Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "If I understand correctly, English speakers are trained to always say \"(and)\nI\" last for politeness. However, Japanese has no such rules. 彼と私 and 私と彼 are\nequally natural, and no one would care about the order even in formal\nsettings. The same is true with 僕と君 vs 君と僕, あなたと私 vs 私とあなた, 私と社長 vs 社長と私, and\nso on. Whichever is fine.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-23T01:15:11.183", "id": "94236", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-23T03:56:34.863", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-23T03:56:34.863", "last_editor_user_id": "816", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Considering the definition of\n[対価](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%AF%BE%E4%BE%A1)(essentially the 3rd\nitem below) and syntax of 見合う, it would be natural to parse it as\n\n * 他人に提供した (財産・労力) _(property and/or labor) provided to someone_\n * と _and_\n * 受け取る財産上の利益 _received benefit in terms of property_\n * が見合っている _are balanced_\n\n見合う is usually used as 報酬 **が** 労力 **に** 見合わない or 報酬 **と** 労力 **が** 見合わない (or\n労力と報酬が見合わない). That said, it is possible to think that 労力と引き換えに受け取る報酬が見合わない (in\nthe sense that it wouldn't sound particularly odd).\n\nAnother hint that helps parse would be that 提供する is an antonym of 受け取る here.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-23T04:16:58.780", "id": "94238", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-23T04:16:58.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94237", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It depends on what you mean by _weird_ and _natural_. 兄をやめたい by itself is a\nperfectly correct and natural sentence as far as grammar is concerned, but\nit's definitely a surprising sentence that never occurs naturally in everyday\nconversation. If you think \"I don't want be your brother anymore\" is\n\"natural\", then 兄をやめたい should be equally natural.\n\nThis of course sounds like a serious breakup notice if interpreted in\nisolation. If the speaker wants to remain the listener's sibling, it has to be\naccompanied by a sentence like これからはお姉ちゃんになりたい (I wanna be your sister from\nnow).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-25T01:31:22.003", "id": "94262", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-25T02:01:07.037", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-25T02:01:07.037", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's a truncated 何をしに来たんだ？ (What did you come here for?)\n\nWith the back half cut off and the particle を omitted, it becomes なにしに", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-23T20:42:05.723", "id": "94243", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-23T20:42:05.723", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94242", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "> Why is there a の after 水泳の授業で?\n\nThis の is a plain possessive particle. 水泳の授業で directly modifies 新型コロナウイルス. で\nis the location particle and is used to specify _where_ Coronavirus is\nhappening. Therefore「水泳の授業での新型コロナウイルス感染」means \"Coronavirus infection _in_\nswimming class.\" See this related question for more information: [using の with\nと,で, から, まで](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/33605)\n\n> Why don't we use をなった here? Also, what is the function of ため here (\"for\"\n> seems not to make sense?)?\n\nをなった won't work here. となる is a variant of になる. See this question for\ndifferences between two: [What is the difference between 〜となる and\n〜になる?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/108/)\n\nため here is used to specify the reason why 水道料金 came to light (発覚した). ため has\ntwo meanings: in order to (or \"for\" like you mentioned) or because/since.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T07:27:36.283", "id": "94246", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T07:54:19.423", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-24T07:54:19.423", "last_editor_user_id": "41067", "owner_user_id": "41067", "parent_id": "94245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm not fully sure on this, but I believe the full stop is what's throwing you\noff. それを [here](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%9D%E3%82%8C%E3%82%92-2057944)\nessentially means それなのに, and こいつは is directly connected to what's in the next\nsentence.\n\n'But despite that, this person... They almost seem like they don't care who\ndies, not even themselves.'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T14:46:37.127", "id": "94249", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T14:46:37.127", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9971", "parent_id": "94247", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "There is a discernable difference there, between 殴られる謂れはない and 殴られてやる謂れはない.\n\nWhen you say 殴られる, you are making a statement matter-of-factly. When you say\n殴られてやる, you are stating intent, making clear that your own **volition and\nagency** are involved: you are **actively allowing** 殴られる to happen. Also やる\nis crude あげる, serving to lifting the speaker's own position. 殴られてやる: I let you\nbeat me up as a favor. I will go easy on you.\n\n * 殴られる謂れはない \nThere's no reason/it's unwarranted for me to get beat up. \n(Okay fine, but 1. maybe nobody wants to beat you up; 2. maybe it's not up to\nyou)\n\n * 殴られてやる謂れはない \nThere's no reason/it's unwarranted for me to let people beat me up. \n(I am hereby announcing my own intention which is I won't allow myself to get\nbeat up and I will take action accordingly)\n\nAnd that's why the character then says おれは手加減はしない (I'm not gonna go easy on\nyou/I'm not holding back/I'm not pulling any punches)\n\nIt's like in English how people say, \"I'm not going to sit here and **have**\nmy name tarnished by detractors.\"\n\nBy the same token, 振られてやる means \"I am going to **let** you (someone else)\nbreak up with me.\" \"I am **allowing** that to happen.\"\n\n> 振られてやるさ、振られてやるさ、邪魔なんかしたくない\n> ([研ナオコ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpvZkI70_Bs)) \n> I will let you dump me/ I will let you dump me/ Cuz I don't wanna be in the\n> way", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T20:06:27.330", "id": "94254", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T22:07:31.093", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-24T22:07:31.093", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94248", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "As noted in the comment, this に can be understood as the common place\nindicator and 警戒と注意 as an abstract place. Essentially it means the same as\nに関して here. So literally, _In the realm of caution and attention, doing too\nmuch does not exist_.\n\nUsing を is possible, but then inserting a comma looks odd. It should be\n警戒と注意をしすぎということはないだろう. This is probably because the verb-object relationship is\nfelt stronger than topic-verb relationship in case of using に.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T21:50:11.667", "id": "94255", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T21:50:11.667", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94250", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "飛騨弁 is not the only recognized dialect spoken in the geographical region that\nis modern-day 岐阜県 (Gifu Prefecture). Two main dialects are recognized in 岐阜県,\nthe other one being 美濃弁 ([Mino\ndialect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mino_dialect)).\n\n> The Mino dialect (美濃弁, Mino-ben) is a Japanese dialect spoken in the\n> southern area, made up of the former area known as Mino Province, of Gifu\n> Prefecture, Japan. It is also referred to as the Tōnō dialect (東濃弁 Tōnō-ben)\n> by residents of the Tōnō region of the prefecture, which is the eastern part\n> of the former province. It is sometimes also referred to as the Gifu dialect\n> (岐阜弁 Gifu-ben), but that can sometimes include Hida dialect, which is in the\n> northern part of Gifu Prefecture.\n\nThis で you are asking about is explained on [美濃弁's Wikipedia\npage](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%BE%8E%E6%BF%83%E5%BC%81):\n\n> 理由の接続助詞には主に「で」や「もんで」を用いる。例：「やっとくで」（やっておくから）。\n\nMore of the dialogue whence your line is taken:\n\n> 四葉: お姉ちゃん、遅い！ \n> 三葉: 明日は私が作るでね。\n\nSo\n\n> 明日は私が作るでね〜\n\nbasically means\n\n> 明日は私が作るからね～ \n> I will cook breakfast tomorrow (so stop complaining)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T16:55:41.187", "id": "94252", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T17:01:45.593", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-24T17:01:45.593", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94251", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "First, 彼女は私に甘える means _She tries to be spoiled by me_ , sticking to _to spoil_\nas translation. So in either case the subject is the one who gets spoiled\n(=gets some benefits).\n\nThe difference of 1 and 2 should be that there is some favor on offer in that\ncontext. For the meaning 1, the subject \"behaves\", just trying to get\nattention from someone (usually in some relationship with the subject. e.g.\nkids/parents, kids/teacher, among partners); For 2, the subject takes\nadvantage of favor offered by someone else.\n\nThere could be ambiguous cases like 彼は親に甘えて学費を出してもらった. This could mean either\n1. He behaved in such a way to get parents' attention on the matter of tuition\nand persuaded them to pay for it or 2. Parents offered him to pay for the\ntuition and he agreed. But as a matter of common sense in Japan, reading 2\nwould be likely.\n\nI have the impression _to spoil_ is not very useful for 甘える. It is more like\n_to get attention from_ , _to take advantage of_. 甘やかす may be closer to _to\nspoil_ (in transitivity also).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T22:30:14.307", "id": "94257", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T22:30:14.307", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I finally decided to organize my comments into an answer, because it seems to\nme the crux of your perplexity is the word 甘える. I wanted to put in my two\ncents and try to leave something more permanent for future reference, because\nthis is a word a lot of us learners struggle with, especially people whose\nfirst language lacks a similar concept.\n\nIt seems you are having difficulty really because English doesn't have a\ncorresponding word. (Just a note, I do know some words in other languages\nsharing the same denotations and connotations with 甘える.) And because there's\nno perfect translation in English, this word may be better explained with\nexamples, which is why your example looks like a perfect one.\n\nLet me give it another crack. Let's say in your example the girlfriend is\nlaser-focused on her job at work and never spends time with her partner. She\nsays the line [you quote\nhere](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/94253/cannot-\nunderstand-%E7%94%98%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B#comment153620_94257)\n「だから私はその分…二人っきりの時はこうやって…甘えてるでしょ」 because she thinks she's been doing certain\nthings as a way to make it up to her partner. 甘えてる here means more than \"give\nattention\". It's a lot of things rolled into one.\n\nMaybe she asks her partner to cook for her, to do her laundry, to give her\nmassages, etc., in contrast to her independence at work. In a romantic\nrelationship, 甘える also means being coquettish, showing her romantic partner\nher weak side, being willing to get dependent and clingy, and all that.\n\nWhen I tell my romantic partner もっと甘えてもいいよ—which by the way I literally did a\nfew weeks ago—I'm telling them that I want them to depend on me, let me do\nthings for them, and get closer to me, like couples do.\n\nIf a dad tells his kid もっと甘えてもいいよ, he possibly means the kid can ask for\nthings. Maybe the mom doesn't buy things for them, but the dad is willing to\nspoil the child. For example, the dad is willing to pamper the kid when they\nwant a new PlayStation and the mother refuses.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-25T21:14:49.947", "id": "94270", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-25T21:54:15.373", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-25T21:54:15.373", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Only interrogative word 何{なん} works here, because the reply gives information\nabout the function/nature of the building as opposed to where it is.\n\nどこ would work in a context like this:\n\n> 写真で見た立派な建物は何処ですか？ \n> 食堂の後ろです。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T22:52:56.437", "id": "94258", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T22:52:56.437", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94256", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Do you have more context on your question? Additionally, what are your guesses\nso far?\n\nNote that both questions mean different things: \"What is that splendid\nbuilding / Where is that splendid building?\". They are **not** two different\nways of asking for the same information. From the provided answer, I'm\ninclined to believe that the more natural question would be the first one:\n\n> What is that splendid building? That splendid building is the exchange\n> students' canteen.\n\n> Where is that splendid building? That splendid building is [in] the exchange\n> student's canteen.\n\nIn the case of the second sentence, you could stretch the point and imagine\nthat the canteen is somehow a smaller part or section of a larger, splendid\nbuilding you have been discussing previously and therefore you are using\nあの立派な建物 as a label or identifier rather than as a description.\n\nHowever, if you swap the terms あの立派な建物 and 留学生の食堂, then the second question\nwith どこですか makes more sense:\n\n> 留学生の食堂はどこですか。あの立派な建物です。Where is the exchange students' canteen ? It's that\n> splendid building.\n\nNote that the structure of the sentence is exactly the same, neither is more\ncorrect than the other in terms of syntax. However, **it just makes more or\nless sense depending on the _meaning_ of the words used**.\n\nIt's only natural that you ask for _what_ something is based on a description\n(立派な建物), whereas if you have the definition or the concept (留学生の食堂), then it\nmakes no sense to ask for _what_ it is, but for other related information,\ne.g. where it is, what is the time table or whatever.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-24T23:04:56.360", "id": "94259", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-24T23:04:56.360", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "94256", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The literal translation should not be that long. This simply means:\n\n> 博愛とか慈愛とかそういうの \n> benevolence, philanthropy and such\n\nそういうの means \"things like this/that/these\", \"something like this/these\",\n\"things along those lines\", \"such things\", etc. You can remember this as a set\nphrase.\n\nUsually, そういうX simply translates to \"X like this/that\" or \"such (a) X\":\n\n * そういう人 \na person like that/this; such a person\n\nIf you want a word-by-word breakdown, そういうの literally means \"things which\n[one] calls in such a way\":\n\n * そう: (adverb) in such a way\n * いう: (verb) to call\n * の: (noun) thing\n\nそれ/そう can refer to something just mentioned, just like English \"it\" can refer\nto anything regardless of its distance. 博愛/慈愛 is not even a tangible object,\nso you don't have to worry about how far it is.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-25T01:04:29.467", "id": "94261", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-25T01:11:43.977", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-25T01:11:43.977", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94260", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I hear both いしそつう【HLLHH】 and いしそつう【LHHHL】 commonly. I believe 意思疎通 _is_ a\nlexicalized compound, but middle-low is not an uncommon pattern at least in\n四字熟語:\n\n * 意志薄弱 いしはくじゃく【HLLHHHH】\n * 支離滅裂 しりめつれつ【HLLHHH】\n * 春夏秋冬 しゅんかしゅうとう【HHLLLLHHH】\n * 因果応報 いんがおうほう【HLLLHHH】\n * 森羅万象 しんらばんしょう【HLLLHHHH】\n\nSome are even more complicated:\n\n * 切磋琢磨 せっさたくま【HLLHLL】\n * 一蓮托生 いちれんたくしょう【LHHHLHHHH】\n\nOn the other hand, 意思表示 is always いしひょうじ【LHHHHL】. I don't know why.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-25T03:04:48.070", "id": "94264", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-25T11:17:54.827", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-25T11:17:54.827", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94263", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Maybe if you could show us the page from the manga that would help, but\nhonestly this just looks like 'Four eyes still has unrequited love for the\ngiant, huh?' to me.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-25T15:48:19.493", "id": "94268", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-25T15:48:19.493", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9971", "parent_id": "94267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "* This と is \"(together) with\" as in 彼女 **と** 話す (\"to talk with her\"), 彼 **と** 知り合いになる (\"to become acquainted with him\").\n * This は is a familiar topic marker. You probably know は can be combined with other particles to topicalize it. This type of は does not have a good English equivalent, but pulling out the topicalized part to the beginning of the sentence has a similar effect. For example, この建物 **には** レストランがある (\"In this building, there is a restaurant\"), 明日 **からは** 試験がある (\"From tomorrow, we have exams\"), 東京 **へは** どう行きますか (\"To Tokyo, how do we go?\").\n\nThus, this Aとは roughly means \"With A, ...\" or \"Between you and A, ...\". It's\nmarked as the topic of the sentence. A literal translation would be as\nfollows:\n\n> 巨人 **とは** 片想いのままだなクソメガネ\n>\n> **With** the giant, it's still a one-sided love, クソメガネ! \n> Between you and the giant, you still have a crush, クソメガネ!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T00:46:02.280", "id": "94271", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T00:46:02.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "That’s because of the contrastive nature of the particle は.\n\n> 相変わらず巨人と **は** 片想いのままだな\n\nIt could be argued that if the person addressed is 片想い with 巨人, and that is\nput in contrast with は, then that person must be 両想い (the opposite of 片想い)\nwith someone else. Who that is is totally up to the context. There is nothing\nin the sentence that indicates it is the speaker himself.\n\nTo me, it seems a bit too much of reading between the lines. The sentence\nsounds neutral enough as it is. Or the person’s 片想い with 巨人 could be put in\ncontrast with other things that are going well for them. They don’t have to be\nother loves.\n\nI personally don’t know how to completely eliminate this nuance of contrast\nusing the phrase 片想い and without dropping the 巨人 part altogether. と or に\nwithout は sounds a bit odd to me. It sounds as if the person in question being\n巨人と／に片想い is new information for the listener and the speaker is reporting it\nto someone else, but this clearly contradicts with な at the end of the\nsentence.\n\n> 相変わらず巨人 **と** 片想いのままだな\n>\n> 相変わらず巨人 **に** 片想いのままだな\n\nには seems to even more strongly suggest that there is another love going on and\nthat love is reciprocated unlike the one with 巨人.\n\n> 相変わらず巨人 **には** 片想いのままだな\n\nThis nuance is probably because of the directional or pinpointing nature of に.\nIt suggests the person’s love is consciously directed towards its object. When\nit is put in contrast with は, it sounds like it is put in contrast with\nsomething that is equally directed towards someone else. This narrows down the\ntarget of contrast and therefore increases the possibility of that being 両想い\nwith someone else.\n\nIn short, I think people are reading too much into it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T03:21:51.407", "id": "94273", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T03:21:51.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "94267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It is simply the following two sentences combined into one with 若木の林のなか kept\nas a common topic.\n\n> 1. 若木の林のなかは、ところまだらに陽の光が煙っていました。\n>\n> 2. 若木の林のなかは、美しい景色でした。\n>\n>\n\nSince the first describes what the speaker observed and the second what they\nthought, the first could be understood as indicating a reason for why the\nspeaker thought the second was true.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T03:33:14.967", "id": "94274", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T03:33:14.967", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "94269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It's still \"even if\". Literally, 高くても安くても means \"even if (the price is) high\nor even if (the price is) low\". But you can translate this simply like\n\"regardless of its price\", \"whatever the price is\", \"no matter how cheap it\nis\", etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T03:43:21.953", "id": "94275", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T03:43:21.953", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94272", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "ても still means \"even if\" in this context. As @Angelos commented, it's the\nmatter of English translation.\n\nThe basic idea of AてもB is that it shows **contrastive** relationship between A\nand B. In other words, AてもB means \"B is true regardless A.\"\n\nBesides \"even if,\" there are many ways to render this idea in English. You can\nuse \"no matter how/what...\" or \"regardless of...\" etc.\n\n> 宿代が高くても安くても金はない\n>\n> It doesn't matter if hotel charges are expensive or cheap, I don't have\n> money.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T03:43:34.723", "id": "94276", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T03:43:34.723", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "41067", "parent_id": "94272", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It is because 高血圧 is not a disease for which physical presence is felt. As you\nguess, 高血圧があるひと is not natural but not impossible. For comparison,\n\n * がんのあるひと is acceptable\n * 腫瘍がある人 is quite normal\n * 風邪のある人 is impossible\n * 咳のある人 is acceptable\n\nI suppose 肺の病気の人 is avoided in order not to use の-phrases consecutively. 病気の人\nis normal for _a sick person_ while 病気がある人 is basically the same but sounds\nmore like _a person with particular (persistent) diseases_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T06:49:16.650", "id": "94281", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T06:49:16.650", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94277", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "肺の病気の人 is natural. There is a difference I can think of though.\n\n私は病気だ is a quality of 私.\n\n私は肺の病気だ has a different meaning, here you are specifying what kind of disease\nit is. (It's a lung disease for me)\n\n肺の can't modify \"病気だ\" because it acts like a verb.\n\nSimilarly\n\n◎私は花粉症です\n\n○私は花粉症があります\n\n◎私は花粉のアレルギーがあります\n\n✕私は花粉のアレルギーです this means something else again\n\nの can acomodate for both though, and I think the unnaturalness is just a\ntendency of English speakers to avoid repetition.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-27T08:50:16.647", "id": "94714", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-27T10:29:53.183", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-27T10:29:53.183", "last_editor_user_id": "48769", "owner_user_id": "48769", "parent_id": "94277", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "The context seems significant in this case. I _think_ the lines mean something\nlike:\n\n> だが、そもそも俺はまともに巨人化できるのか？ \n> But am I even able to properly transform into a 巨人 to begin with?\n>\n> ライナーができないと言うように(なるかもしれない) \n> Things will likely go as Reiner said, which means I will probably fail (if\n> I try)\n>\n> もしくは \n> or\n>\n> ライナーでさえここで休まざるを得ない現状を鑑みるに \n> Judging from the fact that even Reiner has to take a break here\n>\n> 下手に体力のない巨人を生み出せばほかの巨人にやられちまうってことか？ \n> I will probably end up eaten by other 巨人 if I bungle it and transform into\n> a weak 巨人\n\n鑑みる **に** is explained in this answer:\n\n[Grammar behind 言うには](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/82426/30454)\n\nAnd ライナーでさえここで休まざるを得ない現状を鑑みるに apparently connects with the following line,\nwhich is why context is important here.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T06:23:50.917", "id": "94279", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T11:37:23.497", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-26T11:37:23.497", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94278", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I don't know the story too well, but looking at\n[context](https://www.lingq.com/ja/learn-japanese-\nonline/courses/599694/shingeki-no-kyojin-season-2-attack-on-3776765/), the two\nmeans different reasons for staying where they are.\n\nWhat ライナー is saying できない looks like running away (from titans?) not just for\nReiner, but for others including Eren. So the part means _as Reiner says it is\nimpossible, or considering the current situation that even Reiner has to rest\nhere_ (we have no choice but to wait for the nightfall).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T06:33:14.850", "id": "94280", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T06:33:14.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94278", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it's used, but 終わっていますか may be more natural since you are concerned with\nthe current state rather than the past event. 閉店していますか is a stiffer way of\nasking the same thing (preferred in emails etc), but 終わっていますか is perfectly\nfine in speech.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T07:59:48.183", "id": "94283", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T07:59:48.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94282", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "（な）のに may also be used to show disappointment in addition to meaning\n\"although\". This is in contrast with （だ）けど, which is a neutral form of\n\"but/although\".\n\n> 勉強は大変なのに、諦めちゃだめ。\n\nIs incorrect because the clause 諦めちゃだめ is a command. Although （な）のに also\nexpresses contrast, the clause that comes after it cannot express the\nspeaker's opinion. This means that imperatives like the above cannot be used\nwith （な）のに either.\n\nMore particularly, [this article](https://nihongokyoiku-shiken.com/keredomo-\nnoni-temo-japanese/#i-4) mentions that the clause that comes after（な）のに cannot\nexpress a \"command, request, intention, question, or judgement\" of the\nspeaker's.\n\nNote: Although the previous argument was convincing, it was incorrect.\nNaruto's comment makes that pretty clear.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T20:37:50.777", "id": "94287", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-27T17:33:02.447", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-27T17:33:02.447", "last_editor_user_id": "21657", "owner_user_id": "21657", "parent_id": "94284", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "ひとりでに is a lexicalized adverb which has its own entry in dictionaries:\n\n * jisho.org: <https://jisho.org/word/%E7%8B%AC%E3%82%8A%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AB>\n * デジタル大辞泉: <https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%B2%E3%81%A8%E3%82%8A%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AB/>\n\nYou'll basically have to remember ひとりでに as a non-divisible fixed expression,\nand go on. The same is true with some fixed rentaishi such as 大きな; you have to\nremember this because it doesn't follow the basic conjugation pattern of\ni-adjectives.\n\n単独にでなく is made of three words, and can be straightforwardly analyzed by the\nstandard grammar:\n\n * **単独に** : individually; in isolation; separately\n * **で** : (continuative form of the copula だ)\n * **なく** : not\n\nSo it just means \"not individually\", \"not in an isolated manner\", etc.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-27T00:58:51.287", "id": "94293", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-27T01:05:37.033", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-27T01:05:37.033", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94288", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Your understanding is basically correct.\n\nAs a pattern, it is possible to think that 何/どの/どこ etc + ても/でも as _no matter\n/...ever_ , which means roughly the number does not matter (in your case the\nnumber of nights). Literally your sentence means _no matter how many nights\nyou stay, please (stay)_.\n\nExamples:\n\n * 何度やってもうまくいかない No matter how many times I try, it does not work\n * 何回聞いても忘れる No matter how many times I'm told, I forget it (easily).\n * どんな手段を用いてもかまわない I don't care no matter what means you use.\n * どれだけ寝てもまだ眠い However much I sleep, I still fell sleepy.\n * どんな猫でもかわいい Whichever cat it is, it is cute.\n\nAs seen in the last example, it is not always natural to use _no\nmatter/...ever_ , it would be more natural to use _as long as_ or simply\n_any_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-26T22:53:53.630", "id": "94292", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-26T22:53:53.630", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94290", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The\n[つもり](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A4%E3%82%82%E3%82%8A/#jn-148367)\nmeans not intentions (def #1) but something closer to:\n\n> 実際はそうでないのに、そうなったと仮定した気持ち。「死んだ―で働きます」「親の―で世話する」\n\nEssentially it is a way to weaken the preceding statement.\n\n * Xとわかっています I understand X\n * Xとわかっているつもりです I assume I understand X\n\nThe latter is implying _maybe I don't fully understand, but I think I see X_.\n\nSo the sentence in question: _I think I understand that I'm kept alive by\nbeing here,... and also that I could be the worst enemy of mankind_. The\n_also_ corresponds to the last も. In that sense it would be more a more\nprecise translation.\n\n* * *\n\nJust in case, directly answering the question of the title, the sentence has\nthe structure 'Xことはわかっているつもりです. Yも.' The latter 'Yも' can be understood\n'Yもわかっているつもりです'. Or the whole sentence is a variant of 'XもYもわかっているつもりです'.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-27T22:06:42.563", "id": "94298", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-27T22:11:43.763", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-27T22:11:43.763", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94297", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "OK, foreigners' grammar does not seem to focus much on each particle per se.\nThis is more or less a translation of the dictionary definition linked in the\ncomment.\n\nSentence-ending か could mean:\n\n 1. Question marker\n 2. Question marker, with implied negative.\n\n * どうしてそんなことしなければならないのか Why on earth do I have to do it (I don't think I have to).\n\n 3. When denying the interlocutor's assumption\n\n * そんなこと知るか How am I supposed to know that (= I don't know!)\n\n 4. Let's\n\n * ご飯食べようか Let's eat\n\n 5. Urging (mostly appears as ないか)\n\n * さっさと宿題やらないか Why not start working on your homework (The speaker is urging to do the homework)\n\n 6. Surprise, exclamation.\n\n * 誰かと思ったら君だったか I was wondering who it was, and ah, it was you.\n\nThe distinction between 2 and 3 is a bit fuzzy.\n\nか in かとおもう is still a question marker, but practically it means _maybe_. E.g.\nyour sentence means _I thought maybe the girl liked me, but_.\n\nできるか could be a simple question (rising tone) or means 3 (decreasing tone,\nusually stressed). Particularly in a manga, it is a common scene where A tells\nB to do something impossible and B says できるか!, which means _How could I?_\n\n* * *\n\nHopefully the following clarifies your question.\n\nConsider the following\n\n 1. きのう何を食べましたか？\n 2. きのう何（を）食べました？\n 3. きのう何（を）食べた？\n 4. きのう何を食べたか？\n\nAs you say in the comment, 4 is weird. But note 2 is possible in ます form. Also\nin 2 and 3, を tends to be omitted, which is possible in 1 as well.\n\nOn the other hand, all of the following are possible.\n\n 5. きのう学校に行きましたか？\n 6. きのう学校に行きました？\n 7. きのう学校に行った？\n 8. きのう学校に行ったか？\n\n5-7 are common with decreasing politeness. 8 is possible, but sounds strongly\nmasculine, like from someone superior in some sense. I don't know a proper\nEnglish word, but in this case for example a father can say 8 to his child.\n\nOne possible explanation is that non-ます-form + か sounds masculine, and in case\nof wh-question like 4, it sounds almost military. For example, an officer\ncould say to subordinates この非常事態を何と心得ているか _What do you think of this\nemergency?_", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-28T02:22:02.667", "id": "94303", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T04:14:59.123", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-28T04:14:59.123", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94300", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This is a T-shirt designed and sold by the [YouTube\nchannel](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZ-Z_iLRVqx_7Llk4hp458g) of\n[恵良敏彦](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%81%B5%E8%89%AF%E6%95%8F%E5%BD%A6), a\nprofessional boxer and YouTuber. So エラ is simply his family name written in\nkatakana. According to Wikipedia, he used to do support activities for the\nhomeless in Osaka, which is probably why the T-shirt is there.\n\n * [T-shirt online shop](https://tetujinera01.base.shop/)\n * [路上生活者がＩ♥エラTシャツを！ 西成あいりん地区](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwuuQBWCimI)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-28T07:37:42.137", "id": "94306", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T08:12:14.620", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-28T08:12:14.620", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94305", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The way I've understood it, although ように means something like \"so that\", the\nreason it overlaps with \"try\" is that often you are making an attempt, and do\nnot have full control over the situation.\n\nThe grammar dictionary lists that ように is common with potential and negative\nverbs. For instance, consider:\n\n> なるべく会わないようにしよう。\n>\n> I will try as much as possible / make sure that I don't meet anyone\n\nなるべく should make this even more clear. Yes, you have made sure that you won't\nmeet anyone. But you can't be sure of that. I'm not a native speaker or even\nthat fluent, but I think:\n\n> 会わないことにしよう\n\nSounds pretty strange.\n\nSimilarly:\n\n> まずは字を読めるようにしないと。\n>\n> First I have to make the letters readable.\n\nAnd again, you don't seem to have full control over the situation. To contrast\nwith ようとする:\n\n> 私だって声かけようとしてたんだから！\n>\n> I also tried to talk to him!\n\nAgain, just my opinion, but this sounds better than 声かけるようにしてた. It seems to me\nthat ようとする is better for cases especially after you've tried. For instance,\nbefore trying to talk to him, you probably wouldn't expect it to be hard. But\nlet's say you were trying to get opportunities to talk to him. Then I think:\n\n> 声かけるようにする\n\nIs ok, and then after the fact:\n\n> 声かけようとした\n\nWhen ようとする is in the past tense it sounds like it was a failure. If you use\nようとする before the event, it kind of sounds like... although you have control\nover the situation, you expect it to be hard. Like for instance, if you go to\nlift a weight but you expect to be too weak to lift it. Note however that in\nthis case てみる might be more appropriate.\n\nIn summary:\n\n * ように meaning \"so that\" sounds like although you are going to do something to accomplish something else, you don't have full control over the situation.\n * ようとする is especially common after the fact to say that you tried to do something but failed.\n * ようとする doesn't seem that common before the event, since てみる seems to be preferred, but it just sounds like you expect to try but maybe you lack the ability or skills necessary (which is a direct consequence of you: it's not as though someone else makes the situation uncontrollable).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-28T20:34:25.813", "id": "94311", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T20:34:25.813", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48969", "parent_id": "94308", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It is a rhetorical use of passive voice. 服に着られる basically means the person in\nthe clothes gives a funny impression, e.g. the size is too big, it simply does\nnot go well, etc.\n\n(Added) It is less common than the two below, but e.g. 制服に着られている is typically\nused for a boy who entered junior high school ( ≒ 13 years old), for which it\nis first required to wear uniforms (near Tokyo). It means the uniform does not\nfit the boy, not just physically but also in the sense that the overall\nimpression does not feel right somehow.\n\nThere are not many verbs that are used in this way, but two other typical\ncases are:\n\n * （酒を）飲む/（酒に）飲まれる\n\n酒は飲んでも飲まれるな is a common phrase which literally means _even if you drink\nalcohol, don't be drunken by it_. Possibly this makes some sense in English as\nwell. Basically it means _it's ok to drink, but not too much_.\n\n * 金を使う/金に使われる\n\nThis is even more literal. The latter means _to be used by money_ , which\nbasically means that someone is worried too much about money and sort of\nmanipulated by money itself.\n\nSo the basic connotation of this kind of passive is that the person does not\nhave control over the object (服, 酒, 金) which s/he should have.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-28T21:10:39.180", "id": "94312", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T22:03:57.757", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-28T22:03:57.757", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94309", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The so-called adjective particle な is only required for certain adjectives,\nand only when using that adjective **attributively** to directly modify a noun\nor noun phrase. This form of the adjective + な is the so-called **連体形【れんたいけい】\n( \"attributive form\")**, literally the \" **form** (形【けい】) for **connecting**\nto (連【れん】) a **substantive** or non-inflecting word (体【たい】, from 体言【たいげん】\n\"substantive word\"). The _rentaikei_ for verbs is the same as the dictionary\nform, so there is no need for any linking particle to create the attributive\nform.\n\nWhere you see a verb with だ, you're usually seeing one of two things:\n\n * `[VERB in dictionary form or ます form]` + です (or だ), or (more commonly) `[VERB]` + の (or ん) + です (or だ) \nThis is a kind of explanatory construction. Think of this as a bit like the\nEnglish, _\" it's that [someone] is [VERB-ing]\"_.\n\n * `[VERB in continuative (stem) form]` + です (or だ) \nThe verb here is being used as a noun, a bit like English _\" -ing\"_ forms. \n頼【たよ】る is a verb, _\" to depend on someone\"_, and 頼【たよ】り is both the\ncontinuative or stem form of the verb, and (perhaps more commonly) the noun,\n_\" the person or thing depended upon\"_. When followed by だ・です, this 頼【たよ】り is\nunambiguously the noun. Noun statements in Japanese require a だ or です\nafterwards to form a complete\n[predicate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate_\\(grammar\\)).\n\nThere are cases where the 未然形【みぜんけい】 (\"irrealis form\", basically \"hasn't\nhappened yet\") of a verb can be followed by な, so long as that な is the stem\nof the negative auxiliary (suffix) ～ない, and that な is followed by the correct\nending for the syntax (such as ending in ～い for the terminal or attributive,\nor ending in ～く for the adverbial, or ending in ～かった for the past tense,\netc.).\n\nI cannot think of any case where the _mizenkei_ of a verb can be followed by だ\nor です.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-29T00:19:58.477", "id": "94314", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-29T00:19:58.477", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "94313", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> Is there a catch all term for the pattern of words that you can place before\n> ppoi?\n\n> but is there like a group of Japanese words that describe this connection\n> pattern?\n\nThere is no catch-all term, but there are individual terms for each allowable\nword. In the case of っぽい:\n\n 1. noun (名詞)\n 2. verb stem or conjunctive form of a verb (動詞詞幹)\n 3. stem of an i-adjective (形容詞語幹)\n 4. stem of a na-adjective (ナ形容詞の語幹 or 形容動詞の語幹)\n\n* * *\n\nGrammar references vary in their terminology used to describe components of\ngrammar patterns:\n\n 1. Makino and Tsutsui in [A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar](https://bookclub.japantimes.co.jp/en/book/b309631.html) on page 337 defines the formation of -っぽい as:\n\n> (i) N っぽい\n>\n> (ii) Adj( _i_ )stem っぽい\n>\n> (iii) Adj( _na_ )stem っぽい\n>\n> (iv) V _masu_ っぽい\n\n 2. Group Jamassy in [A Handbook of Japanese Grammar Patterns for Teachers and Learners](https://www.9640.jp/nihongo/ja/detail/?678) on page 250 defines the formations of っぽい as:\n\n * [Nっぽい]\n * [Rっぽい]\n\nIn the explanation associated with っぽい on page 251, they describe the\nformation of っぽい as:\n\n> Used with a noun or verb stem to form _i-adjectives_ to express the meaning\n> \"feels that way\" or \"has the tendency to.\"\n\nOn page viii, they define N and R as:\n\n * N: noun\n * R: conjunctive form of a verb\n 3. Michiel \"Pomax\" Kamermans has a thorough list of verb inflections [here](https://pomax.github.io/nrGrammar/#section-7-Conjugation_Schemes), complete with grammatical terms in both English and Japanese.\n\n 4. 旅する応用言語学 explains verb stems (詞幹) [here](https://www.nihongo-appliedlinguistics.net/wp/archives/9131) page (in Japanese) using their own terminology.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-07T06:28:12.267", "id": "94398", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-07T06:35:29.567", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-07T06:35:29.567", "last_editor_user_id": "18313", "owner_user_id": "18313", "parent_id": "94315", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "There are many ways to use いいじゃん, and in a lot of cases the phrase is hard to\nrender accurately in English. So it's well nigh impossible, in my opinion, to\ngive an accurate and comprehensive answer to your title question: What's the\nmeaning of いいじゃん.\n\nJust to sample a few usages of いいじゃん:\n\n> 悲しいなら、泣けばいいじゃん \n> If you are sad, cry (literally: isn't it good if you cry)\n\n> A: デートに誘われたんだ！ \n> Someone asked me out!\n>\n> B: いいじゃん！行ってみなよ \n> Nice! Just go have fun.\n\nHere, you should note the 別に which imparts dismissive undertones especially\nwhen used in conjunction with いいじゃん. The usage is 別にいいじゃん or いいじゃん別に, and the\ngeneral idea is unconcern, or impatience, or sometimes even flippancy. \"I\ndon't care.\" but not so explicit. Literally it's like \"It's okay, isn't it?\"\nDepending on the context, it can go anywhere between \"alright!\" \"I know!\" to\n\"I don't give a damn!\" Here I think a simple \"Alright!\" or \"Okay!\" would do.\n\n> いーじゃん別にそれよりなによ～？ \n> Alright! By the way what did you need to find me for?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-29T19:12:25.323", "id": "94323", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-29T19:18:06.657", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-29T19:18:06.657", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94318", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "いーじゃん別に (and I specifically speak to cases with 別に) typically means\ndisagreement to some issue being raised as a big deal, i.e. hey, don't make a\nbig fuss about it. It's an idiom.\n\n> A. でもさーこのお店、おしぼりくれないんだぜ？ Dude, this place doesn't even give you oshibori (a\n> hand/face towel that comes out when you sit down at a restaurant)\n\n> B. いーじゃん別に Chill, man.\n\nWhen I translate, I can 100% match \"chill , man\" to \"いーじゃん別に\", a rarity in\nEnglish-Japanese translation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T06:10:01.907", "id": "94384", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T06:14:09.223", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-06T06:14:09.223", "last_editor_user_id": "14444", "owner_user_id": "14444", "parent_id": "94318", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "As you say の can replace が as a subject marker.\n\nFor the first sentence, just as in 1 and 2 in the question, の/が are (to an\nextent) interchangeable: スポーツのある/スポーツがある are both fine.\n\nIn the second one, using が is most probably possible and won't change meaning\nmuch. But grammatically, as noted in the comment, they are different:\n\nThe sentence as is has an implicit subject which should be what is being\ndiscussed: (それは)...どこを歩いているのか **の** 違いであり, which literally means _It is a\nmatter **of** where you are walking..._.\n\nOn the other hand, using が would make _where you..._ the subject (of である）:\nどこを歩いているか **が** 違いである = _Where you are walking ... **is** the difference_.\nThis is ok grammatically, but it sounds like emphasizing the difference and\ndoes not seem to fit the context (the emphasis should be 変わりはない).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-29T23:11:40.203", "id": "94328", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-29T23:11:40.203", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94319", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As you are probably aware, it is nominalizing の + を.\n\nA possibility is to consider there is omission after を. For example,\n積み込むのを（行うときに）. But I guess it is a miswriting affected by\n運天へまわって鉄屑を積み込むのを許可する.\n\n[edit] Another (still vaguely wrong) possibility is that の=船(=歌島丸) and を means\n対して, so that the phrase means _to the ship loading scraps from Unten..._", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-29T21:44:32.123", "id": "94325", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-29T23:52:20.567", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-29T23:52:20.567", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94320", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You can drop は for 午後は: 午後授業はありません.\n\nAs noted in the comment, both can be topic or contrast.\n\n * 午後は授業はありません. (午前中は授業があります) 1st: contrast 2nd: topic\n * 午後は授業はありません. (パーティーがあります) 1st: topic 2nd: contrast", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-29T21:54:14.260", "id": "94326", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-29T22:28:32.233", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-29T22:28:32.233", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94321", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "授業 does not refer to a period of time, but rather the class in general. The\nsecond sentence translates as \"The history teacher is Japanese, and rarely\nuses English in her classes.\" The では is frequently used in negations, but\nparticularly where you are stressing the modifier vs the verb:\n\nCompare:\n\n * 私はあまり新宿で買い物しません - I rarely go shopping in Shinjuku.\n * 私はあまり新宿では買い物しません - I rarely go shopping in Shinjuku.\n\nIn verbal English, you could stress Shinjuku to produce the second meaning,\nImplying that you might shop in other places which are not Shinjuku. The first\nsentence might imply that you do other things in Shinjuku, just not shopping.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-02T17:45:12.430", "id": "94345", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-02T17:45:12.430", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "35973", "parent_id": "94322", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Verb +\n[くれる](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B/#jn-64758)\ncan mean\n\n> ㋐人が自分に、または自分の側の者に対して何かをすることを表す。「手伝って―・れる」「秘密にしておいて―・れ」「母がセーターを編んで―・れる」\n>\n> ㋑こちらが、相手に不利益になるようなことを与えることを表す。「痛い目にあわせて―・れるぞ」\n\nRoughly it means the subject does V as favor or as something causing harm to\nthe listener. In your example, I guess the speaker is just saying either _I\nwill give you the honor of my rolling around here_ or _I will do harm by\nrolling around here_. Not really that these are seriously meant, but more of a\njoke.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-29T22:10:48.147", "id": "94327", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T04:19:29.473", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-30T04:19:29.473", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The kanji are \"real\" in the sense that anyone who can read Japanese would\nrecognize what they are supposed to be. 齋, 藤, 愛, and 結, respectively. However,\nthe correct way to write them does not actually include English letters...\nthat's just a \"cute\" variation the person who made the video came up with,\nsince the parts do resemble some letters in some ways.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-30T06:01:45.133", "id": "94331", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T06:01:45.133", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "20479", "parent_id": "94330", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Supplementing Leebo's answer, the real one using a close enough font looks as\nfollows. Most probably it will be recognized as a female name (read e.g. Saito\nAyu).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JVO3X.png)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-30T06:17:50.497", "id": "94332", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T06:17:50.497", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94330", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The bold part of the sentence is actually an embedded question which modifies\nthe verb 見回してみた.\n\n> 俺は、 **何か面白いものはないか** 、店内を見回してみた。\n>\n> I looked around the store, checking whether there is any interesting stuff.\n\nYes, もの refers to a physical object. はないか is broken down into は+ない+か. は here\ncan be understood as a contrast marker. He is looking for interesting stuff,\nas opposed to uninteresting stuff.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-04-30T20:47:04.440", "id": "94336", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-01T15:19:34.483", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-01T15:19:34.483", "last_editor_user_id": "7944", "owner_user_id": "41067", "parent_id": "94334", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "No, it doesn't have to do with your example sentence being in 敬語 and the verb\nin 尊敬語. Note the [link](https://www.edewakaru.com/archives/15531056.html)\n@broccoli facemask provides in their\n[comment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/80414/double-checking-\nmy-understanding-of-%E3%81%AE%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A7#comment131150_80414).\n\n> 【接続】 \n> 名詞［辞書形］＋のことで\n>\n> 【意味】 \n> **〜について**\n>\n> 【例文】 \n> ①N１の文法のことで質問があります \n> ②留学のことで相談したいんだけどいい？ \n> ③A：春休みに行きたいところはある？ \n> B：そのことで話があるんだけど… \n> ④お金のことで話さなきゃいけないことがあるの…\n\nYou don't see を in there for two reasons:\n\n 1. 彼のことで ＝ 彼のことについて\n 2. を is omitted and if put back should mark 何か\n\n> 彼のことで/について何か(を)ご存知ですか\n\n何か is the content (内容) of the action \"to know\", and 彼のこと is the scope (範囲).\nLiterally: \"What do you know about him?\" Here \"what\" is the direct object of\n\"know\", not \"about him\". See? English works the same way and also allows us to\nset a range and talk about the specific content with one verb plus some\nprepositions.\n\nLet's take a quick look at your sentences at the end:\n\n> 彼のことを知っていますか\n\nThis asks directly and specifically if the listener knows \"him\" ( _or_\nsomething about \"him\" that the asker has in mind). Depending on the context it\ncould either be \"Do you know him?\" \"Do you know about him?\" or even \"Do you\nknow what happened to him?\"\n\n> 彼のことで知っていますか \n> 彼について知っていますか\n\nThese two sentences mean pretty much the same. Standalone and with nothing\nelse, they sound a little strange to me.\n\n> 何か彼について知っていますか \n> 何か彼のことで知っていますか\n\nsound more natural to me.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-01T18:51:00.883", "id": "94338", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-01T18:51:00.883", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "94337", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it can be an object. In other words, it is perfectly fine for を to follow\nimmediately after 何か:\n\n> 何かを作る\n\nThe other option:\n\n> 何か作る\n\nis also valid and would have the same meaning, but it is more informal because\nthe particle を is omitted.\n\nYou can find some example sentences\n[here](https://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%22%E4%BD%95%E3%81%8B%E3%82%92%22).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-02T09:43:02.730", "id": "94342", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-02T09:57:05.127", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-02T09:57:05.127", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "94341", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[どう](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86/#jn-154925) means\n_(some)how_ and\n[とか](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8B/#jn-157481) makes\nthe statement more vague.\n\nA bit roundabout way to understand is to consider\n\n * 魔王の代替わりが **関係するとか** 言っていた said the replacement of the Demon King was **related** **or something**\n\nand the sentence in question does not even make explicit how the replacement\nof the Demon King is relevant:\n\n * 魔王の代替わりが **どう** とか言っていた said the replacement of the Demon King was **X** or something\n\nMore practically Aがどうとか言っていた can be seen as a set phrase meaning _said\nsomething about A_ or _said it had something to do with A_. Or as a variant of\nAとか何とか言っていた = _said A or something_ , _(The speaker vaguely remembers someone)\nsaid A_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-03T03:43:07.727", "id": "94349", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-03T03:49:47.183", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-03T03:49:47.183", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "どうmeans blah blah blah, or yali yali yeah. とかmeans \"kind of\"\n\nSo どうとか indicates kind of what someone says. Also どうとかこうとか、なんとかかんとか and\nうんたらかんたら have similar meanings.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T03:34:00.640", "id": "94381", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T03:34:00.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "35252", "parent_id": "94343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Sentence endings are important but not simple. You'll need to learn by\nexamples. Here's the summary:\n\n * **イギリス出身です** : Polite form. Safe in business settings or when talking with a stranger.\n * **イギリス出身ですよ** : Polite form followed by よ. よ is not necessary, but it indicates you are trying to explain something meaningful, like \"you know\" in English.\n * **イギリス出身だ** : Plain form. Used in essays or news articles, but sounds fairly blunt in speech. A difficult boss or a dignified knight may speak like this in fiction.\n * **イギリス出身だよ** : Plain form followed by よ. Safe when talking with your friends or classmates, but overly friendly in business settings.\n\nIf you already know polite form and are trying to speak casually, probably the\nsafest option in real-life conversations is \"イギリス出身。\" followed by nothing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-03T02:15:58.190", "id": "94348", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-03T02:15:58.190", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94346", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about okurigana.\n\n * The reading of 入る is はいる.\n\n * 入る is not an okurigana, but it **contains** an okurigana which is る.\n\nkanji | okurigana \n---|--- \n入 | る \n \n\n\"Okuri\" means something like \"follow-on; accompanying\", and \"gana\" is kana\n(katakana/hiragana) in\n[rendaku](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2526/5010). Therefore,\nokurigana only refers to the hiragana part after the kanji part.\n\nBasically an okurigana is there to indicate the conjugation of the verb.\n\n * 入 **る** = はいる: enter (plain)\n * 入 **ります** = はいります: enter (polite)\n * 入 **った** = はいった: entered (past)\n * 入 **れ** = はいれ: Enter! (imperative)\n * 入 **ろう** = はいろう: Let's enter (volitional)\n\nThe okurigana is the hiragana in bold. The kanji part is consistently read as\nはい. This means there is only a finite number of okurigana patterns, and you\ncannot use a random hiragana as an okurigana. Simply, 入う, 入ざ and 入ふ are all\ninvalid combinations meaning nothing.\n\nIf you are still confused, think that a kanji is like an emoji with a meaning.\nFor example, = 笑 = \"laugh\" and = 踊 = \"danc(e)\". Okurigana refers to a short\nfragment that follows them to indicate a conjugation of the verb.\n\n * **ing** = laughing\n * 笑 **っている** = laughing\n * **ed** = laughed\n * 笑 **った** = laughed\n * **ing** = dancing\n * 踊 **っている** = dancing\n * **ed** = danced\n * 踊 **った** = danced\n * baz (invalid, meaning nothing)\n\nAnd these \"ing\" and \"ed\" correspond to the okurigana. The part itself is\npronounced the same way.\n\nNote that most i-adjectives and some adverbs/nouns have okurigana, too. Still,\nokurigana always refers to only the hiragana part.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-04T02:26:15.847", "id": "94359", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-04T06:51:13.373", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-04T06:51:13.373", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "The second sentence doesn't make any sense.\n\nThe short English definition in your textbook makes it difficult to understand\nthe difference in usage, but if you look hard enough it's there. Your textbook\ndefined （が）通じる as \"to **be** understood\". Xが通じる means that X is being\nunderstood, not doing the understanding. Let's look at an example:\n\n> 言葉の意味が通じる。 \n> The meaning of the words are understood (by someone).\n\nThis is very different from 認める, which is a transitive verb where the subject\nis the one doing the understanding/accepting. In addition, 認める has a nuance of\neither admitting something is true, or recognizing something as correct/right.\n\n通じる can sometimes be loosely translated as \"be accepted\" but as the word\nsuggests, it mostly implies that the point gets _across_. デジタル大辞泉 defines this\nusage of 通じる as the following:\n\n> ２ 意志やものの意味などが相手に伝わる。また、伝える。「冗談が—・じない」「気脈を—・ずる」\n\nThis has less to do with accepting than it has to do with understanding.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-03T20:32:18.967", "id": "94355", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-04T02:30:22.493", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-04T02:30:22.493", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "21657", "parent_id": "94353", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "通じる is a verb for being understood, to be understood. Hence 意味を通じる doesn't\nwork while 意味が通じる does. There's no real way to translate, but the former is\nkind of like saying \"doing the action of being understood to the meaning\",\ni.e. it sounds weird and is technically incorrect. In the latter case with the\nが particle, you're saying \"the meaning does the action of being understood\",\nwhich makes sense.\n\nThe difference between 意味を認める and 意味が通じる is simple: the former is on the side\nof _acceptance_ or _\" agreeful acknowledgement\"_, \"recognizing as legit\"\n(「相手を味方として認める」- recognizing them as an ally/accepting them as a buddy), while\n通じる is simply understanding, their point comes across, regardless of whether\nyou agree with it or not.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-04T05:40:31.210", "id": "94362", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-04T05:40:31.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "51249", "parent_id": "94353", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "To break down:\n\n * [なす (為す in kanji)](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%82%BA%E3%81%99): to do; to achieve; to carry out\n * [すべ (術 in kanji)](https://jisho.org/word/%E8%A1%93-1): way; method; means\n * も: even\n * なく (continuative form of ない): not having ～; there being no ～\n\nA literal translation is \"there being no means which one (can) try\". も is\noptional, so you can say なすすべなく, too.\n\nThat said, なすすべ(も)なく is basically a set phrase that can be (and should be)\nremembered as is.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-04T16:16:59.833", "id": "94365", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-04T16:42:37.613", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-04T16:42:37.613", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94357", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, まいらせそうろう (in its most traditional spelling まゐらせさうらふ) was a high frequency\nhumble marker in the once standard style for written communication called\n[候文【そうろうぶん】](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%80%99%E6%96%87), which is based\non the colloquial language in circa 12th century. Hiragana ligatures you see\non your Wikipedia article represent common words and phrases utilized in the\ntimes 候文 and the cursive script (崩し字) were prevalent.\n\nUnder the style of 候文,\n[そうろう](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%80%99%E3%81%B5_%28%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%82%8D%E3%81%86%29/)\n(as such a humble marker) is bleached of its original meaning and only\nfunctions as the copula / main verb marker that symbolizes the style.\n[まいらす](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%8F%82%E3%82%89%E3%81%99/), being\nthe origin of today's polite marker ます, means from the most literal \"offer\" (=\n差し上げる) to a general humble marker then to a simply politer marker (heavily\nused by women).\n\nYou can find some [usage](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/885481/18) from\nthe ligature's article, which reads:\n\n> 一筆示し［まいらせ候］ = 一筆お示し（いたします／申し上げます） \n> I will (humbly) write you a letter\n\n> 指のみ折り暮らし［まいらせ候］ = 指ばかり折って暮らしております \n> I am spending days only counting on my fingers", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-04T22:52:51.590", "id": "94366", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-04T23:35:54.150", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-04T23:35:54.150", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "94360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "In this case, she pretends that she has no idea. So the speaker says \"Don't\ncheat, or You cheat me!(ごまかしてる)\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T07:19:17.730", "id": "94386", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T07:19:17.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "35252", "parent_id": "94363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "ごまかす has a few meanings whether with a malicious or innocent intent. But it\nessentially means an act to hide the truth. The one in the question is no\nexception.\n\nTake the following examples.\n\n数字をごまかす would mean to cheat the number like providing a false profit report\nwhen the company is losing money\n\n話をごまかす would mean to intentionally not answer a question satisfactorily, to\nevade the question, or to answer it vaguely, all to let the true answer\nhidden. Changing the subject is considered the same. **It's an act of trying\nto not talk about the subject**.\n\nBelow exchange illustrates how one might ごまかす in a casual conversation where A\nhints to like a girl, B pursues the topic, and A keeps evading. Notice the use\nof 2 やさしい. 優しい（kind) gets switched to 易しい（easy) with an intention to go off\ntopic.\n\n * A: 彼女｛かのじょ｝って優｛やさ｝しいよね\n * B: ひょっとして彼女の事｛こと｝好｛す｝き？\n * A: やさしいといえば昨日｛きのう｝のテスト易｛やさ｝しかったね\n * B: 話｛はなし｝をごまかさないで答えろ\n * A: 答｛こた｝えは簡単｛かんたん｝。みんな９０%以上｛いじょう｝\n * B: 彼女の話！\n * A: 確率｛かくりつ｝５０%位｛くらい｝\n * B: 自信｛じしん｝がないって事｛こと｝？\n * A: 話をごまかすのが上手{じょうず｝でも、テストはごまかせないから。\n * B: それは単｛たん｝に君｛きみ｝が５０%って事じゃないか\n\nThe sentence in the question follows a similar logic as to why わかんない or hard\nto understand the other person. Notice how A evades the questions by using\nrelated words but going off topic. But he isn't saying No either, just not\nanswering purposefully. That's one way to 話をごまかす.\n\nBelow the translation of the above example.\n\n * A: she is nice\n * B: do you like her?\n * A: speaking of which. Wasn't the test yesterday easy?\n * B: Answer the question please.\n * A: The answer is easy. All should get 90% or more.\n * B: I'm talking about her\n * A: 50% chance\n * B: Meaning you aren't very confident (that she'd go out with you)?\n * A: Being good at fooling people doesn't necessarily mean it's possible to cheat a test\n * B: That only means you get 50%", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-01-31T15:19:39.740", "id": "98400", "last_activity_date": "2023-02-01T04:52:27.890", "last_edit_date": "2023-02-01T04:52:27.890", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "11571", "parent_id": "94363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Short answer would be that you can use _ha_ instead of _wo_ in most cases.\n\nOne thing you need to be aware of is when Noun + ha can be the subject of the\nverb.\n\nFor example, consider\n\n * Hon wo yomu _= (I) read books_.\n\nYou can use _ha_ (Hon ha yomu) to emphasize your reading books (implying not\nreading mangas for example). Here _hon_ cannot be the subject of _yomu_ ,\nwhence no ambiguity.\n\nNext consider\n\n * Kare no otouto wo mita _= (I) saw his brother_\n\nJust using _ha_ here (Kare no otouto ha mita) would mean _His brother saw\n(something)_ , implying he didn't. So _ha_ is understood as the subject/topic\nmarker in the standalone sentence.\n\nOn the other hand, in a conversation like\n\n * A-san minakatta?\n * Kare no otouto **ha** mita\n\nHere _ha_ is understood as the emphasis/constrast of _wo_. Technically _Kare\nno otouto ha mita_ is ambiguous because _kare no otouto_ can be subject or\nobject for _mita_ , but practically it is always disambiguated by contexts.\n\nThe _kare no otouto_ example suggests: you can most probably use _ha_ instead\nof _wo_ when you are responding to someone, but it is not always possible to\nuse _ha_ when you start describing something. That is, if you want to start a\nconversation about 'you saw his brother', using _wo_ is necessary.\n\nAnd of course, there may well be many other cases where care needs to be\ntaken. So the other (boring) short answer would be, it depends on contexts.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-05T03:00:06.780", "id": "94369", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-05T03:00:06.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94364", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Remember もらう is basically \"to receive\" and くれる is basically \"to give\". 褒めてもらった\ndescribes _your_ action, and 褒めてくれた describes _someone else's_ action. The\ndifference is obvious when personal pronouns are explicitly stated:\n\n * 私は友達に褒めてもらった。 \nI was complimented by my friend. \nI received a compliment from my friend. \n(\"I received the favor of complimenting from my friend.\")\n\n * 友達が私を褒めてくれた。 \nMy friend complimented me. \n(\"My friend gave me the favor of complimenting me.\")\n\nThat said, when you use もらう or くれる, you can normally drop 私, and often the\n\"giver\", too. The difference between 褒めてもらった and 褒めてくれた is small in a typical\nsituation where personal pronouns can be inferred from the context.\n\nIn your example, everyone understands the question is about what just happened\nbetween B and A (\"I\"), so both \"褒めてもらった?\" and \"褒めてくれた?\" are equally natural.\nThe former is closer to \"Was I just complimented?\" and the latter \"Did B/you\njust compliment me?\". The latter may sound like a question directly addressed\nto B (\"Did _you_ ...\"). \"褒めてもらった?\" sounds like a question addressed to the\nspeaker (A) themself, which may be desirable if this was said as a light joke.\n\nSee also: [Why is に used with causativeて+もらう but not causativeて\n+くれる?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/80571/5010)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-05T01:21:29.597", "id": "94368", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-05T02:22:42.903", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-05T02:22:42.903", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94367", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "First of all, 起こす and 起こる are two different verbs. There are three related\nverbs you have to remember and distinguish:\n\n * [**起こす**](https://jisho.org/word/%E8%B5%B7%E3%81%93%E3%81%99): ( **transitive godan** verb) \n 1. to wake someone up\n 2. to cause something; to make something happen; to trigger\n * [**起こる**](https://jisho.org/word/%E8%B5%B7%E3%81%93%E3%82%8B): ( **intransitive godan** verb) \n 1. to happen\n * [**起きる**](https://jisho.org/word/%E8%B5%B7%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8B): ( **intransitive ichidan** verb) \n 1. to wake up; to get up\n 2. to happen\n\nNote that **起こす is always transitive** in Japanese although \"to wake\" is both\nintransitive and transitive in English. 起こる only means \"to happen\", but the\nother two verbs each have two different meanings. The difference between 起こる\nand 起きる is fairly small when they mean \"to happen\".\n\nThe following sentences are different simply because different verbs are used:\n\n> どこで **起こし** ましたか？ \n> Where did [you] wake [ **him/her** ] up? \n> Where did [you] cause [ **it** ]?\n>\n> どこで **起こり** ましたか？ \n> Where did [it] happen?\n>\n> どこで **起き** ましたか？ \n> Where did [you] wake up? \n> Where did [it] happen?\n\nAnd you can attach [explanatory-no](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-\ngrammar/question-markers/) to any of these. This の is hard to translate into\nEnglish, but it's important when you want to speak naturally:\n\n> どこで **起こした** のですか？ \n> Where did [you] wake [ **him/her** ] up? \n> Where did [you] cause [ **it** ]?\n>\n> どこで **起こった** のですか？ \n> Where did [it] happen?\n>\n> どこで **起きた** のですか？ \n> Where did [you] wake up? \n> Where did [it] happen?\n\nSo どこで起こしましたか has two possible meanings depending on the context, while\nどこで起こったのですか has only one meaning.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T02:59:49.283", "id": "94380", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T03:14:39.530", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-06T03:14:39.530", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94370", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, as explained in Mindful's answer, 出身地 is closer to \"birthplace\" and 故郷 is\ncloser to \"home(town)\".\n\n出身地 is a matter-of-fact word that objectively refers to the place where one\nwas born. 故郷 is your home; it's that hometown that makes us nostalgic, talk\nabout dialects or local cuisine, feel a sense of belonging, and so on.\n\n出身地 is preferred in businesslike or academic settings, whereas 故郷 is preferred\nin phrases like 懐かしい故郷, 故郷の料理, 故郷の両親, etc. 故郷 should be much more common than\n出身地 in lyrics and poems. People who have lived in central Tokyo all their\nlives may say 私には故郷がない but not 私には出身地がない. 第2の故郷 is a common phrase, but 第2の出身地\n(my second birthplace) sounds simply illogical.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-05T12:32:45.060", "id": "94374", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-05T12:43:15.287", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-05T12:43:15.287", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94373", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This 説 is a type of recurring humorous expression used in frivolous or otaku-\nish speech in recent light novels and such. 説 is a grandiose word meaning\n\"(public/academic) theory\", but people sometimes abuse this word to say\nsomething as simple as \"It could be that...\".\n\nFor example, someone may say this in a light novel:\n\n> 太郎君、実は女の子だった説!?\n\nThis is normally taken as a joke that simply means something like \"Could it be\nthat Taro is a girl (hehe)?\". Without 説, this might sound like a genuine\ndoubt. This of course does not mean some academic society is seriously\ninvestigating Taro's sex.\n\nIn your case, the creature basically appears to be a cat, but the guy just\nnoticed it could fly. So he is saying \"Now I'm starting to wonder if this is\nactually a bird...\" or sometimes along those lines.\n\nThis type of 説 usually comes at the end of a sentence, so I don't think\nsomething is omitted.\n\n**EDIT** : ここに来て is a set phrase meaning \"after all this\", \"at this (late)\nstage\", etc. For example, \"え、ここに来てそれを聞く?\" = \"What? You ask that NOW?\"", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T00:02:02.097", "id": "94379", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T10:29:08.053", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-06T10:29:08.053", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94375", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "> どういうことだ？\n\nThis should be straightforward: something to the effect of \"what kind of thing\nis that?\"\n\n> ここに来て、\n\nAs explained, this functions as a set phrase that could be translated \"after\nall this\". The literal meaning is something like \"coming to here\", i.e.,\narriving at this (metaphorical) point (in the discussion).\n\n> まさかの鳥説\n\nまさかの鳥 is just まさか \"unexpected[ly]\" applied to 鳥 \"bird\".\n\nThe grammar point here: this entire phrase is a relative clause that modifies\n説 \"theory\". Literally we have a sentence fragment: \"the theory that it's (omg,\nreally?) a bird after all\". The implied sentence continuation would be\nsomething about considering this theory.\n\nAs said in the other answer, it's a particularly affected way of expressing\nthe ideal. I liken this 説 suffix to \"consider the following:\" (except that we\nare actually asked to consider the _preceding_ , Japanese grammar being as it\nis).\n\n> (there is a \"....!?\" missing part so I don't know what was he trying to say\n> here too)\n\nOveruse of ellipses is common in manga, LNs, video game scripts and other such\ndramatic works for young adults. There aren't really any words being left out;\nit just suggests trailing off, or otherwise speaking the line with some\nunusual emphasis. (Sometimes this makes it into the translated versions, too.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T20:32:47.320", "id": "94477", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T21:04:52.887", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T21:04:52.887", "last_editor_user_id": "627", "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "94375", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "取り上げる means \"to bring up and/or discuss (a topic)\". Sometimes it is used only\nin the sense of \"to discuss\".\n\nRegarding this passive voice, there may be something irregular happening\nbecause この語 **を** 様々な取り上げ方 **を** する sounds unnatural if not terrible. I feel\nno sense of 迷惑 in your sentence. Maybe we need to handle this as a special\nconstruction?\n\n * この漢字は様々な書かれ方をする。 \nこの漢字は様々な書き方をされる。 \nThis kanji is written in various ways.\n\n * 妙な褒められ方をした。 \n妙な褒め方をされた。 \nI was complimented in a strange manner.\n\n * 色んな評価のされ方をする作品 \n色んな評価のし方をされる作品 \na work appreciated in many ways\n\n> 「なんか」という語は辞書、文法書によって様々な取り上げ方をされており、 \n> The word なんか is discussed in a variety of ways depending on the\n> dictionary/grammar book, (and...)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T04:22:10.593", "id": "94382", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-07T11:22:26.830", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-07T11:22:26.830", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94376", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This sounds like an unnatural tautology to me, too. Sometimes people use two\nsimilar words effectively to emphasize some concept, but in my opinion, this\ntautology is not working very well as a catchphrase. You don't have to worry\nabout this too much.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-05T23:24:05.420", "id": "94378", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-05T23:24:05.420", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94377", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The sentence is ambiguous and the translation should be done as appropriate\nfor contexts.\n\nThat said, SEEMS reading is the more likely. 姉上が戦いをやめたので would favor FACT\nreading (still ambiguous though).\n\n* * *\n\nConsider:\n\n * 僕がやめるよう言ったので、彼女は行かなかったみたいです\n\nObviously 僕が言った cannot be a hearsay, so FACT reading is the only possibility.\n\n * 僕がやめるように言って彼女は行かなかったみたいです\n\nsounds odd. This may suggest ーてーみたい defaults to SEEMS reading.\n\n* * *\n\nBy the way, did you transcribe やめる correctly or was it 止める? In case of the\nlatter, it is とめる.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T22:46:33.883", "id": "94395", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T22:46:33.883", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94388", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Various verbs like わかる and できる historically describe the quality of a thing.\nわかる is perhaps better thought of as _\" to be understandable\"_. In this case,\nthe noun marked with に is the thing **by which** the subject of わかる _\" is\nunderstandable\"_.\n\nIn your sample sentence, the subject is omitted (implied), and is presumably\nwhatever the speaker was talking about. This subject _\" is not understandable\n**by** you\"_. This becomes _\" you don't know\"_, with \"you\" as the subject,\nonly in translation -- grammatically, in the Japanese, 君【きみ】 (\"you\") is not\nthe subject.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T19:16:17.833", "id": "94392", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T19:16:17.833", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "94390", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "に is not always only used to mark an object. It is helpful to also further\ndistinguish between between a \"direct object\" (usually marked with を) and an\n\"indirect object\" (usually marked with に or と).\n\n> used as a subject mark\n\nMutsuko Endo Hudson in [English Grammar for Students of\nJapanese](https://www.google.com/books/edition/English_Grammar_for_Students_of_Japanese/ECmCFBtvvkcC)\ndescribes a subject as:\n\n> In a sentence describing an action, the person or thing that performs the\n> action is called the **subject**. When you wish to find the subject of the\n> sentence, look for the verb first; then ask, _who?_ or _what?_ before the\n> verb. The answer will be the subject.\n\nIn many Japanese clauses, you'll need to infer the subject, because it isn't\nexplicitly stated in the text or speech alone.\n\nに has several functions, and its function depends on the particular verb that\nに is used with.\n\nMakino and Tsutsui in [A Dictionary of Basic Japanese\nGrammar](https://www.google.com/books/edition/%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E5%9F%BA%E6%9C%AC%E6%96%87%E6%B3%95%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8/3wMrAQAAIAAJ)\nlists the elementary and most common usages of に:\n\n * point of time at which something takes place\n * indirect object marker\n * agent or source in passive, causative and other receiving constructions\n * surface marker\n * purpose when someone moves from one place to another\n * location where someone or something exists\n * place toward which someone or something moves\n\nHowever, don't be misled into thinking that this list is exhaustive. に appears\nin many other patterns and its usage will differ from pattern to pattern.\n\nGroup Jamassy in [A Handbook of Japanese Grammar Patterns for Teachers and\nLearners](https://www.9640.jp/nihongo/ja/detail/?678) lists about 70 different\ngrammar patterns using に and a particular verb or inflection of a verb. Some\nof those に patterns have a component marked by に, where that component also\nis, coincidentally, the subject. But some of those に patterns _do not_ have a\ncomponent that is coincidentally also the subject.\n\nFor example, on page 460 of [A Handbook of Japanese Grammar Patterns for\nTeachers and Learners](https://www.9640.jp/nihongo/ja/detail/?678), in the\npattern Nにかかっては, they show this example sentence and its English translation:\n\n> 3. 彼女にかかってはいつもしらないうちにイエスと言わされてしまう。/ She always makes me say _yes_ without\n> my noticing it.\n>\n\nHere, 彼女 (she) is marked by に, but 彼女 is also the subject because \"she\" is\nperforming the action.\n\nBreaking it up for clarity and understanding:\n\n```\n\n 彼女 (she) \n にかかっては (no one can match her behavior)\n いつも (always)\n しらないうちに (without noticing) \n しらない (to not notice)\n うちに (at a time within) \n イエスと (say yes)\n 言わされてしまう (force me to say, regrettably)\n \n```\n\nGroup Jamassy's explanation of にかかっては, also from page 460:\n\n> With a noun expressing a person or behavior, にかかっては indicates the person or\n> the behavior, followed by an expression to mean that no one can match\n> him/her or his/her behavior including what s/he said.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-07T07:24:45.590", "id": "94399", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-07T07:24:45.590", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18313", "parent_id": "94390", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Simple answer: in English a relative clause comes after the noun, but in\nJapanese it comes before.\n\nExample:\n\n> A man _**who can dance**_\n\nA man = 男 \ncan dance = 踊れる\n\nIn Japanese, that would be\n\n> _**踊れる**_ 男\n\nAnother example:\n\n> These are the flowers _**that I bought**_\n\nThese are = これは \nflowers = 花 \nI bought = 私が買った\n\nIn Japanese, the sentence would be\n\n> これは _ **私が買った**_ 花\n\nSo, your example sentence should be interpreted as:\n\n> _**この世の全てを手に入れた**_ 男 \n> The man(男) _**who got everything of the world in his hands**_", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T23:23:05.880", "id": "94396", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T23:23:05.880", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "94391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This sentence has two grammatical features\n\n 1. inverted type sentence\n 2. lack of verb\n\nThe complete one is \"海賊王\"ゴールドロシアは、かつてこの世の全て、つまり富。名声。力。を手に入れた男です。\n\nTo express a simple figure, this sentence makes Aは、Bです。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T23:56:01.527", "id": "94397", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T23:56:01.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "35252", "parent_id": "94391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I guess you can use all three without sounding too odd in gardening contexts.\n\n * 作る is more common for something edible and may imply growing for crops\n * 育てる may be preferred for flowers (バラを作る is a bit odd).\n * 栽培する is more neutral. It is formal, but usual enough for normal conversation.\n\nFor 'weeds are growing', the most common phrase is 雑草が伸びる.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-06T22:27:23.750", "id": "94394", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-06T22:27:23.750", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94393", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "> Are they both accurate?\n\nNo. The former means that someone lies about the problem, so doesn't suit for\nごまかす. This word doesn't always involve an evil intention. It's often used when\nsomeone has no idea about the issue.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-07T21:21:00.183", "id": "94403", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T07:25:32.713", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-08T07:25:32.713", "last_editor_user_id": "35252", "owner_user_id": "35252", "parent_id": "94402", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "ごまかす (誤魔化す in ateji) refers to an (often poor) attempt to mislead or distract\nsomeone (typically the listener) so that they won't realize some fact. The\nfocus is on such an attitude itself, and the verb is commonly used without any\nobject as if it were an intransitive verb.\n\n問題をごまかす can refer to an attempt to hide a problem itself (∼ dodge/gloss over),\nbut it can also refer to an attempt to hide some aspect of an already\nconfirmed problem (∼ misrepresent). I don't know which is the more common\ntranslation; it depends on the context. Either way, the speaker is trying not\nto deal with the problem head-on.\n\nFor example, suppose you are writing a math paper and have noticed some part\nof your proof is not perfect. If you \"問題をごまかして投稿した\", that probably refers to\nthe act of hiding the issue itself, and if you \"問題をごまかして返答した\" after the\nreviewers pointed it out, that would be closer to misrepresentation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T12:35:55.573", "id": "94408", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T00:58:33.227", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T00:58:33.227", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94402", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Here, ぶっ殺す is used with **でも** meaning \"something like ～\" or \"～ or something\".\nThere is also a nominalizer ん (の) to turn ぶっ殺す into a noun.\n\n * [Meaning of でも or ちょうだい in テレビでも見てちょうだい](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42204/5010)\n * [Meaning of \"でも\" in \"食事でもどうですか？\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21519/5010)\n\nCompare:\n\n * 彼女でなければ解けない問題 \na problem only she can solve \n(She is the only person who can solve it)\n\n * 彼女でもなければ解けない問題 \na problem only a person like her can solve \n(Technically, anyone as capable as her could solve it, but the bar is very\nhigh anyway)\n\nSo:\n\n * ～をぶっ殺さなきゃ、到底復讐にはならねえ。 \nIt's never gonna be a vengeance unless I kill ～.\n\n * ～をぶっ殺すん **でも** なきゃ、到底復讐にはならねえ。 \nIt's never gonna be a vengeance unless _it's something like_ killing ～.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T10:54:33.203", "id": "94407", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T11:55:25.283", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-08T11:55:25.283", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "飛行機の模型ばらした **の** is short for 飛行機の模型 **を** ばらした **もの** , where もの is \"thing\".\n\n * ～した(も)の can refer to an resultant product. See: [What does ものになります mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/93416/5010) Here, ばらしたの refers to the parts you get after the disassembling.\n * ～ **で** いい means \"～ will suffice/do (if not ideal)\". See: [What is the difference between それでいい and それがいい here?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17851/5010)\n\n> チセが作ってた飛行機の模型ばらしたのでいいんじゃねえか。\n>\n> Disassembled parts of the airplane model Chise was making should suffice (as\n> a 代替品), no?\n>\n> Perhaps you can take apart the airplane model Chise was making and use the\n> parts (as a 代替品)?\n\n**EDIT:** If I'm not mistaken, this ばらしたの is an example of **gapless relative\nclauses** explained in the last part of [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14550/5010). They can be used to\nexpress a (by-)product made as a result of the said action.\n\n * 魚を焼く煙\n * 蛙が水に飛び込んだ音\n * キノコを焼いた料理\n * 本を買ったお釣り\n * 部屋の掃除をした残りの時間", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T10:23:28.203", "id": "94406", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T01:47:47.030", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T01:47:47.030", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94405", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "* 勝手に in this context means \"without someone's permission\", \"all by himself\", etc.\n * かけ is the continuative form of かける, which is \"to cast (a spell)\". It's the verb you need to use with a magic spell. For example, 魔法をかける means \"to cast a spell/magic\". See the 14th definition [here](https://jisho.org/word/%E6%8E%9B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B).\n * やがり is the continuative form of やがる, an auxiliary verb used to express disdain. It's like adding a sense of \"darn\" or \"f**king\" to the main verb. This means the healing spell was somehow annoying to this speaker. See: \n * [How to use the inflection \"やがる\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4236/5010)\n * [What does しやがって imply? shiyagatte doesn't seem to show up directly in dictionaries](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11966/5010)\n * ます is just a polite marker. Maybe this person is reporting this event to his boss?\n\n> 勝手にヒーリングをかけやがりまして \n> [He] cast a healing (spell) without [my] permission!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T13:59:21.747", "id": "94410", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T13:59:21.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94409", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "> この本で扱えるのは現代日本の東京の言葉だけです\n\nI think the potential form pairs up nicely with だけ. Literally, \"In this book,\nwhat we **are able** to handle is only the language of modern day Tokyo\nJapanese\", or more naturally \"We can only handle the Japanese of modern day\nTokyo in this book\". Presumably suggesting that they **couldn't** handle\nanything else without a much bigger book.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T14:55:56.653", "id": "94412", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T14:55:56.653", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7944", "parent_id": "94411", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "There are a couple points that cause some common confusion for English-\nlanguage learners of Japanese, particularly for these verbs like 分かる and 出来る.\n\nPart of the problem is that the verb here describes a quality of a thing, and\nnot an action by a person.\n\nIn the comments, there is a description of が in this sentence as an object\nmarker. This それ is only an object **in English** , after translating. As\nJapanese, this それ is the subject of the intransitive verb わかる.\n\nわかる derives from verb わく (\"to split, to come into pieces\"), as the spontaneous\nor potential, describing that a thing \"comes apart\" on its own or \"can come\napart\". This developed idiomatically to mean something closer to the English\nphrasing _\" it is apparent **how it fits together** \"_.\n\nThe subject in Japanese is the thing that \"comes apart\". A better gloss in\nEnglish, in order to show more clearly how the Japanese verb functions, might\nbe _\" to be understandable\"_.\n\nThe に in the Japanese doesn't mark a \"dative subject\" so much as it marks the\n**agent** of the action, exactly like in passive constructions. Just like in\nthe English phrasing, _\" it is understandable **by me** \"_. Or, to use the\nphrasing further above, _\" it is apparent **to me** how it fits together\"_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T18:51:15.737", "id": "94446", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T18:51:15.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "94413", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This sentence may be easier for you to parse without `、「文型」`:\n\n> {日本語にはどんな「文」の型があるのか}を考えます。 \n> We will consider {what _sentence_ types exist in Japanese}.\n\nThe clause enclosed in `{` and `}` is an embedded question.\n\n`「文」の型` and `「文型」`, joined with a comma, are appositive, i.e., the latter is a\nrephrased version of the former. 文型 is a term that refers to basic sentence\npatterns of a language (for example, 英語の基本文型 look like\n[this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vfKLevCuCg)). So you may think this\ncomma is working like `, i.e.,` or `, or` here.\n\n> 日本語にはどんな「文」の型、「文型」があるのかを考えます。 \n> We will consider what types of sentence, or _bunkei_ , there are in\n> Japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T16:25:09.823", "id": "94417", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T18:31:09.290", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-08T18:31:09.290", "last_editor_user_id": "50132", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94414", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You are correct. The subject of a main clause is typically marked with は, so\nwhen が is used instead, it carries a nuance such as _exhaustive-listing_ or\n_neutral-description_.\n\n> お母さんは英語を勉強しています。 \n> My mother is studying English. \n> (neutral; described as a known fact)\n>\n> お母さんが英語を勉強しています。 \n> It's _my mother_ who is studying English. \n> (nuanced: exhaustive-listing-ga)\n>\n> お母さんが英語を勉強しています。 \n> (I found/report) My mom is studying English. \n> (nuanced: [neutral-\n> description](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43213/5010)-ga)\n\nOn the other hand, the subject of a subordinary clause (including a relative\nclause) is marked with が by default, so it carries no extra nuance there. If は\nis used within a relative clause, that's probably a nuanced は known as\ncontrastive-wa.\n\n> 顔が美しい人 \n> a person whose face is beautiful \n> (neutral)\n>\n> 顔は美しい人 \n> a person whose face, at least, is beautiful \n> (nuanced: indicates this person has some fault)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T19:01:33.163", "id": "94420", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T19:01:33.163", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94415", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Those are not のに meaning \"although; despite\", but probably の as a nominalizer\nfollowed by に meaning \"upon; against; at; in reaction to\". Basically this\nshould be the same に as in ～に驚く, ～に苦しむ, etc. See: [に in\nコントロールに苦しまなくなった](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/72042/5010)\n\n * 彼がそう言ったのに驚いた。 \nI was surprised that he said so.\n\n * 蓋が開かないのに困っています。 \nI'm having trouble opening the lid.\n\n * 淡々と言うのに、ライデンは内心ふぅんと思う。 \nUpon hearing his emotionless statement, Leiden thought ふぅん (Meh?) within\nhimself. \n(I'm not sure what this ふぅん implies; see the following context)\n\nI said \"probably\" because this type of (の)に is normally used with certain\nverbs related to psychological reactions. 思う is not a verb commonly used with\n～(の)に, but it makes sense to me. However, the first sentence sounds unnatural\nbecause 同じ方を見やる is not even a psychological reaction... Maybe it's a typo, or\nmaybe this is some sort of his habit in writing?\n\nI have never seen 透徹と. [BCCWJ](https://clrd.ninjal.ac.jp/bccwj/) has 44\nexamples of 透徹 but no example of 透徹と, so I think this is a mere misuse. Still,\nit's clear that the author tried to use it as an adverb by adding と.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T21:06:36.077", "id": "94421", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T21:06:36.077", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94416", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Basically yes, the structure of the sentence is [砲撃にあたり...必要なの] は\n長距離砲兵型と変わらない. So literally, _That (it) requires ... is not different from (the\nsame as) 長距離砲兵型_.\n\nAnother slightly different parsing would be to interpret 必要なのは as a topic\ndescribing the aspect of difference: _in requiring .. at the time of firing,\n(it) is the same as 長距離砲兵型._\n\nIn terms of translation, translating と変わらない adverbially may fit more easily,\nso it is _just as_ rather than _same as_ : _(It) requires .... in firing, just\nas 長距離砲兵型._", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T21:37:13.617", "id": "94425", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T21:37:13.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94418", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Your interpretation is correct. To be precise it's \"not different\", but \"not\ndifferent\" is not different from \"the same as\", so your interpretation is not\nwrong, which is not different from correct. There are reasons we use\nexpressions like double negatives, so the author probably has its reasons to\nchose 変わらない over 同じ.\n\n* * *\n\n> 砲撃にあたり前進観測機が必要なのは長距離砲兵型と変わらない\n\nThis could be written verbosely. I assume something like:\n\n * 砲撃にあたり前進観測機が必要 **であるという事実は** 長距離砲兵型と変わらない\n\n * _(The fact that it needs 前進観測機 for 砲撃 is no different from that of the 長距離砲兵型's)_\n\nor\n\n * 砲撃にあたり前進観測機が必要 **であるという特性は** 長距離砲兵型と変わらない\n * _(Its characteristic is no different from that of 長距離砲兵型's, in terms of requiring 前進観測機 for 砲撃)_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T21:37:49.770", "id": "94426", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T21:37:49.770", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "94418", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The difference between 行くand 出る in all of the three cases that you posted is\nthe following:\n\n行く means that there is an actual movement, i.e. someones moves **from**\nwhatever place **to** the classroom:\n\n> [会社から]日本語の授業に行きました。\n\nIn the case of 出る, whatever the meaning you pick up, there is **no movement**.\nAll the action happens _only_ in the classroom:\n\n 1. (e.g., a student) to **attend** a class (I think that to \"go\" to a \nclass is a misleading translation)\n\n 2. (e.g., a professor) to teach a class\n 3. (e.g., a topic) to come up in a class\n\nSome example sentences for each use:\n\n 1. 歴史の授業に出る。 To attend a history lesson.\n 2. 田中先生は病気なので、今日の授業に出られない。Professor Tanaka is sick, so he will not teach today's lesson.\n 3. この問題は昨日の授業に出た。This problem came up in yesterday's class.\n\n* * *\n\nFinally, to answer your questions, first:\n\n> Is there any nuance difference between 行くand 出る in the first meaning?\n\nIt feels somewhat wrong to use 授業に行くto mean \"to take a lesson\", because the\nemphasis is in the action of moving towards the class, rather than the act of\ntaking the lesson, so I would say they have different meanings altogether.\nAlso note that for the action of attending lessons in a regular fashion or\nunder some kind of schedule, there is the verb 通{かよ}う:\n\n> 毎週フランス語の授業に通っている。 I attend French lessons every week.\n\nAs for the second question:\n\n> How are these three meanings tied to the same verb 出る?\n\nThe point in common between all of this usages of 出る is that, rather than\n\"going\", someone or something (the student, the teacher or the problem)\n\"appears\" in the lesson. In the meaning 1, that would mean \"showing up\" as a\nstudent in a particular class.\n\n* * *\n\nAs I commented in the original question, if you add the full sentence from\nyour textbook where 授業に出る is used we might be able to help you further.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T00:03:11.983", "id": "94430", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T01:53:17.413", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T01:53:17.413", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "94423", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "You may analyze as follows:\n\n# Break them down\n\n * **Kenka ga tsuyoi** = strong (in fighting)\n * **ue ni** = on top of\n * **otokomae** = handsome\n\n* * *\n\n# Put them together\n\nStrong + on top of + handsome\n\n* * *\n\n# Adjust\n\n(I am) strong + (and) on top (of that) + (I am) handsome\n\n* * *\n\n# Result\n\n * I am strong; and on top of that I am handsome!\n\nsame as\n\n * Not only am I strong; but handsome as well!", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T22:10:00.687", "id": "94428", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-08T22:10:00.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "94424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The premise that when a particle is omitted the written representation adds a\ncomma is not true. Some of the commas in your example sentences are actually\nakward:\n\n> テニス、する？ 〇\n\n> 今、何してる？ 〇\n\n> 今、何、してる？ ☓\n\n> どんな食べ物、好き？ ☓\n\nThe comma accounts for an actual pause in the intonation as one would\nnaturally expect, and it does not have a grammatical function in general. For\nthis reason, 何、してる does not make sense, it should be either 何をしてる or 何してる.\n\nPerhaps if you share the source that specifies that the commas are placed to\nrepresent the abscence of a particle we can better understand the purpose\nbehind this, in my opinion, false claim.\n\n**EDIT:**\n\nAfter adding the detailed materials from the source, this is what I found out.\nIn the example dialog, some of the commas do come with a pause, but others\ndon't. Pay attention to the first sentence (minute 3:30):\n\n> あ～、お腹[が]、すいたなあ (3:30, が is omitted)\n\nThere is **no** pause between お腹 and すいた, which does not support my point of\nview, but rather the idea that the comma is only being used as a replacement\nfor が, in this case. In other instances, notably when the omitted particle is\nは, we can actually hear a pause in the example dialog:\n\n> なんだ、じゃ、俺{おれ}[* _は_ ]、一人で行こうっと (3:44, は is omitted)\n\n> あ、まって！ その店[ **は** ]、おいしいんでしょ。やっぱり、私も行くわ！ (3:48, は is omitted).\n\nSo, there is a mixture of commas that represent and actual pause and commas\nthat don't.\n\nI stick to my guns and still think that some of this commas are not natural at\nall. It might be possible that using commas to replace omitted particles is a\nregular practice to some extent, but I can't answer that. I am looking forward\nto listen to what the more experienced Japanese speakers and native speakers\nhave to say.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-08T23:32:30.467", "id": "94429", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T01:32:50.227", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T01:32:50.227", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "94427", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "All the commas in your image are not required at all. Rather, they are usually\navoided. The following sentences are just fine:\n\n * あの人先生？\n * その映画面白い？\n * 何かスポーツする？\n * 今弁護士してる。\n * これ見て。\n\nForget the idea that a comma \"replaces\" a particle; it never does. Commas in\nJapanese play little semantic role, and they are typically nothing more than\nreading aids. They are typically used after conjunctions (e.g., じゃ) and\ninterjections (e.g., あ～), but even this is not a hard rule. In the pasted\nimage, commas are used much more often than usual, but that's probably because\nthe author thought they could help beginner readers to parse those sentences.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T05:05:18.063", "id": "94434", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T05:05:18.063", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94427", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It is a colloquial version of のってくる, where のる means _to accept invitation,\njoin_ (def #5\n[大辞泉](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AE%E3%82%8B/#jn-172646) or def\n#7\n[プログレッシブ和英中辞典](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%81%AE%E3%82%8B/#je-59306))\nand る is changed to ん. It means the speaker asks around for going out, and it\nis only guy-friends **who are willing to join** (ノッて来んの). Note that は is\nomitted and the part is a cleft sentence: ノッて来んの **は** 男のダチばっかりだ. (Edited\naccording to naruto's comment.\n[This](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/93338/45489) may also be relevant\nfor what this の is, but practically you shouldn't worry too much.)\n\nTo me, the mix of katakana/kanji is slightly odd. のる is often written in\nkatakana in the sense that the subject gets higher 'momentum' (in abstract\nsense, See def #10 in the 大辞泉), which to some extent overlaps in the sense\nbeing used.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T04:34:45.407", "id": "94433", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T08:24:04.763", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T08:24:04.763", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94431", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Unfortunately, onomatopoeic and mimetic words are things you have to learn by\nrote. Many of them are used only in a certain type of context. Most native\nspeakers would say すらすら(と) or さらさら(と) is the most natural adverb to describe\nsmoothness of writing characters on paper.\n\n * すらすら is used to describe how smoothly a person writes, reads, says, recalls or calculates something.\n * するする is used to describe how smoothly something moves without noise or friction. For example, a skater on ice.\n\nPlease use a modern corpus like\n[BCCWJ](https://clrd.ninjal.ac.jp/bccwj/en/index.html) to find more examples.\n(Corpora containing old text like 用例.jp can be misleading.)\n\nAlthough するする(と) is not bad as an uncommon alternative in your context, it's\nnot an appropriate choice at least in examinations.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T05:49:35.747", "id": "94435", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T01:50:03.980", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-10T01:50:03.980", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94432", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "You can't say the last two sentences because 感【かん】 is not an independent word\nbut a suffix meaning _-ness_. You cannot use _ness_ as an independent word in\nEnglish, either. For the last two sentences to work, you need to use\n(～という/って)感じ instead.\n\n私のためにしてあげてますよ感 is a highly informal expression meaning something like\n_I'm-doing-this-for-you-kinda atmosphere_ (correct this if it's strange). This\n感 is attached to a clause, but it's still a suffix. It should be avoided in\nformal sentences, but something like this is catchy and interesting on\nTwitter, etc. Another example\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/64462/5010).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T07:34:57.417", "id": "94437", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T07:34:57.417", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94436", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "個人的 or 未熟 cannot follow directly a (pro)noun while 個人 can. I don't have a good\nexplanation for this, but similar things can be seen in the following:\n\n * 彼{特有, 固有}の _particular to him_ is fine while 彼特殊な is not possible.\n * 彼一流の _his superb_ is fine while 彼二流の is not possible.\n\nSo grammatically,\n\n> 1. あくまで私個人の未熟な意見です\n>\n> 2. あくまで私 **の** 未熟で個人的な意見です\n>\n> 3. あくまで私 **の** 個人的で未熟な意見です\n>\n> 4. あくまで私 **の** 未熟な個人の意見です\n>\n>\n\nare possible. One thing is that 未熟な意見 is not entirely idiomatic (an opinion\ncan get mature?), which makes all these give a slightly odd impression. Still\n1 should be totally fine, and 2/3 mean roughly the same. 4 sounds more odd\nbecause 未熟な個人 pops out and looks like meaning _opinion of mine as a premature\nindividual_ and also 私の個人の意見です is not very idiomatic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T08:51:42.197", "id": "94439", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T12:10:04.137", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T12:10:04.137", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94438", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Simply put,\n\n 1. Can 他動詞 be used?\n\nYes. All of 1-5 are grammatically correct.\n\n 2. Must it be used with ている?\n\nNo. It depends on the meaning (which applies to cases of 自動詞).\n\n 3. Does it have to be real?\n\nNo. It can be imaginary.\n\n* * *\n\nI don't know too well about birds, but my image of worm-eating birds is that a\nbird flies down from above and picks up a worm, so it is an instantaneous\naction. According to this preconception, 3 sounds more natural (or likely)\nthan 2, in the sense that 3 describes an instantaneous action. Sentence 2\nsounds more like a bird chewing a worm (or keeping pecking lots of them) in\nfront of you. Sentence 4 is fine just as 2, but simply specific about which\nbird and worm.\n\nFor comparison, 牛が草を食べている sounds more common than 牛が草を食べる. The latter sounds\n_The cow is about to eat grass_.\n\nGrammatically sentence 5 is fine but sounds a bit strange mostly because of\nits meaning. Environmentalists often say things like 地球が泣いている, so it does not\nhave to be real.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T00:41:05.710", "id": "94448", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T00:41:05.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94441", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Here ずるいわたしも is what's actually said by アネット, and と is a plain quotative\nparticle without a corresponding verb (言って is omitted). ずるいわたしも is \"(It's)\nunfair (to do the experiment alone)! Me too!\". [This\narticle](https://eitopi.com/zurui-eigo) explains how ずるい is used.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T01:13:31.700", "id": "94450", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T04:46:38.667", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-10T04:46:38.667", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94442", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The first も is inside a quote. It should be read this way.\n\n> 「ずるいわたし **も** （する）」と（言いながら）割り込んで\n\nわたし is the agent of する. If it weren't for も, が would have been used.\n\nYou could insert に, but that would be interpreted this way.\n\n> 「ずるいわたし **にも** （させて）」と（言いながら）割り込んで\n\nわたし is still the agent of する, but since the verb is used in the causative, it\nis now marked with に.\n\nThe second も may be a bit harder to understand, because of もらう. I suspect you\nare expecting that part to be parsed like this.\n\n> ?［アネット（= わたし） **に** やらせて］もらった\n\nWhile this might sometimes occur in casual conversation, it is not quite\ncorrect grammatically. The correct structure should be like this.\n\n> アネット（= わたし） **が** ［やらせてもらった］\n\nアネット is still the agent of やる. However, she, as the speaker, is also the\nsubject of the clause that ends with もらう, and therefore, should be marked with\nが (or は if topicalized). You could say that the order of precedence is such\nthat the particle for アネット is dictated by もらう, rather than the causative\nbefore it.\n\nも replaces が (or は), and that’s what is happening in both instances here.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T04:15:24.877", "id": "94451", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T04:15:24.877", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "94442", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This sentence has a number of parts that interrelate in a not-entirely-obvious\nway.\n\nHere's the whole sentence.\n\n>\n> 「単語【たんご】」をその形【かたち】の特徴【とくちょう】・文【ぶん】の中【なか】での働【はたら】きによって分類【ぶんるい】したものを「品詞【ひんし】」と言【い】います\n\n### Question 1: Parsing the _nakaguro_ 「・」\n\nThe _nakaguro_ 「・」 symbol does indicate alternatives, as you mention. It looks\nlike you might have gotten confused about where to parse this.\n\nLet's add parentheses to show the bounds of the two alternatives.\n\n> 「単語【たんご】」を **（その形【かたち】の特徴【とくちょう】・文【ぶん】の中【なか】での働【はたら】き）**\n> によって分類【ぶんるい】したものを「品詞【ひんし】」と言【い】います\n\nHow do we know to omit the 「単語【たんご】」を from the two alternatives?\n\nThis leads right into your second question.\n\n### Question 2: The verb for that 「単語【たんご】」を\n\nWe see from that を that this noun requires a transitive verb. Sometimes that\nverb is omitted and implied, which complicates things. However, here, we have\nthe verb explicitly included.\n\nLet's break it down.\n\nHere's what the sentence looks like when we chop out everything but that\nobject noun and its verb:\n\n> **「単語【たんご】」を** その形【かたち】の特徴【とくちょう】・文【ぶん】の中【なか】での働【はたら】きによって **分類【ぶんるい】した**\n> ものを「品詞【ひんし】」と言【い】います\n\n↓\n\n> **「単語【たんご】」を** **分類【ぶんるい】した**\n\nThe bit between を and 分類【ぶんるい】した tells us more detail about _how_ the 分類【ぶんるい】\nhappens: によって (by means of, via) the two alternatives separated by the 「・」\n_nakaguro_.\n\n### Relative clauses and modifiers\n\nNote that everything up through the 分類【ぶんるい】した is itself a relative clause\nmodifying the word もの, giving us more detail about that もの -- what kind of もの\n(thing) it is that we 言【い】います (call) a 「品詞【ひんし】」 (\"part of speech\").", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T18:41:40.667", "id": "94445", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T21:26:22.977", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T21:26:22.977", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "94443", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Using それをすると is not incorrect, just weird. However, what する doing here is\n**not** substituting the verb, but doing the same as in「家事をする」or「掃除をする」-\nperforming the action that is interpreted as a noun (Sorry there might be a\nbetter way to explain in English; I'm doing my best)\n\nThe actual substitution happens at それ, which works as a noun \"the action of\neating\", we just usually shorten it since it's apparent what we're meaning.\n\nTo conclude, \n食べたいけどそれをすると太る - the full sentence \n食べたいけどすると太る - omitting the noun \n食べたいけど太る - even this is okay", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-09T19:29:42.237", "id": "94447", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-09T19:55:15.947", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-09T19:55:15.947", "last_editor_user_id": "42141", "owner_user_id": "42141", "parent_id": "94444", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "As you suspected, it's best to repeat the verb.\n\n> 食べたいけど食べると太る。\n\nUnlike English that requires you to say \"I\" twice, Japanese allows you to omit\neverything other than the verb itself. IMO the Japanese way is not that\ninefficient.\n\nThat said, saying それをすると is not bad, either. It sounds a bit stiff, but it's\nnot unnatural as long as it's said by a mature adult. Note that you cannot\ndrop それを when the substituted verb is a godan/ichidan verb. You can drop それを\nwhen the original verb is a suru-verb.\n\nTechnically, this \"do\" is a pro-verb (代動詞). Related: [“But when I\ndo..”](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/84597/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T00:56:47.827", "id": "94449", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T00:56:47.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94444", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "脂【あぶら】たっぷり (I believe _tappiri_ is a typo for\n[_tappuri_](https://jisho.org/word/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A3%E3%81%B7%E3%82%8A)) is a\nphrase meaning \"fatty\", \"has put on a lot of fat\" (but \"filled with fat\" is\nprobably an overstatement). It's regarded as a good property of tasty fish.\nFat-rich parts of tuna even have a distinct name ([トロ](https://matcha-\njp.com/en/2646)). For beef, 霜【しも】降【ふ】り (\"marbled\", \"fat-laced\") is more common\nas a marketing phrase.\n\nNote that 脂【あぶら】 **の** たっぷり makes no sense in isolation. Perhaps you\nremembered it incorrectly or you remembered only a part of a longer phrase.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T01:21:27.803", "id": "94467", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T21:33:36.813", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T21:33:36.813", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94454", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "～してんじゃねえ is short for ～し **ている** んじゃねえ (see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/61959/5010)), so する is in the\nprogressive/perfective (-teiru) form. Thus this only refers to what's already\ngoing on or what just happened.\n\nOn the other hand, ～するんじゃねえ does not have the progressive -teiru. It can refer\nto both what's going on now and what's going to happen in the future.\n\n * 泣いてんじゃねえ。 \nHey, don't cry. / Stop crying. \n(said to someone crying now)\n\n * 泣くんじゃねえ。 \nHey, don't cry. \n(said either to someone crying now or to someone who may cry in the future)\n\nIn the context in question, しれっと返してんじゃねえ and しれっと返すんじゃねえ are interchangeable.\n戦うんじゃねえ is not interchangeable with 戦ってんじゃねえ because the battle is not in\nprogress now.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T17:29:49.970", "id": "94456", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T17:45:45.507", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-10T17:45:45.507", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94455", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "@naruto said it excellently. I might put it more simply as the difference\nbetween:\n\n 1. telling someone not to do something either right now or in the near future \n= するんじゃねえ。\n\n 2. similar, but referring to whatever has just now occurred / is going on now \n= してんじゃねえぞ。\n\nAlso, to state the obvious, never ever use this expression in real life unless\nyou want to sound very hostile beyond blunt.\n\nYou should also learn, while you're at it, to use \"じゃないよ\" instead of \"じゃねえよ\",\nin case you want to sound blunt and slightly careless just like from the book.\n\nExample:\n\n * 「いいね、待ち合わせにはくれぐれも遅れるんじゃないよ。」 **(future)**\n * 「泣くんじゃないよ。まだここからが勝負なんだ。」 **(present)**\n * 「なに、万引きしてきただって？馬鹿やってんじゃないよ!」 **(recent past)**\n\nIn such cases, it covers \"current events\" \"future events.\" It also allows the\nspeaker to handle \"recent past events\" by making remarks on them right now,\nusing the expression.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T03:50:01.607", "id": "94469", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T05:03:16.460", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T05:03:16.460", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "51308", "parent_id": "94455", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Relevant definitions of\n[ネタ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AD%E3%81%9F/#jn-170158) here are\n\n> ４ 演芸で上演する作品。また、その内容。芸の種類についてもいう。「落語の定番―」「歌―」\n>\n> ５ 人をかつぐための、真実めかした作り話。悪意のある嘘ではなく、相手を笑わせたり軽くからかったりする程度である場合をいう。「彼の失敗談は―だろう」\n\n4 means _a piece of comedy (performance)_ and 5 _a fake story for laughing_.\nThe usage in question is mostly 5 even though it is not exactly a fake. A\nrelevant phrase is お笑いのネタ, literally meaning _a seed of laughing_\n\nSo you are basically right. It means _Formerly it was called .... The\n_ridiculous (joke)_ name was changed in a day._", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T22:52:56.900", "id": "94459", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T22:52:56.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94457", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "My understanding of the English _\" we **have worked** at `[place]` since\n`[time]`\"_ is that it describes an ongoing period -- the speaker began working\nthere at `[time]`, and **still works there**. If the speaker no longer worked\nthere, I would expect them to say _\" we **had worked** \"_ or even just _\" we\n**worked** \"_ instead.\n\nBecause the speaker **still works there** , the Japanese phrase 「働【はたら】いていました」\nis incorrect, since that ～てい(まし)た phrasing puts the action firmly in the past,\nas a completed event -- much like the English _\" we **[had] worked** \"_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-10T22:59:02.863", "id": "94460", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-10T22:59:02.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "94458", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "の is a nominalizer, が is a subject marker, を is an object marker, and 見る is a\nplain transitive verb meaning \"to see\". 俺が走るのが見た is plain wrong because the\nact of running cannot see something.\n\n * ❌ 俺が走るの **が** 見た。(incorrect) \n❌ My running saw [something].\n\n * 俺が走るの **を** 見た。(correct) \n[Someone] saw me running.\n\nHowever, there is another verb 見える which means \"to be visible\", \"to be in\nsight\", \"can be seen\". This can take an action as a subject. See: [What is the\ndifference between 見る and\n見える?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/39242/5010)\n\n * 俺が走るの **が** 見えた。(correct) \n[People] could see me running. / My run was visible.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T00:14:10.630", "id": "94463", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T00:14:10.630", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94461", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "You shouldn't view your sentence as\n\n> 俺が走る + のを + 見た\n\nRather, it is\n\n> 俺が走るの + を + 見た\n\nFrom there, it is easily to see that の is just the 代名詞 that makes 走る(to run)\ninto a noun 走るの(the action of running). The が and を are just being used\nnormally here, and your sentence should be interpreted as such:\n\n> 俺が走るの(The action of me running) を 見た(saw)。 \n> (Someone) saw me running.\n\nObviously, \"running\" isn't a person and thus cannot see, 俺が走るのが見た wouldn't\nmake any sense here. (\"The action of me running saw???\" What could an \"action\"\nsee?)\n\nP.S. you could, however, say 俺が走るのは見た. は does not specify it's the subject or\nobject, but obviously it changes the emphasis(and thus the meaning to some\nextent) of the sentence by now making 俺が走るの the topic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-14T04:10:21.690", "id": "94499", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-14T04:10:21.690", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "94461", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Did you really see テレビは片隅にあります somewhere? It looks odd to me.\n\n片隅 is a nuanced word that typically has a connotation like \"a place that does\nnot receive much attention\", \"a relatively uncrowded part of an area\", etc.\nIt's fine to say 部屋の片隅にたまったホコリを掃除する, 教室の片隅で静かに泣いている, 社会の片隅で生きる and such, but\nit sounds funny if it is used to explain the concrete physical location of\nsomething.\n\nTo describe the position of a TV, 隅 is the natural choice (テレビは(部屋の)隅にあります). A\nsquare room has four 隅. Note that 隅 can have the same connotation as 片隅\ndepending on the context. 隅っこ is a colloquial equivalent of 隅.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T00:53:24.080", "id": "94465", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T00:53:24.080", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94462", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "If the TV was wide enough to span across the two corners, it occupies 両隅.\n\nIf the room was a quadrilateral, you may put four TV's each on 四隅.\n\nThe guests would probably not forget about your awesome TV's, because it\nremains in their 記憶の片隅 (memory's 片隅). We use 片隅 for this case, as a poetic\nexpression.\n\n片隅 tends to convey a \"sad/lonely\" message. So if you wanted to place the TV to\nthe corner, 隅 would be fine. But if you wanted to \"put that rusty tube in the\ncorner of the warehouse as it won't be used\", 片隅 may be the expression you're\nlooking for.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T00:58:04.433", "id": "94466", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T00:58:04.433", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "94462", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "> なきゃ from 行かなきゃ is an abbreviation of なければ\n\nThis is absolutely correct.\n\n* * *\n\n> it would translate to \"Must go\"\n\nThis is not wrong, but not necessarily correct in this context.\n\n* * *\n\n# 行かなければ / 行かなきゃ\n\nThe literal translation is, \"If I don't go...\". That's it. With a couple of\nwords attached the following may happen:\n\n * \"行かなければいい\" (Don't need to go)\n * \"行かなければ宝くじが当たる\" (Win the lottery if I don't go)\n * \"行かなければ結婚して幸せになれる\" (Marry and live a happy life if I don't go)\n\nWhat about now? Do you really have to go? I'd rather stay.\n\n* * *\n\nBut as you mentioned, if you just say \"行かなければ…\", which no one actually says in\nreal life excepts for emo kids, this **implicitly** is equivalent to \"行かなければ\n**ならない** \". This would mean \"If I don't go, (it) won't work\" = \"I shall/must\ngo\".\n\nBut in your case, the consequence of not going is \"not being able to know\":\n\n> 行かなければ (if one doesn't go) 分かる訳ない (there's no way one will know)\n\nNotice it never says one **must** go.\n\n* * *\n\n# Outcome\n\nWith the above in mind, translate as follows:\n\n * 領にでも + 行かなきゃ + 分かる訳ない\n * To the 領 + if one doesn't go + (there's) no way to know\n\nShuffle them around:\n\n * There's no way to know (what is happening) if one doesn't go to the 領\n\nWhich matches your translation:\n\n * You'd have to go to the territory to find out (what is happening)\n\n* * *\n\n# にでも\n\n> でも means \"But\"\n\nAgain, you are not wrong, but not correct here as it's \"〜 **に** でも\". Check out\nthis post for the usage: [\"事故にでもあったのではあるまいか。\" grammar help please?\n[duplicate]](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/29499/%e4%ba%8b%e6%95%85%e3%81%ab%e3%81%a7%e3%82%82%e3%81%82%e3%81%a3%e3%81%9f%e3%81%ae%e3%81%a7%e3%81%af%e3%81%82%e3%82%8b%e3%81%be%e3%81%84%e3%81%8b-grammar-\nhelp-please) . It's tagged as a duplicate but I think this is the better match\nfor your case.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T01:28:36.263", "id": "94468", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T01:45:18.043", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T01:45:18.043", "last_editor_user_id": "48366", "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "94464", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I wanted to add a more detailed breakdown here, since this seems to be the\ncore of what caused the initial difficulty.\n\n> when used together with a verb means that it is something one must do\n\nなければ is two separate parts: the な is the leftover part of ない (in turn from\ntransforming 行く into 行かない), and then ければ transforms that i-adjective [by\nmaking it conditional](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese-grammar/i-adjective-\nconditional-form-kereba/).\n\nIt simply considers the _hypothetical of not_ doing something. \"When used\ntogether with a verb\", the connotation of \"must\" comes from the bad\nconsequence in that verb. So it's not \"I must go\" (with some unclear\nrelationship to the following verb), but \"... if I don't go\". In this case,\n_there's no way to understand what is happening, unless I go._\n\nJapanese doesn't have \"have to\" as a modal the way that English does; the\ngeneral pattern is this kind of hypothetical + consequence construct. See also\nconstructs like Xしてしかない: not \"must do X\", but \"other-than-doing-X does not\nexist\" (in more natural English, \"doing anything but X is not an option\").\n\n* * *\n\nYou might also find it worthwhile to understand 訳ない as more than just a\ncollocation. 訳 is a noun with glosses like \"reason, method, way\"; the entire\npreceding clause (not just the verb, though such a clause could consist of\nonly a verb - as it does here, with 分かる) is used attributively to describe\nthat noun - thus, X訳 is \"a way that X [could be the case]\". Then, that whole\nthing is the が-marked subject of ない - the が has been dropped here, but is\nsometimes used explicitly; see for example the anime title 俺の妹がこんなに可愛いわけがない.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T14:18:32.680", "id": "94476", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T14:18:32.680", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "94464", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it is independent from でも whether a particle can be omitted.\n\n> ひまなら助詞の勉強したら？\n>\n> コーヒー、どうですか？\n>\n> テレビ見てちょうだい\n\nare all fine while\n\n> 舞台袖大人しくして\n\nis not. So 舞台袖 **で** でも cannot have で omitted.\n\nでも comes after a particle.\n\n * 海でもに is not grammatical (maybe rarely possible colloquially).\n * 旅行行きますか is fine, so 旅行にでも and 旅行でも both work.\n * 東京でも行こう is a different usage. It is [で + も](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A7%E3%82%82/#jn-152510): _also in Tokyo_\n * 友達行こう is not possible, so 友達とでも行こう is the only possibility.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T09:23:42.860", "id": "94471", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T09:30:39.840", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T09:30:39.840", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94470", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You understand correctly the part up to the の, which connects with 形.\n\nThe overall structure is これは [[...言葉の] [[他の形...多い]形]] につけられた名前です. So the\ntranslation would be something along the lines of\n\n> This is the name given to the form that ＜他の形の..対立する＞ and ＜最も機能の多い＞ of those\n> words that, just like 動詞 and 形容詞 ＜...＞ ,\n\nwhere your translation suffices for ＜....＞.\n\nA confusing part may be both 他の形の...対立する and 最も機能の多い both modifies 形.\n\n* * *\n\nI'm not exactly sure what 他の形の用法と対立する means. Probably something like _distinct\nfrom usage of other forms_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T11:26:23.690", "id": "94475", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T11:26:23.690", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94472", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As you guessed, it is an irregular application of 憑き. One of the few words\nthat are actually used with -憑き is\n[狐憑き](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%8B%90%E4%BB%98%E3%81%8D/#jn-52989),\nmeaning _someone/state of being possessed by a ghost of fox_. So by analogy\nwith this, 嘘憑き may mean _someone haunted by lies_ ; or possibly _someone\naddicted to lying_ (interpreting 嘘 in 噓憑き as _to lie_ rather than a lie\nitself).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-11T11:08:48.080", "id": "94474", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T11:08:48.080", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94473", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Note this can be subjective to some extent.\n\nBasically\n\n * 整【ととの】った顔【かお】立【だ】ち means _beautiful_\n * 尖【とが】った literally means _pointed_\n * 凛【りん】とした means _dignified_ (according to [here](https://biz.trans-suite.jp/24505))\n\n凛【りん】とした gives an image of someone with a sharp, assertive, confident\nimpression. This includes physical characteristics, so political correctness\n(or whatever) aside, it is not commonly used for fat people. As such, 尖【とが】った\nprobably means here something close to _skinny_ or _bony_ (which may not have\npositive connotations in English).\n\nFor example, Audrey Hepburn in the last press conference scene of _Roman\nHoliday_ may well be described 凛【りん】とした. On the other hand, Marylin Monroe may\nbe too glamorous to be called so. I'm not disparaging Marilyn Monroe, but her\nkind of beauty is not very consistent with 凛【りん】とした.\n\nAnother stereotypical element that comes to my mind is sharpness in eyes,\nagain also in physical sense. So even Audrey Hepburn does not completely fit\nthe description because her eyes are too large. Someone with thinner eyes that\nare slanted upwards (like stereotypical Chinese people) will fit the\ndescription better.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-12T13:22:51.170", "id": "94481", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-12T16:24:41.953", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-12T16:24:41.953", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94479", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "These words are all either verbs, or verb-derived nouns.\n\n * _Hajimaru_ : intransitive verb, \"to begin, to start\", as in \"something starts or begins on its own\". \n * _Hajimari_ : noun derivation from the verb, \"beginning, start\", as in the natural or spontaneous beginning of something -- in line with the intransitive nature of the underlying verb.\n * _Hajimeru_ : transitive verb, \"to begin\", as in \"to begin or start something\". \n * _Hajime_ : noun derivation from the verb, \"beginning, start\", as in the intentional or deliberate beginning of something -- in line with the transitive nature of the underlying verb.\n * _Owaru_ : intransitive verb, \"to finish, to end\", as in \"something ends or finishes on its own\". \n * _Owari_ : noun derivation from the verb, \"ending, finish\", as in the natural or spontaneous ending of something -- in line with the intransitive nature of the underlying verb.\n\nI'm not that familiar with judo as a discipline or how classes are run. That\nsaid, shouting _\" Owari!\"_ at the b̲e̲g̲i̲n̲n̲i̲n̲g̲ of a class sounds like a\nlinguistic mistake to me.", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-12T16:32:23.790", "id": "94483", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-12T16:32:23.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "94480", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I am not particularly knowledgeable about judo, but the usual phrases used in\nJapanese sports or military contexts are:\n\n * 整列！ _Sēretsu!_ (\"Line up!\") [pronunciation](https://forvo.com/word/%E9%9B%86%E5%90%88/)\n * 集合！ _Shūgō!_ (\"Gather!\") [pronunciation](https://ja.forvo.com/word/%E6%95%B4%E5%88%97/)\n\nOf course these can be used also near the end of a class, so they are not\ntechnically counterparts of _owari_. But I think nothing directly derived from\n_hajimaru/hajimeru_ would work as you expect.\n\n_Hajimari_ (\"Beginning!\") may be at least better than _owari_ , but it still\ndoesn't make much sense as a command to line up. Besides, it's too close to\n_hajime_ used at the beginning of a match.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-12T23:08:38.410", "id": "94487", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T07:13:11.207", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-13T07:13:11.207", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94480", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "Language aspects are answered in existing answers. Just let me share some\ngoogle searches. I have no experience of Judo either, so take my comments with\na grain of salt.\n\n* * *\n\n[This](https://okwave.jp/qa/q3383111.html) asks more or less the same question\nin Japanese. The answer says, there is no particular shouting. According to\nit, a session starts like\n\n * The instructor calls students for starting, just like in a normal conversation. E.g, (in English) \"Boys, now we are starting...\"\n * Everybody sits down (or up) in [seiza](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HN8nByO3y3c?t=21).\n * A head student makes three calls:\n * Shōmen ni rei = _Bow to the front_ , then everybody makes a bow.\n * Sensei ni rei = _Bow to the teacher_ , then everybody makes a bow.\n * Otagai ni rei = _Bow to each other_ , then everybody makes a bow.\n\nThis takes place also in the ending. ([This\nvideo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCGi36l51gM) does mostly the same). The\nfirst shomen seems to refer originally to the\n[altar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamidana) of Shintoism (Japanese native\nreligion).\n\nI guess doing all these would be too much, so as naruto suggested, using\n_Seiretsu!_ for lining up and then _Rei!_ for bowing would be good enough (in\nterms of Japanese-ishness).\n\n* * *\n\nBTW I wish I could see Finnish students starting at the shout of _owari!_ ,\nwhich would look a bit surreal. Don't be offended, but that just makes me\nthink how difficult it was for people using different languages to understand\neach other in pre-modern days...", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T03:00:36.730", "id": "94488", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T03:37:59.527", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-13T03:37:59.527", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94480", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "With all due respect, this seems to be one of those cases where learners can\ntell what is grammatical but only native (or near-native) speakers can tell\nwhat is really idiomatic.\n\nGrammatically speaking, there should be nothing wrong with _hajimari_ as it is\nto the intransitive verb _hajimaru_ what _owari_ is to _owaru_ , which is also\n(mostly) intransitive. However, it sounds very odd as something you shout at\nthe beginning of anything. _Owari_ in that context is understood as meaning\nsomething along the lines of “That’s all, ”“This is it,” and so on. No such\nmeaning is attached to _hajimari_. It is just a neutral word for “beginning.”\n\n_Hajime_ is derived from the transitive verb _hajimeru_ , and in that context\nit is understood as an instruction to start doing something. Its opposite is\n_yame_ from _yameru_ , which means to stop doing whatever you are doing now.\n\nI would suggest you take in naruto’s advice.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T04:21:33.577", "id": "94489", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-14T05:59:47.453", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-14T05:59:47.453", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "94480", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "You'll have ask yourself what message you really want to deliver, in terms of\nthe \"beginning\".\n\n# Command\n\nAs in \" _You shall begin to line up_ \"\n\nDo you want to \"command\" your students? Then it's **Hajime**. After all, you\nare in charge to initiate, so this makes sense.\n\n# Statement\n\nAs in \" _The beginning approaches, it's time to line up_ \"\n\nDo you want to \"explain\" that the beginning is approaching? Then it's\n**Hajimari**. This is totally acceptable - story-tellers have been saying\n\"Hajimari Hajimari\" (even twice to sound dramatic) to indicate the beginning\nof the tale. In this case, you are not necessarily the one who is initiating\nthe linining-up - perhaps another entity including mother nature, god(s),\nuniverse, etc. However in the martial arts industry (unfortunately, it is\npractically an industry now days) this approach is never used.\n\n# Choice\n\nSo you see, neither is wrong. The \"do\" in \"Judo\" resembles a \"path\" that one\nfollows. In Japan's conservative culture, students are always \"commanded\",\nwhich is the path you may follow. But nothing is stopping you to change the\napproach towards a humble and friendly style. Call it innovative, unique,\nweird or unnatural, it's up to you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T04:56:24.903", "id": "94491", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T04:56:24.903", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48366", "parent_id": "94480", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "Wherever work sends me, I usually find a martial arts class to train with, for\na few months.\n\nAfter studying karate in my youth, as well as in my itinerate middle age, I\nshould like to add 'seiretsu', as provided by @Naruto, is by far the most\nwidely used command in Japanese martial arts, other than the native language,\nfor the class to fall in, across the Western hemisphere.\n\nWith 'hajime' and 'yame' being used, respectively, at either end of a bout of\nsparring or wrestling.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T15:10:25.250", "id": "94495", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T15:10:25.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "51331", "parent_id": "94480", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you understand the meaning correctly.\n\nRegarding に, it can be understood as indicating the indirect object of the\ncausative 余裕【よゆう】を持【も】たせる, like 彼【かれ】に話【はな】させる = let him speak.\n\n * 余裕【よゆう】を持【も】つ _to have extra_\n * 余裕【よゆう】を持【も】たせる _to let O have extra_\n * 一【いっ】か月【げつ】分【ぶん】に余裕【よゆう】を持【も】たせる _to let a month's supply have extra_.\n\nFYI, for comparison, 一【いっ】か月【げつ】分【ぶん】余裕【よゆう】を持【も】たせる (without に) would mean\n_to add extra of one month's worth_ , that is, X + 1 month's worth instead of\n1 month's worth + α.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-12T22:20:23.280", "id": "94485", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-12T22:25:47.293", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-12T22:25:47.293", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "94482", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Usually, 借り is used to mean something you owe someone. It doesn’t have to be\nmoney. I can be a favor or something.\n\n> 君にひとつ借りがある。 \n> I owe you one.\n\nThe same thing can be said as 貸し from the opposite angle.\n\n> 君にひとつ貸しがある。 \n> You owe me one.\n\nHowever, it seems these words are used in a twisted way in your manga, like\nwhen one person makes the other person angry or something, the second person\ngets the right to “pay back,” and that’s called 貸し from the viewpoint of the\nfirst person. The girl doesn’t get to pay off those “debts”.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T05:32:35.790", "id": "94492", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T05:32:35.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "94490", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As aguijonazo explained, 借り and 貸し can refer to an abstract, mental debt which\nyou owe to someone (借り = borrowing from your standpoint) or which someone owes\nto you (貸し = lending from your standpoint). With that in mind...\n\n> この“貸し”は借りになることはなく\n\nRead this as \"Her 'lending' (貸し) won't be my borrowing (借り), and vice versa\".\nIn other words, they will owe each other nothing even when they say 貸し. Note\nthat 貸し is enclosed in quotation marks, which indicates the word should not be\ntaken at face value.\n\n> 相殺もしない\n\n\"Our 貸し won't cancel one anotehr, either\". This also implies saying 貸し between\nthem does not mean they will remember something for a long time. So to speak,\n貸しにしといてくれ (\"Consider you lent me one = Consider I owe you one\") would\neffectively mean something almost like \"Kindly forget it\" between them. That\nwas the implicit rule between them (or so he believed).\n\n> 隼人はこれで一体ボクにいくつ貸しがあるのかな？ \n> With this, I wonder how much you owe me (if \"貸し\" were taken literally)?\n\nTechnically speaking, this 貸し should have been 借り because she is talking about\nthe mental debt the boy has from _his_ standpoint. If there were no context,\nthis sentence would normally mean \"I wonder how much I owe you\". However, in\nthis context, she clearly believes she has done a lot for him, including what\njust happened (forgetting 猿の妖怪), so _he_ owes a lot. Here, she used 貸し\nnonetheless because it was a special word that had a different meaning between\nthem. I suppose she may jokingly request him to \"pay something back to her\" on\nthe next page.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T13:53:24.590", "id": "94494", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T14:49:22.963", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-13T14:49:22.963", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "94490", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "It's an exception. When は is used as a particle, it's pronounced \"wa\". But\nit's still written as は.\n\nAs for を, both pronunciations \"o\" and \"wo\" exist. I heard them both in Japan,\nalthough I'm not sure if it's a regional thing, or a generational thing, and\nso on.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-13T21:27:33.017", "id": "94497", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-13T22:24:47.010", "last_edit_date": "2022-05-13T22:24:47.010", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "51218", "parent_id": "94496", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, the two dots on top of the kana's are called 濁音点(dakuonten), which\nliterally means voiced-sound-dots. が is indeed か with two dots, and ぎぐげご are,\nrespectively, きくけこ with the dots. The same applied for other kana's with those\ndots, which make a unvoiced explosive into a voiced explosive.\n\nKA -> GA か → が \nTA -> DA た → だ \nSA -> ZA さ → ざ \nAnd so on...\n\nThere is, however, **NO RELATIONSHIP** between KA and SA, or RO and MO, or KA\nand KI and KE or any other kana's that share the same vowel/consonant. Back\nthen about 2000 years ago, Japanese did not have a writing system. They\nlearned how to write from China, which meant writing with thousands of Chinese\ncharacters we now call Kanji. Kanji, if you know anything, is logogram, which\nmeans it's meaning-based and not sound-based. E.g., the English word \"Hello\"\nis written this way because the letters represent the sound /heˈlō/, but the\nKanji 山 mean mountain because it looks like a mountain, and 上 means up and 下\nis down because it's just a line that's above or below another line. (Yes, I\nknow 形声文字 exists but I'm not go into details here)\n\nNow, Kanji is great and all, but the Japanese realized that, after all, their\nlanguage is not Chinese, and there are grammatical stuff that existed in\nJapanese but did not exist in Chinese, and they needed a phonetic writing\nsystem to write all the grammar particles and other components that just\ndoesn't fit to be written with Kanji. So, they picked a bunch of Kanji's, used\nthem for their sound rather than meaning. E.g. 加 means add but is read as か,\nso they write 加 when ever they needed the sound \"ka,\" even it has nothing to\ndo with adding. 世 for せ、止 for と for example. Those Kanji's, when written fast\nin cursive, gradually became round and simplified, and they eventually became\nthe Hiragana we use today. Before the war, which kanji to use was not\nstandardized, so people used 加 架 迦 嘉 randomly and interchangably for the sound\n\"ka\". After the war, they decided to make things standard and adopted the\nofficial list of Hiragana, and they are as follows:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TSE1d.gif)\nCourtesy of omniglot.com\n\nAs for Katakana, the story was similar, it was just a different group of\npeople that pick different Kanji/ different parts of Kanji. There is so much\nmore I want to add, (音読み、訓読み、変態仮名、現代仮名遣い...) but the space here is so limited,\nso I suggest you look up the history of Japanese writing, there are so many\ngood videos that do a in-depth explanation.\n\n_**TL;DR**_ So yeah, while the two dots is a stable pattern to make unvoiced\nexplosives voiced, the formation of each individual kana is NOT RELATED and\nthey arose from independent Kanji.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-05-14T04:34:39.643", "id": "94500", "last_activity_date": "2022-05-14T04:34:39.643", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "94498", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]