question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63117",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A boxer is watching the super featherweight champion fighting and praises his\nspeed:\n\n> あの速さにダメージを与えるため〝芯〟を射抜くのは[８]【フル】ラウンドでも難しい…！！ ベルトをとった あの王者の… 武器【スピード】 **の前では**\n> 。\n\nConsidering the context, I think that in the second sentence he is saying that\nwhat allowed the champion to win the belt is his speed. Could 〜の前では have the\nmeaning of \"thanks to\"? Otherwise, I don't know how to interpret it here. Is\nit a grammar structure I am unaware of? Has something been omitted? Is the\nsentence incomplete? Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-29T17:48:09.433",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63114",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-29T20:21:35.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of 〜の前では in the following sentence",
"view_count": 141
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think it's an incomplete sentence. The remaining part is something like:\n\n> ベルトをとったあの王者のスピードの前では勝てない\n>\n> ベルトをとったあの王者のスピードの前では無力だ\n\nThe では here tells you that the omitted phrase is based previous information.\nThat previous part builds up the image of the 王者's impressive strength due to\nhis speed. Therefore, we expect the following phrase to be the logical\nconclusion, that you cannot win against that strength (given normal\ncircumstances).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-29T20:21:35.100",
"id": "63117",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-29T20:21:35.100",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"parent_id": "63114",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63114
|
63117
|
63117
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63147",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The person the speaker is talking to previously warned of disaster if the the\nspeaker didn't do something, but the speaker did not want to break traditions\nand did not interfere. That person shows up again in front of the speaker\nafter that disaster did in fact occur.\n\n> other person 私の話を思い出して、ここに……魔を封印した場所に来たのですね？\n>\n> speaker: ここに来たのは、己が揺らがぬよう戒めるためです。\n>\n> speaker その他に意味などあり得ません。\n>\n> other person いい加減に分かってください！人間に地上界を治める資格などありません！\n\nYou came here to admonish me for being steadfast (to my beliefs).\n\n * ここに来たのは、己(me)が揺らがない様（を）戒めるためです。\n\nYou came here to admonish me in a resolute way.\n\n * ここに来たのは、己(you)が揺らがない様（に）戒めるためです。\n\nNormally it's pretty obvious from context who 己 is referring to, but i found\nit difficult in this case.\n\nthank you",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-29T19:43:52.390",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63116",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T07:15:29.930",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T05:47:41.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "22187",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"parsing"
],
"title": "who 己 is indicating in this sentence",
"view_count": 204
}
|
[
{
"body": "Judging from the context you provided, I can be pretty sure that it means\n_myself_.\n\n己{おのれ} could surely sometimes mean _oneself_ and sometimes _you_ , but their\n[registers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Register_\\(sociolinguistics\\)) are\nso different that we almost never confuse them in real settings. 己 means _you_\nin vulgar talks (or common in some dialect), and _oneself_ in elevated\nparlance.\n\nIn this case, it is clear that speaker is giving a formal, bookish line, not\nonly in form but in matter. Thus it is only natural to be interpreted as\n_oneself_ , in this case, _myself_.\n\n**PS** \nNot knowing the plot, I'm not sure whether the 己 means \"belief\" as in your\ntranslation, or \"spirit\", \"soul\", \"super-ego\" kind of thing (opposed to some\ndemon or evil).\n\n**PPS** \nThe translation of the second line:\n\n> ここに来たのは、己が揺らがぬよう戒めるためです。\n\nshould be literally like:\n\n> The reason I came here is to restrain myself lest it loosen/waver.\n\nThe accurate interpretation of 己, 揺らぐ, and 戒める is up to the context, though.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T02:47:04.597",
"id": "63147",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T07:15:29.930",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T07:15:29.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63116",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63116
|
63147
|
63147
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63159",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I saw these words a while ago but just now I decided to ask it here because I\ndidn't find the answer anywhere.\n\nAs the title says, I don't really know if there is a difference between\n母方【ははかた】 X 母系【ぼけい】, and 父方【ちちかた】 X 父系【ふけい】as well.\n\nThe sentences I've come across are:\n\n> 父方【ちちかた】の祖父【そふ】の米寿【べいじゅ】のお祝【いわ】いにマフラーを贈【おく】った。\n\nand\n\n> 母系【ぼけい】の祖母【そぼ】はその旧式【きゅうしき】のドレスを着る【きる】ことに固執【こしつ】する。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T03:05:02.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63119",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T10:13:20.703",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"words",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 母方 and 母系? The same question goes to 父方 and 父系",
"view_count": 197
}
|
[
{
"body": "I am attempting to answer this because there is not yet any answer to it, so\nplease help me understand, if someone has a better grasp of this topic than me\n(which certainly includes a lot of people on JSE)\n\n母方【ははかた】 and 母系【ぼけい】 - both are synonyms for \"maternal\" just as \n父方【ちちかた】 and 父系【ふけい】 are synonyms for \"paternal\"\n\nHowever 母方【ははかた】 and 父方【ちちかた】 have the literal meaning of \"on my\nmother's/father's **side** \", while \n母系【ぼけい】and 父系【ふけい】 have the literal meaning of \"in my mother's/father's\n**(familial) group** \".\n\nFor the purposes of discussing a person's individual relatives, for example,\n\"my grandfather on my father's side\" or \"my paternal grandfather\", there is\nlittle semantic difference. You can say either 父方【ちちかた】の祖父【そふ】 or\n父系【ふけい】の祖父【そふ】\n\nFor other topics though, such as \"patriarchy\" or \"matriliny\", or other such\nmore complex concepts, different concepts require one version over the other,\nfor example: \"matriarchy\" = 母系制 【ぼけいせい】 and \"partilocal\" = 父方居住【ちちかたきょじゅう】\n\nThere may also be issues where \"mothers-in-law\" or \"fathers-in-law\" and\nmembers of their family/issues relating to them require special wording, of\nwhich I am unaware.\n\nTo go into why one form is used over the other form for complex concepts, is\nbeyond my level of Japanese proficiency. Hopefully a linguist will pick up\nwhere I can no longer contribute.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T06:07:50.550",
"id": "63155",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T06:07:50.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63119",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "First, let me point out that your second example,\n\n> 母系の祖母はその旧式のドレスを着ることに固執する。\n\nis a very unnatural sentence. You could hardly say something like that, if not\nnever. When I searched 母系の祖母 I only found this example from [Tanaka\nCorpus](http://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Tanaka_Corpus), which contains\nmany errors and should not always be deemed as authoritative Japanese usage\n(see their disclaimer).\n\nInstead you should always say:\n\n> **父方** の祖父 _paternal grandfather_ \n> **母方** の祖母 _maternal grandmother_\n\nGenerally speaking, 母方／父方 is what you call your mother/father's house or\nkinship from your perspective, so you are mentally facing your parents'\ndirection. 母系／父系 means _matriline_ / _patriline_ , which is a line of descent\npassed down from your ancestors to you (they are genealogical terms). For this\nreason, 母系／父系 is usually used to describe hereditary, or inheritance matters,\nthat conceptualized in descending order, not when you call your grandparents.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T08:26:47.090",
"id": "63159",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T10:13:20.703",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T10:13:20.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63119",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63119
|
63159
|
63159
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was listening to the song 命に嫌われている and came across the following lyrics:\n\n> 寂しいなんて言葉でこの傷が **表せていい** ものか\n>\n> そんな意地ばかり抱え今日も一人ベッドに眠る\n\nI don’t understand what ていい is doing here. An attempt at a direct translation\nwould go something like “there’s no way it’s alright for one to be able to\nexpress their hurt by saying they’re lonely” but that sounds quite off to me.\nIf it had been 表していい I would understand, but 表せていい? How does ていい work with\npotential forms?\n\n(Lyrics taken from [this\nsite](https://utaten.com/lyric/%E5%88%9D%E9%9F%B3%E3%83%9F%E3%82%AF/%E5%91%BD%E3%81%AB%E5%AB%8C%E3%82%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B%E3%80%82/).)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T04:57:17.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63122",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-27T18:03:25.393",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T16:49:18.323",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"potential-form",
"rhetorical-questions"
],
"title": "ていい after potential form",
"view_count": 233
}
|
[
{
"body": "\"lonely\" should not be a sufficient word to express this hurt, with such\n(trivial) prides I go to bed alone again today\n\nIMHO, 表せていい is \"can be expressed\" but with ものか it should not be able to be\nexpressed there for I translate \"not a sufficient word to express\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T05:35:33.513",
"id": "63123",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T05:35:33.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32094",
"parent_id": "63122",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63122
| null |
63123
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63126",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In English conversations, when I listen to someone speak, I have a habit of\nintermittently uttering \"mhm\" just to let the other person know I'm listening\nto what he/she is saying. Is there a Japanese equivalent of this? I'm thinking\nof \"はい\", but I don't know if it will come off as being too stiff.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T05:52:02.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63124",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T08:14:58.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 20,
"tags": [
"conversations"
],
"title": "What is the Japanese equivalent of \"mhm\"?",
"view_count": 6181
}
|
[
{
"body": "yes, one way of indicating that you are listening and the other person should\ncontinue talking is by saying \"はい\". However your habit of saying \"mhm\" would\nnot be so out of place, actually. There is a Japanese equivalent in the ん\nsound. It's less \"courteous\" than saying \"はい\", but it is a typical \"I'm\nlistening\" noise.\n\nannnnnnd @leocreatini beat me to it in the comments :P",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T06:21:36.603",
"id": "63125",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T06:21:36.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
},
{
"body": "They're called aizuchi. はい is certainly one. うん is the more casual option.\nWikipedia has the following:\n\n> In the Japanese language, [Aizuchi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aizuchi)\n> (Japanese: 相槌 or あいづち, IPA: [aizu͍t͡ɕi]) are the frequent interjections\n> during a conversation that indicate the listener is paying attention or\n> understands the speaker. In linguistic terms, these are a form of phatic\n> expression. Aizuchi are considered reassuring to the speaker, indicating\n> that the listener is active and involved in the discussion.\n>\n> Aizuchi are frequently misinterpreted by non-native speakers as the listener\n> showing agreement or fully comprehending what is being said.\n>\n> Common aizuchi include:\n>\n> * hai (はい), ee (ええ), or un (うん) (yes, with varying degrees of formality)\n> * sō desu ne (そうですね) (I see.)\n> * sō desu ka (そうですか) (is that so?)\n> * hontō (本当), hontō ni (本当に), maji (マジ), or (in Kansai) honma (本真)\n> (really)\n> * naruhodo (なるほど) (I see, that's right)\n> * nodding\n>\n\n>\n> These can be compared to English \"yeah, yeah\", \"yeah, ok\", \"got it\", \"yep\",\n> \"uhuh\" or \"go on\", but are more pronounced and important in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T08:14:58.537",
"id": "63126",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T08:14:58.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11792",
"parent_id": "63124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 42
}
] |
63124
|
63126
|
63126
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63149",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm working in an IT environment, my supervisor explained that is not\n\"Development rules\" in developing/coding. It is about departments in a\ncompany...??? Somehow I still not understand.\n\nI looked at another site\n(<https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E9%96%8B%E7%99%BA%E4%BD%93%E5%88%B6>) but\nunclear too.\n\nThis is full sentence:\n\n> 開発体制をきちんと整えもっと仕事が進む状況にできればと思っています。\n\nCould anyone explain for me?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T09:14:59.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63127",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T04:11:03.653",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31550",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 開発体制?",
"view_count": 135
}
|
[
{
"body": "This 体制 means \"system\"、\"organization\".\n\n開発体制をきちんと整える means \"We(Our company) properly organize a system for research\nand development\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T10:19:55.483",
"id": "63128",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T11:47:07.427",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T11:47:07.427",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "63127",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "開発体制 refers to the structure of your development team. 体制 refers to the\nstructure of an organization, or how people are assigned to a certain project.\nIt has nothing to do with coding (style) guidelines. For example, 5人体制で開発する\nmeans five people are assigned to the project, サポート体制を作る means organizing a\nsupport team, and 24時間体制で開発する means your team is organized so that your\nproject is developed 24 hours a day.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T03:52:17.887",
"id": "63149",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T04:11:03.653",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T04:11:03.653",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63127",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63127
|
63149
|
63128
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63130",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What are the grammar rules for making verbs into \"to want\" form? ie 食べたい.\n\nI want to be able to say \"I want to visit hokkaido next summer.\" ie\n今度の夏休みに北海度に行きたいです。 is this correct?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T11:31:48.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63129",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T13:35:56.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32096",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "When to use ~たい for things such as 食べたい？",
"view_count": 161
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes it's correct.\n\nたい verbal auxiliary goes after the 連用形 of a verb:\n\n書く → 書き → 書きたい\n\n食べる → 食べ → 食べたい",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T13:35:56.833",
"id": "63130",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T13:35:56.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63129",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63129
|
63130
|
63130
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I would like to know what しっかり頑張ってこい means and if it has any difference (any\nextra nuance) with がんばって.\n\nAlso:\n\nWhy is こい (command form of くる) used?\n\nIn which situation do you use this expression?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T13:49:08.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63131",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-01T16:00:42.020",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T15:29:14.947",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "29677",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "Meaning of しっかり頑張ってこい",
"view_count": 1055
}
|
[
{
"body": "There was a question just a couple days ago about 呼んでくる, and the meaning of くる\nin that case, which might also apply here.\n\n[A little clarification about\n呼んでくる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/63020/a-little-\nclarification-about-%e5%91%bc%e3%82%93%e3%81%a7%e3%81%8f%e3%82%8b/63021#63021)\n\nWithout knowing the context of the しっかり頑張ってこい it's hard to know for sure\nwhether the **こい** is as you mentioned, an actual \"command to come (back)\" or\nwhether it is くる being used in its \"emotional\" sense, representing a\npsychological \"approach\" to the speaker, or \"growth/change\".\n\nThe major semantic difference is that **頑張って** (ください) is a simpler well\nwishing phrase that less emphatic, and doesn't make assumptions about the\nresults of the other person's efforts.\n\n**頑張ってこい** on the other hand, by including the \"command\" form of くる, can be\nthought of as more emphatic/assertive, more positive, possibly even predicting\nor insisting on the success of the other person.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T14:22:08.840",
"id": "63133",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T14:22:08.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63131",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "It is fine to say がんばって to anyone, but you can only use 頑張ってこい if you are\nhigher in the honorific status (otherwise it will be rude). This is because\n頑張ってこい is a command.\n\nしっかり means \"properly\", and thus you should also only use it if you are higher\non the honorific status. Both しっかり頑張って and しっかり頑張ってこい is possible. The former\nform is considered \"softer\". For example, women will tend to avoid しっかり頑張ってこい\nand instead prefer しっかり頑張って.\n\n〜てこい is a command to perform something. For example, one can also say\n洗ってこい、食べてこい、やってこい etc. The difference with 洗え、食べろ、やれ is that it implies you go\nsomewhere to perform these things, rather than doing it here.\n\nTo the point of @ericfromabeno, I agree. If somebody _can_ say 頑張ってこい (due to\nthe honorific relationship), but chooses 頑張って, then they are expressing the\nwish for you to succeed. They won't use this form if they are insisting on\nyour success. For example,\n\n```\n\n 「三等兵、危険な任務だが頑張って」 ← odd\n 「三等兵、危険な任務だが頑張ってこい」 ← natural\n 「決勝戦絶対に負けるなよ、頑張って」 ← odd\n 「決勝戦絶対に負けるなよ、しっかり頑張って」 ← less odd\n 「勝ち負け気にせず頑張って」 ← natural\n \n```\n\nI think the main difference is pressure. If you don't want to give someone\npressure, you use 頑張って. If you want to create a positive pressure you add しっかり\nor even ってこい. You can only create pressure without being rude if you are\n\"higher\" on the honorific status though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T15:17:33.513",
"id": "63192",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T15:17:33.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63131",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63131
| null |
63192
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a graphic design student and one of my designs is a pink 桃色 rose 薔薇 =\n(桃色薔薇). I read that Japanese is read right to left and also horizontally? I\nwant the design's first line to pink and under that rose. I just want to make\nsure it's correct. It is simply 桃色 and under it 薔薇? Or something else?\n\nSorry for such a simple question. I just need clarification. \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/V8ITl.png)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T14:11:28.237",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63132",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T04:47:13.777",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T04:47:13.777",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "32104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"orthography"
],
"title": "How would I write this for a graphic design?",
"view_count": 117
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your source was wrong IF you are talking about horizontally written Japanese.\n\nThere are two ways to write Japanese sentences (in terms of character\npositioning). If you are going to write your characters horizontally, you will\nwrite it like you do in English. Start in the top left, go right. When you\nfinish that line, drop down a row and continue.\n\nThe second way is what can be confusing to some (including your source). In\nthis second method, you start at the top right corner, and write each\nsuccessive character below the first until you finish the column, and then go\nleft one column, and repeat the process.\n\nBoth methods are so common that the spacing is done such that it should be\nvisibly obvious which format is being used.\n\nOf the two formats you included, the left format is written in the correct\norder. It should be noted, however, that because [桃色 is a の-type\nadjective](https://jisho.org/word/%E6%A1%83%E8%89%B2), you should have の in\nbetween your words for pink and flower like this:\n\n> 桃色 **の** 薔薇\n\nOtherwise it is grammatically incorrect.\n\n* * *\n\n**Recap:**\n\nJapanese written horizontally is read left to right, top to bottom.\n\nJapanese written vertically is read top to bottom, right to left.\n\n[This\nresource](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese/Japanese_writing_system#Vertical_and_horizontal_writing,_and_page_order)\nmight be helpful.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T14:24:28.797",
"id": "63134",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T14:40:55.710",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T14:40:55.710",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "63132",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63132
| null |
63134
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63137",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following is less a question of grammar or language but more of\nunderstanding and context, because I feel like I'm maybe missing something. I\nhave the following conversation/sequence of events. There is the Leader with\nher two subordinates, and due to anime shenanigans she just had a vision or\nsomething grip her. Note that both the leader and the subordinates have\nforgotten a log of their long lives. This is what follows:\n\n> **Leader:**\n>\n> 我は今ナニを…\n>\n> ...\n>\n> 記憶にあるか (line break) 二人とも\n>\n> (next page) 遠い過去…”我らと共にあった者”だ\n>\n> _shock on subordinates' faces_\n>\n> **Leader:**\n>\n> どうだ？\n>\n> _subordinates shake heads_\n>\n> _Leader disappointed_\n>\n> **Subordinate A:**\n>\n> でもねLeaderさま\n>\n> ”近くにいないとなんか落ち着かない” \n> ってのはわかる\n>\n> **Subordinate B:**\n>\n> 私にとっては \n> ”なにより必要で大切な”もの \n> …ですね\n>\n> **Leader:**\n>\n> あれは… \n> ”どうあっても我がもとになければならない”もの \n> …だ\n\nA rough translation of the first bit could be:\n\n> Leader: What the heck...was that my memories just now? And two of you too... \n> long time ago...with \"the person who used to be with us\".\n>\n> What about you?\n>\n> Subordinates: Nope.\n\nApart from the 二人とも which confused me and that I now think refers to the\nsubordinates and that とも is in this case \"also with\", this is mostly okay. The\nbigger problem was the fragmentation of the lines.\n\nBut the following kinda confuses me. So we know that the subordinates don't\nremember the mysterious person. But...\n\n> Sub A: But, Leader-sama...I do know how they say \"to feel uneasy when not at\n> someone's side\"... you know.\n>\n> Sub B: For me, it's \"indispensable and precious thing\"...is that so?\n>\n> Leader: That is...\"Something that must be at my side at all costs\"...is what\n> it is.\n\nThe above is just weird to me.\n\nI'm getting a feeling that they are trying to say that even though they don't\nknow or remember this person that Leader just remembered, they are cognizant\nthat Leader might be sick from being far away from this person, or that they\nmight be something precious to her. And then Leader corrects them a bit about\nwhat she actually feels. That she must have that person at her side again at\nall costs. Problem here is B saying that FOR HER it's a precious thing.\n\nOR\n\nThose two are trying to say that though they don't remember or have had the\nvision, they are familiar with the feeling of unease since someone is missing\n(in case of A) and that there is someone precious and indispensable (for B),\nand then Leader states how she also feels on this. But the problem here IMO is\nthat A doesn't say she feels like this, but that she knows/understands such a\npain. Hell TBH, that form \"quote\"ってのはわかる almost feels like she is saying that\nshe is aware of a saying on those lines.\n\nOR\n\nIt could be something entirely different, and all those もの's could be one of\nits many other meanings that I tend to forget about ;)\n\nSo what would be your interpretation of the final exchange? Unless I am\nmistaken about my interpretation of the part that precedes it.\n\nAlso...I'm not sure what's with them making pauses right before the です and だ\nbit. I'd have thought if they were having trouble saying it, the pause would\nbe sooner. But that's the least of my troubles.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T14:27:58.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63135",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T01:46:57.300",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-09T01:46:57.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "26839",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Interpreting the meaning/nuance of a conversation",
"view_count": 177
}
|
[
{
"body": "My sense in this dialogue is that the quotation marks are being used by each\ncharacter to try to describe their specific feelings or impressions, not as an\nattempt to quote some other source...\n\nand the \"mono\"'s are simply a placeholder for this unknown person from their\nmemories, so \"someone\" seems like the best fit, to me.\n\n> 我{われ}は今{いま}ナニを…\n\nWhat was I just...\n\n> 記憶{きおく}にあるか二人{ふたり}とも\n\nDo you have memories too, you two?\n\n> 遠{とお}い過去{かこ}… ”我{われ}らと共{とも}にあった者{もの}”だ\n\nin the distant past... (a sense/feeling of)\"someone with us\"?\n\n> どうだ？\n\nWell?\n\n(subordinates shake heads, Leader disappointed.)\n\n> でもねLeaderさま、”近{ちか}くにいないとなんか落{お}ち着{つ}かない” ってのはわかる。\n\nHowever, Leader, I do understand/get (the feeling of) \"being restless because\nthey're not nearby.\"\n\n> 私{わたし}にとっては ”なにより必要{ひつよう}で大切{たいせつ}な”もの …ですね。\n\nFor me, (there's a sense of) \"someone important, who I need more than\nanything\"...\n\n```\n\n *the ですね。 here is being used as an informative voice, not one seeking clarification.\n \n```\n\n> あれは… ”どうあっても我{われ}がもとになければならない”もの …だ\n\nThat's... Someone who, \"Whatever happens, has to be at my side.\" ...\n\nAll of the ...'s are used exactly as we use them in English, to indicate a\nlong and thoughtful pause. The reason some of them occur before the copula is\nthat this pattern of speech demonstrates thought/hesitancy more than if they\nfollowed the copula (because that would allow the next speaker to fill that\ngap in such a way that it would not come across the same way.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T16:20:09.410",
"id": "63137",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T16:48:09.377",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T16:48:09.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "29347",
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63135",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63135
|
63137
|
63137
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63138",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not sure about the first part of\n\n> 「中３の２５％、短文も理解困難」\n\nDo you read 中 as ちゅう here? 25% of 3 would be 0.75% if I am not mistaken.\nTherefore does it mean something like 「around 0.75% of the population does\nhave trouble with reading and understanding short sentences」? But then...\nwouldn't one just write 0.75% in the beginning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T16:19:08.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63136",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T07:23:13.013",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 12,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"readings",
"numbers"
],
"title": "What does 中３の２５％ exactly mean?",
"view_count": 1513
}
|
[
{
"body": "yes, you read 中 as ちゅう , and 中３ as ちゅうさん\n\n中３ is a shorthand way of writing 中学校3年生 which is **(Japanese) Junior High\nSchool 3rd graders** or in other words, 9th graders. \nso 中３の２５％ would be \"25% of (Japanese) 9th graders\"\n\nso the full translation of\n\n> 「中３の２５％、短文も理解困難」\n\nis\n\n\"Twenty-five percent of 9th graders have difficulty understanding short\npassages.\"\n\nThanks to @Mars and @Eiríkr Útlendi for suggesting the more accurate word\nchoices.\n\nAfter all this editing, I realized one final point that can be made: in the\nexpression 短文 **も** 理解困難, **も** carries the meaning \"even\", so the most apt\ntranslation would be:\n\n\"Twenty-five percent of 9th graders have difficulty understanding even short\npassages.\"",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T16:38:18.987",
"id": "63138",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T07:23:13.013",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T07:23:13.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "29347",
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63136",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 20
}
] |
63136
|
63138
|
63138
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63144",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this sentence :\n\n> こうして **見ている分には** 、本当の親子そのものにしか見えぬ。\n\nI looked up on this very website the meaning of 見ている分には, but I'm still not\nsure as to what it really means.\n\nIs there a way to translate it into english, or is it just fine to take it as\na way to emphasize the verb 見る ?\n\nFor instance, would it bear the same meaning if I were to say\n\nこうして見ていると、本当の親子そのものにしか見えぬ ?\n\nEDIT: As I said: **I looked up on this very website the meaning of 見ている分には,\nbut I'm still not sure as to what it really means. Meaning: I ve read the\nsubject marked as duplicate.**",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T18:13:33.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63139",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T15:58:30.397",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T15:48:53.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "20501",
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "A better understanding of 分には",
"view_count": 438
}
|
[
{
"body": "The meaning is really close. But there is a deeper nuance with 分には.\n\nBasically, 分 means \"part\", like a portion of something we divided. So it\nliterally means:\n\n> こうして見ている分には : in the portion/part that I see doing (like) this, blahblah\n\nYou can see it being almost the same as 範囲. It creates \"borders\" around what\nyou see (見ている) and the rest of the sentence is about what is within these\nborders.\n\nWith と, it's a \"plain conditional\", meaning it's just the same as \"if\" in\nEnglish.\n\nI admit they would probably be translated the same way if we wanted to write\ngood English though.\n\n> こうして見ている分には、本当の親子そのものにしか見えぬ。 : If we look (at them) like this, they look\n> like nothing but real 親子",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T23:25:20.980",
"id": "63144",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T23:25:20.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63139",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63139
|
63144
|
63144
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63142",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "\n\n今のうちにサインもらっとけとでも言うんスか！？\n\nWhat I thought he was saying: \"Are you saying we should get his signature now\nwhile we still can!?\"\n\nI was stuck for several days on this sentence having trouble making sense of\nit, suspecting that there was some contraction I was having trouble with. I\nsuspected that もらっとけ was a contraction of もらっておけ but wasn't sure where else to\ngo from there.\n\nI was also wondering is what is the grammatical meaning of having the form ておけ\nhere, instead of ておこう or something? I've noticed that other questions like\n[this\none](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13892/%E3%81%97%E3%81%A8%E3%81%91-and-\nsentence-translation) mention the ておけ form but doesn't really explain why the\nsentence uses that form specifically.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T18:24:16.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63140",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T22:03:33.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30813",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"set-phrases",
"contractions"
],
"title": "サインもらっとけとでも言う - Breaking this phrase down",
"view_count": 156
}
|
[
{
"body": "Then by the magic of stackexchange (not the first time it's happened), when I\nstarted writing up this question it suddenly clicked in my head that と\nfollowing け was the quoting particle for 言う, and then I discovered that\nとでも言うんスか is simply a variant of [this set\nphrase](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/56145/30813), meaning pretty much\nwhat I thought it meant, \"are you saying that x?\".\n\nFake Edit Again: Found [another\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4839/how-many-verb-\nendings-to-express-do-this-please/4841#4841) explaining that ておけ is an\nimperative form. In other words what he is actually saying is \"Are you telling\nme to get his signature now while I still can!?\" and I believe I managed to\nanswer my own question in the process of writing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T18:24:16.663",
"id": "63141",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T18:24:16.663",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30813",
"parent_id": "63140",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Pretty good effort, I don't think I've ever seen someone hit on the answer to\ntheir question AS they are writing it. ^_^\n\nA couple of points though: 今のうち has more of a meaning of \"right away/right\nnow\", with \"while I can\" being a more casual interpretation. And とでも before\nthe verb carries the meaning of \"or something\"\n\nAlso, according to what Chocolate said in your link, \"～ておけ is the imperative\nof ～ておく which means to do and leave it as it is.\" .... therefor I think the\nimplicit meaning is more along the lines of\n\n`\"Are you telling me to get his signature right away and get it over with, or\nsomething!?\"`\n\n(... although now that I think about it, maybe what she means is that ～ておく\ncarries the meaning of having achieved the goal of the action... which is hard\nto convey in conversational English... maybe \"\"Are you telling me to go and\nmake sure to get his signature right away, or something!?\")",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-30T20:23:18.563",
"id": "63142",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T22:03:33.203",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T22:03:33.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "29347",
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63140",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63140
|
63142
|
63141
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63150",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Just wanted to know how to apply the りする to a verb when saying something like\n\"I want to visit japan and eat food.\" I've seen \"今度の 夏休みに 川に行ったり、海に行ったりします\"\nbut is it as simple as putting り after the ta-form for all things listed prior\nto the last action?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T02:23:14.270",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63146",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T04:33:42.583",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32096",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"kanji"
],
"title": "What's the purpose of ta-form +りする and how to use it?",
"view_count": 510
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can use 「～たり～たりします」 \"do things like ~~ and ~~\" to list two or more\nactions. So your sentence means...\n\n> 今度の夏休みに川に行っ **たり** 、海に行っ **たりします** 。 \n> In my next summer vacation I'll do things like going to the river and going\n> to the beach. (～たり～たり implies you'll probably do other things too.)\n\nIf you want to say \"I **want to** do things like ~~ and ~~\", you can use\n「～たり～たりしたいです」, as in:\n\n> 今度の夏休みに川に行っ **たり** 、海に行っ **たりしたいです** 。 \n> In my next summer vacation I **want to** do things like going to the river\n> and going to the beach. (～たり～たり implies you probably want to do other things\n> too.)\n\n* * *\n\nTo say \"I want to visit Japan and eat food\", you could use the て form for\nconnecting the two verb phrases, and the たい form for \"want to~~\" (e.g.\n食べたい、飲みたい、見たい、行きたい...), as in:\n\n> 日本に行っ **て** 、（日本の）食べ物を食べ **たい** です。 \n> I want to visit Japan and (then) eat the food (there).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T04:27:07.347",
"id": "63150",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T04:33:42.583",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T04:33:42.583",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63146",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63146
|
63150
|
63150
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63158",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Every society has its own way of talking about socioeconomic class.\n\nIn America/Canada, people talk about the \"poor\", \"(lower/upper) middle class\",\nand \"upper class\", as well as the \"1%\" and \".1%\"; basing everything off of\neconomic levels alone.\n\nIn places like the the UK however, and pardon the fact I'm not a brit, they\ntalk more about the \"working class\", which including everyone who mainly does\nlow skilled jobs and lives off a wage alone, and contrast it with a \"middle\nclass\" of people who are more specialized and less bound to an employer. A\ndistinction that of course often results in people such as myself getting\nconfused when reading the guardian, seeing sentences like \"and it was vary\nunexpected that Corbyn picked up so many middle class voters\". :)\n\nGiven this distinction I'm found myself quite curious: How do Japanese people\ntalk, and in doing so, think about, socioeconomic class? What terminology do\nthey use? What aspect do they focus on (USA = income, UK = role)?\n\nPS. Sorry if I deeply misunderstand what \"working\" and \"middle\" class refers\nto, british people whom may be reading this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T03:28:39.517",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63148",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T07:49:36.997",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T03:39:04.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "17968",
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"culture"
],
"title": "How do Japanese people think/talk about socioeconomic classes?",
"view_count": 862
}
|
[
{
"body": "Social (hierarchical) class, in general terms, is called 階層. The occupation-\nbased classification (the \"role class\" you called) is in particular called 階級.\n\nThus,\n\n * 上流階級 _upper class_\n * 中産階級／中流階級 _middle class_\n * 労働者階級 _working class_\n\nAnd the income-based classes are referred to as -層 (階層 itself is not used as\npart of words).\n\n * 富裕層 _the rich (wealthy class)_\n * 中間層 _middle(-income) class_\n * 貧困層 _the poor (underclass)_\n\n中間層 and 中流階級 are often interchangeable like English \"middle class\", but\nswapping the combination of words is uncommon.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T05:37:50.823",
"id": "63154",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T05:37:50.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63148",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Role focused class structure is not a common concept used to describe modern\nJapan. Neither really income-based, at least from maybe the 50s up to the 90s\n(see\n[一億総中流](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%80%E5%84%84%E7%B7%8F%E4%B8%AD%E6%B5%81)).\nHowever, recently the word 格差社会 picked up, and there is a lot more talk about\n貧困層 (the poor), 富裕層 (the rich) and 格差の固定化 (decreasing social mobility). I\nguess income-based classes are starting to become a more common concept.\n\nThat said \"elites\" is a very socially embedded concept. 学歴社会 (essentially\nclass structure by academic (exam) achievement) has been a core part of Japan\nfor long. These classes then translate to 「一流サラリーマン」(people who get jobs at\nprestigious (and normally large) companies) and 「三流サラリーマン」(people who get job\nat less prestigious (normally SMEs)). The lowest on this ladder is 「フリーター」who\nsurvives on temporary jobs. There is one class lower than this though, which\nwould be 「ニート」(NEET). Words like 一流サラリーマン, 三流サラリーマン are more like slangs and\nare not part of a formal vocabulary.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T07:49:36.997",
"id": "63158",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T07:49:36.997",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63148",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63148
|
63158
|
63158
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63152",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I get that 会え is to meet and いい is good but a bit confused on the たら part?\nLooked it up and it's like a conditional formatting for a verb?\n\nSo would the sentence translate to something like, it would be good to meet\nyou?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T04:53:49.073",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63151",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T08:45:00.687",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32121",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does 会えたらいいです mean",
"view_count": 212
}
|
[
{
"body": "たら being \"conditional\" means that it imparts a sense of \"if X then Y\".\n\nSo: 会 **える** = **can** meet, たら = if/then, いい = good,\n\n> 会えたらいいです = \"If we can meet, then it'd be good.\"\n\nOr more naturally in English:\n\n> **\"It'd be good if we could meet.\"** \n> or **\"I hope we can meet.\"** \n> or **\"I hope I can see you.\" / \"I'd like to meet you.\"**\n\n(depending on context, one of these might feel more natural than the others,\nfor example, a business setting vs. a friend get-together vs. a date)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T05:09:45.310",
"id": "63152",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T05:09:45.310",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63151",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63151
|
63152
|
63152
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 日本語を習う時はローマ字を使わない方が良いと思われる。 \n> 日本の将来の見込みは暗いように思われる。 \n> 彼は金持ちであるように思われる。\n\nWhy does the first one use と and the second and third one use ように?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T05:14:29.237",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63153",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T13:40:53.747",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T05:22:43.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "I need help with those sentences: 「～と思われる」「～ように思われる」",
"view_count": 635
}
|
[
{
"body": "My understanding of these sentences is:\n\n1) When learning Japanese it is thought to be good to avoid using romaji. (the\nmeaning is that it helps not using romaji, making an effort to use kanji or\nKatakana instead); \n2) The future of Japan is thought to be dark. \n3) He is thought to be rich./It seems like he is thought to be rich\n\nIn the first one と is more direct, while using ように思われる is a softer way to\nexpress an opinion (it seems like). I don't think it reflects much in the\nEnglish translation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-02-16T19:34:37.140",
"id": "65540",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-16T22:31:46.347",
"last_edit_date": "2019-02-16T22:31:46.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "32984",
"parent_id": "63153",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "IMO:\n\n 1. と思われる indicates a slightly higher confidence compared to ように思われる\n 2. ように思われる indicates it's your perception\n\n(2) probably needs some explanation. If you say 恥ずかしがっていると思われる then you are\nimplicitly asserting that the state 恥ずかしがっている exists. This could be offensive,\nbut if you say 恥ずかしがっているように思われる then it emphasizes that \"it only looks like\nthat to you\", and can therefore be a softer statement. E.g.\n\"昇進を逃して悔しがっていると思われる\" could be more offensive than \"昇進を逃して悔しがっているように思われる\"\nbecause in the latter you are emphasizing that it merely looks like that to\nyou.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-05-06T13:40:53.747",
"id": "94389",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T13:40:53.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63153",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63153
| null |
94389
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The most commonly cited one is Konnichiwa, but knowing that is time specific,\ncan it be used generically in all hours of the day as a \"hello\" instead of a\nspecific \"good afternoon\"? Ohayou and Konbanwa doesn't seem to hold the same\nnuance to me as a standard greeting and more of greeting your coworkers or\nfriends in the morning/evening.\n\nAny generic greetings like these informal greetings such as 'domo' or 'osu' or\n'ya/yo'?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T07:31:13.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63157",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T15:00:31.930",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-02T15:00:31.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"colloquial-language",
"word-requests",
"formality",
"greetings"
],
"title": "Generic Japanese greeting new people?",
"view_count": 303
}
|
[
{
"body": "Domo and yo works (osu sounds weird unless you are both in a martial arts\nclub. Ya as an informal greeting is archaic). You can also use ou.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T14:56:27.657",
"id": "63190",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T14:56:27.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63157",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63157
| null |
63190
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_1130.html?utm_int=news_contents_tokushu_002>\n\nThe following sentence: 死産や流産のあと「早く忘れた方がいい」「次の子どもを」と言われ、傷つく母親たち。\n\nMy attempt at translation: \"After a stillbirth or miscarriage, it is said by\nwounded parents 'It's better to quickly forget' or '[think about] the next\nbaby'\".\n\nWhat irritates me is the lack of the に particle in と言われ 傷つく母親たち. Id expect it\nto be と言われ 傷つく母親たちに。\n\nI could also imagine it being translated as \"After a miscarriage or\nstillbirth, there are wounded parents by whom it is said '...'...\"\n\nBut I also must admit that Im a bit confused by the conjunctive form 言われ.\nThere is no second verb which would make it necessary.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T09:26:53.033",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63161",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T12:17:49.630",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T12:17:49.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "10045",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "[...]と言われ、傷つく母親たち - Was the に left out here or is it something else?",
"view_count": 87
}
|
[
{
"body": "The entirety of 死産や流産のあと「早く忘れた方がいい」「次の子どもを」と言われ、傷つく modifies 母親たち。言われ is the\n連用形 of 言われる, and connects to 傷つく. (Semantically 言われ、傷つく = 言われて、傷つく)\n\nTherefore the sentence means \"mothers who are hurt by others telling them that\nthey should quickly forget, or hope for another child, after a stillbirth or\nmiscarriage.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T11:38:20.150",
"id": "63164",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T11:38:20.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"parent_id": "63161",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63161
| null |
63164
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63181",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm watching the anime ひぐらしのなく頃に. There's a character in it who greets people\nwith おはよう **です**. At first I thought it was just a cute affectation, but then\nI wondered, if おはようございます is okay then why not おはようです?\n\nThere seem to be quite a few hits on Google for this phrase. Is it a different\nlevel of politeness? Is it a regional thing or is it just weird?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T10:55:44.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63162",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T03:13:35.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"greetings"
],
"title": "Is おはようです just weird",
"view_count": 693
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think おはようです is a casual way of saying おはようございます and sensible adults don't\nuse it , so you had better not use it to unfamiliar or elderly people. However\nyou can use it to elderly people, if you are familiar with them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T13:44:45.207",
"id": "63168",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T13:50:53.623",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T13:50:53.623",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "63162",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> I wondered, if おはようございます is okay then why not おはようです?\n\nGrammatically, おはよう is a contraction of おはようございます, which is a Western dialect\nform otherwise should be おはやくございます in Standard Japanese. Since おはよう as such is\nnot a valid word except for this fixed idiom, you can attach nothing to おはよう\ngrammatically.\n\n * [～うございます - keigo い-adjectives](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/765/7810)\n * [Historical prospective of ウ音便 transformation (e.g. 有難く => 有難う)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42890/7810))\n\n> Is it a different level of politeness? Is it a regional thing or is it just\n> weird?\n\nContrary to what was said in the previous paragraph, strictly speaking, です is\nnot prohibited to be attached to any phrases to make polite direct quotation\nout of them, and you can certainly treat it as a simplified polite ending by\ntaking over this grammar. This usage is neither conventional nor standard in\nStandard Japanese, so you can think it of a mildly broken grammar. A girl\nspeaks in off-point grammar is, some kind of, sign of cuteness.\n\n * [ですの](https://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%81%A7%E3%81%99%E3%81%AE)（ニコニコ大百科）\n\nAdditionally, some dialects indeed use this versatile です as their normal way\nof speaking. See:\n\n * [アニメキャラの「やってやるです」みたいな言い回しの文法性について（仮）](https://togetter.com/li/34354)\n * [～するです。って方言ですか？](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1481985769)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T03:13:35.713",
"id": "63181",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T03:13:35.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63162",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63162
|
63181
|
63181
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63165",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For full context:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_1130.html?utm_int=news_contents_tokushu_002>\n\nThe sentence in question:\nその後、適切なケアを受けられないと、「次の子どもを愛せない」など深刻なケースにつながることが分かってきました。\n\nMy attempt at translation: We found out that afterwards, if they cant undergo\nappropriate care, it can severe cases where they cant love the next child.\n\nThe way I translated 適切なケアを受けられない a が instead of an を would be needed. But\nmaybe I just misinterpreted the whole thing, that's why IM asking here ^^\n\nFurthermore, I couldn't really find an entry on jisho for 愛せない. All I found\nwas this <https://jisho.org/search/%E6%84%9B%E3%81%9B%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84> but\nit leads to a dead link ^^ I just assumed that it would mean \"to love\" but I\ncouldn't find confirmation anywhere, especially since I must admit that I cant\nreally use goo jisho...^^\n\nAnd finally, just on a sidenote: Why is 「次の子どもを愛せない」 put into brackets? The\nway I used it it's kind of a relative attribute, but it seems to be more of a\nquotation from an interview or the like.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T11:00:32.027",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63163",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T12:07:07.507",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T11:20:24.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "10045",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-を",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Why is there を coupled with potential form?",
"view_count": 127
}
|
[
{
"body": "The potential form can use を and it is generally equivalent to using が.\nIronically, you asked about this before in the similar medical context [How\ndoes the passive function in this\nsentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/53608/how-does-the-\npassive-function-in-this-sentence). You can read more here: [The difference\nbetween が and を with the potential form of a\nverb](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/609/the-difference-\nbetween-%E3%81%8C-and-%E3%82%92-with-the-potential-form-of-a-verb)\n\n愛する + potential + negation = 愛せる + negation = 愛せない\n\nI think the brackets are just used to more clearly indicate the type of things\nなど is referring to. A style thing so to say.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T12:07:07.507",
"id": "63165",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T12:07:07.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"parent_id": "63163",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63163
|
63165
|
63165
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63169",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The sentence in question: 入院先の聖隷浜松病院が設けてくれました。\n\nFor Full context:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_1130.html?utm_int=news_contents_tokushu_002>\n\nMy attempt at translation: \"The...hospital has made preparations/prepared\nitself.\"\n\nOn <https://jisho.org/search/moukeru> is a transitive verb, but here it seems\nto be used in an intransitive way since there is no を + object phrase\nattached. Did I interprete this correctly? I didnt see this pattern before, I\nthink, so I wanted to have it confirmed ^^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T13:24:17.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63166",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T15:09:13.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Is this enough to make intransitive use of the transitive 設ける?",
"view_count": 64
}
|
[
{
"body": "> つらい心境に陥った女性を支えたのは、出産直後に、亡くなった息子と一緒に過ごした時間でした。入院先の聖隷浜松病院が設けてくれました。\n\n設け(る) is transitive. The object of 設けてくれました is 亡くなった息子と一緒に過ごした時間 in the\nprevious sentence. It's left out since it's obvious from the context.\n\n入院先の聖隷浜松病院が（それを = 亡くなった息子と一緒に過ごす時間を）設けてくれました。\n\nThe hospital provided (it = time to spend with the stillborn baby).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T15:09:13.327",
"id": "63169",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T15:09:13.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63166",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63166
|
63169
|
63169
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63174",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The sentence in question: 亡くなったことを知った当初は息子と会うことは考えられなかったという女性。\n\nFor full context:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_1130.html?utm_int=news_contents_tokushu_002>\n\nMy attempt at translation: \"A woman who knew it had died and originally\ncouldn't think of meeting the child. [now follows her dialogue, see the\narticle)\"\n\nSo, first off, I don't know whether I should treat these は in the sentence as\ntopic or contrast markers. In my translation I more or less just tried to\nfigure out a halfway meaningful translation, because I was even more confused\nby 当初 preceding the first は. As I understood the content, this woman already\nknew the child was dead before it was born, and even though she couldn't\nimagine meeting it, she then asked for it (see context). Thats why I related\n当初 to the 息子と会うことは考えられなかった part, in a way. But as I said, I'm thoroughly\nclueless on how to deal with this sentence correctly^^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T15:32:57.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63170",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T16:44:55.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to interprete these は and parse the sentence",
"view_count": 75
}
|
[
{
"body": "> **亡くなったことを知った当初は息子と会うことは考えられなかった** という女性。\n\nFirst of all, we can see that the whole bolded part is linked to the so called\n\"quotation particle\" と. So it's all what the 女性 \"says\" (いう).\n\n> 亡くなったことを知った当初\n\nIf we take this part individually, we can translate it literally by something\nlike \" _at first/the beginning (当初) I knew (知った) about the fact (こと) (he) died\n(亡くなった)_ \" which would be \" _at the moment I knew he died_ \" in (more or less)\ngood English.\n\n> 息子と会うことは考えられなかった\n\nThis part can be interpreted as \" _I couldn't think (考えられなかった) about the fact\n(こと) of meeting with my son (息子と会う)_ \" = \" _I couldn't think about seeing my\nson_ \".\n\nNow you can just put the parts together and you something like:\n\n> A woman who says at the moment she knew her son passed away, she couldn't\n> think about seeing him.\n\nBasically the woman was told her son was dead because she didn't feel it\nanymore, and when she \"gave birth\" to her dead son, the 助産師 asked her if she\nwould see him or not.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T16:44:55.217",
"id": "63174",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T16:44:55.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63170",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63170
|
63174
|
63174
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63172",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The sentence in question: 看護婦さんたちがたくさん声かけをしてくれ、じゃあ会ってみようと。\n\nFor full context:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_1130.html?utm_int=news_contents_tokushu_002>\n\nMy attempt at translation: \"The nurses give plenty of sayings (help with\nconsolidating words?), let us meet one.\"\n\nI must admit this translation is almost as good as none. Im really clueless\nhow to deal with this. Before, the article switched between what seems to me\nlike a dialogue between a patient and a nurse and descriptions what happened\nin between (the roles are highlighted through the coloring of the\ntextbackground, green being the patient and red the nurse). However, what\nfollows in this \"nursepart\" doesnt fit the pretext. It sounds more like a\nnarrator giving a summary.\n\nHowever, even so, I cant make much sense of all this. I must also admit that I\ndont really know what this concluding と in じゃあ会ってみようと does ^^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T16:02:44.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63171",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T17:04:05.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does 声かけをしてくれ mean?",
"view_count": 169
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can understand it as...\n\n> 看護婦さんたちがたくさん声かけをしてくれて、『じゃあ、会ってみよう』と（思いました or 決めました etc.）。\n\nThe nurses suggested to me many times (that I should meet the baby), and/so I\nthought / decided, \"Then, I'll meet (the baby).\"\n\n声かけをする (similar to 声をかける) has a few meanings. I think here it's used to mean\n\"to make a suggestion\" or \"to encourage\".\n\nA verb phrase like 思いました or 決めました is left out at the end. The と is quotative.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T16:19:53.490",
"id": "63172",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-01T17:04:05.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-01T17:04:05.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63171",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63171
|
63172
|
63172
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63184",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> お金が足りなくて、本が買えませんでした。\n\nShouldn't it be:\n\n> お金が足り _ないで_ 、本が買えませんでした。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T18:12:20.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63175",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T07:04:40.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32127",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"negation"
],
"title": "Why is it なくて and not ないで",
"view_count": 231
}
|
[
{
"body": "ないで doesn't stand for reason/cause (but a condition without the object). Now,\nin this example, shortage of money is the reason why you couldn't buy the\nbook. So, you can't use it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T07:04:40.317",
"id": "63184",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T07:04:40.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "63175",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63175
|
63184
|
63184
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63196",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Big boss leader with his cronies is looking for something and says:\n\n> 先程の赤いおさげが渡してきたデータによるとあの海岸沿いの何処からしい\n>\n> **邪魔をするOrganisationなる** ”羽虫”もいるようだがすべて轢き潰して虱潰しにすれば見つかるであろう\n\nNow IMO this basically boils down to:\n\n> according to the data we got from the pig tailed one, it (what they are\n> searching for) is somewhere along this coast.\n>\n> Then there is also those gnats from the meddlesome Organisation, but if we\n> smush them one by one, we will be discovered.\n\nThe weird bit is the 邪魔をするOrganisationなる”羽虫” specifically \"Organisationなる\".\nWhy would you mate a noun and なる without the particle. And I don't really see\nに fitting in there. Unless she is trying to say something like \"Insects who'll\nturn out to be the troublesome organization\" or something.\n\nSo what's up with that なる?\n\nAlso I'm not 100% on who 見つかる refers to (the thing they are looking or them)\nbuuut I can save that for later.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T18:42:08.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63176",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T17:32:53.273",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26839",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "The role/meaning of なる in 邪魔をするOrganisationなる”羽虫”",
"view_count": 146
}
|
[
{
"body": "That なる is a auxiliary verb of heresay, in short, the same as という, and the\nsubject for 見つかる is the object the speaker is searching for.\n\nI'm not really sure how to interpret \"邪魔をするOrganisation\", but it seems to me\ncomparing a certain organization called \"Organisation\" that disturbs the\nspeaker's group to gnats.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T06:51:07.870",
"id": "63183",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T06:51:07.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "63176",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 邪魔をするOrganisationなる\"羽虫\" \n> a \"gnat\" called _Organisation_ that disturbs us\n\nThis なる is the attributive form of the archaic copula なり. In modern Japanese,\n`AなるB` is a stiff and literary way of saying \"B in A\", \"B that is A\", \"B known\nas A\" or \"B called A\", etc.\n\nFrom 明鏡国語辞典:\n\n> ### なり\n>\n> ② 《主に連体形「なる」の形で》 \n> ㋐ 《場所を表す語に付いて》そこに存在する意を表す。…にある。「自らの内なる思い」「駿河なる富士の高嶺」 \n> ㋑ 《名詞に付いて》その名を持つ意を表す。…という。「ロートリンゲンなる王国」「前衛芸術なるもの」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T17:32:53.273",
"id": "63196",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T17:32:53.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63176",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63176
|
63196
|
63196
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There has been a post for the difference between にしたら and として and にとって, but I\nhaven't been able to find anything about the phrase の上では which also supposedly\nmeans \"from the viewpoint of\" or \"according to\" So what's the difference here?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T20:06:22.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63177",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T07:32:58.597",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29817",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What's the difference between にしたら and の上では",
"view_count": 79
}
|
[
{
"body": "(person) にしたら means \"from the viewpoint of (person)\" in the sense that you\nwould think/feel that way if you were in his/her position.\n\nの上では doesn't take person to begin with and doesn't mean that. It takes objects\nlike theory, imagination, law, or document, and means \"in theory\", \"in\nimagination\", \"in law\" and \"as long as the document says\" respectively, as\nopposed to reality.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T07:32:58.597",
"id": "63186",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T07:32:58.597",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "63177",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63177
| null |
63186
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63180",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am aware that [there is another\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/28317/sentence-\nending-%E3%81%A7) that talks about sentence-ending で. But the example in that\nquestion is in an informal setting.\n\nI have an example of a sentence-ending で in a [newspaper\nheadline](https://www.sankei.com/economy/news/181127/ecn1811270021-n1.html):\n\n> カウチシート初導入 全日空がＡ３８０型機就航 来年５月に成田発着で\n\nI know what the sentence means, and I am guessing the ending で is somehow\nstill a variation of します, as it was explained in the answer to the [other\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/28317/sentence-\nending-%E3%81%A7). Is this correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-01T20:40:44.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63178",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T02:43:08.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "Sentence-ending で in a formal context",
"view_count": 617
}
|
[
{
"body": "In newspaper headlines, the most important information is placed at the top,\nand particles and verb phrases are often left out. \nSo the で in your example is a normal particle で, rather than a sentence-ending\nで. You can rearrange the word order and read it this way...\n\n> 来年５月に、成田発着(便)で、全日空がＡ３８０型機 **を** 就航 **して** 、カウチシート **を** 初(めて)導入 **します** 。\n\nFor more about \"headline grammar\", see these threads:\n\n * [what is the name of the abbreviated writing style used in newspapers?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14512/9831)\n * [why does the following title end \"...守られる\" and not \"守られている\"? just to save space?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23785/9831)\n * [What form is あり?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/35942/9831)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T02:43:08.387",
"id": "63180",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T02:43:08.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63178",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63178
|
63180
|
63180
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63188",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following sentence is from [this\narticle](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_1130.html?utm_int=news_contents_tokushu_002)\non NHK Web特集\n\n> 数えてみたら、息子と一緒に過ごせる時間がとても限られていることに気がつきました。\n\nMy attempt at translation:\n\n> When one tries to count it, they took care that the time shared with the son\n> is very limited.\n\nI'm pretty sure that 数えてみたら here basically means what I wrote above, meaning\nsomething along the lines of\n\n> If one tries to measure the amount of time...\n\nBut since it sounds very cumbersome in my translation, I wanted to ask for\nconfirmation.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T09:42:06.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63187",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T14:20:06.217",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-02T14:20:06.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "20172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs",
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "What does this 数えてみたら mean?",
"view_count": 195
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 数えてみたら、息子と一緒に過ごせる時間がとても限られていることに気がつきました。\n\nYour translation of 数えてみたら meaning \"When one tries to count it\" is spot on,\nalthough in this context it more likely means \"When **I** tried to count it\" —\nyou misinterpreted the (implied) subject of the sentence, because I think you\nmixed up 気がつく \"to notice / realize / become aware\" with 気をつける \"to take care\".\n\n> 数えてみたら、息子と一緒に過ごせる時間がとても限られていることに **気がつきました** \n> Trying to count it, **I became aware** of the fact that the time I was able\n> to spend with my son was very limited",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T14:15:52.933",
"id": "63188",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T14:15:52.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "63187",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63187
|
63188
|
63188
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "In this [answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/5926/32056) it is said\nthat the usage of なくて is narrower than ないで(ないで can always replace なくて\naccording to the logic explained and is ambiguous because of that)\n\nBut in this [question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/63175/why-\nis-it-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A6-and-not-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%A7), the\nanswer says that ないで cannot replace なくて in the sentence discussed.\n\nWhat is the reason behind that?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T15:34:40.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63193",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T15:34:40.903",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "32056",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Trouble ないで vs なくて",
"view_count": 247
}
|
[] |
63193
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63195",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the context of tying things, e.g. shoe laces, rope, neck tie etc, I think\n結ぶ is the correct verb. In all these cases can I replace 結ぶ with つなぐ? Would it\nchange the nuance?\n\nI have a feeling that つなぐ is more general than 結ぶ. My feeling is that 結ぶ can\nonly be used for the sort of things I listed above, but つなぐ can also be used\nfor other things like bridges connecting islands、connecting people etc. Is my\nfeeling correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T16:48:45.893",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63194",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T17:14:07.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 結ぶ and つなぐ",
"view_count": 237
}
|
[
{
"body": "繋ぐ is \"to join\" or \"to connect\", whereas 結ぶ is \"to tie\", \"to knot\", etc. They\nare usually not interchangeable. 靴紐を繋ぐ and ネクタイを繋ぐ sound very weird because\nnothing is joined. ロープを繋ぐ and ロープを結ぶ may be interchangeable when you are\ntrying to extend a rope by tying it to another rope. 手をつなぐ and 手を結ぶ are also\ninterchangeable, but the latter (yes, the latter) tends to have a figurative\nmeaning (\"to become partner with ～\", \"to collaborate\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T17:14:07.363",
"id": "63195",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-02T17:14:07.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63194",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
63194
|
63195
|
63195
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63198",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In *A Frequency Dictionary of Japanese:\n\n> 彼はよく詐欺に引っかかる。\n\nis translated as:\n\n> He is often caught committing fraud.\n\nWhen reading that sentence I understood it as:\n\n> He often falls for frauds (i.e: he is often the victim, not the perpetrator,\n> of frauds).\n\nAre both translations possible?\n\nIn 大辞林 they show this definition:\n\n> だまされて仕組まれたとおりに動かされる。計略にはまる。\n\nAnd even give this example sentence:\n\n> 詐欺に引っかかる。\n\nWhich explains the first thing I thought of when reading the sentence. \nHowever, they also give another possible definition:\n\n> やっかいな事柄や人物とかかわりあいをもつ。\n\nCould this definition be used in this case to interpret the sentence like _A\nFrequency Dictionary of Japanese_ did?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T21:21:48.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63197",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T19:57:30.403",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T19:57:30.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "30652",
"owner_user_id": "30652",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Usage of 引っかかる and double meaning",
"view_count": 389
}
|
[
{
"body": "Although 引っかかる can have the meaning \"get mixed up in\" or \"be involved in\"\namong other meanings (like\n[these](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%BC%95%E3%81%A3%E6%8E%9B%E3%82%8B-610688#E3.83.87.E3.82.B8.E3.82.BF.E3.83.AB.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.B3.89)),\nI suspect that this translation might be erroneous. First of all, a search in\nthe Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (cross-referenced with\n詐欺) reveals only results relating to the meaning of \"falling for scams\" rather\nthan \"committing scams\" and I think that is what most people would understand\nby the term as it appears in your example. Also, if you examine the\ndefinitions listed at the kotobank link above, they all convey a sense of the\nsubject being imposed upon by some kind of undesirable circumstance which is\noften beyond their control. This places the emphasis of what is 'bad' beyond\nthe subject and does not seem to fit with your example in which the subject is\nactively engaged the 'bad' thing.\n\nSecondly, it could easily be an error caused by the English definition \"get\ncaught\" which is ambiguous and requires context. For example, it could mean\n\"get caught (doing something illicit)\" or \"get caught (out by a fraudster)\".\nPerhaps someone was not careful enough in their translation. They saw a\ndefinition of 引っかかる as \"get caught\" and assumed erroneously that it was the\nformer meaning rather the latter.\n\nFurthermore, if you wanted to use 引っかかる in the sense of being caught doing\nsomething illicit, I think it would make more sense to make it more explicit\nby including who is catching them out - perhaps by using 警察に引っかかる and maybe a\nphrase like 詐欺で to clarify that the subject is being caught out by the police\nrather being caught out by the scam. But in my opinion that is beside the\npoint as I believe the most likely explanation is that the translation is\nerroneous.\n\nIf, however, you are asking whether it is _ever_ possible to use 引っかかる in such\na way, then my answer may not apply.",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T22:32:48.547",
"id": "63198",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T10:13:07.550",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-03T10:13:07.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63197",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
63197
|
63198
|
63198
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63209",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In Terrace House, several people are sitting around a table sharing\ninformation about themselves and answering questions.\n\nOne of the guys asks a snow boarder the following question:\n\n> プロってことはどっかスポンサーがついてるってことですよね？\n\nFrom my understanding, ってことはどっか means \"saying (こと) somewhere\". The whole\nsentence in my head translated to English would be something roughly like\n\"Didn't you say something about you being a professional sponsored somewhere?\"\n\nAccording to Netflix's translation on their English CC's, it actually\ntranslates to:\n\n> \"If you're a pro, that means you have a sponsor?\"\n\nAccording to Google translate, ってことはどっか by itself translates to \"Does it mean\nsomething?\"\n\nI know that English translations aren't to be taken literally, but both\nsources suggest that ってことはどっか translates to \"meaning something\" rather than\n\"saying (こと) somewhere\".\n\nWhy is this the case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-02T23:53:50.073",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63199",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-24T05:19:46.740",
"last_edit_date": "2020-01-24T05:19:46.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30808",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"sentence"
],
"title": "ってことはどっか Usage in プロってことはどっかスポンサーがついてるってことですよね？",
"view_count": 343
}
|
[
{
"body": "ってこと is just the shortened form of ということ. Depending on the context its meaning\ncan change, but in the target sentence it comes out twice. You can think of\nthis double ということ form「XXX ということは YYYということだ」as a set phrase that means\nsomething like \"If (condition XXX), then (conclusion YYY)\". Then everything\nelse will be easier to understand.\n\nGoing back to the original sentence,\n\n> プロ **ってことは** どっかスポンサーがついてる **ってことです** よね\n\nThe \"condition\" here is being a プロ, in this case, the speaker knew that the\nother person was a professional snowboarder. The speaker is concluding that\nsince the other person was a professional snowboarder, then he must have\nsomeone as a sponsor (どこか shortened to どっか).\n\nSo, we can then translate the sentence as follows:\n\n> If you are a pro, then you must have someone as a sponsor, right?\n\nThis「XXX ということは YYYということだ」form that I introduced above may vary countless\nways, but it is always an IF and THEN form. Other variations:\n\n 1. XXX ということは YYYということだろう、which means something like \"If (condition XXX), wouldn't it be (conclusion YYY)\"\n 2. XXX ということは YYYということを意味する、which means something like \"If (condition XXX), then it means (conclusion YYY)\"\n 3. XXX ということは YYYということが言える、which means something like \"If (condition XXX), the we can say that (conclusion YYY)\"\n 4. XXX することは YYYということだ、which means something like \"If (condition is verb XXX), then it means (conclusion YYY)\"\n\nand so on. Below are sample sentences from an actual news articles of the\nother variations. [1](https://www.fnn.jp/posts/00395170HDK),\n[2](https://www.m3.com/open/iryoIshin/article/640942/).\n\n> あたごにDWESが既に搭載されている **ということは** 、MIPSそのものが、すでに搭載されている **という事だろう** 。\n>\n> 医学が進歩 **することは** 、実際の医者が変わるというレベルではこれほど大変だ **ということです** ね。",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T02:04:01.510",
"id": "63201",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-17T05:22:35.160",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "30554",
"parent_id": "63199",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You may have broken this sentence up incorrectly, and that's likely what's\nconfusing you.\n\nIt should be this:\n\n> プロってことは｜どっかスポンサーがついてるってことですよね？\n\nThus, you get something like this -\n\n> Since you're a pro, you must have a sponsor somewhere, right?\n\nどっか is a colloquial shortening of どこか, which might also be part of your\nconfusion.\n\nIn the right context, it could also mean that this person must have brought a\nsponsor to the event they're at, but based on your question, that doesn't seem\nquite right.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T07:24:59.257",
"id": "63209",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T07:24:59.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "63199",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63199
|
63209
|
63209
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63202",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: a boxer is telling another one that he is too weak to participate in\na tournament.\n\n> 潰し合いさせられるトーナメントに浮かれてんの出場者ん中でお前だけだぞ？ **掃き溜められた** コトにムカつくけどよ…\n> お前みてェな甘ちゃんと肩並ばされんのはもっとハラが立つ。\n\nLooking in the dictionary, I could find 掃き溜め only as a noun, not as a verb. Is\nit an uncommon use? And what is its meaning here? Considering the context, I\nthink it could mean something like \"I hate I was put in the same tournament\nwith such weak boxers...\". Is my translation correct? You can see the [whole\npage here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/U0VFW.jpg). Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T01:33:11.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63200",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T02:30:41.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"verbs",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Meaning of 掃き溜める",
"view_count": 105
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's most likely a transformation of the word. 掃き溜め is defined as a garbage\ndump, but in this case turned into a verb (Remember Google? ググる is \"to Google\nsomething\"). This is where you add your own contextual understanding of the\nsentence.\n\nIt seemed that the speaker is pissed off at being treated like trash, \"binned\"\nor \"boxed\" together with other... in his words, garbage-quality athletes.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T02:30:41.933",
"id": "63202",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T02:30:41.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25446",
"parent_id": "63200",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63200
|
63202
|
63202
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63204",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> enemy returns a while after being defeated by the mc\n>\n> mc「ど、どうしてあなたが……！ この間滅したはずなのに……！？」\n>\n> enemy「お前を倒さずして、消滅などできん！」\n>\n> enemy charges....\n\ni will \"do it\" without beating you, i can't extinguish you, makes no sense in\ncontext.\n\nWhat is he trying to say?\n\nthank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T03:32:55.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63203",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T03:51:16.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"parsing"
],
"title": "interpretting お前を倒さずして、消滅などできん！",
"view_count": 74
}
|
[
{
"body": "> お前を倒さずして、消滅などできん！ \n> I can never vanish without/before defeating you!\n\n * `未然形 + ずして` is a literary way of saying \"without ～ing\". It's a literary version of ～ないで or ～ずに. See: [闘わずして勝つ vs. 闘わずに勝つ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/58817/5010)\n * 消滅する is intransitive.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T03:51:16.450",
"id": "63204",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T03:51:16.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63203",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63203
|
63204
|
63204
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63220",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to translate the 殺気 in the second sentence below to a English\nequivalent that denotes a emotionless attacker attacking from behind the\nnarrator, but the only words that I am finding online are \"bloodlust\" (can't\nuse as it denotes emotion);\n\n\"thirst for blood\" (again, can't use as it denotes a _active desire_ to kill),\n\nand \"deadly intent\", which my peers have marked confusion with upon reviewing\nmy English only translation.\n\n> 僕は飛び起き、女の子に背を向けて逃げ道を探す。 \n> I leap away, my back facing the girl as I search for a way out.\n>\n> ろくに辺りを見回す暇(ひま)もなく、背後から **殺気** が押し寄せてくる。 \n> Without time to look around, from behind a **lethal intent** descends upon\n> me.\n\nWhat would be a better way to word the second sentence so that my translation\nconveys the meaning behind the original sentence(thereby staying faithful to\nthe source material), and what English phrases/words would work for 殺気?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T04:43:13.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63205",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T15:18:22.373",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26406",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Possible translations for 殺気",
"view_count": 458
}
|
[
{
"body": "Assuming it is the girl who is harboring the lethal intent ( _or is there\nsomeone else in the room?_ ), why not attribute it to her (or whoever)\ndirectly, as would be more natural in English? The disembodied 殺気 might make\nsense in Japanese but it sounds a little odd in English. If I were translating\nthis, I would take a little more license and phrase it something like:\n\n> I had no time to turn and look, but I could sense her murderous intent as\n> she approached me from behind.\n\nor\n\n> I dared not waste time by turning to look, but I could feel her murderous\n> intent as she drew closer from behind.\n\nIf it is someone else in the room, you could use creative ways to name them\nlike \"the silent figure\" or \"a shadowy form\", etc. Personally, I tend to stray\na quite far from the source text sometimes, but I think you get my point :)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T15:00:01.530",
"id": "63220",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T15:50:32.930",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-03T15:50:32.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63205",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63205
|
63220
|
63220
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63225",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: in a gym, a boxer attacks another boxer saying that he was provoking\nhim with his eyes. After punching him, he thinks:\n\n> **瞳だけはぶっ飛ばねー** でやんの \n> 甘ちゃんのクセに\n>\n> 人殴って拳が潤わなかったなんて \n> ねーのに……\n\nWhat is the meaning of the verb ぶっ飛ぶ when it refers to the eyes? Looking at\nits meanings in the dictionary I couldn't find one that fits the context. Is\nit used metaphorically here?\n\nAlso, could you please explain the grammar behind ぶっ飛ばねーでやんの? Is it the\ncontracted form of ぶっ飛ばないでやるの?\n\nThank you for your help!\n\n**EDIT:** since it looks like a strange metaphor, I uploaded the original\npages to provide more context.\n\n[Pages where the fight starts](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NiwbQ.jpg) (here 瞳 is\nused with め furigana)\n\n[Pages with the sentence in question](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uWiT7.jpg)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T05:17:29.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63206",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T03:59:10.843",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T03:59:10.843",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"verbs",
"metaphor"
],
"title": "Meaning of 瞳だけはぶっ飛ばない",
"view_count": 288
}
|
[
{
"body": "Tbh the sentence doesn't make a lot of sense - it reads like somebody tried to\nincorporate many advanced vocabularies without really understanding how they\nare used. There are also a few grammatical mistakes.\n\nHaving said that, if I'm forced my guess would be that the opponent kept his\ngaze on the attacker, despite (other parts of the body) being punched away.\n\nIt's very hard to tell though, as 瞳 is overwhelmingly used for adorable\nthings. An exception is when it's used to describe the pupil specifically, so\nit's possible but it's not obvious to me why the writer would focus on the\npupil. It's also a physically odd situation (body moving away but the pupil\nremains?). ぶっ飛ぶ can also refer to blackouts, but then it's also odd (one is\nunconscious, but the pupil remains conscious?).\n\nI think you'll have to ask the writer - maybe they knew what they wanted to\nexpress, but they are probably not yet proficient enough in Japanese to\nexpress it.\n\n**EDIT:** After looking at the context, I suppose the writer is going for a\nVERY creative, unorthodox writing. They probably added the \"め\" in ふりがな because\nhitomi wouldn't fit (it will make things sound very adorable), but they still\nwanted to focus on the pupil. They also say \"拳が潤う\" which is extremely odd （潤う\nonly refers to pleasant moisture), but it makes sense because the character\nthen talks about erection... \"潤わなかったなんてねーのに\" is probably a misprint of\n\"潤わなかったことなんてねーのに\". I think you have to interpret it with your own creativity.\nIt's not a common expression by any means and I guess you are meant to\ninterpret it in your own way.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T08:32:15.563",
"id": "63210",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T13:54:44.430",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-04T13:54:44.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "499",
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63206",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think 瞳だけはぶっ飛ばねー has the similar meanig of 目だけは死んでない, which means \"He still\nhas a fighting sprit (even if his body was damaged).\" and \"He hasn't yielded\nyet (even if his body was damaged).\" It isn't a common phrase.\n\nAs for the grammar, I found an explanation, and it says 「～でやがるの」changed to\n「～でやんの」. やがる is used when you say about someone's action with contempt or\nhatred such as 学校来ねーでやがる. About の, a dictionary says 断定の言い方を和らげる意を表す.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T16:44:40.810",
"id": "63225",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T17:04:36.007",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-03T17:04:36.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "63206",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63206
|
63225
|
63210
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63208",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know we use に to indicate from whom we receive the favor/thing. I don't see\nany common sense for that. Naturally, I would use から instead because に\nexpresses a direction \"to/toward\" not \"from\".\n\n=> Could you explain to me the root cause?\n\n> * 友達 **に** お菓子をもらった。 => I received candies **from** my friend.\n> * 友達 **に** お菓子をあげた。 => I gave candies **to** my friend.\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T06:02:52.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63207",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T14:59:58.713",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T07:55:15.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "15674",
"owner_user_id": "15674",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Could you explain why に is used with もらう?",
"view_count": 316
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's basically a grammatical reason, not a meaning reason.\n\nJapanese uses three markers for marking core arguments in a clause:\n\n * が marks the subject (or rather, a subject that isn't also a topic; but let's ignore that for this answer)\n\n * を marks the object\n\n * に marks _everything else_\n\nFor the most part, when you have three core arguments, the one that isn't a\nsubject or object is usually a recipient. Since に also (quite separately)\nmarks a destination or direction, that seems like a normal extension of\nmeaning - from 'direction of moving' to 'direction of giving'.\n\nHowever, there are some clear cases where it marks things that aren't\nrecipients. Causatives are a good example: you end up with three core\narguments (subject, object and overall causer), and the leftover third one is\nmarked with に - even though that doesn't make sense if you're thinking of it\nas a direction marker. 貰う is a similar case: it takes the recipient as subject\nand the gift as object, and the leftover core argument - the giver - is marked\nwith に.\n\nTo summarise, because 貰う has three core arguments and already specifies that\nthe recipient is the subject, the leftover giver has to be marked with the\n'leftover core argument marker', which is に.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T07:19:40.133",
"id": "63208",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T07:19:40.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "63207",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Particle に indicates point where effect of action/deed reaches. It is not for\nindicating direction. Particle へ is the one that indicates direction.\n\nFor example, 道路の向こう側に渡る is telling that 道路の向こう側 is the point where action/deed\nof 渡る reaches at last. Action/deed of 渡る is intended to reach that point\ninstead of that direction.\n\nParticle に is also used to indicate indirect object for transitive verb which\ntakes direct and indirect objects. It is because of the above said character\nof に, i.e. indicating point where effect of action/deed reaches.\n\nIn the example sentence of 私は兄にボールを投げた, 兄 is indirect object and ボール is direct\nobject for verb 投げた. Particle に is telling that action of 投げた will bring ボール\nto reach 兄.\n\nWhen this active voice sentence is converted to passive voice, 兄は私にボールを投げられた\nwill come out. Verb 投げられた takes direct and indirect objects which are still\nsupported by same particles as before.\n\nAccording to my opinion, 私 and 兄 are at terminal position for movement of ボール.\nIn case of active voice, ボール as effect of action 投げた moved to the position of\n兄, and if we see that movement from opposite side, action 投げられた will take 私 as\nreaching point. \nI know wording \"reaching point\" sounds funny but concept seems something like\nthis, if we watch movement of ボール between two terminal positions from opposite\nview point.\n\nNow, we try to apply above concept.\n\n> A. 友達にお菓子をもらった。 \n> B. 友達にお菓子をあげた。\n\nI believe that you understand action あげる and action もらう shows opposite\ndirection for transfer of お菓子.\n\n> 私はあなたにお菓子をあげる。 \n> あなたは私にお菓子をもらう。\n\nThey are in the relation of active voice and passive voice essentially, even\nthough not in standard format. It is because あげる cannot be changed to passive\nvoice by adding れる／られる.\n\nI hope you can accept 友達にお菓子をもらった finally by now.\n\nCertainly you can use から which indicates starting point. \nUsing から is for emphasizing starting point purpose instead of using に.\n\n> あなたは私からお菓子をもらう。 \n> 私からあなたにお菓子をあげる。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T14:51:35.770",
"id": "63274",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T14:59:58.713",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-06T14:59:58.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "32184",
"parent_id": "63207",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63207
|
63208
|
63208
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63235",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When multiple adjectives refer to the same noun, the adjective(s) other than\nthe last one are usually written in the て-form:\n\n> **①** 大きくて重い本\n\nHowever writing all adjectives in their い-form is not (necessarily?) incorrect\neither AFAIK.\n\n> **②** 大きい重い本\n\nCan anyone shed some light as to how they differ in meaning/nuance, and why\nand when anyone would opt for form ②?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T09:11:15.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63211",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T05:10:24.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"て-form",
"adjectives",
"i-adjectives"
],
"title": "What's the difference in nuance between multiple 形容詞 (い-adjectives) with and without て-form?",
"view_count": 288
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 大きくて重い本 : Big **and** heavy book\n\nBoth adjectives qualify 本 and only 本, whereas:\n\n> 大きい重い本 : Big (heavy book)\n\n大きい qualifies 重い本 with 重い qualifying 本",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T14:40:11.747",
"id": "63218",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T00:35:58.570",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-04T00:35:58.570",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "大きい重い本 is usually unnatural and you should avoid it in most cases. But there\nare some exceptions:\n\n * It may appear in lyrics and poems where rhythm is important.\n * When a comma is inserted between the two adjectives, the first one can be in the dictionary form: 「大きい、重い本」 This may even sound more formal since the te-form can sound a little colloquial/informal depending on the situation.\n * Although uncommon, when the same adjective is repeated for emphasis, you can say, for example, 「遠い遠い昔」 (\"long long ago\").\n * When the first adjective is part of a relative clause, you can say, for example, 「文字が大きい重い本」 (\"a heavy book using large characters\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T05:10:24.847",
"id": "63235",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T05:10:24.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63211
|
63235
|
63218
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "あ、実は今日、会議があっているんですよ。\n\nThis as an answer for an invitation to do something today. Also the dialog I'm\ntalking about is over the phone.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T10:33:38.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63212",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T16:14:10.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32143",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is the following sentence correct to decline a invitation?",
"view_count": 191
}
|
[
{
"body": "If you're asking if this is the correct way to decline an invitation, then\nyeah you can say that you have a meeting today as a way of saying \"no I'm\nbusy\".\n\nIf you're asking if your sentence is grammatically correct, then no, not\ncompletely. While あっている is used in some dialects, it's not standard Japanese\nso you should probably use ある.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T14:47:12.437",
"id": "63219",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T14:47:12.437",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63212",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "If you decline someone's invitation due to another plan such as a dialog.\n\nIn a formal way, you can say the following sentence.\n\n\"会議の予定が入っているため、申し訳ありませんがお断りさせていただきます。\"\n\nIn a bit casual way, you can say the following sentences.\n\n\"あ、実は今日会議が入ってるんですよね。\"\n\n\"あ、実は今日会議があるんですよね。\"\n\nAlthough this is a casual form, you can use this in the conversation with your\ncolleagues.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T16:14:10.350",
"id": "63223",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T16:14:10.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63212",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63212
| null |
63219
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63228",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The English pronunciation of Brunei is /bɹuːˈnaɪ/ and the Brunei Malay\npronunciation ends in something like /ai/, as far as I can tell (I'm not\ntotally sure about this, but here's the\n[Sultan](https://youtu.be/eIRZUInNHxI?t=285) and the [Second Minister of\nForeign Affairs and Trade](https://youtu.be/WAi2RRWuujg?t=140) saying it that\nway - although they're speaking in English - and this news reader clearly says\nit [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSrN0wP3UnQ)), yet in Japanese the\ncountry's (short) name is ブルネイ, not ブルナイ.\n\nWikipedia\n[lists](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9B%BD%E5%90%8D%E3%81%AE%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E4%B8%80%E8%A6%A7)\n4 ways of writing the country's name in 漢字 that all end with /ai/:\n\n * 文莱 (ブンライ?)\n * 文萊 (ブンライ?)\n * 芠萊 (ブンライ?)\n * 婆羅乃 (バラナイ?)\n\nand the Simplified Chinese 文莱 (wénlái) and Traditional Chinese 汶萊 (wènlái). In\nKorean it's 브루나이 (beurunai).\n\nGiven all this, how did Japanese end up using ブルネイ?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T12:09:18.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63213",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T00:55:15.107",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-03T19:57:51.513",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "3071",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"katakana",
"names"
],
"title": "Why is the Japanese word for Brunei ブルネイ and not ブルナイ?",
"view_count": 553
}
|
[
{
"body": "I'm no expert on Malay. That said, if [this Wikipedia\narticle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malay_phonology#Diphthongs) is anything\nto go by, it appears that the ⟨ei⟩ combination in Malay spellings in general\nis pronounced as //ei//, in line with the Japanese katakana rendering of ブルネイ.\nChecking the spellings of the country's name in the different languages\navailable on Wikipedia, I see that most use the same _Brunei_ spelling,\nrendered in the local phonology as something approaching either //brunei//\n(such as for [Spanish](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brun%C3%A9i),\n[Hawaiian](https://haw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunei),\n[Welsh](https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brwnei), or\n[Russian](https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B9))\nor //brunai// (such as for [German](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunei),\n[English](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunei), or\n[Danish](https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunei)).\n\nA close reading of (the Wikipedia article on [Malay\nphonology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malay_phonology) shows that ⟨e⟩ is\noccasionally realized as //ə// (the schwa sound), which might account for the\nvariance. Alternatively, the variance might reflect different transmission\nroutes for how the term was borrowed, and influence from the native\northographies and phonologies of the borrowing languages.\n\nFor the Japanese term in specific, I cannot find any source that definitively\nstates the source language. The notation used in Shogakukan's monolingual\n国語大辞典 matches that used in [the Daijirin\nentry](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%83%96%E3%83%AB%E3%83%8D%E3%82%A4-127375#E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.9E.97.20.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.89.E7.89.88),\nwhere the etymon (source term) is listed simply as **【Brunei】** with no source\nlanguage given. We can probably safely interpret this to suggest that the\nkatakana rendering is based on the spelling.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T19:57:39.360",
"id": "63228",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T19:57:39.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "63213",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Japanese loanwords, especially place names, are often derived directly from\nthe language used by the people who live there (an endonym) rather than\nEnglish names for non-English speaking countries (an exonym). For this reason,\nthe pronunciation in Japanese may differ considerably from the English name.\n\nIt is now typical to write the names of foreign places in katakana and use the\nforeign names for those places. The foreign (modern) names are mostly commonly\nused in spoken Japanese. Even when written in kanji, these are often read as\nthe modern names rather than the historical reading of the kanji name.\n\nThere are forms of kanji for place names used in formal contexts and for\nhistorical reasons. These often have non-standard readings to reflect to local\nname. Kanji are often used for places that have/had a name in Chinese\n(including much of south east Asia). For example, 北京 is read as “Beijing”, not\n“Hokukyō” or “Peking”. There are also systems of abbreviations 米 for America、英\nfor the UK, 西 for Spain, 土 for Turkey, etc. These are mainly used on maps.\nBefore the existence of katakana, a system of phonetic kanji called man’yogana\nwere used.\n\nThus for Brunei the Japanese once used the Chinese name 文莱 and now use the\nMalay name, writing it as 婆羅乃 and more recently as ブルネイ. The other forms are\nstill used in writing for historical reasons but are not common in spoken\nJapanese. While these should be pronounced differently, they all mean Brunei\n(ブルネイ).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T00:55:15.107",
"id": "63243",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T00:55:15.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14608",
"parent_id": "63213",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63213
|
63228
|
63228
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63236",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In case I am talking with someone using the informal form but we are not close\nfriends yet (perhaps a close acquaintance or someone I'm chatting with online)\nand I want to ask him a personal question (what is his occupation, something\nabout his family ,etc.), should I proceed with the informal form or should I\nswitch to polite (or even honorific) language to ask him the question?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T12:40:20.307",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63215",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T04:10:21.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25339",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"formality",
"conversational"
],
"title": "Question about switching formality in a conversation",
"view_count": 967
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's not that uncommon to be talking simultaneously to two or more people\nusing different levels of familiarity/politeness, but for the same person,\nusing the same level throughout a conversation is the norm.\n\nSwitching between levels of formality/humility in the same conversation with\nthe same person is just not necessary. Even if the kinds of things you wish to\ntalk about change from \"general\" to \"personal\", whatever form of speech the\ntwo of you began with, you can continue with. That said, if you choose to\nswitch to using the polite \"masu\" form of verbs rather than the root form, I\ndon't think that's bad. Your conversation partner might misunderstand and\nthink that you suddenly feel less comfortable with them, but I doubt any real\nconflicts will occur.\n\nI have always had a problem with \"keigo\". I get easily confused by humble vs\npolite vs honorific speech... though I have been told over and over that as a\nforeigner, it is fine to simply use the polite form with everyone all the\ntime, until you consider them to be close friends (and as long as you are\noutside of work... at work always use polite speech... a rule I break far too\noften, but get away with because my schools are very kind....)\n\nThere have been times when I switch back and forth between levels of\npoliteness, and as a foreigner these are either ignored as \"he just doesn't\nknow\" situations, or it gets a small laugh or a humorous comment.\n\ndoing a google search for \"when to use keigo\" might lead you to useful\nwebsites.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T13:18:07.787",
"id": "63217",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T13:18:07.787",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "63215",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This heavily depends on your character, your age, the relationship between you\nand him, and how personal the information you're trying to get is. In general,\nusing honorific forms is probably an overkill, but temporarily switching to\nthe です/ます style will not harm.\n\nPersonally, I am relatively slow to start dropping です/ます, and I am unlikely to\ntalk with someone using the informal language if I don't even know his\noccupation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T05:45:52.630",
"id": "63236",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T05:45:52.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63215",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "How formal/polite you are (or should be) depends on the nature of your\nrelationship. If they’re older, in a more senior position, or you don’t know\nthem very well, you use some degree of formality. This should not change\nduring the course of a conversation.\n\nMixing formal and plain forms is clumsy, although it will be forgiven for non-\nnative speakers unless you’re in a position where you should really know\nbetter (such as working in a Japanese company). It’s best to be consistent and\nuse the same forms throughout a conversation (or letter or email) if you can.\nIf you are a non-native speaker, it is unlikely that you'll be a situation\nwhere you are expected to use honorifics or 敬語. Using the polite ます forms\nshould be acceptable with friends or acquaintances.\n\nIf this is someone you meet regularly, you should use the same level of\npoliteness for an entire meeting. If you are unsure if it’s appropriate, it’s\nprobably best to keep with polite forms and let them initiate if they want to\nspeak as peers or friends. In Japanese culture, it’s not uncommon to maintain\nformalities with friends, rather than switching to a “first name basis”. This\ndoes not mean they don’t regard you as a friend, they may reserve using plain\nlanguage for people they’re really close with such as family and childhood\nfriends.\n\nIf you are learning Japanese and they’re a friend of yours they should be\nwilling to help you if you ask them nicely. It would be better to ask what\nthey’re comfortable with rather than assuming as it depends a lot on how they\nview your relationship (and how familiar they are with foreign customs). Some\nwill feel obliged to use formal speech when speaking Japanese which is why\nthey may prefer to speak English since they can speak “more freely” without\nworrying about politeness or hierarchy.\n\nIf it’s a friend, you can reciprocate if they drop formalities but I’d wait\nfor them to do so first (or ask them). If it’s a colleague, your boss, or\nsomeone older than you, it’s more complicated: they may also use plain forms\nas you’re their “subordinate” and they’ll still expect you to use polite forms\nwith them. Since many Japanese people meet their friends through the\nworkplace, it can be confusing since they’ll speak differently when talking as\nfriends or coworkers.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T00:21:51.763",
"id": "63242",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T04:10:21.480",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T04:10:21.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "14608",
"owner_user_id": "14608",
"parent_id": "63215",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63215
|
63236
|
63217
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63231",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "My sense is that the meaning is identical but that 少なくとも is somewhat more\nformal than 少なくても. Is that observation valid?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T15:46:59.127",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63222",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-13T08:04:03.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 12,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Is there a subtle difference between 少なくても and 少なくとも？",
"view_count": 874
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to [this abstract](http://www.japanese-\nedu.org.hk/sympo/schedule/Abstr/Abst071.html):\n\n>\n> 「～とも」は「～ても」と同様、逆接条件用法を持つが、「～ても」よりも古めかしい形式であると考えられており、現代語レベルでの研究はあまり進んでいない。だが「～とも」は「～ても」とは性質が異なり、また話しことばでは基本的には用いられず、もっぱら書きことばで使用され、上級以上の学習者にとっての理解（読解）・産出（学術論文など）には必要な形式である。\n\nBasically formality and とも is used primarily in written text.\n\nとも can't be used in structures that use repetition, whatever that means (I'm\nguessing having the ても modified words consecutively following one another\nwithout anything else in between):\n\n> ２ 「～ても」と「～とも」の用法\n>\n> 「～ても」にしかない用法としては、例１のような反復用法がある。例２のような不定用法は「～とも」にも出現する。\n>\n> 例１）これはまわりの温度が高くても低くても起こるので、氷が融けるのとはちがう。\n>\n>\n> 例２）日本にもトナリ組的近隣集団がどのムラにもあるが、この集団はあくまで各戸単位の構成であり、どんなに機能が高くとも、各戸の孤立性を低くするものではない。\n\nThere times you only use 少なくとも\n\n> 「～とも」に特徴的な副詞句「少なくとも」が限定するものには、数量・時期の他、主体・観点などがある。\n\n少なくとも is also much more common than 少なくても: 4,961 vs <548 (searching for 少なくて)\nresults in the The National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics\ncorpus.\n\nAlso see [\"高{たか}くっても\" vs. \"高くとも\"、\"低{ひく}くっても\" vs. \"低くとも\", etc.\nusage?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14280/%E9%AB%98%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82-vs-%E9%AB%98%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82-%E4%BD%8E%E3%81%B2%E3%81%8F%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82-vs-%E4%BD%8E%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82-etc-\nusage)",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T19:40:16.740",
"id": "63226",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T00:53:59.117",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-04T00:53:59.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "10045",
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"parent_id": "63222",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "According to 明鏡国語辞典:\n\n> すくなくとも【少なくとも】〘副〙 \n> ❶ 少なく見積もっても。最低限でも。少なくも。「経費は少なくとも百万円かかる」 \n> ❷ ほかのことはさておき、せめて。「少なくともこれだけは実行してほしい」 \n> ◈(表現) 副詞の「少なくとも」の意で「少なくても」というのは慣用になじまない。 \n> 「×少なくても/○少なくとも５人は必要だ（副詞の例）」 \n> 「予算は○少なくても/○少なくとも、精いっぱいやろう（副詞ではない例）」\n\nIt says 少なくとも as an adverb is not interchangeable with 少なくても.\n\nI think 少なくとも cannot be replaced with 少なくても in examples like:\n\n> 「少なくともこれだけは確かです。」(×少なくても～) \n> 「少なくとも規則は守ってください。」(×少なくても～) \n> 「少なくとも私にはそう聞こえました。」(×少なくても～) \n> 「少なくとも、明日までには/１０時までには 仕上げます。」(×少なくても～)\n\nIt seems some people (have recently started to?) use 少なくても with phrases\ncontaining 数字/数量, but it doesn't sound natural to me, and the dictionary says\nit's 慣用になじまない (it's not idiomatic / it doesn't match the idiomatic usage):\n\n> 少なくとも百個はあります。(×/? 少なくても～) \n> 少なくとも一ヶ月はかかります。(?/× 少なくても～)\n\nWhen it's not used as an adverb (i.e. when it's conditional), of course you\ncan use 少なくても. Here, 少なくとも is more formal than 少なくても:\n\n> どんなに人数が少なくても、決行します。(○少なくとも～)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T00:06:36.023",
"id": "63231",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T07:38:38.877",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-04T07:38:38.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63222",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "They are not the same. - (temo) is “even if”. So that version means even if it\nwere few. Sukunakutomo is usually what you want. It means, “At least” or “at a\nminimum” as in “that job requires at least 5 workers”, or “that bag costs at\nleast $100”. Some people incorrectly use the wrong phrase in speech, but that\nis analogous to using ”affect” when “effect” was meant, incorrectly. The\ncolloquial incorrect use in speech does not make it correct.\n\nSukunakutemo should hardly be used. It sounds unnatural due to its proximity\nin pronunciation to sukunakutomo. Of course if you mean to say, “even if there\nare few” as a conditional, then you might use it. Usually, people had meant to\nsay “at least” which is in speech and writing, “sukunakutomo”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-10-13T08:04:03.963",
"id": "90717",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-13T08:04:03.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48421",
"parent_id": "63222",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63222
|
63231
|
63231
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63229",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I read **と言っていた** and **と言っていました** would be the most common and neutral way to\nreport speech. While **と言っている** and **と言っています** also sound okay, they carry a\nnotion of _the quoted speaker is still thinking this way_.\n\nReading some NHK easy news article however I noticed that **と言っています** like in\n\n> 厚生労働者は「全体では新しい社員の給料は上がり続けています」と言っています。\n\nor\n\n> しかし世界中の研究者は、赤ちゃんの遺伝の情報を変えたことが本当だったら問題があると言っています。\n\nseems to be the most common expression, followed by **と言いました** :\n\n>\n> 「このパイロットが飛行機に乗るすぐ前まで、酒を飲み続けていたのは間違いありません。日本に着くまでの１２時間に、大きな事故が起こったかもしれません」と言いました。\n>\n> 会社は、来年３月に１種類のウイスキーを売るのをやめると言いました。\n\n**と言っていました** I actually read quite seldom. One of the few examples (other\nforms like と話していました included) I could find in the last articles was:\n\n> 利用した人は「安心して乗ることができましたが、もう少しはっきりわかる色にしてほしいです」と言っていました。(about the design of\n> escaltors which shall prevent people from climbing the stairs)\n\n(The normal articles of NHK seem to me to prefer the usage of と述べました,i.e.\nと言いました.)\n\nI don't think と言っていますis here supposed to carry the notion mentioned above. Is\nthis form more common because it is considered easier japanese? But in terms\nof difficulty it doesn't seem to make much difference which of these three\nforms is used, does it? Do special rules apply to newspapers somehow? I am\nquite confused now. (≧д≦ヾ)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T19:52:38.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63227",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T08:45:51.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Confusion about reported speech; と言っていました seems to be quite rare",
"view_count": 560
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 厚生労働者は「全体では新しい社員の給料は上がり続けています」と言っています -> Workers say that in general, the\n> wage of all the new members continue to increase\n>\n> しかし世界中の研究者は、赤ちゃんの遺伝の情報を変えたことが本当だったら問題があると言っています。 -> However, researchers\n> from all over the world say that it would be problematic if they really\n> changed the babies' genetic\n>\n>\n> 「このパイロットが飛行機に乗るすぐ前まで、酒を飲み続けていたのは間違いありません。日本に着くまでの１２時間に、大きな事故が起こったかもしれません」と言いました。\n> : They said \"until before this before gets onto the plane, it was sure that\n> he had been drinking. A big accident may have occured during the 12 hours\n> until they arrive in Japan\"\n>\n> 会社は、来年３月に１種類のウイスキーを売るのをやめると言いました。 : The company said that they would stop\n> selling 1 type of whiskey in march next year\n>\n> 利用した人は「安心して乗ることができましたが、もう少しはっきりわかる色にしてほしいです」と言っていました。 : The users said that\n> they could get on without worrying, but they wanted them to make it in a\n> color a bit more recognizable.\n\nIt is wrong to say that when quoting someone (so at the third person) it is\nalways the most natural to use 言っていた. The thing is, in this case, 言っていた is\nused when we want to directly quote someone, whereas 言った is used when we want\nto \"indirectly quote\".\n\nSo while 言っていた is more about retelling something, 言った is more about the action\nof saying. Which is why it's often said that ていた is the only correct\ngrammatically when quoting.\n\nBut if we look at a sentence like:\n\n> 「どうせ君も俺の金目当てなんだろ！」と彼が言ったので\n\nFrom <https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1280477987>\n\nWe can see it's not true at all because it's a quotation, yet it still uses\nthe 言った form. And it's not the only example we can find.\n\nNow for the difference between the past and present tense, it's the same as in\nEnglish:\n\n> South Korea **says** there were [...] labour, 5,000 of whom are alive. The\n> Japan Times **said** : “The term ‘fo[...] were re...\n\nIt's just a matter of tense.\n\nSo to sum it up and make it easier to understand, you can interpret the three\nforms as below:\n\n> と言っています : are saying / have said (say)\n>\n> と言っていました : were saying / had said (said)\n>\n> と言いました : said / have said\n\nOf course, you would probably not translate them like this, but thinking of\nと言っていました as \"were saying\" is a good way to help yourself understanding that\nit's a direct quotation. As literally, 言って/ **いました** means \" **was in the\nstate of** having said\". So if for example you used 言っていました to say \"my sister\nsaid this\", it would add a nuance that would make others think that you\nwitnessed (heard, saw or anything) your sister completing the action of saying\n(言って) and being (居る).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-03T20:48:37.893",
"id": "63229",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-03T22:20:54.100",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-03T22:20:54.100",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63227",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I am still a japanese intermediate learner myself but I think, well not I,\naccording to this page <https://ameblo.jp/stravaganza-\nno2/entry-11975095608.html> I think you can sum up the difference between\na)と言いました and b)と言っていました as a) is focusing on the speech act or the person who\nsaid something while b) is focusing on the content (which may be the most\nusual case and therefore appears to be the most common)\n\nSo using the example from the webpage >> スーさんは明日試験があると言いました<< becomes\nsomething like >> **It was Susan who said that** we will have a test\ntommorrow.<< while >>スーさんは明日試験があると言っていました<< will become something like >>Guess\nwhat! Susan said **we will be having a test tomorrow!** << The first sentence\nmay be imbedded in a conversation like _Susan says everyday we will write a\ntest tommorrow so don't panic_ , the second may be from a conversation like\n_Oh no, what to do? I don't get this subject at all! But if I fail the test, I\nwill have to repeat the year!_\n\nEdit: I forgot to add, it seems like, if the content of an utterance is\nimportant or somehow relevant to a current conversation, you can use the\npresent progressive form which might be why you read rather と言っています than\nと言っていました in news article. But this kind of usage isn't really explained in the\nlink I gave you so you better check the reason for it further.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T17:05:38.323",
"id": "63239",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T08:45:51.153",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T08:45:51.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "32158",
"owner_user_id": "32158",
"parent_id": "63227",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63227
|
63229
|
63229
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63233",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I see that apparently this word is used by a character in a videogame called\ndanganropa. It's a word like boku, atashi or something like that? Or it's\nsomething different? It's used to call yourself superior or something like\nthat maybe? Maybe it's her nickname?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T03:39:36.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63232",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T01:02:20.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30473",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "What does 私様 means?",
"view_count": 328
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's a sort of 役割語{やくわりご}, though I don't any other character in fiction that\nuses it. 私様{わたくしさま} makes her 'regal' personality sound both queenly and\nextremely arrogant, which is the exact vibe she is going for. Interestingly,\nin the first game she pairs it with more modern 'regal, haughty woman' speech,\nbut in the second it's an older style. For example, in the first she would\nprobably phrase 'I have been waiting for you!' as 私様は待っていたわよ while using that\npersonality, but in the second she'd phrase it as 私様は待っておったぞ.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T03:44:46.507",
"id": "63233",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T05:59:10.853",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-04T05:59:10.853",
"last_editor_user_id": "9971",
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "63232",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "It means “I/me/myself” but it is unusual to use this form rather than わたし or\nわたくし. Referring to yourself (or your inner circle) with an honorific is very\nimpolite. These titles (such as さん, 氏, or 様) are typically used to refer to\nothers, just like you don't call yourself \"Mr/Ms\", \"Sir/Madam\", \"the Right\nHonorable\", or \"Majesty\". It comes across as over-confident and arrogant,\nbelittling those you are speaking to.\n\nYou may encounter this in fiction as part of characterization. These are not\nsituations that would occur in daily life. It would be rare to hear this in\nconversational Japanese and should not be used out of context, especially with\npeople you don't know, are older than you, or are more senior.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T14:05:09.627",
"id": "63238",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T01:02:20.227",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T01:02:20.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "14608",
"owner_user_id": "14608",
"parent_id": "63232",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63232
|
63233
|
63233
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63237",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I know there are many uses of か, but the one I want to focus on is using a\nquestion word with か. For example:\n\n> 何を食べるか知ってる？\n>\n> 何を食べるか知っていますか？\n\nFor these two sentences, the か inbetween the two words acts as a connector and\nreplaces the particle. However, I was wondering what to do if this か is at the\nend of a sentence. For reference, I am trying to write the following:\n\n> The contents of the reading are about how baseball entered Japan. \n> あの読み物の内容はどうやって野球が日本に入ったか。\n\nWhat I am unsure of is how to end this sentence is both plain and polite ways,\ni.e.\n\n> あの読み物の内容はどうやって野球が日本に **入ったか**\n\nor\n\n> あの読み物の内容はどうやって野球が日本に **入ったかです**\n\nor something else.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T03:50:35.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63234",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T07:48:43.867",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "30784",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "か usage in subordinate clauses",
"view_count": 522
}
|
[
{
"body": "[An embedded question using\nか](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/13038/5010) forms a noun. You can say\n何を食べるか **を** 知っていますか, although this を is usually omitted. Likewise, you can\nattach だ/です to an embedded question, too. People often insert a comma between\nか and だ/です.\n\n> この読み物の内容は、野球がどうやって日本に入ってきたか、です。 \n> This article is about how baseball entered Japan.\n>\n> これは野球がどうやって日本に入ってきたかについての読み物です。 \n> This is an article about how baseball entered Japan.\n>\n> 大事なのは明日雨が降るかどうかだ。 \n> What is important is whether or not it will rain tomorrow.\n>\n> 株価がどうなるかに注目しています。 \n> I'm paying attention to what will happen to the stock price.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T06:02:03.190",
"id": "63237",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-04T06:19:23.060",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-04T06:19:23.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63234",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
63234
|
63237
|
63237
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'll be taking a written test in a few weeks to become a part-time translator\nfor an automotive client; they sent me some practice documents in the\nmeantime.\n\nI am having issues at the moment, since I just don't understand the context\nwell enough for my intuition to kick in. It's an uphill battle but I must\nimprove to the point where I can impress said client enough to get hired.\n\nThis is taken from a document the client sent, which features material similar\nto what I would be working with:\n\n**制御が値を下げることによって、Vehicle挙動を急変させないこと**\n\nI made an attempt at translating it:\n\n\"The control must not suddenly change vehicle behavior due to its lowering the\nvalue\"\n\nによって is one of my weak points when it comes to Japanese - I always get it\nwrong! Also, the が is stymieing me for some reason... I am not sure whether\nthe \"control\" itself is lowering the value or not. (I think it is)\n\nCan someone please explain how the が is functioning in relation to the\n\"value,\" and also can someone explain the proper way to translate this によって if\nI have it wrong?\n\nP.S. This is my first question on here - よろしくお願いします＾＾",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-04T20:57:40.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63241",
"last_activity_date": "2021-03-22T06:45:21.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32160",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"によって-passives"
],
"title": "How to handle が and によって in this sort of sentence?",
"view_count": 360
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 制御が値を下げることによって、Vehicle挙動を急変させないこと\n\nAs for the \"が\", that particle is often used when a phrase is part of a larger\nsentence (such as in this case where the term ことによって is used. (See meaning #6\nin [this article of mine](http://selftaughtjapanese.com/2013/12/19/a-closer-\nlook-at-japanese-particles-wa-%E3%81%AF-and-ga-%E3%81%8C/))\n\nI think in this case \"制御” (control) is simply acting as the subject of 下げる. So\nit is doing the lowering.\n\nThe phrase ”...ことによって” often means that \"As a result of...\" or simply \"by\".\n\nFinally, こと can refer to a warning, I have seen this before on things written\non car parts. However, without knowing the context I cannot say how this\nfactors in for sure.\n\nThe other tricky part about translating this is the is the させない verb, which\ncan mean 'allow', but because it is in the negative I think it can be more\nsmoothly translated as \"prevent\".\n\nSo a quick attempt at a translation would be:\n\n```\n\n The control system prevents sudden changes in vehicle behavior by lowering the value.\n \n```\n\nHowever, without the context of what the value is and other related\ninformation, I cannot have much confidence in this translation. If I was\ntranslating for a job this I might look for the phrase \"挙動を急変” online (and\nother words) and confirm my understanding of those phrases.\n\nI hope that helps!\n\nUPDATE: One thing that my translation doesn't factor in directly is the ”こと\"\npart. I see that the original poster translated that as \"must\" in a\ntranslation attempt. Depending on the context, that could be a reasonable way\nto render it. Either way, I don't think the function of が or によって changes,\nthough.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T15:15:15.537",
"id": "63258",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T19:29:24.747",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T19:29:24.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "11825",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "63241",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I would translate it as: \"Do not allow the Vehicle behavior to change suddenly\ndue to controls lowering a value.\"\n\n\"Aによって、B\" means \"B as a result of A\" or \"B by doing A\".\n\nLike @Lockselyu said, \"が\" here indicates the subject/actor of the shorter\nclause. So \"制御\" does the lowering of the value, not the sudden change of\nvehicular behavior. The subject for the bigger sentence has been omitted, as\nis common in Japanese. Judging from the ending \"こと\", which in this case\nindicates rules, it would mean the subject is the reader.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-03-22T06:45:21.137",
"id": "84718",
"last_activity_date": "2021-03-22T06:45:21.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "42299",
"parent_id": "63241",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63241
| null |
63258
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63247",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm just wondering a simple way to say \"See you soon\" when the context is that\nyou are talking to your friend remotely (via phone/messaging) and you plan to\nmeet up with them in the very near future (1 or 2 hours).\n\nWould it be as simple as \"Sugu ni miru\"?\n\nThanks for your help, Bazz",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T02:31:35.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63244",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T03:54:18.480",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T02:57:25.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "32163",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "How to say \"See you soon\" when meeting up with someone",
"view_count": 34554
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can simply say (mata or matane)\n\n友達なら(また)か(またね)でいいと思います。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T02:54:05.807",
"id": "63246",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T02:54:05.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> a simple way to say \"See you soon\" when the context is that you are talking\n> to your friend remotely (via phone/messaging) and **you plan to meet up with\n> them in the very near future (1 or 2 hours)**.\n\nIn that situation I would say 「じゃ、あとで。」(← casual)\n\nじゃ is the contracted pronunciation of では, literally \"Then\".\n\nあとで。 as a greeting is a shortened way of saying あとで[会]{あ}いましょう, literally\n\"Let's meet later\" or \"See you later\".\n\nIf you want to sound more formal, you could say 「では、あとで。」 or even more\nformally 「では、のちほど。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T02:55:56.753",
"id": "63247",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T03:54:18.480",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T03:54:18.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
] |
63244
|
63247
|
63247
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So i came across this question and I can’t seem to get my head around it!\nSorry if it’s obvious. I learned that the progressive form for a verb (-ing )\nis the ーて form + (-いる/-います） .\n\nSo I am eating is たべています//たべている\n\nHow do you say I was eating ? Past tense .\n\nTo say , I haven’t don’t soemthing (yet) I learned it’s -て+(いない/いまぜん)\n\nSo the positive version would be the same as the progressive form, correct ?\n\nSo basically haven’t yet (past tense) and the progressive form (present) are\nthe same ? How would yo I make a progressive form past tense ?\n\nThank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T06:42:17.580",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63249",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T10:17:32.160",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T07:44:17.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "32167",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "Confused with verb form ( I am eating vs I was eating, vs I haven’t eaten (yet))",
"view_count": 532
}
|
[
{
"body": "To form the past progressive form (`was ～ing`), just change the います/いる to the\npast tense.\n\n> 食べています。 / 食べている。 \n> I am eating (now). [present progressive]\n>\n> 食べていました。 / 食べていた。 \n> I was eating (at that time in the past). [past progressive]\n\nJapanese ている/ていた is indeed tricky because it can express both the progressive\nform (`is/was ～ing`) and the perfect aspect (`(already) have/had done`,\n`have/had not done (yet)`). (Don't mix _past tense_ and _perfect aspect_. \"I\ndid not do it\" is (negative) past tense, and \"I haven't done it yet\" is\n(negative present) perfect aspect.) You can tell the meaning from the verb\nchoice and the context. Instant state-change verbs (aka punctual verbs) like\n死ぬ and 割れる almost always mean \"have done\" when coupled with ている, whereas many\naction verbs like 寝る and 食べる can mean both.\n\n> (もう)食べています。 / (もう)食べている。 \n> I have (already) eaten. [present perfect] \n> *(もう)食べました is more common. See [this\n> question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42242/5010).\n>\n> (まだ)食べていません。 / (まだ)食べていない。 \n> I have not eaten (yet). [negative present perfect]\n>\n> (もう)食べていました。 / (もう)食べていた。 \n> I had (already) eaten. [past perfect]\n\nFor details, please read the following questions (the first one is the most\nimportant):\n\n * [When is Vている the continuation of action and when is it the continuation of state?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010)\n * [Is 寝る a stative or active verb?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/57193/5010)\n * [Why is a verb in the past (た形) contradicted with ～ていない?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42242/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T07:38:19.517",
"id": "63251",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T10:17:32.160",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T10:17:32.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63249",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
63249
| null |
63251
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63312",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found a resource which says the _-eba_ form is a form used to express a\nconditional without supposition or back thought.\n\nI didn't find any others resources that spoke about the same thing. Is this a\nmistake in my resource or is it real ?\n\nIs there another conditional form to specifically express something\nconditional but with a supposition or a back thought ?\n\nI also found this useful post for [Differences among -たら、なら、-んだったら、-えば,\netc](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/393/differences-\namong-%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89-%E3%82%93%E3%81%A0%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-%E3%81%88%E3%81%B0-etc)\nbut it doesn't help my case.\n\nEdit : If someone is French, here is the link of [JLPT-\nGo](http://jlptgo.com/grammaire/60-japonais-conditionnel-general) (the\nressource which says that)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T10:48:54.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63252",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T03:33:39.337",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-09T03:33:39.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "27132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "General conditional (-えば form) expressing something without supposition or back thought?",
"view_count": 222
}
|
[
{
"body": "I read the explanation given in the link and it may be confusing to state it\nlike this. In fact, the 「~えば」conditional form suppose no constraint on the\ncontext and is the most \"open\" conditional form. It implies that the condition\n(sentence in えば) is less probable to happen compared to the other conditional\nform but, if it went to happen (no matter how low are the odds), the action\ndescribed in the second sentence would happen too. The emphasis is more on the\nfact that the condition is hard to meet. Examples :\n\n * もしよかったら ==> If you agree/if you're fine\n\n * もしよければ ==> Same meaning but sounds more hypothetical than the first one, implying that you're requesting something more rude/asking for a favor that burden a lot the person you're speaking to",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T02:45:34.453",
"id": "63312",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T02:45:34.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31846",
"parent_id": "63252",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63252
|
63312
|
63312
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am trying to translate a song and it's pretty difficult one and I'm unsure\njust what kind of meaning these lyrics have:\n\n> この手を伝う 一本の孤独は \n> 人の色が 褪せたままで\n\nMy problem is with 一本 because I have always used it as a counter and the word\nafter this is 孤独, so I don't quite understand well. I looked up on Jisho and\nthere is this meaning of: \"single-minded focus on ...\" \nCan someone give some examples and a better explanation when it's used this\nway, when it is not used as a counter?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T14:11:14.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63254",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T14:39:39.453",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T14:17:57.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "The meaning of 一本 in these lyrics",
"view_count": 111
}
|
[
{
"body": "If this is from [this\nsong](http://www.utamap.com/showkasi.php?surl=k-180801-079), \"一本の孤独 that runs\non my hand/arm\" refers to his [radial\nartery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial_artery) (or maybe a red line made\nby the flowing blood). This is not an idiomatic phrase nor a common metaphor,\nso you just need to understand the whole context of this song. 一本気 is not\nrelevant at all.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T14:25:40.127",
"id": "63255",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T14:39:39.453",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T14:39:39.453",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63254",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63254
| null |
63255
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I read [somewhere](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13127/why-\ndoes-%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8D-use-%E3%81%AA/13145#13145) that 形容動詞 are a special\nsubclass of nouns. Contrarily 形容詞, the い adjectives, are actually a lot more\nsimilar to verbs. During the time that I have been learning Japanese language\n(almost a year) I have developed the notion that verb is an essential part of\na complete sentence and な-adjective can not fullfill the duty of the verb.\nYet, In [The essence of sentence\nconstruction](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/blog/2009/05/18/the-essence-of-\nsentence-construction/) on Tae Kim's Blog, the part about **Treating verb\nphrases as nouns** , in order to make a sentence, な-adjective is used as a\nsubstitute for verb and だ comes after that only \"If you don’t want to sound\ngirly\". In this example on Tae Kim's Blog\n\n> たくさん運動するのはいいが、 **ちゃんと休むのも大切。**\n\nis being treated as a complete sentence and then we read:\n\n> Finally, let’s add a bit of motherly advice-sounding nuance to it and give\n> it a more conversation style, since it sounds like the speaker is trying to\n> admonish the listener.\n>\n> たくさん運動するのはいいけど、ちゃんと休むのも大切よ。\n>\n> If you don’t want to sound girly, you’ll want to add 「だ」 when using 「よ」 with\n> nouns/na-adjectives.\n>\n> たくさん運動するのはいいけど、ちゃんと休むのも大切だよ。\n\nMy question is that, in order to make a complete sentence , 大切 being a\nな-adjective, **why it is not necessary** for a verb to come after it?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T14:27:25.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63256",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-16T05:06:00.790",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "30049",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "Verb after な-adjective, is it necessary to complete the sentence?",
"view_count": 354
}
|
[
{
"body": "I may be misunderstanding your question but I don't think a verb is always\nnecessary after なadjective. In this case, you can think of it that there is a\nbe-verb and sometimes the be-verb is hidden.\n\nThis sentence is omitting the be-verb and it means \"It's good to exercise a\nlot but taking a break is also important\".\n\n> たくさん運動するのはいいが、ちゃんと休むのも大切。\n\nThe be-verb for this sentence could be\n\n> たくさん運動するのはいいが、ちゃんと休むのも大切 **です** 。(formal)\n\nor\n\n> たくさん運動するのはいいが、ちゃんと休むのも大切 **だ** 。(casual)\n\nThe `よ` is just a post positional particle, not a verb. You can look up 終助詞\nfor more explanation on this. In short, it kind of adds a little more nuances\nto the sentence.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T20:58:02.063",
"id": "63334",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T22:40:45.383",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T22:40:45.383",
"last_editor_user_id": "17476",
"owner_user_id": "17476",
"parent_id": "63256",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63256
| null |
63334
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I am adding support for Japanese to a PDF generation tool and I noticed that\npunctuation is sometimes wrapped to a new line.\n\nI don't know enough about the Japanese language to know if this is okay or\nnot. There are some cases where the only character on the new line is\npunctuation which looks very out of place.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ENYAV.png)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T18:24:49.577",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63259",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T18:24:49.577",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32174",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"punctuation"
],
"title": "Is wrapping punctuation to a new line ok?",
"view_count": 218
}
|
[] |
63259
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "お兄ちゃんには一番知られたくなかったかな\n\nI'm confused. Google Translate says \"I don't want brother to know the best\",\nbut I'm not convinced at all.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T19:20:06.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63260",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T13:22:58.747",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T22:17:01.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "32175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What does this mean?",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "> お兄ちゃんには一番知られたくなかったかな\n\nI guess my brother is the last person I wanted to let know (litt: I didn't\nwant to be known by my brother the most)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T20:01:48.503",
"id": "63263",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T13:22:58.747",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-06T13:22:58.747",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63260",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63260
| null |
63263
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What does くっ change to the meaning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T19:35:53.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63261",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T23:34:57.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32056",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 付ける and くっ付ける?",
"view_count": 343
}
|
[
{
"body": "つける ~ join, put, wear... it means to put one thing onto one another.\n\nくっつける ~ stick... so it means to put something onto one another so that it does\nnot come off.\n\nThe くっ from くっつける comes from 食い.\n\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/60197/meaning/m0u/%E9%A3%9F%E3%81%84%E3%81%A4%E3%81%8F/>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T19:59:30.277",
"id": "63262",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T19:59:30.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63261",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "`くっ` is a variant of the prefix `食{く}い～`. So the original form would have been\n食い付ける.\n\nWhen a verb is prefixed with the morpheme `食い～` (or variants like `くっ～`), it\nadds an additional meaning to the base verb. As is obvious from the kanji,\nthis can be the addition of a literal action of eating, chewing, or using the\nmouth/teeth. But it can also be a figurative meaning which adds an idiomatic\nsense to the base verb. From the examples below, you can see that the prefix\n`食い～` seems to add volition and/or intensity to the original action. It is as\nif conjuring up the image of teeth brings with it a certain ferocity which\nlends a sense of struggle (or at least intent) to that original verb.\n\n> **込{こ}む** be crowded → **食{く}い込{こ}む** encroach, erode, bite into\n>\n> **つける** attach → **くっつける** stick together\n>\n> **しばる** fasten → **食{く}いしばる** clench one's teeth\n>\n> **つぶす** crush → **食{く}いつぶす** eat yourself out of everything\n>\n> **入{い}る** go in → **食{く}い入{い}る** encroach upon\n>\n> **ちぎる** tear up → **食{く}いちぎる** bite off\n>\n> **とめる** stop → **食{く}いとめる** hold back\n>\n> **さがる** step back → **くいさがる** cling to, hold back, doggedly oppose\n>\n> **違{ちが}う** differ → **食{く}い違{ちが}う** clash with\n\n_(All definitions from EDICT2 -[LINK](https://www.edrdg.org/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic/wwwjdic?1E))_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-05T23:06:21.467",
"id": "63264",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-05T23:34:57.510",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-05T23:34:57.510",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63261",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63261
| null |
63262
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63267",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A and B waiting for C to bring more leaked photos of XXX.\n\n> A「C、早く来ないでござるかなぁ……XXXの写真、早く見たいでござるよ」\n>\n> B「どんどん過激になってきてますからね～。今度はパンモロとかかもしれませんよ！？」\n>\n> A「それは夢がないでござるよ！ パンツはチラリと見えるくらいが至高でござる！」\n\nそれは夢がないでござるよ - \"that\" (full panty shot) is not a dream, just a glimpse....\n\nそれは夢がないでござるよ has to mean something closer to \"that's a pipe dream is it not\"\nto make logical sense, but how does it get there?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T04:42:32.830",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63266",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T05:15:43.493",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-06T04:53:28.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 夢がない said by this speaker mean?",
"view_count": 199
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, you seem to have ignored the basic grammar; が is a subject\nmarker and ～がない means \"there is no ～\".\n\n * 夢で(は)ない。 That is not a dream.\n * 夢がない。 There is no dream.\n\nSo それは夢がないでござるよ literally means \"There is no dream in it (=パンモロ)\" or \"パンモロ has\nno dream\". I think you can now guess the meaning, but here 夢がない (\"having no\ndream\", \"dreamless\") means something like \"does not stir one's imagination\",\n\"has no room for imagination\", \"too explicit and thus not exciting\", etc. 夢がある\nmeans \"promising\", \"dreamy\", \"fantastic\", \"not very realistic but exciting\nanyway\", etc.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T05:15:43.493",
"id": "63267",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T05:15:43.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63266",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63266
|
63267
|
63267
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I've doubt about な.\n\nI've to use it only when I'm talking in present tense?\n\nExample:\n\n> １）きれいな人だ \n> ２）きれいな人だった\n\nThe second one is valid?\n\nThanks in advance!",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T08:13:24.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63268",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T00:29:36.933",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T00:29:36.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "32180",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "な Adjectives - Only in present tense?",
"view_count": 95
}
|
[] |
63268
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can anyone explain me what are the differences between `Nounに感じる` and\n`Nounを感じる`. I currently understand `Nounを感じる` as \"To feel Noun\", but I don't\nknow what's `Nounに感じる`. For an example:\n\n> こんなにも近くに感じてる (It's from a song)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T09:12:58.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63269",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T23:29:22.343",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-06T14:50:02.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "32181",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Nounに感じる vs. Nounを感じる",
"view_count": 272
}
|
[
{
"body": "In your example, 近く is a noun that means a close place, and に indicates a\npoint where the target of perception exists. So, it technically means that you\nfeel something at a close place. However, it seems more like saying something\nfeels close to you, which is the same as …を近く感じる, actually, assuming a cliche.\n\nThis structure, I mean, Xを Yに 感じる (or other verbs of perception) has another\nmeaning, like others say. You can compare something to something else. e.g.\nそれを問題に感じる: I find that it's a problem / I find it problematic",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T23:29:22.343",
"id": "63282",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T23:29:22.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "63269",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63269
| null |
63282
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63272",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There are several instances where I noticed people use に to mean something\nalong the lines of \"and\". Here's an example: <https://youtu.be/3cjyUg-\nXjjU?t=24>\n\nI think the narrator says, \"修理人が使う道具は、牛の皮、ハンマー **に** 、庖丁と呼ばれる[刃も?].\n\nAlso, a line from a manga that describes a superhero reads、\n\n```\n\n その能力はスーパーパワーに\n ビーム・バリアー\n 飛行能力に回復力\n \n```\n\nThe に in question is the one in the third line.\n\nI've searched all over the web for something that explains this usage, but\nI've found nothing. Does anyone what it is?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T09:18:08.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63270",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T13:42:53.780",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-06T09:45:45.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "29917",
"owner_user_id": "29917",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"particles"
],
"title": "「に」used to signify addition?",
"view_count": 127
}
|
[
{
"body": "に can be used to enumerate things and be translated by \"and\".\n\nLiterally, it means \"onto\" (I think), so it feels like you're adding up\nsomething onto another thing.\n\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/166083/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%AB/>\n\n> ［並助］並列・列挙・添加・取り合わせを表す。「バターにチーズに牛乳」「月にむら雲、花に嵐」\n\nIt should be two words (or more) from the same semantic field. As you can see\nin the example sentences, the words are kinda related to each other.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T13:42:53.780",
"id": "63272",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T13:42:53.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63270",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63270
|
63272
|
63272
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I’m reading a manga and I’m a little confused to the meaning of きれる in this\ncontext.\n\n> “甘さを自覚した三浦くんは \n> 私に受け止めきれるかな”\n\nWhen I asked one of my friends she told me it’s along the lines “I’ve realized\nthe sweet side Miura-kun has towards me and I wonder how I can get completely\nused to it.” \nI understand that きれる can also mean completely so, is that correct? Or is it\nmore along the lines “I wonder If i will be able to handle Miura-kun, who has\nnoticed how sweet he is himself?” Thank you very much.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T15:46:01.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63276",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T01:12:43.240",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T00:30:58.567",
"last_editor_user_id": "32185",
"owner_user_id": "32185",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does the Verb きれる mean here?",
"view_count": 910
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes this 切れる is the potential form of 切る, which means \"completely\". See also:\n[Is there any difference in meaning between 「抜け切る」 and\n「抜ける」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/33789/5010)\n\n甘さを自覚した三浦くん means \"Miura-kun who is aware of his (own) sweetness\". ~~This 甘さ\nis[考えの甘さ](http://pinasan.com/english/today_study/16251)~~. The sentence is not\nsaying \"sweet side of Miura-kun\" (三浦くんの甘さ). If you are still not good at\nrelative clauses, please review its grammar now. 三浦くん is the subject of 自覚する.\n\nI don't know how to translate 受け止める since there is not enough context. If this\nis a battle manga, this 受け止める should mean \"to stop/endure his blow/attack\". If\nthis is a love story, it should mean something like \"to accept him\".\n\n> 甘さを自覚した三浦くんは私に受け止めきれるかな。 \n> I wonder if I can fully accept/stop Miura-kun, who is now aware of his\n> (own) sweetness...",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T17:00:53.430",
"id": "63278",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T01:12:43.240",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T01:12:43.240",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63276",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "This is intended as a supplement to naruto's answer.\n\nIt might be easier to understand きれる via an easier example first. Take the\nverb 食べる (to eat). First attach きる to the base (continuative form /連用形) of the\nverb to make the verb:\n\n> 食べきる to eat it all, eat everything until it is finished\n> ([definition)](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E9%A3%9F%E3%81%B9%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8B)\n\nNow you can make the potential form of 食べきる (godan) by changing it to:\n\n> 食べきれる to able to eat it all, be able to eat everything until it is finished\n\nAs for 受け止めきれる, please refer to naruto's answer.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T18:36:02.770",
"id": "63280",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T18:36:02.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63276",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
63276
| null |
63278
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63294",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Referring to the sound of an extreme megaphone:\n\n> 地上なら、何十キロ **と** 遠くまで達する音だ。 \n> If it's above ground it is a sound that will reach as far as several tens\n> of kilometres.\n\nI'm pretty confident I've translated this correctly but I don't understand how\nthe と particle is working here.\n\nMy guess is that it is being used to mark a standard for comparison. So in\nreally bad English I have \"The sound reaches distantly, as much as compared to\ntens of kilometres\".\n\nIf my above assumption is true then what happens if I remove まで? My guess is\nthat the sentence becomes ungrammatical. So I can have 地上なら、遠く達する音だ. But\nneither 地上なら、遠くまで達する音だ nor 地上なら、何十キロと遠く達する音だ make sense on their own.\n\nIn summary I feel that the と and まで particles are teaming up in this sentence.\nTo give AとBまで with a meaning \"As much as characteristic B when compared to A\".\n\nCould I rephrase it as:\n\n> 地上なら、何十キロほど遠く達する音だ。\n\nWould that be wrong? Have a different feel?\n\nIs my analysis correct? If not please enlighten me.\n\n**Edit:**\n\nThe suggested duplicate explains と. but it leaves me more confused, because I\nthought まで was playing the part of 'as much as'. What is まで doing? Can it be\nremoved? I still don't understand the overall grammar of the sentence.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T18:23:07.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63279",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T15:39:30.987",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T08:25:07.637",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"particle-まで"
],
"title": "Particle と as a standard of comparison with まで",
"view_count": 343
}
|
[
{
"body": "Since it seems like the question about the と was resolved, I'll just comment\nabout the まで.\n\nI think the use of まで in the original sentence simply expresses to a certain\nextent, similar to the phrase \"空港までお願いします” (which you could say to a Taxi\ndriver).\n\nRegarding your replacement with ほど, I feel that (based on [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/31099/%E3%81%A8-after-\ncounting-something?noredirect=1&lq=1) which I had asked) も and と can be used\nwith uncertain amounts, whereas ほど to me does not feature natural in that\ncase. In other words, saying \"10キロほど\" sounds OK, but \"何キロほど\" a little\nunnatural. (I don't think the grammar changes when 遠く is added)\n\nBy the way, I think the description \"as much as\" applies more to ほど but not as\nmuch to まで.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T15:26:51.627",
"id": "63287",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T15:39:30.987",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-08T15:39:30.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "63279",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "と and まで don't really have anything to do with each other here. と～まで isn't a\ngrammar point or some kind of fixed pattern, its just と being used with まで in\nthe same sentence.\n\nNow と has a meaning that is to me pretty close to も, which is:\n\n> ６ （数量を表す語に付き、打消しの表現を伴って）その範囲以上には出ない意を表す。…までも。「全部で一〇〇円―かからない」「一〇〇キロ―走らなかった」\n\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/154670/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%A8/>\n\nSo basically it means that the 遠く will not go beyond 何十キロ. (not more than)\n\nAs for まで:\n\n> １ 動作・事柄の及ぶ距離的、時間的な限度・範囲・到達点を表す。「ここ迄来れば安心だ」「明日迄待ってください」「東京から大阪迄三時間かかる」\n\nIt focuses much more on the distance between an implied point A, and the point\nB marked with まで. (until)\n\nSo (at least to me), it literally means:\n\n> 何十キロと遠くまで達する音だ : it is a sound that reaches until far (a distance) not more\n> than a few 10 kilometers\n\nAnd:\n\n> 地上なら、何十キロほど遠く達する音だ。\n\nFeels ungrammatical",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T16:24:20.290",
"id": "63290",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T16:24:20.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63279",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Now probably you are confused by the series of non-obvious idiomatic\nexpressions. A more literal translation would be:\n\n> 地上なら、［［何十キロと］［遠くまで］達する］音だ。 \n> _It is a sound that [should reach [to a distance], [by tens of kilometers]]\n> if on the ground._\n\nSo yours is correct as a whole too, but there is no connection between 何十キロと\nand 遠くまで, as both are independent qualifiers to the verb.\n\n * **何十キロと** \nAs previously pointed out, this と is covered by [と after counting\nsomething](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/31099/7810), the way to remind\nabout greatness of the amount. You can actually translate this part alone \"as\nfar as tens of kilometers\". 何十キロほど just means \"some tens of km\" or \"roughly\ntens of km\", but 何十キロほど **も** would be somewhat close to this.\n\n * **遠くまで** \nThis is _noun_\n[遠く](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/157255/meaning/m0u/%E9%81%A0%E3%81%8F/)\n\"distant place\" + postposition まで \"till\".\n\nTo explain 遠く first, we have adverb-looking forms 遠く and\n[近く](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/141163/meaning/m0u/%E8%BF%91%E3%81%8F/)\nas very commonly used nouns (though tend to become adjective in English\ntranslations).\n\n> 電話は遠くに住む人と会話できる _By telephone you can talk with people living far away (= in\n> a distant place)._\n>\n> 遠くの親戚より近くの他人 _Strangers nearby rather than relatives faraway._ (A near\n> friend is better than a far-dwelling kinsman.)\n\nOn top of this, 遠くまで \"up to a distance\" should be memorized as if a fixed\nphrase, since it translates a part of usage of English \"far\". Why? Because\nJapanese 遠い is not just \"long way\" but \"separated by a long distance\", in\nother words, \"removed by distance in the way two points do not interact\".\nThus, a phrase like 遠く達する will be, positively saying, poetic, and negatively,\nunnatural (because it actually reaches the other side). For this reason, 遠くまで\nis the normal phrase we use to describe something travels \"far\".\n\n> ○ 遠くまで来たものだ _we've come a long way; we've come this far_ \n> ○ 遠く（へ／に）来たものだ \n> × 遠く来たものだ",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T17:33:24.557",
"id": "63294",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T17:43:16.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T17:43:16.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63279",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63279
|
63294
|
63294
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I don't know how to differentiate between these 2 meanings of 控える:\n\n> 5. 〔止める，見合わせる〕 勝手な発言は **控えて** ください \n> Please refrain from speaking without permission.\n>\n> 6. 〔少なめにする〕塩分を **控え** なさい \n> Cut down on your intake of salt.\n>\n>\n\nIn this sentence:\n\n> 少なくともそれまではお酒とたばこは **控えて** もらえますか？\n\nHow do we know if it's limiting or stopping completely?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-06T23:20:41.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63281",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T02:38:25.393",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T07:54:33.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "32056",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Trouble with the ambiguous verb 控える",
"view_count": 230
}
|
[
{
"body": "控える basically means cutting down on or refraining from, but to a reasonable\nextent rather than stopping completely. In the case of 塩分, it's impossible to\ncompletely remove salt from your food in the first place. In the case of\n少なくともそれまではお酒とたばこは控える, most people would probably try to stop using/abstain\nfrom them completely, but some people may just cut back. If a physician\nseriously wants a patient to stop smoking completely, they would unambiguously\nsay 禁煙してください or タバコは止めてください.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T02:05:19.717",
"id": "63283",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T02:34:02.043",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-31T02:34:02.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63281",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "In your case, the actually implied prohibition level is still not clear\nwithout broader context. But if I'm allowed to guess from that piece, I tend\nto think you are advised to stop.\n\nGenerally speaking, 控える is a polite way to tell people that something is\n_strongly discouraged_ , i.e. the less the better, but you might do it to a\ndegree that doesn't get much in the way of the goal. This verb has another\nmeaning \"wait on someone at the side\", so you can see that you are expected to\ndo nothing, or at least act without being obstructive. For example, imagine if\nthe chair says 勝手な発言は控えてください in the hearing of the entire conference room, so\nit practically equals \"don't do\".\n\n* * *\n\n**PS**\n\nAccording to [大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/183264/meaning/m0u/):\n\n> **２** \n> ㋐度を越さないように、分量・度数などを少なめにおさえる。節制する。「酒を―・える」「塩分を―・える」 \n> ㋑自制や配慮をして、それをやめておく。見合わせる。「外出を―・える」「発言を―・える」\n\n> [補説] **2**\n> ㋐㋑について、「抜歯後はお酒を控えてください」とあった場合、㋐の「少なければ飲んでもいい」の意味ではなく、㋑の「自制して飲まない」の意味ととらえるのが妥当であろう。「アルコールを摂取した場合は運転を控えてください」は、明らかに㋑の意味である。\n\nIn my experience, 控える in medical advice lingo is \"never\" in most cases. If\nthey want to tell you to reduce the amount, I feel they will say 控えめにしてください.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T05:24:26.413",
"id": "63285",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T02:38:25.393",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-31T02:38:25.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63281",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63281
| null |
63283
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63286",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tHXuu.png)\n\nI read from **[this interesting\narticle](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2018/10/29/language/ghost-kanji-\nlurk-japanese-lexicon/#.XAnSvMmKs0c)** that it's included in **[幽霊文字 (yuurei\nmoji/ghost kanji\n(character)](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B9%BD%E9%9C%8A%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97)**.\nI tried to look up each of those kanjis:\n\nI use these sites to look up those kanjis:\n\na. **[jisho.org](https://jisho.org)**\n\nb. **[yahoo.jp](https://dic.yahoo.co.jp/search/)**\n\nc. **[goo.ne.jp](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch)**\n\nd. **[alc.co.jp](https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?)**\n\n**Here are the results:**\n\n> 1. **jisho** : 彁 = (no known meaning; S&H uses jabberwocky words?)\n>\n> じゅんこ 【彁】 (Junko - unclassified name)\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n\nMy own observation: it might relate to: **謌 (uta/ka, sing or recite) ** and\n**彊 (彊 (kyō/tsuyo(i))** and **歌 (uta/ka, sing)** ; which is カ、セイ?\n\n> 2. **jisho** : 墸 = hesitate [ On: チョ ] (no sentence example)\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n\nMy own observation: it might relate to: **堵** (mistaken character) = fence,\nrailing, enclosure.\n\n> 3. **jisho** : 壥 = fine residence, shop, store [ On: テン ] (no sentence\n> example)\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n>\n> 4. **jisho:** 挧 (Japanese horse chestnut?) [Kun:とち] [On:ウ]\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n>\n> 5. **jisho** : 暃 (be separated) [On: ヒ]\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n>\n> 6. **jisho:** 椦 (wickerwork) Kun: まげもの On: ケン\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n\nMy observation: A mistake of **橳** ? or 群馬県に自生する妖怪というが、見つかっていない。\n\n> 7. **jisho:** 槞 (cage) On: ロウ (or ru)\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n>\n> 8. **jisho:** 蟐 (mantis, toad?(kokuji))\n>\n> **related** : 蟷螂 (かまきり) = praying mantis (esp. the narrow-winged mantis,\n> Tenodera angustipennis). In kotobank, it's:\n> **[カマキリ類の総称.](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E8%9F%90-1763858#E5.8B.95.E6.A4.8D.E7.89.A9.E5.90.8D.E3.82.88.E3.81.BF.E3.81.8B.E3.81.9F.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8.E3.80.80.E6.99.AE.E5.8F.8A.E7.89.88)**\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n>\n> 9. **jisho:** 袮 (ancestral shrine, embroidery) [On:デイ、 ネ、 チ]\n>\n> yahoo: none\n>\n> goo.ne: none\n>\n> alc: none\n>\n> 10. **jisho:** 閠 (intercalation, illegitimate throne) (Kun: うるう On:ケイ、 >\n> ギョク、 ジュン). A mistake of **閏**?\n>\n> 11. **jisho: 駲** (horse's buttocks, horse's tail) (On: シュウ、 ジュン)\n>\n> 12. **jisho** : 妛 (despise, contempt, ugly, same as) (Kun: あなど.る、 おろ か、\n> みにく.い、 みだる) (On: シ)\n>\n> All last three also don't have clear examples/usages.\n\nOthers:\n\n * **垉** ホウ (Break; collapse)\n\n**汢** ねた (Marsh)\n\n**穃** ヨウ (No meaning??)\n\n**粫** ジ、メン、うるち (Gluten-free grain)\n\n**鍄** キョウ、リョウ Clamp\n\n**垈** タイ、ダイ、ぬた Wetlands\n\n**恷** キュウ、ク Be contrary; nice\n\n**熕** おおづつ Cannon\n\n**粐** コ、ロ、ぬか Rice-bran (pieces of grain husk separated from flour after\nmilling.)\n\n**糘** すくも Chaff\n\n**鵈** とび Kite (bird)\n\n**岾** はけ、やま Mountain\n\n**橸** まさ Straight grain\n\n**碵** いしずえ Cornerstone\n\n**粭** すくも Chaff\n\n**膤** セツ、そり、ゆき、たら Snow\n\n**軅** たか、やがて After all (A mistake of 軈?)\n\n**靹** ケツ、とも Archer's arm protector (A mistake of 鞆?)\n\nI find that these **'Japanese-only'** Kanji fascinating. I can only take a\nglimpse of its meaning through the parts. I take that these must be obscure\ncharacters since it's included in \"Ghost Kanji Characters\". I couldn't find\nthese characters in Chinese Dictionary either even though these are considered\n\"Kanjis\".\n\n**Here are my questions:**\n\n> 1.What are the usages and word-pairs/collocation or sentence example that\n> represent the meaning(s) of these Kanji? How do you use it? How often?\n>\n> 2.As a native Japanese or a foreigner who lives for the longest time in\n> Japan, have you used (or at least tried to use) these kanjis?\n>\n> 3.Is its usage only limited to **research or linguistics study**?\n>\n> 4.What does \" **S &H** uses jabberwocky words\" mean? Does it mean a **\n> nonsensical language aka nonsense word**? (what is **'S &H?'**)\n>\n> 5.Are all my assumptions correct? I mean the misintended character? Did I\n> miss something?\n\n**[Additional\nreferences](https://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E5%B9%BD%E9%9C%8A%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97)**\n\n**Notes:**\n\nPlease help me to answer as thorough as possible so that we can contribute to\nthis se. Short answer may suffice if you can summarize all the points well.\n\nThank you very much for all your answers!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T04:49:56.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63284",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T15:17:39.607",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T05:01:10.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "10323",
"owner_user_id": "10323",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"kanji",
"archaic-language"
],
"title": "What is the usage of these 12 kanjis (彁, 墸,壥,挧,暃,椦,槞,蟐,袮,閠,駲,妛)+18 more in modern Japanese? How to read it?",
"view_count": 1631
}
|
[
{
"body": "The [wikipedia\npage](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B9%BD%E9%9C%8A%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97) you\nlinked has a section about usage.\n\nAccording to that, since the definition of ghost kanji is that there is no\nknown usage, by definition, there is no past usage. After they appeared in the\nsystem by mistake, there has been some modern usage, but all examples\nmentioned in the article are misuse while trying to write a similar but\ndifferent kanji. There are no truly intentional usage example mentioned in the\narticle.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T15:17:39.607",
"id": "63286",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T15:17:39.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63284",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63284
|
63286
|
63286
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63293",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In Chinese, [控 means](http://www.zdic.net/z/1a/js/63A7.htm):\n\n> 1. 告状，指出罪恶：～告。～诉。指～。被～。 (accuse of wrong doing)\n>\n> 2. 节制，驾驭：～制。遥～。 (to restrain/cause to move)\n>\n> 3. 开弓：弓不再～。 (to use a bow)\n>\n> 4. 投：～于地。(to throw something)\n>\n> 5. 人的头部朝下或使让残液流出容器的口朝下：～净。～一～。(to tip something down i.e. head/bottle)\n\nI checked the Kangxi dictionary and it seems to that the definition was 1-4 as\nwell back then.\n\nThese largely match with the [Japanese definition for\n控える](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%8E%A7%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B%E3%83%BB%E6%89%A3%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B-364405),\nbut the following don't seem at all related (along with every definition for\nthe intransitive use of the word):\n\n> （他動詞）\n>\n> ④ すぐ近くにある、ということを他動詞的に表現する。\n>\n> * ㋐ 近い関係にある。 「近くに有数の観光地を－・えた都市」 「代議士がバックに－・えている」\n>\n> * ㋑ 時間的に間近にせまる。 「開会式を三日後に－・えて準備に忙しい」\n>\n>\n\n>\n> ⑤ 記録にとどめる。メモする。 「電話番号を手帳に－・える」\n\nWhere did these meanings come from? Was ひかえる a native word that meant \"close\nto\" (or to take notes I suppose) already and just took on the kanji 控?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T16:14:37.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63288",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T16:56:57.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "How did 控える come to mean \"close to\"",
"view_count": 149
}
|
[
{
"body": "## TL;DR:\n\nYou ask:\n\n> Was [this] a native word that ... just took on the kanji?\n\nIn short, **yes**. :)\n\n## The longer details\n\n### Japanese etymologies\n\nFor any word in Japanese, you have to ask first, \"is this a _kun'yomi_ native\nJapanese term, a 大和言葉【やまとことば】? Or is this an _on'yomi_ borrowing from Middle\nChinese, a 漢語【かんご】? Or is it some combination?\"\n\nThese three questions drill down to the history of the word. The oldest\nJapanese words are (generally speaking) the _kun'yomi_. Borrowings from Middle\nChinese were brought over mostly in the 400s through around the 700s.\nCombinations were later coinages in Japan, mixing and matching pieces from\nthese earlier two boxes.\n\nThe word _hikaeru_ is a native Japanese term. Consequently, we can ignore the\nkanji: pretty much all kanji spellings for _kun'yomi_ words are after-the-fact\napplications of a borrowed non-native writing system, and thus the kanji\nspellings are not fully relevant to the origins of the term's derivations and\ncore meanings.\n\n### General derivational patterns\n\nThere are many verbs in modern Japanese that end in _-aeru_. Many (but not\nall) of these verbs originally derive from a base verb in the 未然形【みぜんけい】\n(\"irrealis or incomplete form\", for type 1 verbs this is the stem ending in\n_-a_ ) + auxiliary verb ending ふ denoting repeated or continued action, or\nongoing state.\n\n * This auxiliary had the 下二段活用【しもにだんかつよう】 (\"lower bigrade conjugation\") pattern, where the different conjugations ended in either _-u_ or _-e_. These pretty much all simplified over time into just the _-e_ stem, with the terminal (sentence-ending) and attributive (noun-modifying) forms ending in _-eru_.\n * Many medial (mid-word) \"f\" sounds softened further to \"w\" and then vanished. \n * → These two historical trends together mean that ancient auxiliary ふ later became へる, and then modern える.\n\nSo the key to understanding the many uses of these verbs is to look at the\nbase form.\n\n### Specifics of 控【ひか】える\n\nFor 控【ひか】える, more detailed monolingual Japanese dictionaries show that this\nhas the older kana spelling ひかへる, and derives from the older form ひかふ. This\ntells us that we're dealing with 未然形【みぜんけい】 + auxiliary ふ, so we can find the\nbase form by removing the _-aeru_ from the modern verb, which here leaves us\nwith _hik-_. This is the root of modern verb 引【ひ】く, \"to pull, to draw close\".\nThe auxiliary adds the shade of meaning of either \"to be pulling, to be\ndrawing close\" (as a repeated or continuous action), or \"to keep close: to\nhave pulled, to have drawn close\" (as an ongoing state as the result of the\naction).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T16:56:57.460",
"id": "63293",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T16:56:57.460",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "63288",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63288
|
63293
|
63293
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63296",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I noticed the rare reading of メン contained in the word 雌鳥{めんどり} and I wondered\nhow this unusual reading could have come about. I am not aware of any other\nwords which use this reading for 雌. Is it simply that めんどり is easier to say\nthan めすとり or めすどり ? If that is the case, shouldn't 雌トラ be めんどら? Or is there a\ndifferent reason such as the reading being a relic from an archaic\npronunciation?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T16:23:56.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63289",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T18:09:22.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"readings"
],
"title": "Why is 雌 also read as メン?",
"view_count": 165
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to [デジタル大辞泉](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%9B%8C%E9%B3%A5-644145)...\n\n> めん‐どり【▽雌鳥】 \n> 《「めどり」の音変化》...\n\n> おん‐どり〔をん‐〕【▽雄鳥】 \n> 《「おとり」の音変化》...\n\nAnd 大辞林 says...\n\n> めんどり【雌鳥】 \n> 〔「めどり」の撥音添加〕\n\n> おんどり【雄鳥】 \n> 〔「おとり」の転〕\n\nSo it seems...\n\nめどり → （撥音添加） → めんどり \nおとり → （撥音添加 + 連濁） → おんどり\n\nSome examples of 撥音添加 include...\n\nみな（皆） → みんな \nなにも（何も） → なんにも \nおなじ（同じ） → おんなじ \nこぶ（昆布） → こんぶ \nとび（鳶） → とんび\n\n(But you don't call female tiger as めんどら...)\n\n* * *\n\n**UPDATE:**\n\nAs pointed out by @Eiríkr in the comments below, it might be more reasonable\nto think of it as...\n\nめ(す)のとり → contraction(の→ん)+連濁(と→ど) → めんどり\n\n... Now I'm not totally sure... Let's wait for others to post better answers!\n^^",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T17:37:25.153",
"id": "63296",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T18:09:22.963",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-07T18:09:22.963",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63289",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63289
|
63296
|
63296
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63292",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I saw the word **歪形** written in a food blog and was surprised to learn that\nthe reading is **いがみなり** ([Weblio\nDefinition](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E6%AD%AA%E5%BD%A2)). If this were a\nstandard case of _jukujikun_ , I think it would be read differently. And it is\ndefinitely not standard _ateji_ either since the meanings of the kanji are\nclearly being employed. The いがみ part seems to resemble ゆがみ and also has the い\nof いびつ - is it possible that it is some kind of hybrid of these two readings?\nIs なり sometimes used as a type of glossary reading of the kanji 形？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T16:35:01.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63291",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T03:17:28.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"readings"
],
"title": "Why is 歪形 read as いがみなり?",
"view_count": 138
}
|
[
{
"body": "Those just happen to be one reading of each of those characters. From my\ndictionary (using **Gjiten** with **edict** in Linux)\n\n> * [歪]{いが}む → to warp; to swerve; to deflect; to be crooked; to be\n> distorted; to be bent; to incline; to slant; to be perverted; to be gross-\n> grained; to get bent; to be strained;\n> * [歪]{いが}み → (n) strain; distortion; deformation; bend;\n> * [形]{なり} → (n,adj-no) (uk) style; way; shape; form; appearance; state;\n>\n\nSo it's not a 熟字訓; just two 訓読みs together.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T16:51:10.973",
"id": "63292",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T16:51:10.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "63291",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "You might be aware of Japanese indigenous language (和語 wago) before Chinese\nwords were imported.\n\nImported Chinese characters having same/similar meaning were applied to Wago\nbut still being pronounced as the way it was. It is said kun-yomi. While on-\nyomi is as you know well.\n\nWago \"いがむ\" and \"ゆがむ\" are phonetic variations, while \"いびつ\" has worse\nconnotation of being incomplete, so that, I believe they would be reluctant to\nuse いびつ at formal occasions such as dining gatherings.\n\nWago \"なり\" means 形. Like in idiom of なりふり構わず, なり is 形 and ふり is 振 or 挙動 in\nmodern Japanese.\n\nSo, wago いがみなり means 歪んだ形 and it can be written as 歪形. But I believe very few\nJapanese people can read it いがみなり, when they encounter 歪形 on a paper or\nmonitor screen. Very possibly they will read it as わいけい, and I feel nobody can\nblame them because wago いがみなり is not a general vocabulary for modern Japanese\nlife.\n\nいがみなり is an archaic word and modern Japanese people will use 歪んだ形 for\nexpressing same matter.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T03:17:28.447",
"id": "63301",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T03:17:28.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32184",
"parent_id": "63291",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63291
|
63292
|
63292
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 新しく首相に就任した安倍晋三氏は、その著書『美しい国へ』（文春新書）において次のようなことを書いている。人は、自分が育った郷土に対して素朴な愛着をもつが、それはどこからくるのだろうか。それは、その国の歴史や伝統、文化などに接しているうちにはぐくまれてきたものである。だから「自らが帰属する国がつむいできた歴史や伝統、また文化に誇りをもちたいと思うのは、だれがなんといおうと、本来、ごく自然の感情なのである」。\n>\n>\n> 確かに、人は、自分が育った郷土に対して素朴な愛情をもつ。しかし、それがそのまま自然に国を愛する気持ちになるかというと、必ずしもそうはいえない。特に、現代の若い世代にとって、「国を愛する」ということが、「だれがなんといおうと、ごく自然の感情である」というほど自明である、というとかなり心もとないのではなかろうか。\n>\n>\n> では、「国を愛する」とはどういうことか。どこからでてくることなのか。実は、その後で、安倍氏自身、その答えを書いている。それは、たとえば、外国に行くとすぐにわかることだ。外国人はただ外国語がうまいというだけでは心を開いてくれない。外国人がわれわれに関心を持つのは、ただ抽象的な個人ではなく、その人間の正体、つまり、彼の帰属する国に、彼が背負っている歴史や伝統や文化に関心を持っているのである。\n>\n> その通りであって、私というものの正体（Who am\n> I?）を見せなければ、外国人と真のコミューニケーションはできない。そして「私は誰か（Who?）」を構成する無視し得ない要素が、彼が帰属する「国」なのである。\n> **さらにいえば、この場は誰か」「私はどこに帰属するのか」と問われば、「国」という要素は意識にのぼらない。**\n> 「国を愛する」ということは決して自然で自明とわけではないのであって、いってみれば、一種の倫理的な要素、あるいは決断という要素を含んでいる\n\nThis is the whole passage for context , but I'm basically confused about the\nsentence beginning with さらにいえば.\n\nEssentially, to me it seems the author is trying to say that a person's\ncountry is a vital component of the question of who someone is, and a\nrequirement for communication with foreigners.\n\nThe part that I don't really get is what he means by\n\"「この場は誰か」「私はどこに帰属するのか」と問われば\", because first of all, ｢この場は誰か」makes little sense\nto me due to its ambiguity ('This place is who?' / 'This place is whose'? /\n'From now, who?'), and none of the potential meanings I can see actually fit\nthe idea that \"country is not something that you would think of as a\ncomponent\".\n\nSecondly, I'm not sure who is actually asking these questions, or if they are\nactual questions and not 'constructions' like the above ｢私は誰か？」. Does he mean\n\"you wouldn't think of country as an element in the construction of 'where do\nI belong'? That to me seems weird, because I would imagine it is an element\nthat people would think of...",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T17:33:52.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63295",
"last_activity_date": "2020-10-17T04:02:50.293",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "Difficulties with an ambiguous sentence",
"view_count": 255
}
|
[
{
"body": "Those questions are actual questions. Well, more like hypothetical questions\nto be asked to (young? Japanese) people. The concept of _country_ does not\ncome to mind for those people when asked those questions. It sounds like you\nmight be conflating your own view of the situation (that country is an element\nthat people would think of when asked \" _what do I belong to_ \") with what the\nauthor is saying:\n\n> 「国を愛する」ということは決して自然で自明とわけではないのであって\n\n\"Loving one's country\" is definitely not something that is naturally self-\nevident.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T20:29:00.067",
"id": "63298",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-07T20:29:00.067",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"parent_id": "63295",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63295
| null |
63298
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63300",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[と after counting\nsomething](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/31099/%E3%81%A8-after-\ncounting-something) and [～と多い here\nmeaning?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/33989/%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%A8%E5%A4%9A%E3%81%84-here-\nmeaning)\n\nThe first link says that we can't use concrete numbers but it doesn't seem to\nbe the case in the second link?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-07T19:34:17.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63297",
"last_activity_date": "2022-10-28T02:42:26.817",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-20T02:49:06.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "32056",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Particle-と used with numbers: Are these different?",
"view_count": 469
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes these are different. There are (at least) three ways of using `number +\ncounter + と`, and they have different nuances.\n\n 1. `concrete number + counter + と + adjective`\n\nThis is for showing a concrete figure before using an adjective like 大きい/短い/重い\nor a verb like 倍増した/減った/安定した. Probably this is a kind of quotative-と. The\nnumber/amount can be big, small, or neither.\n\n> * 今回のオリンピックの開催期間は22日間と長かった。\n> * アンケートの結果は「とても良い」が15.2%とかなり少なかった。\n> * 部屋の温度は23℃と、暑くも寒くもなかった。\n> * その商品の値段は1300円と、去年のほぼ2倍になった。\n\n 2. `abstract number (usually with 何) + counter + と + verb`, `abstract number + counter + という + noun`\n\nThis is used only when the number/amount is big. \"no less than\", \"as much/many\nas\", \"millions/thousands/tons of ～\", etc.\n\n> * この橋の建設には何百億円とかかっている。 \n> = この橋の建設には何百億円という費用がかかっている。\n> * 彼は兵士を何万人と率いていた。 \n> = 彼は何万人という兵士を率いていた。\n\n 3. `round number + counter + と + negative expression`\n\n\"(not) even\", \"no more than\", etc. Used with some small round number and\nimplies the actual number/amount is even smaller.\n\n> * 1時間と歩かずに、その町に到着するでしょう。\n> * 全部買っても500円とかからなかった。\n> * 彼は非常に多弁であり、5分と黙っていられない。",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T00:48:14.467",
"id": "63300",
"last_activity_date": "2022-10-28T02:42:26.817",
"last_edit_date": "2022-10-28T02:42:26.817",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63297",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
63297
|
63300
|
63300
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63303",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading the bible in Japanese a bit and came across this bit of Jonah 1:\n\n> アミタイの子ヨナに、主から次のようなことばがありました。\n\nNotice how the noun-phrase \"Jonah son of Amittai\" in the NIV became \"アミタイの子ヨナ\"\nin the Japanese JLB. From what I can tell it could also have been written\n\"アミタイの子のヨナ\" but instead the second possessive is implied by word order.\n\nI've seen this in other instances as well, and I'm really curious: when\nexactly can one get away with implying the possessive like this? I'm really\ncurious as whenever I try to, apparently I can never get it right and still\nhave no clue what I'm doing wrong.\n\nPS. If asking when can you imply the possessive is to much, feel free to\nanswer when you CAN'T imply it if that would make it more answerable.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T03:27:30.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63302",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T11:33:30.627",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-08T11:33:30.627",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17968",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"possession"
],
"title": "When can I get away with implying the の possessive?",
"view_count": 135
}
|
[
{
"body": "Apposition without の (i.e. …子ヨナ) sounds fairly formal, or could be theatrical\nor narrative, compared with the one with it (…子のヨナ). So, you will do it when\nyou want that rhetorical effect.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T04:23:12.530",
"id": "63303",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T04:23:12.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "63302",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63302
|
63303
|
63303
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My question is rather specific, but I have wondered about it since it would\nactually drastically change the meaning of what I'm trying to say.\n\nIs 間 directly connected to the verb?\n\nAs this question sounds odd, I'll try to specify it with an example:\n\n> 「三ヵ月間、日本に行きます。」 \n> (I hope the sentence is actually grammatically correct whoops.)\n\nIf I use the sentence like this, does it mean\n\na) \"I will go to Japan for three months.\" \nb) \"I will go to Japan and the process of going there will take me three\nmonths (but I'm not specifying how long I will actually stay there).\" \nc) It could mean both of the sentences above and depends on the context.?\n\nThanks for the help! \nC",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T08:37:02.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63305",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T08:51:07.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-08T15:44:11.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30739",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "Use of 間 to talk about a span of time (and connection to the verb)",
"view_count": 182
}
|
[
{
"body": "I would choose the C option : It heavily depends on the context.\n\nThe sentence you wrote can probably have both meaning at the same time and\nonly a context clarification can tell which one you meant to say. However,\nwithout the context, I think most people would understand it as \"I'm going to\nJapan for three months\". If I were to say \"I'm going to Japan and it will be\nin three month from now\", I would say 「三ヵ月後に日本に行きます」, so the 後 clearly shows\nit is not the duration of the visit but the time left before you go to Japan.\n\nI'm not really sure for this one so I hope getting some feedback from other\npeople ^^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T02:53:37.773",
"id": "63313",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T02:53:37.773",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31846",
"parent_id": "63305",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 三ヵ月間、日本に行きます。\n\nis grammatically correct, and will be understood as...\n\na) \"I will go to Japan for three months.\" \nor \"I will go to Japan and stay there for three months.\"\n\nI don't think it can be interpreted as b.\n\n* * *\n\nTo say b) \"I will go to Japan and the process of going there will take me\nthree months\", you could probably say something like...\n\n> ３か月かけて、日本に行きます。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T08:51:07.230",
"id": "63316",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T08:51:07.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63305",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63305
| null |
63316
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63317",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A scientist is investigating a mysterious hole in the ground. His experiments\nhave failed and I think he's a bit sulky. He then says:\n\n> 「埋めてしまいなさい」 \n> Fill it in.\n\nThen the narration goes:\n\n> わからないことは、なくしてしまうのが無難だった。\n\nMy literal translation of this is \"It was safe to get rid of something he\ndidn't understand.\", but that doesn't make much sense at all.\n\nFirst of all I'm unsure of the subject of わかる. Is it the scientist or is or is\nit a generic \"things **one** doesn't understand\"?\n\nIs this statement the narrator's belief, the scientists belief, or what the\nnarrator thought the scientists would think?\n\nWith any combination of the above thoughts I still can't make a sentence that\nreally seems to fit the context. Maybe I've translated 無難 wrongly?\n\nSuch a simple sentence, but I'm so confused.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T14:15:36.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63306",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T08:57:18.190",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-09T02:21:06.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "Subject confusion or mistranslation of 無難",
"view_count": 154
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think the most natural sentence in this context would be:\n\n```\n\n わからないものは、なかったことにしてしまうのが無難だった\n \n```\n\nThis means \"The low-risk choice here was to pretend this mysterious thing\nnever existed\".\n\nThis is a bit different from\n\n```\n\n わからないことは、なくしてしまうのが無難だった。\n \n```\n\nFirst, the use of こと rather than もの means the author is including related\nthings to the hole (it's a bit like home vs. house). They are still talking\nabout the hole, but not only about the physical hole.\n\nSecond, they use `なくしてしまう` instead of `なかったことにしてしまう`. The difference is the\nformer means \"eliminate the thing\", whereas the latter means \"pretend it never\nexisted\". I guess it depends whether you think a hole can be eliminated\ncompletely by filling it in, or it's just hidden from view. \nMy guess is the author uses the former because the scientists' desire is to\n\"kill\" the hole - eliminate it. And they think they can do that by filling it\nin. I'm guessing the story goes, \"scientists go home thinking they have\nsuccessfully eliminated the hole and any related danger or creature or what\nhave you, but it turns out filling the hole doesn't eliminate the hole at\nall\".\n\nThis storyline is also strongly suggested by the use of 無難 because it's often\nused to mean \"A low-risk choice that turns out to be wrong (the actor should\nhave confronted the problem rather than taking the easy way out)\".\n\nAs to whose belief it is, I think it's describing the scientists' belief.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T08:57:18.190",
"id": "63317",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T08:57:18.190",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "63306",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63306
|
63317
|
63317
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63311",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider this sentence\n\n> speaker is talking to himself about how to deal with an adversary (X), he\n> has so far tried to hire a 暴漢 to beat up X, and a 探偵 to snoop on X, both of\n> which have failed.\n>\n> **暴漢に襲わせ** ても返り討ち、探偵を雇っても不発……。\n\nin this case would interpret this as:\n\n * (俺が)暴漢に(Xを)襲わせても返り討ち、探偵を雇っても不発……。\n\nCompared to\n\n> 傾いた太陽の橙色が辺り一帯を神々しく染め上げて、風で舞った花びらたちがまるで雪のように煌めいている。\n>\n> その中心で美しく長い **髪を風になびかせ** ながら、優しさに満ち溢れた瞳を細めて俺を見つめる女の子。\n\nand\n\n> だが、どんなに身をよじって暴れても、男の人の力には敵わなかった。\n>\n> **興奮に目を血走らせた** おじさんが、まるで嘲笑うようにべたついた手で....\n\nAt first glance it would appear\n\n風 \"causing\" 髪をなびかせる - i don't think 髪を風に(して)なびかせる applies here\n\n興奮 \"causing\" 目を血走らせた\n\nAs far as i can tell, that does not seem grammatical. But i can't easily add\nunspoken (...) to these for them to make sense.\n\ncompare to:\n\n> 冷たい風が吹き抜け、短い髪をなびかせる。\n\nwhere 風 is no doubt 短い髪をなびかせる'ing.\n\nHow is に and the following causative expressions used here?\n\nthanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T19:31:25.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63308",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T02:31:08.230",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"causation"
],
"title": "に indicating the source of causation?",
"view_count": 98
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both なびく and 血走る are \" _intransitive_ verbs that do not take を\" when used\nplainly. When you form the causative form from these verbs, you have to mark\nthe agent (causee) with **を** , not に (See [this\nrule](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/33515/5010)). Here に plays a role\nthat has nothing to do with the grammar of causation (I believe you already\nknow [this is 原因の「に」](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/62567/5010)).\n\n```\n\n 髪がなびく。 目が血走る。 (simple intransitive usage)\n 風に髪がなびく。 興奮に目が血走る。 (simple intransitive usage with に)\n 髪をなびかせる。 目を血走らせる。 (causative usage)\n 風に髪をなびかせる。 興奮に目を血走らせる。 (causative usage with に)\n \n```\n\nDon't confuse this with causative forms made from transitive verbs, where the\nagent is marked with に (e.g. 息子にお菓子を食べさせる, 暴漢に奴を襲わせる).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T02:08:39.060",
"id": "63311",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T02:31:08.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-09T02:31:08.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63308",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63308
|
63311
|
63311
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that they both refer to some sort of police station but I don't know if\nthey are interchangeable, if they mean the exact same thing,etc",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T22:15:35.793",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63309",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T22:49:23.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32056",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 派出所 and 交番?",
"view_count": 124
}
|
[
{
"body": "They mean the same thing.\n\nThey started using 交番所 to call places where police officers were staying,\nalternating (交) turn by turn (番). Then the official name was changed to 派出所.\nAnd some 25~ years ago, they changed it back to 交番.\n\nSemantically, both are referring to the same thing.\n\nHowever some expressions such as 警備派出所 started being used when 派出所 was the\nofficial name, so it kind of never changed and you would not normally\ninterchange the words in those cases.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-08T22:49:23.147",
"id": "63310",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-08T22:49:23.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "63309",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63309
| null |
63310
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63319",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My friend is creating a word card application to help people memorize Japanese\nwords / Kanji. The subject of what to call the application came up and he\nasked me for some suggestions. One of the requirements is that it's a very\nsimple name with the word Japanese in English and then something else.\n\nI suggested \"Japanese 語\" be the name of the application and I would like to\nget some input from the people here.\n\nI already looked up the meaning of 語 but what I would like to know is does it\nlook totally confusing or make some sense with the English word \"Japanese\"\nbefore it.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T10:49:30.133",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63318",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T13:06:53.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji"
],
"title": "What does this mean to you if you were to see an application named \"Japanese 語\"?",
"view_count": 198
}
|
[
{
"body": "I would say it's indeed confusing at least to native Japanese speakers.\n\n * 語 meaning _word_ is not really common outside academic contexts. Words listed on a word card/list are usually called 単語 by Japanese people who study foreign languages.\n * 語 is also a suffix meaning _language_ or _-ese_. For example 日本 means _Japan_ and 日本語 means _Japanese_. When I see \"Japanese 語\", I can't help reading it as something weird like \"Japanese-ese\".\n\n\"Japanese 単語\" would be at least not confusing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T11:26:35.380",
"id": "63319",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T13:06:53.850",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-09T13:06:53.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63318",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63318
|
63319
|
63319
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63322",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Another question on my favourite\n[hole](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/63306/subject-confusion-\nor-mistranslation-of-%E7%84%A1%E9%9B%A3). An opportunist has offered to buy\nthe hole and rebuild the shrine for the villagers:\n\n> 村長が答えるさきに、村の者たちが、 \n> 「本当かい。それならもっと村の近くがいい。」 \n> 「 **穴のひとつぐらい、あげますよ。** 」 \n> と口々に叫んだので、きまってしまった。 \n> Before the village head man _could_ reply the villagers shouted out\n> \"Really? If that's the case, it would be better closer to the village.\" and\n> \" **We will give you approximately one of the holes.** \", and so it was\n> decided.\n\nI can't understand the sentence in bold. My translation seems like nonsense.\nThere is only one hole, and even if there were more it still seems like a\nweird thing to say.\n\nI thought ぐらい might also be translated as \"as many as\" giving \"We will give\nyou as many as one of the holes\", but that is equally ridiculous.\n\nAnother thought I had was that it might be \"We will give you at least the\nhole\", with the implication that there may be some other kind of payment in\naddition to the hole. But then my belief that Aのひとつ means \"one of the A\"\nbreaks down. Surely \"one A\" would be ひとつのA.\n\nHow should I understand のひとつぐらい here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T18:20:32.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63320",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T00:44:59.880",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T00:44:59.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"reading-comprehension",
"particle-くらい"
],
"title": "Understanding のひとつぐらい in this context",
"view_count": 205
}
|
[
{
"body": "Xのひとつくらい is an idiom which means \"just one X\" rather than \"one of X\".\n\n> 穴のひとつぐらい、あげますよ。 \n> It's just a hole, so we can give it to you.\n\nXのひとつやふたつ is another similar idiom that means \"just one or two X\".\n\n> 失敗のひとつやふたつ、大した問題ではない。 \n> One failure or two is not really a big problem.\n\nThey can also mean \"at least one (or two) X\":\n\n> * 帰国したなら、連絡のひとつくらいしろ。\n> * 誰でも趣味のひとつやふたつは持っているでしょう。\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T21:20:22.927",
"id": "63322",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-09T21:20:22.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63320",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
63320
|
63322
|
63322
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have to answer the question \"日本には「好きこそものの上手なれ」という 諺 がありますが、どんな意味だと思いますか。\"\nusing **生かす** and my idea is to answer that _if you are interested in\nsomething, you'll do your best_. I started writing \"あなたが何かに興味があるなら、あなたは...\"\nand I don't know how to continue the sentence with _you'll do your best_ using\n生かす.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T19:58:55.023",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63321",
"last_activity_date": "2021-07-28T03:06:20.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32205",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"verbs",
"expressions"
],
"title": "How to use 生かす to express \"you'll do your best\"?",
"view_count": 236
}
|
[
{
"body": "First, 好きこそものの上手なれ literally means \"Liking something is being good at it\", or\n\"If you like something, you'll do it well.\" 上手 means being good at something,\nnot doing your best. This こそ-なれ is [koso\nmusubi](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/kobun-adjectives/) used in archaic\ngrammar, but you can probably forget about it for now.\n\nThe difficult part is how we can use the transitive verb 生かす (\"to make use of\n～\", \"to take advantage of ～\" or \"to keep ～ alive\") to explain this proverb.\n生かす is simply unnecessary to explain the meaning of this proverb. (Of course\nwe can create a long example sentence that happens to include 生かす, but I'm not\nsure if that is the right approach.) If you already have an answer and can\nshare it with us, we may have some meaningful discussion about it...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-11T05:47:44.757",
"id": "63337",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-11T05:47:44.757",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63321",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63321
| null |
63337
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63324",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Generally:\n\nAはBを食べる <-> Bを食べるA\n\nbut i do not think i can't rearrange this in terms of\n\n~~~B\n\nHowever if it its a sentence with an indirect object as well:\n\n> 「昔は天の川に見立てた川に笹を流して願い事をする行事なんかもあった\n\ncompared with:\n\n> [［YYが］［XXを］プレッシャーにさらす -- active\n> voice](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/62621/grammar-\n> of-%E3%83%97%E3%83%AC%E3%83%83%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%83%BC%E3%81%AB%E6%99%92%E3%81%95%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B)\n\nare all of the following correct?\n\n昔は川を天の川に見立てた <-> 昔は天の川に見立てた川\n\nYYがXXをプレッシャーにさらす <-> YYがプレッシャーにさらすXX\n\n私はAにBをあげる <-> 私はAにあげるB\n\nthank you for confirming",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-09T22:58:12.433",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63323",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T01:48:15.047",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T00:44:29.283",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "relative clause with direct object",
"view_count": 105
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can rearrange...\n\nAはBを食べる \n→ A **が** 食べるB (\"B that A eats\") \n→ Bを食べるA (\"A that eats B\")\n\n(You _usually_ don't use the topic particle は in a relative clause. 「Aが食べるB」\nwould sound more natural than 「Aは食べるB」 in most situations.)\n\n川を天の川に見立てた \n→ 天の川に見立てた川 \n→ 川を見立てた天の川 \n(In 昔は天の川に見立てた川に笹を流して願い事をする行事なんかもあった, 昔は modifies (行事なんかも)あった, not\n(天の川に)見立てた.)\n\nYYがXXをプレッシャーにさらす \n→ YYがプレッシャーにさらすXX \n→ XXをプレッシャーにさらすYY\n\n私はAにBをあげる (\"I give B to A\") \n→ 私 **が** AにあげるB (\"B which I give to A\") \n→ 私 **が** BをあげるA (\"A who I give B to\") \n→ AにBをあげる私 (\"Me who gives B to A\")",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T01:09:26.043",
"id": "63324",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T01:48:15.047",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T01:48:15.047",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "63323",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63323
|
63324
|
63324
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "If you are offered something that you don't want, what do you say to reject it\npolitely?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T01:13:23.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63325",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T07:57:27.680",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T05:29:57.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "32207",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"phrase-requests",
"culture"
],
"title": "What do you say when you want to reject a gift without offending anyone?",
"view_count": 462
}
|
[
{
"body": "I will say like 申し訳ないけど、～なので受け取れないんです。\n\nI think you should explain the reason why you reject the gift. For example, if\nI am presented a whole cake and reject it, I will say like\n申し訳ないけど、ダイエット中なので受け取れないんです。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T05:59:54.053",
"id": "63330",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T05:59:54.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "63325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "I am not a native speaker and just a beginning learner, but I just learned\nthat one way to say it is 気持ちだけ受け取（る・ります）よ。\n\nIt means something along the lines of \"Thank you for your kindness, but I\nshall politely decline.\" Literally, it means \"I'll accept only your (kind)\nfeelings.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-29T07:57:27.680",
"id": "92755",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T07:57:27.680",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "41283",
"parent_id": "63325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63325
| null |
63330
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63329",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, I was watching this show called Terrace House, and the following exchange\nbetween two participants caught my attention.\n\n> 翔平:「 テラスハウスに入って、一番の…ここに来ての…財産じゃないけど、聖南と出会えたことだな。」\n>\n> 聖南:「いや、何か…普通にうれしいなと思って。普通にね。」\n\nThere are two things I don’t really understand here, by the context and the\nscene itself, she seems very happy about what he told her...\n\n**so is it right for me to assume that 普通にうれしい is close to 結構うれしい? And can I\nuse it in other situations? Like saying the food is good 「普通においしかったよ」**\n\n**My second question is about 財産, jisho says it means “property”, but I can’t\nreally understand how it fits the context here...**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T01:31:55.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63326",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T05:42:26.087",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Different usage of 普通に?",
"view_count": 1202
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this context 普通に means \"just ～\", \"plainly ～\", \"simply ～\", \"～ in its plain\nsense\" or \"not in a tricky way but in a straightforward manner\". This usage is\nrelatively new and many people see it as slangy, if not incorrect. 結構 is\ndifferent because 普通に嬉しい is about the type/quality of joy whereas 結構嬉しい is\nabout the degree of joy.\n\nYou can also say 普通においしい which means it's simply delicious rather than\n\"delicious in a sense\". From the blog of 平野啓一郎 (novelist):\n\n> ###\n> [「普通においしい」](http://keiichirohirano.hatenablog.com/entry/20061130/1164869939)\n>\n>\n> たとえば、ブルーチーズを食べたとき、人は、「クセがあるけどおいしい」という言い方をします。そんなふうに条件や留保をつける必要のある食べ物とは違って、ストレートに、一般の誰もが「おいしい」と同意するであろうような味の食べ物（あるいはその水準に達している食べ物）を食したときに、現代人は「普通においしい」と言うわけです。\n\nOther examples include 普通に間違っています (\"It's just plain wrong\") and 彼は普通に強い (\"He\nis simply strong\" rather than \"He is moderately strong\").\n\n* * *\n\n財産 (\"property\") usually refers to one's money, real estate and other things\nthat have financial values. But it sometimes figuratively refers to one's\nvaluable experience, unforgettable memory, important human relationship, etc.\nFor example you can say \"この留学での経験は私の一生の財産になりました\". In 翔平's case, 財産じゃないけど seems\nto imply \"calling 聖南と出会えたこと as my 財産 may be too much (but still it was the\nbest thing that happened here)\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T04:58:20.760",
"id": "63329",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T05:42:26.087",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63326",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] |
63326
|
63329
|
63329
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I do not quite understand why some sentences do not need particle に.\n\nFor example: \n\n> いすはテーブルの上です\n\nInstead, is it gramatically correct to say: \n\n> いすはテーブルの上にです\n\nLike in this sentence: \n\n> いすはテーブルの上にあります\n\nWhat is the difference here in using に particle??? \nWhy あります needs using this particle and です does not???",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T13:46:03.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63332",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T15:41:03.787",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T13:57:00.150",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "32210",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Particle \"に\" in sentences with \"です\" and \"あります\"",
"view_count": 421
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is because です is not a verb but auxiliary verb.\n\nIn Japanese language, auxiliary verb has differenct character and function\nfrom English.\n\nです only supports noun and adjective to make predicate so that there is no room\nfor particles to appear.\n\n> * これは【いす】です。 noun\n> * いすはテーブルの【上】です。 noun\n> * テーブルの上は【硬い】です。 adjective\n>\n\nBelow are に + verb.\n\n> * いすはテーブルの上にあります。\n> * いすは下に落ちます。\n> * テーブルは横に倒れます。\n>\n\nParticle に as well as others like で、を、へ、etc. are used to indicate\ndirection/destination/location/etc. for action (verb). They have nothing to do\nwith material (noun) or situation (adjective).\n\nThat's why particles do not appear when there is no verb.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-10T14:46:54.320",
"id": "63333",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-10T15:41:03.787",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-10T15:41:03.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "32184",
"parent_id": "63332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
63332
| null |
63333
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63336",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm playing a visual novel that gives LECTURES on how different types of guns\nwork and other real life how-to-use-weapon facts; when I come across the\nfollowing after my character has test-fired a S&W for the first time.\n\nTeacher assassin: たとえ急所を外しても、太めの血管に当てにただけで相手は即死よ\n\nTeacher assassin: 衝撃で血が逆流して, 心臓が破裂するから\n\nThe English Subtitles say that the above translates to\n\n\"Even if the bullet misses a crucial area, the enemy will die instantaneously.\nThe shock forces the blood backwards and the heart bursts.\"\n\nHowever, after posting a question as far as fact-checking the translated\nstatement on Quora, I've gotten a lot of flack from military experts and\nnurses, who say that the above is not possible. So now I'm wondering, did the\noriginal translator mistranslate, OR is it a case of the game-makers Not\nverifying the truthfulness of those two lines of dialogue before giving Ein-\nsensei her dialogue?\n\nAnd what does にただけで mean in the above sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-11T04:07:07.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63335",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-11T05:35:17.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26406",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "translation question AND what does にただけで mean?",
"view_count": 142
}
|
[
{
"body": "The translation is almost correct.\n\n> たとえ急所を外しても、太めの血管に当てただけで相手は即死よ\n>\n> Even if the bullet misses a crucial area, the enemy will die instantaneously\n> only by hitting a thicker vessel,\n>\n> 衝撃で血が逆流して, 心臓が破裂するから\n>\n> because the shock forces the blood backwards and the heart bursts.\n\n`にただけで` is a typo. The correct sentence should be without the `に`.\n\n> たとえ急所を外しても、太めの血管に当てただけで相手は即死よ",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-11T05:35:17.843",
"id": "63336",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-11T05:35:17.843",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17476",
"parent_id": "63335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63335
|
63336
|
63336
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63343",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 母さんはそれから粘り強く俺の説得にかかったが、最後に折れたのは母さんのほうだった\n>\n> Mom tried tenaciously to convince me(stop my foolishness), but in the end\n> she was the one who gave up.\n\nReading this at first, i would have read it literally as \"mom got caught in my\npersuasion\" or \"she got convinced\". But with this sentence structure with the\n～が、最後に... construction, that wouldn't make sense with two agreeing ideas in a\nrow. So i looked up the expression.\n\n[説得にかかる:\n人がある行動を行うのを阻止すること](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E8%AA%AC%E5%BE%97%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B)\n\ncompared to other ～にかかる expressions i can recall:\n\n[網にかかる: 相手の意図した通りに動かされてしまうこと/\n誘惑などに簡単に引っかかるさま](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E7%B6%B2%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B)\n\nor\n\n[手にかかる:\nその人に処理や操作をされること](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E6%89%8B%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B)\n\nWhy does 説得にかかる end up interpreted in the active voice while the others are in\nthe more intuitive passive voice?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-11T18:49:41.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63339",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T07:48:30.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "説得にかかる vs other ～にかかる expressions",
"view_count": 201
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are many meanings for\n[かかる](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B), just like\nthere are many meanings for words like `take`, `make`.\n\n`説得にかかる` falls under this usage type (`start doing`, `work on`):\n\n> その作業をする。取り組む。 《掛》 「三人で－・ってやっと運べるほどの庭石」\n>\n> （動作性の名詞や動詞の連用形に助詞「に」の付いたものを受けて）その作業を始める。手をつける。着手する。 《掛》 「今日から印刷に－・る」\n> 「反対派を押さえに－・る」 「ビラをはがしに－・る」\n\n`網にかかる` falls under this usage type (`get caught`):\n\n> 仕組んだものに捕らえられる。 「大きな魚が網に－・る」 「わなに－・る」\n\n`手にかかる` falls under this usage type (`be handled`):\n\n> ある人の扱いを受ける。 「彼の手に－・るとオンボロ車もピカピカになる」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T03:17:02.573",
"id": "63343",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T03:17:02.573",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17476",
"parent_id": "63339",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "[かかる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/37972/meaning/m0u/), just like its\ncounterpart\n[かける](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/39733/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%8B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B/),\nhas a bunch of meanings as one of basic verbs. The usage you see corresponds\nto definitions below:\n\n> **16** 攻撃的に挑む。攻めていく。「束になって―・る」「攻略に―・る」\n>\n> **17** \n> ㋐物事に着手する。しはじめる。「仕事に―・る」「取り壊しに―・る」 \n> ㋑その事に当たる。従事する。「今―・っている仕事」\n\nかかる is an intransitive that certainly is, as you said, apt to be interpreted\nas passive. But while its core meaning is around \"be hanged on; be put on\", in\nthe definitions above it means more like \"stick _oneself_ on\", or practically\n\"engage in\". In this sense, it is no more counterpart of かける (I can't imagine\nhow to replace it with かける in those situations).\n\nThe nuance of this type of かかる is similar with that of \"grapple with\", that\nsuggests the object is some relatively tough, or time-consuming task, or a\npotentially confrontational opponent. So your translation is fine.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T03:56:23.267",
"id": "63344",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T07:48:30.733",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63339",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
63339
|
63343
|
63344
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I was reading English, I found this exotic word: **epizeuxis**.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PaCtR.jpg)\n\nInstantly I racked my brains to find the equivalent counterpart in Japanese.\n\nHere are the results:\n\n> [**Epizeuxis**](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%B3%E8%AA%9E%E6%B3%95) :\n> **畳語法** (じょうごほう)、 または畳句法、 **畳音法** )\n\n> [Kotobank\n> Definition](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%95%B3%E8%AA%9E%E6%B3%95-292792):\n> 同じ語句を繰り返して強調やリズムの効果を上げようとする修辞法。\n\nOthers definition:\n\n> **《畳語法》** \n> 畳語法（じょうごほう、または畳句法、畳音法、Epizeuxis）とは、激しさまたは強調のために、言葉を連続して繰り返す修辞技法のこと。\n\nMy Questions:\n\n 1. Is there any practical use of **Epizeuxis (畳語法)** in Japanese?\n\n 2. If there is one, can you give an example?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-11T20:42:17.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63341",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T00:29:27.873",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T00:29:27.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10323",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Epizeuxis (畳語法) in Modern Japanese language",
"view_count": 165
}
|
[
{
"body": "1. Yes, there is a practical use of **epizeuxis (畳語法)**.\n\n 2. Example:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/j1QLH.jpg)\n\n**Text:**\n\n> 大嫌い！！\n>\n> 大嫌い \n> 大嫌い \n> 大っ嫌いっ！！\n>\n> 嫌い \n> 大っ嫌い！\n>\n> 大嫌い…\n>\n> 大っ嫌い！！\n\n**Translation:**\n\n> I really hate you !!\n>\n> really really hate\n>\n> really really hate\n>\n> really r..re..really h..ha..hate you !!\n>\n> hate you\n>\n> r..re..really hate you!\n>\n> I really hate you...\n>\n> I r..re..really hate you !!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-11T20:42:17.757",
"id": "63342",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T00:22:22.507",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T00:22:22.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10323",
"parent_id": "63341",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63341
| null |
63342
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63346",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a colleague who is blessed with a girl child and I posted a greeting\nsaying\n\n> おめでとうございます\n\nIn reply to this, he said\n\n> ありがとう。いま、すごく幸せです？\n\nI guess he is asking me about my well being. How should I reply to such\nquestions in Japanese if I want to politely say [I'm good thank you!]?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T05:09:08.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63345",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T06:03:57.980",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T05:17:27.200",
"last_editor_user_id": "19641",
"owner_user_id": "19641",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"phrases",
"greetings"
],
"title": "How to reply to 「いま、すごく幸せです？」",
"view_count": 1259
}
|
[
{
"body": "> _I guess he is asking me about my well being._\n\nIn fact, I don't think so. 幸せ usually doesn't mean normal well-being but only\nthe full-of-joy state, that like whoever has their child. It's not a word you\nuse to ask if somebody is fine.\n\nIn this case, unless it's typo or mojibake, the final ？ represents some degree\nof unsureness or hesitation towards previous words (or, choice of words). It's\nbit slangy, orthographical (non-verbal) usage of the sign, but quite\nwidespread at least on the internet. They as often as not enclose the question\nmark with parentheses （？）, in that case, more unambiguous to readers. With all\nof these it's still open to wide interpretation, but I guess he want to tell\nsomething like:\n\n> It hasn't hit me yet, but I suppose I'm really happy.\n>\n> Is that so-called, I couldn't be happier?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T06:03:57.980",
"id": "63346",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T06:03:57.980",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "63345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
63345
|
63346
|
63346
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63350",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 一月一日から **一月七日、または** 一月十五日まで、新しい年のお祝いをします。\n\nI would understand this sentence if the part in bold was omitted: New Year is\ncelebrated from January 1 to January 15. What is \"一月七日、または” for?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T07:23:42.307",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63348",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T14:26:43.167",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "The meaning of the sentence",
"view_count": 81
}
|
[
{
"body": "`または` means `or`.\n\nSo, the sentence means `New Year is celebrated from January 1 to January 7 or\nJanuary 15.`\n\n> 一月一日から一月七日、または一月十五日まで、新しい年のお祝いをします。\n\nOther examples:\n\n> アメリカ、または日本に行きます。\n\nI'll go to the US, or Japan.\n\n> このテストはスミス先生、またはジョンソン先生に渡してください。\n\nPlease hand this test to Smith-sensei, or Johnson-sensei.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T08:43:01.463",
"id": "63350",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T14:26:43.167",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T14:26:43.167",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "17476",
"parent_id": "63348",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63348
|
63350
|
63350
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "MC spots girls A and B who he recently got to know. C = childhood friend of\nMC.\n\n> A「あ、先輩。こんにちは」\n>\n> MC「おう、A。Bも一緒か」\n>\n> B「何よ、アンタだってC先輩たちといつも一緒じゃない」\n>\n> MC「何だよ、仲良いなって意味で言っただけだぞ」\n>\n> B「アンタが言うとそう聞こえないのよね、不思議ー」\n>\n> MC「ヒネくれてんなー、さすがはレンチ **な** だけある」\n>\n> B「ヒネる工具 **な** だけに？って、全然上手くないわよ！！」\n>\n> (MC) おお、意外にノリがいいな。\n\nMC:「おう、A。Bも一緒か」\n\nB:「What about it, aren't you always with C-sempai?」\n\nMC:「Huh、I'm only talking in terms of how close you two seem.」\n\nB:「If you say that, I don't hear it that way (feels like you were insinuating\nmore), strange.」\n\nMC:「Rebellious aren't you, as expected of just a wrench.」 (a play on ひねくる vs\nひねくれる)\n\nB:「As expected from a wrench tool？ That was not a good joke at all!!」\n\n(MC) Unexpectedly she got the joke.\n\n* * *\n\n\"仲良いな\"って意味 and ヒネくれてんなー are normal sentence ending な, but how was ヒネくれてん\nabbreviated?\n\nWhat are the な in レンチ **な** だけ and ヒネる工具 **な** だけに?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T07:24:10.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63349",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T17:38:35.737",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T17:38:35.737",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"copula",
"sentence-final-particles",
"particle-な"
],
"title": "non sentence ending な in this comedic conversation",
"view_count": 160
}
|
[
{
"body": "> are normal sentence ending な but what how was ヒネくれてん abbreviated?\n\nてん is a short slang form to ている\n\n> what are the な in レンチなだけ and ヒネる工具なだけに?\n\nAccording to The Dictionary of Advanced Japanese Grammar, the pattern\n**（さすがに）~なだけのことはある** is an evaluative comment on something contributing to a\nremarkable, expected result. I presume なだけある is a short version of\nなだけのことはある...\n\nSo, the result in your case, is ひねくれる, and the natural reason contributing to\nthis, is, that B is a レンチ.\n\nI've found the same question asked also here, for reference to the short form:\n<https://eikaiwa.dmm.com/uknow/questions/4278/>",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T14:25:06.457",
"id": "63355",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T14:50:14.907",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T14:50:14.907",
"last_editor_user_id": "32227",
"owner_user_id": "32227",
"parent_id": "63349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
63349
| null |
63355
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63365",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What are auxiliary verbs in Japanese language? Which verbs are auxiliary and\nhow to tell which are auxiliaries, and which are normal?\n\nIt looks like the word です is an auxiliary verb. But why? What tells us that it\nhas this function in sentence?\n\nIs the word ます an auxiliary?\n\nI apologize for silly questions.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T09:21:12.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63351",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-28T02:26:21.777",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T17:57:20.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "32215",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "Auxiliary verbs in Japanese",
"view_count": 10862
}
|
[
{
"body": "Without knowing how far you are in your Japanese studies or linguistic\nstudies, it's difficult to know how much detail to provide. But here are two\nkey points to get you started - I suggest you search the site as there are\nmany detailed posts relating to your questions.\n\n**です** is a copula (in simple terms a copula is a verb which links the subject\nto an element in the predicate).\n\n**Auxiliary verbs** have different forms in English and Japanese. In English,\nthey are **separate words** which modify other words to produce specific\nfunctions. In Japanese, auxiliary verbs (助動詞) take the form of declinable\nwords which attach to specific forms of other words. ます is an auxiliary which\nattaches to the continuative form (連用形) of verbs. For example, the\ncontinuative form of 書く is 書き. Now you can add the auxiliary ます to make 書きます.\n\nI have refrained from going into detail here as I believe there are many\nexplanations of these concepts contained in other posts.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T15:01:00.300",
"id": "63357",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T15:06:36.123",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T15:06:36.123",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63351",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "There are two different definitions of _auxiliary verb_.\n\n### _Auxiliary verb_ as the translation of **助動詞**\n\nWords like ます, (ら)れる are generally taught as \"part of conjugations/forms\" in\nmost Japanese-as-a-second-language textbooks, but they are categorized as 助動詞\nin monolingual Japanese dictionaries and grammar books. This word class is\nusually translated as _auxiliary verb_ (or just _auxiliary_ ). The list of 助動詞\nis relatively small (see below), and you may already be familiar with most of\nthem (as part of \"forms\"). Generally, 助動詞 is a mishmash of functional words\nthat work by modifying the meaning of the preceding word. Most auxiliary verbs\ncan conjugate, and multiple auxiliary verbs can be \"stacked\" to say\ncomplicated things like \"negative-causative-passive\". For example, 飲ませられない\n(\"is not forced to drink\") is a verb 飲む followed by three auxiliary verbs\n(causative させる, passive られる and negative ない). Despite its name, a 助動詞 does not\nnecessarily conjugate like a verb; for example, たい conjugates like an\ni-adjective.\n\n**List of Japanese 助動詞**\n\n * (さ)せる for causation\n * (ら)れる for passive voice, ability, etc\n * ない・ぬ・ん for negation\n * (よ)う for volition\n * まい for negative inference\n * たい・たがる for desire\n * た/だ for past tense\n * ようだ for similarity\n * そうだ for hearsay\n * らしい for hearsay, behavior\n * だ・です for predication/politeness (aka copula)\n * ます for politeness\n * やがる for disdain\n * べし for requirement/certainty\n * ...Plus some rare archaic auxiliary verbs and dialectal forms. See [this Wikipedia article](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8A%A9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E_\\(%E5%9B%BD%E6%96%87%E6%B3%95\\)) (in Japanese) for the full list.\n\n### _Auxiliary verb_ as the translation of **補助動詞**\n\nWords like (～て)いる, (～て)みる, (～て)おく are usually called _subsidiary verbs_\n(補助動詞), but some people like to call them _auxiliary verbs_. For details,\nplease see: [What is a subsidiary\nverb?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18952/5010)\n\n* * *\n\nRegarding です/ます, yes, they are categorized as 助動詞 in Japanese monolingual\ndictionaries. But I think most beginner Japanese-as-a-second-language\ntextbooks usually regard です as a (polite) copula and ます as a politeness\nmarker.\n\nIf you are a beginner, you may be overwhelmed by the number of \"forms\" in\nJapanese verbs, but once you reach an intermediate level and start using\nlearning materials written in Japanese, you may want to familiarize yourself\nwith the concept of 助動詞. See also: [Why Japanese verb has so many\nforms?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/61902/5010)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T01:25:37.420",
"id": "63365",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-28T02:26:21.777",
"last_edit_date": "2023-02-28T02:26:21.777",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63351",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
] |
63351
|
63365
|
63365
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "According to internet sources and my Chinese friend living in Japan, there\nisn't. However, can someone provide more evidence on this issue? If there is\nno grammatical distinction, how can we distinguish these two tenses? I mean,\nhow do we know if one sentence is translated to \"did something\", while the\nother to \"have done something\"?\n\nEdit: I have a new question but I am not sure to start a new one or add to\nthis. My question is on the construction of english tenses in Japanese. I know\nthere is no one-to-one correspondence. But I am hoping to reconstruct them as\naccurate as possible. Simple past is ta-form. Present perfect is もう plus\nた-form. Past perfect is もう plus ていた. Is this correct?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T13:01:14.867",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63352",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T03:08:24.217",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-13T03:08:24.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "17942",
"owner_user_id": "17942",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"tense",
"past"
],
"title": "Is there a distinction between ‘did\" and \"have done\" in Japanese?",
"view_count": 3086
}
|
[
{
"body": "Since your examples are in English, I should point out that the technical\ndistinction you are making is between `the simple past` (a past verb form with\nno auxiliary attached - 'did') and `the present perfect` (a verb form with\nhave/has + past participle - 'have done'). Japanese verbs operate very\ndifferently to this. Although there is a past tense in Japanese, there is no\nsuch thing as a past participle in Japanese. So there is no direct equivalent\nof 'have done'. Therefore there is no **technical** difference between 'did'\nand 'have done' in Japanese (i.e. a verb form which explicitly distinguishes\nthe two as in English).\n\nIn other words, both the following translations are possible for the sentence:\n\n> 宿題{しゅくだい}をした。 \n> I did my homework. / I have done my homework.\n\nHowever, that is not to say that there is no way at all to convey the\ndifference. Depending on what you want to say, it will be possible to include\ncontextual information like time-markers, auxiliary verbs, etc, which makes\nthe intended meaning clearer. But you would need to provide more specific\nexamples of what you want to say in order to highlight the different ways you\ncould express it in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T14:32:16.910",
"id": "63356",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T16:33:44.910",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T16:33:44.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63352",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "While there's no distinction grammatically in the positive sense, there is a\ndistinction in negations:\n\n> 朝食は、 何も食べなかった (I did not eat anything for breakfast)\n>\n> 朝から、何も食べていない (I have not eaten anything since breakfast)\n\nAs shown in the preceding examples, for negations, the た-form is used for the\nsimple past (did not) and the ている-form is used for present perfect (have not\ndone).\n\nSome words that help indicate whether it means simple past or present perfect\ninclude:\n\n * ご飯は **まだ** 食べていない - have not done (negation present perfect)\n * ご飯は **もう** 食べた - have done (affirmation present perfect)\n\nHere's a reference on this: <https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/past-\ntense-and-present-perfect-tense-with-the-ta-form/>.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T15:31:11.553",
"id": "63358",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T16:14:06.373",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"parent_id": "63352",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63352
| null |
63358
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63361",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "# 日本語\n\n> 1. そのチームのメンバー **の中** で誰が一番好き？\n>\n> 2. そのチームのメンバーで誰が一番好き？\n>\n>\n\n上の文（の中？）で、どちらが正しいですか。論理的には「の中」を入れる方が無難だと思うのですけど、時々入っていない文も見る気がして、文脈からすると同じように解釈してもいいと思えるのですが、本当に同じですか。ではなければ、どこで違いますか。\n\nよろしくお願いします。\n\n# English\n\n> 1. そのチームのメンバー **の中** で誰が一番好き？\n>\n> 2. そのチームのメンバーで誰が一番好き？\n>\n>\n\nWhich of the two sentences above is correct? Logically, I think that adding\n「の中」 is the safer option, but I also sometimes see sentences without it which\nseem to mean the same thing from context. Are they really the same? If not,\nhow are they different?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T13:45:21.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63353",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T17:02:00.280",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-13T10:14:14.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "23869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "How are「〇〇の中で」and「〇〇で」different?",
"view_count": 300
}
|
[
{
"body": "`～で` and `～の中で` are the same.\n\nWhen used to compare something within an explicitly stated group, as in your\nsentences, the meaning is identical and they can be used interchangeably. (See\nbelow for exceptional cases where the group is not explicitly stated). `～で` in\nthis case is just an abbreviation for `～の中で`. According to Hamano & Tsujioka\n(2011), \" _by using the spatial word 中 (inside) in an abstract sense, you can\nspecify the group in which you are making the comparison_ \". Their examples\nshow the use of `の中` as optional. For example:\n\n> クラス(の中{なか})で鈴木{すずき}さんが一番{いちばん}英語{えいご}が上手{じょうず}です。 \n> Suzuki is the best in the class at English.\n\nThere is at least one exceptional circumstance where you should use the full\nform の中で and that is when the group to be compared is referred to indirectly\n(with a demonstrative pronoun), as below:\n\n> この中{なか}で、これが一番{いちばん}いいです。 \n> Among these, this is the best.\n\nPersonally, I feel that `～の中で` might possibly be chosen over `～で` in a formal\nwritten style, since the 'full forms' tend to be preferred. But that is\ndebatable and I couldn't offer any evidence to support that. In any case, you\ncan be confident that you can use either variation of it without worrying\nabout making a mistake.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T22:17:13.197",
"id": "63361",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T22:28:23.833",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T22:28:23.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63353",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "For this case, those two are totally same. Even about casual/formal, you can\nsay whichever.\n\nIf anything to say, 1. is a bit too descriptive to hear if it's a verbal\nconversation. I feel\n\n> そのチームの中で誰が一番好き？\n\nis more natural. (of course you can cut メンバーの off also from 2. )",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T17:02:00.280",
"id": "63375",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T17:02:00.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32244",
"parent_id": "63353",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63353
|
63361
|
63361
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> これしかないから みんな **で** どうにかやってきたんだろう\n\nIn the sentence above, why after みんな, instead of particle は or particle が,\nparticle で is used?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T13:47:02.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63354",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-12T18:09:49.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T13:59:54.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "30049",
"owner_user_id": "30049",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Usage of で after みんな",
"view_count": 533
}
|
[
{
"body": "This で emphasizes cooperation unlike は, が.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T17:27:37.397",
"id": "63376",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T17:27:37.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32244",
"parent_id": "63354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
63354
| null |
63376
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63366",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> きっと、盗み飲みしたお父さんの大人のジュースのせいだ。\n\nSo, I can guess from the words 盗む \"steal\" and 飲む \"drink\" that she drank\nsecretly without anyone knowing, however I can't find this word in a\ndictionnary. Why is that ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T21:08:05.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63360",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T01:44:14.937",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-13T00:54:16.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "20501",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"compound-verbs"
],
"title": "Meaning of 盗み飲み",
"view_count": 172
}
|
[
{
"body": "Background:\n\nFrom what I know, it was popular back then to post a cat or dog drinking\nsomething from a cup or a glass while filming it secretly.\n\nI saw many Japanese people posted, for example:\n\n> **#盗み飲み** [猫ちゃん牛乳盗み飲み](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KiZa38VNpk)\n>\n> For\n> [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/%E7%9B%97%E3%81%BF%E9%A3%B2%E3%81%BF).\n\nMost probably it's an invented word, that's why it's not included in the\ndictionary. I can't even find one in **[slang dictionary](http://nihongo-e-\nna.com/eng/eng_search/keyword/%E7%9B%97%E3%81%BF%E9%A3%B2%E3%81%BF/)**.\n\nHowever we can find in goo.ne.jp:\n\n>\n> **[つまみ食い(つまみぐい)／盗み食い(ぬすみぐい)](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/thsrs/1101/meaning/m0u/)**\n\nMeaning:\n\n> 人に隠れてこっそりと物を食べること。\n>\n> You can replace **食べる** with **飲み**\n\n**Meaning:**\n\n> Stealing by drinking secretly/sneakily hidden from human/other people\n> (secretly take a sip/drink/sneaking a bite (for food) or snitching it).\n\n**[インドで「ガソリン中毒」の猿がバイクからガソリンを** 盗み飲み\n**する事件が多発](https://rocketnews24.com/2017/11/13/980000/)**\n\n**Disclaimer** : I'm not a native Japanese, so it might have other nuances\nthat I know nothing about.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T22:38:33.480",
"id": "63362",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-12T23:00:40.753",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-12T23:00:40.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "10323",
"owner_user_id": "10323",
"parent_id": "63360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "This is a **compound verb**. We don't quite do things this way in English, but\nit's a bit like \"`[VERB]`-ing(ly) `[VERB]`\" -- the \"main\" verb is the second\none, and the first verb tells us more about how the second verb is being\nperformed. Pretty much any verb can be compounded with any other verb, but\nmost combinations won't make much sense. :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T00:56:48.123",
"id": "63364",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T00:56:48.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "63360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "[Compound Verb Lexicon](https://db4.ninjal.ac.jp/vvlexicon/db/) recognizes\nonly five verbs that start with 盗み, namely 盗み聞く, 盗み去る, 盗み出す, 盗み取る and 盗み見る.\nHowever, as a [noun formed from masu-\nstem](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/32311/5010), there are several more\nwords that have 盗み. For example,\n[盗み笑い](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/169337/meaning/m0u/%E7%9B%97%E3%81%BF/),\n[盗み撮り](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/169332/meaning/m0u/%E7%9B%97%E3%81%BF/),\n[盗み食い](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/169329/meaning/m0u/%E7%9B%97%E3%81%BF/)\nare relatively common \"nouns\" that also work as suru-verbs. 盗み飲み is not\nparticularly common, but anyone who knows 盗み食い can instantly guess its\nmeaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T01:44:14.937",
"id": "63366",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T01:44:14.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "63360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63360
|
63366
|
63366
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "(In a game) I am a newbie(Lv29), and I saw B(lv100+) having filled his room's\nwall with numerous super-super-rare(SSR) posters, which can be only be earned\nwith enormous effort. (I don't have any)\n\nI sent the below to him via messaging menu.\n\n> I: スゴイ!\n\nLater, I received the reply:\n\n> B: どうかされましたか? (笑)\n\n^I think it means \"Is there anything wrong?\"\n\nDo I need to reply about why I thought him amazing?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-12T23:09:27.140",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63363",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T10:57:00.127",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-13T10:57:00.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "32237",
"owner_user_id": "32237",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Do I need to reply in this situation?",
"view_count": 108
}
|
[] |
63363
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63387",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Learning Japanese on my own so i will be using this site as i means to\npractice and have some questions answered! If you provide the answer in Kanji,\nif you coul dplease put also the furigana (no romanji) i would appreciate it !\nThank you!\n\nMy question is, i want to make the sentence:\n\n\"I thought you didn't want to see me\"\n\nI want to use the word あう（to meet) and 思う\n\nWould i conjugate あう as あいたくない and then add おもっている ？\n\nhow do i link those two verbs? I was thinking first use the の particle to make\nあう a noun, but that wouldn{t make sense.\n\nDon{t think i could use the て form since i want to say i want.\n\nCan someone please help me with the translation and how you got to do it? Both\npolite and informal ways please :)\n\nThank you in advance!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T03:59:51.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63368",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T05:43:54.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32241",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Question regarding conjugation of two verbs with a (-たい）ending",
"view_count": 197
}
|
[
{
"body": "You are very close. Firstly, you are correct that you treat the ～たい form like\nan i-adjective. So \"You didn't want to meet\" would be 会いたくなかった. Then, the\nconstruction for \"I thought X\" is 「X」と思った。 So, putting those together, \"I\nthought you didn't want to meet me\" becomes 会いたくなかったと思った, although I honestly\ncan't say how common such a sentence would be in Japanese.\n\nAlternatively, you might say something like 会【あ】いたくない気【き】がした, which is like \"I\nhad a feeling / I got the impression you didn't want to see me\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T05:44:28.113",
"id": "63370",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T17:29:50.363",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-13T17:29:50.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "16022",
"parent_id": "63368",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You need to use のだ form when you express what you have judged from situations.\ni.e. 会いたくないのだと思った.\n\n(会いたくなかったのだと思った basically means \"I thought you had not wanted to see me\", but\nyou can use it for \"I thought you didn't want to see me\" too.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T05:43:54.143",
"id": "63387",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T05:43:54.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "63368",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63368
|
63387
|
63387
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63395",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've noticed a couple of words with the character 八 that have (seemingly)\nnothing to do with the number 8.\n\n * 八百屋【やおや】 - greengrocer\n * 八つ【やつ】当たり【あたり】 - taking out anger on someone\n * 八丁【はっちょう】 - skillfullness\n\nFurthermore, this is the only number which I've noticed this pattern on. All\nother words consisting a number have a much more obvious relation, (even when\nit's a 一).\n\n* * *\n\nOn jisho.org, the [count of\n#words](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%85%AB%20%23words) containing each of the\nnumeral characters shows a noticeable spike on 八 as well.\n\n```\n\n 一 二 三 四 五 六 七 八 九 十\n 1713 787 1264 438 364 196 172 357 308 320\n \n```\n\n* * *\n\nAnd here's a table of how common each is in newspapers. Doesn't really show\nanything but I thought to include it since I looked into it as well. I wonder\nwhat the count would be if 九州【きゅうしゅう】 was stripped from the count on 九.\n\n```\n\n 一 二 三 四 五 六 七 八 九 十\n 2 9 14 47 31 93 115 92 55 8\n \n```",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T12:12:05.103",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63371",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-15T02:18:29.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3814",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology",
"numbers"
],
"title": "What is the significance of number 8 (八) in Japanese?",
"view_count": 2255
}
|
[
{
"body": "Some words(mainly from old days) have 八 to imply \"all\" or \"so many\". 八百屋 is an\nexample of this.(so many)\n\nand as one number. It's one of a good number because the character 八 looks\nwider to lower(Kanji is written top to bottom, meaning prosperity)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T16:00:29.010",
"id": "63373",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T16:00:29.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32244",
"parent_id": "63371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "This one puzzled me, so I did some digging.\n\nI couldn't find anything definitive on where the \"many\" meaning may have come\nfrom. This kanji _does_ seem to have this meaning in Chinese as well, as we\nsee over at [the Wiktionary entry for the Chinese\nterm](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%85%AB#Chinese), and also over in [the\nUnihan entry](https://www.unicode.org/cgi-\nbin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=%E5%85%AB).\n\nThis is conjecture, but I suspect the \"many\" sense may come from the idea of\nthe eight directions -- the four cardinals, and the four in-betweens: north,\nsouth, east, west, northeast, northwest, southeast, southwest.\n\nThe \"many\" sense appears to be quite old in Japanese, and it's specific to the\n_kun'yomi_ or native Japanese term, so I don't think this was an import from\nthe Chinese. However, the sense development may have been similar in both\nlanguages -- \"eight\" → \"eight directions\" → \"all over, all directions\" →\n\"many, various\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T19:38:50.357",
"id": "63395",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T19:38:50.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "63371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
63371
|
63395
|
63395
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to know how Japanese dictionaries are organized, as Japanese doesn't\nuse the roman alphabet \"a,b,c,d...\"\n\nDo they instead organize words by あ、い、う、え、お? Or do they do it but kanji\nradical? Or something else?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T16:36:10.027",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63374",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-16T15:58:47.270",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T10:37:44.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"dictionary"
],
"title": "How are Japanese dictionaries organized?",
"view_count": 2605
}
|
[
{
"body": "The system is called 五十音 (gojuuon). There’s a decent description of it on\nWikipedia. A web search on “Japanese alphabetical order” will help, also.\n\n[Wikipedia 五十音 article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goj%C5%ABon)\n\n> In the Japanese language, the gojūon (五十音, Japanese pronunciation:\n> [ɡo(d)ʑɯꜜːoɴ], lit. \"fifty sounds\") is a traditional system ordering kana by\n> their component phonemes, roughly analogous to alphabetical order. The\n> \"fifty\" (gojū) in its name refers to the 5×10 grid in which the characters\n> are displayed. Each kana, which may be a hiragana or katakana character,\n> corresponds to one sound in Japanese. As depicted at the right using\n> hiragana characters, the sequence begins with あ (a), い (i), う (u), え (e), お\n> (o), then continues with か (ka), き (ki), く (ku), け (ke), こ (ko), and so on\n> and so forth for a total of ten rows of five columns.\n>\n> [...]\n>\n> The gojūon order is the prevalent system for collating Japanese in Japan.\n> For example, dictionaries are ordered using this method. Other systems used\n> are the iroha ordering, and, for kanji, the radical ordering.\n>\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZksKkm.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-16T02:37:26.017",
"id": "78600",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-16T15:58:47.270",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-16T15:58:47.270",
"last_editor_user_id": "11792",
"owner_user_id": "39692",
"parent_id": "63374",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63374
| null |
78600
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63383",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to understand the nuances between 話をする and 話す. When is one used\nover the other?\n\nI'm reviewing A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar, and it has the following\nexample sentence:\n\n> 私は山田さんとしか話をしない。\n\nWould it mean the same thing if the example sentence were:\n\n> 私は山田さんとしか話さない。\n\nThanks for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T17:30:05.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63377",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T00:09:24.323",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-13T17:56:20.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "32246",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "what's the difference between 話をする and 話す?",
"view_count": 1162
}
|
[
{
"body": "While 話す literally means 'to speak', 話をする has the nuance of having a\nconversation, chatting, discussing, etc, thus implying a somewhat more\nfriendly relationship. So the meaning of the sentences is slightly different.\nI have invented an imaginary pair of scenarios below to help show the\ndifference.\n\n**Scenario A:**\n\n> 私は山田さんとしか話をしない。 I don't chat with anyone except Yamada.\n\nImagine you are working somewhere and although you are acquainted with\neveryone, let's say that Yamada is the only person you feel comfortable\nchatting with. You greet everyone else and exchange pleasantries, but that's\nit. But with Yamada, you might sit together at lunch and have a conversation.\n\n**Scenario B:**\n\n> 私は山田さんとしか話さない。I don't speak to anyone except Yamada.\n\nImagine you are working somewhere and the relationships among the workers are\nextremely bad. Nobody likes each other and you don't even speak to anyone,\nwith the exception of Yamada with whom you do speak sometimes. But you might\nnot be friendly enough to open up and have a chat.\n\nObviously it's an artificial and exaggerated scene and to some extent context\nwill also matter, but hopefully it illustrates the point that with 話をする, you\nmight infer that the exchange has a little more depth and content than the\nbare literal meaning of just speaking.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T00:09:24.323",
"id": "63383",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T00:09:24.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "63377",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
63377
|
63383
|
63383
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "冬休みは家族でイタリアやイギリスへ行きました。 This sentence is very simple but I don't understand\nwhy で is being used instead of と here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T22:04:09.453",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63379",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T22:04:09.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "Why use で instead of とhere?",
"view_count": 29
}
|
[] |
63379
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can someone please tell me what the name Moki means in English? And is it a\nboy's or girl's name?\n\nThank you",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T23:17:04.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63381",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T23:33:51.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32248",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"names"
],
"title": "Meaning of the name Moki",
"view_count": 2853
}
|
[
{
"body": "(Translation requests are generally not allowed on this site, so this issue\nmight be closed by site moderators.)\n\nThere's a fellow named Jim Breen who maintains a few online dictionaries,\nincluding a name dictionary. [Looking up \"Moki\" on his\nsite](http://nihongo.monash.edu/cgi-bin/wwwjdic?2MUJMoki), we find that this\nis an unusual name -- only three instances pop up.\n\n * 茂木【もき】 (s) Moki\n * 茂幾【もき】 (s) Moki\n * 毛木【もき】 (u) Moki\n\nHere, the `(s)` indicates a surname, and the `(u)` indicates an as-yet-\nunclassified name. (Code legend available\n[here](http://nihongo.monash.edu/wwwjdicinf.html#code_tag).) I'll guess here\nthat the last bullet point is also a surname.\n\nIn terms of what \"Moki\" means, I must caution that Japanese names are\nsometimes not very directly connected to meaning, much like names in English\nor other languages. If we just go from the meanings inherent in the kanji\nspellings, we have:\n\n * 茂木【もき】: \"lush\" + \"tree\"\n * 茂幾【もき】: \"lush\" + \"how many\"\n * 毛木【もき】: \"hair, hairy\" + \"tree\"\n\nHope that helps!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-13T23:33:51.800",
"id": "63382",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-13T23:33:51.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "63381",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63381
| null |
63382
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63385",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/acPDA.jpg)\n\nI saw this drawing at a friend's house and wondered what it means;\nunfortunately the friend has no idea. Another friend suggested it's hiragana\nscript, hence the question here: can you please tell me if it's japanese or\nnot and what's the meaning of it?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T01:27:15.253",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63384",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T05:21:04.327",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-14T05:21:04.327",
"last_editor_user_id": "11792",
"owner_user_id": "32249",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Is that drawing in japanese? if so, can you please tell me what it says?",
"view_count": 215
}
|
[
{
"body": "As we've been discussing in the comments, this is a form of 書道｛しょどう｝ -\n_shodou_ , or Japanese calligraphy. In particular, it's one of the forms where\nthe artist takes some liberties with how they write the characters, resulting\nin a more cursive, artistic piece but unfortunately also making it a little\nharder to read if you're not familiar with the way such writing is done.\n\nThat said, it's almost certainly one of two (related) words:\n\n * 仲よい｛なかよい｝ _nakayoi_ , meaning intimate or close (in terms of friendship)\n\n * 仲よし｛なかよし｝ _nakayoshi_ , meaning an intimate or close friend\n\nIn both cases, the _naka_ part is written in kanji (Chinese script used in\nJapanese), and the other part is written in hiragana (the main \"syllabric\"\nscript in Japanese). My money is on it being nakayoshi, but I'm definitely not\na calligraphy expert.\n\nThere is also an artist's signature and seal in the corner, but the photo\nquality isn't good enough to make them out.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T03:45:23.127",
"id": "63385",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T03:45:23.127",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16022",
"parent_id": "63384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
63384
|
63385
|
63385
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "63388",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "More specifically, what is the difference between 「見るの」 and 「見たの」 in this\ncontext:\n\n> 時々、子供のころの夢を（x）があります。\n\nHow does the の particle function? Is its meaning modified by the 「が」 particle\nas well?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T05:11:20.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "63386",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-15T03:10:06.513",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-15T02:41:13.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "32250",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "What does the の particle do in relation to verbs?",
"view_count": 148
}
|
[
{
"body": "> How does the の particle function?\n\nAs mentioned by @Pteromys, the の particle can act as a verb nominalizer. A\nnominalizer is:\n\n> 1. ( _linguistics_ ) Anything, usually an affixed morpheme or a particle,\n> that changes another part of speech into a noun.\n> ([Wiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nominalizer#Noun))\n>\n\nNormally, の is used in conjunction with the topic marker. It turns the\nprevious sentence into a noun - e.g.:\n\n * チーズを食べる - _I eat cheese_\n * チーズを食べるのは、僕です - _I am the one who eats cheese_\n\nAn even simpler example would be:\n\n * 食べるのは僕です - _I am the one who eats_\n\n> Is its meaning modified by the 「が」 particle as well?\n\nNot really. は and が act the same way as they always do when appended to a\nnominalized verb, which is where the real meaning comes from. I'll spare you\nthe difference here since there are many resources with those details!\n\nYou'll often see のが used in set phrases such as ～のが好きです. Remember though that\nthe の just turns the previous sentence into a noun, so similar to above:\n\n * チーズを食べる - _I eat cheese_\n * チーズを食べるのが好きです - _I like to eat cheese_\n\nNow before we pull this all together for your first example, first we have to\nconsider whether to use の or the alternative nominalizer こと. [Here is a good\nanswer detailing the\ndifferences](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1395/what-is-the-\ndifference-between-the-\nnominalizers-%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8-and-%E3%81%AE/1396#1396).\n\nTL;DR with の there is often an **'immediacy of time and/or location'** whereas\nwith こと, **'matters are considered from a more abstract, removed\nstandpoint'**.\n\n * 時々、子供のころの夢を見る - _Sometimes I dream about my childhood_\n * 時々、子供のころの夢を見る「こと」があります - _Sometimes I have a dream about my childhood_\n\nAs for 見た, I don't think it's right either, but I can't really explain\nthoroughly why. I'll leave that to someone more qualified!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-12-14T08:40:52.383",
"id": "63388",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-15T03:10:06.513",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-15T03:10:06.513",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "29738",
"parent_id": "63386",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
63386
|
63388
|
63388
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.