Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "The first clue to choosing the correct expression to go in the blank is to\nnote that \"that mother\" is the topic of the sentence because it is marked with\nは\n\n> そのお母さんは\n\nSo, unless another _actor/subject_ is explicitly expressed, the mother's\nactions and thoughts are being expressed here.\n\nThe next clue is the verb 困る. Something is potentially going to _annoy_ this\nmother.\n\nGiven these two clues, choices _A_ and _B_ make no sense in that position.\nWhatever verb you fill in here needs to retain \"mother\" as the subject.\nChoices _A_ and _B_ would seem to require 私 as the subject. It is not natural\nto switch the subject of the verb like that in the middle of a sentence.\n\nBut this is particularly true given the next clue\n\n> __困ると言いたそうな顔\n\nYou questioned the meaning of そう. This cannot be the _hearsay_ そう because the\ngrammar is incorrect for that form. If you wanted the _hearsay_ そう then the\ngrammar would need to be\n\n> __困ると言いたいそうな顔\n\nBut that really makes absolutely no sense\n\n> A face that I hear wants to say she'll be upset if ...\n\nWhat's being described is a scene in which the mother is _lecturing **me**_. I\ndon't require \"hearsay\" to see the expression on her face.\n\nSo, the only two choices that make any potential sense are choices _C_ and\n_D_.\n\n_C_ takes the wrong perspective. So, the only answer that works is _D_. Keep\nin mind that くれる takes the perspective of the subject being quoted. Here one\nis quoting the mother's perspective--what the mother is \"saying\" by her facial\nexpression. Only in choice _D_ is it stated clearly that if you don't heed\nthis mother's admonishment she'll be upset.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-09T13:46:54.040", "id": "91543", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T17:17:30.350", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-10T17:17:30.350", "last_editor_user_id": "4875", "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "91540", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "First, this そう has the meaning of \"seems/looks\" because it follows the stem of\n言いたい. ～と言いたそうな顔で literally means \"with a face that seems to want to say ～\".\n言いた is not a dictionary form of anything. Just in case, the past form of 言う is\nnot 言いた but 言った.\n\nSecond, in case you missed this, そのお母さん is not \"this mom\" but \"this ma'am\" in\na context like this. She's basically a stranger.\n\nSo this madam was upset and glared at 私 as if to say _something_. What's the\nthing the madam wanted to say? Since D is the correct answer, the content of\n言う, marked with と, is:\n\n> 注意してくれないと困る\n\nThis doesn't have any explicit subject, but in this context, you need to be\nable to infer the subjects like this:\n\n> **(あなたが)** 注意してくれないと **(私は)** 困る \n> If **you** don't pay attention (for the sake of me), **I** am bothered! \n> → It bothers me if you don't pay attention!\n\nくれる indicates the subject of 注意する is someone other than お母さん.\n\n> 注意してくれないと困ると言いたそうな顔で、彼女は私を睨みました。\n>\n> (literally, with direct speech) She glared at me with a face that seemed to\n> want to say \"If you don't pay attention, I will be bothered\".\n>\n> (with indirect speech) She glared at me as if to say she would be bothered\n> if I wasn't more careful.\n\nB is incorrect because no causative form is relevant in this sentence.\n注意させないと困る would mean \"If I won't make her/you pay attention, I will be\ntroubled (in the future)\", but no one would say something like this directly\nto a stranger they won't see again.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T03:04:12.830", "id": "91551", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T03:25:23.763", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-10T03:25:23.763", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91540", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "First, the meaning of 'メインにさせて' is not different from 'メインにして' in this\ncontext.\n\nIt can be considered as a result of confusion, as mentioned in the comment.\nAnother possibility might be 'メインに(で)接客させて'. Even if it is actually strange\nwhen you think about it, hearing 'メインにさせて' in conversation would not surprise\nme.\n\nOr using させる has an effect of evading responsibility in a vague way. As you\nhave guessed, it would literally mean 'let someone make it that the girls do\nthe main part of customer service', implying that the speaker is not the one\nwho did it. (Note the service by girls is considered as something to be\naccused here.)\n\n* * *\n\n[This question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/90676/difference-\nbetween-%E4%BA%BA%E3%82%92%E4%B8%8D%E5%AE%89%E3%81%AB%E3%81%95%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8B-and-%E4%BA%BA%E3%82%92%E4%B8%8D%E5%AE%89%E3%81%AB%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B)\nis partially related in discussing the case where にする/にさせる mean the same. (Not\nsure メインにする might count for an example of this.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T00:09:04.213", "id": "91548", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T00:09:04.213", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91541", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "仕方がない may imply less than ideal circumstances where only limited options\nexist. It could be used to describe a hopeless or grim scenario.\n\n```\n\n Example Sentences from Jisho.org:\n \n 行くより他に仕方がないんだ。\n We have no choice but to go.\n \n そこへ行っても仕方がない。\n It is no use going there.\n \n 彼にしたがうより他に仕方がない。\n I cannot do otherwise than obey him.\n \n```\n\nしょうがない bears a similar meaning to 仕方がない. Both phrases literally mean “there’s\nno way”. This is more of a conversational expression while 仕方がない is the formal\none.\n\n```\n\n Example Sentences from Jisho.org:\n \n あの子はしょうがない子だ。\n That child is impossible.\n \n 冷たいものを飲みたくてしょうがない。\n I am dying for a cold drink.\n \n 男の子のいたずらはしょうがない。\n Boys will be boys.\n \n```\n\nしかない just means “only”. The sentences below would both literally mean “Among\nthe children, there’s only one girl”.\n\n```\n\n 女の子は１人しかいない。\n (ない is changed to いない since were talking about person)\n 女の子は１人だけだ\n https://hinative.com/ja/questions/6212497 for the example\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T15:11:31.140", "id": "91555", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T15:24:01.347", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-10T15:24:01.347", "last_editor_user_id": "48390", "owner_user_id": "48390", "parent_id": "91549", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The subject of the main clause is neither 私たち nor 政府, but \"implicit I\"\n(singular). The subject of a \"-tai\" sentence is normally \"I\", and it is\nnormally omitted.\n\n * この映画を見たいです。 \n**I** want to watch the movie. \n(私は is almost always omitted)\n\n * この映画を見てもらいたいです。 \n**I** want [someone] to watch the movie.\n\n * 彼に(は)この映画を見てもらいたいです。 \n**I** want him to watch the movie.\n\n * 政府に(は)Xをもっと考えてもらいたいです。 \n**I** want the government to think more about X.\n\n * 政府に(は)私たちからとる税金の使い方をもっと考えてもらいたいです。 \n**I** want the government to think more about how they spend the tax they take\nfrom us.\n\nIn all the five examples above, the implicit **subject** is \"I\". If you're\nalready confused by the second or the third sentence above, please reread your\ntextbook and review how to use もらう and に together. Also note that the\n**topic** of the original sentence is 政府 (because it's explicitly marked with\nは), but topic and subject are different concepts in Japanese.\n\n税金の使い方を考えてあげたいです means \"I want to think how to spend taxes _(for someone's\nsake / on behalf of someone)_ \". It's not an ungrammatical sentence, but only\na very arrogant person who believes he is greater than the government itself\nwould say something like this.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T07:15:38.853", "id": "91554", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T07:45:03.843", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-10T07:45:03.843", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91553", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I've never heard the 3rd and 4th of those options in normal Japanese speech,\nso the difference between those and the other 3 is that the other 3 exist and\nthose 2 do not (at least not in any capacity). As for the others:\n\n食堂 translates most directly as \"cafeteria\" or \"food court\". While it can be\nused for restaurants, it tends not to be, and the restaurants which do use it\ntend to be similar in style/scope to what a Westerner might call a \"diner\" (in\nfact, the Netflix show 深夜食堂 was translated in English as Midnight Diner, which\nlends more credence to this reading). The most common usage for 食堂 though, is\nmost certainly a school cafeteria or a food court e.g. in a shopping mall or\nother public venue.\n\nレストラン and 飲食店 are pretty much the same thing. The difference being that レストラン\nis a Japanese 外来語 from the English \"restaurant\", while 飲食店 is the pure-\nJapanese word. In my experience, レストラン is more commonly used, although also\nI'm a Westerner and therefore more prone to hearing/using that word. 飲食店 feels\na lot like, \"this restaurant wants to present an image of being authentic\nJapanese so they use the Japanese word instead of the foreign word\", but\notherwise there is no difference, to my knowledge.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T22:18:03.693", "id": "91561", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T22:18:03.693", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11449", "parent_id": "91556", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I encountered the term 料理屋さん when people were referring to a person or shop as\na means of describing what they do rather than the specific type of food or\ncooking style.\n\nIn my prefecture there were several shops which referred to themselves as\n満腹食堂. They typically served large portions of reasonable or good quality food\nat moderate prices. They did not fit into the cafeteria image, but perhaps\nsomewhat like the 'diner' image mentioned in Ertai's answer.\n\nYou will encounter more ways to describe eating and drinking establishments. I\nfound that looking the words up in Japanese-Japanese dictionaries gives much\nmore detail about the nuances than using Japanese-English dictionaries.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T22:41:57.850", "id": "91562", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T22:41:57.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48892", "parent_id": "91556", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "* **食堂** : A dining hall, a (large) dining room (of a mansion/hotel), a cafeteria (of an office/school), a cheap restaurant (which one may go to every day). Cheap restaurants are also called 大衆食堂 ([image search](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?p=%E5%A4%A7%E8%A1%86%E9%A3%9F%E5%A0%82)). American diners are often introduced as アメリカの大衆食堂.\n * **レストラン** : Typically, unless otherwise specified, a Western-style restaurant that serves Western food. レストラン at least have waiters, and fast food restaurants are usually not considered レストラン. Some レストラン are very expensive, but ファミリーレストラン ([image search](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?p=%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%83%9F%E3%83%AC%E3%82%B9), ファミレス for short) are relatively casual and often serve Japanese food as well as Western food. In anime, you can often see high school students gathering at a ファミレス.\n * **料理店** : Small restaurants that offer traditional cuisine at a relatively high price point tend to be called 料理店. If we just say 料理店, it refers to Japanese restaurants, but there are also インド料理店, メキシコ料理店, etc. A (日本)料理店 ([image search](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?p=%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E6%96%99%E7%90%86%E5%BA%97)) is not very different from izakaya, but 料理店 sounds more quiet and expensive to me (if not as expensive as [料亭](https://savorjapan.com/contents/discover-oishii-japan/ryotei-and-kappo-restaurants-even-japanese-would-struggle-to-differentiate-and-where-to-find-them/)). 料理屋 is a synonym that sounds relatively informal. In particular, 小料理屋 ([image search](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?p=%E5%B0%8F%E6%96%99%E7%90%86%E5%B1%8B)) typically refers to tiny izakaya-type restaurants that are privately owned and only have counter seats.\n * **飲食店** : A catch-all term for everything above as well as bars, café, fast food restaurants, bubble tea shops, etc. This is more of a business/legal term. We see it a lot in news articles (especially during this COVID crisis), but ordinary people don't need to use it often in everyday conversation.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T00:43:52.530", "id": "91573", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T04:12:08.217", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-13T04:12:08.217", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91556", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe this is a difference between two grammar points:\n\n * 雨が降りそう means \"it looks like it's going to rain\"\n * 雨が降るそう means \"I heard it's going to rain\"\n\nSee [This grammar guide's\nexplanation](http://guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/similarity#Guessing_at_an_outcome_using):\n\n> Guessing at an outcome using 「～そう」\n\n> Expressing hearsay using 「～そうだ」\n\nFor verbs, the first is constructed with the stem, and the second is\nconstructed by adding the verb as-is.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T00:55:10.990", "id": "91574", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-12T00:55:10.990", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48969", "parent_id": "91557", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In Japanese, there are particular \"counting words\" that are used. They are\nused depending on the shape of the thing being counted. Some of the ones I\nlearned when I learned Japanese are:\n\n〜枚（まい）: Flat things, such as postcards, letters, pages of a book \n〜冊（さつ）: Things composed of pages, usually books \n〜台（だい）: Mechanized objects, usually things like cars or factory machinery \n〜本（ほん）: Narrow things, like straws or pencils \n〜匹（ひき）: Small, usually tailed animals, like dogs or cats (there is a different\ncounter for large animals like elephants and gorillas, but I forgot what it\nis) \n〜人（にん）: People\n\nUsing these words followed by 数（すう）, meaning \"number\", is a way of saying \"the\nnumber of X\" or \"the count of X\". For example, when talking about postcards,\nyou would use 枚数 to talk about how many postcards you have. The most common of\nthese constructions is almost certainly 人数, although I have also heard 枚数 from\ntime to time, as my hobby is playing trading card games where the topic of\nflat things comes up in conversation on a regular basis. To be honest, I have\nnever heard the other ones, although I'm sure they exist in particular\ncontexts.\n\nWhile this might be difficult to explain with the examples of postcards, any\nflat object can have a 枚数, so I'll change the subject a little. If you are\nplaying poker and you want to make sure the dealer isn't cheating, you could\nsay:\n\n枚数を数えていいですか？ = May I count the number of cards (in the deck)? \n(Of course, if you actually said this in a casino, you might get punched in\nthe face, so don't do that)\n\nIt's difficult to come up with non-contrived sentences using 枚数, because it's\nsimply not a particularly common word; in questions you would more commonly\nuse 何枚 (how many 枚) and in statements you would just state the number. The\nexample sentence 「ポストカードの枚数は６枚です」 is technically correct but extremely\nunnatural; it's the type of thing you would learn to say in a classroom but if\nyou said to a native speaker they'd look at you like you were from outer space\n(even accounting for the case in which saying \"there are 6 postcards\" was a\nreasonable statement in-context, which is another whole can of worms).\n\nFor reference, if you're not sure of the particular counting word to use,\n個数（こすう） or simply 数（かず） will suffice in most situations; for questions you can\nuse 何個 or いくつ (how many?). The exception being that 個 would more often be used\nfor non-living things (個 has a meaning close to \"object\"), so if you used it\nfor people or animals it might sound weird. I've never had a problem in Japan\nusing 数/いくつ for everything, so it's best to stick to those when you're unsure.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-10T21:32:11.027", "id": "91560", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-10T22:06:07.743", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-10T22:06:07.743", "last_editor_user_id": "11449", "owner_user_id": "11449", "parent_id": "91558", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "TL;DR: 枚数 is mostly redundant outside of compound nouns.\n\n* * *\n\nAt first, this question seemed very strange to me. I thought that if one knows\nhow to use 個数, and if they already know certain things are counted with 枚,\nthen there should be no difficulty figuring out how to use 枚数.\n\nHowever, I realized it was not that simple when I thought about other counter\nwords. I myself couldn’t think of a sentence in which 冊数 or 匹数 would sound\nnatural. I have probably never used such words in my life. I would simply say\n[数]{かず} if I need to refer to the number of books or pets.\n\n頭数, for larger animals, is much more common than 匹数, but it sounds a bit\nformal and technical. 台数 and 本数, though pretty commonly used as in 自動車の輸出台数\nand 電車の運行本数, also have a slightly technical sound to them.\n\nIf your example with 枚数 sounds artificial, it probably has more to do with the\ngeneral technicality and/or redundancy of this composition with a counter word\nand 数 than with the rarity of opportunity to count postcards. In fact, the\nsentence would sound more natural, at least in everyday conversation, if 枚数\nwere replaced with 数.\n\n> はがきの[数]{かず}を数える。\n\nI made up the following example in an attempt to come up with one in which 枚数\nwas given a more important role than the direct object of 数える, which is\nredundant after all.\n\n> 一度に使えるクーポンの枚数には制限があります。 \n> There is a limit on the number of coupons you can use at a time.\n\nHowever, 枚数 can be still safely replaced with 数.\n\n> 一度に使えるクーポンの[数]{かず}には制限があります。\n\nCutting off the direct association by の between 枚数 and what is counted (i.e.\nクーポン) seems to somewhat increase the necessity of the counter word, but not by\nmuch. The following two sentences sound almost equally natural.\n\n> このクーポンは、一度に使える枚数に制限があります。\n>\n> このクーポンは、一度に使える[数]{かず}に制限があります。\n\nThe counter word 枚 is most necessary in compound nouns, such as 使用枚数 and 枚数制限.\n\n> このクーポンは、一度の使用枚数に制限があります。\n>\n> このクーポンには、買い物ごとの枚数制限があります。\n\nLike 輸出台数 and 運行本数 above, these sound formal.\n\nCome to think of it, even 個数 is mostly redundant outside of compound nouns, or\nsuch usages as column titles in data sheets (for “quantity”), as it can be\nsafely replaced with 数 when it is used by itself in a sentence.\n\nCuriously, most of the examples in\n[_goo_](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%9E%9A%E6%95%B0/example/) use 枚数\nalone referring to the number of sheets of a manuscript. This could be seen as\na domain-specific usage where what is counted is understood with no explicit\nmention of it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T11:05:15.203", "id": "92630", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T11:05:15.203", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91558", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "ＡといわずＢといわず basically means _everything_ , _everywhere_ , _all the time_ , etc.\nA and B are just examples. It is used to describe the way someone _does_\nsomething, and therefore, it is normally not used in a negative sentence.\n\nI think this rule applies on the semantic level. Though syntactically\nnegative, 手離さない and はなれない in your examples both indirectly describe the way\nsomeone, or a dog, does something anytime or anywhere. The department manager\nis always on their smartphone, and the dog is determined to stay close to\nNello everywhere he goes.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-11T02:58:32.407", "id": "91565", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-11T02:58:32.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91559", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I don't think there are any requirement in X of 'AといわずBといわずX'. My feeling is\nthat acceptability depends only on the meaning.\n\nThe pattern means literally _regardless of A or B, X_.\n\nFor example, both of the following are not acceptable.\n\n> 食事中といわず、会議中といわず、スマホを手離す。\n>\n> 昼といわず、夜といわず、彼と一緒にいない。\n\nIt is because not having a phone or not being with someone else is rather\nnormal and not worth mentioning.\n\nOn the other hand\n\n> 猫といわず犬といわず動物は何でも好きです\n>\n> 猫といわず犬といわず動物は何でも好きじゃないです\n\nare both acceptable (even though the latter sounds less natural - apart from\nsuch a person being unfortunate; probably 嫌いです would be more natural instead\nof 好きじゃないです.). This is due to the fact that both types of people are\nconceivable.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-11T04:04:02.280", "id": "91566", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-11T04:14:55.910", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-11T04:14:55.910", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91559", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The first に is a marker for the \"doer\" of a passive verb. 生かされる is the passive\nform of the transitive verb 生かす (\"to keep someone alive\").\n\n> 人情の温かさ **に** 生かされています。 \n> I am kept alive **by** the warmth of humanity.\n\nThe second に is \"(filled) with\" or \"(full) of\". It's one of the particles you\ncan use with あふれる, 満ちる, etc. Both ～にあふれる and ～であふれる are used, but the former\ntends to be used with intangible things like 笑顔, 人情味, etc.\n\n> コウイチ様は人情味 **にあふれている** すばらしいお方です。 \n> Mr. Koichi is a wonderful person **full of** humanity.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T00:00:29.527", "id": "91572", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-12T00:00:29.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91564", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "適性 is close to suitability or aptitude. 適性 is related to someone's learning\nspeed or future potential rather than their current ability. Someone who has a\n適性 for something is not necessarily good at it _now_ , but they are easier to\nbe good at it _in the future_.\n\n * おしゃべりな人は営業職への適性がある。 \nTalkative people have an aptitude for a sales position.\n\n * 人には適性というものがある。 \n= 人には向き不向きがある。 \nDifferent people are cut out for different things.\n\n才能 (\"talent\") can also refer to someone's future potential, but it is a bigger\nword that tends to refer to rare and great abilities. For example,\nプログラマの適性がある人 reminds me of someone with above-average analytical skills,\npatience, curiosity and such, whereas プログラマの才能がある人 is someone who has\neverything to be a super hacker.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-11T06:20:14.040", "id": "91569", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-11T06:30:13.590", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-11T06:30:13.590", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91567", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "（Vしても/したって）[よさそうなものだ](https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82%E3%82%88%E3%81%95%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%AA%E3%82%82%E3%81%AE%E3%81%A0)\nis a set expression meaning _could_ , implying the speaker's complaint.\n\nRegarding replacement by 良い, 良いものだったのに is grammatical but sounds unnatural. It\nis possible to use 良い in the form 良いものだが (or 良いだろうに). I don't feel difference\nin meaning (良さそうなものだったのに vs 良いものだが), but 良さそうなものだったのに sounds gender neutral or\npossibly feminine and 良いものだが sounds masculine.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T07:07:06.800", "id": "91577", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-12T07:07:06.800", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91570", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "振り切る can mean [several\nthings](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%8C%AF%E5%88%87%E3%82%8B/#jn-195622),\nbut those uses in the question mean something like _to push to the end, focus\nexclusively on sth_. Not listed in the definition, but it is close to the\ndefinition 4 '十分に振る。振り抜く。' Rather than a bat, the visual image of 振り切る in the\nquestion is [this](https://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/11017385.html) kind of speed\nmeter where the indicator is above the max possible speed.\n\nConcretely, the uses in the questions mean:\n\n 1. Pushing something completely in some direction. Essentially meaning マッドハルト's policy(?) is extremist (in some sense).\n 2. Focusing on entertainment aspect or on serious aspect (see the preceding paragraph '１５分は大娯楽アクション その後は地味なシリアスドラマ。').\n 3. Telling the story as fiction or as non-fiction without leaving ambiguities.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T02:54:18.427", "id": "91576", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-12T02:54:18.427", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "91571", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "### The phrase itself\n\nConsidering the context (as a short phrase serving as a sense definition for\n事柄【ことがら】), we would have to parse this as a noun phrase, wherein the parts to\nthe left qualify (modify) that noun. So the core or \"head\" term in this phrase\nis [よ]{●}[う]{●}[す]{●}.\n\nHere's that line deconstructed:\n\n * 事柄 = その事に見られる[よ]{●}[う]{●}[す]{●} \nWhat is a _kotogara_? A _kotogara_ is a kind of _yōsu_ : \n事柄 = [よ]{●}[う]{●}[す]{●} \nBut what kind of _yōsu_ are we talking about? We have to look at the part to\nthe left of the word, the part that describes what kind of _yōsu_ we have. The\nkind that: \nその事にみられる\n\nLet's look at this word-by-word.\n\n * その事に見られるようす →\n * [その]{that}[事]{fact, thing, circumstance }[に]{ PART: \"in\" }[見られる]{ PASSIVE: \"be seen\" }[ようす]{ state; manner; look; kind; characteristic}\n\nReading this phrase more-or-less backwards to arrive at the English ordering\nof concepts, we get:\n\n * The characteristic seen in that thing / circumstance.\n\n### Your specific questions\n\n> Is その事に見られる modifying ようす?\n\nYes. See above.\n\n> What's the role of に here?\n\nSee above. With a passive verb like 見られる, the に _could_ be marking the agent\n(the do-er) of the verb (translatable as _\" by\"_, as in _\" something done\n**by** someone\"_), but that interpretation just doesn't make any sense in this\ncontext. に can also mark location where motion is going, or where a thing or\nquality exists (translatable as _\" to\"_, or _\" at\"_ or _\" in\"_ or \" _on_ \", as\nin _\" we go **to** the store\"_ or _\" it's **on** the table\"_ or _\" there is\nred **in** this\"_), and it's this latter sense that fits the context best.\n\n> What conjugation is 見られる? Is it interchangeable with 見える?\n\n見られる here must be the passive. In this case, it's not interchangeable with\n見える, since the passive sense is needed instead of the potential.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-13T19:33:06.433", "id": "91590", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T19:33:06.433", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "91575", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "してもいい indeed can be used to talk about actions taken/things done by the\nspeaker or the listener, but if it refers to the listener's action in the\ndeclarative, it's usually a grant of permission. Like this line:\n\n> そう思いたいなら、そう思ってもいいぞ \n> Free feel to think that, if that's what you want to think.\n\n> もう来なくてもいいよ \n> You don't have to come anymore. _or_ We don't want you to come anymore.\n\nNote that it doesn't always have to be permission seeking or granting. A lot\nof times it is used to talk about a condition, but I think even in these\ncondition descriptions, there's often an embedded benefit-receiving aspect.\n\n> 学校行かなくてもいいなんて、羨ましいよ！ \n> I am envious that you don't have to go to school. (the listener has\n> received permission from the school/parents)\n\nThus, it's important that you understand if there is a benefiting party\nbetween the conversing parties, and if yes, who the action potentially\nbenefits. In your cited passage, the context makes it clear that the speaker\nis talking about their own action. With a rough rendering, this should be\nclear:\n\n> 寿季: It was my bad. It was already a lot to ask that you make time for me.\n>\n> 桐葉: Would another day have been okay? If necessary, I could've just taken a\n> day off to go with you.\n>\n> 寿季: I'd have liked that as well, but I needed you _today_.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T19:13:31.663", "id": "91580", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T08:06:14.263", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-13T08:06:14.263", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91579", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "In my opinion, in your quoted passage \"to speak out\" is 正解.\n\nMy reading of your sentence is that 国に言っていきたい indicates a temporal\ndirection—\"from now on\"—but it's not a manifest declaration of intention. The\ntemporal/emotional point of reference is the interview. これから is omitted from\nthe utterance, and if put back in, it would refer to the time of the\nutterance. The whole thing means something to the effect of: \"Since the\nconversation we held allowed us to talk and feel better, we would like to tell\nthe government to make efforts to prevent similar things (the situation that\nmany Covid-19 patients didn't get treatment) from happening.\"\n\n* * *\n\n### Edit:\n\nI am just a fellow learner, so take what I say with a grain of salt (or as Al\nPacino says, a punch of salt :) I understand @aguijonazo's explanation, and\ncan see why that's the case here. Plus, they are a very knowledgeable native\nspeaker, so I defer to them. But I don't think my interpretation is\nincompatible with theirs.\n\nLet's see another example:\n\n> 「『暴露』と言うより、ある人物の告白に基づいて証言しました。沈黙を続けてすみませんでした。 **これから** はもっと真実を **言っていきます**\n> 」とツイートした。([source](https://www.sanspo.com/article/20160315-IORL4RYBLZP4PLU6C35SNVBR6E/link-39Y84Z8XPH75D9MMAT67W11N8C/link-39Y84Z8XPH75D9MMAT67W11N8C/)) \n> (Kasahara) tweeted: \"Rather than disclosing, I gave testimony based on\n> someone's confession. I am sorry for having kept silent (on this matter).\n> From now on, I will speak the truth.\"\n\nThis is another example where you see a change announced in a statement. This\nis what J. L. Austin would call a [performative\nutterance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performative_utterance). Kasahara\ndeclares that he will give the public more true information from that point\nonward. By making that declaration, he changes the reality that he is\ndescribing. The previous state of being of that reality was: Kasahara was\nkeeping his silence about the [incident and the\ninvestigation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoki_Kasahara), shunning the\nmedia and not giving interviews.\n\nAnd with a statement of change he changes that reality and reshapes it into a\nnew one where the new state is: _I will start making statements and telling\nthe truth._\n\nTherefore, **a change clearly and unambiguously occurs, from a previous\nreality** [not talking/keeping silent] **to a new one** [speaking out and\nbeing truthful and upfront]. So I think whether the 言っていく indicates a\ncontinued action is really a matter of interpretative focus. The two ways to\ninterpret this performative utterance are just two different focal points. If\nwe focus on the continuation of the changed state, it makes sense that after\nthe change, Kasahara will be in a new state where he will behave differently\nthan before, and will continue to be like that until further changes, hence\n@aguijonazo's answer, I think.\n\nIn my interpretation, on the other hand, the focus is on the point of change,\nnamely when the performative utterance is made. これから、言っていきたい, ていく always\nsignifies a departure from the past state and a change, made even more clear\nwith これから. That's why my interpretation emphasizes the behavioral difference:\nfrom not speaking, to speaking out. To me, a lot of ていく constructions mark a\ndeparture and that is the function of ていく.\n\nHere is another interesting example:\n\n> 「バレンタインの思い出があまりない」と話していた錦戸だが「 **来年から** は北川景子にチョコをもらいましたと **言っていきます**\n> 」と得意気だった。([source](https://www.sponichi.co.jp/entertainment/news/2014/02/09/kiji/K20140209007552630.html))\n\nWhat Nishikido is saying here is: \"I haven't had a lot of memories about\nValentine's Day, but starting next year, I will (be able to) say I received\nchocolate from Kitagawa Keiko.\" Here, he doesn't mean or even entertain the\nthought of keeping getting chocolate from Kitagawa every year. It was\nunderstood the chocolate was 義理チョコ, a token of friendship, and a one-time\nthing. (FWIW, Kitagawa married Daigo two years after this.) Is he going to\nkeep on telling others boastfully about how Kitagawa gave him chocolate? I\ndoubt it. But a change has occurred that put him in a new state where he will\nbe able to brag to other people about that. That's a break from the past [not\nhaving received chocolate from Kitagawa and thus not being able to brag].\n\nThis is further evidenced by some other examples where I think the \"continue\nto do\" interpretation might not be possible.\n\n> 今年、2021年の抱負を **言っていきます**\n> ！([source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V3RFUjkP8U))\n\nI don't think you need to keep on talking about your New Year's resolutions. I\ndon't see a continuous aspect to this.", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T20:17:24.407", "id": "91583", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-14T02:09:48.017", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-14T02:09:48.017", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "It does indicate that something will continue in the future, but it doesn’t\nnecessarily mean they will keep talking to the government about their\nexperiences over and over. It refers more to the continuous effort they are\ngoing to make from now on. 言う here should be understood as meaning “to\ndemand.”", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-13T02:11:42.657", "id": "91586", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T02:11:42.657", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "91581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It's not a te-form. The phrase used there is ついたつかない (meaning **whether or\nnot** ) + a reason expressing で. This is a variant of\n「[するしない](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)」\nand\n「[するかしないか](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B)」.\nするかしないか, for instance, can occur in [these\nphrases](https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B).\n\n> ～するかしないか \n> whether or not to\n>\n> ～するかしないかに \n> scarcely when\n>\n> ～するかしないかの問題 \n> matter of deciding whether to\n>\n> ～するかしないかの選択の自由を持っている \n> have the choice to ~ or not\n>\n> ～するかしないかを決める問題 \n> matter of deciding whether to\n>\n> ～するかしないか迷う \n> debate whether to\n\nSince the temporal point of focus is after the message has become 既読, つく is in\nthe past tense.\n\n> Seems to me every day high school students around the world quibble **over\n> whether** their text/SNS messages have been read.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-12T20:43:23.403", "id": "91584", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T00:05:57.037", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-13T00:05:57.037", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91582", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "3 means that the woman will come to the man's house take care of the dog. 2\nmeans to take care of the dog in the woman's own house. 3 is wrong, 2 is\ncorrect because the woman was asked to care for the dog in her own house.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-13T12:52:36.707", "id": "91588", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-13T12:59:27.227", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-13T12:59:27.227", "last_editor_user_id": "30554", "owner_user_id": "30554", "parent_id": "91587", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's read ほう because it's part of the basic pattern of comparison, `～方が +\npredicate`. It _could_ be understood as an extension of \"this side/direction\n(of seeing ...)\", but IMO it can be just memorized as a pattern of comparison.\nThe act of \"seeing\" itself is not a person.\n\nAlso note that 血の通った人間 **として** 見る is not \"to see flesh-and-blood humans\" but\n\"to see them as flesh-and-blood humans\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-14T01:15:42.323", "id": "91592", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-14T01:15:42.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "This ことがある does not mean \"sometimes\", but simply \"there is something\" (or \"she\nhas something\"). 何かしら思うこと is \"something in mind\".\n\n> それでも何かしら思うことはあったらしい。 \n> Still, she seems to have had (at least) something in mind.\n\n何かしら思うところはあった is a synonym (may sound slightly more euphemistic/polite).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T01:08:21.080", "id": "91606", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T01:49:28.423", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-15T01:49:28.423", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91596", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "A literal translation is \"to put/load even herself (桐葉) onto 朱莉\", and this is\nbasically just a paraphrase of キャラクターに自分を重ね合わせる (although キャラクターに自分を乗せる sounds\nless common to me). As an actress, 桐葉 may be able to put something like\nenergy/emotion/spirit into the voice of 朱莉, but 寿季 and 先生 are thinking that's\nnot enough. The point is that 桐葉 should not hide the existence of herself even\nwhen she is playing the role of someone else. The audience should be able to\nalways feel not only 朱莉 but also 桐葉.\n\nThat な doesn't mean \"don't\". It's a friend of よ/ね/わ.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T01:33:19.243", "id": "91607", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T01:40:14.850", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-15T01:40:14.850", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91597", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Going by the context you've provided here, we can understand a couple things\nin this text:\n\n 1. 姫子, as you explain, is a teacher/mentor to 月見坂桐葉/月見桐奈. And she speaks in a self-assured and patronizing manner.\n\n 2. who お人好しでおっちょこちょいな奴 refers to seems unclear. It could be someone else, or as @naruto points out, it could also be 姫子 or 寿季.\n\n 3. 言い出したこと means \"idea\" or \"suggestion\". 私から言い出したことではない: \"wasn't my idea\"\n\nIn smooth, conversational English, the second half goes something like this:\n\n> 寿季: So you are saying (you did that because) you wanted to help her\n> (月見坂桐葉/月見桐奈) grow?\n>\n> 姫子: Well, yeah, something like that. It wasn't my idea though.\n>\n> 寿季: Eh? What do you mean?\n>\n> 姫子: It's just, um, a good-hearted but scatterbrained someone has been\n> involved, you know? (implying that someone good-hearted but scatterbrained\n> has been helping 月見坂桐葉/月見桐奈)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T00:30:00.980", "id": "91604", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T17:01:40.180", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-15T17:01:40.180", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91598", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The answer is clearer if we look at how they may have been pronounced in Old\nChinese.\n\n * [池](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%B1%A0)\n * (Baxter–Sagart): /*Cə.lraj/\n * (Zhengzhang): /*l'al/\n * [也](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%B9%9F)\n * (Baxter–Sagart): /*lAjʔ/\n * (Zhengzhang): /*laːlʔ/\n\n(Baxter-Sagart refers to one set of reconstructions, specifically [the one in\nthis\nbook](https://ocbaxtersagart.lsait.lsa.umich.edu/BaxterSagartOCbyMandarinMC2014-09-20.pdf).)\n\nNow, reconstructions are necessarily based on incomplete information, and so\nyou can see that the two reconstructions don't agree on what the initial or\nfinal of 池 and 也 actually are. However, both of them agree that the two\ncharacters were certainly pronounced more similar to each other than in modern\nChinese varieties.\n\nYou can see that 池 ended up diverging from 也 in pronunciation starting from\nMiddle Chinese because of a difference in articulation in the initial (either\na sesquisyllable in Baxter-Sagart, or a pharyngealised initial in Zhengzhang's\nreconstruction).\n\nIn summary, you can see that while 也 is not a meaningful phonetic component\nfrom the point of view of modern Chinese dialects or Sino-Japanese readings,\nthey were much closer to each other in Old Chinese.\n\n(PS: Your question also applies to 地, which is certainly more similar to 池,\nbut also raises the similar question of why it has a phonetic 也. The answer is\nthe same as above.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T00:41:41.780", "id": "91605", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T00:46:12.100", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-15T00:46:12.100", "last_editor_user_id": "816", "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "91599", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "While the history of Japanese characters being imported from Chinese is\nrelevant, it is probably more useful to focus on how Japanese is classified\nnow.\n\nKanji characters are usually categorized into 4 types, as follows:\n\n * Pictograms (象形文字) like 門\n * Ideograms (指示文字) like 二 or 三\n * Compound ideograms (会意文字) like 明\n * Phonetic-ideographic characters (形成文字) like 池 \n( _There are 2 other categories but they are somewhat rare._ )\n\nThe phonetic-ideographic characters contain a component that sometimes gives a\nclue to the pronunciation of the character. For example, you will find that\nthe component 昜 sometimes appears on the right side of a kanji. As you can see\n[here](https://jitenon.com/parts/%E6%98%9C), it usually carries the\npronunciation of ヨウ. But not always. Therefore, as a learner you can't rely on\nspecific components always being pronounced a certain way. Kanji evolved in a\nvery unorthodox way, meaning that learners are better served by developing an\nawareness of the components, but not relying on them to provide solid rules\nabout meaning or pronunciation.\n\nIf you want to check the category of any _joyo_ kanji, try this site:\n<https://www.kanjidatabase.com/kanji_search.php> and select 'Look Up Kanji'\nand then tick 'Kanji Classification'. Don't let this derail your learning\nprocess - it is more relevant in academic discussions, although it can have\nimplications for learners.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T10:26:38.603", "id": "91610", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-15T10:26:38.603", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "91599", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "### 叶う{かなう}\n\nThe kanji is [叶](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%8F%B6)\n\n> どんな夢も叶うんだって", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-14T19:23:01.243", "id": "91602", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-14T19:23:01.243", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91601", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "First things first, there seems to be a typo in your quoted text. I googled\nand found a source with the correct version:\n\n> 貴様の言うとおり人間は弱いよ。すぐ死ぬ。その弱い人間が切り刻まれようが突き **刺**\n> されようがそれでもなお生き続けるってことがどんなことなのか…貴様も少しは味わってみろよ。([source](https://sekihi.net/stones/23959))\n\nSo the part you extracted seems to be a subordinate clause that's connected to\nthe following line.\n\nI can't find a duplicate target specifically on なお to point you to, so I am\ngoing to make an attempt at an answer. Surprised this seemingly hasn't been\nasked before.\n\n> なお \n> an adverb that indicates that an action or state is still going on or the\n> degree of something increases; a conjunction indicating that an additional\n> comment follows what has just been said in the preceding sentence (source:\n> _A Dictionary of Advanced Japanese Grammar_ , Seiichi Makino, Michio\n> Tsutsui, Japan Times, 2008)\n\nThe meanings that なお effects include: \"still\", \"even more\", \"all the more\",\n\"additional\" or \"additionally\", \"and\", \"furthermore\". Here it is used to\ndescribe an **intensified** degree, and this usage often occurs with a verb or\nan adjective.\n\nAnother grammar point that might be worth mentioning—although you didn't ask\nabout it in your question—is ～ようが、～ようが. It's verb volitional form + が／と／とも.\nThese occur either in pairs or alone. This phrase has a pretty big variety of\ndifferent forms. It can be used with verbs/nouns/形容動詞/形容詞, but since you seem\nto have gotten the general idea, I won't get into detail on that. The meaning\nis as you say, \"even if\", or \"doesn't matter if\", namely, what's stated after\nit is true despite all the things being stated in the ようが phrase.\n\nってこと ＝ ということ\n\nどんなことなのか with a question/unknown marker か and an explanatory or explanation-\nbegging の\n\nFor のか please see [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/18994/30454)\n\nThe part you are asking about roughly means:\n\n> Humans, weak just like you've said, even if mangled, even if stabbed, still\n> go on living regardless. You know what that's like? You should get a taste\n> of that!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T23:47:30.947", "id": "91616", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-16T17:22:50.877", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-16T17:22:50.877", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "91612", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, the に of 泳ぎに indicates purpose.\n\n海に泳ぎに行きます means \"[I'm] going to the beach (in order) to swim\" in the sense\nthat the intended goal/purpose is the swimming and going to the beach is the\nmeans by which the goal can be achieved.\n\nIncidentally 来週の休みの目的は何ですか？ sounds somewhat strange in this context if you are\njust asking someone what their plans are for the weekend. If that is the\ncontext, then something like 来週の休みの **予定** は何ですか？ would make more sense.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-15T20:48:51.527", "id": "91614", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-16T10:37:05.530", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-16T10:37:05.530", "last_editor_user_id": "25875", "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "91613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "You are not completely off the mark, but there are some misunderstandings.\n\n> ２０１８年、SNSで実施した１２９４人の読書のアンケート\n\nAs you guessed, in this quote \"実施した\" is most likely a transitive verb, with no\nsubject corresponding to it, so someone (not expressly specified in this\nquote) conducted it, and if it was \"実施された\", it would mean \"was conducted\".\nHowever, verbs ending in \"する\" are not always transitive, as we will see below.\n\n> iPhoneが再起動した場合Touch IDを利用するには...\n\nHere, \"再起動した\" is used intransitively, with the が-marked \"iPhone\" being the\nsubject. If it was \"Iphoneを再起動した場合\", then \"再起動した\" would be transitive (which\nit can be without a problem), with no subject corresponding to it present. You\ncan also say \"iPhoneが再起動された場合\", in which case \"再起動された\" is a transitive verb in\nthe passive form.\n\nHere is the takeaway point: There are する-ending verbs that are only used as a\ntransitive verb, and there are する-ending verbs (called \"[labile\nverbs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labile_verb)\") that can be used either as\ntransitive or as intransitive (or more precisely,\n\"[unaccusative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unaccusative_verb)\") verbs.\n\n\"実施する\" is nearly exclusively used as a transitive verb. (\"アンケートを実施する\" and\n\"アンケートが実施される\" are fine, but many people may find \"アンケートが実施する\" strange or\nungrammatical.)\n\n\"再起動する\" can be used as a transitive or intransitive verb. (\"Iphoneを再起動する\" and\n\"Iphoneが再起動する\" are both good.)\n\n> 彼らはウォッカを混ぜたオレンジジュースのグラスを彼に与えた。\n\nRight. The \"混ぜた\" here is a transitive verb, though the person/people who did\nthe act can be (one of) 彼ら or some other party. (The topic-subject \"彼ら\"\ncorresponds to the verb 与えた.)\n\nHere's another takeaway: In Japanese, there exist pairs of related verbs whose\ndistinction is due to the difference in transitivity. The\n混ぜる(transitive)-混ざる(intransitive) pair is one of them. Other examples include\n始める-始まる, 決める-決まる and 見つける-見つかる. But do note that the use of intransitive verb\ndoes not entail the lack of a willful actor in the event it describes.\n\"ウォッカが混ざったオレンジジュース\" can very well refer to a glass of orange juice someone\nintentionally mixed some vodka in, and so can \"なくしたスマホが見つかった\" describe a\nsituation where someone searched high and low for the phone.\n\n> 選択された特定のWi-Fiネットワーク\n\nYes, if it was \"選択した特定のWi-Fiネットワーク\", it would mean \"designated Wi-Fi network\n[unmentioned entity (it can be \"you\", as the case may be)] chose, (or closer\nto \"have chosen\" if you read the た-form as completive rather than preterite).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-16T11:20:47.420", "id": "92616", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-16T11:20:47.420", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11575", "parent_id": "91615", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "If you want to modify 約束 using a relative clause (or any other noun-modifying\nexpressions), を is mandatory at least in formal sentences. As you said, 約束する\nwithout を is a verb, and thus cannot be modified by a noun-modifying\nexpression.\n\n* * *\n\n**を is mandatory** (modifiers are applied to the noun 約束):\n\n * 大事な約束 **を** した\n * 旅行の約束 **を** した\n * 子供を映画へ連れて行く約束 **を** した\n\n(を may be dropped anyway in informal conversations.)\n\n**を is optional** (modifiers are applied to the verb phrase 約束(を)する):\n\n * 昨日約束(を)した\n * 確かに約束(を)した\n * 子供を映画へ連れて行くよう約束(を)した\n\n* * *\n\nSee Chocolate's comment for details.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-16T03:01:25.220", "id": "92615", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-16T06:48:19.717", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-16T06:48:19.717", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "91617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Both sentences are perfectly fine. You can even use two に and say\nパソコンを買いに秋葉原に行った.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-16T23:04:38.040", "id": "92622", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-16T23:04:38.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Both sound fine to me, too.\n\n[初級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック](https://books.google.co.jp/books/about/%E5%88%9D%E7%B4%9A%E3%82%92%E6%95%99%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B%E4%BA%BA%E3%81%AE%E3%81%9F%E3%82%81%E3%81%AE%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC.html?id=l-C4H2sBJlEC)\ndoes say that unlike `[V dictionary form]-ために`, `[V ます-stem]-に` sounds\nunnatural when something is inserted between it and the main verb.\n\n> ○ 昼食を食べるために出かけた。\n>\n> ○ 昼食を食べに出かけた。\n\n> ○ 昼食を食べるためにわざわざ出かけた。\n>\n> ？ 昼食を食べにわざわざ出かけた。\n\nAccording to the book, this is because `[V1 ます-stem]-にV2` is seen as one\nsequence of closely associated actions.\n\nHowever, I don’t particularly find the last sentence to be strange. Even the\nfollowing sentence sounds acceptable to me (although punctuation could be\nimproved).\n\n> 昼食を食べに友達と一緒にわざわざ秋葉原まで出かけた。\n\n`[N]-に` would sound a bit awkward, especially when the inserted phrase is\nlong.\n\n> ？ 昼食にわざわざ出かけた。\n>\n> ？ 昼食に友達と一緒にわざわざ秋葉原まで出かけた。\n\n* * *\n\n[Reference]\n\n◆「〜ために」はＰが移動動作の場合や、使用を表す動詞の場合にも用いることができるので、「〜しに」「〜のに」との違いが問題になります。\n\n(5) 昼食を｛食べるために／食べに｝出かけた。\n\n(6) この網は魚を｛焼くために／焼くのに｝使っている。\n\n両者の違いは、「〜しに」「〜のに」の場合、ＰとＱの間に他の要素が入ると不自然になる点です。これは、「ＰしにＱ」「ＰのにＱ」では、ＰとＱが密接に結びついたひとつなぎの動作のように扱われるためです。\n\n(5)’ 昼食を｛○食べるために／？食べに｝わざわざ出かけた。\n\n(6)’ この網は魚を｛○焼くために／？焼くのに｝母が毎日使っている。\n\n（初級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック §23. 復文と接続詞(3) - 理由・目的 - p216）", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T02:40:10.487", "id": "92625", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T02:40:10.487", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Your translation is of course correct. The issue here is the translation given\nin the book you are reading appears to be done by non-native speakers of\nEnglish. For my money, the book's author(s) is/are likely (a) native Japanese\nspeaker(s).\n\nWhat happens here is a misplaced locative adverbial phrase in the process of\ntranslating that sentence. Conceivably, the author(s) meant to say it like\nthis, with the adverbial \"in Japan\" modifying Smith rather than someone:\n\n> [he will need someone] (when he is) in Japan\n\nSo if we want to hew close to the original translation, we can phrase the\nclause better:\n\n> Since Mr. Smith doesn't speak Japanese, when in Japan he will need someone\n> who can translate for him accurately.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-16T18:05:24.413", "id": "92620", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-16T18:05:24.413", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "92619", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As Eddie Kal says, your translation is correct and the one in the book may\nhave the adverbial phrase “in Japan” in a less-than-ideal position.\n\nHowever, “when he goes to Japan” has its own weakness as it could also be\nunderstood as meaning 日本へ行く時. The Japanese sentence, with たら, is saying Mr.\nSmith will need an interpreter when he has completed the action of 日本へ行く, not\non his way. So, he is already in Japan when the event of the main clause\nhappens. A translation with “(when he is) in Japan” is unambiguous in this\nrespect.\n\nI don’t know how to accurately translate 日本へ行ったら using the verb “to go.”", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T08:17:40.520", "id": "92628", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T08:17:40.520", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92619", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "It depends on the context. The reason is because 〜たら does not translate\ndirectly to English; it sometimes takes the meaning \"if\" and sometimes takes\nthe meaning \"when\".\n\nWithout context, simply reading the sentence as stated, it is assumed that Mr.\nSmith is not in Japan, nor is he planning to go to Japan. Given that Mr. Smith\nis neither in Japan nor going to Japan, there is no context as to why Mr.\nSmith needs a Japanese translator at all. Therefore, 〜たら would take the\nmeaning of \"if\", and the translation would be \"Since Mr. Smith doesn't speak\nJapanese, he will need someone to do accurate translation for him if he goes\nto Japan\", which is close to your translation.\n\nNow, add to that the context that it is highly likely that Mr. Smith will\nsomeday go to Japan for a business meeting. This changes the meaning of the\nsentence. In this case, 〜たら takes the meaning of \"when\", since it is\ndetermined that Mr. Smith is indeed likely going to Japan (although perhaps at\nsome indeterminate point in the future). In this case, since Mr. Smith will be\nin Japan, and he will have a need to use Japanese while in Japan (in a\nbusiness meeting with a Japanese person), the translation changes to \"Since\nMr. Smith doesn't speak Japanese, he will need someone in Japan to do accurate\ntranslation for him (when he goes there for his business meeting)\".\n\nSo, depending on context, both translations can be correct. Of course, in\nexamples from Japanese-learner textbooks, every non-Japanese person is always\nplanning imminent business trips to Japan, which is why they chose the latter\ncase to use, without context; the context is implied since it's a Japanese-\nlearner textbook (I say this tongue-in-cheek, but it's also pretty close to\ntrue).", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T19:38:48.857", "id": "92639", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T19:38:48.857", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11449", "parent_id": "92619", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "て does sound like つ or つぇ in those videos.\n\nThe following is my conjecture of what is happening.\n\nTo pronounce the geminate consonant /tt/, you hold the airflow for longer than\nyou would to pronounce the single plosive /t/. When this airflow is released,\nit tends to cause a little aspiration on /t/, making it sound a bit like the\nEnglish /t/ at the top of a stressed syllable.\n\nThe position of the tip of the tongue for /t/, combined with the narrow\nopening of the mouth in preparation for the close-mid front vowel /e/,\nsometimes causes the released airflow to produce a hissing sound like [s].\nThis makes /t/ sound like an affricate [ts], or [tθ] depending on the exact\nplace of articulation of /t/.\n\nOn top of it, /e/ tends to be centralized in loose pronunciation, sounding\nlike [ɘ] (but not so open as the English schwa [ə]), and this _loose_ vowel,\njust like [ɯ] for /u/, tends to become silent, or unvoiced, when it appears\nbetween two voiceless consonants, such as /t/.\n\nSome people pronounce /e/ more clearly than others, in which case /te/ sounds\nlike, well て, even if it is a bit aspirated. I don't think it is a regional\nthing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T05:17:59.573", "id": "92627", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T06:14:10.643", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-17T06:14:10.643", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92624", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Take a look at the entry for\n\"[どかどか](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%8B%E3%81%A9%E3%81%8B/)\"\non デジタル大辞泉.\n\n> ［副］ \n> １大勢の者が足音をたてて、さわがしく出入りするさま。「客が―（と）入ってくる」 \n> ２物事が一時に集中するさま。「問い合わせが―（と）来る」「入学の諸費用が―（と）必要になる」\n\nWhile it is true that \"どかどか\" is strongly associated with the \"thud-thud\"\nproduced by footsteps, it is also used to evoke the idea of things being or\nmoving in large quantities at a time.\n\nHere are a few examples found on the web involving the precipitation of snow.\n\n> どかどかと降っております、雪。 ([Link](https://ameblo.jp/te-ju-\n> concierge/entry-11117517922.html?utm_source=gamp&utm_medium=ameba&utm_content=general__te-\n> ju-concierge&utm_campaign=gamp_paginationList))\n\n> たまには東京もどかどかっと降ってほしいものです。\n> ([Link](https://blog.nyanscaptain.com/archives/1815))\n\n> 日本海側を中心に雪がドカドカと降り(...)\n> ([Link](http://dcsmt.wni.co.jp/news/detail.html?tpid=202102230215))\n\nThere is also a related term,\n\"[ドカ雪](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%8B%E9%9B%AA-582134)\".\n\nI think it's a fair bet the semantic extension from the \"thud\" sound to the\nidea of large quantities simply traces the reality of a loud sound being made\nby things in large quantities as they move or come into contact with some\nobject.\n\nA quick tangential aside -- \"どかどか\" can also describe the way a single\nindividual walks or runs, and sometimes it has more to do with the manner\n(rushed, inelegant, discourteous, etc.) or how the speaker feels about it than\nthe sound per se. A couple of examples:\n\n>\n> しかし自分の屋敷の庭をどかどかと歩かれて、そのまま見過ごすわけにはいかぬ。([Link](https://www.jacom.or.jp/column/2017/04/170416-32492.php))\n\nThe \"どかどか\" in this sentence is indicative of the rudeness and offense he felt\nof the trespassing.\n\n>\n> 今日はたまこちゃんが、マック君の上をどかどかと歩いてくれた。([Link](https://fuukintei.exblog.jp/11559584/))\n\nThis sentence recounts how the writer's cat Tamako took an insouciant stroll\nacross her Mac computer. (I doubt that any loud sound resembling a thud was\nactually made in the process.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T12:10:35.673", "id": "92632", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T23:16:22.843", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-17T23:16:22.843", "last_editor_user_id": "11575", "owner_user_id": "11575", "parent_id": "92629", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "言う in form, in a subordinate/relative clause, shows that this action occurred\nat the same time as the main verb. The main verb happened in the past, so the\nspeaking did too. But what seems clearer in the Japanese is that the speaking\nwas happening as \"I\" was considering the purchase. 理沙が言ったから sounds like before\nI even got to the store (or wherever) Risa had already talked me into the\npurchase.\n\nThe sequence of tenses in Japanese works differently from that of English.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-18T03:56:01.703", "id": "92643", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-18T03:56:01.703", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4875", "parent_id": "92631", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> ずっと側にい **てくれてありがとう**\n\nThe pattern is `て+くれて+ありがとう`. Formally, you can say `て+下さって+ありがとうございます`.\n\nIn this example, て simply joins the verbs いる and くれる to ありがとう, the order of\nwhich is fixed. To make sense of this order, think of the fixed expression\n`て+くれる`, \"to do something as a favor.\"\n\n> ずっと側にいてくれました。\n>\n\n>> You were always by my side (and I appreciate it).\n\n>\n> Note: the choice of subject in the translation is arbitrary as it's left out\n> in the original.\n\nNow, if we wish to be explicit, add ありがとう at the end.\n\n> ずっと側にいてくれてありがとう\n>\n\n>> Thank you for always being by my side.\n\n>\n> Literally: thank you for granting me the favor of always being by my side.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-18T20:49:17.363", "id": "92647", "last_activity_date": "2022-01-18T16:38:05.250", "last_edit_date": "2022-01-18T16:38:05.250", "last_editor_user_id": "45630", "owner_user_id": "45630", "parent_id": "92633", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "いいから means \"whatever mate\"\n\nThe injured person must be pushing themselves or caring about something\nspecific. The other person is saying \" **we don't care about this** , get well\nsoon.\"\n\nLiterally you could translate いいから by \"because this is ok (just focus on\nhealing)\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T15:23:40.240", "id": "92635", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T15:23:40.240", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "92634", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "As oldergod's answer says, いいから is an idiom and is not a combination of いい and\nから. The meaning is closest to the English idiom \"alright already\". For\nexample, if someone is in the hospital but all they're worried about is all\nthe work they have to do and how their boss is going to yell at them when they\nget back, you might say to them: \"alright already, you'll deal with that\nlater, for now just get better\".\n\nThe idiom tends to get used when the listener is overly worried with something\nirrelevant or trivial, and particularly when they won't shift their focus to\nwhat's actually important (in the opinion of the speaker).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T18:55:49.643", "id": "92638", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T18:55:49.643", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11449", "parent_id": "92634", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "良い often functions like \"ok\" / \"fine\" / \"alright\" in English in that its base\nmeaning is positive but it can be used negatively, sarcastically, or to\notherwise express a lack of need, and so in some fixed expressions it is\npredominantly negative.\n\nLook at these example conversations and their very loose translations:\n\nＡさん：この資料、コピーしておきましょうか。 Ｂさん：それはいいよ。\n\n(A: Shall I prep some copies of these documents? B: That's alright.)\n\nＡさん：この資料、コピーしていいですか。 Ｂさん：それはいいよ。\n\n(A: Could I make some copies of these documents? B: That's alright.)\n\nYou can see that even in English intonation and context can give the exact\nsame reply seemingly opposite yes and no usages.\n\nIn daily life, いいです or 大丈夫です can often functionally mean 要りません in a roundabout\nway , similar to how in English \"okay\" can mean \"yes\" while confusingly \"I'm\nokay\" is a way to say \"I don't need that\", or \"no\", while \"that's okay\" can\nmean either depending on the context and tone. I feel the 'negative' sense is\nperhaps used even more commonly than in English, for example レジ袋はよろしいですか at a\nstore is a common expression (saying はい results in no bag!).\n\nThe other answer provides the excellent translation of \"alright already\" for\nいいから , but there are other phrases like もういい and よくも that also carry this\nnuance.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-17T19:52:56.920", "id": "92640", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T19:52:56.920", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "41892", "parent_id": "92634", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "> 牛乳をかってき **てくれる**?\n\nThe pattern is `て+くれる`, which is also applicable to verbs such as あげる and やる.\n\nBy using くれる, it's implied that the speaker is requesting a favor, so there's\nno need to use its て form or to even pair it with ください.\n\nRelated: [Is くれてください\ntautological?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/84146/is-%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A0%E3%81%95%E3%81%84-tautological)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-18T05:23:58.107", "id": "92644", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-18T05:42:03.790", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-18T05:42:03.790", "last_editor_user_id": "45630", "owner_user_id": "45630", "parent_id": "92642", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "かける basically means _to hang_ , _to hook_ , etc. while しかける means _to set up_\nin general.\n\n罠をかける is not very common, but is appropriate for primitive traps (e.g., rope\ntraps) for capturing small animals, including the one in your story. 罠をしかける is\nvery common, and can be used with any type of trap, including complicated\nones. For example, traps you see in action movies, where spears, bullets, or\nmonsters come at a human when activated, would be しかけられた罠, not かけられた罠.\n\nBoth can be used to metaphorically refer to non-physical traps (e.g., in a\ndetective movie), in which case there is almost no difference.\n\nNote that 罠 **に** かける (\"to entrap\") and 罠 **に** かかる (\"to become entrapped\")\nare different set phrases, and you cannot say 罠 **に** しかける.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-19T01:32:23.843", "id": "92649", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-19T02:27:40.633", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-19T02:27:40.633", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92645", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, Frellesvig (2010, p. 196, n. 3) is very uncomfortable with the\ntraditional explanation of [一日]{ついたち} as \"[月]{つき}[立]{た}ち\" as that would\ncontradict the general principle that the syllables with the historical ï\nvowel (second i) do not have 音便. As an alternative, he proposes an\netymologization through [着]{つ}き[発]{た}ち \"arrival (of a new moon) and departure\n(of the previous)\", which has your deletion before i.\n\nReference:\n\nFrellesvig, Bjarke. _A history of the Japanese language._ Cambridge University\nPress, 2010.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-19T09:38:28.270", "id": "92656", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-19T09:38:28.270", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27977", "parent_id": "92646", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "This\n[presentation](http://www.kyorin-u.ac.jp/univ/user/foreign/nikodebu/lectures\\(PDF\\)/2-4.pdf),\nwhich is based on a book titled 日本語構造伝達文法・発展Ａ, touches upon why 音便 doesn’t\nhappen in the たい-form (e.g. 書きたい).\n\nIf my interpretation is correct, the reason the /t/ sound doesn't affect the\nsound of the preceding verb in the たい-form is that たい, as a semantic unit to\nexpress the subject’s desire that the event described by the verb\nmaterializes, is more independent from, and therefore, less closely associated\nwith the verb than the て of the て-form, which, as an aspect marker, is a more\nintegral part of the verb itself. Thus, 書きて (before 音便) forms one unbreakable\nsemantic unit, so to speak, whereas 書きたい doesn't, and energy-saving phonetic\nchanges, such as that from 書きて to 書いて, don’t easily transcend boundaries of\nsuch units.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-19T12:59:42.523", "id": "92657", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-19T12:59:42.523", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92646", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Although you may hate this, after all 'context' is the only clue. Generally\nthere are cases where ambiguity remains. That said, really ambiguous cases are\nnot so frequent and 脅かす（おどかす・おびやかす) is one of the rare cases.\n\nThe following is an example for\n[おびやかす](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E8%84%85%E3%81%8B%E3%81%99_%28%E3%81%8A%E3%81%B3%E3%82%84%E3%81%8B%E3%81%99%29/#jn-32687)\n\n * 刃物で人を脅かす\n\nBut I think most native speakers would read it as おどかす. This is a case where\nonly the writer knows how to read it. Still in most cases おどかす/おびやかす are\ndistinct. For example,\n\n * [脅]{おど}かさないで _Don't scare me_\n * 平和を[脅]{おびや}かす _Subj. threatens peace_ or _Peace-threatening_\n\nAs you are probably aware, the objects of おどかす/おびやかす are (usually) different\n(roughly animate vs. inanimate), but they can overlap and reading will be\nambiguous in such cases . (Cf.\n[here](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/thsrs/9380/meaning/m0u/))\n\n(In the above example \"刃物で人を脅かす\", おどかす/おびやかす mean mostly the same; おびやかす\nsounds actually a bit weird to me.)\n\n* * *\n\nPractically the following may be useful.\n\n## Use of hiragana\n\nAs for the examples mentioned in the question, the second reading is less\nfrequent and simply hiragana will be used. This is true especially of ほどく and\nとろける. So 解く and 溶ける are likely to be read as とく/とける. 脅かす is a borderline case,\nI guess.\n\n## Collocations/Fixed Expressions\n\nLike 平和を脅かす, the second reading is more common in some fixed combination of\nwords. E.g. 大志を[抱]{いだ}く, 骨を[埋]{うず}める、手紙を[認]{したた}める. Except for this kind of\nexpressions, these kanjis tend to be read in the first reading (だく,うめる,みとめる).\n\n## Contexts\n\nThere are cases where contexts usually disambiguate: この道を **通った** can be read\nとおった or かよった, depending on whether you just passed the road once or used the\nroad to commute to somewhere.\n\n臭い(におい、くさい) is another word usually disambiguated by contexts or probably by\ngrammar.\n\n* * *\n\n[This page](https://quesnt.net/2019/09/25/wrong_word/) lists the kind of words\nyou mention in the question.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T04:43:34.213", "id": "92666", "last_activity_date": "2022-06-17T12:59:41.870", "last_edit_date": "2022-06-17T12:59:41.870", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92651", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "If it's any help, corpora seem to treat 脅かす（おびやかす）as emphasizing the meaning\nof abstract threats. For example, NINJAL list phrases like 命を脅かす and 安全が脅かされる\n(among others) as the making up the bulk of the entries. This might suggest\nthat おびやかす has the nuance of something abstract being threatened (life,\nsafety, wellbeing, economy, etc.). In contrast, the same corpus lists 脅す as\noften relating to threats to named individuals, like 里見を拳銃で脅して. I know you\nwanted to specifically compare the two variants obiyakasu and odokasu, but\nthere may not be a lot of data on which to form a solid conclusion.\n\nThe typical answer of context mattering isn't just some linguistic platitude -\nit is based on experience, research, and corpus linguistics. Collocations\nundoubtedly play a role too, but without doing a detailed corpus analysis of\nspecific words in specific linguistic environments, I'm afraid you might not\nbe satisfied with what is likely to be a variety of somewhat general answers.\nYou could consider Content Analysis, but again that is a rather tedious\nundertaking for a very specific niche word.\n\nLinks: (might require registration) \n<https://nlb.ninjal.ac.jp/headword/V.01390/> \n<https://nlb.ninjal.ac.jp/headword/V.01506/>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T21:12:42.450", "id": "92674", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T21:19:36.827", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-20T21:19:36.827", "last_editor_user_id": "25875", "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "92651", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "* **なにってこと (=なにということ, どうってこと, どうということ)** : \"something worth mentioning; a particular something; a (big) deal; a matter you have to worry about saying _what_ \"\n * **も** : A softening particle. See [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/72380/5010).\n * **ない** : \"not\"\n * **んだ** : Explanatory-no\n * **けど** : See [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32824/5010)\n\nA very literal translation is \"It's that it is not something (important),\nbut...\".\n\nなにってことでもないんだけど roughly translates to \"Well, there's nothing that important,\nbut ...\", \"Nothing special, but ...\". It may be used before saying something\nseemingly unimportant or disappointing. There are lots of variations like\nなにということはないけれども, どうというわけでもないんだが, なにってほどじゃないけど, and so on.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T01:23:53.317", "id": "92664", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T01:38:35.473", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-20T01:38:35.473", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92653", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you get the meanings right. Simply put, なぜ is always _why_ and the\nother two mean sometimes simple _why_ and sometimes asking for method (so they\nare ambiguous to some extent).\n\nWhen asking for a method, なんで is considered as 何+で=with what. As such, it can\nbe pronounced なにで which unambiguously asks for a method (i.e., なにで cannot mean\nsimple _why_ ).\n\nどうして in the method-asking sense should be another form of どうやって, which I think\nis more common. (In most cases, I would understand どうして as _why_ rather than\nasking for method).\n\n* * *\n\nAs a side note, my impression is that どうして and なんで for _why_ are more\ncolloquial, perhaps more common in casual speech. なぜ sounds formal or mature\n(or kind of pressing), but it may depend. (I cannot imagine a child using なぜ\nto parents).\n\nThe formal nature of なぜ may at least partially explain the usage in the\nquestion: なぜ for the first enquiry, then どうして/なんで for talking to himself(?).\nUse of two different words (instead of どうして、どうして or なんで、なんで) is a matter of\nvariation.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T09:01:43.963", "id": "92668", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T09:01:43.963", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92654", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "[Here](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/time-clauses/) is a link\nwith てから、後（で）、and 時. [This](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese-\ngrammar/conditional-form-tara/) article has a section on たら as \"when/after\"\nand its usage. Hope these help:)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-19T22:58:59.393", "id": "92662", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-19T22:58:59.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50031", "parent_id": "92655", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "[ちゃんとした](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F)\nmeans \"decent\" or \"usable\", not \"typical\". It can be safely modified by もっと.\nThe sentence basically means \"I want more decent attack skills\". This is an\nambiguous sentence (both in Japanese and English) which can mean either \"(I've\ngot at least a few useful skills but) I want more skills which are decent\" or\n\"(I've got some useless skill but) I want a skill which is more decent\". If\nthe official translation is correct, it means the latter in this context,\ni.e., もっと modifies ちゃんとした.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-19T13:36:31.520", "id": "92659", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-19T13:42:38.113", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-19T13:42:38.113", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92658", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, これだからXは is a set expression. It literally means \"Because of this, X ...!\"\nand the omitted predicate is usually something negative. It implies \"This is\nwhy I don't like X\", \"This is why X sucks\", etc. (On rare occasions, a\npositive predicate is implied, so you have to always see the context.)\n\nぶちこむ is a strong and rough version of 入れる. It means putting 結菜's account in\nthe newly created list. It's normally rude to say アカウントをリストにぶち込む. He said this\nprobably because he was reluctant or frustrated.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T01:11:11.513", "id": "92663", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T01:26:07.240", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-20T01:26:07.240", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92660", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Yes, it is possible.\n\nI feel you didn't meet the friend for a few years when you say 「学生時代の友人」.\n\n「学生時代からの友人」sounds like you still keep in touch with the friend from college\ndays.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-20T09:37:02.023", "id": "92669", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T09:37:02.023", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50038", "parent_id": "92665", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The correct accent is 止まらないんだ{LHHHLLL}. The drop comes from ＼んだ, but it moves\nback for the vowel. OJAD’s Suzuki-kun is wrong (like it often is).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-01-25T03:11:43.723", "id": "93131", "last_activity_date": "2022-01-25T03:11:43.723", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "92673", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In this case \"もっと早く仕掛けられた\" means much the same thing as \"もっと早く仕掛けられたはずだ\" ('I\n_could have_ moved in sooner'). Even though it lacks an irrealis marker like\n\"たら\" or \"はず\", the context makes it clear that it is in counter-factual mood.\nPerhaps the comparative \"もっと早く\" may give the listener an extra lead in the\nbeginning by hinting at the implicit \"than I (actually) did\". (Though, of\ncourse, comparisons can be with other things than the reality.)\n\n\"言ってることが陸上選手だ\" means pretty much what you are thinking too. The speaker is\ncomparing the other person to a thing which he is not (I assume), but without\nany simile marker. It is a quite common occurrence.\n\nFor example, seeing someone who I know is not a Japanese but speaks and acts\nvery much the Japanese way, I might say \"日本人じゃん！\" instead of \"日本人みたい！\". Or\ntake a conversation like this: A「あぁ、腰が痛くて歩けない」B「おじいちゃんじゃん」. (I'm not sure if\nthese can be explained as simply the distinction between simile and metaphor\nor not.) I guess without dilutive stuff like \"みたい\", \"ようだ\" and \"っぽい\" your\nstatement packs more of a punch as a quip.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-21T00:12:09.260", "id": "92677", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-21T00:12:09.260", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11575", "parent_id": "92675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe because they're adding the nuance \"come to me\" which will lead them\nto heaven or hell\n\nThinking over it again, it is more likely the nuance of \"come to do..\" from\nてくる structure... it's not always a literal \"coming\" motion, but rather an\nindication of change, like in 変わってくる、なってくる, etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-21T02:39:58.073", "id": "92678", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-21T12:20:02.703", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-21T12:20:02.703", "last_editor_user_id": "50031", "owner_user_id": "50031", "parent_id": "92676", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I don't remember the story, but I believe this person is expected to return\nfrom Heaven or Hell after doing something there. If that is the case, (-て)こい\nis nearly mandatory. Just saying 「天国か地獄、好きな方に行け」 might almost sound like \"Die!\nDon't come back here again!\". Even in more realistic daily conversations,\n(-て)こい or (-て)きて is a very common word you usually need to add. For example,\n買い物に行ってきて is much more natural than 買い物に行って, and the latter might sound like\nyou want this person to get away.\n\nMany subsidiary verbs including (-て)くる, (-て)いく, (-て)もらう and (-て)しまう may seem\nunnecessary at first because there are no direct equivalents in English.\nStill, they are very important words in Japanese. Failing to include them\nappropriately will result in a really awkward Japanese sentence.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-21T02:45:23.177", "id": "92679", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-21T02:45:23.177", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92676", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The meaning of 緑色 is strictly limited to the color green, whereas 緑 includes\nthe color green and other figurative meanings like 'greenery', 'natural',\n'environmentally-friendly', etc.\n\nWhile the exact phrase 緑の can refer to something green colored (as would 緑色の),\nthe difference is that this phrase could also have a figurative meaning. It\ncan be used creatively to describe a variety of things associated with the\nconcept 'green'. For example, take the phrase\n[緑の募金](https://www.green.or.jp/bokin/first/know), which is used in this\nspecific context to mean supporting local environmentally-friendly projects.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-21T17:21:22.177", "id": "92683", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-21T17:21:22.177", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "92682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "色 doesn’t play any particular purpose or add any particular nuance in the case\nof 緑. It just might sound a bit redundant to some people.\n\n> 緑のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 緑色のドレスを着ている。\n\n色 is practically mandatory in certain other colors.\n\n> 黄色のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 茶色のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 灰色のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 黄土色のドレスを着ている。\n\nIt should not be surprising that words like 灰 and 黄土 need to be followed by 色\nbecause they don’t refer to colors by themselves outside of very limited\ncontexts.\n\nThough 茶 is much more established as a standalone word for the color brown,\nand 黄 is nothing but the name of the color yellow, these still require 色 for\nsome reason. It is such an integral part that it even appears in their\nadjective forms.\n\n> 黄色いドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 茶色いドレスを着ている。\n\nOn a side note, it is interesting that the name of the most typical kind of\nJapanese tea (today) needs to be modified by another color, as 緑茶.\n\nA few other basic colors have adjective forms (without 色), as well as noun\nforms.\n\n> 白いドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 黒いドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 赤いドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 青いドレスを着ている。\n\nIf the purpose is to simply describe how the person looks, I would say these\nwith adjectives sound slightly more natural than the following sentences with\nnouns.\n\n> 白のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 黒のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 赤のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 青のドレスを着ている。\n\nThough the difference is subtle, these sound a bit like the speaker’s focus is\non what color the person chose to wear out of multiple choices. In other\nwords, the color seems to get more weight in 白のドレス than in 白いドレス, which is\nmore about the dress and the color is only one of its attributes.\n\nTo me, 色 sounds more redundant with 白 and 黒 than 赤 and 青, and 緑 for that\nmatter.\n\n> 白色のドレスを着ている。[very redundant]\n>\n> 黒色のドレスを着ている。[very redundant]\n>\n> 赤色のドレスを着ている。\n>\n> 青色のドレスを着ている。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T02:02:58.063", "id": "92688", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T02:02:58.063", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It is worth mentioning that this usage is probably inherited from Chinese,\nwhere each character corresponds, roughly, to a single-syllable word. Since\nthere are only a limited number of syllables, many characters are pronounced\nthe same, and it would be difficult to know which of several possible meanings\nyou intended. The solution is to add some sort of 'qualifier': an extra word\nthat clarifies the meaning.\n\nThus, '綠: green' becomes '綠色: green colour', '藍: blue' -> '藍色: blue colour',\n'紅: red' -> '紅色: red colour', ...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T08:34:02.983", "id": "92690", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T08:34:02.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50051", "parent_id": "92682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "For a general answer, just look at what everybody else is saying on here.\n\nI will note however, that the one exception is \"Yellow\" (黄色). Here, the \"色\" is\nbaked into the name of the color itself!\n\nFor example you would say\n\n> 赤いペン (red pen)\n>\n> 黄色いペン (yellow pen)\n\nbut\n\n> 黄いペン\n\nis non-grammatical.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T15:06:57.073", "id": "92691", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T15:06:57.073", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50055", "parent_id": "92682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The word じろじろ is part of a cluster of related adverbs.\n\n * [じろじろ](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%98%E3%82%8D%E3%81%98%E3%82%8D-536287) -- First cited to 1700. Found in some older texts as ぢろぢろ.\n * [じろり](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%98%E3%82%8D%E3%82%8A-536416#E7.B2.BE.E9.81.B8.E7.89.88.20.E6.97.A5.E6.9C.AC.E5.9B.BD.E8.AA.9E.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8) -- First cited to 1871. Found in some older texts as ぢろり.\n * じらり -- Date unknown. No actual dictionary entry for this, although it is listed as a synonym in the [じろり entry](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%98%E3%82%8D%E3%82%8A-536416#E7.B2.BE.E9.81.B8.E7.89.88.20.E6.97.A5.E6.9C.AC.E5.9B.BD.E8.AA.9E.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8).\n * [じろっと](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%98%E3%82%8D%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8-297390) -- First cited to 1903. Found in some older texts as ぢろっと.\n\nAll of these have to do with \"moving the eyes and staring pointedly\".\n\nI had first thought that maybe the じろ was a shift from しろ and had to do with\nthe whites of the eyes somehow, and the voicing indicated a softer or rounder\nkind of motion. However, the root is clearly ぢろ, not じろ. I'm not sure how this\nsound symbolism plays out; the initial ぢ is certainly unusual. It's possible\nthat the initial ぢ arose as a kind of emphasis of じ, in which case this might\nstill be related to the whites of the eyes, and / or to adverb じっと\n(\"fixedly\").\n\nThe ろ seems to be related to, or at least suggestive of, the ろ in adverbs like\nぎょろぎょろ (\"rollingly\", as when rolling one's eyes) or ころころ (\"rollingly\", as when\nsomething rolls around).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T01:48:07.283", "id": "92687", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T01:48:07.283", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "92686", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "振る(ぶる, essentially ふる undergoing a 濁音 pronunciation change by being used as an\nattachment or suffix-verb. Usually written in kana alone) indicates acting in\na certain fashion.\n\nExplicitly, it only indicates the way that a person acts, without any other\njudgement (usage ①). But quite often it is used to imply \"putting on airs\" or\n\"acting _like_ something (despite not actually being that way)\" for example,\nin 「いい子ぶる」 \"acting like a good child\" -> \"playing goody two-shoes\" (usage ②)\n\nIn your examples the base expression is...\n\n「偽善者ぶる」 \"to act like a hypocrite\" -> \"to act hypocritically\" (usage ①)\n\n「お姉さんぶる」 \"to act like (my) older sister (even though you aren't)\" (usage ②)\n\nIn this case, then, the verbs are then put into the 受身形 passive form. This\nindicates that the speaker is emphasizing not just that the listener is acting\nin that fashion (putting aside the question of whether they actually are or\naren't the thing they're acting as), but that the listener was/is acting that\nway _in relation to_ the speaker.\n\n「偽善者ぶられるのは我慢ならない」 \"I can't take it that you're acting like a hypocrite to me!\"\n\n「これくらいでお姉さんぶられてもな」 \"Even if you act like you're my older sister after as\nlittle as this...\" -> something like \"What are you doing acting like you're my\nolder sister, even though our connection has been this slight/minimal?\"\n(Japanese is very context sensitive, so this small remark in isolation is\ndifficult to pin down exactly. This is _one_ possible meaning it could have,\nnot the definitive one for that passage.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-23T08:28:25.377", "id": "92700", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-23T08:35:04.850", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-23T08:35:04.850", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "92689", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "「というところ」can mean \"it is the case that...\" \"the situation is..\" and so forth.\nThe で can be understood more abstractly here as \"by way of\" or \"with.\"\nLiterally I would read it as \"With the situation being that....\" I can see\nthis being similar to から in this sense.\n\n「というところだ」is also an N1 grammar structure. Aというところだ is an expression meaning\n“the stage/level/degree that one would call A” and is used to describe a\nspeaker's feelings/opinion/estimate/guess about the current stage/situation.\nThe speaker is not completely sure, but the degree/amount is\nabout/approximately A. Often implies that the amount/degree/activity is “at\nbest” (usually together with せいぜい) A - it is below A level and the speaker\ndoes not consider it to be a big/important thing. Often used with phrases\nexpressing quantity (quantifiers).\n\nI would roughly understand this as \"Already it was about time, so we decided\nto etc.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T18:18:50.747", "id": "92695", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T19:07:22.993", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-22T19:07:22.993", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "50031", "parent_id": "92692", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The というところで in question can be understood as _at the point where_ , the\n_point_ referring to a point in time. As such it can be replaced by とき rather\nthan から.\n\nAs you may understand, the most straightforward というところ is _a place called_\n(e.g. ヨークというところで = _in a city called York_ ). This still can be understood as\nthe same _at the point where_ , but the point is in space.\n\n* * *\n\nAnother related but different というところで is when the last で is a form of だ. It\nworks as a blurring of the statement, meaning _It is something like that..._.\n\n * なんとかうまくいったいうところです _It is like that I have got it done successfully_ = _I have got it done successfully with some reservations_ ,\n\nbut it depends on what reservations there are. The speaker may have had a\ntotal success, but just wants to make it sound modest. Or there are certain\nthings the speaker is not satisfied with.\n\nYet another case is that there is some omission after というところ. Consider e.g.,\n\n * 今月は感染者数が少なかったが、正月で人の移動が増えるとどうかというところです。 _There were few infection cases this month, but **the issue is** what the number will be when more people go out around new year's holidays._\n\nThe omission depends on the context, but usually _the issue is, I wonder, I'm\nnot sure about_ (というところ **が問題です/私は疑問です/私にははっきりわかりません** ).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T06:16:20.540", "id": "92768", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T06:16:20.540", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92692", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "### The grammar\n\nThe word お見舞【みま】い is a noun. Consequently, it does not make any sense\ngrammatically or semantically to use を in your two example sentences:\n\n * 彼【かれ】[を]{●}お見舞【みま】いに行【い】きたい。\n * 私【わたし】は妻【つま】[を]{●}お見舞【みま】いに病院【びょういん】にいった。\n\nThe object particle を is generally used to mark the object of a transitive\nverb. The upper sentence has the adjective (technically, stative verb) 行きたい\n(\"desirable to go\"), which describes a quality of a subject, and thus does not\ntake an object. The lower sentence has the verb いった, the perfective form of いく\n(\"to go\"), which is an intransitive verb, and thus does not take an object.\n\nSince the word お見舞【みま】い is a noun, your sample sentences using の work better:\n\n * 彼【かれ】[の]{●}お見舞【みま】いに行【い】きたい。\n * 私【わたし】は妻【つま】[の]{●}お見舞【みま】いに病院【びょういん】にいった。\n\n### The word お見舞い\n\nThis derives as follows:\n\n * お見舞【みま】い = honorific prefix お + 見舞【みま】い.\n * 見舞【みま】い = the noun form, also the _-masu_ stem (technically, the 連用形【れんようけい】, the \"continuative form\" or \"stem form\") of verb 見舞う.\n * 見舞【みま】う = compound verb, combining 見【み】る (\"to see, to look at\") + 舞【ま】う (\"to dance\", but also \"to go around\", and the root of other verbs like 回【まわ】る [\"to turn around\"] and 回【まわ】す [\"to turn something around, to twist something around\"]) → combined meaning of \"to go around and look at [someone]\".\n\n### How to tell what you're looking at\n\nGenerally speaking, if you have a word ending in an _-i_ sound, it can't be\nthe dictionary form of a verb, since those always end in an _-u_ sound\ninstead. You know immediately that this word either 1) isn't a verb, or 2) is\na conjugated form of a verb.\n\nIf you have a dictionary to hand, looking up the word is the quickest way to\nbe sure. :) If you can't find the word in the dictionary, try the following:\n\n 1. Remove any initial お or ご -- these might be honorary prefixes that aren't actually part of the word.\n 2. Change the final _-i_ to _-u_ and see if there's an entry for a verb with this form.\n\nIf you don't have a dictionary to hand, look for usage examples -- Google can\nbe your friend for this. Examine what you find, and pay attention to the\nparticles and the overall grammar.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T19:27:26.163", "id": "92696", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T19:27:26.163", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "92693", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I would say...\n\n彼 **の** **お** 見舞いに行きたい。 -- A \n彼 **を** ~~お~~ 見舞いに行きたい。 -- B\n\n私は先生 **の** **お** 見舞いに病院にいった。 -- A \n私は先生 **を** ~~お~~ 見舞いに病院にいった。 -- B\n\n* * *\n\nA: 「～の + Noun(=お見舞い) + に + 行く」 \nB: 「～を + 連用形Verb(=見舞い) + に行く」(cf 「映画を見に行く」「ご飯を食べに行く」)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-23T14:02:16.970", "id": "92701", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-23T14:07:54.343", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-23T14:07:54.343", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "92693", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This is almost certainly an erratum.\n\nThe _Kojien_ dictionary explicitly mentions that the meaning of 'easy' is\nwritten as 易しい:\n\n`(「易しい」と書く) 簡単である。容易である。` \n`今昔物語集10「―・しく手を斬らるるがつたなきなり」「―・い仕事」` \n`わかりやすい。「―・い本」`\n\n[Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B%A3%E5%BA%A6) agrees, for\nwhatever that is worth. What book is this from?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-22T21:07:50.667", "id": "92697", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-22T21:07:50.667", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "25875", "parent_id": "92694", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This 来る still roughly means \"to come (to the speaker)\", but its subject can\noften be some intangible stimulation (e.g., pain, stink, hunger) or strong\nemotion (e.g., sorrow, anger). In English, perhaps \"to strike (me)\" or \"to\ncome off (to me)\" is somewhat close.\n\n> ### 来る\n>\n> ❽感情・感覚などの作用や反応が生じる。 \n> 「痛みが去ると空腹感が来た」 \n> 「喜びの後に悲しみが来る」 \n> 「『〔肩をもんだときの痛みが〕来ますか？』『結構来ますねえ』」 \n> 「第六感にぴんと来る」 \n> 「胸にじんと来る」 \n> 「がっくりと来る」 \n> 「かちんと来る」 \n> 「その意見は僕にはしっくりこないなあ」 \n> 「今の気分にこんなにぴったり来る音楽はない」\n>\n> (Source: 明鏡国語辞典 第三版)\n\nIn your context, what comes is not explicitly stated, but it suggests the\nspeaker is psychologically moved in some way or another. She seems to be\nacting haughty, so I guess she euphemistically implied つらい or さみしい without\nsaying it directly.\n\n> あんたに変に距離を取られると結構クるのよ \n> It's pretty nerve-wracking if you distance yourself from me.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-23T00:58:00.803", "id": "92699", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-23T01:31:41.450", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-23T01:31:41.450", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92698", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Those questions are fundamentally different in meaning:\n\n> 女の子って、何でできてる？ \n> What is a girl made of? \n> What are the essential elements/components of a girl?\n>\n> 赤ちゃんってどうしてできる？ \n> Why do babies come to be? \n> How does a baby come into existence?\n\nIn the first sentence, the question is about _already-grown_ teenager girls\nwho were born many years ago. What the speaker has in mind is not a newborn\nbut a female student, and the question has nothing to do with the process of\npregnancy. できて(い)る is the natural choice because it's about the result of an\nevent that happened many years ago. Note that this 何で means \"with what\", not\n\"why\". (放浪息子 is a story about a 女装男子. The phrase in question may be a\nreference to\n[this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Are_Little_Boys_Made_Of%3F).)\n\nOn the other hand, the second question is about pregnancy; the speaker is\nthinking about a newborn who appears (seemingly) from nowhere. Since it's\ndirectly about the process of できる itself, the present tense is the correct\nchoice.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-24T00:31:21.303", "id": "92703", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-24T00:44:57.060", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-24T00:44:57.060", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92702", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "No, they are not interchangeable.\n\nそれで is それ marked with the particle で. In your example, it refers to the\ngeneral situation in which the speaker sees the listener to be, or the manner\nin which the latter is doing something at the time. The sentence implies the\nlistener is being idle or not studying hard enough by the speaker’s standards.\n\n> それで勉強しているつもりですか。 \n> (lit.) Do you think you are studying with (the situation being) that?\n\nそうして is そう followed by the て-form of the verb する. It is interchangeable with\nそのようにして or そうやって, although the first alternative sounds much more formal and\nthe second a little more colloquial than そうして.\n\n> そうして直すんですか。 \n> (lit.) Do you fix it by doing so?\n\nIf そうして is replaced with それで, the sentence would be understood as referring to\nsome concrete tool or means.\n\n> それで直すんですか。 \n> (lit.) Do you fix it with that (thing)?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-26T11:36:38.307", "id": "92720", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-26T11:36:38.307", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92704", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In terms of meaning, both are not so different. I think both can be translated\nas _story_ in English, but sometimes (probably recently) they are used when\npeople want to emphasize the coherence of the whole story. They are more about\nidiomatic expressions rather than nuances.\n\nFor example, typical examples may be like the following:\n\n * プレゼンにストーリーを持たせる\n * 物語としてのコロナ騒動\n\nIn these ストーリー/物語 are not interchangeable.\n\nThe former literally _let the presentation have a story_. The intended meaning\nis that the presentation is given as a single coherent story in such a way\nthat it is understandable from the beginning to the end without (too much)\ndiversion.\n\nAs for the latter, it is literally _covid-19 as a story_ , and 物語として does not\nreally mean much. The whole phrase means that the prose is composed as a\nsingle story rather than a collection of facts. It does have some connotations\nthat the story is partly fiction, but not necessarily that the whole story is\ninvented.\n\nAs a practical distinction, I have the impression that ストーリー is more\nfrequently used for expressions common in business contexts.\n\n* * *\n\n[A dictionary definition of\n物語る](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E7%89%A9%E8%AA%9E) has 'あるまとまった話をする。' . I\nthink this まとまった話 is the closest meaning in the above usage.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-28T00:56:03.217", "id": "92736", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-28T00:56:03.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92706", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "_Story_ in English is a word that can refer to both the work/tale itself and\nits plot/content. When you say \"the plot of this story\", _story_ refers to a\nwork. When you say \"the story of this movie\", _story_ refers to the plot.\n\nIn Japanese, both ストーリー and 物語 can refer to both a work itself and its plot.\nBut there are nuances you have to consider.\n\n * 物語 tends to refer to a work itself, and it's often a dramatic, long and/or old one ( _tale_ , _legend_...). It can also refer to the content of a work, but when it does, it functions more like _drama_ rather than _plot_.\n * ストーリー tends to refer to a plot. It can also refer to a work itself, but when it does, it's closer to (often short) _episode_.\n\nFor example, it's natural say この物語のストーリー referring to the plot of some\ndramatic work (novel, movie, etc.), but このストーリーの物語 sounds a bit puzzling to\nme.\n\nThings like fairy tales, folklore and legends are almost certainly 物語, not\nストーリー. On the other hand, customer stories you can find on business websites\nare not 物語 because it's short, modern and, um, businesslike.\n\nWhen you visit the official website of a movie, you can find the ストーリー (or\nあらすじ) section. It would be rare, if ever, to see 物語 in this situation.\n\nこの映画のストーリーに感動しました and この映画の物語に感動しました are almost the same. 彼の演説にはストーリーがあった\nsounds to me like his speech was technically well-constructed, whereas\n彼の演説には物語があった sounds to me like his speech was dramatic and heart-touching.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-28T09:41:08.790", "id": "92741", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-28T12:59:37.627", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-28T12:59:37.627", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92706", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "First off, the honorific prefix お or ご must come at the very front of a word.\nNeither ひい[お]{●}まごさん or ひ[お]{●}まごさん work because the ひ ( _\" great-\"_) and the\nnoun it modifies cannot have anything between them. As a (very rough) analogy,\nit might be like saying _\" great mister grandchild\"_ instead of _\" mister\ngreat-grandchild\"_ -- weird enough that listeners / readers might not be able\nto understand the intended meaning.\n\n_(Note: This works differently for \"grandparent\" terms, because the お prefix\nhas l̲e̲x̲i̲c̲a̲l̲i̲z̲e̲d̲ for those terms -- it has become part of the\nregular word. However, for まご, the お is still a prefix.)_\n\nSeparately, I'm more accustomed to the short-\"i\" version ひまご, but then again\nmy experience with Japanese has been in the Tōhoku and Kantō regions, and the\nlong-\"i\" version ひいまご might be more common in other parts of Japan. That said,\nI do see that a couple of my dictionary resources list ひいまご as an alternative\nform and point the reader to look at ひまご as the main entry, so take that for\nwhat you will. :) One such example is [here at\nKotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%9B%BE%E5%AD%AB-2056633#E7.B2.BE.E9.81.B8.E7.89.88.20.E6.97.A5.E6.9C.AC.E5.9B.BD.E8.AA.9E.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8).\n\nLastly, Google can sometimes be helpful in getting a quick-and-dirty idea of\nhow common different wording might be. Looking up\n[\"おひまごさん\"](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E3%81%8A%E3%81%B2%E3%81%BE%E3%81%94%E3%81%95%E3%82%93%22)\nshows me only one hit anywhere at all, while looking up\n[\"ひまごさん\"](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E3%81%B2%E3%81%BE%E3%81%94%E3%81%95%E3%82%93%22)\nshows me a little more than 1,000 hits. My guess is that the unprefixed\nversion is used more commonly.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-24T19:03:52.000", "id": "92710", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-24T19:12:13.777", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-24T19:12:13.777", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "92708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "In the version you suggested,「食器や家具など **の** いかにもな高級品で固められ、まるでモデルルームのような壮観さだ」,\nthe (topic-)subject for \"固められ\" would be implicit \"部屋\" (or whatever it is that\nis being described here) so that fully written\n(「部屋は食器や家具などのいかにもな高級品で固められ、まるでモデルルームのような壮観さだ」), it would mean something like\nthis:\n\n> The room, equipped solidly with ostentatious luxury articles, like the\n> tableware and furniture, have an impressive appearance like that of a model\n> room.\n\n(Actually, I now see a potential problem with this sentence centering on the\nreference of 「食器や家具など」, which I will discuss at the end of this answer.)\n\nIn the original sentence 「食器や家具などもいかにもな高級品で固められ (...)」, however, the subject\nis「食器や家具など」, marked with も to suggest that they are not the only things that\nlook expensive. So it can be translated like this:\n\n> The tableware and furniture are all luxury articles too, giving the room an\n> impressive appearance like that of a model room.\n\nThis time 'be equipped solidly' does not work for 「固められ」, because here the\npredicative construction 「XをYで固める」 is used to mean 'make X solid with Y' in a\nsense along the lines of 'make it so that the all (the members) of X is(/are)\nY'.\n\n* * *\n\nOkay, about the potential problem with that sentence. Looking closely,\n「食器や家具などのいかにもな高級品」 in「部屋は食器や家具などのいかにもな高級品で固められ、まるでモデルルームのような壮観さだ」 seems to\nsuggest the notion that all tableware and furniture in general are\nostentatious luxury items ('ostentatious luxury items like tableware and\nfurniture'), which is not true.\n\nThat said, it also feels possible to consider 「食器や家具など」 as having a definite\nreference ('the tableware and furniture (in the room) '), as I did in the\ntranslation.\n\nOr maybe when we say things like 「部屋は食器や家具などのいかにもな高級品で固められ」 , even if it does\nnot have a definite reference,「食器や家具など」 can be taken to pick showy luxury\ntableware and furniture out of all tableware and furniture. After all, I\nusually would not notice anything iffy about phrases like「時計やアクセサリーなどの高級品を売る店」\neven though there are many cheap watches and accessories out there.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-24T21:33:35.030", "id": "92712", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-24T21:46:17.263", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-24T21:46:17.263", "last_editor_user_id": "11575", "owner_user_id": "11575", "parent_id": "92709", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, いっしゅるい is a correct and more common reading although ひとしゅるい is possible.\n\nいっしゅるい is\n[促音便](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9F%B3%E4%BE%BF#%E4%BF%83%E9%9F%B3%E4%BE%BF)\nof いちしゅるい. It may be not impossible to pronounce it as いちしゅるい if the speaker\nwants to put an emphasis, saying it slowly, but it should be rare.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T04:46:51.143", "id": "92726", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T04:46:51.143", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92711", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "懐中電灯が見つけできません is ungrammatical, because the only word できる can directly follow\nis a suru-verb such as 運転, 発見 and 勉強. 見つけ is not a suru-verb (you cannot say\n見つけする).\n\nIf you really want to use both 見つける and できる, you have to say 懐中電灯 **を** 見つける\n**ことが** できません. In your case, it's simplest and most natural to say\n懐中電灯が見つかりません.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T05:29:22.993", "id": "92728", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T05:29:22.993", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92714", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> 腰まで伸びたブロンドの髪が風になびかれサラサラと揺れていた。\n\nThis sentence looked odd to me because なびく in modern Japanese is always an\nintransitive verb. However, as aguijonazo pointed out and as [this entry from\na 古語辞典](https://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%B3%E3%81%8F) says, the\nverb used to be transitive as well, in the sense of \"to bend (something)\". I\npersonally didn't know this fact, but was this written by a relatively old\nnovelist?", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T05:39:24.063", "id": "92729", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-20T10:42:28.427", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-20T10:42:28.427", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92715", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Technically, it’s traditionally [1], and you do occasionally hear that accent\neven now, but it’s definitely a minority of people.\n\nHowever, the current majority accent in Tokyo is [0] (borrowed from the Kansai\naccent, because that's where the word was most actively used before entering\nthe Tokyo dialect).\n\nIn general, 大辞林’s accents are pretty traditional/old/outdated. 三省堂国語辞典 第八版\nlists it as [0].", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-25T14:26:28.687", "id": "92717", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-25T14:26:28.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "92716", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "長い modifies only 針 because it's the only noun that is located near 長い. 鳴って or\n鳴っても is not a noun. The next noun is 霧, but it's too distant.\n\nNote that (長い)針が鳴る is a fairly poetic and unique expression. It is not a\ncommon set phrase.)\n\nIn general, you can read how to deal with a noun that has two or more modifies\nhere: [Are Japanese modifiers \"greedy\", \"anti-greedy\", or do they mean\nwhatever people choose them to\nmean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/46817/are-japanese-\nmodifiers-greedy-anti-greedy-or-do-they-mean-whatever-people)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T05:51:08.173", "id": "92730", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T05:51:08.173", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92721", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "なら is not necessary. は is perfectly fine.\n\n> 駅は病院のとなりですよ。 \n> The station is next to the hospital.\n\nYou can also omit the topic altogether, of course.\n\n> 病院のとなりですよ。 \n> It is next to the hospital.\n\nUsing なら, you would sound like you are explicitly stating the assumption on\nwhich you are going to provide an answer, which is not really necessary but\ndoesn’t particularly sound redundant, either. Remember that なら is basically a\nconditional expression.\n\n> 駅なら病院のとなりですよ。 \n> If you want to know about the station, it is next to the hospital.\n\nが is inappropriate here. Your response would sound like an answer to what is\nnext to the hospital, rather than where the station is located.\n\n> 駅が病院のとなりですよ。 \n> It is the station that is next to the hospital.\n\nって is a short and somewhat colloquial equivalent of というのは. You would use it to\ncite some concept you are not familiar with or quote something someone has\njust said when you want to ask about or comment on it. It would be acceptable\nto ask 駅ってどこですか in informal settings, but if you use it in the response, you\nwould sound like you are, depending on the tone, either puzzled or disgusted\nat what you see as a silly question.\n\n> 駅って、病院のとなりですよ。 \n> Station? (What?) It is next to the hospital.\n\nと言えば is used to introduce a new topic that is related to what is mentioned. It\nwould sound terribly out of place if what follows is a direct response to what\nthe other person has just asked.\n\n> 駅と言えば、病院のとなりですよ。(?) \n> Speaking of the station, it is next to the hospital. (?)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T02:32:35.830", "id": "92723", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T02:32:35.830", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92722", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it roughly goes something like this:\n\n> (「〜した」が過去を表す場合は)((((その出来事が(今と関係がない))ことを)表すことが)多い。)\n\nNote that you should always partition sentences with wholesome 文節. 文節 = 1 自立語\n+ 0 or more 付属語. 助詞 falls under 付属語, so they should **always** follow the\npreceding 自立語. This may seem counter-intuitive to people familiar with\nEuropean languages.\n\nYour second suggestion looks good to me. No, there's nothing problematic about\nthe syntax. For subordinate clauses and usage of は/が see these very\ninformative answers:\n\n[は vs が in 私は言うように書いてください。](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43517/30454)\n\n[「は」vs 「が」 in subordinate\nclauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/54689/30454)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T05:02:35.367", "id": "92727", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T05:02:35.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "92724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "> But how could a complete sentence like 警戒心が剥き出し take the particle の to\n> modify another noun?\n\nRemember that Japanese has something called a \"double subject\" construction\nsuch as 彼は背が高い, フランスはワインが有名だ and この本は表紙が緑色だ. By pulling out the は-marked\nargument and leaving the が-marked argument, you can construct a relativized\nphrase like so:\n\n * 背が高い人 \ntall people\n\n * ワインが有名なフランス \nFrance, which is famous for wine\n\n * 表紙が緑色の本 \na book with a green cover\n\nYour sentence is basically an example of this. 警戒心が剥き出しの is a perfectly valid\nadjectival (noun-modifying) expression, and it modifies the following noun\nphrase 刺々しい雰囲気. (Note that むき出し is a no-adjective on its own, and Japanese\nadjectives are [similar in syntax to\nverbs](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/1016/5010).)\n\nTo explain this in more detail, 彼女は警戒心が剥き出しだ is a valid sentence but\n(この)雰囲気は警戒心が剥き出しだ is not. I think this 警戒心が剥き出しの is a [**gapless** relative\nclause](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14550/5010) that modifies\n(刺々しい)雰囲気. Similar examples include:\n\n * カエルが池に飛び込む音 \nthe sound of a frog jumping into a pond\n\n * 誰かが魚を焼く煙 \nsmoke from someone grilling a fish\n\n * 彼が学校に行った帰り \non his way back from school", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-28T06:20:14.963", "id": "92740", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-28T06:51:43.543", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-28T06:51:43.543", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92732", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "[がたい](https://nihongokyoshi-net.com/2018/06/27/jlptn2-grammar-gatai/) is close\nto にくい and comes after the masu-stem of a verb, meaning \"difficult to do\nsomething\"\n\nFrom\n[デジタル大辞泉（小学館）](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E9%9B%A3%E3%81%84_%28%E3%81%8C%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84%29/)\n\n> 難い（がたい） \n>\n> ［接尾］《形容詞型活用［文］がた・し（ク活）。形容詞「かた（難）い」の濁音化》動詞の連用形に付いて、その動作の実現が困難であることを表す。…しにくい。…するのがむずかしい。「得―・い」「信じ―・い」「いわく言い―・い」\n\nI believe it's in [JLPT grammar](https://nihongokyoshi-\nnet.com/2018/06/27/jlptn2-grammar-gatai/):\n\n> [意味] \n> 〜するのが難しい。 \n> 「能力的にできない」ということには使わない。\n>\n> [英訳] \n> \"difficult to do\" \n> ＊Not used to mean something can't be done because of lack of ability.\n\n * 離れる → 離れ ます → 離れがたい → 離れがたく(連用形) → 離れがたく思う\n\n離れがたい: difficult to leave\n\n離れがたく思う: reluctant to part/leave", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-27T22:20:09.793", "id": "92734", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T22:20:09.793", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "92733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This ものの is yet another way to say \"although\". See the comment section. The\npart before comma is the same as おやすみと言ったはいいが or おやすみと言ったはいいけれども.\n\nThen what does ～たはいいが mean? This is a set expression explained here:\n[「〜たはいいが、……」grammar pattern](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/25955/5010)\n\nSo おやすみと言ったはいいものの means \"I said good night (and things were fine until then),\nbut...\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-28T06:07:50.260", "id": "92739", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-28T06:07:50.260", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92735", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "ドアが開いてある is ungrammatical. The other five are natural.\n\n 1. **ドアが開いている** : The door is open. \n(Implies nothing about why it's open or how it opened. Maybe it opened by\nitself, or maybe it was opened by the wind.)\n\n 2. **ドアが開けられている** : The door has been opened (by someone). \n(Unlike 1, you're at least sure that it was opened by someone.)\n\n 3. **ドアが開けてある** : Someone has opened the door (e.g., for me). \n(The door is open, and you're sure that someone has opened it in advance, for\na reason)\n\n 4. **ドアが開いてある** : (makes no sense)\n 5. **ドアが開けたままだ = ドアが開けたままになっている** : The door is LEFT open. \n(You believe it should be closed.)\n\n 6. **ドアが開けたままだった = ドアが開けたままになっていた** : The door was LEFT open. \n(Past tense of 5.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-28T18:45:08.940", "id": "92745", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-28T18:45:08.940", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92738", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "誰だって means \"anyone\" or \"everyone\" (or sometimes \"whoever\"). The literal\ntranslations would be:\n\n> 誰だって楽な生活をしたい。 \n> Everyone wants to have an easy life.\n>\n> 誰だって自尊心を傷つけられるのは嫌だ。 \n> Everyone hates to have their pride damaged.\n\nThe latter sentence might sound more natural in English if you rephrased it\nlike \"No one wants to have ...\", but that has nothing to do with how the\noriginal Japanese sentence is constructed.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-28T18:23:38.627", "id": "92744", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-28T18:23:38.627", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92742", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The English version explicitly says \"etc.\", which is a rather strong word that\nindicates there are other things on the desk. You should reflect that using\nなど. When there is \"among others\", \"etc.\" and such, you basically need など.\n\nYou may believe や on its own functions as \"etc.\", but や does not explicitly\nstate such a nuance.\n\n> ##### [Difference between と and\n> や～など](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17376/5010)\n>\n> Allows the listener to infer that, while you only mention Japanese culture\n> and history, you are not implying that is the only thing you may be liking.\n\n\"You are not implying that is the only thing\" is different from \"You are\nexplicitly saying there are other things\", right?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-29T00:47:35.197", "id": "92748", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T00:47:35.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92747", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "If we leave aside the question of how much meaning we should read out of\n“etc.” in the English sentence and purely look at the Japanese sentence, など is\nindeed optional. Your sentence is perfectly fine.\n\n> 歴史の本やドイツ語の辞書は机の上にあります。\n\nThe version with など sounds more formal.\n\nYour last sentence sounds incomplete. You still need は.\n\n> 歴史の本やドイツ語の辞書など机の上にあります。(?)\n>\n> 歴史の本やドイツ語の辞書など **は** 机の上にあります。\n\nIn your other example, は can be replaced with など.\n\n> 私は歌舞伎や能 **など** 観ません。\n\nHowever, this など, used in a negative sentence (or in a rhetorical question\nwith a negative implication), doesn’t only list examples but implies that the\nspeaker thinks the things listed are unimportant. なんか is a more colloquial\nversion of it.\n\nを is necessary in an affirmative sentence. This など is neutral.\n\n> 私は歌舞伎や能など **を** 観ます。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-29T01:38:38.010", "id": "92750", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T01:38:38.010", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92747", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Your sentence looks just fine. When you want to avoid saying させる many times\n(esp. if there are even more actions), other options include:\n\n * 犬に、前に進んで壁の前に座って骨を食べるようにさせる。\n * 前に進み壁の前に座り骨を食べるよう、{犬に命令する/犬を動かす/犬を誘導する/etc}。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-29T01:43:43.527", "id": "92751", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T02:44:47.423", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-29T02:44:47.423", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92749", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "～とまではいかないが/とまではいかないとしても is [a\nconstruct](https://marshallyin.com/courses/n1-grammar-\ncourse/lessons/n1-grammar-rule-83/) that means something to the effect of \"is\nnot that much, but...\", \"hasn't reached that degree, but...\" I remembered it\nbeing a JLPT grammar point, but strangely I couldn't find much information on\nother sites. But please see this related Q&A: [とまではいかないまでも\nmeaning](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/30100/30454)\n\nHere いく can be roughly understood as \"to reach (a degree)\". So the preceding\nthing is taken to be a baseline for comparison, and the thing being described,\noften the sentence topic, has not reached that baseline in\ndegree/intensity/significance etc. This construct sometimes corresponds neatly\nwith the English phrase **I wouldn't go as far as to**.\n\n\"I wouldn't go as far as to call that a present from Santa\". Of course in the\nJapanese construct it is the thing at issue that does the \"go\" action, whereas\nthe English phrase has the speaker inserting their own agency into the\nutterance and doing the \"go\", but semantically they could both arrive at the\nsame meaning. Essentially this is hedging language. The speaker is comparing\none thing to another, but is unwilling to assert that they are the same.\n\nで is short for それで/そこで, meaning \"then\". A conjunction (接続詞) in this sentence,\nit actually makes sense here, more so than if it were であれば. I'd expect\nsomething before であれば.\n\nI take あれば to mean (もしそれが)あれば, and それ possibly referring to 恋人になること.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-29T07:28:17.173", "id": "92753", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T07:34:50.723", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-29T07:34:50.723", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "92752", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I feel like this question is more about gift-giving in Japanese culture. But\nsince there's the question of proper language involved, I am going to give it\nan amateurish stab. Japanese gifting etiquette is fairly unique and different\nfrom other cultures.\n\nOne common thing people say in Japan when giving gifts is to describe the gift\nas commonplace or trivial, as a humble gesture.\n\n> つまらないものですが。 \n> This is really nothing of value.\n\nSome other options:\n\n> 心ばかりですが。 \n> Just something trivial to represent my gratitude\n>\n> ほんの気持ちですが。 \n> Just a token of my gratitude\n>\n> ささやかなものですが。 \n> Just some thing trivial\n\nIf you want to mention the gift is a token of your appreciation for something\nthe other party did for you in the past, you can say something like\n\n> 先日は大変お世話になりました。\n>\n> 先日のお礼に気持ちばかりのつまらないものですが...\n\nIf you want it casual/informal\n\n> この間のお礼に、これ、良かったら、どうぞ！", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-29T08:10:15.863", "id": "92756", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T08:10:15.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "92754", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In general, you can not join ます + に, but you can join na-adjective/noun + に.\n\nYou are confused because you are thinking of 強め as a verb, but it is not. The\nverb is 強める, not 強め. 強め is the 連用形 (or ます stem) of the verb. Take a look at\nthe second entry for 強め at [this weblio\npage](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A4%E3%82%88%E3%82%81) (emphasis\nmine):\n\n> マ行下一段活用の動詞「強める」の連用形、 **あるいは連用形が名詞化したもの** 。Conjunctive form of an ichidan\n> verb in the マ column, **or alternatively, nominalization of the conjunctive\n> form**.\n\nWhile it's true that 強める is a verb, what you are seeing in the sentence under\ndiscussion is a _nominalization_ of the 連用形 (or ます stem) of this verb, i.e. 強め\nis being treated as a noun. Consequently, you can add に to it just as you\nwould do with any noun and turn it into an adverb.\n\nNote that this is not to say that any 連用形 form (or ます stem) of a verb can\ndeliberately be nominalized, but other nominalizations come to my mind such as\n出来上がり (from 出来上がる).\n\n> Or is it related to the ます stem + に + 行く (to go for the purpose of doing\n> something) but with just a different verb?\n\nIt is not related to the grammar (ます stem) + に + 行く.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-20T04:48:10.743", "id": "94194", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-20T04:53:29.383", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-20T04:53:29.383", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "92757", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "You are right in that あるとかないとか is roughly equivalent to あるらしい (not really\nあるかもしれない).\n\nThe particular sentence can be considered as an omission of the ending\nあるとかないとか（ **聞いた/言っている** ）= ( **I heard/They say** ) there are cases ...\n\nGenerally とかないとか is an expression to add uncertainty to the preceding\nstatement. ない part may be different depending on the preceding sentence.\n\n * 彼は外国に住んでたことがあるとかないとか _I heard he used to live abroad_\n * その効果はＬＳＤにも匹敵するとかしないとか。(from [here](https://hinative.com/ja/questions/3343572)) _They say that the effect is comparable to LSD_\n\n* * *\n\nIn terms of meaning, とかなんとか= _or something_ is more or less the same. In the\nexamples, あるとかなんとか/するとかなんとか may be used without changing the meaning much.\n\n* * *\n\nThere are cases where とかないとか means more literally _or not_.\n\n * **意味があるとかないとか** 考える前に _before thinking whether **it makes sense or not**_\n * **運動するとかしないとか** いうより食事量が多すぎる _**It is not about whether you do some exercise or not** , but about your eating too much_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T04:37:13.173", "id": "92764", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T05:20:13.373", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-31T05:20:13.373", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92758", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "たら here isn't adversative, it only indicates a timing, a moment.\n\nYou can remove the \"but\" from your translation to something like\n\n> Yesterday, when I ordered a hot drink at Starbucks, I got a cold one.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-29T15:47:47.370", "id": "92760", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-29T15:47:47.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "92759", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "You understand it just right, but here it is just the way it works: 〜る＋ところだった.\n\nI think, you cannot use 〜た＋ところ in this case.\n\nI see it as \"I was standing just there(ところ), about to do something but happily\nI didn't\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T00:05:13.653", "id": "92762", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T00:05:13.653", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50114", "parent_id": "92761", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "With or without the hypothetical condition, or whether in the real world or in\nan alternative one that didn’t happen, there is a time at which you are still\nfacing the risk of missing your train in that scenario. I think you can simply\nunderstand 乗り遅れ **る** ところ as referring to a situation seen from that\nstandpoint.\n\nYou could use a past form putting yourself at a later point in the\nhypothetical scenario where you have already missed the train. However, 乗り遅れ\n**ていた** ところ is much more natural than 乗り遅れ **た** ところ when you talk about a\ncounterfactual event. 乗り遅れ **た** ところ is normally understood as meaning you\nhave really just missed the train. 乗り遅れ **ていた** ところ puts focus on the\n(undesirable) resulting state of the event, rather than the event itself.\n\n> 二分遅れて着いていたら列車に乗り遅れ **ていた** ところだった。\n\nThis sentence sounds a bit redundant, or simply longer than necessary, to me,\nthough. I would probably use the present tense in the main clause.\n\n> 二分遅れて着いていたら列車に乗り遅れ **ていた** ところ **だ** 。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T14:41:26.133", "id": "92772", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T14:41:26.133", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92761", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[ところだった](https://nihongokyoshi-net.com/2019/01/23/jlptn2-grammar-tokorodatta/)\nseems to be treated as a different construct from\n[ところだ](https://www.learnjpntaishi.tokyo/n3/grammar-n3/post-473) in learner's\ngrammar.\n\nAlthough ところだった can be a past form of ところだ, it has the usage _it could have\nbeen that..._ (as explained in the first link).\n\nWhether a ところだった sentence is ambiguous depends on the meaning.\n\n電車に乗り遅れているところだった can only mean _it could have been/happened that we missed the\ntrain_ = _We could have missed the train (but we didn't)_. 電車に乗り遅れるところだった\nmeans the same. (Note 電車に乗り遅れたところだ ~~is not possible~~ usually sounds odd.)\n\nAs an ambiguous example, 外出しているところだった can mean\n\n * _I was out at that time_ = past tense of ところだ; or\n * _I was almost about to go (but was still at home when the phone rang)_.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T07:13:46.210", "id": "92769", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T08:01:29.123", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T08:01:29.123", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92763", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "> 新幹線に乗り遅れ **る** ところでした。\n\nThis sentence is correct. It is just put in the wrong category in your book.\nAs you say, 遅れる is not a progressive form and doesn’t specify any “middle\npoint.”\n\nYou could use the verb in the ている-form.\n\n> 新幹線に乗り遅れ **ている** ところでした。\n\nHowever, this doesn’t mean you were **in the middle of** missing the train\nbecause missing a train is not a durative action. It means that you would have\nfound yourself in a state that resulted from your missing the train.\n\nI would say the difference is in which stage of the scenario to focus on. The\nfirst sentence puts focus on the stage where you are still facing the risk of\nmissing the train, whereas the second is more about the (imaginary) situation\nafter you have already missed the train. What actually happened is the same in\nboth. You nearly missed the train (but didn’t).\n\n* * *\n\n[EDIT]\n\nIn practice, both 乗り遅れるところでした and 乗り遅れているところでした can only describe an event\nthat didn't happen in the end. You don't need context to know it. This is\nbecause 遅れる is not something you actively begin to do.\n\nIn general, the meaning is determined by what comes before it or, in short,\ncontext.\n\n> 家に帰ったら、家族はちょうど昼ご飯を食べるところでした。 \n> When I got home, my family was just about to have lunch.\n>\n> 家に帰ったら、家族は昼ご飯を食べているところでした。 \n> When I got home, my family was in the middle of lunch.\n>\n> 賞味期限が切れていることに気づかずに、食べるところでした。 \n> I nearly ate it without knowing it was past the expiration date.\n>\n> 賞味期限を見なければ、食べているところでした。 \n> If I hadn’t checked the expiration date, I would have eaten it.\n\nThe only sure rule seems to be that the second sense of “in the middle of” is,\nby definition, not possible with non-durative verbs. But not many verbs are\npurely non-durative. You can always zoom in on a punctual action or change to\nsee duration in it.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T15:31:20.400", "id": "92774", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T00:18:25.073", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-31T00:18:25.073", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "92763", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Looks like this 飛んでる/翔んでる is an obsolete buzzword (in 1970's) meaning\n\"freewheeling\", \"liberal\" or \"having different sensibilities (than the older\ngeneration)\". Unlike\n[ぶっ飛んでる](https://jisho.org/word/%E3%81%B6%E3%81%A3%E9%A3%9B%E3%81%B6) (which\nis currently in use in the sense of \"outlandish; insane\"), 飛んでる was a positive\nexpression.\n\n> ###\n> [飛んでる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E9%A3%9B%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%82%8B/)\n>\n> 常識にとらわれずに行動する。自由に生きる。「―◦でる女性」\n>\n> [補説]「翔んでる」とも書く。\n\nSo ちっとも飛んでない means Amuro has a pretty old-fashioned and conservative mindset.\n古い人間 refers to this, too (see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/57008/5010)). They are jokingly\nsaying he is a [newtype](https://gundam.fandom.com/wiki/Newtype) in one sense\nbut is an \"old type\" in another sense.\n\n[おセンチ(な)](http://zokugo-dict.com/05o/osenchi.htm) is another buzzword of the\n70's meaning \"sentimental\".", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-01-04T03:33:11.820", "id": "92827", "last_activity_date": "2022-01-04T12:01:56.383", "last_edit_date": "2022-01-04T12:01:56.383", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "> To thicken it (make it stick together), instead of panko, use crushed _fu_\n> (which I guess is like bread crumbs); that's the secret of keeping meat\n> liquid with lots of good flavor. (alternatively: locking in richly flavored\n> liquid that oozes from the meat)\n\n[つなぎ](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%B9%8B%E3%81%8E)\n\n> Noun \n> 3. thickener (e.g. in cooking); thickening; liaison", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T06:08:21.340", "id": "92767", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T06:08:21.340", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "92766", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "## The word _uchi_\n\nThis has multiple possible spellings. Uncommon / rare spellings marked with a\n†:\n\n * 打ち -- \"hitting, striking\"\n * 宇智 -- name of a former county in Nara prefecture\n * 有知†, 有智† -- knowledgeability; a knowledgeable person\n * 内, 中† -- \"inside, interior\"\n * 家 -- \"home; the inside of a building\"\n * 裡† -- \"the duration of a certain state\"\n\nThe top three aren't relevant here, and don't appear to be related\nderivationally, so let's ignore those for the rest of this post.\n\n## Sense Development\n\nAccording to the [entry](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%86%85-440222) in the big\n_Kokugo Dai Jiten_ (KDJ; a bit like the Oxford English Dictionary only for\nJapanese), the sense of \"inside, interior\" is apparently attestable all the\nway back to 720 in the [_Nihon\nShoki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon_Shoki). See definition [1]-②. The\ncore meaning appears to be \"interior\", but specifically \"of an enclosed (or\nenclose-able) space\".\n\nNot long after, in the\n[_Man'yōshū_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB) poetry\ncollection completed around 759, we see _uchi_ used to mean \"house, home,\nresidence; place of business\", as an extension of the \"interior (of a\nbuilding)\" sense. See definition [1]-⑩-(ロ).\n\nMuch later in 1563, the word is attested meaning \"my home, my house\". See\ndefinition [1]-⑩-(イ).\n\nThree and a half centuries after that in 1916, we see citations of _uchi_ used\nto mean \"I, me, myself\", presumably as an extension of the \"my home\" sense.\nSee definition [2]. The entry describes this usage as primarily feminine and\nprimarily Kansai.\n\n**Summary**\n\nSo in essence, the meanings developed historically in order as:\n\n * \"inside, interior\"\n * \"house\"\n * \"my home\"\n * \"I, me, myself\"", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-01-12T01:03:30.010", "id": "92931", "last_activity_date": "2022-07-15T16:57:44.677", "last_edit_date": "2022-07-15T16:57:44.677", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "92770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "すっがら is equivalent to するから here. I'm not sure why か became が, either an accent\nfrom the speaking character or some touch to make it cute.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T16:09:29.047", "id": "92775", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-30T16:09:29.047", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "92771", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Practically\n[燃やす](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%87%83%E3%82%84%E3%81%99/#jn-220296)\nis used in much more limited contexts than\n[焼く](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%84%BC%E3%81%8F/#jn-221311) as you\ncan see in the definitions.\n\nA [thesaurus entry](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/thsrs/13235/meaning/m0u/)\ntells\n\n> １「燃やす」は、炎を上げさせることをいうのに対して、「焼く」は、火をつけて灰にすることをいう。\n>\n> ２「燃やす」は、「闘志を燃やす」のように、感情を高ぶらせる意にも用いる。\n>\n> ３「焼く」は、「炭を焼く」「パンを焼く」のように、加熱して作り上げる意や、「日光で肌を焼く」のように、日光に当てて変色させる意でも用いる。\n\n3 indicates the meaning of 焼く is wider (cooking, burning things for later use,\netc.) .\n\nRegarding 2, usually 燃やす is used for passion. 焼く is used for やきもち(jealousy).\n\nFor the normal sense of burning, as 1 suggests, 燃やす is more _to set sth on\nfire_ while 焼く means _to burn sth to ashes_.\n\nFor example, comparing 枯草を焼く/燃やす, 焼く implies setting fire to clear up some\nfields and 燃やす more literally means setting fire on brown grasses. On the\nother hand, in the context of 家を焼く, it is implied that the house is already\nburnt down and 燃やす does not fit (but if the house is on fire now, then it is\n燃えている and using 焼く is not possible).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-31T05:09:48.997", "id": "92780", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T05:09:48.997", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "92773", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The term for whisking egg whites is [卵白]{らんぱく}を[泡]{あわ}[立]{だ}てる.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-30T21:53:32.987", "id": "92778", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T00:37:07.837", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-31T00:37:07.837", "last_editor_user_id": "816", "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "92776", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This もう is an adverb that means something along the lines of \"more\" or\n\"additionally\". In your case, you can think this もう corresponds to '-er':\n\n * 少し大きな声で \nin a bit loud voice\n\n * **もう** 少し大きな声で \nin a bit loud **er** voice\n\nThe latter can be used even when the listener is already trying to speak in a\nloud voice. You can remember もう少し and もうちょっと as set expressions that mean \"a\nlittle **more** ～\".\n\nAnother example:\n\n * 5分待つ \nto wait for five minutes\n\n * **もう** 5分待つ \nto wait for **another** five minutes", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-01-04T06:44:19.160", "id": "92828", "last_activity_date": "2022-01-04T06:49:46.377", "last_edit_date": "2022-01-04T06:49:46.377", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "92777", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]