くなった\n>\n> B: 髪のケアにファッション笑い方に立ち振舞い先生が優秀だったもの。\n>\n> A: 本人の努力ありきだよ～",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T11:10:13.437",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57354",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T14:50:32.963",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26839",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Meaning of してなくても",
"view_count": 379
}
|
[
{
"body": "> A: 可愛{かわい}くなった。\n>\n> B: 髪{かみ}のケアにファッション、笑{わら}い方{かた}に立{た}ち振舞{ふるま}い。先生{せんせい}が優秀{ゆうしゅう}だったもの。\n>\n> A: 本人{ほんにん}の **努力{どりょく}ありきだよ～** 。\n>\n> B: **してなくても** キレイ～なズッコい人{ひと}もいるけどね・・\n\n「してなくても」 said by B at the end clearly means 「努力してなくても」 (\" _ **even without\nmaking an effort**_ \"). 「努力」 was mentioned by A just a moment ago.\n\nThis is why @snailplane asked his/her question in the comments. Japanese is an\nextremely contexual language; therefore, we keep shouting \"Context, context,\ncontext!\"\n\nNo one could have answered your question regarding what 「してなくても」 would mean\nuntil you provided the first three lines. Providing enough context is\n_**the**_ key to receiving more reliable answers and even doing so more\nquickly.\n\n> A: You've become cuter.\n>\n> B: My hair care and fashion. The way I laugh and my manners. I had an\n> excellent tutor.\n>\n> A: It's all based on your own effort.\n>\n> B: There is an unfair girl who, without making any effort, is prettty,\n> though!\n\n「ずっこい」 is a slangy version of 「ずるい」, which means \"unfair\" here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T00:27:35.157",
"id": "57364",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T14:50:32.963",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57354
|
57364
|
57364
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My question is kinda simple (I hope).\n\nWhen somebody asks you, for example:\n\n> 学生りょうにＴＶがありますか。\n\nCan you answer:\n\n> 台所 **には** ありますが、部屋 **には** ありません。\n\nOr do you use:\n\n> 台所 **に** ありますが、部屋 **には** ありません。\n\nCan you also explain why that is, because I'm a little bit confused. Does the\nsame thing happen with で->では, へ->へは?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T15:00:14.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57356",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T08:19:38.710",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-18T16:37:20.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "25834",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "に->には / で->では etc",
"view_count": 505
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both work fine, but the focus of the answer would be different.\n\n> 台所にありますが、部屋にはありません。\n\nI think this answer would be more \"direct\". The question is \"Is there a TV in\nthe dorm?\". A direct answer for this question would be \"はい、テレビ **は**\n台所にあります。\", or simply \"台所にあります。\" with テレビ as the implied topic. After directly\nanswering the question, 部屋にはありません follows, which is an optional piece of\ninformation.\n\n> 台所にはありますが、部屋にはありません。\n\nThis answer sounds like you have already noticed that the questioner actually\nwants a TV in his personal room. By adding the contrastive-wa in the first\nhalf of the sentence, you signal that \"there is a TV in the kitchen, but\nthat's probably not what you want\". As a consequence, (テレビは)部屋にはありません gets\nmore focused.\n\nMore simply put, 台所にあります sufficiently works as a straight answer to the\nquestion, whereas 台所に **は** あります sounds like \"Yes, there is, _at least_ in the\nkitchen\".\n\nNote that those explicit は after 台所に/部屋に are all contrastive-wa. The implied\ntopic is always テレビ(は) throughout the conversation. In different contexts, は\ndirectly after ～に can safely work as a topic marker. See: [は、には、に。。。what is\nthe difference between them?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36908/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T04:15:52.457",
"id": "57369",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T08:19:38.710",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-19T08:19:38.710",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57356",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57356
| null |
57369
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57358",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I would like to ask for help or make a request to a person to whom I should\nshow respect. Are the following both ok, or is one of them better?\n\n> 例：Teacher, can you teach me OO? \n> 先生、OOを教えていただいんですか。 \n> 先生、OOを教えてくださいますか。\n\n> 例：Teacher, can you show me OO? \n> 先生、OOを見せていただいんですか。 \n> 先生、OOを見せてもらえませんか。 \n> 先生、OOを見せてくださいますか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T19:08:15.307",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57357",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-15T17:59:21.010",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-15T17:59:21.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "29205",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "Asking a teacher for help or making a request",
"view_count": 1240
}
|
[
{
"body": "First, the level of politeness and use/non-use of keigo should be fairly\nconsistent between members of the class. Being overly formal towards the\nteacher when everyone else uses less formal speech would be odd and\ndistracting. As you are together in the same environment nearly every day,\nmaintaining the same level of politeness in your speech (unless used for\neffect) in the class is important.\n\nFor this reason, I would suggest the following:\n\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を教えてください。」 ’Teacher, please teach me _____.’\n>\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を教えてくださいませんか？」 ‘Teacher, won’t you teach me _____?’\n>\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を見せてください。」 ‘Teacher, please show me _____.’\n>\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を見せてくださいませんか？」 ’Teacher, won’t you show me _____?’\n\nThat being said, your conjugation of いただく is incorrect. It would be:\n\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を教えていただきたいんですが。」 ’Teacher, I would like you to teach me _____.’\n>\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を教えていただいてよろしいですか？」 ’Teacher, could you teach me _____?’\n>\n> 「先生、＿＿＿を教えていただけませんでしょうか（いただけないでしょうか）？」 ‘Teacher, couldn’t you possibly teach\n> me this?’\n\nAgain, I don’t believe that using the いただく form would be the best mode of\naddress in this case. If used towards customers or in other environments where\nyou are expected to be more honorific and deferential it would be appropriate.\n\nUse of もらう seems a bit too supplicating and/or needy and is not necessarily\nappropriate in this setting. Not bad, just not necessary given the\ncircumstances.\n\nFinally, at the end of your post you write 「ありがとうございます」. As there has not yet\nbeen anything done for you this would be strange. Even in English this would\nhave been strange not too long ago. Saying thank you for something that has\nneither been given nor agreed to comes off as out of sequence or even a bit\npushy. It would be better to say よろしくお願いします。 I know you didn’t ask about this,\nbut many others do the same thing and I thought it should be mentioned\nnonetheless.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T19:45:42.097",
"id": "57358",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T19:45:42.097",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "57357",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57357
|
57358
|
57358
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57367",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Saw this in a children's book: 「見つけたのは だーれ？」 Is this essentially the same as\n「だれ」?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T22:45:49.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57360",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-09T16:04:02.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27414",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Does だーれ mean the same as だれ?",
"view_count": 334
}
|
[
{
"body": "This kind of thing can be used to make words more emphatic, as to simulate how\none might pronounce the word in informal speech. The meaning itself doesn't\nchange.\n\nYou might see the same thing in English. (`Whoooo is it?`/ `Noooooo!`/\n`Suuuure.`)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T23:10:41.283",
"id": "57361",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-18T23:10:41.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29208",
"parent_id": "57360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Yes, 「だーれ」 means the same thing as 「だれ」. The important questions, however, are\n\"when\" and \"with whom\" we say 「だーれ」 rather than 「だれ」.\n\nWhen talking to babies and toddlers, we tend to elongate the first syllables\nin question words _**if the question words are placed at the END of\nsentences**_.\n\nIf you do not follow this, you _might possibly_ end up looking slightly cold\nor uninterested to the toddler, but if you ever do it with an adult or a kid\nover 7 or 8, you will look incredibly weird.\n\nSo, we say:\n\n・なーに/なあに\n\n・どーこ/どおこ\n\n・どーれ/どおれ\n\n・なーぜ/なあぜ\n\n・いーつ/いいつ\n\n, etc.\n\nThus, native speakers tend to say to toddlers:\n\n「クマさんは **どこ** にいますか？」 ← No elongation\n\n「 **どこ** にクマさんはいますか？」 ← No elongation\n\n「クマさんがいるのは **どおこ** だ？」 ← **Elongation**\n\nTo use your example sentence,\n\n「 **だれ** が見つけたの？」 ← No elongation\n\n「見つけたのは **だーれ** ？」 ← **Elongation**\n\nRhythm, intonation, syllable lengths, etc., though they are rarely discussed\nhere for obvious reasons, are of utmost importance in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T00:41:23.863",
"id": "57367",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-09T16:04:02.193",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-09T16:04:02.193",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "It's used to make the speaker more childish or cuter. Used a lot when someone\ncloses the eyes of his friend and making him guess who is it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T22:43:25.130",
"id": "57432",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T22:43:25.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29248",
"parent_id": "57360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57360
|
57367
|
57367
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I think the sentence can be understood on its own, but I'm giving some context\nanyway. Editor and author talk about a character.\n\n> Editor: 彼女は作中で優しい子だと言われています。実際そうだと思うんですけど、彼女の優しさって描くのむずかしいと思うんですよ。\n>\n> Author: 優しいのか無関心なのか、鈍感なのか、紙一重の所がありますよね。\n\nI know that のか is used as a sentence ending to ask a question. But I'm not\nsure if Author is using this word to ask a (rethorical) question in this\ncontext, because it's not at the end of the sentence, but as an enumeration.\nRegardless, I translated the sentence like this:\n\n> \"Is it kindness? Indifference? Thickheadedness? These things are paper-\n> thin\".\n\nMy translation may be wrong, that's why I'll be thankful if anyone can help\nme. Also, is Author using のか to imply that the character may actually not be\nkind, but rather something else?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-18T23:20:39.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57362",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T02:45:48.947",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27578",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"particle-か",
"embedded-question"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of the particle のか in this context?",
"view_count": 543
}
|
[
{
"body": "It looks as though you have a valid understanding of the usage.\n\n「のか」, in this context, **does not** form a \"real\" or \"serious\" question. It\nis, instead, used to express the speaker's own doubt regarding how to\npinpointedly label the girl's (unique type of) kindness by enumerating three\npossibilities (plain kindness, indifference and thickheadedness).\n\n> Also, is Author using のか to imply that the character may actually not be\n> kind, but rather something else?\n\nNo, IMHO, that would not be the case. The author knows that the girl is kind\nat least to an extent, but s/he is saying that it is difficult to tell where\nthat kindness originates from -- is it pure kindness or an indifference or\nthickheadedness in disguise?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T02:22:40.417",
"id": "57368",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T02:22:40.417",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57362",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57362
| null |
57368
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Inspired by [this question](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/436987) on\nEnglish SE, and the [List of idioms of\nimprobability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_idioms_of_improbability)\nin Wikipedia which does not have an entry for Japanese, I was wondering... Is\nthere an idiom in Japanese for something that will never happen?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T00:10:45.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57363",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T00:36:47.150",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-19T00:36:12.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7494",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"idioms"
],
"title": "Is there an idiom for something that will never happen?",
"view_count": 792
}
|
[
{
"body": "This one is not strictly 'never', but it does indicate very low probability:\n\n瓢箪から駒 (ひょうたん から こま) a horse from a gourd",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T00:30:45.210",
"id": "57365",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T00:30:45.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "57363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "This one's in\n[jisho.org](http://jisho.org/word/%E7%99%BE%E5%B9%B4%E6%B2%B3%E6%B8%85) with\nthe definition of \"when pigs fly\", which is one of the English idioms that\nmeans the same thing:\n\n百年河清【ひゃくねんかせい】を待つ -> Waiting a hundred years for the Yellow River to clear",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T00:36:47.150",
"id": "57366",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T00:36:47.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16049",
"parent_id": "57363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
57363
| null |
57365
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57371",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 誰も戦争を教えられない\n\nIs 教えられない 可能形 or 受身形? I don't have a specific context. It's the title of a\nbook.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T08:00:08.710",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57370",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-15T17:48:55.547",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-15T17:48:55.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "18269",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Book title 『誰も戦争を教えられない』",
"view_count": 157
}
|
[
{
"body": "Technically, this can mean both \"No one can teach\" (potential) and \"No one is\ntaught\" (passive), but in 99% of the cases this should mean \"No one can\nteach\". This is partly because a [\"passive-\nlike\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/30578/5010) verb 教わる (\"to learn\",\n\"to be taught\") is usually used to express the passive meaning: 誰も戦争を教わらない\n(\"No one will learn war\"). Similarly, 捕まえられない almost always means \"(someone)\ncannot arrest\" because we normally use 捕まらない for the passive meaning. In\naddition, \"No one learns war\" simply looks counterfactual and makes less sense\nto me as a book title.\n\nJudging from [the review](https://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4062816067/), this title\nimplies no one in Japan understands how real wars look.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T08:25:17.487",
"id": "57371",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T18:07:43.357",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-19T18:07:43.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57370",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57370
|
57371
|
57371
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Below is from a children's book that I am reading and I am confused as to the\nway の was used in the sentence.\n\nあれは 亀が吹いて いるのに違いない\n\nI would appreciate any inputs/infos regarding this.\n\nThank you in advance\n\nDan",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T17:58:28.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57375",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T18:50:33.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29215",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-の"
],
"title": "What does の mean in the sentence after いる verb form",
"view_count": 255
}
|
[
{
"body": "This の is a nominalizer. It turns the clause, 亀が吹いている, into a noun. It's the\nsame の as in 彼が来る **の** を知っている (\"I know **that** he will come\").\n\n[(noun/na-adj) +\nに違いない](http://jisho.org/word/%E3%81%AB%E9%81%95%E3%81%84%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84) is\n\"It must be ～\" or \"I am sure ～\". This is a fixed pattern to memorize. For\nexample, 嘘に違いない means \"It must be a lie.\"\n\nSo 亀が吹いているのに違いない means \"It must be that a turtle is blowing it.\" or \"I'm sure\na turtle is blowing it.\"\n\n**EDIT:** More specifically, this の is explanatory-の described\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5398/5010) (technically I believe\nit's still a nominalizer). Actually you can also directly connect a verb and\n～に違いない, e.g., 彼は来るに違いない (\"I am sure he will come.\").",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T18:06:10.037",
"id": "57376",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T18:50:33.300",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-19T18:50:33.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57375
| null |
57376
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57380",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Referring to cherry blossoms:\n\n> 咲き始めてから **１週間から１０日ぐらいすると** 、たくさん花が咲いてきれいです。 \n> After they start to bloom, from one week ???? lots of flowers will bloom\n> and (look) pretty.\n\nI'm struggling to understand the part in bold. If I read it literally I get\n\"When it makes around 10 days from/after a period of one week\". Logically,\ntherefore I get \"Lots of flowers will bloom around 17 (10+7) days after they\nfirst start\". Obviously I think my analysis is nonsense.\n\nMy guess is that it reads \"Lots of flowers will bloom after a period of around\n7 to 10 days from when they first start\". Is this correct? Is there a way to\nbreak it down logically?\n\nMore generally what are the common ways to express an interval of time after\nwhich something will happen? I would have tried something like:\n\n> 7日と10日ぐらいのあいだに\n\nbut that feels incomplete. It seems to be lacking the idea of **later**. I\nknow I can says \"2 days later\" as 2日後に. I guess \" **around** 2 days later\"\nwould be 2日後ぐらいに, but I expect 7日と10日後ぐらいのあいだに is completely wrong.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T20:35:45.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57377",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T00:34:06.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"time"
],
"title": "Expressing intervals of time, and AからBすると",
"view_count": 339
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「咲{さ}き始{はじ}めてから[１週間]{いっしゅうかん}から[１０日]{とおか}ぐらいすると、たくさん花{はな}が咲{さ}いてきれいです。」\n\nI will start with the word that you did not even mention -- 「する」. In this\ncontext, it means \" ** _to pass_** \"; It is often used to express the passing\nof a specific length of time. Whether or not one actually uses the verb \"to\npass\" in one's translation is a totally different matter. Personally, I would\nnot.\n\nNext, the 「と」 is conditional, of course. Again, that does not mean one should\nuse \"when\" or \"if\" in one's translation. I would not use it.\n\n> 「Time Length + ぐらい + する + と」\n\nmeans:\n\n> \"within approximately (time length)\"\n\nIn this case, the time length mentioned happens to have a range of 一週間 to １０日.\n**「から」 can singlehandedly express a temporal or spatial \"range\"**. I mention\nthis because there might be people who thought that 「から」 could only be used to\ndescribe a starting point.\n\nThus, my own TL of 「１週間から１０日ぐらいすると」 would be:\n\n> \"within approximately a week to 10 days\"\n\nBeing a Japanese-speaker, I have no idea where you would get the idea of \"17\n(7 + 10) days\", but I can assure you that that is not what 「１週間から１０日」 means\nregardless of the context that the phrase appears in.\n\n(You mentioned 「7日と10日ぐらいのあいだに」, but if someone said that to me, I would\nprobably think he was trying to say \" ** _between the 7th and 10th of a\ncertain month_** \".)\n\nThe key word here is 「から」 for expressing a range. 「と」 seems quite out of place\nto my Japanese-speaking brain. I could not use a 「と」 if I had to rephrase\n「１週間から１０日ぐらい」. It can be rephrased to 「７日から１０日ぐらい」, using 「一週間」 would sound\nmore natural.\n\n> \"Within approximately a week to 10 days after they start blooming, they will\n> bloom in abundance and look beautiful.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T00:19:24.770",
"id": "57380",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T00:34:06.630",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T00:34:06.630",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57377",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57377
|
57380
|
57380
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57379",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a manga, two American boxers are talking about a guy they used to know who\nnow lives in Japan.\n\n> Boxer A: あのブルドッグがリングに上がるって本当かよ。\n>\n> Boxer B: ああ。ここ数年噂を聞かねェと思ったらボクサーになってたんだよ。日本でな。\n\nI think 数年〜の噂を聞かない means \"I haven't heard of 〜 for some years\", so maybe the\nrough translation of the sentence is \"I haven't heard of him for some years,\nit seems that he's become a boxer\". But what is the meaning of 思ったら here?\nThank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T22:22:59.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57378",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T23:10:35.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"negation",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Meaning of 噂を聞かないと思ったら",
"view_count": 195
}
|
[
{
"body": "So first of all, your assessment that:\n\n> 数年〜の噂を聞かない\n\nRoughly means:\n\n> I haven't heard of 〜 for some years\n\nIs accurate. [噂を聞く](http://jisho.org/search/uwasawokiku) is a set phrase that\ntypically means \"to hear something about\", and doesn't imply negativity the\nsame way \"hearing rumors about someone\" does in English.\n\nMoving on to `思ったら`, [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/30587/7705)\nis at least somewhat related, although the linked answer focuses much more on\nthe omitted clause than on the usage of `思ったら`.\n\nThat said, I would think of this sentence:\n\n> ここ数年噂を聞かねェと思ったらボクサーになってたんだよ。\n\nRoughly like this:\n\n> Just when I was thinking I hadn't heard anything about 〜 for a couple years\n> now, it turns out he's become a boxer in Japan.\n\nMuch the same way we do this with \"think\" in English, one can use conditional\nconjugations of 思う to express that an outcome is novel and/or contrary to what\nthe speaker is expecting.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-19T23:10:35.410",
"id": "57379",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-19T23:10:35.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "57378",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57378
|
57379
|
57379
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57386",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "_Arawareru_ , あらわれる: \"to appear, to come in sight, to become visible, to\nmaterialize, to manifest.\"\n\nIt looks as if _arawareru_ can be written: 現れる, 現われる, 表れる, 表われる, 顕れる, 顕われる\n(Readings: 現 = gen, ken, arawa, utsu; 顕 = ken, gen, ari, arawa; 表 = hyō,\narawa, ara, omote)\n\nQuestion: Why is 現われる or 顕われる read/voiced/understood as _arawa-re-ru_ instead\nof _arawa-wa-re-ru_?\n\nI note that 19th century _ukiyo-e_ title cartouches are recorded as using\n_arawaru_ 顕る and _arawaruru_ 顕るゝ (顕るる), e.g. _Picture of the Vengeful Spirits\nof the Heike Appearing at Daimotsu-no-ura in Sesshū_ , Sesshū Daimotsu-no-ura\nHeike no onryō arawaruru zu:\n\n摂州大物浦平家怨霊顕るゝ圖\n\nせっしゅうだいもつのうらへいけのおんりょうあらわるゝ[る]づ\n\nQuestion: I assume that _arawaru_ and _arawaruru_ are simply more archaic ways\nof writing _arawareru_ , presumably changing in the late 19th or early 20th\ncentury. But was/is there any significant difference/implication/contextual or\nformal reason for using _arawaru_ (現る, 顕る, 表る, あらわる) or _arawaruru_ (顕るゝ,\nあらわるる)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T00:59:47.503",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57381",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T16:33:20.993",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T06:14:42.017",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "26637",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"readings",
"history",
"classical-japanese",
"okurigana"
],
"title": "'to appear': arawareru, arawaruru, and arawaru",
"view_count": 548
}
|
[
{
"body": "**Q1** : This is just a variation of okurigana. Okurigana was not very\nstandardized in the past, and people often used (and still occasionally use)\n生れる【うまれる】, 明かるい【あかるい】, 聞える【きこえる】, 断わる【ことわる】, etc. 現われる is still あらわれる.\n\n * [What does \"irregular\" mean in a sense of a missing okurigana letter? (上【あ】がる・上【あが】る, 明【あか】るい・明【あかる】い)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18581/5010)\n\n**Q2** : あらわる and あらわるる are the same verb in archaic/classical Japanese. あらわる\nis the archaic equivalent of modern あらわれる, and あらわるる is the attributive form\n(連体形) of あらわる. Historically, [辞書形/終止形 of a verb was different from\n連体形](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42906/5010), and あらわる had to be\ninflected to あらわるる to modify the following noun (\"図\"). See [this\nchart](https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%B8%8B%E4%BA%8C%E6%AE%B5%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8).\nあらわる is a ラ行下二段活用 verb.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T01:58:17.047",
"id": "57382",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T02:07:54.073",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T02:07:54.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57381",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> Question: I assume that _arawaru_ and _arawaruru_ are simply more archaic\n> ways of writing _arawareru_ , presumably changing in the late 19th or early\n> 20th century. But was/is there any significant\n> difference/implication/contextual or formal reason for using _arawaru_ (現る,\n> 顕る, 表る, あらわる) or _arawaruru_ (顕るゝ, あらわるる)?\n\nYour question touches on a common phenomenon in Japanese: the shift from the\nolder 下【しも】二段【にだん】活用【かつよう】 or \"lower bigrade conjugation\" pattern to the\nmodern 下【しも】一段【いちだん】活用【かつよう】 or \"lower monograde conjugation\" pattern, also\ndescribed as \"type 2\" in English-language materials. The \"lower\" part refers\nto the vowel -- \"lower\" verbs had stems ending in _-e_ , and 上【かみ】 or \"upper\"\nverbs had stems ending in _-i_.\n\nIn a nutshell, all the modern type-2 verbs ending in _-eru_ used to end in\n_-u_ in the 終止形【しゅうしけい】 or \"terminal form\" used to end a sentence, or used as\nthe headword in a dictionary. So modern 食【た】べる used to be 食【た】ぶ as the plain\nform, and 顕【あらわ】れる in your example used to be 顕【あらわ】る.\n\nBut that's just for the 終止形【しゅうしけい】. The 連体形【れんたいけい】 or \"attributive form\" is\nused when the verb modifies a noun. In modern Japanese, the 終止形【しゅうしけい】 and\nthe 連体形【れんたいけい】 are the same thing, but in Classical Japanese and older stages\nof the language, the 連体形【れんたいけい】 was a separate conjugation, formed by adding\na る on the end of the 終止形【しゅうしけい】. So for 食【た】ぶ, the attributive was 食【た】ぶる,\nand for 顕【あらわ】る, the attributive was 顕【あらわ】るる. In your sample text above,\n顕【あらわ】る is used to modify 圖【ず】, so the verb is conjugated in the attributive,\nas 顕【あらわ】るる.\n\nOver time, the conjugation shifted, and various forms fused, so the _-e_ stem\nending came to be used as the basis for all forms: giving rise to modern stem\nforms 食【た】べ and 現【あらわ】れ, and fused terminal / attributive forms 食【た】べる and\n現【あらわ】れる.\n\nFor more on the conjugation pattern, see [the Japanese Wikipedia\narticle](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%8B%E4%BA%8C%E6%AE%B5%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8).\nThe box at the upper right of that page has links to the other classical and\nmodern conjugation patterns, each with tables showing the different forms --\n未然形【みぜんけい】 (incomplete), 連用形【れんようけい】 (continuative or stem), 終止形【しゅうしけい】\n(terminal), etc.\n\n> Question: Why is 現われる or 顕われる read/voiced/understood as _arawa-re-ru_\n> instead of _arawa-wa-re-ru_?\n\nThis has to do with spelling conventions, and some looseness over time in what\nsounds were regarded as 送【おく】り仮名【がな】, the kana that typically follow the kanji\nto show inflectionary endings.\n\nThe verb _arawareru_ , as shown above, comes from older form _arawaru_. The\nconjugating portion of the older form is clearly just the _-ru_ on the end,\nwhich becomes _-reru_ in various conjugations, and the modern 送【おく】り仮名【がな】\nconvention is to spell the term as 現れる, with the _-wa-_ internal to the kanji\nand the classically conjugating _-reru_ spelled out explicitly (even though,\nin modern Japanese, again only the _-ru_ on the end changes at all; including\nthe れ in the kana might help avoid ambiguity). However, this is only a\nconvention, and not carved in stone, and older spelling conventions usually\nspell out the _-wa-_ , as 現われる. My copies of Daijirin and the Kokugo Dai Jiten\nboth list both spellings, with the _-wa-_ either explicitly spelled out in\nkana, or left implicit.\n\nConsequently, both 現れる and 現われる are considered to be valid spellings of\n_arawareru_. Don't add an extra _-wa-_. :)\n\n**A little speculation:**\n\nMonolingual dictionaries show that the older pre-20th-century-reform spelling\nwas あらはる. If you dig around in etymologies enough, you'll notice that the はる\nending here sometimes suggests a derivation from an older verb form ending in\nふ. We find that あらふ is the pre-reform kana spelling of modern 洗【あら】う, and sure\nenough, one of the less-common senses of this verb is _\"to bring something\nhidden into clear view\"_. The passive conjugation of 洗【あら】う is 洗【あら】われる, and\nthe meaning is _\"to be brought into clear view [as of something hidden\"_. This\nis quite close to 現【あらわ】れる, _\"to become evident, to be discovered\"_. I suspect\nthat 洗【あら】う is the root of 現【あらわ】れる, and as such, the _-wa-_ would actually be\npart of the conjugable portion -- which might explain why older spellings\nexplicitly spell out the わ in kana.\n\nBut again, this last part is only my own speculation, and is not listed as the\nderivation in any of the dictionaries I have to hand.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T06:14:12.910",
"id": "57386",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T16:33:20.993",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T16:33:20.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "57381",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57381
|
57386
|
57386
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57407",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there a difference between saying, for example:\n\n「 **どの** 野菜 **が** いちばん好きですか」\n\nand\n\n「野菜 **の中で、どれが** いちばん好きですか」\n\nTo me, they both seem to mean: \"Which vegetable is your favorite?\", the second\none possibly more literally as \"Of the vegetables, which is your favorite?\"\n\nIs there nuance I'm missing?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T03:00:18.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57383",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T01:41:48.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19139",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"questions"
],
"title": "Is there a difference between どのXが〜 and Xの中で、どれが〜?",
"view_count": 131
}
|
[
{
"body": "The main difference would be in the **_situation/context_** where each\nsentence sounds appropriate.\n\nLet me start with the second sentence, instead of the first, for a good\nreason:\n\n> 「野菜{やさい}の中{なか}で、どれがいちばん好{す}きですか。」\n\nThis sentence could be uttered (almost) out of the blue. It could be uttered\nin a conversation about food or vegetables in general. Both the speaker and\nlistener know that the 「野菜」 includes **_all_** vegetables that exist.\n\nThe first sentence:\n\n> 「どの野菜がいちばん好きですか。」\n\nis a bit different.\n\nIt can be uttered in a conversations specifically about vegetables, but\n**_not_** in a conversation about food in general. At the very least, you need\nto have been talking about vegetables.\n\nIn other words, it could only be naturally uttered when both the speaker and\nlistener's attention is already \"focused\" on either all vegetables or a\nalready-selected group of vegetables.\n\nStrictly speaking, native speakers would feel most comfortable uttering\n「どの野菜がいちばん好きですか。」 in the latter case where a certain group of vegetables are\neither right in front of the listener or has already been discussed.\n\nThe problem, as usual, is that if you casually **_translate_** the two\nsentences, the important difference would not surface.\n\nFor the 「どの～～」 sentence, I might suggest that you use \"Which one of\n**_these_** vegetables do you like the best?\" because that is what it\ngenerally means to us native speakers. We are not choosing from all vegetables\nin the first place.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T01:06:35.647",
"id": "57407",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T01:41:48.840",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T01:41:48.840",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57383",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57383
|
57407
|
57407
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was watching an anime. A boy is in a hurry and he's running, and ends up\naccidentally hitting a girl. He inmediately apologizes and says 大-大変申し訳ございません!\nHe looks very nervous while speaking. The girls notices this and she looks\nworried (about him) at first, then she just smiles and says \"別に\". It's clear\nthat she doesn't want to sound rude at all, she seems to simply want to\ncomfort him and tell him it was nothing and he shouldn't worry. But I often\nread that 別に is an expression that expresses indifference and a lack of\nconcern, so I wonder when it's supposed to be a perfectly normal reply and\nwhen it sounds rude. In this context, is it fine?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T04:05:53.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57384",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T04:54:13.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27578",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Is it impolite to reply to an apology with 別に?",
"view_count": 992
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's not wrong to say just 別に in this situation, though it's not particularly\npolite or gentle, either. It may sound a little blunt or distant as compared\nto something like 大丈夫ですよ. Maybe the girl was also a little flustered?\n\n別に is a [negative polarity\nitem](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/16060/5010). When said on its own,\nit can mean \"Not at all\", \"No problem\", \"Nothing in particular\", \"Not really\"\nand so on, depending on the context. In this context it clearly means \"No\nproblem\" or \"I was not particularly bothered\". It can be rude as a reply for a\nquestion like \"What's your impression about (something)?\"\n\nRelated:\n\n * [How does 別に function as an adverb?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21356/5010)\n * [別に to mean \"not particularly\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18785/5010)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T04:48:46.657",
"id": "57385",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T04:54:13.410",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T04:54:13.410",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
57384
| null |
57385
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57389",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From:\n\n公爵家の令嬢として生まれたクリスティーナは、ある日屋敷に引き取られ養子になった妹と対面することで前世の知識を得る。その知識により、この世界が妹のミシュリーをヒロインとした\n**物語に収められることになること** を知った。\n\nThe dictionary doesn't really help, as I don't understand how any of the\nmeanings really apply here:\n\n 1. to dedicate; to make an offering; to pay (fees)\n 2. to supply\n 3. to store\n 4. to finish; to bring to a close\n 5. to restore (something to its place)\n 6. to achieve (e.g. a result)\n\nThe closest definition seems to be 4 or 6, assuming that the word doesn't have\nsome special meaning related to \"acting\", since \"heroine\" and \"villainess\" are\n'roles' of sorts.\n\nMy best guess is that it means: \"(From those memories,) I learned that, in\nthis world, my younger sister Mishuly would become the heroine at the end of\nthe story.\"\n\nAs in, she either brings the story to a close as the heroine, or she ends up a\nheroine as a result of the story.\n\nMy understanding of とした is also a little fuzzy.\n\nHelp is appreciated!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T11:29:22.393",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57388",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T11:42:17.660",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "28131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 収められる in this sentence?",
"view_count": 119
}
|
[
{
"body": "\"収める\" has several meanings. What's missing in the q above are, 1. include (as\na part), 2. contain (as a whole) or 3. publish. In the context above, it means\n\"include\". Ex. \"His treatise is included [is published, is printed] in the\njournal.\" 彼の論文がその雑誌に収められている",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T11:42:17.660",
"id": "57389",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T11:42:17.660",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29222",
"parent_id": "57388",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57388
|
57389
|
57389
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "On jlpt grammar list n3 i found ippou da and bakari da,but i don’t really get\nthe difference. I know that they both need the dictionary form but still is\nthere a certain difference betweeen them or do they overlap in some cases?\n“Ippou da” means to continue doing something “Bakari da” also seems to mean to\ncontinue doing something",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T11:59:26.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57390",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-27T14:35:44.937",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T16:33:09.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "29223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between “ippou da” (一方だ) and “bakari da”(ばかりだ)?",
"view_count": 1677
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both may describe something undesirable continues all the way, but `Vする一方だ`\nimplies **escalation** , and `Vするばかりだ` does not. In this sense, you can\nreplace `Vする一方だ` with `（ますます／どんどん）Vするばかりだ`.\n\nIf the verb already has a cumulative meaning, then the two expressions make no\ndifference.\n\n> 死傷者は増える一方だ。 = 死傷者は増えるばかりだ。 \n> _Casualties keep on increasing._\n\nOtherwise, these two would not be interchangeable.\n\n> 子どもはおびえる一方だ。 _The child only gets more and more frightened._\n>\n> 子どもはおびえるばかりだ。 _The child can do nothing but being frightened._",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T19:43:36.530",
"id": "57404",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-27T14:35:44.937",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "57390",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
57390
| null |
57404
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57392",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "If I want to talk about a friend of mine who studies psychology, can I say\nfollowing?\n\n> 心理学を専攻している私の友達。\n\nIt sounds like I'm the one studying shinrigaku. Then I could say\n\n> 私の心理学を専攻している友達。\n\nBut it sounds that I'm talking about \"my psychology\", even if I now it doesn't\nmake sense. So how could I translate the following nominal group ?\n\n> My friend who studies psychology.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T12:42:16.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57391",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T15:12:02.850",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T12:51:25.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "15759",
"owner_user_id": "15759",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "Where to put the possessive pronoun in a sentence?",
"view_count": 350
}
|
[
{
"body": "Although technically ambiguous, you can safely say 心理学を専攻している私の友達 without\nbeing misunderstood. Introducing a friend of yours after describing your own\nmajor doesn't make much sense, so people normally take this as \"my friend who\nstudies psychology.\"\n\n私の心理学を専攻している友達 is acceptable but a little puzzling.\n\nRelated: [Are Japanese modifiers \"greedy\", \"anti-greedy\", or do they mean\nwhatever people choose them to\nmean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/46817/5010)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T13:21:19.727",
"id": "57392",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T13:21:19.727",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57391",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "(0) My friend who studies psychology. \n(1) 心理学を専攻している私の友達。 \n(2) A frined of mine. I study psychology. \n(3) 私の心理学を専攻している友達。 \n(4) My friend who studies my psychology. \n(5) 私の友達で、心理学を専攻しているやつ/人。\n\n(1) is perfectly correct as the interpretation of (0).\n\nAs you know, the reason why modifiers exist not only in Japanese but also in\nEnglish is because it is easier for the modified word to be understood when a\nmodifier exists than when it does not.\n\n(2) tells us two facts: he/she is my friend and I study psychology. Two facts\nare irrelavant with each other. Therefore, if (0) and (2) exist grammatically\nas the interpretations of (1), (2) which does not have the significance of\nexistence as a modifier is eliminated and only (0) remains.\n\nYour understanding that (3) or (4) is an incorrect interpretation for (0) is\ncorrect.\n\nIn order to avoid the confusion you feel, we sometimes say like (5) as the\ninterpretation of (0). I think it's a good solution for this kind of\nexpressions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T14:31:36.610",
"id": "57395",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T14:31:36.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57391",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I think the best way to go about this is to simply exclude 私の from the\nsentence entirely. In Japanese, personal pronouns just aren't used as often as\nthey are in English and aren't necessary in many(most) cases that they are in\nEnglish. It's a little bit of a nuance, but simply by talking about a 友達 in\nthis case implies that it is your friend that you're speaking about imo.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T15:12:02.850",
"id": "57400",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T15:12:02.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29228",
"parent_id": "57391",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57391
|
57392
|
57392
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57402",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that なんて and なんか are used to emphazise disgust, belittle something, say\nthat something is undesirable and express negative feelings of the speaker.\nBut in this context I'm not too sure if this applies...\n\nContext: girl is talking with her boyfriend over the phone. She looks very\nhappy and also nervous while he's telling her about his day. But her voice\nsounds too monotone/inexpressive, which makes her boyfriend think that she\ndoesn't actually care about what's he saying. He tells her that she sounds\nlike she doesn't care at all because she sounds too monotone and calm.\nHowever, it's important to say that he's not angry at all, he's just teasing\nher and giggling while telling her she doesn't care. Then she replies saying\n\nそんなことないですよ... 聞いてますよ.\n\nBut he keeps teasing her about her not listening, so she says\n\n聞いてますよ! どうでもよくなんかないよ. While in her mind she thinks\n\n\"余裕なんてない\"...\n\nAgain, keep in mind that she says all of this without getting angry at all\nover his teasing or anything. She's just smiling, and in fact looks pretty\nhappy and a bit anxious. That's why I'm not sure what's the function of なんて\nand なんか.\n\nどうでもよくなんかないよ. (It's not that I don't care)\n\n余裕なんてない = I'm not calm at all (when I talk to you)\n\nI do notice that both sentences are in negative, so the word choice is fine,\nbut like I said, since the girl is happy while using these words, I'm not sure\nif なんて and なんか are trying to emphazise or belittle 余裕 and どうでもよく or why\nthey're being used in this context if she doesn't mean to emphazise/express\ndisgust.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T13:34:54.390",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57393",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T18:40:20.683",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T17:42:21.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "27578",
"owner_user_id": "27578",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Are なんて and なんか used to emphazise feelings that are not disgust/trying to look down on something in this context?",
"view_count": 245
}
|
[
{
"body": "What you learned, that なんて and なんか emphasize the negative feelings of the\nspeaker towards the mentioned, is certainly a (most?) outstanding usage of the\nwords, but at the same time the furthest stretched out definition of them.\nTheir etymological meaning is something like \"such kind of thing\", and there\nexist a wide gradation of meanings between the literal one and the said one,\nwhich cognitive linguists often refer to as _polysemy network_.\n\n * 野球 **なんか／なんて** しながら過ごす \"spend (time) playing baseball **and such things** \" (neutral) \n * Positive branch \n * 野球 **なんか／なんて** どうですか？ \"Why don't we do something, **namely** , baseball?\" (suggestion, recommendation)\n * へえ、野球 **なんて** するんだ！ \"Wow, you **do** play (such thing like) baseball!\"(astonishment, admiration)\n * Negative branch \n * 野球 **なんか／なんて** 小学生以来です \"Baseball... I haven't played **any** since elementary school\" (denial of existence)\n * 野球 **なんか／なんて** してる場合じゃないぞ！ \"This is not a time to play baseball **at all**! (don't you see?)\" (objection, opposition)\n * 野球 **なんか／なんて** つまらない \"baseball is **just so** dull\" (repulsion, belittling)\n\nThe classification shown above is nothing authoritative. I only hope you to\ngrasp the general idea of the semantic development. So, back in your original\nquestion, what those なんか and なんて in her speech represent? It seems to me in\nthis case, a mild nuance of objection alongside negation, or to say: _no,\nyou're wrong; it's not like that at all_.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T18:40:20.683",
"id": "57402",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T18:40:20.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "57393",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57393
|
57402
|
57402
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am having trouble interpreting/parsing a portion of a certain extract from\nan action themed comic :-\n\nJust to give you some context, two enemy factions are battling. Two people\nfrom one faction were sent on a mission to 捕獲 the enemy side, they argue a bit\nat first (let's call them A and B) A was attacking the enemy side with full\nforce but B told A not to kill because their task is to 捕獲, nonetheless B is\njust as reckless and proceeds to use her full force too. A guy from the other\nfaction displays his power and strength and begins to boast about his\nabilities excitedly. Then in classic tsukkomi fashion A and B have a little\nback and forth before B attacks the enemy side again:\n\n> A (to the enemy side): ハッタリはそこまでにしておきな！どのみち手前らは死刑決定してんだからよ！\n>\n> B (to A): だから、捕獲任務なのに殺しちゃ駄目だと思うの……\n\nBut what I don't understand is B's line, it doesn't seem to make an awful lot\nof sense to me in the context, at least in the way I would parse it:\n\n> ”So, even though the mission is to capture, they can't be killed I think…”\n\nperhaps there is some sarcastic meaning that I'm failing to see because the\nnext line says Aにツッコミの言葉を入[…], so my speculation is there's some hint of\nsarcasm in B's line to 'correct' A since it's a \"tsukkomi retort.\"\n\nI would love for someone to help me interpret B's line, thanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T14:20:20.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57394",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-20T19:35:50.200",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "29227",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"parsing",
"interpretation"
],
"title": "Help interpreting/parsing a tsukkomi retort",
"view_count": 178
}
|
[
{
"body": "Read 捕獲任務なのに殺す as one action, \"(for A) to kill them although this is a capture\nmission\", which as a whole is what B thinks is 駄目. The subject of 殺す is A\n(because A just said 死刑).\n\nThis だから is more like \"I told you!\", \"Oh, come on!\" or \"You don't understand?\"\nrather than \"So\" or \"Therefore\". This usage is colloquial and is not listed on\njisho, but 明鏡国語辞典 defines だから also as \"相手の発言に対して反抗的な気持ちを示す語\".\n\nSo B's line is basically \"I told you, (you said 死刑 but) I think you can't kill\nthem, coz this is a capture mission.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T15:00:45.553",
"id": "57398",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T06:40:58.897",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T06:40:58.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57394",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "## The 「colloquial だから」\n\nI imagine「だか **ら** 」is said with the ら emphasized. The usage here is, as\n@naruto indicated, colloquial.\n\nIn conversational English, it's similar to saying\n\n * \"That (what you just said) is **why** I'm doing what I'm doing, so you don't have to tell me. Sheesh.\"\n * That's what I **SAID**.\n * That's what I was **THINKING** already.\n * I **KNOW**! You don't have to tell me. I was already doing that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-04-20T19:35:50.200",
"id": "58060",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-20T19:35:50.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29590",
"parent_id": "57394",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57394
| null |
57398
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57399",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've noticed that 解ける which means 'to be solved' and 溶ける, 'to dissolve' are\npronounced the same way. Furthermore the second one can be written using the\nkanji of the first one. That relation between both words is really similar to\nthe one between the English word solve / dissolve, which made me ask that\nquestion: was the use of the words 解ける / 溶ける influenced by the English\nlanguage? (e.g. solve a mystery as a metaphor coming from dissolving a\nchemical)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T14:33:26.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57396",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T15:02:03.467",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T14:38:25.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "15759",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"etymology",
"homophonic-kanji"
],
"title": "Is the couple 解ける / 溶ける related to the English solve/ dissolve?",
"view_count": 107
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think the pair 解ける 溶ける was probably not influenced by the English language.\n\nRather, it is more likely a standard example of the very common phenomenon of\na (native Japanese) verb being written with different _kanji_ to differentiate\nbetween various nuances/meanings. There are many, many such verbs\n\n> みる → 見る \"to see\", 観る \"to watch\", 看る \"to look after\", 診る \"to examine\"\n>\n> きく → 聞く \"to hear\", 聴く \"to listen\", 効く \"to have an effect\", 利く \"to function\"\n\n(Monolingual dictionaries will list these as 同源 \"same origin\".)\n\nOf course you're correct in observing that this phenomenon is similar to the\none of a verb like _solve_ taking (in this case) a prefix to convey a more\nnuanced meaning, such as _dissolve_ , _resolve_ , _absolve_. But of course,\ncorrelation does not imply causation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T15:02:03.467",
"id": "57399",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T15:02:03.467",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "57396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57396
|
57399
|
57399
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57412",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen it being used as a noun for 'crystals' in a game and it's also been\nused as a verb in the form of 'Kesshou!(crystallize!)' for a superhero\ntransformation call in Spielban.\n\nIs simply saying Kesshou normal for using it as a verb or do you normally\nattach -suru to make Kesshou a verb?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-20T15:22:01.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57401",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T05:30:28.323",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T16:40:26.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "22417",
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"parts-of-speech"
],
"title": "Is 結晶 a verb and a noun?",
"view_count": 149
}
|
[
{
"body": "Are you thinking if one might say けっしょいます, けっしょって or something like that? Then\ndefinitely no, 結晶 itself is a simple noun that never conjugates. (A crystal\nmaniac might try coining such a verb [using this\npattern](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24351/5010) as a joke, but I\nhave never heard such a verb.) 結晶する is still ungrammatical. If you want to say\n\"to crystallize\", it's 結晶 **化** する (works transitively and intransitively),\nwhere 化 (か) is a suffix like _-ization_.\n\n\"結晶化!\" is too long as a \"transformation call\", so 結晶 is a reasonable choice\nfor that. Just because it's used similarly to \"変身!\" does not mean it's a verb.\nShouting a pure noun is not strange even in English (e.g., \"Attention!\",\n\"Silence!\")",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T05:23:58.283",
"id": "57412",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T05:30:28.323",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T05:30:28.323",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57401",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57401
|
57412
|
57412
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57411",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Like, for example, I understand 折れ but in what case should one use 折れろ?\n\nAlso, jisho says the negative imperative is 折るな but what about 折れない？",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T02:17:46.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57408",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T14:50:32.573",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How can a verb be intransitive and imperative at the same time?",
"view_count": 300
}
|
[
{
"body": "simple verb form is 折る, negative form of it is 折らない.\n\n折れ is an imperative form of 折る. In English 'Break it'.\n\n折れろ is also imperative form of 折れる. 折れる is 'to be able to break' as transitive\nverb or 'to be breakable' as intransitive verb. Therefore, in this case 折れろ\nmeans 'Be able to break it!' or 'Be able to be broken!' in English. This is\nweird sounding, yet this makes much sense since Jp rarely use an imperative\nform that way.\n\n折るな is an imperative negated (donno specific grammatical term for it) form of\n折る.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T04:27:35.277",
"id": "57409",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T04:53:30.490",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T04:53:30.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "22412",
"owner_user_id": "22412",
"parent_id": "57408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "折れろ is the imperative form of 折れる as an intransitive verb. \nAs you know, 折れる is also the potential form of a transitive verb 折る.\n\nThe following sentence shows you how 折れろ is used as a verb being intransitive\nand imperative at the same time.\n\n * 犯人{はんにん}はその細｛ほそ｝い枝｛えだ｝にぶら下｛さ｝がった。「 **折｛お｝れろ** 、 **折｛お｝れろ** ！」と見{み｝ている人｛ひと｝は期待｛きたい｝したが、犯人｛はんにん｝はその枝｛えだ｝を伝｛つた｝って塀｛へい｝の向｛む｝こう側｛がわ｝へ逃｛に｝げて行｛い｝った。 _The criminal hung from the thin branch. The crowd shouted \"Break! Break!\" hoping the branch would break, but the criminal hung along the branch and fled to the other side of the fence._\n\n> what about 折れない？\n\n折れない is the negative form of an intransitive verb 折れる or the negative\npotential form of a transitive verb 折る, not the negative imperative form of it\nlike:\n\n * **negative intransitive:** この枝{えだ}は **折れない** からブランコを吊{つ}り下{さ}げることができるよ。 \n_You can hang a swing because this branch will not break_.\n\n * **negative potential and transitive:** その枝{えだ}を僕{ぼく}は **折れない** が力{ちから}の強{つよ}い君{きみ}なら折れると思{おも}う。 _I cannot break the branch, but I think that you can, because you are stronger than me_.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T05:22:10.377",
"id": "57411",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T14:04:38.243",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T14:04:38.243",
"last_editor_user_id": "20624",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "**折る** is a **godan transitive** verb (\"to break something\"). It conjugates\nlike:\n\n> 折らない, 折ります, 折って, 折れば, 折れ, 折ろう.\n\n**折れる** is an **ichidan intransitive** verb (\"to be broken\"). It conjugates\nlike:\n\n> 折れない, 折れます, 折れて, 折れれば, 折れろ, 折れよう.\n\n**折れる** is also the **[potential\nform](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/potential.html) of 折る**. It conjugates\nlike:\n\n> 折れない, 折れます, 折れて, 折れれば\n\n折れろ is perhaps \"intransitive and imperative at the same time\". It can mean\n\"Break (by itself)!\" or \"Give up!\"\n\nThe negative imperative of 折る is 折るな (\"don't break it\"), and the negative\nimperative of 折れる is 折れるな (\"don't break by itself; don't be broken; don't give\nup\"). 折れるな is a way to say \"Don't give up\", so it's heard more often than 折れろ.\n\n取る (transitive \"to remove something\") and 取れる (intransitive \"to be removed\"\nand potential \"can remove something\") conjugate exactly like these.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T05:44:05.573",
"id": "57413",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T14:50:32.573",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T14:50:32.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
57408
|
57411
|
57413
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57418",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that usually, when you talk about someone dying, you say, 'なくなりました' to\nbe polite and, '死にました' to literally just say they died.\n\nSo, I was wondering if you could use 死にました for things other than people, such\nas for animals or plants as なくなりました would probably sound a bit strange?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T10:55:43.243",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57416",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T12:45:03.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27894",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Can you use '死にました' for things other than people?",
"view_count": 153
}
|
[
{
"body": "So, long story short is that you _can_ say that, but it may sound [a little\nunnatural](https://hinative.com/en-US/questions/1045363).\n\nThe post above references using なくなる, but it does give relevant answers to\nyour question:\n\nFor plants: 「枯れる」 - \"to wither\", for animals: 「死んでしまう」 - \"to die/pass away\",\nfor people: 「死んでしまう／亡くなる」 - \"to die/pass away\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T12:22:41.550",
"id": "57418",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T12:45:03.270",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T12:45:03.270",
"last_editor_user_id": "16049",
"owner_user_id": "16049",
"parent_id": "57416",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57416
|
57418
|
57418
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57420",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am having trouble understanding the meaning of this sentence. For context I\nput the whole sentence.\n\n> [数日来]{すうじつらい}の[上京]{じょうきょう}に[際]{さい}しての[昂揚]{こうよう}はすでに[収]{おさ}まり \n> [京一郎]{きょういちろう}の[心]{こころ}は、ひとときの[凪]{なぎ}にあった。\n\nMy translation may be wrong but I have roughly translated the first part to\nmean \"a few days since proceeding to the capital\". I have part of the second\nhalf translated as \"at the time of promotion\". But the last part I am unsure\nof how to interpret it to make sense of the whole sentence instead of just\nparts of it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T12:16:31.690",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57417",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T03:25:42.147",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T03:25:42.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27610",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"kanji"
],
"title": "I need help understanding this に際しての昂揚はすでに収まり sentence",
"view_count": 83
}
|
[
{
"body": "I believe that first clause breaks down as (数日来の(上京に際しての(昂揚)))はすでに収まり. Which\nis to say, the main subject of 収まり is 昂揚, a word that usually refers to a\nfeeling of high spirits (excitement, joy, elation), and everything preceding\nthat is describing the 昂揚.\n\nIn this case, the 昂揚 is the result of him coming to the capital (上京に際して) and\nhas been continuing for the past few days (数日来). However, the excitement of\ncoming to the capital has now subsided (収まり), and so his mind is in a state of\nmomentary calm (ひとときの凪).\n\nDoes that clear things up?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T12:46:24.987",
"id": "57420",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T12:52:48.903",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T12:52:48.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "25107",
"owner_user_id": "25107",
"parent_id": "57417",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57417
|
57420
|
57420
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "It is often said that Japanese contains a large number of homonyms because\nthere was no way to render tonal Chinese words into Japanese. This makes\ncomplete sense. But I am looking for specific examples of Sino-Japanese words\nwhich are homonyms but where their original Chinese counterparts are not\nhomonyms, i.e. the Chinese words have tonal differences, but the Japanese\nwords do not.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T12:34:43.383",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57419",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T15:24:34.857",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T15:08:38.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"homophonic-kanji",
"chinese",
"pitch-accent",
"homonyms"
],
"title": "Specific examples of tonal Chinese words rendered into Japanese",
"view_count": 694
}
|
[
{
"body": "The most homophones that I know of are the various words pronounced きかん\n(ordered by frequency in Japanese)\n\n 1. 機関 _jīguān_ 機關・机关 engine/institution \n 2. 期間 _qījiān_ 期间 time interval/period \n 3. 器官 _qìguān_ organ \n 4. 基幹 _jīgàn_ mainstay/nucleus \n 5. 帰還 _guīhuán_ 歸還・归还 repatriation/return \n 6. 気管 _qìguǎn_ 氣管・气管 trachea \n 7. 旗艦 _qíjiàn_ 旗舰 flagship \n 8. 季刊 _jìkān_ quarterly (e.g. magazine) \n 9. 奇観 _qíguān_ 奇觀・奇观 wonderful sight\n\nFormatting: _kanji_ Mandarin _pīnyīn_ [traditional Chinese・]simplified Chinese\nEnglish.\n\nIn (Modern) Chinese all are pronounced differently.\n\nIn (Modern) Japanese, they can be only partly differentiated using pitch\naccent. The pitch accent given in 新明解 日本語アクセント辞典 groups them as follows:\n\n * きかん【LHH】 ⁴基幹、⁵帰還、⁶気管、⁸季刊、⁹奇観\n\n * きかん【LHH】、きかん【LHL】 ⁷旗艦\n\n * きかん【LHL】、きかん【LHH】 ((新は きかん【HLL】)) ¹機関、²期間、³器官\n\nNote that 94% of the occurrences of きかん (numbers from the written language)\nare 機関 and 器官. For disambiguation, context is always king.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T15:07:41.423",
"id": "57423",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T08:03:07.617",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T08:03:07.617",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "57419",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Keywords: MC, Middle Chinese; OC, Old Chinese: MJ: Middle Japanese; OJ, Old\nJapanese; 呉, _Go'on_ ; 漢, _Kan'on_ ; 唐, _Tō-on_ ; /(absence of superscript)/\nor 平, level tone; /X/ or 上, rising tone; /H/ or 去, departing tone; /p̚/, /t̚/,\n/k̚/, or 入, entering or checked tone*\n\n_On'yomi_ homophones are numerous, but the loss of syllable distinction comes\nfrom multiple sources, of which loss of tones upon importation into Old -\nMiddle Japanese from Early / Late MC is just one. There are at least two other\nmajor sources:\n\n * Phonological shifts in the Japanese language itself. If you've dabbled in [historical kana orthography](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_kana_orthography#Complete_tables_of_differences), you may recognise patterns when going from historical spellings to modern spellings. In fact, the historical kana spellings for many _on'yomi_ represented a more accurate mora-sequence approximation of MC syllables than modern Japanese spelling, but these written distinctions were later lost in spoken Japanese. E.g.:\n\n * **「協」** (呉音: _originally_ **[けふ]{kefu}** , _MC_ **/ɦep̚/** ), **「京」** (呉音: _originally_ **[きやう]{kyau}** , _MC_ **/kˠiæŋ/** ), now both reduced to **きょう**\n * **「帳」** (漢音: _originally_ **[ちやう]{tyau}** , _MC_ **/ʈɨɐŋ H/**), **「兆」** (漢音: _originally_ **[てう]{teu}** , _MC_ **/ɖˠiᴇu X/**), now both reduced to **ちょう**\n * The waves of importation of vocabulary, with readings now classified as [呉音](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go-on), [漢音](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kan-on), and [唐音](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C5%8D-on). All of these are snapshots of both different eras of Middle Chinese phonology and different Chinese topolects during those eras. Combined with the above phonological shifts in Japanese, you can get even syllables which sounded vastly different in different topolects of Chinese in different eras (not even considering tone) converging in Japanese. E.g.\n\n * **「清」** (唐音: **しん** , _MC_ **/t͡sʰiᴇŋ/** ), **「森」** (呉音: _originally_ **[しむ]{simu}** , _MC_ **/ʃˠiɪm/** ), now both reduced to **しん**\n * **「生」** (呉音: _originally_ **[しやう]{syau}** , _MC_ **/ʃˠæŋ/** ), **「匠」** (漢音: _originally_ **[しやう]{syau}** , _MC_ **/d͡zɨɐŋ H/**), now both reduced to **しょう** ; for reference, the 漢音 of「生」and 呉音 of「匠」are **せい** and originally **[ざう]{zau}** , respectively.\n\nThe applicable class of words to answer this question are then those which had\nsyllables distinguished in MC by tone only and have merged in OJ purely due to\nthis loss of tone information upon importation. E.g.\n\n * 京 (/kˠiæŋ/, 平) vs. 敬 (/kˠiæŋH/, 去) both became [きやう]{kyau} -> きょう;\n * 真 (/t͡ɕiɪn/, 平) vs. 震 (/t͡ɕiɪnH/, 去) both became しん\n * 朝 (/ɖˠiᴇu/, 平) vs. 兆 (/ɖˠiᴇuX/, 上) both became [てう]{teu} -> ちょう;\n * 理 (/lɨX/, 上) vs. 吏 (/lɨH/, 去) both became り\n * 相 (/sɨɐŋH/, 去) vs. 想 (/sɨɐŋX/, 上) both became [さう]{sau} -> そう\n\n* * *\n\n*Entering/Checked tone [is not really a tone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checked_tone).",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T13:32:18.297",
"id": "57452",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T15:24:34.857",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T15:24:34.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "26510",
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "57419",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
57419
| null |
57452
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57424",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In this sentence:\n\n> 彼女はお姉さん **が** 着るのと同じ種類の服 **を** 着る。\n>\n> She wears the same variety of clothes as her sister wears.\n\nWhy is the が particle used to mark the sister as the subject, when the one\ndoing the action of wearing を着る is 彼女?\n\n* * *\n\nIf my understanding is correct, the が particle always without exception marks\nthe noun (the subject) that is doing or being something:\n\n> 犬 **が** 走る The dog is running (doing)\n>\n> 花 **が** 赤い The flower is red (being)\n\nI also understand that the subject doing the action can be implied and not\nincluded (zero pronouns).\n\nThe zero pronoun Ø takes the equivalent of \"it\", \"I\", \"she\", \"he\" etc. which\nis included in English but omitted in Japanese.\n\nThe は particle is the topic and does not indicate the noun that is doing or\nbeing (the job が already does).\n\n> 私は (Ø **が** ) 日本人です。\n>\n> As for me, (I) am Japanese. (Øが means \"I\")\n\nOrdering food in a restaurant:\n\n> 彼は (Ø **が** ) 天ぷらです。\n>\n> As for him (it) is Tempura. (not he is a Tempura) (Øが means \"it\")\n\nIf I am misunderstanding this concept please correct me.\n\n* * *\n\nBut in the first sentence above I am not confident when applying these\nconcepts.\n\n> 彼女は (Øが）姉さん **が** 着るのと同じ種類の服 **を** 着る。\n>\n> As for her (she Ø) wears the same type of clothes her sister wears.\n\nMy questions are:\n\n 1. Am I correct in putting (Øが) in the sentence? Does (Øが）mean 彼女が in this case? And does 彼女が indicate that she is doing the action of wearing **を** 着る?\n 2. Is the second が in 姉さん **が** 着る used to indicate that her sister is doing the action of wearing her own clothes? Would this be a second が different from this first invisible が?\n 3. But if 着る is a transitive verb, why is this second が used instead of を? お姉さん **を** 着るのと同じ種類の服 **Edit: disregard this question.**",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T14:05:40.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57421",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T16:39:01.707",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-が",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Why is the が particle used in this sentence?",
"view_count": 783
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's not a good idea to assume there is always ～が (explicit or implicit) along\nwith ～は in Japanese sentences. 私は私が日本人です is plain \"ungrammatical\" rather than\n\"redundant\" or \"wordy\". Japanese people don't interpret Japanese sentences in\nthat way. If your first language is English, imagining an implicit ～が may help\nyou better understand certain sentences like 私は天ぷらです, but that's nothing more\nthan that.\n\n> Am I correct in putting (Øが) in the sentence? Does (Øが）mean 彼女が in this\n> case?\n\nIf you put 彼女が in that place, the sentence would look awfully wrong. This\nsentence is complete as-is.\n\n> Is the second が in 姉さんが着る used to indicate that her sister is doing the\n> action of wearing her own clothes? Would this be a second が different from\n> this first invisible が?\n\nYes, this が after 姉さん is a plain subject marker in a relative clause. I would\nsay there is no such thing as \"first invisible が\" in the first place.\n\n> if 着る is a transitive verb, why is this second が used instead of を?\n\nBecause が marks the subject of 着る (i.e., who wears), を marks the object of 着る\n(i.e., what to wear). 姉さんを着る means \"wear her sister\" rather than \"her sister\nwears\".\n\nIn case you you did not know relative clauses, please [learn them\nfirst](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14550/5010). 姉さんが着るの is \"ones her\nsister wears\". ～と同じ種類 is \"the same kind as ～\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T16:33:16.490",
"id": "57424",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T16:39:01.707",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-21T16:39:01.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57421",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "お姉さんが着るの is a noun phrase where の is been using as a pronoun. The sister is\nthe subject of this noun phrase and is marked with が. As in English, a\nsentence in Japanese can have more than one subject. Consider:\n\n> I like the same clothes that my sister likes.\n\n\"I\" is the subject here and \"the same clothes that my sister likes\" is the\nobject. However, the object of this sentence isn't a simple noun; it's a noun\nphrase which also contains a subject (my sister).\n\nIn the Japanese sentence:\n\n> 彼女はお姉さんが着るのと同じ種類の服を着る。\n\nI think you're overthinking the \"absent subject\" concept. Subjects in Japanese\nare often marked with は; it's just that the element marked with は isn't always\nthe subject. In other words, the topic can be the same as the subject, or not.\nIn this case, it is.\n\n> お姉さんが着るの\n\nThis means \"the ones that (her) elder sister wears\".\n\n> お姉さんが着るのと同じ種類の服\n\nThis means \"the same type of clothes that her elder sister wears\" (or more\nliterally, \"the same type of clothes as the ones that her elder sister\nwears\"). It could be the answer to the question 彼女はどんな服を着る？ The key here is to\nunderstand that you have a noun phrase with another noun phrase embedded in\nit. (This is a relatively complex sentence!) The clothing that 彼女 wears is the\nclothing represented by this noun phrase. Compare:\n\n> 彼女は **鮮やかな服** を着る.\n\nThe structure of this sentence is exactly the same as the original:\n彼女は[NP]を着る.\n\nI hope this makes sense!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T16:33:50.033",
"id": "57425",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T16:33:50.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "57421",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57421
|
57424
|
57424
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57446",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm reading a certain set of kindergarten/lower primary maths textbooks that\nis written by North American authors for an Asian company.\n\nWhenever students are asked to identify the number of rectangles in a given\npicture, the answer booklet gives the number of oblongs instead of the number\nof rectangles.\n\nWhile the topic may be too advanced for kindergarten students, the maths\ntextbooks indeed explicitly say at the bottom of the first page of a textbook\nat the very first level to tell students that squares are special types of\nrectangles, where levels 1-4 are for kindergarten students.\n\nAdditionally, the accompany guide for teachers devotes a whole page of\ndiscussion as to how to teach that squares are special types of rectangles.\nThere's even a paragraph about teaching to kindergarten students. The\nauthors/some of the co-authors of the teacher guides are also authors/co-\nauthors of the textbooks. They have also said that if students are taught that\nsquares are not rectangles, then they will have misconceptions later.\n\nPerhaps, the ones who wrote the answer booklets were not fluent in English\nwhile the ones who wrote the textbooks were.\n\nFor example\n\n> [picture with 4 circles, 2 triangles, 3 square rectangles, 2 oblong\n> rectangles for a total of 5 rectangles]\n>\n> Circle ___\n>\n> Triangle ___\n>\n> Square ___\n>\n> Rectangle ___\n\nThe answer key would give only the numbers:\n\n> 4\n>\n> 2\n>\n> 3\n>\n> 2\n\nSo, the last line is wrong since it should be 5.\n\nCould this happen in Japanese? Or a Japanese dialect? I mean, is there\nsomething specific about the translations of any of the following words\n'rectangle, square, oblong, quadrilateral, quadrangle, parallelogram,\ntrapezoid/trapezium, rhombus' that would cause such confusion? I guess the\ntranslator/s thought that when English speakers say 'rectangle', it means\n'oblong in their language/dialect, but I don't see that as specifically a\nproblem for this particular language.\n\nBy the way, are squares considered rectangles in Japan? Apparently, these\nthings can vary by state, curricula, culture, time, etc. Please provide a\ndocument from the education department of your government or something.\n\nP.S. I'm a monolinguist.\n\nRelated:\n\n[In Korea, are squares considered\nrectangles?](https://korean.stackexchange.com/questions/3394/in-korea-are-\nsquares-considered-rectangles)\n\n[Are kindergartners supposed to be steered from squares being\nrectangles?](https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/13831/)\n\n[In what curricula are “rectangles” defined so as to exclude\nsquares?](https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/13700/in-what-\ncurricula-are-rectangles-defined-so-as-to-exclude-squares)\n\n[Why do we have circles for ellipses, squares for rectangles but nothing for\ntriangles?](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2249741/why-do-we-have-\ncircles-for-ellipses-squares-for-rectangles-but-nothing-for-tria)\n\n[What are/should kids (be) taught about the colour of the\nsun?](https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/394471)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T19:10:00.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57427",
"last_activity_date": "2021-04-10T11:57:39.150",
"last_edit_date": "2021-04-10T11:57:39.150",
"last_editor_user_id": "10230",
"owner_user_id": "10230",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"translation",
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"terminology",
"mathematics"
],
"title": "Could a translation error lead to squares to not be considered as rectangles?",
"view_count": 454
}
|
[
{
"body": "A \"square\" is a specific case of a \"rectangle.\" This is a geometric problem,\nnot a linguistic one. Geometry has no language--a square is always a\nrectangle, no matter what.\n\nIf they do not include squares in the count of rectangles, they need to\nmention that the count of rectangles should not include squares. But you said\nthis was for kindergarten-level readers, so maybe they don't think that\nchildren know that squares are also rectangles? If that is the case, then it's\nyet another problem entirely of \"when do we teach children the specifics of\ngeometry.\" TL;DR We adults might consider squares rectangles, but perhaps\nsmall children do not.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T21:51:29.070",
"id": "57431",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T21:51:29.070",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9596",
"parent_id": "57427",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "The situation is a bit different in Japanese. In the first place, _rectangle_\nin Japanese math jargon is 長方形 (lit. \"oblong square\") so that it's even less\nintuitive than English, but for better or worse, it's not so basic a word that\nkindergarteners would learn.\n\nThe most basic, vernacular word in Japanese to refer to square-like shape is\n四角 (lit. \"quadrangle\"). Though I personally have been thinking it be somewhat\nsynonymous to _rectangle_ , [a\nstudy](https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jjep1953/30/2/30_147/_article/-char/ja/)\nreports that most young children only refer to _square_ by that word. (Even\nthough we actually have a basic word exactly for _square_ : 真四角 (lit. \"true\nsquare\").)\n\n>\n> 周知のように幼児は「さんかく」「しかく」という名称を知ってはいるが，これらを正三角形や正方形に対してのみ（若干名は二等辺三角形や長方形に対しても）使用可能で，不等辺三角形や不等辺四角形に対しては「三角でも四角でもない」「わからない」と判断することが非常に多い \n> _As we already know, that while preschoolers know such terms \"triangle\" and\n> \"quadrangle\", in most cases they judge them to be only applicable to\n> equilateral triangles and squares (for a few also isosceles triangles and\n> rectangles), and not to scalene triangles and irregular quadrilaterals *,\n> towards which they answer \"neither of them\" or \"not sure\"._\n\n* * *\n\n* I mean the shape known as [_trapezium_ in NAm and _trapezoid_ elsewhere](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/65259/157006) in English. Translation error :)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T03:34:26.677",
"id": "57445",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T10:27:11.320",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T10:27:11.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "57427",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "In Japanese, there are two sets of words we learn to describe various kinds of\nquadrilaterals.\n\n**Mathematical terms** are 四角形【しかっけい】 _quadrilaterals_ , 台形【だいけい】 _trapezoid_\n, 平行四辺形【へいこうしへんけい】 _parallelogram_ , 菱形【ひしがた】 _rhombus_ , 長方形【ちょうほうけい】\n_rectangle_ and 正方形【せいほうけい】 _square_. Some are specialized forms of others, as\nshown below:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tC2hA.png)\n\nIf I remember correctly, Japanese people learn these terms in the 4th or 5th\ngrade. Technically speaking, all 正方形 are also 台形, too. People say yes if\nsomeone asked \"Is all 正方形 also 平行四辺形?\" in math classes.\n\nHowever, in reality, people usually use the most specific term when possible,\nand unspecific versions are used when they really need them. 菱形のハンカチ normally\nrefers to a diamond-shaped handkerchief even though a 正方形 is technically a 菱形,\ntoo. In most cases, this is not a _confusion_ but an _optimization_ ;\nobviously, it's too bothersome to say 正方形ではない菱形の形をしたハンカチ or 角が90度ではない菱形のハンカチ\nin daily life. Likewise, when I hear someone say 長方形 in everyday situation, I\nusually assume it's an oblong rectangle.\n\nThat said, if I saw \"the number of 長方形 is 2\" in your example, I would still\nargue that it's technically incorrect, too, because they call it a _math\ntextbook_! So it purely depends on the situation; the more the situation is\ncloser to math, the stricter you should be.\n\nThere is also \"easier\" or \"elementary\" set of words suitable for\nkindergartners:\n\n * 四角【しかく】\n * 真四角【ましかく】\n * 長四角【ながしかく】 or 細長い四角\n\nAdults also use them in non-math situations. 四角 (without 形) [usually refers to\nsquares](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/38517/5010) but sometimes\nincludes rectangles. We should not be too strict on 四角, and we should not use\nthese words if mathematical strictness is important. 真四角 specifically refers\nto squares, and 長四角 specifically refers to oblong rectangles like envelopes.\nAfter all, for kindergartners, people can easily avoid this problem by using\nましかく and ながしかく.",
"comment_count": 13,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T05:37:59.473",
"id": "57446",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T23:05:32.187",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T23:05:32.187",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "57427",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
57427
|
57446
|
57446
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57430",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across the word かいわ in the Genki Textbook and it was translated as\n\"dialogue\". But when I put it into google translate it said it was \"たいわ”.\n\nCould someone please explain to me the differences in these two words, with\nmaybe sentence or phrase examples?\n\nthank you",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T19:39:17.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57428",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T03:42:58.163",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T03:42:58.163",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "29244",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Difference between Kaiwa (会話) vs Taiwa (対話 )?",
"view_count": 1060
}
|
[
{
"body": "The simple answer is that 会話 is the more common word to describe a dialogue\nlike an everyday conversation, for example, about your day or such. In the\ncontext that Genki presents this word, it is a neutral dialogue between two\npeople.\n\n対話, however, is a slightly more advanced term with a different connotation; it\nis also dialogue but in the context of an argument, not the kind where people\nare arguing with each other, but where people discuss a topic with contexts\nand deliberation.\n\nBreaking down the kanji to understand:\n\n> 会話 -- dialogue \n> 会 -- meeting, gathering, party \n> 話 -- tale, talk\n>\n> 対話 -- dialogue \n> 対 -- vis-a-vis, opposite, even \n> 話 -- tale, talk",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T20:06:01.320",
"id": "57430",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-21T20:06:01.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "57428",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
57428
|
57430
|
57430
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57433",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: a boxer and his trainer are waiting in the locker's room for a match\nto start. The president of a famous gym who is also the organizer of the match\npasses by and just waves at them without even looking them in the eyes. At\nwhich the trainer comments (giving him the middle finger):\n\n> へっ… せーぜー盛り上げに貢献しろってか 目くらい合わせろや\n\nSince he used the imperative, I think he was trying to reproach the organizer,\nbut what is the meaning of 盛り上げ? To what the organizer should contribute? Has\nit something to do with enlivening the atmosphere? Note that the boxer and\nespecially the trainer don't have a good relationship with the president.\nThank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T19:42:43.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57429",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T00:12:54.423",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"manga",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Meaning of 盛り上げ in the following sentence",
"view_count": 148
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「へっ… せーぜー盛{も}り上{あ}げに貢献{こうけん}しろってか 目{め}くらい合{あ}わせろや。」\n\nThe one statement made by you that, to me at least, shows your\nmisinterpretation is:\n\n> \"Since he used the imperative, I think he was trying to reproach the\n> organizer\"\n\n1) 「せーぜー盛り上げに貢献しろ」 is only what the trainer **_thinks_** that the president\nwould have wanted to say. The **_imaginary_** imperative is being uttered by\nthe president toward the trainer and boxer.\n\n2) And the trainer is **_quoting_** that imaginary remark by using 「ってか」,\nwhich means along the line of \"Is that what you want to say?\" or \"Is that what\nyou are saying?\".\n\nHope you are following this logic.\n\n**「盛り上げ」 means \"giving a boost to\", \"warming up\", \"making something\nexciting\"** , etc. It is the noun form of the transitive verb 「盛り上げる」.\n\nSo, the trainer is saying:\n\n> \"Geez! 'If anything, contribute in making the show exciting!' Is that what\n> you want to tell us? At least look us in the eye (to say it)!\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T23:44:35.190",
"id": "57433",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T00:12:54.423",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T00:12:54.423",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57429",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57429
|
57433
|
57433
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am helping to plan an event featuring the work of a Japanese artist. I'm\nspeaking to his representative, and would like to ask the question,\n\n> Can you ask (name) if he would be willing to write a short statement to the\n> public about this event?\n\nbut I'm not sure what the most polite way to phrase that would be.\n\nThis is what I have written now, but I'm not sure if it's correct:\n\n> Aさんがこのイベントについての公式声明を発表した場合大変助かります。それについて聞いていただけますか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-21T23:50:30.233",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57434",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-16T18:17:16.940",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-16T18:17:16.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "29249",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"english-to-japanese",
"phrase-requests",
"keigo"
],
"title": "Asking a business contact to make a request on my behalf?",
"view_count": 206
}
|
[
{
"body": "When making your request in conversation, I think that it will not finish with\none phrase. \nI'll write the conversation that I assume below. A is you and B is the\nrepresentative of the artist.\n\nＡ：「はじめまして。Ｘさん/Ｘ先生｛せんせい｝の representative をされている方｛かた｝ですよね。」 \nＢ：「そうですが...。何｛なに｝か？」 \nＡ：「私｛わたし｝は、（名刺｛めいし｝を渡｛わた｝しながら）こう言｛い｝う者｛もの｝です。この度｛たび｝のＸさん/Ｘ先生｛せんせい｝の作品展示｛さくひんてんじ｝イベントのお手伝｛てつだ｝いをしている者｛もの｝です。」 \nＢ：「それは、どうも。」 \nＡ：「ところで、このイベントのパンフレットにＸさん/Ｘ先生｛せんせい｝のお言葉｛ことば｝を載｛の｝せたいと思｛おも｝っているのですが、是非｛ぜひ｝ともあなた様｛さま｝から先生｛せんせい｝にお願｛ねが｝いしていただけないでしょうか」 \nＢ：「どのぐらいの分量｛ぶんりょう｝ですか？」 \nＡ：「（パンフレットのレイアウトを見｛み｝せながら、）ここのところに載｛の｝せたいので、Ｙ文字｛もじ｝ぐらいでしょうか。」 \nＢ：「依頼｛いらい｝の内容｛ないよう｝は分｛わ｝かりました。即答｛そくとう｝はできませんがお待｛ま｝ちいただけますか。」 \nＡ：「はい。ありがとうございます。」 \nＢ：「持｛も｝ち帰｛かえ｝って、のちほど連絡｛れんらく｝します。連絡先｛れんらくさき｝は、名刺｛めいし｝に書｛か｝かれているここでいいですか。」\nＡ：「はい、そうです。出来｛でき｝ればメール/携帯電話｛けいたいでんわ｝でお願｛ねが｝いします。」 \nＢ：「（名刺｛めいし｝を出｛だ｝しながら）何｛なに｝かあったらここに連絡｛れんらく｝ください。」 \nＡ：「突然｛とつぜん｝のお願｛ねが｝いですみません。よろしくお願｛ねが｝い致｛いた｝します。」\n\nI don't think that the conversation will proceed as assumed above. \nTherefore, I think that it is better to request it properly by a letter or by\na document. In this case, you can request it in English.\n\nWell, if you have an appropriate person to whom you can ask to translate the\nrequest in English to Japanese by your side, I think, it is easier to ask that\nperson for making this request in place of you without asking for the\ntranslation.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T01:26:10.867",
"id": "57437",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T03:48:12.350",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T03:48:12.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "57434",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
57434
| null |
57437
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Does it translate to \" he doesn't mind being called that\" ? Edit: 言われた means\nto be said, 自体 means itself and the context is about a person that gets called\nby a certain nick name so I'm not sure if i should understand it as \"he doesnt\ncare being told/called that \"or \" he doesn't care about the nick name on\nitself \"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T00:10:58.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57435",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:31:51.980",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T00:51:30.297",
"last_editor_user_id": "26968",
"owner_user_id": "26968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "言われたこと自体は気にしてないけど meaning",
"view_count": 81
}
|
[
{
"body": "Under \"normal\" circumstances, native speakers would **_not_** use 「言{い}われたこと」\nto refer to being addressed with a nickname. We would use 「（そう） **呼{よ}ばれた**\nこと」.\n\nIf, however, someone addressed you with a completely new nickname that no one\nhas ever addressed you with, you **_might_** use 「言われたこと」, then.\n\nMost naturally, though, I would still say that upon hearing/reading\n「言われたこと自体は気にしてない」, we would think that **_someone told you something_**\n(instead of just addressing you with a nickname) but that you are not bothered\nby it.\n\nIn short, you would **_not_** even talk about being bothered or not being\nbothered for being called by your nickname that \"everyone\" calls you by all\nthe time, would you?\n\nThus, without further context or a more detailed background story, this is all\nI can say.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T01:37:11.527",
"id": "57438",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:31:51.980",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T02:31:51.980",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57435",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57435
| null |
57438
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57440",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading the Japanese version of _Harry Potter and the Philosopher's\nStone_. When Oliver Wood is explaining Quidditch rules to Harry, he says:\n\n> 輪に入るたびに一〇点だ。\n\nWhy say 「一〇点」 instead of 「十点」? How do I read it? 「イチゼロテン」?「ジュウテン」？「Tenてん」？\n\nIs this something specific to sports? The only sport I follow is football, and\nsince I have heard weird things like commentators saying 「いちななーいちはち」 for the\n'17-'18 Premier League season, I suspect that might be the case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T01:22:22.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57436",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:17:06.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18189",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"readings",
"numbers"
],
"title": "Why use 「一〇点」 instead of 「十点」 and how do I read it?",
"view_count": 242
}
|
[
{
"body": "I suppose you're reading the book on paper (or Kindle-like terminal), where\nthe text is written vertically. In _vertical mode_ , the positional notation\nof _kanji numerals_ are used as much as how Arabic numerals are used in\nhorizontal mode.\n\n> 一〇点 _10 points_ vs. 十点 _ten points_\n\nIt doesn't affect the pronunciation, so you're just going to read it out じゅってん\n(or じってん, prescriptively). Something like いちぜろてん is rarely used unless you're\na pilot or the base is other than ten.\n\nSee also:\n\n * [Are kanji typically used in times and dates?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17423/7810)\n * [What is the proper pronunciation for 十分/１０分? じっぷん or じゅっぷん?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11213/7810)\n * [Why is 1st floor written as ikkai いっかい?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40325/7810)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T02:07:48.703",
"id": "57440",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:17:06.140",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T02:17:06.140",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "57436",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57436
|
57440
|
57440
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57442",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In a manga, before the start of a boxing match, one of the boxers looks at his\nfriends in the audience and says:\n\n> シャキ〜ン\n\nThen they reply more or less in the same way:\n\n> しゃっきい〜ん\n\nWhat is the meaning of this expression? Is it an onomatopoeic word used to\nsupport someone? Since the match has a special prize of one million yen for\nthe winner, could it be 謝金? [Here you can see the\npage](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2MljF.jpg) where it is taken from. Thank you\nfor your help!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T01:53:58.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57439",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:44:29.670",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T02:25:17.267",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"manga",
"onomatopoeia",
"sports"
],
"title": "Meaning of シャキン or シャッキン used to support someone",
"view_count": 680
}
|
[
{
"body": "「シャキ～ン」 is an onomatopoeia expressing one's feeling when bracing oneself up\njust before or at the start of an important event. Round 1 is just starting\nhere so, that is how he feels.\n\n「しゃっきい〜ん」 said by that girl would be a pun-like joke. 「借金{しゃっきん}」 means\n\"debt(s)\".\n\nI do not see how 「謝金{しゃきん}」 (\"renumeration\") would be uttered here. It is a\nmuch bigger (and less often used) word than 「借金」.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T02:29:36.520",
"id": "57441",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:29:36.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57439",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "It is an onomatopoeia originally mimics the sound some metallic material makes\nwhen it swiftly extends, like the way the joint makes when a folding knife\nsprings out. But it is also used to express (comically) that someone feels at\n100% condition or full of spirit.\n\nIt's often uttered with striking certain poses. See\n[here](https://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%82%AD%E3%83%BC%E3%83%B3).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/y2PA5.jpg)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T02:39:25.613",
"id": "57442",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T02:44:29.670",
"last_edit_date": "2018-03-22T02:44:29.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "57439",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57439
|
57442
|
57441
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57444",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "reading this sentence confused me (it's not that hard to do actually XD).\n\n彼はその子供がついてこられるようにゆっくり歩いた。\n\nCan i ask if the が in this sentence is actually acting like けど, a ぎゃくせつ if\nthats the word?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T03:00:30.920",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57443",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T03:15:52.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-が"
],
"title": "が in: 彼はその子供がついてこられるようにゆっくり歩いた",
"view_count": 68
}
|
[
{
"body": "The が is a subject marker. その子供 is the subject of ついてこられる.\n\nYou can parse it this way:\n\n> 彼は（その子供がついてこられるように）ゆっくり歩いた。 \n> \"He walked slowly, (so that the child could follow him.)\"\n\nYou could rephrase it as 「その子供がついてこられるように、彼はゆっくり歩いた。」\n\n彼は is the subject of ゆっくり歩いた. \"He walked slowly.\" This is the main clause. \nその子供がついてこられるように \"so that the child could follow him\" is a subordinate clause.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T03:15:52.667",
"id": "57444",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T03:15:52.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "57443",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
57443
|
57444
|
57444
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "57451",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm directly translating from Eng so I'm wondering if 作るworks. I'm only\nfamiliar with ~と友達に成りたい ＆ 友達ができたい。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T13:23:15.523",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57450",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T13:28:19.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"set-phrases",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Can you say 'make friends' using 作る？",
"view_count": 15881
}
|
[
{
"body": "No problem.\n\n「友達{ともだち} **を** 作{つく}る」 is a very comon phrase meaning \"to make (new)\nfriends\".\n\nAs always, just be careful with your **_particle_** choices.\n\n「友達 **に** なる」\n\n「友達 **が** できる」\n\nAmong the three particles in **bold** above, no two are interchangeable.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T13:28:19.370",
"id": "57451",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T13:28:19.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "57450",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
57450
|
57451
|
57451
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How do you say something along the lines of \"my class schedule follows the\nholidays of the year\" or \"my class schedule is dependent on the national\ncalender, including holidays.\n\n授業の定刻は国の休み日をついて is the best I can come up with for the first one. Not even\nsure if tsuku is the correct word.\n\nI have no idea what dependent would be. よって？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T13:59:22.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "57453",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T14:21:06.623",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"set-phrases",
"phrases"
],
"title": "How to say \"including\" or \"it follows\" for schedules and holidays etc",
"view_count": 78
}
|
[
{
"body": "I would use カレンダー[通]{どお}り or [暦]{こよみ}[通]{どお}り, as in...\n\n> 「私の(orうちの)学校のスケジュールは、カレンダー[通]{どお}りです。or [暦]{こよみ}[通]{どお}りです。」\n>\n> 「私の学校は、カレンダー通りに or 暦通りに休みがあります。」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-03-22T14:21:06.623",
"id": "57456",
"last_activity_date": "2018-03-22T14:21:06.623",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "57453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
57453
| null |
57456
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.