question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21100",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "With regard to translating \" **イモ** \", having the listener imagine the image\nand flavour of the vegetable is infinitely more useful than merely a\nconvenient translation. I have seen \" **イモ** \" translated as \" **potato** \"\nseveral times. But, I am suspicious.\n\nI am from the Southeastern USA region, and most of us consider a \"potato\" to\nbe the one, and only one, classic \"baking potato\" (usually grown in Idaho).\nThere are also \"sweet potatoes\" and \"yams\", but we draw no distinction. \"Sweet\npotatoes\" and \"yams\" are both called \"sweet potatoes\".\n\nIf someone asks me \"what is an イモ?\", I am not comfortable with just saying\n\"Ah. It's a potato.\" I've never seen or eaten an イモ. Using terms that a native\nEnglish speaker would use in daily conversation, what is a very short way to\nget the image of an イモ into the mind of someone who knows nothing about Japan?\n\n**note** : I did google images, but I believe some of the \"イモ\" images are\nmislabeled. So, I'm confused. Who has _eaten_ a real イモ and can explain what\nit is in terms that native English speakers use in daily conversation?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T02:56:12.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21099",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-01T11:10:37.427",
"last_edit_date": "2014-12-31T03:36:56.053",
"last_editor_user_id": "4835",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How should \"イモ\" be translated?",
"view_count": 601
} | [
{
"body": "Even though I've been guilty of it plenty of times, it turns out that sweet\npotatoes and yams are different things. (I'm from the midwest -- my wife is\nfrom California).\n\nBut in answer to your question, a regular potato (member of the nightshade\nfamily) is a じゃがいも.\n\nyam is ながいも\n\nsweet potato is さつまいも.\n\nThere's a character for いも, 芋. If someone just said いも to me (as a non-native\nspeaker), I would assume a regular potato.\n\nAlso in internet slang いも was used for e-mobile which is now Y!-mobile. I\ndon't know if anyone still calls it 芋.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T03:31:14.000",
"id": "21100",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T03:31:14.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "21099",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "芋 aka some small, roundish, starchy root vegetable -- a tuber.\n\n * [甘薯]{かんしょ} aka [薩摩芋]{さつまいも} \n * [馬鈴薯]{ばれいしょ} aka じゃが芋\n * [里芋]{さといも} which, as far as I know is what 芋 actually originally meant\n * [長芋]{ながいも}\n * [菊芋]{きくいも}\n * こんにゃく芋",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T04:26:40.293",
"id": "21102",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-01T11:10:37.427",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-01T11:10:37.427",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "21099",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21099 | 21100 | 21100 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is this the proper way to say \"I think in Japanese and English\", or should I\nbe using a particle other than で?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T04:26:36.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21101",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T07:12:38.950",
"last_edit_date": "2014-12-31T07:12:38.950",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8043",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "私は日本語と英語で思っています。",
"view_count": 183
} | [
{
"body": "The issue is in the verb choice, not in the particle. The **only** possible\nparticle is indeed で. If that is not used, the longer phrase 「～～を使って」 will\nhave to be used.\n\nThe verb to use here is 考える, not 思う. 思う is too passive in meaning.\n\nNative speakers would say:\n\n> 「（私は）日本語と英語で考えています。」 or\n>\n> 「（私は）日本語と英語の両方で考えています。」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T07:09:18.203",
"id": "21105",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T07:09:18.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21101",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21101 | null | 21105 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21104",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I looked these words and means surely. Usually I see きっと, but is usual to use\nさぞ?\n\nきっとお疲れでしょう。\n\nさぞお疲れでしょう。\n\nIt's ok use both?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T05:08:08.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21103",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T12:43:15.077",
"last_edit_date": "2014-12-31T12:43:15.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "7341",
"owner_user_id": "7341",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"adverbs",
"modality"
],
"title": "Usage of さぞ and きっと",
"view_count": 449
} | [
{
"body": "Both きっと and さぞ are adverbs of **epistemic modality** (which means they\nexpress a type of uncertainty), but they're different in a number of ways:\n\n 1. **Level of certainty**. きっと is more certain than さぞ. \n\n 2. **Frequency**. きっと is significantly more common than さぞ. \n\n 3. **Register**. きっと is normal in conversation. \n\nI've been told by more than one native speaker that さぞ sounds rather old-\nfashioned.\n\n 4. **Pragmatic restrictions**. This refers to which contexts a word is appropriate in.\n\nさぞ is used under a narrower set of circumstances than きっと. When the speaker\nuses さぞ, they're expressing sympathy with the hearer or the sentence subject.\nIt's somewhat subjective in nature. If this requirement isn't met, using さぞ is\ninappropriate.\n\nきっと doesn't have this requirement, so it can be used more generally.\n\n 5. **Modal harmony**. This refers to co-occurrence with other expressions of modality.\n\nThe adverb さぞ is very likely to co-occur with だろう (or でしょう, etc.) as in your\nexample.\n\nAlthough きっと also co-occurs with だろう, it appears without it more often than さぞ\ndoes, and the greater degree of certainty means it's also possible for きっと to\nharmonize with relatively certain expressions like にちがいない.\n\nAlthough both adverbs are possible in your example, as you can see they're not\nquite the same. By the way, さぞ is usually written in kana.\n\nFor more information about modality from a linguistics perspective, I\nrecommend Heiko Narrog's _Modality in Japanese_ (2009). Modal adverbs such as\nきっと and さぞ are covered on pages 108-110.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T06:17:41.950",
"id": "21104",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T06:17:41.950",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21103",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 21103 | 21104 | 21104 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21107",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a question about the 感じ in 「私の食生活が気になっている感じですか」? Who is the owner of\nthose feelings? Is it something like 'It feels that you are interested in my\neating habits' or maybe 'Are you feeling that you are interested in my eating\nhabits' ?\n\n> 人A「う、うん。敬礼はいいから。なんか・・・・・・大丈夫？変なもんでも食べた？」\n>\n> 人B「食べました！ラボの食事はおいしくなかったです！もう～、だめだめ！」\n>\n> 人A「や、そうじゃなくて。それ以外に」\n>\n> 人B「にひひ、なになに～？私の食生活が気になっている **感じ** ですか～？も～、照れちゃうな～、うふふっ」\n>\n> 人A「うわ・・・・・・ほんとなんだこのノリ。酔っ払いかよ・・・・・・。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T18:58:15.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21106",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T20:11:51.270",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Subject for 感じ in the following sentence",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think that 感じ is always used in the sense of trying to point to\n_someone's_ feelings/sentiments. If 感じ points to anyone's feelings, I'd say it\nwould be the feelings of 人A.\n\nIn this usage, I think one can safely translate it with \"like\", as in\n\n> 私の食生活が気になっている **感じ** ですか \n> So it's **like** you're interested in my eating habits? \n> So you're saying you're interested in my eating habits?\n\n\"like\" is, similarly, trying to wonder what it \"feels like\" to someone else.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2014-12-31T20:11:51.270",
"id": "21107",
"last_activity_date": "2014-12-31T20:11:51.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21106",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21106 | 21107 | 21107 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21109",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't understand the reason to learn Onyomi and Kunyomi of the kanji. Do\nthey have any use besides reading out loud? Can't a person just learn the\nmeaning and read?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-01T05:46:21.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21108",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-15T01:33:03.407",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-15T01:33:03.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "8050",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "What is kanji pronunciation used for?",
"view_count": 653
} | [
{
"body": "弥次郎兵衛 is a way of writing the word ヤジロベエ. None of the kanji tell you what this\nword means. The only way you can tell what it means is by recognizing the\nword. [(It refers to a kind of traditional Japanese toy that balances on a\nsmall point, for example in the shape of a\ndragonfly.)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvUAZvZ21kE)\n\nWhat if someone's name is 良? You can't call them Good. That's not their name.\n\nWhat if you see the kanji 百葉箱? This word means \"Stevenson screen\", but unless\nyou know the actual word the kanji represent, you're unlikely to understand.\nWhat's a \"hundred leaves box\"?\n\nWhat part of your body is the 盲腸? How about the 虹彩? The 喉仏? The 網膜? The 鎖骨?\nAll of these kanji are used to represent _words_ , and unless you can\nassociate the kanji with those words, you'll have trouble figuring out what\nthey mean.\n\nIt's true that you can often figure out an unfamiliar word from the kanji\nalone. But kanji are used to write the Japanese language, and you won't get\nvery far if you skip the actual step of associating the writing with the\nlanguage itself. That doesn't mean you have to sit around memorizing\nindividual _on_ and _kun_ readings, but you need to be able to read words if\nyou want to understand Japanese writing.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-01T06:14:21.037",
"id": "21109",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-01T06:14:21.037",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21108",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21108 | 21109 | 21109 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21116",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between ～や～ and ～とか～ joining particles? For example:\n\n> 1) 飲み物やカップや～ \n> 2) 飲み物とかカップとか～\n\nIt looks like the meaning is about the same of both sentences.. When each of\nparticles ～や～ and ～とか～ should be used?\n\n* * *\n\n明けましておめでとうございます！ ^^",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-01T15:44:16.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21113",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T18:51:55.927",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-03T18:51:55.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "7045",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "When each of joining particles ～や～ and ～とか～ should be used?",
"view_count": 432
} | [
{
"body": "> 1) 飲み物やカップや～ \n> 2) 飲み物とかカップとか～\n\n2 is more colloquial and casual.\n\n> 3) 桃や洋ナシやリンゴなどのフルーツ味 \n> 4) 桃や洋ナシやリンゴとかのフルーツ味 \n> 5) 桃とか洋ナシとかリンゴとかのフルーツ味\n\n3 is the most literary and 5 is the most colloquial.\n\n(You can say 桃や洋ナシやりんごなど/とか + の/が/をetc. but not 桃や洋ナシやりんご **や** + の/が/をetc.)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T07:29:22.087",
"id": "21116",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T12:43:57.850",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-02T12:43:57.850",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21113",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21113 | 21116 | 21116 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've just found sentence: 子供に話を聞かせてあげました。and its translation: I read children\nthe story.\n\nDoes this sentence seem natural to a native Japanese speaker? To me it sounds\nlike it has more weight to it - like a person saying it could be for example a\nkindergarden teacher that actually made the children listen to him/her as part\nof a daily schedule. Like maybe the children, if given the choice, they would\npick a different activity than listening to the story.\n\nAlso, there's this thing about あげる.. when it's used, can we somehow expect the\nreceiver of it be glad/thankful that the action has been done. Like in this\ncase maybe being told the story will have some positive impact on the children\nand so the person saying it could expect the children to be grateful, or at\nleast he/she could feel good because he/she knows that telling the story was a\ngood thing to do.\n\nBeing influenced by my native language and also English, I would rather say\nsomething like: 子供に話を言いました。to express the English translation of the original\nsentence.\n\nI guess what I would like to ask is: am I thinking correctly about the\n'聞かせてあげました’ sentence? Or maybe it is a typical way to express that someone\ntold something to somebody and I'm just imaginating things.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-01T16:49:42.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21114",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T16:01:09.257",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-01T18:35:29.700",
"last_editor_user_id": "1573",
"owner_user_id": "1573",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"causation"
],
"title": "real meaning of 子供に話を聞かせてあげました",
"view_count": 632
} | [
{
"body": "> 「[子供]{こども}に[話]{はなし}を[聞]{き}かせてあげました。」\n>\n> Does this sentence seem natural to a native Japanese speaker?\n\nYes, it is perfectly natural, correct, grammatical, etc. It has no problem\nwhatsoever on any level. No one was forced to either tell or listen to a\nstory, either. No stress or pressure on either party is implied in the\nsentence. It simply says that someone did something for another person.\n\nYour paragraph #3 actually shows a good understanding of the sentence.\n\nIt is, however, not very easy to translate a sentence using あげる/やる/もらう, etc.\nas an auxiliary verb. It would become a very long sentence if one tried to\ninclude the nuance of these words.\n\n「あげる」 implies that you are performing an action that you think would be\nbeneficial to the other person. The action here is 「話を聞かせる」, which is in the\ncausative form -- \"to let the kid(s) listen to a/the story\". I suspect this\ncausative form used with 「あげる」 might add extra confusion for the learner.\n\nTo rephrase 「話を聞かせてあげる」 without changing the meaning, one could say 「話をしてあげる」\nwithout using the causative. You mentioned a 「話を言う」, but that is not correct.\nWe say 「話をする」.\n\nSo, the \"real\" meaning of 「子供に話を聞かせてあげました。」, in my own words, is:\n\n> \"I (or someone) let the kid(s) listen to a/the story (thinking it would\n> please/entertain him/her/them and the kid(s) would benefit from it).\"\n\nSince that is so long, you are more likely to see a \"I told the kids a\nstory.\", \"I read the kids the story\", etc. as a translation in real life.\n\nFinally, after listening to the story, the kids will say;\n\n> 「話を聞かせて **もらった(or もらいました)** 。」\n\nあげる ＜===＞ もらう",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T15:04:03.497",
"id": "21122",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T16:01:09.257",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21114",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21114 | null | 21122 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21118",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that both mean `I have a newspaper` but I can't see the\ndifference.\n\n> [僕]{ぼく}は一つ[新聞]{しんぶん}を[持]{も}っています。\n>\n> [俺]{おれ}は一つ[新聞]{しんぶん}を[持]{も}っている。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T06:04:22.027",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21115",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T08:47:26.133",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "What's the difference between these two phrases?",
"view_count": 99
} | [
{
"body": "> 僕は１つXXを持っています。 \n> 俺は１つXXを持っている。\n\nThe latter sounds more casual and masculine because of the use of 俺 and the\ncasual form いる.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T08:47:26.133",
"id": "21118",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T08:47:26.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21115",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21115 | 21118 | 21118 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21121",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've just started learning kanji but I don't understand what part of kunyomis\nI should memorize.\n\nThis is the first kanji in kanjidamage.com:\n\n一\n\nIts kunyomi is this:\n\nひと*つ\n\nAccording to howto page of the kanjidamage.com :\n\n```\n\n In KUNyomi, the asterisk (*) shows where the kanji ends and the okurigana begin. For instance,\n if the kanji is 食 and the kunyomi is た＊べる, then it's normally written 食べる.\n \n```\n\nSo, shall I memorize the kunyomi as `一 = ひと` or `一=ひとつ`? Do I need to memorize\nthat it is actually used as 一つ?\n\nI've googled but found nothing about this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T08:13:13.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21117",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T05:12:03.267",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-03T05:12:03.267",
"last_editor_user_id": "8050",
"owner_user_id": "8050",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "What part of the kunyomi must be learned?",
"view_count": 386
} | [
{
"body": "You should memorise that 一つ is pronounced ひとつ. It's certainly not the only\ncompound where 一 appears, so _don't_ memorise that 一 \"is actually used as 一つ\".\n一 is also pronounced ひと in other contexts, such as 一人{ひとり}, so if anything,\nyou should memorise that the kun'yomi of 一 is ひと.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T09:54:46.197",
"id": "21119",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T10:00:40.730",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-02T10:00:40.730",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21117",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This is a complement to the other answer.\n\nkun'yomi do not exist by themselves per se. Instead, they exist in words (of\nwhich one possibility is a word identical with the kun'yomi).\n\nSo what you want to do is memorize words including which part is the kun'yomi\nand which part is the okurigana.\n\nAs/if your fluency for the language increases, you will be able to better\nintuit when to use what reading (regardless of whether that reading is kun or\non) in what you encounter. If you have access to native speakers, this is what\nthey do when trying to read unknown words or phrases. In the same way that\nnative AmE and BrE speakers know roughly how to read what they encounter in\nEnglish.\n\n* * *\n\nWhat might be helpful to understand is that kanji are used in roughly three\nways in Japanese:\n\n 1. In Chinese (or Chinese-style) vocabulary which generally use the on'yomi to read one character or a compound of characters.\n 2. As a way to write down words originally native to Japan (or those that are treated as such).\n 3. As a way to write down foreign words based on readings of the characters. (A system that was formerly more common, e.g., 仏蘭西 = France, 亜米利加 = America)\n\nHere's two example sets. The character 忙 is used both for\n\n 1. The Chinese imported vocabulary term [繁忙]{はんぼう}\n 2. To write down the native Japanese word [忙]{いそが}しい\n\n尻:\n\n 1. [not common]\n 2. The native Japanese words [尻]{しり} and [尻目]{しりめ} and [尻尾]{しっぽ}. Also,the place name [野尻]{のじり} and many others.\n 3. To write down the foreign ainu word ri shiri [tall island] --> [[利尻島]{りしりとう}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%88%A9%E5%B0%BB%E5%B3%B6)\n\n正:\n\n 1. [正直]{しょうじき}, [正立]{せいりつ}, ... basically two on-yomi しょう and せい\n 2. [正]{ただ}しい, [正]{まさ}しく, and a plethora of readings in names",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T13:35:27.473",
"id": "21121",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T13:35:27.473",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "21117",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21117 | 21121 | 21119 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21123",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'd like to ask about this phrase, particularly on the meaning of どこまでも as\nthis is the first example I've see of it used together with 余裕{よゆう}:\nどこまでも余裕{よゆう}を見{み}せてくれる\n\nFor context, this is said by a man right after his nemesis calls for a bunch\nof backup and moves behind them to observe the upcoming fight. If it matters,\nthis is the second time he's done this.\n\nAm I correct in reading this as something akin to \"He's giving us a wide\nberth...\", the どこまでも余裕{よゆう} indicating that speaker's enemy is keeping a\nconstant distance from him? Or, should I read it as \"Always keeping his\ndistance...\", the part being meant to evoke criticism on the fact that the\nenemy has the habit of running behind his men when push comes to shove?\n\nThanks for the insight.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T12:45:46.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21120",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T16:13:12.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5108",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Clarification about this use of どこまでも",
"view_count": 215
} | [
{
"body": "I personally don't feel the words mesh very well with the situation you've\nexplained, though I have no idea how the plot is actually going on. Maybe a\npage of the original work would be helpful and not infringe the New York State\nlaw.\n\nHowever, my first impression tells that 余裕 in your quote isn't meant to be\nphysical distance or margin, but mental relaxedness. Otherwise, I think it's\nunnatural to use it with verb 見せる \"to let one see, to show\" here.\n\nAnd for どこまでも, it literally means \"however far ( _sth_ goes)\", but not _I go_\nor _you go_ here, since 余裕を見せる is very unlikely to take location words. Thus\nit should mean \"however far it goes\", or \"what may happen\". どこまでも is an adverb\nwhich doesn't directly modify a noun 余裕, just to be sure.\n\nOne clear thing found in the sentence is a provocative nuance. Using くれる \"give\nto me/us\" in unfriendly situations implies strong sarcasm.\n\nWith all the above, the most approvable interpretation I think is:\n\n> You dare act so chill coming this far, huh?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T16:13:12.047",
"id": "21123",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T16:13:12.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21120",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21120 | 21123 | 21123 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21125",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am familiar with:\n\n> 明{あ}けましておめでとうございます\n\nUsually I use it with family and friends, also I saw some tweets with this\nphrase.\n\nToday I found these two variations: [賀正{がしょう}](https://one-\npiece.com/news/detail/20150101_1839) (noun) and\n[謹賀新年{きんがしんねん}](http://onepiecetower.tokyo) (interjection), looking at\ntangorin.com both means Happy New Year\n\n賀正{がしょう} drawing looks like an interjection.\n\nWhere do I use these forms?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T17:45:05.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21124",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-20T07:18:56.250",
"last_edit_date": "2019-12-30T05:14:14.167",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7341",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "How to use \"happy new year\" expressions: 賀正{がしょう}, 謹賀新年{きんがしんねん}",
"view_count": 2052
} | [
{
"body": "Actually, you hardly have a chance to use them in conversation and everyday\nwriting. The only places for these words are billboards and greeting letters,\nespecially **New Year's Cards**\n([年賀状](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%E5%B9%B4%E8%B3%80%E7%8A%B6&tbm=isch)).\n\nBoth of them are ye olde bywords even Japanese rarely know what they mean, but\nnevertheless used as convenient slogans roughly mean \"Happy New Year\". Yes,\nthey differ in meaning, as much as _Annum Faustum_ and _Felix Sit Annus Novus_\ndo, but usually you can freely pick either one, according to your artistic\nsense :)\n\nGrammatically, they are neither noun nor interjection, unless you say that\neverything which doesn't belong with grammar is interjection. The true face of\nthem is formal Classical Chinese sentences, which can be paraphrased\n([訓読](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%BC%A2%E6%96%87%E8%A8%93%E8%AA%AD))\ninto Japanese as:\n\n> 正【しょう】を賀【が】す _(I) Celebrate the Primary (Month)_ \n> 謹【つつし】んで新年【しんねん】を賀【が】す _(I) Respectfully Celebrate the New Year_\n\nEDIT: \nYou can find many other greeting cliches for your 年賀状 in [this\narticle](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1213961397),\nthough it's too late for this year's...\n\nEDIT 2: \nA [new hypothesis](https://stan.hypotheses.org/2274) on why 正 means the first\n(month):\n\n> The corresponding Chinese root reconstructs as *tek ‘single, only, only\n> one’. It includes these words:\n```\n\n> 隻 *tek > tsyek > zhī ‘single’ 1260c,\n> \n> 適 *s-tek > syek > shì ‘only’ 0877s,\n> \n> 啻 *s-tek-s > syeH > shì ‘only’ 0877k.\n> \n```\n\n>\n> Root *tek and the root in 正 *teŋ-s differ only in the nasality of the coda.\n> This suggests 正 writes 隻 *tek ‘1’ in a context where its ending had become\n> nasalized. The onset of the following word: 月 *[ŋ]ʷat is likely where\n> nasality comes from. 正月 was an appropriate way of putting *teŋ-ŋʷat < *tek-\n> ŋʷat into readable form.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T18:42:46.610",
"id": "21125",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-20T07:18:56.250",
"last_edit_date": "2023-02-20T07:18:56.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "So let me explain something. As you might know, historically speaking, we owe\nso much to Chinese and Korean cultures, thus, these 2 \"賀正\" and \"謹賀新年\" are\nactually Japanese version of Chinese haha.\n\nNow, as a starter, I think you need to know that we, Japanese, use different\nmanner to different person. ( Meaning if the recipient is higher in social\nranking ( such as your boss ) or even though I would not like to say, \"equal\"\nor \"lower\" to you ).\n\nNow, Chinese composure is SOV. Thus Both, 賀正, 謹賀新年, means respectively, \"Wish(\n=賀 ) a good ( inferred ) New Year ( 正 )\", and \"With a respect to you( = 謹 ), I\n( inferred ) wish ( = 賀 ) good ( inferred ) New ( 新 ) Year ( 年 )\"\n\nSo, as I said above, \"formally\" saying, you should avoid using 賀正 to your boss\nbecause of that reason mentioned above, while 謹賀新年 can be more appropriate.\n\nYou might be able to use 賀正 to your friends or your relatives or a man working\nunder the command of you, but I recommend not to use to your boss ( I dare to\nsay, \"formally\" ).\n\nAnd both these 賀正 and 謹賀新年 can or should be used only in New Year letters,\nbecause long time ago people used Chinese origin often in letters. Not\nverbally. Please be careful.\n\nAnd let me add one more advice, 明あけましておめでとう is too frank in either verbal\nmanner or in letters. You can speak this to your close friend, but I think\npersonally you'd better avoid speaking to \"anyone\". 明けましておめでとう御座います, is a\nphrase added with \"politeness phrase\" ( 御座います ) and I'm sure you can use this\nword to anyone from your friend or relatives or even to your boss.\n\nI wish this might helped you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T05:47:13.283",
"id": "21131",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T05:47:13.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21124 | 21125 | 21125 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21130",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Only a tiny extension in the first syllable separates the pronunciation of\n\"少女\" and \"処女{しょじょ}\". No matter how skillful one might be, those without the\nability to speak with the rhythm and flow of a native Japanese cannot help but\nto sometimes be misheard. The extra \"う\" in \"少女\" just might not get heard in a\nflowing conversation.\n\n * As \"処女\" and \"少女\" are both nouns, swapping them will not change to grammatical correctness of a sentence?\n * Are not \"少女\" and \"処女\" similar enough in meaning that, in certain contexts, mistakenly saying \"しょじょ\" instead of \"しょうじょ\" does not change the meaning, but it does introduce sexuality into the sentence? \n * My way of avoiding that issue has always been to say \"女の子\" instead of \"少女\". That is almost the same meaning, right?\n\nIn summary, I don't want anyone to think I am discussing the virginity of\nyoung girls. Do the similar pronunciations of \"少女\" and \"処女\" present such a\nrisk?",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T18:46:45.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21126",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T21:31:55.007",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Am I the only one who never says \"少女{しょうじょ}\"?",
"view_count": 853
} | [
{
"body": "> Am I the only one who never says 「少女」?\n\nNo, you are not. 「少女」 is a fairly big word despite its simple appearance. It\nis almost never used in informal oral communication among us native speakers,\neither. You would look pretty weird if you used it in informal speech.\n\n> As \"処女\" and \"少女\" are both nouns, swapping them will not change the\n> grammatical correctness of a sentence?\n\nCorrect. Even the semantically strangest sentences are often 100% grammatical.\n\n> Are not \"少女\" and \"処女\" similar enough in meaning that, in certain contexts,\n> mistakenly saying \"しょじょ\" instead of \"しょうじょ\" does not change the meaning, but\n> it does introduce sexuality into the sentence?\n\nYes and no. Mistakenly saying the other one **might** be overlooked depending\non the situation, but whenever you say 「処女」, you will sound like you are\nintentionally introducing sexuality into the sentence except, perhaps, in\nfixed phrases such as 「処女[航海]{こうかい}」 = \"maiden voyage\", 「処女[飛行]{ひこう}」 =\n\"maiden flight\".\n\n> My way of avoiding that issue has always been to say \"女の子\" instead of \"少女\".\n> That is almost the same meaning, right?\n\nCorrect. 「女の子」 is what we use in informal speech, too. After introducing the\ngender, you could just use 「子」 as in 「その子」 or 「あの子」 instead of repeating 「女の子」\nmany times.\n\n> I don't want anyone to think I am discussing the virginity of young girls.\n> Do the similar pronunciations of \"少女\" and \"処女\" present such a risk?\n\nYes, it would for J-learners. I would like you to know, however, that to us\nnative speakers, 少女 and 処女 do not sound very similar. There are a ton of other\nwords pairs in which the only difference in pronunciation is the length of one\nof the vowels.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T01:09:22.673",
"id": "21130",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T01:09:22.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21126",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21126 | 21130 | 21130 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to know the difference among all the ways of saying I, both men and\nwomen. I know there are `私`、`僕` and `俺` for men; `私`、`あたし` and `うち` for women;\nand also for elder people I've heard `わしゅ`. I'm not sure what's the diference\nof all these forms and I know there are others.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T18:52:50.503",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21127",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T07:29:49.590",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-03T07:29:49.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "7387",
"owner_user_id": "7387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronouns"
],
"title": "How should say I: 僕、俺、私？",
"view_count": 640
} | [
{
"body": "Male:\n\n```\n\n 私 General - and gender neutral\n 僕 Young boys use this (very young... like when they start to speak up through an indeterminate age). \n 俺 Young (adolescent) use this as well, but it's a more haughty. \n You'd never hear someone use this in a professional setting.\n \n```\n\nYou'll almost never hear young boys using 私 among peers.\n\nFemale:\n\n```\n\n 私 As above, but common for girls to use it among peers.\n あたし Female only, relatively more flexible than the male counterparts. \n \n```\n\nNeutral\n\n```\n\n うち Comes from 家 (meaning home or family). \n So yeah, you're literally saying \"My home's cat\" or \"My home's mother\". \n You could go on for days as to why this is but it's likely due to the \n weight put on the family unit and not the individual.\n \n わしゅ sounds like slang for わし which you'll probably not a hear \n a lot outside of TV but perhaps you might. The take home lesson is, \n as you stated, it's for the elderly. :)\n \n```",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-02T19:27:32.940",
"id": "21128",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-02T19:27:32.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "21127",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21127 | null | 21128 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21158",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It seems like 留める can be read as either とめる or とどめる. JED, my Android\ndictionary app, cites とどめる, and [so does\nwiktionary](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%95%99%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B). But\nwiktionary's [kanji entry](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%95%99#Japanese)\nfor 留, it lists とめる, とどまる, and とまる as kun readings, not とどめる; my IME also\naccepts both とめる and とどめる when typing 留める, and my Anki cards generate 留【と】める\nwhen I type in とめる. Is this a wiktionary boo-boo, or are there two ways to\nread 留める? If so, which is more commonly used?\n\nPlease clarify other kanji you use in an answer with furigana.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T10:19:25.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21133",
"last_activity_date": "2019-06-16T11:46:20.677",
"last_edit_date": "2019-06-16T11:46:20.677",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings",
"aspect",
"multiple-readings"
],
"title": "Why are there two readings of 留める?",
"view_count": 464
} | [
{
"body": "It's **NOT** 留める has two readings, but **_two similar but distinct words_**\nshare the written form 留める.\n\nAs for how different (or how similar) they are, I could say the main\ndifference between とめる and とどめる is\n[aspect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect). The figure below\nexplains how.\n\nEDIT: Note that `とめる` only happens in the transitional duration, while `とどめる`\ndoes as long as you're keeping it still (maybe forever). ",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T12:58:06.527",
"id": "21158",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T16:47:32.127",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T16:47:32.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21133",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21133 | 21158 | 21158 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "ナンパ - seducer, ladies' man, playboy された - passive form + past tense of する",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T13:13:36.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21135",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T01:26:35.400",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8032",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "What could the expression \"ナンパされた\" mean in english?",
"view_count": 590
} | [
{
"body": "Depends on the situation but the possible meanings are:\n\n\"I got hit on.\"\n\n\"I got picked up.\"\n\n\"A guy tried to pick me up.\"\n\nThe reason that I said the meaning depended on the situation is that the\nphrase 「ナンパされた。」 says nothing about the result -- that is whether the guy was\nsuccessful or not.\n\nIn the original 「ナンパされた。」, the unmentioned subject would usually be \"I\",\n\"She\", \"They\", etc. It is the woman/women who got hit on.\n\nExtra Info: When a woman tries to pick up a man, that is called 「[逆]{ぎゃく}ナンパ」\n-- 「逆ナン」 for short if you want to sound more street.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T13:24:24.233",
"id": "21138",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T01:26:35.400",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T01:26:35.400",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21135",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21135 | null | 21138 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How would you say 'he is...' 'she is...' about other people, in regards to\nnaming them? And how would you say:'they are'(meaning people). E.g: 'They are\nmy friends.', 'They are my teachers.', 'They are my family.'\n\nDoes the phrase 'they are...' change depending on whether 'they' are living or\nnon-living objects, or even if they are male or female?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T13:20:31.027",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21137",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-26T02:01:40.223",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-03T16:23:13.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "8063",
"owner_user_id": "8063",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Introducing people",
"view_count": 911
} | [
{
"body": "he is...-> 彼は she is...-> 彼女は They are my friends. -> 彼らは私の友達 'they' are\nliving ->彼ら or non-living -> これら、それら、あれら",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T05:04:37.270",
"id": "21153",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T05:04:37.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8071",
"parent_id": "21137",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "In journalistic contexts, it's 彼・彼女 for he or she as is mentioned while in\neveryday conversation, people basically use あの人・この人・その人 for adults and\nあの子・この子・その子 for young people, after that, あのかた・その方・この方 for people to whom you\nshow your respect and あいつ・こいつ・そいつ for people to whom you don't show your\npoliteness. In addition, attaching たち or ら changes them into \"(living) they\".\nHowever, the plural form of あの方 is あの方々（～かたがた）or あの方たち, not あの方ら, and that of\nあいつ is あいつら, not あいつたち. It's the same for the rest こ・そ. _edited_\n\nDifference among こ・そ・あ is another complicated problem.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T06:56:58.893",
"id": "21154",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T08:29:31.513",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T08:29:31.513",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21137",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21137 | null | 21154 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was experimenting with these phrases to check if they could be used in a\nnormal, everyday conversation in Japanese.\n\nDo these phrases make sense?\n\nYoroshiku. (Nice to meet you.)\n\nYoroshiku onegai itashimasu. (It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance.)\n\nWatashi no namae wa Angela desu.\n\nWatashi wa Angela iimasu.\n\nWatshi wa Angela desu.\n\nAlso, if any of these phrases are correct, could anyone transcribe them into\nkanji?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T13:45:48.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21140",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T01:13:05.500",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T20:45:13.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "8063",
"owner_user_id": "8063",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Simple Phrases in Japanese",
"view_count": 197
} | [
{
"body": "Your expressions are right, except that in the last sentence, you have to put\na _to_ before the _iimasu_.\n\nDeromanized versions of them are:\n\n> よろしく。\n>\n> よろしくお願いいたします。\n>\n> 私の名前はアンジェラです。\n>\n> 私はアンジェラといいます。\n\n \n**[edit]**\n\nIn business conversations you should say:\n\n> よろしくお願いいたします。私は(your surname)と[申]{もう}します。\n\nOutside of business, you may use less polite forms:\n\n> よろしくお願いします。私はアンジェラといいます。\n\nA more non-polite, friendly expression is something like:\n\n> よろしく。アンジェラです。\n\nThe last one is used on occasions like talking to a new friend who is not\nolder than you. Since few women use this style in Japan, it may sound faily\n\"boyish\" when used by a woman.\n\nIn all cases, you can drop 私は, and actually it will make them sound more\nnatural.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T23:41:01.013",
"id": "21148",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T01:13:05.500",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-05T01:13:05.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "21140",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21140 | null | 21148 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21144",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How do you say and write 'this is' and 'that is' in Japanese? Expanding on\nthis, how would you say and write 'these are' and 'those are'? Around this\ntopic, are there any male and female words in Japanese? Also, How would you\nsay 'this is/these are' and 'that is/those are' when it is relevant to people?\n\nIf someone is able to display a written version of the words, could it please\nbe in kanji and hiragana?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T14:03:57.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21142",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T15:14:05.603",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-03T14:32:58.023",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8063",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"usage",
"meaning",
"questions"
],
"title": "Specifying Objects in Japanese",
"view_count": 911
} | [
{
"body": "So.... you are talking about demonstrative pronouns, correct?\n\nThis = これ Ex: This is my book. これ（This) は ( I intentionally say nothing,\nhowever, it is a particle ), 私 ( my ) の ( also a particle ) 本 ( book ) です (\npolite way of saying だ ( meaning, used for decisive endings ))\n\nこれは私の本です。\n\nThat = あれ\n\nEx, That is my book. You can just swap with \"これ\"\n\n```\n\n ---> あれは私の本です。\n \n```\n\nThese = これら. Just switch. These are my books.\n\n---> これらは私の本です。（ Be reminded that unlike English, we do not specifically distinguish plural from a singular ( There are exceptions ))\n\nThose = あれら Switch. Those are my books\n\n---> あれらは私の本です。\n\nUnlike Russian, or other most of European countries ( except English ), we do\nnot have words distinguished with sex. ( basically ( meaning, females use some\n\"special\" words when they speak )).\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T14:52:11.890",
"id": "21144",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T15:14:05.603",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T15:14:05.603",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21142",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21142 | 21144 | 21144 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21149",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I may not know very much Japanese, but I still want to practice reading the\nlanguage, to help learn hiragana, katakana, and kanji. However, since the\nJapanese do not use spaces to separate words, I am clueless as to how to\nidentify the words, how can they tell?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T17:05:39.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21145",
"last_activity_date": "2022-10-31T16:50:53.147",
"last_edit_date": "2022-10-31T16:50:53.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "18771",
"owner_user_id": "8069",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How does someone know when one word ends and the next one starts?",
"view_count": 3707
} | [
{
"body": "Several answers can be given for that question:\n\nThe words are somehow separated by kanji. All the languages that used kanji\nand moved to an alphabet (Korean and Vietnamese) introduced spaces when they\ndropped kanji. So when you read a sentence, the kanji will give you the\nmeanings (not functional meaning such as tense, pronouns, but names, verbs,\nnouns), and you brain will photograph the functional words/endings, so when\nreading you'll alternate between kanji and functional words/endings.\n\nTo make it easier, you can use Rikaichan to lookup words. Research by Kudo\nTaku has shown that greedily consuming tokens has a success rate of 90% in\nparsing input (take the longest word that is available, that is usually what's\ncorrect). His research also yielded a tool to raw tool to separate Japanese\nphrases into grammatical chunks just based on surface forms (tiny segmenter:\n<http://www.chasen.org/~taku/software/TinySegmenter/>), and a full fledged\ngrammatical parser (see chasen and kuromoji).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T18:03:16.517",
"id": "21146",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-03T18:03:16.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7576",
"parent_id": "21145",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "# Yousimplyconsiderwhichparsingmakesanysense.\n\nWhen you can't use kanji, spaces are often inserted to reduce the possible\ncombinations and make reading more comfortable.\n\nDone in many children's fairy tales...\n\n\n\n> 「わたし、ポコくんに どうしてもあってみたくて、ここにきたの」\n>\n> キコちゃんは なきながら はなしました。\n>\n> 「わざわざ たぬきにぼけて ぼくに あいにきてくれたんだね！\n>\n> ぼく、ねがいごとが かなったよ！\n>\n> だって いっしょにあそべるともだちが、できたんだもの！」\n\nOr in many of the early video games...\n\n\n\nNote that every group of words - every idea - is separated by spaces or\ncommas, and usually not much longer than 5-10 kana. This limits the possible\ninterpretations without requiring too much context.\n\nTake the sentence `おしろもせんりょうされておおぜいのひとがころされたわ` as an example. I'm having a\nhard time coming up with any other possible reading here...\n`お尻も善用され、手を押せ、夷の人が殺された環`... nuh, it doesn't work - partly because it uses many\nnon-on-reading-chinese-foreign-compounds.\n\nSo it's possible to split this long string correctly. But just like we can\ntell at one glance how many trees there are to the top right in the second\nimage above (4), we can't (at least I can't) tell - at a glance - how many\nstars there are in the first picture, also above (and no, I'm not ~~spoiling\nthe answer~~ doing the work).\n\nAs I was saying, it's much easier to take a quick look at space-separated\nkana-strings and split it into words than parsing にわにわにわにわとりがいる or とおおおおおおお.\n`にわ にわ にわ にわとりがいる` and `とおおお お おおおお` let you waste your brain power on the\ninner values, not the looks. (Take a cheat look further down for the kanjified\nversion.)\n\n* * *\n\nIn fact, just using a few simple kanji makes it look a lot more pleasing.\n\n\n\nJust imagine the last sentence as きにならなかったひとですね... Hieroglyphic kanji (鑾) look\nquite a bit different (or in fact don't look at all when they're on the verge\nof becoming black holes in tiny font sizes) - visually - than the wobbly\nhiragana (ゑ), which we perceive as different from blocky katakana (ヰ), which\nin turn look different from kanji (嘯) as well.\n\nWe've only got (contrary to some people's beliefs) - as opposed to three on\nJapanese - only two, instead of one, set of letters in English. But that\nshould suffice to illustrate the difference. Try to read this sentence:\n\n> primaryerythromelalgiaisclassifiedaseitherfamilialorsporadic,withthefamilial\n> forminheritedinanautosomaldominantmanner\n\nSure, you _can_ read it, but let's try to use \"kanji\" now:\n\n> primaryERYTHROMELALGIAisCLASSIFIEDaseitherFAMILIALorSPORADIC,withtheFAMILIAL\n> formINHERITEDinanAUTOSOMALDOMINANTmanner.\n\nAnd let's not forget Japanese use full and like programmers full-width\ncharacters. Which makes parsing at least for me even easier:\n\n```\n\n primaryERYTHROMELALGIAisCLASSIFIEDaseitherFAMILIALorSPORADIC,withtheFAMILIAL formINHERITEDinanAUTOSOMALDOMINANTmanner.\n \n```\n\nWe replaced nouns and Latin/Greek/French-based words with capitals, and it\ngets much easier to read. And Japanese gives you one more script.\n\n* * *\n\nWe lots and many kanji, spaces apparently become superfluid - proceed to flow\naway - and thus superfluous.\n\nDone when you discover your IME can spit out all those funny cryptic scribbles\nwith only one pressed space:\n\n\n\nNever mind all those used-by-native-speakers non-general-use kanjis\n(俯瞰【ふかん】・彷徨【さまよ】う・詩【うた】)they (textbooks) tell you that they (funny scribbles)\ndon't get used by them (native speakers) - it gets a lot easier to read.\nAssuming you were blessed with a good optical memory.\n\nTake the last sentence and highlight the three different scripts:\n\n> **万寿沙羅【まんじゅさら】** において **何** も **計算** していない`イオン`が`バースト`を **防** ぐ\n> **詩魔法【うたまほう】**`を` **紡** げたのは **俯瞰視点【ふかんしてん】**`を` **用** いてそれら **全** て`を`\n> **感覚** で **行【おこな】** ったからである。\n\n`を` gets a special treating because it is pretty much used in no other word\nthese days.\n\nThe longest string in any script here is `ったからである` at 7 (hira)gana - similar\nto the first picture above. Much longer and it becomes tedious and hard(er) to\nprocess.\n\n* * *\n\nAlternatively, you may substitute (for kanji) funny cryptic scribbles of\nblocky-ish kana:\n\n\n\nIn bahee you dacinye speak Eegris:\n\n> [Jäger](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/J%c3%a4ger#German): Donを侮っては[non-\n> non](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/non#French)。彼はwonderfulなnice-\n> guy．それをrememberですよ〜\n\nThe (far) above example in the mixed-script becomes (far) more comprehensible:\n`東欧を覆おう` ([the clouds, personified, think:] \"let's cover Eastern Europe\") and\n`庭には2羽鶏がい【居】る` (\"there are two ['winged'] chickens in the garden).\n\n# LetmejustgiveasummarysoIcancallthisaconclusion\n\nLearn the language, its grammar and its word. The rest is pre-installed on\nyour brain. Pattern-matching (p vs. q, さ vs. ち), shape-classification (c vs.\no, 日 vs. 曰), quick-combinatorics (`Will Will will Will's will to Will` or `I\nonce saw a deer riding my bicycle.`) and dis-ambiguation (reed vs. read, 話す\nvs. 離す) are skills we (almost) all possess.\n\nYou're doing it whenever you've got your eyes opened - you look at the things\naround them, classify them, recognize them. Just look up how hard computer-\nvision is. Or natural language processing.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T23:42:27.587",
"id": "21149",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T18:21:20.997",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "21145",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 21145 | 21149 | 21149 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21155",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Can someone highlight the differences between 英才【えいさい】 and 天才【てんさい】?\n\nWhen searching their definitions, I see:\n\n英才：1. genius; brilliance; unusual talent; 2. genius; brilliance; unusual\ntalent\n\n天才：genius; prodigy; natural gift\n\nMy current assumption is that a 天才 is a naturally born genius (genetic, hence\nassuming good in anything), while an 英才 is a genius is a specific, specialized\n(unusual?) field (assuming that genius has a talent for that field, but is not\nnecessarily gifted in other areas). Am I correct?\n\nI'm also curious about other words for genius and their subtleties, if you\nknow some, eg: 異才｛いさい｝、俊士｛しゅんさい｝、春愁｛しゅんしゅう｝、奇才｛きさい}.\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T23:27:21.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21147",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T07:16:32.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7694",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 英才【えいさい】 and 天才【てんさい】 (genius)",
"view_count": 3295
} | [
{
"body": "Let me answer since these are interesting and you gave me a good drive.\n\nAs is here,\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/4689/m0u/%E8%8B%B1%E6%89%8D/>\n\n[使い分け] 【１】「秀才」「英才」は、頭が良く、学業成績が優秀な人。\n【２】「俊才」は、学問の領域だけでなく、手腕のすぐれた人物、抜きん出た才知のある人物にもいう。\n\n英才 is defined as a bright man soooo educated. 俊才 is, a bright man not only\ngood at learning but also good at another ( such as sports? probably? )\n\nSo these both seem to be related in terms of education.\n\nNow onto the 天才,異才,奇才,\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/2961/m0u/%E5%A4%A9%E6%89%8D/>\n\n【１】どの語もすぐれた才能、また、才人の意。「天才」は生まれつき備わっている優れた才能、「偉才」は人並みはずれた才能、「奇才」は世にまれな才能、「鬼才」は非凡で人間とは思われないほどの才能であることをいうが、実際には意味・用法の相違はあまりない。\n【２】「偉才」は「異才」とも書く。\n\nSo these 3 are defined as, as you said, genius, natural born, god-given on (\nprobably ) specific area. ( Like Michael Jordan called as G.O.A.T? )\n\n春愁 is unfortunately a completely different word, meaning\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/106783/m0u/%E6%98%A5%E6%84%81/>\n\n\"Feeling so sullen in spring time\".\n\nHave a good day.!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T01:05:07.093",
"id": "21151",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T01:05:07.093",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21147",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "**天才【てんさい】** is an innate genius who is \"gifted from heaven\". He/she may be\nextremely good at something even without much effort.\n\n**秀才【しゅうさい】** is the next commonest word in this category. A 秀才 has some great\nability, probably due to his much effort, but may not be as good as 天才. I\nthink \"Elite\" is closer to 秀才. I often hear phrases like \"彼は秀才ではあるが天才ではない\",\n\"秀才が努力しても、天才には勝てない\".\n\n**英才【えいさい】** is similar to 秀才, but using 英才 on its own (i.e. \"彼は英才だ。\") is very\nrare. Basically it occurs only in a few compounds, such as\n[英才教育](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E8%8B%B1%E6%89%8D).\n\n**異才【いさい】** is uncommon, and I see these words basically only in\nadvertisements, book reviews, etc. It means he has an unique style in\nwriting/drawing/composing/etc., which may not be loved by everyone. For\nexample, a catchphrase like \"小説界の異才\" claims he has an exceptional talent, but\nwe should know it does not necessarily mean he is exceptionally _good_.\n\n**鬼才【きさい】** is another nuanced word, often seen in advertisements. Think of 鬼才\nas \"天才 AND/OR 異才\". Generally 鬼才 sounds far better than 異才. Compared to the\nstraightforward word 天才, 鬼才 sometimes (not always) emphasizes his/her peculiar\nstyle.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T07:03:46.367",
"id": "21155",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T07:16:32.880",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T07:16:32.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21147",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 21147 | 21155 | 21155 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21339",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Am I correct in thinking that these are ok without a _na_ :\n\n> 1) 印象的 **な** 事実 \n> 2) 印象的事実 \n> 3) 客観的 **な** 事実 \n> 4) 客観的事実\n\nBut these need a _na_?:\n\n> 5) 明らか **な** 事実 \n> 6) ＊?明らか事実 \n> 7) 簡単 **な** 事実 \n> 8) ＊?簡単事実\n\n(From a quick look, Google results count seems to support this).\n\n[According to\nDaijirin](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/150874/m0u/%E7%9A%84/), _-teki_\nshould be making na-adjectives:\n\n> 名詞に付いて、形容動詞の語幹をつくる。\n\nBut is it the case that these _-teki_ -adjectives (and only they) accept\ndropping the _na_? If so, why is that? Influence from the original Chinese\nparticle?\n\nIs there any linguistic articles on this topic?",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-03T23:48:35.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21150",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-29T20:00:34.477",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-29T20:00:34.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "622",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"adjectives",
"suffixes",
"copula",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "-的 adjectives modifying nouns without な",
"view_count": 1801
} | [
{
"body": "When to drop \"な\" depends on the phrase. 客観的事実 is a very common set phrase, but\n印象的事実 is not. You have to usually say \"それは印象的 **な** 事実（でした）\", unless you were\na philosopher and ready to give 印象的事実 some definition.\n\n的 is not special; there are several kanji which can connect two nouns and help\nto make longer compounds without hiragana particles.\n\n～風 (～ style)\n\n> * 西洋風の建築 → 西洋風建築 _Western-style architecture_\n> * 今風の若者 → [？]今風若者\n>\n\n～用 (for ～)\n\n> * 開発用のソフトウェア → 開発用ソフトウェア _development software_\n> * 冬用のテーブル → [？]冬用テーブル\n>\n\n～的 (～'s, of ～)\n\n> * 一般的な事実 → 一般的事実 _general fact_\n> * 一般的なバナナ → [？]一般的バナナ\n>\n\n～型 (～ type, ～ shape)\n\n> * 朝型の人間 → 朝型人間 _morning person_\n> * ハート型の雲 → [？]ハート型雲\n>\n\n～後 (post ～), ～前 (pre ～)\n\n> * 出生前の診断 → 出生前診断 _prenatal diagnosis_\n> * 飲酒後のジョギング → [？]飲酒後ジョギング\n>\n\nHere, [？] indicates that expression is probably grammatical but not familiar\nat least to me. Dropping particles (の/な) will make that group of words sound\nas \"one set phrase\". Unless you really want to introduce that as an\nindependent idea (e.g. \"after-drink jogging\", \"heart cloud\"), dropping\nparticles would sound more or less strange.\n\nAs you can see, I think the similar omission happens in English, too. \"Earth\naxis\" is one of the common set phrases you can find in every dictionary, and\nsaying \"axis of the earth\" all the time is too bothersome. But that does not\nmean you can freely treat \"earth\" as an adjective.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T07:04:18.673",
"id": "21166",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T07:04:18.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21150",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 18
},
{
"body": "Matt Treyvaud answered my question elsewhere, so I'm posting his answer here.\n\n * Yes, _teki_ -words are unlike other na-adjectives in that they can modify nouns without a _na_. The Daijirin definition was incomplete. From the _Nihon Kokugo Daijiten_ :\n\n> 漢語について、 **直接、または「な」** をともなって連体修飾語として用いられるほか、形容動詞語幹として使われる。\n\n * Contrary to what I proposed above, _teki_ -words seem to be able to work as nouns, after all. A closer look on the web and Twitter found examples of _teki_ -words followed by を or subject が. Again from the _Kokugo Daijiten_ :\n\n> 名詞、特に抽象的な意味を表わす漢語の名詞や体言的な語および句について、 **体言** 、または形容動詞語幹をつくる。\n\n * And yes, this is due to influence from Chinese grammar, from where the morpheme was borrowed in the first place. But Japanese _teki_ is a lot newer than I expected ( _de_ 的 isn't, after all, a Literary Chinese particle; that would be _zhī_ 之). Turns out that _teki_ -words are as recent as Meiji. In its early days, _teki_ has even seen use as a general nominalizer:\n\n> ＊文章新論〔１８８６〕〈坪内逍遙〉「予がいふ反訳文は今の新聞紙の文体をいふ也。『豈（あに）それ然らんや』 **的**\n> の文章、若しくは『アナ喧や静まらずや』 **的** の文辞をいふなり」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T15:43:17.080",
"id": "21339",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-17T15:43:17.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "622",
"parent_id": "21150",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21150 | 21339 | 21166 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21157",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've come across the phrase:\n\n> 〜と **でも** 言うべきであろうか\n\nin my reading. I understand most of it, but I am a little confused as to what\nthe \"でも\" is doing. I'm familiar with \"でも\" as a particle, but it appears to be\nfunctioning as something like an adverb in this case. My best guess would be\nto translate it as something like \"〜, one might call it\".\n\nCan anyone explain the function of the word here? Thanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T11:28:02.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21156",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-24T14:11:41.343",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-24T14:11:41.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "8072",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "Function of \"でも\" in \"とでも言うべきであろうか\"?",
"view_count": 1364
} | [
{
"body": "> 「～～ + と + でも + Verb Phrase using [言]{い}う/[呼]{よ}ぶ/[表現]{ひょうげん}する, etc.」\n\nThe 「と」 here is a quotative particle. There is something you want to call,\ndescribe, etc. as \"~~\".\n\n**By using 「でも」, you are opting to give an \"example\" or \"tentative\" name,\ndescription, etc. instead of giving a \"final\" or \"definitive\" one.**\n\nIn English, it means along the lines of \"Let's call it ~~ for now.\", \"~~ would\nbe one way to describe it.\", etc. Thus your translation \"~~, one might call\nit\" is spot-on.\n\n「でも」 consists of 「で」,the [連用形]{れんようけい} of the affirmation auxiliary verb 「だ」,\nand the particle 「も」 if you are into grammar.\n\nThis 「でも」 is quite often attached to another particle.\n\n「このスイカは[山田]{やまだ}さん **にでも** あげよう。」 = \"Let's give this watermelon to Mr. Yamada,\nperhaps?\"\n\n「[日本]{にほん}は[寒]{さむ}いのでハワイ **へでも** [行]{い}きたいのだが、お[金]{かね}がない。」 = \"I would love to\ngo somewhere like Hawaii because it's too freaking cold here in Japan, but I\ndon't have enough money.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T12:09:41.470",
"id": "21157",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T12:14:57.393",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-04T12:14:57.393",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21156",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21156 | 21157 | 21157 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21161",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "They are both written as 何時 (what time) in the dictionary but they seem to be\ndifferent words.\n\nMy understanding is that \"なんじ\" asks for \"exact hour\" while \"いつ\" is like a\ngeneral \"when\". Is that right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T15:59:38.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21159",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T22:58:20.437",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4959",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "What's the difference between いつ and 何時{なんじ}",
"view_count": 1913
} | [
{
"body": "In short, yes.\n\n何時 (なんじ) asks for the time. It is analogous to 何日, 何月 and 何年.\n\n> 「何時 (なんじ) に行きますか。」 \n> 「10時15分にしましょう。」\n\nいつ is general, and includes 何時, 何日, etc. Usually it is written in hiragana.\n\n> 「いつ行きますか。」 \n> 「明日にしましょう。」 or 「10時15分にしましょう。」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T22:58:20.437",
"id": "21161",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-04T22:58:20.437",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "21159",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21159 | 21161 | 21161 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I've seen there are two ways of saying **we** and pluralizing words using:\n\n> ら、たち\n\nBut I can't see the difference and I'm not sure if it can be used with all the\npronouns. Are there other forms of pluralizing words other than these. How\nshould I use them and what's the difference.\n\nAre all these forms right?:\n\n> 僕たち・僕ら\n>\n> 俺たち・俺ら\n>\n> 私たち・私ら？\n>\n> 君たち・君ら\n>\n> あなたたち・あなたら\n>\n> 彼たち・彼ら\n>\n> 彼女たち・彼女ら\n>\n> 犬たち\n>\n> Etc.\n\nWhat's the difference of using hiragana or kanji?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T22:11:40.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21160",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-24T13:38:11.773",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronouns",
"first-person-pronouns",
"plurals"
],
"title": "How to do plurals?",
"view_count": 122
} | [] | 21160 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21163",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've noticed in the book 秘密 by 谷崎{たにざき}潤一郎{じゅんいちろう} that the particle は\nsometimes seems to be used to indicate that with \"AはB\", \"B\" comes after \"A\",\nfor example:\n\n> …さながら土用干【どようぼし】の如く【ごとく】部屋中へ置き散らして、寝ころびながら、手あたり次第に繰りひろげて **[は]{L}**\n> 耽読【たんどく】した。\n\nIs this the case, and/or is there some kind of relationship indicated between\n\"B\" and \"A\" here? Is this strictly a literary usage, or is it also used in\nconversation etc?\n\nI've looked in [Weblio](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%AF) and various\nother dictionaries, but can't seem to find a similar usage.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-04T23:52:07.717",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21162",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T00:19:20.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "796",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "Does this \"は\" indicate a sequence of events?",
"view_count": 294
} | [
{
"body": "It is 「ては」, not 「は」, that one needs to be looking at here. You seem to have\nits usage figured out, though.\n\n> \"Action A + ては + Action B\"\n>\n> Action A must be in the [連用形]{れんようけい}, but Action B could be in almost any\n> form.\n\nThis format expresses the repeated sequence of two different actions. You do\nA, B, A, B, A, B・・・\n\n> 手あたり次第に繰りひろげては耽読した\n\n= \"(I) kept devouring (the books) as (I) spread them open (on the tatami) \"\n\nThis is in no way a strictly literary usage. It is used in daily conversation\nas well.\n\nSee definition #3 here (Not the \"circled\" 3 towards the bottom):\n\n<https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AF-576591#E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.9E.97.20.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.89.E7.89.88>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T00:19:20.283",
"id": "21163",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T00:19:20.283",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21162",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21162 | 21163 | 21163 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21165",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to say \"I drank coffee WITH Harukaさん at Starbucks\"\n\nIs と the particle you use for \"with\"?\n\n> 私はスターバックスでHarukaさんWITHコーヒーをのみました。\n\nIf use と here doesn't that mean \"I drank Haruka and coffee at Starbucks\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T05:35:16.353",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21164",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T07:02:06.003",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-05T07:02:06.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "5237",
"owner_user_id": "5237",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"particle-と"
],
"title": "How to say with?",
"view_count": 17589
} | [
{
"body": "You'd say\n\n> 私はスターバックスでハルカさん **と** コーヒーをのみました。\n\nto mean \"I drank coffee with Haruka-san at Starbucks.\"\n\nYou'd say\n\n> 私はスターバックスで紅茶 **と** コーヒーをのみました。\n\nto mean \"I drank tea and coffee at Starbucks.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T06:27:54.637",
"id": "21165",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T06:27:54.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21164",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21164 | 21165 | 21165 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21168",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I encountered the phrase in this line:\n\n> あいつはあいつで、きちんとバイトしているらしい。\n\nI think I can intuit the general meaning but I was wondering if anyone had a\nfull explanation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T07:39:30.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21167",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-16T13:41:50.650",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-05T15:48:23.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "5305",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of あいつはあいつで?",
"view_count": 1827
} | [
{
"body": "「あいつはあいつで～～」 means \"He ~~ in his own way.\"\n\nAs the word 「きちんと = \"properly\"」 may suggest,\n\n> **\"Pronoun X + は + Same Pronoun X + で\"**\n\nexpresses the speaker's opinion that the Person X is doing something at least\non a satisfactory level if not on an extraordinary level.\n\n「これはこれでおいしい。」 = \"This dish tastes OK if not spectacular.\" ==> \"It tastes good\nin its own way.\"\n\nOne can also use a real personal name instead of a pronoun in this expression\nas in.\n\n> 「スミスはスミスでちゃんと働{はたら}いている。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T08:09:50.380",
"id": "21168",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-16T13:41:50.650",
"last_edit_date": "2019-12-16T13:41:50.650",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21167",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 21167 | 21168 | 21168 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't know how to translate this sentence. Can you help me? Here is the\nsentence:\n\n> 頭に釘を打たれたかのような激痛が１日以上続きました。\n\nI think it's really difficult to translate \" 動詞+かのような+名詞 \"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T08:25:13.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21169",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-08T05:00:11.113",
"last_edit_date": "2017-11-08T03:16:12.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "8079",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to translate 動詞+かのような+名詞?",
"view_count": 322
} | [
{
"body": "The key phrase is **\"as if\"**. It should work basically every time you need to\ntranslate a phrase containing 「かのような」.\n\n\"Verb Phrase + かのような + Noun\" = \"(Noun) as if (Verb Phrase) \"\n\nWhatever event is described in the verb phrase DID NOT occur. Instead, it\n**_feels [just] as if_** it had happened; It is always a **_metaphorical\nexpression_** or simile.\n\n「[頭]{あたま}に[釘]{くぎ}を[打]{う}たれたかのような[激痛]{げきつう}」 =\n\n\"a/the 激痛 that felt as if 頭に釘を打たれた\" =\n\n\" ** _an acute pain that felt as if I had a nail hammered into my head_** \"\n\nIt lasted over a day.\n\nIt would have lasted many weeks if someone actually hammered a nail down into\nthe guy's head, wouldn't it have?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T08:56:56.440",
"id": "21170",
"last_activity_date": "2017-11-08T05:00:11.113",
"last_edit_date": "2017-11-08T05:00:11.113",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21169",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21169 | null | 21170 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21173",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm helping someone translate some supplemental material for an old video\ngame, and I'm a bit unsure how to translate this sentence. For context, it's\nabout an ancient biological superweapon (\"Deus\") hatching an elaborate scheme\nto repair itself over thousands of years.\n\n> 何故 “神”－－デウスは一万年という遠大な時間を **要して** まで自己修復しなくてはならなかったのか?\n\nAnd here's my attempt at a translation:\n\n> Why was it absolutely necessary for 'God', Deus, to restore itself within\n> the long span of 10,000 years?\n\nThe part that's tripping me up here is 要してまで. According to the dictionary, 要す\nbasically means \"need\" or \"require\", but that doesn't seem to fit the way it's\nused in this sentence, so obviously I'm missing something here. The next\nsentence talks about Deus having to operate within a time limit, which\nsupports my interpretation, but that still doesn't make sense of 要してまで.\n\nThe full text I'm translating is here, just in case: <http://xeno-\nunderground.net/x_u_hi_res_scans/xg_pw/PW302.jpg>\n\nAny help would be much appreciated!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T13:56:13.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21172",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T15:26:51.683",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-05T14:48:35.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "8084",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Need help translating a sentence involving 要して",
"view_count": 172
} | [
{
"body": "I really do not think that the issue here is how to translate 「要する」. If your\nTL above is any indication, I do not think you are familiar with the sentence\nstructure 「AしてまでBする」, which is more important.\n\n> 「AしてまでBする」 = \"to go so far as to do A in order to do B\"\n\nIn the sentence in question:\n\nAction A = 一万年という遠大な時間を要する\n\nAction B = 自己修復する\n\n「要する」 can be translated to \"to take\" or \"to spend\" because it is talking about\ntime. If you used \"to need\" or \"to require\" just because your dictionary said\nso without knowing the context, it would make the translation much more\ndifficult.\n\n> My own TL idea: \"Why did Deus the God have to go so far as to spend an\n> enormously long span of 10,000 years in order to restore himself?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T15:26:51.683",
"id": "21173",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T15:26:51.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21172",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21172 | 21173 | 21173 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Both ね and でしょう can be used to form tag questions to confirm an opinion like\nso:\n\n> 1) 疲れたでしょう。 (more of a guess based on evidence / polite)\n>\n> 2) 疲れたね。 (more forceful / the speaker is more certain)\n>\n> 3) 疲れたでしょうね。 (forceful, but polite)\n\nFor the purposes of these questions you can imagine that these sentences are\nspoken to someone who has just done something physically exerting (like moving\nboxes for 7 hours).\n\nAm I right about these guesses? Can anyone elaborate more?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T15:27:18.427",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21174",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-07T07:50:36.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6604",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "What's the difference between ね and でしょう for tag questions?",
"view_count": 1596
} | [
{
"body": "When a speaker says `でしょう`, he or she puts more weights on the guess or\nasking.\n\nWhen a speaker says `ね`, he or she expects an agreement from the listener. It\nis slightly more assertive (or _forceful_ as you say) than `でしょう`. If you want\nto add the politeness, you can rephrase it by saying `疲れましたね。`.\n\nHowever, `でしょうね` is more assertive than the two above, and the speaker might\neven not expect the listener to respond.\n\nNote that `疲れたでしょうね。` is slightly unnatural. I would say `お疲れでしょうね。`.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T20:51:05.090",
"id": "21178",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T20:51:05.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21174",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I am at beginner-intermediate level of Japanese, so please do not consider\nthis as an authoritative answer. It is **completely based on inference derived\nby me**. However, I have presented my arguments in support of my answer.\n\nIt is clear that でしょう when used with rising ending intonation, it would mean,\nthat the person is seeking for hearer's agreement, on something. E.g.\n君も行くでしょう? (You will go, won't you?)\n\nWhereas, ね is also used to get the hearer's agreement, with the intonation is\nfalling one.\n\n> ね of Agreement and ね of Confirmation\n\nNow before we get into the difference we should first understand what,\nactually this agreement ね is!, as ね can also mean seeking for confirmation\n(Intonation is rising), which would mean \"I assume XYZ can you confirm it?\",\nwhereas, agreement ね is a speaker's strong impression of something, and he\nwants the hearer to agree on it, it is not seeking for confirmation, but\nagreement (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, agreement ね).\n\nE.g. あなたは学校生ですね (with rising ね can mean, that the speaker **assumes** that the\nhearer is a student, like he saw a school bag/clothes and assumes it, and\nwants to confirm it.\n\nWhereas, one school student asks another student to rent a motorcycle, and the\nother can reply by saying まだ学校生ね. (This form of ね would mean, I am still\nstudent, right?). Here it can be seen that, this case is not that the person\nwants to assume he just wants an agreement.\n\n> ね of Agreement as per me\n\nNow, coming to the main point, this 2nd ね, the ね of agreement, as per my book\n(A Dict. of Basic Japanese Grammar), is used when there is some shared\nknowledge.\n\n**My Inference, only, from hereon: Please don't take it as an Authoritative\ntext**\n\nThat is to say, both should have the same knowledge/experience on the\nact/scenario/situation (topic of the conversation). That is, both should have\nexperienced the same and have a common knowledge, such that both the person\nare able/in a position to relate it.\n\nE.g. A and B are walking together, they see a cute dog. Now, in this scenario,\nboth/either can use the seeking-agreement ね and say かわいい犬ね? As, the other\nperson has also seen that, i.e. there exists a shared knowledge/experience\nwhich was gathered by watching that dog 犬 and the other can now relate it.\n\nWhereas, If B over here did not see the dog 犬, A cannot say, かわいい犬ね? (Using\nagreement ね) as, B cannot relate which dog/or what is A talking about.\n\nFurther, as per me it is not necessary that the other person has in reality,\ni.e. literally, experienced the same situation/action/scenario, using ね in\nsuch situations, can mean that you can relate to it even without actually\nexperiencing/having knowledge about that.\n\nE.g. A tells B, I was not able to go to Japan to witness the New Year's\ncelebration. Wherein, B replies, 残念ね (with agreement ね), and A replies 残念です.\nOver here, if we look at the scenario, it was not that B was not able to go to\nJapan for the New Year's Celebration, or even in first place planned to. So\nhere, we can see that B tried to relate the situation, in which A was in, in\norder to empathize with A. (In short saying I can understand, I feel bad for\nyou).\n\nHowever, as I can't come up with more examples, as I am still at budding\nstage, so I am unclear to what extent this \"Trying to/Able to relate with no\nexperience/ knowledge scenario/action, by using agreement ね, applies\".\n\nThe points below are purely out of inferences derived from looking at various\nsentences using the agreement ね:\n\nMoreover, as per my inference, this scenario/action/situation in relation to\nwhich agreement ね is used, can be in past, whereas, the statement for present,\nin relation to that past scenario/action/situation. E.g. A and B, are planning\nto a dinner, where B says we will eat a lot tonight, and when they go out in\nthe night, B before starting the dinner can say たくさん食べようね (using agreement ね),\nover here we can infer that, such usage of ね, is can imply there that there\nexists a relation to the shared knowledge about the past\nscenario/action/situation (which is, the conversation, i.e. both of them have\nthis shared knowledge/experience).\n\nThus, as per my inference, agreement ね can only be used, when the speaker and\nthe hearer, both of them find a relation to the shared knowledge/experience of\na action/situation/scenario.\n\nSo, **I suppose** , though I am not confident at all, that only in case that\nthey can relate it with a shared knowledge/experience of a\naction/scenario/situation in regard to which statement has been made, then\nagreement ね will be used.\n\n> でしょう\n\nNow, coming to でしょう, the rising intonation, at the end, tells us that the\nspeaker is asking for agreement (hereinafter, agreement でしょう) and not that he\nwanted to mean \"probably\".\n\nAs per, [Misaさん](https://youtu.be/bG66faxJeSY?t=389)\n\nAgreement でしょう, can be in those cases instead of the Agreement ね, when the\nspeaker is having prior experience of a thing, and when the speakers makes the\nhearer experience the same, agreement でしょう can be used. E.g. A and B go to the\nrestaurant, where A knows and has told B that tasty food is available, so when\nboth eat, A can say to B, おいしいでしょう? (with agreement でしょう). Click on the link,\nthere are 3-4 other examples referring to same scenario.\n\nMy own Inference derived from the same (Not sure):\n\nNow, if we look at the above example, we can clearly see that, since the\nspeaker focused not on the point of shared knowledge/experience which they\nacquired when both ate the tasty food, and on the fact that prior to that,\ni.e. him knowing that the food was tasty here. Thus, it can be inferred that\nin those cases where there isn't any shared knowledge/experience of a\naction/scenario/situation or it is not the intention to bring it up, でしょう\nwould apply.\n\n(Not Sure- Self-made example) E.g. A Husband, suddenly plans to go to a\nWedding Anniversary, and informs him about the wedding and says, 君も行くでしょう,\nover here as shared knowledge/information with the wife that she would have to\ngo, as per my inference, でしょう would be used, as he really wants his wife to\naccompany him.\n\n> Coming to the Question\n\n(Self-made example) As per the above-based inference and reasoning of mine,\nwhich I am still not sure about, 疲れたね, could have been used in those\nsituations wherein, there exists a shared knowledge/experience about a\naction/situation/scenario to which one can relate. E.g. A and B work together\nin the same shift, and there shift ended after 7 hours, so over here, since A\ncan relate how much tiring it was as he did the same, he can say to B (who\nalso worked for the same time), 疲れたね (with rising intonation).\n\nAlso, note that over here if A was not working with B, but was elsewhere and\nthen he would have said this to B, this ね would have been the ね of\nconfirmation i.e. I am assumed you are tired after working for 7 hours, can\nyou confirm it?.\n\n(Self-made example) Whereas, 疲れたでしょう would have been used in a situation where\nthe でしょう is of agreement, where the person cannot relate to the\naction/situation/scenario pertaining to the work/tiredness that the hearer\nmight have that he has. E.g. A a software engineer, who is a friend of B (the\nperson who did physical work for 7 hours), insists that B comes to drinking\nsake after work with A, and says, 君は疲れたでしょう, to convince for a drink saying\nhim release his tiredness (which A has no account of/can relate), by drinking\nalcohol.\n\nI hope it might help ! I know these are more of inferences, however, I tried\nto give a wide perspective, and the possibilities that it might have.\n\nClick hyperlink Misaさん, she has tried to explain the difference. However, I\nfelt that it needed more explanation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-11-26T20:38:26.460",
"id": "82803",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-07T07:50:36.567",
"last_edit_date": "2022-06-07T07:50:36.567",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "36729",
"parent_id": "21174",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21174 | null | 21178 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21176",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is the example sentence: 私の趣味はギターを弾くことです。\n\nMy translation - Playing the guitar is my hobby.\n\nHowever, why is it not: '私の趣味はギターを弾きます。’\n\nBasically I don't understand this use of 'ことです'.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T15:58:59.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21175",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T16:33:48.387",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-05T16:04:31.600",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"verbs",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "Use of ことです in this sentence",
"view_count": 3653
} | [
{
"body": "Short answer: nominalization.\n\n* * *\n\nIn this case, it's not really a quirk of the Japanese language, at least\nyou're doing pretty much the same in English as well.\n\nIn English, we don't say\n\n> *My hobby is play the guitar.\n>\n> *As for my hobby, play the guitar.\n\nThe pattern `A is B` needs two things (either a noun, or mentioning a word or\nphrase, as in _swim is a verb_ ) for A and B. So we use the gerund `playing`,\nwhich basically refers to the act of doing the action `play`.\n\n> My hobby is playing the guitar.\n\nThis does not mean that playing the guitar is done by your hobby, `playing the\nguitar` is behaving like a noun here.\n\nThe same goes for Japanese. `私の趣味はギターを弾く` could perhaps mean `my hobby plays\nthe guitar`, but what you want to say is that the _act of playing_ is your\nhobby.\n\n`弾く事【こと】` (こと is usually written in _kana_ ) is almost literally the _the act\nof playing_.\n\nAnd `ギターを弾くこと` is `playing the guitar`, which is your hobby, ie. 趣味.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T16:33:48.387",
"id": "21176",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-05T16:33:48.387",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "21175",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21175 | 21176 | 21176 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21180",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm starting to study Japanese — and of course, it seems one of the first\nthings one is taught in any language is how to introduce oneself. So,\naccording to some (admittedly sketchy looking) online transliterators...\n\nリック です。\n\nBut I wonder: The name I go by in English (Rick) ends with a consonant, so why\n「ク」 and not any of the other _k_ -series kana? Is it something to do with this\nname in particular, e.g. it's a masculine name? Simply because of the\n[tendency](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5175/8087) (which I don't\nfully understand just yet) of final ~ _u_ to become devoiced? Something else\nentirely?\n\nMore generally, are there general rules for transliteration that lead to this\nresult? I'm afraid I'm too new to the language to know what to search for in\nthat department (at least, my tries so far have come up empty).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-05T20:41:52.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21177",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-26T00:54:47.293",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "8087",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kana",
"names"
],
"title": "General rules for final kana in names ending with consonant?",
"view_count": 2548
} | [
{
"body": "There are at least general tendencies, if not necessarily hard-and-fast rules\nregarding the matter.\n\nJust off the top of my head ---\n\nJapanese vowel assigned vs. Ending consonant of English name\n\n「ウ」: b, f, g, sh, k, l, m, p, s, v, z （ボブ、ジェフ、グレッグ、ジョッシュ、リック、カール、トム、etc.）\n\n「オ」: d, t （トッド、マット, etc.）\n\n「イ」: ch （リッチ、ミッチ）\n\nWhen an English name ends with \"r\", our usual practice is to elongate the\npreceding vowel and ignore the \"r\". （Oscar ==> オスカー）\n\nNot even sure if that covers all the possible name-ending consonants in\nEnglish. Feel free to edit.\n\n**Please remember that we are ONLY discussing the transliteration of English\nnames, not of names from other European languages.** I mention this because,\nfor instance, even though \"Oscar\" as an English name is 「オスカー」 as I stated\nabove, \"Oscar\" as a French name is written 「オスカル」. Likewise, \"Charles\" as an\nEnglish name is 「チャールズ」, but it is 「シャルル」 for the French.\n\n<https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%83%AB%E3%83%AB6%E4%B8%96_(%E3%83%95%E3%83%A9%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B9%E7%8E%8B)>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T01:25:44.457",
"id": "21180",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-07T14:47:01.713",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T14:47:01.713",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21177",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21177 | 21180 | 21180 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Below is a sentence I've come across in a manga that I'm unsure of how to\ntranslate. The context is some girls are watching a voyeur video of one of the\ngirls undressing.\n\n> もう早送りで / よいのでは！ (the / represents a new column of text.)\n\nI think it has something to do with fast-forwarding the video, but I don't\nknow. I'm especially unsure of what the \"のでは\" means. How does the \"は\" particle\nwork at the end of a sentence? Is it supposed to be \"わ\" instead? Any help is\nappreciated. Thanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T08:43:01.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21182",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-18T23:30:57.803",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-18T23:30:15.683",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4113",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particles",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does \"のでは\" mean at the end of a sentence?",
"view_count": 3087
} | [
{
"body": "It is 「は」, not 「わ」. The 「は」 here is of course pronounced 「わ」 because it is a\nparticle.\n\n> 「もう[早送]{はやおく}りでよいのでは！」 ＝\n>\n> 「もう早送りでよいのでは **ないか** (ないだろうか, ないでしょうか, etc.)！」\n\nThe last part is not said but is understood between the speaker and listener.\nThis happens **so very** often in Japanese.\n\n> \"Maybe we should just fast-forward it from here on?\"\n\n「のでは」 is used to make a suggestion.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T09:27:01.790",
"id": "21183",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-18T23:30:57.803",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21182",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
] | 21182 | null | 21183 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Could you tell me when to use:\n\n> こっち、そっち、あっち、どっち?\n\nI don't understand when to use them.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T16:45:04.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21184",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T15:19:46.407",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-20T15:19:46.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "8079",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "How to use こっち、そっち、あっち and どっち",
"view_count": 6209
} | [
{
"body": "* こっち - This way\n * そっち - That way (close)\n * あっち - That way (far)\n * どっち - Which way?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T06:36:18.090",
"id": "21191",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T06:36:18.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8012",
"parent_id": "21184",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "First of all, those are the colloquial forms of こちら、そちら、あちら and どちら,\nrespectively.\n\nFormal or informal, each pair has exactly the same range of meanings.\n\nこっち = this one, this side, this way, over here, **_I, me_** , etc.\n\nそっち = that one, that side, that way, over there, **_you, y'all_** , etc.\n\nあっち = that one, that side, that way, over there, **_he, him, she, her, they,\nthem_** , etc.\n\nどっち = which one (out of the two), which side, which way, **_which person (out\nof the two)_** , etc.\n\n**_IMPORTANT_** : The difference between そっち and あっち is NOT as simple as many\nJ-learners appear to believe, which goes like \"そっち is middle-far and あっち is\nquite far.\" For instance, suppose you are in New York and I am in Tokyo and we\nare talking on the phone.\n\nMe: 「こっちは今日すんげえ寒いんだけど、 **そっち** はどう？」\"It's freakin' cold here today. How 'bout\nover there?\"\n\nYou: 「こっちもめっちゃ寒いよ。」\"Over here as well.\"\n\nNew York is extremely far from Tokyo (Agreed?), but the Tokyo resident would\nonly use 「そっち」, not 「あっち」, to refer to New York when he is directly speaking\nto the New Yorker. (I have seen multiple J-learners who have lived in Japan\nfor over a decade make this particular mistake.)\n\nAfter the phone call, however, the Tokyoite will say to his wife \"(I just\ntalked to Bob the New Yorker.) **あっち** も寒いらしいよ。\" This is because he is talking\nto someone who is right near him on **_his_** side of the world.\n\nCommon phrases using the words in question:\n\n「こっち（に）[来]{き}て！」 = \"Come over here!\"\n\n「どっちがほしい？」 = \"Which one (of the two) do you want?\" You use 「どれ」 instead when\nthere are three choices or more.\n\n「そっちの言いたいことはそれだけ？」 = \"Is that all you've got to say?\"\n\n「それはこっちでやるから、だいじょうぶだよ。」 = \"I'll take care of it myself; Don't you worry!\"\n\n「どっちもどっちだよ/だな。」 = \"The two are equally good/bad/yummy/right/wrong, etc.\"\n\n「どっちかにしてよ。[両方]{りょうほう}は[買]{か}えない。」 = \"Pick one (out of the two). I can't buy\nyou both.\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T08:10:21.967",
"id": "21194",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-23T14:52:36.000",
"last_edit_date": "2020-01-23T14:52:36.000",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21184",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
] | 21184 | null | 21194 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21187",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm not sure if I'm overcomplicating this. I'm talking about events in the\npast, and I want to use relative time markers within that time frame. For\nexample, \"the day after that\", or \"the day before that\", or \"a year later\".\nI'm not sure if I can use 明日【あした】, 昨日【きのう】 and 来年【らいねん】, because as I see it,\nI would be referring to the present timeline, the next day/previous day/next\nyear _for me_. Is this so, or am I overcomplicating it?\n\nIs there a separate set of words for talking about relative time in the past,\nor is this something that is simply understood from context?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T20:57:43.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21186",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T01:41:27.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"time"
],
"title": "How would you talk about relative time in the past?",
"view_count": 340
} | [
{
"body": "There are a few ways to express this.\n\nYou can use 翌{よく} as in:\n\n```\n\n 翌年{よくとし}（orよくねん）\n \n 翌月{よくげつ}\n \n 翌週{よくしゅう}\n \n 翌日{よくじつ}\n \n```\n\nThese means year, month, week, day, following a particular point in time.\n\nOther ways are to use 次の〇 or 前の〇 as in:\n\n```\n\n 次{つぎ}の年{とし} or 前{まえ}の年{とし} （前年{ぜんねん} for more of a 熟語{じゅくご} feel）\n \n```",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T21:15:43.567",
"id": "21187",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-06T21:15:43.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6823",
"parent_id": "21186",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "**Past Perspective:**\n\n> **_Formal_**\n\nAs usual, expect to hear lots of \"on\" sounds.\n\nPreceding time: 「[前]{ぜん} + time word」\n[前年]{ぜんねん}、[前月]{ぜんげつ}、[前週]{ぜんしゅう}、[前日]{ぜんじつ}\n\nSucceeding time: 「[翌]{よく} + time word」 [翌年]{よくねん}、[翌月]{よくげつ}, etc.\n\n> **_Informal_**\n\nThat means lots of \"kun\" sounds.\n\nPreceding time: 「（その）[前]{まえ}の + time word」\n（その）[前]{まえ}の[年]{とし}、[前]{まえ}の[月]{つき}, etc.\n\nSucceeding time: 「（その）[次]{つぎ}の + time word」 （その）[次]{つぎ}の[週]{しゅう}、次の[日]{ひ},\netc.\n\n「その」 is optional but is used frequently.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T01:41:27.923",
"id": "21190",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T01:41:27.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21186",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21186 | 21187 | 21190 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21189",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I am going through song lyrics, and the new grammar and vocab that I learn\nfrom them goes into my studying. One song I came across was “Wolf Boy”\n(ウルフボーイ) by Morning Musume (モーニング娘).\n\nThe first line of the song is:\n\n> 本気に **なれぬ** ウルフボーイ\n\nand is translated to be:\n\n> \"You don't show the real you, wolf boy\"\n\nIs this translation correct? Because I don't know what なれぬ means, and I don't\nunderstand how this translates. Someone please explain it to me. Maybe it's\nslang that I am not getting.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T21:39:00.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21188",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-17T11:13:51.387",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-17T11:13:51.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "8098",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"song-lyrics",
"archaic-language"
],
"title": "What does “本気になれぬ” mean?",
"view_count": 397
} | [
{
"body": "As a literal translation, it's wrong.\n\n> 本気になれぬ \n> ≒本気になれない \n> ≒(You) can't get serious.\n\n(Side note: if you look at the rest of the lyrics, it's pretty clear that at\nleast some of the clauses before 「ウルフボーイ」 don't act as relative clauses, so I\ndon't think the meaning of this line is \"The wolf boy who can't get serious\",\nbut just \"You can't get serious; wolf boy.\")\n\nBut, most song translations are not literal, and rightly so, so expect to find\na lot more things like this if you're trying to learn from them.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-06T22:18:39.417",
"id": "21189",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T01:17:37.233",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-07T01:17:37.233",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "21188",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21188 | 21189 | 21189 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the best way to say \"If you think about it..?\"\n\ni.e. \"If you think about it, this way is better than that way...\"\n\nEspecially when promoting your suggestion as a logically superior suggestion\nthan the person you are talking to or better than the generally accepted group\nopinion. I realise that this may be difficult cultural territory which is why\nI ask.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T06:57:34.730",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21192",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T08:45:23.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "215",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Is there a preferred way to say \"If you think about it..?\"",
"view_count": 953
} | [
{
"body": "A good translation would depend on the subtext, and also the relationship of\nthe speaker and listener. One can say \"If you think about it...\" to present a\nconclusion that the speaker has already thought of, with the (somewhat\ndemeaning) implication that the listener hasn't thought through the issue\nenough to arrive at the same obvious conclusion.\n\nBut it can also be used in a more collaborative way, as if the speaker is\nthinking about it right now and coming to a conclusion on the spot. What\npopped into my head first was 考えてみると... The nuance in Japanese matches the\nsecond situation more closely, in that you are the one who is thinking about\nit and simply presenting that conclusion rather than demanding that the\nlistener think about it.\n\nALC has [a nice\ncollection](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E8%80%83%E3%81%88%E3%81%A6%E3%81%BF%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8)\nof sample sentences including this phrase.\n\nI also referenced a book on tactful speech in Japanese geared towards\nprofessionals for some examples of looser translations which achieve the same\nresult. (できる人の物の言い方大全) I came across the phrase お言葉を返すようですが... which is a\ntactful way of disagreeing with someone in a position of respect.\n\nI hope this helps! I'm very interested in hearing some other perspectives on\nit.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T08:45:23.363",
"id": "21196",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T08:45:23.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7789",
"parent_id": "21192",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21192 | null | 21196 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21195",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking at [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/21186/how-would-you-talk-\nabout-relative-time-in-the-past) and I discovered the word ぜんしゅう (last week).\nI am familiar with せんしゅう, and I was wondering if there is any difference in\nmeaning between them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T07:04:31.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21193",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T08:43:40.313",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9099",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between せんしゅう and ぜんしゅう",
"view_count": 244
} | [
{
"body": "「[先週]{せんしゅう}」 can only mean one thing -- \"last week\", the week before this\nweek. Your stand point is right this moment -- the present.\n\n「[前週]{ぜんしゅう}」 has two meanings:\n\n1) same as 先週.\n\n2) the preceding week of a particular week in the past that one is talking\nabout. Your stand point is in the past, not the present moment. It can be a\nfew weeks ago, many months or even years ago.\n\nYou will always be able to tell from the context which meaning 前週 is being\nused for.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T08:43:40.313",
"id": "21195",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-07T08:43:40.313",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21193",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 21193 | 21195 | 21195 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21199",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My penpal and I were talking about a particular video game and I wanted to\ntell him: _\"The PC version (of the game) has its release date someday next\nmonth and I just can't wait any longer!\"_\n\n> **PC** 版の発売日はいつか来月なの **で** もうこれ以上待てませんよ！\n\nThe above sentence was my attempt, but now that I wrote it I'm not really sure\nif I used 「で」 correctly here. Is there a better/more natural way of saying it,\nnot just the \"and\" part but maybe the whole sentence in general?\n\nI would appreciate any type of feedback/corrections as I'm still a novice.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-07T22:01:23.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21198",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T14:07:16.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5131",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"syntax"
],
"title": "Is it correct to use で in this sentence if I want to convey \"and\"?",
"view_count": 146
} | [
{
"body": "Your translation of \"and\" is not wrong, but your grammatical interpretation\nmay be wrong.\n\n> AはBなので\n\nis\n\n> AはB + 連体形 of 助動詞 \"だ\" + 接続助詞 \"ので\".\n\nHowever, \"ので\" means \"because\", and it may not fit your example. Ending the\nfirst clause with 連用形 (in this case \"で\" from \"だ\") or 接続助詞 \"が\" (in this case\n\"だが\") looks better.\n\nApart from \"and\", \"いつか来月\" does not make sense and should be \"来月のいつか\".\n\nMy translation would be:\n\n> PC版は来月発売ですが、待ち切れません。 \n> I'm very looking forward to playing the PC version, which will be released\n> next month.\n\nor\n\n> PC版が来月発売で、待ち切れません。 \n> As PC version is released soon, I'm always thinking about it.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T00:09:10.740",
"id": "21199",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T14:07:16.033",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-08T14:07:16.033",
"last_editor_user_id": "6554",
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "21198",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21198 | 21199 | 21199 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In Japanese, モブ (short for モブキャラクター) refers to a character who plays a minor\nrole in anime/manga/games -\n[source](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%83%A2%E3%83%96%E3%82%AD%E3%83%A3%E3%83%A9%E3%82%AF%E3%82%BF%E3%83%BC).\nThe same source claims that the etymology is 和製英語 and traces its origin to\nJapanese animators in the 1970's.\n\nIn English, a \"mob\" refers to a type of non-player character in a computer\ngame. According to this\n[source](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mob_%28video_gaming%29#cite_note-bartle-\norigin-2) the term was invented by Richard Bartle as an abbreviation of\n\"mobile object\". I can't find a date for it, but Bartle was born in 1960, so I\nassume the term was coined some number of years after his birth.\n\nThe two words have very similar meanings in both languages but apparently two\ncompletely different etymologies. Is anyone able to come up with additional\nsources that confirm the different etymologies or sources that can refute one\nof the two proposed etymologies?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T01:37:49.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21200",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T13:53:17.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3221",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Etymology of モブ",
"view_count": 4854
} | [
{
"body": "If you look closely, you will see that the article tells you that \"モブ\" indeed\ncomes from the English word \"mob\". But this word had the sense of a\n[crowd](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mob) long before it had the sense of a\nNPC in a video game. In this sense, the \"モブ\" characters were the ones that\nwere drawn in a crowd, for example in sports scenes (cf. second paragraph)\nfrom which the main character would stand out.\n\nThe sense of a NPC came later, and is indeed appropriate for animation but I\nthink we are looking at a coincidence:\n\n * In Japanese the \"crowd of characters\" became a \"featureless character\"\n * For the NPC, their acronym became their name and is the same as the actual word used to describe a crowd.\n\nHowever please note that the etymology of \"mob\" is \"mobile vulgus\" in latin,\nit is thus no coincidence that a \"mobile object\" would be abbreviated in the\nsame way and land on the same word, \"mob\".\n\nCheers !",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T02:31:35.093",
"id": "21202",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T13:53:17.567",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T13:53:17.567",
"last_editor_user_id": "3614",
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"parent_id": "21200",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21200 | null | 21202 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21207",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a question about the meaning of それに in the following passage(second\none). Does it means something like \"To that, after supressing this intense\nsleepiness, Taito said.\" So, this それに refers to the invitation of his friends,\nsame as the first one?\n\n> 「おお、じゃ一緒にやろうよ。これ四人プレイできるから人数が多いほうが楽しい」\n>\n> と誘ってくれて。\n>\n> それに(1st)大兎は、ゲームに参加して、今日は遥のミーティングが終わるのを待とうかなぁ、とかも、考えたが。\n>\n> しかし。\n>\n> 「・・・・・・」\n>\n> しかしそこでまた、あくびが出た。そして強烈な眠気が頭のなかに広がって、まるで寝ろ、寝ろ、寝ろといわれているようで。\n>\n> **それに** (2nd)。その、強烈な眠気を噛み殺すようにしてから、大兎は言った。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T08:08:48.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21203",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T15:12:58.000",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-08T08:41:11.423",
"last_editor_user_id": "3183",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Question about the それに",
"view_count": 1260
} | [
{
"body": "Generally speaking, それに means:\n\n 1. besides, in addition, moreover\n 2. (literally) to it/that, for it/that, against it/that\n\nI think most native speakers instantly try to interpret this second それに in the\nfirst sense. So probably this can be translated as \"Besides.\"\n\nSomething must be omitted after it, but what's omitted cannot be determined,\nas far as I can see in this quoted text. If Taito is worried about something\nnot mentioned here, then that's it (e.g. \"Besides (... he remembered he really\nhas to leave here in 30 minutes)).\n\nBut anyway, as @l'électeur indicated, this text is awkward and far from what I\nexpect in an ordinary novel. Apparently the author [intentionally chose this\nclumsy\nstyle](http://www.amazon.co.jp/review/R1FPO4E6T39TXV/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=4829133473&channel=detail-\nglance&nodeID=465392&store=books), and he tends to [repeat words\nmeaninglessly](http://d.hatena.ne.jp/hobo_king/touch/20081204/1228399418). So\nthis それに may be nothing but an almost meaningless filler to add extra chaos,\nor simulate Taito's confusion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T15:02:57.473",
"id": "21207",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T15:12:58.000",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-08T15:12:58.000",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21203",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21203 | 21207 | 21207 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21205",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider for example [this\narticle](http://www.weeklybiz.us/business/post-13686/) with the following\nheadline.\n\n> 〈ＪＡＬ〉機内食、 **こだわり** の冬メニュー登場\n>\n> 日本航空（ＪＡＬ）は「空の上のレストラン」をコンセプトに展開している機内食「スカイオーベルジュ BEDD（ベッド） by\n> JAL」で12月１日から提供される冬の **こだわり** メニューを発表した。 [...]\n\nWhat is the difference between こだわり and 良い? Both seem to mean \"good\" in\ncertain contexts. But when should you use which?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T08:17:41.387",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21204",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T09:15:26.047",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-08T08:59:18.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "What is the difference between こだわり and 良｛よ｝い?",
"view_count": 1554
} | [
{
"body": "Very different, in short.\n\n「良い」 just means \"good\". It does not say in what way something is good.\n\n「こだわり」 is a noun meaning, in my own words, \"being very selective, paying much\nattention to details, etc.\" . There is a sense of exclusiveness and/or\naesthetics associated with the word. It is often used in advertising.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T09:15:26.047",
"id": "21205",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T09:15:26.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21204",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21204 | 21205 | 21205 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> どうしても入り方にこだわりたいのか...\n\nI'd like to know how 方に works here. I don't think it's read 入{はい}り方{がた}, 'time\nof setting', given the context I have. More likely it's 入り + 方に, since in the\nstory the speaker seems be coerced into entering some kind of contest.\n\nI found [an example on\nTatoeba.org](http://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/107532) of 方{ほう}に\ntranslated as 'made for':\n\n> 彼{かれ}は戸口{とぐち}の方{ほう}に進{すす}んだ \n> 'He made for the door'\n\nMaybe that use of 方に could fit into the sentence in question...",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T17:53:11.690",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21209",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T23:39:33.770",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-08T18:31:47.790",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8025",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "Use of 方に In this sentence",
"view_count": 137
} | [
{
"body": "Pretty sure it's `入{い}り方{かた}`, which here means \"way/means of entering [the\ncontest]\". And `こだわる` here is probably \"insist on, make fuss about\". So, I get\nsomething like:\n\n\"Do you really want to get me into that contest no matter what?\"\n\nCheck a grammar book about the [`～方`\nsuffix](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/6823/).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T19:03:07.147",
"id": "21211",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T19:03:07.147",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3295",
"parent_id": "21209",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "First of all, 「入り方」 is read 「はいりかた」 --「 **か** た」, not 「 **が** た」. It means\n\"how to 入る\".\n\nAlthough OP has not provided enough context, I am going to jump the gun and\npost an answer.\n\n「入る」 here looks like it is being used for its slang meaning of \"to start a\nperformance\". It is used rather heavily in show biz since many performers\nthink the beginning part is important for the success of the rest of their\nperformance.\n\n「～～にこだわる」 means \"to stick to one's way of doing ~~\".\n\nThus, the sentence in question would mean:\n\n\"Do you absolutely have to (or \"want to\") stick to your own way of starting\nyour performance?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T23:39:33.770",
"id": "21216",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-08T23:39:33.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21209",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21209 | null | 21211 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, 入学金 is correct; we can't use 入学費・代・料; that's not 日本語.\n\nBut all of them mean costs for something. Could someone please explain this?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T17:57:01.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21210",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-07T06:49:01.217",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-08T12:30:45.150",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "7343",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"usage",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "What are the differences between 金、料、代、and 費？",
"view_count": 6192
} | [
{
"body": "The top few pages of Google search result already contain lots of fruitful\nanswers, only if you can read them:\n\n[「…代」と「…料」はどう使い分けますか？](http://homepage3.nifty.com/recipe_okiba/nifongo/060.htm)\n(Japanese) \n[中上級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック](https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=0eprLex8sr0C&lpg=PA533&ots=4KFix_xBnG&dq=%E9%87%91%20%E6%96%99%20%E8%B2%BB%20%E4%BB%A3%20%E8%B3%83&hl=ja&pg=PA533#v=onepage&q=%E9%87%91%20%E6%96%99%20%E8%B2%BB%20%E4%BB%A3%20%E8%B3%83&f=false)\n(Japanese) \n[JeckGroup](https://www.facebook.com/jeckgroup/posts/387185661362484)\n(Vietnamese)\n\nThe following is basically a summary of them in English, plus what little I\nknow.\n\n* * *\n\n`～金`: \nA general term for money in specific situations, not necessarily in exchange\nfor something, might even not cost. It's a fallback option when none of the\nrest could apply.\n\n> 保証金, 入学金, お祝い金, 所持金, 補助金, 契約金, 敷金, 賠償金\n\n`～料`: \nCharge or fee for activities done, typically charged by organizations with a\npredetermined amount of money.\n\n> 授業料, 手数料, 送料, 使用料, サービス料, 通行料, キャンセル料\n\n`～代`: \nPrice or charge in exchange for concrete (doesn't mean tangible) items. Most\nwidely used.\n\n> 食事代, 飲み代, タバコ代, バス代, バイト代, 電気代, 地代, 修理代\n\n`～費`: \nOverall expenses for specific activities, not used for detailed items.\n\n> 医療費, 交通費, 学費, 生活費, 食費, 参加費\n\n**BONUS**\n\n`～賃`: \nFare or transportation fees, otherwise limited to a small number of idiomatic\nexpressions.\n\n> 運賃, 電車賃, 家賃, 工賃, 手間賃\n\n`～料金`: \nSimilar to `代` or `料`, just preferred in charges for constant everyday\nservices.\n\n> 通話料金, 電気料金, 高速料金, 基本料金\n\n* * *\n\nSo, your `入学金` is a good example of unspecified expenditure. Not only you in\nJapan wonder why and for what they have to pay it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T19:37:40.857",
"id": "21212",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-07T06:49:01.217",
"last_edit_date": "2016-03-07T06:49:01.217",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21210",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21210 | null | 21212 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that adding お makes it honorific, but I want to know how they're used\ndifferently.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T20:16:46.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21213",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T02:16:08.917",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-08T20:35:28.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "9109",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"honorifics",
"food"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 酒 and お酒?",
"view_count": 738
} | [
{
"body": "As I'm not a native speaker, my opinion is hardly useful. However, here are\nlinks that probably have the answer that you want:\n\nAs per the accepted answer to [using 美化語{びかご} in 謙譲語{けんじょうご} verb forms does\nnot make sense,\nright?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12891/using-%E7%BE%8E%E5%8C%96%E8%AA%9E-in-%E8%AC%99%E8%AD%B2%E8%AA%9E-verb-\nforms-does-not-make-sense-right), your assertion that \" _I know that adding お\nmakes it honorific, but ..._ \" does not seem correct. A native speaker\ndiscussion of what is, is not, 敬語 can be watched at\n[www.bunka.go.jp/keigo](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/keigo/chapter1/index.html)\n\nAs per the accepted answer to [a few words have an honorific 「お」or「ご」 as a\nnecessary prefix,\nright?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13081/a-few-words-have-\nan-honorific-%E3%81%8A-or-%E3%81%94-as-a-necessary-prefix-right)、\"酒{さけ}\" might\nbe getting lexicalized into \"お酒\" for writing. But, saying \"さけ\" seems not\nuncommon (see comments section below). I, myself, have never heard \"酒\" spoken\nwithout 美化語. Likewise, I've never seen \"酒\" written without 美化語。 I'd say that\nsaying \"お酒\" is correct in any context. Can't go wrong with it.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T23:22:02.467",
"id": "21215",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T02:16:08.917",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"parent_id": "21213",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21213 | null | 21215 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21217",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I can't find an explanation on the web and I only can guess what it means.\n\nThe context is this: 幽霊とか見えたりするのか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-08T23:20:38.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21214",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T22:32:57.063",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T21:31:33.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "9112",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "What verb form is \"見えたり する\" and what does it mean?",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "> 「[幽霊]{ゆうれい}とか[見]{み}えたりするのか？」\n\n\" Verb in [連用形]{れんようけい} + たり + する\" is a very common **_informal_** phrase\nmeaning \"to do things like ~~\".\n\nIt becomes even more informal and colloquial when combined with another\ninformal word like 「とか」.\n\n\"Can you (perhaps) see ghosts and such?\"\n\nIt is asking if the other person has extrasensory perception.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T00:27:51.397",
"id": "21217",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T00:27:51.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "The ～たり～たりする construction is used to show that the preceding actions or states\nare examples among a larger list of possible actions and states. When used\nwith a single action/state, as in your sentence, the speaker does not\nnecessarily have other examples in mind, but is merely using the ～たりする\nconstruction to be vague and indirect.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T22:32:57.063",
"id": "21234",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T22:32:57.063",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9118",
"parent_id": "21214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21214 | 21217 | 21217 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I've recently started learning the passive form of verbs and noticed a few\ndifferent usages of particles that have been giving me a lot of trouble and I\nwanted to clarify/confirm.\n\nFrom what I've gathered from my book and this site, when を is used with the\npassive form of a verb it implies that a person (subject marked with は) was\naffected in some way by the individual acting out the verb (marked with に）。\n\n 1. 僕は妹に日記を読まれました。 \n→ My sister read my diary and it has bothered me.\n\n 2. 僕は妹に部屋を掃除された。 \n→ My little sister cleaned my room.\n\nFrom my understanding because 日記 and 部屋 are marked with を it adds the\nimplication that the subject/topic of the sentence (僕) is the owner of the 日記\nand 部屋 since he was affected by his little sister acting out the verb. Is this\ncorrect?\n\nHowever, I have seen examples where the subject (marked with が) seems to be\nthe object/undergoes the change carried out by the verb instead of being\nmarked with を. (Both the subject and the direct object can undergo the\nchange?)\n\n 3. 日記が妹に読まれました。 \n→ The diary was read by my little sister.\n\n 4. 部屋が妹に掃除された。 \n→ The room has been cleaned by my little sister.\n\nIn example 3 and 4, from my understanding these examples imply that the diary\nwas read by the sister and the room was cleaned by the sister (diary and room\nundergoing the change), However since these are NOT tagged with 僕は(or some\nother individual) it is not implied that these do not belong to someone else.\nI.E. The diary being read and the room being cleaned do NOT affect an unnamed\nindividual. And because of this from my understanding sentence 3.) and 4.)\nwould be essentially the same in meaning as 5.) and 6.), basically this is\njust another way of saying the same thing?\n\n 5. 妹は日記を読みました。 \n→ My little sister read the diary.\n\n 6. 妹は部屋を掃除した。 \n→ My little sister cleaned the room.\n\nIs this correct?\n\nFinally there's no way that を in examples 1 and 2 can be replaced with が to\nmake an equivalent sentence is there?\n\n 7. 僕は妹に日記が読まれました。 \n→ My sister read my diary and it has bothered me.\n\n 8. 僕は妹に部屋が掃除された。 \n→ My little sister cleaned my room.\n\nDo sentences 7 and 8 make any sense or are they unnatural and grammatically\nincorrect? Can が and を be used interchangeably at all in these types of\nsentences?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T02:23:42.110",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21218",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T01:46:57.137",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T21:29:38.107",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "4385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"conjugations",
"particle-を",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "は/が and を with the Passive form",
"view_count": 2857
} | [
{
"body": "Either 日記が妹に読まれた or 僕は妹に日記が読まれた sound a slip up of …日記を…, otherwise they sound\nunnatural. (People won't find it so much odd as a slip up.) The structure\nitself can be used in other examples like この国では日記が多くの人に読まれている, but that\nspecific example is not natural.\n\nYou wrote \"it implies that a person (subject marked with は) was affected\", but\nthat doesn't necessarily mean it should be は, the subject marked with は is\nonly a result of topicalization. In other words, without topicalization, it's\nが like 私が妹に日記をよまれたら in a conditional clause.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T07:19:50.347",
"id": "21221",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T07:19:50.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21218",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I agree with all your logic except for example #2. When using the the passive\nwith を, it's only for a negative, or undesirable effect. If someone cleans\nyour room, 99% of the time it's them doing you a favour, so the passive + を\ndoes not work for this case. In that case you'd say\n\n> * 僕は妹 **に** 部屋を掃除 **してもらった** 。 → My little sister cleaned my room (for\n> me).\n> * 妹 **が** 部屋を掃除 **してくれた** 。 → Same\n>\n\nIf it were a weird scenario where you were this huge slob who preferred living\nin your filth, and then your sister upset you by cleaning that all up, then\npassive + を _would_ work, but there would be plenty of other context words and\nsentences to convey this unusual situation.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T16:27:07.900",
"id": "21229",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T01:46:57.137",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-15T01:46:57.137",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21218",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> _From my understanding because 日記 and 部屋 are marked with を it adds the\n> implication that the subject/topic of the sentence (僕) is the owner of the\n> 日記 and 部屋 since he was affected by his little sister acting out the verb. Is\n> this correct?_\n\nYes. But maybe your understanding about why it works in that way is not enough\ncorrect. 僕は in your example #1 and #2 is a topicalization of underlying 僕が,\nwhich is clear if you put these sentences into subordinate clauses.\n\n> 1'. 僕 **が** 妹に日記を読まれたのは、先週でした。 \n> 2'. 僕 **が** 妹に部屋を掃除されたのは、先週でした。 \n> \"It was last week that ...\"\n\nAs you can see, it's essentially the same composition as your #3 and #4.\n\n> _However since these are NOT tagged with 僕は(or some other individual) it is\n> not implied that these do not belong to someone else. I.E. The diary being\n> read and the room being cleaned do NOT affect an unnamed individual._\n\nAs an aside, this statement may not always be true. We often omit the known\nparticipants in discourse, so hearers usually bear the possibility in mind.\nMoreover, lack of topic in your examples makes them more suspicious of\nexistence of hidden topic. (Besides, is it likely that a diary already written\nbelongs to nobody?)\n\n> _And because of this from my understanding sentence 3.) and 4.) would be\n> essentially the same in meaning as 5.) and 6.), basically this is just\n> another way of saying the same thing?_\n\nNot really. Japanese language is quite strict on [animacy\nhierarchy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animacy), that prefers human, animal,\n(maybe robot,) and other \"alive\" things for the subject of a sentence. It's\nnot impossible to override, but doing so needs reasonable cause.\n`日記が多くの人に読まれている` in user4092's answer is valid, because in this case `多くの人` is\nalmost impersonal that not worth focussing if you're talking about the diary.\nYour examples, especially #3 is pretty hard to come up with an appropriate\nsituation at first glance, unless that you're an undercover using the diary as\nan important secret communication tool or something.\n\n> _Do sentences 7 and 8 make any sense or are they unnatural and grammatically\n> incorrect? Can が and を be used interchangeably at all in these types of\n> sentences?_\n\nVery unnatural. The only possible interpretation of #7 and #8 is that 僕は is an\n\"true\" は, as in `象は鼻が長い` \"Elephants have long trunks\", but then the semantics\ncould be bizarre: did he suffer some physical damage, or the stigma of \"man\nwhose diary is read by his sister\"?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T10:52:01.930",
"id": "21261",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T11:25:37.967",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T11:25:37.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21218",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21218 | null | 21261 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21241",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am interested in kanji variants. Please consider these three variant pairs:\n\n(normal kanji) 剣 ---> (variant) 劍 \n(normal kanji) 海 ---> (variant) 海 \n(normal kanji) 器 ---> (variant) 器\n\nAre「劍道」、「海外」、「器械」even considered words? Or, for native speakers, are kanji\nvariants a not so important side-note to the language?\n\nIf native speakers do pay some attention to kanji variants, then do the\ndefinitions change at all? \n「剣道{けんどう}」の定義{ていぎ} = 「劍道」の定義? \n「海外{かいがい}」の定義 = 「海外」の定義? \n「器械{きかい}」の定義 = 「器械」の定義?\n\nHow do you say \"kanji variant\" in Japanese? \nAre kanji variants tested for on 漢字検定試験？What level?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T04:40:56.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21220",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T22:02:58.967",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T11:16:30.813",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "due to kanji variants, are 器械、海外、劍道 even words?",
"view_count": 286
} | [
{
"body": "More precisely, they are older forms ([旧字体]{きゅうじたい}) of kanji, rather than\nvariants.\n\nJapanese kanji went through an artificial simplification conducted by the\ngovernment in 1950s. Now old forms are no longer in use, except occasionally\nin proper nouns they could be used for the purpose of kind of characterizing\nor \"flavoring\" the names. Most people can still read them, but no one uses\nthem in their daily writings or printings. Schools no longer teach them\neither.\n\nYou can learn details about the simplification here:\n<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinjitai>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-10T09:46:11.867",
"id": "21241",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T22:02:58.967",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-10T22:02:58.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "21220",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21220 | 21241 | 21241 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Good day to everyone.\n\nI've been wondering on how you say 'looks like' or 'appears like' but not on\nterms of similarity. It is asking for a description or appearance on an\nobject.\n\nFor example: \"What does your sister look like?\" \"What does your new home look\nlike?\"\n\nI've been looking around and usually I only find the word ~みたい or よう, but I\nthink ~みたい and よう is to express similarity or things that are still abstract\nor used in prediction.\n\nI was thinking of using どんな見える but I'm not sure. Like あなたの新しい家はどんな見えるんですか。\n\nIs that correct? Or is there any other preferred word to ask it? Thank you in\nadvance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T07:26:05.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21222",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T09:37:25.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9114",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to ask the 'looks like' or appearance of something?",
"view_count": 11235
} | [
{
"body": "Some possibilities (although many more exist):\n\n * Use 見{み}た目{め}: \"見た目はどう(なん)ですか？\"\n\n * If you want to use 見える{みえる}, combine it with ふう (from 風{ふう}): \"どんなふうに見える？\" (or \"どういうふうに見える？\")\n\n * A bit more vague and subjective, bot very commonly heard is 感じ{かんじ}: \"どんな感じですか？\". Also goes well with 見{み}た目{め}: \"見た目はどんな感じですか？\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T07:52:14.450",
"id": "21223",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T08:07:24.483",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T08:07:24.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "21222",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Saying the seemingly simple sentence \"What does (something) look like?\" in\nJapanese appears to be very difficult for English-speaking Japanese-learners\nas far as my own experience with them goes.\n\nThe major reason for that, according to none other than my own observation, is\nthat they will try to use a verb or verb phrase that sounds like \"to look\" or\n\"to look like\" and therefore, will tend to end up using 「[見]{み}える」.\nUnfortunately, that is a word that is **_not_** used in the natural-sounding\nways to say \"What does (something) look like?\"\n\nSome learners might argue that verb phrases such as 「～～ように見える」 and 「～～みたいに見える」\nare often used by native speakers. They actually are, but here is the\nimportant difference. In OP's question, **_\"What does your sister look\nlike?\"_** and **_\"What does your new home look like?\"_** clearly are questions\nasked by **someone who has not seen** the sister or the new home,\nrespectively.\n\nIf one used 「どう見える」,「どのように見える」, etc., it would be a question asking for\nsomeone's impression or opinion of a thing that he surely has seen before or\neven that he is standing in front of right now.\n\nThis is why native speakers do not use 「見える」 in saying \"What does your sister\nlook like?\" or \"What does your new home look like?\"\n\nNatural ways to say those would be:\n\n「お[姉]{ねえ}さん（or [妹]{いもうと}さん）って、[外見]{がいけん}はどんな[感]{かん}じなの？」\n\n「お姉さんは[見]{み}た[目]{め}はどんな感じなんですか。」\n\n「[新]{あたら}しいおうちってどんな[外観]{がいかん}なの？」\n\n「新しいおうちの外観はどんな感じなんですか。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T02:27:11.833",
"id": "21300",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T09:37:25.673",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-15T09:37:25.673",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21222",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21222 | null | 21300 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Pretty sure I've mostly seen idea as アイデア\n\nDoes anyone know of other words used for 'idea' and if possible any example\nsentences and contexts where different words are used?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T12:39:13.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21224",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-30T08:37:51.913",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-11T08:55:48.937",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "7073",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "What is the most common word used for 'idea'?",
"view_count": 3703
} | [
{
"body": "Use **アイディア** (or アイデア) when it's replaceable with _resolution_ , _suggestion_\n, etc. If you really want to avoid loanwords, you can use \"(良い)考え\".\n\n> What shall we do? Do you have any _idea_? \n> 何しよう? 何か **アイディア** ある?\n>\n> An _idea_ is something that solves multiple problems at once. -- Shigeru\n> Miyamoto \n> [**アイデア**\n> というのは複数の問題を一気に解決するものである](http://www.1101.com/iwata/2007-08-31.html) -- 宮本茂\n\nUse **概念【がいねん】** (or 考え方) when it's replaceable with _concept_ , _way of\nunderstanding it_ , etc. コンセプト may also be a good translation, I think.\n\n> The basic _idea_ of Darwin's theory of evolution is that all species of\n> organisms arise and develop through the natural selection ... \n> ダーウィンの進化論の基本的な **考え方/概念/コンセプト** は、すべての生物種は自然淘汰を経て発生・発達し…\n\nUse **イデア** when it refers to the [Plato's\ntheory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms).\n\n> According to the theory of _Ideas_ , non-material abstract forms (or _ideas_\n> ), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation,\n> possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality. \n> **イデア** 論によれば、我々が感覚を通じて知っている変化する物質世界ではなく、非物質的・抽象的な形式、すなわち **イデア**\n> が、最も重要かつ基礎的な実在である。\n\n'Idea' in a sentence like this is very difficult to translate using a noun:\n\n> Do you have any _idea_ what I am talking about? \n> 私が何を言っているのか **分かる** か? (or **理解している** か?)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-10T12:42:50.350",
"id": "21243",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T16:40:02.507",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21224",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 21224 | null | 21243 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to Denshi Jisho, they mean \"supplementation\" but I wonder if there\nis any difference in their nuances.\n\nHere are some examples where they are used:\n\n 1. 小まめに **補給** することが大切です。\n 2. 職員の欠員を **補充** するために広告を出した。\n 3. この件について **補足** の説明をさせてください。\n 4. 学校での教育を **補完** する役割が塾にはある。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T13:55:23.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21225",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T07:21:14.953",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T21:28:13.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "4422",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 補給, 補充, 補足, 補完?",
"view_count": 682
} | [
{
"body": "They're quite different words. Grammatically, all of them are used as verbs\nwith `～する`.\n\n**`補充`** is better translated as _to replenish_ , that is to refill something\nwhen the number/amount of them have decreased.\n\n**`補給`** is a special case of `補充`, whose replenishment is intended for\nimmediate consumption. Typical ones I imagine are water for marathon runners,\nand ammo for front-line soldiers. You can use `補充` instead of `補給`, but not\nnecessarily vice versa.\n\nIf `補給` is used without object, it's usually considered as _to take\nnourishment_.\n\n**`補足`** is _to add words as afterthoughts_. You can only use it for adding\ninformation.\n\n**`補完`** is _to complement with something obverse_.\n\n* * *\n\n**Supplementation on krnk's comment:** \n`補填` is _to make good a deficit_ , and `補償` is _to compensate (for a damage)_.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-10T14:41:59.033",
"id": "21246",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T07:21:14.953",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-26T07:21:14.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21225",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21225 | null | 21246 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21227",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Tonight I went to a sushi restaurant. It's called かね喜{き} as is visible on\ntheir inkan and in the company name.\n\nHowever, on their [website](http://sushi-kaneki.co.jp/) it seems calligraphied\ndifferently but maybe I am just bad at identifying handwriting.\n\nEven more strange is the sign there that does not look like 喜 at all.\nAccording to the website it seems to be the way the sushi bar of the chain are\ncalled, but that does not help with why it is written this way.\n\n\n\nCan anyone help me ? I have looked around in my phone (Aedict) on on Weblio,\nto no avail.\n\nThanks a lot !",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T14:12:54.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21226",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-03T16:04:25.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"handwriting"
],
"title": "What is this kanji ? Looks like 七 three times",
"view_count": 730
} | [
{
"body": "That is the [草書体]{そうしょたい} (= \"cursive script\") for the kanji 「喜」, meaning\n\"happiness\", \"delight\", etc.\n\n[http://image.search.yahoo.co.jp/search?rkf=2&ei=UTF-8&p=%E5%96%9C+%E8%8D%89%E6%9B%B8%E4%BD%93](http://image.search.yahoo.co.jp/search?rkf=2&ei=UTF-8&p=%E5%96%9C+%E8%8D%89%E6%9B%B8%E4%BD%93)\n\nThis is the reason that one's 77th birthday is called 「[喜寿]{きじゅ}」.\n\nMore technically speaking, though, it is the \"re-block-ized\" and stylized form\nof the original cursive script for 「喜」. The original cursive is shown at top\nleft of the web page above.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T14:25:22.773",
"id": "21227",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-03T15:06:52.403",
"last_edit_date": "2020-01-03T15:06:52.403",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21226",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
},
{
"body": "㐂 U+3402 is indeed a non-standard form of 喜 U+559C and is graphically made of\n七 U+4E03 three times.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0uVXi.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-01-03T16:04:25.370",
"id": "73709",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-03T16:04:25.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36477",
"parent_id": "21226",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21226 | 21227 | 21227 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My parents are not Japanese but they named my sister and me with Japanese\nnames for the meanings they had: \nMariko - Child of Truth \nMidori - Youthful Immortal.\n\nWith these definitions as guidance, can anyone help me to find Kanji for our\nnames? My sister has also named her daughter Emiko - Graceful child - and it\nwould be very special for us to have the Kanji for our names.\n\nI have tried a few searches but not found what I was looking for.\n\nMany thanks in advance for any assistance you can offer - particularly if you\nknow anyone (or are anyone) called Mariko, Midori or Emiko! I am a lady, by\nthe way, not a man :)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T16:20:14.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21228",
"last_activity_date": "2020-10-26T01:19:47.633",
"last_edit_date": "2020-10-26T01:19:47.633",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9115",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji",
"names"
],
"title": "My name is Midori, but I have never known the Kanji",
"view_count": 4410
} | [
{
"body": "I'm pretty sure Mariko is [真]{ma}[理]{ri}[子]{ko} ([真理]{shinri}=truth, 子=child).\nEmiko is probably [恵]{e}[美]{mi}[子]{ko} (恵=blessing, grace, etc. 美=beauty). As\nfor Midori, I have no idea. We have\n[[緑]{midori}](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%B7%91#Kanji),\n[美]{mi}[登]{do}[里]{ri}, [翠]{midori} etc., but none of them would mean \"Youthful\nimmortal\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T18:04:20.833",
"id": "21231",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-09T18:23:50.553",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-09T18:23:50.553",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "Since \"youthful immortal\" is not a common reading for the name \"Midori,\" if\nyou have the opportunity to ask your parents their intended kanji, that would\nbe the easiest route.\n\nThe main kanji for Midori is 緑 (meaning greenery, or the color green). There\nare a few obsolete kanji variations on it that hold the same meaning. Another\npossible combination that my Japanese grandmother gave is 美＋鳥＝美鳥 (beautiful\nbird).\n\nI am a Japanese American with Midori as my middle name. My Japanese\ngrandmother's name was Mitsu but she used Midori as her nickname/stage name.\nShe gave my mother Midori for a middle name, and then my mother gave it to me.\nMy grandmother immigrated to America in an era where most women's names were\nwritten in katakana with no kanji (most of the women in our family registry\nhave katakana-only names). When my mother was a child, she asked her mom how\nto write her name in Japanese. My grandmother wrote it down in katakana (ミドリ),\ntelling her it meant either \"green\" or \"beautiful bird.\" My mother wrote some\nletters to Japanese relatives and signed them in katakana. When she went to\nuniversity, she took a Japanese course for the first time and learned about\nthe existence of kanji; she felt terribly embarrassed, assuming that she had\nbeen signing her name incorrectly. She assumed that her mother had intended\nfor her name to have a kanji but that she had simply not bothered to teach her\nhow to write it (since katakana is easier to write). Only when she was about\n60 years old she found out that her mother's name had only been in katakana\nand, therefore, her name is most likely to have been intended to be in only\nkatakana: which was the prevalent custom in Japan at the time that my\ngrandmother emigrated. Since my mother gave me my middle name during those\nyears in which she assumed she had a kanji but just didn't know which one it\nwas, I take it that she wanted me to have a kanji. So when I started studying\nJapanese I chose 緑 for myself, since my favorite color has always been green.\nHowever, after I moved to Japan, the Japanese do not consider my middle name\nto have a kanji because my American passport does not have kanji in it, so\nthey write my middle name as ミドリ as if it were a foreign word in all legal\ndocuments.\n\nAll that to say, you could choose to write your name as ミドリ in katakana. It is\nnot a dumbing-down or kiddy way as my mother had thought, but rather a more\nhistorical way of writing female names, and if you immigrated to Japan\nsomeday, they would most likely not recognize your name as having any kanji.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-11T02:24:20.100",
"id": "21250",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-11T02:24:20.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4547",
"parent_id": "21228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 21228 | null | 21250 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21237",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Consider the two questions:\n\n> 1. せんせいの しつもんに なんと こたえました\n> 2. せんせいの しつもんに どう こたえました\n>\n\nI hope they both mean \"How did you answer the teacher's question?\" \nA previous question on this site suggested that なんと should be translated as\n\"as what\" and どう should translate as \"in what manner\". \nSo am I right in thinking that the expected response to questions 1) and 2)\nshould be different? Let's say the question the teacher asked was \"what animal\nis that?\" \nIf I was asked\n\n> せんせいの しつもんに なんと こたえました\n\nthen I would answer with \"I said it's a dog\" for example. But if I was asked\n\n> せんせいの しつもんに どう こたえました\n\n, then I would answer with \"I answered the teacher politely\" or \"I answered\nher in a rude manner\". \nIs this correct, or have I completely misunderstood the difference between the\ntwo words? \nThanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T19:21:41.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21232",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-12T16:54:02.097",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-12T16:54:02.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "なんと versus どう usage",
"view_count": 2288
} | [
{
"body": "For educational purposes, I am taking the liberty of adding 「か」 at the end of\nthe sentences in question. In informal speech, the question marker is indeed\noften dropped, but in this case, the sentences are clearly not informal or\ncolloquial enough to drop it.\n\n> 1)「せんせいの しつもんに **なんと** こたえましたか。」\n>\n> 2)「せんせいの しつもんに **どう** こたえましたか。」\n\n1) can only mean one thing -- \"What was your answer to your teacher's\nquetion?\" (Not a literal translation. Literal TL is difficult here.) It asks,\n\"What did you say?\"\n\n2) can **_technically_** mean two things.\n\n 1. Same as 1).\n\n 2. \"In what manner did you answer your teacher's question.\"\n\nIn real life settings, however, sentence 2) would be used for the same meaning\nas sentence 1) well over 95% of the time by native speakers.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-10T00:00:44.203",
"id": "21237",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T07:53:52.090",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-10T07:53:52.090",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21232",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "\"なんと\" originates from \"何と\", and '何' means 'what'. \"どう\" is about 'how'.\n\nSo it would be better to consider if it is about what or how, although they\ncan be used interchangeably. If it is about how, \"なんと\" may/can not be used\ndepending on the verbs to use with.\n\nIf it is about saying/writing/reading, such as in the case of this question,\nthey would be interchangeable.\n\n * せんせい は えいご で なんと いう \n * せんせい は えいご で どう いう\n\nI Would translate both 'How to say Sensei in English?\n\nHowever if it is about how to make, how to handle, how to eat, etc it should\nbe \"どう\".\n\nすし は どう たべる？ (How to eat sushi?)\n\nThis should be \"どう\" and cannot be \"なんと\".",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T10:58:20.777",
"id": "21262",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T22:04:11.207",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T22:04:11.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "9135",
"owner_user_id": "9135",
"parent_id": "21232",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21232 | 21237 | 21237 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 強い風だから全然聞けなかった\n\nTranslation:\n\n> Because Of The Strong Wind (I:Implied) Could Not Hear At All.\n\nIs This Right?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T21:20:23.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21233",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T07:25:22.603",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-10T07:25:22.603",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9117",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "強い風だから全然聞けなかった Translation Help",
"view_count": 101
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, you are correct.\n\nIn the real Japanese-speaking world, however, it would be more natural to say\n「[聞]{き}こえなかった」 than to say 「聞けなかった」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-10T00:29:43.750",
"id": "21238",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T00:29:43.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21233",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21233 | null | 21238 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21236",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The sentence is 出口が無けりゃ作るまでよ.\n\nI'm pretty sure it means something along the lines of \"If there is not a door,\njust make one\" It confuses me because 出口が無けりゃ should mean \"If there is not a\ndoor\" and 作るまでよ should mean \"until you make it\".\n\nPlease tell me your translation and explain how まで is used in this situation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T23:06:53.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21235",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-11T07:24:44.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7872",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Use of まで in this sentence",
"view_count": 268
} | [
{
"body": "From <http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/208999/m1u/%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A7/>\n\n> ３ 動作・事柄がもうそれ以上には及ばず、それに限られる意を表す。…だけ。\n>\n> 「気に入らなければ断るまでさ」 \n> 「念のために聞いてみたまでだ」\n\nshould be able to see how it's used from those two examples.\n\nTranslation: If there's no way out then all you need to do is make one.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-09T23:22:14.810",
"id": "21236",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-10T03:33:35.153",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-10T03:33:35.153",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"parent_id": "21235",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21235 | 21236 | 21236 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Very often I'll see a whole sentence said/written but then another sentence\nwith けど at the end that is related to the previous sentence.\n\ne.g.\n\n> この広い中庭には、あの校舎以外にも実技訓練や試験などが行われる闘技場や、様々な儀式の行われる大聖堂などが存在している。\n>\n> まあ、休み時間なんかにそこらの芝生とかで休んでる学生も多いけ **れど** 。\n\nOut of the 7 definitions in\n[大辞林](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%81%91%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A9%E3%82%82&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_keredomo_-020):\n\n> 一 （ 接助 ） \n> 活用語の終止形に接続する。\n>\n> 1. ある事柄に，それと逆の，または関係のうすい事柄を結びつける。 「登りは苦しい－，山頂はすばらしい」 「ちょっと淋しそうな顔だ－，美しい人だ」\n>\n> 2. 前置きを本題に結びつける。 「つまらない物です－，お受け取りください」 「勝手な言い分です－，帰らせてください」\n>\n> 3. 二つの事柄を単に結びつける。 「本が届いている－，支払いはすんだの」 「日本の象徴という－，富士山はほんとにすばらしい」\n>\n>\n\n>\n> 二 （ 終助 ） \n> 活用語の終止形に接続する。\n>\n> 1. 事実とは反対の事柄を願う気持ちを表す。 「もうすこし背が高いといいのだ－」\n>\n> 2. 実現しそうにない，はかない願いを表す。 「ちょっとでも晴れてくれるとありがたい－」\n>\n> 3. 軽蔑し，軽んじる気持ちを添える。 「どうせろくなことはあるまい－」\n>\n> 4. はっきり言わず，遠回しに述べる気持ちを表す。 「そろそろお時間です－」\n> 〔くだけた言い方では，「けれど」「けども」「けど」などの形で使われることが多い〕\n>\n>\n\nWhich suits the usage seen here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-10T22:16:58.587",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21248",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T14:12:24.433",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-11T00:15:27.790",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9127",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "what is this usage of けど?",
"view_count": 703
} | [
{
"body": "There could be a couple of different ways to explain the 「けれど」 in the context\nin question, but mine would be the following.\n\nIt is the case of [接続助詞]{せつぞくじょし} for the definition/usage #1 but used as a\n[終助詞]{しゅうじょし} as far as positioning in the sentence.\n\n> 「ある[事柄]{ことがら}に，それと[逆]{ぎゃく}の，または[関係]{かんけい}のうすい事柄を[結]{むす}びつける。」\n>\n> My TL of that is: \"Linking a matter to another that is contrary to or\n> remotely related to it\"\n\nThe passage provided is about the \"original & official\" purposes of the\n[中庭]{なかにわ} = \"courtyard\" and how it is actuallly often used on a daily basis.\n\nOriginal: Use for practical training, examinations, ceremonies, etc.\n\nActual: Place for students to lie down during breaks.\n\nSince there exists a wide gap between the two, 「けれど」 is used to connect them.\nAs you stated at the beginning, this usage of 「けど」、「けれど」, etc. is\n_**extremely**_ common.\n\nFor comparison, it is close in nuance to the word \"though\" in English when it\nis attached to the end of a sentence in informal speech.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-11T00:56:36.223",
"id": "21249",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-11T07:23:26.290",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Both for this case, I believe, because:\n\nThe courtyard in itself serves as the place for trainings, examinations and\nceremonies, which are dedicated or meaningful activities. Then this 'けど' adds\n\"それと逆の，または関係のうすい事柄\" (opposite/less related) activities by students to take a\nrest or be lazy.\n\nThis is related with:\n\n> ある事柄に，それと逆の，または関係のうすい事柄を結びつける。 「登りは苦しい－，山頂はすばらしい」 「ちょっと淋しそうな顔だ－，美しい人だ」\n\n\"まあ、… けれど。\" is used to express a cynical feeling, in this case, the place does\nnot always serve the original purpose and is used by some students to take a\nrest.\n\nThis is related with:\n\n> 軽蔑し，軽んじる気持ちを添える。 「どうせろくなことはあるまい－」\n\nOther examples of \"まあ、… けれど。\" I think of.\n\n * 今年中に売上高100億を達成することになっている。まあ、絵に描いた餅だと思うけれどね\n * We are supposed to achieve the total sale of 100 million yen, although I suspect it would be a pie in the sky.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T10:05:24.587",
"id": "21260",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T14:12:24.433",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T14:12:24.433",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9135",
"parent_id": "21248",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21248 | null | 21249 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21254",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could anyone please help me identify the font used in the image below? (The\nwords read 千羽鶴 - or Senbazuru). Thank you very much!\n\n",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-11T09:32:20.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21252",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-11T10:33:57.490",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9130",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"writing-identification",
"typesetting"
],
"title": "Which font is used here?",
"view_count": 331
} | [
{
"body": "行書体 refers to a style of handwriting, or calligraphy font family simulating\nsuch handwriting in general. Not the name of one specific font.\n\nYou can browse many samples of Japanese 行書体/毛筆体 fonts here:\n\n * [List of 行書体](http://www.fontfactory.jp/font/list/?fontcategory_id=9&fontbrand_id=&fontweight_id=&os_id=&fonttype_id=&str=&preview_str=%E5%8D%83%E7%BE%BD%E9%B6%B4)\n * [List of 筆文字](http://www.fontfactory.jp/font/list/?fontcategory_id=17&fontbrand_id=&fontweight_id=&os_id=&fonttype_id=&str=&preview_str=%E5%8D%83%E7%BE%BD%E9%B6%B4)\n\nUnfortunately, none of them exactly matches the image you provided. Are you\nsure this image is actually rendered from a computer 'font', installed in\nsomeone's computer?\n\nAnyway, if you only need a similar font, I think\n[昭和龍神書体](http://www.fontfactory.jp/font/detail/kswryujin2/) looks quite\nsimilar.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-11T10:23:38.340",
"id": "21254",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-11T10:23:38.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21252",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21252 | 21254 | 21254 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is a significant amount of research relating to tonogenesis -- the\nmechanisms by which a toneless parent language develops tone. But what about\nthe genesis of pitch accent?\n\nFor instance, the falling tone in Middle Chinese is regularly derived from a\nreconstructed final *-s in Old Chinese (which is thought to have been\ntoneless).\n\nIn historical Japanese linguistics, is pitch accent thought to have been part\nof the language from its earliest attested stages? Or is pitch accent thought\nto have arisen later?\n\nAlso, I appreciate that the realisation of pitch accent in Japanese varies by\ndialect. Is the pitch accent part of the \"underlying form\" -- that is, can the\nmanifestations in the daughter dialects be derived regularly from rules\napplied to an underlying assignment of pitch accent?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T04:13:31.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21257",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T19:12:06.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"linguistics",
"pitch-accent"
],
"title": "The genesis of pitch accent in Japanese",
"view_count": 682
} | [
{
"body": "Some language families (such as Chinese and Athabaskan) have visible origins\nfor their tones - you can't reconstruct tone back to the shared proto-\nlanguage, but you can reconstruct other features that later turned into tone.\n\nOther language families (such as Bantu and Oto-Manguean) have no visible\norigins for their tones - you can reconstruct tone back to the proto-language,\nand it seems to have been there as long as anyone can tell.\n\nAs far as we know, Japonic is in the latter category. Most (if not all, I\ndon't have as much knowledge as I'd like) Japonic languages/dialects contrast\ntone, and unlike with Chinese final consonants or Athabaskan glottalisation,\nthere's no clear earlier source for tone in Japonic. Indeed, according to the\nmost prevalent interpretation, Japonic has been losing tone contrasts over\ntime - earlier sources (such as the Ruiju Myougishou dictionary) give more\ntone contrasts than any modern dialect shows (though it's not clear how much\nof this is actual phonemic tone contrast and how much of it is premodern\nlinguists noting any and all tone differences - Hangeul in its original form\nmarked all tones regardless of contrastiveness, and this could be an example\nof something similar). You can fairly regularly predict tone correspondences\nin various dialects, as well.\n\nSo tone seems to have been a part of Japonic as long as anyone can tell.\nBefore about 200-400 AD (the earliest we can reconstruct back to), it's\nanyone's guess, but that's true of any feature in any language family beyond\nthe earliest reconstructions.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T19:12:06.050",
"id": "21268",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T19:12:06.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "21257",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21257 | null | 21268 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21259",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the difference for using these?\n\nExamples:\n\n> さんじごじゅうぷん\n>\n> ろくじよんじゅうごふん",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T04:44:39.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21258",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-20T06:34:26.107",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9129",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"time",
"rendaku"
],
"title": "When would I use ふん instead of ぷん?",
"view_count": 5206
} | [
{
"body": "It all depends on the numbers _**immediately**_ preceding 「分」.\n\n> 「 **ふ** ん Hun」: 2, 5, 7, 9 and 00.\n>\n> 「 **ぷ** ん Pun」: 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, etc.\n\nExamples:\n\n「 **ふ** ん Hun」： 32分（さんじゅうにふん）、15分（じゅうごふん）、57分（ごじゅうななふん）、9分（きゅうふん）、4-5分（しごふん\n[Only number 5, not number 4, affects the way 分 is pronounced.]）\n\n「 **ぷ** ん Pun」：\n1分（いっぷん）、13分（じゅうさんぷん）、24分（にじゅうよんぷん）、6分（ろっぷん）、20分（にじゅっぷん）、60分（ろくじゅっぷん）、2-3分（にさんぷん）\n\n「0分」 can be read both 「ゼロふん」 and 「れいふん」.\n\n_**Additional Info:**_\n\n> In fractions, 「分」 is always pronounced 「 **ぶ** ん Bun」.\n\n1/4 （よんぶんのいち）\n\n3/10（じゅうぶんのさん）",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T10:05:06.510",
"id": "21259",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-20T06:34:26.107",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21258",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21258 | 21259 | 21259 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21264",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the meaning of 普段ならまだしも、さすがに今は少しばかり状況が違う\n\n> 「って、ヴェル！？」\n>\n> 思い切り、まるで飛び付くように抱きついてくるヴェル。\n>\n> 「み、みんな見てますけれどもっ」\n>\n> 普段ならまだしも、さすがに今は少しばかり状況が違う。俺の叫びで気がついたのか、ヴェルは周囲をそっと見回した。\n\nThe two possible definitions that I think could match this usage from\nDaijisen's\n\n 1. あることを認めはするが、特定の条件下では、それと相反する感情を抱くさま。そうは言うものの。それはそうだが、やはり。「味はよいが、これだけ多いと さすがに 飽きる」「非はこちらにあるが、一方的に責められると さすがに 腹が立つ」\n 2. 予想・期待したことを、事実として納得するさま。また、その事実に改めて感心するさま。なるほど、やはり。「一人暮らしは さすがに 寂しい」「 さすがに （は）ベテランだ」\n\nPart of my confusion stems from the nuance of まだしも. The definition from\n[link](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/208298/m0u/%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A0%E3%81%97%E3%82%82/)\nsays `まだを強めた言い方。よくもないがそれでも`\n\nMy intuition makes me feel like it's the first usage because the second one\ndoesn't sound quite right. he says that under normal circumstances that it\n\"wouldn't be that big of a deal/he wouldn't have minded that much / etc.\" but\nthat the current situation is a bit different than normal ( referring to the\nfact that they are currently the centre of attention of many of people there).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T12:02:53.773",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21263",
"last_activity_date": "2022-03-16T23:07:44.347",
"last_edit_date": "2022-03-16T23:07:44.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of \"普段ならまだしも、さすがに今は少しばかり状況が違う\"",
"view_count": 264
} | [
{
"body": "Your intuition regarding the usage of 「さすがに」 is correct.\n\nThe action taken by ヴェル would have been \"acceptable\" to the speaker, if not\nfantastic, had s/he done it under ordinary circumstances. This time, however,\nthe speaker was taken by surprise given the presence of many people around\nthem.\n\n「～～ならまだしも」 means \"it would have been ok if ~~ (or 'ok in a ~~ situation')\".\n\nOne meaning/usage of 「まだ」 is to express one's opinion that something is\n\"comparatively good, if not great\".\n\nSee definiton 二-6 here:\n\n<https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%9C%AA%E3%81%A0-435851#E3.83.87.E3.82.B8.E3.82.BF.E3.83.AB.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.B3.89>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T14:31:14.377",
"id": "21264",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T14:50:13.030",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T14:50:13.030",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21263",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21263 | 21264 | 21264 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> どうした、反撃はしないのか？\n>\n> そう言うならさせてくれ！\n>\n> 冗談を言うな。お前は隙を見せると的確に狙ってくるからな\n>\n> さすがにずっと相手をしてるだけあってよく分かってるなあ。隙は見せてくれそうにないか。しかたない\n\nAs we all know many a time in the Japanese language things are left out\nbecause they are left for the listener/reader to fill in the blanks and guess\nwhat's being said without being directly told, or because it's \"obvious\".\n\nOccasionally you would sometimes see the part that would come after から in a\nsmall sentence before a sentence that ends in it. But, in this case that isn't\nwhat is going on. Is the rest of it just not being said because it's \"obvious\"\ne.g. お前は隙を見せると的確に狙ってくるから隙を見せないように努力している",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T15:33:58.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21265",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-22T09:06:45.953",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T16:17:08.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "9136",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Usage of からな at the end of a sentence",
"view_count": 1791
} | [
{
"body": "I think there are two ways of interpretation:\n\n 1. Suppose that `隙を見せる` = `反撃をさせる`, and the full sentence is `お前は隙を見せると的確に狙ってくるから、反撃はさせない`\n\n 2. Nothing is omitted. `からな` is a conversational element, like \"you know why\".\n\nI have no means to tell which one is correct with the given context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T16:38:22.347",
"id": "21266",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T16:38:22.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21265",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21265 | null | 21266 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "(I do not speak Japanese) I'm translating subtitles (from english to spanish)\nfor the Hirokazu Koreeda's \"Like Father, Like Son\" movie. The characters, the\nNonomiya's and Saiki's, are two couples of different social status (one\nwealthy, the other working class). Spanish, unlike English, reflect social\nstatus (the \"tú\" v/s \"Ud.\"). I want my translation be faithful to the movie's\nsocial aspects. My question is, how characters talks to each other? Do they\ntalks as equals or not? Are they formal or informal?\n\nStarting from the english subtitles, I can have different spanish\ntranslations, all formally correct, but expressing different personalities and\nrelationships. If working father use \"Ud.\" and wealthy one use \"tú\", wealthy\nis dominanting the relation. If both use \"tú\", they are equals. If both used\n\"Ud.\", both are formal, and distant.\n\nSaiki's husband being more a free spirit, like a practical teacher to\nNonomiyo's, made me prefer him using \"tú\" (breaking class barrier) and\nNonomiya's using \"Ud.\" (acknowledging high moral standing). But, this use can\nalso be seen as Nonomiyo's trying to keep distance.\n\nSo, that's my dilemma. I need some japanese speaker to tell me how he see the\npower relationship in the original script.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T17:27:12.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21267",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T00:51:57.627",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-13T00:51:57.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "9137",
"owner_user_id": "9137",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How do characters talk to each other in \"Like Father, Like Son\" movie",
"view_count": 155
} | [
{
"body": "I speak Japanese, English and Spanish. I only checked the outline of the movie\nand will answer in a general way.\n\nThe characters should talk in a formal way like \"Usted\". In Japanese, polite\nexpressions are much more frequently used than in Spanish. For example, I\nwould use \"Tù\" for family or close friends, and use \"Usted\" for relatives,\ncolleagues, or waitresses in restaurants. In this movie, the couples happend\nto know each other by an accident and they should have emotional conflicts.\nThere should be no opportunity to use an informal, friendly expressions.\n\nRegarding to equality, expressions will not change due to being richer or\npoorer. Instead, age can be considered in Japanese. Since Saiki's husband\nlooks older than Nonomiya's, Saiki could take a stronger position and possibly\nuse informal expressions to Nonomiya.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T22:17:39.717",
"id": "21269",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T22:17:39.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9141",
"parent_id": "21267",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21267 | null | 21269 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is different between 分かります and 分かりました。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-12T23:59:41.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21270",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T01:00:05.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9142",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is different between 分かります and 分かりました。",
"view_count": 5152
} | [
{
"body": "分かりました = i understood 分かります = i understand",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T00:39:02.240",
"id": "21271",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T00:39:02.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9143",
"parent_id": "21270",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "A very good question.\n\nDespite how it might look on the surface, this is definitely **_not_** a\nquestion about tense.\n\nWe use the two phrases differently depending on the situations -- more\nspecifically, on the content of the discourse. In other words, it depends on\nwhat the **_other_** person has just said to you.\n\n> You use 「わかりました」 when you understand the explanation or instruction that the\n> other person has just given to you. **_It is an expression of comprehension\n> of and obedience to what has been explained to you._** You just learned\n> something **_now_**.\n\nGuy: \"To get to the XXX Park, you go ~~~~~.\"\n\nYou: 「わかりました。ありがとうございます。」 You will never say 「わかります」 here.\n\n> 「わかります」 is quite different in that it is used to say \"Yes, I know.\" or \"I\n> know what you mean.\" **_It is an expression of knowledge and sometimes,\n> sympathy._**\n\nGuy: 「『懐疑的』の意味はわかりますか。」\"Do you know what 懐疑的 means?\"\n\nYou: 「はい、わかります。」\n\nor --\n\nWoman: \"My husband just sits in the couch and watches TV ~~~~~. He never helps\nme with ~~~~.\"\n\nYou:「わかります。My husband is the same way.」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T01:00:05.447",
"id": "21273",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T01:00:05.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21270",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
] | 21270 | null | 21273 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21275",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[Wikiversity](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese/Pronunciation#Long_vowels)\nsays the following about long vowels in Japanese:\n\n> A long vowel takes two morae. In rōmaji it's written with a macron: ā, ī, ū,\n> ē and ō.\n>\n> In hiragana, it's written with an extra \"あ\" (a), \"い\" (i) or \"う\" (u)\n> depending on the vowel. In katakana, it's marked by appending a dash-like\n> symbol \"ー\".\n\nWhy are they represented differently in hiragana versus katakana?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T00:47:35.713",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21272",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T13:12:02.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"kana",
"long-vowels"
],
"title": "Why are long vowels represented differently in hiragana and katakana?",
"view_count": 2832
} | [
{
"body": "Let's start by saying that not all words follow this rule. According to\n[Japanese\nWikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%95%B7%E9%9F%B3%E7%AC%A6), a number\nof words are written in katakana but with doubled vowels, as if they were\nwritten in hiragana (in which they can be equally well written):\n\n> 例：シイタケ、フウトウカズラ、セイウチ、ホウセンカ、オオバコ\n\nBut these appear to be words that have kanjis, and fallen out of use. The\n\"dash\" is used mainly for foreign and mimetic words:\n\n> 例：ニャーン、テーブル\n\nIt would thus appear that the dash is mainly used in \"new\" words. I could\nimagine as being a consequence of the use of new phonemes, such as `ティ` which\nwould look maybe weirder when elongated into `ティイ` than `ティー`.\n\nAs for the origin (I take this directly from the Japanese wikipedia), it is\nsaid that it was invented to transcribe foreign languages, but it appears\n(according to 国語学大辞典{こくごだいじてん}, literally \"great dictionary of japanese\nlanguage\") that it was first used by a scholar of the Edo period and that it\nbecame commonplace in the Meiji era.\n\nThe symbol itself apparently originates from:\n\n> 引く音の「引」の右側の旁（つくり）から取られたという説がある。\n\ni.e. The right part of the kanji of `引{ひ}く`, \"to pull\", as in \"to stretch the\nsound\". Note that this is a theory.\n\nApparently, in 1900, the ministry of education tried to enforce a new rule, by\nwhich all long vowels (in kanji pronunciations and interjections) would be\ndenoted by a dash `-`, for example: 校長｛こーちょー｝ (principal of a school).\nHowever, this ordinance was quickly repelled, in 1908.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T01:26:16.037",
"id": "21275",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T01:26:16.037",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"parent_id": "21272",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "What you've seen on Wikiversity is just a superficial explanation (or for\nbeginners?).\n\nThe spelling rule doesn't reside in _hiragana_ and _katakana_ , but in **words\noften written in hiragana** (native and Sino-Japanese vocabulary) and **those\nin katakana** (other loanwords and onomatopoeia). Mere rewriting hiragana ←→\nkatakana doesn't change the spelling.\n\nThe former way is mainly retained orthographically as reconfirmation of\ntraditional convention. The [original public\nnotice](http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/nc/k19860701001/k19860701001.html)\non [modern orthography](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_kana_usage)\nclearly differentiates between pronunciation notation (`ユー`) and real spelling\n(`ゆう`).\n\n`ー` appears in hiragana context indicating words or prolongation undefined in\nthe orthography.\n\n> あーちゃん (a nickname), こんばんはー (\"Eveniiiing!\"), えー？ (\"Gah!\") cf. ええ (\"Yes,\n> sir/ma'am.\")\n\nWhile `アイウエオ` reduplication appears in katakana context representing syllable\nor pitch breaking.\n\n> アア溶岩 (\"[ʻAʻā\n> lava](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lava#.CA.BBA.CA.BB.C4.81)\"), サナア\n> (\"Sana'a\", Yemen's capital), オオオオオオ (\"Arghhhhh!\", maybe a dying scream)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T13:12:02.910",
"id": "21284",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T13:12:02.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21272",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21272 | 21275 | 21284 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21281",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I came across this tweet today:\n\n> Is this the least confidence-inspiring use of inverted commas ever?\n>\n> \n\nThe English part of the sign has \"Safe\" and \"Comfortable\" in inverted commas,\nand the Japanese part likewise has \"安心\" (relief, peace of mind) and \"快適\"\n(pleasant; agreeable; comfortable) in quotation marks / corner brackets.\n\nI've previously seen people, including native speakers of English, use\nquotation marks for emphasis in English, though it's listed as a \"Word Crime\"\nin [\"Weird Al\" Yankovic's song](http://youtu.be/8Gv0H-vPoDc?t=2m34s). Do\npeople use quotation marks for emphasis in Japanese as well?\n\n(Note for non-native speakers of English: Don't worry about the stuff said in\n\"Word Crimes\" - it's complaining about mistakes made by native speakers, not\nthose learning it as a second language, and some experts disagree with some of\nthe rules about English espoused in the song)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T01:18:09.150",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21274",
"last_activity_date": "2017-09-18T16:39:04.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"quotes"
],
"title": "Do Japanese people use quotation marks for emphasis?",
"view_count": 5859
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, we use quotation marks (of our own kinds, not yours) for emphasis **_all\nthe time_**.\n\nThe kinds we use are 「」、『』、〈〉、《》、〔〕 and there might possibly be more. Just\nlike the rules regarding punctuations, Japanese is more lenient than English.\nMore is left to your own aesthetic preferences in Japanese.\n\n「」 and 『』 are the ones used most often for emphasis -- particularly 「」. These\ntwo are also used for direct quotation and showing titles.\n\n〈〉and 《》 are used nearly exclusively for emphasis.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T07:53:43.110",
"id": "21279",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T07:53:43.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21274",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "Japanese language doesn't have italics or all-uppercase. Emphasis using square\nbrackets (`「」`) is natural in Japanese, especially when other means of\nemphasis (like [傍点](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15270/5010) or bolder\nfonts) is not applicable.\n\nFor example, when you have to write in plain-text format, something like this\nis totally natural:\n\n> 机の上ではなくて、「下」を探してください。\n\nSuch usage of square brackets is also natural in serious novels. (Using\nkatakana (\"シタ\") is out of the question, by the way. You can't use asterisks\n(`*like this*`), either.)\n\nThat said, to my eyes, this JAL sign (or at least the Japanese part of it)\nlooks poorly-designed, if not instantly laughable.\n\nWell, I think I understand why this English is funny, although I don't know\nhow many of native English speakers will instantly find this English\nlaughable.\n\nI think \"安全\" and \"快適\" in this Japanese sentence are not something that should\nbe strongly emphasized, either. A few Japanese people may actually doubt if\nthe flight is really safe and comfortable.\n\nI believe it's best not to emphasize these words at all, but when I really\nfelt like highlighting these words a bit, there are better ways than brackets,\nlike using a different color or font.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T11:25:09.483",
"id": "21281",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T11:25:09.483",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21274",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21274 | 21281 | 21281 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to Wikipedia, a [tag team](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tag_team)\nis a two-person team of which only one person plays at a time.\n\nSpeaking of a long-length work project, 小林 says:\n\n> 田中とタッグでやる。\n\nIs there any nuance difference with `田中と2人のチームでやる`?\n\nIn particular, is there any nuance that only one of them works at a time?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T05:41:21.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21277",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T07:20:02.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"expressions",
"idioms",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "Meaning of タッグでやる",
"view_count": 103
} | [
{
"body": "There is only a small difference in nuance between 「タッグ」 and 「チーム」, which I\nhonestly would not have even thought about had I not encountered this\nquestion.\n\n「タッグ」 would often connote a somewhat closer relationship required between the\ntwo persons for the project than 「チーム」 would. IMHO, this is because the word\n「タッグ」 is drived from an aggressive contact sport of pro-wrestling.\n\n「チーム」, to me, sounds more \"sophisticated\" (or in Japanese, 「よりスマートな[感]{かん}じ」)\nthan 「タッグ」 does at least when used in business situations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T07:20:02.317",
"id": "21278",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T07:20:02.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21277",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21277 | null | 21278 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21282",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know this is really \"Mainstream\", but let's say I would like to have the\nword \"infinity\" as a tatto.\n\n\n\n(edit)\n\n4.\n\n\n\nWhich one would be the right ? And what exactly does each of them mean ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T10:09:00.260",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21280",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T12:15:05.327",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-13T12:15:05.327",
"last_editor_user_id": "9147",
"owner_user_id": "9147",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "\"Infinity\" as a tattoo",
"view_count": 3055
} | [
{
"body": "* 無限 = infinity.\n * 永久 = eternity.\n * 常: rarely used as a standalone noun. It's something like _ever-_ in _evergreen_ , etc.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T12:06:06.317",
"id": "21282",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T12:06:06.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21280",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21280 | 21282 | 21282 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21285",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Are there any situations in which the verb 育ち行く is used? I checked it up in\nwww.tangorin.com and <http://jisho.org/> and in both I found the definition,\nbut not a single example of its use.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T13:09:19.193",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21283",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T14:04:05.903",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "Is 育ち行く normally used?",
"view_count": 169
} | [
{
"body": "It's not an unfamiliar word, though I'm not sure if it's \"normally\" used.\n\nThis is a compound verb of `育つ` \"grow up\" + `行く` \"go away; get further and\nfurther\", and the meaning is transparent. The `-行く` is appended to 連用形 of\nverbs of state change, to make literary expressions of similar nuance to\n`-て行く` e.g. `去り行く` (老兵は死なず、ただ去り行くのみ \"[Old soldiers never die; they just fade\naway.](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Douglas_MacArthur#Farewell_address_to_Congress_.281951.29)\"),\n`移り行く`, `散り行く`, `変わり行く` etc. These words are hardly used outside attributive\nnowadays, and don't conjugate, either.\n\nI found many examples in Google that related to `育ちゆく体とわたし` (lit. \"My growing-\nup body and I\"), which seemingly is a sub-curriculum of P.E. on sex education.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T14:04:05.903",
"id": "21285",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T14:04:05.903",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21283",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21283 | 21285 | 21285 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How would [name]家, for example 田中家, be pronounced when referring to somebody's\nhome in an informal or casual way? I think I've heard it pronounced ち but it\ncould have been うち too. Perhaps both are acceptable?\n\nI haven't found any note on this specific combination in my dictionaries, and\nI don't trust Google Translate's take on it (which just says か).\n\n(There is also the け pronuncation as in 徳川慶喜家（とくがわよしのぶけ） but that seems to be\na different matter, relating to family/lineage.)\n\nEdit: To stress that I'm asking about casual usage, let's say somebody says\n「ジャック家に行きたい」 on Facebook/Twitter/similar. What is the pronunciation of 「家」 in\nthat sentence? Or if there may be several pronunciations, what is the most\nlikely one chosen in a conversation among friends?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T14:20:17.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21286",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-14T01:50:04.817",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-13T21:16:10.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "9149",
"owner_user_id": "9149",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "How is 家 in [name]家 pronounced?",
"view_count": 1296
} | [
{
"body": "「田中家」 is pronounced as 「たなかけ (Tanaka-ke)」. Usually, this word is used to refer\nto a family whose last names are 田中 or a house where a 田中 family live in.\n(ref. <http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/65854/m0u/>)\n\nWhile 「田中家 (Tanaka-ke)」 sounds formally, 「田中ん家 (Tanaka-n-chi)」 sounds\ninformally and seems to refer a family or a house of a speakers friend.\n\nA kanji word 「田中家」 is almost always pronounced as 「たなかけ」, but there are shops\nor restaurants whose name is 「田中家 (たなかや, Tanaka-ya)」, e.g.\n<http://www.tanakaya1863.co.jp/>. I cannot find other readings (and meanings)\nof 田中家 by Google.\n\n「徳川慶喜家」 means a family line originating from 徳川慶喜. Just like this, in some\ncontext, 「田中家」 also means a family line of Mr. 田中.\n\nEdit: On my experience in Japanese (30+ years), when I have a conversation\namong friends, I say 「ジャックん家に行きたい (じゃっくんちにいきたい)」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T16:29:05.083",
"id": "21288",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-14T01:50:04.817",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-14T01:50:04.817",
"last_editor_user_id": "7834",
"owner_user_id": "7834",
"parent_id": "21286",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21286 | null | 21288 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 異音の原因がわかり、安堵して大きく息を吐く\n\nHere's my thoughts, can someone tell me whether I'm right or not?\n\nrealise cause of the sound > therefore feels relieved > then they sigh.\n\nI thought both these usages of the continuative form were both the usage of\n`原因・理由を表す` but I'm not quite sure about the literal meaning of for the last\npart.\n\nMy main question is whether it expresses causation or merely states the\nactions in which they happen.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T21:25:50.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21289",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T16:18:36.940",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-13T22:14:27.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "9155",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"て-form"
],
"title": "Usage of te-form in 異音の原因がわかり、安堵して大きく息を吐く",
"view_count": 109
} | [
{
"body": "Your guess is perfectly right. [ **EDIT** for the update: the basic meaning of\ncontinuative forms is sequential occurrence, may or may not imply causality.]\n\nAnd the last part `大きく息を吐く` describes a motion of deep breath (expiration). I\nthink English speakers give \"sigh of relief\", too. Perhaps it's more\nunderstandable in English to merge the last te-form verb chain into one\naction, as:\n\n> I breathe a deep sigh of relief, after realizing the cause of the strange\n> noise.\n\nIt's a common gesture to exhale deeply when you're relieved, as the word\n`ほっとする` \"feel relieved\" comes from the breathing sound `ほっ`. Other idiomatic\nexpressions of relief include `胸{むね}をなでおろす` (lit. \"stroke down one's chest\")\nand `一息{ひといき}つく` (lit. \"take a breath\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-13T22:06:57.677",
"id": "21290",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-13T22:17:14.337",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-13T22:17:14.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21289",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21289 | null | 21290 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21292",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "「あける」、 regardless of the kanji, is transitive. _Therefore_ :\n\nWhile the object is「新年」、 what is the subject of「あけましておめでとう」? \nRegardless of what the subject is, is 「あけましておめでとうございます」 a metaphor?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T00:35:50.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21291",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-14T12:06:10.350",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-14T12:06:10.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "9149",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "What is the subject of「あけましておめでとう」?",
"view_count": 619
} | [
{
"body": "あける (明ける in kanji) here is an _intransitive_ verb which basically means _to\nfinish_ , _to change to a new state_ , etc. According to\n[大辞林](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%98%8E%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B%E3%83%BB%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B%E3%83%BB%E9%96%8B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B-195514):\n\n> あける【明ける・空ける・開ける】 \n> 二 **（自動詞）** \n> ①夜が終わって朝になり，あたりが明るくなる。 《明》 ↔ 暮れる 「夜（よ）が－・ける」 \n> ②時間が経過して次の新しい年・日や季節が始まる。主語を示すことはない。 《明》 ↔ 暮れる 「 － ・けて八月二日，いよいよ頂上をめざす日だ」 \n> ③ある特別の状態の期間が終わって，普通の状態に戻る。おわる。 《明》 「長かった梅雨（つゆ）がようやく－・けた」 「喪（も）が－・ける」\n> 「年季が－・ける」\n\nSo the implied subject of あける in あけましておめでとう is 年 or 新年.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T01:09:10.727",
"id": "21292",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-14T04:17:49.847",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-14T04:17:49.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21291",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21291 | 21292 | 21292 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21294",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the sentence これは大きい本を食べる犬です, I understand that 大きい本を食べる is a clause that\ndescribes 犬 as \"a dog that eats large books\"; and を only makes sense within\nthat clause.\n\nHowever, I'm confused about whether これは refers to the dog (これは...犬です) or the\nbooks (これは大きい本...).\n\nIs there any grammatical standard I could follow or must it just be taken\nwithin context?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T02:39:59.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21293",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-14T18:42:24.253",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3567",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "Topic marker in これは大きい本を食べる犬です",
"view_count": 367
} | [
{
"body": "Think about it this way.\n\nWhen you have a verb, it has certain 'slots' that have to be filled with\nnouns. 食べる, being a transitive verb, has two slots - subject and object. である\nalso has two slots (though it's not a transitive verb, it's a special kind of\nthing) - subject and predicate. We've got three nouns here (これ, 本 and 犬), and\nwe need to figure out how they fill those four slots.\n\nOne is quite clear - 本 is the object of 食べる. But what's its subject, これ or 犬?\nNotice that 食べる is in a relative clause, meaning that one noun has been pulled\nout of this clause and placed in the main clause, filling two slots\nsimultaneously. In Japanese, this moved noun always appears immediately after\nthe relative clause's verb, meaning that 犬 has to be the subject of 食べる.\nLooking at the main clause, you can see that 犬 also must be the predicate of\nである, filling that slot also.\n\nNow we've filled three of four slots: object of 食べる, subject of 食べる and\npredicate of である. This leaves only one place for これ to go: subject of である. The\nwhole thing then translates as 'this is (a/the) dog that eats big books'.\n\n(It helps to notice that if これ is somehow attached to 食べる, you end up trying\nto fill two slots with three nouns, resulting in something like *the dog that\nthis eats big books.)\n\nEdit: Noticed a thing - 大きい also takes one noun, but again because of relative\nclauses, that noun has to be 本. So five slots total, but still the same idea.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T03:18:42.420",
"id": "21294",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-14T18:42:24.253",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-14T18:42:24.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "3639",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "21293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21293 | 21294 | 21294 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21299",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know 多い means 'many' but I don't really understand how it's being used in\nthe sentence below as a noun 多く.\n\n> 多くの人々がすべてを失い、多くの人が亡くなった。\n\nMy best translation - 'Many peoples have lost everything and many people have\ncome to lose someone'.\n\nI'm not happy with my translation either.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T15:26:33.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21296",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T02:24:45.673",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T02:24:45.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"adjectives",
"nouns"
],
"title": "How is the adjective 多い being used as a noun 多く here?",
"view_count": 647
} | [
{
"body": "Both 「[多]{おお}い」 and 「多くの」 mean \"many\" but their usages are completely\ndifferent.\n\n> _**Grammar in terms of parts of speech:**_\n\n「多い」 is an adjective all by itself.\n\n「多くの」＝「多く」 + 「の」. 「多く」 is a noun meaning \"plenty\" and because it is a noun, it\nneeds to be followed directly by 「の」 to function like an adjective.\n\n> _**Usages:**_\n\nTo express \"many (noun)\", one can say 「多くの + noun」, but one _**cannot**_ say\n「多い + noun」. I have met 多くの Japanese-learners who did not know this.\n\nThe correct and natural usage of 「多い」 is in the form 「(Noun) + は/が + 多い」.\n\n> _**Sentence in question:**_\n>\n> 「多くの[人々]{ひとびと}がすべてを[失]{うしな}い、多くの[人]{ひと}が[亡]{な}くなった。」\n\nYour translation of the first half is good except for the \"many people **s** \"\npart. It should be \"many people\". **「多くの人々」 means the exact same as 「多くの人」**.\n\n「[亡]{な}くなる」 is a euphemistic word for 「[死]{し}ぬ」 = \"to die\". Thus, one can\nthink of it as the Japanese counterpart for the verb \"to pass\".\n\n\"Many people have lost everything and many (people) have passed away.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T00:38:51.233",
"id": "21299",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T11:28:21.933",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21296",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21296 | 21299 | 21299 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21310",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[_Negotiation of Contingent Talk: The Japanese Interactional Particles Ne and\nSa_ , page\n44](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=FbVGxqAx5jwC&pg=PA44&dq=japanese%20ne%20intonation&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CcS2VNHAO4eGywOKu4DoCA&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=japanese%20ne%20intonation&f=false)\n\nFor example the above link says that there are various different intonations\ne.g. rising, rise-fall,fall-rise etc that all correspond to different\nfunctions, but I can't seem to find any audio samples that clearly show what\nthese sound like.\n\nCan anyone explain what I should be hearing and where, or provide some audio\nsamples for the different categories?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T19:53:36.860",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21297",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T18:16:16.483",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-14T19:55:00.670",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"intonation"
],
"title": "Usage of intonation with sentence ending particles e.g. ね",
"view_count": 248
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think many Japanese learning resources cover it, for the intonation\nstudies are still in its earliest stage, as far as I know. I'm not an expert\nin Japanese intonation either, but it's fairly easy to show the difference in\nmy own voice.\n\n<https://clyp.it/qa2xdoip>\n\nIt says in the following order:\n\n> いいね (rising) \"Sounds good.\"\n>\n> いいね (fall-rise) \"You hear me?\"\n>\n> いいね (rise-fall) \"Fantastic!\"\n\nP.S. \nThe Japanese translation of \"Like!\" in Facebook is いいね！, which I think is\npronounced like the first one if you do.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T18:04:49.920",
"id": "21310",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T18:16:16.483",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21297",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21297 | 21310 | 21310 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21301",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The proverb 死人【しにん】に 口【くち】 無し【なし】 (the dead do not have a mouth) is listed\ne.g. [here](http://www.languagerealm.com/japanese/japaneseproverbs_shi.php)\nand I've also heard it from my (native) teacher.\n\nHere's what I'm wondering:\n\n 1. From what I've heard so far, it should be understood to mean \"You can say anything about a dead person. They will not talk back\". Is that how everyone will understand it? I want to be sure that I'm using it correctly. An alternative interpretation would be \"If you want someone to keep her mouth shut, kill her\". Can I be sure that this is never meant? (I could imagine such a thing being said in a gangster movie)\n\n 2. How old is this saying/are its origins known? Is it connected to a religion, is it maybe originally Chinese, etc.?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-14T22:19:44.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21298",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T11:04:57.480",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T08:44:23.283",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "6650",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Origin and meaning of the proverb 死人【しにん】に 口【くち】 無し【なし】",
"view_count": 337
} | [
{
"body": "From [what I gather](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/dead+men+tell+no+tales),\nthe connotation of the English phrase \"Dead men tell no tales\" is the latter\n-- \"It's safe to kill everyone who knows the secret\". Am I right?\n\nThat's not the primary meaning of Japanese 死人に口なし, although it looks very\nsimilar. As your teacher said, this should be understood as \"You can easily\naccuse a dead person, even unjustly, because they can't argue back\". This is\nusually used for someone who is already dead, and that person does not\nnecessarily have a secret.\n\n> 死者は何も語れないので、何の証言も釈明もできない。口のきけない死者は **生きた者の思うように利用されやすい**\n> ということ。([故事ことわざ辞典](http://kotowaza-allguide.com/si/shininnikuchinashi.html))\n>\n> 死人は **無実の罪** を着せられても釈明することができない。また、死人を証人に立てようとしても不可能である。\n> ([デジタル大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/99528/m0u/))\n\nAnd I think this proverb is frequently used in the sense along the lines of\n\"If you want to ask something from a dead person, it's too late\", typically in\npolice dramas.\n\nThat said, if Japanese people see 死人に口なし in subtitles of foreign spy films,\netc., I believe they can easily understand that implication. (\"Ah, this must\nbe a euphemistic and cool way of saying _kill'em_!\")",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T03:44:49.697",
"id": "21301",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T03:50:35.423",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21298",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Additional information on question #2, at OP's request:\n\n[日本国語大辞典](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon_Kokugo_Daijiten) records a usage\nthat dates back to 1788, which is mid-Edo period.\n\n> 雑俳・柳多留‐二二〔１７８８〕「死人に口なし置みやげとぬかし」\n\nAnd its relationship with Chinese is unclear. They have a bit different\nexpression [死无对证](http://baike.baidu.com/view/198295.htm) \"the dead cannot\ntestify\" in Chinese, which seemingly traces back to Yuan dynasty. Yet it seems\nseveral languages also have [similar\nsayings](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dead_men_tell_no_tales).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T19:36:03.187",
"id": "21311",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T11:04:57.480",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T11:04:57.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21298",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21298 | 21301 | 21301 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have read on [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroha) that the Iroha\npoem has a modern version with updated hiragana and stuff.\n\nHowever, it seems that most times people recite the poem (as in, every time\nI've seen/heard someone recite it), they use the old pronunciation.\n\nIf it so happens that I am called upon to recite Iroha, should I use the old\nor new pronunciation?\n\nAs a related side question: if I want to refer to the poem by name, should I\ncall it \"i ro wa\" by the modern pronunciation, or \"i ro ha\" by the old\npronunciation?\n\nEdit: To clarify: old as in \"iro ha nihoheto\", new as in \"iro wa nioedo\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T04:04:08.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21302",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-26T11:32:34.577",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-15T11:52:17.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "4004",
"owner_user_id": "4004",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "How is the Iroha poem usually pronounced?",
"view_count": 1815
} | [
{
"body": "Actually, what you mentioned are not _old_ and _new_ pronunciations. Both are\n**contemporary** ones.\n\nThe \"irohanihoheto...\" is reading its letter names, while \"irowa nioedo...\"\none, as a meaningful poem. The difference is much clearer if you try the same\nthing in English alphabet, say, \"Cwm fjord bank glyphs vext quiz.\" (a perfect\npangram from [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangram)), where\n\"iroha...\" corresponds to \"see-dublyoo-em-...\" reading, and \"irowa...\" is\n\"koom-fyord-...\".\n\nEach letter in Japanese syllabary was supposed to have the same reading as the\nsyllable itself when it was created, but due to [a series of phonological\nchanges](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language#History), the\ngrammatically valid reading no longer matches the alphabetical one. As for\nlack of voiced consonants, it's said that today's voiced consonants are\nremnants of [prenasalized\nsounds](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenasalized_consonant) in Classical era,\nwhich they had no means to transcribe at that time.\n\n* * *\n\n**P.S.** \nThe real \"archaic\" pronunciation around the 11th century would be like:\n\n> Irofa nifofendo tirinuruwo \n> Wanga yo tarenjo tunenaramu \n> Uwino okuyama kefu ko(y)ete \n> Ashaki yume mishi wefimo shenju\n\nThere are also some fun videos reading [the Tale of Genji in Classical\npronunciation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jEWDiPlxXU).\n\n**P.P.S.** \nWhat your \"a modern version with updated hiragana\" reminded me of was this\n(incorporating ん):\n\n> とりなくこゑす ゆめさませ \n> みよあけわたる ひんかしを \n> そらいろはえて おきつへに \n> ほふねむれゐぬ もやのうち\n\nWhich won the 1st prize of the \"new pangram\" contest held by a newspaper in\n1903.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T13:30:15.293",
"id": "21323",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T17:46:11.480",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-16T17:46:11.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21302",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21302 | null | 21323 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21306",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently saw the sentence on a grammar example site:\n\n多ければよいというものでもない。\n\nFrom this example, it seems that this sentence means the same thing:\n\n多ければよいというわけじゃない。\n\nDo these sentence in fact mean the same thing? Are there any differences\nbetween \"というものでもない\" and \"というわけじゃない・というわけではない\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T09:29:14.403",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21305",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-08T15:57:05.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "というものでもない vs. というわけではない",
"view_count": 3039
} | [
{
"body": "In my own words:\n\n> 「～～という **もの** だ/ではない」 vs. 「～～という **わけ** だ/ではない」\n>\n> = Universality vs. Particularity\n\n「～～という **もの** だ/ではない」 is most often used to describe and/or define a\nphenomenon in light of what is generally considered normal -- in other words,\nin light of common sense. There is little room for personal opinions here.\n\n「～～という **わけ** だ/ではない」 is usually used to explain the reason for or basic truth\nabout a particular phenomenon in order to persuade either oneself or another\nperson. There is plenty of room for personal opinions here.\n\nOP's example 「多ければよい」 = \"the more, the better\", however, is simply too broad\nin meaning to serve as a good example for my explanation of Universality vs.\nParticularity. In fact, it is so broad that it allows itself much\ninterchangeability for use between the pair of phrases in question. So, I am\nwriting some examples myself.\n\n「それが[侍]{さむらい}の[生]{い}き[方]{かた}という **もの** だ。」= \"That is what they call 'samurai's\nway of life'.\"\n\n「[長]{なが}く生きれば[必]{かなら}ずよいという **もの** でもない。」= \"It could not be said with absolute\ncertainty that the longer you live, the better.\"\n\n「スミ[子]{こ}が[町]{まち}から[去]{さ}っていったのは、オレのことが[嫌]{きら}いになった **わけ** ではない。」= \"The reason\nSumiko left the town is not that she came to dislike me.\"\n\n「アメリカ[人]{じん}なら[誰]{だれ}でもハンバーガーが[好]{す}きだという **わけ** じゃないよ。」 = \"It is not that\nevery single American likes hamburgers.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T11:18:38.957",
"id": "21306",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T11:18:38.957",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21305",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21305 | 21306 | 21306 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21316",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I’ve come across some adjective conjugation that I don’t fully understand in\ntwo separate but related example sentences, and so my translations are\ndefinitely wonky.\n\n飲んでいるでしょう。その証拠に、ぜんぜんお腹が小さくならないじゃない.\n\nTranslation: Probably drinking? As evidenced, never stomach (something not\nlittle)….?\n\nI know 小さくない means ‘not a little’ but this ならない is confusing me, I only know\nit from なければならない meaning 'must' but that' doesn't seem to apply here. The\nmeaning overall is eluding me.\n\n文法のルールが説明できるからと言って、それが上手に使えるとは限らない。その証拠に、実際に作文の宿題をチェックしたら、正しく書けていないことが少なくない。\n\nTranslation: Just because I’m able to explain the grammar rules doesn’t\nnecessarily mean I’m good at using them. As shown, in reality when I check my\nhomework essays I’m not able to correctly read _not a little_?\n\nIn this sentence, both the final verb and adjective are confusing me. 書けていない I\nthink means ‘not being able to read’ whilst 少なくない means ‘not a little/not few’\nbut put them together and I’m lost.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T11:58:50.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21307",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T09:19:34.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"conjugations",
"adjectives",
"i-adjectives"
],
"title": "Adjective conjugation of 小さい and 少ない in these sentences",
"view_count": 1599
} | [
{
"body": "Adverb+なる means \"to become\", as in 学生{がくせい}になる (to become a student),\n綺麗{きれい}になる (to become clean/pretty), or 大{おお}きくなる (to become big), so in the\nfirst sentence, 小{ちい}さくならない means \"not to become small\". In the second\nsentence, 少{すく}なくない is just the negative of 少{すく}ない, so it means \"not a few\" (\n_i.e._ , many).\n\nThe first sentence is difficult to make sense of without context, but\ntranslated literally it could mean \"(I/you/he/etc.) probably drinks (a\nlot/regularly). Doesn't that mean (my/your/his/etc.) stomach will remain large\n(not become small)?\"\n\nThe second one is easier: 書{か}く means to write (not to read ;) ), so 書{か}けないこと\nmeans \"things I can't write\". So the sentence means \"There are many things I\ncan't write correctly.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T13:31:25.723",
"id": "21308",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T13:31:25.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21307",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "First, let us review the adjectives involved to make sure there is no\nconfusion.\n\n> **_Size vs. Quantity/Frequency:_**\n\n**_Size:_**\n\n「[小]{ちい}さい」 = \"small\".\n\n「[大]{おお}きい」 = \"large\"\n\n**_Quantity/Frequency:_**\n\n「[少]{すく}ない」 = \"few\", \"a little\", \"not frequent\"\n\n「[多]{おお}い」 = \"many\", \"much\", \"frequent\"\n\n> **_Moving on to Grammar:_**\n\nTo express \"to get or become (adjective)\" in Japanese, you need to attach the\nverb 「なる」 to an adjective. In doing so, however, you need to conjugate the\nadjective into its [連用形]{れんようけい}(conjunctive form). Yes, just like verbs do,\nadjectives also conjugate in Japanese.\n\nThe 連用形 of 「小さ **い** 」 is 「小さ **く** 」. Likewise, 「少な **い** 」 to 「少な **く** 」.\n\n「小さくなる」 = \"to get small(er)\", \"to shrink in size\", etc.\n\n「少なくなる」 = \"to lessen in quantity\", \"to become less frequent\", etc.\n\n連用形 is extremely important. If I, who is neither a teacher nor linguist, must\nuse the word on a daily basis, that should tell you how important it is.\n\nThe plain negative form of an i-adjective is also formed with 連用形. 「小さ **い** 」\nbecomes「小さ **く** ない」 and 「少な **い** 」 becomes 「少な **く** ない」. All humans live in\nthe world of 連用形. In Japan, even animals live in the world of 連用形.\n\n> **_Finally, your sentences:_**\n\n「[飲]{の}んでいるでしょう。その[証拠]{しょうこ}に、ぜんぜんお[腹]{なか}が[小]{ちい}さくならないじゃない。」\n\n\"You must have been drinking (alcohol). As evidence, your belly hasn't shrunk\none bit!\"\n\n「その証拠に、[実際]{じっさい}に[作文]{さくぶん}の[宿題]{しゅくだい}をチェックしたら、[正]{ただ}しく[書]{か}けていないことが[少]{すく}なくない。」\n\nI skipped the first sentence because your translation of that is good.\n\n\"As evidence, when I actually checked my composition homework, (I found that)\nthere are quite a few things that have not been written correctly.\"\n\n「正しく書けていない」 literally means \"has/have not been written correctly\". For a\ntranslation purpose, one could use \"I have not written (or even 'did not\nwrite') correctly.\"\n\n「少なくない」, which expresses high quantity/frequency, is one of those phrases that\nwe native speakers use far more often than Japanese-learners do. It means\n「多い」, which is what the learners tend to use.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T01:29:58.963",
"id": "21316",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T09:19:34.220",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-16T09:19:34.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21307",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21307 | 21316 | 21316 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How do you use もんか? Once, I saw this sentence:\n\n「お前{まえ}に俺{おれ}の気持{きもち}がわかる **もんか** 。」\n\nI understand the meaning but I don't know how you can use it",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T19:55:08.910",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21312",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-22T20:42:11.603",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-22T20:42:11.603",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8079",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "「もんか」の使い方を教えてくれませんか？",
"view_count": 1591
} | [
{
"body": "「もんか」 is the colloquial pronunciation of 「ものか」.\n\nThe usual structure:\n\n> 「Mini-sentence/Verb phrase/Adjective + ものか/もんか」\n\nThis expresses the speaker's _**total denial**_ regarding what is described\nbefore the ものか/もんか part.\n\n> 「お[前]{まえ}に[俺]{おれ}の[気持]{きもち}がわかるもんか！」\n>\n> = \"There's just no way you could understand my feelings!\"\n\n(Adult) female speakers might use 「ものですか」 instead.\n\n_**How to use it (or rather, how not to use it):**_\n\n「～～～ものか/もんか」 is obviously not an expression that you would use often or\nrepeatedly because of its highly negative resonance. You could end up sounding\nunreasonably angry (and even funny) if you used it incorrectly. I would go so\nfar as to say that you would probably hear it more often in fiction than in\nreal life. The last thing you want to do is to sound like a fictional\ncharacter, which unfortunately happens all the time in today's world of\nJapanese-as-a-foreign-language.\n\nYou could use it with close friends and they will think nothing of it. It is\njust not something you would say to strangers, people older than you or people\nyou do not know very well even when you rightfully want to make a statement of\ntotal denial. You would sound far more natural and civilized using phrases\nsuch as:\n\n「～～～はずがない。」、「～～～って（or という）ことはない（と思う）。」、「～～～って、そんなわけはないでしょう（or ないだろう）。」 , etc.\n\nTry replacing the ~~~ with 「お前に俺の気持ちが分かる」 for practice.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T09:57:17.907",
"id": "21320",
"last_activity_date": "2019-07-24T16:08:16.977",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21312",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21312 | null | 21320 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21321",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "The JLPT N5 textbook and the Tangorin online dictionary say 出る is intransitive\nand, as far as I know, should be used with が, but the Genki I textbook says it\naccepts を when it means \"to exit\". So, which is correct?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-15T22:50:33.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21313",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-24T02:28:06.523",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-24T00:16:59.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"particle-を",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Why does 出る accept を although it is an intransitive verb?",
"view_count": 5688
} | [
{
"body": "「[出]{で}る」 is indeed _**always**_ an intransitive verb. 「[出]{だ}す」 is the\ntransitive verb.\n\nSo, why is it possible to say 「レストラン **を** 出る」、「[日本]{にほん} **を** 出る」, etc? It\nis simply an \"exception\" to the general rule that says one can only attach 「を」\nto transitive verbs.\n\nThe 「を」 attached to transitive verbs (as in 「ピザを食べる」) functions differently\nthan the 「を」 in 「レストランを出る」. The former is the famous object-marker. The latter\nis, in my own words, the _**\" spatial mobility\" marker**_. (Excuse my\nignorance if that term is already used elsewhere.) It is not limited to\n\"exiting\".\n\n**Examples of \"spatial mobility\" using intransitive verbs:**\n\n「[家]{いえ} **を** [出]{で}る」 = \"to leave home\"、「[空]{そら} **を** [飛]{と}ぶ」 = \"to fly in\nthe sky\"、「[道]{みち} **を** [歩]{ある}く」 = \"to walk on the street\"、「[公園]{こうえん} **を**\n[散歩]{さんぽ}する」 = \"to take a walk in the park\", etc.\n\nAll of these verbs are _**intransitive**_.\n\n**The transitive 「[出]{だ}す」:**\n\n「ゴミ **を** [出]{だ}す」 = \"to take out the garbage\"、「ともだちにコーヒー **を** [出]{だ}した。」 =\n\"I served coffee to my friends.\", etc.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T11:59:12.117",
"id": "21321",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-24T02:28:06.523",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-24T02:28:06.523",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21313",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "This sense of を is similar to \"from\", like から - I'm not quite sure the\ndifference in nuance between the two though. And this を is used with\nintransitive verbs.\n\nFor reference, [sense 6 of を entry in\nProgressive](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/je2/82142/m0u/%E3%82%92/) says\n「動作の起点を表す」 (indicates the starting point of an action). It gives two example\nsentences\n\n> 1. 8時にホテルを出た \n> He left the hotel at eight.\n> 2. 大学を出ても職はなかった \n> Though he graduated from college, he could not find a job.\n>\n\n[研究社新和英中辞典 also lists it in sense 4 of\nを](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%92).\n\nI agree with what l'électeur said about this を being a different を than the\nobject-marker. As you can see from the linked dictionary entries, the object-\nmarking を is but one of the multiple senses of を.\n\np/s: [The question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12734/6840)\n@snailboat linked in the comments is yet another sense of を which is used with\nintransitive verbs. It corresponds to [sense 3 in\nProgressive](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/je2/82142/m0u/%E3%82%92/) and\n[sense 2 in 研究社新和英中辞典](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%92)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T00:26:52.393",
"id": "21332",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-17T00:26:52.393",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6840",
"parent_id": "21313",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I am a beginner, but let me try to explain you, the way I understood. I hope\nit helps!\n\nLike @l'electur and @3 to 5 business days, said it can be used as a mobility\nmarker. For, better understanding consider \"を\" as\n\"[through](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3243/making-sense-of-\ntransitive-usage-\nof-%E8%A1%8C%E3%81%8F-and-%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B-%E3%82%92%E8%A1%8C%E3%81%8F-and-%E3%82%92%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B)\"\nin case of motion marking. Otherwise, you will get confused with に/へ. Ex.\n小園を歩く (It can be said, as I walked through the park) and 小園に歩く (It can be said\nas, I walked to the park)\n\n> Now, coming back to the question, let us consider two verbs 出る(Deru)\n> 出す(dasu).\n\nIf we use 出る instead if 出す with を, the meaning will change entirely. Let me\nshow you how:\n\nIf we know that 出す being a transitive verb needs to act upon something when\nused with をi.e. to act upon an directly object. Whereas, 出る is otherwise.\n\nNow, let us use both 出す and 出る in same sentence, respectively:\n\n> 家を出す. Now, over here, since 出す is used therefore, it will directly act upon\n> the object i.e. house. Thereby, meaning \"leave the house\". Now, this leave\n> the house, will have the context that you actually held the house in your\n> hand and then left it (Like some super hero). Which will not make sense,\n> until the context is that. As, the verb to leave is directly acting upon the\n> object in this case.\n>\n> Whereas, when we use 出る, the construction would still be the same as in,\n> 家を出る and will also translate to \"leave the house\". However, this leave the\n> house would mean, leave through the house or rather leave the house and go\n> somewhere (or anyplace or nowhere, as the case maybe). As, the verb, being\n> intransitive is not acting upon the direct object i.e. house.\n\nSimilar meaning can be given to other use of を with intransitive verbs.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-02-05T15:22:28.747",
"id": "74265",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-05T15:22:28.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36729",
"parent_id": "21313",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21313 | 21321 | 21321 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21315",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have come across this sentence:\n\n> 毎日同じ **物** を食べる **の** は、面白くない\n\nAnd I'm unclear as to why the の particle is required here since the noun has\nbeen established using 物; is it okay to omit the の in this case or would that\ngrammatically invalidate the sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T01:11:23.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21314",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T01:24:20.630",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-16T01:13:31.443",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7994",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"nouns",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "Requirement of の in this sentence?",
"view_count": 241
} | [
{
"body": "The thing is that in this sentence, what is uninteresting is not the `物` but\nthe fact that you eat the same thing everyday.\n\nThus, you can \"nominalize\" the verb into `食べるの`.\n\nAfter that, it's simply a matter of 「は」indicating the subject. You can thus\nparenthesize the phrase as :\n\n`「毎日同じ物を食べるの」は面白くない `\n\nNote that this is similar, albeit with a different nuance to `食べることは` where\n`こと` has the same function as `の`.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T01:24:20.630",
"id": "21315",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T01:24:20.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"parent_id": "21314",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21314 | 21315 | 21315 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I see the pattern [Adj1]っちゃあ[Adj1]（けど） relatively often, and I know that I've\nlearned it before... I even know what it means. ...but what is it an\nabbreviation of? It is an abbreviation of something, right?\n\nI've thought maybe ～といえば～ or ～というのは～, or something else along those lines, but\n1) none of them seem to feel right to me, and 2) there aren't any relevant\nresults on Google with those, so I assume (perhaps incorrectly?) that they're\nincorrect.\n\nSo what is っちゃあ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T06:16:05.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21318",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-16T17:16:46.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "384",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"abbreviations"
],
"title": "What is being abbreviated as っちゃあ in 「忙しいっちゃあ忙しいけど…」?",
"view_count": 1022
} | [
{
"body": "「(adjective)っちゃあ(same adjective)（だ）けど」＝\n\n「～～って[言]{い}っちゃ（あ）～～（だ）けど」＝\n\n「～～って言ったら～～（だ）けど」\n\n\"somewhat ~~\", \"~~ to a degree\", \"You could call it ~~, I guess\", etc.\n\n「[忙]{いそが}しいっちゃあ忙しいけど」= \"I am somewhat busy if not terribly so\".\n\nThe nuance is that you are not busy enough to want to actively tell everyone\nthat you are busy. If anything, you are only mildly busy. Hope this explains\nwhy the quotative「って言う」 is used in the expression. You are in effect\n\"labeling\" the degree of your own occupiedness.\n\nYou are right. This (the version using っちゃあ) has been a very common colloquial\nexpression for quite a few years now.\n\nI do not remember hearing or saying it as a kid, but that may be because I was\nliving in Nagoya back then. Around Tokyo right now, you would hear it many\ntimes everyday.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T06:56:25.273",
"id": "21319",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T10:59:01.883",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-16T10:59:01.883",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21318",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "っちゃあ is totally convertible to といえば, except that っちゃあ sounds very chatty and\nrough while といえば can be used in formal expressions. You can say 忙しいといえば忙しいけど,\nand it conveys the same meaning.\n\nAs for the word form, actually there are other forms like っていやあ and ってやあ. They\nphonetically seem to fall between といえば and っちゃあ, making the presumable process\nof sound change traceable like this:\n\n 1. といえば /toieba/ -- original form.\n 2. っていえば /Qteieba/ -- colloquial **って** instead of formal **と**\n 3. っていやあ /QteiyaH/ -- **b** drops and **ea** collapses into **yaH** (keeping 2 moras)\n 4. ってやあ /QteyaH/ -- **i** dissipates between **e** and **y** , due to its phonetical similarity to them.\n 5. っちゃあ /QcyaH/ -- **e** drops and impossible ***ty** automatically turns **cy**\n\nPlus, there is even more shortend form:\n\n 6. っちゃ /Qcya/\n\nAll these six forms are possible, though #4 is rather rare.\n\nBy the way there are also forms like ってえば and ってば, which seem to be another\nline of sound change: Qteieba → QteHba → Qteba.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T08:53:37.327",
"id": "21367",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-16T17:16:46.267",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-16T17:16:46.267",
"last_editor_user_id": "7667",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "21318",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21318 | null | 21319 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In English, before clocks were commonplace, the word \"clockwise\" was obviously\nnot in common use. Instead, the closest alternative to \"clockwise\" was the\nnow-archaic word \"deasil\", and its antonym was \"widdershins\" (or, perhaps,\npeople just used \"right\" and \"left\"; see also: [What did we say before\n“clockwise”?](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/72054/43004) on English.SE).\n\nThe Japanese word for \"clockwise\" - 時計回り - also involves clocks. What was the\nJapanese word for 時計回り before 時計 became commonplace? I see that 右回り is given\nas a synonym/definition for 時計回り in some dictionaries; is this what was most\ncommonly used in olden times?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T16:15:28.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21325",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-21T16:26:20.537",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:38:10.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What was the Japanese word for \"clockwise\" (時計回り) before clocks were commonplace?",
"view_count": 885
} | [
{
"body": "According to this source\n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q114784381> , the\nterm 時計回り was also used with sundials, and though the length and time of\nsunlight varied with seasons, the direction didn't, so 「時計回り」was always in\nuse.\n\nThis link <http://kids.gakken.co.jp/box/nazenani/pdf/12_kikai/X1130042.pdf>\npresents the other versions 「右回りと左回り」.Clockwise is 右回り.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T18:41:53.100",
"id": "21340",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-17T18:56:19.350",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-17T18:56:19.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "7576",
"owner_user_id": "7576",
"parent_id": "21325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The content below is an exact copy of [a deleted\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/21341/3437) by [user\nl'electeur](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/4032/l%C3%A9lecteur).\n\n* * *\n\nNoun: [右]{みぎ}ま **は** り\n\nVerb: 右へま **は** る\n\nは ＞ わ back then.\n\nEven today, 「右ま **わ** り」（は changed to わ over time） is a far more intuitive\nword than 「[時計回]{とけいまわ}り」 for native speakers. The only time I myself used\n「時計回り」 and 「[反]{はん}時計回り = \"CCW\"」 often in my life was when I was working for a\nmachine manufacturer. Even then, I was using 「右まわり」 and 「[左]{ひだり}まわり」 outside\nof work.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T15:52:30.410",
"id": "21406",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T15:52:30.410",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"parent_id": "21325",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21325 | null | 21406 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21327",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading a JLPT N5 graded text (to practice reading with kanjis) and I\nunderstand all of it except for the following sentence:\n\n> ペットとしてしいくするのはかんたんです。\n\nI don't understand the として in that sentence. I looked it up on\n<http://jgram.org> and [it's listed as an N2 level\nexpression](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=toshite), so I guess\nit's quite advanced. I read the definition (\"indicates the capacity, role, or\nfunction of someone or something\"), but I don't get how it fits into the\nsentence (I understand it as 'Breeding a pet is easy')",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T16:49:41.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21326",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T02:22:55.463",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T02:22:55.463",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"expressions"
],
"title": "What does として mean in 「ペットとしてしいくするのはかんたんです。」?",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "`〜として` in this sense is like you said: in the role/function/capacity of. You\ncan often remember it `As (a) 〜`. So in this sentence, it might be easier to\nunderstand if you translate this way.\n\n> * ペットとして[飼育]{し・いく}するのは[簡単]{かん・たん}です。 → Having/Raising/Keeping X (whatever\n> animal) **as a pet** is easy. (I think 飼育 is probably one of these\n> definitions here more than \"breeding\", but without more context from the\n> passage... See comments below.)\n>\n\nHere are some other examples that might help:\n\n> * あの人はがんばる会社員 **として** よく知られている → That guy is well known **as a** hard-\n> working employee.\n> * これは母じゃなくて、友達として言いますけど．．． → I'm not telling you this as your mother, but\n> **as a** friend...\n> * 敵 **として** 扱う → Treat someone **as an** enemy\n>",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T17:47:32.407",
"id": "21327",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T19:35:16.700",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-16T19:35:16.700",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21326",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21326 | 21327 | 21327 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21329",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that the On- and Kun- readings are important to know and\nunderstand. However, what about the Nanori readings? Are they worth studying\nif I am aiming to just take the JLPT tests?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T21:19:46.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21328",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T21:44:04.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4610",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Nanori reading needed for JLPT?",
"view_count": 4968
} | [
{
"body": "No, you definitely don't need to know _nanori_ readings for the JLPT.\nHonestly, you can read a lot of basic things pretty well without knowing very\nmany _nanori_ readings.\n\nWhy? Well, suppose you see this ([derived from Japanese\nWikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AE%89%E5%80%8D%E6%99%8B%E4%B8%89)):\n\n> **安倍 晋三** は、日本の政治家。自由民主党所属の衆議院議員（8期）、内閣総理大臣（第90・96・97代）、自由民主党総裁（第21・25代）。\n\nYou may have no idea how to pronounce 安倍晋三, but as long as you recognize that\nit is a name, you'll survive. For example, later on, you might read this:\n\n> **安倍** は「幼い頃から私には身近に政治がありました」と回想している。\n\nFor all you know, maybe 安倍 is pronounced ばびうべぼ, but for the purpose of\nunderstanding the text, you know that the 安倍 here refers to the same thing as\nthe 安倍 earlier.\n\nNow, of course, if you know that あべしんぞう was the prime minister of Japan, but\ndon't know that 安倍晋三 is read あべしんぞう, you'll run into problems down the line.\n_Eventually_ , you absolutely should learn as much _nanori_ as you can,\nbecause they are useful to know for reading names in real life (though, even\nif you do know your _nanori_ , [reading Japanese names in kanji can be fraught\nwith peril](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5529/3437)).\n\nBut for basic texts, including the JLPT (in which all passages are pretty much\nself-contained), _nanori_ are a low priority.\n\n* * *\n\nAlso, as a practical matter, it's not really effective to sit down and \"learn\nall the _nanori_ readings\" in the same way that works for _kun_ and _on_\nreadings. If you look at [Wiktionary's list of _nanori_ for\n一](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%B8%80#Readings), you will see that\nthere's a _lot_ of them - 13, by my count. But even if you memorized them all,\nyou probably wouldn't be able to read the name 一彦 correctly on your first try\n(let's assume that you know that 彦 is pronounced ひこ in names).\n\nIt turns out that 一彦 can be pronounced いちひこ・いつひこ or かずひこ・かつひこ (I think that\nいちひこ and かずひこ are more common than the other two), but not いひこ or おさむひこ or\nすすむひこ or はじめひこ or ひひこ. (Of course, the other _nanori_ are used in other names\ncontaining 一.)\n\nOver time, you'll probably get a feel for which combinations are likely as\nnames, and which aren't (for example, I intuited that いちひこ and かずひこ were the\nonly correct readings, which was close - there are also the two other variants\nI listed) - but sitting down and learning all the _nanori_ for kanji isn't\ngoing to get you there.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T21:37:06.970",
"id": "21329",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T21:44:04.807",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"parent_id": "21328",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21328 | 21329 | 21329 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21336",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My question is on how to properly interpret utterances like the below.\n\n> あれに正面から挑むのは中々に手間よ。どうするの？\n>\n> 下手な小細工が通じる相手じゃないからなあ。正面から挑むだけだよ\n\nOccasionally I'll see someone end the sentence with からな・からね where the sentence\ncould have continued on and still had made sense without the 。.\n\nShould these utterances be treated like 「下手な小細工が通じる相手じゃないから正面から挑むだけだよ」 in\nterms of meaning but with the interjection particle there to serve its\nfunction, Should it be treated as two separate utterances with implied stuff\nafter the から, or something else?\n\nedit:additional examples\n\n(rumour of the protagonists duel has spread throughout the school and his\nfriends are talking about it.\n\n```\n\n 「あいかわらず、噂の拡散スピードが尋常じゃないわね。デイルが口に出したの、ついさっきの授業なのに」\n \n 「まあ、ある意味で閉鎖された世界のうえに、みんな娯楽に飢えてるからな。こういった噂はいち早く広まるさ」\n \n 「それにまあ、デイルは人気あるからな。あのデイルが人族と勝負、となれば誰もが興味深々だろう\n \n```\n\nedit 2: After l'électeur's post I went and opened up some studies done on the\nusage of から and came across\n[原因・理由表現とは](http://hougen.sakura.ne.jp/shuppan/2007/1-1.pdf) which describes\nthe usage of 「から」と「ので」 with 5 usages.\n\n```\n\n (1)事態の原因-主節が具体的な事実・事態を表し、従属節が主節の事態そのものを引き起こす原因・理\n 由を表す場合であ\n \n (2)行為の理由-主節に話者の意志的な行為や聞き手に対する働きかけが現れ、その行為を行う理由が「か\n ら」「ので」によってされる。\n \n (3)判断の根拠-This one is too long but this isn't the usage anyway\n \n (4)発言・態度の根拠-主節に、聞き手に対する働きかけや話し手の意志などの発言や態度が現れ、そのような\n 発言・態度の根拠を表す場合がある。\n \n (5)理由を表さない用法-原因・理由文の中には、原因・理由を表しているとはいい難いものがある\n \n```\n\nand lastly we have the usage of it as a sentence ending particle(which in this\ncase fits with the location)\n\nCould anyone explain which usage this then and how it is used?\n\nBased on my understanding of these it isn't 1 or 3. 4 and 2 I'm not really\nsure about but they don't seem to fit which then means it would be the usage\nof it as a sentence ending particle(which I haven't been able to find any real\ndocuments about that explain its usage apart from implying something else\nafter the utterance).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-16T21:58:29.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21330",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-15T03:47:02.807",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-17T17:44:44.700",
"last_editor_user_id": "7263",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "usage of から at the end of the first sentence with the second part in the next",
"view_count": 1573
} | [
{
"body": "> 「あれに[正面]{しょうめん}から[挑]{いど}むのは[中々]{なかなか}に[手間]{てま}よ。どうするの？」\n>\n> 「[下手]{へた}な[小細工]{こざいく}が[通]{つう}じる[相手]{あいて}じゃないからなあ。正面から挑むだけだよ。」\n\nMy own translation (just in case):\n\n> Person A: \"It'll be pretty troublesome challenging that guy head-on. What ya\n> gonna do?\"\n>\n> Person B: \"He's not the kind to fall for cheap tricks, for sure. Guess I'll\n> just challenge him head-on.\"\n\n**_My answer_** to your question would be that the two sentences in Person B's\nline (in the original, of course) would look better if they were left as are\nin two separate sentences.\n\nWhy? Because for the sentence structure 「Mini-sentence #1 + から + Mini-sentence\n#2。」 to sound natural, the content of Mini-sentence #2 would need to represent\nthe logical and specific (or concrete) result or effect of the content of\nMini-sentence #1.\n\nIn your example, the idea of 「正面から挑む」 was originally mentioned by Person A,\nnot Person B, to begin with. In addition, 「正面から挑む」 as a strategy is not a very\nspecific one. It is almost like saying \"Let's go for broke!\"\n\nWhat would happen if you combined the two sentences into one using から in the\nmiddle? Quite frankly, I do not think most native speakers would notice\nanything strange. I noticed it because this is a place for questions and\nanswers and I read your question carefully a few times. Had I read the\ncombined-into-one sentence in a story, I probably would not have felt anything\nreally unusual about it. It is 100% informal spoken language, so people would\njust read on without thinking anything.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T12:46:14.143",
"id": "21336",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-15T03:47:02.807",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-15T03:47:02.807",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21330",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Holy Cow, You are soooooooooooo good at Japanese!.\n\nAnyway, I was interested in this discussion so that let me join in as a\n\"complement\" lol.\n\nI would like to apologize first off if my \"answer\" MAY be difficult since your\nquestion level is quite high.\n\nNow, let me go onto your first question.\n\n> > Should these utterances be treated like 「下手な小細工が通じる相手じゃないから正面から挑むだけだよ」 in\n> terms of meaning but with the interjection particle there to serve its\n> function, Should it be treated as two separate utterances with implied stuff\n> after the から, or something else?\n\nI am afraid, your English is a bit difficult( I would appreciate if you\n\"clarify\" or rather, please do not ask in a long sentence, but cut some part\none by one, so that I can comprehend precisely (s)).\n\nAfter having read your sentence, I personally assumed you know very well the\ndefinition of this particle な. な is the particle denoting the \"utterance\" by\nthe person who said it him/her self. And after checking and surfing through\nthe multiple sites, なあ is a variable version of な, ( and especially spoken in\nthe \"West Japan\"??????? I DO use, however ) but defined same with な, but \"to\nme, personally\", なあ sounds more frank than な. Though even な itself stands as a\nfrank word to me.\n\nAnd\n\n> > Should it be treated as two separate utterances with implied stuff after\n> the から, or something else?\n\n**No.** We go here to your last question.\n\n> > edit 2: After l'électeur's post I went and opened up some studies done on\n> the usage of から and came across 原因・理由表現とは which describes the usage of\n> 「から」と「ので」 with 5 usages\n>>\n\n>> (1)事態の原因-主節が具体的な事実・事態を表し、従属節が主節の事態そのものを引き起こす原因・理 由を表す場合であ\n\n……… ( I would like to copy and end your post here since it it long. )\n\nSo, as you had checked out, から denotes the beforementioned reasons.... so on.\n\nThus, I said NO. Because the conjunctive particle から, as you mentioned, is\nfunctioning as the conjunctive, thus, it is treated as one sentence with\nconjunctive から asserted \"between\".\n\nOh, I found out it is not so complex. Wow ( just my exclamation, s))",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T06:31:05.283",
"id": "21342",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T06:31:05.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21330",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21330 | 21336 | 21336 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21334",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What are the major prescriptive style guides for writing regular Japanese\nprose (as opposed to e.g. technical writing)?\n\nI suspect that this question will have a fairly short list as an answer - if\nyou were to ask the same about American English, you'd get the _Chicago Manual\nof Style_ , the _Associated Press Stylebook_ , the _MLA Style Manual_ , and\nmaybe a couple others at most (e.g. some might suggest _The Elements of Style_\nor the APA's style guide).\n\n(The [Japanese Wikipedia article\nスタイルガイド](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B9%E3%82%BF%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB%E3%82%AC%E3%82%A4%E3%83%89)\nis strangely silent on Japanese style guides aside from a couple external\nlinks, though I suspect there is information I could find elsewhere - if only\nI knew what the style guides were called!)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T02:19:05.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21333",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-15T15:47:00.090",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-15T15:47:00.090",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"publishing",
"composition"
],
"title": "What are the major prescriptive style guides for Japanese prose?",
"view_count": 447
} | [
{
"body": "The most well known style guide for the media is 『記者ハンドブック\n新聞用字用語集』([official](http://www.kyodo.co.jp/kkservice/HB/),\n[Amazon](http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4764106191/)) by 共同通信社.\n[共同通信社](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyodo_News) is a famous news agency, thus\nI think it's basically the Japanese equivalent of the AP Stylebook. I used it\non a daily basis, because I was a magazine writer/editor. Others are\n『日本語表記ルールブック』 by 日本エディタースクール, 『新しい国語表記ハンドブック』 by 三省堂, 『NHKことばのハンドブック』 by\n日本放送協会, 『朝日新聞の用語の手引』by 朝日新聞 and so on.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T03:58:06.143",
"id": "21334",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-17T03:58:06.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3506",
"parent_id": "21333",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21333 | 21334 | 21334 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21338",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I’m having major trouble understanding and translating these example\nsentences.\n\n> 試験や勉強で忙しくなると、どうして勉強しているのか忘れがちになる。でも勉強は自分のためにしているということを忘れないでほしい。\n\nMy translation: When you become busy with exams and your studies, why do you\ntend to forget your studying? But in order to study for yourself I don’t want\nyou to forget?\n\nMy translations don’t make much sense but that’s the trouble I’m having. I\nunderstand all the vocab and grammar used but I just can’t translate that into\nintelligible English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T12:18:50.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21335",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-17T14:43:10.763",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-17T14:43:10.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Translating “どうして〜のか忘れがちになる”",
"view_count": 247
} | [
{
"body": "The mistake you're doing is misunderstanding the [usage of \"embedded\"\nquestions](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13034/usage-\nof-%E3%81%8B-after-a-clause/13038#13038).\n\nMy translation:\n\n> When you get busy with exams and your studies it can be easy to forget why\n> you're even studying, but I want you to remember that you're studying for\n> your own benefit.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T12:47:03.563",
"id": "21337",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-17T14:37:37.180",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-17T14:37:37.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"parent_id": "21335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Parse it this say:\n\n> {どうして勉強しているのか(を)}忘れがちになる。\n\nどうして勉強しているか is the object of 忘れ(る).\n\n> 「勉強は自分のためにしている」 **と** いうことを忘れないでほしい。\n\nThe と is the quotative particle.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-17T12:47:13.443",
"id": "21338",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-17T12:47:13.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21335",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21335 | 21338 | 21338 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21349",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could someone please help with the correct answer to this N3 challenge? I\nthought the correct one is ために but apparently I'm wrong.\n\n今度の試合に勝てる （ために）一生けんめいがんばります。\n\nVariants given: ために ことに ように みたいに",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T12:28:42.537",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21344",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T16:20:39.273",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T16:10:49.083",
"last_editor_user_id": "4851",
"owner_user_id": "4851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is ために here a wrong one?",
"view_count": 378
} | [
{
"body": "You'd say\n\n> 今度の試合に勝てる **ように** 一生けんめいがんばります。(potential form + ように)\n\nor\n\n> 今度の試合に勝 **つために** 一生けんめいがんばります。(dictionary form + ために)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T16:20:39.273",
"id": "21349",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T16:20:39.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21344",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21344 | 21349 | 21349 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21348",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is this で particle here? It's not a time or a place Same with 戦いで怪我をした. I\ncan't see the usage in any dictionaries unless 場所 is being used in some\nabstract sense to just refer to the setting in which the action takes place.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T15:04:20.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21346",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T16:06:56.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9184",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "で in the usage of サッカーで怪我をした etc",
"view_count": 51
} | [
{
"body": "It's pretty much as you described it. In this case, で is more of an \"in\", but\nnot for a time or place, rather a setting. The same usage is seen in English,\ntoo, like\n\n> * \"I injured myself in battle\"\n> * \"I hurt myself in [a game of] soccer\".\n>\n\nIt's pretty intuitive, and the same happens in many languages, with the\nreasoning being that you're treating \"battle\" as \"the time when I was in\nbattle\" (although obviously not in so many words).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T16:06:56.080",
"id": "21348",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T16:06:56.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "21346",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21346 | 21348 | 21348 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Example:\n\n> 美人じゃなくて悪かったですね！ (sarcastic)\n\ncompared to someone who is using a room and is told `あんまり広い部屋じゃなくて悪いな`\n\nOr for example the difference between 無事でよかった and I can't think of the\ncorresponding for just いい, but I'm sure you understand my question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T15:20:38.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21347",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-11T14:20:37.927",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-15T08:39:21.870",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9184",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 23,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"modality"
],
"title": "Usage of plain i-adjectives or た form (悪かったｖ悪い、良かったｖいい etc）",
"view_count": 1145
} | [
{
"body": "**_Modal vs. Present Tense vs. Past Tense_**\n\n> 「[美人]{びじん}じゃなくて[悪]{わる}かっ **た** ですね！」 = \"Too bad I'm not such a beauty!\"\n\nThat is called 「ムードの『た』」 = **the \"modal 'ta'\",** not the past tense 'ta'.\n**_It is used when one's expectation has just matched or failed to match\nreality._**\n\nThe female speaker of the sentence above knows that the male listener has\nexpected her to be pretty, but he has just found out that she is not so. In\nthis situation, the speaker will use 「悪かっ **た** 」 = \"Too bad!\", not 「悪い」, even\nthough it is happening at the present moment.\n\n> 「あんまり[広]{ひろ}い[部屋]{へや}じゃなくて悪いな。」 = \"Sorry this is not such a big room!\"\n\nIn this case, 「悪い」 is in the plain present tense = \"Sorry about that!\". The\nspeaker knows, as well as the listener, that the listener was in no position\nto expect a large room in the first place.\n\nFor comparison, here is an example of the past-tense 「悪かった」.\n\n> 「あの[時]{とき}は、いい部屋が[空]{あ}いてなくて[本当]{ほんとう}に悪かった。」 = \"At that time, I was really\n> sorry that we didn't have a nice room available (for you).\"\n\n「あの時」 alone should tell us that this sentence is about a time in the past.\n\n* * *\n\n「[無事]{ぶじ}でよかった。」 = \"I am (or was) relieved to find out (something) is (or was)\nOK.\"\n\nWithout further context, it is impossible to tell whether this is the modal\n'ta' or the past-tense 'ta'. It would, however, be safe to say that this\nphrase is more often used when one has just found out that something/someone\nis OK -- in other words, within the modal 'ta' territory = \"I **am** relieved\n~~\".\n\n* * *\n\n**Other examples of the modal 'ta'** :\n\nWhen you have just found an item you have been looking for, you will say 「あっ\n**た** 」, not 「あ **る** 」.\n\nIf it is a person that you have found, you will say 「い **た** 」, not 「い **る**\n」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T01:41:32.250",
"id": "21377",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-11T14:20:37.927",
"last_edit_date": "2017-07-11T14:20:37.927",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21347",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 30
},
{
"body": "The past tense and the present tense can both be used to express the feelings\nof the speaker:\n\n> ご親切にどうもありがとう **ございました** 。\n>\n> ご親切にどうもありがとう **ございます** 。\n>\n> = Thank you so much for your kindness.\n\nBoth can be used in the same situation but each will carry a different nuance\n:\n\nThe former insists on the fact that it is the achievement of the action that\nis the cause of the feelings of the speaker.\n\nThe latter insists on what the speaker is feeling at the time he is speaking\nrather than on the action that caused those feelings.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T01:52:10.730",
"id": "21378",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T14:41:26.767",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "21347",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21347 | null | 21377 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21353",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to break the sentence エサとつてくる into different parts. It is translated as\n\"I'm going to get some food\"\n\nエサ means bait or food(relating to animals). \nくる means come or will come.\n\nbut I'm struggeling with the とつて part. Bing and babelfish translate it with\n\"and shall be\" but this doesn't seem to make sense to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T16:27:08.057",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21350",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T17:21:45.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9186",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "what does とつて in the context of エサとつてくる mean?",
"view_count": 239
} | [
{
"body": "It's a small error. That should be a 'っ', not a 'つ'.\n\n> 餌{えさ}取{と}って来{く}る。\n\nIt now means \"[I'll] get some bait then come back.\" 〜ってくる is quite a common\nstructure in Japanese with other verbs, showing you'll do the action then come\nback (in this case getting the bait, then returning).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T17:21:45.750",
"id": "21353",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T17:21:45.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "21350",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21350 | 21353 | 21353 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21362",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I try to read news in Japanese and sometimes I see equals sign used inside\nsentences. I tend to think text to the right side of \"＝\" is kind of a\nconsequence of the left part. It does not look like it has anything to do with\nany sort of equality. [This Wikipedia\narticle](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equals_sign) notes that it can be used\nas the separator for names, but this usage doesn't seem to fit my case. Here\nis an example taken from [Jiji\nPress'](http://www.jiji.com/jc/c?g=spo_30&k=2015011900012) site:\n\n> 安倍首相「どんな結果でも友好を」＝ヨルダン国王とサッカー談義.\n\nI hope somebody can clear this out for me.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T16:36:33.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21351",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T12:05:59.937",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-22T12:05:59.937",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "2922",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"symbols"
],
"title": "What does \"＝\" equals sign mean in Japanese news headlines?",
"view_count": 3120
} | [
{
"body": "Personally, I think it might function the same as a colon (:) does in English\nin a newspaper or magazine article.\n\n> 安倍首相「どんな結果でも友好を」＝ヨルダン国王とサッカー談義.\n\nIf you saw this in a newspaper article, it would means Prime Minister Abe says\n\"We wish mutual friendship whatever the outcome may be\" = At the conversation\nwith Jordan king about soccer.\n\nI think it just makes a complement or something like that.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T21:28:47.950",
"id": "21359",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T22:32:17.993",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T22:32:17.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21351",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "If you take a look at [Japanese\nnewspapers](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%E6%96%B0%E8%81%9E&tbm=isch),\nyou'll find that the headlines are often stratified in multiple levels. The\nbiggest one is the eye-catcher, and the rest is some supplementary information\nto explain further situation.\n\nNow, the questioned `＝` is mostly used to delimit the \"main\" and \"sub\"\nheadlines in the one line environment. See [this\ntopic](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1192955791) in\na Japanese forum. I'm not familiar with English journalism at all, but if I\nhad to name a closest equivalent, it could be _semicolon_ , as I guess from\n[this page](http://web.ku.edu/~edit/heads.html).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T02:08:18.540",
"id": "21362",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T03:00:31.013",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-19T03:00:31.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21351",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21351 | 21362 | 21362 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21355",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've started reading a light slice-of-life comedy manga called からかい上手の高木さん. I\nwas wondering why the title is written that way, it seems a bit strange to me.\nShouldn't it be 高木さんの上手なからかい?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T17:49:05.110",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21354",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-08T14:10:36.973",
"last_edit_date": "2015-10-08T14:10:36.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"manga",
"word-order"
],
"title": "Why is the title of this manga 『からかい上手の高木さん』 instead of 『高木さんの上手なからかい』?",
"view_count": 795
} | [
{
"body": "からかい上手の高木さん refers to Takagi-san as good at teasing. In this context, the\nからかい上手 is an adjective, which always come before the noun in Japanese, even\nwhere subordinate clauses would be used in English. If it were written the\nother way around, it would be talking about Takagi-san's skillful teasing\n(where teasing is the topic rather than Takagi-san).\n\nGrammatically it checks out, but it's the difference between talking about\n\"Takagi, who is skillful at teasing\", and \"Takagi's skillful teasing.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T18:47:51.543",
"id": "21355",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-17T09:59:24.120",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-17T09:59:24.120",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "21354",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 21354 | 21355 | 21355 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that 別に means \"not particularly\" sometimes, but what is its role in\nthis sentence?\n\n別に山田の私服を見るのは、はじめてってわけじゃないんだけどな。\n\nI assume it means something like \"it's not exactly the first time I've seen\nYamada in plain clothes\", but I don't know what exactly 別に is doing or what\nverb it's modifying.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T19:02:20.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21356",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-29T12:01:32.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5305",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How does 別に function as an adverb?",
"view_count": 508
} | [
{
"body": "Certainly. [The definition given in\n大辞林](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E5%88%A5%E3%81%AB&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_betuni_-010)\nis below.\n\n> > （ 副 ） （下に打ち消しの語を伴って）取り立てて言うこともないという気持ちを表す。とりたてて。特別に。 「 －用はありません」 「\n> －変わった様子もない」 〔その話題を軽く拒否する気持ちを表す。応答の言葉として，感動詞的にも用いられる。「『寒くないか』 『－』」〕\n\nSo as you said, \"not necessarily need to mention 〜\", \"It goes so particularly\nwithout saying...\" etc?\n\nAnd what it modifies is the postpositional particle ぬ or ない, which denotes the\ndenial of the noun, noun phrase, adjective, etc, which comes \"before\" ぬ or ない。\n\nEx : 今日は別に寒くない。--> Today, it is not cold especially.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T21:12:12.297",
"id": "21358",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-18T22:18:59.340",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T22:18:59.340",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21356",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21356 | null | 21358 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21398",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to translate something like the following:\n\n> I watched a movie with together with my friends. \n> _Not at all_ did I watch it _alone_.\n\nWhere the _\"not at all\"_ is supposed to express obvious sarcasm regarding the\n_alone_ -ness. \n**EDIT:** _Obvious sarcasm_ because _\"I\"_ doesn't really have friends, except\nmaybe imaginary ones etc. \nThe exact wording isn't really important. It should just sound like a complete\nand obvious rejection of _alone_. (If that makes any sense...)\n\nSo my attempt was:\n\n> 友達{ともだち}と一緒{いっしょ}に映画{えいが}を見{み}た。 \n> 全然{ぜんぜん}一人{ひとり}では見{み}なかったよ。\n\nI was told that this would not have my intended meaning because 全然{ぜんぜん}\nrelates to just 見{み}なかった and not the whole sentence. So it would mean _\"Alone,\nI did not at all watch it.\"_ \nAs an alternative the following would be possible:\n\n> … \n> 本当{ほんとう}に一人{ひとり}では見{み}なかったよ。\n\nSince this is supposed to be a correction, I understand this to translate as\n_\"I really did not watch it alone.\"_ and not, analogously, as _\"Alone, I\nreally did not watch it.\"_\n\n 1. If everything I'm assuming is correct, why do those two adverbs translate differently in this way, that is, why do they relate to different parts of the sentence? If not, what are my mistakes? \n\n 2. What would be the best translation of my original sentence? Maybe\n\n> 友達{ともだち}と一緒{いっしょ}に映画{えいが}を見{み}た、全然{ぜんぜん}一人{ひとり}ではなく。\n\n?",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T21:53:50.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21360",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T11:16:27.960",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T23:25:18.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "9188",
"owner_user_id": "9188",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Difference between 本当に and 全然 in a negative sentence",
"view_count": 390
} | [
{
"body": "Although I'm not sure I got the full meaning what you tried to show us in your\nexamples, I think the difference between `本当に……ない` and `全然……ない` seems already\nobvious in your own translation.\n\nAs you said, `本当に` means _really_ , while `全然` means _at all_. Thus naturally,\nthe former wants to modify the whole _event_ , and the latter, the _negation_.\nPut simply, `全然` always looks for the closest \"not\", and `本当に` looks for the\nclosest predicate.\n\nNow if the sentence has only one \"not\":\n\n> **全然** 一人ではできない。 ≈ 一人では **全然** できない。 \n> Both roughly means \"I **definitely** ca **n't** do it alone.\"\n\nBut,\n\n> **全然** 書けないわけではない。 _It's not that I can't write **at all**._ \n> ≠ 書けないわけでは **全然** ない。 _It's **definitely** not that I can't write._\n\nOn the other hand, `本当に` is:\n\n> **本当に** 一人では危険だ。 _**Trust me** , It's dangerous (going) alone._ (i.e. \"it is\n> dangerous alone\" is real.) \n> ≠ 一人では **本当に** 危険だ。 _It's **really** dangerous (when you go) alone._ (i.e.\n> \"be dangerous\" is real.)\n\nSo you could say (a) `全然一人では見なかった。` is grammatically parallel to (b)\n`一人では本当に見なかった。`, but not to (c) `本当に一人では見なかった。`\n\nLast but not least, I copied your example in (a), but I have to say the\nsentences (a) and (b) doesn't sound really natural to me.\n\n* * *\n\nFor your second question, actually, if I were in the speaker's shoes, I\nwouldn't use either of those constructions. I'd instead say:\n\n> （別に）一人で見たわけじゃない（し／もん／から）。 \n> （別に）一人なんかじゃなかった（し／もん／から）。\n\nI still can't grasp the nuance of your \"obvious sarcasm\", but as you may know,\n別に also is a typical [tsundere](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundere)\nexpression to deny an obvious fact.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-21T07:21:09.097",
"id": "21398",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T11:16:27.960",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-23T11:16:27.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21360",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21360 | 21398 | 21398 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This question is a mix between the usage of 侮れない and the usage of なかった instead\nof ない in the sentence `意外と、うちのカノジョも侮れなかった`\n\nThe usage of 侮れない like in the example below seems to refer to one who you\ncannot make light of,be unprepared against and so on. The kind of sentence\nbelow is what I would expect when someone is fighting someone,playing against\nthem in a game/etc and you had the impression they would be a formidable\nopponent and then they did something that made you think the below.\n\n```\n\n やはり彼は侮れない相手だ\n \n```\n\nBut then here is where my question comes in. How is the た form used in these\nsorts of usages? Because surely a \"past sense\" interpretation doesn't make\nsense to me. Does the utterance(in meaning) mean that:\n\n1) She is someone who is 侮れない\n\n2) The た form in this case is used to represent that she was already 侮れない\nbefore this action and he has just realised this by her actions/words\n\nI'm sure there's some more points here, but can anyone clarify this for me? I\nsuppose this is similar to how when looking for something and then they find\nit they would say いた. Or perhaps if someone heard sounds and was wondering who\nit was and then realised who it was then they would use だった but if they came\nacross them normally they would use だ/じゃないか/etc",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-18T22:34:38.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21361",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T18:40:18.233",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-18T22:54:09.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "9184",
"owner_user_id": "9184",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "The usage of 侮れなかった",
"view_count": 422
} | [
{
"body": "As a native speaker, and scanning through actual usages of it online, my\nfeeling is that 侮れなかった is most often used when **recounting a past experience\nin which the thing was perceived to be formidable**. So, what is in the past\nis the _time of perceiving_ it to be formidable.\n\nIt's interesting because I think this suggests 侮れない is chiefly a perception\ndependent on a perceiver, rather than a property inherent in the object.\n\nNot sure if this makes sense, but I'll add it anyway:\n\n### Correct:\n\nPast | <- [Perceived formidable] -------------------> | Present\n\nSimilar mental time model in English: “She was nice to me”\n\n### Incorrect:\n\nPast | <------------------- [Perceived formidable] -> | Present\n\nSimilar mental time model in English: “It turns out she was nice”\n\n* * *\n\nAlso, while 侮れなかった does not specifically imply “it used to be formidable and\nnow is not”, it can mean “it was formidable (and now is dead/defunct)”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T18:40:18.233",
"id": "28010",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T18:40:18.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "21361",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21361 | null | 28010 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21365",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> [name] **とでも** 呼んでくれたら嬉しい\n\nWhat does とでも mean here? I know what と and でも mean separately but why are they\nused together here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T07:20:29.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21363",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-24T14:08:08.907",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-24T14:08:08.907",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "What does とでも mean?",
"view_count": 2742
} | [
{
"body": "The key word here is 「[呼]{よ}ぶ」 = \"to call (someone) by (a certain name)\"\n\n「[Name] + と + 呼ぶ」 = \"to call (someone [name]) \" 「と」 here is a quotative\nparticle.\n\n「[Name] + と + でも + 呼ぶ」 = \"to call (someone [Name] or something)\"\n\n「でも」 means \"~~ or something\" here.\n\n> 「[name]とでも呼んでくれたら[嬉]{うれ}しい」 = \"I would be happy if you called me [name] or\n> something.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T08:32:38.263",
"id": "21365",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T13:00:37.763",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-19T13:00:37.763",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21363",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21363 | 21365 | 21365 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21370",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the Japanese for [Chinese\nOpera](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_opera)?\n\nThe Japanese language Wikipedia article on Chinese opera is titled [戯曲\n(中国)](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%88%AF%E6%9B%B2_\\(%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD\\)),\nwith \"中国\" merely being disambiguation metadata.\n[戯曲](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E6%88%AF%E6%9B%B2&eng=&dict=edict) apparently\nmeans drama, with no emphasis of it being Chinese.\n\nThe article mentions \"チャイニーズ・オペラ\", which is a katakana transliteration for\n\"Chinese Opera\". However, a transliteration of English seems a bit strange.\n\nDoes Japanese have a semantic gap for \"Chinese Opera\", having only the word\nfor \"drama\", plus words for the specific branches of Chinese Opera?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T08:31:21.433",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21364",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T12:46:13.263",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-19T11:56:43.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "91",
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "Japanese for \"Chinese Opera\"",
"view_count": 204
} | [
{
"body": "I think the most-often used generic word would be 「[京劇]{きょうげき}」 and that is\nused **_many_** times as often as 「チャイニーズ・オペラ」 in the media.\n\nTechnically speaking, 「京劇」 may be used only to refer to the Beijing version of\nthe art, but if you used the term, Japanese-speakers would at least know that\nyou were referring to the \"traditional\" Chinese theater.\n\nI do know for sure that 「[戯曲]{ぎきょく}」 would not be the word you are looking\nfor. It just means a drama or play regardless of its nationality. To Japanese-\nspeakers, \"Hamlet\" is definitely a 戯曲.\n\nNot too many Japanese-speakers would know what you meant if you used\n「チャイニーズ・オペラ」, either.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T12:38:44.213",
"id": "21370",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T12:46:13.263",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-19T12:46:13.263",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21364",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21364 | 21370 | 21370 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.