question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「自殺、ですか？」\n>\n> 「信じがたい話だがね。......『死霊の声』とやらに、退役してなお付きまとわれたのだそうだ」\n>\n> 「......」\n>\n> それはやはり、まるきり怪談の類に聞こえるのだけれど。\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> 「君も嫌ならそう言って構わんよ、レーナ。今の部隊に残りたければそれでいいし、スピアヘッド戦隊は先刻も言ったが古参兵の集まりだ。話を **聞く分**\n> では出撃時に同調するのがいけないらしいから、最低限の監視だけ行って、指揮は現場に任せても何の問題も......」\n\nDoes the phrase 話を聞く分では mean \"According to what I heard\"? If it does, what\nwould be the funtion of the bold 分? I know it doesn't mean \"part\". It seems to\nhave something to do with この分では, where 分 means \"situation\". I'm not sure.\n<http://www.romajidesu.com/dictionary/meaning-\nof-%E3%81%93%E3%81%AE%E5%88%86%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF.html>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-21T08:57:17.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91287",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T12:55:28.287",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Understaning 聞く分?",
"view_count": 88
} | [
{
"body": "「分」used in this context, such as 「聞く分には」、「見る分には」、etc., indicates something\nlike \"as far as XX is concerned...\", \"from what I have heard so far...\", or\n\"from what I have seen so far...\"\n\nHere is a quick question and answer from Yahoo Chiebukuro on this subject:\n[Yahoo Chiebukuro\nLink](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q14184353054)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-21T12:55:28.287",
"id": "91288",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T12:55:28.287",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "41379",
"parent_id": "91287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91287 | null | 91288 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91295",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm watching an anime in which characters often use 祭り, but I'm not sure about\nits meaning; here's occourrences from the first three episodes:\n\n 1. ままた来た！美人祭り…。ヘンリエッタさん\n 2. なんだとこのムッツリスケベ祭りめっ。僕はムッツリじゃない\n 3. このぉ青春真っ盛り祭りめ\n 4. うるせ！この女の子にモテモテ王子祭りめっ\n 5. じゃ冒険コンティニュー祭りといくか！\n 6. 難所越え祭り\n\nI know 祭り [can mean](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%A5%AD) \"galore\", as in \"many\n[of something]\", and this seems to fit examples 1 (context: many beautiful\ngirls entering a room). It can also mean \"festival\", which I think can fit\nmaybe 3 (more lines for context):\n\n> Shiroi: アカツキさんその「主君」ってのやめようよ。シロエにしない？\n>\n> Akatsuki: じゃあ私の事もアカツキって呼び捨てにして。\n>\n> Naotsugu: このぉ青春真っ盛り祭りめ。はぁ？何だよそれ。\n\nlike \"How you are beahaving is a festival of youth\", and maybe 4:\n\n> サイコー！ってな感じでしょ？\n>\n> おぱんつの次くらいにはな。\n>\n> 直継先輩女の子の前でそういう事言わないで下さい。\n>\n> うるせ！この女の子にモテモテ王子祭りめっ。\n>\n> まぁ…確かにモテモテですけど。うう許さんぞソウジ！\n\nlike the character is very popular with girls, so it's like a festival of\npopularity, or as \"galore\" meaning it's very popular? Which sounds kinda\nstretched to me, though.\n\nFor the other examples, I tried also looking at\n[weblio](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E7%A5%AD%E3%82%8A), but I wasn't\nreally able to understand what 祭り means in them; more lines for context:\n\n2)\n\n> 会社に可愛い娘が全くいないってのが悩みだがな。\n>\n> んなどうでもいいじゃん。\n>\n> なんだとこのムッツリスケベ祭りめっ\n>\n> 僕はムッツリじゃない。\n>\n> この世界には２種類の男がいる。開放的なオープンスケベと内向的なムッツリスケベ！\n\n 5. \n\n> あ…私の方こそその…ありがとう…。\n>\n> え？何が？その…助けてくれようとして…。\n>\n> じゃ冒険コンティニュー祭りといくか！\n\n 6. After the characters just got out of a dungeon:\n\n> …すごい。風が冷たい…。\n>\n> でも気持ちいいぞ。\n>\n> やっと抜けたな。難所越え祭りだぜ！\n>\n> …綺麗だ。すっげぇな！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-21T13:22:57.453",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91290",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T01:38:43.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang"
],
"title": "Meaning of 祭り as a suffix",
"view_count": 127
} | [
{
"body": "We sometimes use 〇〇祭り to call or describe (non-religious, non-traditional)\nevents where you can see a lot of something. 〇〇祭り is also popular as the name\nof a sale/campaign (e.g.,\n[山崎春のパンまつり](https://www.yamazakipan.co.jp/campaign/spring/index.html)).\n\nAmong your examples, 美人祭り seems relatively straightforward because there are\nindeed many 美人. The other ones seem unnatural, and should be taken as jokes.\nThese probably represent this character's idiosyncratic way of describing\nsomething emphatically. (If lots of コンティニュー or 難所越え were happening, saying\nコンティニュー祭り or 難所越え祭り would not be wrong.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T01:29:58.843",
"id": "91295",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T01:38:43.217",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T01:38:43.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91290",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91290 | 91295 | 91295 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91293",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 本当に死んでいる....それ以上は一切の言い表しようもないほど....彼女は完全に死んでいた。\n\nMy understanding is that 一切の言い表しようもない is a clause inside ほど, but I do not\nunderstand what **一切の** means. I know that の can sometimes mark the subject in\nrelative clauses but if that was the case would it mean that 一切 or\n\"everything\" is the thing that cannot express itself?\n\nThis is how I understand this sentence\n\n> She's really dead... She has really died and everything cannot explain\n> itself",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T00:10:21.703",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91291",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T01:10:11.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "46733",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "What does the の do in それ以上は一切の言い表しようもないほど ...?",
"view_count": 56
} | [
{
"body": "一切 is so-called a no-adjective, and this の is a noun-linking-の connecting 一切\nand 言い表しよう.\n\n一切 means \"every(thing)\" in an affirmative sentence, but means \"(not) at all\"\nor \"nothing\" in a negative sentence (i.e., as a [negative polarity\nitem](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/16060/5010)). 一切 works both\nadverbially (without の) and adjectivally (with の), so の is optional when both\na noun and a verb are present after it. The adverbial usage is more common in\nnegative sentences.\n\n * 一切 **の** 希望を捨てよ。 \n希望を一切捨てよ。 \nAbandon every hope.\n\n * 一切 **の** 欠点が見当たら **ない** 。 \n一切欠点が見当たら **ない** 。 \nI can't find any fault with it.\n\n * それ以上は一切 **の** 言い表しようも **ない** 。 \nそれ以上は一切言い表しようも **ない** 。 \nそれ以上は言い表しようも一切 **ない** 。 \nThere is no further way to describe (this).\n\n一切 works also as a plain noun meaning \"everything\".\n\n * 彼は一切を見通している。 \nHe has seen everything through.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T01:03:14.253",
"id": "91293",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T01:10:11.170",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T01:10:11.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91291",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91291 | 91293 | 91293 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am in the process of reading through the Japanese Wikipedia article titled\n\"事件\". The beginning of the article lists two definitions for \"事件\". The\nsentence that I am confused over is as follows.\n\n> 法令用語としては、事柄・案件 **のこと** 。\n>\n> English: As a legal term, **it means** a matter or a case.\n\nDoes the term \"のこと\" actually translate to \"it means…\" in this context? Or, to\nput this in another way, is the term \"のこと\" equivalent to \"~という意味だ\" or\n\"~ということである\" in Japanese?\n\nHere is the article in question:\n<https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6>\n\nI hope someone can explain this to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T01:23:13.297",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91294",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T02:09:40.487",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29607",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"definitions"
],
"title": "What does \"のこと\" mean in the following sentence?",
"view_count": 49
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, this ～のこと means ～のことを表す or ～のことである. In other words, it's a shortened way\nof saying \"It means ～\". The article says that the word 事件 usually refers to\nthings like accidents, troubles and criminal cases, but in legal terms, it\nneutrally refers to cases/issues in general.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T02:09:40.487",
"id": "91298",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T02:09:40.487",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91294",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91294 | null | 91298 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91297",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't understand the purpose of こと in かわいいこと天使のごとし. It seems to function\nlike \"and.\"\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/n1sDa.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T01:33:55.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91296",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T06:13:48.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48791",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "こと in かわいいこと天使のごとし",
"view_count": 108
} | [
{
"body": "> でも寝顔はかわいいこと天使のごとし。 \n> Her sleeping face is cute like an angel.\n\nBasically this こと is a nominalizer which turns かわいい (\"cute\", adjective) into a\nnoun (\"cuteness\"). So the かわいいこと天使のごとし part in isolation can be translated\nliterally as \"(her) cuteness (is) angel-like\".\n\nStill, the topic of the entire sentence is 寝顔, not かわいいこと. In modern Japanese,\nthis `<adjective> \\+ こと + <noun> \\+ のごとし` can be taken as a special\nconstruction that behaves like a long predicate meaning `<adjective> like a\n<noun>`. This is one of those [set expressions that cannot be analyzed using\nthe modern standard grammar](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/42724/5010).\nThis `<adjective> \\+ こと + <noun> \\+ のごとし` pattern is repeatedly used in\n[風林火山](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C5%ABrinkazan), a famous battle\nstandard by Takeda Shingen (full text and translation to modern Japanese are\navailable [here](https://kanbun.info/koji/furin.html)).\n\n**EDIT:** Note that ～こと～のごとし should usually be avoided in an informal\nsituation like the one shown in the picture. 天使のごときかわいさだ and 天使のごとくかわいい are\nalready fairly literary, but かわいいこと天使のごとし sounds even more pompous and kind of\nfeels as if a Shakespeare play suddenly started.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T02:03:51.620",
"id": "91297",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T06:13:48.357",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T06:13:48.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91296",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91296 | 91297 | 91297 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91303",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why don't dictionaries include this kind of things? Do Japanese ones do?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T06:09:24.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91302",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T06:37:16.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "41400",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "Is 茂る a stative verb?",
"view_count": 59
} | [
{
"body": "茂る is a punctual (instant state-change) verb (aka 瞬間動詞). That is,\nこの森には様々な木が茂っている almost certainly means that the forest is full of (already-\ngrown) various trees, not that various trees are in the process of growing\nnow.\n\n> Why don't dictionaries include this kind of things?\n\nUnlike the verb conjugation patterns (godan, ichidan, etc.), the differences\nbetween action/stative/punctual are often blurry, and it's almost impossible\nto perfectly categorize them. See discussions about\n[溶けている](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3140/5010) and\n[寝ている](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/57195/5010).\n\n> Do Japanese ones do?\n\nUnfortunately, no.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T06:37:16.153",
"id": "91303",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T06:37:16.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91302",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91302 | 91303 | 91303 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91331",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> いたずらに会議体を作って、賛否両論を並べ、これ以上時間を費やすのは賢明とは思えません。([source](https://www.toshiharu-\n> furukawa.jp/2012/5))\n>\n> しかし、何時までも状況改善を待つことは賢明とは思えません。([source](https://www.kodomo-\n> kai.or.jp/kochi/2021_unei_hoshin/))\n>\n>\n> 今日のあなたの服装はとても仕事向きの服装とは思えませんが。([source](https://kakiokoshi.hatenablog.com/entry/2016/11/03/155340))\n\nI am under the impression after a 名詞/形容動詞, 「だとは思えません」 and the だ-less 「とは思えません」\nboth seem to occur. But I've always learned that と思う calls for だ if the it\nfollows a 名詞/形容動詞. What's happening? Is it the particle は or the structure\n思えない that's key to this change?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T08:06:49.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91305",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T08:42:41.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"copula",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "It seems だ can be omitted in とは思う?",
"view_count": 130
} | [
{
"body": "I’m not sure if this と should be grammatically categorized as quotative. If it\nis, the quoted part consists of only the adjective 賢明 in the first and second\nsentences, and only the noun phrase 仕事向きの服装 in the third, as what precedes\nthem in each sentence (excluding the adverb とても in the third) is the topic of\nthe main clause and not part of the quote.\n\nFor the sake of explanation, let me take out the main part of the second\nsentence as an example and mark the quoted part with brackets.\n\n> 1. 状況改善を待つことは［賢明］とは思えません。\n>\n\nThis sentence (#1) sounds no less natural to me than the following version\nwith だ (#2).\n\n> 2. 状況改善を待つことは［賢明だ］とは思えません。\n>\n\nNow, let us replace the topic marker は with が to put the topic into the quote\nas the subject.\n\n> 3. ［状況改善を待つことが賢明］とは思えません。\n> 4. ［状況改善を待つことが賢明だ］とは思えません。\n>\n\nIf the と is indeed quotative, I would expect the latter (#4) to sound much\nmore natural than the former (#3). However, this doesn’t seem to be the case\nas the version without だ (#3) still sounds natural enough to me.\n\nIn contrast, of the following pair, in which とは思えません is changed to と思います to\nmake the と undoubtedly quotative, the former (#5) does sound significantly\nless natural than the latter (#6).\n\n> 5. ［状況改善を待つことが賢明］と思います。(?)\n> 6. ［状況改善を待つことが賢明だ］と思います。\n>\n\nThis unnaturalness remains after the contrastive は is restored, too.\n\n> 7. ［状況改善を待つことが賢明］とは思います。(?)\n> 8. ［状況改善を待つことが賢明だ］とは思います。\n>\n\nThis leads me to think that, despite the verb 思う, the と in `Ａが／はＢとは思わない／思えない`\nmay better be understood along the same lines as that in such expressions as\n`Ａが／はＢとは限らない` than as a typical quotative と as in `Ｘと思う`.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T08:42:41.593",
"id": "91331",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T08:42:41.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91305",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91305 | 91331 | 91331 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> ふと、昼間の話を思い出した。\n>\n> 死神。自殺者さえ出している。人の死を **どうとも思わない** 、──エイティシックスの。\n>\n> どんな、人だろうか。\n>\n> わたし達を、──やはり、嫌っているのだろうか。\n\nFrom 86─エイティシックス─ 安里アサト\n\nDoes the bold part mean “indifferent to people’s death”. If it does, why does\nどうとも思わない mean that? How should I parse it? Are there any similar expressions?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T13:58:00.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91307",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T16:16:47.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Understanding どうとも思わない",
"view_count": 166
} | [
{
"body": "I believe you know how to parse the `interrogative + も + negation` pattern.\nFor example, you can say どこへも行くな \"don't go anywhere\", 何も見つからなかった \"could not\nfind anything\", 誰にも分からない \"no one knows\", 門はいつも開いてない \"the gate is always\nclosed\", いつまでも忘れません \"will remember this forever\" and so on.\n\nLikewise, 人の死をどうとも思わない means the subject thinks nothing about someone's death\n(a more literal translation is \"not to regard someone's death as anything\";\nremember the AをBと思う pattern). 人の死を何【なん】とも思わない means the same thing.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T15:37:01.447",
"id": "91308",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T16:16:47.977",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T16:16:47.977",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91307",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91307 | null | 91308 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91310",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「お前それさえ言っときゃ済むと思ってんな!? 謝れっつってんじゃねえよ改善しろっつってんだよ。いつか死ぬぞあんな無茶な戦い方しやがって！\n> 代えの部品が底ついたってのに、次の補充まで修理できねぇぞ！」\n>\n> 「二号機が」\n>\n> 「ああ有るなぁどっかの戦隊長が毎っ回毎っ回機体ぶっ壊すせいで置いてある予備が二機 **もな** ！\n> 他のプロセッサーの三倍も整備の手間かけさせやがって、てめぇ何様だ王子様か!?」\n\nFrom 86─エイティシックス─ 安里アサト\n\nHow should I understand the もな? I know な is an end particle for seeking\nagreement. But what is the も? Is anything omitted after もな?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T16:55:29.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91309",
"last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T23:46:25.623",
"last_edit_date": "2023-04-16T23:46:25.623",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-も"
],
"title": "Understanding もな",
"view_count": 111
} | [
{
"body": "This も is for indicating the marked number is large; \"no fewer than\" or \"as\nmany as\". Nothing is omitted in this sentence, but the verb that normally\ncomes after the も is found at the beginning of the sentence (倒置/anastrophe).\nIn the normal word order, the sentence in question is:\n\n> ああ、(どっかの戦隊長が毎っ回毎っ回機体ぶっ壊すせいで置いてある→)予備が **二機も有るなぁ** ！\n>\n> Indeed, there are (not one but) TWO spares (←I keep coz some commander I\n> know destroys his unit every single time)!\n>\n> (どっかの戦隊長 is indirectly referring to \"you\".)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T17:13:08.957",
"id": "91310",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T02:35:47.263",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T02:35:47.263",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91309",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91309 | 91310 | 91310 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91316",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ylkgw.jpg)\n\nI am torn between three meanings:\n\n * It's ok if you don't need it (You don't want it)\n * If you don't need it, then ok (I'll take it)\n * I don't need it, but ok (I'll take it)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T19:31:32.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91311",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T01:55:47.587",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-22T20:51:45.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "33869",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "Meaning of 「いらないなら、いいけど 」",
"view_count": 125
} | [
{
"body": "It means \"If you don't want this, I don't mind\", but the implication depends\non the situation.\n\n * If the girl is trying to give this doll to someone (which is likely), the text means \"If you don't want this, I don't mind (and I'll keep this with me)\".\n * If someone is trying to push this doll to this girl (which I don't think is very likely unless she is _tsundere_ ), the text means \"If you don't want this, I don't mind (and I'll receive it)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T00:36:50.587",
"id": "91316",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T01:55:47.587",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T01:55:47.587",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91311",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91311 | 91316 | 91316 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know the 2 words mean \"sharp\". 切れ味 is a noun while 鋭い is an i-adjective.\nLooking at an example sentence, it looks like 切れ味鋭い means \"sharp\" too:\n\n> ステーキは切れ味鋭いステーキナイフがないと食べにくいよね。\n>\n> If (you) don’t have (a) sharp steak knife, steak is hard to eat.\n\nIf the two words separately means sharp, isn't it redundant to use the two\ntogether?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T21:48:42.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91312",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T22:54:32.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45590",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What's the literal translation for 切れ味鋭い?",
"view_count": 56
} | [
{
"body": "切れ味 as a noun describes the sharpness of certain things like knives or mental\nacuteness. Thinking of it as \"level\" or \"degree\" of sharpness might help you\nbetter understand its use in tandem with 鋭い. Synonyms sharing the sense of\nsharpness of knives include 切れ and 切れ具合.\n\nYou can say 切れ味のいいナイフ or 切れ味の鋭いナイフ, and they pretty much mean the same thing.\nRedundant? Maybe, but it's nothing out of the ordinary. This occurs in many\nlanguages. This kind of construction may not be as common in English, but it\ndoes occur. For example, we say \"good quality steaks\" in a similar manner, but\nwe can also say \"good steaks\", or even \"quality steaks\" where quality itself\nfunctions as a noun adjunct (or adjective, this is inconclusive and depends on\nwhat dictionary you look at).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-22T22:54:32.210",
"id": "91313",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-22T22:54:32.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91312",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91312 | null | 91313 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I know that Japanese emperors are referred to as 天皇 rather than 皇帝 which is\nused for almost all emperors outside of Japan including Europe, Asia, Africa,\nand the Americas but does the same thing apply to Japanese princesses and\nprinces? Are modern and ancient/Feudal Japan princesses and princes referred\nto by another word? How would you refer to a princess or prince in a Japanese\nfairytale?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T00:19:43.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91315",
"last_activity_date": "2022-12-19T03:00:56.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48706",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Are Japanese princesses and princes referred to by a different word in Japanese than princesses and princes outside of Japan?",
"view_count": 3443
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think you can find a lot of princes and princesses in Japanese\n昔話{むかしばなし} (legends/folktales) to begin with. One example that I can think of\nis 乙姫{おとひめ} in 『浦島太郎』 who is depicted as a princess from the Dragon Palace.\nThere is also 豊玉姫{トヨタマヒメ} (Toyotama-hime) from 『日本書紀』, daughter of sea god\n海神｛ワタツミ｝.\n\n姫{ひめ}(お姫様) is used in translated names and titles of Western fair tale and\nfolklore princesses, such as 白雪姫{しらゆきひめ} (Snow White), but the concept is\nessentially different. A European style prince is called 王子{おうじ}(王子様) in\nJapanese translation.\n\nBut it should be noted that the word 姫 is not restricted to princesses. かぐや姫\nin 『竹取物語{たけとりものがたり}』 is not a princess by Western definition.\n\nNow, the first part of your question: how are members of the Japanese royal\nfamily addressed and referred to?\n\nI believe in the news Japanese princes and princesses are simply referred to\nas name + さま/様. Example:\n\n> 宮内庁関係者はため息をつく。11月6日に執り行われた、 **紀子さま** の父・川嶋辰彦さんの葬儀。秋篠宮ご夫妻、 **佳子さま** 、\n> **悠仁さま**\n> だけでなく、小室眞子さん、圭さん夫妻も駆けつけたのだ。([source](https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/188d05bb1e20daeaab9a691baa787e41c931f8e4))\n\nNote that [Princess\nAkishino](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiko,_Princess_Akishino) is referred\nto as 紀子さま, [Princess\nKako](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Kako_of_Akishino) 佳子さま, [Prince\nHisahito](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino) 悠仁さま,\nwhile people who are not considered members of the royal house are referred to\nusing the more modest さん title.\n[小室眞子さん](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mako_Komuro) is addressed as such\nbecause she has given up her title and thus is no longer a member of the royal\nhouse.\n\nWhen you talk to members of the royal house or write to them, you are supposed\nto address them as 殿下{でんか}. Their titles are 内親王{ないしんのう}, 女王{じょおう}, 親王{しんのう},\nor 親王妃{しんのうひ}, depending on their relations to the emperor and their standing\nin the royal house. These words are translated to prince/princess in English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T01:24:14.553",
"id": "91317",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T01:31:04.707",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T01:31:04.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91315",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The situation is complicated because there are several words for _prince_ and\n_princess_.\n\n * **王子** is the primary translation for _prince_. However, Japanese Emperor's son is almost always called 皇太子, not 王子. Note that this is a tricky title that has been given to various type of people under various rules (see [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince)).\n\n * **皇太子** refers strictly to Emperor's son who will be the next Emperor (sometimes referred to as _crown prince_ ). It mainly refers to Japanese 天皇's son now, but technically it can refer to the King's son in any country. (By the way, the current Japanese emperor does not have a son, so Japan has no 皇太子 now.)\n\n * **親王** refers to any male member of the royal family who is not the current or former Emperor. 皇太子 is also technically a 親王, although he is almost never called a 親王 in practice. Like 皇太子, it was often used to refer to foreign princes in the past, but now it usually refers to Japanese princes.\n\n * **王女** is the primary translation for _princess_. The female equivalent of 王子.\n\n * **内親王** refers to any female member of the royal family who is not the wife of the current/former Emperor. Now this usually refers to Japanese princesses.\n\nIn summary:\n\n| Japanese | English | Example \n---|---|---|--- \nJapanese Emperor's son | 皇太子 | Prince | (vacant) \nJapanese Emperor's brother/nephew | 親王 | Prince | [Prince\nFumihito](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumihito,_Prince_Akishino), [Prince\nHisahito](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino) \nJapanese Emperor's daughter | 内親王 | Princess | [Princess\nAiko](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aiko,_Princess_Toshi) \nJapanese Emperor's sister/niece | 内親王 | Princess | [Princess\nSayako](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayako_Kuroda) (formerly), [Princess\nKako](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Kako_of_Akishino) \nWestern1 Emperor/King's son | 王子 (sometimes 皇太子) | Prince | \nWestern Emperor/King's brother/nephew | 王子 (rarely 親王) | (Prince) | \nWestern Emperor/King's daughter | 王女 (sometimes 皇太子2, rarely 皇太王女2) | Princess\n| \nWestern Emperor/King's sister/niece | 王女 (rarely 内親王) | (Princess) | \n \n1: For some Asian countries, the situation is more complicated because they\nmay have shared naming conventions with Japan. \n2: Used only if she is the next Empress/Queen.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T01:34:55.500",
"id": "91318",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T00:05:02.443",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-13T00:05:02.443",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91315",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "Found the answer to what I was looking for and it is 皇子 for prince (imperial\nprince) and 皇女 for princess (imperial princess).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-12-19T03:00:56.357",
"id": "97694",
"last_activity_date": "2022-12-19T03:00:56.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48706",
"parent_id": "91315",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91315 | null | 91318 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "93382",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "よみに・よむことに・よむために\n\n> **よみ** に家にかえる。 \n> **よむの** に家にかえる。 \n> **よむため** に家にかえる。 \n>\n\nWhat is the difference between the above? \nWhat best fits the English translation \"I will go home to read\"? \nPlease explain why and when each applies?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T02:25:56.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91319",
"last_activity_date": "2022-02-12T19:58:43.253",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T06:52:22.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "48800",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "よみに・よむのに・よむために difference",
"view_count": 142
} | [
{
"body": "> よみに家にかえる。 \n> よむのに家にかえる。 \n> よむために家にかえる。 \n>\n\nSentences have the same fundamental meaning although differ in formality,\nBottom sentence being formal and top being informal,",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T04:44:06.650",
"id": "91323",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T04:44:06.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48800",
"parent_id": "91319",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "The first sentence and the last sentence makes perfect sense to me it is\nbasically saying that the person will return back home to read. However the\nsecond sentence is going over my head but it could possibly mean the same\nthing as the other sentences. I'm just confused on the Noni part of the\nsentence.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-02-12T19:58:43.253",
"id": "93382",
"last_activity_date": "2022-02-12T19:58:43.253",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "50544",
"parent_id": "91319",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91319 | 93382 | 93382 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91322",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I first heard 「っていねえし」 or similar phrases used as an expression of\nsurprise when the speaker finds their intended audience is not there any more\nor doesn't exist to begin with, I thought it was 「でいねえし」, で (それで/そこで) meaning\n\"so\" or \"well\". But it seems to be って.\n\n> 「すみませーん。クラスメート熱あるみたいで…っていねえし」 \n>\n> 保健室についたが人気が感じられない。([source](https://www.pixiv.net/novel/show.php?id=14385916))\n\n>\n> 「ま、いいかぁ。じゃ、とどめを‥‥っていねえし」([source](https://www.pixiv.net/novel/show.php?id=16415722))\n\nIf it's quotative and the contraction of と, can I understand it as coming from\none of these:\n\n> ○○と言ったところで人は(もう)いないことに気付いた\n\n> ○○と言ったところ、人は(もう)いないことに気付いた\n\n> ○○と言いたいが、気が付くと、人は(もう)いないし\n\n> ○○と言っているけど、気が付くと、人は(もう)いないし",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T02:59:58.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91320",
"last_activity_date": "2022-10-04T11:18:04.393",
"last_edit_date": "2022-10-04T11:18:04.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "10531",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"colloquial-language",
"particle-って"
],
"title": "How should I understand って in 「っていねえし」?",
"view_count": 207
} | [
{
"body": "This type of って is a distinct phrase used when a conversation or a plan was\nunexpectedly interrupted by something urgent. It's like \"wait\", \"um\" or \"oh\".\n\n * それで昨日ね……って、聞いてる？ \nAnd yesterday... Wait, are you listening?\n\n * これを買って……って、3万円!? 高っ! \nI'll buy this and...what, 30,000 yen!? So expensive!\n\nNone of the dictionaries I checked explains this usage, but I also suppose\nthis derived from the quotative-って used at the beginning of a sentence.\nPerhaps something like と言いつつ (\"while saying this; meanwhile\") or\n[と言うか](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/85967/5010) was shortened to って.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T04:21:39.017",
"id": "91322",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T04:34:05.317",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T04:34:05.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91320",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91320 | 91322 | 91322 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91324",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is a sentence which would appear in a math exam paper.\n\n> Xの値を求めよ。(Find the value of X.)\n\nWhat kind of conjugation is this 求めよ and how does it work?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T04:15:06.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91321",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T04:44:27.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38770",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"conjugations"
],
"title": "What is this よ in 値を求めよ?",
"view_count": 58
} | [
{
"body": "As you probably know, 求める is an ichidan verb, and the imperative form you\nencounter most commonly is 求めろ. But if we delve deeper into 活用, it also has\nanother [imperative\nform](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugation#%E5%91%BD%E4%BB%A4%E5%BD%A2)\n(命令形), more formal in register and more literary in style: 求めよ.\n\nThe conjugation of 求める falls under\n[下一段活用](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%8B%E4%B8%80%E6%AE%B5%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8).\nSo to answer your question: 求めよ is 求める's literary imperative form.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T04:44:27.300",
"id": "91324",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T04:44:27.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91321",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91321 | 91324 | 91324 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91327",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As is well known there are many different dialects in Japan. There are many\nexamples where the vocabulary, the grammar and/or the pronunciation are\ndifferent in different dialects. It recently occurred to me that the 読み of a\n漢字 may be dependent on the dialect as well.\n\nFor example, I am wondering whether 赤い is always read as あかい regardless of the\ndialect, even though the pronunciation of あかい may be different in different\ndialects. To give another example, if 日本 appears in an article, is it always\nread as if にほん or にっぽん had been written there, or are there any chances that\nit would be interpreted as something else in terms of kanas based on dialects.\n\nTo reiterate, I am not asking about the differences in pronunciations between\ndialects, I am asking whether the way a 漢字 is interpreted in terms of kanas\n(that is how 読み is usually defined) can be different in different dialects. I\nwould also like to exclude 名乗り読み and the names of places since those are a\nlittle bit too convoluted. I am also aware that the accents may be different\nin different dialects (the classsical example being various 漢字 read as はし), I\nam interested in differences beyond the accents. I have done a little\npreliminary research on the topic and it seems the answer is that the 読み are\nalways the same (I may be using the wrong keywords though), but I would like\nto confirm this is indeed the case.\n\nI would really appreciate it if anyone can confirm that it is indeed the case,\nor if it is not, provide a non-exhaustive list of cases where the 読み are\ndifferent in different dialects.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T08:34:51.407",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91325",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T15:58:54.317",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T09:28:42.450",
"last_editor_user_id": "27389",
"owner_user_id": "27389",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"readings",
"dialects"
],
"title": "Are there cases where a 漢字 in a given context has a different 読み just because it is spoken in a different dialect?",
"view_count": 133
} | [
{
"body": "It's up to the author whether to write a certain dialectal word in kana or in\nkanji with furigana. For example, there are [many words for\n_snail_](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48721/5010) in Japanese, most of\nwhich are typically written in kana but have also been assigned to the kanji\n蝸牛 as _jukujikun_. You can read [this\npage](https://furigana.info/w/%E8%9D%B8%E7%89%9B) to see various furigana have\nbeen actually put on top of 蝸牛 by novelists from various parts of Japan\n(蝸牛【かぎゅう】, 蝸牛【かたつむり】, 蝸牛【でんでんむし】, 蝸牛【なめくずら】, 蝸牛【まいまいつぶろ】...). Therefore, it is\nonly natural to me that different dialects can have different ways of reading\na kanji word.\n\nNow you may ask: Would an average speaker of modern standard Japanese ever\nintentionally change the reading of a certain kanji word because a certain\ndialect is being used? Aside from proper nouns, I don't think there are many\nsuch examples, but one example would be 海人; the ordinary reading of this is\nあま, but even Tokyoites may read it as うみんちゅ when they know the context is\nrelated to Okinawa.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T10:20:06.797",
"id": "91327",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T15:58:54.317",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-23T15:58:54.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91325 | 91327 | 91327 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "In the song \"my code\" by GARNiDELiA, there're these two lines:\n\n> 噛｛か｝み締｛し｝めた痛｛いた｝みも 消｛け｝せない傷跡｛きずあと｝も\n>\n> 私｛わたし｝が私として在｛あ｝るために\n\nI understand what the second line means, and I've read other posts on this\nsite about ある being used for people in some cases, but I'd like to know how\nthe feel of this line would change if いる was used instead.\n\nAlso, everything I've read specifically says 在る with that kanji is used for\ninanimate objects, so why would it be used here to talk about 私?\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-23T16:36:30.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91328",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T15:45:56.850",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-24T15:45:56.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "30841",
"owner_user_id": "30841",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "Nuance of 在る for a person in this song",
"view_count": 86
} | [] | 91328 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91330",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> アニメが日本語に興味を持ったきっかけというのもあったし、普通にアニメも好きだったんです。\n\nI don't understand how the part \"アニメが日本語に興味を持った\" can be a modifier for the\nnoun きっかけ if I'm talking about myself. The way I would go about translating it\nis probably \"a きっかけ where/in which etc. the anime was interested in Japanese\"\nwhich is a little funny. There's definitely much more I'm missing though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T01:11:30.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91329",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T04:31:22.210",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-24T03:28:53.950",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "40705",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "How to parse アニメが日本語に興味を持ったきっかけ",
"view_count": 138
} | [
{
"body": "The relative clause that modifies きっかけ is 日本語に興味を持った excluding アニメが. And the\nsubject of this 持った is not アニメ but 私 (which is implied; of course an anime\ndoesn't have an interest in something). アニメ(が) is the subject of きっかけだ.\n\n> アニメが[( **私が** )日本語に興味を持った→]きっかけだ。\n>\n> (literally) Anime is the trigger [←with which **I** got an interest in\n> Japanese].\n>\n> → Anime is what got me interested in Japanese.\n\nThis is something you eventually need to get intuitively. Note that many\nEnglish sentences would look equally ambiguous if you don't have the context\nand the knowledge of which word is used with which word. Please read [my\nprevious answer here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/46822/5010), too.\nIf you are feeling brave, take a look at questions tagged with [ambiguous-\nrelative-clauses](/questions/tagged/ambiguous-relative-clauses \"show questions\ntagged 'ambiguous-relative-clauses'\").\n\nIn case you've missed it, you can read how this 普通に works\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/63329/5010).\n\n(～というの)もある is a way of giving multiple reasons. というの nominalizes the preceding\nclause, and もある says such a thing/situation exists. A very literal translation\nis \"a fact/situation that ～ also exists\".\n\n * 時間がないというのもあるし、お金がないというのもある。 \n(It's not only because) I don't have time, but (also because) I don't have\nmoney, either.\n\n * それも確かにありますが、一番の理由は彼女が努力したことです。 \nThat's indeed one reason, but the main reason is that she made the effort.\n\n* * *\n\n> アニメが日本語に興味を持ったきっかけというのもあったし、普通にアニメも好きだったんです。\n>\n> (For one reason,) anime was what got me interested in Japanese, and (for\n> another) I simply liked anime.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T01:21:37.783",
"id": "91330",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T04:31:22.210",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-24T04:31:22.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91329",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91329 | 91330 | 91330 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91337",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「クジョーの奴は、ばらばらに吹っ飛ん **だんだったか** 」\n>\n> 「ええ」\n>\n>\n> 自走地雷──爆薬の詰まった胴体に棒状の手足と顔のない頭部のついた、遠目には人に見えなくもない出来の悪い対人兵器を負傷兵と見誤って組みつかれた。夜戦の、他部隊の救援任務中だった。\n>\n> 「そりゃあよかった。逝けたのか、あいつは」\n>\n> 「おそらくは」\n\nFrom 86─エイティシックス─ 安里アサト\n\nThe speaker was recalling that his comrade クジョー was killed by some kind of\nlandmine.\n\nMy grammar book says the 〜のだった is used when you recall some past event\nemotionally. And with 〜たのだった, there is an extra nuance that you want to\nconfirm the past single event when you recall it.\n\nI think this explanation applies to the bold example and the か at the end of\nsentence emphasize the confirmation tone.\n\nAm I on the right track?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T13:46:38.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91332",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T00:02:55.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Understanding た form+のだった+か",
"view_count": 198
} | [
{
"body": "Yes you're on the right track.\n\n * 吹っ飛んだ。 \n→ neutrally describes a past event\n\n * 吹っ飛んだ **んだ** 。 \n→ with explanatory-no\n\n * 吹っ飛んだん **だった** 。 \n→ with [modal-ta](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/85949/5010), adds a\nnuance of \"I (emotionally) recall\" or \"I just recalled/noticed\"\n\n * 吹っ飛んだんだった **か** 。 \n→ with the question marker to confirm, \"..., huh?\"\n\nSo the speaker just recalled the past fact (ばらばらに吹っ飛んだ), but added \"huh\" since\nhe was not completely sure.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T00:02:55.940",
"id": "91337",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T00:02:55.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91332 | 91337 | 91337 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 「他のプロセッサーの三倍も整備の手間をかけさせてるのもおれですが」\n>\n> ぐっとアルドレヒトは喉を鳴らした。サングラスの奥から苦々しげに見下ろしてくる双眸を、見返してシンは肩をすくめる。\n>\n> 「ったくおめぇは……たまに冗談言ったと思ったらそれかよ」\n>\n> 「これでも申し訳ないと思ってはいるんです。行動で示せてはいませんが」\n>\n> 「馬鹿野郎。お前らガキどもを生きて **帰らせん**\n> のが整備班の仕事だ。そのために必要だってんなら機体なんざどうなろうが構やしねぇし、どんな手間だってかけてやるよ」\n\nFrom 86─エイティシックス─ 安里アサト\n\nIs the bold 帰らせん the same as 帰らせる?\n\nIt’s our job to make sure you kids come back in one piece.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T15:31:12.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91333",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T15:31:12.167",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"dialects",
"dialogue"
],
"title": "Is the 帰らせん the same as 帰らせる?",
"view_count": 55
} | [] | 91333 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 一つの時代の積み重ねが新たな伝説を生み、ここにまた一人のヒーローが誕生した。ロックマン\n> ([source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiH35lzjXTc))\n\nHere are two translations I have:\n\n> _The culmination of one era gives birth to a new legend, and here again\n> another hero is born._\n\n> _The efforts of an era gave birth to a new legend, and here again another\n> hero is born._\n\nI'm not sure if を生み is supposed to be を生み出した. Nor do I know what tense it\ncould possibly mean exactly.\n\nIs it \"gave birth\", \"gives birth\", \"will give birth\", \"has given birth\", or\n\"produces a new legend\", \"created a new legend\"?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T17:50:43.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91334",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T19:29:47.783",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-24T19:29:47.783",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "32890",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"kanji",
"syntax",
"tense",
"kana"
],
"title": "What is the correct tense for を生み?",
"view_count": 78
} | [
{
"body": "As Japanese, を生み has no tense at all. Tense for this only exists when\ntranslating into a language that requires a tense.\n\nIn your given context, を生み occurs within a longer statement that ends with\n誕生した -- past tense, and the only tense in the entire sentence. So if we were\nforced to translate を生み here into an expression that has tense, the past tense\nmight be appropriate. That said, I personally like\n@[A.Ellett](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/4875/)'s suggestion of\nside-stepping the issue, and using _\" giving birth to\"_, a construction in\nEnglish that itself doesn't really have tense.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T18:53:52.223",
"id": "91335",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-24T18:53:52.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91334",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91334 | null | 91335 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is a word that means support, in a sense of not actually doing any\ncheering or rooting for, but thinking that they are the best and will\ntherefore win?\n\nFor context, I'm translating a WEBTOON (about a fighting tournament), and one\nof the characters declares that another character, in terms of strength, is a\nleague above the competition. However, that character gets knocked out in a\nsingle blow from the main character. The text that I'm translating is\nbasically a side note kind of thing explaining that that character is\nembarrassed that the one they were supporting got knocked out in a single\npunch.\n\nMy first thought was 応援, but that's more along the line of cheering/rooting\nfor, and is a bit different. The other is 支持, but that's used more for support\nfor a person's idea/claim. I was also thinking 推薦, but that's more along the\nlines of nominate, and the character didn't explicitly nominate the other\ncharacter for anything position, just declared the characters strength is\nabove the rest, and is therefore a strong candidate for victor.\n\nAre there any words that would make sense in this scenario? It's not necessary\nthat it be one word, but ideally, due to space constraints , I'm trying to\nhave the translation be something along the lines of \"第三話で----していた[character\nname]がワンパンされたことを恥じらっている, where ____ is the word I'm looking for.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-24T22:15:02.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91336",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T17:16:28.833",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T17:16:28.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "45375",
"owner_user_id": "45375",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-requests"
],
"title": "Word that means support (in the sense of thinking they will win)",
"view_count": 69
} | [
{
"body": "I doubt there is a single Japanese verb that means \"to think they will win\",\nbut you can say 勝つと思っていた側, 勝つはずだった方, etc. Or you can perhaps rephrase the\nsentence and say something like \"あいつが勝つと思ってたんだが、まさかワンパンで破れるとは\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T00:23:10.587",
"id": "91338",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T00:23:10.587",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91336",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91336 | null | 91338 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91340",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> けど、昔の自分に会えたら、言ってますよ。そんな悪い癖染み付く前にとっととやめろって。\n\nI am not sure why 言っている is used rather than 言う. I would expect する after the\nconditional, e.g.「友達に会えれば、買い物に行きます。」([Tae\nKim](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/conditional.html))\n\nI would've used these:\n\n> 昔の自分に会えたら、言いますよ\n>\n> 昔の自分に会えたら、言ってやりたいですよ。\n>\n> 昔の自分に会えたら、言ってやりますよ。\n\nMost examples I have been able to find online use する:\n\n> 過去の自分に会えたら、なんて伝える\n\n> いまあのときの自分に会えたらどうしますか？\n\nI only found one instance with している\n\n>\n> いつかお兄さんに会えたら話せるように韓国語を頑張って勉強してるんです！([source](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1068266225))\n\nThis is the second aspect question I have asked in recent weeks, and it seems\nto be a different issue from\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/91279).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T01:36:05.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91339",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T03:45:58.463",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T01:45:28.233",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"aspect"
],
"title": "Why 言ってます instead of 言います in 昔の自分に会えたら、言ってますよ?",
"view_count": 99
} | [
{
"body": "This condition 昔の自分に会えたら is an unreal one. The ている form is used to describe a\ncurrent state you would be in if that condition were satisfied, rather than an\naction you would take then.\n\n> If I were able to meet the old me, I **would have (by now) told him** to\n> stop a vice like that before it became a habit.\n\nAll your three sentences are perfectly fine.\n\nYour last example is different. It simply describes what the speaker is doing\nnow for when some event happens in the future.\n\n* * *\n\n[EDIT]\n\nAn alternative interpretation is this ている form describes a continuous action.\n\n> If I were able to meet the old me, I **would be (constantly) telling him**\n> to stop a vice like that before it became a habit.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T03:41:35.390",
"id": "91340",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T03:45:58.463",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T03:45:58.463",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91339",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91339 | 91340 | 91340 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91344",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "(I hope to _never_ be this rude to someone by saying such a phrase.)\n\nContext: I would like to use it as a caption for a piece of art for a game,\nwhere a character unlocks a type of weapon after a certain level. Insulted, he\nsays, `You call this toy an \"X\" weapon?` The character thinks it's a toy due\nto how it looks, and is in disbelief as to why people call it `X`. (The `X` is\na proper noun, usually written as katakana. The character has a strong skill\nwith the same name, hence his confusion.)\n\nIt has the same tone as, `You call that a date? (We just ate at McDonald's.)`\nor `You call this an essay? (It's hardly five sentences!)`\n\nFrom what I know, I would phrase it as, `こんなおもちゃなんて、「X」というのか？`\n\nIs it natural? Does it mean what I think it means? Is there another way to\nexpress this type of sentence better?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T15:16:21.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91341",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T19:09:59.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese",
"casual"
],
"title": "How to say, \"You call this toy an 'X'?\"",
"view_count": 72
} | [
{
"body": "だと言うのか can be contracted to だってのか\n\nThese are some of the ways I would say it:\n\n> あれがXだってのか？\n>\n> あれをXと呼ぶのか？\n>\n> Xだと？\n>\n> Xだというのか？\n>\n> こんなおもちゃなんて、Xと呼ぶつもり？\n>\n> これがX(か)？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T19:09:59.720",
"id": "91344",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T19:09:59.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91341",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91341 | 91344 | 91344 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Python programming language documentation contains this sentence describing a\nfunction argument usage:\n\n> モックが特定の呼び出しで呼ばれたことをアサートします。呼び出しでは _mock_calls_ のリストがチェックされます。\n>\n> _any_order_ が _false_\n> の場合(デフォルト)、呼び出しは連続していなければなりません。指定された呼び出しの前、あるいは呼び出しの後に余分な呼び出しがある場合があります。\n\nThe last sentence sounds to me like having a meaning like this.\n\n> There are cases when there are extra calls before or after the specified\n> calls.\n\nThe original English description is worded:\n\n> There can be extra calls before or after the specified calls.\n\nWhich can be understood as proposed above. Like, I specify some expected calls\nand there is a possibility of the _mock_calls_ list containing some extra.\n\nBut the actual meaning of the “there can be” is different here. It means that\nthe assertion succeeds even if there are extra calls. Like, you can use it\neven if there are more calls than those specified. And in this sense, the\nJapanese translation seems to me like it doesn’t fit.\n\nCan “場合がある” convey this meaning of possibility of doing something under given\ncircumstances? It it a mistranslation? I’d expect something more like\n\n> […]余分な呼び出しがあってもいいです。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T17:14:46.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91342",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T20:25:47.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"programming"
],
"title": "Can 場合がある mean “you can”?",
"view_count": 74
} | [
{
"body": "I _think_ it's just a mistranslation. Out of context, that sentence can\ntechnically mean both. I've looked at Python's\n[translations](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0545/) projects and they\nseem to be done by the community, so it could've been anyone. In fact, there\nis already an [issue](https://github.com/python-doc-ja/python-doc-\nja/issues/897) opened for the mock package on the Github project, so I\nwouldn't be surprised if there's more. You could open a new issue linking this\nquestion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T20:20:03.707",
"id": "91345",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T20:25:47.850",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T20:25:47.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "45176",
"owner_user_id": "45176",
"parent_id": "91342",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91342 | null | 91345 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm reading [this story](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-lessons/1-2-the-\nnorth-wind-and-the-sun/) and am trying to understand the structure of this\nsentence:\n\n> 二人{ふたり}とも自{じ}分{ぶん}の話{はなし}ばかりして、人{ひと}の話{はなし}を聞{き}きません。\n\nIn the second part, 話 is used with the direct object particle を as I would\nhave expected. But in the first part, where I would also have expected 話をして,\nthere's no を. Why is that? Apparently ばかり is also a particle (says [this\npage](https://www.thoughtco.com/japanese-particle-bakari-2027853)) – does it\ndisplace を, like は sometimes does? But [this page](https://www.wasabi-\njpn.com/japanese-grammar/expressions-for-numbers-and-amounts/#3) says that ばかり\ncan be combined with が and を.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T17:57:12.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91343",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T17:57:12.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1378",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Why is there no を in 二人とも自分の話ばかりして?",
"view_count": 60
} | [] | 91343 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91350",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> **(A)** ハワイからおみやげにマカダミア•ナッツを買って来る\n>\n\n>> I'll buy you guys a gift of macadamia nuts in Hawaii\n\n> **(B)** ハワイからマカダミア•ナッツのおみやげを買って来る\n\nI suppose に here indicates the purpose of the action like in the following:\n\n> あなたはテレビゲームにお金を使いすぎます\n\nIf that's the case, would **B** sound unnatural because the noun modifier is\ntoo long?\n\nFrom the same book, の is being used instead in another example, but the noun\nmodifier is shorter:\n\n> 田中さんのうちへ行く時、チーズのおみやげを持って行こう。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-25T23:56:11.047",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91348",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-26T01:37:56.620",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-26T00:06:18.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "45630",
"owner_user_id": "45630",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why is に used instead of の? 「ハワイからおみやげにマカダミア•ナッツを買って来る」",
"view_count": 41
} | [
{
"body": "That に is a role/function marker like _as_ in English. See the following\nquestions:\n\n * [に to indicate the role you want something to play?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65432/5010)\n * [grammar of 前の誕生日プレゼントにもらった彼女の絵](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/73351/5010)\n * [Meaning of にと思って in a sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55453/5010)\n\nマカダミアナッツのおみやげを買う is not wrong, but it's more natural to use おみやげに. の in ～のおみやげ\nis more commonly used as a possession marker rather than an apposition marker\n(e.g., 彼のお土産 is \"his gift\" or \"gift for him\"). If you want to use an\n[appositive の](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/40896/5010),\nおみやげのマカデミアナッツを買う sounds better (although it's still less common than おみやげに). I\ndon't think the length of マカデミアナッツ matters here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T01:37:56.620",
"id": "91350",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-26T01:37:56.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91348",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91348 | 91350 | 91350 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been using HelloTalk for a while now, and one correction I got was that\n「manga series)って聞いたことがありますか？」 was wrong, and that the correct way to say it is\n「(manga series)って聞いたことありますか？」\n\nI understand basic grammar, but I've never been able to figure out why I\nsometimes see this grammar point written as 「たことがある」and other times written as\n「たことある」. Is there some kind of nuance here, or? I understand that particles\nare sometimes dropped, but is there a reason behind the が not being used here?\n\nThis was the post, though for the って I accidentally wrote it as が and was\ncorrected before I could edit it in my original post. I'm terrible when it\ncomes to proofreading. Anyways, I have no idea about the other correction. I'm\nsure I made multiple other blunders in my post that weren't corrected, but\nhere it is:\n\n>\n> 今日はハイキングに行く予定だったけど、1日中雨が降ったり止んだりしています。結局家で漫画を読んで1日を過ごしました。もう一度PandoraHeartsを読みました。とても面白いシリーズだと思います。PandoraHeartsのアニメも好きだけど、アニメよりも漫画の方がずっといいと思います。次回、日本語で読んでみるつもりです。\n>\n> 皆さん、PandoraHeartsって聞いたことがありますか？",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T00:22:30.243",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91349",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T00:47:10.143",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-26T01:09:06.923",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "40167",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why is there no が in って聞いたことある",
"view_count": 470
} | [
{
"body": "> XXって聞いたことがありますか？\n\nI don't think your sentence is wrong. It sounds good to me.\n\n* * *\n\nI think they made the correction probably because って sounds colloquial while\nたこと **が** ある does not.\n\n> XX **って** 聞いたことありますか？\n\n↑ って and ことある (omitting が) are both colloquial.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T01:46:05.277",
"id": "91351",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T00:47:10.143",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T00:47:10.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 91349 | null | 91351 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91357",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> アカウントを変えながら使っています。\n\nA native Japanese speaking friend said this in a text, talking about their\nsocial media account. I couldn't figure out what the line meant because ながら's\n\"while\" usage didn't seem to fit. They can't use their account _while_\nchanging it. Plus, isn't 変える a punctual verb (瞬間動詞)? The \"counter to\nexpectation\" meaning explained in [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14192/30454) doesn't seem to work\neither. \"*I changed my account, but I have been using it.\"\n\nWhen asked to clarify, they said 「それで使う意味もありますね」. So it becomes a sequence of\nactions? How is this ながら different from verbs simply strung together?\n\n> アカウントを変えて使っています",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T07:15:18.270",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91352",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:23:40.767",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-26T08:05:49.603",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "ながら for a sequence of actions? アカウントを変えながら使っています",
"view_count": 91
} | [
{
"body": "You are not mistaken in thinking that what comes before ながら needs to last for\nsome period to form a “line”, so to speak, that runs in parallel to the main\ntimeline, and that a punctual verb like 変える can only represent a “point” and\ntherefore is not suitable to be used with ながら.\n\nHowever, アカウントを変えながら使っています is certainly grammatical and natural. This is\nbecause a punctual act gets duration and becomes a “line” when it is repeated\nor turned into a habit. In your example, the presence of ながら implies that your\nfriend is using the SNS repeatedly or habitually switching between multiple\naccounts.\n\nThis usage of ながら is not much different from that in an example like the\nfollowing.\n\n> 学校に行きながら仕事をしています。\n\nAlthough an individual act of going to the school may take longer than a\nsingle switch of social media accounts, that’s not important here because ながら\ndoesn’t refer to that period but a much longer period during which going to\nthe school is a habit.\n\nアカウントを変えて使っています could be describing the same thing, but its focus is on the\nfact that you switch accounts when or before you use whatever you do, with no\nimplication that it is repeated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T22:37:24.130",
"id": "91357",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:23:40.767",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T00:23:40.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91352",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91352 | 91357 | 91357 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91385",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 葉が四枚になったところで、大きい植木鉢に植え替えた。毎日どんどん(a)ーーーーー、とても楽しみだった。\n>\n> そのうち、蔓が伸びてきた。棒を立てて、この蔓を巻いてやった。折れないように注意しながら、伸びた部分をなるべく横に(b)ーーーーーといいそうだ。\n\nFor selection b there are 2 choices: \n1 - 広げる \n2 - 広がっていく\n\nI chose the 2 which was wrong, selection 1 is correct. Why is the 他動詞 広げる\ncorrect and the 自動詞 - 広がっていく wrong? The plant will twine around the pole\nitself, correct?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T09:37:59.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91353",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-01T07:44:53.527",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-29T14:43:33.383",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "葉が四枚になったところで、大きい植木鉢に植え替えた。",
"view_count": 154
} | [
{
"body": "> そのうち、蔓が伸びてきた。棒を立てて、この蔓を巻いてやった。折れないように注意しながら、 **伸びた部分を**\n> なるべく横に(b)ーーーーーといいそうだ。 \n> 1 - 広げる \n> 2 - 広がっていく\n\nThe correct choice is #1, transitive 広げる, because there is direct object 伸びた部分\n**を**. The unmentioned subject is 人 (the speaker or generic you), not the\nplant. It's 人が[subject] + (蔓の)伸びた部分を[direct object] + (横に)広げる[transitive\nverb].",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-29T14:40:46.237",
"id": "91385",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-01T07:44:53.527",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-01T07:44:53.527",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91353",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91353 | 91385 | 91385 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm reading [this story](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-lessons/1-2-the-\nnorth-wind-and-the-sun/) and am trying to understand the use of the causative\nin this sentence:\n\n> あの人{ひと}のマントをどちらが早{はや}く脱{ぬ}がせることができると思{おも}う？\n\nAccording to textbooks and [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/29172/1378), the \"causee\" (the\nagent being caused to take the action) is marked with を for intransitive verbs\nand with に for transitive verbs. 脱ぐ (to take off) is transitive, and を is\nbeing used to mark its object (the cloak), so the causee would be marked with\nに. There's no に, so the causee doesn't seem to be specified. According to\n[this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/29969/1378), the causee can\nbe omitted if it can be inferred from the context. So my first question is:\n\n> Am I right in thinking that the causee has been omitted because it's clear\n> from the context that it's the person?\n\nThe site translates the sentence into English as \"What do you think, which of\nus can make the person take off his cloak earlier?\". Elsewhere, it says: \"We\nhave written English translations with Japanese grammatical structures.\nTherefore, some of them may not be natural in terms of English grammar.\" But\nit seems to me that this translation is actually how the sentence would be\nphrased naturally in English, and its structure doesn't correspond to that of\nthe original, as it doesn't contain the phrase \"the person's cloak\". In fact,\nit seems to me like a faithful translation of the sentence obtained by\nreplacing の with に:\n\n> あの人{ひと}にマントをどちらが早{はや}く脱{ぬ}がせることができると思{おも}う？\n\nSo my second question is:\n\n> Is this a proper Japanese sentence (and if so, is it more or less natural\n> than the sentence as written in the story)?\n\nThe structure of the sentence as written can't really be imitated in English,\nsince the causee can't be omitted in English in this active structure, but I\nwas wondering (third question) whether this passive construction comes closest\nto faithfully rendering the original:\n\n> What do you think, which of us can cause the person's cloak to be taken off\n> earlier?\n\nI'm aware that the verb isn't formally passive in the original, but I wonder\nwhether this phrasing captures the effect of specifing the direct object of\nthe action (the person's cloak) with を and omitting its subject.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T20:40:17.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91355",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T03:18:58.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1378",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-の",
"particle-を",
"causation"
],
"title": "causative without に",
"view_count": 296
} | [
{
"body": "Although 脱がせる is causative in form, it also describes an action that the\nsubject does to someone else directly, as in the case of a parent taking\nclothes off an infant.\n\n> 娘の靴を脱がせた。 \n> I took shoes off my daughter.\n\nIn a case like this, the wearer is embedded in the direct object of the verb\nwith a possessive の. A more literal translation would be:\n\n> I took off my daughter’s shoes.\n\nIn your example, too, the sun and the wind see themselves as the active agents\nof the action, although they are not going to touch a finger on the person (if\nthey have one).\n\nReplacing の with に makes the sentence sound very odd.\n\n> あの人 **に** マントをどちらが早く脱がせることができると思う？\n\nあの人に being far away from the verb may be part of the reason, but the reordered\nsentence below still sounds awkward.\n\n> どちらが早くあの人 **に** マントを脱がせることができると思う？\n\nIf the sentence has to begin with あの人にマントを, some native speakers, including\nme, would be inclined to use the double-causative 脱がさせる (the causative form of\nthe short causative verb 脱がす), although this is probably considered\ngrammatically incorrect.\n\n> あの人 **に** マントをどちらが早く脱が **させる** ことができると思う？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T03:10:24.300",
"id": "91363",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T03:10:24.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91355",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "The \"full\" sentence would be あの人 **に** あの人のマント **を** 脱がせる, which is a textbook\nexample of the causative usage of a transitive verb. However this obviously\nlooks very redundant, and you have two options to fix this:\n\n * Make あの人に implicit: 「あの人 **の** マントを脱がせる」\n * Make あの人の implicit: 「あの人 **に** マントを脱がせる」\n\nIn this case, both are perfectly fine and natural, and these are\ninterchangeable in most similar situations (because we know adults normally\ntake off their cloaks on their own). But of course, depending on the context,\nあの人のマントを脱がせる might have a different implicit causee (agent), and あの人にマントを脱がせる\nmay refer to a cloak someone else is wearing.\n\n(In English, you cannot omit the direct object of the causative- _make_ , so\nyou always need to say something like \"can you make _that person_ take off\n_his_ cloak\" rather than \"can you make take off that person's cloak\". In\nJapanese, the causee can be safely omitted if it can be inferred from the\ncontext. Each language has its own restrictions that make word-by-word\ntranslations difficult.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T03:18:58.273",
"id": "91364",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T03:18:58.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91355",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91355 | null | 91364 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91479",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that in Japan children start school at 6 years of age and that\nthey are expected to learn the 46 hiragana and 46 katakana syllables by the\nend of that year. I'd like to know more about the methods used to teach them.\nI have heard that a lot of Japanese school is straight memorization and if\nthat is the case, it's unfortunate. I'd love to hear about anything other than\nmemorization to help children assimilate the symbols.\n\n—————update————- We are using this method and practicing groups of\nstructurally similar kana. 14 so far. Any critique with better methods would\nbe most helpful ",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T22:03:59.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91356",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T23:10:52.097",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T23:10:52.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "48831",
"owner_user_id": "48831",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"hiragana"
],
"title": "What methods are used to teach hiragana and katakana to 6 year olds?",
"view_count": 190
} | [
{
"body": "In 1st grade they do (officially) learn the kana, but they also have to learn\n80 kanji characters as well. In practice, many students are already quite\nfamiliar with kana by then. If they attended yochien or hoikuen, they\ncertainly spent time writing their name on things, making cards and letters\nfor family, etc. But, in \"school\" they are taught more strictly about how to\nproperly make the strokes; and, lots of repetitive practice and tests.\n\nAll kana come from kanji. In the case of hiragana they are actually cursive\nscript versions of kanji. For example, む is cursive for 無. Most adults don't\nknow this and educationally using this connection to the more complex thing\nwould not be very effective with 6 year olds.\n\nWhen they get to 2nd grade (where they must learn 160 more kanji), more time\nis spent learning the primary radicals of characters as an aid to\nunderstanding meaning.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T11:43:01.240",
"id": "91479",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T11:43:01.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48892",
"parent_id": "91356",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91356 | 91479 | 91479 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91380",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am stumped by 「仕方なくです」 which I have heard/seen occasionally.\n\n> 用があり仕方なく広島へ。。。仕方なくですね\n> ([source](https://beauty.hotpepper.jp/slnH000160839/blog/bidA043636216.html))\n\n>\n> 一年ぶりに来ました。友人に行きたいと言われて仕方なくですが、、、鶏皮は一人5本に減ってました。([source](https://www.google.com/maps/contrib/117540407496366990109/place/ChIJVVVRgJaRQTUR3I8lPBq6YVs/@33.5892153,130.4081892,17z/data=!3m1!4b1))\n\n> 仕方なくです！(笑) ([source](https://satojuku-sato.com/nichijyo-577/))\n\nI know 形容詞の連用形 く, apart from its usage preceding 体言, is also used in 中止法. But\nwhy can it occur before the copula/polite marker です? Is this something of a\nfixed expression for comical effect? Can other words/expressions be used this\nway? Might it be a similar case to\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17446)?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T23:47:44.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91358",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T00:42:13.407",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-27T02:58:48.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"adjectives",
"i-adjectives",
"copula"
],
"title": "「仕方なくです」 形容詞の連用形 く+ copula です?",
"view_count": 100
} | [
{
"body": "You can regard them as cleft sentences for additional information.\n\nTake the first sentence (with a little change/simplification) for example.\n\n * 用があり広島へ行きました。 I went to Hiroshima for an engagement.\n\nThen\n\n * 仕方なくですね.\n\ncan be unfolded as\n\n * （私が広島へ行ったのは） **仕方なく** ですね。 It was because I had no choice (that I went to Hiroshima).\n\n* * *\n\nIn terms of 'sentences pattern', the following are the same.\n\n * 昨日彼女に会いました。たまたまです。I met her yesterday. (It was) Just by chance.\n * たまたま彼女に会いました。昨日（のこと）です。 I met her by chance. (And it was) Yesterday.\n\n* * *\n\n**[Edit] 仕方なくです/仕方ないです**\n\nWhen the subject is _I_ , these are not very different.\n\n * 私は広島へ行きました。仕方なくですね/仕方ないですね。\n\nBoth essentially mean _I had to go to Hiroshima_. Grammatically, 仕方なく\n(implicitly) modifies 行きました while 仕方ない refers to the fact that the speaker\nwent to Hiroshima.\n\nOn the other hand, when the subject is not first person:\n\n * 彼は広島へ行きました。仕方なくですね/仕方ないですね。\n\nHere 仕方なくですね means that he had no choice but to go. 仕方ないですね indicates the\nspeaker's feeling towards his going to Hiroshima (In effect, _There is nothing\nI can do about his going_. Depending on the context, _I understand he had to\ngo_ or _I have to do without him_ etc.).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T09:48:43.510",
"id": "91380",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T00:42:13.407",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-29T00:42:13.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91358",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91358 | 91380 | 91380 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91362",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was watching some anime and realised that some character says わから **ね** いし\ninstead of わから **な** いし. Is this just a slur kind situation where they change\nit so it's easier to pronounce, like how native speakers often say して **ん** の\nrather than して **る** の. (Also this is just my understanding might also be\nwrong)\n\nOne more thing, why do they add the **し** at the end?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-26T23:56:18.910",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91359",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T02:43:20.877",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-27T00:00:41.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"adjectives",
"anime",
"conjunctions",
"particle-し"
],
"title": "わからないし vs わからねいし",
"view_count": 69
} | [
{
"body": "You may have heard a result of /ai/-to-/ee/ conversion described in the\nfollowing questions (it's pronounced like ねえ (ねー), not ねい):\n\n * [What does こまけー mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3746/5010)\n * [What is じゃねぇか? What is its original form?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18454/5010)\n\nし is a non-exhaustive reason marker. Depending on the context, it may work\njust like \"you know\" or sentence-final よ.\n\n * [What is the し particle and how do you use it?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13397/5010)\n * [Are there various ways to use ~し?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1361/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T02:43:20.877",
"id": "91362",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T02:43:20.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91359",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91359 | 91362 | 91362 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91361",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was doing some pre-made flashcard by others and was wondering what the\ndifference between 得意{とくい} and 上手{じょうず} is and the difference between 下手{へた}\nand 苦手{にがて} is since they all mean good at or bad at.\n\nIs there a time when I can only use one and not the other?\n\nAlso, can both of these be used in a formal situation or is only one of them\nformal?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T01:54:23.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91360",
"last_activity_date": "2023-06-18T22:32:36.200",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-27T09:53:43.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "得意{とくい} vs 上手{じょうず} and 下手{へた} vs 苦手{にがて}",
"view_count": 608
} | [
{
"body": "上手 and 下手 are words that objectively refer to someone's skill. 得意 and 苦手 are,\nas the kanji suggest, more or less related to someone's feeling. 得意 has a\nconnotation of having confidence in one's skill, and 苦手 has a connotation of\ndisliking or lacking confidence.\n\n彼は料理が下手です means he is not a skillful cook, but depending on the context, he\nmay like cooking. There is an idiom\n[下手の横好き](https://jisho.org/search/%E4%B8%8B%E6%89%8B%E3%81%AE%E6%A8%AA%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8D).\nOn the other hand, 彼は料理が苦手です means he is not confident in his ability to cook,\nor he simply dislikes cooking. Still, in typical situations, these two are\ninterchangeable.\n\n上手に書けた文章 is a well-written sentence. 得意に書けた文章 makes no sense.\n\n私は彼のことが苦手です usually means the speaker does not like the way he talks or his\npersonality. See the definitions of\n[苦手意識](https://jisho.org/search/%E8%8B%A6%E6%89%8B%E6%84%8F%E8%AD%98), too.\n私は彼のことが下手です doesn't make sense because \"he\" is not a skill. Likewise you can\nsay 寿司は苦手です but not 寿司は下手です.\n\nThose words can be used both in informal and formal situations. Publicly\nsaying 下手 referring to someone else's skill can sound too direct and impolite,\nbut saying テニスが下手 referring to the speaker themselves is fine regardless of\nthe formality.\n\nRelated:\n\n * [What is the difference between 得意 and 上手?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/26105/5010)\n * [What's the most common way to say you are bad at something?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/51790/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T02:14:17.770",
"id": "91361",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T03:20:33.310",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-28T03:20:33.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91360 | 91361 | 91361 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91374",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 女優志望なだけあって自分の見せ方わかってる感じがした。([source](https://twitter.com/mss_oknw/status/760863386489921537))\n\n> 爆豪君ってヒーロー志望なだけあるよね\n> ([source](https://www.pixiv.net/novel/show.php?id=16019300))\n\nGiven that 志望 is a noun, I don't know what な is doing here.\n\n>\n> 私も本日、二次面接通過の返事を頂けたものです！第一志望なだけに、ひとまずすごく嬉しいです！([source](https://career.keipro.net/japan/200604051749016993/))\n\nI would've expected 第一志望だけに without な. I can't seem to find any\nrelated/similar questions, and this issue seemingly hasn't been asked before\non this site. Nor was I successful in finding a page about this grammar point\non the web at large.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T07:54:27.127",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91365",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T00:53:40.803",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-28T00:53:40.803",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"particle-な",
"particle-だけ"
],
"title": "名詞 + なだけ: 志望なだけある",
"view_count": 114
} | [
{
"body": "The な is 連体形 of だ, and as you see, it can be omitted (or replaced by である).\n\n * 女優志望だけあって\n * 女優志望 **な** だけあって\n * （女優志望 **である** だけあって)\n\nAll of these mean the same. (Except であるだけあって is clumsy; it sounds less so in\nthe last example: 第一志望であるだけに)\n\n--\n\nTo me, using な sounds (slightly) more natural, or simply easier when speaking.\nIt possibly has something to do with\n[だけ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A0%E3%81%91/#jn-136029) being\noriginally a noun 丈.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T00:27:09.807",
"id": "91374",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T00:27:09.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91365 | 91374 | 91374 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91373",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 彼女に一万円の借金があります。 \n> I have a debt to her of 10,000 yen. (given translation)\n\nThis (slightly awkward) English translation means that I owe the women 10,000\nyen. Is this sentence ambiguous? Without further context I would interpret\nthis as meaning that the woman owes 10,000 yen to someone else.\n\nWould changing に to には affect the meaning?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T10:51:18.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91366",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T23:21:25.247",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-27T12:26:41.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Ambiguity in XにYがある",
"view_count": 117
} | [
{
"body": "The sentence is ambiguous but almost theoretically (to me).\n\nI would understand the sentence as (a) 'I owe 10000 yen to the woman', rather\nthan (b) 'The woman owes 10000 yen to someone'.\n\n> 彼女 **には** 一万円の借金があります\n\nsounds more like (b) than (a).\n\n> 彼女 **は** 一万円の借金があります\n\nmeans only (b).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T23:21:25.247",
"id": "91373",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T23:21:25.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91366",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91366 | 91373 | 91373 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91369",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have come across 多き being used in combinations such as 恵み多き宝 or 恵み多き地. I\nbelieve the correct reading is おおき. However, I was not able to find an\nexplanation to the differences, e.g. to 多{おお}い.\n\n 1. Does 多{おお}き work like an い-adjective? Meaning that it could be used also at the end of a sentence?\n 2. Does the meaning of 多{おお}き carry a different nuance than 多{おお}い? If yes, which one(s)?\n 3. Is 多{おお}き rather archaic?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T13:19:45.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91367",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T20:09:57.023",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-27T17:10:08.053",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "18895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"etymology",
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Meaning, origin and \"type\" of 多き",
"view_count": 130
} | [
{
"body": "### What is 多【おお】き?\n\nIn brief, this is the Classical Japanese attributive form of modern 多【おお】い.\nThe attributive form or 連体形【れんたいけい】 is the specific conjugation form used when\nan adjective or verb is used to modify a noun or noun phrase.\n\n### Deeper dive: What is this _-ki_ ending?\n\nAll modern _-i_ adjectives have the same _-i_ ending for both the 終止形【しゅうしけい】\n(\"terminal / conclusive form\", the form used to end a sentence) and the\n連体形【れんたいけい】 (\"attributive form\", the form used to modify a noun or noun\nphrase).\n\nExamples:\n\n * 車【くるま】が小【ちい】さい -- terminal\n * 小【ちい】さい車【くるま】 -- attributive\n * 車【くるま】が新【あたら】しい -- terminal\n * 新【あたら】しい車【くるま】 -- attributive\n\nIn Classical Japanese and older stages of the language, the terminal and\nattributive forms were different: the terminal ended in ～し, and the\nattributive ended in ～き.\n\nAs an extra wrinkle, adjectives with modern endings of just ～い (so-called\nク活用【かつよう】形容詞【けいようし】, or \" _-ku_ conjugation adjectives\", named for the\ndistinct adverbial ending, the same for both modern and Classical) conjugated\nslightly differently from adjectives with modern endings of ～しい (so-called\nシク活用【かつよう】形容詞【けいようし】, or \" _-shiku_ conjugation adjectives\"). The key\ndifference is that the terminal for _-ku_ adjectives replaces the ～き with ～し,\nwhile the terminal for _-shiku_ adjectives just drops the ～き (so you don't\nhave doubled ～しし).\n\nExamples:\n\n * 車【くるま】が小【ちい】さし -- terminal\n * 小【ちい】さき車【くるま】 -- attributive\n * 車【くるま】が新【あたら】し -- terminal\n * 新【あたら】しき車【くるま】 -- attributive",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T20:09:57.023",
"id": "91369",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T20:09:57.023",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91367",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91367 | 91369 | 91369 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91372",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> この部屋は図書室です。本やCDを借りたり、宿題をしたり出来ます。日本語の本が２０００冊あります。外国語の本は１０００冊あります。CDは５００枚あります。CDを聞くときはヘッドホンを\n> **しましょう** 。友達と話すときは小さい声で話すように **しましょう** 。\n\nWhy do we have to use the ～ましょう form here instead of just using the ～ます form?\nIf I understand everything correctly than ヘッドホンをしましょう means \"Let's put on the\nheadphones.\" or \"I will put on the headphones\". But here we want to say \"When\nI listen to the CD I put on my headphones\", so why using ～ましょう？\n\nAlso I don't really get the 話すようにしましょう construction here. How can I translate\nthis properly?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T22:10:18.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91370",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T23:21:11.953",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-27T22:25:08.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "41639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "Why is ～ましょう form used in the following situation?",
"view_count": 57
} | [
{
"body": "If you use ～ます (called スル形 in Japanese linguistics papers), in this context,\nyou'll be stating a fact or describing a situation as opposed to making a\nsuggestion.\n\n> CDを聞くときはヘッドホンをします。友達と話すときは小さい声で話すようにします。\n\nStandalone, without more context, this sounds like the speaker is talking\nabout how they do these things: they make sure to put on headphones when\nlistening to music and keep their voice down when they talk to their friends.\n\nOf course you can make that a suggestion without invoking ～しよう(～ましょう):\n\n> 友達と話すときは小さい声で話してください。\n\n> 友達と話すときは小さい声で。\n\n> 友達と話すときは小さい声でお願いします。\n\n> 友達と話すときは小さい声で話しなさい。\n\nYou can use こと to give a command/suggestion if you want to use the verb in\nスル形, but in doing so you risk sounding a bit bossy and peremptory.\n\n> 友達と話すときは小さい声で話すことです。\n\nNow, back to your title question,: why is ～ましょう (シヨウ形) used here?\n\nシヨウ形, or volitional form as it's called in Japanese grammar in English, is\noften used to give instructions by teachers or similar figures of authority.\nThis usage is referred to as 遠回しな命令 (indirect commands) by some Japanese\nlinguists. (See, for example, 山下由美子. \"「しよう」「しようか」 の意味・用法: 日本語教育への提案.\"\n創価大学大学院紀要= The bulletin of the Graduate School, Soka University 33 (2011):\n299-327.)\n\nA teacher may say to the class: 「みなさん、静かにしましょう」 And this is why the volitional\nis commonly used by teachers, guardians to give instructions to\nchildren/students.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T23:21:11.953",
"id": "91372",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-27T23:21:11.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91370",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91370 | 91372 | 91372 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91377",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is in a Manga where B is asked by A:\n\n> A: お前たち恵み多き地に住みたくないか? \n> B: それは… 我らに戦えと? かつてはそういった土地を手に入れるため戦{いくさ}に明け暮れましたが[...]\n\nWhile I get the meaning of the rest, I don't know how to deal with 我らに戦えと,\nbecause of following problems:\n\n 1. I guess that 戦え is the potential ます-stem form of 戦う. If this is correct, why does the に-particle point to 我ら? What or who would is the subject of the sentence?\n 2. If 戦え is NOT the potential form, it would leave only the option to be the imperative form of 戦う (at least in modern Japanese). As the characters in the Manga are using a bit more archaic forms I am not completely sure that this is the case, though. So, in other words, is there an archaic version that is similar to the potential or imperative forms, but actually isn't either of both?\n 3. The と-particle at the end of the phrase: is this the conditional と? Is this the quotation marking と? In general I'm relatively confident that I know how to deal with both, so maybe it becomes clear to me as soon as I understand the 我らに term, but as of now, I'm just asking this to be sure.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-27T23:05:56.867",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91371",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T21:04:28.887",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-28T21:04:28.887",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "18895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"particle-と",
"parsing",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Parsing or meaning of 我らに戦えと",
"view_count": 160
} | [
{
"body": "戦え is the imperative form of 戦う, and this と is a quotative-と. The\ncorresponding verb (言っている) is omitted.\n\n> それは… 我らに戦えと? \n> Are you saying to us that we must fight?\n\nThe imperative forms of some verbs did look different in archaic Japanese, and\nthey are sometimes used today (see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/82130/5010)). But the imperative\nforms of godan verbs like 戦う do not have old forms.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T03:18:26.790",
"id": "91377",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T08:56:51.000",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-28T08:56:51.000",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91371 | 91377 | 91377 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91376",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here's the sentence:\n\n> もえるごみと一緒に毎週土曜日に集めます。\n\nThat sentence has been taken from the text explaining different ways of\ngarbage disposal.\n\nWhat does the word もえる mean here and is there a kanji for it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T01:11:41.887",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91375",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T01:33:45.330",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-28T01:29:06.197",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "41639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs"
],
"title": "What does the word もえる mean in the following sentence and what is the kanji for it?",
"view_count": 60
} | [
{
"body": "[燃える{もえる}](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%87%83%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B) means to burn.\n\n[燃えるゴミ](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%87%83%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B%E3%82%B4%E3%83%9F)\nmeans waste that can be treated and disposed of in incineration.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T01:33:45.330",
"id": "91376",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T01:33:45.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91375 | 91376 | 91376 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91383",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "On my trip home today, I was thinking about how うちに帰っている would be incorrect\nfor my current situation, as I'm currently travelling home and not already at\nhome. I'll walk through my thought process from here:\n\nConsider 食べる:\n\n> 食べる - I will eat\n>\n> 食べた - I ate (without proper grammar, \"I eated\")\n>\n> 食べている - I am eating\n\nOften 帰る is translated as \"to return\", but copying the same transformations\nfrom the 食べる case is incorrect:\n\n> 帰る - I will return\n>\n> 帰った - I returned\n>\n> 帰っている - [WRONG] I am returning\n\nIf we instead translate 帰る as \"to be returned\" (where \"returned\" here is\nintransitive), we still get proper meanings:\n\n> 帰る - I will be returned\n>\n> 帰った - I have been returned\n>\n> 帰っている - [CORRECT] I am returned\n\nSo, I wondered if this was the case that all transitive verbs were\n\"continuous\" and all intransitive verbs were \"discontinuous\", but this is not\nthe case: かぶる is transitive and \"discontinuous\", and 泳ぐ is intransitive and\n\"continuous\":\n\n> かぶる - I will don it\n>\n> かぶった - I have donned it\n>\n> かぶっている - I am (being donned) it\n>\n> 泳ぐ - I will swim\n>\n> 泳いだ - I have swum\n>\n> 泳いでいる - I am swimming\n\nSo my next question was \"is this strictly an English phenomenon?\". Rather, am\nI fixing a problem that only really exists in English by adding \"to be\" onto\ndefinitions?\n\nConsider this timeline of 食べる:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/C0Ix2.png)\n\n食べた happens _after_ 食べている, that is, 食べている describes the interval before 食べた.\n\nThis is not the same of 帰る:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PARIv.png)\n\n帰っている describes the interval _after_ 帰った. So, this is not strictly an English\nphenomenon to my understanding.\n\nSo, is there a name for categories A and B? Especially a name for them in\nJapanese?\n\n| A | B \n---|---|--- \nTransitive | 食べる | かぶる \nIntransitive | 泳ぐ | 帰る",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T06:47:22.363",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91379",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T03:45:19.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48309",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "\"Continuous\" vs \"Discontinuous\" verbs: What to call them in English and Japanese?",
"view_count": 215
} | [
{
"body": "The Japanese terms you are looking for are 継続動詞 and 瞬間動詞. 継続動詞 refers to verbs\nwhose -teiru forms _typically_ refer to progressive actions, whereas 瞬間動詞\nrefers to verbs whose -teiru forms _typically_ refer to resultant states. 瞬間動詞\nis often called a _punctual verb_ or an _(instant-)state-change verb_ in\nEnglish.\n\nI said \"typically\" because the vast majority of verbs actually work in both\nways. 家に帰っている safely means either \"I'm on my way home\" and \"I'm already at\nhome\" depending on the context. The same is true with 食べている and 寝ている (see: [Is\n寝る a stative or active\nverb?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/57193/5010)). It's perfectly fine\nto say もうお昼を食べていますか \"Have you already eaten lunch?\". There are expressions\nwhich force either progressive or stative readings (e.g.,\n[～ているところ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3122/when-\nis-v%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-the-continuation-of-action-and-when-is-it-the-\ncontinuation-of-\nstate#:%7E:text=take%20a%20change%2Din%2Dstate%20verb%20and%20%22zoom%20in%22%20on%20the%20point%20when%20the%20change%20takes%20place%20to%20treat%20it%20like%20a%20continuous%2Daction%20verb)\nforces a progressive reading, and 過去に3回～ている forces a stative reading).\n\nAs you said, transitivity has nothing to do with the aforementioned\ncategories. For example, 始める (transitive, \"to start something\") and 始まる\n(intransitive, \"something starts\") are both nearly always punctual verbs\n(会議を始めている \"We have (already) started the meeting\" vs 会議が始まっている \"The meeting\nhas (already) started\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-29T03:03:00.443",
"id": "91383",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T03:45:19.303",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-29T03:45:19.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91379",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91379 | 91383 | 91383 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91382",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 気づいたときには たまっているもの \n> You'll save [enough money] before you know it.\n\nAt least based on the dictionary definition and examples, 気づくseems to be an\ninstantaneous verb, \"realize\". How then does とき fit in this sentence? I\nthought とき means while doing something.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T10:57:27.127",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91381",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T22:55:24.060",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-28T17:05:31.020",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "10268",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Why is とき used with instantaneous verb 気づく?",
"view_count": 110
} | [
{
"body": "The questions linked in the comment by @[Eddie\nKal](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/30454/), taken together, should\nanswer your question in depth.\n\nIn brief, とき literally means \"time\", and can be used to mean \"time _while_\ndoing something\", or \"time _when_ something happens / happened / will happen\".\n\nIn your sample sentence, we can break things down as follows:\n\n * 気【き】づいたときにはたまっているもの \n[気づいた]{noticed}[とき]{time when }[に]{at}[は]{ CONTRASTIVE }[たまっている]{ it is\naccumulating / accumulated }[もの]{ REASON} \n_(literal)_ At the time you've noticed it, it will have been accumulated, is\nthe reason \n_(idiomatic)_ Because before you know it, it'll be saved up",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-28T22:55:24.060",
"id": "91382",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T22:55:24.060",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91381",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91381 | 91382 | 91382 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "この商品は人気があるから、十日ぐらいで売り切れるはずだ\n\nCan someone explain what the で in this sentence means? As far as I know で has\nthese 3 meanings: 1 - (連用形) of the assertive auxiliary (断定の助動詞), or \"copula\",\nだ/です 2 - 主体を表す。This で is used to indicate the agent of the action. 3 - で as\nmarking \"how\". It specifies how something happens.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-29T06:41:25.353",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91384",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T06:47:40.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "この商品は人気があるから、十日ぐらいで売り切れるはずだ",
"view_count": 44
} | [] | 91384 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91394",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "At the beginning of sentences, I usually see words referencing to a placing\nbeing followed by \"de wa\". For example,\n\n> 日本では見れないという\n\nI thought that when you started sentences with a place you always had to\nfollow it with \"では\", but I found this example,\n\n> 日本 で、 家 の 中 で 靴 を 履いて は いけません。 \n> In Japan, wearing shoes inside the house is not allowed. \n> [nihon de, ie no naka de kutu wo haite ha ikemasen.](https://elon.io/learn-\n> japanese/lexicon/29215/nihon-de-ie-no-naka-de-kutu-wo-haite-ha-ikemasen.)\n\nNow, if I take the English sentence and put it in an English-Japanese\ntranslator, it gives me the sentence as I thought it would be,\n\n>\n> 日本では、家の中で靴を履くことは禁じられています。[translator](https://www.google.com/search?q=translator&source=hp&ei=5-OkYaBGos3k5Q-wyKC4DQ&iflsig=ALs-\n> wAMAAAAAYaTx91y7u8An-\n> kpLpylftblIAfo769jH&ved=0ahUKEwjg1Y605L30AhWiJrkGHTAkCNcQ4dUDCAc&uact=5&oq=translator&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyCQgAELEDEAoQQzILCAAQgAQQsQMQgwEyDQgAEIAEELEDEIMBEAoyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIHCAAQgAQQCjIHCAAQgAQQCjIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEMgcIABCABBAKOgYIABAKEEM6BAgAEEM6CAgAEIAEELEDOhEILhCABBCxAxCDARDHARDRAzoHCAAQsQMQQzoHCAAQsQMQCjoLCC4QgAQQxwEQrwE6CwguEIAEELEDEIMBUABYnglglwpoAHAAeACAAb8BiAGPCpIBAzEuOJgBAKABAQ&sclient=gws-\n> wiz)\n\nIs the wa here irrelevant and it can be omitted and both sentences are\ncorrect, or is it grammatically incorrect to say so and the translator isn't\nworking properly?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-29T14:42:01.907",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91386",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T15:01:21.117",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T01:52:35.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "9878",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-は",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "When do I have to use \"place + de\" instead of \"place + de wa\" at the begining of a sentence?",
"view_count": 205
} | [
{
"body": "The following sentence _does_ sound awkward.\n\n> 日本 **で** 、家の中で靴を履いてはいけません。\n\nHowever, this doesn’t mean a place always has to be marked with では at the\nbeginning of a sentence. In fact, the following sentence sounds totally\nnatural.\n\n> 家の中 **で** 靴を履いてはいけません。\n\nIn these sentences, 家の中で modifies the verb phrase 靴を履いてはいけません to restrict the\nplace where the act of wearing shoes should not happen.\n\n日本で in the first sentence, on the other hand, doesn’t restrictively work on a\nverb phrase like that as the sentence is not saying you should not wear shoes\nin Japan. Rather, it works on the whole sentence indicating a greater setting\nwithin which the statement 家の中で靴を履いてはいけません is true. It sounds much more\nnatural if it is expressed as the topic of the whole sentence with は.\n\n> 日本 **では** 、家の中で靴を履いてはいけません。\n\nLet’s look at another example which sounds natural enough without は.\n\n> 日本 **で** 、デパートで靴を買いました。\n\nThis sentence is understood as stating that the speaker bought shoes in Japan,\nas well as that they bought them at a department store. 日本で modifies the verb\nphrase 靴を買いました, along with more specific デパートで, and both are new information\nto the listener.\n\nAdding は changes this.\n\n> 日本 **では** 、デパートで靴を買いました。\n\nIn this sentence, 日本で is turned into a common topic between the speaker and\nthe listener, and this prepares the listener to hear what the speaker did in\nJapan, possibly in contrast to what they did in another country.\n\nIn English, putting an adverbial phrase like “ _in Japan_ ” at the beginning\nof a sentence itself has a similar effect. So, the last two sentences may be\ntranslated as the following.\n\n> 日本 **で** 、デパートで靴を買いました。 \n> _I bought shoes at a department store in Japan._\n\n> 日本 **では** 、デパートで靴を買いました。 \n> _In Japan, I bought shoes at a department store._",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T05:58:42.313",
"id": "91394",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T15:01:21.117",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T15:01:21.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91386",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91386 | 91394 | 91394 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91388",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was trying a JLPT mock test and there was a question in which you had to\npick the sentence in which the given word was used correctly. In one of those,\nthe given word was だらしない, and the answer was the sentence\n「そんなことで落ち込むなんて、だらしない奴だ」.\n\nBut how can be だらしない be used to reproach an involuntary action? だらしない is\ncommonly translated as \"slovenly, lazy, untidy, undisciplined\", and I don't\nsee how that would apply to the action of feeling sad. Is there a problem with\nthe translation? Does だらしない have a broader meaning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-29T14:49:05.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91387",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T14:58:08.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32264",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"expressions",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Why can だらしない be used in this sentence?",
"view_count": 500
} | [
{
"body": "だらしない also means \"weak, feeble, gutless\".\n\n[デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A0%E3%82%89%E3%81%97%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/#jn-139179)\nsays:\n\n> だらしない \n> ３ 体力や気力がない。根性がない。「このくらいでへたばるなんて―・い」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-29T14:58:08.983",
"id": "91388",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-29T14:58:08.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91387",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 91387 | 91388 | 91388 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I stumbled upon 死に至らしめました today and since 死に至る exists, at first I was trying\nto understand the conjugation but then I saw that jisho consider it as a whole\nverb or expression. There seems to be a couple of verbs having this suffix\nlike 懲らしめる or 成らしめる. Some are considered archaic and almost none are really\nconsidered common. Assuming I didn't miss anything obvious, is this an old\nform of conjugation?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T01:29:03.723",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91391",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T07:30:34.370",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T01:35:36.617",
"last_editor_user_id": "45176",
"owner_user_id": "45176",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"history",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "What is らしめる or rather (verb) + あしめる?",
"view_count": 112
} | [
{
"body": "[しめる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%97%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B/#jn-101074)\nis a causative auxiliary verb. It derived from the archaic\n[しむ](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa009029.htm) and has somewhat\nlimited use.\n\nSince it is a causative, 至らしめる can be written as 至らせる. That said, 死に至らしめる is\nmore like a fixed expression and probably more common than 死に至らせる.\n\nBoth 懲らしめる and 成らしめる similarly derived from 懲る (= modern 懲りる) + しめる/成る + しめる.\nThey are recognized almost as independent words\n([懲らしめる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%87%B2%E3%82%89%E3%81%97%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B/#jn-82583)\nhas an entry in デジタル大辞泉; 成らしめる doesn't).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T07:30:34.370",
"id": "91395",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T07:30:34.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91391",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91391 | null | 91395 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91448",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've noticed that certain hiragan characters are written in the same way. For\nexample one could look at の め あ ぬ as progressions on a similar theme. If I\ncould put it crudely, we have swoop, line+swoop, line+cross+swoop,\nline+swoop+loop.\n\nOther groups of similar construction include: き さ て ち る ろ - characters with a\nhook け は ま ほ よ お お - cross-first T loops れ ね わ - 3-part Ts\n\nThese may just be visual consequences of a limited number of paint strokes but\nI'm hoping there is some relationship here. I certainly don't see a phonetic\nconnection.\n\n---------------EDIT-------------\n\nFolks I realize that some of you have taken my question to mean that I'm\nexpecting the kana to be decomposed into different semantic elements. I know\nthat they have individually evolved from different kanji, but they have\nsimplified into forms that are very similar. I saw another question where\nsomeone responded along the same lines saying that t is not l with another\nline and b is not L+o, etc. but they are groups of letters in the Latin\nalphabet that are written in similar ways and students who are learning the\ncharacters do practice them in groups. For example, n, m, u, r, and h are\npracticed together because of a similar structure. Morever, the elements of\nthe characters do have names. The dot on the i and j is called a jot. The\ncross on the t is a title.\n\nGetting back to my question, are there terms used in Japanese to teach the\nvery similar characters? Maybe elements of the character that are used? I'm\nimagining some 6 year old being told by his teacher to make all the swoops the\nsame in の め あ and ぬ. I say swoops because I don't have a better name for what\nthis might be. Or the Z shapes in れ, わ, and ね. Surely there are grade school\nworkbooks where they teach the young students to draw those zig zags in the\nsame way on all three characters.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T04:42:22.363",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91392",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T19:51:02.883",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T17:43:18.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "48831",
"owner_user_id": "48831",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"hiragana"
],
"title": "Are hiragana characters related based on construction?",
"view_count": 172
} | [
{
"body": "Thanks to the comments thread, I now have a clearer idea of what the poster\nwas looking for in specific. :)\n\nAccording to the Japanese Wikipedia article for\n[筆画【ひっかく】](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AD%86%E7%94%BB) (\"stroke [single\nstroke of a writing implement when writing any character]\"), the following are\nthe basic graphical components that make up any kanji.\n\n\n\nAgain, the strokes above are the basic ones used in kanji, and there are some\nstroke varieties specific to kana that are not listed here.\n\nJust below the table on the Wikipedia page, the text mentions the ループ (\"loop\")\nstroke for certain special kanji, and I suspect that this word might also\napply to the loops on the bottoms of certain kana, such as よ or は.\n\nI am uncertain of the terminology for other graphical components, such as the\nbend-y bit that's almost a loop in や or も, or the big less-circular loop with\ncross-strokes going through it in あ, め, or ぬ. If anyone can provide the names\nfor these elements, I would be happy to update this post.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T19:51:02.883",
"id": "91448",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T19:51:02.883",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91392",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91392 | 91448 | 91448 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91402",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a Manga a character says:\n\n> 神域{しんいき}とはまたゾッとせんな\n\nI guess it is a contraction of しない because of the phrase ゾッとしない - pretty\ndisgusting. But (1) I am not completely sure and (2) how does the contraction\n\"work\" here in detail?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T08:43:53.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91396",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T18:24:02.860",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T17:11:41.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "18895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"contractions"
],
"title": "What is せんな a contraction of?",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "* せん is roughly the same as しない. Strictly speaking, せん is not a direct contraction of しない but a contraction of **せぬ** , which is an equivalent of しない in classical Japanese . せん sounds colloquial but old-fashioned or dialectal at the same time. See: [When does ない become ぬ?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18727/5010)\n * な is a sentence-end particle. It's a contraction of nothing.\n\nぞっとしない is a set phrase that originally means \"not so thrilling\" or\n\"unexciting\", but it's becoming an obsolete phrase. Few people in the younger\ngeneration understand the original meaning of this word correctly. See [this\npage](https://www.bunka.go.jp/pr/publish/bunkachou_geppou/2013_02/series_10/series_10.html).\nTechnically speaking, \"disgusting\" is incorrect, but the majority of real\nexamples of ぞっとしない I found from BCCWJ and 小説家になろう actually seem to mean\n\"disgusting\" rather than \"uninteresting\". I suppose future dictionaries will\ninclude this new sense.\n\nBy the way, if we accept the new sense, ぞっとする and ぞっとしない would effectively\nmean the same thing. We may include this pair in [this\nlist](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/48105/5010).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T18:01:24.430",
"id": "91402",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T18:24:02.860",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T18:24:02.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91396",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91396 | 91402 | 91402 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91398",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is maybe not strictly a language question, apologies.\n\nIs each time a person enters Japan considered a 新規入国 regardless if the person\nhas the status of being able to 再入国 (permanent residents, etc.)? Or is someone\nwith this status considered to be 再入国ing and not 新規入国ing when the person goes\nabroad and returns?\n\nIs each 入国 considered a 新規 even if it is a 再入国 , or are the two exclusive?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T09:34:43.373",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91397",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T10:08:34.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "Are 新規入国 and 再入国 mutually exclusive?",
"view_count": 80
} | [
{
"body": "Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.\n\nBased on personal experience and an explanation of these terms on page 2\n[here](https://www.moj.go.jp/isa/content/930002505.pdf), these terms are\nmutually exclusive. See the linked source for full details, but to summarize:\n\n> ...再入国の許可を受けていったん出国した後に再び入国した外国人を「再入国者」といい，それ以外の入国者を「新規入国者」という。\n\n> Foreigners re-entering the country after having departed _with re-entry\n> permission_ are 再入国者, and foreigners to whom this does not apply are 新規入国者\n\nIn effect, this means that the only way that 再入国 applies is if you left Japan\nwith valid re-entry permission, and are returning with that permission. This\n_generally_ means you either left within the last year on a multiple-entry\nvisa (which usually gives you re-entry within one year for free), or applied\nfor a longer re-entry permit and then left.\n\n新規入国 means that you are entering the country without any kind of re-entry\npermission, either because you have been issued a new visa which you received\nwhile outside the country, or because you are entering on a tourist visa/visa\nwaiver (though this hasn't been possible since Japan closed down the first\ntime).\n\nFinally, note that these are technical immigration terms and not everyday\nwords - I have had more than one native Japanese speaker ask for clarification\nof what exactly these terms mean.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T10:08:34.590",
"id": "91398",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T10:08:34.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "91397",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91397 | 91398 | 91398 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 寿季「だって、なんというか……ずっと憧れの人だったわけで……」\n>\n> 桐葉「あら、そうなの？」\n>\n> 寿季「月見坂さんは俺のこと、 **その辺** のファンだなぐらいに思っていただろうけど……」\n>\n> 寿季「俺は君が心の支えだった。そのぐらいまで月見坂ーー月見桐奈のことが好きだったから」\n>\n> 寿季「多分……このことが無かったら、俺は月見坂さんに告白していたと思うぐらいには」\n>\n> 桐葉「……そうなんだ。ちょっと照れちゃうわね」\n\nContext: A girl called 月見坂桐葉 offers to become 寿季’s girlfriend. The girl is his\nschoolmate and is admired by 寿季.\n\nI asked what this その辺 means elsewhere and a native speaker told me it meant\n“regular” in this context. I don’t know why it means that even if I know it\noriginally means “thereabouts”. Or do you think it means something else there?\nPlease shed some light on it.\n\nIf the context is insufficient, please let me know.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T13:04:25.543",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91399",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T13:54:35.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Why does その辺 mean “regular”?",
"view_count": 204
} | [
{
"body": "その辺 literally means 'around there'. The implication is that you do not have to\nlook too far, you can find 'it' anywhere so that it means 'regular'\nfiguratively.\n\n* * *\n\nNote that その辺 can be used non-figuratively, literally referring to some\nparticular area. E.g. その辺で買った can mean _I bought it around there_ ( _there_\nunderstood by context) or _The shop I bought it is fairly ordinary_ (implying\nsuch a shop can be found anywhere).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-11-30T13:54:35.990",
"id": "91400",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T13:54:35.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91399",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91399 | null | 91400 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can the wa particle replace de, ni, wo, or he?\n\nTake the following sentence:\n\n> Watashi ga Sakura ni Booru wo Koen de Nageru\n\nCan I do this instead:\n\n> Booru wa Watashi ga Sakura ni Koen de Nageru\n\n> Sakura wa Watashi ga Booru wo Koen de Nageru\n\n> Koen wa Watashi ga Sakura ni Booru wo Nageru\n\n> Watashi wa Sakura ni Booru wo Koen de Nageru\n\nIf I can, then what impact does it have on the sentence? My current idea is\nthat ga is more emphasis than wa, but wa is more emphasis than ni, de, wo.\n\nAlso, for the particles he and ni:\n\n> Koen ni iku\n\n> Koen he iku\n\n> Koen wa iku\n\nCan I do this? I feel like this is wrong, since ni and he aren't easily told\napart in this context, so wa may be too vague. But if it is okay, then what\ndoes it mean?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-01T20:37:37.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91408",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T06:26:27.940",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T06:26:27.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "Particle Emphasis",
"view_count": 128
} | [
{
"body": "The most neutral-sounding sentence would be:\n\n> [私]{わたし} **は** [公園]{こうえん}で さくらに ボールを [投]{な}げる。 \n> _Watashi **wa** kōen de Sakura ni bōru o nageru._\n\n私 being the topicalized subject, this sentence states what the speaker will\ndo. No particular emphasis is placed on any part of it, although, depending on\nthe context or the way it is said, the sentence may put what the speaker will\ndo in contrast to what other people will do.\n\nThe subject marker が needs to be restored when the topic marker は is removed.\nIn other words, when a subject is topicalized, が is replaced with は.\n\n> 私 **が** 公園で さくらに ボールを 投げる。 \n> _Watashi **ga** kōen de Sakura ni bōru o nageru._\n\nThis sentence emphasizes the fact that it is the speaker, not other people,\nwho will throw a ball to Sakura in the park.\n\nOther parts of the sentence may be taken out as the topic and moved up to the\ntop, but you need to be careful what to do with the original particle.\n\nWhen what is marked with を is topicalized, を is replaced with は, just like が\nis.\n\n> ボール **は** 私が 公園で さくらに 投げる。 \n> _Bōru **wa** watashi ga kōen de Sakura ni nageru._\n\nThis sentence talks about what will happen to the ball, which is promoted as a\ncommon topic between the speaker and the listener. The listener is expected to\nalready know what ball is referred to. As the speaker, when you have to single\nout the ball as the topic like that, you most probably have something else in\nmind with which you specifically put the ball into contrast. For example, you\nor someone else might take some other action with a bat or a glove, but as far\nas the ball is concerned, you will throw it to Sakura in the park.\n\nOther particles are usually retained, and は is added after them, when what is\nmarked with them is topicalized.\n\n> 公園 **では** 私が さくらに ボールを 投げる。 \n> _Kōen **dewa** watashi ga Sakura ni bōru o nageru._\n\nThis sentence talks about what will happen in the park, which is singled out\nas the topic as opposed to other places. Some other action might be taken in\nthose other places, but if you limit the place to the park, you will throw a\nball to Sakura there.\n\n> さくら **には** 私が 公園で ボールを 投げる。 \n> _Sakura **niwa** watashi ga kōen de bōru o nageru._\n\nThis sentence talks about what will be done to Sakura. Other people might\nbecome targets of some other action, but as for Sakura, you will throw a ball\nto her in the park.\n\nに is practically mandatory in the last sentence above because, without it,\nwhat function さくら plays in the sentence would be unclear. In fact, removing に\nfrom the original sentence would result in a sentence that doesn't make sense\n(if not understood differently).\n\n> 私が 公園で さくら ボールを 投げる。 \n> _Watashi ga kōen de Sakura bōru o nageru._\n\nHowever, this is not always the case. The following three sentences are all\nunderstood as meaning the same: you may not go to other places but you do go\nto the park.\n\n> 公園 **には** 行く。 \n> _Kōen **niwa** iku_.\n>\n> 公園 **へは** 行く。 \n> _Kōen **ewa** iku_.\n>\n> 公園 **は** 行く。 \n> _Kōen **wa** iku_.\n\nThe reason に or へ is optional in this case is that, 行く being a motion verb\nthat typically requires a destination, 公園 is understood as indicating that\neven if it is not marked with に or へ. Though not quite grammatical, the\nfollowing sentence is at least unambiguous.\n\n> 公園 行く。 \n> _Kōen iku_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T06:19:47.693",
"id": "91418",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T06:19:47.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91408 | null | 91418 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A site ([Suki Desu](https://skdesu.com/en/order-structures-phrases-japanese/))\nclaims one way to think about the natural order of particles is wa > ni > de >\nwo (though the full article is more in-depth).\n\nIs this correct, or a good general rule to follow? So, is\n\n> Watashi wa Sakura ni Koen de Booru wo Nageru\n\nis more natural than\n\n> Sakura ni Watashi wa Booru wo Koen de Nageru\n\n?\n\nIs there any definitive natural order rules I can follow?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-01T21:52:29.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91410",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T03:40:26.403",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-01T22:16:00.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "Natural Particle Order",
"view_count": 163
} | [
{
"body": "There are no definite rules for which particles should come before others, it\nis always dependent on context for which order the particles should come,\neither to emphasize a point, express emotion, or to make the sentence\nunambiguous. This does not mean you can just move around parts of the sentence\nhowever you want, some sentence orders may sound more natural in different\ncontexts.\n\nMore important than particles, IMO, is the order of the Subject, Object and\nverb. Template sentences in Japanese are most likely to be written in this\norder.\n\nAnother point to consider is the fact that for the most part, clauses that\nmodify something else usually come before that something else. Let's try your\nexample from the most basic sentence. Following the Subject Object Verb order,\nwe begin with\n\n> 私【わたし】はボールを投【な】げる。 \n> (Watashi wa booru wo nageru) \n> I throw the ball.\n\nOkay, now we want to add that we threw it to Sakura. Either of the following\nsound natural.\n\n> 私【わたし】は桜【さくら】にボールを投【な】げる。 \n> (Watashi wa Sakura ni booru wo nageru) \n> I throw Sakura the ball.\n\n> 私【わたし】はボールを桜【さくら】に投【な】げる。 \n> (Watashi wa booru wo Sakura ni nageru) \n> I throw the ball to Sakura.\n\nComparing English to Japanese is not always a good idea, but I think it\nillustrates a good point here. Changing up the order emphasizes different\nthings. The first sentences emphasizes _who_ you threw the ball to. The second\nemphasizes what you _what_ you threw (the ball).\n\nFinally, we want to tell the reader where we were performing the action.\n\n> 公園【こうえん】で、私【わたし】はボールを桜に投【な】げる \n> (kouen de, watashi wa booru wo nageru) \n> In the park, I threw a ball to Sakura.\n\n> 私【わたし】は公園【こうえん】でボールを桜に投【な】げる \n> (Watashi wa kouen de booru wo nageru) \n> I threw a ball, in the park, to Sakura.\n\nI think both of these are fine, but the first one sounds more natural to me.\nMaybe a native speaker can comment on this. However, if we go with your first\nsentence:\n\n> 私【わたし】は桜【さくら】に公園【こうえん】でボールを投げる。 \n> (Watashi wa sakura ni kouen de booru wo nageru) \n> I threw Sakura, in the park, the ball.\n\n公園で comes really close to the verb 投【な】げる, which makes it easy to mistake 公園で\nfor \"throw the ball using the park\". With a bit of common sense, we can figure\nout that this is not the case, but putting it further away makes it less\nambiguous. What's more, it comes between 桜に and 投げる, interrupting the flow of\nthe sentence.\n\nOkay, so what does this all mean? Well for me it means that the only way to\nlearn word order is to get used to it. Subject Object Verb is a good template\nfor creating sentences, but it is not the only one. Word order is used to\nportray emotion, emphasis, and disambiguate sentence structure. To understand\nit, I really recommend that you just let it go for now and learn it slowly\nthrough both articles and reading books.\n\n**Related:** \n[Sentence Structure/ Element\nOrder](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/6095/sentence-structure-\nelement-order?rq=1) \n[Does Word Order affect\nmeaning](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/19433/does-word-order-\nchange-the-meaning-of-a-sentence?rq=1)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T01:15:54.533",
"id": "91413",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T01:34:49.090",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T01:34:49.090",
"last_editor_user_id": "21657",
"owner_user_id": "21657",
"parent_id": "91410",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I would say the most neutral-sounding order is the following.\n\n> [私]{わたし}は [公園]{こうえん}で さくらに ボールを [投]{な}げる。 \n> _Watashi wa kōen de Sakura ni bōru o nageru._\n\nWhen a に-clause indicates a destination of a motion or a target of an action,\nit tends to be placed later in a sentence than a で-clause. This is probably\nbecause such information is considered more closely associated with the action\nand therefore tends to be kept closer to the verb, which comes at the end. For\nexample, when you throw something to someone, to whom you throw it is\nconsidered more directly associated with the action of throwing than where or\nby what means you do it.\n\nSince an を-clause typically indicates a direct object of an action, it tends\nbe placed immediately before the verb.\n\nIf you change this default order, the portion that is moved back is somewhat\nput in focus.\n\n> 私は さくらに ボールを **公園で** 投げる。 \n> _Watashi wa Sakura ni bōru o **kōen de** nageru._\n\nYou might choose this order if your interlocutor already knows you are going\nto throw a ball to Sakura and you want to stress that you are going to do so\nin the park.\n\nIf a に-clause indicates a time, it tends to be placed early in a sentence.\n\n> 私は **[日曜日]{にちようび}に** 公園で さくらに ボールを 投げる。 \n> _Watashi wa **nichiyōbi ni** kōen de Sakura ni bōru o nageru._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T03:40:26.403",
"id": "91435",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T03:40:26.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91410",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91410 | null | 91413 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is one sentence from [this\narticle](https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/22f59a1d1634f5988a2bf03d5d337437bf82c571?page=2)\nI am not sure I understood correctly.\n\n> 孤独を現実的に捉えている人は少ないですね。 **仕事が生きがいだったり、拘束されている分、自由に憧れる人もいます** 。\n\nI need help on how だったり and 分 works here. This is how I interpret the bold\nsentence\n\n> 仕事が生きがいだったり拘束されたりしていればいるほど、自由に憧れる人もいます。\n\nIs that correct?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-01T23:15:58.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91411",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T04:37:29.403",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T01:21:09.193",
"last_editor_user_id": "48867",
"owner_user_id": "48867",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "だったり and 分 in「仕事が生きがいだったり、拘束されている分、自由に憧れる」",
"view_count": 90
} | [
{
"body": "The original is not very clear.\n\nMy reading is: 仕事が生きがいで **ある人もいれば** 、(拘束されている分、自由に憧れる)人もいる.\n\nSo it means, _there are some people who take works as their objective of life\nand others who are 'bound' in some way and wish for freedom_. These are two\nkinds of people who do **not** 孤独を現実的に捉えている. The former bury themselves in\nwork and the latter wish for freedom (from being among people and therefore\nconstrained) so that both do not 孤独を現実的に捉えている (the latter may think of 孤独 even\npositively).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T04:37:29.403",
"id": "91415",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T04:37:29.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91411",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91411 | null | 91415 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91417",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Imagine if a soldier broke out of an encirclement and retreated away. Should\nenemies still use 包囲に出てくる instead of 包囲に出て行く?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T03:41:57.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91414",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T09:17:58.217",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T09:17:58.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "816",
"owner_user_id": "41444",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"collocations"
],
"title": "Is 包囲に出てくる a fixed collocation?",
"view_count": 71
} | [
{
"body": "From the standpoint of the encircling enemy, one may say either あの兵士は包囲に向かってきた\n(when he is still within the encirclement trying to break out) or\nあの兵士は包囲から出ていった (when he has already broken out of the encirclement and gone\naway).\n\n包囲に出てくる may make sense when the soldier is getting out of something (e.g., a\ntrench) and then approaching the observer (i.e., an encircling enemy). 包囲に出ていく\nmakes sense from the standpoint of the soldier or someone next to him, but the\nencircling side would not say this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T05:27:09.673",
"id": "91417",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T07:54:42.610",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T07:54:42.610",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91414",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91414 | 91417 | 91417 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91419",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> **(A)** 今日は映画を見たり買い物をしたりで楽しかった\n>\n\n>> I had a good time seeing a movie and going shopping today.\n\n* * *\n\nFrom [wildnihongo.com](https://wildnihongo.com/grammar/tari-tari-suru/),\n\n> When ~たり~たりする is not the final segment of a sentence and the main predicate\n> is an adjective (i.e. not a verb), する may be omitted. If the main predicate\n> is a verb, する can NOT be omitted.\n>\n> * E.g. 歌ったり踊ったりとても楽しかった。[Doing things such as singing and dancing was\n> really fun.] In this example, ~たり~たりする is not the main predicate and the\n> main predicate is an adjective. Thus, する can be omitted.\n>\n\nAs far as I'm concerned the main predicate of **A** is 楽しかった, which is an\nadjective. Is the following correct then?\n\n**(B)** 今日は映画を見たり買い物をしたり **した** で楽しかった\n\n* * *\n\nMy books nor the book from which I got the example can't help me parse this as\nthey just state that する follows predicates in the たり form, not to mention this\nnot always the case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T05:24:55.940",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91416",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T04:30:43.757",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T06:00:15.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "45630",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is する omitted from ~たり~たりする because the main predicate is an adjective?",
"view_count": 131
} | [
{
"body": "Grammatically, something like 歌ったり踊ったり is a long **noun** phrase that can work\nalso as a suru-verb or a no-adjective.\n[～ては～て](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/41664/5010) is very similar in\nthis regard, too. Since it's essentially a noun, you can say:\n\n * 歌ったり踊ったり **を** 3時間続けた。\n * 歌ったり踊ったり **が** 好きです。\n * 「今何してる？」「歌ったり踊ったり **です** 。」\n * ステージで歌ったり踊ったり **の** 経験があります。\n\nIn 歌ったり踊ったり **で** 楽しかった, this で after the second たり is a te-form of the copula\nだ used to denote a reason/cause. It's the same で as in 幸せそうでよかった (\"I'm glad\nthat you look happy\") and 心配で電話しました (\"I called him because I was worried\").\nYou can rephrase the sentence as 歌ったり踊ったり **して** 楽しかった using the te-form of\nする, too. They should look natural once you understand 歌ったり踊ったり is a noun.\nHowever, 歌ったり踊ったり **したで** 楽しかった is incorrect simply because する/した and だ/で\ncannot be joined directly (you cannot say するだ/しただ in any condition).\n\nThe next question is why even 歌ったり踊ったり楽しかった is correct if ～たり forms a noun. I\nfeel something like で or して is omitted before 楽しかった, as your textbook says.\nThis happens in speech, but it's not common in written Japanese. This happens\nonly with adjectives probably because [たり after the last verb may be\nomitted](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4793/5010). 歌ったり踊ったり楽しんだ would\nbe taken as \"I did things like singing, dancing and having fun\" rather than \"I\nhad fun singing and dancing\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T07:49:03.047",
"id": "91419",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T04:30:43.757",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T04:30:43.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91416",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91416 | 91419 | 91419 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "仕事がたくさんあるが、明日までにできることはできる。でも、ミスが出ないか心配だ。\n\nI do not get the part that says ミスが出ないか心配だ Does that not mean that I am scared\nof NOT making a mistake, 2 negatives = a positive meaning no mistake?\n\nWhat would be the difference if it said this instead: ミスが出るか心配だ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T08:58:36.703",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91420",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T08:51:57.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "仕事がたくさんあるが、明日までにできることはできる。でも、ミスが出ないか心配だ。",
"view_count": 107
} | [
{
"body": "(According to a few mins' reflection) In 'Xか心配だ', X is what you want to\nhappen. So in the case of the example, ミスが出ない is almost always what you want,\nand 'ミスが出るか心配だ' sounds odd.\n\nAs another example, you may or may not want some rain. If you're going on a\npicnic, you say '雨が降らないか心配だ'. If you are a farmer and there has been no rain\nfor days, then '雨が降るか心配だ'.\n\n* * *\n\n'X **かと** 心配だ' is similar but the above does not (strictly?) apply.\n'ミスが出るかと心配だった' sounds quite normal to me, as well as 'ミスが出ないかと心配だった'. (The\npresent tense 'ミスが出るかと心配だ' still sounds slightly odd; Tense doesn't change the\nacceptability in ' **か** 心配だ'.)\n\n**[Edit]** Both ミスが{出る/出ない}か心配だった mean _I was afraid there would be mistakes_.\nミスが出るかと心配だった sounds that mistakes were 'close' (but did not happen). For\nexample, if you are watching figure skating and the skating is somewhat\nunstable, then ミスが出るかと心配だった fits better. ミスが出ないか(と)心配だった sound more neutral\nwith regards to the 'closeness'.\n\n* * *\n\nThere are somewhat [similar](https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/fr-\ncraindre-avoir-peur-que-ne-expl%C3%A9tif.198124/)\n[things](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%99%9A%E8%BE%9E#%E8%99%9A%E8%BE%9E%E3%81%AE_ne)\nin French.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T03:02:39.093",
"id": "91433",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T08:51:57.200",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T08:51:57.200",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91420",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91420 | null | 91433 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91426",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just read a sketch written by 又吉 直樹さん, and here is a sentence:\n\n> 動かんからエネルギーは消耗せえへんし腹減らんねん。\n\nThe part of 消耗せえへんし makes me feel a little confused. I probably know it means\n“doesn’t consume much so”, but I wanna know the specific grammatical\ninstructions. Is this a Kansai-ben expression?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T15:26:38.297",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91424",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T23:54:53.953",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T23:54:53.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "43732",
"owner_user_id": "43732",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"translation",
"usage",
"kansai-ben"
],
"title": "What does 消耗せえへんし mean?",
"view_count": 144
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, it is Kansai-ben.\n\n> 動か **ん** からエネルギーは消耗 **せえへん** し腹減ら **んねん** 。\n\nmeans\n\n> 動かないからエネルギーは消耗しないし腹が減らないのだ。\n\nエネルギーは消耗せえへん means エネルギーは(← は replacing を)消耗しない, \"I don't consume energy\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T16:02:48.520",
"id": "91426",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T16:02:48.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91424",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91424 | 91426 | 91426 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I am working through [a book about sample texts from Japanese\nliterature](https://www.9640.jp/nihongo/ja/detail/?702) and came around the\nfollowing sentence:\n\n> 歴史に詳しくない日本人でも卑弥呼という名前を知らない日本人はいない。\n\n**What is this particular use of に？** My current understanding shouts for を\ninstead, although it doesn't sound right as well.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T15:34:45.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91425",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T02:53:20.563",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T02:53:20.563",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "25817",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Usage of に in sentence 歴史に詳しくない日本人でも卑弥呼という名前を知らない日本人はいない",
"view_count": 46
} | [] | 91425 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, today I encountered the claim on\n[Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kana)\n\n> Shinkatakana (真片仮名, mana and katakana): mixed script including only kanji\n> and katakana.\n\nWikipedia doesn't list a source for this claim. \nThis sounds to me like the writing system used by the 大日本帝国 (and I'm sure in\nmany other contexts) with 漢字 and the 送り仮名 written in small 片仮名. But googling\nabout 真片仮名 gives me no good results, or at least none at my level of Japanese\nability. So is this a term that is used? If not, is there a better name for\nthe above-mentioned orthography?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T21:14:56.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91427",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T08:19:40.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "41089",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"katakana",
"orthography",
"kana"
],
"title": "Was the writing system used in the Empire of Japan (大日本帝国) called 真片仮名?",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "Edited: Both Kotobank and Goo refer to this term, so it would seem legit. I\nmay ask a blind question of some HS teachers in Japan to get more\nconfirmation.\n\nLinks: <https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%9C%9F%E7%89%87%E4%BB%AE%E5%90%8D-536813>\n<https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%9C%9F%E7%89%87%E4%BB%AE%E5%90%8D/>\n\nAdditional information with example text in links: During the Meiji Period,\ndocuments would be written in kanji with the grammar added using very small\nkatakana characters. Every year I was required to transcribe the Imperial\nRescript on Education at my job. It was written in this manner and some of the\nkana had special uses, like fu in the place of u, as seen in the first\ncharacters 'chin omou ni'.\n\n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Rescript_on_Education>\n<http://thinkweb.co.jp/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/120719.JPG>",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T11:32:17.573",
"id": "91478",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T08:19:40.467",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T08:19:40.467",
"last_editor_user_id": "48892",
"owner_user_id": "48892",
"parent_id": "91427",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91427 | null | 91478 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91430",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From my book,\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lh4Tsm.jpg)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5eakMm.png)\n\nHowever, [Jisho](https://jisho.org/search/%E9%81%85%E3%81%8F) says that 遅く can\nmean 'slowly,' but I can't find an example for that meaning in the same\nsource.\n\nIn this [thread](https://it.hinative.com/questions/17018740), answerers agree\nthat 遅く can be used to mean 'slowly.'",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T23:15:42.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91429",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T23:48:11.597",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45630",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "Can 遅く mean 'slowly'?",
"view_count": 436
} | [
{
"body": "遅く can mean _slowly_ , but ゆっくり is almost always preferred in non-technical\ncontexts. もっと遅く食べた方がいいよ and 彼は遅く走る are not completely wrong but do sound\nfairly unnatural to me.\n\n遅く meaning _slowly_ may be naturally used in scientific contexts because ゆっくり\ncan have unwanted nuances like \"relaxed; leisurely\". For example, saying\n物体が光の速度に近づくと時間が遅く流れる referring to the theory of relativity looks natural to\nme.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-02T23:40:09.530",
"id": "91430",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T23:48:11.597",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-02T23:48:11.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91429",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 91429 | 91430 | 91430 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91437",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Shoudn't there be a nominalizer after やった? I think it's just a casual\ncontracion, but have not seen it before. Moreover, I have seen 決まっているだろう, or\ncontracted to 決まってんだろう before, but in this particular example there's just だ,\nand that I do not understand. At last, the って in わかってるって serves just to sort\nof emphasize it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T01:27:13.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91431",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T04:26:06.590",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T01:34:22.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "40705",
"owner_user_id": "40705",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"contractions"
],
"title": "How to parse わかってるって 例のニセモノがやったに決まってんだ",
"view_count": 76
} | [
{
"body": "First, 決まってんだ is a contraction of 決まってるんだ (which in turn is a contraction of\n決まっているのだ). See [this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/61959/5010).\n\nNext, you don't need a nominalizer (の) before に決まっている **even in formal\nwritings**. It's not incorrect to put の, but it's much less common in reality.\nに can safely take the 終止形 (dictionary) form of a verb in several types of\ncontexts:\n\n * ～するに決まっている, ～するに違いない, ～するに相違ない\n * ～するには (meaning \"in order to\")\n * 言うに(は), 見るに, 思うに, etc. ([What does the に do in 表情から察するに?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29418/5010))\n * ～する[にしては](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%81%AB%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AF-ni-shite-wa-meaning/) (meaning \"for\", \"considering\")\n * ～する[にしろ](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%81%AB%E3%81%9B%E3%82%88-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%97%E3%82%8D-ni-seyo-ni-shiro-meaning/), ～するにせよ, ～するにしても, ～するにしたって (meaning \"even if\")\n * ～する[につけ](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%81%AB%E3%81%A4%E3%81%91%E3%81%A6-ni-tsuke-te-meaning/) (meaning \"whenever\")\n * ～するに留まる\n\nBasically you have to memorize these patterns as-is. I think the following\nquestions are related to the reason why に can sometimes take a \"bare\"\nverb/adjective:\n\n * [How can （の）目指すは be grammatical?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12538/5010)\n * [Zero-nominalisation - Why and When?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4489/5010)\n\n(By the way, this reminded me of [this\nquestion](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/104546/80278) in English\nLanguage Stack Exchange.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T04:15:03.273",
"id": "91437",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T04:26:06.590",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T04:26:06.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91431",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91431 | 91437 | 91437 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91434",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently came across the phrase うれション, referring to when a dog accidentally\nurinates out of excitement. Fairly obviously the first part is derived from\n嬉しい, but what else comes together to form うれション?\n\nIts [page on\njLearn.net](https://jlearn.net/dictionary/%E5%AC%89%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A7%E3%83%B3)\nand other online dictionaries list しょんべん in a \"see also\" section, which makes\nsense from a definition standpoint, but it's non-obvious to me how the rest of\nうれション is derived from しょんべん.\n\nI've also also seen it explained that the ション comes from テンション \"tension\",\nwhich makes sense and I can see how \"tension\" could have an implication of\n\"needing to urinate\", but I don't know if this is actually the case and don't\nwant to blindly trust what I've read on some random forum.\n\nIs anyone able to confirm either of these potential etymologies or explain an\nalternative?\n\n**Edit:** This question made a lot more sense in my head, where the prominence\nof しょうべん on the jLearn results page for しょんべん made me start reading both as\nしょうべん. I failed to notice that they were different even as I put しょんべん into my\nquestion in place of しょうべん.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T02:02:46.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91432",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T17:45:33.327",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T17:45:33.327",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"expressions",
"colloquial-language",
"kana"
],
"title": "What is うれション a portmanteau of?",
"view_count": 122
} | [
{
"body": "Just as the dictionarys say, it's clearly from **うれ** しい and **しょん** べん.\nJapanese people like to make four-mora abbreviations like this one. See: [Is\nthere a generally accepted \"rule\" for truncating loan\nwords?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/6718/5010)\n\nAt least in Japanese, テンション has no association with urination.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T03:25:10.953",
"id": "91434",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T03:25:10.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91432",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91432 | 91434 | 91434 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91440",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> お母さんが男の子に頼んでいます。\n>\n> お母さん：ねえ。\n>\n> 男の子 ：なあに。\n>\n> **お母さん：お母さん、牛乳買って来るから、お風呂洗ってくれない。**\n>\n> 男の子 ：ええー。もうすぐ見たいテレビが始まるんだけど。\n>\n> **お母さん：牛乳、買って来るのと、どっちがいい。**\n>\n> 男の子 ：ええー．．．．．．お菓子も買っていい。\n>\n> お母さん：一つだけよ。\n>\n> 男の子 ：わーい。じゃ、行って来る。わ、あと１０分だ。自転車で行こう。\n\nI don't understand how to translate the sentences marked in bold.\n\nIn the first one, why would mother use the word お母さん in here own speech? Is\nshe asking him to go and buy milk and then to wash the bathroom or is she\nasking her son to wash the bathroom after she comes back from buying milk?\n\nIn the second one, I don't understand the usage of どっちがいい. We have one one\noption here (which is buying milk), so why would we use どっちがいい?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T04:29:43.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91438",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T05:02:20.787",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T05:02:20.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "41639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"pronouns"
],
"title": "お母さん、牛乳買って来るから、お風呂洗ってくれない",
"view_count": 95
} | [
{
"body": "> お母さん、牛乳買って来るから、お風呂洗ってくれない。 \n> I'll go buy some milk, so (while I'm out shopping) can you wash the bath?\n\nAs for this usage of お母さん referring to herself, see: [When referring to\nherself, is there any pronoun other than お母さん when speaking to her\nchildren?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/25947/5010)\n\nThis does not mean \"after I come back\" (that would have been 買って来てから).\n\n> 牛乳、買って来るのと、どっちがいい。 \n> Which do you like, [washing the bath] or go buying the milk?\n\nThe other option (washing the bath) is simply omitted because it can be\ninferred from the context.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T04:46:39.797",
"id": "91440",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T04:46:39.797",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91438",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91438 | 91440 | 91440 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> お昼は簡単に済ませる\n\nwhich one is correct?\n\nI eat a simple lunch.\n\nor\n\nI easily will finish lunch\n\n[na-adjective + に\nparticle?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/33601/na-\nadjective-%E3%81%AB-particle)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T04:31:27.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91439",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T09:42:07.747",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T05:03:10.640",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48518",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "お昼は簡単に済ませる which one is correct? I eat a simple lunch. or i easily will finish lunch",
"view_count": 129
} | [
{
"body": "It means the former: _I eat a simple lunch_. お昼を簡単に済ます suggests eating\nsomething quick and light, maybe typically noodles, sandwiches etc.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T00:40:55.560",
"id": "91456",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T09:42:07.747",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T09:42:07.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91439",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91439 | null | 91456 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "[Source](https://youtu.be/Z0ZZOfQZ_0Y?t=153)\n\nI may have heard it wrong, so the phrase I'm asking for can be heard from the\nlink above.\n\nI was watching a Youtube clip and I heard \"めえ～て注意してよ\", and I suppose that \"め\"\nis something you say to show disapproval? But I couldn't find anything on the\ndictionary so does anyone know what \"め\" means in this context and how to use\nit?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T07:55:14.260",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91441",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T07:55:14.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does ”めえ” in ”めえ～て注意してよ” mean?",
"view_count": 108
} | [] | 91441 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91469",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know 'いそがしい' means busy as in 'having important things to do', but can it\nalso mean busy as in crowded like 'busy street'",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T13:12:57.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91442",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T05:07:31.843",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T05:07:31.843",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "42007",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"adjectives",
"japanese-to-english"
],
"title": "Can いそがしい mean busy as in 'crowded'",
"view_count": 486
} | [
{
"body": "Generally, the answer is no. 忙しい only means 'having a lot of things to do'.\n\n[忙しい街](https://www.google.com/search?q=%E5%BF%99%E3%81%97%E3%81%84%E8%A1%97)\nseems possible, and 忙しい通り may be understood similarly (google search shows it\nis not common), vaguely as streets where people are hectic.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T00:38:08.397",
"id": "91455",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T00:38:08.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91442",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The normal way to say a place is busy, in the meaning of crowded, is 混んでいる,\nthough it is a verb. にぎやか is a similar concept, but is more like \"lively\" or\n\"happening\" than \"busy\" in the sense that there are many people.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T19:40:17.203",
"id": "91469",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T19:40:17.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5379",
"parent_id": "91442",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91442 | 91469 | 91455 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91450",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "To says \"this is broth with strong umami\" which order is right ? both ?\n旨みの強い出汁です。or 強い旨みの出汁です。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T14:46:03.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91443",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T22:43:20.917",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39148",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Noun group order with adjective and の",
"view_count": 53
} | [
{
"body": "To me, both are acceptable, but 旨みの強い出汁です sounds more natural. I guess this is\nbecause X味の強い as a whole is recognized as an adjective. So 酸味の強いジュース/苦みの強いコーヒー\nis more natural than 強い酸味のジュース/強い苦みのコーヒー.\n\nOn the other hand, I don’t think either 屋根の赤い家/赤い屋根の家 is particularly natural\n(Or even the latter may be more natural).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T22:43:20.917",
"id": "91450",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-03T22:43:20.917",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91443",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91443 | 91450 | 91450 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What does adding or removing the question mark in sentences ending with ね\nchange about the meaning, if anything?\n\n> 暑いですね\n>\n> 暑いですね？\n\n> 去年もそのシャツ着てたよね\n>\n> 去年もそのシャツ着てたよね？",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T18:25:59.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91446",
"last_activity_date": "2023-08-15T08:08:16.020",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T21:16:22.340",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48518",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does adding or removing the question mark in sentences ending with ね change about the meaning, if anything?",
"view_count": 239
} | [
{
"body": "If you inflect your voice, you are generally seeking support/approval or\noutright asking a question in a casual way.\n\nA response to seeking support would not be inflected.\n\n> A: 暑いですね？ \n> B: ですね。\n\n*note: the response would usually drop all the understood parts of the sentence.\n\n*note: this is scratching the surface of the nuances of ね.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T11:24:00.380",
"id": "91477",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T17:02:47.273",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T17:02:47.273",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48892",
"parent_id": "91446",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The question mark signifies that you are asking the opinion of a person on\nsomething you accept as fact While only ね makes the sentence a statement you\nare saying that you think is a fact 暑いですね means 'It sure is hot,' 暑いですね？ means\n'It sure is hot, isn't it?'",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-03-23T06:09:41.657",
"id": "93804",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-23T06:09:41.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "50886",
"parent_id": "91446",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91446 | null | 91477 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For よう, why do we prepend な for Na-adjectives, and の for regular nouns? Is\nthere a logical understanding behind this from like a Japanese perspective? I\nfeel as though since they're both technically nouns, then we should treat them\nthe same.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T19:07:10.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91447",
"last_activity_date": "2022-08-31T07:04:15.400",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"particle-な"
],
"title": "よう - Nayou & Noyou",
"view_count": 193
} | [
{
"body": "よう is basically a na-adjective which can also behave as a noun.\n\nNote that not all na-adjectives can be used as nouns, but some can. That's why\nthey fall under the category of adjectival nouns: no-adjectives and na-\nadjectives, using の and な respectively.\n\n* * *\n\n## よう as a noun\n\nAfter **nouns** + no:\n\n * 彼は **留守** のようでした。\n\nAfter **adjectival** nouns + na/no in the non-past affirmative context:\n\n * 彼は **大丈夫** なようです。 大丈夫 is a na-adjective, which is modifying よう, a noun.\n * 彼は **病気** のようだ。病気 is a no-adjective, which is modifying よう, a noun.\n\nAfter **adjectival** nouns or **nouns** + じゃない, だった or じゃなかった in the past\ncontext:\n\n * 彼は練習が **嫌** だったようです。The clause 彼は練習が嫌だった modifies よう, a noun.\n\n## よう as a na-adjective\n\nOnce よう has been modified, this noun can also modify another noun. To do this,\nな is used.\n\n * この間食べたようなケーキだよ。この間食べた modifies よう, and よう modifies ケーキ by using な.\n\nJust like a na-adjective, it can be followed by に to form an adverb.\n\n * 彼女はまるで魚のように速く泳げます。魚 modifies よう, and ように creates an adverb to modify 速く泳げます.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T05:13:48.480",
"id": "91460",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T05:34:38.847",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T05:34:38.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "45630",
"owner_user_id": "45630",
"parent_id": "91447",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91447 | null | 91460 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between the two following sentences?\n\n> Fred san wa Nihongo o hanaseru\n\n> Fred san wa Nihongo de hanaseru\n\nRight now, I think the first using wo, is probably saying Fred can speak\nJapanese while the second one is saying he can speak using Japanese. Is this\ncorrect? Which is most natural?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T20:15:25.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91449",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T21:28:32.623",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-03T21:04:11.090",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-を",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "を vs で - Which is more natural",
"view_count": 116
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not a native speaker, but I think both are grammatical and natural\ndepending on the context.\n\n* * *\n\n> **(A)** フレッドさんは日本語 **を** 話せる\n>\n\n>> Fred can speak Japanese\n\nBecause the object of 話せる is a language, it means 'to be able to speak that\nlanguage.'\n\n> **(B)** フレッドさんは日本語 **で** 話せる\n>\n\n>> Fred can speak **in** Japanese\n\nBy using で, it means 'to be able to speak using that language.' で marks the\nmeans, that is, the way something is done.\n\nNote that 言う can be used as well, but the meaning is different.\n\n> フレッドさんは日本語 **で** 言える\n>\n\n>> Fred can say it **in** Japanese.\n\n**A** may be uttered as a response to 'Can Fred speak Japanese?' On the other\nhand, **B** may be uttered as a response to 'Can Fred speak in Japanese? I'm\nhaving a hard time understanding what he's saying **in** English.'\n\nAnother example with で:\n\n> まだ英語でうまく話せません\n>\n\n>> I'm not good at speaking English yet.\n\n>\n>\n> [Jisho.org](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A7%E8%A9%B1%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8B%20%23sentences)\n\nA literal translation for the above would be 'I can't _skillfully_ speak\nEnglish yet.'",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T00:45:22.633",
"id": "91457",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T21:28:32.623",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T21:28:32.623",
"last_editor_user_id": "45630",
"owner_user_id": "45630",
"parent_id": "91449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91449 | null | 91457 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91454",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was watching an anime and the character said something along the lines of\n\"のど乾{かわ}いたね～\".\n\nThis would mean something like \"I'm thirsty\" (looking at the previous\ndialogues, this was pretty obvious.), but I thought the た at the end would\nmake it past tense, but then it wouldn't make sense making it \"I was thirsty\"\nwhen the character was clearly talking about the present. So I was wondering\nif the た is a particle and have other meanings other than just making\nsomething past tense.\n\nIs this also because the Japanese used doesn't actually translate straight\ninto \"I'm thirsty\" but more \"My throat is dry\" if we translate it word for\nword.\n\nWould be cool if you could give some other examples of how to use this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T22:43:30.693",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91451",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T03:34:00.013",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T03:34:00.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"usage",
"particles",
"aspect"
],
"title": "た particle usage in のど乾いた",
"view_count": 89
} | [
{
"body": "The verb 乾く describes a change of state ( _to get dry_ ) rather than a lasting\nstate ( _to be dry_ ). Therefore, when used in the present tense, it means\nsuch a change either happens usually, as opposed to at a specific point of\ntime, or will happen sometime in the future. The た-form in your example\nindicates that such a change has recently happened and the throat has come\ninto a state of being dry as a result. You can understand this た-form as a\nmarker of **perfect aspect**.\n\nThe literal translation would be:\n\n> のどが乾いた。 \n> _(lit.) My throat has (just) dried._\n\nIf you want to strictly describe a current state, you could use the ている-form.\n\n> のどが乾いている。 \n> _(lit.) My throat is dry._\n\nHowever, this doesn’t say you have rencetly come into that state and is\nprobably inappropriate in your scenario.\n\nThe usage of the た-form in the following example is similar as the verb わかる\nalso describes a change of state (of mind).\n\n> わかった。 \n> _I understand._ \n> _(lit.) I have (just) understood._\n\nThe following sentence with the ている-form, in contrast, sounds as if you are\ntelling the speaker they don’t have to tell what they are telling because you\nalready know it.\n\n> わかっている。 \n> _I know._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T00:23:17.990",
"id": "91454",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T00:23:17.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91451",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 91451 | 91454 | 91454 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The first one is the most confusing one, because I have heard people say it\nusually when they are upset. The other two examples to me sound a little\nsofter with だろう/でしょう. Therefore, I suppose the purpose of だろう is to make the\nsentences, including the first one, sound a little less direct? The second\nexample is also interesting, because of the んだろう part. Would it be a big\ndifference, were the sentence written with only だろう, or even without だろう?\n\nI read about the origin of だろう/でしょう, but it was not much of a help. I think I\nmight be missing the nuances of these words now, but might develop a feel for\nthem later on. They don't always translate well as \"might\" or \"maybe\" or \"I\nwonder\" etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-03T23:22:27.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91453",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T03:28:16.477",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "40705",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "What is the purpose of だろう in expressions such as 何をしてんだろう or なんてかわいい犬なんだろう or 何でだろう",
"view_count": 194
} | [
{
"body": "だろう at the end of a sentence containing interrogatives (\"wh-\" words like 誰, 何,\nなんで, etc) means \"I wonder\". While an ordinary question is addressed to others,\nだろう(か) forms a question addressed to yourself. でしょう is the polite equivalent.\nPlease remember the basic patterns below:\n\n * 彼は来る **だろう** 。 \nI believe he will come.\n\n * 彼は来る(の) **だろうか** 。 \nI wonder if he will come.\n\n * **誰** が来るの **だろう** 。 \n**誰** が来るの **だろうか** 。 \nI wonder who will come.\n\n * 彼は来るのか。/彼は来るのですか。 \nWill he come? (direct quesition)\n\nSo 何をしてんだろう ([contraction of\n何をしているのだろう](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/61959/5010)) means \"I wonder\nwhat they are doing\". It _could_ be translated into English as \"What are they\ndoing?\", especially when the speaker is upset, but it's important to remember\nthis is not an ordinary question that directly expects an answer from someone.\nLikewise, 何でだろう is \"I wonder why\". Unlike 何でなの (which directly asks \"Why?\"), a\nlistener doesn't have to reply.\n\nなんてかわいい犬なんだろう is \"What a cute dog!\". Although this だろう is still a \"I wonder\"\nmarker here, this is a special _exclamatory_ construction you have to master\nseparately. This pattern always starts with なんて, なんと or なんという. See: [JLPT N1\nGrammar なんという / なんと / なんて](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-\ngrammar/%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%A8-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%A6-nan-\nto-iu-nanto-nante-meaning/)\n\nRelated: [だろう in question\ncontext?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/62238/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T03:28:16.477",
"id": "91459",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T03:28:16.477",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91453 | null | 91459 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91465",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was watching an anime and the character said something along the lines of\n\"私{わたし}は、このままでいいの\". This translated into something like \"Do I really want\nthings to stay like this?\" But what does まま do in this sentence? Does it mean\nto keep something in the state as it already is?\n\nI feel like this is kind of a weird word since there's no direct Japanese-\nEnglish translation.\n\nWould this also work in past tense?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T07:45:47.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91461",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T08:40:12.037",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"usage",
"nuances",
"anime"
],
"title": "Use of まま in Japanese",
"view_count": 411
} | [
{
"body": "まま literally means \"condition\" or \"state\", or if you want to go fancy, \"state\nof affairs.\"\n\nThus,\n\nこのまま = things being how they are \nこのままで = keeping things how they are/things staying the way they are \n私はこのままでいいの？ = Is it okay for me, if things stay the way they are? (the\ntranslation you saw essentially says the same thing)\n\nSo your understanding is pretty good.\n\nI am not sure what exactly your last question is about. Do you mean to ask if\nまま can be used to talk about past events? Yes.\n\n> そのままでよかったのに \n> would have been nice if (things/I/you/someone/something) had stayed like\n> that",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T08:40:12.037",
"id": "91465",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T08:40:12.037",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91461",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91461 | 91465 | 91465 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 人間というのは、余程嫌いな相手でない限り、相手の短所より長所のほうに目が行くよう出来ていることが、さまざまな心理実験で明らかにされている、いわゆる「隣の芝部は青い」現象である\n\nI do get the majority of the meaning of this sentence except the beginning\npart:\n\n> 人間というのは、余程嫌いな相手でない限り\n\nDoes this mean: In regards to Humans: There is a limit as to how much a human\ndislikes another humanoid?\n\nContinuing on:\n\nThe opponent (or other person) strong points rather than weak points are\nlooked at by humanoid 1, and this phenomenon is called the grass is always\ngreen/blue on the other side.\n\nAm I right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T07:48:11.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91462",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T16:04:43.530",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T08:41:07.583",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "人間というのは、余程嫌いな相手でない限り",
"view_count": 96
} | [
{
"body": "...限り in this case means \"as long as ...\" (see definition 4 of 限り on\njisho.org: <https://jisho.org/search/kagiri>).\n\nSo I would translate 余程嫌いな相手でない限り as \"as long as it's not someone [subject]\nvery much hates\". The whole sentence would be something along the lines of:\n\n\"The fact that humans are made in a way that they - as long as they don't very\nmuch hate someone - draw their eyes towards others' strong points rather than\ntheir weaknesses is the so-called \"the grass is always greener on the other\nside\" phenomenon, which has been made evident by various psychological\nexperiments.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T16:04:43.530",
"id": "91467",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T16:04:43.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33212",
"parent_id": "91462",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91462 | null | 91467 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91466",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is this famous quote reputedly from 山本五十六:\n\n> やってみせて、言って聞かせて、やらせてみて、\n> ほめてやらねば人は動かじ。([source](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/quote/154/)) \n> やってみせ、言ってきかせて、させてみて、誉めてやらねば人は動かじ。(a different version.\n> [source](https://www.komcon.co.jp/ml/1166/)) \n> Do it and show'em; say things and make'em listen; try and let'em do things;\n> and if you don't praise people (for what they do), people don't lift a\n> finger. (My rendering)\n\nIt appears 動かじ = 動かず, but I can't find anything on [Wikipedia's 四つ仮名\npage](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9B%9B%E3%81%A4%E4%BB%AE%E5%90%8D)\nabout this conversion. Is this a marker of [Early Modern\nJapanese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Modern_Japanese) or a dialect?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T08:28:24.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91464",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T22:58:13.420",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T22:58:13.420",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"auxiliaries",
"auxiliary-ず"
],
"title": "じ/ず conversion in 人は動かじ",
"view_count": 294
} | [
{
"body": "[じ(まじ)](https://www.google.com/search?q=%E3%81%98%20%E3%81%BE%E3%81%98) is an\nauxiliary verb that means _will not_ (as opposed to ず meaning _not_ ). So 動かじ\nmeans _(People) will not move/take actions_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T09:13:23.587",
"id": "91466",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T09:13:23.587",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91464",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 91464 | 91466 | 91466 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91473",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am learning kana and have some problems with similar construction. I found\nan excellent source (<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TohUrbpdYJY>) where Yuko\nsensei described a left-start and top-start concept that works for シ vs ツ and\nン vs ソ. I suppose it's similar to the way > = and < are the same elements with\na different orientation. I'm not able to find any similar distinction between\nい and り.\n\nI can see that both have a similar J on the left with another stroke oriented\nto the right and left respectively. Is there something more I should be\nconsidering? How are these taught in Japan?\n\n--------------Update------------------ I was able to find some help with this video showing someone hand-writing the hiragana. For now I focusing on the start, direction, and end of the characters in the 4-square graph. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSQi34uKMmY>\n\nI also found this set of instructions which does show progressively worse\nexamples of 0i until you end up at ri. <http://japanese-\nlesson.com/characters/hiragana/hiragana_drill/hiragana01_writing.html>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T17:13:04.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91468",
"last_activity_date": "2023-01-08T08:23:24.827",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T05:00:03.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "48831",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kana",
"handwriting"
],
"title": "Differences between い and り",
"view_count": 335
} | [
{
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/j4pCF.png)\n\nBoth consist of a left レ-like stroke and a right J-like stroke.\n\nThe main differences are:\n\n * As for い, the left stroke is longer (a > b) and the whole shape fits in a horizontally long rectangle (E ≧ a);\n * As for り, the right stroke is longer (d > c) and the whole shape fits in a vertically long rectangle (d ≧ F)\n\nComparing these two,\n\n * usually d > a > c ≧ b;\n * as implied by the above, E > F.\n\nAdditionally, you may wonder if い need to be slanted like in the picture.\nPractically, the answer is no (it can be a left vertical stroke + a right\nstroke which is shorter), but it tends to be so than (strokes in) り.\n\nIf you have other questions, let me know.\n\n* * *\n\nProbably a standard instruction is [something like\nthis](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTr3ROSU35g)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T04:26:56.030",
"id": "91473",
"last_activity_date": "2023-01-08T08:23:24.827",
"last_edit_date": "2023-01-08T08:23:24.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91468",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91468 | 91473 | 91473 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91472",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know Rashii（らしい） is an i-adjective. What are the forms Rashiku（らしく） and\nRashisa（らしさ） that I see often used?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T19:42:35.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91470",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T22:34:03.133",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T22:34:03.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"adjectives"
],
"title": "Rashii, Rashiku, and Rashisa",
"view_count": 648
} | [
{
"body": "### Background: Conjugation\n\nThe word らしい conjugates the same as any other _-i_ adjective. Here are the\nbasic forms, with their names in Japanese and English:\n\n * Ending in い \n終止形【しゅうしけい】 terminal / predicative (used to end a sentence) and 連体形【れんたいけい】\nattributive (used to modify a noun or noun phrase)\n\n * Ending in く \n連用形【れんようけい】 adverbial (used to modify another verb or adjective, sometimes\nused as a conjunctive to say \"this _and_ [whatever comes next]\")\n\n * Ending in くて \n接続【せつぞく】 conjunctive (formed from the adverbial + て, used to say \"this _and_\n[whatever comes next]\")\n\n * Ending in さ \n名詞【めいし】 noun or nominal (similar to \"-ness\", used to describe the objective\ndegree or \"how much\" of an adjective)\n\n * Ending in み \n名詞【めいし】 noun or nominal (similar to \"-ness\", used to describe the subjective\nimpression or feeling of the adjective)\n\n### Your Questions\n\n * What is らしく?\n\nらしく is the adverbial form of らしい. While a phrase like 「XYZらしい」 means that\nsomething is \"like XYZ\", or \"seems XYZ-ish\", a phrase like 「XYZらしく」 would mean\n\"in an XYZ manner\" as an adverbial, or \"seems XYZ-ish, _and_ [whatever comes\nnext]\" as a conjunctive.\n\n * What is らしさ?\n\nらしさ is the noun form of らしい. While a phrase like 「XYZらしい」 means that something\nis \"like XYZ\", or \"seems XYZ-ish\", a phrase like 「XYZらしさ」 would mean \"XYZ-ish-\nness\", in terms of the degree or \"much-ness\" of the XYZ-ish quality.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T22:33:31.503",
"id": "91472",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T22:33:31.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91470",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91470 | 91472 | 91472 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> できる人と思わせるために下準備が必要です。しかし、実は最大の下準備は、何といっても「自分を知る」ことである。\n\nJust wanted to confirm the above meaning, does it mean this?\n\n> To make people think that they can do it, preparations are necessary? BUT\n> the most preparations are called \"I know everything\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T09:00:07.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91474",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T21:20:59.303",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T21:20:59.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "できる人と思わせるために下準備が必要です",
"view_count": 137
} | [
{
"body": "Let me break it down to smaller chunks:\n\n> できる人と思わせるために下準備が必要です。\n\nできる人 -- 有能な人, a competent person \n～と思わせる -- make others think (of you) as... \nために -- in order to; so as to \n下準備 -- preliminary arrangements/preparations \n～が必要です。 -- ...are necessary.\n\n_lit._ In order to make others think that you are a competent person, you need\npreliminary arrangements.\n\n* * *\n\n> しかし、実は最大の下準備は、何といっても「自分を知る」ことである。\n\nしかし -- but \n実は -- actually; in fact; as a matter of fact \n最大の -- the biggest; the most crucial \n下準備は(...である。) -- preliminary arrangement/preparation (is...) \n何といっても -- after all; to say the least; no matter how you look at it \n「自分を知る」こと -- to \"know oneself\" \nである。 -- (copula)\n\n_lit._ But, in fact, the most crucial preliminary arrangement is to \"know\nyourself\", after all.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T14:22:04.517",
"id": "91482",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T15:16:13.377",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T15:16:13.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91474 | null | 91482 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not 100% sure that I get the difference between あります and です.\n\nI understand parts of it, for example \"わたしはマルクスです\" using あります doesn't make\nsense for me here as I think it is more of a \"there is\" word.\n\nBut in this sentence I am not sure about the difference, or how it would\ntranslate\n\n> ほんは つくえの うえに あります\n\nvs\n\n> ほんは つくえの うえに です\n\nDoes it translate differently and if it does, how?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T10:50:49.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91475",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T01:23:19.140",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T01:23:19.140",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "48894",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax"
],
"title": "when to use あります vs です",
"view_count": 545
} | [
{
"body": "I would use 'desu' when equating things.\n\n> The book is red. (本は赤いです。)\n\nI would not use 'desu' in your example for the book existing on the desk. In\nthat case 'aru' (or 'iru' for a living thing) is used.\n\n*bonus point: When introducing oneself, it is not usual to start with わたしは as it is understood you are talking about yourself. It would be added at the beginning of sentences where you want the nuance of 'As for me...'\n\n*bonus point: Men generally introduce themselves using 'ぼく' or 'おれ' nowadays and avoid 'わたし'",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T11:15:26.980",
"id": "91476",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-05T17:03:03.077",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-05T17:03:03.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48892",
"parent_id": "91475",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] | 91475 | null | 91476 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91608",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm curious about the nuances/differences between these words when used for\nthe concept of \"normal\" or \"usual.\" Every time I think I understand the\ndifference between these, I get surprised when I still don't.\n\nFor example why are the following sentences ungrammatical/weird?\n\n * あの店は、どんな果物でも普段売っている\n * たいてい飲んでいる薬がありますか？\n\nEdit: To maybe give a better example of why they overlap:\n\nExample 1:\n\n * 普段は夜８時まで営業しています\n * 通常は夜８時まで営業しています\n * 普通に夜８時まで営業しています\n * 平常は夜８時まで営業しています\n\nExample 2:\n\n * 普通に戻す\n * 通常に戻す\n * 正常に戻す\n * 普段に戻す\n\nExample 3:\n\n * 普段のところに行こう\n * 通常のところに行こう\n * 普通のところに行こう\n * いつものところに行こう",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T19:39:10.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91483",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T06:11:09.597",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-11T13:01:25.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "38831",
"owner_user_id": "38831",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference of usage between 普通, 普段, 通常, 平常, 正常, いつも, and たいてい",
"view_count": 2344
} | [
{
"body": "Not a complete answer but a few points from my experience:\n\nいつも stands out in this list because it basically means 'all the time', which\nis a very absolute statement. My experience is that sensibilities in Japanese\nusage make this an unlikely choice.\n\n普通 is often used to describe a normal type of 'thing' (local train, general\nbank account, standard vehicle vs 'kei' vehicle)\n\n普段 gets used a lot to describe proper practice/behavior\n\nTake heart. Even though I have had exposure to Japanese since 1989, I still\nfind it difficult to know which words to use when.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-05T21:59:14.443",
"id": "91484",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T04:08:21.727",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T04:08:21.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "48892",
"owner_user_id": "48892",
"parent_id": "91483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "挙げられた二つの例文に関してのみですが：\n\n> あの店は、どんな果物でも ~~普段~~ **たいてい** 売っている。\n\n「たいてい」はもともと、頻度を表すものではなく、『ほとんどすべてに及ぶさま』や『確率が高いさま』を表します。この例文の「どんな果物でもたいてい売っている」も、「ほとんどすべての果物に及ぶさま」や「売っている確率が高いさま」を示しているものです。『頻度の高いさま』を表して「ほぼ毎日\n(almost every day / on a daily basis / habitually)\n売っている」と言いたいのではないので、「普段」で言い換えるとおかしいです。（「日曜はたいてい家にいます。」のような文では、時間的な割合や確率が高いさまを表して「日曜に家にいる確率が高い」という意味から、「たいてい」を\n\"usually\" の意味で使えます。）\n\n> ~~たいてい~~ **普段** 飲んでいる薬がありますか？\n\n「たいてい」は『ほとんどすべてに及ぶさま』や『確率が高いさま』を表すので、この文には合いません。「日常的に・ほぼ毎日飲んでいる薬」と言いたいので、「普段」がいいです。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T03:31:43.283",
"id": "91488",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T03:36:56.727",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T03:36:56.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "The meaning of those words span over _usually, always, generally, commonly,\nnormally_ etc., depending on the context. The following is a random sketch of\nwhat comes to my mind. (I don't put links, but some are based on goo辞書)\n\n## Basic overlap\n\nThe overlapping meaning of those words is _usual(ly)_.\n\n## Grammar\n\n 1. All are technically nouns.\n 2. 普通 and 通常 can be used as an adjective or as an adverb. (e.g. 普通電車, 通常使わない)\n 3. 正常 can be used as an adjective with or without な (e.g. 正常状態, 正常な状態) but not as an adverb.\n 4. 普段 is mostly used as an adverb.\n 5. 平常 is usually used as an adjective without な (e.g. 平常運行, not 平常な運行). 平常 is mostly used in specific combinations.\n 6. 正常 and 平常 are not natural with の (正常の状態 may be possible, but 平常の体温 is definitely weird).\n 7. いつもだ may be possible in speech (e.g. xxがxxxなのはいつもだし). いつも and たいてい are mostly used as an adverb.\n 8. When using with だ, it is more natural to use xx通りだ (except 正常).\n\n| －as adj | － as adv | な | だ | に | の \n---|---|---|---|---|---|--- \n普通 | 〇 | 〇 | △ | 〇 | △～〇 | 〇 \n普段 | － | 〇 | － | － | － | 〇 \n通常 | 〇 | 〇 | － | △ | － | 〇 \n平常 | 〇 | － | － | △～〇 | － | △ \n正常 | 〇 | － | 〇 | 〇 | 〇 | △ \nいつも | － | 〇 | － | △ | － | 〇 \nたいてい | － | 〇 | － | － | － | 〇 \n \n*〇=acceptable, △=maybe possible, －=not acceptable\n\n## Meaning\n\n 1. 普通 is an antonym of 特別. So, the meaning is more _common, ordinary, average_ , and in some cases can be translated as _usual_.\n 2. 正常 is an antonym of 異常, _normal_ =absence of abnormality. 平常 can be also translated as _normal_ =as usual, as the thing is most of the time.\n 3. いつも is _always_ and means _usually_ in a relaxed sense. In the latter sense, it is not different from たいてい or 普段.\n 4. たいてい is _most(ly)_. たいていのX implies a collection of _most X_.\n 5. 通常 overlaps with 普通 to some extent; 通常 is more formal; 通常 has some rules assumed (at least more so than 普通), and can be translated _generally_. The table below is from goo辞書.\n 6. 普通は vs 普通に. I think 普通に as an adverb (such as 普通におもしろい; or in Example 1) is a recent usage. The meaning of 普通におもしろい could be slightly different depending on context, but it means _it is worth being called interesting, but may not very interesting_ (like, if it is used for a manga in some magazine, 普通におもしろい means it is interesting enough to read on, but may be not enough to buy). 普通は is more usual _usually_.\n\n| …の方法 | ごく…の人間 | 今日の彼は…じゃない | …の業務は五時まで \n---|---|---|---|--- \n普通 | ○ | ○ | ○ | － \n通常 | ○ | － | － | ○ \n \n## Comments on examples\n\n 1. Example 1: 平常は is not natural (Grammar 5). 通常は (and missing 普通は) can mean (a) generally and (b) usually (as an everyday fact). 普段は only means (b). 普通に is natural, but means more like _there is nothing special about the shop, it is open until eight_.\n 2. Example 2: 普段に is not natural (Grammar 4). The others mean mostly similar, it depends on what it is about. If it is about a broken machine, use 正常に; about train schedule, 通常に (from a special schedule over the holidays, for example); 普通に戻す can be used in most cases. Also note this 普通に is not an adverb, but simply 普通+に(to).\n 3. Example 3: 普段のところ and いつものところ mean the same: _the place(s) we go quite often_ (たいていのところに行こう is not possible). 普通のところ means _the place where there is nothing special/eccentric about_ = _an average-looking place_. 通常のところ would mean either, but sounds unnatural possibly due to the formal nature of 通常.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-15T02:38:26.203",
"id": "91608",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T06:11:09.597",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-15T06:11:09.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91483 | 91608 | 91488 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91491",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I noticed something very interesting in the adaptations of the novel\n[『バッテリー』](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%90%E3%83%83%E3%83%86%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC_\\(%E5%B0%8F%E8%AA%AC\\))\nacross media forms. For context, the story is set in a fictional city in 岡山県.\nThe protagonist 原田巧 is described to have been born in Tokyo and moving around\nwith his itinerant family due to his dad's job changes. At the beginning of\nthe story, the family move to 岡山県, 巧's mom's 実家.\n\nIn all the media adaptations, the people in that small 岡山 city speak with a\nvery distinct accent. But interestingly, in its movie adaptation which came\nout in 2007, most local male characters, from barely teenaged elementary,\nmiddle school kids to middle-aged teachers use the first person pronoun わし.\nThis is the only place where I've heard teenagers refer to themselves as わし.\nBut interestingly when the TV drama came out in the following year, the\nmarkedly western accent is kept while the male first person わし is all changed\nto おれ. The anime came out much later in 2016, and it followed suit in\ndiscarding わし as a dialect marker: just like in the TV drama, you hear the\naccent but not the unique use of the male first person pronoun.\n\nSadly I don't have access to the book (This\n[試し読み](https://bookwalker.jp/series/135/) that I found cuts off right before\nthe first scene with local kids) or the radio drama which seemingly came out\nin 2000, so I don't know which personal pronoun is used in them.\n\nI have read every answer under [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/38378/30454), and they appear\nto address わし's use by older men, which I guess is more of a general 役割語 and\nhas enjoyed wider and more lasting currency. I am also aware that in 愛知県（三河弁）\nsome females use this pronoun, but that's outside the scope of this question.\n\n> 中国地方、四国地方、近畿地方、九州地方、北陸地方など西日本全般や東海地方の愛知・岐阜で用いられている。\n> **これらの地域では子供や若者でも普通に使うことが多いが、近年はメディアの影響から、若い人を中心に俺も使われるようになってきた。主に男性の一人称であるが、一部地域においては（主に老人が）男女にかかわらず用いている。**\n> ([source](http://nihonnoiitoko.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2010/07/post-\n> aac9.html#.E5.84.82.EF.BC.88.E3.82.82.E3.81.97.E3.81.8F.E3.81.AF.E3.80.8C.E7.A7.81.E3.80.8D.E3.80.81.E3.82.8F.E3.81.97.EF.BC.89))\n\n[Wikipedia\n日本語の一人称代名詞](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E3%81%AE%E4%B8%80%E4%BA%BA%E7%A7%B0%E4%BB%A3%E5%90%8D%E8%A9%9E#%E5%84%82%E3%80%81%E7%A7%81%EF%BC%88%E3%82%8F%E3%81%97%EF%BC%89)\ncontains similar information.\n\n### My question is\n\nIs the change of the local male 一人称 in media adaptations in any way indicative\nof actual usage change over time? Namely, did young male users of わし in those\nareas actually dwindle in the past two decades?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T01:35:35.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91485",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T20:00:54.957",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T01:43:11.240",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"dialects",
"pronouns",
"first-person-pronouns"
],
"title": "「わし」 used by young males in Western Japan",
"view_count": 1372
} | [
{
"body": "Dialects in Setouchi (Okayama, Hiroshima, Kagawa, Ehime) are known to be close\nto the so-called\n[\"全国共通いなか言葉\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23690/5010) typical of 昔話\n(watch [this YouTube video](https://youtu.be/GA0_a4X_vfM)). People in those\nregions actually use ～じゃのう, ～じゃよ, わし and so on in real life! People often say\n「昔話みたい!」 when an old person in this area appears in a TV program. In\nparticular, the use of ～じゃ in Hiroshima-ben is well-known.\n\nMy personal experiences are not necessary more correct than the information on\nWikipedia, but perhaps I am the most familiar with those dialects among those\nwho frequent here.\n\n * My grandfather living in Northern Tokushima (almost Kagawa) actively uses わし.\n * A female friend of mine from Hiroshima, born in the 1980's, used じゃ actively when she was around 20 (she then moved to Osaka and became a fluent speaker of Osaka-ben, which is very different).\n * When I moved from Tokushima to Kagawa in the late 1980's, I was surprised because most elementary school boys were using わし.\n * I remember one middle school student from Kagawa who traveled to Tokyo in 2000 was using のう and わし. I remember this because I hadn't heard Kagawa dialect for a while. He then moved to Tokyo and now speaks standard Japanese.\n * When I traveled to Hiroshima several years ago, I remember a young local woman near Hiroshima Station speaking in a typical Hiroshima dialect.\n\nUnfortunately, I lived in Setouchi long ago, so I have no personal experience\nof how things have changed in the past 20 years. I am certain that some of\nthem remain, but according to the internet, young users of わし seem to have\nbecome fairly rare.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T04:42:56.723",
"id": "91491",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T04:54:17.367",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T04:54:17.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91485",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "I spent a year living in eastern Hiroshima prefecture in the 1980's teaching\nEnglish and it was pretty common to hear younger men using わし there at that\ntime. I lived with a family and then spoke dialect at home. Most of the\nstudents I taught also spoke in dialect and you heard it everywhere.\n\nIn the times I have been back since then, the last of which was a few years\nago, it seems that 標準語 has made some serious inroads and you generally hear\nmuch less dialect. I don't recall hearing anyone under 50 using わし any time\nrecently. Even the family I lived with didn't seem to speak in 備後弁 as much\nanymore, but that might just be because they hadn't seen me in a while. (Which\nis too bad! I miss hearing people say じゃけえのう.)\n\nSo, in answer to your question, I'll give my entirely anecdotally-based\nopinion that younger men there are no longer using わし as much as they used to,\nat least in the cities.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T20:00:54.957",
"id": "91511",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T20:00:54.957",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48928",
"parent_id": "91485",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91485 | 91491 | 91491 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91487",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In this video:\n[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8JEvkDc48M&t=2m37s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8JEvkDc48M&t=2m37s)\n\n> 今回ですね、キャラクターがしゃべってくれるから、すごい楽なんですよ。 \n> _In this game (unlike previous ones), the characters speak, so it's really\n> easy_\n>\n> しかも、オープニングテーマっていうのか？あれ、オープニングテーマでいいのかな \n> _And then in the opening theme (movie) or whatever you would call it,_\n>\n> とりあえずそこでX5がで何が起こったかっていうのも、あらすじで言ってくれるんでね。助かりますね。 \n> _it recaps what happened in X5, which helps._\n>\n> じゃあ、いきましょう。 \n> _OK, let's go!_\n\nBut: <https://jisho.org/search/toriaezu>\n\n> 取りあえず\n>\n> 1. first of all; at once; right away\n>\n> 2. for now; for the time being\n>\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T02:39:03.383",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91486",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T00:57:05.287",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T02:43:03.647",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "32890",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "How does 取りあえず function in this sentence?",
"view_count": 72
} | [
{
"body": "The adverbial 取り合えず is not easy to translate in some contexts. I think it may\nhelp if you understand it as \"anyway\" or \"for now\". This usage sets aside what\nhas just been said and starts a new topic that's unrelated or semi-related to\nthe previous topic.\n\nLet me give you my rendering of the middle section:\n\n> しかも、オープニングテーマっていうのかな？ あれの…オープニングテーマでいいのかな？\n> ま、とりあえずそこでX5が、で何が起こったかっていうのも、あらすじ言ってくれるんでね。助かりますね。 \n> Moreover, in the... is that the opening animation? Can we call that the\n> opening animation? **Anyway** , you see X5 in there, or if anything at all\n> happens, a summary is given to us. Very helpful.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T03:02:04.807",
"id": "91487",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T00:57:05.287",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T00:57:05.287",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"parent_id": "91486",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91486 | 91487 | 91487 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "1 - 冷蔵庫が壊れたので、新しいのを買うことにした。 2 - 私は部屋を綺麗にした。\n\nCan Someone explain the difference between ~ことにする vs ~にする・~くする\n\n1 is I decided to buy a new fridge 2 is I cleaned my room\n\nThey look the same to me, what's the difference?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T04:18:44.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91489",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T07:51:34.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "冷蔵庫が壊れたので、新しいのを買うことにした。",
"view_count": 73
} | [
{
"body": "ことにする means _to decide_.\n\n * [【JLPT N4】文法・例文：〜ことにする](https://nihongokyoshi-net.com/2019/04/29/jlptn4-grammar-kotonisuru/#:%7E:text=%E6%96%87%E5%9E%8B%EF%BC%9A%E3%80%9C%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AB%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B,-%5B%E6%84%8F%E5%91%B3%5D&text=%E8%87%AA%E5%88%86%E3%81%AE%E6%84%8F%E5%BF%97%E3%81%A7%E3%80%9C%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B,%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%82%92%E8%A8%80%E3%81%86%E6%99%82%E3%81%AB%E4%BD%BF%E3%81%86%E3%80%82&text=Used%20to%20say%20that%20you,something%20of%20your%20own%20volition.&text=%E3%83%BB%E5%B0%91%E3%81%97%E7%A1%AC%E3%81%84%E8%A1%A8%E7%8F%BE%E3%81%AB%E3%80%8C%E3%80%9C,%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E3%80%8D%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E8%A1%A8%E7%8F%BE%E3%82%82%E3%81%82%E3%82%8B%E3%80%82)\n\n～にする can mean _to decide_ / _to make (sth) ～_\n\n * [【JLPT N4】文法・例文：〜にする](https://nihongokyoshi-net.com/2019/05/29/jlptn4-grammar-nisuru/)\n * [【Ｎ５文法】～にする／くする](https://nihongonosensei.net/?p=20162)\n\nA rule of thumb: When the preceding word is a stem of na-adjective (such as\n綺麗), it means the latter; Otherwise, it means _to decide_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T07:51:34.143",
"id": "91523",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T07:51:34.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91489",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91489 | null | 91523 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91501",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 君は学生にすぎない\n\nIn Bunpro, this is translated to \"You are nothing more than a student.\"\n\nCan anyone explain why there must be a に after 学生?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T06:36:41.287",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91493",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T00:27:34.220",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T06:42:51.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Why is Ni here?",
"view_count": 110
} | [
{
"body": "The particle に has many roles, and it can mark a subject of comparison. It's\nexplained as the 11th definition of に in デジタル大辞泉:\n\n> ###\n> [に](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AB/#:%7E:text=11-,%E6%AF%94%E8%BC%83%E3%83%BB%E5%89%B2%E5%90%88%E3%81%AE%E5%9F%BA%E6%BA%96%E3%82%84%E3%80%81%E6%AF%94%E8%BC%83%E3%81%AE%E5%AF%BE%E8%B1%A1%E3%82%92%E8%A1%A8%E3%81%99%E3%80%82,-%E3%80%8C%E5%90%9B%E2%80%95%E4%BC%BC%E3%81%A6)\n>\n> **11** 比較・割合の基準や、比較の対象を表す。「君―似ている」「一日―三回服用する」\n\nExamples:\n\n * AはBに勝る \nA is superior to him\n\n * AはBに劣る \nB is inferior to him\n\n * AはBに似ている \nA resembles B\n\n * AはBに足りる \nA is enough for B\n\n * 身に余る \nmore than one deserves (set phrase)\n\nThat being said, ～に過ぎない is a fixed set phrase you have to memorize. It's\nalways used in this form including the negation. 学生に過ぎる will never mean\n\"You're more than a student\".\n\nAlthough highly bookish, there is also a pattern ～に過ぎる (e.g., 慎重に過ぎる \"to be\ntoo cautious\", 身に過ぎる \"more than one deserves\"). See: [「慎重すぎる」 and 「慎重に過ぎる」 -\nis there a difference?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18870/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T00:27:34.220",
"id": "91501",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T00:27:34.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91493",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91493 | 91501 | 91501 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 現実に、社会のほうも、欠点のない何でも屋のような人間より、多少欠点はあっても、長所の抜きん出た人間のほうを重用するようになってきている。\n\nIs 長所の抜きん出た人間のほう referring to\n\n1 - 欠点のない何でも屋のような人間 \nor \n2 - 多少欠点",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T09:12:53.230",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91495",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T08:13:26.857",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T16:56:07.313",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "現実に、社会のほうも、欠点のない何でも屋のような人間より、多少欠点はあっても、長所の抜きん出た人間のほうを重用するようになってきている。",
"view_count": 133
} | [
{
"body": "Here's the basic structure of the sentence:\n\n> 社会のほうも[=S]、AよりBのほうを[=O]重用するようになってきている[=V]。\n\nSubject: 社会 \nObject: AよりBのほうを, B rather than A \nVerb: 重用するようになってきている, has come to make much of; has started to appoint\n(person) to an important position\n\nA = 欠点のない、「[何]{なん}でも[屋]{や}*」のような人間 \nB = 多少欠点はあっても、長所の[抜]{ぬ}きん[出]{で}た人間\n\n*[何]{なん}でも[屋]{や} means [[何]{なに}をしてもひととおりできる人。](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%BD%95%E3%81%A7%E3%82%82%E5%B1%8B/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T10:22:25.213",
"id": "91496",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T08:13:26.857",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T08:13:26.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91495 | null | 91496 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91502",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> ロンドン **て** どんな町かなと思っていたんです。\n\nWhy is て, not は, used in the sentence? This looks like a place for the topic\nmarker…",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T12:52:08.140",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91498",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T00:33:37.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "て in place of は",
"view_count": 98
} | [
{
"body": "This て is a shortened form of って, which can replace は in informal speech.\n\n * [Difference between って and は as topic marker](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15004/5010)\n * [Replacing は with って](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/39667/5010)\n\nロンドン **て** どんな町かなと思っていたんです。(colloquial) \n= ロンドン **って** どんな町かなと思っていたんです。(colloquial) \n= ロンドン **(と)は** どんな町かなと思っていたんです。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T00:33:37.730",
"id": "91502",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T00:33:37.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91498",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 91498 | 91502 | 91502 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91503",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> A:早いとこ結婚したらどうだ。 \n> B:「ウィー・アー・ザ・ワールド」のブルーススプリングスティーンより唐突だな。 \n> B:アル・ジャロウの後に入ってくるやつな。ビックとなるような初見。 \n> A:でも **ｍｖｐで言ったら** ブルーススプリングスティーンだと思うけどな。 \n> B:たしかに後半のスティービーワンダーに一歩も引かないあの姿勢はすごいけど。\n\nWhat I had come up was that で is an abbreviation of 中で, but I don't understand\nwhat MVP refers to, the 45 singers? So I thought maybe it meant something\nalong the lines of\n\n> \"Among the MVPS (45 singers) it was Bruce Springsteen (that made me ビックとなる)\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-06T18:53:56.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91500",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T01:15:59.503",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-06T19:05:14.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "46733",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"sentence"
],
"title": "How is で used in ＭＶＰで言ったら",
"view_count": 114
} | [
{
"body": "で is a particle that can broadly mark a scope/condition (e.g., 合計で \"in total\",\n1人で \"alone\", 3人の中で最強 \"strongest among the three of them\"). So Xで言ったら describes\nwhat the speaker is going to talk about. It means \"speaking of X\", \"when it\ncomes to X\", \"X-wise\", \"in terms of X\", etc. This is a set phrase that only\ncomes at the beginning of a sentence.\n\n> それで言ったら、...\n>\n> In that sense, ... \n> Speaking of which, ...\n\nMVPで言ったら in this context effectively means \"If I were to choose an MVP (among\nthe singers)\" because MVP by definition refers to one best person. It will not\nmean \"among the MVPs\" unless it clearly says something like MVPの中で言ったら.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T00:47:43.937",
"id": "91503",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T01:15:59.503",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T01:15:59.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91500",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91500 | 91503 | 91503 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For 面白い, why is the noun form commonly 面白 instead of 面白さ? Isn't さ supposed to\nbe the way to take i-adjectives and make them nouns?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T01:12:44.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91504",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T04:13:58.120",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T09:03:28.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "48639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"nouns",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "I-Adjective nominalization",
"view_count": 205
} | [
{
"body": "There is no usage, as far as I know in the modern Standard Japanese, of\n面白【おもしろ】 itself as a noun.\n\n面白さ is a true noun deriving from the adjective 面白い. It means \"fun\" or\n\"interestingness\".\n\n面白 is just a form 面白い minus conjugable い. It is called \"adjective stem\"\n(形容詞語幹) in the Japanese grammar, that does not work as noun; actually not able\nto become a word, but only makes a non-final affix of a word that carries the\nmeaning, mostly you see in a way like \" _perma_ death\" or \" _insta_ kill\". (In\nthis case often written in hiragana or katakana to mark a vernacular vibe.)\n\n> おもしろ動画 \"lolvideo\" → _funny(-est) video_ \n> おもしろ装置 \"loldevice\" → _funny (and often useless) machine_\n\nOf course there are also more conventional words made with it, including\n面白おかしい \"fun-o-hilarious; sidesplitting\", 面白がる \"find amused\", and\naforementioned 面白さ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-10T04:13:58.120",
"id": "91552",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T04:13:58.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "91504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91504 | null | 91552 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 旅行の出発日は八月三十日になった。 \n> 部屋は綺麗になった\n\n> 宿題をしなかったので留年することになりました\n\nCan someone explain the difference between になる and ことになる？ as per the above\nexamples?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T04:46:57.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91507",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T14:09:27.660",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T06:37:50.400",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "になる and ことになる？旅行の出発日は八月三十日になった。",
"view_count": 94
} | [
{
"body": "になる means _to become/change of state_ ; ことになる means _it is decided that_ (the\ndecision being made by someone other than the speaker).\n\n * [【JLPT N５】文法・例文：〜なる](https://nihongokyoshi-net.com/2019/03/13/jlptn5-grammar-naru/)\n * [【JLPT N4】文法・例文：〜ことになる](https://nihongokyoshi-net.com/2019/05/02/jlptn4-grammar-kotoninaru/)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T07:55:12.777",
"id": "91524",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T11:09:42.733",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T11:09:42.733",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91507",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Of the three sentences you posted only the last one's meaning is\nunquestionably clear.\n\n> 旅行の出発日は八月三十日になった。 \n> 部屋は綺麗になった \n> 宿題をしなかったので留年することになりました\n\nThat's because of missing context.\n\nLet's start with the last one.\n\nThe grammar here is\n\n> ...することになりました\n\nThis is a fixed form whose mean is that _someone_ decided some action. There\nis a related form\n\n> ...することにしました\n\nwhich means _I_ (or the natural subject of the sentence) decided on some\naction.\n\nThe first two sentences don't fall into this category. Nothing is being said\nexplicitly in them about decision made by someone else.\n\nBut without context it's hard to say what's going on.\n\n> 旅行の出発日は八月三十日になった。\n\nsimply says\n\n> The day for setting out on the trip was set to August 30th.\n\nWhy this was the case or who really had a say in the day is not clear without\nmore context. Note, it could be a situation, let's say, where your boss set\nthe date for the trip. But as I mentioned above, this is not explicitly\nexpressed there in the sentence. Context would be necessarily to read it that\nway.\n\nSimilarly, with\n\n> 部屋は綺麗になった \n> The room became pretty.\n\nThere could be any number of reasons for this. It could be something natural,\nlike how the morning sunlight lit up the room on a particular day. It could be\nincidental, someone put flowers in the room and brightened the mood of the\nroom. It could just be that someone cleaned the room. But regardless of\ncontext, the room somehow was made beautiful.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T14:09:27.660",
"id": "91544",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T14:09:27.660",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4875",
"parent_id": "91507",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91507 | null | 91524 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 父は兄や姉にも店を手伝わせている。しかし、私には手伝わせるつもりはないらしい。\n\nWhat does the last part つもりはないらしい。 mean? Is it the son that does not want to\ndo it, or is it the dad not wanting to tell the son to do it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T06:48:40.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91508",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T07:59:05.967",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T07:25:29.510",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "47028",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -6,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "「私には手伝わせるつもりはないらしい。」 Who is the agent of つもりはない?",
"view_count": 138
} | [
{
"body": "> 父は兄や姉にも店を手伝わせている。しかし、私には手伝わせるつもりはないらしい。\n\nTo break down:\n\n私に -- me \nは -- contrastive は (contrasting 兄や姉に vs 私に) \n手伝わせる -- have (me) help \nつもりはない -- have no intention \nらしい -- seems\n\n私 is the object of the causative 手伝わせる, so the subject should be 父.\n\n> \"It seems that Dad has no intention to have me help.\"\n\n* * *\n\n> Is it the son that does not want to do it, or is it the dad not wanting to\n> tell the son to do it?\n\nIt's the latter. To say the former, it should use the verb 手伝う, as in 私には\n**手伝う** つもりはない \"I have no intention to **help**.\" Also, using らしい for the\nfirst person's intention would sound weird.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T07:47:07.570",
"id": "91522",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T07:59:05.967",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T07:59:05.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "91508",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91508 | null | 91522 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91550",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Many online Katakana generators will create デービッド for the name David but\nlooking at some texts you'll see デイビット. Is there a difference to how the name\nis being used, e.g. in a sentence, or is it purely a preference on how the\nname sounds?\n\nOn wikipedia you'll see lots of different translations:\n\nDavid Beckham - デビッド・ベッカム\n\nDavid Bowie - デヴィッド・ボウイ\n\nDavid Attenborough - デイビッド・アッテンボロー\n\nDavid Copperfield (book) - デイヴィッド・コパフィールド\n\nDavid Copperfield (illusionist) - デビッド・カッパーフィールド\n\nAre they all correct, does someone in the north of Japan use the same spelling\nas someone in the south, does it change over time? I'm surprised there isn't\nan accepted single translation?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T12:44:03.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91509",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T02:53:50.397",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T10:34:28.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "48923",
"owner_user_id": "48923",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "What is the difference between デービッド and デイビット for a name, is it purely the sound?",
"view_count": 238
} | [
{
"body": "デービッド sounds kind of funny to me but it's not so wrong, probably acceptable. I\nthink デイビッド or ディビッド is much common and natural to Japanese. Basically, there\nis no compatible spelling and pronunciation with English word and name, we can\njust pick up Hirakana/Katakana which sounds similar.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T14:34:44.933",
"id": "91510",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T14:34:44.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43925",
"parent_id": "91509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "It is sometimes difficult to express foreign sounds in kana, leaving\nfluctuations in transliterations. 'David' is one of those.\n\nE.g. [this web site](https://rename-consultant.com/column/name-notation-on-\nfamilybook/) says\n\n> ところが皆様もご存じのとおり、外国語の発音を日本のカタカナでうまく表現できない場合が多々あります。\n>\n>\n> 例えば「David」さん、「デービッド」「デイビッド」「デーヴィッド」「デビッド」等々、色々なカタカナの表記があるようですが、市区町村では統一的な表記のルールがないそうです。\n\nSo ultimately it is decided by the one who writes the name. Dicken's book has\nseveral translations with title ディヴィッド, デイヴィッド, コッパーフィールド, コパーフィールド etc.\n\n* * *\n\nI think デービッド is commonly used only for [Camp\nDavid](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%AD%E3%83%A3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%83%BB%E3%83%87%E3%83%BC%E3%83%93%E3%83%83%E3%83%89)\n\n* * *\n\nNot an English example, but Goethe had [many 'Japanese\nnames'](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%A8%E3%83%8F%E3%83%B3%E3%83%BB%E3%83%B4%E3%82%A9%E3%83%AB%E3%83%95%E3%82%AC%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B0%E3%83%BB%E3%83%95%E3%82%A9%E3%83%B3%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B2%E3%83%BC%E3%83%86#%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E3%81%A8%E8%AA%AD%E3%81%BF)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T00:56:17.490",
"id": "91533",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T00:56:17.490",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "There are multiple factors contributing to great spelling variation of this\nEnglish name.\n\n 1. ビ vs ヴィ: To many Japanese speakers, //b// - //v// distinction is merely orthographical and thus interchangeable.\n\n 2. デー vs デイ: Distinction of these sounds is optional for most dialects. I believe Tokyo people nowadays _can_ hear the difference, but little existing vocabulary requires it; moreover, the English //eɪ// is a diphthong and its last part is not always pronounced clearly.\n\n 3. デー vs デ: English does not have phonemic vowel length. Which it strikes Japanese long or short usually depends on relative lengthiness to other syllables around, and of course, how you pronounced every time. \"A\" in \"Dave\" would be consistently recognized long, but since English speakers tend to insert a non-phonemic \"checkedness\" before a closing consonant, Japanese speakers tend to stably hear a mora ッ in the second syllable of \"David\", and this complicates the length recognition.\n\nSo if it's your name, you have the right to choose which variant to use, and I\ndon't think people would find it wrong either way. (As long as you are fine\nthat people would always use that katakana pronunciation to call you.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-10T02:53:50.397",
"id": "91550",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T02:53:50.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "91509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91509 | 91550 | 91510 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91513",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am trying to understand the sentence for Wanikani:\n\n> 二十一頁の二番はクラスでします\n\nThe translation given is:\n\n> We will work on question 2 on page 21 in class.\n\nCan someone explain the last part? i.e.クラスでします. I haven't come across any\nsimilar examples online.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T22:18:49.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91512",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T16:55:02.737",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T22:26:48.113",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48929",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Use of noun/location before します",
"view_count": 130
} | [
{
"body": "> 二十一頁の二番はクラスでします\n\nNothing too mysterious happening here.\n\nThe で simply marks where the action is taking place, i.e. **in** class.\n\nします is just the polite from of する i.e. 'to do', which they have liberally\ntranslated as 'work on'. So a literal translation of the whole sentence would\nbe \"As for number two of page 21 we will do _it_ in class.\n\n**Edit**\n\nAs you can see from the comment chain my explanation of で as 'where' is\ncontroversial. In this case the more likely usage is \"as a\", i.e. クラスで = as a\nclass. See the link provided by @aguijonazo",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T22:31:38.403",
"id": "91513",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T08:55:02.597",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T08:55:02.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "91512",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Like the previous answer said, the クラスで means \"in class\" while the します is just\na \"do\" do what? We are going to \"do\" question 2 on page 21, it sounds weird in\nenglish but the japanese do (する) is much more versatile and makes sense in\nthis context.\n\nIf there's anything else you might have a doubt about just let me know.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T16:55:02.737",
"id": "91546",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T16:55:02.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "48943",
"parent_id": "91512",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91512 | 91513 | 91513 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91518",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is the text of the Iroha poem, sided with a possible translation (mine):\n\n色は匂えど Iro wa nioedo | Colors, although bright, \n散りぬるを Chirinuru wo | Will scatter. \n我が世誰ぞ Wa ga yo tare zo | In my world, nobody \n常ならぬ Tsune naranu | Is eternal. \n有為の奥山 Ui no okuyama | The remote mountains of the vicissitudes of life \n今日超えて Kyou koete | [I'm] crossing today, \n浅き夢見じ Asaki yume miji | Not dreaming shallow dreams, \n酔いもせず Ei mo sezu | [And] not getting/being drunk.\n\nMy questions are:\n\n 1. What does the particle \"zo\" in l. 3 mean? Should I understand ll. 3-4 as 私（たち）の世には誰も常ならない \"In my/our world, no-one is unchanging\"?\n 2. What verb form is \"miji\"?\n 3. How would you suggest to translate the last line? \"Not getting drunk\"?\n\nAny comments on my translation are naturally welcome.\n\n[Note to self: \"nioedo\" ~ \"niou keredo\", it's an archaic verb form equating to\nhaving a contrastive conjunction after (I believe) a present (or rather non-\npast) tense.]",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T23:06:13.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91514",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T02:27:33.100",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T01:25:22.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "816",
"owner_user_id": "5324",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"poetry"
],
"title": "A couple linguistic questions about the Iroha poem",
"view_count": 440
} | [
{
"body": "* [ぞ](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa010030.htm) is an emphasis marker. 誰ぞ常ならむ is 誰が常であろう in modern Japanese. It is essentially a rhetorical question (\"Who is eternal?\"), but \"Nobody is eternal\" is a valid translation, too.\n * The last two lines have several possible interpretations, but assuming じ is voiced, it is a [negative volitional auxiliary (~I will not)](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa009021.htm). 酔いもせず connects to 浅き夢見じ. A literal translation would be \"I will not have a shallow dream, nor will I get drunk/deluded\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T01:03:14.073",
"id": "91518",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T01:03:14.073",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91514",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "#I'm neither a monk nor a classical Japanese expert.\n\n色 means the same as in\n'[色即是空](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E8%89%B2%E5%8D%B3%E6%98%AF%E7%A9%BA-517754)'\n(Everything is Nothing). So the first two lines mean roughly 'Everything has\nperfume, but will be gone'.\n\nNote that L4 is 常なら **む**. [む](https://footprints-kobun.com/bunpou14/) is a\nclassical auxiliary verb meaning _will_ (≒ modern う・よう). I have nothing\nfurther to add to naruto's answer.\n\nRegarding the last two lines, there seems to be [a\ncontroversy](https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1033674560)\nif it is 見し or 見. I always thought 見し due to a [manga adaptation of _The Tale\nof Genji_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_Genji_\\(manga\\)). The\nfollowing is about 見し variant.\n\nL5-6 mean 'I go over the mountains of worldly things, today'. 有為 here means\nroughly the same as 色 above (things that are made to happen by some other\nthings; things we see).\n\nし of 見し is [連体形 of き](https://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa009002.htm) which\nis an auxiliary verb indicating past tense. So L7-8 mean 'I was dreaming a\nshallow dream, without drinking'. As mentioned in the yahoo answer linked\nabove, I have the impression this fits better (Going over the tangible world,\nthen the author is saying it was a dream).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T02:27:33.100",
"id": "91519",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T02:27:33.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "91514",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91514 | 91518 | 91518 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91517",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As the title says, is [閣閣](https://jisho.org/word/%E9%96%A3%E9%96%A3) a real\nword? I've searched through weblio古語辞典 and\n[BCCWJ](https://bonten.ninjal.ac.jp/bccwj/string_search?commit=%E6%A4%9C%E7%B4%A2&string_search%5Bgenres%5D=PN_core%2CPN%2CPM_core%2CPM%2CPB_core%2CPB%2CLB_core%2CLB%2COW%2COB%2COC_core%2COC%2COY_core%2COY%2COL%2COM%2COP%2COT%2COV&string_search%5Bwords%5D=%E9%96%A3%E9%96%A3&string_search%5Byears%5D=1971%2C1972%2C1973%2C1974%2C1975%2C1976%2C1977%2C1978%2C1979%2C1980%2C1981%2C1982%2C1983%2C1984%2C1985%2C1986%2C1987%2C1988%2C1989%2C1990%2C1991%2C1992%2C1993%2C1994%2C1995%2C1996%2C1997%2C1998%2C1999%2C2000%2C2001%2C2002%2C2003%2C2004%2C2005%2C2006%2C2007%2C2008&utf8=%E2%9C%93)\nand I've gotten no results that are not 内閣閣僚. Out of pure curiosity, I just\nwant to find a real example of this word being used (or just word testimony\nthat a native speaker has heard or used it). Then again, maybe it's just\nanother fob in jisho.org's source dictionary.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-07T23:51:37.560",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91515",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T11:57:46.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "21657",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"dictionary"
],
"title": "Is 閣閣 a real word?",
"view_count": 1261
} | [
{
"body": "I haven't heard or seen it. This seems to be more of an (old?) Chinese\nonomatopoeia ({{zh-cn:阁阁}}). Most Japanese articles that contain this word\n(e.g., [this](http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/%7Erakusyotei/kansi-27.html) and\n[this](http://www.randdmanagement.com/c_chi/ch_244.htm)) seem to be related to\nold Chinese literature. I checked 青空文庫全文検索 (which contains older materials\nthan BCCWJ) and found no relevant results.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T00:37:19.087",
"id": "91516",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T00:37:19.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91515",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Ditto @[naruto's](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/5010/) findings.\n\n> Is this a real word?\n\nYes.\n\nIn Chinese, apparently.\n\nThe top hits at\n[https://www.google.com/search?q=\"閣閣\"](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E9%96%A3%E9%96%A3%22)\nare all for Chinese sites discussing the word, implying that this isn't\nterribly well known in that language community either.\n\nNote also the simplified Chinese script version:\n\n# 阁阁\n\n> Then again, maybe it's just another fob in jisho.org's source dictionary.\n\nSure looks like a goof. While this does apparently appear in texts that are\nnominally Japanese, as naruto notes, these are all in Chinese contexts --\ntexts deliberately evincing a Classical Chinese mood. As such, in linguistic\nterms, this could be viewed more as [code\nswitching](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code-switching), where writers /\nreaders / speakers of Language A who are also knowledgeable about Language B\ndeliberately mix in some words from Language B.\n\nFrom what I'm seeing, I would classify this as Classical Chinese, not\nJapanese, and not in use in modern Chinese either.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T00:51:22.853",
"id": "91517",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T00:51:22.853",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91515",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 91515 | 91517 | 91517 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91521",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I'm looking to express the great inspiration some people feel that guides\nadmirable creations. This kind of thing.\n\nI found 霊感 but I have very little experience with kanjis and I don't want to\nchoose something that will look weird for someone who actually understands it.\n\nBy the way this word will be used with no context. To explain it entirely I'll\nbe gifting someone with a painting with these kanjis in it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T03:51:01.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91520",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T04:49:34.600",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T04:10:19.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "48543",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "霊感 meaning and if it is the best choice to express inspiration",
"view_count": 98
} | [
{
"body": "霊感 without no context primarily refers to a supernatural ability to feel or\nsee ghosts, spirits or such. If a native speaker saw a painting that just says\n霊感, they would first wonder if it's related to occultism or exorcism. You need\nenough context to use 霊感 as a word meaning _inspiration_ (and such a usage is\nnot very common, anyway).\n\nThe common words for _inspiration_ , when it refers to a sudden great idea you\nget from nowhere or from someone, include:\n\n * インスピレーション (transliteration of _inspiration_ )\n * 閃き (lit. \"flash\")\n * 着想 (lit. \"conception\", \"motive\")\n * 刺激 (lit. \"stimuli\")\n\nIt's hard to choose the best one. インスピレーション is the commonest and safest in\nordinary Japanese sentences, but you may not like it since it's a katakana\nloanword. 着想 and 刺激 are kanji words, but IMO they are not very \"fancy\" words.\n閃き sounds fancy enough (to me) but it's not a pure kanji word because it's a\nform of the verb [閃く](https://jisho.org/word/%E9%96%83%E3%81%8F).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T04:49:34.600",
"id": "91521",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T04:49:34.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91520",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91520 | 91521 | 91521 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "91531",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across いただきとう, as in\n「[納めさせていただきとうございます](https://blog.goo.ne.jp/andante625j/e/f5590b2960970d762546902004e311ae)」\nor\n「[軽く説明させていただきとうございます](https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/2165543/blog/1865877)」.\nMy research led me to [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/25141) where I learned とう is\nlikely just an ウ音便 of たい. This seems a fairly rare locution these days.\n\n**#1.** Why does いただきとう always seem to collocate with ござる/ございます? Is it because\nit is a fossil from a different age?\n\n**#2.** This comment piqued my curiosity:\n\n> You have actually been using this 「とう」 in saying 「ありがとう」 ever since you\n> started learning the language. – l'électeur Jun 19 '15 at 7:08\n\nIt instantly makes sense to me: ありがとう―ありがたい. But then I recall often seeing\nありがとう rendered in kanji: 有難う{ありがとう} or 有り{あり}難う{がとう}, especially in verbiage\nused by older people in situations that call for slightly formal language. If\nとう is a monolithic morphological unit, why does a break occur in the kanji\nrepresentation between と and う?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T07:59:35.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91525",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T19:39:13.297",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax",
"morphology"
],
"title": "いただきとう and ありがとう",
"view_count": 223
} | [
{
"body": "Of your two questions,\n@[istrasci's](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/78/) suggested link in\nthe comments should address your first question, about collocation with ございます.\n\nThe second question is more about spelling conventions and morphology. The\nlinked post doesn't quite get into this, so I'll address that here.\n\n# If とう [as an adverbial ending] is a monolithic morphological unit, why does\na break occur in the kanji representation between と and う?\n\nYour question contains within it the seeds of the ansswer.\n\nThe key is that ～とう is not entirely a monolithic morphological unit. It\n_looks_ like one, but it is not treated as one.\n\n## Origins of the ～とう ending\n\nAs you describe, the ～とう ending is _\" an ウ音便 of たい\"_. This ウ音便【おんびん】 is\nbasically a matter of dropping the //k// from adverbial ending ～く, and then\nadjusting the corresponding vowel + vowel in ways that mirror historical sound\nshifts.\n\n_**Note:** The elision (removal) of that medial //k// is also what gives us\nthe modern_ ～い _attributive and terminal / predicative endings for so-called_\n-i _adjectives: in Classical Japanese and earlier, the attributive form for\nthese adjectives ended in_ ～き _instead._\n\n### Vowel fusion\n\nThe vowels fuse as follows:\n\n * あ + う → おう \nExamples:\n\n * あらがたい → ありがたく → ありがたう → ありがとう\n * おめでたい → おめでたく → おめでたう → おめでとう\n * い + う → ゆう \nExamples:\n\n * よろしい → よろしく → よろしう → よろしゅう\n * おおきい → おおきく → おおきう → おおきゅう\n * う + う → うう \nExamples:\n\n * にくい → にくく → にくう\n * やすい → やすく → やすう\n * え + う → よう \nI can't find any adjective examples involving the ～え → ～う shift, simply\nbecause there are so few adjectives ending in _-ei_ (I can only find\n執念【しゅうね】い, \"stubborn, persistent\"). However, there are other historical\nexamples we can show:\n\n * 今日 was けふ (//kepu//) in Old Japanese. That medial //p// lenited (softened) first into //f// producing //kefu// (technically //keɸu//), then into nothing, leaving けう (//keu//). That then shifted into modern きょう.\n * 食べよう (\"let's eat\") was formerly たべむ. That medial //m// lenited, producing たべう. In roughly the Muromachi period, this was pronounced more like たびょう, until the volitional ending was re-analyzed as suffix ～よう, producing たべよう.\n * お + う → おう \nExamples:\n\n * おおい → おおく → おおう\n * すごい → すごく → すごう\n\n### Morphology and okurigana\n\nBroadly speaking, okurigana are added onto the end of a kana spelling to\nindicate that portion of the reading that varies with different conjugations.\n\nSometimes this reflects changes that _used to happen_ in Classical Japanese\nand earlier, but that don't happen anymore. Two whole classes of verbs reflect\nthis: the so-called 上【かみ】一段【いちだん】活用【かつよう】動詞【どうし】 (literally \"upper monograde\nconjugation verbs\"; _kami_ or \"upper\" refers to the い vowel that appears on\nthe end of the verb stem, and い is considered \"higher\" than え, the end of the\nother kind of monograde verb stem), and the 下【かみ】一段【いちだん】活用【かつよう】動詞【どうし】\n(literally \"lower monograde conjugation verbs\", where _shimo_ or \"lower\"\nrefers to the え vowel that appears on the end of the verb stem, and え is\nconsidered \"lower\" than い).\n\nThe _ichidan_ or \"monograde\" part refers to the fact that there is only one\nverb stem for all of the conjugations. Let's look at two verbs as examples:\n\nForm | _Kami_ verbs with \"i\" stems | _Shimo_ verbs with \"e\" stems \n---|---|--- \n終止形【しゅうしけい】 \nTerminal / predicative \n(dictionary form) | [起]{●}[き]{●}る \n **oki** ru | [食]{●}[べ]{●}る \n **tabe** ru \n未然形【みぜんけい】 \nIncomplete / irrealis \n(for negatives, etc.) | [起]{●}[き]{●}～ \n **oki** - | [食]{●}[べ]{●}～ \n **tabe** - \n連用形【れんようけい】 \nContinuative / infinitive \n(for ～ます, etc.) | [起]{●}[き]{●}～ \n **oki** - | [食]{●}[べ]{●}～ \n **tabe** - \n連体形【れんたいけい】 \nAttributive \n(for modifying nouns) | [起]{●}[き]{●}る \n **oki** ru | [食]{●}[べ]{●}る \n **tabe** ru \n已然形【いぜんけい】 \n・仮定形【かていけい】 \nRealis / hypothetical \n(for conditionals, etc.) | [起]{●}[き]{●}れ～ \n **oki** re- | [食]{●}[べ]{●}れ～ \n **tabe** re- \n命令形【めいれいけい】 \nImperative \n(for making commands) | [起]{●}[き]{●}ろ・[起]{●}[き]{●}よ \n **oki** ro / **oki** yo | [食]{●}[べ]{●}ろ・[食]{●}[べ]{●}よ \n **tabe** ro / **tabe** yo \n \nAs you can see above, the verb stem portion remains the same for all verb\nforms.\n\nHowever, in Classical Japanese and older stages of the language, both of these\nconjugation paradigms used to be 二段【にだん】 or \"bigrade\", and that last kana on\nthe verb stem used to _also_ change. In these older conjugation paradigms, the\n_nidan_ or \"bigrade\" part of the name refers to the alternation between either\n\"i\" and \"u\", or \"e\" and \"u\", as seen here:\n\nForm | _Kami_ verbs with \"i\" stems | _Shimo_ verbs with \"e\" stems \n---|---|--- \n終止形【しゅうしけい】 \nTerminal / predicative \n(dictionary form) | [起]{●}[く]{●} \n **ok** u | [食]{●}[ぶ]{●} \n **tab** u \n未然形【みぜんけい】 \nIncomplete / irrealis \n(for negatives, etc.) | [起]{●}[き]{●}～ \n **ok** i- | [食]{●}[べ]{●}～ \n **tab** e- \n連用形【れんようけい】 \nContinuative / infinitive \n(for ～ます, etc.) | [起]{●}[き]{●}～ \n **ok** i- | [食]{●}[べ]{●}～ \n **tab** e- \n連体形【れんたいけい】 \nAttributive \n(for modifying nouns) | [起]{●}[く]{●}る \n **ok** uru | [食]{●}[ぶ]{●}る \n **tab** uru \n已然形【いぜんけい】 \n・仮定形【かていけい】 \nRealis / hypothetical \n(for conditionals, etc.) | [起]{●}[く]{●}れ～ \n **ok** ure- | [食]{●}[ぶ]{●}れ～ \n **tab** ure- \n命令形【めいれいけい】 \nImperative \n(for making commands) | [起]{●}[き]{●}よ \n **ok** iyo | [食]{●}[べ]{●}よ \n **tab** eyo \n \nThe changeability of that last kana in the stem is why the き and the べ are\nstill included in the okurigana for these verbs -- even though that last kana\nof the verb stem no longer changes in modern usage.\n\n### Looking back at that ～とう ending\n\nThe treatment of okurigana for the ～とう ending has some parallels to the\ntreatment of okurigana for _ichidan_ verbs. Since the た portion of the ～たい\nending doesn't _functionally_ change into a different kana, that た is treated\nas part of the unchanging stem of the adjective.\n\nGranted, the sound changes from _ta_ to _to_. However, this only reflects\n[euphony](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_grammar#Euphonic_changes_\\(%E9%9F%B3%E4%BE%BF_onbin\\))\nthrough the fusing of adjacent vowels. That's what I mean when I say that this\nisn't a _functional_ change -- the sound shift does not indicate a change in\nconjugation forms.\n\nConsequently, this ～とう ending is still treated as if it were ～た (part of the\nstem) + う (adverbial suffix) for purposes of figuring out the okurigana, and\nthus this ～とう is morphologically treated as two units instead of one.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T00:00:11.903",
"id": "91531",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T19:39:13.297",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-13T19:39:13.297",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "91525",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 91525 | 91531 | 91531 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The context is this: two women are talking, with the first one (still unnamed)\nthat asks the second girl (Himari) if her trip with her boyfriend went well.\nShe says it was a very nice vacation and then:\n\n> 陽葵の顔が、ぱーっと明るくなっていく。 \n> Himari's face was lighting up in enthusiasm.\n\nThe second woman smiles for Himari's mood swing, but I can't understand\nexactly what the phrase means:\n\n> その変わり様を、彼女は現金だとでも言うように軽く笑う。\n\nThe phrase seems to mean in a literal sense something amongst the line of \"She\nsmiled for her change, as if it was cash\", but I don't think that's the case.\nApparently \"現金\" in a -na adjective can also mean \"calculating/self-\ninterested\", but I'm not sure that you can construct a -そう-like phrase with\n\"とでも言うように\". Any help?",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T11:53:32.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91526",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T16:00:13.930",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-09T16:00:13.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "48937",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"syntax",
"japanese-to-english",
"narration"
],
"title": "Question about 現金だとでも言うように",
"view_count": 140
} | [
{
"body": "As it turned out as a result of our exchange in the comments, this question is\nmore about the meaning of the adjective 現金 than about とでも言うように.\n\nAs an adjective, 現金 is used to describe, often in a casual and non-accusatory\nfashion, someone who easily changes their mood or attitude according to their\n(often short-term) prospects of gaining something. They don't necessarily try\nto deceive other people for their gains as the English word “ _calculating_ ”,\nor even less negative “ _cunning_ ”, might suggest.\n\nIt seems the word 現金 began to be used in this sense in the Edo era in\nreference to shopkeepers who changed their attitude, favorably, when they\nlearned that the customer was going to pay in cash, instead of deferring the\npayment till the end of the month, or even the year, as was the norm at the\ntime. [Reference: [1](https://mag.japaaan.com/archives/128248),\n[2](https://kashi-kari.jp/lab/howtolove-cash-person/)]\n\n〜とでも言うように simply means “ _as if to say …_ ” The speaker smiled at Himari’s\nsudden mood swing as if to say she (Himari) was 現金 because just thinking about\nsomething good that happened to her, or the prospect of her relationship with\nher boyfriend going well, suddenly lightened up her face.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T15:59:50.433",
"id": "91545",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T15:59:50.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "91526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91526 | null | 91545 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> （ナオト） お前のパンツ買うの忘れた。 \n> （真由） それぐらい ちゃんと持ってきてます。 変態。 \n> （ナオト） お前 「変態」 **ってな**\n> …。([source](https://a-haha.hatenadiary.org/entry/20151017/p1))\n\n> （桐乃） あんたが沙織とこそこそ仲よくなったりしたから、ややこしいことになったんじゃない \n> （京介） っていうか、興味津々じゃねえか！ \n> （桐乃） うるさい！あんたこそ、何よ、あやせ見て デレーっとして。人の親友をあんな目で見んな！変態！ \n> （京介） お前、変態 **ってな**\n\nI see two possibilities:\n\n 1. 禁止する意味の終助詞。「お前、変態って言うな！」\n\n 2. 詠嘆を表す間投助詞。「お前、変態って言ったな！」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T18:48:48.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91528",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T13:00:28.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30454",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particles",
"ambiguity",
"interpretation",
"particle-な"
],
"title": "What is this な? 「変態」ってな",
"view_count": 192
} | [
{
"body": "This な is a sentence-end particle similar to さ or ね. It's is nothing more than\na slight \"oh\" or \"come on\".\n\n(っ)てな(ぁ) also can be a contraction of というのは (e.g., 変態てなぁお前のことだ) in\n_shitamachi_ speech, but this is not the case as long as てな is followed by\nnothing.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T07:31:18.203",
"id": "91535",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T07:31:18.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "91528",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Perhaps the problem might be that you are not familiar with or failing to\nrecognize the particular use of 「って」 in these dialogues.\n\nThe function of「って」 in question here is that of picking up on something\nsomeone has said or done as something you find remarkable, shocking,\noffensive, disturbing, funny, or otherwise mention-worthy.\n\nExample 1\n\n> A：こいつ馬鹿みたいに飲んでてベロベロなんですよ \n> B：真っ昼間から酒って・・・\n\n(Here B is expressing their shock or 「呆れ」 at broad-daylight hearty drinking)\n\nExample 2\n\n> A：あのクソジジイ、ガン飛ばしてきやがった \n> B：「クソジジイ」って・・・\n\n(Here B is implying that A's use of the word 「クソジジイ」 is out of line.)\n\nWhat I think is the closest thing to a description of the 「な」 in the cases at\nhand that I could find in a dictionary is this (courtesy of\n[デジタル大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AA/#jn-162229)):\n\n>\n> ［間助］文末や、文中の種々の切れ目に用いる。語勢を添えて、自分の言葉を相手に納得させようとする気持ちを表す。「あの店はな、品物がいいんだ」「彼な、来られないんだって」\n\nMy understanding of this type of 「な」 is that it is something you use to make\nsure your intended listener knows that your speech is addressed to them.\n\n(I guess this is what is called「(聞き手への)働きかけ」 in linguistic discourse on,\nincluding, but not limited to, 終助詞 and 間投助詞.)\n\nSo, in both of your two dialogues,「変態ってな」 does not express a command not to\ncall them \"変態\" (as「お前、変態って言うな！」 does) or the angry accusation\nof「お前、変態って言ったな！」. Rather, the speaker is picking up on the utterance of \"変態\",\nimplying that they find it shocking, and in effect protesting (rather meekly)\nto the other person, at being called such.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-09T13:00:28.737",
"id": "91542",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-09T13:00:28.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "91528",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 91528 | null | 91535 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, yeah, I caught up with the latest interest towards this song and I watched\nthe music video on the official channel. I am currently working through the\nlyrics (some of the words used are totally new to me), but I have already\nencountered a part where the English translation seems off.\n\n[The video is here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCp2iXA1uLE), and the\nfirst time it appears in the lyrics is ~1:00\n\nThis line of the original...\n\n> 踊ってない夜がない夜なんて\n\n...is translated in the English captions as...\n\n> If there is no night we have no dancing night\n\nhowever, when I was listening to it, I thought that this actually meant\n\n> (A) no-dancing night is (a) no-night or something\n\nMeaning that a night when there is no dancing is as good as no night / nothing\nat all. (Well, the dismissive なんて can have a lot of translations, but it's not\nthe point for me here.)\n\nWhat do you think? Possibly, the subject and predicate are just reversed to\nfit the rhythm?\n\nP.S. The fact that there is no comma after \"If there is no night\" makes me\nespecially suspicious of the overall quality here",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-08T19:40:22.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "91529",
"last_activity_date": "2023-07-13T18:08:21.027",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45485",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "About the official (?) English translation of 'Odd Loop' by Frederic",
"view_count": 1067
} | [
{
"body": "I think to answer this question, we would need to look at the following set of\nlyrics as well:\n\n> 踊ってない夜がない夜なんて + とってもとっても退屈です\n\nUsually one may consider なんて literally as \"such (a thing)\" and in this context\nwhen it is preceded by a negative subject it emphasizes that there could be a\nlack of something. i.e. \"such a thing (isn't)\" or \"(no) such thing\". In this\ncase it could likely be fully translated as\n\n> There is no such thing as a danceless night that **isn't** very very boring.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-10-16T09:10:22.177",
"id": "96681",
"last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T17:00:03.667",
"last_edit_date": "2022-10-16T17:00:03.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "54723",
"parent_id": "91529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 91529 | null | 96681 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.