question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24610",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can hatsu be used with activities, like hatsu-no poem?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-28T10:07:10.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24603",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T02:31:32.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between Hatsu and Saisho?",
"view_count": 3768
} | [
{
"body": "Both of them are meaning basically the same.\n\n * 初のポエム\n * 最初のポエム\n\nBut in many cases,初 sentence has a subject at the beginning to say whose\nfirst.\n\n * 私初のポエム(My first poem)\n * Aチーム初の得点(A team's first point)\n * 世界初の車(The world's first car)\n\nAnd the case of 最初,this can also have a subject though,in many cases it\ndoesn't.this does not mean 最初 always pointing \"the world's first\" nor\ndistinguishing something particular. So You have to read between the lines and\nguess the meaning.\n\n * 最初のプロテニスプレイヤー(the first professional tennis player)\n * 最初の電車を逃したので遅刻した(I was late because I missed the first train)\n\n**EDITED**\n\nIt's probably good to mention basic difference between them. 初 is a kanji and\n最初 is a 熟語(idiomatic phrase) which consists of the kanji 初 and 最 which means\n'most'. unlike other 熟語 of 最,最初's 最 basically does not have any meaning but\nemphasizing the word,Because 初 is meaning 'first' without 最. That's the reason\nwhy 初ポエム and 最初のポエム are almost the same meaning.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T00:43:04.543",
"id": "24610",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T02:31:32.607",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T02:31:32.607",
"last_editor_user_id": "10088",
"owner_user_id": "10088",
"parent_id": "24603",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24603 | 24610 | 24610 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24605",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "seeing 尿が遠い/尿が近い in some medical documents and sites, what does 遠い and 近い mean\nin this sense? Does it literally mean the urine is far(ranged)/urine is close\n(ranged)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-28T11:25:25.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24604",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-02T14:21:14.920",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7846",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"etymology"
],
"title": "What does 尿が近い and 尿が遠い mean?",
"view_count": 389
} | [
{
"body": "In this case, 「[近]{ちか}い」 and 「[遠]{とお}い」 express temporal intervals and not\nspatial distances -- \"at shorter intervals\" and \"at longer intervals\",\nrespectively.\n\n「[尿]{にょう}が近い」 means \"having the tendency of urinating frequently\".\n\n「尿が遠い」 means the opposite of that -- \"not having to pee very often\".\n\nWe also say euphemistically 「トイレが近い/遠い」 to express the exact same ideas\nwithout using the word 「尿」(= \"urine\").\n\n(Needless to say, 「トイレが近い/遠い」 can also be used for their \"literal\" meanings --\n\"The restroom is close by / far away.\")",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-28T11:32:40.017",
"id": "24605",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-02T14:21:14.920",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-02T14:21:14.920",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24604",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 21
}
] | 24604 | 24605 | 24605 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24641",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm reading a mathematics textbook, and there are a number of sentences which\nend with もの or こと.\n\nI can work out the intended meaning no problem, so what I would like explained\nto me, are the rules for when I can use this grammatical construction.\n\nThis seems to happen in definitions, especially if mathematically written\nconditions are involved.\n\nFor example:\n\n> すなわち\n>\n> 1. m1, m2 ∈ N ⇒ m1 + m2 ∈ N, さらに 0 ∈ N\n>\n> 2. r ∈ R, n ∈ N ⇒ r•n ∈ N\n>\n>\n\n>\n> となるもの。\n\nor\n\n> f: S → T 全射 (surjection, epimorphism) であるとは、f (S) = T が成立すること。\n\nI asked a (non-Japanese) mathematician, who told me that this can be used to\ngive commands, e.g., 勉強すること。However, I don't see why a command would appear in\ndefinitions in this way...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-28T11:33:57.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24606",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-30T17:58:33.610",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10202",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nominalization",
"mathematics"
],
"title": "Sentence ending with こと or もの in mathematics definitions",
"view_count": 363
} | [
{
"body": "I looked up \"成立\" and two of the meanings are \"coming into existence;\nconclusion\" while having the meaning \"to hold true\" as a suru verb. I think\n\"成立すること\" is simply to address the multiple meanings of the word, and it also\nrefers to the noun (f(S)=T) possessing the quality of the verb (成立する) by\nnominalizing the verb (こと).\n\nI haven't read a math book in a while, but if I can still remember\nmathematicians parlance (haha) I would translate it as: \"When f:S→T is a\nsurjection, f(S)=T still holds true.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T01:38:21.243",
"id": "24635",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-30T17:01:50.003",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-30T17:01:50.003",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10215",
"parent_id": "24606",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "The sentence-final copula `である` (\"be\") is almost always omitted because it's\nobvious in definitions, leaving the sentences looking like ending with nouns.\nBoth `もの` and `こと` are frequently used nominalizers translating \"what do ~\"\nand \"doing ~\" respectively.\n\n> すなわち、1. (...) 2. (...) となるもの。 \n> _i.e. **what** satisfies 1. (...) and 2. (...)._\n\n* * *\n\n> f:S→T が全射であるとは、f(S)=T が成立すること。 \n> _f:S→T is a surjection means **that** f(S)=T holds true._ \n> less literally, _f:S→T is a surjection when f(S)=T holds true._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T07:50:26.680",
"id": "24641",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T08:11:35.010",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-30T08:11:35.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24606",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24606 | 24641 | 24641 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24608",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I often see claims that they are only used to people your own age or younger.\nBut is that true, or an exaggeration based on the fact that you'd use more\npolite forms to someone older, usually? For example, could you use them\nspeaking to your parents, with whom you'd use the plain form anyway?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-28T16:57:35.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24607",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-28T17:23:04.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "かい and だい - age?",
"view_count": 232
} | [
{
"body": "They would sound pretty funny talking with your parents. In fact, a lot of\nJapanese people use ですます form with their parents.\n\nThere are a lot of regional dialects in Japan and that could influence their\nusage (though as you surmise age tends to be the most significant factor), but\nin this case I think they really _are_ uncommon with younger 関東 people. Maybe\nなんだい...sometimes. そうかい... Hmm, yes, rare, even these cases is sort of like\nimitation/acting more than actual self.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-28T17:14:15.510",
"id": "24608",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-28T17:23:04.347",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-28T17:23:04.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "10194",
"owner_user_id": "10194",
"parent_id": "24607",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24607 | 24608 | 24608 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24612",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across something that had favorite works of characters.\n\nOne was:\n\n> 「好きな漫画」\n>\n> 『神風怪盗◯ャンヌ』\n\nAnd another was:\n\n> 「好きな映画」\n>\n> 『ゴッド◯ァーザー』\n\nIs this simply a way of not actually putting the titles to avoid copyright\nissues? Is this common?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T03:17:34.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24611",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T03:45:15.713",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6881",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"usage",
"symbols"
],
"title": "Use of ◯ in titles",
"view_count": 691
} | [
{
"body": "It is, and it is. It's a way to make references to well-known works without\nthe legal headaches that using the actual copyrighted title would. This is\nquite common in parodies - Gintama for example has used this trick to no end;\nthe anime does this instead by bleeping out a syllable or two as the character\nstates the name.\n\nI could be wrong, but from my experience it seems like the kind of thing that\nwould be out-of-place in more serious works. I can't remember seeing it used\nfor anything other than humorous effect, but I don't know that that never\nhappens.\n\nNames of celebrities and other famous people often get similar treatment.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T03:45:15.713",
"id": "24612",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T03:45:15.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "24611",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 24611 | 24612 | 24612 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So I know that using `dictionary form verb ようになりました` means I started to do\nthis thing that I didn't do before. But what would happen if I put it in\npresent tense with `ようになります` would that be wrong? Would that mean something\nelse? [On this website](http://www.learn-japanese-adventure.com/you-ni-\nnaru.html) that describes how the structure works it describes it as `ようになる`\nwhich is plain present tense but then all of the example sentences use\n`ようになりました`. Why is it in past tense? Isn't it describing the current state of\nthings?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T05:15:20.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24614",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T08:59:13.317",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T05:34:18.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "9241",
"owner_user_id": "7952",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Why does ようになる become ようになりました (past tense)?",
"view_count": 861
} | [
{
"body": "> Isn't [〜ようになる] describing the current state of things?\n\nIn fact, it isn't.\n\nなる is acting as a \"state-change\" verb here (瞬間動詞 \"instantaneous verb\" in the\nJapanese literature, often referred to as \"punctual verb\" in English\nliterature). When you use it in past tense, that means the state has changed\n(and it is implied that you are currently in it, though that implication can\nbe canceled).\n\n> できるようになった。 \n> Lit. \"I became able to do it.\"\n\nIf you want to directly say you're in the state, you can say なっている. However,\nit puts a weird emphasis on the state of \"having become able to do it\" -- why\nnot just say \"I am able to do it\" (できる)? In most cases the reason you're using\n〜ようになる in the first place is to highlight the change, not the current state.\nSo I think it's probably more common to use 〜た as opposed to 〜ている in the case\nof 〜ようになる. (Side note: なる does seem to be able to double as a 継続動詞 \"durative\nverb\" here, meaning なっている can also refer to you being in the process of\nchanging state.)\n\nIf you use the plain form, the most likely semantics is future time. A\nhabitual reading is also possible but that seems pretty marginal with 〜ようになる\nwithout significant context.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T05:47:01.963",
"id": "24616",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T08:29:18.657",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T08:29:18.657",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "24614",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The short answer is: \"Because 「～～ようになる」 refers to a **_future_** event.\"\n\nThat is exctly how the \"present\" tense works in many cases in Japanese.\n「[大学]{だいがく}に[行]{い}きます。」 means \"I **_will be attending_** college.\" In other\nwords, that is something a high school kid would say. If you were already a\ncollege student, you would most invariably say 「大学に行っています。」.\n\n「がんばれば、[日本語]{にほんご}が[話]{はな}せるように **なる** (or **なります** )。」\n\nThis sentence is talking about the future. ⇒ \"You will be able to speak\nJapanese if you study hard.\"\n\nIf you became able to speak it at some point in the past (and you can still\nspeak it presently), you would say:\n\n「（２[年]{ねん}くらい[前]{まえ}に）日本語が話せるように **なった** (or **なりました** )。」\n\nThe state of \"being able to speak Japanese\" continues on up to the present\nmoment, but the present moment is not when it occured. It was \"two years ago\",\n\"ten years ago\", etc.\n\nThis is why we use the \"past\" tense in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T08:59:13.317",
"id": "24620",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T08:59:13.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24614",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24614 | null | 24620 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24617",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to my teacher who is a native Japanese, the second option cannot be\nused even though it is grammatically correct. What do you think? Any comments\nare appreciated.\n\n# Option 1\n\n> 彼：すみません。消しゴムを忘れたので、「私があなたに」消しゴムを借りてもいいですか。\n>\n> 彼女：ええ。どうぞ。\n\n# Option 2\n\n> 彼：すみません。消しゴムを忘れたので、「あなたが私に」消しゴムを貸してもいいですか。\n>\n> 彼女：ええ。どうぞ。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T05:36:36.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24615",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T08:34:16.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "貸してもいいですか versus 借りてもいいですか",
"view_count": 6544
} | [
{
"body": "> 消しゴムを忘れたので、（あなたが私に）消しゴムを貸してもいいですか。\n\nThis sounds strange. You use ～てもいいですか for asking for permission (= 'May I\n~~?'), so '（私があなたに・あなたから）・・・借りてもいいですか' is correct. If you want to use the verb\n貸す, here 貸す is the action done by the listener, not the speaker, so you would\nrather say\n\n> 消しゴムを忘れたので、（あなたが私に）消しゴムを貸してくれませんか。\n\nYou use ～てくれませんか for requesting/asking someone to do something (= 'Could you\n~~?')\n\nYou can also say\n\n> 消しゴムを忘れたので、（私があなたに）消しゴムを貸してもらえませんか。\n\nHere the subject would be 私 because the subject of 貸す is the listener but the\nsubject of 貸してもらう is the speaker.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T06:46:55.560",
"id": "24617",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T08:34:16.877",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T08:34:16.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24615",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24615 | 24617 | 24617 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24622",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider the following.\n\n> 長い鉛筆は書きやすいです。\n>\n> 短い鉛筆は書きにくいです。\n\nCan I rephrase them as follows?\n\n> 長い鉛筆ではやすく書きます。\n>\n> 短い鉛筆ではにくく書きます。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T08:37:58.793",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24618",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T10:11:24.523",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Can『ます形』やすい and 『ます形』にくい be rephrased as やすく『ます形』and にくく『ます形』?",
"view_count": 154
} | [
{
"body": "I am afraid your last two sentences make no sense, but at least you are\nclearly thinking \"logically\" here because those two sentences would surely\nwork if they were in another language.\n\n「やすい」(= \"easy to do/handle\") , in modern Japanese, is mainly used in the\nformat:\n\n> 「[連用形]{れんようけい} of a verb + やすい」\n\nWhen in that format, one can conjugate 「やすい」 into 「やすく」 if one needs to add\nanother phrase to it as in:\n\n「このPCは使いやす **く** 、しかも[安]{やす}い！」= \"This PC is not only easy to use, but is also\ninexpensive!\"\n\n(Hope my use of 「やすい」 and 「安い」 in one sentence did not confuse some users.)\n\nYour last two sentenes could be corrected to something like:\n\n「[長]{なが}い[鉛筆]{えんぴつ}は(or なら)うまく[書]{か}けます。」 書 **け** ます ＞ 書 **き** ます\n\n「[短]{みじか}い鉛筆ではうまく書けません。」",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T10:11:24.523",
"id": "24622",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T10:11:24.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24618",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24618 | 24622 | 24622 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24621",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It is said by a boy who has just finished talking about his plan to a group of\nlittle kids. Here is the sentence.\n\n**とまあ** ざっとこんなところだが どうだみんな！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T08:49:47.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24619",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T09:11:21.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does the word 「とまあ」mean?",
"view_count": 1459
} | [
{
"body": "It means somethng like \"So, ~~\" used when trying to wrap up a convo or\nexplanation. It is mostly an attention-drawer than a meaningful phrase.\n\nThe 「と」 is, believe it or not, a quotative particle used to refer to the over-\nall content of the speaker's statement that is now ending.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T09:11:21.413",
"id": "24621",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T09:11:21.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24619",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24619 | 24621 | 24621 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> A: この資料、もう捨てましょうか。 \n> B: あ、ちょっと待ってください。 \n> B: 捨てる前に、ここをコピーしてください。\n>\n> (A: kono shiryou, mou sutemashou ka. \n> B: a, chotto matte kudasai. \n> B: suteru mae ni, koko o kopi--shite kudsai.)\n\nI know that mou with a past-tense verb means already. But what does it mean\nwith this verb tense? Or even with もう捨てますか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T14:16:05.270",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24623",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T15:36:44.457",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T15:36:44.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "769",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What does mou もう mean with non-past verb?",
"view_count": 11011
} | [
{
"body": "It can mean many things with present tense\n\n * \"anymore\"\n\n> 「もうしませんから許してください」\n\n * \"soon, almost\"\n\n> 「もう終わりますから、しばらくお待ちください」\n\n * \"again, also, another, the other\"\n\n> 「もう片方の靴下が見つからない」\n\n * or it can simply emphasize the speaker's feelings\n\n> 「これはもう疑う余地のない事実だ」\n\nSource: <http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/218382/m0u/>\n\nYour example is actually a very good one and gets at the some classic Japanese\nindirectness (though every language has this type of thing).\n\nBasically when the speaker says:\n\n> この資料、もう捨てましょうか。\n\nThey mean:\n\n> この資料、もう要らない？\n\nBut are making it more polite by making the verb about themselves instead of\nthe person they are speaking to.\n\nSo the meaning here is actually \"anymore\", though obviously you can't\ntranslate it literally like that.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T14:38:05.553",
"id": "24624",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T14:38:05.553",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10194",
"parent_id": "24623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24623 | null | 24624 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24634",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Not the literal meaning, I know its some sort of tsukkomi, but I can't quite\nfigure out what it means.\n\nThe best idea I've got is something along the lines of \"give me back my\nconcern\" or something like that. I'm probably way off though.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T16:26:47.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24625",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T00:31:49.477",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T16:33:36.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "10209",
"owner_user_id": "10209",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does \" 自分の胸に聞いて頂戴 \" mean? Not Literally",
"view_count": 211
} | [
{
"body": "It most often means:\n\n**\"You (should) know the answer deep down.\"**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T00:31:49.477",
"id": "24634",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T00:31:49.477",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24625",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24625 | 24634 | 24634 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24627",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is a complete sentence from a book.\n\n> おいしいお料理に、とても楽しい雀の踊り。\n>\n> (There was??) delicious food and a fun sparrow dance.\n\nFor context, in the previous sentence an old man is introduced to the bird and\nits friends. In the succeeding sentence we are told that the old man had a\ngreat time.\n\n1) Is the sentence correct or is there a bit missing from the end? I would\nlike to write おいしいお料理に、とても楽しい雀の踊りがいました。\n\n2) If it is correct what is the grammar here? Under what circumstances can I\nomit the verb and why would I do so?\n\n3) What is に doing. It appears to be acting as 'and'. I've never seen this\nbefore?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T16:51:11.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24626",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T16:58:29.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjunctions",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Can a sentence end in a noun?",
"view_count": 2117
} | [
{
"body": "1. The sentence is fine in a storybook sense. It is not a complete sentence, but books don't always use complete sentences--English included. The verb is implied, though it wouldn't be いました like you wrote. ありました or more colorfully perhaps （が）待っていました。\n\n 2. You can omit anything that is understood without it. As Japanese is very verb-centric it's more common to omit nouns than verbs, but sometimes, as in this example, it's fine to omit the verb.\n\n 3. The に here means \"in addition to\" or \"not only\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T16:58:29.820",
"id": "24627",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T16:58:29.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10194",
"parent_id": "24626",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24626 | 24627 | 24627 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24631",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading a Japanese text, and came across this piece of dialogue :\n\"なんで他人とケンカするの\" \"なんでって...売られるからだよ.売れられたケンカは買う.そんだけだ.\" But I really can't seem\nto understand what the second person is trying to say by \"売られる\" ? \"売る\" is\nsupposed to mean \"to sell\", is he trying to say that fighting sells basically\n? I also can't seem to understand what the text is saying by \"は買う\", even\nthough it means \"to buy\" technically. I just really can't understand the use\nof these two verbs here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T21:34:57.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24629",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T22:05:59.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10210",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"verbs",
"expressions"
],
"title": "売る exact usage/meaning",
"view_count": 400
} | [
{
"body": "Learning phrases like 喧嘩を売る 喧嘩を買う is a hard part of any language because they\nare often not even thought to be idioms or set phrases. So you will not find\nthem in a ことわざ book or a 四字熟語 book. In the case of 喧嘩, you might find example\nsentences in the regular dictionary entry for 喧嘩, but for any language, not\nonly Japanese, it is good to also have a collocation reference. Here is one I\nhave read before and found interesting:\n\n[http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4053021308/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_2?pf_rd_p=187205609&pf_rd_s=lpo-\ntop-\nstripe&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=476749110X&pf_rd_m=AN1VRQENFRJN5&pf_rd_r=1K9HDZB77C24P5B2HDST](http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4053021308/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_2?pf_rd_p=187205609&pf_rd_s=lpo-\ntop-\nstripe&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=476749110X&pf_rd_m=AN1VRQENFRJN5&pf_rd_r=1K9HDZB77C24P5B2HDST)\n\nBut really any will do. It's very interesting to see which nouns and verbs go\ntogether and the different meanings you get when you combine them.\n\nIn this specific situation\n\n> 喧嘩を売る\n\nmeans to pick a fight / throw down the gauntlet, and\n\n> 喧嘩を買う\n\nmeans the opposite of \"back down\": to accept a challenge",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-29T21:58:35.507",
"id": "24631",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-29T22:05:59.040",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-29T22:05:59.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "10194",
"owner_user_id": "10194",
"parent_id": "24629",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24629 | 24631 | 24631 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24655",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider the following sentence.\n\n> 打った人は誰ですか。\n\nHow can I translate it in English? I don't know who gets hit or who hits.\n\nDo I need to add something like below to make it clearer?\n\n> 私が打った人は誰ですか。Who is the person I struck?\n>\n> 私を打った人は誰ですか。 Who struck me?",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T04:01:50.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24636",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T16:59:50.677",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-30T04:18:12.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "9896",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How can I translate 打った人は誰ですか?",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "The first sentence depends on context for the exact meaning. It can be either,\nsince the grammatical role of the modified noun isn't explicitly given in\nJapanese. This includes things normally marked with が and を (subjects and\nobjects), like in your example, but also to things marked with other\nparticles, like で or に:\n\n> 鉛筆で書いた -> 書いた鉛筆 \n> 私が店に入った -> 私が入った店\n\nJust like in regular sentences, you can omit things from relativized clauses.\nThis is another reason why relative clauses can be ambiguous (but of course,\nfull sentences can be ambiguous for this same reason). You can often\ndisambiguate by adding extra information, like you did in your last two\nsentences. However, don't feel like you have to make everything clear by\nputting in as much information as you can. Japanese tends to omit things that\ncan be implied, and adding information already understood can actually be\nunnatural.\n\nAnother way to disambiguate is by making the relative verb passive:\n\n> 撃たれた人 = person who was shot\n\nI feel like this is less common for inanimate leading nouns, though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T16:59:50.677",
"id": "24655",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T16:59:50.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "24636",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24636 | 24655 | 24655 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24639",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Taken from an educational book with parallel English literal translation. The\noriginal work is Mishima's \"Patriotism\".\n\n> 麗子は良人の親友であり、たびたびこの家へも遊びに来た元気な青年将校の顔を思い浮べた。\n>\n> Reiko recalled the faces of the cheerful young officers who were such dear\n> friends of her husband and had often paid social visits to the house.\n\nWhat I'm having trouble with is the copula:\n\n麗子は良人の親友 **であり** 、たびたびこの家へも遊びに来た元気な青年将校の顔を思い浮べた。\n\nWith that translation, I'd expect the sentence to look like:\n\n麗子は良人の **親友** 、たびたびこの家へも遊びに来た元気な青年将校の **顔** を思い浮べた。\n\nWhere relationship between 親友 and 顔 is copulative and the sentence becomes\n\n麗子はXを思い浮べた。 Reiko recalled X (the noun phrase that describes the officers).\n\nIn other words, I am very confused about the original sentence's grammar and\nlooking for an explanation how it turns into what it was translated into in\nthe educational text.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T06:31:43.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24638",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-18T10:18:50.593",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"copula"
],
"title": "Listing modifiers with 〜であり",
"view_count": 2987
} | [
{
"body": "Parse it as\n\n> 麗子は[{(良人の親友であり、)(たびたびこの家へも遊びに来た)(元気な)青年将校}の顔]を思い浮べた。\n\n「良人の親友であり*」「たびたびこの家へも遊びに来た」 and 「元気な」 all modify 「青年将校」.\n\n*であり is the continuative form of である. \n\n(良人の親友である)青年将校 \n-> (良人の親友であり、)(たびたびこの家にも遊びに来た)青年将校 \nor, (良人の親友で*、)(たびたびこの家にも遊びに来た)青年将校 \n*であり sounds more literary than で.\n\neg. \n(かわいい)女の子 -> (かわいくて)(優しい)女の子 \n(きれいな)お姉さん -> (きれいで)(優しい)お姉さん \n(医者である)父 -> (医者であり、)(教師でもある)父 or (医者で、)(教師でもある)父",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T06:44:05.930",
"id": "24639",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T07:11:19.717",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-30T07:11:19.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24638",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24638 | 24639 | 24639 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why do we use は rather than に in the following sentence?\n\n> インタネットがとても遅い時は、切腹したいです。\n\nIn my opinion it should be\n\n> インタネットがとても遅い時に切腹したいです。\n\nAny comments are welcome.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T07:33:20.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24640",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T23:42:09.337",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why do we use は rather than に in インタネットがとても遅い時は、切腹したいです?",
"view_count": 176
} | [
{
"body": "Both formulations are valid, and very likely mean the same thing.\n\n\"したいです\" very unambiguously refers to the speaker, as if the subject was\nsomeone else, it would be more appropriate to say \"したいそうです\" or \"したいらしいです\" (or\neven \"したいですと\".)\n\nThe greatest difference of these two sentences is the context where it would\nbe appropriate to use. It would be more appropriate to use the second\nformulation if [it was an answer to a specific\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/24640/why-do-we-\nuse-%E3%81%AF-rather-than-%E3%81%AB-\nin-%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%82%BF%E3%83%8D%E3%83%83%E3%83%88%E3%81%8C%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82%E9%81%85%E3%81%84%E6%99%82%E3%81%AF-%E5%88%87%E8%85%B9%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84%E3%81%A7%E3%81%99#comment53684_24640).\n\n> **A:** どのタイミングで[ACTION]したいですか。\n>\n> **B:** インタネットがとても遅い時に[ACTION]したいです。\n\nor perhaps more naturally:\n\n> **A:** どのタイミングで[ACTION]したいですか。\n>\n> **B:** インタネットがとても遅い時(です)。\n\nUsing the first formulation (インタネットがとても遅い時 **は** ) is less appropriate when\nthe topic already has been established by the questioner. It might sound like\nyou aren't listening.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T23:42:09.337",
"id": "29668",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T23:42:09.337",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "24640",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24640 | null | 29668 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24644",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was wondering with anyone knew the etymology of とにかく or any of its variants.\nThe literal meaning doesn't make sense when you consider its actual meaning,\nso I got curious.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T07:54:46.310",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24642",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T14:11:14.703",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9596",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Etymology of とにかく",
"view_count": 371
} | [
{
"body": "It comes from Classical Japanese idiomatic phrase とにかくに, analyzed into と\n(\"some way\") + に (\"in\") + かく (\"that way; such a way\") + に (\"in\"), and as a\nwhole meant for \"by some means or other\" or \"by any means\".\n\nThe kanji you may often see ([兎に角](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/to/tonikaku.html)) is ateji.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T08:29:38.087",
"id": "24644",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T14:11:14.703",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-30T14:11:14.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24642 | 24644 | 24644 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QBxlR.jpg)\n\nCan you please help me translate the writing on this piece of paper? I've been\nworking on this for the past four hours by looking up the characters one by\none and using translation websites and Google translate, but it's so hard for\nme because I'm not that familiar with the Japanese language. It came from\ninside a wooden box with a pair of chopsticks in it that was given to me by a\nJapanese guy (an acquaintance from work).I don't think it's that important -\nit's probably just a set of instructions or something - but I am really really\nreally curious about what it says.\n\nBased on my research, the first two characters on the topmost sentence mean\n'lacquerware', and sentence number one I think says something about the\nintended purpose of the item? That's about as far as I got with google\ntranslate... the rest of the translations didn't make any sense to me at all.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T09:16:25.177",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24645",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T16:35:19.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10218",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Can somebody please please help me translate this...?",
"view_count": 460
} | [
{
"body": "> 漆器をお使いいただく上でご注意\n>\n> １．製品本来の用途、使用目的に添って正しくお使い下さい。誤ったご使用は製品の破損や身体に危険を及ぼす場合があります。\n>\n> ２．体質により、ごくまれに漆等の塗料でかぶれることがあります。異常を感じたときは、ご使用をお止めいただき専門医にご相談ください。\n>\n> ３．直火、電子レンジ、乾燥機、食器洗浄機、たわし等でのご使用しないで下さい。\n>\n> ４．塗りの表面を、冒すような化学繊維、薬品等はご使用しないで下さい。\n>\n> ５．割れ、ひびが入った場合は、お早めに新しい製品をご使用下さい。\n\nLacquerware usage warnings.\n\n 1. Please use properly according to its the intended use. Incorrect usage may damage the product.\n 2. If you develop any rashes, discoloration, or other symptoms due to contact with the lacquer, please see a doctor immediately.\n 3. Do not use with open fire, microwave, dryer, dishwasher, scrubbing brush, or similar.\n 4. Do not use apply chemical fibers or other chemical products to the surface of the product.\n 5. If cracked, please replace as soon as possible.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T13:17:28.560",
"id": "24649",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T16:35:19.397",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10194",
"parent_id": "24645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24645 | null | 24649 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24647",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Based off my understanding of できる in this context, it is used to describe\nsomething as coming to be. Would saying 紅葉ができる be a natural way of saying that\nthe red leaves of autumn have come to be (i.e. the leaves have turned red)?\n\nThe full sentence of this context is as below.\n\n> 紅葉が出来て、カナダは美しくなっています。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T11:04:49.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24646",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T11:25:59.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "Validity of 紅葉が出来る?",
"view_count": 82
} | [
{
"body": "紅葉ができて doesn't sound natural. I think [紅葉]{こうよう}する is what you're looking for.\nFor example:\n\n> [木々]{きぎ}が[紅葉]{こうよう}して、カナダは今美しいです。\n\nOr you could use 紅葉で (Lit. with / because of the red leaves)\n\n> 紅葉で、今カナダは美しいです。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T11:25:59.240",
"id": "24647",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T11:25:59.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24646",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24646 | 24647 | 24647 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24651",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In Japanese, how would one go about appending an additional request or\nafterthought?\n\nFor example:\n\n> 1: お水【みず】をお願【ねが】いします。\n\n\"Water please.\"\n\n> 2: あっ、（・・・）、氷【こおり】を入【い】れていただけませんか。\n\n\"..Ah **also** , could you add ice (to that)?\" / \"Additionally, could you add\nice (to that)?\"\n\nMore specifically, what would be the most natural way of filling in （・・・）? The\nclosest word I know of would be それから, though I feel this word may be incorrect\nin this situation.\n\n**Also** , is there a more natural way of phrasing the example sentences?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T12:02:27.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24648",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T08:48:18.460",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T08:48:18.460",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "9838",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"expressions",
"questions"
],
"title": "\"Also...\" interjection in Japanese; appending an additional request or afterthought",
"view_count": 5295
} | [
{
"body": "I would not use also in this situation in English or in Japanese. If you\nwanted to add something to your order you could use 追加で or それに, but this\nsituation is different.\n\nIf it's soon and they haven't left the table, you don't have to put anything\nin your ellipses. If they've started to leave, すみません, is fine. If some time\nhas elapsed you might want to make it clear you're talking about your water by\nexplicitly saying 水に.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T14:02:31.617",
"id": "24650",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T14:35:58.357",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-30T14:35:58.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "10194",
"owner_user_id": "10194",
"parent_id": "24648",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Most naturally and commonly, that would be:\n\n> 「あっ、 **あと** 、氷 **も** 入れていただけませんか？」\n\nWe also use 「それと」 as well.\n\nDespite what you stated, 「それから」 is not a bad choice at all. Native speakers\nuse that, too.\n\nYou can say 「あとひとつ」, 「（それと/それから）もうひとつ」, etc. as well.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T14:10:50.977",
"id": "24651",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T14:10:50.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24648",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] | 24648 | 24651 | 24651 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24653",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not confident I parsed this correctly (text from Mishima's Patriotism).\nPlease confirm or deny:\n\n> 中尉は麗子が「お供をする」と言った言葉を、新婚の夜から、自分が麗子を導いて、このばに及んで、それを澱みなく発音させたという大きな教育の成果と感じた。\n\nCan this be summed up as 中尉はA言葉を、B成果と感じた。, as in the lieutenant **felt** the\nwords (described by A) to be the **product** (of his \"education\", described by\nB). (I am not not looking for translation, but rather for whether I understood\nthe underlying syntax correctly).\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T14:26:13.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24652",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T14:58:27.260",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-30T14:58:27.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "10216",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "Does XをYと感じる here mean to feel X to be Y?",
"view_count": 92
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, you are correct on this.\n\n「新婚の夜から、自分が麗子を導いて、このばに及んで、それを澱みなく発音させたという大きな教育の成果」 is one big relative clause\nwhere everything else eventually modifies 「成果」.\n\nThe narrator is saying that the lieutenant feels Reiko's statement to be his\nhuge 「成果」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T14:47:41.823",
"id": "24653",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T14:47:41.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24652",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24652 | 24653 | 24653 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24656",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does the phrase 'sou janai' (romaji) mean in an informal speaking\ncontext?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T16:35:31.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24654",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T22:28:07.043",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-31T22:28:07.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "9212",
"owner_user_id": "9818",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"phrases"
],
"title": "The meaning of the phrase 'sou janai' (romaji)",
"view_count": 4508
} | [
{
"body": "'That's not so', 'no', 'you're wrong', &c. By the way, it's 'Rōmaji' (no N),\nnot 'romanji'.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T17:23:34.600",
"id": "24656",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T17:23:34.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "24654",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24654 | 24656 | 24656 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24658",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was learning Japanese a few years ago and a phrase I picked up (I think from\nthe Pimsleur program) was \"Yee ka ka desu ka\" (or maybe the \"Yee\" was written\nas \"ii\" to pronounce as a short form of \"ee\"), to mean \"how are you?\"\n\nI then said this to some Japanese people I met. Some say it can mean \"how are\nyou\", but some showed a \"what is it?\" facial expression and when I tell them\nwhat I meant to say, told me it can't mean \"how are you\". Can this phrase mean\nit? Or perhaps only in a certain context or between really close friends who\nsaw each other recently?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T22:05:16.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24657",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-12T03:12:02.487",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-12T03:12:02.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"phrase-requests",
"questions",
"greetings"
],
"title": "Can \"yee ka ka desu ka\" mean \"how are you?\"",
"view_count": 10020
} | [
{
"body": "I think you're referring to\n\n> いかがですか \n> ikaga desu ka\n\nwhich is the polite version of\n\n> どうですか \n> dou desu ka \n> How are things?\n\nIt can be used to ask \"How are you?\" in a polite way, but **only with\ncaution** : いかがですか【ikaga desu ka】 is mostly used to mean \"Would you like\nsome?\", so if you're holding something in your hand, one might assume you're\noffering to give something.\n\nThe more complete way of asking \"How are you?\" in a polite way would be\n\n> いかが **お過ごし** ですか \n> ikaga **osugoshi** desu ka \n> How are you doing?\n\nIf it's clear from the context of a conversation, short forms like\n\n> いかがですか、最近 \n> ikaga desu ka, saikin \n> How are things recently?\n\nmay be used, but いかがですか{ikaga desu ka} is **not used to start off a\nconversation**.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-30T22:42:47.530",
"id": "24658",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-30T22:42:47.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "24657",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 16
},
{
"body": "I think you are referring to\n\n> 如何ですか - Ikaga-desuka？\n\nand asking whether it’s appropriate to use as a salute to your acquaintance.\n\n“如何ですか？” means “How are you faring (well)?” , which is nothing wrong on its\nown as a phrase. But as the other answerer already mentioned, we rarely say\n“如何ですか？” as a greeting, nor start conversation with a friend with this phrase,\nbecause it’s too abrupt and rude.\n\nWe would prefer ”お久しぶりです/ 最近お会いしていませんが – Though I haven’t seen you a little\nwhile,” then continue “ご機嫌 (お調子、お体、お仕事の方、ご家族の方) は如何ですか？” – How about your\nlatest condition (mood, health, business, family) ?” when we meet our\nacquaintance after an interval.\n\nOf course there are many other ways of saluting, like\n“やあ、お元気ですか”、”今日は、お久しぶりです”、”暫（しばらく）です、お変わりありませんか？” as you have in English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-03-02T00:46:29.077",
"id": "32608",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-10T15:51:20.800",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-10T15:51:20.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "10219",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "24657",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24657 | 24658 | 24658 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24671",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am working through some terms to an insurance policy at the moment and I\ncame across something that doesn't quite make sense to me. Under the terms for\n個人賠償責任保険金 (Insurance Payment for Damages/Liability), there is a clause that\ncontinues: 保険期間中の次の偶然な事故により、他人の生命または身体を害したり、他人の物を壊したりして、法律上の損害賠償責任を負われた場合\nwhich I understand more or less, my rough interpretation being \"Insurance\nshall be paid in cases in which the buyer is held legally responsible for\ndamages caused by any of the unforeseen accidents during the coverage period\nset forth below causing bodily harm or death to another person or damaging the\nproperty of another person.\"\n\nWhat I don't quite follow is the next part, which says:\n（1）本人の居住の用に供される住宅の所有、使用または管理に起因する偶然な事故\n\nLooking at this sentence out of context I would imagine something like\n\"Unforeseen accidents stemming from the possession, use, or management of a\nresidence provided for the habitation of the insured\", but this just does not\nmake sense to me in context. The insurance is for people who have purchased a\nbicycle and covers them for liability in relation to accidents caused while on\nor riding the bicycle.\n\nIf someone could give me an interpretation that makes better sense, I would be\nreally grateful.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T02:10:19.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24659",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T10:50:30.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10015",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Can someone help me understand this? (From the terms to an insurance policy)",
"view_count": 119
} | [
{
"body": "> 「本人の居住の用に供される住宅の所有、使用または管理に起因する偶然な事故」\n\nWhile this is only a noun phrase (relative clause), not a \"sentence\" as you\ncall it, your translation of it is spot-on.\n\nWhat has this got to do with a bicycle insurance?\n\nMany bicycle insurance plans in Japan, including even the more inexpensive\nones, just come with coverage for these types of non-bicycle-related\naccidents. So, you should only be happy.\n\nMine covers the same thing as yours (in-house accidents) in addition to\naccidents like breaking things while shopping in stores and sport injuries.\nAnd I sure do not need to go to those places by bicycle to get covered.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T10:50:30.987",
"id": "24671",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T10:50:30.987",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24659",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24659 | 24671 | 24671 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24667",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My understanding is that \" **百姓** \" is a very impolite way to refer to modern-\nday traditional Japanese farmers. A good translation might be \" _country\nbumpkin_ \".\n\nAs best I can remember: \nI learned that word while relaxing with friends at an 居酒屋{いざかや} in Tokyo.\nSubsequent to that, I tried using it in daily conversations with not very\nclose friends. Each time, I was cautioned about saying \" **百姓** \". Those who\nrefer to farmers as \" **百姓** \" imply that they, themselves, are cultured and\nrefined, while the \" **百姓** \" lead uneducated, unrefined, bumpkin-ish\nlifestyles.\n\n 1. Is my recollection of meaning and usage correct?\n 2. In what type of settings would a non-native Japanese speaker be able to say \" **百姓** \" and not be judged as an elitist jerk? In fact, I'd hope to be judged as being someone who knows clever slang.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T02:24:04.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24660",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-30T12:37:34.670",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9509",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "In what type of social settings could one say \"百姓{ひゃくしょう}\"?",
"view_count": 497
} | [
{
"body": "> 1.Is my recollection of meaning and usage correct?\n\nYes, it is correct and that is because 「[百姓]{ひゃくしょう}」 is closer to \"peasant\"\nthan to \"farmer\" in feeling.\n\n> 2.In what type of settings would a non-native Japanese speaker be able to\n> say \" 百姓 \" and not be judged as an elitist jerk? In fact, I'd hope to be\n> judged as being someone who knows clever slang.\n\nWhether you are a Japanese-learner or native speaker, there are basically no\nsituations where you can call a farmer a 百姓 without offending someone. The\nonly exception would be when a farmer calls himself a 百姓, which happens quite\noften.\n\nWe have the term 「お百姓さん」, which sounds more \"correct\" than the plain 「百姓」 but\nit still would not be used much in public by the more careful speakers -- in\nparticular, by the media. In private conversations, though, 「お百姓さん」 is still\nheard fairly often.\n\nThe safest word choices would be 「農家{のうか}」 or 「農家の人」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T06:09:36.717",
"id": "24667",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-29T11:52:42.970",
"last_edit_date": "2019-12-29T11:52:42.970",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24660",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "Something I'd like to add: 百姓is more a historical term, like \"peasant\" or\n\"serf\". I think it would only be appropriate to use the term when talking\nabout people in the past. Japanese history textbooks, for example, use the\nword frequently, much the same way you'd see an English textbook use the word\n\"peasant\" or \"serf\", because in that context, it's not an insult, but simply a\ndescription of their state.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-12-30T12:37:34.670",
"id": "73661",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-30T12:37:34.670",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36434",
"parent_id": "24660",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24660 | 24667 | 24667 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24666",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have come across the word in a manga. It is said by a boy who was talking\nabout the future plan of selling prizes awarded from playing Pachinko.\n\nHere is the sentence including the word:\n\n> いつまでも たたき売{う}りなんぞ **してやせんっ** 。\n\nI'm not sure if the word is related to the word 痩{や}せる.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T03:22:39.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24661",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-04T00:57:17.927",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-03T17:36:43.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"particle-は",
"renyōkei"
],
"title": "What does the word 「してやせんっ」 mean?",
"view_count": 725
} | [
{
"body": "ま is sometimes replaced with や:\n\n> * もうしわけありやせん （もうしわけありません）\n> * ありがとうございやす （ありがとうございます）\n> * 元気でありやす （元気であります）\n>\n\nIf that's the case with your example, that part simply means してません.\n\nI'm not sure if this is a real dialect spoken somewhere, or it's a kind of\nslurred speech not particularly associated with a certain dialect.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T05:16:18.523",
"id": "24664",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T05:16:18.523",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24661",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "It has nothing to do with 「[痩]{や}せる」(= to become slimmer); That is for sure.\n\n「してやせん」＝「して + や + せん」\n\n「して」, needless to say, is the て-form of 「する」.\n\n「や」 is a colloquial (or regional) pronunciation of 「は」.\n\nSee here: [大辞林\n「や（係助）口頭語で、係助詞『は』がなまったもの。『誰も[来]{き}やしない（こやしない）』『霧で何も見えやしない』」](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%82%84-647430#E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.9E.97.20.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.89.E7.89.88)\n(Toward the bottom of the page)\n\n「せん」 means 「しない」.\n\n「～～して **や** せん」＝「～～して **は** いない」 = \"would/will not be doing ~~\", \"am not doing\n~~\", etc.\n\nOther examples with the same structure:\n\n> 「[誰]{だれ}も[食]{た}べ **や** せん！」＝「誰も食べ **は** しない！」 = \"No one will eat it!\"\n>\n> 「[車]{くるま}なんか[買]{か}え **や** せん！」＝「車なんか買え **は** しない」 = \"There is no way I could\n> afford a car!\"",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T05:40:55.957",
"id": "24666",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-04T00:57:17.927",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24661",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24661 | 24666 | 24666 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24665",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "`開いた口がふさがらない` means: `Feel shocked`, or `Unbelievable`, right?\n\n**My question is:**\n\nWhat does `ふさがらない` mean, what is that verb without `ない`?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T05:12:05.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24663",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T05:19:55.360",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-31T05:19:55.360",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "About: 開いた口がふさがらない",
"view_count": 61
} | [
{
"body": "[塞【ふさ】がる](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/192230/m0u/) is an intransitive\nverb which means _to shut_ , _to close_ , etc.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T05:19:55.157",
"id": "24665",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T05:19:55.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24663",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24663 | 24665 | 24665 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24674",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Most people use いろいろ質問する. But if I analyze it, いろいろ is な形容詞.\n\nSo I think it should be いろいろな質問する. What do you think?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T11:16:54.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24672",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T12:10:00.793",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "いろいろ質問する versus いろいろな質問する",
"view_count": 425
} | [
{
"body": "* いろいろ can be used as a standalone adverb. (e.g. 色々話す, 色々ある, ...)\n * 質問する without を is a _verb_ , and it cannot be directly modified by the dictionary form of an adjective. (See [this similar question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/4007/5010) on 勉強する/勉強をする)\n\nThus, these three phrases are all natural:\n\n * いろいろな質問をする\n * いろいろ質問をする\n * いろいろ質問する\n\nBut this phrase is non-standard:\n\n * いろいろな質問する",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T11:57:15.843",
"id": "24674",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T12:10:00.793",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24672",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "いろいろ can also be considered an adverb.\n\nIf you are describing the **types** of questions, いろいろな質問 would be correct.\nBut in the case of いろいろ質問する, you are talking about the **action** of asking\ndifferent things, and thus doesn't require な.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T12:04:37.650",
"id": "24677",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T12:04:37.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10226",
"parent_id": "24672",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24672 | 24674 | 24674 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24681",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "It seems common in advertising, but is it used in speech?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T11:29:12.450",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24673",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T17:58:55.700",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Is the phrase 僕も私も used in ordinary speech?",
"view_count": 109
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think it's commonly used in everyday conversations. To say 'we all',\nwe usually use 我々みんな, 僕たち全員, etc., depending on the formality.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T16:29:43.073",
"id": "24681",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T16:29:43.073",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24673",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "If you ask if it is commonly used in ordinary speech, the answer is no, but I\ndon't think it sounds particularly weird to use that phrase in ordinary\nspeech. I just can't think of a situation where I would say \"I\" twice like\nthat in an ordinary context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T17:58:55.700",
"id": "24685",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T17:58:55.700",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6891",
"parent_id": "24673",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24673 | 24681 | 24681 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24680",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading an interview with a manga artist and having trouble making sense\nout of this part:\n\n>\n> 漫画家が集まって酒飲んだりすると、アシスタントの愚痴ばっかりですよ。ぶつぶつぶつぶつ。おなじ部屋でアシスタントをおだてて、なだめすかして、いま俺、言い過ぎたかなあなんて思いながら二時間ぐらい過ぎたりしてます。いまのは俺が悪い、いや、あいつのほうが悪いだろう、とか。\n\nI get the first part just fine, but after the ぶつぶつ part I can't quite work out\nwhat he's saying. A little help, anyone?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T11:59:37.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24675",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T08:23:50.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6637",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"parsing"
],
"title": "Can't quite parse these sentences",
"view_count": 172
} | [
{
"body": ">\n> おなじ部屋でアシスタントをおだてて、なだめすかして、『いま俺、（アシスタントに対して）言い過ぎたかなあ』なんて思いながら二時間ぐらい過ぎたりしてます。『いまのは俺が悪い』、『いや、あいつ（←アシスタント）のほうが悪いだろう』、とか（思いながら）。\n\nこんなのでいいでしょうか・・・",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T14:45:22.660",
"id": "24680",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T08:23:50.047",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-01T08:23:50.047",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24675",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24675 | 24680 | 24680 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24679",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "At the end of an anime the next episode is advertised with a recurring joke\nwhere the character メロ says:\n\n> みんな見るメロ\n\nIt's supposed to translate as 'Everybody watch Mero.'. But surely it actually\ntranslates to the incomplete sentence 'Mero who everybody watches...'.\nWouldn't 'Everyone watch Mero' actually be\n\n> みんなメロを見て下さい\n\nor something similar, which, admittedly, is less cute. So my question is, does\nthe original sentence actually translate to 'everyone watch Mero' and if so,\nwhy? Or is it funny because it's a word for word translation of how an English\nperson who didn't know Japanese would say it. Or is there a big hole in my\nunderstanding of Japanese grammar?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T12:42:20.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24678",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-03T03:46:52.243",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-31T18:34:54.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "9212",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"anime"
],
"title": "On the grammar of みんな見るメロ",
"view_count": 527
} | [
{
"body": "Adding a peculiar \"sound\" at the end of almost every sentence is an\nidiosyncrasy of [many\ncharacters](http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/5271942/) in Japanese\nanime/manga/games.\n\nMost of these sounds are simply omitted after being translated into English,\nbut there are a few exceptions. For example even in the English version of\n_Final Fantasy_ , [moogles speak like \"How are you,\nkupo!\"](http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Kupo_\\(term\\)), and this kupo means\nnothing.\n\nThis typically happens for childish, mascot-like characters. In your example,\n[みんな見るメロ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8EqMk2kg3M) is repeatedly said by a\ngirl who jokingly plays an imaginary infantile character who likes to always\nadd メロ at the end. Semantically, it just means みんな見てね.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T13:16:06.583",
"id": "24679",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-03T03:46:52.243",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-03T03:46:52.243",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24678",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 24678 | 24679 | 24679 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24687",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The man is about to commit harakiri:\n\n刀を前へ廻し、腰を持ち上げ、上半身が刃先へのしかかるようにして、体に全力をこめているのが、軍服の **怒った肩** からわかった。\n\nWhat is understood here by \"pointy shoulders\" (if I'm understanding 怒った肩\ncorrectly)? How can pointy shoulders (which I assume to be part of his\nuniform) show that he was gathering his strength?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T16:44:24.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24682",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T18:13:16.863",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-31T16:51:03.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "10216",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"comprehension"
],
"title": "Trouble understanding the meaning of 怒った肩 here",
"view_count": 80
} | [
{
"body": "肩を[怒]{いか}らせる = [square one's\nshoulders](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E8%82%A9%E3%82%92%E6%80%92%E3%82%89%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8B)\n\nHe squared his shoulders under the uniform. You could see that he was\ngathering his strength from the shape of his squared, raised shoulders.\n\n> [軍服]{ぐんぷく}の[怒]{いか}った[肩]{かた}\n\n≒ 軍服の[下]{した}の怒った肩 or 軍服を着た、怒った肩 \n= his squared shoulders under the uniform",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T18:13:16.863",
"id": "24687",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T18:13:16.863",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24682",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24682 | 24687 | 24687 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The font I am looking for [here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tFmfn.png) from\nthis [site](http://www.thejapaneseconnection.com/free-kanji-symbols-\ncustomer/asian-japanese-kanji-symbol-aroma.htm) doesn't seem to name out the\nfont. If someone could answer, I would greatly appreciate it.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T17:17:11.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24683",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T17:39:28.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10229",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Can someone help me identify this font?",
"view_count": 264
} | [
{
"body": "It's\n[DF華康【かこう】楷書【かいしょ】体【たい】W5](http://www.fontfactory.jp/font/detail/df_kakoukaisho_w5/),\ndesigned by\n[ダイナコムウェア](http://www.dynacw.co.jp/dynafont/tabid/93/Default.aspx).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T17:39:28.153",
"id": "24684",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T17:39:28.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24683",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24683 | null | 24684 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24689",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am pretty confident in saying that **屋上** is a tangible location. Like: \n\"アパートの **屋上** に庭があります。\" \n\"夏では、デパートの **屋上** にビアガーデンがあります。\"\n\nI've always thought of **屋根** as \"ceiling\" (but I've never really used it in\npractice). maybe: \n\"暑い時に、 **屋根** に付けられた扇風器を点けます。\"\n\nSo, what are the differences between **屋上** and **屋根** ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T18:04:03.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24686",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T18:51:28.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Please clarify how to choose 屋根{やね} vs. 屋上{おくじょう}",
"view_count": 1097
} | [
{
"body": "屋上 = rooftop floor\n\n\n\n屋根 = roof\n\n\n\nceiling = [天井]{てんじょう}\n\n\n\n> アパートの 屋上 に庭があります。\n\nYes, you use 屋上 here. 「アパートの屋上に(は)庭があります。」\n\n> 夏では、デパートの 屋上 にビアガーデンがあります。\n\nYou say 「夏には、デパートの屋上でビアガーデンが開催されます。」 \n「夏には、デパートの屋上にビアガーデンがオープンします。」etc.\n\n> 暑い時に、屋根 に付けられた扇風器を点けます。\n\n「暑い時(に)は、天井に(取り)付けられた扇風機をつけます。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T18:33:01.683",
"id": "24689",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T18:51:28.143",
"last_edit_date": "2015-05-31T18:51:28.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24686",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 24686 | 24689 | 24689 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24691",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "2021 Update: RIP :'(\n\n* * *\n\nIn [this\nvideo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hnkxy2OOrc4&feature=youtu.be&t=154),\nIdina Menzel says \"My friend, Sayaka.\" (referring to [Sayaka\nKanda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayaka_Kanda), Japanese voice of Anna\nfrom Frozen)\n\nShe gives emphasis to the YA which seems to be similar to [this review of the\nanime School Days](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN1tEZCW5dU) wherein the\nreviewer says \"MaKOto\" and \"KaTSUra\".\n\nSo, what is the correct pronunciation of \"Sayaka\" ? Google Translate gives [2\ndifferent\npronunciations](https://translate.google.com/#auto/en/%E6%B2%99%E4%B9%9F%E5%8A%A0).\nThe Japanese one is the one I'm thinking and the American one is the one Idina\nsaid.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T18:52:17.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24690",
"last_activity_date": "2023-01-22T14:17:07.463",
"last_edit_date": "2023-01-22T14:17:07.463",
"last_editor_user_id": "10230",
"owner_user_id": "10230",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"names",
"pitch-accent",
"fiction"
],
"title": "Frozen: Idina Menzel pronounces \"Sayaka\" ( 沙也加 )?",
"view_count": 1037
} | [
{
"body": "The pitch for Sayaka is さやか【HLL】 (or in your notation SAyaka).\n\nAlso Makoto has pitch まこと【LHH】 and Katsura has pitch かつら【HLL】.\n\nStressing the penultimate syllable is a frequent pronunciation mistake that\nespecially native speakers of English seem to be prone to (but of course not\nonly native _English_ speakers).\n\nStressing the penultimate syllable is one of the main ingredients for speakers\nof Japanese to emulate an American accent. (Other ingredients would be wrongly\nlengthened vowels and an American R, as in [SOO]{寿}-[shi]{司} and\n[ten]{天}-[POO]{ぷ}-[rah]{ら}.)",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T19:41:33.780",
"id": "24691",
"last_activity_date": "2015-07-07T05:28:09.810",
"last_edit_date": "2015-07-07T05:28:09.810",
"last_editor_user_id": "10450",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "24690",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] | 24690 | 24691 | 24691 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24693",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As the title hints, I'm wondering what the usage differences are between\nthese. I've suggested to myself that it may just be a difference with nouns\nand adverbs, or maybe that 宜 is just a Japanese reading of the similar meaning\nthat can be interchanged with saying you are 'well' or 'good'.\n\nI'd like for someone to clear this up just so I know for other examples in the\nfuture, and what sort of context they'd be used in if they are meant for\ndifferent occasions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T21:17:24.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24692",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T21:31:57.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10231",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"syntax"
],
"title": "The difference between using 元気 and 宜しい/宜しく",
"view_count": 174
} | [
{
"body": "They are quite different words.\n\n元気 is used to describe people (or animals etc) and their moods. It often means\nsomething like 'healthy and happy', 'doing well', etc; and when it's used to\ndescribe a personality it means something like 'positive and energetic'.\n\n宜しい is basically the formal form of いい, meaning 'good (in general)',\n'positive', 'satisfactory', 'permissible', etc. It's used to describe mostly\nsituations and actions. (I don't think you can really use 宜しい to mean 'high\nquality' or 'nice' like you can いい, but I could be wrong.)\n\nBe careful not to let your understanding of English words get in the way of\nyour understanding of Japanese words. English 'good' can mean many things,\nincluding 'doing well', 'positive', 'satisfactory', 'high quality', even 'not\nin need of what you're offering'; and there's no single Japanese word that\ncorresponds to all of these senses.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T21:31:57.907",
"id": "24693",
"last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T21:31:57.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "24692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24692 | 24693 | 24693 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24697",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm pretty sure that, in daily conversation, \"frogs\" are called かえる, right?\nCan someone please confirm this?\n\nI know that \"frogs\" are also called かわず in this 諺{ことわざ}\n\n> 井の中の蛙{かわず}\n\nBut, by definition, 諺s are archaic. So, in summary, in daily conversation, a\nfrog is exclusively called かえる, right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-05-31T23:19:54.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24694",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T12:02:15.713",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-01T12:02:15.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"animals"
],
"title": "In daily conversation, frogs are called かえる not かわず, right?",
"view_count": 212
} | [
{
"body": "In my experience, while 蛙｛かえる｝ is very common, and often written using kana\nalone, I have never heard 蛙{かわず} in an everyday conversation. I have not found\nmany sources but [this\nanswer](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q116130551)\ntaken [from here](http://www.nikkoku.net/ezine/kotoba/ktb023.html) seems to\nsum it up quite well :\n\n> 「かえる」は日常語として「かわず」は歌語として、言い分けられてきた。\n\nMeaning that indeed, 蛙{かわず} is only used for stylistic purposes nowadays.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T00:37:32.180",
"id": "24696",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T00:37:32.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3614",
"parent_id": "24694",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Yes, the everyday word in modern Japanese is カエル. The other word is now\nbasically an archaic synonym appearing in traditional poetry, the proverb you\nmention, and so forth.\n\nThey weren't always treated as synonyms, though; if you'd like to learn more\nabout the history of the two words and the difference in meaning they\noriginally had, you might find [this blog entry by Matt Treyvaud](http://no-\nsword.jp/blog/2007/10/types_of_frogs.html) interesting.\n\nI'm not sure it makes sense to say 諺 are archaic by definition. I think it\nmakes more sense to say that many contain archaic language.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T00:38:03.837",
"id": "24697",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T00:38:03.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24694",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24694 | 24697 | 24697 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24698",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "On jisho.org, the definition of 今に is given as \"before long; even now\" and 今にも\nis given as \"at any time; soon\" so the both seem to refer to the near future\nwith 今にも perhaps being more immediate. However, example sentences I've seen\nseem to give no indication that 今に is referring to a near future. E.g., also\nfrom jisho.org:\n\n> 今に後悔するぞ。 You will yet regret it.\n>\n> 今にわかる。 You'll see.\n>\n> 今にバチがあたるぞ。 You'll get it someday.\n\nDoes 今に indicate a near future? If not, why is 今 used in this way?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T00:19:45.667",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24695",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T00:52:22.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "When does 今に refer to?",
"view_count": 463
} | [
{
"body": "「[今]{いま}に」 surely means \" ** _in the near future_** \" said in the speaker's\n**inference** or **volition**. A synonym would be 「そのうち」.\n\nIn all of your three example sentences, 「今に」 is used that way. If it did not\nfeel like it, it would be because of the liberty taken in the translations.\n\nNot that I did not know it before, jisho is not such a good dictionary if it\njust says 「今に」 means \"before long; even now\" because \"even now\" is the\nliterary usage of 「今に」. It is rarely used for that meaning in one's everyday\nkind of conversation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T00:52:22.973",
"id": "24698",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T00:52:22.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24695",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24695 | 24698 | 24698 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I assumed not, but I saw\n\n> 言い知れぬ甘美なもの\n\nTranslated as **\"something inexpressibly sweet\"** , as if 言い知れぬ modified 甘美な.\nIs it just a quirk of translation and both the adjective 言い知れぬ and 形容動詞 modify\nもの (that is, lit: something inexpressible and sweet), or does 言い知れぬ modify\n形容動詞 here somehow?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T11:31:39.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24702",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-15T06:51:09.330",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-01T12:22:55.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "10216",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"adjectives"
],
"title": "Can an adjective modify a na-adjective?",
"view_count": 351
} | [
{
"body": "言い知れぬ is an expression that is used like an adjective, but is actually a\n**negative verb**. Basically, it's an archaic way of saying 言い知れない. In this\ncase, don't think of 言い知れぬ as modifying the na-adjective. Think of it as\nmodifying the noun which has already been modified by the na-adjective. The\n\"sweetness\" isn't what's indescribable; the \"sweet thing\" is.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T16:48:14.063",
"id": "28008",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T16:48:14.063",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11116",
"parent_id": "24702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24702 | null | 28008 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have recently become aware of the difference between the English and\nJapanese \"sh\" sounds, which I understand are formalized as the palato-alveolar\nfricative [ʃ] and the voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative [ɕ]. I am trying to\ncorrect my pronunciation from [ʃ] to [ɕ], but I can't seem to nail the right\nsound. I discussed it with some Japanese friends and they suggested that I\npronounce it without opening my mouth as much (口の空間を狭くして) so that's what I\nhave been attempting, but it seems like that has somehow resulted in し often\nbeing misheard as ひ (資料as肥料、代償as代表) and the like. I did some research online\nand it seemed to reinforce what I was doing; I read somewhere that the\nJapanese し is pronounced with a \"flatter tongue,\" that is, the flat part of\nthe tongue behind the tip contacts the alveolar ridge. But the flatter I make\nmy tongue, the less sharp the \"sh\" sound becomes, and altogether it sounds\neven more ひ-like.\n\nAny thoughts, tips, or materials out there that could help me out? If I move\nmy tongue very close to the front of my mouth as I pronounce it I can produce\na much sharper \"sh\" sound, but is this correct? I feel like I\"m using the tip\nof my tongue more than the blade in this case but maybe I'm wrong? Any advice\nyou could provide me with would be incredibly helpful!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T12:19:22.197",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24704",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T15:14:30.147",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-15T04:29:16.470",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10235",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"phonetics"
],
"title": "Native pronunciation of the character \"し”",
"view_count": 1016
} | [
{
"body": "Shape of the tongue aside, what's important is that you're placing the tip of\nyour tongue against your lower teeth. Try placing the tip of your tongue right\nwhere your lower teeth go into your gums. Thinking about the shape of the\ntongue in the mouth makes little difference; it's more about where the tip is\nin your mouth (as with all consonants).\n\n\n\nHere's a picture. Don't focus on what the tongue looks like in the mouth (it's\njust a blob, as tongues are, and won't help). Look at where it meets the\nteeth. Try make a fricative there yourself, and compare yourself with native\npronunciation until you think the two match.\n\nIf you don't get it within minutes of practicing, that's generally not a huge\nissue, as hearing the lanuage more will make the sounds easier to mimic, but I\nthink consonants are easy enough to figure out just by thinking about it\n(vowels are usually how people sound the most \"foreign\" in a language, because\nthere's a lot more variation).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T14:00:52.067",
"id": "24705",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T14:00:52.067",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24704",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "This method may or may not work, and will probably work better if one be a\nnative speaker of some form of British English, but try saying “syi” as in the\nonset of “suit”, when it be pronounced as “syoot” instead.\n\nThe British English realization of “sy”, as distinct from “sh” is actually\nfairly close, and also shares the same underlying phonemic sequence with the\nJapanese sound. Remember that “sh” is not considered a single sound in\nJapanese, it is rather analysed as a sequence of two sounds that simply\nassimilate into each other in pronunciation.\n\nSpeakers of dialects of English that lack “sy” and pronounce “suit” identical\nto “soot” might find it difficult to pronounce “sy”, however — one's mileage\nmay vary.\n\n_P.S._ : I did a spectogram of British English: “soot”, “suit” and “shoot” as\nwell as a Japanese “しゅ”:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FpEHN.jpg)\n\nThe part with the dark bands at the bottom is where the vowel starts, before\nthat is the sibilant-like sound in each language where the dark band is at the\ntop. As you can see; in English “s” the dark band is at the top, and in\nEnglish “sh”, it is in the middle, whereas in the Japanese sound, it is in\nbetween both, as well as in the English “sy” in “suit”.\n\nOne thing of interest is that English “s” and “sh” are constant, whereas in\nEnglish “sy”, the dark band moves noticeably. In the Japanese sound the band\nalso moves, but to a lesser degree, indicative of that in both languages these\nare actually two sounds, not one, that to some extent transition into each\nother.\n\nIn English “syoo” however, the vowel seems to have elements of a diphthong, as\none can see a dark band flowing down, and transitions from something more “i”\nlike to something more “u” like. This is præsent in the Japanese to a far\nlesser extend and can probably be omitted, but the Japanese vowel in “しゅ” does\nstill seem to slow some slight progression from a i-like vowel to a u-like\nvowel. Whereas in English “soot” and “shoot”, the u-like vowel after it is\nnigh completely constant.\n\nI also cut out the sounds used for comparison by ear, in the same order:\n\n<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aILXJ-oWIYFB6wvb5agIrGKmuX_jniwe/view>\n\nI also now did a spectogram of one speaker's rendition of the “し” in “知らない”,\nto satisfy my own curiosity more than anything:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AWBEJ.jpg)\n\nThis also seems to indicate a mild transition during the fricative, indicating\nthat the tongue position isn't constant, but to a far lesser extend than in\n“しゅ” and certainly the English sample of “suit”. There are also more dark\nbands in the middle at the end than at the start here.\n\nSo lessons to be learned from this:\n\n * the Japanese “し” and “しゅ” sound seems to be somewhat in between the English “s” and “sh” sounds, probably closest to “sy”, but a bit more in the “sh” direction than “sy” normally is in English.\n\n * The English “syoo” sound shows a far more prominent set of transitions than the Japanese “しゅ” sound, which shows more than the Japanese “し” sound, but both still show transition whereas English “soo” and “shoo” are constant.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T23:14:08.600",
"id": "79907",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T15:14:30.147",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-01T15:14:30.147",
"last_editor_user_id": "35937",
"owner_user_id": "35937",
"parent_id": "24704",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24704 | null | 24705 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24717",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> (中尉は）両手で刃｛やいば｝を腹｛はら｝の奥深く押さえつけながら、引き廻して行かねばならぬのを知った。\n\nMy trouble lies with\n\n> 刃を腹の奥深く押さえつける\n\nIf I consider 奥深く to act as adverbial form of 奥深い, then I don't know what is\nmodified by 腹の: taking の 助詞 to work in attributive role modifies nouns, and\nthere is no noun here; taking の to work as an agent case marker doesn't make\nsense to me, as there is nothing for 腹 to act upon.\n\nTaking 奥 as a noun doesn't make sense either because it's missing a case\nmarker, something like\n\n> 刃を腹の奥 **に** 深く押さえつける （with に in allative role)\n\n**In other words, how does の work here?**\n\nA bit more if necessary for context:\n\n中尉は右手でそのまま引き廻そうとしたが、刃先は腹｛はらわた｝にからまり、ともすると刀は柔らかい弾力で押し出されて来て、両手で刃を腹の奥深く押さえつけながら、引き廻して行かねばならぬのを知った。",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T14:19:33.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24706",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T08:02:31.953",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-01T14:52:43.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "10216",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"particle-の",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Problem parsing this sentence, particle (postposition) の",
"view_count": 189
} | [
{
"body": "That 奥深く is not an adverb おくぶかく but two nouns of おく and ふかく.\n\nThe の functions as the possessive marker for the 腹, in other words 腹の奥 stands\nfor deep inside the abdomen. The 深く here is a noun (like 遠く・近く・多く）that means a\ndeep part and the relation between 腹の奥 is 'equivalent'（同格）.\n\nIn this example, those nouns are used like an adverb by their own, but if you\nadd に, it should be 腹の奥深くに.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T08:02:31.953",
"id": "24717",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T08:02:31.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "24706",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24706 | 24717 | 24717 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24711",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does this grammatical structure/pattern mean?\n\nI am trying to understand the meaning of the following sentence where the\nVerbてのNoun pattern appears.\n\n> \"昭和64年に起きた誘拐事件を巡る物語だけに、“昭和な顔”を買われての起用だったという\"\n\nHow do you translate the aforementioned sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T17:51:15.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24709",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-12T09:11:04.253",
"last_edit_date": "2019-01-12T09:11:04.253",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3273",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"translation",
"syntax",
"て-form"
],
"title": "Grammatical Pattern : VerbてのNoun",
"view_count": 1161
} | [
{
"body": "> 「Verb in [連用形]{れんようけい} + て + の + Noun」\n\nis a phrase pattern in which the \"Verb + て + の\" part describes the condition\nthat generates what is expressed by the following noun.\n\n「“[昭和]{しょうわ}な[顔]{かお}”を[買]{か}われての[起用]{きよう}」 means:\n\n**\"casting based upon his reputation as having the 'Showa-esque face'\"**\n\n「買われる」 here means \"to be regarded highly\".\n\n(I am not translating the whole sentence because you did not show us your\nattempt.)\n\nI am sure some of you have come across the phrase 「[見]{み}てのお[楽]{たの}しみ」, which\nis in the same structure. \"You must see it to enjoy it!\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T23:04:23.097",
"id": "24711",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-01T23:53:45.047",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-01T23:53:45.047",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24709",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] | 24709 | 24711 | 24711 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The difference between （連用形）なさい and （美化語）なさい is rather clear; the first would\nonly be used for social inferiors, and the second can be used for social\nsuperiors (it's also part of set expressions ごめんなさい・お休みなさい・お帰りなさい).\n\nWhat I'd like to know is the implications of the second, and how it compares\nto （美化語）下さい. Is it more forceful? Also, in what situations would you use the\nfull ～ませ forms?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T20:10:52.717",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24710",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-16T10:08:21.040",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-26T17:51:38.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "19278",
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"keigo",
"renyōkei",
"imperatives",
"bikago"
],
"title": "（美化語）なさい - sound",
"view_count": 277
} | [
{
"body": "お（連用形）なさい sounds more forceful and old-fashioned than お（連用形）ください and you can't\nuse お（連用形）なさい in general to social superiors while you can do the latter. As\nfor ～ませ, an employee in a shop is likely to use it to the customer.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T07:34:07.167",
"id": "24716",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T07:34:07.167",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "24710",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24710 | null | 24716 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24715",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have not learnt much yet but I am interested in knowing it quickly. My\nquestions are:\n\n * Do 見える (to see, to be seen, to be visible, to appear) and 見せる (to show, to display) come from 見る (to look, to see, to watch, to take a look)?\n * If yes, what kind of conjugation are used?\n\nThe term \"conjugation\" I mean here is like another conjugation, for example,\n\n * 食べる - 食べない\n * 書く - 書かない\n * etc",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-01T23:26:58.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24712",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-20T23:04:14.433",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Do 見える - 見せる come from 見る?",
"view_count": 692
} | [
{
"body": "見える is euphonic change (or slurring) from 見ゆる, which is a form of 見ゆ, which is\na form of 見る（→み） combined with auxiliary verb ゆ.\n\n見せる was a form of 見す, which is combination of aforementioned み and auxiliary\nverb す.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T07:15:24.227",
"id": "24715",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T07:15:24.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "24712",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24712 | 24715 | 24715 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Does 顔をする mean to make a face or to have a particular type of face? When I\nlooked at the Japanese dictionary definition for する, it was quite confusing\nsince one had ある状態・性質であることを示す compared to\n人や物がある形・色・性質である。また，人がある服装・顔の形・表情である。This gets particularly frustrating when I\nsee a sentence such as 顔していない because I cannot tell if it's progressive or\nresultave if I don't know whether it means to make an expression or to have an\nexpression. For example, I was watching Saekano episode 6, and at the last\nminute, there is a scene where the main girl sees a sketch of her and she\nreacts.\n\n恵：私、全然こんな顔していないよ\n\nThe official translation is \"I don't make a face like that at all,\" but I am\nnot too sure how reliable the translation is. For starters, I don't know\nwhether it is progressive or resultave. If it is resultave and 顔をする means to\nmake a face, then the actual translation would be \"I didn't make that face at\nall.\" However, if it is progressive, then there are even more possibilities.\nIf 顔をする means \"to make an expression\" then it could mean that she doesn't make\nthat face habitually, but if 顔をする means \"to have an expression\" then she could\nbe speaking strictly about the present and not anything habitual (i.e. that's\nnot the face she's making right then and there).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T01:53:36.417",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24713",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-23T08:49:14.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Meaning of 顔をする?",
"view_count": 3102
} | [
{
"body": "顔をする it is close to \"make a face\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T07:11:06.043",
"id": "24744",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T07:11:06.043",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10244",
"parent_id": "24713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Probably the official translation is wrong. 顔をする has two meanings.\n\n人や物がある形・色・性質である。\n\n> 私、全然こんな顔していないよ\n>\n> I don't look like this (picture) at all.\n>\n> 米国北部・ユーラシア西部の大型の皿型の顔をしたフクロウ\n>\n> large dish-faced owl of northern North America and western Eurasia.\n>\n> 酒を好み頭が長く、白髪で赤い顔をした長寿の神とされる。\n>\n> He was a long lived deity with white hair and a long red face who liked\n> sake.\n>\n> かわいい顔をしている\n>\n> S/he is cute.\n\n人がある服装・顔の形・表情である。\n\n> 彼は妙な顔をした。\n>\n> He made a strange (looking) face.\n>\n> 山田さんは旅行社から出された見積もりに渋い顔をした。\n>\n> Mr Yamada frowned on the estimate presented by a travel agency.\n>\n> かわいい顔をする\n>\n> S/he pretends to be cute.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-23T08:49:14.087",
"id": "28223",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-23T08:49:14.087",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "24713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24713 | null | 28223 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24723",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have done a homework. In the worksheet there are figures of two digital\nclocks. One is small and the other one is much bigger.\n\nMy teacher said the following sentences contextually are not correct. She gave\na red cross mark for each.\n\n> 大きい時計は読みやすいです。\n>\n> 小さい時計は読みにくいです。\n\nBut I also provided other options as follows and she gave me green marks that\nmean correct answers.\n\n> 大きい時計は見やすいです。\n>\n> 小さい時計は見にくいです。\n\nI am still confused why the first group using 読む is not contextually correct\nbut the other one using 見る is correct. Do you have any idea? In my\nunderstanding, we read the clock and reading is a subset of seeing. Therefore\nif seeing is considered correct then reading must be also considered correct.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T04:09:25.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24714",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T11:39:06.367",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Confusion in choosing either 見やすい or 読みやすい",
"view_count": 200
} | [
{
"body": "Although this seems so a subtle (non essential) problem that everyone\nunderstands what you mean, I might support your teacher in the following\nreasons.\n\nAs you stated in your question, reading is in the subset of seeing. In general\ncontext, however, you should use general terms. To love is a subset of to\nlike. (Well, perhaps.) Do you feel like saying ''I love you'' to your\ncolleagues as well as to your girl friend?\n\nSecondly, we Japanese don't think that we can read a clock, but rather look at\na clock and read off **time** from the clock. So, your teacher would accept\n\n> 小さい時計の **文字は** 、読みにくいです。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T11:39:06.367",
"id": "24723",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T11:39:06.367",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10234",
"parent_id": "24714",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24714 | 24723 | 24723 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24720",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have found it in a manga in a situation that there is a news reporter asking\nthe following sentence to a boy whom the reporter thought that he is living in\na ruin building with a group of little kids.\n\nここにいる少年たちは みんな **きみをしたって きたというが** ほんとうですか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T09:37:57.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24719",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T09:15:58.707",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T09:15:58.707",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does 「きみをしたって きたというが」 mean?",
"view_count": 220
} | [
{
"body": "> ここにいる少年達はみんな君を **慕って** 来たというが、本当ですか?\n\nThere is a transitive verb\n[慕【した】う](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%85%95%E3%81%86) which means _to\nyearn for_.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T11:14:45.747",
"id": "24720",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T11:14:45.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24719",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24719 | 24720 | 24720 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24727",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "An example I read is:\n\n> こちらの条件を呑んだ、と認識していいんだな. \n> (They) have accepted our conditions...\n\nWhat does the last part mean, and how does it affect the first part?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T11:37:33.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24722",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T15:36:35.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10241",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What does いいんだな mean?",
"view_count": 2076
} | [
{
"body": "> 『こちらの条件を呑んだ』、と認識していいんだな。\n\nThe と is the quotative particle. The subject of 認識して is the speaker. していいんだな\nconsists of して (te-form of する) + いい (good; allowed) + ん (nominalizer の) + だ\n(copula / auxiliary verb) + な (sentence-ending particle), meaning \"It's okay\nto ~~, right?\"\n\n> May I take it that you/they have accepted our conditions?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T15:36:35.953",
"id": "24727",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T15:36:35.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24722 | 24727 | 24727 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "An example is (Tanaka and the speaker are in a relationship.):\n\n> どれだけあたしと田中さんが頭をひねったか \n> (I think it means something like) How long have Tanaka and I...\n\n頭をひねった doesn't make much sense literally, so I'm not sure about it.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T11:44:56.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24724",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-27T17:30:41.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10241",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 頭をひねった mean?",
"view_count": 480
} | [
{
"body": "\"puzzle over\" might be the one option. Ex.\n昨日の変な天候にどれだけあたしと田中さんが頭をひねったか、言葉で表現するのは難しい (puzzle over the weird weather)\n\nAnother option is \"devise\" or \"contrive\". Ex.\nこの問題を解決するためにどれだけあたしと田中さんが頭をひねったか、あなたにはわからないだろう",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-28T06:18:27.417",
"id": "25381",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-29T14:27:03.180",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-29T14:27:03.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "10264",
"owner_user_id": "10264",
"parent_id": "24724",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Consider \"scratching your head\".\n\nI suspect the person who downvoted here may not realize that this expression\nhas two (semi-related yet distinct) meanings:\n\n 1. An intensive mental process trying to find some answer or solution, with at least the potential that such answer or solution might actually be found. This is the case where one might use the \"rack your brain\" translation.\n\n 2. Wondering about or being confused or puzzled by something. One reference describes this as 「疑問に思う」, and gives as an example 「高すぎる見積もりの数字に頭をひねる」. There is no notion that your mental activity is going to resolve the confusion; you're just stating that your brain was spinning because you are (or were) confused or surprised or couldn't understand something. This is the case where one is better off with the \"head scratching\" translation. In the example above: \"The high estimate left me scratching my head\", or perhaps more colloquially, \"The estimate was head-scratchingly high\". \n\nThe English word \"puzzle\" actually works for both, with slight variations:\n\n 1. \"how much Tanaka and I puzzled over this\"\n\n 2. \"how puzzled Tanaka and I were by this\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-27T06:39:59.157",
"id": "30083",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-27T17:30:41.823",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-27T17:30:41.823",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24724",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24724 | null | 30083 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24728",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Since you often need to write your signature fast it should be something\nshort. I wonder which script, kana or kanji, natives use for writing their\nsignature (in most cases)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T14:59:27.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24725",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-10T09:35:39.830",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-02T17:41:26.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "9185",
"owner_user_id": "7898",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"culture"
],
"title": "What do Japanese signatures look like?",
"view_count": 17722
} | [
{
"body": "Japanese people use\n[[印鑑]{いん・かん}](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_%28East_Asia%29#Japanese_usage)\n(or [判子]{はん・こ}) stamps for official \"signatures\". Here are some common ones:\n\n# 田中\n\n\n\n# 山田\n\n\n\nIf they really need to write quickly, they may use [行書]{ぎょう・しょ} (semi-cursive)\nor [草書]{そう・しょ} (full cursive), but **a)** that would be for everything they're\nwriting, not just their name, and **b)** anything official (signing legal\ndocuments, etc.) is done with the 印鑑.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T15:29:54.497",
"id": "24726",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T15:29:54.497",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "24725",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "Talking about _writing_ signatures rather than using seals, the answer is that\nthey vary, and by no small degree.\n\nFirstly, it's worth noting that not all Japanese have Kanji names. In more\nrecent times, some people (usually girls) are given names purely in kana, and\nalmost always hiragana, sometimes even where the kanji that usually write it\nare obvious. This is to say that the name on their birth certificate will be\nin hiragana.\n\nThe Japanese government requires that all names be either in kanji or kana,\nbut kana names aren't that common, and are limited almost entirely to women.\n\n**Kanji**\n\nThe most common is generally kanji. This is the most common way Japanese\npeople write their name, and so it follows logically that signatures write\nlike this. Below are some examples:\n\n  \n\n**Kana**\n\nI can't find any examples of katakana signatures in isolation. It's sometimes\nused to annotate sounds, but wouldn't be used in legal documents, and as it\nstands few if any names are written in katakana for native Japanese. Hiragana\nis used, though more so amongst women, and even more in arts such for\nactresses and seiyuu:\n\n \n\nThough the last one actually has the same artist with a kanji signature:\n\n\n\n**Romaji using Hepburn**\n\nA sign of increasing westernization, and of status, though again not as common\nas kanji, or hiragana. The image below is an example of this.\n\n\n\n**Summary**\n\nOverall, kanji is definitely the most common, followed by hiragana. Katakana\nis rare, other than sometimes annotating kanji readings, and finally the\nsmall, but increasing number of people who write using romaji. All give off a\nvery different feel, and you may see more of some types in certain occupations\nthan others, especially in arts.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T15:39:40.500",
"id": "24728",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T17:08:46.177",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24725",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "It would be helpful if **signature** were better defined in the question. This\nis because the term signature can refer to at least the following things:\n\n 1. as a synonym for \"your trademark\"\n 2. how you would sign something for a fan\n 3. how you would write your name / indicate who you are on a quasi-legal document\n 4. how you would write your name / attest identity on an important legal contract\n\nThe answer by sqrtbottle talks almost exclusively about 1 and 2. In an\nAmerican context, 2-4 might all be roughly the same. In my own case, my\nsignature in English is illegible and doesn't even include every single\nletter.\n\nFor 3-4, the point is that it should be a mark that would be hard to duplicate\ndue to the idiosyncratic nature of writing.\n\nWhen I deal with \"signatures\" ([署名]{しょめい}) in Japanese however the situation\nis quite different -- regardless of whether I'm writing it is in English\ncharacters or one of the Japanese scripts.\n\nThe most common way of doing 3 or 4 is using an [印鑑]{いんかん}. Inkans come in\ndifferent degrees of legal validity scaling up from things you bought at a 100\nyen shop for signing lighter documents to a [実印]{じついん} which is only used for\nmuch more serious matters like signing a loan for a house or car.\n\nA second related concept is [自署]{じしょ} where you can attest that something is\nyou by writing out your full name legibly by hand. For many documents, you\nneed to stamp it with your inkan if you printed it but can just skip this if\nyou hand wrote it ([押印]{おういん}[不要]{ふよう}).\n\nI was just at the driver's license office and didn't bring my 印鑑, but being a\nforeigner they just had me sign on the border of the revenue stamps. They were\nnot happy with my Western-style initials signature because they wanted at\nleast some legible part of my name on the stamps. By American (maybe more\nbroadly Western?) standards, this would be unnecessary as the thing that makes\nit a signature is that it suffers from the defects of my writing style.\n\nConsequently, it matters greatly if by \"signature\" you mean official or formal\nway of attesting identity or if you mean something you can write for a fan.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-11-10T09:35:39.830",
"id": "62772",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-10T09:35:39.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "24725",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24725 | 24728 | 24728 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24732",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "* In daily conversation, \" **雷** \" means both the lightning and the accompanying thunder as a single phenomenon, right? \n * At night, I sometimes see lightning on the horizon, but no thunder. That is 雷, right?\n * All the time, I hear the thunder, but not see the lightning. That is also 雷, right?\n * Does \"雷を見えた？\" sound like natural Japanese?\n * Does \"雷を聞こえた？\" sound like natural Japanese?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T18:19:09.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24729",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T06:45:36.693",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 17,
"tags": [
"definitions"
],
"title": "\"雷{かみなり}\" is thunder, or lightning, or both?",
"view_count": 4186
} | [
{
"body": "雷 refers to both lightning and thunder, though tends to suggest lightning more\nthan thunder if you use it on its own (this would be the image that comes to\nmind when you say it). 見る, 聞こえる are both valid to use, but should take が and\nnot を, because they're sensory. You can hear a dog (bark), so why wouldn't you\nbe able to hear lightning (crash)?\n\nYour two sentences are both valid, but should read in the general form as:\n\n> 雷を見る\n>\n> 雷が聞こえる\n\nFor all extensive purposes, the everyday use of 雷 is for lightning and\nthunder, and context reveals which it translates better into English as.\n\nAnd finally, something from the comments that's worth clearing up:\n\n電 now refers to electricity, not lightning. It meant lightning in the past,\nperhaps, though now is definitely electricity, and not lightning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T19:13:32.050",
"id": "24731",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T19:13:32.050",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Yes, 雷 refers to both the lightning and the sound caused by it.\n\nIf you need to distinguish, the specific term for the visible discharge of the\nlight is 稲妻【いなずま】, and the specific word for the sound is 雷鳴【らいめい】. Although\nthese words often appear in news media and scientific papers, we usually just\nuse 雷 in everyday conversations.\n\nAs for the last two questions, the natural ways to say them are \"雷( **が**\n)聞こえた?\" and \"雷( **が** )見えた?\". \"が\" is often omitted in conversations, and we\ndon't use \"を\" there.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T19:14:03.803",
"id": "24732",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T19:19:33.380",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-02T19:19:33.380",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 21
}
] | 24729 | 24732 | 24732 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "When I first learnt about counters I was taught that the number with its\ncounter comes after the noun e.g.\n\n> 鳥を二羽見た。\n>\n> I saw two birds\n\nRecently I've been seeing constructions like this:\n\n> 二羽の鳥を見た。\n\nIs there any difference between these two constructs and any reason I should\nchoose one over the other?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T18:31:42.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24730",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T18:31:42.567",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"counters"
],
"title": "Counter before or after noun",
"view_count": 74
} | [] | 24730 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24740",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, the difference between 兄{あに} and お兄{にい}さん is merely the level of\nformality. Based only on the rules of 敬語{けいご} you say 兄 or お兄さん. note that the\nreading of 兄 changes by adding **お** .\n\nI am almost certain that 敬語 has _nothing_ to do with deciding whether to say\n腹{はら} or お腹{なか}. Even though the superficial difference is 美化語, the difference\nis not about 敬語. So, what is the difference in meaning and usage? Would a\ndoctor refer to my abdomen as 腹 or お腹? Is my へそ in the middle of my 腹 or お腹?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T20:54:07.360",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24733",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T03:02:16.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between \"腹{はら}\" and \"お腹{なか}\" is not 敬語{けいご}?",
"view_count": 1026
} | [
{
"body": "At times, they are interchangeable, but 腹 has a wider range of uses whereas お腹\nis only used to refer to the belly (particularly what is 'inside' the belly).\n\n腹 on the other hand can have the meaning of 'gut' in the psychological sense\nof the word as well as the physiological sense eg 'gut feeling' or\n'butterflies in my stomach'.\n\nYou can see the difference when you search for the terms in dictionaries like\nweblio ([腹](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E8%85%B9) vs\n[お腹](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%8A%E8%85%B9))\n\nAs far as medical usage goes, I believe more specific terms are used eg\n腹部(abdomen) or 胃 (stomach), so your へそ would actually be in the middle of your\n腹部 if you wanted to be academic.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T03:02:16.973",
"id": "24740",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T03:02:16.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10243",
"parent_id": "24733",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24733 | 24740 | 24740 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24735",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In Chinese 'black' is 黑 and in Japanese it's 黒, but the kanji are not the\nsame. In traditional Chinese it's exactly the same as in simplified so both\nare 黑 but Japanese is different. Was 黒 simplified?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T22:00:22.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24734",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-17T20:05:37.457",
"last_edit_date": "2020-02-17T20:05:37.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "7387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"chinese",
"kyūjitai-and-shinjitai"
],
"title": "What's the story behind 黒 and 黑? Why are they different?",
"view_count": 1600
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, 黒 is the 新字体{しんじたい} (simplified) form of 黑, which took the two dots at\nthe top and turned them into a straight line. The same simplification can be\nseen in 曾 -> 曽. This was all part of the 1945 simplification scheme in\nJapanese.\n\n黑 is still used in chinese though, both simplified and traditional, and has\nthe exact same meaning of \"black\", as you pointed out.\n\nWithout going too much into it for fear of being off-topic, Japan underwent\nits simplification of characters in 1945 -- earlier than Chinese. Because of\nthis, it has a few different forms. Simplified chinese has a lot of the same\nsimplifications, but equally there are a few divergences every now and again.\n黒 is an example where Japan changed the character from 黑, and Chinese never\ndid.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-02T23:31:43.353",
"id": "24735",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-02T23:31:43.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24734",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "「黒」 came from a [clerical\nscript](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_script) shape which was adopted\nas official in Japan. Both 「黒」 and 「黑」 co-existed in various locations, with\n「黒」 being made obsolete in Chinese-language regions in recent times.\n\n`[商](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shang_dynasty) \n[甲](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_bone_script) \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VRPBS.png) \n[燕](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian/Reference/JiaguwenReference)758 \n[合集6976](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/jgwhj/?bhfl=1&bh=6976&jgwfl=)``[西周](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Zhou) \n[金](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_bronze_inscriptions) \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3c9qt.png) \n伯簋 \n[集成4169](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/yzjwjc/?bh=4169&jgwfl=)``[春秋](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spring_and_Autumn_period) \n金 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/sjzDK.png) \n鑄子叔黑簠 \n[集成4571](http://www.guoxuedashi.com/yzjwjc/?bh=4571&jgwfl=)`\n\n * `[秦](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qin_dynasty) \n[簡](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_and_wooden_slips) \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DNtB6.png) \n封診式23 \n[睡虎地秦簡](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuihudi_Qin_bamboo_texts) \n``今 \n[楷](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_script) \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D0Z2Y.png) \n \n`\n\n * `[戰國](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warring_States_period)・[楚](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chu_\\(state\\)) \n簡 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gw6ie.png) \n174 \n曾侯乙墓簡``[東漢](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_dynasty#Eastern_Han) \n[隸](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_script) \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5wwn7.png) \n史晨奏銘 \n``[常用](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Dy%C5%8D_kanji) \n楷 \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EARk3.png) \n \n`\n\n> 「黑」 originally depicted a _person_ 「大」 drawn with an emphasised head and\n> _facial tattoos_ as punishment for crimes. Dots 「丶」 were added around the\n> person later, and the dots were eventually corrupted into 「火・灬」.\n>\n> As is common across characters when not the bottom-most component, 「大」 was\n> eventually corrupted into 「土」.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-02-17T10:12:23.760",
"id": "74463",
"last_activity_date": "2020-02-17T10:59:01.923",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26510",
"parent_id": "24734",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24734 | 24735 | 24735 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Difference between と and とは？\n\nFor example in below sentences\n\n> そんなに大きいと思わなかった。\n\nand\n\n> そんなに大きいとは思わなかった。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T00:58:20.710",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24736",
"last_activity_date": "2023-08-28T14:17:26.897",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1805",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"usage",
"particles"
],
"title": "Difference between と and とは",
"view_count": 740
} | [
{
"body": "_In this case,_ there is very little difference, although the latter strikes\nme as a bit more common.\n\nI would categorize the は in the latter sentence as a contrastive wa: \"(I knew\nit was big, but) I didn't think it was this big\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T03:39:13.093",
"id": "24773",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T06:40:43.760",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T06:40:43.760",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "24736",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "I think the は in とは is an emphasis on と",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2023-08-28T14:17:26.897",
"id": "100824",
"last_activity_date": "2023-08-28T14:17:26.897",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "57385",
"parent_id": "24736",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24736 | null | 24773 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "41454",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Looking something up in a dictionary is\n\n辞書{じしょ}を引{ひ}く\n\nBut what about looking something up in ALC? Which particle is correct? Would\nwe say\n\n> ALCで確認{かくにん}しました\n\nor\n\n> ALCを確認{かくにん}しました\n\nor something else?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T01:23:27.147",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24738",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T11:05:50.263",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T11:52:41.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "9838",
"owner_user_id": "1805",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage",
"particles"
],
"title": "Phrases to describe looking something up somewhere other than a dictionary",
"view_count": 198
} | [
{
"body": "As far as I know, the most common term is '調べる'. You can also use 探す・捜す, or\neven 探索 (for search engines etc) which all carry the connotation of\n'searching/exploring'. 確認 is more if you're looking something up to confirm\nyour knowledge of it.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T02:05:09.883",
"id": "24739",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T02:05:09.883",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10243",
"parent_id": "24738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "For your example, で is correct.\n\nThe sentence has been shortened if you add the removed pieces back to the\nsentence it will become more explicit as to what is going on.\n\n> ALCでこの言葉の意味を確認します。\n\nIn your example if you used を then it would mean that you are going to confirm\nif ALC is correct.\n\nI can't add comments yet but 探す and 捜す have very specify use cases.\n\n捜す - has the connotation that the item being searched for is something lost or\na criminal.\n\n探す - has the connotation that the item being searched for is something desired\nor needed like a job, or a girlfriend.\n\n",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T23:20:06.420",
"id": "24767",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T23:20:06.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10252",
"parent_id": "24738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "(Just copying comment)\n\nIf it's [アルク](http://www.alc.co.jp/) you'd say:\n\n * ALC **で** 確認しました。\n * 電子辞書 **で** 確認しました。\n * オンライン辞書 **で** 確かめました。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-04T11:05:50.263",
"id": "41454",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T11:05:50.263",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10859",
"parent_id": "24738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24738 | 41454 | 41454 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24808",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Quoted from [the Japanese Wikipedia entry about\nチャンプルー](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%81%E3%83%A3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%83%AB%E3%83%BC)\n\n>\n> チャンプルーの語源は、インドネシア語・マレー語のcampur[1][2]（チャンプールまたはチャンポール：音声は[3]）との説がある[1]。この語は、同語源の日本語のちゃんぽんと同様「混ぜる」「混ぜたもの（料理）」という意味を持ち、インドネシア料理にはナシチャンプルという、飯と数種類のおかずを混ぜた料理がある（ナシ\n> nasi はインドネシア語で飯の意）。\n\nDoes チャンプルー come from Indonesian?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T05:26:23.690",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24741",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-09T09:04:04.080",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T09:25:28.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Does チャンプルー come from Indonesian?",
"view_count": 446
} | [
{
"body": "I don't know about this word's (チャンプルー) history in Japanese, but yes, in\nIndonesian there is a word \"campur\". Campur means \"mix\"; from an Indonesian-\nJapanese dictionary: 混合、混ぜる、干渉する。 Because I often hear this word \"campur\" in\nIndonesian, in my opinion, it could have come from Indonesian.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T01:07:47.477",
"id": "24808",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-09T09:01:48.193",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-09T09:01:48.193",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10259",
"parent_id": "24741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "(From WWWJDICT)\n\n>\n> [CHANPURUU](http://tangorin.com/general/%E3%83%81%E3%83%A3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%83%AB%E3%83%BC) \n> noun: \n> chanpuru; champuru; Okinawan stir-fry dish, usually containing vegetables\n> (especially bitter melon), tofu, meat or fish (poss. from Indonesian\n> \"campur\" meaning mixed)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-09T07:54:50.903",
"id": "24890",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-09T09:04:04.080",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-09T09:04:04.080",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10294",
"parent_id": "24741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24741 | 24808 | 24808 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24770",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Both wiktionary and jisho.org list the on'yomi for 落ちる as ラク. The kun'yomi is\n落{お}ちる, 落{お}とす, or 落{お}ち. So I'm wondering how this kanji developed the\nreading れ in お洒落{しゃれ} and 洒落{しゃれ}.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T09:10:59.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24750",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T01:33:41.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4242",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"readings"
],
"title": "Where does the れ reading of 落 in 洒落 come from?",
"view_count": 136
} | [
{
"body": "Technically れ is not a reading of 落, しゃれ is a reading of 洒落. A reading which\nignores the usual reading of the characters.\n\nI think it is arguable whether this is:\n\n当て字:assigning kanji to words for their phonetic value, ignoring their semantic\nvalue. This is often used for e.g. native Japanese geographical names, like\n恵比寿, えびす.\n\n熟字訓:assigning multiple kanji to (usually native Japanese) words based on their\nsemantics, but ignoring the morphemes they usually represent. A commonly used\nexample would be the あす reading of 明日.\n\nIf we believe the etymology on <http://gogen-allguide.com/si/syare.html>, 洒落\noriginally had a reading of しゃらく, which meant something like \"frank,\ncarefree\", but started to be used for しゃれ for both its phonetic similarity and\nsemantic similarity.\n\nSo maybe the most precise decription is to say that it's _both_ an imperfect\n当て字 and an imperfect 熟字訓.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T01:33:41.943",
"id": "24770",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T01:33:41.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "24750",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24750 | 24770 | 24770 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24752",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was looking at the title of the song\n\n> きみ の しらない ものがたり\n\nI thought translated into something like\n\n> Your Unknown Story\n\nbut it was actually\n\n> The Story You Don't Know\n\nI'm confused as to why its translated like this.\n\nIf the の here shows possession, and the verb しらない means \"I don't know\" it\nshould be Your unknown story shouldn't it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T11:07:33.300",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24751",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T12:29:11.747",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T12:29:11.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "9838",
"owner_user_id": "10247",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Understanding the particle の when used with the verb 知る",
"view_count": 194
} | [
{
"body": "See [this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12825/how-does-\nthe-%E3%81%AE-work-\nin-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E4%BA%BA%E3%81%AE%E7%9F%A5%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E/12826).\n**snailboat** puts it rather nicely.\n\nIn short, it may make more sense to think about it as [ きみ **が** しらない ] ものがたり\n(and in fact, they are equivalent).\n\nThe subject of しらない is implied to be きみ, and thus the title can be translated\nas:\n\nthe story you (the subject) don't know\n\nThe title could only be translated to \"your unknown story\" if the subject\ncould be inferred to be \"everyone else\".",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T11:16:49.950",
"id": "24752",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T11:37:59.363",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9838",
"parent_id": "24751",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "> 「きみ **の** しらない ものがたり」\n\nIn this phrase, 「の」 means the same thing as 「が」, the subject marker. It does\nnot express possession.\n\nThus, that phrase means \"the story that you do not know of\".\n\nOther examples of this use of 「の」.\n\n「ボク **の** [食]{た}べたピザは1,000[円]{えん}でした。」\"The pizza that I ate was 1,000 yen.\"\n\n「スミスさん **の** [住]{す}んでいる[町]{まち}はきれいです。」\"The town Smith lives in is pretty.\"\n\n**IMPORTANT** : This use of 「の」 is only possible in sub-clauses, not in main-\nclauses.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T11:21:26.697",
"id": "24753",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T11:26:48.313",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T11:26:48.313",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24751",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24751 | 24752 | 24752 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24764",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm not interested in the translation as much as the use of the word けど in a\nspecific sentence. The textbook presents it as 'but' and 'so', and the\ndialogue where it appears is as follows:\n\n> たけしくん、今度の休み、予定ある？ \n> ううん。別に。どうして？ \n> みちこさんの長野のうちにいこうと思ってるんだ **けど** 、一緒に行かない？\n\nI understand the sentence in general, but not the use of けど. She explains what\nshe's going to do and offers an invitation to たけしくん, but I don't get the けど at\nthe end of the explanation of her plans.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T17:45:03.427",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24754",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T22:43:36.627",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T17:56:23.207",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Use of けど in a sentence from my textbook",
"view_count": 198
} | [
{
"body": "けど and が are very similar. In spoken language, けど is a very cool way of saying\n\"I relinquish my speaking time to you\" but sometimes it is also a polite\npause.\n\nけど is shortened from けれども which can also sometimes become けども\n\nYou could just as easily write が in the sentence you provided, but けど tends to\nbe more colloquial.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T21:28:41.530",
"id": "24762",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T21:28:41.530",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "24754",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "In this case think of if as meaning 'so'. In the first part of the sentence\nthe speaker is presenting the fact that he is planning to go to michiko-san's\nhouse and in the second part he's inviting Takeshi-kun to go along. In English\nit would be the same as:\n\n> I'm going to do X, so would you like to join me?\n\nLike sova said, けど can be a queue to let the other person talk, but in the\nexample above that is not the case. If the speaker had paused a couple of\nbeats then Takeshi-kun would realize that he's being invited to come along\nwithout the speaker needing to finish his sentence\n\n> みちこさんの長野のうちにいこうと思ってるんだけど…\n\nThen Takeshi-kun would need to either say yes or give an excuse as to why he\ncan't go (culturally in Japanese you must give a valid excuse why you can't\nhang out with someone. Simply saying because I don't want to is rude so it's\nalways good to have a response chambered.)\n\nOne bad habit that students of Japanese often have, is saying けど and then\npausing to think. When speaking to a native speaker, they assume that person\nis either letting them talk or that they cannot express what they want to say.\nThere are signifiers that you're thinking like あの but the differ depending on\nif you're talking to friends or teachers, etc. That's different subject so I\nwont discuss it further.\n\nSorry for deviating from your question a bit but I also wanted to clear up\nSova's point and I don't have enough reputation yet to comment.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T22:43:36.627",
"id": "24764",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T22:43:36.627",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10252",
"parent_id": "24754",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24754 | 24764 | 24764 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24769",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've taken up reading the manga \"Fruits Basket\", with the intention of trying\nto understand every word and grammar point if I possibly can.\n\nThere is a conversation, starting on page 27 of the first volume, between\nShigure and Yuki. They are cousins, sharing a house. Shigure is an adult, Yuki\nis a high-school student. They are not very good at house work like cooking\nand cleaning. In this scene they are walking through a forest, returning home\nfrom dining out:\n\n> [紫呉] あーあ、もうこんな時間か。毎日夕食が出前か外食だと疲れちゃうなぁ。\n>\n> [由希] じゃあ紫呉が食事作ってよ。\n>\n> [紫呉] 作ったって文句言うじゃないか君は。\n>\n> [由希] カレーの中にたくあんが入ってれば文句の一つも言いたくなるよ。\n>\n> [紫呉] 由希君は頭はいいくせに家事一般だけはだめだし、やっぱだらけた男二人暮らしには“花”が必要だねぇ。\n>\n> ＊ 花ってなす女性の事さ。\n>\n> [由希] 気楽だね紫呉は。\n>\n> [紫呉] 何を言う。花あってこその男じゃないですか…\n\n(Conversation ends here as they spot the main character nearby)\n\nMy problem is mainly with the last two lines there.\n\n 1. What is Yuki saying, exactly? It seems to mean something like \"You live comfortably, Shigure\", but I don't understand how it relates to what Shigure said about needing a woman around the house.\n 2. What is Shigure saying? \n * What does 花あってこその男 mean? I tried to look for similar expressions and it seems that `[noun]あってこその[noun]` is not uncommon, but I can't figure out what it means exactly.\n * What confuses me even further is the じゃないですか at the end. I'm not sure if it's a genuine question or the common rhetoric question that is really an assertion...\n * And so, I'm not sure whether the 花あってこその男 refers to Yuki or to Shigure himself.\n * And how does it relate to what Yuki was saying?\n\n**Edit**\n\nHere are a few similar `あってこその` phrases that I picked off Google, but couldn't\nreally understand:\n\n * あの時代あってこその今\n * 人あってこその環境省\n * マイナスあってこそのプラス\n * 失敗あってこその現在\n\nNote that in none of them is there a particle before the あってこそ, and there is a\nの following it.\n\nNote also: the なす in the footnote about 花 is suspect - this part is written in\nhandwriting so it was hard for me to decipher. Nevertheless, Shigure is\nabsolutely talking about needing a woman around the house, as by the end of\nthe chapter, they get one - Tohru Honda, the main protagonist.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T18:19:46.160",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24755",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T01:08:09.280",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T20:53:35.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "7446",
"owner_user_id": "7446",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"manga"
],
"title": "Please explain the end of this conversation, especially the あってこそ part of it",
"view_count": 434
} | [
{
"body": "AあってこそB means that B exists due to A. The pattern is Verbて＋こそ. The first\nexample I found on the interwebs\n\n親になってこそ、親の苦労や気持がわかる。\n\nB/c he became a parent, he understood the struggles and rewards [of being a\nparent].\n\nYou can of course use this with NOUN+あってこそ as you stated, or NOUN+いてこそ in case\nof a person. A quick google search came up w/ some cheesy DVD called あなたがいてこそ.\nThe B in this case, being implied as \"something\".\n\nThat should help you understand the last line, although I admit that the\nfootnote 花ってなす女性の事さ has thrown me.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T20:07:12.690",
"id": "24757",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T20:07:12.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7550",
"parent_id": "24755",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The AあってこそのB(だ) means something along the lines of\n\n> B wouldn't exist without A \n> B wouldn't be B without A \n> B cannot bring out its full potential without A\n\nThe じゃないですか here is rhetorical, so the full meaning is something like\n\n> Men wouldn't be men without flowers(women), would they...\n\nあってこその is fossilized to a certain extent (i.e. a fixed expression), so it\nmight be easiest to memorize it as is. The fact that が is usually missing\nafter A also witnesses slightly archaic grammar.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T01:08:09.280",
"id": "24769",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T01:08:09.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "24755",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24755 | 24769 | 24769 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I heard this in a Japanese song sung by Vocaloid Hatsune Miku\n([YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkYbNnGe2Ik))\n\nDoes anyone know what this onomatopoeia means? It's clear from the context of\nthe lyrics that it is an onomatopoeia, but I've never heard it used before.\n\nFor context, the lyrics say:\n\n> ホッペタを少し膨らませて \n> I’ll puff out my cheeks and go\n>\n> モキュモキュにしてやるぞ \n> “mokyu mokyu” just for you, OK?\n>\n> アヒルみたいな唇をして \n> I’ll make duck lips and go\n>\n> モキュモキュにしてやるぞ \n> “mokyu mokyu” just for you, OK！",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T20:05:46.543",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24756",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T23:30:09.160",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T20:11:55.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9128",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"song-lyrics",
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "What does the Japanese onomatopoeia もきゅもきゅ mean?",
"view_count": 4330
} | [
{
"body": "earthliŋ's response has a link to a Japanese page that explains the meaning\nbut for those who can't read Japanese I figured I'd answer in English.\n\nIt basically means cute in a soft and cuddly way.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T22:50:47.850",
"id": "24765",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T23:30:09.160",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-03T23:30:09.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "10252",
"owner_user_id": "10252",
"parent_id": "24756",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It means \"cute (and fluffy)\".\n\nImagine a hamster stuffing its face with food.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T22:50:54.890",
"id": "24766",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T22:50:54.890",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24756",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24756 | null | 24766 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24774",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "As Japan is 日本, the origin of the sun or \"Land of the Rising Sun\" as it's\nsometimes put in English, would 日末 make sense as the \"Land of the Setting Sun\"\nas a west to Japan's east?\n\nFor instance, British Columbia (the westernmost Canadian province) is on the\nopposite side of the Pacific and does has a setting sun on its flag to\nrepresent being on the west coast of North America in the same way Japan's\nrising sun flag derives from being on the east coast of Asia.\n\nWould it make sense to use 日末 as a figurative way to refer to British Columbia\nor some other place associated with \"west\" such as Portugal, Peru, or\nCalifornia? Or do native Japanese speaker not think about the implicit\nassociation with \"east\" in the name of their country in a way that would make\nsense to think of a western counterpart (Japan obviously isn't east or west to\nanyone who lives there)\n\nIf it does make sense, what would be the correct reading of 日末?\n\nIf a different kanji in place of 末 would better convey the sense of a setting\nsun counterpart to 日本 instead, that's a reasonable answer too. I only arrived\nat 末 by looking up 本 in Wikitionary and checking its antonyms.\n\n ",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T20:10:34.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24758",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T04:30:17.703",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T00:24:44.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "10251",
"owner_user_id": "10251",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"kanji",
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Would 日末 be a reasonable opposite to 日本?",
"view_count": 747
} | [
{
"body": "Neither Wiktionary\n([English](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AB)\n/\n[Japanese](http://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AB))\nnor\n[jisho.org](http://jisho.org/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&keyword=%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AB)\ncontain any reference to **日末** , so I don't think that it's possible to use\nthis kanji combination as a word.\n\nSwapping the kanji around, there _is_ an entry on\n[jisho.org](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%9C%AB%E6%97%A5) for **末日** (read as\nまつじつ), but the definition is \"last day (of a month)\" rather than \"land of the\nsetting sun\". I'm not sure how common this word is, but it's also mentioned on\n[WWWJDIC](http://www.edrdg.org/jmdictdb/cgi-\nbin/entr.py?svc=jmdict&sid=&q=1525570) and crops up a few times on [Japanese\nWiktionary](http://ja.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E7%89%B9%E5%88%A5%3A%E6%A4%9C%E7%B4%A2&profile=default&search=%22%E6%9C%AB%E6%97%A5%22&fulltext=Search).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T21:04:16.230",
"id": "24760",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T21:04:16.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9212",
"parent_id": "24758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "日末 'himatsu' would mean \"end of the day\" if anything\n\nif you wanted to say (something of the) setting sun 落日 (raku jitsu) might be\nappropriate\n\nCheck out <http://jisho.org/search/setting%20sun>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T21:21:58.807",
"id": "24761",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T21:21:58.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "24758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> Or do native Japanese speaker not think about the implicit association with\n> \"east\" in the name of their country in a way that would make sense to think\n> of a western counterpart (Japan obviously isn't east or west to anyone who\n> lives there)\n\nThis is true. Many people know, as a piece of knowledge, that the etymology of\n日本 has something to do with _east_ or _sunrise_. But it's highly unlikely to\ncoin a new country name directly using this knowledge. There is no such\nJapanese word as 日末, but when I see this, the first reasonable interpretation\nof this \"word\" would be \"the end of Japan\" (because 日 by itself means Japan\ntoday), and then, \"the end of the day\", \"the last day (of a week/event/etc)\",\netc. Associating it with _west_ would be too difficult.\n\nThere are many modern and old Japanese words that are related to 'sunset' or\n'dusk' (日没, 落日, 日暮れ, 黄昏, ...), but I don't know how to use these words to\nrefer to an actual country without being rude. Many of these words are\nstrongly associated with 'downhill', 'decadence', etc. But if you insist, I\nwould say 日暮 may be the safest -- it actually appears in the name of a [real\nplace](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5%E6%9A%AE%E9%87%8C%E7%94%BA), and\nsome people have kanji 暮 in their names, and I can feel a certain beauty of\nsunset in this word.\n\nIf you are making a work of fiction and only need an archaic alternative of\n_west_ , [read\nthis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthly_Branches#Directions).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T04:23:48.477",
"id": "24774",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T04:30:17.703",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T04:30:17.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24758 | 24774 | 24774 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24763",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In JoJo's Bizarre Adventure anime, Stardust Crusaders arc, episode 3, a person\n（花京院｛かきょういん｝） who JoJo (the protagonist) just saved, asks JoJo why he did\nthat, to which JoJo replies\n\n> さあ、 **そこんとこ** だが、俺もよく分からん.\n\nLater on, JoJo asks 花京院 why he decided to join him, to which 花京院 also replies\n\n> **そこんところ** だが。なぜ同行したくなったのかは 私にもよく分からないんだがね。\n\nWhat does it mean? \"This and that\" (no particular reason)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T20:21:53.837",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24759",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T17:29:28.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"anime"
],
"title": "What does そこんところ mean?",
"view_count": 800
} | [
{
"body": "Both 「そこ **ん** とこ」 and 「そこ **ん** ところ」 are colloquial pronunciations of:\n\n> 「そこ **の** ところ」\n\nThis is a very common expression which means \" _ **the point (that has just\nbeen) raised**_ \".\n\nYou would need to memorize 「そこんとこ」, etc. to be able to use them naturally\nbecause you simply **will not** arrive at them by directly translating any\nEnglish phrases.\n\nThese phrases are often followed immediately by 「だが」、「ですが」, 「なんだけど」, etc.\nmaking the whole phrase mean \" _ **Regarding the point raised(, though,)**_ \".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-03T22:38:59.343",
"id": "24763",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-21T17:29:28.193",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-21T17:29:28.193",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24759",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24759 | 24763 | 24763 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24772",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While studying yesterday, I came across two words with the suffix さ:\n\n無邪気さ(translated as innocence) and 寛大さ (translated as generosity).\n\n1) What's the difference between these words and the words without the さ? I\nthought that な-adjectives without the な are already nouns.\n\n2) Can I add さ to other 形容動詞 too, for example 人気さ or 便利さ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T01:05:30.670",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24768",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T01:50:12.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9682",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"suffixes",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "A Question About the Suffix さ",
"view_count": 176
} | [
{
"body": "1) I know that some people like to categorize な-adjectives in this way, but\nIMHO it's silly. There are many な-adjectives that don't work as nouns without\nthe な, and there are many nouns that don't work as な-adjectives by adding な.\n\n2) さ is quite productive, so in general, I _want_ to say yes. However:\n\n * Although everybody will understand 人気さ (and I can find many examples of it on Google), it sounds (to me) a bit clumsy or childish, since 人気 is already also a noun meaning the same thing. \n * 便利さ is completely grammatical, and is in fact probably the most common way to express the concept. However, there is often another more technical word expressing the same thing, in this case for example 便益.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T01:50:12.520",
"id": "24772",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T01:50:12.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "24768",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24768 | 24772 | 24772 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "30531",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Pre-Meiji:\n\n * What was Japanese animism popularly called before 国家神道 (State Shinto) was [created](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Shinto) in the early Meiji period (19th century)? Prior to that, was the word 「神道」 a common term among the populace, or was it part of a jargon that the average Japanese person did not use in normal conversation or did not generally know of?\n * How was Japanese animism (i.e. what might now be retroactively called ['proto-Shinto,'](http://www.greenshinto.com/wp/2011/10/30/proto-shinto-in-manyoshu-poems/) 'historical origins of Shinto,' or 'early Shinto') referred to before the word [「神道」 was coined](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto)? According to a book referenced in Wikipedia, the oldest recorded usage of the term (read as 「しんどう」) is as recent as the second half of the 6th century.\n * How was Japanese animism referred to before the importation of the concept and word of 「宗教」 (religion), which happened in early Meiji? In other words, what were the beliefs/practices considered to be rather than religious practices?\n\nMeiji and Onwards:\n\n * How was 神道 referred to during early Meiji when the government was insisting that 国家神道 not be referred to as a \"religion?\"\n * I have heard that 国家神道 adapts more from Chinese animism leading up to Meiji than from ancient Japanese animism. How are these differing roots described in Japanese (i.e. are there technical terms that differentiate Chinese-influenced Shinto from indigenous Shinto)?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T01:40:18.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24771",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-19T03:53:12.800",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-25T21:18:05.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "4547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"words",
"history",
"academic-japanese",
"religion"
],
"title": "How was Japanese animism referred to before 国家神道 (State Shinto) was created?",
"view_count": 664
} | [
{
"body": "Take into account that 1)Japanese people history in Japanese archipelago\nstarted very recently (at the earliest in the Yayoi period) and 2) they\nimported writing knowledge from China even more recently.\n\nSince \"Shinto\" is a reading that stems from Chinese, most likely, in the same\nway as current \"Nihon\" was once read \"Hi-no-moto\", the original reading was\n\"kami-no-michi\" (this reading currently persists, even if not very common) or\nsome archaic variant of it.\n\nHowever, there's a possibility that Shinto was a \"made-up\" religion result of\nunifying original Japanese inhabitants' animism (which could be just one or\nseveral depending on the tribe, no records conserved on the topic) with\nwhatever religion the Yamato settlers believed in, in which case the original\nname would still be Shindo/Jindo. It's not unusual for invading empires to\nmerge their own religion with the ones of the people they invade (making their\ngods superior, of course), and Japanese Shinto shows traits that hint that it\nwas exactly that case (they have both a main pantheon and a belief in nature\ngods, plus they have a clear division between \"holier\" Heaven gods and \"less\nholy\" Earth gods, that somehow existed before the youngest pair of Heaven gods\ngave birth to the land despite there being no Earth and them don't belonging\nto Heaven).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-18T21:11:24.637",
"id": "30521",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-18T21:11:24.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9769",
"parent_id": "24771",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "To look for a time before the word \"Shinto\" was used, you must look back to\nthe Asuka period, as the question suggests. At this time, the educated term\nfor Japanese ritual was _jingi_ 神祗. But I would caution against thinking of\nthis as Shinto. The formation of Shinto as a nationwide ideal for ritual,\npractice, and teaching, did not happen in the classical period, even though\nthere were already ritual traditions at Ise, Izumo, and other places. The\n_Kojiki_ and _Nihon Shoki_ , at that time, were simply history books, not\nsacred texts, and the kami were part of the Buddhist macrocosm.\n\nWe should instead think of _jingi_ as the word for Japanese court ritual in\ncontrast to Buddhist ritual. This contrast faded into the background with the\nend of the Heian period. In the medieval period there was _shinbutsu-shūgō_\n神仏習合, free mixture of kami and buddhas, and identification of kami as avatars\nfor boddhisatvas, and thus little need for a separate category. I think modern\nShinto really began with [Yoshida\nShintō](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshida_Shint%C5%8D), a medieval attempt\nto construct a non-Buddhist theory of shrines, and developed apace in the Edo\nperiod.\n\nIn the Edo period, literate Japanese said that their country had \"three\nteachings\" 三教. This was a borrowing from Chinese civilization, where\nConfucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism existed alongside each other, sometimes in\nconflict and sometimes in harmony. In fact, back at the dawn of the Heian\nperiod the Japanese Buddhist genius Kūkai had written a book called _Sangō\nShiiki_ 『三教指帰』 that discussed these \"three teachings\"; the third was Daoism,\neven though there were no Daoists in Japan (that we know of), because he was\nendeavoring to compare it to Buddhism. Kūkai was responsible for putting the\nJapanese kami in a Buddhist cosmos.\n\nBut by the Edo period, the third teaching was no longer Daoism; it was already\nShinto, or _kami-no-michi_. Shinto was recognized as having its own ritual\ntradition and style of practice, which was clearly not Chinese. This was due\nto the medieval tradition of commentary on the _Nihon Shoki_ and Yoshida\nShintō, as well as other pre-Edo ritual practices which are not so well-\nunderstood.\n\nWhat happened to Edo period Shinto? You could write a book about this --\nindeed, I plan to -- but to put it very simply, the Kokugaku school claimed\nthat the existing schools were too _private_ in character; that is to say,\nthey were too religious. The goal of Kokugaku was to create a \"national\nteaching\", but simultaneously to create a _public_ -facing teaching, something\nlike what we would think of as \"secular\".\n\nSo what did ancient Japanese people call their animism? Likely nothing at all,\nsince there was nothing to contrast it with.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-19T03:39:44.367",
"id": "30531",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-19T03:53:12.800",
"last_edit_date": "2016-01-19T03:53:12.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "583",
"owner_user_id": "583",
"parent_id": "24771",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24771 | 30531 | 30531 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24777",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the sentence including the word.\n\nしかし 里子といってもこのきずついた子どもたちをほんとうにいたわれるおとななんていやしない なんとなくいびり出されてそこをとび出し また\n兄貴かぶのおれをしたってあつまってきちまったんだ **したって こられりゃ** おれも男さ",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T06:00:25.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24776",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T06:22:39.663",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does the word 「したって こられりゃ」 mean?",
"view_count": 208
} | [
{
"body": "It's a colloquial/slurred way of saying [慕]{した}ってこ(来)られれば, \"If/when you are\nadmired/followed (by these kids)\". 慕ってこられる is the passive of 慕ってくる, to\nrespect, admire, and/or follow.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T06:11:36.543",
"id": "24777",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T06:22:39.663",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T06:22:39.663",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24776",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24776 | 24777 | 24777 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Given a building, how to classify it as マンション or アパート?\n\nNon-subjective set of criteria preferred. \nIn particular, if there is any legal definition of these terms that would be\nthe best.\n\nI used to think that the difference was subjective, but apparently it is not,\nas this bank asks its customers to declare formally whether they live in a\nマンション or アパート (among other options):\n\n",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T06:20:10.610",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24778",
"last_activity_date": "2021-06-19T03:50:01.493",
"last_edit_date": "2018-04-11T03:10:54.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "107",
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"definitions"
],
"title": "How to tell whether a building is マンション or アパート",
"view_count": 1704
} | [
{
"body": "One way to distinguish is to look at the **materials** supporting the\nbuilding's structure:\n\n * Light structure with either: \n * [Timber](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_framing#Japanese)\n * [Prefabricated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefabricated_building)\n * Light steel beams\n\n... is often アパート.\n\n * Heavy structure with either: \n * Heavy steel beams\n * [Reinforced concrete](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforced_concrete)\n * Steel framed reinforced concrete\n\n... is often マンション.\n\nAs pointed out by @Chocolate, <http://house-on.com/onepoint01.html> adds a\n`中高層（3階以上）` (=at least 3 floors) condition for being a マンション.\n\nBetter/other criteria welcome!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T06:30:09.327",
"id": "24779",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-11T03:09:01.543",
"last_edit_date": "2018-04-11T03:09:01.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "107",
"owner_user_id": "107",
"parent_id": "24778",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "One other distinction I've encountered in translating real estate-related\nmaterials is that アパート generally refers to smaller buildings with multiple\nunits, but one owner for the whole building, whereas マンション generally refers to\nlarger buildings with multiple units, where each unit might be owned\nindividually. In this case, the difference between an アパート vs. a マンション is not\ntoo dissimilar from the distinction in English between an \"apartment\" and a\n\"condominium\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2018-04-11T18:08:50.010",
"id": "57872",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-11T18:08:50.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "24778",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Yes, I had this issue clarified today by a native Japanese speaker. If you own\na condo, you should call it “マンション” but if you are renting an apartment in a\nlarge building, that is an “アパート.”",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-06-19T03:50:01.493",
"id": "87115",
"last_activity_date": "2021-06-19T03:50:01.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45282",
"parent_id": "24778",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -2
}
] | 24778 | null | 24779 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What's the difference between による and によって?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T07:52:13.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24780",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T07:19:30.970",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-30T07:13:48.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "10255",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What's the difference between による and によって?",
"view_count": 3318
} | [
{
"body": "「によって」 is like \"depending on ...\"\n\n「好きな食べ物が人によって違います。」 (It depends on the person what food he/she likes.) or\n(From person to person, it's different on what food he/she likes.)\n\nwhile 「による」 is like \"according to...\"\n\n「山口さんによると、アメリカの食べ物がおいしいです。」 (According to Mr. Yamaguchi, American food is\ndelicious.)\n\nUnfortunately I still don't know other uses for the two, though.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T09:21:01.747",
"id": "24783",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T09:21:01.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7846",
"parent_id": "24780",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "They have the same meaning but different conjugation forms, which means, they\nmerely differ in their ability to connect to other words.\n\n**による** \nSince よる is plain (dictionary) form, it's used as a main verb or noun\nqualifier.\n\n> 遠足に行けるかどうかは天気 **による** 。 \n> _Whether we'll be able to go on a picnic **depends on** the weather._\n\n> 震災 **による** 被害は甚大だ。 \n> _The damage **(which brought about) by** the earthquake is immense._\n\n**によって** \nよって is the _te_ -form of the verb, so practically it functions as a\npostposition leading (actually following) a [sentence\nadverb](http://grammar.about.com/od/grammarfaq/f/sentadvqa.htm) clause.\n\n> ヒーローの活躍 **によって** 世界は救われた。 \n> _**Thanks to** the hero's efforts, the world is saved._\n\nIf you swap them in a sentence, you'll usually get very different things.\n\n> ウイルス **による** 病気を治療する _cure a disease **caused by** viruses_ \n> (because ～による qualifies the noun 病気.)\n\n> ウイルス **によって** 病気を治療する _cure a disease **using** viruses_ \n> (because ～によって qualifies the predicate 治療する.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T18:46:55.240",
"id": "24794",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T07:19:30.970",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-30T07:19:30.970",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24780",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24780 | null | 24794 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24787",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider the following,\n\n 1. 机の上に本があります。\n 2. 本は机の上です。\n\nWhat I don't understand is the second sentence which is another form for the\nfirst one. It is caused by the fact that there is no preposition に in the\nsecond one.\n\nIf you don't understand what I meant, let consider the following sentences.\nThe first two sentences are understandable because they have English\nequivalents. But it is not the case for the last one.\n\n * This is a book. これは本です。\n * This book is red. この本は赤いです。\n * This book is on the table. この本は机の上です。I never read and hear この本は机の上にです。in which there is に inserted between 机の上 and です.\n\nCan anybody here explain why?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T08:46:08.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24781",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T13:43:02.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How can 【所】に【物】があります be converted to 【物】は【所】です?",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "You can say:\n\n> 本はどこですか？ Where's the book? (＝本はどこにありますか？) \n> 机の上です。 It's on the desk. (＝机の上にあります。) \n> 本は机の上です。 The book is on the desk. (＝本は机の上にあります。)\n\nand no one would think you're saying \"The book is upper part of a desk\". \nSimilar examples are:\n\n> お父さんは二階です。 Dad is upstairs. \n> 太郎くんは学校です。 Taro is away at school. \n> 姉は今、ロンドンです。 My sister is in London now.\n\nYou can even say:\n\n> 僕はウナギです。(I'll have eel.) \n> 私はオレンジジュース。(I'll have orange juice.)\n\nat a cafe or restaurant, and no one would think you're saying you're an eel or\norange juice.\n\n> *この本は机の上にです。\n\nis incorrect.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T13:18:55.387",
"id": "24787",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T13:43:02.630",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T13:43:02.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24781 | 24787 | 24787 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24784",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 路{ろ｝上{じょう}でたたき売{う}りしようが こそドロやろうがめんどうみようって **ことにならあね** 。\n\nWhat does 「ことにならあね」 mean? Is it equivalent to 「ことにならない」？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T08:57:05.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24782",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-04T00:08:30.257",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-04T00:08:30.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does 「ことにならあね」 mean?",
"view_count": 217
} | [
{
"body": "> 「(~って)ことにならあね」\n\nI think it's slurred 「(~という)ことになる+わ(や)+ね」 \ni.e. 「(~という)ことになる(だろう)よ・よね」\n\nFor example:\n\n> 酒がまずくならあ！ ≒ 酒がまずくなる(よ/わ)！",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T09:34:12.367",
"id": "24784",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T10:00:16.767",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T10:00:16.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24782",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24782 | 24784 | 24784 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24786",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 案ずるより産むが易し\n>\n> It is better to get down to work than (just) to worry about it (beforehand).\n> ｜ Fear can magnify a danger. ｜ A danger is not as great as it seems in\n> advance. ｜ We have nothing to fear but fear itself.\n\nI am a bad with classical Japanese so please need some help understanding the\ngrammar here.\n\nAll I can see is 易し is old 終止形 of 易しい, and the 案ずるより perhaps a contrastive\nadverbial clause (\"rather than worry...\") if modern rules apply but what is\nthe 産むが part - how does that translate to \"fear\"? (a somewhat detailed grammar\nbreakdown would be appreciated!)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T11:24:40.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24785",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T13:14:53.643",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"classical-japanese"
],
"title": "Help understanding 案ずるより産むが易し",
"view_count": 80
} | [
{
"body": "* 案ずるより: rather than worrying \n * 案ずる: to worry (archaic version of 案じる)\n * ～より: than ～\n * 産むが: bearing (a baby) (is) \n * 産む: to bear (a baby)\n * が: (subject marker)\n * 易し: easy (archaic version of 易しい)\n\nSince this is a proverb, 産む here is used to figuratively mean \"to actually do\nsomething\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T12:59:12.840",
"id": "24786",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T13:14:53.643",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T13:14:53.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24785",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24785 | 24786 | 24786 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24790",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "My question is:\n\nIf 結婚 is written as 結{けっ}婚{こん} rather than 結{け}っ婚{こん}, why do we write 持{も}って\nrather than 持{もっ}て?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T13:46:17.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24788",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T18:09:10.320",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-05T18:09:10.320",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"okurigana"
],
"title": "If 結婚 is written as 結{けっ}婚{こん} rather than 結{け}っ婚{こん}, why do we write 持{も}って rather than 持{もっ}て?",
"view_count": 182
} | [
{
"body": "Because 結 don't have reading of け but けつ and 持て would be ambiguous if it's もって\nor もて.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T14:23:07.730",
"id": "24789",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T14:23:07.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "24788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "結婚 is a Chinese loanword; 持つ is native Japanese. In chinese loanwords,\nsometimes final sounds like つ get contracted to っ〜, but because it's still\n結{けつ}, the つ is still \"part of\" the reading. Often 2-kanji words are chinese\nin origin.\n\nIn the case of 持って, the っ is a suffix to 持つ's root, 持. 持 on its own doesn't\nhave a つ sound in it. Same goes for 読む -> 読んで.\n\nOn the note of Japanese vs Chinese, you do actually get some words with っ for\n2-character compounds that are Japanese in origin. An example is 引{ひ}っ越{こ}し,\nmoving house. This one again has it because 引く doesn't naturally contain つ is\nthe Kanji -- the kanji alone with its Japanese reading is ひ (though you would\nnever say it alone).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T14:59:51.917",
"id": "24790",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T14:59:51.917",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Despite your confusion, you're actually asking two distinct questions\nunrelated to each other.\n\n 1. **Why 結{けっ}婚{こん} rather than 結{け}っ婚{こん}**\n\nBecause none of affixes involved in this case. Okurigana isn't for marking\nsound changes. It only clarifies some kind of grammatical meaningful\ndifferences caused by conjugation or derivation, or by homographic kun'yomi\nwords, that could be obscured solely in kanji. For extensive explanation on\nokurigana, [refer to this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/21051/7810), but in this case,\n結{けつ} + 婚{こん} → けっこん is but a regular pattern the kanji 結 transforms itself\n(in fact, it's more like 結 _ket_ become _ket-u_ when no connectable sound\nfollows), nothing added and confused. It's just like we don't add any letter\nwhen 春{はる} + 雨{あめ} becomes 春雨{はるさめ}, or don't change spelling in English e.g.\n_electri **c**_ → _electri **c** ity_.\n\nThere are indeed some cases we do put っ in the middle of a word, for example,\nwhen gemination (an infix!) is added for emphasis like 奇怪{きかい} \"bizarre\" →\n奇{き}っ怪{かい} \"most bizarre; outrageous\", or the word inherently has っ like\n江戸{えど} \"Edo\" + っ子{こ} \"-ic boy/girl\" → 江戸{えど}っ子{こ} \"Tokyoite (born and bred)\".\n\n 2. **Why 持{も}って rather than 持{もっ}て**\n\nIn today's orthography, okurigana to verbs is started in the last syllable of\nthe stem, unless the stem only has one or less syllable long. e.g. _o.ku.r-_ →\n送る, 送らない, 送って ( _okur-_ + _-te_ > _okut-te_ ) etc. / _si.ra.be-_ → 調べる, 調べない,\n調べて etc. [The\nstandard](http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/nc/k19730618001/k19730618001.html)\n_has many provisos **extending** the okurigana, but **reducing** the okurigana\nis generally substandard_ except for a few exceptions.\n\nThus, the conjugated forms of the verb _mot-_ is written as 持つ for _mot-u_ and\n持って for _mot-te_ (持て is imperative _mot-e_ ).\n\nConfusingly, there's a word 以{もっ}て \"by means of; with\" which shares the same\netymology with 持つ, but normatively spelled without っ, because it's considered\nto be a full-fledged adverb/postposition by its own.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T09:10:47.133",
"id": "24816",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T09:36:28.673",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24788 | 24790 | 24790 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24798",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have some trouble understanding this sentence:\n\n> AとかけましてBと解きます。その心はC。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T18:32:55.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24792",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-21T07:44:39.330",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-07T15:36:41.650",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "6677",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of sentence",
"view_count": 228
} | [
{
"body": "It's the format of a traditional Japanese joke in the form of a riddle (謎かけ).\nThe wording is kind of fixed and outdated, so you may find it a bit difficult\nto understand from today's language.\n\n> AとかけましてBと解きます。その心はC。 \n> Literally: _(I) pose (you) A, and (you) answer B. The clue is... C._ \n> Meaning: _What do A and B have in common? It's C._\n\nWhat goes in _C_ is the punch line and often is a pun on _A_ and _B_.\nSometimes the entire joke is given in monologue, sometimes it's played in Q&A\nstyle (the original way): \"What is like _A_?\" → \" _B_ is.\" → \"Why?\" → \"Because\n_C_.\"\n\nAn example from\n[Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%9E%E3%81%8B%E3%81%91):\n\n> 「ミニスカート」とかけて、「結婚式のスピーチ」と解く。その心は「短いほど喜ばれる」 \n> _Why is a \"mini-skirt\" like a \"wedding speech\"? Because \"the shorter (they\n> are), the more are pleased (with them)\"._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T19:50:30.843",
"id": "24798",
"last_activity_date": "2019-12-21T07:44:39.330",
"last_edit_date": "2019-12-21T07:44:39.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24792",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24792 | 24798 | 24798 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24799",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As a guest is leaving a man's house the guest is told:\n\n> おみやげをお持ちいたしましょう。\n\n**Edit: After this the guest is offered a choice of present to take.**\n\nI am not familiar with this use of the volitional form, when the speaker is\nnot involved in the action. If the sentence ended in か then I'd be happy to\ntranslate it as \"Will you take a present\". Note that this is printed text so I\nguess I shouldn't assume a question with raised intonation in place ofか,\nbesides which the man doesn't provide an answer.\n\nSo how should I interpret this use of the volitional form? The best I can come\nup with is \"You should take a present\" (meant as a polite suggestion) but I\ncan't find this usage documented anywhere (note, I am not yet able to read\nJapanese dictionaries). I have read [this\nlink](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14877/why-is-the-\nvolitional-form-used-in-this-\ntitle-%E6%99%82%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AF%E8%87%AA%E5%88%86%E3%82%92%E7%96%91%E3%81%8A%E3%81%86)\nand [this link](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15889/can-the-\nvolitional-form-be-used-when-the-speaker-is-not-intending-to-do-the-acti) on\nthis site, but they both seem to require that the speaker should have some\ninvolvement in the action. Is the fact that the speaker will be 'giving' the\npresent sufficient involvement to allow this use?\n\nIn summary, please clarify the grammar of this use of the volitional form and\nwhen it can be applied. Many thanks.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T19:15:01.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24795",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T20:54:23.817",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "Can volitional form mean 'you should ...'",
"view_count": 364
} | [
{
"body": "> As a guest is leaving a man's house the guest is told:\n>\n\n>> おみやげをお持ちいたしましょう。\n\n>\n> **Edit: After this the guest is offered a choice of present to take.**\n\nSo the owner of the house (the man) tells the guest leaving his house\n`おみやげをお持ちいたしましょう`, and then offers the guest a present. What the man is\nspeaking of is his own actions; namely \"I'll go get the presents\" for the\nguest to choose from (duly noted by @seafood258 in the comments above).\n\nThe お＋連用形＋いたす form is humble speech (謙譲語) for the speaker. So the man is\ndefinitely saying that he himself will do the action. The opposite form of\nhonourific speech (尊敬語) would use the form お＋連用形＋に＋なる. So if the man was\ntelling the guest to do something, it would need this form (or another\nhonourific form).\n\nSo as your other research showed, the man **is** involved in the action\nbecause he's describing his own action, not the guest's.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T20:10:33.290",
"id": "24799",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T20:54:23.817",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "24795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24795 | 24799 | 24799 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24811",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Do 臭い{くさい} and [腐る]{くさる} have similar roots? They obviously sound very\nsimilar; the only difference in pronunciation is the final mora, but maybe\nthat's only because of the part of speech. The meanings are related as well.\nWhen things rot, they tend to smell bad. Of course, 臭い isn't restricted to\njust bad food, but meanings tend to change/broaden over time.\n\nSo I'm wondering, were these once pretty much the same word, separated once\nthey were given kanji? Or have they always been thought about separately, and\nthe sound/meaning is just coincidence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T19:31:50.963",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24797",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T05:26:08.350",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T20:12:55.853",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Are 臭い{くさい} and 腐る{くさる} related?",
"view_count": 369
} | [
{
"body": "[語源由来辞典](http://gogen-allguide.com/ku/kusaru.html) lists theories that they\nmight be connected for the very same reason you mentioned, among others.\n\n>\n> 動植物が腐ると悪臭を発することから「くさあるる（臭荒）」とする説もあるが、「くさい（臭い）」は「くさる」が語源なので、前後関係が逆転している。「くそある（糞生）」から「くさる」に転じたとする説もあるが、「くそ」も「くさる」もしくは「くさい」から生じた語と考えられるため、この説も採れない。\n\nThe way I understand it, it is generally believed that 腐る, along with くそ,\nstems from 腐る, but that is not proven (and there are other conflicting\ntheories, such as 腐る stemming from 糞荒【くさあるる】, whose reading I can't quite\nexplain).\n\nApart from that, I've been able to retrieve two related citations from the\n岩波古語辞典, from two different sources. The first one is for 腐り, from a\n[Yahoo!](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q14144385679)\nquestion.\n\n> 「クサシ(臭し)・クソ(糞)と同根。悪臭を放つようになる意」\n\nThe second one is for 臭し (classical form of 臭い), which can be found\n[here.](http://www.ctb.ne.jp/~imeirou/soumoku/k/kusunoki.html)\n\n> <クサリ(腐)・クソ(糞)と同根> はげしい、いやなにおいがする。悪臭を放っている。\n\nAs you can see, both entries cross-reference each other.\n\nSo, it seems like the 腐る・臭い connection is definitely the most agreed upon\ntheory, although there does not seem to be a definite proof. There definitely\nseems to be some kind of connection between (at least two of) くそ, くさい and くさる,\nthough, although we can't know for sure how exactly it's laid out.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T05:26:08.350",
"id": "24811",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T05:26:08.350",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4289",
"parent_id": "24797",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24797 | 24811 | 24811 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Having trouble with the bolded part:\n\n> 沈む太陽が海に溶け、全てを赤く染めあげる一瞬の――儚いけれど鮮烈な一時は、しかしそこで止まっていた。水平線に半ばまで埋もれながら、決して落ちない太陽。\n> **寄せては引き、引いては返すも** 、どこか現実味を欠いた潮騒……\n\nWhat (I think) I understand so far:\n\n> A fleeting but vivid moment when the sinking sun dissolves in the sea,\n> tinting everything red. However, it stops there. This sun, half-buried under\n> the horizon, will certainly not set. **???** Sea roar that is out of touch\n> with reality...\n\nHow to translate the bolded part? Is it talking about the tide, so that\n\n> 寄せて **は** 引き、引いて **は** 返す **も**\n\nAre ほ、も the s.c. 係助詞 and simplifying it into 寄せて引き、引いて返す、どこか現実味を欠いた潮騒 it's\nbasically a long clause ((寄せて引き、引いて返す)、(どこか現実味を欠いた)) of 潮騒?\n\n> sea roar that pulls back, then comes in, then pulls back again [...])?\n> _(again, my English vocabulary is poor so that's probably not the right word\n> for describing tidal movement.._.)\n\nI have only recently read about the s.c. 係助詞 (I don't know if that's the\ncorrect notion to use here, even) and a lot of vocabulary here is unfamiliar\nto me so I'm looking for help as to whether I understood it correctly.\n\n(btw please correct me if I failed at other parts of translation)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T20:17:30.367",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24800",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T21:22:16.597",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-04T21:22:16.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "10216",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"comprehension"
],
"title": "Unable to understand grammar/meaning here",
"view_count": 159
} | [] | 24800 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 昼でも夜でもない境界【きょうかい】の、現実の中の非現実【ひげんじつ】。そういうものが一般的【いっぱんてき】に何と言われ、形容されるか、それをすっかり忘れていた。黄昏刻【たそがれどき】は\n> **[逢魔ヶ刻]【おうまがとき】** ――人でないモノに逢【あ】う刻限【こくげん】。\n\nWhat (I think) I understand so far:\n\n> The most unreal of all realities, set on the boundary that is is neither\n> night nor day. What would be the usual way to call such a thing, or describe\n> it - that I completely forgot. Dusk time is ???, appointed time for meeting\n> things that aren't human.\n\nWithout ヶ it would seem something like \"(lit.) time of meeting evil spirits\",\n\"the witching hour\" etc, but what does ヶ add? Is that a play on 刻一刻? A sign\nthat 逢魔ヶ is to be read like 逢魔逢魔 or 逢魔魔 (so that it becomes X刻はA時、B刻限)?\n\nPlease correct me if I failed at other parts of translation.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T21:19:01.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24801",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T15:17:10.690",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T15:17:10.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does ヶ mean here?",
"view_count": 529
} | [
{
"body": "逢魔が刻 is a fixed expression, \"time of disaster\" or some such, according to a\nmeaning listed in the post which this question is a duplicate of.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T21:37:29.590",
"id": "24802",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-04T21:37:29.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10216",
"parent_id": "24801",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24801 | null | 24802 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I read the post on here from 2011 about the difference between に and には, but I\ncame back still a little confused (especially with all the non-layman grammar\nwords like transitive/nominative/etc).\n\nI have two examples and I think I know how to use には, but I'm wondering if\nsomeone could double-check or expand on the subject.\n\n> 日本語はアメリカ人には難しいと思います。\n>\n> I think Japanese is (more) difficult for Americans (as opposed to other\n> nationalities).\n\nSo, in a way, I'm implying that I'm taking into consideration other\nnationalities compared to Americans in terms of English being difficult,\nputting emphasis that it is much harder for Americans compared to others.\n\n> 日本語はアメリカ人に難しいと思います。\n>\n> I think Japanese is difficult for Americans.\n\nThis would be just saying that Japanese is hard for Americans, not comparing\nit to any other country/nationality. So its implied I could also think\nJapanese is equally as hard for, say, Russian people and that Americans don't\nnecessarily have a _harder_ time.\n\nWhat do you all think? Would love some feedback to properly understand には\nbetter.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T23:23:27.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24804",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T06:56:07.880",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10258",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"syntax"
],
"title": "Question about に and には in terms of emphasis",
"view_count": 517
} | [
{
"body": "Hope this does not shock you too badly. If anything, it is at least an honest\nopinion of a native speaker.\n\nRegardless of one's intended meaning and/or nuance, it sounds much more\nnatural to say:\n\n> 1.「日本語はアメリカ人 **には** 難しいと思います。」\n\nthan to say:\n\n> 2.「日本語はアメリカ人 **に** 難しいと思います。 」\n\nTo be even more honest, my ears do not accept Sentence #2. Sure, I could\neasily _**guess**_ what the speaker/author would have wanted to say but I also\nknow without even thinking that Sentence #2 is not something many native\nspeakers would say in a natural setting. **We would use 「には」**.\n\nBesides 「には」, one could use 「にとっては」, but not just 「に」.\n\nMoving on to the topic of \"Americans vs. Others\"...\n\nSentence #1, all by itself without further context, does **not** mean or imply\nthat people from other countries have an easier time learning Japanese than\nAmericans do. To mean that, it would need to be mentioned in the surrounding\nsentences.\n\nThe easiest way to express that without even creating a whole new sentence\nwould be to say:\n\n> 「日本語はアメリカ人には **特に** 難しいと思います。」 or\n>\n> 「日本語はアメリカ人にとっては **特に** 難しいと思います。」\n\n「[特]{とく}に」 can be placed right in front of 「アメリカ人」 in either sentence.\n\nExtra:\n\nAs an おまけ, here is an example of the \"emphatic 「には」 vs. plain 「に」\".\n\n> 「スカイツリーは東京 **に** あります。大阪 **には** ありません。」\n\nI do know that many J-learners would just use 「に」 in the second sentence, too.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T06:56:07.880",
"id": "24812",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T06:56:07.880",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24804",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24804 | null | 24812 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I was listening to a song and decided to check the lyrics to it.\n\n<http://www.kasi-time.com/item-74499.html>\n\n夜風に吹かれ 考える 好き 嫌い 嫌い 好き 繰り返す\n\nSince there were no question marks, so it made me doubt if it was a question\nbeing asked in the lyrics. Also, when I did a dictionary search for でしょう\n\n[http://classic.jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E3%81%A7%E3%81%97%E3%82%87u&eng=](http://classic.jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E3%81%A7%E3%81%97%E3%82%87u&eng=)\n\nSome have question marks, while some don't.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-04T23:26:00.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24805",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-12T13:42:47.960",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-05T21:19:28.410",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"song-lyrics",
"punctuation"
],
"title": "Do you need a question mark to indicate a question in Japanese?",
"view_count": 20328
} | [
{
"body": "Nope, it's optional. The final particle か indicates that the sentence is a\nquestion, so that can be seen as the question mark of Japanese. In fact,\nadding a question mark when there's already a か can seem redundant.\n\nThat said, you'll find it used a lot anyway, just because sometimes people\nwant to use it. But it is definitely a casual thing, so you'll only see it in\ncasual writings, like manga. You won't find it in anything formal.\n\nEdit: after reading the song text more closely, I'd also like to add that\nsometimes, as occurs a few times in the lyrics, it's necessary to add a\nquestion mark in writing to show that it's a question even if it doesn't end\nin か. In speaking it is clear when this happens, but not in writing. This\nstill only applies to casual works, though, because formal sentences will be\ngrammatically set up to indicate that it's a question without the need for a\nrandom question mark.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T00:06:08.177",
"id": "24806",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T00:21:59.063",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-05T00:21:59.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "24805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "The short answer is 'no' because all questions end in 「か」 in any \"official\" or\n\"formal\" writing. You just know when you see a question.\n\nI never even learned how to use a question mark in elementary school. I was\nsurprised to learn that it was regularly used in English when I started\nlearning English in junior high school.\n\nIn non-official and non-formal writing these days, however, the question mark\nis used everywhere, especially when the questions are short as in:\n\n「マジで？」= \"For real?\"\n\n「[車]{くるま}で[行]{い}くの？」= \"Are you going by car?\" or \"Are you driving (there)?\"\n\nEven today, we would not often use a question mark at the end of a longer\nquestion ending in 「か」 in an informal setting like a personal letter. It could\nlook \"funny\" if you used one. Old habits die hard.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T00:16:49.293",
"id": "24807",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T00:16:49.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 16
},
{
"body": "Spoken Japanese in particular tends to use intonation to indicate whether or\nnot a question is being asked, regardless of the final particle. (If it's a\nquestion, the speaker's tone rises a bit at the end, just the way it does in\nEnglish.) I'd assume that's what's being done in the lyric, or what the\nlyricist thought people would assume automatically. They could easily have\nused \"?\" (and should have, honestly ^_^b), but adding \"か\" would have thrown\noff the rhythm.\n\nIt also depends on context: In these lyrics, if the singer's been mulling over\ntheir feelings about someone else earlier in the song, it could very well be\n\"I love them. I don't. I don't love them. I do.\" If they've been wondering how\nsomeone feels about _them_ , it's definitely a question.\n\nWith regard to でしょう, since it's sort of a \"guessing\" word, it technically\nalways leaves room for someone to deny the assumption of the sentence, but it\nisn't always used to ask questions, per se. \"疲れてるでしょう\" would be \"You must be\ntired\" or \"I bet you're tired\", but if you're using it to ask whether a house\nguest wants to go to bed soon, you'd probably raise the intonation at the end,\nand in writing, if you wanted to keep the syllables exactly as they were (and\navoid adding か) you'd need to tack a question mark on the end to show that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-12T13:42:47.960",
"id": "36609",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-12T13:42:47.960",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16085",
"parent_id": "24805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] | 24805 | null | 24807 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24813",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In what contexts might \"風呂\" be used instead of \"お風呂\"? \"お巡りさん\" has been\nlexicalized. \"お茶\" is almost lexicalized. What about \"お風呂\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T02:03:47.503",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24809",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T07:14:33.323",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-05T02:31:41.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "9509",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"honorifics"
],
"title": "In what contexts might one say \"風呂{ふろ}\" instead of \"お[風呂]{ふろ}\"?",
"view_count": 125
} | [
{
"body": "Off the top of my head....\n\n 1. In scholarly and/or technical writing regarding bathing or baths.\n\n 2. In advertisement for apartments, describing whether they are equipped with bath tubs or not.\n\n 3. In the news about a bathroom.\n\nRegardless of the context, many male speakers choose to use 「風呂」 over 「お風呂」 on\na daily basis.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T07:14:33.323",
"id": "24813",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T07:14:33.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24809",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24809 | 24813 | 24813 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24966",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw this article on Gizmodo Japan:\n\n> [だれもがスマホの便利さを享受できる第一歩。視覚障 **がい**\n> 者がiPhone操作を学べるアプリ](http://www.gizmodo.jp/2015/06/iphone_visually_support.html)\n\nObviously, this is 視覚障 **害** 者 (or possibly, 視覚障 **碍** 者). It is in the title\nof the article, as well as several places within the body of the article.\n\nWhy is the 害 written in hiragana? Is there some kind of stigma, or political\nincorrectness behind using 障害者?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T02:42:22.537",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24810",
"last_activity_date": "2018-11-27T02:40:16.860",
"last_edit_date": "2018-11-27T02:40:16.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"hiragana",
"orthography"
],
"title": "Why is hiragana used in the middle of this compound word? (障害者 vs 障がい者)",
"view_count": 575
} | [
{
"body": "Some people argue that the use of \"障害者\" is politically incorrect, because the\nkanji \"害\" has the meaning like \"to harm\". Because of this, there has been\nshift to \"障がい\", especially in media and official documents. It seems [障がい was\nfirst seen in\n1990s](http://crd.ndl.go.jp/reference/modules/d3ndlcrdentry/index.php?page=ref_view&id=1000117824)\non newspapers. On the other hand, some people think that it is oversensitive,\nand that the mixture of kanji and hiragana is weird. Anyway there has been\nsome arguments over this (try, for example, searching google for\n[障害+表記+site:go.jp](https://www.google.co.jp/search?&q=%E9%9A%9C%E5%AE%B3+%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98+site%3Ago.jp)).\n\nHistorically, (as you probably know), 障害 was written as 障碍 or 障礙． Here, \"碍\"\n(=礙), as used in [碍子](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%A2%8D%E5%AD%90), simply\nmeans obstruction, without the negative tones that 害 has. In accordance with\nthe introduction of\n[常用漢字](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B8%B8%E7%94%A8%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97),\nwhich neither 碍 nor 礙 is listed on, those kanji-s were eventually replaced by\n害. Because of this, some people (including me, by the way) think that using\n\"障碍\" or \"障礙\" will settle the problem. Newspapers will never use this for now\nbecause it isn't listed in the joyo-kanji list, and I don't know if there is\nany movement towards listing them. It was at least actually discussed in\nnational diet\n([question](http://www.shugiin.go.jp/internet/itdb_shitsumon.nsf/html/shitsumon/a167001.htm)\nand [answer to\nthat](http://www.shugiin.go.jp/internet/itdb_shitsumon.nsf/html/shitsumon/b167001.htm)).\n\nI don't know what ratio of the people think it is (politically incorrect vs\nnot a problem) or (important vs irrelevant vs I don't care).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-12T11:28:43.393",
"id": "24966",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-12T14:54:14.537",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-12T14:54:14.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "4223",
"owner_user_id": "4223",
"parent_id": "24810",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] | 24810 | 24966 | 24966 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24815",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Colleague talking about a very expensive business event:\n\n> 1回行ってみたいなーとは思うけど、まあ当分先だろうな。\n\nWhat does 当分先 mean in this context?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T07:33:19.983",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24814",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T08:04:13.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "107",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of 当分先 (まあ当分先だろうな)",
"view_count": 419
} | [
{
"body": "It means \"not in the near (but further into the) future\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T08:04:13.550",
"id": "24815",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T08:04:13.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24814",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24814 | 24815 | 24815 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24819",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "These have the same reading as ひろげる, but a different kanji. Is there any\nvariation in connotation between these, or is it just variant spelling? Is 広げる\nthen, as I believe it is, the more commonly used of the two?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T13:59:41.427",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24817",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T14:15:04.073",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-05T14:18:26.843",
"last_editor_user_id": "9185",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Difference between「広げる」、「拡げる」",
"view_count": 228
} | [
{
"body": "Although _Shinmeikai_ and _Daijiten_ have these as being exactly the same,\n_Meikyō_ provides a narrow band of usage for 拡げる. [This answer was rewritten\nto reflect this.] 拡げる is used for \"broaden\" or \"enlarge,\" but not for\n\"unfurl\". 広げる can be used for all three.\n\nThere is another kanji associated with ひろげる, 展げる, which is used only in the\nsense of \"unfurl\". It's comparatively rare.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T14:35:02.387",
"id": "24819",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T14:15:04.073",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-06T14:15:04.073",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "583",
"parent_id": "24817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24817 | 24819 | 24819 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "25172",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 日本の言語パートナーを探して。\n\nIs what I currently came up with but I think it is much to direct. I want to\nexpress something like this: \"I would be very pleased to find a Japanese\nlanguage exchange partner\" (meaning a male or female, native speaker)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T14:21:24.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24818",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-22T22:33:32.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10261",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Polite/nice way to ask for a language exchange partner",
"view_count": 1173
} | [
{
"body": "I would say\n\n「日本語を教えてくださる方を探しています。代わりに英語(or French or Russian? I don't know what your\nmother tongue is.) をお教えします。男性でも女性でも構いません。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-20T05:54:31.857",
"id": "25172",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-20T05:54:31.857",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10402",
"parent_id": "24818",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24818 | 25172 | 25172 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24821",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the video game Chantelise, the epilogue starts with:\n\n> それから数年の歳月が流れました\n\nThe translated version just says:\n\n> After several years\n\nAnd while that's a concise and accurate translation...\n\nI was wondering about a more faithful translation, and after a bit of\nresearch, I got:\n\n> After several years had flowed by\n\nWhere:\n\nそれから = After(ward?)\n\n流れました = Flow(ed?) ; I assume it's like \"How time flies\", but Japanese has \"How\ntime **flows** \"?\n\n* * *\n\nBut, is \"several years\" the correct translation of \"数年の歳月\"?\n\nAnd if so, why is there a 'の' inside it? Or am I splitting the phrase\nincorrectly?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T21:27:16.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24820",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T22:51:58.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9717",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"etymology"
],
"title": "Translating \"数年の歳月\" in this context, is it a unit of time?",
"view_count": 173
} | [
{
"body": "I'll address each issue one by one. I wouldn't say \"After several years\" is an\naccurate translation. I'd say it gets the gist, but we'll get to making a\nbetter translation at the end.\n\n**それから**\n\nThis word means \"from then on\" or \"afterwards\". Your translation of it is\nfine, and as it's just a word, I won't overelaborate on it.\n\n**流{なが}れる**\n\nThis does indeed mean \"to flow\", both in the sense of a liquid, and time.\n時間の流れ is a common phrase meaning \"the flow of time\". 流れました is just the polite\npast tense of this, so your translation of \"flowed\" is correct, though ends up\nsounding awkward in the sentence in English when you piece it together, as\nwe'll see later.\n\nIt's not unnatural, in English or Japanese, to mention the flow of time if you\nthink about it as a fluid. Not as common as 時間が過ぎます, but still used.\n\n**数年の歳月**\n\nWithout going into linguistics over what の does, it can often be used in the\ntype of phrases that you mentioned like 数年{すうねん}の歳月{さいげつ}. This part is best\ntranslated as either \"many years\", or \"years upon years\". 数年 is literally\n\"many years\", and 歳月 means \"year\" in much more flowery language than what most\npeople are used to, 年. 「〇〇年の歳月 」 [1] can be used to count years, such as:\n\n> 彼は論文を書くのに **3年の歳月** を要した\n>\n> He took 3 years to write his thesis\n\nの is modifying the previous expression so that you can count years (歳月), in\nthis case \"many\". You're not splitting the phrase incorrectly, but just need\nto realize that you're counting years in this phrase.\n\n**Overall translation**\n\nNow that we know all this, we can piece together a good translation. A more\nliteral translation sounds awkward in English, but if you're a literal mind\nyou could think about it instead as\n\n> Thereafter, many years flowed past.\n\nFine English, but it doesn't flow as well. I'd prefer a translation along the\nlines of:\n\n> それから数年の歳月が流れました\n>\n> Thereafter, years upon years passed.\n\nNot how I'd translate this as day-to-day language, but this is a video game,\nand drama's important.\n\n* * *\n\n[1] In case you didn't already know, 〇〇 is commonly used in Japanese (and\nChinese and Korean incidentally) to indicate 何々, or some value to fill those\ncircles, like how you might say \"after x years\" or even with underscores\n\"after __ years\" to show that this can take whatever value it needs to.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T22:02:55.200",
"id": "24821",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T22:51:58.327",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] | 24820 | 24821 | 24821 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24824",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Taking the sentence below:\n\n> 食糧として狩る者たちが存在する…\n\nThe first part (食料として), I take to mean \"as a food source\".\n\nThe second part (狩る者たち), I take to mean \"hunters\".\n\nTying that together with the が, it looks like \"Hunters __ as a food source...\n\nThe last part (存在する), I believe is \"exist(s)\".\n\nIt looks like the sentence says \"Hunters exist as a food source...\" However,\nthis doesn't make sense in context. Does anyone know where (or if) I'm messing\nup on my grammar?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T22:11:04.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24822",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T23:09:36.277",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-05T22:31:03.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "7317",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"verbs",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "Possible idiom or grammar structure I don't understand",
"view_count": 95
} | [
{
"body": "> \"Hunters exist as a food source.\"\n\nThis translation clearly makes no sense and needless to say, it is not what\nthe original means, either. Basically, you are making at least **two**\nmistakes here.\n\n> 「[食糧]{しょくりょう}として[狩]{か}る[者]{もの}たちが[存在]{そんざい}する。」\n\n 1. You are not \"seeing\" the unmentioned direct object for the verb 「[狩]{か}る」 = \"to hunt\". **In Japanese, it is the reader/listener's job to, from the context, \"fill in the blanks\" created by the writer/speaker**. You must learn to \"see\" them.\n\n 2. You translated 「狩る者たち」 into \"hunters\". That cost you in the end, did it not? That is \"translating too much\". It means \"those who hunt\".\n\nThat said, the biggest mistake you made is not giving us the context if I may\nget down to business here. How do we know what kind of translation fits the\ncontext?\n\nI am imagining the context to be like there are those who hunt animals for\npleasure and those who hunt for food -- that kinda stuff. Thus, my TL attempt\nwould be something like:\n\n**_\"There exist those who hunt (animals) for food.\"_**",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T23:09:36.277",
"id": "24824",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T23:09:36.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24822",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24822 | 24824 | 24824 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24825",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Also, is ね used at all in 関西？ I know な is at least more common, even among\nfemale speakers. And has どす fallen out of use?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T22:29:58.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24823",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T23:35:48.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"dialects"
],
"title": "Does 京都 use じゃ、や、or だ？",
"view_count": 97
} | [
{
"body": "My experience with speakers in Kyoto is that they use や most if they're going\nto use dialectal patterns. 関西 men also, surprisingly to me, use わ fairly\nregularly.\n\nI've never heard どす, but it's possible I just never caught it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-05T23:35:48.370",
"id": "24825",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-05T23:35:48.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4179",
"parent_id": "24823",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] | 24823 | 24825 | 24825 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24828",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Outside of Australia and New Zealand, am I likely to be understood by Japanese\nspeakers if I use キーウィ to mean New Zealanders?\n\nBased on what\n[weblio](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%AD%E3%83%BC%E3%82%A6%E3%82%A3)\nand\n[Wiktionary](http://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%82%AD%E3%83%BC%E3%82%A6%E3%82%A3)\nsay, I suspect not, but I want to check as sometimes dictionaries don't\nmention slang terms.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T01:06:41.043",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24826",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T01:58:34.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "Can キーウィ be used to mean New Zealander?",
"view_count": 184
} | [
{
"body": "I would have to say no.\n\n「キーウィ」 refers only to the kiwifruit to at least 99% of Japanese-speakers --\nperhaps even more.\n\nThose who have lived in New Zealand or Australia **_might_** refer to a New\nZealander as 「キーウィ」 among themselves, but that kind of private usage still\nwould not count as an established meaning of the word within the Japanese\nlanguage.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T01:58:34.040",
"id": "24828",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T01:58:34.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24826 | 24828 | 24828 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24829",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "My attempt is as follows:\n\n>\n> 数{すう}学{がく}が一[番]{ばん}で美{うつく}しくて強{きょう}力{りょく}な人{にん}間{げん}の精{せい}神{しん}の創{そう}造{ぞう}です。\n\nIs it correct?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T01:26:57.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24827",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T11:18:48.870",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-06T14:08:48.407",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to say ''Mathematics is the most beautiful and powerful creation of human spirit\" in Japanese?",
"view_count": 1362
} | [
{
"body": "To use as much of what you used as possible, just **drop the 「で」** and you\nwill have at least a grammatical sentence. You **cannot** say 「一番 **で** +\nadjective」 to mean \"most (adjective)\" or \"(adjective)est\".\n\nThe next step would be to replace the conversational 「一番」 by the more\nformal「[最]{もっと}も」.\n\nThen, I would seriously think about the validity of the 「が」 in 「数学が」. Having\nbeen here so long, I know 「が」 is Japanese-learners' favorite subject marker.\n(They often use it even when it should **_not_** be used at all.) More context\nis needed to choose between 「は」 and 「が」 here. Generally speaking, one needs a\nvery good reason to use 「が」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T02:18:35.920",
"id": "24829",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T02:18:35.920",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24827",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I would say \"人間(の)精神が精神が想像した最も美しく強力なものは数学である。\", or\n\"数学は人間(の)精神が想像した最も美しく、強力なものである。\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T06:16:49.720",
"id": "24832",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T06:16:49.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10264",
"parent_id": "24827",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "It would be more natural:\n\n> 数学は人間の精神による創造の中で、最も美しくそして強力なものです。\n\nAlthough it may depend on the context, in this case, the original passage\nmeans, I suppose, that:\n\n> Mathematics is one of the most beautiful and powerful creations that human\n> spirit has ever created.\n\nIf so, at least, it would be better to say:\n\n> 数学は\n\nrather than\n\n> 数学が.\n\nBecause **数学が** implies **only** or **emphasizing** , so it is going to be\n**Only Mathematics is** as if **数学だけが** or **It is Mathematics that ...**. On\nthe other hand, **数学は** does not mention others or means implicitly **at\nleast**.\n\nFor example, to say **I study Japanese.**\n\n> **私が** 日本語を勉強します。\n\nThis sentence is more natural when there must be only one person to study\nJapanese in a group or class.\n\n> **私は** 日本語を勉強します。\n\nThis means that I do not know if other people do, but I do. Or\n\n> **私は** 日本語を勉強しています。\n\nThis is more like **I study Japanese everyday.**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T11:18:48.870",
"id": "24855",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T11:18:48.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10271",
"parent_id": "24827",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24827 | 24829 | 24829 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24831",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "E.g.\n\n> 危険な投機的な事業\n>\n> 危険で投機的な事業\n\nAre they both grammatical and mean the exact same thing?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T04:49:06.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24830",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T05:53:17.060",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10263",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "Is there any difference for using 連用形 vs 連体形 when listing 形容動詞 to modify a 名詞?",
"view_count": 148
} | [
{
"body": "If you mean \"risky **and** speculative\", then you should say 危険 **で** 投機的な,\nbecause that's one of dedicated meaning 連用形 has.\n\nSaying 「危険な、投機的な事業」 (putting a comma is a good practice) for this meaning is\nnot prohibited, but it either sounds like adding words one by one while you're\nspeaking, which isn't very nice for written language; or could mean \"risky\n**or** speculative\".\n\nOtherwise, 危険な投機的な事業 might well be interpreted as \"risky speculative\nbusiness\", that is, 危険な modifies all what comes after.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T05:53:17.060",
"id": "24831",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T05:53:17.060",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24830",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24830 | 24831 | 24831 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24875",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A man has just returned home to his wife and says:\n\n> 今日は、雀のお宿へ行って、おいしい料理や雀の踊を見てきたよ。\n>\n> Today, I went to the sparrow's house and (ate) delicious food and (came and)\n> saw a sparrow dance.\n\nIn the first half of the sentence he moved away from his current viewpoint\n(行く）which makes sense, but in the second half doesn't 見てきた suggest that he is\nat the sparrow's house when he is speaking (I came and saw)? Why is it not\n見ていった?\n\nI also don't understand why either きた or いった is actually needed here. Doesn't\n行く in the first half of the sentence provide all the coming and going\ninformation needed?\n\nLastly, I read the sentence literally to mean \"saw both a sparrow dance and\ndelicious food\". I'm assuming that the \"eating\" is somehow implicit. But it\ncould equally well be \"cooked delicious food\" for example. Am I missing any\nsubtleties here?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T10:44:40.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24833",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T03:40:43.203",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-06T21:48:16.137",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Change of viewpoint in mid-sentence",
"view_count": 315
} | [
{
"body": "It says \"Today, I went to the sparrow's inn, saw delicious dishes or a sparrow\ndance (there) and came back here\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T21:12:56.073",
"id": "24843",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T21:12:56.073",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "24833",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "行ってきた is the te-form of the verb 行く + きた(来た), the subsidiary verb (補助動詞) くる.\nIt's used for \"went (and came back)\" or \"have (just) been to\", e.g.\n\n> 郵便局に行ってきた。I've just been to the post office.\n\n* * *\n\n> 今日は、[雀]{すずめ}のお[宿]{やど}へ行って、おいしい[料理]{りょうり}や[雀]{すずめ}の[踊]{おど}りを見てきたよ。\n\nIt literally says \"Today, I went to the sparrow's house, saw delicious dishes\nand sparrow dance, and came back.\" (The お[宿]{やど} here is not inn but house;\nwhen ojiisan sings \"suzume, suzume, oyado wa dokoda?\" he's looking for the\nlittle sparrow's house, not their inn.)\n\nBut as you can see, the writer intended to say \"Today, I went to the sparrow's\nhouse, ate delicious dishes, saw sparrow dance, and came back.\"\n\nI'm not sure this is grammatically \"correct\" (actually I think it's probably\nsloppy/wrong) but, we often say and hear sentences like this in daily\nconversation, or sometimes even in tv drama:\n\n> * 朝食に、トーストとコーヒーを飲んで、・・・ I drank bread and coffee for breakfast, and...\n> * おやつに、ジュースとケーキを食べた。 I ate juice and cake for snack.\n> *\n> [朝飯にトースト二枚とミルクを飲んで、それからどうした？](http://ultraseven.seesaa.net/pages/user/m/article?article_id=7495985&page=3)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-08T08:21:41.473",
"id": "24875",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T03:40:43.203",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T03:40:43.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "24833",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24833 | 24875 | 24875 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24845",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am a Japanese language student in the beginner level. I have just learnt a\ngrammar as follows.\n\n> パンとごはんとどちらの方が好きですか。ごはんの方が好きです。\n\nI am impatient to learn something like,\n\n> I see things differently than any others do.\n\nCould you give me a crash course for this?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T14:06:31.577",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24834",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T00:11:41.353",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-06T18:43:00.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "9896",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to say \"I see things differently than any others do\" in Japanese?",
"view_count": 725
} | [
{
"body": "Natural ways of saying that would be:\n\n> 「（私 **は** ）[物]{もの}の[見方]{みかた} **が** ほかの[誰]{だれ}とも[違]{ちが}います。」 or\n>\n> 「（私 **の** ）物の見方 **は** ほかの人とは違っています。」\n\nBack in high school (in Japan), we would have been \"required\" to translate it\nto something like:\n\n> 「（私の）物の見方は,ほかの[人達]{ひとたち}の **それ** とは違います。」\n\nwith 「それ」 referring to 「物の見方」. This sounds a little more formal than the first\ntwo sentences above. The first two are more informal if not necessarily\ncolloquial.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T00:11:41.353",
"id": "24845",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T00:11:41.353",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24834 | 24845 | 24845 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "\n\nThere is 格 , then THAT character that i can't recognise, and then 内 . Does\nsomeone have any idea of what that kanji is?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T17:29:08.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24836",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T17:46:41.870",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-06T17:46:41.870",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10267",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "What kind of kanji is this?",
"view_count": 173
} | [
{
"body": "It says 格納{かくのう}:\n\n> ［名］(スル)物を一定の場所に納め入れること。「航空機を―する」\n> [(大辞泉)](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%A0%BC%E7%B4%8D-460656)\n\nSo the thin 糸 and 内 aren't separate characters, they're both part of 納.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T17:30:31.930",
"id": "24837",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T17:30:31.930",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24836",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24836 | null | 24837 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24839",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A sentence in my book:\n\n> これは、漢字{かんじ} **が**\n> 持{も}つ体系的{たいけいてき}なつながりを明{あき}らかにして文化勲章{ぶんかくんしょう}を受{う}けた漢字学{かんじがく}の第一人者{だいいちにんしゃ}、\n> 白川{しらかわ}静{しずか}さんに、漢字の成{な}り立{た}ちを一つ{ひとつ}一つ{ひとつ}教{おし}えてもらった本{ほん}です。\n\nThe very start of the sentence reads: _\"これは、漢字 **が** 持つ....\"_\n\nWhy is the 助詞 \"が\" instead of \" **を** \"? \nIsn't \"漢字\" the direct object of \"持つ\"?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T18:38:37.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24838",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T19:16:51.827",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-06T18:58:12.600",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10193",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"particle-を",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Can \"が\" ever mark the direct object?",
"view_count": 356
} | [
{
"body": "漢字が持つ is a relative clause. It has a gap in object position:\n\n> 漢字-が ＿＿- ~~を~~ 持つ\n\nThe gap is filled semantically by the following noun phrase 体系的なつながり:\n\n> ① 漢字-が 体系的なつながり-を 持つ \n> ② [ 漢字-が ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿- ~~を~~ 持つ ] 体系的なつながり\n\nThese can be translated into English:\n\n> ① Kanji have a systematic relationship. \n> ② the systematic relationship [ _which_ kanji have ＿＿ ]\n\nThe details are different in English because of articles and relative\npronouns, but hopefully you can see the parallel:\n\nIn example ① we have an independent clause (a complete sentence).\n\nIn example ② we come up with a noun phrase by **relativizing** the clause; we\npull out one of the arguments and turn it into the head noun that the clause\nmodifies.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T19:16:51.827",
"id": "24839",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T19:16:51.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "24838",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] | 24838 | 24839 | 24839 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24841",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Normally, I don't have much trouble finding written kanji. However, this one\nhas me stumped:\n\n\n\nThe closest character I can find is 逃.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T19:42:19.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24840",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T20:06:23.110",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7317",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Can't find this kanji",
"view_count": 834
} | [
{
"body": "These are the same character, but the image you showed gives in its\ntraditional form, and an old style. 逃 in previous forms has 2 dots in its\nradical 辶, as with many other characters.\n\nAlso, the writing style is slightly old, so it looks different in \"font\" if\nyou will to the computer graphics version of the character.\n\nLooks like you didn't have much trouble finding this kanji either!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T20:06:23.110",
"id": "24841",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T20:06:23.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "24840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] | 24840 | 24841 | 24841 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been learning japanese for quite a while and always wondered why :\n\n> 言ってんじゃねえぞ\n\ncould be an order. Whereas something like :\n\n> 言わない\n\ncan't be an order.\n\nBecause basically, 【言ってんじゃねぞ】 is just :\n\n> 言う の テ形\n>\n> 助動詞 いる not pronounced since it's a contraction\n>\n> Contraction of the particle の (ん)\n>\n> And じゃない\n\nSo I don't understand why 【○○てんじゃねえぞ】can be understood as :\n\n\"Don't ***\"\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T20:30:51.523",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24842",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T21:23:28.257",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "Why can 言ってんじゃねーぞ be an order?",
"view_count": 228
} | [
{
"body": "Expanding the contraction 言ってんじゃねぇぞ, you get 言っているのではないぞ as you say, which is\na のだ form negated. Now, a のだ form can be used as a virtual order and its\nnegative form can be prohibition.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-06T21:23:28.257",
"id": "24844",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-06T21:23:28.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "24842",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24842 | null | 24844 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I posted this タイからこんにちは！ in the web somewhere with my Twitter ID. And then\nthere is someone new followed me in Twitter with a tweet タイからこんにちは！ じゃねんじゃ in\nhis timeline. I wonder what that actually means..\n\nThis is used by tsukkomi player? How?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T05:27:00.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24846",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-11T19:05:09.587",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-11T19:05:09.587",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "7040",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"contractions"
],
"title": "What is じゃねんじゃ.. My friend say it is Tsukkomi but I don't get it",
"view_count": 237
} | [
{
"body": "It's a dialectal (jocular) expression with a little slack spelling.\n\n> じゃねんじゃ \n> → じゃね **え** んじゃ (restoring contracted vowel) \n> → じゃ **ない** んじゃ (non-vulgar form) \n> → じゃないん **だ（よ）** (Standard Japanese equivalent)\n\nSo, it means something like \"No way it's that ~\", or more tsukkomi-like:\n\n> _\"Hello from Thailand\"? Oh, come on!_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T08:47:11.063",
"id": "24850",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T08:47:11.063",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24846",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24846 | null | 24850 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24852",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[夏目漱石の「坊っちゃん」から](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000148/files/752_14964.html)\n\n>\n> 大工の兼公【かねこう】と肴屋【さかなや】の角【かく】をつれて、茂作【もさく】の人参畠【にんじんばたけ】をあらした事がある。人参の芽が出揃【でそろ】わぬ処【ところ】へ藁【わら】が一面に敷【し】いてあったから、その上で三人が\n> **半日[相撲]【すもう】をとりつづけに取ったら** 、人参がみんな踏【ふ】みつぶされてしまった。\n\nRegarding the phrase in bold.\n\n> ... **半日[相撲]【すもう】をとりつづけに取ったら**...\n\nI assume とりつづけ is the verb stem of 取り続ける, whose definition can be inferred\nfrom the [alc\nresults](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%8F%96%E3%82%8A%E7%B6%9A%E3%81%91)\nto mean \"to keep up\", or \"to maintain\". Thus, I first thought upon seeing\nとりつづけに取る was something like, \"to compete (in wrestling) to keep up\n(something)\". However, that sounds rather strange to me. It appears to make\nmore sense when you treat it as an adverbial phrase.\n\nMy questions:\n\n * What is the definition of 取り続ける (if that is indeed the word used), and how does it differ from 続ける? Or should I perhaps treat it as 取って続ける?\n * Is 「三人が半日相撲をとりつづけに取ったら」 parsed as 三人が [ 半日相撲をとりつづけに ] 取ったら?\n * Does 「半日相撲をとりつづける」 mean \"to continue wrestling for half a day\"?\n * If the above are correct, could 「半日相撲をとりつづけにとる」then be interpreted as \"to wrestle continuously for half a day\"?\n * What would be the difference in meaning between 「とりつづけに取ったら」 and 「とりつづけたら」 in the passage?\n\nApologies for the barrage of questions. I suppose what I am really asking is\nfor a step-by-step confirmation of my thinking process. While I believe I am\non the right track, my understanding of the sentence still feels somewhat\n\"iffy\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T07:06:25.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24847",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T19:01:35.210",
"last_edit_date": "2015-06-07T19:01:35.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "9838",
"owner_user_id": "9838",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"translation"
],
"title": "Meaning of 「半日相撲をとりつづけに取ったら...」",
"view_count": 506
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's one verbal phrase とり続けにとる. Repeating the same verb using the\n\"VにV\" pattern (e.g. 笑いに笑う, 泣きに泣く, 食べに食べて飲みに飲む) is one way to emphasize the\nverb. It describes something is done intensively for a long time.\n\n * [現代日本語の同一動詞反復表現「VにV」について](https://www.lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp/nichigen/issue/pdf/10/10-04.pdf)\n * [古典 文法 格助詞 に](http://www.hello-school.net/haroajapa010005.htm) (see the last section)\n\nSo if the phrase in question were \"半日相撲をとりにとったら\", the sentence would be very\nnatural and the answer would be very simple.\n\nThe sentence actually says \"とり続けにとったら\", and I admit I haven't seen the same\n\"V続けにV\" pattern before (\"泣き続けに泣く\" sounds weird). That said, I think we can\nreasonably interpret this as a variation of the pattern above. So it means the\nsame as 半日相撲をとりつづけたら (to continue wrestling for half a day), but with the\nemphasis on the fact that they enjoyed wrestling for a long time.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T09:12:34.257",
"id": "24851",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T09:12:34.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24847",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "> _What is the definition of 取り続ける (if that is indeed the word used), and how\n> does it differ from 続ける? Or should I perhaps treat it as 取って続ける?_\n\n続ける is a 補助動詞 here, which attaches to another verb to make it mean \"continue\nto V\" ([see here](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=tsuzukeru)). And\n取る is the verb we use for \"fight wrestling\", so effectively 相撲を取る equals to\n\"to wrestle (a bout)\".\n\n> _Is 「三人が半日相撲をとりつづけに取ったら」 parsed as 三人が [ 半日相撲をとりつづけに ] 取ったら?_\n\nI don't quite understand this part, but it's true that 三人が is the subject and\n取った（ら） is the corresponding predicate.\n\n> _Does 「半日相撲をとりつづける」 mean \"to continue wrestling for half a day\"?_\n\nYes, you're right.\n\n> _If the above are correct, could 「半日相撲をとりつづけにとる」then be interpreted as \"to\n> wrestle continuously for half a day\"?_\n\nKind of. In fact, I don't feel it's a natural wording, though comprehensible,\nfrom today's perspective. But indeed 漱石 has used this construction at least\nfor a several times.\n\n> この間中みたように、 **降り続けに降られる**\n> と困るが、もう天気も好くなったから（『[門](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000148/files/785_14971.html)』）\n>\n> 四十年間やかましい小言{こごと}を **吐き続けに吐いた**\n> 顔はこれだなと思う。（『[カーライル博物館](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000148/card1046.html)』）\n>\n> その日はちょうど内にいて、食事中例の気作{きさく}な話を **し続けにした**\n> ため（『[彼岸過迄](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000148/files/765_14961.html)』）\n\nMaybe it's a style that was popular at his times, or his own.\n\n> _What would be the difference in meaning between 「とりつづけに取ったら」 and 「とりつづけたら」\n> in the passage?_\n\nI can only guess, but I think the nuance of 「とりつづけに取ったら」 wouldn't be too far\nfrom the combination of \"continuously\" (取り続ける) and \"exhaustively; intensively\"\n([取りに取る](https://www.lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp/nichigen/issue/pdf/10/10-04.pdf)), so\nafter all it should mean \"wrestled as much as we want without a break\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T09:45:49.560",
"id": "24852",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T10:10:39.987",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "24847",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] | 24847 | 24852 | 24851 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "24849",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Novels in English are generally completely written in past tense, but Japanese\nnarration is quite confusing because they constantly switch between past and\npresent tense. For example, take this excerpt from a light novel I was\nreading.\n\n> 加藤は、泣かない。 \n> 英梨々みたいに、泣く訳がない。 \n> けれど、いや、だからこそ…… \n> その、初めての叛逆が、まるで尖った木の枝で刺されたかのように、鈍く痛んだ。 \n>\n\nFrom an English reader's perspective, such a paragraph is bizarre since it's a\nmix of present and past tense despite describing events happening at the same\ntime. I have heard of sentences such as 私の言うことを誰も信じなかった, where only the end\npart of a sentence is past tense, but I am unsure if this applies to an entire\nnovel. If I wrote an entire novel in present tense and only made the last\nsentence past tense, does that retroactively make the whole novel past tense?\n\nThere is also how the present tense of a verb often expresses something\ndifferent from future tense or habitual action. For example:\n\n> まだ日も暮れない夕方の通学路を、駅に向かってゆっくりと **歩く** 俺と加藤\n\nA sentence like that is quite confusing because 歩く seemingly means \"walking,\"\nthe progressive form of \"walk.\"\n\n* * *\n\nThere are also many sections in songs where present tense is used. For\nexample*:\n\n> 諦めかけた夢がまた **波打つ** \n> あの日のままで\n\nIt doesn't fit the usual definitions of the Japanese present tense. The best\nfit, I found, was wikipedia's definiton of the simple present tense for\nEnglish where it says \"In providing a commentary on events as they occur.\"\n\nHowever, now I am in a conundrum. Is Japanese narration done in past tense,\nlike English is usually done, or are they narrating as the event happens? In\naddition, now it is very difficult to distinguish between describing habitual\nactions and providing commentary as an event happens when reading Japanese.\n\n*[Link to song lyrics](http://www.kasi-time.com/item-70488.html)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T07:49:43.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "24848",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T10:14:22.400",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T10:14:22.400",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"tense"
],
"title": "How does present tense work in Japanese narration?",
"view_count": 1828
} | [
{
"body": "This rhetoric is called\n[史的現在](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%B2%E7%9A%84%E7%8F%BE%E5%9C%A8), or\n[historical present](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_present), which\nbasically makes the sentence more vivid, and gives the feeling as if the\nreader were in the place. In particular, you can see this commonly happen in\nsport news.\n\nI'm not quite sure how frequently this happens in the English literature, but\nI don't call it a Japanese-only phenomenon.\n\nRelated question: [Why did the author briefly jump to present tense in this\narticle?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23349/5010)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-06-07T08:11:59.307",
"id": "24849",
"last_activity_date": "2015-06-07T08:11:59.307",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "24848",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] | 24848 | 24849 | 24849 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.