Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "Generally yes, that is how one can construct a noun phrase from a sentence\nalthough tense/aspect may require different considerations for each verb.\n\n> 猫がにゃーにゃー鳴いていた The cats were meowing \n> にゃーにゃー鳴いている猫 The meowing cats\n\n* * *\n\nConsider\n\n> 太郎は花子が好きだった Taro liked Hanako\n\nApplying the same construction, we get\n\n> 花子が好きな太郎\n\nThis is ambiguous between \"Taro who likes Hanako\" and \"Taro whom Hanako\nlikes\".\n\n* * *\n\nAnother example:\n\n> 花瓶が割れた The vase was broken\n\n割れる花瓶 is not possible (or means an object that works as a vase and has\nseparable parts). \"A broken vase\" is always 割れた花瓶.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-05T22:31:23.293", "id": "96501", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-05T22:31:23.293", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96498", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "遠くに瞬いている街の灯 is a perfectly correct phrase that means \"the lights of the town\ntwinkling in the distance\". But note that, strictly speaking, this is not a\nclause, but a (noun) phrase that _contains_ a (relative) clause.\n\nYou may be worried that 瞬いている might modify only 街 (i.e., \"the town that is\ntwinkling\"), but you don't have to worry about this. When we look at the\nEnglish version, we understand \"twinkling\" modifies not just \"the town\" but\n\"the lights of the town\" even without thinking, and that's because we know a\ntown itself doesn't twinkle. Likewise, also in Japanese, everyone understands\n瞬いている modifies not just 街 but 街の灯 as a whole.\n\nRelated: [Are Japanese modifiers \"greedy\", \"anti-greedy\", or do they mean\nwhatever people choose them to\nmean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/46817/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-06T04:43:14.350", "id": "96506", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-06T04:43:14.350", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96498", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You are right, 常識 includes _knowledge_ as well as judgement. Generally it\nmeans what the speaker thinks other people take for granted.\n\n> [常識](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%B8%B8%E8%AD%98/#jn-108599) \n> 一般の社会人が共通にもつ、またもつべき普通の **知識・意見や判断力** 。「―がない人」「―で考えればわかる」「―に欠けた振る舞い」「―外れ」) \n> [補説]common senseの訳語として明治時代から普及。(emphasis added)\n\nThe following J-E dictionary entry has multiple senses :\n\n> [常識](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E5%B8%B8%E8%AD%98/#je-35642) \n> 1〔思慮分別〕common sense \n> 2〔周知のこと〕common knowledge \n> 3〔妥当なこと〕\n\n* * *\n\nA word for _good sense_ and not knowledge is\n[良識](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E8%89%AF%E8%AD%98/#jn-232512). But at\nleast to me, this generally refers to moral judgements. Assuming that is not\nalways the case with _good sense_ , it may not be a perfect fit.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-06T00:11:49.533", "id": "96503", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-06T00:11:49.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96500", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "* This かい is 甲斐 in kanji. It has several meanings, but here it refers to \"value worth doing something\" or \"enough result/motivation (to justify some action)\". 甲斐があった is a set phrase that roughly means \"it was meaningful/worthy\".\n * This は is contrastive, i.e., [implies \"at least\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/29444/5010). For example, after watching a movie, 見た甲斐 **が** あった sounds like the speaker is satisfied, but 見た甲斐 **は** あった sounds like \"It was not meaningless\".\n\n> ～につき合ったかいはあった。 \n> At least, it was worth it to deal with ～.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-06T04:32:39.473", "id": "96505", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-06T05:15:00.093", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-06T05:15:00.093", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96504", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It is not a verb. This kind of sentence such as 「今日は雨です」 can be translated as\n\"It is rainy today.\" Other examples include 晴 and 曇.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-06T18:18:15.810", "id": "96516", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-06T18:18:15.810", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "32581", "parent_id": "96511", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "平等(びょうどう) tends to be used in contexts related to equality of rights. See for\ninstance article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:\n<https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/udhr/1b_001.html>\n\n同等(どうとう) is used to compare the quality of two items or skill levels. See for\ninstance the requirements for the Japanese Language B program at Sophia\nUniversity:\n<https://www.sophia.ac.jp/jpn/otherprograms/seiki_jugyo/nd/index.html>\n\n対等(たいとう) refers to two counterparts in a discussion or relationship. See for\ninstance the aim of the Ibaraki Prefectural Government to help Japanese and\nforeigners develop relationships on an equal footing:\n<https://www.pref.ibaraki.jp/seikatsukankyo/josei/kenmin/nihongo.html>\n\n均等(きんとう) is about equal distribution, e.g. between genders, age groups, etc.\nSee the following discussion about the distribution of age groups at Sakan:\n<https://www.t-cb.co.jp/recruit/enquete/>\n\n互角(ごかく) refers to competition, e.g. in an election or war. See the following\narticle about the Liberals and Conservatives being neck and neck:\n<https://www.vancouvershinpo.ca/news/canada-news/2021/09/17/canada-\nelection-2021-preview/>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-06T17:02:33.880", "id": "96515", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-06T17:02:33.880", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18145", "parent_id": "96512", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You can (as you already guessed) consider it as cognate objects.\n\nThere may be cultural differences but 選挙 is often considered as a battle/war.\n[選挙戦](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E9%81%B8%E6%8C%99%E6%88%A6/) is more\nexplicit. Similarly for entrance exams: 受験戦争. Thus 受験を戦う could be used in some\ncontexts.\n\nOther than that, I think most commonly ー戦 can be objects for 戦う.\n\n * 日本代表は対スペイン戦を主力選手なしで戦う The national team will have a match against Spain without major players.\n * 明日決勝戦が戦われる Tomorrow will be the final.\n\nSo as for 1 and 3, the answer is yes and no in the sense that 戦う as a\ntransitive verb requires a certain type of nouns (cognates or similar) but not\nspecific set of nouns.\n\nRegarding 2, I guess the above usage is common enough. I feel Japanese tends\nto use 戦う more than 競争する in contexts of competition, which could be one of\nreasons it appears in ordinary speech.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T03:01:54.573", "id": "96519", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T03:01:54.573", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96517", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Your first example,\n\n> Xはにほんごでなにといいますか,\n\nis a well formed sentence written in hiragana. いいます means \"to say\", \"to call\"\netc. The sentence means \"What do you call X in Japanese\".\n\nYour second example,\n\n> Xは日本語にほんごで何なにと言いいます,\n\nis a confused mess. My guess is that you cut and pasted something with\nfurigana, and the sentence was actually supposed to be\n\n> Xは日本語{にほんご}で何{なに}と言{い}います。\n\nBased on this assumption I think you are asking about the います in 言います. But います\nis not a separate word here. The full word is 言います and it is just the masu-\nform of 言う. To make the masu-form you replace the う with an い.\n\nTo labour the point, 言います and いいます are the same word. Just as the dictionary\nforms 言う and いう are the same. It's just that the first one is written with\nkanji in each case.\n\nFinally います on its own is the masu-form of いる meaning \"to be\", \"to exist\" etc.\nThat's why people are saying these are very different words.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-08T07:26:40.563", "id": "96535", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-08T07:26:40.563", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7944", "parent_id": "96518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "むわっ is a variant of an onomatopoeia\n[むわり](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/67792/9831).\n\n(っ)て is a colloquial version of と.\n\nSo むわって means 「むわっ」と, or 「むわり」と.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T04:03:12.007", "id": "96522", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T04:03:12.007", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9831", "parent_id": "96520", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Not interchangeable in general. Xに満足していますか is a neutral and common way to ask\nwhether someone is satisfied with something - food, finance, life etc. 満足ですか\nis not too different. 満ち足りていますか is typically used to ask someone's spiritual\nwell being, at least in a modern setting.\n\nIf you want to ask about \"being satisfied with one's life and accomplishment\",\nyou will need to make it explicit by saying something like あなたは人生に満足していますか.\nあなたの人生は満ち足りていますか is possible, but again, it sounds like it focuses onto\nspiritual life almost exclusively.\n\n満ち足りですか is ungrammatical.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T14:04:07.317", "id": "96527", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T14:04:07.317", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96523", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The second sentence literally means \"We want to make the boat be able to go.\"\n\nSo the boat is the object the protagonist wants to act upon, that's why you\nneed を and not で. It's not that they want to go by boat, they want to do\nsomething to the boat to make it work.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T05:35:59.703", "id": "96525", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T05:35:59.703", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "38417", "parent_id": "96524", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[「[蝶]{チョウ}」](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%9D%B6#Readings) ( _butterfly_\n) is a [phono-\nsemantic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character_classification#Phono-\nsemantic_compound_characters) compound, comprised of semantic\n[「[虫]{まむし}」](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%99%BA#Alternative_forms) (\n_poisonous snake_ > _worm, insect_ ) and phonetic\n[「[枼]{ヨウ}」](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9E%BC#Readings):\n\n * 「虫」 appears here as a semantic classification component for snakes, worms, insects, and other non-fish slimy or wet animals (e.g. 「蛙」 _frog_ and 「蟹」 _crab_ );\n * 「枼」 is the original form of [「[葉]{ヨウ}」](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%91%89#Readings), and appears as a phonetic hint in 「蝶」, 「葉」, and [some other characters](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9E%BC#Derived_characters) (most of which aren't used in modern Japanese).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T23:54:35.607", "id": "96534", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T23:54:35.607", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "26510", "parent_id": "96526", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The structure of this sentence is AをBと思う, meaning \"to think of A as B\",\n\"regard A as B\" etc, where A is 今のような学歴社会 and B is いいことだ.\n\nPutting it together we get something like:\n\n> There are a lot of Japanese who do not regard the current academically\n> focused society as a good thing.\n\nNote that I'm not 100% sure on my translation of 今のような学歴社会.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T15:39:12.370", "id": "96529", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T15:39:12.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7944", "parent_id": "96528", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "You aren't parsing it correctly. It goes like this:\n\n> (向こうの社長に(もう少し踊ってくれないか)) って頼まれたけど\n\nThe か is the question marker, and it's simply part of the question\n「もう少し踊ってくれないか」 (\"Won't you dance a little more?\" as a Japanese passive\nrequest).\n\nThe って is the quotation marker—the informal of と. So with the 頼まれた\n\n> I was asked \"Won't you dance a little more?\" by my/that 社長 over there", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T20:53:58.017", "id": "96532", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T20:53:58.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "96530", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, the quick and easy answer, it is just being used as katakana to be\npretty. No actual reason. Like in the pic: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Iq7Bp.png)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-07T22:44:06.467", "id": "96533", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-07T22:45:52.850", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-07T22:45:52.850", "last_editor_user_id": "54654", "owner_user_id": "54654", "parent_id": "96531", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "## Usage of の\n\nThe particle の connects two nouns, where one modifies the other.\n\nWhile it is true that in many instances this denotes a relation of possession\n(genitive):\n\n> AのB。\"B belongs to A\"\n\n> 私の名前 \"My name\"\n\nit is not always the case, and の may indicate any relationship or connection\nbetween both nouns arbitrarily. The nature of this relationship is determined\nby context, like many other aspects in Japanese:\n\n> 司会のミラーさん。\"Moderator Miller\" (A is qualifying or describing B)\n\n> 男の人。 \"A man\" (Again A is qualifying B)\n\nNote that among learners of Japanese as a foreign language, there's a whole\ncategory of the so called \"の adjectives\", where an \"adjective\" modifies a noun\nconnected by the の particle. From the standpoint of Japanese grammar, there's\nno such category and the supposed \"の adjectives\" are simply nouns, that happen\nto modify other nouns by connecting both with の.\n\n## The particular case of 二ノ国\n\nTo answer your first question, \"Is this still the particle の ?\" the answer is\nyes, ノ in 二ノ国 corresponds to the particle の without a doubt.\n\nI found [this entry](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/19218/what-\ndoes-ni-no-kuni-mean-exactly) in the sister site anime.stackexchange.com where\nthey try to determine the meaning of the title. The accepted answer states\nthat:\n\n> So the final title is either: \"The Country of Two\" [...] or \"Second Country\"\n\nI checked the [entry for 二ノ国 at the Japanese\nWikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E3%83%8E%E5%9B%BD). It\nturns out that besides 二ノ国, there is also an 一ノ国. Since there are actually 2\ncountries, it only makes sense to translate 二ノ国 as \"Second Country\" or\n\"Country number two\" rather than \"The country of two\":\n\n> シズクは現実世界（『 **一ノ国** 』）とは異なる並行世界 **二ノ国** からやってきたのだという。 **一ノ国** と **二ノ国**\n> はそこに暮らすものの魂が繋がる表裏一体の世界だった。\n\n> Shizuku is said to have come from a parallel world called **Ni no Kuni** ,\n> which is different from the real world (\" **Ichi no Kuni** \"). **Ichi no\n> Kuni** and **Ni no Kuni** were two sides of the same world where the souls\n> of those who lived there were connected.\n\n## A note on numbers in Japanese\n\nPlease note that 二ノ国 is not the common way to count stuff in Japanese.\nUsually, to count objects in Japanese you should use counters. This is a\ncomplex topic and I can't explain it here, just beware that numberのnoun is not\nthe only nor the standard way to count things in Japanese. Here you are some\nexamples of numbers combined with nouns (counters in **bold** font):\n\n> **三{み}つ** のミカン Three mandarines (general counter)\n\n> 三{さん} **番{ばん}目{め}** の車 The car in the 3rd position (ordinal counter)\n\n> 第{だい}3 **課{か}** The 3rd lesson (counter for lessons)\n\n> 三{さん} **月{がつ}** The 3rd month, March (counter for months)\n\n> 三{さん} **ヵ月{げつ}** Three months (counter for months)\n\nThere is a counter for countries, with the same kanji 国, but it is pronounced\n国{こく} instead of 国{くに}. However, this counter does not seem to be used\nregularly (see the [discussion in the comments\nsection](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/96531/what-is-the-\nmeaning-of-%e3%83%8e-in-the-videogame-\ntitle-%e4%ba%8c%e3%83%8e%e5%9b%bd/96557#comment157273_96557)):\n\n> [三{さん} **国{ごく}**](https://jisho.org/search/%E4%B8%89%E5%9B%BD) Three\n> countries (counter for countries).", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T21:18:18.443", "id": "96557", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-15T11:18:33.633", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-15T11:18:33.633", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "96531", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "People sometimes capitalize surnames to clarify although I'm not sure a lot of\npeople do this for business cards.\n\nThat is, in case of John Smith, it is written\n\n> John SMITH \n> ジョン スミス\n\n* * *\n\nAt least if your name is uncommon enough (to the extent that most Japanese\nwon't tell which is surname), I think it is reasonable to add 名・姓, but\nprobably something like \"ジョン(名) スミス(姓)\" with smaller fonts for 名・姓 looks\nbetter. (This is just an opinion.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-08T09:57:49.160", "id": "96537", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-08T09:57:49.160", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96536", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "Have a look at the following two sentences.\n\n> 「山が近くに見えると雨の兆し」なのは何故か\n> <https://blog.goo.ne.jp/qq_otenki_s/e/e1b0a205b5f40b9360bd8905c3b90165>\n\n近くに brings the location (of the mountain) into focus, and it's far more common\nthan 近くで.\n\n> エンパイアステートビルが近くで見えるホテル <https://4travel.jp/os_qa_each-59348.html>\n\n近くで shifts the focus to the activity (of enjoying the view).\n\nTofugu has an article that dives into the contrast between に and で.\n<https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/ni-vs-de/>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-08T14:59:26.897", "id": "96540", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-08T14:59:26.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18145", "parent_id": "96539", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "As for the last question, 攻撃 and 侵入 are ordinary words.\n\n攻撃 is an attack in many contexts. For example the batting side in baseball is\ncalled 攻撃側 (lit. attacking side).\n\n侵入 is entering into a place where one is not supposed to, with or without\narmed forces. So the act of sneaking into a house is 侵入, but can't be a 侵攻\n(even if s/he has a gun).\n\n* * *\n\nI don't think 侵攻 and 侵略 are clearly distinguished in ordinary speech, but 侵攻\nsounds a military advancement into other countries' territory whereas 侵略\nsounds an advancement + taking control over the territory. Accordingly, 侵略\nsounds worse than 侵攻. (In dictionary terms,\n[侵略](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%BE%B5%E7%95%A5/#jn-115934) has\n'taking territories and possessions of other countries' as an addition to 侵攻).\n\nAccording to [this](https://waeijisho.net/essay.html?id=300), 侵略 is the\nofficial translation of _aggression_ [as defined by UN](http://un-\ndocuments.net/a29r3314.htm). And 侵攻 is the word for invasion. I suppose\noutside specific contexts _aggression_ and _invasion_ are not that clearly\ndistinguished, and the same is true for 侵略 and 侵攻.\n\n侵犯 is a word used mostly in the context of territorial disputes, meaning an\ninfringement of (territorial) rights. 領域侵犯 means a country entering another\ncountry's territory and 領海侵犯 is entering the sea (the word often appears in\nconnection with China). FYI a broader word for infringement of rights is 侵害.\n\n* * *\n\nSo, at least from the Western viewpoint, Russia's act can be described as\neither of them depending on the focus: 侵入(entering), 侵攻(entering with the\nmilitary), 侵略(occupying the territory), or 攻撃(actual bombing etc.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T00:19:29.557", "id": "96545", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-09T00:19:29.557", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96543", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I think the word '侵略' usually implies negative evaluation by the speaker. In\nother words, the speaker chooses the word '侵略' intentionally over '侵攻' to\ninclude the meaning that there was wrong doing by the occupying forces (e.g.,\ninhumane treatment of civilians). Yet in other words, the listener usually\ndetects that the speaker used the word '侵略' intentionally to add negative\nevaluation to '侵攻'.\n\nTo convince yourself about this point, you may search if Japanese major news\npapers used the word '侵略' for the US and allied forces entering into Iraq, for\nexample, and it'll be difficult to find such a case. Usually, it is called\n'イラク侵攻'. In contrast, you will often find that '侵略' is used for the Japanese\noccupation of regions in Asia during the Pacific war. Note that not all\noccupation is called '侵略'. A more neutral word for occupation is '占領'.\nOccupation of Japan by the allied forces after the war is not usually called\n'侵略' but '占領'.\n\nFor the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, the news papers seem to have used\n'侵攻' so far.\n\ncf. テーマ ウクライナ侵攻, 日経新聞 <https://www.nikkei.com/theme/?dw=22012404>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T10:41:37.563", "id": "96552", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-09T10:41:37.563", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7266", "parent_id": "96543", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> Is it missing a の? Is it a casual way of saying すべてのはじまり?\n\nNo, you usually cannot omit の at this position if \"start of everything\" is the\nintended meaning. So you should first see if this すべて is working adverbially.\nJust as \"これはすべて本だ\" means \"These are _all_ books\", \"夢見るコトがすべてはじまり(だ)\" could\nmean \"(Actions of) dreaming are _all_ beginnings\", or a little more naturally,\n\"Dreaming is _always_ the start (of something)\".\n\n(I said \"usually\" because this is a part of lyrics; if the adverbial reading\nfails, we may have to accept the adjectival reading even though it's incorrect\nin prose. But the adverbial reading seems to fit the context in this case.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T01:29:13.190", "id": "96546", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-09T05:58:44.757", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-09T05:58:44.757", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "First I agree with \"Dreaming is the start of everything\". And yes すべてのはじまり or\nsomething のはじまりis often used as \"beginning of sth\". I sometimes see not using\nの when indicating affiliation, if that doesn't change the meaning.\n\nI think a main reason is the rhythm (I may not use the words accurately, you\ncan feel the difference by adding a preposition). すべてはじまり can treated as one\nitem here \"everything beginning\", a missing of の does not affect the\nunderstanding \"beginning of everything\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T01:53:49.937", "id": "96547", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-09T01:53:49.937", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54316", "parent_id": "96544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the sentence is a little bit weird or childish since there's no\npunctuation and the word choice is too casual. I don't think this sentence is\nwritten by a Japanese who has enough educational background. Aside from that,\nin this sentence \"っていうことなんだよね。\"can be divided into \"っていうことなんだ\"+\"よね”. As you\nhave mentioned \"っていうことなんだ\" is often used when someone conclude or rephrase\nwhat s/he has said. For example, \" 彼女はカレーとキムチが好きなんだ。つまり辛い物が大好きっていうことなんだ。\". And\nthe \"よね\" is used when someone wants to seek empathy for what s/he has said.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T08:52:19.760", "id": "96550", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-09T08:52:19.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54661", "parent_id": "96548", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It is the following usage of\n[の](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%81%AE/#je-58755).\n\n> 5〔形状，性質〕\n>\n> 正方形の箱 \n> a square box\n>\n> 雨の日 \n> a rainy day\n>\n> 金のメダル \n> a gold medal\n>\n> 木の机 \n> a wooden desk／a desk made of wood\n>\n> ブロンズの彫刻 \n> a bronze sculpture／a sculpture in bronze\n>\n> 白髪の老人 \n> an old man with white hair／a white-haired old man\n>\n> 夢の国 \n> a dreamland\n>\n> 英語の演説 \n> 「an address [a speech] in English\n\nAdding another example, コロナの人 would mean _a person infected with Covid_. In\nthe same way, 不滅のあなた means _immortal you_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T13:55:29.327", "id": "96578", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T13:55:29.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96553", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You've misunderstood that Wikipedia article.\n\nThe linguistic term for は、で and を in that sentence is **particle** (助詞) , not\n**modifier** , even though they do \"modify\" the word or phrase that they\n**FOLLOW**.\n\nで is showing how 台所 relates to the action; \"in the kitchen.\"\n\nIf anything, that entire phrase \"台所で\" would be the modifier because it is\ndescribing where the action takes place.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-09T18:40:36.227", "id": "96556", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-09T20:56:05.023", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-09T20:56:05.023", "last_editor_user_id": "54657", "owner_user_id": "54657", "parent_id": "96554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Yes, 与えられる can mean either \"can give (something to someone)\" or \"is given\n(something by someone)\", and this sentence is technically ambiguous. But if\nthere is no other context, almost everyone would take it as passive voice,\njust as you did. This is because the implied subject of this sentence is\n\"generic you\" (or \"one\", \"people\"), who clearly doesn't have an\nprivilege/ability to grant someone freedom.\n\nIn certain rare contexts (for example, when the implied subject is a selfish\nson of a king who is in charge of freeing prisoners), the other interpretation\nmay be possible.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T03:29:43.993", "id": "96566", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T03:29:43.993", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96563", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "There is no kanji for the particle は (unless you are writing\n[Man'yōgana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dgana) perhaps).\n\nOne might ask why there have to be exactly two characters, and why they have\nto be kanji? If you absolutely must have the text be the width of two\ncharacters, might I suggest XXです?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T03:49:43.533", "id": "96569", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T03:49:43.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "96568", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Does it have to be all kanji? I might not fully understand the motivation but\nif you just want to have it as a prefix and the length to be 2 characters, 此は\ncan fit.\n\n此方, read \"kochira\" (こちら), can fit, but some may not understand the intention\nbecause it lacks は/が.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T04:13:59.653", "id": "96570", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T06:18:18.423", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-10T06:18:18.423", "last_editor_user_id": "10531", "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96568", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "“I didn't have to come here.” and “I wish I didn't come here.” are essentially\nthe same interpretation for “ここに来なくてよかった。” You wish you didn't come because\nyou didn't have to.\n\n* * *\n\n * ここに来てよかった\n\nalways means _I'm glad about my coming here._\n\n * ここに来なくてよかった\n\nSince ここ suggests the speaker is already \"here\", s/he cannot be glad about\n_not_ coming \"here\" **now**. So, either (1) the speaker did come and regrets\non it (\"I didn't have to come here\") or (2) the speaker is glad about not\nhaving been \"here\" **in the past** (\"I'm glad that I didn't come here\").\n\n* * *\n\nAnother example.\n\n * 新しいスマホを買わなくてよかった.\n\nBy default, it would be understood as _I am glad that I didn't buy the new\nsmartphone_ (e.g., because the model turned out to be bad in battery\nconsumption). In this interpretation, the speaker **didn't** buy the phone.\n\nIn some contexts, it could mean _I didn't have to buy a new smartphone_ / _I\nwish I hadn't bought a new smartphone_. In this case, the speaker **did** buy\nthe phone. For example, you thought you needed a newer phone to play a new\ngame, but actually the older model turned out to be enough for the game.\n新しいスマホを買わなくて **も** よかった should be more common (lit. It was fine as well if I\ndidn't buy a new phone).\n\n* * *\n\nIn general Xしてよかった tends to be \"I am glad ...\" whereas Xしなくてよかった is \"I wish I\ndidn't...\".\n\nNote that しなくてもよかった is unambiguously \"I wish I didn't...\".", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T13:37:05.723", "id": "96576", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T22:08:13.227", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-10T22:08:13.227", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96572", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It is literally \"a thing about a broad framework like...\".\n\nThe usage of の is \"concerning\", but you could treat のこと as a whole meaning\n\"about\".\n\n* * *\n\nThe relevant definition is [the\nfollowing](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%81%AE/#je-58755):\n\n> 12〔…に関する〕on; of; in\n>\n> 熱帯植物の本 \n> a book on tropical plants\n>\n> 児童心理学の権威 \n> an authority on child psychology\n>\n> 化学の先生 \n> a chemistry teacher\n>\n> 魚の研究 \n> a study of fish／research on fish\n>\n> 剣道の達人 \n> a fencing expert／an expert in fencing\n>\n> 歴史の試験 \n> a history examination／an examination in history\n>\n> 小さいころの話をしてください \n> Please tell me about your childhood.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T13:46:53.660", "id": "96577", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T13:46:53.660", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96573", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> \"何か、機械とかに人間っぽいことをさせる、知能を持たせるみたいなまあ広い枠組みのことをAIと言って\"\n\nI think the \"のこと\" here is _referring to/summing up_ everything that came\nbefore it in that sentence as what constitutes/defines this thing called an\nAI.\n\nI would interpret the entire thing as\n\n> \"AI is this broad term that has to do with making machines human-like,\n> giving them intelligence and things like that.\"\n\nBut something closer to \"verbatim\" would be like\n\n> \"Let's see, something like making machines human-like, giving them\n> intelligence, well, it's a broad field, this thing called AI.\"\n\nのこと doesn't really change the meaning of the sentence, and in this scenario,\nit broadly functions like the phrase \"this sort of thing\" would in English.\n\nI don't think there is really an \"exact\" translation here, and there often\nisn't. A single Japanese phrase might even be more open to interpretation even\nwith full context because the language itself is heavily contextual. English\nis linguistically a lot more precise and detail-driven, and this distinction\nis what makes translation so hard sometimes, which is why we use the term\n**localization** to go beyond translation toward contextualized interpretation\nin order to generate meaning.\n\nI think a good approach here (and always with Japanese, for me) is to try to\ngrasp the overall meaning first and then zoom in on the parts for the exercise\nif you need to, but not immediately for meaning.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T16:22:13.837", "id": "96585", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T16:22:13.837", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54657", "parent_id": "96573", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "In Japanese, most kanji usually have several readings, which are divided\nbetween readings of original Japanese words (kunyomi), and readings that come\nfrom the pronunciation of Chinese compound words that were imported at some\npoint into Japanese (onyomi).\n\nUsually, words formed by a single kanji take the kunyomi reading, such as the\ncase of Wolf (狼 Ōkami), and words composed by several kanji use the onyomi\nreading. This is not a hard rule at all, but the general trend.\n\nNote that the name Sekirō is written 隻狼, so it **does** have the kanji for\nwolf in it, but it is read with a different, Chinese reading. [This\npage](https://ag.hyperxgaming.com/article/7266/what-does-sekiro-mean-in-\nsekiro-shadows-die-twice) explains the meaning of the word according to both\nkanjis. I quote the relevant part here:\n\n> The name Sekiro (隻狼) is comprised of two kanji, Chinese characters adopted\n> by the Japanese in the fifth century. The first kanji, Seki (隻), refers to\n> one part of a pair, and is likely a shortening of Sekiwan (隻腕), meaning one\n> arm, or a one-armed person. The second kanji, Rō (狼), means wolf, and is\n> read as Ōkami on its own (detached from other kanji). It seems likely then\n> that Sekiro (隻狼) is in fact a shortening of Sekiwan no Ōkami (隻腕の狼), or one\n> armed wolf.\n\nRegarding\n[Sekijo](https://sekiroshadowsdietwice.wiki.fextralife.com/Sculptor):\n\n> The Sculptor is referred to as \"Sekijo,\" by Hanbei The Undying—a name that\n> was likely given to him in much the same way Isshin of Ashina gave Sekiro\n> his name. The Sculptor is also known as Orangutan (猩々, Shoujou), just as\n> Sekiro is known as Wolf (狼, Ookami); Isshin gives Sekiro his name by\n> condensing One-armed Wolf (隻腕の狼, Sekiwan no Ookami) into Sekiro (隻狼,\n> Sekirou), while Hanbei does the same for the Sculptor, who is also one-\n> armed, by condensing One-armed Orangutan (隻腕の猩々, Sekiwan no Shoujou) into\n> Sekijo (隻猩, Sekijou).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T13:35:20.093", "id": "96575", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T13:51:15.187", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-10T13:51:15.187", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "96574", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "ず is the continuative form (連用形) of the negative auxiliary ぬ. It follows the\npre-nai/irrealis form (未然形). In other words, [ず and ぬ are different\nconjugations of exactly the same\nword](https://www.kokugobunpou.com/%E5%8A%A9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84-%E3%81%AC-%E3%82%93/).\n(Note that when ぬ follows a continuative form, it's a different [auxiliary for\nperfective aspect](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12585/5010) that\nconjugates differently.)\n\nThe difference between ぬ and ず is simple; ず modifies something adverbially,\nwhereas ぬ modifies something attributively (aka adjectivally) or works as a\npredicate. So 有無を言わせず is _forcibly_ and 有無を言わせぬ is _forcible_ , _undoubtable_\nor _indescribable_ depending on the context (literally, \"(which) doesn't let\n[someone] say yes or no\").\n\n言わせる (ichidan) and 言わす (godan) are [two causative\nforms](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/86621/5010) of 言う. They mean the\nsame thing, although 言わせる sounds more common in ordinary speech.\n\nSo we have the following combinations:\n\n| 連用 (adverbial) | 連体 (attributive) | 終止 (predicative) \n---|---|---|--- \n**言わす** | 有無を言わさ **ず** (に)働かせる \n有無を言わさ **ないで** 働かせる | 有無を言わさ **ぬ** 迫力 \n有無を言わさ **ない** 迫力 | 彼は有無を言わさ **ぬ** 。 \n彼は有無を言わさ **ない** 。 \n**言わせる** | 有無を言わせ **ず** (に)働かせる \n有無を言わせ **ないで** 働かせる | 有無を言わせ **ぬ** 迫力 \n有無を言わせ **ない** 迫力 | 彼は有無を言わせ **ぬ** 。 \n彼は有無を言わせ **ない** 。 \n \nRelated: [What is the difference between the negative forms -ず and\n-ぬ?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/235/5010)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T01:27:29.073", "id": "96591", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-11T01:53:04.037", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-11T01:53:04.037", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96579", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It looks like you're understanding the sentence fine. I also feel like some\nsubtle nuances of the original sentence were lost in the translation.\nねるのが惜しいぐらい is hard to translate in a short phrase, but like you said, it's\nexpressing the sentiment that it would have felt like a waste to spend time\nsleeping (if the time could be spent painting). Maybe an alternative\ntranslation could be\n\n> 絵かくのたのしくってさ、ねるのが惜しいくらいだったんだよ \n> I loved painting — so much so that sleeping almost felt like a waste\n\nくらい means \"about/approximately\" — when comparing her love about painting, she\nsays it \"approximately\" felt like sleeping would be a waste, but that would be\nquite extreme, so it's relativized by saying くらい (I translated it as\n\"almost\"). This usage of くらい is quite common (relativizing some extreme\nstatement, but still strengthening some other the sentiment to which it is\ncompared). For example, I think one could say\n\n> ドラ焼きが好きすぎて、吐くほど食べたい **くらい** \n> I love dorayaki so much so that I **almost** [but not exactly] want to eat\n> to the extent of throwing up\n\n_**Edit.**_ For more information about this usage of くらい see also @naruto's\nanswer on [Postpositional or prepositional\nくらい](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29453/1628)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T15:38:19.123", "id": "96583", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T09:56:58.760", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-12T09:56:58.760", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "96580", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/35DCG.gif)\n\nSometimes くらい does this linguistically.\n\nI haven't seen that film yet (it's on my list), so I might be missing context,\nbut it seems like the speaker is saying it was \" _ **kinda**_\nunfortunate/regrettable/disappointing.\" Maybe, on the one hand, they enjoy\ndrawing/painting, but on the other hand, they were really tired and enjoyed\nthe shut-eye.\n\nIt's ironic, though, that I am attempting to give an exact description when I\noften use ぐらい to do the opposite.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T15:43:02.393", "id": "96584", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T15:43:02.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54657", "parent_id": "96580", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "Japanese is not an Indo European language. As such, it does not share the same\nstructures and grammatical concepts. Arguably, Japanese does not have an\ninfinitive.\n\nWhat do you mean when you say “infinitive“? Define how you intend the term,\nand then we might be able to elucidate whether Japanese has an “infinitive”\nfor your purposes.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T15:12:54.893", "id": "96582", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T15:12:54.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "96581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "For what is worth, and always taking into account that it's not the same as an\ninfinitive, as Eiríkr Útlendi explains in [their\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/96582/32952), in Japanese you\nhave what is sometimes called the \"dictionary form\". Just like in some\nlanguages such as English and Spanish we look up verbs in a dictionary using\nthe infinitive, in Japanese you would look up the verb in a dictionary by its\n\"dictionary form\".\n\nFor the ichidan verbs, the dictionary form always ends in る, and for the godan\nverbs it ends in a mora of the -u (う) column (or row) of the hiragana table,\nsuch as く, つ, む, etc. Whether this final moras of the dictionary form are\nregarded as an auxiliary part or as part of the word, I don't know. Does it\nreally matter? If you look up verbs in the dictionary, they come up as whole\nwords, including る, く or whatever the ending mora is.\n\nTo put it in terms of the \"masu stem\", you can obtain the dictionary form of a\nverb as follows:\n\n * Ichidan verbs: Add る to the \"masu stem\".\n\n> たべ ~~ます~~ → たべ → たべ + **る** → たべ **る**\n\n * Godan verbs: replace the last mora of the \"masu stem\" by the mora with the same consonant but in the -u (う) column of the hiragana table.\n\n> のみ ~~ます~~ → の **み** → の **む**\n\nThis is my personal opinion, but I think that learning verbs and verb\nconjugations starting from the masu stem is a mistake, because it just hides\nthe difference between ichidan and godan verbs, whereas learning verbs\ndirectly in the dictionary form is more natural, and it is very easy to change\nfrom the dictionary form to the masu form.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T18:32:01.807", "id": "96586", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T19:34:46.023", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-10T19:34:46.023", "last_editor_user_id": "32952", "owner_user_id": "32952", "parent_id": "96581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It is a transcription error.\n\nIt says\n\n> じゃ そこにいてね。勝手にどっか行っちゃ、だめだよ。\n\n * そこにいてね = stay there\n * どっか = somewhere, elsewhere\n\nFor 行っちゃ = 行っては, your understanding is correct.\n\nOverall, it means \"Then, stay there. Don't go elsewhere on your whims\n(～without telling me).\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-10T22:45:01.060", "id": "96588", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-10T22:45:01.060", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96587", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The 今 is used as an adverb. The subject is 赤い車.\n\nSo, 赤い車は今どこにありますか？ is a good expression. 今、赤い車はどこにありますか？ is also OK.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T04:20:47.697", "id": "96594", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-11T04:20:47.697", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "37138", "parent_id": "96593", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It doesn't matter.\n\nIndeed, multiple patterns can be found in the Japanese language in the kun-\nyomi transcription of kanji, as in this problem.\n\nThis problem is caused by the combination of kanji (imported from China) and\nhiragana (invented in Japan).\n\nAlthough many people are familiar with the kanji themselves, the use of the\nOkurigana is not precisely defined, and the Okurigana is used in various\npatterns.\n\nNo matter which pattern is used, the meaning is understood without confusion\nthanks to the kanji, so the word survives and has become a part of the\nJapanese language.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T08:17:13.880", "id": "96596", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-11T08:17:13.880", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "37138", "parent_id": "96595", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think much of that is due to the shortage of standardization. That said, it\nserves some purpose.\n\n[送り仮名の付け方](https://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/sisaku/joho/joho/kijun/naikaku/okurikana/index.html)\ntried to standardize it and succeeded to some extent for long. Many large\nnewspapers and publishers have adhered to it. Before then, I believe there was\nno official rule and things were more chaotic.\n\nThe standard way, like 引き受けます, basically boils down to having kanji for the\nstem (the constant part in conjugation) and hiragana for the suffix (the\nvariable part).\n\n * ひかない, ひく, ... → 引（ひ） is the constant part\n * うかる, うける, ... → 受（う） is the constant part\n\nThis distinction helps readers, because when the variable part is \"hidden\" in\na kanji, it can create ambiguity and the reader may not know what is the\nreading the writer intends. If you write おりる as 降る, the reader might confuse\nit with ふる. (Although おり in おりる is the constant part now, the verb had forms\nlike おるる historically.)\n\nThe non-standard way to write ひきうけます as 引受ます is economical in terms of the\nspace it occupies. So it may be seen on an advertisement where you are charged\nper character or per square meter.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T08:34:15.003", "id": "96597", "last_activity_date": "2022-12-03T02:42:16.240", "last_edit_date": "2022-12-03T02:42:16.240", "last_editor_user_id": "10531", "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96595", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "If it is a written exercise, 練習問題 or 演習 should be common. 練習問題 can be just 問題.\nFor example,\n\n 1. 今日はこの練習問題(問題/演習)だけやります.\n 2. ２０３ページの１と２の練習問題(問題/演習)を終わらせてください.\n\n練習 is more commonly used for something sportive as in\n\n * サッカーの練習をしよう Let's train for soccer.\n\nエクササイズ is also for activities, but I feel it's more for stretching, yoga, etc.\nIn the context of language learning, I think 練習 or エクササイズ could be used for\nrole-playing in dialogues.\n\nAnother related word is 例題, which can be used for exercises in textbooks.\nThere is no strict distinction, but it tends to be 'a problem for explaining\nnew things' and done in classrooms rather than independently by students.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T21:48:35.283", "id": "96602", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-11T21:48:35.283", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96598", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "\"Cafeteria\" on its own is simply 食堂, but a cafeteria-style restaurant could\nalso just be called ファミリーレストラン (with maybe a 食べ放題 at the beginning).\n\nA Japanese-style restaurant is (most?) commonly お食事処. I have never been to\none, so I can't describe it from experience, but these probably serve the more\ntraditional Japanese food. This [chigai.site](https://chigai.site/9740/) entry\nsays they can often serve 懐石料理, so this may be closest to what you're looking\nfor.\n\nAnd while definitely not the word for your context, there are also 立ち[食]{ぐ}い\n\"restaurants\", though these are often little more stalls/storefronts that are\nstanding-room only (hence the name), accommodating little more than a few\ncustomers at a time. #IYKYK\n\nOne final thought as related to you question: keep it simple! Instead of\nfumbling for the correct word for \"restaurant\", why not simply ask the chef, \"\n_How long have you worked **here**?_\". My ¥2...", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T17:19:28.957", "id": "96600", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T03:44:41.640", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-12T03:44:41.640", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "96599", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "(この/こちらの) **お店** is the most suitable and natural word in this context. It can\nbe used safely regardless of whether the restaurant is causal or expensive,\nJapanese-style or Western-style.\n\nYou can also use 料理店 or 懐石料理店 (see: [What is the difference between 食堂 ,\nレストラン, 料理店, 料理屋 and 飲食店?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/91556/5010)) if\nyou really want to be specific. If you know the restaurant is categorized as\n[料亭](https://savorjapan.com/contents/discover-oishii-japan/ryotei-and-kappo-\nrestaurants-even-japanese-would-struggle-to-differentiate-and-where-to-find-\nthem/) (the most expensive type), you can use it, too. But in my opinion,\n(この)お店 is the most natural when you just want to say \"(this) restaurant\"\ngenerically without worrying about details. See [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/39172/5010), too.\n\n(お is a \"beautifying\" prefix which isn't strictly necessary, but most people\nkeep it when they want to speak politely.)\n\n**EDIT:** \"Generic Japanese-style restaurants\" is perhaps 和食のお店 or 和食屋, but\npeople usually don't imagine sushi restaurants, unagi-ya and ramen shops with\nthis word. If you want to refer to everything like these, you may have to say\n日本の料理を出すお店全般 or something.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-11T19:52:09.553", "id": "96601", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T01:10:04.463", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-12T01:10:04.463", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96599", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It should be 家にいよう. It's the volitional from of いる and there is nothing\nirregular about it.\n\nBy the way, 一応 works better for risk mitigation such as 傘を持っていく than risk\navoidance such as 家にいる.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-12T00:16:46.130", "id": "96604", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T00:16:46.130", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96603", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "* \"100kg\" is not ひゃくキログラム but **ひゃっ** キログラム (or just ひゃっキロ when there's no room for confusion). ひゃく becomes ひゃっ before the K and P consonants. Likewise, 100回 is ひゃっかい and 100本 is ひゃっぽん (but 100人 is ひゃくにん and 100円 is ひゃくえん).\n * Prescriptively speaking, じっぷくろ is correct, but じゅっぷくろ is more common. じゅう becomes じゅっ/じっ before K and P.\n\nOther furigana are correct.\n\nRelated:\n\n * [Why is 1st floor written as ikkai いっかい?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/40325/5010)\n * [gemination orthography](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/90606/5010)\n * [What is the proper pronunciation for 十分/１０分? じっぷん or じゅっぷん?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11213/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-12T07:07:24.243", "id": "96606", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T07:13:18.177", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-12T07:13:18.177", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96605", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "As for 1, 引っ越す is the most common word in speech. A synonymous kango is 転居する.\nIf you go far (e.g. to a foreign country) on a permanent basis, 移住する can be\nused as well. When you move from Tokyo to Osaka and back to Tokyo again, this\ncan be described as\n\n * 東京から大阪に引っ越してまた戻ってきた.\n\nHere you cannot use 移住した. When you do 移住, usually you'll never return.\n\n2 and 3: _to move from A to B_ is usually AからBに(へ)引っ越す. Bまで引っ越す is not\nimpossible, but much less common.\n\nFor 4, no. 移動する in a similar usage would mean _to travel_. E.g.,\n東京からＮＹに(へ、まで)移動した means _(I) travelled from Tokyo to NY._", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-12T12:57:12.920", "id": "96608", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T12:57:12.920", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96607", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "First off, parsing song lyrics is in the same vein as parsing poetry.\nSometimes there is deliberate ambiguity, and no one knows what the true\nmeaning is except for the writer.\n\nI acknowledge that your question is about grammar and not necessarily meaning\nbut song lyrics, like poetry, play fast and loose with prescriptive grammar.\n\nThat being said, I think the key to understanding the line \"その時は頼りない爪でひっかいて\"\nin this case is by looking at the line that comes after:\n\n> 守ってあげるから\n\nthe use of \"あげる\" here suggests the direction of the action in that clause.\n\"あげる\" always speaks to the subject doing something for someone else. So the\nsubject is doing the protecting, and we can assume that the subject is \"私\"\nbecause otherwise, the speaker would be saying someone would be protecting\nsomeone else. You can't use \"あげる\" to say that you receive something only to\nsay that you do something for someone or that someone else does something for\na third party.\n\nSo the subject of the first line is \"We/Us\" because of the verb ending in\nthere, and then we get to \"守ってあげる\" with what we have to assume is the same\nspeaker (there is nothing to suggest otherwise).\n\nSo while:\n\n> その時は頼りない爪でひっかいて **くれて**\n>\n> その時は頼りない爪でひっかいて **ください**\n\nare both grammatically valid segments, it would just be odd from a Japanese\nsentence for the subject to shift like that without any indication.\n\nIn English, it would be fine because we would explicitly include some\nindication as to who is doing the action:\n\n> **I** would scratch it with **my** claws\n>\n> scratch it with **your** claws\n\nbut in Japanese, it's just not necessary; in this case, though, the fact that\nit isn't there means we would have to rely on some other context for that\ninfo, and the surrounding context suggests that the speaker is the doer of the\naction and that the \"て\" is acting as a conjuction. So taking some creative\nliberties (which I think is necessary when deciphering poetry and prose), and\nfocusing on localization, I would interpret the entire thing as:\n\n> Let's keep walking toward the ocean\n>\n> Where we might find great beasts\n>\n> Then I would scratch them with my unreliable claws\n>\n> To protect you\n\nI was wondering about the next two lines, and checking the original lyrics, I\nsee where they are separated. I think this represents a separate thought.\n\n> なんて言えたら\n>\n> もっと強くなれるかな\n\nI would interpret this part as (again, taking some creative license and\nfocusing on localization):\n\n> What could I say\n>\n> that could make me stronger\n\nor\n\n> What could be said\n>\n> that could make us stronger\n\nIn this context, because we are dealing with song lyrics and because of the\nnature of Japanese, both are valid interpretations. We could debate, but there\nis no way of telling from the rest of the lyrics. The writer may not have even\nhad anything definite in mind because the language naturally allows for this\nkind of ambiguity.\n\nI suppose my conclusion here is that these things are usually clear from\ncontext. Generally speaking, you can sometimes use the subject or the doer of\nthe action to determine between an imperative or conjunctive \"て”, but the\nsubject isn't always necessary in Japanese. In that case, you just have to\nderive from the surrounding context or accept the duplicity/ambiguity in the\ninterpretation because that is completely valid in Japanese.\n\nThis is a nice little article on ambiguity or\n[曖昧](https://www.arabnews.jp/en/features/article_64134/) in Japanese. This\nphenomenon is well researched and documented, so you'll be able to find a good\ndeal of information on it. I think understanding this concept is essential if\nyou truly want to approach native-level fluency. Japanese people often talk\nabout foreigners not being able to \"read the air\" 「空気読めない」and part of that has\nto do with this concept.\n\n**EDIT** I didn't mention the [trailing\n\"て”](https://selftaughtjapanese.com/2020/02/24/japanese-grammar-pattern-the-\ntrailing-te-form/) here, which I think is an integral part of my\ninterpretation.\n\n**Also** see @bulgar69's interpretation. It kinda throws ambiguity back into\nthe mix for me where \"ひっかいて” is concerned. But his interpretation (which uses\nthe imperative) makes more sense poetically to me! So I'd vote up his answer\nover mine if he posts one.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-12T17:07:34.607", "id": "96613", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-13T20:13:08.060", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-13T20:13:08.060", "last_editor_user_id": "54657", "owner_user_id": "54657", "parent_id": "96609", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "引き受ける means \"takes over X\", \"takes care of X\" etc. 引き継ぐ means you replace\nsomeone who was fulfilling a role before you.\n\nFor example, if you say `猫の世話を引き受ける` then it means you accept taking care of\nthe cat. If you say `猫の世話を引き継ぐ` then it means there was somebody else who was\ntaking care of the cat, and they are handing that responsibility to you.\n\nTherefore, you can say `子猫を見つけ、世話をひき受けた` but it'd be odd to say\n`子猫を見つけ、世話を引き継いだ` because it implies someone else was taking care of the\nkitten before. 引き受ける is neutral so you can use it in both cases. For example\nboth `貴子がしていた子猫の世話を引き継いだ` and `貴子がしていた子猫の世話を引き受けた` is fine.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-12T14:45:44.453", "id": "96611", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-12T14:45:44.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "96610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "ばかりだ has many usages, but this type of ばかり is almost the same as だけ in terms\nof both meaning and grammar. Here it means \"only\", \"all\" or \"nothing but\". The\nsubject is これら(の会社) (or \"they\" or \"these companies\"), which has been simply\nomitted.\n\n * 会社である。 \nThey are companies.\n\n * 会社 **ばかり** である。 ∼ 会社 **だけ** である。 \nThey are **all** (such-and-such) companies.\n\n * 会社 **ばかり** であるから… \nSince they are all (such-and-such) companies...\n\n * このように{[来る者拒まず、本人確認を行うことなく貸し付ける▶][懐の深い金融会社]} **ばかり** であるから… \nAs such, since they are all \"broad-minded\" financial companies that welcome\neveryone and lend money without verifying their identity... \n(懐の深い is a positive expression and is being used sarcastically here.)\n\nRelated: [What's the usage of ばかり in\n\"見たこと無いものばかりだわ！\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/47740/5010)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-13T01:58:25.680", "id": "96616", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-13T02:18:49.697", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-13T02:18:49.697", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96615", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "There is usually no linguistic reason for this. Song titles and such may be\ntranslated, un-translated, or even changed completely, based purely on\ncommercial requirements. If someone in charge of publishing thinks that a song\nwill sell better under a different name, its title may be \"localized\" in\nwhatever way they want.\n\nIf an English title is judged to be too difficult or misleading in katakana,\nit may be given another name. For examples, see [13 surprising Japanese\ntranslations of American movie\ntitles](https://japantoday.com/category/entertainment/13-surprising-japanese-\ntranslations-of-american-movie-titles).\n\nThat said, this kind of title twisting has been criticized and become less\npopular these days. I believe that most new songs are enjoyed in their\noriginal titles without translation or katakanization.\n\n* * *\n\nThis is not a Japanese-only phenomenon. One notorious example is\n[_Sukiyaki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukiyaki_\\(song\\)).\n\n> In Anglophone countries, the song is best known under the alternative title\n> \"Sukiyaki\", the name of a Japanese hot-pot dish with cooked beef. The word\n> sukiyaki does not appear in the song's lyrics, nor does it have any\n> connection to them; **it was used only because it was short, catchy,\n> recognizably Japanese, and more familiar to English speakers**. A Newsweek\n> columnist compared this re-titling to issuing \"Moon River\" in Japan under\n> the title \"Beef Stew\".\n\nAnd there are examples like\n[this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Passage) and\n[this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumo_Do,_Sumo_Don%27t).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-13T06:32:27.393", "id": "96618", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-13T09:57:11.640", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-13T09:57:11.640", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The pattern is something like:\n\n * どうＸならばＹというのだ(か)\n * What/How (much)/... on earth does one X to Y?\n\nmeaning\n\n * Whatever/However (much)/... one does X, Y won't happen/is impossible.\n\nMore practically, X can be dropped from translation and just _How is it\npossible Y_ would convey the meaning. Note that どうしたら=\"how\" has essentially\nthe same structure (literally _how does one do to.._ ).\n\nExplanation by examples:\n\n> どうあがけば人間が雷に勝てるというのだ \n> How much must one struggle to defeat thunder? \n> How on earth can one defeat thunder?\n\n> どう見たらこれが猫だと思うのだ \n> What do you see to think that this is a cat? \n> How come you think this is a cat?\n\n* * *\n\nI think your confusion stems from the fact that there is no construction in\nEnglish which naturally combines _how_ and _if_ , which is what どう・・ば does.\n\nI'm not sure how much this helps, but see the following comparisons.\n\n * こうすれば人間は雷に勝てる\n\nwhich literally translates to\n\n * If one does this, one can beat thunder.\n\nNow changing こう to どう and adding というのだ, it becomes (literally)\n\n * If one does **how/what** , can one beat thunder?\n\nSlightly more naturally,\n\n * Can one beat thunder by doing _what_?\n\nIn the case of the sentence in question, a similar translation is\n\n * Can one beat thunder by struggling how?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T12:11:51.950", "id": "96642", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T12:11:51.950", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96619", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "`[V て-form] なお` is a somewhat grammaticalized, rather formal, or literary,\nexpression that means the same as `[V て-form]-も、なお` where なお more clearly\nworks as an independent adverb in the sense of \"still\", or まだ. It is used to\nsay something or someone continues to do something or be in a certain state\ndespite an adverse event or circumstances.\n\nThe following sentences, in the descending order of formality, are all valid.\n\n> 国から反逆の罪で追われてなお、〜と公言している。\n\n> 国から反逆の罪で追われてもなお、〜と公言している。\n\n> 国から反逆の罪で追われてもまだ、〜と公言している。\n\nHowever, the following combination sounds like something is missing.\n\n> ? 国から反逆の罪で追われてまだ、〜と公言している。\n\nThis て is a simple conjunctive with no adversative sense, and that's what's\nmissing. `[V て-form] なお` conveys it without the help of も.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-13T20:54:16.730", "id": "96629", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-13T20:54:16.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96621", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "That もの refers to （山登りの）コース like the English pronoun \"one\" would. They prefer\n_one that allows them to hike from the start without riding the bus and that\nis open on Saturdays._\n\nもの appearing before コース might have confused you. You can rephrase the sentence\nto:\n\n> バスを使わずに最初から歩いて登れるコースで、土曜日のものがいい。\n\nThe original sentence sounds better to me not because of the word order per se\nbut because 土曜日のもの sounds a bit awkward.\n\nBecause this もの refers to a concrete thing (like \"one\" would), it can't be\nreplaced with こと.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-13T18:38:48.610", "id": "96624", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-13T18:38:48.610", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96622", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "There is no difference in meaning.\n\nGrammatically the subject/topic of the first sentence is デンジ君 and the subject\nof the second is the implicit _I_. Thus they roughly correspond to\n\n 1. Denji shall be in Hayakawa's unit.\n 2. I will let Denji join Hayakawa's unit.\n\nIn both sentences, もらう indicates the speaker benefits from Denji's joining the\nunit.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T10:21:16.877", "id": "96641", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T10:21:16.877", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96623", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It can be removed but doing so would change the meaning of the sentence.\n\n飼いならしてたい is a contracted form of 飼いならして **い** たい. Whoever is the subject wants\nto be in a **state** where, depending on context, they either continue the act\nof taming \"me\" or keep \"me\" tamed.\n\n飼いならしたい would mean they want to tame \"me\". It's a one-time action or change,\nrather than a state.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-13T19:29:21.693", "id": "96627", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-13T19:29:21.693", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96625", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "In modern Japanese, it's read ぐんしん most of the time.\n\nBetween ぐんしん and ぐんじん, ぐんじん may be an old variation or even a more standard\nway to read it a while ago, but it's mostly replaced by ぐんしん now. It doesn't\nhelp that 軍人 is also read ぐんじん.\n\nIt looks like the term means \"legendary war hero [who was human before dying]\"\nand \"deity of war [who is always immortal]\". I feel like in the latter sense\nit's more likely to be いくさがみ.\n\n<http://doi.org/10.15024/00002106> gives a summary on the old usage of\n\"ikusagami\". (I don't know if the author intentionally avoided using \"gunshin\"\nand \"gunjin\", though.)\n\nThe 9 individuals mentioned were named 九軍神 and there might be a customary way\nto read it as a proper noun. I don't know if it's きゅうぐんしん or きゅうぐんじん, but I'm\npretty sure it's not きゅういくさがみ.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-13T23:42:10.973", "id": "96632", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T00:00:32.217", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-14T00:00:32.217", "last_editor_user_id": "10531", "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96626", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it is just た＼り, but if the verb already has a drop in it then the た＼り\ndrop becomes irrelevant.\n\nあがる￣→あがった￣→あがった＼り\n\nさが＼る→さが＼った→さが＼ったり\n\nたべ＼る→た＼べた→た＼べたり", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T01:06:49.120", "id": "96633", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T01:06:49.120", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "96631", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Surprisingly, no JLPT study sites or dictionaries I usually look at explain\nthis usage explicitly.\n\n～以来 basically means \"since ～\", but when it's used as a _noun (or no-\nadjective)_ and with some rare event, it means \"the first after ～\" (or\nsometimes \"the most significant after ～\").\n\nIt can be used in two ways:\n\n * Like a suffix, `noun + 以来`\n\n> * 卒業以来の再会でした。 \n> It was our first reunion since graduation.\n> * この町でこんなに雨が降ったのは2010年以来だ。 \n> We haven't had this much rain in this town since 2010.\n\n * `te-form + 以来`\n\n> * 子供が生まれて以来の海外旅行に行きます。 \n> We are going on our first trip abroad since our child was born.\n> * これほどの危機は第二次世界大戦が終わって以来だ。 \n> This crisis is the worst one after WWII ended.\n\nThis となる is roughly the same as である. See: [Trouble with translation\n「アジア人歌手では過去最大級となる。」](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32208/5010) and\n[What is the difference between 〜となる and\n〜になる?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/108/5010)\n\nSo 2018年の本庶佑氏以来となる is a relative clause meaning \"which would have been the\nfirst after Tasuku Honjo in 2018\". It _adjectivally_ modifies 日本人の医学生理学賞受賞.\nNote that なる is an attributive form, so it never adverbially modifies ならなかった.\n\nNote that 以来 as an adverb does not have meaning of \"for the first time\".\nCompare the following sentences and see how の drastically changes the meaning:\n\n * 3年前に会社を辞めて以来煙草を吸っている。 \nI have been a (regular) smoker since I left my job three years ago.\n\n * 3年前に会社を辞めて以来 **初めて** 煙草を吸っている。 \nI am (now) smoking a cigarette for the first time since I left my job three\nyears ago.\n\n * 3年前に会社を辞めて以来 **の** 煙草を吸っている。 \nI am (now) smoking the first cigarette since I left my job three years ago.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T02:48:06.143", "id": "96635", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T06:12:18.787", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-14T06:12:18.787", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96634", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "None of the options are correct. \"Let's kiss while looking at each other\"\nwould be more accurate\n\n互いを眺めながらキスをしようよ would sound more natural imo as it otherwise wouldn't be clear\nwho/what they want to look at\n\nしよう is the causal form of しましょう (which is the volitional form of する)\n\nOther examples of verbs with ながら: \n食べながら - While eating \n読みながら - While reading \n話しながら - While talking \n歩きながら - While walking \n走りながら - While running", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T08:30:00.927", "id": "96637", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T09:13:10.433", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-14T09:13:10.433", "last_editor_user_id": "54703", "owner_user_id": "54703", "parent_id": "96636", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As I'm no Japanese linguist, I think it's better to just think of ので as a\nformal way of saying から. Makes life easier for me.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T09:23:55.727", "id": "96639", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T09:23:55.727", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54703", "parent_id": "96638", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "I see the use of ので here as implying that the first event has some effect on\nthe second event. The underlying relation could be\n\n * the speaker thinks that eating is the only thing left to do before sleeping (Note that it's 食べた and 寝る - there is a strict temporal order, and the present is between the two.)\n * the speaker thinks that being not hungry makes it easier to sleep", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T09:54:19.407", "id": "96640", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T09:54:19.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96638", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Essentially you are correct. This sentence is just omitting 「ないか」after the\n「のでは」. It just sounds slightly nicer to word it this way.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T12:41:08.707", "id": "96644", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T12:41:08.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50360", "parent_id": "96643", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "とする implies the chooser has authority, whereas にする is neutral.\n\nFor example, if you say `ランチ休憩は30分にする` it simply means the chooser decided to\nmake it 30 minutes, possibly just for themselves. If you say `ランチ休憩は30分とする`\nthen it implies authority so it implies it was decided for multiple people.\n\nHence, you can say 「私のお弁当はカツカレーにしてください」 but not 「私のお弁当はカツカレーとしてください」. On the\nother hand, it's natural to say 「税率は15%とする」but a bit odd to say 「税率は15%にする」\nbecause it sounds overly casual for the topic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T14:46:32.033", "id": "96648", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T14:46:32.033", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "96645", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This is simply a contraction of [食]{く}って[い]{L}かない, which of course is,\n\"Should(n't) we go get something to eat?\".\n\nSee also [～ましょうか vs ～ませんか](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/56124/78).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T17:24:34.107", "id": "96650", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T21:48:10.363", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-14T21:48:10.363", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "96646", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "There is no such thing as \"de-form of a suru-verb.\" This 追加 is a simple noun\nmeaning _extra/addition_ , and this で is a case particle to mark a\ncondition/scope.\n\nSimilar examples of `noun + で` include 合計で (\"in total\"), 割引で (\"at a discount\nprice\"), 確認で (\"for conformation\"), 一人で (\"alone\"), 土足で (\"with one's shoes on\"),\n本気で (\"seriously\"), 笑顔で (\"with a smile\"), etc. All of these work adverbially.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T05:38:37.827", "id": "96679", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T05:38:37.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96652", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "For ordinary people, it's mostly a guesswork. What I think most would do is to\nfind a similar sounding word in the modern vocabulary and borrow its accent\npattern (which might or might not be accurate). For example, はむ can be\npronounced like かむ (噛む).\n\nThere are NHK programs in which broadcasters read classics. One example is\n[古典購読](https://www.nhk.or.jp/radio/ondemand/detail.html?p=0961_01). I believe\ntheir accent doesn't sound too strange to most native speakers.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-30T08:47:47.110", "id": "96928", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-30T08:47:47.110", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96653", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Well, I understand the question to be in two parts.\n\n(1) Whether the actual pitch of Old Japanese verbs is known (to researchers);\n\n(2) How do modern Japanese people apply modern pitch when reading Old or\nClassical texts.\n\nThese are properly two different questions, so I will try to deal with them\nseparately.\n\n(1) The historical pitch is really well-known from the tone marks assigned to\nmany words in dictionaries and texts. The go-to reference here is Elisabeth de\nBoer's _The Historical Development of Japanese Tone_ (2 Vols., Harrassowitz\nVerlag, 2010).\n\nUsually, in literature dedicated to Japanese tones only nouns are considered,\nbut the tonal marks occurred on verbs as well, and there are listings of\nthose.\n\nFor example, in Samuel E. Martin _The Japanese Language Through Time_ (Yale\nUniversity Press, 1987), which is the most accessible place actually giving\nhistorical tones, on pages 192-197 there is the complete chart of all verbs\nmarked with tonal marks in the _Ruiju Myōgishō_ dictionary (12th cent.), in\nseveral forms. (Note that Martin assumed the tonal marks to denote the\nopposite of how they are treated now, so read all, say 'HL' as 'LH' and vice\nversa.) For example, from _Ruiju Myōgishō_ we know that the verb 置く 'to put'\nhas final form [おく]{LL}, coordinate converb [おきて]{LHL} without onbin or\n[おいて]{LHL}, [おいて]{LHH} with one, infinitive (converb) [おき]{LH} and deverbal\nnoun [おき]{LL}.\n\nOf course, all of the aforementioned refers to the period of tone marks, which\nis late 10th to 14th century, corresponding to Early Middle Japanese; however,\nit is not assumed that Old Japanese of the 萬葉集 was drastically different in\nthis regard.\n\n(2) The pronunciation of Classical verbs in modern, Tokyo, pronunciation is a\nseparate matter, more prescriptive than descriptive. For this, there are\nnorms, and dictionaries actually explain that.\n\nアクセント習得法則, the preface to the Shinmeikai accent dictionary, actually has Table\n2 of Section 42 to help making the Tokyo pitch for a Classical correspondence\nto a current verb. In general, most forms are made as in current language, as\nfor the unique forms:\n\n * The final (終止形) and attributive (連体形) forms are unstressed or stressed according to the verb (泣く is unstressed in modern, so [なく]{LH}, [なくもの ]{LHHHL}; 起きる is stressed in modern, so [おく]{HL}, [おくるもの]{LHLLL}). Post-final らん is stressed on ら if the verb is unstressed, allows the stress on the verb otherwise ([なくらん]{LHHL}, but [おくらん]{HLLL}).\n\n * The a-form (未然形) is as follows: negation ず does not enforce any stress ([なかず]{LHH}, [おきず]{HLL}), same with its attributive -ぬ; conjectural -ん (-む) enforces the stress before it, overriding all else ([なかん]{LHL}, [おきん]{LHL}); conditional -(a)ば makes stress before it if unstressed ([なかば]{LHL}) but gives way to existing stress ([おきば]{HLL}).\n\n * Coordinate converb -て enforces stress before it only on unstressed ones ([なきて]{LHL}, but [おきて]{HLL}; the dictionary also says there is a tendency to say the -て-form of unstressed verbs unstressed as [なきて]{LHH}); perfective -ぬ enforces stress before ([なきぬ]{LHL}, [おきぬ]{LHL}); -たり enforces stress before it only on unstressed ones ([なきたり]{LHLL}, but [おきたり]{HLLL}) - here also [なきたり]{LHHL} is possible, with stress on た in case of unstressed verbs.\n\n * As for the 已然形 form, -ども enforces stress before it only on unstressed ones ([なけども]{LHLL}, but [おきども]{HLLL}).\n\n * Finally, in the imperative, the unstressed verbs get final stress (or before -よ, if present: [なけ ]{LHL}, [なけよ]{LHL}), the others retain stress ([おき]{HL}, [おきよ]{HLL}).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-30T09:17:12.600", "id": "96929", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-30T09:17:12.600", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27977", "parent_id": "96653", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The が is not a subject marker, so the literal translation is still \"(The\nsubject) is good at tennis\".\n\nIt is the usage of:\n\n> [が](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%8C/#jn-34931) \n> ２ 希望・好悪・能力などの対象を示す。「水―飲みたい」「紅茶―好きだ」「中国語―話せる」\n\nThat is, it marks \"what\" in wanting, liking, and ability to do something.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-14T22:34:40.617", "id": "96658", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-14T22:34:40.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I think this could be seen as a case of a person’s ability with something\nbeing described as a property of that thing. If that's indeed the case, it's\nin a way related to what was discussed\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/91189/43676). As pointed out\nthere, something like that happens in English, too. _This stew eats well_\ndoesn’t mean the stew does the act of eating but the stew is such that people\ncan eat it in a certain way or with a certain feeling. Borrowing this sentence\nstructure, テニスが上手です might be translated as:\n\n> Tennis plays well.\n\nI know a translation with a noun or an adjective would look more literal, but\nI couldn’t find an English word that means something one does well in the way\n_favorite_ works for something one likes. Substituting it with a made-up\nliteral translation of 上手, it would become:\n\n> Tennis is an “upper-hand”.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-15T01:07:41.250", "id": "96660", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-15T03:39:34.220", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-15T03:39:34.220", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Since the second part talks about selling assets (\"持ち物全部を売却しても\"), I'm inclined\nto think it as \"in order to purchase\". Note that in this sense of 求める,\ncommercial transaction is normally implied. I wouldn't add \"or get\". I don't\nthink it can have a broader meaning of \"to get something [by arbitrary\nmeans]\", unless it's used metaphorically.\n\nAnother interpretation of \"to seek\" may be okay, but I would rather expect\nother constructions like 求めようとして in that case.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-15T02:19:55.120", "id": "96661", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-15T02:25:03.307", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-15T02:25:03.307", "last_editor_user_id": "10531", "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96657", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "の is a very generic noun-linking particle, and `AのB` can be translated like\n\"A's B\", \"B of A\", \"B as A\", \"B that is A\" and so on (see [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/40896/5010)). On the other hand,\n`AであるB` basically only means \"B that is A\", so it is sometimes useful to avoid\nambiguity. For example, 子供の先生 can possibly mean both \"the child's teacher\" or\n\"a child teacher\" (e.g., a 8-yo girl teaching math), whereas 子供である先生 only\nmeans \"the teacher who is a child\".\n\nBesides, you may choose to use `AであるB` intentionally when you want to\nemphasize the \"A = B\" relationship. For example, while 緑のカップ is the ordinary\nway to say \"a green cup\", someone may intentionally say 緑であるカップ (\"a cup that\nis green\") when you want to emphasize the \"green\" part.\n\n(By the way, 一人の人 typically just means \"one person\" or \"an individual\",\nalthough it can refer to \"a lonely person\" depending on the context. 一人である人\nsounds a bit puzzling, but it might refer to \"a person as an individual\", \"a\nperson who is alone\" or something. I used other examples because the story\ngets complicated when numbers are involved.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T04:34:18.660", "id": "96678", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T04:45:03.233", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-16T04:45:03.233", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96659", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "**Question 1** : You're overthinking again. No such joke is intended. If his\ninitials have some strange meaning in another language, that is purely a\ncoincidence.\n\n**Question 2** : イニシャル and 頭文字 are a little different. イニシャル in Japanese is a\nword that almost specifically refers to the first **Latin** character of a\n**person name** (in his case, \"U\"). 頭文字 refers to the first character in\ngeneral, and it can be the first kanji (\"上\"), the first kana (\"う\"), or the\nfirst romaji (\"U\") of anything. Since 上 is obviously too specific as a hint,\nso I'd expect う or U as a response. (Technically, 風/ふ/F can be called his 頭文字,\ntoo, but remember Itsuki is a type of character who keeps addressing him with\nhis family name.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T04:16:43.730", "id": "96677", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T07:48:40.470", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-16T07:48:40.470", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96663", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "から has a few different meanings. Let's take the following examples.\n\n学校は午前８時１０分から始まる。 The equivalent in Chinese appears to use 開始 (read かいし in\nJapanese and meaning \"start\") to convey the idea of starting from a certain\npoint in time.\n\n彼の部屋に明かりがついているから、彼は帰宅したにちがいない。​ Chinese seems to use 所以 (read ゆえん in Japanese\nand meaning \"reason\") to convey the idea of \"therefore.\"\n\n１０から２を引くと、８残る。 Chinese appears to use 中 (read なか in Japanese and sometimes\nmeaning \"out of\") to convey the idea of taking one thing out of another.\n\nよく振ってから使用してください。 Chinese seems to use 前 (read まえ in Japanese and meaning\n\"before\") to convey the idea of doing one thing before another.\n\nNone of the kanji above appear to have から as an alternative reading, and\ndictionaries do not list a historical kanji for the particle から as they do for\nまで.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-15T11:13:46.440", "id": "96665", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-15T11:13:46.440", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18145", "parent_id": "96664", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "やつ is actually a key word in the core part of the sentence.\n\n 1. Let's start by identifying that core.\n\n> やつもいる: _Beings also exist._\n\n 2. What kind of beings? Here's where we add a subordinate clause.\n\n> 死んだ人の体を乗っ取れる: _That take over the bodies of people_\n\n 3. So what do we have so far?\n\n> 死んだ人の体を乗っ取れるやつもいる: _Beings also exist that take over the bodies of people._\n\n 4. We can leave things like this, or we could decide to be more specific about the types of beings we are talking about.\n\n> 悪魔には: _Amongst demons_\n\n 5. So now we get...\n\n> 悪魔には死んだ人の体を乗っ取れる **やつ** もいる: _Amongst demons, beings also exist that take\n> over the bodies of people._ i.e. _Amongst demons, there are **those** that\n> take over the bodies of people._\n\n**Removing やつ would be like removing the word \"those.\"**\n\n 6. However, perhaps we are not completely sure about that fact.\n\n> らしい: _It seems that..._\n\n 7. So in the end we get...\n\n> 悪魔には死んだ人の体を乗っ取れるやつもいるらしい: _It seems that amongst demons, there are those\n> that take over the bodies of people._ i.e. _Apparently, some demons can take\n> over the bodies of dead people._", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-15T13:25:13.470", "id": "96667", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-15T13:25:13.470", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18145", "parent_id": "96666", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Here 元気だと is not a conditional clause. The と is quotative. You can think it is\na shortened version of 元気だと言って/主張して.\n\nSo it means _no matter how much they try, (claiming) **that they are fine**_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-15T14:31:06.930", "id": "96670", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-15T14:31:06.930", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96668", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "* Did you notice 言う at the end of the sentence lacks と/って? There is no quote in this sentence. The translation should not include \"saying _that (blah-blah)_ \". The implied object of this 言う is the content of 報告.\n * The implied subject of the sentence seems to be \"we\" including the speaker (Shosuke) himself.\n * ～なんだが, ～ですが, ～だけど and so on can be used to bring up a topic (\"speaking of ～\", \"regarding ～\", \"with respect to ～\").\n\n> ……兄貴、 \n> brother,...\n>\n> この報告なんだが、 \n> (regarding) this report/debriefing...\n>\n> まさか \n> I doubt this is true but / do you really mean / don't tell me / could that\n> mean\n>\n> これから毎回ここまで来て言うのか？ \n> will we come here and say [this] every time from now on?\n\nSo a translation is something like \"Um, Keisuke/brother, do you mean...we're\ngonna come (all the way) here and do this debriefing every time from now on?\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T03:41:13.670", "id": "96676", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T03:47:08.047", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-16T03:47:08.047", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96671", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The structure is\n\n> いたずらもまあまあかな\n\nwhere the following conditional is inserted\n\n> ここまで手が込んでくると.\n\nThe former means\n\n> Prank is okay as well.\n\nand the latter\n\n> if (it is) contrived this much.\n\nYou should be able to see the meaning simply by combining these.\n\n* * *\n\nBTW [Weblio](https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/My%2C+my) does seem to say _my,\nmy_ is まあまあ, but I suppose it is in the sense of emphatic まあ (Wow). which\nseems consistent with [\" _interjection_ An expression of surprise,\nincredulity, or pleasure.\"](https://www.zurich.co.jp/car/useful/guide/cc-\nroadsign-list-\nmeaning/?utm_medium=pas&utm_source=iya&utm_campaign=tx&utm_content=100046&argument=hT7qcPFB&dmai=pas_iya_tx_100046&yclid=YSS.1001033242.EAIaIQobChMIgM6c7arj-\ngIV1cEWBR3Ggg7CEAAYAiAAEgKqmPD_BwE)\n\nThe まあまあ here is _so-so_\n([#3](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%81%BE%E3%81%82%E3%81%BE%E3%81%82/#je-71177))", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T01:27:10.187", "id": "96674", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T01:27:10.187", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96673", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "There are several key issues here which I thought were interesting and may not\nbe straightforward. I will give you a breakdown.\n\n * も\n\n\"even\" I feel this も stresses the topic.\n\nいたずらも: Even as a prank\n\n * くる\n\nAs @aguijonazo points out this くる is defined as\n([デジタル大辞泉（小学館）](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B/)):\n\n> ９ （補助動詞）動詞の連用形に接続助詞「て」が付いた形に付く。\n>\n> ㋐少しずつ移行したり、程度が進んだりして、しだいにその状態になる。だんだん…になる。「日増しに暖かくなってきた」「最近太ってきた」\n\n * 手が込んでくる\n\nTherefore, here this phrase means \"intricately/elaborately crafted/devised\"\n\n * と\n\nI would think of this と as \"when\" rather than \"if\".\n\n * まあまあ\n\nmeans \"not too bad\"\n\nThus\n\n> いたずらもここまで手が込んでくるとまあまあかな\n\nmeans:\n\n> (Even) as a prank, it is not bad when they put so much effort into it", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T03:31:37.127", "id": "96675", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T06:28:51.673", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-16T06:28:51.673", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "30454", "parent_id": "96673", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "To be honest, 許す can work for all of the examples. I think what matters when\nchoosing from 許す and other options is not the strength of allowing/forbidding,\nbut the speaking/writing style you want to use.\n\n-することを許す is sort of a translationese, and not the most basic way to put \"to allow somebody to do something\" in Japanese. It _is_ common in written Japanese, but not so much in spoken and colloquial Japanese.\n\nOther options for spoken Japanese include:\n\n**-させてくれる**\n\n> The coach let me have a short rest.\n\n> コーチは私に短い休憩をとらせてくれました。\n\n**-してもいいと言う**\n\n> My parents allowed me to go to the KTV next saturday night.\n\n> 両親は次の土曜日の夜にKTVに行ってもいいと言ってくれた。\n\nIn a family context, it seems to make sense to avoid translationese, so\n行くことを許した may sound strange. However, if the sentence is part of a larger text,\nlike a memoir, written more formally, 行くことを許した is perfectly fine here, too.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T11:39:41.780", "id": "96684", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T11:39:41.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96680", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You are correct. That is a replacement for 暗示. So the sentence means like\n_But, the delusion that Nezuko has is **(a delusion)** such that she thinks\nhumans are her family._", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T09:51:23.887", "id": "96683", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T09:58:46.317", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-16T09:58:46.317", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "From an English perspective, ～たいと考えています may seem redundant, but this is\nperfectly natural in Japanese. ～たいです or ～欲しいです are actually [unrefined\nsentence endings](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/68969/5010), and they\nare usually avoided in proper news articles and such. Instead of です, people\nvery commonly add と思っています, と言っています or と考えています after たい/欲しい.\n\nFor example, something like 私は車が欲しいです is polite and natural enough in\nconversations and not-so-formal business exchanges, but in very formal\nwritings, you should say 私は車が欲しいと思っています or 私は車が欲しいと考えております, etc. Likewise, you\nwill almost never hear a sentence like 政府は登録をしてもらいたいです in news broadcast.\n\nWhen you translate this into English, you can just use \"want\".\n\n> 政府は、日本に住む人みんなにマイナンバーカードを作って、健康保険証の登録をしてもらいたいと考えています。 \n> The government wants everyone living in Japan to create a My Number card\n> and register for the health insurance function.\n\n(Just to be sure, the subject of 考えています is 政府 at the beginning of the\nsentence, and the 政府 can safely \"say\" or \"think\" something just as [White\nHouse can](https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2013/09/personification.html).)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T17:30:32.977", "id": "96689", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T02:42:39.000", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-17T02:42:39.000", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96687", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "As to why it doesn't say -たいと言っています nor -たがっています, 言っています sounds more like\nquoting so you wouldn't want to use it when you are summarizing, paraphrasing\nor adding your own analysis. (This distinction is kind of blurry, though.)\nたがっています sounds more like you are personifying the government with emotion and\npreferences, so it's less appropriate in neutral reporting. 考えています is also\npersonifying but to a lesser extent, I think.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T09:22:51.277", "id": "96707", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T09:33:17.573", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-17T09:33:17.573", "last_editor_user_id": "10531", "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "96687", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "There is no strict rule for putting commas. In this case, the predicate part\nis long enough and it is reasonable to place a comma (for a pause) after 僕は.\n\nAs for the question, ギリギリに is not an adverb here, rather simply a noun ギリギリ +\nに meaning _at the limit_. So the sentence means _Thanks to it, I was barely\nable to stay at the limit where I could distract the doubts towards them_. (It\nis ambiguous what 辛うじて modifies.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T21:54:41.357", "id": "96694", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T21:54:41.357", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96691", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "ギリギリ here is used as a noun for ギリギリな／のところ, and it is modified by the clause\nこいつらへの不信感を誤魔化せる (or 辛うじて〜誤魔化せる if you interpret 辛うじて as modifying 誤魔化せる,\ninstead of 留まっていられた.)\n\nI wouldn’t put a comma there.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T05:09:27.900", "id": "96703", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T05:09:27.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96691", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It is\n[出張{でば}る](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%87%BA%E5%BC%B5%E3%82%8B/#jn-152268).\nThe particular meaning here is\n\n> ２ 仕事などをするために、 **ある所に出向く。** 出張する。\n\nA translation for the sentence would be _to step in_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T21:57:56.197", "id": "96695", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T21:57:56.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96692", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "出張る used like this is not simple \"to come/go\", but often has a connotation of\n\"unnecessarily\" or \"although unwanted\". It implies a 3年 is unwelcome, so you\nmay translate this like \"to bother to jump in\", \"to interfere\" or \"to butt\nin\". Translating it as \"to try to mess\" may be too strong, though.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T02:20:09.580", "id": "96697", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T02:20:09.580", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96692", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Both are 'correct' interpretations. It depends on what 棒にあたる means. If\ninterpreted as _beaten by sticks_ , the phrase means (1) and if as _stumble\nupon (just) something_ , it means (2).\n\nAccording to\n[Wikipedia/犬も歩けば棒に当たる](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8A%AC%E3%82%82%E6%AD%A9%E3%81%91%E3%81%B0%E6%A3%92%E3%81%AB%E5%BD%93%E3%81%9F%E3%82%8B)\n(quoting JapanKnowledge), the usage of (1) dates to 1758 and that of (2) to\n1705.\n\nThis is purely a personal impression, but I guess (2) is more common. Also, it\nis not necessarily a _good luck_ but more like _something_. So the overall\nsense is like _if you come out, you'll find something_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-16T22:03:47.007", "id": "96696", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-16T22:03:47.007", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96693", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This とき (時 in kanji) means \"when\", so 書くときの基本 is like \"Basics When Writing\". の\nis a noun-linking particle, which is necessary because 基本 is a noun and とき\nneeds to modify 基本 adjectivally.\n\nSimilar examples:\n\n * 桜を見たときの思い出 \nmemories of when I saw cherry blossoms\n\n * 会社を辞めたときの話 \nthe story of when I left the company", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T04:22:27.877", "id": "96702", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T04:22:27.877", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96700", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "In this case, することになる adds a \"ended up/resulted in\" to the sentence\n\nIt emphasizes on the result of getting a job transfer and makes it a decisive\nfact\n\nThe meaning for 転勤になる and 転勤する is almost the same imo, only difference is that\n転勤する is the verb form", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T06:02:31.230", "id": "96705", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T06:29:41.843", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-17T06:29:41.843", "last_editor_user_id": "54703", "owner_user_id": "54703", "parent_id": "96704", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "I assume you already know the [basics of how ことになる\nworks](https://apieceofsushi.com/jlpt-n4-grammar-koto-ni-\nnaru-%E3%80%9C%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8B-%E6%84%8F%E5%91%B3-%E6%96%87%E6%B3%95-meaning/).\n\n転勤することになりました normally refers to a future event (relative to the time of the\nstatement). \"It was decided that (someone) **would** be transferred.\"\n\n転勤になりました can also refer to a future event, in which case the two sentences are\ninterchangeable. But 転勤になりました can be used also to refer to a past event, like\n\"(Someone) was transferred (following someone's decision)\". So 先月転勤になりました\nusually means this person was actually transferred last month, whereas\n先月転勤することになりました usually means such a decision was made last month (but the\nactual transfer may happen much later).\n\nNote that `noun + になる` works like this only when the noun is inherently\nrelated to some decision/judgement (有罪, 合格, 採用, 離婚, etc.). Otherwise, `noun +\nになる` may mean something different. For example, 勉強することになりました means \"(It was\ndecided that) I am going to study\", whereas 勉強になりました normally means \"I learnd\na lot / It was a good lesson\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T05:34:57.150", "id": "96725", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T12:19:45.403", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-18T12:19:45.403", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96704", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The dictionary form + noun corresponds to the usage of relative clause in\nEnglish, so you can use it as long as it respects the grammar of the verb.\n\n * 飲む人 a man who drinks\n * 酒を飲む人 a man who drinks alcohol\n * コーヒーを飲む人 a man who drinks coffee\n\nAs for the other pattern, it is not _verb stem_ but _masu-form_ (without masu)\nused as a noun (see below). This is called 連用形の名詞化. So grammatically _verb\nmasu-form_ + _noun_ is a complex noun made by combining two nouns. As is the\ncase with most complex nouns, what combination is natural depends on\ncollocations and there are no easy rules. Ultimately you need to consult\ndictionaries or depend on intuition.\n\nFor example, 飲み人 is not common but certainly understandable and so is 酒飲み人.\nBoth would be understood as a habitual drinker. On the other hand コーヒー飲み人 is\nodd.\n\nThere are more totally common words that have this structure, like 生き方, ゴミ捨て場,\n読み仮名.\n\n* * *\n\nAbout _masu-form_ and _stem_ : note they coincide in ichidan verbs. For godan\nverbs, they are different.\n\n * godan: 走ら-ない, **走り** -ます, 走-る\n * ichidan: 生き-ない, **生き** -ます, 生き-る\n\nAnd compare the relevant nouns: 走り方 and 生き方.\n\n* * *\n\n(added)\n\nJust to clarify some points discussed in the comment, in the 'dictionary form'\nusage, you don't have to have it in plain dictionary form. It is more or less\nconstructed in a way similar to English.\n\n> 猫が走る a cat runs \n> → 走る猫 a cat that runs\n>\n> 猫が外を走る a cat is running outside \n> → 外を走っている猫 a cat that is running outside\n\n> 猫がソファで眠る a cat sleeps on the sofa \n> → ソファで眠る猫 a cat that sleeps on the sofa\n>\n> 猫がソファで眠っていた a cat was sleeping on the sofa \n> → ソファで眠っていた猫 a cat that was sleeping on the sofa\n\nThe _sentence-ending_ form may be less confusing to denote the form used in\nthis usage.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T00:00:46.590", "id": "96724", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T04:04:11.837", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-18T04:04:11.837", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The kango-reading (ちくりん) should be clearly more common in government documents\nand technical contexts, but both readings are natural in TV shows, novels,\nblogs and such, and it's a matter of taste. Some words can have different\nmeanings depending on how they are read (e.g., [さんどう vs\nやまみち](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/72177/5010) or [きょう vs\nこんにち](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17752/5010)), but that is not the\ncase here. I personally think it's generally safe to always use ちくりん when in\ndoubt.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T17:19:45.463", "id": "96711", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T17:19:45.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96709", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The translation you saw on the streaming sites is the correct one.\n\nAlthough ～ことはない can mean \"there is no need to ～\", it also means \"～ never\nhappens\" or \"～ is impossible\". For example, depending on the context,\n彼が行くことはない means either \"He doesn't have to go\" or \"There is no possibility\nthat he will go\". In this situation, \"no possibility\" is the correct\ninterpretation because うつつを抜かす is a phrase with a fairly bad meaning, and no\none suggested she _needed_ to forget herself and immerse herself in love.\nSaying \"I don't _need to_ get hooked\" in this context simply doesn't make much\nsense.\n\n[`～に限って(～ない)` is a set\nphrase](https://www.edewakaru.com/archives/20100829.html), and this 私に限って is\nmore like \"(putting others aside,) as far as I am concerned\" or \"(I don't know\nabout others but) at least regarding myself\" or \"I am the last person to ...\".\nOf course she isn't saying she is literally the only person in the world who\nisn't interested in love.\n\n> 彼に限って失敗はしない。 \n> He is the last person to fail. / He will never, ever fail. \n> (But not \"He is the only person who won't fail.\")\n\nSo the original sentence translates to something along the lines of \"I am the\nlast person who gets hooked on that kind of things\", \"As far as I am\nconcerned, I'll never be infatuated with such things\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T18:09:39.343", "id": "96712", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T03:40:36.167", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-18T03:40:36.167", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96710", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "First, 焦げてた does mean _burnt_ but I guess here it just means _burnt but\nedible_. Also, you may be aware by the picture but 焼き芋 is typically baked\n_sweet_ potato not what is called _baked potato_ in English.\n\nThe pattern is よく＋potential rather than ああも+potential. See the question below.\n\n * [Meaning of よく住める](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/93955/45489)\n\nああも is [ああ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%81%82%E3%81%82/#je-1)+も\nand means あのように= _like that_. Here it modifies 喜んで or 喜んで食べられる. Thus the\nsentence means\n\n> How can one(you) eat sweet potatoes that are just baked with pleasure like\n> that?\n\nimplying the speaker does not like baked sweet potatoes in general.\n\n* * *\n\nThe following means the same and may be easier to parse\n\n> よく焼いただけの芋をああも喜んで食べられるね", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T23:06:02.587", "id": "96721", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T23:06:02.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96713", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "辞書にある言葉で 出来上がった世界 is one big relative clause where 辞書にある言葉 is another relative\nclause, contained within the bigger one. To make a Japanese relative clause\nyou move the clause behind the noun it modifies (for example 「魚を食べた猫」'the cat\n_that_ ate the fish'. Not that because of this there is no Japanese word for\n'that' in this sense.\n\n'([With words in the dictionary] the world made) I hated.' In other words, 'I\nhated the world (that is) made of words (that are) in the dictionary.'\nBrackets added to the translation to help you understand how the English\nsentence uses relative clauses too.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T23:19:04.357", "id": "96723", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T23:19:04.357", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9971", "parent_id": "96714", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "心の中 **で** 怪物を飼ってる would sound as if the person went inside their own mind and\ndid the act of keeping a monster there, just like keeping a pet in their\napartment. The focus here is on the act, and で indicates where it takes place\n(or the spatial aspect of its circumstances).\n\nWhen you say 心の中 **に** 怪物を飼ってる, on the other hand, your focus is more on the\nexistence of a monster itself and where it is. に is more appropriate.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T06:21:05.563", "id": "96726", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T06:21:05.563", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "96718", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "This is an idiom that you can find in any dictionary:\n<https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%96%A7%E5%98%A9%E3%82%92%E5%A3%B2%E3%82%8B-491468>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-17T21:32:15.853", "id": "96720", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-17T21:32:15.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "96719", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "ささやか is almost always written in all hiragana, and 細やか without furigana is\nalmost always read as こまやか. I believe most native Japanese speakers don't even\nknow ささやか can be written as 細やか in kanji (FWIW, I didn't). As for the meaning,\nささやか and こやまか have very different meanings, and they are never\ninterchangeable.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T08:59:42.800", "id": "96728", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T09:04:54.873", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-18T09:04:54.873", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96727", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Note\n[ところ](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93%E3%82%8D/#jn-158611)\ndoes not have to be physical (bold added).\n\n> １ 空間的な場所。人や物が存在する場所。\n>\n> ２ 抽象的な場所。場面。範囲。多く、連体修飾語によって限定される場所や部分をいう。 \n> ㋕事柄。内容。こと。 **「思う―あって辞任する」** 「自分の信じる―を貫く」\n\n思うところ/思い当たるところ etc. always means _idea_ about something, so if ある is used, it\nis always in the sense of 10. I don't think it particularly affects\ntranslation though.\n\n* * *\n\nConsider\n\n * 彼女はなぜ外国へいったのか\n * 自分には思い当たるところがある\n\nHere ところ refers to a reason the speaker has in mind, so the usage of ある is 10.\n\nBut\n\n * 彼女はどこへ行ったのか\n * 自分には思い当たるところがある\n\nStrictly speaking, the ところ refers to _the idea_ about where she went, so the\nある is still 10 but ところ here in a sense refers to a physical place, so 思い当たるところ\nexists also physically.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T23:57:18.010", "id": "96740", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T23:57:18.010", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96730", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "No, repeating an adjective only emphasizes the meaning. It does not\nautomatically add the meaning of \"overly\". 長い長い is simply \"long, long\" or\n\"very long\", but not \"too long\".\n\nHere, saying 早い just once corresponds to saying \"(That's) too fast\" in\nEnglish. We don't need to say something long like 早すぎる in a situation like\nthis. So 早い早い is simply 早い said twice for emphasis (\"Too fast, too fast!\").\nIt's not different from saying \"wait, wait!\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T16:13:11.963", "id": "96732", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T16:13:11.963", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96731", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It means \"here/with this\"\n\n> \"With this (money), thats not all there is, right?\"\n\nthats the best way i could show it in english.\n\nYou already translated it yourself really.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T18:12:05.660", "id": "96734", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T18:19:04.720", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-18T18:19:04.720", "last_editor_user_id": "37155", "owner_user_id": "37155", "parent_id": "96733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Note that すき is a na-adjective technically. So it is a repetition of\nadjective, which can happen in English as well (e.g. the Beatles has [Blue\nBlue Sky](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHrl8x2fHyI)).\n\nHopefully the following help to see a general pattern.\n\n * 若いころは旅行が楽しくて楽しくて世界中回った\n * In youth, I liked travelling so much and traveled all around the world.\n * 働くのが嫌で嫌でいつもさぼっている\n * I hate and hate working, so am always slacking.\n * かゆくてかゆくてたまらない\n * It is so itchy and I can't bear it.\n\nNote that the repeating part is usually some sort of feeling/sensation.\n\n(I don't know if _hate and hate_ works, but you know what I mean...)\n\n* * *\n\nRe どうしようもないくらい, it is easier just to remember\n[どうしようもない](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%A6%82%E4%BD%95%E3%81%97%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%82%82%E7%84%A1%E3%81%84/#jn-154928)\nis one word meaning _there is nothing that can be done/no way/hopeless_. くらい\nis _(to the) extent/degree_.\n\nOverall, the sentence means _I loved her so much. So much so that there was\nnothing that could be done about it_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T23:44:59.447", "id": "96739", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T23:44:59.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96735", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the 3rd line connects to the 4th line to comprise a full sentence. Its\nbasic structure is AをBにしてあげる = _I will make A B/turn A into B for you_.\n\nMaybe slightly off the dictionary meaning, but 一期一会のひととき has the connotation\nof _one-off_ , so the two lines mean _I will turn this one-off meeting into an\nunforgettable moment for you_.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-18T23:26:06.900", "id": "96737", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-18T23:26:06.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "96736", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "So, all in all, 薬屋 and ドラッグストアー tend to carry the same things. The wording is\nmore a matter of branding and local practice.\n\n薬局 means pharmacy, and is more likely to be like a dispensary. They will often\ncarry the same things as those above, in smaller amounts but will also handle\nprescription drugs more directly.\n\nBasically, drugs stores will often have pharmacies, but stand alone pharmacies\nare also common.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-19T05:12:11.673", "id": "96743", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-19T05:12:11.673", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "26018", "parent_id": "96741", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "* **薬局** sell prescription drugs (処方薬) such as antihypertensives and diabetes pills. A more unambiguous term is 調剤薬局. Some of them also sell over-the-counter drugs (市販薬) that do not require a prescription from a doctor. Small prescription-only 薬局 are often found in a row in front of a large hospital (nicknamed 門前薬局). For example, [this street](https://goo.gl/maps/zQWkb5shtX6uPnx37) has eight (門前)薬局 in a row, and these are never called ドラッグストアー.\n * **ドラッグストアー** sell 市販薬, and they also deal in thermometers, plasters, supplements, protein powder, toilet paper, shampoo, soap, toothpaste, detergent, diapers, cheap cosmetics, etc. Larger ones sell various types of food and bevarage, too. If I understand correctly, this is pretty much the same as drugstores in USA.\n * **薬屋** is no longer common in modern Japan, at least in urban areas. Older people in rural areas who are not familiar with the word ドラッグストアー may still use 薬屋, but I personally see or hear this word mainly in samurai dramas and fantasy works.\n\nHowever, confusingly, some ドラッグストアー are named like ○○薬局 (e.g.\n[スギ薬局](https://www.sugi-net.jp/) and [ウェルシア薬局](https://www.welcia-\nyakkyoku.co.jp/)) even if they do not handle prescriptions. This is why the\nlonger term 調剤薬局 is sometimes necessary to disambiguate.\n\nBesides, some ドラッグストアー do handle prescription drugs, too (called\n調剤併設型ドラッグストア), and the number of such hybrid stores is increasing. In such\ncases, there is a big sign that says \"処方せん(受付)\" or \"調剤受付\" in the storefront,\nso you can tell if a drugstore has a 調剤薬局 function by looking for this sign\n([example](https://goo.gl/maps/tUpCwNY8s3P2zuG16)).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-10-19T05:14:31.350", "id": "96744", "last_activity_date": "2022-10-20T01:22:55.460", "last_edit_date": "2022-10-20T01:22:55.460", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "96741", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]