Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "> What function is the が in those bolded sections performing?\n\nIn both sentence, が is the plain subject marker that marks the subject of\n所属する, which modifies 部隊 as a relative clause. It appears that you have parsed\nthese sentences correctly. The object of (捨札置場に)置く is clearly 部隊 in Sentence\n1, and the object of (スタンバイゾーンに)移動する is also 部隊 in Sentence 2.\n\n> あなたの場にあるキャラカードを1枚選び、そのカードが所属する部隊を捨札置場に置く。 \n> Pick one character card that is in your 場, and place the 部隊 which that card\n> belongs to into the 捨札置場.\n>\n> 使用キャラカードが所属する部隊をスタンバイゾーンに移動し行動可能にする。 \n> Move the 部隊 which the character card (using this skill) belongs to into the\n> スタンバイゾーン and make it (=部隊) actionable.\n\nSo these sentence are saying 部隊 is something that can go into the 捨札置場 and the\nスタンバイゾーン. You're saying this won't happen, but I think this is the only\nplausible interpretation.\n\n* * *\n\nBy the way, I think が in 戦闘力 **が** 使用キャラカードの戦闘力以下のキャラカード can be explained as a\nplain subject marker in a relative clause. This noun phrase is constructed\nfrom the following base \"double-subject\" sentence.\n\n> このキャラカード **は** 戦闘力 **が** 使用キャラカードの戦闘力以下だ。 \n> As for this character card, the power is less than or equal to the power of\n> the character using this skill.\n\n(Note that 以下 works like a no-adjective, and the attributive form of だ is の,\ne.g., この本は表紙が緑色 **だ** → 表紙が緑色 **の** 本.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-20T05:13:08.610", "id": "90815", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-20T05:26:46.023", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-20T05:26:46.023", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90796", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As you said, いらっしゃる is an honorific version of だ. Simply, there is even an\nhonorific version of \"is\" in Japanese. It's used to describe the state of\n\"being\" of someone respectfully.\n\nIn general, **anyone** who needs to pay respect to that chairman will use the\nhonorific language. They may or may not belong to the same organization, and\nthey may or may not be directly beneath the chairman. Sometimes it's used by\nsomeone who is _above_ the mentioned person. For example, in a wedding speech,\na president may use the honorific language when introducing a bride who is\ntheir subordinate. On the other hand, 尊敬語 is not used in news or Wikipedia\narticles where objective writing style is preferred.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-19T00:46:19.557", "id": "90801", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-19T00:46:19.557", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90797", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "As a simple noun, 娘 does mean \"(young) girl\" as well as \"daughter\". Basically\nthis usage is bookish, and it's not used outside established set phrases\n(e.g., 看板娘) in casual speech.\n\n * [Sentence ending in 娘](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/82524/5010)\n * [Usage of を in 自らを豊作を司る](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/33480/5010)\n * [What purpose does ある serve in the sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/38202/5010)\n * [What does 看板親父 mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21687/5010)\n\nBut that is not to say it's okay to address someone using 娘 in real spoken\nJapanese. Only in fiction, someone who speaks in a pompous, dignified and/or\nold-fashioned manner (e.g., gods, prophets, landlords, samurai) may use 娘 to\naddress a stranger girl.\n\nNote that 息子 is always \"son\", never \"boy\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-19T01:09:03.273", "id": "90802", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-19T01:14:21.127", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-19T01:14:21.127", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90799", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Yes, it can. You may want to look at\n[追い打ち(撃ち/討ち)](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E8%BF%BD%E3%81%84%E6%92%83%E3%81%A1).\n\n> 2: 弱っているところに _重ねて打撃を与え_ 、さらに厳しい状態に追いやること。 \n> _To strike an additional blow to a weakened state, making it even harder._", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-19T02:05:09.427", "id": "90804", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-19T02:05:09.427", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45272", "parent_id": "90803", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "_Safe_ in English somehow means both \"unlikely to be harmed; not in danger\"\nand \"unlikely to cause harm; not dangerous\" depending on the context. The same\nis true for 安全, and 彼は安全だ is ambiguous. However, 無事 in Japanese only means \"to\nbe not in danger (any more)\", and 彼は無事だ never means \"He is not dangerous\".\nLikewise, \"君、無事かい\" only means \"Are you all right?\" or \"Are you undamaged?\"", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-19T02:44:48.320", "id": "90806", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-19T02:55:49.573", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-19T02:55:49.573", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90805", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "In modern Japanese, 種 as a counter for kinds/species is always read **しゅ**. 3種\nis さんしゅ.\n\nくさ is an archaic counter that is no longer in use. You don't have to remember\nit unless you are studying archaic Japanese literature seriously.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-20T01:35:25.957", "id": "90811", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-20T04:41:31.087", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-20T04:41:31.087", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90809", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "たら can be hypothetical (i.e., \"if\"), but たときに cannot.\n\n * 明日雪が降ったら、... \nIf it snows tomorrow...\n\n * 明日雪が降ったときに、... \nWhen it snows tomorrow (and I know it will), ...\n\nLikewise, depending on the context, 学んだら can sound like you may or may not\nlearn something in the future. You can usually tell if a certain たら is\nhypothetical from the context.\n\nThat said, 学ぶ is usually used in educational contexts, and 再び愛することを学ぶ already\nsounds a little weird to me. Isn't something like 再び愛せるようになったら (or なったときに)\nenough?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-20T03:07:00.690", "id": "90812", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-20T03:07:00.690", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90810", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "たら indicates that something happens, as described in the main clause, when the\ncircumstance described in the subordinate clause (i.e. before たら) comes true.\nIf it is likely to happen, たら is usually translated with _when_ in English,\nand if it is less certain, it may be translated with _if_. This is a\ndistinction English makes. In Japanese, the basic idea is the same regardless\nof the likelihood.\n\nThe difference from 〜た時に is that it puts focus on a (usually one-time)\ncondition rather than timing. For example, when you say 再び愛せるようになっ **たら** ,\nyou mean that you learning to love again is a necessary condition for doing\nwhatever is stated in the main clause. In general, when you talk about such a\ncondition, you are either consciously or unconsciously thinking about a\npossibility of it not being met. When you say 再び愛せるようになっ **た時に** , on the\nother hand, you are more likely assuming that that time will come.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T14:25:09.340", "id": "90834", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:52:48.807", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:52:48.807", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90810", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "～したことがある means \"have done\" with the focus on the thing at issue having\nhappened in the past or having a certain experience.\n\n～することがある means \"occasionally/sometimes do\", focusing instead on the action\nbeing a possible occurrence.\n\nFor the grammar point, see, for example, [this](https://nihongokyoshi-\nnet.com/2019/05/09/jlptn4-grammar-kotogaaru/) and\n[this](https://j-nihongo.com/dic-kotogaaru/).\n\nそこで泳ぐことがありますか means \"Do you swim there?\" or more literally \"Does it ever\nhappen that you go there for a swim?\" Since the English sentence is \"Have you\never had a swim there?\" You got it right. I think it should be そこで泳いだことがありますか", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-20T04:26:25.873", "id": "90814", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-20T04:32:12.870", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-20T04:32:12.870", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "90813", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Possibly the tag \"提案\" is misleading in the paper. In the suggestion of the\nprofessor, 行為者=SH and 受益者=SH/H and 決定権者=H, so it is actually 勧誘（グループ型）.\n\nBetween しよう and しようか, the presence of か makes it more explicit that the\ndecision maker is the hearer, the students in the example. As such it sounds\nsofter, and seems more appropriate because otherwise it sounds like a command\n(if implicit) from above (the professor).\n\nOn the other hand, お疲れ様会でもしよう sounds more friendlier, like the speaker and the\nhear(s) are on equal terms. So if the speaker is another student, しよう would be\npreferred.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T03:04:53.343", "id": "90825", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T03:04:53.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90816", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "お疲れ会でもしよう would sound as if the professor is already pretty much determined to\nhold a party and expects the students to agree to join him. でも sounds a bit\nout of place in this case because the speaker already knows what they are\ngoing to have and there is no need to make it vague with でも. He would more\nlikely say お疲れ会（を）しよう. This could be part of the reason more native speakers\nchose しようか than しよう.\n\nBy saying お疲れ会でもしようか, the professor is suggesting that they have a party (or\nsomething) together, but leaving the final decision to the students. It goes\nwell with でも because whether what they are going to have is indeed お疲れ会 is\nless certain than in the first case. Someone might suggest an alternative.\n\nThe professor would be more embarrassed in the first case if the students\nrefused his suggestion. The か (along with でも) could be seen as a hedge against\nthis risk.\n\nBetween friends, お疲れ会でもしようよ would sound most natural. The final よ ensures the\ndecision is a mutual one.\n\nしようか sounds like a command, or even intimidation, when the listener has no\nchoice under the given circumstances. This is not the case here or in the\nexample of 学校を休もうか. In the latter, the parent is trying to convince the kid to\nagree to her suggestion by involving the kid in the decision, instead of\nunilaterally pushing her decision upon the kid.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T07:12:05.343", "id": "90831", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:55:52.020", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:55:52.020", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90816", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "Syntactically, this の is a noun, and everything before it is a relative\nclause. But I think it's best to treat this の as \"some special noun working as\na placeholder\". It's also different from what we usually call a nominalizer\n(which turns 見る \"see\" to 見るの \"seeing\", etc.).\n\nYour sentence is a [cleft\nsentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/19208/5010), a special\nconstruction to focus a certain part of a sentence. This の roughly corresponds\nto the \"placeholder _it_ \" in English cleft sentences like \" _It_ 's John who\nate the cake\". You can see that this _it_ is specially referring to a person,\nwhich is odd outside of this construction. Likewise, の in a cleft sentence is\na special noun which is used in place of many things including 者/人, 物, 場所/所\nand 時/時間, and it is unlikely to be an abbreviation of any particular word.\n\n * 昨日ここへ来た **の** はだれですか？ \n昨日ここへ来た **人** はだれですか？ \nWho was **it** that came here yesterday? \n(This can be rephrased as \"Who was _the person who_ came here yesterday?\", but\nthat does not mean this _it_ is short for _person_.)\n\n * 彼がここへ来た **の** はいつですか？ \n彼がここへ来た **時間** はいつですか？ \nWhen was **it** that he came here?\n\n * 昨日彼が来た **の** はどこですか？ \n昨日彼が来た **場所** はどこですか？ \nWhere was **it** that he came yesterday?\n\n * 昨日彼がここへ来た **の** は何故ですか？ \nWhy was **it** that he came here yesterday? \n(For this one, I don't know how to rewrite this using a normal noun and a\nnormal relative clause)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T04:30:03.467", "id": "90830", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T04:56:04.747", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-21T04:56:04.747", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90819", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "What you've discovered is that English translations are not always helpful,\nparticularly when a word is used rather idiomatically and in a less strictly\nliteral fashion.\n\nMy Japanese-Japanese dictionary lists three meanings for 明ける\n\n * 明るくなる。朝になる。\n * 新しい年になる\n * 一定の期間がすぎる。期限が満了する\n\nThe first two definitions are not too hard to understand or discern.\n\nThe third one is a bit more difficult to grasp and understand (at least from a\ntoo literal thinking about \"light\"). Consider the following sentences lifted\nfrom my Japanese-English dictionary:\n\n * 梅雨が明けた。 The rainy season ended.\n * 刑期があけた。 His sentence came to an end. (Ie., he served his sentence.)\n\nThe idea here is along the lines something coming to complete _fullness_ and\nthus being _complete_ ; having fully (満) completed itself and come its end\n(了).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-20T21:53:04.337", "id": "90822", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T02:19:37.920", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-21T02:19:37.920", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "90821", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "明ける _appears_ to mean either \"to start\" or \"to end\" in certain set phrases,\nand that's probably why it may seem confusing.\n\n[](https://jisho.org/word/%E9%96%8B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B)\n\nHowever, 明ける doesn't originally mean either of those things. I think the\nfundamental meaning of 明ける is \"to become bright\" or **\" to move to a\nbrighter/positive/active period\"**.\n\n * 年が明ける: the old year ends and the new year starts (which is worth celebrating)\n * 夜が明ける: the night ends and the day starts (i.e., dawn)\n * 夏休みが明ける: a summer vacation ends (and an active period starts)\n * 梅雨が明ける: a rainy season ends (and the hotter and brighter season starts)\n * 喪が明ける: the period of mourning ends (and we're in a brighter mood now)\n\nNote that 明ける is used with specific words including ones listed above as the\nsubject. We don't usually use 明ける when something gets darker or less active\n(either physically or psychologically).\n\nAs a noun, 年明け refers to the _beginning_ of a year, but 夜明け refers to the\n_end_ of a night. This may seem inconsistent at first, but they actually\nconsistently refer to \"a period after some positive/bright change\". (Of course\nmany people think 休み明け (post-vacation period) is not fun, but that's another\nstory.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T03:34:17.557", "id": "90827", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T03:52:17.353", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-21T03:52:17.353", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90821", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's definitely dialectal, but according to [this\npage](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A0%E3%81%8B), it's not specific to\n茨城. To me, this type of sentence-end だか is stereotypical\n[いなか言葉](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/23691/5010) that is associated\nwith no particular region in Japan. (That is not to say だか is an imaginary\nthing.)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T00:22:24.037", "id": "90824", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T00:41:21.310", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-21T00:41:21.310", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90823", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The verb that seems to be throwing you off is [奢る{おごる}(jisho.org's\ndefinition)](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%A5%A2%E3%82%8B), a godan verb meaning\nto pay for someone else's stuff, often a meal. Since it's a godan verb, the\nte-form is おごって. From there you get おごっちゃう.\n\n> あたしおごっちゃう \n> It's my treat", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T04:18:03.283", "id": "90829", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T04:18:03.283", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "90828", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "> is this a normal (speech) word order or is it a stylistic inversion used for\n> a literary effect.\n\nYes, this is a normal order and not a stylistic inversion.\n\nThis is just as normal: **彼女は恋愛と結婚は別のものと考えていた。**\n\nThis is a stylistic inversion: **彼女は考えていた…恋愛と結婚は別のものと。**\n\n* * *\n\n> Is it the clearest expression? Shouldn't it at least be escaped with commas:\n> 、彼女は、?\n\nIt is clear enough, but not the clearest. Commas could help as follows, but\nnot mandatory. Some may get annoyed by the abuse of commas, but it's a matter\nor preference:\n\n * 恋愛と結婚は別のもの、と彼女は考えていた。\n * 彼女は、恋愛と結婚は別のもの、と考えていた。\n\nThe clear **est** would be something like: 彼女は、「恋愛」と「結婚」は別のものである、と、考えていた。\nwhich is overkill and will surely trigger some types of people.\n\n* * *\n\n> It took me a minute to understand what's going on (I'm a beginner)\n\nTake is slow and easy, you'll get used to it :)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T09:58:43.920", "id": "90833", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T09:58:43.920", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90832", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I've been working with and in Japanese off and on since about 1988, but I'm\nnot a native speaker, so take this with a grain of salt. :)\n\n## How to parse 店は人の多いところがいいです\n\n> 人の多いところ \n> My understanding is that の marks the subject of the adjective 多い, which can\n> be replaced が for emphasis... \n> Overall, it means \"A place with lots of people.\"\n\nYour parsing so far is correct.\n\n## Can 店は人の多いところがいいです be ambiguous?\n\nI don't think so.\n\nYou point out:\n\n> ところ means \"place\" but it can also be used to refer to a point in time.\n\nThe term ところ used to refer to a point in time is, I think, ~~always~~\n_usually_ in the context of a verb phrase:\n\n * するところ → just about to do\n * しているところ → in the moment of doing\n * したところ → just finished doing\n\nI don't think it refers to time with _most_ adjectives, where instead it\nrefers to an aspect of something (as in 「彼女【かのじょ】のいい[と]{●}[こ]{●}[ろ]{●}」 \"the\ngood aspects of [my] girlfriend\"), or to a location (as in\n「蚊【か】のいない[と]{●}[こ]{●}[ろ]{●}」 \"a place without mosquitoes\", or\n「カバの少【すく】ない[と]{●}[こ]{●}[ろ]{●}」 \"a place with few hippos\").\n\n## Can the above sentence convey the meaning \"It's good when the shop is\ncrowded\"?\n\nI don't think so. To convey the sense of _\" the point or span in time when a\nquality is present\"_, I'm much more accustomed to seeing the word とき used\ninstead:\n\n> 店【みせ】は人【ひと】の多【おお】い[と]{●}[き]{●}がいいです\n\n(Albeit, this isn't \"crowded\" so much as just \"there are a lot of people\".)\n\n### Addendum\n\nAs pointed out by @[Nameless](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/45630/)\nin the comment to this post, there are sometimes cases where `[ADJ]+ところ`\nrefers to a moment or time, such as 「忙【いそが】しい[と]{●}[き]{●}」 \"a busy moment\".\n\nI think the reason that doesn't work here with 店【みせ】 and 人【ひと】の多【おお】いところ is\nbecause a 店【みせ】 is inherently a \"location\", as noted by\n@[A.Ellett](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/4875/) in the comment on\nthe question, so ところ in context must mean a place. Meanwhile, because neither\na person nor a person's current state is a \"location\", 忙しいところ cannot refer to\na \"busy place\" and still make sense in that context.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T19:08:13.960", "id": "90836", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T00:42:06.377", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-22T00:42:06.377", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "90835", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "> 店は人の多いところがいいです\n\nA sentence like this is fine only when there is enough context. Without any\ncontext, this is a very vague sentence. My interpretations (in the order they\ncame to my mind) were:\n\n 1. I (usually) prefer crowded places within a shop/restaurant.\n 2. The good point of shops/restaurants (in general) is that I can find many people there.\n 3. Shops/restaurants should be located at a crowded location.\n 4. When you go to a shop/restaurant, choose one that has many customers. \n(I somehow didn't notice this until @Chocolate mentioned it, but this is also\na natural interpretation.)\n\nIn 1, 3 and 4, ところ refers to (three different kinds of) physical places. In 2,\nところ refers to an abstract aspect (cf. [Meaning of ところ in\nアメリカのいいところ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23738/5010)).\n\nところ [can refer to a point of\ntime](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/62181/5010), but in this case I\ncould not think of a possible interpretation where ところ means time point.\nSomething like 人の少ないところを狙って店に入る would mean the same thing as 人の少ない時を狙って店に入る.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T02:34:23.660", "id": "90842", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T04:51:34.353", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-22T04:51:34.353", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90835", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "(誰かを)友達に追加する means \"to add (someone) as a friend\". (誰かを)友達へ追加する would also\nmean the same thing, but its nuance is closer to \"to add (someone) _to_ the\nfriend (list)\".\n\nFollowing [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/33605/5010) rule, the\nnominalized version of those is 友達への追加. (Somehow にの is an invalid\ncombination.) Thus 友達への追加を許可 literally means \"Allow adding as a friend\" or\n”Allow adding to the friend list\".\n\nThis may not be 100% wrong, but I agree that it's highly confusing. Since\nthere is no word that corresponds to \"others\", it's very hard to get who's\ndoing what. It should have been \"他の人が(あなたを)友達に追加するのを許可\" or at least\n\"他人に友達追加を許可\". (The gray description below the checkbox is clear enough,\nthough.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-21T23:42:48.593", "id": "90838", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T23:53:56.327", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-21T23:53:56.327", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90837", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "> I don't know how to theorize this but somehow I feel that the only\n> grammatically plausible modification relation here is that \"友だちへの\" modifies\n> \"追加\". What am I missing here?\n\nYou are missing \"common sense\" which takes years of experience dealing with\nexactly these types of sentences, which is difficult to explain logically.\nMany Japanese people are puzzled with these wordings too, especially those who\nare not used to such interface. Common sense is not common after all.\n\nLet's break it down:\n\nFirstly, **友だちへの追加を許可（する）** can be interpreted in two ways:\n\n * 「友だちリストへの追加」を許可する\n * 「友だち」へ対して、「追加」という行為を行う事を許可する\n\nSo it's already ambiguous. Here's where the \"common sense\" comes in to play.\nDon't ask me how I know this, but 友だち here does not mean (your) friend. 友だち\nhere is pointing to a \"list of friends\" or \"contact list\". Actually from an\nengineer's perspective it's all about attributes - users who have the\nattribute \"friend\" appears on \"list of friends\".\n\nSo let's replace 友だち with contact list.\n\n「contact list」への追加を許可 = allow/permit the addition to \"contact list\". Now we're\ngetting close. We still don't know \"who is giving permission\", \"who is\nreceiving permission\", \"who's contact list\". Again let's use \"common sense\" -\nyou are at the liberty to press/slide the button, thus you have control over\npermissions. Also, look at the description: 「あなたの電話番号を保有しているLINEユーザー」\n\nSo the answer is, that button/slider enables/disables the following:\n\n**You allow \"あなたの電話番号を保有しているLINEユーザー\" to do \"addition to (their) contact\nlist\".**\n\nTo make it simple, you are allowing \"LINE users who possess YOUR phone number\"\nto add you to their friend list.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T00:02:57.967", "id": "90839", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T00:02:57.967", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90837", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "That phrase is basically used \"to the teacher\".\n\n**Example:**\n\nHey teacher, thanks to you I got a job. **I hereby express my gratitude (to\nyou right now).**\n\nSimilar when you apologize - お詫び申し上げます = I hereby express my apologies.\n\n[This post may be related and\nhelpful.](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/58180/the-different-\nusage-\nbetween-%E8%87%B4%E3%81%97%E3%81%BE%E3%81%99-and-%E7%94%B3%E3%81%97%E4%B8%8A%E3%81%92%E3%81%BE%E3%81%99-interms-\nof-%E8%A3%9C%E5%8A%A9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E/)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T00:42:12.380", "id": "90841", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T00:42:12.380", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90840", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> which one is correct? Are they both correct?\n\nYes, both are correct.\n\n* * *\n\n> In what circumstances should each of these replies be replied to if they are\n> both correct?\n\nThey're both typical formality quotes and makes not much difference. If I had\nto explain the difference, it would be:\n\n**1 - いいえ、こちらこそ** if you want to be humble. \"You owe me nothing\".\n\n**2 - またいらっしゃってください** if you want to emphasize hospitality. \"Please come\nagain\".\n\nYou can combine them too - いいえ、こちらこそ。またいらっしゃってください would be good.\n\n* * *\n\nThis may be a subjective question. If someone thanked you, would you emphasize\n\"that was nothing to thank me for\" or would you emphasize \"sure, you're very\nwelcome\" ? Depends on the time, place, and occasion :)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T03:14:02.147", "id": "90844", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T03:14:02.147", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90843", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "> If A is 最寄り(Nearest person) then what is B?\n\nYour \"if\" scenario is highly unprobable. Having said that, if you are seeking\nfor the answer for such hypothetical scenario, let me know and I'll edit the\nanswer. Here I explain ignoring your \"if\" statement.\n\n最寄り probably means 最寄り（の）駅 (station) or バス停 (bus stop). Some wrongly assume\n最寄り is limited to train stations, but it can be attached to many things, such\nas 最寄りの郵便局 (your nearest post office). But when we casually say 最寄りどこ？\n(where's your \"moyori?\") we mean \"where's the station/bus-stop closest to your\nhome?\".\n\nThe sentence can be interpreted somewhat like the following:\n\n_This person shares the same 最寄り (e.g. train station) with me, but this person\nnever talks to me. Such non-social person is the student council president of\nmy school?_\n\nTo be fair, I don't think you need to be chatty or have コミュ力 to become student\ncouncil.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T14:20:25.050", "id": "90850", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T14:20:25.050", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90848", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The word \"一斉\" is used when a lot of people do something at the same time. \ne.g.\n\n * コンサート会場{かいじょう}に居{い}た人々{ひとびと}が一斉{いっせい}に拍手{はくしゅ}をした。 \n_The people in the concert hall clapped in unison._\n\nOn the other hand, \"同時\" is used when (not a lot of) people do something at the\nsame time. \ne.g.\n\n * 路上{ろじょう}パフォーマンスを見{み}ていた人々{ひとびと}が、同時{どうじ}に拍手{はくしゅ}をした。 \n _People who were watching the street performance clapped at the same time._\n\nSo, we use different words depending on the number of people.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T14:40:50.673", "id": "90851", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T14:40:50.673", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45272", "parent_id": "90849", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> I am wondering if there is any nuance or difference between them ?\n\nYes, there is. I'll try to explain my opinion.\n\n> I am also wondering if there is some politeness attached to it ?\n\nNo, politeness isn't the factor\n\n* * *\n\n**一斉に**\n\n * I would say \"along with\"\n * Timing is not important compared to 同時に\n * Larger scale compared to 同時に\n * Dynamic and impactful compared to 同時に\n\n**Examples**\n\n * At a concert, 一斉に拍手 round of applause\n * At a marathon, 一斉に走り出した start running at once\n\nIt's used when a phenomenon occurs \"along with\" each other. It's not really\nimportant that we start clapping our hands at 10:00:01, is it?\n\n* * *\n\n**同時に**\n\n * I would say \"simultaneously\"\n * Timing is important compared to 一斉に. I say compared to 一斉に, because 同時に is not always used for timing-critical stuff\n * Not necessarily a large-scale or group activity, can be used for small boring things (press button simultaneously)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T14:45:23.217", "id": "90852", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T14:45:23.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90849", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This may not be correct, but my impression is that with 一斉, it's multiple\n\"copies\" of an action happening at the same time such that it really only\nfeels like one action.\n\n> * 一斉メール → Sending one email to multiple recipients at the same time\n> *\n> [選挙の開票は全国一斉に行われる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E4%B8%80%E6%96%89/#je-3847)\n> → Ballot counting will begin simultaneously [at the same time] throughout\n> the country.\n> * So even though it's clearly many different people/groups doing the\n> counting all over the country, the \"counting\" still feels like just one\n> action.\n> *\n> [ベルが鳴ると皆一斉に立ち上った](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E4%B8%80%E6%96%89/#je-3847)\n> → The moment the bell rang, they all stood up at once.\n> * Again, even though it's multiple students standing up, it seem like\n> only one joint action.\n>\n\nWhereas 同時 doesn't necessarily/usually have this nuance, and the multiple\n\"actions\" feel (more) distinct and separate.\n\n> * 同時通訳 → Simultaneous interpretation\n> * 山登りは楽しいけど、同時にとても危ない → Mountain climbing is fun, but at the same time\n> very dangerous.\n> *\n> [彼が入ってきた、それと同時にベルが鳴った](https://jisho.org/sentences/51866a06d5dda7e98100b0cf)\n> → He came in, and at the same time the bell rang.\n> * Two distinct things happening at the same time\n>\n\nThough there does seem to be a good amount of overlap.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T15:02:38.973", "id": "90853", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T15:02:38.973", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "90849", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It depends what you mean by \"late\".\n\n[残業]{ざん・ぎょう} means \"overtime work\". So it could mean working late, but not\nnecessarily (like if you were working a weekend shift or something).\n\nAnd if it is for a normal shift, it could mean \"later than normal\", but not\nnecessarily late into the night. So if you normally work, say, 6:00-15:00, but\ntoday you are 残業ing until 18:00, well that's late compared to your normal\nquitting time, but I don't think anyone would consider 18:00 \"late\" in the\nday/evening.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-22T22:37:20.907", "id": "90857", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-22T22:37:20.907", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "90856", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "That's a nice name.\n\n> Can I use “安中” to refer to myself?\n\nDepends on what you mean by \"can I\"\n\n * Can I write \"from 安中\" when writing casual letters to friends?\n\nYes, your choice, just as aguijonazo commented.\n\n * Can I write 安中 on official documentation and registration?\n\nYou better comply to the formatting on your [registration\npapers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%ABminhy%C5%8D) - if it's written in\nalphabet, you better use alphabet.\n\n * Is it a safe set of kanjis to be used as names as a Japanese citizen?\n\nYes, that combination is not vulgar.\n\n * Is it a good set of kanjis?\n\nThere's an entire business regarding names, so you better ask the \"experts\".\nSorry I couldn't find a good English explanation but here's a [Japanese Wiki\npage](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%A7%93%E5%90%8D%E5%88%A4%E6%96%AD) .\nIt's one of those spiritual things but many parents and companies utilize such\nservices even today.\n\n* * *\n\n> If not, what variation could I use?\n\nIt depends on why not. Without making assumptions, here's my opinion on your\nname:\n\n安中 is not weird, it's a reasonable combination of kanji. But I've never heard\nof that city, and my first guess would be Yasunaka and then people would\ncorrect me. Such interaction happens all the time, so I guess it's part of the\nculture.\n\n**If あんなか アンナカ**\n\nWhen I hear An or Ann, the first kanji I imagine is 杏 . Naka can be 中 or 仲 .\nThey both have meanings - 中 is middle or center while 仲 is bond or friendship.\n安中, 安仲, 杏中, 杏仲 all are acceptable for me. You can also experiment with three\nkanjis like 杏奈華 . It's not strange too, but not as common as the two kanji\nsuggestions.\n\n**If あなか アナカ**\n\n亜中 or 亜仲 .", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-23T02:21:32.403", "id": "90859", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-23T02:21:32.403", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90858", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> I know its wrong, but what else can you do with a book other than read it??\n\nBooks have many use cases, it's only limited by your inspiration! But in this\ncase, 本 is not a book. It's a \"counter\". [Check out these questions and\nanswers.](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/search?q=count%20%E6%9C%AC)\n\n一時間 is one hour - it's a way to count. Likewise, 一本 is one \"bus coming on that\nroute\" - a way to count too.\n\nIt's confusing because 本 means book, you're correct. But when we attach バス,\nyou can forget about the book.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-23T03:56:05.747", "id": "90862", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-23T03:56:05.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90860", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The で is the continuative form (連用形) of the assertive auxiliary (断定の助動詞), or\n\"copula\", だ/です. Your sentence can be rewritten like this:\n\n> 勉強で得意だったのは、国語と社会 **でした** 。(そして、) 苦手だったのは、数学と理科でした。\n\n(でした is the past form of です, as you know.)\n\n* * *\n\nTake these sentences for example:\n\n> 朝ごはんは、ご飯とみそ汁 **です** 。お昼ごはんは、カレーライスとサラダです。\n\nYou can combine them by turning the です into the continuative form で:\n\n> 朝ごはんは、ご飯とみそ汁 **で** 、お昼ごはんは、カレーライスとサラダです。\n\nTurning the whole sentence into the past tense, you have:\n\n> 朝ごはんは、ご飯とみそ汁で、お昼ごはんは、カレーライスとサラダ **でした** 。\n\nNow I believe you can see how your sentence is structured.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-23T04:26:46.013", "id": "90863", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-23T04:38:50.763", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-23T04:38:50.763", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "90861", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "That's because the sentence wants to emphasize that it is 内側 that has 白 color.\n\nIf you just want to tell information about wall colors, the following sentence\nis the most natural.\n\n壁は内側は白くて外側は緑です\n\nEnglish equivalent is \"The inside wall is white, the outside wall is green.\"\n\nIf you are asked which side of the wall is white, then you'd like to emphasize\nit is 内側 that is white, so the following sentence would be natural.\n\n壁は内側が白くて外側は緑です\n\nEngish equivalent is \"It is the inside wall that is white, and the outside\nwall is green.\"\n\nIf you are asked which side of the wall is green and which side is white, then\nyou'd like to emphasize both 内側 and 外側. So this would be natural sentence.\n\n壁は内側が白くて外側が緑です\n\nEnglish equivalent is \"It is the inside wall that is white, and it is the\noutside wall that is green.\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-23T13:13:12.327", "id": "90866", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-23T13:13:12.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9608", "parent_id": "90864", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "> 壁は内側（ ）白くて外側（ ）緑です。\n\nIf I’m asked to fill in these blanks when I’m given no context, I would\nprobably put が in both, to try to make the sentence as neutral-sounding as\npossible.\n\nPutting は in both would not be incorrect but the sentence sounds as if one\nside of the wall is supposed to be put in contrast with the other, but it\nisn’t.\n\nは fits better in the following sentence, which clearly puts the two sides in\ncontrast with each other.\n\n> 壁は内側（ ）白いですが、外側（ ）緑です。\n\nNow, in the original sentence, one is が and the other is は.\n\n> 壁は内側が白くて外側は緑です。\n\nAlthough the nuance is very subtle, it sounds as if some part of the wall\nbeing white is assumed or somehow expected, whether because of prior knowledge\nor common sense, and the sentence is stating it’s the inner side that is\nwhite. The outer side being green is given as additional information, somehow\nput in contrast with that.\n\nBy the same token, the version with two が’s could be interpreted as a\nstatement given when it is already assumed that some part of the wall is white\nand the part that is not is green.\n\nBut I would say the nuance is very subtle.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-25T08:17:18.337", "id": "90884", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-25T08:33:53.973", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-25T08:33:53.973", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90864", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "## Defining our terms\n\nI sense some confusion around the terms _transitive_ and _intransitive_. Let's\ndefine our terms first, and then we can look at your question.\n\n### \"Transitivity\" in English\n\nIn English grammar contexts, _transitivity_ is often talked about as a\nproperty of **syntax** -- the structure of the given sentence. A verb is\n\"transitive\" if that sentence has an explicitly stated object for that verb.\nMeanwhile, a verb is \"intransitive\" if that sentence does not have any\nexplicitly stated object for that verb.\n\nThat's actually what the label _transitive_ refers to: the action of the verb\n_transits_ or \"goes across\" to some other noun.\n\nCompare:\n\n * I **eat** _pizza_. \nThe verb here is **eat** , and in this sentence, the verb is\nt̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, because that verb has the object _pizza_.\n\n * I **eat**. \nThe verb here is **eat** , and in this sentence, the verb is\ni̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, because that verb has no object.\n\n * I **walk** _the line_. \nThe verb here is **walk** , and in this sentence, the verb is\nt̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, because that verb has the object _the line_.\n\n * I **walk**. \nThe verb here is **walk** , and in this sentence, the verb is\ni̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, because that verb has no object.\n\n### \"Transitivity\" in Japanese\n\nIn Japanese grammar contexts, _transitivity_ is a instead property of\n**semantics** -- the meaning of a given verb. A verb is \"transitive\" if that\nverb describes an action on some other noun. Meanwhile, a verb is\n\"intransitive\" if that verb does not describe an action affecting some other\nnoun.\n\n_(Note that what specifically meets the terms of \"affecting some other noun\"\ncan be culturally bound and tricky to figure out -- more on that below.)_\n\nThe Japanese terms for these are 他動詞【たどうし】, literally \"other-acting word\", and\n自動詞【じどうし】, literally \"self-acting word\".\n\nCompare:\n\n * 私【わたし】は _ピザ_ を **食【た】べる** 。 \nThe verb here is **食【た】べる** , and this verb is always t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲,\nalways a 他動詞【たどうし】, because that verb describes an action that fundamentally\nrequires an object -- when you \"eat\", you're always eating \"something\", even\nif we don't say what that \"something\" is. Here, we have the object _ピザ_ , but\nthe verb **食【た】べる** would still be t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲ even without that\nobject.\n\n * 私【わたし】は **食【た】べる** 。 \nThe verb here is **食【た】べる** , and this verb is always t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲,\nalways a 他動詞【たどうし】, because that verb describes an action that fundamentally\nrequires an object -- when you \"eat\", you're always eating \"something\", even\nif we don't say what that \"something\" is. Here, we have no object at all, and\nthe verb **食【た】べる** is still t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲.\n\n * 私【わたし】は _ライン_ を **歩【ある】く** 。 \nThe verb here is **歩【ある】く** , and this verb is always\ni̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, always a 自動詞【じどうし】, because that verb describes an\naction that only changes things for the subject -- when you \"walk\", the action\nonly directly affects you, nothing else. Here, we have the object __, but the\nverb **歩【ある】く** is still i̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲ even with that object.\n\n * 私【わたし】は **歩【ある】く** 。 \nThe verb here is **歩【ある】く** , and this verb is always\ni̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, always a 自動詞【じどうし】, because that verb describes an\naction that only changes things for the subject -- when you \"walk\", the action\nonly directly affects you, nothing else. Here, we have no object at all, and\nthe verb **歩【ある】く** is still i̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲.\n\n## Your question\n\n> Are verbal nouns or suru verbs transitive, intransitive, both, or either\n> depending on the verbal noun or suru verb?\n\nHerein lies some confusion.\n\nI'll ignore the bit about _\" verbal nouns\"_, since a noun by definition cannot\nbe transitive or intransitive.\n\nRestated, your question amounts to, _\" is a verb transitive depending on the\nverb?\"_ In which case, the answer has to be **yes**.\n\nHowever, I _think_ instead you're asking, **_\" How do I tell if a_ suru _verb\nis transitive? \"_** There are two ways to approach this.\n\n### Dictionaries\n\nJapanese dictionaries do a sadly awful job in recording this information. Some\ndictionaries will at least indicate whether a given _suru_ verb is even a\n_suru_ verb, and not just a noun -- Daijirin does this, as does Digital\nDaijisen: [here's Daijisen's entry for\n学習【がくしゅう】](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%AD%A6%E7%BF%92-11976#E3.83.87.E3.82.B8.E3.82.BF.E3.83.AB.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.B3.89),\nfor instance. The top of the entry has the notation ［名］(スル), indicating that\nthis is a **[名]{めい}** [詞]{し} or _noun_ , and that it can take する as a verb.\nBut there's no explicit indication whether this is a 自動詞【じどうし】 (intransitive\nverb) or 他動詞【たどうし】 (transitive verb). We have to look at the sample questions\nto guess that it might be a 他動詞【たどうし】 (transitive verb), since one of these\nuses the direct-object construction 「英語[を]{●}学習する」.\n\nBy contrast, [here's the 学習【がくしゅう】 entry in Shogakukan's _Kokugo Dai\nJiten_](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%AD%A6%E7%BF%92-11976#E7.B2.BE.E9.81.B8.E7.89.88.20.E6.97.A5.E6.9C.AC.E5.9B.BD.E8.AA.9E.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8).\nThat entry only indicates 〘名〙, that the word is a **[名]{めい}** [詞]{し} or _noun_\n, with no information about verb-ness or transitivity -- not even any sample\nsentences using a verb construction.\n\n### Semantics\n\nAnother way of approaching this question is to consider the **semantics** of\nthe verb, the underlying meaning: **Does this action require an object in\norder to make sense?**\n\nThink about \"eating\" and \"walking\" in our examples above. Then think about\n_suru_ verbs like 勉強【べんきょう】する (\"to study\") or 学習【がくしゅう】する (\"to learn\"). Is it\npossible for someone or something to 勉強【べんきょう】 or 学習【がくしゅう】 without an object?\n**No.** These actions fundamentally **require** an object, even if that object\nis unstated. We know that when someone 勉強【べんきょう】するs or 学習【がくしゅう】するs, they are\ndoing those actions on something else -- whatever books or subject material\nthey are studying or learning from. So we can surmise that these _suru_ verbs\nare 他動詞【たどうし】 or t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲ verbs.\n\nWhat about 故障【こしょう】する (\"to have a breakdown, to malfunction\")? Is it possible\nfor someone or something to 故障【こしょう】する without an object? **Yes.** This action\nis fundamentally something that a noun does all on its own. We know that when\nsomething 故障【こしょう】するs, that something is doing the action itself -- nothing\nelse is directly affected. So we can surmise that this _suru_ verb is a\n自動詞【じどうし】 or i̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲ verb.\n\n### Note\n\nAs we see above with our 歩【ある】く example, some 自動詞【じどうし】 or\ni̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲ verbs can still take direct objects. In many such\ncases, these are verbs of motion, and the syntactical objects describe where\nor how the action is being performed. Consider English constructions like _\"\ndrive the highway\"_, or _\" go that route\"_, where _highway_ and _route_ are\nthe objects of the verbs.\n\nAnd some verbs are a̲m̲b̲i̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲, where they describe action\nthat can be either \"self-acting\" or \"other-acting\". Take 完成【かんせい】する (\"to\ncomplete\"), for instance. [Daijisen's\nentry](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%AE%8C%E6%88%90-470378#E3.83.87.E3.82.B8.E3.82.BF.E3.83.AB.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.B3.89)\nincludes sample sentences showing both 自動詞【じどうし】 and 他動詞【たどうし】 senses:\n\n * 「ビルが完成する」 → the building becomes complete on its own: 自動詞【じどうし】 / i̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲\n * 「大作を完成する」 → someone or something completes the great work: 他動詞【たどうし】 / t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲\n\nMeanwhile, [this Chiebukuro\nthread](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q143450544)\nsuggests that at least some native speakers consider 完成【かんせい】する to be\nexclusively a 自動詞【じどうし】 / i̲n̲t̲r̲a̲n̲s̲i̲t̲i̲v̲e̲ verb. So usage patterns for\nthis particular verb may not be entirely settled.\n\n> **_\" How do I tell if a_ suru _verb is transitive? \"_**\n\nUltimately, 1) look in dictionaries for sample sentences, 2) think about the\nnature of the action itself, and 3) also check in with native speakers.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-25T19:20:08.953", "id": "90892", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-25T19:20:08.953", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "90867", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Another quicker answer.\n\nAs you might have noticed, 勉強する can be both transitive and intransitive.\n\n * 僕は図書館で勉強した _I worked in the library_. (intrans.)\n * 僕は英語を勉強した _I studied English_. (trans.)\n\nThere are many such suru-verbs (with transtitive/intransitive uses), [this\narticle](http://www2.ipcku.kansai-u.ac.jp/%7Eshkky/wakumon/no-33/07xu.pdf)\ncontains a list for example. Note that there are some disagreements among\ndictionaries.\n\n[学研国語大辞典](https://sakura-\nparis.org/dict/%E5%AD%A6%E7%A0%94%E5%9B%BD%E8%AA%9E%E5%A4%A7%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8/)\nseems to contain explicit information on transitivity. (I have no idea on the\nlegitimacy of the website.)\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2igWb.png)", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-25T23:50:43.283", "id": "90896", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-25T23:50:43.283", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90867", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Sort of. I think you might be reading a bit too much into it. できれば has a bit\nmore formal tone, but the meaning is the same and they can be used\ninterchangeably.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-24T00:14:01.790", "id": "90869", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-24T00:14:01.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48521", "parent_id": "90868", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "> I'm just wondering if できれば・できたら at the beginning of a sentence has any\n> difference in nuance?\n\nIn real life they're interchangeable.\n\n> But I tend to read too much into things :-)\n\nWell, you asked for it... actually there are subtle differences technically\nspeaking.\n\n**できたら** = \"If such thing was to be accomplished\"\n\nWhen you shout \"できた！\" it means \"I have done it!\" so it's past tense. That's\nwhy できたら assumes the future where you have reached できた (completion).\n\n* * *\n\n**できれば** = \"If such thing can be attempted\"\n\nWhen you shout \"できる！\" it means \"I'm confident I can do it!\". So by saying できる,\nyou're already \"assuming the future state of completion\". できれば means you are\n\"assuming the case that you are assuming the future state of completion\".\nSorry for the confusing explanation...\n\n* * *\n\n> as used at the beginning of a sentence, usually\n\nIf I may break that condition and use the words at the middle of a sentence...\n\n * タスクA1はできますか？。それが「できれば」タスクA2ができます。\n * タスクB1はできますか？。それが「できたら」タスクB2ができます。\n\nI would interpret as follows: top sentence is focused on feasibility of\ncompleting task A1, and bottom sentence is focused on moving on to task B2.\nBut this is just my interpretation so I may be thinking too much like you. I\nhope comments can correct me if I missed something.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-24T01:25:30.453", "id": "90870", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-24T01:25:30.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90868", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You answered incorrectly because you ignored 子供にも. Without this 子供にも, your\nfirst interpretation would have been just fine.\n\n> 林さんはピアノが好きで、 ~~子供にも~~ 小さいときからずっと習っていた。 \n> Hayashi-san likes the piano, and he has been learning it ever since he was\n> small.\n\nHowever, the actual sentence _does_ have 子供にも, and this 子供 refers to Hayashi-\nsan's child. With 子供にも, the first choice starts to look very weird:\n\n> 林さんはピアノが好きで、 **子供にも** 小さいときからずっと習っていた。 \n> Hayashi-san likes the piano, and he has been learning it **also from his\n> child** ever since he (Hayashi-san) was small. \n> (AにBを習う = to learn B from A)\n\nThis is \"grammatically\" correct, but semantically strange. It is impossible\nfor a child to learn something from their own son or daughter who has not been\nborn yet.\n\nIn your sentence, this 子供にも has a different role. That is, marking the agent\n(causee) of a causative verb. The following is the causative construction you\nneeded to notice:\n\n> 子供 **に** (ピアノ **を** )習わせる \n> to make his child learn (the piano)\n\nAnd the following is what the original sentence actually means:\n\n> 林さんはピアノが好きで、子供 **に** も小さいときからずっと **習わせ** ていた。 \n> Hayashi-san likes the piano, and he has also **had his child learn it**\n> ever since she was small.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-24T14:52:58.553", "id": "90876", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-24T15:30:48.707", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-24T15:30:48.707", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90871", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I would say there are two clues to determine the correct answer:\n\n * the presence of the particle を marking the direct object of a verb, and\n * the use of an active verb in one sentence and a passive verb in another.\n\nI suppose one might be able to construe the passive as a _suffering passive_.\nBut, the key matter here is that there is no further context.\n\nPut a bit more directly,\n\n> この学校ではバイクで通学することを十年も前から校則で禁止している。\n\nmakes perfectly good sense in the complete absence of further contextual\ninformation.\n\n> この学校ではバイクで通学することを生徒会で話し合った結果、禁止された。\n\njust doesn't sound quite right. There's a grammatical conflict between こと\n**を** and 禁止 **された**.\n\nAs I mentioned before, you might construe this as an example of _suffering\npassive_. But that requires a bit of mental gymnastics in my opinion. The\n_first_ problem is that there is no context provided in which such an\ninterpretation makes sense. But more so, _secondly_ if you were to make this\nout as the suffering passive, then somehow you would have to construe this\ndecision by the student assembly as somehow directed against the speaker.\nPerhaps that sort of situation could arise in an anime, but I'd think in real\nlife it's unlikely (and probably would make the speaker seem a bit\nnarcissistic).\n\nAt any rate, in these sorts of problems, you should choose an answer that\nmakes the best possible answer in a context neutral situation. You should\nthink about the grammar and how it is laid out and interpreted in a context\nwithout the addition of any further baggage.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-24T14:14:23.880", "id": "90875", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-24T14:21:51.020", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-24T14:21:51.020", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "90872", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "この前 can mean the same thing as この間 (\"the other day\", \"some days ago\"), but in\nthis sense, it rarely takes に. In your sentence, この前 **に** means something\nmore literal, \"before this\", \"prior to this\". (この前 **に** can also mean \"in\nfront of this\".)\n\n * この前見た映画 \nthe movie I watched the other day\n\n * この前に見た映画 \nthe movie I watched before this one \n(rare) the movie I watched the other day\n\nIn the context in question, この前に and ついさっき happen to work interchangeably, but\nin general, they are different. この前に in the sense of \"prior to this\" can refer\nto something that happened many years ago (e.g.,\nいまはビルが建っていますが、この前に建っていたのは古い神社です).\n\n> Is the way「この前に」 is used here common?\n\nこの前に meaning \"before this\" is not uncommon at all, but perhaps その前に is much\nmore common. And この前に tends to mean \"in front of this\" much more often.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-24T15:50:26.937", "id": "90878", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-24T17:44:13.683", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-24T17:44:13.683", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90877", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "ドアの鍵を外す is natural only when you are dealing with a lock like this:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Weh39.png)\n\nIn this situation, all the three translations DeepL gave would work the same\nway, don't they?\n\nThe normal translation of \"to unlock\" is 鍵を開ける. It's used also with electronic\nlocks that can be opened with IC cards. Most people don't usually have to say\n鍵を外す in their daily lives. If they do, it would mean breaking the lock or\nuninstalling the locking mechanism from the door entirely.\n\n**EDIT** : 鍵を外す is used also when removing the locked/prviate status, e.g.,\nfrom an SNS account.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-25T03:02:11.110", "id": "90880", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-25T03:27:01.067", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-25T03:27:01.067", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90879", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "If I have no context and both 鍵 and ドア are new information to me, I would\nunderstand it as a request to remove a lock from a door.\n\nIf I already know from context that no screwdriver is involved, I would\nunderstand it as a request to either:\n\n 1. unlock the door, if the lock is a chain lock, which requires the action that can be described by the verb 外す to unlock\n\nor\n\n 2. remove a key from a lock, if the key is left inserted.\n\nEven when these conditions are satisfied, I would still think the request is\nphrased strangely because I would say either 鍵を開けてください or チェーンを外してください for the\nfirst case and 鍵を抜いてください for the second if I were on the requesting side.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-25T05:27:30.597", "id": "90881", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-25T05:38:21.593", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-25T05:38:21.593", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90879", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The guy is using the Spanish word \"con\" which means \"with\".\n\n\"Nihongo con Teppei\" => \"Japanese with Teppei\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-25T16:51:40.263", "id": "90889", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-25T16:51:40.263", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "90886", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "作られた tends to be used when you have some \"creator\" in mind, whereas できた tends\nto be used when who made it is not important or something came into existence\non its own. Please keep in mind that できる is fundamentally an intransitive verb\nalthough it's commonly translated into English using the passive voice. In\nyour case, 法律が作られた tends to be chosen when you are interested in the law-\nmaking process, whereas 法律ができた tends to be chosen when you're interested only\nin the resultant fact.\n\nTo give other examples, 近所に郵便局ができた is usually more natural than 近所に郵便局が作られた\nbecause most people are not interested in who made the post office. 森ができた\nrefers to a common natural phenomenon, but 森が作られた may sound like it's a man-\nmade forest.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-26T00:36:34.300", "id": "90897", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T00:56:50.063", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-26T00:56:50.063", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90887", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The wife's husband died. This is the suffering passive.\n\nIt's saying, (a bit too literally?)\n\n> The wife's _sadness_ at the loss of her husband was respectfully written\n> about in the novel.\n\nPut in a looser translation,\n\n> The wife's grief at the loss of her husband was _beautifully_ described in\n> the novel.\n\n丁寧 doesn't technically mean _beautiful_ but I think this word in English in\nthis context captures nicely the feeling expressed in Japanese.\n\n## Grammar-wise, consider the following\n\n> 妻は夫に先に死なれた\n\ncould be rendered\n\n> The wife had her husband die on her.\n\nwhich kind of captures the _suffering_ aspect of the passive.\n\nIn the passive construct, に can mark the original subject of the sentence.\n\nSo with just this fragment, we could perhaps rephrase this (avoiding the\npassive) by saying\n\n> 夫が妻の先に死んだ。\n\n> The husband preceded his wife in death. (a rather loose translation again)\n\nBut since it's the wife's _grieving/sadness_ that is being described, such a\nnon-passive structure would be difficult to work with.\n\n## Breaking this sentence down and rebuilding it bit by bit.\n\nThe core sentence is\n\n> その小説には悲しみが書かれていた\n\n> The grief was written about in the novel.\n\nYou could ask, \"whose grief?\" 妻の悲しみ. _The wife's grief_.\n\n> その小説には妻の悲しみが書かれていた\n\n> The wife's grief was written about in the novel.\n\nYou could further ask, \"how was it described?\" 丁寧に. _Respectfully_.\n\n> その小説には妻の悲しみが丁寧に書かれていた\n\nFinally, what was the wife grieving? The fact that her husband died.\n\n> その小説には夫に先に死なれた妻の悲しみが丁寧に書かれていた", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-26T01:54:17.953", "id": "90899", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T02:16:22.407", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-26T02:16:22.407", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "90898", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I doubt \"pure\" is the best word to describe 清楚, but it does mean something\nalong the lines of \"simple\", \"innocent\", \"clean\", \"plain\", \"tidy\", and so on.\nPlease refer to that YouTube video or Google Image Search for the connotation\nof the word. As a matter of fact, 清楚 is a common word that virtually every\nteenager understands, and it has been around [at least for 100\nyears](https://myokoym.net/aozorasearch/search?word=%E6%B8%85%E6%A5%9A)\nwithout any significant change in the meaning. I'm curious what page said this\nterm is VTuber-derived. Recently, this word may be especially common as a\ncategory of the faces and personalities of young female people (including\nidols and VTubers), but it is not used in a different way from its original\nmeaning.\n\n**EDIT:** As pointed out in the comment section, the word 清楚 seems to be often\nused sarcastically in the VTuber community, and the word seems to have been\nimported to fans in the West along with the incorrect definition. See [this\narticle](https://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E6%B8%85%E6%A5%9A%28Vtuber%29). This is a\nkind of local joke that only works in the VTuber community.\n\n> 「清楚」の本来の意味は「飾りけがなく、清らかなこと」。今日では、慎ましく清潔感のある美しい女性を表す言葉として使われている。 \n>\n> Vtuber界隈においては、公式設定や自身の主張で「清楚」を標榜していてもおよそ清楚とは言いがたい言動がしばしば見られ、そうしたVtuberの形骸化した「清楚」設定は本来的な用法とは正反対とも言える新しい語義として受け入れられている。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T00:54:42.810", "id": "90913", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T22:06:59.457", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-31T22:06:59.457", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90901", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Generally it is not possible to predict whether 町 is read as まち or ちょう.\n\n大手町 at the center of Tokyo is read as おおてまち while there is [大手町]{おおてちょう} in\nKishiwada city of Osaka\n([source](https://style.nikkei.com/article/DGXNASFK01024_R01C11A1000000/)).\n\nAs mentioned in the link, ちょう is more common in Western Japan whereas まち is\ndominant in Eastern Japan.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-26T04:26:26.633", "id": "90903", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T04:26:26.633", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90902", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Answer is, no.\n\nFollowing are not orders, not requests:\n\n * あなたは頑張るぞ (you)\n * あなたたちは頑張るぞ (you guys)\n * 彼は頑張るぞ (he)\n * 彼らは頑張るぞ (those guys)\n * みんなは頑張るぞ (everyone)\n * 私は寝るけどみんなは頑張るぞ (everyone except for me)\n\n* * *\n\nFollowing may be subjective:\n\n * 私たちは頑張るぞ (we)\n * みんなで頑張るぞ (us)\n\nThese are not orders, not requests, but has the nuance \" let's 頑張る \". If your\nboss says 「みんなで頑張るぞ」 (let's do this together) you can consider that's an order\nor being voluntold.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-26T07:46:17.933", "id": "90905", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T07:46:17.933", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90904", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "であろう adds a sense of supposition, estimation, or guess: the speaker (or\nwriter) is not certain that this is the case, but is supposing or presuming\nthat it is.", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-26T18:10:51.473", "id": "90909", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-26T18:10:51.473", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "90907", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Yes it seems to be a variant of やろー (野郎). You probably have seen `っ` randomly\ninserted between kana for emphasis (e.g. あっつい, きったねぇ, まっじで). I think ん in used\ninstead here because ろ cannot be preceded by っ.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T00:19:51.587", "id": "90912", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-27T00:19:51.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90911", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I didn't find a good duplicate, so I started writing up an answer. I was\nhalfway into composing this when a duplicate was suggested. After reading that\nanswer, I think I'd like to add something of my own, at the end.\n\nThis 助詞 で can be found [here](https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%81%A7):\n\n> 7. 主体を表す。 \n> こちらでやっておきます。 \n> クラスのみんなで山に登った。\n>\n\nSo this で is used to indicate the agent of the action. As mentioned in the\nlinked answer, this is another way of seeing で as marking \"how\". It specifies\nhow something happens, with the emphasis on the entity marked by で as a whole.\n\n> 来年もこのメンツで花見に行こう \n> Next year, we (people who showed up today/last time) shall go see cherry\n> blossoms.\n\nIn such sentences the noun marked by で is usually the agent of the action.\nYour sentence thus can be understood to have 皆さんが omitted\n\n> 是非(皆さんが)皆さんで見に来てほしいです。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T02:06:31.767", "id": "90916", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-27T02:06:31.767", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "90915", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The first いう is originally 言う, but this ていう/という is almost a fixed particle\nused to join two phrases and make the first modify the second. AというB is \"B\ncalled A\", \"B known as A\", \"B of A\", \"B that is A\", etc. Since it's a function\nword rather than an ordinary verb, it's almost always written in hiragana. The\nsecond 言う is literally \"say\".\n\n * 消防士という仕事 \nthe job known as firefighter\n\n * リーダーを補佐するという役割 \nthe role of supporting the leader\n\n * 彼が試験に合格したというニュース \nnews that that he passed the exam\n\n * \"comprised of\" という言い方をする \nto use the expression \"comprised of\"\n\n> 私たちはよく「みんな持っているから」とか「みんなもそう言っている」なんていう言い方をしますね。\n>\n> We often use such a phrase as \"Because everyone else has it\" or \"Everyone\n> says so\", right?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-28T00:43:18.440", "id": "90933", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-28T00:43:18.440", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90917", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Assuming my interpretation of your argument is correct, you are very very much\non the right track! But unfortunately I can prove wrong not against individual\nbullet points 1 to 3, but the point prior to reaching them. If my\ninterpretation is wrong, sorry please correct me.\n\n> in うれしいY, Y again should be the thing that evokes the feeling of happiness\n\nExactly! For 「嬉しいニュース」 (good news), the news **evokes** happiness, but news\n**doesn't receive** happiness.\n\n> The correct translations for “I feel glad” and “a happy person” should be\n> 私がうれしいと感じる/思う...\n\nFrom one logical perspective yes, but let's decompose that \"I feel glad\" and\nadd a kind little \"thanks\".\n\nWhat you are saying is:\n\n * 私は嬉しい気持ちになっています。ありがとうございます。\n * 私は嬉しい気持ちに浸っています。ありがとうございます。\n * 私は嬉しい気持ちを感じてます。ありがとうございます。\n * etc...\n\nYes, they're correct. But most of the time we say: **私は嬉しい気持ちです。ありがとうございます。**\n\nActually, no. It becomes shorter: **（私は）嬉しいです。ありがとうございます。** _We don't really\nsay 私は but for explanation, I leave it here._\n\nIt can be shorter too:\n\n * 私、うれしい。ありがとうございます。\n * うれしい。ありがとうございます。\n\nLet's go back to 「私は嬉しいです」 and observe those words. If we follow one set of\nlogic, it sounds like a lunatic. 「私は人間です」 (I am human) makes sense, but\n「私は嬉しいです」 (I am happy) makes no sense. This works similarly in English too:\n\n**John** \"I am happy!\"\n\n**Karen** \"Hell no, you are not a \"happy\", you are a human. You are merely\n\"feeling happiness in your soul\".\"\n\nKaren is kind of making a valid point, but it doesn't work that way. There are\nmany logic and rules intertwined that makes 「私、うれしいです！」 a valid statement. I\nwon't go beyond the scope of your question, but I hope this helps clear some\nof your doubts.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T13:20:55.447", "id": "90920", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-27T13:20:55.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "90919", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The first two are straightforward.\n\n> 実験室で \n> テスト済み\n\n> 体の自然な解毒能力を \n> 高めましょう\n\nThe last one becomes a bit awkward if if the line break has to come near the\nmiddle, but I would put it this way.\n\n> ナチュラルライフ \n> のための天然成分", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T15:49:40.967", "id": "90922", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-27T15:49:40.967", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90921", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you understand them mostly correctly.\n\n助ける can be used for _help_ in a broad sense, the difference from 救助する/救う is\n助ける can mean _to assist_.\n\n救う/救助する both mean _to save_ , the latter sounds like the situation being more\nserious (e.g. fire, disaster). And as you noted, 救う can mean\n_consoled/consoling/feel less sad_ (mostly) in the passive form 救われる. 救助する\ndoes not have this usage.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-28T00:18:51.127", "id": "90932", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-28T00:18:51.127", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90923", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The problem you've encountered, albeit badly notated, is that the spelling and\nreading 中国【ちゅうごく】 is shared by two different terms. \n_(Definitions here as according to the Daijirin dictionary.)_\n\n * 中国【ちゅうごく】 - _pitch pattern 0,_ 平板【へいばん】 \n * The middle of the country. The area where the imperial court was historically located. The 畿内【きない】 area.\n * The 中国地方【ちゅうごくちほう】 (Chūgoku region).\n * An old name for the 山陽道【さんようどう】 region.\n * In the old [Ritsuryō system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritsury%C5%8D), the third of four regions of Japan, as apportioned based on area and population.\n * 中国【ちゅうごく】 - _pitch pattern 1,_ 頭高【あたまだか】 \n * China\n\nSo ultimately both pitch patterns are correct -- just for different meanings.\n\n* * *\n\n**Note:** Broadly, I've noticed that Chinese-derived terms tend to have\n頭高【あたまだか】 pitch accent patterns. For terms like 中国【ちゅうごく】 that are inherently\nChinese-derived, we see that the sense more closely tied to China still has\nthe 頭高 pitch, while the more Japan-specific senses now use the 平板 pitch\npattern.\n\n* * *\n\n### Addendum\n\nYou'd also noted:\n\n> ちゅ[うごく]{HHH} [0]\n>\n> So it's _heiban_? Then I listen to yomichan's audio, and think \"wait,\n> there's definitely a high-low dropoff after ちゅ\".\n\nI realized that there's a possible note of confusion here that I want to\naddress.\n\nIn the 平板【へいばん】 pitch accent pattern, there is no downstep, which is why\ndictionaries might annotate this using the number zero, indicating a lack of\ndownstep.\n\nThis is **not** to say that the pitch doesn't decline at all in 平板 words --\nthe speaker's pitch will rise after the first mora, and then gradually decline\nuntil the next word or phrase that has another high pitch in it. _(Note: This\nis for \"standard\" Japanese, i.e. 標準語【ひょうじゅんご】 or Tokyo-based broadcaster-\nese.)_\n\nFor words with a downstep, meanwhile, numerical dictionary notation indicates\nthe mora right after which the speaker's pitch drops more markedly.\n\nCompare the following contrastive pair:\n\n * 変【か】える: pitch pattern 0, 平板【へいばん】: [かえる]{LHH} \nGenerally speaking, the え mora will have a slightly higher pitch than the る\nmora.\n\n * 帰【かえ】る: pitch pattern 1, 頭高【あたまだか】: [かえる]{HLL} \nGenerally speaking, the か mora will have a markedly higher pitch than the え\nmora.\n\nIn your term 中国【ちゅうごく】, the 平板【へいばん】 pronunciation will still show some slight\ndecline in pitch after the rise on the う mora, so the ご and the く will be\nslightly lower. The 頭高【あたまだか】 pronunciation will show a marked decline in\npitch after the ちゅ mora, much more of a drop in pitch than you hear between\nthe high-pitched morae in the 平板【へいばん】 pronunciation.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T21:15:31.453", "id": "90928", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-27T22:26:11.817", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-27T22:26:11.817", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "90925", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "[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=%E8%80%85%E5%8B%9D%E3%81%A1&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)\nreturns: 45 examples for 者勝ち vs 17 examples for both もの勝ち and もん勝ち.\n\nFor writing, 者勝ち seems more common as suggested by the corpus, but it could be\nonly that we type that way (e.g. when I type 早い者勝ち below, it is suggested by\nthe input method as I typed はやい). Since もん is an easier-to-pronounce version\nof 者, it does not exactly make sense to compare them in writing.\n\nMy personal impression is that, for more idiomatic phrases like 早い者勝ち, 者 and\nもん sounds equally natural, but for less common ones like 笑ったもん勝ち, もん sounds\nnatural (or smoother) possibly because they are used in written form less\nfrequently.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-28T00:08:17.397", "id": "90931", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-28T00:08:17.397", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90927", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "In general, もん is highly colloquial, and should be avoided in formal writings.\nもん may be fine in casual personal blogs, but it's out of the question in news\narticles, Wikipedia articles and such. Even in casual writing, もん sounds a bit\nrough, and many people choose to use 人 instead.\n\nHowever, this ～もん勝ち (\"the one who does ～ is the winner\") is an exception\nbecause it is an established set phrase. It's fine to say 逃げたもん勝ち (\"fleeing is\nwinning\") even in a serious essay. I personally feel もん is more common in this\nset phrase, but I may be wrong.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-28T00:54:09.967", "id": "90934", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-28T00:54:09.967", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90927", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "分担する here means to pitch in, do one's part, or pull one's weight. The to divvy\nup sense is related to this.\n\nIf I say 「俺だって、半分の家事を分担している」, I am telling the listener I have been doing half\nof the chores.\n\n> 本田さんに仕事を分担させた。\n\nmeans [I/we/or some subject] asked 本田さん to pitch it/contribute/help with work.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-27T22:35:40.107", "id": "90930", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-27T22:35:40.107", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "90929", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "完全 is a noun, and it acts as an adjective when suffixed with な; it can also\nact as adverb when suffixed with に, which I think it's the case in that\nballoon: they just left out the に, but 完全 is acting adverbially, so the\nsentence means something like \"I completely missed my chance to say it\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-28T16:24:53.907", "id": "90938", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-28T16:24:53.907", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "35362", "parent_id": "90937", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The「これだけ」is modifying「いつもと違う」. It seems to describe a degree or amount of\ndifference (ie. how much different from the usual).\n\nThere is a hidden question embedded in the「どちらかというと」part. Judging from the\ncontext, you can understand it as\n\n> ( **面白い声と面白くない声** 、)どちらかというと面白い声に聞こえます\n>\n> If I have to comment whether my voice sounds interesting or not, my voice\n> sounds interesting.\n\n「どちらかというと」is a common expression used when trying to select one thing out\nmultiple options, usually to evaluate its value. It is usually rendered as \"if\npushed I'd say...\" in English.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-28T18:28:49.703", "id": "90940", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-28T18:28:49.703", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "41067", "parent_id": "90939", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "* いい声 is \"cool voice\", not \"meh voice\". When it refers to a male voice, it typically refers to a low-frequency, dandy voice. Note that いい always means \"good\" rather than \"not necessary\" when it restrictively modifies the following noun.\n * This 面白い is \"funny\" rather than \"interesting\".\n * This これだけ is \"this much\", not \"only this\". It modifies (いつもと)違う. これだけいつもと違う声 literally means \"the voice that is as different than usual as this\".\n * どちらかというと/どっちかというと (literally \"to say which\") is a common set phrase that means \"if anything\", \"more of\", \"if I have to choose one\", etc. \n\n> * どちらかというと嬉しかった。 If anything, I was glad.\n> * どっちかというと犬派です。 I'm more of a dog person.\n\n>\n> まぁいい声って言うよりもこれだけいつもと違う声を出すと、どちらかというと面白い声に聞こえますが、いつも同じ声を聞いていると飽きてしまうかもしれないので……\n>\n> Well, if my voice sounds this different from usual, it would sound more like\n> a funny voice rather than a cool voice, but if you always hear the same\n> voice, you might get tired, so...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T01:44:10.480", "id": "90943", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T02:15:41.927", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-29T02:15:41.927", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90939", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "煌め **き** is the masu-stem of the verb 煌め **く**. This 煌めき is used as a noun\n(\"twinkling thing\"). See [masu-stem used as a\nnoun](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/32311/5010). To be more specific,\nin this context, 煌めき seems to refer to twinkling/shiny _moments_ in one's\nlife.\n\nAs verbs, 瞬く and 煌めく are similar, but the former is focused on the quick\nbrightness change, while the latter also describes something is bright/shiny.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T03:05:00.710", "id": "90946", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T03:20:16.547", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-29T03:20:16.547", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90942", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's because the 社長室 is not the president's **home**. For whatever reason,\nごめんください is used only when you're in front of someone's **home**. Basically\nit's polite \"Hello!\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T02:25:29.093", "id": "90945", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T02:25:29.093", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "間違っても is an idiom used to prohibit something strongly. See [this\nentry](https://jisho.org/word/%E9%96%93%E9%81%95%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82).\nSince this is an idiom, you can translate it simply as \"no matter what\" or\n\"never, ever\". It literally means \"(Don't do it) even by mistake\". See\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/13200/5010), too.\n\n[生々しい](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%94%9F%E3%80%85%E3%81%97%E3%81%84)体験 (生しい is\na typo) is \"vivid experience\". Perhaps you mixed up 体験 (experience) and 試験\n(examination/test)?\n[色あせる](https://jisho.org/word/%E8%89%B2%E8%A4%AA%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8B) is just\n\"to pale\" or \"to lose vividness\", and it refers to no particular visible color\nhere. This usage is so common that I don't call it a 比喩. Finally, don't ignore\nthe ～に比べたら pattern (\"if/when compared with ～\").\n\n> あなたが現に夢中で打ち込んでいる恋愛の生々しい体験に比べたら、[本による体験は]色あせてしまうにちがいないからだ。 (typo fixed)\n>\n> It's because [the experience of reading] must pale in comparison to the\n> vivid experience of romance you're currently engrossed in.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T07:13:17.830", "id": "90965", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T07:19:35.943", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-29T07:19:35.943", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90947", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "黙って adverbially modifies （恋人とジェット・コースターに乗って）遊ぶ. \n黙って means \"silently\" \"without talking\".\n\n例えば...\n\n> 黙ってご飯を食べる -- eat silently \n> 黙って映画を観る -- watch a movie silently\n\nIt indicates how you do 「（恋人とジェット・コースターに乗って）遊ぶ」.\n\nI think the 「黙って」 here contrasts with 「本の話を仕掛ける」(start talking about books):\n\n「本の話を仕掛ける」 vs 「黙って(遊ぶ)」\n\nSo I think 「黙って」 here implies 「本の話を仕掛けないで / 本の話をしないで...」 (\"without talking\nabout books...\").", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T03:52:20.753", "id": "90949", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-30T03:34:15.403", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-30T03:34:15.403", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "90948", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The basic meaning of this type of 黙って～する is \"to shut one's mouth (and ...)\".\n\n> 黙って寝ろ。 \n> Shut your mouth and go to bed! \n> Stop complaining/chattering and go to bed already!\n>\n> (Not: \"Be quiet while you're sleeping!\")\n\nIn your context, 黙って～する implies \"to stop worrying and just ～\" or \"to just do ～\nwithout quibbling\", \"to do ～ anyway\". It does not mean you have to keep silent\nwhile you're having fun on a roller coaster.\n\n～に比べたら means \"if/when compared with ～\", and everything before this に is the\nthing that is compared with the chat about a book.\n[～に過ぎない](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-\ngrammar/%E3%81%AB%E9%81%8E%E3%81%8E%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84-ni-suginai-meaning/) is\n\"is no more than a ～\", \"is only/merely ～\".\n\n> 例えば遊園地に行って黙って恋人とジェット・コースターに乗って遊ぶことに比べたら、[本の話は]ずっと不毛なお喋りにすぎないからだ。\n>\n> It's because, if compared with, say, going to an amusement park and _just_\n> (happily) enjoying a roller coaster ride with your girlfriend, [chatting\n> about a book] is merely a far more fruitless idle talk.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T05:25:57.493", "id": "90956", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T05:36:33.417", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-29T05:36:33.417", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90948", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "Please consider the more literal translation of 何でも as \"whatever it is\" to\nmake sense of this situation. This is not a translation you will want to\nactually use, but it can help clarify how 何でも works in Japanese.\n\n\"飲み物は何でもいいです\" can be understood as \"Whatever the drink is, it is fine\", which\nbecomes \"Any drink is fine\" in more natural-sounding English.\n\n\"あの子は頭がいいから、なんでもすぐ覚える\" can be understood as \"Because this child is bright, he\nlearns quickly whatever it is [that he is trying to learn].\"\n\nThe fact that the English translation is sometimes 'anything' and sometimes\n'everything' is more a reflection of how the English language works rather\nthan something intrinsic to the Japanese language, I believe.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T04:52:27.350", "id": "90953", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T04:52:27.350", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7122", "parent_id": "90952", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "They are difficult to summarize in a few words because they have to be\ndiscussed from both the perspective of population and the perspective of\nformality level.\n\nIn the perspective of population, roughly speaking:\n\n * (大都会: >1,000,000 people)\n * 都会: >100,000 people\n * 都市: >10,000 people\n * 町: >500 people\n\nIn the perspective of formality, 都会 and 町 are relatively informal words that\nare commonly used in casual conversations and song lyrics. On the other hand,\n都市 is a relatively formal and/or academic word typically used in news articles\nand academic contexts. We say 町に行こう (referring to any populous district\nnearby) but almost never say 都市に行こう. We say 都市開発 (\"city/town development\") or\n都市計画 but never say 都会開発. When I hear the word 都市開発, I think of large cranes\nand railway, whereas when I hear the word 町作り, I think of something more human\nlike flea markets, flower gardens and local _matsuri_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T04:10:06.487", "id": "91007", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T04:26:49.603", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-01T04:26:49.603", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90954", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "In addition to the excellent points @naruto made about scale and level of\nformalism, here are some additional elements I collected from native speakers.\n\n都会 is an abstract concept while 都市 is about individual large cities.\n\n都会 cannot be counted, while 都市 can, as in 「東北地方にいくつかの都市があります」.\n\n都会 is the opposite of 田舎. 都市 does not have an opposite. It is a stage beyond\n集落, 村, and 町. Hence the story called 「田舎のネズミと都会のネズミ」.\n\nThe borders of 都会 are vague, while a 都市 has clear, official borders.\n\n都会 is a kind of environment, characterized by '賑やか', '人が多い', '夜でも明るい', the\npresence of buildings, and so on. It is strongly associated with a lifestyle,\nthat's why you can say 「都会暮らしは大変」but not 「都市暮らし」. You can say 「都会に住みたい」but not\n「都市に住みたい」. In the same vein, 都会的 exists, but not 都市的.\n\n都市 is about the cities themselves, not a fuzzy concept. 未来都市 makes sense, but\n未来都会 does not. 「東京は日本で一番大きい都市です」", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-06T09:15:38.707", "id": "91090", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-06T09:15:38.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7122", "parent_id": "90954", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "This sentence has the `～で(も)いい` construction to express something is\nfine/acceptable (if not ideal).\n\n * [What is the difference between それでいい and それがいい here?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17851/5010)\n * Maggie Sensei: [Noun + で(も）いい VS +がいい ( = Noun + de (mo) ii vs + ga ii)](https://maggiesensei.com/2014/05/20/%e3%80%9c%e3%81%a7%e3%81%84%e3%81%84-%e3%80%9c%e3%81%a7%e3%82%82%e3%81%84%e3%81%84%e3%80%80vs%e3%80%80%e3%80%9c%e3%81%8c%e3%81%84%e3%81%84-de-ii-demo-ii-vs-ga-ii/)\n\nThis sentence has two でも, meaning whichever is fine.\n\n * XでもYでもいい \n= XでもいいしYでもいい \nX is fine and Y is fine, too \nX or Y, whichever is fine\n\n * 同じ本を読むことでも、同じ本を話す(こと)でもいい \nreading the same book is fine, and talking about the same book is fine, too\n\n * 同じ本を読むことでも、同じ本を話す(こと)でもいいからやってみたほうがいい。 \nReading the same book or talking about the same book, you should do whichever\nyou like (together with your girlfriend).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T06:17:40.897", "id": "90958", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T06:17:40.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90957", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Maybe you saw ので (\"because\") in the sentence? Then no, this sentence does not\nhave one. This の after 歩いていく is a plain nominalizer, and you have\nmisinterpreted (or ignored) では.\n\n`noun + では` [has many\nusages](https://selftaughtjapanese.com/2015/02/26/japanese-particle-\ncombination-%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF-de-wa-and-%E3%81%98%E3%82%83-ja/), but here it\nroughly means \"With X\" in the sense of \"If X is used/chosen\".\n\n * スマホでは画面が小さすぎます。 \n(lit.) With a smartphone, the screen is too small. \nThe screen is too small if you used a smartphone.\n\n * これでは買えません。 \nWith this (amount of money), I cannot buy it.\n\n * 毎日外食するのではお金が沢山かかります。 \nIf you choose to eat out every day, it costs a lot of money. \n(This の is a nominalizer.)\n\nAlso note that 歩いていく is in the present tense, and this\n[-ていく](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/676/5010) implies someone moves\n**from here** (to the station).\n\nTherefore you have to read the first half of the sentence like this:\n\n> 駅まで遠いですから、歩いていくのでは\n>\n> Because the station is far from here, if one (chooses to) walk (from here\n> to) there,...\n\nAnd naturally, the correct choice is 2.\n\n\"I walked (from the station) so I am tired\" would be 歩いて **きた** ので疲れています.\n(There is no は after で, くる is used instead of いく, and くる is in the past form)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T08:29:40.413", "id": "90966", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T08:29:40.413", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90959", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "昨日私は十二時過ぎ **に** 起きた would have meant \"I woke up after 12 o'clock\". に marks a\ntime point when something happens.\n\nHowever, the first half of the actual sentence is 十二時過ぎ **まで** , or \"\n**until** after 12 o'clock\". まで in a non-negative sentence refers to the\ncontinuation of some action or state.\n\n * 5時まで働く \nto work until 5\n\n * この店は9時まで開いている。 \nThis shop is open until 9.\n\nIn your case, it's the \"up/awake status\" that has continued until after 12,\nand the continuation of the result of an instant action is expressed using the\n-teiru form.\n\n> 昨日私は十二時過ぎまで起きていた。 \n> I was awake until after 12. \n> (i.e., I woke up (probably in the morning) and that state continued until\n> after 12)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-29T06:49:06.970", "id": "90963", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-29T06:49:06.970", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90960", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The way you phrased your question doesn’t seem quite right to me. An aspect\nmarker may or may not be added to a verb. When it is, the resulting inflection\nstill contains a part that indicates tense at the end. The question of which\nof る and た is more appropriate is a question about tense. What the book\nexplains about 相対テンス and 絶対テンス in a noun-modifying clause still applies, with\nor without an aspect marker.\n\n**Example 1:**\n\n> 1. 私と勉強してい **る** 男はよくトイレに行った。\n> 2. 私と勉強してい **た** 男はよくトイレに行った。\n>\n\nThe first sentence would be understood as meaning either of the following:\n\n * the speaker is currently studying with the man [continuous action]\n * it’s the speaker’s current habit to study with the man [habit]\n\nEither way, this is not what you want. If the man and the speaker were\nstudying together at some point of time in the past, the verb form has to be\n勉強していた. According to 視点の原理 in the book, this is an example of 絶対テンス as the\nsame tense marker, た, is used in both the subordinate clause and the main\nclause.\n\n**Example 2:**\n\nFirst of all, 弟が sounds more natural than 弟は as a standalone sentence. The\nlatter makes the sentence sound as if it’s talking about what the brother did\non the assumption that he having done something is already known. If the\nsentence is about what happened with no such assumption, it should be 弟が.\n\n> 1. 私が食べてい **る** ラーメンを弟が食べた。\n> 2. 私が食べてい **た** ラーメンを弟が食べた。\n>\n\nBoth are possible, but they conjure up slightly different pictures. In the\nfirst I see the brother eating from the speaker’s bowl while the latter is\nstill in the middle of eating it, perhaps taking advantage of a moment when\nthe speaker is looking the other way. In the second, on the other hand, I see\nthe brother eating the noodles while the speaker is away, leaving the bowl\nunattended. The first sentence could be understood as describing the latter\nscenario as well, though, if the speaker is thought to have been still _in the\nmiddle of_ eating the noodles.\n\nThe first sentence is definitely a case of 相対テンス as the subordinate clause and\nthe main clause use different tense markers, one る and the other た. As for the\nsecond, while it might look like 相対テンス, I think it is more natural to\nunderstand this 食べていた as describing a past state in 絶対テンス.\n\n**Example 3:**\n\n> 1. 弟は無くしてしま **う** 玩具を見つけた。\n> 2. 弟は無くしてしま **った** 玩具を見つけた。\n>\n\nThe first sentence would mean that the brother found the toy he would\neventually lose. So, the correct option has to be the second. However, the\nsentence would sound much more natural if it said 無くしてしまっていた玩具, or more simply\n無くしていた玩具, to describe it as a past state (which resulted from a _past-of-past_\naction). I see this as a case of 絶対テンス, too. The toy was in the state of being\nlost at the time, as seen from the perspective of the speaker at the present.\n\nIn any case, 無くしてしまった itself doesn’t describe a _past-of-past_ action as you\nseem to think it does. If it’s understood as one, that’s because of context.\nYou must have lost the toy first to rediscover it later. This is probably the\nreason the sentence doesn’t quite sound natural.\n\n* * *\n\nReference: 初級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック\n\n**視点の原理**\n\na. 主節と従属節 (名詞修飾節を含む) が同じ時制形式 (ル形－ル形、タ形－タ形) である時、従属節のテンスは発話時との時間的前後関係で決まる\n(=従属節のテンスも絶対テンスになる)。\n\nb. 主節と従属節 (名詞修飾節を含む)が異なる時制形式 (ル形－タ形、タ形－ル形) である時、従属節のテンスは主節時との時間的前後関係で決まる\n(=従属節のテンスは相対テンスである)。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-30T01:05:16.653", "id": "90972", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:48:49.660", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:48:49.660", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90967", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "It may be not _too_ weird, but it would sound weird as a female name. I guess\nit is not impossible for some strange parents to give such (male) names to\ngirls.\n\nYou can search keywords like '男女兼用 名前' to get the idea of which names can be\nused for boys and girls (like [1](https://namedic.jp/names/unisex/),\n[2](https://pon-navi.net/nazuke/popular/chuuseiteki-namae),\n[3](https://ranking.goo.ne.jp/column/6257/ranking/52366/))\n\n* * *\n\n'Ya' in _Shinya_ is most likely to be written as 也, which indicates a male\nname most of the time. [This\nsite](https://b-name.jp/%E8%B5%A4%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93%E5%90%8D%E5%89%8D%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8/f/%E3%82%84/?t=s&mode=3)\nlists 亜也 as a female name, though. (あや is a common female name, but the\nparticular kanji rendering is not.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-30T01:18:00.127", "id": "90973", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-30T09:47:39.383", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-30T09:47:39.383", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90970", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "In the quoted sentence, 結果を出す means _to accomplish (something)_ or _to produce\nnotable outcome_.\n\nIn concrete terms, for a football player (of some type), 結果を出す means scoring\nor assisting goals; for an academic, publishing papers; for a salaryman,\nleading a successful project.\n\nSo the speaker is undecided between changing jobs or staying to get something\ndone (which would put him/her in a better position in the company or in the\njob market).\n\n* * *\n\nMy impression is that this usage is recent. Cf. [a chiebukuro\nquestion](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1136695126)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-30T08:36:34.850", "id": "90975", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-30T09:46:32.773", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-30T09:46:32.773", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90974", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Short answer is yes, you can compare several dictionaries\n[here](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%97%E3%81%B0%E3%81%97%E3%81%B0).\n\nFor example, 精選版 日本国語大辞典 has\n\n> しば‐しば【屡・屡屡・数・数数】\n>\n> 〔副〕 （副詞「しば（屡）」を重ねたもの） たびたび。しきりに。幾度も。何回となく。\n\nSo apparently even 数 alone can be used for しばしば.\n\nI think using 数々 for しばしば is rather rare, most of the time hiragana is used. I\nhave seen 屡/屡々 in older novels, but never 数々.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T07:03:01.470", "id": "90985", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T07:03:01.470", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90976", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As @aguijonazo points out in their comment, the third entry on your linked\nWeblio page of 手前 is what you are looking for. In this sense the word means\n\"appearance\", something that you've already done or a position that you have\nalready taken, and as a result it affects other things.\n\nSo let's look at the examples in that entry\n\n> 言い出した手前、とても断れない \n> [since] (someone, possibly the speaker) has already said/suggested that, it\n> is impossible to turn it down now\n\nIf this isn't clear, let's fill in a made-up context. Say, your friend A san\nneeds $500 to buy a present for their partner but they are cash strapped. You\ncasually suggest you can lend them the money. A week later A san comes to you\nfor the money, but you have just lost your job. You ask your other friend B\nsan what to do. And in the discussion this line pops up. 「言い出した手前、とても断れない」\n\nYou suggested that you would lend A san the money, and now you can't refuse to\ndo so. That's 手前. It sets up a situation, and the situation it explains\naffects other things said.\n\nLet's look at your quoted line.\n\n>\n> 完全看護を掲げている手前、付き添い婦は認められず、そうかといって看護の域はどこまでか、それをはみ出した部分はだれがするか、家族が毎日通って補助するしかない\n\nYour interpretation isn't exactly correct. Well, it's not that \"the hospital\ndoesn't give a caretaker.\" The original sentence claims the hospital doesn't\napprove of private caregivers.\n\nSo the hospital seems to claim [total\ncare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_care), and as a result, they don't\nallow private nurses/caregivers (付き添い婦). But still the problem is there is no\nclear delineation of the hospital's care service scope. And there are things\noutside the scope of the total care provided by the hospital, and they have to\nbe done too, but who is going to do those things is the question.\n「家族が毎日通って補助するしかない」 There's no other way except that family members have to go\nto the hospital every day and do the extra work.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T00:32:09.107", "id": "90981", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T00:37:38.547", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-31T00:37:38.547", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "90977", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Based on [this (bot)\ntweet](https://twitter.com/ff5_four_hearts/status/1246566270465499137), the\ncorrect phrase is おれは、バッツ。チョコボといっしょにあてのない旅をしてる…\n\nBreaking down the sentence,\n\n * おれは、バッツ。 I'm Butz.\n * チョコボといっしょに together with Chocobo\n * あてのない旅をしてる… on a journey without destination.\n\n[あて](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%82%E3%81%A6/#jn-5005) generally\nmeans _target, objective_. の is a subject maker, あてのない as a whole means\n_targetless, destinationless_.\n\nGrammatically, the subject ofthe second sentence (= Butz) is omitted. So it is\nおれは/チョコボといっしょに/あてのない旅をしてる… = I / together with Chocobo / am making a\ndestinationless journey.\n\n* * *\n\nNot sure of the spelling of Butz. Maybe Bartz?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T06:28:33.983", "id": "90983", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T06:28:33.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90982", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it's the te-form of 回る. This 回ってくる means \"(for a task/role) to come (in\nturn)\".\n\n> ###\n> [回る](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%9B%9E%E3%82%8B_%28%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8F%E3%82%8B%29/)\n>\n> ６ 物事が順に移る。「仕事が―・ってくる」「週単位で当番が―・る」\n\n[The やすい construction](https://nihongokyoshi-\nnet.com/2019/05/02/jlptn4-grammar-yasui/) is also important. Besides, 叱る is\nnot \"to scream\" but \"to scold\". (叫ぶ is a different word with a different\nkanji.)\n\nSo:\n\n> 母親に叱る役割がまわってきやすいのです。\n>\n> (It's that) the role of scolding can easily come to the mother.\n\nA free translation is \"In a case like this, it's often the mother's turn to\nscold (her kid).\"\n\n回る/回す has other meanings:\n\n * [meaning of the expression 順調に回る](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/82519/5010)\n * [What does \"回る\" mean in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/68142/5010)\n * [What does 王室宮内庁を予算ごと回す mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65691/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T03:24:11.493", "id": "91004", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T08:43:52.127", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-01T08:43:52.127", "last_editor_user_id": "35362", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90984", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "フォローする as a Japanese verb also means \"to make up for one's mistake\", \"to lend\na hand (after something undesirable happens)\" or \"to give follow-on support\".\n\n> 失敗してもフォローするので、思いきってやってください。 \n> Even if you fail, I can give a hand (and make up for the mistake), so just\n> go for it.\n\nImagine someone who watches over you from behind and lends a hand whenever you\nneed it. In this case, what the mother does is to comfort the child and gently\ntell him what he did wrong.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T02:57:11.650", "id": "91003", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T03:02:31.800", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-01T03:02:31.800", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90986", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Comparing\n[とにかく](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8F/#jn-159706)\nand\n[ともかく](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8F/#jn-160357),\nthey are mostly interchangeable (one is listed in the definition of the\nother).\n\nとにかく has the usage shared by なにしろ (meaning _above all, particularly_ or\npractically _very (much)_ ):\n\n> [用法]とにかく・[用法]なにしろ――\n>\n\n>> 「彼はとにかく（なにしろ）まじめな人だから」\n\n>>\n\n>> 「このごろ、とにかく（なにしろ）忙しくってね」\n\n>\n> のように、取り上げた事柄をまず強調しようとする意では相通じて用いられる。\n\nThis usage is only for とにかく (or at least ともかく should be much less common).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T01:13:54.447", "id": "90997", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T01:13:54.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "90987", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "With a better look at the semantics, a rough parse of this sentence is going\nto be something like:\n\n> しかしその当時は、[技術レベルがまだ低かった○○] **[A]** 、[当事者たちに受け入れてもらうことはできなかった] **[B]** 。\n\n「しかしその時は」 is a temporal adverbial elevated as a topic, so it's not part of the\nfocus here. Let's take a look at the relation between A and B. If you use\n**AのみならずB** , you are putting A and B in the same category or on the same\nlevel. If the entire sentence contains causality -- though it doesn't have to\n-- A and B would be either 1. both reasons or 2. both results.\n\nFor example,\n\n> 地震で家のみならず、家族も失った。\n\nBoth 家を失った、家族を失った are the results of the earthquake. The function of のみならず\n(のみか) is 添加 (addition, supplementation).\n\nBut in fact, with the semantics clear, clause A is a reason, among others,\nthat led to clause B. There is a causal relation between A and B, and that's\nwhy you have to use こともあって. Here, こともあって functions to give inexhaustive\nreasons.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T18:52:58.183", "id": "90993", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T18:52:58.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "90989", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "のみならず means “not only” and what follows it is expected to be some addition\nthat can be translated with “but also”. In this sentence, it would be another\nproblem that existed at the time in addition to technology not being advanced\nenough. Robots not being accepted, however, seems more like a result of\ntechnology not being advanced enough than an additional problem.\n\nLet’s suppose, however, that those two can be connected with のみならず as two\nproblems, rather than a cause and a result, because that's not at all\nimpossible.\n\nWhat makes the sentence unnatural in this case is the particle that marks\n当事者たちに受け入れてもらうこと.\n\nSince what comes after のみならず is an addiction to what is said before it,も works\nwell.\n\n> 技術レベルがまだ低かったのみならず、当事者たちに受け入れてもらうこと **も** できなかった。\n\nが is not bad, either.\n\n> 技術レベルがまだ低かったのみならず、当事者たちに受け入れてもらうこと **が** できなかった。\n\nHowever, は gives an impression that acceptance by people, which was not\nachieved, is specifically focused in contrast to something that _was_\nachieved, and this doesn't quite go well with のみならず.\n\nThis problem doesn't exist with こともあって because `ＡであることもあってＢ` states B is the\ncase, giving A as one of the reasons, and it is natural to put B in focus in\ncontrast to what was stated earlier or implied by context.\n\nIn `ＡであるのみならずＢ`, on the other hand, A and B are supposed to be an equal pair\nand specific focus on B is not expected.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T22:55:19.000", "id": "90996", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:45:24.113", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:45:24.113", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90989", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "...にする is a set expression indicating a choice one has/will make.\n\n> さて、昼にしましょう\n\n> Well, how about lunch?\n\n* * *\n\nThere was a time when saying things like _let's do lunch_ or _let's do dinner_\nwere viewed as horrible California-isms. It seems they've managed to have\nestablished themselves more broadly in English now.\n\nBut, in Japanese, saying\n\n> 昼をしましょう\n\nwhile this is technically _grammatical,_ as pointed out in the other answer,\nit doesn't make much sense. (I was perhaps a bit careless in my use of the\nword, _grammatical_ , previously.) 昼 here is being treated as the object of\nthe verb する; you don't do _afternoon_ in Japanese (even if you can make some\nkind of sense of that expression in English).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T15:31:24.910", "id": "90991", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T15:33:27.867", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-02T15:33:27.867", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "90990", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "昼をしましょう would mean \"Let's do noon\", but not in the sense of \"do\" meaning\n\"choose\" as it can in English. And, \"noon\" is not something you can actively\ndo or perform. Like, you can't use it as an answer to questions like \"What do\nyou like to do?\" or \"What should we do together?\"\n\nSo this doesn't make sense (though, contrary to above, it _**is**_\ngrammatical).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T22:45:46.853", "id": "90995", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T22:45:46.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "90990", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "昼にする is a fixed phrase, but if you need to analyze it, I think you could see\nit as a special case of `ＡをＢにする` as follows.\n\n> （この時間を）昼（ご飯を食べる時間）にする。\n\nBy the way, コーヒーにする could be seen like that, too.\n\n> （私が飲むものを）コーヒーにする。\n\n昼をする makes little sense. 昼 in the sense of either “daytime” or “lunch” simply\ndoesn’t work well as an object of the verb する.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T05:13:09.847", "id": "91009", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T05:13:09.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90990", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the English translation is misleading here. Literal translation will\nbe \"Komi-san's friend(s) became more numerous\", or even more literal \"Friends\nbecame more numerous at/for/to Komi-san\". So friend(s) are the actor and Komi-\nsan is a recepient. As such she is marked with \"ni\". But of course she can be\nmarked with \"ha\" as well.\n\nIt works similarly in Russian, so it's not peculiar to Japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-10-31T19:47:27.813", "id": "90994", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-31T20:27:00.777", "last_edit_date": "2021-10-31T20:27:00.777", "last_editor_user_id": "39017", "owner_user_id": "39017", "parent_id": "90992", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "It’s not much different from sentences like this.\n\n> 駅前に店ができた。\n\nThis できる describes a change of state, a kind that puts something into\nexistence somewhere. That _somewhere_ is marked with に. This usage of に could\nbe seen as basically the same as the standard usage of the particle in the\nsentence below, except the _existence_ described will happen only as a result\nof the change described by the verb.\n\n> 駅前に店がある。\n\n増える in your sentence works in a similar manner. As a result of the described\nchange, Komi-san has a new friend or friends, or they _come into existence in_\nKomi-san. In fact, this state can be described as below.\n\n> 古味さんに（新しい）友達がいる。\n\n(This usage of に is discussed\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42803/43676).)\n\n増える doesn’t always work like that, though. For example, 人口が増える doesn’t\ndescribe a change that newly puts something into existence somewhere. It\nmerely describes a change in some variable. So, the following sentence is a\nbit strange.\n\n> 日本に人口が増えた。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T03:27:17.733", "id": "91005", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:42:38.073", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:42:38.073", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "90992", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "もらう (\"to receive\") is a verb that can take up to three particles (i.e.,\n[trivalent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valency_\\(linguistics\\))). A **が** B\n**に** C **を** もらう means \"A (gratefully) receives C from B\".\n\n> 彼女 **は** 母 **に** 指輪 **を** もらった。 \n> She received a ring from her mother. \n> (が is replaced to は because it's the topic of the sentence)\n\nが (or は) marks the subject who is the receiver, and に (or から) marks the giver.\nThese rules won't change when もらう is used as a donatory subsidiary verb (i.e.,\nwhen the given thing is a \"favor\" instead of a tangible object). Therefore:\n\n> さくら **が** パーティーに誘ってもらった。 \n> Sakura was invited to a party (by someone, and she was grateful). \n> (Read this as though Sakura received an imaginary invitation.)\n\n> さくら **に** パーティーに誘ってもらった。 \n> [I/Someone] was invited to a party by Sakura (and I/he/she was grateful).\n\nOf course you can use both が (は) and に and say something like this:\n\n> 太郎が花子にパーティーに誘ってもらった。 \n> Taro was invited to a party by Hanako (and Taro was grateful).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T01:44:00.877", "id": "91000", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T02:29:32.710", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-01T02:29:32.710", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "90999", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I remember when I first learned about してもらう、してあげる and the like, it helped me\nto think translate it in my head as \"to receive the action of ...~ing\" or \"to\ngive the action of ...~ing\" :\n\n**さくらが** パーティーに誘ってもらった\n\n**Sakura** _received the action of being invited_ to the party.\n\ni.e.; Sakura got invited to the party.\n\n**さくらに** パーティーに誘ってもらった\n\n[Someone] _received the action of being invited_ to the party **by Sakura**.\n\ni.e.; Sakura invited them to the party.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T04:28:16.670", "id": "91008", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T04:28:16.670", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "25254", "parent_id": "90999", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "This される does not have the passive meaning. It's a less common usage of (ら)れる\nknown as 自発 (\"spontaneous\").\n\n * [Why is the passive form used in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42680/5010)\n * [Is there a reason why the passive and the potential form are identical (at least for える/いる verbs)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/60050/5010)\n\nSo this 遠慮される means something along the lines of なんとなく遠慮したい気持ちになる (\"to\nspontaneously feel like refraining\"). 遠慮させられる is different because it means\nsome external pressure is making you to do 遠慮.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T02:33:33.713", "id": "91002", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T03:09:07.203", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-01T03:09:07.203", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91001", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "No, it cannot mean/indicate physical face, as far as I aware.\n\nThat synonyms are really just for \"外から見たものの様子のこと\", and that's also why there's\n\"メンツ・面子\" is in that synonyms list (Also in 世間の風評, 会合や事業などに参加する人々のこと.)\n\nThe only real synonyms I can think of for 面子 is \"面目\" and \"体面\" for \"save/lose\nface\", \"prestige\", and \"顔触れ\" for members.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T07:17:30.677", "id": "91012", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T07:17:30.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45272", "parent_id": "91010", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "A more literal translation would be something like:\n\n> I will turn tomorrow and next Tuesday into days off.\n\nThis, of course, doesn’t refer to any process during which those days are\ntransformed into something else. You just treat them as your days off.\n\nIf you say this as a declaration when you have just made up your mind to take\nthose days off, it may be more naturally translated using the English verb “\n_decide_.”\n\n> I have (just) decided to take tomorrow and next Tuesday off.\n\n私は明日と来週の火曜日（に）休みを決める would be understood as meaning that you will decide when\nto take a day off or vacation on the specified dates. Your vacation, to be\ndecided tomorrow and next Tuesday, might be months away.\n\nIf you want to make a similar declaration to the first using the verb 決める, you\nwill still use する.\n\n> 私は明日と来週の火曜日を休みにすることに決めた。 \n> I have (just) decided on taking tomorrow and next Tuesday off.\n\nこと, as a nominalizer, roughly corresponds to the “ _-ing_ ” suffix of the\ngerund “ _taking_.”\n\nThe verb 決める must be used in the past tense here because the present form\nwould be understood as referring to a future action (of deciding).\n\n* * *\n\n**[EDIT]**\n\nI don’t mean to confuse you, but you can also say:\n\n> 私は明日と来週の火曜日を休みにすることにした。\n\nThis final した is very similar in meaning to 決めた.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T11:36:53.257", "id": "91015", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:41:55.427", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:41:55.427", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91011", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "いや means \"unpleasant\"\n\nよ in this context means \"it is\"\n\nね is used at the end of a sentence to solicit the listener's agreement with\nthe speaker.\n\nPut together the whole is \"it's unpleasant, isn't it?\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T13:05:03.270", "id": "91016", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T13:05:03.270", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10072", "parent_id": "91013", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm not sure _archaic_ is appropriate, but 6-8 are not in current use.\n\nFor 3-5, they appear only in fixed combinations.\n\n * [首]{こうべ}を垂れる _bow, (symbolically) be modest_\n * [頭]{かぶり}を振る _shake one's head (to mean no)_ ; The modern equivalent is [首]{くび}をふる. [コトバンク](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%A0%AD%E3%82%92%E6%8C%AF%E3%82%8B-465928) has the same usage for かしら and あたま, but I guess these two are not common in modern speech either.\n * おつむ is defined as [頭。主として幼児に対して用いる。](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%BE%A1%E9%A0%AD_%28%E3%81%8A%E3%81%A4%E3%82%80%29/#jn-31780), but I guess it would be seen used as a pejorative in modern fiction (or maybe in real life by some very rude speakers). I think this is usually written in hiragana. Examples: 足りないおつむで考えろ _Think with your pea-brain!_ ; 日本の政治家はおつむが弱い _Japanese politicians are lacking intelligence_.\n\nFor こうべ and かぶり, the above are pretty much the only phrases you may encounter\nin modern speech. For おつむ, there can be many variants, but basically it is\nused to mean _stupid mind_ in combination with phrases meaning _weak_.\n\nThe uses of かしら which is in current use and cannot be replaced by あたま are:\n\n * _Boss_ : again this is not exactly current, but frequently seen in fiction. The leader of bandits may well be called かしら. I don't really think there are real groups of people whose leader is called かしら, not even Japanese mafias.\n * _head of fish_ : [尾頭]{おかしら}付き means a fish cooked with its shape intact, usually used for expensive fish (esp. 鯛). This may be considered as a set phrase.\n\nFor other cases where you mean just _head_ , あたま should be fine (except the\ndifference between English and Japanese on what is head and what is neck like\n[首]{くび}を振る above).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T05:09:08.770", "id": "91032", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T05:09:08.770", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91017", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "新規 and 新たな cannot be used as a predicate, and they cannot be used in\ncomparative sentences, either.\n\npre-noun adjectival | adverbial | comparison | predicate \n---|---|---|--- \n新しい計画 | 新しく計画する | これより新しい計画 | この計画は新しい \n新たな計画 | 新たに計画する | ❌これより新たな計画 | ❌この計画は新ただ \n新規(の)計画 | 新規に計画する | ❌これより新規な計画 | ❌この計画は新規だ \n \n新しい is a plain word, 新た is a bookish and a little dramatic word (∼ \"brand-\nnew\"), and 新規 is a technical-sounding word. 新規 is not a word we commonly see\nin lyrics. 新たな夢 sounds more dramatic than 新しい夢, but 新規の夢 sounds simply odd.\n\nAs 新規 is a kango (Sino-Japanese word with on-readings), it's often used before\nanother kango.\n\nI may be wrong, but 新規 may tend to mean \"first-time\" rather than \"new\". 新規客\nand 新しい客 can both refer to \"first-time customer (who has never visited the\nstore before)\" and \"new customer (e.g., 8th visitor of the day after the first\n7)\", but I feel 新規客 tends to refer to the former. There is even an expression\n[ご新規さん](https://jisho.org/word/%E3%81%94%E6%96%B0%E8%A6%8F). The same can be\nsaid for 新規感染 vs 新たな感染; both can refer to first-time infection and\nreinfection, but 新規感染 tends to refer to the former.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T00:42:51.930", "id": "91025", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T00:48:31.960", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-02T00:48:31.960", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91018", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "One possibility I can think of is that she is presenting the hypothesis that\nshe is the sole culprit, in which case Uesugi would not be part of it and\ntherefore deserve a chance to explain himself. She could be asking if he would\nstill stop her from giving Uesugi that chance.\n\nFor #1 to be plausible, the two at the scene must be in such a relationship\nthat (she knows that he knows that) he would likely give her such a chance if\nshe were in Uesugi’s shoes. I have never watched the series and don’t know if\nthey are.\n\nBut poor acting…", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T02:55:04.427", "id": "91028", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T02:55:04.427", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91020", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "From the text can tell that 甲斐's way of doing thing is \"地検に告発を\" without\ninforming the culprit before(その前に本人と話さない). But 幸村 thinks culprit should be\ninformed before(その前に本人と話す) to have a chance to explain him/herself(弁明の機会を与える),\nand this is 幸村's way of doing things(私のやり方よ). 甲斐 don't agree with 幸村's way. So\nwhat 幸村 assumes(私が犯人だったとしても？) is: if I were the culprit, will you directly\n\"地検に告発を\" without informing me before as well? (I didn't see the scene, but I\nguess they two are friends or have a close relationship?)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T03:05:18.407", "id": "91029", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T03:05:18.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48607", "parent_id": "91020", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I haven't watched the show at all so it's possible that I'm totally wrong, but\ngiven the background:\n\n * 甲斐 and 幸村 are new partners\n * 幸村 and 上杉 were old partners\n\nin other words, 幸村 : 上杉 = 甲斐 : 幸村\n\nAnd what the previous two lines say, without omission, are:\n\n * （私［幸村］は上杉に）弁明の機会を与える。\n * （あなた［幸村］は上杉に）す（=弁明の機会を与える）べきじゃない。\n\nThen this line is possibly intended to be:\n\n> 私［幸村］が犯人だったとしても（あなた［甲斐］は私［幸村］に弁明の機会を与えないのか）？", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T03:25:17.080", "id": "91031", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T03:25:17.080", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "91020", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Both are indeed correct, but I would understand とき slightly differently in\nthose two sentences.\n\n林さんに会っ **た** とき refers to a specific point in time. The speaker will be with\nHayashi-san then and he will return the book when that time has come. This is\na typical example of relative tense.\n\nI would understand 林さんに会 **う** とき as referring more to an occasion than a\nspecific point in time, or, in other words, a longer span of time than in the\nsentence with 会った. It sounds like the speaker will return the book taking\nadvantage of the occasion to go out and meet Hayashi-san.\n\nThe probability of him returning the book to someone other than Hayashi-san\nseems to increase in this case. He might drop by a library on his way to the\nmeeting, or meet the owner of the book after the meeting with Hayashi-san is\nover. He might as well return the book to Hayashi-san when the two meet, of\ncourse.\n\nI think this can be seen as a case of absolute tense being used in a noun-\nmodifying clause (recently discussed\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/90967/43676)), with とき being the\nmodified noun.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T23:32:46.590", "id": "91023", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:40:13.527", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:40:13.527", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91021", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I leave practically useful explanations to @aguijonazo's answer.\n\nLinguistically this た does not indicate past tense, but perfect aspect. So\nthis is outside any tense rule.\n\nFor example, [this\narticle](https://www.u-bunkyo.ac.jp/center/library/image/fsell2007_071-091.PDF)\ncites the following:\n\n> 松下（1930）は、「た」は動作性活用の語の第二活段へ附いて完了の意を表すものである。 現在、過去、未来、不拘時の何れにも用ゐられて其の完了を表す。\n>\n> 1 御覧なさい、綺麗な月が出ました。 現在の完了\n>\n> 2 私は子どもの時は国に居りました。 過去を完了に表す\n>\n> 3 借りたものは還さなければならない。 不拘時の事件の完了\n>\n> 4 明日伺ったらばお目に掛かれましょうか。 未来の事件の完了\n\nThe た in the question is the same as 4. The same article seems to discuss\nfurther how to sort out usage of た consistently, but for the current question,\nI suppose it is enough to note that た is not necessarily a tense marker.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T01:00:37.710", "id": "91027", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T01:00:37.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91021", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "You need to use ところ instead of とき.\n\n * 「描く」の漢字を使ったほうがいい **ところで** 、「書く」の漢字を使ってしまいました。\n * 「描く」の字を使うべき **ところで** 「書く」の方を使ってしまいました。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T00:53:24.027", "id": "91026", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T00:53:24.027", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91024", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> そして、子供は、そういう大人の生活の知恵を敏感に知っていて。。。 \n> ...therefore the kids are sensitive to the wisdom life and they know it of\n> the beforementioned adult\n\nIt seems you're not parsing the sentence correctly.\n\nHow about parsing it like this:\n\n> そして、子供は、そういう（大人の）「生活の知恵」を（敏感に）知っていて。。。\n\nそういう modifies the noun phrase 生活の知恵 \"wisdom in living\". \n敏感に modifies the verb phrase 知っていて.\n\nSubject = 子供 children \nObject = そういう（大人の）生活の知恵 adults' such wisdom in living \nVerb = （敏感に）知っている are sensitively aware of / sensitively learn", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T05:28:39.647", "id": "91033", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T11:16:38.350", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-02T11:16:38.350", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "91030", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm not a linguist, but I think this expression has \"if you could\" implicitly.\n「（言えるものなら）馬鹿を言え」\"Tell me the nonsense (if you could)\", which implies that the\nspeaker believes the opponent should not tell.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T12:59:29.560", "id": "91039", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T12:59:29.560", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48613", "parent_id": "91034", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The following are my guesses.\n\nPossibility 1: There is the expression 'バカも休み休み言え' to mean _don't keep saying\nstupid things._ 'バカ言え' derived from this with omission and change of the\nparticle. There are some extensions of 'バカ言え', like those in the comments.\nThis might better explain why most other cases do not work in the same way\n(e.g. 'バカなことをしろ' does not mean 'バカなことするな').\n\nPossibility 2: For some reason imperative is used to mean 'に違いない' in the\nsimilar way that English _must_ has double meaning. So バカ言え/嘘つけ means\n'(お前は)バカなことを言っている/嘘をついているに違いない' = _It must be that you are saying stupid\nthings/lying_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T02:02:13.633", "id": "91060", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T02:02:13.633", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91034", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, depending on the context, 何やってるの can be a question about someone's\noccupation. Of course the same sentence can also mean \"What are you doing\n(now)?\" This is natural because the -teiru form can describe one's habitual\naction. See: [Habitual\naspect](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11925/5010)\n\nThe answer can be in the -teiru form, too, e.g., 保育士をしています, お米を作っています,\n歌手やってます, 電車を運転している人です.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T09:40:50.617", "id": "91037", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T11:39:21.660", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-02T11:39:21.660", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91035", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]