Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

[ { "body": "Here is the [Japanese Wikipedia entry for\n水色](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B0%B4%E8%89%B2?oldid=42481733) that you\ncan look at, but here are some key points:\n\n 1. > 現在では一般的に淡い青色のことを水色と呼ぶことがあり、その中には空色などが含まれることが多い。空色はとくに水色に近いため、色鉛筆やクレヨンのセットでは水色に代表されることが多く、しばしば同一視される。\n\n 2. > 英語の **アクア** は一般的な水の色を表す名前であるが、ウェブカラーではAquaは青緑に近く彩度の高い色合いとして定義されている。\n\n 3. > そのほかにも英語には水の色に由来する色名が多い。\n\nSo the verdict is.....‍♂️? Sky Blue and 水色 are often used interchangeably. It\naddresses the fact that web \"aqua\"/cyan is a saturated blue-green (which we\nknow by its values), but it doesn't say definitively that you can/can't call\nthat 水色. And there are many colour names in English based on the colour of\nwater...so I suppose they fall under 水色. To this end, the page lists some\nother colour names: アクアブルー, [水縹]{みず・はなだ}, アクアグリーン, and ウォーターグリーン.\n\nI would say the four colours you gave could probably safely be called 水色 in\nconversation, or even in a general specification. But you could also more\nclosely try to pigeonhole them into one of those other colours when you need\nto be more precise.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-02T07:52:10.670", "id": "99157", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-02T07:52:10.670", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "99156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Typical 水色 contains much more red and less green in the RGB space, i.e., much\nwhiter (see [this Wikipedia\narticle](https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B0%B4%E8%89%B2)). But I think\nit's perfectly understandabke to call cyan (#00ffff) 濃い水色 or 鮮やかな水色.\n\n**EDIT:** Among the colors you listed, #afe8ea is closest to what Japanese\npeople imagine with 水色. You can find [many traditional Japanese\ncolors](https://www.colordic.org/w) if you search, but most of these are rare\nand even Japanese people are not familiar with them. Common color names around\nblue and green that Japanese use in everyday life (aside from 青 and 緑\nthemselves) are 水色 and 青緑. So if they see vivid cyan like #00ffff, most people\ndescribe it as 濃い水色 or maybe 青に近い青緑.\n\nSee also: [Is there a word that describes greenish-blue colours (of any\nshade)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24120/5010)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-02T08:31:37.750", "id": "99158", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-03T04:05:15.147", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-03T04:05:15.147", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Not sure how you arrived at 'happy new year', but you're overcomplicating it.\nあけて should be the te-form of 明ける and in this case it has meaning 6) or 7) on\n[this page](https://jisho.org/search/%E6%98%8E%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B).\n\nThe translation is a bit confusing because 夜が明ける literally means 'the night\nends' hence the translation of 'dawn'. The rest of your translation is fine.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-02T09:43:50.673", "id": "99160", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-02T10:34:31.020", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-02T10:34:31.020", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "7944", "parent_id": "99159", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The taxonomies vary between researchers (which can be said for a lot of things\nabout Japanese). [This\npaper](http://repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/20000/1/jlc0320) mentions\n複合辞 (compound particles), 後置詞 (postpositionals), 複合格助詞 (compound case\nparticles), 格助詞相当句 (case particle equivalents). They might not be exactly the\nones you are thinking about but seem close.\n\n[現代語複合辞用例集](https://repository.ninjal.ac.jp/?action=repository_action_common_download&item_id=2322&item_no=1&attribute_id=22&file_no=1)\ncontains a list with (technical) analysis.\n\nThere are other resources like 日本語複合辞用例データベース and BCCWJ複合辞辞書 (again, less\neducational than research oriented), but I don't think they are freely/easily\naccessible now.\n\nThere are fairly new scholarly books about them:\n\n * <https://www.izumipb.co.jp/book/b571981.html> (2019)\n * <https://www.hituzi.co.jp/hituzibooks/ISBN978-4-89476-661-7.htm> (2023)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-05T09:44:08.393", "id": "99209", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-05T09:49:48.127", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-05T09:49:48.127", "last_editor_user_id": "10531", "owner_user_id": "10531", "parent_id": "99161", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This is a convention called \"okurigana omission\". See the following for\ngeneral discussions.\n\n * <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okurigana#Compounds>\n\n> In compounds, okurigana may be omitted if there is no ambiguity in meaning\n> or reading – in other words, if that compound is only read a single way. If\n> okurigana occur after several characters (esp. both in the middle of the\n> compound and at the end of the compound, as in 2-character compounds),\n> either only the middle okurigana, or both the middle and the final okurigana\n> may be omitted; omitting only the final okurigana but retaining the middle\n> okurigana is rather unusual and somewhat questionable, though not unknown.\n\n * [Why can some words be written with or without okurigana? How do the uses differ?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/6242/5010)\n * [有り難う vs 有難う — Is this the same word?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42093/5010)\n * [Is there a lingustic term for okurigana omission?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/43055/5010)\n\nThe kanji 入 has multiple kun-readings, some of which are\n[はい-る](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%85%A5%E3%82%8B-1),\n[い-れる](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%85%A5%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B) and\n[い-る](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%85%A5%E3%82%8B) (the part after the hyphen is\nokurigana). い-る is no longer used in everyday conversation except in fixed\nphrases and compounds. い-り is not a dictionary form, so you see い-る instead.\nMany words that start with い can be written with or without okurigana:\n\n * 入り口 = 入口 \nentrance\n\n * 入り江 = 入江 \ninlet; bay\n\n * 入れ墨 = 入墨 \ntattoo\n\n * 入れ知恵 = 入知恵 \ngiving advice\n\n(Note that how safe it is to drop okurigana depends on words. Although\nunderstandable, it is usually wise to avoid 入墨 and 入知恵.)\n\nHowever, in names, いり is used without okurigana. For example, 入江 (いりえ) is also\na common surname, and we never insert り between 入 and 江 (hiragana is rare in\nfamily names). So in such cases, it's reasonable to think that 入 has an\nintrinsic reading of いり. That's why いり (without okurigana) is listed as a\nnanori reading.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-03T03:51:43.717", "id": "99171", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-03T05:01:51.567", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-03T05:01:51.567", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99162", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This 振り corresponds to this definition on jisho.org:\n\n> ### [振り](https://jisho.org/word/%E6%8C%AF%E3%82%8A)\n>\n> 6. lead in (e.g. to a running joke, asking a question); lead up​ \n> Usually written using kana alone, See also 前振り, oft. as フリ\n>\n\nIn the context of a comedy or talk show, フリ (also called 前フリ) refers to\nsetting up a situation or context that leads to a main joke. When you notice\nsomeone's フリ, you are expected to follow along and respond with an appropriate\njoke. A classic example of フリ in English would be [_knock-\nknock_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knock-knock_joke). A classic Japanese\nexample would be [絶対にXするなよ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29030/5010).\nMany フリ are more obscure and subjective.\n\nIn this context, the two girls said 「話しかけると面倒くさそうな顔するけど、すごく優しくて大好きなお兄さんだ」 and\n「なッ！？ ちょ、チワプー！？私そこまで言ってない！！！」, and these are the comments that MC thought were\nフリ. Following along with this flow, MC said 「小鳥……お前、そんな風に思ってたの」 in a\ndeliberately tedious (or annoyed) tone, thinking it would serve as a joke.\n\nHowever, Kotori didn't get MC's joke and seemed genuinely scared. So he said\nthis in mind:\n\n> 今の流れは、そういう“振り”だと思うじゃん \n> I thought the current flow was like that kind of _lead in_ , wasn't it?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-03T02:02:13.417", "id": "99170", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-03T02:16:40.400", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-03T02:16:40.400", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99164", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Quoting to this [website](https://www.waraerujd.com/blank-581) (in Japanese):\n\n>\n> 苦手とは、不得意であることやつきあいにくい相手を意味する。「苦い」は味覚の一種だが、甘・塩・酢・苦の基本味覚の中でもヒール（悪役）を演じているように、「苦い」は、不愉快である、つらい、苦しいといった感覚、感情を言い表すのに使う。「苦手」は、取り扱ったり、つきあったりするのが難しいので、できるなら相手にしたくない（きらいな）対象を意味する。例えば「勝負事は苦手です」と言えば、「いつもコロ負けしているので賭け事に手を出したくない」ということ。「苦手」を直訳すると、「なめると苦い味のする手」で、漢方薬を扱っている薬剤師の手みたいなことになるが、この解釈は冗談ではなく、江戸時代に「苦手」と言えば、「爪が苦く毒を持ち、触れると腹痛を抑えたり、ヘビをつかまえたりできる手」を意味していた。まさに、腹痛の「手当て」であり、ヘビを素手で捕らえる「ゴッドハンド」だった。しかし、そんなパワーを持っていたにしても、いまどき「手が苦いから」などと解釈する人もいないので、「手」が「相手」や「傾向」の意味に解釈されて現在の「苦手」の使い方に落ち着いたものと思われる。\n\nIn short, 苦手 in the Edo period used to refer to the hand of the\npharmacist(serving traditional Chinese medicine) who put bitter drugs/poison\non their nails and thereby could heal stomach-ache by touching or could catch\nsnakes. Even those the meaning changed today, the 苦 did in fact mean 苦い.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-03T01:09:57.507", "id": "99169", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-03T01:09:57.507", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99165", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This is a prototypical [_Iyo_\ndialect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyo_dialect) populaized by Soseki's\n[bestselling novel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botchan), to the point that\nit's disproportionately well known to Japanese people compared to the\npopulation who actually speak the dialect, which is dying.\n\nI don't think Kiyohiko Azuma, the writer, specifically set an Iyo (Ehime)\nbackground for this old lady. (He is not known for doing that kind of detailed\nresearch.) My guess is he simply found the sound of the dialect interesting\nand wanted to create an exotic atmosphere by having the lady speak it.\n\nOnline sources suggest that ぞなもし breaks down into ぞ + な + もし where もし is\nprobably synonymous with 申し (as in 申します). In any case, the local Iyo people\nare known to add this word to the end of sentences to mean \"isn't it?\" or\n\"don't you think?\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-03T15:03:17.730", "id": "99180", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-03T15:03:17.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "13840", "parent_id": "99178", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You haven't given us much to work with, but we can at least dig into what we\nhave. :)\n\n## The sample text\n\n * なきゃよかった\n\nThis breaks down to four basic meaning components.\n\n### なきゃ\n\nThis is a contraction from なければ. The basic progression:\n\n * _nakereba_\n * _nakerya_\n * _nakya_\n\n### よかった\n\nThis is the past tense of よい, which is also basically the same thing as いい.\n(Modern _ii_ is a sound shift from older-and-still-used _yoi_.)\n\nThe past tense of modern _-i_ adjectives is in turn a contraction of the basic\nadverbial ～く form + あった, the past tense of old copula (\"to be\" verb) あり that\nturned into modern ある・あります.\n\nSo the core to understanding this なきゃよかった is understanding the implications of\nthe ～ばいい construction.\n\n## The meaning of ～ばいい: the general case\n\nThe ～ばいい construction literally breaks down more or less like so:\n\n * ～ば: only if (what ever comes before), then...\n * いい: it's good\n\nPut it together, and this means _\" it's only good if `[VERB / ADJ]`\"_.\nIdiomatically, this is used similarly to English \"should\".\n\nExamples:\n\n * あの本を読【よ】めばいい → \"it's only good if [I, you, they, etc.] read that book\" → \"[I, you, they, etc.] should read that book\"\n * 気温【きおん】が高【たか】ければいい → \"it's only good if the temperature is high\" → \"it should be warm\" (as in, it needs to be warm for some specific purpose, like for plants or for an activity)\n\n## The meaning of ～なきゃよかった: the specific case\n\nSo なきゃよかった → なければよかった → \"it [was / would only have been] good if not `[VERB /\nADJ]`\" → \"it shouldn't have been `[VERB / ADJ]`\".\n\nDepending on what comes after, this might have different nuances. For\ninstance, adding a ～のに on the end brings in a sense of regret: _\" oh, **if\nonly** it hadn't have been X...\"_\n\nExamples:\n\n * 値段【ねだん】が高【たか】くなければよかったのに → _\" if only the price had not been (as / so) high\"_ → implying that they wanted to buy it, but didn't because they considered the price to be too high\n * 眠【ねむ】くなければよかったのに → _\" if only I hadn't have been (so) sleepy\"_ → implying that they wound up missing out on something\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not fully address your question.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-03T17:29:28.687", "id": "99183", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T03:57:58.177", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-04T03:57:58.177", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "99179", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "好 and 女子 are two different words. 好 is a single character and is commonly read\nas 好{す}き, 好{この}む, or 好{こう}物. The meaning, as you've defined, is \"fond,\npleasing, like something\".\n\n女子 are two separate characters 女 and 子, and since 女 means female or woman and\n子 means child, 女子 means a young girl and is read as 女{じょ}子{し}\n\nYes the character 好 is made from the characters 女 and 子, depicting a\nwoman/mother 女 being very fond of her child 子.\n\nSidenote: In Chinese the same character 好, besides the meaning of like/fond,\nalso has the meaning \"good.\" That's why some people explain the origin of this\ncharacter as \"It's good for women to bear children, so 女 + 子 is good.\" Just\nsaying, you might find this alternate version when you look around online.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-03T17:12:53.727", "id": "99182", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-03T17:12:53.727", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99181", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Your breakdown seems correct but your final translation doesn’t sound quite\nright. I think it’s because of “even.”\n\nも puts what it marks in the same category as other things, which are often not\nstated explicitly. In this case, the event of him dying is included in the\nspeaker’s speculation among other possibilities. “He might even die” sounds\nlike him dying is a less likely scenario and even that less likely scenario is\npossible. The Japanese sentence doesn’t have this nuance. It implies the\nspeaker wouldn’t be surprised if it had happened (supposing a trace of\nhumanity remained in him).\n\n死ぬだろう means the speaker is reasonably certain he is going to die.\n\nIn any case, you are correct about the sentence not conveying the meaning of\nthe original, where the speaker seems to doubt he died. I’m not sure how they\nended up with this translation after having translated the preceding lines\nwith reasonable accuracy.\n\n> Some say he died. \n> やつが死んだと言う者も居る。\n>\n> Codswallop, in my opinion. \n> そんなのは、たわごとにしか過ぎん。\n\n* * *\n\nThe sentence might have been meant as a contrapositive statement suggesting\nthe speaker didn't think he had even a trace of humanity left in him, but it's\na bit hard to understand, especially for young readers. あるかもしれないが, just for\nexample, would have made this meaning much clearer. Or even just replacing the\nfinal さ with が would have made a huge difference.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T01:01:40.273", "id": "99186", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-05T00:37:27.103", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-05T00:37:27.103", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think this も is a special type of も that adds the nuance of \"naturally\", \"of\ncourse\", or \"no wonder. This 死ぬこともあろう can be translated as \"naturally, he\nwould die\". It's described in the following questions:\n\n * [かわりもしますよ what is the meaning of this も?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/82516/5010)\n * [Using も alone to mean 当然 / “naturally”](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/84635/5010)\n * [Structure of ～くもなろうものだ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/84599/5010)\n\nあろう is the \"volitional\" form of ある, and you're right that it's used here as an\ninferential marker (∼死ぬだろう). You can also say 死にもしよう(さ) here.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T02:11:46.017", "id": "99187", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T02:11:46.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "\"お前\" is not very polite as you understand, but not necessarily gender-\nspecific. A mother can say to her child \"お前も大人になった\" (You've grown up). \"お前\"\nsounds sometimes authoritative (like Yubaba) and sometimes very friendly (like\nZeniba) according to contexts and tones, even in these days. You have a good\nreason to get misguided that the word is for males because guys who love\nauthority speak loud.\n\n\"あたし\" is not age-specific. Old ladies say \"あたしもよ!\" (Me too!) during friendly\nconversations. I guess Miyazaki just wanted to characterize the twin as frank\npersons with no intention of irony.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T04:20:05.077", "id": "99188", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T04:20:05.077", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54245", "parent_id": "99185", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Word order changes the nuance, much as it does in English.\n\n * 遅【おそ】い散歩【さんぽ】 \n * _\" a slow walk\"_\n * 散歩【さんぽ】が遅【おそ】い \n * _\" the walk is slow\"_\n\n(Noting here that 散歩【さんぽ】 means \"a walk, a stroll\".)\n\n> Also to add on, what would 歩くのが遅い mean\n\n歩【ある】く is the basic verb meaning \"to walk\".\n\nAdding the の on the end **nominalizes** this -- it turns this into a special\nkind of noun.\n\nThe が after that marks this noun as the subject.\n\n * 歩【ある】くのが遅【おそ】い \n * _\" the walking is slow\"_ \nSpecifically as in \"the act of walking\", distinct and separate from the\n\"stroll\" sense expressed by the word 散歩【さんぽ】.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T04:53:10.823", "id": "99190", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T04:53:10.823", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "99189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "He is saying the slang word どあほ (ど阿呆) meaning \"total idiot\". 阿呆 means idiot\nand the ど adds emphasis.\n\n<https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A9%E9%98%BF%E5%91%86>\n\nI searched it up and apparently it's some sort of iconic phrase from Slam\nDunk.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T07:56:11.897", "id": "99195", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T07:56:11.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "56216", "parent_id": "99191", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "She says このひとは{LHLLH}.\n\nこの＼ひと is the standard accent for that word/phrase, so there is nothing unusual\nthere.\n\nAs for the raised は, you can raise any particle to make it sound emphasized,\nthough I would consider this to be in the realm of intonation as opposed to\npitch accent (because it is not lexical).\n\nSuch an intonation pattern is not required for a は to be the contrastive は,\nbut it does often cooccur with it.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T07:19:52.837", "id": "99194", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T07:29:43.930", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-04T07:29:43.930", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "99193", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "To me, でも、アメリカンの家には普通です is okay if not totally natural.\n\nIn terms of omission, it drops a part of phrase which should be the source of\noddness.\n\nIn full, it should be\n\n> (アメリカンの家に煙突があるの)は普通です\n\nand 煙突がある(の) is dropped.\n\nCompare\n\n> (アメリカでは(家に煙突があるの))は普通です\n\nDropping the whole phrase inside () (and associated は) results in\n\n> アメリカでは普通です\n\nwhich is more natural. So just leaving a topical phrase works whereas the\nfirst version feels like chopping a sentence.\n\n* * *\n\nCf. _It is (felt) normal for [person]_. would translate to _[person]には普通です_.\nE.g.,\n\n * アメリカ人に(とって)は(家に煙突があるのは)普通です\n\nHere again, the は-phrase アメリカ人には is left and the main clause in () is dropped.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-04T22:48:56.490", "id": "99201", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-04T22:48:56.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99199", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The correction from アメリカン to アメリカ is just a question of vocabulary. アメリカン is\nnot a common word by itself.\n\nI agree the addition of こと is unnecessary.\n\nThe で in アメリカの家では can be understood as delimiting the scope within which the\nmain statement (about something being normal) is true.\n\nに sounds odd here because the sentence lacks a verb that goes with it to\nexplicitly state something (a chimney) exists in a particular place (an\nAmerican house).\n\nIn the following sentence, which uses both, で delimits the scope within which\nthe statement 家に煙突があるのは普通です is true, whereas に modifies the verb ある to denote\nwhere a chimney exists.\n\n> アメリカでは家に煙突があるのは普通です。\n\n* * *\n\nI re-read your question and realized that you chose に not as a location marker\nbut for marking something whose standards something (the normal-ness of having\na chimney) is judged by. に alone is simply not suitable for that. You can use\nにとって instead.\n\n> アメリカの家にとっては普通です。\n\n* * *\n\nI had to add this because many people seem to be misled.\n\nYou can also say:\n\n> アメリカでは普通に家に煙突があります。\n\nThis で cannot be explained as a location marker working on an adjective as it\ndoes on a verb because the sentence has no adjective in it. And there seems to\nbe no good reason to see this で as a different usage from the で in\nアメリカでは家に煙突があるのは普通です.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-05T03:32:31.243", "id": "99206", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-05T16:21:43.100", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-05T16:21:43.100", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99199", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "This is simply because you must use で as a location marker when the predicate\nis an adjective (including no-/na-adjectives like 普通).\n\n * アメリカ **で** はそれは普通です。 \nIt's normal in America.\n\n * ニューヨーク **で** は物価が高いです。 \nPrices are high in New York.\n\n * 東京 **で** は今、桜が綺麗です。 \nIn Tokyo, the cherry blossoms are beautiful right now.\n\n * 動物の体は寒い場所 **で** 大きく、暖かい場所 **で** 小さい。 \nAnimal bodies are larger in cold places and smaller in warm places.\n\nYou can use に as a location particle when it's used with a verb of existence\nsuch as ある and いる. So アメリカの家 **に** は煙突が **ある** is perfectly fine.\n\nアメリカには普通です might be acceptable when some verb that takes に is clearly implied\nin the previous context (e.g., \"I rarely have the opportunity to go to China,\nbut to America, it's common\"), but this doesn't happen often.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-05T03:39:29.377", "id": "99207", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-05T03:39:29.377", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99199", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "**Hello Malu, i assumed that you're a foreigner office worker, who traveled to\nJapan to work for the 1st time. In case you wanted to ask permission from\nothers to smoke, you can say these sentences (depends on context/ situations\nyou're in)**\n\n**1/Sumimasen, kokode tabaco wo sutte moiidesuka ? ( \"Excuse me, can i smoke\nhere ?\" )**\n\nThis is the polite version, when you're speaking with your boss or a stranger\nyou met for the 1st time.\n\n**2/Kokode sutte moii ? ( \"Can i smoke here? \")**\n\nShort and casual version, if you wanted to speak with a JP friend/ colleague\nat your working place.\n\n**Hope my answer will help you have motivation to learn Japanese and having\nfun while working/ living in Japan.**", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T16:57:18.527", "id": "99256", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T16:57:18.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "42363", "parent_id": "99200", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "To give a full breakdown:\n\n[大丈夫]{daijoubu} cannot be \"okay\" in the sense of \"permissible\", but only in\nthe sense of unharmed, in good condition, feeling all right, etc. It overlaps\nto some extent with [元気]{genki}, but the latter is more affirmative - actually\nin high spirits, more than just \"okay\" - and forms different idioms (大丈夫 might\nfor example be used colloquially as something like \"I'm fine, you don't need\nto bother helping me with this\", or \"don't worry, everything will be okay\",\ndepending on context, whereas [お]{o}[元気]{genki}[です]{desu}[か]{ka} is a common\nexpression roughly equivalent to \"How are you?\").\n\nThe plainest form of \"okay\" in the sense of \"permissible\" is [いい]{ii} (also\nwritten 良い), literally \"good\". However, you will definitely not get away with\njust saying that by itself and gesturing - that will just be rude, and call\nattention to your status as a foreigner and lack of effort in trying to\ncommunicate properly. Even formalizing this like いいですか will not realistically\nget you anywhere; you'll want to actually explain what you're asking about.\n\nThe standard idiom here is to use the te-form of a verb (roughly comparable to\nforming a participle or gerundive in English using the `-ing` suffix) plus\n[も]{mo} + いい. The literal meaning works out something along the lines of \"also\nokay in the case of whatever-ing\", i.e., \"will the situation still be good if\nI do whatever?\".\n\nIn the current example, we use the verb [吸]{su}[う]{u} - in the primary sense,\nto breathe or to suck up/in, but also to smoke (cigarettes). We can be more\nexplicit by saying what we propose to 吸う - in this case, [タバコ]{tabako} (a\nloanword from the English \"tobacco\", normally used specifically for\ncigarettes). Thus, fully elaborated,「タバコ[を]{o}[す]{su}[って]{tte}もいいですか？」. In\nDaniel's example, we also add [すみません]{sumimasen} (a set expression for \"excuse\nme\"; the hyper-literal meaning is something more like \"the matter is not\nsettled\" or \"I still owe you something\") and [ここ]{koko}[で]{de} meaning \"here\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-09T01:05:22.230", "id": "99265", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T01:05:22.230", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "99200", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The book doesn’t say using 〜と in non-past sentences isn’t OK. It just\nconsiders it out of its scope because that usage was already explained in the\nfirst book (初級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック). Note that the book says ここで扱うのは次のような形式です\nat the beginning of Chapter 30.\n\nThe term 事実的条件 is used in Chapter 24 of the first book, too. As you\nunderstood, it appears to refer to only sentences that talk about something\nthat actually happened, obviously in past tense. The most basic usage of 〜と in\nnon-past tense, which is the main topic of the section in which 事実的条件 is\nmentioned under もう少し, isn’t given any name like 〜条件. It is just explained as\n反復的・恒常的に成り立つ依存関係. I think that’s what it is.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-05T00:35:12.340", "id": "99204", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-05T00:41:28.540", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-05T00:41:28.540", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99202", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "There is nothing rare about this という. You should read it as 「次こそは」という意識. It\nappears to follow a particle only because the quotation it follows happens to\nend with one. 次こそは is not a complete sentence, of course. You could make it\ncomplete by adding something like 成功する or うまくやる if you want to, but it’s not\nnecessary because 次こそは alone is understood as a declaration of the person’s\ndetermination to do something better next time around.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-06T06:58:50.597", "id": "99221", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-06T06:58:50.597", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99213", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It's **word** -dependent. The formal version of that sentence is:\n\n> 私 **は** 毎朝10キロ走っています。\n\nThere must be は after 私. There **must not** be any particle after 毎朝. You can\nadd を after 10キロ, but it's completely optional, and adding it does not make\nthe sentence sound any more formal.\n\nMany words work both as a noun/adjective and as an adverb. If you look up a\nword in a dictionary, you can see its part of speech like this:\n\n\n\nSince 毎朝 is an adverb, you can use it without any particle.\n\nThe number of such words is large, and you basically have to remember them\nindividually. But there are some tendencies.\n\n * Time-related words: 毎朝 (every morning), 昨日 (yesterday), 今日 (today), 明日 (tomorrow), 来年 (next year), 昨夜 (last night), 昔 (long time ago), 最近 (recently)\n * [Quantity-related words](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36890/5010): 10キロ, 3つ, 5回, 一部 (part; partly), 全部 (everything)\n * Suffixes such as くらい, 通り, ごろ\n * Others: 偶然, 大抵, 早速\n\nNote that English is equally confusing. There are words that act both as both\na noun and a verb ( _report_ , _drink_ , _increase_ ), words that act both as\nan adjective and an adverb ( _fast_ , _early_ , _daily_ ), words that act as a\nnoun, an adjective and an adverb ( _most_ ), and so on. Learners must look\nthem up in a dictionary.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-06T03:00:01.577", "id": "99219", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-06T03:00:01.577", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99214", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, I think it keeps the original pitch accent before the [eba-to-ya\ncontraction](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/12580/5010).\n\n * あそぶ‾: あそばな\\ければ あそばな\\きゃ\n * なく‾: なかな\\ければ なかな\\きゃ\n * がんば\\る: がんばら\\なければ がんばら\\なきゃ\n * およ\\ぐ: およが\\なければ およが\\なきゃ\n * か\\く: かか\\なければ かか\\なきゃ\n\n * あかい‾: あか\\ければ あか\\けりゃ\n * あお\\い: あお\\ければ あお\\けりゃ\n * お\\おい: お\\おければ お\\おけきゃ\n * こ\\い: こ\\ければ こ\\けりゃ", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-06T03:48:31.687", "id": "99220", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-06T03:48:31.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99216", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The auxiliary べき is inflected like a Classical _-i_ adjective. Or I guess,\nmore historically accurately, as a Classical _-ki_ adjective.\n\n_(Note: This was introduced to me using the adnominal_ -ki _form. Other\nmaterials might start from the terminal / dictionary form ending in_ -shi\n_instead.)_\n\n活用形【かつようけい】 | Inflection | Form \n---|---|--- \n未然形【みぜんけい】 | Irrealis / Incomplete | --- \n連用形【れんようけい】 | Continuative / Adverbial | べく \n終止形【しゅうしけい】 | Terminal / Predicative \n(also \"Dictionary Form\") | べし \n連体形【れんたいけい】 | Adnominal | べき \n已然形【いぜんけい】 | Realis / Conditional | べけれ \n命令形【めいれいけい】 | Imperative | --- \n \n * _Note: Many Japanese grammars include a_ mizenkei _for adjectives, as this is the canonical conjugation for verbs for constructing the negative. However, for adjectives, the negative simply comes after the adverbial, and moreover it is clearly separable as you can insert a particle between the adverbial ～く and the following ない._\n\nSince べく is clearly the adverbial conjugation, yes, such phrases are\nsyntactically and grammatically adverbial.\n\n* * *\n\n_PS: Can anyone help file a bug report for how the furigana are not working\nwhen included within a table?_", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-06T02:56:33.430", "id": "99218", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-06T17:07:18.670", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-06T17:07:18.670", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "99217", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "First of all, you have to understand the following two points:\n\n * -ている has two functions, \"progressive\" and \"resultant state\" (see [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010) if you need a refresher).\n * いらっしゃる is the honorific verb for all of いる, 行く and 来る.\n\nTherefore, one honorific version of 持ってくる is **持っていらっしゃる** , and you can make\nthis simply by replacing くる with いらっしゃる. Its negative-past version is\n持っていらっしゃらなかった. Another honorific version of 持ってくる is お持ちになる, which can somehow\nmean \"to bring (here)\" or \"to take (to somewhere)\" without explicitly saying\nくる or いく. So if you answered 持っていらっしゃらなかった or お持ちにならなかった, rest assured that\nthese are perfectly correct honorific translations of \"[He] did not bring\n[it]\".\n\nHowever, 持ってきていらっしゃらなかった is also a correct phrase. In this case, いらっしゃる is the\nhonorific version of いる (because there is already くる).\n\nThe difference between 持っていらっしゃらなかった and 持ってきていらっしゃらなかった is basically the same\ndifference between 持ってこなかった and 持ってきていなかった. This may seem confusing, but both\nof these are valid translations of \"[He] did not bring [it]\", and are used\nmore of less interchangeably to describe a past event. This use of -ていない is a\ntricky topic but has little to do with honorifics themselves. Please read:\n[Why is a verb in the past (た形) contradicted with\n～ていない?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42242/5010)\n\nFinally, 持ってきていらっしゃらなかった can possibly have a progressive meaning (\"He was not\nbringing it (on his way)\") depending on the context, but it's not the primary\ninterpretation of this phrase when there is no context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T02:28:39.093", "id": "99227", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T02:39:01.030", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-07T02:39:01.030", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99224", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "You can only use multiple です/ます when they can stand on their own as\nindependent sentences. Like おいしいですから、たくさん食べました。When you seperate it, it can be\n\" おいしいです。\" and \"たくさん食べました。\"And normally the first sentence would be before\n~が、~けど（S1+V1 but S1+S2)or ～から、～ので(Because S1+V1, S2+V2). For です then you can\nuse as AですからB without \"、\". And it's also grammarly correct if you remove です\nbefore ~けど, ～から、～ので (for Ajective な you have to remove な + だ ) even if it was\na formal sentence. For example: 健康は第一だから、納豆は人気です。But while we can have clause\nA in the plain form and clause B in the polite form, if you reverse it then\nthe sentence (健康は第一ですから、納豆は人気だ) is grammarly wrong. Also you can use twice\nwhen you quote a sentence, like: コウイチは 「納豆はおいしいです」 と言いました。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T05:39:59.760", "id": "99230", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T05:39:59.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "56245", "parent_id": "99226", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "> So I wonder if this was a Japanese slang for something and how do I\n> translate it?\n\nPerhaps you read \"kanji\" (or かんじ in hiragana, or カンジ in katakana), and only\nthink of 漢字 - i.e., the name for the fancy characters the textbook is making\nyou slowly and painfully memorize.\n\nHowever, another common word with the same pronunciation is 感じ, which Jisho\nglosses as \"feeling; sense; impression​\". In the two contexts you've\nhighlighted - after こんな and after いい - the intended word will almost always be\n感じ, because these are common idioms.\n\n「いい感じ」, literally a \"good feeling\", carries a sense of comfort or ease or\npleasantness.\n\n```\n\n 色 まぜ ペン で イイ カンジ に します。\n \n colour+mixing+pen by-means-of good feeling towards is-done\n \n \"By using a (???) pen, we/I make [it] nice [to look at].\"\n \n```\n\n(I suspect that 色まぜペン is a specific term with a specific meaning, but search\nresults don't seem very helpful. From the photos, it might just be that\nthey're pens with ink that's selected for pleasant colour blending. Or if the\ncontext is digital art, maybe this refers to a specific tool in the drawing\nprogram?)\n\n「こんな感じ」, literally \"this kind of feeling\", is usually better translated as\n\"like this\" or similar. It's often used by itself, as an implied question\n(\"This way? Am I doing it right?\").\n\n```\n\n こんなカンジの 目 を 描き たい 人 向け。\n \n this way -categorized eye (accusative) drawing -want person -intended-for\n \n \"For those who want to draw eyes [that look] like this.\"\n \n```\n\nThe word 感じ is not at all slang, but it is used in some colloquialisms; and\nthe choice here to use katakana is definitely for a specific stylistic effect.\nBecause the text seems to be about drawing faces, I guess that the author\nwants to emphasize the idea of a cool, in-vogue appearance created by drawing\nwith specific techniques.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T05:38:23.520", "id": "99229", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T05:38:23.520", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "99228", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "**任せなさい >>> It means \"Just leave it to me !\" or \"You can count on me !\"**\n\nI have a feeling that this character felt very confident about his/her own\nskill, and volunteered to do something.\n\nHope this helps you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T06:18:10.927", "id": "99232", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T06:18:10.927", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "42363", "parent_id": "99231", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "なかれ is an archaic way of speaking, found in texts such as prophecies,\ntranslations of Shakespeare, fairy tales, and ancient spells in fantasy\nworlds. Unless you want to intentionally imitate these styles, you should not\nuse it yourself. It is sufficient to understand its meaning. ～するなかれ and\n～することなかれ are almost the same, but the former feels older and more orthodox to\nme. See also: [Grammar of\n\"なかれ\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/53495/5010)\n\n～ず is a common expression in modern standard Japanese. あえて誤解をおそれず can be used\nwithout any issues in a normal formal text. See: [What is the difference\nbetween the negative forms -ず and\n-ぬ?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/235/5010) However, in classical\nJapanese, ず was also used as the predicative form (終止形), so you may see ず\nappearing at the end of an archaic sentence. Its meaning is the same as ない.\nEither way, it does not have a negative imperative meaning (i.e., \"Don't\").\n\nあえて is simply an adverb with the same meaning as English \"dare\". It means\nsomething like \"doing even though it's unnecessary\" or \"doing even after\nconsidering the risks\". It is not something to be paired with なかれ or ず for\nmemorization. あえて～するな corresponds to \"Don't dare ～\" or \"Don't do ～\nunnecessarily\", and あえて～しろ just means \"Dare do ～\" or \"Do ～ daringly\". As an\nexception, if you're doing [漢文訓読](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanbun), あえて～ず\nis said to [have a special meaning](https://www.try-\nit.jp/chapters-14482/sections-14486/lessons-14901/practice-3/), but you don't\nneed to worry about it unless you're studying _kanbun_ seriously. Most\nJapanese people learn about this once in high school, but they usually forget\nit by the time they graduate.\n\nTLDR: Unless you're seriously studying old materials, focus on memorizing the\nusage of あえて and ず individually. Don't try to use なかれ except when you're doing\nsome roleplay.\n\n**EDIT** : If 敢えて出社せず and あえて誤解をおそれず are book titles, there are two ways of\ninterpretating them:\n\n 1. ず is the old predicative form, and the author intentionally imitated old literature. If this is the case, 敢えて出社せず = 敢えて出社しない = \"I dare not wend unto the office!\".\n 2. ず is simply the continuation form of ぬ; 敢えて出社せず = 敢えて出社せずに = 敢えて出社しないで = \"Daringly choosing not to go to the office...\".\n\nAssuming they are book titles, I personally feel 敢えて出社せず is 1, while\n敢えて誤解をおそれず is 2. If it's 敢えて出社するなかれ, it's an negative imperative, \"Dare thou\nnot wend unto the office\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T13:49:46.027", "id": "99234", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T01:14:14.140", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-08T01:14:14.140", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99233", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "They both could be used in that case. There is a slight difference in nuances,\nbut it's not critical.\n\nI`d use 綺麗 if I saw or heard someone or something gorgeous, showy, colorful.\nSomeone or something that stood out. For example: 綺麗な女性を見ました。 I saw a\nbeautiful lady. (Meaning, she stood out from all other women.)\n\n美しい, even though it also means 'beautiful', is not always about appearance or\nother visible or audible characteristics. It could mean that someone or\nsomething appealed to my eye _or heart_ , even if it wasn't as eye-catching as\nwith 綺麗.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T20:02:01.443", "id": "99236", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T20:02:01.443", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "56113", "parent_id": "99235", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "綺麗 is more commonly used as a compliment for a woman’s appearances. It may be\nused for someone English speakers might describe as “pretty” but not\nnecessarily “cute”. When you say someone is 美しい, I would think of someone who\nis elegantly beautiful not only in her physical features but also in her\ndemeanor. It could sound a bit too serious as a casual compliment.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T02:40:51.617", "id": "99244", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T02:40:51.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99235", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Both of your cases are OK, and it can be used to any ages. However, I think\n「綺麗な男」 is a slightly more unusual expression than 「美しい男」.\n\n「綺麗」 has nuances of clean and clear. I think that is the difference. The sound\nof「風鈴」(wind-bell) is 「綺麗」and also「美しい」, although in this case 「綺麗」is more\ncommonly used.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T06:35:54.590", "id": "99253", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T06:18:12.070", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-09T06:18:12.070", "last_editor_user_id": "56257", "owner_user_id": "56257", "parent_id": "99235", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Agreed with other answers that 綺麗 focuses on the physical appearance, while\n美しい also includes mental/situational aspects.\n\n> Does it matter what age a person is? Is one only appropriate if the person\n> is young like in their 20s, late teens or a teenager? Do you only use one\n> when they are in their 30s or older?\n\nYou can use it for any ages, and regardless of their gender. 綺麗 does require\nthat the subject is 整っている, i.e. things need to be neat. For example, you can't\ndescribe a hand with scars and dirty with oil 綺麗, because it's not neat. On\nthe other hand, 美しい doesn't have such restriction and you can pretty much use\nit for anything (even when the subject is not neat).\n\nFor example, 「傷だらけの、機械油にまみれた美しい手」is completely fine, whereas\n「傷だらけの、機械油にまみれた綺麗な手」is contradictory.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T07:45:49.727", "id": "99254", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T07:45:49.727", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "99235", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "機会【きかい】 is an important part of that, too. It helps to address this part of\nthe sentence as if it were a noun.\n\nSo, in this sentence 武勲【ぶくん】をあげる機会【きかい】 means _a chance to demonstrate\ndistinguished military service​_.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T21:28:09.703", "id": "99239", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T22:07:11.910", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-07T22:07:11.910", "last_editor_user_id": "56113", "owner_user_id": "56113", "parent_id": "99238", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Personally I find both of these sentences a bit confusing, because I rarely\nsee 自分【じぶん】 when more than one person is mentioned. However, the first\nsentence feels more off because first person is mentioned.\n\n自分【じぶん】 is generally used to show a viewpoint of a speaker and with 私【わたし】 the\nspeaker is clearly not the person before は. Therefore, viewpoint is\ninconsistent.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T23:10:10.640", "id": "99241", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T23:30:31.473", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-07T23:30:31.473", "last_editor_user_id": "56113", "owner_user_id": "56113", "parent_id": "99240", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I had no difficulty understanding the sentence the way it was intended. It is\ndefinitely not grammatically incorrect. It might just sound more natural, or\neasier to read, if 自分 were closer to the verb of which it is the object.\n\n> 妻は私が今でも自分を愛していると信じている。\n\nIf the question is whether the sentence is ambiguous, the answer is certainly\nyes. But the second sentence is equally ambiguous. I don’t think this\nambiguity has much to do with 自分 because the following sentence is also\nambiguous as to who 彼女 refers to. It could easily be another woman. 自分 at\nleast avoids the risk of this misunderstanding.\n\n> 妻は私が今でも彼女を愛していると信じている。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-07T23:55:11.427", "id": "99242", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-07T23:55:11.427", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99240", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This may seem confusing and inconsistent if you analyze this based on the\nmeaning of the English term \"shapeshift\", but it's not really a difficult\nconcept.\n\nIn English, I think that \"shapeshift\" typically refers to significant\ntransformations, such as a cat turning into a human or a human turning into a\nwolf (correct me if I'm wrong). However, the meaning of the verb 化ける (\n_bakeru_ ) in Japanese is somewhat broader. It can describe not only a cat\ntransforming into a human, but also an umbrella or a cat transforming into\ntheir _yōkai_ versions ([ _kasa-obake_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasa-\nobake) and _bake-neko_ ), as well as a human retaining their original form and\nbecoming a ghost. For example, in a manga, it is common for a human character\nto say \"私が死んだら化けて出てやる (If I die, I'll come back as a ghost/yūrei)!\" using the\nverb _bakeru_.\n\nNaturally, the range of what お化け ( _obake_ ; a [noun\nversion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/32311/5010) of 化ける) can refer to\nis quite extensive. It encompasses all sorts of creatures that have \"an\noriginal form\" such as a human, a fox, a cat, an umbrella, a pot, a lantern,\nand so on. When people say お化け without context, it typically refers to\ntraditional Japanese creatures and human ghosts ( _yūrei_ ) like\n[these](https://www.irasutoya.com/2013/08/blog-post_9820.html).\n\nOn the other hand, inherently unique creatures/species like _kappa_ , _oni_\nand _tengu_ are called _yōkai_ , but they tend not to be referred to as\n_obake_. Note that an _oni_ is not a shapeshifter just as western goblins and\nogres aren't shapeshifters. That said, the boundaries between _yōkai_ and\n_obake_ are not always very strict, and different people may have slightly\ndifferent ideas about them.\n\nIn the narrow sense of \"shapeshift\", such as when a human turns into a wolf or\na cat turns into a human, people use 変身 (henshin). 変身 also includes\ntransformations like a human becoming Spider-Man or Ultraman.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-11T04:51:23.993", "id": "99296", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-11T06:36:16.700", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-11T06:36:16.700", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99243", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In short, you can't. The way Kanji compound are read is never certain, also\none who is well-versed in Japanese could have a basic idea, but one could\nnever know if two Kanji's when put together, would be read as:\n\n * on-on like 日{にち}曜{よう} 習{しゅう}慣{かん} 現{げん}在{ざい}\n * kun-kun like 街{まち}角{かど} 片{かた}隅{すみ} 隙{すき}間{ま}\n * on-kun like 大{だい}好{す}き 両{りょう}手{て}\n * kun-on like 湯{ゆ}桶{とう} 片{かた}方{ほう}\n * a special reading for the two kanji's together 今日{きょう} 昨日{きのう} 欠片{かけら}\n\nSometimes same kanji's, when in different contexts and meaning different\nthings, will be read differently as well: 人間{にんげん} human and 人間{じんかん} the\nhuman world. So, you just have to know them one by one.\n\nHowever, there are patterns, and quite a lot of patterns. For example, the\npair 日曜 is always read as にちよう coming from 日曜日, and then 朝 on its own, is\nalways read as あさ. So intuitively anyone who speak Japanese, even if seeing\nthis word for the first time, would read にちようあさ. 朝 is rarely read as ちょう,\nwhich is its on-reading.\n\nFor 今学期, you have to note first that 今, when read as いま, means now. But when\nread as こん, it means \"this\" or \"the current\" like 今週{こんしゅう} this week and\n今月{こんげつ} this month. 今年 is this year, and it's not こんねん, but read as\nことし.(Yeah, that's why I say you cannot know for sure. Just gotta see enough of\nthem to know by rote.) 学期 just means school term and is read as がっき, and since\n\"this current term\" makes much more sense than \"now-term\", 今学期 is read as\nこんがっき and not いまがっき.\n\n**TL;DR** A general rule does not exist for reading Kanji compounds. However,\nthe majority of compounds will be read as on-on, and some Kanji's like 片 are\nalmost never read in its on-yomi, but kun-yomi. One has to just know them.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T20:44:17.537", "id": "99260", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T20:44:17.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "程度は知ったほうが良い simply means literally \"It's better to know how far you're going!\"\nOr if you wanna paraphrase it and contextualize it, \"you're going too far!\"\n\n程度 means progress/depth, and here it's just \"how far (one) is going.\"\n\nXXしたほうがいい is common expression, and means \"it's better to do XX\" or \"Should do\nXX\". It's what people use to give advice. Note how the verb is in past tense,\nbut the meaning conveyed is not in past tense.\n\nBreaking the ほうがいい part down, we know that ほう・方 is indicating choice, and\nliterally means \"the side\", so 知った方 means \"the side of knowing\" が is the\nsubject-particle, いい is good. Together, 知ったほうがいい is literally \"The side/choice\nof knowing is good\", or, \"You should know.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T20:57:14.890", "id": "99261", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T20:57:14.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99246", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "> その時間を制服のような借り物の声で話すこと\n\nThe verb here is 話す. その時間 is the を-marked part, and 【【制服のよう】な【借り物】】の声 is a\nで-marked part. The entire phrase to that point modifies こと.\n\n```\n\n その 時間 を 制服 の よう な\n that time(duration) (acc.) uniform -type-of resembl-ing\n \n 借り 物 の 声 で 話す こと\n borrow -ed-thing -type-of voice by-means-of speak -action\n \n```\n\n\"[The act of] talking then in the voice [of someone] borrowing a uniform\"\n(metaphor for someone who was deputized?), I guess. The のs here seem a bit\nabstract.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T12:23:37.647", "id": "99255", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T00:02:31.350", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-09T00:02:31.350", "last_editor_user_id": "627", "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "99247", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Do you realize that しないで in 気にしないでね is one part and should not be separated?\n\nしないで is one of the te-forms of しない, the other being しなくて. Te-form has several\nfunctions, and the one being used here is to make requests. When making\nrequests, people prefer しないで over しなくて, so the sentence 気にしないでね is requesting\nthe other party to not mind.\n\n> 気にしないでね。 Please don't mind.\n\nThen, the other one 気にすることないわ has no element of request in it, so the speaker\nis talking about self. \"I will not mind.\" It's pretty much the same thing as\n気にしない, both mean \"I don't mind\", but 気にすることない has a stronger emphasis, and\nindicates that the speaker is not just not mining now, but also won't mind in\nthe future. Let's translate them literally into English and see:\n\n> 気にしない I don't mind. (or I won't mind) \n> 気にすることない The action of me minding doesn't exist.\n\nSee how the second one brings a stronger emphasis? I know for a English\nspeaker, the second sentence sounds redundant and too wordy, but that's\nliterally what the Japanese sentence means, and in Japanese, it's a perfectly\nfine sentence, not redundant or wordy at all.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T21:05:05.560", "id": "99262", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T21:05:05.560", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99248", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You shouldn't translate it literally. As it was mentioned in the comment\nsection, カモにする is a set expression that has an established meaning: _to easily\nattain victory._\n\nA slang term using the word 'duck' was born from the fact that it was easy to\ncatch them by taking advantage of the duck's habit of taking off for food at\nsunset and returning to the place where it was in the daytime at dawn. Because\nof their large size, taste and abundance in numbers (they are migratory birds\nthat migrate to ponds and swamps in Japan from autumn to winter) they were an\neasy prey. Hence, that expression.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T06:05:36.923", "id": "99251", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T06:05:36.923", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "56113", "parent_id": "99249", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "もん here is a contraction / casual way of saying もの. See the \"Other forms\"\nsection at the bottom of [Jisho's もの\nentry](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%82%82%E3%81%AE)\n\nSatoshi's opponent saying まあこんなもんよ in a more literal sense is something like\n\"Now, it's this sort of thing / way!\"\n\nSo depending on the character or demeanor of Satoshi's opponent, \"How are you\ndoing now?\" could be an acceptable subtitle.\n\nIf the battle is more intense / Satoshi's opponent is more aggressive, it\ncould even be translated to something like \"So this is how it's going to be!\"\nor \"You're going to lose like this now!\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T06:19:39.457", "id": "99252", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T06:19:39.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30339", "parent_id": "99250", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "In English, \"No smoking\" is grammatically not an imperative, but it\neffectively has such a meaning (\"Don't smoke\").\n\nLikewise, ～なし is grammatically not an imperative (it's just \"No ～\"), but\ndepending on the context, it can be interpreted as a (negative) imperative\n(\"Don't ～\"). Although っこ and なし are often paired together, なし by itself can\neffectively mean \"Don't\".\n\n * それ以上はなしだ。 No more. / Don't ask more.\n * 反論はナシですよ。 No rebuttals please. / Don't argue back.\n\nBesides, ～っこなし is not necessarily a negative imperative, either. For example,\n勝てっこなしだよ means \"There is no chance of winning\" rather than \"Let's not win\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T19:29:51.303", "id": "99295", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T19:29:51.303", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99257", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Your understanding is correct.\n\n寄せ集め means something like a \"jumble\", but with the implication that the\nquality is bad. Large in quantity, low in quality. That's what 寄せ集め\ninsinuates.\n\n寄せ集めの色 is referring to the masses of 黄巾賊, those who identifies themselves by\nwearing a yellow band(黄巾). So the 色 here is just 黄色, a symbolic reference to\nthe rebel army.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-08T21:13:56.333", "id": "99263", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-08T21:13:56.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99258", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "言ってる is an informal and colloquial version of 言っている, and it sounds fairly out-\nof-place if used in a solemn narrative part of a novel. So let's compare the\nfollowing two phrases instead:\n\n 1. たった今確定した事実を **言う** かのように\n 2. たった今確定した事実を **言っている** かのように\n\n言っている can only refer to something that has already been said, so when this\nphrase refers to something yet to be said (i.e., \"as if she is going to say\"),\n言うかのように is the only option. In your case, however, the two phrases are\ninterchangeable because they refer to something that was just said. Maybe\n言うかのように might sound slightly more literary (don't ask me why), but the\ndifference is minimal.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T19:10:26.387", "id": "99294", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T19:10:26.387", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99259", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "いうかのように and いって（い）るかのように are practically interchangeable in this context.\n\nI feel a slightest nuance in focus, though. The version with the dictionary\nform sounds like it is referring to the speaker’s state of mind that led to\nher saying what she said ( _”as if to say …”_ ), whereas the version with the\ncontinuous form describes how she was saying it when she was actually saying\nit ( _”as if she was saying …”_ ).\n\nThe difference is very subtle.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-11T10:46:49.453", "id": "99299", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-11T10:46:49.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99259", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "**TL;DR** There is no relationship between the usage of a/the to the usage of\nは/が. They belong to completely different categories and should not be\ncompared. It's like comparing apples to oranges.\n\nI'm not gonna explain the differences of は and が here as it's a lengthy\ndescription and one could easily find a LOT of resources online dedicated to\nto the usages of は and が, so I'm gonna stick to your question here.\n\n**First** , let's note how は and が and a and the have different grammatical\nfunctions in their corresponding languages, and those do not line up.\n\n> a - the indefinite **article** to precede an unspecific item \n> the - the definite **article** to precede a specified item or commonly-\n> known item (THE sun, THE moon, THE Pacific Ocean)\n\n> は - the particle marking the topic of the sentence, could be subject, could\n> be object, could be any other info like time/place/etc. \n> が - marks strictly the subject of the sentence.\n\nSee how they do not line up at all? In your examples they do, but it is in no\nway indicative of a general pattern.\n\n**Second** , English has not only a and the, but also article-less sentences.\nConsider the following sentence:\n\n> Cats eat fish. \n>\n\nIf we change it to either `a cat eats fish`, or `the cat eats fish`, the\nmeaning would not be the same. In Japanese, `Cats eat fish` should be\n\n> 猫{ねこ}は魚{さかな}を食{た}べる\n\nThe は means we're discussing the topic `cats` in general, so in general, cats\nare a kind of animal that would eat fish. Now consider this:\n\n> Where is the fish ?! The cat ate it. \n> 魚{さかな}はどこ？！ 猫{ねこ}が食{た}べた。\n\nHere, the が makes cats the subject, telling that it's the cat that performed\nthe action of eating the fish. The English sentence uses the because it's a\nknown cat to the speaker and listener, but in Japanese we use が because we are\nnot discussing cats **in general.** This is contradictory to the statement\nthat `if we are correctly using a definite article such as \"THE\" in English to\ndescribe the subject or topic of a sentence, then we would tend to use は in\nJapanese`. Note that Japanese doesn't have articles either.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-09T15:09:42.677", "id": "99271", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T15:09:42.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99267", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "As you pointed out, such a similarity does exist, and mentioning it on the\nfirst page of the relevant explanation in a Japanese textbook can work well as\nan icebreaker to draw the reader's interest. In fact, [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/51/5010) is the most-voted answer\non this site, and has a similar explanation. Without explaining it in this\nway, some learners might not even realize that distinguishing between は and が\nis important.\n\nHowever, if understanding the difference between は and が were as simple as\nthis, learners would not be so confused. In reality, the usage of a/the and\nは/が differ in most cases, and it would take several dozen pages of explanation\njust to give learners a rough understanding of how to use them. Basically,\nonce you realize that these differences are important, it's faster to learn\nhow to use them by forgetting their connections to the language you already\nknow.\n\nI have an English grammar book for Japanese high school students, and it has a\nchapter of several dozen pages solely on articles. Most of the content written\nthere cannot be compared to the differences between は and が at all.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T00:20:53.937", "id": "99278", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T00:20:53.937", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Xに **でも** なって means \"to become X **or something** \". This でも is a particle\nthat means \"or something (similar)\". See: [Meaning of \"でも\" in\n\"食事でもどうですか？\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21519/5010)\n\n * プロのシェフにでもなったような気分だ。 \nI feel like I've become a professional chef or something.\n\n * 小説家にでもなって自分の物語を世界に伝えたい。 \nI want to become something like a novelist to share my story with the world.\n\nXにもなって means \"even after becoming X\", so the correct answer is B.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T04:03:42.833", "id": "99281", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T04:03:42.833", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99268", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "No, you cannot know. The Japanese naming convention is that you could use the\nKanji's you like, then attribute **ANY** readings to it. You can have a name\nspelt as 山田 then have it read as `BANANA` and that's completely valid.\n\nEven among native Japanese, no one can be exactly sure of the exact reading of\nanother person's name, so it's always better to politely ask. However, one\ncould deduce a possible reading given the knowledge of names they already\nhave. That's why the guy thought 越前 was to be read as こしまえ, as that was the\nmost likely.\n\nIn an anime(I forgot which one) there was a guy names 星空, but had it read as\n`NASA`. Any Japanese people would read `HOSHIZORA` upon seeing this name,\nuntil instructed to read it as `NASA`.\n\n(Yes, he was referring to the NASA from National Aeronautics and Space\nAdministration in the US)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-09T15:18:12.417", "id": "99272", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T15:18:12.417", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It's short for ものじゃない.\n\n> すてき！！こういうこせい的などくそう的なまちがいはだれにもやれる **もんじゃない** わ \n> Awesome!! This kind of unique, stupid mistake is **not** some **thing**\n> anyone can do!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-09T15:22:16.717", "id": "99273", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T15:22:16.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99270", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This やら is actually from やる in it's passive form (やられる) + ていません, which in the\nend gives you やられていません. The word やる has lots of different meanings, but from\nthe context, I'd say it's something like 'not being done' or 'not being\nfinished' or 'not being beaten'.\n\nSo, this Suzuna character says something like:\n\n> Huh? It's kind of like, 'I'm not really being beaten,' isn't it?\n\nTo which the second character, Platinum, asks:\n\n> Huh, what do you mean...\n\nAnd Suzuna answers:\n\n> I mean this.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-09T21:54:22.540", "id": "99275", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-09T21:54:22.540", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "56113", "parent_id": "99274", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "クロ and シロ are originally police jargon meaning \"guilty\" and \"innocent\",\nrespectively. グレー means \"suspicious\".\n\n * <https://jisho.org/word/%E7%99%BD>\n * <https://jisho.org/word/%E9%BB%92>\n\nIn your case, \"extremely gray\" is a mistranslation because 限りなく is an\nadverbial form and thus modifies (白に)近い, not グレー. 限りなく白に近いグレー refers to gray\nthat is very close to white. In other words, 99% innocent.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-09T23:50:04.143", "id": "99277", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T03:14:06.973", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-10T03:14:06.973", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99276", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "かな in modern colloquial Japanese means \"I wonder\" or \"...no?\", but this type\nof かな never appears in classical literature. When you see かな in haiku, it's\nalmost always an exclamatory particle similar in purpose to \"O\", \"oh\" or \"!\"\nin English.\n\n * [What is the conjugation of 「悲しきかな」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/90506/5010)\n\nThe corresponding entry on jisho.org seems to be\n[this](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%93%89). It's a little hard to find a natural\nequivalent of this type of かな in modern Japanese, but it would be \"(～である)なあ\"\nor \"～よ\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T03:21:27.457", "id": "99280", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T03:27:37.720", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-10T03:27:37.720", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99279", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It seems like you are not interested in learning the language(the vocabulary\nand the grammars), but just want a phrase that asks for permission to shoot\nvideos nicely. As such, I will not explain on the grammar structure of the\nsentence or the usage of words. Just the sentence, here you go:\n\n> Is it OK for me to take photos/videos here? \n> ここで撮影してもよろしいですか？ \n> Kokode satsuei shitemo yoroshii desu ka?\n\nThat'll cover both photos and videos.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T05:36:09.587", "id": "99284", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T05:36:09.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99282", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "目は通して is related to the phrase 目を通す which means \"to look over\". Changing out は\nfor を can be seen as setting the overall topic and or emphasis / comparison to\nsomething else (e.g I looked over this thing, but not the other thing).\n\nIt's also in the て form here and paired with ある to mean \"has been done\" or \"X\nis in a resulting state\". So 目は通してある is \"It has been looked over / at\"\n\n既に is simply just \"already\".\n\nSo in full we have\n\n> 声を落とせ。既に目は通してある。\n>\n> Lower your voice. I've already looked it over.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T08:15:23.757", "id": "99287", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T08:15:23.757", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "30339", "parent_id": "99285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "[目を通す is a common\nidiom](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%9B%AE%E3%82%92%E9%80%9A%E3%81%99) you have\nto remember, but this 通す is a transitive verb that means \"to pass (something)\"\nor \"to let (something) pass through\". It's used like this:\n\n * パイプに水を通した。 \nI passed water through the pipe.\n\n * このフィルムは水は通さないが空気は通す。 \nThis film doesn't let water pass but lets air pass.\n\nSo the literal meaning of 書類に目を通す is something like \"to pass one's eyes\nthrough the document\" or \"to make one's eyes go through the document\". I think\nyou can now imagine why the idiom conveys the action of skimming a document to\nget a general sense of its content.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T09:46:14.627", "id": "99288", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T10:14:58.053", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-10T10:14:58.053", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It's `信頼して + い + なさる`. 呈する is not used in this sentence.\n\nなさる is a godan verb that not only serves an honorific for する but also attaches\nthe masu-stem of any verb and acts as an honorific auxiliary:\n\n * 食べなさる to eat (honorific)\n * 食べなさります to eat (polite + honorific)\n * 食べなさりました ate (polite + honorific + past)\n * 食べなされ Eat please! (honorific + imperative)\n * 食べていなさる is eating (honorific + progressive)\n\nNote that these are correct but dated expressions. They mainly appear today as\npart of the role language of old people or fictional samurai.\n\nIn modern Japanese, you are probably more familiar with the irregular\nconjugated forms of なさる. Actually, the familiar ～なさい form is originally a\nslurred version of ～なされ:\n\n * **お** 食べなさ **い** ます to eat (honorific; see [this](https://learnjapanesedaily.com/japanese-%E3%81%8A-%E3%81%AA%E3%81%95%E3%82%8B-grammar-o-nasaru.html))\n * 食べなさい Eat!\n * 食べていなさい Keep eating!\n\nSee:\n\n * [Proper form of なさる - なさります or なさいます](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32700/5010)\n * [なさい and ください using い-stem instead of う-stem](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/91192/5010)\n * [what grammatical structures in this word 考えなさんな?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/83410/5010)\n\nJFYI, 呈する is a tricky verb. You can say 運転なさる or 勉強なさる, but instead of 呈なさる or\n愛なさる, you must say 呈しなさる or 愛しなさる. See: [Conjugation of する verbs like\n発する](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/78047/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T15:13:01.200", "id": "99290", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T15:44:11.353", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-10T15:44:11.353", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99289", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Before discussing whether it's unnatural or not, the main issue here is that\nmost young people probably have never seen or heard such an expression. As for\nmyself, I can only recall that I might have heard my grandparents using it\nabout 30 years ago, but I have no idea whether it's dialectal or simply old.\nYou can safely forget あて meaning \"per\", and use ～あたり or ～につき instead, as your\nfriends say.\n\nあて meaning \"to\" in the context of mailing is very common.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-10T16:32:37.937", "id": "99292", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-10T16:32:37.937", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99291", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "* 規模 is \"scale\" or \"size\", not \"scheme\". Since 力 is contrasted with 規模 here, I think 力 mainly refers to the power of individual soldiers and weapons.\n * This その refers to 敵. It is purely optional here, but if present, it adds a mild literary or stilted flavor.\n * The two も are listing particles that have a nuance of \"all/both (of A, B, C, ...)\". 私は猫も犬もハムスターも好きです means \"I like (all of the) cats, dogs and hamsters\". Note that も replaced が.\n\n> 敵は(その)規模も力も強大だ… \n> The enemy is formidable in terms of both scale and strength.\n\nJust in case you're still unsure, compare the following:\n\n * 彼は性格がいい。 \nHe has a nice personality.\n\n * 彼は顔も性格もいい。 \nHe has both a good-looking face and a nice personality. \n(lit. As for him, both the face and the personality are good.)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-11T08:16:50.117", "id": "99298", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-11T08:52:46.570", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-11T08:52:46.570", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99297", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The short answer is no. Historical figures are referred to by names alone. It\nshould be the same as Mr./Mrs. etc. are not used for historical figures in\nEnglish.\n\nThat said, it is possible to use suffixes (or it's imaginable for some people\nusing them) in certain cases. E.g., a historian might use 足利尊氏さん in explaining\nsomething on TV. This would give a sort of closeness to the figure, as you\nmention. Or a descent of a historical figure using 様 to show respect. On the\nother hand, I cannot really imagine 氏 is added to refer to a historical\nfigure.\n\n* * *\n\nIn Japanese historical context, family name+氏 (e.g. 足利氏) means the family as a\nwhole (as a clan). It's like _the Habsburgs_ , but in Western history ー家{け} is\nused (ハプスブルク家).\n\nAnd an exception I can think of is お釈迦様{しゃかさま} to mean the Buddha/Siddartha\nGautama. But this is more or less a proper name by itself.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-11T22:59:45.583", "id": "99303", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-11T22:59:45.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99301", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Academic and objective texts like Wikipedia articles generally do not include\nany honorifics at all, regardless of whether that person is alive or not. In\ncasual and private conversations, celebrities and athletes who are not your\npersonal acquaintances are usually mentioned without any honorifics at all,\nunless you feel particularly close to them. Historical figures are mostly\nmentioned in contexts similar to these, so as a result, you will rarely see\nhonorifics added to their names.\n\nHowever, in principle, there is no rule that requires you to change honorifics\nusage based on whether someone is alive or not. In news shows and talks shows,\npeople still commonly say [手塚治虫](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osamu_Tezuka)さん\neven though he passed away more than 30 years ago. While there is no strict\nrule, it is better to use honorifics while the person is still in the memory\nof many people. Familiar deities may also be called with affectionate\nhonorifics like さん or 様 (e.g., イエス様, えびすさん, 神様, 仏様). You may see hardcore\nfemale \"sengoku otaku\" adding 様 to the names of warlords from 500 years ago.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-12T02:15:33.587", "id": "99308", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-12T02:23:57.120", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-12T02:23:57.120", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99301", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "-ている describes **either** a resultant state or a progressive action, but it does not describe both at once. In other words, it does not describe \"the _result_ of a _progressive_ action\". For basics, see: [When is Vている the continuation of action and when is it the continuation of state?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010)\n\nIn most cases, you can judge the type of a verb intuitively, but for some\nverbs, its type may differ from your intuition as an English speaker. You\nprobably know [知る is one of such tricky\nverbs](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36928/5010).\n\nAs for なる, it has a strong tendency to work as an instant state-change verb.\nIn other words, なっている usually means \"has become\" rather than \"is becoming\".\nThis is a fact you have to get used to by seeing various usages of なる.\n\nFor example, when you hear 大きくなっている, it usually describes a resultant state,\n\"has become big\" or \"has turned big\". However, a progressive reading is\npossible when it's used with an expression for a gradual change. だんだん大きくなっている\nmeans \"is becoming big gradually\", and\n大きくなって[きている](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36928/5010) has a similar\nmeaning. Likewise, 暗くなっている without any context normally means \"It has\n(already) become dark\" (you looked out of window and noticed it), but you can\nsay だんだん暗くなっている or 暗くなってきている to mean \"It's getting darker\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-12T01:24:56.163", "id": "99306", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-12T01:24:56.163", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99302", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, you're seeing the correct definition of this し. This し is a kind of\nreason marker. It's adding a sense of \"cuz\" or \"you know\".\n\n> そのほうが頭の固いお方にもご理解いただけそうですし。\n>\n> _(Because)_ that way, those with rigid minds might be able to comprehend it\n> _(you know)_.\n\nRelated:\n\n * [Usage of ”し” particle](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/28096/5010)\n * [し at the end of the sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/58439/5010)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-12T00:40:37.280", "id": "99305", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-12T00:40:37.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99304", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "> 食べて is like a command/request to eat\n\nCorrect. It's \"Eat it\" said in a casual manner. You can say this to your\nfriend or family member, but it's impolite to say this to your teacher or\nboss. 食べろ would sound oppressive and is rarely used in day-to-day speech.\n\n> Like, you can't say 食べる to someone\n\nActually, we have \"plain-form imperative\", too (See: [Plain form as\nimperative](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15816/5010)). But this is\nrelatively uncommon, so you can revisit this after getting used to the te-form\nas a request.\n\nIn addition, if said with a rising intonation, \"食べる?\" means \"(Wanna) eat it?\"\n\n> is it the same thing with で? For example, 動かないで would mean stop as in like a\n> command/request, but 動かない would just not be?\n\nCorrect. 動かないで is the negative version of 動いて. But again, the negative-plain-\nform imperative exists, too, so \"動かない!\" is one of the possible ways of saying\n\"Don't move!\". See the last part of the link above.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-12T03:12:45.900", "id": "99310", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-12T03:18:19.400", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-12T03:18:19.400", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99307", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "～にいく／～にくる (where ～ is the -masu stem of a verb) and ～ていく／～てくる are both\nstandard constructions, and there is some overlap in their usage.\n\nIf you say ～にいく then it implies you are going to a specific place in order to\ndo ～. For example, 公園に遊びにいく means \"I am going to the park to play\". So in your\ncase, 今度遊びに来てください means \"Please come (here) to play next time\", i.e. it's an\ninvitation to come back to play with the speaker.\n\nOn the other hand, ～ていく has a few different interpretations depending on\ncontext, but one main interpretation is that the subject is going somewhere,\nand doing ～ before or as part of the journey. For example, 歩いていきます means\nyou're walking somewhere (you're going there, and walking is part of the\njourney). ～てくる is similar, but it implies that the end of the trip involves\ncoming back home or to coming to the person being addressed. For example, when\nyou leave home you will say 行ってきます, meaning (roughly) \"I'm going out, and will\nbe coming back\". You could also say だいどころからいすをとってきます to mean you're going to\nbring a chair from the kitchen.\n\nIn that context, 遊んできてください sounds like an invitation to go away, play, and\nthen come back, which sounds more like what a frustrated parent might tell\ntheir hyperactive child.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-12T05:19:22.980", "id": "99311", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-12T05:21:22.880", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-12T05:21:22.880", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "16022", "parent_id": "99309", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "As the final correction by your teacher suggests, you chose the wrong\nparticle, and that caused the confusion more than anything else. The particle\nshould be で to denote the circumstance in which you realized your mistake.\nCorrecting that and changing 気づいました to 気づきました, we get the following.\n\n> 漫画を買うところで、巻が違うと気づきました。\n\nThis sentence is not at all incomprehensible. I’m not sure why it took your\nteacher so long to understand what you meant. However, without enough context,\npeople might understand this ところ as referring to a concrete place where comics\nare sold. If your listener already knows you nearly bought the wrong volume of\na comic and asked you when exactly you realized your mistake, then the\nsentence sounds natural enough as a response (though you might omit 巻が違うと in\nthat case). If you are saying it to someone who doesn't know you were going to\nbuy a comic to begin with, you should probably say:\n\n> 漫画を買おうとしたところで、巻が違うと気づきました。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-13T08:41:21.840", "id": "99315", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-13T08:41:21.840", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99314", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "～てはいけない is much broader than simple permission. It can express that, but\nultimately, it expressed that something shouldn't or mustn't be done for\nwhatever reason.\n\nあの子 (I think, rather than 'I') was crying because 'they should never have been\nborn', perhaps believing that if they hadn't been, some painful events in\ntheir past wouldn't have played out the way they did.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-13T20:07:59.377", "id": "99320", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-13T20:07:59.377", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9971", "parent_id": "99316", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "生まれてはいけなかった means \"I should not have been born\" or \"I wasn't supposed to be\nborn\".\n\nGenerally, ～してはいけなかった in the past form can mean two things:\n\n> 見てはいけなかった。\n>\n> 1. I was not allowed to see it (so I didn't see it).\n> 2. I shouldn't have seen it (although I saw it in reality).\n>\n\nNote that Japanese has no grammatical subjunctive mood. The sentence structure\ndoes not change based on whether it is factual or counter-factual.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-13T20:08:51.940", "id": "99321", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-15T02:48:50.717", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-15T02:48:50.717", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99316", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The small ッ cannot be pronounced on its own. In other words, there is no such\nthing as \"the ッ syllable\". Discussing whether it's voiced or not is as\nmeaningless as discussing whether punctuation marks (`,`, `?`, `!`) and\ndiacritics are voiced or not. Although they may affect how surrounding\ncharacters are pronounced, they cannot be pronounced in isolation.\n\nIf you mean the next consonant after the small-tsu, such as ド as in ベッド, yes,\nit will be voiced as it is written. ド in ベッド is voiced, like _d_ in _bed_ ,\nand ト in ベット is unvoiced ( _t_ in _bet_ ).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-13T20:26:48.667", "id": "99322", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-13T20:32:48.110", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-13T20:32:48.110", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99317", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "There is almost always a glottal stop between the two syllables either side of\nthe ッ, which might be what you mean by \"sounds voiceless\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-14T21:17:50.667", "id": "99334", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-14T21:17:50.667", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1699", "parent_id": "99317", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "Without regard to k/g, t/d, p/b, set your lip and tongue in the same shape and\nposition as you pronounce the consonant which immediately follows `ッ` and\n**completely shut the outflow of air momentarily** , which is the state of\n`ッ`.\n\nThe exceptions I could find were:\n\n 1. the case of following `ch` such as `きっちり`, `ぽっちゃり`, etc. where the shape and position of the tongue are those for `t` which reminds us of `tch` notations like `pitch` in English and\n 2. the case of following `s` such as `あっさり`, `ぐっすり`, `こっそり`, etc. where `sssss` sound takes place without shutting the air outflow (probably because our teeth is not airtight). `s` could have taken the same strategy as `ch` and put silent `t` in front to avoid air leakage, but it didn't. (Precisely there are cases such as `まっすぐ` pronounced as `まっつぐ`, but very very local.)\n\nI personally do not know any words in which `ッ` is followed by `j` (voiced\n`ch`) or `z` (voiced `s`).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T17:08:52.043", "id": "99395", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T18:58:24.897", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-18T18:58:24.897", "last_editor_user_id": "54245", "owner_user_id": "54245", "parent_id": "99317", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I don't have much first-hand experience, since I don't speak Japanese.\nHowever, I have read some phonetic studies that have some relevant\ninformation.\n\nAs [naruto's answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/99322/30606)\nexplains, the basic pronunciation of ッ is not a separate sound, but a\nlengthening of the following consonant sound. When it occurs before p, t, k,\nthe pronunciation is generally transcribed phonetically as a long or\n\"geminate\" consonant, written in the IPA as [pp], [tt], [kk] or [pː], [tː],\n[kː]. (This is not the same thing as a glottal stop, although it may sound\nsimilar.)\n\nSo the pronunciation we would expect for ッ before b, d, g is simply [bb],\n[dd], [ɡɡ] or equivalently, [bː], [dː], [ɡː]: a long (or geminate) voiced\nplosive.\n\nHowever, there is some linguistic literature that indicates that voiced\ngeminate consonants in Japanese are sometimes \"devoiced\", making them sound\nmore like [pː], [tː], [kː]. Here are some papers on this that I found:\n\n * \"[Partial devoicing of voiced geminate stops in Tokyo Japanese](https://asa.scitation.org/doi/10.1121/1.5078605)\", _The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America_ 145, 149 (2019), by Qandeel Hussain and Shigeko Shinohara\n\n * \"[Geminate devoicing in Japanese loanwords: Theoretical and experimental investigations](http://roa.rutgers.edu/content/article/files/1321_kawahara_1.pdf)\", 31 March 2015, by Shigeto Kawahara. Two examples given where devoicing may occur are /baggu/ or /bakku/ ‘bag’ and /doggu/ or /dokku/ ‘dog’. This article says that \"the devoicing of geminates occurs only when there is another voiced obstruent within the same morpheme\" (page 2).\n\nI think I hear devoicing in the first pronunciation of [\"バッグ\" on\nForvo](https://forvo.com/word/%E3%83%90%E3%83%83%E3%82%B0/) (by gordon3155),\nalthough I'm not certain.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-19T02:00:18.427", "id": "99399", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-19T02:11:46.837", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-19T02:11:46.837", "last_editor_user_id": "30606", "owner_user_id": "30606", "parent_id": "99317", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "* The kanji 身 refers to one's body/flesh (as opposed to soul, mind, spirit, etc). 現身 also refers to one's body, but with an added nuance of \"(bound to) this world\".\n * 降ろす is \"to bring down\" or \"to call down\", and it's a verb commonly used in the context of necromancy ( **降** 霊術), deity possession, [_itako_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itako), etc. 神降ろし is a common phrase. This assumes that the 飢獣 belongs to some \"different realm\", usually some heavenly place. Together with 現身に, we can tell that this person's ability is something closer to channeling or possession rather than simple transformation or summoning.\n * Without context, no one would imagine 飢獣 when hearing きじゅう. The sound of きじゅう is usually associated with 機銃 (machine gun). But Japanese has tons of homophones, so this wouldn't be a problem at least in written texts.\n\n> 現身に飢獣を降ろす \n> (who) channels a ravenous beast into the body", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-13T21:37:01.660", "id": "99324", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-13T22:37:22.607", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-13T22:37:22.607", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "These all make sense.\n\n * ここにスマホを置いて\n * スマホをここに置いて\n * eventにpersonを招待する\n * personをeventに招待する\n\nBecause ここに and スマホを both describe 置いて. In the same way, eventに and personを\nboth describe 招待する. For example, these are correct Japanese.\n\n * ここに置いて\n * スマホを置いて\n\nIn like this case, Japanese don't care the order.\n\nBut if I had to differentiate the two, I choose \"eventにpersonを招待する\" when I'm\ntalking about the event with someone. And when I'm talking about the person\nwith someone, I choose \"personをeventに招待する\".\n\nI think Japanese tend to say topic word first.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-14T08:31:57.490", "id": "99327", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-14T08:31:57.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "56317", "parent_id": "99325", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You are asking as if っぺら(い) were a kind of suffix, but it's not a suffix that\ncan emphasize something. Actually, the only adjective I can think of that\ncontains っぺら(い) is 薄っぺら(い).\n\nRegarding 薄っぺらな (na-adjective) vs 薄っぺらい (i-adjective), yes, they are\ninterchangeable and have the same meaning. There is a slangy i-adjective\n[ペラい](http://zokugo-dict.com/29he/perai.htm), but this is never used as a na-\nadjective (ペラな is wrong).", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-14T16:41:37.707", "id": "99331", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-14T16:41:37.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99329", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The only good explanation I've ever read of this is in Susumu Kuno's \"The\nStructure of the Japanese Language\". There are really (at least) two functions\nof \"wa\". In this case, both are probably _contrastive_ (there's an implicit\ncomparison being made: \" **nowadays** , ...[, whereas **in the past** , ...]\"\nand \" **people who raise cats and dogs** [rather than **people who don't**\n]]\"). This is distinct from the _thematic_ use of \"wa\", which is probably what\nyou normally think of when you say \"topic marker\".\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yccet.jpg)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-14T21:30:31.063", "id": "99335", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-15T02:28:10.177", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-15T02:28:10.177", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1699", "parent_id": "99330", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]

[]

[]

[ { "body": "作文 often means \"a paragraph of literature homework/document\" or \"a piece of\nliterature\", depending on the context.\n\nIt can mean an essay that a professor at your university has given you as a\nhomework assignment.\n\nBut an essay isn't usually written in a literary style (like Shakespeare's\nRomeo and Juliet), rather it's often written in a normal or scientific style\n(clear logical explanations, almost no metaphors or beating around the bush\nand giving your professor a headache).\n\nI hope this helps to clear up your confusion.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-15T10:53:22.540", "id": "99339", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-15T11:01:27.557", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-15T11:01:27.557", "last_editor_user_id": "42363", "owner_user_id": "42363", "parent_id": "99338", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "作文 is closer to \"composition\", and it primarily refers to writing assignments\nsuch as those given as homework to elementary school or middle school\nstudents. The subject is not limited to social issues; it can also be about\nyour family, favorite sports, personal dreams, what you ate yesterday, and\nvarious other casual topics. In many cases, the focus is on writing sentences\nwith proper grammar and spelling, while the appropriateness or uniqueness of\nthe content is considered less important. A 作文 doesn't have to be opinionated\nor highly logical.\n\nAfter progressing to high school, the term 作文 becomes uncommon, although 英作文\n(the English version of 作文 assigned by an English teacher) remains common.\nWhen mature adults say 作文する or 作文を書く on purpose, it may even have a sarcastic\nor joking tone, implying a piece of writing that lacks substance or that\ndoesn't require accuracy in its content. For\nexample:「報告書は適当に作文して提出しておけ、どうせ誰も読まないよ」(\"Just throw together the report and\nsubmit it; nobody's gonna read it anyway\").\n\nThe academic-style essay as you described, such as those assigned to high\nschool or college students, is referred to as **小論文**. The essay as an art\nform, where a professional author's personal opinions or experiences are\nconveyed through refined prose, is called **随筆** or **エッセイ**.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T01:01:29.233", "id": "99350", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T04:56:31.553", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-16T04:56:31.553", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99338", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think theoretically it can be both passive/respect, but I would read it as\npassive. So your understanding should be fine\n\nI assume the speaker has some influence over decision of ministers. The\nsentence says _I was asked to make Dumbledore a minister_.\n\nOr, if the one who asked to make D. a minister is aristocratic/royal or\nsomething, it can be understood as _The noble person asked me to make D. a\nminister_.\n\n* * *\n\n> I wonder if all of ダンブルドアを大臣に is the quote and there is an implied する\n> missing.\n\nOn this point, it is natural to think that there is a verb omitted between 大臣に\nand と. As you guessed, it can be '大臣にする(ように)と'. と quotes the content of what\nwas asked. (I was asked (to see) _that ..._ ).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-15T22:53:39.743", "id": "99345", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-15T23:50:10.833", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-15T23:50:10.833", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99341", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "You can replace うち with 間 in that sentence.\n\n> 日の下を歩いてる間に、耳鳴りがしてきた。\n\n中上級を教える人のための日本語ガイドブック says:\n\n> ◆「〜うちに」は「〜あいだに」と似た表現ですが、二つの用法に分けて考える必要があります。\n>\n> ①「ＰうちにＱ」のＱが意志的な動作である場合 \n> (8) 妻が出掛けている **うちに** 、光子に電話をかけた。 \n> (9) 明るい **うちに** 、帰ったほうがいいですよ。\n>\n> ②「ＰうちにＱ」のＱが無意志的な変化や現象である場合 \n> (10) おしゃべりに夢中になっている **うちに** 、２時間もたってしまった。 \n> (11) 毎日乗っている **うちに** 、運転が上手になります。\n>\n>\n> ①の用法では、「ＰうちにＱ」には「ＰでないとＱができない（だから、ＰのあいだにＱをする）」というニュアンスが出ます。「ＰあいだにＱ」にはそのようなニュアンスはありません。 \n> (8)’ 妻が出掛けている **あいだに** 、光子に電話をかけた。 \n> (9)’ 明るい **あいだに** 、帰ったほうがいいですよ。\n>\n> また、「〜うちに」は(12)のように動詞の否定形に後続できますが、「〜あいだに」はできません。 \n> (12) 暗くならない｛⚪︎うちに／×あいだに｝、帰ったほうがいいですよ。\n>\n> ②の用法では、「ＰうちにＱ」と「ＰあいだにＱ」に違いはありません。\n\n耳鳴りがする in your sentence is clearly not volitional, and this should make うちに\ninterchangeable with 間に as explained in the last line.\n\nHaving said that, though, I personally feel うち sounds more natural not only in\nyour sentence but also in (10) and, especially, (11). 間に sounds to me like you\ncan determine when the event of the main clause (Q) happens or happened. The\nmain clause in (10) can still be understood as a discovery the speaker made at\none point of time, but those in (11) and your sentence are both about a\ngradual change that is correlated with the event of the subordinate clause\n(P). I feel うち sounds more natural in these cases. But that’s my opinion.\nThere might be regional differences.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T00:55:40.307", "id": "99349", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T00:55:40.307", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99342", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I agree that the usage 厭わない is a bit odd here, or could be called wrong.\n\nGiven her ability, the meaning should be _I can 'blossom' my hands anywhere,\nso I won't let you go_ , as you have checked in translation.\n\n咲く場所を厭わない would be slightly more naturally どこへでも咲くことを厭わない ( _my hands do not\nhate to blossom wherever it is_ ). It is assumed that some places are better\nfor 'blossoming' than others and the phrase says any place is not hated (as a\nplace to blossom) despite that.\n\n* * *\n\nI guess 厭わない is used that way because it is considered as a synonymous to\n気にしない. However, since 厭わない rather means _not to avoid_ , 咲く場所を厭わない would be\nmostly unnatural, strictly speaking (avoiding places where blossom happens is\njust a different thing).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-15T22:45:34.567", "id": "99344", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-15T22:45:34.567", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I'm prefacing this with I know very little about One Piece, but that shouldn't\nmatter all too much. With that being said, let go over things:\n\nFirst let's talk about 厭わない. This is simply 厭う in the negative form.\n[厭う](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%8E%AD%E3%81%86) has a lot of meanings, but\nfor the most part it seems to be focused on \"disliking the act / the\nenvironment of X\". So if we negate 厭う, it becomes 厭わない which means something\nlike \"not disliking the act / the environment of doing X\".\n\nNow let's talk about 場所. [場所](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%A0%B4%E6%89%80)\njust means place, location, spot, or etc. And it's really no different here if\nyou were translate that sentence in a literal way.\n\nBefore we talk about a literal translation, I see you mentioned:\n\n> Most translations I see have this as \"anywhere\"\n\nThis might be difficult to understand what I mean at first, but 場所 is being\n_**translated**_ to \"anywhere\". At the end of the day, translations are\ninterpretations that attempt to work / make the most sense in the target\nlanguage. So 場所 as \"anywhere\", even though it might not really mean anywhere,\nmight be the \"best\" interpretation for the given context. And 場所 being\n\"anywhere\" does make sense under the context of Robin's power. If I remember\ncorrectly, her power allows her to grow extra limbs _**anywhere**_ on her\nbody.\n\nSo with a more literal translation of the whole thing we get:\n\n> 咲く _ **場所**_ を _ **厭わない**_ 私の体は...あなたを決して逃がさない\n>\n> My body _**does not loath**_ the _**spots**_ where it blooms... There is no\n> way for you to get away\n\nBut this is somewhat odd in English to leave as is. So let's clean it up:\n\n> My body _**doesn't mind**_ blooming from _**anywhere**_... There is no way\n> you'll get away.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-15T22:56:28.093", "id": "99346", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T00:34:42.693", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-16T00:34:42.693", "last_editor_user_id": "30339", "owner_user_id": "30339", "parent_id": "99343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The Xはくだらない is an idiomatic usage meaning _not being less than X_ , where X is\na price. (cf.\n[下る](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%B8%8B%E3%82%8B_%28%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A0%E3%82%8B%29/#jn-61845)\n#8.)\n\nLiterally 下る here is a transitive verb meaning 'going below _obj._ ' So it\nmeans _(the value) does not go below 一千万ベリー_.\n\n* * *\n\n以上 in 一千万ベリー以上 is redundant and should be 一千万ベリーはくだらない.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T00:01:36.583", "id": "99348", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T00:01:36.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99347", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "We have the following mass of evidence:\n\n 1. Modern Chinese dictionaries don't have anything relevant for 捗.\n\nQuoting the _Jíyùn_ 集韻 (1037) for all cases, they would give three\ndefinitions:\n\n**buH** > _bù_ (like 步) [Japanese ] 'used in 捗攎 **buH lu** > _bùlú_ , collect\nand store';\n\n**bu** > pú 'used in 捗攎 or 荹攎 **bu lu** > _púlú_ , pick overgrown grass';\n\n**trik** > _zhi_ 'to hit'.\n\nThe latter would be チョク, for sure, but the meaning does not match. More\nimportantly, all three definitions are apparently _Jíyùn_ -internal, and there\nare only marginal appearances in actual transmitted texts.\n\n 2. On the other hand, there is 陟, which is well-known and attested, occurs in texts many times, has the required reading ( **trik** > _zhi_ , fit for チョク), as well as the required meanings 'to ascend; to progress'.\n\n 3. Furthermore, the compound 進陟 **tsjinH trik** > _jìn zhi_ is actually attested, in the meaning 'advance in office' from at least the _Wèi Shū_ (6th cent.), and in Tang literature already as simply 'make progress'.\n\n 4. In Korean, the corresponding Korean word 진척 (chinch'ŏk, 'to advance, progress') is given as 進陟 in Korean dictionaries.\n\n 5. Even further, in 大漢和辞典 there are two entries, the second marked not as a separate one, but the part of the previous:\n\n * 進陟 シンチョク, defined 官位などをすすめのぼす 'advance in rank' (with quote from the 7th-century _History of the Northern Dynasties_ ) and 仕事がはかどる。はかがゆく '(the work) is making progress' (without quotes).\n\n * 進捗 シンチョク, defined 〔邦〕すすみはかどる。仕事などが進行する。本邦で、進陟の㊁と同じく用ひる。 '(in Japanese) to make progress. (Of work or similar) to move forward. In Japanese, used instead of 進陟 in its second meaning.'\n\nTo conlude, it may be almost conclusively established that 進捗 is an anomalous\nJapanese-only spelling of 進陟 'to advance, progress', which was used in Tang-\nera China, later lost in Chinese, but remained in Korean and Japanese. As 陟\nitself is somewhat marginal in Japanese, it is not implausible that the\nspelling in the only word containing it that was used frequently has morphed\nsomewhat. Anyway, this 捗 is independent of the 捗 of the dictionaries.\n\nPerhaps 捗 as a form of 陟 was actually more widespread in China itself than the\nreceived texts on paper want to persuade us. A similar case would be 楪 in 楪子\n(ちゃつ), where the Chinese dictionary definitions ('window' and similar) as well\nas readings make no sense ('small plate'), but in reality this is the same\nword as Mandarin 碟子, where the first character, taking form only in medieval\nChinese writing, oscillated between various semantic components and finally\npicked different ones in China and Japan.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T09:03:43.927", "id": "99352", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T09:03:43.927", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27977", "parent_id": "99351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "`[V ます-stem]-出がある` means doing the act of the verb is challenging because it\nrequires you to deal with a large amount of something but is at the same time\nsatisfying. For example, you might describe a long novel you consider to be\nworth a read as 読み出がある.\n\nHowever, this construction is not so commonly used any longer. If I heard it\nfrom a young person, I would probably assume that person is speaking some\ndialect. Most people would say `[V ます-stem]-ごたえがある` for a similar meaning.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T09:56:08.273", "id": "99354", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T09:56:08.273", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99353", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "\"かな\" here means \"probably / maybe\"\n\nShe's not sure if she need a boyfriend or not.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T08:07:22.363", "id": "99379", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-17T08:07:39.357", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-17T08:07:39.357", "last_editor_user_id": "42363", "owner_user_id": "42363", "parent_id": "99355", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You're free to choose!\n\nIf the new word is gonna be a place/person name, then the existing convention\nis that you may use any Kanji and attribute any readings to it, for example,\nyou could use the Kanji 回 and have it read as `BANANA` if you want.\n\nIf the terms is not a name, you're still free to choose to assign it the on-\nreading, the kun-reading, or even a special reading. If I create a new term,\nlet's say, 雨流, I can have it read as うる, うりゅう, あまながし, あめながし, or even a special\nreading like ゆばし or クール・デ・プルイー or whatever. So long I communicate this with my\naudience clearly, there's no problem. In fact, giving newly-coined terms in\npretty common.\n\nExample of special readings of newly-coined terms:\n\n東京{とうきょう} 喰種{グール} \n\n[青眼の白龍]{ブルーアイズホワイトドラゴン} (Blue eyes white dragon from YuGiOh)\n\nEven in the standard language, there are a TONS a special readings for Kanji\npairs, the most common ones being 今日{きょう}、昨日{きのう}、明日{あした} so this concept of\nspecial reading is not strange to Japanese people at all.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T19:40:19.897", "id": "99363", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T19:40:19.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "99356", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "You have a number of misconceptions here.\n\nThe ～て form is not a gerund, for one thing. It has a number of uses, but the\nmain one is either connecting clauses. 「夕ご飯を食べて、寝た」 'I ate dinner, _and_ went\nto bed' or connecting a verb to an auxiliary verb 「朝ご飯を食べてください」 ' _Please_ eat\nyour breakfast'.\n\n～（ら）れる has two uses, sort of. One is the potential form, expressing abilities.\n「アレルギーでリンゴは食べられない」 'I can't eat apples, due to allergies', while the other is\npassive, which means that the subject of the verb is what is being acted upon.\n「魚は猫に食べられた」 'The fish was eaten by a cat.'\n\nNow, for ichidan verbs such as 食べる, these forms are identical, but for a godan\nverb, the passive form replaces the ending -u with -a and adds -reru, while\nthe potential form replacing the ending -u with -e and adds -ru. So 話す has 話せる\nand 話される. Additionally する is an irregular verb with the passive される and\npotential できる.\n\nThus, ～されて might be 'was [some verb]ed, and', or it could form a request like\n「騙されないでください！」'Don't be fooled!' There's no contradiction in logic here.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T14:38:53.137", "id": "99358", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T14:38:53.137", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9971", "parent_id": "99357", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "There are _countless_ things that you \"don't think\"; but only a select few of\nthem are worth mentioning. By bringing them into consideration for discussion,\nyou inherently think _about_ them, and thus consciously have a thought to the\ncontrary.\n\nI would say that Japanese is simply being more logical than English here (not\na difficult feat; but also, especially when it comes to negation I find that\nJapanese is pretty logically rigorous e.g. see how しかない works). \"I don't\nthink\" is just one of those English set phrases that Japanese doesn't really\nreflect. It's a particular form of understatement - we generally _really do_\nmean that we consciously disbelieve X, even though the literal meaning admits\nthe middle ground of simply not having considered the question. I'm sure you\ncan reflect that kind of understatement in Japanese, but I think you'd have to\nbe _even more_ roundabout.\n\nWhile I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that I'm missing something and my\nexposure isn't broad enough, I just can't recall hearing anything like と思いません\nin my Japanese immersion; that sounds about as unnatural to me as おはよう御座いません.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T20:09:48.503", "id": "99364", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T20:09:48.503", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "99360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I will try to add some understanding. Note the difference:\n\n> I think it is not sold.\n\n> I do not think it is sold.\n\nNotice that there really is not a difference. However, English and Japanese\n_are not_ equivalent languages. You may hear the negative 思いません used trying to\nget agreement, such as\n\n> いい天気だと思いませんか。\n\nOtherwise, if you are expressing your thoughts, you will use the positive 思う;\n**note** , however, that if you use the negative, you are saying \"I do not\nthink [that],\"\n\n> ここで売っていると思いません。\n\nIt says...well, something correct in English. However, this is not commonly\nsaid. If you want to speak with natives, you have to follow accepted patterns\nof speech. It is similar to how from English we want to use pronouns, yet in\nJapanese it is not allowed (or is inappropriate) in most contexts even though\nit technically is correct when translated.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T23:09:12.713", "id": "99370", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T23:09:12.713", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "34965", "parent_id": "99360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The most natural way to say what you meant would be:\n\n> 普通の食品店では売っていないと思います。\n\nUsing 思うよ instead of 思います is just a question of style. I agree with your\nteacher that the sentence sounds more natural with は marking 普通の食品店で to add a\nsense of contrast.\n\nThe original sentence is not wrong, but it sounds like you are specifically\ndenying or disagreeing the statement, or someone’s earlier claim, that\nwhatever is referred to is sold at ordinary grocery stores, rather than\nstating what you think.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T00:00:29.507", "id": "99372", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-17T00:00:29.507", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "1. I don't think it's sold at the normal grocery store. \n普通のスーパーで売っているとは思いません。\n\n 2. I think it's not sold at the normal grocery store. \n普通のスーパーでは売っていないと思います。\n\nBoth are correct sentences, and they convey the same basic meaning. However, I\nhave heard that English speakers prefer 1 (negation applied to think/思う),\nwhereas Japanese speakers prefer 2 (negation applied to sold/売っている).\nUltimately, I think this is a matter of convention, and you have to get used\nto this fact.\n\nIn the Japanese sense, when you say 売っているとは思いません, it gives off a nuance,\nalthough subtle, as if you're unnecessarily negating the other person's\nthoughts (\"such an idea is wrong\"). 売っていないと思います is neutral and safer in this\nregard. In particular, 売っていないと思います is much more natural when the listener has\nno assumption about where it is sold, for\nexample:「ローズマリーが必要ですが、普通のスーパーでは売っていないと思うのでデパートで買ってきてください。」\n\n**EDIT:** After reading the comments, I just wanted to add this:\n\n 1. 彼女は彼が好きだとは思いません。 \nI don't think she likes him.\n\n 2. 彼女は彼が好きではないと思います。 \nI think she does not like him.\n\nBoth are correct and natural sentences at least in Japanese. In Japanese,\nOption 1 probably means she does not like or dislike him in particular,\nwhereas Option 2 probably means she actively dislikes him. So there are useful\napplications for both options. I thought there would be similar differences in\nEnglish in a case like this, but I might be mistaken.", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T00:30:23.967", "id": "99373", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T02:27:28.907", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-18T02:27:28.907", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "It is an emphasis (cf.\n[も](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/%E3%82%82/#je-75042) #5), and add _as\nmany as_ in the example. As such, も can be dropped but perhaps it is better to\nadd 間 (八日間{ようかかん}) to make it work adverbially.\n\nAnother example:\n\n * 日本に来てもう10年経った 10 years have passed since I came to Japan\n * 日本に来てもう10年も経った As many as 10 years have passed since I came to Japan", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T23:09:38.780", "id": "99371", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T23:09:38.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99362", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Your interpretation\n\n> something that people obtained in situations where genetics are not related?\n\nis fine, except perhaps more literally _places_ rather than _situations_.\n\nThe first phrase (人が遺伝子交換をする為に...) suggests that (the author thinks) people\nare attracted by each other at the genetic level. Then, the sentence in\nquestion essentially says genes are not everything ( _one may be attracted by\nsomething that a person obtained not from genes = something that has nothing\nto do with genes_ )", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-16T22:58:53.167", "id": "99368", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-16T22:58:53.167", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99366", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The literal meaning of 加減 is \"add and subtract\", hence \"balance\" or\n\"adjustment\". But actually this is a word where the 減 part is focused in many\ncases. In other words, it tends to be used in the context of refraining from\noverdoing something.\n\n * 加減しなさい typically means \"don't overdo it\" or \"go easy on it\".\n * 加減をせずに usually means \"without holding back\" or \"without restraint\", and 加減もせずに is an emphatic version of it.\n * 加減を知らない人 is someone who is too aggressive and overdoes things.\n\n手加減 is a variation of this. It almost always refers to something along the\nlines of holding back.\n\nIn the context of the lyrics in question, 加減もせずに describes that the thrown\nwords were unreserved and harsh.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T00:50:34.200", "id": "99375", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-17T02:22:07.690", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-17T02:22:07.690", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99367", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "開いています is most likely understood as describing a state where something is\nopen, although it is not impossible for it to mean something is in the process\nof opening. もう simply adds that it is already in that state.\n\n> もう開いています。 \n> It is **already** open. \n> It is **already** opening. (much less likely)\n\n開きます alone could refer to either something that opens habitually (like a store\nopening at a regular time every day) or something that will open in the\nfuture. もう rules out the first option as it obviously refers to a one-time\nevent. It means something like “soon” or “in no time” in this case.\n\n> もう開きます。 \n> It will open **in no time**.\n\n[宿題]{しゅくだい}をしました alone would refer to what someone did at some point in the\npast. When used with もう, however, its focus shifts to the current state where\nthat person has already passed that point.\n\n> もう[宿題]{しゅくだい}をしました。 \n> I have **already** done my homework.\n\n[宿題]{しゅくだい}をしていました could mean either someone was doing their homework or\nsomeone had done their homework by some reference time in the past. もう doesn’t\ncompletely remove this ambiguity.\n\n> もう[宿題]{しゅくだい}をしていました。 \n> They were **already** doing their homework. \n> They had **already** done their homework.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T00:43:06.950", "id": "99374", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-17T10:15:39.710", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-17T10:15:39.710", "last_editor_user_id": "43676", "owner_user_id": "43676", "parent_id": "99369", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "If I need to use a relative clause, the translation would be:\n\n> 上で食べ物を炒めているそれは何ですか? \n> (lit.) What is that thing where you're cooking the food on top?\n\nTo avoid any confusion, it may be better to say その黒いの (\"that black thing\"), 板\n(\"plate\") or something instead of just saying それ.\n\nJapanese has no particle that directly corresponds to the English preposition\n\"upon\", so you need to use an adverbial phrase (上で) instead. Even if it had,\nJapanese relative clauses work by _omitting_ a particle, and there is no way\nof distinguishing \"with which\", \"in which\", \"by which\" and so on. It's simply\nimpossible to give a word-by-word translation of \"upon which\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T03:27:49.487", "id": "99377", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-17T03:39:46.470", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-17T03:39:46.470", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99376", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "> はりつめた心が はち切れてしまいそう\n\nFirst off, the verb applies to the \"strained heart,\" and means \"[to\nburst](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%AF%E3%81%A1%E5%88%87%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B).\"\nしまう implies something happened with surprise or unintendedly. [A ます-stem with\nそう means something \"looks like [...].\"](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese-\ngrammar/verb-sou/) And so we have:\n\n> It [will] look like my strained heart will burst.\n\nBased on the lyrics, there is a very strong romanticism going on. Of course,\nin a more applicable English translation, \"look like\" may be removed since\nuncertainty is not common in English songs.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T22:17:55.040", "id": "99397", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T22:17:55.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "34965", "parent_id": "99378", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Both have almost the same meaning by themselves, but are not that\ninterchangeable. The difference is mostly how they are combined with other\nwords.\n\nIn 大辞泉, (versions of) 然る+べし is the only combination where both readings are\npossible. For this particular case, the readings are interchangeable, but\nしかるべき is much more common in modern Japanese.\n\n>\n> [さる◦べし【▽然るべし】](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%84%B6%E3%82%8B%E3%81%B9%E3%81%97/#jn-89828)\n>\n> ［連語］《動詞「さり」の連体形＋推量の助動詞「べし」》 \n> １ ふさわしい。相応である。 \n> ２ そうなるのが当然である。そうなる運命である。 \n> ３ りっぱである。れっきとしている。\n\n>\n> [しかる◦べし【▽然る▽可し】](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%84%B6%E3%82%8B%E5%8F%AF%E3%81%97/#jn-94582)\n>\n> ［連語］《ラ変動詞「しかり」の連体形＋推量の助動詞「べし」》 \n> １ それが適当であろう。また、ふさわしい。 \n> ２ そうなるはずである。そうなる運命である。 \n> ３ 立派である。すぐれている。\n\nIn practice, 然る in modern writing would be most of the time しかる. For さる, it is\nused in fixed patterns such as\n[さること](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%84%B6%E3%82%8B%E4%BA%8B/#jn-89765)\nor\n[さるもの](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E7%84%B6%E3%82%8B%E8%80%85/#jn-89856)\nand they are always written in hiragana.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-17T22:33:43.510", "id": "99384", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T00:34:00.807", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-18T00:34:00.807", "last_editor_user_id": "45489", "owner_user_id": "45489", "parent_id": "99381", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You're correct.\n\n * と: quotation marker (負けてはいられない is the quote part)\n * 言う: \"to say\"\n * ように: \"like\"; \"as if\"\n\n> 足もとでは黒猫のジジも負けてはいられないというように、横から鏡をのぞきこんでは、体をのばしたり、ちぢめたりしています。\n>\n> At her feet, Jiji the black cat, **as if saying \"I won't be outdone\"**, is\n> peering into the mirror from the side, stretching and shrinking his body.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T03:37:31.630", "id": "99393", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T03:37:31.630", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99383", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This is just another [wago-and-kango](/questions/tagged/wago-and-kango \"show\nquestions tagged 'wago-and-kango'\") problem. 比較する is a kango, and thus sounds\nstiffer. There is no fundamental difference in meaning, but they have to be\nchosen according to the formality, seriousness and so on.\n\nIn your case, 兄ちゃんと比較されなければ and 兄ちゃんと比べられなければ share the same meaning, but the\nformer sounds like she is a little more mature and/or serious.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T02:10:27.393", "id": "99386", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T02:10:27.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99385", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "めんどくさい is simply a colloquial variant of めんどうくさい. In formal situations,\nめんどうくさい or めんどうな is preferred. But in highly formal or academic contexts,\nobjective phrases like 時間を要する or 煩雑な would be better.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T03:03:22.853", "id": "99389", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T03:03:22.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99387", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you misheard the person saying 行くぞ、行くぞ, which is a brusque way of\nsaying what you guessed.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T03:24:46.693", "id": "99391", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T03:24:46.693", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "99390", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "First, please make sure you have not misheard 行くぞ, 行くよ, or something.\n\nIf you're 100% sure that the the guy was saying 行きそう, it never means \"Let's\ngo\", no matter how many times it's said. Don't trust Google Translate.\n\n行きそう just means \"It's going\", or move verbosely, \"It looks like it's about to\ngo\". Probably he was was watching something that can be described as 行く, such\nas a rocket launch.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-18T03:26:34.390", "id": "99392", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-18T03:26:34.390", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99390", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The question was answered in a\n[comment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/99394/purpose-\nof-%E3%81%A8-in-%E3%81%97%E3%82%85%E3%81%A4%E3%81%A9%E3%81%AE%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%A8%E3%81%B5%E3%82%81%E3%81%84%E3%81%B2%E3%82%93?noredirect=1#comment161795_99394).\nThis has nothing to do with the grammatical concept of のような・のように and was,\ninstead, just a matter of incorrectly converting Hiragana text to Kanji.\n\nThe correct conversion would be:\n\n> 奈良市出土 **の用途** 不明品\n\nThe bold part is the correct Kanji equivalent of のようと from the original\nparagraph.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-19T11:15:06.193", "id": "99406", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-19T11:15:06.193", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48332", "parent_id": "99394", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It depends on the word.\n\nYou seem to misunderstand the difficulty of 面倒, but it is a fairly common word\n(JLPT N3) and is normally written in kanji. There is no reason for anyone but\na complete beginner not to learn how to write it in kanji. 面倒くさい has [two\npossible readings](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/99387/5010), and\npeople usually use kana when the shorter (colloquial) version is intended. But\nthe longer version (めんどうくさい) is normally written with kanji.\n\n貴方 is something you may not have to write yourself, but you need to know how\nto read. See also: [Why is 私 a sixth grade\nkanji?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/62132/5010)\n\nThere are many words, such as 薔薇 ( _bara_ , rose) and 嚢腫 ( _nōshu_ , cyst),\nthat may not be necessary to write, but should be readable by a respectable\nadult. There are also many words like 蟷螂 ( _kamakiri_ , mantis) and 鸚哥 (\n_inko_ , parrot) that even adults don't need to be able to read.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-19T03:01:21.813", "id": "99401", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-19T03:01:21.813", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99400", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "It's going to depend on what kind of fluency you're aiming for, but if your\naim is to be able to read a variety of common Japanese texts (including simple\nnovels along with video games and even street signs) then at a bare minimum\nyou should be familiar with the [kyouiku\nkanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%8Diku_kanji), which are kanji that\nare taught in Japanese schools up to 6th grade. You don't necessarily need to\nknow every possible reading and be able to instantly recognise how to process\na compound word, but you should definitely know the most common readings,\ncompounds and meanings. (So for example you should absolutely be able to read\n食べる｛たべる｝ and 食事｛しょくじ｝, and probably also 食う｛くう｝, but you can go for a while\nwithout knowing 食む｛はむ｝and 乞食｛こじき｝). Of note, both component kanji of 貴方, along\nwith 面, are covered in kyouiku.\n\nHowever, if you want to be properly fluent (which would include being able to\nread most contemporary novels and newspapers), then you should be looking at\nthe [jouyou kanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Dy%C5%8D_kanji) list,\nwhich roughly doubles the size of the kyouiku list and covers kanji that are\ntaught up to the end of high school.\n\nThe JLPT does not currently publish a list of kanji that are covered in its\nlevels, but based on what I've seen in a few unofficial guides by N2 you\nshould probably know all the kyouiku kanji and by N1 you should know the full\njouyou.\n\nThis would absolutely include knowing how to read many common words that are\nfrequently written in kana, like 貴方 and 面倒, as long as the characters are in\nthe list.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-19T05:38:16.547", "id": "99404", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-19T05:38:16.547", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "16022", "parent_id": "99400", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I think I recall things like \"貴方\" being in the JLPT N1 test, so it does need\nto be learned somewhere down the line.\n\nBut realistically, the vast majority of people quit learning Japanese far\nbefore getting to a level where it is needed to read obscure kanji.\n\nIf you're a beginner, focus on the most common readings until you get a better\nunderstanding for kanji. As you become better at reading, you will naturally\nlearn many readings if you have the vocab because many words share similar\npronounciations.\n\nFor example, say you can read \"見解\"(けんかい）and \"学年”（がくねん）, then when you come\nacross the word \"見学”（けんがく）, it is very easy to learn to read.\n\nI think it's important not to jump in too deep and slowly building up your\nknowledge. If you plan to work in Japan and are closing in on a more advanced\nlevel, you do see words like \"貴方\" here and there.\n\nIt's worth noting that most hiragana words can also be written in kanji, but\ndepending on the obscurity, almost everyone to almost no one may know them.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-19T06:34:20.420", "id": "99405", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-19T09:07:01.500", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-19T09:07:01.500", "last_editor_user_id": "55721", "owner_user_id": "55721", "parent_id": "99400", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Hmm, interesting question!\n\nWhen you see \"あなた\" you know it means \"you\", but when you see \"貴方\", that \"貴\"\nactually means \"high/noble\" and shows a kind of respect, so kanji has the\ndepth\n\n擬音語 is another challenge, at least to me :-)\n\nCAS", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-22T06:31:00.307", "id": "99418", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-22T07:03:45.407", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-22T07:03:45.407", "last_editor_user_id": "56364", "owner_user_id": "56364", "parent_id": "99400", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "This カン is [勘](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%8B%98) in kanji. \"6th sense\" is one\nof its possible translations, but rather than some supernatural ability, it\nbasically refers to a type of \"perception\" everyone has (people say\nあの人は勘がいい/悪い but not あの人には勘がある/ない). It broadly refers to instinct, intuition,\nhunch, and even random guess. Depending on the context, 勘がいい人 may refer to\nsomeone who can dodge bullets using their animal-like instincts, someone who\ncan see through another person's lies intuitively, or someone who is good at\ngames like blackjack.\n\n気配の察知 in a context like this refers to perceiving the presence of a (hidden)\nperson/animal. In some fictional works, such as _Dragon Ball_ , 気配 may refer\nto something akin to \"aura\" or \"qi\" that is constantly emitted by lifeforms.\nBut when an ordinary person like me says 誰かの気配がする, it may actually refer to\nthings like subtle breathing sounds or pure hunch.\n\nSee also: [What is the sense of 気配がする (けはいがする) versus\n気がする?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/980/5010)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-19T05:02:09.347", "id": "99403", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-19T11:11:24.440", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-19T11:11:24.440", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99402", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "[突き刺さる](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%AA%81%E3%81%8D%E5%88%BA%E3%81%95%E3%82%8B)\nis an _intransitive_ verb meaning \"(for a knife, stick, etc.) to\npenetrate/cut/stick into something\". 突き刺さった is its past/perfect form (aka the\n\"ta-form\"). なら is a conjunctive particle meaning \"if\". See: [Japanese\nConditional Form なら](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese-grammar/conditional-form-\nnara/)\n\n胸 is a word that means \"chest\", \"breast\" or \"heart (in the psychological\nsense)\" depending on the context. Here, \"heart\" is the natural translation.\n\n> この胸に突き刺さったなら \n> If it stuck into my heart, ...\n\nOf course, this doesn't mean a murder has occurred. This is a metaphorical\nexpression that describes that you were deeply moved or struck by the killer\ntune.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-20T02:28:38.477", "id": "99408", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-20T03:06:17.130", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-20T03:06:17.130", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99407", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's safe to say コミュ障 (or コミュ症) is 100% slang. As far as I remember, it has\nalways been used in this short form since it began to be used a few decades\nago. It's never used in serious medical contexts.\n\nThe term コミュニケーション障害 exists as pure medical jargon, and it refers to the same\nthing as explained in [this English Wikipedia\narticle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_disorder). There is [an\nacademic society](http://www.jacd-web.org/) for this \"disorder\". Many Japanese\narticles on this subject explicitly state that it's very different from the\nslang term コミュ障. However, コミュニケーション障害 is not widely known even among\nprofessional health care providers, presumably because it's nothing more than\na hodgepodge of disease entities that are unrelated to each other.\n\nTherefore, it sounds very wrong to me to \"expand\" コミュ障 to コミュニケーション障害. But\nsince ordinary English readers would not understand \"komyusho\", I think the\ntranslators could think of no choice but to use \"communication disorder\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-04-20T23:48:04.753", "id": "99411", "last_activity_date": "2023-04-21T16:35:42.157", "last_edit_date": "2023-04-21T16:35:42.157", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "99409", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]