Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "Your sentence doesn't quite sound right to me, although I can't quite point to\na grammar rule to explain why. You might be correct in assuming that the\npotential form of the main verb renders it as a stative verb and doesn't sit\nright with the ～ながら. However, I think that if you insert a topic marker は then\nthe sentence would work.\n\n歩きながら **は** メッセージが送れない。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-16T23:05:30.220", "id": "87523", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-16T23:05:30.220", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "87521", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "The person who said that may have meant to add the sense of potentiality to\nthe whole act of 歩きながらメッセージを送る. Though it sounds incomplete as an independent\nsentence, it doesn’t sound particularly unnatural in a subordinate clause\n(provided it is not a quote).\n\n> 歩きながらメッセージを送れないのは当然だ。\n\n> 歩きながらメッセージを送れないことはない。\n\n> 歩きながらメッセージを送れないなら、立ち止まればいい。\n\nAs an independent sentence, the following sounds more correct and more\nnatural.\n\n> 歩きながらメッセージを送ることはできない。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T07:51:37.500", "id": "87540", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:22:42.123", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:22:42.123", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87521", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In some cases you can use なんとかなる to say 'everything will be fine', but なんとかする\nmight be better when you want to convey that you are really committed to\nimprove the situation.\n\nLiterally なんとかなる means something like 'the situation will just take its\ncourse; things will go as they go'. It is in 3rd person, more neutral as such,\nand does not tell whether the speaker really does something.\n\nFor example, if you are talking about a work project that is stuck with some\nproblem, you would better tell your supervisor なんとかします because なんとかなります would\nsound irresponsible or vague.\n\nI think people (like me) tend to use なんとかなる more exactly because it does not\nput any responsibility on those who say this :). So the distinction is partly\npsychological, and using なんとかなる does not necessarily mean that the speaker\nwill NOT do anything.\n\n===\n\n**A note on the endings**\n\nThe endings よ or さ do not affect the meaning.\n\nRoughly,\n\n * よ in 何とかなるよ indicates that the speaker particularly tries to make the listener be aware that it will be okay.\n * 何とかなるさ sounds masculine\n\nIf uttered cheerfully, it sounds more optimistic and probably softer than\nなんとかなる. A possible English parallel is saying it with emphasis on 'will':\n\"Things _will_ be fine!\"\n\nFYI: なんとかなるわ is a feminine version and なんとかなるわよ is feminine + emphasis same as\nよ above.\n\nCf:\n\n * [Ending a sentence with さ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1895/ending-a-sentence-with-%e3%81%95)\n * <https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/sentence-ending-particles/>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-17T03:06:24.767", "id": "87527", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T04:03:30.267", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-18T04:03:30.267", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87526", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Whether or not it is allowed/correct depends on the context. By itself, you\nwould be well advised to not use this construction in a regular conversation,\nsince it is wrong/odd.\n\nThere are examples however, where this phrase is correct. For example in old\nJapanese, が and の were used interchangeably, so it can be correct in a\nhistoric context.\n\nMost commonly, this construction is used as an abbreviation if it's clear from\nthe context who or what the sentence is about (耳の大きい+[ _omitted noun_ ]). You\nmentioned that you encountered this phrase in a YouTube video, so I think it's\nlikely that it refers to something mentioned in that video (I guess something\nwith ears?!).\n\nA typical example would be, that the speaker made a statement about a\nperson/animal, then realized that he/she forgot to mention an important piece\nof information (the big ears) and then immediatly adds this abbreviated\nsentence to leave it up to the listener to figure out the correct meaning and\ngrammar.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-17T08:26:20.053", "id": "87531", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-17T08:26:20.053", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39903", "parent_id": "87528", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "耳の大きい in isolation is not a valid sentence, but it is correct as a [relative\nclause](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14550/5010) with [ga-no\nconversion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12825/5010) applied. For\nexample, the following sentences are correct.\n\n> 耳 **の** 大きいゾウを見ました。 \n> = 耳 **が** 大きいゾウを見ました。\n>\n> I saw an elephant whose ears are big.\n\nHere, 耳 **が** 大きい and 耳 **の** 大きい are modifying ゾウ as a relative clause, in\nwhich case が and の are (usually) interchangeable.\n\nFor 耳の大きい to make sense, it **must** be followed by another noun. Otherwise,\nit's just a strange sentence \"fragment\". For example, if 耳の大きい is the only\nphrase printed on a T-shirt, it's plain wrong.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T03:16:14.520", "id": "87550", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T03:16:14.520", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87528", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "勝負 is a general term ranging in meaning from a _game_ to a _contest_ which\nincludes such things as fights and contests to settle disputes (which is what\na _duel_ in English usually refers to).\n\n決闘 is a particular kind of 勝負 that we generally translate as a duel.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T00:37:03.333", "id": "87534", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T00:37:03.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "87533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "決闘 specifically refers to [this tradition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel)\nto protect one's honor, fought with rapiers, pistols or such. It usually ends\nwith one of the participant's death. Basically this is something in the past\n(at least in developed countries), and you won't see this outside of wild-west\nmovies or dramas set in the middle ages. This kind of dueling was mainly\npracticed in Europe and the US, and the word 決闘 also typically refers to\nWestern ones. Japanese samurais also occasionally did similar things, but they\nmay tend to be called 果たし合い.\n\n勝負 is a much broader term that encompasses \"match\", \"game\", \"(card game)\nduel\", etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T04:19:16.433", "id": "87538", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T09:41:35.697", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-18T09:41:35.697", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "決闘 is used for the one-time win/lose situation to be involved in the honor. It\nis especially used to refer the stage damage/being damaged in a direct\nway.(i.e. French mathematician Évariste Galois are believed to have dueled for\nhis fiancée, Kojiro Sasaki and Musashi Miyamoto are believed to have dulled\nfor their art of sword mastery in Ganryu island and so on.)\n\nThe honor of both parties will maintain depends on the performance of the\nduel. Kojiro Sasaki and Musashi Miyamoto are both known to be sword mastery.\n\n勝負 is a much more broad term and may have similar nuance with the duel though,\nit basically is used to decide win/lose in an indirect way. It is used to\ndescribe for using a lot of energy to compete though, it is not necesarilly\nimplying for the honor. It can be used for the game of winning the goods like\nbingo.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T04:22:37.327", "id": "87539", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T04:22:37.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "34735", "parent_id": "87533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I guess the author (of the website) takes the sentence as follows:\n\n(A) NEET = 何もしない人々 where 仕事をする or 学校に行く are examples of things they don't do,\n\nwhereas you take the sentence to mean\n\n(B) NEET = (仕事しない + 学校に行かない + 何もしない)人々.\n\nBoth are not too different and I am not sure which is more natural. Anyway it\nlooks like the author tries to translate the sentence interpreted in (A) and\n(probably) to do the translation in word-by-word manner as much as possible,\nwhich resulted in a confusing sentence.\n\nA full translation (with minimal change to the original) would be something\nlike ' _you use a term NEET to call those people who don't do such things as\ngoing to work or going to school'_ (Still awkward, but hopefully you see what\nI mean.).\n\nYou can of course translate it using _do nothing_ , e.g: _'those people who do\nnothing, that is, those who neither work nor go to school'_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T03:46:00.203", "id": "87536", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T04:14:16.160", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-18T04:14:16.160", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "That English translation is not very literal. As you said, 何もしない means \"not to\ndo anything\".\n\nIn your case, you can think two relative clauses are nested like this:\n\n> [ 学校にも行かない [ 何もしない人達 ] ]\n>\n> [ [ people who don't do anything ], who don't even go to school ]\n\nAlternatively, you can think this is a list of independent relative clauses.\nThis is not common, but occasionally happens in pompous or stilted sentences.\nFor example, compare the following three sentences:\n\n 1. 真のリーダーとは、常に周囲に気を配り、決断ができ、人を成長させる人のことである。 \nA true leader is one who is always aware of his or her surroundings, can make\ndecisions, and develop others.\n\n 2. 真のリーダーとは、常に周囲に気を配って、決断ができて、人を成長させる人のことである。\n 3. 真のリーダーとは、常に周囲に気を配る、決断ができる、人を成長させる人のことである。 \nA true leader is one who is always aware of his or her surroundings, who can\nmake decisions, and who develops others.\n\nThey all mean the same thing. Sentence 1 and Sentence 2 each has only one long\nrelative clause with three verbs. Sentence 3 has three independent relative\nclauses, which is not common but might sound cooler.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T03:53:55.333", "id": "87537", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T03:53:55.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This is not some special construction, but is a simple combination of で and ね.\nね is a sentence-final particle used to seek agreement or draw the listener's\nattention.\n\nで can be either a case particle or the continuative form of the copula だ. As a\ncase particle, で has many roles, so its translation can vary.\n\n * 東京でね。 \n(That is) in Tokyo, you know.\n\n * 3日でね。 \nWithin three days, okay?\n\n * ハサミでね。 \nWith/Using scissors, right?\n\n * 1人でね! \n(You do it) alone!\n\nLikewise, で in お手伝いで is a case particle that marks a\ncondition/scope/situation.\n\n * 手伝い **で** バスケの試合に出た。 \nI went to a basketball game as an aid/help.\n\n * ちょっとお手伝い **で** ね。 \nAs a little help, you know.\n\nで can also be the te-form of the copula (だ). A te-form can be at the end of a\nsentence in casual speech. For examples of this type of でね, see: [What exactly\nis this でね construction?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11950/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T13:03:06.180", "id": "87544", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-18T13:03:06.180", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87541", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "外していた refers to continuation of state up until some time point in the past.\nSee the picture in [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/57195/5010). This form\ncorresponds to [past perfect aspect](https://www.ef.com/wwen/english-\nresources/english-grammar/past-perfect-tense/) in English.\n\n 1. コンタクトを外して(い)る \nI have taken off my contacts.\n\n 2. コンタクトを外して(い)た \nI **had** taken off my contacts (when something happened).\n\nSentence 1 means the speaker is not wearing contacts now. In Sentence 2,\nwhether the speaker is wearing them now is not important; what's important is\nthat she was not wearing them at some time point in the past.\n\nIn this context, 外しちゃってたから describes the reason why she bumped into many\nthings outside this room, which is an event in the past. Whether she is\nwearing contacts now is not relevant to this past event, so 外しちゃってたから is more\nnatural than 外しちゃってるから. (She is still not wearing contacts now, but that is\nnot her concern at this moment, because she believes she is safe now.)\n\nこっちで is just \"here\". It simply refers to this changing room.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-18T12:41:10.810", "id": "87543", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T01:40:22.660", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-19T01:40:22.660", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87542", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "言ったのは少女のひとり **だ** is also a valid sentence. It is understood as a statement of\na fact about a past event. 言ったのは少女のひとり **だった** means the same but it somewhat\nsounds like it is describing the situation at the time when that event\nhappened.\n\n[This](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/25376/43676) is partially related.\n\nA similar question could be asked about the tense of a cleft sentence in\nEnglish. I found [this](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/85561/421317) but\nit is closed as “too basic”. I don't think it is.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T14:45:30.403", "id": "87563", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:20:53.477", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:20:53.477", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87545", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "According to デジタル大辞泉 entry on ようだ,\n\n> （２） **例示** の意を表す。「隣のおばさんのような働き者は少ない」\n\nThe ような in「勘違いしてしまうような男子」simply illustrate what type of 男子 is.\n\nIf it helps, here's my tentative translation of the sentence you provided\n\n> Alice: Yeah. Since she is very nice to everyone, it seems to me there are\n> **guys like the ones who take it as a wrong idea**. I'm worried about that.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T00:02:33.937", "id": "87547", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T00:02:33.937", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "41067", "parent_id": "87546", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "That ような sounds redundant to me. It’s like saying:\n\n> 勘違いしてしまう **ような** 男子がいそうで \n> It seems there are boys **like those** who will mistakenly think she likes\n> them\n\nWithout it, the meaning basically remains the same.\n\n> 勘違いしてしまう男子がいそうで \n> It seems there are boys who will mistakenly think she likes them", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T09:35:51.037", "id": "87559", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:21:23.677", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:21:23.677", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87546", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Japanese and English are very different in how they communicate information. A\nstand alone sentence in English can frequently be understood (even if only\nimperfectly) without any further context. Japanese is quite different. Just a\nsimple verb alone is an entire sentence.\n\n> 見たな\n\nWhat does this mean? It could mean: \"I saw you\", \"you saw me\", \"he saw me\",\n\"they saw us\", etc. etc. In a different context perhaps: \"You saw the\nheadline\". Given the right context, any of these meanings could be made\nobvious.\n\nIn English, this effect is harder to convey. But, consider the phrase \"family\njewels\". What does it mean? Am I referring to someone's testicles or a\ngrandmother's priceless diamond necklace. Without context, there's no way to\nknow.\n\nThe Japanese verb はめる has a wide range of possible meanings (as per the Jisho\nlink I provided in the comments). はめた is just the past tense of this verb.\nWith はめたな, な is just a\n[particle](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/370/4875) whose range of\nmeaning is beyond the scope of this answer, but it adds a bit of color to the\nexpression (English doesn't have a real equivalent to this, \"isn't it?\" barely\nscratches the possibilities).\n\nSo, what you have here is a situation like the verb 見た. Only はめる has a much\nbroader range of possibilities of meanings from \"to put on\" to \"ensnare\" to\n(according to Jisho) \"sexual intercourse\", which for me was a revelation, but\nthen given the right context might be easily enough construed (I'm going to\nguess that it is rather crude).\n\nI'm not sure how useful the youtube video you linked to is for learning\nJapanese. While certainly はめたな can mean \"you set me up!\", how likely is this\nsomething that you're going to say in Japanese (it would be extremely\nconfrontational if you did). Perhaps you might hear it in an anime. But more\nlikely, you're going to use this verb to say things like, てぶくろをはめた (I put on\nmy gloves). I can imagine a detective movie in which Sherlock quips, \"はめたな\"\n(\"hmmm, she'd put on her gloves\") and thus concludes that the suspicious\nlandlord is actually innocent.\n\nThe youtube video is an odd collection of random expressions with a broad\nrange of formality that are a bit incongruous next to each other. If you cut\nan pasted some together in a creative way to make a story, it could probably\nbe quite amusing. But, if you walked into a room and just announced\n最低なやつ！はめたな, folk would probably just break out into laughter (or just mutter\nto themselves 変な外人だな).\n\nAnyhow, there are lots of great places to learn and study Japanese online (and\non youtube even). [Some are kind of hilarious](https://youtu.be/9jubQt8h8_Y).\nBut generally these sorts of lists are just not really all that helpful as you\nmight think they are.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T03:07:12.767", "id": "87549", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T14:50:54.680", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-19T14:50:54.680", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "87548", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "おすすめ **で** 出てきました means “It came up as a recommendation.” I don’t know how to\ngrammatically explain this usage of で.\n\nおすすめ **に** 出てきました more concretely refers to a place where that thing came up,\nsuch as a list or section. It may be translated as “It came up in\nrecommendations.”", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T07:30:52.147", "id": "87556", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:21:54.737", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:21:54.737", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87552", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This is difficult partially due to the difficulty of differentiating dry\nup/wither/wilt/shrivel on my part, but here is a non-comprehensive answer.\n\n * 枯れる means something completely dead. 枯れた花 is actually possible. The difference with 萎れた花 is that 萎れた花 may be just lacking some water. You can water it for the 萎れた花 to revive. I'm not sure how 'dried up' the English 'dry up' means, but 枯れる means complete dry-up. Roughly 枯れた invokes the image of something brown, 萎れた something still with some color.\n * 枯れた野菜 is not impossible but sounds odd, probably because ordinary people no longer see them as grown in field. It could mean vegetables that remain uncropped in field or those that died out as a result of excessive heat. 萎れた野菜 sounds more normal, and means stale vegetables left in the fridge.\n * 枯れた/涸れた : as the hen of the kanjis suggests, the former should be applied to plants/tree, the latter to something to do with water. But I don't think people really care about the difference (the sounds are the same anyway...).\n * 萎む is the opposite of 膨らむ/膨れる (swell up). A typical thing that 萎む is a balloon. It means something that has tension on the outer surface from the inner content (water, air,..) loses the tension. (I'm not sure 'tension' is the right word here. The idea is, 張り as the result of swelling is lost).\n * 萎れる/萎む : 萎れた花/萎んだ花 are both possible, but they are slightly different. 萎れた花 sounds more like a flower as the collection of petals and stem drooping. 萎んだ花 sounds more like a flower with no stem shrinking (like, petals shrinking towards the center) - I hope you see what I mean and tell me how you describe these more properly in English... Possibly 萎んだ is closer to _wither_ and 萎れた to _wilt_.\n * 萎びる invokes the image of wrinkled surface. My dictionary says it is wrinkled and irrecoverable. So, combined with 枯れる, things 萎れる → 萎びる → 枯れる. The distinction 萎びる/萎れる might not be so strict, but 萎びた in 萎びたキュウリ (wrinkled cucumber) cannot be really replaced with 萎れた. This can be a matter of collocations.\n * 萎れる figuratively means losing cheerfulness, like a kid who was scolded by his mom. A similar word in this sense is しょぼくれる. In this sense no others can replace 萎れる. This might be similar to _wilt_.\n * 萎える: this is used as 足の萎えた (disability about legs, or legs go very weak) like you mention, or 気持ちが萎えた (losing the motivation or やる気が衰えた). I'm not sure about the parallel with _shrivel_ : according to dictionaries at hand, shrivel happens as something dries up. But 足の萎えた usually means (partially) disabled legs due to lying in bed for long or to old age.\n\n===\n\nAs for the last phrase, a usual one in a case like this would be ご協力をお願いします (I\nask you for the collaboration)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T11:47:19.477", "id": "87560", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T12:45:57.057", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-19T12:45:57.057", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87553", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Natural languages aren't like programming languages — due to ambiguity, a\ngiven word does not have the same \"precedence\" or \"binding strength\" in all\ncontexts, thereby admitting multiple interpretations. Look at\n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence> for examples of this.\n\nProgramming languages are constructed to avoid this type of ambiguity, so that\nthere's only one syntax tree for a given string of tokens. Not so for natural\nlanguage.\n\nContext is necessary in these cases to disambiguate and identify which\ninterpretation is most likely.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T07:03:20.593", "id": "87555", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T07:03:20.593", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "87554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "In the most prototypical usage, the verb かかる takes two arguments.\n\n> [ _activity/goal_ ] に [ _time_ ]（が）かかる\n\nAs an example, 避難に時間がかかる matches this pattern. ［避難まで］に時間がかかる` is the result of\nsubstituting the [ _activity/goal_ ] part with a specific point of time that\nmarks some event. In this particular example, it could be understood as either\nthe beginning or the completion of evacuation.\n\nAs a marker of a specific point of time, までに seems more suitable than まで.\nHowever, the marked point is not a deadline by which some event has to happen\nas in the normal usage of までに. After all, 時間がかかる refers to something that\nnaturally happens, not something you have to finish before some deadline. In\naddition, the meaning of 時間がかかる makes one imagine a state in which something\nis ongoing. Perhaps for these reasons, に is sometimes omitted as we can see in\n辺りから人がいなくなる **まで** 一体何分かかる. To me, 辺りから人がいなくなる **までに** 一体何分かかる still sounds\nmore correct and natural, though the nuance is subtle. By the way, it could be\nrephrased to ［辺りから人がいなくなる **の** ］に一体何分かかる, which matches the prototype better.\n\nIf the [ _time_ ] part is the concept of time itself, such as 時間, the subject\nmarker が is used. (It may be replaced with は or も, of course.) If it refers to\na duration of time, such as 何分, が is usually not used. (は or も may be added.)\nAnd this duration may be represented by an end point marked with まで.\n避難に［夜中まで］かかる is an example of that, and までに cannot be used in this position.\n\nAs for the question of how かかる should be grammatically categorized, I cannot\nclaim to have a definite answer. There is some “meta” property to this verb.\nShould a passage of time be considered something that takes time? One thing I\ncan say is that 時間がかかっ **ている** is a valid expression to describe a state in\nwhich some ongoing activity is taking more time than expected. However, this\ndoesn’t necessarily mean it goes better with まで than までに. It’s complicated.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-21T02:54:09.113", "id": "87582", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:15:28.330", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:15:28.330", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87564", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "First, the verb is actually closer to \"settle,\" but \"decide\" is also a\ntranslation I've found. So some liberty is being taken with the translation to\nmake it sound more natural in English. I would go with the idea that the\nmatter of his innocence has been settled, and it's implied he is found\ninnocent due to the phrasing.\n\nI think the biggest issue is that this sentence has a dropped topic (probably\n\"the jury\" or \"the judge\"). Another problem for translation is that が does not\nalways mark the subject of a verb, and often marks what experiences the effect\nof the verb (or sometimes an adjective). The verb is an active verb as you\nstated, with an understood topic that's also acting as the subject. So a\nbetter translation would be something like \"(Someone) decided his innocence at\nthe trial.\"\n\nUnfortunately, English can't drop the subject of a verb unless we use a\npassive verb to turn the object into a subject. Which is why this is\ntranslated as a passive verb construction in English. If the topic/subject had\nbeen kept, it would likely have been translated as a normal active sentence. I\nhope this helps.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-19T22:58:54.933", "id": "87568", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T22:58:54.933", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29860", "parent_id": "87565", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Some verbs, some consisting of a noun and auxiliary する, work as both\ntransitive and intransitive verbs, and 確定する is one such verb. It is used\nintransitively in your example with 無罪 being its subject. If there is no\nintransitive equivalent in English, the idea expressed by such a verb needs to\nbe translated with a transitive verb either in the passive voice or, depending\non the verb, with a reflective pronoun (e.g. itself) as its object. There\nseems to be nothing strange about that.\n\n確定する may be more common as an intransitive verb. When it takes an object, it\nis often used in the causative form 確定させる.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-20T08:41:43.977", "id": "87575", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:16:33.293", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:16:33.293", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87565", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "無理 = force 無理に = forcibly 取る = to take 取ろうとしない(で) = to try not to take\n(please)\n\n無理に取ろうとしないで Please don't try to take by force (forcibly).\n\n~ようとする This is a grammar point meaning to attempt to do something, so if you\nchange する into しない, it means to try not to do something.\n\nI hope this helps!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-20T01:25:18.367", "id": "87570", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-20T01:25:18.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45617", "parent_id": "87566", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This is a sentence about the parents' honeymoon, right? In this case, は is the\nnatural choice because 両親 is the shared topic of both verbs (結婚した and\n行きませんでした). The latter sentence is a little puzzling because it sounds like\n行きませんでした has an implicit subject that is different from 両親.\n\nIn general, use が when you want to specify a different subject in a\nsubordinate clause, like this:\n\n * 両親が結婚した時、日本は戦争中でした。 \n(The two verbs have different subjects.)\n\n * 夜が来たら電話します。 \n(The implicit subject of 電話する is \"I\".)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-20T01:28:43.450", "id": "87572", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-20T01:54:06.837", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-20T01:54:06.837", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87569", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The prefix ご and the suffix 様{さま} are used in [honorific\nspeech](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_honorifics), to speak in a\nrespectful manner regarding someone or something. Here are some more examples\nof the usage of [honorific\nprefixes](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2111/honorific-\nprefixes-%e3%81%94-vs-%e3%81%8a).\n\nAs naruto mentioned in the comments on your question, 本家{ほんけ} is the word\nthat's being mentioned respectfully. Looking around on\n[Twitter](https://twitter.com/search?q=%22%E3%81%94%E6%9C%AC%E5%AE%B6%E6%A7%98%22),\nthe word is used in slang to mean _the original_ as naruto pointed out in a\ncomment on this answer. As you can see from the results, it's mostly people\nuploading edits or remakes of vocaloid clips and giving credit to the original\nsongs.\n\nThe use of honorifics is likely to show respect to the creators of various\nvocaloid songs.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-20T07:17:55.520", "id": "87574", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-21T10:47:23.073", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-21T10:47:23.073", "last_editor_user_id": "39516", "owner_user_id": "39516", "parent_id": "87571", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "株 originally referred to tree stumps, from which new stems sprouted. It then\ncame to mean a unit of plants (consisting of several stems made up of one or\nmore individuals).\n\nSuch unit of plants can be multiplied by 株分け, where this unit is broken up and\ndivided into smaller 株s which grow individually, and can then be divided again\n(see [here](https://www.shibagaki-\ngreentech.com/2019/10/25/%E6%A0%AA%E5%88%86%E3%81%91%E3%81%AE%E4%BB%95%E6%96%B9-%E5%A4%A7%E3%81%8D%E3%81%8F%E3%81%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E6%A4%8D%E7%89%A9%E3%81%AE%E6%A0%AA%E3%82%92%E5%88%86%E3%81%91%E3%81%A6%E5%A2%97%E3%82%84%E3%81%99%E6%96%B9%E6%B3%95-2019-10-25/)).\nThe procedure to maintain microorganisms like bacteria, virus, cells is\nsimilar, and thus 株 is used to refer to these strains.\n\nAccording to a dictionary, the etymology for stock is:\n\n> Perhaps the notion is of the \"trunk\" from which gains are an outgrowth\n\n([source](https://www.etymonline.com/word/stock))\n\nAnd this is perhaps why 株 was used to translating stock.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-21T10:10:38.160", "id": "87584", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-21T10:10:38.160", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "87576", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Something like this is very common in novels and lyrics, and similar questions\nhave been asked many times:\n\n * [Why is 未来 read as あした?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29431/5010)\n * [Why are some lyrics' words written in kanji whose usual reading is not how it is sung?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/198/5010)\n * [Why do some kanji have furigana that are not valid readings?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5565/5010)\n * [Are these furigana wrong?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/66762/5010)\n * [Reading 男 or 女 as ひと](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1448/5010)\n\nIn your case, the author want you to read this word as ピカ・バル, but also want\nyou to know the meaning of ピカ・バル is \"shining leaf\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-21T00:34:09.877", "id": "87579", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-21T00:34:09.877", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87577", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "> how is the nai form of a verb related to the verb masu stem\n\nIt isn't. The \"nai form\" of a verb is entirely dependent on the \"Mizenkei\nbase\", whilst the \"masu form\" of a verb is entirely dependent on the\n\"Ren'yōkei base\". Incidentally, the mizenkei base and the ren'yōkei base have\nthe same pattern for ichidan verbs, but they are unrelated.\n\n> how is the nai form of a verb related to … nai/nakatta (from aru)?\n\nIf you are new to these \"verb bases\", you can read up about them on\n[Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugation#Verb_bases).\nTo summarise, the forms/suffixes of verbs are only compatible with specific\nverb bases. The\n**[negative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugation#Negative:_Conjugation_table)**\n,\n**[passive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugation#Passive:_Conjugation_table)**\nand\n**[causative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugation#Causative:_Conjugation_table)**\nforms/suffixes are only compatible with the mizenkei base.\n\nActually, the verb \"aru\" is an exception that doesn't actually have a mizenkei\nbase, which might explain why the negative form is simply \"nai\". As for the\nexamples you used, the negative form can be summarized as follows:\n\nVerb | Mizenkei base | + Negative Suffix \n---|---|--- \naru | N/A (exception) | **nai** \ntaberu | tabe | tabe **nai** \nayamaru | ayamara | ayamara **nai** \n \nIt's worth noting that since \"aru\" has no mizenkei base, it cannot be\nconjugated into the passive or causative forms.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-22T09:41:49.370", "id": "87592", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-22T09:41:49.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27424", "parent_id": "87578", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Japanese-as-a-second-language learners generally remember 楽しかった and so on as a\nform of 楽しい. However, in the \"traditional\" Japanese grammar, た/だ is indeed a\nstandalone word categorized as a 助動詞 (auxiliary verb).\n\n * [Auxiliary verbs in Japanese](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/63351/5010)\n * [Why Japanese verb has so many forms?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/61902/5010)\n\nSo yes, た in 見た, た in 簡単だった, and た in 楽しかった are exactly the same 助動詞 for the\npast tense. For example,\n[this](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%9F/#jn-132183) is the entry\nfor た in a monolingual dictionary, and it clearly says it's an auxiliary verb\nthat signifies the past tense.\n\nく and かっ are considered as part of the \"true\" conjugation forms of\ni-adjectives (namely [連用形](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/65953/5010)).\nThey are not regarded as a word, and they don't have any intrinsic meaning on\ntheir own. The following table is the conjugation chart of i-adjectives\ndescribed in Japanese Wikipedia.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1J3sG.png)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-21T11:38:44.447", "id": "87585", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-21T11:38:44.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87583", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Short answer: we may never know how -く arose. -かった (e.g. 楽しかった) can be\nsynchronically analyzed as the contraction of -く and あった (i.e. 楽しく + あった).\n\nLong answer:\n\nThe origin of -く is indeed tricky, since as\n[naruto](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/5010/naruto) mentioned in\nthe comment it is attested from antiquity.\n\nAccording to Frellesvig, B. (2010). _A history of the Japanese language_.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\n\n> we interpret these formants as forms of a restricted copula ('adjectival\n> copula') and gloss examples accordingly, e.g. _samu-ku_ cold-ACOP.INF\n> 'coldly'. This interpretation of the formants attaching to the adjective\n> stem finds further support in its relations to some other grammatical forms\n\nand considers the resemblance of the adjectival copula to the past tense\nauxiliaries (\"ki ... used in old japanese to indicate past or so\") in your\nquestion.\n\nAs for -katta, it is more straightforward.\n\n> In OJ (=Old Japanese) the existential verb _ar-_ was used with the\n> infinitive of the adjectival copula ( _-ku_ ) , the regular copula ( _ni_ ,\n> _to_ ) and the negative auxiliary ( _-zu_ ) to form analytic forms, and\n> these combinations sometimes fused phonologically: ADJ- _ku ar_ - => ADJ-\n> _kar_ -, NOUN- _ni ar_ - => NOUN- _nar_ -, NOUN- _to ar_ - => NOUN- _tar_ -,\n> VERB- _zu ar_ - => VERB- _zar_ -. In EMJ (=Early Middle Japanese) the fused\n> forms gave rise to secondary conjugations\n\nIt may not be historically (i.e. diachronically) accurate to say that 楽しく and\nあった contracted to form 楽しかった, since the form あった is attested much later than\nthe phonologically fused form たのしかr-. However, just like it is perfectly\nacceptable to say that the word \"ability\" is from \"able\" + \"-ty\" (rather than\ntracing it all back to Latin words _habilis_ and _habilitās_ ), the synchronic\nanalysis of 楽しかった as 楽しく + あった is a perfectly valid one.\n\nFor completeness, other analyses of forms historically related to the\nexistential verb ある include:\n\n * 楽しかろう, synchronically 楽しく + あろう\n * 堂々たる, synchronically (and diachronically) 堂々と + ある\n * 許されざる, which is 許されず + ある\n * 華麗なる, which is 華麗に + ある\n * 良かれ悪【あ】しかれ, which is 良く + あれ + 悪【あ】しく + あれ\n\nMost of these forms are now quite dated though.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T13:07:32.297", "id": "88679", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T15:19:31.580", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-30T15:19:31.580", "last_editor_user_id": "36955", "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "87583", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "(Edit: I noticed I forgot to explicitly answer the main question. **Yes, as\nfar as I can tell it is grammatically correct.** )\n\n終わり is the so called 連用形（れんようけい）\"connective form\" of 終わる. This form does\nindeed serve as ます-stem, but **it can also serve as a nominalization of the\nverb**. In this case 終わり means \"(the) end\".\n\nIn fact, the 連用形 (\"ます-stem\") can be used to create nouns for most verbs. The\nresulting noun will have the meaning of \"the act of ~ing\", but it can often\ncarry additional meanings as well:\n\n切る \"to cut\" -> 切り \"cutting (the action)\", or more frequently: \"cut (the\nresult), \"limit\" (in an expansion of the original sense) etc.\n\nThe て-form can be used to connect the previous phrase with a following\nauxiliary verb, but it can also connect the previous phrase with a following\nphrase (and not neccessarily an auxiliary). This connection can be a temporal\none / succession (ＡしてＢ: \"Do A and then B\"), or as it seems to be the case in\nyour question, a rather conditional one (攻撃されて終わりだ: \"If you get attacked, it's\nthe end (= it's over)\"). This conditional sense resembles the usage of the\nauxiliaries -たら or -ぇば.\n\nI'm lacking the context but I'd guess an appropriate translation would be\nsomething like: **\" If we get attacked while we're slugging around, we're done\nfor!\"**\n\n(ps This is my very first time posting on Stack Exchange so I hope I didn't\nmess anything up. Feel free to provide feedback, edit or correct me if\nneccessary.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-21T22:05:38.953", "id": "87587", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-21T23:37:45.317", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-21T23:37:45.317", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "45628", "parent_id": "87586", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "To me, it looks like a new compound coined by the author. It's not uncommon at\nall for a novelist to make up a new kanji word (see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/68908/5010) for another example).\n\nIt may be a rare term actually used somewhere in the past and known to\nexperts. Still, an ordinary Japanese speaker don't know this word, and would\nnot bother to look this up in a dictionary anyway. The supposed meaning\n(\"flaming grudge\") is self-explanatory.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-22T03:35:48.140", "id": "87591", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-22T03:47:24.970", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-22T03:47:24.970", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't know about this character, but as far as I can tell from my search,\nthere is no indication that マンボスチン was ever used even as slang. I think it's\nmost likely that it's just a made-up word made by combining マンゴスチン\n(mangosteen) and マンボ (mambo), with no particular meaning other than that it\nhas a \"tropical\" ring. That ムーチョ should be also for the same purpose.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-24T02:50:08.093", "id": "87607", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-24T02:50:08.093", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87594", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It does essentially mean the same thing as `気をつけてください`, just with different\nnuance.\n\nIt does literally mean something like \"I want you to be safe for me.\" But I\nwould say \"I want you to be _careful_ for me\" would be a better translation.\nMaybe they don't care whether you stay safe or not, they just don't want you\nto total their car that you're borrowing.\n\nIt's not as polite as `気をつけてください`. It sounds like you are speaking to someone\nwho is lesser than you (or perhaps a close friend). I also feel it implies you\nthink the person might not be careful if you don't specifically warn them to\nbe.\n\nThe meaning of もらう specifically in this sentence is to \"have X done for me\".\nIt is used after the て form of a verb to indicate what is being done. [Further\nreading](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-\ngrammar/%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82%E3%82%89%E3%81%86-te-\nmorau-%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82%E3%82%89%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84-te-moraitai-\nmeaning/)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-22T20:14:52.400", "id": "87597", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-22T21:48:38.847", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-22T21:48:38.847", "last_editor_user_id": "10407", "owner_user_id": "10407", "parent_id": "87595", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "弱い refers mainly to physical weakness, as an opposite to 強い.\n\nAs per [Jisho's definition](https://jisho.org/search/%E7%94%98%E3%81%84) #4,\n甘い means \"naive; overly optimistic; soft on; generous; indulgent; easy-going;\nlenient\". In other words, it's less about being physically weak and more about\nan emotional weakness. So in the context you gave, it could mean either \"You\nwere naive to think such an attack would work!\" or possibly \"You're going easy\non me (when you should be going all out)\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-23T01:54:18.757", "id": "87602", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-23T01:54:18.757", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "16022", "parent_id": "87599", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "甘い can be used to describe something that lacks a required level of sharpness,\ntightness, resilience, etc.\n\n> ピントが甘い。 \n> (of a photo) It is a bit out of focus.\n\n> ねじが甘い。 \n> The screw is a bit loose.\n\nIt could also be used to describe a ball that doesn’t have enough air\npressure.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-23T02:32:37.847", "id": "87603", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:06:25.520", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:06:25.520", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87599", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Manga typesetting is a science in itself, but in this instance I think there\nis no \"empty line\", it is just some extra space that visually separates the\npart in the larger font (larger for emphasis / louder voice) from the rest of\nthe sentence.\n\nIn general such white space might also indicate a brief pause.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-26T07:52:29.070", "id": "87634", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-26T07:52:29.070", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "87600", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "あの人は歩いて行きました。 The person went there on foot. 歩いてis one of ways how the person\nwent there like バスで(by bus).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-24T06:20:57.750", "id": "87608", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-24T06:20:57.750", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45389", "parent_id": "87606", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "You can stick to 歩いていく in most cases (according to my reflection for a few\nminutes). At least, I don't think there are cases where using 歩いていく instead of\n歩く can be a source of major confusion.\n\nSome examples:\n\n * 駅に歩いていく means _I walk to the station_ ; 駅に歩く is not really grammatical.\n * 駅まで歩いた means _I walked up to the station_. This implies 'I reached the station'; 駅まで歩いて行った sounds more like 'I started walking towards the station'.\n * 山で歩いた means _I walked in the mountain_ (for hiking); 山で歩いて行った sounds strange (a natural response would be _Where?_ )\n * 健康のため毎日歩く means _I do some walking every day for keeping good health_ ; 健康のため毎日歩いていく sounds strange (again _Where?_ ); 健康のため毎日駅まで歩く/歩いていく are both possible (the destination is indicated)\n\nSo overall, if there is a destination, it is safer to use 歩いていく. Using 歩く\nimplies the action of walking (instead of using other transportation) is\nemphasized.\n\nPlease note that the distinction is subtle, and there could be cases where the\nexamples above(where both are possible) mean the same thing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-24T10:36:12.760", "id": "87611", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-25T03:40:29.030", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-25T03:40:29.030", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87606", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The difference between 色々 **と** 手続きがある/色々 **な** ・・・ is only grammatical\n(色々と[adv.] modifying ある / 色々な[ adj.] modifying 手続き), and I don't see any\ndifference in meaning.\n\n色々と手続きがある can be 'translated' as _There are procedures variously_ , which\nobviously is not a normal sentence, but I guess many English speakers would\nunderstand it as _There are various procedures_ if forced to.\n\nSo you can simply think 色々なXがある / 色々とXがある mean the same thing.\n\n===\n\nA side note is that 色々とある is also possible, without indicating various _what_.\nHere 色々な is impossible simply because there is no noun to be modified. The\nexpression is used mostly in conversation, as an answer to _Why?_. This is\nused when you want to be vague. The conveyed message is _There are many\nthings/reasons, but I don't want to talk about them to you_ , or _I really\ncannot elaborate on what they are._", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-25T01:40:52.293", "id": "87622", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-25T03:38:32.230", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-25T03:38:32.230", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Although the nuance is subtle, I feel 色々と手続きがある implies there are lots of\nthings to do, while 色々な手続きがある focuses more on the variety of those things.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-25T03:42:55.333", "id": "87623", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:05:57.800", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:05:57.800", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "A simple answer is, yes it is used as お返しする since the speaker is a child. It\nlooks like the girl speaks without です/ます endings, and that is why お返しする is\nused.\n\nProbably a confusing thing is that お返し is certainly お＋返し, but to mean _the\nfavor in return_ , お返し is the only possible form.\n\nYou can see many samples mentioned in the definition of\n[返し](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E8%BF%94%E3%81%97) are prefixed by お,\nand those お cannot be omitted.\n\nIn other words, お in お返しする exists because of vocabulary, and not (very much)\nof 敬語. I cannot really think of other phrases (usable by a child) to mean\n_return the favor_ than お返しする. (Maybe お礼する is possible, but again お cannot be\nomitted)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-25T00:59:00.363", "id": "87621", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-25T03:41:59.357", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-25T03:41:59.357", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "こっち in this context refers to this (suing) side, i.e., the claimant. こっちっす\nimplies he will win the case. In other words, 勝つのは is the implied subject.\n\nThis 百ゼロ means \"100:0\", i.e., \"absolutely\". 百[対]【たい】ゼロ is the standard way to\nsay this, but in colloquial speech, 対 may be simply omitted (e.g.,\n水と砂糖を七三【ななさん】で混ぜる = Mix water and sugar at 7:3).\n\n> これ訴えたら百ゼロでこっちっすよ \n> If I sued this, I'll win by a ratio of 100:0.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-24T14:48:05.420", "id": "87617", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-24T14:48:05.420", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87614", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It should be always はっぴゃく [happyaku]. If they say はっびゃく [habbyaku], it’s a\ntypo.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-24T15:14:38.277", "id": "87618", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-24T15:14:38.277", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87615", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "I don't think there is a widely-known Japanese noun for this profession.\n\n * According to [this page](https://www.governmentjobs.com/jobs/3127951-0/historic-interpreter), it appears that people in this profession do not necessarily wear historical costumes. Simple museum guides are called ガイド or 案内員.\n * Some theme parks have employees in a historical costume (e.g., there are lots of ninja and samurai walking or performing in [日光江戸村](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edo_Wonderland_Nikko_Edomura)). They are simply called キャスト, スタッフ, or [俳優](http://edowonderland.net/company/recruit/), but none of them are specific enough. Some of them do provide guided tours, but most do not have deep academic knowledge.\n * Descriptive expressions that can be used in news articles include 歴史的衣装に身を包んだガイド, 当時の衣装を着た実演スタッフ, etc.\n * 通訳 strictly refers to someone who translates languages orally, so 歴史的通訳 makes no sense. (If a time machine is invented in the future, there may be people with such a job name.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-26T02:05:08.457", "id": "87633", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-26T02:05:08.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87619", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "であり is the continuative form of [である](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-\nlessons/how-keigo-polite-speech-works-in-conversation/) (a literary and stiff\ncopula), so it's used to connect verbs in a broad sense. However, you have\nmissed ながら, which in this context means \"albeit/despite/although\". 当事者でありながら\nmeans \"although she is a person involved (in the matter)\".\n\n * [What is the difference between ながら and のに for expressing \"despite\"/\"although\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/72770/5010)\n * [ながら vs ながらも – what are the subtle differences?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/78046/5010)\n\n> 当事者でありながら置いていかれた形の美智子 \n> Michiko, who has been left out of the conversation despite being an\n> involved person", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-26T00:19:19.317", "id": "87631", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-26T00:19:19.317", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87625", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This type of \"miss\" is tricky to translate. Options include:\n\n * (前の携帯が) **なくてつらい** , **なくて大変だ** : if you are actually having trouble because you don't have it\n * (前の携帯が) **懐かしい** : if you are just feeling nostalgic about it\n * (前の携帯が) **あればいい[のに](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/42414/5010)**\n * (前の携帯が) **(今)欲しい**\n * (前の携帯は) **良かったな**\n\nIf you reeeally loved your old phone, 恋しい is not a wrong choice, although it\nusually sounds exaggerated.\n\nOn a side note, when the object is a human, 恋しい is not always a safe choice\nbecause it can imply romantic love, as the kanji suggests. If you just want to\nsay \"I miss you\" to your friend, consider using いなくて寂しい, 寂しくなるよ, 会いたいな or\nsomething.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-25T14:10:03.360", "id": "87627", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-27T01:03:31.040", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-27T01:03:31.040", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87626", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

[ { "body": "～の役に立つ just means \"to be useful for X\", whereas ～の力になる literally means \"to\nempower X\". The latter should be used only when something/someone makes\nsomeone feel stronger, encouraged or more capable. Also, the latter does not\nalways mean something/someone is useful in a practical sense.\n\nFor example, この枕は快適に眠る力になる sounds odd because good sleeping has little to do\nwith power or capability. 試合前にもらった彼の手紙は役に立った means his letter contained a\npractical advice and was useful, whereas 試合前にもらった彼の手紙は力になった means his letter\nencouraged you. On the other hand, 彼女は会社を成長させる役に立っている can sound rude and\ncondescending, while 彼女は会社を成長させる力になっている is a nice expression.\n\n手伝う is \"to help\" in the sense of \"to lend a hand\", and it never takes an\ninanimate thing as a subject.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-25T23:56:49.153", "id": "87630", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-26T00:02:13.440", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-26T00:02:13.440", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87629", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Grasping and describing the exact meaning of words is an arduous task, and\nthese pretty similar words probably differ in scores of subtle ways I can't\neven fathom, but here are a few notable differences between them I can see and\nput into words.\n\nCrudely put, \"手伝う\" means \"to help\" (in the sense of \"lending a hand\") while\n\"役に立つ\" means \"to be useful/helpful\". \"手伝う\" often implies being useful, but not\nnecessarily. For example, you may say \"父の仕事を手伝ったが、あまり役に立たなかった。\".\n\n\"役に立つ\" usually refers to affording _practical_ help, while \"力になる\" is often\nabout lending moral support (though it can be used about practical help, too).\nYou might hear an Olympic athlete, interviewed after winning a gold medal, say\nsomething along the lines of \"皆さんの応援が力になりました。\", but probably never\n\"皆さんの応援が役に立ちました。\".\n\nIn terms of absolute frequency, I suspect \"力になる\" comes in dead last. (For\nreference, there are 220 raw hits for \"力になる\" on\n[BCCWJ](https://bonten.ninjal.ac.jp/bccwj/string_search?commit=%E6%A4%9C%E7%B4%A2&string_search%5Bgenres%5D=PN_core%2CPN%2CPM_core%2CPM%2CPB_core%2CPB%2CLB_core%2CLB%2COW%2COB%2COC_core%2COC%2COY_core%2COY%2COL%2COM%2COP%2COT%2COV&string_search%5Bwords%5D=%E5%8A%9B%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8B&string_search%5Byears%5D=1971%2C1972%2C1973%2C1974%2C1975%2C1976%2C1977%2C1978%2C1979%2C1980%2C1981%2C1982%2C1983%2C1984%2C1985%2C1986%2C1987%2C1988%2C1989%2C1990%2C1991%2C1992%2C1993%2C1994%2C1995%2C1996%2C1997%2C1998%2C1999%2C2000%2C2001%2C2002%2C2003%2C2004%2C2005%2C2006%2C2007%2C2008&utf8=%E2%9C%93),\nbut the actual number will be much lower after removing false positives. There\nare 298 hits for \"手伝う\" and 1029 for \"役に立つ\".) I guess we don't really use\n\"力になる\" in the \"practical help\" sense in our everyday lives like the other two.\nSuch uses of \"力になる\" tends to be reserved for less mundane situations, or more\nformal or affected style of speech, I may well say.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-26T00:40:15.777", "id": "87632", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-26T00:40:15.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11575", "parent_id": "87629", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "These are zeros and decimal points.\n\n\"In 90, it was 20.3 percent; in 2004, it was 27.6 percent.\"", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-26T20:58:13.857", "id": "87639", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-26T21:20:41.880", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-26T21:20:41.880", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "87638", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "It's used when you accept something even if you don't think it's honestly\ngood, such as when you think \"that's weird\" but you can't help yourself\nlaughing because it's funny.\n\nThe phrase \"一周回って\" can be used to acknowledge a comment that would generally\nbe regarded as bad, but statement is still so to the point that it makes\nsense.\n\nThe phrase \"一周回って\" is used in the same way as the slang term \"逆に\". It's not\nstrictly \"逆\", since 一周(roundabout) = 360 degrees and 逆(opposite) = 180\ndegrees, though it's a well-established usage.\n\nSide note: It's also used to say that you have come \"full circle\".\n\nFor example, let's say that you liked Girl A at first, but then you changed\nyour mind to Girl B and stayed away from Girl A for a while.\n\nBut when time passes and you looked at Girl A again, you feel that she is good\nagain. When you look at other girls, but you still like Girl A, you say, \"\n_一周まわったけど、やっぱりAが好きだな_ \".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-27T03:04:39.383", "id": "87641", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-27T03:04:39.383", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45272", "parent_id": "87640", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "This type of 一周回って is an expression used when someone started thinking the\nother way round, or started to have a completely different impression after\nlooking at something extreme for a while. Imagine you are running a race\nwithout knowing the course was a loop. You're thinking you are running in the\nlead, but eventually you'll notice you are chasing the last person. Whether\nyou are running forward or backward, you eventually reach the same location.\n\nIn your case, person A has believed the earth is round also in this _isekai_ ,\nbut noticed there was nothing to prove it objectively. After all, he knows\nlittle about how physics work in this new world, so blindly believing the\nworld is round could be as wrong as believing the world is flat. He thought he\nwas the most knowledgeable, but he realized he could be the least\nknowledgeable. That's why he said 一周回って.\n\nOther simpler examples can be found in [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/61639/5010). Other examples\ninclude:\n\n * 最初は彼が勝つと嬉しかったが、あまりにも強いので一周回ってつまらなくなってきた。\n * あの芸人のギャグは嫌いだったが、あまりに同じネタを繰り返すので一周回って好きになってきた。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-27T05:33:49.290", "id": "87642", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-27T05:52:33.630", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-27T05:52:33.630", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87640", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The role of のも is particularly well explained in the\n[answers](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/19204/i-dont-\nunderstand-what-%E3%81%AE%E3%82%82-means-in-this-sentence) that Jimmy Yang\nlinked to, so I will not repeat that.\n\nAs for putting an adjective 有能な before 人材, I would argue that the core meaning\nof the word 人材 is the second meaning listed in\n<https://jisho.org/search/%E4%BA%BA%E6%9D%90> :\n\n> 1. capable person; talented person​\n> 2. human resources; personnel​\n>\n\nAs the meanings listed for 人材派遣 (temporary employee placement​) and 人材紹介会社\n(employment agency; staffing agency; personnel placement agency​) imply, I\nargue that the core concept of 人材 is \"human resource\".\n\n人材 does have a connotation of that person being capable. Hence, as aguijonazo\npointed out in the comment, 無能な人材 does look strange; but since it is only a\nconnotation, it is completely acceptable to say 有能な人材, 優秀な人材 or エリート人材.\n\nThere is an interesting semi-joke related to this: 「人財」「人材」「人在」「人罪」. It is a\ncliché repeated in business-related articles such as <https://jtb-\nhrsolution.jp/hrsupplement/evp/65> :\n\n * 「人材」: the usual word for \"human resource\"\n * 「人財」: human resource so capable that it is equatable to a treasure (財宝)\n * 「人在」: someone who simply exists (存在) in the company. They might do their job but mediocrely or without any passion; in other cases, they might simply sit in the office and serve very little (In Japan, it is quite hard to legally fire a person)\n * 「人罪」: someone who deals damage to the company or the organization, or even commits crimes (罪) for their own benefit", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T11:55:27.940", "id": "88678", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T12:03:46.417", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-30T12:03:46.417", "last_editor_user_id": "36955", "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "87643", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's youtsubato, right? :)\n\n 1. そうにない seems treated as a single word/phrase [in a dictionary](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/#jn-129025), negative of [そうだ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%A0/). [This site](https://www.kokugobunpou.com/%E5%8A%A9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%A0/#gsc.tab=0) states そうに as 連用形 of そうだ. Seraching そうにない/そうではない (on this site or Google) suggests it is treated as a word in foreigner's grammar of Japanese.\n\n 2. 連れていきそう = 連れていく + そうだ = likely to take to. So you are right on this.\n\nThroughout the sentence, the object of 連れていく is omitted, and it is obviously\nYotsuba the little girl. The subject of the second 連れていく is Koharuko the\nspeaker.\n\n * お兄ちゃんが連れていきそうにないところ : places where you (Tochan the father) are unlikely to take Yotsuba (to)\n * ...に連れて行くのが私の役割かなと : I thought it would be my role to take Yotsuba to ....\n\nSo the whole sentence translates roughly as: \" _I thought it might be my duty\nto take Yotsuba somewhere you wouldn't take her to_ \".\n\n(The variation in vocab indicates just my unsureness.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-27T22:59:24.173", "id": "87647", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-27T23:04:41.743", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-27T23:04:41.743", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87644", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It is only the ending\n[か](https://www.kokugobunpou.com/%E5%8A%A9%E8%A9%9E/%E4%B8%BB%E3%81%AA%E7%B5%82%E5%8A%A9%E8%A9%9E%E3%81%AE%E7%94%A8%E6%B3%95/#gsc.tab=0)\n+ オイ (\"Hey!\"). With オイ, it sounds like the speaker demanding the listener's\nattention/response.\n\nThis sounds rude, and in that sense, can be called a slang. Depending on\ncontexts, it can mean hostility.\n\nNote that オイ is not a grammatical ending. It is just _Hey_. `プール行くかオイ : Are we\ngoing to a pool, aren't we?` can be written `プール行くか、オイ` or `オイ、プール行くか`.\n\nThe fact that this is said by a woman or a girl is not that surprising. I\nthink that 'strong' girls often talk that way in manga, even though very few\ngirls (and possibly no women of decent age...) would do so in reality.\n\n===\n\nA particular phrase that comes to my mind is `やんのかオイ`, which means something\nlike _Are you gonna fight with me?_. This オイ can be replaced with コラ\n(`やんのかコラ`). These are typically used by naughty boys (不良) in manga confronting\nwith each other.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-28T00:44:34.107", "id": "87649", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-28T00:44:34.107", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87645", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "田中さんは何を見た↑。 ⇒\"見た\" is a plain-form. You don't need \"のだ\". \n田中さんは何を見たのですか。⇒\"見た\" is a plain-form. To make this a polite form, you need\n\"のだ\". \n田中さんが見たのは何↑。 ⇒This is a noun sentence, and \"何\" is a plain-form. You don't need\n\"のだ\". \n田中さんが見たのは何ですか。⇒This is a noun sentence, and \"何\" is a plain-form. To make this\na polite form, you need \"です\". \n\nIn the Plain-form, \"のだ\" or \"です\" are not necessary, while in the polite form,\n\"のだ\" or \"です\" are necessary.\n\nだれが来ますか。 ⇒Masu-form, Polite-form, No need for \"のだ\". \nだれが来ましたか。⇒Masu-form, Polite-form, No need for \"のだ\". \nだれが来ます↑。 ⇒Masu-form, Polite-form, No need for \"のだ\". \nだれが来ました↑。 ⇒Masu-form, Polite-form, No need for \"のだ\". \nだれが来る↑。 ⇒Root-form, Plain-form, No need for \"のだ\". \nだれが来た↑。 ⇒Ta -form, Plain-form, No need for \"のだ\". \n\nThe word \"Masu\" implies politeness. so you don't need \"のだ\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-28T03:39:10.637", "id": "87650", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-29T17:17:38.570", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-29T17:17:38.570", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "45710", "parent_id": "87648", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "They indeed seem to contradict each other. However, the rules described in the\npreceding pages should not be taken too literally. The book itself offers the\nfollowing caveat in p286.\n\n>\n> 本来「のだ」が必要とされる文で「のだ」が使われないことがあります。この場合、「のだ」を使っても問題はないので、学習者は「「のだ」が不要になることもある」ということを知っていれば十分です。\n\nAs for the examples you copied from p287, the authors probably needed a few\nexamples with an interrogative that end with か (without の) in order to\ndemonstrate だれが｛来る／来た｝か as invalid in contrast to あの映画を｛見るか／見たか｝ with no\ninterrogative.\n\nWhile these questions are not exactly invalid, they sound somewhat _detached_\nfrom the situation, as if the speaker is interrogating someone for the purpose\nof obtaining a fact, indifferent to the situation of that person. Depending on\nthe context, they could even sound a little intimidating.\n\nThe following equivalents with ん or の sound more natural in most cases.\n\n> だれが来る **ん** ですか。 \n> だれが来た **ん** ですか。 \n> だれが来る **の** ↑。 \n> だれが来た **の** ↑。\n\nThe difference is the presence or absence of 前提 and 焦点 as the book puts them.\nThe _who_ part gets focused by の or ん against the background knowledge that\nsomeone will, has, or did come and only their identity is unknown. I suppose\nit is due to the lack of this focus that questions with interrogatives sound\nunnatural unless they also contain の or ん.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-28T11:16:08.757", "id": "87653", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:04:28.423", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:04:28.423", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87648", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The first sentence sounds unnatural as a sentence to relay someone’s message\nto another person. It focuses on the fact that Tanaka-san, as the topic of the\nsentence, said whatever he said, rather than its content.\n\nThe following sounds more natural.\n\n> 田中さん **が** 「明日10時にまた電話します」と言 **っていました** 。\n\nThe second is good but it would also sound more natural with が, unless there\nis some reason to put Tanaka-san's message in contrast with someone else's.\n\n> 田中さん **が** 明日10時にまた電話するとのことです。\n\nOf these two, the latter sounds more formal. It sounds like something a\nsecretary would say. The former could sound somewhat irresponsible, as if what\nTanaka-san was saying is someone else’s business.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-28T09:27:52.093", "id": "87652", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-28T09:27:52.093", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "87651", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I am not 100% sure but it seems that they just confused vertical and\nhorizontal lines and the correct kanji would be 傷 (wound, hurt, injury). In\nthis case the translation would be something like \"storm wound\" \\ \"storm\ndamage\". Does it make sense to you?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-28T14:38:28.950", "id": "87655", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-28T14:45:09.950", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-28T14:45:09.950", "last_editor_user_id": "45708", "owner_user_id": "45708", "parent_id": "87654", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It's a colloquial variant of これ以上の結果は欲張りすぎ **というものだよ**.\n\n * This (っ)てな is a corrupted version of という or というような. It sounds a little dialectal or [shitamachi](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/62713/5010)-ish to me (typically heard in _rakugo_ performances). \n * [What is な-particle doing in `ってなわけで`?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3348/5010)\n * [Meaning of てなわけで at the start of a sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/41231/5010)\n * [How I should parse/translate てなことで at start of sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/86931/5010)\n * This もんだ is the same as ものだ, which you have [already asked about](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/83382/5010).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-29T05:08:19.883", "id": "88663", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-29T05:15:48.327", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-29T05:15:48.327", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I was hoping someone would find what I haven't been able to find: namely a\nduplicate of this question. But the only questions/answers I can find are\nrelated to various particular scenarios.\n\nThere are various constructions similar to ...しか...ない in Japanese. Some call\nthese [_negative polarity\nitems._](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1565/4875) The linked answer\ngives some other examples in both English and Japanese that may help you wrap\nyou mind around the concept. And as @aguijonazo mentioned in the comments,\nthis particular construction can at times be reworded into a corresponding\nnegative construction in English.\n\nBut, here I'd just like to mention the following: There are various ways of\nsaying _only_ in Japanese. The ...しか...ない construct is one of them.\n\n> I eat _only apples_.\n>\n> りんごしか食べません。\n\n> I only read Japanese novels.\n>\n> 日本語の小説しかよまない。\n\n> I could only get there by train.\n>\n> 電車でしかいけなった。\n\nしか is applied to the noun phrase (after a particle if there is one) that is\nbeing restricted. In English, the translations can be a bit more lose.\n\nOther ways of expressing _only_ in Japanese can be formed using だけ and ばかり.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-29T16:59:20.973", "id": "88669", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-29T23:32:51.613", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-29T23:32:51.613", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "87658", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, another name for u-verb is \"consonant-stem verb\", which means the last\nconsonant before the u-vowel will be preserved, and the last u will be changed\nto a/i/e/o. For example, かく _kaku_ can conjugate like _ka **k** anai_, _ka\n**k** imasu_, _ka **k** e_, and _ka **k** ō_. This table basically shows most\nJapanese verbs are very regular and easy to remember.\n\nBy the way, 着る【きる】 meaning \"to wear\" is a **regular** ru-verb (aka vowel-stem\nor ichidan verb). There is nothing exceptional. You just have to remember the\nverb type; one きる is a regular ru-verb and the other きる is a regular u-verb.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T02:59:02.763", "id": "88673", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T02:59:02.763", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87659", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "In your case, I think で is a particle because the part until で adverbially\nexplains how その土地の有名な酒 is called using examples.\n\nIn general, if you can replace で with であり or でして, it's a conjugated copula\n(だ). For example, で is the te-form of だ in the following sentences (で is\ninterchangeable with であり/でして):\n\n * 彼は「やっぱりね」といった **感じで** 、全く驚いた様子がない。 \nHe is like \"I knew it\"; he doesn't seem to be surprised at all.\n\n * 梅雨はもう終わっている **感じで** 、空には雲ひとつ見えません。 \nLooks like the rainy season is over, there's not even a cloud in the sky.\n\nOn the other hand, で is a condition/situation/means marker (particle) in the\nfollowing sentences (で adverbially modifies the following verb):\n\n * 彼は「やっぱりね」といった **感じで** こちらを見た。 \nHe looked at me as if to say \"I knew it\".\n\n * 空を飛んでいる **感じで** 踊ってみてください。 \nTry to dance as if you are flying in the sky.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-29T08:45:09.433", "id": "88667", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T02:29:33.057", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-30T02:29:33.057", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87660", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Generally speaking, you have to know which Kanji to use in which context. It\nis just like memorizing words, you have to learn the difference for each word\nwith kanji variations.\n\nAt the same time, note the following:\n\n * In most cases (including the ones you listed), sentences will be understood if a wrong variation is used.\n * In some cases even native speakers are prone to mistakes. So, as a learner, you shouldn't worry too much.\n * As commented, you can use Hiragana always.\n\nIf you use standard input method on Windows, it suggests the difference (when\napplicable).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/exAoS.png)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-29T00:16:56.760", "id": "87662", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-29T00:16:56.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "87661", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This とかある is a very colloquial and informal construction. A polite version\nwould be:\n\n> もっと可愛いお人形の方が良い(など)ということはありますか？\n\nAnd for this ある, the following definition may be related:\n\n> ### [ある](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%82%E3%82%8B/#jn-7643)\n>\n> 10 ある考え・気持ち・感覚などを持っている。「お願いが―・る」「言いたいことが―・る」「かすかな痛みが―・る」\n\nIn English, this type of ある roughly corresponds to _to have [a feeling,\nopinion, dream, question, pain, idea, etc.]_. In Japanese, we say 夢がある, 意見がある,\n痛みがある, 考えがある, and so on, so the basic idea is the same here. The subject of\nthis ある is an intangible \"idea\"; the speaker is asking whether the listeners\n**have** an idea/feeling indicated by the preceding noun clause. (とか can form\na noun clause.)\n\nYou can also say \"(～がいい)なんてこと(は)ある?\".\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT:** This `[person] + 的には` is another highly informal phrase that\neffectively means \"in ～'s standpoint\" or \"for ～\". For example, 私的には means \"in\nmy opinion\" or \"as far as I am concerned\", but much more informally. You can\nalso say ○○さん的には, あなた的には, etc. Don't use this in formal speech.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-29T03:24:21.693", "id": "88662", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-29T07:36:05.803", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-29T07:36:05.803", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "87663", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This can be remembered as a literary set phrase, but it's technically a\n[remnant of the grammar of classical Japanese\n(文語)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/42724/5010). In modern Japanese,\nit's 皆を呑み込もうとするかのように両手を大きく広げる.\n\n * **呑み込ま** : the 未然形 of 呑み込む\n * **ん** : the 連体形 of the classical volitional/conjecturing auxiliary [む](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa009010.htm). The 連体形 worked as a nominalizer in classic Japanese. よう(とすること) in modern Japanese.\n * **が** : the archaic possessive particle. の in modern Japanese.\n * **如く** : the 連用形 of the classical adjective-like auxiliary [如し](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa009030.htm). ように in modern Japanese.\n\nRelated:\n\n * [Auxiliary verb ん](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23924/5010)\n * [Is there a difference between んがため and ために?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5396/5010)\n * [Verb ending in -ん with positive meaning?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/72064/5010)\n * [meaning of ~に於るが如く](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/83026/5010)\n * [Why is there a が in 深淵に臨むが如し?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/70684/5010)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-29T05:58:38.677", "id": "88665", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-29T07:19:23.240", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-29T07:19:23.240", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88664", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This 察するに means \"Judging from the situation\" or \"If I guess\". This 証拠に means\n\"As an evidence\". These に's are grammatically different.\n\nThe first に is a literary conjunctive particle which roughly works like と, but\nwith only a small set of verbs. It directly takes the dictionary form of a\n**verb** :\n\n * [What does the に do in 表情から察するに?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29418/5010)\n * [Grammar behind 言うには](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/82426/5010)\n\nThe second に is a case particle used as a **role/function** marker. It takes a\n**noun** (including a verb nominalized with の):\n\n * [に to indicate the role you want something to play?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65432/5010)\n * [Exact meaning of 教科書をトピックに選ぶ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13896/5010)\n * [I really can't understand the use of に + と USED TOGETHER in this clause](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/76801/5010)\n * [Meaning of にと思って in a sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55453/5010)\n * [What is the function of the に in 仕上げに?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/80057/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T00:41:58.937", "id": "88672", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T00:41:58.937", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88670", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "I would say it is mainly because of the context. If we look at\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A4%E3%81%A4/#jn-147598> :\n\n> 1. 二つの動作・作用が同時に並行して行われることを表す。それぞれが…して。…ながら。「諸事情を考慮しつつ計画を立てる」「大声で叫びつつ走りだす」\n> 2. 二つの動作・作用が矛盾して行われることを表す。…にもかかわらず。…ていても。「早起きが健康にいいと知りつつ、つい寝すごしてしまう」→つつも\n>\n\nwe might be tempted to conclude that つつも can only mean \"although\" and not\n\"while\", but we can see that is not necessarily the case if we look at\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A4%E3%81%A4%E3%82%82/#jn-147737>, in\nwhich both \"while\" and \"although\" are listed:\n\n> 1. 「つつ」を強めた言い方。…しながら。「働きつつも学ぶ」\n> 2. …にもかかわらず。「努力しなければならないと知りつつもついなまけてしまう」\n>\n\nI would argue that, in case of つつも, the connotation is leaned slightly toward\n\"although\": to me, 働きつつも学ぶ seems to slightly suggest that the writer considers\n\"studying while working\" to be an unusual thing requiring extra effort.\n\nI would also argue that \"while\" in the English language is also often used to\ncontrast two opposing ideas or concepts that nevertheless happen at the same\ntime.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T11:04:40.453", "id": "88677", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T11:04:40.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "88674", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "There is a subsidiary verb (-て)いく. To break down:\n\n * **連れる** : \"to accompany/take\"\n * **連れて** : the te-form of 連れる\n * **連れていく** : [(-て)いく](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/676/5010) added\n * **連れてく** : the contracted version of 連れていく; see [this chart](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/18159/5010)\n * **連れてって** : the te-form of 連れてく; the te-form is not 連れていて because てく still conjugates irregularly like 行く\n\n連れてよ or 連れてくれよ would make no sense in this context. (-て)いく is a **very**\nimportant subsidiary verb, and failing to add it would make the sentence sound\nawfully wrong. Whenever you want to say \"to take [someone] (to somewhere)\",\nyou need either いく, くる, or keigo equivalents of them.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T10:33:09.880", "id": "88676", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T10:49:07.400", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-30T10:49:07.400", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It usually expresses experience, as is often the case with someone’s bio, but\ncan also be continuous or habitual when it refers to collective births.\n\n * 新たな潮流/動きが生まれている業界: The industry where the new trend/movement is born\n * ここのところ毎年何千人もの赤ちゃんが生まれている: These years, thousands of babies are born per year.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-30T22:11:35.860", "id": "88681", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-30T22:11:35.860", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "88680", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "どこにあるか is an embedded question: _Where is it?_\n\n知っていますか is the main sentence: _Do you know?_\n\nPutting these two together, you get\n\n> Do you know where it is?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-31T03:13:27.640", "id": "88683", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-31T03:13:27.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "88682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Like [this case](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11916/questions-\non-a-usage-of-%E3%81%98%E3%82%83%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84), じゃない works as an\nemphasis. So if it matches the context, 私は母さんを助けたかったんじゃない can be 私は母さんを助けたかった\nwith emphasis added. That is, not a negative sentence.\n\n===\n\nUsing the example in the linked post, きれいじゃない could mean\n\n 1. きれいじゃない? (rising tone) Isn't it beautiful?\n 2. きれいじゃない (falling tone) (a) It is not beautiful / (b) It **is** beautiful\n\nThe difference (of tone) between 1 and 2 is clear. That between 2a and 2b, to\nme, is something like the following.\n\n * 2a is pronounced like there is a pause between じゃ and ない. Or ない is pronounced distinctly. With exaggeration, it could be written じゃぁない.\n * In 2b, じゃない is pronounced as a single word.\n\nI'm bad at explaining pronunciations, sorry if this is not very clear.\n\n===\n\nI found [an article](https://hermes-\nir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/15502/gengo0004100190.pdf) on the web. The\nsentence in the question should be considered as 強め用法 on page 6.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-31T11:00:42.587", "id": "88685", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-31T11:00:42.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "If I remember correctly, Luffy cut himself with a knife to show that he had\nthe enough courage to join Shanks' party, right?\n\nまで here is to indicate [極端な例 (see\n1-4)](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A7/#jn-208999) of the\nact of 頼む. A full unfolding of the phrase would be\n今日は顔にけがをしてまで頼んだのにシャンクスは航海に連れて行ってくれない.\n\n(Edit: It may be that まで should be understood as indicating 動作の及ぶ範囲, but the\nexplanation below remain more or less valid.)\n\nA possible difficulty is that injuring oneself is not usually a way of asking.\nBut in this scene, getting injured is actually to show the courage, so put it\nmore verbose, 今日は顔に怪我をしてまで自分（＝Luffy）の勇気を示したのに・・・.\n\nSo the sentence translates like _Even though I injured myself (to show the\ncourage) and asked to take me to the sea today(, Shanks didn't agree to do\nso)._\n\n===\n\nHopefully the following examples help:\n\n * 昨日は徹夜までして探したのに見つからなかった : Even though I searched without sleeping yesterday, I didn't find it\n * 親に借金までしたのにうまくいかなかった : Even though I borrowed money from my parents, it didn't work out.\n * 彼女と別れてまでアメリカに来たのに結局何も得られなかった : Even though I came to US leaving my girlfriend, I got nothing in the end.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-31T13:36:36.337", "id": "88687", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-31T13:50:09.850", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-31T13:50:09.850", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88686", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This こと is \"thing\", a word that refers to an abstract/intangible thing (fact,\nstatement, etc). It is modified by a relative clause (私が彼について言った).\n\n> 私が彼について言った **こと** \n> the **thing** that I said regarding him \n> what I said with regard to him\n>\n> 私が彼について言った **こと** は、彼の弟にについても当てはまる。 \n> The **thing** I said regarding him also applies to his brother. \n> What I said about him is also true about his brother.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T03:50:03.063", "id": "88718", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T03:50:03.063", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88688", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "事変 is \"insurgence\", \"rebellion\" or \"coup\" that threaten a government, but it\nalso refers to an armed conflict between nations that is \"not officially an\nact of war\". Either way, it's an outdated word mainly used to refer to certain\nhistorical events like ones listed\n[here](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8B%E5%A4%89). In modern Japanese,\nother words including 紛争, クーデター and 反乱 are usually chosen.\n\n事件 is a much smaller word meaning \"(criminal) case\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T03:38:21.903", "id": "88717", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T03:38:21.903", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88692", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "魚売りは、おれが泥棒だと言って sounds like the fishmonger is calling themself the thief,\nwhich seems a bit unlikely, but as per the comments below, it could be\nunderstood as intended too.\n\nIn 魚売りは、おれを泥棒だと言って, the quoted part is just 泥棒だ. If you want to say, _The\nfishmonger called me a thief_ and capture \"me\" within the quote, then the\nsentence should have been おまえが泥棒だと言って\n\nKeep in mind that Japanese does not have indirect speech like we do in\nEnglish. Japanese only has direct speech, _the fishmonger said, \"you're a\nthief\"_", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-07-31T22:49:58.337", "id": "88694", "last_activity_date": "2021-07-31T23:46:56.113", "last_edit_date": "2021-07-31T23:46:56.113", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "88693", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "The speaker is saying 'The fishmonger, calling me a thief..\". (It seems the\nline is adapted, but the speaker seems 兵十. [Cf. the\noriginal](https://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000121/files/628_14895.html).）\n\n~~と in 泥棒だと言って is clearly 引用の「と」~~ , and requires a 終止形 ending for the\npreceding verb (or words that conjugate).\n\n[Edit] Maybe naruto is right - this is not a 引用, but still it requiring a 終止形\nshould be the same. I found [a seemingly relevant\narticle](http://www.lingua.tsukuba.ac.jp/ippan/TWPL0/TWPL03_29/9_kim.pdf).\n\nCompare:\n\n * その女の子を **かわいい** と言って : saying that the girl is pretty\n * その女の子を **きれいだ** と言って : saying that the girl is beautiful\n * その女の子を **美少女だ** と言って : saying that the girl is a pretty girl\n\nAll the bold words are in 終止形.\n\n===\n\nA simpler (no) explanation is that the acceptable particles are determined by\nthe verb. If this sounds fair enough, just remember it as pattern:\n\n * call N1 N2 = N1 **を** N2 **と** 呼ぶ / N1{ **を,が** }N2 **だと** 言う.\n\nConcretely:\n\n * {俺が泥棒だ, 俺を泥棒だ, ?俺は泥棒だ, ?俺を泥棒}と言って are all possible with (?) being less natural, but\n * 俺を泥棒と呼んで is the only option.\n\nIn short, だ in the question exists because いう (tends to) requires it.\n\n===\n\nFYI: ごん狐 is possibly one of the few non-fairy-tale stories that close to\neverybody knows in Japan (as long as s/he learned from standard textbooks in\nprimary school).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-01T00:15:14.537", "id": "88698", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T11:25:25.737", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-02T11:25:25.737", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88693", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This 言う is a member of [this verb\ngroup](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55158/5010), so だ before と is\noptional. (This reminds me of the \"optional _being_ \" in English, as in \"to\nregard me as being a thief\" vs \"to regard me as a thief\".)\n\nI would say this type of と is **not** quotative- _to_ because the part marked\nwith と is a simple noun (phrase) rather than a sentence.\n\n俺が泥棒だと言って would tend to be taken as \"saying 'I am the thief'\" (i.e., the 魚売り\nis calling himself a thief).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T03:25:11.280", "id": "88716", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T03:25:11.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88693", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Such の is called 体言の代用 in school grammar, and it is usually taught that it can\nbe replaced with (の)もの/(の)こと.\n\nAccording to [a\ndictionary](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AE/#jn-171157):\n\n * 体言(practically a synonym for noun) + の = <体言>のもの\n * 活用語 (words with conjugation, including verb and adjective) + の = <活用語> nominalized.\n\nA possible source of confusion is that の can be replaced with のもの or もの, and\nthe grammar does not differentiate them. My guess is that のもの replaces の when\npreceded by a noun (the first case above) and もの when preceded by others. Not\ncompletely sure, though.\n\nThe answer to the question: because 最後 is a noun, the correct form is\n最後の＝最後のもの.\n\n===\n\nOther examples: 二番目の = the second one / 僕の = mine / 人の = other people's\n(things) or someone else's (thing)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-01T01:14:11.263", "id": "88699", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-01T03:00:02.327", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-01T03:00:02.327", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88695", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "According to Frellesvig, B. (2010). A history of the Japanese language.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press, in Late Middle Japanese the verbs did\nhave the volitional forms that is implied by the addition of -う to the 未然形\nform; that is, せう(= _syoo_ ), 開けう(= _akyoo_ ), 寝【ね】う(= _nyoo_ ), 起きう(= _okyuu_\n), 見【み】う(= _myuu_ ) in parallel with 書かう(= _kakɔɔ_ ) and 持たう(= _motɔɔ_ ).\n\nHowever, in Modern Japanese, the volitional form have changed; this is best\nexplained as an analogical change.\n\n * As /ɔɔ/ (=あう) and /oo/ (=おう) merged, the suffix was reanalyzed as _-(y)oo_ , making the volitional form of 上一段活用 [見【み】う(= _myuu_ )] and 上二段活用 [起きう(= _okyuu_ )] outliers to the paradigm\n * As the former 二段活用 became levelled to 一段活用, the conjugation paradigm of 開け- was no longer alternating between _ake-_ and _aku-_ ; instead it was levelled to a single form, _ake-_. The volitional form _akyoo_ is thus an outlier to the paradigm\n\nHence we have 開けよう, 寝よう, 起きよう, 見よう as the new paradigm of volitional forms,\nresolving both of these outliers while also making -う/-よう parallel with\n-せる/-させる, -れる/-られる in that they care whether the preceding verb is 四段 (or, 五段\nafter the spelling reform) or not.\n\nLanguages tend to make changes unpredictable from sound laws, and in many\ncases (especially in verbal paradigms) such changes are fuelled by analogical\nlevelling. For instance, Old French had **tons** of vowel alternations (caused\nby sound laws from Latin to Old French) such as leve / laver, aime / amer,\ntrueve / truver, many of which have lost the alternations in the contemporary\nlanguage (lave / laver, aime / aimer, trouve / trouver).\n\n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_French#Verb_alternations>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T14:39:09.173", "id": "88721", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T14:39:09.173", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "88700", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I would think that こんな means \"like this\". So more literally I would translate\nthis sentence as \"Thank you for always being there for me like this\" or \"Thank\nyou for always taking care of me like this\".\n\nAs for the main verb according to jisho there are several possible meanings:\n相手にする (相手をする) \"to keep company\", \"to listen to\", \"to look after\"...\n\nI personally often see how the particles like に or を get omitted so I suppose\nthis is also the case in this sentence.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-01T10:26:14.323", "id": "88702", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-01T11:20:38.860", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-01T11:20:38.860", "last_editor_user_id": "45708", "owner_user_id": "45708", "parent_id": "88701", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "~~Both of your examples are not grammatical.~~ [Edit] The first is not very\nacceptable and the second is ungrammatical.\n\nくらい+particles is possible.\n\n 1. 5000円くらいはする : It costs around 5000 yen.\n 2. 子犬くらいの大きさはある : Its size is at least more than that of a puppy.\n\nThese くらい is for indicating approximate quantity, which you probably have in\nmind.\n\nくらいも / くらいを are possible in the following, but くらい here means a bit different\n(apparently called\n[軽視](http://www.edewakaru.com/archives/21957775.html#:%7E:text=%E3%80%8C%E3%80%9C%E3%81%8F%E3%82%89%E3%81%84%E3%80%8D%E3%81%AF%EF%BC%BB%E8%BB%BD%E8%A6%96,%E4%BD%BF%EF%BC%88%E3%81%A4%E3%81%8B%EF%BC%89%E3%82%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%BE%E3%81%99%E3%80%82)\nin foreigners' grammar).\n\n 3. 一万円くらいも払えないならこんなとこ来るな : You are not supposed to come to a place like this if you can't pay even (such a small amount as) 10000 yen.\n 4. これくらいを暑いというようじゃ東京に住めない : One cannot live in Tokyo if one calls (such a low temperature as) this hot.\n\nSo my tentative conclusion is くらい for approximate quantity cannot be used with\nも/を.\n\n===\n\n[Edit]\n\nOf the sentence in goldbrick's comments, I think 往復で4000円くらいもかかる is the only\none with 'approximate' くらい. (`3cmくらい` may be on the border). To me, this is\nacceptable, but sounds still a little unnatural.\n\nPerhaps using approximate くらい + も/を is not completely impossible. But one\nthing could be that, if you want to emphasize something,\nrounding/approximating the quantity might be contradictory. At the same time,\nin emphatic も, people will understand if the number is rounded without くらい:\n\n * 一日1000人も感染者がいるのにオリンピックやるんですか？ : Is Olympic games taking place when we have 1000 cases of infection per day?\n\nNobody thinks the number is exactly 1000 when hearing this sentence.\n\nThe other くらいs in the comment look like use of 例示 (which is listed in\ndictionary 学研現代新国語辞典 at hand; I don't see this use is specifically mentioned\nin foreigners' grammar).\n\nI suppose further subtle subcategorization of くらい's use is required for\nprecise analysis.\n\n===\n\nComments on your samples:\n\n 1. sounds unnatural (while the one in goldbrick's comment is ok) possibly because 5200 is too precise a number to be postfixed by くらい (an extreme case would be `5289円くらい`, which makes no sense.)\n\n 2. as commented by goldbrick, is not acceptable simply because 'eating too much' cannot be really combined with 'an amount as large as a mountain'.\n\nAlso, possibly you are right in that を in くらいを can be dropped in most cases.\n10万円くらい払った. = I paid around \\100000.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T11:22:42.120", "id": "88719", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-03T07:28:19.493", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-03T07:28:19.493", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88703", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Yes, these sentences are all grammatical and make perfect sense. The number of\npossible \"stacked\" conjugations is very large (see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/61903/5010) for an example), so\nwebsites cannot show them all.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T02:51:05.690", "id": "88715", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T02:51:05.690", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88705", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "According to jisho 理由 means \"reason, motive\" and 原因 means \"cause, origin\".\nThinking in terms of their translation 理由 would have something to do with your\ngoals (what do you want to get?, for what did you do it?) whereas 原因 would be\ncloser to \"initial reason, cause\" (what caused the accident? what happened and\nmade you do smth?)\n\nNote that I only think in terms of english here but some examples seem to\ncorrelate with my reasoning:\n\n別の理由があるね？ (there is another reason isn't there?)\n\n事故は彼の不注意が原因だった。(the accident was due to his carelessness.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-01T16:36:08.333", "id": "88707", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-01T16:42:46.740", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-01T16:42:46.740", "last_editor_user_id": "45708", "owner_user_id": "45708", "parent_id": "88706", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "原因 is _cause_ , whereas 理由 is _reason_. They are similar, but the former\nassumes there was an observable but unexpected \"event\".\n\nWhen you are describing the reason for something that is always true, you\nshould use 理由:\n\n * 素数が無限にある理由 \nthe reason why there are infinite prime numbers\n\n * 生きる理由 \nthe reason to live\n\nIn the following example, 原因 sounds like the speaker is asking about the\ndirect cause (e.g., traffic accident), whereas 理由 may sound like the speaker\nis asking about more indirect or ultimate reasons (e.g., fate, grudge).\n\n * 彼が死んだ原因 \nthe cause of his death\n\n * 彼が死んだ理由 \nthe reason of his death", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T02:26:05.610", "id": "88713", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T02:26:05.610", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88706", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "今 means \"now\", and すっきりした is in the past tense. Therefore いまあたまがすっきりした means\n\"My mind (just) clear **ed** up **now**!\", which is a correct sentence but\ndoesn't fit the previous context (\"after traveling for two weeks\"). To fix\nthis, you can do either of the following:\n\n * Just remove いま: あたまがすっきりした\n * Keep いま and use the [teiru-form](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3140/5010): いま(は)あたまがすっきりしている", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T02:05:02.217", "id": "88711", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T02:05:02.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I would not use 過ごす in this context; I would prefer ゲームに時間を費【つい】やす, ゲームに時間を使う,\nゲームするのに時間をかける etc.\n\n「有意義な時間を過ごす」「楽しい時間を過ごす」「家族と時間を過ごす」are perfectly fine, but somehow I find\n時間をゲームするために過ごす or 時間をゲームに過ごす extremely unnatural or even at the verge of being\nungrammatical.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T14:03:52.797", "id": "88720", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T14:03:52.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "88709", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Basically you can think 母 is always in \"the universe of discourse\", because\nwhen you say 母, it's determined; it almost certainly refers to your own\nmother. This means は is the ordinary particle choice. Usually, you should say\n母はすしを作ります, replacing が with the topic-marker は.\n\nHowever, が can be used in the following two cases:\n\n * When exhaustive-が is intended. \n\n> 母がすしを作ります。 \n> It's _my mother_ who makes sushi. \n> (as a response to \"Who makes sushi?\")\n\n * When neutral-description-が is intended. \n\n> 母がすしを作ります。 \n> (I just noticed) my mother will make sushi! \n> (when you are told to report everything happening in your house)\n\nI think your textbook will soon explain these special usages of が, but you can\nread several previous questions:\n\n * [What's the difference between wa (は) and ga (が)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/22/5010)\n * [Can someone explain me the use of は and が in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43213/5010)\n * [Why is this sentence ungrammatical? 「お寺が公園のとなりです。」](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/68923/5010)\n * [Why does 「電話は切れた」 sound more adversarial than 「電話が切れた」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/38639/5010)\n\nEither way, if there is no previous context at all, 母がすしを作ります sounds unnatural\nand sudden. But textbooks sometimes need to show you this kind of \"un-\ntopicalized\" sentence to explain how the Japanese sentence is structured.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T02:41:40.287", "id": "88714", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T02:41:40.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88712", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "「会社への行き方」 works. I feel that, since 仕方 is originally derived from し（連用形 of する）\n+ 方【かた】, it is ungrammatical for it to connect to a verb.\n\nCompare:\n\n * 水を飲む → 水の飲み方【かた】\n * 会社へ行く → 会社への行き方【かた】\n * 話をする → 話の仕方【しかた】\n * あいさつ(を)する → あいさつの仕方【しかた】", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-02T17:21:21.763", "id": "88723", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-02T17:21:21.763", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "88722", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "With an i-adjective, you can say:\n\n> この本は何も面白くない。 \n> This book is not interesting at all.\n\n> 何も熱くないよ。 \n> It's not hot at all!\n\nKeep in mind that i-adjectives don't take だ.\n\nWith a noun, for example you can say:\n\n> 彼には何も欠点がない。 \n> He has no faults at all.\n\n> 何も欲しいものはない。 \n> I want nothing at all.\n\nUse 何も only in the context of choosing one type of thing from many\npossibilities. When the noun is countable and you want to say there is not\neven one, you should use 1つもない, 1本もない, 1円もない and so on. Compare the following:\n\n> ここには何も本がない。 \n> There is not even one (type of) book here whatsoever.\n\n> ここには1冊も本がない。 \n> There is not even one book here.\n\n**EDIT:** If you wanted to say \"This is not a book by any means\", you should\nsay まったく instead. (何も is not incorrect in colloquial speech, though)\n\n> これはまったく本ではない。 \n> This is not a book by any means. (It's a tablet.)\n>\n> これは絶対に本ではない。 \n> This is absolutely not a book.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-03T00:25:17.720", "id": "88726", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-03T00:40:30.823", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-03T00:40:30.823", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "You could use a noun with 何も to express your opinion that something doesn’t\nqualify as the said noun at all.\n\n> 何も悲劇ではない。 \n> It is not a tragedy at all (although some may call it a tragedy).\n\n> 何も名案ではない。 \n> It is not a good idea at all (although some may claim it to be).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-03T05:45:28.027", "id": "88730", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-03T05:45:28.027", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "88724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[ぞくぞく](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%9E%E3%81%8F%E3%81%9E%E3%81%8F/#jn-130143)\n\n 1. a feeling of cold\n 2. trembling due to fear, excitement, nervousness\n\n[ぞわぞわ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%9E%E3%82%8F%E3%81%9E%E3%82%8F/#jn-283415)\n\n 1. noisiness\n 2. trembling or goosebumps due to disgust, uncomfortableness, excitement\n\nSo the above are dictionary definitions, I think ぞわぞわ-1 is rare. (Usually\n_noisy_ is ざわざわ）\n\nI think your intuition is basically right. A few finer points:\n\n * As you can see, both can mean trembling. So in some cases they are interchangeable. There is an example ぞわぞわと悪寒が背筋を這昇った直後 [from this site](http://yourei.jp/%E3%81%9E%E3%82%8F%E3%81%9E%E3%82%8F), where I think ぞくぞく is also possible.\n * ぞくぞく is more like chill, coldness; ぞわぞわ is more like creepiness (so in the above example ぞわぞわ _is_ 'better' due to 這昇る = creep up).\n * ぞわぞわ is generally more negative. If you see a cockroach, it's ぞわぞわ (maybe ぞくっとした is possible, though. That means you are really scared.)\n * ぞくぞく can be positive. 明日から大学生だと思うとぞくぞくした = _I felt chill to think I am going to be a university student from tomorrow._ This means the speaker is positively excited about being a student. To use ぞわぞわ here is a bit strange, but that would indicate anxiety of the speaker.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-03T13:32:05.833", "id": "88736", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-03T13:57:59.893", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-03T13:57:59.893", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88725", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Actually, I think it's more typically thought of as a ~~row~~ line of text.\nSee for example [Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%BE%E8%A1%8C).\nThe ~~row~~ line that contains ま would be called ま行{ぎょう}, where 行{ぎょう} just\nmeans a line of text/row/column.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Toz9e.png)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-03T00:57:53.717", "id": "88728", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-03T14:18:10.037", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-03T14:18:10.037", "last_editor_user_id": "10045", "owner_user_id": "10045", "parent_id": "88727", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Some people pronounce 相変わらず with a prolonged あ sound, dropping the /w/ sound,\nin casual speech. (It’s kind of like the opposite of 場合 becoming ば **わ** い,\nwhere the /w/ sound is added.) あいか **あ** らず in your novel may be the\nreproduction of that pronunciation intended to express casualness.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-03T08:14:26.053", "id": "88733", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T02:00:42.277", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T02:00:42.277", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "88731", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "The spelling is trying to visually transcribe a pronunciation that is\nsometimes cited as a characteristic of the younger speech with \"loosened\"\narticulation (incidentally, it was [a hot topic on\nTwitter](https://togetter.com/li/1744860) weeks ago).\n\nNote that in this case, however, as an introspection of the \"younger\ngeneration\", what あいかあらず stands for is probably not literally like\n[[aikaːɾazɯ]] as it suggests, but [[aikaɰaɾazɯ]], which retains an approximant\nwithout the labial narrowing (in the prescriptive [[aikaβaɾazɯ]]). It is\ngenerally distinguishable among speakers who use this pronunciation from the\nstrictly consonant-less variant, which is not unheard either in a casual\nspeech.\n\n* * *\n\n**Edit:**\n\n> Also, I wonder if は in 二十センチは is related to this kind of は?\n\nYes, but the answers to the post don't seem right. You should instead see this\none: [Does は mean 'at least' in this\nsentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29438/7810)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T05:39:47.430", "id": "88760", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T05:49:11.767", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-05T05:49:11.767", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "88731", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "While in my opinion this video did a good job at explaining it in an easy to\nunderstand way, there are a few things I would like to point out.\n\nIf a verb looks like a Type 1 verb (also called Godan verb), it is always a\nType 1 verb (except for the Type 3 verbs). But, if a verb looks like a Type 2\nverb (also called Ichidan verb), it isn't neccessarily a Type 2 verb. The\nvideo also mentions that there are exceptions like 帰る (かえる), which is a Type 1\nverb, but for some reason it shows 走る (はしる) as an example for Type 2 verbs\neven though it's Type 1. Here is a list of all these exceptions\n(<https://www.sljfaq.org/afaq/which-godan.html>) but I recommend to just\nalways look up whether a new verb you learn is Type 1 or Type 2 instead of\nlearning a whole list.\n\nThen the video mentions that する and 来る are exceptions, which is correct, but I\nwould also add 行く as a little exception, which will get relevant if you want\nto form the past tense and -te form but I guess he will mention that in Module\n5.\n\nAt last I would also add that for making the \"capable\" form (potential form)\nof a Type 2 verb, you can actually not only add れる but also られる, which is a\nbit longer and less common in speech.\n\nSo yes I would say this video is usable but there are still some things\nmissing which makes the video unfavorable for being your only reference. There\nare still things missing like passive form, causative form, imperative form\nand so on.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-03T11:45:29.263", "id": "88735", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-03T11:45:29.263", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39347", "parent_id": "88734", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "These Xとして and Xとする have essentially the same meaning, \"to claim/say/report\nX\".\n\n * [What does this としています express?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/56323/5010)\n * [Is this volitional +とする?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/56596/5010)\n\nThe difference is that として is the te-form and とする is the attributive form\n(i.e., modifies the following noun as a relative clause). In other words, として\nin the first sentence is \"..., claiming X\", whereas とする in the second sentence\nmeans \"[a man] who claims X\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-04T01:11:36.397", "id": "88745", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-04T01:11:36.397", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88737", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The \"方\" used here is a suffix that attaches to the 連用形 of a verb (to make a\nphrase meaning \"the way to [verb]\" or \"how to [verb]\") and cannot stand on its\nown as a noun (at least in modern Japanese). So \"世の中の方\" is ungrammatical.\n\nThe expression in question here is \"世の中を渡る\".\n\nYes, you can say it is an idiomatic expression, and your understanding of its\nliteral meaning is correct: \"to cross the world\", like crossing a river or the\nsea.\n\n[デジタル大辞典](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%B8%96%E3%82%92%E6%B8%A1%E3%82%8B/)\nhas an entry for \"世を渡る\" (which is pretty much the same thing as \"世の中を渡る\") in\nwhich it is defined as:\n\n> 生活する。暮らしていく。\n\nWhich means something to the effect of \"to live; to make a living\".\n\nIt seems quite possible that the expression arose from an analogy between\nsailing across the sea (or on a smaller scale, river-crossing -- or any kind\nof crossing, at any rate) and living, both of which are fraught with obstacles\nand hardships, and sometimes require tricky maneuvers to get through\nsuccessfully.\n\n(If it did, it is not the only expression that similarity between the two\nunderlies; we also have \"世間の荒波\" (\"rough waves of life/society\"), which\ndescribes the harshness of human life/society.)\n\nI think the dictionary's definition is fair enough, but my own little advice\nis that it might be a good idea to understand it to mean not just \"to live\" or\n\"to make a living\" but also \"to navigate through life/society\" or something\nlike that.\n\nThere is also a related expression,\n\"[世渡り上手](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E4%B8%96%E6%B8%A1%E3%82%8A%E4%B8%8A%E6%89%8B)\"\n(or \"世渡りがうまい\"), which describes someone who is world-wise and street-smart and\nknows how to get what they want, get ahead in life, get into people's favor,\ncultivate a social network, etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-04T22:08:35.573", "id": "88753", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-04T22:08:35.573", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11575", "parent_id": "88738", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This では is short for [ではないか](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17947/5010),\nwhich roughly means \"..., isn't it?\". For example, 夢では means \"It's a dream,\nisn't it?\" or just \"Isn't it a dream?\".\n\n> それが人の本質だから **では** \n> = それが人の本質だから **ではないか**\n>\n> It's because that is the true nature of humans, **isn't it**?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-04T01:01:17.043", "id": "88744", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-04T01:01:17.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88743", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "* **人は** : \"as for humans\" (noun + topic marker)\n * **話せる** : \"to be able to talk; can talk\" (potential form of 話す \"to talk\")\n * **～ようになる** : \"to come to ～; to reach the point where ～\" (see [this](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8B-you-ni-naru-meaning/))\n * **と** : \"if; when(ever); once\" (conjunctive particle, see [this](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%81%A8-to-meaning-whenever/))\n * **すぐ** : \"soon\" (adverb)\n * **いろいろなことを** : \"various things\" (noun phrase + object marker)\n * **尋ねます** : \"to ask\" (ichidan verb in polite form)\n\nAll in all, the sentence literally means \"As for humans, once [they] reach the\npoint where [they] can talk, [they] soon ask various things\". You can\ntranslate it more naturally like \"As soon as a person learns to talk, they\nstart to ask various questions.\"", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T03:40:38.707", "id": "88758", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T03:46:43.940", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-05T03:46:43.940", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88746", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[宵宮]{よいみや} takes four syllables.\n\nI don’t know about the game(?) character, but as a normal word, it seems to be\npronounced as よいみや{LHHH} according to [NHK’s accent\ndictionary](https://sakura-\nparis.org/dict/NHK%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E7%99%BA%E9%9F%B3%E3%82%A2%E3%82%AF%E3%82%BB%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8/content/5624_1682).\n\nThe same word is also read as よみや{HLL}, and it can be written as 夜宮 in this\ncase.\n\nIf it is a person’s last name, I would guess it is pronounced as よいみや{LHLL}.\n\nThe /oi/ sequence could sometimes sound like it constitutes one syllable (i.e.\ndiphthong), as in よいこ{HLL}, but I think it is generally considered a\ncombination of two syllables.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-04T10:18:46.273", "id": "88749", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-04T10:18:46.273", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "88747", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As commented, they mean the same\n[ある範囲の分量。区別されたもの。](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%88%86_%28%E3%81%B6%E3%82%93%29/#jn-197124).\n\nA way to understand such 分 is to think about the amount of _what_ is being\ntalked about.\n\nFor the sentences in the question:\n\n * 必要な単位の分 **の科目や必修科目**\n * 休職の分 **の仕事**\n\nA possible process to understand the sentece as follows:\n\nThe main clause is\n\n * 自分の興味のある科目や必修科目を、バランスよく選ばなければならない。You have to choose (compulsory) courses interesting to you in a well balanced way.\n\nThe part ending in 分 describes how much those 科目や必修科目 should be:\n\n * 進級や卒業に必要な単位の分 : the amount of courses you take is such that you can get credits required for successfully proceeding to next year/graduation\n\nThe second sentence can be understood in the same way:\n\n * 仕事が溜まっていた : Tasks had been accumulating\n * 一年間の休職の分 : the amount of those tasks is such that it represents a year's leave\n\nI guess a difficulty lies in that you have to change the structure of the\nsentence a lot in order to get a decent translation (which I didn't do above).\n\n===\n\nI am wondering if there is no single English word for 進級.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T09:59:46.460", "id": "88766", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T14:12:22.073", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-05T14:12:22.073", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88750", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "They more or less mean the same. There is a slight nuance which doesn't change\nthe meaning between ある and あった (note that it's not the past tense).\n\n 1. When an earthquake occurs, call me.\n 2. When an earthquake occurs, call me.\n 3. In case of an earthquake, call me.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-04T16:17:16.733", "id": "88752", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-04T16:17:16.733", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "88751", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "To follow the first instruction 「地震があ **る** ／起き **る** 場合には、電話してください」, you\nwould need to know in advance that an earthquake will happen and make a phone\ncall before it strikes, which probably requires some kind of supernatural\npower.\n\n「津波が来る場合には、電話してください」 may be a valid instruction, though, because a tsunami\nfollows an earthquake with a delay and you may have time to prepare for it\nbefore it arrives.\n\nIn terms of timing, the other two basically mean the same thing. You would\nmake a phone call after an earthquake has occurred.\n\nThis is related: [The use of present and past tenses in ～時\nsentences](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/30877/43676)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T00:23:39.460", "id": "88754", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T01:59:21.203", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T01:59:21.203", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "88751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This か is a question marker, and いつの事だか is an embedded question.\n\n * [Usage of か after a clause?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13034/5010)\n\nAs the above link says, it's okay to have だ before か in embedded questions,\nand the が between the noun and わかる is usually dropped.\n\n * いつのこと(だ)?: \"When was it?\" (an ordinary question)\n * いつのことだ **か** : \"when it was\" (an embedded question, now a noun clause)\n * いつのことだかわからない: \"I don't know when it was\"\n\n> その晩、夢を見た。いつの事だかわからない。けれども覚えのある光景があった。 \n> I saw a dream that night. I don't remember when I saw it, but there was a\n> scenery I do remember.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T01:00:03.940", "id": "88756", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T01:56:00.910", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-05T01:56:00.910", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88755", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "hajimemashite is used when you meet someone for the first time. It's usually\ntranslated as 'nice to meet you'. Here's a video (second one) with cute\nexamples: <https://www.erin.jpf.go.jp/jp/lesson/01/key-phrases/> By the way:\nhajimeru means 'to start/begin'. This could help you remember that you use\nhajimemashite when you meet someone for the first time - you're starting a new\nrelationship.\n\ndouzo yoroshiku (onegai shimasu) could be translated somewhat (but not\nexactly) as 'I am counting on you in the future', or 'please be nice to me'.\nRather than just saying that it's nice to meet this person, you're expressing\nthat you hope you'll get along well. You can also use this expression when\nyou're asking for a favor.\n\nHope this is clear and helpful! Good luck with your Japanese studies.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T17:57:08.657", "id": "88772", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T17:57:08.657", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29821", "parent_id": "88762", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Using just the word 家族 would most likely be interpreted in the literal sense\nin Japanese, i.e. that there is some kind of blood relationship or connection\nthrough marriage. If you are a foreigner and said 日本の家族 I suspect that would\nbe interpreted as meaning you are married to a Japanese person and the\n'family' you mean is the extended family of your spouse. The word isn't\nusually used figuratively in the same way it can be in English (although it\nmay be possible). That said, you can put it in a simple phrase to make your\nintended meaning clear. Something like:\n\n家族みたいな関係 a family-like relationship", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T08:50:54.290", "id": "88764", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T08:50:54.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "88763", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "We may not use 家族 to refer to friends as much as in other cultures, but\ncalling someone with whom you have a family-to-family relationship as you\ndescribe in your post 日本の家族 is totally acceptable, and it sounds quite natural\nas a caption to a photo in which you appear with them.\n\n日本のお母さん, 日本のお父さん, 日本の兄弟, etc. would also be understood the way you would\nexpect them to be.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T09:05:35.160", "id": "88765", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T01:57:51.897", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T01:57:51.897", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "88763", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "決行 (けっこう{LHHH}) and 欠航 (けっこう{LHHH}) are both of level pitch. No other options\nare offered by NHK日本語発音アクセント辞典 or 大辞林.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T13:27:39.947", "id": "88768", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T13:27:39.947", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27977", "parent_id": "88767", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "決行 and 欠航 are pronounced the same, but you _can_ tell which is used from the\ncontext. Simply, 決行 is not a word used in a situation like the one in that\nvideo. Note that the person on the right is supposed to be a traveler who\ndoesn't speak Japanese like a native speaker.\n\n決行 means holding a public/social event or carrying out a plan/operation\ndeterminedly despite some obstacle (typically bad weather). Here \"event\"\nincludes a live concert, a sport game, a competition, a strike action, a\nmilitary operation, and so on, but not a departure of a ferry/airplane.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-06T01:28:07.143", "id": "88780", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-09T04:07:17.567", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-09T04:07:17.567", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "88767", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Practically you can replace this particular ということで with として.\n\nI cannot really explain the construction grammatically, but you can take this\nto be similar to (independent) participle construction in English (sorry I\ndon't know the proper name for the construction; I mean something like\n_Leaving the town_ , he headed for the north) as follows:\n\nFirst,\n\n * Xということだ = It is that X.\n\nで makes it adverbial:\n\n * it being that X\n\nSo it is like embedding X as the description of the situation. If this\n'theory' is correct, 君を「静」のキャラということで設定した translates literally as _I set you,\nit being that you are the static character_ , or _I designed you, your being\nthe static character_ , which is _I designed you as the static character_ in\nmore normal English.\n\nAs you may be aware, there are a couple of related questions:\n\n * [ゲストハウスの当番だということで、郷田さんと熊沢さんがゲストハウスまで案内してくれることになった](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/54875/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A7-in-this-sentence)\n * [なぁに、姉さん。その銃は。 ……私も暴発ということで殺すの？](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/60111/meaning-of-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A7-this-time)\n * [当面はノーサンキューということで。](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/47731/meaning-of-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A7)\n\nwhere:\n\n * ゲストハウスの当番だということで : Being in charge of the guest house\n * 私を暴発ということで殺す : kill me, it being that it was an accidental discharge\n * 当面はノーサンキューということで（理解してください） : (Please understand) it being that I don't want it for now.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-06T12:10:12.813", "id": "88795", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-06T12:10:12.813", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "88769", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I know this is not the answer that you are asking for, but I would like to\npoint out that 彼はみんなに修正をあげる does not work, not because of incorrect social\nsituation but because the direct translation of \"give corrections\" as 修正をあげる\nsomehow does not work in the Japanese language. I would use:\n\n * (person/document)の誤【あやま】りを修正する\n * (person/document)の間違いを修正する\n * (document)に修正を加える\n\nAs for the second question,\n\n> あなたは僕に許してもらいたいのなら\n\nFirst of all, は cannot be used as a subject marker in subordinate clauses (See\n[は vs が in\n私は言うように書いてください。](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/43517/%e3%81%af-\nvs-%e3%81%8c-in-%e7%a7%81%e3%81%af%e8%a8%80%e3%81%86%e3%82%88%e3%81%86%e3%81%ab%e6%9b%b8%e3%81%84%e3%81%a6%e3%81%8f%e3%81%a0%e3%81%95%e3%81%84)\n) for more details. Hence「あなた **が** 僕に許してもらいたいのなら」.\n\nHowever, using pronouns is awkward here in the fist place. It is best to use\n「許してもらいたいのなら」, without either of the two pronouns you wrote.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-05T21:23:02.460", "id": "88776", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-05T21:23:02.460", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "36955", "parent_id": "88770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]