question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19208",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Here's the sentence in question:\n\n> 生まれた **のも** 育った **のも** 京都なんですよ\n\nI thought using の in a sentence signified possession (e.g. 私の本 [My book]). If\nI interpret the sentence as such, it doesn't make any sense.\n\nThen I came to the conclusion that I should include the も from the sentence\nand read it as のも, but doing that made the sentence even more confusing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T02:03:52.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19204",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-21T04:53:08.993",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-21T04:53:08.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7556",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 28,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"cleft-sentences"
],
"title": "I don't understand what のも means in 生まれたのも育ったのも京都なんですよ",
"view_count": 15721
} | [
{
"body": "の is being used as a nominalizer (something that turns a verb into a noun) in\nthis case, with も meaning \"as well as\". So, literally, it would read something\nlike \"My being born as well as my growing up were in Kyoto.\" In other words,\n\"I was born and raised in Kyoto.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T02:09:32.007",
"id": "19205",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T02:09:32.007",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4039",
"parent_id": "19204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "alexhatesmil's answer isn't wrong, but I just want to supplement regarding the\nも and what it's doing.\n\nSo first, like the above の is a nominalizer.\n\nBut that means you need something to connect の blocks to the rest of the\nsentence. You can do so with either は or も\n\nso you could say:\n\n> 育った **のは** 京都です。\n\n= The place I was raised is Kyoto.\n\nThe も here replaces は as a topicalizer and adds \"as well as\"\n\n> 生まれた **のも** 育った **のも** 京都です。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T02:55:28.570",
"id": "19206",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T02:55:28.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "19204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "## Cleft sentences\n\nIn linguistics, there's something called a **cleft sentence**. The basic idea\nis that you split a sentence into two parts in order to focus something:\n\n> _１ａ._ **I met** _her_ **that day**. _(original sentence)_ \n> _１ｂ._ It was _her_ that [ **I met** **that day** ]. _(clefted sentence)_\n\nIn this example, we split the sentence into **\"I met __ that day\"** and\n_\"her\"_. Because we've neatly divided the sentence in two, we call this a\n\"cleft\" sentence. It expresses the same basic information, but it puts the\nfocus on _\"her\"_ , the element we pulled out.\n\nWe could just as easily focus a different element instead:\n\n> _２ａ._ **I met her** _that day_. _(original sentence)_ \n> _２ｂ._ It was _that day_ that [ **I met her** ]. _(clefted sentence)_\n\nAll of these sentences express the same basic information, but their focus is\na little bit different. We could think of our first cleft as answering the\nquestion \"Who did I meet that day?\" and our second cleft as answering the\nquestion \"When did I meet her?\"\n\nWith that in mind, let's look at our examples again:\n\n> _1ｂ._ It was _her_ that [ **I met** **that day** ].\n```\n\n> non-focused element: **I met _()_ that day**\n> focused element: **_()_** = _\"her\"_\n```\n\n>\n> _２ｂ._ It was _that day_ that [ **I met her** ].\n```\n\n> non-focused element: **I met her _()_**\n> focused element: **_()_** = _\"that day\"_\n```\n\nThe non-focused element introduces a variable , and the focused element tells\nus the value of .\n\n* * *\n\n## Cleft sentences in Japanese\n\nJapanese has cleft sentences that work like this, too! You've probably seen\nthem before, although you might not have known the technical term. The most\nbasic type of cleft looks like **Ａ** のは **Ｂ** だ in Japanese, where **Ａ**\nintroduces a variable ****, and **Ｂ** tells us the value of that variable.\n\nLet's use a simplified version of your sentence as an example:\n\n> _３ａ._ [京都]{﹅・﹅}で **生まれた** 。 ' **[I] was born** _in Kyōto_.'\n\nThis is a basic sentence. We want to turn it into a cleft sentence, so let's\nsplit it into two parts!\n\n> _３ｂ._ **生まれた** のは[京都]{﹅・﹅}だ。 'It's _[in] Kyōto_ that **[I] was born**.' \n>\n```\n\n> non-focused element: **_()_ 生まれた**\n> focused element: 京都で = **_()_**\n```\n\nWe want to focus [京都]{﹅・﹅}で, which goes at the end of the sentence before だ\n(dropping the case marker で). Then we add the nominalizer の to the non-focused\nportion, 生まれた, so we can make it into the topic of the sentence.\n\nNow we have a statement containing a variable (\"[I] was born \") and we also\nhave the value of that variable ( = \"[in] Kyōto\"). Note that the final\nsentence is missing the case particle で, so we have to understand the\nrelationship between the two halves from context.\n\nBy the way, sometimes it's natural to use a cleft in Japanese when we'd use a\nnon-cleft in English. So don't get too hung up on the English translations\nhere―they're designed to show you the meaning of the Japanese sentences, not\nto give you the most natural way to communicate in English.\n\n* * *\n\n## Putting it all together\n\nAs it happens, your sentence is a little more complicated! To come up with\nyour sentence, we'll need to put two of these things together, and of course\nwhen we do so we'll naturally need to use も instead of は. Let's start with\nthese sentences:\n\n> _４ａ._ **生まれた** のは[京都]{﹅・﹅}だ。 'It's _[in] Kyōto_ that **[I] was born**.' \n> _４ｂ._ **育った** のは[京都]{﹅・﹅}だ。 'It's _[in] Kyōto_ that **[I] was raised**.'\n\nAnd combine them into this:\n\n> _４ｃ._ **生まれた** のも **育った** のも[京都]{﹅・﹅}だ。 'It's _[in] Kyōto_ that **[I] was\n> born and raised**.'\n\nFinally, to get your sentence we have to make a few more changes. We'll add\nのだ, contract の to the informal ん, replace だ with the polite です, and add the\nassertive final particle よ:\n\n> _４ｄ._ **生まれた** のも **育った** のも[京都]{﹅・﹅}なのだ。 \n> _４ｅ._ **生まれた** のも **育った** のも[京都]{﹅・﹅}なんだ。 \n> _４ｆ._ **生まれた** のも **育った** のも[京都]{﹅・﹅}なんです。 \n> _４ｇ._ **生まれた** のも **育った** のも[京都]{﹅・﹅}なんですよ。\n\nSince the exact meaning of のだ depends on context, I've provided no explanation\nhere―that could, of course, be the subject of another question.\n\nAnd that's it! For more explanation of cleft sentences, see Martin's 1975\n_Reference Grammar of Japanese_ , p.863-869. For more explanation of English\nclefts, see Huddleston & Pullum's 2002 _Cambridge Grammar of the English\nLanguage_ , p.1414-1427.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T04:13:09.740",
"id": "19208",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T05:17:04.843",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-22T05:17:04.843",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 57
}
] | 19204 | 19208 | 19208 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19211",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So, in English, we tend to use phrases like \"Do you speak English?\" when what\nwe're really talking about is ability -- i.e. \" _Can_ you speak English?\"\n\nMy question is, does this work in Japanese? The impression I get is no, but I\nwant to make sure. Like, if someone were to ask \"日本語しゃべるの?\", it wouldn't be\n\"Do you speak Japanese?\" as in \"Can you speak Japanese?\", it would be \"Do you\nspeak Japanese?\" as in \"Do you ever speak Japanese?\", or possibly \"Are you\ngoing to speak Japanese?\", right? To ask about ability, I have to actually use\na potential form of the verb -- しゃべれる. Right?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T07:31:14.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19210",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T09:09:56.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6637",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "Asking \"Do you speak Japanese?\" in Japanese",
"view_count": 11622
} | [
{
"body": "The most common form is 「日本語ができますか？」 or 「日本語(を)喋れますか？」. It's completely OK to\ndirectly ask someone's ability in this case.\n\nI usually make \"indirect\" questions like 「日本語をお話しになりますか？」 only when I talk to\nsomeone who is far higher than me and have to be super polite.\n\n「日本語しゃべるの？」 sounds a bit weird to me, because 「しゃべるの？」 is a casual expression\nbut the speaker is asking too indirectly. 「日本語しゃべれる(の)？」 or 「日本語できるの？」 is\nbetter when you are talking to your friend.\n\nIn certain situations, as you suspected, 「日本語しゃべるの？」 can mean \"Are you gonna\nspeak Japanese (e.g. in the meeting tomorrow?)\".\n\nLikewise, \"Do you drink?\" is \"お酒飲める?\" (casual) or \"お酒はお飲みになりますか?\" (polite) in\nJapanese.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T08:39:16.457",
"id": "19211",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T08:39:16.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19210",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "Naruto's answer has good advice on politeness; 「日本語しゃべるの？」is extremely casual\nand could result in problems if used in the wrong situation.\n\nBeyond that, one point: verbs have different conjugations, one of these is the\n_potential_ form which implies \"capability to become\".\n\n日本語をしゃべれますか？ literally means \"CAN you speak Japanese\", while 日本語をしゃべりますか would\nmean \"DO you speak Japanese\" as you ask. In context it's unlikely anyone will\nmark a difference between them.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T09:09:56.833",
"id": "19212",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T09:09:56.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7561",
"parent_id": "19210",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] | 19210 | 19211 | 19211 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19218",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just heard something like:\n\n> この話が **あさっての方向** に向かっています \n> Kono hanashi ga asatte no houkou ni mukatteimasu\n\nIt was used when one of conversation partners said something off topic or\nloosely tied to it. What does あさっての方向 (asatte no houkou) mean in general and\nin this case? I tried Tangorin for explanation but they had only あさって (asatte)\nand 方向 (houkou) separately.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T10:55:14.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19214",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T15:29:08.150",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-22T11:10:19.903",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3233",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"idioms"
],
"title": "Meaning of あさっての方向 \"Asatte no houkou\"",
"view_count": 1423
} | [
{
"body": "This is a variation on an idiom,\n[あさっての方を向く](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%98%8E%E5%BE%8C%E6%97%A5%E3%81%AE%E6%96%B9%E3%82%92%E5%90%91%E3%81%8F-195778),\nwhich means you're focusing on the wrong thing or failing to notice what you\nshould. The key to the idiom is **あさって**. Literally, it comes from the idea\nthat you're focusing on **the day after tomorrow** when you _should_ be paying\nattention to tomorrow!\n\nThe idiom, though, is now more general than that, and it can be used without a\nverb like 向く. In fact, the only strictly necessary part of the idiom is\n**あさって** itself!\n\nPhrases like **あさっての方向** mean something like \"the wrong way (without\nrealizing)\", and that \"way\" can be either literal or figurative. If it's\nliteral, it could be used in phrases meaning _going_ the wrong way, _looking_\nthe wrong way, or _aiming_ something the wrong way. If it's figurative, it\ncould mean _missing the point_ , talking about _the wrong subject_ , or just\n_failing to notice something_. It can even mean _feigning ignorance_ if you're\ndoing it on purpose―close to the English phrase \"looking the other way\".\n\nTo figure out the exact meaning, you'll have to pay attention to context. In\nyour example, it looks like the basic figurative use:\n\n> この話が **あさっての方向** に向かっています\n\nIn this case, I think your explanation was pretty good―they were saying\nsomething \"off-topic\", right? They were focusing on the wrong thing\n(figuratively on あさって, not on あした, the thing they should have been focusing\non). The speaker was pointing that out. Depending on context, a phrase like\n\"That's besides the point\" or \"You're barking up the wrong tree\" could be\nappropriate as a translation.\n\n* * *\n\nFor reference, here is the definition from the\n[明鏡ことわざ成句使い方事典](http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E6%98%8E%E9%8F%A1%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%82%8F%E3%81%96%E6%88%90%E5%8F%A5%E4%BD%BF%E3%81%84%E6%96%B9%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8-%E5%8C%97%E5%8E%9F-%E4%BF%9D%E9%9B%84/dp/4469021105):\n\n> **あさってをむく** 【明後日を向く】 \n> 〔使い方〕全く見当違いの方を向く。 \n> 「あさってを向いていて、前の車に追突してしまった」 \n> 「みんながあさってを向いていて、議論がかみ合わない」 \n> 「銃口があさってを向いているから的には当たらない」 \n> ◆①あしたに目を向けるべきなのに、あさっての方を見ている \n> 意からいう。「あさっての方を向く」とも。 \n> ②「そっぽを向く」は、意図的に見るべき方向から目をそらす \n> 意だが、「あさってを向く」には意図が働かない。 \n> 〔誤用〕①協調しない態度をとる意で使うのは誤り。「×いくら説得して \n> も、あさってを向いていて相手にしない」「×厳しく管理し過ぎ \n> て、部下にあさってを向かれる」 \n> ②「あさって」と「みょうごにち(明後日)」は同意だが、「みょ \n> うごにちを向く」は誤り。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T12:42:26.527",
"id": "19218",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T15:29:08.150",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-22T15:29:08.150",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19214 | 19218 | 19218 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can this word be derived to original Japanese words or is it maybe, like the\nkanji might suggest, of Chinese origin?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T12:51:07.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19219",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T13:36:51.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "What is the etymology of the word 杜撰（ずさん）?",
"view_count": 169
} | [
{
"body": "Taken from [here](http://www.gogen-allguide.com/su/zusan.html):\n\n>\n> 杜撰の「杜」は、中国宋の杜黙（ともく）という詩人を表し、「撰」は詩文を作ることで、杜黙の作った詩は律（詩の様式）に合わないものが多かったという故事に由来するという、中国の「野客叢書（やかくそうしょ）」の説が有力とされる。日本には禅を通じて入ったとされ、古くは「ずざん（づざん）」と言われた。\n\nTranslation:\n\nThe 杜{ず} of 杜撰{ずさん} represents the poet 杜黙｛ともく} from the Song Dynasty. 撰{さん}\nrepresents making poems. The poems made by 杜黙｛ともく} often did not fit the\n[metre](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre_%28poetry%29), and this act is\nthought to be the origin to 杜撰{ずさん}. The explanation in the Chinese\n野客叢書{やかくそうしょ} is regarded to be the origin. It is believed that this word came\nto Japan through Zen Buddhism and used to be ずざん（づざん）.\n\nAlso from [here](http://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9D%9C%E6%92%B0):\n\nThe excerpt from 野客叢書{やかくそうしょ}:\n\n> 杜默 為詩、多不合律。故言事不合格者為 **杜撰** 。\n\nand the Japanese translation:\n\n>\n> 杜黙（ともく）は宋の詩人、「撰」は著作することで、杜黙の作る詩に律（作詩の規則）を外れたものが多かったことから、誤まりが多い著作を意味するようになったという。\n> (I'm leaving out the translation into English at is pretty much the same as\n> I explained above.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T13:31:23.880",
"id": "19220",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T13:36:51.983",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-22T13:36:51.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "1217",
"owner_user_id": "1217",
"parent_id": "19219",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19219 | null | 19220 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19222",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading a book and I couldn't figure out what character this is:\n\n> \n\nWhat is this character?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T19:23:31.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19221",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-23T02:05:25.533",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-23T02:05:25.533",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7527",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"orthography"
],
"title": "What is this character?",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "It is the hiragana だ, which is pronounced as _da_. You should keep [a hiragana\ntable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiragana#Table_of_hiragana) and [a\nkatakana table](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katakana#Table_of_katakana)\nnearby if you are just starting out.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-22T19:36:00.443",
"id": "19222",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-22T19:36:00.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "19221",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19221 | 19222 | 19222 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently found myself in a situation where I had to attempt customer service\nover the phone in Japanese and I got tripped up on some terminology that I've\nnever encountered before. Most of it had to do with credit card payment\nlogistics. Are there any good resources for dealing with this kind of\nspecialized vocabulary?\n\nSpecifically, I found myself getting stuck on:\n\n 1. **\" Charge\"**, both as a verb and as a noun, in the sense of charging a certain amount to a card.\n\n「支払い」 seems to be an appropriate noun, but what would the verb be? 「支払わせる」\ndoesn't sound right to me.\n\n 2. **\" Hold\"**, in the sense of a temporary reservation placed on a card that will clear up by itself after a few days.\n\nA dictionary suggests 「数日間保留中」, but I'd like to be sure of that before I\nactually try using it.\n\n 3. **\" Offer\"**, as in \"offer to buy\" as a noun (e.g, \"your offer\" or \"an outstanding offer\" pertaining to an item for sale).\n\nI was using 「お申し込み」, but it would be nice to be more specific than this, if\npossible.\n\n 4. **\" Finalize\"**, in the sense of officially completing a transaction.\n\nMaybe 「纏める」? I'm not sure if that's an appropriate usage.\n\nIf you have any familiarity with this kind of vocabulary, any help would be\ngreatly appreciated. The dictionary offers some guidance, but I'm wary of\nattempting to use any of these terms without seeing them in context first.\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-23T02:48:58.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19228",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-23T15:35:23.360",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1568",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "Specialized banking/credit card vocabulary",
"view_count": 1033
} | [
{
"body": "* Charge\n\nLooking at the credit card sites, お支払い is used everywhere, with 'charge'\nexpressed as お支払い いただきます or お支払いは...になります. 請求 means charge, invoice so you can\nuse it except when you yourself pay (as in 'I'll charge my credit card').\n\n * Hold\n\nWhen I was in Japan, the banking lady explained it to me with '仮’, temporary\ncharge, temporary transfer, etc ... There might be a better way\n\n * Offer\n\n発売 is used for being on sale for general products, but also has a meaning/root\nof launching a product (from the 発 root). 売りに出す, 売り出し means put out for sale,\nI've heard the second one several times. The dictionary also shows 売り物, things\nfor sale.\n\n * Finalize\n\nThe banking term is settlement. I've heard 納める for taxes. 手続きを完成する sounds good\nto me, especially the 手続き sounds like a banking term, but my Japanese level is\nnot that good. The dictionary show 決済 and 弁済 for settled payment.\n\nNotes/remarks appreciated, my Japanese is not anywhere near native level.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-23T15:35:23.360",
"id": "19231",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-23T15:35:23.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7576",
"parent_id": "19228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19228 | null | 19231 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19270",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was translating a passage the other day for a health spa and came across the\nfollowing passage:\n\n> 揺らぎやすい女性のための限定メニューができました。 \n> 1ヶ月の周期の中で、私たちの体は大きく変化します。 \n> 生理は、体をととのえる絶好のチャンス。 \n> より快適に過ごせる体づくりをお手伝いいたします。\n\nI was a little befuddled by 揺らぎやすい because it obviously doesn't mean easily\nfluctuating women. I gather from the rest of the passage and some precursory\nGoogle searches, it has a meaning similar to 'women with menstruation\nproblems', but I'm not sure if that is the exact meaning or not. Can anyone\nclarify?\n\nAnd sorry I was unable to talk to the spa for clarification. I was working\nthrough an agent and it needed to be done quickly.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-23T15:38:05.520",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19232",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T14:21:15.843",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-26T14:21:15.843",
"last_editor_user_id": "6604",
"owner_user_id": "6604",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "What does 揺らぎやすい女性 mean?",
"view_count": 362
} | [
{
"body": "揺らぎやすい女性 is not an idiomatic phrase, and it is not until you read the second\nline that you can tell what it actually refers to. The meaning of 揺らぐ here is\nclearly described in the second line, \"私たち(女性)の体が大きく変化する\" due to the\nmenstruation cycle.\n\nBut I think 揺らぎやすい女性 is a misleading expression.\n\nWe have two 和語 verbs which use this kanji: 揺【ゆ】らぐ and 揺【ゆ】れる.\n\nWe mainly use 揺れる for physical vibration/swinging/fluctuation. 「揺れる女性」 or\n「振動する女性」 is obviously funny in this situation (振動する _always_ refers to\nphysical vibration).\n\nThe primary meaning of 揺らぐ is \"to lose control/balance, become unstable, be\nabout to collapse\". And 揺らぐ is far more commonly used against\nintangible/mental things: 「決心が揺らぐ (lose determination)」「信頼が揺らぐ (lose\nconfidence)」「気持ちが揺らぐ (be disconcerted)」「計測値が揺らぐ (measurements become\ninconsistent)」.\n\nIf I see 揺らぎやすい女性 without any further context, it comes off to me as something\nlike \"mentally unstable woman\", or \"indecisive woman\". I think this ad should\nhave said at least \" **体調が** 揺らぎやすい女性\" in the first line to avoid confusion.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T07:11:24.433",
"id": "19270",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T08:28:17.533",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-26T08:28:17.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19232",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19232 | 19270 | 19270 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19269",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In books that I've come across and even in dictionaries, I've seen the word\n「好きな」 translated as \"favorite\". I'm a little confused by this because 「好きです」\nnormally gets translated as \"like\", or in my mind, \"is liked\".\n\nI'm wondering what is the Japanese idea behind the word 「好き」. For instance, in\nEnglish, the ideas of \"like\", \"love\", and \"favorite\" all have a relationship,\nbut at the same time are different. So I can say I _like_ the colors red,\nblue, green, and yellow, and I _love_ (especially like) the colors red and\nblue, but I can only say my _favorite_ color is blue. There can only be one\nfavorite since the idea itself implies that it is _the_ #1 most liked thing.\n\nWhen we were in school, if the teacher asked, \"What is your favorite color,\"\nand you proceeded to rattle off a list of multiple colors, you would be\ncorrected; the teacher would say, \"Those are all colors that you _like_ , but\nwhich one do you like _the most_?\"\n\nIn Japanese, I understand that you have the terms 「好き」, 「大好き」, and 「一番好き」.\nWhen I look up 「好き」 on\n[Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/jeword/%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8D), I see it translates\n「好きな詩」 as \"one's favorite poem\". But how can this be translated as your\n_favorite_ poem? Shouldn't 「好きな詩」 just be a poem that you _like_? Wouldn't\nyour favorite poem be 「一番好きな詩」?\n\nReturning to the color example, if someone asked 「好きな色は何ですか？」, would you\nrespond with only one color, or would it also be acceptable to respond with\nmore than one color?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-23T17:55:36.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19234",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T00:18:55.080",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T00:18:55.080",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7508",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"translation",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Does 好きな really mean \"favorite\"?",
"view_count": 14959
} | [
{
"body": "「好きな～」 generally corresponds to \"～ which one likes\", and one can safely have\nmultiple 好きな色 and 好きな食べ物.\n\n> 好きな色は赤と黒です。\n\nSome E-J dictionaries say \"favorite\" is \" **特に** 好きな\" or \" **大** 好きな\", which\nmeans the English adjective \"favorite\" is usually stronger than 好きな. And as\nfar as I know, English has no single-word adjective which exactly matches 好きな.\nI think \"favorite\" is sometimes chosen because it is not practical to\ntranslate 好きな as \"which I like\" every time you see it.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T05:40:19.147",
"id": "19269",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T05:40:19.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19234",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19234 | 19269 | 19269 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19239",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The difference between \"翻訳\" and \"通訳\" has been explained very well in several\nforums. Even so, for me that nuance is a distraction and I prefer to simplify\nwith this strategy:\n\n> 1. When I hear \"翻訳\", \"通訳\", \"訳す\", or \"訳する\" I sense \"to translate\". If\n> \"written or spoken\" is ever relevant, I can deduce from context.\n> 2. To say \"to translate\", I just say \"訳す\". My understanding is that \"訳す\"\n> can have either the \"翻訳\" and \"通訳\" meaning. A native speaker can use context\n> to decide \"written or spoken\".\n>\n\nI've not been corrected yet. That strategy seems like an easy solution to the\n\"written or spoken\" issue. So, is my strategy wrong in any way? Might it be\ntechnically correct, but painfully unnatural, Japanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T03:08:55.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19238",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T04:23:52.557",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "\"訳す\" is the best way to say \"to translate\"?",
"view_count": 11809
} | [
{
"body": "According to dictionaries, the correspondence with English is pretty good:\n\n * **翻訳する** and **訳す／訳する** both mean \"translate\", to say or write something in one language that corresponds to another language. This is often written, but strictly speaking it doesn't have to be.\n\n * **通訳する** means \"interpret\", which is translating orally so that two or more people can communicate with one another. So technically, you're translating any time you interpret, but not the other way around.\n\nDictionaries mostly say 翻訳する and 訳す／訳する are synonyms in this sense.\n\n* * *\n\nYou're right, though, that some people treat 訳す as \"translate\" and 翻訳する as\nspecifically \"translate writing\". For example, [on\neigoTrans.com](http://www.eigotrans.com/topics/trans_difference.shtml) we find\nthe following description:\n\n> 当たり前のことだが、「通訳」は **声を通じて言語を訳す** のに対し、 **「翻訳」は文字によって言語を訳す**\n> 。つまり、翻訳者は文章での表現力が、通訳者は音声での表現力が必要となってくる。\n\nHere they use 訳す as a general term for translation, and they use 通訳 and 翻訳 for\nspoken and written translation, exactly as you suggested. But take a look at\nthis definition for 通訳 from 明鏡国語事典, which uses 翻訳 in a very different way:\n\n> 異なる言語を話す人の間に立って、話が通じるように双方のことばを **翻訳して伝える** こと。また、その人。「英語を日本語に通訳する」「同時通訳」\n\nIf 翻訳する were always limited to written translation, this definition wouldn't\nmake any sense―there's no _written_ translation involved in interpreting. But\nI'm sure you understand this definition just fine anyway, so it's safe to say\nthat 翻訳する can also refer to translation in general, not just written\ntranslation.\n\n* * *\n\nHow do we reconcile this? Actually, it's pretty simple―it's based on context!\nWe find the exact same distinction made in English in the same contexts. For\nexample, [Macmillan\nDictionary](http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/interpret)\ndefines _interpret_ like this:\n\n> _to translate what someone is saying in one language into another language\n> so that someone else can understand it_ \"I speak Spanish. Would you like me\n> to interpret for you?\"\n\nIt's clear that in this definition _translate_ is used in a general sense.\nThere's obviously no written translation involved in interpreting!\n\nBut you can find professionals who use the term _translate_ [specifically for\nwriting](http://www.alsintl.com/blog/translate-vs-interpret/):\n\n> Translation essentially consists of taking a text in one language and\n> rendering it into another language. Did you catch that word “text”? **The\n> key characteristic of translation is the fact that it works in the medium of\n> the written word.**\n\nThis is the same situation we find with 翻訳 and 通訳 in Japanese! 翻訳 is often\nused specifically for written translation, but it's also possible for it to\nrefer to translation in general. So to decide how 翻訳 is used, just like in\nEnglish with _translate_ , you'll need to pay attention to context.\n\nAnd the same goes for your strategy of always saying 訳す. **You'll want to\nchoose which word you say based on context.** You're right that you can use\nthe word 訳す for both written and spoken translation, but if (for example) you\nwant to talk specifically about interpreting, the most natural word is\nprobably 通訳する, and you'll want to use that instead.\n\nAs a general rule, **you should aim to use the same word a native speaker\nwould use in the same context** , and I'm afraid that means taking shortcuts\nlike \"always use 訳す\" is counterproductive.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T04:23:52.557",
"id": "19239",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T04:23:52.557",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19238",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19238 | 19239 | 19239 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19243",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "### The Sentence:\n\nRecently, I've been trying to broaden my understanding of Japanese by\nstumbling through translating some blog posts. I came across this sentence:\n\n> 見に来てくださった方、 \n> チームA **のこと** も、私 **のこと** も、 \n> **好きになってもらえたかな** ー？\n\nFor a bit of context, the writer is talking about a concert event that various\npeople attended, and she (appears to be) asking them if they liked it. But any\nnuance beyond that is lost on me.\n\n### Things I don't understand:\n\nThere are three main things I don't get about this sentence:\n\n1) How does the middle clause (チームAのことも、私のことも) connect with the other two\nclauses, i.e. is it the object of 見? The \"subject\" (i.e. ～が) of 好き? Both?\nSomething else entirely?\n\n2) Why is the middle clause 何のことも何のことも rather than just 何も何も ? What does のこと\nadd?\n\n3) Everything about the final clause. I think I understand some of the pieces\n(好きになって ～ come to like, come to love; もらえる ability (and willingness) to\nreceive something, presumably here a helping verb like もらう and くれる that\nindicates who benefits from the action rather than describing an action on its\nown but... what does that mean here?; か question particle; な emphasis), but I\nhave no idea how they are meant to go together.\n\nSomehow all these together add up to \"Did those of you who came to watch team\nA and me like/love (it/what you saw/etc.)?\" (Per my own analysis and that of a\nJapanese teacher, though she didn't have time to explain further.)\n\n### What I'm looking for\n\nMy main concern is understanding what is going on here and how the pieces fit\ntogether, so I can understand it if I see something like it again, and so I\ncan use the same constructions myself. I'd especially like references to\nspecific discussions on these words/structures, whether on the web or in\nprinted books (as long as they aren't too obscure) so I can investigate on my\nown (I did some already but didn't turn up much).\n\nSecondarily, I'd also love pointers on how to translate sentences like this.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T05:54:25.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19241",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T07:04:39.527",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4918",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Help me understand the grammar of this sentence: ～のこと～のこと、～なってもらえたかな",
"view_count": 332
} | [
{
"body": "> 見に来てくださった方、 \n> チームAのことも、私のことも、 \n> 好きになってもらえたかなー？ \n> Lit. \"I wonder if those of you who kindly came to watch ended up enjoying\n> both Team A and myself...?\" \n> \"Thanks everyone for attending! Did you enjoy Team A's and my\n> performances?\"\n\n 1. 「チームAのこと」 and 「私のこと」 are the \"〜が-marked objects\" of 「好きになる」.\n\n「見に来てくださった方」 is the \"subject\" of 「好きになる」, that is, the people who are\nexperiencing the 好き.\n\n 2. 「〜のこと」 makes it so they are not asking if you literally came to like the team and the her, but something related to them, such as their performance, act, song, etc.\n\n 3. Your analysis was correct, aside from it not being the question 「か」 + emphasis 「な」, but rather the speculative ending 「かな」.\n\nThe usage of 「〜もらえた」 is, as you expected, as a supplementary verb which makes\nit so the speaker indicates that the action is beneficial for them. It isn't\neasy to gloss this in English, but something like \" _Were you kind enough_ to\nlike it?\" sort of has the same feeling.\n\nHopefully this helps you understand. My only comment on how to translate\nsentences like this is you mostly need to abandon the syntax of the Japanese\nto retain the right feel. Also, note that this is rather girly speech, so I\nwould warn against copying it exactly if you aren't trying to sound girly.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T07:04:39.527",
"id": "19243",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T07:04:39.527",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "19241",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19241 | 19243 | 19243 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "In 『よつばと!』, よつば says 「ここ家がいっぱいある」 to which her father replies 「そうだろう」.\n\nWhat's the difference between そうです and そうでしょう? I know when we use そうです but I\ncan't figure out the other. I know ましょう is used to suggest stuff, but I don't\nknow how it fits with そうでしょう.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T07:39:18.393",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19244",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-02T16:01:46.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-02T16:00:14.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "What's the difference between そうです and そうでしょう?",
"view_count": 5355
} | [
{
"body": "The main semantic distinction that I'm aware of is that they represent\ndifferent levels of certainty or previous awareness.\n\nAs a really simple example:\n\n**Person 1:** それは ねこ ですか [is that a cat?]\n\n**Person 2:** そう です [it is]\n\nAs opposed to:\n\n**Person 1:** それは ねこ です [that is a cat]\n\n**Person 2:** そう でしょう [yes, so it seems]\n\nApart from that でしょう is often used as an alternative to です when the speaker\nwants to appear less forceful in what they're saying. It suggests the\npossibility of something being the case rather than explicitly stating that it\nis.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T08:50:36.527",
"id": "19245",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T13:18:38.993",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-24T13:18:38.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "7519",
"owner_user_id": "1667",
"parent_id": "19244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "To keep it simple, let's assume that you're only talking about そうです and そうでしょう\nas \"complete\" statements, i.e. when responding to something, and let's ignore\nthe そう part for a while to better focus on the main point here, which is the\ndifference between です and でしょう.\n\nWhile です and でしょう are both used to express a certain level of politeness, and\nusually considered to bear the function of copula, です in most contexts is the\nlexicographical equivalent of a _neutral_ \"be\" or \"is\" in English.\n\nでしょう on the other hand, is in one word roughly the equivalent of \"seems\".\nDepending on the situation, other frequently used translations include \"I\nthink\", \"I guess\", \"I wonder\" or even \"I hope\". In many cases でしょう can be\ntranslated as \"don't you agree?\" or \"that's what I thought!\", much like the\nparticle ね.\n\nTranslations of phrases including でしょう would usually include a \"be\" or \"is\",\nbut by itself it often matches phrases like \"yeah, I guess\", where \"be\" or\n\"is\" may be omitted even in English.\n\nIt's thus necessary understand that context in which でしょう is used, to choose a\nsuitable translation for a given situation. Re-inserting そう into the equation;\nWhile そうです means \"it is so\", そうでしょう should be interpreted as \"so it seems\", or\ndepending on the context, something like \"isn't it so?\" or \"that's right!\"\netcetera.\n\nSide-note: While the phrase そうだ is often used as an exclamation upon realizing\nor remembering something, I've never heard anyone use そうです in the same manner,\nand I don't think that would fly very well. In other words, even though\n\"that's right!\" can be a viable translation also of そうです, it's not so in the\ncontext of \"talking to yourself\".\n\nIn more complex sentences like 雨{あめ}が降{ふ}りそうです, the そう construct has a\nsomewhat different function as compared to the above, and is used to modify\nthe main clause rather than to give feedback on someone else's statement. The\ndifference between です and でしょう though is still the same.\n\n**Edit** : The OP changed the question from being general to adding a specific\ncontext. In this named context, そうだろう should be interpreted as a confirmation\nof the observation made by やつば, much as suggested by @naruto, who does a good\njob trying to get at the difference between そうだろう (そうでしょう) and some neutral\nconfirmation (そうだ, そのとおりだ etcetera).\n\nMoreover, I would suggest that the reason why the context of \"adult\" vs.\n\"child\" makes the phrasing from the OP's example natural is that (in\ncombination with the informality of だろう) it also hints on the nature of the\nrelationship, as in the adult being more experienced and knowing things that\nthe child has yet to discover.\n\nThis is because in contrast to a neutral confirmation, そうだろう in this case\nimplies that the speaker either has already made the same observation\n(obviously without the need for confirmation from the child), already knew\nthat \"there are a lot of houses here\", or possibly just feels that it's an\nobvious conclusion based on some other fact.\n\nTo me, understanding the relationship between speaker and listener is\nnecessary to comprehend how an often uncertain or seeking-confirmation-like\nphrase as だろう suddenly turns into something really quite the opposite. (Of\ncourse, the same phenomenon can be observed not only in Japanese, but in other\nlanguages as well, including English.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T08:53:26.263",
"id": "19246",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T09:24:43.430",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-28T09:24:43.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "7519",
"owner_user_id": "7519",
"parent_id": "19244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Without context, I translate 「そうです」to \"It is.\" and「そうでしょう」to \"It is, isn't\nit?\". But「そうでしょう」can be taken in different meanings depending on the\nsituation, relationship between the speaker and listener(s) and intonation. I\nthink of three situations to use 「そうでしょう」.\n\n 1. Authorization to confession or apology. \nA: 「申し訳ありません。どういう結果を引き起こすか、慎重に考えてから行動すべきでした。」 \nB: 「そうでしょう。今後二度とこのような事の無い様に注意してください。」 \n\n 2. Persuasion. \nC: 「これは我々が責任を取るべき問題だとおっしゃっているのですか。」 \nD: 「そうでしょう。それが唯一の解決策ですよ。」 \n\n 3. Agreement without being so sure. \nE:「この書類の提出期限は月末でしたよね。」 \nF:「そうでしょう。担当部署に確認してもらえますか。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T12:57:56.990",
"id": "19247",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T12:57:56.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7546",
"parent_id": "19244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "～だろう/でしょう in this context does _not_ represent the uncertainty or guessing of\nthe father. This actually is a strong affirmation of the Yotsuba's\nobservation. I would translate this そうだろう as \"Indeed,\" \"Exactly,\" \"Just as you\nsay,\" or simply \"Yup.\" I feel translating this as something like \"So it seems\"\nor \"I think so too\" is too weak.\n\nIf Yotsuba's father had said そのようだ or そうみたいだ, then it would have been \"So it\nseems.\" Or if he had added extra words and said 多分そうだろう or おそらくそうだろう, then of\ncourse it would have meant \"Probably it is so.\"\n\nThen, what's the difference between \"そうだろう/そうでしょう\" and \"そうだ/そうです\" in this\ncontext, when both versions represent almost the same level of certainty?\n\n> 1. Customer: あら、この財布は安いわね。 \n> Shop staff: そうでしょう！\n>\n> 2. Customer: あら、この財布は安いわね。 \n> Shop staff: そうです！\n>\n>\n\nIn both examples, the staff strongly assures that the wallet is a good deal.\nBut I feel the shop staff is a bit more friendly in the first example. Maybe\nit's related to euphemism?\n\n> よつば: ここ家がいっぱいある！ \n> 父: そうだろう。\n\nHmm. I would say this そうだろう is a bit more friendly version of \"そうだ\", but a bit\nmore dignified/paternal version of \"そうだね／そうだな\". Anyway, the difference is not\nin the level of certainty.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T11:18:16.970",
"id": "19264",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-02T16:01:46.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-02T16:01:46.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19244",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 19244 | null | 19264 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19252",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've always interpreted the plain/present affirmative of a verb (e.g. 行く/行きます）\nas either\n\nA.) an action that I will do in the future 図書館に行きます \"I will go to the library\"\n\nB.) an action that I habitually do. よくテレビを見る \"I often watch T.V.\"\n\n～ている conjugations can for a variety of verbs translate as having an enduring\nstate or state which is a result of change\n\nExample\n\n> * 僕の友達はヨーロッパに行っている → \"My friend is gone to Europe\"\n> * ドアが開いている → \"The door is open\"\n> * 僕は結婚してる → \"I'm married\"\n>\n\nFor verbs of this nature which do not have an \"action in progress\"\ninterpretation from the ~ている conjugation, is it possible to interpret the\nplain/present affirmative of a verb as an action in progress/event currently\ntaking place as well?\n\nExamples\n\n> * 今僕の友達はヨーロッパに行く → \"My friend is going to Europe now\" (As in an action in\n> progress, he's on the plane on his way there)\n> * ドアが開く → \"The door is opening\" (Door is actively in the process of\n> opening)\n> * 僕は結婚します → \"I'm getting married\" (In the process of completing wedding\n> arrangements and so on)\n>\n\nAre these interpretations correct? If not is there some other method in order\nto express those type of sentences? Any insight or clarifications would be\ngreatly appreciated.\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T18:39:17.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19249",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-22T08:58:01.900",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-22T08:56:18.023",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"conjugations",
"て-form"
],
"title": "Dictionary form of verb to indicate progressive actions or actions in progress?",
"view_count": 378
} | [
{
"body": "The answer is basically no. You can express any progressive actions with\n(adverbal form) + つつある, which was created to translate exactly English\nprogressive forms, though it's not frequently used in everyday conversation.\n\nSpeaking how to translate the examples you suggested to common expressions,\n\n 1. \"My friend is going to Europe now\"：私の友達は今ヨーロッパへ向かっている\n 2. \"The door is opening\"：ドアが開くところだ / ドアが開く (= The door is about to open)\n\nIf you find #2 inaccurate (though it depends how you define \"open\", fully or\npartially), you can still use 開いている for that usage (and 行っている for #1), or\n開いていっている. As for \"I'm getting married\", I'm not sure if it's an natural\nexpression to begin with. So, I'd suggest 結婚しつつある.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T21:06:48.140",
"id": "19252",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T21:06:48.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "19249",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> is it possible to interpret the plain/present affirmative of a verb as an\n> action in progress/event currently taking place as well?\n\nNot really. There are several different patterns you can use depending on the\nsituation. In general, you can use the pattern `〜つつある` for something that is\ncurrently in progress.\n\n> * ドアが開いている → The door is open (in an open state).\n> * ドアが開きつつあります → The door is opening (right now; I can see it happening) \n> \n>\n> * × 今僕の友達はヨーロッパに行く → \"My friend is going to Europe now\" (As in an action\n> in progress, he's on the plane on his way there)\n> * ○ 今僕の友達はヨーロッパに行きつつある → \"My friend is going to Europe now\" (As in an\n> action in progress, he's on the plane on his way there) \n> \n>\n> * × 僕は結婚します → \"I'm getting married\" (In the process of completing wedding\n> arrangements and so on)\n> * ? 僕は結婚しつつある → \"I'm in the middle of getting married\" → I guess if you\n> got a phone call during the middle of your wedding and you answered it, you\n> might say this, but this does not translate to what you want.\n>\n\nFor motion verbs, you can also use `辞書形＋[途中]{と・ちゅう}` to indicate \"on the way\"\n(and sounds better to my ear than `〜つつある`, but that might just be me).\n\n> * ○ 今僕の友達はヨーロッパに行く途中です。 → \"My friend is going to Europe now\" (As in an\n> action in progress, he's on the plane on his way there) \n> \n>\n>\n\nFinally, to indicate that something is starting right now (i.e., has just\nbegun and is in progress), you can use `〜ているところ`. However, I believe that\nemphasis is on the fact that it has just (somewhat recently) begun compared to\n`〜つつある`.\n\n> * 試合のため、スタジアムを開場しているところだ → They're just starting to open the (doors of\n> the) stadium for the game.\n>\n\nAs far as your sentence about preparing for a wedding, I don't think even \"I'm\ngetting married\" in English affords those semantics. Maybe in a very\nparticular context. Anyway, you'd need to specify that you're doing the\npreparations with something like\n\n> * 結婚式の準備をしています\n>\n\n* * *\n\n関連項目:\n\n * [How can I say “Right now”, or “At that exact moment”?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/272/78)\n * [How close are なりつつある and なっている?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3717/78)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T23:54:13.580",
"id": "19256",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-22T08:58:01.900",
"last_edit_date": "2017-05-22T08:58:01.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "19249",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19249 | 19252 | 19252 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "異なる is the dictionary form. To express the idea of condition, one has to\nchange the u into an e and add the suffix ba.\n\n異なれば = If one differs.\n\nHow do you express the idea of a negative condition -> if one does not differ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T20:14:12.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19250",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T22:10:03.553",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-24T22:10:03.553",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "How is \"if one does not differ\" translated using the word 異なる and the ば-ending?",
"view_count": 88
} | [
{
"body": "\"if one does not 'verb'\" can be expressed as : verb + ない form + ば form = verb\n+ なければ\n\nIt is similar to the ば form conditional for い adjectives: 高い(い adj) + ば form =\n高ければ\n\nIn your particular example : 異ならなければ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T20:30:54.600",
"id": "19251",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-24T20:30:54.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4507",
"parent_id": "19250",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19250 | null | 19251 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19262",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "When somebody uses 声が出る, what is the significance of saying it this way as\nopposed to using 言う? Is this used commonly and does it have some sort of\nspecial nuance I'm not aware of?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-24T23:44:44.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19255",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-25T22:26:29.493",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-25T22:26:29.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "3073",
"owner_user_id": "7214",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"set-phrases",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "What does \"声が出る\" mean?",
"view_count": 1156
} | [
{
"body": "It is different to the translatation of \"声に出る\" in English, because English\ndoes not have such expressions. An expression like \"声がでる\" is called \"自発表現\" in\nJapanese.\n\nThis expression means: _Something makes a person do naturally_. If I must\ntranslate \"声が出る\" into English, it would be _I was naturally made to say_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T03:50:07.833",
"id": "19260",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-25T22:26:09.610",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-25T22:26:09.610",
"last_editor_user_id": "5041",
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "19255",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Here are my 2 cents.\n\nUnlike 言う, which denotes the action of speaking, 声が出る denotes the ability to\nspeak at a particular point of time.\n\n> 治療を受け続けてきた今、彼女はやっと声が出るように戻れました。\n\nWould mean:\n\n> After receiving continuous treatment, today, she is finally able to speak\n> again.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T04:37:50.740",
"id": "19261",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-25T08:00:59.643",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-25T08:00:59.643",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7595",
"parent_id": "19255",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "When you use \"say\" or \"言う\", the _content_ of the speech is the most important.\nThe existence of the _physical_ sound/voice is not usually important, nor\nnecessary.\n\n> * Dictionaries say so.\n> * 彼はブログで、そう言っていた。（≒彼のブログに、そう書いてあった。）\n>\n\nOn the other hand, when we use \"声が出る\" (intransitive) or \"声を出す\" (transitive),\nthe existence of the physical sound is the most important concern. The content\n(what is said as a word) is not very important. For example, you cannot use\n\"言う\" in the following sentences:\n\n> * (in a quiet classroom) 驚きのあまり、声が出てしまった。\n> * 病気が治って、また声が出るようになった。(or 声を出せるようになった)。\n> * (watching music video) 3人の中で、彼女が一番声が出ている。\n> * (while sneaking) シッ！ 大きな声を出すな！ (≒ keep your voice down!)\n>\n\nIf the physical voice and the content is both important to you, you can also\nuse \"声に出して言う\" (say out loud).\n\n> * (to kids) 間違ったら、「ごめんなさい」と声に出して言いなさい。\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T07:49:36.390",
"id": "19262",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-25T07:49:36.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19255",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 19255 | 19262 | 19262 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If I want to say the dog barked, which is more grammatically correct: inu WA\nnaita or inu GA naita? I'm thinking the second one because it's identifying\nwhat's barking, but I'm not sure I fully understand the usage of ga.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T15:45:17.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19266",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-25T17:41:41.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7598",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "particle grammar, は and が",
"view_count": 139
} | [
{
"body": "We can't explain this vast arguments in a few lines, but here are some rough\nguidelines.\n\n * **The** dog barked means you've already talked about a dog, so it's \"inu WA naita\". \n * However if you want to stress where that sound came from, you'll say inu GA naita, meaning naita no wa inu da = it has been the dog who barked (bad English?)\n * **A** dog barked means that you still hadn't talked about a dog till now, so it's \"inu GA naita\".\n * you use GA if the verb or the adjective needs it. E.g. ore wa inu ga suki; inu ga mieta!; inu ga kaitai na...\n * If you make a contrast explicit or implicit between what a cat does and what a dog does, you'll say again \"inu wa naita\". Other ex. inu wa ita ga, neko wa inakatta (there was a/the dog, but there wasn't a/the cat).\n * The contrast you create may be implicit, for instance you don't have to talk explicitly about the cat, and it may be a contrast with something you don't know.\n * An implicit contrast may put some sort of limit (generally to what you know or can say). Usually \"wa\" will be translate with \"at least\". E.g. a student took something it wasn't yours, and someone saw it: \"Did you see what he took from that desk?\" \"keshigomu wa nusunda\" (he took at least an eraser)\n * The negative form has an inherent contrastive nature, so you will usually say inu wa nakanakatta. However if you want to put a stress like that in the second point of this list you may say inu ga nakanakatta. \n * In a dependent clause you'll use GA, no matter what: inu ga naita toki... inu ga naita kara... etc. Exceptios are sentence followed by to (e.g. inu wa naita to omou).\n * \"Dogs bark\" or \"the dog is man's best friend\" or \"A dog is a man's best friend\" imply the use of the term \"dog\" as \"generalized idea of a dog\"; you're not specifically talking about a certain dog, so you will have to use wa again.\n\nHope it helps.\n\nIf someone can suggest other cases I'll add them in the answer. Thanks.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T17:41:41.223",
"id": "19267",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-25T17:41:41.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "2972",
"parent_id": "19266",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19266 | null | 19267 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Based on the pronunciations [here](http://www.saiga-\njp.com/pronunciation_voice.html), what I hear in Anime, and the way I hear\nkana pronounced in Japanese class, it seems to me that Austin should start\nwith ア rather than オ, but it is clearly spelled with an オ\n([reference](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B9%E3%83%86%E3%82%A3%E3%83%B3)).\nWhy is this? Am I somehow seriously misunderstanding the way kana are\npronounced?\n\nI am assuming that the reason for this has to do with cot/caught merger in\nEnglish. It seems to me that British people would very likely pronounce words\nlike \"Austin\" with the オ sound. On the other hand, I pronounce Austin much\nlike [this guy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8buFjFAnyy4).\n\nThis issue is particularly important to me because my last name also contains\nthis same sound, and in class, I've been spelling it with an ア.",
"comment_count": 15,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-25T21:20:33.513",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19268",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T00:15:17.377",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T00:15:17.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"katakana",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "Why is Austin spelled with an オ?",
"view_count": 1488
} | [
{
"body": "It takes a long time but I think asking \"why\" is usually the wrong approach in\nJapanese. At least I found it that way. Many of these words were adopted ages\nago. As such they are Japanese words... they're just based on their foreign\nequivalents. Memorization & repetition is your friend.\n\nSome others worth mentioning:\n\nBomb = ボム (I've seen this one done improperly as バム in a gaijin-run\nrestaurant) Paul = ポール Scott = スコット\n\nTons more. Wait until you have to remember if it's カ vs キャ. Ex: Cat = キャット,\nCut = カット, Carrot = キャロット, Carrier = キャリアー",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T22:30:14.993",
"id": "19276",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T22:30:14.993",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "19268",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "The main two factors in transcription from English to Japanese are\n\n 1. (Japanese perception of) pronunciation in English\n 2. spelling in English\n\nTranscribing `au` as `オー` is the norm (note the lengthening!):\n\n> audio オーディオ \n> auction オークション \n> Australia オーストラリア \n> Austria オーストリア \n> audition オーディション \n> automatic オートマ (abbr.) \n> aura オーラ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T00:12:45.693",
"id": "19277",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T00:12:45.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "19268",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19268 | null | 19277 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19275",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm currently studying the potential form by making up sentences from several\nscenarios, and am finding it rather difficult to check their correctness using\nnothing but vague online translators.\n\nIs the above translation acceptable? Here it is with some context:\n\n```\n\n すみませんが、どの[列]{れつ}に[食]{しょく}パンが[見]{み}つけられますか？\n \n```\n\nOr would it generally be better to form it in a simpler way, such as:\n\n```\n\n すみませんが、[食]{しょく}パンはどの[列]{れつ}にありますか？\n \n```",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T15:45:48.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19271",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T07:20:09.677",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T07:20:09.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "3594",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Is \"Xがどこに見つけられますか\" an acceptable translation of \"Where can I find X\"?",
"view_count": 123
} | [
{
"body": "The second is far better... and it's good that you don't trust the online\ntranslators. :)\n\nI'd recommend doing some Google searches of the verb(s) in question and kind\nof copying and pasting. Other than that, it's going to be hard to know what\nverbs to use when w/o immersion.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T22:21:11.867",
"id": "19275",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T22:21:11.867",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "19271",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19271 | 19275 | 19275 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19281",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 士郎の理想、英雄となった姿があなたではないのですか。\n\nI think the subject of なった is 姿, but a friend tells me it's 士郎.\n\nIs it not possible that the sentence means\n\n> The figure that became hero, are not you?\n\n?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T22:07:42.070",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19273",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T17:57:34.803",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T17:57:34.803",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7597",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"syntax",
"parsing"
],
"title": "What is the subject in 「士郎の理想、英雄となった姿があなたではないのですか。」?",
"view_count": 268
} | [
{
"body": "英雄となった姿 is followed by が which should tell you it's not that. Ex: 彼は目が青。(subj:\nhim).\n\nCan't tell w/o some reference, but the subject is あなた. Could be Shirou, might\nnot be.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-26T22:18:18.983",
"id": "19274",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T22:18:18.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "19273",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "As a whole sentence, 「士郎の理想、英雄となった姿」 is the long subject phrase. If I have to\nnarrow down, 理想 and 姿 are the two parallel subjects.\n\nAccording to [this Wikipedia\narticle](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate/stay_night), [this\ntweet](https://twitter.com/saber_bot/status/272550240698105856), and [this\npage](http://lparchive.org/Fatestay-night/Update%20216/), this question is\nmade in a special context. Here, the speaker is talking to Archer, who is\nsupposed to be the reincarnation of Shirou, who wanted to became a hero.\nArcher says he and Shirou are two separate beings. But the speaker believes\nthat the person in front of the speaker, Archer, and Shiro are virtually the\nsame person.\n\n> 1. あなたが士郎の理想です。 \n> You are the ideal of Shirou.\n> 2. 士郎の理想があなたです。(\"you\" emphasized in this form) \n> The ideal of Shirou is you. ( _or_ It's you that is the ideal of Shirou.)\n> 3. 士郎の理想、英雄となった姿があなたです。 \n> The ideal of Shirou, the figure (of Shirou) who became a hero, is you.\n> 4. 士郎の理想、英雄となった姿があなたですか。 \n> Is the ideal of Shirou, the figure (of Shirou) who became a hero, you?\n> 5. 士郎の理想、英雄となった姿があなたではないのですか。 \n> Isn't the ideal of Shirou, the figure (of Shirou) who became a hero, you?\n>\n\nIn the first half of the sentnece, there is a relative clause \"英雄となった\". And\nthe subject of the なった is 士郎, as your friend suspected. You can understand it\nlike 「士郎の理想、(つまり／そして、)士郎が英雄となった姿」 (Here's the article about [GA-NO\nconversion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12825/), just in case\nyou don't know that)\n\nAがBとなった姿 = the figure of A who became B; A in the form of B; etc.",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T04:02:16.580",
"id": "19281",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T06:36:23.707",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19273",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19273 | 19281 | 19281 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 上手{じょうず} に なりたければ もっと 練習{れんしゅう} する **[こと/べき/もの]** だ\n\nAs per my understanding, all the 3 options seem appropriate above. \nIs that correct? \nIf so, are there any quirks or exceptions?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T03:16:32.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19280",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T04:16:43.507",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T15:33:12.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Expressing \"should do\" with こと・べき・もの",
"view_count": 948
} | [
{
"body": "They all work. None are particularly conversational though, so usage differs.\nすることだ is quite strong, so you would use it sparingly. In fact, I'd say for the\nfirst two, a better translation is \"you must...\"\n\nFor \"should do...\", I'd recommend looking up:\n\nするほうがいい/したほうがいい \nしなければなりません/しないといけない",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T16:44:53.430",
"id": "19290",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T00:55:53.683",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-04T00:55:53.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "19280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "こと to support a rule or a culturally-held-wisdom that says \"Look both ways\nbefore crossing the street\" or whatever\n\nべき Kinda oldschool. Also interchangeable with Beshi if you go way back in\ntime. It's more like \"The governing bodies [should] take care of the poor\" or\nsomething to that degree. It's usually used for law or community-based action.\n\nもの Not really the first that comes to mind when using \"should\" or \"in order\nfor things to go well\" ... but it's usable. I think that _mono_ is more for\n\"Hey if you wanna succeed, you're gonna have to study hard, it's just one of\nthose things.\" ... that sort of feel will probably not steer you wrongly.\n\nHope that helps. Please excuse the romaji, but to me Romaji are very helpful.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T16:37:54.233",
"id": "29564",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T16:37:54.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "19280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Vたほうがいい is pretty commonly used as \"should.\" In Japan I have almost never\nheard べき from a Japanese speaker. However ほうがいい expresses \"should\" in the\nsense of something imperative, but is slightly weaker in the sense of\nsuggestion though it is suggestive, in which case sometimes たらいい is better.\n\nThe situations I'm talking about are like this:\n\n> You should probably get a license. \n> 免許あったほうがいいと思う\n>\n> You should go to the party! \n> パーティいったらいい！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-04T03:52:38.520",
"id": "41444",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T04:16:43.507",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10300",
"parent_id": "19280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19280 | null | 19290 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19284",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Just learned the verb “to live” 住む. When conjugated to masu negative it is\npronounced as すみません. How is this related to the expression すみません which means\n“I'm sorry”/“Please excuse me”? Or is it just a coincidence?\n\nIs there any way the negative of 住む would actually be used in conversation? In\nEnglish it feels wrong to say “not live” or “doesn't live”, and I don't know\nany examples where the negative of 住む is used.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T05:47:26.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19282",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T17:58:07.857",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T17:58:07.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7584",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Is the negative form of 住む related to すみません (i.e. \"I'm sorry\"/\"Excuse me\"), and how is it used in actual conversation?",
"view_count": 981
} | [
{
"body": "住む often occurs in the 〜ている form in the wild to reflect a continuing state or\ncondition.\n\nSo then, if I wanted to say I don't live somewhere I would say (dictionary and\npolite):\n\n> 東京に住んでいない / 東京に住んでいません。\n\nor\n\n> 東京に住んだことはない。 / 東京に住んだことはありません。\n\n(I have not lived in Tokyo)\n\n* * *\n\nThe すみません of apologies is from\n[済む](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/120120/m0u/). But generally, it is\nnot written in kanji. In fact, even Japanese people sometimes seem to get\nsurprised by it if you use the kanji in apologies:\n[chiebukuro](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1346617188).\n\n* * *\n\nAccording to the [online Japanese accent\ndictionary](http://www.gavo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/ojad/search/index/sortprefix:accent/narabi1:kata_asc/narabi2:accent_asc/narabi3:mola_asc/yure:visible/curve:invisible/details:visible/limit:20/word:%E3%81%99%E3%82%80),\nall three すむ verbs have the same accent in their pronunciation.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T05:58:59.330",
"id": "19283",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T06:08:41.930",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T06:08:41.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "19282",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Regarding the etymology of the \"please\" すみません, according to [the gogen-\nallguide entry](http://gogen-allguide.com/su/sumimasen.html), it is 済みません, not\n住みません.\n\n* * *\n\nAs to whether 住みません is used, it is, but not terribly commonly.\n\nBasically it's only used when you really want the future tense:\n\n> 太郎と一緒に住みませんか？ \n> \"Won't you live together with Tarou?\"\n>\n> 今週より後に、この家には誰も住みません。 \n> \"After this week, no one will live in this house.\"\n\nOtherwise, you use the negative stative form:\n\n> 太郎はイギリスにはもう住んでいません。 \n> \"Tarou doesn't live in England anymore.\"\n\nAs a side note, 住まない is much more common than 住みません for the reason that it can\nappear in relative clauses with the stative semantics (〜ません, of course, is not\nused in relative clauses):\n\n> 人が住まない家は侘しい。（≒人が住んでいない家は侘しい。） \n> \"Houses that no one lives in are dreary.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T06:13:34.643",
"id": "19284",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T06:41:37.183",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "19282",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19282 | 19284 | 19284 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19286",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> お百姓と、その息子を殺したヘビ\n>\n> ヘビがお百姓(ひゃくしょう)の息子の方へはい寄って来て、噛み殺してしまいました。 \n> お父さんのお百姓は、悲しくてたまりません。 \n> それでオノを持ち、ヘビの穴のそばでヘビが出てきたらすぐに **叩き殺そうと** 待ち構えていました。 \n> そのうちにヘビが一匹、穴から出てきました。 \n> お百姓は、 \n> 「それっ！」 \n> と、オノを振り下ろしました。 \n> でもヘビは頭を引っ込めてしまい、オノはそばの岩を二つに割っただけでした。 \n> こうなると、お百姓はヘビに仕返しをされたら大変だと思って怖くなりました。 \n> それでヘビに **仲直りをしようと** 、言いに行きました。 \n> しかしヘビは首を振って、こう答えました。 \n> 「あなたもわたしも、今さら気持ち良くお付き合いする事は出来ません。 \n> わたしはこの岩の裂け目を見るたびに。 \n> また、あなたは息子さんのお墓を見るたびに。 \n> 嫌な事を思い出すのだから」\n>\n> このお話しは、深い憎しみを持つ人同士が、仲直り出来る事はめったにないと教えています。\n>\n> おしまい\n\nFrom <http://hukumusume.com/douwa/pc/aesop/08/15.htm>\n\nI found that I didn't understand the meaning of the grammar \"~ようと ....\" when I\nwas reading children stories.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T07:06:22.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19285",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-22T16:31:20.237",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-22T16:31:20.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "14627",
"owner_user_id": "7610",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "～ようと.... Japanese grammar",
"view_count": 7311
} | [
{
"body": "The `ようと` form denotes the intention to do something, or an impending action.\n\nFor example, the sentence you've highlighted in the paragraph means to say\nthat,\n\n`\"[they] laid in wait by the snake's nest, in an attempt to beat it to death\nthe instant it showed itself.\"`",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T07:31:11.967",
"id": "19286",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T07:31:11.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7595",
"parent_id": "19285",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> それでオノを持ち、ヘビの穴のそばでヘビが出てきたらすぐに **叩き殺そうと** 待ち構えていました。\n\nThe \"Volitional + と\" in your first example means ～(よ)うとして・～(よ)うと思って, \"trying\nto~~\" \"in an attempt to~~\" \"with an intent to~~\", as the other poster has\nsaid. For more info on this grammar, see:\n\n[Volitional + と in\nひとまず心を落ち着けようと、[...]](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13441/9831) \n[Volitional + と + Verb](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9688/9831)\n\n* * *\n\n> それでヘビに仲直りを **しようと** 、言いに行きました。\n\nThe と in your second example is a quotative particle. You should parse the\nsentence this way:\n\n> それでヘビに『仲直りをしよう。』と、言いに行きました。 \n> So he went to say \"Let's make peace.\" to the snake.\n\nThe ようと here cannot be replaced by ようとして or ようと思って.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-01-20T22:53:17.650",
"id": "42727",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-21T03:36:16.157",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "19285",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19285 | 19286 | 42727 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19288",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the manga Yotsubato, the main character Yotsuba's father says\n「ジャンボが二人分働くしな」. I understand the sentence as a whole, I think, but I don't\nunderstand the しな at the end.\n\nHere's the full dialogue:\n\n> よつば：ジャンボ、しばらく見ないうちにまた大きくなった！ \n> ジャンボ：お？どこでおぼえたそのセリフ \n> お父さん：まあいいか。ジャンボが二人分働くしな",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T13:21:57.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19287",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T17:56:55.893",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T17:56:55.893",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "しな at the end of a sentence",
"view_count": 3329
} | [
{
"body": "* 〜し〜し is a common pattern for listing things. Although the pattern strictly speaking requires at least two list items, in colloquial speech it often occurs by itself. Here, the previous discussion probably contains some things which are good about ジャンボ and the fact that he works for two is just another good thing about him. \nRelated questions: (1) [Are there various ways to use\n~し?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1361/are-there-various-ways-\nto-use-%E3%81%97), (2) [Joining adjectives with し before a\nnoun](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11209/joining-adjectives-\nwith-%E3%81%97-before-a-noun), (3) [The many ways to say \"and\" in\nJapanese](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/474/the-many-ways-to-\nsay-and-in-japanese?lq=1), (4) [What is the し particle and how do you use\nit?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13397/what-is-\nthe-%E3%81%97-particle-and-how-do-you-use-it)\n\n * な is a variant of ね. \nRelated questions: (1) [What nuance does \"ですな\"\nbring?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/6806/what-nuance-\nbrings-%E3%81%A7%E3%81%99%E3%81%AA), (2) [「ね」 vs 「な」 in 「そうだね」 /「そうね」/\n「そうですね」](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13474/%E3%81%AD-\nvs-%E3%81%AA-\nin-%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%A0%E3%81%AD-%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%AD-%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%A7%E3%81%99%E3%81%AD)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T14:25:56.360",
"id": "19288",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T15:51:42.627",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "19287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "“しな” = 接続助詞 “し” + 終助詞 “な”\n\n“Aするしな。” implies something happens because of A. Your example implies “Because\nジャンボ works instead of someone (father?), he doesn’t have to work.”",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T14:33:32.907",
"id": "19289",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T15:20:38.143",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T15:20:38.143",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19287 | 19288 | 19289 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19296",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 明治【めいじ】時代【じだい】 **における** 学校【がっこう】教育【きょういく】について\n\nPlease help understand the use of ～における. Is it a form of `において`?\n\nWhy wouldn't it be a past form then?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T17:37:27.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19291",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T22:25:32.747",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T18:30:47.440",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Understanding use of における",
"view_count": 818
} | [
{
"body": "`における` can be thought of as a prefix version of `において`. While you can say for\nexample `△においては`, this usually means something like \"about △\", `における` can be\nused when you want to focus on a particular aspect of your subject matter. In\nthis case your subject matter is the Meiji era, and you are focusing on its\nschool education. You can also translate `における` as \"pertaining to\". I would\ntranslate your phrase, depending on the continuation, as\n\n> About the school education of/during the Meiji era...",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T22:25:32.747",
"id": "19296",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T22:25:32.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7238",
"parent_id": "19291",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19291 | 19296 | 19296 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19330",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Which of these words are cognates (share a common etymology)?\n\n * 住【す】む (\"live\") (rarely 棲む or 栖む)\n * 澄【す】む (\"clear\") (rarely 清む)\n * 済【す】む (\"end\")\n\nAccording [gogen allguide](http://gogen-allguide.com/su/sumimasen.html) and\nseveral dictionaries such as the\n[大辞泉【だいじせん】](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/smp/leaf/jn2/120156/m0u/), `済む`\nderives from `澄む`. Perhaps the English expression `I believe that the issue is\n#cleared up#.` helps to illustrate this relationship.\n\nThe 広辞苑【こうじえん】 dictionary (6th ed.) speculates that `住む` derives from `巣【す】`\n(\"nest\"), and lists `巣にいる` as the first (ie oldest) meaning. It also quotes\nthe following phrase from the 古今和歌集【こきんわかしゅう】 providing a certain plausibility\nfor the suggested etymology: `花【はな】に鳴【な】く鶯【うぐひす】、水【みづ】に住【す】むかはづの声【こゑ】を聞【き】けば`.\nAlthough, it is not quite clear to me why `住む` here would mean `巣にいる`\nspecifically and not `to live` in general.\n\nThis suggest that 住む is unrelated to 澄む・済む. However, I did not find any\ninformation regarding the origin of 澄む.\n\nAre the above mentioned sources correct? Is 澄む cognate with 住む, or are they\nnot related at all?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T20:01:39.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19292",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T18:17:38.973",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-27T20:22:35.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"false-etymology"
],
"title": "Are 済む・澄む・住む cognate?",
"view_count": 411
} | [
{
"body": "Much as described in the question comments by Yang Muye and blutorange, 1) all\nof these _sumu_ verbs derive from Old Japanese in ways that make the kanji\nirrelevant to a discussion of etymology, and 2) all of the modern senses of\n_sumu_ arise from an underlying idea of **to settle**. Interestingly, the\nEnglish term **to settle** covers most of the same meanings as the Japanese\n_sumu_ : to **live in a place** , to **become clear** (such as water), to\n**finish** , to **be fully paid** (such as an account), etc.\n\n(This same etymology was briefly mentioned [in this other\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/17344/difference-between-\nthe-words-for-living-\nresiding-%E4%BD%8F%E3%82%80-%E6%A3%B2%E3%82%80-%E6%B3%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8B-%E6%9A%AE%E3%82%89%E3%81%99#answer-17350).)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-30T18:17:38.973",
"id": "19330",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T18:17:38.973",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "19292",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19292 | 19330 | 19330 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19294",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading [the comic strip titled 「エボラ出血熱の巻」 on\nスマ町](http://mainichi.jp/sumamachi/news.html?cid=20140902mul00m03001000sc) when\nI encountered 「忘れててさ」. I've reproduced part of the dialogue here for a bit\nmore context (bold mine)\n\n> てっしー：火達磨さん！宿題手伝いますよ \n> 火達磨 ：てっしー！助かるッ！実は夏休みの調べ学習 **忘れててさ** … \n> てっしー：テーマはエボラ出血熱ですか\n\nI gathered that the second clause is omitted, and that the complete pattern\nwould be 「Ａてさ、Ｂ」. Based on this, I found [this 大辞林 entry on\nてさ](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%81%A6%E3%81%95&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_tesa_-010)\nwhich says\n\n> 〔接続助詞「て」に間投助詞「さ」の付いたもの。(snip)〕 \n> ① 文中で，「て」によって調子を整えつつ，「さ」によって語句を軽く指示し，相手に念を押す意を表す。\n\nI interpreted this definition (likely inaccurately) as\n\n> In mid-sentence, while adjusting the tone with 「て」, lightly indicate the\n> phrase with 「さ」, and expresses emphasis to the person one is talking to.\n\nwhich frankly sounds quite vague to me, especially the 「調子を整えつつ」 part.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T20:33:56.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19293",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T00:33:34.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6840",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particles"
],
"title": "What does the てさ in 「忘れててさ」 mean?",
"view_count": 640
} | [
{
"body": "I interpret it as follows. The `-て` is a shortened version of `いて`, so it\nshould be `忘れていて`. The `さ` is the usual relaxed sentence ending particle,\noften used between parts of a sentence to request feedback from the listener.\n\n> ね、僕さ、実はさ、昨日コンビニ行ったらさ、...\n\nSo I would translate the sentence as \"Y'know, I actually forgot to do my\nhomework...\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T21:40:04.630",
"id": "19294",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T00:33:34.100",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-28T00:33:34.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "7238",
"owner_user_id": "7238",
"parent_id": "19293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19293 | 19294 | 19294 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "23192",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently started studying the 古事記. In the beginning of the modern\ntranslation, there is a piece of grammar which, while not terribly confusing\nin itself, still fascinates me. The whole sentence is as follows. I have\nbolded the relevant part.\n\n> [臣安万侶]{しんやすまろ}が申し上げます。\n>\n> そもそも宇宙の始めに、混沌とした根元がすでに固まって、まだ生成力も形も現れなかったころのことは、 **名づけようもなく**\n> 動きも無く、誰もその形状を知るものはなかった。\n\nIf we look at the corresponding original passage:\n\n> 臣安万侶[言]{まを}さく、[夫]{そ}れ混元既に[凝]{こ}りて、気象[未]{いま}だ[効]{あらわ}れず。 **名も無く** [為]{わざ}もなし。\n> 誰か其の形を知らむ。\n\nSo the translation is evidently \"[the shapeless fleeting state of the early\nuniverse] has no name\", but the grammar of the modern translation, \"名づけようもなく\",\nis an interesting usage of the volitional form, making it sound more like\n\"Nobody has ever bothered giving a name to [this]\". I would be happy to hear a\nmore experienced Japanese speaker's interpretation of it.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T22:15:56.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19295",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-11T13:30:25.660",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7238",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"volitional-form",
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "Grammar in a modern translation of the 古事記 : ～ようもない",
"view_count": 329
} | [
{
"body": "In this case, it isn't the volitional form, but よう(様). See [this entry in the\n大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/226111/m0u/%E3%82%88%E3%81%86/),\nsense 2 and 6.\n\n> よう〔ヤウ〕【様】\n>\n> ２ 方法。やり方。\n>\n> ６ 動詞の連用形の下に付いて複合語をつくる。\n>\n> * ありさま、ようすなどの意を表す。\n>\n> * …する方法、…するやり方などの意を表す。\n>\n>\n\nTherefore, 名づけようもなく could literally be interpreted as `[there] not even being\na way/possibility to name [it], ...`. Or shorter, `it cannot be named` or\n`unnameable`, which is just another way of stating `[because] there is no\nname` (名も無し). I suppose the translator chose this expression because it flows\nbetter with the rest of the sentence and the style.\n\nFor 一段 verbs there isn't any difference in form to the volitional, but\nconsider these examples with 五段 verbs:\n\n * どうしようもなくさみしい夜だ。\n * 疑いようもなく幸福です。\n * 温泉の看板が出ていて迷いようもなく。\n * 陸軍の見せた音痴ぶりは、救いようもなく見事なものだった。\n * 河口近くで見た夕焼け空がまた、言いようもなく美しかった。\n * 見間違いようもない強烈な光を宿している。\n\nThese examples should also make it clear that this collocation means that\nthere is not possibility/doubt about the verb action not taking place. But\nkeep in mind it shouldn't always be translated literally.\n\n> かれは見るからに美しく優雅な生き物でしたが、何とも言いようがなく脆弱な感じでした。\n>\n> He struck me as being a very beautiful and graceful creature, but\n> indescribably frail.\n>\n> H. G. Wells『タイムマシン』",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-11T09:02:34.850",
"id": "23192",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-11T11:34:47.523",
"last_edit_date": "2015-03-11T11:34:47.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "19295",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19295 | 23192 | 23192 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19298",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Both of them mean bed and they target the same [wiki\npage](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%99%E3%83%83%E3%83%89).\n\nI mostly see ベッド, so I guess it is the common word for bed. In which case\nshould I use 寝台 ?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T23:16:06.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19297",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T23:36:43.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1553",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between ベッド and 寝台",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "(Note that 寝る doesn't necessarily imply sleeping, but can mean \"to lie down\".)\n\n寝台 is just what it says: an elevated platform (台) for lying down / sleeping\n(寝) and usually refers to the \"bed\"s in couchette/sleeping cars in trains (or\nbuses, ships, etc.).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-27T23:36:43.990",
"id": "19298",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-27T23:36:43.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "19297",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19297 | 19298 | 19298 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19318",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I always found it funny how the counter for people, `人`, has the special cases\n`[一人]{ひとり}`, `[二人]{ふたり}`, but then continues `[三人]{さんにん}`, `[四人]{よにん}`, ...\n\nHowever, this summer I came across a neat bit of info. If you go to bunraku\nplays or similar performances, like Doh theatre performances, they will say\n`[四人]{よったり}` instead. I heard this phrase also survives in some regional\ndialects in mordern Japanese, although I don't know which ones. This has lead\nme to conjecture that in the past, people were counted as the following, or a\nvariation thereof.\n\n`[一人]{ひとり}、[二人]{ふたり}、[三人]{みったり}、[四人]{よったり}、[五人]{いったり}、[六人]{むったり}、[七人]{ななたり}、[八人]{やったり}、・・・`\n\nDoes anyone know whether there is any evidence for this in old Japanese?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T01:31:29.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19300",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T14:18:42.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7238",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 12,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"classical-japanese"
],
"title": "Old way of counting people?",
"view_count": 521
} | [
{
"body": "Please note that the nature of writing using Chinese script often makes it\nimpossible to know how the word was originally pronounced. Generally the only\nreal way of knowing is by having glosses written in kana. In Old Japanese,\nneither hiragana nor katakana were yet invented, though man'yoogana does\nindicate the pronunciation. That said, I can only find `hitori` and `futari`\nin Old Japanese, though the corpus is relatively small compared to the other\nperiods.\n\nIf you expand the search a few centuries, citations for most of the other\nterms are easier to come by. Note that there are multiple manuscripts for the\nsame text, some containing kana readings that other manuscripts do not. That\nis why the same text appears multiple times below with different dates. I gave\nthe manuscript name when relevant.\n\n * mitari: 金光明最勝王経 (西大寺 c. 830), 観弥鞘上生経 (c. 850), 大唐西域記 (c. 950)\n * yotari: 金光明最勝王経 (石山寺旧蔵 c. 1050), 金剛頂瑜枷中略出念誦経 (c. 1065)\n * itori: 東大寺諷誦文 (c. 830), 観弥鞘上生経 (c. 850)\n * mutari: 法華論義草 (c. 950)\n * yatari: 日本書紀 (兼永本 c. 1200)\n\nI variously searched for two days through my resources but did not immediately\ncome up with anything for `7人` or `9人`. A lack of evidence, though, is not\nevidence in itself. I figure I have spent enough time on this already though,\nso I am calling it quits here.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T14:18:42.923",
"id": "19318",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T14:18:42.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1141",
"parent_id": "19300",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
] | 19300 | 19318 | 19318 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Came across this sentence that has this \"interrogative word + non-polite form\n+ か + 知る\" structure but not too sure if this is a kind of question or answer.\n\n> どこの会議室か知りません。\n\nIs this a question or an answer?\n\nAm I right to assume that this sentence simply means:\n\n> Do you know what kind of meeting room (is that)?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T05:35:17.180",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19301",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T10:08:58.533",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-28T10:08:58.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7399",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"questions",
"particle-か"
],
"title": "How do you interpret an \"interrogative word + non-polite form + か + 知る\" construct?",
"view_count": 202
} | [
{
"body": "> どこの会議室か知りません。\n\nLiterally means \"I don't know which meeting room it is.\"\n\n> Do you know what kind of meeting room (that is)?\n\nWould literally be (それが)どんな会議室か知っていますか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T09:03:16.150",
"id": "19302",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T09:03:16.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19301",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19301 | null | 19302 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19306",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> おや **には** 長生きしてもらいたいとおもう\n\nPlease help understand the `には` construct. \nIs it a form of emphasis?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T14:35:00.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19304",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T22:58:26.903",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-29T22:58:26.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "What's the function of ~には in 「おやには長生きしてもらいたいとおもう」?",
"view_count": 201
} | [
{
"body": "Yes.\n\n“には” = 格助詞 “に” + 係助詞 “は”\n\n係助詞 “は” is emphasis. In your example, “おやに” is emphasized.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T14:53:54.633",
"id": "19306",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T14:53:54.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19304",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19304 | 19306 | 19306 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19308",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen the last one (屋) many times before meaning something along the lines\nof \"establishment where you can buy things or services\".\n\nHowever, the rest of the word confuses me. Doesn't the word 八百 also mean the\nnumber 800 (はっぴゃく)?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T20:12:53.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19307",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T02:03:55.897",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7620",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Why \"greengrocer\" kanjis are 八百屋 (やおや)?",
"view_count": 5181
} | [
{
"body": "Note: My answer is based on [this entry for 八百屋 on Gogen-\nallguide](http://gogen-allguide.com/ya/yaoya.html)\n\nOriginally it's called 青屋 (あおや) which is abbreviated from 青物屋.\n\nThere are two theories on how the あおや reading became the current reading やおや\n\n 1. Change due to the ease of pronunciation and for the purpose of differentiating from the indigo dyers which is also called 藍屋 (あいや) - short for 藍染め屋. \n 2. Change due to association with 八百{やお} which can mean \"large number\" corresponding to the fact that 青屋 sells a large number of items. This 八百{やお} comes from 八百万{やおよろず} which is a term meaning \"uncountably large\" used in Japanese religious context i.e. 八百万の神. \n * the reading of 八百 started out as やほ, then became やを, and finally settled at やお.\n\nRegardless of how the change occurred, after the reading of 青屋 changed from\nあおや to やおや, the 青 was replaced by 八百 thus resulting in 八百屋.\n\np/s: As noted, 八百 and 八百万 denote 800 and 8,000,000 respectively. I believe\ntheir figurative meaning of \"large number\" derive from the religious\nconnections though. For example, 七百万 doesn't have such figurative meaning.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-28T21:45:19.097",
"id": "19308",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T02:03:55.897",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-29T02:03:55.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "6840",
"parent_id": "19307",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
] | 19307 | 19308 | 19308 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19322",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "* Can someone be \"さびしい\" without being \"かなしい\"? \n * I assume that one can be \"かなしい\" without being \"さびしい\". If this is not true, please explain.\n * I don't think I've heard \"かなしい\" so much in conversation. Are there alternative words?\n\nthank you.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T02:08:17.427",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19309",
"last_activity_date": "2015-04-21T09:22:23.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "can one be \"さびしい\" without being \"かなしい\"?",
"view_count": 994
} | [
{
"body": "It all depends on the situation/context so if you can provide that, it would\nmake for a better answer.\n\nBut speaking from a general sense..\n\n**さびしい** or **さみしい** is used to describe a sad feeling stemming from missing\nsomeone or something; like something is missing from you heart. As stated\nabove, loneliness doesn't quite fit, although it may fit in certain\nsituations.\n\nExample:\n\nMy girlfriend went off to school and I won't see her for six months. → さみしい\n\n**かなしい** is used to describe a truly sad feeling, perhaps more in the\ntraditional sense. Sad in US English tends to describe both さみしい and かなしい so\nit's a little difficult but.\n\nExample:\n\nMany children are dying from civil war in Syria. → かなしい\n\nThere are other similar words such as 心細い, 切ない, etc. that also reflect a\ncertain sadness.\n\nExample:\n\nI moved to Japan with my wife but I don't speak Japanese and can't interact\nwith the community. My wife doesn't understand my feelings and I feel\nhelpless. → 心細い\n\nMy friend's girlfriend broke up with him because he wouldn't accept her\nreligion although they were deeply in love. → 切ない\n\nThis doesn't quite answer your question but perhaps you can elaborate on what\nyou are trying to get an answer to.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T23:48:50.583",
"id": "19322",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T23:48:50.583",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6823",
"parent_id": "19309",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "Absolutely. For example, consider the phrase 寂しい場所. A desolate place. Do you\nthink it necessarily must be 悲しい場所 as well? I don't.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-04-20T23:06:24.267",
"id": "23893",
"last_activity_date": "2015-04-20T23:06:24.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6580",
"parent_id": "19309",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "# Yes\n\nPeople can be 悲しい without 寂しい, and vice versa. In fact, we can even find\npeople describing themselves or others that way.\n\n# 寂しいが、悲しくない\n\n> **あぁなんか悲しくないけど寂しいね** 。ずっと一緒だったからいなくなっちゃうのかって思うとつらいや\n\n[twitter - しばはらみゆ\n(m0s020)](https://twitter.com/m0s020/status/511876608638984192)\n\n* * *\n\n> ツイッターを閉じてしまいましたが、その先には高みを目指すキミがいることを望んでます。\n>\n> だから\n>\n> **寂しいけど悲しくない**\n\n[ameblo blog - smile](http://ameblo.jp/hina-tae-kiri/entry-11956764421.html)\n\n* * *\n\n> しあわせな最期を見送ることができました。\n>\n> **寂しいけれど、不思議と悲しくないのは**\n> 、光の世界に帰ったあとも、その存在を感じ続けられているから。いろんなところで助けられているのを感じてしまうから。そして、その度に、ニンマリして、ありがとうと言ってしまう。\n\n[blog - birth harmony](http://birth-harmony.com/blog/posts/133)\n\n* * *\n\n> その あたたかな気持ちで\n>\n> 心が 満たされているから なのか･･･\n>\n> 「 **寂しいけど 悲しくない感じ** 」がしています。\n>\n> 「それって どう違うの？」と娘に尋ねられ\n>\n> うまく答えられず・・・\n\n[blog - cocolog-nifty](http://tiisanahosinokai.cocolog-\nnifty.com/blog/2010/12/post-ba41.html)\n\n* * *\n\n> 「 **真咲と会えなくなるのは、寂しい。でも悲しくないよ** 。真咲が幸せにならない方が、もっと、悲しい」\n\n[いしいめぐみ, 愛細胞分裂, ISBN-13\n9784835579481](https://books.google.de/books?id=RSlVV7_o8O0C&pg=PA188)\n\n* * *\n\n> 「君も僕もその“苦の海“に溺れ続けた。だけど君はもう旅立っんだね、もう苦痛を味わうことのない世界へ。 **僕は悲しくないよ、ただ少し寂しいんだよ**\n> 、だから涙が出てしまうのかな……」\n\n[川室恵也【かわむろけいや】, 大罪の蝶, ISBN-13\n9784286033891](https://books.google.de/books?id=z-myABgSc30C&pg=PA52)\n\n# 悲しいが、寂しくない\n\n> 2週間ぶりに会えるのに… \n> 2人の1周年記念日なのに… \n> 会えるのは夜ご飯のたった数時間なんて…(p_q*)ｼｸｼｸ \n>\n>\n> **悲しいけど、寂しくないのは** \n> 想い合ってるってちゃんとわかるから。 \n> せっかく会えるからとびきり笑顔で居よう。\n\n[twitter - ゆーこ (uco514)](https://twitter.com/uco514/status/420487834219204608)\n\n* * *\n\n> えみさんのお見送り 一緒にいってくれてありがと。 **バイバイだけど、悲しいけど、 会いにいく！ 寂しくない！** 札幌でも頑張れ〜♥♥\n\n[pinsta - rarara1829](http://pinsta.me/rarara1829)\n\n* * *\n\n> 先週だけど、『おみおくりの作法』2度目の鑑賞。最後にガツンときて沈黙、そしてその後じわりとくる暖かさ、 **悲しいけど寂しくない**\n> 、そんなステキなラストシーンにココロ癒される。\n\n[twitter -\nHikariGoino](https://twitter.com/HikarGoino/status/579287284320628736)\n\n* * *\n\n> **悲しいのは寂しいからじゃない**\n>\n> 悲しいのは悔しいからじゃない\n>\n> 悲しいのは頑張れない自分\n\n[blog girlstalk - まきちむ](http://www.ca-girlstalk.jp/blogs/articles/981533)\n\n* * *\n\n> 今日、ブリュ丸の大好きだったキャンディが虹の橋に行っちゃった。\n>\n> **悲しいけど、向こうにはブリュ丸もクッキーくんもいるから寂しくないよ。**\n>\n> 今頃、みんなで走り回って楽しんでるよね。\n>\n> BonBon丸もキャンディにお別れが出来てよかったよ。\n>\n> また逢える日まで バイバイ\n\n[diary - bnyut.petit](http://bnyut.petit.cc/banana/2382968)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-04-21T09:22:23.390",
"id": "23901",
"last_activity_date": "2015-04-21T09:22:23.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "19309",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19309 | 19322 | 19322 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19319",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> あなたにとって仕事【しごと】 **とは** なんでしょうか\n\nWhat is the purpose of `とは` above? \nWould using `は` alone have been any different?\n\nIf `とは` is a grammatical construct, I would appreciate additional examples\nclarifying its significance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T02:43:40.560",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19310",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T11:18:32.073",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-30T11:18:32.073",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Purpose of ～とは in 「あなたにとって仕事とはなんでしょうか」",
"view_count": 518
} | [
{
"body": "“とは” introduces a definition.\n\n“AとはBである” = “The definition of A is B”\n\nIn your example: “あなたにとって仕事 **とは** なんですか” = “How do you define jobs?” where\n“What do you work for?” is implied.\n\n“あなたにとって仕事 **は** なんですか” sounds awkward and is interpreted as “あなたの仕事はなんですか” (=\n“What is your job?”).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T14:20:23.333",
"id": "19319",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T14:20:23.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19310",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19310 | 19319 | 19319 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm wondering how 馬鹿も一芸 should be translated into English. [EDICT-based\ndictionary\nsites](http://beta.jisho.org/search/%E9%A6%AC%E9%B9%BF%E3%82%82%E4%B8%80%E8%8A%B8)\nlist this phrase with the following translation:\n\n> 馬鹿も一芸 \n> even a fool has a talent\n\nIs this translation correct?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T11:27:40.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19312",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T11:22:43.890",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-30T11:22:43.890",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7622",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"expressions",
"idioms"
],
"title": "What does 馬鹿も一芸 mean in English?",
"view_count": 868
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think that \"even a fool has a talent\" is a fitting translation. (If\none would want to say that it should be something like 馬鹿にも一芸.)\n\nRather, 馬鹿も一芸 means something like \"even being a fool can be a talent\".",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T12:37:05.013",
"id": "19313",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T12:37:05.013",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "19312",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19312 | null | 19313 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19317",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> このしごとはきけん **を伴う**\n\nI am aware of the `**に** ともなう` construct. \nIs this any different? \nWhen would ともなう take the を particle rather than に?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T13:00:08.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19314",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T22:54:46.173",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-29T22:54:46.173",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Difference between ～に伴う【ともなう】 and ～を伴う【ともなう】",
"view_count": 551
} | [
{
"body": "The difference is the object.\n\n“AがBに伴う” = “A accompanies B”\n\n“BがAを伴う” = “B is accompanied by A”",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T13:58:40.337",
"id": "19317",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-29T13:58:40.337",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19314",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19314 | 19317 | 19317 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19331",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm curious if there's any historical link between the kanji for \"gate\",\n門{かど}, and the kanji for \"circle\" or \"yen\", 円{えん}. If 門 is gate, 円 looks like\na closed gate. Am I being whimsical and seeing patterns in the wind, or is\nthere a substantive link here?\n\nPlease use furigana when writing kanji; I'm a beginning student and don't know\nmany kanji.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-29T14:47:21.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19320",
"last_activity_date": "2015-04-17T16:15:04.913",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology",
"history"
],
"title": "Etymological connection between 門 and 円?",
"view_count": 421
} | [
{
"body": "As noted in the question comments, the kanji 円 was originally 圓. The nutshell\nversion of the article Yang Muye linked is that monks developed a shorthand\nversion of 圓 that looked like a box with a vertical line through it:\n. Over time, the shape of the\nsurrounding box changed, likely due to the same anatomical and mechanical\nprocesses that inform any change in handwriting.  became , and then that became the modern\nsimplified _shinjitai_ character 円.\n\n門, meanwhile, is a pictogram of a gate. You might run across alternative form\n鬥, but otherwise, this character is much more straightforward, both in\nsemantic development and graphical evolution.\n\nUltimately, the resemblance between 円 and 門 is purely accidental, and has much\nmore to do with the constraints placed on kanji shapes and the kinds of\nstrokes used in handwriting.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-31T00:18:25.977",
"id": "19331",
"last_activity_date": "2015-04-17T16:15:04.913",
"last_edit_date": "2015-04-17T16:15:04.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "19320",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 19320 | 19331 | 19331 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19327",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that ～もの converts the verb into a noun. So たべます meaning \"to eat\"\nbecomes たべもの meaning \"food\". Can ～もの be applied to all verbs?\n\neg. ききます meaning \"to listen\" becomes ききもの meaning \"music\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-30T02:38:47.673",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19324",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T17:52:05.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5237",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Can ～もの be applied to all verbs to make them a noun?",
"view_count": 753
} | [
{
"body": "There _is_ a way that ～もの can be applied to all verbs to \"make them a noun\",\nbut it's _not_ the way you're thinking of.\n\nIf you have a verb (e.g. 走る【はしる】 \"to run\") and a noun (e.g. 人【ひと】 \"person\"),\nyou can _always_ take the dictionary form (辞書形【じしょけい】) of the verb and put it\nbefore the noun, to get a construction that means something like \"[noun] that\n[verb]s\" (e.g. 走る人 \"person who runs\"). Since もの is a noun, you can do the same\nthing with any verb and もの as well.1 Note, however, that I put \"make them a\nnoun\" above in quotes for a reason: this construction is not actually a noun.\nRather, it forms what I guess you would call a \"nominal\" (thanks,\n@DariusJahandarie): a grammatical construction that behaves like noun, but\nisn't a noun (kind of like a noun phrase in English).\n\n**However** , words like 食べもの【たべもの】 aren't formed this way. The way we can\ntell is that the dictionary form of 食べる【たべる】 is, well, 食べる, not 食べ. Instead,\nthe word 食べもの is formed by taking the _stem form_ of the verb and putting it\nbefore もの.2 This is not generalizable in the same way that the \"dictionary\nform + noun\" rule is. Only some verbs have a related noun of the form \"stem\nform + もの\". Some examples: 飲みもの【のみもの】 \"drinks\", 生きもの【いきもの】 \"living things\",\n洗いもの【あらいもの】 \"things to be washed [esp. clothes or dishes]\".\n\n聞く【きく】, however, is not one of those verbs - ききもの does not mean \"music\" or\n\"things one listens to\" or any such thing.3 Similarly, 走りもの doesn't mean\nanything at all, though you might think it would mean \"runner\" or something\nlike that.\n\nIncidentally, if you want to talk about \"music\", the right word to use is\nprobably 音楽【おんがく】.\n\n* * *\n\n1 You should be careful about using \"[dictionary form] + もの\", though - there\nwill often be a better choice. For example, you _could_ say 食べるもの to mean\n\"food\", but that would be very strange, and people would look at you funny,\nand so you should stick to 食べもの instead.\n\n2 When I say that 食べもの is \"formed\" in such-and-such a way, I am speaking\nanachronistically - in modern Japanese, 食べもの is a single noun, not a complex\nconstruction built from 食べ and もの. In other words, \"[stem form] + [noun]\" is\nnot [productive](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity_\\(linguistics\\)) in\nmodern Japanese, whereas \"[dictionary form] + [noun]\" _is_.\n\n3 Okay, I lied for illustrative purposes. 聞き物 _is_ actually a word, but it\ndoesn't mean at all what you might expect it to mean based on an analogy with\nたべもの. Rather, it means [\"something worth listening\nto\"](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E8%81%9E%E3%81%8D%E7%89%A9) (cf. [the same\nin a monolingual\ndictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/50979/m0u/)). Furthermore, as\n@snailboat points out, 聞き物 is a very rare word - only two hits in the\n[Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written\nJapanese](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/), versus over 10,000 for the\nmore common word 音楽 (which, keep in mind, isn't a synonym). The moral of the\nstory: be wary about \"[stem form] + もの\" nouns - not all the nouns that you\nimagine might exist actually _do_ exist, and of the ones that do exist, some\nof them will not mean what you think they mean",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-30T05:20:25.230",
"id": "19327",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T17:52:05.667",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-30T17:52:05.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"parent_id": "19324",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19324 | 19327 | 19327 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19328",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 事故【じこ】があった **とか** で電車【でんしゃ】が止まり【とまり】……\n\nHere とか does not seem to indicate an 'example'. \nDo I understand it correctly? \nWhat does this form of `とか` represent?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-30T02:57:14.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19325",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T13:37:42.113",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-30T12:35:05.503",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does ～とか mean when it doesn't indicate an example?",
"view_count": 1821
} | [
{
"body": "You're right. This 「とか」 does not indicate an example. The 「とか」 in\n「事故{じこ}があったとかで電車｛でんしゃ}が停まり{とまり}・・・」 is\n\n> 《格助詞「と」＋副助詞「か」》はっきりしない事柄を指示する意を表す。「家族が病気だ―で困っているらしい」 \n> [case marker _to_ + adverbial particle _ka_ ] Indicates that something is\n> unclear or undetermined.\n\nfrom meaning #1 in\n[goo辞書「とか」](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/157481/m0u/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8B/).\nYour sentence could be rewritten as:\n\n> 事故があった（ということ）らしく電車が停まり・・・ \n> 事故があったそうで電車が停まり・・・\n\nExamples:\n\n> この辺りは昔からリンゴで有名だとか。接続:「普通形」+とか\n> ([日本語能力試験N2・文法](http://quizlet.com/15501318/n2-flash-cards/)) (≒\n> 有名だとのこと。/有名だそうです。/有名だという話です。/有名だと聞きましたが。) \n>\n> [ルーズソックスも流行っているのだとか！](http://matome.naver.jp/odai/2141234580212260601/2141273583831824003)(≒\n> はやっているとのこと。/はやっているそうです。/はやっているという話です。)\n\n* * *\n\nThe 「とか」 in 「アツアツおでんとかそういうのはやらないので」 indicates an example and is meaning #2 in\n[goo辞書「とか」](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/157481/m0u/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8B/):\n\n> 《並立助詞「と」＋副助詞「か」 》 ２ 断定を避け、あいまいにするために語の後に付ける。「学校―から帰る」 \n> [parallel marker _to_ + adverbial particle _ka_ ] Connects to the right of\n> words to make them less conclusive and introduce ambiguity.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-30T06:21:53.123",
"id": "19328",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T13:37:42.113",
"last_edit_date": "2014-10-30T13:37:42.113",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19325 | 19328 | 19328 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19333",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 1. 電車に **乗るとき** は、白線の内側でお待ちください。\n> 2. 電車に **乗ったとき** は、白線の内側でお待ちください\n>\n\nWhat is the difference between ～たとき and ～るとき?\n\nIn particular, what is ungrammatical about the second sentence with ～た? I felt\nthat this sentence, while being in disagreement with itself tense-wise, isn't\nungrammatical, per se. Is disagreement in this way ungrammatical?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-31T04:34:51.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19332",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T01:36:36.097",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T01:36:36.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"tense",
"time"
],
"title": "What is the difference between ～たとき vs ～るとき",
"view_count": 1268
} | [
{
"body": "You are right that it's in disagreement with itself tense-wise, and that is\nwhat makes it ungrammatical.\n\n> ✗ 電車に乗ったときは、白線の内側でお待ちください。 \n> ✗ \"When you got on the train, please wait on the inside of the white\n> lines.\"\n>\n> 電車に乗るときは、白線の内側でお待ちください。 \n> \"When you get on the train, please wait on the inside of the white lines.\"\n\nAs seen by these translations, if you treat that 〜た as the past tense, it\ndoesn't make sense. In the 〜る case, it can be interpreted either as referring\nto a single future event, or multiple future events, as in English.\n\n* * *\n\nYou might ask, \"why do you have to treat this 〜た as past tense, as opposed to\nstative, like in 「乾いたタオル」 'dry towel' or 「タイプされた論文」 'typed paper'?\"\n\nThe answer is that stative 〜た only works when the actor is not critical to the\nstate. In this case, 「電車に乗った」 is about an actor who is getting on the train,\nso the stative 〜た reading is not possible.\n\nI detail 〜た in relative clauses in this answer: [What are the general\nprinciples of using verbs to modify nouns (ex\n焦げるトースト/焦げたトースト)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11975/what-\nare-the-general-principles-of-using-verbs-to-modify-nouns-\nex-%E7%84%A6%E3%81%92%E3%82%8B%E3%83%88%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B9%E3%83%88-%E7%84%A6%E3%81%92%E3%81%9F%E3%83%88%E3%83%BC/11976#11976)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-10-31T05:10:53.353",
"id": "19333",
"last_activity_date": "2014-10-31T07:01:12.367",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "19332",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19332 | 19333 | 19333 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19336",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This question came to my mind while playing `漢字読めるカナ` for Android to pass\ntime.\n\n`温故知新` is a [4-character idiom](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yojijukugo) from\nthe [論語, Confucian Analects](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analects), meaning\n`to learn from the past`.\n\nIt is a Chinese phrase* and its kun-reading is usually given as\n\n> 故【ふる】きを温【？】て、新【あたらし】きを知【し】る。\n>\n> To ??? the old, and learn/understand the new.\n\nDictionaries and [gogen-allguide](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/o/onkochishin.html) disagree how one should read the first\ncharacter `温`. The reading `故き温【たず】ねて` \"to revisit the old\" seems to be a bit\nmore common. The problem I've got this reading is that the character `温` does\nnot mean `たずねる` or anything close -- I cannot find such a nuance in a kanji\ndictionary either. Kanji dictionaries such as the 漢字源, however, list the\nalternative interpretation that has been suggested, that is `故きを温【あたた】めて` \"to\nwarm up the old\".\n\n(1) Did `温` ever signify something like `たずねる`? Was it ever read as `温【たず】ねて`\nin other contexts?\n\n(2) Can anybody shed some light on the intended meaning of `温` in `温故知新`?\nPresumably, this would involve knowledge of Classical Chinese.\n\n* * *\n\n* The original Chinese phrase in the Analects is [`子曰、温故而知新、可以為師矣`](http://manapedia.jp/text/index?text_id=1898). See the link for the kanbun reading.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-01T09:07:23.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19334",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-01T21:26:19.747",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-01T09:32:17.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology",
"chinese",
"yoji-jukugo"
],
"title": "Significance of 「温」 in 「温故知新」",
"view_count": 539
} | [
{
"body": "In the dictionary 字通【じつう】 (1996), we find:\n\n> [3] よく温熟する、ならう、たずねる。\n\nIn addition, the dictionary 類聚名義抄【るいじゅみょうぎしょう】 (approx. 12th century) lists*\nthe following meanings for 温:\n\n> アタゝム・タツヌ・ウルフ・ツゝム・シル・アタゝカナリ・ウツクシ・ヤハラカナリ\n\n尋【たず】ねる (or rather, タツヌ) is the second listed.\n\n* * *\n\nMoving on now to Chinese sources, in\n[漢典](http://www.zdic.net/z/1d/xs/6E29.htm), it is written:\n\n> (2) 复习 [review]\n>\n> 温故而知新。——《礼记·中庸》\n>\n> 温《缁衣》一章。——清· 袁枚《祭妹文》\n>\n> (3) 又如：温故知新；温故（复习学过的知识）；温旧稿（比喻操旧业；干老营生）；温课\n\nCompare, for instance, (modern) Chinese 溫習 \"to review, revise\". Finally, in\n[康熙字典](http://www.kangxizidian.com/kangxi/0634.gif):\n\n> 又燖也。《中庸》温故而知新。《註》温如燖温之温，謂故學之熟矣，復時習之謂之温。\n\nThis suggests that the use of 温 as \"to review\" is an extension of \"to\n(re)heat\".\n\n* * *\n\n*You can find a publicly available copy of this dictionary [here](http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/2586895?tocOpened=1). 温 can be found in book 6, page 11, to the left.\n\n",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-01T10:13:34.437",
"id": "19336",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-01T21:26:19.747",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-01T21:26:19.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "578",
"parent_id": "19334",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19334 | 19336 | 19336 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19343",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I came across a learn-Japanese book from the 1980s and wanted to know what you\nguys think. The book gave a general formula for introduction and here is how\nit goes:\n\n 1. Someone says their name with any combination of 「よろしくおねがいします」 and/or 「はじめまして」, and the standard response is to repeat what they said but put your _own name_ instead. For example\n\n> キム ：はじめまして。よろしくおねがいします。キムです。 \n> あかみ：はじめまして。よろしくおねがいします。あかみです。\n\n 2. The general response to 「はじめまして」 is 「よろしくおねがいします」\n\n 3. The general response to 「よろしくおねがいします」 is 「こちらこそ。」\n\nI was wondering how rigid these responses are? Are the responses below valid\nor should I just default to the textbook response?\n\n 1. Can I respond to 「はじめまして」 with 「こちらこそ。」? \n\n 2. Can I respond to 「よろしくおねがいします」 with 「よろしくおねがいします。」? \n\n 3. If someone says 「田中です。はじめまして。よろしくおねがいします」, can I respond with something like 「こちらこそです。」?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-01T09:21:23.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19335",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-21T08:32:00.590",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-02T13:35:25.653",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4369",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"culture",
"greetings"
],
"title": "What are valid responses to the expressions 「はじめまして」 and 「よろしくおねがいします」 used in introductions?",
"view_count": 16824
} | [
{
"body": "こちらこそ is a response to よろしくおねがいします. People often say 「こちらこそよろしくお願いします」 for\nthis reason. I don't think we say 「こちらこそはじめまして」 probably because if the other\nperson hasn't met you before, it goes without saying that you haven't met that\nperson either.\n\n```\n\n A: 田中です。はじめまして。よろしくおねがいします。\n B: こちらこそよろしくおねがいします。\n \n```\n\nThis is acceptable, but also unnatural in terms of conversation because it's\nkind of like:\n\n```\n\n A: Hello, I'm Alice. Nice to meet you.\n B: Nice to meet you, too.\n A: (Um... so what's this person's name?)\n \n```\n\nSo to answer your questions,\n\n 1. Yes, you can, but replying with 「はじめまして」 might be better.\n 2. It is totally okay to respond with that, but it would be even better to respond with 「こちらこそよろしくおねがいします」\n 3. Yes, but you might want to mention your name also.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-01T12:22:30.863",
"id": "19337",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-01T18:00:35.310",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-01T18:00:35.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "5212",
"parent_id": "19335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "**1)** You are right. There are many combinations of よろしくおねがいします AND/OR\nはじめまして. I think the standard template of introducing is:\n\n> はじめまして。田中です。よろしくおねがいします。\n\nIf you just put your name instead of 田中 in your response, it will not be bad.\nBut you can change the template depending on the situation. If you meet a\nperson who has social status or age same as you (friend of your friend, for\nexample) you can skip はじめまして or よろしくおねがいします. Also you can say simply よろしく or\nどうぞよろしく(hardly used) or よろしくね instead of よろしくおねがいします. It sounds friendly but\nbe careful and don't use it when you meet elder person.\n\nYou can use also といいます instead of です (only in case of introducing)\n\n> [私は]田中です – I am Tanaka\n>\n> 私の名前は田中です – My name is Tanaka (hardly used but can be useful depending on\n> situation)\n>\n> [私は]田中といいます – I am called Tanaka (very verbatim\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xTgWS.gif)\n> but japanese often use it)\n\nNote that 私は(わたしは) is skipped usually – no sense to say \"I\" when you are\ntalking about yourself (in japanese thinking)\n\n**Meeting elder person**. If you want to be very polite in introducing, you\ncan use next variants\n\n> でございます instead of です (hardly used but sounds very politely)\n>\n> ともうします instead of といいます\n>\n> よろしくおねがい **いた** します instead of よろしくおねがいします\n\nRemember: you should use polite words throughout the sentence, not only one.\n\n> はじめまして。田中ともうします。よろしくおねがいいたします。\n\n**2)** You said \" _The general response to はじめまして is よろしくおねがいします_ \". But it is\nnot quite so. My advice is - dont think rigidly. Use it appropriately to\nsituation.\n\nWhat does mean はじめまして and よろしくおねがいします? はじめまして inherits from verb はじめる(begin,\nstart) and it is just greeting to person, who you meet first time. It probably\nmeans something like \"let's begin a friendship\" (very verbatim again\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZotJU.gif) \n(source: [kolobok.us](http://smiles.kolobok.us/standart/smile3.gif)) ).\nよろしくおねがいします does not mean \"nice to meet you\", \"i'm glad to meet you\" or\nsomethink like this. おねがいします means request to do somethink like \"please do it\nfor me\" and よろしくおねがいします is just more polite request. I don't know what\njapanese are requesting to person in first meeting (probably it is like\n\"please be a friend for me\" or \"I hope you will be kind to me\". It's not more\nthan idiomatic expression) but it is often used in daily life. Example:\n\n> A: Can you do it for me?\n>\n> B: Yes, I can\n>\n> A: Well, おねがいします\n>\n> (english-japanese mix\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xTgWS.gif))\n\n3) You said _\"The general response to よろしくおねがいします is こちらこそ\"_. Yes, it sounds\ngood but needs some addition. こちらこそ sounds simply, so you had better respond\nwith full sentence こちらこそよろしくおねがいします if you want to be polite. Also you can put\nいいえ before it (いいえ、こちらこそ[よろしくおねがいします]). Why いいえ? Try to remember The Matrix\nscene where Neo meets Morpheus first time:\n\n> Neo: It's an honor to meet you\n>\n> Morpheus: **No** , the honor is mine\n\n(Note, that is not translation, only analogy).\n\nこちらこそ is just emphasis to yourself and can be used in many situations. For\nexample, when some person helped you, and you helped that person, and when\nhe/she says \"I'm grateful to you\", you can respond \"no, I am very grateful to\nyou\" with using こちらこそ.\n\nHere are a direct answers to your questions\n\n**1)** \" _Can I respond to はじめまして with こちらこそ?_ \" No\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/c3jNx.gif) \n(source: [kolobok.us](http://smiles.kolobok.us/standart/nea.gif)) respond to\nはじめまして with はじめまして and add after that こちらこそ if companion said よろしく. Don't use\nit when you talk first and don't say it if companion did not say よろしく.\n\n**2)** \" _Can I respond to よろしくおねがいします with よろしくおねがいします?_ \" Yes, you can, but\nこちらこそよろしくおねがいします sounds a little bit better.\n\n**3)** \"*If someone says 田中です。はじめまして。よろしくおねがいします、 can I respond with something\nlike こちらこそです?\" It has been already answered above.\n\nAnd finally I want to add some **wrong** examples\n\n> You: はじめまして。田中です。こちらこそ\n>\n> Companion: mmm... What こちらこそ\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/L1LML.gif)\n\none more\n\n> Companion: はじめまして。田中です。\n>\n> You: はじめまして。やまもとです。こちらこそ\n>\n> Companion: mmm... What こちらこそ\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/L1LML.gif)\n\nSo, as you can see, japanese is not rigid but very flexible (sometimes too\nflexible to understand or remember all these\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JSEk6.gif) \n(source: [kolobok.us](http://smiles.kolobok.us/madhouse/wacko2.gif)) )\n\nGood luck with your study. がんばって\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/M4Yze.gif) \n(source: [kolobok.us](http://smiles.kolobok.us/standart/derisive.gif))",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T12:58:33.747",
"id": "19343",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-21T08:32:00.590",
"last_edit_date": "2019-02-21T08:32:00.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "18772",
"owner_user_id": "7645",
"parent_id": "19335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19335 | 19343 | 19337 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19342",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "Could you help me with this sentence (it's from Attack on Titan)\n\n> そんなに寝ぼけるまで熟睡【じゅくすい】して **たの** ？\n\nそんな refers to the muttering he did earlier\n\nまで probably doesn't mean \"until\", but rather \"even\"\n\nSo something like, \"even half asleep, you do...\" \nI'm just not sure how the 熟睡 part fits in, and how the ”たの” works.\n\nI appreciate any help on that matter. Thanks :)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-01T12:58:14.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19338",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-02T19:14:24.670",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-01T13:03:58.273",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7641",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "たの at the end of 「そんなに寝ぼけるまで熟睡してたの？」",
"view_count": 1913
} | [
{
"body": "The `してたの?` denotes both a question and a feeling of astonishment.\n\nFor example, the sentence translate to\n\n`Did you have such a good sleep that you're only just half awake right now?`\n\nWhich poses a question of whether thr subject had a good sleep, and at the\nsame time express doubt and astonishment that someone could be having a good\nsleep in that situation. (You know, with all the 巨人 around :/)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T03:10:22.860",
"id": "19339",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-02T07:41:14.180",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-02T07:41:14.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "7595",
"owner_user_id": "7595",
"parent_id": "19338",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "As a native Japanese speaker, let me answer. I am really afraid to say, do not\nmisunderstand the \"structure\" of my tongue, otherwise you will probably\nmisunderstand forever.\n\nFirst off, the sentence you made perfectly makes sense.\n\nNow let me explain \"linguistically\"\n\n”してたの” will be divided into, well, 4 pieces! ( What a complex language, my\nfriend, but the since the structure is completely different from English from\nthe very basic, please hang on to it )\n\n----> し/て/た/の。\n\nFirst し is variable form of \"old\" word \"す”, which according to the word that\ncome after it changed to \"し” ( linguistically categorized as \"conjunctive\nform\" ( = in order to continue to next word て )) ---> in English, meaning \"do\"\n\nSecond \"て” was actually, or historically, a verb, however, it lost the\noriginal meaning and currently categorized as noun so that the sentence can be\ncontinued. ---> In English, meaning, nothing, just a \"superficial\" noun.\n\nThird \"た” means in English, \"finish\", being categorized as \"auxiliary\".\n\nFinally, \"の” is expressing the \"question\" in English, so to say,\nlinguistically categorized as a particle.\n\nSoooooooooo, after long jargon, \"してたの” means in English, \"( you ) did so?\"\n\nSince Japanese is S-O-V, you have put in \"熟睡” correctly. Because it is a noun\n= O.\n\nI explained V in your sentence above.\n\n熟睡＝O + してたの = V = \"did you so?\"\n\nWow, I think I am going nuts. ha-ha.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T06:47:57.307",
"id": "19340",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-02T06:47:57.307",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19338",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The previous sentence is Eren saying なんで、ここに... which can be translated to\n\"Why am I here?\"\n\nそんなに means \"so\", \"so much\". For the differences with こんなに and あんなに, see this :\n[Why use あんなに instead of こんなに when expressing one's\nmemories?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11824/why-\nuse-%E3%81%82%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA%E3%81%AB-instead-\nof-%E3%81%93%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA%E3%81%AB-when-expressing-ones-\nmemories\\(refering)\n\nまで in this case means \"to such an extent\".\n\nねぼける means \"to be half asleep\" or \"to act strangely, to be disoriented, to be\nconfused, to ramble, as if just waking up\".\n\n熟睡 means a deep sleep.\n\nしてた is a casual way of saying していた wich is just the past tense of the ている form\nof する.\n\nの? is a feminin way of saying のか。/のだ? which here combines a bit of surprise\nand asking for explanation/confirmation about the situation you just\nsaw/heard, in this case, Eren not knowing where he is.\n\nSo the whole sentence means : \"You were sleeping deeply enough to be _that_\nconfused?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T10:03:13.993",
"id": "19342",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-02T10:15:44.190",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "19338",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> 熟睡する \"enter deep sleep\" \n> 熟睡している \"be deeply asleep\" \n> 熟睡していた \"was deeply asleep\"\n\n+\n\n> 寝ぼける \"become disoriented (due to sleep)\" \n> そんなに寝ぼける \"become _that_ disoriented\" \n> そんなに寝ぼけるまで \"until (you) become _that_ disoriented\"\n\n=\n\n> そんなに寝ぼけるまで熟睡していた \"(You) were so deeply asleep until you became _that_\n> disoriented.\"\n\nThen, turn it into a question with 「の？」:\n\n> そんなに寝ぼけるまで熟睡していたの？ \"(You) were so deeply asleep until you became _that_\n> disoriented?\"\n\nAnd drop the 「い」 as is commonly done in colloquial speech:\n\n> そんなに寝ぼけるまで熟睡してたの？ \"(You) were so deeply asleep until you became _that_\n> disoriented?\"\n\nAnd finally a slightly more natural translation:\n\n> そんなに寝ぼけるまで熟睡してたの？ \"You were sleeping so deeply that you became _that_\n> disoriented?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T19:14:24.670",
"id": "19348",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-02T19:14:24.670",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "19338",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19338 | 19342 | 19342 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19357",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw a broadcast named 「えん旅」 on NHK. It's about travel, food, culture. Is it\nsome abbreviation? I don't understand what the 「えん～」 part means.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T08:23:58.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19341",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T22:29:09.037",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T22:29:09.037",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "NHK has a series titled 「きらり！えん旅【たび】」. What does the えん in えん旅 mean?",
"view_count": 256
} | [
{
"body": "We find the following information on their official webpage:\n\n> 「えん旅」の“えん”には、応援の“援”、出会った人たちとの“縁”、人々が輪でつながる“円”、旅の締めくくりの旅人によるステージでの公”演”\n> などさまざまな意味を込めています。\n\n<http://www.nhk.or.jp/ashita/entabi/>\n\nThey are using kana instead of kanji for the first part to leave its meaning\nopen for the viewer. Also, compare this to how some personal (first) names,\nespecially female first names, are kana-only.\n\nAs they explain on their webpage, `えん` can be interpreted in different ways,\nincluding, but not limited to:\n\n * 援, which stands for 応援【おうえん】, \"aid\" or \"support\"\n * 縁, referring to the relationship established with the people they meet\n * 円, referring to band (or \"circle\") that connects us all\n * 演, which stands for 公演【こうえん】 \"public performance\"\n\nAnother interpretation I can think of is 遠 \"far (away\", as they are travelling\nall over the country. Perhaps also as in 遠足【えんそく】.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T17:01:02.500",
"id": "19357",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T17:19:22.953",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T17:19:22.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "19341",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 19341 | 19357 | 19357 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19346",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "「 **床屋** 」と「 **髪床** 」という単語の意味は何か違いますか？ \nどちらが古いですか？ \nもし両方とも古かったら、今の時代に「美容院」以外に髪を切る場所に関してどんな単語を使ったほうが良いですか？ \nよろしくお願いします。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T15:03:26.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19345",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-22T20:05:53.510",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-09T04:59:19.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7649",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "「床屋」と「髪床」の違いは何ですか？",
"view_count": 1159
} | [
{
"body": "髪床のほうが古いですね。というか、現代あまり使わないでしょ。普段は「女性は美容院に行く」、「男性は床屋さんに行く」といいます\n（ま、美容院に行く男もいるでしょうけど[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Hiu8J.gif) \n(source: [kolobok.us](http://smiles.kolobok.us/standart/mosking.gif)) ）",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T15:42:13.733",
"id": "19346",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-22T20:05:53.510",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7645",
"parent_id": "19345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "床屋{とこや} is a barbershop where men frequent, while 美容院{びよういん} is a beauty salon\nwhere women frequent. 髪床{かみどこ} is an abbreviation of 髪結{かみゆ}い床{どこ}, a shop who\ndresses men's hair by adjusting length of hair, binding it at the back of\nhead, and shaving the top front of the head which is called 月代{つきしろ}\n(tsukisiro), in the Warring States and Edo era - You can look at how Japanese\nmen dressed their heads then in 浮世絵 - Ukiyoe. It's a counterpart to today's\nbarbershop, but is completely obsolete today.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-08T21:24:12.753",
"id": "33443",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-09T08:19:53.957",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-09T08:19:53.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "19345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "「床屋」と「髪床」は、意味に違いはありませんが、「髪床」は非常に古い言葉で現在は使われません（江戸時代を連想させる言葉です）。「床屋」は現代でも使われますが、やや古い印象で、若い世代ではだんだん使わなくなってきていると思います。（「床屋」という単語は一時期放送禁止用語に入っていた†1ため、なじみが薄くなったのかもしれません。）\n\n> 今の時代に「美容院」以外に髪を切る場所に関してどんな単語を使ったほうが良いですか？\n\nまず法的に、日本で髪を切るところには「美容所」と「理容所」の二種類があります。本来「美容所」は主に女性向けのサービスを行う場所、「理容所」は男性向けのサービスを行う場所で、業務内容に違いがあるのですが、この区別を厳格に行う都道府県は少数で、例えば東京では事実上区別がありません†2。\n\nそのため、特に若い世代ではまとめて「美容室」と言ったり、「床屋」と言ったりすることがあります。そもそも、普段「～に行く」という言い方をする時はどちらも使わず、「髪を切りに」とか「散髪しに」とか「ヘアカラーをしに」と言うのが一番普通だと思います。\n\nその他の言い方：\n\n * 「美容所」：美容院・美容室・ヘアサロン など\n * 「理容所」：床屋・理髪店・散髪屋・理容室 など\n\n* * *\n\n†1\n「「床屋」は、江戸時代、売春を副業としていた店があったという俗説があるため、以前はほぼ全面的に禁止となっていたが、概ね2008年（平成20年）以降、慎重に扱うべき言葉となり、内容によってはそのまま放送されることも多い。」（[ウィキペディア](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%94%BE%E9%80%81%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C%E7%94%A8%E8%AA%9E)）\n\n†2\n[安倍首相の「美容室でカット」は違法？「男の散髪」をめぐる奇妙なルール](https://www.bengo4.com/other/1146/1307/n_2781/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-06T04:13:59.707",
"id": "33972",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-06T04:13:59.707",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "19345",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19345 | 19346 | 19346 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I just received an answer from a Japanese friend about a video I sent her. The\nvideo shows my dog doing stuff. She answered with, among other things, these\ntwo sentences:\n\n本当にかわいくて、かしこい犬です。そしてに白い足がとてもかわいい！！\n\nI understand the meaning of そしてused at the beginning of a sentence, similar to\nそれから but without the chronological order implication. I don't understand why\nshe used に after it, though. Any ideas?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-02T16:22:51.447",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19347",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-02T16:22:51.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Don't understand the use of そして + に in a sentence",
"view_count": 105
} | [] | 19347 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that 人生 is used for “human life”, and 生命 for “life” in the biological\nsense. But I want to express that life (whatever) is something good, something\npositive and I don´t know if it's possible.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T04:45:16.253",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19349",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T05:45:40.397",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T05:45:40.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7652",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What's the word for \"life\" but with emphasis on the positiveness of life?",
"view_count": 89
} | [
{
"body": "What about いのち (and the kana spelling here is intentional):\n\n> 盗人が来るのは、ただ盗んだり、殺したり、滅ぼしたりするだけのためです。わたしが来たのは、羊がいのちを得、またそれを豊かに持つためです。\n> （ヨハネ福音の10:10）\n\nMy other thought is ライフ in the katakana.\n\nMy sensibilities could be off on both of those since I'm not a native speaker,\nbut I get the impression that the 和製英語 has a positive feel to it and the other\ncan mean life in the sense you would want to call good better than 生命 or 人生.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T04:51:01.353",
"id": "19350",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T04:51:01.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "19349",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19349 | null | 19350 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19360",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm confused as to the meaning of this cinematic term found in the credit of a\nmovie. ストーリー総監修? Story Total Supervising Editor?? I'm not sure what this\nmeans. Is there any English equivalent to this or should I just come to my own\nconclusions?\n\nFor context, this credit was given to the author of the original work which\nthe film serves as a sequel to. The credit of 脚本/script was given to another\nperson. I'd just like to understand the English Equivalent of ストーリー総監修 so I\ncan better grasp the role the author played.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T05:26:16.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19351",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T23:08:29.343",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T06:45:18.287",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"kanji",
"definitions",
"terminology"
],
"title": "What is the English equivalent of ストーリー総監修?",
"view_count": 226
} | [
{
"body": "I don't know much about movies but here is my guess.\n\n“総” means “whole”. eg. “総収入” is “total income”.\n\nGoogling “総監修” gave some examples and it seems to be used as “everything is\nsupervised by _somebody_ ”. Thus “ストーリー総監修” seems to mean “the whole story was\nsupervised by _somebody_ ”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T23:08:29.343",
"id": "19360",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T23:08:29.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19351",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19351 | 19360 | 19360 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a denshijisho, always giving me helpful expressions attached to a\nkanji/word etc. and this time it was\n\n> 馬は動物である。 \n> A horse is an animal.\n\nin which I don't understand the function of the particle de.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T08:11:44.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19352",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T12:59:09.050",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T08:43:53.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7637",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "What function does で have in the sentence 馬は動物である?",
"view_count": 104
} | [
{
"body": "「で」 in this sentence is a part of 「である」. 「である」 means 「です」 in ~~respectful\nspeech~~ or written speech.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T12:37:59.687",
"id": "19355",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T12:59:09.050",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T12:59:09.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "7649",
"owner_user_id": "7649",
"parent_id": "19352",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19352 | null | 19355 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19354",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "After a brief hiatus I'm getting back into my Japanese study. I've hit a\nroadblock straight away ;-) I am having trouble with the use of '使ってみなさい'\nhere. I don't think I've seen it before. -なさい means \"please don't do \". Then\nthe sentence after that, I am confused by the use of 'ない’.\n\nCould somebody help me with the translation please?\n\n(context: Zelda guide book talking about using new items that you find)\n\n> ちなみに宝箱やツボの中から入手できる矢束、爆弾などは、「その場で使ってみなさい」という、さりげないヒントであることが多い。 (By the way,\n> inside treasure chests and jars you can get arrows, bombs etc. [that place\n> please don’t see and use ] there are many casual hints。)\n>\n> 使っても意味のない場所やタイミングでアイテムが手に入ることはないのだ。\n\nI'm sure it ends with saying \"there is no need to obtain items\" but that makes\nlittle sense. The beginning of the sentence is confusing to me, I cannot even\nguess at what it is trying to say. The meaning of [their] use... not at this\nplace?\n\nReally struggling...",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T09:32:38.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19353",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T10:08:56.130",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4071",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "使ってみなさい, and 使っても意味のない場所",
"view_count": 828
} | [
{
"body": "～なさい gets appended to the stem of the verb. Here, you have the compound verb\n使ってみる \"to try to use\", whose stem is 使ってみ. Appending ～なさい gives\n\n> 使ってみなさい \n> _Try to use [it]!_ \n> Give it a try!\n\nFor the second part, you are probably more confused by the の than by the ない.\n\n> 使っても意味のない場所\n\nis\n\n> [使っても意味がない] 場所\n\nafter \"ga-no conversion\". That is, 使っても意味がない modifies 場所, giving\n\n> 使っても意味のない場所 \n> a place, where using [it] is pointless/useless",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T10:08:56.130",
"id": "19354",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T10:08:56.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "19353",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19353 | 19354 | 19354 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm at the point in my textbook where it explains the use of -ている and the\nthree kind of verbs related to its use: stative, durative, instantaneous. The\nbook says I should ask myself if saying something such as 昨日は１時間買っている is\nlogical. At first view, it seems it isn't, and 買う is an instantaneous verb\n(buying something, which is exchanging money for something, over an hour,\nseems a bit ridiculous). But thinking about it a bit more, this situation came\nto my mind:\n\n> A: あなたはどこですか。 \n> B: 食べ物を買っている。\n\nIn this context, it does seem possible he's saying 'I'm buying food'. So, my\nquestion is: is there a fool-proof way to know if a verb is durative or\ninstantaneous? Some list or tool around I can use to verify what type of verb\neach is?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T18:53:18.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19358",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T20:48:49.753",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-03T18:55:27.113",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"て-form",
"aspect"
],
"title": "買う, durative or instantaneous?",
"view_count": 458
} | [
{
"body": "I would say that 買う itself is instantaneous, unless it's a rare situation\nwhere your job is like a purchasing manager or something, where you're just\nconstantly buying things. Even then, it still seems questionable to say it's\ndurative. You would also use 買っている for habitual buying actions.\n\nFor your example, it'd be better translated as \"I'm out buying food\", for\nwhich you could say\n\n> A: あなたはどこですか。 \n> B: (スーパに)食べ物を買いに行っています。\n\nIn this situation, the 行っている is stative (\"being 'gone to'/at someplace\"), and\nthe 買いに is the purpose of you're going (〜＋に行く).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-03T20:48:49.753",
"id": "19359",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-03T20:48:49.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "19358",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19358 | null | 19359 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19374",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 何【なん】人【びと】も触れる【ふれる】こと能わぬ【あたわぬ】才媛【さいえん】\n\nI'm having trouble with this sentence. I'm just confused as to whether '能わぬ'\ncounts as a negative verb that affects 何人も or not.\n\nSince I know 何人も means everyone/all unless there's a negative verb attached in\nwhich case it becomes nobody/no-one, and I'm wondering if the negative verb\nwould be considered attached to this, because there's the presence of こと. It\nsuggests to me a meaning more along the lines of \"a talented woman for who\ncan't get close to everyone\" or, to be more literal \"a talented woman [for\nwhom the matter of] becoming close to everyone is impossible\"\n\nSo would this be more along the lines of \"to let everyone near her is\nimpossible for her\" or \"it is impossible for her to let _anyone_ near her\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T15:59:01.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19362",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T00:02:11.307",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-04T19:35:59.053",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Translation help with this sentence? 何人も触れること能わぬ- everyone or no one?",
"view_count": 350
} | [
{
"body": "It literally means \"a talented woman whom no one is able to touch\". 能わぬ would\nmean \"not be able to\". But, I would personally translate this to \"a talented\nwoman whom no one can get close to\" or something similar.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T19:22:04.107",
"id": "19370",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T19:22:04.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "19362",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The sentence looks old. In modern Japanese, it would be:\n\n> だれも触れることのできない才媛\n\nHere, “何人も” is translated into “だれも”, and “する [こと] 能わぬ” into “することができない”.\n\nThis phrase is a derivative of the following sentence:\n\n> その才媛にはだれも触れることができない。\n\nNow, does this mean “No one can” or “Not enveryone can”? The answer is “No one\ncan”. Why? “だれも” is usually used as an adverb. Thus, the sentence can be\nanalysed as:\n\n> だれも (その才媛には 触れることが できない)。\n\nThis means:\n\n> One cannot touch the talented lady. This applies to everyone.\n\nTherefore the original phrase means:\n\n> a talented lady who no one can touch",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T23:53:04.073",
"id": "19374",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T00:02:11.307",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-05T00:02:11.307",
"last_editor_user_id": "6554",
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19362",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19362 | 19374 | 19374 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19364",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between [当たり前]【あたりまえ】 and [相変わらず]【あいかわらず】? \nThey both seem to mean “the usual” or “ordinary”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T16:29:17.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19363",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T06:33:12.673",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-08T06:33:12.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Both 当たり前 and 相変わらず seem to mean \"usual\" or \"ordinary\". What's the difference between them?",
"view_count": 1530
} | [
{
"body": "[当]{あ}たり[前]{まえ} means 'obvious' - something is exactly the way everyone ought\nto expect it to be, and it's quite surprising that you're expecting it to be\nsomething else. It can mean 'ordinary' in the right contexts - effectively the\nabove, just minus the surprise at your expectations.\n\n[相変わらず]{あいかわらず} means 'same as ever' - something remains the way it's expected\nto be, even if there might be a reason for it to have changed.\n\nThere are better ways to say 'usual' or 'ordinary':\n\n[普通]{ふつう} - 'normal', 'usual'\n\n[大抵]{たいてい} - 'normal', 'average' (especially of an occurrence; generally used\nto talk about average things as a group rather than to say something is\naverage)\n\nいつも(の) - 'usual', 'common' (「いつものことだ」~= 'happens all the time')\n\n[一般]{いっぱん}([的]{てき}) - 'average', 'ordinary' (especially of a person;\n[一般人]{いっぱんじん} 'normal person', 'civilian')",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T16:51:22.337",
"id": "19364",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-06T16:27:30.087",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-06T16:27:30.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "3639",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "19363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19363 | 19364 | 19364 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19379",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I believe that [www.yojijukugo.com](http://www.yojijukugo.net/) has a pretty\nthorough list of 四字熟語? Is there a better site?\n\nHowever, I know that I've seen a lot of 4, or more, adjacent kanji that are\nnot listed as 熟語。An example is \"原子発電{げんしはつでん}\"。\n\n 1. When I see 4 adjacent kanji that are not listed as 熟語、then that just means \"の\" is being omitted (to save space when printed). From context, you know the meaning without the \"の\".\n 2. You **say** \"原子発電\" instead of \"原子の発電\" just as an extension of what is done when writing.\n 3. real 四字熟語 are pretty rare, so you must assume that 4 kanji in a row is not a 四字熟語 until you can prove it in a dictionary, right?\n 4. The ability to omit \"の\" when, by context, everyone knows it is there, allows you to say stuff like \"愛国精神{あいこくせいしん}\", \"愛社精神{あいしゃせいしん}\", \"愛人類精神{あいじんるいせいしん}\", etc. right? The technique is, if the \"の\" is obvious by context, you don't necessarily have to say it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T16:57:39.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19365",
"last_activity_date": "2021-01-06T10:44:11.267",
"last_edit_date": "2021-01-06T10:44:11.267",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"compounds",
"ellipsis",
"yoji-jukugo"
],
"title": "the omission of an implied \"の\" creates the appearance of a 四字熟語{よじじゅくご}?",
"view_count": 1318
} | [
{
"body": "What makes something 四字熟語 is not very easy to define. What you are talking\nreally comes down to a concept known as idiomaticity in Linguistics.\n\nHaving that said, 四字熟語 are generally words used as idioms (i.e. 慣用句). A 慣用句 is\nan expression that often utilizes more than one unrelated words to mean\nsomething completely different. For example, 画竜点睛 means something crucial that\nis necessary to make something complete, but it is not straightforward to\nderive this meaning from 画竜 and 点睛 separately.\n\nOn the other hand, words like 原子発電 are constructed words (or 複合語). They differ\nfrom 慣用句 that they are artificially put together to mean a concept derived\nfrom those words, in this case, 発電 using 原子. Here are some other examples that\nare _not_ considered as 四字熟語: 株式会社, 高等学校, 関東平野.\n\nAs a side note, a _lot_ of 四字熟語 used in Japanese originally came from Chinese,\nand there is usually an interesting story behind how each of them came to use.\nSome of my favorite ones are 羊頭狗肉 and 矛盾.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T19:12:49.740",
"id": "19369",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T19:12:49.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "19365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "As for your last question, please read this question and answer first:\n\n[Can kanji compounds be formed\narbitrarily?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/17996/can-kanji-\ncompounds-be-formed-arbitrarily)\n\nThis question is about two-kanji compounds (熟語 in the narrow sense), but the\nanswer there is basically true for many cases involving four kanji or more. In\nfact, most of the \"四字熟語\" you encounter, like 火力発電 or 愛国精神, are established set\nphrases, and larger online dictionaries like Eijiro list many such phrases.\nDon't try to freely combine arbitrary two-kanji 熟語 (in the narrow sense)\nbefore you definitely hear that combination. We have 学校生活 and 学校新聞 but we\ndon't have 学校屋根 or 学校授業.\n\nBut there are exceptions. You can combine multiple 熟語 (in the narrow sense)\nwithout particles in the following cases. (By the way, some people may say\nsuch long compounds are 複合語 but not 熟語)\n\n 1. When space-saving is really important, as in news headlines. Today's Yahoo! headline has \"中国高官 続く自殺に粛清の声\" and \"FW武藤 欧州強豪が極秘視察\", but they are usually \"中国 **の** 高官\" or \"[FW]{フォワード} **の** 武藤 **を** 欧州 **の** 強豪が極秘 **に** 視察\" inside body texts and daily conversations.\n 2. When creating a proper noun, something like an organization name. 世界自然保護基金日本委員会, 全日本高校生英語弁論大会関東予選, 北海道大学医学部附属病院根室分院内科研究室 etc.\n 3. When you want to introduce/define a new concept, and use it many times. You can use 石油資源不足国 as something like a set phrase when you are writing an extensive article about oil-poor countries. But if you just want to say \"Japan is an oil-poor country\" once, then \"日本は石油資源が不足している国だ\" is better. You can't generally say 母親電話 to refer to \"a phone call from my mother\", but if your company created a new service then you might name it as 母親電話 ( _Mamaphone_?).\n\nAnd you may have to learn which 熟語 tends to be a part of longer 複合語. \"～精神 (～\nspirit)\", \"～指数 (～ index)\", \"～作戦 (～ mission)\", \"～装置 (～ device)\" are the\nexamples of such \"productive\" 熟語.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T04:03:19.870",
"id": "19379",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T06:14:50.730",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19365",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
] | 19365 | 19379 | 19379 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19368",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "頭金 means \"initial deposit\". The meaning of first Kanji is \"head\", the second -\n\"money, gold\". How to understand them both - etymology? \"Head\" + \"money\" seems\nnot related.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T17:12:59.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19366",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T18:36:18.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "The etymology of 頭{あたま}金{きん}",
"view_count": 100
} | [
{
"body": "(It is also referred to as \"down payment\" in US English.)\n\nI believe it is because 頭金 is the **first** deposit of **money** to get a\nloan.\n\nIn Japanese, 頭 can be used to refer to the head or start of something.\n\nFor example,\n\n先頭{せんとう} → head of a line or a list\n\n頭{かしら}文字{もじ} → First letter of a word\n\n月{つき}の頭{あたま} → First part of a month\n\nAt least this is how I understand it..but I'm starting to wonder if there is a\nhistorical reason/practice for why it is called 頭金..I did a quick search and\ncouldn't find anything online.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T18:36:18.247",
"id": "19368",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T18:36:18.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6823",
"parent_id": "19366",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19366 | 19368 | 19368 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19372",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The sentence below is taken from a light novel.\n\n> 声を **かけようかどうしようか** 迷っていたら、ほんの一瞬風が止んだ\n\nI don't understand what 「かけようかどうしようか」 means. Is it an expression? This light\nnovel sometimes omits kanji and I'm wondering if there should be kanji in here\nor not. I know that 「どうしようか」 is like “What should I do”, but I have no idea\nwhat 「かけようか」 is.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T19:55:23.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19371",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-06T14:47:32.337",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-06T14:47:32.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"expressions",
"interrogatives"
],
"title": "What does 「かけようかどうしようか」 mean?",
"view_count": 654
} | [
{
"body": "かける here would literally mean something like \"to cast\", but 声をかける is an\nexpression in Japanese to mean \"to greet someone\", \"to say something (to\nsomeone)\", or even \"to invite someone (to something)\" and \"to cheer someone up\n(in sports)\".\n\nIt is actually rare to see it written in kanji. If you are to still write it,\nit would be 声を掛ける.\n\nSo, 声をかけようかどうしようか迷っていた roughly translates to \"I was wondering if I should say\nsomething or not\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T20:20:39.677",
"id": "19372",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T20:26:43.927",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-04T20:26:43.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "6891",
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "19371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "This is the volitional form of `かける`: in particular, this expression is\n`声をかける`. It has several meanings, the most general being \"to speak/call out\nto\". It can also mean \"to inform or let know\".\n\nSo it's essentially just two questions in a row. There's no special pattern\nhere. Depending on the context of the novel...\n\n> * [Should I say something? What should I do?]迷っていたら、ほんの一瞬風が止んだ\n>\n\nAlso, in the phrase 声をかける, the かける is usually just written in kana, but if it\nwere kanji, it would be 掛ける.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-04T20:21:53.807",
"id": "19373",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T20:21:53.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "19371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19371 | 19372 | 19372 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19381",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I received an email from one of our suppliers who aims to visit my company\nand have a meeting with me, the main part of it is\n\n> 12月5日(金)13時以降にご都合は如何でしょうか？\n\nNow, I am fine with the mentioned date/time, and I would like to reply in a\nbit formal way.\n\nMy attempts are like:\n\n> 1. はい、12月5日(金)13時以降にご都合大丈夫です。\n> 2. 12月5日(金)13時以降に来ていただいても宜しいです。\n>\n\nBut they still don't seem to be really formal, and may even sound offensive\nsomehow?!\n\nP.S: I do speak Japanese without any problem, but still struggle when it comes\nto business emails, and 敬語 :(",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T02:23:42.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19375",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T09:06:41.073",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-05T08:18:43.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "7400",
"owner_user_id": "7400",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"keigo",
"business-japanese",
"email"
],
"title": "How to reply to a business email with \"yes, I'm ok with this time frame\"?",
"view_count": 3693
} | [
{
"body": "* ご都合 is an honorific expression, so don't use ご都合 if it refers to the 都合 of yourself.\n * よろしいです [sounds like you were higher than the guest](http://bizkeigo.koakishiki.com/question/question-8.html). (\"よろしいでしょうか\" is OK, though)\n\nMy suggestion:\n\n * 12月5日(金)13時以降であれば差し支えありません。\n * 12月5日(金)13時以降にお越しいただければ問題ありません。\n * 12月5日(金)13時以降であれば、こちらの都合は大丈夫です。(maybe too verbose)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T07:24:08.980",
"id": "19381",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T09:06:41.073",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-05T09:06:41.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19375 | 19381 | 19381 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19396",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The words 思い付く and 思い浮かぶ both mean something along the lines of \"to come to\nmind\". But I'm not actually sure about the details of when to use one versus\nthe other. Yet, at the same time, they don't feel interchangeable, either.\n\nI get the feeling that the difference has something to do with volition...\nlike, 思い付く is when you are trying to think of something, and 思い浮かぶ is when\nsomething just naturally occurs to you. On the other hand, 浮かぶ is often used\nwhen referring to trying to think of ideas (e.g. いいアイデアが思い浮かばない).\n\nSo, what is the actual difference between these words? When should I use 思い付く\nand when should I use 思い浮かぶ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T02:30:41.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19376",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-25T00:34:09.923",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-05T02:49:09.140",
"last_editor_user_id": "384",
"owner_user_id": "384",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"verbs",
"compounds"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 思【おも】い付【つ】く and 思【おも】い浮【う】かぶ?",
"view_count": 510
} | [
{
"body": "思い付く is used to when you deliberately try to come up with something, and\nsucceeded. You can think of it as going through some kind of algorithmic steps\nto reach the idea.\n\n思い浮かぶ can be still used in the same situation , but it emphasizes the cases\nwhere ideas naturally came into your mind. It's more like getting a virtual\nlight bulb above your head.\n\nBut these can be probably used interchangeably and I don't think I would\ndifferentiate the two so much.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T12:08:12.847",
"id": "19387",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T12:08:12.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "19376",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "思{おも}い付{つ}く and 思{おも}い浮{う}かぶ are compound verbs (複合動詞{ふくごうどうし}) - [思{おも}う +\n付{つ}く] and [思{おも}う + 浮{う}かぶ].\n\n思{おも}う implies the action that the doer works his/her mind subjectively and\nemotionally to image/determine/worry/hope/expect/like or love.\n\n> 日本{にほん}の将来{しょうらい}を思{おも}う。\"I think of the future of Japan.\"\n>\n> 問題{もんだい}ないと思{おも}う。\"There should be no problem.\"\n>\n> 風邪{かぜ}を引{ひ}いたんじゃないかと思{おも}う。\"I might/must be a cold.\"\n>\n> 子{こ}を思{おも}う親心{おやごころ}。\"Parental tenderness for children\"\n>\n> 彼{かれ}には他{ほか}に思{おも}う人{ひと}がいる。\"He has someone in his mind/likes someone else.\"\n\n付く indicates that someone or something (stain, color, decoration,\ncondition/provision, power, price, name, smell and so on) attaches to the\nobject. [...が] 思{おも}い付{つ}く is used when some (beneficial or good) idea for the\ndoer comes up in his/her mind, especially without a deep consideration. To\n思{おも}い付{つ}く something is like the pop sound of the cork stopper when you open\nthe champagne bottle.\n\n> いいアイデアが思{おも}い付{つ}いた。\"I came up with an idea.\"\n>\n> 解決策{かいけつさく}が思{おも}い付{つ}かない。\"I can't come up with any solution.\"\n>\n> 思{おも}いつくままに語{かた}る。\"I talk things in mind without thinking.\"\n\n浮{う}かぶ indicates that someone or something rises up gradually or floats\nsomewhere unstable like in the air or on the water. [...が] 思{おも}い浮{う}かぶ is\nused when the doer comes up with an idea or a certain image/memory/impression\nfrom an event. This idea/image/memory/impression can be blurry at first and\nbecome clear gradually as you bring the camera into focus on the object.\n\n> いいアイデアが思{おも}い浮{う}かんだ。\"I came up with an idea (after considering a bit).\"\n>\n> この曲{きょく}を聞{き}いていると、ゴッドファーザーのシーンが思{おも}い浮{う}かぶ。\"I can visualize the scene from\n> the God Father while listening to this song.\"\n\nWhen 思{おも}い浮{う}かぶ is used in the same situation as 思{おも}い付{つ}く, it gives the\nimpression that you have a little bit of thought before coming up with an\nidea.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-06T12:42:13.870",
"id": "19396",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-25T00:34:09.923",
"last_edit_date": "2015-10-25T00:34:09.923",
"last_editor_user_id": "5090",
"owner_user_id": "5090",
"parent_id": "19376",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19376 | 19396 | 19396 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19378",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "いつまでに送ればいい **かって** いうことですよ。\n\nI can kind of get whats going on here. Forgive me if I'm mistaken but I think\nit means \"When are you expected to send this **thing** , is what I mean\".\n\nI don't understand how かって fits here; the dictionary came up with a lot of\nwords similar to かって, but none of them would make sense if I applied them\nhere.\n\nI also went to Google Translate and it decided to group かっていう together and\ntranslate it as \"I mean\" but isn't that implied with いう in the sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T03:24:33.737",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19377",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T08:02:41.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7556",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How is かって being used here?",
"view_count": 869
} | [
{
"body": "`かって` in this sentence is not one unit, but two. `か` and `って`.\n\nIt might be easier to see like this:\n\n> いつまでに送ればいいか、っていうことですよ。\n\n * **か** is the question particle.\n * **って** is an alternate form of と, a quotative particle.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T03:29:50.640",
"id": "19378",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T03:29:50.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "384",
"parent_id": "19377",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "To build on rintaun's answer, think of it as being delimited in quotes (er,\nkakko, whatever):\n\n> 「いつまでに送ればいいか」ということですよ。\n\nUnpunctuated, pure Hiragana without spaces is actually _really_ hard to read\nbecause of ambiguities of this form and the army of homophones. (Trying to\nread Romaji is even more confusing.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T08:02:41.050",
"id": "19382",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T08:02:41.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7545",
"parent_id": "19377",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19377 | 19378 | 19378 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm an ALT and my supervisor asked me to write my goals in Japanese this year.\nI'm trying to keep it simple, but I really struggle with putting English into\nJapanese.\n\nHere is my attempt\n\n> Deepen my relationship with students. Learn more about them and spend more\n> time talking with them. \n> 生徒とrelationship深まります。生活についてもっと知って行きたいと思います。\n>\n> Always be available to students. Encourage them to talk with me and ask me\n> questions. \n> 生徒に向かって助けることがいつでもできそうに進みたいです。私と話すし、私の質問をお勧めします。\n\nAny help making these statements clear and acceptable for my supervisor to\nread would be much appreciated. Direct translation is not necessary at all,\njust a good, polite goal statement.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T05:35:49.197",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19380",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T16:17:09.920",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7657",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "How can I translate these workplace goals into Japanese?",
"view_count": 300
} | [
{
"body": "> Deepen my relationship with students. Learn more about them and spend more\n> time talking with them.\n>\n> 生徒達との人間関係をより深めたいと思います。そのためにも彼らとコミュニケーションを積極的にかわしていきたいです。\n\n`生活についてもっと知って行きたいと思います。` sounds a bit odd to me. `生活について` sounds as if you are\nalso interested in knowing their personal lives, e.g. when they sleep or wake\nup. Nothing wrong with that I guess, but it is probably not appropriate to say\nso in this situation. Also, you must say `彼らの生活` otherwise I have no idea\nwhose or what `生活` you are talking about.\n\n> Always be available to students. Encourage them to talk with me and ask me\n> questions.\n>\n> いつでも生徒達からの要望に応えれるよう努めます。生徒達には何かあれば気軽に質問するよう勧めます。\n\nI completely changed how you translated it because what you wrote didn't make\nsense grammatically, and it was hard to guess what you were trying to say\nwithout reading the original sentences.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T12:44:42.650",
"id": "19388",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T13:49:08.380",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "19380",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19380 | null | 19388 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "For example:\n\n * \"You should wear a jacket. After all, it's snowing out there.\"\n * \"Of course I bought you a present! It's our anniversary after all.\"\n\nI tried an online dictionary but they gave me a lot of different words. けっきょく\nseems like a different sort of \"after all\", more like \"in the end.\" だって seems\nclosest to what I want, but it's listed as a colloquialism and I'd like\nsomething more formal. There's しょせん, どうせ, やはり, and それもそのはず, and I'm not sure\nwhich if any of them are appropriate.\n\nI've also read だから and なぜなら used in this context being translated as \"after\nall\", but is that accurate?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T08:21:37.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19383",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T13:40:47.437",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7660",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"translation",
"words",
"idioms"
],
"title": "How do you say \"after all\", in the sense of reaffirming or justifying a previous statement?",
"view_count": 5438
} | [
{
"body": "I think for this \"after all\", your best choice is だって.\n\n> You should wear a jacket. After all, it's snowing out there. \n> ジャケット着たほうがいいよ。だって、雪が降っているからね。\n>\n> Of course I bought you a present! It's our anniversary after all. \n> もちろんプレゼント買ってあるよ。だって、俺たちの記念日じゃん。\n\nIf you want a formal sentence, I think you should have different example\nsentences. Especially the second sentence seems to suggest an informal\nsituation.\n\nIn a more formal context, you might want to try\n\n * なんでかというと\n * なぜかというか\n * なぜなら\n\n(increasing order of politeness) to justify a preceding statement.\n\nI would say, though, that a more formal situation would usually imply more\ncareful phrasing, e.g.\n\n> It's snowing outside, so I would suggest you wear a jacket.\n\nAnd, finally, none of the other options you listed fit this use of \"after\nall\". (For what it's worth, I checked an [English\ndictionary](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/after#after__22)\nand the way you use \"after all\" in your example sentence is not listed there.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T11:22:11.497",
"id": "19386",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T11:38:00.657",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "19383",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "There are no one-to-one translations here. It really depends on who is talking\nto who and the context of the conversation.\n\nI believe `after all` in these two sentences are similar, but they take\nslightly different meaning.\n\nThe first sentence implies that they were aware of some indications or\nexpectations of snowing. Maybe they had a chat about whether it is going to\nsnow. It is close to saying `You should wear a jacket. After all, it actually\nsnowed (as we expected or didn't expect).`\n\nIn the second sentence, the speaker uses `after all` to emphasize the fact\nthat it is their anniversary today.\n\nI would translate these two `after all`s differently in Japanese. Here is my\ntake.\n\n> You should wear a jacket. After all, it's snowing out there.\n>\n> ジャケット着たほうがいいよ。やっぱり雪降っているし。\n\n`だって` would also work depending on the context, but `やっぱり` sounds more natural\nto me as it describes a situation that something happened contrary to their\nexpectations.\n\n> Of course I bought you a present! It's our anniversary after all.\n>\n> もちろんプレゼント買ってあるよ。今日は俺たちの記念日じゃないか。\n\nUsing ～じゃないか emphasizes the fact that it is our anniversary. These below may\nalso work. And you can also choose to prefix each of these with なんてったって.\n\n * 今日は俺たちの記念日じゃん。\n * 今日は俺たちの記念日でしょう。\n * 今日は俺たちの記念日だろ。\n * 今日は俺たちの記念日だよ。\n * 今日は俺たちの記念日だしね。\n\nSorry for a very personal answer, but I think it really depends on the context\n(and also who translates it).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T13:40:47.437",
"id": "19389",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T13:40:47.437",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "19383",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19383 | null | 19386 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19395",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is difference between 変わり and 変える ? 変える means \"to change\". Maybe 変わり is\njust a noun? Or maybe there is some grammar rule?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T08:56:36.837",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19384",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-06T06:41:37.897",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Difference between 変{か}わり and 変{か}える",
"view_count": 11371
} | [
{
"body": "First, let's change 変わり to 変わる, so we have two verbs. 変わる is an intransitive\nverb. It means \"to change\" in the sense of \"become different\": the subject of\nthe verb is what's being changed. In contrast, 変える is transitive. It means \"to\nchange\" in the sense of \"amend\": the subject of the verb is causing the\nchange, and the object of the verb is the thing being changed.\n\nIt's the same as the difference between a witch changing into a cat, and a\nwitch changing _you_ into a cat. The first of those is 変わる, and the second is\n変える. Japanese has lots of instransitive/causative pairs like this, where the\nkanji is/are the same, and the rest of the word distinguishes which is which.\nThey can be tricky for native English speakers because we usually use the same\nword with both meanings (like \"change\") and use grammatical context (is there\na direct object) to figure out whether it's transitive or intransitive. In\nJapanese, writing that way gives you nonsense sentences.\n\nOften with る verbs, replacing the る with り makes the verb into a noun. 変わり is\n**a** change, in the sense of an alteration or difference. There's no\ncorresponding noun 変えり, though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T09:34:26.747",
"id": "19385",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-05T09:34:26.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3625",
"parent_id": "19384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Japanese has a number of morphologically related transitive-intransitive\npairs. The pair of verbs you've discovered, 変わる and 変える, belongs to the\nlargest group, **_-ar_** (intransitive) and **_-e_** (transitive):\n\n```\n\n **Intransitive** **Transitive**\n \n あ **が** る ag- **ar** -u _'rise'_ あ **げ** る ag- **e** -ru _'raise'_\n 集 **ま** る atum- **ar** -u _'gather'_ 集 **め** る atum- **e** -ru _'gather'_\n 溜 **ま** る tam- **ar** -u _'accumulate'_ 溜 **め** る tam- **e** -ru _'accumulate'_\n 止 **ま** る tom- **ar** -u _'stop'_ 止 **め** る tom- **e** -ru _'stop'_\n \n```\n\nThe romanized versions reflect the actual morphology better than the versions\nin kana and kanji, but you'll need to recognize the distinction in Japanese\nspelling, since Japanese isn't usually romanized.\n\nIn this case, the root is _kaw-_ , so we end up with the following pair:\n\n```\n\n 変 **わ** る kaw- **ar** -u _'change'_ 変 **え** る ka(w)- **e** -ru _'change'_\n \n```\n\nIn Modern Japanese, /w/ drops out before vowels other than /a/, so we're left\nwith _kaeru_ rather than _*kaweru_. Historically, however, this root was\n_kap-_ , and we can see the etymological presence of the original consonant\n_p_ in both words in the older spellings 変はる and 変へる.\n\nNote that in each **_-ar_** / **_-e_** pair, the intransitive verb is a\n**consonant-stem verb** ending with _r-_ , while the corresponding transitive\nverb is a **vowel-stem verb** ending with _e-_. Consonant- and vowel-stem\nverbs may be called by another name in your textbook; they're called 五段（ごだん）\nand 一段（いちだん） in Japanese, and in books for learners they are sometimes called\n\" _-u_ verbs and _-ru_ verbs\" or \"Group I Verbs and Group II Verbs\".\n\nFor more information about transitive-intransitive pairs, see Shibatani's 1990\nbook, _The Languages of Japan_ , pages 235-237. (The chart above is based on\nthe one on page 236.)\n\n* * *\n\nThe infinitive form of a verb, called the 連用形（れんようけい） in Japanese, is formed\nby adding _-i_ to consonant-stem verbs and adding nothing at all to vowel-stem\nverbs:\n\n```\n\n 変わ **る** kawar- **u** → 変わ **り** kawar- **i** \n 変え **る** kae- **ru** → 変え **** kae- ****\n```\n\nThis form can be used like a noun, but it has lots of other uses. For example,\nit's the form that you add the polite auxiliary 〜ます to:\n\n```\n\n 変わ **る** kawar- **u** → 変わ **ります** kawar- **i** - **masu** \n 変え **る** kae- **ru** → 変 **えます** kae- **** - **masu**\n \n```\n\nFor more information about this form, see your textbook. Besides the names\ngiven above, it may also be called the continuative form (a translation of the\nJapanese name), the \"Vmasu stem\", or sometimes just \"the stem\". Unfortunately,\ndifferent people use a lot of different names for the same things.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-06T03:27:40.790",
"id": "19395",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-06T06:41:37.897",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-06T06:41:37.897",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 19384 | 19395 | 19395 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm sure something similar to this has been asked already, but I'm hoping this\nis a little different. I imagine the nominalizing usage of の is related to its\nnoun modifying usage, like:\n\n> 食べる **の**\n\nversus\n\n> テーブルの上にリンゴがあった **の** を食べた\n\nbut in the first case the usage of こと is permitted, while in the latter it is\nnot. Assuming these are these are the same の, why can't we use こと in both\ncases? Is it something like the の usage came about first, and later the こと\nusage was added?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-05T20:45:12.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19393",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T10:46:35.373",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-06T05:58:26.297",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"nominalization"
],
"title": "の versus こと in head-internal relative clauses",
"view_count": 294
} | [
{
"body": "You could certainly claim more easily that\n\n> テーブルの上にリンゴがあった **もの** を食べた\n\nis grammatical as opposed to the こと version. This sounds a bit strange to me\neither way. However,\n\n> I ate the one on the table with apples.\n\nalso is a bit confusing to me. It's sort of a garden-pathy sentence. Did you\neat the apple dish sitting on the table or did you eat the dish sitting on a\ntable also containing apples? For that matter, were you siting on the table\nfull of apples eating something?\n\nMore to the point is that の often abbreviates もの as well as こと.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T06:42:17.790",
"id": "19405",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T06:42:17.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1565",
"parent_id": "19393",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "According to\n[Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8A%A9%E8%A9%9E#.E6.BA.96.E4.BD.93.E8.A8.80.E5.8A.A9.E8.A9.9E)\n(Sorry, I couldn't find more reliable source) the の you've described is the の\nof 準体言助詞 .\n\nIt seems that this usage of の would magically work as if it were\n「こと」「もの」「ところ」, or whatever the appropriate.\n\nTo answer your question of \"Why can't こと be used instead of の?\" the answer is\n\"Because の has special gramatical usage that can substitute 「こと」「もの」「ところ」 or\nwhatever\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-04T10:46:35.373",
"id": "41451",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T10:46:35.373",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10859",
"parent_id": "19393",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19393 | null | 41451 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19406",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In an anime series called \"Ojarumaru\", the title character sometimes ends his\nsentences with てたも. I can't really figure out what it means. Here are some\ndialogue examples from the show:\n\n> 助けてたも!\n>\n> おねがいじゃもう一つ作ってたも。\n>\n> エンマに「よいシャク見つかってよかったの」とつたえてたも。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T03:48:15.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19401",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T13:17:49.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7674",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage",
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "What does てたも mean?",
"view_count": 1330
} | [
{
"body": "[たも](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/139069/m0u/) is 音変化 of たもれ, meaning\nください. たもれ is the command form of\n[たもる](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/139097/m0u/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%82%E3%82%8B/),\nwhich is 音変化 of\n[たまわる](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/138937/m0u/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8F%E3%82%8B/).\n\n> 助けてたも! ≒ 助けてたもれ, 助けてください \n> おねがいじゃもう一つ作ってたも。≒ 作ってたもれ, 作ってください \n> エンマに「よいシャク見つかってよかったの」とつたえてたも。≒ つたえてたもれ, 伝えてください",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T06:03:29.053",
"id": "19404",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T06:03:29.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19401",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "助けてたも ＝ 助けてください。\n\nーてたも means ください and was used throughout the [Heian\nperiod](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heian_period) by _important, respected or\ndistinguished_ people.\n\nThe character おじゃる丸 uses てたも because he is a 5-year-old Heian-era prince.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T06:57:24.643",
"id": "19406",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T06:57:24.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7671",
"parent_id": "19401",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Anyway, たもれ/たも is kind of very archaic expression, and it's only spoken by\nHeian Era aristocrats in manga/anime (like Ojarumaru!), novels or TV shows.\nSo, be careful not to use this in your 21st century real life :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T13:17:49.327",
"id": "19412",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T13:17:49.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19401",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19401 | 19406 | 19404 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19403",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In Spanish we have lots of dishes whose names refer to the main ingredients it\nhas. For example \"arroz con pollo\" (rice and chicken), \"arroz con leche\" (rice\nand milk), or \"pollo con papas\" (chicken and potatoes).\n\nThe first is a main course, the second is a dessert and the third is kind of\nfast food and a main course.\n\nThe options I have is translate using と, like チキンとライス, or write in katakana\nthe Spanish name, アロスコンポイオ。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T04:19:31.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19402",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T06:29:17.483",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-07T06:29:17.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "7671",
"owner_user_id": "7201",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"food"
],
"title": "How should I refer to food whose name mentions its main ingredients?",
"view_count": 147
} | [
{
"body": "Japan doesn't seem to have an issue with using Spanish words for food (at\nleast, not if パエリア is any indication). If we look on Wikipedia for arroz con\npollo, we can see that their transcription is\n\"[アロス・コン・ポーヨ](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B9%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%BB%E3%83%9D%E3%83%BC%E3%83%A8)\".\nThat said, as with any language, you can use the native name if you want, but\nif the target culture has no concept of what it is, you're going to be\ndescribing it anyway. I would guess that if you just say \"チキンライス\" or something\nit won't really get the point across of what arroz con pollo is, so whatever\nyou choose to describe it with will need to be detailed anyway.\n\nThere are other things to be careful about too, though. For example, I just\ntried looking up arroz con leche, and it seems that in English we call it\n\"Rice pudding,\" and the corresponding Japanese concept is called ミルヒライス, which\nis actually borrowed from German!\n\nThe short of it is just look it up and see if the thing you're trying to\ndescribe already exists in the collective Japanese consciousness. If it\ndoesn't, then translate it as an explanation of what the dish is and include\nthe Spanish if you want to, similar to how you would translate \"natto\" into\nother languages.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T05:40:40.930",
"id": "19403",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T05:53:00.877",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-07T05:53:00.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "19402",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19402 | 19403 | 19403 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19409",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When visiting shrines or temples, one can get an accordion style book and for\na couple hundred yen have a shrine's seal stamped inside. What is this book\ncalled?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T07:03:15.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19408",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-28T10:52:45.550",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-28T10:52:45.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "1805",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"religion"
],
"title": "What's that accordion style book you can get at shrines called?",
"view_count": 657
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's\n[[御朱印帳]{ごしゅいんちょう}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9C%B1%E5%8D%B0_\\(%E7%A5%9E%E7%A4%BE%E4%BB%8F%E9%96%A3\\)).\n\n",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T07:16:55.357",
"id": "19409",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T07:16:55.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19408",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19408 | 19409 | 19409 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19428",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As a **potential customer** , how should I start and end an email if I am\nemailing a business, for example, to ask about a product? How should I\nintroduce myself? Would I need to use 謙譲語 and 尊敬語?\n\nAdditionally, what would be the difference between if I knew the name of the\nperson I will be emailing and not?\n\nI saw [this question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15637) but\nit seems to only address the case that I have already interacted with the\nbusiness in the past, which isn't the case.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-07T07:47:23.523",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19410",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T01:10:27.550",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1497",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests",
"email"
],
"title": "Greetings to use in email enquiries",
"view_count": 1700
} | [
{
"body": "Usually Japanese start or end an email with own name in business whether he is\nstranger or colleague.\n\nfor example like this\n\n```\n\n for a potential customer\n はじめまして、○○社の△△と申します\n 今回は●●の件でメールをさせていただきました\n \n for a colleague\n △△です。お手数ですが今月分の支払いをお願いいたします\n \n C2B 11/8 23:32(Japan time) rewrote\n △△です。この度は●●社の○○という件についてお伺いしたいことがございます。\n \n B2C \n ●●社の△△です。この度は弊社製品をご利用していただきましてありがとうございます。\n \n```\n\nBy the way, if you write or speak about your own thing, you should use 謙譲語. \n謙譲語 are words or sentence which make the speaker so humble that the companion\nis higher in status than the speaker \nAnd, if you refer about the companion, you need to use 尊敬語 \n. 尊敬語 are words or sentence which make the companion high in status.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T09:49:19.117",
"id": "19419",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T14:51:44.093",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-08T14:51:44.093",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "19410",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Writing as a customer will be much easier than writing in business. You don't\nhave to be too nervous. Using basic 丁寧語 (e.g. 思っています instead of 思っている) will\nsuffice, though extra correct 謙譲語 (like 存じております) may somewhat improve your\nimpression.\n\nAs for 尊敬語, I don't think you need it. But to add one point, utilizing the\nword 貴社 (or 御社) will be useful, like 貴社の製品 \"your products\".\n\nYou can start the letter with like \"●●●● 様\", or \"●●●● 御中\" (●●●● being the name\nof the company). If you know someone to write to specifically, then start it\nlike \"●●●● (department name) ○○○○様\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T15:12:08.347",
"id": "19428",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T01:10:27.550",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T01:10:27.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19410",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19410 | 19428 | 19428 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19421",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "What is the difference between 積もる 【つもる】 and 溜まる 【たまる】? I've found the verbs\nused like this:\n\n 1. 洗濯｛せんたく｝が溜まる｛たまる｝。\n\n 2. 雪｛ゆき｝が深く｛ふかく｝積もる｛つもる｝。\n\nIn this context, are these verbs interchangeable? Can I say 3 and 4?\n\n 3. 洗濯｛せんたく｝が積もる｛つもる｝。\n\n 4. 雪｛ゆき｝が深く｛ふかく｝溜まる｛たまる｝。\n\nN.B. I will consider the usage of 積もる 【つもる】 and 溜まる 【たまる】 in sentences 1 and 2\ncorrect (since I found it in textbooks while studying for N3), but if you have\nany doubts please let me know.\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T07:36:40.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19415",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-02T12:06:55.210",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-08T09:03:39.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "7679",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 積もる 【つもる】 and 溜まる 【たまる】?",
"view_count": 2476
} | [
{
"body": "> 洗濯物が溜まる／洗濯物が積もる\n\n洗濯(物)が溜まる is a very common way to say \"to have a lot of clothes to wash\". It\nimplies you have to wash that laundry soon.\n\nIf you do want to emphasize the _physical_ aspect of the pile of the laundry,\n洗濯物が積もる may be technically OK. You might say 「洗濯物が山のように積もっていて(or\n山のように積んであって)、ドアが開けられない!」 when the laundry is physically blocking the door :)\n\n> 雪が積もる／雪が溜まる\n\n雪が積もる is more common, and it means a certain area is _uniformly_ covered by\nsnow after a snowfall. If you see a layer of snow on a car after a snowy day,\nyou can say \"車の上に雪が積もっている\". You can modify this sentence with adverbs like 深く,\nたくさん, いっぱい, 少し, etc.\n\n雪が溜まる (or noun 雪【ゆき】溜【だ】まり) refers to the localized, irregular accumulation of\nsnow, due to wind or other environmental/topographical reasons. If you see\nremaining snow under the car, several days after the snowfall, then you can\nsay \"(まだ)車の下に雪が溜まっている\". If there's a lot of such snow, you can say\nたくさん／大量に／いっぱい溜まっている, but not 深く溜まっている.\n\nThe difference between \"埃【ほこり】が積もる\" and \"埃が溜まる\" is the same (埃 = dust). 積もった埃\nis seen on a flat floor, and 溜まった埃, behind a bookshelf or in my PC.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T10:26:42.687",
"id": "19421",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T12:42:45.153",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-08T12:42:45.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19415",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "No, you can't say neither 3 nor 4.\n\nIn my experience of daily life, usage of 溜まる is mostly for water, money, and\nundone tasks (like 洗濯(物), 洗い物, 仕事, 宿題, etc.), whereas 積もる is mostly for 雪 and\n埃. Just like Will has explained.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T10:28:04.537",
"id": "19422",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T10:28:04.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19415",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 積もる{つもる}\n\nMostly used for things that fall from above that you have no control of. Think\nof something accumulating _on top of something_.\n\n * 雪{ゆき}が積もる。\n * 塵{ちり}が積もる。\n * 積もった怒り{いかり}が爆発{ばくはつ}した。\n\nYou could say 埃{ほこり} as well, but 塵{ちり} is the most common.\n\n> 溜まる{たまる}・貯まる{たまる}\n\nThink about something filling up a container _from the bottom_.\n\n * お風呂{ふろ}に水{みず}が溜まる。\n * 貯金{ちょきん}が **貯** まる。\n * ストレスが溜まる。\n * 何か入{い}れ物{もの}などの下{した}に溜まる。\n * 心{こころ}のリミット／限界{げんかい}の下から溜まってくる気持ち{きもち}。\n\n* * *\n\nIncidentally, there's also 募る{つのる} for things that _increase, grow or\naccumulate_ abruptly or forming a steep heap.\n\n * 恨み{うらみ}が募る{つのる}。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T13:20:02.647",
"id": "19427",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T14:05:02.313",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-08T14:05:02.313",
"last_editor_user_id": "7671",
"owner_user_id": "7671",
"parent_id": "19415",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "溜 is composed with 氵(さんずいへん; water/liquid) + 留 (to stay). [...が] 溜まる implies\nthat something collected/accumulated/built up should have streamed/flowed.\n\n積 is composed with 禾(のぎへん; grain) + 責 (to charge the debt piercingly after\nlending for a while) and means to pile crops carelessly. [...が] 積もる indicate\nthat something is simply piled/accumulated with no expectation.\n\n> 1. 洗濯(物)が溜まる。\n> 2. 雪が積もる。\n> 3. 洗濯(物)が積もる。\n> 4. 雪が溜まる。\n>\n\nAs for 洗濯(物), both sentence #1 & #3 means that you have lots of clothes to\nwash. Sentence #1 indicates that you feel the need to wash, whereas you only\nrefer to the situation that the dirty clothes are piled up on the floor or\nsome place in sentence #3.\n\nAs for the sentences about 雪, you describe the situation that the snow piles\nup, for instance, on the road or the roof in the sentence #2. In the sentence\n#4, the snow also piles up but on the place where it should not like the\ndrain.\n\n溜まる is also often in the situation that you feel frustrated because you don't\nexpect it to accumulate.\n\n> 仕事でストレスが溜まった。'I got stressed at work.'\n>\n> 慣れない土地での生活で、疲れが溜まる。'I'm tired from living in a completely new place.'",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T00:10:44.990",
"id": "19432",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-02T12:06:55.210",
"last_edit_date": "2014-12-02T12:06:55.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "5090",
"owner_user_id": "5090",
"parent_id": "19415",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19415 | 19421 | 19421 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "My textbook says 行く is instantaneous (expresses changes from one state to\nanother) and can only be used to describe the result of a change, not\nmovements that are currently in progress. But a Japanese native has told me\nthat it can be used to express an on-going action. For example\n\n> 今父はコンビニにタバコを買いに **行っています** 。\n\ndescribes the father somewhere in the process of the action.\n\nSo, as you can imagine, I'm very confused with all this. Could somebody please\nclarify it a bit? Is my textbook wrong?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T08:48:28.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19417",
"last_activity_date": "2023-08-04T02:35:42.040",
"last_edit_date": "2023-08-04T02:35:42.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"aspect",
"verbs-of-motion"
],
"title": "Is 行く stative, continuous or instantaneous? 「今父はタバコを買いに行っています。」",
"view_count": 682
} | [
{
"body": "行っています doesn't express an on-going action in the same way that 走っている might be\nrunning. The sentence means that the father has gone to buy some fags and\nhasn't yet returned.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T09:11:20.570",
"id": "19418",
"last_activity_date": "2023-08-03T16:49:08.313",
"last_edit_date": "2023-08-03T16:49:08.313",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"parent_id": "19417",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "Cited sentence obviously states a continuous state of his/her father being out\nand absent. In this case continual ています is indispensable, you can never say\n今父はコンビニにタバコを買いに行きます.\n\nIn instantaneous sense, like \"Tomorrow my father will go to the convenience\nstore to buy cigarettes\" (though this expample sounds pretty unreal), you can\nsay 明日父はコンビニにタバコを買いに行きます.\n\nSo, roughly, 行きます is instantaneous and 行っています is continuous. Please learn\nabout the continual ている/ています. Here are my try of showing some continous\nexamples similar to your one:\n\n * 父は出ています。 My father is out now.\n * 彼は入院しています。 He is in the hospital.\n * 田中さんは田舎に帰っています。 Tanaka-san is back in his/her hometown.\n\nCompare these with instantaneous 出ます, 入院します, 帰ります.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T09:59:05.247",
"id": "19420",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T09:59:05.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19417",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "行っている often means \"he has been there\" but that doesn't mean you always can't\ninterpret it as \"he is going\". So, the textbook is wrong in that aspect.\n\n 1. [habitual action] ここのところ医者に行っている: I'm going to the doctor these days \n 2. [on-going action] うまく行っている: It's going well\n\nEdit: When you find your father walking the street and you assume\n「おっ、タバコ買いに行ってるな」, that 行っている is ~~the durative meaning~~ the on-going meaning.\n\n<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jQn0ytqSm4#t=0m07s> #13 and #5 in the blue\nshirt pressing the DF is what I'd yell 「行ってる！」.",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T06:29:50.663",
"id": "19451",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T02:10:53.643",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-12T02:10:53.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "19417",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Whether something is durative or instantaneous isn't a property of verbs, but\nof _predicates_ :\n\n * 「道を行く」 is durative\n * 「うまく行く」 is durative (as @user4092 nicely pointed out)\n * 「〇〇を買いに行く」 is instantaneous\n\nWith a **durative predicate** , you get these interpretations:\n\n> **progressive** \n> 仕事は（今）うまく行っている \n> \"My job is going well (currently).\"\n>\n> ｓｔａｔｅ \n> ／ ＼ \n> **ーーーー｜｜｜｜｜｜｜？？？？？？？？？？＞** \n> ＾ ＾ \n> ｂｅｇｉｎ ｎｏｗ \n> ｇｏｉｎｇ ｗｅｌｌ\n>\n> **habitual** \n> 仕事は（毎日）うまく行っている \n> \"My job is going well (every day).\"\n>\n> ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ｓｔａｔｅ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ \n> ／ ＼ \n> **ーー｜｜ーー｜｜ーー｜｜ーー｜｜ーー｜｜ー＞** \n> ＼ ／＼ ／＼ ／＼ ／＼ ／ \n> ｄ１ ｄ２ ｄ３ ｄ４ ｄ５ \n> note: this habitual makes it explicit you are currently in the state of\n> this action happening habitually, while the plain-form habitual does not\n> make that explicit\n>\n> **perfective** \n> 仕事は（今までに二回）うまく行っている \n> \"My job has gone well (twice up to this point).\"\n>\n> ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ｓｔａｔｅ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ \n> ／ ＼ \n> **ーー｜｜｜ー｜｜｜ーー？？？？？？？？？？＞** \n> ＼ ／ ＼ ／ ＾ \n> １ ２ ｎｏｗ\n\nWith an **instantaneous predicate** , you get these interpretations:\n\n> **resultative** \n> 父は（今）タバコを買いに行っている \n> \"My father is out to buy cigarettes (currently).\"\n>\n> ｓｔａｔｅ \n> ／ ＼ \n> **ーーーーｘ｜｜｜｜｜｜？？？？？？？？？？＞** \n> ＾ ＾ \n> ｇｏ ｏｕｔ ｎｏｗ\n>\n> **habitual** \n> 父は（毎日）タバコを買いに行っている \n> \"My father is going out to buy cigarettes (every day).\"\n>\n> ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ｓｔａｔｅ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ \n> ／ ＼ \n> **ーーｘ｜ーーｘ｜ーーｘ｜ーーｘ｜ーーｘ｜ー＞** \n> ＼ ／＼ ／＼ ／＼ ／＼ ／ \n> ｄ１ ｄ２ ｄ３ ｄ４ ｄ５\n>\n> **perfective** \n> 父は（今までに二回）タバコを買いに行っている \n> \"My father has gone out to buy cigarettes (twice up to this point).\"\n>\n> ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ｓｔａｔｅ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ \n> ／ ＼ \n> **ーーｘ｜｜ーｘ｜｜ーー？？？？？？？？？？＞** \n> ＼ ／ ＼ ／ ＾ \n> １ ２ ｎｏｗ\n\nGenerally, people explain that the difference between durative and\ninstantaneous predicates is that a durative predicate gets a progressive\ninterpretation (in addition to the other two), while an instantaneous\npredicate gets a resultative interpretation (in addition to the other two).\n\nI agree with that explanation, but I hope by comparing the pictures of\n\"progressive\" and \"resultative\", you can see how they are pretty much exactly\nthe same concept, it's just that it's the action which is continuing in the\n\"progressive\" case, while it's the result continuing in the \"resultative\"\ncase.\n\n# Your question\n\nYour question really has to do with what that native speaker meant. The fact\nis that 「タバコを買いに行く」 is instantaneous and 「父は今タバコを買いに行っている」 has a \"resultative\"\ninterpretation.\n\nOne possibility is that your native speaker source could have been saying that\n「父は今タバコを買いに行っている」 can have the implication 「父は今タバコを買っている」, which is an action\n父 is in the process of doing (though not necessarily -- while he went out to\nshop, he may instead be stuck in traffic or lost).\n\nAnother possibility is that your source did not properly convey what they\nmeant, and they were only try to say what the \"resultative\" picture (and\n\"progressive\" picture, in fact) says, namely that the subject is in some on-\ngoing state.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T02:26:36.230",
"id": "19459",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T02:32:39.560",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T02:32:39.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "19417",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19417 | null | 19418 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19424",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A couple days ago I came across the following Japanese phrase:\n\n> ?度乾燥しなさい\n\n\"?\" represents a character I was unable to recognize. Attempts at drawing it\non Google Android handwriting input yielded 樶, 橄, 裕, 榴, 欄. A few attempted\ndecompositions I remember:\n\n 1. Tree radical, on its right the composition of upper part of 習, a mouth side by side with something and a horizontal line below;\n 2. Tree radical, 習 on the right;\n 3. Tree or origin radical, on the right a day on top of a ear and 又 or 文 - that gave 樶.\n\nAny idea what that character may be?\n\nPS Searching 度 with JEDict led me to 極度. Could that be it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T10:29:50.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19423",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T04:41:57.030",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T04:41:57.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5324",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "What's the first character in the phrase 「?度乾燥しなさい」?",
"view_count": 439
} | [
{
"body": "It is 極【きょく】.\n\nSee also the (closed) question [Superdry.\n極度乾燥(しなさい)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/6434/superdry-%E6%A5%B5%E5%BA%A6%E4%B9%BE%E7%87%A5%E3%81%97%E3%81%AA%E3%81%95%E3%81%84)\nfor the origins of this.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T10:40:24.320",
"id": "19424",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T10:40:24.320",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "315",
"parent_id": "19423",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19423 | 19424 | 19424 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19440",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A few minutes ago on NHK I saw some entertainment show - and there was the\nphrase 「きゅんきゅん」 as an answer to some question. I can not find translation for\nit..",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-08T19:58:32.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19430",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T00:26:06.407",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T00:26:06.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "388",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "Meaning of きゅんきゅん",
"view_count": 8421
} | [
{
"body": "\"きゅんきゅん\" is a onomatopoeia(オノマトペ) in Japanese. \n\"きゅんきゅん\" denotes that someone is felt or moved someone's mind by palpitation\nof falling faint love. \nCompare it to feeling after read through Japanese manga \"君に届け\", English novel\n\"The Gift of the Magi\".\n\nNowadays, \"きゅんきゅん\" also means the feeling like \"kawaii\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T12:51:53.520",
"id": "19440",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T12:51:53.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "19430",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19430 | 19440 | 19440 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19435",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to figure out if word order effects the meaning of a sentence. I've\nlearnt that verbs should always come last and heard that the order of other\nwords in the sentence isn't that strict as the subject and object can be\ndetermined from the particle. In contrast I know in English the subject and\nobject is determined from word order.\n\nSo are these two sentences \" _I bought a dictionary_ \" the same:\n\n> 1. 私は辞書{じしょ}を買い{かい}ました。\n>\n> 2. 辞書{じしょ}を私は買い{かい}ました。\n>\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T03:27:29.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19433",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-18T21:52:43.993",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5237",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-order"
],
"title": "Does word order change the meaning of a sentence?",
"view_count": 1125
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, both share the same meaning, though sentence 2 sounds a little unreal\n(may be it could be possible in a poem or lyrics).\n\nThere is a word in linguistics called a \"syntax marker\". Japanese marks a\nsentence's syntax or structure using particles. Russian does so using word\ndeclensions. For languages with neither particles nor declensions, like\nEnglish and Chinese, word order matters in order to indicate the structure.\n\nSo, Japanese has a somewhat freer word-order thanks to its particles.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T04:32:26.660",
"id": "19435",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T09:00:54.477",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T09:00:54.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19433",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Yes, the word order makes a slight difference in modality which describes the\nthought/emotion/belief of the speaker about the contents of a\nsentence/sentences towards the listener.\n\n> 1. 私は辞書{じしょ}を買い{かい}ました。\n> 2. 辞書{じしょ}を私は買い{かい}ました。\n>\n\nBoth are completely accurate as a sentence in Japanese and mean 'I bought a\ndictionary' in English as you said. These two sentences can be decided into 3\nclause phrases called 文節{ぶんせつ} in Japanese. 文節 is composed with an independent\nword (i.e., noun, adjective, verb) and an adjunct word (i.e. は, が, を).\n\n> 1'. 私は / 辞書{じしょ}を / 買い{かい}ました。 \n> 2'. 辞書{じしょ}を / 私は / 買い{かい}ました。\n\nJapanese tends to place the phrases in order of what the speaker wants to\nimpress. In the sentence #2', 辞書{じしょ}を is placed in the first of the sentence,\nso the speaker wants to impress 辞書{じしょ}. Although, は is following 私 in the\nsentence. は is a topic marker and [noun/noun clause + は] is apt to position in\nthe first in the sentence because it tells what is the topic/theme. So the\nsentence #2 & 2' sound a bit unnatural/unreal for some people. To make it\nsound more natural, you can replace を following 辞書{じしょ} to は and は following 私\nto が*;\n\n> 辞書{じしょ}は私が買い{かい}ました。 \n> _As for/talking about what I bought, it is a dictionary._\n\nが is the subject marker in this sentence to tell who is the doer of the action\n(買いました). This will be another discussion, so I won't go further than this now.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T09:23:05.947",
"id": "19438",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-18T21:52:43.993",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-18T21:52:43.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "5090",
"parent_id": "19433",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19433 | 19435 | 19435 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19436",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> このアパートは[古]{ふる}いが、その[広]{ひろ}さ **によって** [家賃]{やちん}の[安]{やす}さが[気]{き}に[入]{い}った。\n\nIsn't this application of `によって` valid? \n'According to/based on the spaciousness of the room, the meagerness of the\nrent is likable'. \nIf not, what is the appropriate replacement?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T04:29:52.773",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19434",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T07:59:10.933",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T10:31:02.580",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Expressing 'according/as per'",
"view_count": 332
} | [
{
"body": "Cited sentence might not be correct. I would say the line like this:\n\nこのアパートは古いが、その広さに対する家賃の安さが気に入った。 \nor: このアパートは古いが、その広さに対して家賃が安いのが気に入った。 \nor more naturally: このアパートは古いが、広いわりに家賃が安いのが気に入った。\n\nNote that 家賃の安さ requires an attributive form に対する \"in contrast to / compared\nto\" (so によって is wrong in this respect too), whereas 家賃が安い requires -te form\nに対して \"in contrast to that / compared to that\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T05:30:53.370",
"id": "19436",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T09:05:15.857",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T09:05:15.857",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19434",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This feels like a `～に応じて` to me -- in this case, it would be `～に応じた`.\n\n> ～に応じて → in proportion to; according to; according as\n> ([参考](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/english_japanese/?search=%E5%BF%9C%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B&match=beginswith&dictionary=NEW_EJJE&block=58725&offset=66&title=%E5%BF%9C%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B))\n\nI can't say why it feels more natural to me other than the proportionality\naspect (a bigger room would obviously be more expensive).\n\n> このアパートは古いが、その広さ **に応じた** 家賃の安さが気に入った。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T21:14:12.020",
"id": "19447",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T21:14:12.020",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "19434",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> このアパートは古いが、その広さに（ ）、家賃の安さが気に入った。 \n> １）したがい ２）よって ３）加え ４）関して\n\nChoose 3. Then it will literally be like\n\n> This apartment is old, but I liked it for its reasonable/cheap rent as well\n> as its size/speciousness.\n\n[Source](http://vancouverjapaneselesson.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/2011-jlpt-%E7%B7%B4%E7%BF%924-n3/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T07:41:42.017",
"id": "19452",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T07:59:10.933",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-10T07:59:10.933",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19434",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19434 | 19436 | 19436 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19439",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> As this game is selling well, I plan to buy one too.\n\nHow would we express this in Japanese?\n\n> 1. よくうれているようだから\n> 2. よくうられているようだから\n>\n\nWould the above sentence be interpreted as an active or passive form in\nJapanese? \nIs there an instance when an active voice in English takes a passive\ninterpretation in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T09:12:46.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19437",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T18:05:48.770",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T18:05:48.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Interpreting active/passive voice in Japanese",
"view_count": 928
} | [
{
"body": "Intransitive \"to sell\" is 売れる/売れている in Japanese. You don't have to use any\npassive voice here.\n\nBut yes, sometimes English active verb is better translated into passive in\nJapanese. For example, \"The sign reads 'NO TRESPASSING'\" may be best rendered\nas 標識には立入禁止と書かれている. In this case there is no verb equivalent to intransitive\n\"read\" in Japanese.\n\nSuch cases are not so frequent, but after all, it all depends on each verb.\nYou have to learn one by one looking up dictionaries, I think.\n\nBTW よく売られている is also possible, and may mean \"is commonly sold (in many\nshops)\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T09:46:31.463",
"id": "19439",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T17:28:13.603",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T17:28:13.603",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19437",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19437 | 19439 | 19439 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is it possible and acceptable to transcript foreign names into _hiragana_\ninstead of _katakana_ for aesthetic or other personal purposes?\n\nHow would Japanese people judge this choice? Would they perceive it as a\nmistake?\n\nThank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T14:40:34.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19441",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T15:47:22.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7686",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"hiragana",
"names"
],
"title": "Intentional hiragana transcription for foreign names",
"view_count": 2235
} | [
{
"body": "Don't do that. You have to use katakana for foreign names in almost all cases\n(excluding Chinese names where kanji can be used).\n\nThe only exception, maybe, is when you want to be a comedian/etc and want to\nplay a childish, cute or simple-minded character [under that hiragana\nname](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%BE%E3%81%84%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B_\\(%E3%81%8A%E7%AC%91%E3%81%84%E8%8A%B8%E4%BA%BA\\)).\n\nThe general impression of hiragana ばらく・おばま (instead of バラク・オバマ) is described\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15108/). If I see ばらく・おばま,\nI would think it's a mistake, or it's a kind of\n[ゆるキャラ](http://www.yurugp.jp/vote/result_ranking.php) inspired by the US\npresident with the same name.\n\nAddressing foreigners using hiragana can be insulting in many contexts, too.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T15:28:30.293",
"id": "19444",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T15:47:22.833",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19441",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19441 | null | 19444 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19455",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a sentence from a character bio, but for whatever reason―maybe the\nauthor's quirky―they've written it in a really verbose way in what seems to be\nclassical Japanese. I get the general gist of most of it but this one phrase\nis getting me kind stuck.\n\n> [彼【かれ】]に次代【じだい】の礎【いしずえ】たる資質【ししつ】を見出【みいだ】し\n\n[She] finds in [him] an attribute that is the next era's foundation? A\ndisposition of those who will be founders of the next era? I feel like I've\ngotten the general idea (I think?) but I just don't know what would be the\nright way to put it into words. This is the first time I've come across たる and\nit's... pretty confusing.\n\nIf it helps, I'm pretty sure the sentence is referring to a scene when the\ncharacter who's bio is in question thought \"he could become a good leader,\nbecause being able to change peoples hearts is like a requirement (the word\nused was 必要条件【ひつようじょうけん】 which I feel ties into the use of たる since たる is\napparently used to refer to requirements?) of leaders.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T14:45:39.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19442",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-30T02:20:07.080",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-30T02:20:07.080",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"construction"
],
"title": "use of たる in 礎たる資質",
"view_count": 246
} | [
{
"body": "**[たる](http://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%8B%E8%80%85)**\nwas used by to express the likelihood of becoming something or someone:\n〇〇になることができる。\n\n> 彼{かれ}に次代{じだい}の礎{いしずえ}たる資質{ししつ}を見出{みいだ}し。\n\nMeans _the character_ in question _has the potential to become a pillar for\nthe next generation_.\n\nThe following are simplified versions meaning roughly the same:\n\n * 彼ならば次{つぎ}の時代{じだい}の基盤{きばん}を築{きず}くことができる才能{さいのう}があると思った。\n\n * 彼だったら将来{しょうらい}安定{あんてい}した「社会{しゃかい}、政府{せいふ}、家族{かぞく}など」を作{つく}ることができると思った。\n\n * 彼だったら次{つぎ}の世代{せだい}を任{まか}せられる。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T16:07:45.503",
"id": "19455",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T16:32:34.737",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-10T16:32:34.737",
"last_editor_user_id": "7671",
"owner_user_id": "7671",
"parent_id": "19442",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19442 | 19455 | 19455 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19446",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across the following sentence\n\n> Aチームに[勝つ]【かつ】チームがあるとしたら… \n> If A team is the winning team...\n\nWhy is the に particle being used in `Aチームに`? \nWhy would it not be `Aチームは` in this case? \nI have not come across an explanation on this usage of `に`.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T15:33:31.513",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19445",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T23:41:18.930",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-09T23:41:18.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "What is the function of particle に in 「Aチームに[勝つ]【かつ】チームがあるとしたら…」?",
"view_count": 220
} | [
{
"body": "First, your translation of the example is not correct, but that doesn't matter\nwith respect to what you want to know. The example means \" **if there is a\nteam that beats Team A, then...** \".\n\nThe verb 勝つ has the\n[valency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valency_%28linguistics%29) が―に,\nwhereby が marks the subject, and に the object:\n\n```\n\n subjectが objectに 勝つ\n \n```\n\nThe antonym of 勝つ is 負ける, which also has a が―に valency.\n\nOne famous explanation of verbs like these can be found _Shigeru Miyagawa_ 's\n_Structure and Case Marking in Japanese_ (Syntax and Semantics vol. 22).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T15:52:22.510",
"id": "19446",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-09T15:52:22.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5362",
"parent_id": "19445",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19445 | 19446 | 19446 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19460",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_(grammar)>:\n\n> In certain languages, the agent is declined or otherwise marked to indicate\n> its grammatical role. In Japanese, for instance, the agentive case is marked\n> with the case particle ga (が), while the nominative case, also called \"bare\n> case\" or hadaka-kaku (ハダカ格), is marked with no case particle.\n\nPlease teach me more about ハダカ格 and how it contrasts with the agentive case\nmarked with が。 Thank you!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T23:01:40.303",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19448",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-04T20:40:35.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4481",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"linguistics"
],
"title": "Please teach me more about ハダカ格",
"view_count": 915
} | [
{
"body": "The citation from Wikipedia supplied by the OP strikes me as nonsense. If the\npresence of が should mark agentive case, why does it appear in case\ndistributions that we never associate with agency?\n\n```\n\n 1. 庭に木がある。 \n 'There is a tree in the garden.'\n 2. 僕にはお金がない。 \n 'I don't have money.'\n 3. ボールが壁にあたったとき... \n 'when the ball hit the wall' \n \n```\n\nExample (1) is a locative construction. The tree (木) can't be viewed as the\nagent. \nExample (2) is a possessive construction. The money (お金) cannot be the agent. \nExample (3) is a directional construction. The ball (ボール) fails to be the\nagent. \nThe nouns in (1-3) qualify, however, as subjects, i.e. one may assume they are\nmarked by the nominative.\n\nBare case is possible in Japanese in two unrelated circumstances. 1. In\ncolloquial Japanese, the case markers が and を can be dropped. (See Sjiveru's\ncomment) 2. Quantitative expressions are not overtly case marked. Here are\nexamples for the latter phenomenon:\n\n```\n\n 4. 消費税は3％上がった。\n 'The consumption tax rise by 3%.'\n 5. 新幹線では京都駅から東京駅まで2時間半かかる。\n 'By Shinkansen it takes 2 and a half hours from Kyoto station to Tokyo station.'\n 6. 昨日、本を2冊読んだ。\n 'Yesterday (I) read two books.'\n \n```\n\nIn the examples (4-6), the quantitative expressions **3%** , **2時間半** , and\n**2冊** are not marked by a case particle. According to Wikipedia, we would\nhave to assume that they are marked by the nominative. If being marked with\nthe nominative should have any consequences we would like to assume that the\nquantitative expressions are subjects, which is nonsensical. \nThe citation from Wikipedia doesn't hold any water. The case marker が\nspecifies nominative case, but the nominative doesn't always mark the subject,\nalthough in many cases it does. Bare case, i.e. the absence of case markers,\noccurs with drops of nominative が and accusative を, but not with other case\nmarkers. \nFinally, please note that Takahashi's argument may be more refined than the\ncitation acknowledges. My comment addresses the Wikipedia citation.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T15:17:05.913",
"id": "19453",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T18:42:20.107",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-10T18:42:20.107",
"last_editor_user_id": "5362",
"owner_user_id": "5362",
"parent_id": "19448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Use of the unmarked case is categorized into three.\n\n 1. When particle は・が・を (and に when the verb is 行く or 来る) are simply omitted.\n 2. When the unmarked case is the most natural (the least nuanced) choice. e.g. ビール飲みますか？ いちご好きですか？\n 3. When it's grammatically required. e.g. あっ、納豆が腐ってる！ → あっ、 **この** 納豆くさってる！",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T02:29:14.980",
"id": "19460",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T02:29:14.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "19448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I put that citation into the Wikipedia link. It came from a grammar book in\nJapanese published by Hitsuji Shobou. It lists Japanese cases, giving the\nparticle that marks the case (or showing a zero crossed through for the\nnominative case), gives some Japanese names for the cases, and gives the\nEnglish name for the cases.\n\nI think some confusion regarding the so-called bare case may result from the\nfrequent use of は \"wa.\" To eliminate that confusion, one should remember that\n\"wa\" does NOT mark case:\n\n<http://www.nkc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/study_info/study_info01_04_e.html>\n\nThe agentive case is similar to the nominative case, but as I understand it\nmarks the \"agent\" of the sentence, that is, the actual noun that performs the\naction of the verb or has the attribute of the predicate (or in the case of a\npassive verb, receives the action of the passive verb). This construction\nmakes sense in a topic prominent language like Japanese.\n\nFor completion, here is a particle-English name (formal Japanese name) table\nof cases taken from that source (using the pronunciation, not the spelling of\nthe particle, when romanized):\n\n(ø), nominative（名格）; \nが/ga, agentive（主格）; \nを/o, accusative（対格）; \nに/ni, dative（与格）; \nへ/e, allative（方向格）; \nで/de, locative-instrumental（所‐具格）; \nと/to, commitative*（共格）; \nから/kara, ablative（奪格）; \nまで/made, terminative（とどき格）; \nまでに/made ni, limitative（かぎり格）; \nの/no, genitive（属格）\n\n*Normally, this is called \"comitative,\" but in my source is written with 2 m's as \"commitative.\"\n\nIt then lists cases that involve the genitive being combined with another case\n(such as への), but I won't list that here. Those who have studied Latin may be\nconfused by the designation of the ablative, but should keep in mind that the\n\"proper\" ablative simply specifies the origin of an action or something from\nwhich something separates; Latin expands the ablative by also including the\nlocative (where something occurs) and instrumental (the means by which\nsomething occurs) aspects, speakers relying on prepositions to tell the\ndifference. Note also that \"wa\" is not listed here; on the following pages\n(pp. 28-29), the book lists the different ways that cases are marked when\naccompanied by \"wa\": For the nominative, は \"wa\" is simply added; for the\nagentive and the accusative, the case particle is replaced by は; for all the\nothers (excluding the genitive), は is tacked on after the case particle.\n\nThe book is written in Japanese, but English translations were given for the\ncases. Source: Takahashi, Tarou et al. (2010). A Japanese Grammar (in\nJapanese) (4 ed.). Japan: Hitsuji Shobou. p. 27. ISBN 978-4-89476-244-2.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-07-04T04:14:05.133",
"id": "25496",
"last_activity_date": "2015-07-05T05:38:05.640",
"last_edit_date": "2015-07-05T05:38:05.640",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "10527",
"parent_id": "19448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "@Thomas Gross\n\n 1. 庭に木がある。(niwa ni ki ga aru.) 庭に (niwa ni) alone is the locative construction. If we remove 庭に (niwa ni) we are still left with 木がある (ki ga aru) or \"The tree exists (i.e. performs the action of existing).\"\n\n 2. 僕にはお金がない。(boku ni wa okane ga nai.) This may be possessive semantically, but the construction is similar to the \"mihi est\" construction in Latin. Literally, money is not existing to the speaker. We can delete 僕には (boku ni wa) and still have お金がない (okane ga nai) or \"Money does not exist (i.e. perform the action of existing).\"\n\n 3. ボールが壁に当たった時... (booru ga kabe ni atatta toki...) Once again, only 壁に (kabe ni) is the directional construction. If one deletes 壁に (kabe ni) the sentence still says something like \"When the ball hit...\" which clearly shows an agentive relationship.\n\n 4. Though forms of がる (garu) are typically analyzed as a separate verb, がった (gatta) as I understand it is an abbreviated form of があった (ga atta). Perhaps this might change your analysis somewhat.\n\n 5. Indeed, this numerical expression appears to be used in the nominative. The specified time period 2時間半 (ni jikan han) isn't really acting as an agent to anything, but the expression itself is still functioning in a subject-like manner to the verb かかる (kakaru).\n\n 6. This numerical expression here using a counter word is probably being treated as an adverb and thus does not require a particle.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-05-04T20:40:35.233",
"id": "47071",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-04T20:40:35.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22011",
"parent_id": "19448",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19448 | 19460 | 19460 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19450",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could someone help me understand when which kanji is used? For example I have\nseen 臭い on a packet of cat sand. I can't remember where I've seen the other\nbut I found the following example sentence on\n[jisho.org](http://jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E8%87%AD%E3%81%84):\n\n> 臭いをたどってみよう。\n\nIt's translated as \"I should follow my nose.\"\n\nAt first I suspected that 臭い【におい】 is used for undesirable smell and 匂い【におい】 is\nused for good smell but the example above seems to contradict my little\ntheory.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-09T23:03:14.900",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19449",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T00:44:20.683",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-10T00:44:20.683",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "388",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji",
"homophonic-kanji"
],
"title": "Kanji for におい - when do you use 匂い and when do you use 臭い?",
"view_count": 1178
} | [
{
"body": "Yes you are right, 匂い and 香り is always for good smells like from flowers,\nfood, etc, whereas 臭い is mostly for undesirable smells. But sometimes 臭い is\nneutral, which case I think your example falls into.\n\nBTW that jisho.org page you cited seems to be a little confusing, because it\nlists [臭]{にお}い (noun) and [臭]{くさ}い (adjective) jumbled together. So, just be\ncareful!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T00:21:06.150",
"id": "19450",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T00:21:06.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19449 | 19450 | 19450 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19457",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have come across this word a few times:\n\n> 森羅万象{しんらばんしょう}\n\nIf you [look it\nup](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%A3%AE%E7%BE%85%E4%B8%87%E8%B1%A1), you\nusually get something along the lines of:\n\n * the creation\n * the universe\n * all nature\n\nI would like to know if there's perhaps a **deeper** meaning to it, and also,\ncould anybody shed some light on its etymological origin?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T15:49:58.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19454",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T22:58:04.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7671",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"yoji-jukugo"
],
"title": "What is the etymology of 森羅万象 and what does it mean?",
"view_count": 821
} | [
{
"body": "The basic meaning of the [4-character\nidiom](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-character_idiom) 森羅万象【しんらばんしょう】,\nsometimes also しんらばんぞう, しんらまんしょう, or しんらまんぞう, is `all things in the universe`.\n\n## Etymology\n\nLet us examine 森羅 and 万象 separately.\n\n**森羅**\n\n> 樹木が茂り連なる意から\n>\n> (大辞泉)\n\n森 refers to a forest or many trees. 羅【ら】, as in the word 羅列【られつ】, means\n網【あみ】`net` and in extension also 連【つら】なる `be in a line`. The compound 森羅\nderives from the idea of a great many trees growing next to each other. It\nmeans 'many things in a line', and from this, it developed the sense relevant\nhere: `all things in heaven and on earth`.\n\n**万象**\n\n万 means ten-thousand, in this case a metaphor for \"a lot\" or \"all\". This\nmetaphor can be observed in the words 万屋【よろずや】 `general store` or\n[八百万【やおよろず】の神【かみ】](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto) `the multitude of\nShintou deities` as well. 象【しょう】 should be understood similarly as in 象【かたど】る\nor 現象【げんしょう】, here it means `shape`. Thus, 万象 refers to `a great many shapes\nand forms`.\n\n## History\n\nOther than the picturesque metaphor explained above, there is no particular\nstory connected with the origin of this idiom. However, today is is used\nespecially in the context of the Yin and Yang philosophy and the\n[易経【えききょう】](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Ching), an old (approx. 2-3\nmillenia ago) Chinese text about a form of fortune-telling with bamboo sticks.\nIt is based upon the idea and philosophy of [Yin and\nYang](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_and_yang), and how they influence or\ncause the change of all things in the universe (=森羅万象).\n\n[Several pages](http://kotowaza.avaloky.com/pv_yoj206.html) suggest that this\nidiom had already been used in this context in ancient China, however, I\ncannot find any occurences of either 森羅 or 萬象 in the [original Chinese text of\nthe 易經.](http://ctext.org/book-of-changes/yi-jing/), nor do I get any hits for\n森羅萬象 when I expand the search to all texts classified as \"Pre-Qin and Han\" on\nctext.org.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-10T18:07:36.643",
"id": "19457",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-10T22:58:04.800",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-10T22:58:04.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "19454",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19454 | 19457 | 19457 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19470",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I learnt the words 獣{しし} and 野獣{やじゅう} and their definitions look too similar.\nCan someone explain me the difference between them?\n\nWhile searching more for beast words, I also found that 獣 could also be spelt\nけもの or けだもの (also written in katakana ケダモノ).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T02:06:13.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19458",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T14:46:03.730",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-16T05:09:10.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "7694",
"owner_user_id": "7694",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 獣｛しし｝ and 野獣｛やじゅう｝ (beast)",
"view_count": 688
} | [
{
"body": "獣 is always read **けもの** or **けだもの** in modern Japanese.\n\n> [けもの](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%91%E3%82%82%E3%81%AE)\n\nSimply refers to any kind of beast or animal.\n\n> [けだもの](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%91%E3%81%A0%E3%82%82%E3%81%AE)\n\nIt's only used for emotionally deprived, unscrupulous, monstrous individuals,\nlike a murderer, rapist or barbarian. It always refers to the actual\nperpetrator, so for example, you wouldn't call Adolf Hitler a けだもの. Think of\n[Chucky from Child's\nPlay](https://www.google.com/search?q=chucky&espv=2&biw=1024&bih=568&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=3wBiVLyGB8HamAXp14LACA&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=2#tbm=isch&q=child%27s+play+chucky).\n\n>\n> [野獣{やじゅう}](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%84%E3%81%98%E3%82%85%E3%81%86)\n\nAlso means beast or brute, but it doesn't carry any negative connotation like\nけだもの.\n\n> しし is not used in modern Japanese as 獣, but 獅子{しし} is an outdated form of\n> ライオン.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T12:27:24.010",
"id": "19470",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T12:27:24.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7671",
"parent_id": "19458",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "現代でもライオンを意味する「獅子（しし）」はたまに使われます。ライオンの写真をみて「獅子」という人はお年寄りを除いてあまりいないように思います。古来日本にはライオンがいませんので、何百年も昔の方は伝聞できっとライオンの姿や形などを聞いて、威厳のある獅子を屏風に描く・・・とかしていたのでしょう。日本の古語に疎い自分でも、中学の古文の授業で「しし」に触れましたが、そのときの意味はライオンではなく「肉」でした。「猪（いのしし）」という動物は日本人なら誰でも知っている筈なので、獣（けもの）を「しし」と当て字で読ませても違和感はありません。食べる肉は動物である「獣」から得られますし。そうやってリンクしているわけです。作者には作者が醸し出したい世界があるのでしょう。私は「獣」を「しし」と読まされれて感じることは、古風めいた表現だなということであり、出てくる動物のイメージは日本の伝統画に出てくる「獅子」のようなものです。だから、「しし」と聴いたら荒々しいイメージも持ちます。ネットで画像を見て、（現代の一般的な日本人が）昔の日本人が獅子に対するイメージをどのように持っていたと思っているかを、その一部を共有したいなら、「獅子舞」の獅子の頭の部分を見ると分かり易いかもしれないです。専門家でないから責任は持てませんが・・・。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-08-19T14:46:03.730",
"id": "52497",
"last_activity_date": "2017-08-19T14:46:03.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25471",
"parent_id": "19458",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19458 | 19470 | 19470 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19468",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In いっすんぼうし, a very popular fairy tale, this line appears:\n\n> **だいじんは からだは** ちいさいけれど げんきな \n> いっすんぼうしを たいそう きにいり \n> じぶんの いえで はたらかせることにしました。\n\nIs 「だいじんは からだは」 grammatically correct? What would be done to make this more\ncorrect?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T02:48:54.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19461",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T10:59:35.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6713",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-は",
"child-speech"
],
"title": "Is saying 「XはYは…」 acceptable?",
"view_count": 660
} | [
{
"body": "The sequence 体は小さいけれど元気な serves as an adjectival block which modifies\n[一寸法師]{いっすんぼうし}. 体は小さいけれど元気な一寸法師 is object of the verb 気に入り, in turn.\n[大臣]{だいじん}(は) is its subject. So, the whole sentence has kind of a nested\nstructure, and the two は belong to different levels respectively.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T09:37:30.837",
"id": "19468",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T10:59:35.963",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-12T10:59:35.963",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19461",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 19461 | 19468 | 19468 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19473",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The definitions do not help with an umabiguous separation. \nSo I put forward an example: どあはしめると,じどうしゃてきにかぎがかかる **ようになっている** Why would\n`ことになっている` **too** not be apt here? \nIs this dependent on the speakers perception - whether he believes an\nevent/activity happens as part of a previous arrangement/decision;or a\nnatural/spontaneous phenomenon. \nIn the above sentence - the act of the key turning automatically on the\nclosing of the door can be interpreted either way?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T05:34:09.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19464",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T16:09:06.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "ことになっている vs ようになっている",
"view_count": 4727
} | [
{
"body": "“するようになっている” means that something is designed to do something, while\n“することになっている” means that someone or something have to do something.\n\n> ○ ドアは閉めると、自動的に鍵がかかる **ようになっている** 。 \n> × ドアは閉めると、自動的に鍵がかかる **ことになっている** 。\n>\n> ○ 彼はここに来る **ことになっている** 。 \n> × 彼はここに来る **ようになっている** 。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T14:10:59.777",
"id": "19473",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T16:09:06.717",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T16:09:06.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19464",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19464 | 19473 | 19473 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19469",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I learnt both 意志{いし} and 志し{こころざし}, but am always confusing the two of them.\n\nCan someone highlight the differences between those 2 words (and other\nvariants if any) ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T06:34:20.407",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19465",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T02:45:29.353",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T10:38:52.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "7694",
"owner_user_id": "7694",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 意志｛いし｝ and 志し｛こころざし｝ (will)",
"view_count": 461
} | [
{
"body": "> 意志{いし}\n\nIt's just the **will** or **desire** of doing anything. **やろう** とする気持{きも}ち。\n\n * 今週中{こんしゅうちゅう}にそのプロジェクトをやり遂げるという意志がある。\n\n> 志{こころざし}\n\nIncluding the meaning of 意志{いし}, it's the **determination** or **resolution**\nto carry out a higher, long term goal or objective. It's not just the will,\nbut the **ambition** , **aspiration** and **resolve** to do something.\n\n * 志{こころざし}は高{たか}く持{もつ}つべきだ。\n * 将来{しょうらい}博士{はかせ}になるという志{こころざし}を持{も}つ。\n\n志{こころざし} is mostly used in the written language, as opposed to 意志, not\nuncommon in spoken conversation at all.\n\nA variant could be\n[意向{いこう}](http://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%E6%84%8F%E5%90%91?catId=business)\nused in business contexts to mean intention or\n[つもり](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A4%E3%82%82%E3%82%8A).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T11:20:10.970",
"id": "19469",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T02:45:29.353",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-12T02:45:29.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "7671",
"owner_user_id": "7671",
"parent_id": "19465",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19465 | 19469 | 19469 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19475",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "証明｛しょうめい｝means proof, but in the sense \"certification\"\n\nBut 証｛あかし｝ and 証拠｛しょうこ｝look very similar, meaning \"proof, evidence\".\n\nWould the difference be that 証拠 requires something physical (object), while 証\ncan be intangible, eg mathematical proof?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T08:09:29.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19466",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-16T05:08:43.003",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-16T05:08:43.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "7694",
"owner_user_id": "7694",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 証【あかし】 and 証拠【しょうこ】 (proof)",
"view_count": 1065
} | [
{
"body": "* 証【あかし】: An object (mainly tangible) that symbolizes/proves the existence of something (often intangible, such as love, safety and friendship). Dictionaries just say 証【あかし】 is 証拠, but I feel this word is somewhat closer to \"symbol\" in modern Japanese. This is a bit literary expression, and is not frequently seen in scientific contexts.\n * 証拠【しょうこ】: An object or observational result that proves not only the existence of something but also the correctness of any theory/hypothesis/idea in general. Sounds more technical/scientific than 証【あかし】. This I think is closest to English \"evidence\".\n * 証明【しょうめい】: This mainly refers to the \"process\" of proof rather than the object itself (ie. We do 証明 using 証拠). Mathematical proof is almost always 証明. Additionally, it can mean \"certificate\" or \"proving something is genuine\", as in 証明書.\n * 認証【にんしょう】: Certification/authorization/verification/license, typically issued by a certain organization.\n * ～証【しょう】: A suffix that means \"certificate/license\". 「運転【うんてん】免許【めんきょ】証【しょう】 (driving license)」\n\n> * 恐竜が生きていた証拠: OK\n> * 恐竜が生きていた証: Uncommon in scientific articles, but OK in TV shows\n> * 愛の証拠として指輪を贈る: OK but sounds less romantic\n> * 愛の証として指輪を贈る: OK\n> * 彼が犯人であるという証拠: OK (Refers to a physical entity, like a fingerprint)\n> * 彼が犯人であるという証: Weird\n> * 彼が犯人であるという証明: OK (Refers to the logic and reasoning)\n> * ピタゴラスの定理の証明: OK\n> * ピタゴラスの定理の証拠／証: Incorrect (Pythagorean theorem can be proved purely by\n> logic)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T17:34:47.033",
"id": "19475",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T18:07:34.003",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T18:07:34.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19466",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 19466 | 19475 | 19475 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19472",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I think in the example below, どのダンジョンも・・・ means \"whichever dungeon\". The\nadvice applies to any dungeon in the game. Can somebody confirm this for me\nplease?\n\n> **どのダンジョンも** 、前半はダンジョンアイテム探し、後半は入手したダンジョンアイテムを使っての攻略となる。ダンジョンアイテムはボスにも有効だ。\n\nI imagine this is a standard pattern but I can't say I have seen it a lot in\nmy experiences of Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T09:22:39.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19467",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T13:49:20.470",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T13:18:49.913",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4071",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "どの object も = \"whichever\"?",
"view_count": 1096
} | [
{
"body": "“どのAも” means that the sentence applies to every A. Thus, your interpretation\nis correct.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T13:49:20.470",
"id": "19472",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-11T13:49:20.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19467",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19467 | 19472 | 19472 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19494",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between 賢い{かしこい} and 利口{りこう}?\n\nFor exemple, sentence 1 and sentence 2 have the same meaning?\n\n1.彼は若いが賢いよ。\n\n2.彼は若いが利口だね。\n\nKotobank.jp explains 賢い{かしこい} through 利口{りこう}\n([reference](http://dic.search.yahoo.co.jp/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=kb&p=%E8%B3%A2%E3%81%84&dic_id=all&stype=prefix))\nand 利口{りこう} through 賢い{かしこい}\n([reference](http://dic.search.yahoo.co.jp/search?p=%E5%88%A9%E5%8F%A3&stype=prefix&aq=-1&oq=&ei=UTF-8)),\nbut is there any subtile difference between those two terms?\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T13:39:59.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19471",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T10:34:05.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7679",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 賢い{かしこい} and 利口{りこう}?",
"view_count": 478
} | [
{
"body": "I see almost no difference between the two. I googled and found a handful of\narticles and questions about this topic, written by native Japanese people.\nBut none of the explanations was convincing enough, at least to me.\n\nBoth tend to refer to the ability of solving practical problems, not just the\nability to memorize something and get high marks on written tests. Both are\ndefinitely positive words, and are rarely used sarcastically.\n\n(Derivative words such as お利口【りこう】さん, ずる賢【がしこ】い have different meanings, of\ncourse)\n\nAside from semantics, I feel 賢い is used a little bit more often, especially\nwhen it modifies inanimate nouns (賢い使い方, 賢い掃除機, etc).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T10:34:05.003",
"id": "19494",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T10:34:05.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19471",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 19471 | 19494 | 19494 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19480",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 天気予報【てんきよほう】によると今年【ことし】の夏【なつ】はあついだろう(ということだ/そうだ)\n\nBoth ということだ and そうだ can represent an 'externally induced' opinion/conclusion. \nHow do we identify the context to choose one over the other then?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-11T15:24:56.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19474",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T17:52:45.940",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-11T22:32:38.477",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Comparing ということだ and そうだ",
"view_count": 752
} | [
{
"body": "There are two main differences:\n\n 1. 「ということだ」 conveys more certainty in the information than 「そうだ」 does.\n\n 2. 「ということだ」 indicates that the information was heard from a public source, while 「そうだ」 indicates that it was heard from a private source (e.g., your friends or family).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T09:07:21.173",
"id": "19480",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T17:52:45.940",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-12T17:52:45.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "19474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19474 | 19480 | 19480 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19478",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Simple question, Google Translate and rikaikun translate 会心 as \"Satisfaction\"\nor \"Congeniality\", although if it is in an online game where it is a stat\nattribute, what do you think would be the best official translation?\n\nWe still do not know the mechanics of this in the game since it is fairly new.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T00:04:50.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19477",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-29T09:25:27.003",
"last_edit_date": "2019-08-29T07:34:01.887",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7700",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"video-games"
],
"title": "English for 会心 as a stat in an online game",
"view_count": 3064
} | [
{
"body": "In action or role playing games, 会心【かいしん】 means クリティカル/critical hit, which\nhappens randomly and deals more damage than usual. If it appears in stats\n(like `会心 15`), it must be short for 会心率 (率【りつ】 = chance, rate).\n\nUnlike \"critical\", 会心 is always used for good damages inflicted on enemies by\nallies.\n\nHowever, 会心, or more specifically\n[会心の一撃](http://d.hatena.ne.jp/keyword/%B2%F1%BF%B4%A4%CE%B0%EC%B7%E2), is\nstrongly associated with [_Dragon Quest_\nfranchise](http://www.dragonquest.jp/), so other games use it less frequently.\nThe safer replacement is クリティカル. (\"Critical damage\" inflicted by enemies is\ncalled 痛恨【つうこん】の一撃 in _Dragon Quest_ ).\n\nSince _Dragon Quest_ is very popular in Japan, both 会心の一撃 and 痛恨の一撃 are\nfrequently and jokingly used in daily conversations.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T01:01:24.510",
"id": "19478",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-29T09:25:27.003",
"last_edit_date": "2019-08-29T09:25:27.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "19477",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
] | 19477 | 19478 | 19478 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "「こういうこと **も** 、歳をとったらできなくなるだろうなあ」という文中の助詞｢も｣の意味を教えてください。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T03:56:59.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19479",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-12T11:13:13.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3261",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "助詞｢も｣の意味を教えてください",
"view_count": 265
} | [
{
"body": "By using も, the speaker may be implying the activity is _not the only_ thing\nhe is going to miss. There are a lot of activities out there that are\ngradually getting away from you as you grow old.\n\nAt least he is not thinking it to be a special case, for which は should be\nused instead.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T09:57:43.817",
"id": "19481",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T10:23:52.580",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-12T10:23:52.580",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "19479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19479 | null | 19481 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19484",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw those words in the textbook Marugoto A1. There is no explanation, just\nsome examples of those stores (すしや、うどんや、ピザや).\n\nThe ーさん ending suggest that is a person, maybe the person that cooks that\ndish.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T19:26:07.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19482",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T21:34:05.717",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-12T19:36:34.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "7201",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"suffixes",
"food"
],
"title": "Is すしや and おすしやさん the same?",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "They are exactly same. Appending さん after a store is common. The latter is a\nmore polite form. However, the latter is not used in formal writing.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-12T21:34:05.717",
"id": "19484",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-12T21:34:05.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19482",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19482 | 19484 | 19484 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19486",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found a table at [this\npage](http://homepage3.nifty.com/jgrammar/grammar/jgr_part.htm) that seems to\nbe labeling Vし・Vせず・Adjなく・Nに as present tense, and Vして・Vしないで・Adjなくて・Nで as past\ntense. Please teach me about this distinction in the above words.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T00:47:44.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19485",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T04:07:15.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4481",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "This text appears to be labeling V-し・V-せず・Adj-なく・N-に as present, V-して・V-しないで・Adj-なくて・N-で as past. Why?",
"view_count": 130
} | [
{
"body": "They seem to be attempting to draw a distinction between _sequential\ncoordination_ forms and _simultaneous coordination_ forms.\n\nし・せず・なく・に are (theoretically) _simultaneous_ coordination. The state/action\nthey describe is true/occurring _while_ whatever next thing is true/occurring:\n\n> 本を読み、テレビを見た。\n>\n> He read a book and watched television (at the same time).\n\nして・しないで・なくて・で are (theoretically) _sequential_ coordination. The state/action\nthey describe is true/occurring _before_ whatever next thing is\ntrue/occurring:\n\n> 本を読んで、テレビを見た。\n>\n> He read a book and (then) watched television.\n\nIn modern Japanese the distinction mostly isn't bothered with, though, and\ninstead the differences work out something like this:\n\nし is literary (書き言葉) / して is colloquial (話し言葉)\n\nせず (/しなくて) is 'without doing' / しないで is 'instead of doing'\n\nなく is literary / なくて is colloquial\n\n「Xに、」 isn't really used as 'is X, and' in modern Japanese / 「Xで、」 is\n\n(though correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not as sure on the last two)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T04:07:15.730",
"id": "19486",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T04:07:15.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "19485",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19485 | 19486 | 19486 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19492",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I often confuse 妥協｛だきょう｝(compromise; giving in) and 歩み寄り｛あゆみより｝(compromise,\nconcession). Can someone explain the differences, when to use one over the\nother?\n\nIt seems that there are a lot of other variants as well:\n折衷｛せっちゅう｝、和解｛わかい｝、譲歩｛じょうほ｝、折｛お｝り合｛あ｝い、互譲｛ごじょう｝、着地点｛ちゃくちてん｝, etc. Would be\ngreat to get some details on those words as well.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T05:37:46.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19487",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T18:54:58.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7694",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "difference between 妥協｛だきょう｝and 歩｛あゆ｝み寄｛よ｝り (compromise)",
"view_count": 715
} | [
{
"body": "These words or phrase are so similar that even a native Japanese speaker could\nconfuse their meanings. However, there are a few differences between these\nwords:\n\n * **妥協** \"compromise\"\n\nUsually, 妥協 is based on a unilateral view from a person or group and suggests\nsome kind of dissatisfaction.\n\n> 私はその契約には納得いかなかったが、予算から考えて **妥協** せざるを得なかった。\n\n * **歩み寄り** \"compromise\"\n\nThis word is based on a bilateral view from multiple people or parties.\n\n> 私はその契約ははじめは納得できなかったが、向こう側からの **歩み寄り** もあり結局その契約を結んだ。\n\n * **折衷** \"combination\"\n\nThis word doesn't mean \"compromise\", and it is also a little archaic. Native\nJapanese speakers usually don't use it.\n\n> 和洋 **折衷** (This phrase is almost a proverb at this point.)\n\n * **和解** \"peacemaking\" / \"mutual understanding\"\n\nThis word is more formal and objective than 歩み寄り. It originally meant ending a\nwar, quarrel, or fight by peaceful ways.\n\n> かつてその国は内戦状態であったが現在は **和解** が成立している。\n\n * **譲歩** \"compromise\"\n\nThis word is more formal than 歩み寄り, and more subjective than 和解 (but it\ndoesn't mean \"peacemaking\").\n\n> 双方の **譲歩** により金融危機は免れた。\n\n * **互譲** \"compromise\"\n\nThis word is very similar to 譲歩. However, it is an archaic expression and\nusually is not used.\n\n * **着地点** \"result by mutual understanding\"\n\nThis word is similar to 妥協.\n\n> 結局のところ、この案が **着地点** になりそうだ。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T10:13:46.137",
"id": "19492",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T18:54:58.673",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-13T18:54:58.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "19487",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 19487 | 19492 | 19492 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19539",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A friend of mine jokingly came up with this sentence:\n\n> **家を動かすんじゃなくて、引っ越すんだ**\n\nAs I see that （こうするのだ。ボールを投げるんだ。） pattern enough, I interpreted it as a light\nimperative, a person showing other person what to do: You're don't move the\nhouse, you move to a new house (that's what you do). Then, someone else asked\nare those の's nominalizers or explanatory, which I was at a loss to in regards\nto sorting out the usages against grammar.\n\nI'm guessing that they both are explanatory, answering an invisible question\n(このゲームをするにはどうすればいい?), which may not have actually been even sought for by the\nother party.\n\nThe の in こうするの definitely sounds explanatory. So the の in こうするのだ is\nexplanatory as well.\n\nI think what I'm having a hard time imagining is the explanatory with a じゃない\ntacked on it. [According to Tae Kim's\nGuide](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/nounparticles), the\nexplanatory の can have a じゃない tacked on it:\n\n> こうするのじゃない。\n\nWhile I get the meaning is simply negation of こうするの, I can't see it as\nproviding any explanation. It feels much more like:\n\n> （君がすべきことは）こうする **の** じゃない。 (Nominalizer の)\n\nI suspect if you think about the sentence as a negation of V＋のだ, it's just the\nnegation of the explanatory tone, and that's what it usually is.\n\n> こうするの vs \n> こうするの。。。じゃない！\n\nHowever, because by adding stuff it's possible to make such sentences as\nbelow, there's a certain level of ambiguity. Though it should be clear by\ncontext. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly sure that the nominalizer の\ncannot be turned into ん.\n\n> （君がやるべきのは）家を動かす **の** じゃなくて、引っ越す **の** だ \n> （明日俺がするのは）家を動かす **の** じゃなくて、引っ越す **の** だ\n\nIs my line of thinking on track? I greatly appreciate the help!\n\n* * *\n\nEdit: To clarify what I'm asking a bit:\n\n 1. How do you grammatically categorize ボールを投げる（ん/の）だ\n 2. How about ボールを投げる（ん/の）じゃない? (I concluded that they were both the explanatory ん/の)\n 3. I know you can use the above two phrases to (more or less) instruct someone else. Could use you ever use those phrases towards yourself to provide an explanation to someone who for 1) Is asking what are you are going to do, and 2) Seems to think that you are going to throw the ball.\n\n 4. 家を動かすのじゃなくて、引っ越すのだ can be interpreted as above, but it also sounds really similar to XじゃくてYだ。 Are there any valid ways to interpret the の-particles in the above as nominalizers?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T07:12:15.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19488",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T16:44:19.543",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-06T16:44:19.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "3360",
"owner_user_id": "3360",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"particle-の"
],
"title": "の in Verb＋のじゃない: Nominalizer or Explanatory?",
"view_count": 577
} | [
{
"body": "Explanatory tone or imperative usage are nominalizer の when it's the predicate\nof the sentence. It's essentially the same thing. For example, you can regard\n見るのは信じるんだ as explanatory tone or imperative but never \"to see is to believe\",\nwhich is 見ることは信じることだ. Likewise, you can interpret 家を動かすのじゃなくて、引っ越すのだ as the\nnominalizer, but that means it's either explanatory or imperative. (When it's\nnot the nominalizer, it's a pronoun. i.e. \"not one to animate the house but\none to move\")\n\nAs for question 3, yes, ボールを投げるんだ can be an explanation to those who are\ncurious, and ボールを投げるんじゃない？ can be a wild guess.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-16T07:21:57.327",
"id": "19539",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-16T07:27:52.277",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-16T07:27:52.277",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "19488",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19488 | 19539 | 19539 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[In this thread on japan-guide.com](http://www.japan-\nguide.com/forum/quereadisplay.html?0+27379), we find two seemingly\ncontradictory statements concerning the conditional particle `ば`.\n\nOne poster states:\n\nIf A & B are the same subject, B must be non-volitional. Otherwise, B can be\nvolitional, e.g.:\n\n> [日本]{にほん}へ[行]{い}けば、[富士山]{ふじさん}がみられます\n\nAnother poster states that `ば` were used in expressions which reflect the\nspeaker's will, judgment, permission, view, order or request, e.g.:\n\n> [安]{やす}ければ、[買]{か}います \n> [早]{はや}く[起]{お}きられれば、 [電話]{でんわ}をかけます/します\n\nHow do we reconcile these two statements?\n\nBoth do seem correct on their own.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T07:43:47.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19489",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-25T00:52:20.850",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-25T00:52:20.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Using conditional 'ば'",
"view_count": 233
} | [
{
"body": "Gramatically there is no restriction on volatility. Practically, however, the\nfirst presenter’s rule is partially correct.\n\nIf you say:\n\n> × 早く起きれば、電話します。\n\nJapanese listener thinks:\n\n> It is you that decides whether to wake up early or not. Thus, you must know\n> whether you will make a call or not.\n\nOn the other hand:\n\n> ⚪︎ 早く起き **られれ** ば、電話します。\n\nis acceptable, because you don't know yet whether you can wake up early or\nnot.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T13:44:54.283",
"id": "19497",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T13:44:54.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19489",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19489 | null | 19497 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19498",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Are these translations correct?\n\n 1. \"As per the survey conducted **on the students**...\" \n\n> **[学生]{がくせい}たちに[対]{たい}する** [調査]{ちょうさ}によると……\n\n(students are the topic of the research)\n\n 2. \"As per the survey conducted **among the students**...\" \n\n> **[学生]{がくせい}たちにおける** [調査]{ちょうさ}によると……\n\n(students are the target population for the research; the topic could be\nanything)\n\nWhat would be the recommended way to state the following?\n\n 3. \"As per the survey conducted on alcohol among the students...\"\n\n( _alcohol_ is the topic while _students_ is the target population)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T08:03:59.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19490",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T13:49:10.203",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-13T11:43:51.520",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7334",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Expressing subject vs target",
"view_count": 142
} | [
{
"body": "1. On the students \nThe researcher is NOT a student,(for example, the researcher is a teacher,\nscientist and so on) isn't he? \nIn this case, \"学生たちに対する調査によると・・・\" is natural Japanese translation, you already\nsaid . \nIn addition, \"学生たちに対して行われた調査によると・・・\",\"学生たちを対象にしたアンケートによると\" are natural.\n\n 2. Among the students \nThe researcher may be that a student, that others. \nIn this case, \"学生内における調査によると\" is natural Japanese. \nI think that an expression like \"学生たちにおける調査によると・・・\" is similar to\n\"学生たちに対する調査によると\" in Japanese. It is because that \"Aにおける\" infers that the\nspeaker is not A.\n\n 3. \"As per the survey conducted on alcohol among the students\" \nThe topic is alcohol. The target is students.(The target is not drinking\nstudents.) \nIn this case, \"アルコールに関する学生内における調査によると・・・\" is natural translation.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T13:49:10.203",
"id": "19498",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T13:49:10.203",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "19490",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 19490 | 19498 | 19498 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19493",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a problem I encountered today. I had no idea how to decide what was\nthe best course of action, and I only got the advice of a classmate (You're\ndoing it WRONG) to confirm.\n\nAs I am still learning, I often stumble upon words that I only partially know\nhow to write; for example in 魅力的{みりょくてき}, I obviously know how to write 力, I\nalmost always remember how to write 的, but I often forget how to write 魅.\n\nFaced with that situation, should I try to insert hiragana or just give up and\nwrite the whole thing in kana?\n\nIf it is possible, are all combinations acceptable? i.e.\n\n * み力的\n * 魅りょく的\n * みりょく的\n * 魅力てき\n * 魅りょくてき",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T09:38:57.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19491",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-31T23:28:07.320",
"last_edit_date": "2019-01-31T03:39:10.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "30123",
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 17,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"orthography",
"kana"
],
"title": "Can I insert hiragana in words I only know partially how to write?",
"view_count": 1281
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, mixtures of this type are possible, and it's quite common with certain\nwords. For example, 石鹸 has a rather difficult second kanji, and the word is\noften written 石けん instead. 轟音 is often written ごう音. And so on.\n\nIn your example, none of the characters is particularly rare and all of them\nare on the [常用漢字表 (the official jōyō kanji\nchart)](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/sisaku/joho/joho/kijun/naikaku/pdf/joyokanjihyo_20101130.pdf),\nso prescriptively speaking 魅力的 is probably the official or proper way to write\nit. If you don't know how to write it and you're doing formal writing, I\nsuggest looking it up on your phone or other device and copying the kanji.\n\nBut that doesn't mean people never make this sort of substitution. In fact,\nthey do it for all sorts of reasons! Here are the reasons I've come across so\nfar:\n\n 1. Because the kanji or its reading isn't on the jōyō chart (for example: writing 隕石 as いん石)\n 2. Because the writer couldn't remember how to write a character, or didn't want to write out the entire character (sometimes [略字](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%A5%E5%AD%97#.E5.AE.9F.E4.BE.8B) are used instead with certain characters)\n 3. Because the writer thought a character was too difficult for the target audience / age group (for example, writing 一生懸命 as 一生けん命 even though 懸 is a jōyō kanji)\n 4. Because the character is missing from a font or would be too hard to read in a tiny or pixelated font (for example in old video games with limited fonts or display sizes), or because it's too hard to write a complex character in a very small space\n 5. Because the writer believes a character has connotations they want to avoid (for example, [writing 子供 as 子ども](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13938/why-did-asahi-shinbun-write-%E5%AD%90%E3%81%93%E3%81%A9%E3%82%82-instead-of-%E5%AD%90%E4%BE%9B%E3%81%93%E3%81%A9%E3%82%82-in-this-headline))\n\nSo although I think all of your examples are technically possible, most of\nthem aren't especially likely. I think your reasons for writing み力的 are\nperfectly understandable, but I'm not sure why anyone would write something\nlike 魅りょく的. (Still, [you can find a few people on the internet who have\nwritten it that\nway](https://www.google.co.jp/search?hl=ja&q=%22%E9%AD%85%E3%82%8A%E3%82%87%E3%81%8F%E7%9A%84%22&nfpr=1&sa=X&ei=Fn1kVPfrG4ObigLsvIDgBA&ved=0CBwQvgUoAQ),\nso I can't say no one ever would!)\n\nBy the way, some people find mixed kana-kanji words like this aesthetically\ndispleasing. You can always avoid this problem by looking up the proper kanji\nwith your phone or such, or writing the word in all kana if you prefer. (If\nyou're doing formal writing, I would look up the kanji.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T10:16:05.650",
"id": "19493",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-31T23:28:07.320",
"last_edit_date": "2019-01-31T23:28:07.320",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19491",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 25
}
] | 19491 | 19493 | 19493 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I remember that Estonian has multiple grammatical cases marking some kind of\nlocation. I recently learned that the particle `を` can be used to mean\nsomething like \"out of\" or \"from\", for an action that involves continuous\nmovement, such as,\n\n> うちをでます。\n\nThis reminds me of the [elative\ncase](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elative_case), which marks \"out of\" or\n\"from\", e.g. `maja` is the Estonian word for \"house\", and `majast` means\nsomething like \"out of the house\". Is this case comparable to the function of\n`を` in the above sentence, or are the concepts too different for this analogy\nto be useful? The reason I ask is because I suspect I haven't fully grokked\nthis particle usage.\n\nPlease could you use furigana for any kanji you write in an answer.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T13:32:17.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19496",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T16:01:01.873",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-13T16:01:01.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-を",
"linguistics"
],
"title": "Is the particle を in をでる comparable to elative case?",
"view_count": 135
} | [
{
"body": "“を” is used as “from” only when used with a verb meaning “get out”. Usually\n“から” is used for “from”. Where both can be used, the meanings are different.\n\n> ⚪︎ 家{いえ}を出{で}る \n> Get out of home to go somewhere (eg. shopping).\n>\n> ⚪︎ 家から出る \n> Get out of house (not necessarily to go somewhere; eg. to clean your\n> garden).\n>\n> ⚪︎ バスを降りる \n> Get off the bus because you have arrived at your destination.\n>\n> ⚪︎ バスから降{お}りる \n> Get out of the bus (not necessarily because you have arrived at your\n> destination; eg. because the bus is broken).\n>\n> ⚪︎ 家から行{い}く\n>\n> × 家を行く",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T14:06:43.410",
"id": "19499",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-13T14:16:40.670",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "19496",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 19496 | null | 19499 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "30183",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm pretty sure the answer to this is \"yes\", but I'm a bit unsure about why.\nFor example, given the following scenario:\n\n> My friend, John, tells me that his friend, Mariko, is performing a survey\n> and he asks me to take it. The survey is very interesting to me and I\n> subsequently contact Mariko directly to talk about her research.\n\nIn this situation, can I introduce myself by saying 「調査について、ジョンに\n**聞かせてもらいました** 」? In the sense of ～てもらう as \"to get someone to do something\",\nthis seems odd given that I didn't actually do anything. But it feels right,\nand I'm not sure why. I could say 「ジョンから聞きました」, but that doesn't sound as\nnatural to my ears.\n\nSo, despite having no actual agency in having heard about the survey, can I\nsay 聞かせてもらいました? And bonus points for telling me why.\n\n(Also, just as confirmation, it _is_ inappropriate in this situation to say\n聞かせていただきました, right?)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T18:57:24.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19500",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-02T02:40:31.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "384",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "Can you say ～てもらった when you actually did nothing?",
"view_count": 370
} | [
{
"body": "I think the key to remember with てもらう is that you benefited from it (more or\nless). Doesn't matter if you did anything... in fact in many cases you won't\nhave done anything. I think for this situation (considering the fact you\nactually want to do the survey - IE they're doing you a favor and not the\nother way around) 頼まれてもらいました or maybe 紹介してもらいました might work better.\n\nI guess I never heard of of that form as \"to get someone to do something\".\nThen again, I'm sure the text books are way different now.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-15T01:45:43.480",
"id": "19516",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-15T01:45:43.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "19500",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> In this situation, can I introduce myself by saying 「調査について、ジョンに\n> **聞かせてもらいました** 」?\n\nYes, you can; There is nothing wrong or unnatural about it.\n\nThe reason that one may use 「聞かせてもらいました」 here would be that it would make one\nsound **_interested_** in the survey. To use 「もらう」, one did not have to\nrequest John to explain what his friend Mariko was doing.\n\nBy using 「もらう」, you could also imply that John is a kind individual and that\nyou are humble enough to appreciate the information he has given to you.\n\nCould one also say 「友人のジョンから **聞いた** んですけど、～～～～」? Yes, certainly. One might\nnot sound quite as interested, but it would still be a valid phrase choice.\n\n(To avoid sounding indifferent or improper, your overall tone of voice can\noften be more important than a word or phrase choice here and there, if I may\nadd.)\n\n> Also, just as confirmation, it is inappropriate in this situation to say\n> 聞かせていただきました, right?\n\nDepends. If you are not that close to John in the first place, using 「いただいた」\nis proper and natural. If you, however, are indeed very close to John and\nMariko already knows about it, then it would be inappropriate to say\n「聞かせていただきました」 because you are, then, making John sound like a stranger.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-02T02:40:31.030",
"id": "30183",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-02T02:40:31.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19500",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 19500 | 30183 | 30183 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was watching Sora no Method 06, and at about 17:03 the line 今日は誘ってくれて嬉しかった\ncame up. Crunchyroll translated the line as \"I'm happy you invited me today,\"\nbut the problem is that she was invited the day before, not today, but\nCrunchyroll's line made it seem like she was invited today. Is it possible\nthat 今日 only modifies 嬉しかった and doesn't necessarily specify the day that 誘う\nhappened?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-13T20:58:43.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19501",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-14T07:29:07.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "I don't get how 今日 works in 今日は誘ってくれて嬉しかった.",
"view_count": 258
} | [
{
"body": "That 今日 indicates the day when she felt happy. If it's the day when she was\ninvited (for), the sentence would be 今日誘ってくれて嬉しかった.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-14T05:46:56.190",
"id": "19504",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-14T05:55:12.727",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-14T05:55:12.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "19501",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "今日は誘ってくれて嬉しかった sounds perfectly natural to me. I think it's like \"Thank you\nfor asking me out for today.\" implying \"Today, I had a great time.\"\n\n今日誘ってくれて嬉しかった sounds to me like \"I was happy you asked me out TODAY, not\nanother day.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-14T07:17:40.870",
"id": "19505",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-14T07:29:07.303",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-14T07:29:07.303",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "19501",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 19501 | null | 19505 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "19503",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have looked at [Getting your haircut in\nJapan](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4230/getting-your-haircut-\nin-japan/4232#4232) already and did not see this word in there.\n\nUsually when going to the barber I simply say:\n\n短{みじか}くしてください\n\nSince my hair is pretty uncomplicated.\n\nNow, I would like to ask them for a \"trim\" (keep my hair relatively the same\nlength just cleaned up). Would I be able to say the following, or does it\nsound odd?\n\n整{ととの}えてください",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-14T01:35:42.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "19502",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-15T01:55:57.573",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3956",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Usage of 整{ととの}える for asking for a trim when getting a hair cut",
"view_count": 4235
} | [
{
"body": "整える should be most suitable. However, just saying 'please put my hair in\norder' might be a little ambiguous. I'm sure your barber would ask for more\ndetails and you would get your desired haircut. But to be sure you might want\nto mention that you want to keep the length the same. \nTherefore you could say:\n\n長{なが}さをそのままで、全体的{ぜんたいてき}に整えてください。\n\nWhich pretty much means 'Overall cleanup please, but keep the length as is.'\n\nAnother option is to use\n[揃{そろ}える](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%8F%83%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B). (to line\nup, to make uniform, to put in order, etc.) \nI feel this is particularly useful when you have long hair as this 'line up'\nspirit is quite strong. (At least to me.) But it should make you perfectly\nunderstood even when you have short hair.\n\nPersonally, I often use\n[片付{かたづ}ける](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E7%89%87%E4%BB%98%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B)\nwhich literally means 'to tidy up.' Although I believe this is not the first\nchoice of a native Japanese speaker, every hair dresser so far has always\nunderstood immediately what I mean.\n\nIn case you want any parts trimmed with a machine, this is referred to as\n[刈{か}り上{あ}げる](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E5%88%88%E3%82%8A%E4%B8%8A%E3%81%92%E3%82%8B).\nTherefore, 刈り上げをお願いします should get you the traditional schoolboy haircut.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-11-14T03:03:59.020",
"id": "19503",
"last_activity_date": "2014-11-15T01:55:57.573",
"last_edit_date": "2014-11-15T01:55:57.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "7714",
"owner_user_id": "7714",
"parent_id": "19502",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 19502 | 19503 | 19503 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.