Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "You are close, but this あげる is not \"to give\" but \"to raise/elevate\". 落とす and\n上げる are transitive verbs with opposite meanings. The literal translation is\n\"I'd heard that bringing someone's mood down and then bringing it up makes\nthem twice as happy.\" The speaker said this to explain why he intentionally\ndisappointed the friend.\n\nRecently 上げて落とす and 落として上げる are used as slangy set phrases, and the object\n(気分を) is not always stated explicitly. See: [What is the meaning of\n上げて落としたみてー?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/71856/5010)\n\nAnd yes, this 方が is a phrase used for comparison. It can safely take a verb\nbefore it (as a relative clause).\n\n * 夢は大きい方がいい。 \nA big dream is better (than a small dream).\n\n * お金はある方がいい。 \nHaving money is better (than having no money).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T10:02:37.177", "id": "91038", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T12:03:55.643", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-02T12:03:55.643", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91036", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The word you are looking for is most probably 健康診断. It refers to a general\nhealth check-up.\n\n検診 is a more specific check-up that aims to detect a particular disease, such\nas cancer as in the case of がん検診. Some 検診 may be included in 健康診断.\n\n身体検査 has some overlap with 健康診断 but its focus is more on body measurement and\nsimple fitness test than medical examination. When I hear this word, I think\nof those conducted on kids in schools.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-02T23:00:45.647", "id": "91045", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-02T23:00:45.647", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91040", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Seems like you're comfortable with double negative so I won't bother\nexplaining that.\n\n> Is it a specific grammatical form with some nuance?\n\nYes, if you think of it this way:\n\nAllow me to change the two kanjis to help semantics:\n\n**水分なんかは **取って** **摂れない** こともない**\n\nThe first 取る is literally \"take\", as in, put in your mouth and gulp it down.\n\nThe second 摂る is \"take\" as in consume/absorb for the organs.\n\nImagine a machine. It may 取る water but it can't 摂る.\n\nYou don't really need to be picky about 取る vs 摂る in real life, but 食事を取る and\n食事を摂る can express different nuances.\n\n* * *\n\nI can make similar examples with giraffes, known for sleeping while standing\nup. Here 寝る means \"lying down\" and 眠る means \"zzzzz\" :\n\n**寝て眠れない** Can NOT sleep lying down.\n\nBut research has proven that they actually CAN sleep lying down if they\nchoose:\n\n**寝て眠れない こともない** It's not like they really CAN'T sleep lying down.\n\nI think it was described that 屍鬼 don't pee or poop. I wonder what happens to\nthe consumed water.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T04:21:03.690", "id": "91047", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-03T04:21:03.690", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "91041", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "In general, the second verb is the potential form of the first, or its\nequivalent as in the case of やってできないこともない.\n\nやってできないこともない means basically the same as just できないこともない. If I had to translate\nthem in such a way that their difference becomes clear, I would put them this\nway.\n\n> できないこともない。 \n> _It’s not like you can’t do it._\n\n> やってできないこともない。 \n> _It’s not like you can’t do it if you (try or choose to) do it._\n\nDoing whatever it is sounds more challenging, and/or the speaker less willing,\nin the latter than in the former.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T11:34:31.537", "id": "91052", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-03T11:34:31.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91041", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Thanks to the comments, this finally clicked for me. どちらかといえば (if anything) +\nむしろ (A rather than B) = if anything, A rather than B. In hindsight, this was\nreally straightforward.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T00:37:35.233", "id": "91046", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-03T00:37:35.233", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48616", "parent_id": "91042", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It's probably two \"sentences\":\n\n * 願うは豊穣。 \nIt's fertility that I with for. \n(The archaic version of 願うのは豊穣(だ))\n\n * 品足る礼賛。 \nAdoration for things/goods/merchandise being abundant! \n(So-called [呼体句/体言止め](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/86022/5010);\nsemantically something like 品が足ることを礼賛しよう)\n\nThe word after 品 is unlikely to be the auxiliary たる because 品である礼賛 makes even\nless sense to me (but you may want to refer to the original comic). Note that\nthe auxiliary たる has nothing to do with 足る, so that 代表足る者 is a plain typo. If\nthe kanji 足 is used, it surely is a verb meaning \"to be sufficient/enough\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T00:26:16.297", "id": "91059", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T00:26:16.297", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91043", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Please forget ～ないといけない and ～なければならない for now. なければできない is totally different\nfrom them. なければできない is not a special construction, so you can just read it\nword by word. 体験をする means \"to have an experience\", and 体験ができる means \"can have\nan experience\".\n\n * 登らなければできない体験 an experience you cannot have if you don't climb it \n * 登らなければ if you do not climb\n * できない体験 experience you cannot have \n * できない cannot (have)\n * 体験 an experience\n\n> 富士山に登るのは大変だったが、《登らなければできない素晴らしい経験》がいくつもできた。\n>\n> Climbing Mt. Fuji was tough, but I was able to have many 《great experiences\n> that I could not have had if I hadn't climbed it》.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T11:23:34.240", "id": "91051", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-03T14:56:10.800", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-03T14:56:10.800", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91048", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "This indicates a \"five-day-a-week system\". You need to provide the context,\nbut my guess is this is referring to the\n[学校週5日制](https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shougai/week/index_a.htm), i.e. the\nidea that the school week is five days long, as opposed to (for example) six\ndays.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T05:13:25.573", "id": "91050", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-03T05:13:25.573", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "91049", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "In your case, the topic has been already fixated to 来週(は) in the question, so\nyou don't have to say 来週 again. Everyone understands you are currently talking\nabout the next week's plan.\n\nIf there were no previous context, 日曜日に買い物に行きます normally refers to 次の日曜日 (\n_next_ Sunday), which can be different from 来週の日曜日 (Sunday of the next week)\nbecause many think a 日曜日 is at the end of a week. For example, when 次の日曜日\nrefers to 3 days from now, 来週の日曜日 may refer to 10 days from now.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T23:54:10.183", "id": "91057", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T00:37:42.287", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-04T00:37:42.287", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91054", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Since the question contains 来週の, it is fine just to say 日曜日に買い物に行きます。\n\n* * *\n\n(Not completely on-topic for the question)\n\nAs noted in the comment, there will be some subtle thins in 来週の(/先週の）.\n\nFirst of all, most (tabular) calendars has Sundays as the left most column.\nBut(?) many Japanese think Monday is the first day of the week (correctly, I\nassume).\n\nConsider this week: 10/31(Sun) - 11/6(Sat).\n\n * On 10/31: technically 11/6 is 来週の土曜日, but I would not use it to denote 11/6. Most probably 次の土曜日 or even (wrongly) 今週の土曜日.\n * On 11/1: similarly I would not use 先週の日曜日 to mean 10/31; it is most probably understood as 10/24. To mean 10/31, probably just 昨日 or 日曜日.\n * During 11/1 - 11/6: 次の日曜日 denotes 11/7 and 来週の日曜日 denotes 11/14. (*)\n * On 11/7: 次の日曜日 and 来週の日曜日 denote 11/14.\n\nDue to the similar ambiguities mentioned in the comment, I guess 来週の日曜日(*) is\nless likely to be used as it is later in the week.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T23:58:34.697", "id": "91058", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T00:09:50.030", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-04T00:09:50.030", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91054", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Both 2つの言葉が話せる and 言葉が2つ話せる are perfectly correct. 2つの言葉が話せる tends to sound\nslightly more technical, but it's natural to use some stiff expressions when\ntalking about the definition of a word. This has been asked several times on\nthis site.\n\n * [How to list numbers of things](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17816/5010)\n * [Questions about counters](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36890/5010)\n * [Positioning of quantities (using counters)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/8136/5010)\n\nAnd it's perfectly fine to use 言葉 here, too, because it means both _language_\nand _word_. If you want to avoid all misunderstandings, you can use 言語\ninstead, but usually you don't have to worry that much. 2か国語が話せる is also\ncorrect (one may argue \"two languages\" and \"languages of two countries\" are\nnot necessarily the same, but this is a fixed phrase and there is no room for\nmisunderstanding).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-03T23:34:27.670", "id": "91056", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-03T23:41:04.047", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-03T23:41:04.047", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91055", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This sounds like incredulity.\n\n> どうしたのかって？人が死んだ。\n\n> Are you asking _what happened_? Someone died.\n\nWithout context, I'm not really sure what the original question really meant.\nWere they asking \"What happened?\" or \"What's going on with you?\" If it's the\nlater, then\n\n> You asking me, \"what's going on with me?\" Someone died.\n\nか here is signaling a degree of incredulity that whoever asked the question in\nthe first place asked what they did.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T02:53:16.113", "id": "91062", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T02:53:16.113", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91061", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "どうしたの and どうしたのか are the same except that the latter is usually regarded as\nthe literary style. The のか style is fairly bookish and stiff at the end of a\nsentence, but it's less so in the middle of a sentence. Here, どうしたのって and\nどうしたのかって are almost the same except that the latter may sound a little more\nserious/formal.\n\n * 昨日は何食べたのって聞かれた。(informal)\n * 昨日は何を食べたの **か** (と)聞かれました。(formal)\n\n(But is that really a rhetorical question? A typical rhetorical question is\nsomething that implies \"no\". Something like 誰が分かるのか (\"Who knows?\") is a\nrhetorical question because it implies \"no one knows\", but in this case どうしたの\nis just an ordinary question and it does not imply \"nothing happened\" or\n\"nothing is wrong\". Person B simply quoted it without changing the meaning of\nthe question itself.)\n\n* * *\n\nYou probably know this, but if だ/です were used, it would add a nuance of\naccusation/shock (see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/90333/5010)).\n\n * どうしたの **だ** って？\n * どうしたのか **だ** って？\n * どうしたの **です** って？\n * どうしたのか **です** って？", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T04:06:26.127", "id": "91063", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T04:06:26.127", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91061", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "[Wiktionary's definition of\nその](https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%AE)\n\n> 3. その人の。 \n> それ以来、その姿を見た者はいない。\n>\n\n> すべて国民は、法律の定めるところにより、 **その人の** 保護する子女に普通教育を受けさせる義務を負ふ。\n\nwhere the antecedent of その人 is 国民, or each member of the collective noun 国民.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T04:44:41.570", "id": "91065", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T04:44:41.570", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91064", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Nope, this is the usual その. It seems to me that you didn't parse the sentence\ncorrectly.\n\nYou can understand the sentence like this\n\n> (すべて国民) は、(法律の定めるところ)により、[その {( **国民が** )保護する子女}に 普通教育を 受けさせる義務]を 負ふ。\n>\n> All people have the responsibility to let their children receive general\n> education under the law.\n\n国民 is the hidden subject of 保護する. 子女 are boys and girls under care by 国民.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T04:52:45.810", "id": "91066", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T04:52:45.810", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "41067", "parent_id": "91064", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "つった is past tense of つる - there are several verbs pronounced つる, but they all\nhave the same inflection. As far as I can tell using Jisho, the relevant word\nis 攣る \"to cramp; to be cramped; to contract\", normally written in kana (that\nis, after all, a very complex kanji). A [web\nsearch](https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffsb&q=%E8%B6%B3%E3%81%8C%E3%81%A4%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F&iax=images&ia=images)\nimplies that 足がつった is a common collocation (especially if we look at image\nresults): \"[my] leg has cramped\". Thus 足がつった猫 is a cat described by 足がつった,\ni.e. a cat for which its leg is (or legs are) cramped, i.e. a cat with stiff\nlegs.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T12:59:11.207", "id": "91068", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T12:59:11.207", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "91067", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "So you are one of those people who pick three one-yen coins from their wallet\nwhen asked to pay one thousand.\n\nIt is hard to tell how to differentiate two sounds to someone who can’t\ndifferentiate them, not least in writing. One thing I can tell for sure is\nthat under practically no circumstances are あん /aN/ and えん /eN/ pronounced the\nsame. As a general rule, Japanese vowels retain their qualities regardless of\ntheir position in a word, whether they are long or short, or what other sound\ncomes before or after them.\n\nFrom the description in your comment it seems that the difficulty arises for\nyou when /aN/ or /eN/ is pronounced like one nasalized vowel, rather than a\ntwo-mora sequence. Then, it could be because you are not used to the /e/ sound\ngetting nasalized. I learned from the Wikipedia entry on [Burmese\nphonology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burmese_phonology) that the /e/ sound\noccurs only in open syllables in your language and also that nasalization\nhappens when a syllable ends with a nasal final, such as /m/, /n/, and /ŋ/,\nwhich by definition never happens in an open syllable. Since /e/ does exist as\na distinct sound from /a/, you might want to begin by trying to produce a\nnasalized /e/ yourself and see how it sounds differently from a nasalized /a/.\n\nI don’t think I can’t give any better advice than this.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-05T03:13:08.077", "id": "91081", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-05T03:13:08.077", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91070", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Those two sounds are not distinguished in Japanese. They are free allophones\nof the same phoneme /o/.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T15:47:07.667", "id": "91073", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T15:47:07.667", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91072", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Both sentences are similar, but carry slightly different meanings.\n\nI think the most pressing thing to take note of is the difference between 見る\nand 見える. For a deeper understanding, I suggest checking out [this\nthread](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5287/what-is-the-\ndifference-\nbetween-%e8%a6%8b%e3%81%88%e3%82%8b-%e3%81%bf%e3%81%88%e3%82%8b-%e8%81%9e%e3%81%93%e3%81%88%e3%82%8b-%e3%81%8d%e3%81%93%e3%81%88%e3%82%8b-and-%e8%a6%8b%e3%82%89%e3%82%8c%e3%82%8b-%e3%81%bf%e3%82%89%e3%82%8c%e3%82%8b-%e8%81%9e%e3%81%91%e3%82%8b-%e3%81%8d%e3%81%91%e3%82%8b)\nand [this thread.](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/39242/what-is-\nthe-difference-between-%e8%a6%8b%e3%82%8b-and-%e8%a6%8b%e3%81%88%e3%82%8b)\nBut, for now, I will focus on the most likely application of the word:\n\n見る: to look. (the action of looking)\n\n見える: to be visible. (the action of having the ability to be looked at)\n\n> 私があなたを見る\n\nIf we break this down literally, it would be something like \"I am look(ing) at\nyou.\"\n\n> あなたが見えてます。\n\nAnd if we broke this one down literally, it would be \"You are visible\"/\"You\nare seen.\"\n\nThusly, if you wanted not to say \"I am look(ing) at you\" but instead, \"I can\nsee you\" (lit: You are visible to me) it would be:\n\n> 私にはあなたが見えてます。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-02-04T05:10:17.183", "id": "93282", "last_activity_date": "2022-02-04T05:10:17.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45258", "parent_id": "91074", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I guess the source of your doubt is that the reading いまおっと certainly is not\nstandard. It is used by extension of colloquial\n[[今彼]{いまかれ}](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%BB%8A%E5%BD%BC/) = current\nboyfriend. But I don't think people usually say [今妻]{いまつま} (though [元妻]{もとつま}\nsounds usual).\n\nAs such こんぷ is not possible; Most 今 has the single reading depending on the\ncombination. Words like 今日 = きょう, こんにち are exceptions (I don't come up with\nany other..).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-04T23:23:09.717", "id": "91077", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-04T23:23:09.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91075", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "If I understand you correctly, no, you cannot write out an English word using\nmatching hiragana sounds and expect anyone or any search to understand what\nyou are saying.\n\nIf you see a word written in katakana that _sounds_ like an English word, it's\nbecause that is a defined loanword. Loanwords are always written in katakana.\n\nIf you need to know how to say 'exit' in Japanese, just use an English-\nJapanese dictionary like [Jisho](https://jisho.org/search/exit) or use a\ntranslator.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-05T00:23:01.707", "id": "91078", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-05T00:23:01.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45675", "parent_id": "91076", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "切り替える could be used but it sounds more like switching to the other language\nfor the rest of the conversation.\n\nIf you are using it for language-exchange kind of thing, it would be clearer\nto use simply something like:\n\n * 最初に(最初の30分)英語を話してそのあと日本語を話しましょう Let's speak English first (first 30 mins) and then speak Japanese.\n\nMaybe closer to the 'switching between English and Japanese' you have in mind\nis:\n\n * 英語と日本語を交互に話しましょう.\n\nBut this is not clear about how 'switching' takes place (like the English\nphrase), and may sound suggesting switching the languages frequently.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-06T09:44:39.700", "id": "91091", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-06T13:17:47.967", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-06T13:17:47.967", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91079", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Though it is true that //eja// and //ea// tend to be neutralized in fast\nspeech (e.g. 部屋タイプ vs ヘアタイプ), the sound clips on that forvo page all sound\nappropriate to me.\n\nIt is a conjecture, but since you said you are Italian, the standard Italian\nlanguage has a 4-level vowel height distinction; that means you have an open\n//ɛ// (in _vento_ \"wind\") and a closed //e// (in _venti_ \"twenty\") between\n//i// and //a//. Japanese, in contrary, only has 3-level height, with only\n//e// that stands in the very middle ([[e̞]]) between //i// and //a//. It\nmeans the Japanese language tolerates a bit more open //i// than the Italian\ncounterpart. In the sound clips I hear two distinct Japanese sounds //e// and\n//j// (which is nothing but //i//) after //h// and before //a//, but if you\nonly hear monotonic //e//, you are perhaps recognizing both the starting and\nending articluations within the range of Italian //e//.\n\n(By the way strawberrybrown's pronunciation sounds most standard to me among\nthose clips, and molio's one sounds overly exaggerated.)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T16:30:02.793", "id": "91115", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T21:52:08.363", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-08T21:52:08.363", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "91082", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "努める is a wago and 努力する is a kango (see the tag [wago-and-\nkango](/questions/tagged/wago-and-kango \"show questions tagged 'wago-and-\nkango'\")), but in this specific case, 努める happens to be a fairly stiff and/or\nformal word that is even stiffer than 努力する. Elementary school students seldom\nuse 努める. In informal speech, 頑張る and 努力する are much more common.\n\nThe semantic difference between 努める and 努力する is small, but 努める can mean just\n\"to try\", whereas 努力する more explicitly means you use lots of time and energy.\nA time-consuming task like studying goes well with 努力する. On the other hand,\nreducing household garbage is basically a matter of consciousness and does not\nusually require a lot of effort, so 努める may be more natural in such cases.\n努めて挨拶を行います is natural (although very formal), but 努力して挨拶を行います may even sound\nlike you have some mental or physical problem.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-05T16:40:52.370", "id": "91084", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-05T16:42:53.363", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-05T16:42:53.363", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91083", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Historically, 学校 was spelled in kana -- and pronounced as something like --\nがくかう. Regular sound changes resulted in modern がっこう:\n\n * In the ～くか～ in the middle, the //u// sound was unstressed, leading to it gradually being omitted.\n * The //au// vowel combination on the end shifted from //au// (like English _ow!_ ) to //ɔː// (like English _awe_ ) by the early 1600s, as demonstrated by the 1603 [_Nippo Jisho_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nippo_Jisho) (Japanese-Portuguese dictionary). This then merged with //oː// (the long \"O\" sound) between then and the early modern period.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-05T19:29:35.773", "id": "91087", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-05T19:29:35.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "91086", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Only ところで sounds right to me. It’s quite neutral in register.\n\nお伝えしたいことが is inappropriate for the same reason you suspected 言っておきたいことがあります\nmight not be quite right, although it is less bad just because it doesn’t use\nthe subsidiary verb おく.\n\nときに in the sense of ところで sounds archaic.\n\nThis means there is no good equivalent for “ _I just wanted to say …_ ” in\nthis context because ところで just means “ _by the way_.”", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-06T13:53:23.257", "id": "91094", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-06T13:53:23.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91089", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "They are talking about how much hair to cut. The man perhaps is a hair stylist\nand the woman is a customer.\n\n 3. That (cutting up to your ear is visible) might be good to you, but you might realize this was too short after I cut that much.\n 4. I see. Then I would keep my hair so I can tie them up on the back.\n\nFrankly, the man is suggesting cutting up to the ears are visible can be too\nmuch and the woman may regret, and the woman agrees.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-06T13:15:11.293", "id": "91093", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-06T13:15:11.293", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48613", "parent_id": "91092", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "降って【ふって】きて is the te-form of 降る followed by [the subsidiary verb\n(-て)くる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/676/5010) in its te-form. くる as a\nsubsidiary verb is very common in Japanese, so you have to get used to it.\n\n * 降る: \"to fall; to move down\"\n * 降って: te-form of 降る\n * 降ってくる: \"to fall (toward me); to come down\"\n * 降ってきて: te-form of 降ってくる \"to fall (toward me) (and...)\"\n\nが is not \"is\" but a generic subject marker. が is used simply because これ is the\nsubject of the sentence.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-07T04:49:56.767", "id": "91096", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-07T04:49:56.767", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91095", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "いきなり is not terribly wrong, but いきなり tends to express a truly instant event\nthat occurs all of a sudden. If I understand the context correctly, you are\ndescribing a phenomenon that progresses over a few days, so 急に sounds more\nnatural. But if you have unexpectedly entered a cold room, saying いきなり涼しくなった\nis equally natural.\n\nAs the linked question says, いきなり also carries the nuance of subjective\nunexpectedness or mental unpreparedness, but this difference is not important\nnow.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T02:17:01.173", "id": "91107", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T02:26:35.420", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-08T02:26:35.420", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91097", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "覚えていてください just means \"(please) remember\". 覚えている is the -teiru form of 覚える, and\n覚えていてください is its -tekudasai form.\n\nIn Japanese, verbs like 知る, 分かる, 覚える and so on work a little differently from\nEnglish equivalents. The fundamental meaning of 覚える is \"to memorize\", and you\nneed the -teiru form when you want to say something is already in your memory.\n\n * 覚えます。 \nI will memorize it.\n\n * 覚えています。 \nI remember it. (I can recall it. / I have memorized it and its result still\nexists.)\n\n * 覚えているところです。 \nI am (in the process of) memorizing it.\n\n * 覚えてください。 \nPlease memorize it (from now).\n\n * 覚えていてください。 \nPlease remember it. (Don't forget it. / Keep it in mind.) \n(In a rare context: Keep memorizing it.)\n\nSee also:\n\n * [When is Vている the continuation of action and when is it the continuation of state?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010)\n * [For 知る what is the difference between the simple present (知る) and 知っている forms?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36928/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T02:09:17.473", "id": "91106", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T02:33:25.447", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-08T02:33:25.447", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91098", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "* という is not \"in other words\". Please read [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/52003/5010) and get used to how it works.\n * This 気負い means \"pressure put on oneself\" or \"(negative) self-consciousness\" rather than \"enthusiasm\". (The [definitions from jisho.org](https://jisho.org/word/%E6%B0%97%E8%B2%A0%E3%81%84) are admittedly misleading. 気負い refers to \"It's _MY_ job\" kind of eagerness/pressure, not enthusiasm in general.)\n * 自然体 is \"natural stance\", and 自然体で roughly means \"like one's regular self\".\n * 分 is \"to the extent\" or \"the more ～ the more ～\".\n\n> 「よいことをする」という気負いがない分、自然体でボランティアに関われる人も多いのです。\n>\n> There are also many people who are engaged in volunteer activities in a\n> natural manner all the more because they have no self-imposed pressure to\n> \"do good things\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T05:12:13.280", "id": "91110", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T05:49:51.643", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-08T05:49:51.643", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91099", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You cannot expect a one-to-one correspondence for such basic function words.\nThe volitional form can be translated into English as _will_ , _let's_ ,\n_shall_ , _should_ and so on depending on the context. And _should_ can be\ntranslated into Japanese as (よ)う, べき, はず, (れ)ばいい and so on depending on the\nintended meaning.\n\n * 昼食を食べよう。 \nLet's have lunch.\n\n * お昼は、どこで食べようか? \nWhere should we eat for lunch?\n\nIn English, _should_ in a question can express someone's volition or casual\nsuggestion, so these translations are both fine. But when you say something\nlike \"You should stop smoking\", this _should_ is stronger, and you usually\nneed something stronger than the (よ)う-form.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T02:01:17.577", "id": "91105", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T02:06:04.937", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-08T02:06:04.937", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91100", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "If you are a beginner, you should learn the following three usages.\n\n**しよう (with a flat or falling intonation)**\n\nThis pattern is used when you suggest that you and the listener do something\ntogether. It is often translated as \" _Let's ..._ \"\n\n> 昼食を食べよう。 \n> Let’s have lunch.\n\n**しようか with a falling intonation**\n\nThis pattern is used when you invite the listener to decide something with you\nabout something you are going to do together. It is often used with a question\nword (interrogative) such as なに, どこ, and いつ.\n\n> お昼は、どこで食べようか。(↓) \n> Where are we going to eat for lunch?\n\n> 予約をしようか。(↓) \n> Why don’t we make a reservation?\n\n**しようか with a rising intonation**\n\nThis pattern is used when you offer to do something for the listener.\n\n> 予約をしようか。(↑) \n> Shall I make a reservation for you?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T09:46:35.787", "id": "91111", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T09:46:35.787", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91100", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "ちゃった is a contracted form of -てしまった. This しまう (仕舞う in kanji) originally means\n\"to end (up)\". See [this\nentry](https://jisho.org/word/%E4%BB%95%E8%88%9E%E3%81%86) on jisho. Just like\n\"to end up\" in English does not always imply an undesirable outcome, Japanese\nちゃう/てしまう does not always express the sense of regret. Here, すごい人になっちゃった just\nmeans \"he ended up becoming a great person\" or \"he turned out to be a great\nguy\".\n\nSee also:\n\n * [「しまう」 as an auxiliary verb](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21026/5010)\n * [What are these forms: かけちゃお, つないじゃお?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4781/5010)\n * [What is the meaning of てあげられちゃうんだけど](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/56515/5010)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T04:51:30.640", "id": "91109", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T04:51:30.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91108", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "I am not sure about each item's translations but it brings more or less the\nnuance that \"although standard school credits are important, what each\nindividual did on their own in their own specialty _also comes into play_ when\ntalking about promotion.\"\n\nThe くる is simply the idea of bringing something new on the table, which here\nis the fact that individual contributions matter.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T17:12:12.270", "id": "91117", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T05:56:53.240", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-10T05:56:53.240", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "91116", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This is an example of -てくる used to describe something that _psychologically_\ncomes towards you. 関わってくる typically refers to something that becomes more and\nmore important over time, but here it refers to something that may not seem\nimportant at first but will turn out to be important later. One of the ways to\ntranslate this 関わってくる would be \"to _come_ into play\".\n\nSee: [Difference between -ていく and\n-てくる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/676/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-10T01:05:42.850", "id": "91138", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T01:05:42.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91116", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Several websites (e.g. [this](https://www.yuraimemo.com/1228/)) say the\nfollowing:\n\n 1. Originally 持てる is the potential form of 持つ\n 2. It turned into the passive meaning, somewhat by extension, 支持される ( _gain support_ )\n 3. Then further by extension, 持てる started to mean ちやほやされる（←持ち上げられる） = _gain popularity_.\n\nThese happened in Edo era, and the katakana writing started in Showa.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-08T23:30:09.770", "id": "91119", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T23:30:09.770", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91118", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "There are three similar-looking but different expressions.\n\n * **モテる** : \"to be popular (usu. with opposite sex)\" (usually written with katakana; originally slang, but very common now; from the potential form of 持つ; for details, see [the post you linked](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65901/5010)) \n\n> 彼は年上にモテる。 \n> He's popular with older people.\n\n * [**持ってる**](https://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E6%8C%81%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%8B): \"to have good luck\", \"to have that special something\" (usually in kanji; relatively recent slang (since circa 2010); contracted form of 持っている) \n\n> 宝くじ当たったの？ 持ってるねえ。 \n> You won the lottery? Luck's on your side!\n\n * **持てる** : \"to be wealthy\", \"which one owns\" (stiff literary expression; from the realis form of 持つ followed by the attributive form of the [archaic auxiliary り](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa009007.htm); i.e., archaic version of 持っている) \n\n> 持てる者と持たざる者 \n> haves and have-nots\n>\n> 持てる力を振り絞る \n> to use all one's strength\n\nThey derived from 持つ in different ways in different ages. In particular, モテる\nand 持ってる are totally different expressions to me, and you should not mix them.\n(Of course they sound totally different, too.) モテる is a fairly old word and I\ndon't think the post you linked is outdated.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-09T01:24:39.327", "id": "91121", "last_activity_date": "2022-02-08T07:04:48.300", "last_edit_date": "2022-02-08T07:04:48.300", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91118", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm afraid to say none of those 10 attempts are spot-on.\n\n * \"グレーかもしれないけど、ギリギリセーフ(だ)\" as a whole is the quoted sentence corresponding to 思う. Let's not be deceived by the comma.\n * セーフ in a context like this means \"barely safe/acceptable\" rather than \"(perfectly) safe\". ギリギリ intensifies this meaning. I suppose this is related to the fact that _safe_ was initially introduced to Japanese as a baseball term. \"セーフ!\" on its own can mean \"That was close!\" See: [「ギリギリセーフ！」と英語でどういうの？](https://www.qqeng.com/blog2/study/do-that-was-close.html)\n\n> You thought \"(Legally speaking) it may fall in a grey area, but (practically\n> speaking) I'd be barely safe\", didn't you?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-09T03:11:54.097", "id": "91122", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-09T03:18:59.780", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-09T03:18:59.780", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91120", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I doubt it is particularly the problem of おく; possibly there can be similar\nissues in general (e.g. [this\narticle](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/147422557.pdf) looks relevant).\n\nThe forms used in the question may be the most neutral, but other forms are\ncertainly possible.\n\n 1. This た indicates simple past. But with a slight change, 置く can be used. For example, in the context like「今の教育は・・・だけれども、昔の教育は徳育に重きを置く。たとえば・・・」 , the present tense sounds natural enough. Use of 置いていた/置いている are possible, and similar to 置いた/置く respectively.\n\n 2. This た should be a indicator of perfect aspect rather than past. 置いている、置く both can be used without changing the meaning (much). 置いていた (to me) implies the system is obsolete, as such can be used if the system is compared with some other current system.\n\n 3. 置く can replace 置いている, which sounds more natural possibly because the sentence describes a state; 置いた indicates a past event (of starting to put emphasis on language learning); 置いていた implies the speaker is no longer a student there.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T07:36:41.157", "id": "91158", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T07:42:30.557", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-11T07:42:30.557", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91123", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Let’s first look at examples in which the verb 置く is used in a literal sense.\n\nThe following sentences all mean different things as indicated in brackets.\n\n> 1. 台にテレビを **置く** 。[habitual or future action]\n> 2. 台にテレビを **置いている** 。[current state]\n> 3. 台にテレビを **置いた** 。[past action]\n> 4. 台にテレビを **置いていた** 。[past state]\n>\n\nThey can be converted into the following noun phrases.\n\n> 1. テレビを **置く** 台 [habitual or future action, or static property (in this\n> case, purpose)]\n> 2. テレビを **置いている** 台 [current state]\n> 3. テレビを **置いた** 台 [past action or current state]\n> 4. テレビを **置いていた** 台 [past state]\n>\n\nOf these, the one with the た-form (#3) is somewhat special in that it can also\nbe understood as describing a current state just like the one with the ている-\nform (#2). However, it doesn’t quite sound so natural as, say,\n[太った猫](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3361/43676), possibly because\nhaving a TV set placed on it is not so much a permanent property of the table\nas being fat is of the cat. It seems more natural to explicitly describe it as\na state with the ている-form (#2) if that's what you mean.\n\nWhen 置く is used in a figurative sense as in 重きを置く, it loses part of its\nquality as an action verb and this seems to blur the distinction between the\ntwo sentences below.\n\n> 1. うちの学校では特に語学に重きを **置く** 。\n> 2. うちの学校では特に語学に重きを **置いている** 。\n>\n\nOutside of limited contexts in which it is understood as describing a future\naction, the first sentence is no longer about an action but a current, or\npermanent, state of mind of the people running the school. Personally, the\nsecond still sounds more natural, though. This could be precisely because the\npossibility of 置く referring to a future action cannot be ruled out completely.\n\nThe following pair in the past tense also means practically the same thing as\none another.\n\n> 1. 昔は徳育に重きを **置いた** 。\n> 2. 昔は徳育に重きを **置いていた** 。\n>\n\nAlthough I would still choose the second if I have to choose one, the\nnaturalness of the first sentence seems to somewhat increase compared to the\nfirst sentence in the present tense above. Even if 置いた is understood as a past\naction, the state that resulted from it is already a thing of the past. Then,\nit is not much different from what the second sentence says.\n\nAs for the noun phrases, the following three are all correct.\n\n> 1. 聞くことと話すことに重きを **置く** 言語獲得の体系\n> 2. 聞くことと話すことに重きを **置いている** 言語獲得の体系\n> 3. 聞くことと話すことに重きを **置いた** 言語獲得の体系\n>\n\nThe version with the た-form (#3) sounds more natural than テレビを置いた台 probably\nbecause the described property of the system is more permanent. The version\nwith the ている-form (#2) sounds slightly less natural than the other two to me\nbecause it makes the described property seem like a transient state.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T03:23:58.213", "id": "91181", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T03:23:58.213", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91123", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "[ンな](https://jisho.org/word/%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA) is a corrupted version of そんな.\nIt sounds a little offensive and is typically used when the speaker is\nirritated. Ordinary Japanese words don't start with ん, but this is one of the\nrare exceptions that happen only in slangy Japanese. ン is typically written in\nkatakana, especially in the middle of a sentence (otherwise this would be hard\nto parse).\n\n * ンなやつ = そんなやつ = such a guy\n * ンなこと = そんなこと = such a thing\n * ンな場合 = そんな場合 = such a case/situation\n * and so on\n\nAnd もん is simply a corrupted version of もの. So わかるかンなもん is the same as\nそんなもの(が)わかるか, or \"No way I know/understand such a thing!\", referring to\nwhatever mentioned in the previous context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-10T00:49:21.403", "id": "91137", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T00:49:21.403", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91128", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "It would not sound unnatural if you have the right context and the right tone.\nIt'd be like having `...` in english for something like: \"You could have\njust...\". If you ask an english speaker if that's natural, they would say no.\nBut this happens all the time in conversation. That's the same thing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-09T15:17:35.237", "id": "91134", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-09T15:17:35.237", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "91132", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Since って is followed by a verb, it's a colloquial version of と, not という. So\nthe sentence is the same as 彩坂桜が書くとなったら. For ～となる, see:\n\n * [Meaning of verb+となる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/47659/5010)\n * [ないとなると meaning in a sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/30891/5010)\n * [JLPT N1 Grammar となると / となれば](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8C%E3%81%B0-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-to-naru-to-nareba-meaning/)\n\n> だが一般文芸、しかも新進気鋭の彩坂桜が書くってなったら話題沸騰間違いなし \n> But when it comes to general literary arts, and up-and-coming Sakura\n> Ayasaka writing one, it's sure to be a hot topic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-10T02:25:05.237", "id": "91140", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T02:25:05.237", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91135", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "角【かど】が立つ【たつ】 is an idiom that means \"may get on other's nerves\n(unintentionally)\". The literal meaning is something like \"to become\nangular/pointed\". For example, 角が立たないような話し方をする means to speak politely and\neuphemistically avoiding any expressions that may make the listener upset.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-10T01:38:46.287", "id": "91139", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T01:38:46.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91136", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "> Is the on'yomi kanji reading really needed if I'm going to Japan?\n\nDepends.\n\n * Are you going to Japan to sight-see, and you don't care to read signs, menus, media? \n \nThen, **no** , you don't need to learn the _on'yomi_ of the kanji. \n\n * Are you going to Japan to study or otherwise immerse yourself in the culture, and you want to be able to read? \n \nThen, **yes, absolutely** , you need to learn the _on'yomi_ of the kanji.\n\nAs user @[Angelos](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/9971/) noted in\ntheir [comment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/91144/is-the-\nonyomi-kanji-reading-really-needed-if-im-going-to-japan#comment-148763), many\nJapanese words that are spelled in kanji are only read with the _on'yomi_.\nMany of these words are very basic vocabulary.\n\nIf you don't learn the _on'yomi_ of the kanji, you will be functionally\nilliterate. Whether learning the _on'yomi_ is \"really needed\" all comes down\nto what you yourself personally need for your trip.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-10T17:49:00.637", "id": "91145", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-10T17:49:00.637", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "91144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "First of all, verbs in Japanese have only two tenses, past and non-past. The\nlatter is also known as the “present” tense, although it is also used to\ndescribe a future event.\n\nSecondly, as you may have already learned, [V て-form]-いる can mean many\ndifferent things depending on the verb and/or the context. [V て-form]-いた is\nsimply its past version and it also can mean many different things.\n\nReplacing きた with きていた makes a grammatical sentence.\n\n> 大きな犬がこっちに **走ってきていた** ので、びっくりした。\n\nHowever, it probably won’t be understood the way you want it to be. Because of\nthe verb 走る, which describes a visible action, 走ってきていた will more likely be\nunderstood as describing a progressive action in the past.\n\n> I was startled because a large dog **was running up** toward me.\n\nきていた without 走る can be understood as referring to a past state that resulted\nfrom an earlier action, in this case that of 来る, and this might be translated\nusing the past perfect tense in English.\n\n> 大きな犬がこっちに **きていた** ので、びっくりした。 \n> I was startled because a large dog **had come** where I was.\n\nThe simple past tense is fine in the original sentence (and in its English\ntranslation) because it is meant to describe an action that happened at one\npoint of time in the past.\n\n> 大きな犬がこっちに **走ってきた** ので、びっくりした。 \n> I was startled because a large dog **ran up** toward me.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T01:39:39.873", "id": "91153", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T06:37:26.480", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-11T06:37:26.480", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91146", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "\"なの\" can be used as either a question marker or an explanatory marker\ndepending on intonation. Think of reading it as \"嫌いなの？\" versus \"嫌いなの\". In this\ncase, the context tells you that it means the latter.\n\nIf you want to learn more about なの, check out this\n[answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/516/45675) and keep in mind that\n嫌い is, sneakily, a な-adjective so the な must be linked to it and の itself is\nan explanatory-の, which is described in more detail in this\n[answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/5399/45675).\n\nSo, the speaker is explaining that they dislike the implied subject, which\nwould be a response to an inquiry such like:\n\n> なぜそれを捨ててる **の** ですか？ **(Explain)** why are you throwing that away?\n>\n> 嫌いな **の** 。 **(Because)** I hate it.\n\nAlso, a super casual way of using です is to not use it at all. More formally\nthis sentence would be 嫌いなのです or 嫌いなんです.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T02:18:31.230", "id": "91154", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T02:18:31.230", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45675", "parent_id": "91147", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "嫌いなの when answering someone is casual/informal feminine, childish, or cute way\nto say you dislike something. Children (boys/girls) will use it, women will\nuse it. Depends on how it is said whether it is straight feminine usage, or\ncute, or childish.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T03:53:12.493", "id": "91155", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T03:53:12.493", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48697", "parent_id": "91147", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm pretty sure I found the answer. I had the idea to search 英語で役立つ言葉, and\njust look at those articles for examples.\n\nThe phrase I was looking for was 「という言葉」.\n\nTo answer the first example with this:\n\n> 「料理」という言葉が好きじゃない。\n\nSome confirmation would still be nice, but I am quite confident this is it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T00:41:01.563", "id": "91151", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T00:41:01.563", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48694", "parent_id": "91148", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Yes, you can use って, but here って is a contraction of と言う; it can also appear\nas って言う. Here are some options you can choose from:\n\n> 発音が難しいから「料理」って言う言葉が好きじゃない。\n\n> 「料理」と言う言葉が好きじゃない。発音が難しいし。\n\n> 「料理」って言葉が気に入らない。発音が難しいし。\n\nThe same goes for the other one.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T00:42:02.207", "id": "91152", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T00:42:02.207", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91148", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This comma should be an apposition marker, and 翼 should be the boy's name.\n\n> 吊るされた少年、翼とまっすぐに歩けない理由 \n> Tsubasa the Hanged Boy and Why He Can't Walk Straight\n\nYou can find this appositive `nickname/catchphrase + name` pattern commonly in\ntitles (e.g., [美少女戦士セーラームーン](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailor_Moon),\n[アルプスの少女ハイジ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi,_Girl_of_the_Alps), [most\ntitles of _Super\nSentai_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Sentai#Productions)). The comma\nis technically not necessary as long as you can separate words, but in this\ncase it would have been hard to parse the title without one. See also: [What\nis the grammar for saying things like \"Step A\", \"our friend Nozomi\", or \"the\nsnowiest city in the world,\nAomori\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/80479/5010)\n\nIn general, you [can use\ncommas](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/54469/5010) to list three or more\nthings, but since 翼 is widely known as a common person name, I would say\nalmost no one would read this as a list. (But please check if there is a\ncharacter called Tsubasa in the story.)\n\n**EDIT:** It turned out that the name of the boy is not 翼 (see comments). Then\nwe may have to parse this as a three-item list. It's not something I come up\nwith when I look at this without preconceptions, but it's not an impossible\ninterpretation depending on the story (e.g., when everyone in the story has a\nname in katakana).", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T00:02:12.930", "id": "91150", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T04:55:58.630", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-11T04:55:58.630", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91149", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The meaning 2 is correct.\n\nIn dictionaries,\n[ても](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82/#jn-152504) has an\nindependent entry. It translates to _even if, although_.\n\n> １\n> 未成立の事柄を仮定条件として述べ、その条件から考えられる順当な結果と対立する内容の文へ結びつける意を表す。たとえ…したとしても。「失敗し―あきらめはしない」「煮―焼い―食えない」\n>\n> ２ 既定的な事柄を述べ、その条件から考えられる順当な結果と対立する内容の文へ結びつける意を表す。…たにもかかわらず。「知ってい―知らぬ顔をする」\n>\n> ３\n> （多く「にしても」「としても」の形で）ある事柄を仮定条件として認めて、下の文の叙述を起こす意を表す。「自信があるにし―、試験を受けるのはいやな気分だ」", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-12T00:44:46.203", "id": "91166", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-12T00:44:46.203", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91160", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The culprit there is `腰` meaning waist, but also attitude, power and\nwillingness to act by oneself. It is a part of many expressions including\n“腰が低い” meaning “modest” and ”腰が高い” meaning “arrogant”.\n\nThe meaning then extends to `物腰` as an “attitude towards things” too. “物腰が低い”\nis then “having modest manners”.\n\nOther interesting expressions with 腰 would be:\n\n * 腰が重い slow in action\n * 腰が軽い hasty\n * 腰を上げる reluctant\n * 腰を入れる resolute", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T22:02:11.337", "id": "91163", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T22:02:11.337", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10104", "parent_id": "91162", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Basically they are synonymous (souces: [1](https://www.tamagawa-\nsangyo.co.jp/information/775/),\n[2](https://www.ykk.co.jp/japanese/ykk/mame/fas_01.html)).\n\nAccording to the web, チャック derived from [巾着]{きんちゃく} in 1927. Possibly because\nof this, in the idiomatic expression '口にチャック' = 'to be quiet', the other two\ncannot be used.\n\nPossibly for the same reason, チャック seems to fit better in some cases than the\nothers: The zipper of trousers is usually called チャック; When a bag has the\nzipper, チャックになってる sounds more common (to me).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-11T23:17:06.490", "id": "91165", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-11T23:17:06.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91164", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "If I have to choose between 原因 and 目的, I wouldn't choose 原因. 原因 indicates the\ncause of something. The _objective_ is to **earn** money. So, as an\n_objective_ I would say 目的.\n\nI would translate this お金を稼ぐため as _**in order** to earn some money_. Likewise,\n学生生活を楽しむため as _**in order** to enjoy life as a student_.\n\nクラブ活動 here refers to activity in a school club. This is not _going to the\nbars/clubs_.\n\n> 「学生生活を楽しむため」とは、旅行や遊び、クラブ活動など、生活を楽しむお金を稼ぐためという意味だ。\n\nThe basic sentence pattern here is\n\n> A とは B という意味だ。\n\n> To say _A_ means _B_\n\nThis sentence has already been lifted from a larger context. There seems to be\na question about what 学生生活 refers to. The speaker clarifies that 学生生活 covers\nthings like _trips, hanging out, activities in clubs, etc_.\n\nSometimes it strikes me that you're applying English word order to Japanese\nand that will definitely wind up with some confusion for you.\n\nPart _B_ here is\n\n> 旅行や遊び、クラブ活動など、生活を楽しむお金を稼ぐため\n\nYou start translating this as \"In order to make money for...\" but then jump to\npart _A_ of the sentence before completing part _B_. You need to complete _B_\nthat right there and the completion is\n\n> In order to make money for travel, hanging out, club activities, etc\"\n\nThat is the _B_ portion of the sentence.\n\nThe _A_ portion just says\n\n> 学生生活を楽しむため\n\nwhich we can render in English as\n\n> In order to enjoy life as a student\n\nI would also advise you to try to stick to as close a literal translation as\nyou can while you're trying to master Japanese. You translated portion _A_ as\n\n> in order to to have a great students life\n\nwhich is decent colloquial English, but it's deviating too far from the\nJapanese.\n\nSo, here are my two suggestions for you as you're learning Japanese\n\n 1. Be mindful of Japanese word order\n 2. Stick to as literal a translation as possible--this will help you better to master the underlying grammar which initially can be tricky if you're thinking in English (or another language with a very different word order for sentences).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-12T03:16:39.357", "id": "91168", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-12T17:20:10.423", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-12T17:20:10.423", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91167", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "### Why do all Japanese verbs in dictionary form end with -u? What is the\nreason, linguistically?\n\nJapanese dictionaries lemmatize (choose the headword form of) conjugating\nwords using the so-called 終止形【しゅうしけい】 or **terminal** / **terminative** /\n**predicative form** (the form used to end a sentence in a plain indicative\nmood). For the entirety of the history of the Japanese language (where we have\ntext written in Japanese), the _shūshikei_ of almost all verbs has ended in\n_-u_.\n\n_(The one notable exception in older texts is the copula ( \"to be\" verb)_\n有【あ】り _and its derivatives. That said, at least some linguists theorize that\nthis is an exceptional form that evolved from an older_ shūshikei _of_ aru.\n_It is generally the case that the most exceptional terms in any language are\nthe ones that are used the most: consider the oddities of English_ \"to be\"\n_or_ \"to go\", _and the stranger conjugation forms for these very-common verbs.\nWithin modern Japanese, consider the oddities of how_ だ _conjugates.)_\n\n### Did they start off with some not ending with -u, then evolving to end with\n-u by analogy?\n\nAs for _why_ the terminal forms for Japanese verbs all end in _-u_ , the\nreasons for this are not clear. I recall reading some commentary somewhere\nthat certain linguists theorize that ''-u'' may have been an ancient verb-\nforming suffix. In modern Japanese, we do see that ''-ru'' can be used in a\nsimilar fashion to form some slang-y neologisms like ググる (from グーグル) or スタバる\n(from スターバックス). But why was _-u_ ultimately used for the _shūshikei_ verb\nending instead of something else? Who knows? I've never read any theories\nabout this. It may have to do with unknowables, such as cultural perceptions\nof sound textures over time, or the ease of pronunciation of specific sounds\nin specific sequences, etc. etc.\n\nLooking at European languages, we could ask similar \"why\" questions -- why do\nall Spanish infinitives (the dictionary form) end in _-r_? Why do all German\ninfinitives end in _-en_? Why do all Hungarian infinitives end in _-ni_? Why\ndo all English infinitives start with _to_?\n\n### Exploring \"why\" questions about Japanese\n\n⇒ When it comes to languages, certain kinds of \"why\" questions are very\ndifficult to answer. The younger the records of the language, the more\ndifficult these questions become. Consider that Hungarian is only reliably\nrecorded [since the\n900s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_language#Old_Hungarian), while\ntexts in Japanese only go back [to the\n700s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Japanese#Sources_and_dating). English\nis a bit of a mongrel, but even so, we have textual evidence [since the\nmid-600s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English#History). Spanish,\nmeanwhile, is attested in some form or another [all the way back into\nLatin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_language#History), and Latin\nitself has [literature dating from the 200s\nBC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Latin#Works_of_literature).\n\nDigging into \"why\" questions becomes a bit easier if the given language has\nknown relatives, and we can [explore comparisons and connections between the\nlanguages](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_linguistics) and\nreconstruct more of the pre-historical (not-yet-recorded) [proto-\nlanguage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-language), based on what we know\nand can derive about how sounds and meanings change over time. For English,\nSpanish (and Latin before that), German, and Hungarian, there are numerous\nknown relatives, and we can compare these to derive more information about\nearlier stages, stretching back before our textual horizons. For Japanese,\nhowever, there isn't quite so much -- we've got a good number of Japanese\ndialects, and Okinawan and the other Ryūkyūan languages, but no confirmed\nrelatives outside of the Japanese archipelago.\n\nThere is a good bit of recent and current ongoing research comparing the\nvarious Japonic languages (mainstream Japanese, Japanese dialects, and the\nRyūkyūan languages). I've noticed that some volunteers are creating and\nediting [various Proto-Japonic entries at\nWiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Japonic_language);\nthat said, I myself haven't read enough of the underlying academic research to\ntell how accurate these are.\n\nIf you're interested in the historical development of Japanese, and current\ntheories about the likely pre-history of Japanese, here are a few authors you\nmight find informative:\n\n * Alexander Vovin\n * Bjarke Frellesvig\n * J. Marshall Unger\n * Samuel Martin\n * Marc Miyake\n\nI'm sure there are others; this list is just intended as a starting point.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T00:02:01.497", "id": "91179", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T01:15:14.927", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-13T01:15:14.927", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "91169", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "The\n[でん(と)](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%81%A7%E3%82%93/#je-102503) is\nan onomatopoeia for (the subject presenting itself) _grand_ or _big_.\n\n構える here means\n[ある態度をとる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E6%A7%8B%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B/#je-13398)\nor simply _to exist_.\n\nThe linked entries have relevant examples:\n\n> 彼はでんと構えて動こうともしなかった\n>\n> He had 「planted himself in the chair [《口》 plunked himself down very firmly]\n> and showed no sign of moving.\n>\n> 部屋には大きな机がでんと置いてあった\n>\n> A big desk was placed ostentatiously [conspicuously] in the room.\n>\n> いかにも[大家]{たいか}らしく構えている\n>\n> He has the bearing [air] of an important person.\n\nSo the sentence in the question means literally _The fact alone is there\nfirmly_. (I guess this is not a good translation, but makes sense in the\ncontext.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T07:46:27.847", "id": "91183", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T12:39:45.850", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-13T12:39:45.850", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91172", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "I usually use でしょう to mean \"I wonder if...\" or \"It seems likely/possible\nthat...\" This seems [confirmed](https://jisho.org/search/deshou) by jisho.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-12T14:32:30.037", "id": "91175", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-12T14:32:30.037", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18954", "parent_id": "91174", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "`でしょう` (丁寧) and `だろう` (普通) can be translated as \"probably\". So 明日、雨が降るでしょう is\ntranslated as _\" it will probably rain tomorrow\"_. In this sentence the\nspeaker is almost certain that it will rain tomorrow.\n\nFor levels of certainty you could refer to\n<http://guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/certainty>\n\n**Edit** : about `降っているでしょう` \nSomeone pointed out that `降るでしょう` should be used instead of `降っているでしょう`, but I\nwould like to say that `降っているでしょう` is not quite wrong, however, Japanese\npeople usually don't use. I have asked my Japanese teacher and this is a\nsummary of what I have received:\n\n * 「明日は雨が降るでしょう」：It will rain tomorrow.→シンプル\n * 「明日の18:00ごろには雨が降っているでしょう」：It will be raining around 18:00 (Because the weather news said it will rain from 17:00 to 21:00). →18:00には雨が降っている予定です。\n\nLong story short, try to stick to `降るでしょう` and you are safe ;)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-12T19:25:07.667", "id": "91176", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T09:24:53.780", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T09:24:53.780", "last_editor_user_id": "40614", "owner_user_id": "40614", "parent_id": "91174", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Some _-na_ adjectives can also be used validly and grammatically as nouns.\nYour example sentences happen to include _-na_ adjectives that cannot be used\nas nouns.\n\n * 綺麗【きれい】 is only ever an adjective. The noun form would be 綺麗さ. \n * [Nihon Kokugo Dai Jiten (NKDJ) entry at Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%B6%BA%E9%BA%97%E3%83%BB%E5%A5%87%E9%BA%97-247288) (in Japanese). Note that the part-of-speech marker at the top only has 『形動』 (short for 形容動詞【けいようどうし】 or \" _-na_ adjective\").\n * [Digital Daijisen (DDJS) entry at Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%B6%BA%E9%BA%97-480543) (in Japanese). Note the same part-of-speech marker. Note too the 『[派生]きれいさ［名］』 line towards the bottom, showing that the noun derivative is formed by adding ～さ on the end.\n * 静【しず】か, outside of extremely rare exceptions such as 「静かの海」 as noted by @[broccoli facemask](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/7810/) in the comments, is only ever an adjective. \n * [NKDJ entry at Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%9D%99%E3%81%8B%E3%83%BB%E9%96%91%E3%81%8B-282013) -- this one includes the noun derivative towards the bottom of the page.\n * [DDJS entry at Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%9D%99%E3%81%8B-519671)\n\nIn these cases, even when used predicatively, we know that these words can't\nbe nouns unless they include the nominalizing suffix ～さ, so constructions like\n「あの子は綺麗です」 or 「この森は静かです」 can only be understood as `[NOUN = ADJ]` sentences.\n\nIn those cases where a _-na_ adjective can also be used as a noun, such as\n幸【しあわ】せ, context can help you figure out the intended sense.\n\n * 幸【しあわ】せ \n * [NKDJ entry at Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%BB%95%E5%90%88%E3%83%BB%E5%B9%B8-2044698), showing a part of speech of 〘名〙, but then also including examples with clear _-na_ adjective constructions.\n * [DDJS entry at Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%B9%B8%E3%81%9B-515403), showing a part of speech of ［名・形動］.\n\nYour sample sentence:\n\n * これは幸せです。 \n * We don't have a lot of context here. That said, it's not that common that people talk about something being \"happiness itself\", so this is most likely saying that これ is 幸【しあわ】せ as an adjective: _\" happy, fortunate, lucky\"_.\n\n⇒ Beware of the pitfalls of translation, however! While it may be valid to\nparse this sample sentence as `[THIS = NOUN]`, we have to think about how\nJapanese fits together conceptually. Considering the senses of 幸【しあわ】せ, in\nterms of _\" things coming together in a favorable way\"_, even were we to use\nthe noun interpretation, it's probably a better translation to think of this\nas _\" an **instance** of things coming together in a favorable way\"_, rather\nthan any kind of over-arching meaning of _\" the essence of favorable\ncoincidence in any and all circumstances\"_.\n\nLooping back to your core question:\n\n### How does one tell if a na-adjective used as a predicate is meant to be an\nadjective and not a noun, or vice versa?\n\n 1. Check the dictionary for the part of speech for the word. \n * Not all _-na_ adjectives can be used as nouns.\n 2. Check the dictionary for details on the meaning. \n * If the word can be used as a noun, does the noun make sense in your context?\n 3. Check usage patterns. \n * Does the meaning you're thinking of still work when the term is used in other sentences? Google, Linguee, and other search engines can be your friend in this regard.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-16T00:04:03.333", "id": "91215", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T00:04:03.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "91178", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This is my take on the question, but I'd like to hear others' opinions.\n\nYour question is quite sound. In fact, if I choose to be strict, I'd say its\nuse is not quite orthodox. If I were to proofread the script, I would probably\nat least mention the part for rephrasing. As you state in the question, \"一緒に\"\ncan most naturally seen in contexts such as\n\n * （先生に）母と一緒に料理を教えてもらっている． \n * : My mother and I are taught together.\n * （祖母に）勉強方法も一緒に教えてもらった \n * : Grandma taught me how to cook and how to study.\n\nCompared to these usage, 「(祖母に)一緒に料理を教えてもらって」is less natural. Not in the sense\n\"Native speakers don't write like that\", but \"On a second thought, it is\nslightly illogical\". That being said, the text doesn't sound strange,\nespecially with the actor's performance, and any Japanese speaker may prefer\nit this way.\n\nAs [@A.Ellett](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/4875/) mentions in the\ncomment, the 一緒に emphasizes the toghether-ness of the activity, giving even\nmore touching aspect. 「一緒に料理を教えてもらって」provokes an image of the two cooking\ntogether, the protagonist learning from the other. (Plain 「料理を教えてもらって」 doesn't\nimply any one-sidedness, though.) Allowing me to be sentimental, I'd say 一緒に\ncame first because being together is what she is remembering sweetly the most.\nTogether they did cook, where grandma taught the protagonist.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-06T10:40:54.623", "id": "91497", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T10:40:54.623", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4223", "parent_id": "91180", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The answer is tricky because it depends on how you interpret \"top\".\n\nTop does not point to a physical location/space in the racing track. It's an\nintangible concept, but the \"concept\" can be attributed with relative\nmeasurements such as 1st place, 2nd place 3rd place. Thus top, middle, and\nbottom exists. So does that make \"top\" a \"location/space\" or does it not? This\ncan trigger a philosophical debate.\n\nDepending on the interpretation, either answers make sense:\n\n\"Yes, because **トップへの道のり** を走る makes sense\"\n\nThe runner is running through the conceptual location/space of \"road to top-\nposition/victory\".\n\nor\n\n\"No, because トップという順位を維持しつつ走っているが、 **走っている場所・空間はトラックである** \"\n\nThe runner is maintaining top position, not running across it. The runner is\nrunning on the location/space called racing track.\n\nUnderstanding your question was the hard part to begin with, so I hope this\nprovided at least some useful points even if it didn't fully answer your\nquestion.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-17T00:40:24.927", "id": "91225", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-17T00:40:24.927", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "91182", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "The topic of the sentence is 編集. It's the only は-marked word in the entire\nsentence, isn't it? Here 編集 means \"(magazine/book) editor\" (person). You need\nto notice this basic structure:\n\n> 編集は、料理人みたいなものだ。 \n> An editor is something like a chef.\n\n編集 and 料理人 each has _a little_ long relative clause:\n\n> (...雑誌を作る) **編集は** 、(...食卓を賑わす) **料理人みたいなものだ** 。 \n> **An editor** (who makes magazines ...) **is something like a chef** (who\n> enlivens a dining table ...).\n\n例えて言えば is an inserted phrase. \"..., if put metaphorically, ...\" or\n\"metaphorically speaking, ...\".\n\nTherefore:\n\n> 知名度の高い執筆者ばかり適当に揃えて一冊の雑誌を作る **編集は** 、例えて言えば、インスタント食品をうまく使って食卓を賑わす\n> **料理人みたいなものだ** 。\n>\n> **An editor** who makes a magazine by arranging only well-known authors at\n> random **is** , metaphorically speaking, **something like a chef** who\n> enlivens your dining table by using instant foods.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-15T03:02:27.793", "id": "91208", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-15T03:15:31.153", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-15T03:15:31.153", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Grammatically, both a and b are possible. It is a matter of which situation is\n(by far) the commoner.\n\n * 起きてほしい would mean _ask mom to wake up_ ;\n * 起こしてほしい would mean _ask mom to wake **me** up_,\n\nof which the latter is the likelier.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T10:18:34.333", "id": "91187", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T10:18:34.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91186", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "With adjectives like 好き it is possible to say the following\n\n> [sentence 1] りんごがすきです\n\n> [sentence 2] わたしがすきです\n\n**Sentence 1** should be relatively easy to understand\n\n> _Someone_ likes apples.\n\n**Sentence 2** isn't particularly clear when completely divorced from context.\n\nIt could mean,\n\n> _Someone_ likes me\n\nI would say that _without_ any further context, this is the default reading.\n\nBut it could also mean,\n\n> _I_ like _something_.\n\nThere's a lot of discussion on this site about the difference between は and が\nin this sort of context. I'll leave that discussion aside except to say that\nas a stand alone sentence\n\n> わたしがすきです\n\nEither sounds like _I_ am liked by someone or _I_ am the sole individual\nwithin _some group_ who likes something.\n\n* * *\n\nBut, we don't have a stand-alone sentence here.\n\nWe have instead\n\n> せんぱいが好きな食べ物は、なんですか\n\nせんぱいが好きな is a relative clause modifying 食べ物. Since _foods_ typically don't\nhave a preference for who's going to eat them (unless your in some strange\nalternate universe of anime, sci-fi, etc), the most natural way to construe\nthis is that 食べ物 is what is being _liked_.\n\nThat means that the relative clause\n\n> せんぱいが好きな\n\nfunctions much like **sentence 2** above in the sense where it is せんぱい is the\none who is liking something.\n\n_But,_ there is one important caveat here. The は-が distinction I mentioned\nabove is null here. That's because は as the topic marker cannot be embedded in\na relative clause (when は is found in a subordinate clause, then は is not\nmarking the topic but usually functioning _contrastively_ ).\n\nSo this が in the relative clause marks the _subject_ who _likes_ some kind of\nfood. Unlike **sentence 2** above, in a relative clause, the reading is\nneutral: that is, nothing is to be construed as _せんぱい_ being the only\nindividual who likes something.\n\n* * *\n\nYou could indeed say\n\n> せんぱいの好きな食べ物は、なんですか\n\nBut if you're thinking this の is a possessive marker indicating\n\n> せんぱいの食べ物\n\nthen you are unfortunately mistaken. A native speaker is not naturally\ninclined to hear it like this. That is because の can be used in relative\nclauses (under special conditions which apply here) to stand in for the\nsubject marker が.\n\n* * *\n\nFor details on subtopics I've brought up:\n\n * See this [question for が as an exhaustive listing marker](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/72751/4875)\n\n * See this [question for は vs が in relative clauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/54693/4875)\n\n * See this [question for when の can be substituted for the subject marker が in relative clauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/12829/4875)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T14:43:51.207", "id": "91196", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T15:04:22.877", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-13T15:04:22.877", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91188", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "So you say you know about relative clauses. Presumably then you would be happy\nwith a sentence like\n\n> せんぱいが食べた食べ物は何ですか。 \n> What food did senpai eat?\n\nIn this sentence せんぱいが食べた modifies 食べ物 to describe the food. It's the food\nthat 'senpai ate'.\n\n> せんぱいが食べ物を食べた --> せんぱいが食べた食べ物 \n> Senpai ate food --> the food senpai ate.\n\nThe object gets promoted to the head noun of the relative clause.\n\nThe same thing happens with your sentence: せんぱいが好きな食べ物. This is \"the food that\nsenpai likes\".\n\nIn this case we have\n\n> せんぱいは食べ物が好きだ --> せんぱいが好きな食べ物 \n> Senpai likes food --> the food senpai likes\n\nIn this case it is the subject rather than the object that has been promoted\nto the head noun, but that's allowed too.\n\nThere are a couple of minor oddities to watch out for with this one. せんぱい\n**は** has become せんぱい **が** because は is not (usually) allowed in relative\nclauses. And, だ becomes な because you changed the predicative form of the na-\nadjective into the attributative (is that a real word?) form.\n\nFinally, you say you would be happier if the sentence was せんぱい **の**\n好きな食べ物は、なんですか. This would also be perfectly grammatical, but I suspect not for\nthe reason you think. の can replace が in relative clauses. See [this\nlink](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12825/how-does-\nthe-%E3%81%AE-work-\nin-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E4%BA%BA%E3%81%AE%E7%9F%A5%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E)\nfor example.\n\nI guess you wanted to treat 好きな食べ物 as a noun and then modify it with せんぱいの to\nget \"senpai's liked food\". I'm not sure if that is a valid way to look at the\ngrammar or not. Perhaps someone else can weigh in on that.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T14:45:28.800", "id": "91197", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T14:45:28.800", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7944", "parent_id": "91188", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I can’t answer your question of **why** できる is used as a substitute for the\npotential form of する, but let me share what I think is relevant, anyways.\n\nWhat is now known as the “potential form” started to be used to describe\nsomething’s property, rather than someone’s ability. For example, what would\neventually become 読める meant that a piece of writing was “readable,” or worth\nreading, rather than someone was capable of reading something.\n\nRelated to this are forms of certain transitive verbs that were used like\nintransitive verbs. One example is what would become 切れる, which is still used\nas the intransitive version of 切る as in the following example. (In English,\nthe same verb “to cut” can be used both transitively and intransitively.)\n\n> この包丁はよく切れる。 \n> This kitchen knife cuts well.\n\n知れる is another example. Though “potential” in form, it doesn’t normally\nindicate potentiality (可能) but “spontaneity” (自発).\n[[1](https://www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/summary/kotoba/term/153.html),\n[2](https://japanknowledge.com/articles/blognihongo/entry.html?entryid=380)]\nIt is now used mostly in certain set phrases in the sense that something is\neasily known.\n\n> 彼の気が知れない。 \n> I can’t understand what he is thinking. \n> (lit. His feelings cannot be known.)\n\n> 彼の能力はたかが知れている。 \n> His skills don’t amount to a hill of beans. \n> (lit. The upper limit of his skills is known.)\n\nされる is similar in that it may indicate “spontaneity” (自発) but not potentiality\n(可能).\n\n> 接戦が予想される。 \n> A close contest is expected.\n\nAs far as syntax goes, the subjects in these examples are all something, not\nsomeone capable of doing something. I don’t know how and when the potential\nform came to be used to describe someone’s ability, but even in that newer\nusage, the object of the action is still normally marked with が, as if it is\nthe subject.\n\n> 漢字が読める。\n\nAs for できる, it literally means “to come out.”\n[[3](https://www.fleapedia.com/%E4%BA%94%E5%8D%81%E9%9F%B3%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%83%87%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9/%E3%81%A6/%E5%87%BA%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B-%E3%81%A7%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF-%E6%84%8F%E5%91%B3/)]\nIf someone is capable of doing something, that thing comes out in a desirable\nstate when they do it. Though I couldn't find any reference, I suppose the\nfocus shifted at some point of time from something’s “spontaneous doability”,\nwhich される would have indicated, to how it comes out as a result of doing it.\n\nNote that what comes out is still marked with が as the syntactic subject.\n\n> 接戦が予想できる。 \n> We can predict a close contest. \n> (lit. A close contest comes out of our prediction. (?))", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T16:03:59.403", "id": "92671", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T16:03:59.403", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I'd like to add some detail to @aguijonazo's post, regarding the development\nof the so-called \"potential form\" or 可能形【かのうけい】 of modern \"type I\" or\n五段【ごだん】活用【かつよう】動詞【どうし】.\n\n### Background\n\nThere are a few different theories for how this verb form arose. The most\ncompelling exploration of this that I've yet read is the 2016 paper\n[「可能動詞の成立」](https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/nihongonokenkyu/12/2/12_1/_pdf)\nby Japanese linguistic researcher\n[三宅【みやけ】俊浩【としひろ】](https://jglobal.jst.go.jp/en/detail?JGLOBAL_ID=201901006631023359).\nMiyake starts out with a summary of the main theories:\n\n * Theory A is the 未然形【みぜんけい】 (\"irrealis form\", describing something that hasn't happened: also called the \"inconclusive\" or \"imperfect\") of the verb stem (ending in _-a_ for _godan_ verbs) + the _-reru_ ending, as previously written about by Yamada in 1936, Yuzawa in 1936, and Fukuda in 1996, among others\n * Theory B is the 連用形【れんようけい】 (\"continuative form\", also called the \" _-masu_ stem\") of the verb stem (ending in _-i_ for _godan_ verbs) + auxiliary verb 得る (\"possible to\", either _uru_ or _eru_ depending on grammatical context), as previously written about by Shibutani in 1993\n * Theory C is the development of intransitive _nidan_ conjugation forms from _yodan_ transitive verbs, as previously written about by 坂梨 (Sakanashi? Sakari?) in 1969 and 2006, Yamada in 2001, Aoki in 1996 and 2010, among others\n\nTheory C is where Miyake lands in his analysis.\n\n### Development\n\nIf Miyake's paper is correct, this kind of usage first appears roughly in the\nlate 1500s, as a kind of shift to the 下【しも】二段【にだん】活用【かつよう】 or \"[lower bigrade\nconjugation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Middle_Japanese#Conjugation)\"\npattern and to intransitive use, for transitive verbs that were usually\n四段【よだん】活用【かつよう】 or \"[quadrigrade\nconjugation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Middle_Japanese#Conjugation)\".\n\nLooking at the examples provided, this appears to be very similar to the so-\ncalled \"ergative\" usage pattern in English, where a semantically transitive\nverb (a verb that conceptually requires an object to make sense, even if that\nobject is not stated in the sentence -- things like _\" eat\"_ or _\" read\"_) is\nused intransitively, and where the subject of the now-intransitive verb is\nusually the object of that same verb when used transitively.\n\nExamples of this pattern in English:\n\n * This stew eats well. \n→ The verb _\" eats\"_ is semantically transitive (it conceptually requires an\nobject to make sense). Here, we have the noun _\" stew\"_ as the subject, when\n_\" stew\"_ would usually be the object of the action of _\" eating\"_. \nIn this construction, we know that it is not the _\" stew\"_, but instead\nsomeone else that is doing the _\" eating\"_. Rather, we are describing a\nquality of the _\" stew\"_, talking about **how** the _\" stew\"_ can **be\neaten**.\n\n * The paper tears messily. \n→ The verb _\" tears\"_ is semantically transitive (it conceptually requires an\nobject to make sense). Here, we have the noun _\" paper\"_ as the subject, when\n_\" paper\"_ would usually be the object of the action of _\" tearing\"_. \nIn this construction, we know that it is not the _\" paper\"_, but instead\nsomeone else that is doing the _\" tearing\"_. Rather, we are describing a\nquality of the _\" paper\"_, talking about **how** the _\" paper\"_ can **be\ntorn**.\n\n * The new car handles like a dream. \n→ The verb _\" handles\"_ is semantically transitive (it conceptually requires\nan object to make sense). Here, we have the noun _\" car\"_ as the subject, when\n_\" car\"_ would usually be the object of the action of _\" handling\"_. \nIn this construction, we know that it is not the _\" car\"_, but instead someone\nelse that is doing the _\" handling\"_. Rather, we are describing a quality of\nthe _\" car\"_, talking about **how** the _\" car\"_ can **be handled**.\n\nIn these examples above, we have the same kind of basic change -- a usually-\ntransitive verb is used intransitively instead, in order to describe something\nabout the usually-object noun. This is the same kind of construction happening\nin Japanese -- usually-transitive verbs are used intransitively instead, to\ndescribe something about the usually-object nouns.\n\n### The basic mechanism\n\nEnglish syntax (the ordering of the words) clarifies the grammatical roles of\nthe different words. Japanese syntax uses different mechanisms to clarify this\n-- particles, and verb conjugations.\n\nThere are many other verbs that distinguish between transitive and\nintransitive senses based on conjugation paradigm. In modern Japanese, the two\nverb types are more clearly distinct -- things like あく・あける, つく・つける, つむ・つめる,\nたつ・たてる. All of these pairs used to have shared dictionary forms (technically\nthe 終止形【しゅうしけい】 or \"terminal form\", used to finish a sentence) -- あく, つく, つむ,\nand たつ for our examples here. The shifted conjugation pattern from _yodan_\n(the earlier version of modern _godan_ , i.e. \"type I\" verbs) to _nidan_ was\nused to mark the shift in valence (transitivity).\n\nIn the oldest such verb pairs, the basic _yodan_ form was intransitive (like\nつく or たつ), and the shifted _nidan_ form was transitive (like the modern\n_ichidan_ forms つける or たてる). This basic mechanism was then later used in\nsimilar fashion to mark the shift in valence for transitive _yodan_ verbs and\ntheir intransitive _nidan_ counterparts.\n\n* * *\n\n### Regarding 出来【でき】る\n\nThere was a separate question a couple years ago about the derivation of the\nword 出来【でき】る. Please see [my answer post over\nthere](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2706/etymology-\nof-%E5%87%BA%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B-dekiru/18068#18068) for a fuller exploration of\nwhere this word came from.\n\nIn specific relation to your own question, the relevant details are:\n\n * The word itself stretches back to the beginnings of written Japanese in the 700s.\n * The sense _\" to be do-able\"_ first appears in the late 1600s. This seems to be a reasonable extension of earlier meanings of _\" to spontaneously become manifest, to come into being on its own\"_.\n\nI am less certain how potential was expressed prior to the appearance of these\ntwo things, the _\" to be do-able\"_ sense of verb 出来【でき】る and the 可能動詞【かのうどうし】\nor \"potential verb\" forms of regular verbs. Clearly, I should study Classical\nand Old Japanese in further depth.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-21T05:46:03.420", "id": "92681", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-24T22:24:23.913", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-24T22:24:23.913", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "91189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "> 青いワンピースを着て、どこに行きますかな。\n\ndoesn't sound natural (at least in modern standard Japanese), I'm afraid. The\npolite form of 「～だろう」 is 「～でしょう」. (行きます is the polite form of 行く, as you may\nknow.)\n\n> 青いワンピースを着て、どこに行くのでしょう。/ 行くんでしょう。 \n> \"I wonder where (she) is going in a blue dress.\"\n\n* * *\n\nUsing かな, you can say:\n\n> 青いワンピースを着て、どこに行く **のかな** 。\n\nThis would mean almost the same thing as your original sentence.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T14:43:12.477", "id": "91195", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T14:43:12.477", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "91190", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You can see `～たことがある` as a fixed form meaning \"To have done ~ before\" (see\n[here](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-\ngrammar/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8C%E3%81%82%E3%82%8B-ta-koto-ga-aru-\nmeaning/)).\n\nIf you are interested in the structure, ある is the usual ある, meaning something\nexists; こと nominalizes the verb, something like \"The fact of [doing verb]\" in\nEnglish, like 食べること, \"The fact of eating\": since が as subject marker have to\nfollow a noun, you need something to make 見た a noun, and that's こと. So 見たこと is\nsomething like \"The fact of having seen in the past\" (\"in the past\" because\nthe verb is in past form).\n\nIf you add がある, i.e. \"exist\", 見たことがある literally means \"It exists the fact of\nhaving seen [something] in the past\"; but that, in a less literal and awkward\ntranslation, means that in the past the subject saw the object - i.e., \"I have\nalready seen\".\n\nThere are two が because the first is linked to こと (as subject of ある), while\nthe second to 女の人 (as subject of います): there is one sentence with its subject\n- 見たことがある - modifying another sentence with its subject - 女の人がいます.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T14:21:05.720", "id": "91193", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T14:30:27.020", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-13T14:30:27.020", "last_editor_user_id": "35362", "owner_user_id": "35362", "parent_id": "91191", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "There are several things going on in this sentence, so let's look at them one\nby one.\n\n> 見たことがある女の人がいます\n\nFirst, there's a relative clause:\n\n> 見たことがある\n\nand then there's the main clause:\n\n> 女の人がいます\n\nThe main clause just says\n\n> There is a woman.\n\nが here marks the subject of the main clause.\n\n* * *\n\nRegarding the _relative clause_\n\n> 見たことがある\n\nThis is a special construction, which works as follows:\n\n> < _past tense verb_ >ことがある\n\nwhich means\n\n> _Someone_ has had the experience of doing _verb_\n\nPut another way, it means\n\n> _Someone_ has **previously** experienced doing _verb_\n\nSo, in this particular case we have\n\n> _Someone_ has **previously** seen _something_\n\n* * *\n\nIf we put the relative clause together with the main clause, note that the\nrelative clause _modifies_ 女の人. So we have\n\n> There is a woman who _someone_ has previously seen.\n\nwhich then can be worked as\n\n> There is a woman who [ _I,she,he,they_ ]'ve seen before.\n\nThe choice here between _I, she, he, they, etc_ all depends on who's in the\nscope of conversation. Without further context, a native speaker would default\nto understanding this as _I_. But, your book perhaps has provided a context or\nassumes one, which is _she_ (a _she_ difference from this particular _woman_ )", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-13T14:21:15.110", "id": "91194", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-13T14:31:58.983", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-13T14:31:58.983", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91191", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "As pointed out in the comment section, くださる and なさる are irregular verbs in\nJapanese. The regular **imperative** form くだされ/なされ somehow changed to ください/なさい\nlong ago, making them look identical to the pre-masu form.\n\nThe れ version still exists, but sounds fairly old. You can hear samurai and\nold sage say 見なされ or 見てくだされ in fictional works.\n\nSee also: [Proper form of なさる - なさります or\nなさいます](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32700/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-15T03:37:29.503", "id": "91209", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-15T03:37:29.503", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91192", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I find what your book provided a bit confusing. So, I looked up this\ngrammatical structure in one of my reference books. This is what I found:\n\n**... さえ ... たら/ ... ば**\n\nThey define the semantics of this as:\n\n> あるものごとが実現すればそれで十分で、ほかはちいさなことだ、必要ではない、問題ではない、という気持ちを表す。\n\nSeveral examples are provided using subtle changes of the grammar:\n\n * あなたさえそばにいてくだされば、ほかにはなにもいりません。\n * 今度の試験で何がでるのかさえわかったらなあ\n\n_Source: 日本語文型辞典_ I found this grammar dictionary very useful. It uses very\nsimple Japanese explanations and rather straight-forward examples. It\nsupplemented my other learning material very well.\n\nI leave the translation of these example sentences for you to speculate on.\n\nBut, regarding the semantics, what was expressed was\n\n> [This structure] expresses the feeling that if a certain occurrence should\n> happen, that would be sufficient; anything else is a small matter, not\n> necessary, not a problem.\n\n* * *\n\nSo now let's return to your question,\n\n> What is meant by ため in this phrase 成り立つための必要最低限の条件を示す?\n\nため is expressing purpose. In other words\n\n> ...ための必要最低限\n\nis saying\n\n> _the absolute minimum necessary for ..._", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-15T00:47:54.380", "id": "91206", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-15T00:57:41.193", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-15T00:57:41.193", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91200", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I would probably say...\n\n> 1. ジョンのカラオケより、僕のバスケのほうがうまい。\n> 2. アメリカは恋しいけど、(それよりも)日本のほうが好きだ。 \n> or アメリカには帰りたいけど、それよりも日本にいたい(気持ちのほうが強い)。\n>\n\ncf.\n\n> 「私の英語より君の日本語のほうがうまいから、日本語でしゃべろう。」 \n> \"You're better at speaking Japanese than I am at speaking English, so let's\n> speak Japanese.\"\n\n> 「私の英作文能力より君の日本語読解力のほうが上だから、日本語で書くよ。」 \n> \"You're better at reading Japanese than I am at writing English, so I'll\n> write in Japanese.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-14T14:43:20.010", "id": "91204", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-15T00:48:25.917", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-15T00:48:25.917", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "91202", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "それで literally means \"with this\", and it does have various usages. Bit in this\ncontext, それで simply means \"with/using this approach\" or \"in this way\". It\nmeans the same thing as その方法で or そのやり方で.\n\nそれで meaning \"and\" or \"by the way\" is a fixed set phrase, and that's why it's\ndescribed in dictionaries. それで in your question is a simple combination of それ\nand で as the method/means marker.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-15T01:21:56.517", "id": "91207", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-15T03:26:26.720", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-15T03:26:26.720", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91203", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This is less an answer than a _guide_ to how you might try to read and\nunderstand sentences like these. It seems you're getting stuck a lot and\nhaving difficulty figuring out how to parse the sentences.\n\nSo, let's take\n\n> そこへゆくと、まだ固い莟を見つけ出して、これにあたたかい春の風を送り、花に育てる編集の仕事はそれ自体がひとつの芸術である\n\n* * *\n\nThe **first** thing I would do is just make sure I know how to read the kanji\nand what all the vocabulary means.\n\n * [莟]{つぼみ} a bud, a young plant\n * [春]{はる} spring ( **not** _summer_ )\n * [編集]{へんしゅう} ...\n\n* * *\n\n**Next** , I would try to figure out what the basic structure of the sentence\nis.\n\nSince the sentence ends in である you should expect the following structure\n\n> Aは/がBである\n\nSo, we can boil the whole sentence down to\n\n> 仕事はそれ自体が芸術である\n\nHmmm. So, you'll need to figure out what's going on here with a marked topic\nand subject for the sentence.\n\nBut essentially this reduced sentence says\n\n> As for the job, it is itself an art.\n\nSo now, you'd have the basic sentence.\n\n* * *\n\n**Now** we need to build up from this.\n\nHere there are three things to consider\n\n 1. そこへゆくと\n 2. まだ固い莟を見つけ出して、これにあたたかい春の風を送り、花に育てる\n 3. How does #1 relate to #2 (For example, is it part of the relative clause or the main sentence?)\n\nI'm going to initially pretend like そこへゆくと isn't even there and just see if I\ncan make sense of the bulk of the _relative_ clause.\n\n> まだ固い莟を見つけ出して、これにあたたかい春の風を送り、花に育てる\n\nThis relative clause is broken into three parts marked by the verbs: 出して, 送り,\nand 育てる. So, at a minimum, this relative clause is describing three aspects of\n編集の仕事. Given the form of 出して and 送り, I'll initially try to connect these using\n\" _and_ \" in English.\n\n_Now_ take each of these one by one\n\n> まだ固い莟を見つけ出して \n> _Someone_ discovers a still firm bud.\n\n> これにあたたかい春の風を送り \n> _Someone_ sends it a warm Spring breeze\n\n> 花に育てる \n> _Someone_ nurses [it] into a flower.\n\nPutting these three parts together\n\n> _Someone_ finds the still firm bud, sends it a warm Spring breeze, and\n> nurses it into a flower.\n\n* * *\n\n**Now** we need to connect the relative clause to what's happening in the main\nclause. As noted the relative clause modifies 編集の仕事.\n\n> The job of being an editor, who finds a young, firm bud, sends it a warm\n> Spring breeze, and nurses it into a flower....\n\nAnd now we can complete the sentence.\n\n> The job of being an editor is itself a kind of art, where the editor is\n> someone who finds a young, firm bud, sends it a warm Spring breeze, and\n> nurses it into a flower.\n\n* * *\n\nThere's still the matter of そこへゆくと. You could follow the lead suggested in the\ncomments regarding this, but also you could just translate it literally into\nEnglish\n\n> If you're going to go there,....\n\nThis is referring to the build up of the previous paragraphs and amounts to\nsaying\n\n> If that's how you're going to think about things,\n\nwith the implication being _we can imagine the situation as follows_ (though\nthis is not explicitly spelled out).\n\n* * *\n\nOK. So what are the take-aways here?\n\n 1. As I've recommended before, _slow down_.\n 2. Take the time to write out the vocabulary by hand.\n 3. Actually break the sentence down into its parts. Write these out on a sheet of paper so you can see it all in front of you. This might seem tedious, but it's a good way to help train your brain into how to parse a Japanese sentence.\n 4. Make sure you've accounted for everything and you're not trying to force the sentence to say what you think it should say. (I think this is such an easy trap to fall into when starting with a new language: we anticipate too quickly where we think we're being taken and then get confused because we're not really _hearing_ what's being _said_.)\n\n* * *\n\nAs I mentioned in the comments, you haven't really told us what question was\nbeing asked. Without knowing that, it's hard to say why one choice is better\nthan another. But let's look at the choice you made and the choice that was\nmarked as correct.\n\nYour choice:\n\n> 優秀な才能を持つ編集者がいれば、より良い雑誌がつくれるようになる。\n\nFollow the same _principles_ as I outlined above. (1) Make sure you know what\nall the vocabulary means and how to read the kanji. (2) break the sentence\ndown into its most basic structures. (3) Stitch everything back together.\n\nI'll assume that you already did #1. So for #2, the basic sentence is\n\n> 雑誌がつくれるようになる \n> You'll be able to create a magazine.\n\nGo through all the steps I recommended for this sentence. In the end, you\nshould wind up with something like\n\n> If there is an editor who has superior talent, then it will be possible to\n> create a good magazine.\n\nThe choice marked as correct.\n\n> まだ有名でない執筆者の才能が花開くかげには、優秀な編集者がいる。\n\nyou should be able to analyze this to be saying\n\n> Behind the blossoming of the talent of a not-yet famous author there is a\n> superior editor.\n\nGiven that the paragraphs you provided us in your question are focused more on\nauthors than the publishing of a magazine, it seems clear that choice d is\nmost likely not hitting the target (so to speak).", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-15T14:17:54.630", "id": "91212", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T03:38:06.223", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T03:38:06.223", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91210", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "They are mostly interchangeable, but there are differences.\n\n * ないと sounds relatively informal and should be avoided in very formal situations. On the other hand, なければ sounds formal and should be avoided in very casual conversations. Whichever is fine in day-to-day business conversations, although なければ sounds politer.\n\n * ないと is normally followed by another negation and form a double-negative sentence that effectively means \"must\". なければ does not have this restriction.\n\nなければ | ないと | meaning \n---|---|--- \n食べなければいけない。 \n食べなければダメだ。 | 食べないといけない。 \n食べないとダメだ。 | I must eat it. \n食べなければ。 | 食べないと。 | I must eat it. \n(another negation is implied) \n食べなければ良い。 | ❌ ~~食べないと良い。~~ | I will be fine if I avoid eating it. \n食べてからでなければいけない。 \n食べてからでなければダメだ。 | 食べてからでないといけない。 \n食べてからでないとダメだ。 | I must eat it first. \n食べてからでなければ。 | 食べてからでないと。 | I must eat it first. \n(another negation is implied) \n食べてからでなければ良い。 | ❌ ~~食べてからでないと良い。~~ | I'm fine if it doesn't happen after\neating.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-16T00:34:35.280", "id": "91216", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T00:52:17.320", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T00:52:17.320", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91211", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Japanese has many more homonyms than English. While English has more than\n3,000 syllables (some say tens of thousands), Japanese has only about 100. For\nexample, there are 48 different kanji for \"kosho\" alone. Therefore, I think it\nis safe to say that the Japanese language has evolved into an expression that\ntakes meaning from context, and therefore does not place as much importance on\nthe similarity of sounds.\n\nThe following is a quote from the origin of fujitsu's company name.\n<https://www.fujitsu.com/jp/about/brand-values/>\n\n> ＜「富士電機製造（株）」の社名の由来＞\n> 古河電気工業（株）とドイツのシーメンス社が、発電機・電動機国産化のため、1923年に富士電機製造（株）を設立。社名の由来は、「古河」の「フ」と、「ジーメンス」（ドイツ語読み）の「ジ」を取った「フジ（富士）」から。（日本一の富士山をイメージ）", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-16T02:11:10.043", "id": "91218", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T02:11:10.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39141", "parent_id": "91217", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "They sound completely different. Native speakers, at least, will never have\nthe idea that the two sound similar.\n\n * じ and き are different characters with totally different sounds. Or do you think \"G\" and \"key\" sound alike in English?\n * Only 富士通 has an elongated つ at the end, which is a very important distinguishing feature in Japanese. See: [Are there many occurrences of elongated syllables throughout the language?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65027/5010)\n * Most importantly, they show different pitch accent patterns: 不吉 (ふきつ【LHH】) is _heiban_ (flat), whereas 富士通 (ふじつう【LHLL】) is _nakatakadaka_ (middle-high). This means it's difficult to confuse them even in an extremely noisy environment where one cannot distinguish \"G\" and \"key\".\n\nForeigners who don't give a damn about accents and long vowels might think\n_fujitsu_ and _fukitsu_ are a bit alike, but I wonder how many of them know\nthe word 不吉.\n\nBy the way, there is even a word\n[不実](https://jisho.org/search/%E4%B8%8D%E5%AE%9F) (ふじつ【HLL】) which means\n\"unfaithful\". Even though 不実 and 富士通 are romanized the same way (Fujitsu),\nthey sound totally different to native Japanese speakers because of the\ndifference in the vowel length and the accents. Also note that many English\nwords sound alike to those who don't speak English. For example _flight_ and\n_fright_ sound identical to Japanese speakers.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-16T02:17:18.027", "id": "91219", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T06:26:53.200", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T06:26:53.200", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91217", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "か is not just a question marker but also is a sentence-end particle used to\nconfirm something with a bit of exclamatory feeling. This type of か is\npronounced without a rising intonation. If your example sentence was\npronounced without a rising intonation, it means the speaker is now certain\nthat she is a newbie.\n\nExamples:\n\n * そうか。 \nI see. / Oh is that so. / Alright.\n\n * そうか？⤴ (with rising intonation) \nIs that so? / Really?\n\n * 君か! \nOh it's you!\n\n * 大きくなったじゃないか! \nYou've grown up, haven't you!", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-16T11:07:14.583", "id": "91221", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T11:07:14.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91220", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Please read [this question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/393/5010).\nThe main clause after と must be **non-volitional** ; that is, you cannot\ndirectly use たい, (よ)う, つもりだ, なさい and so on after と. In your case, you have to\nsay お金があれば車を買うつもりだ, お金があるなら車を買うつもりだ or お金があったら車を買うつもりだ. Or you can use と when\nyou describe a similar cause-effect relationship as an objective fact (e.g.,\nお金があると人は車を買う).\n\nSee also [How Conditionals Work in Japanese: …と, …ば, …たら, and\n…なら](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/how-conditionals-work/). You\nmay think the main function of と is closer to \"whenever\" or \"and then\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-17T02:46:13.577", "id": "91228", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-17T03:17:33.677", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-17T03:17:33.677", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91226", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "This は is not a particle but a part of the verb 挟む (\"to insert; to put\nbetween\").\n\n * **プログラム** : \"(event) program\" (leaflet)\n * **に** : destination marker (particle)\n * **挟んで【はさんで】** : te-form of 挟む\n * **あります** : expresses something has been done in advance \n * [Stative verbs: ～ている vs ～てある vs ～（ら）れる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5505/5010)\n * [How ~てある and ~ておいた differs?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/41028/5010)\n\n> 最初からプログラムにはさんであります。\n>\n> I have inserted it in your program (leaflet) from the beginning. \n> It's already inserted in your program.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-17T09:12:44.350", "id": "91233", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-17T09:17:50.600", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-17T09:17:50.600", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91231", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It should always be \" **< KEYWORD>**の検索結果\". You can put a line break before の\nif you like.\n\nThat の is like English _of_ , but the word order is different. \"A of B\"\nroughly translates to \"BのA\". Therefore putting の at the very beginning, like\nyour first example, makes no sense.\n\n**EDIT** : \"検索結果: **< KEYWORD>**\" is an alternative.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-17T13:12:49.387", "id": "91235", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-17T13:37:41.707", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-17T13:37:41.707", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes it's perfectly suitable. The quote part (marked with と) is an independent\nsentence and can have another は.\n\nAnother situation where you have two は's is when you want to use は as an\nexplicit contrast marker (e.g., 彼は背は高い \"He is (at least) tall\").", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T00:28:58.343", "id": "91241", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T00:28:58.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91236", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "First, let's not use 推測 (\"to conjecture\") casually in a daily conversation\nunless you want to speak like a mad scientist or a robot in an 80's movie.\nIt's a stiff technical word.\n\nNext, the implied subject will always be inferred from the context. Generally\nspeaking, 正しく推測しました can be about a third person, and 正しく推測していました can be about\nthe first person (\"I\"). Without understanding the entire flow of the\nconversation, I cannot tell why someone explained to you like that. Still,\n推測しました tends to refer to something that just happened, while 推測していました tends to\nrefer to a guess made in the past. If someone (\"you\", \"I\" or \"he\") made some\nguess in the past and it turned out to be correct just now, one may say\n正しく推測していた (or more casually 当たって(い)た or 正しかった), but not 正しく推測した.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T05:14:27.870", "id": "91252", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T05:26:20.807", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-18T05:26:20.807", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91238", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "First of all, I would never say either 正しく推測しました or 正しく推測していました under any\ncircumstances. They sound very odd.\n\nIf I have to use the word 推測, I would use it as a noun.\n\n> 推測が正しかったです。\n\nYou can use の to specify whose guess it was, and it can be anyone.\n\n> （私／あなた／彼の）推測が正しかったです。\n\nIf I have to use 推測 in its verb form, I would still nominalize it with こと.\n\n> 1. （私／あなた／彼の）推測したことが正しかったです。\n> 2. （私／あなた／彼の）推測していたことが正しかったです。\n>\n\n(正しかった can be replaced with 正しい but let’s leave it aside in this discussion.)\n\nIn everyday conversation, it is more common to use a plainer verb like 思う.\n\n> 1. （私／あなた／彼の）思ったことが正しかったです。\n> 2. （私／あなた／彼の）思っていたことが正しかったです。\n>\n\nThese two are different in that the former describes a change of state of mind\nthat happened at one point of time, while the latter refers to a state of mind\nthat lasted for some period. This difference is not that important when you\nare talking about yourself. However, since you cannot tell when exactly some\nchange occurred to another person’s inner state (unless they express it\nsomehow), the first form is not usually used for anyone other than the\nspeaker.\n\nThe same difference applies when a verb is used as the predicate.\n\n> 1. そう（だろうと）思いました。 \n>\n> 2. そう（だろうと）思っていました。\n>\n\nBoth are good if you are talking about yourself, while only the second is\nappropriate if you are talking about a third person, except in a novel or a\nvoice-over where the narrator describes the state of mind of a character\nobjectively. One thing you need to be careful with here is that neither\nsentence is appropriate if you are talking about the second person. This is\nfor a different reason than what we have discussed so far: you don’t tell\nsomeone what they thought as if you know better.\n\nIt is OK to ask that person using either form.\n\n> 1. そう（だろうと）思いましたか。 \n>\n> 2. そう（だろうと）思っていましたか。\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-19T00:48:37.547", "id": "91264", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:27:51.507", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:27:51.507", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91238", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You can put various nouns in front of a number to indicate what kind of number\nit is.\n\n * 合計100時間 \n100 hours in total\n\n * 累計100時間 \ncumulative total of 100 hours\n\n * 3個1980円 \n1980 yen for three pieces\n\n * 差し引き5万円, 差額5万円 \nthe difference of 50,000 yen\n\n * 税込み700円 \n700 yen including tax\n\n * 税抜き700円 \n700 yen without tax\n\n * 先頭5人 \nthe first 5 people (in a waiting line)\n\n * 最終1マイル \nthe last one mile\n\n * 西暦2021年 \n2021 A.D.\n\n * 時速88マイル \n88 mph\n\n * 結成5周年 \n5th anniversary (of a group)\n\nI personally do not feel these nouns are temporarily being used as adjectives\nor adverbs. Perhaps we can just understand this as a common pattern.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T03:00:08.497", "id": "91247", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T03:16:53.780", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-18T03:16:53.780", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91239", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "ため here is nothing special — just used in its most common meaning, \"for the\npurpose of;\" \"the sake of.\"\n\nYour sentence can be translated as follows:\n\nこれは、 **かぜをひかないため** のサプリメントです。 \nThis is the supplement **for the sake of not catching a cold**.\n\nSince ため is a noun, it's followed with の. Again, nothing special. (The\nsupplement for this sake; **this sake's** supplement)\n\n風邪をひかないように, on the other hand, is an adverbial phrase. It roughly means \"In a\nway of not catching a cold,\" and does not quite fit the context here.\n\nIf you're asking about ため with negative verbs, then it's simple — just use\nnegative verbs as you would use positive verbs.\n\n風邪を引くため \n風邪を引かないため\n\nGrammatically though, negative verbs of this sort (ending in ない) are actually\nい-adjectives, and because ため is a noun, then 引かないため and いい人 and 強い風 are all\nstructurally equivalent (い-adj + noun).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T02:16:05.507", "id": "91244", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T02:16:05.507", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "91240", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As you suggest, the following sentence does sound awkward.\n\n> かぜをひかない **ために** 、このサプリメントを飲んでいます。\n\nThe reason is that かぜをひかない is not something you actively do, and therefore,\nnot suitable as a purpose.\n\nThe sentence below with ように, which denotes a desired state rather than a\npurpose, sounds much more natural.\n\n> かぜをひかない **ように** 、このサプリメントを飲んでいます。\n\nIf you still need to use ため, you should insert する as below so that the\nadverbial clause describes what you actively do to achieve a desired state,\nrather than the desired state itself.\n\n> かぜをひかない **ようにするために** 、このサプリメントを飲んでいます。\n\nHowever, this distinction becomes less strict in a noun-modifying clause\nmaking かぜをひかない **ため** のサプリメント much more acceptable, although some might find\nit a bit informal and still prefer かぜをひかない **ようにするため** のサプリメント.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T03:04:28.813", "id": "91248", "last_activity_date": "2023-01-12T11:57:57.840", "last_edit_date": "2023-01-12T11:57:57.840", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91240", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "日和 may not always refer to weather, but it always refers to a perfect day for\ndoing something. It's typically used like 雨の日は勉強日和だ (\"Rainy days are perfect\nfor studying\"), but IMO it's also natural to say テスト前に3連休があるので勉強日和だ (although\nsome may argue this is not a traditional usage). Either way, この本は勉強日和だ makes\nno sense.\n\nI think the 雲行き/形勢 meaning is applicable almost exclusively in the set\nexpression 日和見 and 日和見主義 today.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T04:48:09.150", "id": "91251", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T04:54:15.080", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-18T04:54:15.080", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91242", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't think so. In this case,\n\n> しかも、中途半端な男にいって振られるのが嫌だったら、どうせだったらめっちゃいい男にいったほうがいいよね\n\nIf you use the どうせだから, it could imply that you're going to be rejected anyway.\nLike,\n\n> どうせ（振られるの）だから...\n\nOn the other hand, if you use どうせだったら, \" _If there is a possibility that you\nwill be rejected anyway..._ \" comes to my mind first (for me personally).\nLike,\n\n> どうせ（振られる可能性があるの）だったら...\n\nI think the original sentence was meant to say, \" _If you don't want to\nconfess to a half-baked guy and get rejected, it's still better to confess to\na nice guy and get rejected anyway._ \" When I translate it into English like\nthat, it doesn't seem to make much difference whether if we use \"どうせだから\" or\n\"どうせだったら,\" but when it's in Japanese, I feel required to read the true meaning\nbetween the words, which is a strangely sophisticated thing to do.\n\nI'll leave this answer for now, hoping that others will come up with a more\nexcellent answer. The answer mine looks more like based on my feeling.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T02:40:55.673", "id": "91246", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T02:40:55.673", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45272", "parent_id": "91243", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Your translation doesn't quite capture the nuance, which may have led to your\nquestion. A better translation might be \"Taro and Hanako are just kids, but\nthey sure can talk big\".\n\nNote that のに is already being employed in the original sentence, just with くせ\ninjected. The のくせに could be replaced with なのに, and the broad meaning would be\nthe same, but it would make the phrase less dismissive of Taro and Hanako\nbeing kids. A bit like \"are kids\" vs \"are just kids\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T18:40:44.173", "id": "91259", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T18:55:02.667", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-18T18:55:02.667", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "29876", "parent_id": "91249", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "かもしれない with no extra element can represent any degree of uncertainty above 0%\nand below 100%. ひょっとしたら, literally like \"if it were to happen\", specifically\nimplies a low probability. It is used with a connotation that the speaker did\nnot recognize the possibility or evaluate it likely beforehand, or it is an\nunwelcome assumption, etc.\n\nBy the way, ひょっと is practically only used in three derivative forms: ひょっとしたら,\nひょっとすると, and ひょっとして. While they are all possibly translated into \"perhaps\",\nひょっとしたら grammatically leans most toward conditional clause and ひょっとして to\nadverb, which results in uninterchangeability in some situations.\n\n> Are you perhaps Keanu Reeves? \n> ?? ひょっとしたらキアヌ・リーブスですか？ \n> ○ ひょっとしてキアヌ・リーブスですか？", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-20T07:37:52.210", "id": "91278", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-20T07:37:52.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "91250", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It's merely a component of the word 厚生, which means \"welfare\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T18:18:12.140", "id": "91258", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-18T18:18:12.140", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29876", "parent_id": "91255", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "As a prior answer points out, 厚生 means \"welfare\". I'd like to add some sources\nto that, because I can see where you may have been stuck: how is \"thick\"\nrelated to \"welfare\", right?\n\n[精選版 日本国語大辞典](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%8E%9A%E7%94%9F-495978):\n\n> 〘名〙 ( **「厚」は加える、強くするの意** ) \n> ① くらしを健康で豊かにすること。古くは政治を行なう人が人民の生活を豊かにすることをいう。 \n> ※古文真宝笑雲抄（1525）五「福与二恩沢一也。富貴な人は厚生したばかりぞ」 〔書経‐大禹謨〕\n\nIf you see the bolded part, the kanji 厚 here brings in the idea of to\nadd/increase, and to make stronger. That's where the sense of \"welfare\" and\n\"better quality of life\" comes in.\n\nThis can be further adumbrated by this definition found on\n[Wiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%8E%9A%E7%94%9F), the key words\n豊か, 増進する:\n\n> 厚 生（こうせい） \n> 生活を **豊かにし、健康を守り増進する** こと。\n\nNote that the adjective 厚い is related to this usage:\n\n[jisho.org](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%8E%9A%E3%81%84)\n\n> abundant (​Only applies to 厚い)\n\n[デジタル大辞泉（小学館）](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%8E%9A%E3%81%84/)\n\n> 富んでいる。金持ちだ。 \n> 「至って―・き御身上の御方はいかが侍らん」〈仮・東海道名所記・六〉", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-18T19:16:44.110", "id": "91260", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T05:05:23.100", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-19T05:05:23.100", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91255", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The both `出るとも限らない` / `出ないとも限らない` sounds the same to me(Japanese native) in\nthis context.\n\nI suppose that this is because it implicitly contains bipolar conclusions.\ni.e. `出るとも出ないとも限らない` (`We can't say either \"it happens\" or \"it doesn't\nhappen\"`) \nThe particle 「 **も** 」 basically has meanings like `too`, `also`, `both`.\nCoupled with the negation `限らない` it negates the both conclusions, `happen` and\n`not happen`.\n\nHowever, we would never use 出ると **は** 限らない in this context whereas `出ないとは限らない`\nis possible. \nI suppose that this is because in many cases the particle 「 **は** 」 contains a\nmeaning like `Against your expectation`, `You may not know`. (Note that there\nare exceptions)\n\n> 出ると **は** 限らない \n> I think you think it happens, but it's not necessarily so\n\n> 出ないと **は** 限らない \n> I think you think it doesn't happen, but it's not necessarily so", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-30T23:26:52.363", "id": "91405", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T23:39:55.930", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T23:39:55.930", "last_editor_user_id": "38911", "owner_user_id": "38911", "parent_id": "91256", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I have not been able to find any conclusive evidence to suggest one way or the\nother, but I personally feel it is a misuse, or to be precise, a mix-up of two\nsimilar constructs, namely `[V ない-stem]-ないとは／も限らない` and `[interrogative] [V\ndictionary form]-とも限らない`.\n\nThis [page](https://nihongonosensei.net/?p=20639) specifically mentions the\nlatter usage with examples, as follows.\n\n> 「いつ死ぬとも限らない（不知何时死）」等のように、「いつ」「どこ」などの疑問詞が来ると動辞形でも接続可能な場合もあります。例（７）（８）。\n>\n> （７）災害はいつ襲ってくるとも限らない。 \n> （灾害说不定什么时候就会来。）\n>\n> （８）首都圏ではいつ巨大な地震が起こるとも限らないと言われている。 \n> （据说首都圈随时都有可能发生大地震。）\n\nOne user on\n[chiebukuro](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1478120909),\nwhose answer was not chosen as best, goes further to claim only いつ津波が襲って\n**くる** とも限らない is grammatical and いつ津波が襲って **こない** とも限らない is not, contradicting\nthe best answer.\n\nIf these are accurate, the question is whether 何かしらの in your sentence\nqualifies as an interrogative.\n\n> 突然 **何かしらの** 問題が出るとも限らない。\n\nI don’t think it does because it just means “some” and is not asking “what.”\n\nWe might get a grammatical sentence by replacing 何かしら with 何, or by adding いつ.\n\n> 突然 **何の** 問題が出るとも限らない。\n>\n> **いつ** 突然何かしらの問題が出るとも限らない。\n\nI am not very sure, though.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-31T02:31:19.777", "id": "92779", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T02:31:19.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91256", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "You can take it as a set phrase. Note, however, that what you follow is an\nemotion, an instinct, or something that drives you from within yourself, and\nalso that you follow it without thinking much, like you let whatever is\nindicated by the noun determine your course of action. You cannot use it for\nthings like a schedule even if they belong to you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-19T02:20:09.143", "id": "91267", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T03:15:36.597", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-19T03:15:36.597", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91257", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I would understand it this way.\n\n> 寺や神社いわゆる宗教があっても、（今あなたがしたように）「僕たちに宗教観がない」って（多くの日本人が） **言う**\n> のが、このゲームを作った人からすると日本の「宗教観」って理解しがたい（原因）だろうなってことなんですけど（＝って私は言っているんですけど）伝わりますかね？\n>\n> _I’m saying that the fact that we ourselves **say** we don’t have any\n> religious view (as you have just done), despite the fact that we do have\n> religious symbols like temples and shrines, must make it difficult for those\n> who created the game to understand the Japanese religious view. Am I making\n> myself clear?_", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-19T01:09:25.567", "id": "91265", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T13:37:16.843", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-19T13:37:16.843", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91262", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "These can all refer to someone who (currently) has tan lines, and in this\nsense, they are interchangeable. However, 日焼けあとが残る人 can also refer to someone\nwho gets tan lines (easily) regardless of their current skin tones. For\nexample, 日焼けあとが残る人と残らない人の違い means \"the difference between those who (easily)\nget tan lines and those who don't\", and in this case 残る is not interchangeable\nwith the other two.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-22T07:35:27.647", "id": "91304", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T07:35:27.647", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The word is [燦燦](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%87%A6%E7%87%A6-513492).\n\nJapanese of certain generations or above think of the song titled\n[愛燦燦](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%84%9B%E7%87%A6%E7%87%A6_\\(%E7%BE%8E%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%B2%E3%81%B0%E3%82%8A%E3%81%AE%E6%9B%B2\\))\nby the legendary singer\n[美空ひばり](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%BE%8E%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%B2%E3%81%B0%E3%82%8A)\nwhen we hear this word. Although the song was released relatively late in her\ncareer, everything associated with her is considered classic. This could be\nwhy the friend thought someone old came up with the phrase.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-19T06:33:42.780", "id": "91271", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T06:33:42.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91268", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "よいな (or in more common forms いいな, いいですね), in this case, is essentially a\npretty forceful way of confirming the interlocutor has understood something -\n'You've got that, haven't you?!' or something like it. The な or ね here is in\nits confirmation function, '- right?'.\n\n'I shall be waiting at the Ark of Heaven. You must come too, when you are\nready. You understand, X?'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-19T05:16:51.850", "id": "91270", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T05:16:51.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9971", "parent_id": "91269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't know exactly but I think it doesn't matter if you write it with Kanji\nor not.\n\njisho.org shows directly the Kanji characters when you look up the verb.\n\n<https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A7%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8B>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-19T14:55:38.040", "id": "91275", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T14:55:38.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "33887", "parent_id": "91274", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "できました and 出来ました are the same, but 出来ました is not frequently used. Japanese don't\nusually use kanji on words that has grammatical function. 生きていく is not usually\nwritten as 生きて行く. Anyways, 出来ました and できました can be in grammatical function and\nother functions. In this case, just the popularity of use that matters.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-14T15:07:29.687", "id": "91600", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-14T15:07:29.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48992", "parent_id": "91274", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Early on, I would joke with people about 打ち合わせ (the noun) as people with a\ndisagreement punching it out to determine who was correct.\n\nI generally consider this to be like 'hammering things out' in English.\n\nMy experience over the years has been that just as the parts of English words\ndo not always carry one exact meaning, the meaning of individual kanji in\ncombinations have many variations.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-05T11:50:36.933", "id": "91480", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T21:32:29.763", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T21:32:29.763", "last_editor_user_id": "48892", "owner_user_id": "48892", "parent_id": "91276", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "[This article](https://gogen-yurai.jp/uchiawase/) recommended by @aguijonazo\nexplains the etymology.\n\nThe term comes from court music, where wooden sticks were used to set rhythm\nfor all instruments. Originally, `打ち合わせ` referred to clapping (`打つ`) of those\nsticks used to make the rhythm match (`合う`). The meaning then generalized and\nthe word is now used for preliminary discussions that ensure that all involved\nparties are on the same page.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-09T19:34:02.883", "id": "91547", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T19:34:02.883", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10104", "parent_id": "91276", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "て adds the perfect aspect, which is more natural as suggested by the English\nversion using perfect tense. 来週には忘れる is less natural, but not impossible.\n\nRegarding は, you are right. This is because the sentence means 'by next week'.\n来週忘れる would mean 'I will forget next week', which is unlikely (forgetting is\nnot a conscious action; as an side, 来週に does not fit in this case).\n\n* * *\n\nCf. Suppose you have a task that takes another week. Then, （この仕事は）来週には終わる\nsounds (to me) as natural as 来週には終わってる. Strictly speaking, the former suggests\nthat the task does not finish this week while the latter does not specify -\nbut I guess this is a technical differentiation and not that we really use\nthem differently.\n\nIf you talk about a TV series finishing next week, （このドラマは）来週終わる is more\nnatural than 来週には終わる mostly because the program is usually once a week.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-20T12:10:17.240", "id": "91280", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-20T22:26:39.260", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-20T22:26:39.260", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91279", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think the main difference lies in when the said action (instant-state-change\nverb, 忘れる in your case) can happen. 来週には○○する implies something will happen\naround or (shortly) before 来週 **but not now** , whereas 来週には○○している implies it\ncan happen **anywhere** between now and 来週.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AFHUR.png)\n\nIn your situation, the difference between 来週には忘れる and 来週には忘れている is not very\nimportant. But compare the following sentences:\n\n * 私は500年後には死ぬ。 \n(The speaker is not an ordinary human because this sounds like he intends to\nlive at least for another 300-400 years. 私は500年後に死ぬ without は means he will\ndie strictly in 500 years, and you even need an ability to precisely predict\nyour future to say this.)\n\n * 私は500年後には死んでいる。 \n(An ordinary human can safely say this. は is usually necessary, but it can be\nomitted in a relative clause. 2年後に死んでいる人 and 2年後には死んでいる人 are interchangeable.)\n\n * 10年後には結婚したい。 \n(He probably doesn't want to get married right now.)\n\n * 10年後には結婚していたい。 \n(He may want to get married even now, and 10年後 is a worst scenario.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-22T03:41:28.357", "id": "91300", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T15:17:07.767", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T15:17:07.767", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91279", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't think so. My Japanese friend Miko said it was usually \"ww\" and not\n\"w\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-20T22:23:46.257", "id": "91282", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-20T22:23:46.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48778", "parent_id": "91281", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "`w` emerged and became popular spontaneously, so no one can tell what the\npeople who started using it were thinking. That said, I personally think the\nresemblance to a laughing mouth was obvious (at least to those who had been\nfamiliar with Japanese-style kaomoji like `^w^`), and it should not be\nunrelated to why it gained popularity.\n\n`ω` (Greek omega) is another popular symbol for laughing mouth in kaomoji (eg\n`(･ω･)`), and it is sometimes used instead of `w` at the end of a sentence,\ntoo.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-21T00:47:05.290", "id": "91283", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T10:43:40.560", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-21T10:43:40.560", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91281", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Regarding the particular phrase, simply because '音の無い二人' does not make sense\n(as an ordinary Japanese phrase) and '音のない世界' is quite natural, '(音の無い)\n(二人だけの世界)' is the only possibility.\n\nGenerally there remain ambiguities on which adjective (etc) modifies which\nnouns. A famous example is '黒い目のきれいな女の子'. There are many possible readings for\nthis (18 ways attributed to Hisashi Inoue, a famous writer, by [this\npage](https://researchmap.jp/blogs/blog_entries/view/86185/ed261373560a263bd99ad001894f369c?frame_id=415042)).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-22T05:04:48.863", "id": "91301", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T05:04:48.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91284", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "A translation of your Japanese sentence would be:\n\n> \"Man, only a genius would choose that as their major!\"\n\nIf this sentence was directed at _you_ personally, then:\n\n> \"Man, you must be a genius for having chosen that major!\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-21T12:59:20.367", "id": "91289", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T12:59:20.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "41379", "parent_id": "91285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Assuming it was written by a native speaker, I would call this a humorous\nsentence rather than a perfectly standard one. The sentence literally does\nmean:\n\n> それを専攻するのは天才 **でしかない** よ！ \n> Majoring in that means [someone] **is merely** a genius!\n\nBut it effectively means:\n\n> Majoring in that means [someone] **is nothing but** a genius!\n\nしかない is normally used in a negative way (\"only\", \"merely\", \"no more than\",\netc), but here it is used to refer to something desirable, which is why you\nwere puzzled, right? In reality, people may say something like this half-\njokingly.\n\n * 「自信ありますか？」「自信しかないです！」 \n\"Are you confident?\" \"I have nothing except for confidence!\"\n\n * 幸せでしかない。 \nI'm nothing but happy.\n\nDon't try them at home unless you're really fluent in Japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-22T08:14:55.707", "id": "91306", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T12:15:21.893", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T12:15:21.893", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This AをBと思う _is_ \"to think of A as B\" or \"to regard A as B\". Here A\ncorresponds to 沈黙するレーナ and B corresponds to the interrogative 何. か is a\nquestion marker. So you can imagine a question like this:\n\n> 沈黙するレーナを何と思った(の)か？\n>\n> What did [he] think of silent Rena as? \n> → What did [he] think about Rena's silence?\n\nSince it's placed at the beginning of a sentence, it expresses the speaker's\n(or the narrator's) speculation about the reason for the subsequent part. See\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/65697/5010) for other examples.\n\n> 沈黙するレーナを何と思ったか、カールシュタは気遣わしげに首を傾げる。\n>\n> (literally) What did he think about レーナ's silence; カールシュタ tilted his head in\n> a caring way.\n>\n> → Looking at レーナ's silence, カールシュタ thought of something and tilted his head\n> in a caring way.\n\n(If the narrative part is written in the first person's view, see Eddie Kal's\ntranslation in the comment section.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-22T02:34:37.213", "id": "91299", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T16:51:16.753", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T16:51:16.753", "last_editor_user_id": "7944", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91286", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]