question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21368",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Wiktionary [lists](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%81%BF%E3%82%8B#Japanese)\na couple of different kanji words that are verbs pronounced \"みる\", some but\nmaybe not all of which are associated with looking at something in one form or\nanother.\n\nWhat's the difference between them? For example, does it depend on whether the\nobject is flat or three dimensional, or if there's a time component involved?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T08:52:33.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21366",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T11:16:32.473",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"homophonic-kanji",
"collocations"
],
"title": "Different kanji forms for \"みる\"",
"view_count": 262
} | [
{
"body": "**EDIT : See this answer too :**\n\n[Difference between 見る and\n観る?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/17858/difference-\nbetween-%E8%A6%8B%E3%82%8B-and-%E8%A6%B3%E3%82%8B/17927#17927)\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT 2 : A very usefull link in the comments of the previous answer.**\n\n<http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/bunkasingi/pdf/ijidoukun_140221.pdf>\n\n* * *\n\nTo be taken with a grain of salt :\n\n見る is the most general, I think it can pretty much replace the others and it's\nthe one you should use if you aren't sure which one is the right one. It means\nto see, to watch, to look...\n\nCombined with と it also means \"to expect that...\", \"to judge that...\", \"To\nconsider that...\" (from what is observed).\n\n> かなり時間オーバーをすると見る。\n>\n> I expect him to do quite a few hours of overtime.\n\n観る means to watch, to contemplate, to gaze at... I think it is mainly used for\nactivities like watching a movie, watching a play... maybe contemplating a\nlandscape (not sure).\n\n診る means to examine (medicaly).\n\n> 医者に診てもらわなくてはいけません。\n>\n> You have to get medical attention.\n\n看る means to look after someone (often medicaly), to take care of someone.\n\nYou have to write みる in ひらがな when used as an auxiliary in the ~てみる form.\n\nI don't know about 視る and the last two are different verbs.\n\nAnd a final observation, this verbs have **a lot** of meanings so this list is\nfar from being exhaustive. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T11:04:45.140",
"id": "21368",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T11:16:32.473",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "21366",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21366 | 21368 | 21368 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, what would the difference between 膝{ひざ}がガクガクする or 膝{ひざ}がガクガクしている\nbe?\n\nI believe the correct definition in Daijirin is\n「恐怖{きょうふ}・疲労{ひろう}・緊張{きんちょう}などのために体{からだ}の一部{いちぶ}が小刻{こきざ}みに震{ふる}えるさま」, but that\ndoesn't help me see how the two differ.\n\nor the difference between:\n\n> 自分{じぶん}で出{だ}しておいてナンだけど、すごい **ドキドキする** 怖{こわ}いかも\n>\n> 自分で出しておいてナンだけど、すごい **ドキドキしている** 怖{こわ}いかも",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T11:18:03.670",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21369",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-25T02:02:00.040",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-25T02:02:00.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"onomatopoeia",
"aspect"
],
"title": "The difference between する and している with onomatopoeias",
"view_count": 1912
} | [
{
"body": "Generally, `〜してる` indicates the state of that onomatopoeia, while `〜する` is\ndescribing the stimulus that caused it.\n\nSay you are watching an intense movie with a friend.\n\n> ドキドキしてる = (My/your/his/their/our) heart is pounding\n>\n> ドキドキする = (This movie is) heart-pounding\n\nHere is an example where the two can mean different things:\n\n> 膝がガクガクしてるね = Your knees are shaking (but mine are not)\n>\n> 膝がガクガクするね = This is knee-shaking (for the both of us)\n\nAnd the most critical distinction:\n\n> あの人、ドキドキしてる = That person is excited\n>\n> あの人、ドキドキする = That person is exciting",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T12:20:35.707",
"id": "27979",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T12:20:35.707",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "21369",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21369 | null | 27979 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21372",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 彼ならそれくらいの事はいいかねない\n\nTranslation: He can say such things.\n\nI don’t understand why this なら follows 彼. I’ve seen it more than once too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T13:54:36.297",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21371",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-30T07:38:33.787",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-30T07:38:33.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "What does 彼なら mean?",
"view_count": 347
} | [
{
"body": "「～～なら」, all by itself, means \"if ~~ is the case\", \"if it were ~~\", etc.\n「[彼]{かれ}なら」, therefore, means \"if it were him\".\n\n「Verb + かねない」 means \"capable of (verb)ing\", \"not scruple to (verb)\", etc. As\nusual, the verb needs to be put into its [連用形]{れんようけい} (\"continuative form\").\nThe 連用形 of 「[言]{い}う」 is「言い」.\n\n> 「[彼]{かれ}ならそれくらいの[事]{こと}はいいかねない。」 =\n>\n> \"I would not put it past him to say something like that.\" or\n>\n> \"He would not scruple at saying something like that.\"\n\nIf you want (or are required) to do a more literal translation, you could use:\n\n\" _ **If it were him, he would be capable of saying something like that (or\n'as bad as that')**_ \"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T14:09:45.467",
"id": "21372",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-27T13:53:36.187",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21371",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21371 | 21372 | 21372 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was discussing with my Japanese colleagues about expressions peculiar to\ncontemporary bourgeoisie. \nOne expression I already knew was `ご機嫌よう!`, meaning `またね!`.\n\nMy question is about another one: `おきばりになさって！`, meaning `頑張れ！` according to\nthem. \nApparently it can be heard at\n[certain](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9D%B1%E6%B4%8B%E8%8B%B1%E5%92%8C%E5%A5%B3%E5%AD%A6%E9%99%A2%E4%B8%AD%E5%AD%A6%E9%83%A8%E3%83%BB%E9%AB%98%E7%AD%89%E9%83%A8)\nsport competitions, said to お嬢様s by her mothers.\n\nSurprisingly enough, Google has [no\nresults](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E3%81%8A%E3%81%8D%E3%81%B0%E3%82%8A%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%81%95%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%22)\nfor this expression. How can it be?\n\n * Did I misspell the expression? I am pretty sure my colleague said that, though.\n * Is it so rare that even Google does not know about it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T15:15:09.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21373",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T16:17:53.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"idioms",
"interjections"
],
"title": "おきばりになさって！ with the meaning of 頑張れ！",
"view_count": 448
} | [
{
"body": "@Choko has the answer, it seems that the correct expression is:\n\n> おきばりなさって\n\nSome more examples:\n\n> ほな、あんじょうおきばりなさってサービスの練習しとくなはれ！\n\n(<http://fresco.blog.tennis365.net/archives/day/20101222.html>)\n\n> みなさんも新年度っすてきにおきばりなさってくださいね\n\n(<http://www.tv-asahi.co.jp/reading/sanpo_hagino/date/2012/04/01/>)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T16:17:53.650",
"id": "21374",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-19T16:17:53.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"parent_id": "21373",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21373 | null | 21374 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21376",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know ほど means ‘degree’ or ‘extent’ and so 僕のほど might translate as ‘to my\nextent’ but I don’t see how that possible translation fits with the rest of\nthe sentence’s meaning.\n\n> 彼女が僕に対して持っている気持ちは、僕のほど強くないようだ。\n\nMy translation: The feelings she holds against me don’t seem to be that\nstrong.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T20:53:52.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21375",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T16:02:00.050",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-19T23:10:10.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Meaning of 僕のほど in this sentence",
"view_count": 546
} | [
{
"body": "The way I read this, you shouldn't see it as 僕のほど with の as the 'possessive'\nlike 僕の猫, but rather view の here as acting like a quasi-pronoun. Like\n\"彼女の車は青い。僕のは黒い。\"\n\n> 僕の(気持ち)ほど強くないようだ\n\n[ほど often follows a noun\ndirectly](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%BB%E3%81%A9) without a\nの outside of keigo, and I think this is one of those situations.\n\nSo you could read the sentence as:\n\n> It seems that the feelings she has for me aren't as strong as mine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-19T23:37:03.147",
"id": "21376",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T16:02:00.050",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-20T16:02:00.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "1797",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "21375",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21375 | 21376 | 21376 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21383",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The term \"手の込んだ\" is described in denshi jisho as being a \"Noun or verb acting\nprenominally\".\n\nIn the context of Japanese, what does it mean for something to be acting\nprenominally? For example, does it mean that there's restrictions on where\nsuch a word can be used?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T13:53:04.393",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21381",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T14:37:47.530",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-20T14:22:38.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "91",
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"terminology"
],
"title": "What does the term \"prenominally\" mean?",
"view_count": 2253
} | [
{
"body": "In Japanese it is called 連体修飾語 (for a word) or 連体修飾節 (for a phrase). 連体修飾\nmeans modification or description of a noun, or in Japanese 体言に連なる修飾.\n\nAs suggested by the word “prenominal”, it is placed before a noun. Eg:\n\n> 手の込んだ 料理\n\nHere, 手の込んだ is placed before and describes 料理.\n\nUsually, 連体形 of 用言 (動詞, 形容詞 and 形容動詞) is used as 連体修飾語. 手の込んだ is also a 連体形.\n\n> 手 (名詞) の (助詞) 込ん (連用形 of 動詞 “込む”) だ (連体形 of 助動詞 “た”)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T14:14:22.427",
"id": "21383",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T14:37:47.530",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-20T14:37:47.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "6554",
"owner_user_id": "6554",
"parent_id": "21381",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21381 | 21383 | 21383 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21386",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can someone please help me parse the following sentence:\n\n> ...新商品をお試しくださいますようご案内申し上げます。\n\nI guess the meaning is something like \"We invite you to try our new product,\"\nbut I don't understand how ます+よう connects the お試しください with ご案内申し上げます. I don't\neven know if I should think of the ます here going with ください or よう (does くださいます\noccur in other sentence patterns?).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T14:11:25.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21382",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T16:03:29.527",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-20T15:46:38.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "9199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax"
],
"title": "Explain ますよう + [noun]",
"view_count": 1151
} | [
{
"body": "Your translation is correct. The sentence parses thus:\n\n> ...新商品を お試しくださいます よう ご案内申し上げます。\n\nSo the ます is not separate at all. The first verb is in fact お試しくださいます. The\npattern `verb X + よう（に）+ verb Y` means that Y happens for/so that X happens.\n\n> * 彼に電話する **ように** 言ってください。 → Please tell him ( **that he should / to** )\n> call me.\n> * (Inside train/subway cars as they approach a stop) お忘れものがございません **よう**\n> 、ご注意ください。 → Please make sure **that** you do not forget your belongings\n> (inside the car).\n>\n\nSo here, `verb Y` is ご案内申し上げます; it is not a noun as the title indicates.\n\nSince this is from a company to consumers about their new product, they will\nuse super-polite speech. That is why they use お試しくださいます instead of just\nお試しくださる or even 試してくださる, and ご案内申し上げます instead of just ご案内します. Also, leaving\nout the に after よう is often common in very polite speech, although I can't\nreally explain why other than maybe it just happens a lot. But the meaning\nwould not change if the に were there.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T16:03:29.527",
"id": "21386",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T16:03:29.527",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21382",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21382 | 21386 | 21386 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21389",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A while ago, I heard the word ぶっちゃけ on a comedy show used to mean \"frankly.\"\n\nI'd like to know three things:\n\n1) How polite/impolite is this word? Looking it up online, it seems to be\nslang. I guess I shouldn't be using it at work...\n\n2) If it is impolite/casual, what is a formal word with a similar meaning? I\nsaw 率直に suggested online as a more formal alternative. Are there other good\nwords to use?\n\n3) Who uses this word/When was this word popular? Now that I think of it, I\nhaven't heard anyone in \"real life\" use this word. Is it only used by a\ncertain group (i.e., teenagers) or was only popular for a short time? Do most\npeople know what it means?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T15:46:07.390",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21384",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T18:03:58.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "Politeness and Usage of ぶっちゃけ",
"view_count": 1993
} | [
{
"body": "1) ぶっちゃけ is used among close friends or family in a very casual setting. I\nwould not use this in a typical setting and especially not in a business\nsituation.\n\nぶっちゃけ originally came from 打{ぶ}ち明{あ}ける→ぶっちゃける which means to expose or \"kiss\nand tell\" a scandalous or juicy story.\n\nSince then, it came to mean frankly, or bluntly, or 'to get to the point of\nthe matter', etc. but it's usage is still very slang.\n\n率直{そっちょく} means straightforward or candid. For example, 率直{そっちょく}な意見{いけん}\nmeans \"honest and open opinion\".\n\n2) Another way to say 率直 is ストレート. Both work in any setting but 率直 sounds a\nlittle more formal.\n\n3) I find that young adults (maybe sometimes older adults?) and teens use this\nprimarily. I still hear it even nowadays. I'm sure everyone knows what it\nmeans. It's still widely used on TV although not as much as early 2000s.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T18:03:58.657",
"id": "21389",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T18:03:58.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6823",
"parent_id": "21384",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21384 | 21389 | 21389 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21387",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "These two sentences have been giving me trouble in terms of understanding\ntheir meaning.\n\n> 友達が恋人にふられて、とても落ち込んでいる。でも、一体何を言ってあげたらいいか、全然分からない。\n\nMy translation:\n\n> My friend was able to trip up my lover and it was a very crowded fall? But,\n> I’ll never understand what on earth he said?\n\nI'm mostly concerned with how 一体 is used in this sentence but I could do with\nsome assistance understanding the rest as well as it's not clear to me, as\nshown by my translation which is seriously lacking.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T15:56:11.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21385",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T11:22:58.613",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-23T11:22:58.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4463",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Use of 一体 in this sentence",
"view_count": 770
} | [
{
"body": "You've gotten a few things confused here.\n\n * Here, ふる is a verb meaning \"to dump\" (or \"to reject\"). I don't know that \"trip up\" is a meaning of ふる, though I could well be unaware of it. So, ～にふられる means \"to be dumped by ~\".\n * The 恋人 is the 友達's 恋人, not the speaker's. \n * 落ち込む should be seen as a single verb with its own meaning here, rather than as a compound of 落ちる + 込む (indeed, many verbs that are [stem form] + 込む should be viewed as one verb rather than two). In this case, 落ち込む means \"to feel down\". (Also, こむ as in \"to be crowded\" is more commonly written 混む rather than 込む.)\n * Here's the answer to your main question: when 一体 is used at the beginning of a question, it makes the question more emphatic. (See also: [Why does 一体 mean \"what the heck?\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/6015/3437))\n * [て form] + あげる means \"to do ~ for / on behalf of / as a favor to someone\". Similarly, you can use [て form] + やる for \"to do ~ for an inferior\" and [て form] + [差し上げる]【さしあげる】 for \"to do ~ for a superior\". So, 言ってあげる means something like \"to say something as a favor to my friend\" (but this sounds terrible in translation).\n * I think it is better to translate 全然分からない here as \"I don't understand\" rather than \"I'll never understand\" (present rather than future).\n\nPutting all this together, your translation should look more like this:\n\n> My friend was dumped by his lover, and he's really dejected. But, I really\n> have no idea what to say to him [e.g. to make him feel better].\n\nI'm not sure what the best way to translate the nuances of ～てあげる is, but the\npoint is that you're not _just_ saying something to him; you're saying\nsomething to him _with the intention to help him out_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T16:19:09.503",
"id": "21387",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-21T22:47:32.127",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"parent_id": "21385",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21385 | 21387 | 21387 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Sentences below are all from Japanese songs:\n\n「何度も何度でもスキになる」\n\n「いつもいつでもみんなが側にいる」\n\n「いつも何度でも夢を描こう」\n\nQuestions：\n\n 1. What effects does this 「XもXでも」 or 「XもYでも」 pattern bring about?\n 2. Is there any difference between the meaning/nuance of 「何度もスキになる/いつもみんなが側にいる」and that of 「何度でもスキになる/いつでもみんなが側にいる」?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T17:26:55.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21388",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T18:11:24.207",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-で",
"particle-も"
],
"title": "Co-occurrences of 「も」 and 「でも」 such as in 「何度も何度でもスキになる」",
"view_count": 166
} | [
{
"body": "1) 「XもXでも」「XもYでも」is primarily used for emphasis. In English you might say,\n\"I'll do it again and again!\" Here, again is used twice to emphasize that\nyou'll do it again. Similarly, in Japanese, 何度も何度でも, \"Many many times, as many\ntimes (as it takes)\", is repeated to emphasize the speaker's intention.\n\n2) Primarily, emphasis will be lost. For example compare saying, \"I'll fall in\nlove with you many times!\", compared to \"I'll keeping falling in love with\nyou, over and over and over, as much as it takes!\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T18:11:24.207",
"id": "21390",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-20T18:11:24.207",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9198",
"parent_id": "21388",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21388 | null | 21390 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Colour me a little confused.\n\n1) Say I'm comparing two objects:\n\n> Q: テレビと本と、どちらが好きですか？\n>\n> A: テレビより、本 **の** ほうが好きです。\n\n2) Then say I'm comparing two actions:\n\n> Q: テレビを見る **の** と、本を読む **の** と、どちらが好きですか？\n>\n> A: テレビを見るより、本を読むほうがすきです。\n\n3) Then, suppose I'm comparing two objects negatively:\n\n> Q: テレビと本と、どちらがおもしろくないですか？\n>\n> A: テレビは、ほんよりほどおもしろくないです。\n\n4) Lastly, I'm comparing two actions negatively:\n\n> Q: テレビを見る **の** と、本を読む **の** と、どちらがおもしろくないですか？\n>\n> A: テレビを見る **の** は、ほんを読む **の** ほどおもしろくないです。\n\nSo, to be sure I've got this right: in positive comparisons, you only use の\nfor the ～より～ほうが structure comparing objects, and when asking someone a\nquestion that involves comparing actions. In negative comparisons, you don't\nuse の when comparing objects at all, but you do use の both for asking someone\nto compare actions and for ～は～ほど.\n\nSo if I've not made a mistake, the question is: what the heck is going on\nhere? I'm very confused at the differences between these structures in the\nusage of の. Could you please try to explain to me _why_ の is used or not used\nin each of the four examples?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T20:41:33.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21391",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-24T01:38:19.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"comparative-constructions"
],
"title": "The use of particle の in positive and negative comparisons",
"view_count": 288
} | [
{
"body": "> Q: テレビと本と、どちらが好きですか？\n>\n> A: テレビより、本 **の** ほうが好きです。\n\nNo problem. 「の」 is needed to connect 「本」 and 「ほう」, both of which are nouns.\n「の」 is _**not**_ optional if you are using 「ほう」.\n\nIn colloquial speech, however, you will hear us say 「テレビより本が好き。」, but even in\ncolloquial speech, you cannot use just 「ほう」 without a 「の」 before it.\n\n> Q: テレビを見る **の** と、本を読む **の** と、どちらが好きですか？\n>\n> A: テレビを見るより、本を読むほうがすきです。\n\nGreat. The two 「の's」 are needed because you need to nominalize the two verbs\n「見る」 and 「読む」. Only then, you can attach the particle 「と」.\n\nIf I may say this, quite a few J-learners forget to add 「の」 in this type of\nsentence. In addition, they tend to insert 「の」 between a verb and 「ほう」, which\nis a grammar mistake.\n\n> Q: テレビと本と、どちらがおもしろくないですか？\n>\n> A: テレビは、ほん **よりほど** おもしろくないです。\n\nYour first mistake; We do not say 「～～よりほど」. You need to pick one and drop the\nother. 「ほど」 sounds more formal (or elegant) than 「より」, but using 「より」 is just\nfine in daily convos.\n\nMore naturally, it is 「テレビが」, not 「テレビは」 in the answer. が-answer to a\nが-question is the golden rule. (You did use 「が」 in the question.) If it had\nbeen a plain statement instead an answer to a question, using 「は」 would have\nbeen more natural.\n\nBTW, there is absolutely no room for using 「の」 in either the question or the\nanswer. That is unless you add 「ほう」 into the question and answer to say:\n\n「テレビと本と、どちらの[方]{ほう}がおもしろくないですか。」 「テレビの方が、本よりおもしろくないです。」\n\n> Q: テレビを見る **の** と、本を読む **の** と、どちらがおもしろくないですか？\n>\n> A: テレビを見る **の** は、ほんを読む **のほど** おもしろくないです。\n\nQuestion is good. Answer needs to be fixed.\n\nWe do not say 「Verb + の + ほど」. You must either (1) drop 「の」 and use only 「ほど」\nor (2) use 「より」 instead of 「のほど」.\n\nThe nominalizer 「の」 is necessary in all of the other places.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-21T01:37:22.400",
"id": "21397",
"last_activity_date": "2017-07-24T01:38:19.033",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21391",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21391 | null | 21397 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can someone explain what と means in this sentence:\n\n> 『・・・・・・』っていう文章だ **と** 良かった",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-20T21:34:33.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21393",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T12:20:38.237",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-22T12:20:38.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "9201",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-と",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of と in 「『・・・・・・』っていう文章だと良かった」?",
"view_count": 265
} | [
{
"body": "> 『・・・・・・』っていう[文章]{ぶんしょう}だ **と** [良]{よ}かった\n\nThe と is a conjunctive particle that, in this case, tells us that some sort of\njudgement will follow it based on supposition or hypothesis.\n\nJudgement: 良かった\n\nHypothesis: 『・・・』っていう文書だと\n\n\"If the phrase (or sentence) had been '・・・・', it would have been better (or\ngreat).\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-21T00:13:36.483",
"id": "21396",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-21T00:13:36.483",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21393",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21393 | null | 21396 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21401",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This sentence is from Kanji in Context Workbook 1.\n\nお嬢さんが近々結婚すると言って、隣の人が挨拶に来た。\n\nI get that basically it means that my neighbour came to visit me and announced\nthat his/her daughter was getting married.\n\nI understand that 挨拶 generally means \"polite speech\". Here, does 挨拶にきた just\nmean it was a friendly visit, or does it suggest that the real reason was to\nmake the announcement (out of courtesy)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-21T14:00:49.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21399",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-21T14:59:26.253",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of 挨拶 in a visit",
"view_count": 161
} | [
{
"body": "There are a few different types of 「[挨拶]{あいさつ}」.\n\n> Type I: The Everyday Kind:\n\n「おはよう」、「こんにちは」、「さようなら」、「どうも～」, etc.\n\n> Type II: The Short Speech:\n\nIf you have someone (an important guest, sponsor, host) making a short speech\nat an event, we call it あいさつ.\n\n> Type III: The Visit-And-Pay-Your-Respect Kind:\n\nThis is the type of あいさつ described in your sentence. On the more special\noccasions in our lives, we must, out of courtesy, pay a visit to certain\npeople to \"officially report\" your news. It could be about relocation, new\nemployment, graduation, marriage, pregnancy, etc.\n\nFrom that sentence alone, we could not know how \"friendly\" or \"formal\" the\nvisit was, but since it was between next-door neighbors, I would assume that\nit was a fairly casual and informal event.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-21T14:39:03.670",
"id": "21401",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-21T14:59:26.253",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-21T14:59:26.253",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21399",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21399 | 21401 | 21401 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I see this kind of thing occasionally, and by that I mean the usage of ていた\nforms:\n\n> 俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれ **ていた**\n\nin narrative where the た form:\n\n> 俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれ **た**\n\nwould have meant the same thing to me. What is the difference in\nmeaning/nuance I'm missing here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T00:40:01.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21402",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T11:20:48.730",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-22T00:52:43.433",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9207",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"aspect"
],
"title": "usage of ていた in 俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれていた",
"view_count": 154
} | [
{
"body": "弾かれていた is the past perfect form of the verb: \"Had been repelled\" 弾かれた is the\npast form of the verb \"Had repelled\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T09:22:15.947",
"id": "21403",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T09:22:15.947",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9211",
"parent_id": "21402",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "It is the speaker's (or author's) _**temporal viewpoint**_ that makes the\ndifference in the tense choices. More specifically in this case, it is a\nquestion of whether one's temporal viewpoint is on the present moment or a\ntime in the past.\n\n_**Past tense passive voice**_ for a present viewpoint:\n\n> 「[俺]{おれ}の[一撃]{いちげき}は、[彼]{かれ}のもう[一本]{いっぽん}の[剣]{つるぎ}にギリギリで[弾]{はじ}かれ **た** 。」\n>\n> \"My shot _**was**_ just barely _**repelled**_ by his other sword.\"\n\n_**Past perfect passive voice**_ for a past viewpoint:\n\n> 「俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれ **ていた** 。」\n>\n> \"My shot _**had**_ just barely _**been repelled**_ by his other sword.\"\n\nIt would not be very productive to discuss how important the difference is in\nnuance when all we have is a single sentence. Generally speaking, the\ndifference in nuance would tend to be relatively minimal unless the larger\ncontext proves otherwise.\n\nIf the other sentences immediately before or after this sentence were in the\npluperfect as well, it would be fairly strange to write this one in the plain\npast tense.\n\nIt is all about the flow.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T11:05:46.040",
"id": "21404",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T11:20:48.730",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21402",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21402 | null | 21404 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21411",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In usages of あ after other syllables such as け or め, is the あ pronounced or\ndoes it prolong the previous vowel's sound?\n\nTaking the katakana spelling of \"Mary\": メアリー is that \"Meh-ah-ri\" or \"Mehhh-ri\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T17:18:35.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21409",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-03T23:40:18.670",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-03T23:40:18.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7272",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Effects of あ after other vowel endings",
"view_count": 191
} | [
{
"body": "The あ is pronounced separately, like \"meh-ah-ri\".1 This will always be the\ncase for sequences like メア, ケア, エア, etc.\n\nFor the most part, vowels in katakana loan words are only lengthened by the\nvowel-lengthening mark \"ー\" (which I just learned is called 長音符【ちょうおんぷ】). For\nexample: アードバーク \"aardvark\", イーストウィック \"Eastwick\", 烏龍【ウーロン】 \"Oolong\", エース \"ace\",\nオークション \"auction\".\n\nOccasionally, you will see a repeated vowel used in katakana loan words to\nindicate lengthening instead2 (like in hiragana), e.g. アア \"aʻa\".3 But you\nwon't ever see something like エア used to mean long /e/. That would have to be\nエー or maybe エエ. The same holds true for all vowels, except for the exception\nyou probably already know, in which おう is usually pronounced as long /o/\nrather than /ou/.\n\n* * *\n\n1 I'm sort of guessing here, but I suspect that the reason Mary is spelled\nメアリー in katakana is that early transcriptions of the word were drawn from a\ndialect of English that didn't have [the Mary-merry\nmerger](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/88115/43004) (or perhaps a time\nbefore the merger even had begun anywhere?), so that the first vowel in the\nword was actually a diphthong (\"two vowels\"): /ɛə/. The closest approximation\nto that diphthong in Japanese is エア. If you were to transcribe \"Mary\" from a\ndialect of English that did have the Mary-merry merger, I think you would\nwrite it メーリー and pronounce it \"mehhh-ri\", as you put it.\n\n2 Repeated vowels are pretty common when using katakana to write non-loan\nwords, though, e.g. [the names of plants and\nanimals](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/20840/3437).\n\n3 A type of lava that is wonderful for Scrabble purposes. I would imagine the\nuse of アア rather than アー here is to indicate that the ア should be\nrearticulated - in the original Hawaiian, it looks like there's a glottal stop\nin the middle there.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T21:45:41.547",
"id": "21411",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-22T21:45:41.547",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"parent_id": "21409",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21409 | 21411 | 21411 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21412",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't know which to choose:\n\n> 忙しくて昼ごはんを食べる時間 **さえ** ない\n\nor\n\n> 忙しくて昼ごはんを食べる時間 **こそ** ない\n\nThe explanation in my textbook is given in such a way that I can't understand\nthe difference:\n\nIt says こそ \"expresses emphasis\" and for さえ it gives an example \"Even children\nknow that\" with no additional elaboration and that example is also, I think,\nemphasis, so how to understand?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-22T18:50:50.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21410",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T02:31:21.860",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-23T01:33:20.830",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"focus-particles"
],
"title": "What's the difference between こそ and さえ in 「忙しくて昼ごはんを食べる時間＿＿＿ない」",
"view_count": 1368
} | [
{
"body": "The main difference is that こそ is used to single out something as a primary\n\"example\" of something. It is usually only used to emphasize something\n\"positive\". It most often will replace は to add the emphasis. It's not a\ndirect translation, but it might help to think of it in term of something like\n\"especially\" or \"particularly\".\n\n> * 音楽 **こそ** 命だ → _Music_ is life\n> * これ **こそ** 待っていたものです → _This_ is what I've been waiting for (more than\n> anything else)!\n> * 今 **こそ** チャンスなんだ！ → _Now_ (more than any other time) is our chance!\n> * 人間関係に **こそ** 人生の価値がある → It's (particularly/especially) _in\n> relationships_ that one's life has value!\n>\n\nさえ singles out an \"extreme\", implying that the statement obviously applies to\nother examples. It most often carries a negative connotation, but not always.\nIt is usually replacing も or を in the sentence, and can be thought of as\n\"even\". Actually, I believe every occurrence of さえ can be replaced by も, but\nnot necessarily the other way around. Here are some of my examples from\n[another さえ post](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4864/78) that you can\nrefer to for more info:\n\n> * 先週の病気は本当に辛【つら】かった。水 **さえ** 飲めなかった。 → \"My illness last week was really\n> bad. I couldn't **even** drink water!\" → When one is sick, you expect them\n> not to be able to drink alcohol, soda, etc. But water should be OK for most\n> people. **Even water** , the most basic thing was intolerable for this\n> person.\n> * えりこは親友の花子 **にさえ** 知らせずに外国へ旅立った。 → \"Eriko left on a trip to a foreign\n> country without telling **even** her best friend Hanako.\" → You'd expect her\n> to not tell her co-workers, acquaintances, etc. But best friends usually\n> tell each other everything, and she didn't tell **even** her.\n> * 山の上には夏 **でさえ** 雪が残っている。 → \" **Even** if it's summer, there is snow left\n> on the top of the mountain.\" → You expect snow to be on top of a mountain in\n> winter, and some leftover in the spring. But usually by summer it's all\n> gone, but for this mountain the snow remains **even** then.\n>\n\nSo for your sentence, さえ is the correct choice. It sounds ungrammatical to me\nthat have こそ in there. But regardless, さえ is needed for the overall meaning.\n\n> * 忙しくて昼ごはんを食べる時間 **さえ** ない → I'm so busy, I don't **even** have time to\n> eat lunch → If you're busy, of course you don't have time to go shopping, to\n> the movies, etc. But this person is so busy, there's not even enough time\n> for them to eat. Of course, this may be an exaggeration, but it still\n> emphasizes just how busy they are.\n> * それが子供に **さえ** 分かる常識です → That's such common sense that **even** children\n> know it.\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T00:48:33.487",
"id": "21412",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T02:31:21.860",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21410",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21410 | 21412 | 21412 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21414",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I understand all of the words other than \"クソ\" in the phrase \"クソコラグランプリ\". \"コラ\"\nmeans photomontage, photoshop or the like (from \"collage\"?). \"グランプリ\"\ntransliterates as \"grand prix\", which roughly means competition.\n\nBut what about \"クソ\"? Its [literal\nmeaning](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%B3%9E#Etymology_1) is faeces, and\nsome people have translated the whole phrase into English as [crappy collage\ngrand prix](https://storify.com/reportedly/explaining-the-japanese-meme-\nmocking-isis). I'm suspicious that it doesn't have a nuance of inferior\nquality, which is a common meaning of \"crappy\" these days. Instead, might it\nhave a nuance of extremely unpleasant, or maybe be used as an intensifier?\n\nKotaku mentions that the phrase has previously been used in the context of\n[Final Fantasy 15](http://kotaku.com/square-enix-makes-better-final-fantasy-\nxv-photoshops-po-1641995627).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T03:42:38.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21413",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-07T14:50:55.757",
"last_edit_date": "2016-01-07T14:50:55.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"meaning",
"internet-slang",
"offensive-words"
],
"title": "Nuance of \"クソ\" within \"クソコラグランプリ\"",
"view_count": 785
} | [
{
"body": "It's not uncommon to see people use apparently derogatory words among\nthemselves to increase the togetherness of community, and so does Japanese\ninternet society, as a long tradition.\n\nYou can find a number of such Japanese memes like\n[これはひどい](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%81%93%E3%82%8C%E3%81%AF%E3%81%B2%E3%81%A9%E3%81%84)\n\"that's terrible\",\n[マジキチ](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%83%9E%E3%82%B8%E3%82%AD%E3%83%81)\n\"absolutely crazy\",\n[作者は病気](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E4%BD%9C%E8%80%85%E3%81%AF%E7%97%85%E6%B0%97%E3%82%B7%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BA)\n\"the author's sick\" etc. which actually praising their eccentricity as a sign\nof creativity. I guess English speakers could easily get the nuance, too.\n\nThe クソ here, too, just plainly means \"crappy\", \"trash\" or \"nonsense\", but also\nserves for multiple purposes: to show authors' modesty, to suggest their\nnovelty, and to represent collective unity.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T12:49:07.887",
"id": "21414",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T12:49:07.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21413",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "A コラ (or コラ画像) can roughly be devided into two categories:\n\n 1. A コラ that looks as if it were genuine. For example, an image of an anime character, porn actress, etc., whose head is skillfully replaced with the head of someone else. Making a good コラ in this sense requires a great amount of time and skill.\n\n 2. A コラ that is meant to be served as a pure joke, as in [#FF15クソコラグランプリ](https://twitter.com/hashtag/ff15%E3%82%AF%E3%82%BD%E3%82%B3%E3%83%A9%E3%82%B0%E3%83%A9%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%83%AA). We can find many quick-and-dirty コラ tweeted just a few minutes after an anime episode is broadcast. You don't have to be a Photoshop wizard to create this kind of コラ, because the existence of unnatural edges or lighting doesn't matter.\n\nAnd the word クソコラ, which emerged very recently, specifically refers to コラ in\nthe latter sense. So the nuance of クソ here is \"quick, dirty but funny.\" There\nare many people who regard themselves not as a コラ職人 but as a クソコラ職人, and I\nthink they do that for either (or both) of the following reasons:\n\n * Because they don't want to be criticized for being unskillful.\n * Because they want to show their respect for traditional and skillful コラ職人.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T15:08:12.120",
"id": "21416",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T15:08:12.120",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21413",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21413 | 21414 | 21416 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21421",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know that the word 偽善者 exists in Japanese and is listed in Japanese-English\ndictionaries as the translation of 'hypocrite'.\n\nBut the kanji 偽善 and the definition make me wonder what the actual word I'm\nlooking for is.\n\nThe definition given for 偽善者 is usually something like: 偽善を行う人。\n\nAnd the definition for 偽善 is usually something like:\nうわべをいかにも善人らしく見せかけること。また、そういう行為。\n\nThe meaning I'm thinking of when I say 'hypocrite' or 'hypocritical' in\nEnglish is engaging in the same behaviors that you condemns others for,\nwhereas the Japanese definitions make me think of someone just pretending to\nbe good/nice to hide their true feelings.\n\nWhat would be the best word choice for the same meaning in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T14:03:56.193",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21415",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T04:28:45.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1035",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How to describe something as hypocritical",
"view_count": 2665
} | [
{
"body": "It's not a 100% match but pretty close to the nuance you are looking for.\nOften you point out something like this in Japanese as: 矛盾{むじゅん}している。\n\nE.g. 言葉{ことば}と行動{こうどう}が矛盾{むじゅん}してる。\n\nThat is, \"your words and your actions are contradictory\".\n\nHope that helps!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T19:06:04.567",
"id": "21421",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T21:32:39.847",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-23T21:32:39.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "6823",
"owner_user_id": "6823",
"parent_id": "21415",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "This is often shortened to 言動矛盾.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T04:28:45.647",
"id": "21441",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T04:28:45.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9210",
"parent_id": "21415",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21415 | 21421 | 21421 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21425",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Do 「勉強を続ける」 and 「勉強をやり続ける」 have the same basic meaning: \"to continue with\none's studies\"?\n\nIs 「やり続ける」 a slightly rougher, less formal, way of saying「続ける」？ But, the\ndifference in nuance is minimal at best?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T15:59:11.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21417",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T03:25:31.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "「勉強{べんきょう}を続{つづ}ける」 vs.「勉強をやり続ける」",
"view_count": 146
} | [
{
"body": "i got a hold of 2 native speakers. they pretty much agree with what i wrote.\nhowever, i learned you can also say \"し続ける\", and that \"ず\" and \"づ are pronounced\nthe same (can't image how romaji deals with \"づ\" and \"ず).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T03:25:31.607",
"id": "21425",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T03:25:31.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"parent_id": "21417",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21417 | 21425 | 21425 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21420",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In anime and Japanese television and so forth, I've noticed that people\nconfronted with a sudden undesired stimulus, like heat or pain or cold, will\noften utter something like 熱っ【あつっ】！ or 痛たた【いたたた】… or 寒【さむ】！, all of which\nfollow the pattern of taking a word that describes the undesired stimulus and\nthen modifying it in some way, like clipping it or extending it.\n\nTo my English ear, this sounds a little bit unusual, since in English, the\nthings people exclaim when presented with an undesired stimulus are generally\nnon-words (e.g. \"Aaaah!\" or \"Ouch!\" or \"Brrrr\") or profanities, rather than\nsomething like \"Hot!\" or \"Painful!\". This is the case even in works of\nfiction, though of course the exclamations might be more articulate or\nexaggerated than one would expect from real life.\n\nDo Japanese speakers exclaim these sorts of things in real life?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T17:30:01.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21418",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T04:31:32.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"spoken-language",
"interjections"
],
"title": "In real life, do Japanese speakers exclaim things like 熱っ！ or 痛たた… or 寒！?",
"view_count": 892
} | [
{
"body": "Yes.\n\nBut there are many, many variations as you might have guessed.\n\nFor example,\n\nあっつっ！instead of あつっ！and so on.\n\nThere are also regional differences.\n\nFor certain regions in Japan, さむい is spoken さぶい。 So, さぶっ！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T18:00:55.640",
"id": "21419",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T18:00:55.640",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6823",
"parent_id": "21418",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Yes, saying those as the very first word after the stimulus is very common\neven in real life.\n\n> * 痛【いた】っ！ 痛たたた… いててて…\n> * 寒【さむ】っ！\n> * 臭【くさ】っ！\n> * 熱【あつ】っ！ 熱つつつ… あちちち…\n> * うるさっ！\n> * 汚【きたな】っ！\n> * 痒【かゆ】っ！\n> * 旨【うま】っ！\n>\n\nWe don't say 寒むむむむ or 臭ささささ for some reason... perhaps because they're\ndifficult to pronounce? And as you can see in the last example, you can\nsometimes use this kind of expressions for pleasant but unexpected stimuli.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T18:01:44.857",
"id": "21420",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-23T18:08:34.483",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-23T18:08:34.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21418",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "When it comes to expressing sudden emotional changes Japanese uses descriptors\nrather that onomatopoeia.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T04:31:32.643",
"id": "21442",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T04:31:32.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9210",
"parent_id": "21418",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21418 | 21420 | 21420 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21450",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I remember seeing in [the thread\nbefore](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3361/%E5%A4%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%8B%E7%8C%AB-\nvs-%E5%A4%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E7%8C%AB/3364#3364.) that there was no\ndifference between ている and た. So then what would be the difference between the\nusage of them in these sentences below?\n\n> * 最後に立っていたものが勝者だ\n> * 最後に立っているものが勝者だ\n> * 最後に立ったものが勝者だ\n>\n\nAll the above are from using google search with the first two being the most\ncommon and the third being the least with only two hits with the words\n`最後に立ったものが`.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-23T19:55:17.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21422",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T06:52:19.423",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-23T20:28:42.240",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "7263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "What is the difference between using ている、ていた、た in relative clauses?",
"view_count": 1250
} | [
{
"body": "For general explanations, it's better to see the posts you and Darius (in his\ncomment) mentioned. Here I focus on specific issues.\n\n**Summary:**\n\n * 最後に立っていたものが勝者だ \n_Who was standing at the end {is / will be} the winner._ \nor _Who {is / will be} standing at the end {becomes / will become} the\nwinner._ .........(*1)\n\n * 最後に立っているものが勝者だ \n_The winner {is / will be} who {is / will be} standing at the end._ \nor _Who {is / will be} standing at the end equals to the winner._\n.........(*2)\n\n * 最後に立ったものが勝者だ \n_Who stood up last {is / will be} the winner._\n\n**Discussions:**\n\nThere are two factors you should take care of.\n\nFirst, the verb `立つ` means \" _to stand **up_** \", not \" _to stand_ \". The\n\"standing\" (`立っている`) sense is only possible as its result. That's why your\nthird example is the odd one out. What I imagined was a chicken game sitting\non hot chair as long as possible.\n\nYour first and second examples both could translate the English sentence, \"The\nlast one standing is the winner.\" So, what's the difference? It's very subtle,\nbut put shortly, the first one is what you'd typically say when you think: \"If\nsomeone's standing alone, then he/she wins.\", while the second one is\ntypically used when you think: \"I'll know who's the winner by seeing someone's\nstanding alone\".\n\nThe difference eventually comes from that Japanese \"past tense particle\" `-た`\ndoesn't exactly means what _happened_ in past, but what _was confirmed_ in\npast. In the first sentence, you first judge there's only one person standing,\nand in the next step, you judge that person wins. Thus I chose verb _become_\nin my translation (*1). On the other hand, the second one insists that the two\njudgments are possible in a overlapped time range. Usually the interpretation\nhas no problem, like `立っているものが勝者だ` sounds perfectly natural, but in this\nspecific case, `最後に` \"at the end\" inevitably evokes the feeling that the only\ntiming to judge the \"standing\" is the very moment a match ends, therefore you\ncouldn't shake off some unnatural ring except you're telling a solid,\nuniversal fact (*2).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T12:49:08.390",
"id": "21427",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T06:52:19.423",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-26T06:52:19.423",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21422",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> * 最後に立っていたものが勝者だ\n>\n\nThe last person who **was** (still) standing is the winner\n\n> * 最後に立っているものが勝者だ\n>\n\nThe last person who **is** (still) standing is the winner\n\n> * 最後に立ったものが勝者だ\n>\n\nThe person who stands up last is the winner\n\nThe third one is uncommon because there aren't many competition where you try\nto not stand up.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T13:13:25.890",
"id": "21448",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T13:13:25.890",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "21422",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Well, as with any sentences that don't have a large number of adjuncts or\ncontext limiting their meaning, there are many interpretations.\n\n* * *\n\n> 最後に立っ **ていた** ものが勝者 _だ_\n\n 1. **Matrix time** : present \n**Subordinate time** : past\n\n> (\"Who is the winner?\") \n> \"The last person who **was** standing _is_ the winner.\"\n\nThat is, the person who was (before time of speech) standing up last (and may\nor may not be standing at time of speech) is the winner.\n\n 2. **Matrix time** : future \n**Subordinate time** : past or relative past\n\n> \"The last person who **was** standing ( _will be_ / _is_ ) the winner.\"\n\nThat is, either:\n\n * \" **was** \" = past: the person who was (before the time of speech) standing up last (and may or may not be standing at the time of speech) will be the winner.\n * \" **was** \" = relative past: the person who was (before the reference time) standing up last (and may or may not be standing at the reference time) will be the winner.\n\n(As for the English gloss, this sentence suggests the past interpretation as\nopposed to the relative past interpretation at first glance, I think. But,\nwith enough context: \"In this game, people sit up and down in order, and then\na bell randomly rings. When that happens, the person who was standing up last\nwill be the winner.\", the relative past interpretation works fine in English\nas well.)\n\nFor both interpretations, in Japanese and the English glosses, whether the\nperson is still standing up or not is not specified, though there is probably\na slight suggestion of \"no longer standing\" (since you would use 「立っている」/\"is\nstanding\" otherwise, after all).\n\n* * *\n\n> 最後に立っ **ている** ものが勝者 _だ_\n\n 1. **Matrix time** : present \n**Subordinate time** : present\n\n> (\"Who is the winner?\") \n> \"The last person who **is** standing _is_ the winner.\"\n\nThat is, the person who is (at time of speech) standing is the winner.\n\nHonestly, interpreting this sentence as occurring in present time is slightly\nweird, since you'd probably just say 「立っている人が勝者だ」 \"The standing person is the\nwinner.\".\n\n 2. **Matrix time** : future \n**Subordinate time** : present or relative present\n\n> \"The last person who **is** standing ( _will be_ / _is_ ) the winner.\"\n\nThat is, either:\n\n * \" **is** \" = present: the person who is (at time of speech) standing up last is the winner.\n * \" **is** \" = relative present: the person who is (at reference time) standing up last is the winner.\n\nAgain, the present is somewhat pragmatically weird, since you would normally\nnot use 「最後に」 \"last\" -- that means this sentence would probably have the\nsubordinate clause interpreted in the relative present.\n\n* * *\n\n> 最後に立っ **た** ものが勝者 _だ_\n\n 1. **Matrix time** : present \n**Subordinate time** : past\n\n> (\"Who is the winner?\") \n> \"The last person who **stood up** _is_ the winner.\"\n\nThat is, the person who (before the time of speech) stood up last (and may or\nmay not be standing at time of speech) is the winner.\n\n 2. **Matrix time** : future \n**Subordinate time** : past or relative past\n\n> \"The last person who **stood up** ( _will be_ / _is_ ) the winner.\"\n\nThat is, either:\n\n * \" **stood up** \" = past: The person who (before the time of speech) stood up last (and may or may not be standing at the time of speech) will be the winner.\n * \" **stood up** \" = relative past: The person who (before the reference time) stood up last (and may or may not be standing at the reference time) will be the winner.\n\n* * *\n\nFinally, to address the core of your confusion, **「た」 cannot be interpreted as\n「ている」 here** (which is hopefully clear due to the different glosses provided).\n\nThe reason for this is because (as further explained in the thread I linked in\nthe comments), the actor (namely, the person who stood up) is explicitly\nmentioned in the sentence, which prevents the stative reading of 「た」. With a\ndifferent head, like 「立った状態」, 「立った」 can be interpreted as 「立っている」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T18:36:42.440",
"id": "21450",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T18:36:42.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "21422",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21422 | 21450 | 21450 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am learning hiragana and I am looking at sa, shi, su, se, so, and za, ji,\nzu, ze, zo. The characters look the same except the \"z\" characters have little\nstrokes on the side of the character. Why is this? And what is the difference?\nWhen do we use it, and how?\n\nExample:\n\nさ vs ざ",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T04:39:00.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21426",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T21:07:20.140",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-24T05:39:00.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "9221",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"hiragana"
],
"title": "Why do さ and ざ look the same except for the little strokes on the side?",
"view_count": 685
} | [
{
"body": "The reason for the similarity is that they are thought of as being _variants\nof the same letter_. The little dots are called 濁点｛だくてん｝, and they designate\nthat you should say the same sound but voiced instead of unvoiced.\n\nThe sounds S, T, and K are always spoken with a burst of air, while the voice\nbox is silent. When these sounds are \"voiced,\" that is if your voice is making\na noise at the same time as you speak these sounds, they become Z, D, and G\ninstead. Rather than make entirely new kana columns for the voiced variants of\nthese sounds, the 濁点 are used.\n\nThe one column where the rule might seem a little strange to English ears is\nthe は・ば・ぱ group. In this case, I would consider ぱ to be unvoiced, ば to be the\nvoiced version, and は to be a different consonant altogether. This one you\njust need to memorize.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T21:07:20.140",
"id": "21438",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T21:07:20.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "820",
"parent_id": "21426",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21426 | null | 21438 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21429",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> Even a thief is right three times out of ten.\n\nI ran into this quote in a book about Taiichi Ohno, the creator of Toyota's\nphilosophy. Does anyone know a phrase that corresponds with this translation?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T12:58:45.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21428",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T00:33:45.170",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-25T00:33:45.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "468",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "What is the Japanese proverb for \"even a thief is right three times out of ten\"?",
"view_count": 303
} | [
{
"body": "It is probably 盗人【ぬすびと】にも三分【さんぶ】の理【り】, which is perhaps better translated as\n\"even a thief has his reasons\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T13:16:50.373",
"id": "21429",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T13:16:50.373",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "578",
"parent_id": "21428",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21428 | 21429 | 21429 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Was not sure how to title my question because I don't know who to explain such\ngrammar pattern.\n\nI came across something like that in Tae Kim's guide:\n\n> 勉強をすればするほど、頭がよくなるよ。 (The more you study, the more you will become smarter.)\n\nBut it seems it only applies to verbs, \"the more you do something, the more\nsomething will happen\".\n\nI was wondering how to say something like \"the earlier we leave, the earlier\nwe'll arrive\", \"the faster you run, the faster you'll get tired\" etc?\n\nThose grammar patterns are similar in English but I have a feeling they're not\nthat similar in Japanese and I have no idea how to find something like that.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T13:36:14.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21430",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-31T05:17:25.377",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-24T17:18:43.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "9224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "\"The earlier we leave, the earlier we'll arive\"-type construction",
"view_count": 920
} | [] | 21430 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I tried to read a blog entry but some sentences are confusing me.\n\n> 握手会でもファンの方が当たったよ！って嬉しそうに言ってくれた\n\nI know all the words and the grammar involved but 当たったよ！is confusing me. The\nverb meaning I've learned doesn't make any sense here.\n\nFor the following case, I'm lost when I try to identify the subject.\n\n最初は誰の手もかりず振りVを見て一人で覚えたあと るかに細かい振りを教えてもらいながらフリを覚えたって言ってたけど is it the blog\nauthor (安奈) or 高塚ちゃん ? Since 言ってた means that the author heard someone saying\nit, the author is the subject from the beginning ?\n\n高塚ちゃんに出てもらえて良かったなって思います Here it's the same as the first one, how I'm supposed\nto understand 出てもらえて in this sentence ?\n\nI add the blog entry link because I guess it will be easier to understand it\nwith the context :\n<https://plus.google.com/116252784914637564000/posts/fNufttEs3vv>\n\nMaybe it's very basic questions, but I tried several times to understand and I\nfailed those parts.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T13:55:20.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21431",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-17T15:11:44.670",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-17T15:11:44.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "9223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Confused about sentences: 当たる and 出る",
"view_count": 336
} | [
{
"body": "> 握手会でもファンの方が当たったよ！って嬉しそうに言ってくれた\n\nXが当たる in this context means \"to win X\", where X is a ticket, prize, lottery,\netc. 安奈's fan said to her, 「（チケットが）当たったよ！」 = \"I won it (=the ticket of the\nshow)!\"\n\n> 最初は誰の手もかりず振りVを見て一人で覚えたあと るかに細かい振りを教えてもらいながらフリを覚えたって言ってた\n\nThe omitted subject of all these actions is 高塚ちゃん. 高塚ちゃん studied the\nchoreography alone first, then 高塚ちゃん learned it with the help of るか. And\nthat's what 高塚ちゃん said to the author, 安奈.\n\n> 高塚ちゃんに出てもらえて良かったなって思います\n\n出る here means 出演する. Looks like you already know the meaning of \"verb + もらう\"\npattern, which is [described\nhere](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14828/5010). The author, 安奈 is glad\n高塚ちゃん will be on stage.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T16:39:27.973",
"id": "21434",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T16:39:27.973",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21431",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21431 | null | 21434 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21446",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I was [looking at a\ndictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/je2/25071/m0u/) the definition\n(in the English part) was given as\n\n> be [get] excited; 《口》be [get] worked up\n\nWhat exactly these `[]` are referring to is unclear to me. From my\nunderstanding 興奮している would describe the state of being excited (or having\nbecome excited). If 興奮する describes the state of being excited then the usage\nof 興奮している would seem redundant.\n\nMaybe a few quick examples would help clear this up (or what I believe they\nmean):\n\nExample #1:\n\n> そんなに **興奮するな**\n\n_Don't get so excited, keep your cool_ etc. This doesn't mean 'don't **be**\nexcited', it means 'don't **become** excited'.\n\nExample #2:\n\n> 今日、「車の来る道な～んだ？」と、娘に聞いてみました。 \n> 「あぶないから、おててをぎゅ！」と答えてくれました。\n>\n> 子供自身は、一応頭では理解しているようです。 \n> 車は危ないということは分かっていても、 **興奮していて** つい周りが見えなくなったのかもしれません\n\nIn the above it is saying that his daughter was so excited that she\nmightn't've been able to see her surroundings.\n\nExample #3:\n\n> 赤い色のギターを1ヶ月前に見つけて **興奮して** つい買ってしまった\n\nThis one says that saw the guitar one month ago. This caused him to become\nexcited, which led to him buying it (I don't feel like translating the usage\nof つい or しまう here as they are not the focus).\n\nSo in #1 it was \"don't become excited\", #2 it happened because she was excited\nand in #3 it happened because he became excited. Is this right?\n\nAn additional example\n[here](http://www.coelang.tufs.ac.jp/mt/en/gmod/contents/explanation/046.html):\n\n> (3) 「～に興奮する、わくわくする」の表し方\n>\n> 「わたしはその旅行にとてもわくわくしています」は、 \n> I **am** very **excited about** the trip. と表現できます。\n>\n> ☞ 「わたしは～にとてもわくわくしています」は、I am very excited about ～ という言い方をします。 \n> ☞ <am + excited> は、「（わたしは）興奮する、わくわくする」という意味です。 \n> ☞ <be 動詞 + excited + about ～> は、「～に興奮する、わくわくする」という意味を表しています。\n>\n> 「その男の子はその話に興奮しました」は、 \n> The boy **was excited about** the story. と表現できます。\n\nThey say that わくわくする、興奮する means <am + excited>. If this was the case then why\nwouldn't they just leave it at that?\n\nIn part one of that link they use the example ～に興味がある to mean 'to be\ninterested in' and (obviously?) one does not use 興味があっている in this case (it\nseems there are some results on Google search for this but most are learner\nmistakes and I'm not checking the rest).\n\nAnyone care to clarify things?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T15:26:20.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21432",
"last_activity_date": "2019-11-18T23:19:13.017",
"last_edit_date": "2019-11-18T23:19:13.017",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"て-form"
],
"title": "興奮する to be excited or to get excited?",
"view_count": 1592
} | [
{
"body": "As you understand, 興奮する is not a static aspect (, which is 興奮している). In that\nsense, the description of the dictionary should be \"興奮する: get excited, 興奮している:\nbe excited\". However the problem is, actual usage of the two forms isn't\ncorrespondent between English and Japanese. For example, \"I watched the movie.\nI was excited\" is (I believe) more common than \"got excited\", but\nあの映画見てきた。興奮してた。is less common than 興奮した in Japanese.\n\nA similar problem occurs between おぼえる and \"to remember\" (due to explanations\nof dictionaries). おぼえる means (1) to feel (some emotion) or (2) to memorize /\nto learn and never \"to remember\" but still, it tends to happen that an English\nspeaker use to remember where a Japanese speaker use おぼえる. They usually don't\nbother to say おぼえておきやすい名前 for \"a name that's easy to remember\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T05:11:48.547",
"id": "21446",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T06:08:56.627",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-25T06:08:56.627",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21432",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21432 | 21446 | 21446 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21437",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It's a sentence from dragonball, the hearer (悟飯) just asked the speaker to\ncreate something to wear that could hide his identity without looking like a\nkind of body protection.\n\n> どってことないじゃない！悟飯くんだってばれなきゃいいんでしょ？\n>\n> That's no big deal! It's gonna be ok as long as you don't get busted right?\n\nI don't get the meaning of だって here, I know that most of the time it can be\nreplaced by either も or でも but I don't see how either one would fit here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T18:20:58.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21435",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T19:07:59.043",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "Meaning of だって in this sentence",
"view_count": 223
} | [
{
"body": "「だって」 is not a constituent in your sentence.\n\n「`悟飯くんだ`って」 is an abbreviation of 「`悟飯くんだ`ということ」 in casual speech.\n\n**How the abbreviation takes place**\n\n> At the very beginning: `悟飯くんだ`ということ\n>\n> 「と」 is replaced by 「って」: `悟飯くんだ`っていうこと\n>\n> 「いう」 is dropped: `悟飯くんだ`ってこと\n>\n> 「こと」 is dropped: `悟飯くんだ`って\n\n**Similar instances**\n\n> なんで`好きだ`ってばれたんですか。\n>\n> `女の子だ`ってばれちゃうじゃない？",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-24T18:52:30.097",
"id": "21437",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-24T19:07:59.043",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-24T19:07:59.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "5346",
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"parent_id": "21435",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21435 | 21437 | 21437 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21454",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "There are lots of 二字熟語, say, where both characters have the same radical,\ne.g., 明日, 機械, and 往復. I find these interesting as often the common radical is\nstrongly associated with the meaning of the compound. Of course, there are\nalso lots of compounds where the character itself is repeated（e.g. 色々, 数々, and\n日々), though I would put these in a different category.\n\nIs there a name for either of these types of kanji compounds?\n\nI tried looking at the Wikipedia entry for 踊り字 for the second type, but didn't\nnotice any special word for it used there, just something like 同じ漢字を重ねる.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T04:57:44.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21445",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T10:59:22.783",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-29T10:59:22.783",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "9199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Is there a name for kanji compounds consisting of kanji with the same radical and for compounds with repeated kanji?",
"view_count": 1082
} | [
{
"body": "It's 畳語(じょうご) / reduplication, though it's not limited to kanji.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T05:15:42.193",
"id": "21447",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-25T05:15:42.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21445",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "We don't have specific words for kanji or radical reduplication, bacause it's\nmerely coincidence, or a side effect happens when we put related or the same\n**words** together.\n\nAs for repeating the same words, we call it\n[畳語](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%B3%E8%AA%9E). If a word that written\nin a single kanji is repeated, it appears _as if_ the kanji is repeated. But\nif you try with other words, you'll get 場面{ばめん}場面{ばめん} (or 場面々々) \"situation by\nsituation\", 知{し}らず知{し}らず \"unconsciously\" or ぴかぴか \"glitter-glitter\", too.\n\nCategorizing words whose components have the same radical is generally not as\ngood an idea as it _seems_ to be. I won't deny its use for mnemonics, since\nradicals with strong semantic restriction (like 木, 虫 or 魚) may create more\nsame-radical ([dvandva-type](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvandva)) compounds,\nbut as a whole, we don't think coincidence of radical itself is associated\nwith some essential nature of our writing or language. Radicals often only\nshed light on their meanings from one side; 機械 both have radical Tree, but\ntoday's people easily notice that it's starting to deviate from what it's\nsupposed to mean. How 消滅{しょうめつ} \"vanish\" is related to Water(*1), and how\n陰険{いんけん} \"sly and mean\" to Cliff(*2)? Actually, they're examples two\ncharacters of one radical _happened_ to be brought together, irrelevant of\nwhat the radical meant. 明日 is more like false positive; 明's 日 \"sun\" is\nhistorical simplification of 囧 \"window\". A similar case is 鮮魚{せんぎょ}(*3) \"raw\nfish\". Although these words share the same radical, you'll see graphically\nunrelated 鮮明{せんめい} \"vivid\" shows far much semantic relevancy with each other.\n\nThere _is_ , however, a small number of words that yield same-radical\ncompounds with high probability. 葡萄{ぶどう}, 混沌{こんとん}, 齟齬{そご} and 魑魅魍魎{ちみもうりょう}\nall belong to [連綿語](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%80%A3%E7%B6%BF%E8%AA%9E).\nFor instance, 葡萄 \"grape\" both have Grass, because they put it intentionally to\nmake sure it refers to a plant. (Neither 葡 nor 萄 is used outside \"grape\" or\ntranscription of _Portugal_ , 葡萄牙.) These words had their sounds in multiple\nsyllables first, then got their kanjis later. Basically it's a [matter of\nChinese](http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%81%AF%E7%B6%BF%E8%A9%9E) that\naffecting Japanese writing too.\n\n* * *\n\n*1: `消` originally meant \"rivers run dry\", and `滅` meant \"annihilate\" in its bare form `烕`. Why `滅` has got Water is not clear, but probably was association with its another meaning: \"extinguish fire\".\n\n*2: `陰` means \"overcast, dark\". It got Cliff while heavily used to mark place names in mountains' shade (north) side. `険`'s one just came from one of its meaning: \"precipitous pass\".\n\n*3: `鮮` originally meant a name of fish. Using it for \"fresh, lively\" is a kind of rebus.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T04:36:34.233",
"id": "21454",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T10:19:46.757",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-28T10:19:46.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21445",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21445 | 21454 | 21454 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I love learning kanji, so I thought about taking the kanken (probably level\n6). So I started to look for information here and there, and it seems I'll\nhave to learn radical names.\n\nI'm totally fine with that, but my problem is: which name to learn ? Let's\ntake 乙 for example: should I learn 乙部{おつぶ}, or simply 乙{おつ}. But in that case,\nI found quite a lot of other names: おつにょう (well, I suppose this one is only if\nthe radical is used as a nyou part of a kanji), つりばり (this one seems to be for\nthe 乚 variant) or れ (seems to be for 乚 again) ? Or again for 丨: should I learn\n丨部{こんぶ}, ぼう or たてぼう?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T17:28:47.447",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21449",
"last_activity_date": "2021-01-26T22:06:55.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9232",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Which radical name should I study for the kanken?",
"view_count": 895
} | [
{
"body": "Last I checked, Kanken doesn't test on the **names** of any radicals, just\nknowledge of which element of a particular kanji _is_ the radical. The names\nare just for your own memorization. Call them whatever you want, though\nknowing a few of the common ones can be useful for talking with Japanese\npeople about particular kanji.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-18T19:13:21.353",
"id": "41780",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-18T19:13:21.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19118",
"parent_id": "21449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The Kanken tests don't require you to write the name of the radical, instead\nthey give a multiple choice of radical names, and for each radical, where\nalternative names exist, the test gives all of the alternative names for each\nradical. In practice it's mostly fairly easy to identify which one is which,\nand you don't need to remember all of the exact names. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uILh7.jpg)\nThe thing which they test for, and the thing which is sometimes difficult, is\nwhether you can identify the radical of each kanji, so the thing you need to\nknow is \"what is the official radical of this kanji according to\nKanken/Monbusho\" rather than being able to reproduce the names.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-03-01T22:03:33.617",
"id": "74728",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-01T22:10:58.890",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-01T22:10:58.890",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "On differing names: Radicals and it's names is a wide subject, and such this\ntopics require to have in mind that grammar and its nomenclature evolves\nthrough time (as the language itself). In linguistics, this kind of issue pops\nup all the time, and to explain the variations we have to look back at the\nlanguage history (this approach is called diachronic). With that in mind,\nlet's say that some times some scholars seems to prefer a specific\nnomenclature and classification pattern, and sometimes they prefer others.\nOnce your objective is the Kanken test, we do not need to explain the\nvariations so let's take a look of how they behave in modern japanese.(this\napproach is called synchronic).\n\nOn the radicals names: You seemed to ask generally about the names of all\nradicals, but because there are plenty, I'll just treat the examples you've\nhighlighted. The 乙、乚 and the 丨\n\n乙 is called おつ。おつにょう, as you've suspected, refers to 乙繞, 繞 being the radicals\nwritten from the left to the bottom. (like 辶) 乚 is the same radical when\nwritten in the right (like a 旁「つくり」, but it'is not), but once this radical\ncomes the representation of \"something that obstructs the growing of other\nsomething\", traditionally it as been read just as another form of 乙, in fact\nthey have the same name. Both of them are おつ, but maybe that's why when\nreferring to 乙、usually、one would say おつにょう。 About 乙部 「おつぶ」this is not the\ntraditional name of the radical, indeed it is not hard to find it, but it's as\nan abbreviation of 乙繞部首 \"the radical otsu\" As the Grammatical terms usually\nrequire kanji with lots of strokes, it is common to abbreviate the\nnomenclature (e.g. like the informal classical verbs conjugation: サ行変格活用ー＞サ変)\n\nIn fact we could generalize that no radical has 部 in the end of it's name.\nWhenever we find it, we must read it as an abbreviation of the grammatical\nnomenclature. The same goes for 丨 the name can be either ぼう or たてぼう. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EyHdR.jpg)\n\nBut as your aim is the Kanken test, (maybe) you should not worry too much\nabout it (for taking the test), because just as @Ben's answer well shows, the\nkanken test do not demand you to write the radical name. Another point is that\nmaybe you might not study all radicals starting from the ones with less\nstrokes, FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE TEST. Once every level of Kanken has a\npredefined list of kanji (that goes with the japanese scholar years, level 6\ncorresponding to 5th grade) maybe sticking to this list could be way more\neffective.\n\nFor the Kanken test, I strongly recommend you the preparatory book series\npublished by the very Kanken Association. ([](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yWxcD.jpg))\nThey have a book for every level.\n\nI have answered based on my personal experience with the help of the kanji\npractice manual 漢字学習ステップ published by 日本漢字能力検定協会、the japanese kanji dictionary\n例解学習漢字辞典 published by 小学館、and by the japanese language dictionary 広辞苑\npublished by 岩波書店。\n\nGood luck!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-01T20:37:03.353",
"id": "76981",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-01T20:37:03.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38567",
"parent_id": "21449",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21449 | null | 41780 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I came across this sentence in みんなの日本語 I.\n\n> カラオケは いちばん お金を 使いません。\n\nI now understand this sentence means:\n\n> Karaoke is the cheapest activity. (or Karaoke is the activity that spends\n> least money).\n\nHowever, I originally thought this sentence meant:\n\n> Karaoke is not the most expensive activity.\n\nI now know the second meaning is not the right answer, but if I encounter\nsimilar sentences in the future, how can I know the ません negates only the\nお金を使い, but not the entire いちばんお金を使い?\n\n* * *\n\n「みんなの日本語I」の教科書に、こんな文がありました。\n\n> カラオケは いちばん お金を 使いません。\n\nこれは次のような意味だと理解しています。\n\n> Karaoke is the cheapest activity. (or Karaoke is the activity that spends\n> least money).\n\n（訳: カラオケはいちばん安い遊び（活動）です or カラオケはいちばんお金を使わない遊びです）\n\nしかし、はじめに読んだとき、私は次のような意味だと思いました。\n\n> Karaoke is not the most expensive activity.\n\n（訳: カラオケはいちばん高い遊びではありません）\n\n今は、これが二番目の意味ではないと知っていますが、もしこれから同じような文章を見た時、「〜ません」が「いちばんお金を使い」全体ではなく、「お金を使い」の部分だけを否定しているということをどう見分けたらよいでしょうか。",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-25T23:15:15.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21451",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-13T07:37:24.190",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-03T16:42:51.920",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7983",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Scope of negation in 「カラオケはいちばんお金を使いません。」",
"view_count": 877
} | [
{
"body": "> Karaoke is the cheapest activity.\n\n\"Karaoke\" > \"カラオケ\" \n\"is\" > \"です\" \n\"the cheapest\" > \"最も安い\" \n\"activity\" > \"遊び\"\n\n> カラオケは最も安い遊びです。\n>\n> カラオケは いちばん お金を 使いません。 \n> カラオケ(という遊び)は (他の遊びの中でも)いちばん お金を 使いません。\n\nAll this is the same meaning. \nBecause,「いちばんお金を使いません」= 「最も安い」\n\nBut,\n\n> Karaoke is not the most expensive activity.\n\n\"Karaoke\" > \"カラオケ\" \n\"is not\" > \"ではありません\" \n\"the most expensive\" > \"最も高い\" \n\"activity\" > \"遊び\"\n\n> カラオケは最も高い遊びではありません。\n\nNote: \nA:「最も高い遊びではありません」 \nB:「最も安い遊びです」 \nA is the meaning that is different from the B.\n\nNote2: \n“いちばんXXXです” + “お金を使いません” = “いちばんお金を使いませんです” \n“です” was abbreviated. \ntherefore “いちばんお金を使いません”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T01:43:45.497",
"id": "21452",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-13T07:37:24.190",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21451",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The みんなの日本語 example literally translated reads: \n`Karaoke uses the least money`. [`カラオケは一番お金を使いません`] \nAnother way of saying it would be: \n`カラオケは一番お金のかかるものではありません` [`Karaoke is not the thing that uses the most money`] \nTo say it in a more straight manner \n`カラオケは一番高い娯楽ではありません` [`Karaoke is not the most expensive activity` {activity\nin this case is substituted for the kanji for leisure; 娯楽－ごらく}] \nTo say the message it as basic and easily as possible \n`カラオケは一番安い娯楽です` [`Karaoke is the cheapest activity`] \nA different way being \n`カラオケは一番お金がかかりません` [`Karaoke uses the least amount of money`] \nIt really depends on what situation you are in, how you would like to say it\nand who you are having to talk to.\n\n**EDIT: Sorry, I just re-read the question. I misunderstood the question\ninitially.**\n\nTo answer how the ません negates only the お金を使い, but not the entire いちばんお金を使い you\nwould look at the sentence structure.\n\nThe sentence `\"カラオケは一番お金を使いません\"` has the structure [Subject] > [Adjective] >\n[Topic / Status of subject] > [Quasi-Verb]. \nThe Quasi-Verb interacts only with the secondary subject. Taking the examples\nof things like `ラッシュの電車は一番空いてません` [The rush hour train is the least empty (the\nmost not empty)] or `中国に行くために、飛行機は一番時間がかかりません` [To get to China, to fly is the\nquickest (does not use the most time)] you can see this is true in most cases.\nThe ません would reverse the meaning of the verb would it have been a ます -\n`カラオケは一番お金を使います` [Karaoke IS the most expensive activity] in much the same way\nas putting `not` in front of a verb in general English sentences changes only\nthe meaning of the verb.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T05:28:03.133",
"id": "21470",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-12T00:50:56.770",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-12T00:50:56.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "9241",
"owner_user_id": "9241",
"parent_id": "21451",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The least expensive : いちばん 金を使わない\n\nNot the most expensive : いちばんは 金を使わない",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-12T14:16:27.847",
"id": "21761",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-12T14:16:27.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21451",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21451 | null | 21452 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Someone asked me something without including the subject. I don't know what\nthey were referring to, so how would you go about asking for the subject of\nwhat they are talking about, or just generally asking what they are talking\nabout?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T03:38:39.900",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21453",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T04:05:37.267",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-26T14:54:49.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "3073",
"owner_user_id": "9236",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"phrases"
],
"title": "How to say \"I don't know what you're referring to\"?",
"view_count": 4052
} | [
{
"body": "Japanese's particle system comes in handy here.\n\n`何【なに】が（ですか）？` (for asking the subject)\n\n`何【なに】を（ですか）？` (for asking the object)\n\nExchanges like this can be difficult to translate into English...\n\nOr for instance:\n\n`（「あれ」って）何【なん】のこと？（ですか？・かよく分かりません）`",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T04:45:02.827",
"id": "21455",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T04:45:02.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "315",
"parent_id": "21453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "You can use \"何の話？\", \"何のこと？\", \"何の話ですか？\", or \"何のことですか？\"\n\n> * A:「すごかったよ！」 B: 「え？ 何の話？」 (casual)\n> * A:「明日までにやってください。」 B: 「すみません、何のことですか？」 (politer)\n> * (jumping into a conversation)「ねえねえ、何の話？」\n>\n\n何 here can be read as either なん or なに, but the latter sound politer.\n\nNote that using \"言う\" in this situation can sound accusatory.\n\n> * 何を言っているの？ ≒Are you kidding? What are you talking about?\n> * 何を言っているのか分かりません。 ≒What nonsense you are talking!\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T09:14:30.087",
"id": "21458",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T09:14:30.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "This really depends on situation and the people you are talking to.\n\nUsually a semi-polite `何についての話ですか？` (About/Referring to what are you talking\nabout) would work for most situations.\n\nThere are more formal and less formal ways of saying it though depending on\nwhat social position the other person is though.\n\nLess formal would be `何の話ですか？`\n\nMore would be `何についてのお話でしょうか？`\n\nThis is in no way an exhaustive list and the context of the situation\ngenerally denotes the way you are expected to ask.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T04:05:37.267",
"id": "21467",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T04:05:37.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9241",
"parent_id": "21453",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21453 | null | 21455 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21460",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What would be the most adequate counter word for this type of instant noodles?\nLike '1 package of ramen'.\n\n",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T14:31:57.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21459",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-25T06:42:29.937",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-25T06:42:29.937",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7945",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"counters",
"food"
],
"title": "Counter word for prepackaged instant ramen",
"view_count": 664
} | [
{
"body": "Since these come in 'bags' rather than in cups, you can use the 袋{ふくろ}\ncounter.\n\n> インスタントラーメン一袋{ひとふくろ}",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T14:41:33.257",
"id": "21460",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-26T14:41:33.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "21459",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21459 | 21460 | 21460 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have seen two type of compound verbs in Japanese, in one type the first verb\nis used in its \"te form\", in the second type the first verb is used in the\n\"masu stem form\". What difference does the form make of the first verb make to\nthe meaning of the compound verb?\n\n例： 持ってくる, this is where we have the first verb in \"te form\" 例： 吸い取る, this is\nwhere we have first verb in \"masu stem form\"\n\nFor example, why don't we say 吸って取る instead?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T20:41:28.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21461",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T06:58:58.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3441",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"compound-verbs"
],
"title": "Compound verb in Japanese; verb(te form)+verb vs verb(masu stem form)+verb",
"view_count": 1423
} | [
{
"body": "Japanese tends to separate the type of compound verbs into how they behave\nphysically. E.g. 持ってくる is more like 2 separate action, Pick it up and bring\nit. However 吸い取る is more like a single action. E.g. Another one 溶け込む as a\nsingle action would never be read as 溶かして込む。 Many of these just need to be\nmemorized.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T06:58:58.397",
"id": "21473",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T06:58:58.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9245",
"parent_id": "21461",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21461 | null | 21473 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When I learnt Japanese I was taught that a transitive verb in its \"te form\"\nfollowed by the verb \"iru\" represents a continuous action. However, this is\nnot the case with intransitive verbs which instead represent a state when used\nthis way;\n\nTherefore 開けている means that a subject is opening the door, the action of\nopening is taking place and perhaps the subject has its hand on the handle of\nthe door and is pulling it. However, 開いている means that the door is open rather\nthan an action in which the door seems to be \"automatically\" opening.\n\nThis creates a confusion in my mind for example, 死んでいる means dead rather than\na thing in the process of dying but not yet dead.\n\nWhy does the meaning differ so much for the two type of verbs? So, how does\none represent continuous actions when using intransitive verbs?\n\nAlso, using ところ with a verb, one can present an action which is taking place\n\"this instant\". Does the transitive verb in \"te form\" not do this already?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T20:50:07.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21462",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-19T21:39:45.650",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-26T21:38:28.310",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3441",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "Meaning of, Transitive verb in \"te form\" + iru vs Intransitive verb in \"te form\" + iru",
"view_count": 1944
} | [
{
"body": "I guess we cannot directly translate English into Japanese and vice-versa. I\nthink that is a common mistake made by a lot of English speakers. You have to\nthink in Japanese instead. Let me use some of your examples and provide some\nexamples:\n\n 1. ドアを開けている。\n 2. ドアが開いている。\n 3. 犬が死んでいる。\n 4. 飛行機が飛んでいる。\n 5. 彼が笑っている。\n\nAs a general guide, the thinking process for te-iru forms is \"being in the\nstate\". For 1, it is very direct. Transitive verbs in the te-iru form can be\ndirectly translated into V-ing. Hence, I am opening the door. You can think of\nit as, \"I am in the state of opening the door.\"\n\nFor 2, similarly, think of it as being in the state. So you will get, the door\nis opened, it is in the opened state. The next question is, how to express\n\"the door is opening (by itself)?\" That would be just, 「ドアが開く」. Remember, do\nnot think in English. If you think in English, you will be confused. 「開く」just\nmeans open, the act of opening. Hence, naturally「ドアが開く」can be processed as\n\"the door opens\". However, it also means \"the door is opening\"! You should\nknow by now that Japanese depends heavily on context. So, let's put this into\ncontext.\n\nThe elevator just arrived. ドアが今開く。 The elevator's doors open now/are opening\nnow.\n\nIf you really want to express the continuous form, to emphasize on the\ncontinual action, then you could also say ドアが開いているところです。\n\nLet's move on for more examples.\n\nFor 3, similarly, thinking of the state, the dog is in the state of being\ndead. For 4, it is translated as the plane is flying... now why is a \"V-ing\"\nused here? It is because flying is the state of being in flight! Hence, it\nmakes perfect sense!\n\nAnd lastly for 5, \"He is laughing\"; he is in the state of laughter.\n\nAllow me to emphasize the point of being in context again. For example,\n「私が怖い」can mean \"I am a scary person\" or \"I am afraid\". 「猫が怖い」can mean \"I am\nscared of cats (私は)\" or \"Cats are scary\". So Japanese language is actually\nvery ambiguous and depend heavily on context. Take some time to ponder over it\nand you will eventually get it!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-17T09:48:20.560",
"id": "24372",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-17T10:11:05.963",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-17T10:11:05.963",
"last_editor_user_id": "10117",
"owner_user_id": "10117",
"parent_id": "21462",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Although the original question is from years ago, I will leave this here in\ncase someone might find it helpful.\n\nThe above answer from user @chun-kiat states, though only in passing, a verrry\nimportant thing for English (at least) speakers learning Japanese: the sooner\nyou give up on trying to draw parallels and correspondences between English\nand Japanese, the sooner you will begin to make real progress in your studies.\nI also upvoted that answer because somehow it had a -1 rating. Not sure what\nminus ratings mean...\n\nI'm a native English speaker, studied French in college, and did a year-abroad\nthing in France. Because French and English are syntactically and\netymologically related, I could lean heavily on my internalized knowledge of\nEnglish grammar and vocabulary to springboard my way into French. Although\nthere are of course notable and tricky differences -- for example, French\nwants to be more precise with all its crazy verb tenses and modes.\n\nAnd, after hearing in my linguistics classes how \"Japanese is so different\"\nand \"Japanese is a total outlier\" and \"Japanese is the hardest language to\nlearn\" etc, I was like \"hold my beer\" and signed up for a 1-year exchange\nprogram language course in Japan.\n\nBased on my prior success with French and my cross-referential approach to\nlanguage learning, I approached Japanese with the same mindset. And for six\nmonths I pursued dead ends and rabbit holes and got more and more frustrated\nwhen I could not get it to just \"fall into place.\"\n\nI'm not sure how or why, but at some point it clicked for me that I would just\nhave to swallow the thing whole and take it on its own terms. Once I stopped\ntrying to make Japanese act like I wanted it to I began to make real progress\nand the experience got a lot more fun and fascinating.\n\nOf course this will be easier to do if you are in the country and surrounded\nby the language all the time. If you have the opportunity to do it that way\nit's definitely the best way to go.\n\nBut be careful of falling into the trap of trying to find \"hooks\" and\nsimilarities where there are none. It's like holding on to preconceived\nnotions in general. You just end up holding your own self back from making\nprogress.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-12-19T21:39:45.650",
"id": "83183",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-19T21:39:45.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5078",
"parent_id": "21462",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21462 | null | 24372 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21464",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It's either:\n\n * Host family of everyone's\n * Host family of your's (I got this from Google Translator)\n\nThis is from Mirai Book 5.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-26T23:38:45.560",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21463",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T04:30:42.507",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-27T00:14:35.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "9242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Translation of Hosutofamiri- no Minasan (ホストファミリーのみなさん)",
"view_count": 292
} | [
{
"body": "_Minasan_ (皆【みな】さん） means _everyone_ , and it's mainly used as a vocative,\njust like you say in English, \"Hello, _everyone_!\" to people in front of you.\n\n_Hosutofamiri- no_ （ホストファミリーの） modifies _Minasan_. And in this case, the\nparticle _no_ （の） indicates the host family is in\n[apposition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apposition) to _Minasan_. (Ex.\nRudolph, the reindeer = トナカイ **の** ルドルフ; My friend Kevin = 友達 **の** ケビン)\n\nSo ホストファミリーの皆さん refers to _everyone_ in front of the speaker, who are host\nfamilies of someone. It can be _my_ host family, or _yours_ , or _theirs_ ,\ndepending on the context. The literal translation would be \"everyone in\n(somobody's) host family\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T00:01:20.110",
"id": "21464",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T04:30:42.507",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-27T04:30:42.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21463",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21463 | 21464 | 21464 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the meaning of 家族ポイント and 家族ポイントを消費?\n\nExamples:\n\n> 家族ポイントを消費して行くオプションもありましたが、年の初めから無理をすることもなかろうと看病モード。\n>\n> かなりの家族ポイントを消費しつつ、札幌歴史ゲーム友の会の例会に久々に参加しました。\n>\n> 家庭にオーブン付レンジをお持ちのお父さん、絆ばかりで家族ポイントを消費がちだと思いますので、株を上げるのは如何でしょう？（黒いな）\n\nAre 家族ポイント a kind of \"points\" that are earned by doing some 家族サービス and can be\nspent on non-family leisure? Or am I misunderstanding the concept?\n\nI particular in the 3rd example, I fail to see why having an oven would have a\nnegative point impact.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T03:25:49.140",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21466",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T07:44:15.723",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"idioms"
],
"title": "Meaning of 家族ポイントを消費",
"view_count": 148
} | [
{
"body": "(すみません、文脈を勘違いしていたので修正します)\n\n家族ポイント is not an established idiom.\n\n家族ポイント in these examples can be understood as \"level of confidence from their\nfamily\". That's something you lose when you are away from your family and\nabsorbed in your hobby. This is a very ゲーマー臭い word play which non-gamers are\nunlikely to think of, and it seems that all the three authors of these\nsentences are core gamers.\n\nIn your third example ([original post\nhere](http://blog.livedoor.jp/kusunoki3378/archives/52538907.html)), the cause\nof losing his 家族ポイント is not the oven but 絆 (=[機動戦士ガンダム\n戦場の絆](http://web.gundam-kizuna.jp/sp/)). That part can be translated into\nplain Japanese as \"戦場の絆をプレイしてばかりいるせいで、家族からの信頼を失いがちだと思いますので\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T05:00:47.513",
"id": "21469",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T07:44:15.723",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-27T07:44:15.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21466",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21466 | null | 21469 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "> オーストラリアは 今 **夏で** とても あつい です。\n\nDoes this sentence mean:\n\n * “Australia is currently in **summer and** it's very hot”. Or,\n * “Australia is now very hot **in summer** ”.\n\n* * *\n\nI know that the Japanese sentence could follow the sentence pattern below.\n\n> オーストラリアは 今 **夏です。** とても あつい です。 \n> オーストラリアは 今 **夏で、** とても あつい です。 \n> (I have seen sentences where there is no comma after で.\n\n\n\n(All Rights reserved to Mirai Book 5 Company.)\n\n* * *\n\nOr, the **で** could be used to say, **\"in summer\"**.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T04:09:23.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21468",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T10:59:33.523",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-29T10:59:33.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "9242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Translation of particle で in 「オーストラリアは今夏でとてもあついです」",
"view_count": 431
} | [
{
"body": "It means that it is current summer in Australia and it is very hot.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T06:51:03.570",
"id": "21471",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T06:51:03.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9245",
"parent_id": "21468",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Pretty much. A rougher translation would be: \"As for Australia, it is now very\nhot due to summer.\" Would pretty much equates to \"Australia is (now) very hot\nin summer.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T06:52:52.630",
"id": "21472",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T06:52:52.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9246",
"parent_id": "21468",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Basicaly, you're asking if that で is the particle で or the suspensive/て form\nof だ. The thing is, those two often have very similar meaning.\n\nIf we think it's the particle で, it means that the summer is the direct cause\nof the heat :\n\n> It's very hot in Australia right now because it's summer.\n\nIf we think it's the て form of だ, we just state two facts but with the idea\nthat there is a causal link between them.\n\n> It's summer in Australia right now and (that's why) it's very hot.\n\nLong story short : It means the same thing.\n\nNow, I don't know exactly what you meant when you wrote \"Australia is now very\nhot in summer.\" : if the implied idea was that the summers have been hot in\nAustralia for some years but that it hasn't always been the case, then I think\nthe proper japanese sentence would be :\n\n> オーストラリアは今 **では** 夏 **の時** とてもあついです。\n>\n> Nowadays, Australia is very hot in summer/Australia's summers are very hot.\n\nでは indicates that there is a contrast between now and before, and I don't\nthink で can replace の時 there but I can't really explain why.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T12:48:11.880",
"id": "21475",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T12:48:11.880",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "21468",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> オーストラリアは 今 夏 **で** とても あつい です。 \n> Does this sentence mean: \n> Australia is currently in Summer and it's very hot. \n> Or, \n> Australia is now very hot in summer.\n\nThe former.\n\n> =オーストラリアは今、夏です。+ とても暑いです。\n\nThe で is a 断定の助動詞「だ」, not a case particle(格助詞).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T10:33:33.583",
"id": "21493",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T10:33:33.583",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21468",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21468 | null | 21493 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21476",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I've been following the Genki textbook up until now and I learnt to use そば to\ntalk about things that are near something else. I recently bought a JLPT N5\ntextbook, as it's my intention to try and take it someday, and found the word\nがわ. Looking it up, I found it listed as ~side. Could somebody provide some\nexamples and explain the difference, if any, between them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T12:38:40.407",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21474",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T02:43:36.190",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "がわ/そば difference and use",
"view_count": 1131
} | [
{
"body": "I think そば is used for saying something is near something, whereas 〜側【がわ】 is\nusually used in collocations like 右側【みぎ・がわ】 and 左側【ひだり・がわ】, meaning right-side\nand left side respectively.\n\nAn example of each would be...\n\n郵便局【ゆう・びん・きょく】は美術館【び・じゅつ・かん】のそばにあります。 The post office is near the art museum.\n\n郵便局【ゆう・びん・きょく】は美術館【び・じゅつ・かん】の左側にあります。 The post office is on the left side of\nthe art museum.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T12:54:31.143",
"id": "21476",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T12:54:31.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7802",
"parent_id": "21474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "One big difference is that がわ can me used to mean \"side\" in the sense of a(n)\n\"(opposing) stance\".\n\n> * [訴追]{そ・つい}側・[検察]{けん・さつ}側 (the prosecution) ←→ [被告]{ひ・こく}側 (the defense)\n> * 学生側の不満1 → Dissatisfaction on the part/side of the students\n> * 責任は会社側にある2 → The fault is on the part/side of the company\n>\n\n>\n> 1 Example taken from プログレッシブ英和・和英中辞典 \n> 2 Example taken from ウィズダム英和辞典",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T16:46:29.163",
"id": "21480",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T16:46:29.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Possibly an easier way of generally defining the difference would be...\n\n`そば` = Next to\n\n`側` = On the side of (both arguments, and directions).\n\n駅の向こう側にあるスーパーは薬局のそばにあります。[The Chemist/Drug Store is next to the Supermarket on\nthe far side of the Train Station]",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T02:43:36.190",
"id": "21486",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T02:43:36.190",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9241",
"parent_id": "21474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21474 | 21476 | 21476 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21491",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The speaker just stated that her father is too sure of himself.\n\n> いくらママが死んじゃって いないからってさ！ (there is a space in the manga as well)\n>\n> チャンピオンなのを利用していろんな女の人と遊びまくってんのよ！\n>\n> He uses his title to have fun with every girl that moves!\n\n* * *\n\nOk, first, I don't get the meaning of いくら here... is it a casual way of using\nthe いくら...~ても/でも form (I.E. dropping the も)?\n\nIt still wouldn't make sense to me : \"No matter how much mom died..\"?? or is\nit just to stress the concession : \"Ok, EVEN though mom is dead...\"?\n\n* * *\n\nI don't understand who's the subject of いない either, is it the dead mom? Is it\na way of saying he hasn't found another wife yet (新妻がいない...)?\n\n* * *\n\nAs at that point I basicaly only understood that her mom is dead, I don't know\nwho's the subject of って and if it's short for 言う or 思う...\n\nThanks for your time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T13:18:40.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21477",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T05:33:24.610",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of いくら and って in this sentence",
"view_count": 593
} | [
{
"body": "The subject of って (と言って) is void or general you/they and that of いない is ママ (I\nguess it refers to a owner of a bar here). So, the whole いくら「ママが死んじゃっていないから」って\ntranslates into \"no matter how much you say because the lady is dead and\ngone\", and in more natural sounding English (aside from \"lady\"), \"(he\nshouldn't do it) even if the lady is dead and gone\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T05:33:24.610",
"id": "21491",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T05:33:24.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21477",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21477 | 21491 | 21491 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21479",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just realized that newspapers sometimes end a person's name with 「さん」：\n[後藤さん不明、昨年１１月に把握\n首相、答弁で明かす](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASH1W5JQWH1WUTFK00F.html?iref=comtop_6_01)：。And\nthen sometimes end a person's name with 「氏」：\n[自民・山本一太氏、人質事件で与野党結束訴え](http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/politics/20150127-OYT1T50148.html?from=y10)：。\nIn this forum, I found this thread [What does 氏 mean after a name, how is it\ndifferent from さん or\n様?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2482/what-\ndoes-%E6%B0%8F-mean-after-a-name-how-is-it-different-\nfrom-%E3%81%95%E3%82%93-or-%E6%A7%98)。 However the accepted answer explains\nthat the difference is 敬語{けいご}。I cannot imagine that the impersonality of a\nnewspaper allows for 敬語？\n\n * What criteria decides whether to end a name with 「氏」 or 「さん」in a newspaper？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T14:59:11.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21478",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T03:21:02.813",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"honorifics"
],
"title": "What criteria decides whether to print 「氏」 or 「さん」 at the end of a person's name in newspapers?",
"view_count": 374
} | [
{
"body": "氏 is cut out for public figures and さん is for ordinary people. さん could convey\na slightly respectful nuance and that can more or less hurt fairness that\nnewspapers must hold. (I find the order in the link determined firstly in\nterms of formality and that of respectfulness is secondary.)",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T16:18:02.383",
"id": "21479",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-27T16:18:02.383",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21478",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21478 | 21479 | 21479 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21487",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Hope this is an appropriate question!\n\nI visited Tokyo back in September and got by on some very basic Japanese\n(though more often with the help of their good grasp on English).\n\nAnyway, there was a couple of times I heard as a parting phrase... once from a\nbarman and I believe another in a restaurant. I thought it was just \"arimasu\"\nor \"arimasen\" by itself though I may have missed a particle or other word. I\ntried to look it up when I was there and have searched many times over the\nlast few months to decipher it but with no luck.\n\nThe curiosity is still getting to me, could anyone here shed some light on how\nthat might be used as a parting phrase?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T18:05:09.400",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21481",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T06:05:27.007",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9249",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"greetings"
],
"title": "Arimasu as a parting phrase",
"view_count": 179
} | [
{
"body": "I guess you've misheard heavily slurred ありがとうございます.\n\nWhen spoken very quickly, ありがとうございます can be pronounced like ありゃーっす！ or ありわーっす！\nor\n[あざーっす](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1017958575)！\nAnd ありがとうございました can be more like ありゃーしたぁ！ or あーした！\n\nSimilarly, slurred いらっしゃいませ can sound like\n[しあわせ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrQsKpuocKI),\n[ラッシュアワースリー](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASPWlMlbkKM), or even\n[エアロスミス](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Insn6p4azM8).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T02:51:46.383",
"id": "21487",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T02:51:46.383",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21481",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "Combining the comments on your question, when leaving a Japanese-style\nrestaurant in Japan the following is not uncommon.\n\nWhen you have just paid the bill and turn towards the door.\n\nStaff:`お客様お帰りです` / `お客様帰ります` / `Some other form of \"The customer is leaving\"\ndepending on local accents`\n\nThe customer may also add a `ごちそうさまでした` or `ありがとうございます` whilst paying or on\ntheir way towards the door.\n\nAs naruto adds, and personal experience follows; especially in Tokyo you find\na fair amount of restaurants where the staff exclaim `あざーす`、`ありざーす` or some\nother shortened form of `ありがとう`.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T02:55:08.480",
"id": "21488",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T06:05:27.007",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-29T06:05:27.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "9241",
"owner_user_id": "9241",
"parent_id": "21481",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21481 | 21487 | 21487 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21485",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Dictionary or other references are appreciated, as no dictionary I have\nreferenced gives me an example of this kind of usage.\n\n[Example](http://jpa.ac/cram/column/mori2/mori2-05.html):\n\n>\n> とにかく、このメンタルブロックをぶち壊さないと、願望は達成できない。人は願望を持った場合、「それは実現不可能だ」ということを証明したがる習性を持っている。\n> **曰く** 、「教室が狭いのでそんなに人数が入らない。」 **曰く** 、「この地区は不況が厳しいので、その授業料では受け入れられない。」\n> **曰く** 「資金がない。」 **曰く、曰く** …。いわゆる消極型人間がほとんどなのである。\n\nIt looks like すなわち, なぜかと聞くと, 例えば, つまり, or something like that, but I cannot\npin it down.\n\nI'm interested in all possible usages of (adverbial?) 曰く without a name\nprefix, not just the meaning of this one example, so if you can't answer this\nbut know of any more examples with possibly different usages (it is quite hard\nto google this ><), please add them in the comments.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T21:01:57.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21482",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T02:25:15.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "315",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does 曰く mean when it is *not* preceded by a name?",
"view_count": 642
} | [
{
"body": "I see this pattern once in a while. These 曰く are the same as the one preceded\nby a name, except that the speakers are unimportant and thus omitted.\n\nSo basically these just mean \"one says ..., another says ..., another says,\n...\". As for the last two 曰く, even the contents of their speech are omitted,\nthus effectively implying they are quibbling about trivial things.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T02:25:15.780",
"id": "21485",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T02:25:15.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21482",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21482 | 21485 | 21485 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21501",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My question is how to interpret this.\n\n> そう呟いて見上げる空は、朝見たよりも輝いて見えた\n\nIn this sentence does it mean he was already looking at the sky before he\nmuttered whatever he said, or can it still indicate actions in succession when\nthe verb is used in a relative clause after the て form(i.e. he muttered this\nand then looked up)?\n\nedit: I think it means that in this case he was already looking upwards before\nhe said it and the て form is to show the successive action at the end of the\nsentence?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-27T21:14:02.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21483",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T06:23:29.323",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-15T06:23:29.323",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Usage of て form before relative clause e.g. そう呟いて見上げる空は、朝見たよりも輝いて見えた",
"view_count": 347
} | [
{
"body": "Generally speaking, connecting two verbs like this using _te_ -form indicates\nthe two actions happens simultaneously, or the second one happens soon after\nthe first one.\n\n> * 酔って運転する drive under the influence of alcohol, drink and drive\n> * 会って話す meet and talk\n> * 食べて寝る eat and sleep, go to bed just after eating\n> * 遊んで暮らす spend days in idleness\n>\n\nIn your example sentence, maybe he muttered something _and then_ looked up to\nthe sky. Or maybe he muttered something and looked up to the sky almost at the\nsame time. But it's unlikely that he has been already looking at the sky for a\nwhile before muttering something.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T15:41:08.960",
"id": "21501",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T15:41:08.960",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Usually, `A-て B` composition describes \"do _B_ with effect or result of _A_ \",\nthat is, either _A_ continues as long as _B_ does (like your second one\n`輝いて見えた`), or _A_ completes when/before _B_ starts. But I know, oddly enough,\n_A_ sometimes accepts action of utterance that apparently too late for _B_ 's\nbeginning.\n\nSome examples through quick Googling:\n\n> 「ここか……緊張するな」そう言って見上げるのは１１階建てのマンション。 (from\n> [here](http://homepage3.nifty.com/mercurius/novel/app_old/021.html))\n>\n> 綺麗だねぇと言って見上げる村人たちの顔に (from [here](http://tanpen.jp/148/23.html))\n>\n> 「どっから来たの、おじさん」そう言って見上げたサンジに (from\n> [here](http://www6.ocn.ne.jp/%7Epuppy/novel/kaiki/11.htm))\n\nI suspect this usage is a rhetorical compromise with grammar, in order to\nsmoothly induce readers' attention from speech to visual scene.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T16:45:42.233",
"id": "21503",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T16:22:26.940",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21483 | 21501 | 21503 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Recently, I've been studying about family terms and how to ask where they\nlive, how many siblings, or what do they do. There is a question in one of my\nworksheets that involves writing it in hiragana.\n\nThe question is: “Ask if Mika lives with her parents”\n\nI know the ending would be 「にすんでいるんです。」\n\nI know the verb for to live is 「すむ」 and in て＋いる form it's 「すんでいるんです」 with に as\nthe particle because it has something to do with a place.\n\nSo, I wrote\n\n> みかーさん、ごりょうしんもいっしょにすんでいるんですか。\n\nI know the last part translates to “...is living together”, but that sentence\nis more like “Mika, does your parents also live together?” Not “Mika, do you\nlive with your parents?” I've tried looking into my textbooks, but none of\nthem have an example sentence.\n\nI'm just confused about how to completely write the sentence.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T03:30:43.690",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21489",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T15:32:31.337",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-28T15:32:31.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "4691",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How do you write \"do you live with your parents?\" in hiragana?",
"view_count": 1977
} | [
{
"body": "> “do you live with your parents?”\n\n**Literal translation** \n\"do you\" > \"あなたはXXXですか\" \n\"live with\" > \"と一緒に住む\" \n\"your parents\" > \"あなたの両親\"\n\n> \"あなたはあなたの両親と一緒に住むですか？\" _< - strange..._ \n> \"あなたはあなたの両親と一緒に住んでいますか？\" _< - \"あなたの\" little redundant_ \n> \"あなたは両親と一緒に住んでいますか？\" _< - Literal translation_ \n> \"あなたはりょうしんといっしょにすんでいますか？\" _< - in Hiragana_\n\n**In general** \n\"あなたは\" > \"みか-さん\"(Mika) \n\"両親\" > \"ご両親\" _< - Polite language_ \n\"一緒住む\" = \"同居する\" \n\"一緒に住んでいますか\" > \"同居なされているのですか\" _< - Polite language_\n\n> \"みかさんはご両親と同居なされているのですか？\" _< - in general_ \n> \"みかさんはごりょうしんとどうきょなされているのですか？\" _< - in Hiragana_\n\n**Note(supplement):**\n\n> \"お前親と一緒に住んでんの？\" _< - close friends (rudely)_ \n> \"おまえおやといっしょにすんでんの？\" _< - in Hiragana_",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T04:50:34.923",
"id": "21490",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T08:10:41.027",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-28T08:10:41.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "9235",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21489",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21489 | null | 21490 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21496",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I understand that で is used when referring to the place where an action is\ntaking place. But what about the following sentence?\n\n> 日本で車が速い。\n\nSince there's no action taking place I would have expected to write 日本に rather\nthan 日本で. But the example I saw used で.\n\nCan somebody please tell me which way is correct and maybe explain why?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T11:47:15.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21495",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T15:33:06.557",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-28T15:33:06.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"adjectives",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Use of で for location with an adjective",
"view_count": 430
} | [
{
"body": "Japanese **adjectives** (形容詞) form independent predicates, that means, they\ngrammatically act as verbs (速い means \" ** _be_** fast\"). Again, all verbs\nexcept for ones referring to \"staying\" (e.g. ある, いる, 住む, 泊まる etc.) mark their\nlocations by `で`. The same thing applies to all word classes (with the help of\ncopula `だ`):\n\n> Verb: 日本 **で** 走る _run in Japan_ \n> Adjective: 日本 **で** 安い _be inexpensive in Japan_ \n> Adjective noun: 日本 **で** 有名だ _be famous in Japan_ \n> Noun: 日本 **で** 英雄だ _be a hero in Japan_\n\nAs an aside, your\n\n> 日本で車が速い。\n\ndoesn't sound natural as a complete sentence, unless you're reporting what\nhappens in front of your eyes (journalists favor it for articles, though). If\nyou simply want to say that \"cars are fast in Japan\", you'd topicalize one\nelement:\n\n> 日本で **は** 車が速い。 _Cars run fast in Japan (neutral / compared to other\n> countries)._ \n> 日本で車 **は** 速い。 _Cars run fast in Japan (compared to other\n> transportations)._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T14:31:30.930",
"id": "21496",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T15:31:42.027",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-28T15:31:42.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "First of all, 「日本で車が速い。」 seems unnatural to me. \nI would use the topic marker and say 「日本では車が速い。」 \n \nIn Japanese an adjective can be thought of as a verb, as in Klingon. \nThink of it as action of \"being fast\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T14:41:10.333",
"id": "21498",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T14:41:10.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21495 | 21496 | 21496 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21506",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have translated the phrase 書き込みによると which, and if I'm right, means\n\"According to the writing\". I want to know more about the structure and\ngrammar rules used here. I found it in\n[this](http://www.excite.co.jp/News/chn_soc/20150122/Recordchina_20150122057.html)\narticle.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T14:39:45.627",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21497",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T22:29:23.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Explaining the phrase 書｛か｝き込｛こ｝みによると",
"view_count": 117
} | [
{
"body": "書き込みによると means \"according to the entry/note.\"\n\n書き込み = (handwritten) note; post; jotting; entry.\n\nによると = a JLPT 1 grammar point that means \"according to\". You can read more on\nthis grammatical form\n[here](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=niyoruto).\n\nHope this helps!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T21:54:47.440",
"id": "21506",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T22:29:23.177",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-28T22:29:23.177",
"last_editor_user_id": "4965",
"owner_user_id": "4965",
"parent_id": "21497",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21497 | 21506 | 21506 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21502",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example\n\n> この中でどれが一番難しいのですか。\n>\n> 数学が一番難しいのです\n\nIs the の here used as nominalizer meaning \"one\" or is it used as\nexplanatory/emphasizing のです?\n\nI assume the sentences translate to \"Amongst these (courses) which is the most\ndifficult **one**? Math is the most difficult **one**.\"\n\nTherefore I think the の here is a nominalizer, but I rememberer reading that\nnominalizing の cannot be used before です and we should use こと instead. For\nexample:\n\n> 私の趣味は映画を見るのです。x\n>\n> 私の趣味は映画を見ることです。√",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T15:01:22.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21499",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T16:10:43.687",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6893",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"particles",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Usage of の before です",
"view_count": 374
} | [
{
"body": "Usage of の devides into (1) pronoun and (2) nominalizer.\n\n 1. 難しいのと簡単なやつ、どっちがいい？ Which do you like, difficult one and easy one?\n 2. それが難しいのは知っている I know that it's difficult.\n\nAnd, when the nominalizer appears in the position of the predecate of the\nsentence, we call it \"explanatory/emphasizing の\".\n\nSpeaking of your examples, you can regard この中でどれが一番難しいのですか and 数学が一番難しいのです as\neither pronoun or explanatory の.\n\nAs you say, you can't use nominalizer の in the position of the predecate\nunless it's explanatory/emphasizing の. In other words, の can be used before です\nwhen it's a pronoun or explanatory/emphasizing の.\n\n * そのメガネは映画を見るのです Those glasses are one to watch movies\n * 何するんですか？ → 映画を見るんです",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T16:10:43.687",
"id": "21502",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-28T16:10:43.687",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21499",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21499 | 21502 | 21502 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've seen both of these used about equally, and they seem to have similar\nmeanings. Are they entirely interchangeable?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T20:04:52.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21504",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-31T05:14:21.867",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9258",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "実名 vs 本名 connotation？",
"view_count": 331
} | [
{
"body": "Both are translated as \"real name\" in English. According to\n[類語例解辞典{るいごれいかいじてん}](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/5374/m0u/%E5%AE%9F%E5%90%8D/),\n本名{ほんみょう} is used as opposed to the name that a person uses such as a stage\nname or alias. 実名{じつめい} is used when one dares to disclose one’s name.\n\nThe sentences below are examples taken from 類語例解辞典{るいごれいかいじてん}:\n\n> 1. 本名{ほんみょう}/実名{じつめい}を名乗{なの}れ。 \n> 'Tell me your real name.'\n>\n> 2. 実名{じつめい}入{い}りで記事{きじ}を書{か}く。 \n> '(person) writes a [newspaper/magazine] article in her own name.'\n>\n> 3. 本名{ほんみょう}を偽{いつわ}る。 \n> '(a person) lies about their real name.'\n>\n>\n\nCompared with 本名{ほんみょう}, 実名{じつめい} tends to be used in the sense of\nrevealing/hiding the real name. For instance, the police make 実名{じつめい} of the\nsuspect public or they hide 実名{じつめい} of the victim.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T23:00:01.847",
"id": "21507",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T09:51:13.393",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-29T09:51:13.393",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "5090",
"parent_id": "21504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "Yes, I agree with nominozomy about 70%. For these kind of stuff, you need to\n\"feel\" when it is used, when it should be used.\n\nAlthough nominozomy quoted [実名]{じつめい}[入]{い}りで[記事]{きじ}を[書]{か}く。 '(person)\nwrites a [newspaper/magazine] article in her own name.'\n\nRegarding this I never came across wherever it is at work, or municipal\nregistration stuff, or a conversation. And to me, personally, it sounds a bit\nstrange.\n\nIn terms of frequency, 本名 is far more often used than 実名, at the official\nprocedures, or in business, because as nominozomy said \"Compared with\n[本名]{ほんみょう}, [実名]{じつめい} tends to be used in the sense of revealing/hiding the\nreal name.\" And 実名 reminds me of some kind of criminal activities, though not\nfor all cases.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T02:05:44.290",
"id": "21545",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-31T05:14:21.867",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-31T05:14:21.867",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21504 | null | 21507 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 呆れたように言う彼女を横になったまま見上げつつ、俺は持っていた本を机の上に置いた\n\nMy question is about the usage of why is いう used in this relative clause and\nnot another form.\n\n * 俺は持っていた本を机の上に置いた-I placed the book I was holding on the desk\n\n * 彼女を横になったまま見上げつつ- This says he does the above while lying down and looking up at her.\n\n * 呆れたように言う- This modifies her but the question is how. Does this sentence narrate himself as doing all this as she speaks(if so, why る-form), or what else could it mean?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-28T20:17:52.523",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21505",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-06T16:25:47.847",
"last_edit_date": "2022-06-06T16:25:47.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Question about order of events in relative clauses. 呆れたように言う彼女を横になったまま見上げつつ、俺は持っていた本を机の上に置いた",
"view_count": 338
} | [
{
"body": "> 呆れたように言う彼女を横になったまま見上げつつ、俺は持っていた本を机の上に置いた\n\nI think it breaks apart like so:\n\n> 呆れたように (as if she were amazed)\n\n言う彼女 (the girl in question) を横になったまま見上げつつ (looked up while lying down), (while\nas for me) 俺は, (the book I was holding I placed on [top of] the desk)\n持っていた本を机の上に置いた\n\n## the takeaway:\n\n言う彼女 is a noun. \"the spoken-of girl\" or \"the previously mentioned girl\" or\n\"the girl in question\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-10T02:34:40.460",
"id": "23157",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-06T16:24:50.403",
"last_edit_date": "2022-06-06T16:24:50.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "21505",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Let's take another example.\n\n 1. while looking up the moon that orbits the earth\n 2. while looking up the moon that is orbiting the earth\n\nI believe you would find the first one more natural. (I'm not a native speaker\nof English, though) Then, it's because you know it didn't only move when you\nhappened to see it.\n\nLikewise, in the case of 呆れたように言う彼女を横になったまま見上げつつ, the speaker was not aware of\nher speaking for a certain period of time (hence not \"言っている\" or \"言った\"）, but he\nrather felt as if she would resume whining if she ~~want~~ wants. ~~(The \"if\nshe want\" part is important. If the speaker found it consistent, it falls into\nthe realm of …ている.)~~ (Edit; Awareness of a certain period of time is\nimportant after all.)\n\nEdit; one reason is simply because shorter forms are preferred in a modifying\nclause.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-10T22:00:31.423",
"id": "23181",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-11T07:22:38.260",
"last_edit_date": "2015-03-11T07:22:38.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21505",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "A:呆れたように言う彼女\n\nB:横になったまま見上げつつ\n\nC:持っていた本を机の上に置いた\n\nA is his description about her move.\n\nB is his action #1\n\nC is his action #2\n\n呆れたように言う。 According to his observation, her speaking tone has incredible or\nall negative.\n\nI don't understand meaning of る-form in your question.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-11T00:14:10.790",
"id": "23182",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-11T00:14:10.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4162",
"parent_id": "21505",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21505 | null | 23157 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21513",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen this a couple of times and it seems to simply mean \"it's about time,\nso ___\", but why is that?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T05:38:33.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21511",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T07:52:41.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5305",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"time"
],
"title": "Meaning of 時間も時間だし?",
"view_count": 709
} | [
{
"body": "**Nuance**\n\n> \"時間も時間だし\" \n> \"(今の)時間も(___の)時間だし\"\n\n**Example**\n\n> \"時間も時間だし、家に帰ろう。\" \n> \"(今の)時間も(門限の)時間だし、家に帰ろう。\" \n> \"it's about time, so curfew. Let's go back home.\" \n> \"Now Time is a time of curfew. Let's go back home.\" _< - Nuance_\n\nI apologize if there are any mistakes in my English writing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T07:52:41.440",
"id": "21513",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T07:52:41.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21511",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21511 | 21513 | 21513 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "If I understand correctly, only 大きくない can be used?\n\ne.g., 猫は大きくない, not 猫は大きじゃない?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T07:31:37.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21512",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T18:35:39.943",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-29T21:29:13.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "9262",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"adjectives"
],
"title": "大きじゃない vs 大きくない？",
"view_count": 2448
} | [
{
"body": "Yes. If you say \"it is not big\", you say \"大きくない\" in Japanese. 大きじゃない is wrong.\nAnd you can say \"大きくはない\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T12:51:15.763",
"id": "21531",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T18:35:39.943",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-30T18:35:39.943",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "21512",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "When the adjective 大きい is negated, it becomes 大きくない.\n\n* * *\n\nAlthough the word 大きな also exists, you can't replace the な on the end with\ncopula forms like で or だ:\n\n> 大き **な** 猫 'large cat'\n>\n> ＊大き **だ** ← _ungrammatical_ \n> ＊大き **で** はない ← _ungrammatical_ \n> ＊大き **じゃ** ない ← _ungrammatical_\n\nThis is different from most _na_ -adjectives:\n\n> きれい **な** 花 'pretty flower'\n>\n> きれい **だ** ← _grammatical_ \n> きれい **で** はない ← _grammatical_ \n> きれい **じゃ** ない ← _grammatical_\n\nSo even though it ends in な, we have to be careful not to treat this word as a\nnormal _na_ -adjective.\n\n* * *\n\nThis word isn't classified as a 形容動詞 ( _na_ -adjective) in most monolingual\ndictionaries. Instead, it's usually classified as a\n[連体詞](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%80%A3%E4%BD%93%E8%A9%9E) (adnominal\nword). This is a class of non-inflecting words that appear before nouns,\nincluding words like この and とある.\n\nHowever,\n[Daijirin](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E5%A4%A7%E3%81%8D%E3%81%AA&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_ookina_-010)\npoints out that 連体詞 generally can't function predicatively, while 大きな can:\n\n> 耳の大きな人 ← 耳の大きな is a relative clause in which 大きな predicates on 耳\n\nSo it may make more sense to classify it as a special kind of 形容動詞 instead,\none with a restricted distribution (or set of forms). Either way, though, it's\na bit exceptional, so just keep in mind that this word is special and doesn't\nfit perfectly into any category.\n\n* * *\n\nIn this answer, the ＊ symbol means 'ungrammatical.'",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T18:15:09.997",
"id": "21539",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T18:15:09.997",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21512",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21512 | null | 21539 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21523",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It is from a line in _One Piece_ :\n\n\n\nAnother instance from the same manga:\n\n",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T09:50:46.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21515",
"last_activity_date": "2021-01-10T08:38:05.487",
"last_edit_date": "2021-01-10T08:38:05.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"particle-が"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of the 「だろうが」 in 「仲間だろうが！！！！」",
"view_count": 2163
} | [
{
"body": "According to [this article](http://yeemar.seesaa.net/article/14242770.html),\n三省堂国語辞典 says:\n\n> 「だろうが」「でしょうが」などの形で文末につき、「念をおして相手をなっとくさせようとする気持ちをあらわす」（『三省堂国語辞典』）\n\nAnd [デジタル大辞泉's entry](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/34931/m0u/) says:\n\n> [３]［終助］ \n> ２\n> （多く体言や体言の下にののしる意の接尾語「め」を伴ったものに付いて）ののしりの感情を強める。「このあほうめ―」「あいつめ―」「敵(かたき)の回し者め―」〈伎・幼稚子敵討〉\n\nI think those pictures show its usage better than a hundred words. This が was\nused because they were upset, and they tried to strongly convince people in\nfront of them.\n\n> * 言ったでしょう？ I told you, didn't I? (already accusatory)\n> * 言ったでしょうが！ (even stronger)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T03:00:23.880",
"id": "21523",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T03:00:23.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21515",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 21515 | 21523 | 21523 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21525",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Are the two 「が」 different?\n\nIs 「目が見えない」 (at least in principle) ambiguous (eyes can't see / eyes can't be\nseen)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T10:04:54.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21516",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T07:13:22.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "「星が見えない＝Stars can't be seen」 but 「目が見えない＝Eyes can't see」, why?",
"view_count": 367
} | [
{
"body": "Yes.\n\n**見える**\n\n 1. ([divalent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valency_%28linguistics%29)) _A_ が _B_ に見える \" _A_ is visible to _B_ \".\n\n> 大切なものは目に見えない。 _What is essential is invisible to the eye._\n\n 2. (divalent) _A_ が _B_ に見える \" _A_ looks (like) _B_ \".\n\n> 「でつ」がスヌーピーの顔に見える。 _\" でつ\" looks like Snoopy's face._\n\n 3. (monovalent) _A_ が見える \" _A_ can see things\".\n\n> [吸血鬼]{きゅう・けつ・き}は夜でも見える。 _Vampires have night vision._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T17:37:58.703",
"id": "21518",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T20:12:21.347",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21516",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "The particle \"が\" is not different in your examples, but the verb \"見える\" has\n[more than one meaning](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/210883/m0u/).\n\nTheoretically, you are correct. A person like\n[Altair](http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Alta%C3%AFr_Ibn-La%27Ahad) might\nbe described as 目が見えない人.\n\n\n\nOf course you have to say フードのせいで外から目が見えない人 or something like that in order to\navoid confusion.\n\nSimilar things happen in English, and the natural interpretation greatly\nchanges depending on the subject. It's always difficult to answer why, but I\nthink that's something you have to learn.\n\n * I _look_ at the dog. vs. The dog _looks_ cute.\n * I _read_ the sign. vs. The sign _reads_ \"No trespassing.\"\n * I _sold_ the book. vs. The book _sold_ well.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T07:13:22.003",
"id": "21525",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T07:13:22.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21516",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21516 | 21525 | 21518 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21520",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've found this sentence on alc.co.jp\n\n> 食事 **でも** どうですか\n\nand I am puzzled as to meaning this でも conveys. How does it differ from\n\n> 食事 **は** どうですか\n\nThis would be my first choice but which, according to Google, is used less\noften?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T18:04:02.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21519",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-11T03:04:56.627",
"last_edit_date": "2022-05-11T03:04:56.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"questions",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "Meaning of \"でも\" in \"食事でもどうですか？\"",
"view_count": 1655
} | [
{
"body": "This でも is used to mean \"〜 or something\", usually in regards to suggestions.\nIt leaves room for other options.\n\n> * 食事 **でも** どうですか → How about something to eat (or something else)?\n> * お茶に **でも** いかない？ → Would you like to go out for tea maybe?\n>\n\n* * *\n\n参照\n\n * [The use of でも and ででも in this sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13463/78)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-29T18:12:22.370",
"id": "21520",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-29T18:23:00.577",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21519",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 16
}
] | 21519 | 21520 | 21520 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21524",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 神の思し召しであなたとよき友情を育むためにあなたにメールする **よう** お告げがありました\n\nI think the sentence roughly translates into: \"For the sake of raising you and\ngood friend into God's thoughts, you mailed a divine message\"\n\nInstincts tell me that there should be a な or に before/after the よう in the\nsentence\n\nI found some pages on the net discussing the proper usage of よう in a sentence\nfrom [this site](http://maggiesensei.com/2012/04/03/request-\nlesson-%E3%82%88%E3%81%86you/) and\n[here](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/similar.html). All of the examples had\nような、ように、なよう, and によう.\n\nI did come across [a\nsample](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12397/how-\nis-%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB-different-to-just-%E3%82%88%E3%81%86) that was\nwritten as 話せるよう. The thing that has left me confused is that nothing came\nafter よう.\n\nWas I right to suspect this sentence as being grammatically incorrect or am I\ncompletely off the mark?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T01:04:47.450",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21522",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T05:40:33.617",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7556",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is it grammatically correct to use よう without な, に or だ（です）after it?",
"view_count": 324
} | [
{
"body": "YES, That is right.\n\n> \"メールするよう(に)お告げがありました\"\n\n\"に\" is optional. \nHere, \"ように\" or \"よう\" is used in the sense of such instructions or request.\n\nor\n\n> \"メールするよう(に との)お告げがありました\" \n> \"メールするよう(に という)お告げがありました\"\n\n**as other example**\n\n> \"上司から今すぐ帰社するよう(に)連絡がありました\" \n> \"医者に規則正しい生活を送るよう(に)言われました\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T05:40:33.617",
"id": "21524",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T05:40:33.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21522",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21522 | 21524 | 21524 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21527",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I start by saying that I'm a beginner in Japanese and maybe my question will\nseem obvious to you.\n\nI've been told by Japanese people that there's a difference between 水 and 湯. I\nunderstand that 湯 means \"hot water\", but isn't it the same if I said あつい水?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T09:04:29.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21526",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-27T23:52:22.483",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6742",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 水 and 湯",
"view_count": 3484
} | [
{
"body": "Although most dictionaries or word lists translate \"mizu\" simply as \"water\",\nthe actual meaning of \"mizu\" is \"cold/cool water\" whereas \"o-yu\" is \"warm/hot\nwater\". So to a Japanese \"atsui mizu\" sounds like \"hot cold water\". They can\nunderstand it because they know in English there is a word called \"water\"\nincluding both \"mizu\" and \"o-yu\", but a Japanese person would never express it\nthat way.\n\nThe criterion basically is the human body temperature. Everything below it is\n\"mizu\", above it \"o-yu\". It is possible to say \"tsumetai mizu\" however in\norder to stress that the water is really very cold.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T09:27:52.057",
"id": "21527",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T09:27:52.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9265",
"parent_id": "21526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "In general, We call what you might think of as \"あつい水\" -> \"(お)湯\". \"あつい水\" is not\nused in conversation for that meaning.\n\nHowever, \"あつい(お)湯\" is correct and can be used.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T09:36:56.830",
"id": "21528",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-27T23:52:22.483",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-27T23:52:22.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "32062",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The original difference between 水 and お湯 is that the latter was prepared, but\nthe former was never. Hence, the honorific お is an indicator that this has\nbeen done for the listener's well being. Using temperature as a divider is for\nsimplicity's sake.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T01:19:58.910",
"id": "21616",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T01:19:58.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9210",
"parent_id": "21526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Adding to the other answers and regarding the phrase あつい水, I'd like note this\nis possible _in certain contexts._\n\n* * *\n\nAn article on _Tokyo Language Center_ :\n\n> **誤用？「熱い水」**\n>\n> 「地球の環境」がテーマの番組で、深海を探査するシーンで「摂氏２００度をこえる熱い水がふきだしている」というフレーズが聞こえてきました。\n>\n>\n> このシーンでは「摂氏２００度をこえるお湯」はそぐわないんですね。なんか科学的な雰囲気が壊れてしまい、「温泉でのんびり」という感じになってしまいそうで・・・\n>\n> 「ゆ」はただ単に「温度」の問題だけではなく、「生活」といった文脈の上に存在しているようです。\n\n[source](http://tokyolc.seesaa.net/s/article/33602240.html)\n\n(summary: お湯 has got a cultural aspect to it. It sounds inappropriate in a\npurely scientific context.)\n\n* * *\n\nAn article on _ShareWIS press_ using it in a similar context:\n\n> **海底にある ”特異点” ホットスポットが熱い！**\n>\n> 海の水って冷たいですよね。でも海底には熱水系といって、暖かい（というか **熱い）水** の環境があるのをご存知でしょうか。\n\n[source](http://press.share-wis.com/hot-spot)\n\n* * *\n\nA book titled **熱い水のような砂** by 桐野 夏生 (ISBN-10: 438785121X):\n\n> 日本女性と冒険家の砂漠ロマンスです。ある理由があって、サハラ行きにＯＫしたフィルこと、イギリス貴族で冒険家のフィリップ・コンウェイ。\n> 日本から遥々〜会いにやって来た日本女性、小津香子に次第に惹かれていくことに…\n\n[(beginning of an amazon\nreview)](http://www.amazon.co.jp/review/R1649JDPLC1VNM/)\n\nお湯 is something nice. The scorching hot sand of the Sahara is not.\n\n* * *\n\nA basic introduction to thermodynamics on _NHK_ :\n\n> **熱効率と不可逆変化**\n>\n> \n>\n> 最初に出てきたペルチェ素子を使った装置を思い出してください。\n>\n> 下にある **熱い水** から、上の冷たい水に熱が移動してプロペラが回りましたね。\n>\n> 時間が経って２つのビンに入っている水の温度はほぼ同じになりました。\n\n[source](http://www.nhk.or.jp/kokokoza/library/tv/butsurikiso/archive/resume022.html)\n\n* * *\n\nAnd a a short article I found talking about that temperature is not the only\ndifference:\n\n> **お湯は熱い水**\n>\n> **狭山市立教育センター**\n>\n> **所長 澤 田 剛**\n>\n> 「お湯」は、英語では「hot water」になります。では「hot\n> water」を直訳すると、どうなるでしょう。「熱い水」ですね。つまり、英語話者にとっては「お湯」はただ「温度が上がった水」でしかないのです。しかし、日本人にとって「湯」と「水」には、\n> **単に温度の高い低いではない違いがある**\n> ようです。「お湯」は、「お風呂」や「温泉」（＝いでゆ）を意味しますし、「湯ざまし」「ぬるま湯」等の言葉がある通り、一度沸かした「水」は、冷めても「お湯」です。風呂が沸いたと思い足を入れたら冷たかった。すると「なんだ、まだ水じゃないか」ということになります。\n\n[source](http://www.sayama-stm.ed.jp/center/index/syokan/H26/2607.pdf)\n\n* * *\n\nWhich explains this as well, from 中学数学の基本問題 on geisya.or.jp:\n\n> **食塩水の濃度**\n>\n> [...]\n>\n> ※ Ａ君がａ(゜Ｃ)の冷たい水ｂ(ｇ)とｃ(゜Ｃ)の **熱い水**\n> ｄ(ｇ)を，Ｂ君が，ｅ(゜Ｃ)の冷たい水ｆ（ｇ）とｇ(゜Ｃ)の熱い水ｈ(ｇ)を持っていて，各自の水を混ぜる場合にも，上の問題と同様の取り扱いになります．\n\n[source](http://www.geisya.or.jp/~mwm48961/math3/m2salt03.htm)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-20T18:41:46.860",
"id": "23375",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-20T18:57:20.870",
"last_edit_date": "2015-03-20T18:57:20.870",
"last_editor_user_id": "3275",
"owner_user_id": "3275",
"parent_id": "21526",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21526 | 21527 | 21527 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21536",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I never heard 者{もの} alone, just for work profession.\n\n 1. Both means person right?\n 2. Is 者{もの} old-fashioned, when used alone?\n\nExample:\n\n[...] 居る者",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T11:41:15.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21530",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T17:07:24.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7341",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Difference between 者{もの} and 人{ひと}",
"view_count": 4297
} | [
{
"body": "者(もの) and 人(ひと) means \"person\" and as you said 者 isn't uesd alone, it is used\nas a part of a word like ばか者. And a part of a word \"者\" is often read as しゃ\nlike 消費者、被害者、旅行者、出席者 etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T13:09:25.393",
"id": "21532",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T13:09:25.393",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "21530",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Yes, both mean \"person\", and there is no difference in meaning; only in\nnuance.\n\n者 {もの} is used in formal contexts, whereas 人 {ひと} is much more casual. For\nexample, you would most likely use \"あの人\" in conversation, yet on certificates\n(including mine for the JLPT), \"人\" is replaced by \"者\" in all contexts (except\nkanji compounds). 〜もの referring to people is sometimes used as a suffix for a\nhandful of words in everyday language, but when used on its own, it's reserved\nexclusively for formal context, where its meaning maps 1:1 with \"人\".\n\nIt's not really that 者 is old-fashioned -- it's still used today in formal\nsituations -- but it is uncommon (though it's always been that 人 has been the\nmore common and casual in comparison).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T15:25:18.187",
"id": "21533",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T15:25:18.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "21530",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Not necessarily old-fashioned, but standalone 者 does sound stiff.\n\nIt's commonly found in military settings or in legal documents, where\neverything is written in an objective manner:\n\n> * 違反した者は、6か月以下の懲役もしくは100万円以下の罰金に処す。\n>\n\nIt's also used as a humble expression of 人 in formal business settings. Using\n人 is clearly inappropriate in the following sentences:\n\n> * はじめまして、私は田中という者です。\n> * 申しわけありません、会社の者は、ただいま全員外出しております。\n> * 担当の者を呼んで参ります。\n>\n\nAlthough it may sound quite insolent, a person with a higher status can\ndirectly addresses their people like this:\n\n> * 反論がある者はいるか？\n>\n\nMoreover, standalone 者 is frequently found in serious written articles in\ngeneral, as an synonym of 人, as long as honorific expressions are not\nnecessary. I did Wikipedia search and found that \"する者は\" is used more\nfrequently than \"する人は\" there.\n\n> * ～だと考える者もいれば、そう考えない者もいる。\n> * 生きている者にはすべて、等しく1日に24時間が与えられている。\n> * ナレーションをする者のことを、ナレーターと呼ぶ。\n> * [*]今日は、大阪市に住んでいる者にインタビューをします。: This is rude. Use 大阪市に住んでいる人に (neutral)\n> or 大阪市に住んでいる方に (politer)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T17:07:24.087",
"id": "21536",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T17:07:24.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21530",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 21530 | 21536 | 21536 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21542",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does the phrase 「あえて言{い}えば」 mean? What are a few example sentences?\n\nIs the following usage correct: \n「好きな日本料理{にほんりょうり}はあんまりないが、 **あえて言えば** 納豆{なっとう}ですね。」\n\n\"I don't really like Japanese food, but if I had to mention something I would\nsay natto.\"",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T16:35:50.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21535",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T19:56:02.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "translation of 「あえて言えば、....」",
"view_count": 548
} | [
{
"body": "「あえて言えば」is often used to mean a kind of weak opinions. Your sentence looks\ntotally natural to native speakers (including me).\n\nI'll list some example sentences:\n\n * あなたの提案で概ね問題ないが、あえて言えば予算が気になる。(Your proposal looks good as a whole, but I have little worry about its cost.)\n * あえて言うほどでもありませんが、家に帰ったら手は洗った方がいい。 (This may be a needless concern, but I think you should wash your hands when you go back home.)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T19:56:02.887",
"id": "21542",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T19:56:02.887",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9268",
"parent_id": "21535",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21535 | 21542 | 21542 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21561",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the usage difference between these three definitively? As an\nintermediate Japanese speaker, I somewhat understand where I would say them,\nbut I can't point out under which contexts any of them \"wouldn't be allowed\"\ncompared of any of the others. In speech, I have no problem selecting one for\nusage, but I just can't pick out if, when somebody else uses one, they are\nusing it in an \"incorrect\" way (I can figure out if it's natural or not).\n\n〜が is largely a \"but\", where you give a contradicting statement afterwards\n\n〜ても is closest to an \"even though\" suffix to a word\n\n〜のに is a more emotional \"が\", with a connotation that even though an action was\ntaken, that something has / hasn't happened.\n\nWhere is each NOT allowed under the other contexts?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T15:39:44.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21537",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T06:52:22.840",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-30T17:17:57.893",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"particles"
],
"title": "Differences between 「が」、「ても」、「のに」",
"view_count": 1477
} | [
{
"body": "### が\n\n```\n\n ○ 私は電車で行きますが、あなたはどうしますか。\n × 私は電車で行っても、あなたはどうしますか。\n × 私は電車で行くのに、あなたはどうしますか。\n \n```\n\nThe spirit of が is not contradiction, but that the next phrase comes from\n\"other direction\". Since English language doesn't have a word wholly\ntranslates it, it could become \"and\", \"while\", \"when\", or even \"so\". But as\nfar as I know, Korean, Vietnamese and Polish have similar notions.\n\nThe colloquial equivalent is `けど`.\n\n### ても\n\n```\n\n × 何度食べたが、ブロッコリーは嫌いだ。\n ○ 何度食べても、ブロッコリーは嫌いだ。\n × 何度食べたのに、ブロッコリーは嫌いだ。\n (○ 何度も食べた[が/のに]、ブロッコリーは嫌いだ。)\n \n```\n\nAs you said correctly, this word corresponds to \"even if\", \"no matter\", or\n\"-ever\" in _whatever_ , _whenever_. Thus, only this one is grammatical with\nbare question words.\n\n### のに\n\n```\n\n × 約束したが、どうして来なかったんですか？\n × 約束しても、どうして来なかったんですか？\n ○ 約束したのに、どうして来なかったんですか？\n (○ どうして、約束[したのに/しても]来なかったんですか。)\n (△ 約束しましたが、どうして来なかったんですか？)\n \n```\n\nThis one is a loaded word, that conveys the latter statement contradicts with\nexpectation or obligation the former one implies. In most cases, it's almost\nungrammatical to use other words when the latter clause carries accusatory\nconnotation.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T06:52:22.840",
"id": "21561",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T06:52:22.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21537",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21537 | 21561 | 21561 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21541",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the best way to formulate a natural equivalent in Japanese?\n\nFrom my experience, the most common way seems to be contextual inference.\nPronoun dropping is obviously super common, but whether or not that is **a\nway** to do doesn't interest me; what is the most natural way to say something\nlike:\n\n> one must eat to survive\n\nand retain the information that relates to an unspecified person (explicity).\nSo for a second let's imagine that it was translated:\n\n> 生き延びるために、食べなきゃ\n\nThe problem with that for me is that it loses the meaning in the English that\nrelates to in-specificity. Even 誰か to me seems pretty different, e.g.\n\n> 生き延びるために、誰か食べなきゃ\n\nLike, how weird does it sound to say \"someone must eat to survive\" - not\nreally at all an equivalent. Ok ok, apples and oranges to a degree, but if you\nthink about the difference: one refers to someone whether or not they exist,\nin a sort of timeless semantic space. Whereas somebody has an immediacy that\nhas a much more localized sense of time belonging to its usage and\nconnotation.\n\nDoes 誰か have a similar sense of immediacy in this sense? Can I use どれか to\nrefer to people in this situation?\n\nThanks !",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T18:52:40.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21540",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T20:41:26.230",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-30T20:41:26.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "4142",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"pronouns"
],
"title": "indefinite pronoun equivalent of \"one\" e.g. \"one must...\", \"one might...\"",
"view_count": 274
} | [
{
"body": "You can use 人:\n\n> 人は、生きるために食べなければならない。\n\nIt makes sense even in English, to a degree - 'a person must eat to live'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-30T19:18:25.950",
"id": "21541",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-30T19:18:25.950",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "21540",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21540 | 21541 | 21541 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was watching Shirobako episode 16. and at 2:31 the witch says \"落ちる！\" as she\nfalls out of a plane. The subs translated it as \"We're falling!\" but I'm\nconfused on why that is so. I'm not sure if present tense of a verb can be\nused to indicate continuous action. In this situation, why isn't it \"We're\ngoing to fall!\" instead of \"We're falling!\" or 落ちる最中 instead of 落ちる?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T08:27:39.437",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21546",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T16:32:35.380",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"tense"
],
"title": "Can the Japanese present tense indicate a continuous acton?",
"view_count": 200
} | [
{
"body": "Based on what I've seen in the video:\n\nIn this scene, she utters it _on_ the plane. Japanese 落ちる usually implies the\nresult of _falling_ , so in this case she literally says: \"We (our planes) are\ngoing to crash!\" Maybe the translator wanted to make a more liberal\ntranslation.\n\nBy the way, the same line is repeated by another woman immediately after it.\nIt sounds like a pun on an editorial jargon 落ちる, which means \"an article,\nepisode, publication etc. is dropped, withdrawn with accidental causes\" (in\nmost cases, because they were unable to make deadlines).\n\n \n(cited from <http://s-c.seesaa.net/article/118641344.html>)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T19:10:48.070",
"id": "21554",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T12:42:10.100",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-01T12:42:10.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21546",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Subtitles don't translate directly, word-to-word or form-to-form.\n\n落ちる here is grammatically present tense, but semantically it can be seen as\nfuture.\n\nBecause there is no \"real\" future tense in Japanese.\n\nWe (are going to) fall!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T16:32:35.380",
"id": "21571",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T16:32:35.380",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21546",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21546 | null | 21554 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21548",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just come across these two words used to describe \"home rental\". However, I\nwant to know the difference between these two words and whether they can be\nused interchangeably.\n\nMy understanding is that\n\n * 家賃 can be used to refer to:\n\n 1. To let\n 2. The rent (money)\n * 借家 refers to the house being rented.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T11:40:55.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21547",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-31T19:32:59.147",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7983",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Can 借家 and 家賃 be used interchangeably",
"view_count": 172
} | [
{
"body": "Simply, No.\n\nYour understanding is correct except that 家賃 does not mean \"to let\" (only your\n#2), thus not interchangeable.\n\nIf you are confused, may be this way of thinking helps you a lot.\n\nChinese origin Kanji, when divided, the former is always (not entirely)\nadjective or verb. (This becomes sometimes different for JAPANESE KANJI\nbecause JAPANESE KANJI is not actually, KANJI.)\n\n家賃 ⇒ 家(house's) / 賃 (money/rent) ⇒ the house rent.\n\n借家 ⇒ 借(rent (v. tr.)) / 家 (house) ⇒ a house rented.\n\nHave a good night.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T12:37:11.320",
"id": "21548",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-31T19:32:59.147",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-31T19:32:59.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21547",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21547 | 21548 | 21548 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21551",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "this is my first question here so please bare with me.\n\nUntil the other day I was aware of two different ways use counters\n\nAs an adverb.\n\n> * ペンを３本買いました。\n>\n\nAs a noun.\n\n> * ３本のペンを買いました。\n>\n\nThe other day I found out that you could say\n\n> * 友達３人と出かけました。\n> * 犬３匹と遊びました。\n>\n\nBut you can't say\n\n> * ペン３本を買いました。X\n>\n\nAt first I thought this was something to do with the と particle, but I found\nout these are also correct.\n\n> * 鍋に水１リットルを入れる。\n> * 鍋に水を１リットル入れる。\n>\n\nMy question is, what are the rules for placing the quantifier between the noun\nand the particle? I apologize in advance if this question has been asked\nbefore, I was unable to find anything. Thanks.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T15:21:08.580",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21549",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T05:40:32.870",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-31T17:16:24.760",
"last_editor_user_id": "6912",
"owner_user_id": "6912",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"numbers",
"counters",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "Placing a quantifier between a noun and particle?",
"view_count": 1604
} | [
{
"body": "Generally there are three choices for the kind of quantifiers addressed here.\nAlthough the OP's question uses numeral quantifiers, the same would be true\nfor others, such as すべて, etc.\n\n### Attributive position\n\nThat is the case where the quantifier, marked by の, precedes the noun, e.g.\nthe OP's third example.\n\n### Composition\n\nComposition is when the quantifier follows the noun, but not the case marker.\nSee the third to sixth of the OP's examples. OP claims that the fifth example\nis bad, but I don't think it is (as bad as is claimed).\n\n### Quantifier floating construction\n\n[**Quantifier floating**](http://grammar.about.com/od/pq/g/Quantifier-\nFloating.htm) is when the quantifier follows not only the noun, but also the\ncase marker.\n\n```\n\n (1) 3本のペンを買いました。 \n [[[quantifier-case]noun-case]...verb]\n \n```\n\nThere the quantifier is subordinate to its **host noun**. From that position,\nthe quantifier can **float** beyond its host noun. It then resides in a\nstructurally higher position than in (1). The result is the OP's first\nsentence, i.e.\n\n```\n\n (2) ペンを3本買いました。\n [[noun-case][quantifier]...verb]\n \n \n```\n\nJapanese quantifier floating has captured the attention of linguists because\nit helps identify a subject-object asymmetry. Compare the next two sentences:\n\n```\n\n (3) ペンを学生が3本買いました。\n A student bought three pens.\n (4) * 学生がペンを3人買いました。\n Three students bought pens.\n \n```\n\nIn (3), the quantifier floats, and produces (1). Then the object ペンを\nscrambles, i.e. moves across the subject 学生が. As a result, the subject now\nintervenes between the host noun and its quantifier. \nExample (4) illustrates that the same is not possible with subject-related\nquantifiers. The conclusion many linguists draw is that in order for an object\nto be able to intervene between a subject and its floated quantifier, the\nsubject must be base-generated in a position after the object, i.e. in OSV\nword order. (4) being ungrammatical, is thus seen as support that Japanese is\n\"truly\" a SOV language.\n\nQuantifier floating in Japanese seems to be largely restricted to host nouns\nmarked with nominative （が）or accusative （を）case. Other rare cases are\ndiscussed in Shigeru Miyagawa (1989: Structure and Case Marking in Japanese,\nAcademic Press).\n\nIn Miyagawa & Saito (eds) _The Oxford Handbook of Japanese linguistics_\n[link](https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-\njapanese-linguistics-9780195307344?cc=il&lang=en&#), there is a good section\non floated quantifiers. An overview of quantifier floating in other languages\ncan be found [here](http://bobaljik.uconn.edu/papers/FQII.pdf).\n\n### Other quantifiers\n\nNote that there are quantifiers that cannot appear in the constructions above.\nAttribution, composition, and floating are only available for quantifier\nadjuncts that scope over a noun. There are, however, also quantifier adjuncts\nand arguments over verbs:\n\n```\n\n (5) 亀は100年間生きることがある。\n Turtles may live 100 years.\n (6) 物価は3％上がった。\n Prices rose by 3 percent.\n \n```\n\nExample (5) shows the quantifier adjunct/adverb 100年間, which scopes over the\nverb. (5) cannot be rephrased using attribution or composition. Since\nattribution is not available, floating is neither. \nExample (6) shows the quantifier argument 3%. Again, attribution, composition,\nand/or floating are not available. Another interesting point is that\nquantifier arguments can express differential and absolute values. Quantifier\nadjuncts always express absolute values.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T16:09:39.020",
"id": "21551",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T05:40:32.870",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5362",
"parent_id": "21549",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21549 | 21551 | 21551 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21622",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "タクシーの全部{ぜんぶ}が白い{しろい}。\n\nWould that be a natural way to say: all the taxis are white. ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T15:41:43.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21550",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T06:39:18.110",
"last_edit_date": "2015-01-31T16:02:38.437",
"last_editor_user_id": "5123",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Use of 全部{ぜんぶ} in the following sentence",
"view_count": 1607
} | [
{
"body": "It sounds unnatural to me. If a native speaker hears the sentence, he/she will\nimagine an unrealistic taxi which is completely white (including body, wheel,\nsheets, and so on).\n\nInstead, you should say: 「全部のタクシーが白い。」or「タクシーは全部白い。」. But the latter may be\nambiguous depending a context, which may again mean \"The taxi is completely\nwhite.\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T22:08:38.557",
"id": "21555",
"last_activity_date": "2015-01-31T22:08:38.557",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9268",
"parent_id": "21550",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "\"タクシーの全部が白い\" There are two meanings.\n\n> ① \"タクシーの全部分が白い\" ＞ \"All parts of the taxi is white.\" \n> ② \"全てのタクシーが白い\" ＞ \"All taxis are white.\"\n\n**example** \n① \"私は個人タクシーのドライバーだが、客寄せのための特別な塗装のため、タクシーの全部が白い。\" ②\n\"私の所属しているタクシー会社では、保有しているタクシーの全部が白い。\"\n\nIn general, we use ②.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T02:28:16.607",
"id": "21618",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T02:28:16.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21550",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "No, it would not be a natural way to say \"all the taxis are white.\"\n\nYou're looking for:\n\n1 タクシーはみんな白い。\n\n2 タクシーは全部白い。\n\n3 タクシーはすべて白い。\n\n4 全部のタクシーが白い。\n\n5 すべてのタクシーが白い。\n\nAs was mentioned above タクシーの全部 means \"the entirety of the taxi(s)\" which\nrequires a very narrow, specific context, although keep in mind that examples\n2 and 3 (2 more than 3, though) can also mean \"the taxi is entirely white.\"\nLacking grammatical number, Japanese requires extra information/context to\nclarify part/whole distinctions which are very easy to make in languages like\nEnglish, which do have grammatical number.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T06:39:18.110",
"id": "21622",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T06:39:18.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9306",
"parent_id": "21550",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21550 | 21622 | 21622 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm new to this site (just made an account), I've been learning about the\npassive form of verbs but I'm a bit confused by what the passive form actually\nis... I tried googling but couldn't find an explanation that didn't use lots\nof lingustic vocabulary. Am I right in thinking its similar in a way to how\nyou'd speak if you were to narrate something... (sorry I don't know many\ngrammatical terms).\n\nFor example:\n\nケーキが誰かに食べられた。\"The cake was eaten by someone\" would be how you'd speak if you\nwere narrating or reading something to somebody etc..\n\nBasically just want an idea of what the passive form actually is...",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-01-31T17:28:40.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21553",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-09T18:46:28.930",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9275",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "The passive form",
"view_count": 1107
} | [
{
"body": "I hope I get your question right.\n\n**Why do people use passive voice?**\n\n1) Because there is no alternative, the subject cannot act on its own.\n\n> I was born in A. \n> The cake was eaten by John.\n\nWhen the baby is born other people do all the work. The baby is just born. \nThe cake cannot do much of his own. Therefore other people act upon him. A\ncake can _smell_ , however, so it is important to consider the scenario: In\nthe eating situation the cake cannot do much but being eaten.\n\n2) To Emphasise. Sometimes both things can act and we want to emphasis one of\nthem. We can also write\n\n> John ate the cake\n\nNow the focus is on John. Does _he_ regret? What will _he_ eat next? But if\nsomeone were to ask `\"My cake! Where is my cake?\"` the cake would be important\nand we would answer: `The cake was eaten by John.`(Actually, we wouldn't\nbecause people tend to avoid passive when having spoken conversation, but\nlogically we would.)\n\n**Why do Japanese people use passive voice?**\n\nL37 of Minna no Nihongo says (I don't have the english version, so no direct\nquote)\n\n> (P1)は(P2)に(passive form verb)\n\nTo express an action done by P2 towards P1 from P1s perspective. P1 becomes\nthe topic of the sentence\n\n> (P1)は(P2)に(N)を(passive form verb)\n\nTo describe what P2 does with a possession of P1. In most cases P1 is annoyed\nby that.\n\nIf the acting person is not important, you can make a sentence with passive\nand leave out the actor as in\n\n> フランスで 昔{むかし}の 日本の 絵{え}が 発｛はっ｝見｛けん｝されました。 \n> An early Japanese painting was discovered in France\n\nThere are more examples, but (as I see it) it boils down to 'emphasis on the\nperson/thing that is acted upon'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-07T15:55:48.070",
"id": "21684",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-09T18:46:28.930",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-09T18:46:28.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "7355",
"owner_user_id": "7355",
"parent_id": "21553",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21553 | null | 21684 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21563",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "\"欧米{おうべい}\" means \"the Western countries (USA, Canada, Western Europe,\nAustralia)\". \"欧米\" is something that I've heard frequently in daily\nconversations.\n\nSo, the headline [日米欧で株上昇\n日経平均は一時２００円超高](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASH1R369VH1RULFA007.html) caught\nmy attention. Of course, newspapers are full of abbreviations. Here is my\ninterpretation:\n\n\"日米欧で株上昇...\" \n_Stock prices increased in Japan, the USA, and Western Europe._\n\n\"日欧米で株上昇...\" \n_Stock prices increased in Japan, the USA, Canada, Western Europe, and\nAustralia._\n\nIs that what is going on in the title?\n\nbtw: \nIn a conversation, could I say \"にちおうべい\" to mean \"Japan and the Western\ncountries\"? Could I say \"にちおう\" to exclusively mean \"Japan and Western Europe\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T01:53:32.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21557",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T08:25:19.600",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-01T06:44:49.403",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4835",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "difference between \"日欧米で株上昇\" and \"日米欧で株上昇\"?",
"view_count": 119
} | [
{
"body": "(I don't think Australia is included in 欧米 when it comes to the market,\nthough)\n\n欧米 is a word but either 日米欧 or 日欧米 are not a word but just three abbreviated\nwords are put in a row and they both mean \"Japan, the USA, and Europe. So, if\nyou want to say \"Japan and the Western countries\", it should be 日本と欧米, not\n日欧米. And, if you want to say exclusively \"Japan and Western Europe\" it's 日本と西欧\nbecause 欧 includes eastern one too. Today, 日欧 often sands for \"Japan and EU\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T08:25:19.600",
"id": "21563",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T08:25:19.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21557",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21557 | 21563 | 21563 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21566",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "[地下鉄]{ちかてつ}\n\nHow does one know the \"hiragana spelling\", i.e. the hiragana representation of\nthe word is\n\nちかてつ\n\nbut not other forms involving misspelling one or more of the following\n\n * か vs. が\n * て vs. で\n * つ vs. づ or ず\n\n, especially when the pronunciation of か, て, つ in the word in reality is\naffected by a tendency to 濁音. I'm told that the unvoiced k-row sounds and\nt-row sounds are often pronounced as voiced g- and d- sounds when they are not\nappearing as the first sound of words.\n\nPlease enlighten me!",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T02:37:25.307",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21558",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-05T11:44:12.627",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6920",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "How does one keep from being confused about the pronunciation of 地下鉄？",
"view_count": 1432
} | [
{
"body": "I don't agree with what you were told about it.\n\nOf course in rapid speaking consonants tend to be pronounced rather roughly,\nand it may be prominent especially in non-initial consonants, but still\nvoiceless consonants (k, t, ts, etc.) have to be distingushed from voiced ones\n(g, d, z, etc.) in Japanese.\n\nFor example in this conversation:\n\n> A: じゃあ明日には完成するんだな？\n>\n> B: [誓]{ちか}うよ。\n\nthe word 誓う must not be pronounced ちがう, because ちがう means another word 違う,\nand, 誓う and 違う are totally different two words which are to be distinguished\nonly by the voiced-ness of the second consonant, /k/ vs /g/.\n\nIn short (and linguistically), /k/ and /g/ are a pair of different phonemes\nwhich can constitute a \"minimal pair\".\n\nTheoretically this kind of pair can happen with any word containing relevant\nconsonants (like [香水]{こうすい} vs [洪水]{こうずい}, [囮]{おとり} vs [踊り]{おどり}, [文系]{ぶんけい}\nvs [文芸]{ぶんげい}..., etc.), so, I recommend you to always try to pronounce them\ndistinctively; I mean, voiceless consonants voicelessly, and voiced voicedly,\nat least until you get very fluent in Japanese.\n\nAnd all this situation also applies to any native speaker. They have to\ndifferentiate words in those pairs too. か/て/つ in ちかてつ is never pronounced\nfully voiced to appear as が/で/ず, so as to avoid confusing with words like\nちがてつ, ちかでつ, ちがでず..., etc, though in this case they are all non-existent words.\n\n* * *\n\n**[EDIT] In reply to qazwsx's comment**\n\nAs for your final question, my answer is clear; Just forget this \"g-ng\ncontrasting\" (which you are trying to perform) and simply stick to the \"k-g\ncontrasting\" (read words as their ローマ字 are spelled). Have you ever seen a\ntextbook that explains about this \"g-ng contrasting\" whatever? I bet you\nhaven't (because there is no such one), and you should not take in such a rule\nwhich is not mentioned in any one of existing textbooks.\n\n<http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kakuki/20/tosin03/10.html> \nHere is a short report by 国語審議会 (National Language Council), stating that\npeople incapable of pronouncing 鼻濁音 are increasing among young generation, in\naddition to the already existing people who use dialects without 鼻濁音. Your\ntheory is WRONG in the first place.\n\nTo be very precise, yes, a kind of this \"g-ng contrasting\" does exist in\nTohoku dialects, mainly among aged people. But when your are new to a\nlanguage, no doubt you should learn the standardized one first, not a dialect.\n\nSo I strongly recommend you to quit this \"g-ng\" practice immediately, and get\nback to the standard \"k-g\" pronunciation.",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T10:10:15.000",
"id": "21566",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T02:10:42.030",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7667",
"parent_id": "21558",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I think you've mixed up two different things:\n\n 1. voicing in compound words ([連濁](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendaku))\n 2. [deaspiration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant) in non-initial position\n\nThe first one is a grammar rather than pronunciation. In most cases, whether\nthe voicing happens or not is determined by word, and the kana spelling always\nreflects the pronunciation change i.e. 雲 (くも) → 雨雲 (あまぐも), 雷雲 (かみなりぐも), 浮き雲\n(うきぐも) etc. You're not allowed to do such things like sometimes say あまぐも and\nsometimes あまくも.\n\nNote that this rule refers historical classification of 清音/濁音, so we do 日 (ひ)\n→ 夏日 (なつび), 曜日 (ようび) etc. even they no longer form voiced/unvoiced pair in\ntoday's pronunciation.\n\nThe second one is a pure pronunciation problem. We aspirate voiceless (stop)\nconsonants in the beginning of word, but do not in other places: **か** た,\n**と** り (aspirated) vs. み **か** た, こ **と** り (unaspirated). English speakers,\ntoo, aspirate them at the beginning of first or stressed syllables: _**p**\nie_, _re **p** ine_ (aspirated) vs. _s **p** y_, _occu **p** y_ (unaspirated).\nThis doesn't mean it could change into voiced consonants. The voiceless/voiced\ncontrast is fundamental in Japanese pronunciation.\n\nHowever, if your mother tongue doesn't have this distinction, it's possible\nthat you overlook the difference. Especially when you speak a language that\ncounts aspiration but not voicedness (just opposite to Japanese), including\nChinese, Korean, Georgian, Zulu or Scottish Gaelic, you may have false belief\non sound qualities without proper care. If that's the case, what you have to\ndo is just practice.\n\nTechnically, some languages like [American\nEnglish](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2829778/) or German could\nhave weaker voicing that the difference is mainly perceived through other\nfactors. Japanese voicing I believe is more \"typical\" than them, but you can\nalso use various side effects of voicing, such as buzzing undertone, slightly\nlower voice or less crisper sound, as aid of hearing.\n\n* * *\n\nNow I see that you have difficulties distinguishing voicedness.\n\nListen to it: <https://clyp.it/0omton0o>\n\nI pronounced 12 pieces of sounds in total, with labial/dental/alveolar/velar\nconsonants each combined with aspirated (VOT > 100ms),\n[tenuis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuis_consonant) (0 < VOT < 10ms; don't\nmind tenseness) and voiced (VOT < -100ms) articulations.\n\n```\n\n aspirated tenuis voiced\n p/b #1 #2 #3\n t/d #4 #5 #6\n ch/j #7 #8 #9\n k/g #10 #11 #12\n \n```\n\nBasically, you have to train to accommodate yourself hearing #2, #5, #8, #11\nas **voiceless** , and #3, #6, #9, #12 as **voiced**. However, there's another\npitfall in Japanese, that people often _use tenuis series instead of voiced\nseries in **word-initial_** , where unvoiced sounds are expected to be\naspirated.\n\n[This post](https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/11/what-is-the-\ndifference-between-voiced-and-voiceless-stop-consonants) in linguistics SE\nwould be helpful, too.",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T12:08:50.593",
"id": "21568",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T12:06:59.370",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:54:11.000",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21558",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "(Expanding on my comments; this post only covers the spelling part rather than\nany pronunciation confusion you may have had.)\n\n> I'm told that the unvoiced k-row sounds and t-row sounds are often\n> pronounced as voiced g- and d- sounds when they are not appearing as the\n> first sound of words.\n\nKanji have _on_ readings (音読み, Chinese-derived ones) and _kun_ readings (訓読み,\nnative Japanese ones). What you were told applies primarily only to kun\nreadings. **Rendaku happening with _on_ readings is very rare.** [1]\n\nI admit that I don't know how the Chinese study (Japanese) kanji and their\nreadings, but westerners typically learn the kanji and its readings, and they\nlearn which readings are on readings, and which kun.\n\nAlso, as you may have learnt, words that typically consist of two kanji in a\nrow are much more likely to use the _on_ readings of a kanji.\n\n* * *\n\nLet's take 地下鉄, as it was your example. It's\n\n```\n\n 地: on: チ ジ\n 下: on: カ ゲ kun: した しも もと さ.げる さ.がる くだ.る くだ.り くだ.す くだ.さる お.ろす お.りる\n 鉄: on: テツ kun: くろがね\n \n```\n\nYou might note that チ、カ、 and テツ are all _on_ readings; hence, there won't be\nany voicing for them. The word will be read as ちかてつ\n\n* * *\n\nAnother word, 手紙:\n\n```\n\n 手: on: シュ ズ kun: て\n 紙: on: シ kun: かみ\n \n```\n\nNote that かみ is a kun reading; hence, it is likely to rendaku into がみ in this\nword: てがみ\n\n* * *\n\n[生け]{いけ}[花]{ばな}, same thing. はな is a kun reading → likely rendaku.\n\n* * *\n\n[会]{エ}[釈]{シャク}:\n\n```\n\n 会: カイ エ kun: あ.う あ.わせる あつ.まる\n 釈: シャク セキ kun: とく す.てる ゆる.す\n \n```\n\nシャク is an 音読み, so it won't be ジャク\n\n* * *\n\nCompound words, however, are a common exception to the 'no rendaku for on\nreadings' rule. [会]{カイ}[社]{シャ} becomes がいしゃ when paired with the word 株式:\n[株]{かぶ}[式]{シキ} + [会]{ガイ}[社]{シャ}. My guess is that the Japanese no longer\nconsider these at a kanji (reading) level but at a word level, and the word\nacts like a native _kun_ reading.\n\n* * *\n\n[1] I'm seeing perhaps one case of a 連濁-ed _on_ reading for every hundred\nwords, if not fewer than that. [忍]{ニン}[者]{ジャ} is a good example",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-27T09:41:23.917",
"id": "22977",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-05T11:44:12.627",
"last_edit_date": "2015-03-05T11:44:12.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "6820",
"owner_user_id": "6820",
"parent_id": "21558",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21558 | 21566 | 21568 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21562",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Just encountered in some Japanese text. I understand it's conjugated in the\nbase negative form of the verb but I'm baffled as to what the じ means.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T05:24:08.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21559",
"last_activity_date": "2020-10-29T01:19:57.857",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7161",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"conjugations"
],
"title": "What kind of conjugation is used here? 「取らじ」",
"view_count": 181
} | [
{
"body": "It's a Classical Japanese particle, nowadays only used as frequent as\n\"methinks\".\n\nIt means exactly what _must not_ (as in 'I suppose the pie must not be ready\nyet') does in English, and attaches to Classical 未然形 of a verb or adjective\n(that is, the form which the negative -ず and -ぬ appends to).\n\nSee: [the entry of\nじ](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/92527/m1u/%E3%81%98/) in a Japanese-\nJapanese dictionary",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T07:21:49.000",
"id": "21562",
"last_activity_date": "2020-10-29T01:19:57.857",
"last_edit_date": "2020-10-29T01:19:57.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "9971",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21559",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21559 | 21562 | 21562 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21572",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've noticed that some Japanese Twitter users put words/short sentences\nseparated by an \"@\" symbol in the \"name\" field. A common one I've noticed is\n\"abc123@LINEスタンプ販売中,\" which seems to imply they're selling stamps on LINE.\nSome even have multiple \"@\" symbols in between stuff.\n\nIt seems to be fairly common in the Japanese Twitterverse, so I'm hoping\nsomeone can shed some light on the matter. Thanks!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T06:12:20.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21560",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T16:44:08.897",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-01T07:42:03.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "6554",
"owner_user_id": "5477",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"idioms",
"internet-slang"
],
"title": "Twitter idioms: Why do some Japanese have an \"@\" in the middle of their \"names\" (not usernames)?",
"view_count": 759
} | [
{
"body": "I remember seeing @ being used to indicate current status, what they're doing,\netc since over 10 years ago.\n\nAnd I remember using it myself.\n\nLike:\n\n[My name here]@管理人\n\nto indicate that I was the webmaster.\n\nOh the good old internet...\n\nThe usage seems to have survived those years.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T16:44:08.897",
"id": "21572",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T16:44:08.897",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21560",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21560 | 21572 | 21572 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21565",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have some trouble to translate this sentence:\n\n> 友達【ともだち】に 嘘【うそ】がばれてしまった\n\nis that: \"I have discovered that my friend is lying\" or \"My friend found out I\nwas lying\"?\n\n* * *\n\nこの文の翻訳に迷っています：\n\n> 友達【ともだち】に 嘘【うそ】がばれてしまった\n\nその文の意味は「友達が嘘をついていることを気づいた」また「友達が私の嘘していることを気づいた」ですか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T08:31:51.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21564",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T01:16:55.407",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-02T01:16:55.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "7363",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particles",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Translation of 友達【ともだち】に 嘘【うそ】がばれてしまった",
"view_count": 258
} | [
{
"body": "Since the sentence says 友達 **に** ばれた, it means that your friend found out.\nThere is another hint in the sentence, though: しまった is usually used to convey\nan unfortunate event/outcome/happening from the point of the speaker. In this\ncase this is your friend finding out about your lie.\n\nTo get the other meaning with the least change, we can say\n\n> 友達 **の** 嘘がばれてしまった \n> my friend's lie was found out\n\nBy whom would not be immediate, but it could mean that you found out about\nyour friend's lie.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T08:44:30.720",
"id": "21565",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T08:44:30.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21564",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21564 | 21565 | 21565 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Firstly I found that 「丸{まる}」 originated from 「麻呂{まろ}」:\n\n[日本水路協会：船の名前にはなぜ「丸」が付くのか](http://www.jha.or.jp/jp/jha/charts/story/2004/08_2.html)\n\nThen this answer said that 「麻呂{まろ}」 originated from 「おまる」:\n\n[古代日本人の名前についている 「～麻呂」\nには何か意味があるのですか？](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1111442251)\n\nIt started to make me feel kind of circular: from おまる to まろ to まる(again).\n\nThen I came across this answer saying 「丸｛まる｝」 directly originated from 「おまる」:\n\n[人名に付ける「丸」の語原について (おまる？それとも麻呂？)](http://q.hatena.ne.jp/1262937857)\n\nConfused <@_@>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T10:53:37.777",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21567",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T13:43:49.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Confused about the relationship between 「丸」 as in 「日本丸」 and 「麻呂」 as in 「君麻呂」",
"view_count": 91
} | [
{
"body": "My understanding:\n\n\n\nGiving children degrading names was widespread, and is still practiced in some\npart of world, in order to deceive wicked spirits.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T13:43:49.850",
"id": "21569",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T13:43:49.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21567",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21567 | null | 21569 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Why is 「で」 in 「三人のうちで一番...」 omissible but 「で」 in 「ここで待つ」 not?\n\nAre there any rough guidelines regarding whether a particle can be omitted or\nnot?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T14:22:12.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21570",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T01:19:13.003",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-07T23:54:11.680",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particles",
"ellipsis"
],
"title": "Why is 「で」 in 「三人のうちで一番...」 omissible but 「で」 in 「ここで待つ」 not?",
"view_count": 571
} | [
{
"body": "It's all a question of necessity.\n\nIn 「三人の中で」, で is expressing not a physical location so much, but rather a\nmental map of where something lies. In the case of 「ここで」, as ここ is a tangible\n(albeit relative) place, particles aren't be dropped after it, no matter what\nthey are.\n\nThe rules vary from particle to particle.\n\nを can be dropped in nearly every case where it's showing the receiver of an\naction.\n\n> オレンジ（を）食べる\n>\n> 写真（を）見る\n\nIt can't be dropped in cases of showing movement\n\n> 道を歩きます\n\nが can usually be dropped unless it's important so that the sentence makes\nsense\n\n> 彼女の笑顔、一番美しいのです\n\nBUT\n\n> Ａ：誰が彼を教えましたか。\n>\n> Ｂ：私が教えた。\n\nThis above sentence NEEDS が because grammatically the rules require it when\nquestions contain が. In most other cases, though, it's okay to drop\n\nに (and by extension へ) is usually kept in all cases, because it's pretty\nimportant in showing the direction of travel for people and/or objects.\n\n> 彼にプレゼントを貰いました。\n>\n> 仕事に行きました or 仕事へ行きました\n\nIn reference to your initial question, で is usually kept if it shows where\nsomething happened (i.e. where you waited) just as に is kept for travel. But,\nin the case of showing that from a selection, x is the most y, it's usually\nokay to drop, because it's not giving an indication of physical location. You\nalso need to keep で if you're saying that you did something a certain way\ne.g.:\n\n> 車で学校に行きました。\n\nThe rules are a bit more awkward than this at times, but these cover most\nthings. You'll always be better off just listening to Japanese being spoken\nand hearing what other people do and what sounds the most \"natural\", which you\neventually get a good sense of at some stage in your learning : )",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T23:34:05.370",
"id": "21582",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-01T23:34:05.370",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "21570",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "It's not really that で is omitted, but うち is diverted to something like\n\"conjunction\" or \"preposition\" in English. It can lead a full sentence (\"\n_sentence_ (終止形) + うち\") or a noun phrase (\" _NP_ + のうち\") to make an\n**adverbial clause** (sentence adverb) that means \" _in the course of; within_\n\". Sometimes, you can reword them using plain noun うち.\n\n> **\" adverbial\" うち vs. \"ordinary\" うち**\n>\n> 学校に通う **うち** 、嫌でなくなってきた。 = 学校に通う **うちに** 、嫌でなくなってきた。 \n> 三人の **うち** 一番背が高い。 = 三人の **うちで** 一番背が高い。 \n> 乗客の **うち** 3名死亡、5名負傷 = ( _no equivalent_ ) \n> ( _no equivalent_ ) = 城壁の **うちを** 歩いて点検する。\n\nMany other \"formal nouns\" (形式名詞) that refer to place or time, provide similar\nusage; なか \"in/amidst ...\", うえ \"as well as ...\", もと \"under ...\", とき \"when ...\",\nところ \"despite ...\" etc., which more or less sound more high-register-ish or\nformal than the noun + postposition form equivalent (if any).\n\nSome ordinary nouns (結果, あげく, 瞬間 ...) are gradually acquiring such usages,\naccording to [this recent\nresearch](http://www.ninjal.ac.jp/event/specialists/project-\nmeeting/files/JCLWorkshop_no3_papers/JCLWorkshop_No3_12.pdf).",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T08:58:39.400",
"id": "21593",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-08T01:19:13.003",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-08T01:19:13.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21570",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21570 | null | 21593 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I want to say:\n\n> Tell Paul to send me the letter I wrote for his father.\n\nMy attempt is:\n\n> パオロさんに それ 父に 書いてあげる 手紙、出してあげると 伝えてください\n\nIs this grammatically correct? How could it be written otherwise?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T17:27:14.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21573",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-25T18:08:10.693",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-17T12:09:56.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "9278",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "How to say “Tell Paul to send me the letter I wrote for his father”",
"view_count": 1020
} | [
{
"body": "Almost, but not quite. First of all, it's kind of a strange sentence in\nEnglish. In Japanese, it is usually possible to omit one or more pieces of\ninformation and the meaning will still be clear. In this case, however, there\nare four different people involved: The speaker, the listener, Paul, and\nPaul's father. So in order to convey the exact meaning of the English, you\nwill need to specify each of the people.\n\n(Note: I'm not actually sure how \"Paul\" is most commonly written in katakana.\nパオロ as you have it makes it sound Italian like \"Paolo\". In the Bible, the\napostle Paul is written as パウロ. And I myself would probably write it as ポール or\nポウル. So I'm not sure which is most common, but that's another topic.)\n\nSecond, when you say \"letter I wrote _**for**_ his father\", do you mean \" _\n**for**_ \" in the sense that his father asked you to write the letter to\nsomeone else on his behalf because he couldn't/didn't want to, or that his\nfather is the intended recipient of your letter? For the sake of simplicity,\nI'm going to assume the latter; if I'm wrong, please comment and I'll change\nit.\n\nHere's how I'd write the whole sentence:\n\n> **私が** （ **パオロの／その** ）お父さんに書いた手紙を **私に** 出す **ように** **パオロに** 伝えてください。 → (The\n> letter **I** wrote to **his/Paul's** father) (send to **me** ) ( **him to**\n> ) ((you) please tell **Paul** )\n\nNote that you could also put the パオロに at the very beginning.\n\nSo you can actually omit the \"you\" who is the listener, but as you can see,\nyou need to specify that it was **I** who wrote the letter to **his/Paul's**\nfather, and **Paul** needs to be told to send it to **me**. I think if you\nleave out any of these, the meaning will not be exactly as you want:\n\n * If you leave out the わたしが, the writer of the letter is ambiguous\n * If you leave out パオロの／その, then it sounds like the letter was written to the listener's father\n * If you omit the 私に, Paul is simply being told to send the letter (possibly \"to his father\" would be implied)\n * If you omit the パオロに, it sounds like you want the listener to tell Paul's father to send the letter that you wrote to him (Paul's father), which just doesn't make sense.\n\nFinally, the actual grammatical mistakes are the と and あげるs that you have. The\nと would be for a \"quotation\" of words. When you want the listener to tell the\nthird person to do something, you must use ように.\n\n> * パオロに手紙を出す **と** 伝えてください → Please tell Paul (the words), \"Send the\n> letter\".\n> * パオロに手紙を出す **ように** 伝えてください → Please tell Paul **to (do the action of)**\n> send(ing) the letter.\n>\n\nYou don't need the あげる in 出してあげる because that means you're doing the favour of\nsending a letter for someone. It would actually be 出してくれる to mean Paul is\nsending it as a favour for you, but because of the ように I just described, this\nisn't needed. You don't need the あげる in 書いてあげる unless my assumption at the\nbeginning was incorrect, and you _were_ actually writing the letter as a\nfavour to Paul's father. But even if that were the case, I think there are\nbetter ways to say that.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T20:14:02.047",
"id": "21578",
"last_activity_date": "2021-07-28T17:26:06.537",
"last_edit_date": "2021-07-28T17:26:06.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "21573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Yo let's be polite!\n\nWhen talking about someone else's father you want to use お父さん.\n\nYour own pops is your Chichi 父.\n\nThe letter written to Paul's father = Paul (no) Otousan (ni) kaita tegami\n\n\"Send it to me please\" = [it] (wo) 「watashi (ni) okutte kudasai」\n\nSay all that to Paul = (to) Paul-san (ni) tsutaete kudasai.\n\nパオルさんの お父さんに 書いた手紙を 私に 送ってくださいと パオルさんに 伝えてください。\n\nThe letter written for Paul's dad, \"send it to me\" -- say this to paul please.\nOr in more natural english \"[please] tell paul to send me the letter written\nfor his father\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-03-08T05:44:07.503",
"id": "23112",
"last_activity_date": "2015-03-08T05:44:07.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "21573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21573 | null | 21578 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21586",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> あなたも なかなか やるやないの〜\n\nUm... is this supposed to be a form of `[positive verb] [negative verb]`\nchaining together? What does it mean?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T17:44:29.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21574",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T06:36:00.990",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-03T06:36:00.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7040",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"dialects",
"kansai-ben"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of やるやない？",
"view_count": 1260
} | [
{
"body": "> やるやないの\n\nThis is a Japanese dialect used mainly the Kansai region (Hyogo, Osaka, etc.).\n\nPerhaps you have misunderstood which words are being used in the sentence:\n\n> ≠ 「やる」 + 「やらない」 \n> ≒ 「やるじゃない（の）」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T05:31:29.677",
"id": "21585",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T06:36:51.440",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-02T06:36:51.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "9244",
"parent_id": "21574",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "I'm not sure due to lack of context, but there's a high likelihood that it's\nin **Kansai-ben/Kansai dialect**.\n\nWhat's written is Kansai-ben negation. The Hyojungo/standard version would be\n\n> あなたも なかなか やる **じゃない** の〜\n\nHere are some links that should be helpful:\n\n * [List of Hyojungo to Osaka-ben suffix conversions. Please refer to the 8th listing. (in Japanese)](http://hougen.u-biq.org/osaka.html)\n * [Wikipedia Kansai-ben page for further reading. (in English)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_dialect)\n\nHope that helps!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T05:41:20.813",
"id": "21586",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T05:41:20.813",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9285",
"parent_id": "21574",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21574 | 21586 | 21585 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21577",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I found this sentence in Tatoeba, and, based on my understanding, the\ntranslation would be \"He doesn't like\", however everyone translated it as \"I\ndon't like him\". Why??\n\nThe は particle indicates that the main topic of the sentence is 彼. So \"好きじゃない\"\nis something that 彼 does, not \"I\". It should be 彼が if the meaning would be \"I\ndon't like him\".\n\nWho is correct?\n\n**Edit:** \nI found this sentence as is on Tatoeba, It wasn't me who created it. The\nculprit for the lack of context is the Japanese (or not) who created it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T18:39:49.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21575",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T22:26:24.117",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-02T22:26:24.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "7405",
"owner_user_id": "7405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-は",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "What is the real correct translation of \"彼は好きじゃない\"?",
"view_count": 372
} | [
{
"body": "There are two basic argument structures for the predicate 好{す}き(だ):\n\n> Ａ **が** Ｂ **が** 好き（だ） ← Traditional form \n> Ａ **が** Ｂ **を** 好き（だ） ← Innovative form\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> Ａ ＝ subject \n> Ｂ ＝ object†\n\nOf course, you won't often see sentences in this exact form:\n\n 1. It's possible to omit one or both arguments. \n 2. In a matrix clause, unless you have a good reason to use the case marker が for the subject, you'll usually replace it with something like the focus particle は (or in informal speech, simply leave the particle out).\n 3. It's also possible to replace the case marker on the _object_ with a focus particle, for example to show contrast, or to omit it in informal speech.\n\nBased on 2, we might arrive at a basic sentence pattern:\n\n> Ａ **は** Ｂ **が** 好き（だ）\n\nBut we should keep in mind that this isn't the basic structure―it's just what\nwe get when we apply topicalization to the subject. And although it's common\nto topicalize the subject, **the focus particle は doesn't actually mark a\nsubject specifically** ; it can be applied to other constituents, and it often\nis.\n\nWhen one argument has been omitted, it's possible that the remaining argument\ncould be the subject or the object. Most commonly, it will be understood as\nthe object, and the omitted subject will be understood as referring to the\nspeaker. But that isn't necessarily the _only_ correct interpretation―in the\nright context, the remaining argument could be understood as the subject.\n\nThere are other hints, too:\n\n 1. If the only overt argument is marked with ～のこと, it must be the object, not the subject. This happens fairly often with 好き(だ). \n 2. If the only overt argument is inanimate, then it must be the object, as 好き(だ) only makes sense with an animate subject.\n\nIf you pay attention to hints like these and to the surrounding context, the\ncorrect interpretation should be clear most of the time.\n\n* * *\n\n†For more information about the analysis of the second argument as a\nnominative object, please see [_The Oxford Handbook of Japanese Linguistics_ ,\npages 142-146](http://goo.gl/sHGq4c).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T19:51:10.647",
"id": "21577",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T11:53:03.837",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-02T11:53:03.837",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "Your question is impossible to answer because you have not provided any\ncontext - you have not told us what was said before 彼は好きじゃない. It could mean\nthe following:\n\n 1. I don't like him (but I do like someone else).\n\nIn this case the は particle serves to compare 彼 with someone else. The fact\nthat 私 is the person speaking is hidden.\n\n 2. He doesn't like it.\n\nHere, what 'it' is is known from the context of the surrounding conversation.\n'It' could be apples, you, me, anything.\n\nJust a suggestion, Japanese is highly contextual. You have to know what was\nsaid before in order to know the 'real correct' translation of something.\nUsing a tool like Tatoeba which gives you single sentences with other people's\ntranslations based on what they think is the surrounding context will cause\nyou confusion.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T03:08:48.040",
"id": "21583",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T18:50:57.993",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7760",
"parent_id": "21575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Step by step.\n\n> _What is the real correct translation of “彼は好きじゃない”?_\n\nIt totally depends on context. If you talk about possibility, it could mean\nany of \"(I/you/he/she/it/we/they) do(es)n't like him.\" or \"He doesn't like\n(me/you/him/her/it/us/them)\". But the probable interpretations I think without\npreceding context would be \"I don't like him.\", \"He doesn't like it.\" and \"He\ndoesn't like them.\"\n\n> _The は particle indicates that the main subject of the sentence is 彼._\n\nIt's but a misunderstanding. As you see, snailboat has already written a great\nanswer that make it ever clearest. So は doesn't tell anything about whether it\nshould be subject or object here.\n\n> _everyone translated it as \"I don't like him\". Why??_\n\nMaybe only me, but if I were one of them, I'd definitely do the same thing.\nRemember, although it happens to make some weird structure and be translated\ninto English \"like\", 好きだ is an _adjective_ , literally means \"favorable\".\nThus, the first impression we get from 「彼は好きじゃない」 is hardly different from\nthat of 「彼は良くない」 or 「彼は親切じゃない」. If the example were something like 「彼は嫌っていない」,\nit'd have more chance that native speakers' judgments would split up.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T14:38:20.827",
"id": "21595",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T14:38:20.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21575 | 21577 | 21577 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A few weeks ago a Japanese friend told me the way to say I'm hungry is お腹がすいた,\nand today, doing an exercise in my textbook, I found the following sentence:\nはい、食べたいです。お腹が空いていますから。\n\nIs there any difference between them?\n\nI checked this post and the first person answering says there is a difference,\nbut he can't explain what it is.\n\n[what is the past tense of\nお腹が空いた?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1187/what-is-the-past-\ntense-of-%E3%81%8A%E8%85%B9%E3%81%8C%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F)\n\n* * *\n\n数週間前、日本人の友達が「I'm\nhungry.」を日本語に訳すと「お腹がすいた」になると言いましたが、今日教科書の問題をしながら、下記の文を見つけました：「はい、食べたいです。お腹が空いていますから。」\n\nこの2つには違いがあるのでしょうか。\n\nちなみに、「[what is the past tense of\nお腹が空いた?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1187/what-is-the-past-\ntense-\nof-%E3%81%8A%E8%85%B9%E3%81%8C%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F)」というポストをチェックしましたが、最初の回答者は、違いはあるけど説明はできない、とおっしゃいましたのではっきりしないままです。",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-01T19:34:15.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21576",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T09:48:06.320",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Difference between お腹がすいた and お腹がすいている ― 「お腹がすいた」と「お腹がすいている」の違いは？",
"view_count": 9200
} | [
{
"body": "Your question is too good, but when I dare to consider the difference,\n(お腹が)空いた feels that you now have found yourself hungry from a subjective\nviewpoint and the feel of hunger is right on you in the moment you utter the\nword. On the other hand, …空いている is somehow objective.\n\nConsidering はい、食べたいです。お腹が空いていますから that your text book says, that expression\nfeels a little too logical for a person who is really hungry, if he/she really\nis. He/She would be more likely to say 食べたいです。お腹すきました。.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T10:06:25.330",
"id": "21594",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T10:06:25.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21576",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Just my two cents, but here goes.\n\nThe base form of your sentence is: `お腹が空く` - to become hungry; to get an empty\nstomach according to [jisho.org/onaka-ga-\nsuku](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E3%81%8A%E8%85%B9%E3%81%8C%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%8F;dict=edict)\n\nSo, taking the two in formal form:\n\n`お腹がすきました` = \"My stomach became empty\" just like `誰かが来ました` is \"Someone came.\"\n\n`お腹が空いています` = \"My stomach is empty\" just like `誰かが来ています`is \"Someone is here.\"\n\nSo they basically mean the same thing, but with a slight twist.\n\n## The rest of this answer is pure opinion.\n\nPersonally I think `お腹がすきました` is more soft/polite/indirect. It's like saying\n\"I became hungry, and now I'm not sure what I'll do about it. Any\nsuggestions?\" That way you politely allow your conversation partner to suggest\nif you should go get something to eat, if you should wait a little, or\nsomething third.\n\n`お腹が空いています` is more strong/direct/clear. It's like saying \"I'm hungry, so I\nwant something to eat. Are you coming with me?\" There isn't much room to\ndiscuss whether to wait or not, because you are hungry _now_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T00:17:52.720",
"id": "21596",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T09:48:06.320",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-03T09:48:06.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "9293",
"owner_user_id": "9293",
"parent_id": "21576",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21576 | null | 21594 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21588",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have noticed the usage of `gkbrです` in sentences not related to the\n[G](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B4%E3%82%AD%E3%83%96%E3%83%AA)\ninsect:\n\n> 田中さんに掘り返されたことでgkbrです。\n>\n> 恐怖でgkbrですが続きテツヤ待機。\n\nDoes it mean \"I am afraid and want to crawl under the furniture\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T06:01:12.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21587",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T05:05:06.047",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"idioms",
"internet-slang",
"animals"
],
"title": "Meaning of \"gkbrです\"",
"view_count": 2377
} | [
{
"body": "According to the [ja.wikipedia page on\nGKBR](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/GKBR), it can be ゴキブリ as well as:\n\n> ｶﾞｸｶﾞｸﾌﾞﾙﾌﾞﾙ - 恐怖で震えるさまを表す擬態語。\n\nSo it'd be \"GaKu BuRu,\" onomatopoeia that represents fearful trembling.\n\nIt's some 2ch slang, of course.\n\nHere also is [an entry on the nicovideo\ndictionary](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/gkbr)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T06:10:10.667",
"id": "21588",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T06:10:10.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "21587",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 21587 | 21588 | 21588 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "As preparation for my trip, I am re-learning my Japanese. I imagined a\nscenario which I am not sure if it is okay to ask.\n\nIs it polite to ask someone if they speak English or are people offended by\nthe question?\n\nAlso, is 英語を話せますか okay or is 英語ができますか better?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T07:38:58.023",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21589",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T14:07:00.573",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-02T14:07:00.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "6863",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"culture"
],
"title": "Is it polite in Japan to ask if someone speaks English? (英語を話せますか？)",
"view_count": 2578
} | [
{
"body": "either is fine. no problem both \"英語を話せますか\" and \"英語ができますか\". \nBut, I would use \"あなたは英語を話せますか？\". \nbecause, \n\"話せますか\" include the meaning of \"speaking\". \n\"できますか\" include the meaning of \"speaking\" and \"writing\" and \"reading\"...etc",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T08:07:46.793",
"id": "21590",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T08:07:46.793",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21589",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "While I wouldn't consider it too impolite to ask someone directly whether he\nor she speaks English, the better strategy might be to ask\n\n> 英語で質問してもいいですか \n> お伺いしたいんですが、英語で大丈夫ですか\n\nor something along these lines. This way, you are asking for permission to\nspeak in English without putting anyone in the situation of assessing their\nown English skills.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T08:32:54.900",
"id": "21591",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T08:32:54.900",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21589",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "I often say 英語は大丈夫ですか? to shop keeper telling them I will be the one to speak\nEnglish and it is ok most of the time. (They will often become reluctant and\nanswer ちょっと.. though)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-02T08:54:31.450",
"id": "21592",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-02T08:54:31.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7040",
"parent_id": "21589",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21589 | null | 21591 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21604",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": ">\n> 私は自分では淋しくも何ともないから、彼女と私とでは、一般的にいう「不幸」という点で、どっこいどっこいのような気がするのだが、彼女は自分のほうが私よりも「ちょっと幸せ」だと感じている\n> **のだろう** 、結婚には失敗したけれど、子供が三人いる。これが彼女が私よりも幸せだと思う最大の理由だと推理したのである。\n\nWhat is the meaning of のだろう here and how does it connect to the rest of the\nsentence?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T05:17:13.077",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21601",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T06:33:10.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "902",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"conjunctions"
],
"title": "「のだろう、」 mid-sentence",
"view_count": 946
} | [
{
"body": "\"-だろう\" is the meaning of \"guess\" or \"think\" or \"wonder\" and so.\n\n> This is \"彼女は自分のほうが私よりも「ちょっと幸せ」だと感じているのだ\" and \"だろう\". \n> \"彼女は自分のほうが私よりも「ちょっと幸せ」だと感じているのだろう\" is omitted first \"だ\".\n\n\"彼女は感じているのだろう。\" -> \"I think she feels.\"\n\nNote: \n(Where \"彼女\" is \"A\". \"私\" is \"B\")\n\n> \"...のだろう、結婚には失敗したけれど、子供が三人いる。\" \n> It reasons that \"A\" is feeling. \n> \"これが彼女が私よりも幸せだと思う最大の理由だと推理したのである。\" \n> \"B\" was reasoning it.\n\nThus, Is equal to the following. \n\"私は [彼女は自分のほうが私よりも「ちょっと幸せ」だと感じているのだろう]と推理したのである。理由は[結婚には失敗したけれど、子供が三人いる]である。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T05:44:34.823",
"id": "21602",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T06:45:17.527",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-03T06:45:17.527",
"last_editor_user_id": "9235",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "That だろう in question is not special.\n\n(Assuming this paragraph is exactly the same as the original) I think the\nconfusing problem is that the author used punctuation marks clumsily (with a\ncertain intention, maybe). Read this paragraph like this:\n\n> 1. 私は自分では淋しくも何ともないから、彼女と私とでは、一般的にいう「不幸」という点で、どっこいどっこいのような気がする。\n> 2. だが、彼女は自分のほうが私よりも「ちょっと幸せ」だと感じているのだろう。\n> 3. （なぜなら、彼女は）結婚には失敗したけれど、子供が三人いる。\n> 4. これ（＝子供が三人いること）が彼女が私よりも幸せだと思う最大の理由だと（私は）推理したのである。\n>\n\nThis is definitely 読みにくい文章, so don't worry too much.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T12:09:15.180",
"id": "21604",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T12:09:15.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "That のだろう indicates the preceding part is what the speaker is guessing. And\nit's not directly related to the rest of the sentence, just two sentences that\nshare the same subject wrapped together.\n\n 1. 彼女は自分のほうが私よりも「ちょっと幸せ」だと感じているのだろう\n 2. (彼女は) 結婚には失敗したけれど、子供が三人いる",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T06:33:10.033",
"id": "21621",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T06:33:10.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21601 | 21604 | 21604 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21613",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "\"ここに名前を書くだけでいいですか？\" means \"Is it ok to just write [my] name here?\"\n\nI'm confused about where でいい comes from.\n\n<http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/must#part5> is about conjugating\nていい /でいい to adjectives and verbs.\n\nI don't know which grammar rules are applied when でいい is conjugated to nouns\nas in \"ここに名前を書くだけでいいですか？\".\n\nCan anyone tell me?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T08:00:56.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21603",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T20:26:19.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Which grammar rules are applied when でいい is conjugated to nouns?",
"view_count": 239
} | [
{
"body": "The option でいい is also available for nominals:\n\n```\n\n (1) それでいい。\n It's ok/enough.\n (2) そのままでいい。\n It's fine that way.\n \n```\n\nだけ in 書くだけ is a nominal, but it is not free, rather it must attach to\nsomething, in this case 書く. だけ is a nominal suffix, and it expresses a\nlimitation, rendered in English as _only_ or _just_. Other limitative nominal\nsuffixes are ばかり, ぐらい・くらい, ほど, まで, and どころ.\n\nSince だけ is a nominal, the expression でいい can attach to form your example,\n(1), (2), or others.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T18:20:14.243",
"id": "21609",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T18:20:14.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5362",
"parent_id": "21603",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The 「〜でいい」 you see after nouns can be analyzed as follows:\n\n> 「だ」's continuative form + 「いい」\n\n* * *\n\n「だ」's continuative form, 「で」, should not be confused with the 「…で」 you see in\nthe て-form of verbs (like 「飲んで」), which is actually just a 「て」 that has\nundergone a sound change:\n\n> //nomite// \n> ⇒ //nomte// \n> ⇒ //nonde//",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T20:26:19.933",
"id": "21613",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T20:26:19.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "21603",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21603 | 21613 | 21609 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So after reading [the answer to this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9798/769), I did some searching\nand came across [this\nwebsite](http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8290), which said, \"A\nvery common phrase is \"yoko ni naru\". (Become horizontal = lay down).\" So I\nwas wondering if \"tate ni naru\" which would seem to be (become vertical =\nstand up) was used as well.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T13:57:46.577",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21606",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T15:47:50.863",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "769",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"phrases",
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "Is there such a thing as: tate ni naru?",
"view_count": 279
} | [
{
"body": "There's already a word for getting up, namely 起きる. I think that 横になる is mostly\nused to distinguish laying down from sleeping. Getting up is 起きる (and waking\nup is 目が覚める). In any case, 縦になる is not used.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T15:47:50.863",
"id": "21608",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T15:47:50.863",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21606",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21606 | null | 21608 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to come up with a polite introduction.\n\n> Hajimemashite. \n> Watashi wa Megan to moushimasu. \n> Tekisasu kara mairimashita. \n> watashi wa kentakkii-shuu ni sunde orimasu. \n> Sumimasen, watashi wa nihongo wo sukoshi dake zonjite orimasu. \n> Douzo yoroshiku onegai itashimasu.\n>\n> Nice to meet you. \n> My name is Megan. \n> I am from Texas. \n> I live in Kentucky. \n> Sorry, I only know a little Japanese. \n> Please take care of me.\n\nFor the \"I only know a little Japanese,\" would it be better to use _zonjite\norimasu_ or would it make more sense to use something like _hanashimasu_\n(speak)? I didn't know if _hanashimasu_ is polite enough. And is _douzo\nyoroshiku onegai itashimasu_ too polite? I'm going to an interview, if that\nhelps!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T18:39:54.303",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21610",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T01:09:55.740",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-03T19:14:37.390",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9301",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"politeness"
],
"title": "Help with Kenjougo!",
"view_count": 1557
} | [
{
"body": "> Sumimasen, watashi wa nihongo wo sukoshi dake zonjite orimasu.\n\nThe problem of this sentence is that it's unclear you want to say this\npositively or negatively. People will expect something negative after\n_Sumimasen_ , just like English \"I'm afraid...\"\n\nIf you want to say this positively, like \"(Yes,) I speak Japanese a little.\"\nDon't add _Sumimasen_ :\n\n> * 私は日本語を少しだけ話せます／使えます。 \n> Watasi wa Nihongo wo sukosi dake hanasemasu/tsukaemasu.\n>\n> * 日本語は少しだけ話せます／できます／わかります。 \n> Nihongo wa sukosi dake hanasemasu/dekimasu/wakarimasu.\n>\n> * 少しは日本語が話せます／できます／わかります。 \n> Sukosi wa Nihongo ga hanasemasu/dekimasu/wakarimasu.\n>\n>\n\nI feel the kenjogo 存じております is a bit overkill here, even in a job interview. It\nshould be spared until you want to talk about something more sensitive, such\nas someone's personal affair.\n\nIf you want to say this negatively, like \"I'm afraid I speak little Japanese\":\n\n> * すみません、日本語はあまり得意ではありません。 \n> Sumimasen, Nihongo wa amari tokui de wa arimasen. (I'm not very good at\n> Japanese.)\n> * すみません、日本語はまだ勉強中です。 \n> Sumimasen, Nihongo wa mada benkyo chu desu. (I'm still learning Japanese.)\n>\n\nNote that although these are semantically negative, they don't sound actually\nnegative to the interviewer's ears. If your Japanese is satisfactory, they\nserve as humble expressions even without humble terms.\n\nThe rest of your self-introduction looks nearly perfect. Good luck!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T01:09:55.740",
"id": "21615",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T01:09:55.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21610",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21610 | null | 21615 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I'm studying for Japanese exam of the second year and teacher corrected this\nsentence-mistake:\n\n> 音楽 を 聞いた あとで、 **大きい** ケーキ を たべました。\n\nwas corrected to\n\n> 音楽 を 聞いた あとで、 **大きな** ケーキ を たべました。\n\nWhat is the difference?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T19:13:56.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21611",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T04:11:45.027",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-03T20:12:55.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "9279",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 大きいケーキ and 大きなケーキ?",
"view_count": 2869
} | [
{
"body": "(Going entirely based off my intuition here, so I could be wrong...)\n\nI think both 「大きいケーキ」 and 「大きなケーキ」 are grammatical in that context, but the\nlatter fits much better.\n\nThe difference to me seems to be that 「大きな〜」 is the natural choice for a\n**judgment** , while 「大きい〜」 is the natural choice for a **description**.\n\nCompare\n\n> 大きい車は、ほとんどの人に役に立たない。 \n> \"Large cars are not useful for most people.\" \n> (大きな also works here, IMO.)\n\nvs\n\n> 今、すごく大きな車が正面衝突した！ \n> \"A big car just crashed!\" \n> (大きい doesn't seem to feel right to me in this sentence.)\n\nIn your case, you are sort of \"telling a story\", so suddenly being very\nobjective about the size of the cake doesn't really make sense, it's your\nsubjective impression about it that matters, hence 「大きなケーキ」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-03T19:50:47.270",
"id": "21612",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-03T19:50:47.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "21611",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Example one, 大きいケーキ is a generalized observation about cakes. Example two,\n大きなケーキ is a direct relationship between size and cake. Thus the English\nequivalency would be in 1) a big cake, and in 2) the cake I ate was huge.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T00:56:07.630",
"id": "21614",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T00:56:07.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9210",
"parent_id": "21611",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "**Difference of how to use**\n\n> \"大きいケーキ\" ＞ \"ケーキが大きい\" OK \n> \"大きなケーキ\" ＞ \"ケーキが大きな\" NG",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T01:46:20.413",
"id": "21617",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T01:46:20.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21611",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Here is an extensive article about this topic.\n\n[「大きい声」と「大きな声」](http://www.urayasu.meikai.ac.jp/japanese/meikainihongo/7/sasaki.pdf)\n\nVery short summary:\n\n * 大きい and 大きな are interchangeable in most cases.\n\n * On average, 大きな is 8 times more frequently used than 大きい which directly modifies the following noun.\n\n * 大きい sometimes means \"elder/older\". 大きな doesn't.\n\n> 一番大きい兄さん (the eldest brother) vs. 一番大きな兄さん (elder brother with the largest\n> body)\n\n * 大きな/小さな sometimes expresses the sense of intimacy with the modified noun, while 大きい/小さい doesn't.\n\n> 小さな胸 (someone's little heart) vs. 小さい胸 (small breast) \n> (the difference may be not as big as the English translation suggests)\n\n * Some set phrases only accept 大きな.\n\n * Statistical analysis revealed many famous novelists almost exclusively use 大きな in their works, while a few novelists mainly use 大きい.\n\n * And the author failed to find the meaningful difference in usage between 大きな声 and 大きい声, after investigating 440 real examples.\n\n* * *\n\nPersonally, I see no meaningful semantic difference between 大きいケーキ and 大きなケーキ.\nHowever, I do feel 大きなケーキ is more common. Sticking to 大きな when it refers to\nthe physical size of something seems to be a safe strategy, and that may be\nthe sole reason your teacher corrected your sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T03:46:27.303",
"id": "21619",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T04:11:45.027",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-04T04:11:45.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21611",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 21611 | null | 21619 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21625",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm still a beginner with japanese.\n\nHere is the example that I foud: すみませんが、さとうをとってください\n\nI'm not completely sure about the meaning of が in this sentence, since the\nteacher told me you can both use it or not. What is it for?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T08:32:26.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21623",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T09:50:40.613",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T09:50:40.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "9297",
"owner_user_id": "9297",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"usage",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the difference between すみませんが and すみません?",
"view_count": 4408
} | [
{
"body": "yes that's right. we can use the both sentence in the same sense.\n\n> A: \"すみません。さとうをとってください\" \n> B: \"すみませんが、さとうをとってください\"\n\nNote: \n\"すみませんが\" or \"申し訳ありませんが\" or \"恐れ入りますが\"...etc \nThese are just like the Cushion.\n\nA is just it has been completed. \nB can be connected to the sentence after without punctuation.\n\n> \"すみませんさとうをとってください\" NG \n> \"すみませんがさとうをとってください\" OK\n\nadverb\n\n> \"さとうをとってください。すみません。\" OK \n> \"さとうをとってください。すみませんが。\" NG",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T08:54:27.153",
"id": "21624",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T01:55:37.817",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T01:55:37.817",
"last_editor_user_id": "9235",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "「が」 simply means \"but\".\n\n> 「すみません **が** 、さとうをとってください。」 =\n>\n> \"Excuse me, _**but**_ please pass me the sugar.\"\n\nYou can also make the same request without using 「が」 by saying:\n\n> 「すみません。さとうをとってください。」 =\n>\n> \"Excuse me. Please pass me the sugar.\"\n\nThe difference between the two is almost too subtle to mention. It just flows\na little better with 「が」IMHO.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T08:57:37.257",
"id": "21625",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T08:57:37.257",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 21623 | 21625 | 21625 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "If I wanted to say \"I bought the shoes in Tomoyo's shop\", how would the\nparticles work? I know \"shoes\" would take the を particle. But when it comes to\n\"Tomoyo's shop\" would I place the の particle after \"Tomoyo\" and the で particle\nafter \"shop\" or would I write \"Tomoyo's shop\" and then ので together? Or are\nboth ways wrong?\n\nTo clarify, \"Tomoyo's shop\" is not the shop's name, it's more like \"I have a\nfriend named Tomoyo who owns a shop.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T21:00:40.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21629",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-25T01:56:42.257",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T10:50:39.080",
"last_editor_user_id": "6840",
"owner_user_id": "9314",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "How to use の particle and the で particle if I want to say “I bought the shoes in Tomoyo's shop”",
"view_count": 1539
} | [
{
"body": "these two particles are completely defferent, because の particle indicates\npossession as for example わたし の 家族 は ４ 人 です: in this case kazoku that is\nfamily belongs(の) to me(watashi). In your sentence で particle works at the end\nof sentence>tomoyo-s shop で as you said. So the sentence sounds like : watashi\nwa tomoyo no mise de kutsu o kaimashita that is: わたし は ともよ の 店 で くつ を 買いました。\nので particle instead is used in odrder to give a reason, explain something, as\nit is the contracted form of ˜んです.doesn't matter now. I hope have been clear.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T22:18:33.257",
"id": "21631",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T22:18:33.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9279",
"parent_id": "21629",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "You have two choices:\n\n 1. 私/は/TOMOYO店/の/靴/を/買いました。\n\n 2. 私/は/TOMOYO店/で/靴/を/買いました。\n\nNow in either case, you need to put the particle を, which should come after\nthe object denoting the \"what you bought\" in this case. ( I'd like to call it\na particle indicating the object. ( Please do not be confused by the term\n\"object\" )).\n\nThough, this site is a bit simplified, this might be a help.\n\n<http://blogs.transparent.com/japanese/the-%E3%82%92-particle/>\n\nNow, 1's の denotes the possesion, since it will be interpreted \"I bought\nTomoyo Shop's shoes\".\n\n2's で denotes the place since it will be interpreted as \"I bought shoes at\nTomoyo's Shop\".\n\nGood luck.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T23:23:36.647",
"id": "21634",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-25T01:56:42.257",
"last_edit_date": "2016-11-25T01:56:42.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21629",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "You are on the right track.\n\n> ともよ **の** お店 **で** 靴を買いました。\n\nworks. The construction AのB combines two nouns A and B into one _noun phrase_\n, i.e. grammatically AのB works just like a single noun.\n\nJust note that this sounds like it's someone's shop, like you know Tomoyo (it\nsounds like that in English, too). If \"Tomoyo's Shop\" is just the name of the\nshop, you can just say\n\n> [Tomoyo's Shop]{トモヨスショップ}で靴を買いました。\n\nor use the shop's Japanese name.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T23:58:54.957",
"id": "21636",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T23:58:54.957",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21629",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21629 | null | 21636 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "大阪から東京までに泳ごうとしたけど、途中で道に迷います。 My translation:[(I implied) tried to swim from\nOsaka to Tokyo, but got lost on the way.] I haven't saw (までに) used like this\nbefore, so I'm not sure if I am using it right in this sentence. Is there\nanother way to make this sound/read right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T21:47:29.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21630",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T01:23:40.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9117",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "大阪から東京までに泳ごうとしたけど、途中で道に迷います。Does this sound natural/correct?",
"view_count": 190
} | [
{
"body": "> 「[大阪]{おおさか}から[東京]{とうきょう}までに[泳]{およ}ごうとしたけど、[途中]{とちゅう}で[道]{みち}に[迷]{まよ}います。」\n\nThe first thing I would earnestly like to sugggest is that you take the bullet\ntrain instead.\n\nA couple of other things I would like to point out are:\n\n> It is 「大阪から東京 **まで** 」, not 「大阪から東京 **までに** 」. You have no choice there.\n\n「までに」 expresses a temporal limitation, not anything spatial.\n\n「8[時]{じ} **までに** [来]{き}てください。」 = \"Please come by 8 o'clock.\"\n\n> Change the tense of 「迷います」 to 「迷った」 to go with the past-tense verb phrase\n> 「泳ごうとした」.\n\nIn all honesty, I do not even know if one could say 「道に迷う」 when talking about\nswimming in the ocean . I know that it does not sound too strange to my\nJapanese ears as we do not really have a word for it. It sure adds humor to\nthe statement, so let us keep it.\n\n> We now have 「大阪から東京まで泳ごうとしたけど、途中で道に迷った。」\n\nTo make it sound one-step more natural, I would suggest the sentence:\n\n> 「東京から大阪まで泳いで **いこう** としたけど、途中で道に迷った。」\n\nFinally, an even more natural way to say it would be:\n\n> 「東京から大阪まで泳いでいこうとしたけど、途中で道に迷って **しまった** 。」",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T22:22:37.587",
"id": "21632",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T22:22:37.587",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I would change 道 for 方面 or possibly 方向 or even better say 迷子になった. There is no\nroad in the water.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T01:23:40.683",
"id": "21639",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T01:23:40.683",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9210",
"parent_id": "21630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21630 | null | 21632 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21635",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A friend of mine wrote：\n\n> 誘えていないんだ。\n\nBut aparently it should be written as:\n\n> 誘いていないんか。\n\nI think this is not a typo because he wrote two different sentences, both with\n`え` instead of `い`. Is this wrong or just a local difference.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T23:18:28.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21633",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-26T05:40:48.970",
"last_edit_date": "2015-10-26T05:40:48.970",
"last_editor_user_id": "7387",
"owner_user_id": "7387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"dialects",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "Is this a different accent than Tokyo's?",
"view_count": 169
} | [
{
"body": "Nothing is either wrong or dialectal about 「[誘]{さそ}えていないんだ。」. It sounds 100%\nnatural and it would be said all over the country.\n\nIt is your 「誘 **い** ていないんか。」 that is incorrect. There is no such conjugation\nas 「誘いて」 in standard Japanese. The correct form is 「誘って」 for the plain and\n「誘えて」 for the potential.\n\n> 「[誘]{さそ}えていないんだ。」 means:\n>\n> \"(You) have not been able to invite (someone).\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-04T23:53:14.040",
"id": "21635",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T23:53:14.040",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21633",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21633 | 21635 | 21635 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21643",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "\"Almost\" and \"usually\" here means that while \"alternative\" is definitely used,\nvast majority of people is still using the mentioned version. Just look at\ngoogle results count!\n\nAlso, note that kanji used in words like 暫く and 敢て are jōyō while 鹸 is not.\n\n(I understand the common variants are generally suggested by IMEs and\ndictionaries and people simply are used to seeing しばらく written in kana. But my\nquestion is, how did this situation come into existence?)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T00:39:27.367",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21637",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T03:20:47.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9315",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"history",
"kana-usage"
],
"title": "Why words such as しばらく are almost always written in kana while words such as 石鹸 are usually in kanji?",
"view_count": 423
} | [
{
"body": "A lot of the times, but not always, this originates in literature. A word like\nしばらく came up through Heian and Kamakura female writers, so they were written\nin hiragana from the beginning. 石鹸 on the other hand has its origin in Meiji\nwhen a lot of new and fancy Western products entered Japan. There was a need\nfor words that would also describe its utility and Kanji simply does that\nbetter, think 電話.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T01:19:10.793",
"id": "21638",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T01:19:10.793",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9210",
"parent_id": "21637",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Most modern style guidelines say that adverbs, including しばらく, should be\nwritten in hiragana. ([examples of adverbs](http://www.yamanouchi-\nyri.com/yrihp/techwrt-2-4s/t-2-4s03a.htm) which should be written in\nhiragana.) It is true that some adverbs are simple enough even in kanji, but\nmany people are conscious of this rule and tend to use hiragana versions.\n\nI think this rule came into existence somewhere during [the simplification\nprocess in\nwriting](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8F%BE%E4%BB%A3%E4%BB%AE%E5%90%8D%E9%81%A3%E3%81%84)\nafter WWII. Pre-war documents are full of kanji adverbs. I found that\n[当用漢字表](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kakuki/syusen/tosin02/index.html),\npredecessor of 常用漢字表, issued in 1946, already said\n「代名詞・副詞・接続詞・感動詞・助動詞・助詞は，なるべくかな書きにする」.\n\nAccording to such guidelines, I believe 石鹸 should be written as 石けん because\n\"鹸\" is not in jōyō kanji list. Frankly, I am a native speaker of Japanese and\nI don't remember how to write 鹸 in kanji by hand. But IMEs are so powerful,\nand people do not strictly memorize which kanji is in the jōyō kanji list. And\nsuch mixture of kanji and hiragana in a single noun is simply not pleasant to\nthe eye. So it's not surprising people use 石鹸 often, and I would probably do\nthe same in casual situations.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T03:20:47.410",
"id": "21643",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T03:20:47.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "21637",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] | 21637 | 21643 | 21643 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I understand the obvious uses of へ. My understanding gets a bit fuzzy when it\ncomes to things other than a physical direction toward a physical place.\n\nFor example; a sentence such as this: 勝ちへ向かう\n\nIs this limited to just goals/expectations? Is there any limit to what\ngoals/expectations can use this particle? Honestly, I wish this particle could\njust mean 'to' in general. :/",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T01:39:59.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21640",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T05:37:14.940",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T05:20:32.383",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9314",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-へ"
],
"title": "The use of へ towards an abstract concept",
"view_count": 336
} | [
{
"body": "The use of \"へ\" does not depend much on the relationship. \nFor \"向かう\", however, there are two meanings.\n\nA:\n\n> \"駅へ向かう\"\n\nI headed to the station.\n\n```\n\n I headed to *the destination*.\n \n```\n\nB:\n\n> \"勝ちへ向かう\"\n\nI headed for the win.\n\n```\n\n I headed for *the state(or the time)*. \n \n```",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T02:58:59.253",
"id": "21641",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T05:37:14.940",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T05:37:14.940",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "There's nothing special about 勝ち in the sentence. In fact, I think you can\nsafely think of へ as \"to, toward, towards\", both for physical and metaphorical\ndirection.\n\n> 日本語の理解へ ! \n> Towards a better understanding of Japanese!\n>\n> 明るい未来へ ! \n> Towards a brighter future!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T03:15:02.050",
"id": "21642",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T03:15:02.050",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 21640 | null | 21642 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21645",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I always see this sentence being used. Like **忘れようとしてします** or **毎日勉強しようとしてする**\nI'm just wondering what is the difference if I use **忘れる** or **勉強する**\ninstead. Whenever I watch anime or JDrama I always here this pattern. Can\nsomeone enlighten me?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T05:26:29.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21644",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T06:52:45.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "～しよう＋としてします。 What is the meaning of this expression?",
"view_count": 486
} | [
{
"body": "The difference between, for example, 勉強しようとする and 勉強する is simply the\ndifference between \"to try to study/to be about to study/to get down to\nstudying\" (depending on the context) and \"to study.\"\n\nAs for the construction しようとしてする, I found a couple of examples on Twitter:\n\"おやすみってツイートしようとしてする前に寝てた\" and \"恋はしようとしてするもんじゃない恋は落ちるもの.\" However, in these,\nしようとしてする cannot be taken as a single lexical unit. The first one has a break\nbetween the しよう and the する (\"I **was about to** (しようとして) tweet goodnight, but\nfell asleep before **doing so** (する).\" And in the second one, するもの means that\nlove is \"a thing to do\" (するもの) that cannot be a \"try to/be about to/get down\nto doing\" (しようとして) \"thing to do.\" I.e., the しようとして is like an adjective that\ndescribes (or, in the tweeter's mind, shouldn't be allowed to describe) the\nするもの. In other words, there's no half-assing about with love - you fall in or\nyou don't.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T06:52:45.647",
"id": "21645",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T06:52:45.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6614",
"parent_id": "21644",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21644 | 21645 | 21645 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21648",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What I've learnt is: when you talk about your mother you use はは、 when you talk\nabout someone else's mother you use おかあさん。\n\nBut what happens when you talk **to** your mother? How should you address her?\n\nIn anime they usually say おかあさん, but isn't it too formal?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T08:26:40.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21646",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-25T06:45:57.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9297",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "はは or おかあさん what should be used?",
"view_count": 2739
} | [
{
"body": "How children address their mothers totally depends on the family.\n\nCommon ones are:\n\nおかあさん、ママ、おふくろ、おかあちゃん、かあちゃん, etc.\n\nIt is not formal at all to use おかあさん. In fact, it is so common that I had to\nplace it at the top of the list above.\n\nUncommon ones include: [母上]{ははうえ}、お[母様]{かあさま}, etc.\n\nIn real life, I have only met one person who addressed her parents 母上 and\n[父上]{ちちうえ}, respectively. She was from an very old-fashioned and strict family\nwith a lawyer father.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T08:34:28.290",
"id": "21647",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-25T06:45:57.133",
"last_edit_date": "2017-12-25T06:45:57.133",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21646",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "If you want to talk to your mother in Japanese, call her おかあさん. This is like\ncalling your mother \"mother\". Small kids sometimes call their mother ママ\n(\"mommy\"), but since you're probably older than 10, you should stick to おかあさん.\n(And no, it's not too formal. Anime Japanese is not really known for being too\nformal...)\n\nThere are cutefied or colloquial variants on おかあさん, like おかあちゃん, かあちゃん, かあさん.\n\nBy the way, it's also possible to talk about your own mother using おかあさん, as\nin うちのお母さんが…\n\nJust to be clear, 母 is not a form of address, but expresses the biological\nrelationship \"mother\". Talking to your mother, you wouldn't address her with\n母. You can use 母 in principle for talking about other mothers (太郎君の母を見ました),\nbut this sound like \"I saw Taro's biological mother\".\n\nIn the olden days, 母上 was (and in Samurai circles still is) a formal way of\naddressing (and talking about) your own mother.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T08:40:38.593",
"id": "21648",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T08:51:23.373",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T08:51:23.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21646",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21646 | 21648 | 21647 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In\n[スーパー大辞林](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%82%A6%E3%82%A4&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_UINNDO-_-010)\nI found:\n\n> **ウインドー** [0] 〖window〗 (1)窓｡ (2)ショー-ウインドーの略｡陳列窓｡\n> (3)コンピューターのディスプレー画面上で情報の表示されている部分｡画面をいくつかの部分に分割し,それぞれに異なった情報を表示する方式をマルチ-\n> ウインドーという｡\n\nIn [Wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows) I found:\n\n> Microsoft Windows（マイクロソフト **ウィンドウ** ズ）は、マイクロソフトのオペレーティング システム (OS) の製品群。\n\nQuestions:\n\n 1. Is the katakana writing (in some cases, even pronunciation, e.g. ウイ v.s. ウィ) for loanwords (especially new words) in Japanese kind of unsettled/arbitrary? \n\n 2. If it is not that arbitrary, is there any guideline for Japanese learners when they have to choose between, say, 「ドー」 and 「ドウ」?\n\n* * *\n\n**和訳**\n\n[スーパー大辞林](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%82%A6%E3%82%A4&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_UINNDO-_-010)には、\n\n> **ウインドー** [0] 〖window〗 (1)窓｡ (2)ショー-ウインドーの略｡陳列窓｡\n> (3)コンピューターのディスプレー画面上で情報の表示されている部分｡画面をいくつかの部分に分割し,それぞれに異なった情報を表示する方式をマルチ-\n> ウインドーという｡\n\nとありますが、[ウィキペディア](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows)には、\n\n> Microsoft Windows（マイクロソフト **ウィンドウ** ズ）は、マイクロソフトのオペレーティング システム (OS) の製品群。\n\nとありました。\n\n質問ですが、\n\n 1. 日本語の外来語（特に新語）のカタカナ表記は（あるいは、「ウイ」と「ウィ」の場合とかは、発音も）、揺れや人の好みで変わるのですか？\n\n 2. 好みでないとしたら、日本語の学習者が「ドー」と「ドウ」のようなものをどう使い分けるか知るための基準などはありますか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T10:26:38.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21649",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-10T04:16:06.937",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T20:38:14.307",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"loanwords",
"orthography"
],
"title": "Standard for writing/pronouncing loanwords: ウインドー v.s. ウィンドウ, etc",
"view_count": 335
} | [
{
"body": "The difference here is one is an object with a defined, determined dictionary\nentry and one is a name. Microsoft has chosen to have it's name read with a\ncloser pronunciation to the English word 'Windows' than the contemporary\ndictionary entry for window.\n\nHowever, my dictionary in particular, (one that is based on J-DICT files)\nshows `ウィンドウ`,`ウインドウ`,`ウインドー` and `ウィンドー` as in use, katakana entries. In my\nexperience, for the most part when using カタカナ, unless it is a name of\nsomething or a pronunciation guide, the extended sound (for example `ドウ`) is\nusually represented with a 「`ー`」 (as in `ドー`). As for the small `ィ`, this is\nagain related to pronunciation / naming preference. `ウイ` would produce a sound\nlike the English word `we` whereas a `ウィ` would pronounce a shorter `wi` sound\nas in the word `window`.\n\nLooking at another example `ヴイ` would be pronounced like the letter `V` (when\nreading out the alphabet for example) wheras `ヴィ` would be pronounced like the\n`vi` in `vision`. Another thing you have to be careful of is that Japanese\ndoes not always follow the English pronunciations for loanwords that have been\ntaken from elsewhere (such as German, Spanish and Russian).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T00:07:55.223",
"id": "21658",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T08:20:33.027",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-06T08:20:33.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "9241",
"owner_user_id": "9241",
"parent_id": "21649",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> > 日本語の外来語（特に新語）のカタカナ表記は（あるいは、「ウイ」と「ウィ」の場合とかは、発音も）、揺れや人の好みで変わるのですか？\n\nFirst of all, about this your question, it seems to me we do pay much\nattention regarding how to \"spell\" and how to \"pronounce\".\n\nFor example, this person is using ウィンドウズ。\n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q14128374314>\n\nAnd this person uses ウインドウズ。\n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q10130525720>\n\nAnd both are pronounced as u - i - n - do - u - zu.\n\nHowever, from my personal experience, from realllly my personal experience, I\nhave seen more smaller ィ than large イ, as a spelling way, again personally.\n\nOnto your next question.\n\n> > 好みでないとしたら、日本語の学習者が「ドー」と「ドウ」のようなものをどう使い分けるか知るための基準などはありますか？\n\nSo as I answered above to your first questions, it is, I might be able to say,\nit might depend on the person. However, since in the Microsoft Window's case,\nsince it is a legal right, it is always spelled as \"ウィンドウズ” or \"ウインドウズ”. ( I\nhave never ever seen in computer stores Windows labelled as \"ウィンドーズ″。\n\nAnd in case your question is about the \"standard\" how to use ドウ and ドゥ,\nregarding when, or what kind of situation, from your 大辞林,\n\n> > ウインドー [0] 〖window〗 (1)窓｡ (2)ショー-ウインドーの略｡陳列窓｡\n> (3)コンピューターのディスプレー画面上で情報の表示されている部分｡画面をいくつかの部分に分割し,それぞれに異なった情報を表示する方式をマルチ-\n> ウインドーという｡\n\nFrom my experience, when we say \"window\", I think personally, most of people\nwould have the image of (3) コンピューターのディスプレー画面上で情報の表示されている部分。 Again from my\nexperience, we call the 窓 as まど, and ショーウインドー as ショーウインドー.\n\nGood night.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-07T14:39:31.280",
"id": "21683",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-07T14:39:31.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21649",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Transcription from other languages usually has some arbitrariness, and there\nare no consensus everyone can agree on. Jawp community has also struggled to\n[build a\nrule](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E5%A4%96%E6%9D%A5%E8%AA%9E%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E6%B3%95),\nbut the actual management is conducted by first making the article, creating\nredirects towards that one name, then discussing renaming when someone finds\nit necessary. As long as you stick to one expression (or one rule --- some\nsensible readers might be slightly annoyed to find out \"フォルダ\" (folder) and\n\"ブラウザー\"(browser) used in the same document. Me, for one;)), it does not\nusually matter whichever expression you use.\n\nThings to consider in the \"arbitrariness\" here:\n\n * There are words that are melt into Japanese vocabulary, and thus almost never used in other forms. Examples include 「ペンギン」(although it sounds more like 「ペングウィン」).\n * For proper nouns, there is usually one fixed expression.\n * Sometimes one expression is more widely used than the others per convention. In such cases, one can still use either without sounding odd. I don't think ウィンドウ/ウィンドー is a typical example of these, because there are enough examples of 「ウィンドウ」used to describe a (glass-made) window ([[1]](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000212/files/46441_23642.html), [[2]](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000042/files/2460_10266.html), [[3]](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000311/files/2643_7377.html)). \n * There are sometimes conventions kept in specific specialities. One famous example is in the technology/computer science field, [where the 「ー」's that correspond to \"-er\", \"-or\" are usually omitted](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%95%B7%E9%9F%B3%E7%AC%A6#.E9.95.B7.E9.9F.B3.E7.AC.A6.E3.81.AE.E7.9C.81.E7.95.A5). Examples include 「オペレータ operator」，「コンパイラ compiler」, 「ベクタ vector」 etc. These are not strict either.\n * There are cases one expression makes different impression from others. 「ストライキ」 and 「ストライク」 mentioned by @kmk is the extreme case. 「インキ ink」might sound old-fashioned (「インク」 is used instead), because the former expression was dominant several decades ago[citation needed]).\n * Although I refer to it as \"arbitrariness\", there are general rules and conventions behind these transcriptions. One does not simply write down how it sounds (usually). Some people prefer to do so (try to imitate the original pronunciation as faithfully as possible), and they are sometimes called [原音主義](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8E%9F%E9%9F%B3%E4%B8%BB%E7%BE%A9).\n\nChoice between several expressions is, depending on the word, difficult for a\nJapanese, too. You can usually consult a dictionary. Searching for the\nexpression (with \"quotes\") in google and seeing i) the usuages and ii) how\nmany results each expression returns is a good idea, too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-10T04:16:06.937",
"id": "21716",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-10T04:16:06.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4223",
"parent_id": "21649",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21649 | null | 21716 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "What is the difference between these two grammar patterns?\n\n> 1. わたしは 大学で **教えに** 英語を 習っています\n> 2. わたしは 大学で **教えるために** 英語を 習っています\n>",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T12:31:19.753",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21650",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-07T05:36:13.033",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-06T13:48:02.077",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9279",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the difference between ために and -masu root verb+ に?",
"view_count": 414
} | [
{
"body": "The verb stem (pre-masu) form + に expresses purpose (~for the purpose of),\nhowever, this construction can only be used with _motion_ verbs, such as 行く,\n来る, and 帰る. The plain form + ために also expresses purpose, but unlike verb\nstem+に it can be used with a wider variety of verbs. It can also express\nreason or cause as well. If you've seen から (because / so) or ので (because /\nso), ため can be used there as well, but it sounds a bit too formal for casual\nconversation.\n\n> 1. わたしは 大学で 教えに 英語を 習っています\n>\n\nSince 教える isn't a motion verb, using に + the verb stem (pre-masu) is\nunfortunately ungrammatical in this instance. Nevertheless, I'm fairly certain\npeople would know what you meant if you said this.\n\n> 2. わたしは 大学で 教えるために 英語を 習っています\n>\n\nThis is the one you want. Since 教える (to teach) isn't a motion like to go\n(somewhere) or to return to (someplace), ため is should be used instead.\n\nため can also be used with motion verbs, in which case its English translation\nis equivalent to verb stem +に construction mentioned above.\n\nFor example, 試験の勉強を **するために** 図書館に行きました (I went to the library to study for an\nexam) and 試験の勉強を **しに** 図書館に行きました (I went to the library to study for an exam)\nare the same. When ため is used with a motion verb instead of verb stem+に, it\nexpresses a rather important purpose, whereas with verb stem+に, the purpose\ndoes not have to be important.\n\nHere are some sample sentences from _A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar_\nif you want some examples:\n\n 1. コーヒーを飲む **ために** 来ました。 (I came **to have** some coffee)\n 2. 父が亡くなった **ため** 、学校に来られませんでした。 ( **Because** my father died, I couldn't come to school.)\n 3. 雪の **ため** 、電車が遅く来てしまった。 (The train arrived late **because** of the snow)\n\nYou may have noticed that に has been dropped in 2 and 3. According to _A\nDictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar_ , に sounds more formal and is can be\nadded if/when ため modifies a verbal phrase (that's just a fancy way of saying\nため is modifying a phrase that contains a verb). If ため modifies a noun, such as\n体育館は、運動する **ための** 建物 then に becomes の. If this rule is confusing, you can\nalways just drop に and の and simply write ため instead.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T23:46:27.850",
"id": "21657",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T08:20:36.807",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-06T08:20:36.807",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7207",
"parent_id": "21650",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 1. わたしは 大学で 教えに 英語を 習っています\n>\n\nI have never used this. ↑\n\n> 2. わたしは 大学で 教えるために 英語を 習っています\n>\n\nI do use this. ↑\n\n**supplement:** \n(e.g.日本人教師の)わたしは (e.g.アメリカの)大学で (e.g.学生に数学を)教えるために 英語を 習っています \nor \nわたしは (大学で 教えるために) 英語を 習っています",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T07:40:50.527",
"id": "21666",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T09:11:30.480",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-06T09:11:30.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "9235",
"parent_id": "21650",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "The biggest difference is in the **_range of usage_** that the two expressions\nallow themselves.\n\n「ために」 can be used in far more situations than 「に」 because:\n\n> you can only choose from a handful of verbs for Verb B in 「[連用形]{れんようけい} of\n> Verb A + **に** + Verb B」\n\nwhereas\n\n> choices for Verb B in 「Verb A + **ために** + Verb B」 are unlimited.\n\nChoices for **Verb A** , which expresses the purpose, are literally unlimited\nfor **both** structures.\n\nChoices for **Verb B** in 「連用形 of Verb A + **に** + Verb B」, however, are\nlimited to those few that express \"motion\" such as\n[行]{い}く、[来]{く}る、[連]{つ}れていく、[走]{はし}ってくる, etc.\n\n> Your sentence #1 「わたしは[大学]{だいがく}で[教]{おし}えに[英語]{えいご}を[習]{なら}っています。」,\n\ntherefore, is incorrect and it makes nearly no sense. Why? Because 「習う」 is not\na motion verb and it cannot be placed there.\n\n> Sentence #2 「わたしは大学で教えるために英語を習っています。」\n\nis correct and it makes sense. It may not be 100% natural-sounding by the\nnative standard but we will not get into that. Point is it is a grammatical\nsentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T16:30:10.823",
"id": "21674",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-07T05:36:13.033",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-07T05:36:13.033",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21650",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21650 | null | 21674 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21652",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to understand the lyrics to the children's song 雨降りお月さん\n(<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21JW-j5JJdc> ; analysis here\n<http://homepage3.nifty.com/funahashi/sonota/hoka23.html> ). What's up with\nthese verses:\n\n> 雨降りお月さん 雲の[蔭]{かげ} \n> お嫁に行く **ときゃ** 誰 **と** ゆく \n> ひとりで[傘]{からかさ} さしてゆく \n> 傘ない **ときゃ** 誰 **と** ゆく\n\n 1. Is the きゃ a contraction, and if so, of what? What does it mean?\n 2. Are those とs companionship, conditional, or something else?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T13:23:35.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21651",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T23:55:24.013",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T23:55:24.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "622",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-と",
"contractions"
],
"title": "「行くときゃ誰とゆく」— what's this きゃ and the とs?",
"view_count": 544
} | [
{
"body": "* ときゃ is a contraction of [とき]{時}は\n * 誰 **と** is \" **with** who\"\n\nDoes this answer your questions?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T13:34:59.687",
"id": "21652",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T13:34:59.687",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "21651",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21651 | 21652 | 21652 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Some rough Google search shows:\n\n> 一週間後に解約する (✓)\n>\n> 一週間後で解約する (☓)\n\nbut:\n\n> 一週間後にの解約 (☓)\n>\n> 一週間後での解約 (✓)\n\nIf that's right, why is that discrepancy?\n\nQuestions below seem related:\n\n[What's the difference between に and で when speaking of time of an\naction?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/685/whats-the-\ndifference-between-%E3%81%AB-and-%E3%81%A7-when-speaking-of-time-of-an-action)\n\n[に vs で again: 前に vs\n後で](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2201/%E3%81%AB-\nvs-%E3%81%A7-again-%E5%89%8D%E3%81%AB-vs-%E5%BE%8C%E3%81%A7)\n\n* * *\n\n**和訳**\n\n少しググった限りでは、\n\n> 一週間後に解約する (◯)\n>\n> 一週間後で解約する (☓)\n\nに対し、\n\n> 一週間後にの解約 (☓)\n>\n> 一週間後での解約 (◯)\n\nなようですが、誤りでなければ、なぜこういうふうに食い違っているのですか？\n\n以下の質問とも関係がありそうです。\n\n[What's the difference between に and で when speaking of time of an\naction?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/685/whats-the-\ndifference-between-%E3%81%AB-and-%E3%81%A7-when-speaking-of-time-of-an-action)\n\n[に vs で again: 前に vs\n後で](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2201/%E3%81%AB-\nvs-%E3%81%A7-again-%E5%89%8D%E3%81%AB-vs-%E5%BE%8C%E3%81%A7)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T14:09:24.503",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21653",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T06:37:25.033",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"particle-の",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "「一週間後に解約する」 but 「一週間後での解約」, why not the same particle?",
"view_count": 455
} | [
{
"body": "**_Taking Actions at Specific Times:_**\n\nPlain and simple, what governs the particle choice for expressing the time of\naction is the **_part of speech_** that follows the particle -- nothing else.\n\n> Use **に** with verbs:\n\n「[一週間後]{いっしゅうかんご} **に** [解約]{かいやく}する」 = \"to cancel after a week\"\n\n「5[月]{がつ} **に** [渡米]{とべい}します。」 = \"I am going to the U.S. in May.\"\n\n「2[年前]{ねんまえ} **に** [結婚]{けっこん}しました。」 = \"I got married 2 years ago.\"\n\n> Use **の** or **での** with nouns:\n\n「一週間後 **での** （or just **の** ）解約」 = \"a/the cancellation after a week\"\n\n「5月 **の** 渡米」 = \"a/the/one's visit to the U.S. in May\"\n\n「2年前 **の** 結婚」 = \"one's marriage 2 years ago\"\n\n> Exceptions:\n\nCertain time words **_do not_** take a particle when followed by a verb or\nverb phrase, but even with those, you need to place a 「の」 when followed by a\nnoun.\n\nThose words include: [来週]{らいしゅう}、[先週]{せんしゅう}、[来年]{らいねん}, etc. = next week,\nlast week, next year, etc.\n\nCorrect: 「来年[行]{い}きます。」 = \"I will go next year.\"\n\nIncorrect: 「来年に行きます。」\n\nCorrect: 「先週の[旅行]{りょこう}」 = \"one's trip last week\"\n\n**Finally, regarding combining particles:**\n\n「にの」 is just not a possible particle combination at least in standard\nJapanese.\n\nPossible combinations include: での、への、へも、とも、のも、でも、にも, etc.\n\nI will not give examples here as it would be off-topic. If asked as a separate\nquestion, I might post an answer. Just mentioned it because you used 「にの」 in\n「一週間後にの解約」, which is an incorrect phrase.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T02:22:39.663",
"id": "21663",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T02:34:08.723",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-06T02:34:08.723",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21653",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21653 | null | 21663 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21656",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English, the popular translation of 「君を笑いに来た」 is \"I came to laugh at you,\"\nbut ever since I heard the original in Japanese, I was curious as to what is\ngoing on in the sentence from the grammatical perspective (in particular, the\n「笑いに来た」 part). Does anyone know?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T21:29:43.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21654",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T23:39:03.303",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-05T22:59:45.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the grammatical analysis of the sentence 「君を笑いに来た」?",
"view_count": 974
} | [
{
"body": "# Your Sentence\n\nThis is how it breaks down:\n\n```\n\n [君を 笑い ]に 来た \n [kimi=wo waraw-i ]=ni ki-ta \n [you=PATIENT laugh-CONT]=PURPOSE come-PAST\n \"I came to laugh at you\"\n \n```\n\nThat is:\n\n * the inner clause is 「君を笑う」 \"laugh at you\",\n * that inner clause gets inflected to the 連用形{れんようけい}: 「君を笑い」,\n * then it gets added as an argument to 「来た」 via the `PURPOSE` 「〜に」\n\n* * *\n\n# The `PURPOSE` 「に」\n\nI call this 「に」 the `PURPOSE` 「に」 in my gloss above.\n\n 1. **Most verbs do not take a`PURPOSE` 「に」 argument**: usually, if you want to specify the purpose you need to do something more complex like 「ために〜」.\n\n**The verbs that do allow for this`PURPOSE` 「に」 are movement verbs (移動動詞).**\n\nIn _A Reference Grammar of Japanese_ , Samuel Martin gives examples of verbs\nthat take the `PURPOSE` 「に」:\n\n> 行く・来る・かえる・戻る・出る・出向く・出かける・赴く・寄る・入る・歩く・上る・押し寄せる・向かう・集まる・群がる・立つ・逃げる・顔を出す・かかる\n\n(Pulled out of examples on Martin 1975, pp. 405-406.)\n\nThis is far from a conclusive list though.\n\n 2. On the **inner verb** (「笑う」, in your case), there's a semantic constraint. Basically, the inner verb needs to be something a human willfully does. Examples of inner verbs that don't work are 「開く」 (not something a human does) and 「乗り過ごす」 (not something you willfully do).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-05T23:39:03.303",
"id": "21656",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-05T23:39:03.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "21654",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 21654 | 21656 | 21656 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21661",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I want to say \"many Dutch (go by | take the | use the ) bike\". (or car,...)\n\nI've come up with:\n\n> おおぜいのオランダ人は自転車{じてんしゃ}で行{い}きます。\n\nand\n\n> おおぜいのオランダ人｛じん｝は自転車{じてんしゃ}を使{つか}います。\n\nBut they seem very constructed to me and I'm not sure whether you can omit the\nthing for which they use a bike. But I want to omit that!\n\nHow can I say this properly?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T01:46:32.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21660",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-13T21:53:53.623",
"last_edit_date": "2016-01-13T17:05:23.130",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7355",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "How to say \"go by bike\"",
"view_count": 1345
} | [
{
"body": "I believe it will more sound natural if the sentence goes like this.\n\n多くのオランダ人は自転車に乗ります。\n\nThis way it can mean \"to use\" \"go by\" or \" take the\" , which you want to tell.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T02:00:56.533",
"id": "21661",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T02:00:56.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7242",
"parent_id": "21660",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "Both ”大勢のオランダ人は自転車で行きます” and ”大勢のオランダ人は自転車で行きます\" are right as the direct\ntranslation of “Many Dutch (go by | take the | use the ) bike\". (or car,...),\nbut sound somewhat stiff or unrefined to me as a Japanese expression. Just as\na suggestion, how about saying, just by changing the angle of construction:\n\nオランダでは自転車に乗っている人を多く見かけます – In Netherlands, we see a lot of people riding\n(using) a bicycle.\n\nオランダでは多くの人が日常 （or ふだん）自転車を使用しています – In Netherlands many people make daily use\nof bicycles.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-13T21:53:53.623",
"id": "30392",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-13T21:53:53.623",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "21660",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 21660 | 21661 | 21661 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there any further implication to be gleaned from this and how did this\nmeaning come to be? Is there any suggestion that the male genitals are somehow\nan obstacle to enlightenment?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T03:20:39.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21664",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T05:46:38.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9319",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"history"
],
"title": "Why did 摩羅 also come to mean penis?",
"view_count": 362
} | [
{
"body": "Excerpt from 日本国語大辞典 entry:\n\n> まら 【魔羅・摩羅】\n>\n> **(1)** 「ま（魔）(1)」に同じ。\n>\n> ＊却癈忘記〔１２３５〕下「勤行之人の魔道に堕ると、世間に人のいふ事、甚謂有事也。魔と者具には魔羅と云ふ」\n>\n> **(2)** （(1)から転じたとも、排泄する意の「まる」の交替形ともいう）陰茎をいう。もと僧侶が用いた語。\n>\n> ＊霊異記〔８１０〜８２４〕中・一一「卒爾に（マラ）に蟻著きて嚼み〈国会図書館本訓釈 万良〉」\n\nThat means, the \"penis\" sense may have come from buddhist _māra_ , or the verb\nまる \"excrete\", or confusion between both.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T05:46:38.180",
"id": "21665",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T05:46:38.180",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "21664",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 21664 | null | 21665 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21670",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "According to\n[http://www.jisho.org/words?jap=%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A0&eng=&dict=edict](http://www.jisho.org/words?jap=%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A0&eng=&dict=edict),\nただ is a na-adjective.\n\nPeople seem to use ただの exelucisvely, and I wonder what ただな means.\n\nWhat does ただな mean?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T12:13:05.670",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21667",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T19:24:15.497",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Does ただな mean the same thing as ただの?",
"view_count": 1305
} | [
{
"body": "It's probably adverb ただ and interjecting particle な, which conveys a flavor\nlike \"ok?\"/ \"sure?\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T12:37:51.953",
"id": "21668",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T12:37:51.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "21667",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "As @nkjt said, notice that the modern _tada_ = \"ordinary, free, as-is\"\n**isn't** listed as a na-adjective.\n\nPerhaps you're thinking of the [直]{ただ} entry. Contrary to what the jisho.org\nsite says, this isn't a na-adjective. Rather, it's a **nari** -adjective – the\nClassical Japanese ancestor to na-adjectives (notice jisho.org marks it as\n\"archaic\"). _Tada-nari_ is a Classical adjective meaning \"direct, straight,\nonly, normal\".\n\nSources:\n\n * The Ōbunsha Classical Japanese dictionary has _tada-nari_ ;\n * The _Digital Daijirin_ entry for _tada_ [lists it](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/136674/m0u/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A0/) as both a noun and a nari-adjective;\n * _Meikyō Kokugo Jiten_ doesn't list modern _tada_ as na-adjective, just as noun, adverb, or prefix.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T13:06:09.130",
"id": "21669",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T19:24:15.497",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-06T19:24:15.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "622",
"owner_user_id": "622",
"parent_id": "21667",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "「ただ **な** 」 is NOT an adjective in the same way that 「きれいな」,「みごとな」, etc. are.\nThus, a noun _**cannot**_ follow 「ただな」.\n\n「ただ **な** 」 is usually used like an _**interjection**_ at the beginning of a\nsentence that is said in reply to a statement made by another person. It means\nsomething along the lines of:\n\n> \"One thing that we have to consider is ~~\", \"One thing you shouldn't forget\n> is ~~\", \"We can't go without mentioning ~~\", etc.\n>\n> A feminine version is 「ただ **ね** 」. 「ただ **な** 」 sounds pretty masculine.\n\n_**Other \"ただ + particle\" forms and their usages:**_\n\n「ただ **で** 」 = \"for free\"\n\n「ただ **の** 」 = \"ordinary\", \"run-of-the-mill\", etc. It can also mean \"free (of\ncharge)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T13:35:59.417",
"id": "21670",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-06T13:35:59.417",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21667",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 21667 | 21670 | 21669 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "21675",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Since おふくろ is one way to address one's own mother, I was wondering whether the\n「ふく」 part is related to the word meaning 'clothes' or not.\n\nAnd if not, what is the origin of おふくろ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T14:35:48.523",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "21671",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-07T06:19:13.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9297",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Is おふくろ related to ふく?",
"view_count": 378
} | [
{
"body": "The kanji for it is 袋 (Bag - ironically) so I'd say no. According to the link\nbelow, the word is derived from:\n\n> 1. Bags being used to manage valuables... like a mother would.\n> 2. The bag in the uterus (placenta?)... [TMI me thinks]\n> 3. When a mother hugs a child tightly, the [futokoro: area around the\n> chest] becomes like a bag.\n>\n\nSide Note: Interested to know what [懐]{ふところ} is in English. J-Wikipedia says\nit's the inner part of the upper torso of garments.\n\n<http://homepage2.nifty.com/osiete/s623.htm>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T15:25:42.877",
"id": "21672",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-07T06:19:13.227",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-07T06:19:13.227",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "21671",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "My answer is (basically) the same as kiss-o-matic.\n\nI would have never thought about why we call our mothers おふくろ if you didn't\nask us.\n\nI am going to translate (<http://gogen-allguide.com/o/ofukuro.html>) ( I can\nnot copy the original Japanese due to the copyright ):\n\n> The word has been seen since Muromachi era, and there are several theories\n> about the origin of the name that have not been confirmed. One theory is お\n> is a prefix, and since mothers managed placing all the money and valuables\n> into bags (ふくろ), thus they came to be called お/ふくろ.\n>\n> Another theory is that because organs such as the placentae, womb, and egg\n> membrane were called ふくろ, the name of organ also became used for mothers.\n>\n> Last one holds because children were brought up by mothers, the name ふところ\n> denoting \"the nest, pockets, etc\" contracted to be おふくろ.\n>\n> In modern times, the word おふくろ is mostly used by males. however according to\n> the Japanese-Portuguese dictionary published in 1603, it was females rather\n> than males using the term back then.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-02-06T23:28:39.073",
"id": "21675",
"last_activity_date": "2015-02-07T04:18:35.123",
"last_edit_date": "2015-02-07T04:18:35.123",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "21671",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 21671 | 21675 | 21675 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.