question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading \"Fruits Basket\" volume 3. In this scene, Kyo is annoyed by some\ncomments his classmates make, and says:\n\n> いっぺんシメんぞ、おまえら。\n\nI assume that this is some kind of a threat, like \"I'll get you all for this\".\nBut what is the literal meaning? Unfortunately there are several varieties of\nいっぺん and several しめる. It's written in Kana, so am not sure which ones I should\npick. Also, why would they use katakana for the シメ?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-30T17:40:48.513",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27733",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-25T02:57:47.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7446",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does いっぺんシメる mean exactly?",
"view_count": 559
} | [
{
"body": "「いっぺん」 ＝ 「[一回]{いっかい}」 ＝ 「[一度]{いちど}」 ＝ \"(for) once\"\n\nNow, onto 「シメる」. When you see a verb that sounds familiar but its **_stem part\nis written out in katakana_** , the chances are that you are seeing an\ninformal or slangy verb. 「シメる」 is no exception. It comes from 「締める」= \"to\ntighten\", \"to be strict\",etc., but **_not_** 「閉める」= \"to close\".\n\n＊Note that this occurs only with the Yamato verbs, not with Sino-loan-verbs\nthat end in 「する」.\n\n(Verbs such as 「アピる」= \"to apeal\", 「ディスる」= \"to disrespect\", etc. technically\nbelong in a different category of verbs, obviously, so I am not including them\nwith my statement above regarding Yamato verbs even though they are also\nwritten out in the 'katakana + る' format.)\n\n「シメる」, IMHO, has a perfect English counterpart for both meaning and nuance\n(and even slanginess) -- **_\"to put the screws on (someone)\"_**. You do not\nhave to be a gangster to use 「シメる」; We use it jokingly quite often.\n\n「シメ **ん** ぞ」 is just the Kanto colloquial form of 「シメ **る** ぞ」\n\n> いっぺんシメんぞ、おまえら。\n\ntherefore, means:\n\n> \"I'll hafta put the screws on you guys for once!\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-25T02:57:47.160",
"id": "28253",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-25T02:57:47.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "27733",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27733 | null | 28253 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27743",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't understand the use of \"行っていた\" in following line from the book \"死者の学園祭\"\nby 赤川次郎:\n\n> 手塚校長は父の旧友という事だったが、年齢は父より大分 **行っていた** 。\n\nI assume it means the principal is older, but I can't tell from the context\nwhat the relation is between their ages, and no dictionary entry for 行く or 行う\nseems to be relevant. Does the bolded text mean the same as if he had said\n年上だった?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-30T20:31:18.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27736",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T19:45:51.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1157",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs"
],
"title": "行く when comparing age",
"view_count": 152
} | [
{
"body": "It's **行{い}く**.\n\nSet phrases like 年{とし}が行{い}く means \"grow old\". And it's not three-year-old\n\"old\" but really advanced in years. There's a similar expression 年{とし}を取{と}る,\nwhereas 年が行く suggests more like the speaker is talking from younger eyes, in\nmy personal sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T03:57:58.733",
"id": "27743",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T19:45:51.990",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-08T19:45:51.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27736",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27736 | 27743 | 27743 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27749",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I found a poem by Nagai Kafu entitled 震災 (The Earthquake) in a volume of\nJapanese prose and poetry. It's a short poem about the Ansei Edo Earthquake\n(安政江戸地震) in 1855 which destroyed the red light district Yoshiwara. I reproduce\nthe parts of the poem which I have some questions about:\n\n> 今の世の若き人々\n>\n> われにな問いにそ今の世と\n>\n> また来る時代の藝術を\n\nWhat is the structure of われにな問いにそ? I understand it's construed as a negative\nimperative (\"Do not ask me ...\") but I don't recognise the syntax.\n\n> われは明治の兒ならずや\n\nI understand that -ならず is the 未然形 of なり, but what is the correct translation\nof ならず + や?\n\n> わが感激の泉とくに枯れたり\n\nIs there an adverb とくに in this line, or am I parsing it incorrectly?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-30T22:29:05.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27737",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T11:44:05.527",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"classical-japanese",
"poetry"
],
"title": "Couple of classical Japanese questions",
"view_count": 374
} | [
{
"body": "[This article](http://mokuou.blogspot.jp/2010/11/blog-post_16.html) seems to\nshow what the original poem is like.\n\n> われに **な問ひそ** 今の世と\n\nThe original text goes like this. The `な V そ` sandwich (`V` takes 連用形 except\nfor す and 来 become 未然形, せ and こ) is a common Classical pattern for negative\nimperative \"please don't\", which is given [a detailed\nexplanation](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%9D) in Japanese dictionary.\n\n> われは明治の兒ならずや\n\n`negative` + 係助詞 [`や`](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%84) (no\nparticular order) are combined to be rhetorical question. So here it says \"Am\nI not a child of Meiji (times)?\", or in this context, \"Know you not, I am a\nchild of Meiji?\"\n\n> わが感激の泉とくに枯れたり\n\nThere is an adverb とくに, means\n\"[already](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/158236/m0u/)\"; not the one\nmeans \"[especially](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/158236/m0u/)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T12:03:04.873",
"id": "27749",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T22:29:53.320",
"last_edit_date": "2015-08-31T22:29:53.320",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27737",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I offer my translation, made thanks to the community.\n\n_Note:_ the names mentioned by the poet Nagai -- Dangiku, Ochi, Ichiyo, Koyo,\nRyokuu, Encho, Shicho, Ryuson and Ogai Gyoshi -- were all contemporary poets,\nperformers and figures of the Meiji period.\n\nFor some of them, Nagai describes their falling into oblivion punningly, in a\nmanner befitting their names.\n\n> 今の世の若き人々\n>\n> Young people of our age,\n>\n> われにな問ひそ今の世と\n>\n> ask me not of the arts of our age and\n>\n> また来る時代の藝術を。\n>\n> those of the age to come.\n>\n> われは明治の兒ならずや。\n>\n> Am I not a child of the Meiji?\n>\n> その文化歴史となりて葬られし時\n>\n> When that culture and its history were entombed\n>\n> わが青春の夢もまた消えにけり。\n>\n> The dreams of my youth, too, disappeared.\n>\n> 團菊はしをれて桜癡は散りにき。\n>\n> Dangiku dried up, and Ochi dispersed.\n>\n> 一葉落ちて紅葉は枯れ\n>\n> Ichiyo fell, Koyo withered,\n>\n> 緑雨の聲も亦絶えたりき。\n>\n> Ryokuu's voice too was severed.\n>\n> 圓朝も去れり紫蝶も去れり。\n>\n> Encho passed, Shicho too.\n>\n> わが感激の泉とくに枯れたり。\n>\n> My wellspring of emotion too, already withered.\n>\n> われは明治の兒なりけり。\n>\n> I was a child of the Meiji.\n>\n> 或年大地俄にゆらめき\n>\n> One year, the earth shook, and\n>\n> 火は都を燬きぬ。\n>\n> Fire destroyed the capital.\n>\n> 柳村先生既になく\n>\n> Master Ryuuson was already gone;\n>\n> 鴎外漁史も亦姿をかくしぬ。\n>\n> Ougai Gyoshi too, vanished from our sight.\n>\n> 江戸文化の名残烟となりぬ。\n>\n> Edo, the remnants of its culture, became as smoke.\n>\n> 明治の文化また灰となりぬ。\n>\n> Meiji, its culture too, became as ash.\n>\n> 今の世のわかき人々\n>\n> Young people of our age,\n>\n> 我にな語りそ今の世と\n>\n> speak not to me of the arts of our age and\n>\n> また来む時代の藝術を。\n>\n> the age which be to come.\n>\n> くもりし眼鏡ふくとても\n>\n> Now though I wipe my clouded glasses,\n>\n> われ今何をか見得べき。\n>\n> what is there to see?\n>\n> われは明治の兒ならずや。\n>\n> Am I not a child of the Meiji?\n>\n> 去りし明治の世の兒ならずや。\n>\n> Not a child of the Meiji age, long-gone?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T05:44:16.803",
"id": "27762",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T11:44:05.527",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "816",
"parent_id": "27737",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27737 | 27749 | 27749 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27741",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From my understanding 向ける is transitive and means to face/turn something\ntowards something.\n\n> 安藤は日本国内から世界に目を向けたのです。\n>\n> -Andou turned his eyes from inside Japan to the world.\n\n向く on the other hand is essentially just the intransitive form of 向ける, meaning\nto turn or face\n\n> 上を向いて\n>\n> -Look up\n\nAre my grammatical interpretations of 向ける and 向く correct?\n\nand finally 向かう, which is also listed as intransitive. Does 向かう function in\nthe exact same way as 向く？ Do their meanings overlap completely? If not what is\nthe nuance that makes the two verbs different? In what cases would 向かう be\nused?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-30T23:14:07.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27738",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T00:23:05.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 向かう, 向く, 向ける",
"view_count": 5845
} | [
{
"body": "Your interpretation of 向く and 向ける seems fairly good. While the meaning of\nthese three verbs tend to overlap they are not exactely the same, thus 向く and\n向かう are not two verbs for a single concept.\n\n* * *\n\nNow, let's delve into some details. As you noticed, 向く and 向かう are\nintransitive and 向ける is transivitive. It is often considered that 向く and 向ける\nform an intransitive/transitive pair whereas 向かう lives in its own world (which\nis not exactly true because those verbs are quite close).\n\n * 向かう can express a movement in space, time or a change of situation:\n\n * 海へ向かう。 → Go towards the sea.\n * 秋に向かう。 → (lit. We're welcoming fall) Fall is coming.\n * 鏡{かがみ}に向かって、櫛{くし}で髪{かみ}を梳{と}かす。→ Comb one's hair in front of a (looking) glass.\n * 黎{れい}明｛めい｝に向かう。 → The dawn is drawing near.\n * 平｛へい｝癒｛ゆ｝に向かう。 → He/She is on his/her way to heal.\n * 向ける can express a movement in space:\n\n * 星{せい}黎{れい}殿{でん}に足を向ける → (lit. direct one's feet towards the palace of the black star) \nWalk towards the palace of the black star.\n\n * 扇子を顔に向ける。 → Direct the fan towards one's face.\n * 向く shows that something faces a direction.\n\n * 上を向いてください。 → Look up.\n * 扇子を顔に向く。 → Direct the fan towards one's face. (@HiruneDiver mentioned that since 向く is the literary version of 向ける it can be used here. But usually 向ける would be better. see comments)\n\nNevertheless, it should be noted that those verbs have other meanings as well.\n\n 1. 将軍を向ける。→ Send a general (for some kind of mission) \n(Here 向ける means `send somebody for a task')\n\n 2. その教科書は初心者に向いています。→ This textbook is addressed at beginners.\n 3. 頼もしい方に向いた任務。→ A work for/addressed at somebody reliable.\n 4. [e](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/214820/m0u/%E5%90%91%E3%81%8F/)[t](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/214576/m0u/)[c](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/214895/m0u/)[。](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/2036/m0u/%E5%90%91%E3%81%8F/) (each letter hide a link)\n\nUsage 2. and 3. are well-known through the two suffixes 向き and 向け.\n\n * 初心者向きの教科書。→ A textbook good for beginners. (It suits them). \n * 初心者向けの教科書。→ A textbook addressed at beginners. (It had been designed with beginners in mind).\n\n* * *\n\nLast thing that is worth mentioning is, that while 向く is not a verb of motion\n(unlike 飛ぶ,歩く,走る,…) it takes the を particle very often (に is also possible).\nSome other verbs behave like this, for example, 振り向く and 振り返る. More\ninformation on this subject can be found\n[here](http://uuair.lib.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10241/305/1/KJ00000065260.pdf).",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T01:31:24.807",
"id": "27741",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T00:23:05.800",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-02T00:23:05.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "4216",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "27738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 27738 | 27741 | 27741 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27810",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> Bob had resigned himself to the fact that they would drag him into their\n> quarrel sooner or later.\n\nThere is a party of 3 people. Two have been having a petty argument. Bob is\nfocused on an immediate, important, problem. He wants to ignore the argument.\nWhich of these is the truest translation?\n\n> 遅かれ早かれ、二人の口論に **引きずりこまれる** と、Bobは観念していた。 \n> or \n> 遅かれ早かれ、二人の口論に **引きずりこませられる** と、Bobは観念していた。\n\nWhy is causative used: \nBob would have to be **forced** (使役形) into participating in the argument,\nright? He would not just passively let himself (受身形) get involved.\n\nWhy is causative-passive used? \nBecause Bob is the subject of \"he resigns himself to getting involved\" but\nthen the object of \"they would drag him into the argument\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T01:07:11.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27740",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T06:43:41.650",
"last_edit_date": "2015-08-31T03:32:54.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"passive-voice",
"causation"
],
"title": "Does the best translation of this sentence require causative-passive?",
"view_count": 217
} | [
{
"body": "「~~を~~に引きずり込む」 means \"drag ~~ to/into ~~\", so 「~~に引きずり込まれる」 means \"be dragged\nto/into ~~\" ≒ \"be forced to participate in ~~\", \"to get involved in ~~\". For\nexample...\n\n> 二人はボブを口論に引きずり込む。They drag Bob into the quarrel. \n> → ボブは二人の口論に引きずり込まれる。Bob is dragged into their quarrel.\n\nSo I think your sentence would translate to:\n\n> 遅かれ早かれ二人の口論に引きずりこまれると、ボブは観念していた。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T06:43:41.650",
"id": "27810",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T06:43:41.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "27740",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27740 | 27810 | 27810 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27759",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 「そうだ！家で音楽聞こうっと」\n>\n> 「もう寝ようっと」\n>\n> 「英語でブログを書いてみようっと。」\n\nHow does it differ from a volitional form without っと?\n\nMy best guess is that it's a monologue marker, like な is.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T06:25:38.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27744",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T21:00:53.827",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6820",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "What does volitional form + っと mean?",
"view_count": 2924
} | [
{
"body": "I might be wrong, but it sounds to me like a shortened version of と思います,\nsomething like \"I think I will...\".\n\n> 「英語でブログを書いてみようと思いました。」\n>\n> I thought about writing a blog in English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T20:09:43.123",
"id": "27756",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T20:09:43.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1319",
"parent_id": "27744",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Yes it's a sentence-ending particle which is usually used in monologues. [One\narticle](http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110008799626) says the main function of this\nっと is to casually convince/confirm something to the speaker themselves.\nPerhaps it's like saying 'okay' to yourself.\n\n> * これで良しっと。\n> * 今日も1日お疲れさまでしたっと。 (before going to bed, to oneself)\n>\n\nOccasionally it's used when there's an actual listener. When that happens, it\nexpresses the speaker's sarcasm or indifference to the matter or the listener.\n\n> * 俺はもう知らないっと。 I don't care any more.\n> * 「彼女ができたんだ。」「そりゃよかったねっと。」 (indifferently)\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T21:00:53.827",
"id": "27759",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T21:00:53.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27744",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
]
| 27744 | 27759 | 27759 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27747",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was trying to make a sentence using the words あまり and はやい so I tried making\na sentence saying:\n\n> I don't get up early much.\n\nor\n\n> わたし は あまり はやい おきません。\n\nBut the more I stare at it the more incorrect it feels. I figured since はやい\nsounds more relative then specific it wouldn't require に. But something about\nit just feels off I could be over thinking this and I'm hoping I am. I'm just\nwondering if someone here could tell me if this is correct or not.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T08:47:07.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27746",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T11:18:06.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10247",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "わたし は あまり はやい おきません Is this correct?",
"view_count": 163
} | [
{
"body": "はやい is an adjective. You can't use it to modify a verb (おきる) like this. It\nonly modifies nouns.\n\n**early** describes how the the **waking up** was done, therefore you need to\nuse an adverb. To change an i-adjective into an adverb replace the final い\nwith く, so your sentence becomes\n\n> わたしは あまり はやく おきません。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T11:18:06.257",
"id": "27747",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T11:18:06.257",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "27746",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 27746 | 27747 | 27747 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27752",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> ヘスティアはせっせと残りの「神聖文字」を付け足し、己のしてやれる **ことに努める。**\n\nI don't really understand why に used instead を even though 努める is transitive?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T13:28:11.253",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27751",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T21:33:57.483",
"last_edit_date": "2015-08-31T21:33:57.483",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "10316",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Why do some transitive verbs take に instead of を?",
"view_count": 211
} | [
{
"body": "I think you're mixing up two different つとめる with different kanji. 努める is\nalways intransitive.\n\n * [**務【つと】める**](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/147797/m0u/) ( _transitive_ ; ～を務める): be in charge, play a role. [Examples](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%8B%99%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B).\n\n * [**努【つと】める**](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/147796/m0u/) ( _intransitive_ ; ～に努める): make an effort, endeavor. [Examples](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%8A%AA%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B).\n\nAnd there is also\n[勤める](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/147798/m0u/%E5%8B%A4%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B/).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T15:31:01.823",
"id": "27752",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T15:31:01.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27751",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27751 | 27752 | 27752 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know there are different ways to get the sense of 'although..., but...' in a\nsentence. Too many ways for me to be clear about how to express it at all, to\nbe honest. In Chinese it's as simple as can be: 虽然。。。但是。Is there an equivalent\nin Japanese that suits most situations, independent from style and politeness\nlevel? Also, if you happen to know of a good Chinese-Japanese Dictionary I'd\nbe more than happy with your recommendation.\n\nGreets, Touming",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T18:48:31.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27754",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-15T13:54:11.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11063",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"usage",
"syntax",
"chinese"
],
"title": "How to create 'although' sentences in Japanese",
"view_count": 7914
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not sure if this is very polite, but at least in a casual setting you can\nuse のに:\n\n> 天気がよかったのに、散歩に行きませんでした。\n>\n> Although the weather was fine, I didn't go for a walk.\n\nI think a more formal way of expressing a similar construction is using ながら:\n\n> 寒いながら、ジャケット着ずに待ちました。\n>\n> Although it was cold, I waited without putting my jacket on.\n\n_Disclaimer: I am not 100% sure the example above are correct, probably a\nnative speaker could correct me._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T20:06:03.520",
"id": "27755",
"last_activity_date": "2015-08-31T20:06:03.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1319",
"parent_id": "27754",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "To me, が seems to be the thing you're looking for. It is most commonly known\nas the \"subject marking particle\", but can also be placed at the end of a\nclause to create the sense of \"although\" or \"but\".\n\nFor example:\n\n> 今日はいい天気だ **が** 、遊びに行きたくない。 \n> Although the weather is nice today, I don't want to go play.\n\nThis type of が can also be used in polite sentences:\n\n> 私は日本に行ったことがあります **が** 日本語がぜんぜんできません。 \n> Although I've been to Japan before, I can't speak Japanese at all.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T20:58:08.920",
"id": "28014",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-15T13:54:11.753",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-15T13:54:11.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11116",
"parent_id": "27754",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27754 | null | 28014 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27778",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I think I have a sort of loose understanding of how the words differ and what\nthey mean, but I'm really not too sure. I've checked out weblio and goo and\nALC to look around a bit first. Can anyone help clear it up?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-08-31T20:42:32.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27758",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T01:18:00.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10161",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning",
"usage",
"definitions"
],
"title": "What distinguishes 人情 from 人性?",
"view_count": 204
} | [
{
"body": "人情 is affection or kindness while 人性 is human nature that's relatively used in\nnegative connotation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T21:01:18.227",
"id": "27773",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T21:01:18.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "人情【にんじょう】 is a common (and maybe a bit nostalgic) word which refers to (good)\nhuman emotion. You can basically think 人情 includes 友情 (friendship), 愛情 (love),\nand compassion toward others in general.\n\n人性【じんせい】 is _very_ rare at least as a Japanese word, and I don't know how to\nuse this term. Google gives Chinese articles about 人性 in the first page,\nalthough I live in Japan. Perhaps you can ignore this word, but after looking\nat a dictionary, it seems it's more like [人間性 (human nature,\nhumanity)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_nature).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T00:49:06.920",
"id": "27778",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T01:18:00.677",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-02T01:18:00.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27758",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27758 | 27778 | 27778 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am wondering if it is a necessary skill to learn how to read and write\nkuzushiji in modern japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T03:55:41.260",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27761",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T12:58:12.117",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10377",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"handwriting"
],
"title": "Is kuzushiji considered archaic?",
"view_count": 536
} | [
{
"body": "I don't know whether it's technically considered archaic, but unless you're\nworking at a museum, I don't think you'd even need to know how to read\nkuzushi-ji, let alone write it. It would be a cool skill to have, but you'll\nnever need it in day-to-day life. I lived over there for about a year and have\nworked as a translator for seven, and the only kuzushi-ji I've seen so far was\non a plaque on an old monument.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T06:56:09.547",
"id": "27763",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T06:56:09.547",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11067",
"parent_id": "27761",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Moderate _kuzushiji_ style based on modern orthographical standard (like\n[this](http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/201001/01/47/b0172747_19595829.jpg) or\n[this](http://blog-fino.cocolog-nifty.com/photos/uncategorized/photo_23.jpg))\nis widely accepted and well understood. Some people are actually fond of\nwriting in such style, so maybe you'll need to learn how to read them in\nprivate letters and fancy cards.\n\nMeanwhile, hardcore historical _kuzushiji_ stored in archives and museums\n(like [this](http://su-cultural-history.up.n.seesaa.net/su-cultural-\nhistory/image/P1030717.JPG?d=a48) or [this](https://ks.c.yimg.jp/res/chie-\nque-10135/10/135/309/910/i320)) is totally different and basically\nincomprehensible to today's people without proper training. Students of\nJapanese history or philology have to start with learning to decipher those\ncharacters. They are, like old German handwriting, definitely archaic.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T12:58:12.117",
"id": "27768",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T12:58:12.117",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27761",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 27761 | null | 27768 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27786",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In on of the grammar books I found a question:\n\n> 運転して（ ）、急に車の前へ犬が飛び出してビックリした。 \n> 1)いるなら ２）いれば ３）いても ４）いたら\n\nThe correct answer is marked as 2. Is it correct? I have never seen 〜ば used in\nsuch way, the only examples I see on the internet are like:\n\n> ３０分前に出発すれば良かったのに\n\nIs it possible there is a mistake in that book?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T07:46:46.777",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27764",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T15:15:12.950",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-01T14:46:07.323",
"last_editor_user_id": "11068",
"owner_user_id": "11068",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "possibly wrong usage of 〜ば〜た in grammar book",
"view_count": 216
} | [
{
"body": "The correct answer is #4 「いたら」, not #2 「いれば」. You would say:\n\n> 運転して **いたら** or 運転して **いると** 、急に車の前へ犬が飛び出してビックリした。\n\n運転しているなら(#1)/いれば(#2) would be like \"if I am/was driving\", and 運転していても(#3)\nwould be like \"even if I was driving\". 運転していたら(#4) can mean either \"if I was\ndriving\" or \"when I was driving\" (Here it means the latter). I think いたら\nsounds a bit more casual than いると.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T15:15:12.950",
"id": "27786",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T15:15:12.950",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "27764",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27764 | 27786 | 27786 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27812",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking up 婚儀 on ejje to understand the differences between it and 結婚式\nwhen I found a third definition for it which confused me\n\n> 3) union, spousal relationship, matrimony, wedlock, marriage\n>\n> 自発的に人生（または離婚まで）のために結ばれた夫婦である状態 (the state of being a married couple\n> voluntarily joined for life (or until divorce))\n>\n> -a long and happy marriage 長く幸せな結婚生活\n>\n> -God bless this union 神は、この夫婦に恩恵を与える\n\nAs far as I know, 婚儀 refers strictly to the marriage ceremony itself, not the\nunion between two people, and I haven't found any other usages like or\ndefinitions like this in other dictionaries. Is this an error, or an old\nusage? Or can 婚儀 be used in place of 結婚, and in what circumstances?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T10:47:10.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27765",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T07:37:09.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances",
"definitions"
],
"title": "Detail on the usage of 婚儀 to refer to a spousal relationship?",
"view_count": 90
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's an error. Never heard it being used to refer to the concept of\nthe marriage.\n\nGenerally 婚儀 is just an archaic version of 結婚式. Almost always, wedding\nceremonies will be called 結婚式. It could be used e.g. if you are referring to\nthe emperor's wedding ceremony etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T07:37:09.533",
"id": "27812",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T07:37:09.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "27765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27765 | 27812 | 27812 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27771",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From what I've read あります can be used to say \"There is/There are X nonliving\nthings. あります Can also be used to say one has something. I'm wondering if it\ncan be used like this:\n\n> わたし は すいようび に アルバイト が あります\n\nMy goal of in making this sentence was to say\n\n> I have a part-time job on Wednesday\n\nI'm not sure if this is the correct way to say this though hence the question.\nThe original version of the sentence did not have わたし は in it but I added it\nsince I'm not sure if the sentence would make sense without it. If anyone can\nlet me know whether or not this is the correct way to say that I would be\ngrateful.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T10:51:05.973",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27766",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T22:38:05.360",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-01T22:38:05.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10247",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Can あります be used to say: \"I have to do X on a certain day\"?",
"view_count": 235
} | [
{
"body": "Your sentence\n\n> 私{わたし}は水曜日{すいようび}にアルバイトがあります。\n\nis absolutely correct sentence to say\n\n> I have a part-time job on Wednesday.\n\n(or \"I have to do a part-time job on Wednesday\").\n\nYou can choose whether adding わたしは to the sentence or not. Both sentences make\nsense and natural sentences for me.\n\n「水曜日{すいようび}にアルバイトがあります。」 is, if anything, preferable because わたし is often\nclear in most of the situation and Japanese people tend to omit an obvious\nsubject, but both sentences are used in general.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T16:30:43.317",
"id": "27771",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T16:30:43.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10752",
"parent_id": "27766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27766 | 27771 | 27771 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27776",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> **仕事に** 真面目で広大な都市の中をしょっちゅう飛び回っているため、彼女とは連絡を取ろうとしてもそう簡単には捕まらない。\n\nI'm not sure how to interpret the first part of the sentence. What does に do\nhere?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T12:10:01.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27767",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T00:31:26.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10316",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What function does に serve in this sentence?",
"view_count": 143
} | [
{
"body": "仕事に modifies the na-adjective 真面目 right after it.\n\n仕事に真面目で ≒ 仕事に対して真面目で ≒ \"(She is) serious about her job, and ...\"\n\nYou can say it's not very common, but we can find examples like \"料理に真面目で\" or\n[this company slogan](http://securityhouse-soko.net/mind) on the net.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T00:31:26.543",
"id": "27776",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T00:31:26.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27767",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27767 | 27776 | 27776 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27775",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does \"扎し魔神\" mean in this epiphet?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qIO7W.png)\n\nI think it says \"かつて魔法石を統ベる者と呼ば扎し魔神\", but I'm not sure because the font has\nstrange kerning...\n\nSo, I'm having:\n\n\"かつて魔法石を統ベる者\" == \"Former Magic Stone Lord\"\n\n\"と呼ば扎し魔神\" == \"And also called [扎し] Majin/Magic God/Demon God/Etc.\"\n\nBut I'm not sure if \"扎し魔神\" is a compound word or something...\n\nSo, can you help me out?\n\n**What is \"扎し魔神\" in the context of that epiphet?**",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T22:02:38.673",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27774",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T22:42:27.327",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-01T22:16:07.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "9717",
"owner_user_id": "9717",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji"
],
"title": "What does \"扎し魔神\" mean in this epiphet?",
"view_count": 114
} | [
{
"body": "I can see that font being hard to read if you don't understand everything yet.\n\nThat is not 「扎し」 but 「れし」part of 「呼ばれし」, \"to be called\".\n\n「かつて」 can be translated to \"ex-\", but it also means \"once\" or \"long ago\", for\ncases where someone is praising another or when talking about a title that\ndoesn't necessarily have an \"ex-\" or is actually still continuing into the\npresent, which would be the case here.\n\nThus\n\nかつて魔法石を統ベる者と呼ばれし魔神 = The demon god who long ago was called he who governs\nmagic stones.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-01T22:42:27.327",
"id": "27775",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-01T22:42:27.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "27774",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27774 | 27775 | 27775 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27779",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been reading some documents on documents by various political parties,\nand have seen the term \"異質の危険\" used by 日本共産党 a few times now, but cannot work\nout what it means.\n\nWhenever I've seen it, it's always surrounded by quotation marks, such as\n\n>\n> 安倍晋三政権が今国会へ提出し、国家安全保障会議（日本版ＮＳＣ）設置法案とともに成立をねらう秘密保護法案に対し、反対の世論が広がっています。秘密保護法案は、外交、防衛など日本の「安全保障に関する情報」を保護するため、「行政機関の長」が「特定秘密」を指定し、それを漏らした公務員などに「懲役１０年」もの重罰を科す弾圧法です。情報に接近しようとした国民や報道機関も対象です。秘密保護法は、「安全保障」を名目に、広範な行政情報を国民から隠す、文字通りの「軍事立法」です。これまでにはない\n> **“異質の危険”** は明らかです。\n\nand\n\n>\n> 日本中の原発が停止した“原発稼働ゼロ”の期間は７００日になろうとしている。原発がなくても電力が足りていることは、この月日が証明している。ひとたび大事故を起こしたら、その被害が空間的にも時間的にも制限なく広がる\n> **「異質の危険」** を持つ原発と人類は共存できない。\n\nI've tried to find other examples of this term in databases of parallel texts,\nand definitions of it in Japanese, but cannot find any kind of explanation. I\nsuppose that a literal translation might be \"heterogeneous danger\" or \"foreign\ndanger\", but I cannot work out how this makes any sense in the context of the\nparagraphs such as the above.\n\nWould anyone be able to shed any light on this phrase?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T00:45:09.807",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27777",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T10:27:21.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11073",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of the expression \"異質の危険\"?",
"view_count": 217
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think 異質の危険 is a commonly used combination, but in this context, 異質の\nroughly means _qualitatively different_.\n\nWhile there are varying degrees of dangerous things in the world, the authors\nare basically saying that 秘密保護法案/原発 is incomparably, enormously dangerous, and\nputting it simply as \"more dangerous than others\" (quantitatively) is not\nenough.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T01:03:14.323",
"id": "27779",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T10:27:21.290",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-02T10:27:21.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27777",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27777 | 27779 | 27779 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27781",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the difference between 鳥肉 and 鶏肉? A friend said that 鶏肉 is cooked\nchicken and 鳥肉 is raw chicken. That doesn't seem right to me since I've rarely\nseen 鳥肉 used.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T02:37:55.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27780",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T04:41:02.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9635",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Difference between 鳥肉 and 鶏肉",
"view_count": 1292
} | [
{
"body": "Basic answer: they do not differ in the way your friend claims.\n\nA google image search can be helpful for these sorts of questions. If you do\nso for this question, you'll see that they turn up roughly the same images\nwith little distinction in terms of whether it is cooked or not.\n\nLonger answer\n([reference](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q119765241)):\n\n[鳥肉]{とりにく} is literally \"bird meat.\"\n\n[鶏肉]{とりにく} is chicken meat (also readable as\n[けいにく](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%B6%8F%E8%82%89)).\n\nTurns out though that nearly all of the bird meat people in contemporary Japan\neat is chicken. Ergo, the uses are largely synonymous. One defense of this\nsuggestion is that we don't bother spelling out types of cattle so precisely\nmost of the time. What do you want for dinner? \"Guernsey Beef Steak\" vs.\n\"Angus Beef Steak\" (normally, we'd just say steak).\n\nHumorous bonus question from\n[知恵袋](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1369222773) was\nwhy a 焼き鳥屋 is not called a 焼き鶏屋 since the bird meat there is all chicken\nusually.\n\nConceivably, 鳥肉 could be meaningfully broader in some place where they eat\npheasant, quail, or duck. My knowledge is not exhaustive.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T02:51:04.513",
"id": "27781",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T04:41:02.600",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-02T04:41:02.600",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "27780",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 27780 | 27781 | 27781 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27785",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In attempting to write about wearing ankle weights for the day, I found myself\nat a loss for which verb was appropriate.\n\n * 巻く seems like it could be appropriate since they wrap around the ankle - in which case, it would also work for wrist weights. By this logic, I'd consider 着る for weighted vests, since they are worn like a normal vest with added straps.\n * 締める seems appropriate since they fasten with velcro and straps (which could also work for weighted vests and wrist weights).\n * 履く is a possibility since they're worn on the lower body, which would again make 着る the best option for weighted vests. I haven't the foggiest on which would be appropriate for wrist weights in this instance. する, maybe?\n\nWhich word would be appropriate for each type of weight?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T05:14:14.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27782",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T06:07:03.477",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-02T06:07:03.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "10099",
"owner_user_id": "10099",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the correct 'to wear' verb for body weights?",
"view_count": 472
} | [
{
"body": "* ウェイトを付ける/着ける is the safest, common choice in this case. Both for ankle and wrist weights.\n * ウェイトを巻く is fine if you want to use a more specific verb.\n * ウェイトを装着する is also OK, but may sound too technical in casual conversations.\n * ウェイトを締める is acceptable, but sounds a bit off. It's usually specifically used for belts.\n * ウェイトを着る: wrong.\n * ウェイトを履く: wrong because it's only for ~~shoes and socks~~ shoes, socks, trousers, underpants, etc.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T05:30:31.697",
"id": "27783",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T06:00:56.630",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-02T06:00:56.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27782",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I would say:\n\n> アンクルウェイトを【つける、足首に巻く、装着する】 \n> リストウェイトを【つける、手首に巻く、装着する】 \n> ウェイトベストを【着る、着用する、maybe 装着する、つける】",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T05:55:36.450",
"id": "27785",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T05:55:36.450",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "27782",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27782 | 27785 | 27785 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27790",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can't understand Kanji, so please use furigana in answers :)\n\nContext: I'm using Rosetta stone, so there's just pictures. The picture\naccompanying the first sentence is a girl sleeping on a beach, the picture for\nthe second sentence is just some random guy in mid-stride, walking on top of a\nmountain.\n\n> おんなのこは かいがんで ねています\n>\n> おとこのひとは やまを あるいています\n\nI'm confused about the use of で in one and the use of を in the other. As I\nunderstand it, で implies wandering around inside some fixed borders, whereas を\nindicates going through a location.\n\nWould I be right in thinking the first sentence uses で to imply the girl is\nsleeping on the beach/within the borders of the beach, and を implies the man\nis walking _through_ the mountains, not within them?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T18:20:02.703",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27788",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T15:11:30.370",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11037",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"particles"
],
"title": "を vs で in these sentences",
"view_count": 401
} | [
{
"body": "~を together with an motional intransitive verb means \"through ~\" as you\ncorrectly figured out.\n\n~に before an motional verb defines the destination of the movement.\n\nThese two uses can't be applied on 寝{ね}る (*) though, because sleeping\nobviously doesn't contain any motion. I prefer to think of the ~で particle as\na \"context marker\". In which context are you sleeping? In the locational\ncontext of the beach. Or another example: かぜで [学校]{がっこう}を[休]{やす}んだ。 In the\ncontext of/because of a cold, I didn't go to school.\n\n(*) As snailboat pointed out, 寝る does not only have the meaning \"to sleep\",\nbut \"to lie down\" as well. Of course this is a motion and can be put together\nwith ~に, for example: かいがんに寝る means \"to lie down on the beach\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T21:46:30.860",
"id": "27790",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T15:11:30.370",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-03T15:11:30.370",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11048",
"parent_id": "27788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27788 | 27790 | 27790 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "28080",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is the difference in meaning between:\n\n> (1) お調べいただいた **上{うえ}** 、注文通りの品をお送り下さいますよう、お願いします。 \n> (2) お調べ **いただき** 、注文通りの品を送り下さいますよう、お願いします。\n\nI understand #2.\n\n> (2) Upon your looking into the matter, please send me the stuff I ordered.\n\nI can't figure-out how to voice \" _いただいた上、_ \" in English in my head. I want a\nstrict translation, not a paraphrase. Nothing is clicking for me, but this is\nmy best try:\n\n> (1) Please look into the matter, and then based on what (I expect) you to\n> find, send me the stuff I ordered.\n\nAlso, I am seriously hoping that \" _で_ \" was dropped off the end of \"いただいた上\n**で** 、\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T19:27:26.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27789",
"last_activity_date": "2019-11-08T12:28:36.143",
"last_edit_date": "2019-11-08T12:28:36.143",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10938",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "\"お調べいただいた上、\" vs. \"お調べいただき、...\"",
"view_count": 679
} | [
{
"body": "You're right. The \"で\" has been dropped off the end of \"いただいた上で、\".\n\nCheck this page (<http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=uede>) for other\nexamples, including a note lower down that this can be dropped.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-02T22:55:05.293",
"id": "27791",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-02T22:55:05.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10072",
"parent_id": "27789",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "## X as a prerequisite for Y:\n\nX is what must be done before Y.\n\n> X いただいた上、Y してください。\n>\n> After (and only after) doing X, do Y.\n\n* * *\n\n## X and or then Y:\n\nThe order of completing X and Y is not strictly emphasized.\n\n> X いただき、Y してください。\n>\n> Do X, and do Y.\n\n* * *\n\nSee how (1) is asking a little more explicitly that you actually read the\ndocument before signing:\n\n> 1. お読みいただいた上、こちらにご署名{しょめい}ください。\n>\n\n>\n> After reading (the document), sign your name here.\n>\n> 2. お読みいただき、こちらにご署名{しょめい}ください。\n>\n\n>\n> Read (the document), and sign your name here.\n\nIt would be weird to say (1) when the order doesn't matter:\n\n> 1. フォークはこちらに置{お}いていただいた上、スプーンはこちらに置{お}いてください。\n>\n\n>\n> After putting the forks here, put the spoons here.\n>\n> 2. フォークはこちらに置{お}いていただき、スプーンはこちらに置{お}いてください。\n>\n\n>\n> Put the forks here, and put the spoons here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-17T15:23:25.040",
"id": "28080",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-17T18:10:00.933",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27789",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 27789 | 28080 | 28080 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27796",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English, it is considered a best practice to emphasize differences between\nthe names of medications that are fairly similar, so as to minimize the risk\nthat a medical practitioner will misread the name of one medication as another\nmedication, thereby potentially causing a harmful or fatal medication error.\n\nThe preferred way of doing this is via so-called \"[tall man\nlettering](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_Man_lettering)\", in which one\ncapitalizes the section of the name that is distinguishing. For example, the\ndrugs \"hydralazine\" and \"hydroxyzine\" are typically typeset as \"hydrALAzine\"\nand \"hydrOXYzine\" in medical contexts. (Other methods of sub-word emphasis,\nlike boldface or use of a different font, are not preferred, since they may\nnot always be available. For example, if you have a system that prints\nprescriptions using a dot-matrix printer, you're boned if you rely on boldface\nor multiple fonts being available.)\n\nWhat is the equivalent of this in Japanese, if any? I would be interested in\nknowing the answer in any context where distinguishing between similar-looking\nwords is critical, whether in medicine or elsewhere.\n\n(Note: I am aware of various ways to emphasize individual glyphs in Japanese,\nsuch as by using 傍点. I am specifically interested in knowing what is actually\nused in practice in medicine or other fields where distinguishing between\nsimilar-looking words has implications for safety/etc.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T00:27:40.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27792",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T04:58:43.427",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-03T02:14:25.033",
"last_editor_user_id": "3437",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"typesetting"
],
"title": "How are similar-looking words (e.g. names of medications) distinguished?",
"view_count": 324
} | [
{
"body": "Distinguishing drugs with similar names is a critical problem in Japan, too.\nSome notorious examples include リピラート (hypolipidemic agent) vs. ソピラート\n(antiarrhythmic agent), and タキソール vs. タキソテール (both used for chemotherapy).\nMedical workers are [working hard to prevent\n取り違え](http://www.nichiyaku.or.jp/anzen/).\n\nHowever, at least in medicine, there is no similar convention which is\ndirectly related to the language features of Japanese. Some drugs have\nabandoned their brand names altogether (like\n[this](https://medical.nikkeibp.co.jp/leaf/all/series/drug/update/201206/525627.html)\nand [this](http://www.med.or.jp/nichinews/n210820o.html)) to avoid confusion\n(BTW in Japan, most drugs are referred to using their brand names, rather than\nthe generic names). Some drug packages [use larger\nfont](http://pfizerpro.jp/lp/establish-g/products/dc05/docetaxel_injection/).\nAside from these, there's not much worth discussing in this site.\n\nPartially using hiragana wouldn't work, because they don't stand out. To\nhighlight a part of a word, one method that works everywhere is to use\nbrackets (i.e., `タキ「ソ」ールとタキ「ソテ」ール`), but that's not done routinely in medical\npractice (AFAIK).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T03:29:00.793",
"id": "27796",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T04:58:43.427",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-03T04:58:43.427",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27792",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27792 | 27796 | 27796 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27797",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "# Japanese\n\n# 前書き\n\n２ヶ月前、私は国内会議で発表しました。そのときは、まだ日本語のミスがたくさんある原稿を使っていました。今、文学の博士課程の友人に修正してもらっています。もちろん、これは勉強になります。修正された部分は、たいてい（私の言おうとしている意味に）的確だとわかりますし、なぜそう修正されるのかわかるのですが、ときどき私の使った表現が古かったせいなのだろうかと思うことがあり、確認したいです。\n\n# 質問本文\n\n私の質問は「〜のごとく」に関してです。 \n原稿には私は以下の文を書いていました：\n\n> 上のごとく、道徳的自己は神の支配を愛する。\n\nですが、友人は修正して以下のように変えました：\n\n> 上述のように、道徳的自己は神の支配を愛する。\n\n別の研究で、西田幾多郎の論文を読んでいたときに、「上のごとく」（実際は「右の如く」）という表現を知って、使いました。これは古びた表現ですか。または、使い方の間違いですか。\n\n# English\n\n# Preface\n\nTwo months ago, I presented at an academic conference inside of Japan. At the\ntime, I used a manuscript which still contained many errors in the Japanese.\nNow, I'm getting revisions from a friend who is in a humanities PhD program.\nOf course, I'm learning a lot from these. And I generally think the\ncorrections are accurate (to the meaning I want to say) and can understand why\nthe corrections work. Periodically though, I wonder if the problem is I used a\noutdated expression and I want to confirm that [here].\n\n# Question itself\n\nMy question then is in relation to the use of the expression \"X no ごとく\". In my\nmanuscript, I had the following sentence:\n\n> 上のごとく、道徳的自己は神の支配を愛する。\n\nApproximately, \"As written above, the moral self loves to serve God.\"\n\nMy friend corrected it to:\n\n> 上述のように、道徳的自己は神の支配を愛する。\n\n(same translation).\n\nIn a different research project, I was reading an article by Nishida Kitaro,\nand that's where I picked up the 「上のごとく」(Actually,「右の如く」). Is this phrase\noutdated? Or did I use it incorrectly?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T03:13:39.977",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27793",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-22T19:43:03.033",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"academic-japanese",
"written-language"
],
"title": "「上のごとく」対「上述」：現在では「〜のごとく」は使わないほうがいいですか。",
"view_count": 1823
} | [
{
"body": "> 「上のごとく」\n\n文法的に間違っているわけではないのですが、おっしゃる通り、古い感じがするから修正されたのだと思います。As stated above を言うのでしたら、\n\n> 「上述のように」 \n> 「上に述べたように」 \n> 「上のように」 \n> または、 \n> 「上述のとおり」 \n> 「上に述べたとおり」\n\nなどがよいかと思います。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T04:27:47.303",
"id": "27797",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T06:56:29.547",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-03T06:56:29.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "27793",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "既述の\n\n前述の通り\n\n前述の方法に加えて\n\n> <http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q13142200988>\n> 上記と前述の違いって何ですか？\n>\n> dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/126430/meaning/m0u/\n> ぜんじゅつ【前述】とは。意味や解説、類語。［名］(スル)前に述べたこと。既述。先述。「―のとおり」「―したように」⇔後述。\n\n前章でも述べたが\n\n前章で述べたように\n\n前節で触れたとおり\n\n前節でもかるく触れたとおり、\n\n本章の冒頭で述べたとおり\n\n* * *\n\nre: 「上のごとく」\n\n> <http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/80504/meaning/m0u/>\n>\n> ............. 「彼の言うごとく市場はまもなく安定した」「脱兎のごとく逃げ帰った」「一〇年前のことが今さらのごとく思い出される」\n> [補説]現代では文章語的表現、または改まった表現をする場合に用いられる。\n\nThe use / meaning of 「のごとく」 has shifted or narrowed. In the last 30 years or\nso, this 1st listed usage 「彼の言うごとく市場はまもなく安定した」 has become rare.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-09-22T19:28:22.133",
"id": "39402",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-22T19:43:03.033",
"last_edit_date": "2016-09-22T19:43:03.033",
"last_editor_user_id": "16344",
"owner_user_id": "16344",
"parent_id": "27793",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27793 | 27797 | 27797 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a bilingual Japanese/English speaker but I always have difficulty trying\nto describe \"update\" in Japanese. For example, when I'm visiting a company we\nwork with regularly and want to say, \"please let me give you an update (about\nour company)\", I don't quite know how to say this. I think the closest might\nbe something like, 「新しい方針について説明させて下さい」However, I'm not necessarily trying to\ninform them about a new policy but more about sharing what is new at our\ncompany. Any advice?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T17:10:41.660",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27798",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T23:14:30.467",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-03T23:14:30.467",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "11086",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How can I say, \"please let me give you an update \"?",
"view_count": 4297
} | [
{
"body": "If you want to just talk about what's new at the company, you might use\n[改新]{かい・しん} or [革新]{かく・しん}. The \"newness\" of 新しい is already captured in those\nwords, so you won't have to be redundant.\n\nTo be humble, you might want to preface it with [弊社]{へい・しゃ} (\"our company\").\n\nAs for the ending, it depends a little on the context of with whom you are\nspeaking and when. If you use 〜させて下さい, you are asking them to let you do it,\nbut it almost sounds pathetic and/or like begging; like you're the `OTL` guy.\n\nIf you're in some kind of mutual meeting and they've shared about their\ncompany, and it's _clearly_ your turn to share about your side, you should use\n〜させていただきます. \"I receive you letting me do 〜\". It's a very common way to make\nhumble statements.\n\nAlso, I would probably use 案内 instead of 説明, but again, it depends on the\nsituation. 案内 is more for what they don't know. 説明 - to me - implies that they\nmight already have some foreknowledge, and you're simply clearing up any\nconfusion for them.\n\nSo I think I might say something like this:\n\n> 弊社の改新につきまして、ご案内させていただきます。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T17:37:02.303",
"id": "27799",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T17:37:02.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "27798",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27798 | null | 27799 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27801",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 昔、ある月刊誌で書評を頼まれたことがある。\n>\n> Some time ago, I was asked to do a book review by a certain monthly\n> magazine.\n\nAm I correct in my understanding that when a passive verb conjugation takes an\nobject then you get the indirect/adversative passive?\n\nAnd further, am I right in thinking that this generally means that the person\nis unhappy about what's happening?\n\nSo does this sentence have more of the feel of \"I had a book review imposed on\nme\" rather than \"I was asked to do a book review\"?\n\nAside: Why is the agent marked with で rather than に?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T18:08:14.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27800",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-11T09:57:53.007",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-11T09:57:53.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Is this sentence indirect passive?",
"view_count": 252
} | [
{
"body": "This sentence has definitely no regrettable feeling. An example where a\npassive verb has a negative touch:\n\n私は彼女にピザを食べられた。\n\nHere are three objects involved: The victim (me), the performer\n(her/girlfriend) and the object (pizza). Assumed, we change the sentence a\nlittle:\n\n私は彼女に食べられた。\n\nDo you see how the meaning is changed completely? That's an indicator for the\nfirst sentence being a passive sentence with a negative feeling. Let's see now\nhow this works with another verb, like 頼む:\n\n私は彼女に書評を頼まれた -> 私は彼女に頼まれた\n\nThe first sentence means \"I was asked by my girlfriend to do a book review\".\nBut even if you take the object away, in both sentences you are asked by your\ngirlfriend to do something (and you are not suddenly eaten up by her!).\n\nComing to your last question, why で and not に: You are not asked by the 月刊誌. で\nmarks a context, and what is a proper context for being asked to write a book\nreview? Yes, into where are you supposed to write the book review? Into the\nmonthly magazine.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T19:52:21.490",
"id": "27801",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-03T21:04:00.190",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-03T21:04:00.190",
"last_editor_user_id": "11048",
"owner_user_id": "11048",
"parent_id": "27800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27800 | 27801 | 27801 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "28039",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The way I thought of past tense working with なら was that if X had happened in\nthe past, then Y would have resulted. For example,\n\n>\n> [車ががけから落ちていたなら彼らは死んでいただろう。](http://classic.jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%20gake&eng=)\n>\n> They would have been killed if the car had gone over the cliff.\n\nHowever, there are times where I feel that past tense with なら doesn't always\nwork that way.\n\n>\n> [もう一度奈良を訪れたなら私は４回訪れたことになります。](http://classic.jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E3%81%9F%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%20%E3%82%82%E3%81%86%E4%B8%80%E5%BA%A6%E5%A5%88%E8%89%AF&eng=)\n>\n> If I visit Nara again, I will have visited it four times.\n\nI don't see how this sentence works if we that is how past tense works with\nなら. If so, then なります should be なりました instead to reflect something like \"If I\nhad visited Nara again, I would have visited it four times.\" When a past tense\nof a verb works with なら, does it indicate what would have happened if a\nparticular event occurred in the past, or does it indicate a general result if\na particular event occurs, regardless of when it happens? Right now, from the\ntranslation of \"If I visit Nara again, I will have visited it four times,\" I\ndon't see a difference between もう一度奈良を訪れたなら私は４回訪れたことになります and\nもう一度奈良を訪れれば私は４回訪れたことになります.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-03T22:27:02.033",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27803",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T06:48:06.350",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How does past tense work with なら?",
"view_count": 974
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not sure where your confusion is coming from, but since nobody is\nanswering I would like to offer some examples so it might help clarify your\nproblem.\n\nAt least in my bilingual mind, it seems to work like this. I'm interested how\nothers may conceptualize (or theorize!) differently, though.\n\n### 落ちたなら〜\n\n```\n\n 落ちていた なら、死んでいた だろう\n If it had fallen, it would have been dead\n \n 落ちた なら、死んだ だろう\n If it fell, it would have died\n \n 落ちる なら、死ぬ だろう\n If it falls, it will die\n \n```\n\nThis corresponds to English pretty cleanly, in that you can similarly mix the\ntenses, for instance:\n\n```\n\n 落ちたなら、死ぬだろう\n If it fell, it will die\n \n 落ちていたなら、死んだだろう\n If it had fallen, it would have died\n \n```\n\n### 訪れたなら〜\n\nIn the case of your other example, you might be able to see why 「〜ことになります」\ndoes not become 「〜ことになりました」. The `“it would be that”` part doesn't change:\n\n```\n\n もう一度 訪れていた なら、４回 訪れていた ことになる\n If I had visited once more, it would be that I had visited four times\n \n もう一度 訪れた なら、４回 訪れた ことになる\n If I visited once more, it would be that I have visited four times\n \n もう一度 訪れる なら、４回 訪れた* ことになる\n If I visit once more, it would be that I visited four times\n \n```\n\nThe irregularity I feel is actually in the last sentence, where I don't think\nanybody would say 「もう一度訪れるなら、４回 **訪れる** ことになる」. Also, I personally don't think\nthere is a meaningful difference between “it would be that I visited” and “it\nwould be that I **have** visited” in this kind of sentence. Maybe that has\nsomething to do with it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-15T18:40:13.977",
"id": "28031",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-15T18:40:13.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27803",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think this question is quite difficult. It has a few points.\n\nFirstly, \"になります。\" is different from \"become\". In this context, \"４回訪れたことになります。\"\nis equivalent to \"４回訪れた計算になります。.\" It rather means \"evaluate or calculate.\" In\nthis case, the moment of evaluation is general.\n\nSo, sometimes, なる。 and なった。 are almost equivalent. But, sometimes they have a\nlittle difference.\n\n> また死体が見つかったぞ。やつは3人殺したことになる。\n>\n> また死体が見つかったぞ。やつは3人殺したことになった。\n>\n> (Both) We’ve found another dead body. The one has killed three in total.\n\nThey are basically the same, but there is a slight difference. The former\nsays, \"If you count the number, it is three.\" but the latter is \"If you have\ncounted the number at this moment, it is three.\" So, the latter expects there\nwould be more victims.\n\n> やつは3人殺すことになる。 (The future is determined. He is doomed to kill three. Or, an\n> author of a book knows it.)\n>\n> やつは3人殺すことになった。 (He just got a curse. Now, He is doomed to kill three. Or, he\n> was just ordered to execute three.)\n\nFor more realistic cases, imagine a soccer game. Before a game, you can say\n「5点は取ることになるね。(They will score at least five.)」, and while the game,「3点差になりました!\n(Now they are three points ahead.)」.\n\nSecondly, た basically means completion rather than past. I think French is the\nsame. \"I ate\" is \"J'ai mangé\" (\"I have eaten.\" in literal.) Also, it has\nseveral meanings.\n\nIn English, “If I were a bird, I can fly.” doesn’t mean ‘Condition: I was a\nbird.’ た and “if” or “when” have similar, but a little bit different effect.\n\n> 話が出た時点で考えよう\n>\n> 話が出る時点で考えよう\n>\n> (Both) Let’s think when we talk about it.\n\nThe former is not sure if they will talk about it. The latter is almost sure\nthat they will talk about it.\n\n> 今度会ったとき話すよ\n>\n> 今度会うとき話すよ\n>\n> (Both) I will tell you when we see next time.\n\nThe latter sounds the next time is already scheduled. The former is unsure\nabout when it is.\n\nI think this present form is similar to the English present form. “My flight\nis at ten.”\n\nSimilar thing, happen to “なら”\n\n> 車ががけから落ちていたなら彼らは死んでいただろう。\n>\n> They would have been killed (not happened) if the car had gone over the\n> cliff (not happened).\n>\n> 車ががけから落ちているなら彼らは死んでいただろう。\n>\n> Judging from the car gone over the cliff, they should be dead at that time.\n\nIn former case, the car did not go over. In latter case, it did.\n\n> 車ががけから落ちていたなら彼らは死んでいるだろう。\n>\n> If the car went over the cliff (not sure), they are dead now.\n>\n> 車ががけから落ちているなら彼らは死んでいるだろう。\n>\n> If the car has gone over the cliff, they are dead.\n\nNow, let’s get back to the original sentence.\n\n> もう一度奈良を訪れたなら私は４回訪れたことになります。\n>\n> If I visit Nara again (which is not sure), you can evaluate that I’ve\n> visited it four times.\n>\n> もう一度奈良を訪れれば私は４回訪れたことになります.\n>\n> If I visit Nara again, you can evaluate that I’ve visited it four times.\n\nThe latter is not much different from the former, but yet I feel the speaker\nis slightly more confident about visiting Nara again.\n\n> もう一度奈良を訪れたなら私は４回訪れたことになりました。\n>\n> If I visit Nara again (which is impossible), you would evaluate that I’ve\n> visited it four times.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-16T06:48:06.350",
"id": "28039",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T06:48:06.350",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27803",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27803 | 28039 | 28031 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The introduction to the 10th Anniversary Edition of [_Vegetarian Cooking for\nEveryone_](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0767927478) contains the\nfollowing passage on page 4 (emphasis added):\n\n> Vegetarians have often used the phrase \"I don't eat anything with a face on\n> it,\" to describe their food choices as plant-based. But there is another\n> interpretation of that phrase \"food with a face.\" **The Japanese have a word\n> for it, _teikkai_ , which refers to the provenance of a food―where it comes\n> from, how it was raised, who grew it.** It is the opposite of \"general\n> foods,\" those faceless foods that come to us anonymously from a vague\n> source: foods without soul.\n\nNever having heard of _teikkai_ , I [tried to look it up in a\ndictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/jn/%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%81%A3%E3%81%8B%E3%81%84/m0u/)\n- and of course, I found nothing. [Searching for `\"teikkai\"` in Latin\nscript](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22teikkai%22) gives only [one\nrelevant result](http://inspiritual.biz/the-zenful-\nkitchen/2011/6/16/teikkai.html), which is by some other reader of the same\nbook and provides no further insight. My best guess would be that the author\nmeant _tekkai_ or _teikai_ , but then again, none of 撤回・鉄拐 nor 低回・停会 mean\nanything remotely related.\n\nIs there a word that resembles _teikkai_ in Japanese that has something to do\nwith \"the provenance of a food\"?\n\n(Structurally-similar question from some time back: [What is a word for\n\"participation\" that resembles\n\"kameseru\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17723/))",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T01:19:53.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27804",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T17:31:20.727",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words",
"food"
],
"title": "What word that resembles \"teikkai\" might refer to \"the provenance of a food\"?",
"view_count": 224
} | [
{
"body": "I believe chocolate-san is right and I have the website of the Japan Organic\nAgriculture Association in\n[Japanese](http://www.joaa.net/mokuhyou/teikei.html) and\n[English](http://www.joaa.net/english/teikei.htm#ch5-1) to prove it.\n\nIt turns out this \"teikei\" 「提携」 (lit. \"cooperation\") has been around since\n1978. The longer names are 産消提携{さんしょうていけい} and 生消提携{せいしょうていけい}.\n\nIt seems the problem, aside from getting the transliteration wrong, was that\nthe author thought it was a common word. Or more precisely, that the\ndefinition she gave was the main meaning of the word. In actuality, the JOAA\nstarted a movement and named it teikei. (See section 3 of the English\nwebsite).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T17:13:24.187",
"id": "33779",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T17:31:20.727",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T17:31:20.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "1761",
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"parent_id": "27804",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27804 | null | 33779 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27813",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I just started watching \"Eden of the East\" and noticed that the Katakana used\nfor Eden was エデン. I'm wondering why isn't it instead イデン which would be\npronounced the same way as in English (which I was assuming was the source).\n\nMy only guess is that the source is actually something like Spanish that\npronounces it differently but I have no way of checking that.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T01:50:33.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27805",
"last_activity_date": "2017-12-11T08:34:03.640",
"last_edit_date": "2015-10-05T12:02:14.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11089",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"katakana",
"religion"
],
"title": "Why is Eden written as エデン in Japanese?",
"view_count": 3681
} | [
{
"body": "I highly doubt that they translated directly from Hebrew. The first complete\ntranslation of the bible is the [明治元訳聖書]{めいじげんやくせいしょ}, which was first\npublished 1880. It contained already the name エデン. Before this, attempts were\nmade to translate a Chinese versions into Japanese.\n\nIn Chinese the modern name for Eden is [伊甸]{yīdiàn}. An older name (~1875) was\n[埃田]{āitián}, as can be found\n[here](https://archive.org/stream/1875ChineseMandarinEasyWenlichinoisOldTestamentOfSchereschewsky/MandarinChineseOldTestamentSchereschewsky#page/n35/mode/2up)\non the left page the 9th column from right. But the āitián is modern pinyin\nand I don't have any experience in Chinese language history. But I guess the\npronunciation was more like エデン. In Korean for example, the pronuncation for 埃\nis still 애 (~= え). And 田 is even in modern Japanese でん.\n\nSo my unsophisticated answer would be: エデン comes from 埃田 which had a similar\nChinese pronunciation at that time and because people prefered to translate\nfrom Chinese instead from Hebrew/Greek original texts.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T08:34:51.303",
"id": "27813",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T08:34:51.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11048",
"parent_id": "27805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Etymology for English words can usually be found in most dictionaries,\nunfortunately in Japanese language dictionaries it appears that etymology\nusually not included.\n\nTherefore it is probably impossible to discover the origin of the word エデン,\nbut it is important to note that katakana is used to transliterate FOREIGN\nwords, not just English words, and that probably at some point エデン became\ncommon usage and stayed that way. More important is to note that エデン, not イデン,\nif you're learning Japanese that distinction is more important than the \"why\"\nis it pronounced that way.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T00:23:19.467",
"id": "27840",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T00:23:19.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11098",
"parent_id": "27805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Just a guess, but even if the Bible had been translated from English, it could\nbe due to the fact that someone focused on the written text of the Bible. The\ntranslator might not had heard an oral interpretation by an English native\nspeaker at the time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T14:47:41.583",
"id": "27860",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T14:59:25.647",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-06T14:59:25.647",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "27805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27805 | 27813 | 27813 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27815",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following sentence is from [a blog called Nippon\nTalk](http://www.nippontalk.com/en/hot-water-washing-\nmachines-%E6%B8%A9%E6%B0%B4%E6%B4%97%E6%BF%AF%E6%A9%9F/):\n\n>\n> お湯{ゆ}を使{つか}える洗濯機{せんたくき}のパワーに感動{かんどう}した夫{おっと}は、沖縄{おきなわ}旅行{りょこう}から帰{かえ}るとすぐにその洗濯機{せんたくき}についての情報{じょうほう}を調{しら}べ始{はじ}めた。\n\nI'm trying to pick apart the words in an effort to understand Japanese\ngrammar.\n\nHere's the first part:\n\n> お湯{ゆ}を使{つか}える洗濯機{せんたくき}のパワーに感動{かんどう}した夫{おっと}は、・・・ \n> Oyu o tsukaeru sentakuki no pawaa ni kandoushita otto wa...\n\nI translated this as:\n\n> お湯を使える洗濯機 \n> Oyu o tsukaeru sentakuki \n> _'washing machine that uses hot water'_\n\nand\n\n> ・・・のパワーに感動した夫は \n> …no pawaa ni kandoushita otto wa \n> _'husband that is excited by the power of washing machine that uses hot\n> water'_\n\nWhy are the particles を (o) and に (ni) used in the way that they are?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T02:10:16.860",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27806",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T18:32:43.390",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-04T18:32:43.390",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7012",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"particles",
"particle-に",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Why are these particles used here?",
"view_count": 276
} | [
{
"body": "You did a good job translating these sentences!\n\nを marks the object for the verb 使える. What can be used by the wash mashine? Hot\nwater.\n\nに is here a bit more tricky and indicates a reason, why he gets excited. Two\nhumorous examples (from the anime AcchiKocchi) with this \"reason\"-usage:\n\n**[寒]{さむ}さに[震]{ふる}える** つみきさんを籠に乗せて早く暖かい地へ (つみきさん is shivering, because of\ncold.)\n\n* * *\n\nさっきの **先生には[驚]{おどろ}いた** な。 **あまりの[白]{しろ}さに** (I was surprised, because of our\nteacher. Because of all the white)\n\nどういう意味だ？ (What do you mean?)\n\n先生の下着白だったようじゃな (Her underwear was white, wasn't it?)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T08:55:54.427",
"id": "27815",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T08:55:54.427",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11048",
"parent_id": "27806",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27806 | 27815 | 27815 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27811",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw [一点]{いってん}で used a handful of times in examples like\n[一点]{いってん}で[撃ち抜く]{うちぬく} or [一点]{いってん}で[討つ]{うつ} and while I know what the word\nitself means, I don't understand how it's being used with these verbs.\n\nCould anyone explain?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T02:23:24.623",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27807",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T07:29:56.273",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-04T03:36:28.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "5108",
"owner_user_id": "5108",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of 一点で?",
"view_count": 175
} | [
{
"body": "IMO it's mostly used in anime and it not a common usage. It serves to\nexaggerate (similar to \"super ultra...\" etc.) the fact that the action is a\nvery focused, single action.\n\nMore common usage in everyday speech is e.g. `一点で支える`",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T07:29:56.273",
"id": "27811",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T07:29:56.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "27807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27807 | 27811 | 27811 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Once I read that the sentence ending particle \"ね\" is not only used when we are\nasking for an agreement or expressing our agreement, but it is also used when\nwe are talking about our experience, our thoughts even if the listener doesn't\nknow anything about it. Can someone make it clear? I don't understand how to\nuse ね with that meaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T08:46:09.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27814",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-02T20:18:17.023",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-02T20:18:17.023",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "10992",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "Question about ね",
"view_count": 413
} | [
{
"body": "This is basically the same post as\n<https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/27583>\n\nI'm going to explain about sentence ender ね (not interjectional ね).\n\nIt has several usages and some of them can be interpreted like English tag\nquestion. But the function that's shared by all those usages is to indicate\nthat information accompanied with な or ね is your impression or conclusion\nthrough observation (including recollection or imagination of your own) in the\nmoment.\n\n(Difference between な and ね is that the former is cut out for monologue while\nthe latter is aimed at other people. If you use な in speaking to other people,\nit sounds rough.)\n\nFor example, when you are talking to your friend on the phone, you can say\n声きれいだね (which can be translated to \"you have nice voice, right? / indeed /\nafter all\") . However, if you say 髪きれいだね (\"you have pretty hair…\"), s/he will\nbe surprised and respond as \"Are you watching me!?\".\n\nThat's to say, you can't use it like tag question unless you share the context\nwith the listener. (To say another example, In order to be able to say おいしいね\nas a tag question, the listener has to be actually eating it, not only present\nthere.)\n\nOn the other hand, 髪きれいだよね works well even in that scene because よね can refer\nto what is not present in the context.\n\nIn the situation where you can say 声きれいだね, if you nevertheless use よね and say\n声きれいだよね, it feels a little uncertain compared with one without よ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T07:04:38.143",
"id": "27825",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T07:04:38.143",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27814",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27814 | null | 27825 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is 薄く and ほのかに both modify 輝く in the following sentence? Or, maybe I'm\nmistaken something, but since 薄く and ほのかに have the similar meanings, 薄く\nmodifies ほのかに and ほのかに 輝く? Please, explain me how can you understand it? For\nme both of the varients sounds fine, and context is not helping much...\n\n> 西の空に沈みゆく太陽と、 **薄くほのかに** 輝く夕月のほかに、俺たちの街の上にかかる大きな黒い月。\n\nAs an example, I was told that in the following sentence, 仄かに modifies うっすらと,\nand うっすらと modifies 冷たい. Because both of them have the similar meanings.\n\n> 見上げた空には、月もなく雲もない。 しかし仄かにうっすらと、冷たい青さが目に凍みる。\n\n_Edit_ : I found the another example, which demonstrates the fact that even if\nadverbs have the similar meaning it doesn't mean much, and they could modify\nwhatever the grammar and context allow. Which leads me to the opinion that the\nonly way to understand, is the context. But as I mentioned earlier, sometimes\ncontext doesn't help much, hence I'm asking this question.\n\n> 微かにほんのり儚くほのかにうっすらと存在してるだろ？",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T12:11:21.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27816",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T18:15:38.767",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-06T12:06:04.907",
"last_editor_user_id": "3183",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "How to understand when adverb modifies another adverb and when verb?",
"view_count": 234
} | [
{
"body": "My two cents.\n\n薄く and ほのかに both modify 輝く.\n\n仄かに and うっすらと both modify 凍みる.\n\n微かにほんのり儚くほのかにうっすらと all modify 存在してる.\n\nI just read aloud. I judge from「、」and how well words go together. I sometimes\nchange the order of words and check whether the meaning has changed.\n\nThey are sometimes ambiguous, but it does not matter. it is possible to\nunderstand sentences without understanding their relations. I think this is\nexactly same in English. Especially, you are speaking you don't think strictly\nwhat modifies what.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-16T18:15:38.767",
"id": "28054",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T18:15:38.767",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27816",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27816 | null | 28054 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, I'm reading this:\n<http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E5%86%A8%E6%A8%AB%E3%81%AF%E4%BA%8C%E5%BA%A6%E6%8F%8F%E3%81%8F>\n\nAnd he says this:\n\n> 背景も人物もなぐり描きです。 読み切りのツーショット。鴉ＶＳ蔵馬。幽助ＶＳ仙水。幽助と雷禅が対面する回はほとんど一人で描きました。\n> 後半の２話はあるハガキの批判の通り、落ちる寸前の半日で19枚上げたものです。\n\nIs \"後半の２話\" supposed to refer to the latter two chapters he has named? It would\nmake sense that way, but I feel like I've never seen 後半 used in this\nparticular way before.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T17:04:05.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27817",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-06T04:34:42.063",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6637",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"parsing"
],
"title": "need help making sense of 後半の二話",
"view_count": 79
} | [
{
"body": "In general, when you list more than two things (A, B, C, D, and E) and want\nrefer to the _last two_ (D and E), the normal wordings are 最後(の)2つ, 後ろ(の)2つ,\nand 後二者【こうにしゃ】 (formal). 後半(の)2つ would be also OK when there are exactly 4\nthings in the list.\n\nIn this case, I'm having trouble understanding what 後半の2話 refers to. It may be\n\"幽助VS仙水\" and \"幽助と雷禅が対面する回\", but it doesn't seem to match the remainder of the\nsentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T03:49:18.620",
"id": "27846",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T03:49:18.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27817 | null | 27846 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27820",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When might 選る be used over 選ぶ?\n\nAlso is there an additional fossilised morpheme deriving one from the other\n(i.e. is 選ぶ er-ab-u), and if so, what does it mean?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T18:20:50.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27818",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T19:23:39.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "When to use 選る/選ぶ?",
"view_count": 523
} | [
{
"body": "The verbs 選{えら}ぶ, 選{えら}む and 選{よ}る are thought to be derived from the original\nverb 選{え}る.\n\nHere's what 日本国語大辞典 has to say about the etymology of 選ぶ:\n\n> 動詞「える(選)」の未然形に、継続を表わす「ふ」の付いたもの。万葉仮名により、上代では、「ふ」は清音であったと考えられる。\n\nOf course, this dictionary is using the traditional analysis where words are\nsegmented on kana boundaries, in which [the continuative/repetitive auxiliary\nふ](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%B5) attached to the irrealis form えら.\nThat would mean it was _e-ra-pu_.\n\nLess traditionally, we can segment it _er-ap-u_ , with the continuative\nauxiliary _-ap-_ attached to the verb _er-_. At some point the /p/ voiced to\n/b/, so it became _er-ab-u_ , as you wrote above. This must have happened\nearly on, as although /p/ is indicated in the earliest writing, it was already\nindicated as /b/ in 栄花物語 (circa 1028). The form with /m/ is recorded in\n観智院本『類聚名義抄』 (1241).\n\nIn most other words containing this auxiliary the /p/ didn't voice, and so\nthey underwent regular sound change, for example in 戦う _tatak-a(w)-u_ < 戦ふ\n_tatak-ap-u_ , which is built on the root 叩く _tatak-u_.\n\n* * *\n\nIn Modern Japanese, 選{えら}ぶ is much more common than 選{よ}る／選{え}る. I don't think\nthere's a really big difference in meaning today despite the presence of the\ncontinuative morpheme in 選ぶ. In general, you should probably use 選ぶ rather\nthan 選る.\n\nOne exception might be compound forms like 選り好む, where you'll use 選る and not\n選ぶ. In this case, it's possible to read 選り好む as より or えり, but in general I\nthink えり sounds more archaic and より more modern. But this sort of usage isn't\nvery common.\n\nAnother exception is in set phrases like よりによって, which is usually written in\nkana but actually contains the verb we're discussing. In kanji, it would be\n選りに選って. In this sort of use, 選る is still a common word.\n\n* * *\n\nAn unrelated verb, すぐる, can also be written 選る. What's more, none of すぐる・える・よる\nare included as readings on the 常用漢字表. So to avoid confusion, you may want to\nwrite all of these in kana. Otherwise, people might not be able to figure out\nwhat 選り選る is :-)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T19:23:39.430",
"id": "27820",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-04T19:23:39.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "27818",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 27818 | 27820 | 27820 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27830",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen both of these words used on television programs, but as far as I can\ntell they both mean \"level\"/\"steps\". Is the word order interchangeable here or\ndo they mean different things?\n\nA search of Wikipedia reveals that 階段 usually means \"staircase\", but I don't\nunderstand why the swapped words have similar but subtly different meanings.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T19:06:15.383",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27819",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T09:12:27.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "2923",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 段階 and 階段?",
"view_count": 553
} | [
{
"body": "階段 always means staircase. It can be used metaphorically, e.g. 大人の階段を昇る but\nnever to the concept of incremental steps. 段階 on the other hand is never used\nto refer to staircase and instead refers to the concept of incremental\nsteps/phases, e.g. `段階を経ましょう`, `第一段階にある`. So they are clearly different. I\nsuppose it was just a convenient way to generate words!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T09:12:27.387",
"id": "27830",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T09:12:27.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "27819",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 27819 | 27830 | 27830 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I use という _to-iu_ , for example:\n\n> これと同{おな}じ「草{くさ}」というものがここに生{は}えますか？ \n> _Kore to onaji “kusa” to-iu mono ga kokoni haemasu ka?_\n>\n> Does something like this so-called “grass” grow around here?\n\nShould I replace いう for “申す _mōsu_ ” “申し上げる _mōshiageru_ ” or “おっしゃる _ossharu_\n” if I use honorifics form?\n\nAre these words interchangeable in all situations? If not, when do I use each?\n\n-Jerbot",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T20:24:36.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27822",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T09:02:31.240",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-05T08:49:48.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "10650",
"owner_user_id": "11095",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"synonyms",
"honorifics",
"word-requests",
"subordinate-clauses"
],
"title": "Should I use honorifics to say (言う 'iu') for subordinate clauses?",
"view_count": 213
} | [
{
"body": "No, because it's not an action that you or the listener does. If anything, the\naction is done by mankind and you don't need to respect mankind ;) Similarly\nfor e.g. `関西でよく食べられる明石焼をご存知ですか？`. Here, the verb `know` is changed to show\nrespect, but not the verb `eat`.\n\nIf the action is performed by a group you need to show respect, that's a\ndifferent story. E.g.\n\n> 天皇陛下が好んで召し上がった饅頭はどれですか？ \n> 社長がフロッピーと呼んでおられたのは何ですか？ \n> 御社でお使いになっているソフトは何ですか？\n\nAnother exception is if you are a royalty or something (at least that's how\nit's depicted in some films etc.)\n\n> サンマと申すものを持って参れ\n\nHere, mankind is below you so you change the verb.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T09:02:31.240",
"id": "27829",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T09:02:31.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "27822",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27822 | null | 27829 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27827",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just learned about 況や and 況して, I tried to search for some detailed grammar\npoint but nothing...\n\nAre they the same? I saw both mean \"not to mention...\" but they seem different\nfrom the way I saw them used.\n\nCan they be used in everyday life?\n\n> 誰にも倒されない・・・況してお前だ！ : I will not be defeated... certainly not by you!\n\nIs it correct if I say that? If yes what does it change to add a 「や」 to 「況して」?\n\n> 日本の経済はやばいよね。況や起こってる政治問題。: The economy of Japan is in a bad shape... Not to\n> mention the current politic issues.\n\nIs this one correct?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-04T21:45:58.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27823",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T08:49:03.250",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-05T08:27:05.797",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"usage"
],
"title": "「[況]{いわん}や」 and 「[況]{ま}して」 usages",
"view_count": 373
} | [
{
"body": "いわんや is archaic and is rarely used in the everyday language. However, まして or\nましてや is still used. Examples would be:\n\n> 魚も食べられないのだから、まして肉など論外だ \n> 魚も食べられないのだから、ましてや肉など論外だ\n\nThey both have the same meaning, but ましてや gives a bit more emphasis and is\nalso a bit more archaic.\n\nTo your examples: `誰にも倒されない・・・況してお前だ！` does sound ungrammatical, you'd have to\nsay something like `誰にも倒されない・・・況してお前にはな！`.\n\nSame for `日本の経済はやばいよね。況や起こってる政治問題`. You'd have to change it to\ne.g.:`日本の経済はやばいよね。況や今の政治問題はもっとやばい。`",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T08:49:03.250",
"id": "27827",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T08:49:03.250",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "27823",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27823 | 27827 | 27827 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27831",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Although it's not as common as キリスト, ハリストス is seen in the name of Japan's\nOrthodox Church. But why ハリストス if the pronounce of the Greek `Χριστος` is\n_khristós_ (with a clear `kri` sound)? There is キリストス too, that is more\ncommon, though the last ス is always dropped.\n\nIs that because of historical reasons? Regional? Is ハリストス an old pronounce?\nAnd if it is, why ハ instead of キ?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T08:39:40.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27826",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-26T10:36:13.903",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-26T10:36:13.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"katakana",
"orthography",
"spelling",
"religion"
],
"title": "Why would the Japanese transliteration from Greek Χριστος be spelled as ハリストス instead of キリストス?",
"view_count": 213
} | [
{
"body": "In modern (and medieval) Greek, Χριστος is pronounced /xristos/. The [h] in ハ\nis the closest Japanese can come to [x]. Compare バッハ for German /bax/.\n\nIt's not ヒ, because that would represent [ç] (I imagine German 'ich' [iç]\nwould be transcribed イッヒ). It's not フ, because that would represent [f] or\n[ϕ]. It's not キ, because that would represent [c] or [k].\n\nキリスト derives ultimately from the earlier Greek pronunciation /kʰristos/, via\nLatin /kristʊs/ and its descendents (probably early modern Portuguese\n/kʁisto/). キ is probably used instead of ク for a mix of two reasons. One,\nmodern transcription conventions weren't yet in use, and an alternative method\nfor putting extra vowels in (which languages like Māori use) is to add the\nsame vowel as the next one. Two, the proximity of the /i/ probably makes the\n/k/ sound a bit more like [c] anyway.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T15:44:50.740",
"id": "27831",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T15:50:54.143",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-05T15:50:54.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "3639",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "27826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27826 | 27831 | 27831 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27834",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, I have the following sentence:\n\n> 私は World of Tanks をします。\n\nI am certain this sentence is laid out correctly. However, I am unsure of how\nI would pronounce \"World of Tanks\". Should I simply pronounce it (and any\nother titles that appear in Latin characters) as I would in English or as if\nit were written in katakana?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T18:48:12.207",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27832",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T19:06:36.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7692",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Latin characters in Japanese?",
"view_count": 557
} | [
{
"body": "Generally, you would pronounce it as though it were in katakana: ワールド・オブ・タンクス.\nNot doing so may lead to confusion. Although I must ask, why is it so\nimportant it be written in Roman letters?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T19:06:36.560",
"id": "27834",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T19:06:36.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "27832",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27832 | 27834 | 27834 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27847",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is \"腹違いの兄\" currently considered a slur? What about with past generations in\nJapan? In US society at least it once had negative connotation. But, now there\nis no negative meaning at all. What about Japan?\n\nWhat is the formal way to say \"腹違いの兄\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T18:54:52.977",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27833",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T04:24:20.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"slang"
],
"title": "Is \"腹違いの兄\" considered a slur?",
"view_count": 127
} | [
{
"body": "The formal and neutral way of saying this is 異母【いぼ】兄弟【きょうだい】 or 母親の違う兄.\n\n腹違い is slangy, but [not derogatory in itself in most\ncases](http://search.yomiuri.co.jp/komachi.html?q=%E8%85%B9%E9%81%95%E3%81%84&fq=all&term=ALL&ch=).\nSome people may feel it's politically incorrect or vulgar, and use the\nalternative expressions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T04:24:20.323",
"id": "27847",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T04:24:20.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27833",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 27833 | 27847 | 27847 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27872",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So far, the word そうです is used to express \"hearsay\" sentences with I who is\nimplicitly defined as the listener.\n\n * 彼女は結婚したそうです。I heard that the woman got married.\n * あなたは合格したそうです。I heard that you passed.\n\n# My questions:\n\nHow is the sentence below in Japanese? If I want to say, for example.\n\n> The woman heard that I passed the test.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T20:18:28.670",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27835",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T05:18:50.200",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-07T01:00:10.103",
"last_editor_user_id": "9896",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to say \"The woman heard that I passed the test\"?",
"view_count": 334
} | [
{
"body": "If you did pass the test: \n~ことを聞いた \n~と聞いた\n\nIf you did not pass the test, or there was not even a test: \n~ことを聞いた* \n~と聞いた\n\nThe usage of こと reflects the presupposition of truth on passing the test from\nthe speaker's point of view.\n\n*denotes unacceptability",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T14:04:54.523",
"id": "27872",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T05:18:50.200",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-09T05:18:50.200",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "542",
"parent_id": "27835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 27835 | 27872 | 27872 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Can よ be replaced by ね in some cases? For example, in this sentence I read I\nthink ね is interchangeable with よ: \"A:で、男役はお好きで らしたんですか 。 B:いやあ、あんまり好きじゃないですね\n。\" If so, in which cases can you do it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T20:28:14.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27836",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T10:33:05.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10992",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Another question about ね",
"view_count": 169
} | [
{
"body": "I think you'll have to read something like [this\narticle](http://mitizane.ll.chiba-u.jp/metadb/up/SB00228823/kokusaikyouiku_4_11.pdf).\nIt's surprisingly complicated. Here's how they structure it:\n\n```\n\n 1．命題内容が聞き手領域の事柄の場合\n ＜「よ」＞の機能\n 1−①聞き手の求める新情報告知のための＜注意喚起1＞\n 1−②聞き手が気付いていない新情報告知のための＜注意喚起2＞\n 1−③聞き手の知っているべき事柄の告知のための＜注意喚起3＞\n 1−④聞き手に対する行動要求のための＜注意喚起4＞\n ＜「ね」「よね」＞の機能\n 1−①聞き手への命題内容の事柄に対する＜確認要求＞\n 1−②聞き手への命題内容の事柄に対する＜コメント＞\n \n 2．命題内容が話し手領域の事柄の場合\n ＜「よ」＞の機能\n 2−① 聞き手に直接関わらない新情報告知のための＜注意喚起5＞\n 2−② 聞き手に直接関わる新情報告知のための＜注意喚起6＞\n 2−③ 聞き手に直接関わる意思表明のための＜注意喚起7＞\n ＜「ね」と「よね」＞の機能\n 2−① 聞き手への命題内容の事柄に対する＜情報・意思受入れ要求＞\n \n 3．命題内容が中立領域の事柄の場合\n ＜「ね」と「よね」＞の機能\n 3–①聞き手への命題内容の事柄に対する＜同意・共感要求＞\n 3−②聞き手への命題内容の事柄に対する＜同意・共感表明＞\n \n```\n\nThat said IMO the most important bits is 注意喚起 vs 共感要求. For example, `ダメだよ`\nwould imply \"Don't do it\", whereas `ダメだね` would imply \"Don't think that would\nwork (don't you think?)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T09:04:01.200",
"id": "27849",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T09:04:01.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "27836",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Yes, in the sense that both can work in that context, though their nuances are\ndifferent.\n\nIn that case, the sentence with ね added feels that the speaker is showing his\nattitude as if he has just thought twice if he really likes it or not and\nconsequently come to the conclusion, in short, it conveys a nuance of \"after\nall\".\n\nOn the other hand, よ in that case indicates that the speaker is conscious that\nwhat he says doesn't accord to the listener's belief or expectation that the\nspeaker may like 男役.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T10:03:38.443",
"id": "27851",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T10:03:38.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27836",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The implication of よ is emphasizing one's personal opinion. ね has an\nimplication of seeking agreement.\n\nThey can replace each other in any sentence, and that sentence will remain\ngrammatically correct, but the nuance of the sentence will be changed.\n\nAlso, you have written 尊敬語 using a colloquial style. But let's ignore that,\nbecause it looks like the sentences are part of a Q&A session, between an\ninterviewer(A) and a young person or a male talento(B). But the way the\nquestions are framed, it seems like a female actor/talento who is portraying a\nmale is being questioned. It's a strange sentence.\n\nA:で、男役はお好きで らしたんですか 。Did you enjoy playing [the part of] a boy? \nB:いやあ、あんまり好きじゃないですね 。mmm, I don't really enjoy it, you know. \nB:いやあ、あんまり好きじゃないですよ 。mmm, I don't really enjoy it at all!\n\nFinally, じゃない and よ is usually used by males, but not always, everything\ndepends on the situation and context. And ね is usually used by females, but\nagain everything depends on situation and context.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T10:33:05.807",
"id": "27852",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T10:33:05.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "27836",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27836 | null | 27849 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw a usage that defied my understanding of なり:\n\n> ことねは彼が話すサッカーの話をわからない **なりに** 相槌を打ちながら聞いていた。\n\nAs far as the definitions given here:\n[なり](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/165329/m0u/%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8A/), I\ndon't think any of them are a perfect fit. Is there another meaning to なりに\nwhen used in a context like this? I would guess \"although\", but if it's that,\nwhat's the nuance?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T22:30:45.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27837",
"last_activity_date": "2020-03-21T14:27:43.277",
"last_edit_date": "2020-03-21T14:27:43.277",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "4187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "the meaning of なりに in わからないなりに",
"view_count": 734
} | [
{
"body": "You are looking up the wrong word -- the particle 「なり」. The 「なり」 in question\nis a _**noun**_.\n\nThese need to be treated as two completely different words.\n\n> 『Phrase A + なり + に + Phrase B』\n>\n> = \"Performing B _**in the restricted or predetermined conditions**_ of A\"\n\n_**Grammar Point:**_\n\nPhrase A must end in a noun or the [連体形]{れんたいけい} (attributive form) of a word\nthat inflects. No exceptions.\n\n「わからない」 is in the 連体形, so it works.\n\nRestricted conditions: **Kotone does not really understand the soccer stuff\nthat he talks about**.\n\nDespite that, **she was listening to him (attentively), chiming in every now\nand then**.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-24T00:58:57.637",
"id": "28230",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-24T01:06:15.947",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "27837",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27837 | null | 28230 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am learning how to construct a japanese phrase with passive verb.\n\nFrom \"Mira-san wa watashi o pa-ti- ni shoutaishimashita\" to \"Watashi wa Mira-\nsan ni pa-ti- ni shoutaisaremashita\". Is the phrase after conversion with\npassive verb correct? With the two \"ni\" which seems bizarre.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-05T23:40:41.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27839",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T01:20:49.783",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11103",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Constructing sentence with passive verb",
"view_count": 165
} | [
{
"body": "I think it is correct, but to avoid the double \"ni\" you could say \"Watashi wa\nMira-san no pa-ti- ni shoutaisaremashita\" - I guess she's inviting you to her\nown party.\n\nThere is no problem with having \"ni\" twice - they do very different jobs (one\nis \"by\" and the other is \"to\") but just happen to be the same kana.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T01:20:49.783",
"id": "27841",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T01:20:49.783",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10072",
"parent_id": "27839",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27839 | null | 27841 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27845",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm analyzing the subtitles of the first episode of an anime entitled\n\"Bleach.\"\n\nDuring the opening there are subtitles for the theme song. There is a line\nthat is read as such:\n\n\"物語のような石が沈く\" translated as \"As a story tells, the rock will sink...\"\n\nI am only aware of the verb shizuMU (沈む) not shizuKU\n\nIs this a different form of the verb? Or is it an irregular reading of the\nkanji used?\n\nBecause I am aware of 滴 (雫), a suru verb and noun, but that is for a drop of\nwater, or dripping.\n\nAnyone have any idea? Is it just a regional accent?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8AR40.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T01:33:40.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27842",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T04:12:03.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1670",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "沈く or 沈む？ \"The rock will sink.\"",
"view_count": 128
} | [
{
"body": "That fansub is incorrect. [That part](https://youtu.be/k2ThIEbisnY?t=44s)\nactually says 物語のような **星の雫** ([Lyrics](http://www.kasi-\ntime.com/item-11106.html)). (雫 = dripping)\n\nAccording to a dictionary, there is a verb\n[沈【しず】く](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/96763/m0u/) which is found in\nancient Japanese documents (such as 万葉集, written more than 1000 years ago).\nBut my IME refuses to convert しずく to 沈く, and you can safely ignore this verb.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T03:26:30.107",
"id": "27845",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T04:12:03.480",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-06T04:12:03.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27842",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27842 | 27845 | 27845 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27848",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As I understand the term コンペ先 translates as a \"competitor\" ( _edit: from the\nexamples in the answer, I think \"contestant\" seems more appropriate as there\nis an unspoken requirement for some contest or tender_ ).\n\nIn a business situation in which there is company X asking for bids, and three\ncompanies: A, B, and C take part in a tender, which of the following is the\nproper use case:\n\n 1. A calling B a コンペ先\n 2. X calling A a コンペ先\n\nOr are both correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T02:05:28.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27843",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T16:32:17.023",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-06T16:32:17.023",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"loanwords",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "What is the proper use case for コンペ先?",
"view_count": 124
} | [
{
"body": "Apparently this can be used in many ways, depending on the context.\n\nX calling A a コンペ先 （コンペ先＝コンペ参加者・提案側）:\n\n> * 仕事の引き合いがあった時は必ず、競合状態をクライアントにつくってもらうんです。つまり、 **コンペ先**\n> をそろえてもらい、正当に競争してもらうことをルール化しています。\n> ([source](http://www.watanabetakao.com/melma/malma_31.htm))\n> * 「A社やB社にも相談するようにって言われているんだよね…」(略)有名企業で実績を残してきた人だけに、声掛けする **コンペ先**\n> にも人脈があるようだった。([source](https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=DXMkprd88-wC&pg=PT86&lpg=PT86&dq=%22%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%9A%E5%85%88%22&source=bl&ots=KEB3Sg6sgj&sig=o_EYhNmZ_GIJN64ksO_IB7-7tu8&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBmoVChMIhbKM8svhxwIVxp-\n> UCh1vhgk7#v=onepage&q=%22%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%9A%E5%85%88%22&f=false))\n> * 「この提案内容で、 **コンペ先**\n> のXX氏に、担当してもらおうかな。あっちは、内容は時間不足でいまイチだったけど（略）頼もしかったからな…」([source](https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=iKGMBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT30&lpg=PT30&dq=%22%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%9A%E5%85%88%22&source=bl&ots=owE0lVaNb0&sig=Ud6ZzxH24Yu6b8b7xCNQUssMmdA&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=0CEgQ6AEwCWoVChMI-\n> bz15MzhxwIVgqOUCh10uAHK#v=onepage&q=%22%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%9A%E5%85%88%22&f=false))\n>\n\nA calling X a コンペ先 （コンペ先＝コンペ主催者）:\n\n> * フォト **コンペ先**\n> から『出品票の最終確認」ってメールが来たから、とあるURLをクリック。コンペ参加者の作品全部がアップロードされてみんなの作品を目の当たりにする・・・なう\n> ([source](https://twitter.com/KEI__kay/status/38177161898754048))\n> * **コンペ先** 募集：現在、コンペに参加させてくださる少女漫画雑誌様（少女漫画でなくても勿論歓迎です）を募集しております。\n> ([source](http://ameblo.jp/fleur-tsugu/entry-11978212067.html))\n> * コンペに参加することができました。このときに大切な出会いがありました。（中略）彼は **コンペ先**\n> の地主さんのアドバイザーをしていたのです。([source](https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=wSIZSCMPB6QC&pg=PT47&lpg=PT47&dq=%22%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%9A%E5%85%88%22&source=bl&ots=24CcM_98yJ&sig=4M-gVY6MikkOnfzLcTbpWesVM6A&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=0CEEQ6AEwB2oVChMI-\n> bz15MzhxwIVgqOUCh10uAHK#v=onepage&q=%22%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%9A%E5%85%88%22&f=false))\n>\n\nA calling B a コンペ先 （コンペ先＝競合他社・ライバル):\n\n> * 一緒に案件獲得に臨んだ技術者からは、「お前とオレが組んで **コンペ先**\n> に負ける訳ないだろ」と言って頂けるようになりました。([source](https://job.rikunabi.com/2016/company/senior/r255900057/K108/))\n> * 営業なのに何一つ売ることのできない状況を経験し、本当に需要がある物は何か？を常に考るようになりました。(略) 顧客から **コンペ先**\n> （競合）が世界大手のBOSHやGEだと聞く事もしばしば・・・。([source](http://studyabroadberkeley.blogspot.jp/2010/04/blog-\n> post.html))\n>",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T04:57:19.683",
"id": "27848",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-06T05:48:31.943",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-06T05:48:31.943",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27843",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27843 | 27848 | 27848 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27883",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've been thinking about a way to say\n\n> \"Flash-forward two years in the future, he is now a school-teacher.\n\nor something of the like.\n\n> 二年後、彼は今教師です。\n\nis what I thought of. Does this even make sense?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T09:10:26.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27850",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-07T16:52:29.610",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-07T16:52:29.610",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11108",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-requests"
],
"title": "How can I say \"Flash-forward\"?",
"view_count": 323
} | [
{
"body": "I found this\n[expression](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=fast+forward+to+the+present):\n\n> * fast-forward to the present: \n> 早送りして現在を見てみる\n>\n\nPerhaps it can be modified to:\n\n> * fast-forward to X year: \n> X年に早送りして見てみる\n> * fast-forward by X years: \n> X年間早送りして見てみる\n>\n\nSome more tries (please edit/correct/comment if it's wrong or unnatural)\n\n * 時計をX年進める",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T14:10:40.457",
"id": "27873",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T14:16:50.127",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-07T14:16:50.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "542",
"parent_id": "27850",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 二年後、彼は今教師です。\n\nIt only means \"After two years, he is now a school-teacher.\" It's present\nevent.\n\nJapanese vocabulary doesn't have the word \"flash forward\", because Japanese\nnovelists have never invented it. If your intent is to find a rhetoric to\ndescribe the future as if it's already happened, there are several ways:\n\n> 二年後、そこには教師になった彼の姿が（あった！）\n\nI think it's a wording popularized by docudrama programs, so maybe sounds too\nTV trope.\n\n> 二年後を見てみよう。彼は今教師だ。 \n> 二年後を見てみましょう。彼は今教師です。\n\nThat's not a fixed phrase. Just manually set the scene into the future, and\nyou can continue your talk with present tense.\n\n> 二年後、彼は教師になっている。 \n> 二年後、彼は教師になっています。\n\nThis one is a steady expression to tell determined future, but the viewpoint\nremains in present.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T18:15:06.667",
"id": "27883",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T18:15:06.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27850",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27850 | 27883 | 27883 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Hi I am currently doing a Japanese task **about inviting people** to a\nbirthday party. I want to **write** that we will watch a movie but it will not\nbe titanic. Is のはタイタニックを見ないようにしましょう right or did I get it wrong?\n\nWhat would be a good way to write the details of the party on the invitation?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T12:29:24.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27856",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-15T14:16:10.727",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-15T14:16:10.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "11110",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How do I write \"Let us not watch Titanic,\"?",
"view_count": 287
} | [
{
"body": "In a real life situation, I'd just go with\n\n> 内容：映画鑑賞（※タイタニックを除く）\n\nto make it clear and simple.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-10-15T04:18:21.220",
"id": "28679",
"last_activity_date": "2015-10-15T04:18:21.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11446",
"parent_id": "27856",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27856 | null | 28679 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "**What is this descriptor of a bag?**\n\nI know the first line is \"Bag.\", but what's the second?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yDtmB.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T13:40:05.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27857",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-26T00:49:47.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9717",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "What is this descriptor of a bag?",
"view_count": 126
} | [
{
"body": "It says:\n\n> ケロヨンストラップ[付]{つき}。 Comes with Keroyon (cell phone?) charm/strap.\n\nケロヨン↓\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AzH8S.jpg) \n(source:\n[naganoblog.jp](http://img01.naganoblog.jp/usr/n/a/w/nawateribbit/IMG_0912.JPG))",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T14:18:16.463",
"id": "27858",
"last_activity_date": "2019-02-26T00:49:47.100",
"last_edit_date": "2019-02-26T00:49:47.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "18772",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "27857",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27857 | null | 27858 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27877",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "There is a phrase 罪を着せる translated (J-to-E) as \"charge someone with a crime\",\n\"pin a crime to someone\", \"assign guilt to someone\". So a crime has been\ncommitted and one takes actions to attribute blame for the committed crime to\nsomeone else.\n\nBut ALC also shows 罪を着せる when searching for \"to frame someone\" (E-to-J). Here\nthe English phrase could also be used in a situation where someone takes\nactions before the actual crime was committed, so that blame would fall to a\ntarget person.\n\nCan I use Japanese 罪を着せる in the latter situation (meaning something like\n将来の罪を着せる)?\n\nIf not what would be the proper Japanese phrase to describe setting someone\nelse up, framing somebody? たくらむ feels to broad for this meaning, doesn't it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-06T23:35:13.150",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27862",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T15:51:48.477",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-07T00:29:38.047",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Can I use 罪を着せる to describe actions before a crime was committed?",
"view_count": 130
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, you can say something like this:\n\n> * 彼に罪を着せるために、あらかじめ彼のスーツに香水の臭いを付けておいた。\n> * その電話は、彼女に罪を着せようとして仕掛けられた罠だったのです。\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T08:48:05.107",
"id": "27868",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T08:48:05.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "27862",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "When someone does [罪]{つみ}を[着]{き}せる, if there is no 罪, it's impossible to do\n着せる, so 罪 is supposed to exist. However, it's possible that 罪を着せる is used to\nexpress actions related with prospective 罪, as mentioned by narutoさん in the\nanswer.\n\nThe expression 罪を着せる does not specify what someone actually does. So, the\nactual action of 罪を着せる could be lying, remaining silent, blaming someone else\nwithout proof, destroying real evidences, inventing fake evidences or things\nlike that.\n\nBut whatever s/he does, the point of 罪を着せる is that s/he \"puts the blame on\nsomeone who is innocent\" or \"sets someone up to take the fall.\"\n\nIt doesn't matter much who is guilty of the crime actually. Almost anyone can\nbe the subject of the idiom 罪を着せる. For example, let's say, there are four\npeople here and a crime occurred. No one, except the culprit and the witness,\nknows who did that.\n\nA: is guilty of the crime and keeps it secret.\n\nB: is the witness and knows A did that.\n\nC: is innocent and does not know anything about the crime.\n\nD: is also innocent and does not know anything about the crime.\n\n> 「ＡはＤに罪を着せた。」\n>\n> 「ＢはＤに罪を着せた。」\n>\n> 「ＣはＤに罪を着せた。」\n\nThese are all grammatical and valid usage of 罪を着せる.\n\nThe synonyms of 罪を着せる are\n\n> 「[罪]{つみ}を[被]{かぶ}せる」\n>\n> 「[濡]{ぬ}れ[衣]{ぎぬ}を[着]{き}せる」\n>\n> etc.\n\nIf you want to express \"deceiving\" nuance rather than \"blaming\" nuance,\n「仕立て上げる」 can be more suitable, I think.\n\n> 「たまたまそこにいる[大学生]{だいがくせい}を、[犯人]{はんにん}に[仕]{し}[立]{た}て[上]{あ}げる。」\n>\n> 「いじめっ[子]{こ}が、いじめられっ子を、[悪者]{わるもの}に仕立てあげた。」\n\nThese examples are too sad if really happened. But both sentences are\ngrammatical, and both「犯人に仕立てあげる」 and 「悪者に仕立て上げる」 are common usage of 仕立て上げる.\n\nIn some situations, 「はめる」 and 「[罠]{わな}にかける」 can be used to describe a similar\nnuance, as mentioned by user4092さん in the comment. 「[陥]{おとしい}れる」 can also\nimply a similar meaning. These expressions mainly imply \"deceive and drive\nsomeone into an awful situation.\" So I guess that 罪を着せる can be one way of はめる,\n罠にかける, or 陥れる, but it's not the only way to achieve them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T15:51:48.477",
"id": "27877",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T15:51:48.477",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10484",
"parent_id": "27862",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27862 | 27877 | 27868 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just saw on Imabi.net :\n\n<http://www.imabi.net/karanodenoda.htm>\n\nThat 「ので」 is actually the て form of the explanatory particle の with だ...\n\nIt actually makes a lot of sense if it is true. I`ve always been taught that\n「ので」, 「から」 and 「の(だ/です）」 are 3 different things and I used them without\nactually knowing where they come from.\n\nSo if it is true :\n\n> 明日は学校に行かない。風邪を引いたんだ。: Tomorrow I`m not going to school. Because I got a\n> cold.\n>\n> 風邪を引いたんで、明日は学校に行かない。: Because I got a cold, tomorrow I`m not going to\n> school.\n\nAre ｔhose two sentences exactly the same and there is no difference in meaning\nbetween the 「んだ」 and 「んで」 ?\n\nThanks a lot!\n\nEdit :\n\nOn the dictionary, it is written that 「ので」 comes from the particule の + the\n格助詞 で. So if it is the て form of のだ, then the 連用形 of だ is the 格助詞 で？",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T00:03:32.400",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27863",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-20T13:06:49.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-04-18T22:35:13.710",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"particle-の",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Explanatory particle「の」 comes from 「ので」?",
"view_count": 822
} | [
{
"body": "**_EDITED for clarity_**\n\nOne of the main differences between から and ので is as follows:\n\nから is often used when the speaker is indicating subjective impressions. The\nreason given is the speaker's own judgement, and this means that what follows\nから is typically some kind of invitation, a warning, an order, etc. For\nexample: \n危ないから、走らないで。 \nThe speaker judges that it is dangerous and tells someone not to run.\n\nOn the other hand, ので is used when the reason is expressed as an objective\nfact. For example, \nドルもユーロも値上がりしているので、...\n\nSince this is an objective fact (and not subjective judgement by the speaker),\nit is more appropriate to use ので.\n\nIn general, this distinction can give sentences a different kind of sense and\ntone. Although your example doesn't relate strictly to that, the use of ので in\nyour example does. 風邪を引いた is presented as an objective fact, thus justifying\nthe use of ので over から. This is different from using the explanatory の at the\nend of the sentence, which does not have the same effect.\n\nIn the second sentence, 引いたんで is ok for informal conversation but not for\nanything else.\n\n**Summary**\n\n(1) Using the explanatory の at the end of the sentence is different to using\nので mid sentence.\n\n(2) Whether to use ので or から depends on whether your are expressing a\nsubjective judgement or an objective fact.\n\n(3) ～んで is only appropriate in a relatively informal situation. Otherwise, use\nので.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2017-09-20T14:59:04.737",
"id": "53390",
"last_activity_date": "2018-04-20T13:06:49.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-04-20T13:06:49.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "27863",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27863 | null | 53390 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27898",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Does そうなる have a meaning besides \"become so\" when used in this sorta context?\n\n> Speaker A:あなた、それに興味ある？ \n> Speaker B: うん...まあ、そうなるかな\n\nIt looks to me like it doesn't mean \"become so\", but something more like \"I\nwonder if it's so\". Is that wrong?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T07:38:30.977",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27866",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T20:31:17.573",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11112",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "The meaning of そうなる in this context",
"view_count": 1233
} | [
{
"body": "That なる is difficult.\n\nThe original sentence, そうなるかな, is equivalent to (これは)そういうことになるかな。,\n(これは)そういう話になるかな。 or (これは)興味あることになるかな。.\n\nなる has a meaning like evaluation. For example, 盗まれた紙幣は30億円になる。 does not mean\n\"The stolen bills become 3 billion yen.\" but \"The stolen bills are evaluated\nas 3 billion yen.\"\n\nThe direct translation should be like \"This whole situation may indicate (or\nbe evaluated as a story) that I am interested in it.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T13:13:08.360",
"id": "27898",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T20:31:17.573",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-12T20:31:17.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "8010",
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27866",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27866 | 27898 | 27898 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27870",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[EDICT-based](http://www.edrdg.org/jmdict/edict.html) dictionaries mark the\nword やじ馬 (野次馬) for \"onlookers, street crowd, or rubbernecks\" as _sensitive_.\n\nI cannot find the word in the 放送禁止用語 lists and [Wikipedia\npage](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%87%8E%E6%AC%A1%E9%A6%AC) also does not\nseem to mention any particular warnings on usage.\n\nSo my question is: is it really sensitive and to what degree?\n\nWould it be offensive against someone who was a member of street gathering? Or\nwould it generally be bad taste to use the word in a semi-official situation,\njust relating the story \"there was an accident and huge crowd gathered\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T09:22:22.520",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27869",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T13:41:20.820",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-07T13:41:20.820",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"slang",
"offensive-words"
],
"title": "Is the word 野次馬 offensive?",
"view_count": 1106
} | [
{
"body": "It's not prohibited to use in public, though it's not necessarily an objective\nexpression and has negative nuance because it means people who gather at\nincidents with casual curiosity. In that point, 人だかり etc. will be safer.\n\nIf you address a certain person as 野次馬, it'd sound offensive to him/her, but\non the other hand, it's not particularly a problem to use it for the case of\n\"there was an accident and huge crowd gathered\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T10:18:22.190",
"id": "27870",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T10:18:22.190",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27869",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 27869 | 27870 | 27870 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27878",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 彼は自分の権利 **に執着する。**\n>\n> 利欲 **に執着する** 人も数多い。\n\nI thought all する verbs are transitive so they should take the particle を. How\ncome this one doesn't?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T14:15:36.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27874",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T03:22:57.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10316",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why does this する verb take に?",
"view_count": 879
} | [
{
"body": "The so-called \"suru verbs\" consist of a noun (which signifies mostly some sort\nof action) and the verb suru, with no particle in-between. The class of such\nverbs is very large, e.g. 執着する (to have a tendency to), 愛する (to love), キスする\n(to kiss), 勉強する (to study) etc.\n\nSuru verbs can be intransitive. In your case, the suru verb 執着する has the\nindirect object 利欲 with the particle に: 利欲 **に** 執着する - to be prone **to**\ngreed.\n\nIt seems that there is no easy way to figure out whether a given suru verb is\ntransitive or intransitive, i.e. to qualify サ変名詞 (verbal noun) as 他動詞\n(transitive verb) or 自動詞 (intransitive verb). See also [a posting about this\nclassification](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15461/does-it-\nmake-sense-to-talk-\nabout-%E3%82%B5%E5%A4%89%E5%90%8D%E8%A9%9E%E3%81%95%E3%81%B8%E3%82%93%E3%82%81%E3%81%84%E3%81%97-as-%E4%BB%96%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%97-or-%E8%87%AA%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E%E3%81%98%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%97).\nAt least, it is undefinable morphologically.\n\nThe verbal noun 執着 originated from two Chinese verbs 執 and 着, so this\nstructure V-V can be probably an argument for transitivity. But semantically,\nI would compare ...に執着する with ...に着く (to arrive at). Naively considered, 執着 in\nthe proposed context means rather a \"direction\" to an indirect object than a\n\"possession\" of a direct object.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T15:54:13.400",
"id": "27878",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T06:07:13.070",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11113",
"parent_id": "27874",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 27874 | 27878 | 27878 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I feel really frustrated that I can't get a simple sentence like this\ncorrectly. I want to say, \"are you going back to sleep?\" My first thought was\nthat I needed 戻る in the sentence, so I thought make I can just combine to\nverbs and it would magically mean what I expect it to mean such as ねって戻りますか？ I\nclearly have an misunderstanding of how 戻る can be applied. Could someone\nexplain the thought process for arrive at the correct sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T15:16:03.633",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27875",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T15:40:24.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11114",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"phrases"
],
"title": "How do I construct \"going back to [verb]\" type of sentence?",
"view_count": 62
} | [
{
"body": "You can use (conjunctive form)に 戻る, that is, ねに 戻る.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T15:40:24.980",
"id": "27876",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T15:40:24.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27875",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27875 | null | 27876 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27880",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How can I produce the sort of Japanese quotation marks shown on this book\npage?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SXlmg.jpg)\n\nI tried ″英語″ but in documents on my computer (Microsoft Word, plain text) it\ncomes out looking like this screenshot: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6g1wk.png)\nwhere 1) both marks are in the same direction rather than pointing in toward\neach other and catty-corner to each other (mirrored), and 2) my academic\nadvisor says there is too much blank space between the left quotation mark and\nthe text inside it (that typographical symbol cannot be scooted over, in the\nsame way as the space on the outer sides of「」cannot be pushed in to make a\nword on the outside closer to it:「」without spaces on either side). This is for\nan academic paper of which I will pass out a copy for the audience to read\nalong during the presentation, so it ought to match the original quotation\nfrom the book.\n\nI looked in the character viewer on my MacBook Air, and I checked [Japanese\ntypographic\nsymbols](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_typographic_symbols) on\nWikipedia, but I could not find anything else that looks like this mirrored\nset of quotation marks.\n\n* * *\n\nEdit:\n\nU+301F and U+301D used together don't seem to match in size and thickness\n(even when they are in the same font size):\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ANF7Z.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T16:38:08.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27879",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T22:43:41.430",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-07T22:43:41.430",
"last_editor_user_id": "4547",
"owner_user_id": "4547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"punctuation"
],
"title": "How can I produce Japanese quotation marks?",
"view_count": 886
} | [
{
"body": "I think those are `〝` U+301D and `〟` U+301F:\n\n> 〝英語〟および\n\nDepending on the font, you may be able to use `“` U+201C and `”` U+201D in\n縦書き.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T17:01:26.480",
"id": "27880",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T17:01:26.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "27879",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 27879 | 27880 | 27880 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27889",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Please explain the function of と (in bold) in this behemoth of a sentence:\n\n>\n> この偽書評を書いたときには、あとで誰かから「ろくでもない嘘をつくな」という苦情の手紙とか、「どこに行けばこの本が手にはいるのか」といった問い合わせがくるんじゃないか\n> **と** 覚悟していたんだけど、。。。\n\nIf you can't find the bold it's the last と in the sentence.\n\nI'll put my translation attempt in the order of the Japanese to aid following\nthe structure\n\n> When I wrote this fake book review, afterwards, by somebody, such\n> complaining letters as \"You've told a worthless lie\" or, enquiries such as\n> \"Where can I go to get this book\", wouldn't they come? と prepared for,\n> but...\n\nI can't quite get the last part くるんじゃないか **と** 覚悟していたんだけど to make sense.\n\nAlso, could you please explain why it is という after the first quote but といった\nafter the second quote. I don't think I've seen という, when used like this,\nexpressed in the past tense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T17:32:32.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27881",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T22:28:40.220",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-19T22:28:40.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Help understanding と in 問い合わせがくるんじゃないかと覚悟していたんだけど",
"view_count": 266
} | [
{
"body": "と can be used to report speech, thought, or intention (it marks either direct\nspeech or indirect speech.)\n\n\"... to iimashita.\" = I said that ...\"\n\n\"... to omoimashita. = \"I thought that ...\"\n\n\"... と覚悟していた\" = \"I was prepared for ...\"\n\nYour translation is something like: \"When I wrote the fake book review,\nalthough I was prepared for the possibility that complaining letters and\nenquiries would come afterwards...\"",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T01:01:49.760",
"id": "27889",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T01:18:03.427",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-08T01:18:03.427",
"last_editor_user_id": "10072",
"owner_user_id": "10072",
"parent_id": "27881",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27881 | 27889 | 27889 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27888",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "**EDIT 1 :** For those interested by the subject, I've already asked a similar\nquestion about ちゃんと : [Meanings of\nちゃんと](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14988/meanings-\nof-%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93%E3%81%A8).\n\nThe sentence is from Dragon ball, the speaker just got robbed of the balls and\nsays this :\n\n> ドラゴンボールのことを知っているやつがいてもおかしくはないわね。昔の文献にちゃんと載ってるんだから...\n>\n> It's not surprising that some people know about the Dragonballs. With them\n> being mentioned in old books and all...\n\nI'm not sure what nuance ちゃんと brings in this context, I.E. what would be the\ndifference in meaning or even in feeling (not necessarily in translation as I\nknow it can be minimal or inexistant) if it wasn't there.\n\n**EDIT 2 :** Ok, killing two birds with one stone here : some pages later, the\nsame character responds to another one who is worried because they don't have\na car anymore (which in this story can be transformed in small objects called\nCapsules to be transported).\n\n> この前の町でちゃーーーーんとカプセルを買ったわよ!\n>\n> (No worries) I did buy some Capsules in the previous city!\n\nThanks for your help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T18:22:22.073",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27884",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T00:47:18.717",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "Some precisions about the nuance of ちゃんと",
"view_count": 347
} | [
{
"body": "ちゃんと is a beautiful word meaning \"properly\"\n\nちゃんとする or ちゃんとした usually means something like \"with attention to all the\ndetails\"\n\nちゃんと is often used to emphasize that someone \"made sure\" something was done\ncorrectly, or that something is legitimate.\n\n鍵をちゃんとかえした (かぎをちゃんとかえした) I [made sure to have] returned the key. This could\nalso mean \"I put the key back to its proper place.\" It has a lot to do with\ndoing things the \"right\" way which you'll learn more about as you delve into\nJapanese culture. Great question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T20:34:12.017",
"id": "27887",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T20:34:12.017",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "27884",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I agree with @sova that the meaning is usually something like \"properly\" or\n\"correctly.\"\n\nI would say that in EDIT 1 the meaning is \"clearly\" - \"... with them being so\nclearly mentioned ...\"\n\nI think that in EDIT 2 it also conveys a sense of \"promptly\" - \"I returned the\nkey promptly.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T00:47:18.717",
"id": "27888",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T00:47:18.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10072",
"parent_id": "27884",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27884 | 27888 | 27888 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27886",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is an anime/manga called 俺物語!! which is translated as \"My Story!!\" or\n\"My Love Story!!\" depending on which site you visit. The way I have learned\nit, it should be \"俺の物語\" to be \"my story\" instead of the \"俺物語\". My question is:\nWhat is the difference between \"俺物語\" and \"俺の物語\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T19:12:50.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27885",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T22:30:51.097",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-19T22:30:51.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "11117",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"compounds"
],
"title": "Difference between 俺物語 and 俺の物語",
"view_count": 238
} | [
{
"body": "「俺物語」 is named in accordance with a typical name for stories, (noun)物語. The\nmost famous of these would be 「源氏物語」. 俺の物語 would simply be 'a story of mine'.\nAn interesting note about these 物語 titles: the Japanese translation of _The\nLord of the Rings_ is called 「指輪物語」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-07T19:49:54.413",
"id": "27886",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-07T19:49:54.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "27885",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 27885 | 27886 | 27886 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27893",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I heard Japanese speaker correcting himself from 面会 to 対面. **Edit:** The\nactual phrase was 「二人が ~~面会~~ 対面をした時に・・・」\n\nHe was referring to a meeting of two people one-on-one in a casual setting,\nbut still relations of the two were official.\n\nWhat would be the difference between these two words? What could be the\npurpose of the correction?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T08:00:19.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27890",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T10:45:50.627",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-08T10:45:50.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "The difference between 面会 and 対面",
"view_count": 199
} | [
{
"body": "面会 : interview. visitation.\n\n対面 : face to face.\n\n対面する : face.\n\nI think 面会 is not wrong, but 面会 is sometimes used to explain a visitation in a\nhospital or in a prison.\n\nI would use 差しで会った。, but probably this is informal way to explain.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T10:36:55.370",
"id": "27893",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T10:36:55.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27890",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27890 | 27893 | 27893 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not sure if the 「やっと」 would mean 'at last' or relate to any specific\nJapanese dialect. Here is sentence including the words in question.\n\n> だから わしが特{とく}別{べつ}におねがいして **やっと** おまえたちも入{にゅう}場{じょう}することもゆるされたんだ。\n>\n> おとなし **うせにゃ** いかんぜ。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T08:18:51.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27891",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T18:24:51.480",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"expressions"
],
"title": "What do 「やっと」 and 「うせにゃ」 mean?",
"view_count": 293
} | [
{
"body": "やっと is a standard Japanese word. It means a desire has finally come after\ndifficulties or long time.\n\nThe second sentence is おとなしう/せにゃ/いかん/ぜ。. This sounds a little bit old, yet I\nthink this is not a dialect but euphonic changes.\n\n * おとなしう → おとなしく \"behave yourself\"\n\n * せにゃ → せねば \"if not be\"\n\n * いかん → いけない \"must not\"\n\n * ぜ → ぜ\n\nLiterally, it means \"If you do not behave yourself, it is bad.\"\n\nThe whole translation: \"Because of it, I asked them exceptionally, and\nfinally, you are allowed to enter too. You must behave yourself.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T09:51:31.677",
"id": "27892",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T18:24:51.480",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-08T18:24:51.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27891",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27891 | null | 27892 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27895",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am confused with following question. What's the difference between たべられる and\nたべさせられる?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T10:52:31.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27894",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T14:00:57.043",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-08T13:40:17.270",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11120",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"passive-voice",
"causation"
],
"title": "Difference between passive voice and causative-passive form",
"view_count": 1316
} | [
{
"body": "* 食べる \"to eat (something)\" _(active voice)_\n\n * 食べられる \"to be eaten (by someone)\" _(passive voice)_\n\n * 食べさせる \"to make/let (someone) eat (something)\" _(active voice, causative)_\n\nAs you might know, the passive voice can sometimes express a feeling of\nunhappiness towards the result of the action (that is done against one's\nwill).\n\nIn this case, the one doing the action of the verb is always doing it against\nhis will, forced by someone.\n\nHence, 食べさせられる means \"to be forced (by someone) to eat (something)\".\n\n> 私はケーキを **食べた** 。 \n> I ate the cake.\n>\n> ケーキは私に **食べられた** 。 \n> The cake has been eaten by me. ← _Unnatural because of the inanimate\n> subject_\n>\n> 私は弟にケーキを **食べさせた** 。 \n> I made/let my little brother eat the cake.\n>\n> 私は兄にケーキを **食べさせられた** 。 \n> My big brother made me eat the cake. / I've been forced by my big brother\n> to eat the cake.\n>\n> 私は友達に一時間も **待たせられた** 。 \n> I had to wait my friend for a good hour. / My friend made me wait a good\n> hour.\n\nFor the Godan verbs, される is often used instead of せられる:\n\n> 待つ → 待たせられる → 待た **される**",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T11:17:06.877",
"id": "27895",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T13:38:41.737",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "27894",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Does this help to illustrate the difference?\n\n * \"Unfortunate\"\n\n> タコに食べられた。 \n> I was swallowed by an octopus.\n\n * \"Not so serious\"\n\n> タコを食べさせられた。 \n> Someone made me eat octopus.\n\n * \"Unlikely\"\n\n> タコに食べさせられた。 \n> An octopus (spoon-)fed me.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T14:00:57.043",
"id": "27899",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T14:00:57.043",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "27894",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27894 | 27895 | 27895 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27897",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The character just says out of the blue (in order to lighten the mood) :\n\n> ハナクソの秘密をそっと話{はな}くそう!! [with dots above the seconds は、な、く and そ]\n\nIs it just a pun on 話そう？ => Let's talk discretely about the secret of the\nsnot!!\n\nLike, I don't know, if there was a verb \"to sno\" in English meaning \"to speak\"\nand the speaker voluntarily pronounced it \"snoT\" instead of \"sno\" : Let's snoT\ndiscretely about the secret of the snot!!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T11:43:32.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27896",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-19T22:26:57.837",
"last_edit_date": "2021-11-19T22:26:57.837",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "ハナクソの秘密をそっと話くそう Is it just a pun on 話そう?",
"view_count": 122
} | [
{
"body": "Grammatically correct would be 話そう, without the く. But in order to make it\nsimilar to ハナクソ (similar words tend to be funny, right?), only one single\nhiragana く is added. Your analogy in English fits this perfectly. The く\nfunctions the same way as your T in snoT.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T13:03:51.943",
"id": "27897",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T13:03:51.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11048",
"parent_id": "27896",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27896 | 27897 | 27897 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I want to say that 'A is cheaper than B'.\n\nGenki, the book, would formally suggest:\n\n> A のほうがBよりやすいです.\n\nWhat would be a more colloquial way to say this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T15:47:47.413",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27901",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-11T22:53:27.797",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-11T22:53:27.797",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11033",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"comparative-constructions"
],
"title": "A more colloquial way of comparing A and B than the A のほうがBよりXです pattern?",
"view_count": 159
} | [
{
"body": "Just remove the 「です」 which is used basically to make the sentence politer here\n(丁寧語), and you will have a more familiar version of what you want to express.\n\nYou can also remove the 「Bより」 and just say something like :\n\n> Aの方が(もっと)安い",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T15:53:53.537",
"id": "27902",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T15:53:53.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"parent_id": "27901",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "You could also say \"やすいのはAだ\" or \"やすいのはAです\". Strictly this translates as \"The\ncheap one is A\". Nevertheless, if you have already been discussing the various\nmerits of A and B, then this will give the impression of \"the cheaper one is\nA\".\n\nYou could even say \"やすいのはA\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T02:13:09.047",
"id": "27912",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T02:13:09.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10072",
"parent_id": "27901",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Colloquially, 〜のほうが is often shortened to 〜のが.\n\n * A **のが** Bより安い\n * AよりB **のが** 早い etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-11T18:02:42.467",
"id": "29173",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-11T18:02:42.467",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27901",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27901 | null | 27902 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27906",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Basically I'm going through the が ある / が いる grammar - is it okay to say\n(person) に (object) が ある/いる?, e.g. Michiko-san に お金 が あります (Michio san has\nmoney)\n\nI guess I'm using it like you might say (Location) に (object) が ある e.g. \"there\nis a lamp in that house\" - does (person) need a different particle in the\nexample I gave above?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T21:07:16.777",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27904",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T21:41:01.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6940",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles",
"possession"
],
"title": "How do you say (someone) has (object)?",
"view_count": 4674
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, you can use に to indicate the owner of the object, as you did in your\nexample.\n\nIt is also used in various combinations with は.\n\n> みちこさん **に** お金があります \n> みちこさん **は** お金があります \n> みちこさん **には** お金があります\n\nAll of these are possible to mean \"Michiko has money\", but I think the last\ntwo usually sound better than the first.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-08T21:41:01.327",
"id": "27906",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-08T21:41:01.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "27904",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27904 | 27906 | 27906 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27935",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've recently begun noticing that occasionally I'll see a dictionary form of\nthe verb followed by the particle に, for example:\n\n> 1.)まだ学校へ行く **には** 早い時間です。 It's still too early to go to school.\n\nI've been kind of confused by it since from my experience normally the\ndictionary form of verbs are followed by a nominalizer の or こと before a\nparticle. For example:\n\n> 2.)まだ学校へ行く **のは** 早い時間です。\n>\n> 3.)まだ学校へ行く **のに** 早い時間です。\n\nWhat is the general function of に directly following the dictionary form of a\nverb and how is it generally used? How would sentence 1's meaning differ from\nsentences 2 and 3?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T00:05:11.923",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27907",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T03:38:52.173",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4385",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"particles",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Dictionary form of verb followed by に",
"view_count": 2356
} | [
{
"body": "Here, には means \"in order to\" or \"for the purpose of\". In sentences that use\nthis expression, the predicate often expresses the necessity for or importance\nof using a specific means. You can use the nominalizer の if you choose to, and\nit won't change the meaning: まだ学校へ行く **のには** 早い時間です。\n\nThis には can also come after a noun, as in このかばんは長旅には便利だ (This bag is suitable\nfor long trips).\n\nThere are many other expressions involving に that can attach to verbs (or\ni-adjectives and other interesting things) including:\n\n> にしては\n>\n> にちがいない\n>\n> に当たって\n>\n> にもかかわらず\n>\n> に従って\n>\n> に過ぎない\n>\n> につれて\n\nSource: A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T03:26:07.803",
"id": "27935",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T03:38:52.173",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-10T03:38:52.173",
"last_editor_user_id": "902",
"owner_user_id": "902",
"parent_id": "27907",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 27907 | 27935 | 27935 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Often in a business setting I hear Japanese speakers using この旨 where この事\nseemingly fits as well.\n\nLike 「この旨をご連絡させて頂きます」 or 「〇〇の旨かしこまりました」\n\nIs it just a matter of corporate speak or is there a difference in meaning?\n\nAlso, would it sound strange if used outside of formal situations?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T01:35:53.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27909",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T01:13:06.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"synonyms",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "Using 旨 where こと could be used a well",
"view_count": 601
} | [
{
"body": "旨{むね} only partially substitutes for こと. It means \"effect\" in \"I'll contact\nthem to that effect.\" For telling the topic of matter, you can use 件{けん}\ninstead.\n\n> ご契約の旨連絡させていただきます。 _I'll let them know to the effect that you (enter into\n> the) contract._\n>\n> ご契約の件連絡させていただきます。 _I'll let them know concerning your contract._\n\nBoth of them are only used in formal/business settings.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T04:51:30.323",
"id": "27917",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T01:13:06.193",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27909",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27909 | null | 27917 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27925",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am having some trouble telling the difference between the two. Don't they\nboth mean \"myself\"? And so does 私自身, right? I don't get the difference, when\nyou would you use any of them and how to choose. I guess that 自分 doesn't\nnecessarily point to \"me\" and therefore could mean \"yourself\" or \"himself\"\ndepending on context, but then does the same apply to 自身? Someone help me ~~\n;w;",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T01:49:40.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27910",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T23:49:42.010",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-09T02:59:23.103",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9536",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances",
"reflexives"
],
"title": "自分 and 自身, what's the difference",
"view_count": 4085
} | [
{
"body": "We use them like this\n\n自分自身の経験から/自分の経験から\n\n自分自身をふりかえる/自分をふりかえる\n\nIn those case, both are totally same meaning. In my opinion, when 'を''の'and so\non, are attached after ’自分自身’or ’自分’, you can use them as same meanings.\n\n自分自身、よくわかりません。\n\nin that case, you can't replace 自分自身 with 自分, and this sentence often seen and\nheard. I can't recall other good examples now.\n\nExcept those examples, in most case, you can't replace 自分 with 自分自身. You could\nsay ’自分自身’ is a special expression of '自分'.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T12:53:42.937",
"id": "27922",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T12:53:42.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11137",
"parent_id": "27910",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "自分 means oneself, and it can refer to the speaker or somebody else.\n\n自身 also means oneself, and it can refer to the speaker or somebody else.\n\nThe difference is that 自身 is a suffix that attaches to a pronoun (or name) to\nemphasize it (it works just like the word 自体). In the sentence below, 自身 is\nattached to ジェーン to emphasize that ジェーン is the one who wrote the letter (I got\nthis sentence from jisho.org):\n\n> ジェーン自身がこの手紙を書いた\n\nOn the other hand, 自分 doesn't attach to other words as a suffix, it just means\n\"oneself\" and you have to figure out who it's referring to based on context.\nIn the sentence below, notice that 自分 doesn't attach directly to その役員;\ninstead, it is used later in the sentence to refer to その役員 (This sentence is\nalso from jisho):\n\n> 矛盾する報告を受けて、その役員は自分の立場を考え直した\n>\n> Conflicting reports prompted the director to reconsider her position.\n\nThen you have the special case where the thing 自身 attaches to is 自分, making\n自分自身.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T16:39:24.083",
"id": "27925",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T23:49:42.010",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-09T23:49:42.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "902",
"parent_id": "27910",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 27910 | 27925 | 27925 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27920",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Since \"二者択一の問題\" is _a multiple choice problem with **2** options_, would it be\nunderstandable to say: \n\"三者択一の問題\" --> _multiple choice with **3** options_ \n\"四者択一の問題\" --> _multiple choice with **4** options_ \n.....\n\nwould it also be a natural thing to say?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T03:01:46.587",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27914",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T07:12:40.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "can i say \"四者択一の問題\"?",
"view_count": 100
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, you can fill in any number in `n 者択一`, but it generally sounds too lofty,\nand the most common way to name it is `n 択`. \"Multiple choice problem with _n_\noptions\" is often called `n 択問題`.\n\nBy the way, \"multiple choice problem\" itself is 択一問題, 選択問題, or 多肢選択問題.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T07:12:40.340",
"id": "27920",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T07:12:40.340",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27914 | 27920 | 27920 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27923",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From what my test book says in the vocab section the verb かきます usually takes\nthe particles を for things and に for people. I'm pretty sure that you would\nuse を like this.\n\n> ともだちに てがみを かきました - I wrote a letter to a friend/friends\n\nSo then I guess my question would be then for に would I just make the sentence\nlike this?\n\n> ともだちに かきました - I wrote to a friend/friends(?)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T03:50:57.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27915",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T14:57:02.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10247",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "かきます（to write) when used with the particle に",
"view_count": 2468
} | [
{
"body": "Just a precision, I don't think the distinction is really between things and\npeople and it's not related to the verb 書く either, it's just about the meaning\nof を and に.\n\nThe particle を marks the direct object in this case. Therefore it follows\n**what** you write.\n\nThe particle に marks the point of arrival/goal of an action/recipient of\nsomething in this case. Therefore it follows the **recipient** of the letter.\n\n> 政府に手紙を書いた。 I wrote a letter to the governement.\n\nFor the rest, see the comments below your question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T14:57:02.113",
"id": "27923",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-09T14:57:02.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"parent_id": "27915",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27915 | 27923 | 27923 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27921",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to find the words to differentiate _theatre_ (the physical place)\nfrom _play_ (as in stage play). I keep finding the words 劇場{げきじょう} and\n演劇{えんげき} in the dictionary but can't figure out which is which. To make\nmatters even more confusing Google Translate even suggested 劇場{げきじょう}の演劇{えんげき}",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T07:05:23.193",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27919",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-30T17:23:01.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1714",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "Difference between 劇場{げきじょう} and 演劇{えんげき}",
"view_count": 591
} | [
{
"body": "In short for a general \"theatre\":\n\n * 劇場{げきじょう} means a \"theatre\" as a place. \n * 演劇{えんげき} means the \"art of theatre\".\n * you were probably looking for 芝居{しばい} - a stage play.\n * also \"theatre\" as a troupe would be called 劇団{げきだん}\n\nThe differences get blurred when these words are used as adjectives (search\nfor \"screenplay\" on google: 演劇の台本 = 48,000, 芝居の台本 = 58,000 results).\n\n* * *\n\nNow, depending on the genres, specialised vocabulary is used, for example\n\"theatre as a place\" might be called:\n\n * 能楽堂 - a general name for noh and kyogen theatre stages (国立能楽堂, 観世能楽堂) \n * 芝居小屋{しばいごや} - a stage for smaller scale theatrical plays\n * 演芸場{えんげいじょう} - a stage for variety shows, musical performances, vaudeville (国立演芸場, 大須演芸場)\n * 寄席{よせ} - a stage for storytelling performances: rakugo, kōdan, rōkyoku, etc.\n * finally there are borrowed words: シアター (\"theatre\", both for stage and cinema, but might be used also in a troupe name) and even 演芸ホール (a hall for performing arts in which plays could also be staged).\n\nThe following are added to proper names to indicate theatre either in the\nsense of the place or a troupe.\n\n * 〜座{ざ} - an ending for proper names of theatres and troupes of all genres: kabuki stages (松竹座, 南座), smaller stages (呉服座), and even non-Japanese theatres (グローブ座)\n * 〜亭{てい} - an ending for proper names of the \"寄席{よせ}\"-style of stages (天満繁昌亭, 動楽亭)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T07:46:13.067",
"id": "27921",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-30T17:23:01.697",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-30T17:23:01.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "27919",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 27919 | 27921 | 27921 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27943",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the manga Dragon Ball, a girl is captured and frightened to be sexually\nharassed. It turns out the sexual torture is simply a blown kiss. She then\nsays:\n\n> **へろへろ** とかぱふぱふとか **きょいきょい** とか **いんぐりもんぐり** とかされるかと思っちゃった。\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JzVox.png)\n\nEarlier in the manga, they describe ぱふぱふ as putting one's head between a\ngirl's boobs and squeezing them around.\n\nI was wondering if the other 3 also have something close to a meaning or if\nthey are just random sexually connoted babbling.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T16:27:02.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27924",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T20:38:14.687",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-10T20:38:14.687",
"last_editor_user_id": "10484",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"onomatopoeia"
],
"title": "A quick question about funny sexuality-related words",
"view_count": 955
} | [
{
"body": "へろへろ, ぱふぱふ and きょいきょい seem to be onomatopoeia.\n\nへろへろ is actually one of very common Japanese onomatopoeias, and most\ndictionaries have the entry of it like\n[this](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%81%B8%E3%82%8D%E3%81%B8%E3%82%8D&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_herohero_-010).\n\nいんぐりもんぐり is a dialect word in some regions in Japan, according to [this\nwebsite](http://www.hiromachi.com/hougen/) and [this professor's\nanswer](http://www.jrt.co.jp/tv/ohayo/awaben/030903.htm).\n\nHowever, in the manga story, the author bound those nonsexual words to special\nmeanings which represent some kinds of sexual techniques. So, in this case, I\nthink I can say that those words are neologisms created by the author.\n\nNobody knows for sure what those words actually mean, because the author has\nnever officially stated what they mean (except ぱふぱふ). I think it spices up the\nmanga. The unfamiliar funny sexual flavors of those unknown onomatopoeias seem\nto fire the readers' imagination, which is fun.\n\nIn real life, real people don't use those words to mean sexual techniques,\nunless they are under the influence of the manga or anime of Dragon Ball.\n\nBut ぱふぱふ is the exception. ぱふぱふ has been a very popular slang of what it is,\nsince Dragon Ball was published and one of the most popular RPG game series in\nJapan, Dragon Quest series (called Dragon Warrior in other countries), was\nreleased. The character designer of Dragon Quest series is the author of\nDragon Ball, so the games contain ぱふぱふ jokes too, although the others, へろへろ,\nきょいきょい and いんぐりもんぐり, don't seem to be used again.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T20:37:03.490",
"id": "27943",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T20:37:03.490",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10484",
"parent_id": "27924",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27924 | 27943 | 27943 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27934",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand from itrasci's answer in [this\nlink](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/421/usage-\nof-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%A6-and-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%8B-as-emphasis)\nthat なんか after a noun acts like a weak form of は which downplays the\nimportance of the noun. But please look at the following sentence (where the\nwriter is talking about authors he has invented in order to write book reviews\non them):\n\n> ...具体的に言うと、牟田口正午｛むだぐちしょうご｝とか、大坂五兵｛おおさかごへい｝ **なんかの** 作品は今読んでも刺激的だと思いますよ。\n\nGiven the context I can see why he might be downplaying the authors but I'm\nsure なんか must be doing something different in this context. I would never\nwrite はの (or at least I've never seen it) and the は comes after 作品 anyway.\n\nI was wondering if it might be a contraction of 何か suggesting 'the works of\nauthor A or author B or **whatever** ' but it doesn't seem correct to just\nattach 何か directly to the end of a noun.\n\nPlease help me understand the grammar here and the contexts in which I can use\nit. Thanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T17:25:55.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27926",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T06:43:10.767",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Use of なんか followed by possessive の",
"view_count": 303
} | [
{
"body": "> 牟田口正午 **とか** 、大坂五兵 **なんか** の作品\n\n(Aとか)Bなんか, (Aとか)Bとか, (Aやら)Bやら, etc. are colloquial versions of (Aや)Bなど.\n\n> ≒ 牟田口正午 **や** 、大坂五兵 **など** の作品 \n> (works of Mudaguchi Shogo, Osaka Gohei, and others / and so on / etc.; \n> works by authors such as Mudaguchi Shogo and Osaka Gohei)\n\nThis phrase is used to give examples. See definition #1 on\n[goo国語辞書「なんか」](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/165619/m0u/), #1 on\n[goo国語辞書「など」](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/164368/m0u/), or #① on\n[Weblio辞書「など」](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%A9).\n\nCompare:\n\n> 牟田口正午 **と** 大坂五兵の作品 \n> (works of Mudaguchi Shogo and Osaka Gohei)\n\n* * *\n\nExamples:\n\n> 抹茶アイス **とか** 抹茶チョコ **なんか** が好きです。 \n> おじいさんは農場で牛 **とか** 豚 **とか** 羊 **なんか** を育てている。 \n> 男の子はカエル **とか** カタツムリ **とか** 仔犬の尻尾 **とか** でできている。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T03:06:19.080",
"id": "27934",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T06:43:10.767",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T06:43:10.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "27926",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27926 | 27934 | 27934 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27946",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "With regard to talking about one's \" _personality_ \", such as one being out-\ngoing, stoic, cold, not trustworthy, etc. I've always said \" **人柄{ひとがら}** \".\nAnd, the natives seem to basically understand what I mean.\n\n 1. With regard to how it sounds, are \" **性格{せいかく}** \" and \" **人物{じんぶつ}** \" both really formal to use in a conversation? \n 2. What are a few contexts where \"人柄\" is not understandable / very inappropriate, and \"性格\" and/or \"人物\" must be used?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T17:38:35.860",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27927",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T03:10:11.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "\"人物\" vs. \"性格\" vs. \"人柄\"?",
"view_count": 1909
} | [
{
"body": "**性格**\n\nThe bottom line of this word is \"temperament\", \"disposition\". And this one is\n**the most common word** to describe a person's personality. It translates\n\"character\" in psychological terms, and also used for a thing's\ncharacteristics.\n\n**人柄**\n\nA word mostly for one's interpersonal character. But effectively, it's almost\nalways used to tell what kind of **virtue** whoever has, thus **not much\ncompatible with bad evaluation**. For example, 人柄が冷たい (=\"has cold character\"?)\nonly had [7 hits in\nGoogle.jp](https://www.google.co.jp/search?hl=ja&q=%22%E4%BA%BA%E6%9F%84%E3%81%8C%E5%86%B7%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84%22).\nWe could say 人柄が良くない, but 人柄が悪い sounds a little stiff if not wrong.\n\n**人物**\n\nThis one is more like _person_ (respectable figure, someone important) or\n_identity_ , rather than _personality_. But it can be used as a more formal\nalternative to 人柄, as well. On this point the usage is similar to 人柄. The word\nalso translates \"character\" in drama, so 悪い人物 is likely to be _baddie_.\n\n* * *\n\n**BONUS**\n\n**人格{じんかく}** : persona, \"personality\" in psychology as in 多重人格 \"multiple\npersonality\".\n\n**個性{こせい}** : personality, individuality; but since Japanese culture doesn't\npraise being special, this word sometimes means \"eccentricity\".\n\n**性向{せいこう}** : (behavioral) tendency, propensity.\n\n**根性{こんじょう}** : ( _old-fashioned and/or slangy_ ) habitualized attitude,\ninnate or acquired. Also means \"guts\" or \"patience\" by its own.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T03:04:14.117",
"id": "27946",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T03:10:11.877",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T03:10:11.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27927",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
]
| 27927 | 27946 | 27946 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27929",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand what 明日{あした} means. And I understand また明日 means \"see you\ntomorrow\". But I recently heard では明日, and I do not understand what it\nmeans/the difference between また明日.\n\nまた明日 translates to \"In addition tomorrow\".\n\nでは明日 translates to \"So tomorrow\".\n\nI used <http://www.systranet.com/translate/> to translate.\n\nClarification and understanding would be helpful.\n\nI'm trying to learn Japanese.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T17:48:27.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27928",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T02:53:09.023",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-09T18:05:09.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "11141",
"owner_user_id": "11141",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "Difference between また明日 and では明日?",
"view_count": 1350
} | [
{
"body": "You can imagine a sequel to the these expressions, like a whole sentence for\nexample :\n\n> また明日話を続けましょう。 : Let's continue our talk again tomorrow.\n>\n> では明日話を続けましょう。 : So let's continue our talk tomorrow.\n\nI think when you are in a hurry the second one is a bit better, a conversation\nfor example :\n\n> 私 : あっ、そろそろ帰らないと親に殺される！ : Ah! If I don't get back soon I'll get killed by my\n> parents!\n>\n> 友達 : 待ってよ！明日はどうする？ : Wait a sec! How do we do for tomorrow?\n>\n> 私 : うーん、お前は飲み物持ってきて！俺が食料とか買うんだから。 : Hum, You bring the drinks! Coz I'll get\n> the food and other stuffs.\n>\n> 私 : あっ、じゃ明日！ : See ya!\n\nHere I don't feel like the 「また明日」 would be better. But that is only my way of\nseeing things, if a native speaker could confirm it would be nice.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-09T19:20:03.843",
"id": "27929",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T02:53:09.023",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"parent_id": "27928",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27928 | 27929 | 27929 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27948",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In a bid rigging (談合入札) how do you call the suppliers:\n\n * the one to win the contract\n * others who are intended just to take part and to lose (I recall some expression with 馬)\n\nAs we are talking about illegal activity, I expect these expressions to be\nslangy.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T01:49:00.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27932",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T04:20:33.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"slang",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "Vocabulary related to bid rigging",
"view_count": 126
} | [
{
"body": "It may be 本命 (the one to win) and 当{あ}て馬{うま} (the one to lose). I didn't find\nit out until I read the comment.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T07:03:51.883",
"id": "27948",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T04:20:33.543",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-12T04:20:33.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27932",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27932 | 27948 | 27948 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27936",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "They seem to be used in the same way.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T01:57:33.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27933",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T17:13:02.693",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-10T12:44:51.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "10045",
"owner_user_id": "11143",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "What is the difference between は and を?",
"view_count": 735
} | [
{
"body": "Well は is used a lot as a topic particle and を (o) is used as a direct object\nmarker..\n\nDirect Object Marker:\n\neg:\n\nほんをください。 _Give me the book please._\n\nおなまえはなんですか。 _What's your name?_\n\nHere is some more background on は を ＆ へ:\n\n[Why are the particles \"は\" (ha⇒wa), \"へ\" (he⇒e), and \"を\" (wo⇒o) not spelled\nphonetically?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/379/why-are-the-\nparticles-%E3%81%AF-\nha%E2%87%92wa-%E3%81%B8-he%E2%87%92e-and-%E3%82%92-wo%E2%87%92o-not-spelled-\nphonet)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T04:34:59.710",
"id": "27936",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T17:13:02.693",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10844",
"parent_id": "27933",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27933 | 27936 | 27936 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27939",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have been learning Nihongo for 1 month and I am confused with that word.\nPlease help me!!",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T15:55:30.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27938",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T05:51:35.740",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T05:51:35.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "[六月目]{むつきめ} meaning?",
"view_count": 650
} | [
{
"body": "It means \"more than 5 months have passed.\"\n\nSo\n\n> \"日本語を勉強し始めて[一月]{ひとつき}が経ちます。\"\n\nis the same as\n\n> \"日本語を勉強し始めて[二月目]{ふたつきめ}になります。\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T16:12:51.437",
"id": "27939",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T05:49:56.673",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T05:49:56.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5081",
"parent_id": "27938",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27938 | 27939 | 27939 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I've only studied Japanese for two semesters, 10 years ago, so this is a\nreally basic question...\n\nIf I'm emailing a teacher at an American university (let's call him 塚中) that\nI've never met before to ask a question about his class that I'm thinking\nabout taking, would it be acceptable to use「塚中先生初めまして！」as the first line of my\nemail before proceeding in English?\n\nWould it be seen as friendly and casual (what I want) or off-puttingly\ninformal? Or just straight-up wrong?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T18:08:35.063",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27940",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T05:16:52.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11152",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"greetings",
"email"
],
"title": "Email greeting for a teacher I've never met",
"view_count": 2600
} | [
{
"body": "You could [use something\nsimilar](http://japanese.about.com/library/blintroduction.htm). I don't think\na teacher at an American university would be off-put by that. I would not be\nworried about it, right or wrong. \n(My personal preference: [name], hajimemashite. [message].)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T19:06:40.580",
"id": "27941",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T19:06:40.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11071",
"parent_id": "27940",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "So, this guy has no idea who you are. And, he has no heads-up that a stranger\nwill be asking him to do something. Pure imposition. Regardless of language,\nbest to start with an apology:\n\n> 恐れ入りますが、\"name of class\"という授業に関する質問があります。\n\nor\n\n> ご迷惑をおかけして申し訳ございませんが、\"name of class\"という授業について、お伺いしたいことがあります。\n\nIn English, I would say \" _Professor Tsukanaka, I am very sorry to be\ntroubling you, however I have a question about one of your classes._ \".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-10T19:44:05.393",
"id": "27942",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T23:19:54.733",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T23:19:54.733",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"parent_id": "27940",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I guess that you're trying to use 「塚中先生初めまして！」 as a replacement for \"Dear\n塚中先生,\" or some other salutation. But I can't say it's a good idea to use the\n初めまして sentence in the first line, because in a Japanese email, the first line\nis commonly used for addressing a contact (organization name, department name,\ntitle, contact name). And a greeting is usually written in the second or the\nthird line. For example,\n\n> ～～大学 ～～学部 教授 塚中先生\n>\n> 初めまして、(Last name / Full name)と申します。\n\nThis is a common way to start a Japanese email, in a case like yours. The\nphrase 初めまして is usually followed by the sender's last name or full name.\n\nUsing exclamation point, question mark or other emotional symbols is a bit too\ncasual in this case, because only traditional Japanese punctuation marks such\nas 、 and 。 are appropriate to use in Japanese business emails. (In Japan,\nwriting an email to a professor is a formal thing, so people usually try to\nwrite a business-letter-level email to a professor.) If you would write to\nfriends or family, it will be totally fine to use exclamation point and\nquestion mark with Japanese words, though.\n\nIf you want to make the first line less formal, the following example would be\nuseful.\n\n> 塚中先生\n>\n> 初めまして、(Last name / Full name)と申します。\n\nThis is less formal but still polite. The line break after the 塚中先生 is\ncrucial.\n\nI suggest these polite ways to start an email, because I guess that if you\nshow that you know not only some Japanese phrases but also some Japanese\nmanners, it will make a good impression on 塚中先生.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T17:05:34.043",
"id": "27952",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T05:16:52.990",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10484",
"parent_id": "27940",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27940 | null | 27952 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know that 之助 is a suffix for generating names. But what is its intended\nmeaning?\n\nAlso, there's a lexical item 承知の助 which [I understand is meant to be an\ninterjection \"Understood!\"](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/109348/m0u/).\nWhat's going on there? Is this usage meant to be humorous?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T00:58:31.243",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27945",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T19:04:55.290",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-13T19:04:55.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"names",
"suffixes",
"interjections"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of the suffix 之助?",
"view_count": 690
} | [
{
"body": "之助 was a common suffix for generating nick names. The real name was not widely\nused and this kind of names was used.\n\nWell, I think English also has a suffix to make words like name like \"No\nproblemo!\"\n\nThis is a phrase came from yedo period to make it sound humorous. This phrase\nis so old but still somewhat used in informal situation, sometimes \"がってん承知の助.\"\nI feel the one who says this is really understood and eager to do something.\n<http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%8C%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%93%E6%89%BF%E7%9F%A5%E3%81%AE%E5%8A%A9>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T09:12:16.847",
"id": "27949",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T09:12:16.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27945",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Yes, [之助]{の・すけ} is appended to [承知]{しょう・ち} in order to make the word sound\nhumorous, regardless of whether it actually sounds funny or not. It's a kind\nof play on words.\n\nDuring the Edo period ([江戸]{え・ど}[時代]{じ・だい} 1603 - 1868), many words were\nmodified for fun. Turning a plain word into a name-style word without changing\nthe meaning (or with growing the meaning sometimes) was one of popular ways to\nbe humorous. 承知之助 is an example of it. Another example of this kind of 〜之助 is\n\n> いい[気味]{き・み}[之助]{の・すけ}\n\nいい気味 of Edo vocabulary means \"feeling good\" or \"happy to know the unhappiness\nof whom one dislikes.\" 之助 was a common last part of men's names, such as\n[吉]{きち}之助, [半]{はん}之助, etc., in the Edo period. The name-like compound word\nいい気味之助 means the same as いい気味 but the nuance is somewhat humorous.\n\n[承知]{しょう・ち}[之助]{の・すけ} is also a name-like compound word, and means the same as\n承知 but the nuance is somewhat humorous by using 之助. This 之助 is playfully added\nto 承知, just for fun.\n\nSometimes, animals were used to create humorous words as well. For example,\n[面白]{おも・しろ}い was turned into [面白]{おも・しろ}[狐]{ぎつね} or 面白[狸]{だぬき}. A derivative\nof 面白狸 was\n[面白狸の腹鼓](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/33405/m0u/%E9%9D%A2%E7%99%BD%E7%8B%B8%E3%81%AE%E8%85%B9%E9%BC%93/).\nAll of them meant 面白い, although in some cases they seemed to imply additional\nmeanings for extra fun.\n\nKami ([神]{かみ}) was also used to create humorous words in order to emphasize\nthe meaning. For example, [上]{あ}がったり was turned into 上がったり[大明神]{だいみょうじん} in\nsome conversation during the Edo period. 上がったり大明神 was a word which humorously\nemphasized the meaning of [上がったり](http://gogen-allguide.com/a/agattari.html).\n\nHowever, most those name-style words couldn't have survived. We can see those\nold humorous words in [草双紙](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kusaz%C5%8Dshi) or\nEdo language dictionaries, such as\n[江戸語の辞典](http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E6%B1%9F%E6%88%B8%E8%AA%9E%E3%81%AE%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8-%E8%AC%9B%E8%AB%87%E7%A4%BE%E5%AD%A6%E8%A1%93%E6%96%87%E5%BA%AB-422-%E5%89%8D%E7%94%B0-%E5%8B%87/dp/4061584227/),\nbut almost never hear those words (いい気味之助, 面白狐, 面白狸, 上がったり大明神 etc.) used in\npresent-day life. I guess that the extinction of them is due to changes of\npeople's sense of humor and of naming conventions.\n\nBut somehow, 承知之助 has survived. Most of today's people don't use it because it\nsounds unfunny and too old, but at least we know the meaning and the usage of\n承知之助.\n\n### 付け足し言葉\n\nNowadays, these extra words, such as 〜之助, 〜狸の腹鼓, 〜大明神 etc., are called\n[付]{つ}け[足]{た}し[言葉]{こと・ば}.\n\n付け足し言葉s are not only name-style words but also any kind of additional words\nhumorously following the base word. People enjoy the rhythm of phrase,\nassociation of the meanings of words, and something like that. For example,\nthese are 付け足し言葉.\n\n> 「[驚]{おどろ}き [桃]{もも}の[木]{き} [山椒]{さんしょ}の[木]{き}」(means 驚き with humorous nuance)\n>\n> 「お[茶]{ちゃ}の[子]{こ}さいさい[河童]{かっぱ}の[屁]{へ}」 (means\n> [お茶の子](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/31600/m0u/)(easy) with humorous\n> nuance)\n>\n> 「しーらんぺったんゴリラ」(means [知]{し}らない with humorous nuance)\n\nIn many cases, 付け足し言葉 is young children's fun these days. A picture book\n『[おっと合点承知之助](http://www.ehonnavi.net/ehon/4136/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8%E5%90%88%E7%82%B9%E6%89%BF%E7%9F%A5%E4%B9%8B%E5%8A%A9/)』\nis popular in Japan.\n\nOf course, there are some adults enjoying 付け足し言葉 as well, though. But it's\nlike a hobby or a study.\n\nSo, the 之助 in 承知の助 implies something more than the literal meaning, because\nit's 付け足し言葉.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T18:14:15.700",
"id": "27984",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T18:14:15.700",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10484",
"parent_id": "27945",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27945 | null | 27984 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27968",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> **見さらせ** と言わんばかりに威風堂々と胸を張るその姿は....\n\nWhat does さらせ do in this sentence? Is it a type of conjugation or is it\nanother verb attached to 見?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T05:56:04.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27947",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T22:24:23.943",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T06:12:40.660",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10316",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"dialects"
],
"title": "What does さらせ do?",
"view_count": 199
} | [
{
"body": "As choco commented, さらせ is an imperative form of さらす. It only means \"do\", but\nwith bad intention and abusively.\n\nThe dictionary says its mainly used in Kansai. 見やがれ should be standard.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T22:24:23.943",
"id": "27968",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T22:24:23.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27947",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 27947 | 27968 | 27968 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the game of go (囲碁{いご｝), the expression 神｛かみ｝の一手｛いって｝ refers to the perfect\ngame of go, and it is referenced multiple times in the anime Hikaru no Go.\n\nMy question: Why 神の一手 and not 神の手? I can't find the kanji 手 alongside 一 on any\nonline dictionary.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T16:03:46.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27951",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T18:05:40.130",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-11T16:09:58.580",
"last_editor_user_id": "11157",
"owner_user_id": "11157",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "The kanji 一 in 神の一手",
"view_count": 159
} | [
{
"body": "According to [jisho.org](http://jisho.org/search/%E4%B8%80%E6%89%8B):\n\n> 一手{いって}: move (in game); method; single-handed; monopoly\n\nFrom the Japanese definition, it mostly refers to moves in 囲碁 and 将棋. Since it\nis a board game term, it makes sense in 神の一手 (god's go moves/method) more than\n神の手 (hand of god).\n\nFor more details in Japanese: [Yahoo Japanese\nDictionary](http://dic.search.yahoo.co.jp/search?p=%E4%B8%80%E6%89%8B&stype=full&aq=-1&oq=&ei=UTF-8)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T18:05:40.130",
"id": "27953",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-11T18:05:40.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9981",
"parent_id": "27951",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27951 | null | 27953 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I often see in Japanese business letters ご確認ください。what and how do I use this\nphrase?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-11T22:35:52.380",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27954",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T22:51:32.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11160",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"usage",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "The proper use of ご確認ください",
"view_count": 2238
} | [
{
"body": "ご確認ください means \"please have a careful look at the case, and I am looking\nforward your response.\"\n\nご確認ください is a little respectful than 確認してください and more respectful than 確認してくれる；\nご確認いただく is a little respectful than 確認していただくand more respectful than 確認してもらう\n\nsubject of 確認してください :You ; subject of確認してもらう:I or we",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T02:51:01.823",
"id": "27956",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T06:26:47.497",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-12T06:26:47.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "11161",
"owner_user_id": "11161",
"parent_id": "27954",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "\"Please verify\" or \"please confirm\"\n\nKakunin = confirmation\n\ngo kakunin = your (honored/respected) confirmation\n\ngo kakunin kudasai = please deign to give your honored confirmation or \"please\ncheck this.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T22:21:31.573",
"id": "27967",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T22:21:31.573",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "27954",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "An important thing to note in real-life usage of this phrase is that sometimes\nit does not ask for any explicit reaction or response.\n\nObviously, if the sender is bringing up a problem that needs to be dealt with,\nor if something is awaiting your explicit approval, ご確認ください will mean _Please\nlook into this and do something about it_ or _Please confirm and reply_.\nFrequently this call to action is written a little more explicitly as ご確認願います\n/ ご確認よろしくお願いします.\n\nIn other situations, ご確認ください can simply mean _Please take note that I did\nsomething_. For example, the sender may have attached an itinerary that does\nnot call for your input. Or maybe the sender has sent a photo you asked for.\nIn this case, the sender does not expect a response at all.\n\nSome inane emails may even go as far as to use ご確認ください and よろしくお願いします\ninterchangeably. In such extreme cases, this means nothing more than a\n_Regards_ at the end of the letter.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T22:51:32.560",
"id": "27969",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T22:51:32.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27954",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27954 | null | 27969 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27958",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the comments section of [Do the Japanese believe that USSR dropped nuclear\nbombs on Hiroshima and\nNagasaki?](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/28927/do-the-japanese-\nbelieve-that-ussr-dropped-nuclear-bombs-on-hiroshima-and-nagasak), it's\nspeculated that Japanese people agreed with a statement that the Soviet Union\ncarried out the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because the respondents\nwere thinking of the United States, but were confused by the similarity\nbetween \"USA\" and \"USSR\".\n\nAssuming that the survey was made in Japanese, is it plausible that \"USA\" and\n\"USSR\" was used, and that a large number of native speakers would confuse\nwhich country \"USA\" and \"USSR\" refer to? Alternatively, are there other terms\nfor the Soviet Union which could be mistaken for the United States?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T01:28:45.517",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27955",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T03:54:02.703",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:46:46.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "Are Japanese terms for the United States and the Soviet Union likely to be confused by native speakers of Japanese?",
"view_count": 901
} | [
{
"body": "That's not likely to happen, as long as the survey was conducted in Japanese.\n\n * **USA** → アメリカ, 米国{べいこく} \nAs like most nations outside US do, we prefer to abbreviate the country's name\nto toponym.\n\n * **USSR** → ソ連{れん} (ソビエト)\n * **Russia** → ロシア\n * ( **\"united states\"** → 合衆国{がっしゅうこく})\n\nIf someone should believe that the Soviet Union was America, then it's another\nfailure of public education, but irrelevant to linguistic matters.\n\n**PS** \nI Googled for Japanese source of \"25 per cent of young Japanese people believe\nthat the bombings were carried out by the USSR\" but I could find nothing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T03:48:49.883",
"id": "27958",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T03:54:02.703",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-12T03:54:02.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27955",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
]
| 27955 | 27958 | 27958 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27970",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While trying to figure out the polite imperative form of 呼ぶ I figured the\ncorrect conjugation to be 呼んで下さい。I found instead that, colloquially, the\nimperative is 呼び出して下さい。 Am I correct in assuming that this is to distinguish\nbetween, 読んで and 呼んで in everyday speech?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T03:45:21.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27957",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-24T22:18:41.970",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-12T04:13:09.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "4314",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"colloquial-language",
"spoken-language",
"homophonic-kanji"
],
"title": "Distinguishing between homophones in everyday speech",
"view_count": 343
} | [
{
"body": "No. As 読んで and 呼んで have different accents in both standard Japanese and Kansai\ndialect.\n\n呼ぶ and 呼び出す are...\n\n * 呼ぶ: call someone.\n * 呼び出す: call someone and ask him to come somewhere.\n\nThey are similar, sometimes same.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T22:53:13.040",
"id": "27970",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T22:53:13.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "8010",
"parent_id": "27957",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 27957 | 27970 | 27970 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27961",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the sentence including the word.\n\n> そのドヤ街｛がい｝に住む｛すむ｝子｛こ｝どもたちをそそのかしてかれらを **部下{ぶか}となし**",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T09:35:14.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27959",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T06:09:10.780",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-04T06:09:10.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"renyōkei"
],
"title": "What does the word 「部下となし」 mean?",
"view_count": 163
} | [
{
"body": "「部下となし」 does not exist as a single idiom or set phrase -- as you should be\nable to tell from the paucity of Google search results such a query will bring\nup.\n\nInstead, the なし here is the continuative form (連用形{れんようけい}) of the verb 為{な}す\n(to make/turn in to):\n\n\"He tempts the kids who live in that flophouse area, and turns them into his\nsubordinates.\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T13:08:20.467",
"id": "27961",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T13:13:50.373",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-12T13:13:50.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "27959",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27959 | 27961 | 27961 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27966",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A dialogue between a monk and a shogun (fiction), fragment for context:\n\n> Shogun: 「生きておれば死を望み、死に果てれば生を望む……全く、御坊に言われるまでもない。\n> 人の心の働きというのは本当に勝手なものよ。どこまでも満足せぬように出来ておる」\n>\n> Monk: 「であればこそ、人は満足を求めてあがき、自らを高めるのでござる。\n> 満ち足りた人間は木石も同然、悟りの境地ではござるが、世の役には立ち申さぬ。殿がかような生き仏になっては御国の大事。 いや、勝手な言い草おおいに結構！ 殿\n> **におかれては** どうか今後とも、自侭になさってくださりませい！」\n\nIs putting におかれては instead of just に makes it more of a honorific expression?\nOr is the meaning entirely different?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T12:20:56.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27960",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T21:52:12.497",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11053",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"verbs"
],
"title": "How is 置く used here?",
"view_count": 212
} | [
{
"body": "From [大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/166252/m0u/):\n\n> ### に‐おい‐て【に×於て】\n>\n> **３** （多くは下に「は」を伴って）上の人物・事柄を強く指示する意を表す。…こそ。\n\nThis usage does carry some honorific weight, but perhaps more importantly it\nputs emphasis on what you're talking about, as opposed to something else.\n\n> 殿 **は** どうか今後とも、自侭になさってくださりませい\n\n_You My Lord, keep doing as you wish_\n\n> 殿 **におかれては** どうか今後とも、自侭になさってくださりませい\n\n_As for you My Lord, keep doing as you wish_\n\nThe connotation here being that, nirvana may be wonderful for some people, but\nnot for the shogun. Therefore, _as for_ him, he may continue being self-\ncentered.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T21:48:55.067",
"id": "27966",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T21:52:12.497",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27960",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27960 | 27966 | 27966 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27963",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the sentence :\n\n> 1年たったらここんとこを **ピッと** おせばレーダーに反応がでるとおもうわ!\n\nI didn't find any information about ぴっと in the dictionaries I searched in...",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T14:56:00.233",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27962",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T16:36:29.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of ぴっと。",
"view_count": 207
} | [
{
"body": "It's a sound effect (beep) of a button press. This is a\n[sample](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3DrK8dK8VA) from youtube.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T16:36:29.123",
"id": "27963",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T16:36:29.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "542",
"parent_id": "27962",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 27962 | 27963 | 27963 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27975",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In [this Japanese song](https://youtu.be/hzcvm2UgVvo?t=1m6s), there is a line\nsaying:\n\n> まる **で** 夢かま **ぼ** ろし\n\nThe /d/ in 「で」 and the /b/ in 「ぼ」 sound to me as if they (especially the /b/)\nare pronounced as unaspirated /t/ and /p/ respectively.\n\nSome possible explanations:\n\n 1. I simply heard them wrong.\n 2. The singer's pronunciation here is kind of unusual.\n 3. People sometimes use unaspirated voiceless sounds instead of their voiced counterparts, even at **non-word-initial** positions ([an answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/21558/how-does-one-keep-from-being-confused-about-the-pronunciation-of-%E5%9C%B0%E4%B8%8B%E9%89%84/21568#21568) saying people do this at **word-initial** ).\n\nPlease kindly share your opinions!\n\n* * *\n\nadded [a clearer clip](http://1drv.ms/1KiaEKp) of the line\n([source](http://www.xiami.com/song/1769509693?spm=a1z1s.6659509.0.0.JISrN6))\n\nSomehow, the /d/ in this clip sounds more unvoiced to me than the /d/ in the\nyoutube video above <@_@>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T17:03:42.967",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27964",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T08:41:59.973",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Voiced stops pronounced as their unaspirated voiceless counterparts",
"view_count": 423
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's #1, you heard them wrong. They sound like /d/ and /b/ to me.\n\nI'm a non-native speaker, but the /d/ and /b/ don't sound unusual to me.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-12T17:17:41.967",
"id": "27965",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-12T17:17:41.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "27964",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I think it's half #1, half #2.\n\nWhen a singer (especially female) sings tenderly, some whispering (breathy)\nfeature tends to be blended into the voice, resulting in incomplete voicing.\nIt's a universal phenomenon. The whole phrase in your sound clip has\nunderlying breathing, so in some ways you're true, these are not true voiced\nconsonants.\n\nWhat you hear at で or ぼ is what they call [slack\nvoice](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slack_voice). Your vocal cords are set in\nthe position where you pronounce voiced consonants, but the vibration is less\nthan perfect, making a sound half voiced, half unvoiced. If you only focus on\nVOT (or, if there is vibration during plosion), you may think it's unvoiced,\nbut you must also care about the sound quality, so that you'll notice it's\ndifferent (much \"thicker\") than ordinary unvoiced consonant, namely か in your\nclip.\n\nWhat's more, the singer properly tries to maintain glottal vibration till\nright before those consonants, which makes the consonants of で and ぼ\neffectively sound like //dt// and //bp//, unlike か's is just //kʰ//. But when\nit comes to this point, で's \"voicedness\" is certainly quite weaker than ぼ, as\nyou observed.\n\n```\n\n cons. voice offset voice onset\n で 80ms 50-70ms?\n か 200ms 100ms\n ぼ 10ms 10ms\n \n```\n\n( _shoddily_ analyzed with Praat)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T06:06:16.090",
"id": "27975",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T08:41:59.973",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-13T08:41:59.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "27964",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 27964 | 27975 | 27975 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that place names often undergo changes separate from regular\nlanguage, but I always wondered if there was any phonetic rule behind reading\nfor the word 馬場. Meaning \"horse riding grounds\" and being a designated area in\nmost castle towns, it converted into contemporary place names, yet in some\nareas it is pronounced mostly ばば, but in some places ばんば. Most notably:\n\n * 東京 高田馬場{たかだのばば}\n * 大阪 馬場町{ばんばちょう}\n\nThis [wiki page](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%A6%AC%E5%A0%B4%E7%94%BA)\nshows ばんば only in Ishikawa, Aichi and Osaka Pref. However having visited a few\ncastles I remember seeing ばんば elsewhere (e.g. 桜の馬場{ばんば} in Kumamoto).\n\n1) Is there a more general phonetic rule behind this? Are there other examples\nof words in which repeated syllable gets an ん before?\n\n2) Could such rule (if existed) be tied to a regional dialect (like ん is\nplaced where や is used in areas where や replaces だ ...though I doubt)?\n\nOr is it just purely customary?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T03:46:17.860",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27971",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T06:15:50.800",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-13T04:05:22.483",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"dialects",
"phonetics"
],
"title": "Is there any phonetic rule behind readings 馬場{ばば} and 馬場{ばんば}?",
"view_count": 131
} | [
{
"body": "Section 1 of the appendix on Japanese phonology in NHK 日本語発音アクセント辞典 suggests\nthat pre-nasalisation of /b/ is found in dialects in what it describes as\n東部方言, covering all of Japan east of 石川県 and north of 愛知県, precisely where you\nobserved that the wiki page has ばんば. This should indicate that there's an\nisogloss somewhere in the region.\n\nI have no information on why Osaka or Kumamoto would have ばんば place names\nthough: the book indicates that pre-nasalisation only occurs in Western\ndialects (西部方言) before /g/ and /d/. The book does not describe pre-\nnasalisation occurring in any Kyushu dialects.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T06:04:23.100",
"id": "27974",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T06:15:50.800",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-13T06:15:50.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "816",
"owner_user_id": "816",
"parent_id": "27971",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27971 | null | 27974 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to translate the following sentence,\n八世紀の「養老神祇令」散斎条に、唐の令にはみられない肉食禁止条項が挿入されていること , but can't figure out the meaning\nof 散斎条. Searching the almighty google didn't yield any results either.\n\nIt's referred to as 「養老神祇令」散斎条, so apparently a part of, or law in, the Yoro-\nCode (which is a revision of the Taiho-Code from 701)\n\nSadly I can't find any translations or explanations about this, or a list of\nlaws from that code. Even a japanese friend of mine couldn't help.\n\nUpdate: While the meaning is now more or less clear, I am still strugling to\nfind a fitting translation for \"散斎\". Also, do you think, 養老神祇令 can be\ntranslated as \"The Law of the Gods of Heaven and Earth during the Yoro\nperiod\"?\n\nThank you for your help and suggestions in advance.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T14:46:48.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27981",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T17:47:07.737",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-13T17:47:07.737",
"last_editor_user_id": "11171",
"owner_user_id": "11171",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Meaning of 散斎条 in this context?",
"view_count": 78
} | [
{
"body": "[Here](http://www.sol.dti.ne.jp/hiromi/kansei/yoro06.html#11) is a list of\nthose laws, including the specific 散斎条.\n\nAfter some cursory Googling, `散斎` seems to be a ritualistic period of time\nwhere people avoid doing normal activities, somewhat like Passover or Shabbat.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T14:59:41.697",
"id": "27982",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T14:59:41.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27981",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27981 | null | 27982 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "28002",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In writing, sometimes you get the illusion of a 4-character compound:\n\n> Xさんは **去年教職** を退【しりぞ】いた。\n\nThis bothers some non-natives. To correct the \"problem\", can I always just\nplace a comma between the kanjis where there is a false 四字熟語?\n\n> Xさんは去年、教職を退いた。\n\nBut to me, that does not look good at all. \"Xさん\" feels too far away from \"退く\",\nright? In this particular case, is this ok?:\n\n> 去年、Xさんは教職を退いた。\n\nSo...\n\n * Is there a general rule for correcting the false 四字熟語 \"problem\"? \n * Do native speakers not mind false 四字熟語? \n * Is it that native speakers do mind, and will try to re-word - but, if they can't create a sentence that they like, then they will just not worry about it and move on?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T17:40:08.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27983",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T09:51:05.433",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-14T09:28:29.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"syntax",
"orthography",
"spelling"
],
"title": "How can one stop \"去年【きょねん】教職【きょうしょく】\" from looking like a weird 4 kanji compound?",
"view_count": 417
} | [
{
"body": "As with almost anything, there are people who care and others who don't! But\nit is definitely a thing to consider if you are trying to write well.\n\n# Degrees of severity\n\nThere are two angles to this. One is “trivial“, in that the consideration is\nmostly about legibility, flow, and aesthetics. The other is more\nconsequential, where the “false compound” could **really** throw off the\nreader, complicating the interpretation process, and in the worse case cause\nthem to misinterpret the sentence.\n\nIn your example, 「去年教職」 is unlikely to cause a serious problem, at least for\nnative readers. 去年 is a common enough word, and 去年教職 is hard to conceptualize\nas a compound (what would that even mean? I guess it could be read as 「去年教/職」\nlike a clergy job?). On the legibility side, it helps that 去年 and 教職 are\ndemarcated by a difference in 画数-density. Still, I understand why one would\nwant to break up the false compound.\n\nFalse 3-kanji compounds tend to cause more confusion:\n\n> 最悪値を変える (At worst, I'll change the value?) (I'll change the worst value?)\n>\n> あなたとは当面面と向かって話せない (I won't be able to talk to you in person for the time\n> being)\n\n# Remedies\n\n### The “proper” quick fix is to insert a comma:\n\n> Xさんは去年、教職を退いた。最悪、値を変える。あなたとは当面、面と向かって話せない。\n\nThis is good because it matches the flow of how you would read it out loud.\n\n### Where the medium permits, you can “cheat” and insert a narrow space:\n\n> Xさんは去年 教職を退いた。\n\nThis is done in informal writing like hand-written letters and online\ncommunication. It's generally not allowed in the body text of publications\n(header text can be an exception).\n\n### Some words read better when switched to hiragana:\n\n> 到底底力は出せない → とうてい底力は出せない\n\nChoosing between kanji/hiragana is an art in itself and a serious writer can\nbe a real stickler for these things. Prestigious publishers may have house\nrules. But it's a great technique to build.\n\n### Opt for a synonym:\n\n> 最悪値を変える → いざとなれば値を変える\n\n### Reorder the words:\n\n> 去年、Xさんは教職を退いた。\n\nNow we're into rewrite territory, and this will start to affect the meaning of\nthe sentence.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T09:51:05.433",
"id": "28002",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T09:51:05.433",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27983",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 27983 | 28002 | 28002 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27986",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have a couple of Japanese novels and textbooks that have the kanji 上 ＆ 下 on\nthem. Now, intuitively, I would say that the 下 kanji would be the book I start\nwith. Whereas the 上 would be the one I finish up with. But I'm not sure.\n\nThis is an example of what I'm asking about:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gOdzq.jpg)\n\nWhere do I begin? I appreciate your help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T18:24:37.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27985",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T04:52:49.520",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-14T04:38:19.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5129",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "Japanese novels 上・下",
"view_count": 1259
} | [
{
"body": "The opposite is true: 上篇{じょうへん} is the first volume and 下篇{げへん} is the second,\ncorresponding to the traditional writing direction.\n\nIf there's a third volume, they will be labelled 上、中、下 in order.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T18:40:49.087",
"id": "27986",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T18:40:49.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"parent_id": "27985",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "I often find that novels that I'm familiar with here in the US are split up in\nto 2 or 3 parts, leading to these 上 and 下 volumes. Patrick Rothfuss has a\ngreat [blog entry](http://blog.patrickrothfuss.com/2011/11/fanmail-faq-why-\nare-they-breaking-up-your-book) as to why this happens. His example involves\nGerman to English translations, which he says are 30% - 40% longer, and I\nbelieve the same is true for Japanese translations. Once books get to a\ncertain size, they get really hard to bind durably so that they don't\nphysically fall apart.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T04:52:49.520",
"id": "27995",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T04:52:49.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9281",
"parent_id": "27985",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27985 | 27986 | 27986 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> もう一度やり直した\n\nIn this sentence, what is the minimum number of times やる was done, two or\nthree times? At first, I thought it was three times because もう一度 means to do\nsomething again, and if you were to do the action of repeating again, that\nwould imply you have done the action at least twice because the act of\nrepeating requires you to have done it at least once. So it would go:\n\n> やる やり直す もう一度やり直す\n\nand もう一度やり直す would require doing something three times. However, I have seen a\nlot of sentences where もう一度やり直す or something similar to that mean to do\nsomething a second time, not a third or higher amount of times. For example,\n\n>\n> [我々は一度その家にペンキを塗って、またそれを繰り返した。](http://classic.jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E6%88%91%E3%80%85%E3%81%AF%E4%B8%80%E5%BA%A6%E3%81%9D%E3%81%AE%E5%AE%B6%E3%81%AB%E3%83%9A%E3%83%B3%E3%82%AD%E3%82%92%E5%A1%97%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%80%81%E3%81%BE%E3%81%9F%E3%81%9D%E3%82%8C%E3%82%92%E7%B9%B0%E3%82%8A%E8%BF%94%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F%E3%80%82&eng=)\n>\n>\n> [私は電話を切って、もう一度彼女にかけなおした。](http://classic.jisho.org/sentences?jap=%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AF%E9%9B%BB%E8%A9%B1%E3%82%92%E5%88%87%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%80%81%E3%82%82%E3%81%86%E4%B8%80%E5%BA%A6%E5%BD%BC%E5%A5%B3%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8B%E3%81%91%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8A%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F%E3%80%82&eng=)\n\nHow does this work? If もう一度やり直す means to do やり直す again, that would imply you\ndid the action of やり直す in the past before, which further implies that you did\nthe action of やる even farther in the past, which would mean もう一度やり直した would\nrequire doing an action a minimum of three times. However, many sentences\nimply もう一度やり直す as only doing やる a second time, and I am confused on why this\nis the case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T19:38:45.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27987",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T23:25:28.967",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of もう一度やり直す?",
"view_count": 228
} | [
{
"body": "Think of 「もう一度」「また」「再度」 as the word “again”.\n\nConsider the redundancies of:\n\n> Let's start over again.\n>\n> Could you repeat that again?\n>\n> I'll call you back again.\n\nIn most situations, people are not confused by the repetition counts in these\nsentences.\n\nYes, 「もう一度やり直す」「また繰り返す」 are redundant phrases when meaning a rep count of 2,\nand an astute proofreader will edit them down. But it happens all the time, so\ntry not to overthink it. Assume the rep count is 2, unless there is reason to\nsuspect otherwise.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T23:25:28.967",
"id": "27990",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T23:25:28.967",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27987",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 27987 | null | 27990 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27991",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading [an article on\nohtabooks.com](http://www.ohtabooks.com/qjkettle/news/2015/02/16101614.html)\nwhich had the following sentence:\n\n> 英単語を覚えるため、1ページごと辞書を **食べた**\n\nTo me, this looks like:\n\n> To learn English words, I **ate** a dictionary page-by-page.\n\nUsually, 食べる means 'eat'. But that seems silly here!\n\nIs this a figurative use of 食べる? I think it is, but I'm not sure what it means\nspecifically. In English, people sometimes talk figuratively about 'devouring'\na book, meaning they read through the book very quickly, often in one sitting.\nBut I'm not sure that's quite the same meaning intended by 食べる here.\n\nOr could it be that it's _supposed_ to be amusing? (I got the impression it\nwas supposed to be serious.)\n\n### Can someone explain how 食べる is used here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T23:21:07.810",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27989",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T23:35:02.923",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "To learn English vocabulary, I ate a dictionary page-by-page",
"view_count": 238
} | [
{
"body": "From an Amazon [book\nreview](http://www.amazon.co.jp/review/R2LPK2B54YDXWI/ref=cm_cr_dp_title/376-9069893-0696427?ie=UTF8&ASIN=4040219007&channel=detail-\nglance&nodeID=465392&store=books):\n\n> 英語の単語を覚えるための奇行の一つとして語り継がれる伝説の一つに、 「覚えるためにとにかく辞書のページを片っ端から食べた」\n> というのがあります。（少なくとも、そんな冗談を私は聞いた）\n\nFrom an OKWave [answer](http://okwave.jp/qa/q7664819/a21292897.html) to the\nquestion 「英単語は辞書を破って食べると覚えられるのでしょうか」:\n\n> 戦前の旧制高校（今の大学、一部では旧制中学でも）の学生の間で言われた事で、 法螺混じりの当時の学生のバンカラ気質を表した戯言です。\n> 本は当時は高い物で、特に辞書は高価でした。 それでも俺はこんなに凄いんだぞ、そして英語をマスターしたんだぞと言う法螺話です。\n\nSo 食べる seems to literally mean _eat_ , as in this silly urban legend.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-13T23:35:02.923",
"id": "27991",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-13T23:35:02.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27989",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 27989 | 27991 | 27991 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "From what I have seen, they are both used to say \" to call someone\" by phone,\nbut I was wondering if there was a difference between the two. Is one more\nformal? Is there a nuance in meaning? Are there situations where one could not\nbe used while the other could? Thanks.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T02:57:48.077",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27992",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T02:57:48.077",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9536",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning"
],
"title": "電話する and 電話をかける",
"view_count": 60
} | []
| 27992 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "27997",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I learned 去年 well before 昨年, so I just always use 去年 out of habit. But now I'm\nwondering if they really are interchangeable or if there's even a subtle\ndifference that would make one more appropriate in some situations over the\nother.\n\nSo are they interchangeable, or does a subtle difference exist?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T03:19:55.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27993",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-15T04:32:12.020",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 17,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 去年 and 昨年?",
"view_count": 9111
} | [
{
"body": "From what my teacher told me, 去年{きょねん} and 昨年｛さくねん｝mean the same thing, but 昨年\nsounds more sophisticated.\n\nI would guess that depending on the situation they may or may not be\ninterchangeable with the difference being who your audience is.\n\n_There may be a situation where this specifically is the case, but I am not\naware of it, someone more knowledgeable than I will have to answer as to\nwhether or not this is the case._",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T03:46:20.220",
"id": "27994",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T03:46:20.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7417",
"parent_id": "27993",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "去年 can be used in almost any situation. 昨年 is more formal and not good for\ncasual conversation.\n\nFor example,\n\n> 1) 去年、結婚いたしました。 \n> 2) 昨年、結婚いたしました。\n\n2) is better because いたしました is a humble form but 1) is totally acceptable. On\nthe other hand,\n\n> 1) 去年、結婚しちゃった \n> 2) 昨年、結婚しちゃった\n\n1) is natural but 2) sounds a bit strange.\n\nThe same applies to:\n\n> 昨日{きのう} vs. 昨日{さくじつ} (yesterday; the same kanji but read differently)\n\n**前年{ぜんねん}** is a similar word and it means ' **previous year** '.\n\n> 大統領{だいとうりょう}選挙{せんきょ}の前年は、株価{かぶか}が上がる。 \n> Stock prices rise in a pre-presidential election year.\n\n前年 is often used to compare a certain year with the previous year.\n\n> 前年比{ぜんねんひ} 50%増{ぞう} \n> Up 50% over the previous year\n\nWithout reference to another year, 前年 means 'last year' and it is used almost\nalways to compare 'last year' with 'this current year'.\n\n> 1) 息子が生まれる前年に、結婚しました。(I got married in the year before my son was born.) \n> 2) 前年、結婚しました .\n\n1) is natural. 2) sounds incomplete because it doesn't compare anything or\nspecify the reference year.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T05:36:36.993",
"id": "27997",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T15:53:22.400",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-14T15:53:22.400",
"last_editor_user_id": "10770",
"owner_user_id": "10770",
"parent_id": "27993",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 26
}
]
| 27993 | 27997 | 27997 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "28048",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Recently I've been using the スーパー大辞林 Japanese dictionary, because it is built-\nin to all my Apple devices. But I frequently find words where there is a\nsingle entry in the dictionary, but 2 or 3 different kanji \"spellings\" are\nlisted.\n\nFor example, if I search for 空く, I get [this\npage](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%8F&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_aku_-040)\nwhich claims to be the entry for 開く, 空く, and 明く all at the same time. Does\nthat mean that all 3 of those words have identical meanings? It looks like\nsome of the definitions are reserved for only one of the kanji. Like in my\nsearch, definitions 1 and 3 are marked 《開く》 and definition 4 is marked 《空》.\nDoes that mean that to use 空 to convey the meaning from definition 1 is\nincorrect? If that's the case, why don't they have separate dictionary\nentries?\n\nAre these entries indeed homonyms, in that they have the same pronunciation,\nbut unique, independent meanings, and it is these unique meanings that gave\nrise to the separate kanji to begin with? That would seem to argue for their\ndictionary entries to be separate.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T05:09:21.820",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27996",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T20:20:08.747",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-16T18:50:39.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "9281",
"owner_user_id": "9281",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"spelling",
"dictionary"
],
"title": "Dictionary definition of multiple words with identical pronunciation but different kanji",
"view_count": 514
} | [
{
"body": "These 3 kanji words are by some means the same and by the other means quite\ndifferent. They are like \"Venn diagram\", not exact the same,but share some\nparts.\n\nThe reason why they are not distinguishable, is that they have the same\norigin.\n\nThe multiple spelling entries you have found almost always share the same \"kun\nyomi\" but not the same \"on yomi\" because they are indifferent till Kanji\nintroduced.\n\nThere are many examples you can find. For example, 明るい(bright) and 赤い(red)\nhave the same pronouciation \"aka\". Since 赤 is the same as 明,the sun is bright\nand also red(as the national flag says).\n\nOn the other hand the same kun-yomi doesn't guarantee the same origin. The\ndictionary site has one entry for 居る, another entry for 射る and yet another\nentry for 炒る-煎る-熬る.\n\n居る = ゐる = 'wiru'\n\n射る = ヤ行上一段活用 = 'yiru'\n\n炒る = いる = 'iru'\n\nThese are from the different origins, don't share the same meaning,thus the\ndifferent entries are given.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-16T14:42:39.227",
"id": "28048",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T14:42:39.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5081",
"parent_id": "27996",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "To add to the good technical reasons given by user897730, let me explain how\nthe relationship **feels** to a native mind.\n\nEvery kanji character already has meanings tied to itself, independent of any\nactual Japanese “word”. (And by “word” I mean a combination of sounds.) It\nhappens to be that, coming from another language (Chinese), the kanji meanings\ndo not map perfectly to the preexisting Japanese words. Hence the Venn diagram\nmetaphor.\n\nSo, it's not that the numbered dictionary meanings are assigned to the kanji,\nbut the other way around: the kanji are assigned to the numbered meanings.\n\nWhen sentences flow from your mind, they come as sounds, not spellings. I'm\nsure English speakers are very aware of this (you're/your? then/than?). When\npeople say in English “open the door”, “open your schedule”, or “open a\nstore”, I doubt they are conscious of which numbered dictionary meaning they\nare using. They definitely **feel** like the same, single word. Imagine one\nday the U.S. decides to import kanji characters, and imperfectly map them in a\nway that sort of corresponds to the numbered meanings. Would it make sense to\nsplit them up into different dictionary entries?\n\nWhen natives write these words, we actually have to think quite consciously to\ndecide which is the “correct” kanji to use for a word-as-a-sound that comes to\nmind. It is a major source of mistakes, and we will often just give up or\nspare ourselves the embarrassment and write it in hiragana!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-16T20:20:08.747",
"id": "28057",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-16T20:20:08.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "27996",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27996 | 28048 | 28057 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "28005",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the following examples the same imperative form is used for two opposite\nmeanings:\n\n 1. 「ウンと言え！」 \"say yes!\" \"agree!\"\n 2. 「バカを言え！」 \"don't talk stupid!\"\n\nClear from context, but I wonder what do Japanese people hear in their minds\nin the second case? Is it simple \"バカを言えない\"? Or is it unfinished clause, like\n\"バカを言えば...\" (something like \"talk more stupid, then...\"?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T06:56:41.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27998",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T13:24:15.923",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-14T08:04:27.933",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"negation",
"imperatives"
],
"title": "言え used both as negative and positive imperative",
"view_count": 162
} | [
{
"body": "It's definitely imperative and it sounds \"Talk whatever stupid!\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T13:24:15.923",
"id": "28005",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T13:24:15.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27998",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 27998 | 28005 | 28005 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "28006",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the sentence including the words.\n\n> このおっさん **はな** 更{こう}生{せい}だとか なんだとか そんな しゃれたことを考{かんが}えるようなおやじじゃねえよ\n>\n> まあ ごくかんたんに **いうとな**\n\nAnother question: Do the 「な」 in both words work as particle?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T07:39:20.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "27999",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-15T06:19:17.457",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What do 「はな」 and 「いうとな」 mean?",
"view_count": 212
} | [
{
"body": "It's この おっさん-は な and いう-と な, i.e. particle は or particle と followed by\ninterjectional particle な, which functions as a filler in this case.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-09-14T13:31:08.800",
"id": "28006",
"last_activity_date": "2015-09-14T13:50:47.013",
"last_edit_date": "2015-09-14T13:50:47.013",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "27999",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 27999 | 28006 | 28006 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.