question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18320",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the context of chatting with someone whom you have never met before,\nJapanese always give you the courtesy of complimenting your language skills.\nIn a non-business context, my response is sometimes\n「いやいや、不束者{ふつつかもの}です、私。」That almost always gets a smile out of the person that\nI am addressing.\n\nI'd always assumed that using the word 「不束者」 demonstrated that, while my\ngrammar is extremely poor, I have made the effort to memorize strange\nvocabulary. It is a backhanded self-compliment (if your Japanese were poor,\nthen you would not know such a word), and that causes the smile. But, now I am\nthinking that my usage of 「不束者」 is so wildly out of context, it just sounds\nridiculous.\n\nSo, is saying 「いやいや、不束者です、私。」 a clever sounding way to decline a compliment?\nOr, does it just sound comical?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-20T22:38:19.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18319",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-20T23:21:46.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "what nuance does calling oneself \"ふつつかもの\" have?",
"view_count": 948
} | [
{
"body": "Lovin' the question!\n\nThat is a very funny reply that only Japanese-learners could use. Trust me,\nyou will get an instant laughter everytime you say that to a Japanese-speaker\nin your life from now on. You are lucky!\n\n「不束者」 is a humble expression pretty much reserved for marriage-related\ngreetings by and about a girl. That is what you, as a bride, call yourself or\nwhat your parents call you when greeting your broom's family.\n\nIts nuance, believe it or not, is something like \"I am (Our daughter is) such\nan big, fat, uneducated and unrefined country girl.\"\n\nKeep using it and bringing a smile to our faces!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-20T23:21:46.157",
"id": "18320",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-20T23:21:46.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18319",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 18319 | 18320 | 18320 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Today, I was in English class, and I learned about language families and then\nwriting systems. Of course, there is kanji, and ideographic system, but\nhiragana and katakana are both syllabary systems.\n\nHow did this idea to make a syllabary writing system come about in\nJapanese/Chinese history? Why did someone want to do it? Was the idea taken\nover from people who had already done it?\n\nAlso, where to the syllabary sounds come from? For example, why is \"yo\" a\nsyllable in the system but \"ye\" or \"yi\" isn't?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T01:10:57.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18324",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T04:06:31.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7078",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"history",
"linguistics"
],
"title": "How were hiragana/katakana influenced by syllabary writing systems?",
"view_count": 2026
} | [
{
"body": "You've got two distinct questions here, I'll answer them in turn.\n\nJapanese wasn't really 'influenced' by any other syllabic phonetic writing\nsystems; instead, it turns out a syllabary is the most natural kind of\nphonetic writing system to create out of nothing (or out of a semantically-\nbased system like Chinese). Of the various examples we have of people creating\na phonetic writing system without already knowing one, exactly one instance is\nanything other than a syllabary, and that's Egyptian (or 'hieroglyphics').\n(I'm discounting the semantic parts of Egyptian, since you could write 100%\nphonetically in Egyptian; it just had too much ambiguity to be practical.)\nEgyptian was a somewhat unique case, since the structure of spoken Egyptian\nencouraged the script's inventors to write only consonants and totally\ndisregard vowels. The Phoenicians stripped out all of the semantic parts of\nEgyptian but still didn't add vowels, since they didn't need them any more\nthan the Egyptians. Later, the Greeks borrowed Phoenician and the Indians\nborrowed a descendent of Phoenician (Aramaic), and the structure of Greek and\nSanskrit forced them to come up with ways to mark vowels. The Greeks invented\nthe alphabet, and the Indians invented the abugida.\n\nAll the other cases have been syllabaries. Japanese is a good example. Mayan\nis another - it's totally a syllabary, and has some interesting conventions\nregarding how to write syllable-final consonants. The Sumerians, Hittites and\nPersians all adapted Sumerian cuneiform into syllabaries (though the Persian\nversion has some alphabetic traits). There are some other cases as well of\npeople being exposed to the _idea_ of writing without learning a particular\nsystem, and they made syllabaries too - Cherokee is a good example. Of the\ncases where people have invented straight-up alphabets (or abugidas, like\nCanadian Aboriginal Syllabics), the inventors have either learned or learned a\nfair amount about a system that already worked the way theirs would. (Hangeul\nis probably an example of this - there's good reason to believe that it was\ninspired a good deal by 'Phags-pa, which is ultimately descended from\nPhoenician/Egyptian.)\n\nSo it's not surprising that the Japanese created a syllabary rather than an\nalphabet, as an alphabet is a bit less obvious of an option. Further impetus\ncomes from the fact that Chinese characters each represent a single syllable\n(so you could, if you wanted to, treat Chinese like a syllabary with a huge\namount of semantically-conditioned variation) - though this is more due to the\nstructure of the language than any conscious attempt to create a one-\nletter/one-syllable correspondence. When the Japanese first started writing\nJapanese, they used Chinese characters that sounded like whole Japanese\nsyllables, since there wasn't anything smaller they could use. Kana are\nultmately just a graphical simplification of those Chinese characters,\nalthough they've since been totally dissociated from their original forms.\n\nAs for why the system is missing certain combinations, it's mostly due to what\ncombinations spoken Japanese allows. /ji/, for example, is missing because\nspoken Japanese doesn't allow /j/ and /i/ to combine like that - /ji/ is not a\nvalid Japanese syllable. The language used to allow /wi/ and /we/, and so\nthere were kana for those syllables (ゐ and ゑ, respectively); but it no longer\ndoes, and so those kana have been removed as there is no more need for them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T02:15:28.040",
"id": "18325",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T02:15:28.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "18324",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "In about 2000 years ago, people in Japan were still using clay vessels and had\nno characters at all, while China had developed a large civilization and their\nown writing system, kanji. In those days, Japanese and Chinese used completely\ndifferent languages, with completely different vocabulary, syllables, and\ngrammar.\n\nIn around the 1st to 4th century, kanji were gradually imported to Japan. At\nfirst, kanji were only used as a part of Chinese language, by selected\nJapanese people who want to study Chinese culture and religion (Buddhism).\nThere was still no way to write Japanese, spoken by Japanese people. Again,\nJapanese is different from Chinese.\n\nIn around the 6th to 7th century, Japanese people developed \"manyo-gana\"\n(万葉仮名). In this system, people used kanji as syllabary characters, totally\nignoring their meanings. For example, they used kanji 以 to represent the\nJapanese vowel \"i\" (い). At last, Japanese people learned how to write Japanese\nas it is pronounced. But unfortunately, manyo-gana were too complicated to\nserve as syllabary characters, so they needed something better.\n\nIn around the 7th to 8th century, Japanese Buddhist monks started to simplify\nmanyo-gana, and developed purely phonetic characters, katakana. At first,\nkatakana were symbols rather than characters, used to instruct how to read\ndifficult scriptures from China. But they turned out to be useful to write\nordinary Japanese, so katakana were adopted everywhere. This was when people\nstarted to mix kanji and katakana.\n\nAlmost at the same time, noble people developed hiragana, which is another\nsimplification of manyo-gana.\n\nIn summary, Japanese needed to develop syllabary characters (hiragana and\nkatakana) because kanji were only borrowed from Chinese, and only using kanji\nwas not enough to express Japanese language well. Chinese people did not need\nsuch things because kanji were their native characters, optimized for writing\ntheir own language.\n\nI think Japanese people could have stopped using kanji altogether somewhere in\nthe history, but that never happened. Kanji have thier own strength as\nideographic characters. On the other hand, Korea used Chinese kanji until\nseveral hundred years ago, and then stopped using them, in favor of their own\nsyllabary characters called _Hangul_.\n\nI'm sorry I don't know where Japanese \"sounds\" come from.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T02:19:49.080",
"id": "18326",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T02:36:01.653",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T02:36:01.653",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18324",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "Please note that kana is not a true syllabic script anymore. The reason for\nthis is due to /n/. For example, take the word /sinbun/ \"newspaper\". If you\nbreak it into its syllables, it is sin.bun. While accents are determined by\nsyllables in some dialects, kana--as well as Japanese speakers--segment this\nas si.n.bu.n. The appropriate term for this mora.\n\n> How did this idea to make a syllabary writing system come about in\n> Japanese/Chinese history?\n\nKana are simplified forms of Chinese characters. Before the development of\nkana, Japan borrowed Chinese characters to phonetically write Japanese words.\nThis is known as man'yoogana. Chinese of course is a different language with a\ndifferent phonology, so there was considerable differences in pronunciation of\nthe same characters. After doing this long enough, a short hand form of the\nsame characters developed into the two forms of kana: hiragana and katakana.\n\n> Why did someone want to do it?\n\nUntil man'yoogana came around, Japan did not have a way to write their\nlanguage. Hopefully we can agree that being able to write and record words is\na useful thing.\n\n> Was the idea taken over from people who had already done it?\n\nQuite likely. Records indicate that it was the Koreans who initially taught\nJapan about Chinese characters. Recent research has also indicated that\nkatakana has its origins in the Korean peninsula (more precisely Silla). If\nyou're interested in knowing more, search for the work done by 小林芳規, in\nparticular regarding the text 大法広仏華厳経.\n\n> Also, where to the syllabary sounds come from?\n\nThe phonology of the language. Initially, the sounds were of the form ((C)V)+,\nso quite simply characters were applied to each of these fully formed sounds.\nA little later long vowels, palatalized consonants, and /n/ developed\nresulting in several innovations: doubling of vowels, small kana, and a new\n/n/. As the language continued to develop, several sounds naturally fell out\nof use and are no longer used.\n\n> For example, why is \"yo\" a syllable in the system but \"ye\" or \"yi\" isn't?\n\nIt may help to brush up on phonetics, particularly\n[glides](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semivowel). Glides form a pair with\nvowels: the glide is non-syllabic while the vowel is syllabic. These sounds\nare phonetically quite similar and the lack of distinguishing is not an odd\nthing in human speech. You could try the linguistics forum for more details.\n\nThat said, /ye/ existed and was distinguished from /e/ in man'yoogana, the\npre-cursor to kana. The distinction was lost by the time that the kana scripts\ndeveloped, so no need for a character.\n\nThere is morphological evidence of /yi/ and /wu/. For example, /yi/ can be\nseen in the conjugation of the following verbs:\n\n * kuy- (悔ゆ to regret): ku **y-i** , ku **y-i** , kuy-u, kuy-uru, kuy-ure, ku **y-i**\n * mukuy- (報ゆ to repay): muku **y-i** , muku **y-i** , mukuy-u, mukuy-uru, mukuy-ure, muku **y-i**\n * oy- (老ゆ to age): o **y-i** , o **y-i** , oy-u, oy-uru, oy-ure, o **y-i**\n\nAnd /wu/ can be seen in the following verbs:\n\n * suw- (据う plant): suw-e, suw-e, su **w-u** , su **w-u** ru, su **w-u** re, suw-e(yo)\n * uw- (植う plant): uw-e, uw-e, u **w-u** , u **w-u** ru, u **w-u** re, uw-e(yo)\n * uw- (飢う starve): uw-e, uw-e, u **w-u** , u **w-u** ru, u **w-u** re, uw-e(yo)\n\nWhile they are apparent in the morphology, there is no evidence that they ever\nexisted phonologically. You can handle this as a natural result of phonetics,\nor you could posit phonological rules such as /y/ --> ∅ / _ [i] and /w/ --> ∅\n/ _ [ɯ].",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T03:52:58.177",
"id": "18328",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T04:06:31.053",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T04:06:31.053",
"last_editor_user_id": "1141",
"owner_user_id": "1141",
"parent_id": "18324",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18324 | null | 18326 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not sure if I understood this sentence right\n\n> まだ行ったことのないアメリカや日本に行ってみたいです。\n\nI got it like: \"I want to visit places where I've never been such as America\nand Japan\".\n\nAnd why is there の?\n\n**Edit** : Thanks to the links now I know why there is の\n\nBut I'm still unsure about the right translation for that sentence.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T06:11:34.867",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18330",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T16:06:57.133",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T16:06:57.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7082",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-の",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "How to translate 「まだ行ったことのないアメリカや日本に行ってみたいです」?",
"view_count": 259
} | [
{
"body": "I'd translate this as : I'd like to visit places in America and Japan that\nI've never been to before.\n\nThis seems to be an answer to a previous query. As with many Japanese\nsentences, the \"proper\" translation is very dependant on the context.\n\n行ったことのないアメリカ seems to me that the person has been to America before, but is\ntalking about places in America that they haven't _yet_ visited. A literal\ntranslation might be \"The America that I haven't visited\"\n\nAs for #2, I don't have a perfect answer because I'm not a student of grammar,\nbut there is a slight change of nuance between の and が here. が makes it sound\nmore like the person has never been to America at all.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T13:37:49.257",
"id": "18334",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T13:37:49.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7088",
"parent_id": "18330",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18330 | null | 18334 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18351",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In an essay I'm reading called 料理, the author says the following (note: the\nfull sentence is very long, so I've omitted a few of the clauses while keeping\nenough to get the general point across):\n\n> 料理中の男に、このように特殊な事情はまったく無関係、かたわらで私が青白い顔をしていようが、とにかく、時間をかける。\n\nThe explanation in the back of the book says:\n\n> Kakuta could have used で after 無関係, but that would have weakened the\n> statement. The clause sounds strong precisely because で is not there.\n\nI have a few questions about this.\n\n * In what way does omitting で make it stronger? I.e. can anyone explain the nuance exactly?\n\n * Would omitting で always be understood to strengthen the statement? Or does it depend on the situation and context?\n\n * Does this apply to any other conjunctions or particles as well? Or is this something unique to で?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T06:18:26.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18331",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T14:50:36.307",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T15:27:30.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "1575",
"owner_user_id": "1575",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particles",
"conjunctions"
],
"title": "omitting conjunction で for emphasis?",
"view_count": 435
} | [
{
"body": "(Either で is conjunctive particle or adverval form of copula) It's because\nonce で is omitted, it's no longer a continuative clause and equivalent to\n無関係だ.\n\n無関係で…時間をかける。 → 無関係(だ)。…時間をかける。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T03:39:10.620",
"id": "18347",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T03:39:10.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18331",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "If you include 「で」 , then the「で」will naturally be accented in speech as it is\nthe end of the clause and the 「で」is linking the two clauses together (not\nreally as a conjunction, but as the 連用形 for 「である」 or 「だ」).\n\nIncluding 「で」 makes it sound as though the first clause is trying to explain\nthe second. Leaving the 「で」 out makes the clause ending in 「無関係」 stand out\nlike a separate utterance. Now the emotional force can more naturally rest on\nthe word 「無関係」 rather than on the conjoining 「で」.\n\nHere's another example:\n\nConjoined utterance with 「で」: (The two thoughts are directly linked, so the\nopinion expressed in the first clause sounds limited by its application to the\ncase in the second clause.)\n\n> 幸福とお金がまったく無関係で、就職できても幸せになるはずだと考えてはならない。\n\nAnd without 「で」: (The first thought is now much more broad in its application\nand import as the speaker is essentially saying, \"There is absolutely no\nconnection between happiness and money.\" [full stop])\n\n> 幸福とお金はまったく無関係、就職できても幸せになるはずだと考えてはならない。\n\nYou could imagine the second sentence having a period in place of the comma\n(though that's not grammatically cool) to show the pause and emphasis present\nin speech.\n\nIn the case of 「で」 being the 連用形 of 「である」・「だ」, removing it should always make\nthe word before it sound stronger. I can't think of any examples off the top\nof my head where it wouldn't.\n\nI believe this would be unique to 「で」, but only because it is the 連用形 of\n「である」・「だ」. So removing 「であり」 (in speech) would often make the last word in an\nutterance stronger, if for no other reason than that the speaker would\nbasically be ending his thought there, rather than ending it on a \"verb\" as\nnormally would be expected.\n\nJust to recap the idea I was trying to get across in the example up there you\ncould translate them differently this way:\n\n> 幸福とお金がまったく無関係で、就職できても幸せになるはずだと考えてはならない。 \n> There's no connection whatsoever between money and happiness. So, even\n> though you get a regular job you shouldn't think that you'll necessarily be\n> happy.\n\n(In this case I would think that the emphasis was being placed on the\napplication rather than the principle stated in the first clause.)\n\n> 幸福とお金はまったく無関係、就職できても幸せになるはずだと考えてはならない。 \n> There is absolutely no connection whatsoever between money and happiness.\n> Even though you get a regular job you shouldn't think that you'll\n> necessarily be happy.\n\n(In this case I would think that the emphasis was being placed on the\nprinciple stated in the first clause, the application sounding more like a\nsecondary point supporting it)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T03:50:26.027",
"id": "18348",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T03:52:26.297",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-22T03:52:26.297",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "18331",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "First, let us get the part of speech straight as it is of utmost importance\nhere.\n\n> The 「で」 that is \"omitted\" in the phrase 「[無関係]{むかんけい}で」 is an auxiliary\n> verb. Specifically, it is the [連用形]{れんようけい} of the affirmation auxiliary\n> verb 「だ」. Because it is the 連用形, the sentence can continue following it\n> while maintaining its natural flow. In meaning, 「で」＝「であり」or「であって」.\n\nIt could not be the particle 「で」 not only because that would not fit the\ncontext but also because particle 「で」 basically never gets omitted.\n\nIt is not the conjunction 「で」, either, even though that is a much better (and\nmore logical) guess than thinking of it being a particle. Conjunction 「で」 is\ntoo informal to fit in this particular context. More importantly, the 連用形「で」,\nwhile being an auxiliary verb, already functions as something of a conjunction\nby linking one clause to another.\n\n> \"In what way does omitting で make it stronger?\"\n\nIt just looks and sounds stronger to end a clause with a noun (when possible)\nwithout a short word or two following it that does not affect the meaning of\nthe clause. It makes the clause that much more concise with no \"frills\".\nPlease read the thread below if you have not. This is a classic technique in\nJapanese.\n\n[what exactly is\n\"体言止{たいげんど}め\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14524/what-\nexactly-\nis-%e4%bd%93%e8%a8%80%e6%ad%a2%e3%81%9f%e3%81%84%e3%81%92%e3%82%93%e3%81%a9%e3%82%81)\n\n> \"Would omitting で always be understood to strengthen the statement? Or does\n> it depend on the situation and context?\"\n\nIt would depend on the context and situation. Strengthening your statement is\nnot always welcomed. Doing so with shorter phrases and sentences could make\nyou sound curt when you do not want to. Overuse of [体言止]{たいげんど}め is never\nrecommended.\n\n> \"Does this apply to any other conjunctions or particles as well?\"\n\nThe 「で」 in question was neither a conjunction nor particle as I stated. It is\nmostly the verb 「する」 in all of its conjugated forms and affirmative auxiliary\nverbs that can be omitted for the \"strenghthening\" effects.\n\nConjunctions are rarely, if ever, omitted for any reasons in the first place.\nWhen particles are omitted, that is only for informal/colloquial shortening.\nIt is not done in formal writing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T14:50:36.307",
"id": "18351",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T14:50:36.307",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18331",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18331 | 18351 | 18351 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The only time I have ever seen this reading for moon was with the Japanese\npronunciation of the Death Note character, Light, who's first name is written\nwith the word moon. I want to know if the reading \"raito\" for moon was used\nbefore Death Note was created or did the author specifically made up the\nreading to name their character after?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T11:32:47.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18332",
"last_activity_date": "2019-03-23T21:39:45.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7087",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "Was the Japanese reading \"raito\" for moon, ever been used before Death Note came to existence?",
"view_count": 4027
} | [
{
"body": "I can't say anything authoritative about whether it has _ever_ been used that\nway, but at least based on [this\nsite](http://dqname.jp/index.php?md=view&c=ra310) that lists unusual names,\npeople seem to be very surprised that someone might actually use that name for\nsomeone.\n\nOutside the context of names I do not know of any prominent usages of it that\nway, however my knowledge is by no means exhaustive. I'd say that it's likely\nthat the author chose that name to be かっこいい and that if any previous\noccurrences existed it would have been coincidence.\n\nIt's also worth mentioning that you will not find this usage in any dictionary\nor name kanji dictionary.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T11:36:33.127",
"id": "18333",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T23:45:11.110",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T23:45:11.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "18332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "No, the main character of _Death Note_ might be the very first person with the\nname 月【ライト】 (although there is no way to confirm this).\n\nOf course no dictionary says \"月\" can be read as ライト. But in Japan, it is\n_legal_ to name a person using simple kanji, and specify its readings freely.\nIf they really wish, parents _can_ ignore what kanji dictionaries say about\nreadings.\n\nTypical Japanese \"unusual names\"\n([DQNネーム/キラキラネーム](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/DQN%E3%83%8D%E3%83%BC%E3%83%A0))\nare those which look like normal Japanese words but their readings come from\nWestern words, such as 「火星【マーズ】」 or 「不死鳥【フェニックス】」. Those unusual names do\nhappen occasionally in reality, but in manga and games, authors often create\nstrange names to avoid conflict with real names or names from other works.\n\nAs for 月, I wouldn't be very surprised if there were a few real people\nsomewhere in Japan with unusual names like 「月【ルナ】」 , 「月【ムーン】」, 「月女神【アルテミス】」.\n「月【ライト】」 is also legal, but \"月\" and \"ライト\" (either it's _right_ or _light_ )\nhas no direct link, so I doubt if there was a person with such a name before\n_Death Note_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T02:35:11.003",
"id": "18344",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T02:35:11.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18332 | null | 18344 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18336",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Okay,first off:I am not really someone who studies japanese or is a native\nspeaker but I am doing karate1 for some years and I hear some words or phrases\nhere and there.There is one common saying from Shoshin Nagamine:\n\n> Once when asked for a brief definition of a good Karate person, Osensei\n> Shoshin Nagamine replied: **Kisshu fushin, Oni te hotoke kokoro.** A demon's\n> hand, a saint's heart.\n\nThis is mostly abbreviated with Kisshu fushin.As per online tools,there are no\ntranslations available that would explain this. As far as I can see, \"Oni te\nhotoke kokoro\" would pretty much mean \"Demon with the spirit of a saint\"(as I\nknow that Onis are some sort of japanese demons and the rest of it got\ntranslated to somewhat related things).But what does Kisshu fushin stand for?\n\nPlus:explaining the whole sentence would be very nice ;)\n\n1) I hope that you are not tired of explaining language to some ordinary\nkarateguy :D",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T14:21:54.693",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18335",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T15:27:43.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7090",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Kisshu fushin actual meaning",
"view_count": 1428
} | [
{
"body": "\"Kishu busshin\" and \"Oni te hotoke kokoro\" mean the same thing. The first uses\nSino-Japanese pronunciations which might be hard to understand if you're\nhearing the word for the first time. The second uses native Japanese\npronunciations, which would be easier to understand for a Japanese speaker. It\nwould be like saying some complicated word formed from Latin roots and then\nexplaining its etymology in everyday English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T15:27:43.837",
"id": "18336",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T15:27:43.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3221",
"parent_id": "18335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18335 | 18336 | 18336 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18338",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 平民が、貴族にそんな口[利]{き}いていいと思ってるの.\n\nAbove is the full sentence from a book I'm reading. I get いいとおもっている part =\nthink its nice (roughly), and already looked up 貴族に, そんな口利き, but the sentence\nas a whole makes no sense at all to me. Please help, and thank you.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T15:30:57.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18337",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T16:52:35.227",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T16:49:36.920",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4402",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "break down ~いていいと思ってる",
"view_count": 212
} | [
{
"body": "You can parse it like this:\n\n> （平民が、貴族にそんな[口]{くち}( **を** )[利]{き}いて(も)いい）と、思って(い)るの？\n\nI think it's like \"Do you think that 平民 is allowed to talk to 貴族 that way?\"\n\nそんな modifies 口(≒way of talking). \n口を利く means \"to speak, to talk\".",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T16:47:31.583",
"id": "18338",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T16:52:35.227",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-21T16:52:35.227",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18337",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18337 | 18338 | 18338 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the last panel at the bottom of the page, she says 「しょ__ー」.\n\nI'm not quite sure as to what that last character is, including its use(s) and\npronunciation(s).\n\nI have seen this character in various other comics, and I think that it might\nbe a sound effect/onomatopoeia (?).\n\n\n\nWhat is it and what does it mean?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T17:16:46.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18339",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-15T01:34:44.257",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-15T01:34:44.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7092",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning",
"usage",
"onomatopoeia",
"writing-identification"
],
"title": "Meaning of しょわー",
"view_count": 553
} | [
{
"body": "> しょわー\n\nI think it's an onomatopoeia of the fizzing sound from soda.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-21T17:35:49.283",
"id": "18340",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-21T17:35:49.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18339",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "My money's on onomatopoeia as well, as it's written outside of a speech\nbubble, like the sniffing sound くんくん and the gulping sound ごく, and it's in the\nsame hand as those. We also see あー in this same format in the same panel as\nthe little girl says 「あー！」.\n\nThat being said, while しょわー sounds very effervescent, the illustration makes\nme think it's meant to represent her shivering after drinking more of the sour\nbeverage.\n\nAs said above, the last character before the chôon is a speedily-written わ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-04-17T17:02:55.607",
"id": "23827",
"last_activity_date": "2015-04-17T17:02:55.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9877",
"parent_id": "18339",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18339 | null | 18340 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18343",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For an upcoming conference, I'm supposed to bring copies of my own materials.\nOne sentence contains a phrase that I'm a little unsure how to understand.\nFirst the Japanese sentence in its entirety:\n\n> 参加者に配付する資料がありましたら,当日90部をご持参願います。\n\nI believe I understand the conditional part and most of the rest. I understand\nit to say \"if you have any materials to distribute to the participants, please\nbring then on the day [of the conference].\"\n\nWhere I'm confused is the 90部.\n\nMy first instinct was to understand 90部 the name of an office or room at that\nuniversity. But nothing else is named in that way in the document.\n\nOR\n\nMy second guess is that it is saying I should bring 90 copies of the\nmaterials.\n\nWhat does it mean in this context?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T01:31:37.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18341",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T02:17:54.007",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"counters"
],
"title": "Can number + 部 mean the number of copies?",
"view_count": 413
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, 部 is a counter for copies of a newspapers, etc. and it applies to a\nbroader range of printed materials as well.\n\n[WWWJDIC](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi) gives one of\nthe meanings as \"(5) counter for copies of a newspaper or magazine.\" It also\ngives 一部 as a broader meaning \"one copy (e.g. of a document).\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T01:38:56.250",
"id": "18342",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T02:17:54.007",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-22T02:17:54.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"parent_id": "18341",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "From the definition for 部 in 数え方の辞典:\n\n> ② 書籍やひとまとまりの文書を数えます。\n>\n> a. 書物や印刷物などの、複製した数を数えます。\n>\n> 「１００万部のベストセラー小説」 \n> 「コピーを２０部作成する」\n>\n> b. 数冊の書籍を一括して数えるのに用います。\n>\n> 「１部５冊」\n\nSo yes, 部 is a counter for copies of printed materials, as in sense 2a. This\ncounter isn't limited to just newspapers and magazines like WWWJDIC appears to\nsuggest, and it doesn't refer to a room number.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T02:05:09.663",
"id": "18343",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T02:05:09.663",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18341",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18341 | 18343 | 18342 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18346",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was listening to 悲しい色やね by Ueda Masaki. I was able to pick up the lyrics,\nbut there are certain phrases that I cannot translate. In the main melody\npart, I was able to pick up\n\n```\n\n ほーみーたい\n 大阪ベイブルース\n \n```\n\nIn the first line, I can understand that たい means \"want to\", but I have no\nidea what ほーみー means. It does not seem to be an onomatopoeia. I searched it on\ngoogle, and it suggests some kind of musical instrument, but that does not\nseem to make sense. Then, a friend of mine told me that there is a word like\nthat in Okinawan dialect, but was not sure. If that is right, what does it\nmean? Will it make sense with \"want to\"?\n\nIn the second line, I know that this is a song about Osaka, and Osaka people\noften like to have particular western people as their mascot. For example,\npeople were happy with the Colonel Sanders statue in Osaka, and they once\nthrew him into a river. Can I consider ベイブルース (Babe Ruth) along the same line?\nBut who is 大阪ベイブルース? It doesn't seem to just Babe Ruth himself, is it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T03:19:42.043",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18345",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T10:05:49.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "What does this lyric mean?",
"view_count": 1150
} | [
{
"body": "It is my favorite song. Ask anything about it.\n\n> 「ほーみーたい」 = \"Hold me tight.\"\n\nI know it sounds like 「ほーみーたい」 but that part is actually in \"English\".\n\n> 「大阪ベイブルース」 = \"Osaka Bay Blues\".\n\nThe whole song takes place on a pier facing the Osaka Bay. It is not \"Osaka\nBabe Ruth\", but I had a good laugh!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T03:26:11.437",
"id": "18346",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-22T10:05:49.977",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-22T10:05:49.977",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 18345 | 18346 | 18346 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18357",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What impact does the 「で」 add if placed like this:\n\n> 秋の風は静か **で** vs. 秋の風は静か\n\nor\n\n> 心配しない **で** vs. 心配しない",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-22T23:29:29.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18352",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T01:24:40.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances",
"particles"
],
"title": "で at the end of a word",
"view_count": 1051
} | [
{
"body": "We have two different words here -- two different で's. Auxiliary verb vs.\nParticle.\n\n> In the phrase 「[秋]{あき}の[風]{かぜ}は[静]{しず}かで」, the 「で」 is the [連用形]{れんようけい} (=\n> \"continuative form\") of the affirmation auxiliary verb 「だ」.\n\nThus, the phrase will surely be followed by another phrase in regular prose-\nstyle writing. As a title of a creative writing, however, it can be used by\nitself without another phrase following it.\n\nAn example of when the phrase is followed by another would be\n「秋の風は静かで、[失恋]{しつれん}した[私]{わたし}の[心]{こころ}を[癒]{いや}してくれる。」 = \"The autumn wind is\nquiet and (therefore) it soothes my broken heart\"\n\n> 「秋の風は静か」 sounds more like a fractured sentence that is \"acceptable\" in\n> informal conversation but it would require an auxiliary verb or verb phrase\n> such as 「だ」 and 「である」 at the end in any kind of formal writing.\n\nNow, on to the second pair of phrases.\n\n> The 「で」 in 「[心配]{しんぱい}しないで」 is completely different. It is a particle\n> attached at the end of an informal imperative.\n\nBoth 「心配しないで。」 and 「心配しない。」 can mean \"Don't worry!\" in informal speech, but\nthe former would sound a little friendlier.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T01:19:16.750",
"id": "18357",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T01:24:40.350",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-23T01:24:40.350",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18352",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18352 | 18357 | 18357 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18358",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading about the kanji 幻, which I take to mean illusion or vision(not 見\nvision), and looked at words with it. I saw the words:\n\n * [幻滅]{げんめつ｝-disilusion\n * 幻想｛げんそう｝-illusion\n * 幻覚｛げんかく｝-hallucination\n * 幻影｛げんえい｝-phantom\n * 幻｛まぼろし｝-illusion\n * 夢幻｛むげん｝-fantasy/phantom\n\nIs that the correct translation of the words? Are some more common than\nothers? What are the different connotations of each word for an illusion? A\nlot of them, like 幻影 and 幻 look similar, but the first seems to be more of the\nghost kind, but I'm not too sure. What's the difference between 錯覚 and 幻覚?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T00:42:48.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18356",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T16:46:22.627",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-24T16:46:22.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "6881",
"owner_user_id": "6881",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Difference between Japanese words for illusion with 幻",
"view_count": 2332
} | [
{
"body": "* 幻影【げんえい】 / 幻【まぼろし】: Almost the same, except that the former being 漢語 and the latter being 和語. Some ghostly or dreamy things that may or may not exist. 「幻の大陸」 means a continent whose existence is not confirmed.\n * 幻想【げんそう】: This comes off to me as \"imagination\", \"fantasy\" or \"fiction\" rather than \"illusion\". It's in titles of many comics and games, but we usually don't use it in daily conversations.\n * 夢幻【むげん】: This is another cool-sounding word for novelists and artists. As an otaku I recall I saw this word many times, but never sought for its definition. Usually \"夢 and 幻\" is enough to understand it.\n\nAnd the following words are scientific terms, which are medically or\npsychologically defined. But you can safely use these in daily conversations,\ntoo.\n\n * 幻覚【げんかく】: = _[Hallucination](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination)_. To perceive something which _is not_ really there, usually due to mental illness. It includes 幻視【げんし】 and 幻聴【げんちょう】, which are typical symptoms of schizophrenia.\n * 錯覚【さっかく】: = _[Illusion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion)_. To perceive something which _is_ really there, but in a distorted way, even when the sensory system is normal. The best-known is [錯視【さくし】 (optical illusion)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_illusion), aka 目の錯覚.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T02:07:49.210",
"id": "18358",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T02:07:49.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18356",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18356 | 18358 | 18358 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18360",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have been wondering this for a while now, but hesitated to ask.\n\nI have been studying jouyou kanji for several years, yet I do not know if\nthere is a general way of how to read a list of kanji out loud. How do\nJapanese people generally read a single kanji?\n\nOr is it unusual to read a list of kanji out loud, as some kanji on themselves\nare rather to be understood?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T04:00:13.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18359",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T04:27:34.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7096",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "Is a kanji list read in 訓読み or 音読み?",
"view_count": 292
} | [
{
"body": "I am not sure if there any traditions or rules regarding kanji lists, but\nusually when someone refers to a particular kanji it is called by its common\nuse _and_ the word it is in, without separating 訓読み from 音読み.\n\nSome kanjis have no 訓読み at all, some kanjis have a wide list of 音読み so it is\nvery hard to distinguish which kanji are you referring to by calling one of\nits pronunciations. To solve this problem people refer to a particular usage\nof a kanji which is made using an example of a commonly known word.\n\nFor example:\n\n * referring to 漁 it's said 漁船のギョ\n * referring to 電 it'd said 電気のデン and so on.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T04:27:34.983",
"id": "18360",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T04:27:34.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6748",
"parent_id": "18359",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18359 | 18360 | 18360 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I am reading a Meiji era novel and I frequently sentences that have a verb and\nthen end in ぬ for example:\n\n> 二階なる一室を下りて主人夫婦が足投げだして涼みいし縁先に来たり **ぬ** 。\n\nor\n\n> 教師は筆おきて読みかえし **ぬ** 。\n\nCan someone help me with this? I know that ぬ can be a variant or hold the same\nfunction as ーず [per here [Conjugation of negative auxiliary\n〜ぬ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12225/conjugation-of-\nnegative-auxiliary-%E3%81%AC\\]) but I don't see how that would work in these\nsentences.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T07:23:32.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18361",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T08:06:24.500",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Use of 「ぬ」 as a sentence ending in literature",
"view_count": 92
} | [] | 18361 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18364",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What are the uses of に and とは in this sentence?\n\n> 俺のような学生生活 **に** 夢も持たない人間 **とは** まったく違う人種。\n\nI know this sentence says something along the lines of 'Those people are like\na completely different race than someone who has a dreamless school life like\nme'. What I don't understand is the use of に on the 学生生活 and also the とは but I\nthink that it might be a shortening of というは?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T08:37:24.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18363",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T10:09:18.423",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-23T08:48:46.860",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7103",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "What are the uses of に and とは in this sentence?",
"view_count": 285
} | [
{
"body": "In this context, the 「～～に」 describes what the object of an action is --\n\"towards\", \"for\", \"regarding\", etc. The action here is to have dreams. This\n「に」 has the same meaning as 「～～に[対]{たい}して」.\n\nThe 「～～とは」 means \"from/than ~~\" and is often following by a word like\n「[違]{ちが}う」, 「[異]{こと}なる」, etc. to express \"A is different from/than B.\" 「とは」 is\nan emphatic version of a plain 「と」 as in 「AはBと違う」. 「は」 is often combined with\nanother particle to express emphais as in 「には」、「では」, etc. This 「と」 has nothing\nto do with 「というのは」.\n\nYour translation is actually very good.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T09:28:17.117",
"id": "18364",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T10:09:18.423",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-23T10:09:18.423",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18363 | 18364 | 18364 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18393",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "It seems that in response to questions regarding the differences between 漢語\nand their 和語 equivalents, it is often explained that the 漢語 is \"more formal\"\nthan the 和語. As a result, I get the feeling that this is a trend.\n\nOne example of this, which made me think of this question, is [What is the\ndifference between [友達]{とも・だち} and\n[友人]{ゆう・じん}?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18312/384).\n\nAnd so, the originally question was this: **Is this feeling of mine correct?\nAnd is it always that way, or are there some instances where the 和語 is clearly\nmore formal?**\n\nUpon reading some comments, however, I realize that I am not entirely sure\nwhat even _I_ mean by \"formal\" in the above questions. \nIs there some consistent way in which we can understand \"formal\" as it is used\nin responding to these types of questions? Or are people using it to refer to\na bunch of different concepts?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T11:56:22.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18365",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-05T00:02:19.953",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-04T23:03:29.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "384",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"formality",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "Are 漢語 always more formal than 和語？",
"view_count": 865
} | [
{
"body": "I'll leave any definitive answers to our native speakers, but rather than\nformal–informal I've started to think that maybe poetic–prosaic might be a\nmore apt duality. (And formality usually implies little poeticality.)\n\nOne other example where both readings are common is 竹林 with チクリン being\n\"prosaic\" and たけばやし being poetic.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T12:14:02.090",
"id": "18367",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T12:14:02.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "I think there's definitely lots of truth in that tendency. 漢語 was essentially\nthe Latin of Japan for a long time; i.e the language of the elites. In fact,\nChinese poetry is still compulsory in Japanese education, a bit like Latin I\nguess.\n\nBecause of this history, 漢語 is associated with art, science, government etc.\nand is thus generally more formal.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T19:56:02.283",
"id": "18393",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T19:56:02.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "18365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "While 漢語 is more formal/technical/academic than the 和語 equivalent in most\ncases, there are a few exceptions.\n\n * 一番 (kango) is less formal/academic than 最も (wago).\n * 喧嘩 (kango) is less formal than 争い (wago).\n * 本当に (kango) is less formal/polite than 誠に (wago) in greetings.\n\nI think the number of such exceptions is very small. I understand these may\nnot be good examples because they don't share even a single kanji. Anyway,\njust because a word is in on-yomi doesn't mean it's always more formal.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-05-05T00:02:19.953",
"id": "58363",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-05T00:02:19.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18365 | 18393 | 18393 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18369",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I cannot understand the meaning of 手前 in the following sentence. As far as I\nknow 手前 means \"in front of my/your hands\" or could be a pronoun. However I\nhaven't seen before the usage like in the sentence below, so could you please\nexplain the meaning.\n\n> 着物姿の女の子なんて珍しいから、つい眼で追いかけてしまっていた。眼が合って、彼女は口を引き結んで、僕の前で挑みかかる **手前な** 顔をして。\n\nTranslation attempt:\n\n> \"Because it is pretty rare to see a girl wearing kimono, my eyes\n> unintentionally followed her. Our eyes met, she tighten one's jaw and right\n> in front of me...\"\n\n~Edited: I think I'm more or less understand the meaning, thanks to Brandon.\nBut I also can't figure out why it's used な here, as if 手前 is na-adjective?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T13:52:01.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18368",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T15:17:05.980",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-23T15:17:05.980",
"last_editor_user_id": "3183",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Question about the phrase「挑みかかる手前な顔」",
"view_count": 605
} | [
{
"body": "手前【てまえ】 has a number of uses; the pronoun being the much rarer case. Here it\nmeans \"before\" as in time.\n\n挑みかかる手前な顔 A face one would make just before initiating a challenge.\n\n> My eyes locked onto her; what with a girl dressed in a kimono being far from\n> common. Our eyes met and she pursed her lips and made a face as if to say\n> \"bring it on\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T14:15:08.720",
"id": "18369",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T14:43:37.050",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-23T14:43:37.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "18368",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18368 | 18369 | 18369 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18372",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am trying to translate the following small text (taken from a VN):\n\n> _もうこんなことはやめようか――_\n>\n> 心配そうな眼差しは、まるで **そう言っているようだった** 。\n\nSo far my attempts have led me to this:\n\n> It was as though his worrying gaze **seemed to be telling** _maybe we should\n> give it up_\n\nThe thing that seems to prevent me from fully understanding this text is the\nvolitional part: [よう] after [ている]. For some reason, it just seems unnecessary\nto me, so what function does it have?\n\nI am also aware of the abstract meaning of 「そう言う」(sometimes: [そういう] ) meaning\n\"That kind of ...\" but I was unsure whether it is the same 「そう言う」 since I have\nnever seen it being used in て-form, let alone「～ている」. Therefore I translated it\nby intuition instead.\n\nMy question: is my translation correct with respect to 「ーているよう」 at the end of\n「そう言う」?\n\nAny corrections and comments are very much appreciated!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-23T23:24:08.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18371",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T04:00:26.563",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"syntax",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "Need Help Understanding ーているよう",
"view_count": 626
} | [
{
"body": "よう(だ) in this sentence is used to express inference based on reliable\ninformation (often based on what the speaker sees) or similarity. It is not\nthe volitional form of a verb. You can translate it as \"look like\", \"look as\nif\", \"seem\", \"be like\", etc. It is often used with まるで which gives it more\nemphatic meaning \" _just_ like\", \" _exactly_ as if\".\n\nA verb can stand before this よう. It can be in progressive form and in this\nsentence I guess it means that the action is happening now. 言っている in this\nsentence is just the progressive form of the verb 言う, it's not used in\nauxiliary sense as in そういう.\n\nそう refers to the thought cited in the previous sentence (もうこんなことはやめようか).\n\nAll together, your translation gets the meaning across. Tim's translation from\nthe comment is closer to the structure of the Japanese sentence and I'll quote\nit in here:\n\n> \"We've had enough, let's give up.\" His worried look seemed to say exactly\n> that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T03:33:29.823",
"id": "18372",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T04:00:26.563",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-24T04:00:26.563",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"parent_id": "18371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18371 | 18372 | 18372 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18377",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Please look at the Texas Instruments\n[TI-108](http://education.ti.com/en/us/products/calculators/elementary-\ncalculators/ti-108/tabs/overview). Is that a 電卓{でんたく} or 計算機{けいさんき}? My guess\nis that the most basic calculators are 電卓, and that as more scientific\nfunctionality is added (like graphing), a calculator becomes a 計算機? So, the\nTI-108 is a 電卓、right? Devices such as the\n[TI-36X](http://education.ti.com/en/us/products/calculators/scientific-\ncalculators/ti-36x-pro/tabs/overview) and the [TI-84\nPlus](http://education.ti.com/en/us/products/calculators/graphing-\ncalculators/ti-84-plus/features/features-summary) are 計算機?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T04:48:00.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18374",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T19:43:00.523",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-24T04:54:40.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "4835",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "difference between 電卓{でんたく} and 計算機{けいさんき}",
"view_count": 456
} | [
{
"body": "「[電卓]{でんたく}」 is originally short for 「[電子式卓上計算機]{でんししきたくじょうけいさんき}」, meaning\nthat the two words refer to the same thing -- an electronic pocket (or desk)\ncalculator.\n\nWe also use the word 「計算機」 to mean the same thing as above.\n\nThus, you may call any one of the TI products you mentioned using any one of\nthe three words I mentioned.\n\nAdditionally, you could also specifically use the newer word 「グラフ電卓」 or\n「グラフ[関数]{かんすう}電卓」 to refer to the ones with a graphing function.\n\n関数 means \"function\" in math, not the \"function\" as in \"graphing function\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T05:47:40.807",
"id": "18377",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T05:47:40.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18374",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "I would call all the TI series shown above 「電卓」rather than 「計算機」. Indeed, 「電卓\n(calculator)」is a small, portable「計算機 (computer)」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T19:43:00.523",
"id": "18392",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T19:43:00.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7116",
"parent_id": "18374",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18374 | 18377 | 18377 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Do both 思い and 想い mean \"feeling\", and if they do are they used\ninterchangeably? If not, what is their difference in meaning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T05:01:42.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18375",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-03T23:41:44.920",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "想い vs. 思い - Do Both Mean Feeling?",
"view_count": 7418
} | [
{
"body": "> \"Do both [思]{おも}い and [想]{おも}い mean \"feeling\"?\"\n\nYes, both mean \"thought\", \"feeling\", etc.\n\n> Can I just use either one in my writing?\n\nNo, not really. Only 「思う」 is officially correct according to our Education\nMinistry. That means that in school, you can only use 「思い」. You WILL be\ncorrected if you use 「想い」 in school. You will not see 「想い」 in newspapers,\neither.\n\nIf you look up 「おもい」 in a monolingual dictionary, you will find that the kanji\n「想い」 is \"marked\" for being \"not official\" like in this dictionary, which uses\na triangle for that purpose.\n\n[http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%80%9D%E3%81%84?dic=daijisen&oid=02560200](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%80%9D%E3%81%84?dic=daijisen&oid=02560200)\n\nOur writing system is rather complex to begin with as you know. So, the\ngovernment tries to keep it simple even by a little -- at least in schools.\n\n> Does that mean 「思い」 and 「想い」 are not interchangeable?\n\nPersonally, I would say that they are not. I would feel pretty weird if I used\n「思い」 if I were writing a letter to someone I liked. If our language gives you\nthe aesthetic choices that other languages do not, I say 'Keep'em!'\n\n> Can I use 「想い」 in my private life after school?\n\nYes, of course, you can. Many people use it in letters, emails, poems, etc.\n\n> Cool. Is there a difference in meaning or nuance between the two words?\n\nIn meaning, not really, but in nuance, I would have to say yes, which is why\nyou see both used often. 「想い」 looks and feels more personal and/or emotional\nthan 「思い」.\n\nIf you saw litter on the street and felt something, that would be a 「思い」. If\nyou are thinking of someone special and missing her, that would be a 「想い」 for\nmany of us if described in writing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T11:25:28.470",
"id": "18380",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T11:25:28.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
},
{
"body": "Firstly, the biggest difference is that the kun'yomi reading of 「おも（う）」 in the\njouyou kanji list is only assigned to to 思う. In official documents, textbooks,\nnewspaper articles, etc 想う isn't used. Though some businesses will, depending\non the business.\n\n思う is used for general situation \"to think\", such as 思考、思案、思索、思慮、意思, etc. 想う\nhas a more personalised feeling (personal mental states, etc):\n想起、回想、追想、予想、夢想、空想、発想, etc. This meaning can also be extended to thinking about\n\"something\" - your thoughts are targeting something. It also has to do with\nwords dealing with music, arts, etc: 楽想、構想、詩想.\n\nIn general, 思う is the general use (including 思う・思い）, and 想う is for personal\neffecting mental states and object d'art things.\n\nSo to answer directly, they both have the meaning of \"feeling\" but they have\nsubtles to them and the use of one when the other is apporpiate might be odd\nto read. 思い is the origin of the action, and 想い is the way of thinking about\nan action.\n\nExamples:\n\n> 競馬をしようかと思案することが思い\n>\n> 映画を観ようと思考するのが思い\n>\n> 映画の感想を言うこと想いになる",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T12:04:13.693",
"id": "18381",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-03T23:41:44.920",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6934",
"parent_id": "18375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18375 | null | 18380 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18378",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A few minutes ago Anthony was talking about 思い and 想い on chat, and he [asked a\nquestion about\nthem](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18375/%E6%83%B3%E3%81%84-vs-%E6%80%9D%E3%81%84-do-\nboth-mean-feeling). I looked up the verb 思う in 明鏡国語辞典 since I thought it was\nrelevant. It has this bit:\n\n> 「想う」は、主に心にイメージを描く意で「幼少のころを想う」「想う人はもういない」などと使うが、今は一般に「思う」で **まかなう** 。\n\nI'm not familiar with this use of まかなう. The definitions I'm familiar with are\nmore or less the dictionary definitions: providing meals for someone, paying\nfor their expenses (covering living expenses, medical costs, etc.), or things\nlike that. But that doesn't really make sense to me here.\n\nI think this is saying something like 「思う」 is now used generally while 「想う」 is\nusually used in the more limited manner the sentence describes. But I don't\nreally get まかなう. I'm having trouble finding a dictionary definition that fits.\nIs it talking about 「思う」 generally being used in place of 「想う」 ?\n\nWhat does まかなう mean here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T05:28:46.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18376",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T06:12:39.913",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What does まかなう mean here?",
"view_count": 340
} | [
{
"body": "In that context, 「まかなう」 means \"to get by or manage with the bare minimum\nwithout asking for more\".\n\nYour dictionary is saying that in many cases, only 思う is used nowadays instead\nof using 想う, which people have tended to prefer in the past.\n\nExample: When the eatery staff cook a meal for themselves using only what is\nleft and available in the kitchen without obtaining additional ingredients,\nthose dishes are called まかない[料理]{りょうり}.\n\nEDIT: \"to make do\" was the English phrase I was trying to remember but failed\nuntil now!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T06:01:03.033",
"id": "18378",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T06:12:39.913",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-24T06:12:39.913",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18376",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18376 | 18378 | 18378 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18383",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is probably a basic question on tense / aspect in conditional sentences\nbut I can't find an explanation and it would be very useful to resolve.\n\nI will illustrate my question with an example from a drama I saw yesterday.\n\n_Context_ : \nA young woman has been reunited with her family. After suffering for a long\ntime, isolated from her family in Hokkaido, she had heard her successful\nsister on the radio. She then fled to Tokyo, initially not to find her family\nbut by chance they are reunited. She relates to them how she heard her sister\non the radio and asked herself, how could my sister be so successful and I\nturn out like this?. She then says:\n\n> 「お姉やんに会ったら、もっと惨めな気持ちになった・・・(うらやましくて、うらやましく・）」\n\nDoes this/can this mean:\n\n> \"If I met you, my older sister, I would have felt more miserable. (I was so\n> jealous. [That's why I did not look for you]).\"?\n\nOr, does it/can it also mean:\n\n> \"When I met you, my older sister, I felt more miserable. (I was so\n> jealous).\"?\n\nI think it is the first*, or based on the context I describe (I don't think I\nmissed anything), it could be either.\n\nIf I wanted to make the first statement then I might have used the present\nplain form in a longer sentence：\n\n「お姉やんに会ったら、もっと惨めな気持ちになると思ったから会うつもりはなかったんだ。・・」\n\nBut that is because I am a weak speaker and try to minimize the chance of\nbeing misunderstood.\n\n*If she had said ~なっただろう the question might not have occurred to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T09:30:12.383",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18379",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T23:20:44.320",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-24T23:20:44.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "1556",
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Can 「〜たら〜た。」structure mean \"If I had~then I would have~\"?",
"view_count": 3652
} | [
{
"body": "My answer is based on the assumption that the sentence in question has been\ncorrectly transcribed.\n\n> 「お[姉]{ねえ}やんに[会]{あ}ったら、もっと[惨]{みじ}めな[気持]{きも}ちになった。」\n\ncan only mean one thing with or without any further context. It means:\n\n> \"When I met you, my older sister, I felt more miserable.\" to borrow your own\n> TL.\n\nA native speaker would never say 「お姉やんに会ったら、もっと惨めな気持ちになった。」 if she has not met\nher older sister as she speaks this line. 「もっと惨めな気持ちになった」 is a simple\nstatement of a fact. It is not like the English \"I would have felt more\nmiserable.\", which only expresses conjecture.\n\nThere are different ways to change the Japanese sentence in question into the\nequivalents of the English sentence \"If I had met you, my older sister, I\nwould have felt more miserable.\" I am going to start with the least formal and\nwork my way up.\n\n> 1) 「お姉やんに会ったら、もっと惨めな気持ちになった **と思う** 。」\n\nThis is the easiest and most informal (or almost too informal); therefore, it\nborders on \"being sloppy\". You could end up sounding uneducated, too. Not\nrecommended by me but you will hear this format once in a while.\n\n> 2) 「 **もし** お姉やんに会っ **て（い）たら** 、もっと惨めな気持ちになっ **て（い）たと思う** 。」」\n\nThere is a pretty big gap between #1 and #2 in terms of clarity and the\nlistener's impression of the speaker. This structure, you will hear very\noften.\n\n> 3) 「もしお姉やんに会っていたら、もっと惨めな気持ちになっていただろう（or いたであろう。」\n>\n> 4) 「もしもお姉やんに会っていたとしたら、もっと惨めな気持ちになっていたことでしょう。」\n\n3) is the structure you will hear a lot in English classes in Japan as the\ntranslation of the English \"I would have ~~~ if I had ~~.\" In real life, it\nwould sound almost stiff. Replace 「であろう」 with 「と思います」 and you will basically\nhave the most realistically polite way of saying this.\n\n4) will make you sound like an upper-middle-class dame. It sounds very nice\nbut to use it naturally, all the other things you say will need to be just as\nrefined.\n\nI personally recommend 2) and 3).",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T13:29:58.583",
"id": "18383",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T13:29:58.583",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18379",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18379 | 18383 | 18383 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I wanted to say \"I'll be logged into Skype every night.\" So, I said 「毎夜、Skypeと\n**つながっている** つもりです。」 But now I am thinking maybe the verb tense should have\nbeen 「毎夜、Skypeと **つながる** つもりです。」\n\nMy sense is that「 毎夜、Skypeとつながっているつもりです。」 means (1) shift forward to each\nevening, and then state what I will be doing at that time in the continuous\ntense.\n\nI sense that 「毎夜、Skypeとつながるつもりです。」 means (1) shift forward to each morning or\nafternoon, (2) state with the future tense (つながる) what I will be doing even\nlater on that day in the evening (be on Skype). So, this feels like a double\nfuture. Does that make sense?\n\nIn summary, once \"つもり\" shifts the context into the future, can you use the\ncontinuous verb tense?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T13:52:04.973",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18384",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T16:44:18.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "Can you construct a future-continuous verb tense?",
"view_count": 728
} | [
{
"body": "First 毎夜 isn't so common. 毎晩２３時ごろ or some such would be must more common.\nSecond, つながっている is not continuous, but rather perfect aspect (completed action\nwhere the effect or state continues into the present).\n\nIf you want to strongly establish a future context, why not use something like\nこれから or 来週 or some such? つもり talks about your intent or plans for some future\ntime and sounds a little strange here IMO; maybe not wrong, but just not\nusual?\n\nIf you mean that until some specific future time point you will not have been\nconnected to Skype, but from now on you're planning to be connected every\nnight, you could say something like:\n\nこれからは毎晩ずっとSkypeとつながってることにした。 \n\n> I've decided that from now on I'll be connected to Skype all night every\n> night.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T16:44:18.377",
"id": "18390",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T16:44:18.377",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "18384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18384 | null | 18390 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In these examples:\n\n> 久しぶりやな\n\n> いい感じやなぁ\n\nI don't understand what \"ya\" and \"na\" mean at the end of a sentence",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T14:00:25.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18385",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-08T09:46:12.927",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-08T09:46:12.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7112",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"usage",
"particles",
"dialects",
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "Meaning of やな at the end of a sentence",
"view_count": 6649
} | [
{
"body": "It means ”だね”, and if I am not mistaken can be heard in the 関西 area. For\nexample, せやな is the same as そうだね.\n\nSo, いい感じやなぁ would be the same as いい感じだね.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T14:06:24.750",
"id": "18386",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T14:06:24.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7096",
"parent_id": "18385",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "「やな」 is a Kansai affirmative sentence-ender used just like 「 **だな** 」 in\nKanto.\n\n「[久]{ひさ}しぶりやな。」 = \"Long time no see, yeah?\" or just \"Long time no see!\"\n\n「いい[感]{かん}じやなぁ。」 = \"That's cool.\", \"That's pretty good.\", etc.\n\nReal Kansai people might use ええ, not いい for the second phrase, though.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T14:09:53.593",
"id": "18387",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-08T02:31:47.913",
"last_edit_date": "2017-07-08T02:31:47.913",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18385",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "## Answer\n\nAs other answerers say, you can replace `やな` by `だな`.\n\n```\n\n [雨]{あめ}[降]{ふ}ったみたいやな。 = 雨降ったみたいだな。 (It looks like it rained.)\n これは[君]{きみ}のやな？ = これは君のだな？ (It is yours, isn't it?)\n \n```\n\n## A variety of usages / forms\n\nIn the same way, you can replace `やね` by `だね`.\n\n`やね (だね)` is a more familiar variation.\n\n```\n\n [雨]{あめ}[降]{ふ}ったみたいやね。 = 雨降ったみたいだね。 (It looks like it rained.)\n \n```\n\n## Exception\n\nTo express an agreement for someone's thought, `せやな` and `せやね` are used in\nsome cases. In these sentences, `やな` and `やね` are not replaceable.\n\n```\n\n A: これ[美味]{うま}そうだな。 (It looks like delicious.)\n B: せやな。 (It should be.)\n \n```\n\n`せやな` is a correct sentence but `せだな` is not correct. Let's replace `せ` by\n`そう`.\n\n```\n\n せやな。 (Correct)\n せだな。 (Incorrect)\n そうだな。 (Correct)\n \n```",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T09:26:16.193",
"id": "18402",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T09:35:37.183",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-25T09:35:37.183",
"last_editor_user_id": "5353",
"owner_user_id": "5353",
"parent_id": "18385",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18385 | null | 18387 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18394",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I was listening the the opening theme of the animation 巨人の星. I was able to\npick up the first part.\n\n```\n\n 重いこんだら\n \n```\n\nI understand that `重い` (heavy) is a relative clause modifying `こんだら`. What is\nこんだら? It should be something heavy, I guess. Is it related to コンドル? Or, is it\na type of ゴンドラ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T15:46:04.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18388",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T04:47:32.387",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-24T15:56:24.333",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "What kind of object is こんだら?",
"view_count": 597
} | [
{
"body": "思【おも】い込【こ】む \nmeans to be convinced of something\n\n日本語が難しいと思い込んでいる \nI'm convinced that Japanese is difficult (whether that's actually true or\nnot).\n\n思い込む → 連用形 + ～たら(if / when) → 思い込んだら",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-24T16:28:18.187",
"id": "18389",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-24T16:28:18.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "18388",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "In the context of that song, 「思い込む」 does not mean \"to be convinced\".\n\n> It means along the line of \"to make a firm resolution\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T01:04:22.430",
"id": "18394",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T01:04:22.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18388",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "コンダラ is a slangy word for a man-powered \"land roller\" to flatten the grounds,\nlike this one.\n\n\n\nAlthough the \"correct\" name of this tool is \"(整地【せいち】)ローラー\" or something,\nthere are a few high school students who actually call this コンダラ. Even\nJapanese Wikipedia has the [entry for\nコンダラ](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%80%E3%83%A9).\n\n* * *\n\nYes, I'm only half kidding. What is really said in that song is \"思い込んだら\" (=\n_if (you are) determined_ ), not \"重いコンダラ\".\n\nBut you are not the only person who misinterpreted it as 重いコンダラ.\n\nActually there were great many native Japanese people who heard that song and\nwondered, \"What's コンダラ? It must be something heavy, used by little leaguers?\nOh I got it, it's the name of that roller!\"\n\nThis error became a very famous joke, repeated on the radio and TV many times\nin the past. And some people actually started to call this コンダラ. And now, at\nlast, there are people who call this just コンダラ and don't know why it's コンダラ!\n\nYou can show the picture above and ask \"what's the name of this?\", and I'm\nsure many people will answer \"definitely it's コンダラ\", jokingly or seriously.\nThe following is a real question made by a native Japanese speaker who wanted\nto know the etymology of コンダラ.\n\n運動場を平らにする時に使う大きなローラーをコンダラと言ってましたが、何語なのか、さっぱり分かりません。一応色んな言葉の辞書は見ました。 \n<http://q.hatena.ne.jp/1256308673>\n\nAnd you can read the article\n[コンダラ](http://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%80%E3%83%A9) in\npixiv百科事典, which describes this word rather seriously.\n\n* * *\n\n**Edit** : Putting the joke aside, 「思い込む」 here may be a bit confusing. In this\ncontext, 「思い込む」 means \"strongly determine (one's way of living)\", not \"one's\n(erroneous) assumption\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T02:08:35.250",
"id": "18396",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T04:47:32.387",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-25T04:47:32.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18388",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 18388 | 18394 | 18396 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18398",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am using an easy-to-read VN to get some grammar experience. The following\nsentence has been troubling me for about half an hour now:\n\n> 生徒会に入ったら、どうしてもこっちを着なきゃだめなの？\n\nThe topic of 着る is 制服 if that will help understand it better.\n\nI have no problem understanding the first clause「生徒会に入った **ら** ー」: \" **When**\n(you) join the student council...\"\n\nMy first doubt comes with the 「どうしても」, does it mean something like \"by all\nmeans\"? However, the biggest problem I have is wrapping my mind around this\n(triple negative?): 「着なきゃだめなの?」\n\nSo here's what I know: 「なきゃ」 is casual for「なければ」 and together with 「だめ」 it\nwould mean \"Gotta wear (uniform)\" or less casual \"Must wear (uniform)\".\nHowever, since it's 「だめな(い)」 I got really confused. Does 「着なきゃだめ **な** 」\naltogether mean \"Must not wear (uniform)\"?\n\nI am sorry if the explanation is messy, but I tried to write down my thought\nprocess. ~~At some point I also became uncertain whether the topic is 制服 due\nto the を particle in this sentence (I expected 「に」particle after 「こっち」\n\"here\").~~\n\nPlease point me in the right direction and if it isn't too much, an\nidiomatically correct translation would also be much appreciated as I feel it\nwould help me figure out the X by knowing Y.\n\n### Edit 1:\n\nThe topic is confirmed to be 制服. I translated こっち as \"here\", rather than the\ncorrect \"this\", referring to the school uniform.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T01:39:42.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18395",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T02:32:12.737",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-25T02:22:15.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "5131",
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"negation",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Trouble parsing sentence with どうしても and a triple negative",
"view_count": 1290
} | [
{
"body": "`なの？` is the plain form of `ですか？`, not a negative.\n\n`どうしても` can be understood as \"no matter what\" in this context.\n\nIs that enough to help you understand the meaning of the sentence?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T02:27:59.160",
"id": "18397",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T02:27:59.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18395",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Where to start...\n\n「どうしても」, in this context, means \"no matter what\". The nuance is \"One has no\nchoice but to ~~.\" This is an extremely common phrase.\n\nRegarding the \"triple\" negative, it is only **\"double\"** at best in reality.\nBy the Japanese standard, it is actually only \"single\".\n\n> 「[着]{き}なきゃだめなの」\n\nNegative #1 = 着なきゃ, colloquial for 着なければ (\"if I do not wear\")\n\nNegative #2 = だめ (\"no good\"). It looks like negative if translated into \"no\ngood\", but the word だめ is NOT negative in Japanese.\n\nなの is affirmative despite what you stated. There is no ない embedded in it. なの\nis an affirmative question-ender.\n\n「着なきゃだめなの？」 therefore, literally means \"Is it no good if I don't wear ~~?\".\nMore naturally, \"Do I have to wear ~~?\"\n\n「こっち」 here colloquially means \"this one (rather than the other one)\" . The\nother one is called 「あっち」.\n\n> 「[生徒会]{せいとかい}に[入]{はい}ったら、どうしてもこっちを着なきゃだめなの？」\n\ntherefore means: \"Would I have to wear this one no matter what if I joined the\nStudent Council?\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T02:32:12.737",
"id": "18398",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T02:32:12.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18395",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18395 | 18398 | 18398 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18401",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking at the\n[lyrics](http://music.goo.ne.jp/lyric/LYRUTND365/index.html) of RCサクセション's\n雨上がりの夜空に. My understanding is that this is a song about a person talking to\nhis/her (personified) car. There are several things I don't understand.\n\n(1) In this line\n\n```\n\n バッテリーはビンビンだぜ\n \n```\n\nI understand that バッテリー is mentioning a car battery. But why is `ビンビン` used?\nDoes it have any meaning related to charging of a battery?\n\n(2) In this line\n\n```\n\n こんな夜に 発車できないなんて\n \n```\n\nThe person is perhaps sad that he/she cannot ride the car. But why is `発車`\n(start moving with the car) used here? I guess it would be more natural to say\nthat they cannot start the engine, but why is it particularly mentioning `発車`?\nIs it normal in Japanese say \"I cannot start moving with the car\" when they\ncannot start the engine or cannot go for a drive?\n\n(3) In this line\n\n```\n\n 雲の切れ間にちりばめたダイヤモンド\n \n```\n\nWhat is `ダイヤモンド` mentioning? I cannot make sense of a slit between the clouds\nbeing filled with a diamond. Is it some metaphor?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T07:29:31.773",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18399",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T09:11:21.773",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-25T07:34:47.213",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "About a song lyric",
"view_count": 216
} | [
{
"body": "This song uses \"double entendre\" everywhere in the lyrics. The explicit\ncontext, of which you are aware, is riding a car, and the implied context is\nriding a woman.\n\nI agree with you that ビンビン and 発車 sounds unnatural, when they are only talking\nabout cars. But I hope you can easily understand what ビンビン and 発射 (the same\nsound as 発車) mean in the latter context.\n\nAnd twinkle twinkle little stars are like diamonds in the sky --- Japanese\npeople are familiar with that metaphor, too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T08:53:33.487",
"id": "18401",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T09:11:21.773",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-25T09:11:21.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18399",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18399 | 18401 | 18401 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Prompted by a comment thread, I was curious if my understanding of the\nsemantic differences between\n\n> [nominal phrase]？ \n> [nominal phrase]なの？ \n> [nominal phrase]ですか？ \n> [nominal phrase]なんですか？\n\nis actually correct or just a delusion.\n\n(か？ and のか？ further complicate things so I've left them out to keep everyone\nsane.)\n\n# Scenarios\n\nI conjured up a bunch of example scenarios and have tried to categorize them\nand how each different type of ending works.\n\n### Confirmation\n\nWhen you are asking for something to be confirmed because you didn't hear it\nor it was surprising...\n\n> 「彼は医者になった」 \n> 医者［○？ ｘなの？ ○ですか？ ｘなんですか？］\n\nなの？ and なんですか？ seem like they are asking a redundant question to me. I would\nnot be surprised if this was me making a mistake, though.\n\n### Referring to immediate states of things\n\nThere's a certain class of 形容動詞 which seem to behave differently, for example:\n\n> ダメ ［○？ ○なの？ ○ですか？ ○なんですか？］ \n> 大丈夫［○？ ○なの？ ○ですか？ ○なんですか？］\n\nThese 形容動詞 seem to accept simply ？.\n\nHowever, ones which don't refer to the immediate states of things don't accept\n？ nearly as easily, e.g.:\n\n> きれい［ｘ？ ○なの？ ○ですか？ ○なんですか？］ \n> 上手 ［ｘ？ ○なの？ ○ですか？ ○なんですか？］\n\n(I can't seem to think of any 名詞 which allow just ？ aside from in the\nconfirmation usage.)\n\n### Inference\n\nSometimes, you follow a statement up with a question asking regarding some\ninference you've made.\n\n> 「彼氏は病院で働いてる」 \n> 彼は医者［ｘ？ ○なの？ △ですか？ ○なんですか？］\n\nI think the latter three all work, but なの？ and なんですか？ seem to \"flow\" a tiny\nbit better to me than ですか？.\n\n### Question words\n\n> 誰［○？ ○なの？ ○ですか？ ○なんですか？］\n\n### Normal questions\n\n> 彼氏は医者［ｘ？ ○なの？ ○ですか？ ○なんですか？］\n\n### Other things\n\nThere are other things like rhetorical questions which use none of these\nendings, so they are not included unless there ends up being a good reason.\n\n# Comparing the endings\n\nSo, sometimes multiple things work equally well. Are there differences in\nnuance?\n\n * There's the obvious difference in politeness between the non-です and です versions.\n * I really do not see a difference between ですか？ and なんですか？ in the cases I have them both marked as ○. This is unlike the non-question case: 「彼氏は医者です。」「彼氏は医者なんです。」, where the latter sounds more like you're making a stance on something or using the sentence as justification something.\n * When both ？ and なの？ are possible, なの？ seems more childish to me.\n\n# The question\n\nSo, how much have I gotten wrong here? Are there other types of scenarios\nworth considering? (Sorry for the long blogging question.)\n\nI'm totally open to an answer which completely ignores my analysis and gives a\nradically different one.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T08:22:50.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18400",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T06:32:37.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"questions"
],
"title": "The difference between [noun phrase]+[？・なの？・ですか？・なんですか？]",
"view_count": 2033
} | [
{
"body": "1. For a confoirmation to 彼は医者になった, both 医者？ or 医者なの？ work. But the formar is more associated with nuance of \"Huh? Perdon me?\" while the latter has more to do with surprise.\n 2. きれい？ or 上手？ are fine.\n 3. For a reply to「彼氏は病院で働いてる」, it's 彼は医者［○？ ○なの？] though the latter has more sense of inference.\n 4. As a normal question (e.g.\"Excuse me, do you have a boyfriend who is a doctor?\"), it's 彼氏は医者［○？ ×なの？］.\n\nPolite versions are just parallel.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T16:09:24.483",
"id": "18407",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T16:09:24.483",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18400",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I'd say that the ones you've picked are pretty regular semantically.\n\n 1. ~？ and ですか？are simple yes/no questions used when you have no prior information one way or the other. You can also use them to confirm that you heard correctly. \n 2. なの？ and なんですか？ tie the question in with the discourse or prior assumptions. You've heard or gotten some hint that e.g. he's a doctor, and you want to confirm or express a nuance of surprise/disbelief/awe etc: \"医者なの？\"\"医者なんですか？\". Likewise, if you'd heard that he was NOT a doctor, you'd use \"医者じゃないの？\"\"医者じゃないんですか？\"\n 3. I'd say that in each pair, ですか？ and なんですか？ are pretty much just polite versions of the others. \n\nAll nouns and na-adjectives work fine before \"？\", by the way.\n\nIf you start looking at less commonly used patterns like か？, なんだ？ etc, it gets\na bit hairier.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T23:57:52.967",
"id": "18410",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T23:57:52.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "18400",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I agree with the comments from the other two answers. I am not sure how useful\nthis will be but as I looked into guidance on acceptable sentence endings a\nlittle while ago (in particular when the zero copula, の and か can be used) you\nmight be interested to see what I found for “question statements”. As I\nalready had them I have kept のか？ and だ in but by all means disregard these\nparts.\n\nThe most useful reference was “Da and the Zero Form as the Two Contracted\nForms of the Japanese Copula” by Mioko Miyama (which I got from Snail boat and\nyou can google). I have pasted the list I made using this paper of acceptable\nendings for questions (excluding です) below.\n\n**Acceptable stand alone questions formats per M Miyamoto’s paper** (Nb:\n∅=zero copula)\n\nWh-questions:\n\n誰が学生 な の？ \n誰が学生 だ？ \n誰が学生 ∅？ \nか： \n誰が学生 であるのか？ \n誰が学生 なのか？\n\nYes/No questions:\n\n太郎が学生 なの？ \n太郎が学生 ∅？ \nか： \n誰が学生 であるのか？ \n誰が学生 なのか？\n\nThe other points I think are relevant are:\n\n_1. の-nominaliser／です_\n\nAs per the extract from Snailboat in Chat yesterday, there is some\n“controversy”but の can be used (1) when the speaker wishes to include some\nconjecture/attitude – touched upon by Dainichi - or (2)just as a plain\nquestion marker (with no extra nunace).\n\nWith questions ending in ですか I think の is only used when including such\nconjecture/attitude, because it is not acting as a question marker. So if, for\nexample, you are just seeking information (with no prior knowledge) then んですか\nmay sound out of place (I have an example and references).\n\nI am not aware of any difference in politeness between questions and non-\nquestions using んです(か).\n\nWith なの I think the additional nunaces may be conveyed by intonation/emphasis.\n\n_2. Nouns vs 形容動詞_\n\nThe paper I cited states that “although adjectives are not under consideration\nhere, da after nominal adjectival predicates behaves in the same way” . Based\non this statement and inquiries to native speakers, there is no difference in\nthe copular taken by nouns and that taken by 形容動詞.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T05:11:33.453",
"id": "18416",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T06:32:37.100",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-27T06:32:37.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "1556",
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"parent_id": "18400",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18400 | null | 18410 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the character for the word resistance. I'm looking for the term in the\nsense of \"I feel resistance towards taking on this challenge\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T13:36:19.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18404",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-15T08:13:09.810",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-15T08:13:09.810",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7129",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -4,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "What is the character for resistance?",
"view_count": 369
} | [
{
"body": "In that context, you really do not have many choices. It would be either\n「[抵抗]{ていこう}」 or 「抵抗[感]{かん}」.\n\n> \"I feel resistance towards taking on this challenge.\"\n\ncould be said as:\n\n> 「この[挑戦]{ちょうせん}を[受]{う}けるのは抵抗がある。」\n>\n> 「この挑戦を受けることには抵抗感がある。」\n>\n> 「この挑戦を受けることには抵抗感を感じる。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T13:58:44.183",
"id": "18405",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T13:58:44.183",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18404",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18404 | null | 18405 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18409",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I remember once I have seen 「なの」 was not placed at the end of a sentence\n(meaning it was not a question) ever since then I wondered what it meant but\ndidn't have any clear examples. Today I saw this sentence in my textbook:\n\n> 男の子 **なの** は知ってる\n\nThe textbook translates this sentence as \"It is a boy, I know\". The topic of\nthe chapter is not about the 「なの」 part, so no explanation is given about it.\n\nWhat does 「なの」 mean here?\n\n**Edit 1:** Got the comma right in the translation. Sorry for\nmisunderstanding!",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T22:21:52.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18408",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T01:41:06.590",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-28T01:41:06.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"syntax",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "Problems understanding なの in this sentence",
"view_count": 547
} | [
{
"body": "You can break なの down into the formal noun の and the adnominal copula な (i.e.,\na form of だ which shows up before nouns).\n\n**Your sentence:** Basically, the sentence （彼が）男の子だ is embedded into は知ってる by\nturning it into a noun using の.\n\n> （彼が）男の子だ \n> ⇒［（彼が）男の子な］のは知ってる\n\n**Alternatives:** You could also write it as\n\n> 男の子であるのは知ってる \n> \"I know that he's a boy.\"\n\nwhich is equivalent in meaning but slightly more formal/literary/whatever\nbecause it uses である in place of な to represent the copula. Another option is\n\n> 男の子（だ）ということは知ってる。 \n> \"I'm aware of the fact that he's a boy.\"\n\nwhich gets across the same point in a slightly more lengthy way.\n\nIf it was simply 男の子は知ってる that would either be read as \"The boy knows\" or \"I\nknow the boy\", because there is no copula.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-25T22:42:06.740",
"id": "18409",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-25T22:42:06.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18408 | 18409 | 18409 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18421",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In conversations done among **heavily otaku** people, I often hear the words\n2-jigen or 3-jigen used. I know its meaning: two-dimension and three\ndimension, except that it does not always seem to make sense. For example, in\na conversation I found recently between two otaku people in Tokyo and Kyoto,\n\n```\n\n watashi wa 4-jigen kara kimashita. dakara 3-jigen de samishiku arimasen.\n \n```\n\nthe first sentence, I can understand literally. But in the second sentence,\nwhat does it mean? The literal translation \"(not) lonely in/at 3-dimension\"\ndoes not make sense to me. How can I interpret that? I only hear this use\namong otaku people, not ordinary people. Is this a jargon among **heavily\notaku** people? I just can't grasp the meaning!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T07:36:52.297",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18420",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-23T09:39:23.407",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-23T09:39:23.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words",
"manga",
"culture"
],
"title": "What does 2-jigen or 3-jigen mean?",
"view_count": 1079
} | [
{
"body": "Basically it's a joke. Since most otakus supposedly feel more comfortable in\n2D world (anime/manga) than 3D world (reality), this guy makes a play on it\nand says he feels fine in 3D because he comes from a 4D world.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T08:53:06.140",
"id": "18421",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-26T08:53:06.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "18420",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 18420 | 18421 | 18421 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am learning Japanese, and was wondering how to end an email to my Japanese\nSensei?\n\nLike something similar to Regards or Thank You. A more respectful way to end\nan email.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T12:28:43.900",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18423",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-26T23:23:21.510",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-26T12:41:33.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "7117",
"owner_user_id": "7117",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"email"
],
"title": "Ending an email in Japanese to your sensei?",
"view_count": 34549
} | [
{
"body": "You could always try the simple (どうぞ)よろしくお願い致します. The bits around it might\nchange based on context, but at a basic level it's just fine, and I'm pretty\nsure in most situations it would be there regardless.\n\nThe verdict seems to be out on the appropriateness of どうぞ. There are sites\nthat say it is acceptable to use it, but user @Rilakkuma has personal\nexperience being told not to. I'd imagine that in formal business settings\nthis might be more of an issue than in a casual email to your professor,\nthough.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T12:44:06.207",
"id": "18424",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-26T23:23:21.510",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-26T23:23:21.510",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "18423",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18423 | null | 18424 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18466",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I have noticed in various environments that some people will sometimes, when\nspeaking to someone of lower status, say おつかれさん instead of お疲れ様. Similarly one\nmight hear ご苦労さん instead of ご苦労様. I've looked in dictionaries, and they say\nthat this usage of さん is simply a [change in sound from the original\nさま](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%95%E3%82%93?dic=daijirin&oid=DJR_sann_-120).\nThis suggests that it might be correct usage, but it does not make an explicit\nremark about politeness, and if it really is just a change in sound, then\ntheoretically one should be able to say it to those of higher status. In my\nexperience, though, it has been used exclusively to lower status individuals.\n\nMy assumption was that it's a kind of play on words turning さま into さん like\nthe honorifics despite the original meaning of 様 in this case, however looking\nit up and seeing that it is actually a shortening made me unsure. What is the\nReal Right Way to use it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T12:58:51.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18425",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-31T00:43:53.077",
"last_edit_date": "2022-05-31T00:43:53.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage",
"politeness"
],
"title": "Is おつかれさん \"correct\" Japanese to address to someone of lower status?",
"view_count": 1101
} | [
{
"body": "The nature of sound shortening is often, due to the environment that spawns\nsuch changes, rather 'casual' and colloquial. Much like how 様 and さん have\nrelatively different levels of 'politeness' so do お疲れさま and お疲れさん. (Speaking\nmerely from personal experience, I have only used お疲れさん among friends and\ncasual acquaintances in informal situations. Among equal colleagues, in\nworking / formal environments I have never heard such abbreviation of お疲れ様)\n\nThis will likely be the main reason you will not have heard it said by and\nindividual of lower status, to one higher status. (i.e. it would be impolite\nto do so.)\n\n(As a side note, another reason will be due to a long standing societal norm\nthat 労い／慰労 'thank or praise for ones efforts / work' is a 'one way road'. Said\nby those of higher status to those of lower. お疲れ様 carries such a nuance and\ncan thus be seen as rude when one of lower status says it to one of higher\nstatus. The stronger nuance contained in ご苦労様 even more so.) ...That being\nsaid, this topic is under discussion in Japan, language is ever changing and\nit is inconvenient not to have an equivalent お疲れ様 phrase for lower > higher\nstatus word transactions.\n\nIn regards to your speculation of it being a play of words 様 to さん; I would\nspeculate that it is much more likely that rather than any cognitive attempt\nof being witty, it is rather pure linguistic change brought about by the same\nenvironmental factors that spawned さん from 様.\n\nTo thus answer the question, it is a perfectly sound and linguistically\n'correct' phrase to use and its meaning will almost certainly be understood.\nWhether the environment such a phrase is in used and the relative social\nstatus of the speaker and receiver will allow for it to be considered\n'correct' usage in context however... well, this can really only depend on the\nrelationship between the speaker / receiver and how the receiver feels about\nsuch language being used at the given time and place.\n\nTo err on the side of safety, お疲れ様です／でした is likely to cause the least ripples\n(= likely to be considered the 'correct' approach)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T01:13:00.423",
"id": "18433",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T01:30:31.483",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-27T01:30:31.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "6947",
"owner_user_id": "6947",
"parent_id": "18425",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Basically,\n\n```\n\n from low to high (and high to low)\n お疲れさまです\n \n from high to low\n ご苦労様です\n お疲れさん\n ご苦労さん\n \n```\n\nIn many cases, the act of 省略 generally decreases the level of honour.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T09:27:23.113",
"id": "18452",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T09:27:23.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "18425",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Your observation is correct. I'm not sure about the etymology, but as a matter\nof fact, we can use 「お疲れさん」 to someone whose status is equal to or lower than\nourselves. Addressing it to your boss is clearly rude.\n\nPersonally, I usually stick to 「お疲れさまです」 in a business setting, because I\nthink saying お疲れさん is over-friendly and shows little or no respect. Even when\nI talk to my colleague who is 10 years younger than me, I would at most use\neither 「お疲れさんです」 or 「お疲れさま」. Although it depends from company to company, I\ndon't recommend you become the first person to use 「お疲れさん」 in your office.\n\nAs for ご苦労さま(です), a majority of people believe it should not be addressed to\nthose of higher status than ourselves. Some people think it's OK, but I'd\nrather not take an unnecessary risk here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-28T04:13:48.200",
"id": "18466",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-28T04:13:48.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18425",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Just a little insight as an ALt in a junior highschool in Japan; The head of\nthe English department as well as the vice-principle would often say ご苦労さん to\nstudents at the end of the day, instead of ご苦労様. I always thought they said it\nin that way to seem friendly to the students.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-05-30T06:34:35.160",
"id": "94759",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-30T06:34:35.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "51270",
"parent_id": "18425",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18425 | 18466 | 18466 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18432",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Would it be correct to say\n\n> これは日本のお[土産]{みやげ}です\n\nto say that 'this souvenir is from Japan'? And if so, can the same form be\nused to say it's a present from a friend? For example\n\n> これはよしさんのお土産です\n\nas in 'this is a souvenir from Yoshi' (given to me by Yoshi)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T22:41:06.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18431",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T08:56:10.993",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-27T01:06:37.233",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How do you say \"This souvenir is from X\" where X is a person or a place?",
"view_count": 1745
} | [
{
"body": "The first one you can use (put stress on the 日本 and it emphasizes where the\nsouvenir came from). With no stress it's \"This is a Japanese souvenir.\"\n\nFor something which literally means that, you can use から.\n\n> 'This souvenir is from Japan' \n> これは日本 **から** のお[土産]{みやげ}です。\n>\n> 'This is a souvenir from Yoshi' \n> これはよしさん **から** のお土産です。\n\nBonus: これはよしさんから **もらった** お土産です。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-26T23:31:58.640",
"id": "18432",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-26T23:39:46.223",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-26T23:39:46.223",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3360",
"parent_id": "18431",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Addition to the answer above.\n\nTo ask where some goods are produced you can say:\n\n> \"...は[何処]{どこ}[産]{さん}ですか?\"\n\nTo ask where a person is from, you may ask (politely):\n\n> \"ご出身はどこですか?\"\n\nor rather informal form:\n\n> \"どこから来たのですか?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T01:24:00.020",
"id": "18435",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T08:56:10.993",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-27T08:56:10.993",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6748",
"parent_id": "18431",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18431 | 18432 | 18432 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there any difference between the two \"エ\" in 「エフェクト」? The first is bigger\nand the latter seems smaller.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T03:06:54.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18438",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T05:17:56.600",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T05:17:56.600",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5113",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"katakana"
],
"title": "Is there any difference between the two \"エ\" in 「エフェクト」?",
"view_count": 273
} | [
{
"body": "The smaller ェ is used in combination with フ, thus making フェ (fe).\n\nHave a look at katakana combinations: <http://nihongo.as.ua.edu/katakana.htm>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T03:12:51.570",
"id": "18439",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T03:12:51.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7096",
"parent_id": "18438",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18438 | null | 18439 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18457",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Made-up example to illustrate what I mean by \"double causative\", since that\nmay be an abuse of terminology:\n\nSuppose your grandmother always forces your kids to eat okra, which they hate.\nYou think this is unreasonable and the kids should be allowed to eat what they\nwant. As the grandmother is about to come over, you say to your spouse, \"Don't\nlet grandma make the kids eat okra!\"\n\nMy guess would be something like this:\n\n> おばあさんに、子供たちにオクラを食べさせることをさせないで！\n\nIs my attempt correct? What is the most natural way to express this meaning?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T09:58:17.657",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18453",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T09:39:53.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1726",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"causation"
],
"title": "How can you express a \"double causative\"?",
"view_count": 431
} | [
{
"body": "No, it is not correct, sorry to say. You literally created a \"double\ncausative\" in:\n\n> 「[食]{た}べ **させる** ことを **させない** で」\n\nBut we would not use this structure in a natural setting. It sounds quite\nwordy and awkward.\n\nMost naturally, we would say something like:\n\n> 「おばあさんに、子どもたちにオクラを食べさせないようにしてね（ or しようね）。」\n\nFor more clarity, one could insert 「[無理]{むり}に」= \"forcibly\" and say:\n\n> 「おばあさんに、子どもたちに無理にオクラを食べさせないようにしてね（ or しようね）。」\n\nNeedless to say, 「してね」 is a friendly request and 「しようね」 is volitional.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T15:22:40.007",
"id": "18457",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T15:31:37.633",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-27T15:31:37.633",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "I'd go for the slightly different construction below:\n\n> おばあさんに、子供たちにオクラを食べさせないようにしてください。\n\nMake sure that grandma does not make the children eat Okra.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T09:20:49.637",
"id": "18721",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T09:39:53.120",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-19T09:39:53.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "1805",
"owner_user_id": "1805",
"parent_id": "18453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18453 | 18457 | 18457 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18455",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 完成前とずいぶん色が違うじゃねぇか！\n\nIn this sentence, what is じゃねぇか?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T12:28:04.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18454",
"last_activity_date": "2018-07-24T21:43:25.937",
"last_edit_date": "2018-07-24T21:43:25.937",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7040",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "What is じゃねぇか? What is its original form?",
"view_count": 6840
} | [
{
"body": "じゃねぇか is just a colloquial form of the tag question じゃないか.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T12:44:20.540",
"id": "18455",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-29T12:32:51.647",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-29T12:32:51.647",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7148",
"parent_id": "18454",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "This doesn't only happen with じゃない > じゃねえ, but generally /ai/ > /ee/, like\n\n> きたない > きたねえ \n> やばい > やべえ \n> (食{た}べたい = ) 食{く}いたい > 食いてえ\n\nAs in the other answer, this is extremely informal and in the wrong context\ncan easily be considered plain rude.\n\nXと違う = to differ from X \n完成前 = before completion\n\n**Edit.** For completeness, there's also\n\n * /ae/ > /ee/ \ne.g. お前 > おめえ\n\n * /oi/ > /ee/ \ne.g. すごい > すげえ\n\n * /ui/ > /ii/ \ne.g. さむい > さみい, まずい > まじい",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T18:42:15.090",
"id": "18458",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-29T13:31:56.903",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-29T13:31:56.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18454",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] | 18454 | 18455 | 18458 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In two anime series, HUNTER×HUNTER and D.Gray-man, the word 怨【おん】 was\ntranslated in the English subtitles as \"darkness\".\n\n闇【やみ】 is another word for \"darkness\". What is the difference between these two\nwords?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T21:29:03.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18459",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T03:02:33.553",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-24T03:02:33.553",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7154",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 闇 (yami) and 怨 (on)",
"view_count": 207
} | [
{
"body": "闇{やみ} and 怨{おん} are not really related at all.\n\n * 闇{やみ} means \"darkness\", approximately (as well as some related concepts).\n\n * 怨{おん} doesn't stand on its own, but is part of words like 怨{うら}み and 怨念{おんねん} which both mean \"grudge\", approximately.\n\nMaybe if you explain what made you think they were related a better answer can\nbe given?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T22:26:00.630",
"id": "18460",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-27T22:26:00.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18459",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18459 | null | 18460 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to know if these pronouns are used in real situations. I saw them come\nup in some video games and wonder if people really use them.\n\n * 我{わ}が輩{はい} - I've read that this an old usage word but I've seen it in Mario games said by bowser.\n\n * 方{かた} - I once saw this in an RPG and the commentator said it was a more polite form of 達{たち}.\n\nI also want to know how I would sound if I used one of these (rude, feminine,\nold, young, etc.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-27T23:01:55.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18461",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-28T15:49:08.777",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-28T01:24:14.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7145",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"usage",
"pronouns"
],
"title": "Usage of the pronouns 「我が輩」 and 「方」 in everyday life",
"view_count": 293
} | [
{
"body": "Neither of those are common-use pronouns, but for different reasons - one\nisn't common-use, the other isn't a pronoun. I'll explain.\n\n我が輩 is a relatively unusual first-person pronoun. It is used in exactly two\ncontexts:\n\n * When a male speaker wants to sound stuck-up and self-important - almost always in fiction, and often with noticeably more literary speech than is normal for conversations\n * When someone is making a reference to 「我が輩は猫である」, the first line of a very famous Natsume Souseki short story (though the line is arguably more famous than the story as a whole)\n\nNo speaker outside of fiction would ever unironically use 我が輩, though it may\nshow up in jokes.\n\nAs for 方, it's not a pronoun, but rather a pluraliser suffix (read がた thanks\nto rendaku). It is, as you say, a more formal version of 達, and it's used\nprimarily to show deference to the people whose noun it's attached to. It's\nmost commonly heard in set phrases like 先生方, but it can be attached to\nanything as the situation demands. Still, outside of set phrases, you're most\nlikely to hear 方 used in situations where the people whose noun it's attached\nto are of high enough status to require verbs like なさる - it's not too much of\nan everyday word.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-28T03:16:44.430",
"id": "18465",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-28T15:49:08.777",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-28T15:49:08.777",
"last_editor_user_id": "3639",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "18461",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18461 | null | 18465 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18495",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have heard and read something that sounds like:\n\n> xxxはできないことになります\n>\n> It became impossible to do xxx\n\nIs this correct and should the preceding verb be in this form only? To express\nthe same meaning, could one use 「ように」or other grammatical constructs?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-28T01:14:10.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18464",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T22:25:04.493",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "664",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Usage of -ないことになる",
"view_count": 219
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, it's correct (aside from tense of the verb) and the verb should be\nadnominal form (attributive form) since こと is a noun. ように・・ is also correct\nand actually more common for that meaning, though it doesn't mean \"(if that\nwas the case) that means you wouldn't be able to do it\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T22:25:04.493",
"id": "18495",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T22:25:04.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18464",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18464 | 18495 | 18495 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18503",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I think that these sentences might have similar meanings:\n\n> 1. 犬{いぬ}についての記事{きじ}が朝日{あさひ}新聞{しんぶん}に書いてあります。\n> 2. 犬についての記事が朝日新聞に書かれています。\n>\n\nI think that the direct translations are:\n\n> 1. There is an article about dogs that is written in the Asahi Shinbun\n> (there is no chance to specify the author).\n> 2. An article about dogs has been written in the Asahi Sinbun (it is\n> possible to mention the author).\n>\n\nDoes each at least have correct grammar? \nWhat is the nuanced difference? \nWhat criteria are used to decide which to say?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-28T12:27:33.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18473",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-23T19:52:53.930",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-29T03:21:10.533",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 16,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "meanings of 「書{か}いてある」 and 「書かれている」",
"view_count": 1566
} | [
{
"body": "Your implications are the opposite. Passive in 2. is a common strategy to\navoid mentioning the subject. 1. is at least not passive in the normal sense.\nYou can have an explicit subject in 1 if you change the 記事が to 記事をwithout\nchanging the verb form.\n\nI don't see any basis in using \"there is ...\" versus \"an article is ...\" to\nexpress 1 versus 2.\n\nThe original sentences are both correct.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-28T12:31:53.790",
"id": "18474",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-28T12:37:21.440",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-28T12:37:21.440",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18473",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Both are grammatically correct and they both mean \"An article about dogs has\nbeen written in the Asahi Sinbun\" though the former can't specify who wrote it\nas you say. The former (書いてある version) seems to apear often in everyday\nconversation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T04:35:06.873",
"id": "18503",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T04:35:06.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18473",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18473 | 18503 | 18503 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18476",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My textbook says the correct structure is\n\n> WHEREにWHOがいる\n\nFor example:\n\n> 日本にかおるさんがいる\n\nBut I've seen some webpages with examples such as:\n\n> かおるさんは日本にいる\n\nSo... are they both correct? Do they have different meanings? Is one of them\nwrong?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-28T22:51:55.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18475",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-29T10:35:48.103",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-29T03:23:43.733",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "は/が with いる. When to use each of them",
"view_count": 299
} | [
{
"body": "Both are correct but their meaning isn't exactly the same.\n\nAn easy way to understand it is to think of them as answers to different kind\nof question :\n\n> 庭に犬がいる。\n>\n> (There is) a dog in the garden.\n\nCan be the answer to :\n\n> 庭に何がいる？\n>\n> What's in the garden?\n\nWhereas :\n\n> 犬は庭にいる。\n>\n> The dog is in the garden.\n\nCan be the answer to :\n\n> 犬はどこにいる？\n>\n> Where is the dog?\n\nIn the former example, the word precedeing が is the new information (which in\nthis case can be translated with the indefinite article \"a\"), the hearer and\nthe speaker both know which garden they are talking about.\n\n**EDIT : This distinction between known and unknown information is probably\n100% true when に is followed by は (庭には...) but 庭に犬がいる can also mean \"there is\na dog in a garden\" with both informations being new to the hearer.**\n\nIn the latter example, the word preceding は is the known information\n(translated with the definite article \"the\" here, they know which dog they are\ntalking about), and the word preceding に is the new one.\n\nSo in your case :\n\n> （誰が日本にいる？）日本にかおるさんがいる。\n>\n> (Who is in Japan?) (It is) Kaoru (that) is in Japan.\n\nVS\n\n> （かおるさんはどこにいる？）かおるさんは日本にいる。\n>\n> (Where is Kaoru?) Kaoru is in Japan.\n\nYou can find a similar construction with だ :\n\n僕は学生だ。 (What are you?) I'm a student.\n\nVS\n\n僕が学生だ。 (Who is the student?) I'm the student.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-29T00:30:45.127",
"id": "18476",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-29T10:35:48.103",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "18475",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18475 | 18476 | 18476 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 包み込む **ようにして** 、彼を抱きしめる \n> 包み込む **ように** 彼を抱きしめる\n\nThe example could either use ようにして or 包み込むように抱きしめる（albeit written\ndifferently). What is the difference between these two usages? Can anyone\nexplain the usage of ようにする as I can't seem to find it in any Japanese\ndictionary. (I've seen some explanations for this in English but I generally\ntry to avoid random explanations about Japanese grammar on the internet\nbecause they normally don't go into enough detail and only explain one usage.)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-29T18:42:49.380",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18479",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T01:17:48.153",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-29T01:17:48.153",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6981",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between usage of ように and ようにして",
"view_count": 2910
} | [
{
"body": "If there are several uses for the 〜ようにする construct, then I could be way off...\nbut here is one explanation from an N3 grammar study book* that I have been\nusing:\n\n> **〜ようにする** \n> Expresses the act of making an effort to do something habitually. \n> \n> **Example** \n> 健康のために、野菜を食べるようにしています。 \n> I try to eat more vegetables for the sake of my health.\n\n_Edit_ : On the same page, it describes 〜ように\n\n> **〜ように** \n> To aim for a certain situation or result. \n> \n> **Example** \n> 早く起きられるように、今晩なるベく早く寝ます。 \n> I'm going to bed as early as possible tonight so I can wake up early\n> tomorrow.\n\nSince I am not super well-versed in using these myself, I can't really\nelaborate further. But, hopefully this will help you enough.\n\n*ISBN: 978-4-86392-036-1",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-29T22:35:50.347",
"id": "18482",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-29T22:48:48.993",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-29T22:48:48.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "3261",
"parent_id": "18479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "\"包み込むようにして彼を抱きしめる\" means the same thing as \"包み込むように彼を抱きしめる\" or that you set\nsomething so that it wraps him and then hold him.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T01:04:40.483",
"id": "18853",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T01:04:40.483",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18479 | null | 18853 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18483",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I realize it is a kind of Kansai-ben but how does it compare to the other\nforms of \"I\" in terms of how they want to represent themselves?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-29T18:54:07.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18481",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T01:58:59.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4280",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"culture",
"dialects"
],
"title": "What is the implication when a girl refers to herself using \"うち\"? Is it meant to be more or less feminine? Neutral? Tomboyish?",
"view_count": 328
} | [
{
"body": "I think うち is a neutral and common feminine first-person pronoun, at least in\npart of Kansai region. There, people who use うち use it because everyone else\nuses it. As long as it is used with fluent Kansai-ben in an informal setting,\nI would feel nothing special about うち.\n\nWikipedia says うち is used also by male people in certain regions in Kyushu,\nbut I have not heard that.\n\nAnother point is that うち is a casual pronoun, just like 俺. Although some\nKansai comedians and _geisha_ are always using it on TV, I usually don't hear\nうち from Kansai people in a serious situation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T01:58:59.830",
"id": "18483",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T01:58:59.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18481",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18481 | 18483 | 18483 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18485",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "はるばる - from afar; over a great distance; all the way\n\nI'd greatly appreciate someone telling me what the と at the end of はるばる does\nto it's meaning, and if it affects the words' location in a sentence (I've\nseen it used at the beginning as well as the end of a sentence which has me\nconfused!)\n\nAny example uses much appreciated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T04:43:40.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18484",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T05:54:16.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7170",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How to use はるばる / はるばると in a sentence",
"view_count": 462
} | [
{
"body": "It is something like `-ly` in English. It turns a word into an adverb. In case\nof `はるばる`, it has a slight flavor of adverb from the beginning, so it may be\nused with or without `と`.\n\n\n\nThe word moving around is not directly due to `と`. Adverbs move around\nrelatively freely.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T05:54:16.090",
"id": "18485",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T05:54:16.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18484",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18484 | 18485 | 18485 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18491",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm learning the counter for minutes, which is 分. I know, there are several\nexceptions in when it comes to pronunciation.\n\n * 1 min = **いっぷん**\n * 2 min = にふん\n * 3 min = **さんぷん**\n * 4 min = **よんぷん**\n * 5 min = ごふん\n * 6 min = **ろっぷん**\n * 7 min = ななふん\n * 8 min = **はっぷん**\n * 9 min = きゅうふん\n * 10 min = **じゅうっぷん**\n\nBut on some sites they stated that 3分 is **さんぶん** , or that 4分 is **よんふん**...\n\nSo I'd like to know which are correct. Thanks",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T08:28:09.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18487",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-30T19:40:45.737",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-30T14:31:21.333",
"last_editor_user_id": "7174",
"owner_user_id": "7174",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"readings",
"counters",
"time"
],
"title": "Exceptions in pronouncing the counter for minutes (分)",
"view_count": 1464
} | [
{
"body": "## 分 meaning \"minute(s)\"\n\nWhen 分 is used as a counter with the meaning \"minute(s)\", it is read as\nfollows:\n\n> １分 = いっぷん \n> ２分 = にふん \n> ３分 = さんぷん \n> ４分 = よんぷん \n> ５分 = ごふん \n> ６分 = ろっぷん \n> ７分 = ななふん \n> ８分 = はちふん・はっぷん \n> ９分 = きゅうふん \n> １０分 = じゅっぷん・じっぷん\n\nThese \"irregularities\" are due to sound changes. The above sound changes are\nparticular to 分【ふん】, but\n[gemination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology#Gemination_2) is\noften triggered by ち・く (as in い **ち** or ろ **く** ) and they somewhat explain\nthe readings here. (Note that っ＋ふ becomes っぷ, and similarly for はひへほ, and\ncompare also [１個]【いっこ】 from い **ち** ＋こ or [６個]【ろっこ】 from ろ **く** ＋こ.)\n\n## 分 meaning \"part(s)\"\n\nBut 分 can also be used be used as a counter meaning \"parts\", in which case it\nis always read ぶん. For example when reading fractions:\n\n> ⅓ \n> さんぶん の いち \n> _lit._ one of three parts\n\nSo, when 3分 means \"three parts\", it is always read さんぶん, not さんぷん.\n\nWhen 3分 means \"three minutes\", it is always read さんぷん, not さんぶん.\n\nSimilarly, よんぷん = \"four minutes\" and よんぶん = \"four parts\".\n\nさんふん and よんふん are non-standard readings.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T11:19:58.450",
"id": "18491",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-30T19:40:45.737",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-30T19:40:45.737",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18487",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18487 | 18491 | 18491 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18489",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The phrase \"じいつにくうだらない\" appeared in the _Doraemon_ manga, but the words don't\nappear in a dictionary. What is actually being said?\n\nじいつ - ?\n\nくうだらない - silly (?)\n\nI would greatly appreciate help translating.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T09:12:52.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18488",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T11:08:53.467",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-30T11:08:53.467",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "7170",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What does じいつにくうだらない mean?",
"view_count": 479
} | [
{
"body": "じいつ - じつ = realy\n\nくうだらない - くだらない = boring",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T09:31:51.340",
"id": "18489",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T09:31:51.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7175",
"parent_id": "18488",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18488 | 18489 | 18489 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18500",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I think that there are a lot of societal influences with regard to how to\nbegin addressing a Japanese man with his first names. Please put the societal\nissue aside and just consider the linguistics of this scenario.\n\n * Both the Japanese and American are speaking in Japanese.\n * Both the Japanese and American are men. \n * In formal and informal settings, a Japanese addresses me using my first name.\n * I address the Japanese using his last name.\n * During the first few weeks / months of getting to know him, he uses my first name and I use his last name. I can't remember how it happened, but I've been speaking to some Japanese men using their first names for awhile.\n * I prefer using his first name if I consider him a close friend and if he has no problem with it. But, in the presence of another Japanese person, I would never say his first name. \n\nWhen I think the time is right (which is not this question), how would I\nexpress this thought in Japanese? The context is an American saying it to a\nJapanese.\n\n> Hey Tanaka-san. Is it cool If I start using your first names?\n\nI would say something like\n\n> 悪いけれども、これから、下のお名前を使わせて頂いても、宜しいんですか？\n\nIs that ok? I am sure it sounds very unnatural, but even asking to use his\nfirst name is unnatural. So, what should I say?\n\nBy the way, my observations are that, even when best of buddies, Japanese men\nalways address each other using last names. And, the norms for addressing\nJapanese women with first names are completely different.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T16:09:46.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18492",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-02T05:08:28.510",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T05:08:28.510",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to say \"let's start using our first names when we talk?\"",
"view_count": 956
} | [
{
"body": "Yours is good but the よろしいんですか part (which would mean \"Are you saying you\nallow me to use your first name?\") should be よろしいですか (though いいですか or\nよろしいでしょうか are better IMO).\n\nThat said, 下の名前で呼ぶのはどうでしょうか？ is probablly closer to what you want to say.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T22:58:08.443",
"id": "18496",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-30T22:58:08.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18492",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "How about:\n\n> ([今度]{こんど}から)[下]{した}の[名前]{なまえ}で[呼]{よ}んでもいいですか。(a little casual) \n> 下の(お)名前で呼ばせてもらってもいいですか。/[構]{かま}いませんか。(more polite) \n> 下のお名前で呼ばせていただいてもいいでしょうか。/よろしいでしょうか。(even more polite)\n\netc...",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T03:34:08.127",
"id": "18500",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T01:28:16.513",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-01T01:28:16.513",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18492",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18492 | 18500 | 18500 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've started to begin writing hiragana but I've seen many ways of writing\nthem, usually I'm able to read the different ways of writing them but it keeps\nbothering me sometimes how mine and what I see don't look similar and would\nlike to know if my writing is understandable. Thank you in advance ",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T20:41:07.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18493",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-12T15:30:26.560",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T16:02:09.307",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7179",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"hiragana",
"handwriting"
],
"title": "Is my hiragana writing understandable?",
"view_count": 4329
} | [
{
"body": "I think the only character one would stumble over is い, because it looks close\nlike a し with either a bit of dirt, or like an incomplete じ. The rest of\ncharacters are definitely legible.\n\nTwo comments:\n\n * き and さ are written with a gap in the curve (in handwriting).\n * The next character I would point out would be に, which looks too much like two characters しこ.\n\nOtherwise, good job and keep practising!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-30T21:01:29.047",
"id": "18494",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T00:26:58.993",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T00:26:58.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18493",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "This is pretty old but your \"ki\" and your \"sa\" are wrong.\n\nEdit: In handwriting, the curve in き and さ are usually and commonly not\nconnected and instead separated into two strokes; but in some sans-serif fonts\nin Japanese, those strokes are connected. You're not completely wrong, but\nit's more customary to separate them into two strokes.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-07-16T06:36:01.397",
"id": "25740",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-12T15:30:26.560",
"last_edit_date": "2017-09-12T15:30:26.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10642",
"parent_id": "18493",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18493 | null | 18494 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across Vて+た construction in a song I've been listening to:\n\n> あなたのその瞳をただ **見つめてた**\n\nCan someone explain what it means? I've tried looking for it in some grammar\nbooks but unfortunately I couldn't find it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T02:55:50.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18498",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T12:32:13.683",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T12:29:20.177",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "What is Vて+た construction?",
"view_count": 12992
} | [
{
"body": "The て-form of a verb followed by いた (past tense of いる: to be) indicates the\npast progressive tense (e.g., 食べていた \"I was eating\", 飲んでいた \"I was drinking\").\nIn spoken Japanese though, the い of いた is usually silent, so it sounds like\ntabe[teta] and non[deta].",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T08:12:00.360",
"id": "18510",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T12:32:13.683",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T12:32:13.683",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "18498",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] | 18498 | null | 18510 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm a beginner in Japanese language. I'm confused as to where I should use\nkanji or hiragana. For example, \"Company\" is written as\n\n * 会社 in kanji \n * かいしゃ in hiragana\n\nWhat is the difference between those two form writings? Which one should I\nuse?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T04:26:31.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18502",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T09:08:19.320",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T08:56:16.497",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4171",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"usage",
"kanji",
"hiragana"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 会社 and かいしゃ?",
"view_count": 265
} | [
{
"body": "According to my dictionary, かいしゃ (hiragana) can mean either a\ncompany/corporation/workplace or a household word/universal praise. I'd stick\nwith writing the word 会社 in kanji to be more specific and avoid any confusion.\nIt's also good practice to get as much exposure to kanji as you can early on.\nIt'll help you out big time when reading more advanced material.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T04:45:50.857",
"id": "18505",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T09:08:19.320",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T09:08:19.320",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6753",
"parent_id": "18502",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Usually, a common word like _kaisha_ will only ever be written as かいしゃ instead\nof 会社 in these two cases:\n\n * When accomodating for young children or non-Japanese speakers who might not be able to read kanji (yet).\n\n * For stylistic/typographic purposes. For example, as part of an all-hiragana name of a company on a billboard. Just another way to stand out in an attempt to catch your attention, I suppose.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T08:01:27.560",
"id": "18509",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T08:01:27.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "18502",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18502 | null | 18509 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm a beginner in Japanese language. In English, \"Company Name\" and \"Name of\nCompany\" are basically the same. In Japanese, are those two the same or\ndifferent? Which one should I use?\n\n * 会社名前 \n * 会社の名前",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T04:37:41.133",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18504",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T08:56:03.397",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T08:44:43.807",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4171",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage",
"set-phrases",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Which one is correct 会社名前 or 会社の名前?",
"view_count": 279
} | [
{
"body": "One of the uses of the の particle (that you will learn early on in Japanese)\nis to show possession. \"Company Name\" is the same as \"Company's Name\".\nCompany's Name = 会社の名前",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T04:57:44.943",
"id": "18506",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T04:57:44.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6753",
"parent_id": "18504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "会社の名前{なまえ} consists of two nouns, one describing the other. The one with の is\nin genitive case which is used to indicate possession in this case. It's\nroughly equivalent to _'s_ or _of_ in English: _company's name_ or _the name\nof the company_ (both are translated to 会社の名前). Note that 名前 is a native\nJapanese word and it uses kun-yomi reading of the kanji in this case.\n\nAs it happens often in Japanese, there's also a Sino-Japanese word with the\nsame meaning which uses on-yomi readings only. For company name it is\n会社名{かいしゃめい} or 社名{しゃめい} (not 会社名前). As a rough rule, those kind of words are\nusually more formal then equivalent native Japanese words.\n\nPlease also note that Japanese and English grammar don't work in the same way\nand order of words in both language is often different and has a different\nsignificance. You cannot really directly translate word by word.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T05:28:33.650",
"id": "18507",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T08:56:03.397",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T08:56:03.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"parent_id": "18504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "会社{かいしゃ}の名前{なまえ} is grammatically fine, and while compound nouns are sometimes\nformed by simply eliminating the の particle (e.g.,本{ほん}の棚{たな} -> 本棚{ほんだな} or\n勉強{べんきょう}の不足{ふそく} -> 勉強不足{べんきょうぶそく}), in this case the word you are looking\nfor is: 会社名{かいしゃめい} (the _on-yomi_ of 名 is generally used in compound nouns\nand has the same meaning as 名前{なまえ} as a whole: _name_ ).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T05:29:20.740",
"id": "18508",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T05:48:03.523",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T05:48:03.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "18504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18504 | null | 18507 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18513",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the game Tingle's Love Balloon Trip, if you ask your friend Lion, who is\nvery strong, to forcefully open a gutter, he responds:\n\n> こ、 こわしたら まずいだろ ? やめとこうぜ。\n\nThe first sentence I take it means, \"W-what if I break it?\", literally, \"It'll\nbe bad if I break it, right?\"\n\nI'm not sure about the second sentence; I guess it either means, \"Quit asking\nme.\", or maybe something like \"I won't!\" since やめ probably is the stem of 辞める,\nbut how about the 〜とこう part?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T09:26:35.143",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18512",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-25T20:25:46.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3527",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 「やめとこう」mean?",
"view_count": 1916
} | [
{
"body": "やめとこう is the volitional form of やめとく, which is a very frequently heard\ncontraction of やめておく (やめる written in kanji would be 止める: to stop (doing\nsomething)).\n\nThe て-form of a verb plus おく (originally from 置く: _to put down_ ) is a bit\nhard to explain concisely, but usually should be taken as to (not) do\nsomething now, rather than let things run their course. In other words, it's\nused when doing something proactively, or at least showing or (asking for) the\nintent to be proactive with your decision making.\n\n> こ、 こわしたら まずいだろ ? やめとこうぜ。\n\nShould be read something like this: \"D-don't you think we'd get in trouble if\nwe broke it? Let's forget about it already.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T09:52:39.917",
"id": "18513",
"last_activity_date": "2014-08-31T09:58:09.197",
"last_edit_date": "2014-08-31T09:58:09.197",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "18512",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "I would say \"Leave it\"\n\nif you break it, it's bad. Let's leave it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-05-25T20:25:46.347",
"id": "58979",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-25T20:25:46.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30030",
"parent_id": "18512",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18512 | 18513 | 18513 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18518",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The line:\n\n今のは心が響いてくるなんてレベルじゃなかった。流れ込む意識の奔流に一瞬、自我を奪われてしまっていた.\n\nCan anyone explain what the 心が響いてくる part means?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T19:35:43.353",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18514",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T06:32:35.960",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6981",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of 心が響いてくる",
"view_count": 356
} | [
{
"body": "It does not mean anything. It is a mistake made probably by a native speaker\nwith low-education level. The person probably intended 心に響いてくる lit. '(the\nsound) resounds to the heart'. It is a metaphor, its actual meaning being\n'(the sound) moves the heart' (also a metaphor in English).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-08-31T22:56:30.817",
"id": "18516",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T04:47:15.387",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-01T04:47:15.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "29",
"owner_user_id": "7181",
"parent_id": "18514",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -2
},
{
"body": "There is a metaphorical idiom \"心に響く\", which usually means \"move/touch one's\nheart\":\n\n> 心に響く[おもてなし](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/219528/m0u/)\n>\n> そのスピーチは私の心に響いた\n\nBut this line is from some science fiction or fantasy novel, right?\n\nIn the second sentence, the speaker is experiencing something very unreal; the\n\"consciousness\" of someone else is wildly rushing into his mind. Probably he\nis summoning a ghost, or experimenting with telepathy.\n\nSo in this context, I think \"心が響いてくる\" is not a metaphor, but a _literal_\ndescription of what is happening here; \"(someone else's) heart begins\nresonating (with the speaker's mind).\"\n\nThe speaker thought that putting his (supernatural) experience as \"echoing\" or\n\"resonating\" was too mild, and rephrased it as \"流れ込む意識の奔流\" (rush of\nconsciousness (actually) flowing into my mind), which had almost taken over\nhis own self.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T04:16:18.437",
"id": "18518",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T06:32:35.960",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18514",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18514 | 18518 | 18518 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18519",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Which of the following is the most polite? Is any of them incorrect? Is there\na more standard way to ask someone if you could stay with them while in town?\n\n~ 8日から9日まで、あなたのお宅にお邪魔させてもらえませんか。\n\n~ 8日から9日まで、お宅に泊めてもらえませんか。\n\n~ 8日から9日まで、あなたのお宅に滞在させてもらえませんか。\n\nIs 「あなたの」 unnecessary?\n\nIs 「あなたのお宅にお邪魔させてもらえませんか。」 ambiguous? In other words, would the reader clearly\nunderstand it is a request to stay overnight rather than to drop by?\n\nCan 「お宅」 be used to refer to a place of residence when it is not a personally-\nowned house, such as a share house apartment シェアハウスのマンション?\n\nAlso, can 「8日から9日まで、」be shrunk down to 「8〜9日に」?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T03:16:32.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18517",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T06:25:35.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"set-phrases",
"politeness",
"phrase-requests",
"questions",
"formality"
],
"title": "Politely asking to stay at someone's home? お邪魔させてもらう、泊めてもらう、or 滞在させてもらう?",
"view_count": 1622
} | [
{
"body": "* All of them are syntactically correct, but they are semantically strange as explained below. Depending on the situation, `もらう` may not be polite enough. `いただく` will be even more polite.\n * In the second one, `泊める` is just about the night, so it is unnatural to mention `8日から9日まで`, which means the whole two days (unless you are talking about both nights of `8日` and `9日`, in which case it would be better to say `8日と9日の晩`). If you intend to stay only on the night of `8日`, then `8日の晩` would be better.\n * The third one is unnatural because `滞在` implies much longer span than a day or two.\n * `あなたの` is unnecessary.\n * `あなたのお宅にお邪魔させてもらえませんか。` does not mean to stay over night (unless, for example, the context is about lovers, and you have a shared knowledge that visiting implies staying over night).\n * It is not impossible for `お宅` to refer to share house apartment, but `お家{うち}` would be better.\n * The following is not just for Japanese: The expression `... から ... まで` or `from ... to ...` is usually used when you are talking about a range of more than two things; it is unnatural here. You should use `... と ...` or `... and ...`.\n\nConsidering this, a better expression is:\n\n> 8日の晩、おうちに泊めていただけませんか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T06:21:05.447",
"id": "18519",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T06:25:35.507",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-01T06:25:35.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "7187",
"owner_user_id": "7187",
"parent_id": "18517",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18517 | 18519 | 18519 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18522",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to Google Translate, おでんとか is \"Toka Oden\". What is Toka? What is\nおでんとか?\n\nContext:\n\n> アツアツ **おでんとか** そういうのはやらないので\n\nIs it a name? Or is it an incorrect translation?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T09:09:27.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18520",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T17:25:02.890",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-01T17:25:02.890",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "how to translate おでんとか?",
"view_count": 257
} | [
{
"body": "おでん is name of a Japanese dish, which is made of daikon, fishcakes, konnyaku,\nkombu, etc., stewed long time. So, the phrase is アツアツ + おでん + とか ... which\nliterally means:\n\n * アツアツ - very hot (熱々)\n * おでん - the Oden itself.\n * とか - \"kind of\" or \"etc\"\n\nso we get \"Very hot Oden etc.\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T09:18:20.690",
"id": "18522",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T09:18:20.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6748",
"parent_id": "18520",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18520 | 18522 | 18522 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between 生まれてくる and 生まれる?\n\n[I looked up くる in\n大辞林](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_kuru_-070)\nand found the following:\n\n> ある事態が出現し，またある現象が現れる意を表す。 「生まれてくる子供のために」 「なくした本が出てきた」\n\nBut this still doesn't help me understand the difference in usage.\n\nTake the examples:\n\n> 早く生まれてくるといいね\n>\n> 早く生まれるといいね\n\nWhat is the difference between these lines? Based on guessing I'd think the\nfirst line is more personally involved and would be something like what a\nhusband/wife might say about their baby and the second one would be what an\noutside might say to that husband/wife.\n\nCan anyone explain the difference?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T09:17:16.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18521",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T03:31:06.300",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6981",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between 生まれてくる and 生まれる",
"view_count": 749
} | [
{
"body": "The meaning of these two sentences are almost the same and are\ninterchangeable.\n\nHowever, there is another minor nuance difference, which is not based on\ngrammatical things. By adding 「-くる」, it reminds the reader or the hearer that\nthe subject of the sentence is a baby and makes put more focus on a baby than\na mother. In other words, it adds a hidden nuance that a baby will \"come\" to\nthis world. This nuance might partly explain what you pointed about the\nfamiliarity difference. An outside person who is not so familiar with\nhusband/wife generally use the latter expression, unless the talk ongoing\nbetween them is directly relating to the baby.\n\n(The above explanation seems to be different from the explanation of 「-てくる」 or\n「-ていく」 in the previous thread and the dictionary. I mean that, in addition to\nthose basical meaning in the dictionary, they comprehend the sentence as\nabove-explained in this specific case of combination of 「生まれる」 and 「-てくる」.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T10:13:19.423",
"id": "18523",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-02T00:59:56.700",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T00:59:56.700",
"last_editor_user_id": "6802",
"owner_user_id": "6802",
"parent_id": "18521",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18521 | null | 18523 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18531",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "So I learned about _kaizen_ at school, and we defined the word as meaning\n\"continuous change and improvement for the better\".\n\nThe word _kaizen_ seems to have a bigger and deeper meaning than this simple\ndefinition implies. Does this word have a significance or meaning that one\nmight not be able to learn from a dictionary definition?\n\nI love the word and idea behind it, but I was wondering what the exact meaning\nwas so that I could use _kaizen_ for my college essay, which asks \"what word\nin another language cannot, or should not, be translated from its original\nlanguage?\"",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T22:53:09.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18529",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-30T03:08:22.967",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T16:00:41.090",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7190",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the exact meaning of \"kaizen\"?",
"view_count": 8941
} | [
{
"body": "From my research, I believe that Kaizen ((改善) refers to the continual\nbetterment of an activity, be it healthcare, banking, or education. But it\nmust include all employees, from the CEO/President to the janitor to make\nthings better for everyone. Is this close to what you were looking for? The\nbasic premise is that by making things better, or more efficient, it will\nreduce waste.\n\nIt appears to be an idea that was implemented after WWII. Simply the word\nmeans \"good change\". But it has taken on a very business oriented definition\nsince WWII.\n\nI think this link has a really good explanation of the term:\n<http://lifehacker.com/207029/practice-your-personal-kaizen>\n\nI hope this helps! Best of luck with your essay!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-01T23:07:54.023",
"id": "18531",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T23:07:54.023",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5129",
"parent_id": "18529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In Japanese, usually 改善【かいぜん】 is no more than a neutral and simple word that\ncorresponds to \"improvement\" or \"refinement\".\n\nThe only fact I know as a piece of knowledge, which make this word somewhat\n\"special\", is that some companies like Toyota [love this word as a\nslogan](http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4569691897).\n\nApparently, Toyota's special method of 改善, also written specifically as\n\"カイゼン\", [has been introduced\ninternationally](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%82%AB%E3%82%A4%E3%82%BC%E3%83%B3),\nand gained deeper meaning outside of Japan. I personally didn't know that, and\nI'm surprised to see the lengthy English Wikipedia article about _Kaizen_. I\nwould say _Kaizen_ of that kind is a (English) buzzword, only known to part of\nthe Japanese population.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T05:15:20.657",
"id": "18535",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-02T05:23:53.403",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T05:23:53.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 23
},
{
"body": "I read an article written by a linguist, who agreed with Naruto, but added\nthat continual improvement, always seeking to improve, is so embedded in\nJapanese culture that no additional qualifiers are required to confer meaning.\n\nHowever, For the U.S., and many other cultures, there is not necessarily the\n_implied_ richness around the ongoing nature of improvement inherent in the\nword's meaning, so continual helps to bridge the gap.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-16T17:20:32.223",
"id": "41727",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-16T17:20:32.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19095",
"parent_id": "18529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "改善 merely means improvement, but the Toyota management concept others have\nmentioned - often written in katakana as カイゼン to disambiguate it - is\nprevalent in Japan, as well as Japan's overseas development assistance\nprograms.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-18T18:38:13.517",
"id": "41778",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-18T18:38:13.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19118",
"parent_id": "18529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18529 | 18531 | 18535 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18533",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> この かみ **に** 電話番号を 書いてください。\n\nWhy is it wrong to use で instead? What if the sentence is like\nこのボールペン＿＿電話番号を書いてください?\n\n> 六時に 会社 **を** 出て、うちへ 帰ります。\n\nWhy is it wrong to use から here? Is it because it's a fixed expression?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T04:52:57.973",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18532",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-02T09:44:45.393",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T09:44:45.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "6996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "に/で and を/から - particle choice in two JLPT N5 sentences",
"view_count": 345
} | [
{
"body": "First question about で: かみに means \" **on** the paper\" (\"write on the paper\")\nwhile かみで would mean \" **with** the paper\" in a sense \"using a tool\" as in\n\"write with a pen\". So your second sentence requires で:\n\n> このボールペンで電話番号を書いてください\n\nSecond question about から: when you go **out** of a location, you use を\nparticle in this situation, not から. Note that から is used as well in every day\nlife depending on the situation but at JLPT 5 level, を will be used in your\ntextbook and exercises.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T04:56:56.960",
"id": "18533",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-02T06:37:51.517",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T06:37:51.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"parent_id": "18532",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18532 | 18533 | 18533 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18539",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There's a line in the [lyrics for the song \"Viva La Viva\" by\nStereopony](http://en.verygooddays.com/stereopony/lyrics/viva-la-viva-la/)\nthat's written like this:\n\n> ヨボセヨペゴパヨ チキンピリョヘヨ\n\nUnderneath this is:\n\n> (わたしはチキンが大好きです。)\n\nThe second line isn't actually sung, so I'm assuming it's some kind of\ntranslation of the first. As for the first line, I've no idea where to even\nbegin parsing this (besides the word チキン). Does it actually mean anything?\n\nMy first thought is that it's either a completely different language or that\nit's some kind of \"language game\" similar to Pig Latin in English. Or it could\njust be nonsense words used to fit in with the song (the \"translation\" line\nmerely there for a joke).",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T10:27:58.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18536",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-19T23:48:04.940",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-19T23:48:04.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4404",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Is this sentence in a different language or is it just gibberish?",
"view_count": 352
} | [
{
"body": "It's Korean:\n\n```\n\n ヨボセヨ [여보세요](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%EC%97%AC%EB%B3%B4%EC%84%B8%EC%9A%94#Korean) yeoboseyo _'Hello' (polite)_\n ペゴパヨ [배고파요](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%EB%B0%B0%EA%B3%A0%ED%94%84%EB%8B%A4#Korean) baegopayo _'[I'm] hungry' (polite)_ \n チキン 치킨 chikin _'chicken'_ \n ピリョヘヨ [필요해요](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%ED%95%84%EC%9A%94%ED%95%98%EB%8B%A4#Korean) piryohaeyo _'[I] need' (polite)_\n \n```\n\nThe third column is Revised Romanization. The glosses on the right aren't\nsupposed to be a perfect translation, just to give you a general idea of what\nit says. (I've studied Korean too, but I'm not a very advanced student.)\n\n_I'm posting this little Community Wiki answer since it was already answered\nin the comments. If anyone would like to improve this answer, please feel free\n:-)_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T17:00:37.087",
"id": "18539",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-14T21:21:59.850",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-14T21:21:59.850",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18536",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18536 | 18539 | 18539 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18538",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Full context: シャレオツだた\n\nGoogle translate shows: I was Shareotsu.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T12:14:26.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18537",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T18:05:05.130",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T12:21:50.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What does シャレオツ mean?",
"view_count": 1111
} | [
{
"body": "[シャレオツ](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%83%AC%E3%82%AA%E3%83%84)\n(syareotu) is slang for\n[お洒落](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%BE%A1%E6%B4%92%E8%90%BD?dic=daijirin&oid=DJR_osyare_-010)\n(osyare) .",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T12:23:44.783",
"id": "18538",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-02T12:29:00.250",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-02T12:29:00.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "1141",
"owner_user_id": "1141",
"parent_id": "18537",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "しゃれおつ or シャレオツ means cool, fashionable. Above.\n\nAnother version: おつしゃれ is a rearrangement of the same word however this\nversion tends to be used amongst media piers, show biz etc. This version is\nnot grammatically correct but still spoken as such.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T17:40:26.853",
"id": "36091",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T18:05:05.130",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T18:05:05.130",
"last_editor_user_id": "15850",
"owner_user_id": "15850",
"parent_id": "18537",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18537 | 18538 | 18538 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18543",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't quite derive the meaning of 自分でも from the parts that make it up.\n\nHere are the example sentences I don't get with the offered translations.\n\n> 自分でもそれをやってみます。 Do it by yourself.\n>\n> 自分でもそれが解っているんだけと。 I know it myself.\n\nAre the translations wrong? Why is there a も there? There doesn't seem to be\nan \"Even\" or a \"Too\" nuance in the sentences.\n\nCan anyone shed some light on this?\n\nI'd also appreciate an answer that clarified if this でも is で＋も or でも and what\ndifference would it make if the も was dropped.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-02T23:37:02.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18540",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-04T03:55:07.117",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3754",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "I can't quite understand the meaning of 自分でも",
"view_count": 1163
} | [
{
"body": "As requested, to break things down into parts...\n\n> 自分でもそれをやってみます。\n\n【自分】oneself / myself\n\n【で】by (preposition)\n\n【も】too\n\n【それをやってみます】 will try to do it\n\nFor pure comprehension purposes, this can be made easier to understand by\nreplacing【自分でも】with【私も】＋【自分で】\n\ne.g.【私も自分でそれをやってみます。】 Effectively, \"I too, will try to do it by myself.\" (As\nopposed to leaving the task up to someone else to do.)\n\nIf the も was dropped remove \"too, \" from the above phrase.\n\n> 自分でもそれが解っているんだけと。\n\n(Note: I will assume a typo and that the final と is supposed to be ど)\n\n【自分】I / myself (personal pronoun)\n\n【でも】even (adverb)\n\n【それが解っているん】understand that\n\n【だけど】([conjunction] to an omitted phrase or [emphasis] depending on the\nnuance)\n\nEffectively, either...\n\n[Conjunction] \"Even though I understand that...\" (Omitted phrase understood by\ncontext) For example:\nA「タバコをやめるべきですよ。体に悪いんです。」B「自分でもそれがわかっているんだけど・・・（やめられないんだよ）」\n\n[Emphasis] \"Even I understand that !／? (don't treat me like a fool)\" For\nexample: A「空が青いって知ってますか？」B「私でもそれがわかっているんだけど（バカにしないでください）」",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T06:07:12.680",
"id": "18543",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-04T03:55:07.117",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-04T03:55:07.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "6947",
"owner_user_id": "6947",
"parent_id": "18540",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18540 | 18543 | 18543 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18550",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English, \"UFO\" (Unidentified flying object) is generally pronounced with\neach letter being pronounced.\n\nBy contrast, I've read in my textbook that in Japanese, \"UFO\" is pronounced\n\"ユーフォー\".\n\nIs there any particular reason for the difference in pronunciation, such as\none of the letters being hard to pronounce as a letter? Or is it relatively\ncommon for things that are pronounced letter by letter in English to be\npronounced as if it were a word in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T13:50:37.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18545",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-03T19:06:50.527",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Why is \"UFO\" pronounced as if it were a word?",
"view_count": 1729
} | [
{
"body": "It was probably borrowed from English pronunciation:\n\n```\n\n American English British English\n Letter pronunciation /ˌjuː ef ˈoʊ/ /ˌjuː ef ˈəʊ/\n Word pronunciation /ˈjuːfoʊ/ /ˈjuːfəʊ/\n \n```\n\nOn the top, we have the pronunciation in IPA of the three letters UFO, one\nafter the other. Where does the bottom pronunciation come from? Well,\n[according to\nWikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object), this was\nactually the way it was originally pronounced!\n\n> The acronym \"UFO\" was coined by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, who headed\n> Project Blue Book, then the USAF's official investigation of UFOs. He wrote,\n> \"Obviously the term 'flying saucer' is misleading when applied to objects of\n> every conceivable shape and performance. For this reason the military\n> prefers the more general, if less colorful, name: **unidentified flying\n> objects. UFO (pronounced Yoo-foe) for short.** \" _(emphasis added)_\n\nSo presumably it was borrowed from English as-is.\n\nYou can see this pronunciation for yourself in the Oxford English Dictionary,\nor in many freely available online dictionaries, including the [Oxford\nAdvanced Learners\nDictionary](http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ufo)\nand [Collins\nDictionary](http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/ufo).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T18:02:24.737",
"id": "18550",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-03T19:06:50.527",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-03T19:06:50.527",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18545",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18545 | 18550 | 18550 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18547",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is taken from the manga Doraemon - of which I'm sure most people are\nfamiliar with so in explaining the context I hope you don't think I'm crazy..\n\nHaving eaten a transforming biscuit that turned him into a cockerel, a man\ncomplains about a prank phone call he just took:\n\n\"だれかの いたずらだ、 トサカに くる\"\n\nTranslating that literally hasn't enabled me to understand the joke. Can\nanyone shed some light?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T14:36:01.427",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18546",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-03T14:59:04.413",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-03T14:38:43.373",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7170",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "\"トサカに くる\" meaning",
"view_count": 207
} | [
{
"body": "In Japanese the phrase 「頭にくる」 is an idiom used to mean \"get angry.\" 「トサカにくる」\nis a slang version of that that emphasizes just how cheesed off you are. トサカ\n(=鶏冠) is [the red part at the top of a chicken/rooster's\nhead](http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/cyocotomoca/imgs/9/3/93517228.JPG). Notice\nhow it goes up through the head and kind of flares out. Because of how silly\nthe image is, though, you'd use it at a time when a kind of silly playfulness\nis involved. According to [this site](http://zokugo-\ndict.com/20to/tosakanikuru.htm) it might refer to the redness of the chicken\nas blood rushing to your head.\n\nApparently when you're seriously angry and just _have_ to express it through a\nbodily extremity, you can use\n「[怒髪天{どはつてん}を衝{つ}く](http://www.fleapedia.com/%E4%BA%94%E5%8D%81%E9%9F%B3%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%83%87%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9/%E3%81%A8/%E3%83%88%E3%82%B5%E3%82%AB%E3%81%AB%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF%E4%BD%95%E3%81%8B/)」.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T14:59:04.413",
"id": "18547",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-03T14:59:04.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "18546",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18546 | 18547 | 18547 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18558",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Example:\n\n> 「できるのか？」【大男】\n>\n> 大男が眼を細めてくる\n\nThe definition for the first expression as given from\n[weblio](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E7%9B%AE%E3%82%92%E7%B4%B0%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B)\nis\n\n> 目の開き方を小さくする。\n>\n> うれしそうにほほえみをうかべる\n\nIs the reason that this line uses 眼 instead of 目 to make it so that the reader\nunderstands that it would mean the first definition or does this mean the\nsecond definition?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T15:04:40.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18548",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-04T09:58:37.703",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-04T03:21:04.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "6981",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"homophonic-kanji"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 目を細める and 眼を細める",
"view_count": 283
} | [
{
"body": "The expression 「[目]{め}を[細]{ほそ}める」 (with 目, not [眼]{め}) already has two\nmeanings to begin with.\n\n> Literal: \"to squint\"\n>\n> Figurative: \"to smile in delight (at the sight of something/someone one is\n> fond of)\"\n\nWhich one it means should be clear from the context as the two meanings are\nquite different from each other.\n\nHowever, some people would choose to use 「眼」 for their own aesthetic reasons.\nThe language is very tolerant toward these personal aesthetic choices,\nespecially in creative writing.\n\nWhen 「眼」 is used in the expression in question, it would mostly (but still not\nalways) be used for the literal meaning of \"to squint\", but if it were\nunclear, one would always have the context to decide on the meaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-04T09:58:37.703",
"id": "18558",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-04T09:58:37.703",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18548",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18548 | 18558 | 18558 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18551",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It seems that there are a number of animal and plant names that can either be\nused with or without 類 as a suffix. For example, in case of 'fish', I have\nseen both 魚類 and 魚 being used to denote the respective animals. Another\nexample would be 'mammal', which I have seen both as 哺乳動物 and 哺乳類. Is there\nany difference in meaning involved in these cases, and if yes, in what\nsituations would each be used? I have the impression that the 類 versions may\nbe used more in the context of biology, but I am not sure about that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T15:52:17.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18549",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T08:29:40.847",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T08:29:40.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "7198",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage"
],
"title": "類 in animal and plant names",
"view_count": 405
} | [
{
"body": "Generally speaking, yes, words like 魚 **類** , 人 **類** , and 哺乳 **類** sound\nmore technical and scientific than 魚, 人, or 哺乳動物.\n\n魚【さかな】(和語) is the word we usually use when we want to say _fish_ in daily\nlife, for example at supermarkets, while 魚類 (漢語) is only used in the\nbiological context. I think the basic difference between 人 and 人類 is the same\nas the difference between _person_ and _mankind_ / _human beings_.\n\n--- (Maybe you can stop reading this now) ---\n\nOn the other hand, from the expert point of view, 類 is a rather non-scientific\nword. The word 類 is _not_ used in the current [Japanese biological\nclassification\nsystem](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%94%9F%E7%89%A9%E3%81%AE%E5%88%86%E9%A1%9E).\nThere are only ドメイン (domain), 界【かい】 (kingdom), 門【もん】 (phylum), 綱【こう】 (class),\n目【もく】 (order), 科【か】 (family), 族【ぞく】 (genus), 種【しゅ】 (species), and the minor\nsupra-/sub-categories of these. The most technically authoritative name for\n哺乳【ほにゅう】 **類** (mammalians) is 哺乳 **綱【こう】**.\n\n> じつは、「類」とは、正式な分類単位の名前ではありません。 **いわば、俗語です** 。何らかの共通点がある生物を、便宜上、まとめて呼ぶ名です。 ...\n> 「類」は、綱だけを指すのではありません。門や目や科や属を指すこともあります。どの分類単位を指すのかは、決まっていません。 \n> ( <http://blog.zukan.net/blog/2009/08/12-812_1.php> )\n\nJapanese \"類\" is a _customary_ and ambiguous term for grouping any kind of\norganisms, at any level. It seems that certain words like\n[哺乳類](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%93%BA%E4%B9%B3%E9%A1%9E) or\n[魚類](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%AD%9A%E9%A1%9E) already have strict\n(customary) definitions, and are safely used by experts.\n\nBut there are cases where using 類 is obviously troublesome. For example, the\nbiological classification of \"dog\" is as follows:\n\n * Class: Mammalia 哺乳綱\n * Order: Carnivora ネコ目\n * Family: Canidae イヌ科\n * Genus: Canis イヌ族\n * Species: Canis lupus タイリクオオカミ種\n * Subspecies: _Canis lupus familialis_ イエイヌ\n\nThe word \"イヌ類\" is not strictly defined in this system, and it might refer to\nイヌ科 (includes foxes), or イヌ族 (includes wolves), or イエイヌ (scientific name of\nwhat we usually call dogs, and there are of course many types of dogs).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T18:33:45.177",
"id": "18551",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-03T19:26:48.120",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-03T19:26:48.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18549",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 18549 | 18551 | 18551 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18556",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I am reading Toki wo Kakeru Shojo and those three words are refered in the\ntext quite as synonyms. Also my dictionary translates them all as\n'laboratory'.\n\nIt seems that they are used at different levels and are made for different\npurposes. Then in order not to have a vague meaning in mind, I would like to\nknow the differences of those three words.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T20:09:39.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18552",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T12:38:16.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7201",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 実験室, 研究室 and 実習室?",
"view_count": 552
} | [
{
"body": "With these kinds of words, it often helps to look instead at the relative\ndifferent constituents:\n\n実験： empiric test, (scientific) experiment \n研究： (academic) research/study \n実習： practical training\n\nThen when you tack 室 to the end, it just makes a room where the respective\nactivities take place:\n\n実験室： room where you perform (scientific) experiments (a.k.a. laboratory) \n研究室： room where you perform (academic) study and research (a.k.a. laboratory) \n実習室: room where you perform practical training (i.e. physics lab for a physics\nclass)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-03T20:22:20.967",
"id": "18553",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-03T20:22:20.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1565",
"parent_id": "18552",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I work at a university in Japan, worked at a different one previously, and was\na visiting scholar for a year and a half at another one.\n\n[実験室]{じっけんしつ} = a real laboratory -- as the term would be used in English.\nThis is where you would conduct actual experiments in the natural sciences.\n\n[研究室]{けんきゅうしつ} = either a professor's office or a room that students use to\nread books, study, goof off, etc.\n\n[実習室]{じっしゅうしつ} = a room for practical training. As my university trains future\nteachers, these are rooms that look like classrooms. If it were say something\nlike music, it would mean a music practice room.\n\n* * *\n\nTo give an example, my friend is doing a PhD in fisheries. He and the other\ngraduate students use a 研究室 that has their computers, books, and pet fish.\nFrom what I gather, his lab mates spend a lot of time watching hentai there.\nHis advisor also has 研究室 which is his office as we would use the term in\nAmerica. They have on their floor a 実験室 that contains several pieces of lab\nequipment including an HPLC.\n\nSee also my answer at [Difference between 研究所 and\n研究室](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15005/difference-\nbetween-%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80-and-%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E5%AE%A4)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-04T00:31:16.380",
"id": "18556",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-04T00:31:16.380",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "18552",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Disclaimer: The only research I do is googling.\n\nWhile not an authoritative source, [JP Wikipedia's 研究室\nentry](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E5%AE%A4) says this on\nthe first sentence:\n\n>\n> 研究室（けんきゅうしつ、laboratory）とは、大学、短期大学、高等専門学校、研究所、企業の研究開発部門の研究の単位であり、また教員、研究者の執務室、部屋、プライベート空間のこと\n\nSo sometimes, 研究室 is not used to refer to a physical room or a facility, but\nrather a research division of institutes like universities and research\ncenters. I came across a few uses of the term 研究室 not covered in virmaior's or\nb-wilson's answer.\n\n 1. Some universities' 文学部 (Faculty of Letters) use 研究室 to mean \"department\", e.g.\n\n * [Tohoku University](http://www.sal.tohoku.ac.jp/undergrad.html)\n * [Kyoto University](http://www.bun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/departments/departments_list/)\n * [University of Tokyo](http://www.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/laboratory/index.html)\n * [University of Nagoya](http://www.lit.nagoya-u.ac.jp/overview/graduate/)\n 2. Also, 研究室 is sometimes used in the sense of \"research group\", perhaps similar to [Stanford AI Lab](http://ai.stanford.edu/), [MIT Media Lab](http://www.media.mit.edu/), [Caltech's Jet Propulsion Lab](http://www.caltech.edu/content/jet-propulsion-laboratory), etc.\n\n * Keio University: [伊藤研究室](http://www.appi.keio.ac.jp/Itoh_group/jp/) - Quantum computing\n * Nagoya Institute of Technology: [a list of 研究室 under the Department of Computer Science and Engineering](http://jouhou.web.nitech.ac.jp/link.html)\n * Tokyo Institute of Technology: [a list of 研究室 under the Department of Chemistry](http://www.chemistry.titech.ac.jp/staff.html).\n * Kyushu University: [a list of 研究室 under the Graduate School of Medical Sciences](http://www.grad.med.kyushu-u.ac.jp/masters_course/laboratory.html)\n\nAs far as I can tell (which is not very far), the terms 実験室 and 実習室 are not\nused in these 2 ways.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T12:38:16.080",
"id": "18571",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T12:38:16.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6840",
"parent_id": "18552",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18552 | 18556 | 18553 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm looking at this phrase:\n\n> 俺が話していた男。。。\n\nI don't know if this sentence is correct in the first place, but I feel as if\nthis can be translated two ways, specifically:\n\n> The man I was talking to... \n> The man I was talking about...\n\nIs this correct? Either way, how is it possible to make distinct these two\nmeanings so that I can avoid ambiguity if a case like this comes up?\n\nMost of the time, it's easy to tell which particle is implied. I remember this\nline from a song, where it's pretty clear で is the \"missing\" particle:\n\n> あなたが笑ったこの丘\n\nBut I worry about the few cases where it could be a problem.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-04T03:13:33.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18557",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T12:26:25.533",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-04T11:32:29.620",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4004",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese",
"relative-clauses",
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "Can the appositive have more than one meaning in a phrase?",
"view_count": 243
} | [
{
"body": "「[俺]{おれ} **が** [話]{はな}していた[男]{おとこ}」 indeed can mean the two different things\nyou listed. (Note that this is an equivalent of the English relative clause.\nIt is NOT a \"sentence\" as you said that it was.)\n\nAs always, the context will tell you which one of the two it means. With this\nparticular phrase, however, it might take more than just a sentence or two as\nenough context. One might even have to know the whole background story.\n\nAs a writer or speaker, there are ways to alter this phrase so that the reader\nor listener would understand exactly what you mean without any further context\nbut the short relative clause itself.\n\n> To mean \"the man I was talking to\" or \"the man who was talking to me\", one\n> could say:\n>\n> 「俺 **と** 話していた男」 or\n>\n> 「俺 **と** (or **が** )[一緒]{いっしょ}に話していた男」\n\nPower of particles, it is.\n\n> To mean \"the man I was talking about\", you could say:\n>\n> 「俺 **が** お[前]{まえ} **に** 話をしていた男」 or more naturally,\n>\n> 「この前(or [以前]{いぜん})俺 **が** お前 **に** 話をした男」\n\nNote: I used the tough-guy pronoun 「お前」 to go with the 「俺」 which had already\nbeen used in the question. No other reasons.\n\nLastly, I do not understand at all what you mean by \"it's pretty clear で is\nthe \"missing\" particle\" regarding the phrase 「あなたが[笑]{わら}ったこの[丘]{おか}」. As far\nas grammar, nothing is missing in it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-04T12:36:19.300",
"id": "18561",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T12:26:25.533",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18557",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18557 | null | 18561 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18572",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Today I had a discussion with some coworkers about items in apartments.\n\nOne coworker called the water heater above the sink [給湯器]{きゅうとうき}, and the\nother coworkers thought that that item was called [湯沸器]{ゆわかしき}. Eventually,\nthey weren't quite sure but decided that the 給湯器 vs. 湯沸器 issue was a\ngeneration thing (i.e., people in their 20s call the water heater 給湯器 and\npeople mid-30s and above call it 湯沸器.)\n\nIs there any difference in meaning between 給湯器 and 湯沸器? If not, is there any\ndifference in who uses 給湯器 and 湯沸器?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-04T11:36:16.837",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18559",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T14:23:50.873",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-04T14:35:51.470",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Difference between 給湯器 and 湯沸器?",
"view_count": 186
} | [
{
"body": "> \"Is there any difference in meaning between 給湯器 and 湯沸器?\"\n\nTechnically speaking, yes, there is a big difference.\n\nA 湯沸器 is a little water heater generally installed over the kitchen sink. It\nhas its own tap from which you get hot water.\n\nA 給湯器 is much larger than a 湯沸器 and it can be located anywhere in the house or\napartment. It can even be located outside the house. It produces hot water for\nthe entire house/apartment --- the kitchen, bath/shower, anywhere where tap\nwater runs.\n\nIn other words, if you have a 給湯器, you do not need a 湯沸器.\n\n> \" is there any difference in who uses 給湯器 and 湯沸器?\"\n\nCareful speakers/writers would not use the two words interchangeably. Some\npeople call a 給湯器 \"ボイラー\".\n\nNaturally, I have no idea what kinds of housing your coworkers grew up in, but\nthe 湯沸器 has been less common by the year for the last 20-30 years. I myself\nhave never lived in a place that had a 湯沸器 in the last 25 years or so because\nall of the places (4 of them all together) I have lived in that time have had\na large central 給湯器 in them.\n\nWhat this could mean is that if someone is in his 20s, there is a big\npossibility that he might never have grown up with a 湯沸器 around him. If so,\nthe word 湯沸器 may not be in his active vocabulary.\n\nWhen that person is old enough to leave his home and live by himself in an\ninexpensive little apartment that has a 湯沸器 but not a 給湯器, he might well call\nit 給湯器 because it still has the same function though on a smaller scale ---\nmake hot water.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T14:23:50.873",
"id": "18572",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T14:23:50.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18559",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18559 | 18572 | 18572 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18632",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have some questions about 桜でんぶ/おぼろ.\n\nAs I understand, 桜でんぶ is the name for the pink, fluffy stuff in sushi made\nfrom fish.\n\nMy questions are:\n\n1) Are there any other common words for 桜でんぶ? I read other places that おぼろ and\nそぼろ is used for 桜でんぶ, but are these words common?\n\n2) Is the word 桜でんぶ widely known in Japan? When I ask friends about 桜でんぶ, many\ndon't seem to know what I'm talking about, but maybe this is just limited to\nmy friends.\n\nThanks!\n\nEdit: Changed question to make it more about the word rather than the object.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-04T11:42:39.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18560",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T12:32:21.013",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-10T01:35:59.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "6861",
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Other words for and familiarity of 桜でんぶ?",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "There seem to be at least two reasons that no one so far has answered your\nquestions.\n\n1) Food names -- the older foods in particular -- differ greatly from one\nregion to another.\n\n2) おぼろ has become increasingly unpopular during the last few decades;\ntherefore, the younger members may actually have never seen or eaten it.\n\n> \" Are there any other common words for [桜]{さくら}でんぶ?\"\n\nNo, not that I know of -- except for plain でんぶ. I grew up calling 桜でんぶ just\nでんぶ without adding the color name. In fact, I could not recall ever seeing でんぶ\nin any other colors besides pink. I have lived half of my life in Tokyo and\nthe other half in Nagoya.\n\n> \"I read other places that おぼろ and そぼろ is used for 桜でんぶ, but are these words\n> common?\"\n\nTo me, the three food items that you mentioned are all different things.\n\nおぼろ comes in much larger and heavier flakes than でんぶ does. おぼろ feels \"wet\"\nwhile でんぶ is pretty much dehydrated. One could arguably say that the two taste\npretty much alike because they are both made with white-fleshed fish like red\nsnapper.\n\nI have not seen おぼろ in more than a couple of decades, honestly. Grandma used\nto make it and she was the last person to do so in my family.\n\nMoving on to そぼろ, it usually refers to ground pork or chicken fried and boiled\nin soysauce and sugar. It is still very popular and I am sure you have seen it\nin convenience store bentos covering the rice with eggs cooked the same way.\n\n> \"Is the word 桜でんぶ widely known in Japan? When I ask friends about 桜でんぶ, many\n> don't seem to know what I'm talking about, but maybe this is just limited to\n> my friends.\"\n\nAll I could say is that the word 桜でんぶ should be widely known pretty much\neverywhere because I do hear/see it in the media. Your friends may be too\nyoung to know the word. I am sure they have seen and eaten it in inexpensive\nsushi, but it is just not something many people buy by itself, let alone cook\nat home anymore.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T13:06:33.503",
"id": "18632",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T12:32:21.013",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-13T12:32:21.013",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18560",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18560 | 18632 | 18632 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18568",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was watching <http://youtu.be/FiqsDshUSDA?t=6m40s>. At the 6th minute, he\nreads 傾げたく as かしげたく.\n\n[Jisho.org lists both\nreadings](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E5%82%BE%E3%81%92%E3%82%8B%20&eng=&dict=edict).\n\n[Goo's dictionary gives a preference for the かしげる\nreading](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/jn/%E5%82%BE%E3%81%92%E3%82%8B/m0u/)\n(insofar as かたげる lists かしげる as a meaning).\n\nAnother site claims that the かしげる reading is [一般 in contemporary\nJapanese](https://japanknowledge.com/articles/blognihongo/entry.html?entryid=213).\n\nMy question is this:\n\n 1. Is it acceptable to pronounce it かたげる?\n\n 2. How is the difference characterized between using the two pronunciations (if it is acceptable to say it かたげる)? [nuance, region, antiquated sound]",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T02:43:07.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18564",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T06:21:28.383",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-08T06:21:28.383",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "What's the reading of 傾げる? かしげる or かたげる?",
"view_count": 207
} | [
{
"body": "I can't deny the dictionary, and I feel I have heard \"かたげる\" somewhere in the\npast, but I can say \"かたげる\" is very rare.\n\nEven かしげる is quite uncommon in the modern 標準語, and I can hardly expect this\nword used except in the idiom \"首をかしげる\". 傾【かし】ぐ/傾【かし】げる has been almost\ncompletely replaced by 傾【かたむ】く/傾【かたむ】ける, I think.\n\n> 家の柱が傾 **く** (かたむく: OK)\n>\n> 家の柱が傾 **ぐ** (かしぐ: uncommon, かたぐ: ???)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T07:16:05.470",
"id": "18568",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T07:21:39.543",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18564",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18564 | 18568 | 18568 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18567",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "ALC translate the Japanese マラソン into the English \"marathon\", which the English\nWikipedia says has an `official distance of 42.195 kilometres`.\n\nIs マラソン always 42.195 km?\n\nOr has the Japanese word a broader meaning, describing any kind of running\nrace?\n\nFor instance, [this\npage](http://www.solius.jp/marathon/categories/short10.html) is a list of マラソン\nunder 10 kilometers: `1km～10kmのマラソン大会一覧`\n\nSo, what is actually a マラソン?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T02:43:56.133",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18565",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-29T06:11:47.817",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-29T06:11:47.817",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"definitions",
"katakana",
"loanwords",
"wasei-eigo"
],
"title": "Is マラソン always 42.195 km?",
"view_count": 313
} | [
{
"body": "「マラソン」 is a Japanese word. It should not matter what the word \"marathon\" means\nin the original language from which Japanese borrowed the word.\n\nLikewise, 「[手紙]{てがみ}」, in Japanese, means a \"letter\", but 「[手紙]{shou zhi}」, in\nChinese, means \"toilet paper\". There are no problems with that, however,\nbecause those are two different languages.\n\nWell, so much for preliminaries. The word 「マラソン」 can be used to refer to any\nrunning event if the distance is \"long\" by someone's **subjective** judgement.\nThe \"official\" マラソン is, of course, 42.195 km.\n\nWhen I was a kid, which was before we had the word 「ジョギング」, many people around\nme called \"running around the neighborhood for 10-20 minutes for fun and/or\nhealth\" マラソン. We did not really have another word for it.\n\nマラソン does not even have to involve running, believe it or not. 「ヒアリングマラソン」 is\na method of learning a foreign language where you keep listening to recordings\nfor hours at a time. 「[禁煙]{きんえん}マラソン」 is for those trying to quit smoking. You\ntry to break your own record in how many days you can go without smoking so\nthat your brand-new reward pack that you give to yourself for making a new\nrecord tastes incredibly great.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T03:36:58.483",
"id": "18566",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T03:42:11.093",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-05T03:42:11.093",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18565",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "マラソン by its own strictly means running 42.195 km, as long as it is used as the\nname of professional athletic competitions. For example, \"10000m走\" (10,000\nmetres) is never マラソン. 長距離走【ちょうきょりそう】 is the generic term which corresponds to\n\"long-distance running\" (usually >= 5 km), which of course includes マラソン.\n\nWhen it comes to amateur events or PE classes at school, マラソン can refer to\nmany types of long-distance running (or any other \"very long\" events,\nmetaphorically).\n\nThere are ハーフマラソン (≒21 km) and クォーターマラソン (≒10 km) mainly for amateur runners.\nSo if you do need a distinctive word, you can also call the 42 km version as\nフルマラソン. (And I think English has words like \"full marathon\" and \"half\nmarathon\", too.)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T07:04:07.627",
"id": "18567",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T07:04:07.627",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18565",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 18565 | 18567 | 18567 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "If I've talked about a thing before, and want to ask whether or not it exists\nin another place (or time), would I use \"は\"?\n\nFor example, if I said \"In Sydney, I saw a ryokan. Are there ryokans in\nMelbourne?\", would I say \"は\" or \"が\" in\n\n> シドニーで、旅館を見ました。\n>\n> メルボルンに旅館（は／が?）ありますか？\n\nBy contrast, if I hadn't talked about it before, would I use \"が\"?\n\n> 私はメルボルンに行きます。\n>\n> メルボルンに旅館がありますか？\n\n(The reason I'm asking about this is that I probably got the wrong idea about\nwhen to use \"が\" and \"は\" because I misinterpreted the grammar section of\n\"Japanese For Busy People I\" Unit 4 (page 68 in the kana edition))",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T14:35:31.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18573",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T07:52:32.910",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-が",
"は-and-が"
],
"title": "Is は used when asking if something already discussed exists?",
"view_count": 534
} | [
{
"body": "Assuming there is no talk of 旅館 beforehand, then in the first conversation you\nhave introduced the topic (旅館) with the first line so yes, you would use は not\nが when asking if there are 旅館 in Melbourne. But, rather than：\n\n> メルボルンに旅館はありますか？\n\nI might have said:\n\n> 旅館はメルボルンにもありますか？\n\nor even:\n\n> メルボルンにもありますか?、旅館は・・\n\n(You might even not have to mention 旅館 at all in the second line, but it all\ndepends on the context, the moment and how obvious the topic is to the other\nparty.)\n\nIn your second scenario you are introducing 旅館 in the second line so が would\nbe appropriate.\n\n**Edit (after reading the other answers and giving it some thought).**\n\n1) In my answer I tried to avoid using には to keep it simple and chose a\nresponse using も.\n\n2) The first scenario is easy because the topic has been mentioned. What is\nharder is explaining why が does not have to be used when 旅館 has not been\nmentioned. I think one short answer is that:\n\n> If you mentioned that you were going to Melbourne and asked about 旅館 because\n> you were looking for somewhere to stay then は can be used because the\n> listener can infer that from the previous statement. (This is admittedly\n> more likely in Kyoto than Melbourne but if we assume its a conversation\n> between two Japanese people it is easier to imagine.)\n\nAs mentioned は and が is a complicated subject and different books give\ndifferent rules. You have cited a beginners text book if you are looking for\nshort explanation, that can be difficult. My notes are below.\n\n* * *\n\n**\"A students guide to Japanese Grammar\" by Naomi Hanaoka McGloin** gives the\nfollowing cases when it is not necessary to introduce a theme with が:\n\n(i) Nouns mentioned in previous discourse\n\n(ii) Nouns not mentioned but can be inferred such as エンジン in the following\nsentence.\n\n> 先週車を買いました。エンジンは日本製です。\n\n(iii) Nouns that have not been mentioned but can be identified non-\nlinguistically. For example if you hold up a book and say;\n\n> これは私の本です。\n\n(iv) Nouns uniquely identifiable such as the River Amazon in the following\nsentence:\n\n> アマゾン川は南アメリカにある。\n\n(v) Generic nouns. For example:\n\n> 日本人は寿司を食べる\n\nQ: How can we apply these to the second scenario and conclude は is\nappropriate?\n\nA: If you mentioned that you were going to Melbourne and asked about 旅館\nbecause (for example) you were looking for somewhere to stay, and that was\nclear to listener then case 2 would apply.\n\nNow, I am not going to argue my first answer is better (I am learner trying to\nlearn from my mistakes and open to correction) but if you wish confirm the\nexistence of something that could not be inferred from the prior conversation\nthen が would be appropriate. To take a more clear cut example, if you wanted\nto ask if it rained in Melbourne very often then I think you might say:\n\n> 私はメルボルンに行きます。\n>\n> メルボルンでは雨がよく降りますか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T16:03:51.417",
"id": "18574",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T03:36:42.987",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-07T03:36:42.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "1556",
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"parent_id": "18573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "In both cases, the natural particle choice would be 「は」. The speaker simply\ndoes not have enough reason to use「が」 in either of the two. You need a good\nreason to use 「が」 but J-learners tend to over-use it.\n\n> \"In Sydney, I saw a ryokan. Are there ryokans in Melbourne?\"\n\nIn this situation, the speaker does not know whether or not there are ryokan\nin Melbourne. To ask about that, you would use 「は」. The first sentence about\nSydney has no effect on the particle choice after the 「[旅館]{りょかん}」 in the\nsecond sentence, but you must let it have effect on the particle after the\n「メルボルン」. You would need 「には」 instead of 「に」 for the comparison between the two\ncities.\n\n> 「メルボルン **には** 旅館 **は** ありますか。」 would be a very natural-sounding sentence.\n\nThe second situation is no different in the sense that the speaker does not\nknow whether or not there are ryokan in Melbourne.\n\n> 「メルボルンに旅館 **は** ありますか。」\n\nYou could change the 「メルボルンに」 to 「メルボルンには」, but unlike in the first situation,\nit is optional. If you used 「には」 here, it would be for emphasis whereas it was\nfor comparison in the first situation.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T23:48:18.430",
"id": "18577",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T23:48:18.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18573 | null | 18577 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18588",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "このたなの一番おくの方にございます。\n\n * They are at the far end of this shelf.\n\nThis is an example sentence from one of my textbooks but I don't understand\nwhat おく means and I'm a bit confused on the use of 方 as well, especially when\nlooking at the translation.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T18:53:17.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18575",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T00:55:17.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"usage",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Use of おく and 方 in this sentence",
"view_count": 344
} | [
{
"body": "おく means the interior of something but is often used to mean \"in the back\".\nThis is the use of 方 (ほう) meaning a direction. So put together you get\nsomething like \"toward the deepest\" part of the shelf, which you textbook has\nchosen to express as the \"far end\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-05T19:20:50.997",
"id": "18576",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T19:20:50.997",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6793",
"parent_id": "18575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "`奥{おく}` is the part far away from the \"entrance\" of a thing, so it could be\ntranslated by `bottom` or `back` for example depending of the type of object\n(e.g. a vase or a room). Or `end` in the case of a shelf ; it will most likely\nrefer to the part the farther from the speaker / listener in this case. So\n`一番{いちばん}おく` would indeed be the `far end` of the shelf here.\n\nWhat does `の方{ほう}` add then ?? `の方{ほう}` can indicate a direction, as in\n`奥{おく}の方{ほう}へお進{すす}みください` (`please proceed _towards_ the back`), but can also\nbe used to refer to an area or more generally a thing in a _vague_ manner. I\nthink the sentence could also be translated to `They are _towards_ the far end\nof this shelf`. It doesn't make a big difference though and I guess that's why\nit is omitted in your textbook translation. It could also be omitted in\nJapanese, `一番{いちばん}おくにございます` is perfectly valid but in this case it really\nrefers to a precise location and you wouldn't expect to find anything after it\n(meaning they're the last items on the shelf).\n\n* * *\n\nNote: `の方{ほう}` being used to refer vaguely to things, leads to some people\nabusing it in an attempt to sound less \"harsh\" (intending to be more polite).\nYou may hear it a lot in some restaurants for example. It doesn't add any\nmeaning more than making the statement generally more ambiguous though, and is\nconsidered poor style.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T00:55:17.740",
"id": "18588",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T00:55:17.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4533",
"parent_id": "18575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18575 | 18588 | 18576 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18579",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "こんばんは。I am new to learning Japanese and this website. I usually try to learn\nthings of my own initiative, by searching up specific things I don't\nunderstand and trying to make sense of them myself. However, since I began\nteaching myself this language I have begun to come across many roadblocks and\nsuch with slang, colloquial expressions and the like, so I've come to the\nconclusion that I really do need help with these specific problems.\n\nWith that, my problem at the moment is that I came across the phrase\nこんなことが、あっていいのか……？which I can tell means something along the lines of \"These\nkinds of events... are they really okay?\" but I can not for the life of me\nfigure out what the あって means in this case. I've heard of あっての meaning\nsomething like \"thanks to X, Y\" and I know that the て form of ある would be あって,\nbut it doesn't seem like either of these things are related to this situation.\nAny help is greatly appreciated! ありがとございます！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T02:03:08.667",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18578",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-06T02:55:57.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7214",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"て-form"
],
"title": "How is あって being used in this context?",
"view_count": 1678
} | [
{
"body": "In this context, 「て」 ＝ 「ても」. In informal speech, 「て」 is often used instead of\n「ても」.\n\nWhat is 「ても」, then? It is a compound of two particles used to express\n\"permission\" or \"tolerance\". Both of the following phrases mean \"It is OK to\n~~\", \"It is OK if ~~\" with the first one being more informal than the second.\n\n> 「～～て（も）いい」\n>\n> 「～～て（も）かまわない」\n\nThus, your phrase 「こんなことが、あっていいのか……？」 means:\n\n> \"Is it OK (Should it be allowed) if something like this happens?\".\n\nThe antonymous expressions (\"It is not OK to ~~\"), in the order of\ninformality, are:\n\n> 「～～てはいけない」\n>\n> 「～～てはならない」\n\nNote that in the negative forms, the 「は」 in 「ては」 is rarely omitted.\n\nFinally, if you want to speak and write \"natural\" Japanese, you do not say\nありがとう before someone actually replies. In Japanese, we say that only when\nservice has been rendered.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T02:50:12.790",
"id": "18579",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-06T02:55:57.403",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18578",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18578 | 18579 | 18579 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18582",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Some online dictionaries list the shorter writing as \"irregular\". What does\nthis mean exactly? Were those words used like that long ago? Is it an\nabbreviation with writing? Or a slang?\n\nNote that I'm not asking for an explanation of the difference between 上【のぼ】る\nand 上【あ】がる.\n\nNot sure how to tag this because I have no idea why this is happening.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T11:47:53.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18581",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T09:49:05.257",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-08T09:49:05.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "3814",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "What does \"irregular\" mean in a sense of a missing okurigana letter? (上【あ】がる・上【あが】る, 明【あか】るい・明【あかる】い)",
"view_count": 1218
} | [
{
"body": "The official [jōyō kanji\nchart](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kijun/naikaku/pdf/joyokanjihyo_20101130.pdf)\nlists 上{あ}がる and 明{あか}るい. It does _not_ list 上{あが}る and 明{あかる}い. In other\nwords, the latter two are _not_ official ways to write these words.\n\nOf course, people don't always follow the official recommendations, and even\ntoday you'll find some variation in how people use okurigana, but I think\nyou'll find in this case that the official way is much more common.\n\nSo why are they included in the dictionary? According to [Jim Breen's EDICT\ndocumentation](http://www.edrdg.org/jmdict/edict_doc.html) (and I assume\nyou're using EDICT because it's the only dictionary I'm aware of that has an\n\"irregular okurigana usage\" tag), variants are included \"to enable software to\nmatch with variant forms\". For the most part, you can ignore these―you'll come\nacross variations in okurigana yourself from time to time, but it's usually\nobvious how to read them in context, and the two you picked out aren't\nespecially common.\n\nYou can read more official recommendations for okurigana usage [on the Agency\nfor Cultural Affairs\nwebsite](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kijun/naikaku/okurikana/index.html),\nalthough actual usage doesn't always follow these recommendations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T12:12:57.243",
"id": "18582",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-06T12:12:57.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18581",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 18581 | 18582 | 18582 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18584",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am a rank amateur at the Japanese language, but I was trying read some\narticles on the Japanese Wikipedia. I happened to come across the bizarre\nsentence ホルモンの肉が好き, which looked to me like it said \"She likes hormone meat\".\nI ran the passage through Google Translate, and it translated it as \"I like\nthe meat of the hormone\".\n\nWhat exactly does this phrase mean, and if it does mean \"She likes hormone\nmeat\", what am I missing that makes that make sense? Here's the rest of the\npassage. It's a description of a character from a light novel. It comes from\n[this Wikipedia\npage](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%80%88%E7%89%A9%E8%AA%9E%E3%80%89%E3%82%B7%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BA#.E4.B8.BB.E8.A6.81.E4.BA.BA.E7.89.A9)\nand is the first paragraph under the section 阿良々木 火憐（あららぎ かれん）. The line in\nquestion is the very last sentence:\n\n>\n> 蜂に刺された少女。本格的な初登場は「かれんビー」。「かれんビー」「こよみツリー」のメインキャラクター。中学3年生（「するがデビル」では私立栂の木高校へ進学している）で空手\n> [注\n> 27]二段の持ち主。暦の2人の妹の内の上の妹で、妹の月火と合わせて「栂の木二中のファイヤーシスターズ」という通り名を持つ。実戦担当で、自称：正義の味方。6月生まれ、身長：170cm（後に175cm以上に伸びている）。自分より背の低い「瑞鳥（みずどり）くん」という年下の恋人がいる（詳細不明だが暦に似ているらしい）。暦曰く「可愛いと言うよりも恰好良い」容姿。ホルモンの肉が好き。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T19:53:29.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18583",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-06T20:46:48.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7218",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does ホルモンの肉が好き mean in this passage?",
"view_count": 712
} | [
{
"body": "Apparently the word is indeed derived from \"hormone\" ([source](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/ho/hormon.html)) but in food context refers to dishes [made from\noffal](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horumonyaki).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T20:46:48.870",
"id": "18584",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-06T20:46:48.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "18583",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18583 | 18584 | 18584 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18587",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Is there a particular reason why verbs are classified as \"class 1\" verbs\n(一段動詞) and \"class 5\" verbs (五段動詞)? Where did class 2 to 4 go? Do or did they\nexist at all, and why (not)?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T20:54:37.910",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18585",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-30T23:46:44.353",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-07T01:29:18.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "7219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 23,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "Why are the verb classes called ichidan and godan?",
"view_count": 6525
} | [
{
"body": "Ichidan verbs keep a single root when conjugated, hence their name. For\nexample 見る is 一段 so it keeps its み- stem. みる みます みない みれば みよう みて みた are used\nfor the infinitive, conjunctive, negative, imperative, volitional, connective\nand past forms, respectively.\n\nOn the other hand 五段 verbs change according to the verb form. For example 読む\nwould be よむ よみます よまない よめば よもう よんで よんだ respectively. You can see that the final\n\"mu\" of \"yomu\" can change to mi, ma, me and mo (in addition to mu!), making it\n5.\n\nThere aren't any 2, 3 or 4段 verbs in modern Japanese. Only two types of verbs,\nyay!\n\nEDIT: I just realized you might be asking WHY it's this way... In which case I\nhave no idea!",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T21:08:18.403",
"id": "18586",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-06T21:15:34.283",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-06T21:15:34.283",
"last_editor_user_id": "7148",
"owner_user_id": "7148",
"parent_id": "18585",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "Before considering modern Japanese, I think that it is easier to understand\nthis by first understanding classical. Classical Japanese has three major\nregular verb classes: quadrigrade (四段), monograde (一段), and bigrade (二段). Both\nmonograde and bigrade may further be sub-divided into upper (上) and lower (下).\nThere are also four irregular classes: k-irregular, s-irregular, n-irregular,\nand r-irregular. Verbs are conjugated into six forms: irrealis (未然形),\nadverbial (連用形), conclusive (終止形), attributive (連体形), realis (已然形), and\nimperative (命令形).\n\nLet's consider the quadrigrade verb kak- 'to write' (書く). When conjugated to\neach of the above forms, it becomes kak-a, kak-i, kak-u, kak-u, kak-e, kak-e.\nNotice that the distinctive suffixes are a, i, u, e. The total number of\ndistinctive suffixes is four, which is why this is called quadrigrade (四段).\n\nNext, let's consider the monograde verb mi- 'to see' (見る). When conjugated to\neach of the above forms, it becomes m-i, m-i, m-iru, m-iru, m-ire, m-iro.\nNotice how all of the forms contain a single -i. This is why it is called\nmonograde (一段). Now let's consider the verb tabe- 'to eat' (食べる). It\nconjugates as tab-e, tab-e, tab-eru, tab-eru, tab-ere, tab-ero. This time all\nof the forms contain a single -e. This too is monograde. To distinguish\nbetween these two, those ending in -i are called upper monograde and those\nending in -e are called lower monograde. The normal vowel ordering in Japanese\nis a, i, u, e, o. Notice that comparing i and e, i comes first and e comes\nsecond. Traditionally these would be written vertically. As a result, i is\nconsidered to be \"upper\" and e is \"lower\" in this chart, hence the names.\n\nNext let's consider the bigrade verb ok- 'to rise' (起く). (Older form of modern\noki- 起きる 'id'.) When conjugated to each of the above forms, it becomes ok-i,\nok-i, ok-u, ok-uru, ok-ure, ok-i[yo]. All forms have an -i or -u in it. This\nis a two-way distinction, hence the name bigrade. Now let's consider the\n(older) verb tab- 'to eat' (食ぶ). This conjugates as tab-e, tab-e, tab-u, tab-\nuru, tab-ure, tab-e[yo]. Again there is a two-way distinction, so this too is\nbigrade. However, this time the distinction is between -u and -e. As such,\nbigrade may be sub-classified into upper bigrade (i/u) and lower bigrade\n(u/e).\n\nThe four irregular verb classes are simply irregular which explains their\nnames.\n\nNow let's look at modern Japanese. Modern Japanese simplifies much of the\nabove: all quadrigrade verbs have now become quintigrade (五段), bigrade verbs\nhave gone bye-bye (pun intended), and two of the four irregular classes have\ndisappeared. Also note that the conjugation class formerly known as realis\n(已然形) is now known as conditional (仮定形).\n\nLet's consider the new quintigrade verb. In addition to the four distinctions\nearlier, there is now a fifth, hence the name. This fifth form is -o. This can\nbe seen in kak-o: \"(I) shall write, let's write\". However, this form is\nsecondary in nature: it derives from kak-au (and earlier kak-amu). -au-\nregularly changes into o: (long o). This -a is the same -a as seen in the\nirrelias (未然形). This is not a true form, but is added to by-pass the\nphonological explanation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-06T22:59:08.753",
"id": "18587",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T14:59:32.627",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-08T14:59:32.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "1141",
"parent_id": "18585",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 30
}
] | 18585 | 18587 | 18587 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18590",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> のみこむのに苦労【くろう】した日本語【にほんご】は、佃煮【つくだに】にするほどあった。\n\nAccording to the book explanation ほど is being used here to adduce an extreme\nexample to metaphorically indicate the degree or severity of something. In\nthis sentence, as I understand it, the writer is using 佃煮【つくだに】 (which I\nunderstand has a strong flavor) to indicate how hard it was to assimilate\nJapanese.\n\nHowever I'm not sure if I got it right, I cannot quite explain or translate\nthe sentence. I tried to look for other examples of the grammatical pattern on\nInternet but I couldn't find anything that could clarify the meaning of the\nsentence, I also looked at Wikipedia article for 佃煮【つくだに】 and I think the\nstrong flavor of the food is the key here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T00:57:35.353",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18589",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-23T19:36:49.497",
"last_edit_date": "2022-03-23T19:36:49.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "4604",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning and translation of 「佃煮にするほど」",
"view_count": 1402
} | [
{
"body": "The \"large amount\" is the key here, and the flavor of 佃煮 is not important. 佃煮\nis a kind of preservative food, and it is made when we have too much food.\n\nSo \"佃煮にするほどあった\" here means \"there were too many (Japanese expressions) which I\ncouldn't digest/handle for now\".\n\nBut this idiom is rare. The more common ways to metaphorically say \"there are\ntoo many something (which are not particularly important)\", are 「○○は星の数ほどある」,\n「○○は掃いて捨てるほどある」, 「○○は腐るほどある」 etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T03:29:40.583",
"id": "18590",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T03:36:48.010",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-07T03:36:48.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18589",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18589 | 18590 | 18590 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18592",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A little while ago, in a neighbourhood in Tokyo, I came across this sign:\n\n\n\nI'm not sure of the readings of the place names, but the sign is put there by\nthe local police, `戸塚[警察署]{けいさつしょ}`, in association with the local town\ncouncil, `下落合東[町会]{ちょうかい}`. The small text on the right side states that this\narea is under special focus for the prevention of home robberies,\n`侵入{しんにゅう}盗犯{とうはん}防止{ぼうし}重点{じゅうてん}地区{ちく}`. All that makes sense to me.\n\nWhat I'm wondering about is the main body, which says:\n\n> 甘{あま}い言葉{ことば}と暗{くら}い道{みち}\n>\n> 気{き}をつけよう！\n\nIt's a little weird to me because various dictionaries I've looked at define\n`甘{あま}い言葉{ことば}` as \"sweet talk, flattery, alluring words\" and so on, which,\neven if said on a dark street, `暗{くら}い道{みち}`, don't seem to be particularly\nthreatening.\n\nIs the idea that people will stop you on dark streets and sweet talk you into\nletting them into their home so that they can rob you? That's the only way I\ncan make sense of it all, but, it seems like such an unlikely crime with such\nlow chances of success, that I feel I'm missing something.\n\nWhat exactly is this sign warning people about?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T04:53:33.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18591",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T22:12:03.900",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "119",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Why should one be careful of soft and sweet words in this neighbourhood?",
"view_count": 815
} | [
{
"body": "I think you're more or less correct about the meaning which I would loosely\ntranslate as\n\n> Be careful of dark alleys and people who are saying things that are too good\n> to be true!\n\nWhile I agree that the actual advice isn't terribly useful, I think the point\nof such signs is to keep such things on your mind so you're more aware of your\nsurroundings in general.\n\nSo to answer your question: I don't think you're really missing anything.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T05:36:27.407",
"id": "18592",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T05:36:27.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18591",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "This sign is misleading. The first line `侵入盗犯防止重点地区`, which mentions one kind\nof a crime, has no direct connection to the other part, which mentions another\nkind of crime.\n\nAs for the other part, it is pretty much ambiguous. One thing to note is that\n`暗い道` is used here with double meanings: the literal \"dark road\" and the\nmetaphorical \"hell of a life.\" It can be mentioning any kind of crime where a\nstranger comes to you with sweet words and brings you into hell; it can be\nabout kidnapping, drug addict, prostitution, etc. In this respect, It is a bad\nsign. Its intention is not clear.\n\nFrom your mentioning of the second part in the order `あまい言葉と暗い道気をつけよう！`, I can\ntell that you are clearly missing one thing. That is, this is a verse\nfollowing the traditional 5 mora-7 mora-5 mora pattern. It only makes sense\nwhen read it as `気をつけよう！あまい言葉と暗い道`. `気をつけよう` is actually six morae, where five\nis expected, but it does not sound so unnatural. This is called 字余り. It is\nfollowed by the seven morae `あまい言葉と` and the five morae `暗い道`. On top of that,\nthe lines in vertical writing have always been read from right to left\nthroughout history; never from left to right. Furthermore, `あまい言葉と暗い道` is\nlowered against `気をつけよう！` (in other words, `気をつけよう！` is negatively indented),\nwhich also indicates that this line comes after `気をつけよう！`. You seem to have\nmissed all of these three clues.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T13:26:38.123",
"id": "18594",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T22:12:03.900",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-07T22:12:03.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "7224",
"owner_user_id": "7224",
"parent_id": "18591",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18591 | 18592 | 18592 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18611",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In everything I can find online, the constructions `[N1]を[N2]とする[N3]` and\n`[N1]を[N2]とした[N3]` are lumped together as basically having the same meaning.\nIs there any difference between them?\n\nMy textbook contains the following examples:\n\n> 山田をリーダーとするサークルを作る。 \n> We will make a club with Yamada as the leader.\n>\n> 環境問題をテーマとしたテレビ番組をみる。 \n> I watch TV programs about environmental problems.\n\nWould there be any difference in nuance if `とした` was used in the first example\nand `とする` was used in the second?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T07:49:11.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18593",
"last_activity_date": "2018-02-02T16:28:13.330",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1871",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 〜を〜とする and 〜を〜とした before nouns?",
"view_count": 3489
} | [
{
"body": "I feel like that there is actually a subtle difference but I also think that I\nmight not ever have thought about it had I not seen this question. In that\nsense, I appreciate the question.\n\nAre we native speakers required to be aware of the difference? No, I do not\nthink so unless one wants to write professionally.\n\nI think that \"[N1]を[N2]と **した** [N3]\" sounds **more indirect, oblique or\nroundabout** regarding the [N1] than in \"[N1]を[N2]と **する** [N3]\". The former\nwith した sounds just slightly more \"informal\" or even colloquial/conversational\nat times because of the indirectness. The latter with する has an \"official\"\nfeel to it.\n\n> A)「[山田]{やまだ}をリーダーと **する** サークルを[作]{つく}る。」\n>\n> B)「山田をリーダーと **した** サークルを作る。」\n\nThere is a little more emphasis placed on the choice of 「山田」 as the leader in\nA) than in B), but both are correct and presentable .\n\n> C)「[環境問題]{かんきょうもんだい}をテーマと **した** テレビ[番組]{ばんぐみ}をみる。」\n>\n> D)「環境問題をテーマと **する** テレビ番組をみる。」\n\nIn C), it sounds like the speaker would watch TV programs that are more\nloosely related to environmental issues than implied by D). In D), the speaker\nseems more selective of the programs being about environmental issues.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T11:06:07.147",
"id": "18611",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-27T10:40:36.117",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18593",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 18593 | 18611 | 18611 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18596",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "* 「AとしてのB」 might translate as \"B as A\"?\n * 「BとしてのA」 might translate as \"A as B\"?\n\nIs there a meaningful difference between the two.\n\nI was just thinking about how to explain how to write documents in English,\nand this is the sentence that I was writing: \n「 _分詞としての形容詞や副詞をよく使えば、活発的な文章になります。_ 」 \nbut then it occurred to me that I perhaps should write: \n「 _形容詞や副詞としての分詞をよく使えば_ 、....」\n\nIs this \"six of one and half a dozen of the other\"? maybe a difference in\nnuance?\n\noriginal sentence: \n\" _The usage of participles as adjectives and adverbs creates more active\nsentences._ \"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T15:06:37.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18595",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-12T04:46:44.600",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-12T04:46:44.600",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Do 「AとしてのB」 and 「BとしてのA」 have symmetry?",
"view_count": 221
} | [
{
"body": "Just as the English \"A as B\" is not symmetrical, so is Japanese \"BとしてのA.\" B is\nthe usage/disguise. A is the object to be used.\n\n> 分詞としての形容詞や副詞をよく使えば\n\ndoes not make sense.\n\n> 形容詞や副詞としての分詞をよく使えば\n\nwould be a better translation for your English sentence. However, it is\nunnatural to fit everything into a noun. It is far more natural to use an\nadverbial expression like:\n\n> 形容詞や副詞として分詞をよく使えば\n\nor even more naturally:\n\n> 分詞を形容詞や副詞としてよく使えば",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T15:49:52.430",
"id": "18596",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-12T04:36:29.493",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-12T04:36:29.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7224",
"parent_id": "18595",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18595 | 18596 | 18596 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't know if the number of days using for six cases above is how many? 3\ndays or 10 days or...? And moreover, 上旬、中旬、下旬 and 始め、半ば、終わり which is using for\nmonth, which is for week and which is for year? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T16:23:05.737",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18597",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T16:38:29.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"synonyms"
],
"title": "About 上旬、中旬、下旬 and 始め、半ば、終わり．．．?",
"view_count": 400
} | [
{
"body": "旬 is a way to group the day of month by its second decimal digit. The days of\nmonths whose second digit is 0, 1, and 2 respectively belong to 上旬, 中旬, and\n下旬. Strictly following this rule, the days 30 and 31 should not belong to any\nof them, but by adjustment, they belong to 下旬.\n\n始め (beginning), 半ば (midst), and 終わり (end) have nothing particularly to do with\ndays. It is a subjective matter what range they express.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T16:38:29.210",
"id": "18599",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-07T16:38:29.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7224",
"parent_id": "18597",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18597 | null | 18599 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18604",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In Japanese, using Katakana, why is the name Danny written and pronounced ダニー.\nWhy not just ダニ? I'm not sure why the `i` is being extended when this doesn't\nreally happen in english.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T16:38:27.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18598",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-28T01:54:38.677",
"last_edit_date": "2019-01-22T00:04:18.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "7226",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"names",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "Why is Danny written & pronounced ダニー and not ダニ?",
"view_count": 2756
} | [
{
"body": "Words brought to Japan from English speakers and which end in 'y' are usually\npronounced with extended 'i' sound.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T05:54:26.887",
"id": "18604",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T05:54:26.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7231",
"parent_id": "18598",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "To build on koji's answer, sometimes you'll see changes in the katakana-\nization of foreign words and names to avoid collisions with native words and\nnames. An additional incentive for the long \"y\" sound is that there's a native\nword だに, which means \"mite or louse\" (that is, a small blood-sucking\narthropod). It's probably a *good* thing that the katakana pronunciation of\n\"Danny\" has shifted the way it has. :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-01-22T00:03:49.733",
"id": "65017",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-22T00:03:49.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "18598",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I believe it's simply the way the word was borrowed. Each English or other\nloanword in Japanese has or eventually acquires a standard writing. Of course\nsome have more than one accepted writing, but the point is the transliteration\ncan **seem** arbitrary or like it's more different from the original\nlanguage's pronunciation than it is. Indeed, in some cases it probably is\nsomewhat arbitrary, the way Japanese speakers end up adopting English, German,\nPortuguese or other languages' words. But I doubt anyone knows for sure,\nincluding native Japanese speakers. xP _I_ don't know, that is for sure.\n\nHowever, I probably _can_ answer adequately in the case of the word you\nspecifically asked about. To answer this question about Japanese, however,\nI'll have to let you in on a little secret about _English_ pronunciation.\n\nFirst of all, ダニー isn't _necessarily_ one of those words that have a random or\narbitrarily assigned pronunciation in Japanese that is different from English.\nBelieve it or not, phonetically at least, English actually _does_ feature\nshort **and** long vowels, like the _\"ii\"_ in _\"Danii\"_ ; although unlike\nJapanese, vowel length is not phonemic (i.e., it's only _phonetic_ ), but\nthat's not important.\n\nWhat this means basically is that while most English speakers (apart from\nEnglish linguists and similar groups) don't even realize it, or make a big\ndeal out of it, vowel length does exist in English. For example, try this:\n\n 1. Say _\"bad\"_ the way you normally do.\n 2. Now say _\"bat\"_ your usual way.\n\nListen carefully to the vowel _'a'_ in each word. If you're like most native\nEnglish speakers, you'll notice the _'a'_ in _\"bad\"_ is held slightly longer\nthan that in _\"bat\"_. This is because in most varieties and dialects of the\nspoken English language, the length the vowel/diphthong in a stressed syllable\nis related to whether the consonant or consonant cluster that follows it is\nvoiced or voiceless. Stated more simply, in English, for single-syllable\nwords, a pre-consonantal short vowel in a stressed syllable is generally\nlengthened before a voiced consonant. Of course, that's a great over-\nsimplification of the English vowel length system, but you get the point.\n\nActually, even consonants can be doubled in English, the way they are in\nJapanese. This is most clearly evident in the standard American English\npronunciation of _\"thirteen\"_ , for instance, where most speakers say what\nsounds like _\"thurt\" + \"teen\"_ instead of the usual British _\"thuh\" + \"teen\"_.\n\nNow, _this_ is where your question comes into play. And that's because, in\nEnglish, many word-final vowels are spoken long, as well. And native Japanese\nspeakers, being conditioned to hear the difference between short and long\nvowels more explicitly than English speakers, are able to pick up on the fact\nthat the word-final _'y'_ at the end of _\"Danny\"_ is pronounced long by most\nEnglish speakers. Keep in mind, of course, that English long vowels aren't\n**quite** as long as Japanese usually, except in certain dialects, like the\n\"Southern drawl\" of the United States, but even standard American English\nfeatures phonetic vowel length, even though it's not taught in school because\nit generally doesn't affect/create any minimal pairs (i.e., words that differ\nonly in vowel length).\n\nSo finally, we have an answer:\n\n_\"Danny\"_ , or _\"ダニー\"_ in Japanese, was transliterated with a long vowel\nbecause there is a long vowel in the English pronunciation, for most native\nspeakers. I'm sorry for the long, possibly tedious answer, but it's the most\nconcise I can explain it without using purely linguistic jargon, and _that_\n**would** be inexcusable hehe. =) If you want more information on English\nvowel length, there's plenty available on Wikipedia, as well as many other\nsites, I'm sure.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-04-28T01:54:38.677",
"id": "76871",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-28T01:54:38.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37178",
"parent_id": "18598",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18598 | 18604 | 18604 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm looking for an explanation of the usage \"あったものじゃない”.\n\n例文\n\n> １）ムードも何も **あったものじゃありません** ね (context:Girlfriend and boyfriend were out on a\n> date and the boyfriend's stomach made a large noise because he hasn't eaten\n> all day)\n>\n> ２）心の準備も何も **あったものではない**\n>\n> ３）美しい景色も何も **あったものではない**\n\nLooking at these expressions in context they seem to strongly deny the part\nbefore も何もあったものではない, but can someone explain the way the grammar is used here?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-07T17:06:10.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18600",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-25T04:34:21.140",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6981",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Looking for an explanation of the usage \"あったものじゃない”",
"view_count": 792
} | [
{
"body": "My true feeling is that the expression 「～～も[何]{なに}もあったものではない」 should be\nmemorized (and actively used) as a common idiom than be analyzed\ngrammatically.\n\n> It is an expression of \"total\" negation. \"There is no ~~ whatsoever!\"\n\n「～～も何も」 lumps together things that are like or related to \"~~\". See\n[http://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%BD%95%E3%82%82?dic=daijisen&oid=13802800](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%BD%95%E3%82%82?dic=daijisen&oid=13802800)\n\n「あった」: Do not take this to be the past tense. Rather, take it to be in the\nhypothetical form because with this phrase, you want to say \"~~ could not\nexist.\" **You are only stating your opinion; You are not stating a fact**.\nWhat I mean by that is that 「あったものではない」 is **_not_** an expression about\nsomething that actually existed, exists or will/might exist. In that sense, it\nis tense-free to begin with.\n\nA better-known expression for J-learners would be 「～～した方{ほう}がいい」, which is\nalso an expression for stating an opinion rather than a fact. People often ask\n\"Why use the past-tense た?\" in it, but again, that is NOT the past-tense た.\n**The speaker is only giving advice; It is only his opinion**. Just like\n「あったものではない」, this is not an expression about someone actually doing something\nin the past, present or future. It is \"tenseless\".\n\n「もの」 here is a nominalizer with a special function to express one's judgement\nemphatically. See Definition 5-ア in\n[http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%89%A9?dic=daijisen&oid=18293900](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%89%A9?dic=daijisen&oid=18293900)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T13:40:15.307",
"id": "18615",
"last_activity_date": "2017-02-25T04:34:21.140",
"last_edit_date": "2017-02-25T04:34:21.140",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18600",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "I haven't formally studied this, but from exposure, I've taken it to mean the\nfollowing:\n\n> 心の準備も何も+negative: not even psychologically prepared, not even anything at\n> all\n\nThe negative sentence ending could be できていない, for example. Since all the\nobjects in your example sentences are nouns, they can also take ある・ない, which\nskips the step of choosing an appropriate verb. Note that in conversation you\ncan actually _stop_ at 何も, and the negative will be assumed by listeners.\n\nSuffixing もの and placing the negative after that adds further emphasis: \"there\nwas nothing like that at all.\" Compare to \"not a damn thing\" in English.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T22:43:40.780",
"id": "18712",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T22:43:40.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3131",
"parent_id": "18600",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] | 18600 | null | 18615 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've always wondered why the 音読み of the kanji 洗 is セン when, in all Chinese\ntopolects I'm aware of, the reading ends in a vowel.\n\nI always chalked this up to Japanese having borrowed a Middle Chinese reading\nat a time when 洗 still ended in a nasal (cf. the Japanese vs Chinese reading\nof 鳥), but I was surprised to find that this isn't the case, and that it's\nreconstructed as *sejX in Middle Chinese.\n\nWhy, then, is there a nasal in the Japanese reading (and according to\nWiktionary, the Korean reading too)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T02:02:56.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18601",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T03:14:26.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"chinese"
],
"title": "Etymological origin of -n in 洗 (セン)",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "According to Pulleyblank's Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation\n(<http://books.google.com/books?id=qWGIxP1R4P4C>, p336), there's a\nreconstructed EMC pronunciation of 洗 as *sɛn' (no idea what the apostrophe\nmeans, though - glottal stop?). This apparently corresponds to a modern\nMandarin pronunciation of xiǎn, which also has a nasal final.\n\nThere may also be a reconstructed pronunciation of 洗 corresponding to modern\nMandarin xǐ (the other option a lookup gives, and the pronunciation I assume\nyou're referring to), but Google Books won't give me the page it should be on.\nIf anyone has that book (or Google Books does give you that page), look it up\nsomewhere on pages 330-332 and let me know if it's there.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T02:20:11.733",
"id": "18602",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T02:20:11.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "18601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I assume you're referring to [the Baxter-Sagart Middle Chinese\ntranscriptions](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Baxter-\nSagart_Old_Chinese_reconstruction) of the [Qieyun rime\ndictionary](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qieyun). When I search these\ntranscriptions for 洗, I find _two_ readings listed:\n\n 1. *sejX, corresponding to modern Mandarin xǐ, Japanese セイ・サイ, and Korean 세 se \n 2. *senX, corresponding to modern Mandarin xiǎn, Japanese セン, and Korean 선 seon\n\nSo I think the final nasal already existed in Middle Chinese and was borrowed\ninto Japanese. This may not have been obvious because xǐ is the usual reading\nin modern Mandarin while セン is more common today in Japanese.\n\nAs for xiǎn, I don't know when this reading is used, but it _is_ at least\nlisted in my dictionary. My Chinese is too rudimentary for me to say any more\non the subject. The Japanese and Mandarin readings listed above are from 新漢語林,\nand the Korean readings are taken from Wiktionary.\n\n(For those who are curious, the final X in Baxter's notation indicates [a\nrising\ntone](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baxter%27s_transcription_for_Middle_Chinese#Tones).)",
"comment_count": 13,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T03:06:50.110",
"id": "18603",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T03:14:26.607",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-08T03:14:26.607",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18601 | null | 18603 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18651",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've heard that it is supposed to be \"less demanding\" (or something in that\nregard) to ask a negative question when you're asking for a favor or anything\nalike.\n\nLet's say I want to turn this sentence into a negative one:\n\n> スカイプで話しましょうか？\n\n**How do I go about doing it?** I want to convey the following meaning:\n\"Should we talk over skype?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T14:55:04.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18605",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T16:12:53.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Asking a negative question",
"view_count": 1765
} | [
{
"body": "I think I would probably say スカイプで話しませんか？",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T15:27:15.587",
"id": "18606",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T15:27:15.587",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18605",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "By chance I just read something new (for me) on these expressions which\nexplains Choko's answer (〜ませんか？):\n\n> 〜ましょうか？ is used when the speaker is in a position to make the relevant\n> decision. When used as an invitation toward someone with who the speaker is\n> not too close it can sound too familiar.\n\n==>>\n\n> 〜ませんか？ is used as a polite invitation. The meaning is similar to \"Would you\n> like to ~?\" in English. (Don't confuse with 〜ないんですか？ which means \"You're\n> not...\")\n\n_Reference: \"Japanese Grammar in Use\" - E Manita & J Blagdon p188_",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T16:12:53.113",
"id": "18651",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T16:12:53.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"parent_id": "18605",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18605 | 18651 | 18606 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Please, help me to understand the word コミカライズ. It was in phrase 衝撃のコミカライズ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T18:16:00.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18607",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T19:01:40.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7234",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Looking for a translation コミカライズ",
"view_count": 328
} | [
{
"body": "I believe this is \"comicalize\", or to turn into a comic/manga.\n\n[According to\nhatena.jp:](http://d.hatena.ne.jp/keyword/%A5%B3%A5%DF%A5%AB%A5%E9%A5%A4%A5%BA)\n\n> * 小説、アニメ、ゲーム、映画、ドラマなどをマンガ化すること。\n> * 小説化を意味する「ノベライズ」から派生した和製英語。\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-08T18:32:13.607",
"id": "18608",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-08T19:01:40.290",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-08T19:01:40.290",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7148",
"parent_id": "18607",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18607 | null | 18608 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18616",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been reading a Visual Novel and I couldn't understand what\nexactly「その足を縫われたいか」means. The only translation I could guess is -\n\n> \"You want that(your) leg(s) to be sewed?\"\n\nHowever I'm not really sure that it's correct here. So, here is some context,\nbecause the dialogue by itself is not really helpful.\n\nContext: In the world of this VN exist lots of 人外(yeah and of course they are\neating humans.). Main character (僕) is able to absorb their power by killing\nthem. But if 人外's power is strong, in order to fully control it, as Ignis\nsays, he must submiss it be his own will or to satisfy 人外's dying wish. In\nthis case the dying wish was to kill Ignis. That's why she made 僕 a drunked\nand allowed the 人外 to control 僕's body, then they fighted and Ignis falsified\nher own death, because he wasn't able to submiss it with his own will.\n\n> イグニス:「あぁ。素面のまま、襲いかかられると危ないからな」\n>\n> 僕が酔っていたから、イグニスも、軽くあしらえたという訳か。\n>\n> 僕:「ずいぶん手間を掛けるな。この前は、あの子に勝っていたじゃないか？」\n>\n> イグニス:「その足を縫われたいか？」\n>\n> 僕は首を振る。\n>\n> イグニス:「生身で獣と戦うのは骨が折れるんだ。布石を打たせてもらった」\n>\n> イグニスはベンチに座った。僕も、となりに座る。\n>\n> イグニス:「狼の力を使いこなすには、二つ方法がある。一つは、意志の力で屈服させる。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T12:20:46.770",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18612",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T15:37:07.197",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-09T15:37:07.197",
"last_editor_user_id": "3183",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Meaning of phrase「その足を縫われたいか」",
"view_count": 223
} | [
{
"body": "> 「その[足]{あし}を[縫]{ぬ}われたいか？」\n\nmeans what it literally says.\n\n\"Do you want your leg(s) to get sewed up?\"\n\nWhat it is saying is \"Do you want to get hurt in the legs so badly that you\nwill need to have the cuts sewed up?\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T13:48:18.630",
"id": "18616",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T13:48:18.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18612",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18612 | 18616 | 18616 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "What is the meaning of のか in the following sentences? Does it have the same\nmeaning as のですか?\n\n> 漢字はどう正しく書くのか、どう正しく読むのか、彼らは時々迷います。\n>\n> 参加するのか、参加しないのか、ここではっきり返事しなさい。\n\nAlso, I have found sentences of the same structure but instead of のか, they\ncontain only か. For example:\n\n> 「白」という漢字はどんな時に「はく」と読むか、どんな時に「しろ」と読むか、首をかしげます。\n>\n> 彼はどの大学に入るかはまだ決めていません。\n\nIf I change the か in the above two sentences to のか, will it change the\nmeaning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T12:46:39.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18613",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-15T02:35:40.880",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6893",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 25,
"tags": [
"usage",
"meaning",
"nuances",
"questions"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of のか and how does it differ from か?",
"view_count": 42737
} | [
{
"body": "As far as I know, this kind of の shows personal/emotional involvement more\nthan a grammatical function. In the first sentences, they are wondering how to\nread or write kanjis in general... and whether they should participate or not\nto something requiring a reply. The の indicates that this question is\npreoccupying them.\n\nIn the next sentence, a specific example is given. It makes sense to me that\none is a bit less personally involved about writing and reading 白 than reading\nand writing kanjis in general. But if it were the final question in a spelling\nbee contest (for example ;P), then maybe you would wonder with the のかs.\n\nThe last example you gave could have had a の to empathize with the student.\nWithout it, it has more of a factual feeling.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T13:36:31.113",
"id": "18614",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T13:36:31.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7148",
"parent_id": "18613",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "のか and のですか are two versions of the same thing - both are questions with の -\nbut のですか is more formal due to the inclusion of です. I wouldn't say のか has the\n_same_ meaning as のですか, but it does have the same meaning _if you disregard\nformality_ - のですか is the formal version of のか. In your example sentences, the\nのかs are in embedded questions (eg English 'I don't know _if_...'), and putting\nのですか is ungrammatical, since you're not supposed to have formality marking\ninside embedded questions (or other subordinate clauses).\n\nのか and か are not really the same, though. の here is the so-called 'explanatory\nの', which generally indicates explanations/reasoning/cause/etc. のか thus asks\nwhether or not this is an _explanation_ for something, though it may not be\nimmediately obvious what the explanation is supposed to be for. か on its own\njust asks whether or not something is the case. An example:\n\n> あいつ、やったか？\n\nis a simple question asking 'did he do it?'.\n\n> あいつ、やったのか?\n\nasks instead 'is some effect I'm observing caused by him doing it?'.\n\nか and のか are quite often interchangeable, but ultimately they are different.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T18:03:51.433",
"id": "18623",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T18:03:51.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "18613",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "There's 2 different usages of `か` here (but it's not `のか` on one side and\n`か／のですか` on the other one):\n\n 1. `か` as a subsentence connector. For example: `どの大学に入るかはまだ決めていません`, where `か` serves to connect `hasn't decided` clause to the `which university he goes to` subsentence by expressing it as a question, a doubt or similar (expressed in English by `how`, `why` etc). In your 3rd sentence it expresses options (`if` in English), but that's still similar to this use case.\n 2. `か` as a sentence closer. For example: `いつ来るか`, where `か` serves to ask a question.\n 3. similarly to the 1st case it can express alternatives (`whether`). As in `参加するかしないか`: `whether [you] participate or not`.\n\nYou see it actually adds the same nuance to the clause it follows (specify it\nas a question or a doubt) in all cases, but in the 1st and 3rd cases it is\nattached to a sub-clause. And as @Sjiveru already pointed out, grammatically\nthe formality of a sentence is expressed on its main clause and sub-clauses\nuse a neutral stance. That's why you couldn't say `どの大学に入りますかはまだ決めていません` but\nyou could say `いつ来ますか`.\n\nNow, you can also replace the `か` particle in the above cases by `のか`. For\ncase #2 above, it easy to see it as making the question / doubt significantly\nstronger (as the 大辞林 [puts\nit](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%AE%E3%81%8B?dic=daijirin) it's more `問いただす`\ninstead of simply `問う`). So you could translate `いつ来るのか` by `When the hell\nwill [he] come...` For case #1 and #3, I prefer to think of it as sub-clause +\n`の` + `か`, each of them adding the nuance they also add when used separately.\nSo with `か` you express a doubt and with `の` you express a stronger personal\ninvolvement (as @comeauch explained). In case you're not confident on how to\ngenerally use `の` after clauses, check on it first as `のか` is merely the same\nin the context of a question. So with your 2 first examples:\n\n```\n\n 漢字はどう正しい書くか、どう正しい読むか、彼らは時々迷います : express a simple fact\n 漢字はどう正しい書くのか、どう正しい読むのか、彼らは時々迷います : somewhat implies they're really lost at it for example (for this reason something like `彼らは本当に迷います` feels more like a natural context for using `のか`)\n \n 参加するか否{いな}か返事してください : rather polite and distant way to ask to answer\n 参加するのか、参加しないのか、ここではっきり返事しなさい : strong request to take clear action (implying the speaker is possibly frustrated or angry about it already)\n \n```\n\nAnd `のか` is \"another\" particle, but it stills behaves the same as `か`\ngrammatically. So `どの大学に入りますのかは全く分かりません` or `どの大学に入るのですかは全く分かりません` would\nsimilarly be wrong, and `いつ来るのですか` completely correct (although in this last\nexample the question would be directed at someone else instead of oneself, as\nthe more formal tone necessarily implies).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T21:29:48.487",
"id": "18626",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-10T09:24:14.347",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-10T09:24:14.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "4533",
"owner_user_id": "4533",
"parent_id": "18613",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> \"What is the meaning of のか in the following sentences? Does it have the same\n> meaning as のですか?\"\n\nIt appears that you may be confusing the 「か」 and 「のか」 used at the end of wh-\nquestion clauses with the 「か」 and 「のか」as question-sentence endings. In all of\nyour example sentences, the 「か」 or 「のか」 is used as the former kind.\n\n> 「どう/だれ/いつ/どこ/なに/なぜ + Mini Sentence + か/のか」 makes the wh-question clause\n> complete. \"how to ~~\", \"who ~~\", \"when ~~\", etc.\n\nThe 「か」 or 「のか」 by itself does not have such an important meaning but it MUST\nbe used in pair with a question word in a question clause. You simply have no\nchoice but to use it.\n\nRegarding the difference between 「か」 and 「のか」 in these types of sentences, it\nseems that at least in informal speech, we have been using the two more\ninterchangeably by the decade. That is my honest personal observation as a\nJapanese-speaker. Strictly speaking, though, you would need to use 「のか」 with a\nwh-word.\n\nIf I were a grammarian, I would probably explain the difference by saying that\nyou would be placing more emphasis on the wh-question part by using 「のか」 than\nby using 「か」. **By using 「のか」, you would be requesting a clearer or more\nprecise answer from the other person** (or from yourself, depending on the\ncontext).\n\nThat would be the difference that you would probably be required to know if\nyou were asked about it on a test. If, however, you were just trying to make\nsense of a 「か」 or 「のか」 used in a wh-question clause in an email or something\nthat is informal from a Japanese-speaker, you might end up reading too much\ninto it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-08T07:28:03.667",
"id": "18994",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-15T02:35:40.880",
"last_edit_date": "2017-12-15T02:35:40.880",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18613",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 18
},
{
"body": "> 漢字はどう正しく書くのか、どう正しく読むのか、彼らは時々迷います。\n\nSee Section 2, いったい～なのか. It is used to show perplexity\n\n> 参加するのか、参加しないのか、ここではっきり返事しなさい。\n\nSee Section 2, いったい～なのか. It is used to show impatience\n\n> 「白」という漢字はどんな時に「はく」と読むか、どんな時に「しろ」と読むか、首をかしげます。\n>\n> 彼はどの大学に入るかはまだ決めていません。\n\nSee Section 6.\n\n* * *\n\nI think のか used in questions (excluding rhetorical usage) generally fall into\n4 categories.\n\n## 1. つまり～なの（か） type\n\nYou use this の when asking for confirmation. の functions like a quotation\nmark, which encloses an existing proposition. This kind of の often appears\nafter つまり.\n\nThe ～ part can be your **conclusion, speculation, or simply hearsay** :\n\n```\n\n (When you hear the rain) 雨が降ったの？\n 元気がなさそうですね。頭が痛いのですか\n \n```\n\nThis の(ですか) is frequently used in **yes-no questions** and **alternative\nquestions**.\n\nNotes: The non-question version のだ/のです is abundantly discussed in research\npapers. Another related form のではないか can often used in the same context.\n\n## 2. いったい/ほんとうに～なのか type\n\nYou use this の when you feel **puzzled and difficult to figure out the\nanswer**.\n\nThe ～ part can be a **wh-question** or **alternative question** , which are\noften accompanied by いったい. It may also be a **yes-no question** or\n**alternative question** , which is often accompanied by ほんとうに. It is also\ncommon to use it to show **your curiosity or impatience**.\n\n```\n\n 結局何なのですか\n いったい何が問題なの\n \n```\n\n## 3. なんで～なのか type\n\nA special の is trivially used in **wh-questions**. I think it is similar to\nいったい～なのか type, but the degree of perplexity is very low --- as far as you have\nused your brain, you can add の. This means, you can almost always add の.\n\n```\n\n どこへ行ったの\n いつ始まるのですか\n 誰がやったの\n \n```\n\nOne of the restrictions I have noticed is that you do not use this type of の\nwhen the wh-word is immediately before (です)か, such as 何時ですか, だれですか, なんでですか,\nnor when the wh-word modified a noun that is immediately before (です)か, such as\n何時のことですか, 誰の財布ですか, etc. In other words, **the wh-word must be adverbial**. It\nfollows that when you convert a ～なのですか question to ～のは～ですか form, you do not\nadd an additional の.\n\nAnother restriction I found is that you do **not** use this の when it does not\nmake much sense to use your own mind to figure out the answer, for example\n\n```\n\n お名前は何とおっしゃいますか\n (A teacher asks a student) 88と99を足すといくつになりますか\n (When taking the order) 何になさいますか\n \n```\n\n## 4. ～で～なのか type\n\nAnother special の similar to なんで～なのか, except that the なんで part replaced by a\nnoun. ～ is a **yes-no question**. This の is used when the **focus of the\nquestion is adverbial**.\n\n```\n\n この時計は、ネットで買ったの\n 今日は、車で来たのですか\n \n```\n\nThee function of this の might be similar to つまり～なの（か）, which is used to\nexpress your speculation and ask for confirmation, but it is just trivially\nused and does not have much implication.\n\nJust like なんで～なのか, の is not necessary in some cases.\n\n```\n\n 次は高瀬駅に止まりますか？\n \n```\n\nNotes: This function of の seems related to ～のではない, and mentioned as 否定のスコープ in\nresearch books. But I disagree because の is not necessary for this function.\n\n## 5. Politeness concerns\n\nAlthough の does not change the meaning of a sentence, there are times you have\nto use it to sound natural.\n\nAs far as I know, you should usually use の in cases 1. つまり～なの（か） and 2.\nいったい/ほんとうに～なのか.\n\nAs for 3. なんで～なのか and 4. ～で～なのか, の is usually obligatory in plain forms (だ体),\nand less important in polite forms (です・ます体). When it does not make much sense\nto figure out the answer by yourself, you may want to or have to avoid the use\nof の.\n\nI think the main purpose of using の in plain forms is to expresses your\nemotions, like curiosity, intimacy, etc. It seems that の and other sentence-\nfinal sentences are more common in informal and plain forms than formal and\npolite forms. For example, you often have to say ～だよ to sound natural where\n～です is sufficient.\n\nSometimes, questions with の sound friendly, while those without any sentence-\nfinal particles may come off as curt and rude.\n\n```\n\n 誰がした\n どこへ行く\n 何をする\n \n```\n\n(どこへ行きますか may still be impolite because asking someone's intention is\ngenerally considered improper.)\n\nEven when の is not necessary, some people consider using の as humbler and\npoliter.\n\n```\n\n 先生、この漢字はどう読むのですか\n \n```\n\nBut sometimes, using の when it is unnecessary may make you sound impatient,\npushy, or like interrogating.\n\nThe Japanese language itself is changing over time. It seems that in\ncontemporary usage, 何で, なぜ and どうして are always paired with の. But this\ntendency was less prominent several decades ago.\n\n## 6. Indirect Questions\n\nYou can follow the same rules above. But indirect questions can be considered\nas abstract nouns, so sentence-final particles are not really necessary. の can\nbe omitted.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-08T11:51:32.560",
"id": "19002",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-09T05:27:04.247",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4833",
"parent_id": "18613",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 18613 | null | 18994 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18619",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm new to Japanese language. I was looking for a way to ask \"what class are\nyou in?\" or similar (not sure if that's the right way to translate it to\nJapanese, but the idea is to ask him what class is he taking in this precise\nmoment, considering we're in different schools and we're texting).\n\nSo far I've found threads here in Stack Exchange but they refer to the verb\n\"attend\" or \"to be registered\" rather than what I want to say.\n\nI ended up with the sentence:\n\n> nani no kurasu wa anata ga imasu ka (sorry no hiragana on my computer's\n> keyboard)\n\nHe understand what I meant, but I'm not sure that was right. What's the right\nway to ask this?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T15:00:16.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18618",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T16:18:02.007",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-09T15:50:56.270",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "5230",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Verb used for \"being in a class\"",
"view_count": 380
} | [
{
"body": "You could say something like\n\n> * 今の{授業・クラス}は？\n> * 今なんの{授業・クラス}？\n> * 今出席の{授業・クラス}は？\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T16:05:09.013",
"id": "18619",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T16:18:02.007",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-09T16:18:02.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18618",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18618 | 18619 | 18619 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18625",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English, when giving directions, there are two possible constructions you\ncan use when telling someone which road to use for a given segment of the\ntrip:\n\n * 'take', which refers to the entire journey along that road ('take I-35 to 183')\n * 'get on', which only refers to the beginning point of the journey along that road - you have to then explicitly refer to the end as well with 'get off' or 'go to' or something ('get on I-35 and get off at 183')\n\nThe first one corresponds just fine to Japanese 通る, but is there a Japanese\nequivalent of the second? I can imagine multiple options (at the very least 乗る\nor 入る, depending on the metaphor being used), but I don't think I've ever\nactually come across a word for this.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T16:39:54.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18620",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T19:51:51.583",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "'Get on' a road",
"view_count": 188
} | [
{
"body": "Informally, we say 「～～に[乗]{の}る」 or 「～～に[入]{はい}る」.\n\nFormally and officially, we say 「～～に[進入]{しんにゅう}する」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T19:51:51.583",
"id": "18625",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-09T19:51:51.583",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18620",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18620 | 18625 | 18625 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18639",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "This is potentially much simpler than I'm expecting but when simply ordering\nevents within a sequence are there any contextual differences between using ～て\nand ～てから?\n\nFor example, if I was talking about my morning routine and wanted to say I eat\nbreakfast and then brush my teeth I could say it using either ～て or ～てから.\n\n> 毎朝、朝ごはんを食べ **て** 歯を磨きます。 \n> Every morning I eat breakfast and brush my teeth.\n>\n> 毎朝、朝ごはんを食べ **てから** 歯を磨きます。 \n> Every morning I brush my teeth AFTER I eat breakfast.\n\nMy interpretation is that meaning wise, these two sentences are essentially\nthe same, first I eat my breakfast then I brush my teeth. Is this correct?\nDoes ～てから place emphasis on one of the two events over the other or are these\njust two different ways of saying the same thing? How are these sentences\ndifferent? In a situation like this why would I choose one over the other, is\nit simply a stylistic choice? Is there some nuance I'm missing here?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-09T19:49:44.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18624",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-01T18:50:35.483",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-10T03:16:23.260",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 16,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"て-form",
"particle-から"
],
"title": "～て vs ～てから for sequencing activities",
"view_count": 3246
} | [
{
"body": "It's simply that `てから` puts a strong emphasis on the order of the actions. `て`\nis just an enumeration and doesn't necessarily imply ordering.\n\n> 味噌汁を飲んでご飯を食べる。 Drink miso soup and eat rice. (both happen, maybe together,\n> maybe one after the other, but we can't say - they're just 2 parts of a same\n> group of actions)\n>\n> 味噌汁を飲んでからご飯を食べる。 _First_ drink miso soup, and _then_ eat rice. (there's no\n> way rice eating happens before miso soup drinking)\n\nTrying to reverse the clauses makes the difference evident:\n\n> ご飯を食べて味噌汁を飲む。 Eat rice and drink miso soup. (same meaning)\n>\n> ご飯を食べてから味噌汁を飲む。 _First_ eat rice, and _then_ drink miso soup. (opposite\n> meaning)\n\nPrefer `てから` to explicitly specify the order things happen (giving\ninstructions is a good example - but there's a lot of other valid use cases).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T00:29:06.503",
"id": "18628",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-10T00:29:06.503",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4533",
"parent_id": "18624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "This question is trickier than it may appear to many Japanese learners and\nhere is why.\n\nOP's first sentence means what s/he stated in English not only because 「て」 was\nused but also because the two activities happen to be those that physically\ncould **not** take place simultaneously -- \" **brush teeth** \" and \" **eat**\n\".\n\n「て」 can certainly signify the sequence of activities, but it can also signify\n\" **juxtaposition** \".\n\nSee definition 一-5 in\n[デジタル大辞泉「て」](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%A6?dic=daijisen&oid=12537100)\n\nThis means that if the two activities chosen to form the example sentences had\nbeen \" **eat breakfast** \" and \" **watch TV** \", which could easily be\nperformed simultaneously, the 「て」 would have been ambiguous in function and\nmeaning. If one of those two activities still took place before the other,\nusing 「てから」 would have been the only possible choice in order to clarify the\nsequence.\n\nWe would often say something like:\n\n> [朝]{あさ}はいつも[朝]{あさ}シャンして、コーヒー[飲]{の}んで、[新聞読]{しんぶんよ}んで・・・みたいな[感]{かん}じかなあ。\n\nWhen a native Japanese speaker says this, the 「て/で」(depends on verb) would\noften be for juxtaposition, and not necessarily for sequence. The three\nactivities mentioned could take place in any order.\n\nThat is the difference between 「～～て」 and 「～～てから」.\n\n＊「朝シャン」 is a slangy/colloquial word for \"shampoo in the morning\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T00:56:50.827",
"id": "18639",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-01T18:50:35.483",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-01T18:50:35.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 17
},
{
"body": "1.\n\n> 毎朝、朝ごはんを食べて歯を磨きます。 \n> Every morning I eat breakfast and brush my teeth.\n\n2.\n\n> 毎朝、朝ごはんを食べてから歯を磨きます。 \n> Every morning I brush my teeth AFTER I eat breakfast.\n\nThese two translation perfectly works for Japanese people. \nMost of Japanese choose 1. \n2 a little bit sounds like foreigner or children .",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-11T13:35:18.930",
"id": "29168",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-11T13:35:18.930",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11680",
"parent_id": "18624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "Another difference is that てから implies volitional actions, like \"After\nstudying I'm going to eat some icream\". It's more about planning than about\nsimply listing actions. That's why, for example, only てから can be used in case\nof command, suggestion etc: \n\n * 勉強が終わってからテニスをしましょう\n * ~~勉強が終わってテニスをしましょう~~\n * 勉強が終わってから遊びなさい\n * ~~勉強が終わって遊びなさい~~",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-03-31T18:41:44.760",
"id": "93920",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-31T18:41:44.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39646",
"parent_id": "18624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18624 | 18639 | 18639 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "56117",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm having some trouble with this beautiful passage from the _Kana Preface_ to\nthe _Kokinshū_ , which is talking about us (spaced for clarity):\n\n> 1 人まろ なくなりにたれど、 \n> 2 うたの こと ゝどまれるかな。 \n> 3. たとひ とき うつり こと さり、 \n> 4. たのしび かなしび ゆきかふとも、 \n> 5. この うたの もじ あるをや。 \n> **6. あをやぎの いと たえず、 \n> 7. まつの はの ちりうせず して、 \n> 8. まさきのかづら ながく つたはり、 \n> 9. とりのあと ひさしく とどまれらば、** \n> 10. うたの さまを（も） しり、 \n> 11. ことの こゝろを えたらむ人は、 \n> 12. おほぞらの 月を みるがごとくに、 \n> 13. いにしへを あふぎて いまを こひざらめかも。\n\nThe Iwanami and Shogakukan anotated editions tell us two pieces of cultural\ncontext needed to understand it:\n\n 1. The modifier clauses starting each line in 6-9 are traditional images (序詞) for the things that follow: green willow threads for \"not ceasing\", pine needles for \"not scattering\", the [_masaki-no-kazura_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trachelospermum_asiaticum) vine for \"reaching long\", and bird tracks for \"lasting a long time\". It may seem strange that bird tracks would be an image for 久しく とどまる, but this is due to the fact that:\n 2. 鳥の跡 is [a conventional metaphor](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/161301/m0u/%E9%B3%A5%E3%81%AE%E8%B7%A1/) for \"written characters\" (due to the legend that Cangjie invented characters by imitating the footprints of plovers). So this particular image also echoes the point of line 5 above.\n\n(grammar note: if とどま **れ** らば seems weird, it's because ら here is the 未然形 of\nthe perfective/progressive suffix, り.)\n\nNow here's Lamarre's translation:\n\n> Although Hitomaro has gone, the acts of songs have remained. Even though\n> eras shift and deeds pass, and delights and sorrows come and go, the\n> characters ( _moji_ ) of songs continue. Should **they** be retained **as**\n> changeless **as** birdtracks and transmitted **as** long **as** rampant\n> vines, **just as** the evergreen needles never scatter and vanish, **just\n> as** the threads of green willows always trail, then the people who know the\n> designs of songs and obtain the hearts of words surely will look up to the\n> high ages and yearn for this day, just as we look to the moon in the great\n> heavens. _[emphasis mine]_\n\nA bit liberal in some aspects, and it glosses over the \"bird\ntracks=characters\" motif, but my question is regarding the parts in bold. I\ndon't see how we came from the morphology and syntax of 6-9 to an\ninterpretation where:\n\n * The _moji_ or _uta_ of the previous sentence (\"they\") is supposed to be the subject of the conditional ( _todomarer **aba**_ ), and\n * The 4 images ( _aoyagi_ , _matsu-no-ha_ , _masaki-no-kazura_ , _tori no ato_ ) are targets for the condition: \"if they last as long as the bird tracks\"… (and not, as I'd expect from the isolated clause: \"if the bird tracks last long\"…)\n\nI've checked the modern translations/explanations in Iwanami and Shogakukan,\nand also the Portuguese one by Wakisaka, and they all agree on this point;\ne.g. Shogakukan:\n\n> **この歌が** 青柳の糸の絶えぬ **ごとく** […]鳥の跡の久しく残る **ことくに** 、長く後世に伝わりますならば […]\n\nBut I'm not used to Classical, so I don't understand where are the ごとくs coming\nfrom…\n\nTL;DR: In the first citation above, why does 鳥の跡久しくとどまれらば translate to \"if the\npoems last as long as the bird tracks\" and not just \"if the bird tracks last\nlong\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T00:18:49.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18627",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-24T13:41:57.760",
"last_edit_date": "2018-01-24T13:41:57.760",
"last_editor_user_id": "622",
"owner_user_id": "622",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax",
"conditionals",
"classical-japanese",
"morphology"
],
"title": "Classical: On the subject of a sentence with 連用形/て clauses + ば condicional",
"view_count": 203
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not really for the suggested translation, so I'm going to translate it\nmyself.\n\n 1. Although other people and I will be gone,\n 2. the events in the songs will remain.\n 3. Even if time shifts and things leave,\n 4. (even if) delights and sorrows come and go,\n 5. (how could I deny) that the characters of this song will be there\n 6. If the threads of green willows never disconnected,\n 7. (if) the pine needles never scattered,\n 8. (if) the masaki-no-kazura vine reached long,\n 9. (if) the birdtracks were retained for long,\n\n10-13. The people who know the designs of songs and obtain the hearts of words\nWOULD NOT look up to the high ages as if to look at the moon in the misty sky\nand yearn for this day",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T03:15:26.467",
"id": "18630",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-10T03:15:26.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18627",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I had forgotten to post it, but here's an answer given to me independently by\n[Matt Treyvauld](http://no-sword.jp) and by my bungo teacher, Dr Junko Ota\nfrom São Paulo University.\n\nThe four images above aren't syntactically connected to anything else; they're\nkind of \"floating\" in the text, as purely evocative illustrations. This effect\nmay be approximated with modern punctuation:\n\n> Should these characters— _threads of the green willow!_ —never cease, and—\n> _needles of the pine!_ —never scatter, and— _vines of the jasmine!_ —reach\n> long, and— _tracks of Cangjie's bird!_ —perpetuate unto posterity…\n\nBecause the imagistic clauses are free-floating, the verb phrases of lines\n6–10 are all modifying the implied subject _kono Uta no Moji_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-01-22T15:19:22.217",
"id": "56117",
"last_activity_date": "2018-01-22T15:19:22.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "622",
"parent_id": "18627",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18627 | 56117 | 18630 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18631",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen both:\n\n> 授業を受ける\n>\n> 授業を取る\n\nMeaning:\n\n> \"Take a class\"\n\nIs there a difference in usage, nuance, or meaning?\n\nFor example, if I want to write:\n\n> He/she will probably take the beginner's class. \n> (ビギナーの授業を受ける・取るかもしれません。)\n\nwhich would be more appropriate?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T01:20:25.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18629",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-02T22:07:36.630",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between 授業を受ける and 授業を取る",
"view_count": 2774
} | [
{
"body": "\"授業を受ける\" refers to the act of being in class while a class is in session. You\nshould mentally picture you being in a classroom at the very moment when the\nteaching is going on.\n\n\"授業を取る\" on the other hand refers to the act of registering for a class, for a\nsemester for example. It need not involve your being present in a classroom.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T09:21:08.623",
"id": "18631",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-02T22:07:36.630",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-02T22:07:36.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "18629",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 17
}
] | 18629 | 18631 | 18631 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm having trouble understanding sentences containing 「なんて」\n\nHere are some of them that I've encountered today:\n\n> 漫画 **なんて** つまらない\n\nand\n\n> あまりにも刑事 **なんて** 職業に似合わない",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T14:33:07.140",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18634",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-10T14:33:07.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "What does なんて mean?",
"view_count": 258
} | [] | 18634 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18636",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've heard in anime that close friends greet each other saying 'yo', as if it\nwere the same in English when you say \"yo!\". I've been searching how to write\nit, but I have only found the common ways to greet (like `konichiwa`, etc).\nDoes it have a kanji or do you write it using the hiragana `よ`?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T15:58:55.287",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18635",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-10T16:31:15.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5230",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"greetings"
],
"title": "Greeting a friend saying 'yo'",
"view_count": 6398
} | [
{
"body": "よ！ Only hiragana. You can find this kind of things by looking at online\ndictionaries like <http://jisho.org/>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T16:31:15.510",
"id": "18636",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-10T16:31:15.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7148",
"parent_id": "18635",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18635 | 18636 | 18636 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18665",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Up to now my understanding of ~てくる has been very vague. No matter how many\nexplanations I read, in practice my translations always feel uneasy. Here are\na few unresolved doubts I have:\n\n * From what I understand ~てくる signifies inception or continuation depending on the verb with which it's used. How can I tell which verbs entail which meaning? From what I understand the former meaning is more aligned with changes in state (なってくる, 分かってくる, 太ってくる, etc.), wheres the latter comes in to play with verbs that involve activity (like 押してくる and 運動してくる). \n\nMy first question is regarding \"state verbs\". When てくる (as opposed to other\ntenses) is attached to words of this class of verbs the meaning is always\n\"start to ~\", correct? So \"あなた、 いつか私を愛してくる” means \"You will come to love me in\ntime\"; and \"私は義理を感じてくる” translates to \"I start to feel a sense of duty\"? Can\n\"感じてくる\" not mean \"continue to feel\", that is, without the implication of\ninception?\n\nMy questions concerning \"activity verbs\" (not really sure of the correct terms\nhere) are much the same. \"運動してくる\" means \"continue to exercise\" and \"押しこんでくる\"\nmeans \"continue to push in\", I think. Is the concept of inception altogether\nabsent? Would it be incorrect to translate those lines as \"start to exercise\"\nand 'start to push in\" respectively\"?\n\n * I'm under the impression that when てくる is attached to a verb which indicates a process of change, inception is signified; whereas when it is attached to a verb that doesn't involve change (like 押す or 泣く) the indication is continuation. Could someone better explain the difference between verbs which entail either inception or continuation? \n\n * When it comes to verbs which involve change ~てきた is usually translated to English as either has~ or has begun to~, for example, \"私は太ってきた\" is translated as either \"I have begun to get fat\" or \"I have become fat\". To me, those two translations offer two different meanings, yet I often see such translations used interchangeably regarding that verb and others like it. The former translation indicates a change has started and is continuing in the present, right? The latter states a change has completed and the results of said change are persisting in the present. Clearly I'm misunderstanding this kind of usage of ~てきた. Why are these differing translations used seemingly interchangeably? \n\nWhile these aren't are all my doubts concerning ~てくる, they are the largest.\nPlease help me better understand.",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T17:34:49.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18637",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T23:53:11.420",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T10:29:37.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "4187",
"owner_user_id": "4187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "Some questions regarding ~てくる (edited)",
"view_count": 1979
} | [
{
"body": "～てくる has those meanings.\n\n 1. to do something and come back here\n 2. someone does something toward the speaker\n 3. gradual change ([edit] or accumlation of acts)\n\nSo, 運動してくる makes sense only when it's used in the meaning of 1.\n\nAs for difference between ～てくる and ～てきた, the former means the gradual change\nprogresses from now on, and the latter indicates a gradual change that started\nbefore now. If you stand in the course of the change, you can say either,\nthough the focus is different.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T02:38:41.280",
"id": "18659",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T23:53:11.420",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-13T23:53:11.420",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18637",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Note:I cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information below so take it with\na grain of salt. Any comments that point out inaccuracies would be\nappreciated.\n\nWhile I can't fully answer your question because I'm still learning myself, I\ncan still provide some information that you don't know. I haven't found a\ntextbook that goes into depth about the usage either which is very annoying.\n\nMaggie does explain some concepts of the usage but in my opinions doesn't go\ninto enough detail[link](http://maggiesensei.com/2010/03/13/requested-\nlesson-%E3%80%8C%E3%80%9C%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%81%8F%EF%BC%8B%E3%80%9C%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B%E3%80%8Dteiku-\ntekuru/)\n\nI'm not sure how much Japanese you can read but anyway.\n\n[link](http://coffeejp.com/article/yufa/2007-06-05/article_1115.html)\n「～てくる」は、物理的に、また、心情的に、ものごと・状況などが話の中心点（ときに話し手であったり聞き手であったりします）のほうに近づくという意味合いを表します。\n\n意志動詞（食べる、見る、する、など）に「～てくる」が付くと、「ある動作をして、また、話し手／聞き手のところに戻る」（見てくる。聞いてくる。上例（５））という「順次的動作」を表します。\n\nまた、（９）や「これまでずっと我慢してきた。」のように「動作の継続」を表すこともできます。\n\n一方、(11)のように無意志動詞（落ちる、なる、など）に付くと、発話時までにおける「状態変化の出現」（例：寒くなってくる。少し太ってきた。世の中が変わってきた。）を表します。\n\nThe gist if you can't follow the above is that the different uses depend on\nwhether the verbs are 意志 or 無意志 with verbs like 食べる、見る、する being 意志 and 落ちる、なる\nbeing 無意志. With 意志 verbs the usages would correspond to usage (2) and (4) from\nbelow and 無意志 would correspond to (3) and (5).\n\nHere's the definitions from\n[Excite](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_kuru_-070).\nTry to read these definitions and then understand which usage these examples\nfall under(you can check which usage is which because it shows them on their\nwebsite)\n\n「台所で変な音がしたからちょっと見てくるよ」\n\n「生まれてからずうっとこの村で暮らしてきた」\n\n「いつも，ひとに迷惑をかけるな，といってきたはずだ」\n\n「眠くなってきた」\n\n「少年がこっちへ走ってきた」\n\n「いけない，大事な書類をうちに忘れてきた」\n\n「蜂が飛んできた」\n\n「うちへ帰ってカバンを置いてきます」\n\n「生まれてくる子供のために」\n\n「出るとき玄関の鍵はきちんと掛けてきたはずです」\n\n(1) 話し手の方へ向かって動作が行われ，その話し手の方へ近づく意を表す。\n\n(2) （すぐに現在地に戻ることを前提にして）別の場所へ行って動作を行う意と，現在地に至る前に別の場所である動作を完了・実現した意を表す。\n\n(3) ある事態が出現し，またある現象が現れる意を表す。\n\n(4) 動作が継続・反復されて現在に至るまで続く意を表す。\n\n(5) 事態が進行してある段階に至る意を表す。\n\nI hope this comment will at least benefit you in some way although it won't\nfully explain the usage.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T19:02:39.453",
"id": "18665",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T19:02:39.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"parent_id": "18637",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18637 | 18665 | 18659 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "These other apposition-with-name variants are readily apparent to me:\n\nName as appositive genitive\n\n> 富士の山 = the mountain of Fuji\n\nName modified by non-restrictive appositive\n\n> 私の友人のAさん = A-san, my friend, / A-san, a friend of mine,\n>\n> 私の父であるB = B, my father,\n\n(Note: I know that the above two are often translated as the below, but I'm\ninterested in grammatical equivalence, if possible.)\n\nName as restrictive appositive\n\n> Aさんという私の友人 = My friend A-san\n\n* * *\n\nWhat about a name used as a non-restrictive appositive?\n\n> ? = My father, B,\n\n`? Bという私の父` doesn't sound right to me, but my ear could be deceiving me.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-10T18:37:14.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18638",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-28T07:03:40.350",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5247",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How would a name be used as a non-restrictive appositive?",
"view_count": 244
} | [
{
"body": "Just like you said 「[富士]{ふじ}の[山]{やま}」, you can say 「[父]{ちち}の(his name)」. That\nis completely natural and grammatical. 99% of the time, we would not add a\npronoun and say 「私の父の(his name)」.\n\n「Bという私の父」 does sound more than strange. You have a good ear.\n\n「Bという父」, however, would be possible in certain contexts. You could use it if\nyou wanted to emphasize your father's name, for instance, in a composition or\nspeech in which you talk about your father. You could say something like:\n\n「(father's name)という父を[持]{も}って、[本当]{ほんとう}に[幸]{しあわ}せです。」\n\nObviously, though, that is not something you would say very often.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T01:23:56.940",
"id": "18640",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T03:11:09.460",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T03:11:09.460",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18638",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "“私の父、B” is common in modern Japanese.\n\n“Bという私の父” sounds as if you have several fathers and one is named B.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T14:02:48.587",
"id": "19248",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T14:02:48.587",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "18638",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18638 | null | 18640 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18646",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "「食{た}べる」 can be negated as 「食べない」. 「美{うつく}しい」 can be negated as 「美しくない」. etc.\netc.\n\nCan you negate 「べき」as in: \n「明日は受験なので、勉強するべきです。」( _Since you are taking a test tomorrow, you should\nstudy._ ) \n「明日は受験なので、遊ぶべき___。」( _Since you are taking a test tomorrow, you **should not**\nplay around._)\n\nEvery part of speech in Japanese seems negatable, but I can't figure-out how\nto negate 「べき」。「遊ばないべきです」 is not the answer I am looking for.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T03:41:29.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18642",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T20:53:07.257",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T03:50:26.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "4835",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "How to negate \"べき\"? (ie. \"should not\")",
"view_count": 3160
} | [
{
"body": "There is a word that is not used so frequently in everyday speech but that\nnonetheless performs this task: べからず. You use it in the same was as べき/べし. An\nexample on alc shows the following sentence:\n\n> 自然を侮るべからず。 \n> Don't underestimate nature.\n\nI am not a native of course, so I can't comment on precisely where you should\nand shouldn't use it, but I'd say in most situations, unless you know it's OK\nto use it, you should just opt for the simpler ～べきではない or ～しないこと or ～してはいけない\nor something similar (aka see 非回答者's post). In general searching I see it also\nused in the phrase 「べからず集」 to refer collectively to things you should not do\n(like as a list).",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T03:59:09.263",
"id": "18643",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T04:43:52.417",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T04:43:52.417",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "18642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Most naturally, you can use one of the two below.\n\n「[遊]{あそ}ぶべきでない。」\n\n「遊ぶべきではない。」\n\nThe second one places more emphasis on the negation.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T04:23:25.303",
"id": "18644",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T04:23:25.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "べき is a fun part of modern Japanese grammar with odd rules probably best\nexplained using the historical explanation.\n\n# History\n\nべし used to be a 助動詞{じょどうし} (auxiliary).\n\n**Connecting to things before it:** べし followed the 終止形{しゅうしけい} (conclusive\nform) normally, and with ラ変{へん} verbs it followed the 連体形{れんたいけい} (adnominal\nform). (NB: One could think of it as _u_ being part of the morpheme: _-ube-_.)\n\n**Connecting to things after it:** べし inflected like an adjective:\n\n> 未然形 ｏ べから \n> 連用形 べく べかり \n> 終止形 べし ｏ \n> 連体形 べき べかる \n> 已然形 べけれ ｏ \n> 命令形 ｏ ｏ\n\n**Evolution:** べし did not evolve like a normal adjective would (i.e., become\nべい and end be able to sentences), but instead did something weird, presumably\ndue to its status as a 助動詞 and not a 形容詞.\n\n# Now\n\nCurrently, べき behaves like this:\n\n**Connecting to things before it:** べき still behaves completely like a 助動詞 in\nthis sense -- you need a fully surfaced verb to connect it to:\n\n> ｘ猫だべき \n> ｘ猫なべき \n> ｘ猫のべき \n> ｘ猫べき \n> ｏ猫であるべき\n>\n> ｘ熱いべき \n> ｏ熱くあるべき\n\n**Connecting to things after it:** This is the odd bit. べき behaves a lot like\n同じ when connecting to things after it: For nominals, べき it connects directly.\nWhen concluding sentences, it takes the copula (which can be ∅ in informal\nspeech, but I think most people think of the copula still being there).\n\n> やるべきこと \n> 行くべきだ\n\n(Side note: there is also べし still around for ending sentences which people\nuse when trying to sound archaic or pompous or whatever, but amusingly, some\npeople say べしだ which means some people treat it as a noun also.)\n\n# Your question\n\nAs written in other answers, but now with reasons:\n\n * You cannot use ないべき, because べき needs to attach to a fully-surfaced verb, and there is none in ない (it is a 助動詞). なくある is not acceptable (because it is the 助動詞「ない」 not the 形容詞「無い」).\n * You can use the old way of negating べき, which is べからず, but of course you will sound archaic if just using it in normal speech, like you're saying a proverb or quoting something.\n * The new way of negating it is by negating the copula: べきでない／べきではない.\n\nHowever, there is a lingering thing that needs to be discussed:\n\n> You should not [eat the cake]. ⇒ You shouldn't eat the cake. \n> You should [not eat the cake].\n\nIn English (at least in my opinion), there is a subtle ambiguity in focus\nbetween \"You should not eat the cake.\" One way to read it is that there is an\naction, and you should not take it. The other way is that there is an action\nof not doing something, which you should take. The former way can be\ncontracted but the latter cannot.\n\n(If you can't tell the difference, consider the dialogue: \"Should I eat the\ncake, or should I not eat the cake?\" \"You should not eat the cake.\")\n\nThis is of course very subtle. What's the situation in Japanese?\n\nIn Japanese, you use べきでない for both. Since the negation is all the way on the\noutside, it sort of suggests the \"You should not [eat the cake].\" nuance, and\nif there is a situation that really needs the \"You should [not eat the cake].\"\nnuance, you don't have anything like ないべき to use. In the case where I really\ncare about such a nuance, I think I would use ない方がいい.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T06:18:47.207",
"id": "18646",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T20:53:07.257",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T20:53:07.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 19
}
] | 18642 | 18646 | 18646 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.