question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "What is the difference between 勉強する, 習う, 学ぶ, and 学習する?\n\nI've read some explanations in another question but it's still not clear\nenough to me how they are different.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T05:05:09.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18645",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-18T22:34:47.960",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-18T22:34:47.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "6986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 28,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Differences between 勉強する、習う、学ぶ and 学習する?",
"view_count": 14926
} | [
{
"body": "習う means to be taught something that requires some technical skills or\nknowledge like how to drive a car or school subjects by a teacher. It's\nsynonymous with 教わる.\n\n勉強する is to learn school subjects or to practice drilling exercises about\nschool subjects.\n\n学ぶ・学習する are to learn school subjects or something new that can be a lesson to\nyou.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-12T10:07:48.560",
"id": "18657",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-17T22:56:18.440",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-17T22:56:18.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I will try to explain the expressions in the order that most native speakers\nwould learn them, hoping that that alone might tell the learner something.\n\nThe first one is definitely 「[習]{なら}う」. Any 4-year-old would know what it\nmeans and would be able to use it correctly.\n\n**In order to 習う something, you need a teacher**. Simply put, if you learn\nsomething mostly by **imitating** your teacher, parent, sibling, etc., that\nwould be called 習う. The object of the activity 習う can be anything from\norigami, drawing, writing hiragana, swimming --- anything. It does not need to\nbe an academic subject. If a small kid is learning something under a teacher\nfigure, the kid will say 「～～を習って（い）る」. He will NOT use any of the three other\nexpressions.\n\n(If you feel like you have already \"learned\" something today, that is good\nnews for me, but would that \"learned\" be 習った? I am not your teacher nor did I\nhave you \"imitate\" me. You will find out later on.)\n\nThe next word (actually, an expression because it consists of two words) a kid\nwould learn would be 「[勉強]{べんきょう}する」. **This is THE word out of the four that\nis by far the most often used from elementary school to college**.\n\n勉強する places much emphasis on the time and effort put into learning. The\nsubject of the action would most often be, but not restricted to, school\nsubjects. When your mom tells you to stop playing the game and go study, she\nwill say 「勉強しなさい！」. She will not use any of the other three words. When saying\nsomething like \"How many hours do you study everyday?\", most people would use\n勉強する nearly 100% of the time.\n\nThe next one could be either 「[学]{まな}ぶ」 or 「[学習]{がくしゅう}する」. It could not be\nstressed enough that those are actually bigger words than many J-learners\noften appear to think or to be even taught.\n\n学ぶ places more emphasis on the good result of learning -- mastery, discovery,\netc. -- than 習う or 勉強する. One could 習う or 勉強する for hours and days without\nmaking much progress in quite a few cases. If someone said 「～～を学んだ」, that\nwould usually mean that he actually gained knowledge in the process. 学ぶ is\nused more often in writing than in speaking (unless you are in education and\nyou talk about studying and learning all day everyday).\n\nFinally, 「[学習]{がくしゅう}する」. As I stated above, it is a fairly big word. In\nschools, teachers use it way more often than students do. 学習 sounds more\n\"systematic\" and/or \"carefully planned\" than 勉強.\n\n学習 can be used in both academic and non-academic context. If a baseball player\nkeeps chasing bad sliders from the same pitcher, then he is a\n「学習できない[選手]{せんしゅ}」. 選手 = player.\n\nIt is not only humans who can 学習する. Other animals, too, 学習する different things\nfrom life experiences. We all need to keep 学習する-ing to survive.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T02:00:45.547",
"id": "18658",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-01T00:46:00.863",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-01T00:46:00.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 52
},
{
"body": "Even though it's not in your question, I'm going to throw in another important\ncontextual word. [研究]{けんきゅう}する.\n\nIf you are in graduate school (at least at the doctoral level) or a\nresearcher, you should generally speaking not refer to what you do as\n[勉強]{べんきょう}する, i.e. \"study.\" Instead, you 研究する, i.e. \"do research.\"\n\nThe same basic rule exists in America with the same risks of sounding\npretentious if you 研究する as an undergraduate or 勉強する as a [名誉教授]{めいよきょうじゅ}\n\"Professor emeritus\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T04:39:43.317",
"id": "18660",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T04:39:43.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "18645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18645 | null | 18658 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18648",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Both 昼{ひる} and 正午{しょうご} mean noon, so are they interchangeable?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T10:55:01.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18647",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T12:58:43.183",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T11:00:29.427",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7261",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What's difference between 昼(hiru) and 正午(shōgo)?",
"view_count": 8375
} | [
{
"body": "「正午」 only has one meaning --- \"12:00 p.m.\"\n\n「昼」 has a few different meanings --- \"daytime\", \"12:00 p.m.\", \"lunch\",\n\"afternoon\", etc.\n\nSo, the two words are only interchangeable when talking about \"12:00 p.m. (=\n'noon')\".\n\nStrictly speaking, however, it is always better to use 「正午」 when referring to\n\"noon\" in order to avoid any ambiguity.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T12:38:07.013",
"id": "18648",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T12:58:43.183",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T12:58:43.183",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18647",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "[正午](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/108227/m0u/%E6%AD%A3%E5%8D%88/) is\n'noon' as in 12:00 on a 24h clock.\n\n[昼](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/188633/m0u/%E3%81%B2%E3%82%8B/) can\nhave the same meaning (2 in the dictionary) or just refer to the\nafternoon/daytime in general (1 in the dictionary).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T12:40:09.360",
"id": "18649",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T12:40:09.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3010",
"parent_id": "18647",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18647 | 18648 | 18648 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "From [this\nsong](http://www.animelyrics.com/anime/seireitsukai/bladedance.jis):\n\n> 宙よりも高く 宙よりも高く \n> どこまでも駆け昇っていくの \n> 心は気高く 心は気高く \n> **そのまた先で感じていくの** \n> あの日描いた未来を わたしたちの理想論を \n> 実現(させる) 踊る刃(やいば)達の祭壇へ\n\nCan anyone explain how the line “そのまた先で感じていくの” relates to the rest?\n\nMy rough translation:\n\n> _Higher than the sky, Higher than the sky \n> We will keep ascending to new heights_ \n> **???** \n> _To make the future we dreamed of that day into reality \n> To realise our vision of an ideal world \n> We head to the altar of dancing blades_\n\nThe two lines that I'm not sure of is how to express 心は気高く in English and what\nit means by そのまた先で感じていくの.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T20:33:47.143",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18652",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T08:39:38.897",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T08:39:38.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "Need help understanding 心は気高く / そのまた先で感じていくの",
"view_count": 400
} | [
{
"body": "I think that the problem is that you don't realize that また can be inserted\ninto その先, like\n\n> その先の、その先の、その **また** 先 (のそのまたうーんと先) \n> Further than that, further than _that_ and further than that **again** (and\n> even further than _that_ )\n\nThe lines just before have\n\n> 心は気高く 心は気高く\n\nSo, _beyond_ that place where \"our hearts are sublime\", we'll (actually) \"be\nexperiencing that day, when we painted our future\".\n\n(Note that the part あの日描いた未来を would in a standard sentence come before\nそのまた先で感じていく, like あの日描いた未来をその先で感じていく.)\n\nI'm really bad at translations, but the grammar involving また is straight-\nforward, I think.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T22:14:32.643",
"id": "18653",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T22:20:13.117",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-11T22:20:13.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18652",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I assume that you are looking for the _object_ of the verb \"感じる\", because\nyou're interested in the relationship of this line and the rest of the lyrics.\n\nThere are three verbs (\"感じる\", \"実現させる\", \"踊る\") and two nouns with direct object\nmarker `を` (\"未来を\", \"理想論を\") in the last three lines. When I _read_ these lines,\nthe grammatical relationship of these words was not very clear to me (and I'm\na native Japanese speaker).\n\n 1. \"未来を感じていく\" & \"理想論を感じていく\" & \"実現する (w/o specific object)\" ?\n 2. \"未来を感じていく\" & \"理想論を実現する\" ?\n 3. \"感じていく (w/o specific object)\" & \"未来を実現する\" & \"理想論を実現する\" ?\n\nSo I had to [listen to the song\ndirectly](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4H9Wvli2fY). And the way of singing\nrevealed that the first two interpretations are _very_ unlikely. It sounded\nlike \"そのまた先で感じていくの\" does not strongly relate to the subsequent lines, and the\nobject of 感じていく was not really specified anywhere.\n\nAs a result, \"We'll keep on feeling, at somewhere even further than that\" is\nall that's explicitly written in the line. I'm not sure, but perhaps \"(熱い)想い\"\nor some kind of fighting spirit which is sung all over the lyrics, is the\nimplicit target of 感じる here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-12T03:48:20.173",
"id": "18656",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-12T03:48:20.173",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18652",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18652 | null | 18653 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18655",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this verb:\n\n> 捕【と】らえられていた\n\nIt could have been pretty much any verb really. I tried to parse the different\nforms the verb has been assigned. Here's my process:\n\n捕【と】らえる - (Transitive verb) **To catch**\n\n捕【と】らえられる - (Passive form) - **To get caught**\n\n捕【と】らえられていた - (Passive, past-progressive form) - **Had been getting caught**\n\n**Question** : I want to know if my understanding of these forms (combined) is\ncorrect or not.\n\nIn other words, 捕【と】らえられていた = **Had been getting** caught?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T23:29:47.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18654",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T23:49:39.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"verbs",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Need help parsing combined forms of a verb",
"view_count": 168
} | [
{
"body": "I am afraid that your understanding of the third form is incorrect.\n\n「捕らえられていた」 is the equivalent of the English \" **pluperfect** passive voice\".\nThere is no \"progressive\" expressed in this.\n\nIn English, it would be \"had been caught (and had stayed in captivity since)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-11T23:49:39.057",
"id": "18655",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-11T23:49:39.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18654",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18654 | 18655 | 18655 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I cannot, for the love of my life, understand the difference between\n\n * 下る{くだる}\n\n * 下りる{おりる}\n\n * 下がる{さがる}\n\nDon't they all mean the same, basically? Is there a difference, and if yes,\nhow could I proceed to get it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T11:32:35.570",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18661",
"last_activity_date": "2020-10-05T18:15:51.170",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-14T02:15:21.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "7269",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 20,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between 下る、下りる、下がる?",
"view_count": 6338
} | [
{
"body": "`おりる` and `くだる` both mean to move from a high place to a low(er) place. The\ndifference is that the former focuses on the end point/result, whereas the\nlatter focuses on the movement and/or the course taken. `さがる` means to go down\nor back, often used in relation to some value or standard. You also use it\nwhen a part of something (bodily or other) lowers from its normal position.\n\nHere are a couple of examples from my book (which I can't find in order to\ncredit it):\n\n```\n\n | おりる | くだる | さがる\n ――――――――――――――――――――――――――\n 急いで山を～ | 〇 | 〇 |\n 小舟で川を～ | | 〇 |\n 舞台に幕が～ている | 〇 | | 〇\n 成績が五番～ | | | 〇\n 一歩後ろへ～ | | | 〇\n \n```\n\nHere's a screenshot if it's misaligned in your browser (courtesy of @psosuna)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hWy0g.png)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T04:35:59.723",
"id": "18667",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-06T16:17:53.967",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-06T16:17:53.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18661",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 22
}
] | 18661 | null | 18667 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18664",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As I spend more time in Japan, I pick up habits that I'm not sure are good or\nbad. My question here is about nuance / occasion of usage.\n\nIn formal contexts, how does the impression differ between these two\nlocutions:\n\n> 今の仕事は悪くはないです。\n>\n> 今の仕事は悪くないです。\n\nI get that ~くない is the standard taught to 初級 students of Japanese and that\nくはない is something that appears later.\n\nI'll throw in my guess: for me, 悪くはない sounds like making a judgment more so\nthan 悪くない, but I'm not at all sure if that's right or if there's anything else\nit throws in. I also tend to add です for politeness at the end when using 辞書形\nconstructions in polite contexts so as written above both get the です thrown\nafter.\n\nIn other words, I'm asking what sort of impression difference putting the は\nadds. Obviously you can say 悪くはありません as well. But mainly, I'm trying to\nunderstand how the two expressions might differ in nuance.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T14:10:55.003",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18662",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T23:44:31.403",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"particle-は",
"i-adjectives"
],
"title": "〜くはない vs 〜くない in adjective negations",
"view_count": 5439
} | [
{
"body": "> XXは悪くない。\n\nsounds to me like XX is okay or maybe good.\n\n> XXは悪く **は** ない。\n\nsounds to me like saying:\n\n> XXは悪くない。が、良くもない。(XX is not bad. But it's not good, either.)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T14:45:07.810",
"id": "18663",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T14:45:07.810",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18662",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
},
{
"body": "I would have no choice but to say that there is a difference. Little particles\ndo have that kind of power and influence over much bigger words than\nthemselves.\n\nYou would sound like you are a little more satisfied with your job if you said\n「[今]{いま}の[仕事]{しごと}は[悪]{わる}くないです。」 than when you said 「今の仕事は悪く **は** ないです。」.\n\nThis is a prime example of the contrastive は. What and where is the contrast\nin the sentence 「今の仕事は悪く **は** ないです。」, then? It is left unsaid.\n\nWhen a Japanese-speaker hears or reads a sentence like that using は, he will\ninstinctively \"know\" that a few words were implied but not said. Those words\nwould be something like 「でも、（[特]{とく}に）[良]{よ}く **も** ないです。」. Particles 「は」 and\n「も」 are often used in a pair like that.\n\n「このピザはまずくないです。」 means the pizza is at least average in taste. It may well be a\nlittle better than average.\n\n「このピザはまずく **は** ないです。」 means the pizza is average at best.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-13T14:58:24.767",
"id": "18664",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-13T23:44:31.403",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-13T23:44:31.403",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18662",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 19
}
] | 18662 | 18664 | 18664 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18692",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that the である style of writing is used as a somewhat-formal stylistic\nchoice, often in editorials, and in rare cases, in particular styles of\nspeeches. I remember being taught at some point, though, that when writing in\nである form it is necessary to still use だ as a sentence ender in some\nsituations, but I can't recall what those situations were.\n\nIs this the case and if so, when is it necessary to use だ when writing in である\nform?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T01:51:45.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18666",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-04T14:18:52.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7025",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "If writing in である form, when is it necessary to use だ？",
"view_count": 900
} | [
{
"body": "The question sounds a little vague, so my answer may or may not contain what\nyou wanted to know.\n\nWhether it is the である/だ or です/ます style that you are writing in, you should NOT\nend every sentence with the same word(s). Otherwise, your writing would sound\nmonotonous and boring.\n\nIn the case of である and だ, there is a difference in nuance between the two;\ntherefore you actually have more reason to use both -- namely, clarity -- than\njust avoiding monotonousness and boringness.\n\n**「だ」** tends to sound slightly more intuitive, more subjective and more\ndogmatic than **「である」**. Depending on the statement you are making, one of the\ntwo sentence-enders would generally sound more suitable.\n\nThis does not apply to the です/ます style of writing because there is no\ndifference in nuance (let alone, meaning) between です and ます. The choice is\nautomatic and is not left with the author. It all has to do with what\n[品詞]{ひんし} (= \"part of speech\") directly precedes the sentence-ender.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-17T00:31:56.423",
"id": "18692",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-04T14:18:52.113",
"last_edit_date": "2018-10-04T14:18:52.113",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18666",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18666 | 18692 | 18692 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18669",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the video game \"Tingle's Love Balloon Trip\", a person asks the protagonist\nto catch a certain kind of butterfly. They want the dust from the butterfly's\nwings to use as a kind of fertilizer. The name of this butterfly is 「ゼッコーチョウ」.\nHere is the relevant bit of dialogue:\n\n> ゼッコーチョウ っていう チョウを つかまえて ほしいの。ハネが もえあがるような はでな ルックス なんだって !\n\nNow I know that ちょう means butterfly, but I can't make head or tail of ゼッコー, so\nI'm assuming it must be a pun of some sort.\n\nWhat could be the meaning of this name?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T10:40:18.717",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18668",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-14T10:54:31.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3527",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"puns"
],
"title": "What kind of butterfly is a 「ゼッコーちょう」?",
"view_count": 271
} | [
{
"body": "It is a pun.\n\n「[絶好調]{ぜっこうちょう}」 is a word meaning \"top form\", \"best condition\", etc.\n\nAnd as you said, 「[蝶]{ちょう}」 means a \"butterfly\".\n\nTypes of butterflies are named 「～～蝶」, so there you go.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T10:54:31.760",
"id": "18669",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-14T10:54:31.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18668",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18668 | 18669 | 18669 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18671",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I noticed that both are pronounced the same way and that both have\napproximately the same meaning \"to send\". Is there a slight nuance in the\nusage of both of these versions of \"to send\"? I'm thinking that one might be\nmore related to sending a person somewhere and the other might be more related\nto sending an object somewhere. Or am I completely wrong?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T10:55:46.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18670",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-15T15:19:05.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1286",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs"
],
"title": "what is the difference between 送る and 贈る?",
"view_count": 929
} | [
{
"body": "The difference is rather huge.\n\n「[送]{おく}る」 means to physically \"send by mail or a delivery service.\" What you\ncan send must be a tangible item. It can also be a person that you 送る to some\nplace by a mode of transportation.\n\n「[贈]{おく}る」 means \"to present a person with something\". That something can be\neither tangible or intangible. You can 贈る a favorite saying of yours or your\nown poem to someone. The focus is on the \"presenting\", not on the actual\n\"sending\".\n\n「贈り[物]{もの}」 means a \"gift\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T11:20:29.330",
"id": "18671",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-15T15:19:05.280",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-15T15:19:05.280",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18670",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18670 | 18671 | 18671 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "* 夕焼けに染まる \n * 夕焼けに染められる\n\nI got both examples from\n[here](http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g297897-i85904433-Negombo_Western_Province.html)\nand [here](http://umenokia.exblog.jp/19924401/) respectively. I understand\nwhat these sentences mean, but I'm a little confused as to how sentence\nparticle ’に’ works in these sentences. If both of the 自動詞 and 受身形 make use of\nparticle に, does that mean 自動詞 and 受身形 are exactly the same? If so how could\nwe differentiate the use of 自動詞 or 受身形, or to be clear, why would there be two\ndifferent forms? Shouldn't there at least be like a difference in nuance?\n\nIs there a difference in nuance for both these sentences? Is it that one is\nmore commonly used than the other? Any difference in meaning for both of them?\n\nAlso, how would you understand the use of 'に' here? If we were to translate\nthem literally, do they both mean \"by\" in English? Or is there something else\nI don't know about?\n\nSorry if it sounds like a dumb question, but this has been troubling me for a\nlong time.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T12:35:39.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18672",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-15T18:26:03.763",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-14T12:43:48.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "7273",
"owner_user_id": "7273",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "How should I understand the use of particle に in the context of 受身形 and 自動詞 in these sentences?",
"view_count": 446
} | [
{
"body": "First, a small list of grammar terms needed to read both OP's question and my\nreply.\n\n[自動詞]{じどうし} = intransitive verb\n\n[他動詞]{たどうし} = transitive verb\n\n[能動形]{のうどうけい} = active voice form\n\n[受身形]{うけみけい} = passive voice form\n\nNow, the phrases in question:\n\n> 1) [夕焼]{ゆうや}けに[染]{そ}まる\n>\n> 2) 夕焼けに染められる\n\nOP says \"自動詞 and 受身形\" a few times, so it would not be a typo. The truth is ,\nhowever, **neither** of the two phrases in question is a combination of 自動詞\nand 受身形.\n\n染まる is a 自動詞. = \"to turn color\"\n\n染める is a 他動詞. = \"to dye something (a particular color)\"\n\n「夕焼けに染まる」 is a combination of a 自動詞 and 能動形. Something turns color against or\nbecause of another thing.\n\n↓↓\n\n> \"Something turns color with the evening glow.\" (It is that something that is\n> doing the action.)\n\n「夕焼けに染められる」 is a combination of 他動詞 and 受身形. Something is **made** turn color\n**by** another thing.\n\n↓↓\n\n> \"Something gets bathed by the evening glow.\" (It is the evening glow that is\n> doing the action.)\n\nWe have two different に's here.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T01:53:56.830",
"id": "18674",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-15T09:52:47.073",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-15T09:52:47.073",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18672",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18672 | null | 18674 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If I look in Google Ngrams, I see that the transliteration \"honbu\", meaning\nHQ, basically didn't exist until 1964. But it didn't surpass \"hombu\" until\n1976. I believe Modified Hepburn was introduced in the 1950s, but I am\nwondering when the Library of Congress adopted it as an ALA standard--in maybe\nthe early 1970s? I can't find any dates for this information, though I have\nlooked on the LOC website.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-14T17:18:55.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18673",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-19T20:42:22.070",
"last_edit_date": "2017-03-25T14:57:28.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7275",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"translation",
"history",
"culture",
"rōmaji"
],
"title": "When did LOC adopt modified Hepburn?",
"view_count": 368
} | [
{
"body": "1983.\n\nIn the deepest corners of the Library of Congress website, you can find the\n[Spring 1983 issue of the Cataloging Service\nBulletin](https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeCSB/CSB_020.pdf). On page\n51, you can see the specification calling for the modified Hepburn system for\nromanization.\n\nAn excerpt of the paragraph:\n\n> The modified Hepburn system of romanization as employed in **Kenkyusha's New\n> Japanese-English Dictionary** (3rd and later editions) is used. For the\n> syllabic nasal, \"n\" is always used preceding \"b,\" \"m,\" and \"p.\" Romanization\n> for words of foreign origin follows the American National Standard system\n> for the romanization of Japanese, e.g., ベトナム Betonamu; ヴェトナム Vetonamu.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-05-19T19:47:08.863",
"id": "47591",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-19T20:42:22.070",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-19T20:42:22.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "19206",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "18673",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18673 | null | 47591 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18677",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I've being studying Japanese over 3 years by now, but I don't think I've ever\nencountered a phrase to express \"very little\", like in a humble \"I know\nJapanese language very little\". Can I say 「本当に少し」or anything of this sort? I\njust don't see it being used. Thank you.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T15:34:47.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18676",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T00:57:22.060",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "2922",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How can I say \"very little\" in Japanese",
"view_count": 16416
} | [
{
"body": "How about:\n\n> ほんの少し｜just a little\n\nThe ほん comes from 本 but the examples in my Progressive dictionary are all use\nhiragana.\n\nLogically\n\n日本語はほんの少ししか知らない。= I only know a little Japanese.\n\n(The extra し makes it a little tricky to say)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T15:44:18.487",
"id": "18677",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T00:57:22.060",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-18T00:57:22.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "1556",
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"parent_id": "18676",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "In casual speech, `ちょこっと` is usually used.\n\n> コーヒーは？\n>\n> はい。`ちょこっと`だけです。\n\nIt's more of a modification of `ちょっと` somewhat akin to how we say \"teeny\" to\nmake `tiny` seem even smaller.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T20:58:06.700",
"id": "18682",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-17T05:42:04.270",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "17",
"parent_id": "18676",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In addition to answers above:\n\n * ちょっとしか分からない - I can understand not more than a little.\n * ちょっとだけ分かる - I understand very little only (this can be perceived as a humble phrase which actually means you are positioning yourself as very knowledgeable).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T21:34:39.857",
"id": "18683",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-15T21:34:39.857",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6748",
"parent_id": "18676",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18676 | 18677 | 18677 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How do you say something like: \"There are 8 days until I go on vacation\"? I'm\npretty much confused on the how to say \"x days/hrs/weeks until blank\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T17:45:24.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18678",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-17T18:06:03.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7283",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "How do you say there are \"x\" number of days until some event or something?",
"view_count": 8363
} | [
{
"body": "> 誕生日まで（あと）８日です。 \n> There are 8 (more) days until my birthday.\n\n(Sidenote: ８日 can be pronounced 「ようか」 or 「はちにち」, though I think NHK recommends\n「はちにち」 for time intervals like this.)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T18:54:14.970",
"id": "18681",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-15T18:54:14.970",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18678",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Not a direct translation, but you could say it like\n\n> 今日の[８日後]{よう・か・ご}は旅行(の)スタート！ → 8 days from today is the start of my vacation!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-17T18:06:03.457",
"id": "18699",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-17T18:06:03.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18678",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18678 | null | 18681 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a little clueless with these two sentences right here.\n\n>\n> 景気判断は前月のまま据え置き、消費増税後の駆け込み需要の反動減は「和らぎつつある」とした。ただ反動減が長期化すれば、「景気下押しのリスク」となる可能性を初めて指摘。\n>\n>\n> 政府は７～９月期には自動車の生産・販売や住宅建設などが反動減から脱して景気が上向くことが、来年１０月に消費税率を予定通り１０％に再引き上げするのに欠かせないとみている。\n\nSome of the words I've tried scouring the dictionary but to no avail, 消費増税後の\n**駆け込み需要**? I don't quite understand how 駆け込み relates to 需要 in the sentence.\nHere's another one: 反動減 I know 反動 means reactionary, but what does the 減 do\nhere? I tried looking up for it and nothing showed up. What does it mean in\nthe sentence? How would you translate it?\n\nAlso, does the 政府 here correspond to 再引き上げする or みている? Or is みている simply a\ngrammatical pattern I'm unaware of?\n\nFor context:\n\n> 反動減の長期化懸念 景気判断据え置き ８月経済報告\n>\n>\n> 内閣府は２６日、８月の月例経済報告を公表した。景気判断は前月のまま据え置き、消費増税後の駆け込み需要の反動減は「和らぎつつある」とした。ただ反動減が長期化すれば、「景気下押しのリスク」となる可能性を初めて指摘。反動減からいつ脱するかが、景気回復のカギとなりそうだ。\n>\n> 個別項目では、企業収益は上場企業の４～６月期の業績が伸び悩んだことを受けて、「改善に足踏みがみられる」と判断を引き下げた。\n>\n>\n> 個人消費は「一部に弱さが残るものの、持ち直しの動きがみられる」と判断を据え置いた。大雨など天候不順で百貨店や家電量販店の売り上げが落ちたが、景気全体への影響は限定的だとしている。住宅建設は「減少のテンポが緩やかになっている」と判断を引き上げた。項目によって、判断の上げ下げにばらつきが目立っている。\n>\n>\n> ４～６月期の国内総生産（ＧＤＰ）の実質成長率は増税の影響でマイナス６・８％（年率）と落ち込んだ。政府は７～９月期には自動車の生産・販売や住宅建設などが反動減から脱して景気が上向くことが、来年１０月に消費税率を予定通り１０％に再引き上げするのに欠かせないとみている。\n>\n>\n> 甘利明経済再生相はこの日の会見で、「７～９月期に力強く回復することが大事だ。反動減が底打ちし、回復に向かう動きをしっかりみていきたい」と述べ、反動減の長期化に懸念を示した。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-15T18:47:48.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18680",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T15:16:55.560",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7284",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Trouble with these sentences, subject-verb confusion and difficult words?",
"view_count": 241
} | [
{
"body": "「[駆]{か}け[込]{こ}み」, in this context, means \"last-minute\"; therefore,\n「駆け込み[需要]{じゅよう}」 means \"last-minute demand\". If you are doing something at the\nlast minute, you will have to 駆ける = \"run fast\", won't you?\n\n「[反動減]{はんどうげん}」 means a \"reactionary downturn\".\n\nIn April of 2014, the Japanese consumption tax rose from 5% to 8%, causing a\nlast-minute surge in demand in many industries because many individuals and\ncorporations wanted to save money by purchasing goods before the tax hike took\nplace on April 1. After April, however, we naturally had a reactionary\ndownturn in demand of goods because we had stocked up pretty good before\nApril. 「減」 = the downturn\n\nOn to the next sentence\n「政府は７～９月期には自動車の生産・販売や住宅建設などが反動減から脱して景気が上向くことが、来年１０月に消費税率を予定通り１０％に再引き上げするのに欠かせないとみている。」.\n\nSubject of sentence: [政府]{せいふ} = the Japanese Government\n\nMain verb: みている = To observe (for judgement). There sure is the quotative 「と」\nthere. 「～～とみている」 = \"~~ is the way someone sees it\".\n\nWhat is the administration's judgement? (What is the \"~~\" part?) It is\n「７～９月期には自動車の生産・販売や住宅建設などが反動減から脱して景気が上向くことが、来年１０月に消費税率を予定通り１０％に再引き上げするのに欠かせない」.\n\n(I am not translating any part of it unless you show us your own attempt.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T11:10:55.983",
"id": "18687",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T11:10:55.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18680",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18680 | null | 18687 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "This is in a university context. Professors will be given an extra post\n(mostly in name) and the notification will be sent to them in English. I have\nnot been able to find any examples of how this would be translated/laid out.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T01:33:50.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18684",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T01:33:50.957",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5060",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Can you show any examples of a 兼務発令書 in English?",
"view_count": 109
} | [] | 18684 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18686",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a question about the words ヒーター and ストーブ.\n\nI understand that they are both used to heat rooms. However, I am not sure\nexactly the difference between the two. A Yahoo answer in Japanese says\nsomething about a ストーブ using resources directly to heat and a ヒーター heating\nindirectly, but I don't fully understand.\n\nCould someone explain the difference between a ヒーター and a ストーブ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T02:36:54.543",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18685",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T05:08:06.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Difference between ヒーター and ストーブ",
"view_count": 884
} | [
{
"body": "It might be valuable to preface this by saying that many buildings in Japan do\nnot have any kind of central heating system. They rely on various kinds of\ndiscrete units to provide heating. The difference in the units will be in\ntheir heating mechanisms and the extent to which they can heat a certain area.\n\nTo state the difference very simply, a ストーブ in home use will generally be a\nstandalone unit that sits on the floor and burns some sort of fuel to create\nheat. There are [many types of\nストーブ](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B9%E3%83%88%E3%83%BC%E3%83%96),\nburning wood or coal or natural gas or any variety of fuel, but modern units\nin homes will usually use kerosene.\n\n\n\n[Image source](http://www.kondo-sanko.jp/shouhin/index.php?ID=4060401)\n\nA ヒーター will usually be a sort of space heater. They'll have tubes that are\nheated and glow orange/red, radiating heat. Other sorts exist, like fan\nheaters or the like, but in my experience ヒーター has usually meant the radiating\nkind.\n\n\n\n[Image source](http://item.rakuten.co.jp/ace/1501733/)\n\nThere is a third type of (often) wall-mounted heating device that combines air\nconditioning and heating into one unit. I believe that while stove or heater\nmight have dedicated terms, people use 暖房 more generally with this, i.e.\n暖房を入れる (referring to the エアコン). I'm not sure what mechanism they use to heat,\nbut I'd guess they fall under the fan heater category because they blow warm\nair into the room. Note that 暖房 is a term for all kinds of heating and not air\nconditioning units exclusively.\n\nThere are very likely exceptions to each of these terms that I didn't cover\nand am not aware of, but this has been the difference in my personal\nexperience.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T04:42:29.350",
"id": "18686",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T05:08:06.990",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-16T05:08:06.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "18685",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18685 | 18686 | 18686 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18691",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "If you go to a job interview and say, \"I am a detail-oriented person\", it\ndoesn't come off as a negative trait. But I feel when someone says\n`私は細かい事を気にする人です`, it has some negative connotation to it. Is there a way to\nsay \"a detail-oriented person\" in Japanese that doesn't come off as a negative\ntrait?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T20:34:25.243",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18688",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-17T05:39:24.563",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-17T05:03:21.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4137",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to translate \"a detail-oriented person\"?",
"view_count": 2548
} | [
{
"body": "I think I'd say it like...\n\n> 細部に注意を払います。\n\nThough maybe it'd be a little more humble to say it like...\n\n> 細部に注意を払うように努めています。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T20:48:24.423",
"id": "18689",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T20:55:03.740",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-16T20:55:03.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18688",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I've found \"attention to detail\" as `細部への気配り`. So perhaps you could say\nsomething like `細部への気配り者`.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-16T21:10:29.953",
"id": "18690",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-16T21:10:29.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18688",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You can modify the \"気にする人\" part and say like this:\n\n> 私は細かい事によく気がつく人だと思います。\n\nNow this sounds positive and suitable for presenting yourself.\n\nAnd you can use a more neutral word\n[几帳面【きちょうめん】](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/52781/m0u/) (na-adjective):\n\n> 私は几帳面な性格なので、細かい書類の管理や事務作業は得意です。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-17T00:31:10.533",
"id": "18691",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-17T00:31:10.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18688",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18688 | 18691 | 18691 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18704",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the novel I'm reading now (「キッチン」 by 吉本{よしもと}ばなな), there's this section\nwhere the protagonist is talking about her boyfriend's brother for the first\ntime, introducing him to readers and giving his description. There's also a\nsentence which gives the brother's name:\n\n> 名を、柊という。\n\nI have a problem understanding grammar in this sentence:\n\n * What is the purpose of 「を」 in this sentence? I guess the predicate is implied but I cannot figure out what it could be.\n\n * The sentence ends with 「という」. Should I interpret it as 「と言う」?\n\nLet me know if more context information is required.",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-17T02:57:03.473",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18693",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T23:34:23.363",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T23:34:23.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」",
"view_count": 367
} | [
{
"body": "# The simple answer\n\nThis いう, which you could gloss as \"call\", simply takes two arguments. You can\ncall it a \"accusative-quotative construction\" (which is just a fancy way of\nsaying that there is both an を-marked thing and a と-marked thing).\n\n# The actual answer\n\nTo learn more about these so-called accusative-quotative constructions, let us\nplay with this sentence:\n\n> チョコは非回答者が可愛いと思っている。 \n> tyoko-ha [[hikaitousya-ga kawai-i] to] omot-tei-ru \n> \"Choko thinks that 非回答者 is cute.\"\n\nAnother way to say this is by lifting 非回答者 outside of the downstairs predicate\nand marking it with を:\n\n> チョコは非回答者を可愛いと思っている。 \n> tyoko-ha hikaitousya-wo [kawai-i to] omot-tei-ru \n> \"Choko considers 非回答者 to be cute.\"\n\nNote: I will be alternating \"thinks\" and \"considers\" in English because\n\"considers\" sometimes allows me to build a sentence with similar syntax to the\nJapanese in English while \"thinks\" doesn't always work as smoothly.\n\nAnother way to say it is by using a complex predicate 可愛く思う:\n\n> tyoko-ha hikaitousya-wo [kawai-ku omot]-tei-ru \n> \"Choko considers 非回答者 cute.\"\n\nIn the previous sentence, 非回答者 is _not_ \"lifted\" out of a downstairs\npredicate, because 「ちょこは非回答者が可愛く思っている」 is not grammatical. 非回答者 is simply at\nthe top level.\n\n* * *\n\nThe same sort of thing also works for other predicates, such as\n\n> チョコは非回答者が不満だと思っている。 \n> tyoko-ha [[hikaitousya-ga human da] to] omot-tei-ru \n> \"Choko thinks that 非回答者 is dissatisfied.\"\n>\n> チョコは非回答者を不満だと思っている。 \n> tyoko-ha hikaitousya-wo [[human da] to] omot-tei-ru \n> \"Choko considers 非回答者 to be dissatisfied.\"\n\nYou can also kind of get rid of the inner predicate like we did with 可愛いと→可愛く,\nbut it doesn't work out perfectly:\n\n> チョコは非回答者を不満に思っている。 \n> tyoko-ha hikaitousya-wo human-ni omot-tei-ru \n> \"Choko considers 非回答者 dissatisfactory.\"\n\nNamely, the \"experiencer\" of 不満 is now Choko, not 非回答者.\n\nHowever, this does not hold for all semantically similar sentences. For\nexample, 次郎はその仕事が楽だと感じた→次郎はその仕事を楽に感じた works just fine (i.e., they have the\nsame meaning).\n\nThis is totally my own interpretation, but I think when this transformation\ntakes place, the \"experiencer\" of the verb switches to the nominative.\nSometimes, this can result in a different interpretation, but sometimes, it\nresults in the same interpretation.\n\nIn fact, I think the same happens with 可愛く, it's just \"experiencing\" 可愛い means\nthinking that someone is cute -- there is no other way to experience it. (For\nthe few others I've thought of, this type of argument seems to hold for all\ni-adjectives, but obviously not for all na-adjectives as evidenced by 不満).\n\n* * *\n\nAnyways, after taking you on that long linguistic journey, I'm basically going\nto say that a lot of that isn't really relevant. I just wanted to introduce\nthat there are some verbs which seem to accept を and と simultaneously, and\nthose are the verbs that allow what has historically been described as\n\"raising-to-object\" or \"exceptional case marking\" (which means there are many\nsentences which you can use to get a feel for how the を-marked thing and\nと-marked thing interact).\n\nFinally, to answer the actual question, this いう is one such verb that accepts\nboth an を-marked thing and と-marked thing simultaneously:\n\n> 名を柊という。 \"(He) says (his) name as Hiiragi.\"→\"(He) calls himself\n> Hiiragi.\"→\"His name is Hiiragi.\"\n>\n> 彼を柊という。 \"(I/we) call him Hiiragi.\"→\"His name is Hiiragi.\"\n\nIn this case, と is not really compartmentalizing a predicate, but instead\nacting quotatively. Either way, it's the same thing as we saw before.\n\n* * *\n\n**References** :\n\nUnfortunately, I could not find a reference which exactly discusses things\nusing the perspective I gave, but these are in a very, very close ballpark.\nThey discuss the syntax and semantics of these accusative-quotative\nconstructions in great detail without getting too technical and were very fun\nfor me to read.\n\n * Horn, S. W. (2008). [Semantic constraints on the subject-to-object raising (ECM) construction in Japanese](http://vsarpj.orinst.ox.ac.uk/files/horn.eals.pdf).\n\n * Matsuoka, M. (2012). [On so-called small clause constructions in English and Japanese](http://opac.lib.yamanashi.ac.jp/metadb/up/honkan/14_265-271.pdf).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T04:46:46.630",
"id": "18704",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T05:24:56.667",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18693",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18693 | 18704 | 18704 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18876",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I learned recently that two mora Sino-Japanese words using one character\nalways end in /ki/, /ku/, /i/, /u/, /chi/, /tsu/, or /n/. However, I was also\ntold that 馬【うま】 and 梅【うめ】 are Sino-Japanese. What explains this difference\nfrom the trend? They are older words, but I also realized that, 馬 for\ninstance, only has one mora in Chinese. (Although 梅 has two...) Did they just\nchange over time?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-17T19:23:01.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18700",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T03:27:22.637",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-18T12:08:03.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"history"
],
"title": "History of 馬 and 梅",
"view_count": 266
} | [
{
"body": "As Snailboat mentioned in her comment, [gogen-allguide.com](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/u/uma.html) has a good explanation for said etymologies.\n\nAlthough, I should caution against analyzing Chinese moraically; Chinese is a\nsyllabic language.\n\nWhile 馬{うま} and 梅{うめ} are etymologically borrowings from Chinese, they predate\nany of the three major 音読み classifications (ie, 呉音、漢音、唐音), and are thus\nfunctionally nativized as indigenous Japanese lexemes.\n\nThe understanding is, at the time, Japanese had used a nasalized variant of\n/u/ (ie, /ũ/), which for /ũma/ and /ũme/ surfaced as [mma] and [mme]. Over\ntime, this nasalization was lost, and thus, only the vowel quality /u/\nsurfaced, resulting in our modern /uma/ and /ume/.\n\n(By the by, this nasalized /ũ/ also accounts for Chinese coda /ŋ/ (\"ng\")\nresulting in 音読み /u/, such as:\n\n> 【京】 /*kjiaŋ/ → /ki.ya.ũ/ → /kyou/",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T20:45:37.860",
"id": "18876",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T03:27:22.637",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T03:27:22.637",
"last_editor_user_id": "4229",
"owner_user_id": "4229",
"parent_id": "18700",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18700 | 18876 | 18876 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18706",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Looking at examples on weblio, it looks like maybe 持ち込む is more for things and\n持ってくる is for bringing people along with you, etc?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T02:23:41.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18703",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T06:14:35.653",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-18T02:36:52.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "4660",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "difference between 持ち込む and 持って来る？",
"view_count": 332
} | [
{
"body": "持ち込む is to bring things inside, take something into.\n\n持ってくる is just to bring things.\n\nNone of them are used for people. That would be 連れてくる.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T06:14:35.653",
"id": "18706",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T06:14:35.653",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1065",
"parent_id": "18703",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18703 | 18706 | 18706 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18709",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "They're both \"price\", but I don't see the difference. Even the Kanji appear to\nsuggest similar meanings. Thanks for any advice!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T05:12:58.723",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18705",
"last_activity_date": "2018-06-16T17:43:13.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7300",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 値段 and 価格",
"view_count": 7793
} | [
{
"body": "\"値段\" (mixed _kun-on_ compound) is a rather colloquial word, used in most part\nof our daily life. In most cases, 値段 refers to \"how much we/you have to pay\"\nin individual transactions, from the viewpoint of those who buy or sell the\nitem.\n\n> 慌てて買う前に、値段をよく確かめよう。\n>\n> あのお店でレアなグッズを見つけたけど、値段が高すぎて買えなかったよ。\n\nUsing 価格 in casual conversations like these is not incorrect, but sounds a bit\nunnatural to me.\n\nOn the other hand, the usage of \"価格\" is that of typical 漢語. In serious written\narticles or business conversations, we mainly use 価格:\n\n> 原油産出量の増加に伴い、ここ数年、石油の価格は緩徐な下落傾向にある。\n>\n> 「需要」と「供給」という2つの要素が、小売市場における商品の価格を決定づける。\n\n価格 can construct many longer compound words, such as 希望小売価格, 市場価格, 価格調査. I\ncan't think of similar compounds which contain 値段.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T12:54:25.797",
"id": "18709",
"last_activity_date": "2018-06-16T17:43:13.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18705",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] | 18705 | 18709 | 18709 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't really understand the \"まわりであーだこーだ\" part in the following sentence I\nread in a manga:\n\n> こそこそ人のこと調べたり、 **まわりであーだこーだ** 、女は面倒くさい\n\nDoes まわりで means 人のまわりで?\n\nMy guess for \"あーだこーだ\" is that it means \"making a fuss\", here. Am I getting it\nright?\n\nThank you very much in advance!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T11:18:38.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18708",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T13:40:55.090",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-18T11:21:05.350",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7302",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"meaning",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does まわりであーだこーだ mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 401
} | [
{
"body": "**まわりで:** Oh this is ambiguous... I think the speaker wants to say 「 **俺の**\nまわりで (literally, _around me_ )」 here, but it can be taken in two opposite\nways... \"behind my back\" or \"clinging around me\". I guess the former is the\nlikely interpretation here because it is preceded by \"こそこそ人のこと調べたり\", but I'm\nnot sure.\n\n**ああだこうだと言う:** (((ああ+だ)+(こう+だ))と言う). To say various trivial things. To\nquibble.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T13:40:55.090",
"id": "18711",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-18T13:40:55.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18708",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18708 | null | 18711 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "あいつは自分の嫁が決まってから、この呪縛を解除して自分の子供を産ませようとしてるんだ\n\nWhen this kind of construction (ようとする）is used with things like てから or simple\nte form before it does it then mean that this applies to all of them or only\nthe final verb?\n\nIf we split up the above sentence.\n\nあいつは自分の嫁が決まってから- After he has chosen his wife\n\nこの呪縛を解除して- he will remove/lift/whatever the spell and then\n\nWe end with the final part of the sentence. I know and have seen the usage of\nようとする many times before but when I think about this and I see it in the\nprogressive like this I'm unsure (because he's obviously not trying to make\nthem give birth to his child right this second because all the other steps\nhaven't been completed anyway)\n\nCan anyone clarify this?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-18T23:00:09.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18713",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T01:09:57.893",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Need help with the meaning of this sentence (usage of ようとしている）",
"view_count": 607
} | [
{
"body": "As far as \"pure\" **grammar** , only the last verb phrase\n「[自分]{じぶん}の[子供]{こども}を[産]{う}ませ」 modifies 「ようとしてるんだ」.\n\nIn **meaning** , however, 「あいつ」 does have a 3-step plan: 1) Get a wife. 2)\nRemove the spell. 3) And let her give birth to his child. In this sense, the\nguy is ようとしている all of the three things.\n\nThus, one could say that there are two correct answers, depending on what your\nfocus is.\n\n*Note that the subject of the mini-sentence 「[自分]{じぶん}の[嫁]{よめ}が[決]{き}まる」 is 「嫁」. I mention this because you translated it into \"he has chosen his wife\". While it is a valid translation, I just want to say that you cannot attach 「ようとする」 to 「自分の嫁が決まる」 even if you wanted to because 「自分の嫁が決まる」 is not an action (though \"he has chosen his wife\" is one). I mentioned all this just in case you were fooled by your own translation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T01:09:57.893",
"id": "18714",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T01:09:57.893",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18713 | null | 18714 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18720",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A native speaker told me that: \n泥棒{どろぼう}に、お財布{さいふ} **を** 、盗{ぬす}まれた。 \nis correct.\n\nHowever, I sure think that: \n泥棒に、お財布 **が** 、盗まれた。 \nis correct.\n\nMoreover, I am pretty sure that using the object marker, 「を」, in any 受身形\nsentence is extremely uncommon. What is going on? Is a native speaker telling\nme incorrect Japanese?",
"comment_count": 15,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T01:29:36.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18715",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T07:34:09.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"particles",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "「を」 object marker in this 受身形{うけみけい} sentence",
"view_count": 654
} | [
{
"body": "I might be seeing this too simplistically, but in the first sentence:\n泥棒に財布を盗ぬすまれた (A thief stole my wallet) you are the subject and the wallet is\nthe object, hence the を on the wallet.\n\nIn the second sentence: 泥棒に財布が盗まれた (the/a wallet was stolen by a thief) the\nwallet is the (passive) subject, hence the が.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T07:16:08.533",
"id": "18719",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T07:16:08.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3494",
"parent_id": "18715",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "There are various ways to analyze passives in Japanese grammatically (see\nIshizuka, p. 174), but I will be presenting a specific view which I really\nlike, which is Ishizuka's.\n\nWhen you passivize a sentence in Japanese (by adding -(r)are- to the verb),\nyou\n\n * lift a non-が argument of the active sentence to が, and\n * lift the が argument of the active sentence to に.\n\nThe non-が argument can be anything -- sometimes it's the を argument, sometimes\nthe に argument, sometimes the から argument, or sometimes even a possessive の\nlower down in the structure, etc.\n\n(Note: There is also another type of passive where there is truly a new\nargument added, not pulled out from the original active sentence -- but not\nall native speakers accept them and they aren't needed to discuss this\nquestion. See Ishizuka, p. 263.)\n\n# Your sentences\n\nSo, I would say these are the original active sentences of your passives:\n\n> 泥棒が （私から） 財布を 盗んだ。 \n> ⇒ （私が） 泥棒に 財布を 盗まれた。\n\nNamely, 私から gets promoted to 私が, and 泥棒が gets promoted to 泥棒に. \n(Note: The 私の version is probably just as fine an original sentence for this.)\n\n> 泥棒が 財布を 盗んだ。 \n> ⇒ 財布が 泥棒に 盗まれた。\n\nHere, 財布を gets promoted to 財布が, and 泥棒が gets promoted to 泥棒に.\n\n# Semantic differences\n\nSo, while that is a little syntax which you may or may not believe, is there\nan actual semantic difference between the two constructions?\n\n### Adversarialness\n\nIn general, there is a difference in adversarialness, though in this specific\ncase not really.\n\nThe usual difference is that there is a connotation of the が-marked argument\nin the passive sentence being \"affected\" (which usually gets further\ninterpreted as adversarial due to information structure) when it was\noriginally marked by:\n\n * \"on\" に (e.g., 雨が太郎に降った。⇒太郎が雨に降られた。)\n * の (e.g., 直美がケンの子どもを叱った。⇒ケンが直美に子どもを叱られた。）\n * から (e.g., 妻が夫から逃げた。⇒夫が妻に逃げられた。）\n\nwhile the others (other にs, を, etc.) do not result in the が-marked argument\nbeing \"affected\".\n\nHowever, both of your sentences are adversarial, simply because getting your\nwallet stolen always affects you negatively.\n\nIn English, consider\n\n> John saw Mary entering the building at 6 o'clock.\n>\n> Mary was seen entering the building at 6 o'clock by John.\n\nMary is clearly more negatively affected in the latter.\n\nHowever, in\n\n> A thief stole John's wallet.\n>\n> John had his wallet stolen by a thief.\n\nJohn was negatively affected in both just due to \"thief\" and \"stolen\".\n\nSo while 泥棒に財布を盗まれた。 forces the adversarialness, I think 泥棒に財布が盗まれた。 and\n泥棒が財布を盗んだ。 are equally as adversarial anyways simply due to the words used.\n\n### Person being stolen from\n\nAs yu_ominae points out...\n\n泥棒に財布を盗まれた。 requires an explicit understanding of someone being stolen from /\nthere being a wallet owner. If you look at the syntax, this is because the\nthing in the が-position (which is omitted, but only due to context making it\nclear) is who it is being stolen from or the owner of the wallet.\n\nOn the other hand, 泥棒に財布が盗まれた does not require that understanding, because it\nis really just like the passive in English (\"The wallet was stolen by a\nthief\"), where, while who it is being stolen from could optionally be added as\nan adjunct (私から/\"from me\"), it is not a part of the actual sentence.\n\n# Source\n\nIshizuka, T. (2010). [Toward a Unified Analysis of Passive in Japanese: A\nCartographic Minimalist\nApproach.](http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001036/current.pdf)\n\nRelevant sections are:\n\n * Raising things to が: pp. 67-150.\n * Adversarial connotations: pp. 245-261.\n\nBut the entire thing is quite nice.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T07:22:54.497",
"id": "18720",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T07:34:09.430",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-19T07:34:09.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18715",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 18715 | 18720 | 18720 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18718",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How do you combine a noun phrase with an い-adjective? For example:\n\n> red house: 赤い家\n>\n> house [I] went to last week: 先週に行った家\n>\n> red house [I] went to last week:\n>\n> * 赤い先週に行った家?\n> * 赤く先週に行った家?\n> * 赤いに先週に行った家?\n> * 赤くて先週に行った家?\n> * 先週に行った赤い家?\n>\n\nNote in particular that I don't want 赤い to apply to 先週, which might be glossed\nas \"house I went to last red week\". It's not clear how to make the distinction\nhere.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T04:04:40.810",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18717",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T09:37:06.750",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4016",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"adjectives",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Combining a noun phrase with an adjective",
"view_count": 374
} | [
{
"body": "赤い先週に行った家?\n\nThe house (I) went to last red week.\n\n赤く先週に行った家?\n\nThe house (I) went to last week (but you did it in a red way). <-- Meaning is\nreally weird.\n\n赤いに先週に行った家?\n\nThe house (I) went to last week which belongs to red. <-- This has no meaning\nat all.\n\n赤くて先週に行った家?\n\nThe house (I) went to last week and which was red. <-- This kind of works...\n\n先週に行った赤い家?\n\nThe red house (I) went to last week. <-- This is what you want. Although I\nwould not use に here. Don't ask me why because I can't tell you, but it sounds\nreally weird.\n\nAn い adjective will be put just before the word or group of words it applies\nto. Just like in English, really.\n\nIn this case, if you put it anywhere else than before the word 家, the meaning\nof the sentence becomes weird.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T05:45:04.157",
"id": "18718",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T09:37:06.750",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-19T09:37:06.750",
"last_editor_user_id": "5123",
"owner_user_id": "3494",
"parent_id": "18717",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18717 | 18718 | 18718 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18724",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How do you say:\n\n> My skills in programming languages are Javascript, Zend framework, Yii\n> framework, etc\n\nI have tried this:\n\n> 私のスキルはプログラミング言語で。\n\nAnd I don't know how to list the items \"Javascript, Zend framework, Yii\nframework, etc\", especially how to place the particles.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T09:58:01.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18722",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-22T00:08:00.253",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-22T00:08:00.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7210",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How do you say \"My skills in programming languages are Javascript, Zend framework, Yii framework, etc\"?",
"view_count": 507
} | [
{
"body": "> * X, Y, Z言語が使えます。\n> * X, Y, Z言語で開発が出来ます。\n> * X, Y, Z言語でソフト構築が出来ます。\n> * 言語X, Y, Zのプロです！\n> * プログラミング言語はいくつか使えます。\n>\n\nThere are a lot of possible translations, so just pick one. But I'm sure\nsomebody else will offer a better translation soon.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T17:23:03.513",
"id": "18724",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T19:31:10.853",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-19T19:31:10.853",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "3494",
"parent_id": "18722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "My $0.02.\n\n> * プログラミング言語のうち、X、Y、Zが(専門・得意)です。\n> * ソフト開発にかけて、得意とする言語はX、Y、Zです。\n>",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T19:48:44.470",
"id": "18726",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T03:06:01.197",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T03:06:01.197",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18722 | 18724 | 18726 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18725",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As mentioned in the [Addressing strangers without knowing the\nname](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/17716/addressing-strangers-\nwithout-knowing-the-name/17717#17717) thread, 敬語{けいご} often communicates the\nimplied actors in a sentence. The thread titled [using 美化語 in 謙譲語 verb forms\ndoes not make sense,\nright?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12891/using-%E7%BE%8E%E5%8C%96%E8%AA%9E-in-%E8%AC%99%E8%AD%B2%E8%AA%9E-verb-\nforms-does-not-make-sense-right) raises the issue of whether 美化語 is 敬語, or\nnot. Then, I noticed example sentences in the thread titled [「を」 object marker\nin this 受身形\nsentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18715/%E3%82%92-object-\nmarker-in-\nthis-%E5%8F%97%E8%BA%AB%E5%BD%A2%E3%81%86%E3%81%91%E3%81%BF%E3%81%91%E3%81%84-sentence)\nthat would seem to add more clarity regarding whether 美化語 is 敬語 (and thus can\nbe used to create implied actors):\n\nCan an implied subject be created by adding 美化語 to 財布:\n\n_usage case #1_ \n\"泥棒{どろぼう}に財布{さいふ}が盗{ぬす}まれた。\" \n\"泥棒に **お** 財布が盗まれた。\" \nHere, both are ok. The \"お\" is optional because the owner of the wallet is not\nknown. Personally, I would not add the \"お\".\n\n_usage case #2_ \n\"泥棒に財布を盗まれた。\" \nThe use of \"を\" _implies_ that I am the owner of the wallet. So, that means\nthat I cannot make the wallet honorific. which means that, if 美化語 is 敬語, then\nI cannot say: \n\"泥棒に **お** 財布を盗まれた。\"\n\nIn essence, this the progression: \n(1) \"泥棒に財布を盗まれた。\" // ok. The implied owner of the wallet is me. \n(2) \"泥棒に **お** 財布を盗まれた。\" // whoops. I have made something that is mine, the\nwallet, honorific by adding 美化語 on the wallet.\n\n_conclusion_ \nIn usage case #2 (modify 財布 with を)、 adding 美化語 to 財布 is still grammatically\ncorrect, but sounds unnatural because I am misusing honorifics?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T16:39:58.473",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18723",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T18:26:11.733",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particles",
"honorifics",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "can 美化語{びかご} create implied subjects?",
"view_count": 322
} | [
{
"body": "**美化語 is not 尊敬語 (=honorific)** , although 美化語 is a subset of 敬語.\n\nUsing 美化語 simply \"beautifies\" the target word. Saying お財布 (instead of 財布) does\n_not_ imply the owner of the wallet, and you can always say 私のお財布 if you like.\nIn this case, 「泥棒にお財布を盗まれました」 is a perfect way to say \"I had _my_ wallet\nstolen\".\n\nLikewise, you can usually say (my) \"お寿司\", \"お友達\", \"お風呂\", \"お菓子\" etc., without\nworrying about honorifics at all, because these are 美化語 (male speakers use\nthese less frequently, though)\n\nBut you cannot use words like \"お体\", \"お姿\", \"お目\", \"お手\", \"ご気分\", etc., if these\nnouns belong to yourself. Some people say \"私のお仕事\" is not good in formal\nconversations, either. So it depends.\n\nFrom 文化庁's [敬語の指針\n(PDF)](http://www.bunka.go.jp/1osirase/pdf/keigo_sisin_houkokuan.pdf), page\n37:\n\n> 自分のことに「お」や「御」を付けてはいけないと習ったような気がするが 「お待ちしています」や「御説明をしたいのですが」などと言うときに，自分の動作なのに\n> 「お」や「ご」を付けるのは，おかしくないのだろうか。これは，どう考えれば良いのだろうか。 \n> \n> 【解説】自分側の動作やものごとなどにも\n> 「お」や「御」を付けることはある。自分の動作やものごとでも，それが＜向かう先＞を立てる場合であれば，謙譲語Ⅰとして，「（先生を）お待ちする」「（山田さんに）御説明をしたい」など「お」や「御」を付けることには全く問題がない。\n> **また「私のお帽子」など，美化語として用いる場合もある** 。「お」や「御」を自分のことに付けてはいけないのは，例えば\n> 「私のお考え」「私の御理解」など，自分側の動作やものごとが相手側や第三者に直接かかわらない場合で，自分側の動作やものごとを立ててしまう場合である。この場合は，結果として，自分側に尊敬語を用いてしまう誤用となる。",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T18:26:11.733",
"id": "18725",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-19T18:26:11.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18723 | 18725 | 18725 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Does anyone know what to call the outdated, high form of language which will\nsay for example \"ならぬ\" rather than \"ならない\" or more accurately \"だめだ\"?\n\nSpecifically, I would like to know if there is a name for the dialect used by\nKuchiki Byakuya from the anime Bleach so that I can research it and learn it.\nFeatures that I have noticed about the way he speaks:\n\n * Particles like \"は\" or \"を\" are never dropped, and ～ている never becomes ～てる even in fast or casual speech (not that I've ever heard him speak casually).\n\n * ～ない → ～ぬ.\n\n * ないだろう → なかろう.\n\n * そんなことはない → そんなことあるまい、そうはあるまい.\n\n * いい → よい.\n\n * お前、君 → 卿（けい）.\n\n * 質問する → 問う.\n\nI realize all of these things can be put down to simply old or overly formal\nlanguage, but I want to be able to study it so as not to make non-native-\nspeaker errors when writing (I intend to write a fictional character who uses\nsuch language). Thus, if anyone knows what to call this type of language (in\nJapanese), I would really like to know.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T20:58:35.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18727",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T19:50:16.017",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T18:21:23.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7313",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"negation",
"classical-japanese",
"auxiliary-ず"
],
"title": "When does ない become ぬ?",
"view_count": 1243
} | [
{
"body": "> \"Does anyone know what to call the outdated, high form of language which\n> will say for example \"ならぬ\" rather than \"ならない\" or more accurately \"だめだ\"?\"\n\nWe call it 「[文語体]{ぶんごたい}」 or 「文語[調]{ちょう}」(\"Literary style\") as opposed to\n「[口語体]{こうごたい}」 or 「口語調」 (\"Colloquial style\").\n\n> \"Specifically, I would like to know if there is a name for the dialect used\n> by Kuchiki Byakuya from the anime Bleach so that I can research it and learn\n> it. \"\n\nI just watched a YouTube video and he speaks 100% Standard.\n\n> \"Alternatively, if anyone is fluent enough to correct my usage, that would\n> be equally helpful.\"\n\nNative speaker here. All of your conversions look good except for 「そんなことあるまい」,\nwhich sounds like a combination of 口語体 and 文語体 in that order. You would want\nto stick with 「そうはあるまい」 or 「そのようなことはあるまい」. Strictly speaking, 「そんな」 is just\ntoo colloquial to go with 「あるまい」 (even though one could expect to see/hear\nsuch a combination in manga/anime).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T00:54:56.047",
"id": "18728",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T19:50:16.017",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T19:50:16.017",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18727",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "Technically ぬ is preferred when modifying a nominal (attributive/連体形) and ず\nelsewhere (fundamentally predicative/終止形). Nowadays under the merger of these\ntwo forms in regular verbs and adjectives, using ぬ to end a sentence seems to\nhave become acceptable as well, but you still don't use ず with nouns or ぬ with\nadverbial conjunctions (*ぬに/*ぬして), I suppose.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T20:21:41.173",
"id": "33664",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T20:21:41.173",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11489",
"parent_id": "18727",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I think what you are talking about is old or antiquated forms of Japanese\nexpression, either written or spoken in or before Meiji era.\n\nIt’s an issue of antiquity vs recency, i.e, 古語 vs 現代語, not the difference of\n\"style\" between 文語体 (literary style) and 口語体 (spoken style).\n\nThe samples of words you quoted can be rephrased in various ways in old, now\nobsolete style, for examples:\n\n• ～ない →\n～あらぬ（あらざりき）、（聞か）ぬ（聞かざりき）、（見）ぬ（見ざりき）、（言わ）ぬ（言わざりき）、（語ら）ぬ（語らざりき）、（持た）ぬ（持たざりき）、（来たら〉ず（来たらざりき）、去（い）なぬ（云なざりき）-\ndon’t go away, etc.\n\n• ないだろう → なからん、なかる（あらざる）べし、.\n\n• そんなことはない → 左様なことはあるまじき (ありて然らず）\n\n• いい → よい、よかろう、（下がりても）よし - You may go..\n\n• お前、君 → 貴様、お主、貴殿、御身、そなた、そこ許（もと). You don't call your friend \"卿,” which means\n“aristocrat” or “my lord.”\n\n・質問する → 問う、訊く、訊ねる.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T08:13:19.633",
"id": "33694",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-30T00:57:30.957",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-30T00:57:30.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "18727",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18727 | null | 18728 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19096",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I keep seeing these onomatopoeic adverbs popping up with the form: _っ_り. Some\nexamples include ぐっすり、ぴったり、すっきり、etc…. Is there a name for these adverbs, and\nwhy are they in this specific form?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T01:32:16.043",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18729",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-17T16:39:15.880",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-20T06:37:05.367",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5213",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"words",
"etymology",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "_っ_り form adverbs",
"view_count": 1719
} | [
{
"body": "Since no-one else has tried to answer, I'll write up a few thoughts in the\nhope of attracting a more knowledgeable person, Somebody Is Wrong On The\nInternet style.\n\nI do not think there is any single, universally accepted name for this form.\nSometimes you see the term \"ri adverb\" (in Japanese, \"り副詞\"), but this often\nencompasses 3-mora adverbs too ( _yahari_ as well as _yappari_ ), so it is not\nquite what you're after. Maybe \"geminated ri adverb\" would be it?\n\nAs for why they are in this specific form... I don't have an airtight theory\non this, but here are some thoughts.\n\n 1. As far as I can tell these adverbs first started appearing in the latter half of the Late Middle Japanese period. (Muromachi period and after.)\n 2. The vast majority of these adverbs are clearly related to mimetic roots that are attested much earlier, often in Old Japanese (e.g. _nikkori_ obviously has something to do with OJ _nikwoyaka_ ; _hissori_ must be related to OJ _pisoka_ ; etc.)\n 3. In most cases, geminated forms (e.g. _yappari_ ) have earlier or at least roughly contemporaneous attestations than ungeminated forms (e.g. _yahari_ ).\n 4. On the other hand, doubled forms (e.g. _nikoniko_ ) tend to appear a bit earlier, during Early Middle Japanese.\n 5. If I recall my Frellesvig correctly, LMJ is exactly the stage when /Q/, the \"geminate-the-following-consonant\" phoneme became distinct from the phoneme he represents as /C/, which was expressed either as gemination or a moraic nasal depending entirely on context (his example I think was that in EMJ there could be no minimal pair like contemporary Japanese _shittai_ vs _shintai_ ).\n\nBasically, it looks like this form of adverb arose during the LMJ period,\nfollowing the appearance of the doubled forms, as a new way to express mimetic\nmaterial adverbially using the new-to-Japanese gemination phoneme /Q/.\n\n(Why should a new form have arisen? Was it systematically different in\nsemantics or usage patterns than the doubled forms? I don't know.)\n\nUngeminated versions apparently appeared shortly afterwards, possibly\noriginally as hypercorrections/backformations based on other word pairs with\nphonemically similar profiles, e.g. _yoppodo_ and _yohodo_.\n\nAccounting for the final _-ri_ is harder. It's worth noting that there are\nalso attested forms that don't include this, e.g. _nikko [to]_ , _ukkara [to]_\n, apparently with little to no semantic differentiation, so apparently adding\n_-ri_ was originally just one ending among several that combined with the\ngemination.\n\nIt makes sense that the variants would be whittled away to one non-zero form,\nsince that helps identify each member of this word class as a member of the\nclass, but as for why _-ri_ should have been (a) a contender in the first\nplace, and (b) the final winner, I have only idle speculation. (e.g., consider\nrepeated usage of /r/ as a sort of \"flavorless\" consonant throughout the\nhistory of Japanese morphology; consider lingering influence of forms like\n/ari/ and /nari/; etc.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-15T04:20:41.270",
"id": "19096",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-15T08:03:41.120",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-15T08:03:41.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "531",
"owner_user_id": "531",
"parent_id": "18729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "To expand on Matt's answer somewhat, I have a dim memory of reading somewhere\nthat the final り in these adverbs is derived from classical あり (modern ある, _to\nbe_ ). Digging around in my sources at the moment, I cannot find where I read\nthis. That said, this functions here in many ways nearly identically to the\nauxiliary verb (助動詞{じょどうし}) り, which is analyzed as an abbreviation of あり (see\nthe [Weblio](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%8A) or\n[Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%82%8A-656986) entries; search the page\nfor 助動), and which is used to indicate 1) completion, 2) the result of an\naction, or 3) an ongoing state. The last sense especially fits semantically\nfor these -り adverbs, which all seem to describe state.\n\nIn terms of the historical development of these terms, the basic trend over\ntime appears to be:\n\n * **Two-mora root** \nThis is often still apparent in other existing words. For instance, the ひそ\nroot in modern ひっそり also appears in ひそか, ひそひそ, ひそむ, ひそまる, ひそめる, and ひそやか.\n\n * **Reduplication** \nMany, but not all, of the ‑り adverbs went through a reduplication phase. For\nroot ひそ, that would be ひそひそ.\n\n * **Gemination** \nI suspect this initially developed as a kind of fast, informal-speech, clipped\nabbreviation. ひそひそ, for instance, is sometimes realized as ひそびそ even by some\nmodern speakers. This might have been realized like: `/hisobiso/` →\n`*/hiso̥bi̥so/` → `/hisso/`\n\n * In fact, we find that almost all of the -り adverbs that include gemination also have a reduplicated form without the り: ひっそり has ひそひそ, にっこり has にこにこ, うっかり has うかうか. Sometimes the reduplicated version has different voicing: さっぱり has さばさば, しっかり has しかじか.\n * One geminated ‑り adverb that appears to break this mold is やっぱり. However, some digging shows that this apparent outlier does hew to the pattern -- after allowing for some semantic variation. やっぱり is most often used in modern Japanese to mean something like _\"just as I thought, just as expected\"_. It also has a less-well-known sense of _\"quietly, steadily, gently\"_. This is much closer to the putative root やは, cognate with the やわ in やわらかい _\"soft, gentle\"_ and also found in older Japanese as a standalone ‑な adjective meaning _\"soft, gentle, mild; fragile\"_. The `/h/` in modern やは would have been a `/p/` in older stages of the language, giving us a possible development like `/yapayapa/` → `*/yapyapa/` → `/yappa/`.\n * **Addition of the ‑り** \nAgain, this seems to be the ‑り that came from あり. The suffix ‑り likely\ndeveloped first, and then was used for these adverbs. Use of あり itself would\nusually imply forms like とあり or にあり on the end -- and these are known\nhistorically to become たり and なり, which produces adjectives. Also, we cannot\nfind any textual evidence of forms like *ひっそあり, only ひっそり.\n\nIf you run across a geminated ‑り adverb, identify the root, and dig around in\na good Japanese dictionary to find the related terms. This can be a good way\nto expand your vocabulary.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-14T17:59:28.363",
"id": "36660",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-17T16:39:15.880",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-17T16:39:15.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "18729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18729 | 19096 | 19096 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Would it be 亀先輩? How would you write \"Turtle-Senpai\"? 亀せんぱい maybe? I have no\nidea how to properly add a suffix to a word/name.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T02:18:26.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18730",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-20T02:34:19.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7315",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"spelling"
],
"title": "How would you write \"Turtle-senpai\"",
"view_count": 3812
} | [
{
"body": "If you're asking whether you should write \"senpai\" as 先輩 or せんぱい, the answer\nis 先輩. (If you're trying to give off a cute or childish feeling to the text\nyou could use せんぱい, but that's not really something you'd normally do.)\n\nI guess I should mention that you'd never use the 先輩 honorific when referring\nto yourself, so your handle is rather odd sounding.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T02:34:19.563",
"id": "18731",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-20T02:34:19.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18730 | null | 18731 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18733",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "On Facebook, you see 笑 getting used a decent amount to mean \"lol\". To my\nAmerican eyes, using something that literally means \"smile\" - and even looks\nsemi-subconsciously kind of like an advanced emoticon of somebody winking\ntheir eye - comes across as being more feminine than the clearly gender-\nneutral \"lol\". But that may not be the common consensus, and it is apparently\nthe only real equivalent to \"lol\" in Japanese.\n\nAre guys generally supposed to use this? Are there any restrictions like that\non this character?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T03:41:16.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18732",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-20T04:25:49.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1771",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"expressions",
"gender"
],
"title": "Is using 笑 to mean \"lol\" feminine or gender-neutral?",
"view_count": 23339
} | [
{
"body": "I think there are a few things in the same ballpark as 笑 worth discussing:\n\n * `（笑）`, which strikes me more as \"Heh.\" than \"lol\";\n * `笑`, which feels like \"haha\" or \"lol\";\n * `ｗ`, which IMO doesn't really have a parallel in written English, but is the equivalent of smiling or slightly giggling while you say the sentence outloud; and\n * `ｗｗ[…]`, which feels like \"hahaha[…]\".\n\nThey all feel quite gender-neutral to me. Of course you don't seem as serious\nif you're laughing (with （笑） seeming the most serious of them all to me), but\nI don't really think that makes any of them feminine.\n\n(This is honestly just my own impression of them, which could be wrong.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T04:25:49.947",
"id": "18733",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-20T04:25:49.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18732",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18732 | 18733 | 18733 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18736",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that \"verb without masu + よう\" expresses one's will to do something or\nstimulating other person to do something.\n\nBut while I was trying to translate [the lyrics to Hitoshizuku by Nobuhiko\nOkamoto](http://down.hangame.co.jp/movie/pc/easy/kamihaji/lyrics/hitoshizuku.pdf),\nI found this:\n\n> いつの日かぬくもりに触れる **よう** \n> 祈り捧げ ただよう\n\nCan someone explain to me what it means here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T07:13:26.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18735",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-03T13:46:14.377",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-03T13:46:14.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7318",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does よう at the end of the sentences mean?",
"view_count": 1824
} | [
{
"body": "You have two different よう's here.\n\n> いつの[日]{ひ}かぬくもりに[触]{ふ}れる **よう**\n>\n> [祈]{いの}り[捧]{ささ}げ ただ **よう**\n\n触れるよう = 触れるように = \" **so that** I could touch\", \" **hoping to** touch\". The\nよう（に） expresses one's purpose or goal.\n\nただよう = [漂]{ただよ}う = \"to drift\", \"to wander\". The よう just happens to be the\nending of the verb ただよう in its dictionary form.\n\n\"Hoping to touch the warmth one day, I offer up prayers and drift about.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T08:55:38.657",
"id": "18736",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-20T08:55:38.657",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18735",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18735 | 18736 | 18736 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18738",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is a sentence from Dragon Ball :\n\n> 一気にこれ以上修業した **って** 意味はない **って** 。限界までやったんだ。\n\n悟空 says this to his son who's worried because they just chill out before a\nbattle instead of training until the last minute.\n\nAs far as I know, the second って means と言っている and is used to insist on what\nprecedes it, like : \"And I'm telling you that...\" in English. Am I right here?\n\nAs for the first って, I don't know if it means という, or even というのは :\n\n> I'm telling you that it wouldn't have made sense to train more than that\n> without pausing.\n\nOr if, as I think, it's part of たって meaning ても :\n\n> I'm telling you that even if we trained more than that without pausing, it\n> wouldn't make sense.\n\nIs there a way to tell one from the other when a word like 意味 comes after?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T12:34:57.973",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18737",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-16T01:37:32.057",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-16T01:33:12.190",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"syntax",
"particle-って"
],
"title": "Some questions about って",
"view_count": 2288
} | [
{
"body": "> 「[一気]{いっき}にこれ[以上]{いじょう}[修行]{しゅぎょう}した **って** [意味]{いみ}はない **って**\n> 。[限界]{げんかい}までやったんだ。」\n>\n> \"As far as I know, the second って means と言っている and is used to insist on what\n> precedes it, like : \"And I'm telling you that...\" in English. Am I right\n> here?\"\n\nRight. The second って is quotative, implying \"Here is what I want to say and I\nknow what I'm talking about.\".\n\n> \"As for the first って, I don't know if it means という, or even というのは\"\n>\n> \"Or if, as I think, it's part of たって meaning ても \"\n\nIt is part of **たって** , which is the informal way of saying **ても or たとしても**.\nThese express a **non-resultative hypothetical condition** , which is why your\nTL:\n\n> \"I'm telling you that even if we trained more than that without pausing, it\n> wouldn't make sense.\"\n\ncould not be any better.\n\n> \"Is there a way to tell one from the other when a word like 意味 comes after?\"\n\nYou would need to look at the whole phrase, not just the single word,\nfollowing the って -- in this case, 「意味はない」. If the phrase after the って seems\ncontradictory to the phrase before, you have what I called the \"non-\nresultative hypothetical condition\" above. In the sentence in question, the\ntwo phrases are \"to train hard\" and \"it is nonsense\".\n\nI could, however, easily form a sentence containing a 「って意味」 in which って\nactually can be replaced by という rather than by ても or たとしても.\n\n「その[単語]{たんご}に『[食]{た}べる』って意味はないよ。」= The word does not have the meaning of \"to\neat\".\n\nSo, you would need to pay attention to the whole context as usual.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T13:20:56.353",
"id": "18738",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-16T01:37:32.057",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-16T01:37:32.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18737",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "The first って comes from とて originally and does, as you think, mean something a\nbit like ～ても here.\n\n大辞泉 says\n\n>\n> ［接助］活用語の終止形、助詞などに付く。打消し・反語の意の表現を伴って、ある条件を述べそれが順当な予想に反する結果を生じることを表す。…としても。…といっても。「言った―、どうにもならない」→からとて\n> →って\n>\n> Attaches to the sentence final form of words, or other particles. Together\n> with a a negative or rhetorical expression, it expresses that the result of\n> some stated condition runs counter to what would be expected.\n\nIn your example:\n\n> 一気にこれ以上修業したって意味はないって。限界までやったんだ。\n\nLook, there's no point in training so much at once (even if you train more\nthan this...). You've done as much as you can for now.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T16:10:09.230",
"id": "18742",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-20T16:10:09.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "18737",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18737 | 18738 | 18738 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18755",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was watching an anime series called Steins;Gate today. [In episode 9 (around\nsix minutes in)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPSghWQUE-g#t=05m45s), one of\nthe characters proposes physically travelling through time:\n\n> 凶真「ずばり、物理的タイムトラベルだ！」\n\nThe other characters pause for a moment (because it's so ridiculous) and then\nthey ignore him:\n\n> 紅{く}莉{り}栖{す}「まゆり。麦茶、冷蔵庫にまだある？」 \n> まゆり「ちょっと待っててね」\n\nIn response to being ignored, he pulls out his phone and dramatically pretends\nto talk to someone on the phone for a moment:\n\n> 凶真「俺だ！ 機関によるラボ内の切り崩し工作が始まったようだ。この鳳凰院凶真の言葉が、ラボメンの心に届かないのだ」\n\nAnd his friend replies:\n\n> ダル「それ、前からじゃねぇ?」 \n> 凶真「ならなぜ、この素晴らしい議題を **華麗にスルーする** のだ！」\n\nI understand that スルーする is slang for ignoring someone (from _through_ ), but I\ncan't figure out how to make sense of 華麗に modifying it. _How_ exactly are they\nignoring him?\n\n明鏡国語辞典 defines 華麗 as 「はなやかで美しいこと」, but it doesn't really make sense to me\nhere.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T13:49:04.793",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18739",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T15:33:00.537",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T15:33:00.537",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "華麗にスルーする Ignore someone . . . how exactly?",
"view_count": 1334
} | [
{
"body": "First, one would need to understand the fact that \"to ignore\" is not the\nprimary meaning of 「スルーする」 and that it is a secondary and slang meaning of the\nphrase. It is also a rather \"new\" meaning as well. The primary meaning of\n「スルーする」 is 「[素通]{すどお}りする」, which means \"to pass something without dropping\nby\". You just keep on walking, driving, etc. without stopping. I am sure that\nyou could easily see how the new slang meaning of \"to ignore\" was derived from\nthat.\n\nThis is why we have an imagery of a person walking on by without paying\nattention to the things as he passes them. If you could imagine a person\nphysically moving, you could then describe the action with an adverb like\n「[華麗]{かれい}に」. 華麗に/華麗な can be used only to describe something physical. \" **One\npassed by just beautifully and completely.** \"\n\nWhat I was implying in my comment above is \"Would the word \"to ignore\" allow\nyou to have that imagery?\" I thought not, which would explain why 「華麗にスルーする」\nmakes no sense to you but it makes perfect sense to Japanese-speakers. They\nignored the guy through and through.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T00:00:14.640",
"id": "18746",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T00:00:14.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18739",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "The Japanese slang スルーする has significantly _positive_ nuance by itself,\ncompared to Japanese 無視する. People who are good at net slang consider it to be\nsomething difficult to master. There is even a word\n[スルー力【りょく】](http://internet.watch.impress.co.jp/static/uocchi/2007/04/01/kentei.htm)\nor\n[スルースキル](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%82%B9%E3%83%AB%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B9%E3%82%AD%E3%83%AB),\nwhich is the important skill to survive the information era.\n\nThis is not surprising, because スルーする was [probably derived from succor jargon\nスルーパス](http://www.paradisearmy.com/doujin/pasok_through.htm), which is another\n和製英語, meaning a difficult pass penetrating the defense. You can see an example\nof [typical 華麗なスルーパス](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzPop7Tgooo) at YouTube.\n\nSo ever since スルーする was born, 華麗に and スルーする have been used together very\nfrequently. You can safely call \"華麗にスルー\" a set phrase.\n\nSo what is this \"art of ignoring?\" When can you ignore something nicely? Here\nare some examples.\n\n> A: 掲示板にまた荒らしが現れましたよ。 \n> B: **華麗にスルー** しましょう。\n\nIn this conversation, B recommends that A should not respond to the troll. He\nknows that ignoring a troll is sometimes difficult, but B expects A to\nexercise his \"skill of ignoring\".\n\n> A: あー、のどが渇いた。 \n> B: 冷蔵庫に昨日のカレーが入ってるよ。 \n> A: コンビニでお水買ってくるね。 \n> B: うわ、 **華麗にスルー** された（笑）！\n\nIn this case, A could have directly responded to B's joke by saying\n「カレーは飲みものじゃない！」, but didn't. Intentionally ignoring B's joke made B laugh\ninstead. (Such \"gag by ignoring gag\" is sometimes referred to as ボケ殺し, and\ncertainly is technical if done intentionally)\n\n> 「雨が降るから傘を持っていけ」ってあれほど言ったのに、 **華麗にスルー** された。\n\nThis is a sarcastic usage of 華麗にスルー. This 華麗に emphasizes his surprise that his\nadvice was totally ignored.\n\n> 今日は新作ゲームの発売日だけど、お金がないから **華麗にスルー** する。\n\nThis is naturally-sounding (though slangy) to me, and I believe no one would\nquestion \"どこが華麗なんだ?\". But now I think this 華麗に means almost nothing any more.\nBecause 華麗にスルー is a set phrase, such things can happen. If I must, I would\ntranslate this 華麗に as \"dare\".\n\nIn the example of _Steins;Gate_ , if 凶真 had said 物理的タイムトラベル jokingly, my\nsecond example would be the closest. But I think he said this rather\nseriously, so \"because スルー is frequently used with 華麗に\" would be the only\nexplanation.\n\n(PS. Steins;Gate面白いですよね)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T13:22:23.930",
"id": "18755",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T13:22:23.930",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18739",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18739 | 18755 | 18755 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18757",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've heard the phrase 参った and understood it to mean something like 'I/we lost'\nor 'knocked out'. How did this come from 参る, to visit or go by? I read in a\ndictionary that it's some phrase said by a the defeated person in a judo or\nkendo match but I don't fully understand.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T14:04:27.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18740",
"last_activity_date": "2022-11-11T04:40:02.047",
"last_edit_date": "2019-07-20T11:17:40.680",
"last_editor_user_id": "26860",
"owner_user_id": "7073",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"sports"
],
"title": "How did 参った come to mean 'defeated' from 参る?",
"view_count": 458
} | [
{
"body": "(I failed to identify the authoritative article about this, so the following\nstory is based largely on my speculation.)\n\nYou probably know that 参る is a humble form and means to visit someone with\n_higher status than ourselves_.\n\nAnd I think your dictionary also said that 参る can specifically mean \"to visit\na shrine/temple/grave.\" (=参拝) The noun お参り always means \"a visit to a\nshrine/temple/grave and offering prayers.\" See the [result of Google Image\nSearch for\nお参り](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%8A%E5%8F%82%E3%82%8A&tbm=isch),\nand you can understand that Japanese 参る means not only \"going\", but also\n\"showing the highest respect\" for Gods, or someone else.\n\nThis, I suppose, explains why 参った also came to mean \"I lost.\" By saying 参った,\nyou admits your opponent is stronger than you, and deserves your respect. (In\n_judo_ and _kendo_ , showing such respect is especially important.)\n\nThere's [a blog post about this topic](http://donnat.cocolog-\nnifty.com/blog/2010/05/post-1f97.html).\n\nBy the way, this お参り pose (putting hands together in front of you) is also a\ngesture of surrender, or begging for one's life.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T15:19:45.760",
"id": "18757",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T18:01:00.387",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T18:01:00.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18740",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "In a [judo context](https://www.judo-ch.jp/english/dictionary/terms/maitta/),\n参った is used to mean \"I surrender\" when submitting to an opponent (usually due\nto an armlock, strangle, or hold down).\n\nAccording to Wikipedia this meaning is first noted in the 1500's and stems\nfrom the older meaning of \"to go [to a superior]\":\n\n> 4. to be overcome, to cede to a superior person or superior circumstances\n> ( _by extension from the older \"go to a superior\" sense_)\n> 1. [from late 1500s] ( _intransitive_ ) to lose to an opponent \n> 参{まい}ったな。 ― _**maitta** na._ ― You **got** me.\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-11-11T04:31:23.553",
"id": "97160",
"last_activity_date": "2022-11-11T04:40:02.047",
"last_edit_date": "2022-11-11T04:40:02.047",
"last_editor_user_id": "26860",
"owner_user_id": "26860",
"parent_id": "18740",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18740 | 18757 | 18757 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18754",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As explained in the thread titled [\"Can 美化語{びかご} create implied\nsubjects?\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18723/can-%E7%BE%8E%E5%8C%96%E8%AA%9E%E3%81%B3%E3%81%8B%E3%81%94-create-\nimplied-subjects), in a very, very limited number of circumstances a noun\ncould be upgraded to pseudo-尊敬語 by using 美化語 (such as ご気分{きぶん}, etc). However,\nat least one noun, 会社{かいしゃ}, seems to have a clear 尊敬語 and 謙譲語 form:\n\n * 御社{おんしゃ} = \"company (implied your company)\"\n\n * 弊社 = \"company (implied my company)\"\n\nI am thinking that \"御社、会社、弊社\" might be similar to these verbs with regard to\nturning them into 敬語:\n\n * 御覧になる、見る、拝見する\n * 召し上がる、食べる、いただく\n * ご存知、知る、存じる\n\netc.\n\nJust like there are \"irregular\" verbs in Japanese, there are \"irregular\" ways\nto turn a verb into 敬語。So, I'm thinking that:\n\n> 御社、会社、弊社\n\nis an \"irregular\" way of making 敬語 nouns. After all, if there is no irregular\n謙譲語 word for the noun, I don't think that you can transform a noun into 謙譲語。\n\n**So that I can google better and talk with native speakers about this\nbetter:**\n\n * What are a few nouns that have a distinct 尊敬語 (no connection with 美化語)?\n * What are a few nouns that have _any_ 謙譲語 form?\n\nAnd, is anything that I said in this thread wrong?\n\nbtw: I am **only** interested in 敬語 _nouns_. In this thread, I don't care\nabout 敬語 _verbs_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T15:38:13.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18741",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T01:24:32.567",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"honorifics"
],
"title": "謙譲語{けんじょうご} nouns such as 弊社{へいしゃ}, etc",
"view_count": 636
} | [
{
"body": "The nouns of 尊敬語 are どなた(だれ)、[逝去]{せい・きょ}(死亡)、おぐし(髪) and so on. The nouns of\n謙譲語 are 祖品(品)、私見(意見)、愚妻(妻) and so on. The words inside ( ) are nomal nouns.\n\nI think the nouns of 尊敬語 and 謙譲語 are not many. 美化語 is common words when we use\nthe nouns of 尊敬語.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T21:11:14.743",
"id": "18744",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T04:57:06.307",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T04:57:06.307",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "**There are simply too many to mention.**\n\nHere are some of the more common trios of words presented in the order of\n[尊敬語]{そんけいご}--[普通語]{ふつうご}--[謙譲語]{けんじょうご}.\n\n> English: Respectful (your ~~) -- General (a/an ~~) -- Humble (my/our ~~)\n\nShop: [貴店]{きてん}--[店]{みせ}--[当店]{とうてん}\n\nSchool: [貴校]{きこう}--[学校]{がっこう}--[当校]{とうこう}\n\nBank: [貴行]{きこう}--[銀行]{ぎんこう}--[当行]{とうこう}\n\nOffer/Gift: [厚志]{こうし}--[物品]{ぶっぴん}--[寸志]{すんし}\n\nOpinion: [高見]{こうけん}--[意見]{いけん}--[愚見]{ぐけん}\n\nHouse: [尊宅]{そんたく}--[家]{いえ}--[小宅]{しょうたく}\n\nManuscript: [玉稿]{ぎょっこう}--[原稿]{げんこう}--[拙稿]{せっこう}\n\nSon: [子息]{しそく}--[息子]{むすこ}--[愚息]{ぐそく}\n\nGroup of people: [各位]{かくい}--[集団]{しゅうだん}--[一同]{いちどう}\n\nLetter: [芳書]{ほうしょ}--[手紙]{てがみ}--[寸書]{すんしょ}\n\nHandwriting: [尊筆]{そんぴつ}--[筆跡]{ひっせき}--[拙筆]{せっぴつ}\n\nEDIT: I forgot to say that I do not really understand what you mean by\n\"irregular\". In 「御社、会社、弊社」, it uses 御 for \"respectful\" and 弊 for \"humble\". Is\nthat not pretty \"regular\" in that sense?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T11:01:47.027",
"id": "18754",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T01:24:32.567",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-23T01:24:32.567",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18741 | 18754 | 18754 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 世の中結局強い物が勝つ。 \n> 弱い奴らは死んでいく。 \n> ただそれだけ\n>\n> 弱い奴らは勝手に死んでいくのだ\n\nMaybe a better way of phrasing this question would be asking the difference in\nusing merely plain form and this form.\n\ne.g.\n\n> 強いものが勝ち弱いものは死ぬ\n>\n> 強いものが生き残り、弱いものは死んでいく\n\nCan someone try to explain the difference in nuance and meaning between them?\n(And before anyone starts to explain the super basics of ていく I already know\nand understand them but I'm having trouble understanding it as seen above. I'm\nnot asking for a translation.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-20T21:53:41.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18745",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T09:44:35.583",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-20T22:03:12.140",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Usage of ていく in 死んでいく",
"view_count": 527
} | [
{
"body": "**Edit : Take a look at the comments after reading.**\n\nI think this link will answer pretty well your questions, [with a nice\nreflection that helps clarifying the nuances between the different\nforms.](http://www.cjvlang.com/petitprince/birdheart/dyingj.html)\n\nTo sum up :\n\n死ぬ：To be going to die.\n\n死んでいる：To be dead.\n\n**死んでいく：To be dying, with the idea that the process is occuring gradually.**\n\n> ていく also conveys the ideas that what's happening is going away from the\n> speaker, and therefore :\n>\n> * Is often used with verbs that are related to disapearance : 消えていく...\n>\n> * Makes the speaker sound more objective/indifferent.\n>\n>\n\nOn the contrary :\n\n> てくる conveys the ideas that what's happening is going toward the speaker, and\n> therefore :\n>\n> * Is often used with verbs that are related to appearance: 出てくる...\n>\n> * Makes the speaker sound more subjective/concerned.\n>\n>",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T00:47:00.067",
"id": "18747",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T09:44:35.583",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "18745",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18745 | null | 18747 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18751",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The [official JLPT N1 sample](http://www.jlpt.jp/e/samples/n1.html) contains\nthis sentence:\n\n> いまさら後悔してみたところで、してしまったことは取り返しがつかない。\n\nWhich I would translate as:\n\n> Even if it is too late I tried to feel sorry, but what has been done can be\n> undone.\n\nIf my translation correct, I fail to see any situation where anyone would say\nthis, especially the \"tried to feel sorry\" part. The sample does not give any\ncontext unfortunately. Can you imagine any scenario where someone sane would\nactually say this?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T03:31:49.040",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18748",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T05:35:41.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "いまさら後悔してみたところで、してしまったことは取り返しがつかない",
"view_count": 563
} | [
{
"body": "This 〜たところで... can be used in a positive way, but is usually used to express\nthe opinion that even if a condition is fulfilled, it's pointless/meaningless.\n\n> \"Even if (I) came to regret it, it'd be pointless [too late], what (I)'ve\n> done can't be undone.\"\n\nI think this is a different usage of 〜てみた: [\"二 -> ① ->\n㋑\"](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E8%A6%8B%E3%82%8B%E3%83%BB%E8%A6%B3%E3%82%8B%E3%83%BB%E8%A8%BA%E3%82%8B%E3%83%BB%E7%9C%8B%E3%82%8B?dic=daijirin)\nat Daijirin which connects to a non-volitional verb, indicating the completed\naction creates a new state/awareness.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T05:35:41.500",
"id": "18751",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T05:35:41.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "796",
"parent_id": "18748",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18748 | 18751 | 18751 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the nuance difference between `取り返しがつかない` and `仕方がない`?\n\nWhen would one use one rather than the other?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T03:33:13.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18749",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T04:28:06.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 取り返しがつかない and 仕方がない",
"view_count": 99
} | [
{
"body": "取り返しがつかない refers to something that cannot be _undone_. It's mostly used to\n_caution against_ an action - _'hey, if you do this, you can't take it back'_.\nAfter the fact, it's pretty much just a plain statement of fact with minimal\nemotional connotation.\n\n仕方がない refers to something that cannot be _avoided_. It's mostly used to\n_lament or complain that an action must be done_ or _a state cannot be\nchanged_ - describing something that is clearly suboptimal but is the only\navailable or reasonable choice: _'ah well, there's nothing we can do about\nit'_.\n\nTheir uses basically never overlap. In theory, both might be valid\nobservations after an action happens, but the emphasis is quite different.\nWith 取り返しがつかない, the point is that the action shouldn't have been done because\nit was irreversible. With 仕方がない, the point is that the action isn't worth\ncomplaining about because no amount of complaining is going to change\nanything. You can even make sentences like this:\n\n> 取り返しがつかないことだったから、仕方がない。\n>\n> It was irreversable, so there's nothing that can be done about it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T04:17:05.673",
"id": "18750",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T04:28:06.403",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "18749",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18749 | null | 18750 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18753",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Dictionary definitions often use plus signs when describing what words or\nphrases are made of. For example, [the definition for たところで…ない in\n大辞泉](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93%E3%82%8D%E3%81%A7%E2%80%A6%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\nsays:\n\n> 《「たところで」は過去の助動詞「た」の連体形＋名詞「ところ」＋格助詞「で」。「ない」は打消しの助動詞、または形容詞》\n\nI think the basic pronunciation of the plus sign in math is たす. But this isn't\nmath, and I'm curious if people would pronounce it differently in this\ncontext.\n\nFor example, If I were reading this definition aloud, could I also say に\ninstead of たす? I have a feeling that might be appropriate, but I'm not sure.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T07:14:55.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18752",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T08:43:20.703",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T08:43:20.703",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"symbols"
],
"title": "Pronouncing ＋ in dictionary definitions",
"view_count": 425
} | [
{
"body": "I myself definitely would read it as 「プラス」 in that dictionary definition.\n\nIn math, at least I was taught to read it as 「たす」 in first-grade and continued\nto do so until I entered junior high school where I was required to read it as\n「プラス」. Since then, I have been reading it that way except when talking to kids\nbelow junior high age (11 or 12).\n\nI may or may not represent the nation on the matter, but I should not be far\nfrom the norm, either.\n\nRegarding 「に」, I personally do not use that reading for 「+」, but that sure\nsounds like an educated guess on your part. It makes sense at least.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T08:03:04.350",
"id": "18753",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T08:03:04.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18752",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18752 | 18753 | 18753 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is the difference between 貸す and 貸し出す? Please explain it to me. Thank\nyou!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T14:41:36.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18756",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T00:49:09.863",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T14:46:25.987",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage",
"synonyms"
],
"title": "Difference between 貸す and 貸し出す",
"view_count": 807
} | [
{
"body": "I think the meaning of 貸す is \"lend\". \"貸し出す\" have the image like bringing out\nthe place where the thing is from. . For example, we don't say \"図書館の本は貸し中です。\"\nbut say \"図書館の本は、貸し出し中です。\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T17:43:29.457",
"id": "18761",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T00:49:09.863",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-24T00:49:09.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18756",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "[類語例解辞典 says](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/1828/m0u/)\n\n> **[使い分け]** \n> 【１】「貸す」は、一般的に広く用いられる。 \n> 【２】「貸し出す」は、公共機関や店が、そこの所有物を一時的に、そこから持ち出すことを認める意。また、銀行などの金融機関では金銭についてもいう。\n\nNamely, the difference is that 貸し出す is used when some sort of organization,\nstore, or bank is doing the lending.\n\n(If this is accurate, I don't think 貸す and 貸し出す are parallel to \"lend\" and\n\"lend out\" in English, where I think the only difference is \"lend out\" is more\nnatural without an indirect object: ○ \"He lent out the book last Monday\", ?\n\"He lent the book last Monday\".)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T18:44:37.210",
"id": "18762",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T18:44:37.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18756",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18756 | null | 18762 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18768",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I have a question about ように in the following sentence. As far as I can\nunderstand まるで～ ～ように here emphasize counter factuality, and would be\ntranslated like \"as if, just\". However I cannot understand what exactly does\nit connects to, maybe 「もかも純白のこの部屋」?\n\n> 少年はまるで潔癖症を患ったように何もかも純白のこの部屋に似つかわしくないその写真に、何度も視線をやっていた。\n\nTranslation attempt:\n\n> The boy again and again looked at the photograph, which looked out of place\n> in this pure white room _as if he suffered from fastidiousness_.\n\n[Context](http://i.piccy.info/i9/6e56df0ad3114d324249cc67e5231395/1411372439/220438/782693/1006.jpg)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T15:42:20.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18758",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T08:22:25.753",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-22T07:55:02.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "3183",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Question about 「まるで～ ～ように」",
"view_count": 752
} | [
{
"body": "As you said, the meaning of \"まるで～のように\" is \" as if\".\n\nI think first \"少年はまるで潔癖症を患ったように\" modify \"何度も視線をやっていた\" and\n\"何もかも純白のこの部屋に似つかわしくないその写真\" is object but I notice this sentence can be\nexplained otherwise like \"まるで潔癖症を患ったように\" modify \"何もかも純白の部屋\".\n\nThis sentence can be explained both like \"少年は潔癖症を患ったように、何度も視線をやっていた\" or\n\"まるで潔癖症を患ったように何もかも純白の部屋\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T16:28:13.517",
"id": "18759",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-21T18:29:50.837",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-21T18:29:50.837",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "( **Edited** thoroughly after OP provided [the\ncontext](http://i.piccy.info/i9/6e56df0ad3114d324249cc67e5231395/1411372439/220438/782693/1006.jpg))\n\n潔癖症【けっぺきしょう】の患者 is a person who pathologically loves cleanness and\ncompulsively keep washing everything. Without the context, I had difficulty\nparsing this sentence with confidence. Specifically, I didn't know whether\n\"潔癖症を患ったように\" modifies \"純白の部屋\" or \"視線をやっていた\".\n\n 1. 潔癖症を患ったように純白のこの部屋 ((?)pure white room which looked as if it had 潔癖症)\n 2. 潔癖症を患ったように写真に視線をやっていた (looked at the photo as if he had 潔癖症)\n\n(The second one makes sense, because \"repeated checking\" is one of the\nsymptoms of [this psychiatric\ndisorder](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_disorder))\n\nBut with the context OP provided, there is only one way to interpret this\nsentence. While \"whiteness\" of the room was emphasized in this chapter\n(蚕の繭の中にいるようだった), the boy remains basically calm and collected\n(少年は…大人びた表情で何かを静かに考えていた). So obvisouly, the first one is the author's\nintention.\n\nThat said, I'm afraid this 「まるで潔癖症を患ったように純白の部屋」 is awkward, because a room\nnever gets sick! It is the owner of the room who may get sick. You have to add\nextra characters to make this phrase valid: 「まるで潔癖症を患った **人のものであるかの**\nように純白の部屋」, or \"pure white room which looks as if it belongs to a person with\n潔癖症.\" After fixing this error, the whole sentence looks OK (although very\ncomplicated):\n\n> 少年は『｛まるで潔癖症を患った **人のものであるかの** ように何もかも純白のこの部屋｝に似つかわしくないその写真』に、何度も視線をやっていた。",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-21T17:43:15.480",
"id": "18760",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-22T13:34:40.460",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-22T13:34:40.460",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I would parse it like this:\n\n> 少年は〔｛まるで潔癖症を患ったように（何もかも）純白の｝この部屋に〕似つかわしくないその写真に、何度も視線をやっていた。\n\n... the adverbial phrase 「まるで潔癖症を患ったように」 modifying the adjectival phrase\n「(何もかも)純白の」.\n\nI would personally write it this way, though:\n\n> まるで潔癖症を患ったように何もかも純白のこの部屋に似つかわしくないその写真に、 **少年は** 何度も視線をやっていた。\n\nor maybe like this:\n\n> 少年は **、** *まるで潔癖症を患ったように何もかも純白のこの部屋に似つかわしくないその写真に、何度も視線をやっていた。\n\n* * *\n\nIf 潔癖症を患ったように modified 視線をやっていた, then it should be written as this:\n\n> 少年はまるで潔癖症を患ったように **、** *何もかも純白のこの部屋に似つかわしくないその写真に何度も視線をやっていた。\n\nor:\n\n> 何もかも純白のこの部屋に似つかわしくないその写真に、少年はまるで潔癖症を患ったように何度も視線をやっていた。\n\n* * *\n\n*So this is why @l'électeur asked in his comment: \"Are you sure there is not one more comma somewhere?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T13:55:18.993",
"id": "18768",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T08:22:25.753",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T08:22:25.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18758 | 18768 | 18759 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I noticed that in the case of nouns, we can use either of these:\n\n 1. Ｎのとおりに\n 2. Ｎどおりに\n\nBut this seems to be case-specific.\n\nWhen or in which circumstances do we use the latter?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T02:35:25.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18765",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-26T21:03:25.287",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-10T09:00:29.460",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7331",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "When do we use 〜どおりに instead of 〜のとおりに after nouns?",
"view_count": 1450
} | [
{
"body": "You can use “のとおりに” after any noun phrase. However, it may sound slightly\nawkward when used after a short noun. This form can be analyzed as:\n\n> “Nのとおりに\" = 名詞 “N” + 助詞 “の” + 名詞 “とおり” + 助詞 “に”\n\n“どおりに” is used like a postposition. Usually it is used after a short noun.\nAnalysis:\n\n> “Nどおりに” = 名詞 “N” + 名詞 “どおり” + 助詞 “に”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T00:36:46.687",
"id": "19237",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T00:36:46.687",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "18765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18765 | null | 19237 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was doing some reading, and I read that while the volitional form can be\nexplained as coming from the 未然形 for う-verbs, it cannot be explained for\nる-verbs. (I'm sure I should be using better terminology here, like 五段, but the\ncorrect words escape me.) Is this true? Can the usage of よ in the volitional\nform not be explained?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T05:21:06.913",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18766",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T01:05:32.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"history",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "Origins of the Volitional Form",
"view_count": 305
} | [
{
"body": ">\n> 〔一段活用・二段活用の動詞に推量の助動詞「む」を伴ったもの，例えば，「見む」「受けむ」などは，中世末期までに「みう」「うけう」から「みょう」「うきょう」の形に変化していたが，そこから，動詞未然形「み」「うけ」と助動詞「よう」とが分かれて，助動詞「よう」が生ずるに至った。現代語のように，五段活用の動詞には「う」が，その他の活用の動詞には「よう」が付くというように，接続のしかたを補い合うような用法が一般的になるのは近世江戸語以降のことである〕 \n> ― [大辞林 entry for\n> よう](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%82%88%E3%81%86?dic=daijirin)\n>\n> Combinations of monograde (一段) and bigrade (二段) verbs with the conjecture\n> auxiliary _-mu_ , for example _mi-mu_ and _uke-mu_ , had transformed from\n> _mi-u_ and _uke-u_ to _m-you_ and _uk-you_ by the end of the Middle Ages;\n> however, at that point, they were reanalyzed as the imperfective forms (未然形)\n> _mi-_ and _uke-_ plus the auxiliary _-you_ ― and thus, the auxiliary _-you_\n> was born into existence. The notion of complementary auxiliaries, such as in\n> modern Japanese, where _-u_ attaches to quintigrade verbs and _-you_\n> attaches to other verb classes, did not become predominant until the modern\n> Edo dialect. (Translation mine.)\n\nWhether 大辞林 is to be believed or not, I'm not sure, but it sounds quite\nplausible to me. _Classical Japanese: A Grammar_ by Haruo Shirane gives a\nsimilar explanation:\n\n> \"In the Heian period, _mu_ also appeared as the nasalized sound-change _n_.\n> Beginning in the Kamakura period, this _n_ changed to _u_ (う), which is how\n> it appears in modern Japanese. Thus, _ika-mu_ (行{い}か **む** , I will go)\n> becomes _ika-n_ (行{い}か **ん** ) and then ikō (行{い}か **う** ). This _u_ also\n> combined with the preceding verb stem to become _yō_ (よう), as in modern\n> Japanese _tabeyō_ (たべよう, let's eat).\" \n> ― Shirane, H. (2005). _Classical Japanese: A Grammar_ (p. 99). New York,\n> NY: Columbia University Press.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T01:05:32.227",
"id": "18772",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T01:05:32.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "18766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 18766 | null | 18772 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have recently heard that the phrase のみ means \"only\". Does it come from\nanother compound, like の実 or something? I don't think that's necessarily where\nit came from, but I would be surprised if that の was not the genitive\nparticle. (Or conjunctive? I'm not sure what the right term is.)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T06:21:12.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18767",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T07:27:44.987",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-23T07:27:44.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particles",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Where does のみ come from?",
"view_count": 445
} | [
{
"body": "Expanding on Darius's comment...\n\n大辞林 says (1) 語源は「の身」で，「…それ自身」と強調するのが原義といわれる。 Comes from の身 (GEN. body).\nOriginal meaning is emphasis of \"that thing itself\".\n\n(2) 漢文における文末助辞「耳」の訓読から生じた用法。 Comes from a native reading of the Classical\nChinese word 耳\n\n(3) 現代語では主として書き言葉に用いられ，これに相当する助詞としては，一般に「だけ」「ばかり」の語が用いられる In current usage,\nthe word is mainly used in written material. Generally, 「だけ」 and 「ばかり」 are\nused to express the same meaning.\n\nIn case you don't understand (2), 耳 is used in Classical Chinese (漢文) as a\ncontraction of 而已, a final particle meaning something like \"that is all\",\n\"nothing more\", \"that is the end of that\". The kun reading of 耳 is みみ, which\nwas modified to のみ, according to this theory. Note that this matches up with\nits usage in Japanese as a final particle, in sentences such as the first\ncomment below.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T16:22:26.680",
"id": "18770",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-22T16:40:59.360",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-22T16:40:59.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "3221",
"owner_user_id": "3221",
"parent_id": "18767",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18767 | null | 18770 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I found this sentence on a manga, and I can't find its meaning for I don't\nunderstand the function of にも in this case:\n\n> 勉強 **にも** スポーツ **にも** それから恋愛か。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T14:52:38.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18769",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-07T00:17:04.547",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-07T00:17:04.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "6812",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "What is the function of にも in this sentence?",
"view_count": 724
} | [
{
"body": "For example the question could have been \"what are you taking interests in\"\nwith \"in\" standing for に, this would be a suggestion for the answer: \"In\nlearning and in sports and also relationships.\"\n\nIn this case you are summing up things you would use に after in a full\nsentence. 勉強に興味あります。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T23:22:27.433",
"id": "18784",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T23:22:27.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7345",
"parent_id": "18769",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "In this context, 'にも' means 'as well as'",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T00:47:19.320",
"id": "18786",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T00:47:19.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7346",
"parent_id": "18769",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18769 | null | 18784 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18780",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there a set phrase for politely replying to an invitation to have your\nacademic paper published as a journal article?\n\nI presented a paper at a Japanese academic conference, and I've received an\nemail from the academic society's committee which says they have selected it\nto have it published in their annual academic journal\n(「発表者には要旨原稿をいただきたいということになりました。」) and that I must first reply to let them know\nwhether or not I accept the invitation (「まずは要旨掲載を希望するか否か、ご意向をお知らせ下さい。」).\n\nI want to thankfully accept the invitation. If I reply with\n\n> ご連絡ありがとうございます。\n>\n> はい、要旨掲載を希望します。\n>\n> よろしくお願いします。\n\nis that okay, or is it not polite enough? Is there a set phrase that should be\nused? Should the reply be longer? Should I thank them specifically for\nchoosing or for considering my paper for publication?\n\n* * *\n\n**Edit:**\n\nkimbrys notes, \"it might be quite too short of an answer for such email\" and\nnaruto writes, \"you can't be too polite.\" How can I write this sort of\nresponse email longer and more robustly in order to be more polite? What\nadditional sort of content would be standard?\n\nThis time, I received the instructions\n「…掲載する論文の執筆を依頼することが決まりました。以下に執筆要領を記しますので、それに従いご執筆願えるか否か、諾否をお知らせ下さい。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-22T23:50:50.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18771",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-21T03:02:27.513",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"politeness",
"keigo",
"email",
"academic-japanese"
],
"title": "How do you politely and gratefully reply to an invitation to be published?",
"view_count": 2243
} | [
{
"body": "お返事ありがとうございました。\n\n掲載していただければ光栄です。\n\nどうぞ宜しくお願いいたします。\n\nYet, it might be quite too short of an answer for such email.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T16:33:48.667",
"id": "18780",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T16:33:48.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7344",
"parent_id": "18771",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18771 | 18780 | 18780 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Differences in usage between 撮る{とる} and 写す{うつす}、写る｛うつる} ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T03:29:10.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18773",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-26T21:19:51.117",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-23T04:03:00.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "6986",
"owner_user_id": "6986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage",
"synonyms"
],
"title": "Differences in usage between 撮る{とる} and 写す{うつす}、写る｛うつる}?",
"view_count": 1338
} | [
{
"body": "More context would be helpful.\n\nFor starters, the last two are action verbs: 写す (transitive \"to photograph\")\nand 写る (intransitive \"to be photographed\"), so I would suggest looking into\nthe differences between those type of verbs. Quick example:\n\n写真を写す to take a picture この写真はとてもよく写っている. This photo came out very well (read:\nwell photographed).\n\nAs for the difference between 撮る and 写す, they both can be used to express the\nsame thing (take a photograph), but unlike 撮る, 写す can be also used in\ndifferent context (copy, reproduce)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T16:19:11.463",
"id": "18779",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T16:19:11.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7344",
"parent_id": "18773",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Basically,\n\n撮る → take a photograph \n写る → be in a photograph \n写す → copy something down\n\nAs @user3683045 mentioned, we also use 写す for photographing something.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T21:19:51.117",
"id": "18820",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-26T21:19:51.117",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5212",
"parent_id": "18773",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18773 | null | 18779 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18812",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the thread titled [usage cases for\n「ありがたい」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/17584/usage-cases-\nfor-%E3%81%82%E3%82%8A%E3%81%8C%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84) many very good answers were\ngiven. However, one issue that was not addressed was (when speaking formally)\nwhether ありがたい _brings an end to the thought_. What I mean is that\n\n * \"ありがとう\" might mean \"thank you very much. and whatever i am thanking you for is a done deal. reneging is not acceptable.\"\n * \"ありがたい\" seems more like \"i fully expect you to do what i am thankful for. but, stuff happens and you can renege without any hard feelings.\"\n\nSo, that is why in the thread titled [how do you politely and gratefully reply\nto an invitation to be\npublished](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18771/how-do-you-\npolitely-and-gratefully-reply-to-an-invitation-to-be-published), I would say:\n\n\"ご掲載になってくださって、 **ありがたい** です。これからも、よろしくお願いします\" \nrather than \n\"ご掲載になってくださって、 **ありがとう** ございます。これからも、よろしくお願いします。\"\n\nThe _usage cases for 「ありがたい」_ thread already answers every question I have\nabout 「ありがたい」。 But, with regard to the very specific usage case given in this\nthread, is that difference between **ありがたい** and **ありがとう** there?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T04:05:43.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18774",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-26T17:42:29.523",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "after saying \"ありがとう\" to someone, they can't renege without hard feelings?",
"view_count": 492
} | [
{
"body": "ありがたい is used when something is convenient/beneficial/welcome to the speaker.\nAnd it's very often used with \"if/もしも-clause\" or 仮定形 conjucation.\n\n> 論文を掲載していただければ、ありがたいです。 (before your article is reviewed)\n>\n> 教えてくれればありがたい(です)。(before someone actually teaches you something)\n\nAnd yes, sentences like these mean that your offer may or may not be accepted.\n(By the way, in the cover letter of a scientific article, I recommend\nreplacing ありがたいです with 幸い【さいわい】です, which is even politer.)\n\nI'd say 連用形 + ありがたい (present tense) is very unnatural:\n\n> (*) 間違いを教えてくれて、ありがたい(です)。 \n> (*) 論文を掲載していただき、ありがたいです。\n\nBut using ありがたかった after something was already done is OK:\n\n> 間違いを教えてくれて、ありがたかった。(≒ It was kind of X to point out ...)\n\nOn the other hand, ありがとう(ございます) is _Thank you_ , and it's usually used when\nsomething was already done, or determined to be done.\n\n> 論文を掲載していただき、ありがとうございます。(after your article was successfully published)\n>\n> 教えてくれてありがとう(ございます)。(after someone actually taught you something)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T18:08:58.017",
"id": "18812",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-26T17:42:29.523",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18774",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18774 | 18812 | 18812 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm currently self-teaching myself Japanese with the aim of becoming a\nproficient reader so I can read Japanese liteature without the aid of a\ntranslation. I've heard mention a few times of the language reforms that took\nplace in 1946; some of the authors I'm interested in reading (Ichiyo and\nSoseki) are from about 50 years before this. Am I going to encounter serious\nproblems when trying to read their work once I become proficient reading post-\nreform literature? Any pointers anyone can provide would be greatly\nappreciated.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T06:50:17.810",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18775",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T06:50:17.810",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7342",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"readings"
],
"title": "Difficulty of Meiji literature",
"view_count": 122
} | [] | 18775 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18783",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't even know if this is the correct place to post this. The only source\nthat I'm in touch with the Japanese language is through anime. So my question,\nwhich I understand that could be kinda silly,\n\nGomen'nasai translates to I'm sorry. Kiri-sute gomen is the right for a\nSamurai to \"Cut and leave\" in case a commoner insults his honor\n\nSo does \"gomen\" mean something literally ? or is it an untranslatable word?",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T08:49:37.810",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18776",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T21:43:27.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4276",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "How is \"gomen\" used?",
"view_count": 16802
} | [
{
"body": "The word ごめん (gomen) essentially means \"forgive\" or \"pardon\". ごめんなさい (gomen\nnasai) is a common phrase that literally means \"forgive me\" or \"pardon me\",\nand ごめん (gomen) or ごめんね (gomen ne) is a more colloquial way to say the same\nthing. Like saying \"sorry\" instead of saying \"I am sorry\".\n\nI don't know much about samurai-era Japanese, and so I've never heard \"kiri-\nsute gomen\" before. But assuming it's written 切り捨てごめん, ~~then it would\npresumably mean something like \"forgive them by cutting them and throwing them\naway\"~~.\n\n**Correction:** Based on [the defintion Darius Jahandarie linked in the\ncomments](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%8D/%E5%88%87%E3%82%8A%E6%8D%A8%E3%81%A6%E5%BE%A1%E5%85%8D%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF%E4%BD%95%E3%81%8B/),\nThe meaning of \"Kirisute gomen\" is more like \"pardoned for cutting and\nthrowing away\" and refers to the special right of being able to kill someone\nof a low station and not be charged with a crime. Essentially, a \"license to\nkill\" (legal pardon for killing). According to the same article, it was not a\ngeneral license to kill in every situation, but was to be exercised in accord\nwith the warrior customs of the time.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T20:55:29.243",
"id": "18783",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T21:43:27.170",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-23T21:43:27.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "302",
"owner_user_id": "302",
"parent_id": "18776",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18776 | 18783 | 18783 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Let's say I want to call a policeman, or I am in a n-person conversation\ninvolving a policeman and I want a word to refer to the policeman. And let's\nsay I want a respectful word.\n\nI believe おまわりさん could sound a bit insulting (low rank). \nShould I say 警察さん? \nIs there a more respectful way to call a policeman, who actually might be an\nofficer?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T11:55:00.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18777",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T04:45:41.470",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-24T04:45:41.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "107",
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"politeness"
],
"title": "Respectful way to say \"policeman\"",
"view_count": 5172
} | [
{
"body": "I do not think there is anything insulting with お巡りさん: I've definitely heard\nit said to koban people to their face by people with no ill-intent.\n\nBut it's also a term that specifically refers to koban-type cops (literally\nmeans \"person on the beat\"). Perhaps not higher-up officers or detectives.\n\nFor something more formal and more respectful, how about: 警察官 (police officer)\n\nThere's also 警察の職員 (police personnel), but that's really generic and maybe not\nwhat you need in your context.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T13:51:34.293",
"id": "18778",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-23T13:51:34.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "290",
"parent_id": "18777",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18777 | null | 18778 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference in usage/meaning between クラス and 学級? Why did I never\nlearn the latter in language classes?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T18:25:52.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18781",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T07:45:11.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference in usage between クラス and 学級",
"view_count": 1588
} | [
{
"body": "クラス at school can refer to:\n\n 1. a group of students who learn together (このクラスには生徒が35人います。)\n 2. a lesson, a lecture (5分後に数学のクラスが始まります)\n\nIn kanji, the former is 学級, and the latter is 授業/講義.\n\n学級 and クラス (in the first meaning) are basically interchangeable, but 学級 is\ntypically used in elementary and middle schools. For some reasons, people\nstart to prefer クラス maybe after entering high school. (Does this explain why\nyou didn't learn 学級?)\n\n> [学級 - Wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AD%A6%E7%B4%9A) \n> 一般には、 **幼稚園・小学校・中学校などで** 、幼児・児童・生徒などが学校生活の大半の時間を過ごす場\n\nAnd there are many set phrases where only one of the two can be used. For\nexample, クラス替え is usually not called 学級替え, and 学級閉鎖 (due to flu outbreak,\netc.) is far more common than クラス閉鎖.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T07:45:11.480",
"id": "18792",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T07:45:11.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18781 | null | 18792 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18791",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm working on an Android app that will help people learn Japanese kanji using\na flash-card style study system. As part of this app, I need to show kanji on\nthe screen both in plain-text form, and also possibly animations of the stroke\norder.\n\nThe problem is that the default system font used in Android, Roboto, doesn't\nlook much like handwritten Japanese. It is very square, and lacks the \"hooks\"\nand variations in thickness that I usually see in handwritten kanji. Not only\nthat, but there are some kanji in the font that are drawn in what I am told is\na Chinese variant of the writing, that might not reflect the way the kanji is\ndrawn in Japan.\n\nSo, I'd like to use a different font in my app to produce the flash cards and\nanimations. The question is: which one? There are a number of fonts on my PC\nthat I could potentially use (for example SimSun, Yu Mincho, or Kozuka), but\nI'm not sure which of them, if any, would be best. I was wondering, **does the\nJapanese government or education system provide any guidelines or official\nstandards that apply to what fonts should be used when teaching kanji?** If\nso, do you know where I can find them? If not, is there a font you would\nrecommend as a good foundation for learning kanji?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-23T20:42:33.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18782",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T05:39:31.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "302",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"stroke-order"
],
"title": "Is there an \"official\" font or other writing standard that should be used when teaching kanji?",
"view_count": 4124
} | [
{
"body": "The font you're looking for is 教科書体【きょうかしょたい】. It is based on how people\nhandwrite kanji.\n\nTextbooks for elementary school students are printed with this font family.\nAfter graduating from elementary schools, 明朝体 is primarily used.\n\nThe following article explains why 教科書体 is better than 明朝 or ゴシック family, for\nlearners.\n\n<http://www.mitsumura-tosho.co.jp/kyokasyo/syogaku/kokugo/qanda/number/02.asp>",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T05:39:31.257",
"id": "18791",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T05:39:31.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18782",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
] | 18782 | 18791 | 18791 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I hear 別に used as \"not in particular\", did this usage come about just directly\nfrom the meaning of \"separately\"? So when used, it means that someone has a\nseparate interest, like, etc. and hence they don't particularly have the\ninterest, or share the like?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T00:39:43.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18785",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T05:23:30.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "別に to mean \"not particularly\"",
"view_count": 1681
} | [
{
"body": "No, this negative expression means \"Not really\", \"I'm not interested\", \"I\ndon't care\", etc.\n\nI think this 「別に…」 is the shortened form of \"別に言いたいことはない\" or \"別にそういうわけではない\",\nand 別に here roughly corresponds to _particularly_.\n\nSomething positive, like \"これとは別のものが好きです\" or \"私はこれとは別に、言いたいことがあります\" is not what\nthe speaker want to say.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T05:23:30.170",
"id": "18790",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T05:23:30.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18785",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18785 | null | 18790 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have a question about how to properly answer a question.\n\nAt restaurants, the hostess will often ask 「何名様ですか」 (\"How many in your\nparty?\")\n\nFor example, if you have four people in your party, is it proper to reply\n「4名です」? Or is 「4人です」 better?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T01:14:06.687",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18787",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-06T16:35:26.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Proper answer to 「何名様ですか」",
"view_count": 2189
} | [
{
"body": "There is no difference between 4人です and 4名です.\n\nYou may say the word as you like.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T02:49:29.703",
"id": "18789",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-06T16:35:26.390",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-06T16:35:26.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18787",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
},
{
"body": "According to [the article](http://www.nhk.or.jp/kininaru-blog/55095.html) from\n\"[トクする日本語](http://www.nhk.or.jp/kininaru-blog/)\" by NHK, 人 is used when you\njust count the number of people whereas 名 is more used in a formal expression\nor when there is a fixed number.\n\n`「人{にん}」＝【単純{たんじゅん}に人数{にんずう}を数{かぞ}える場合{ばあい}】、「名{めい}」＝【改{あらた}まった表現{ひょうげん}をする場合{ばあい}、定員{ていいん}･定数{ていすう}のある場合{ばあい}】とまとめることができそうです`\n\nTherefore, restaurants wouldn't ask you \"何人様{なんにんさま}ですか\". As a customer \"４人\"\nis more appropriate since \"４名\" sounds a bit formal and objective. Although,\nnowadays people don't really mind whether \"４人\" or \"４名\" is used in response.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-09T19:57:15.303",
"id": "19826",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-11T09:04:34.240",
"last_edit_date": "2014-12-11T09:04:34.240",
"last_editor_user_id": "5090",
"owner_user_id": "5090",
"parent_id": "18787",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18787 | null | 18789 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24078",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm currently reading a children's book about numbers with sentences of the\nform:\n\n```\n\n numberは j1 j2\n \n```\n\nwhere `j1` and `j2` are japanese words and `j1` starts sounding similar to\n`number`.\n\nI am stuck with\n\n> 4は [シュワー]{しゅわー}っと しんかんせん\n\nwhere the \"ー\" is 4 times the expected size and yes, after it comes hiragana. I\nfigure it means \"4 stands for x shinkansens\" as the page shows a picture of 4\nsmiling electric trains that are sorted by size.\n\nHowever, I can not find a translation for シュワーっと, exept for `シュワシュワ ~\nbubliness`. But I don't see sense in that. Could it be an onomatopoeia =\ndescribing a sound? Also, why use 2 alphabets?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T14:58:55.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18793",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-02T00:05:11.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7355",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "meaning of シュワーっと",
"view_count": 672
} | [
{
"body": "シュワー is the sound of something moving fast, in this case, a bullet train.\n\nOnomatopoeia in Japanese is quite interesting. It plays a bigger role in\neveryday Japanese than it does in everyday English. There is common\nonomatopoeia for Japanese words where we have none for the same words in\nEnglish. And Japanese speakers will use often different onomatopoeia to\ndescribe the same sound.\n\nI remember watching a game show in Japan where participants had to identify\nthe nuances in sound conveyed by various onomatopoeia. For example, they were\ndebating about how ザー is the sound of strong rainfall, but ガー is the sound of\neven stronger rainfall.\n\nIn your sentence, シュワー , like most onomatopoeia, is written in katakana. The\nrest of the sentence is written in hiragana, as is typical for a children's\nbook.\n\nAs another user mentioned, っと immediately following the onomatopoeia makes it\nclear that シュワー is a quotation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-02T00:05:11.510",
"id": "24078",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-02T00:05:11.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9851",
"parent_id": "18793",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18793 | 24078 | 24078 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18804",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "On a recent question, [非回答者さん wrote the following\ncomment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18776/how-is-gomen-\nused#comment43025_18776):\n\n> Tokyoites say ごめんください all the time when entering another person's home. I\n> cannot even think of another phrase that could replace it.\n\nAnother user was surprised and [asked a follow-up question on\nchat](http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17827983#17827983):\n\n> Don't people use お邪魔します too when entering another people's house?\n\nThey do seem rather similar, so I thought I would ask about them here:\n\n### What exactly is the difference between ごめんください and お邪魔します？",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T15:17:49.160",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18794",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T00:52:21.607",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between ごめんください and お邪魔します",
"view_count": 1051
} | [
{
"body": "When you visit another person's home, you say ごめんください in order to check\nwhether anybody is home.\n\nWhen you enter another person's home, you say お邪魔します to the host.\n\nWhen you leave another person's home, you say お邪魔しました to the host.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T00:25:50.217",
"id": "18804",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T00:52:21.607",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-25T00:52:21.607",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18794",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 18794 | 18804 | 18804 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18796",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have just learned about \"WH question\" in japanese. Now I'm learning about\n\"What is\" and since the examples are so simple, only \"What's your name\". I'm\ncurious how to say \"What are the differences between car and motorcycle\".\n\nThis is what I try so far for \"What are the differences between car and\nmotorcycle\" :\n\n> 間にそしてオートバイを異なるはなんですか？\n\nAnd this is for \"What are the differences\" :\n\n> 異なるはなんですか？\n\nAre those correct?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T16:36:11.310",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18795",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T18:46:18.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7210",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"tense"
],
"title": "How do you say \"What are the differences between car and motorcycle \"?",
"view_count": 13163
} | [
{
"body": "To ask about the difference between Ａ and Ｂ, you could say:\n\n> **Ａ と Ｂ の違{ちが}い** は何{なん}ですか？\n\nHere, we put two nouns together with と, giving us the larger noun phrase ＡとＢ.\nWe want to join this to the noun 違い \"difference\", so we use the genitive\nparticle の.\n\nLiteral translation doesn't work very well between English and Japanese; our\nphrase is literally close to \"the difference of A and B\". There's no need to\nsay something like \"between\" in Japanese. The little words like prepositions\nor particles rarely match up well between languages, and this is especially\ntrue between English and Japanese.\n\n間にそしてオートバイを isn't really comprehensible, but it looks like you tried to\ntranslate \"between\" and \"and\" using a dictionary. That doesn't work, I'm\nafraid! You can't translate word-by-word into Japanese. You have to learn how\nsentences are normally formed, and that's different in each language.\n\nFor now, don't try to form your own sentences from scratch using a dictionary.\nInstead, try to pattern everything you say after correct Japanese. You might\nfind a book like Naoko Chino's [_Dictionary of Basic Japanese Sentence\nPatterns_](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/4770026080) helpful.\n\nBy the way, your sentence doesn't appear to have \"car\" in it. You can use\n車【くるま】 for \"car\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T17:04:50.177",
"id": "18796",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T17:04:50.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "I also believe you can say it like so:\n\n> **AとBは** どう違{ちが}うの？\n\nOr \"As for **A** and **B** , how are they different?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T18:46:18.230",
"id": "18797",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T18:46:18.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17",
"parent_id": "18795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18795 | 18796 | 18796 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18799",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If you ask a question, such as 誰がこれが分かる？ Is this still grammatical? Is it okay\nto use two が's in the same sentence?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T20:17:48.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18798",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-25T14:47:35.720",
"last_edit_date": "2015-10-25T14:47:35.720",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "Using が multiple times in one sentence",
"view_count": 1642
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, it is grammatically correct. But if you want to avoid multiple がs like\nthis, you can replace the former with に.\n\n> * 誰 _ **に**_ これがわかる？\n>\n\nSee also [this topic about が and に\ninterchangeablitily](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4440/78).",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T20:52:47.910",
"id": "18799",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T22:26:26.160",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18798",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18798 | 18799 | 18799 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "These two words appear to mean the same thing and the entry on Google\ndictionary gives the definition as the same for both.\n\nAre there any cases where you would use one instead of the other?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T22:44:17.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18800",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-19T18:45:37.763",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-24T22:56:37.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "7073",
"owner_user_id": "7073",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"usage",
"meaning",
"kanji",
"word-usage",
"kanji-choice"
],
"title": "Is there any difference in meaning between 陥る and 落ち入る?",
"view_count": 305
} | [
{
"body": "Although it's etymologically a compound of 落{お}ち＋入{い}る, it's now usually\nwritten 陥る instead. The NHK漢字表記辞典 recommends writing it 陥る and doesn't mention\nthe other spelling at all. Some dictionaries list both spellings, as you point\nout; for example, 明鏡国語辞典 lists the word under 陥る but mentions the alternative\netymological spelling:\n\n> 〔表記〕語源を反映させて「落ち入る」とも。\n\nThis is written under sense one, 「落ちて、中のほうに入る」, so I suppose this spelling\nwould likely only be used when the word is used in its literal sense, as\nreflected by the kanji 落 and 入. But if I try to check actual usage by\nsearching the [_Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese\n(BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/) using the freely available 少納言\ninterface, I find the following results:\n\n```\n\n 陥る 600 results\n 落ち入る only 1 result\n \n```\n\nSo regardless of meaning, writing it as 落ち入る is a lot less common. I think you\ncan stick to writing 陥る yourself, and be prepared to recognize the alternate\nspelling if you ever see it.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T23:02:13.517",
"id": "18802",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-24T23:10:16.873",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-24T23:10:16.873",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "When I write おちいる in 漢字、I always write 陥る. I don't think I've ever seen the\ncase of おちいる being described as 落ち入る. MS Word simply converts 'ochiiru' into\n陥る, with no alternative.\n\nWe hear 落ち込む meaning \"depressed\" pretty often, but no 落ち入る.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-03-18T22:18:57.800",
"id": "32973",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-18T23:00:05.580",
"last_edit_date": "2016-03-18T23:00:05.580",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "18800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "It's all about how ancient Japanese decided to make correspondences between\nnative Japanese words and Chinese characters. A native Japanese word おちいる is\nundoubtedly composed of two native Japanese words おち[る] and いる. But one\nancient Japanese guy found this particular combination would better translate\nto a single Chinese character, rather than a combination of literal\ntranslation of each of them",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-03-19T18:45:37.763",
"id": "32993",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-19T18:45:37.763",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13840",
"parent_id": "18800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18800 | null | 18802 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm asking mostly about verbs like 陥る / 落ち入る though I'd also be interested in\nnouns and adjectives.\n\nI'm not really looking for synonyms, more words where the meaning and\npronunciation are the same but the kanji changes. I know there are instances\nof this though I don't know what it's called and ideally I'd like some more\nexamples.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-24T23:01:15.737",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18801",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T15:24:02.367",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7073",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"synonyms",
"homophonic-kanji"
],
"title": "What is the term for a word which can be written with one kanji or two kanji but where the meaning is the same?",
"view_count": 214
} | [
{
"body": "One convenient way to manage situations like this is to combine following\npieces to convey your intention:\n\n * 同音【どうおん】 same reading (on- or kun-)\n * 同訓【どうくん】 same kun-reading\n * 異音【いおん】 different reading\n * 同義【どうぎ】 same meaning\n * 異義【いぎ】 different meaning\n * 類義【るいぎ】 similar meaning\n * 同字【どうじ】 same kanji\n * 異字【いじ】 different kanji\n\nFor example, there are\n[同音異義語](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E9%9F%B3%E7%95%B0%E7%BE%A9%E8%AA%9E),\n[同音異字語](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E9%9F%B3%E7%95%B0%E5%AD%97),\n[同字異音異義語](http://www.h-dc.com/hantai/ionigigomain.htm), etc.\n\nYou can mix these freely, and at least make yourself understood in blog posts\nor Q&A forums like _Y! Chiebukuro_. But professional linguists may have better\nspecific words or rules which I'm not aware of.\n\nYour 陥る/落ち入る pair is 同音異字 which happens to be 同義, too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T15:24:02.367",
"id": "18811",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T15:24:02.367",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18801",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18801 | null | 18811 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[These are the lyrics to a metal song about Lovecraft's _The Dunwich\nHorror_](http://rocklyric.jp/lyric.php?sid=136149/%E3%83%80%E3%83%B3%E3%82%A6%E3%82%A3%E3%83%83%E3%83%81%E3%81%AE%E6%80%AA/%E4%BA%BA%E9%96%93%E6%A4%85%E5%AD%90).\nThe band tends go Classical for effect (cf. the refrain at the end: 闇にこぞりて /\n我が主来ませり …). The first verse is transcribed in most Japanese sites as this:\n\n> 俺は大地と海洋の \n> 近親婚の末息子 \n> 因襲めいた村の奥 \n> 夜鷹に言葉 **教わった**\n\nHowever, when I listen to the song, I hear the singer go /o.so.wa.ra.ta/\n([0:56- here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mE1ndqXbdUY) – notice that his\n/r/ is often lateralized; cf. 0:41, 0:54, 3:24 etc.). Not _osowatta_ , not\n_osowareta_ , but _osowa **ra** ta_.\n\nWhen I told my teachers about this they said, “B-baka na! Surely you're\nmishearing! Sonna koto wa nai hazu! That form doesn’t exist, it doesn’t even\n_make sense_!” They said it was impossible. They said no native speaker would\never produce it. But I'll show them! With the dark powers of ad-hoc Google\nsearches, I'll show all of them!\n\nFrom 『去日来日』 by 植松正 (1977)：\n\n> これは、よほど学「先生」と言ったって、学校などで **教わらた** 先生というのとは、だいぶ感じが違う。\n\nFrom 『逸見東洋の世界』 by 臼井洋輔 (1990):\n\n> 寺子屋では **教わらた** のか、心そこにあらずで、彼が本気で出入りしていたのは、[…]\n\nFrom 『現代のエスプリ』 , somewhere between nos. 286 to 289:\n\n> その構造は数学的にみても動をやってのけます。たとえば彼らは、誰にも **教わらた** 神経結合の組み合わせだけで、[…]\n\nThese 3 are all we get from Google Books, but they're in actual print. Google\nScholar claims two more hits but they're restricted, and a regular web search\ngets some ~20 examples (versus 170 for _osowatta_ ).\n\nSo my question is: Are these all typos? A surface phonetic process (which)? A\ndialect form? Language change? And what does it _mean_ – is it equivalent to\n_osowaratta_ 、 _osowareta_ (if this even makes sense?)、 some Classical form I\ndon’t recognize, or what?",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-19T11:46:35.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18806",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-19T10:13:23.973",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-18T02:50:16.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "622",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"phonology",
"morphology"
],
"title": "Japanese: \"osowarata\"?",
"view_count": 413
} | [
{
"body": "I listened to the music, and it also sounded like ら to me as a single sound.\nBut, I simply understand this as った.\n\nJapanese ら's r is generally an alveolar lateral flap, which is like /t/\nwithout plosive or stop. Although, these two sounds are quite different from\nJapanese natives, they are close. If you open your mouth and breathe while\nsaying /っ/, it sounds like ら.\n\nI don't think Google Books scanned correctly. ら and っ look similar, and some\nother parts of these books were also not scanned correctly.\n\nosowareta doesn't make sense because it is 襲われた (attacked). Also, 教わる is 四段活用,\nso the original form is osowari-ta, modified by 撥音便 to be osowat-ta, but this\nchange occurred 1000+-200 years ago, and the original form is not natural at\nall now. And, osowarA is 未然形, and it is so unnatural to go with た. I believe\nthere are no dialects like this.\n\nTypos like 教わるた are common. Say you typed \"businessman\" and decided to change\nit to \"businessperson.\" Sometimes you delete too much or less and get a\n\"businesperson.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-23T08:26:03.820",
"id": "28222",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-19T06:39:35.910",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-19T06:39:35.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "18806",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "There is no Japanese word that's spelt or spoken as \"教わらた.\"\n\nNeither the past tense of the verb, \"教える\" or \"教わる\" does inflect into \"教わらた.\"\n\nIt should be 教わった, 教えられた、or 習った if we use a different word. I wonder why such\nan expression as \"寺子屋では教わらたのか,\" and \"誰にも教わらた神経結合の組み合わせ\" exists in reliable\npublications.\n\nI think it's a typo, or perhaps you misread the word in question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-19T10:13:23.973",
"id": "36014",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-19T10:13:23.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "18806",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18806 | null | 28222 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18813",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example I find myself saying things like:\n\n> What did you win, bro?\n\nI could leave out the \"bro\" and the sentence would be complete but I\nunconsciously add emphasis with the subject again because it's the way I\nspeak.\n\nIn a conversation, would it be okay to do the same in Japanese for emphasis as\nwell? Something like:\n\n> 何を当てるの[兄貴]{あにき}?\n\nI'm unsure since in Japanese you can omit the subject altogether. Or maybe it\njust doesn't sound or translate the same, thoughts?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T14:47:15.040",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18807",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T23:50:17.387",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-25T19:01:54.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "3568",
"owner_user_id": "3568",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Repeating subject for emphasis okay?",
"view_count": 315
} | [
{
"body": "As virmaior said in the comments, \"bro\" in this sentence is a vocative - it's\nused to address \"bro\". It's not the subject of the sentence. The subject of\nthe English sentence is \"you\".\n\nVocatives' natural position is at the end or beginning of a sentence. In\nwriting, you usually put a comma to separate it. When speaking, you make a\nshort pause.\n\nThus\n\n> What did you win, bro?\n\nto me looks better written as\n\n> 何が当たったの、兄貴?\n\n(Note, I changed the structure of the sentence based on 非回答者's comment below.)\n\nAs for omitting or adding a vocative, yes, you can use it or not, not very\ndissimilar to English:\n\n> 何が当たったの、兄貴? What did you win, bro?\n>\n> 兄貴、何が当たったの? Bro, what did you win?\n>\n> 何が当たったの? What did you win?",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T21:31:55.277",
"id": "18813",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T23:50:17.387",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"parent_id": "18807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18807 | 18813 | 18813 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm reading a children's book (no kanji) and the sentence is:\n\n> いどうはんばいしゃは、 みんなが だいすきな たべものを うってるよ。\n\nFrom the context, I figure it means:\n\n> The mobile catering guy everyones favourite food selling\n\n(I'm not good at particles) My question is: What is the form うってる?\n\nI assume that よ is the emphasis-particle and the word is 売る - \"to sell\",\nbecause context, but I do not get the conjugation. I checked\n[here](http://japaneseverbconjugator.com/VerbDetails.asp?JapaneseVerb=uru&VerbClass=1&EnglishVerb=sell),\nbut the closest form I could find is \"utte iru\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T14:56:27.103",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18808",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-25T03:37:54.510",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-27T13:50:56.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "7355",
"owner_user_id": "7355",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"contractions"
],
"title": "What word and form is うってる？",
"view_count": 899
} | [
{
"body": "売ってる is a contraction of 売っている. The い in ~ている verb endings is often dropped in\ncasual speech.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T15:08:01.683",
"id": "18809",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T15:08:01.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7359",
"parent_id": "18808",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "売{う}ってる is an informal contracted form of 売って **い** る.\n\nIn the 〜ている construction, いる is a special type of verb called a \"subsidiary\nverb\" (or 補助動詞 in Japanese), a verb which serves a grammatical purpose rather\nthan having its literal meaning, and [this type of verb very often contracts\nwith\n〜て.](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18157/%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8A%E3%81%8F-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8F-for-\npreparation-conjugation-and-nuance/18159#18159)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-25T15:10:20.690",
"id": "18810",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-25T15:10:20.690",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18808",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18808 | null | 18810 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18816",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "値段 (nedan) and 代金 (daikin) both means \"cost\" but im not sure where is a\ndifference.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T12:59:04.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18815",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T15:00:41.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7363",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What is difference between 値段 (nedan) and 代金 (daikin)?",
"view_count": 3999
} | [
{
"body": "The meaning of 値段 is \"price\"and the meaning of 代金 is \"payment\"\n\nFor example, 「この本の値段は、1000円です。消費税を含めると代金は1080円になります。(日本の消費税は8％)」\n\n値段は物の価格。代金とは、買った物の代わりに出すお金。",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T17:14:41.787",
"id": "18816",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-26T19:35:47.310",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-26T19:35:47.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18815",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "\"Nedan\" is a cost of individual item. \"Daikin\" is a cost of total order\nincluding VAT.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T15:00:41.137",
"id": "21517",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T15:00:41.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9263",
"parent_id": "18815",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] | 18815 | 18816 | 18816 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18823",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A few minutes ago on TV I heard the phrase `実に`. I know that `実` is used like\n`実は` - means `the fact, that..`. But what the person have mean by saying `実に`?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T19:47:04.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18817",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-08T05:10:36.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between 実は and 実に",
"view_count": 2176
} | [
{
"body": "実に means \"very\", \"really, \"surely\" in English and 本当に in Japanese.\n\nFor example, あなたは実に美しい。(You are very beautiful).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T20:04:59.670",
"id": "18818",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-08T05:10:36.630",
"last_edit_date": "2017-07-08T05:10:36.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "`実に` is used as an adverb, for example to reinforce a feeling or emphasize a\nfact.\n\n```\n\n 実に美しい。 [It|He|She|etc] is _truly_ beautiful.\n \n```\n\n`truly`, `really`, `indeed` would all be acceptable translations (depending on\nthe context). @DariusJahandarie suggested `truly` and it fits actually very\nwell as it shares the same \"truth\" root (see my comment about `実` itself).\n\n`実は` is used as `To tell the truth` or `To be honest` for example in English,\nin order to reveal a truth that until now was somehow hidden.\n\n```\n\n 実は昨日でした。 [To tell the truth|Actually], it was yesterday. (with the added meaning that you didn't know and now I reveal it to you)\n \n```\n\nThe difference comes from the function of the particle appended to it. `実`\nhere has the same meaning as `ほんとう` which you may be more acquainted with. And\nwith which you encounter the same difference when appended by either `に` or\n`は`:\n\n```\n\n ほんとうに優しい。 [He|She]'s very/really kind.\n ほんとうは優しいよ。 In truth / Actually, [I|he|she] [am|is] kind. (meaning e.g. \"[I don't|He doesn't] look so, but in truth ...\")\n \n```\n\nSame again with `実際{じっさい}`: `実際に` and `実際は` have similar nuances.\n\nYou may encounter `実` in other expressions again such as `実のところ`, or `実をいうと`,\nwhich both mean the same as `実は`. You see here that `実をいうと` translates\ndirectly into the English `to tell the truth`.\n\nTo sum it up, I could answer to @DariusJahandarie bewilderment about my\ninitial omission of `truly` as a potential translation for `実に` by:\n\n```\n\n 実{じつ}に合{あ}う訳{やく}ですね。実{じつ}は全{まった}く思{おも}いつきませんでした。\n \n```\n\n, and by the way those wouldn't be interchangeable ;)\n\nPS: stumbled upon\n[this](http://www.tanos.co.uk/jlpt/skills/vocab/sentences/?vocabid=86315)\nextensive list of examples of usage of `実に` along with translations, it might\nbe a good resource to forge a better feeling of the various contexts the\nexpression can be used.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T23:21:18.127",
"id": "18823",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-08T04:43:06.180",
"last_edit_date": "2017-07-08T04:43:06.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4533",
"parent_id": "18817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18817 | 18823 | 18823 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How long has katakana been used as today, to represent non-Japanese words,\nonomatopoeia et al.? But specifically, has this usage been around since before\nU.S. Commodore Matthew Perry arrived in Japan in the 19th century? I read in\nGoto-Jones' _A Very Short Introduction to Modern Japan_ that Japan around this\ntime was very insular and distrusting of foreigners, Perry's arrival being a\ncatalyst that changed this. So I assumed that around that time, the Japanese\nwouldn't have used katakana to represent foreign words if they didn't\nassociate with other countries anyway.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T20:56:41.893",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18819",
"last_activity_date": "2023-08-17T23:06:20.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"history",
"katakana"
],
"title": "Did the modern usage of katakana predate the Americans?",
"view_count": 577
} | [
{
"body": "My understanding is that until the Meiji era, through the early 1900's,\nforeign words were most often written in kanji. Perhaps the sudden exposure to\nforeign cultures and the rise of the merchant class and marketing led to it's\nemergence as the definitive way to write foreign non-Chinese words. As the\nscript was imported centuries ago, it is possible that it has had always been\nwidely regarded as non-native.\n\n * 檸檬 (レモン) lemon\n * 仏蘭西 (フランス) France\n * 麦酒 (ビール) beer",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-26T21:47:03.213",
"id": "18822",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-26T21:47:03.213",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3875",
"parent_id": "18819",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "My informal understanding is that hiragana was originally \"woman's alphabet\"\nand katakana was \"man's alphabet.\" Now, it has evolved to hiragana to\nrepresents Japanese native words and grammar parts while katakana represents\nforeign words. Of course, sometimes katakana is used instead of hiragana just\nto be rude or funny or whatever. For example, ゴメン was used instead of ごめん just\nto be less polite or whatever.\n\nJust a fun tidbit I learned myself......",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-03-25T19:34:44.330",
"id": "93851",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-25T19:34:44.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "50909",
"parent_id": "18819",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18819 | null | 18822 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18827",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the meaning of 具体的に? Usage of particle `に` in this context is not very\nclear to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-27T07:58:38.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18826",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T00:23:06.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of 具体的に",
"view_count": 361
} | [
{
"body": "具体的に means \"practically\" or more literally \"concretely.\" The addition of the に\nchanges 具体的 to function adverbially.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-27T08:18:01.450",
"id": "18827",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T00:23:06.873",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-28T00:23:06.873",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "18826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18826 | 18827 | 18827 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was wondering if someone could help me with the kanbun reading of this text:\n\n> 這箇是誰誰是我. (It is an expression used by Dôgen in Eihei kôroku 9, 55).\n\nAlthough I am unsure, I figured one possible reading might be:\n\n> 是【これ】這箇【しゃこ】は 誰【だれ】是【これ】我【われ】は 誰【だれ】.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-27T09:31:16.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18828",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-08T12:47:25.737",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T07:19:50.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "7367",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "Kanbun reading of this expression",
"view_count": 478
} | [
{
"body": "The 1988 Shunjusha edition of Dogen (ed. Kagamishima Genryu 鏡島元隆) gives this\nreading:\n\n> 這箇はこれ誰そ誰かこれ我\n>\n> kore wa kore ta so, tare ka kore ware\n\n\"Who is this? Who am I?\" (or more provocatively \"... is me?\")\n\nPoints that might interest you:\n\n * 這箇 _can_ be pronounced \"shako\" but in most of the kanbun I've seen it's just assigned the reading \"kore\"\n\n * When 是 is used as a copula, as it is here, the \"kore\" is normally put just before the predicate, not at the start of the sentence: \"X是Y\" → \"X (wa), kore Y\" → (En.) \"X is Y\"\n\n * 誰 is traditionally \"ta(re)\" in kanbun rather than \"dare\", because the rules for kanbun were set down before the first consonant of \"tare\" became voiced a couple of centuries ago",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-08T12:47:25.737",
"id": "36515",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-08T12:47:25.737",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "531",
"parent_id": "18828",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18828 | null | 36515 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "23158",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Japanese language is `日本語`. But if I want to say `The language of Japanese\npeople` - should I write `日本人の言{げん}語{ご}`?\n\nAnd if I want to say the same about animals, for example `cat` - like `cat's\nlanguage` - is it right to say `猫の言語`?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-27T10:00:29.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18829",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-10T02:43:21.820",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-27T11:55:46.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "7045",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"usage"
],
"title": "Proper usage of 語 and 言語 and 言葉 when speaking about someone's language",
"view_count": 3821
} | [
{
"body": "Many countries/cultural groups already have a predefined ~語 in Japanese,\nアラビヤ語, セルビア語, for example.\n\n言葉 is the all-purpose word for \"words\" and \"language\" ... the kanji do it\njustice as \"leaves of talk\"\n\n言語 actually leans more toward \"linguistics\" 言語学 or \"the study of language\"\n\n言葉は水だ \"language is liquid\" or \"language is water\" ... I don't think it would\nwork as well using 言語 instead.\n\nIf you wanted to ask someone what languages they speak, you could ask 何語 話せますか\nOR どんな言葉 話せますか",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-10T02:43:21.820",
"id": "23158",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-10T02:43:21.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "18829",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18829 | 23158 | 23158 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18862",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[dic.yahoo.co.jp](http://dic.search.yahoo.co.jp/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=kb&p=%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8F%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dic_id=all&stype=prefix)、[weblio.jp](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8F%E3%81%95%E3%82%93)、and\nother dictionaries, state that the parts of speech for「たくさん」are noun and\n形容動詞。imho, usage cases where たくさん is used as 形容詞 is uncommon. I have seen たくさん\ntake the な particle in sentences such as \"写真{しゃしん}がたくさんな記事{きじ}\" . But, I have\nnever seen たくさん take the に particle.\n\nI recently heard the sentence:\n\n> \"人がたくさん参加{さんか}した。\"\n\nThat sounds ok to me but looks weird. I cannot help but wonder if something\ngrammatically needs to be between \"たくさん\" and \"参加\". Surely, there must be a\n助詞{じょし}, Perhaps, can you write:\n\n> 人がたくさん **に** 参加した\n\nTo function as a full-fledged 形容動詞、たくさん must be able to take the 「に」助詞. I've\nnever said \"...たくさんに...\". I would like to add this to my vocabulary. examples\nplease?\n\nIn the thread titled\n[たくさん：形容動詞](http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2642823) _Tonky_\nseems to say that \"...たくさんに...\" never happens. In the lengthy thread titled\n[usage of たくさん vs. 多い](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/864/usage-\nof-%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8F%E3%81%95%E3%82%93-vs-%E5%A4%9A%E3%81%84?rq=1) no one\ncreates a sentence that has the \"...たくさんに...\" construct.\n\nIf たくさん can take な, but not a に、then it would be questionable whether it is\nreally a 形容動詞, right?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T03:30:53.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18832",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T11:03:56.787",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"parts-of-speech"
],
"title": "Making 「たくさん」act as a full-fledged 形容動詞{けいようどうし}",
"view_count": 241
} | [
{
"body": "I think there are a couple of points to make here:\n\n 1. Nouns of quantity are similar to number+classifier compounds in that they're often used in \"bare form\" as adverbs:\n\n> りんごを1個食べた ~ 1個のりんごを食べた \n> りんごをたくさん食べた ~ たくさんのりんごを食べた\n\nin both cases, the former version with the adverbial form is the more natural\none, and the latter tends to be used only when for some reason, the\nnumber+classifier+noun needs to be confined into one noun phrase. Note\ntherefore: **No particle is missing after たくさん**.\n\n 2. The reason that *たくさんに doesn't exist is not that たくさん is not a 形容動詞, but semantic reasons, similar to how there's no \"manily\" in English, and \"in a many way\" doesn't make sense.\n\n 3. It seems you might not be aware that some 形容動詞 take の instead of な, for example たくさん and 普通. You'll find that there's some discussion whether it really makes sense to label these as 形容動詞 (see e.g. [So-called の-adjectives - how does の *really* work?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2770/so-called-%E3%81%AE-adjectives-how-does-%E3%81%AE-really-work)), but at least this explains why you found that label in your dictionary.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T04:09:25.147",
"id": "18862",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T11:03:56.787",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "18832",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18832 | 18862 | 18862 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Where does the phrase だらけ come from? I only know だ as a copula and ら as a\nconditional marker or pluralizing suffix, are either of these at use in this\nphrase? My dictionary lists it as \"implying (negatively) that something is\nfull of\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T04:56:06.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18833",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T05:12:14.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Where does だらけ come from?",
"view_count": 196
} | [
{
"body": "As far as I know, there is no consensus for the origin of this word. I've\nchecked a number of resources including 日本国語大辞典 (but the 精選版, not the full\nedition), 日本文法大辞典, and the other various monolingual dictionaries I have at\nhand, and none offer an explanation.\n\nMartin offers one theory, courtesy of Ōtsuki, on page 136 of his 1975\n_Reference Grammar of Japanese_ , where he discusses the etymology of several\nwords including だらけ. First he notes:\n\n> Where do these words come from? **Many of those with distinctively voiced\n> initials go back to elements with voiceless initials, having picked up the\n> voicing as part of the well-known compound nigori process**. The restrictive\n> だけ is from the noun たけ 'length; total quantity', related to たか 'amount,\n> volume' and たか- 'high, tall' (as is たけ 'peak').\n\nHe gives a number of other examples that fit this pattern, then discusses だらけ\nvery briefly:\n\n> **The origin of だらけ is problematical; one suggestion (Ōtsuki) has it related\n> to たらたら 'dripping profusely'**.\n\nI don't know if you'll find this information satisfying, but it's all I can\ndig up at the moment. Perhaps someone else will have something to add.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T05:12:14.657",
"id": "18835",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T05:12:14.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18833",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18833 | null | 18835 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18836",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "`kono kami ha yuki sou da` - is this correct? \nI know that rashii and mitai can be used ~ but that's beside the point.\n\nAlso,if 'sou da' can be used with 'N' - how do we differentiate 'seems like'\nwith 'heard that' in the above case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T05:05:57.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18834",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T06:23:38.623",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "N + sou desu is acceptable",
"view_count": 615
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not sure what you mean by your example sentence ... but as you state\nthere's two ~そう constructions.\n\nThese are normally called [伝聞]{でんぶん}, hearsay and [様態]{ようたい}, \"seems like\".\n\nAccording to nearly all the sources I can find, you cannot place a noun before\nthe \"seems like\" 様態 one. And when you do so before the hearsay one, you need\nto put a だ.\n\n> この[本]{ほん}は[仏教]{ぶっきょう}の[聖典]{せいてん}だそうです。\n\nI hear that this book is a Buddhist scripture.\n\nNow what's confusing to me (as a non-native speaker of Japanese) is what you\nmean by two of the words you've got there \"kami\" and \"yuki\" ... \"yuki\" could\nbe either \"snow\" ([雪]{ゆき}) or a verb conjugation of iku [行]{ゆ}き or a personal\nname. \"kami\" could be either [神]{かみ} \"god\" , [髪]{かみ} hair or [紙]{かみ} paper or\n[上]{かみ}. So I'm not really sure what you intend to mean by the sentence. Do\nyou mean to say \"the sky looks like snow\", \"I heard the God is snow\", \"The god\nseems to be going\" ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T06:00:21.880",
"id": "18836",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T06:23:38.623",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-28T06:23:38.623",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "18834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18834 | 18836 | 18836 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18839",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've run into this use of も a few times and I'm not sure what to make of it.\nHere's the sentence I'm confused about:\n\n> 余裕を見せていられる **のも** 、いまの内だ。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T06:26:24.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18837",
"last_activity_date": "2021-02-05T15:35:16.207",
"last_edit_date": "2021-02-05T15:35:16.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "5305",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "what does のも mean at the end of a clause?",
"view_count": 2807
} | [
{
"body": "> 「[余裕]{よゆう}を[見]{み}せていられる **のも** 、いまの[内]{うち}だ。」\n\nThe 「の」 is a nominalizing particle. It enables the verb phrase 「見せていられる」 to\nfunction as a noun.\n\nThe 「も」 is kind of like \"also\" but not quite in that it only hints at a\npossibility that there might be another thing that the speaker thinks applies\nbesides 余裕を見せていられること.\n\n> 「\"Verb phrase in potential\" + の + も + いまのうちだ。」 means:\n>\n> \"The situation where you could be (verb phrase) will not last long.\"\n\n余裕を見せていられる = \"(you could be) looking like you have leeway\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T06:54:14.503",
"id": "18839",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T07:20:38.140",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18837",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18837 | 18839 | 18839 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18848",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> kono team ga makeru (hazu ga nai / wake ga nai).\n\nWhich one is correct? \nHow do we differentiate the use of the above?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T06:47:35.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18838",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T10:21:32.547",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-29T10:21:32.547",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "expressing 'not possible that'",
"view_count": 567
} | [
{
"body": "Both are correct and the wake version is stronger. (The ga after team is very\nnatural. ~~The subject in a sub-clause is basically denoted by ga.~~ Or rather\nany combinations of \"kono team ga/ha makeru hazu ga/ha\" can work in many\nsituatoins. ~~[edit] The usual wa/ga theory cause a mental breakdown to those\ninsubstantial noun structures because \"hazu\" is the subject in terms of syntax\nwhile it's semantically more like a part of the predicate.~~ It seems\nidiomatic in the negative form.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T07:39:53.650",
"id": "18842",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T00:55:29.817",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-29T00:55:29.817",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18838",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "* ~makeru wakeganai translates to \"there is no way they will lose\"\n * ~makeru hazuganai translates to \"they probably wont lose/they shouldn't lose\"\n\nSo differentiating them depends on what you want to say. ~makeru kanousei\n(可能性）ha hikui would be another, albeit colder, way to say that there is a low\nprobability of them losing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T15:34:58.637",
"id": "18848",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T15:34:58.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7374",
"parent_id": "18838",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18838 | 18848 | 18848 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18844",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm trying to understand the grammar of 「出{で}て」 in 「出{で}て来{き}ました」. Why is 「て」\nused here?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T07:37:45.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18841",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T13:26:11.597",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T13:26:11.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Understanding the meaning and grammar of 出{で}て in 出{で}て来{き}ました",
"view_count": 443
} | [
{
"body": "For example, \"to leave home\" can translate into 家を出る and \"to come\" is 来る.\nThen, \"to leave home and come\" translates to 家を出て来る.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T08:19:23.600",
"id": "18843",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T08:19:23.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "て is used for runnig on two verbs. In this case 出る and 来る are run on, so it\nbecome 出て来る. This usage is often used.\n\nFor example, 走る and 行く are run on, so it become 走って行く.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T08:52:48.773",
"id": "18844",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T08:52:48.773",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The ～て form roughly corresponds to the concept of the gerund from English. It\nis a non-finite conjugation that makes the verb dependent on some subsequent\npredicate to properly describe when and how the action is happening. In\nparticular, it has a few special usages with various auxiliary verbs.\n\nThe main point is that ～て strips a verb of any temporal placement, thus\npriming it for easy manipulation by other verbs.\n\nedit: One major class of special usages is the grammatical aspects,\n～ている・～ておく・～てしまう・～てある・～ていく・～てくる. Depending on the context, your ～てきました is\neither using the ～てくる aspect or using くる literally to mean \"to come\". The\nprecise meaning would depend on the context.\n\nEither way, て fulfills the same role of stripping 出る of its tense and looking\nto くる to decide what its new tense/aspect is.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T14:21:12.680",
"id": "18845",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T18:15:15.840",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-28T18:15:15.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "4481",
"owner_user_id": "4481",
"parent_id": "18841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18841 | 18844 | 18844 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18854",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From JapanesePod101, with their translation:\n\nミュージカルは、歌【うた】にのせて物語【ものがたり】を展開【てんかい】する。 \nA musical can tell a story with songs.\n\nI understand that のせる means (amongst other things) \"to take on board\". Does\n歌にのせて mean something like the musical is \"riding on\" (i.e. conveyed by) songs?\nAlso, what is the direct object of the transitive のせて?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T14:32:52.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18846",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T01:15:40.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words"
],
"title": "Explanation of 歌にのせて",
"view_count": 269
} | [
{
"body": "The direct object of のせて is 物語, and the sentence means \"the musical evolves\nthe story putting it on the songs\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T01:15:40.223",
"id": "18854",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T01:15:40.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "18846",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 18846 | 18854 | 18854 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18852",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "_Note_ : This contains 3 parts but I think they are about 3 aspects of the\nsame construct, hence I'm asking all 3 here instead of splitting into 3\nquestions.\n\nI guess this construct is quite common in news, for example in [this NHK News\nWeb article](http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20140928/k10014933901000.html)\n\n> インチョンアジア大会、サッカー男子の日本は、２８日の準々決勝の韓国戦を前に、最後の調整を行いました。\n\n 1. Here, 準々決勝の韓国戦 is clearly not an object to any verb coming after it that is present in the sentence. Judging from the context, it seems like を前に functions as \"before\", i.e. \"the Japanese men's soccer team made some final adjustments **before** their quarterfinal match with Korea\".\n\nAdditionally, from [this post on Japan Reference\nforum](http://www.jref.com/forum/learning-japanese-64/%8F%A2%82%B7-euphemism-\ndie-%82%F0%91o%82%C9%8E%E5%82%CC%82%E0%82%C6%82%D6-54303/#post736994) and\n[examples on\nALC](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%82%92%E5%89%8D%E3%81%AB&ref=sa), I\ngather that を前に can mean \"before\" both spatially and temporally. Is this\ncorrect?\n\n 2. If を前に does mean \"before\", then how does it differ from の前に? Is it a matter of one being more common in written form, or is there any difference in nuance?\n\n 3. Now, according to the Japan Reference forum post and ALC examples linked above, を前に used in those ways is the same as を前にして, which makes sense - otherwise that を would be without a corresponding verb.\n\nThat brings me to the question, \"How does one break down this を前にする\"\nstructure? What I know is that the construct 「AをBにする」 has a few common usages\n(reference: [大辞林 definition ❷ of\nする](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%82%BA%E3%82%8B?dic=daijirin&oid=DJR_suru_-010)):\n\n * to raise/appoint A (where A = person) as B or to B (where B = position or profession)\n * to treat/consider/think of A as B\n * to change A into B\n * to use A as B\n\nIn any case, they give me a sense of being volitional (someone is actively\ndoing something). Whereas を前にする - and equivalently を前にして - feels like it just\nis that way, without any volition involved.\n\nDoes it even make sense to break を前に(して) down this way? Or is it a somewhat\nfixed phrase that can't be broken down?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T15:11:48.200",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18847",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T00:22:54.037",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-28T15:19:20.587",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "6840",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "How does one analyze \"N + を前に + V\", where N is not an object of V",
"view_count": 1453
} | [
{
"body": "> \"Additionally, from this post on Japan Reference forum and examples on ALC,\n> I gather that を前に can mean \"before\" both spatially and temporally. Is this\n> correct?\"\n\nYes, it is correct. In your example sentence, however, it is strictly\ntemporal.\n\n> \"If を前に does mean \"before\", then how does it differ from の前に? Is it a matter\n> of one being more common in written form, or is there any difference in\n> nuance?\"\n\nThere is a slight difference in nuance that has nothing to do with written or\nspoken language.\n\n「を前に」 tends to express one's somewhat stronger sense of purpose towards and/or\na higher degree of importance of the two events, in particular, the upcoming\none.\n\n「の前に」 would simply express the temporal order of events without any particular\nemphasis implied. For that reason, it can sound more informal than 「を前に」.\n\n> \"Does it even make sense to break を前に(して) down this way? Or is it a somewhat\n> fixed phrase that can't be broken down? \"\n\nIt would make practically no sense to break it down. Both 「～～を前にする」 and\n「AをBにする」 are set phrases, but there is a difference in meaning between the two\nする's.\n\nThe 「する」 in 「～～を前にする」 is not a verb of real action since it only means \"to\nbe\". It cannot be replaced by another verb.\n\nThe 「する」 in 「AをBにする」 represents a real human action or effort. In your word,\nit is \"volition\". It could be replaced by other verbs or verb phrases\ndepending on the meaning even though 「AをBにする」 is a set phrase. Those other\nverbs include\n[変]{か}える、[変更]{へんこう}する、[使]{つか}う、[使用]{しよう}する、[任命]{にんめい}する、[育]{そだ}てあげる、etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T00:22:54.037",
"id": "18852",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T00:22:54.037",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18847",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 18847 | 18852 | 18852 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18850",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between `日{に}本{ほん}` and `来{らい}日{にち}`? Both of them\nmeans `Japan` right? I understand that `来{らい}` means `next`, like\n`来{らい}年{ねん}`. But above context is interesting to me.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T17:30:17.140",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18849",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T04:59:35.207",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-29T04:59:35.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between 日{に}本{ほん} and 来{らい}日{にち}",
"view_count": 330
} | [
{
"body": "「日本」 means \"Japan\".\n\n「来日」 means a \"visit to Japan\" said from the Japan side. \"A visit to Japan\"\nsaid from the visitor's country side, it is 「[訪日]{ほうにち}」.\n\nHere, 「来」 means \"to come\", not \"next\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-28T17:42:49.460",
"id": "18850",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-28T17:42:49.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18849",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 18849 | 18850 | 18850 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18873",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Should I use Japanese or Western parentheses when inserting a Japanese word\ninto a sentence parenthetically? For example,\n\n> Japanese uses morae (モーラ)\n>\n> _or_\n>\n> Japanese uses morae （モーラ）\n\nIs there any reason from Japanese typography that would suggest to use\nJapanese parentheses with Japanese words?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T16:31:28.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18855",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T13:54:05.583",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"punctuation"
],
"title": "When mixing Japanese and English, should I use Japanese parentheses?",
"view_count": 2162
} | [
{
"body": "I would recommend using Japanese parentheses for Japanese text, as it's\nslightly higher (and therefore centralizes the text better than with half-\nwidth parentheses). However, since full-width parentheses already have leading\nspace, I wouldn't add a space between the English text and the full-width\nparenthesis.\n\nSo instead of:\n\n> Japanese uses morae （モーラ）\n\nI would recommend:\n\n> Japanese uses morae（モーラ）",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T17:15:40.733",
"id": "18856",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T17:15:40.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4229",
"parent_id": "18855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I think that since you are writing in English and provide the Japanese merely\nas reference, you should use parentheses that are designed for your Latin\nfont.\n\nSince you're not relying on using a monospace font in Japanese for rows to\nalign both vertically and horizontally, there's no reason to use monospace\nparentheses. **Japanese doesn't really care about what parentheses are used\naround it.** (Provided proper spacing, of course.)\n\nIn case the Japanese words look too crammed, reasonable typesetting software\nwill allow you to add thin spaces when parentheses are followed (or preceded)\nby characters from a particular Unicode range.\n\nUsing full-width parentheses with no spaces is a hack that might look\nreasonable in an short example, but it will also prevent line breaks, besides\nthe fact that the parentheses might not go well with your Latin font, and\nyou'll probably use two different types of round parentheses, which for me\nwould be an absolute no-go:\n\n> Japanese (just like Sanskrit, in fact) uses morae（モーラ）\n\n_(R-rated for bad typography.)_\n\nYou might also want to adjust the baseline and font size of the Japanese\ncharacters to balance with the English text. (Not just for the parentheses.)\n\n> Japanese uses morae ( モーラ )\n\nalready looks pretty decent on my computer. I've inserted a [hair\nspace](http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/200a/index.htm)\nafter/before the opening/closing parentheses.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T00:53:27.227",
"id": "18860",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T01:21:44.250",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-30T01:21:44.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "In general, typographically speaking, **Japanese kana and kanji look much\nbetter inside Japanese full-width (or 全角, double-byte) parentheses.** Because\nEnglish characters like 'j', 'y' can extend below the baseline, English (半角,\nhalf-width) parentheses tend to be positioned slightly lower than Japanese\nones.\n\n\n\nIn some Japanese fonts (such as MS Mincho), this difference may not be\nnoticeable. But in certain fonts, especially professional ones, combination of\nEnglish parentheses and Japanese texts can produce awful results.\n\nIn the world of _Japanese_ professional typography, where main text is written\nin Japanese, the following is the general rule:\n\n 1. **Use English (half-width, single-byte, 半角) parentheses if they contain only English characters.** Generally, it is _not_ necessary to insert a space before opening parentheses or after closing parentheses, if your software is good enough. Spaces between symbols and texts should be adjusted via settings (such as [`\\xkanjiskip`](http://ascii.asciimw.jp/pb/ptex/base/xkanjiskip.html) in Japanese LaTeX and 文字組みアキ量設定 in InDesign). And of course these software can handle line breaks properly, with or without such spaces. In the screenshot above, you can see that inserting such spaces makes almost no difference in the final output. (Notice the tiny dots in the third line. This is the default behavior of InDesign.)\n\n 2. **Always use Japanese (full-width, double-byte, 全角) parentheses if they contain one or more Japanese character(s).** Don't insert any spaces before or after the parentheses.\n\nI emphasize that these rules apply when you're typesetting articles mainly\nwritten in Japanese. It is common to insert (English, single-byte) spaces\nbefore English `(` and after English `)` if you're writing an email. [Japanese\nWikipedia has similar\nguideline](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E3%82%AC%E3%82%A4%E3%83%89#.E6.8B.AC.E5.BC.A7.E9.A1.9E).\n\nAnd of course, if your article is mainly in _English_ , basically you must\nfollow the _English_ style guidelines. As @Earthliŋ states, always sticking to\nEnglish (half-width) parenthesis is one of the reasonable choices, especially\nwhen your software is not very good at Japanese fonts.\n\nBut when the situation permits, you can always choose to use Japanese\nparentheses and pursue the best-looking results:\n\n\n\nTo my eyes, the second line (Japanese words surrounded by Japanese\nparentheses, surrounded by English spaces) looks best, even though two types\nof parentheses coexist in one sentence. But I don't know how it looks to\nWesterner's eyes, so I would like to hear opinions of others. And you can\nnotice that this software properly adjusts the actual spaces between the\nwords, so you don't have to worry about the unwanted spaces by using \"full-\nwidth\" parentheses.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T12:00:14.220",
"id": "18873",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T13:54:05.583",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-30T13:54:05.583",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "18855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 18855 | 18873 | 18873 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to\n[jisho.org](http://beta.jisho.org/search/%E3%81%84%E3%81%84%E5%8A%A0%E6%B8%9B)\nand the [yahoo japanese\ndictionary](http://dic.search.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%84%E5%8A%A0%E6%B8%9B&ei=UTF-8&b=1&dic_id=jj&stype=prefix),\nthe phrase 「いい加減【か・げん】」means roughly either 'half-baked' or 'quite-well'.\n\nI know that 「[目覚]{め・ざ}めなさい」means \"wake up\" or \"open your eyes\".\n\nI can understand that 「いい加減【か・げん】」is often used when trying to knock someone\nback to his senses.\n\nBut this doesn't jive quite well with the translations given above by the\ndictionaries.\n\nIt seems that 加減【か・げん】 means \"extent, degree\", so we can sort of see that\n「いい加減【か・げん】」can mean \"to a good degree\" if we translate it literally.\n\nIf we go with the literal translation, I can see that the entire phrase can be\nunderstood as \"open your eyes really well!\".\n\nBut given the dictionary translation of 「いい加減【か・げん】」, it seems like the phrase\nmight as well mean \"open your eyes in a half-baked way\".\n\nI need some help deciphering this.\n\nThe only analogy I can think of is when in English people use \"really bad\" to\nmean \"to a high degree\"; as in: \"I need this really bad!\"\n\nIs this kind of a similar nuance?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T20:07:00.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18857",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T21:48:59.253",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-29T21:48:59.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "113",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Analysis of いい[加減]{か・げん}[目覚]{め・ざ}めなさい",
"view_count": 245
} | [
{
"body": "If you check the example sentences with orders, you may get a better grasp of\nthis expression:\n\n> * `いい加減にしろ` That's enough!; cut it out!; get a life!.\n> * `いい加減にしなさい` Shape up!; act properly!\n>\n\nBasically, in colloquial speech `いい加減(に)` is usually used in one of two ways:\n\n1) Stop acting irresponsibly/carelessly/slacking off. Usually it's followed by\n`しろ` / `しなさい`/`やめて`/etc, but sometimes works on its own. \n2) Do smth. properly/promptly/right away. Usually followed by the more\nconcrete order.\n\nSo in your case the translation would be something like \"Stop dreaming and\nwake up already!\" (change to fit the context).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-29T21:25:41.923",
"id": "18858",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-29T21:25:41.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "18857",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18857 | null | 18858 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18861",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My Japanese coworker has been unable to explain clearly this. I know that the\ndifference comes up naturally but as someone learning Japanese I need a few\nexamples and grammar rules to know which one to use.\n\nCould you help me understand when to use each of them concretely?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T00:45:48.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18859",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T05:18:04.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "664",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Difference between 「なるベく」 and 「なるべき」",
"view_count": 2860
} | [
{
"body": "「なるベく」 should be considered a single word meaning you want to do something or\nwant something done \"as [...] as possible\". For example,\n「お問い合わせはなるべく短めにお願いします。」 would mean \"Please keep any inquiries as short as\npossible.\".\n\nThe 「～べき」 suffix gets attached to verbs and means \"should\", so 「なるべき」 means\n\"should become\". For example,「なるべきようになった。」 means \"It is as it should be.\"\n\nSo basically,「なるベく」 is used when expressing intent (when the subject is the\n1st person) or making a request (when the subject is not the 1st person),\nwhereas 「なるべき」 is used intransitively as a qualification of how things are or\nare supposed to be.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T02:52:24.433",
"id": "18861",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T02:59:03.250",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-30T02:59:03.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "18859",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "なるべく is an adverb and the meaning is \"as～as possible\".\n\nなるべき is made up from a verb なる and a Japanese old auxiliary べし. The meaning of\nべし is 「～して当然だ。するのがよい。」 and so on. べき is a conjugation change of べし.\n\nFor example, 明日はなるべく早く起きよう。( I will wake up as early as possible tomorrow).\n\nあなたは英語の先生になるべきだ。(You should/have to be an English teacher).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T04:23:10.983",
"id": "18864",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T05:18:04.927",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-30T05:18:04.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "18859",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 18859 | 18861 | 18861 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18865",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I few minutes ago on NHK news 「注目」 I've heard/saw the phrase 「やるっきゃない」. I have\nno idea what it means.. And what grammar rules are here?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T04:18:54.463",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18863",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-20T13:29:15.473",
"last_edit_date": "2017-08-20T13:29:15.473",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"colloquial-language",
"particle-しか"
],
"title": "Meaning and grammar of やるっきゃない",
"view_count": 2095
} | [
{
"body": "[っきゃ](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A3%E3%81%8D%E3%82%83) is an informal\nspoken contraction of しか, a particle. やるっきゃない means やるしかない.\n\nThe particle しか is always followed by a negative of some sort, either an\nexplicit negative like ない or a predicate that is semantically negative such as\nだめだ or あるもんか.\n\nTaken together, しか＋ない means something like \"only; nothing but\". It commonly\nfollows nouns, but it can follow other sorts of constituents as well. When it\nfollows a verb, it means that the verb must be done or will unavoidably happen\n(= \"there is no alternative to 〜\"). Your example やるっきゃない means something like\n\"have to do [it]\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T05:05:16.350",
"id": "18865",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T05:05:16.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18863",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 18863 | 18865 | 18865 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18867",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can we use Kanji for 「もらう」(to receive)? If so, is it recommended?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T07:15:27.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18866",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T07:29:56.253",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 12,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Can we use Kanji for 「もらう」?",
"view_count": 1218
} | [
{
"body": "You can. It's written 貰う in kanji. People will generally be able to read it.\n\nIt is, however, not recommended by the Agency for Cultural Affairs. The kanji\n貰 and the reading もらう are _not included_ on the [Jōyō Kanji\nchart](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kijun/naikaku/kanji/joyokanjisakuin/).\n\nIt is not recommended by the NHK漢字表記辞典 either. According to the NHK\ndictionary, this word should always be written in kana.\n\nIn any case, please make sure you write もらう in kana when using it as a\nsubsidiary verb (補助動詞) as in 〜てもらう. Subsidiary verbs are generally written in\nkana.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T07:29:56.253",
"id": "18867",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T07:29:56.253",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18866",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 23
}
] | 18866 | 18867 | 18867 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18871",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I can understand what the phrase means 「お世{せ}話{わ}になりました」- \"Thank you for\neverything\". But literally it's quite strange to me. Could you explain the\nlogic of it? Also would be very nice to know more about 「お世{せ}話{わ}になります」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T09:07:17.977",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18868",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-12T09:19:31.987",
"last_edit_date": "2014-09-30T11:29:47.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "7045",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Explaining the phrase お世{せ}話{わ}になります and お世{せ}話{わ}になりました",
"view_count": 40440
} | [
{
"body": "世話 is a fixed expression that has a deep cultural meaning. I don't think it\nwill translate well without the cultural background.\n\nI'm not sure where you got \"thank you for everything\" as a translation. I\nwould say that's a semi-functional translation for when it might be\nappropriate to use the expression, but it doesn't explain what it means to say\nit very well. In other words, you would say that when in English you might say\n\"thank you so much for everything\" but if you tried to parse it that would not\nshow up and if you thought that's exactly what it means you would be wrong.\n\nI would translate it as \"I've been a burden on you and caused you a lot of\ndifficulty and trouble.\" But it's basically a set phrase so that might not\neven be a good translation in some contexts.\n\n* * *\n\nPiece by piece breakdown (if that's what you mean by logic):\n\n```\n\n お = to make it more polite\n 世話 = care, attention, consideration\n にな[る] = to become\n ~りました = polite past-tense\n \n```",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T09:24:14.513",
"id": "18869",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T09:24:14.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "18868",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "The most common meaning of 世話 is care or looking after, but it is often used\nin set expressions such as\n\n> お世話になりました。\n\nAs you say it means \"Thank you for everything.\" or \"Thank you for everything\nyou have done for me/taking care of me\" but you might use it even if someone\nhas not really done anything except be around, be cooperative and ready to\nhelp. It is also used as greeting on the phone, often in business where a\nrelationship exists:\n\n> いつもお世話になっております。\n\n世話になる is not just used in fixed greeting:\n\n> 息子はその婦人にたいへんお世話になった。 \n> My son owes that woman a great deal.\n\nand there is also a する-verb (世話する):\n\n> その婦人は母のない子供を5人世話している。 \n> That woman is taking care of five motherless children.\n\nI think it is important to remember these because the passive nature of the\nfixed expression (\"Thank for taking care of me\") can be confusing. It is\nnormally clear from the context who is taking care of who, but (as I\ndemonstrated in my hastily typed first answer) it is easy to get the subject\nand object the wrong way around:\n\n> Aがいつもお世話になっております。 \n> \"Thank you for always taking care of A\"\n>\n> Aさんにはいつもお世話になっております。 \n> \"A-san，you always take very good care of us. (Thank you)\"\n\nNote: \"us\" is implied. It just could also be another from your group, such as\n\"my son\", the meaning depends on the context. Also, it is only my feeling, but\nif you can use this expression with the names correctly it will carry more\nweight.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T10:53:45.920",
"id": "18871",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-12T06:01:57.837",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"parent_id": "18868",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The exact meaning/translation could be a matter of discussion (as we can see\nfrom the above answers), but here is its usage.\n\nIn Japan, when we write an email to our colleagues (in the same company), we\nusually start the email with お疲れ様です. Likewise, when we write an email to a\nbusiness partner/customer/someone in a different company, we write\nお世話になります。Same goes for answering phone call. After receiving the call, if it\nturns out that the call is from a colleague in the same company, we say\nお疲れ様です, but if it turns out that the call is from a business\npartner/customer/someone in a different company, we say お世話になります.\n\nOn a related note, お世話になっております is more formal version of お世話になります. Thanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-12T09:19:31.987",
"id": "41641",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-12T09:19:31.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19036",
"parent_id": "18868",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18868 | 18871 | 18869 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18872",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the short story I'm reading now (「ドライブ・マイ・カー」 by Haruki Murakami) there are\ntwo very similar phrases to express what I would translate as \"too cautious\":\n「慎重すぎる」 and 「慎重に過ぎる」:\n\n> いささか乱暴すぎるか、いささか **慎重すぎる** か、どちらかだ。\n>\n> 彼女たちは多くの場合、 **慎重に過ぎる** 女性ドライバーたちを馬鹿にし、[...]\n\nMy question is: are those two phrases different in some way because having or\nnot having 「に」 between 「慎重」 and 「すぎる」?\n\nAlso, why is 「すぎる」 written using hiragana only in one case and kanji in the\nother?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T10:34:05.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18870",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T12:00:13.973",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5041",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"kanji"
],
"title": "「慎重すぎる」 and 「慎重に過ぎる」 - is there a difference?",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "Though it is fairly subtle, there is a difference between the two.\n\nIt sounds a little more literary and/or formal when 「に」 is inserted than when\nit is not. There is no difference in meaning.\n\nRegarding the kanji vs. kana issue, the author could have chosen to use either\nfor both as far as \"correctness\" is concerned. It seems to me that he made an\naesthetic choice here by avoiding using three heavy-looking kanji in a row in\n「慎重過ぎる」 in the first sentence.\n\n「慎重に過ぎる」 in the second sentence looks a little スッキリ to us because of the\nbreathing room that the hiragana 「に」 produces there.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T12:00:13.973",
"id": "18872",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T12:00:13.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18870",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18870 | 18872 | 18872 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18875",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can we use Kanji for「すみれ」? I want to describe violet color. I've tried 「菫色」to\nlook [here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E8%8F%AB%E8%89%B2), but no luck..",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T18:22:53.893",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18874",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T20:13:57.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Can we use Kanji for 「すみれ」 (violet color)?",
"view_count": 163
} | [
{
"body": "It appears so.\n\nFor example, it's recognised in this [aggregate\ndictionary](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E8%8F%AB%E8%89%B2).\n\nJapanese Wikipedia also has [a page for\nit](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%8F%AB%E8%89%B2).\n\nAnd searching the [Shonagon\ncorpus](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_form) yields 15 counts of\n菫色; 28 counts of すみれ色; and one count of すみれいろ。This indicates that perhaps the\nkana variant すみれ is more common, though in literary instances, the kanji\nvariant is also acceptable. (Although, admittedly, 15 and 28 are too low a\ncount to do any meaningful statistical analysis.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T20:13:57.370",
"id": "18875",
"last_activity_date": "2014-09-30T20:13:57.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4229",
"parent_id": "18874",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18874 | 18875 | 18875 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18879",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "Not sure the best way to word this. Why is it that some sounds from a loanword\nget combined down to a shorter or different sound while other do not? Here are\nsome examples:\n\n## Shortened, but sound weird to me/many Japanese learners\n\n> * Pineapple → パイ ** _ナ_** ップル not パイン・アップル → The 'n' and 'a' sound combine\n> to ナ instead of remaining separate\n> * Menu → メ ** _ニュ_** ー not メン・ユー → 'n' and 'y' combine to ニュ instead of\n> remaining separate\n> * Double-\"you\" → ダブ ** _リュ_** ー not ダブル・ユー → 'r' and 'y' combine to リュ\n> instead of remaining separate\n>\n\n## Separate, seemingly breaking the above patterns\n\n> * Time-out → タイムアウト not タイ ** _マウ_** ト → 'mau' becomes 'mu' + 'au'\n> seemingly unnecessarily\n> * Backup → バックアップ not バッ ** _カ_** ップ → why not similar to the \"pineapple\"\n> pattern?\n> * Piano → ピアノ not **_ピャ_** ノ → Similar to \"menu\" in my eyes\n>\n\nWhat gives?",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-09-30T23:10:52.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18878",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-02T23:43:48.277",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-02T23:43:48.277",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"loanwords",
"abbreviations"
],
"title": "Why do some loanword sounds get \"contracted\" when katakanized, but not others?",
"view_count": 633
} | [
{
"body": "When words are borrowed in speech, they're generally \"repaired\" to match the\nphonology of the target language. In Japanese, that usually means picking the\nnearest consonant and vowel sounds and adding epenthetic vowels to avoid\nconsonant clusters that aren't allowed (like /str/ → /sutor/), although other\nmethods of repair are occasionally used (e.g. deletion).\n\nBut this isn't an exact process. It depends on the pronunciation of the\noriginal word (which may vary) and the way the word is perceived in the target\nlanguage (which may also vary). Sometimes more than one repair is possible,\nand sometimes words are borrowed more than one way: consider _strike_ ストライク\nand _strike_ ストライキ, or _Hepburn_ ヘボン and _Hepburn_ ヘプバーン, as in James Curtis\nHepburn and Audrey Hepburn.\n\nAnd of course, there are further complications. Many words are borrowed via\nwriting rather than speech, and words have been borrowed at different points\nin time, resulting in different pronunciations than you might expect. Most\nspeakers no longer say the /h/ in _white_ /hwaɪt/, but it was relatively\ncommon back when ホワイト was borrowed.\n\n* * *\n\nLet's look at your examples.\n\nIn the case of _time-out_ and _backup_ , we can see that each word corresponds\nrather transparently to a pair of words, _time out_ and _back up_. I suspect\nthat this correspondence influenced both words, whether they were borrowed via\nspeech or writing. What's more, both _time-out_ and _backup_ can be pronounced\nlike a pair of words in careful speech. Given that, the way they're borrowed\nmakes sense.\n\nI think that _pineapple_ is less transparent (despite the spelling) and that\nmost speakers pronounce the /n/ as a syllable-initial consonant (following the\nmaximum onset principle), like \"pie napple\" rather than \"pine apple\".\nHonestly, the reason this word in Japanese doesn't match my expectations as an\nEnglish speaker is the location of the pitch accent, not because it has ナ in\nthe middle.\n\nA couple of your examples are implausible. _Menu_ simply doesn't sound like\nメンユー, it sounds like メニュー. Try saying it both ways! And there is no separation\nto \"remain separate\". _Piano_ doesn't sound like ピャノ. The vowels are fairly\ndistinct in English and I see no reason why a Japanese speaker would perceive\nthem as a glide or interpret the spelling as representing a glide.\n\nBut I'm not sure it's really possible to answer a question like this\nrigorously. I see no reason why 'W' _double-you_ couldn't be ダブル・ユー as well,\nbut whoever borrowed it first must have perceived it the other way and ダブリュー\nbecame more popular. For that matter, I don't see why _time-out_ couldn't have\nbeen borrowed as タイマウト. It's not an exact science and I'm afraid there are no\nabsolute rules to explain it―all we can really do is try to find tendencies\nand patterns.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T00:02:44.810",
"id": "18879",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T01:10:20.687",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T01:10:20.687",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18878",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "Japanese is full of strange pronunciation of foreign words(most English). \nAlthough ability in English is increasing in Japan, it has been quite low\nespecially for a developed exporting nation, and even though there has and\nstill is a lot of interest in other cultures, things are often taken into\nJapan and used in a way to fit Japanese people. \nI don't think a lot of these words enter Japanese through an official process,\nand I don't think many Japanese people question the authenticity of most of\nthese words, so I think this is the most probable reason for these differences\nin pronunciation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T01:06:36.967",
"id": "18880",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T01:06:36.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6995",
"parent_id": "18878",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -4
},
{
"body": "I basically agree with the 1st 3 paras of Snailboat's answer but to put it\ndifferently:\n\nIf an English word is not pronounced consistently throughout the English\nspeaking world then, even if the spelling is consistent, you cannot predict\nhow it will be pronounced as a loan word.\n\n\"Schedule\" is one example: In the States the \"sch\" is pronounced to sound like\n\"sk\", in Britain it usually sounds like \"sh\". To my ears the Japanese スケジュール\nshows the influence of an American drawl, but I don't really know, and FWIW\nmany in the UK now say the word with a \"sk\" sound, and some regional accents\ngive the \"d\" a \"j\" sound.\n\nIf the adoption of loan words is organic then you can't really expect to find\nrules but you might expect some consistency. To identify the consistency you\nprobably need know how the foreign word (and the pronunciation of its source)\nsounds to native Japanese ears, not yours or mine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-04T16:25:23.387",
"id": "18938",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-05T09:36:30.117",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-05T09:36:30.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "1556",
"owner_user_id": "1556",
"parent_id": "18878",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I think that along with snailboat's answer, some of these can be explained by\nnasalization occurring in Japanese.\n\nWhere you perceive a syllable break, e.g. in [men.ju], trying to convert the\nphonetics to kana doesn't work out, because a final ン is usually nasal, i.e.\n\n```\n\n [menjuː] menu\n [meɴjuː] メンユー\n [menʲuː] メニュー\n \n```\n\nSimilarly,\n\n```\n\n [pain.æpl̩] / [painæpl̩] pine apple\n [painap̚.puɽu] パイナップル\n [paiɴ.ap̚.puɽu] / [paiɴjap̚.puɽu] パイン・アップル\n \n```\n\nSo メンユー would usually be pronounced with a nasal ン, i.e. [meɴjuː], which is\nfurther than [menʲuː] from the English [menjuː] and similarly for pine apple.\n\n(Note that in パイン・アップル we see the [j] of 千円 [seɴ **j** eɴ] appear, which gives\n_**y** en_.)\n\nThe result is that the syllable border in English may fall within a single\nmora in Japanese to avoid nasalization, and thus stay closer to the English\npronunciation.\n\nピアノ may be explained either\n\n * by being a case of romanization by spelling, or\n * by romanization by sound, since native English speaker do pronounce _piano_ [pi'ænoʊ], not just ['pʲænoʊ]. ([Wiktionary](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/piano) in fact only lists the former.)\n\nAs for タイムアウト and バックアップ, my theory is that the syllable border has not been\nwelded into a single mora in Japanese is that in this case, the syllable\nborder is in fact a _word border_ and both words on either side have probably\nexisted longer than the compound word.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-04T19:31:55.740",
"id": "18941",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-05T23:41:56.987",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-05T23:41:56.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18878",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18878 | 18879 | 18879 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18883",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 暇（なら・としたら）ちょっと手伝って下さい。 \n> Hima (nara/toshitara) chotto tetsudatte kudasai.\n\nBoth the options seem grammatically correct.\n\nIs it not so?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T01:53:48.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18881",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T02:33:36.130",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T02:26:44.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Expressing 'if so'",
"view_count": 2651
} | [
{
"body": "暇としたら is not grammatically correct. と here is related to the quoting particle\nand for quoting a sentence, you want a full sentence, here 暇だ _hima da_ ,\ngiving 暇だとしたら _hima **da** to shitara_. In any case, I think the next two\noptions are better choices of saying \"if you have time / if you're free\"\n\n 1. > 暇なら、ちょっと手伝ってください。 \n> _hima nara, chotto tetsudatte kudasai_\n\nwhich is correct just the way you said it.\n\n 2. > 暇だったら、ちょっと手伝ってください。 \n> _hima dattara, chotto tetsudatte kudasai_\n>\n> 暇 **でしたら** 、ちょっと手伝ってください。 \n> _hima **deshitara** , chotto tetsudatte kudasai_ (polite)\n\nI myself would probably use the second one, although choosing between them\nwould depend on the situation.\n\nWe have a question explaining the differences between なら, ～たら and ～えば:\n[Differences among -たら、なら、-んだったら、-えば,\netc](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/393/differences-\namong-%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89-%E3%82%93%E3%81%A0%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-%E3%81%88%E3%81%B0-etc)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T02:33:36.130",
"id": "18883",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T02:33:36.130",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "18881",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18881 | 18883 | 18883 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 人口が増える [ に伴い／とともに ] 周辺もにぎやかになってきた。 \n> Jinkou ga fueru (ni tomonai/to tomo ni) shuuhen mo nigiyaka ni natte kita\n\nBoth the options seem grammatically correct. What's the difference then? Or do\nI understand it wrong?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T02:03:30.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18882",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T03:55:44.033",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T02:43:25.523",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Expressing concurrency",
"view_count": 137
} | [
{
"body": "AFAIK, they are nearly identical and interchangeable. One of my grammar books\nhas the exact same wording for both structures.\n\n> _～すると、それと一緒に_ \n> 動詞の辞書形／名詞 ＋ {に伴って・とともに}\n\n参照: [Proportion and Rate](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2528/78)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T03:55:44.033",
"id": "18886",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T03:55:44.033",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "18882",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 18882 | null | 18886 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Sports (de ha/ni ha)soccer ga ichiban suki desu.\n\nWhich one is correct? \nWhat is either of them used to express?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T04:07:23.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18887",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T07:38:01.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "expressing 'among' in japanese",
"view_count": 3353
} | [
{
"body": "In this sense (the domain for a superlative), \"among\" can be expressed by 〜で\nor 〜の中で:\n\n> スポーツ **では** サッカーが一番好きです。\n\nThe domain can be anything that makes sense in context. If you're describing\nthe most or best in the world, then you can say 世界で. If it's the most or best\nyet, you can say 今までで. If it's the most or best out of a list of choices, you\ncan say ＡとＢとＣの中で.\n\nBy the way, your sentence would probably not be translated into English using\n\"among\", so please keep in mind that it's only an approximate gloss.\n\nReferences:\n\n * Makino and Tsutsui's _Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar_ , p.148\n * Martin's _Reference Grammar of Japanese_ , p.142\n * Iwasaki's _Japanese: Revised Edition_ , p.118",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T07:38:01.517",
"id": "18890",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T07:38:01.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18887",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 18887 | null | 18890 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18889",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between 受{う}ける and もらう? Both translates as \"receive\"..",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T06:36:00.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18888",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-15T11:46:37.180",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-15T11:46:37.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "7045",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between 受{う}ける and もらう",
"view_count": 5354
} | [
{
"body": "* もらう - the most common use is when you express gratitude by \"receiving\" someone's action - 一緒に行ってもらう。 One more use is when you receive something from someone, as mentioned in the comment below: 友達からプレゼントをもらう。\n * 受ける (うける) - when you receive something, but not personally from someone, such as e-mail. \n * 得る (うる) - when you receive something non-material. Such as approval.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T06:54:48.960",
"id": "18889",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T13:50:48.347",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T13:50:48.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "6748",
"owner_user_id": "6748",
"parent_id": "18888",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18888 | 18889 | 18889 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "As I understand, 〜ます should only be used in the ending verb while others\ninside the sentence should be in basic form. How come, then, that the polite\npast negative tense is made using 〜ませんでした, which contains polite conjugation\nin the beginning 〜ません as well as in subsequent でした, which I learned is polite\nform of です (I presume it is a contraction of でありました similarly to です itself)?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T12:09:31.657",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18892",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T12:09:31.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1127",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"negation",
"tense",
"past"
],
"title": "Only 〜ます in ending verb vs. 〜ませんでした",
"view_count": 97
} | [] | 18892 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18895",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was recently listening to the _Hunter x Hunter_ anime, and during a\nconversation, a passing character that the protagonist meets states,\n\n> 頑張って、いいハンターに **なり** な\n\nThis struck me as a bit odd, as I expected to hear:\n\n> 頑張って、いいハンターに **なる** な\n\nWhen I checked the unofficial captions I'm using, it reads, \"Do your best to\nbecome a good Hunter.\"\n\nI asked another Japanese learner his thoughts, and he theorized maybe it was a\nshort form of \"[stem] + に + [verb]\". This would make sense given the caption\nbeing \"to become\" rather than \"and you will become\", but neither of us were\nreally sure.\n\nWhat is this usage of the verb stem, and when should/can I use it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T22:15:04.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18894",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T22:21:56.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3035",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "When should I use a verb stem by itself?",
"view_count": 1469
} | [
{
"body": "なりな is an imperative form, with 〜な derived from 〜なさい.\n\n[From 大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/162229/m0u/%E3%81%AA/):\n\n> ２ 《補助動詞「なさる」の命令形「なさい」の省略形》動詞・動詞型助動詞の連用形に付く。命令の意を表す。「早く行き―」「好きなようにやり―」\n\nBe careful not to mix this up with なるな, which can itself have multiple\nmeanings.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T22:21:56.980",
"id": "18895",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T22:21:56.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18894",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 18894 | 18895 | 18895 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18897",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "After a trip to Japan, I got a slip stapled to my passport, the first bullet\npoint of which reads:\n\n> 活字体で記入して **下さい** 。黒色又は青色のペンで記入して **ください** 。\n>\n> \"Please type or print clearly. Write by using black or blue pen.\"\n\nI **have already read through** [this question on using 下さい vs\nください](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/110/3035), but the answers\nemphasize using the two as differences between objects/actions, て-form/other\nforms, and personal preference. Here, these are both actions, both て-forms,\nand both written on the same sheet, so personal preference is not a factor.\n\nGiven the English translation above (provided on the same stapled slip), I\nspeculate that it might be a politeness indicator, more of a soft request to\nprint neatly, whereas the second request is more firm and required. (But\nthat's just a guess of my own.)\n\nWhat is the purpose for using the kanji and non-kanji forms of ください in this\nsentence, given that they both follow 「～で記入して」?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T22:36:50.517",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18896",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T23:01:20.010",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3035",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Why does this text use both 下さい and ください in the same context?",
"view_count": 458
} | [
{
"body": "I think many people use the two forms freely without a difference in meaning,\nand I think your sentence is actually a good illustration that this is true. I\ndon't think there's any detectable difference in meaning between 記入してください and\n記入して下さい in your example. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if whoever wrote it\ndidn't even notice they were writing it two different ways!\n\nAlthough both forms are widely used, writing it in kana is more common. If I\nsearch the [_Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese\n(BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_form), I find the\nfollowing:\n\n```\n\n してください 10072 results ← 4x more common\n して下さい 2408 results\n \n```\n\nOf course, I haven't looked through all of these results to find out how\nthey're used, so take the numbers with a grain of salt, but I think most of\nthe results are probably applicable here.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-01T23:01:20.010",
"id": "18897",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T23:01:20.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18896",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 18896 | 18897 | 18897 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18916",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It seems that one of the uses of ~kiri is to show continuance of\nstate/condition. \nis it similar to '~ta mama' then?\n\nHowever,i have not been able to find an example of this usage. \nAppreciate help.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-02T01:30:46.727",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18898",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-03T01:51:26.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "example usage of ~kiri",
"view_count": 1149
} | [
{
"body": "I will just form a few phrases with the particle 「きり」.\n\n「[寝]{ね}た **きり** [老人]{ろうじん}」 = \"(a) bedridden elderly person(s)\"\n\n「マリアは2[年前]{ねんまえ}[日本]{にほん}に[行]{い}った **きり** [帰]{かえ}ってこない。」 = \"Maria went to\nJapan 2 years ago and has not returned since.\"\n\n「[窓]{まど}は[閉]{し}め **っきり** にしないで、たまには[開]{あ}けて[空気]{くうき}を[入]{い}れ[替]{か}えてね。」 =\n\"Don't keep your windows shut all the time. Crack'em open once in a while for\nventilation.\"\n\nNote: In informal speech, 「きり」 is often pronounced 「っきり」, but remember not to\nuse 「っきり」 in a phrase like 「寝たきり老人」 because you will end up sounding like you\nhave grudges against those elderly.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-03T01:51:26.320",
"id": "18916",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-03T01:51:26.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18898",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18898 | 18916 | 18916 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm having difficulties in understand some of the uses of \"ni\" particle. If\nsomeone can help me explaining what is the function of the particle(like its\nrepresenting movement, indicating location or pointing the indirect object) in\nthe following sentences it would be great!\n\n 1. わたしは旅行 **に** 行きません。 \ndirection?\n\n 2. 8時の電車 **に** 遅れてしまいました。\n\n 3. バスの時間 **に** 間に会いませんでした。\n\n 4. 電車 **に** 傘を忘れてしまいました。 \nwhy not use で instead?\n\n 5. あの先生は学生 **に** 人気があります。\n\n 6. 画稿の近くです、子供 **に** 注意ください。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-02T06:42:32.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18899",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-05T11:11:51.573",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-03T09:55:31.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7388",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "particle に uses",
"view_count": 1668
} | [
{
"body": "IMPORTANT: I have provided a translation for each sentence, but DO NOT be\nreading my translations as you read my explanations. Instead, you should be\nlooking at the original sentences in Japanese. Otherwise, some of the\nexplanations might not make sense as it is not my translations that I am\ntrying to explain.\n\n 1. わたしは[旅行]{りょこう} に [行]{い}きません。 = \"I am not going on a trip.\"\n\n> \"Direction?\"\n\nNo, it is expressing \"purpose\", not direction. 旅行 is not a specific place or\ndirection. Had the sentence been 「わたしはNYCに行きません。」, then the usage of the に\nwould have expressed \"direction\".\n\n 2. 8[時]{じ}の[電車]{でんしゃ} に [遅]{おく}れてしまいました。 = \"I was late for the 8-o'clock train.\"\n\nObject/target of action.\n\n 3. バスの[時間]{じかん} に [間]{ま}に[合]{あ}いませんでした。 = \"I was unable to make the departure time of the bus.\"\n\nTime of action.\n\n 4. 電車 に [傘]{かさ}を[忘]{わす}れてしまいました。 = \"I forgot my umbrella in the train.\"\n\nPlace of action.\n\n> \"Why not use で instead?\"\n\nWe just do not; You would sound pretty strange if you used で in that context.\n\"Forgetting a belonging in the train\" is not an \"active\" enough action for us\nto use で. It is more like the lack of an action of bringing the umbrella with\nyou when you get off the train. If, however, you ate, danced, took pictures,\nused the phone, smacked a friend, etc. in the train, you would need to use で.\n\n 5. あの[先生]{せんせい}は[学生]{がくせい} に [人気]{にんき}があります。 = \"That teacher is popular among the students.\"\n\nObject of comparison or assessment.\n\n 6. 画稿の近くです、子供 に 注意ください。← This makes no sense. Do you even know what 画稿 is? We do not say 注意ください, either. It should be either 注意してください or ご注意ください in natural Japanese.\n\nI have taken the liberty of thinking the sentence was meant to be something\nlike:\n\n「[学校]{がっこう}の[近]{ちか}くです、[子供]{こども}に[注意]{ちゅうい}してください。」 = \"School nearby. Drive\ncarefully.\"\n\nObject of action or attention.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-04T08:24:40.833",
"id": "18937",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-05T11:11:51.573",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-05T11:11:51.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "18899",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18899 | null | 18937 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18903",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the meaning of 「以{い}上{じょう}」 when someone finishes his/her speech and\nsays 「以上」? For example - the lawyer at the court after his speech says 「以上」and\nstops speaking then.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-02T07:10:41.537",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18900",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-02T07:37:52.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of 「以上」 when someone finishes his/her speech and says 「以上」",
"view_count": 1151
} | [
{
"body": "The meaning is \"that's all\", in the sense of \"(all that there is, I've said)\nbefore\".\n\nThe [second definition of 以上\nhere](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/11464/m0u/%E4%BB%A5%E4%B8%8A/)\nshows that \"above\" is equated with \"before\", and the fourth definition\ncorresponds to the usage you're referring to.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-02T07:37:52.500",
"id": "18903",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-02T07:37:52.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"parent_id": "18900",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 18900 | 18903 | 18903 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "18920",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is the difference between 「答え｛こたえ｝」 and 「回答｛かいとう｝」 and 「正解{せいかい}」? They\nmean \"the answer\", but.. when each should be used?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-02T07:20:18.160",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "18901",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-19T16:33:49.860",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-19T16:33:49.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "7355",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 「答え｛こたえ｝」 and 「回答 ｛かいとう｝」 and 「正解 {せいかい}」",
"view_count": 2251
} | [
{
"body": "* 答え is more like \"please answer, or respond\"\n * 回答 is an area where you fill out your response\n * 正解 is like you said and implies \"correct\" answer.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-03T03:35:55.147",
"id": "18919",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-03T03:35:55.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7397",
"parent_id": "18901",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -2
},
{
"body": "* 答{こた}え is a generic word that can mean _answer_ , _response_ or _solution_.\n * 回答｛かいとう｝ is a response to being asked something. It is always elicited by someone else. (An unsolicted answer/solution to, say, a riddle would be either 解答{かいとう} or 答え.)\n * 正解{せいかい} means _correct_. Usually said in reponse to someone's 回答 (e.g., in a quiz).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-03T04:24:21.577",
"id": "18920",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-03T04:29:37.153",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-03T04:29:37.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "18901",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 18901 | 18920 | 18920 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.