question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71730",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Do any other widely used acronyms besides KK (Kabushiki Kaisha) and NHK (Nihon\nHousou Kyoukai) translate directly into Japanese? I have seen DIY, SS, NTT,\nJR, and LDK to name a few, but the terms would have English word meanings.\nThank You!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T15:24:05.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "70719",
"last_activity_date": "2019-10-04T18:01:57.110",
"last_edit_date": "2019-10-04T18:01:57.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "Do any other widely used romaji based acronyms besides KK and NHK translate directly into Japanese words?",
"view_count": 124
}
|
[
{
"body": "I don't understand why you ask \"why\". There is no such a rule that Latin\nacronyms must be made only from pure English words. Here are some nationally-\nor globally-known organizations based on romanized Japanese:\n\n * [**YKK**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YKK) = **吉** 田 **工** 業 **株** 式会社, world's largest zipper manufacturer\n * [**SNK**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNK) = **新日** 本 **企** 画, game software company best known for _King of Fighters_ franchise\n * [**TDK**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TDK) = **東** 京 **電** 気 **化** 学工業, best known as a compact cassette manufacturer\n * [**DNP**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai_Nippon_Printing) = **大日** 本印刷 (P = printing), Japan's one of the largest printing companies\n * **KNT** = **近** 畿 **日** 本 **ツ** ーリスト, travel agency\n * [**DHC**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DHC_Corporation) = **大** 学 **翻** 訳 **セ** ンター, now known for cosmetics and supplement\n\nAnd there are also many [slangy romaji\nabbreviations](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/69906/5010) like KY\n(空気読めない) and JK (女子高生).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T05:06:16.303",
"id": "71730",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T12:48:12.867",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T12:48:12.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "70719",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
70719
|
71730
|
71730
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Based on my understanding, it seems that \"な-adjectives\" and \"nouns\" both\nfunction as nouns in the grammatical sense with the exception that\n\"な-adjectives\" are linked to other nouns with な and \"nouns\" are linked to\nother nouns with の. What is the origin of this distinction? How has it come to\nbe that we have a \"な class\" and \"の class\" of what otherwise seem to be the\nsame part of speech?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T16:10:19.963",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "70721",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-10T16:10:19.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33505",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"adjectives",
"history",
"nouns",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "な vs の classes of nouns",
"view_count": 129
}
|
[] |
70721
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I just noticed that the quantifying words that have an initial sound as /h/\nsuch as 本、匹、分\n\nFor example: 本 hon /h/ becomes /p/ : 1,6,8,10 /h/ becomes /b/ : 3,?? and ん\nsound before /b/ becomes /m/ (is it assimilation?)\n\n1 [一本]{いっぽん} ippon \n2 [二本]{にほん} nihon \n3 [三本]{さんぼん} sanbon \n4 [四本]{よんほん} yonhon \n5 [五本]{ごほん} gohon \n6 [六本]{ろっぽん} roppon \n7 [七本]{ななほん} nanahon \n8 [八本]{はっぽん} happon \n9 [九本]{きゅうほん} kyuuhon \n10 [十本]{じゅっぽん} juppon \n？？ [何本]{なんぼん} nanbon\n\nsome words have sound changing but other words, that have similar\ncharacteristics, do not.\n\nFor instance \"さんぼん\" ; /h/---->/ b/ \nBut \"よんほん\" \nsound does not change\n\nI would like to know that 1. \"Is there phonological explanation that can\nexplain about changing of these sound?\" 2. \"why doesn't it occur in every\nwords which have similar characteristics?\"\n\nThank you for taking your time to answer my question!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T16:43:04.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "70722",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T14:16:13.050",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T15:07:37.020",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "34596",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"counters"
],
"title": "/h/ sound changing in some Japanese counters",
"view_count": 354
}
|
[
{
"body": "> _1. \"Is there phonological explanation that can explain about changing of\n> these sound?\"_\n\nIf you are asking about the general rule, for _h_ → _b_ , it's 連濁 (rendaku)\n\"compound voicing\", in case you don't know. There is [a great\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2526/7810) with [a dedicate\ntag](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rendaku) on this\nsite, as well as [an independent article on\nWikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendaku).\n\nFor _h_ → _p_ thing, it's called 促音便 (sokuonbin), or would be like \"gemination\nsandhi\" in English. This is also a basic grammar of Japanese, [the\nusage](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40325/7810) and [the\nhistory](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/60962/7810) already covered on\nthis site. Also [a small patch of explanation on\nWP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology#Gemination_2).\n\nEdit: I've found [an answer conveniently explains\nboth](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/38728/7810).\n\n> _2. \"why doesn't it occur in every words which have similar\n> characteristics?\"_\n\nWhile you can simply call it irregularity, but it does have something behind\nthe story.\n\nIf you take a look at a grammar book 『口語法』 compiled by a government commission\nin 1916, they have listed\n[漢語の数詞](http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/1870063/29) (Sino-Japanese\nnumerals):\n\n> 一 二 三 四 五 六 七 八 九 十...\n\nThey did not provide any pronunciation in this section, but [an interesting\nnote](http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/926955/38) was put on this paragraph.\n\n> 數を呼ぶに、次のように云ふことがある。聞きちがわせぬ爲である。 \n> _Sometimes numbers are pronounced as follows, in order to avoid\n> mishearing._ \n> 二百四十番【ふたひやくよんじうばん】 四百七十九圓【よんひやくななじうきうえん】\n\nFrom above, we can assume that the typical pronunciation of numbers at that\ntime was:\n\n> いち に さん し ご ろく しち はち く じゅう\n\nAnd **よん** ・ **なな** ・ **きゅう** that we have today were merely telephone\npronunciation such as \"tree\", \"fife\", and \"niner\". Therefore, **よん** ほん was\noriginally the ad hoc replacement of **し** ほん, which would have no condition\nto trigger rendaku.\n\nBelow are bonus tips about counter readings related to your question:\n\n * ふた for 2 is the only one that has not gained wide acceptance, but still used as telephone pronunciation among pilots, traders, military etc. alongside ひと for 1.\n * **はっ** ぽん and **はち** ほん are equally good. **なな** ほん can be read **しち** ほん as well. However, 7 has no *しっ- form, presumably because it'd be too confusing with 4 (し-) and 10 (じっ-; prescriptive form of じゅっ-).\n * Numbers end with ん (3, 何, 万...) that make the counter voiced, such as さん **ぼ** ん, are rather exceptional that only found with some counters established in old times. さんがい (< 階 floors), なんびき (< 匹 animals) and いちまんべん (< 遍 rounds; repeats) are only others I can recall. Otherwise unvoiced counters remain unvoiced: なんかい (< 回 times), なん **ぴ** ん (< 品 pieces of work) etc.\n * Foreign words as counters are never affected by rendaku, not even _h_ → _p_ : さんハロン (three furlongs), ろくヘクタール (six hectares), じゅっフォルダ (ten (computer) folders of...) etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T04:59:59.583",
"id": "71779",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T05:52:13.773",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T05:52:13.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "70722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "According to\n[いっぽん、にほん、さんぼん問題の解決](https://marginaliae.wordpress.com/2013/03/05/%E3%81%84%E3%81%A3%E3%81%BD%E3%82%93%E3%80%81%E3%81%AB%E3%81%BB%E3%82%93%E3%80%81%E3%81%95%E3%82%93%E3%81%BC%E3%82%93%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C%E3%81%AE%E8%A7%A3%E6%B1%BA/),\nI adopt the author's theory and I translated it.\n\n> 1. いっぽん 原形「ぽん」が前接する「いち」の語末母音脱落、促音便化によって保存された **_Due to\n> the[apocope](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocope) and\n> [gemination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemination) of 「いち」, the original\n> form of 「ぽん」has remained._**\n> 2. にほん 母音間に挟まれたという条件下で、唇音退化が進行し「ほん」に結実 **_surrounded by vowels, labial\n> weakening had proceed into 「ほん」._**\n> 3. さんぼん 発音の音色については遡行同化、「ぼん」の有声化については順行同化が起こった\n> 4. よんほん 和語「よ」が数詞整備によって「よん」となり「し」に代わって、成立済みの「ほん」に後代に接ぎ木された **_Wago「よ」became\n> 「よん」by the adjustment of numeral. And, replacing 「し」and grafted to the\n> 「ほん」later._**\n> 5. ごほん 母音間に挟まれたという条件下で、唇音退化が進行し「ほん」に結実 **_surrounded by vowels, labial\n> weakening had proceed into 「ほん」._**\n> 6. ろっぽん 原形「ぽん」が前接する「ろく」の語末母音脱落、促音便化によって保存された **_Due to the apocope and\n> gemination of 「ろく」, the original form of 「ぽん」has remained._**\n> 7. ななほん 和語「なな」が数詞整備をへて「しち」と交替し、成立済みの「ほん」に後代に接ぎ木された **_Wago「なな」switched\n> into「しち」by the adjustment of numeral. And, grafted to the 「ほん」later._**\n> 8. はっぽん 原形「ぽん」が前接する「はち」の語末母音脱落、促音便化によって保存された **_Due to the apocope and\n> gemination of 「はち」, the original form of 「ぽん」has remained._**\n> 9. きゅうほん 母音間に挟まれたという条件下で、唇音退化が進行し「ほん」に結実。ただし「きゅう」の語形は後発 **_surrounded by\n> vowels, labial weakening had proceed into 「ほん」._**\n> 10. じっぽん 中古音の閉音節入声の日本語における表現形として促音が用いられ、これが原形「ぽん」を保存して接続した **_Closed\n> syllable[checked tone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checked_tone) from\n> Ancient Chinese phonology had expressed as gemination in Japanese. Thus, it\n> preserved「ぽん」._**\n>\n\n* * *\n\n> 通説として上代以前、古代日本語のハ行はパ行ないしファ行のような音であったとされている。まずスタート地点はパ行、\n> **すなわち「『本』の原形は『ポン』であった」**\n\nThe author explains, in ancient times,it believed that the sound of ha-gyō of\nclassical Japanese was pa-gyō or fa-gyō. i.e. original form of 本{ほん}(ほん) is\n本{ぽん}(ぽん).\n\n**For, 2 and 5. 二本{にほん}, 五本{ごほん}.**\n\n>\n> 数詞には「いち、さん、ろく」のごとき二字のものと「に、ご」のごとく一字のものがある。数を数える時、こうした不整合が邪魔になる。そこで人は誰でも自然に「にーい、ごーお」というように一文字数詞には母音を足して発音する。...中略...\n> すなわち「に＋ぽん」、「ご＋ぽん」のケースでは、前章に説いたように歴史的に不安定だった /p/ 音を支えてくれる音韻環境がなかった。脆弱な /p/\n> 音は響きの強く長い母音に前後を囲まれ、その結果「唇音退化」は順調に進行して、もともとの両唇破裂音が摩擦音に変化し、さらには唇のすぼめが弱まって（唇音退化）、けっか声門摩擦音におさまる。そして「にほん、ごほん」という発音に帰着することになる。\n\nThen, the author explains when you are counting 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ..., you\npronouncing like 「いち、に(~)い、さん、しい、ご(~)お」to adjust the length of the sound with\n2 letters of other numerals. As the sound of 「p」is weak comparing to the\nvowels of 「に(~)い」and 「ご(~)お」,then Labial weakening progressed. The sound\nof「p」becoming 「h」, it has become being pronounced as 「にほん」, 「ごほん」.\n\n**For 1, 6 and 8. 一本{いっぽん}, 六本{ろっぽん}, 八本{はっぽん}**\n\n>\n> 「いっぽん、ろっぽん、はっぽん」は「いち、ろく、はち」が連語成分となるために、元来入声［（にっしょう）：この入声については後述］であった語末子音に日本語特有の事情で添加されていた語末母音の脱落がおこる。...中略...「っ」の一字は音楽の休符の役割に近い。音を出さずに次の音を待つのである。この「無音のタメ」には思わぬ副作用があり、これが古い音韻の両唇破裂音——すなわち「ポン」の音を維持する条件になっていたのである。\n\nRegarding「いっぽん、ろっぽん、はっぽん」, 「いち、ろく、はち」being the element of the collocation, the\nword ending consonant originally which had been the checked tone and the word\nending vowel dropped off. Thus, the 「p」has preserved as the dropped checked\ntone replaced with the gemination 「っ」. The\n[syncope](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncope_\\(phonology\\)) allows you to\npronounce voiceless bilabial stop easily.\n\n**For 3,三本{さんぼん}**\n\n> 平たく言えば前後の音が同化する、ということであり /san/ + /pon/ で前者の /n/ が後者の /p/ に同化して両唇性を獲得し /sam/\n> となる。かたや後者の /p/ は前者の /n/ の有音性に同化して /bon/ となる。あわせて /sambon/ という音韻が獲得される。\n\n/san/ + /pon/ ; the former \"n\" regressively being assimilated with \"p\", it\nbecomes /sam/ with bilabial nasal \"m\". And, the latter \"p\" being assimilated\nwith the voiced sound of the former \"n\", it becomes /bon/. Putting them\ntogether, the phoneme of /sambon/ has appeared.\n\n**For, 4,7 and 9.四本{よんほん}, 七本{ななほん}, 九本{きゅうほん}**\n\n>\n> 「し」は平安時代から続く根強い忌み言葉であり、たとえば室町時代の『祇園会御見物御成記』献立表に「二、三、よ、五」とあるという。あからさまに「四（し）」を避けている。...中略...「忌み言葉として『し』は嫌われ四は読みの『よ』を使う」としている。\n\nDue to the tetraphobia of 「し」, 「し」was disliked and 『よ』was used.\n\n>\n> 「きゅうほん」の成立は前章「よんほん、ななほん」同様に新しいと見られる。古来の「く」に代わって「きゅう」は、前段に説いた「し→よん」「しち→なな」の数詞整理と同時期に「九」のスタンダードな読みという立場を確立する。\n\nSo, 「きゅう」 replaced with 「く」, the same as numeral adjustment\nof「し→よん」「しち→なな」occurred in 20th century.\n\n**For 10.十本{じっぼん}**\n\n>\n> 「じっぽん」の形は先にも触れた「促音便に伴う古音の保存」で説明には足りよう。問題は何故に「じゅうほん」がないのか、ということである。しかしこれは実は「偽の問題」であって、「じゅう」という読みそのものが起源的なものではない。むしろ「じっ」という慣用的な促音便の方が、漢数字「十」の起源的な発音の痕跡をありありと残すものである。...中略...\n> さて、「十」の古形推定形に見る -p\n> が入声であり、こうした語彙を古代日本語が取り込む時にはどうしても無理を通さざるを得なくなる。なにしろ日本語は開音節オンリーの言語である。語末閉音節の語形や表記法（さらには感受性）がないのに、この入声の語末音節内破音をなんとか表現しなければならない。そこで「ジフ」などと訓じてお茶を濁した。\n\n「じっぽん」 : The Gemination preserved the「ぽん」. 十 used to be the checked tone 「p」.\nHowever, Japanese language had only open syllable. Therefore, read「ジフ」as kun-\nyomi to solve the issue.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T14:16:13.050",
"id": "71790",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T14:16:13.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "70722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
70722
| null |
71779
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71797",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It seems that both ~によって and ~を通じて (sometimes ~を通して) can be used to mean\n\"through\", \"by means of\", \"via\". Both seem moderately but not very formal.\n\nAre there any differences in nuance that dictate when I use one over the\nother?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T17:53:18.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "70723",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T04:50:29.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4382",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"definitions"
],
"title": "Difference between ~によって and ~を通じて (through, by means of)",
"view_count": 1276
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to [N1N2N3外国人のための日本語学習ブログ : 日本語能力試験２級文法\n～を通して／～を通じて／～によって](http://blog.livedoor.jp/rosetea425/archives/133624.html),\n\n> １．［名詞］＋を通（とお）して／［名詞］＋を通（つう）じて＝ **「～をとおって（to go/pass\n> through)」「直接ではなく間に何か入って」「ずっと～」という意味。**\n\n「~を通して、〜を通じて」 is used to express \"the experience; go/pass thorough\", \"doing\nsomething using the medium such as person or things\", \"throughout ~\".\n\n> **体験を通して、学んだことは忘れない。「～をとおって（to go/pass through)」**\n\n_You don't forget the things learnt by what you are actually doing._\n\n> **社長と話したい場合、秘書を通してアポをとる必要がある。**\n\n_In case you would like to contact CEO, you need to make an appointment\nthrough the secretary._\n\n> **この辺は、一年を通して２０度以下になることはありません。**\n\n_Around here, it does not get colder below 20℃ throughout a year._\n\n> 2.［名詞］＋によって／［名詞］＋による＋［名詞］＝ **「～で」方法、手段を表す （by means of/with~)**\n\nAnd, によって is focusing on \"the method\" to acquire the outcome.\n\n> **1. Q：彼はどうやった漢字を覚えたのかな？** _How has he learnt kanji?_\n>\n> **A：彼は、何度も書くことによって、漢字を覚えたそうですよ。**\n\n_He learned kanji by writing kanji again and again._\n\n> **2. 暴力{ぼうりょく} による解決{かいけつ}ではなく、話し合いによる解決を希望{きぼう}します。**\n\n_Not achieving the solution by force and arms, but we hope to reconcile by\nargument._\n\nFor 〜を通して、〜を通じて, which one preferred is according to the research\n[「Nを通じて」と「Nを通して」について](https://www.ninjal.ac.jp/event/specialists/project-\nmeeting/files/JCLWorkshop_no5_papers/JCLWorkshop_No5_37.pdf),\n\nThe author says,\n\n> 100万語当たりの頻度は、 **「Ｎを通じて」は48.3語で、「Ｎを通して」は42.5語**\n> で、「Ｎを通じて」のほうはやや多いが、大きな違いは見られなかった。しかし、表１、図１が示すように、サブコーパス別に見ると、出現の偏りが見られた。まず、\n> **「Ｎを通じて」の用例が多いのは「白書」「新聞」「広報誌」「教科書」「国会会議録」である。この５つのサブコーパスはどちらというと、より書き言葉的であると言える。[!法律は「Ｎを通して」が0語であるのに対し、「Ｎを通じて」の出現頻度が20.4語である。法律は書き言葉的で、漢語を多用すると思われる。**\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VruXH.png)\n\n「Ｎを通じて」is 48.3 in 1 million words, whereas 「Ｎを通して」is 42.5. And 「Ｎを通じて」is used\nmore often in an annual report, newspaper, journals, textbook, the Diet\nRecord. The frequency of appearance in law, 「Ｎを通して」is 0, but 「Ｎを通じて」 is 20.4\nsince the document in law is very written language and uses a lot of 漢語.\n\n> 一方、「Ｎを通して」の出現が多いのは「教科書」「広報誌」「書籍」である。雑誌は多ジャンルの内容に分かれ、一概に書き言葉的あるいは話し言葉的とは言えない。\n\nThe「Ｎを通して」appears a lot in journals, textbook, books. Since magazine has a\nwide variety, you cannot conclude written language or spoken language\nunconditionally.\n\nThe author concludes,\n\n> 第一、傾向として、先行研究でも指摘されているように、\n> **「Nを通じて」「Nを通して」の両方が書き言葉的ではあるが、「Nを通じて」がより書き言葉的であることが検証できた** 。第二、\n> **「Nを通じて」が情報伝達の媒体としての用例、期間を表す用例が多く、それに対し、「Nを通して」は主体の積極的な持続行為により、何かを実現し、あるいは得られることを表す用例が多いことが分かった**\n> 。第三、\n> **「Nを通じて」は公的な活動について述べる傾向にあり、「Nを通して」はどちらかというと私的な、具体的な事柄について述べる傾向にあることが分かった。**\n> この第三の違いについてはコーパスのレジスターに影響されている可能性もあり、今後、別のデータで検証する必要がある\n\n* * *\n\nSo, 「~を通じて」「~を通して」both are written language though, 「~を通じて」is used more often\ntreated as written language. The followings are examples in the paper and I\nrearranged.\n\n> 「Nを通じて」が情報伝達の媒体としての用例\n\n * その話は山田さんを通じて相手にもつたわっているはずです \n\n_The story should be delivered to the customer via Mr.Yamada._\n\n> 期間を表す用例\n\n * その国は一年をつうじてあたたかい。 \n\n_The country is warm throughout a year._\n\n * このあたりは四季をつうじて観光客のたえることがない。 \n\n_Around here, the visitors never cease throughout four seasons._\n\n> それに対し、「Nを通して」は主体の積極的な持続行為により、何かを実現し、あるいは得られることを表す用例\n\n * 子供は、学校で他の子供と一緒に遊んだり学んだりすることを通して、社会生活のルールを学んで行く\n\n_Children learn the rule of the society by learning and playing with other\nchildren at school._",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T04:37:45.530",
"id": "71797",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T04:50:29.123",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T04:50:29.123",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "70723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
70723
|
71797
|
71797
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "70725",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My name is Joe Tailor. I tried to translate it to Japanese and got this:\nジョーテーラー\n\nIs this accurate? Or are there inaccuracies like it being “Joe Taylor” for\nexample? It has to be with an “i” please. Thank you.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T20:13:09.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "70724",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T14:54:53.680",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35338",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Translation of my name",
"view_count": 223
}
|
[
{
"body": "ジョー・テーラー is one correct spelling with the middle dot or interpunct added. テイラー\ncan also be a spelling based on personal preference. After researching the\nmost common spellings of both names, I realized that the name Tailor is\nconsidered a profession, spelled the same way, and that indicates the way it\nwould be spelled as was indicated in the question. The name Taylor however, is\nmore commonly recognized as a first or last name. The two terms are written\ndifferently to reflect the difference between the profession or the name\nTailor, and the name Taylor. The difference in spelling is determined by the\nuser.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T21:41:27.143",
"id": "70725",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T14:54:53.680",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T14:54:53.680",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"parent_id": "70724",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] |
70724
|
70725
|
70725
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "70729",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Assuming present tense, we can use i-adjectives in an attributive context both\nin the affirmative form:\n\n> 高い 椅子 が あります - there's an expensive chair\n\nAnd in the negative form:\n\n> 高くない 椅子 が あります - there's an inexpensive chair\n\n* * *\n\nI know we can use na-adjectives similarly in the affirmative form:\n\n> 綺麗な 人 が います - there's a pretty person\n\nBut for the life of me I can't find any info on whether using na-adjectives in\nthe negative form is allowed in an attributive context (i.e. modifying a noun\nrather than as a predicative with a copula). So is the following grammatical?\n\n> 綺麗じゃない 人 が います - there's a non-pretty person",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T23:16:56.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "70728",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T03:34:51.213",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35341",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"negation",
"na-adjectives",
"attributive"
],
"title": "Do na-adjectives have an attributive negative form?",
"view_count": 719
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your guessed-at negative attributive is perfectly correct. The only caveat I'd\nadd is that じゃ is a somewhat-informal contraction for では, and thus you should\nprobably use the full では form in any formal spoken or written context.\n\n> 綺麗[じゃ]{●}ない 人 が います \n> ↓ \n> 綺麗[で]{●}[は]{●}ない 人 が います\n\nHappy studying!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-10T23:33:15.317",
"id": "70729",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-10T23:33:15.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "70728",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Although the name might scare people away,\n[Japanesewithanime](https://www.japanesewithanime.com/2018/11/na-\nadjectives.html?m=1#attributive-form) actually has a really in-depth post that\ncovers this topic. I'll just quote the relevant part discussing why your guess\nwas right, but there's a ton more information, so you might want to read\nthrough it.\n\n> The na of na-adjectives is actually a copula. The prenominal copula, or\n> attributive copula.\n>\n> Basically, da だ is the copula you use in an independent clause, while na な\n> is the copula you use in an attributive clause, also called adjectival\n> clause. A clause that describes nouns.\n\nBut there isn't a negative form of な, so you have to go back to だ.\n\n> The negative form of na-adjectives is literally just replacing the normal\n> copula by a negative copula such as denai でない, dewanai ではない or its\n> contraction, janai じゃない.\n\nHe includes a link talking about the difference in usage between [ではない and\nでない](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1363483578)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T03:34:51.213",
"id": "71728",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T03:34:51.213",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35327",
"parent_id": "70728",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
70728
|
70729
|
70729
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm not talking about homonyms that have very different meanings to be able to\nmake it abundantly clear from context alone like hana (nose, flower) or kami\n(hair, god, paper), but like tokei(watch, clock) and koshi (back and waist).\n\nDo people just say 手の時計 for watch or 普通の時計 for a standard clock? What about\nkoshi? Usually people will use it in body-related topics where context alone\nseems rather unhelpful because both are plausible. What then?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T05:06:09.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71729",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T14:34:13.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-usage",
"homonyms"
],
"title": "How do you differentiate saying vague words in Japanese that have multiple meanings? E.g. tokei, koshi",
"view_count": 261
}
|
[
{
"body": "They are not \"vague\" from the Japanese standpoint. Seen from the opposite\nside, I must say English is equally confusing. How do you distinguish 胃 and 腹\nwhen they are both \"stomach\" in English? How do you distinguish 恋 and 愛 when\nboth are \"love\" in English? How about 兄/弟 (\"brother\"), 胡椒/唐辛子 (\"pepper\"),\nごはん/米/稲 (\"rice\"), 水/湯 (\"water\"), 絵/写真 (\"picture\"), 便所/風呂 (\"bathroom\"), and so\non?\n\nThe Japanese language makes no distinction between \"watch\" and \"clock\" at a\nsingle-word level. Just as English speakers do not think \"water\" has two\nmeanings, Japanese speakers do not think 時計 has two meanings. 普通の時計 is either\n\"ordinary clock\" or \"ordinary watch\". There are compounds like 腕時計 (\"watch\"),\n置時計 (\"table clock\") and 壁掛け時計 (\"wall clock\") if you really need to distinguish\nthe types of 時計, but you should not use them without a reason.\n\nAs for 腰, it refers to the lower back and the pelvic part of the body (see the\npicture [here](http://nakayama-seikei.com/archives/111)), so it's an\nequivalent of neither \"waist\" nor \"back\". We also have words like 背中, ウエスト and\nお尻. See also: [How can I differentiate between feet and\nlegs?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/524/5010)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T05:49:58.223",
"id": "71732",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T14:34:13.850",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T14:34:13.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
71729
| null |
71732
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was thinking it meant \"I believe I can be happy\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T05:30:16.587",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71731",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T14:04:06.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"questions"
],
"title": "What does 幸せになれると信じています mean?",
"view_count": 123
}
|
[
{
"body": "If I just read it literaly, it does mean what you said at least. \"幸せになれる\"\nmeans \"I can be happy\" just like \"と信じています\" does mean that \"You are believing\"\nso it will means \"I believe I can be happy in the future\". I would like to put\n\"in the future\" because it does sound like th person really want to be happy\non a larger side than just \"I can be happy\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T13:48:48.553",
"id": "71734",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T14:04:06.147",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T14:04:06.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "35353",
"owner_user_id": "35353",
"parent_id": "71731",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71731
| null |
71734
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RS1Ks.jpg)\n\n\"大阪ではタピオカを入れた飲み物を売る店がたくさん***できていて***、。。。”\n\nI looked it up in the Weblio Japanese-English Dictionary (the most trustworthy\none online I suppose) and found this definition of できる (as below) the most\nreasonable one for the sentence above. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oh8Yh.jpg)\n\nTo my confusion, the definition and its example sentence do not seem like the\nsame thing.\n\nThe definition says \"to come into being\"\"to start to exist\"\"to take form\". But\nthen its example sentence is more like \"to conceive (a child)\" rather than \"to\nappear\"\"to start to exist.\" Can it be applied to both physical objects and\nliving things? Or is it restricted to the latter?\n\nThank you all for taking the time to answer my question! I deeply deeply\nappreciate it!",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T16:33:18.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71735",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T07:18:35.600",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T04:45:39.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "35334",
"owner_user_id": "35334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "I think できる in this sentence here means \"begin to exist\", am I correct?",
"view_count": 132
}
|
[
{
"body": "Remember が is a **subject** marker.\n\n> 2人の間に \n> between the two (parents),\n>\n> 男の子 **が** \n> a boy ( **←SUBJECT!** )\n>\n> できた。 \n> came into existence / started to exist / formed.\n\nHence \"a boy was born\". できる is an intransitive verb, whereas \"to conceive\" is\ntransitive. When you say \"to conceive a child\", the child is an **object** ,\nbut that's not how the original Japanese sentence is constructed.\n\nThere is a transitive verb\n[もうける](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%84%B2%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B) that means \"to\nconceive (a child)\". With this, you can say 彼女は男の子 **を** もうけた \"She conceived a\nboy\". See 男の子 is now marked with を, an **object** marker.\n\nIn conclusion, there is no syntactical difference between 店ができる and 男の子ができる.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T07:13:26.250",
"id": "71751",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T07:18:35.600",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T07:18:35.600",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71735",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71735
| null |
71751
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71738",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that the title san cannot be used when referring to myself. It seems\nappropriate to use if it is with a title of some sort. I just wanted to\nclarify. Thank You!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T17:50:55.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71737",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T18:43:23.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "Can I use the title san if I refer to myself as an ojisan?",
"view_count": 354
}
|
[
{
"body": "**おじ is \"uncle\", but おじさん is not necessarily \"(Mr.) uncle\" any more.** おじさん\nusually means \"middle-aged guy\", and you can refer to someone as おじさん even if\nhe is not your uncle. You can even say 私はもうおじさんだ (\"I am no longer young\"),\nreferring to yourself, and this さん has no honorific meaning. The same can be\nsaid for おばさん (\"middle-aged lady\").\n\nThis process is called\n[**lexicalization**](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13081/5010). In\nshort, おじさん was initially `おじ + さん`, but this combination became a new word\nwith its own meaning. さん has become an integral part of the new word. This\nalso means dictionaries have a dedicated entry for おじさん (see it in\n[jisho.org](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%98%E3%81%95%E3%82%93),\n[goo辞書](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%98%E3%81%95%E3%82%93/#jn-31000)).\n\nNote that you can still address your real uncle with おじさん, too. When you talk\nto your young nephew, you may call yourself おじさん, and this is in the same vein\nas [calling yourself\nママ/お父さん/etc](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/25947/when-\nreferring-to-herself-is-there-any-pronoun-other-\nthan-%E3%81%8A%E6%AF%8D%E3%81%95%E3%82%93-when-speaking-to) when talking to\nyour child. In my case, I don't have a nephew and I haven't met my real uncle\nfor decades, so whenever I say おじさん, it almost certainly means \"middle-aged\nguy\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T18:22:48.633",
"id": "71738",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T18:43:23.683",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T18:43:23.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71737",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
71737
|
71738
|
71738
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71747",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 身の危険が迫った時にだけ発現する能力だから\n\nI know there are two relative clauses in the above sentence, as shown below.\nExample structure is [verb/sentence]noun/main clause]\n\n> Relative clause 1: [身の危険が迫った]時]\n>\n> Relative clause 2: [発現する]能力]\n\nI know that clauses are made with the \"sentence/verb + noun\" construct, and\nthe main clause extends to the end of the sentence unless in the case a\nsecond/third/etc relative clause exists, at which point the main clause will\nend where the next relative clause begins.\n\nIn the above case however, the particle に already exists in the first main\nclause, which makes me highly doubt the だけ particle is being used with the\nfirst clause (despite me knowing that particles can be combined in different\nways; and this might be a case of seeing a combination I've not encountered\nbefore). This [dictionary](https://sakura-\nparis.org/dict/%E6%98%8E%E9%8F%A1%E5%9B%BD%E8%AA%9E%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8/exact/%E3%81%A0%E3%81%91)\nhas a example of にだけ, and this\n[answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/61253/%E3%81%AB%E3%81%A0%E3%81%91-vs-%E3%81%A0%E3%81%91%E3%81%AB-\ndifference-in-meaning/61281#61281) gives a possible meaning which failed to\nanswer my question.\n\nWhich clause is the だけ particle attached to, the first one (thereby making the\nfirst main clause 時にだけ), or the second one (thereby making the second relative\nclause だけ発現する)?\n\nMy best guess for the entire sentence would be that the だけ is attached to the\n身の危険が迫った時に(だけ) clause, but I would still like to have a secondary opinion.",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T18:54:32.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71739",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T06:53:38.633",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-11T20:06:55.853",
"last_editor_user_id": "26406",
"owner_user_id": "26406",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-に",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Which clause is the だけ in 身の危険が迫った時にだけ発現する能力だから attached to?",
"view_count": 176
}
|
[
{
"body": "Without the だけ and だから, you have a long noun phrase, which you could parse...\n\n> ［〈（身の危険が迫った）時に〉発現する］能力\n\n身の危険が迫った modifies 時.\n\n> [身の危険が迫った]時に = _lit._ \"at times [when physical danger is approaching]\"\n\n身の危険が迫った時に発現する modifies 能力.\n\n> [(身の危険が迫った)時に発現する]能力 = _lit._ \"ability [that appears at times (when physical\n> danger is approaching)]\n\n* * *\n\nAdding だけ:\n\n「～～時に...」 = \"... when ～～\" \n→ 「～～時に **だけ**...」 = \"... **only** when ～～\"\n\nSo,\n\n> 「身の危険が迫った時 **にだけ** 発現する」 = \"appears **only when** physical danger is\n> approaching\"\n\nThe だけ modifies 身の危険が迫った時に.\n\n* * *\n\nAdding だから:\n\n> 「身の危険が迫った時にだけ発現する能力だから」 \n> _lit._ \"Because (it) is the ability that appears only when physical danger\n> is approaching.\" \n> → \"Because it's the ability that appears only when you're in danger.\" /\n> \"Because the ability appears only when you're in danger.\"\n\n～だから consists of the copula だ + particle から. Depending on context, から at the\nend of a sentence can mean \"Because...\" or \"..., you know.\" etc.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T03:39:06.537",
"id": "71747",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T06:53:38.633",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T06:53:38.633",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71739",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71739
|
71747
|
71747
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71741",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a bit confused by the price display in a sushi restaurant video, see\n<https://youtu.be/V1g0yIBTDjQ?t=608>\n\nDo I misread the number or is this a joke (the video has an unusual cut\nthere)?\n\nIt shows the price as 1500万0000円, which I would read as 15,000,000円,\napproximately 150,000.00$ (with exchange rate 100 yen = 1 dollar). Does 万 have\nanother meaning differing from ten-thousand here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T19:41:15.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71740",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T20:30:05.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25253",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"numbers"
],
"title": "What does 1500万0000円 mean on a price display?",
"view_count": 355
}
|
[
{
"body": "You have read it correctly. 1485万0000円 is indeed 14,850,000 yen, which is way\nabove the average annual income of Japanese people. 万, 億, 兆 and so on can be\ninserted to help readers quickly grasp the number. (See:\n<https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/18296/5010>)\n\nThis restaurant is くら寿司, and you can [play various mini-\ngames](http://www.kura-corpo.co.jp/fair/2015bikkurapon.html) using their touch\npanels, including something like a slot machine. See [this\nvideo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doNXSTGTpE8). I may be wrong, but this\n1485万 may be from one of such games. Or it may be from something entirely\ndifferent. Either way, it's not the actual charge.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-11T20:30:05.440",
"id": "71741",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-11T20:30:05.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71740",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71740
|
71741
|
71741
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm reading the JLPT N3 読む guide and the explanation for the conjunction ただ\nsays this:\n\n> 前の文の内容 **と** 違うことがある **と** 付け加えて説明する。\n\nAlso, there's a section where the next sentence appears:\n\n> 台風が接近しています。そのため、明日の旅行は中止 **と** なりました．\n\nWhy is と being used for this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T00:08:51.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71742",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-27T15:36:53.277",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-27T15:36:53.277",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "34934",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Why is the particle と being used in the following sentences?",
"view_count": 345
}
|
[
{
"body": "前の文の内容と - With the content of the previous sentence\n\n**Noun + と - with(noun)**\n\n**友達と - with friend**\n\n違うことがあると - If there is a difference\n\n**jisho + と - if(verb)**\n\n**そこに行くとーIf you go there**\n\n付け加えて説明する - Add explanation\n\n前の文の内容と違うことがあると付け加えて説明する。\n\nliterally it means\n\nIf there is a difference With the content of the previous sentence Add\nexplanation",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T12:00:26.507",
"id": "71758",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T12:00:26.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35045",
"parent_id": "71742",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 前の文の内容 **と** 違うことがある...\n\n「～～ **と** 違う」 means \"is different **from** ~~\".\n\nThe と in ～と違う indicates 「比較・類別の際に照合される相手」(明鏡国語辞典) or 「比較の基準」([#3 in\nデジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/154670/meaning/m0u/)). It's used with\na word that expresses difference, similarity, identity, or comparison, such as\n同じ, 違う, 異なる, 似る, 比べる, etc. Eg:\n\n> ～ **と** 同じ -- is same **as** ~~ \n> ～ **と** 異なる -- differs **from** ~~ \n> ～ **と** 似ている -- is similar **to** ~~ \n> ～ **と** 比べる -- compare **with** ~~\n\nRelated thread: [How is と used in these\nsentences?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/57038/9831)\n\n* * *\n\nThe と in ～と付け加えて説明する is quotative.\n\n> 『前の文の内容と違うことがある』 **と** 付け加えて説明する。 \n> _lit._ (The word ただ is used to) additionally explain **that** there's\n> something different from (something that deviates from / doesn't agree with)\n> the content of the previous sentence.\n\n* * *\n\n> 明日の旅行は中止 **と** なりました。\n\n～～となる (≂ ～～になる) means \"become ~~.\" The と marks the result of change.\n\n中止となりました means _lit._ \"became cancellation\" → \"was cancelled\"\n\nYour example can be rephrased as 明日の旅行は中止になりました without changing the meaning.\n中止 **と** なりました sounds a bit more formal than 中止 **に** なりました.\n\n～となる and ～になる are not always interchangeable. For more, see: [What is the\ndifference between 〜となる and\n〜になる?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/739/9831)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T14:31:38.477",
"id": "71761",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T15:43:01.167",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T15:43:01.167",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71742",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "**Disclaimer: regarding your second question only (please consider splitting\nyour question in two different ones).**\n\nThe following patterns are very similar an both mean \"A becomes B\":\n\n> Aは B **に** なる\n>\n> Aは B **と** なる\n\nThe difference between them is that 「AはB **と** なる」 implies that **B is the\nfinal state reached by A** , whereas 「AはB **に** なる」 does not.\n\nFor example:\n\n> 昔はこの辺に畑がたくさんあったものだが、今はすっかり住宅地【じゅうたくち】 **と** なった。 Long ago, there were plenty\n> of fields in this area. Now, it has completely turned into a residential\n> district.\n\nIt is very unlikely that the area changes to a different kind of place in the\nfuture, therefore it is its final state and となる is used.\n\nSimilarly, in the sentence of the question\n\n> 明日の旅行は中止 **と** なりました。 The trip tomorrow has been cancelled.\n\nthe trip has been cancelled。Since 「 **と** なる」 is used, we can infer that the\npossibility of uncancel the trip is very unlikely as \"cancelled\" is regarded\nas the final state of the trip.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T06:12:11.247",
"id": "71780",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T14:42:42.353",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"parent_id": "71742",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
71742
| null |
71761
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Sorry if this has been answered before, but I couldn't find it.\n\nI understand that when the on'yomi reading is used, this is associated with\nwords with a more \"literary\" feeling or with written usage. However, I don't\nknow if this is a relatively safe way to differentiate which usage is\npreferred of if it's just applied in some cases.\n\nThanks in advance!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T02:33:53.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71743",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-20T19:02:50.303",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T17:03:11.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "34557",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"spoken-language",
"wago-and-kango",
"written-language"
],
"title": "How can I differentiate if a word is (either fully or preferentially) used for spoken or written language?",
"view_count": 281
}
|
[
{
"body": "I'm not an expert myself, but I asked a few Japanese people about this, and\nthe answer I got is that there is no actual rule. You either have to check in\na dictionary or try using the word and watch if people are surprised by what\nyou said. There seems to be a general trend, that the less hiragana and the\nmore strokes in a kanji, it's usually not a word for casual conversation,\nthough keep in mind, it's just a hint, and not a rule.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-01-03T21:09:33.170",
"id": "73716",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-03T21:09:33.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36332",
"parent_id": "71743",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71743
| null |
73716
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know from looking at the title many of you are thinking \"Frey, you should\nKNOW THIS by now.\" And to be honest I should, its just a matter of the more\nresearch I did only served to further confuse me.\n\nDialogue with **sentence in question** :\n\n> 「たしかに今までは、そんな自分に気づかなかったでしょうね。平穏な暮らしをしている限りはわからないわ。身の危険が迫った時にだけ発現する能力だか」\n\nMy Genki I book says the following on ている\n\n> A verbal \"te-form\" when followed by the helping verb いる, means either of the\n> following:\n>\n> (a) an action in progress, or\n>\n> (b) a past event that is connected with the present.\n>\n> Which of these two senses a given verb is used in is to a large extend\n> determined by the semantic characteristics of the verb. The verbs we have\n> learned so far can be roughly divided into three groups based on their\n> semantics.\n>\n> (1) verbs that describe continuous _states_\n>\n> (2) verbs that describe _activities_ that last for some time\n>\n> (3) verbs that describe _changes_ that are more or less instantaneous\n\nAt first, I thought the している was being used as (b) _a past event that is\nconnected with the present_. Considering how [in\ncontext](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rv11_3d2_bQSZs5vn9XfB98_pk7TGdShLgQlKdBTaSg/edit#heading=h.41rue9tc3lf2)\nthe past event was 平穏な暮らし, I thought option (b) was the correct choice as far\nas to what している meant in the above sentence and context.\n\n[My research](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/510907/which-one-of-\nmy-possible-translations-for-this-sentence-best-reflects-the-time-c) to find a\nway to show the ている time construct through the usage of specific tenses in my\nnative language, American-English - which I never formally studied the tenses\nof - has led to an extreme doubt in the accuracy of the ている being used as (b).\n\nLooking around JSE Q&A for information on which of the above numbered options\nwould work for する lead me to [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1532/26406) and\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/2297/26406) answer, the later of\nwhich has the following excerpt:\n\n> So as a verb it means \"to act in a way that accomplishes [objective]\"\n>\n> And for ～をする since を marks the direct object, it means \"do ～\" (Because it's\n> a direct object, doing ～ directly accomplishes ～)\n>\n> する can also be used for describing some attribute:\n>\n> 私は長い足をしている to mean \"I have long legs\"（stative resultant ている form of する)\n>\n> To accomplish \"long legs\", the simplest way is to simply \"have\" it.\n\nFurther research into the ている construct led me\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/45251/%E3%81%95%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-vs-%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-for-\ncertain-objective-verbs), and [to this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/43190/the-use-\nof-%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B). Questioning the particle usage of を in the\nabove was what might have led me to [the\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1532/26406) containing the\nabove except in the first place. After all this research, I still have no clue\nwhether する is a transitive/intransitive verb in the above, which according to\nmy Genki II book will affect how the ている affects the verb, [among other\nthings](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3122/when-\nis-v%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-the-continuation-of-action-and-when-is-it-the-\ncontinuation-of-state/3140#3140).\n\nAs you can see I'm confused because of over-research into figuring out what\nthe している is if its not option (b) from the above Genki I excerpt. If the\ncorrect option was in fact (b), please answer the following translation\nquestion:\n\nAs a native Japanese would read している and recognize that the 平穏な暮らしthat\noccurred far in the past is being connected to the present via している, **what\nspecific tense** would work for describing 平穏な暮らしをしている限りは so that a English\nreader will have the same (or as close as possible) experience reading the\ntranslation as a native reader would when reading the original?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T03:20:15.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71745",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T20:51:28.667",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T20:51:28.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "26406",
"owner_user_id": "26406",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage",
"verbs",
"て-form",
"tense"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of している in this sentence?",
"view_count": 1754
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 平穏な暮らしをしている限りはわからないわ。 \n> You won't notice it (=the ability) as long as you are leading an uneventful\n> life.\n\nThis する is \"to do\". Although \"to do an uneventful life\" makes little sense in\nEnglish, 平穏な暮らしをする makes perfect sense in Japanese. Basic \"light verbs\" like\nする, やる, かける, とる, ひく and so on have lots of unpredictable usages, and you have\nto remember which noun is used with which verb. See: [What does する mean\nhere?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/39591/5010) And of course this する\nis transitive. You should be able to tell it just by looking at を after 暮らし. A\nsuru-verb like 勉強する is a different topic.\n\nNext, this ている describes **(a)** , an action in progress. Note that the\nprevious sentence is about his past (気づかなかっ **た** ) but the main predicate of\nthe sentence in question is in the **present** tense (わからない). This means this\nsentence is about a generic fact; it's about how an ability-owner is leading\ntheir life _now_ , not how the protagonist has lived his life so far. In other\nwords, she is saying \"In general, anyone with the ability can notice their\nability whenever they starts living a dangerous life\".\n\nFinally, this sentence has nothing to do with historical present. A general\nfact like \"The earth is round\" is described in the present tense both in\nEnglish and in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T05:14:00.780",
"id": "71748",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T06:12:52.190",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T06:12:52.190",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71745",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71745
| null |
71748
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71750",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Google translate gave be result below\n\n> 所定 = Predetermined\n>\n> 固定 = Fixed\n\nWhich word is used when?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T05:20:44.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71749",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T09:22:23.210",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "34456",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "「所定」と「固定」の違いは何でしょうか？",
"view_count": 125
}
|
[
{
"body": "* 所定 is a no-adjective. 固定 is a transitive suru-verb and no-adjective.\n\n> 固定の金額: OK \n> 所定の金額: OK \n> 金額を固定する: OK \n> 金額を所定する: NG\n\n * Obviously, fixation of a tangible object is 固定 but not 所定.\n\n> その絵は壁に固定されている。 \n> The picture is fixed to the wall.\n\n * 所定 means \"it's been already determined/established by someone\", 固定 means \"it won't change\". A 所定のルール may be revised in the future, whereas a 固定のルール is, um, fixed.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T06:36:32.137",
"id": "71750",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T06:36:32.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71749",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "所定 and 固定 have totally different meanings. The reason why the translation you\nhave found seems confusing is partially because 所定 usually never translates\ninto one fixed word in English.\n\n**固定** is easy; it's a verb or a noun (but sometimes virtually an adjective)\nthat means \"to fix\", \"fixing\", and \"fixed\", in the sense \"to have something\nnot move\".\n\n**所定** is hardly used in Japanese other than the form 所定の, which roughly means\n\"which is previously given\", but I guess you wouldn't see this phrase as it is\nin English. Instead:\n\n> 所定の書式 _the provided/designated format_ \n> 所定の時間 _the appointed/arranged time_ \n> 所定の手続き _the prescribed procedure_ \n> 所定の料金 _the fee as specified (in...)_\n\nIn other words, it tells you to see and follow the content of some provision\nor agreement that already exists. Thus you might translate \"fixed\" sometimes\n所定 and sometimes 固定, but they'd be quite different settings.\n\nMachine translation is usually unreliable with pairs like English and Japanese\nwhere many grammars and concepts don't match up.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T09:22:23.210",
"id": "71754",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T09:22:23.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "71749",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71749
|
71750
|
71754
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am trying to wrap my head around how the Japanese speak and how that differs\nfrom kanji. On and Kun makes a difference when reading kanji, depending\nusually how the sentence is made up of kanas and kanji. But when speaking, do\nthey speak in On and Kun as well? Do they pay attention how they say it\ncompared to how they would write it out and then read that outloud?\n\nFrom my understanding, you can technically write all in kana if you really\nwanted to, regardless how practical that would actually be, but it can be\ndone. So when speaking do they take into account, \"well I am saying this,\nwhich if I wrote it with kanji (assuming you knew the kanji to begin with),\nand since this word would be next to this kanji or not next to any kanji, I\nwould have to say it this way to make sense.\"?\n\nI've read that Japanese school children in general for their age/level, learn\nto speak Japanese first, then learn the kanas and then the kanji. Which I\nguess makes sense, especially if what I wrote above is true of you can\nbasically write anything with the kanas. I've taken a similar approach due to\nmy confusion, but fact checking with dictionaries to make sure it is accurate\nfor the sound.\n\nWhat I am seeing so far is that in hira Love (I guess general love) is AI. I\nsearch for the kanji and find it, but it has both On and Kun with the Kun\nbeing the AI sound. Same with To Meet in hira. The sound AU is used and again\nthat is Kun when looking at the kanji. The dictionaries I have show the\ndifferent meanings of a kanji, but I am not sure how they represent themselves\nin the On or Kun, just that they exist and these are the sounds with some\nhaving a few different ones.\n\nI probably just confused you as much as I confuse my self, but can anyone help\nme understand please? Thank you for your time and patience.",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T07:20:19.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71752",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T04:34:14.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35361",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"katakana",
"hiragana",
"sound-symbolism"
],
"title": "Do the Japanese speak with On and Kun in daily conversation?",
"view_count": 2002
}
|
[
{
"body": "Take a step back for a second.\n\nKanji do have meaning on their own, but they aren't always words on their own.\nSome kanji only make one sound corresponding to one word. In these cases, it's\na simple matter of learning the Kanji, the word and the pronunciation.\n\nHowever most Kanji make multiple sounds depending on the context and can be\nused to form various very different words. It might be useful to start off\nthinking of kanji as cool letters that have some meaning or meanings\nassociated with them and have different sounds depending on context. Think\nabout the letter 'G'. sometimes it makes a sound like at the start of \"Go,\"\nand sometimes it makes a sound like at the start of \"Giraffe.\" G on it's own\nisn't a word unless there's some context to read it in. Kanji also require\ncontext to become words.\n\nLet's look at 4 words\n\n> 生{い}きる : いきる : Ikiru : To live (Kun'yomi)\n>\n> 生{なま} : なま : Nama : Raw (Kun'yomi)\n>\n> 生{せい}徒{と} : せいと : Seito : Student (On'yomi)\n>\n> 一{いっ}生{しょう} : いっしょう : Isshou: A lifetime (On'yomi)\n\nAs you can see, the kanji 「生」 makes all kinds of different sounds depending on\nwhich word you've formed, and depending on your context.\n\nTo answer your original question, the labels On'yomi and Kun'yomi only refer\nto the origin of a particular pronunciation of a Kanji with On referring to a\npronunciation of Chinese origin and Kun referring to a pronunciation of\nJapanese origin. Japanese people use both On'yomi and Kun'yomi when they speak\ndepending on which words they use.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T08:52:53.657",
"id": "71839",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T04:22:12.770",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35374",
"parent_id": "71752",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -3
},
{
"body": "I would say there is very little conscious thought of whether something is a\n_kun_ reading or an _on_ reading of a character when speaking normally. That\nsaid, if you were to ask someone if a given reading is _on_ or _kun_ , they’d\nlikely be able to answer quickly (if educated). It’s more\nsecondary/subconscious knowledge, but can sometimes come in explicit use if\nyou’re trying to read a new compound word and guessing how each character\nshould be read (e.g, it’s more likely to use _on_ readings).\n\nIn the end, people think in terms of spoken words and their meanings, with\nwriting systems adding an extra layer of nuance or connections between words.\nThis means that something like characters and readings would not be in the\nprimary mental thought process for most conversations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T04:34:14.370",
"id": "71934",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T04:34:14.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "71752",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71752
| null |
71934
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71756",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In a book I found this sentences, which I can't quite understand:\n\n> この熱意を勉強に向けてくれ **たらと** ため息をつくこともしばしばだが、自分でも覚えのあることだから、滑稽と笑うことはもちろんできない\n\nThe part which puzzles me the most is `たらと`, which seems like two\nconditionals, but I can't understand nor find its meaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T08:14:39.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71753",
"last_activity_date": "2022-09-13T13:00:10.663",
"last_edit_date": "2022-09-13T13:00:10.663",
"last_editor_user_id": "35362",
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is たらと some form of conditional?",
"view_count": 457
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's conditional-たら followed by **quotative** -と. Adding some punctuation\nshould help you parse this correctly:\n\n> 「この熱意を勉強に向けてくれたら」と、ため息をつくこともしばしばだ。 \n> It's common for me to sigh, thinking \"If only he channeled his passion to\n> studying!\"\n\n * You can end a sentence with たら/れば/etc to say \"If only ～!\". \n * [How do you say \"If only things were different\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/53640/5010)\n * Quotative-と may be used without a corresponding verb, in which case you can assume ～(と)思って or something is omitted. \n * [だろうと how can I translate it?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/45089/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T11:19:07.677",
"id": "71755",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-22T11:20:51.810",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-22T11:20:51.810",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71753",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "Welcome to Stack Exchange, and thanks for your question!\n\nTo answer your question, no, たらと does not represent two conditionals together.\nThe と here is being used as a quoting particle, while the たら is the usual\nconditional. The verb that follows the と is the expression ため息をつく, which means\n\"sigh\" or \"breathe a sigh\". As such, what comes before the と marks _what the\nspeaker is sighing about_.\n\nI can understand why reading this is a bit confusing: the たら should typically\nlead onto another clause stating the result. But, perhaps exactly because he's\nsighing (which suggests this is an internal monologue that doesn't have to be\nfully formed), or because the logical conclusion of the thought is fairly\nobvious (that it would be _good_ if the person the speaker is talking about\ncould put the same enthusiasm into studying), the speaker doesn't finish the\nsentence. Ending a sentence on たら has the sense of \"If only ...\".\n\nIt might be easier to parse this clause if I add punctuation as follows:\n\n> 「この熱意を勉強に向けてくれたら…」とため息をつくこともしばしばだ。\n\nPutting this all together, you might translate it as:\n\n> I often sigh \"If only he could put this (sort of) enthusiasm into his\n> studies...\".\n\nHope that helps to clarify your understanding of the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T11:19:23.387",
"id": "71756",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T11:49:13.293",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T11:49:13.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33435",
"parent_id": "71753",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71753
|
71756
|
71755
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I've been having a bit of trouble differentiating between these 3 grammatical\npoints as their usage is quite similar and can be interchanged at times.\n\nCan someone explain the difference with some examples?\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T12:20:46.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71759",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T12:20:46.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35364",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 以外と、案外 and 割と",
"view_count": 110
}
|
[] |
71759
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71770",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I think this sentence:\n\n> あまり日がささまいためか、どれもひょろひょろとした貧弱な木だ\n\nmeans something like \"Since they get too much sunlight, they are shabby\ntrees\", but while I know `ために` I can't find anything about `ためか` in my\ngrammars; I was wondering if they have the same meaning.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T12:59:12.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71760",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T17:01:56.173",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T17:01:56.173",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-か"
],
"title": "Is ためか the same as ために?",
"view_count": 567
}
|
[
{
"body": "No, ためか and ために don't mean the same thing -- just as か and に do not mean the\nsame thing.\n\nThe か in ためか is the same か used as the verbal question mark. This indicates\nuncertainty and indefiniteness.\n\n_(Separately, I'm pretty sure you have a typo, where ささまい should be ささない\ninstead.)_\n\nIf the sentence said あまり日がささないため[に]{●}, that would be a definite reason.\nHowever, the sentence instead says あまり日がささないため[か]{●}, indicating that the\nspeaker is uncertain, and is proposing a possible theoretical reason for the\nobserved result. In English, we would use words like _maybe_ , _perhaps_ ,\n_possibly_ , and the like to express a similar idea.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T17:00:45.627",
"id": "71770",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T17:00:45.627",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71760",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71760
|
71770
|
71770
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71778",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I posted a question a while back concerning the term moai and I am trying to\nexplain it others. Would it be considered a type of club?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T15:43:50.860",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71765",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T01:55:40.390",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T00:12:00.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "Is a 模合 considered to be a type of クラブ ？",
"view_count": 149
}
|
[
{
"body": "I knew nothing about [模合](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%A8%A1%E5%90%88)\nbecause I'm not from Okinawa, but judging from the description on Wikipedia\nand some other articles on the net, I think it's **not** safe to start your\nexplanation like \"模合とはクラブの一種で…\". Instead, you can say \"模合とは会の一種で…\" or\n\"模合とは互助会のようなもので…\".\n\nThe main two purposes of 模合 seem to be \"to help one another financially\" and\n\"to hold drinking parties regularly\". The former is the original purpose, and\nthe latter is often the \"true\" purpose today :) However, neither of the two is\nassociated with what people usually imagine with the word クラブ. While there are\nmany different types of クラブ (including sport clubs and even nightclubs), they\nare generally for entertaining or socializing people via some shared interest.\nA typical クラブ is not for mere casual drinking or for helping people\nfinancially. 会 is a very broad and vague term which can refer to any type of\norganization/group/gathering, so I think this is suitable to start your\nexplanation.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T01:49:55.007",
"id": "71778",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T01:55:40.390",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T01:55:40.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71765
|
71778
|
71778
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71769",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know what both words mean but I'm not sure what's implied here.\n\nContext: I'm reading this from the manga, 五等分の花嫁。A girl said this to a boy\nafter she asked him to dance at a campfire with him, 私と踊ってくれませんか？待ってるから. Also,\nthe campfire would be the next day and this was the first encounter between\nthe two people. They don't have an established relationship.\n\nI think the subject of the sentence is the speaker and she's saying I'll be\nwaiting. What's the から doing here though? The unsaid subject is \"I\" (the\nspeaker) not something like 今. Are we also supposed to assume that から means\nthe current place in time in this situation? \"I'll be waiting from now on.\"\n\nI feel there's a simple explanation for this but I think I'm just missing\nsomething obvious here. Or perhaps I'm right but I find that unlikely. Any\nhelp would be appreciated. Thanks",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T15:56:25.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71766",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T13:24:54.163",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T13:24:54.163",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What does 待ってるから mean?",
"view_count": 557
}
|
[
{
"body": "I'm assuming you already know the [reason\nkara](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40069/16104), which is the one\nbeing used here... basically meaning \"because\".\n\nThere could be a lot of things implied here that are not being said, but with\nthe context in hand I would guess the following.\n\n> (私は)待ってるから(、来てね。) - **Hey come, I'm waiting! (Implying that because she is\n> waiting for him, he should go and dance with her already.)**\n\n**Edit:**\n\nWith the context you provided I would translate it as:\n\n> 1 - 私と踊ってくれませんか？...(私は)待ってるから(踊ってくれ）- **Won't you dance with me? ... I'll be\n> waiting for you (and because of that, come and dance with me).**\n\nor\n\n> 2 - 私と踊ってくれませんか？...(私は)待ってるから(答えてくれ）- **Won't you dance with me? I'm\n> waiting, answer me! (So because i'm waiting answer me, don't leave me\n> hanging)**",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T16:51:32.620",
"id": "71769",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T13:08:04.867",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T13:08:04.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "16104",
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"parent_id": "71766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
71766
|
71769
|
71769
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "英雄はただ、1人でいい。 This sentence, What does it mean. I got 2 meanings in my mind.\n\n1.) Hero is just one person. (Only one hero is enough)\n\n2.) Hero is one person and good. (Hero is one good person)\n\nWhich one is correct here ? And why is it ? Thanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T16:19:55.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71767",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T16:40:27.097",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T16:37:23.617",
"last_editor_user_id": "32181",
"owner_user_id": "32181",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particle-で"
],
"title": "で usage in this sentence",
"view_count": 74
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think the `でいい` here means **\" it's ok to...\", \"There's no problem in...\"**\n\nSo, I believe \"Only one hero is enough\" is a good translation if there's\ncontext for that, like if the person who got answered that said before that\n\"one person/here is not enough\", etc.\n\nI would interpret it as either:\n\n> **It's ok for a hero to be just one person.**\n>\n> **Only one hero is enough.**\n\nDepending on the context.\n\nHere's another example:\n\n> Person1: **アイスクリームを食{た}べたい。I want to eat ice cream.**\n>\n> Person2: **まあ、今{き}日{よう}スーパーに行く予{よ}定{てい}はない... Well, I have no plans of going\n> to the supermarket today...**\n>\n> Person1: **コンビニのアイスでいいよ。Hey, it could be a convenience store ice cream (I\n> don't mind)**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T16:40:27.097",
"id": "71768",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T16:40:27.097",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"parent_id": "71767",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71767
| null |
71768
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71772",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm tring to read a novel, but am completely dumbfounded with this sentence.\nContext goes like this:\n\n> A: {Suddenly stands up}\n>\n> B: 「どうしたんですか？」「トイレ？」\n>\n> C: 「わかんないとこがあった？ 私にわかるとこなら教えるけど？」\n\nMy questions are:\n\n * why is it あった and not ある? \n * is こと completely interchangeable with とこ? I see a lot of them in the novel like this another one 俺は壊れたとこがある (which also a complete mystery of a sentence)\n * what is the meaning of 私 にわかる?\n * if 私 にわかる translated as \"Want to know from me about it?\" then why けど at the end which translates as _but/however_? (even if my translation of 私 にわかる it still doesn't make sence for me why it's translated like that)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T17:00:52.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71771",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T21:25:10.377",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T17:25:52.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "9205",
"owner_user_id": "9205",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "How can [わかんないとこがあった？ 私 にわかるとこなら 教 えるけど？] be translated?",
"view_count": 147
}
|
[
{
"body": "* why is it あった and not ある? \n\nPresumably C (or somebody else) was describing something to A just a little\nbit before this excerpt. As such, the あった refers to what was just said -- \" _\n**was** there something you **didn't** understand (in whatever was just talked\nabout previously)?_\" If the speaker had used ある instead, the statement would\nbe a bit vaguer -- \" _ **is** there something you **don't** understand (in\ngeneral, not necessarily in connection with whatever was just talked about\npreviously)?_\"\n\n * is こと completely interchangeable with とこ? I see a lot of them in the novel like this another one 俺は壊れたとこがある (which also a complete mystery of a sentence)\n\nNo. とこ is a shortening or clipping of ところ.\n\n * what is the meaning of 私 にわかる?\n\nわかる, like できる, is often translated into English in the active voice: _\" **I**\nunderstand something, **I** can do something\"_. However, the Japanese words\nmore accurately describe a quality of the \"something\": _\"something **is\nunderstandable** to / by me, something **is doable** by me\"_. This is why the\n\"something\" in both わかる and できる sentences takes the subject particle が instead\nof the object particle を. The agent (person or thing doing the action) in the\nEnglish sentences is the subject, and the patient (the \"something\") is the\nobject. However, in Japanese, the agent is the \"something\" that is the subject\nmarked with が, and there is no patient or object. Instead, we either use the\ntopic particle は for the person, or the instrumental (\"by\") particle に.\n\nMore broadly, わかる and できる are verbs of **potential** , which take this same\ngrammatical construction in Japanese. See more about potentials in this\nquestion and its answers:\n\n> [Why doesn't 分かる have a potential\n> form?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5988/why-\n> doesnt-%e5%88%86%e3%81%8b%e3%82%8b-have-a-potential-form)\n\n * if 私 にわかる translated as \"Want to know from me about it?\" then why けど at the end which translates as _but/however_? (even if my translation of 私 にわかる it still doesn't make sence for me why it's translated like that)\n\nSee the previous point about the にわかる construction.\n\nWith that in mind, here's a breakdown word-by-word, then a reformulation of\nthat to get a translation in proper English.\n\n> 私にわかるとこなら教えるけど \n> me by understandable place/aspect if teach/explain but → \n> If it's something I understand, I'll explain it [to you]...\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above doesn't fully answer your questions.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T17:28:22.750",
"id": "71772",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T21:25:10.377",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T21:25:10.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71771",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71771
|
71772
|
71772
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71776",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Taken from question 4 and 5 of this URL:\n<https://japanesetest4you.com/japanese-language-proficiency-test-\njlpt-n1-listening-exercise-5/>\n\nQUESTION 4: The audio starts with: あ～ぁ、やってらんないよなあ。 I usually feel pretty\nconfident with spoken Japanese contractions, but I can't make heads or tails\nof what this statement is. What is \"やってらんない\" short for?\n\nQUESTION 5:\n\nThe statement and three possible responses are:\n\nこの料理、二人分にしちゃ物足りないよね。\n\n1 うん、食べた気がしないね。\n\n2 ひとり分で十分だったよね。\n\n3 本当、食べきれないよ。\n\nThe correct answer is 1, although I'm confused why 2 wouldn't be the better\nanswer.\n\nMy translations are: This meal wouldn't be enough for two people. 1: Yeah, but\nI'm not feeling hungry. 2: It was plenty for one. 3: I really can't eat it\nall.\n\nWhat am I missing here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T19:01:43.723",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71773",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T05:24:17.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4382",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"jlpt",
"reading-comprehension",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "Japanese N1 practice questions help",
"view_count": 257
}
|
[
{
"body": "**QUESTION 4**\n\nやってらんない is short for やっていられない. やっていられない becomes やってられない, which becomes やってらんない\n([`re`-to-`n`](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/61959/5010)). But since\nthis is a colloquial and slangy expression, we see this almost always in the\ncontracted form. Variations include やってられるか, やってられっか, やってられん, やってらんねー, etc.\nIt's a set phrase meaning \"I can't stand it anymore\", \"I've had enough\", \"I'm\nso tired of this\", etc.\n\n**QUESTION 5**\n\nThe options actually mean:\n\n> 1: Yeah, I don't feel like I ate anything. \n> 2: (Ordering just) one serving/dish would've been enough. \n> 3: I really can't eat it all.\n\nSo 2 and 3 mean they ordered too much. Here 1人分 (\"one person's worth/portion\")\nis the same as 1人前 (\"one serving (of food)\"). \"It was plenty for one\" would be\nsomething like 1人なら十分だったけどね.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T21:51:24.063",
"id": "71776",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T05:24:17.563",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T05:24:17.563",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71773",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71773
|
71776
|
71776
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71781",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 意外と早かったね。\n\nThe speaker is saying this in what I would take as a form of astonishment at\nhow fast the students moved the wooden logs out of the warehouse.\n\nIn the sentence is a noun, 意外, meaning \"unexpectedly\" or \"surprising\", and an\nadjective 早かった \"was fast\". And a sentence ending particle. Lastly, the unsaid\nsubject is the activity of moving the logs.\n\nI'm unsure of what the と particle is doing here though. This isn't a\nconditional and I know that と is used for quoting things. I also know that\nthose things don't necessarily have to be said either. They can be thoughts,\nsounds made by actions or the manner in which something is done. Would this be\na case in which the と particle is \"encapsulating\" the manner in which\nsomething was done? If so, what purpose is と serving? It seems to be used in\nan adverbial sense. I don't believe this to be と's \"and\" or \"with\" usage for\nkeeping a reciprocal relationship with the subject either.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T20:33:01.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71774",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T01:20:48.293",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-28T01:20:48.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "How is the と particle working in 「意外と早かったね」?",
"view_count": 241
}
|
[
{
"body": "「意外と」 works as an adverb here, and it's not 意外 + と. 「意外と」 has almost the same\nmeaning as 「意外に」, so in this case, 「意外と早かったね」 means \"it was faster than I\nexpected.\"\n\nFor the slight difference between 「意外と」and 「意外に」, see this post ([Is there any\ndifference between 意外に and\n意外と?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2714/is-there-any-\ndifference-between-%e6%84%8f%e5%a4%96%e3%81%ab-\nand-%e6%84%8f%e5%a4%96%e3%81%a8?noredirect=1&lq=1)).\n\nIn some cases, adverbs end with 「と」. For example, 「自然に」and 「自然と」has almost the\nsame meaning.\n\n * <https://hiiragi-june.hatenadiary.org/entry/20080528>\n * <https://hiiragi-june.hatenadiary.org/entry/20080604>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T06:12:14.280",
"id": "71781",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T06:12:14.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15665",
"parent_id": "71774",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71774
|
71781
|
71781
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71777",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there a proper way to address the Emperor of Japan when meeting in person?\nIs he addressed as 天皇 or 天皇陛下?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T21:15:44.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71775",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T22:33:54.903",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T21:38:56.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "What is the proper way to address the Emperor in person？",
"view_count": 1019
}
|
[
{
"body": "He is addressed as [陛下]{へいか} (\"Your Majesty\"). Directly calling him [天皇]{てんのう}\nwould be rude. Princes and princesses are addressed as [殿下]{でんか} (\"Your\nHighness\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-12T22:25:00.260",
"id": "71777",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T22:33:54.903",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T22:33:54.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71775",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
71775
|
71777
|
71777
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The phrase Nなく means \"without N\" and is used to modify verbs, as in:\n\n> 彼は私を躊躇なく殴った。 \n> He hit me without hesitation.\n\nIn sentences like this, is it ungrammatical or unnatural to say Nがなく instead\nof Nなく?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T06:20:35.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71782",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-27T16:04:50.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11824",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is it ungrammatical to say Nがなく instead of Nなく when it means \"without N\"?",
"view_count": 324
}
|
[
{
"body": "> In sentences like this, is it ungrammatical or unnatural to say Nがなく instead\n> of Nなく?\n\nBasically, yes. The role of `<Noun>なく` is explained in the\n[answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/59614/7705) linked in\nChocolate's comment, but what's important here is that it behaves like an\nadverb.\n\nGenerally if you say `<Noun>がなく`, you are making a statement and `ない` is the\nverb. This `なく` is functionally equivalent to `なくて`, in the sense that the\nconjugation here just allows the sentence to continue.\n\nYou have\n\n> 彼は私を躊躇なく殴った。\n>\n> He hit me without hesitation.\n\nYou could also have\n\n> 彼は躊躇がなく、私を殴った。\n>\n> He had no hesitation, and hit me.\n\nwhich is technically grammatical, though it sounds awkward (as does the\nequivalent English), and people reading it may just think you wanted to say\n`躊躇なく`.\n\nThis\n\n> 彼は私を躊躇がなく殴った。\n\nis just confusing and likely ungrammatical; I wouldn't know what to make of\nit.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T01:08:48.583",
"id": "71832",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T01:08:48.583",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "71782",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71782
| null |
71832
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Whats the difference between 見つからない and 見当たらない？\n\nIs 見つけない used for physical objects? Like I can’t find the book etc...\n\nand 見当たらない eg -> I can't find that line on this page?\n\nIn the middle of all this where does 見出す fit in?\n\nI want to know the difference in nuanaces please",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T07:49:21.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71783",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-20T10:02:15.213",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-20T10:02:15.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "3512",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "To find / to look for / to detect",
"view_count": 153
}
|
[
{
"body": "見つけない implies that something was lost and you are looking for it.\n\n見当たらない means that you are looking for something and you cannot see it in your\nimmediate vicinity (as the word implies, within your field of vision). I often\nuse this phrase when looking for something on a piece of paper or a webpage.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T08:36:21.600",
"id": "71785",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T11:17:45.387",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T11:17:45.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "1805",
"parent_id": "71783",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71783
| null |
71785
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was wondering what the difference is between 合意、納得、相互理解?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T08:10:45.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71784",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T16:02:16.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35372",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 合意、納得、相互理解？",
"view_count": 106
}
|
[
{
"body": "Direct translations by the word themselves are\n\n合意 both opinions are match(agreement) \n納得 understand \n相互理解 understand each other\n\nBut as you know words have many meanings with its context so you/we might need\nmore info.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T16:02:16.033",
"id": "71791",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T16:02:16.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35310",
"parent_id": "71784",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71784
| null |
71791
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71788",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why is arimasen, which means \"is not\" the same thing as there's no hope?\n\n> I am so lazy, **so there's no hope.**\n>\n> 私はとても怠け者なので、 **希望はありません。**\n>\n> Watashi wa totemo namakemononanode, **kibō wa arimasen.**\n\nI would have thought that a one-to-one translation of \"there's no hope\" would\nhave made more sense, but Google Translate tells me that \"arimasen\" pretty\nmuch means \"there's no hope\". Is there a reason for this?\n\nThe translation used was from English to Japanese, and I used the sentence:\n\n> I am so lazy, **so there's no hope.**",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T12:41:12.180",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71786",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T14:35:26.387",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T14:15:45.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "35376",
"owner_user_id": "35376",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Why does \"arimasen\" mean \"there's no hope\"?",
"view_count": 1778
}
|
[
{
"body": "The crux of the matter is that you are focused around ありません, but you should be\nfocusing on the entire phrase 希望はありません, which you have in bold.\n\n**ある** means (as pertaining to an intimate object) [to exist; to\nhave](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%9C%A8%E3%82%8B), among other things. ありません is\nthe negative form, don't have/does not exist. You should also check out this\n[webpage](http://guidetojapanese.org/learn/complete/existence) about usage for\nexistence verbs, as it might clear up some confusion.\n\n**希望** means [hope](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%B8%8C%E6%9C%9B).\n\n**は** is your topic marker.\n\nDoing a linear translation we get the following:\n\n> 希望はありません \n> (lit) hope (topic) exists not.\n\nIn more natural English:\n\n> There is no hope.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T14:14:21.660",
"id": "71788",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T14:35:26.387",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T14:35:26.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "71786",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71786
|
71788
|
71788
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "この川にマスが多い。This river is full of trout.\n\n新潟は雪が多い。 There’s much snow in Niigata\n\nWhat’s the difference between に and は here ?\n\nI learned only Noun1はNoun2がAdjい/な structure",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T18:14:03.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71793",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T05:42:47.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32181",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"particle-は",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "Difference between NはNが多い and NounにNが多い",
"view_count": 203
}
|
[
{
"body": "The difference might be in the context. N1はN2が多い sounds like an explanation\nonly for N1, while N1にN2が多い sounds like an explanation compared to several\nothers.\n\n> この川はマスが多い。 \n> This river has a lot of trout (describing only for this river).\n>\n> この川にマスが多い。 \n> _This_ river has a lot of trout (compared to some other rivers).\n\nBut は is sometimes used to imply a comparison with others. It may depend on\nthe context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T02:51:15.390",
"id": "71796",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T05:42:47.430",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T05:42:47.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "35154",
"parent_id": "71793",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71793
| null |
71796
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is は a particle in こんにちは and こんばんは?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T18:40:10.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71794",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T19:31:12.747",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-13T18:43:59.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "16104",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Is は a particle in こんにちは and こんばんは?",
"view_count": 334
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes. This は is the same as the topic marker は.\n\nThese expressions were originally the start of a greeting, as in,\n[今日]{こんにち}はお[元気]{げんき}でしょうか (\"You're feeling well today?\") or [今晩]{こんばん}はいかがですか\n(\"How are you this evening?\"), etc. Over time, through regular and frequent\nuse, the opening portions came to be used independently as simplified\ngreetings.\n\nAccording to Shogakukan's [国語]{こくご}[大]{だい}[辞典]{じてん} entry for [今日]{こんにち}は:\n\n> （「今日は…」と続けた挨拶語の下略されたもの） \n> (omitting the portion of the greeting continuing on after \" _konnichi\n> wa_...\")",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-13T19:31:12.747",
"id": "71795",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-13T19:31:12.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71794",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71794
| null |
71795
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71807",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a sentence I'm struggling to fully understand:\n\n> 高校生に **も** なった少女たちに揃い制服を着せ、ボタンをきちんととめている **か** 、指定通りのネクタイを締めている **か**\n> 、いちいち干渉し、その上でさらに靴からマフラーからヘアアクセサリーにいたるまで、細かく取決めや 禁止事項を設けることへの、疑問がないと言えば嘘になる\n\nI think it's about things high school students have to do as regulation, and\nit's saying that would be a lie to say there were no issue about what\nregulations permit or ban; but I'm not sure about the meaning of `も` in\n`にもなった`, and of `か` in `ボタンをきちんととめているか、指定通りのネクタイを締めているか` (something like `とか`,\nmeaning \"or/something like\", maybe?).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T08:37:51.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71798",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T15:46:05.910",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T10:49:12.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of か and も in this sentence?",
"view_count": 153
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this context, も emphasizes the meaning of the sentence. As seen in\ndefinition 1 in this\n[dictionary](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%AB%E3%82%82-592921), に and も can\nwork together to put stress on the word 高校生.\n\nLet's see the slight difference between に and にも using your example.\n\n * 「高校生 **に** なった少女たちに揃い制服を着せ...」 tells us just the fact that the school (or somebody) makes their female students wear a uniform.\n * 「高校生 **にも** なった少女たちに揃い制服を着せ...」 means that even the high school girls have to wear a uniform. Sometimes, the sentence implicitly includes the writer's opinion such as \"high school girls are matured enough, but they have to wear a uniform (like children).\"\n\nIn this context, か expresses doubt rather than \"or/something like\", and it can\nbe replaced by [かどうか](https://j-nihongo.com/kadouka/).\n\n「ボタンをきちんととめている **か** 、指定通りのネクタイを締めている **か** 、いちいち干渉し」means that people\ninterfere with how the girls wear their uniform, for example, **whether** they\nproperly button up their shirt, or **whether** they tie an approved tie.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T15:46:05.910",
"id": "71807",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T15:46:05.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15665",
"parent_id": "71798",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71798
|
71807
|
71807
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My friend showed me a doujinshi that she asked me to translate and there is\none page that has me stumped. I think it would be difficult without knowing\nthe whole story of it, but I will try my best to explain in short the context.\nFirst, these are the lines on the page I have problems with: \n\n> 切り花なんていつか枯れる。切ったのは俺？それとも自分で\n\nThe speaker (I will call him Red from now on because of his clothes) is\nremembering his friend with whom he parted ways after he had a clash with him\n(they were rivals as well and fought because of different opinions. They were\nclose before things happened and ended up fighting). \nRed received some flowers and their color reminded him of his friend. \nIn the above sentence, Red is comparing his friend (which he is not sure if he\nis dead or not) to a cut flower, that will wither at some point. \n \nWhen they parted it was a little dramatic, because Red's friend slashed Red's\narm with a sword as one last act, then he jumped off a cliff. \nI can't explain the whole story, but what I am not sure of is the part 切ったのは俺？ \n\n> \"Was I the one who was cut?\"\n\nOr if I take it in a figurative manner (because there have been so many\ncomparisons, like the flower one), could Red also be saying \"Was I the one who\ncut you?\" (was it my actions and the things I said that _cut_ you?) \n\n \nThen followed by それとも自分で\n\n> Or did you (wanted to cut yourself)? \n>\n\nPerhaps with the meaning of 'cutting yourself from me' \nI can only guess that after 自分で the verb 切る is implied. \nI apologize if I made it all very confusing, any interpretation would be of\nhelp and maybe will make me realize something, because I tried from many\nperspectives to translate this part and it's difficult despite the fact that I\nknow the context.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T09:21:36.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71799",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-12T05:01:20.137",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T14:20:41.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"sentence"
],
"title": "What does \"切ったのは俺?\" mean in this context?",
"view_count": 316
}
|
[
{
"body": "I do not know flower arrangement at all. But I guess probably 切り花 is used to\nimitate their friendship parted their way.\n\nSo, the Red's been remembering those days getting along with superimposing the\nreceived 切り花 with the memoir.\n\nAnd Red's wondering \"Was I the one who cut a way? Or (did he want to) by\nhimself?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T04:26:55.680",
"id": "71816",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T04:26:55.680",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71799
| null |
71816
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Doing my Japanese practices today, and I've noticed that\n\nPresent Tense:\n\n```\n\n 現在形\n \n```\n\nNegative Form:\n\n```\n\n 否定形\n \n```\n\nPast Tense:\n\n```\n\n 過去形\n \n```\n\nAnd I wondered what Negative Past tense is in Japanese. Thought it's an easy\nquestion but after many fruitless searches, I can't seem to find an answer\nanywhere. Not that it's a much needed phrase to be learnt, but it would be a\nreally helpful little knowledge to have!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T09:49:24.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71800",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T16:51:03.177",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T20:13:36.817",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35088",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"terminology",
"linguistics"
],
"title": "What is the term for \"Past Tense Negative Form\" in Japanese?",
"view_count": 193
}
|
[
{
"body": "### Findings and brief analysis\n\nGoogling about, here's what I've found so far.\n\n * [過去の否定形](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E3%81%AE%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E5%BD%A2%22) -- 35,400 hits \nOf the first page of 10 hits, 6 were about French grammar, one about\nMongolian, one about Korean, one about English, and one about Japanese.\n\n * [否定の過去形](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E3%81%AE%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E5%BD%A2%22) -- 27,200 hits \nFirst 10 hits: 5 about Japanese, two about Ryūkyūan (Okinawan and Miyako), two\nabout Korean, and one about English.\n\n * [過去否定形](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E5%BD%A2%22) -- 36,200 hits \nFirst 10 hits: all 10 about Japanese grammar, but all 10 targeting a Chinese-\nreading audience.\n\n * [過去否定形 + は](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E5%BD%A2%22+%22%E3%81%AF%22) (the \"は\" added to filter for just Japanese sites) -- 8,870 hits \nFirst 10 hits: 5 about Japanese grammar, one about Korean, one about Finnish,\none about Russian, one about Thai, and the generic page about negative verbs\nat\n[https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/否定動詞](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E).\n\n * [否定過去形](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E5%BD%A2%22) -- 10,100 hits \nFirst 10 hits: 9 about Japanese (3 clones of a Japanese question about\ndescribing Japanese grammar in English, 3 pages explaining Japanese grammar to\nChinese readers, a [Japanese Wikibooks page for non-native learners of\nJapanese](https://ja.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E/%E9%9D%9E%E6%AF%8D%E8%AA%9E%E8%A9%B1%E8%80%85%E3%82%80%E3%81%91/%E6%96%87%E6%B3%95/%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E),\n1 in Japanese asking about Japanese grammar, and 1 in Japanese about Kansai-\nben), and 1 about English.\n\n * [否定過去形 + は](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E5%90%A6%E5%AE%9A%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E5%BD%A2%22+%22%E3%81%AF%22) -- 9,550 hits \nFirst 10 hits: 8 about Japanese (4 clones of the Japanese question about\ndescribing Japanese grammar in English, 3 about Japanese grammar, 1 about\nKansai-ben), 1 about English, and 1 about French.\n\nGiven the pattern of conjugational endings in Japanese, negation comes first,\nand then the past tense suffix happens on the end. So the more natural\nJapanese-y way of thinking about it, and ordering the terms, would be 否定【ひてい】\nand then 過去【かこ】, which might be why the variants with this same order seem to\nbe used more specifically for talking about Japanese grammar in Japanese.\n\n### TL;DR:\n\nThere doesn't seem to be a set phrase for this, with some variation. However,\nthe most common for talking about Japanese grammar appears to be 否定の過去形 or\n否定過去形.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T16:51:03.177",
"id": "71850",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T16:51:03.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71800
| null |
71850
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71865",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "All these words can be translated in English as \"arrogant\", but I would like\nmore explanation as to which context each would be used in.\n\nFor example, I can't tell the difference between these expressions:\n\n> **傲慢** な態度をとる\n>\n> **横柄** な態度をとる\n>\n> **威張った** 態度をとる\n\nThis is my current guess of the differences based on what I read so far:\n\n**傲慢**\n\nTo act like one is better than others by looking down on them. Used to\ndescribe the personality of a person as a whole.\n\n**横柄**\n\nTo act superior by ignoring others. Used to describe the behavior and actions\nof a person. The antonym would be 謙虚\n\n**威張る**\n\nTo behave like one is important (not too certain how this is different from\nthe others)\n\nEDIT:\n\nAs a user has pointed out, there are more similar words that can be\ninterpreted the same way in English. If anyone can add as to how these words\nare different, it would be appreciated.\n\n**高慢** - From the kanji, I'm guessing this is based more on being too proud of\noneself, hence being arrogant\n\n**高ぶる** - Not too sure about this one",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T10:07:03.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71801",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T02:33:15.097",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T01:47:14.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "27851",
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 傲慢、 横柄、 威張る、高慢、高ぶる?",
"view_count": 248
}
|
[
{
"body": "横柄 and 威張った only describe someone's behavior visible to others. 傲慢 can also\ndescribe someone's way of thinking.\n\n * 横柄な態度, 威張った態度, 傲慢な態度: OK\n * 横柄な口の利き方, 威張った口の利き方, 傲慢な口の利き方: OK\n * 傲慢な考え方: OK\n * 横柄な考え方, 威張った考え方: NG\n * この会社を自分だけで大きくしたと思っているなら傲慢だ。: OK\n * この会社を自分だけで大きくしたと思っているなら横柄だ。: NG\n\nAs for 威張った態度 vs 横柄な態度, they are very close, but I somehow feel the former\ntends to refer to an explicit and noisy behavior, whereas 横柄な態度 mainly refers\nto a more silent and insidious behavior.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T07:06:55.450",
"id": "71865",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T02:33:15.097",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T02:33:15.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71801",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71801
|
71865
|
71865
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71803",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Individual kanji have on and kun readings. Which character in a multiple kanji\nword determines if the word has an on or kun reading? 月曜日 is a better example,\non on kun. Would Nichiyoubi be considered an onyomi or kunyomi word?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T12:24:11.910",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71802",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T02:10:08.213",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T02:10:08.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "Are groups of kanji classified as on or kun'yomi overall or individually?",
"view_count": 208
}
|
[
{
"body": "Most multi-kanji words have either only on-readings or only kun-readings, but\nthere are exceptions. For example, 時計 is neither purely kun nor purely on. (と\nis a kun-reading, けい is an on-reading)\n\nWords like 時計 are called **kun-on compounds** or **湯桶読み**. Likewise, words\nlike 毎年 is called **on-kun compounds** or **重箱読み**.\n\nSee: [Can a Japanese word combine both on'yomi and kun'yomi\ncharacters?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40433/5010)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T13:09:50.463",
"id": "71803",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T13:09:50.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71802",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71802
|
71803
|
71803
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71805",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the following exercise, I'm asked to choose between 「どんどん」,「だんだん」 or\n「ぞんぞん」to complete the sentence:\n\n> 遠慮【えんりょ】しないで、____ 食【た】べてください。 Do not hesitate, eat ____ (adverb) please.\n\nI think that neither どんどん (rapidly, steadily) nor だんだん (gradually) fit well in\nthis sentence, do they? Therefore, I think that the correct choice is ぞんぞん.\nHowever, I can't find a proper definition for ぞんぞん in English. I found an\n[article](https://note.mu/mnhds/n/ne8bdc277f266) where they talk about ぞんぞん,\ntried to read it but the required level is way too high for me that I\ncouldn't.\n\nTo sum up,\n\n 1. What does ぞんぞん mean?\n 2. Is ぞんぞん the right answer of the exercise?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T14:24:08.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71804",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T16:23:16.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 「ぞんぞん」?",
"view_count": 310
}
|
[
{
"body": "1. I don't know what ぞんぞん means. (I'm from Kansai, by the way.) \n(In the article you found, they say ぞんぞんする means ぞくぞくする in 土佐 dialect.)\n\n 2. The correct answer is どんどん. どんどん can mean not only \"rapidly\" \"steadily\" but also \"one after another\" \"do...more (and more)\" \"do...a lot\" \"keep on doing\" \"continuously\" etc. \n\n> どんどん食べてください。 \"Eat a lot.\" \"Eat more.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T15:18:59.283",
"id": "71805",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T16:23:16.770",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T16:23:16.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71804",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
71804
|
71805
|
71805
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71808",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a manga I am reading, I came across the following sentence.\n注目集めてるな。早くミクを探そう。\n\nThe speaker just crashed on his skis and a crowd of people started to gather\naround, thus garnering a lot of attention to what just happened. The speaker\nis somewhat stealthy leaving the scene and saying that it seems he should look\nfor ミク.\n\nMy question is that I believe this to be a case of そう where it should be\nconnected to the verb steam in order to mean seems or like. Is that not how\nthis is working here? If this is the case I suspect it to be, why did the し\nget dropped off of 探しそう?\n\nAny help would be appreciated. Thanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T15:44:10.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71806",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T17:59:38.170",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T17:59:38.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Why is 探そう not 探しそう?",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "This is the volitional, formed with おう after a 五段 verb, as in 行こう or 進もう, and\nよう after 一段, as in 食べよう or 感じよう. It is not the そう of 探しそう.\n\nIt has a number of uses, but one of the most common, and the one here, is\nroughly 'I should', 'I will', 'we should', 'let's' and such.\n\n「注目集めてるな。早くミクを探そう{さがそう}。」= 'I'm drawing a lot of attention. I'll go and look\nfor Miku right away.'",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T15:54:43.217",
"id": "71808",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T15:54:43.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "71806",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
71806
|
71808
|
71808
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71818",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 学生時代にもっと勉強すればよかった **と** 、今ではとても残念だ。\n\nThis doesn't seem like the ～と... pattern:\n\n> Expresses the idea that when ～ arises or happens, it will definitely lead to\n> ...",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T18:56:46.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71810",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T10:25:55.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35041",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "What is the function of と in this sentence?",
"view_count": 215
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this context, と is used to refer to the preceding phrase, or\n学生時代にもっと勉強すればよかった. This is because we can consider that と is a part of と思う and\nthat 思う is omitted from the sentence. Indeed, by inserting 思う, we can\nparaphrase the sentence as follows:\n\n> (1) 学生時代にもっと勉強すればよかった **と** ，今ではとても残念に **思う** ．\n>\n> (I should have studied more in my school years. Now I deeply regret\n> **that**.)\n\nNow, for a quick understanding of how と works, consider a simplified version\nof sentence (1):\n\n> (2) 学生時代にもっと勉強すればよかった **と** ~~，今ではとても残念に~~ **思う** ．\n>\n> (I think **that** I should have studied more in my school years.)\n\nIn sentence (2), と is indeed used to refer to the preceding phrase.\n\nNext, for a further understanding of how と works, consider an expanded version\nof sentence (1):\n\n> (3) 学生時代にもっと勉強すればよかった **と** ，今では`学生時代にもっと勉強しなかったことを`とても残念に **思う** ．\n>\n> (I should have studied more in my school years. Now I deeply regret **that**\n> `I did not study more in my school years`.)\n\nIn sentence (3), と is essentially used to refer to the preceding phrase. This\nis because what I deeply regret now, or `学生時代にもっと勉強しなかったこと`, can only be\ninferred from the phrase preceding と.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T10:20:17.830",
"id": "71818",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T10:25:55.837",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35390",
"parent_id": "71810",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71810
|
71818
|
71818
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am around N5 level (almost finished book that is a little bit over this\nlevel) and so I decided to try learning some life language translating manga\nfrom raw and checking it in a translated version. I use Noragami and it's my\nfirst day so the beginning. I found a sentence that is translated very\ndifferently than I did it with me not understanding why so if anyone could\nclarify what it literally says, I'd be grateful.\n\nイタズラ書きだらけの壁にひとつの携帯番号。\n\nIf it helps: furigana for first kanji is ga, then it's kabe, at the end it's\nkeetaibangou.\n\nI kinda understand that it should end with something connected to a mobile\nphone number, probably a lone one/only one and that there is an inscription on\na wall. But I cannot understand those katakana and then hiragana parts and I\ncannot connect it into one sentence. \nThanks a lot for help.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T19:58:03.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71811",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T01:17:07.687",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T20:08:47.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "35386",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"manga",
"sentence"
],
"title": "What does \"イタズラ書きだらけの壁にひとつの携帯番号.\" mean?",
"view_count": 130
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think your interpretation of the sentence, **_a lone one/only one and that\nthere is an inscription on a wall._** , is close.\n\nI think 「イタズラ書きだらけ」is compound. It is strange to drop one word in the phrase.\n\nSo, do you want to parse the sentence a little bit for understanding the mix\nof ひらがな and カタカナ?\n\n> ((イタズラ + 書き) + だらけ) + の + 壁 + に + ひとつ + の + 携帯番号。\n\n[イタズラ書き](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%82%AA%E6%88%AF%E6%9B%B8%E3%81%8D%E3%83%BB%E5%BE%92%E6%9B%B8%E3%81%8D-203653)\nmeans _Doodles/graffiti/sketches,etc._\n\n[だらけ](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%A0%E3%82%89%E3%81%91-563186) means\n_(something like unnecessary stuff) scattered about, full of (often used\nnegatively)_ and the suffix to noun\n\n「イタズラ書きだらけ」 Doodles/graffiti/sketches,etc. are spread out/scattered about.\n\n> イタズラ書きだらけの壁にひとつの携帯番号。\n\n_There's one/lone mobile phone number on the wall (about) which\nDoodles/graffiti/sketches,etc. are scattered (about)/spread out._",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T01:17:07.687",
"id": "71815",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T01:17:07.687",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71811",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71811
| null |
71815
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm going crazy over this, i would like to understand the meaning of という in\nthis sentence and i can't find anywhere a specific answer:\n\n昔の中国 では、珍しい貝殻がお金として使われていたということである。\n\nI know the meaning of という but i can't understand its role in this sentence,\ncould someone help me? Very thank you!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T20:33:55.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71812",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T20:33:55.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of という in this sentence?",
"view_count": 69
}
|
[] |
71812
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71814",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pLB1W.jpg)\n\nPlease tell me which one is the most correct usage of 迎えにいく\n\n 1. 両親が国へ帰るので、空港へ迎えに行きます。\n 2. 迎えに行きますから、駅に着いたら、電話してください。（The answer is this one but I do not understand why?)\n 3. この荷物を郵便局へ迎えに行きます。\n 4. 今年の夏休みは子供を海へ迎えにきます。\n\n(2) is the correct answer according to the textbook, but I think that (1) is\nalso correct, in terms of grammar and meaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T23:15:10.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71813",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T23:45:34.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17481",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Which one is the correct usage for \"迎えにいく\"",
"view_count": 425
}
|
[
{
"body": "I believe #1 is incorrect because of the verb 帰る.\n\nWhen you describe someone else's movement with the verb 帰る, it feels as though\nthey are moving away from you. So, in the first sentence, it sounds like, at\nthe very least, you are not in your parents' home country at the time, and\nthus going to pick them up at the airport would be strange.\n\nI believe that if the sentence used 帰ってくる, it could be correct. This would\nimply that they are returning home and that you are where they are returning\nto, so you would be able to greet them upon their arrival.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-14T23:32:57.953",
"id": "71814",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-14T23:45:34.457",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-14T23:45:34.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "20479",
"owner_user_id": "20479",
"parent_id": "71813",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71813
|
71814
|
71814
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I found a kanji for emperial court/governmental court as follows: \n廷: courts, imperial court, government office\n[jisho.org](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%BB%B7%20%23kanji)\n\nI am looking for an adjective for this word made with this kanji or another\njoyo kanji to mean \"from court\", \"affiliated with court\", or \"court-related\"\nin general.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T09:34:47.320",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71817",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T09:34:47.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32343",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Is there kanji(s) to mean \"from court\" or \"court-related\"?",
"view_count": 75
}
|
[] |
71817
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Look at the following words:\n\n意 Idea \n圧 Pressure \nおとこ Man \n女性 Woman \n子 Child \nヘア Hair \n想い Thought\n\nSome of the above words are single kanjis, some kana, and some combination of\nkanji-kana. \nIs there a standard way to make this words adjective i.e. ideal, high-\npressure, manly, womanly, childish, hairy, thoughtful, etc? Can this be done\nby adding a prefix or suffix kana, similar to what we do in English by adding\n\"ly\", \"ish\", and \"ful\" to nouns?\n\nOr does Japanese use independent words for adjectives that do not have much\ncommon with their related noun?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T11:10:54.913",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71819",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T05:36:13.393",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-16T20:03:10.473",
"last_editor_user_id": "32343",
"owner_user_id": "32343",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"katakana",
"adjectives",
"hiragana",
"kana"
],
"title": "How to create adjectives in Japanese?",
"view_count": 333
}
|
[
{
"body": "Just as you have used various English suffixes to turn nouns into adjectives\n(\"-ly\", \"-ish\", \"-ful\", ...), there are a number of ways to do this in\nJapanese, too. Most important ones are:\n\n * **-な** : \n * 損 (disadvantage) / 損な (disadvantageous)\n * 不思議 (mystery, wonder) / 不思議な (mysterious)\n * **-の**\n * 真 (truth) / 真の (true)\n * 永遠 (eternity) / 永遠の (eternal)\n * **-っぽい**\n * 子供 (child) / 子供っぽい (childish)\n * 熱 (fever) / 熱っぽい (feverish)\n * **-的(な)** : \n * 男性 (male gender) / 男性的(な) (manly, masculine)\n * 理論 (logic) / 理論的(な) (logical)\n\nThe first two bullets are also simply known as \"na-adjectives\" and \"no-\nadjectives\", respectively. Of course you cannot combine nouns and these\nsuffixes arbitrarily, so basically you have to remember nouns and their\nadjective versions one by one.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T04:51:32.460",
"id": "71864",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T05:36:13.393",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T05:36:13.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71819",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71819
| null |
71864
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71827",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was trying to get a full understanding of this sentence's structure:\n\n> 政府が学校の建設を計画しているが、遅々 **として** 進まないので、現地にあるNGO組織が学校づくりを支援している\n\nI know `として` as \"As; In\", like in `教師として`, \"as a teacher\", but in this\nsentence I don't think it has that meaning; I found other meaning (apart from;\neven; from a viewpoint), none of which seems to apply here.\n\nI'm guessing the `と` part is meant to be adverbial, i.e. `遅々 (slow) > 遅々と\n(slowly)`, but if that's the case I'm not sure about the `して` part.\n\nI think I get the meaning (The goverment has plans to build [a school], but\nsince those were proceding slowly, on-site NGOs associations assisted in\nbuilding it\"), but I'm not sure how `として` fits in.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T11:30:11.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71820",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T00:44:36.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage",
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is として in this sentence adverbial?",
"view_count": 183
}
|
[
{
"body": "So, the simple answer to your question is that\n[遅々として](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E9%81%85%E3%80%85%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6)\nis a set phrase, and is used commonly enough with `進まない` that the [whole\nthing](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E9%81%85%E3%80%85%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E9%80%B2%E3%81%BE%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\nis in the dictionary as a set phrase.\n\nThat said, it's also worth keeping in mind that not every instance of `とする`\nand `として` necessarily have to be mean `as`.\n[とする](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B) has quite a few\ndifferent usages, and it can also just come about coincidentally with adverbs\ntaking `と`, which is what happened here.\n\nYou might see constructions like\n\n> 話を延々とする (to speak endlessly)\n\nor\n\n> 漠然とした予感 (a vague suspicion)\n\nboth of which are not instances of `とする` meaning `as`, but the result of\n[延々](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%BB%B6%E3%80%85) and\n[漠然](https://jisho.org/search/%E6%BC%A0%E7%84%B6) being adverbs which take\n`と`.\n\nEdit: Just for clarity's sake here, these two examples are slightly different\nthings. `話を延々とする` is just a と-adverb in the middle of `話をする`, whereas\n`漠然とした予感` is a common pattern where `とした` is used after a と-adverb to qualify\na noun. For the latter pattern, you can also find quite a few examples with an\n[quick\nsearch](https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F&ref=sa),\nbut trying to explain this construction is beyond the scope of this question.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T18:11:50.693",
"id": "71827",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T00:44:36.947",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-16T00:44:36.947",
"last_editor_user_id": "7705",
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "71820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71820
|
71827
|
71827
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "My vocabulary textbook lists the three following words:\n\n> 滅び行く種族\n>\n> _Endangered species_\n>\n> 種族の絶滅\n>\n> _The extinction of species_\n>\n> 消滅した種族\n>\n> _Extinguished species_\n\n(Hope the English translations are correct idioms, my textbook is in French)\n\nBy extrapolating from these words, I can guess that 滅ぶ, 絶滅する and 消滅する all bear\nmore or less the same meaning.\n\nWhat's the difference between these three verbs, and which are the most\ncommonly used? I expect 滅ぶ to be less common since 漢語 tend to be more used in\n\"technical\" contexts, how about it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T11:38:55.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71821",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T04:23:07.500",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18582",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "Difference between 絶滅, 消滅 and 滅ぶ",
"view_count": 257
}
|
[
{
"body": "In my interpretation, they suggest a different background / context.\n\n * 絶滅 is group-wise (species) viewed from system, and it only talks about the fact, no implication for the cause.\n\n * 滅ぶ is an intransitive verb so it implies a little bit of causality. (such an animal ate all their food source and break an food supply chain and cannot survive anymore, or tribe/country being too aggressive that leads to a cruel retaliation from another and they get killed.)\n\n * 消滅 is more about phenomenon, like \"wiping out\". not necessarily about extinction and can it be used to describe things, like a city or a single entity.\n\nThe followings are example usage I came up with now.\n\n * \"ニホンオオカミは絶滅したと考えられている。\" (Japanese Wolf is believed to be extinct.)\n\nSounds about right.\n\n * \"ニホンオオカミは滅んだ。\"\n\nIt sounds like it's implying some of their actions triggered their extinction.\n\n * \"かの民族は戦争によって滅んだのだ。\"\n\nIt sounds right. Not sure how the tribe got involved in war, but the verb \"滅ぶ\"\nmatches with the context of war.\n\n * \"ニホンオオカミは消滅した。\"\n\na bit weird. it sounds like suggesting some instant phenomenon killed them,\nwhich we do not know. If you are writing a novel about it, then it is\nacceptable.\n\n * \"恐竜は巨大隕石の衝突で消滅したと考えられている。\" (Dinosaurs are believed to disappear after a huge comet hits the earth.)\n\nSounds about right.\n\nWhen I hear the word \"消滅\", I typically associate it with fiction. Because\nthat's where mostly that words are used. In fact I instantly imagined Goku\nfrom Dragon Ball hitting Frieza with Genkidama. Goku is gonna wipe Frieza and\nsurface of the planet, that fits very well with the feeling of \"消滅\"\n\n<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjkB9QdSAtY>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T18:00:04.057",
"id": "71826",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T18:00:04.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35391",
"parent_id": "71821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "According to the category of 環境省, the ministry of the environment,\n[環境省レッドリストカテゴリーと判定基準](https://www.env.go.jp/press/files/jp/110618.pdf)\nclassifies the preservation status.\n\n**絶滅** is used to describe for the preservation status as \"extinct\". 「\n我が国ではすでに絶滅したと考えられる種」 **_Species are considered to be extinct in our\ncountry._**\n\n\"Threatened\" : 「絶滅危惧{ぜつめつきぐ}」 is categorized as hypernym of \"Critically\nEndangered(CR) +Endangered\".\n\nThe hyponym , Critically Endangered(CR) +Endangered, is expressed as\n「絶滅の危機に瀕している種」 **_Species are on the verge of extinct._**\n\n滅ぶ・滅びる is often used to describe that something once had influence on other\nenvironment, but having lost their control leads to their extinction. ex) The\nempire once flourished, mammoth, dinosaurs and so on.\n\n消滅する is used to describe something existing has been going out. ex) ozone\nhole, coral reef, the chance of winning the championship, rights and so on.\n",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T01:39:08.313",
"id": "71833",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T01:39:08.313",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "* 絶滅: \"extinction (of species)\"; a kango technical term used only in _biological_ contexts\n * 消滅: \"disappearance\", \"vanishing\"; a kango used with various subjects in various technical/legal/academic contexts\n\n> * 賠償を請求する権利が消滅した。\n> * 台風は上陸する前に消滅した。\n\nWhen someone says 消滅した種族, I would say it probably refers to a vanished\n(ethnic) _tribe_ , because 絶滅 is the normal term in biological contexts. Note\nthat 種族 has two meanings from the English perspective (species vs ethnic\ngroup).\n\n * 滅ぶ: \"(for a country, civilization, tribe, etc) to perish/fall\"; As you have suspected, it's not preferred in academic contexts, but it has its own literary (or poetic) merit. \n\n> * 地球は核戦争によって滅ぶだろう。\n> * 東ローマ帝国は15世紀に滅んだ。\n> * 滅びの美学 \"aesthetics/dignity of the dying/perishing\", something you may\n> find in a tragedy",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T02:49:53.523",
"id": "71862",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T04:23:07.500",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T04:23:07.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
71821
| null |
71862
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71823",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I realize that both words mean to give. What is the difference between さしあげる\nand あげる? The word was used in a chat with an elderly person.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T12:44:50.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71822",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T14:41:49.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "What is the difference between さしあげる and あげる?",
"view_count": 290
}
|
[
{
"body": "差{さ}し上{あ}げる is the honorific version of あげる: it os used to show respect to the\nperson you're talking to.\n\nIt is used the same way as あげる in combination with the て form of a verb to\nexpress that the speaker offers an action to the interlocutor.\n\n> 手伝って差し上げましょうか。\n>\n> Shall I help you?\n\nOn the other hand, 与{あた}える can be used to express the action of giving, but to\na person of lower status.\n\nI have never seen 与える used with the て form of a verb though, but ~てやる can be\nused to express the same meaning as ~てあげる but toward a person of lower status.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T13:29:02.597",
"id": "71823",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T14:41:49.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18582",
"parent_id": "71822",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71822
|
71823
|
71823
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "It's the term used for the rock, paper and scissors game. I have also heard\nthe term kai bai bo/bou used. Which term is correct? Kai bai bo/bou sounds\nChinese. How does jyankenpon and kai bai bo/bou relate to iwa, kami, and\nhasami?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T15:04:49.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71824",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T15:09:31.473",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-15T15:09:31.473",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"etymology"
],
"title": "How does ジャンケンポン become the meaning for the rock paper and scissors game?",
"view_count": 88
}
|
[] |
71824
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71829",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a beginner, so I'm sorry if this is obvious: I was just reading a text\nwhich said\n\n> 虫取りをしました\n\nwhich, according to google, means \"I took insects\", which confused me at first\nbecause 取り is already a verb, isn't it? What would it mean if instead of that,\nthe text had said\n\n> 虫取りました\n\nwhat role does the 取り verb play in the sentence if する is the main verb in the\noriginal?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T19:18:31.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71828",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T21:21:37.403",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-15T19:32:56.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "35392",
"owner_user_id": "35392",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "Difference between 虫取り and 虫取りをする?",
"view_count": 89
}
|
[
{
"body": "I couldn't find \"虫取{むしと}る\" (and so \"虫取{むしと}ります\") in any dictionary.\n\n\"虫{むし}取{と}り\" is a noun, composed of \"虫{むし}\" which means insect, and the\nnominalization of \"取{と}る\" which generally means \"to take\", but in this case\ncan be interpreted as \"to catch\". \"取{と}る\" is nominalized by taking its stem,\nie. turning its る to a り.\n\nSo in the end, \"虫取り\" is a compound noun that means \"catching insects\", and can\nbe turned into a verb when used along with \"する\"; therefore \"虫取りをする\" means \"to\ncatch insects\", or more literally, \"to do insect catching\".",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-15T21:21:37.403",
"id": "71829",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-15T21:21:37.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18582",
"parent_id": "71828",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71828
|
71829
|
71829
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71841",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Context: while talking about himself, a boxer says:\n\n> 今持ってるモノは **もったいぶらず** 全て出す。それが俺の武器に繋がるんでねェ。拳に表れるんだよォ ――――[生き方]【スタイル】ってヤツは。\n\nAccording to dictionaries, the meaning of もったいぶらない is unpretentious, modest.\nBut since this boxer is a flamboyant and ostentatious man, I thought that\nmaybe it could have a slightly different nuance here. Could you help me\nunderstand its exact meaning in the sentence above?\n\n[Here](https://i.imgur.com/5BSGJfE.jpg) you can see the whole page. Thank you\nfor your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T00:22:41.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71831",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T11:55:15.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"nuances",
"verbs",
"sports"
],
"title": "Meaning of もったいぶらず in the following sentence",
"view_count": 279
}
|
[
{
"body": "## New answer\n\n**Major revision has been made, in response to By137's comment, as follows:**\n\nTo begin with, consider the origin of もったいぶら **ず**. Where does it come from?\nもったいぶら **ず** , or equivalently もったいぶら **ないで,** is an adverb which means doing\nsomething in a **not** もったいぶる way. もったいぶる is a verb which means that someone\nis unwilling to do something because it is もったいない．\n\nNext, consider the meaning of adjective もったいない. When do we think that doing\nsomething is もったいない? First, it is もったいない when **valuable** resources, such as\nmoney, time, or effort, are spent in a not useful/efficient/effective way. A\ntypical usage is as follows:\n\n> 時間がもったいない。\n>\n> It's a waste of time.\n>\n> (This implies that there can be a more useful way of spending time.)\n\nIt is also もったいない when something is being done in favor of someone who does\nnot deserve it. In other words, it is もったいない when it is not **worthy** enough\nto spend some **valuable** resources in favor of someone. A typical usage is\nas follows:\n\n> あなたにはもったいない。\n>\n> You don't deserve it.\n>\n> (This implies that there can be someone else who really deserves it.)\n\nIn both usages, the key to understand the meaning of もったいない is a sense of\n**values/worthiness**. Of course, everyone has a **different** sense of\nvalues, and whether to think that something is もったいない depends on who you are.\nIn other words, when to say もったいない is a **subjective** matter. We shall return\nto this point at the end of the answer.\n\nNow, go back to the main question. What does もったいぶら **ず** mean? We can infer\nthe meaning from its origin and from もったいない: Doing something もったいぶら **ず**\nmeans doing something **without** 'hesitation that is caused when one\nconsiders whether it is **worthy** enough to do.' For example, in the manga,\nthe boxer said:\n\n> (1) 今持ってるモノはもったいぶらず全て出す。\n>\n> I'm gonna spend all (the money) I have right now (without considering how\n> valuable the money is).\n>\n> (The boxer is very willing to pay all his signing bonus in order to drink in\n> a hostess bar.)\n\nThen, think about what a もったいぶらない way of boxing is. After saying (1), the\nboxer added that:\n\n> (2) それが俺の武器に繋がるんでねェ。拳に表れるんだよォ ――――生き方スタイルってヤツは。\n>\n> That will lead to my strong point. In my fist ―is my way of life (which is\n> もったいぶらない).\n>\n> (The boxer is trying to say that his もったいぶらない **characteristic** is his\n> strong point and that he もったいぶらない not only in spending money but also in\n> boxing and even in living a life.)\n\nBut how can the boxer's act of spending all his money in a もったいぶらない way, or\n(1), relate to his boxing style? And what is a もったいぶらない boxing style? As\nexplained above, whether something is もったいない is a **subjective** matter, and\nthe boxer is a man of もったいぶらない: In many aspects, he lives his life もったいぶらないで,\nand he actually thinks that doing so is really **nice/cool/chic**! That's why\nhe boxes もったいぶらないで, or he puts his **full** effort when he boxes.\n\nLast but not least, consider the other question: Why does もったいぶらない mean\nunpretentious or modest, according to a dictionary? As explained above,\neveryone has a **different** sense of values: To be a もったいぶらない person, one\nneeds to **give up** his/her sense of values to some extent and to be **open-\nminded**. That's why a person of もったいぶらない characteristic can be\nreceived/considered as modest, humble, generous, easy-going, and even\n**nice/cool/chic** , at least in the Japanese society.\n\n## Old answer\n\nAs background information, もったいぶら **ず** , or equivalently もったいぶら **ないで** , is\nan adverb which means doing something in a **not** もったいぶる way. もったいぶる is a\nverb meaning that someone is unwilling/reluctant to do something because doing\nsomething is もったいない. We feel もったいない when we spend or miss **valuable** things,\nsuch as money, time, and opportunities, usually in an inappropriate way.\n\nFrom the background information, we can conclude that もったいぶら **ず** is an\nadverb which means doing something **without** hesitation/reluctance and\nwithout contemplating relevant **values**. In the manga, もったいぶらず is used to\nindicate that the boxer is very willing to spend what he has, say all his\nsigning bonus (契約金), in order to drink in a hostess club.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T10:15:40.903",
"id": "71841",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T11:55:15.340",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35390",
"parent_id": "71831",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I basically agree with the other answer. But, we need to connect them with the\nboxing a bit.\n\nI adopt the definition もったいぶらない ; doing something without\nhesitation/reluctance and apply it to the boxer.\n\nSo, probably the boxer prefer to fight against his opponent very aggressively\nwithout considering stamina i.e. no hesitation.\n\nAccording to the wikipedia, I guess his fighting style is kind of\n\"[Brawler/slugger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxing#Boxing_styles)\".\n\n> _They often have a higher chance than other fighting styles to score a\n> knockout against their opponents because they focus on landing big, powerful\n> hits, instead of smaller, faster attacks._\n\nSo, his [生き方]【スタイル】 seems to be living life-in-the-fast-lane and he prefers to\nfight like in that way even in the boxing ring.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T11:27:21.450",
"id": "71868",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T11:27:21.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71831",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71831
|
71841
|
71868
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71838",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the following sentence, the verb がる appears to be used in passive form when\nthe speaker is describing herself as a child:\n\n> 私は少し奇妙がられる子供だった\n\nWhat does がる indicate when used in passive form? Because the verb normally\nindicates a quality someone is displaying, I don't understand how it can be\nput in passive form.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T06:31:30.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71834",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T12:34:36.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14125",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"passive-voice",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "がる passive form",
"view_count": 208
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this context, 私 is the one 奇妙が **られる** by others/someone around me. In\nother words, `他人から/周囲から` (by others/someone around me) is omitted from the\nsentence, as follows:\n\n> 私は`他人から/周囲から`少し奇妙が **られる** 子供だった",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T08:47:53.443",
"id": "71838",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T08:47:53.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35390",
"parent_id": "71834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Well ～がる can mean to «act as if～» or «behave as if～». I don't know who is\nacting here, but let's say it's her teacher. In that case my best guess at\nwhat the non-passive form of the sentence would be something like,\n\n> 私は先生が（私を）少し奇妙がる子供だった。 \n> I was a child that the teacher acted as if was a little strange.\n\nHowever who acted as if she was strange isn't really important, so passive is\nused here to shift focus onto herself as the recipient of the verb. So it's\nmore about how she was treated by others (or her perceived opinion of herself\nfrom others).\n\n> 私は（先生に）少し奇妙がられる子供だった。 \n> I was treated as a little strange child (by my teacher). \n> _(lit. I was a child that was acted as if a little strange by my teacher)_\n\nSo in essence people around were showing signs that she was a bit strange when\nshe was a child. So although it might not translate well into English, it\nshould act much like any other passive verb in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T12:34:36.180",
"id": "71844",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T12:34:36.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13677",
"parent_id": "71834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71834
|
71838
|
71838
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71837",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In email communications, I have seen use of 申し訳ございません when saying sorry. How\nthis phrase has been constructed and how it is different from すみません。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T07:40:57.200",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71836",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T08:36:59.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34456",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Explanation of 申し訳ございません",
"view_count": 1722
}
|
[
{
"body": "It literally means \"There is no excuse\", or \"I have no excuse\". Let's break it\ndown:\n\n * 申{もう}す is the humbling version of 言{い}う\n * 言{い}い訳{わけ} means \"excuse, explanation\"\n * so 申{もう}し訳{わけ} is kind of a humbling version of 言{い}い訳{わけ}\n * ございます (or 御{ご}座{ざ}います in kanis but that's very rare; ござる in plain form) is polite version of ある, so ございません is a more polite way to mean \"there is not\"\n\nAs a result, 申{もう}し訳{わけ}ございません literally means \"I have no excuse\", and\ntherefore is a very polite way to say \"I'm sorry\".\n\nOn the other hand, すみません is written 済{す}みません in kanjis. 済{す}む can mean \"to\nfeel at ease\", so 済{す}みません might be translated as \"I feel bad [for what I\ndid]\", which basically means \"I'm sorry\".\n\nTo sum it up:\n\n> 申{もう}し訳{わけ}ございません\n>\n> _I have no excuses_\n>\n> すみません\n>\n> _I feel sorry_\n\nNow as you may know, 申{もう}し訳{わけ}ございません is much more often used in formal\ncontexts than すみません, which is not rude _per se_ but would be considered not\nrespectful enough in a working context, especially in emails.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T08:00:23.160",
"id": "71837",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T08:36:59.153",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18582",
"parent_id": "71836",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] |
71836
|
71837
|
71837
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Good day,\n\nI'm currently studying Japanese in a school here in Tokyo and I'm on my 5th\nmonth already here. Problem is that the lesson here is sometimes too fast,\nwhich is why I need to use other resources such as this website to learn. Our\nlesson is currently about `謙譲語`. I saw in the vocabulary that `いたします` is the\nhumble equivalent of `する`, but I'm having trouble figuring out when to use it.\n\nIn the Minna no Nihongo Book 2nd Ed. that we're currently using,\n\n```\n\n 1st and 2nd verb group\n お＋します \n \n Example\n よていをお知らせします\n かばんをお持ちします\n \n 3rd verb group\n ご＋します\n ご案内します\n 中止の場合はご連絡します\n \n```\n\nI was wondering where `いたします` fits in the actual lesson, as I cannot find the\nactual usage in the book, all I know is that I should use it on some events\nlike when entering a room `失礼いたします`, or `お願いいたします` but I need some explanation\nto further understand it's usages. Any help is much appreciated, thank you!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T12:10:47.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71843",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T12:45:55.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33355",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"politeness"
],
"title": "謙譲語 (Kenjougo) Beginner question",
"view_count": 175
}
|
[
{
"body": "謙譲語 は humble form。\n\nIt is used while speaking to the superior by humble ourself.\n\nInstead of giving respect to the superior by humble ourself it will\nautomatically give respect to the superior.\n\nしますはいたします。\n\n勉強します － 勉強いたします。\n\nお願いします - お願いいたします。\n\n目上の人と話すとき使います。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T12:45:55.240",
"id": "71845",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T12:45:55.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35045",
"parent_id": "71843",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71843
| null |
71845
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When sending a thank you message to a friend that showed me and my family\naround in her country, I wrote something along the lines of\n\n> We had as much fun as we did thanks to you.\n\nLater when I was trying to put that into Japanese, the closest I could get was\n\n> （わたしたちは）あれほど楽しめたのは○○さんのおかげです。\n\nwhich I think gets the point across, but I don't think I've heard a native\nspeaker say anything like that and I don't want to be speaking English even\nthough the words are Japanese.\n\nWhat would be a more natural expression for this situation?\n\nIs a phrase that more literally means \"as much as we did\" simply not used?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T13:16:32.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71846",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T13:58:08.957",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-16T13:48:36.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "Is there an equivalent phrase for \"(enjoyed it) as much as we did\"?",
"view_count": 119
}
|
[
{
"body": "You are right that a native may not put it in that way, but if you want to be\nsincere, better at least not to make your friend think that you just copy-\npasted what a native would say.\n\nIt may be more about culture than language, that a Japanese may more likely\nfocus on expressing gratitude for what the host did, rather than on how he/she\nfelt about what the host did. So, simply 本当にお世話になりました. But, saying that would\njust seem like a generic copy-paste, so, I think yours probably works better,\nor write e.g. starting with the above \"copy-paste\" and add [might be better to\naddress his/her family name] \"Xさんのおかげですごく楽しかったです。\" [Or, depending on your +\nyour host's age, possibly replace \"すごく\" by \"とても\"]",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T13:58:08.957",
"id": "71847",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T13:58:08.957",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34261",
"parent_id": "71846",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71846
| null |
71847
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71849",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I see terms for soccer and football and they seem closely related. What is the\nterm used to clearly indicate American football? National/American Football\nLeague football. Thank you for your time in answering this question.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T16:00:31.437",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71848",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T16:24:14.247",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-16T16:24:14.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "What term is used to mean the game of American football?",
"view_count": 169
}
|
[
{
"body": "From my experience, サッカー is almost exclusively used to refer to the one you\nuse your foot for most of the time, and アメフト for the handegg version.\n\nAs some fun examples of usage, you might want to check [NFL Japan's\nsite](https://nfljapan.com/guide/about) or read some of Murata Yusuke's\n[Eyeshield\n21.](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%82%A4%E3%82%B7%E3%83%BC%E3%83%AB%E3%83%8921)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T16:04:07.180",
"id": "71849",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T16:21:09.223",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-16T16:21:09.223",
"last_editor_user_id": "5427",
"owner_user_id": "5427",
"parent_id": "71848",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71848
|
71849
|
71849
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71899",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I noticed that the term \"can\" is written with a kanji term but pronounced as\nin English. Why use a kanji? The word coffee has a kanji, but is commonly\nwritten in katakana.\n\nIt might be ateji, but I always thought that ateji was accompanied by a\nkatakana spelling or the katakana spelling would be the one predominantly\nused.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T19:10:11.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71851",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T00:30:54.723",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T19:47:22.527",
"last_editor_user_id": "19278",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji",
"etymology",
"katakana"
],
"title": "Why is the term for can as in ''aluminum can\" written in kanji?",
"view_count": 531
}
|
[
{
"body": "I assume that you're referring to「缶」- it's **not** pronounced as in English,\nbut an _on'yomi_ (and also a word used in Chinese).\n\nThis is a bit hard to see in the _shinjitai_ form. In _kyūjitai_ , the _kanji_\nis「罐」.「罐」is made up of semantic「缶」( _picture of a jar/pot_ ) and\nphonetic「[雚]{かん}」, which occurs in many characters as a sound component:\n\n * [觀]{かん} ( _Shinjitai_ : 観)\n * [權]{けん} ( _Shinjitai_ : 権)\n * [歡]{かん} ( _Shinjitai_ : 歓)\n * etc.\n\nNote that「[缶]{ふう}」( _jar/pot_ ) is not the same morpheme as「[缶]{かん}」, Japanese\nhave just merged the two together to the same shape by simplifying「罐」(by\ncutting off「雚」).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T19:47:29.807",
"id": "71852",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-16T19:47:29.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "71851",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "Droooze's answer is a good one. I'd like to add onto that here.\n\n### Origins of the _\"metal can\"_ meaning for 缶\n\nEven before, and especially after, the fall of the Edo 幕府【ばくふ】 (shogunate) in\n1868, Japanese researchers were busy trying to find out what Japan had missed\nout on during the long period of 鎖国【さこく】 (\"locked country\") policy, when the\nTokugawa regime strictly controlled foreign access to and contact with Japan.\nDuring this time, many new words and concepts were imported into Japanese,\nwith old words sometimes pressed into service with new meanings. Some common\nterms that we don't even think about, like 社会【しゃかい】 (\"society\") and 自由【じゆう】\n(\"freedom\") were re-forgings of older words to apply to new meanings.\n\nFrom what I can find, it appears that 缶【かん】 is one such similar term.\nAccording to Shogakukan's 国語大辞典【こくごだいじてん】 (KDJ) entry\n[here](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%BC%B6%E3%83%BB%E7%BD%90%E3%83%BB%E9%91%B5-2025576),\nthe word 缶【かん】 in reference to a \"can\" dates from the late 1800s. Both the KDJ\nentry and the separate Daijisen entry\n[here](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%BC%B6-468981) agree that this particular\nsense came from either English _can_ or Dutch _kan_ , with the kanji spelling\nan example of ateji usage.\n\nAs droooze notes, this kanji 缶 had a long history in Japanese and Chinese\nprior to the late 1800s, referring more generally to a _container_ of some\nsort -- possibly an earthenware, glass, or ceramic _\"jar\"_ , or a metal\n_\"pot\"_ or _\"water bucket\"_ , that kind of thing. The shift in sense from\n_\"metal pot or water bucket\"_ to _\"metal can\"_ isn't very far, and indicates\nthe kind of creative linguistic rejiggering that happened a lot in the late\n1800s in Japan.\n\n### Why use kanji for a borrowed term\n\nThere are a many borrowed words that have kanji forms. The most obvious ones\nare almost all of the _on'yomi_ terms out there -- these mostly came into the\nJapanese language as borrowings from Middle Chinese.\n\nThat said, your question is clearly asking about more recent borrowings. Even\nthen, there are a few such terms that have common kanji forms. The more\nfamiliar ones were borrowed earlier on in the course of Japanese contact with\nEuropeans, such as 天麩羅【てんぷら】 (from an apparent conflation of Portuguese\n_temperar_ and _tempora_ ), or 煙草【たばこ】 (from Spanish and Portuguese _tabaco_ ,\nin turn from terms in either Taíno and/or Arabic), or 如雨露【じょうろ】 (from\nPortuguese _jarro_ ), or 襦袢【じゅばん】 (from Portuguese _gibão_ ). So using kanji\nfor borrowings isn't unheard of.\n\n缶 is a much more recent borrowing, comparatively, but it's also on the edge of\nold enough that the spelling has had time for wide adoption. Combine that with\nthe way the reading conveniently overlaps with the borrowed foreign word, the\nsimplicity of the character (not too many strokes), and that it is perhaps\nvisually evocative of a can, and we see persistent use in modern writing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T00:30:54.723",
"id": "71899",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T00:30:54.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71851",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71851
|
71899
|
71852
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71857",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A is a commoner right now. B is a high ranking commander. A ceremony just\nfinished, involving A getting bestowed a role by the queen/殿下 as a reward for\nsome good deeds. B was in the audience and was a very brief acquaintance of A,\nthis is their first real conversation. The 殿下 had defended A during the\nceremony against criticism from some of the nobility, and demanded that there\nwill be no objections to A's new role.\n\n> A「ま、平民出身騎士の私もよくいびられてはいますけどね」\n>\n> B「あなたも平民なのですか？」\n>\n> A「はい──本来なら今日みたいな謁見には呼ばれませんけどね」\n>\n> **B「私はあの場にいましたし・・・多分あなたに向けられる視線が選民意識の高い貴族のものばかりではマズイと、殿下が判断されたのではないでしょうか」**\n>\n> A「なるほど・・・それであなたも呼ばれたと」\n>\n> B「多分ですけどね」\n\n * All eyes naturally should be looking at A during the ceremony and A was only looking and replying to the 殿下. So あなたに can only be indicating the direction if that were the case, and not the agent doing \"向けられる\". So it seems the 謁見/選民意識の高い貴族 are the ones be doing the 向ける, as is described. But then how is it grammatically correct to use the passive form here? compare to \"あなたに向ける視線が選民意識の高い貴族のものばかり\" for example\n\n * Ending the with 殿下が判断されたのではないでしょうか, who is doing the 判断 here then? What did happen was a definitive ruling by the queen that A will get the role/job without further debate. But since it was not written as \"殿下に判断されたのではないでしょうか\", does that mean the queen herself is being \"judged\" by B's interpretation? That would a very sacrilegious thing to say in this context.\n\nI look at the sentence as:\n\n> \"[多分あなたに向けられる視線が選民意識の高い貴族のものばかり]ではマズイ\" と 殿下が判断されたのではないでしょうか\n\n... but depending who is actually doing the actions, that may make no sense.\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T21:43:57.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71853",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T02:10:01.027",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Passive ambiguity in this passage (「あなたに向けられる視線」・「殿下が判断された」)",
"view_count": 142
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are two kinds of passive happening here: straightforward passive, and\nhonorific passive.\n\n# Straightforward passive\n\nThis is your basic, garden-variety passive: something _is being done_.\n\nYour analysis of the に in あなたに向けられる視線が is correct: this is not the\ninstrumental に, but rather the directional に.\n\nHowever, your analysis of the verb isn't quite right. We can't say\nあなたに[向]{●}[け]{●}[る]{●}視線が, because that means that the 視線【しせん】 is the one\ndoing the 向ける-ing. This doesn't make any sense, because 向ける is a transitive\nverb, and 視線 here is marked with the subject particle が, such that the 視線\nwould grammatically have to be 向ける-ing some unstated object.\n\nInstead, the 向けられる is the straightforward, garden-variety passive. A more\nidiomatic English translation that maintains this passivity might be, _\"the\ngazes **[that were] turned** towards you...\"_\n\n# Honorific passive\n\nWhen speaking about someone in an outside or otherwise status-elevated social\ncontext, speakers in Japanese often use honorific constructions. In this kind\nof context, using the basic verb する, I might talk about myself 致【いた】す-ing\n(using the humble register for myself), whereas I'd talk about the status-\nelevated person as される-ing (using the honorific register for the \"exalted\nother\").\n\n### Anecdote\n\nYears ago, I visited Kyōto as a tourist. I was reasonably fluent in Japanese\nafter having lived in the Tōhoku and then the Kantō for a total of, perhaps,\nfour years or so. In the taxi cab from the station, the driver asked us,\nどこから[来]{●}[ら]{●}[れ]{●}[ま]{●}[し]{●}[た]{●}か, which confused me initially, as I\nwasn't used to the honorific passive. Later in the conversation, he also\nasked, どこへ行かれますか. At this point, my memory of earlier studies kicked in, and I\nrealized more clearly what he was saying: どこから[来]{●}[ま]{●}[し]{●}[た]{●}か, and\nどこへ[行]{●}[き]{●}[ま]{●}[す]{●}か, only in the honorific register, using the\npassive honorific.\n\n### Back on point\n\nIn your sample sentence, you have 殿下が判断[さ]{●}[れ]{●}[た]{●}. We see that 殿下 is\nmarked with the subject particle が, so we know that she's the subject of the\nverb. This _could_ grammatically be the straightforward passive, but as you\nnote, that doesn't make sense in this context -- the queen is not being\n\"deemed\" or \"judged\" in one way or another. Rather, the queen herself is\n_doing_ the \"deeming\" or \"judging\" here. And because she's the queen of the\nspeaker, the speaker is using the honorific register, and thus we see instead\nthe honorific passive.\n\n# How to tell which passive?\n\nGenerally speaking, if the passive construction would be truly ambiguous,\npeople will find other ways of saying things to avoid that ambiguity. Perhaps\ninstead of the honorific passive, they might use a different verb altogether,\nperhaps なさる. As with many things in language, **context is key**.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T00:22:45.267",
"id": "71857",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T00:22:45.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71853",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
71853
|
71857
|
71857
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71855",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> その巨大{きょだい}な学園{がくえん}は都会{とかい}のど真{ま}ん中{なか}の一等地{いっとうち} **に** 聳{そび}えたっていた\n\nI can understand the meaning of this sentence but I can't comprehend what「に」is\nmeaning in it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-16T23:14:28.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71854",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T02:04:16.413",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-16T23:34:28.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "35324",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "what is に's role in this sentence?",
"view_count": 94
}
|
[
{
"body": "### The immediate question\n\nThis に is the locative に indicating where something is happening.\n\n> どこ **[に]{●}** 立【た】ちますか。 \n> Where `[LOC]` stand `[question mark]`. \n> → Where [do you] stand? \n> ここ **[に]{●}** 立【た】ちます。 \n> Here `[LOC]` stand. \n> → [I] stand here.\n\nIn your sample sentence, the に tells us where the action is taking place --\nspecifically, where その巨大【きょだい】な学園【がくえん】 (\"that giant school\") is\n聳【そび】え立【た】っている (\"standing really tall → towering\").\n\n### Deeper analysis\n\nI suspect you're having trouble breaking down the grammar of the sentence.\nLet's do that now.\n\n> その巨大{きょだい}な学園{がくえん}は都会{とかい}のど真{ま}ん中{なか}の一等地{いっとうち} **に** 聳{そび}えたっていた\n\n1) What are we talking about here? Look for the topic particle は:\n\n> その巨大{きょだい}な学園{がくえん} **[は]{●}**\n\nSo we're talking about a 学園{がくえん}. The words before the 学園{がくえん} modify that\nnoun and tell us more about it: the 学園{がくえん} is, more specifically, その\n(\"that\") 巨大【きょだい】 (\"giant\") 学園{がくえん} (\"school\").\n\n2) What are we saying about the 学園{がくえん}? What is it doing? What is the main\nverb of our sentence? In Japanese, that's generally at the end:\n\n> 聳【そび】えたっていた\n\nThis is a verb phrase with three verbs: 聳【そび】える (\"to be really tall\"), 立【た】つ\n(\"to stand\"), and いた, the past tense of いる (\"to be\"), used to form progressive\nconstructions.\n\nPutting these back together, we get \"being really tall\" + \"standing\" + \"was\" →\n\"was standing really tall\" → \"was towering\".\n\n3) Where is the action happening? We can usually tell by looking for the\nlocative particle に:\n\n> 都会{とかい}のど真{ま}ん中{なか}の一等地{いっとうち} **[に]{●}**\n\nSo the action is happening in the location marked by the に: in this case, in\nan 一等地【いっとうち】, literally a \"first-class [piece of] land\", i.e. a \"prime\nlocation\". The words before the 一等地【いっとうち】 tell us more about it, so we know\nthat it is 都会{とかい}のど真{ま}ん中{なか}の, or \"right in the middle of the city\".\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not answer your question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T00:02:37.160",
"id": "71855",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T02:04:16.413",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T02:04:16.413",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "71854",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71854
|
71855
|
71855
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71859",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading this manga, and came accross the following monologue:\n\n> たかが弦ごときで世界の終わりみてーなツラしやがって\n>\n> 俺が上げて落としたみてーで後味ワリーだろがッ\n>\n> 俺の昼寝返せ!!!\n\nI can't understand what 上げて落としたみて means. Is this an expression? Are those\nverbs all changing each others meanings?\n\nI've found those translations so far: \"I'd feel bad if I were to leave now\",\n\"you make me feel bad just looking at you, and gives me a bad feeling\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T00:07:54.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71856",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T12:06:47.907",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-02T12:06:47.907",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "35399",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs",
"syntax"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 上げて落としたみてー?",
"view_count": 1108
}
|
[
{
"body": "みてー is a contracted form of みたい (\"is like ～\"). It's an instance of\n[/ai/-to-/ee/ contraction](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18454/5010).\n上げて is the te-form of 上げる, and 落とす is a verb. Therefore a very literal\ntranslation is \"It's like I raised it and then dropped it\".\n\n上げて落とす is a slangy expression which may be called an idiom. It roughly means\n\"to set someone's expectations and then disappoint them\", \"to praise something\nand then disparage\", etc. 上げる basically means \"to elevate\", but it also has\nslangy meanings like \"to praise\", \"to flatter\" or \"to hype\". 落とす is to \"to\ndrop\", but it also means \"to say negative things about something\", \"to\ndisappoint\", etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T01:31:49.453",
"id": "71859",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T04:27:33.847",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T04:27:33.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71856",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
] |
71856
|
71859
|
71859
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What’s the difference between 「[独]{ひと}り[言]{ごと}」 and 「[独白]{どくはく}」? They both\nmean ‘monologue’?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T01:20:22.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71858",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T02:15:48.407",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T02:15:48.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "35400",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How to say monologue?",
"view_count": 289
}
|
[
{
"body": "独り言 is anything that is said to yourself, typically when you are alone.\n\nToday, 独白 is mainly used in the context of acting. A 独白 is meant to be heard\nby the audience, not someone else in the plot. In this sense, モノローグ is equally\ncommonly understood. But in older novels, you may see 独白 used in the same\nmanner as 独り言. In addition, recently I sometimes see 独白 used in the context of\nprivate interview, as if it were short for 独占告白 (for example\n[this](https://books.bunshun.jp/ud/book/num/1692030300000000000C)), but I'm\nnot sure if this is a right usage of 独白.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T01:49:06.247",
"id": "71860",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T01:49:06.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71858",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71858
| null |
71860
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71871",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can さくじつ and きのう be used the same way? I know the terms mean yesterday. Thank\nyou!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T14:21:51.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71869",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T15:35:17.103",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T15:35:17.103",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"usage",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "Can さくじつ and きのう be used the same way?",
"view_count": 844
}
|
[
{
"body": "It depends on the context.\n\nさくじつ and きのう both mean yesterday (and the same Kanji 昨日 is used for the\nwords). A major difference in their usage is that さくじつ is almost always used\nin a **formal** context (written and spoken), while きのう is often used **both**\nin formal and informal contexts (written and spoken): Using さくじつ in a casual\nconversation seems weird. You can hear きのう not only in a casual conversation\nbut also in the news.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T14:42:53.087",
"id": "71871",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T14:42:53.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35390",
"parent_id": "71869",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
71869
|
71871
|
71871
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71878",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a sentence that I came across in a manga I am reading. The male speaker\nis speaking to five girls (one of whom he met 5 years ago but doesn't know\nwhich one) and says, この中で昔俺に会ったことがあるよって人ー?\n\nI understand that manga doesn't have the best punctuation but I believe that\nthe complete logical clause before よって may be a clause describing the 人 and\nsince this is casual speech there is no need for the copula or か to be used\nfor question form. I just can't seem to figure out what the よって is doing. I\nwould appreciate any help on this one. Jisho says that よって means \"therefore;\nconsequently; accordingly; for that reason.\"\n\nCould these just be two separate sentences where the second sentence is just\n\"Therefore, that person is?\" With the unsaid subject being the person he met\nbefore (introduced in the previous clause).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T20:58:07.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71872",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T02:37:20.143",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T22:42:09.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "33404",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is よって doing in the following sentence?",
"view_count": 227
}
|
[
{
"body": "You have parsed it wrong.\n\n> この中で「昔俺に会ったことがあるよ」って人ー? \n> (Is there) anyone who has met me long ago?\n\nSo 昔俺に会ったことがあるよ is an (indirect) quote, and よ is a sentence-end particle\nwithin the quote. This って is a very casual variant of という used like this:\n\n * 地球が丸いって事実 (= 地球が丸いという事実)\n * 美女が野獣に恋をするって話 (= 美女が野獣に恋をするという話)\n * ペンギンが飛べないってのは本当？ (= ペンギンが飛べないというのは本当？)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T00:54:28.947",
"id": "71878",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T02:37:20.143",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T02:37:20.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71872",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71872
|
71878
|
71878
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71876",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a sentence that I read in a manga that has caused some confusion for\nme. It is an unsaid sentence by a girl who was surprised by an accidental\nencounter she had with a boy. She was in a robe and seemed to have just left\nthe shower. Here is the sentence and my attempted breakdown follows,\n\n> あの時はびっくりしてらしくも **なく** 追い返しちゃったけど.\n\n`あの時` is the non logical topic.\n\nThe unsaid subject of the first clause is the speaker.\n\n`びっくりしてらしく` - I believe to be 「びっくり」 + 「する（て form）」and 「らしく」 is 「らしい」, meaning\nseeming or appearing, in its て form but with the て left off\n\n`も` - additive particle. In this case it is following the て form so it will\nhave a meaning of \"even though.\"\n\n**`なく`** is the start of the second clause - ???\n\nThe subject of the second clause is still the speaker.\n\n`追い返しちゃった` - \"Done\" sent away. The action has completed and is a fact. She\ndone sent away the boy.\n\n`けど` - trailing but, something may be implied.\n\nSo my likely incorrect and current best guess and what the speaker is thinking\nin her head with this sentence is, _\"That time, even though I seemed\nsurprised, I turned him away.\"_\n\nI'm not sure at all how **「なく」** fits into this or if my thinking that there\nare two logical clauses here is correct. I think that the \"even though\" part\nof my translation sounds a bit funky as well. Of course someone would turn the\nother person away if they saw them at an embarrassing moment. Any help would\nbe much appreciated. Thanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T21:40:27.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71873",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T08:37:54.990",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T22:40:02.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is なく doing in the following sentence?",
"view_count": 204
}
|
[
{
"body": "One possible way is to divide the sentence in four parts as follows:\n\n> あの時は / びっくりして / らしくもなく追い返しちゃった / けど.\n\nEach part has its own role:\n\n> **Time (When?)**\n>\n> あの時は, or 'at that time.'\n>\n> **Reason (Why?)**\n>\n> びっくりして, or 'because I was surprised.'\n>\n> **Action & Way (What? & How?)**\n>\n> らしくもなく追い返しちゃった, or 'I turned you away, which was らしくない.'\n>\n> **Conjunction**\n>\n> けど, or 'although.'\n>\n> (In fact, more context is necessary to figure out the meaning of けど. Note\n> that someone uses けど both meaninglessly and frequently.)\n\nNow, take a look at らしく **ない**. The word comes from らしい, or more precisely\n自分らしい in this context, and is the **negation** of 自分らしい. A 自分らしい act of doing\nsomething is to **be yourself or be honest to yourself** and do it. In\ncontrast, a 自分らしく **ない** action is to do something, **not** being yourself or\n**not** being honest to yourself.\n\nFrom the discussion above, we can infer the meaning of **なく** and the\nsentence:\n\n> あの時はびっくりしてらしくも **なく** 追い返しちゃったけど.\n>\n> At that time, although I do **n't** normally do (or I actually did **n't**\n> want to do) this kind of things, I turned you away because I was surprised.\n\n* * *\n\n**Addendum on も**\n\n**も** emphasizes the sense of **negation** (ない) when it is used in らしく **も**\nない. The same applies to らしくもなく.\n\nThe question we ask is: Why did the girl say らしく **も** なく, rather than らしくなく?\nTo understand her word choice and her feeling, focus on a **causal\nrelationship**. As discussed above (and as the questioner mentioned in the\ncomment), the girl did not want to turn away the boy. Then, what made her turn\nhim away? One cause of her doing so is the surprising encounter with him. But,\nis there any other cause? Here **も** comes into play: By using **も** , the\ngirl **emphasizes** that herself is **not** a cause of her doing so (thus the\nsurprising encounter is indeed the major/predominant cause). Also, by\nemphasizing the sense of negation, she may feel **less** responsible for what\nshe did.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T23:48:46.090",
"id": "71876",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T08:37:54.990",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35390",
"parent_id": "71873",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71873
|
71876
|
71876
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In reading exercise #3 of JLPT N3 読む guide, there's a sentence that contains\n**それ** and I don't understand why.\n\n> 大好きなおもちゃが壊れてしまった子供にとっては、 **それ** を直してくれるおもちゃの専門家が、神様のように見えるようです。\n\nCan someone explain to me why **それ** is being used?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T22:48:44.570",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71874",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T23:38:20.120",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T23:37:06.923",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "34934",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"pronouns"
],
"title": "What is それ doing in this sentence",
"view_count": 100
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's a pronoun which refers to `おもちゃ` and is `直してくれる`'s object; as far as I\nunderstand, the breakdown is `それを直してくれる` (to fix that [toy]) and `おもちゃの専門家`\n(toy expert), giving \"The toy expert who fixes that [toy]\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-17T23:33:12.180",
"id": "71875",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-17T23:38:20.120",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-17T23:38:20.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"parent_id": "71874",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71874
| null |
71875
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71882",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Once, a long time ago, someone asked me to tell me how I thought something\nwent in Japanese. I replied\n\n> うまくいったと言います。\n\nQuickly realizing my mistake, I corrected myself like this:\n\n> 言います…思います。うまくいったと思います。\n\nBut I'm not sure a native speaker would correct themselves this way. Is there\na more natural way?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T04:32:26.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71879",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T08:05:27.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How would a native speaker correct themselves when they misspeak?",
"view_count": 1757
}
|
[
{
"body": "There is no one fixed phrase that everyone uses to correct their own misspeech\nsuch as \"I mean\" in English. In such a situation we usually say:\n\n * Formal settings\n\n> ～と言います……いえ……思います \n> ～と言います……間違えました……思います \n> ～と言います……すみません……思います \n> ～と言います……失礼しました……思います\n\n * Informal settings\n\n> ～と言います……違う……思います \n> ～と言います……違った……思います \n> ～と言います……間違えた……思います \n> ～と言います……じゃない……思います \n> ～と言います……じゃなくて……思います \n> ～と言います……じゃなかった……思います \n> ～と言います……えっと……思います\n\nEspecially in informal ones, the inserted phrases are uttered extremely fast\nso that you may only hear something like \"choo\" (違う) or \"j'nut\" (じゃなかった).\nBesides, meaningless fillers are often put in the place, sounding like \"ah\",\n\"umm\", \"nnn\", \"eh\", etc.\n\n* * *\n\n**PS**\n\n@jogloran has reminded me of the word [もとい (or\nもと[へ]{e})](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/219650/meaning/m1u/%E5%85%83%E3%81%B8/),\nwhich is worth learning but no longer used actively when you correct yourself\nexcept those who speak in an overly pedantic way or fantasy world nobles. In\nmodern usage, it becomes more a rhetorical device that roughly means \"rather\",\n\"or to say\", \"more correctly\" etc.\n\n> あの子は彼らのアイドル、もとい教祖だ \n> _That (boy/girl) is their idol, or you might say, guru._",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T05:30:45.470",
"id": "71882",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T08:05:27.290",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T08:05:27.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "71879",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] |
71879
|
71882
|
71882
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71884",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I think, the word \"何となく\" means as below\n\n> somehow or other; for some reason or another;\n\nHowever, how it has been formed so that it means like above?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T05:16:59.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71880",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T07:55:04.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34456",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Formation of word \"何となく\"",
"view_count": 276
}
|
[
{
"body": "何となく is made up of:\n\n * 何【なん】と: contraction of... \n * 何【なに】: question-word \"what\"\n * と: quotative particle \"(call/say) that\"\n * なく: adverbial form of i-adjective ない (\"not be\"); \"not being, without\"\n\nAs a whole it means \"without 'what'\", or in more understandable English\n\"without naming what (it is)\", thus comes to represent a feeling that you\ncan't pinpoint the specific reason.\n\nNote that this phrase is already an idiom, with an undivided accent\nなんとなく{LHHHL} instead of etymological なんと{HLL}なく{HL}.\n\nSimilar constructions:\n\n * [それとなく](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/131791/meaning/m0u/) \"without (pointing) 'that'\" → \"implicitly; subtly\"\n * 幾度／何度となく \"without 'how many times'\" → \"countless times\"\n * [～ともなく](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/50260/7810) \"without any specific\" ([a JLPT N1 grammar](https://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-jlpt-n1-grammar-%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F-tomonaku/))",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T07:44:55.313",
"id": "71884",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T07:55:04.193",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T07:55:04.193",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "71880",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71880
|
71884
|
71884
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71883",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across the following sentence. It is one of my Japanese assignments\nexplanation:\n\n> 次の「です・ます」 **体【てい】** の文章を「だ・である」 **体【てい】** に書き換えましょう。Let's write and exchange\n> the following text in「です・ます」form to the 「だ・である」form.\n\nAlthough I understand the assignment, I'm struggling to figure out what 体【てい】\nexactly means. [According to jisho.org](https://jisho.org/word/%E4%BD%93-2)\n(bold added by me):\n\n> 体【てい】 \n> Noun \n> 1. Appearance; air; condition; state; **form** \n> 2. Voice (grammar)\n\nSo I believe that in my sentence, 体【てい】 means \"form\". However, as the second\nentry states \"voice\", which is a linguistic term, I wonder if 体【てい】 can be\nused only in linguistic contexts such as my assignment statement. Is that so?\n\nIf not, what are other contexts or situations where 体【てい】 can be used? I could\nnot find example sentences either, I would appreciate it if you provide some.\n\nよろしくお願いします！",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T05:19:36.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71881",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T06:19:51.680",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What are the meaning and the usage of 体 【てい】?",
"view_count": 363
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think the 体 in 「である体」「ですます体」「敬体」「常体」 is read as たい.\n\n\"Voice\" as a linguistic term is [態]{たい}, as in [受動態]{じゅどうたい}, [能動態]{のうどうたい}.\n\n[体]{てい} can be used like...\n\n「[体]{てい}のいい話」 \n「[体]{てい}よく断る」 \n「職人[体]{てい}の男」 \n「～～という[体]{てい}で」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T06:19:51.680",
"id": "71883",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T06:19:51.680",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71881",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71881
|
71883
|
71883
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71888",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "If I want to say \"I forgot everything about it,\" I would go for \"全部/全て忘れた\".\nBut then I thought what about \"何でも忘れた\"? I know that 何でも is followed by\npositive predicate. But somehow this sentence sounds strange to me. I am not\nsure if it could also be the right way to say so.\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T09:54:10.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71885",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:43:42.400",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is the sentence \"何でも忘れた\" correct?",
"view_count": 1523
}
|
[
{
"body": "I rarely say or hear 何でも忘れた as the meaning of \"I forgot everything\". I say\n何もかも忘れた.\n\nDarius Jahandarie explains 何でも well. 何でも忘れた makes sense as the meaning of \"I\nforgot anything\". However, it is usually used with a modifier such as\n彼は、勉強したことは何でも忘れた、and I think どれも and どんなことでも are more common.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T13:28:41.450",
"id": "71887",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:43:42.400",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T08:43:42.400",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "71885",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "何でも generally means “any (one) thing”, not “everything”.\n\n> 何でもいい → Anything is good. \n> 何でも忘れる → He forgets anything (he gets told). \n> 何でもできる → He can do anything.\n>\n> 全部できる → He can do everything (= all of the things). \n> 全部できた → He was able to do everything. \n> 全部忘れる → He will forget everything. \n> 全部忘れた → He forgot everything. \n> 全部いい → Everything is good. \n> 全部よかった → Everything was good.\n\nThe reason 何でも忘れた is weird is for the same reason “He forgot anything” is\nweird in English: “anything” raises a potential but unspecified thing into the\ndiscourse, which doesn’t work well with the past-tense, because you should\nknow what is being referred to. “Everything” raises all the things in the set\nbeing discussed, which goes fine with the past-tense.\n\nThis is not to say past-tense doesn’t _ever_ work with “any”/何でも; in\nparticular stative predicates work okay: 何でもよかったのに一つも選んでくれなかった “Anything would\nhave been fine but he didn’t pick even one”. 何でもできたのに諦めて引きこもりになってしまった “He\ncould have done anything but he gave up and became a hikikomori.”\n\nThis seems to be because the state somehow protects the scope of the\nquantifier, and doesn’t let it get affected by the past-tense 〜た. I feel like\nits usage is more common in counterfactuals (like the 〜のに sentences above)\nthough it’s also possible outside of them: 私は(生まれてから)何でもできた. However this\nfeels somehow very slightly odd so I’d recommend against it unless you know\nwhat you’re doing.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T15:32:23.737",
"id": "71888",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T15:32:23.737",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "71885",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 18
}
] |
71885
|
71888
|
71888
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71891",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was trying to write \"Half of the population will die\" in Google Translate. I\nwrote：\n\n「人口の半分は死にます。」\n\nBut Google decided this was better:\n\n「人口の半分が死亡します。」\n\nAre these just different ways to write the same sentence, or is using the noun\nand する verb better for this sentence?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T16:30:51.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71889",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T17:34:04.637",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T17:22:08.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "35417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "What is the difference between these sentences?",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "Neither is better than the other per se, but there is a clear difference in\nformality. As usual, the kango version (死亡) is more formal, whereas the wago\nversion (死ぬ) is more common in casual speech.\n\nSee questions tagged with [wago-and-kango](/questions/tagged/wago-and-kango\n\"show questions tagged 'wago-and-kango'\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T17:34:04.637",
"id": "71891",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T17:34:04.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71889",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71889
|
71891
|
71891
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71893",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between 紅葉{こうよう} and 紅葉{もみじ}?\n\nI want to chat about the autumn colors of leaves and I found these terms in\nJisho. The definition reads only こうよう or only もみじ which is confusing to me. I\nwas directed to the same page for both terms. Can I use them the same way?\nThank you for answering my question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T17:20:53.057",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71890",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T19:07:18.277",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T19:07:18.277",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"word-usage",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "Do the terms 紅葉{こうよう} and 紅葉{もみじ} mean the same thing?",
"view_count": 742
}
|
[
{
"body": "[Both readings are valid](https://kotobank.jp/jeword/%E7%B4%85%E8%91%89) for\nthe kanji `紅葉`.\n\nAccording to [this page](https://onimaru-m.com/kouyou-momiji/), the usage is\nas follows:\n\nこうよう is mostly used to refer to the red/yellow autumn leaves before they fall,\nas well as to the scenery/images [involving them].\n\nもみじ is mostly used to refer to the tree itself, or especially to the tree(s)\nthat show the autumn colors\n\nThe first word can be used as a verb, the second cannot, i.e.:\n\n〇 紅葉{こうよう}している楓{かえで} Autumn-colored maple tree(s)\n\n× 紅葉｛もみじ｝している [wrong usage]\n\nHowever the other way around is possible, i.e. you can call the trees _kouyou_\nwhen they show autumn colors.\n\nThe page then goes on to cover more related words, e.g. difference between かえで\nand もみじ trees and leaves.\n\nP.S. To describe the activity of maple-tree viewing/hunting, say 紅葉｛もみじ｝狩{が}り\nand **not** 紅葉｛こうよう｝狩{が}り",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T18:12:47.107",
"id": "71893",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-18T18:12:47.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "71890",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71890
|
71893
|
71893
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "ようやく has the following definitions in\n[romajidesu](http://www.romajidesu.com/dictionary/meaning-\nof-%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%82%84%E3%81%8F.html):\n\n> 1. ( _adv_ ) **finally; at last** \n> 「そっか」ウィリーはようやく納得した。 \n> \"Well, OK,\" Willie finally agreed.\n>\n> 2. **barely; narrowly; hardly; only just** \n> ９時２０分の電車にようやく間に合った。 \n> I barely made the 9:20 train.\n>\n> 3. **gradually; little by little; by degrees**\n>\n>\n\nI'm wondering, when is the last definition relevant?\n\nFor example, consider the following sentence:\n\n> ようやく理解できたんでしょうね。\n\nShould I read it as \"he finally understood what he had to do\" or \"he gradually\nunderstood what he had to do\"?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T17:56:10.493",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71892",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T06:46:03.003",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-18T19:13:37.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "35418",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Does ようやく mean \"gradually\"?",
"view_count": 376
}
|
[
{
"body": "> **ようやく** 理解できたんでしょうね。\n\nI'm not an expert, since I'm also learning how to translate Japanese language\nthrough internet. The biggest problem is so minimum info of the subject, so\njust by this line can be translated into many sentences.\n\n`んでしょう` -- can be translated to: I think, I guess, I suppose, probably, it\nseems, right?, isn't it, etc.\n\n`できた` -- can be translated to: can, capable, able,etc.\n\n`理解` -- can be translated to: understand, know, realized, comprehend, etc.\n\nSo, we need to read the earlier sentences to translate the sentence that you\nwere asking about.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-18T19:26:48.173",
"id": "71894",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T06:46:03.003",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T06:46:03.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "35087",
"parent_id": "71892",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> **ようやく** 理解できたんでしょうね。\n\nIn this sentence ようやく means \"finally\" \"at last\".\n\n\"It seems (s/he) finally understood.\"\n\n* * *\n\n> I'm wondering, when is the last definition relevant?\n\nHere are a few examples using ようやく in the sense of \"gradually\":\n\n> * 人々はようやくに列を乱して*（夏目漱石『趣味の遺伝』）--\n> [デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/226831/meaning/m0u/)\n> * 寒さもようやくゆるんできた --\n> [大辞林](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%BC%B8%E3%81%8F-653411)\n> * ようやく秋もたけなわになった _Autumn has gradually ripened._ -- プログレッシブ和英中辞典\n>\n\n* sounds pretty old-fashioned.\n\nようやく as \"gradually\" is usually used with a verb phrase expressing a change of\nstate, such as ～～てくる, ～～になる. \nようやく is not very commonly used in this sense in contemporary Japanese. Some\nmight say it's an outdated usage.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T00:23:30.347",
"id": "71897",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T03:40:13.783",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T03:40:13.783",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71892",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71892
| null |
71897
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71902",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While learning Katakana, I was instructed to try and translate my name Todd. I\nended up with トド.\n\nWhen I look it up online, I see トッド everywhere. ッ appears to be 'tsu'.\n\nI think I am missing something about combined characters. Can anyone provide\nsome clarification?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T00:28:40.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71898",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T01:18:24.150",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T01:18:24.150",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "35421",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"katakana",
"names",
"orthography",
"gemination"
],
"title": "What is the middle character in Todd (Katakana)",
"view_count": 145
}
|
[
{
"body": "The \"small _tsu_ \" ッ is not pronounced _tsu_ , but rather represents\n[gemination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemination).\n\nThe rule of thumb is that a final D gets transliterated as ッド (and a final T\nas ット)\n\n * bed → ベッド\n * pad → パッド\n * good → グッド\n * god → ゴッド\n\nAs you probably learned, this is part of a set of rules of thumb, which deal\nwith final consonants in transliteration, since (except for ン) there are no\n_kana_ without a vowel at the end.\n\nAs Japanese phonetics allow for /u/ to be almost silent, naturally _kana_ from\nthe /-u/-column in the _kana_ chart (e.g. ク, ス, フ, etc.) would be good\ncandidates to simulate final consonants. However, for /du/ or /tu/ this does\nnot work, as these are pronounced _zu_ and _tsu_ and so here one uses the\n_kana_ from the /-o/-column instead.\n\nI guess the small _tsu_ ッ is added to make the ド sound more \"dry\", i.e. more\nlike a consonant and less like a syllable.\n\nSee also\n\n * [How did \"little tsu\" become a lengthener?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/751/1628)\n * [Why was つ originally used to mark consonant gemination? When was that?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/39312/1628)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T01:17:02.217",
"id": "71902",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T01:17:02.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "71898",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71898
|
71902
|
71902
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 日本はユーラシア大陸の東にある島国 **で** 国の70%は山です。\n\nI translated it as something like \"Japan is an island country of east of the\nEurasia continent and 70% of it is made of mountains.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T00:37:11.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71900",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:42:06.660",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T00:51:31.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "35213",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"copula"
],
"title": "What's the usage of で in this sentence: 日本はユーラシア大陸の東にある島国で国の70%は山です。",
"view_count": 151
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 日本はユーラシア大陸の東にある島国 **で** 国の70%は山です。\n\nThe で is the continuative form of the copula だ. Your translation looks good to\nme. You can split the sentence into two, like this:\n\n> 日本はユーラシア大陸の東にある島国 **だ/です** 。（そして）国の70%は山です。\n\n\"Japan is an island country located to the east of the Eurasian Continent.\n(And) 70% of the land is mountains.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T00:54:09.187",
"id": "71901",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:42:06.660",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T08:42:06.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71900",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
71900
| null |
71901
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71904",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I read the following sentence on the shinkansen:\n\nかけ込み電車は危ないのでおやめください\n\nI looked up on Google but I could not find any mention of やめる being used\nwithout the て form. So why is it the case in that sentence?\n\nAlso, why is the stem of 込む used instead of the dictionary form? Why isn't\nthere any particle indicating motion towards the train? Why is the noun at the\nend of the first sentence instead of the beginning? Why is かけ used?\n\nIn my mind, this is what I would have expected:\n\n電車にかけ込むことは危ないのでやめてください。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T01:21:47.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71903",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:46:45.573",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35422",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "ください without て form and auxiliary verbs",
"view_count": 294
}
|
[
{
"body": "> おやめください\n\nお+[連用形]+ください is an honorific language of ～～てください. So おやめください is an honorific,\npoliter way of saying やめてください. It consists of: the honorific お + the\ncontinuative form of やめる + the imperative form of くださる.\n\nFor more on お/ご～～ください, you may want to see: \n[「ご覧ください」v.s.「ご覧をください」](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/58239/9831) \n[Is \"して\" dropped in this phrase\n\"ご利用{りよう}ください\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24221/9831)\n\n* * *\n\n> かけ込み電車\n\nIt should be a typo of かけ込み **[乗]{じょう}** [車]{しゃ}. かけ込み乗車 means かけ込んで乗車すること or\n走って電車に乗ること/乗り込むこと.\n\nかけ込み乗車 is a compound noun (複合名詞) consisting of かけ込み and 乗車. かけ込み is a noun\nform of かけ込む (deriving from the continuative form of かけ込む), which is a\ncompound verb (複合動詞) made of the verbs [駆]{か}ける + 込む, literally \"run/rush + go\ninto\" → \"rush in\".\n\nCompound nouns with a (probably) similar structure, off the top of my head:\n\n> 乗り越し運賃、詰め込み教育、投げ込み教材、居座り強盗、居眠り運転\n\nFor more on compound words (複合語), these threads might be of help: \n[Meaning of 盗み飲み](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/63360/9831) \n[Dropping particles in casual\nspeech/songs](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40729/9831)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T02:34:00.167",
"id": "71904",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:46:45.573",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T08:46:45.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71903",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
71903
|
71904
|
71904
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I can't seem to figure out how this is supposed to be parsed. For context, two\ncharacters broke up and went back to being friends, and when they get back\ntogether again, one of them says this. (This is from a manga, so I put spaces\nwhere there were column breaks and new lines in between the bubbles.)\n\n> なんかさ… 別れてから 友だちに戻って \n> 実はちょっと 嬉しいとき あったんだ \n> …なんか そーゆーの \n> 友だちとか 恋人より \n> もっとずっと 仲良しって 感じしない？\n\nMy first interpretation was that it was something like 友だちの方が恋人より仲良し, but I'm\nnot sure that that makes any sense. It seems like the opposite that 友だち would\nbe more 仲良し than 恋人.\n\nAnother interpretation was that it's そのときの方が友だちとか恋人とかより仲良し, but again I don't\nthink this makes much sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T02:46:45.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71905",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T14:09:22.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18035",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the relationship between 友だち, 恋人, and 仲良し in this dialog?",
"view_count": 756
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is like 私達は別れてから友達に戻ったから、私達は今、ただの友達よりも恋人よりも、仲良しだと感じる. \nそーゆーの here means the two who broke up but now are friends. \nShe feels more friendship now.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T09:57:07.843",
"id": "71912",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T09:57:07.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35021",
"parent_id": "71905",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "(S)he is indeed claiming that \"友だち would be more 仲良し than 恋人\".\n\nHere's my attempt at translation:\n\n> なんかさ… 別れてから 友だちに戻って 実はちょっと 嬉しいとき あったんだ\n\nHow would I put it... After we broke up and went back to just friends... I\nActually was a little happy.\n\n> …なんか そーゆーの 友だちとか 恋人より もっとずっと 仲良しって 感じしない？\n\nLike, you know... being friends... has this feeling of being much more close\nthan lovers, you see?\n\n* * *\n\nUnfortunately 仲良し does not have an exact equivalent in English and may be\nsomewhat difficult to distinguish from 友だち/friendship.\n\nThe root of it is 仲{なか} (relation; [close] relationship) which is also used in\nthe following words [among many others](https://jisho.org/search/%E4%BB%B2*):\n\n * 仲間{なかま} - friend/partner/colleague/comrade\n * 仲{なか}直{なお}り - reconciliation; making up (e.g. after a fight/break up)\n * 仲間{なかま}入{い}り - getting accepted into/joining a group (e.g. of friends)\n * 仲人{なこうど} - matchmaker\n * 仲間{なかま}はずれ - being left out; being ostracized\n\nAs another example, 仲{なか}がいい is also used when describing siblings or cousins\nwho help and respect each other, don't fight etc.\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT**\n\nBy popular demand, let me try to clarify the terms a little more.\n\nWhile 仲良し can be used as a type of relationship on its own (probably somewhat\nanalogous to \"best buddies\"), in this case it's used as a _qualifier_ on the\ncloseness/intimacy of the relationship and is not a stage by itself.\n\nBoth 友だち (friends) and 恋人 (lovers) can be 仲がいい (on good terms) or 仲が悪い (bad\nterms/falling out/cats and dogs). E.g. in the latter case the friends may have\nhad a quarrel over something or \"lovers\" could be in an abusive relationship\nand only stay together due to some external factor.\n\nNow, assuming you were on good terms (仲がいい/仲良し) in both cases, how would being\nfriends be a closer relationship (もっとずっと仲良し) than lovers?\n\nThis is a little difficult to answer without reading the work, but going by\nthe common tropes I've seen in manga, during the 恋人 stage there could be a\nmore heightened awareness of the other party or the opinion of the people\naround (緊張 - tension/nervousness), or the implied pressure of having to be\nconsiderate (気遣い), while 友だち is usually a more relaxed environment where each\ncan be closer to their true self and more open, which could make it feel more\nclose or intimate.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T10:36:59.107",
"id": "71913",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T19:49:02.720",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T19:49:02.720",
"last_editor_user_id": "3295",
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "71905",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "**How to parse 「友だちとか 恋人より もっとずっと 仲良し」**\n\nThe fundamental structure of the phrase is as follows:\n\n> A **とか** Bより C\n>\n> It is more C than A **and/or** B\n\nHere **とか** is used to **enumerate a list** of things (A and/or B). Based on\nthe structure, we can infer the meaning of the phrase as follows:\n\n> 友だち **とか** 恋人より もっとずっと仲良し\n>\n> We are in a relationship that is way more intimate than a friend **and/or**\n> lover.\n\n* * *\n\n**Relationship among 友だち, 恋人, and 仲良し**\n\nEven though 友だち and 恋人 are different **types** of interpersonal relationship,\nthey are **both** classified into 仲良し (an intimate relationship). Keeping this\nin mind, review how the relationship of the two characters has been changed\n(arrow ↓ denotes the flow of time):\n\n> **恋人**\n>\n> ↓ 「別れてから 友だちに戻って」\n>\n> **友だち**\n>\n> ↓ 「実はちょっと 嬉しいとき あった」\n>\n> **恋人**\n>\n> ↓ 「友だちとか 恋人より もっとずっと 仲良しって 感じ」\n\nDespite the change of their relationship **type** , they have **kept** their\nintimate relationship (仲良し) going, all the time. This implies a strong\nintimacy/bond that goes way beyond the types of their relationship (友だちとか 恋人より\nもっとずっと 仲良し). This is also why one of the characters said, \"To be honest, I was\na bit happy (実はちょっと 嬉しいとき あった).\"\n\nAll in all, the key is that they have **kept** 仲良し, no matter the type of\ntheir relationship (友だち or 恋人).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T11:27:48.623",
"id": "71915",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T21:52:23.047",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "35390",
"parent_id": "71905",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "The relationship between her and her boyfriend has three types.\n\nOne is just a friend. Second is a pair of lovers. Third is back to being\nfriends with her boyfriend after they broke up.\n\nShe says she feels that the third relationship is closer to him than the other\ntwo relationships. 仲良し means \"the relationship is close\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T04:59:57.057",
"id": "71936",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T14:09:22.570",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T14:09:22.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "71905",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71905
| null |
71913
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71911",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> この間も『のりこ **くん** 、お弁当買いに行ってくれないか』だって。\n\nI know that the suffix くん is used with boys' names, while ちゃん is used with\ngirls' names. But I've just listened to a dialogue between two girls, and one\nof them is talking about what her boss said to her.\n\nWhy is くん, not ちゃん, used with the girl's name？",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T03:29:38.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71907",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T09:02:13.717",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T07:33:45.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "31549",
"owner_user_id": "31549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"suffixes"
],
"title": "The suffix くん with a girl's name",
"view_count": 342
}
|
[
{
"body": "> one of them is talking about what her boss said to her.\n\nThis is very important context. `くん` can be used by a boss for a subordinate\nregardless of their gender. Outside of workplace, it can also be used in other\nhierarchical settings, e.g. a teacher talking to a student or a school club's\npresident speaking to a club member.\n\nHowever, as [mentioned by\n@naruto](https://komachi.yomiuri.co.jp/t/2010/0325/303778.htm), especially in\nworkplace it seems to be going out of fashion, in part exactly due to the\npotential confusion about the person's gender. The gender-neutral さん is likely\nthe better option nowadays.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T09:02:13.717",
"id": "71911",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T09:02:13.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "71907",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71907
|
71911
|
71911
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Sentence:\n\n> 先生、こちらは学校の友達のJennyです。\n\nThis sentence is an example of の's ability to convey a hierarchy of\ninformation, but I still don't get how you would know where to put the two のs.\nHow do you use の in this sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T06:59:36.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71908",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:32:00.110",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T08:30:11.240",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Particle の and hierarchy of info",
"view_count": 113
}
|
[
{
"body": "の can represent two different types of relationship.\n\n 1. belonging (AのB = A's B, B of A)\n 2. apposition (AのB = A that is B)\n\nIn your example, \"学校の友達\" describes the former type of relationship (i.e., 友達\nbelonging to the 学校), and \"友達のJenny\" describes the latter type of relationship\n(i.e., \"My friend Jenny\"). You have to get used to it.\n\n(BTW, 'of' in English is similar; compare \"The city of London\" and \"A city of\nUK\".)\n\nSee this question for details: [What's the difference between 日本人の学生 and 日本の学生\n?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40892/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T07:40:42.557",
"id": "71909",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T08:32:00.110",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T08:32:00.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71908",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71908
| null |
71909
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71917",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What do Japanese see when they look at the moon? In America, we see the face\nof a man. Is it the same in Japan? A fellow Japanese learner asked me this\nquestion online.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T10:57:12.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71914",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T12:43:55.903",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T12:40:26.423",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -6,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"culture"
],
"title": "What Japanese term would be used to describe the image that Japanese see when they look at the moon?",
"view_count": 219
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's usually seen as \"mochi-pounding rabbits\" -> 月の兎\n(<https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9C%88%E3%81%AE%E5%85%8E>)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T12:02:52.537",
"id": "71917",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T12:43:55.903",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T12:43:55.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "35365",
"owner_user_id": "35365",
"parent_id": "71914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71914
|
71917
|
71917
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Please I need some help here. I am all in on learning to mimic how Japanese\nspeak and write as well as learning proper grammar. Just knowing vocal and\ngrammar will lead to unusual and unnatural speech, but sometimes I run into a\nconcept that really confuses me. This sentence is an example.\n\nレポートを書かなければなりません。\n\nI understand all the words in this sentence. I understand that it means, “I\nhave to write a report.” My problem is my head is having trouble wrapping\nitself around WHY does it mean, “I have to write a report.”\n\nWhen I see this sentence or sentences like it, my brain is torn in half trying\nto parse it properly.\n\nCan someone please take the time to explain to me how and why this sentence\nand others like it communicate a requirement to do something?\n\n[Origin of ~なければ\nならない](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11788/origin-\nof-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%91%E3%82%8C%E3%81%B0-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\nis a similar question, but it doesn't really ask why which is what I am\nasking. Knowing it is so doesn't help me understand why it's so and how to\nplug into my brain how to parse it without having to stop and deconstruct the\npuzzle of it.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T12:23:17.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71918",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T13:34:53.903",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T13:34:53.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "27811",
"owner_user_id": "27811",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"syntax"
],
"title": "レポートを書かなければなりません。",
"view_count": 181
}
|
[
{
"body": "The components are:\n\n書く - To write\n\n書かない - Not to write\n\n書かなければ - If I/you/etc. don't write\n\n書かなければなりません - If you don't write it's not good\n\nThe literal meaning is something like \"If you don't write it's not good\", so\nyou must write.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T13:10:24.023",
"id": "71920",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T13:10:24.023",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"parent_id": "71918",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71918
| null |
71920
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a karate-do practitioner. And I love the meaning of DO (way). I'm building\na cyclist group. And I want to call it \"The way of two wheels\". Does it make\nsense to call it Niwa-Do?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T15:02:42.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71921",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T17:39:54.597",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T15:41:28.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "35430",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "Way of the bicycle",
"view_count": 343
}
|
[
{
"body": "二輪 (in the sense of \"two wheels / bicycle\") is read にりん, so \"The way of two\nwheels\" could be...\n\n> [二輪道]{にりんどう}\n\nIt looks like some people are already using it, eg\n[「大日本二輪道連合会」](http://gmcu.fc2web.com/),\n[「二輪道カップ」](https://www.google.co.uk/search?biw=1093&bih=500&sxsrf=ACYBGNQ8vDcE3qf_AgDHB5EpYLR1UUKSug%3A1568907447614&ei=t6CDXfuVJcOchwPgyKLICQ&q=%22%E4%BA%8C%E8%BC%AA%E9%81%93%E3%82%AB%E3%83%83%E3%83%97%22&oq=%22%E4%BA%8C%E8%BC%AA%E9%81%93%E3%82%AB%E3%83%83%E3%83%97%22&gs_l=psy-\nab.3..0i4i37j0j0i30l3.12140.14473..14955...0.0..0.220.1476.0j8j1......0....1..gws-\nwiz.......0i7i30j0i7i5i30j0i7i4i30j0i4i37i32j0i4i30.O_gxDE6xMoE&ved=0ahUKEwi7zebYm93kAhVDzmEKHWCkCJk4ChDh1QMICw&uact=5) \n(It seems they're using 二輪 in the sense of \"motorcycle / 自動二輪\", though...)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T15:40:12.447",
"id": "71922",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-19T17:39:54.597",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T17:39:54.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71921",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
71921
| null |
71922
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "1. What are the differences in meaning between these three sentences? \n\n> えいがはなにを **みましょう** か。 \n> えいがはなにを **みます** か。 \n> えいがはなにを **みません** か。 \n>\n\n 2. Does the last sentence even make sense?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T17:15:05.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71923",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T15:08:48.913",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T14:50:21.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage",
"questions"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 「何を...ましょうか」, 「何を...ますか」 and 「何を...ませんか」?",
"view_count": 429
}
|
[
{
"body": "I will answer first your 2nd question, and after that I will address your 1st\nquestion.\n\n* * *\n\n## **2. Does the last sentence even make sense?**\n\nNo, the 3rd sentence does not make sense. Only the 1st and the 2nd sentences\nmake sense:\n\n> えいがはなにをみますか。Regarding movies, what will [you/we] watch?\n>\n> えいがはなにをみましょうか。Regarding movies, shall we [you/we] watch?\n\nUsing ません or ましょうか turns the question more into a proposal:\n\n> ラーメンを食【た】べ **ませんか** 。Won't [you/we] eat ramen? \n> ラーメンを食【た】べ **ましょう** 。Let's eat ramen. \n>\n\nIt does not make sense:\n\n> ~~えいがはなにをみ **ませんか** 。Regarding movies, what movie won't [you/we] watch?~~ \n>\n\nTo propose the listener to watch a movie with ませんか or ましょうか, you can also use:\n\n 1. なにか (it means \"something\"), and drop を: \n\n> えいがは **なにか** みませんか。Regarding movies, won't [you/we] watch some [movie]? \n> えいがは **なにか** みましょうか。Regarding movies, Let's watch some [movie]? \n>\n\n 2. The actual title of the movie: \n\n> えいがは **Star Wars** をみませんか。Regarding movies, won't [you/we] watch Star Wars? \n> えいがは **Star Wars** をみましょうか。Regarding movies, Let's watch Star Wars? \n>\n\n 3. Remove えいがは and use えいが as the object of 見【み】る directly: \n\n> えいがをみませんか。Won't [you/we] watch Star Wars? \n> えいがをみましょうか。Let's watch Star Wars? \n>\n\n* * *\n\n## 1. What are the differences in meaning between these three sentences?\n\nIf you compare the three sentences used as a proposal (as explained in the\nprevious section), **they mean the same, but the difference is in the _level\nof politeness_ of each proposal**. In the Japanese language, in general, the\n_less_ direct you are the _more_ polite you sound. So, arranged from the\n_more_ polite to the _less_ polite:\n\n> 1) えいがは **なにか** みませんか。Regarding movies, won't [you/we] watch some [movie]? \n> 2) えいがは **なにか** みましょうか。Regarding movies, let's watch some [movie]?. \n> 3) えいがは **なにか** みますか。Regarding movies, will [you/we] watch some [movie]?. \n>\n\n(1)(ませんか) is a _negative_ sentence and therefore it is the most _indirect_.\nFor this reason, it is the politest one.\n\n(3)(ますか) is a _positive_ sentence and therefore it is the most _direct_. For\nthis reason, it is the less polite. To be honest, I don't think it is\nfrequently used to make a proposal because it sounds too direct. I guess it is\nmore used as a regular question.\n\n(2)(ましょうか) is somewhat in the middle. ましょう is the standard grammar to make\nproposals in Japanese. Worth noting that if you don't add the か to ましょう, it is\nstill valid as a proposal sentence, but ましょうか is politer than ましょう because,\nagain, turning it a question by adding か makes it more indirect and therefore,\npoliter. So, adding ましょう to the comparison, from the **more** polite to the\n**less** polite:\n\n> 1) えいがは **なにか** みませんか。Regarding movies, won't [you/we] watch some [movie]? \n> 2) えいがは **なにか** みましょうか。Regarding movies, let's watch some [movie]?. \n> 3) えいがは **なにか** みましょう。Regarding movies, let's watch some [movie]. \n> 4) えいがは **なにか** みますか。Regarding movies, will [you/we] watch some [movie]?. \n>",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T13:40:59.117",
"id": "71950",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T15:08:48.913",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T15:08:48.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "32952",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"parent_id": "71923",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "えいがはなにをみましょうか implies an invitation. しましょう(か) means \"Let's\". It means\n(私達は)何の映画をみようか(\"What movie should we watch?\" Or \"Let's watch a movie. What is\na good movie to watch?\"),\n\nえいがはなにをみますか is a question. It is \"What movies do you watch?\"\n\nえいがはなにをみませんか is also a question. You are asking someone what movies he doesn't\nwatch. However, it is rarely used and a bit unnatural. I say どんな映画は見ないのですか.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T13:51:54.690",
"id": "71952",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:59:48.187",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T13:59:48.187",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "71923",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71923
| null |
71952
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71958",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have the following sentence from a manga, 「問題集作ったくらいでなんだっていうのよ。そんなの…いらないわ」,\nand I am not sure what **「でなんだっていう」** is doing here. I think I may be mainly\nthrown off by the **「で」** at the beginning.\n\nContext:\n\n> 「これ、フータローが私たちのために作ってくれた。 受け取って」\n>\n> 「問題集作ったくらいで、なんだっていうのよ。そんなの…いらないわ」\n\nSetting: 5 girls are being tutored and were each given a set of practice\nproblems. One of the girls is upset that she has to complete the practice\nproblems and study, so she is heading upstairs to her room. One of the other\ngirls stops her on the stairs and attempts to hand the test back to her. The\ngirl who is refusing to take the test then (I believe) thinks this sentence in\nher head. Also worth noting that she has an angry look on her face and is\nclenching her first.\n\nHere's my attempted breakdown:\n\n> 「問題集作った」 - Made collection of problems\n>\n> 「くらい」 - degree or extent of how lengthy the set of problems is. (maybe\n> translated as \"just\")\n>\n> 「で」 - て form of copula ???\n>\n> 「なんだっていうの」 - なんだ is explanatory の + copula (the fact is/ the matter is) and\n> っていう is quoting what was introduced before, allowing us to refer to that\n> clause. Then の nominalizes all of this into a noun for us.\n>\n> 「そんなの」 - literally That kind of thing but meaning something like \"c'monn\"\n\nSo I think she is thinking something like, _\" (The fact is) it's just a\ncollection of problems. c'monn\"_\n\nAgain, I'm not sure what form **「で」** plays in this, so I'm afraid my\ntranslation may be off. I'm also not sure if I properly understood what\n**「くらい」** is doing here either. I think my translation fails to capture the\nanger she has as well.\n\nAny and all help is appreciated.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T17:22:46.693",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71924",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T17:17:44.287",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"rhetorical-questions"
],
"title": "Help needed breaking down で + なんだっていう in this sentence",
"view_count": 331
}
|
[
{
"body": "Let's make it general.\n\n`なんだっていうのよ` has emotional emphasis and woman-specific parts like `よ`. So it'll\nbe like `なんだっていうんだ`, `なんだというのだ`. Or simply `なんだ`.\n\n## Examples\n\nIt can be used like\n\n> [少]{すこ}し[外]{そと}を[走]{はし}ったからなんだっていうんだ。その[程度]{ていど}じゃ[痩]{や}せやしないぞ。 (You ran\n> outside a bit? That won't make you slim. / It's not effective to your\n> weight.)\n>\n> [彼]{かれ}は「[努力]{どりょく}して[解決]{かいけつ}しました」って[言]{い}っていた。それがなんだ。[意味]{いみ}なんてありゃしない。\n> (He goes like \"I've managed to solve it\". So what? It's totally nonsense.)\n\nIn above cases, the speaker underrates another person's activity. More\nstrongly, despising.\n\n> あの[国]{くに}が[戦争]{せんそう}をしたからといってなんだというのだ。[我々]{われわれ}には[関係]{かんけい}ない。 (We won't\n> care if the country wages a war with another country.)\n\nIn this case the speaker has nothing to do with something / is not interested\nin something.\n\n## The original issue\n\n> [風太郎]{ふうたろう}「(snip)…ただでさえお[前]{まえ}は[出遅]{でおく}れてるんだ、[四人]{よにん}にしっかり[追]{お}いつこうぜ」\n> (Your score is lower than other sisters. Let's study hard and make it up.)\n>\n>\n> [二乃]{にの}「うるさいわね。[何]{なに}も[知]{し}らないくせに。とやかく[言]{い}われる[筋合]{すじあ}いはないわ。あんたなんか、ただの[雇]{やと}われ[家庭教師]{かていきょうし}。[部外者]{ぶがいしゃ}よ」\n> (Shut up. You know nothing and have nothing to do with me. You are just a\n> hired private teacher. An outsider.)\n>\n> ...\n>\n> [三玖]{みく}「これ、フータローが[私]{わたし}たちのために作ってくれた。[受]{う}け[取]{と}って」 (Here, Futaro has\n> made it for us. Take this.)\n>\n> [二乃]{にの}「[問題集]{もんだいしゅう}[作]{つく}ったくらいで、なんだっていうのよ。そんなの…いらないわ」 (He made a\n> question collections... So what? I don't need this.)\n\nThanks to @BJCUAI, it seems it's from 『[五等分]{ごとうぶん}の[花嫁]{はなよめ}』, a popular\nmanga.\n\nIt's hard to translate it in simple sentence. Nino is angry to him (Futaro)\nand she spat out her emotion at Miku. It's clear that the question collections\nare useful to study, but Nino won't accept that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T17:12:04.177",
"id": "71958",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T17:17:44.287",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5353",
"parent_id": "71924",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71924
|
71958
|
71958
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tbMMZ.png)\n\nI am not sure what this means...That line is said by the speaker to the\nlistener.\n\n「諦観{ていかん}」 = resignation \n\n「削{そ}ぐ」 = to discourage; to weaken; to reduce (here I found that this verb can\nbe written like this 「殺{そ}ぐ」with the kanji that it usually for 'kill' and I\nthink here it was used to give it a more serious nuance) \n\n「迷{まよ}う」= to lose one's way; to waver; to hesitate; \n\nHow would 「諦観{ていかん}が迷{まよ}いを殺{そ}いでくれてたんだ」 translate...? \n\n_\"Your resignation weakened me?\"_ (I am so unsure of what the speaker is\nsaying)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T20:38:47.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71925",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T08:21:25.970",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T03:07:37.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "22175",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "諦観{ていかん}が迷{まよ}いを殺{そ}いでくれてたんだ meaning",
"view_count": 216
}
|
[
{
"body": "諦観 has two meanings, “resignation” and “clear vision” \nIt means “My clear vision used to extinguish my hesitation.”\n\nHe maybe has lost his clear vision and now hesitates to do something or he has\na clear vision but it can’t extinguish his hesitation.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T04:41:04.480",
"id": "71935",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T04:41:04.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35021",
"parent_id": "71925",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Let's make the structure clear:\n\n * 諦観が ( **Subject** ) \n * 諦観 \nYou are right that the word now means \"resignation\", or _an \"it can't be\nhelped\" feeling_. Its true meaning is, however, embracing Buddhist truths.\nSince Buddhism emphasizes detachment from worldly desires, (secular) people\nstarted to use it that way.\n\n * が ← the nominative particle (marks subject)\n * 迷いを ( **Object** ) \n * 迷い \nWhile it's true that it comes from 迷う, the word form is a verbal noun that\nmeans \"indecision; hesitation; perplexity\".\n\n * を ← the accusative particle (marks object)\n * 殺いでくれてたんだ ( **Verb** or predicate) \n * 殺ぐ \nIt means \"to brake; reduce; slacken; lighten\" and has little to do with \"kill\"\nmeaning of 殺. Although they share the same kanji, the murder 殺 is read in\non'yomi サツ/セツ (e.g. 殺人 \"homicide\") and the reduction 殺 is サイ (e.g. 相殺\n\"offset\").\n\n * 殺ぐ (dictionary form)\n * 殺いで \"reducing...\" (te-form)\n * 殺いでくれる \"reduce for me\" ([beneficial](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/receiving-and-giving/#2))\n * 殺いでくれて \"reducing ... for me\"\n * 殺いでくれて（い）る \"be reducing for me\"\n * 殺いでくれて（い）た \"was / have been reducing for me\"\n * 殺いでくれて（い）たんだ \"it is that ... was / have been reducing for me\" ([explanatory](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5398/7810))\n\nAs a whole, it'd mean something like:\n\n> (The fact is that,) the resignation used to lessen the dither, thankfully.\n\n_Whose_ resignation and _whose_ dithering they are talking about, is unknown\nfrom the piece, but both should be the same when unexpressed. No matter who it\nis, くれる indicates that it is the speaker that was happy with that.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T08:15:06.363",
"id": "71940",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T08:21:25.970",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T08:21:25.970",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "71925",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71925
| null |
71940
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71928",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Some time ago I was speaking with a Japanese teacher, and to say \"A white\nchocolate dog\" she said `犬のホワイトチョコレート`; I asked, shouldn't it be\n`ホワイトチョコレートの犬`, since `犬のホワイトチョコレート` sounded to me like \"A white chocolate of\ndog\" or \"Dog's white chocolate\", but she confirmed `犬` first. I was unable to\nunderstand why `犬` goes as first element, though, I think something about `犬`\nbeing the main concept. Any ideas?\n\nIf it does is `犬のホワイトチョコレート`, how do you understand if something like\n`男のホワイトチョコレート` means \"A man's white chocolate\" or \"A man of white chocolate\"?\n\nEdit: the meaning was - and it was clear for both the teacher and me - a\nedible dog made out of white chocolate; there was no misunderstading about\nthat.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T22:41:15.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71927",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-21T11:32:32.023",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-19T23:41:22.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "35362",
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Word order in 犬のホワイトチョコレート",
"view_count": 172
}
|
[
{
"body": "The particle の has many roles.\n\n犬のホワイトチョコレート can potentially mean:\n\n 1. a dog named White Chocolate (compare トナカイのルドルフ \"Rudolph the reindeer\" and 友達のジョン \"my friend John\")\n 2. dog-shaped white chocolate\n 3. white chocolate owned by a certain dog\n 4. white chocolate made specially for dogs\n\nホワイトチョコレートの犬 can potentially mean:\n\n 1. an edible dog made of white chocolate\n 2. a (living) dog that is somehow like white chocolate\n 3. a dog owned by a person called White Chocolate\n 4. a dog born in a place called White Chocolate\n\nI feel \"a white chocolate dog\" is a little confusing. Maybe she took it as \"a\ndog called White Chocolate\" but you meant an edible dog? If you explain it in\nother words, you may get a different response from her.\n\nAs for 男のホワイトチョコレート, I probably take it as \"special white chocolate for men\"\nif there is no context, but it's equally ambiguous.\n\n**EDIT:** If the intended meaning is \"an (edible) dog made of white\nchocolate\", both 犬のホワイトチョコレート and ホワイトチョコレートの犬 can potentially refer to that,\nbut the former is like \"dog(-shaped) chocolate\" whereas the latter is like\n\"chocolate(-made) dog\". The final noun is the main noun. Anyway, you should\navoid ambiguous phrases like these unless there is clear context. Usually it's\nmuch better to say 犬の形のチョコレート or チョコレートでできた犬.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T23:15:01.433",
"id": "71928",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-21T11:32:32.023",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-21T11:32:32.023",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "71927",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
71927
|
71928
|
71928
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I came across this line today which left me a bit confused:\n\n> 彼らには子分を二人もやられてる。\n\nThe speaker is referring to men from a gang. I've struggled with the meaning\nof やる outside of its most basic usage, but I've got \"They are deceiving two\nhenchmen\" and \"Two henchmen were killed by them\" and \"They've got two henchmen\nwith them.\"\n\nAm I on the right track, or does this mean something else entirely?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-19T23:33:29.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71929",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:21:39.077",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T08:38:30.527",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "35434",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"verbs",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "What does やられてる mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 579
}
|
[
{
"body": "やられる here means “be defeated”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T08:32:16.483",
"id": "71941",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T08:32:16.483",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35021",
"parent_id": "71929",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The やる here can mean \"to kill\" or \"to beat up\", depending on context. \nSee: [What does やっちまえ mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14852/9831)\n\nやられる is its passive form, \"to be killed/beaten up\". \nやられて(い)る here means \"to have been killed/beaten up\".\n\n* * *\n\n> 彼ら **に** は子分 **を** 二人もや **られ** てる。\n\nThis is Possessor's Passive structure (持ち主の受身), a kind of Indirect Passive\nstructure (間接受身構文). E.g.\n\n> （私が）泥棒 **に** 財布 **を** 盗ま **れ** た。 ← Possessor's Passive / Indirect Passive \n> Often translated as: \"I had my wallet stolen by a thief.\" \n> cf. 泥棒に財布 **が** 盗まれた。 ← Direct Passive (直接受身) / Normal Passive \n> \"The/My wallet was stolen by a thief.\" \n> (→ Active voice: 「泥棒が財布を盗んだ。」 \"A thief stole the/my wallet.\")\n\nThe 子分 refers to _the speaker's_ men.\n\nSo the sentence literally means:\n\n> \"I had two of my men killed/beaten up by them.\" \n> → \"They've killed two of my men.\" / \"They've beaten up two of my men.\"\n\n(The Direct Passive equivalent would be 「彼らには子分 **が** 二人もやられてる。」, and its\nactive voice sentence would be 「彼らは子分を二人もやっている。」 )\n\nFor more on Possessor's Passive, you may want to read:\n\n * [How is the passive form used with を?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/69169/9831)\n * [Does indirect passive allow for the を in “四方を海に囲まれる”](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/27566/9831)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T09:24:02.717",
"id": "71944",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:21:39.077",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T13:21:39.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71929",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71929
| null |
71944
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "72024",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English there is the idiomatic expression \"with high stakes.\" There is also\nthe adjective high-stakes, which means involving serious risks if there is no\nsuccess. Is there a similar idiom in Japanese?\n\n> a \"high-stakes\" negotiation\n>\n> a conversation with \"high stakes\"",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T02:24:09.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71930",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-23T16:16:23.370",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-23T16:16:23.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "31549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"translation",
"idioms"
],
"title": "What is the term for the English idiom of \"with high stakes\"?",
"view_count": 292
}
|
[
{
"body": "I see more idiomatic phrase like\n[乾坤{けんこん}一擲{いってき}](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%B9%BE%E5%9D%A4%E4%B8%80%E6%93%B2/)\nの大勝負{おおしょうぶ}。\n\n優勝をかけた敵地・福岡でのホークスとのプレーオフ。勝てば優勝という乾坤一擲の試合.\n\n\" _Playoff game for the Championship competing with Hawks at Fukuoka as away\nteam. All or nothing game with high stakes to hit the jackpot._ \"\n\nor\n\n一世{いっせい}一代{いちだい}の大勝負{おおしょうぶ}に出る is also used often when you are taking risk a\nlot.\n\n「だから **一世一代の大勝負** に出て投資用にアパートを買っても、入居者がいなかったら毎月赤字を垂れ流すリスクがあった。」the sentence\nfrom [「利回り」で金を生む家・車・時計の選び方｜新R25](https://r25.jp/article/724072821109731641).\n\n\" _If you bought an apartment with high stakes for an investment and found no\ntenants, you had risk to face deficit every month._ \"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-23T11:40:00.227",
"id": "72024",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-23T11:50:00.160",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-23T11:50:00.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71930",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
71930
|
72024
|
72024
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71933",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to understand the usage of 二つ下 in the following sentence.\n\nシンちゃんは私の二つ下のいとこです\n\nWhen I read it without 下 it sounds like:\n\nShin-chan is my second cousin or something along those lines.\n\nThe issues is I don't understand the usage of 二つ let alone 二つ下 in this\nsentence.\n\nWouldn't it usually be written as シンちゃんの私のはとこです\n\nI'm a bit confused here.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T03:42:12.413",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71931",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T05:54:31.767",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T05:54:31.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "35435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"word-usage",
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "二つ下のいとこ instead of はとこ",
"view_count": 115
}
|
[
{
"body": "In 明鏡’s definition for 下:\n\n> ❺ 地位・能力・程度・ **年齢** などが劣っていること。また、その人。 「3歳下の弟」\n\nNamely, 下 can refer to the fact that someone’s position, ability, level, or\nage is lower. In your case it’s age.\n\nIn the example it uses 歳 instead of つ for the counter, but つ (as well as 個)\nwork for age just fine, albeit slightly informal.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T04:14:03.347",
"id": "71933",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T04:14:03.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "71931",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71931
|
71933
|
71933
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71943",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When 添付される is used for physical objects. Does it mean \"included with\" or\nphysically \"attached to\"? So far I've only seen 添付 used with email and paper\ndocuments, for which no distinction needs to be made.\n\nFor example, if you are thinking about buying a machine, say a CNC, and the\ndescription of the product says\n\n> 設定表は本体に添付されています。\n\nDoes it mean that the settings table is physically attached to the machine, or\nis it just included with it?\n\n**Edit** \nI finally found a picture to help explain the kind of situation I have in\nmind. \nSee the safety sheet on [this\nmachine](http://vintagemachinery.org/photoindex/detail.aspx?id=6050). It is in\na plastic folder that is screwed to the machine. Would this be considered\n「本体に添付されています。」? Now, picture the plastic folder hanging from the machine with\nstring through one of the holes on the left. Would that be considered\n「本体に添付されています。」? \nI have to ask with this much detail because I was given the Japanese sentence\n`設定表は本体に添付されています。` with the English translation `the settings table is\nattached to the machine.` I have to change the English if \"attached\" is not\ncorrect.\n\nThank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T07:15:10.160",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71939",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:49:36.143",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T11:25:12.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "1761",
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "添付される for physical objects. Does it mean \"included with\" or \"attached to\"?",
"view_count": 213
}
|
[
{
"body": "I know nothing about CNC or its 設定表, but I believe it is packed together.\n添付【てんぷ】 always means \"place it alongside\", so you should find it separately.\nIf it were built in or written in the machine's memory, I think they would use\n内蔵 \"store inside\".\n\nAs an aside, a considerable number of people confuse 添付 with 貼付 \"stick on\"\n(whose correct pronunciation is ちょうふ). In this case, you may find it on any\nside of the product, or the box. But it doesn't change the situation here.\n\n**Edit:**\n\n> _It is in a plastic folder that is screwed to the machine. Would this be\n> considered 「本体に添付されています。」? Now, picture the plastic folder hanging from the\n> machine with string through one of the holes on the left. Would that be\n> considered 「本体に添付されています。」?_\n\nThe setting seen in the pictures you provided is not the typical case we use\n添付 at all, unless the paper can be freely taken out from the folder, or the\nfolder from the machine. 貼付 might be somewhat better, but we would usually\ncall it 固定されている or simply 本体にある (if nailed); 連結されている or 結ばれている (if permanently\ntied). You can also use 付属, where it just means \"come with\", regardless of\nform.\n\n添付 in the usual sense implies that the attachment is given in a physically\nseparate medium, unlike the English _attach_.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T09:17:59.527",
"id": "71943",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:19:16.277",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T13:19:16.277",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "71939",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "According to the patent :\n[警告{けいこく}表示{ひょうじ}機能付{きのうつき}数値制御装置{すうちせいぎょそうち}](https://astamuse.com/ja/published/JP/No/1996022314)\nby DMG森精機{もりせいき}. The safety procedure : 注意書{ちゅういが}き, attached to the bottom\nleft in the image, is a bit blurry though, it looks similar to the machine in\nthe image you provided. So, I think the exprssion 「貼付{ちょうふ}」as the other\nanswer provided, 「貼{は}られている」 basically fit with your question. The following\nis the excerpt from the patent. The bold part describes warning labels and\nsafety procedure is attached to the CNC.\n\n「工作機械には、その工作機械を正しく、安全に操作するために取扱説明書などが付属しており、又、図５や図６に示すように、工作機械本体の警告、注意などが必要と思われる主要箇所には、誤操作を防止したり、機械を安全に使用するための\n**警告ラベルや注意書きなどが貼られている** 。これらの警告ラベルなどによりオペレータの誤操作などを防止しようとするものである。」\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/w8Zp5.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T13:49:36.143",
"id": "71951",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:49:36.143",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71939",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71939
|
71943
|
71943
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71949",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have been studying pitch accent for a few months now, primarily from the NHK\nAccent Dictionary. My Japanese is not terribly strong, so it took me a while\nto muddle through the explanations and figure out all the appendices -\ncounters, compound nouns, auxiliaries, etc. - but I got there in the end.\nHowever, there is one thing that is just completely stumping me: honorifics,\nas in 〜さん, ～さま, 〜ちゃん, 〜君, etc.\n\nI searched the internet multiple times, unsuccessfully. I have searched\nthrough every location in the book and I can't find anything. The only other\nthing that I can't see detailed in the book is case particles, but I\nunderstand how they work. I ended up putting several names+honorific into the\nSuzuki-kun Prosody Tutor and observing that they _seem_ to work as particles.\nAfter discovering that, I did manage to find this:\n\n'For instance, the very important endings ～さん, ～ちゃん, and ～さま behave like most\nparticles. The pitch does not change. If the name is 頭高型, it still is with\nthem. With 君, there is typically no change, but if the name is 平板型, the\nresulting phrase may become 尾高型. Lastly, titles tend to be accented, but they\ndon't have to be when the surname is accented.'\n(<https://www.imabi.net/pitch.htm>)\n\nHowever, there's no source and no corroboration from anywhere else. Can\nanybody confirm this or possibly point me in the direction of official\nsources?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T09:04:38.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71942",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:35:36.890",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35438",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"names",
"honorifics",
"pitch-accent"
],
"title": "Pitch Accent for Honorifics",
"view_count": 751
}
|
[
{
"body": "I have just checked the matter in my _Handbook of Japanese Phonetics and\nPhonology_ , Chapter 11 ‘The Phonology of Japanese Accent’ (as it describes,\nsay, the prosody of [氏]{し} or [家]{け} suffixes, it would perhaps be and\ninteresting read to you as well). It refers to the following two primary\nsources:\n\n 1. The MIT dissertation by William J. Poser, 1984: **The phonetics and phonology of tone and intonation in Japanese**. It is not available officially, but, luckily, Mr. Poser has provided [the complete text](https://www.academia.edu/2667912/The_phonetics_and_phonology_of_tone_and_intonation_in_Japanese) on his Academia.edu page! Unfortunately, it has nothing to say exactly on the matter under question.\n\n 2. Timothy J. Vance 1987 book, **An introduction to Japanese phonology**. It is probably accessible somewhere... except Amazon purchase by an unreasonable price... and might contain the solution.\n\nHowever, S. E. Martin with his **A reference grammar of Japanese** has\nprobably answers to everything, and, sure enough, now it does. Right on page\n1056!\n\n> The most general title for people is さん, a shortening of the formal version\n> さま; there are also hypocoristic (endearing) versions ちゃん and ちゃま. Though\n> often written with a hyphen, as if attached as a suffix, this title -\n> variously translated as 'Mr, Miss, Mrs, Ms,...' <...> - **has no affect on\n> the accent of the word with which it forms a phrase** (emphasis mine); thus\n> it is a syntactic reduction (with obligatorily dropped juncture) and is best\n> treated as a separate word, a \"reduced title\": [さとうさん]{HLLLL}/[さま]{LL},\n> [やまださん]{LHHHH}/さま{HH}, [ハルポマルクスさん]{LHHHLLLLL}/[さま]{LL} 'Mr Harpo Marx',\n> [よしこちゃん]{HLLLLL}/[ちゃま]{LLL} 'little Miss Yoshiko', [けんちゃん]{HLLLL}/[ちゃま]{LLL}\n> 'our Ken'.... <...> The title san can be followed by the collectivizer たち\n> (§2.7): [やまださんたち]{LHHHHHL} (also [やまださんたち]{LHHHLLL}?)...\n\nHere conversion to SE-accepted accent notation is mine.\n\nFurthermore, the classic by Eleanor Harz Jorden, et al., **Japanese: The\nspoken language** (1987) spenda a lot of time on accent and might cover it.\nVol. 1, page 26, its introduction as **-Sañ** (accentless) points at the same.\n\nTL/DR: assume that -さん and its relatives do not alter the accent of word (if\nexisted, retains at the same place, if was absent, also absent). It MAY be\naccented due to further affixation (such as with たち) and (possibly) there are\nexceptions.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T12:36:17.163",
"id": "71949",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:35:36.890",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T13:35:36.890",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "27977",
"parent_id": "71942",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
71942
|
71949
|
71949
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71948",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between 箸【はし】 and 割【わ】り箸【ばし】? Do both terms refer to\nchopsticks?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T12:16:14.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71946",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T12:35:51.997",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T12:35:51.997",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 箸【はし】 and 割【わ】り箸【ばし】?",
"view_count": 154
}
|
[
{
"body": "割り箸 are disposable (usually wooden) chopsticks you will get in a restaurant.\nThey are made from one piece of wood. You will have to break them (割る) into\ntheir two parts to use them.\n\n箸 is the general term.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T12:24:58.300",
"id": "71948",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T12:34:03.617",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T12:34:03.617",
"last_editor_user_id": "35365",
"owner_user_id": "35365",
"parent_id": "71946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71946
|
71948
|
71948
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "In a short story I'm reading (or trying to) I found this sentence:\n\n> 屋上の手すりから、ひらひらと風になびくタータンチェックのひだスカート **と** 、そこからにょっきりと生えた二本の脚 **と** が見えた\n\nI think the general meaning is the character saw from the rooftop's handrail\nsomeone's legs protuding from her skirt fluttering in the wind, but I can't\nunderstand what the two `と` in bold means, and how would the sentence's\nmeaning be different without them.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T12:23:34.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71947",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T13:33:49.900",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Meaning of と in this sentence",
"view_count": 62
}
|
[] |
71947
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71954",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I order a pizza, would I use ichimai 一枚 to order a slice or the whole\nthing? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T14:47:42.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71953",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-27T19:52:52.980",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-27T18:00:07.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"words",
"counters"
],
"title": "Would the same counter be used to order a slice of pizza and a whole one?",
"view_count": 1196
}
|
[
{
"body": "As for pizza, **枚** always stands for a whole round pizza. Each cut slice is\ncounted with\n[**切【き】れ**](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%88%87%E3%82%8C_%28%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8C%29/)\n(一【ひと】切れ, 二【ふた】切れ...).\n\n(top: ピザ 一枚, bottom: ピザ 一切れ) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZPrp6.jpg)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T15:20:18.393",
"id": "71954",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T15:43:36.753",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T15:43:36.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "71953",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
] |
71953
|
71954
|
71954
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A Japanese boxer that has never been beaten in Japan is fighting against a\nCuban boxer in his first match against a foreigner. After easily taking the\nlead of the match, the Cuban boxer says:\n\n> この **小せェサル** の島国にはいなかっただろう テメェを支配出来るボクサーは\n\nI know that サル is used as an offensive word meaning \"idiot, hick\", but used\ntogether with 小せェ could it be an offensive way to say \"puny\"? Please consider\nthat previously in the manga (see [here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NBWV6.jpg)\nand [here](https://i.imgur.com/RZtDUw7.jpg)) he made a derogatory comment\nabout Japanese physical features.\n\n[Here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dMQXF.jpg) you can see the whole page. Thank\nyou for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T16:07:46.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71956",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-21T00:51:11.360",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-21T00:51:11.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "17797",
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"adjectives",
"sports",
"offensive-words"
],
"title": "Meaning of 小せェサル in the following sentence",
"view_count": 192
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think it's not 小せェサル but [小]{ちい}せェ(サルの)島国.\n\nちい **せぇ** is a rough, slangy pronunciation of ちい **さい**. \n(See: [What does こまけー mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3746/9831) /\n[What is じゃねぇか? What is its original\nform?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/18458/9831))\n\n> この + 小さい + サルの島国 \n> this little island of monkeys\n\n小さい describes （サルの）島国. It's probably referring to Japan.\n\nI think サル here is used as an offensive/derogatory word for Japanese people.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T16:34:25.743",
"id": "71957",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T16:45:58.127",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T16:45:58.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71956",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "> この **小せェサル** の島国にはいなかっただろう テメェを支配出来るボクサーは\n\nI have nothing to add the explanation for the grammar of 「小せぇサル」 in\nChocolate's answer.\n\nBut I think 「 **小せぇサル** 」 is kind of metaphor implying the person who leads\nthe group. Since\n[豊臣{とよとみ}秀吉{ひでよし}](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyotomi_Hideyoshi), daimyō,\npolitician of the sengoku period, whose nickname is\n”「[小{こ}猿{ざる}](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyotomi_Hideyoshi#Names)」 :\nlittle monkey\", there were the leader whose height is not tall in Japan,\n\"140cm\" according to [this site](https://machi-log.net/?p=46626).\n\nWhereas basically athletes in Cuba basically compete only in amateur league\nand play in a national team. Therefore, the athletes should respect the\nleader, and the leader in Cuba was [Fidel\nCastro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro), a tall person : \"191cm\"\nby google search.\n\nIt is not clear if the author wants to imply the average height of Japanese\nathletes is relatively small comparing to that of Cuban. But I guess probably\nthe author tried to use some contrast in the page or the author had an images\nof the leaders to some extent.\n\nSo, I think the sentence from Cuban boxer is saying _\"Even little monkey like\nyou lead the opponents in this island.\"_. And probably in Cuba, which is also\nthe country of an island, the situation is different.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-21T00:07:27.003",
"id": "71969",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-21T00:17:59.307",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-21T00:17:59.307",
"last_editor_user_id": "34735",
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "71956",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
71956
| null |
71957
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71961",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My question is why is かな being used in this sentence? The person is asking me\nwhy I come/came to he site? or wondering why I came to the site? Would かな be\nadded after the の? I am used to seeing かな used in statements not questions.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T18:16:40.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71960",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T19:31:24.570",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T19:31:24.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "18435",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"phrases"
],
"title": "What does どうしてこのサイトに来てるのかな？",
"view_count": 125
}
|
[
{
"body": "かな at the end of a question sentence ending with の is a bit of a reflexive\nending that provides the nuance of wondering about what is being asked.\n\nConsider, then:\n\n> どうしてこのサイトに来てるの？ \n> Why did you come to this site?\n\nvs.\n\n> どうしてこのサイトに来てるのかな？ \n> I wonder why you have come to this site.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T19:00:43.457",
"id": "71961",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T19:00:43.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21684",
"parent_id": "71960",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
71960
|
71961
|
71961
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71964",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 王の身辺警護は基本的に親衛隊が行っている。\n>\n> これは騎士団とどちらが上というものでもなく、単純に役割を分担している。\n>\n> ただし王の護衛という重要な役目であり、当然ながら構成する騎士は選りすぐりのエリートばかりだ。\n>\n> The King's personal security is basically done by his elite bodyguards\n>\n> Whether this is knights.........., the role is simply assigned.\n>\n> ....important so gotta go with the elite knights\n\nyou can sorta infer the soft counterargument against the first sentence in the\n2nd sentence before the initial statement is reconfirmed in the 3rd sentence,\nbut i'm not sure how 騎士団とどちらが上というものでもなくworks in this framework.\n\nhow do you interpret とどちらが without the second option?\n\nWhat exactly is 上 in this context?\n\nHow wide is the scope of ~, when it comes to ~というものでもなく in this case?\n\nthanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T19:14:16.913",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71962",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-21T06:41:23.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"parsing"
],
"title": "interpreting ～とどちらが上というものでもなく",
"view_count": 89
}
|
[
{
"body": "## どちら\n\nWith some annotations it should be\n\n> 王の身辺警護は基本的に親衛隊が行っている。\n>\n> これは騎士団とどちらが上というものでもなく、単純に **（親衛隊と騎士団は）** 役割を分担している。\n>\n> ただし王の護衛という重要な役目であり、当然ながら **（親衛隊を）** 構成する騎士は選りすぐりのエリートばかりだ。\n\nThe first sentence mentions mainly to the King's elite bodyguards (a group of\nelite knights).\n\nIn the second sentence, next to first one, mentions to another group of\nknights.\n\n`どちら` implies two similar parts in its context, so the parts will be similar\n親衛隊 and 騎士団.\n\nSo it can be simply\n\n> 親衛隊と騎士団はどちらが上というものでもなく、単純に役割を分担している。\n\nand the translation should be:\n\n> Between elite bodyguards and knights, neither is superior to the other. They\n> simply share jobs.\n\n(borrowed from comment)\n\n## Interpretation of 上\n\nIt means `greater`, `higher rank` or `better position` in this context. In\nJapanese, sometimes a speaker mentions to someone in higher rank with 上. For\nexample,\n\n> 上の人に仕事を頼まれた。(My boss asked me a job.)\n\n## Range of 〜 in 「〜というものでもなく」\n\nIt widely varies. In the second sentence, it covers `騎士団とどちらが上`.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T20:33:18.987",
"id": "71964",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-21T06:41:23.143",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5353",
"parent_id": "71962",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
71962
|
71964
|
71964
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71967",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have the following sentence from chapter 140 of the manga, 『五等分の花嫁』.\n\n> 今の父と再婚する **までの** 私たちは極貧生活でした。\n\nContext: One of the girls (of 5 siblings) is speaking with her male friend and\nshe is discussing how that before their family became rich, they used to be\nquite poor.\n\nHere is my attempted breakdown. I believe the subject of the clause marked as\nthe topic to be the girl's mother (I could very well be wrong here, causing my\nwhole interpretation to go awry).\n\n`今の父と再婚するまで` - Until her second marriage with the current father.\n\n`の` - possessive?\n\n`私たちは極貧生活でした。` - 私たち is the subject and as for them, they were poor.\n\nI've seen plenty of \"noun + の + noun\" situations and plenty of situations\nwhere a clause precedes の allowing の to treat the clause as a noun.\n\nExample: `涼しい飲み物の一番の選択` - The best choice of cool drinks\n\nExample: `漫画を読むのが楽しい。` - The thing of reading making is fun.\n\nI've also seen where you can combine particles like で and の to make noun\nphrases. The pattern here is \"noun + での + noun\".\n\n`図書館での勉強` - studying in the library.\n\nI'm starting to think that the usage is similar to the first. One issue is\nthat I'm unsure what **まで** is. Jisho says it's a particle, although I only\nconsidered true particles to be \"が、を、で、へ、に、も、は\". Considering it to be a noun,\nthe structure would be, \"relative clause packed onto noun ( **まで** ) + の +\nnoun\".\n\nThe English translation sounds goofy but it would be something like this:\n\n * _As for us (私たち) of class \"until our mother remarried with our current father,\" we were poor._\n\nWould this be correct? I think the root cause of my misunderstanding is まで and\nseeing it as a noun. までの seems a bit weird to my western eyes.\n\nI appreciate all help that comes my way.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T20:13:50.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71963",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-23T12:49:03.643",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-23T12:49:03.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "33404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "What is the の particle doing in this sentence when used after まで?",
"view_count": 370
}
|
[
{
"body": "Seems to me it's just the adjectival の.\n\n(今の父と再婚するまで)の(私たち)\n\n\"Us\" (私たち) is modified with \"until [the time when] my mom married our current\ndad\"\n\nYou were correct when you compared it to a noun-phrase like \"図書館での勉強 -\nstudying in the library\". I'm far from an expert but you can see the\nadjectival の used together with other particles all the time.\n\nOther examples of までの taken from\n<https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AE>:\n\n~までの地図 - A map to ~\n\n~までの日を数える - Count down the days until ~\n\n~までのタクシー代 - Taxi fare to ~\n\nand so on.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T22:55:18.360",
"id": "71967",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T22:55:18.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4382",
"parent_id": "71963",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71963
|
71967
|
71967
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71968",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Taken from <https://japanesetest4you.com/japanese-language-proficiency-test-\njlpt-n1-listening-exercise-6/>, question 4. Select the most appropriate\nresponse:\n\nでは、そろそろ新年会もこの辺でお開きにしましょうか。\n\n 1. ああ、この場所がいいですね。\n\n 2. そうですね。もう遅いですし。\n\n 3. 皆さんおそろいなので、まず乾杯しましょう。\n\nThe correct answer is 2. But I'm not sure why 1 doesn't also make sense, since\nthe first speaker uses 「この辺で」.\n\nWhy would the first speaker use 「この辺で」? Translated literally, \"Let's get the\nNew Year's party started around here soon\" sounds a bit odd. Is there a\ncolloquial usage I'm not familiar with?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T22:42:59.380",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71965",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T23:19:18.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4382",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "JLPT N1 practice question: Usage of この辺で",
"view_count": 276
}
|
[
{
"body": "Firstly, お開きにしましょう means \"let's wrap it up\" not \"let's get started.\"\n\nI guess you can kind of think of it as the people are going to spread out and\nmove away. I'm not sure of the full etymology.\n\nTherefore #2 is the most appropriate, and #3 would be the complete opposite.\n\nOption #1 would be kind of a strange interaction.\n\n> A: \"Let's wrap things up now\"\n>\n> B: \"Yes this is a good location\"\n\nこの辺 can also mean \"now\" or \"at this point\" temporally. Words like ここ and そこ\ncan also be used for time.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T23:07:01.980",
"id": "71968",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T23:19:18.510",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "20479",
"parent_id": "71965",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71965
|
71968
|
71968
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "71990",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context:\n\n> [両]{りょう}の[貴様]{きさま}は[明日]{あした}の[末]{すえ}に[亡]{な}いです。\n\nwith the intended meaning\n\n> Both of you will be dead by the end of tomorrow.\n\nThis question is about the 「 **両の貴様は** 」. I understand that the\n\"plural/collective\" is not used if there is a classifier phrase indicating the\nnumber of objects preceding the object to pluralize. My problem here comes\nfrom the ever-irritating \"Inverted Partitive Genitive\" behavior. 両の, an\nadjective-like object (noun in the genitive) meaning \"both of,\" is technically\na numerical phrase qualifying 貴様は. My question is:\n\n# Should the presence of a genitive numerical phrase prevent pluralization?\n\nMore concretely, should my sentence above begin with:\n\n * [両]{りょう}の[貴様]{きさま}は\n * [両]{りょう}の[貴様]{きさま}たちは",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-20T22:47:31.910",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "71966",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-22T01:37:41.060",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-21T12:04:02.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33716",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"plurals"
],
"title": "Do genitive numerical phrases block the plural?",
"view_count": 207
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 両の貴様は \n> 両の貴様たちは\n\nI'm afraid both are incorrect and make little sense. To say \"Both of you\", you\ncould say:\n\n> 貴様らは二人とも \n> 貴様らはどちらも \n> 貴様らは両方とも \n> 貴様らは両方 \n> etc.\n\n* * *\n\n\"Both [noun]...\" could be 両方のXXが, XXが両方, XXが両方とも, eg:\n\n> 両方の手が, 手が両方, 手が両方とも, 両手が _Both hands (nom.)_ \n> 両方のカードを, カードを両方, カードを両方とも, カードを二枚とも _both cards (acc.)_ \n> You don't need to pluralise the noun.\n\nBut \"both of [pronoun]\" doesn't work this way; to mean \"both of you/us/them\",\nyou don't say:\n\n> *両方のあなたたちが, *両方の私たちが, *両方の彼らが, *両方のそれらが\n\nYou'd instead say:\n\n> あなたたち/私たち/彼らが二人とも/両方とも, それらが二つとも/両方とも\n\n全部 and すべて (\"All of ~~\") work the same way; you can say 全ての人/人々が, 全ての商品が,\n商品が全て, 商品を全部, りんごを３つとも etc., but 全てのあなたたちが, 全ての私たちが, 全部のそれらを sound unnatural.\n\n* * *\n\n> 両の貴様は明日の末に亡いです。\n\nThis makes little sense, I'm afraid.\n\n> Both of you will be dead by the end of tomorrow.\n\ncould translate to something like:\n\n> 貴様らは二人とも明日の終わりまでには死んでいるだろう。 \n> 貴様らは二人とも明日の終わりまでに死ぬだろう。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-09-21T15:49:48.030",
"id": "71990",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-22T01:37:41.060",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-22T01:37:41.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "71966",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
71966
|
71990
|
71990
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.