question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29456",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When you say : 第一木曜日, does it mean the first Thursday of the month? Or does it\nmean Thursday of the first week of the month?\n\nFor instance, if we talk about October 2015, would 第一木曜日 be October 1st or\nOctober 8th?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yzNho.png)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T14:30:29.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29455",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-25T15:34:18.130",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-25T15:31:14.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "4540",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "第一木曜日 : Which Thursday of the month is it?",
"view_count": 125
} | [
{
"body": "It would mean the first Thursday of the month. In October 2015, 第一木曜日 is\nOctober 1st. The 8th of October would be 第二木曜日.\n\n[Here's](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1376925763)\na question on Chiebukuro from someone who was mixed up with a similar problem.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T15:04:04.053",
"id": "29456",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-25T15:34:18.130",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-25T15:34:18.130",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "29455",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29455 | 29456 | 29456 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29459",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to translate 駅から歩けなくなっちゃって. I don't really speak Japanese but this\nis what I got so far:\n\n * なっちゃって apparently means having done something against one's intention\n * 駅から is \"from the station\" \n * 歩けなく has ~something~ to do with walking but I couldn't figure out what grammatical case this is. \n\nMaybe it's actually 駅 から 歩け 泣く なっちゃって? \"I ended up crying on my way from the\nstation\" or something like that. But that would make 歩け imperative which\ndoesn't make sense to me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T15:48:49.463",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29458",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T02:52:31.033",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-27T02:52:31.033",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11731",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations",
"negation",
"potential-form",
"aspect"
],
"title": "meaning of 歩けなくなっちゃって",
"view_count": 2828
} | [
{
"body": "Here's where 歩けなく comes from:\n\n 1. Start with the verb 歩く, \"to walk\".\n 2. Turn it into its potential form: 歩ける, \"able to walk\".\n 3. Make it negative: 歩けない, \"unable to walk\".\n 4. Turn the newly formed i-adjective into an adverb: 歩けなく.\n\nNow, なっちゃう is a shorter form of なって + しまう.\n\nなって, of course, is the -て form of なる, which means \"to become\". なる requires\nthat the adjective you are becoming is in an adverbial form, which is why we\nneeded step 4 above.\n\nしまう, as it seems you already know, indicates that the action occurred\nunintentionally or had a regrettable result.\n\nPutting these together, 「歩けなくなっちゃう」 roughly means \"to unfortunately become\nunable to walk\".\n\n「駅から歩けなくなっちゃう」 = \"(I) unfortunately won't be able to walk from the station\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T16:23:42.283",
"id": "29459",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-25T16:23:42.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "29458",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 29458 | 29459 | 29459 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why is に used in a sentence like this?\n\n> 若者が元気 **に** 溢れている\n\nI thought it was:\n\n> 若者に元気 **が** 溢れている\n\nI know に is used as an indirect object marker. Could someone tell me the\ndifference between direct and indirect object?\n\n* * *\n\nI already understand this usage of the particle:\n\nIt is used to show destination of an action\n\n> 本を彼に上げた\n\nTo show an action in a place with semi-permanent or permanent consequences\n\n> 山に雪が積もった\n\nTo show existence in a place\n\n> 部屋にいる\n\nTo show a specific time when something happens\n\n> 来た時に林檎を食べた\n\nTo show the agent in passive or verbs of receiving\n\n> ペンを彼に貰った \n> 林檎が彼に食べられた",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T16:53:41.703",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29460",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-25T21:46:34.007",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-25T20:10:00.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Why is に used in 若者が元気に溢れている?",
"view_count": 276
} | [
{
"body": "You are understanding `に` correctly. This is actually a quirk of the verb 溢れる.\nIt can be used with either a subject (〜が) or with an object (〜に/〜で).\n\n### 元気 as subject\n\n> 若者に元気 **が** 溢れている \n> _元気 is overflowing in the 若者_\n\n### 元気 as object\n\n> 若者が元気 **に** 溢れている \n> _若者 is overflowing with 元気_\n\nJust remember that when you are talking about something that is overflowing\n_literally_ and not figuratively, you should put it as a subject:\n\n * コップから水 **が** 溢れている _Water is overflowing from the cup_\n * コップが水 **に** 溢れている ← unnatural\n\n* * *\n\nThere are other verbs like this that can be used both ways, for example:\n\n * 満ちる → 月 **が** 満ちる / (心が)喜び **に** 満ちる\n * 欠ける → 歯 **が** 欠ける / (彼は)常識 **に** 欠ける",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T20:02:59.363",
"id": "29461",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-25T21:46:34.007",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-25T21:46:34.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29460",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29460 | null | 29461 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "From this question\n\n[Why is に used in\n若者が元気に溢れている?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/29460/why-\nis-%E3%81%AB-used-\nin-%E8%8B%A5%E8%80%85%E3%81%8C%E5%85%83%E6%B0%97%E3%81%AB%E6%BA%A2%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B)\n\nI did few hours ago another one, a bigger one arose.\n\n> マフィアは隠れ蓑に合法的な事業を展開している\n\nI know に can be used as an indirect complement but I would have used として since\n隠れ蓑に is not the recipient of an action.\n\nAlso Can someone explain how is に used as an indirect complement?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T20:35:53.340",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29462",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T16:27:03.470",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "に as an indirect complement",
"view_count": 280
} | [
{
"body": "So yesterday I was trying to understand this a little better. I think that に\nis just the answer japanese has to most of the indirect compliments.\n\nThere are Transitive and Intransitive verbs\n\n* * *\n\n**Transitive verbs** have\n\nSubject=The one who performs the action \nDirect Object=The one which the action acts upon \nVerb=An action\n\n> 僕が林檎を食べる\n\nHow do you know which is the direct object? \nYou could ask this questions:\n\n> What is the action? \n> Who/What is doing the action? \n> What is being (insert verb)?\n\nSo the answers are\n\n> What is the action? 食べる \n> Who/What is doing the action? 僕 (Marked with が) \n> What is being (食べる )?林檎 (Marked with を)\n\nSometimes there is a receiver of the direct object: \n**The indirect object**\n\n> 僕が彼にペンを上げた\n>\n> What is the action? 上げる \n> Who/What is doing the action? 僕 \n> What is being (上げる)?ペン \n> Who is recipient of the Object?彼\n\n**This indirect object is marked with に**\n\nIn my example\n\n> マフィアは隠れ蓑に合法的な事業を展開している\n>\n> What is the action? 展開する \n> Who/What is doing the action? マフィア \n> What is being (展開する)?合法的な事業 \n> Who is recipient of the Object?隠れ蓑\n\nYou can say that 隠れ蓑 is the recipient of the action but you can say that it\nanswer the te question\n\n> as what?\n\nWhich is another indirect complement. So as long as there is no other particle\nthat fit the role に can be used. (IF there is a choice you can use another\nparticle which fit the same gramatical role in that situation, but not with\nthe complement of means で)\n\n* * *\n\n**Intransitive verbs**\n\n**Here there is no direct object for the action** Excluding times when: You\nget out of a smaller to a bigger place:\n\n> 建物を出る\n\nYou are going trough something\n\n> 空を飛んでいる\n\nSo some verbs have a transitive and intransitive form.\n\nThe transitive is used to act upon an object and the intransitive is kinda\nlike a state of being.\n\n> Transitive:閉める=To close something \n> Intransitive:閉まる=To be closed\n\nSome verbs while being intransitive have different meanings. For example:\n\nIntransitive:映える=To shine, To look attractive, To look pretty\n\n映える=To shine\n\n**If the meaning is active** (The subject is doing an action) You have\nsomething like this:\n\n> 夕焼けが空に映える\n>\n> What is the action? 映える \n> Who/What is doing the action? 夕焼け \n> What is being (映える)? Nothing \n> Where is the verb happening?空\n>\n> The sunset shines in the sky\n\nAs you can see に here means the location where something takes place.\n\nIf the meaning is passive (in the sense that something is doing a state for a\nlack of a better term). 映える=To look attractive\n\n> ジャケットが映えるように三角筋と僧帽筋を鍛える.\n>\n> What is the action? 映える \n> Who/What is doing the action? ジャケット \n> What is being (映える)? Nothing \n> What is the indirect complement? Nothing\n>\n> In order for a jacket to look attractive you have to train your deltoids and\n> traps.\n\nWhen I say **indirect complement** I mean the answer to every question which\nis not \"Whom?\" \"What?\". (that is how it is my native language at least).\n\n * It can used to also mean the way you do something when transforming な adjectives into adverbs.\n * It can be used to show company\n\nand has other roles.\n\nUltimately I think it does not matter the distinction beetween intransitive\n(active and passive) since I believe you could say, but I am not sure so if\nthere is a mistake please correct me.\n\n> 僕がジャケットに映えるように三角筋と僧帽筋を鍛える. I,in order to look good in a jacket, train my\n> deltoids and traps.\n>\n> 僕にジャケットが映えるように三角筋と僧帽筋を鍛える. In order for the jacket to look good on me, I\n> train my deltoids and traps.\n\nIf I am wrong please correct me.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T07:07:03.047",
"id": "29469",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T07:07:03.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"parent_id": "29462",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "You are correct that you can use `として` there. This kind of `〜に` basically\nmeans として. I'm not sure you can call it a complement though, because according\nto the definitions I just looked up, it seems more like an adjunct. But\nterminology is not my forté, so I'll just give some examples of the same kind\nof usage.\n\n * (私は)息抜き **に** 本を読む → I 本を読む as a 息抜き\n * (私は)暇つぶし **に** テレビを見る → I テレビを見る as a 暇つぶし\n * (私は)東京を拠点 **に** 活動する → I 活動する with [ 東京 as the 拠点 ]\n * (私たちは)結婚を前提 **に** 付き合う → We 付き合う with [ 結婚 as a 前提 ]\n\nThe `に` in the above examples can all be replaced with `として`.\n\nFor many of the words that are often used adverbially like 試しに (試しに買った) or 戯れに\n(戯れに描いた), you can't replace the `に` with `として` because those are set phrases.\nBut the meaning of the `に` is basically the same as として.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T16:27:03.470",
"id": "29494",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T16:27:03.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29462",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29462 | null | 29494 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29464",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found [this\nsentence](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%83%83%E5%85%A8%20%23sentences) on\nJisho.org recently:\n\n> どーすんの、このお店{みせ}！完{かん}ッ全{ぜん}に閑古鳥{かんこどり}が鳴{な}いちゃってるじゃない。 \n> What happened to this place?! It's completely dead!\n\nI am baffled as to why there is a small ッ in the middle of 完全. The furigana\nprovided ignores it, and I would be surprised if it were a typo because it is\nin the middle of a word with kanji. I've never seen anything like this before.\n\nIs the small ッ supposed to affect the pronunciation of the word? Why is it\nthere?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T21:09:54.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29463",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T01:27:21.720",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T01:26:35.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"colloquial-language"
],
"title": "Why is there a small ッ in 完ッ全?",
"view_count": 579
} | [
{
"body": "When っ is placed in the middle of a word, it's showing an elongation/stress\nfor emphasis.\n\nFor starters, this appears in many common words not written in kanji, notably:\n\n> すっごい (even すっげー), from 凄{すご}い\n>\n> やっぱり, from やはり\n\nIn a lot of colloquial Japanese, っ serves as a small hiccup (in reality a\ngeminated consonant, or sometimes a glottal stop), and is used very commonly\nfor emphasis. Perhaps you've heard some of the following:\n\n> 全{ぜん}ッ然{ぜん}わかんない！\n>\n> I don't understand AT ALL. (emphasis that you understand 0% of what's being\n> said)\n>\n> 絶{ぜっ}ッ対{たい}ダメ！\n>\n> NO WAY! (emphasis that it's totally out of the question)\n\nIn your example, we see the same thing as above -- ッ is added between the\nkanji (almost as an okurigana) showing that the speaker is stretching out (and\nslightly straining) the ん sound in かんぜん, which gives the effect of emphasizing\nthat it really is 完全に.\n\nShowing where the emphasis lies:\n\n> どーすんの、このお店{みせ}！完{かん}ッ全{ぜん}に閑古鳥{かんこどり}が鳴{な}いちゃってるじゃない。\n>\n> What happened to this place?! It's TOTALLY dead!\n\nIt's hard to explain the っ, but I found a good example that came to mind. In\n<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6A_pU1Tdhjo#t=2m15s>, Hatoko (the pink haired\ngirl) says \"全ッ然わかんない\" right after where I set the timestamp. Hopefully it\ngives a clear idea of what the ッ sounds like here, and in 完ッ全.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-25T22:03:58.423",
"id": "29464",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T01:27:21.720",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "29463",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29463 | 29464 | 29464 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29468",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "If I don't know the kanji of a thing but I know the hiragana of it, can I just\nwrite the hiragana if I have to write it down? Is it a free choice? Or some\nrules or social formalities?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T02:31:27.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29466",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T16:23:43.367",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T16:23:43.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "5464",
"owner_user_id": "11795",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"hiragana"
],
"title": "The role of hiragana when there is a relevant kanji?",
"view_count": 1427
} | [
{
"body": "If you write a thing in hiragana that should be written in kanji, it looks\nlike a kid who didn't know kanji so much wrote it. There's no rigid rule\nwhether you use kanji or hiragana, but you should use kanji in something\nformal. And it's better to use kanji even in informal texts.\n\nbut there are some exceptions. If the kanji of the things is difficult to\nwrite even for Japanese, we usually write them in hiragana or katakana. ex)\nrose is 薔薇(bara) in kanji, but it's hard even for Japanese to remember the\nkanji, so we usually write ばら.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T03:33:36.063",
"id": "29467",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T03:51:00.087",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T03:51:00.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "11790",
"owner_user_id": "11790",
"parent_id": "29466",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "First, as @TheWanderingCoder states, sometimes hiragana can be ambiguous. `かみ`\ncan be `神`(God), `紙`(Paper), or `髪`(Hair) for example. So Kanji is required\nhere to understand the intended meaning, even though there are situations\nwhere it is understood from context.\n\n**To answer your questions**\n\n# Can I just write the hiragana if I have to write it down?\n\nMost of the time, **yes** as people will understand from context. I've seen\npeople write `会議` as `会ギ` on whiteboards before because `議` is a pain to\nwrite.\n\nBe careful though, a big glob of Hiragana/Katakana is hard to read. Japanese\nspeakers (readers?) \"chunk\" the text by Kanji, so too much Kana will take them\nlonger to read.\n\n# Is it a free choice? Or some rules or social formalities?\n\n1) There are modern preferences that exist, for example `おいしい` is often\nwritten in Hiragana and not as `美味しい`. You can experiment with your preferred\nstyle as the choice can give a different persona, particularly when\nchatting/texting. Heavy use of Hiragana can come off as young and sometimes\nfeminine.\n\n2) Take this phrase that you will write at the bottom of every business email\nyou write in Japanese `よろしくおねがいいたします`.\n\nQuickly looking through my emails, the following patterns all occur:\n\n * `よろしくお願いいたします`\n * `よろしくお願い致します`\n * `宜しくお願い致します`\n\nThe top being the least formal and the bottom being the most. Note though, the\ndifference in formality is not that big. If I get an email with the 1st\npattern vs the 3rd, it's not an insult or anything like that.\n\nI'm pretty sure I've seen `宜しく御願い致します` before too, which would be even more\nformal.\n\nI personally use `よろしくお願い致します`, but on formal/serious emails I will use\n`宜しくお願い致します`.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T04:32:09.640",
"id": "29468",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T05:02:24.740",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T05:02:24.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "7390",
"owner_user_id": "7390",
"parent_id": "29466",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "Quoting from `mirka`'s final comment in \n[How can one stop “去年教職” from looking like a weird 4 kanji\ncompound?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/27983/how-can-one-\nstop-%E5%8E%BB%E5%B9%B4-%E3%81%8D%E3%82%87%E3%81%AD%E3%82%93-%E6%95%99%E8%81%B7-%E3%81%8D%E3%82%87%E3%81%86%E3%81%97%E3%82%87%E3%81%8F-from-\nlooking-like-a-weird-4-kanji-compound)\n\n> Kanji/hira/katakana is a pretty deliberate choice, especially in writing\n> intended for publication (speaking from my experience in the industry).\n> Sometimes it's to stop a secondary kanji from “sticking out” (食べ始める→食べはじめる),\n> sometimes it's to alter the nuance of a word (かれ/彼/カレ, よみがえる→蘇る). They all\n> change the “feel” to the reader, and it's one of the things that make\n> Japanese such an expressive language.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T13:46:46.043",
"id": "29470",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T13:46:46.043",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"parent_id": "29466",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29466 | 29468 | 29468 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I heard an expression:\n\n> その◯◯が二両の **かたに** 預けてあるのは、彼は知りません。\n\nThe intended meaning was \"he did not know that ◯◯ has been pawned for 2 ryō\".\nNot a pawn-shop, but given as a collateral to a person who lends money.\n\nI searched all dictionaries I had in hand specifically for a meaning that\nwould fit the case and could not find any.\n\nDid I miss anything in dictionaries or did I just mishear? Is there such a\nphrase? If so, what would be the etymology, ie. which one of 方, 形, 片, ...\nwould it be and why?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T13:49:16.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29471",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T00:11:51.490",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T00:11:51.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "The meaning of かたに in かたに預ける",
"view_count": 76
} | [
{
"body": "It is `形` (mortgage).\n\n> ２ （形）証拠に残すしるし。保証のしるし。抵当。「カメラを借金の―に置く」\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/41603/meaning/m0u/%E5%BD%A2/>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T14:00:15.480",
"id": "29472",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T14:00:15.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11802",
"parent_id": "29471",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 29471 | null | 29472 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm a foreigner, and my name is Shiori. I've heard of a several Japanese\npeople with this name, and they write it with kanji (of course).\n\nI know that when you are a foreigner, you are supposed to write your name in\nkatakana, but since my name is Japanese, is it possible for me to use kanji?\n\n[According to wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiori); the most\ncommon ways of writing Shiori are 栞, 撓 and 詩織. I know that foreigners should\navoid kanji for their name because even if it sounds like your name, the\n_meaning_ comes out as weird. But these kanjis for Shiori are already used for\nnames, so the meanings don't come out as weird..?\n\nSo even if my name is Japanese, should I use シオリ or any of the kanjis?",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T14:53:27.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29473",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T02:07:53.490",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-27T02:07:53.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "11595",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"names"
],
"title": "As a foreigner with a Japanese name, what are the implications of writing my name in katakana or kanji?",
"view_count": 14170
} | [
{
"body": "While studying Japanese in university, we had a professor who was from Japan\nand he explained that, unless you are Japanese, your name should be written in\nKatakana. As someone already pointed out, Japanese names are often written in\nKanji and they usually mean something that the parents intended. Just because\nyour name sounds like it could mean something in Japanese does not mean that\nit can be translated accordingly.\n\nTake Hannah for example.\n\nIt could be simplified into Hana, which means several things in Japanese, such\nas \"flower\", \"edge\", even \"nose\". You might be inclined to chose \"flower\" as\nthe meaning and even then you have two choices of Kanji: either 花 (which is\nthe more common) or 華 (a more archaic version, rarely used on its own). The\nchoice of the Kanji you will use is entirely your own, but that is now how\nJapanese names work.\n\nShiori does sound like a Japanese name, but unless your parents intended it to\nbe a Japanese name (with a designated meaning that would make selecting a\nKanji easier), using Kanji to write it may seem presumptuous, especially to\nJapanese natives. It is therefore more appropriate to use Katakana when\nwriting it.\n\nAs for the possibility of using Hiragana rather than Katakana, I would advise\nagainst it, as it is usually perceived as a feminine way of writing your name.\nSocially speaking, Hiragana was traditionally used by women when writing\n(obviously verb conjugations, adverbs, prepositions or other grammatical\nstructures do not count). When Japan opened its borders to foreigners in the\n19th century, Katakana began being used to write foreign words, including\nnames. It is therefore best to write your name in Katakana, as a foreigner, as\nit was linguistically intended.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T19:40:24.287",
"id": "29477",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T19:40:24.287",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11804",
"parent_id": "29473",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -4
},
{
"body": "I'll migrate my answer from the comments and add a bit.\n\nOverall, I do believe that it's totally down to the individual how they write\ntheir name, especially so in Japanese. On the whole, foreigners, even overseas\nJapanese, very often have katakana attached to their names rather than kanji,\neven if they do have a version of their name that uses kanji -- the two\nexamples that come to mind are Yoko Ono (known as オノ・ヨーコ rather than 小野洋子) and\nMichio Kaku (ミチオ・カク rather than 加來道雄 -- he even gets his name put in the\nWestern order)\n\nUsing a name in Kanji will help a lot to seem less foreign, if that's your\nintention, which is why a fair number of naturalized Japanese and foreigners\ndoing business in Japan will give themselves Japanese names using kanji (plus\nthe law requires a name to be hiragana, katakana, or kanji). Kanji come off as\nmore refined, too.\n\nThere is a contradiction to this though, in that Katakana surnames with Kanji\nforenames are nearly unheard of. I've only ever seen this once, and the fact\nthat I remember it for being strange is a credit to how rare it really is.\n\nFor you, you could do a few things, and pick whichever suits you best:\n\nFirstly, you could ask your parents what they thought Shiori meant (if\nanything). I know a lot of parents who give children foreign names at least\nmake an effort to check they know what it means (or what they think it means),\nso this could work for you, and then you can deduce which kanji your parents\nwere referencing.\n\nIf they didn't have anything in particular in mind, you could always pick one\nof the kanji options for Shiori yourself. Or, if you're a girl, it's okay to\nwrite your name in hiragana as しおり, which is commonplace in Japan amongst\ngirls, but not boys. Because of this, it's seen as a very feminine trait.\n\nFinally, you could Japanize your surname and pick a kanji for your name. This\nis probably the most Japanese option (As mentioned in the comments, [Marutei\nTsurunen](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marutei_Tsurunen) did this, which is\nwhy I disagree strongly with the notion that Kanji isn't for foreigners), or\notherwise just make up a new surname to use in Japanese. But if you're using a\nkatakana surname, a katakana forename is the only natural option, as I\nmentioned earlier.\n\nDon't feel pressurized to pick a Kanji unless it suits you. There are a lot of\nnative Japanese with hiragana names, and lots of Korean Zainichi who even just\nuse kana completely (even though most Koreans can write their names in 漢字).\nChoose what type of impression you want to give off with your name, and\nwhether you want to feel more Japanese with your name (while being mindful\nthat they'll be able to tell in reality if you're not ;), more feminine (if\nyou're a girl), whether katakana's fine for your tastes and so on. I use a\nKanji name as most Japanese do, except in my case it's (by virtue of my name)\nclearly a Chinese name.\n\nFigure out what type of a name you think suits your personality and who you\nare, but don't get too caught up on an option fitting 100% perfectly. As\nShakespeare said, a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T21:05:06.533",
"id": "29478",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T21:28:54.560",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T21:28:54.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "9185",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "29473",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "This sounds tautological, but the fact is, having a foreign-looking name in\nthis largely homogeneous country _strongly_ signals that you are foreign. A\nbig question is whether you want to be broadcasting this signal.\n\nGrowing up among many _[haafu](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C4%81fu)_ and\nother mixed-race kids, I know first-hand how annoying it can be. Of course,\nonce in a while someone will compliment you on your cool katakana or otherwise\nforeign name, but in day-to-day life, it can be pretty inconvenient. People\nread out your name like it’s a question, you have very little anonymity since\nyour name is so conspicuous, and in the worst case you get picked on or mildly\ndiscriminated against. Some of us have kanji versions of our names, so we use\nthem along with the Japanese parent’s surname whenever that is possible and\nmore convenient.\n\nThis is one reason why some foreigners here adopt a Japanese-looking [common\nname](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%80%9A%E5%90%8D), or settle on a kanji\ntransliteration upon naturalization.\n\nIn your specific case, having a Japanese-sounding name like that in katakana\nwill most likely signal that you are a\n[nisei](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nisei) of some sort, or that you\nactually have a kanji name but are stylizing it in katakana for coolness or\npseudonymity.\n\nSo really, it is up to you, whether you are going to live in Japan or are just\nstudying in different country. Your name is your identity, and if you think a\nkanji version of it represents your identity better, go for it!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T22:35:31.397",
"id": "29481",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T23:15:15.043",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T23:15:15.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29473",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 29473 | null | 29481 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29475",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is this sentence put together correctly? I'm trying to say \"I drew (name on\nperson)\" formally. Drew as in \"drew a picture of\". In this case I will be\nusing Yamada-san as an example.\n\n> 私 **は** 山田さん **が** 描きました。\n\nI Yamada-san drew.\n\nAm I using は and が right? Am I using the right kanji for draw(描く)? Am I using\nthe right form of the verb(きました)? Is the entire sentence wrong and doesn't\nmake any sense in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T15:24:49.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29474",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T16:51:15.173",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T16:51:15.173",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11595",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"syntax",
"particle-は",
"particle-が",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Does \"私は山田さんが描きました。\" make sense in Japanese?",
"view_count": 391
} | [
{
"body": "> Am I using は and が right?\n\n×私は山田さんが描きました。\n\n○私は山田さん **を** 描きました。I drew Yamada-san.\n\n○私は山田さんの[絵]{え} **を** 描きました。I drew a picture of Yamada-san. \n \nYou have to mark the direct object (the thing the verb acts upon) with を. \nLike in 私はパンを食べます (I eat bread), for example, where you mark the thing you eat\nwith を. Here you attach を to the thing you drew.\n\n> Am I using the right kanji for draw(描く)? Am I using the right form of the\n> verb(きました)?\n\nYes! The kanji for 描く (to draw) is correct, and the conjugation and verb\nending ～ました is right for the polite past tense.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T16:22:26.777",
"id": "29475",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T16:29:16.810",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T16:29:16.810",
"last_editor_user_id": "3010",
"owner_user_id": "3010",
"parent_id": "29474",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29474 | 29475 | 29475 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29491",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "`埋める` has two possible readings `埋{う}める` and `埋{うず}める`.\n\nOf course kanjis have tons of inconsistencies. While _(same furigana / same\nokurigana / different kanji / different meaning)_ , such as 熱{あつ}い and 厚{あつ}い,\nis standard fare, what about _(different furigana / same okurigana / same\nkanji / ??? meaning)_ , such as `埋{う}める` and `埋{うず}める`?\n\n 1. the writer writes the furigana?\n 2. the reader gets to choose the difference in nuance by reading it as `うずめる` or `うめる`?\n 3. I'm sure that there are a few more cases such `埋める` in the `常用漢字`. Are the differences in meaning for each such pair always so great that only one of the readings is appropriate? Therefore, context always dictates which reading to use?\n\nI totally don't understand this. thanks.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T17:46:04.230",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29476",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T19:43:29.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"furigana",
"okurigana"
],
"title": "How to choose the reading of 埋{う}める and 埋{うず}める?",
"view_count": 800
} | [
{
"body": "If the average native reader cannot be expected to pick the correct reading\nbased on context clues or set phrases, and the difference is important to the\nwriter, the onus is on the writer to prevent this problem.\n\nFurigana is of course an option, but for something like 埋める, a good way is to\njust write the whole word in hiragana if you mean to convey the less common\nreading. That is, I write the word うめる as 埋める, and the word うずめる as うずめる.\n\nThe readings are pretty easy to distinguish with words like:\n\n * 柄 → がら／え\n * 盛り → もり／さかり\n * 角 → つの／かど\n * 値 → あたい／ね\n\nSome other words can be a little harder to tell:\n\n * 音 → おと／ね\n * 歪み → ゆがみ／ひずみ\n\nAnd then for compounds, there is a [whole\npile](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1434889639) of\nthese multiple reading words. You may have to rely on collocational clues,\nbecause the meanings are sometimes pretty similar (e.g. 大事{おおごと}になる vs.\n大事{だいじ}に至る).\n\nIn any case, your confusion is justified. Even a professional newscaster has\nbeen tripped up by this word! (See ことばの話448「骨をうめる」 on [this\npage](http://www.ytv.co.jp/announce/kotoba/back/0401-0500/0446.html).)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T09:05:04.843",
"id": "29491",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T09:05:04.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29476",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "* For filling a lack うめる is preferable, e.g. 空白をうめる (fill in the blank), 欠員をうめる (fill a vacant post) \n * For \"bury one's face into something\" only うずめる can be used (顔をうずめる)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T19:43:29.647",
"id": "29616",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T19:43:29.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11854",
"parent_id": "29476",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 29476 | 29491 | 29491 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29480",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the Yotsuba-to manga one of the heroes first calls a younger of the two\nsisters (16 y.o) 美女. Then he gets to know an older sister (I guess 21 y.o) and\ntells that she is a real 美女. A younger sister hearing that gets somehwat\ndistressed and he then tells her that she (the younger one) is a 美少女. This, as\nfar as I can tell from the picture creates a comic effect. However I was not\nable to find a comic connotation looking up the 美少女 word in a dictionary. So,\ndoes the word 美少女 have any ironic or humoristic connotations?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T22:04:46.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29479",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T09:15:56.860",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Does 美少女 sound somewhat ironic, humoristic, etc?",
"view_count": 147
} | [
{
"body": "少女 is simply \"girl\", making it clear that it's a young girl (compare 少年 for\nboy).\n\nIn this example, by making the adjustment that the younger sibling is actually\na 美少女 rather than 美女, it points out that she's the younger sibling of two, and\nnot being a FULL beauty to the extent her sister is. It also hints at her\nhaving a more young form of beauty than her older sibling, that the younger\nsibling is still developing or not quite there at the same level as her\nsister, and so on; whatever you make of it.\n\nI mean, it's not laugh out loud humor, just connotations of words, but it's\nimportant to know that 美少女 definitely points to a younger type of beauty, like\na good looking high schooler, while in this context they're reserving 美女 for\nthe fully developed beauty of the older adult sister.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T22:12:25.727",
"id": "29480",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-26T22:12:25.727",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "29479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I guess the insertion of 少 creates a \"nice save\" moment, where he possibly\navoids offending the younger sister by being quick and witty enough to save\nhis previous statement which was intended to work as a compliment, and remains\na compliment after the slight modification with 少.\n\nIt is not ironic. It may be slightly amusing/humorous since the user displays\nhis wit in a clever way to possibly avoid an unpleasant or awkward situation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T09:15:56.860",
"id": "29492",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T09:15:56.860",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "542",
"parent_id": "29479",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29479 | 29480 | 29480 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29484",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> その瞬間、まる子は、 **地割れができて** 、AとBとCの三人と、まる子とDとEに分けられてしまったような気がした。 \n> Just then Maruko had a feeling that **the group** seemd to be divided into\n> the three people A,B,C, and herself and D and E.\n\nThe only meaning I can find for 地割れ is \"cracks in the ground\". I get the\ngeneral meaning that Maruko's friends are divided into two groups. But I can't\nfigure out what 地割れができて means. Literally \"able to make cracks\"?\n\nAlso I'm a bit confused because there seems to be no subject for the verb 分ける.\nThe subject is obviously her group of friends, but is it ok just to leave that\nout of the sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T23:37:17.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29482",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T00:29:41.973",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-26T23:49:39.013",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"set-phrases",
"metaphor"
],
"title": "Meaning of じわれができる",
"view_count": 87
} | [
{
"body": "In this sentence, できる means \"be formed\" not \"be able to do\", and 地割れ is\ncompared to \"the boundary you can't cross\" (because the crack is too deep to\ncross over)\n\nAnd it is okay to leave out the subject. If anything, it sounds a little odd\nif you put a subject in the sentence because it is obvious that the subject is\nher and her group of friends.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T00:29:41.973",
"id": "29484",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T00:29:41.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11790",
"parent_id": "29482",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29482 | 29484 | 29484 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have looked in a [good](http://www.linguee.com/english-\njapanese/search?source=auto&query=%22%E5%85%B1%E5%82%AC%E5%8F%8E%E5%85%A5%22)\n[many](http://jisho.org/search/%E5%85%B1%E5%82%AC%E5%8F%8E%E5%85%A5)\n[sources](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E5%85%B1%E5%82%AC%E5%8F%8E%E5%85%A5)\nfor this expression, and I am at a loss.\n\nIt is in the context of an Income and Expenditure Statement (収支報告書) I am\ntranslating, and is found adjacent to 寄付金 and ランチョン:\n\n> 共催収入 寄付金\n>\n> 共催収入 ランチョン\n\nThe closest I can get is \"joint sponsorship income.\"\n\nHow would you translate 共催収入?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-26T23:56:11.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29483",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T02:07:45.363",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5060",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Meaning of 共催収入",
"view_count": 72
} | [
{
"body": "I have discussed this with my superior and it seems that these were in\nrelation to a co-sponsored event. The event was primarily sponsored by the\nuniversity at which I work, and these two instances were co-sponsored with a\nprivate company.\n\nI have therefore translated them as:\n\n共催収入 寄付金 → Donation received from co-sponsor\n\n共催収入 ランチョン → Donation received from co-sponsor of luncheon",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T01:41:44.510",
"id": "29485",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T01:41:44.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5060",
"parent_id": "29483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "This is Japanese native. I think ”共催”means co-sponsored for events such as\nexhibition or concert. So how about this translation 共済＝co-sponsored fee?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T02:07:45.363",
"id": "29530",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T02:07:45.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11817",
"parent_id": "29483",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29483 | null | 29485 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 演奏技術向上への一可能性\n\nContextually, this is from a paper talking about teaching piano and this is\nthe subtitle of the paper (so it is a stand alone sentence). I'm having\nproblems translating the above sentence without it being overly awkward. The\nbest I've come up with is:\n\n> One possibility to improve performance skills\n\nI believe that 技術 usually means 'technology', but in this case as piano\nperformance is the subject, I thought skills was more apt. 'One possibility'\nalso seems awkward to me, but I'm just not coming up with another word to\nreplace it. I'd welcome any suggestions, thank you.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T01:45:22.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29486",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-09T21:43:47.613",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-27T05:22:36.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "11274",
"owner_user_id": "11274",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Ideas for translation of 演奏技術向上への一可能性",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "It seems to me \"A potential for better technique\".\n\n技術 also means technique or skill. If \"Technology\" is used to mean such as\nengineering technologies, literally \"テクノロジー\" would be used. For example\n<http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/> a site about technology is title as 日経テクノロジー.\n\n可能性 can be possibility, probability, potential, etc. I suppose the paper is\ntalking about a potential that something can have the potential of improving\nthe techniques.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-09T21:43:47.613",
"id": "38349",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-09T21:43:47.613",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9135",
"parent_id": "29486",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29486 | null | 38349 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've been trying to learn the pitch-accent of standard Japanese, but this is\nmore difficult as it should be as it's hard to find good learning resources\nthat provide proper descriptions of how the accent works. For many words, this\nisn't too much of a problem, as I've found that good monolingual Japanese\ndictionaries use numbering notation to mark the location of pitch-accent.\nHowever, dictionaries don't tend to include many compound nouns, as their\nmeaning can readily determined through their constituent parts.\n\nI've been trying to find what rules govern the location of pitch-accent in\ncompound words, but have found various conflicting descriptions.\n\nOne approach says that:\n\n> If N2 is three morae long or longer, a compound noun accent falls on the\n> initial syllable of N2; e.g. 携帯電話 is pronounced けいたいでꜜんわ.\n\nBut another approach that I have found says that:\n\n> The compound accent falls either on the rightmost, nonfinal foot of the\n> compound, or on the original accent position of the second noun; in which\n> case 携帯電話 would presumably be pronounced either as けいたꜜいでんわ, or else without\n> any downstep, as 電話 is unaccented.\n\nThese two descriptions seem to be conflicting, so I'm not sure what the actual\nrules are here. Would anyone be able to offer any advice on this matter?\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T03:33:14.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29488",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-16T02:35:37.573",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-28T01:59:07.647",
"last_editor_user_id": "11459",
"owner_user_id": "11459",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 19,
"tags": [
"phonology",
"compounds",
"pitch-accent"
],
"title": "What are the pitch-accent rules for compound nouns?",
"view_count": 3176
} | [
{
"body": "A first, I write the initial word in compound nouns ''N1'', and the second\nword ''N2''. \n \nThe original pitch-accent pattern of N2 governs the location of pitch-accent\nin compound words.\n\n## If N2 is 3 morae long or longer\n\n(1) In case N2 has the accent-fall in the middle, or on the initial syllable\nof the word, the compound noun keeps the location of N2. \n\n * [たまご]{LHL}（卵） -> [おんせんたまご]{LHHHHHL}（温泉卵）\n * [ひこうき]{LHLL}（飛行機） -> [かみひこうき]{LHHHLL}（紙飛行機）\n * [はみがき]{LHLL}（歯磨き）it means toothpaste -> [やくようはみがき]{LHHHHHLL}（薬用歯磨き）\n * いいんかい{LHLLL}（委員会）-> よさんいいんかい{LHHHHLLL}（予算委員会）\n * [オリンピック]{LHHHLL} -> [ソルトレイクシティーオリンピック]{LHHHHHHHHHHHHHLL} \n \nHowever, some exception can be hit upon.\n\n * [せんげん]{LHHL}（宣言） -> [ポツダムせんげん]{LHHHHLLL} \n * [じょうけん]{LLHHL}（条件） -> [あくじょうけん]{LHHHLLL}（悪条件）\n * [なっとう]{LHHL}（納豆）-> あまなっとう{LHHLLL}（甘納豆）\n * [やきゅうじょう]{LHHHHHH}（野球場） -> [けんえいやきゅうじょう]{LHHHHHHHHHH}（県営野球場） \n \nThere seems to be too many exceptions to call it rule. \nSome scholars or teachers may insist that it is the rule for the accent to\nfall on 1st syllable of N2, e.g.あくじょうけん{LHHHLLL}, and おんせんたまご{LHHHHHL} is\nrather exceptional. \n\n(2) In case N2 has the accent-fall at the last syllable, or has no accent\nfall, the compound noun accent falls on the first syllable of N2.\n\n * [でんわ]{LHH}（電話）-> [けいたいでんわ]{LHHHHLL}（携帯電話）\n * [さかな]{LHH}（魚） -> こざかな{LHLL}（小魚）\n * [あたま ]{LHHL}（頭） -> いしあたま{LHHLL}（石頭）\n * [おとこ ]{LHHL}（男）-> おおおとこ{LHHLL}（大男）\n * [エアコン]{LHHH} -> たきのうエアコン{LHHHHLLL}（多機能エアコン）\n * [こうえん]{LHHH} -> こくりつこうえん{LHHHHLLL}（国立公園）\n\n* * *\n\nThe location of pitch-accent is quite complicated because many factors have\nsomething to do with it. Moreover, many words are changing in their pitch-\naccent. I can hardly explain it perfectly.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T14:33:54.760",
"id": "29588",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T14:33:54.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11654",
"parent_id": "29488",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "So, Toshihiko's answer gives the answer for the normal case, but there is a\nwhole other facet of this issue:\n\n**Do two nouns always compound or not?**\n\nAnd the answer is that in many cases they do not. I can't list out all the\ncases, but the major categories to pay close attention to are:\n\n# 1. N2 is somehow locative\n\nE.g.,\n\n * ロシア南部 → ロ＼シア・ナ＼ンブ\n * ロシア国境 → ロ＼シア・コッキョー￣\n * ヨーロッパ各国 → ヨーロ＼ッパ・カ＼ッコク\n\nYou may occasionally hear the compounded versions of these, but not-compounded\nis more common.\n\n# 2. N2 is a _transitive_ suru-verb (他サ)\n\n**subject+verb → no compounding**\n\n * 当局発表 → ト＼ーキョク・ハッピョー￣\n\n**object+verb → compounding**\n\n * 結果発表 → ケッカハ＼ッピョー\n\n * 乱数調整 → ランスーチョ＼ーセー\n\n * 再建検討 → サイケンケ＼ントー\n\n * 承認申請 → ショーニンシ＼ンセー\n\n * 自動車販売 → ジドーシャハ＼ンバイ\n\n※ However, there are some exceptional transitive N2 verbs which cause the\nphrase to not compound:\n\n * 〜禁止（e.g., タバコ禁止 → タバコ￣・キンシ￣、 撮影禁止 → サツエー￣・キンシ￣）\n * 〜中止（e.g., 開催中止、渡航中止）\n * 〜防止（e.g., 蔓延{まんえん}防止、再発防止）\n * 〜改正（e.g., 憲法改正、特措法改正）\n * 〜独占（e.g., 権力独占、市場独占）\n * 〜開催（e.g., 大会開催、オリンピック開催）\n * 〜獲得（e.g., タイトル獲得、金メダル獲得）\n * 〜設立 (e.g., 水泳部設立、組織設立）\n\n**modifier+verb → compounding**\n\n * 急激上昇 → キューゲキジョ＼ーショー\n * 全国販売 → ゼンコクハ＼ンバイ\n\n# 3. N2 is an _intransitive_ suru-verb (自サ)\n\n**subject+verb → no compounding**\n\n * 雨雲発達 → アマグモ￣・ハッタツ￣\n * 社長辞任 → シャチョー￣・ジニン￣\n * 景気後退 → ケーキ￣・コータイ￣\n\n**modifier+verb → compounding**\n\n * 一時帰国 → イチジキ＼コク\n * 引責辞任 → インセキジ＼ニン\n\n# 4. N2 is a _both_ transitive and intransitive suru-verb (自他サ)\n\n**subject/object+verb → no compounding (usually, especially when it's a novel\ncombination)**\n\n * 所得減少 → ショトク￣・ゲンショー￣ (or ショ＼トク・ゲンショー￣）\n * 問題解決 → モンダイ￣・カイケツ￣ (* see below)\n * 感染拡大 → カンセン￣・カクダイ￣ (* see below)\n\n**But it seems like if they get lexicalized enough they can compound:**\n\n * 人口減少 → ジンコーゲ＼ンショー (I think this is always compounded)\n * 問題解決 → モンダイカ＼イケツ (I list this in both sections because you hear both)\n * 感染拡大 → カンセンカ＼クダイ (You used to hear this more but it seems like everyone has settled on not compounding it)\n\n**modifier+verb → compounding**\n\n * 急激減少 → キューゲキゲ＼ンショー",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-05-12T16:32:57.150",
"id": "94484",
"last_activity_date": "2022-07-16T02:35:37.573",
"last_edit_date": "2022-07-16T02:35:37.573",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "29488",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
]
| 29488 | null | 94484 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "When looking up 田 on\n[Jisho.org/田](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%94%B0%20%23kanji), it states it's\nreadings as た and でん, but when the kanji is used in the family name Yamada\n(山田), the reading obviously changes to 'da'/だ.\n\nIs this something you just 'have to know'? Or why isn't the fellow called\nYamata?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T08:45:42.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29490",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T07:13:13.860",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T07:13:13.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "9465",
"owner_user_id": "9465",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"readings",
"rendaku",
"multiple-readings"
],
"title": "Why is 田 read as だ instead of た/でん in 山田?",
"view_count": 112
} | []
| 29490 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29523",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 「だっ大丈夫よ、まるちゃんだってわたしたちのタイプだと思うよ、ねぇ」ととし子ちゃんが **なぐさめれば**\n> 、「そうだよ。さくらはぼくらの方の仲間だよ」と長山君が笑顔で言い、「そうよ」とたまちゃんが優しくうなずく。 \n> _(When?)_ Toshiko comforted her, saying, \"It's alright. I think Maru is our\n> kind of person\", Nagayama smiled, saying \"That's right Sakura is on our\n> side\" and Tama amiably nodded her head in agreement.\n\nI've only ever seen the ば form used to mean 'if' rather than 'when'. But 'if'\ncertainly doesn't make sense here. How should I interpret なぐさめれば in this\ncontext?\n\n**Edit:** I understand that in general the distinction between 'when' and 'if'\nis a bit blurry in Japansese, but I was under the impression that the ば form\nalways meant 'provided that...'. The 'when' in this sentence seems to be a\ndefinite 'at/after this point in time something definitely happens'. There\ndoesn't seem to be any hint of a conditional in it. I would have thought とき\nwould have been better here. I must be missing something.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T16:30:01.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29495",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-08T03:35:26.307",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-27T17:06:35.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Is it ever right to use ば conditional to mean 'when'?",
"view_count": 429
} | [
{
"body": "The English 'when' versus 'if' distinction of 'probably going to happen'\nversus 'maybe not going to happen' is something Japanese on the whole doesn't\nbother with. There are certainly cases where using one conditional form sounds\nmore tentative than another, and contexts that make tentativeness clear for\nother reasons; but none of the conditional forms (ば, ったら, と, etc) explicitly\nstate that the condition they're referring to is either likely or specifically\nnot likely. You can add a degree of tentativeness by using もし (もしやれば sounds a\nlot less like it will happen than just やれば), but beyond that, there's no\nexplicit likeliness involved.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T16:46:07.177",
"id": "29496",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T16:46:07.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "29495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "From スーパー大辞林:\n\n> ### ば\n>\n> ③ […] 引き続いて起こる事柄についての，きっかけを表す。…すると。\n\nIf I may add more to the quoted definition, this is a particular type of `〜ば`\nwhere it denotes the chronology of a single occurrence (trigger event →\nfollowing event), and says nothing about what would happen if the trigger\nevent were to happen again. To me, this kind of `〜ば` seems more common in\nwritten language, and less likely to be found in spoken language.\n\nThe natural translation can either be “then” or “when”, depending on the\ncontext or clause order, e.g. _X happened **then** Y happened_, or _Y happened\n**when** X happened_.\n\nSome examples from published books, found on\n[少納言](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/):\n\n * はっとして見渡せ **ば** 、ほかにも植物が並んでいます。 \n_Startled, I looked around, then saw other plants as well._\n\n * 聞け **ば** 、この教授の学生時代の同級生が例の人事部の佐藤次長であるとのこと。 \n_When I asked, I was told this professor's classmate was that assistant\nmanager Sato from HR._\n\n * 東京に出れ **ば** 、私の生まれ故郷に足を向けることも多くなった。 \n_After coming out to Tokyo, I've been visiting my hometown quite often._",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T21:30:11.917",
"id": "29523",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T21:30:11.917",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "To add two things:\n\n1) The if/when blurriness remains even when they use 時, believe it or not.\n\nもし彼がきた時は、どうにか対処しなければならない。If he does wind up coming, then we'll have to deal\nwith that somehow.\n\n2) Another thing to keep in mind is that ～もなければ、～もない is a fixed phrase meaning\nthere is none of either one thing or the other.\n\n小説もなければ詩集もない does not mean \"if there are no novels, then there are no poetry\ncollections.\" It means \"There are no novels and there are no poetry\ncollections.\" It's a more emphatic form of 小説も詩集もない.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-08T03:35:26.307",
"id": "34005",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-08T03:35:26.307",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9306",
"parent_id": "29495",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29495 | 29523 | 29523 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29502",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this example in a textbook, and I can't figure out the grammar\nof the 2nd sentence:\n\n> 彼から来るはずの連絡がない。事故にでもあったのではあるまいか。\n\nok:\n\n> The correspondence from him that was expected has not come.\n> `事故にでもあった`のではあるまいか。\n\nI've no idea what `事故にでもあった` means. I can only imagine tokenizing as:\n\n> 事故、に、でも、あった\n\nmaybe I can imagine:\n\n> 事故、に、合った。 `I had an accident`\n\nNot sure what to make of that `でも`... I don't know.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T18:52:00.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29499",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T21:25:04.203",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-27T21:25:04.203",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "\"事故にでもあったのではあるまいか。\" grammar help please?",
"view_count": 674
} | [
{
"body": "The ～にでも makes the sentence mean 'Could he have been involved in an accident\nor such?' It just makes the sentence politer than ～に alone. The last bit is a\nlittle odd too: ～のではあるまいか is a somewhat archaic way of saying ～のではないだろうか. The\nconstruction is used for offering a suggestion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T19:37:27.107",
"id": "29502",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-27T19:37:27.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "29499",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29499 | 29502 | 29502 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29501",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Okay so the のほうが / より combo is to my understanding used to say something is\nmore than or less than in Japanese and if you add の to the short form version\nof a verb it the expresses the idea of doing that verb. If I wanted to say I\nlike doing something more than doing something else would combining these two\ntogether be the correct way to say this? If so, how would this be written? I\nhave two different ideas about how it would be written, but I'm not really too\nsure on either so I'll leave them in examples below.\n\n> ex1. ぼくは およぐ **のの** ほうが さんぽするより すきです\n>\n> ex2. ぼくは およぐ **の** ほうが さんぽするより すきです\n\nAs you probably noted immediately the only real difference between the two is\nthe double の. Since they both use の I'm unsure if I would put two in like\nexample one or merge them together. Other than that I've really only seen\nexamples of the のほうが / より combo with nouns so I'm not too sure if this is even\nthe proper way using verbs.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T19:08:45.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29500",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T02:44:00.730",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10247",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"particle-の",
"nominalization",
"comparative-constructions"
],
"title": "Verbal short form の for expressing the idea of doing a verb ＋ のほうが / より",
"view_count": 303
} | [
{
"body": "With verbs, no の is necessary at all. You can say\n[僕は泳ぐ方が散歩するより好きです]{ぼくはおよぐほうがさんぽするよりすきです}. That being said, as user4092 says,\nyou can use の, in which case it's\n[僕は泳ぐのの方が散歩するより好きです]{ぼくはおよぐののほうがさんぽするよりすきです}. It's impermissible to only use\none の, because the two の are different. (Though it may have been permissible\narchaically, where most particles could directly follow verbs.)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T19:32:44.117",
"id": "29501",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T02:44:00.730",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T02:44:00.730",
"last_editor_user_id": "9971",
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "29500",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29500 | 29501 | 29501 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "# English\n\nIn the compound verb 手伝う, we see the following sound change:\n\n> て＋つ **た** う→てつ **だ** う\n\nUnexpectedly, the た from つたう turns into だ. 連濁, at least with the 手+伝う\nanalysis, can't account for this, because it's not the first consonant of 伝う.\n\nWhat happened here?\n\n# Japanese\n\n「手伝う」の発音についての質問です。\n\n> て＋つ **た** う→てつ **だ** う\n\n意外なことに、「つたう」の「た」が有声化されて「だ」になります。「手＋伝う」という解析であれば、「た」は「伝う」の最初の子音ではないので、連濁が原因にはならないと思います。\n\n何が原因と考えられますか？",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T21:14:27.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29503",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-26T18:03:49.403",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-26T18:03:49.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"phonology",
"rendaku"
],
"title": "Why is the た in 手伝う voiced?",
"view_count": 791
} | [
{
"body": "# English\n\nThere's two possible explanations here, and from a little bit of searching, it\ndoesn't seem like anyone knows which is right (or that anyone's really thought\nmuch about it).\n\nOption 1: Rendaku plus metathesis (as Earthling suggested). te + tsutau >\ntedzutau > tetsudau. There might be another example of this happening with 舌鼓\n- shita + tsutsumi > shitadzutsumi > shitatsudzumi (though for this one the\nunmetathesised version seems to be valid in nonstandard dialects).\n\nIt's possible that this is a regular change restricted to words where the\nsecond half is at least tVtVCV. It might just be irregular.\n\nOption 2: 手伝う is not actually 手 + 伝う, but something else entirely; with the\nkanji spelling the result of a folk etymology.\n\nThose are the most likely possibilities.\n\n# Japanese\n\n有り得る説明は二つありそうです。少し調べてみたら、どちらが正しいか誰もよく分からないみたいです（そもそも誰もあんまり考えてないみたいです）。\n\n一。 「不規則連濁」（連濁プラス音位転換、Earthlingさんの仮説）。て＋つたう → てづたう → てつだう。「舌鼓」はもう一つの例なのかもしれません\n－ した＋つつみ → したづつみ → したつづみ （けど「したづつみ」という非音位転換した方も標準外の方言で可能みたいです）。\n\n後半がtVtVCVの言葉に限られる規則的な音便の可能性がありますが、単に不規則の可能性もあります。\n\n二。 「手伝う」という言葉は実は「手＋伝う」ではなくて、別の由来のある言葉だということ。その場合は漢字の由来は民間語源のはずです。\n\n以上は最も有り得そうな可能性であるみたいです。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T19:05:41.310",
"id": "29521",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-26T01:42:20.530",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "29503",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "I think this is not due to a shifted rendaku, but rather due to a change in\npitch accent that occurs in all compound verbs (つたう{LHH} → てつだう{LHHL}).\n\nIt’s difficult to say てつたう{LHHL} without the た sounding voiced, because the\n‘a’ in た needs to be fully voiced to clearly pronounce the pitch drop, at\nwhich point it sounds like the ‘t’ is voiced when you speak quickly enough.\n\nAnother example of this pronunciation phenomenon would be 恋い慕う. If you\npronounce it as こいしたう{LHHHL} it sounds like こいしだう, although the orthography\nhasn’t changed to reflect that in the case of this word.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-26T15:16:29.033",
"id": "78245",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-26T15:16:29.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "29503",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29503 | null | 29521 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to a grammar book I'm reading, the sentence \"宿題をしないで、学校に出掛けてしまいました\"\ntranslates into \"He went off to school without doing [his] homework.\" However,\nI do not understand either why (or even if) the しまいました is needed, nor do I\nunderstand why the -まい- is present.\n\nSo my questions would be\n\n(1) Why is the しまいました needed?\n\n(2) What function does the -まい- stem serve?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T21:38:38.820",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29504",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T06:47:27.620",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-27T21:46:29.920",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11719",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"subsidiary-verbs"
],
"title": "Why is しまいました needed here?",
"view_count": 7093
} | [
{
"body": "You could argue that the てしまう* doesn't technically add any new information to\nthe sentence in the form of a subject or object, but that's not to say that\nit's not useful.\n\n* * *\n\n*This is the same thing as てしまいます but in plain form -- don't worry about it for now, it's not relevant to this discussion\n\n* * *\n\nFirstly, to clear up your question, the てしまいました is actually split up into 2\nparts, します, and しまいました. In the 2nd part of your question when you mention the\n\"まい\" stem, that's not really what it is.\n\nIn this, the first part (します) is the verb \"to do\" that I'm sure you already\nknow.\n\nThe second part, しまいます, is really what the question is about. It comes out as\nしてしまいます because it conjugates as して + しまいます (て form in して is being used to\nlink these).\n\n〜しまいます shows two possible things:\n\n1) That the action （します）was unintentional, like leaving your luggage on a bus\nwhen you get\n\n> 荷物を網棚に置いたままバスを降りてしまいました。 (Don't worry if you don't understand this in\n> Japanese)\n>\n> I got off the bus, accidentally leaving my luggage in the overhead storage\n> (an obvious mistake).\n>\n> 映画館で映画を観ていて寝てしまいました。\n>\n> I accidentally fell asleep while watching a movie at the theater\n> (unintentionally).\n\n2) The action is over and done with now (with a nuance hinting towards\nregret), like the English phrase \"it's over and done with\", or eating the last\nslice of cake.\n\n> ごめんなさい。クッキーを全部食べてしまいました。\n>\n> Sorry...I ate all the cookies (too late, they're all gone).\n>\n> 最初の結婚は失敗してしまいました。\n>\n> My first marriage failed (but you didn't want it to).\n\nIn your sentence, it's hinting at the first -- you accidentally forgot to do\nyour homework, and you regret doing so. Strictly speaking, you don't _need_ to\nadd しまいました. The sentence makes sense without it, but by adding it, you change\nthe nuance of the sentence. As you'll see with time, a sizable portion of\nJapanese grammar deals with nuances of sentences rather than solid grammatical\nmeaning. But, in this case, it's definitely natural to use しまいます, simply to\nrepresent the sentiment behind not doing homework (it was an accident and you\nregret it).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-27T22:32:25.830",
"id": "29505",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T06:47:27.620",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-28T06:47:27.620",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "29504",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 29504 | null | 29505 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29772",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In\n[this](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q13151805898)\nquestion which I will paste below, the asker uses both, one right after the\nother.\n\n> GTA5に関しての質問です。 \n> GTA5に関する動画で、(...)\n\nWhat is the difference between the two?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T07:18:22.847",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29508",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-09T09:29:53.010",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-28T07:43:03.530",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What is the difference between に関しての and に関する?",
"view_count": 311
} | [
{
"body": "There is practically no difference in usage.\n\nSee also: [What's the difference between 〜に対しての and\n〜に対する?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11515/whats-the-\ndifference-between-%e3%81%ab%e5%af%be%e3%81%97%e3%81%a6%e3%81%ae-\nand-%e3%81%ab%e5%af%be%e3%81%99%e3%82%8b \"word choice - What is the difference\nbetween に関しての and に関する? - Japanese Language Stack Exchange\")",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-09T09:29:53.010",
"id": "29772",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-09T09:29:53.010",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29508",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29508 | 29772 | 29772 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm wondering how you would use parenthetical statements in Japanese. In\nEnglish, commas are used, as in the sentence:\n\n> Tanaka-san is, for obvious reasons, a good person.\n>\n> He took the train to work, as most people do.\n\nHow would I make this type of addition to a sentence in Japanese where it\ndoesn't change the overall meaning, but rather sits as a side comment? Are\ncommas still appropriate, and where in the sentence should I put this?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T08:57:40.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29509",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T04:59:46.350",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11719",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"subordinate-clauses"
],
"title": "Parenthetical Statements in Japanese",
"view_count": 539
} | [
{
"body": "I would think you would use parentheses rather than a pair of commas. [This\nlink from\nreddit](https://m.reddit.com/r/LearnJapanese/comments/1s60h1/when_writing_in_japanese_how_do_you_use/)\nhas a comment that suggests extra information is written in parentheses, and\nis backed up by this statement, [as seen on\nWikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%8B%AC%E5%BC%A7):\n\n> 説明文自体または読み飛ばせる追記事項などを書く場合がある。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T02:27:26.227",
"id": "29629",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T04:59:46.350",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T04:59:46.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"parent_id": "29509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Subordinate clauses can, [as mentioned by\nrhyaeris](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/29629/11830), be put inside\nparentheses. This is useful if you want to allow the reader to be able to skip\nthe information within the parentheses.\n\nHowever, there are many ways to structure a sentence in Japanese, and\ndepending on media, some might be more suitable than others (think: some media\ncall for more formal writing; speaking and writing are different; etc.)\nDepending on the length of the sentence and number of clauses, you might not\nwant to use parentheses at all.\n\n> Are commas still appropriate, and where in the sentence should I put this?\n\n**Yes.** They are not always necessary, but if you decide to use them, you\nshould place them to separate the clauses.\n\nHere are some examples on how you can phrase the example sentences without\nusing parentheses:\n\n> Tanaka-san is, for obvious reasons, a good person.\n>\n> いうまでもないが、田{た}中{なか}さんはいい人だ。\n\n* * *\n\n> He took the train to work, as most people do.\n>\n> ほとんどの人のように、電{でん}車{しゃ}で通{つう}勤{きん}している。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T04:31:14.043",
"id": "29673",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T04:31:14.043",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "29509",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29509 | null | 29673 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "32439",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> つまり他人の未来を知る、という事は他人の現在と過去を **熟知してなければならない** 訳だ。 \n> それも、未来という答えを弾き出す為に、自分の人生と等価値 **になるほど深く** 。 \n> だがそこまで他人の過去や現在を熟知してしまっては色々と不都合が生じてしまう。\n\nI am not sure about what the second bold part refers to? \nI believe it refers to the first bold one\n\n> Long story short, knowing strangers future you have to have knowledge of\n> strangers past and present. \n> Moreover, in order to understand the future you have to have a deep\n> understanding as much as you have for your life. \n> But, having such a deep understanding of others past and present will cause\n> various incoveniences.\n\nIs it correct?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T11:57:13.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29510",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-24T16:51:01.790",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-28T17:26:35.223",
"last_editor_user_id": "11589",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"adverbs",
"particle-ほど"
],
"title": "Adverb referring to previous verbs",
"view_count": 186
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, it is correct. I think it may be a good question even for Japanese\nstudents.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T15:55:14.600",
"id": "29517",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T15:55:14.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11654",
"parent_id": "29510",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Your interpretation is correct. But I'd say that there was an omission in the\nsentence and the reference is actually in the part that got omitted. \n2nd sentence without omission would be:\n\n> それも、未来という答えを弾き出す為に、自分の人生と等価値になるほど深く _他人の現在と過去を_ **_熟知し_** _てなければならない訳だ。_\n\nSo, actually 「深く」 is modifying 「熟知し」(熟知する as end-form). \nIt makes sense though, to say that 「深く」 \"refers to the first bold one\" as you\nsay...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-02-24T16:51:01.790",
"id": "32439",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-24T16:51:01.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13662",
"parent_id": "29510",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 29510 | 32439 | 29517 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29512",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Though the speaker is supposed to support her boyfriend who is fighting, she\nlooks like she supports his opponent. Another character then says to her :\n\n> おまえ なにいってんだよ ボーイフレンドだろ...！\n>\n> Just what are you saying? That's your boyfriend isn't it?\n\nShe responds :\n\n> いいじゃない べつにあこがれるぐらいかってでしょ！\n>\n> Yeah, yeah, give me a break. [?]\n\nI'm a bit lost there, I'm used to see べつに in negative sentences, and I don't\nsee what かって means here... I suspect the end of the sentence is omitted but I\ncan't figure out what the omitted part would be...",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T13:00:04.357",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29511",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T13:40:55.343",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of かって and general sense of this sentence",
"view_count": 338
} | [
{
"body": "\"勝手(かって)\" in this case means \"license\" and \" abandon \", \"one's own way\", etc.\nFor example, 私のかって means \"That is my choice\" and \" As I please\",etc.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T13:40:55.343",
"id": "29512",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T13:40:55.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29511",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29511 | 29512 | 29512 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29532",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The speaker is facing an old man in a martial art tournament and thinks :\n\n> (1) 武道会に出場できるほどの老人なのにまるで聞いたこともない名だ。\n>\n> Though this old mand is strong/good/in shape enough to participate in the\n> tournament, I've never even heard his name.\n\nI'm pretty sure I got the meaning (roughly) right but this way of using ほど\nstil confuses me a bit.\n\nWhen used with の like this, does it feel to native speakers that the quality\nほど refers to is omitted? Assuming I'm not mistaken, if a european person were\nto say this sentence in japanese, they would probably end up with something\nlike :\n\n> (2)武道会に出場できるほど **つよい/すぐれている** 老人なのに...\n\nOr just :\n\n> (3)武道会に出場できる老人なのに...\n\nUnlike (2), (3) doesn't give the feeling that it's impressive to participate\nin the tournament or that the old mans has whatever quality remarkable enough\nto participate, it just states that he is capable of it.\n\nI was wondering for a time if ほど didn't refer to the quality of being old, but\n\"old enough to participate\" doesn't really make any sense here.\n\nSo yeah, are we supposed to fill in our minds the appropriate quality from the\ncontext or does ほど have a more precise meaning when used like this that I'm\nmissing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T13:45:10.657",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29513",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T08:52:56.810",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Precisions about ほど, and particularly what quality ほどの refers to",
"view_count": 138
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, you can fill in the appropriate qualities from context, and it does mean\nthat there is something remarkable about it. Still, that doesn't necessarily\nmean that anything _feels_ omitted.\n\nI think it feels similar to writing it as:\n\n> This is an old man who is **at the level of** being able to participate in\n> the tournament, and yet I've never heard of him.\n\nOr take this sentence, for instance:\n\n> 外を歩けない **ほどの** 天気だった\n\nWithout further context, you can't tell whether it was rainy, windy, or really\nhot. But that's ok, because all that it's saying is that the weather was “at\nthe level of” them not being able to walk outside, and that this level was\nexceptional in some way.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T08:52:56.810",
"id": "29532",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T08:52:56.810",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29513",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29513 | 29532 | 29532 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29520",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found a slightly unnatural use of 「〜て来た」 in the postscript of the Gospel in\ncolloquial Japanese.\n\n> 当時口語の聖書はなかった。のみならず私の改訳について\n>\n> 聖書改訳文は元訳の文体に限り申候 口語体は威厳なく口調悪く記憶に不便に候 勅語もし口語体にて作られる時代来らばイザ知らず云々\n>\n> と言って来た人があった位である。\n>\n> （中略）\n>\n>\n> そのうちに世の中の風潮も変わって来て、私の訳が出来て六年後、二十五年になって、カトリックから新約の口語訳が出た。また二十七年にキリスト新聞社から、これも新約の口語訳が出た。私は日本における口語新約聖書完訳の草分けをしようという念願は達したので、自分のものの出版の必要を感じなくなった。しかし友人の勧めによって、とにかく出版を断行することにした。そして十二、三回も稿を改めたマルコ福音書を第一分冊として、翌二十八年十二月に出版した。この時はさすがに口語訳を非常に\n> **喜んで来た** 。\n>\n>\n> 「註解なしにはわからなかった処がすらすらと、生き生きと読み取れ、身に迫ってまいります」というようなのが沢山あった。これに励まされて私も改訳を急いで訂正しようと決心した。\n\n塚本虎二訳 1993 『新約聖書 福音書』 岩波書店 (bold emphasis added)\n\n* * *\n\nI have never seen this expression but it can be literally understood as:\n\n> 喜ん(連体形・撥音便) + で(接続助詞) + 来(補助動詞) + た(過去)\n>\n> = 「口語訳が喜ばれるようになって来た」 People came to welcome Bible in colloquial terms.\n\nIs my understanding correct? Are there any other possible interpretation?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T14:05:37.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29514",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T18:10:02.520",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11802",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "How to understand this usage of 「〜て来た」?",
"view_count": 635
} | [
{
"body": "I agree that it is an unusual expression, but I understood it to be exactly in\nthe same form as the “言って来た” in “言って来た人があった位である”. That is, as an action taken\ntoward the speaker. I find this interpretation especially likely because they\nboth are used in conjunction with quotes from readers.\n\nFrom スーパー大辞林:\n\n> ### 来る\n>\n> ⑰ …話し手の方へ向かって動作が行われ…\n\n * お客さんが(私に)電話をかけてきた \n_A customer gave me a phone call._\n\n * お客さんが(私に)怒ってきた \n_A customer got angry towards me._\n\n * おかしな服を着てたら友だちが笑ってきた \n_A friend laughed at me when I was wearing a strange outfit._\n\n * 口語訳を非常に喜んできた \n_People were very pleased (towards me) for the colloquial translation._\n\nMost occurrences of 喜んできた I could find online were not used in this sense, but\nrather in the sense of “以前から常々喜んできた”. But since your specific sentence begins\nwith “この時は”, I think this can be ruled out.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T18:10:02.520",
"id": "29520",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T18:10:02.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29514",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29514 | 29520 | 29520 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29518",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "We have:\n\n> Easy peasy + lemon squeezy (+ additional rhymes)\n\nI've come across this expression:\n\n> らくしょう + かいしょう + ??しょう\n\nWhere I was unable to clearly identify the third element, but it sounds like\nじょ or じょう\n\nMy candidates for the words are 楽勝、快勝、常勝\n\nSince I was unable to find expressions corresponding to them [(from\ntangorin)](http://tangorin.com/examples/%E6%A5%BD%E5%8B%9D%E5%BF%AB%E5%8B%9D)\n[(from\nalc)](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E6%A5%BD%E5%8B%9D%E5%BF%AB%E5%8B%9D&ref=sa),\nI decided to post this question.\n\n 1. What are the words (Did I get them right?)\n 2. Is this expression recognizable? Is it common or uncommon usage?\n 3. Are there other expressions to convey \"easy peasy\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T14:21:25.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29515",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T19:59:35.890",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "542",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Word play: \"Easy peasy\" analog",
"view_count": 531
} | [
{
"body": "1.楽勝 means \" easy victory\". 快勝 means \"good victory\" and it may not easily win.\n常勝(じょうしょう) means that \" always win\".\n\n2.They are recognizable and common usage.\n\n3.I don't come across my mind now.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T15:15:48.807",
"id": "29516",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T15:15:48.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29515",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Of course the individual words are very common, but personally I do not\nrecognize this as a fixed expression. I found [one\nperson](http://namira229.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-1066.html) who wrote a blog\nentry titled “圧勝。楽勝。快勝。”, and [another\nperson](http://ncc1701.jugem.jp/?eid=3188) with “楽勝。快勝。圧勝。”. Yet [another\nperson](http://www.tfm.co.jp/lock/staff/onair/2010/1109/) seems to have used\n“楽勝快勝優秀賞” as a radio name. Could it be that what you heard was a one-off —\nsomething just made up by the person?\n\nThere are several Japanese expressions that are similar to _easy peasy_ :\n\n 1. ちょちょいのちょい\n 2. 屁{へ}のカッパ (or カッパの屁)\n 3. お茶{ちゃ}の子さいさい\n 4. 余裕{よゆう}のよっちゃん\n\nAll of them except #1 may sound a little dated though. #4 is a lame Showa-era\njoke, but I bet people who've heard of it will find it funny in an ironic,\nhipster way by now. Also I might add 朝飯前{あさめしまえ} (lit. _before breakfast_ ) or\n屁でもない (lit. _not even a fart_ ), but those seem more like metaphorical idioms\nakin to “piece of cake”, rather than a word play like “easy peasy”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T16:10:59.983",
"id": "29518",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-28T19:59:35.890",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-28T19:59:35.890",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29515",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29515 | 29518 | 29518 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29535",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've never really understand the difference between these 3 structures :\n\n> ものすごいスピードで攻撃したのですが...\n>\n> ものすごいスピードで **の** 攻撃 **を** したのですが...\n>\n> ものすごいスピードで **の** 攻撃 **だった** のですが...\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if the first 2 were totaly interchangeable, but what\nabout the third? Does it have a particular nuance or is it virtually the same\nas the others?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T18:00:41.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29519",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T10:58:03.863",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between [Noun]する vs [Noun]をする vs [Noun]だ",
"view_count": 882
} | [
{
"body": "> 1. **ものすごいスピードで** 攻撃した\n>\n\nThe bold part is an adjunct, the sentence reads: \nAttacked **with tremendous speed**\n\nThe main verb for this is 攻撃する\n\n* * *\n\n> 2. **ものすごいスピードでの攻撃** をした\n>\n\nThe bold part is a noun phrase, the sentence reads: \nDid **an attack of tremendous speed**\n\nThe main verb for this is する\n\n* * *\n\n> 3. **ものすごいスピードでの攻撃** だった\n>\n\nThe bold part is a noun phrase, the sentence reads: \nIt was **an attack of tremendous speed**\n\nThe main verb for this is the copula だ",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T10:42:44.993",
"id": "29534",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T10:51:14.447",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T10:51:14.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "542",
"parent_id": "29519",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "It is mostly just different ways of saying the same thing. In english the\ndifference might be something like this:\n\n> 1. (subject) attacked with an amazing speed.\n>\n\nWhen the noun signifying the action (攻撃) is directly tied with the verb する,\nyou can interpret the compound as a verb. ie. \"attacked\".\n\n> 2. (subject) made/performed an attack with an amazing speed.\n>\n\nIn normal usage these ways of saying the sentence is as you say\ninterchangeable. Grammatically you disconnect the noun signifying the action\nfrom the verb する, thus you \"do an attack\" instead of just \"attacking\".\n\n> 3. It was an attack with an amazing speed.\n>\n\nHere, since you end the sentence with だ/だった instead of する, you've moved from\n\"doing\" to \"being\", hence \"It was\".\n\nHope that answers your question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T10:58:03.863",
"id": "29535",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T10:58:03.863",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11739",
"parent_id": "29519",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29519 | 29535 | 29535 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am looking for a word, idiom or a phrase to describe an attitude when\nsomeone is able to and often publicly makes fun of one's own deficiencies.\n\nHaving an objective, critical, maybe even cynical view of one's own\ncapabilities or actions and having enough confidence in one's abilities so\nthat one is not worried about bringing them in public.\n\nA regular modesty (謙虚), effacing (目立たない), self-effacing (控えめな) do not convey\nthe meaning of self-confidence. At the same time they suggest a reserved\nattitude, while I am looking to describe someone who purposefully makes fun of\nhis own mistakes.\n\n**Update:** I am looking for a phrase that captures the essence of _self-\ndeprecating_ as explained [here](http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/self-\ndeprecating):\n\n> A _self-deprecating_ person knows her own weaknesses and shortcomings and\n> isn't afraid to point them out, often in a humorous way. (...) Being self-\n> deprecating is usually considered a good trait, a quality of someone with a\n> wry sense of humor.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T22:32:56.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29524",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T10:17:12.293",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-07T10:17:12.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "A phrase for a capable person with a critical view of himself",
"view_count": 292
} | [
{
"body": "I can't think of or find a singular adjective/idiom that precisely captures\nthis quality, so I'll suggest some ways how this is usually expressed.\n\nThis quality is often described as “having the ability to admit one's\n[something negative]”. Common options for that negative something are: 非, 間違い,\n欠点, 落ち度, 短所. You might say for example:\n\n> * 彼は自分の間違いを認めることのできる人間だ。\n> * 自分の非を認める余裕のある人が好きだ。\n>\n\n自嘲{じちょう} is the word for self-mockery, but it should be used with caution as\nit can just as well be a very negative trait. You need to clearly state that\nthey _have the ability to_ 自嘲, and not simply that they are a 自嘲的 person.\n\nSame goes with 自虐的{じぎゃくてき}, which can be used to describe a type of self-\nmocking humor or joke (e.g. 自虐的ユーモア, 自虐ネタ). Be careful with this too, as\n“自虐的な人” is definitely not a compliment.\n\n* * *\n\n**Sidenote** : I came across a 四字熟語 that describes the [opposite kind of\nperson](http://yojijyukugo.com/so/yj05630.html), someone who stubbornly\nrefuses to admit a mistake.\n\n> 漱石枕流{そうせきちんりゅう}\n\nIt comes from a Chinese story where a person obviously meant to say “I want to\nrest my head on a rock, and rinse my mouth in the river”, but instead misspoke\nand said “I want to rinse my mouth with a rock, and rest my head on the\nriver”. He refused to admit the mistake, and doubled down: “I meant to brush\nmy teeth with the rock, and rinse my ear in the river”.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T11:57:46.580",
"id": "29537",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T11:57:46.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29524",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29524 | null | 29537 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29536",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There seem to be three very similar expressions of surprise - おや, あれ, and あら.\nIs there much particular difference? So far I've gathered that あれ is almost\nalways genuine surprise, whereas あら and おや can express more broad ranges of\nemotion, and that あら is a little more feminine.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-28T23:03:47.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29525",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T11:21:51.763",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-28T23:25:02.053",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"interjections"
],
"title": "Expressions of surprise おや あれ あら",
"view_count": 1623
} | [
{
"body": "The 3 have very similar meaning that even Japanese sometimes can't\ndistinguish.\n\nおや \nIt just describe surprising.\n\nあら \nIt's almost the same as おや but feminine.\n\nあれ \nIt's slightly different, it means surprising when a difference is found with\nsomething, like your memory. e.g. あれ? an egg should have been in refrigerator!\nwho ate it!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T11:17:04.067",
"id": "29536",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T11:21:51.763",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T11:21:51.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "11680",
"parent_id": "29525",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29525 | 29536 | 29536 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29575",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Since 充 can be used to spell 充｛あ｝てる it can have the meaning of \"to match\".\nTherefore, the only place where I think 充たす fits is to say something like\nある条件を充たす. Nevertheless, according to the 漢字漢和辞典 I looked up, 満たす can cover all\nthe senses of みたす.\n\nIn what cases 充たす can be used?\n\n* * *\n\n「充」という漢字は「充｛あ｝てる」という単語に表れているから「一致」という意をも持っています。したがって、「充」は「ある条件を充たす」といった場合に使うことができると思ったが、調べた漢字漢和辞典によると、「満たす」という綴り方が「みたす」のすべての意を満たすから、かなり迷っています。\n\nそれで、「充たす」を使える場合を教えてもらえませんか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T00:38:13.023",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29529",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T09:43:25.293",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T08:38:15.680",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"spelling"
],
"title": "Are there some cases where みたす could be spelled as 充たす? 「充｛み｝たす」という書き方はどんな場合で使えるか？",
"view_count": 185
} | [
{
"body": "充たす is less common and perhaps more literary than 満たす, because the kun-reading\n充たす is not listed in 常用漢字表. Personally I don't semantically distinguish the\ntwo, and when I write something I always stick to 条件を満たす, エネルギーを満たす, 欲求を満たす,\n幸福な気持ちで満たされる, and so on.\n\nAccording to BCCWJ Corpus, 満たす is roughly 20 times more common than 充たす today.\nAs far as I can see, all the examples of 充たす there were safely replaceable\nwith 満たす.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T04:02:29.177",
"id": "29575",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T04:02:29.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "There is not clearly distinction between 充たす and 満たす.\n\nBut, there are some opinions of this distinction.\n\n1) 満たす is used in mathematical use or when we pass over the borderline. ex)\n3名以上の人数を満たす when something pours into container which has a decided capacity\nor volume(never change) , we use 満たす.\n\nA glass is filled with water. →満たす(As the volume of this glass is fixed.)\n\nex)条件を満たす we pass over the suggested conditions.\n\nAbove of two examples are very similar.\n\n2)充たす is used when satisfied or in something not physical but mental (or\ninvisible)\n\nex)心が充たされる\n\n心 doesn't have fixed volume and cannot see . when filled with something (we\nthink), as a flexible volume,the volume gets more.\n\n充たされれば充たされるほど拡がっていく⇔The more we get, the more we want.\n\nan 充たす is not kanji for common use.\n\n満たすは、一定のラインを超えること。充たす は、一定の内容を備えること。\n\nともありました。参考になればと思います。\n\n迷った時には 満たす を使うか ひらがなで記入すれば まず問題なさそうです。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T09:36:14.810",
"id": "29584",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T09:43:25.293",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-01T09:43:25.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "11784",
"owner_user_id": "11784",
"parent_id": "29529",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29529 | 29575 | 29575 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29558",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was asked to nominalize `「傾聴」とは耳を傾けて熱心に聞く(--?--)。` These were the options:\n\n> (1)「傾聴」とは耳を傾けて熱心に聞く`ということである`。 \n> (2)「傾聴」とは耳を傾けて熱心に聞く`というのである`。\n\nWith regard to grammar, I'd think that `というのである` can be substituted for\n`ということである` and be grammatically correct and have the same basic meaning. I\nfeel that `というのである` is a superset of `ということである`.\n\nI found [When choose の/こと or\nというの/ということ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12590/when-\nchoose-%E3%81%AE-%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8-or-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%AE-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8)\nbut the answer is not very good.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T02:59:32.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29531",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T23:29:12.030",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"nominalization"
],
"title": "「というのである」 basically same as 「ということである」?",
"view_count": 1908
} | [
{
"body": "They are not interchangeable. Only 「聞くということである」 is correct.\n\nFirstly, the という doesn't change anything important, so it ultimately comes\ndown to the difference between the nominalizers こと and の.\n\nWhen the nominalizer immediately precedes the copula, only the nominalizer こと\ncan be used to prevent confusion with the のだ/のである grammar. This rule applies\neven if the copula isn't explicitly said, as can be seen in the actual\n[dictionary.goo.ne.jp definition of\n傾聴](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/66877/meaning/m0u/%E5%82%BE%E8%81%B4/).",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T04:22:12.010",
"id": "29558",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T23:29:12.030",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-01T23:29:12.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "9749",
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "29531",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 29531 | 29558 | 29558 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When hesitating to say something that might either hurt the other party or put\nthe speaker in bad light, do the following expressions differ:\n\n> そんなことは言い辛い{づらい}\n>\n> そんなことは言い難い{にくい}\n>\n> そんなことは言い難い{がたい}\n\nOr are they perfect synonyms?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T10:42:40.907",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29533",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T12:11:03.913",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Are there differences between 言い辛い・言いにくい・言いがたい?",
"view_count": 908
} | [
{
"body": "いいづらい basically means you would feel kind of sore if you say it. You often use\nit when you feel it too harsh for the listener, or when the words are a tongue\ntwister.\n\nいいがたい is a relatively bookish word and you use it when the words are\nobjectively not reasonable for the situation.\n\nいいにくい is a general word that covers those two above.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T12:54:50.387",
"id": "29540",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T12:54:50.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "29533",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "In addition to what user4092 says, \n \nYou will say 楽{たの}しいとは言{い}いがたい when you are not pleasant or happy. \n''～（し）がたい'' is often used when you don't want to do it or you can't do it\nbecause of the situation even if you want. \nIt is used with an intentional verb as ''許{ゆる}しがたい'', ''理解{りかい}しがたい'',\n''耐{た}えがたい'', etc. It is not used when it's physically impossible, or with a\nnon-intentional verb, so you can't say ''(!)霧{きり}で前{まえ}が見{み}がたい'', ''(!)\n_sixth_ や _months_ は私には発音しがたい'', or ''(!)彼{かれ}の説明{せつめい}はわかりがたい''. (わかる is not\nan intentional verb, it is the intransitive form of わける, so わかりがたい can't be\nused, either わかりづらい or わかりにくい should be used.) \nFurthermore, ''～がたい'' refers to yourself, not to others in most cases. \n\n \n言いにくい is, as user4092 says, a general and neutral word, but has different\nnuance from 言いがたい. 言いがたい has a shade of meaning that you don't want to say,\nwhile, 言いにくい doesn't. So it is used when you say natural characteristics, your\nmind, features of electrical products, or the situation you face. It is not\nonly used in written sentences but also conversation. \n\n言いづらい is the most colloquial expression in these three words. \nIt is also used when you try to say a tongue twister in addition to what 4092\nsays. \n''～（し）づらい'' used with a transitive verb gives a hint that you actually want to\ndo it and you can do it if you get over great difficulty. \n \nIf it is used with an intransitive, it means the same as '' ～（し）にくい''. \n\n* * *\n\nI give some examples as follows. \n \n\n> case 1. He told me he swam across the Pacific. I can't trust what he said. \n> 彼{かれ}の言うことは信{しん}じがたい。 It's appropriate. \n> ! 彼の言うことは信じづらい。It's not appropriate. You'll wonder why I desire to trust\n> him. \n> ! 彼の言うことは信じにくい。It's not appropriate, too. \n> \n> case2. I want to ask his advice again, but I'm afraid he will get disgusted\n> with me. \n> 彼{かれ}に相談{そうだん}しづらい。 It's the most appropriate \n> 彼に相談しにくい。 It's O.K. too, but it may be too objective. \n> ! 彼に相談しがたい。 It's not used because I want to ask. \n> If I don't want to ask him, it can be used, however 相談できない is more natural. \n> \n> case3. The seats in airplanes does not burn easily. You explain it to\n> someone. \n> 飛行機{ひこうき}の座席{ざせき}は燃{も}えにくい。 It's appropriate; an objective fact \n> 飛行機の座席は燃えづらい。 It's appropriate, the same as 燃えにくい, although a little\n> colloquial. \n> ! 飛行機の座席は燃えがたい。It's not used, quite strange.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T17:53:00.260",
"id": "29546",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T12:11:03.913",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T12:11:03.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "11654",
"owner_user_id": "11654",
"parent_id": "29533",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 29533 | null | 29546 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the reason for putting this comma in?\n\n> **異変と** 、その影に潜む陰謀を、彼はまだ知らない。\n\nAs I understand it, the sentence means that he doesn't (yet) know about either\nthe 異変 or the 陰謀. Is this comma here meant to make the reader parse the\nsentence in a certain way?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T14:33:20.670",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29541",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T10:52:51.493",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T14:39:01.217",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11818",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"punctuation"
],
"title": "What is the purpose of the comma after the と in 異変と、その影に潜む陰謀を、彼はまだ知らない。",
"view_count": 115
} | [
{
"body": "While the logical meaning is the same with or without the comma, without it,\nthe reader may feel like he doesn't know **one** thing:\n\n> [ 異変とその影に潜む陰謀 ] を、彼はまだ知らない。\n\nWith the comma, it is much clearer that 彼 doesn't know **two** things:\n\n> [ 異変 ] と、 [ その影に潜む陰謀 ] を、彼はまだ知らない。\n\nIt just emphasizes the 異変 more, and I think the pause matches the way a\ntasteful narrator would read the sentence out loud. I'd say the difference is\nsimilar to these two sentences:\n\n 1. He has yet to discover the anomaly, and the conspiracy behind it.\n 2. He has yet to discover the anomaly and the conspiracy behind it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T10:52:51.493",
"id": "29562",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T10:52:51.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29541",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29541 | null | 29562 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29548",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 大切にされるタイプってのもあるんだね。 \n> Type who is prized ?????\n\nI can't figure out what the particle soup after タイプ means. I'm assuming that\nって is the colloquial topic marker. If so, then I'm really confused about what\nの is doing.\n\nI'm guessing that the overall meaning is \"There are also types (of people) who\nare prized, aren't there?\". But I can't break down the grammar.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T14:46:24.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29542",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T18:10:47.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Particle の following topic marker?",
"view_count": 123
} | [
{
"body": "I'm fairly certain the って you are seeing here is the colloquial form of という。\nThe の is just the vague noun placeholder. If you look at it that way, it makes\na lot more sense:\n\n> 大切にされるタイプというの - Cherished(by someone) type(type thing)\n>\n> もあるんだ - Also exists\n\nHard to tell without context but it probably means something like \"Cherished\ntypes also exist\"\n\nFor clarification, you can replace の with もの：\n\n> 大切にされるタイプというもの - The type that is cherished",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T18:10:47.010",
"id": "29548",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T18:10:47.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11176",
"parent_id": "29542",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29542 | 29548 | 29548 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29587",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I heard the sentence\n\n> 大好き **なんですけれども**.\n\nSo my question is about the ending ～なんですけれども. What is the meaning of this\nending, and when it should be used?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T15:06:33.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29543",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-15T08:44:00.977",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-15T08:44:00.977",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "7045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "The usage and meaning of the ending ～なんですけれども",
"view_count": 3328
} | [
{
"body": "んです is just the polite version of the 'explanatory の' concept (for which there\nare many entries on this site. And, けれども, simply means 'but'.\n\n> (The thing is), I really like you but...\n\nYou don't need anything after 'but'. It's a way of making an excuse. I'm\nguessing that this is a response to somebody's love confesssion, and it's a\ngentle way of letting the person down.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T16:05:13.493",
"id": "29545",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T14:48:20.500",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-01T14:48:20.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "11739",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "29543",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "なんですけれども is widely used in polite conversation with an explanatory feel and\nmaybe also argumentative texts. (My boss and also teachers used this a lot\nwhen they wanted to explain something.)\n\nIts compounded of the explanatory expression んです/のです/の and けれども which is\nrelated to が/けど/けれど which roughly means but/on the other hand.\n\nIt is also used for weighing arguments, somewhat like \"however\".\n\n大好きなんですけれども would mean \"I really like it but...(on the other hand)\" But could\nalso as mentioned by user3856370 be used for polite refusal, or just a way of\nsaying, \"But i don't want to get into it right now\" or \"but there are reasons\nI...\" As it often is with が at the end of a sentence, it is left to\ninterpretation.\n\nIn the end the meaning and usage depends on the context.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T13:33:08.420",
"id": "29587",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T13:33:08.420",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11739",
"parent_id": "29543",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29543 | 29587 | 29545 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29547",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to know how to translate the word grade in sentences like\n\n> what is the passing grade for this course?\n\nor\n\n> Where are the final grades posted?\n\nI found some options in the dictionary like 採点{さいてん}, 級別{きゅうべつ} and 等級{とうきゅう}.\nBut the dictionary doesn't give me enough context to decide if any of those is\ncorrect.\n\nAre those translations o.k.? Should I use a different expression?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T15:13:38.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29544",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T17:53:48.480",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T15:30:26.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "4600",
"owner_user_id": "4600",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"translation",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "What is the right translation for grade in the context of a course",
"view_count": 4080
} | [
{
"body": "The word you are looking for is 成績{せいせき}. In general, it means \"result\", but\nis commonly used to mean \"grade\":\n\n> 英語でいい成績を取った \n> I got a good grade in English.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T17:53:48.480",
"id": "29547",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T17:53:48.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "29544",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 29544 | 29547 | 29547 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 「今日は何する **の** ？」\n\nI found this sentence by a Japanese person on a Japanese speaking website. I\nam aware that の is the possessive particle in Japanese, and allows for\nsentences such as\n\n> 「僕 **の** 娘は店に行って靴を買います。」\n\nBut what I don't understand is why の is used at the end of the first sentence\nwithout directly stating anything. Why exactly is の being used like that, and\nwhat does it mean?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T18:17:09.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29549",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-29T21:07:56.520",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T21:07:56.520",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11393",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-の",
"questions"
],
"title": "Why in this sentence is 「の」used in this fashion?",
"view_count": 40
} | []
| 29549 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29681",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My questions are regarding portions of the following sentence in bold:\n\n> 幸{さいわ}いナイフが小さい **のと** 、親指の骨が堅{かた}かった **ので** 、今だに親指は手に付いて居る。\n\nMore generally, I am wondering about the 「〜のと〜ので」 construct presented here. (I\nam assuming that it can be treated as a single construct)\n\n 1. What role does 「のと」 play here? Is it simply linking multiple reasons for 「ので」, or is there some relation between the reasons listed?\n\n 2. Can 「のと」 also be used in this fashion for more than two reasons?\n\n 3. What would be the difference between the above and the following?\n\n> 幸{さいわ}いナイフが小さ **くて** 、親指の骨が堅{かた}かった **ので** 、今だに親指は手に付いて居る。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T19:18:33.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29551",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T12:38:44.490",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T23:32:09.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "9838",
"owner_user_id": "9838",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"particles"
],
"title": "Meaning of 「〜のと〜ので」",
"view_count": 3842
} | [
{
"body": "> 1. What role does 「のと」 play here? Is it simply linking multiple reasons\n> for 「ので」, or is there some relation between the reasons listed?\n>\n\nYes. It is linking multiple reasons for \"ので\". \"のと\" can be broken up into \"の\"\nand \"と\", where the former is appended to the adjective to make it a noun (e.g.\n\"小{ちい}さいの\" = \"小さいこと\" = \"the fact that the knife was small\"), and the latter\nsimply plays the role of a conjunction (e.g. \"AとB\" = \"A and B\").\n\nThe word preceding \"のと\" can be a verb, い-adjective or な-adjective, with the な\nappended. Examples:\n\n 1. あるのと\n 2. 気{き}づいたのと\n 3. 入{はい}っているのと\n 4. 知{し}られていたのと\n 5. 高{たか}いのと\n 6. 静{しず}かなのと\n\nYou can replace \"ので\" with something that would be equivalent, such as \"ことから\"\nor \"おかげで\", or in spoken dialogue, where the last part of the sentence is\nimplied and easily inferred by the listener, omit it altogether.\n\n> 2. Can 「のと」 also be used in this fashion for more than two reasons?\n>\n\nYes, you can string together more than just two reasons with \"のと\" to make a\nlist of reasons why something is the way it is, or why something happened.\nHowever, it might be stylistically better to vary what conjunctions you use;\nthis especially if it is a long list.\n\nAn example:\n\n> >\n> 幸{さいわ}いナイフが小さいのと、親{おや}指{ゆび}の骨{ほね}が堅{かた}かったのと、手{て}袋{ぶくろ}をしていたのと、すでに救{きゅう}急{きゅう}車{しゃ}を呼{よ}んでいたので、今{いま}だに親指は手に付{つ}いている。\n\nBut as you can see, it gets a little bit repetitive after more than one or two\nuses.\n\n> 3. What would be the difference between the above and the following?\n>\n\nThey are two ways of saying the same thing. The て-form of an い-adjective is\nused to create a conjunction between the first and second clauses, where the\nclauses are independent of each other.\n\nIn the first clause, the knife is being described, and in the second clause,\nthe hardness of the finger is being described. The combination of these\nattributes result in the speaker still having his or her thumb attached.\n\nUsing \"のと\" instead of the て-form would, however, imply at an earlier stage in\nthe sentence that the properties being listed all contributed to a common\neffect (lowering the probability of cutting a finger off, in this case).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T12:35:42.563",
"id": "29639",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T01:12:07.187",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-04T01:12:07.187",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "29551",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The difference between X **くて** Yので and X **のと** Yので is that `くて` can\nsometimes imply a causal relationship **between** X and Y.\n\nIn a context where the two reasons could possibly be related, a sentence with\n`くて` can be interpreted as:\n\n> 頭が痛 **くて** 、昨日あまり眠れなかったので、集中できない。 \n> _I can't concentrate because [ I couldn't sleep well yesterday because [my\n> head hurt] ]._\n\nUsing `のと` will unambiguously separate the two reasons:\n\n> 頭が痛い **のと** 、昨日あまり眠れなかったので、集中できない。 \n> _I can't concentrate because [my head hurts] and [I couldn't sleep well\n> yesterday]._\n\nThis is not an issue in your example from 『坊っちゃん』, because knife size cannot\npossibly be interpreted as the cause of the rigidity of his thumb bone. There\nis no significant difference between `のと` and `くて` in this case.\n\n**TL;DR** `のと` is a way of simply listing reasons, while `くて` can sometimes\ndenote a relationship between them. `のと` can be used in this way to list more\nthan two reasons.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T12:38:44.490",
"id": "29681",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T12:38:44.490",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29551",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29551 | 29681 | 29681 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29556",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I was watching a movie where a guy was texting his friend. One of the text\nmessages he sent was 「友達出来た？」 The subtitles translated it to be \"Made any new\nfriends?\"\n\nFrom the context of the movie the translation made sense, but I thought\n作る｛つくる｝ was used when referring to making friends, isn't it?\n\nAlso checking [jisho.org](http://jisho.org/search/%E5%87%BA%E6%9D%A5) for\n出来｛でき｝ doesn't yield anything similar to making friends. So right now I'm\nconfused, it seems like both are valid ways of asking if someone made friends.\nIs one more formal than the other? Or what's the difference?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T22:38:34.560",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29552",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T11:18:48.617",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-29T23:17:36.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "4287",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"translation"
],
"title": "Difference between 友達出来た vs 友達を作った",
"view_count": 990
} | [
{
"body": "出来る, dekiru, means to be able to do something. 出来た, dekita, is the past tense\nand means to have been able to do something which translates as having\naccomplished something. \"Yuushoku ga dekita\" means to have accomplished dinner\nwhich means to have made dinner and is the same usage as \"made a friend\".\n[dekiru is intransitive so \"wo\" cannot be used after yuushoku .]",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T01:59:35.690",
"id": "29555",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T02:09:11.847",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T02:09:11.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "11708",
"owner_user_id": "11708",
"parent_id": "29552",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "[According to this\npost](http://lang-8.com/44649/journals/478674?_session_id=7b95b28651f669cc3a7fb1388802df7d),\nthe difference lies in what we are emphasizing.\n\nWith 友達ができる, or in your case, its question form, we are focusing on the\n**result**. That is, did you or did you not get any friends.\n\nWith 友達を作る, we are emphasizing the **action or process** of making friends.\n\nBased on this explanation, I would conclude that in a question form できた would\nbe more common, which is [confirmed by a corpus\nsearch](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_form).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T02:59:57.620",
"id": "29556",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T02:59:57.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5060",
"parent_id": "29552",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "できる can mean _to come to being_ , or rather, it is the original meaning of\nできる. \nIn [jisho.org](http://jisho.org/search/%E5%87%BA%E6%9D%A5) for 出来る, the 6th\nand 7th meaning seem to be the same as できる of ''友達（が）できる''. \n\n''友達ができた'' is more natural, and used more often than ''友達を作った''. \nIt gives a hint that you didn't desire someone to be a friend, or didn't make\nefforts for making friends. ''It became ' _I have friends.'_ '' is the nearest\nexpression to 友達ができた in English, even though it's wrong English. \n \n''友達を作った'' gives an impression that you made great efforts for that. Although\nit's never strange expression, if someone hears that, s/he may even think that\nyou can't become friends with anyone through daily plain talk.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T11:10:21.777",
"id": "29563",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T11:18:48.617",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11654",
"parent_id": "29552",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29552 | 29556 | 29563 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm wondering what's the proper way to explain a dialog between two people, to\na friend. For example saying :\n\n> So friend A came up and told us \"Hello\", so I replied \"hello\" back and he\n> asked how I was\n\nI often want to say things like that to explain something but always end up\nusing basic words without knowing if it's natural or not, for example :\n\n> ある友達がおはよーって言って来て、でおはようって答えて、元気か聞いてくれた。\n\nIt sounds really wordy and all these て forms don't sound good to me but I\ndon't know what I should be using. Also I don't know if I should be using\n答える、返事 or another one. And can I use くれる here? Thanks",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-29T23:45:23.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29553",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-12T21:58:15.317",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-12T21:58:15.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "18772",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"dialogue"
],
"title": "How to explain a dialog naturally to a friend",
"view_count": 239
} | [
{
"body": "How about using ～から、～たら etc.\n\n> 友達がおはよーって言ってきて、おはようって言っ **たら** 、元気かって聞いてくれた。/聞いてきた。 \n> 友達がおはよーって言ってきた **から** 、おはようって返事し **たら** /答え **たら** 、元気かって言ってくれた。/言ってきた。 \n> etc...\n\nor the passive voice (to use the same subject(=私) for the sequence of\nsentences)...\n\n> 友達におはよーって言 **われ** て、おはようって言ったら、元気かって聞 **かれ** た。 \n> 友達におはよーって言 **われ** たから、おはようって返事したら/答えたら、元気かって言 **われ** た。 \n> etc...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T04:16:03.850",
"id": "29557",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T10:04:29.087",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T10:04:29.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "29553",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 29553 | null | 29557 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I tried looking up this word in Denshi Jisho, but to no avail. What does \"ため\"\nmean when it is attached to the verb 止める?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T08:22:36.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29559",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-30T09:53:21.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11719",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"verbs"
],
"title": "\"私には、セーラームーンを見るのを止めるための強い意志が欠けている。\"",
"view_count": 111
} | [
{
"body": "ため means “in order to” (or “because”, in other contexts); in this case, it's\n“in order to stop watching Sailor Moon”.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T09:20:58.963",
"id": "29560",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T09:20:58.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11719",
"parent_id": "29559",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29559 | null | 29560 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29572",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A news program announced:\n\n> 〇〇店が入る雑居ビルが全焼した。\n\nI was expecting\n\n> 〇〇店が入った雑居ビルが全焼した。\n\nas in 「水が入ったグラス」. The former seems like it's saying that the shop was going to\nbe set up in the building sometime in the future, but it was clear from\ncontext that the building already contained the shop. What is the difference?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T09:33:28.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29561",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T02:28:33.130",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T11:55:45.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "11824",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"tense",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "飲食店が入る雑居ビル vs 飲食店が入った雑居ビル",
"view_count": 197
} | [
{
"body": "When you say\n\n> 〇〇店が入る雑居ビル\n\nIt can be interpreted 2 ways.\n\n 1. 〇〇店 plan to set up a store in the building (future)\n 2. 〇〇店 already have a store in the building (present)\n\nThe sentence itself is ambiguous. It can be mean the future or present. But\nyou can distinguish one from another according to the context in most cases,\nas you did in the news program.\n\nBy the way, this is not a special case of verb 入る, but any verb works like\nthis.\n\nFor example\n\n> 私の働く会社\n\nIt can mean \"The company I works for\" or \"The company I will work for\".\n\nWhen you say\n\n> 〇〇店が入った雑居ビル\n\nIt is clear the sentence only talking about the present, not the future.\n\nIn conclusion when you say 〇〇店が入る the sentence itself is ambiguous (but you\nusually can distinguish according to the context), 〇〇店が入った is not ambiguous it\nonly talking about the present. In other words, there is no practical\ndifference in cases the context is clear.\n\nNews program prefer shorter sentences when there is no chance to\nmisunderstand. I think that's why the news program use 入る rather than 入った.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T02:28:33.130",
"id": "29572",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T02:28:33.130",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9608",
"parent_id": "29561",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29561 | 29572 | 29572 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29568",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> “はっきりとしてくれないわたしが好きな人”より“はっきりとしているわたしを好きな人”を憎からず\n>\n> はっきりとして=Be clear \n> くれない=not give to me \n> わたしが好きな人=The person I like\n>\n> [はっきりとしてくれない]>わたしが好きな人 so はっきりとしてくれない modifies わたし \n> or \n> はっきりとしてくれない modifies 人 \n> The person who I like which is not clear with me.\n\n* * *\n\n> はっきりとしている=Is clear \n> わたしを好きな人=The person who likes me\n>\n> [はっきりとしている]>わたしを好きな人 so はっきりとしている modifies わたし \n> or \n> はっきりとしている modifies 人 \n> The person who clearly likes me.\n\nWhat is modifying what?\n\nI believe it's the second option in both cases tough.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T17:08:43.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29565",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T06:25:22.280",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"relative-clauses",
"parsing",
"subsidiary-verbs",
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "Help parsing a sentence with possibly embed relatives",
"view_count": 425
} | [
{
"body": "\"Xが好きな人\" is ambiguous and [means both \"the person who likes X\" and \"The person\nX likes\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23644/5010), ~~but in this\ncontest, it's obviously used in the first sense~~ (see comments below).\n\nActually, わたしが好きな人 and わたしを好きな人 are the same here. Both noun phrases inside\nthe quotes are about \"the person who likes me (who is はっきりとしている or していない)\",\nnot \"the person I like\".\n\nThe verb はっきりとする means \"to show a clear/definite stance\", \"to say things\nclearly\".\n\n * ([はっきりとしてくれない]わたし) が好きな人 = the person who likes (私 who doesn't say things clearly).\n * ([はっきりとしている]わたし) を好きな人 = the person who likes (私 who says things clearly).\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT** : As @goldhick and @marasai pointed out in the comment section, this\nsentence can still make sense if the first noun phrase means \"the person I\nlike\". I didn't notice such an interpretation is possible.\n\nIf the first phrase means \"the person who likes me\", as described above, the\nwhole sentence essentially means \"I'd love a person who loves me because I'm a\nkind of person who says things clearly\".\n\nIf the first phrase means \"the person I like\":\n\n * [はっきりとしてくれない] (わたしが好きな人) = (the person whom I like) [who doesn't show a definite stance toward me]\n * [はっきりとしている] (わたしを好きな人) = (the person who likes me) [ _obviously_ ]\n\nThe whole sentence essentially means \"I'd choose someone who definitely loves\nme, rather than loving someone who may not love me.\" If this is the case,\nはっきりとしている in the last phrase is used differently from the others.\n\nChoose whichever matches the context.",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T22:05:02.063",
"id": "29568",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T06:25:22.280",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29565",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29565 | 29568 | 29568 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29567",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am trying to say I will help someone read a book.\n\n> 私は本があなたをたすけよみます。\n\nIs this correct?\n\nSorry if the question is off-topic. I am very new to Japanese and don't yet\nfully understand how to build sentences larger than very basic ones.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T21:20:54.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29566",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T21:35:22.373",
"last_edit_date": "2015-11-30T21:35:22.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "15",
"owner_user_id": "11827",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Is 私は本があなたをたすけよみます correct?",
"view_count": 141
} | [
{
"body": "No, that sentence is incorrect for two reasons.\n\n * が after 本 means 本 is the subject of the verb. 本があなたをたすける means \"The book helps you\", which is not what you want to say.\n * たすけよむ is probably grammatical but it makes no sense here, because it means something like 'read while helping' rather than 'help (someone) read'. Instead, use `[dictionary form of the verb] + のを助ける`. `の` here is a [nominalizer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29367/5010), and `あなたが本を読むの` means \"your reading the book\", which serves as the object of the verb 助【たす】ける.\n\nThe correct sentence would be:\n\n> 私はあなたが本を読【よ】むのを助【たす】けます。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-11-30T21:34:57.683",
"id": "29567",
"last_activity_date": "2015-11-30T21:34:57.683",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29566",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29566 | 29567 | 29567 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29570",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been thinking recently about patterns between onyomi and their respective\nChinese counterparts (as presumably existed in middle Chinese and are now\nreflected across modern Chinese dialects). Japanese certainly does reflect a\nlot of the consonant endings that existed in middle Chinese that have been\nlost in some dialects (particularly Mandarin, which only preserves -r, -n and\n-ng as consonant finals) (cf. 六 - Mandarin liù, Cantonese luk6, Japanese roku)\n(cf. 七 - Mandarin qī, Cantonese cat1, Japanese shichi)\n\nI was wondering in particular about the phenomenon regarding the -p final and\nthe -ng final, both of which seem to be widely represented in modern Japanese\nby the elongation of the vowel sound (cf. 十 - Mandarin shí, Cantonese sap6,\nJapanese jū) (cf. 零 - Mandarin líng, Cantonese ling4, Japanese rē/rei). Is\nthere any evidence of earlier Japanese having -ng as a valid phoneme, and if\nnot, is there any particular reason why Japanese would have borrowed these\nelongated-vowel readings as substitutes for the -ng and the -p finals\n(especially in the case of the latter, which seems like it would be replicable\nby Japanese phonology)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T00:53:52.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29569",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T01:45:24.490",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-01T00:58:59.260",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"history",
"chinese",
"onyomi"
],
"title": "Pattern in onyomi for middle Chinese -p and -ng finals",
"view_count": 655
} | [
{
"body": "It's actually due to a couple of things.\n\nFor *-p, Japanese actually did originally borrow it as *-pu. Subsequent sound\nchanges have turned Old Japanese *p into /w/ between vowels, and the resulting\n-(w)u has combined with the vowel before it. (Note that Modern Japanese /p/ is\nactually a Middle Japanese reintroduction from Chinese; where Old Japanese *p\nisn't modern /w/ it's /h/.)\n\n十 is an example - MC *dʑip > OJ *dʑipu > MJ *dʑiwu > *dʑiu > *dʑuu > NJ /dʑuu/\n\nFor *-ŋ, Japanese originally borrowed it as *-u, because Old Japanese didn't\nhave anything like Modern Japanese's /N/ phoneme (which is new from Middle\nJapanese). Again, this -u has undergone additional interactions with the vowel\nbefore it.\n\n名 is an example - MC *mjᴇŋ > OJ *mijau > MJ *mjɔɔ > NJ /mjoo/\n\nJapanese later borrowed a different set of pronunciations (漢音, as opposed to\nthe above 呉音), where MC *-jᴇŋ finals were borrowed as *-ee instead of *-jau.\nThis is why 名 can also be read /mee/.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T01:45:24.490",
"id": "29570",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T01:45:24.490",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "29569",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29569 | 29570 | 29570 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29589",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Having problems understanding the title of this academic paper:\n\n> 心理臨床家の語りの場としてのスーパーヴィジョン\n\nI can break down some of the elements to be 心理臨床家(clinical psychologist),\n語り(talk or words), and スーパーヴィジョン(supervision). I'm having problems with の場として,\nthough. I know 場 is place, is the meaning of this something like \"Supervision\nof the clinical psychologist's talk location\"? That sounds way too awkward and\nliteral so I know I'm missing something. Thanks.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T02:05:35.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29571",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T16:06:02.390",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-01T02:38:33.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "11274",
"owner_user_id": "11274",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"academic-japanese"
],
"title": "Meaning 'の場として'",
"view_count": 125
} | [
{
"body": "The word 'supervision' is actually treated as a place. The phrase literally\nmeans \"supervision as a place of 語り of clinical psychologists\".\n\n> * 憩いの場としての家庭 home as a place of relief\n> * 働く場としての大学 a university as a place of work\n>\n\nI feel 語り is something deeper than simple 'talk'. Probably 'storytelling' or\n'narrative' is closer, but there may be a formal technical term for it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T16:06:02.390",
"id": "29589",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T16:06:02.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29571",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29571 | 29589 | 29589 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29611",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The potential form of \"する\" is \"できる\". However, \"～ことができる\" can be appended to\nverbs to create a potential form. Hence, \"することができる\" can be used as the\npotential form of \"する\". While I think there are times this sounds perfectly\nnatural, I wonder if it is grammatically ill-advised, as you are appending the\npotential form of the verb to the verb to make the potential form of said\nverb.\n\nThe cases where I find it most natural to use \"することができる\" is when I start off\nwriting or saying something, using the form \"～を[NOUN]する\" and when turning that\ninto potential form realize it's too late to change the layout of the sentence\nas I already committed to using \"を\" (as opposed to \"が\") and potentially\nalready said \"する\". Then in hindsight, I feel like the better sentence would\nhave been \"[NOUN]ができる\".\n\n**Is using \"することができる\" ill-advised?** Should it be replaced with other\ngrammatical structures? If so, what are the recommended ways of rephrasing\nwhat would otherwise be \"することができる\"?\n\nClosest related question I could find: [ことができる versus V~える\nform](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2689/%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8C%E3%81%A7%E3%81%8D%E3%82%8B-versus-v%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B-form)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T03:09:38.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29573",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T08:31:25.900",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Is it bad practice to use \"することができる\" as opposed to just \"できる\"?",
"view_count": 1197
} | [
{
"body": "''することができる'' isn't ill-advised at all. \nGenerally, you can say ''(verb, dictionary form)～ことができる'' when someone can do\nsomething, of course you can say ''することができる''. You don't have to care about\nduplicating ''する''. \n \nThere are many verbs like ''勉{べん}強{きょう}する'', ''質{しつ}問{もん}する'', etc. \nThese ''する-form verb'' can be appended to ''ことができる'', such as ''勉強することができる'',\n''質問することができる'', instead of shorter forms ''勉強できる'', ''質問できる'', although the\nshorter forms are used more commonly in daily talk than ''することができる''. \n\n* * *\n\n(I added more explanation.)\n\nThere can be a certain difference between 勉強ができる and 勉強できる。 \nIf you want to say that someone can study, you'd better say 勉強できる, or\n勉強することができる. \n勉強 **が** できる sometimes means that someone is good at studying, has a good\nrecord in school; e.g.彼{かれ}の子{こ}供{ども}は勉強ができる。 \nThis usage of 勉強ができる is the same way as スポーツ（サッカー,野{や}球{きゅう},etc.） **が** できる,\n英{えい}語{ご} **が** できる. It means not just someone can do something, but also\nsomeone is good at something. You have to make out which meaning it has. \n \nAll ''[NOUN]ができる'' don't indicate this meaning, 質問できる is absolutely the same\nas 質問ができる.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T12:06:54.167",
"id": "29586",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T08:31:25.900",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T08:31:25.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "11654",
"parent_id": "29573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "> Is using \"することができる\" ill-advised?\n\n**Short answer:**\n\nNo. \"することができる\" is perfectly normal.\n\n**Long answer:**\n\nIf you do a quick search for \"することができる\" on google, you will find a lot of\nhits, where some of the main ones are people voicing the same concern. \"Is\n'することができる' good grammar?\". Nonetheless, the fact that you do get over 65\nmillion hits for the term, and that some are from major Japanese\norganizations, such as the [Japan Patent\nOffice](https://www.google.co.jp/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjN1_-1rr3JAhVDrKYKHfGiC2wQFghHMAU&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jpo.go.jp%2Fshiryou%2Fkijun%2Fkijun2%2Fpdf%2Ftjkijun_ii-1.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGbQqigrAnfSkUQ7zsEz3SyI4TvEw&sig2=1LC5RKaQXyWOVqhbV-89jA&bvm=bv.108538919,d.dGo)\nand the [Ministry of Health, Labour and\nWelfare](https://www.google.co.jp/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=13&ved=0ahUKEwiGzPiNrb3JAhUEkJQKHXqjD8k4ChAWCCswAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mhlw.go.jp%2Ftopics%2F2009%2F07%2Fdl%2Ftp0701-1x.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGg6qthbJ9jW59UWa4m_YNKiSAPzQ&sig2=87oGoqI6xuHFMqyVpccpGA&bvm=bv.108538919,d.dGo&cad=rja),\nsignifies that it is used widely. For this fact alone, the phrase should be\nconsidered grammatically accepted, if not correct.\n\n> Should it be replaced with other grammatical structures? If so, what are the\n> recommended ways of rephrasing what would otherwise be \"することができる\"?\n\n\"することができる\" is a very verbose way of saying something, and while being\ngrammatically acceptable, it can easily be replaced with other grammatical\nstructures. Here are some examples of sentences that avoid the grammatical\nstructure and essentially mean the same thing:\n\n**Verbose form:** \"表{ひょう}示{じ}することができる\"\n\n**Alternatives:**\n\n 1. 表{ひょう}示{じ}できる\n 2. 表{あらわ}せる\n 3. 示{しめ}せる\n 4. 表{ひょう}示{じ}可{か}能{のう}である\n 5. 表{ひょう}示{じ}可{か}\n 6. 見{み}せられる\n 7. Etcetera...\n\n\"することができる\" is a grammatical structure that when looked at closely, even has\nsome natives wondering about the validity of its structure, while\nsimultaneously being used ubiquitously. Although verbose, it is correct to use",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T14:14:35.673",
"id": "29611",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T08:14:19.717",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T08:14:19.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "29573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29573 | 29611 | 29586 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29578",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> スーパーヴァイジー\n\nI'm guessing from the pronunciation that this word means supervise, but am\ndoubting myself as I've incorrectly guessed at loan words before and had them\nbe wrong, and I'm not having luck in dictionaries...would love any feedback if\nanyone knows for sure what this means. Thanks!\n\nEdit: here is the sentence for context (I'm not so clear on what the sentence\nmeans):\n\n>\n> そこから，スーパーヴァイジーがスーパーヴィジョンの場で「語る」こと，「語り」を得ることが，心理臨床家としての新たな「主体性」の生成に繋がることを見出した。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T04:21:49.197",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29577",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T04:32:39.310",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-01T04:32:39.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "11274",
"owner_user_id": "11274",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"academic-japanese"
],
"title": "Question about loan word スーパーヴァイジー",
"view_count": 306
} | [
{
"body": "I guess \"supervisee\", that is, \"One who is supervised.\" (Context would of\ncourse help)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T04:29:50.297",
"id": "29578",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T04:29:50.297",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7717",
"parent_id": "29577",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "The word, スーパーヴァイジー is a form of the word スーパーヴィジョン, or \"supervision\", so your\npresumption was indeed correct. I hope I have helped you! (⌒▽⌒)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T04:30:52.480",
"id": "29579",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T04:30:52.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11393",
"parent_id": "29577",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 29577 | 29578 | 29578 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Is the word チェリーボーイ (Eng. \"cherry boy\", meaning \"male virgin\") a genuine\nloanword from English, or is it wasei-eigo?\n\nI would have thought it to be a genuine loanword, but [the sources cited on\nEnglish.SE here](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/290782/) seem to indicate\nthat the word was in use in Japan by the end of WWII (c. 1945), but is only\nattested in English back to the 1970s. This suggests that \"cherry boy\" might\nactually be a \"reverse\" loan of the wasei-eigo back into English, kind of like\n\"salaryman\" and \"office lady\". The relative frequency of these words\n(incredibly low in English; somewhat higher in Japanese) also sort of points\nin this direction.\n\n[語源由来辞典 says](http://gogen-allguide.com/ti/cherry_boy.html)\n『「チェリーボーイ」は和製英語と思われがちだが、アメリカでも用いることはある』, but the mere fact that the word is\n_used_ in English does not necessarily indicate that it _isn't_ wasei-eigo\n(again, like \"salaryman\").",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T17:18:33.073",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29591",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-24T12:49:39.300",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:38:10.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3437",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"words",
"loanwords",
"wasei-eigo"
],
"title": "Is チェリーボーイ wasei-eigo?",
"view_count": 7036
} | [
{
"body": "The meaning of cherry boy is inexperienced soldier.Inexperienced soldier→male\nvirgin.I think japanese military or other country's military used this words.\nAnd actually,experienced soldier were rated high by japanese military.For\nexample 靖国神社.By the way 和製英語 is word that japanese created\nselfishly.Inexperienced soldier and male virgin are nearly meaning.So cherry\nboy is not 和製英語.\n\nIn japan someone made love with 100 wemen is called 100人斬り. Both of these\nwords are concerned about war.It might be that these are japanese sexual\ncultural words.\n\nBy the way that it is not 和製英語 doesn't mean english words.和製英語 is not quite\ndifferent meaning to English words.\n\"意味が日本特有であれば和製英語であると認定するならば、英語の意味からどの程度異なっていれば認定してよいかは難しい問題である\" from jp\nwikipedia和製英語.\nこの意味において日本特有の意味合いでないと思ったので和製英語ではないと私は思いました。日本製の言葉かと言われれば半分日本製の言葉かもしれません。\n\nI have ever edited \"和製英語\" of english wikipedia.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-02-22T08:55:45.337",
"id": "32365",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-24T09:29:42.920",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-24T09:29:42.920",
"last_editor_user_id": "13619",
"owner_user_id": "13619",
"parent_id": "29591",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "The oldest confirmed sighting I have for the term in Japanese is a [1972\nsong](http://www.showapops.com/wiki/index.php?title=%E3%83%86%E3%83%AC%E3%83%95%E3%82%A9%E3%83%B3%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B7%E3%82%B9%E3%82%BF%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BA).\nThis raises the question of whether the term was introduced to Japan by\nAmerican soldiers [during the Vietnam\nwar](https://books.google.com/books?id=HRsWBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=%22A%20World%20of%20Hurt%22%20%22cherry%20boy%22&source=bl&ots=sTyxKKN7qt&sig=Pe_rB4oQT3Pyoo8D7Fk2sEJYmgM&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiU3ozD0rvJAhXE1h4KHR8pA5QQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&q=%22A%20World%20of%20Hurt%22%20%22cherry%20boy%22&f=false),\nas one comment has pointed out. Even more intriguing is the earliest citation\nfor it on Google Books: the gay poet Royston Ellis's book _The Cherry Boy_\n(Turret, 1966), followed by Lance Taunton's _Cherry Boy_ (Windsor House,\n1970), which is apparently gay erotica. A bit of Googling seems to\n[confirm](http://www.odps.org/glossword/index.php?a=term&d=8&t=2754) that\n\"cherry boy\" was period slang in the gay community.\n\nBut this doesn't rule out wasei-eigo. This still might be the result of some\nJapanese schoolboys irresponsibly granted access to an English dictionary,\nsince according to 渋谷知美『日本の童貞』, the 日本チェリーボーイ倶楽部 was founded in 1956. However,\nI'm not entirely sure of the provenance of this claim, as the book's sole\nsource for the club is a 1996 article in a weekly tabloid. (By the way, that\nbook points out that the Japanese language didn't even have a term for male\nvirginity until the 1920s.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-02-23T20:40:21.330",
"id": "32413",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-24T12:49:39.300",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-24T12:49:39.300",
"last_editor_user_id": "583",
"owner_user_id": "583",
"parent_id": "29591",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29591 | null | 32413 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29594",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 怒られるタイプの男子に囲まれている **ただ** ひとりの怒られるタイプの女子。 \n> I'm surrounded by boys who are the \"getting scolded\" type (but?) I'm the\n> only girl _of that sort_.\n\nDoes ただ mean 'but' in this context? If so, when/how should I use it. How, for\nexample, does it differ from けど?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T19:49:19.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29592",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T18:57:22.573",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-02T18:57:22.573",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjunctions"
],
"title": "What does ただ mean in this context, following a verb and before ひとり?",
"view_count": 803
} | [
{
"body": "When `ただ` appears directly before a numeral + quantifier pair, like in the\nphrases `ただひとり` or `ただひとつ`, it usually has this meaning:\n\n> 数量・程度などがきわめて少ないさま。たった。わずかに。「ただ一人だけ生き残る」\n>\n> (二-③ in 明鏡国語辞典)\n\nI think it corresponds to the word 'only' in your translation, as part of\n`ただひとり`. I don't think it means 'but' here. There isn't any conjunction in the\noriginal Japanese noun phrase – `怒られるタイプの男子に囲まれている` is a relative clause\nmodifying `（ただひとりの怒られるタイプの）女子`.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T21:07:14.340",
"id": "29594",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-01T21:23:22.690",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "29592",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29592 | 29594 | 29594 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How has the percentage of writing using each script changed since 1945? With\nscript reform, increasing influx of loanwords, and stylistic choices, several\nfactors affect how much certain parts of the Japanese script are used in\nwriting. Modern Japanese is very different from how it looked in 1945, by any\nmeasure.\n\nTaking this into the context of my question, what proportion of words used in\nwriting are written in hiragana, katakana, and kanji? I've been unsuccessful\nin finding any information on this so far. Keeping in mind that this has\nnothing to do with whether we agree or disagree with the changes that have\nhappened (after all, language is just communication whatever words you use),\ndoes there exist data for something like:\n\n```\n\n % Words by script in 1945:\n Hiragana: .%\n Katakana: .%\n Kanji: .%\n \n % Words by script in 2015:\n Hiragana: .%\n Katakana: .%\n Kanji: .%\n \n```\n\nAny sources of written language is fine, whether newspapers (the easiest to\nfind), journals, handwritten letters, websites and so on.",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-01T21:03:36.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29593",
"last_activity_date": "2021-06-06T01:06:30.487",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-08T15:45:24.017",
"last_editor_user_id": "18435",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"words",
"kanji",
"katakana",
"orthography",
"hiragana"
],
"title": "How has Japanese kanji and kana usage changed since 1945?",
"view_count": 1325
} | [
{
"body": "I don't know how to help with hiragana and kanji, but I can help with\nkatakana. The Katana alphabet's word count has increased massively, but there\nis little empirical data to prove their increase in such writings. The\nincrease of katakana words in Japanese writing poses a problem for foreign\nlearners of Japanese whose L1 is English.\n\nI hoped I helped. :)\n\nThis might help with kanji\n<http://www.japanesestudies.org.uk/ejcjs/vol12/iss3/premaratne.html>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-16T08:26:53.097",
"id": "38500",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-16T08:26:53.097",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17511",
"parent_id": "29593",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I believe one can write a program to do this, but you can also estimate usage\nin the 2010s by using Table 5.9 of this\n[book](https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=-7Z-GA73MMAC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90) and\nassuming that the ratio of katakana to hiragana usage hasn't changed much\nsince 1985 (hiragana remains dominant because most okurigana and particles are\nwritten in hiragana, although this assumption may underestimate % katakana\nconsidering the influx of loan words since), and with the Kanji usage\nrepresented by Figure 1 of this\n[article](http://www.japanesestudies.org.uk/ejcjs/vol12/iss3/premaratne.html).\n\nAs for the 1945 proportion, kanji and katakana were mostly used based on the\n[Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katakana#Usage), but because\nof my limited exposure to these documents, I cannot provide a good estimate.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-11T22:37:39.260",
"id": "77229",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-11T22:37:39.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"parent_id": "29593",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29593 | null | 77229 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29615",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What would be the difference between\n\n> 扉はやはり音もなく、押されるまま **に** 動いた。\n\nand\n\n> 扉はやはり音もなく、押されるまま **で** 動いた。\n\nWhen do you use ままで instead of ままに？",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T00:46:53.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29596",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T18:52:13.570",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-02T00:56:41.083",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11108",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 11,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Difference between ままに and ままで?",
"view_count": 1056
} | [
{
"body": "> 扉はやはり音もなく、押されるままで動いた。\n\nThis is unnatural. \nままで is usually used to indicate that the state is unchanged; e.g. 凍った\n**ままである** (remain frozen)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T18:52:13.570",
"id": "29615",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T18:52:13.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11854",
"parent_id": "29596",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 29596 | 29615 | 29615 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29598",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As far as I'm aware, とある means 'some':\n\n> とある会社の従業員 \n> An employee of some company\n\nAnd just ある can be used to mean the same thing.\n\nDoes that give a different level of formality? A more 'direct' or pointed way\nto referring to the following noun?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T02:06:53.380",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29597",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T02:40:47.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"nuances"
],
"title": "What is the difference between とある and ある?",
"view_count": 188
} | [
{
"body": "They are the same thing. However, 「ある」 is more common nowadays, especially\namong the younger generation.\n\nSources:\n\n * [Chiebukuro](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1296602837)\n * [lang-8](http://lang-8.com/554045/journals/287427577267505715082110860385120298845)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T02:40:47.463",
"id": "29598",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T02:40:47.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "29597",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29597 | 29598 | 29598 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29605",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The following sentence is baffling me:\n\n> 頭が腸捻転エビ固めモミ手返しを喰ったようで「明日にでも実家に帰らせて頂きマス」とか「私の前世は『枯野の宿』だった」とか口走りかねない。\n\nI think I understand the ending (but please let me know if anything is\nmistranslated):\n\n> 「明日にでも実家に帰らせて頂きマス」とか「私の前世は『枯野の宿』だった」とか口走りかねない: It wasn't unlike me to blurt\n> out things like, \"May I go visit my parents tomorrow?\" or \" _Kareno no Yado_\n> was my former life.\"\n\nIs the beginning portion something to the effect of \"While rubbing my hands\ntogether and eating shrimp out of their shells...\"?\n\nAny help and insight you could provide me with would be very much appreciated!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T03:14:06.287",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29599",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T16:04:46.820",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T16:04:46.820",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "3585",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Help understanding 腸捻転エビ固めモミ手返し",
"view_count": 134
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's basically a nonsense joke. 腸捻転エビ固めモミ手返し is his own made-up word\nwhich just sounds like some [attack/move of professional\nwrestling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_wrestling_attacks).\n\n * 腸捻転【ちょうねんてん】: [volvolus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvulus) or \"intestine twister\" (I think there's no such attack in reality)\n * エビ固【がた】め: [逆エビ固め (boston crab)](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%80%86%E3%82%A8%E3%83%93%E5%9B%BA%E3%82%81)\n * モミ手: hand-rubbing\n * 返し: counter-attack, counter-move\n\nSo it's something like \"intestine-twisting boston-crab hand-rubbing counter-\nattack\", but each word is not really important.\n\n喰う/食う in this context is \"to take (an attack)\".\n\nHis head was so confused as if he took this strange \"attack\", that he almost\nsaid those meaningless sentences like 実家に帰ります/前世は宿だった.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T11:04:27.060",
"id": "29605",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T11:04:27.060",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29599",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29599 | 29605 | 29605 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29601",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know there are `音読み` and `訓読み`.\n\nIn case of 国, but has 2 way to pronounce: `国{くに}` vs `国{こく}`.\n\nWhen to use which?",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T07:59:52.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29600",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T09:43:39.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "国 - The 2 ways to pronounce",
"view_count": 356
} | [
{
"body": "When 国 is used as a part of idiom like 米国, it's pronounced こく like 米国(べいこく).\nWhen it's used alone, it's pronounced くに.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T09:43:39.443",
"id": "29601",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T09:43:39.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29600",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29600 | 29601 | 29601 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29606",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If I wanted to say: She told me she knew my brother.\n\n> 彼女は僕の弟を知ってると僕に言った。\n\nWould this be correct? Or would I have to use the passive form?\n\n> 彼女に僕の弟を知ってると言われた。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T10:34:55.900",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29604",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T16:07:15.477",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T16:07:15.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "11108",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "How would you say someone told you something?",
"view_count": 6139
} | [
{
"body": "Both sentences are grammatically and semantically correct, _but as Choco\nmentions in the comment below, it's more natural to leave out the 僕の in 僕の弟,\nbecause 弟 without a qualifier such as ～さん or Xの～ is always taken to mean the\nspeaker's own younger brother_.\n\nOther than that, which form is more natural depends on what aspect you want to\nemphasize. Without knowing the context the phrasing most likely to be used by\na Japanese person would simply be:\n\n> 彼女は弟を知っている [と言いました / と言った / って]。\n\nHowever, you've now lost the explicit information that tells the listener that\nit was _you_ who she told she knows your brother.\n\nIf that information is important, there are two ways to rephrase that\nsentence:\n\n * You can add 僕に as you did in your 1st sentence. Keep in mind though that doing so can add more emphasis on 僕に than natural given the context (especially when you use the word order you did where 僕に is placed close to the verb).\n\n * You can use the passive form as you did with your 2nd sentence. This is done very often because it has the benefit of being grammatically unambiguous without adding unwanted emphasis on the **you** -part:\n\n> 彼女に弟を知ってると言われた。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T11:19:02.210",
"id": "29606",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T03:48:21.107",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T03:48:21.107",
"last_editor_user_id": "5176",
"owner_user_id": "5176",
"parent_id": "29604",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29604 | 29606 | 29606 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29609",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been listening to this memetic song for quite a bit, but recently I was\nthinking perhaps the title could be inaccurate. Shouldn't it be \"Airman wo\nTaoserarenai\"?\n\nThere are 2 points I have to make here:\n\nOne, たおせない means \"to not beat/defeat\" when the song clearly sings about not\nbeing **able** to defeat Airman, which would be expressed by the negative\npotential form of 倒せる: 倒せられない.\n\nTwo, the object is エアーマン, not the player, so エアーマン needs a を instead of a が,\nright?\n\nAm I on the mark on these two counts?\n\n<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opADNvgeZYY>\n\nMore on the song: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Man_ga_Taosenai>",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T11:51:42.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29607",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-07T15:25:42.093",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-07T15:25:42.093",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"particle-を",
"song-lyrics",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Is \"Airman ga Taosenai\" grammatical?",
"view_count": 664
} | [
{
"body": "'Not defeat' is 倒さない, not 倒せない. 倒せない means 'not be able to defeat'. As for が\nvs を, the potential form ('be able to', 'can') is traditionally used with が, I\nthink in either of the following manners: 僕にはエアーマンが倒せない, or 僕はエアーマンが倒せない, but\nit's becoming more and more frequent to use it with を like this: 僕はエアーマンを倒せない.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T12:32:23.633",
"id": "29609",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T17:43:26.763",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T17:43:26.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "9971",
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "29607",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29607 | 29609 | 29609 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Are there any rules for reading \"!\" as an onomatopoeia?\n\n> 先刻、 ！ ！ ！ ！ ！ ！\n>\n> と、喫茶店ナイルの時計が、私の肩の上で鳴ったが、黒住は、まだ現れなかった。\n\n蘭{らん} 郁二郎{いくじろう} 著 『蝕眠譜{しょくみんふ}』 [青空文庫\nNo.43433](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000325/card43433.html)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T12:13:39.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29608",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-28T08:02:36.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11802",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"onomatopoeia",
"symbols"
],
"title": "How to read 「！」 as a clock chime?",
"view_count": 576
} | [
{
"body": "I have seen this mark \"!\" used in an old English language comic, albeit\ntranslated from French. It was used to denote the sound of the pips of the\nofficial clock one could telephone (the service may well still exist). I\nimagine if you had to verbalise the pip tones in Japanese you would say 「ピー」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-25T10:31:09.923",
"id": "30703",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-25T10:31:09.923",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12341",
"parent_id": "29608",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It depends on the clock.\n\nFor a big tower clock, it's ビーン・ボーン, with one of each for each peal. For a\nsmall radio clock, ピー is probably an appropriate rendition, and for a water\nclock, カタッン might very well be the way to go.\n\nUltimately, there's no entirely _right_ answer, and it very much depends on\nthe context in particular and specifically.\n\nSimply reading it as \"The sound this clock makes to mark the hour.\" to your\nmind's eye is probably the most appropriate.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-26T22:16:32.427",
"id": "30747",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-26T22:16:32.427",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "519",
"parent_id": "29608",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "It's not an answer to your question directly but out of interest \"!\" does have\na reading in both English and Japanese. In English it can be read as\n[bang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shebang_\\(Unix\\))' and in Japanese it can\nbe read as [ビックリ](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%84%9F%E5%98%86%E7%AC%A6).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-01-28T08:02:36.387",
"id": "30782",
"last_activity_date": "2016-01-28T08:02:36.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12106",
"parent_id": "29608",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29608 | null | 30747 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Question to any Japanese reader:\n\nWhen you look in SQL-Server and do\n\n```\n\n SELECT * FROM sys.fn_helpcollations() \n WHERE (1=1) \n --AND description LIKE '%insensitive%'\n AND name LIKE '%japanese%' \n \n```\n\nyou get Kanatype-sensitive and Kanatype-insensitive collations.\n\nMy understanding is, that this is two different kind of alphabets, Hiragana\nand Katakana.\n\nSQL-Server documentation states:\n\n> If this option is not selected, SQL Server considers Hiragana and Katakana\n> characters to be equal for sorting purposes\n\nSo my question:\n\nWhen/Why would you want to use kanatype-insensitive collation? \nWhat's the deeper purpose? \nIs a phonebook-lookup kanatype-sensitive or kanatype-insensitive?\n\nIn which cases would you use a sensitive collation, and when an insensitive\ncollation?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T15:13:55.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29612",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-30T11:09:39.217",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-02T23:17:23.217",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11853",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"kana",
"sorting-order"
],
"title": "What do you need kanatype sensitivity for?",
"view_count": 975
} | [
{
"body": "In general, if you're storing any Japanese text that needs to be sorted, you\nprobably want to go with Kanatype insensitive. Why would you want it like\nthis? Because it makes sorting more intuitive in terms of Japanese language.\n\nIn english, since we have only one writing system, it's easy to sort things\nalgorithmically. We simply order the characters by their character codes\n(already in alphabetical order) and we're done. In Japanese, though, because\nthere are multiple ways to write out equivalent sounds, sorting can get a bit\ntricky. Hiragana and Katakana alphabets are separated into separate Unicode\nblocks, so when we try sorting things with \"Kanatype sensitivity\", we end up\nwith results that aren't completely intuitive.\n\nImagine you had a list of names that you wanted to sort:\n\n```\n\n { \"ピカチュウ\",\"さとし\",\"マリオ\",\"まちだ\",\"はるか\" }\n \n```\n\nThe romanized equivalent to the list is:\n\n```\n\n { \"Pikachu\",\"Satoshi\",\"Mario\",\"Machida\",\"Haruka\" }\n \n```\n\nWhen sorted kanatype sensitive, you would get the following result:\n\n```\n\n { \"さとし\",\"はるか\",\"まちだ\",\"ピカチュウ\",\"マリオ\" }\n { \"Satoshi\",\"Haruka\",\"Machida\",\"Pikachu\",\"Mario\" }\n \n```\n\nWhen sorted kanatype insensitive, you would get this result instead:\n\n```\n\n { \"さとし\",\"はるか\",\"ピカチュウ\",\"まちだ\",\"マリオ\" }\n { \"Satoshi\",\"Haruka\",\"Pikachu\",\"Machida\",\"Mario\" }\n \n```\n\nTo Japanese speakers, the second sort is a lot more intuitive, as the results\nare actually sorted phonetically instead of based on character sets. \"まちだ\" and\n\"マリオ\" both start with the same phonetic sound, but because one uses hiragana\n\"ma\" and the other uses katakana \"ma\", they are separated when kanatype\nsensitivity is enabled. With kanatype insensitivity, the list can be properly\nsorted so that the two words appear next to each other on the list despite\ntheir writing system differences.\n\nA good analogy for English language would be case-sensitivity. Imagine if you\nwanted to sort a list of words for a dictionary, some of them proper nouns\nwhile others are not:\n\n```\n\n {\"New York\",\"new\",\"jet\",\"Japan\",\"squirm\",\"SQL\"}\n \n```\n\nIf we ignored the fact that uppercase and lowercase letters represent the same\nletter and just sort based on character code, we would get something like\nthis:\n\n```\n\n {\"Japan\", \"New York\", \"SQL\", \"jet\", \"new\", \"squirm\"}\n \n```\n\nA dictionary sorted like this would hardly be useful, especially if we wanted\nto look up a word without knowing whether it started with an uppercase or\nlowercase letter. We'd have to check the first part of the dictionary with all\nthe proper nouns before checking the last part with all other words.\n\nIf we ran a case insensitive sort that treat \"A\" and \"a\" as the same letter\ndespite having separate character codes. We would get a result that is much\nmore intuitive:\n\n```\n\n {\"Japan\",\"jet\",\"new\",\"New York\",\"squirm\",\"SQL\"}\n \n```\n\nSo in general, unless you have a specific reason not to, you should always\ndisable kanatype sensitivity. A phonebook-lookup would be kanatype sensitive.\nNote that in Japanese there is also an additional character type, Kanji, that\nyou would also need to work with. Kanji is much harder to sort, as there are\nalmost always multiple ways to read each Kanji and no real \"alphabetical\"\norder to the Kanji. Most forms intended for Japanese people usually have two\nfields for names: the user's name as it is normally written out, and the\nuser's name completely written out in katakana. Not only does this let people\nknow how to correctly pronounce a name which might be ambiguous written solely\nin Kanji, but it allows software to sort by the unambiguous katakana-only\nfield, making the sort kanatype insensitive.\n\nFor more information, I definitely recommend checking out [this excellent\narticle](http://www.localizingjapan.com/blog/2011/02/13/sorting-in-\njapanese-%E2%80%94-an-unsolved-problem/), which explains the issues with\nsorting in Japanese much better than I can.\n\n**TL;DR:** Kanatype insensitivity makes sorting Japanese text more intuitive\nand should generally always be enabled unless you have a reason not to.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T23:14:31.707",
"id": "29625",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T15:11:54.950",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T15:11:54.950",
"last_editor_user_id": "11858",
"owner_user_id": "11858",
"parent_id": "29612",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 29612 | null | 29625 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29644",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「俺焼き豚頼んでないですよ」 \n> 店主であり違法改造バイク夢五萬のライダーである高田くんのお兄さんは、 **菜ばしを“サービス”という形に動かした** 。\n>\n> \"I did not order pork loin.\" \n> Takada's brother, who is the shop owner and rides an illegally modified\n> motorcycle \"Dream50000\", said the chopsticks were \"service\" and moved them\n> to that shape?\n\nWhat does that bold part mean?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T15:58:08.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29613",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T17:43:50.480",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "XをYという形に sentence",
"view_count": 393
} | [
{
"body": "Well, you figured it out, but I'll make a proper answer since nobody else\nseems to be writing one.\n\n> 高田くんのお兄さんは、菜ばしを“サービス”という形に動かした。\n>\n> 高田くんのお兄さんは _Takada's brother_ -- subject\n>\n> 菜ばしを _chopsticks_ -- object\n>\n> 動かした _moved_ -- verb\n>\n> 高田くんのお兄さんは、菜ばしを動かした。 _Takada's brother moved (his) chopsticks_\n>\n> “サービス”という[形]{かたち}に _into the shape of_ 「サービス」\n\nサービス means 'freebie' in this context. He was making a gesture with his\nchopsticks to inform that the food was \"on the house\".\n\nWhat that gesture looks like, I don't know. If someone happens to know, please\ncomment.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T17:43:50.480",
"id": "29644",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T17:43:50.480",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "6820",
"parent_id": "29613",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29613 | 29644 | 29644 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29690",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 類は友を呼ぶじゃないけどね、やっぱり実際使って直接肌で感じる冒険者の方が、 **その武具に思うことはいっぱいあるみたい。**\n\nI'm having trouble interpreting this part of the sentence. What does に思う do\nhere? Does その武具に思うこと mean something like: \"Thoughts about the armor\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T20:54:49.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29619",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-14T18:42:34.993",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-14T18:42:34.993",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "10316",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Trouble interpreting に思う in その武具に思うことはいっぱいあるみたい",
"view_count": 947
} | [
{
"body": "Your interpretation is correct. This `〜に思うこと` is equivalent to `〜に対して思うこと`.\n\n> 実際使って直接肌で感じる冒険者の方が、その武具に思うことはいっぱいあるみたい。 \n> _It seems that adventurers who actually use and experience it firsthand\n> have more thoughts about that armor._\n\nI can't grasp the full context from this excerpt, but 思うことがある often implies\ncritical, nuanced, or complicated thoughts/feelings.\n\nSimilar uses:\n\n * 上司 **に思うこと** はたくさんあるんだけど、なかなか言えない。\n * 私 **に思うこと** があったら、なんでも言ってください。\n * 戦争 **に思うこと** はいろいろある。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T19:14:12.060",
"id": "29690",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T19:19:43.003",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T19:19:43.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "888",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29619",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 29619 | 29690 | 29690 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Girl A is complaining about her bleak future to girl B. Girl B replies:\n\n> 泣いたって仕方ないじゃん。\n\nI asked a similar question\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/28999/adverb-followed-\nby-%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6) about おもしろくって仕方ない where I was told that it was a more\nemphatic version of おもしろくて仕方ない\n\nI'm struggling to apply similar thinking to this construction.\n\nIs って short for という in this case?\n\nI don't know how to translate this sentence at all (note that there is no\nsuggestion that the girl was crying before this sentence).\n\n> I can't stand that you cried, can I? \n> It's no use that you cried is it?\n\nNeither of these attempts sounds right. Please help.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T21:38:37.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29620",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T23:40:07.177",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"colloquial-language",
"i-adjectives",
"particle-って"
],
"title": "Past tense verb followed by って仕方ない",
"view_count": 131
} | []
| 29620 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to play around with words I know already to form simple sentences\nand I thought of making short sentences using the verbs 行きます and 前記{ぜんき} (it\nshould mean \"said\"; I only use Google translate, because that's the only\ntranslator I could use for Japanese. Suggestions on a better one will be\nappreciated.)\n\nSo, here's my example sentence in English:\n\n> And he said, 'Do I go to the store?' \n> I said 'Yes.' He went.\n\nHere's what I written in Japanese:\n\n> と 彼は 前記 「私は みせ へ 行きます か。」 \n> 私 前記「はい。」彼 行きました。\n\nIs this correct?\n\nIf you type using Kanji in your answer, please show Hiragana next to it in\nparenthesis, too. (I do not know a lot of Kanji yet.)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T21:42:59.260",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29621",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-01T15:56:16.060",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-02T22:23:15.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11855",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "I need help with an example sentence",
"view_count": 220
} | [
{
"body": "This is very close to a question on translation and may get closed. You should\ntry to ask more specific questions if possible, but I'll try to give you a few\npointers.\n\n1) The verb 'to say' is 言{い}う. Past tense is 言{い}った.\n\n2) When you want to quote something e.g I said \"....\" then you use the quote\nmarker と after the quote (note that this is very different from the と which\nmeans 'and'.\n\n> 「はい。行{い}きました」と言{い}った。 \n> I said, \"Yes. He went\".\n\nNote that you do not need to say 'He' in the quote. The previous sentence asks\n\"Did **he** go\" so we know that the topic of the conversation is 'he'. It is\nunnatural in Japanese to repeat the topic when it is already clear.\n\n3) Verbs go at the **end** of sentences.\n\n4) と does mean 'and' but it is used for exhaustive lists. It cannot be used to\nmean 'and then...'. そして or something similar should be used for that.\n\nIn summary, I think there are a quite a few basic concepts that you need to\nlearn before you can start constructing sentences like this. Japanese grammar\nis **very** diffferent fom English grammar and just translating the individual\nwords and putting them in the same order as English will not work most of the\ntime. Finally, don't ever rely in Google translate it is rarely correct. Good\nluck in your studies.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T22:28:50.320",
"id": "29622",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-02T22:28:50.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "29621",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "There are a few things I must point out that are probably the fault of Google\nTranslate:\n\n“And” as in “and he said…” is a conjunction in English, which should be\ntranslated to something like 後{あと}で or そして. The particle と is solely for\nnouns, as in 犬{いぬ}と猫{ねこ} “dogs and cats.”\n\n前記 means said as in aforementioned, not “did say”\n\n> The said company has gone bankrupt. (The aforementioned company has gone\n> bankrupt).\n\nNow to the grammar point you need to know: verbs come at the end of the\nclause, and when we say someone says or thinks something, we need the quoting\nparticle と (not the “and” と)\n\nSo, the correct sentence for you English would be as follows:\n\n> そして、彼{かれ}は「(私{わたし}は)店{みせ}へ行{い}きますか」と言{い}った。\n\n> 私{わたし}は「はい」と(言{い}った)。彼{かれ}が行{い}きました。\n\nThe parts in brackets are the parts that can be omitted in speech, but are\nneeded for complete and grammatical Japanese. Note that I used 言{い}った, which\nis タメ語(non honorific) for 言{い}いました. If you are just beginning, you will learn\nthe latter first.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-07-31T23:26:45.477",
"id": "88697",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-01T15:56:16.060",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-01T15:56:16.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "39855",
"owner_user_id": "39855",
"parent_id": "29621",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29621 | null | 88697 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the scenes of fight in old stories, I sometimes encountered a phrase\n～やまさりけん usually in the compound form:\n\n> 力やまさりけん \n> 腕やまさりけん\n\nWhat is the exact meaning of the phrase and what part of the sentence is it?\n\n> 太郎 **の力やまさりけん** 突き出した槍は相手の体に突っ込んできた。\n\nAt first I assumed it was 勝り{まさり}剣, but in the above example it was used in a\nspear fighting scene and it does not seem to work grammatically. It seems\nneither an adverb nor an adjective.\n\nAlso, shouldn't comma be used after まさりけん in the above example?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-02T22:44:06.350",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29623",
"last_activity_date": "2022-02-18T02:12:26.703",
"last_edit_date": "2022-02-18T02:12:26.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "50401",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"idioms",
"auxiliaries",
"archaic-language"
],
"title": "What is ～やまさりけん and what part of sentence is it used as?",
"view_count": 276
} | [
{
"body": "まさりけん is 連用形 of the verb \"勝{まさ}る\" + an old verbal auxiliary \"けん\".\n\nけん means past guess like ～ただろう, so まさりけん is translated as 勝{まさ}っただろう. And\nけむ=けん.\n\nI first think や was used as a tone of the word including light emotion in this\ncase but as choco-san said, や was used as question, so 力やまさりけん is translated\nas 力が勝ったのだろうか.\n\nIf a comma was used after まさりけん, it might be easy to understand but I think it\nis no problem without it.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-12T09:40:21.440",
"id": "29821",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-12T14:42:43.903",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-12T14:42:43.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29623 | null | 29821 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29638",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This word/set of words/whatever it is popped up in something I am reading, and\nI cannot find any clue as to what it is referencing. The book is a taiko\nperformer's biography, and this is the very last sentence of the introduction,\nwhere he is reminiscing about Sado Island and his deep connection to it.\n\nThe sentence in question:\n\n> 真野湾沖に三二の漁火を数えた夜、ケステンGチンキをぬりながら・・・佐渡で\n\nI know the beginning is something along the lines of \"The night that I counted\n32 fish-luring flames out on Mano Bay,\" and I assume 「ぬりながら」is \"while\npainting...\", but even if I assumed 「ケステンGチンキ」were the name of some kind of\npaint, or a reference to coloring on the water, I don't really understand what\nthis phrase is trying to convey.\n\nHere's the rest of the paragraph for context:\n\n> この本は、一九八四年一月から月刊「鼓童」に不定期連載されはじめ八五年七月\n> で一二回（一打）になったー表題の『万里の未知も一打から』と、八二年・三年季刊「鼓童」に載った太鼓の話三編をまとめたものです。ウンコがながめた金魚のお話、最後のページまでお付き合い願えれば幸いです。真野湾沖に三二の漁火を数えた夜、ケステンGチンキをぬりながら・・・佐渡で\n\nThank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T00:17:02.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29627",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T12:02:46.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3585",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "What is 「ケステンGチンキ」 a reference to?",
"view_count": 138
} | [
{
"body": "I googled 「ケステン チンキ」 and found this:\n\n> 浅在性白癬に対するKestenチンキの治験\n\n[https://mol.medicalonline.jp/archive/search?jo=ai6yrtyb&ye=1978&vo=6&issue=6](https://mol.medicalonline.jp/archive/search?jo=ai6yrtyb&ye=1978&vo=6&issue=6)\n\nMaybe 「ケステンGチンキ」 is a kind of antifungal medications: cream for tinea.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T11:56:57.323",
"id": "29638",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T12:02:46.750",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T12:02:46.750",
"last_editor_user_id": "11802",
"owner_user_id": "11802",
"parent_id": "29627",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29627 | 29638 | 29638 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29666",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Japanese - English dictionaries translate both as \"misunderstanding\" or \"wrong\nguess.\" Upon consulting dictionary.goo.ne.jp, I found:\n\n誤解 - When the facts and the true intentions of a partner's words and deeds are\nshown to differ. Seems like when a fact was thought to do one thing and it\ndoes another.\n\n勘違い - When the facts differ with one's understanding of the situation. Seems\nto be when you think something looks some way and in fact it is another.\n\nBoth seem to be pretty similar and probably are just versions of the same. On\nWeblio both seem to have similar meanings and example. Is there any particular\nnuance or are they both basically the same, like 誤る and 間違える?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T04:17:08.013",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29630",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T21:49:34.540",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T04:31:17.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "6881",
"owner_user_id": "6881",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning",
"usage",
"nuances",
"dictionary"
],
"title": "Difference between 誤解 and 勘違い",
"view_count": 1274
} | [
{
"body": "There is certainly some overlap, but there is a difference.\n\nIn general, 誤解 is to misunderstand, whereas 勘違い is often about misreading or\nmisremembering. So 誤解 can sometimes be deeply entangled and hard to fix, while\nmany 勘違い are simple “Oops!” type mistakes that are obvious in hindsight.\n\nThe “misremembering” kind of 勘違い is never called a 誤解. For example, if an\ninvitation clearly said 9am but you misremembered it as 10am and showed up\nlate, that is a 勘違い.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T21:49:34.540",
"id": "29666",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T21:49:34.540",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 29630 | 29666 | 29666 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29651",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been using [online](http://www.gavo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/ojad/phrasing/index)\n[tools](http://www.gavo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/ojad/eng/search/index) to learn the\npitch-accent rules that affect verb and adjective conjugation, and memorising\nthe rules that govern how conjugation affects the location of the accent in\nwords.\n\nFor example, there seems to be a rule that the gerundive (-te) and the past\n(-ta) conjugations shift the accent forwards one position to the syllable that\ncontains the antepenultimate mora.\n\nIt seems also that auxiliary verbs such as the causative (-Caseru) and the\npassive (-Careru) carry accent on the syllable that contains their penultimate\nmorae.\n\nMy question is whether the accent still moves forward one position in the\ngerundive and past conjugations of auxiliary verbs such as the causative and\nthe past. For example, would \"腫れさせられꜜる\" -> \"腫れさせらꜜれた\" be the correct position\nof the accent?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T06:19:47.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29632",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T13:23:58.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11459",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"conjugations",
"pitch-accent"
],
"title": "Location of pitch-accent on conjugated auxiliary verbs",
"view_count": 994
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, the accent still moves forward one position in the gerundive and past\nconjugations of auxiliary verbs such as the causative and the past. \nI will give an example as follows. \n\n> 書く{HL} ; 書かれる{LHHL} ; 書かせる{LHHL} ; 書かせられる{LHHHHL}\n>\n> 書かない{LHLL} ; 書かれない{LHHLL} ; 書かせない{LHHLL} ; 書かせられない{LHHHHLL}\n>\n> 書いて{HLL} ; 書かれて{LHLL} ; 書かせて{LHLL} ; 書かせられて{LHHHLL}\n>\n> 書いた{HLL} ; 書かれた{LHLL} ; 書かせた{LHLL} ; 書かせられた{LHHHLL}\n\n書{か}く has the accent fall originally, so if ''-られる'' or ''-させる'' is put on the\nverb, the accent fall still exists. \n \nWhile, ''腫{は}れる'', which is given as example in the question, doesn't have\naccent fall. Even if ''られる'', ''させる'', or ''させられる'' is put on a verb without\nany accent fall such as ''腫れる'', accent fall still does not exist. \n \n\n> 腫れる{LHH} ; 腫れさせる{LHHHH} ; 腫れさせられる {LHHHHHH} \n> \n> 腫れない{LHHH} ; 腫れさせない{LHHHHH} ; 腫れさせられない{LHHHHHHH}\n>\n> 腫れて{LHH} ; 腫れさせて{LHHHH} ; 腫れさせられて{LHHHHHH}\n>\n> 腫れた{LHH} ; 腫れさせた{LHHHH} ; 腫れさせられた{LHHHHHH} \n>\n\nYou can consider verbs with ''られる'' and ''させる'' as just verbs Group2 such as\n''[食]{た}べる'', ''[開]{あ}ける'' in behavior of accent rule. \nThat is,\n\n> When the verb has the accent fall, [...(ら)れる]{LHHHHHHL},\n> [...(ら)れない]{LHHHHHHLL}, [...(ら)れた]{LHHHHHLL}, [...(ら)れて]{LHHHHHLL}\n>\n> It's the same pattern as 食べる{LHL} , 食べない{LHLL}, 食べた{HLL}, 食べて{HLL} \n>\n\nor\n\n> When the verb doesn't have accent fall, [...(ら)れる]{LHHHHHHH},\n> [...(ら)れない]{LHHHHHHHH}, [...(ら)れた]{LHHHHHHH}, [...(ら)れて]{LHHHHHHH}\n>\n> It's the same pattern as 開ける{LHH} , 開けない{LHHH}, 開けた{LHH}, 開けて{LHH}\n\n* * *\n\n(added)\n\nGroup2 means verbs whose verb basees end with vowel, such as 食{た}べる, 寝{ね}る,\n着{き}る , 恥{は}じる. \n \nWhile, these words as follows are categorized in another group, that is called\nGroup1 in Japanese education. \nしゃべる, 練{ね}る, 切{き}る, 走{はし}る, 書{か}く, 待{ま}つ, 飛{と}ぶ...etc. \n \nする and 来{く}る are called Group3, each of which has irregular pattern of the\ninflection.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T03:53:41.350",
"id": "29651",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T13:23:58.397",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-04T13:23:58.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "11654",
"owner_user_id": "11654",
"parent_id": "29632",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29632 | 29651 | 29651 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29637",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was working through my N5 sentential grammar (sentence composition) practice\nbook, and there was a question with an adverb, おおごえで （大声で）:\n\n> 山を のぼりながら おおごえ ＿＿＿ ＿＿＿ ＿＿＿ ＿＿＿ 人も いました。\n>\n> １ うた ２ うたう ３ を ４ で\n\nThe answer given is below:\n\n> (A) 山を のぼりながら **おおごえ ＿で＿** ＿うた＿ ＿を＿ ＿うたう＿ 人も いました。\n\nHowever, I was thinking perhaps the adverb おおごえで should be placed before the\nverb うたう since the person was **singing loudly** ( _loudly_ modifying _to\nsing_ ). The resulting sentence would be:\n\n> (B) 山を のぼりながら うた を **おおごえ で** うたう 人も いました。\n\n 1. Which sentence is correct, A or B?\n 2. Also, are there any differences in nuance between A and B? Thank you!\n\n*I am aware of a related question being posted before (see below), but the adverb in that post was a time frequency adverb and it was easy to see how the scope of that kind of adverb changes with its placement. With おおごえで, the matter is an entirely different one, I suspect.\n\n[Can placements of adverbs be altered\nfreely?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/823/can-placements-of-\nadverbs-be-altered-freely)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T06:52:43.310",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29634",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T05:00:22.047",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"syntax",
"jlpt",
"adverbs",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Placement of adverbs",
"view_count": 612
} | [
{
"body": "\"大声で\" isn't an adverb, but rather a noun followed by the particle で, which\nindicates the means by which something is done. The difference is like the\nEnglish \"There was even a person who was singing _in a loud voice_ while\nclimbing the mountain\" vs. \"There was even a person who was singing _loudly_\nwhile climbing the mountain\". \"大声で\" is better thought of as the former.\n\nAs far as word order is concerned, unmarked word order places the instrumental\ncase (nouns marked with で) before the accusative case (nouns marked with を).\n\n\"歌を大声で歌う\" would be marked word order, placing a special emphasis on the fact\nthat the song is being sung in a loud voice. Most songs are probably sung\nloudly while climbing a mountain, so there's no special emphasis on this fact.\n\nHowever, you're right in thinking that an adverb (or a verb or adjective used\nadverbially) would be typically placed immediately before the verb in a\nsentence with unmarked word order. Something like that might be \"歌をやかましく歌う\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T09:27:12.943",
"id": "29637",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T09:35:53.960",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-03T09:35:53.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "11459",
"owner_user_id": "11459",
"parent_id": "29634",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 29634 | 29637 | 29637 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29647",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is the sentence containing the word.\n\n> おことわりだね おまえみたいな 弱｛よわ｝ **っぴい** と組むなんて！\n>\n> やるんなら おれひとりでやらあ。\n\nIn my opinion, I think it would be transformation of the word 弾き or 'player'\nbut I'm not uncertain if it is correct because the word ends with 「い」. I have\nsearched on some dictionary sites but there is no one describing about it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T07:22:11.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29635",
"last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T06:06:42.820",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"words",
"colloquial-language",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "What does the word 「っぴい」 mean?",
"view_count": 696
} | [
{
"body": "We sometimes say 弱っちい in stead of 弱々しい. I think 弱っぴい is a transformation of\n弱っちい.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T07:58:02.040",
"id": "29636",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T07:58:02.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29635",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "`～っぴ`/`～っち` is a sort of \"suffix\" which generates cute-sounding nicknames.\nThink of it as an rough equivalent of `-ie` as in _doggie_ , _walkie-talkie_ ,\netc.\n\n * へたっぴ (下手【へた】 + っぴ, clumsy person)\n * [けろけろけろっぴ](http://www.sanrio.co.jp/character/keroppi/) (けろけろ + っぴ)\n * [たまごっち](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamagotchi) (たまご + っち)\n\n弱っぴい itself is not common (probably I haven't seen this before), but it should\nsimply mean \"weak boy/guy\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T23:47:08.150",
"id": "29647",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-03T23:47:08.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29635",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 29635 | 29647 | 29647 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to Genki II, \"any causative verb can be interpreted either with the\n\" _make_ somebody do\" reading or the \" _let_ somebody do\" reading\".\n\nIn English, it's not uncommon to hear a construction such as \"Let it drop\" or\n\"Make him do it\". So are there constructions such as 「落ちさせて」?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T18:19:14.433",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29645",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-11T10:23:39.850",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-11T10:23:39.850",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11863",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"causation"
],
"title": "Is it possible to make a V-causative-te construction?",
"view_count": 374
} | [
{
"body": "I do not know what “causative verb” means in your book, but judging from the\n落ちさせる example, I assume that it means verbs with -せる/させる suffix such as 遊ばせる\nand 片付けさせる. (使役動詞 in Japanese usually means a different form: it means verbs\nsuch as 落ちさす, 遊ばす, and 片付けさす.)\n\nThen you can just use them in the imperative form with -て. A child may say to\ntheir parents:\n\n> 宿題が終わったらテレビゲームで遊ばせて。 Let me play a video game after I finish homework.\n\nIf a father always cleans his child’s room, a mother may say to him:\n\n> 遥に自分で片付けさせて。 Make Haruka clean up her own room.\n\n“Let it drop.” in English _would_ be 落ちさせて in Japanese if we only considered\ngrammar, but we just do not say it that way. If “let it drop” means something\nlike “do not worry about it,” it is usually just 気にしないで or 放っておいて.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T09:31:38.463",
"id": "29679",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T09:31:38.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15",
"parent_id": "29645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29645 | null | 29679 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29652",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does マナーもいっしょに「携帯」 mean?\n\nThis is the title of an article in J501 that talks about how people should\nwatch when and where they use their cellphones. I get the text but can't make\nsense of the title. Is there any way to say this in natural English?\n\nI also can't make sense of the related マナーもいっしょに携帯しましょう. \"Let's have our\nmanners also cellphone together\" is my best guess, but it's definitely not\nvery usable English.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-03T23:46:28.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29646",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T05:15:19.110",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-04T00:28:03.387",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does マナーもいっしょに「携帯」 mean?",
"view_count": 241
} | [
{
"body": "[From goo辞書](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/66822/meaning/m0u/)\n\n> けい‐たい【携帯】\n>\n> ［名］(スル)\n>\n> 1. 身につけたり、手に持ったりすること。「非常食を―する」\n> 2. 《「ケータイ」と書くことが多い》「携帯電話」の略。\n>\n\n\"携帯する\" as a verb, means to carry something portable, like a mobile phone (see\nnumber 1 above).\n\nThe sentence is a bit of a\n[pun](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/136473/meaning/m0u/%E3%83%80%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A3%E3%83%AC/),\nwhere it uses the word \"携帯\" to not mean \"mobile phone\" (where it can, and very\noften does), at the same time as the adjective \"いっしょに\" is referring to the\nomitted and implied \"携帯\" (in this case, meaning \"mobile phone\").\n\nThe sentence basically means: \"don't forget your manners\" or [\"carry your\nmanners along with your mobile\nphone\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/29646/what-\ndoes-%E3%83%9E%E3%83%8A%E3%83%BC%E3%82%82%E3%81%84%E3%81%A3%E3%81%97%E3%82%87%E3%81%AB-%E6%90%BA%E5%B8%AF-\nmean#comment61572_29646).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T05:15:19.110",
"id": "29652",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T05:15:19.110",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "29646",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29646 | 29652 | 29652 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was playing The Legend of Zelda, the Ocarina of Time, and the great deku\ntree says 「今{いま}、ハイラルはその力{ちから}に飲{の}み込{こ}まれようとしておる。。。」, which as far as I can\ntell means \"Right now, Hyrule is being swallowed up by this power.\" It seems,\nhowever, to be worded as though it meant \"Right now, Hyrule is trying to be\nswallowed up by this power\" because it uses 「ようとして」, which I've been told\nmeans that somebody is trying to do the verb in question.\n\nWho is trying to do what in this scenario/why is it worded this way?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T02:48:29.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29648",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T03:50:24.260",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-04T03:50:24.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "7214",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"volitional-form"
],
"title": "Why is the 「ようとして」 construct used here?",
"view_count": 601
} | [
{
"body": "It is a stylistic way of saying that something is about to happen.\n\nHyrule is not yet swallowed up, nor is it being swallowed up, but it is in a\nstate where it is about to be swallowed up.\n\nEssentially, it is \"on the brink\" of entering the new state which is\ndescribed.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T03:02:36.017",
"id": "29649",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T03:02:36.017",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "29648",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It's definition ⑦ in 大辞林, under\n[助動詞「よう」](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%82%88%E3%81%86&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_you_-170):\n\n> ⑦ （「ようとする」の形で）それが実現する直前であることを表す。 「家を出ようとするところに，電話がかかってきた」 「助成金がうち切られようとしている」\n\nThe key word here is 直前. In your example, その力に飲み込まれる is something that's\n_about_ to happen.\n\nThis meaning of 〜(よ)うとする is distinct from the volitional meaning you describe.\nHow do you know which one works? Well, I hope it's clear that その力に飲み込まれる\nexpresses a _non-volitional_ situation, so the volitional meaning isn't\ncompatible with it. On the other hand, this \"about to do/about to happen\"\nmeaning _is_ compatible with non-volitional situations, so it makes sense\nhere.\n\nYou can find the same meaning under\n[助動詞「う」](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E3%81%86&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_u_-150),\nof course:\n\n> ⑥ （「うとする」の形で）それが実現する直前であることを表す。 「叫ぼうとして目が覚めた」 「まさに沈もうとする夕日」\n\nIt's the same ending, but う and よう are categorized as separate auxiliaries in\nJapanese school grammar and in monolingual dictionaries.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T03:02:53.570",
"id": "29650",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T03:02:53.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "29648",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 29648 | null | 29650 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29656",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In Emperor Hirohito's announcement of the end of World War II, there was a\nsection that's been\n[translated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyokuon-h%C5%8Ds%C5%8D#Full_text)\ninto English as \"not necessarily to Japan’s advantage\".\n\n> But now the war has lasted for nearly four years. Despite the best that has\n> been done by everyone – the gallant fighting of the military and naval\n> forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the\n> devoted service of Our one hundred million people – the war situation has\n> developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of\n> the world have all turned against her interest.\n\nThe phrase has sometimes been interpreted as an understatement, for example\n[this blog post](http://www.eamonn.com/2015/08/14/the-war-situation-has-\ndeveloped-not-necessarily-to-japans-advantage/) interpreted it that way.\n\nI came across a blog post\n[saying](http://keywords.oxus.net/archives/2007/12/22/understatement/) that\nmaybe the statement was difficult to translate accurately, but I don't know\nhow expert the person being quoted by the blog post is.\n\nI'm aware that the Japanese used in the speech is very different from everyday\nJapanese. I'm not interested in learning how to understand the Japanese used\nin that speech, but knowing whether understatement is used in Japanese.\n\nWas \"not necessarily to Japan’s advantage\" meant to be an understatement?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T11:39:10.213",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29654",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T13:26:43.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"rhetoric"
],
"title": "Was \"not necessarily to Japan’s advantage\" meant to be an understatement?",
"view_count": 347
} | [
{
"body": "> 喫緊の間かつ極めて秘密裡に作業が行われたため、起草、正本の作成に充分な時間がなく、また詔書の内容を決める閣議において、\n> **戦争継続を求める一部の軍部の者によるクーデターを恐れた陸軍大臣・阿南惟幾が「戦局日ニ非（あらざる）ニシテ」の改訂を求め、「戦局必スシモ好転セス」に改められる**\n> など、最終段階まで字句の修正が施された。[(source)](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8E%89%E9%9F%B3%E6%94%BE%E9%80%81#.E7.B5.82.E6.88.A6.E8.A9.94.E6.9B.B8)\n\nSo, the original line was more direct:\n\n> 戦局日ニ非（あらざる）ニシテ \n> →（現代訳）日に日に劣勢になっていく \n> →it's getting worse every day \n>\n\nAnd the War Minister Anami Korechika, fearing a coup d'etat from military\nwanting to continue the war, argued to change this. In the end it was changed\nto the more understated 戦局必スシモ好転セス (=not necessarily going to our advantage).\n\nIt's clear that the \"not necessarily\" line is meant to be an understatement.\nThere was a more direct original line and this was changed to the final line\nin order to understate how badly the war was going.\n\n> 全文の15行目の「各々最善ヲ尽セルニ拘ラス戦局」の後の「日ニ非ニシテ」とあるのは **「これでは負け戦だ」として**\n> 「必ズシモ好転セズ」と書き換えられ、[(source)](http://www2u.biglobe.ne.jp/%7Eakiyama/no212.htm)\n\n* * *\n\nEdit: This source mixes historical analysis with talk about the film\n『日本のいちばん長い日』 but it shows that the final line is meant to understate how badly\nthe war is going (and why):\n\n>\n> 映画の中でも閣議決定の際の意見対立は重要な場面です。詔書案として挙がってきた「戦勢日に非にして」という字句をめぐって、阿南陸相は頑として「戦局好転せず」と訂正すべきだと主張するのです。\n> **曰く、個々の戦闘には負けたが、戦争の勝負はついていない。国のために戦って死んでいった者たちに対し、またいまだに戦っている部下たちに対し、何と申し訳が立つ！\n> 戦局が悪化の一途をたどっているのは事実かもしれないが、この原案では従来の大本営発表（退却を転戦とカムフラージュして戦果を強調してきた等々）がすべて虚構であったことになる……。**\n>\n>\n> 〈陸相はこの一点に関するかぎり強硬で、たとえ孤立無援であろうと、譲ろうとはしなかった。最後のときにおよんで、なにが彼をこれほどまで強引にさせているのかと、閣僚たちが訝（いぶか）しく思うほどに、毅然として、自説を主張しつづけた。\n> **やがて閣僚たちも陸相の辛い立場を理解するようになった。彼がもっともおそれていたのは部下の暴挙である〉** （『日本のいちばん長い日\n> 決定版』文春文庫）\n>\n> なんだ、組織防衛と体面の問題か、と言うこともできるでしょうが、当時の“歴史的現在”に身をおいてみれば、建軍以来、\n> **一度も敗戦を知らない帝国陸軍を率い、しかもいったん聖断が下った以上、何としても部下を絶望的な混乱から救い、彼らに“栄光ある敗北”を与えなければならない、**\n> という阿南の必死の努力とジレンマがここにありました。結局、この箇所は大論争の末に「戦局必ずしも好転せず」で決着します。[(source)](http://www.shinchosha.co.jp/kangaeruhito/mailmag_html/643.html)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T12:28:00.530",
"id": "29656",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T13:26:43.533",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3010",
"parent_id": "29654",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29654 | 29656 | 29656 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29661",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So in my N4 textbook, I have the following explanation for a grammatical\nconstruct:\n\n> Noun + なら: \n> Use \"〜なら\" when you say that options are no good, but \"〜\" is possible, okay\n> or not a problem. \n>\n\nThe examples don't make a lot of sense, so I go and google なら. All I can find\nis stuff about how なら is a particle used to express conditionals, i.e. it's\none of the ways of saying what 'if' says in English. This is a meaning of the\nなら particle that I'm familiar with. I can't find anything about any other\nmeanings of なら.\n\nCan someone explain what my book is on about? Is this related to なら's 'if'\nmeaning, or is it an entirely different word/meaning completely?\n\nThe book examples are:\n\n> 1) 日曜日 **なら** 時間が取れるから、いっしょに買い物にいこうよ。\n\nI think this is supposed to mean - I have time on Sunday, let's go shopping\ntogether. The なら supposedly implying that days other than Sunday are no good.\n\n> 2) A: 今度のパーティーでつうやくをしてもらえませんか。 \n> B: すみません。手紙のほんやく **なら** できますが、つうやくはちょっと...。\n\nSo now it's lost me, I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, and what なら\nis doing here.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T12:10:26.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29655",
"last_activity_date": "2019-10-16T13:41:10.070",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-04T23:14:25.353",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11873",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"conditionals",
"auxiliaries"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of Noun + なら",
"view_count": 3549
} | [
{
"body": "なら means \"if\".\n\n> 1. 日曜日なら時間が取れるから、いっしょに買い物にいこうよ。 \n> Trans: If it's Sunday, ...\n>\n\nSo yes, he is specifically talking about Sunday being most optimal.\n\n> 2. すみません。手紙のほんやくならできますが、つうやくはちょっと...。 \n> Trans: I am sorry. If it's translation (of letter), I can do it but\n> interpretation is a bit (difficult, etc)...\n>\n\nHere, translation is no problem but interpretation is difficult.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T15:06:04.890",
"id": "29657",
"last_activity_date": "2019-01-27T13:52:33.203",
"last_edit_date": "2019-01-27T13:52:33.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10513",
"parent_id": "29655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Just to add to xeta217's answer, なら is used when the speaker is making an\nassertion about what has just been said (or about a current state).\n\nSo 日曜日なら has a feeling of \"If it's Sunday your talking about then...\" Likewise\n手紙のほんやくなら \"If it's letter translating then...\".\n\nA) 店に行く\n\nB) 店に行くなら、卵を買ってください。\n\nA) I'm going to the shop. B) Well _if it is the case that_ you're going to the\nshop then buy eggs please.\n\nSo when your book talks about an 'option being no good' it's not that なら has\nsome special meaning in this context. It's just that this form of 'if' is most\nappropriate. The condition is an assumption about what has been said.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T18:24:02.323",
"id": "29661",
"last_activity_date": "2019-10-16T13:41:10.070",
"last_edit_date": "2019-10-16T13:41:10.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "35728",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "29655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29655 | 29661 | 29657 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29667",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can read all of them but I'm not really sure what it means and what my\nfriend is sorry for?\n\nIs she saying she's sorry to be my neighbour...?\n\np.s we're playing a multiplayer game when she said this if that helps",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T15:37:16.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29658",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T23:53:33.700",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11874",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "お隣さんになって早々, 申し訳ないですうぅ~ means?",
"view_count": 139
} | [
{
"body": "In Japanese, apologies are sometimes expressions of humility, that can be\nreplaced with a \"thank you\". Essentially, apologizing is for whatever effort\nthe listener expended (or will expend) on behalf of the speaker.\n\nSo it is likely that the neighbor of yours apologized for something you did to\nhelp her ([as suggested in\ncomments](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/29658/%E3%81%8A%E9%9A%A3%E3%81%95%E3%82%93%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E6%97%A9%E3%80%85-%E7%94%B3%E3%81%97%E8%A8%B3%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%A7%E3%81%99%E3%81%86%E3%81%85-means#comment61584_29658)),\nor something you will or are expected to do. It depends a lot on the context.\n\nFor example, if this person moved into your neighborhood and shortly\nafterwards asked for help, or requested backup, resources or whatever game-\nmechanic is used in this multiplayer universe that is directly beneficial to\nthe receiver and non-beneficial (or not necessarily beneficial) to the giver,\nit would be appropriate to thank the giver. It can also be appropriate to\napologize to the giver, to show more humility.\n\nSo an effective translation might be:\n\n> \"Sorry to be such a burden on you right after moving in next door!\"\n\nor:\n\n> \"Thank you for helping me right after I moved in next door!\"\n\nor even:\n\n> \"Thanks in advance!\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T23:07:27.943",
"id": "29667",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T23:53:33.700",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"parent_id": "29658",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29658 | 29667 | 29667 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is the sentence including the word.\n\nわしはあの東光少年院にはいったが さいご とうてい 生きて 出られるような **気がせんのや** 。\n\nIt is said by Kansai spoken guy.\n\nI have tried to look on some Japanese dictionary web sites and found that the\nword that is close to the meaning in my opinion is 気がせく but I think it cannot\nbe conjugated to the form in the sentence above. The word would be 「気がせない」but\nI am uncertain about it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T17:40:18.917",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29659",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T04:38:13.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"words",
"kansai-ben"
],
"title": "What does the word 「気がせんのや」mean?",
"view_count": 305
} | [
{
"body": "気がせんのや means 気がしないのだ. や would be a Kansai form of だ, and せん is an alternative\nform of しない. As for why it's not しん, it's derived from せぬ, which in turn is\nderived from せず.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T18:02:46.267",
"id": "29660",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T18:02:46.267",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "29659",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Nothing at all already explained the question about 気がせんのや, but for your\ninformation, related to the last paragraph:\n\n> I have […] found that the word that is close to the meaning in my opinion is\n> 気がせく but I think it cannot be conjugated to the form in the sentence above.\n> The word would be 「気がせない」 but I am uncertain about it.\n\nthe negative form of せく (急く) is せかない (or せかん if you use the negative ん), not\nせん or せない.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T04:38:13.457",
"id": "29674",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T04:38:13.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15",
"parent_id": "29659",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29659 | null | 29660 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 「考えてもみなさいよ。 **ドリフでも** いつも決まって怒られるのはカトちゃんでしょ」 \n> Try to think about it. The one who always, without fail, gets scolded is\n> カトちゃん. Right?\n\nI haven't the faintest idea what ドリフでも means in this sentence. I can only\nguess that ドリフ is a person's name and I have completely mangled the\ntranslation. If it is a name though, I can't come up with a translation that\nmakes sense. Thanks.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T19:50:56.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29662",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-04T19:50:56.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of ドリフ in this sentence",
"view_count": 166
} | []
| 29662 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29670",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm struggling to understand the meaning of the phrase 「どちらがどうとかいう」 in the\nfollowing passage.\n\n> 彼女のことが好き、という昔の気持ちは、多分、ちゃんと残っている。一緒にいる仲間という気持ちは、強く残っている。\n>\n> でも一瞬だけ。\n>\n> 「・・・・・・」\n>\n> 一瞬だけ、頭の中にもう一人の顔もよぎる。\n>\n> それに自分でも驚く。別に **どちらがどうとかいう**\n> んじゃないのだけど。でも、まだそんなことをまるで考えたことがなかったから。自分を好きな女の子がいて、それを自分も好きになって、それでどうするとか、どうなるかとか、そんなことを真剣に考えたりするほど大人じゃなかった自分に、驚く。\n\nIf I'm to translate 「どちらがどう」 word by word, it would be - \"which is how\". So in\na way this whole sentence seems to me something like - \"Not that it matters.\".\n\nI've also tried to look for more examples -\n[1st](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1443525144),\n[2nd](https://twitter.com/iwatacoffee/status/658430710575792128). Which, to me\nlooks sort of similar to my example. But in the\n[3rd](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q147020374)\nexample, it seems that the questioner asks more detailed information(or rather\npoints of attention) about buying or borrowing 成人式の振袖.\n\nCould someone please give me more detailed information about this phrase?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-04T20:46:43.473",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29663",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T01:33:24.630",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Meaning of phrase 「どちらがどうとかいう」",
"view_count": 840
} | [
{
"body": "As you've correctly inferred, 「どちらがどう」 in literal terms translates to \"which\nis how.\" Then it follows that 「どちらがどうとかいう」 means \"to say which is how\" ― in\nother words (with a bit of a leap?), \"to make comparative judgements between\ntwo things/people.\"\n\nIn context, 「別にどちらがどうとかいうんじゃないのだけど。」would suggest that the speaker is not\ncomparing, or unable to compare, the two love interests of his, or that he\njust doesn't know which girl he likes better.\n\nIn the 振袖 example, 「どちらがどうとかありますか？」is asking for a comparison between buying\nand renting one, the pros and cons of each option, to help the inquirer make\nthe right choice.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T01:15:33.447",
"id": "29669",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T01:15:33.447",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "29663",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "どちらがどう refers to the difference between options, and as an extension, to some\nunspecified intention or feeling resulting from the difference. So in your\nexample text the speaker is saying he has no particular intention or\ndifference in how he feels about the two girls. It's hard to pinpoint what it\nactually means and this is intentional. It's used to avoid appearing to be\ndirect/crass.\n\nThe usage in your \"1st example\" is very similar. The speaker is essentially\nsaying \"I'm not interested in finding out who was wrong\", but doesn't even\nwant to appear he/she is raising that point, so the expression is used instead\nof \"どちらが間違っていたか知りたい訳ではないのですが\" to avoid using those more specific words.\n\nThe usage in your \"2nd example\" and \"3rd example\" is more practical. In the\n2nd example it simply means \"Putting the actual arguments aside, this kind of\nanalysis is interesting\". In the 3rd example it's simply used to mean \"are\nthere any difference?\".\n\nA similar expression is \"どうこうしようっていうんじゃない\", whose literal translation is \"I\ndon't intend to impose some unspecified things onto you\", but the expression\nhas actually the effect (and the intent) of intimidating the listener, because\nit implies the speaker has some unspecified power to cause some unspecified\nthings (harm)!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T01:33:24.630",
"id": "29670",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T01:33:24.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "29663",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29663 | 29670 | 29669 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29680",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "An N5 vocabulary question I'm having trouble understanding:\n\n> わたしの となりの （ ） を かけた ひとは すずきさんです。\n>\n> １ くつ ２ かぎ ３ めがね ４ でんわ\n\nThe answer is 3: わたしの となりの （ **めがね** ） を かけた ひとは すずきさんです。\n\nWhich I construe as _The person beside me who wore glasses is Suzuki-san._\n\nHowever, what is stopping 4 from being a valid answer?\n\n> わたしの となりの （ **でんわ** ） を かけた ひとは すずきさんです。\n\nI interpret this to be _The person beside me who made a call is Suzuki-san._\n\nA Google search of phrases in this question doesn't bring up anything helpful\nfor me. The book's explanation doesn't cut it too: 「となり **で** 電話を かけ **ている**\nひとは～」は◯。 Why must **で** and **かけている** be used?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T03:00:45.450",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29671",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T10:31:50.280",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T03:06:07.633",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"て-form",
"jlpt",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Use of かける (N5 question)",
"view_count": 1097
} | [
{
"body": "I think No.3 is better because I guess わたしのとなりの ～のひと means the situation of\nthe person.As you said 隣で電話をかけている人 is no problem because the action comes\nafter で like 公園で電話をかける.\n\nHowever I think it is difficult to judge the difference between the action and\nthe situation.I think 私の隣で電話をかけた人、私の隣で眼鏡をかけた人(the action of sporting a pair of\nglasses) are no problem.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T08:10:46.563",
"id": "29678",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T08:10:46.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29671",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "## かけた as Current State\n\nThis question is testing whether you understand how the seemingly past tense\nかけた can actually be describing the **current state** of a person. This kind of\nverb usage happens a lot with articles of clothing.\n\nThe correct translation is not “who **wore** glasses”, but rather:\n\n> The person beside me who **is wearing** glasses is Suzuki-san.\n\nめがねを **かけている** 人 or めがねを **かけた** 人 most often means the person who **has\nglasses on** , and not the person who is _in the process of putting on_\nglasses, nor the person who _has put on_ glasses at some point. Similarly,\n青いコートを着た人 usually just means _person in a blue coat_ , not _person who\n**wore** a blue coat_.\n\n## かけた as Past Action\n\nIn contrast, the かけた in でんわを **かけた** 人 clearly has a past tense meaning, i.e.\n_person who **made** a phonecall_.\n\nAs you point out, the でんわ choice is not ungrammatical per se (even though the\ncontext may be harder to imagine). However, the big hint is choice #2, かぎ.\nThis noun acts similarly to でんわ, in that かぎを **かけた** 人 means _person who\n**locked** (a door)_. Since you cannot have multiple correct answers, these\nchoices can be ruled out. Sadly, multiple choice questions often involve this\ntype of sleuthing and mind-reading.\n\n* * *\n\n> Why must で and かけている be used?\n\nThe textbook probably wanted to say that, in order to describe the person's\n**current state** and not an action done by them in the past, it must be\n電話をかけている人 ( _person who is making a phonecall_ ). Changing the となり **の** to\nとなり **で** is not necessary, although the meaning will be altered a bit:\n\n * 私のとなり **の** でんわをかけている人 _[person beside me] who is making a call_\n * 私のとなり **で** でんわをかけている人 _person who is [making a call beside me]_",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T10:31:50.280",
"id": "29680",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T10:31:50.280",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29671",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29671 | 29680 | 29680 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29677",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I want to ask\n\n> What songs do you like?\n\nIs\n\n> なにをうたがすきですか？\n\nthe correct way of asking that?\n\nI am trying to get better at building sentences but I have no way of knowing\nwhether or not the sentence is correct, is it a problem if I continue to post\nquestions like this here?\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T06:09:58.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29675",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T12:56:35.897",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T12:55:57.563",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11827",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Is なにをうたがすきですか？ correct?",
"view_count": 159
} | [
{
"body": "[何]{なん}の[歌]{うた}が[好]{す}きですか? and どんな[歌]{うた}が[好]{す}きですか? are correct.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T06:15:55.220",
"id": "29676",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T06:59:49.680",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T06:59:49.680",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29675",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I will answer your to the best of my ability but it was just a stone's throw\nfrom when I was at your level. Let's look at your sentence.\n\n> なにをうたがすきですか?\n\n\"何{なに}を\" is marked as the direct obect, but there is no verb to take it. 好{す}き\nis an adjective and です is the copula, so you need to rephrase your sentence.\n\nどんな is OK since it means \"what kind (of)...\" so an acceptable sentence such as\n\n> どんな歌{うた}が好きですか?\n\nor\n\n> なんの歌が好きですか ?\n\nwould suit your needs.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T06:31:14.693",
"id": "29677",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T12:56:35.897",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T12:56:35.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11589",
"parent_id": "29675",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29675 | 29677 | 29677 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29711",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "People are discussing the characters in a comedy show and one of them asks\n\n> 高木ってとこじゃないの\n\nFrom the context I'm guessing it means \"You like Takagi, don't you?\"\n\nAgain the dreaded って. Don't know if it means は or という here. とこ means \"place\",\nand when I put it all together I get \"It's not a place called Takagi\"/\"Takagi\nis not a place\". Arghh!!!\n\n[This link](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/23562/what-are-the-\nmeanings-\nof-%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93-and-%E3%81%AD%E3%81%88%E3%81%A7-in-\nthis-sentence) looked promising but it didn't help in the end.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T12:49:27.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29682",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T15:39:42.347",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Meaning of nounってとこ",
"view_count": 2656
} | [
{
"body": "From\n[Weblio類語辞書](http://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93%E3%81%A0):\n\n> **ってとこだ**\n>\n> （意義素）ある物事を説明し、要するにそうであることを示す表現。\n>\n> （類語）そんな感じだ ・ そんな雰囲気だ ・ そんなとこだ\n\nFrom these definitions the literal sense could be rendered \"It's at/about...\"\n\n * 高木ってとこじゃないの？\n\nIs it about(lit: \"is (your mind) at\") Takagi？\n\n * 値段相応ってとこかな\n\nIt's all about/at matching value to money",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T15:11:49.190",
"id": "29683",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T05:44:12.243",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11489",
"parent_id": "29682",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "You are correct that it is a colloquial form of というところ. It doesn't literally\nmean _place_ , but perhaps you can think of it as “in that _vicinity_ ”.\n\nってとこ is often used when you are pretty sure, but not exactly sure:\n\n> Q: How heavy is that bag? \n> A: 5kg **ってとこ** だ ( _I'd say 5kg_ )\n>\n> Q: Who do you think she has a crush on? \n> A: 高木 **ってとこ** じゃないの？ ( _I bet it's Takagi, no?_ )\n>\n> Q: Why didn't he give me credit for my work? \n> A: 自分だけほめられたい **ってとこ** だろう ( _He wants all the praise, or something like\n> that._ )",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T15:39:42.347",
"id": "29711",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T15:39:42.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29682",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 29682 | 29711 | 29711 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29685",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've come across this phrase: \"１００歩譲って\". I couldn't find an explanation in\nEnglish as to what it means but it seems to be in use. I assume it's something\nlike \"let's suppose, for the sake of argument\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T15:36:35.687",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29684",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T16:18:59.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11731",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"phrases"
],
"title": "meaning of １００歩譲って",
"view_count": 336
} | [
{
"body": "Your understanding is correct. It suggests that even if part of the opposing\nargument is assumed true (by \"taking a hundred steps back\") the end result\nwon't change.\n\n * 百歩譲って、デモすれば安保法案が成立しないというのなら行きますよ。でも止まらないし、それはデモ参加者も多くが知っていることでしょう\n\nEven if I would also go there if going on the demonstration would mean the\nmilitary legislation won't be passed, (in reality) it still can't be stopped\nin any case and most of the demonstrators should know this too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T16:18:59.603",
"id": "29685",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T16:18:59.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11489",
"parent_id": "29684",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29684 | 29685 | 29685 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29710",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've seen the word 戸感 (or something similar) in a few visual novels, and i was\nable to find it also in some lyrics when i searched for it on\n[google](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%22%E6%88%B8%E6%84%9F%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&hl=ja#),\nbut i couldn't find it neither on [jdic](http://nihongo.monash.edu.au/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic?1MUJ%E6%88%B8%E6%84%9F),\n[goo](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/all/%E6%88%B8%E6%84%9F/m0u/) nor\n[alc](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E6%88%B8%E6%84%9F), and trying to\nunderstand it by the meaning of kanji doesn't make much sense...",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T16:52:14.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29686",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T13:52:44.133",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T18:46:32.113",
"last_editor_user_id": "10280",
"owner_user_id": "10280",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"meaning"
],
"title": "what is the actual word looking similar to 戸感",
"view_count": 392
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's the verb [戸惑]{とまど}う, \"to be puzzled / confused / disoriented\".\n[戸惑]{とまど}い is its noun form.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T13:52:44.133",
"id": "29710",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T13:52:44.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "29686",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29686 | 29710 | 29710 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 昨日雨が降っていた時 **に** 、私は家にいました。\n>\n> 昨日雨が降っていた時 **は** 、私は家にいました。\n\nHow do these two sentences differ in meaning? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T18:42:08.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29687",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T22:08:52.897",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T22:08:52.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "11883",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 時に and 時は",
"view_count": 1589
} | [
{
"body": "I don't think there is really much difference between the two sentences.\n\n昨日雨が降っていた時に \" **at** the time it was raining\".\n\n昨日雨が降っていた時は \" **As for** the time it was raining\"\n\nIn the second sentence \"the time it was raining\" is introduced as a topic so\nit is expcted that the listener already has some knowledge that this event\nhappened.\n\nThe は in the second sentence could also be seen as a contrastive marker. i.e I\nwas at home **at the time it was raining** but I was out for the rest of the\ntime. Either way, I don't think it really changes the meaning in these\nexamples.\n\nPerhaps a native speaker can see more of a change in nuance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T22:03:50.453",
"id": "29699",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T22:03:50.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "29687",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29687 | null | 29699 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "why does 手段を選ばない = will do anything?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T19:36:33.473",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29692",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T19:48:31.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11432",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "why does 手段を選ばない = will do anything?",
"view_count": 109
} | [
{
"body": "It means they're not choosy about the means they use to reach a target. They\ndon't choose their means or measures, they'll do anything to get where they\nwant to.\n\nThe first time I heard this, I thought it was weird too. I thought that by\n\"not choosing any means\", one would end up doing nothing, but I guess it makes\nsense to me now.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T19:44:35.463",
"id": "29693",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T19:44:35.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11739",
"parent_id": "29692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "選ばない here can mean \"not picky, not bothering to choose\", or in other words,\nindiscriminately. There is a similar idiom in Chinese I'm pretty sure,\nalthough I don't know which one came first since they both date only back to\nthe 19th century it seems.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T19:48:31.187",
"id": "29694",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T19:48:31.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11489",
"parent_id": "29692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29692 | null | 29693 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29697",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is the sentence in question:\n\n寂しくはあったけれど...\n\nMy impression is that it means \"There was loneliness but\" or \"He/She/It was\nlonely but\". However I don't understand the grammar behind it. It looks to me\nlike 寂しい is in it's adverbial form but I didn't think that adverbs could be\nsubjects? It seems like 寂しく is modifying あった ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T19:52:48.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29695",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T20:28:25.080",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"particle-は",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Grammar behind adverbs + は",
"view_count": 152
} | [
{
"body": "I think you have a number of things confused:\n\n 1. True, adverbs can't be subjects. \n 2. But **寂しく isn't an adverb** , it's the -く form of an adjective, called the 連用形 in Japanese grammar.\n 3. And **は isn't a subject marker**. It doesn't show any particular syntactic relationship; it can be placed on subjects, objects, or other things. It can even follow adverbs, although that's not what's going on here. It's true that は is _most commonly_ placed on subjects, but it appears on other kinds of constituents all the time.\n\nWhat's going on here is that the adjective 寂しかった has been split up into two\npieces, 寂しく＋あった, so that the contrastive particle は can be put in between:\n\n```\n\n 寂しかった → 寂しく＋あった\n sabisik'atta → sabisiku＋atta\n \n```\n\nNow, normally you can't do that. You have to leave the あった contracted, because\nlong ago in the history of the Japanese language it fused with the -く form of\nthe adjective, which turned it into the inflectional form -かった rather than a\nseparate word.\n\nBut you can still use the two words separately if you need to put something in\nbetween:\n\n```\n\n 寂しかった＋ **は** ＝ 寂しく＋ **は** ＋あった\n```\n\nIn this case, は is adding contrastive meaning to the adjective 寂しかった. It isn't\nmarking a subject. This contrast goes well with the following けれど, and the\npart you left out presumably tells you what it's contrasting with.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T20:21:56.630",
"id": "29697",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-05T20:28:25.080",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-05T20:28:25.080",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "29695",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 29695 | 29697 | 29697 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I saw this being said in a drama, when A said to B, 嘘ついてたんだ and the\ntranslation was \"So you lied!\".\n\nMy question is, why is it 嘘ついてたんだ and not 嘘ついたんだ? Thanks.\n\nEdit: How to tell the difference between the two?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T20:14:29.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29696",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T12:37:56.523",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-06T20:38:53.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "10484",
"owner_user_id": "11884",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "嘘ついてたんだ vs 嘘ついたんだ",
"view_count": 240
} | [
{
"body": "嘘をついてたんだ is short for 嘘をついていたんだ. They're using the ている-form which is used for\nverbs in progress, similar to the english -ing though not exactly the same.\nInstead of \"you lied\" (嘘をついた） the meaning becomes \"you were lying\" or \"you've\nbeen lying\" (all this time)（嘘をついてた）.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-05T20:34:55.180",
"id": "29698",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T13:41:52.183",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-06T13:41:52.183",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11739",
"parent_id": "29696",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "When someone says 「[嘘]{うそ}ついたんだ。」, s/he is talking about the act which is\nsaying something untrue.\n\nWhen someone says 「嘘つい **て** たんだ。」, s/he is talking about the acts which are\nsaying something untrue and keeping it secret for a period of time.\n\nIn many cases, 嘘つい **て** たんだ sounds more guilty than 嘘ついたんだ, although it\ndepends on the context.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T20:34:00.443",
"id": "29714",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T20:34:00.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10484",
"parent_id": "29696",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29696 | null | 29714 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Do na-adjectives need a な before a は?\n\n> もっと きれいなは どうですか。\n>\n> もっと きれいは どうですか。\n\nWhich is correct?\n\nPersonally I think な is needed as the sentence is a shorter form of もっと きれいな\nハンドバッグは どうですか。(replace ハンドバッグ with any noun). References say to use な in front\nof modified nouns, but nothing about は particles. I have tried Googling for\nもっと (na-adj)なは but I am still not sure.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T04:45:45.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29702",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T11:07:39.363",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-06T04:51:23.443",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "Na-adjectives before は",
"view_count": 346
} | [
{
"body": "(The question was answered in the comment section; therefore, I will\ncommunity-wiki this.)\n\n> もっと きれいなは どうですか。\n>\n> もっと きれいは どうですか。\n>\n> Which is correct?\n\nNeither is, unfortunately.\n\nThe correct sentence that is shortest and most natural would be:\n\n> 「もっときれいな **の** はどうですか。」 (\"How about a prettier _**one**_?\")\n\nThis is because you cannot attach a 「は」 to an adjective without nominalizing\nthe adjective first.\n\nAlso correct but somewhat colloquial/slangy would be:\n\n> 「もっときれいな **やつ** はどうですか。」\n\nNot that I recommend that you use 「やつ」 actively, but you will see/hear it\nquite often.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-31T11:07:39.363",
"id": "42156",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-31T11:07:39.363",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "29702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 29702 | null | 42156 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I guess it is an archaic form...\n\nSometimes I hear an adverbial phrase 力{ちから}なくなく used in context when someone\nresigned something after an effort. Let's say a warrior was pursuing another\none to no avail and …力なくなくお城へ引き返した.\n\nDoes なくなく correspond here to 無く無く and does the repetition emphasise the first\n無い? Or perhaps (I doubt it, but cannot really exclude the possibility from the\ncontext) does it negate it (like 無くもない), ie. \"he resigned _not having lost_\nall his strength\"?\n\nOr maybe it is something else? 泣く泣く? But then how does it relate to 力?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T05:27:16.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29703",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T10:46:07.263",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-07T10:46:07.263",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"negation",
"archaic-language"
],
"title": "Is なくなく an emphatic negative expression (e.g. in 力なくなく)?",
"view_count": 195
} | [
{
"body": "力無く means \"weakly\" and なくなく(泣く泣く) means \"begrudgingly\".\n\nI don't know the word of 力なくなく. 力無く泣く make sense, it means I cry weakly.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T06:49:40.750",
"id": "29704",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-06T06:49:40.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "29703",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Seeing this particular phrase 力なくなく for the first time myself, I cannot think\nof it as anything else but a kind of\n[畳語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%B3%E8%AA%9E) (reduplicated\nwords/phrases) version of the adverbial phrase 力無く (without strength; limply,\nexhaustedly), with the meaning unchanged.\n\nUsing 力なくなく as double negative (i.e. not without strength) would be pushing it\nboth grammatically and stylistically, and 力泣く泣く leaves 力 abandoned, disjoined\nfrom any part of the sentence, as you suspected.\n\nNow, as 畳語-fying goes, 力なくなく seems atypical, but I don't know of any rule that\nsays it cannot be done, and Google search shows that it has been done by\npublished authors too\n([力なくなく](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=typo&oq=typo&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.878j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#tbm=bks&q=%22%E5%8A%9B%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%22)\nand\n[力無く無く](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=typo&oq=typo&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.878j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=%22%E5%8A%9B%E7%84%A1%E3%81%8F%E7%84%A1%E3%81%8F%22&tbm=bks)),\nunless these examples are just typographical errors or another construction\naltogether -- but it doesn't look that way.\n\nI believe it's done more for rhythmic effect than emphasis, if anything. The\nseven-syllable variant makes the flow of the sentence a little more...\nlilting, at least to my ear, though the scene it describes (a disheartened and\nexhausted warrior making his way back to his castle empty-handed) is just the\nopposite of that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T03:36:19.017",
"id": "29720",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T06:40:40.627",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-07T06:40:40.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "29703",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29703 | null | 29720 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "31117",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Building on from [this\ncomment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/25459/use-\nof-%E3%81%A8-and-meaning-of-%E8%89%B2%E3%80%85-in-this-\nsentence/25464#comment55273_25464),\n\nIt is possible that in English, a mother may opt to refer to herself in the\nthird person: using \"Your mother\" instead of \"I\" to create emphasis.\n\nIt is observed from the comment that `お母さん` is a common way for mothers to\nrefer to themselves regardless of the fact that she is irritated or not.\n\nWhat strategies are available in Japanese to achieve the same effect? Can\nchanging the term of self-address cause the desired effect?\n\nPossible Situations (please include other situations if you find them\nrelevant):\n\n> If the mother typically refers to herself using:\n>\n> 1. お母さん\n> 2. ママ\n> 3. わたし\n>\n\nWe cannot change from お母さん to お母さん so there is no effect there. So what are\nthe other options (if possible/applicable)?\n\nDoes changing from ママ to お母さん express displeasure/irritation?\n\nDoes changing from わたし to お母さん express displeasure/irritation?\n\n**Is it possible for the person convey a stand-offish or confrontational\nnuance by using a different self-address term from the one typically used by\nthat person?**",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T08:47:30.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29705",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T16:02:25.297",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "542",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"first-person-pronouns"
],
"title": "Change in self-address for emphasis or to express frustration or dissatisfaction",
"view_count": 362
} | [
{
"body": "You can express it by changing お母さん / ママ to わたし or addressing the child as あなた\n/ 彼・彼女(when talking to someone else). If she usually uses わたし, changing it to\nindecently formal わたくし may work.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-08T11:49:05.493",
"id": "29754",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-09T05:28:19.003",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-09T05:28:19.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "29705",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "> \"It is possible that in English, a mother may opt to refer to herself in the\n> third person: using \"Your mother\" instead of \"I\" to create emphasis.\"\n\nI know very little about the English language, but if this statement were\naccurate, then I must say that it would be the complete opposite in the\nJapanese-speaking world.\n\nI could not say that I have ever seen or heard of a mother who, in natural\nsettings, addresses herself as 「わたし」, 「あたし」, etc. when speaking to her own\nyoung child. Here, I am talking about \"normal\" situations where the mother is\nneither frustrated nor dissatisfied. (It should also be noted that once the\nkids reach a certain adult-like age, the mothers often switch to using the\n\"real dictionary pronouns\" such as 「わたし」.)\n\n> \"What strategies are available in Japanese to achieve the same effect? Can\n> changing the term of self-address cause the desired effect? \"\n\nI may have answered this question indirectly when I stated that it was the\nopposite in Japanese a minute ago, but here is what happens.\n\nWhen unusually frustrated or angry, the mother may opt to use 「わたし」、「あたし」,\netc. to refer to herself with her young child. **_For those still unfamiliar,\nthose are NOT the words that mothers use to refer to themselves with their\nyoung kids. Instead, they use 「おかあさん」、「ママ」、「かあちゃん」, etc. as if those were\nfirst-person pronouns._**\n\nIf the mother used 「わたし」、「あたし」, etc., the kid would immediately sense that\nhis/her mom was angry, upset, etc. because it is so obvious if the mom is\nusing a different word as a pronoun. There is that \"tense\" feeling involved in\nthe word choice. The mother also knows that the switch would work in her favor\nin making the kid listen up.\n\n> \"We cannot change from お母さん to お母さん so there is no effect there. So what are\n> the other options (if possible/applicable)?\"\n\nAs I stated, the effective change is from the pseudo-pronoun to the dictionary\npronoun.\n\n> \"Does changing from ママ to お母さん express displeasure/irritation?\"\n\nI doubt that very much as a Japanese-speaker. I just cannot imagine a native-\nspeaking mother doing the switch. The idea sounds highly unnatural to me.\n\n(It is true that many of the kids who grew up addressing their moms as 「ママ」\noften start addressing them as 「お母さん」 in public, if not at home, around the\ntime they enter junior high or high schools because they feel like they could\nlook childish addressing their moms as 「ママ」 in front of their peers. But it is\nnot something the mother does herself.)\n\n> \"Does changing from わたし to お母さん express displeasure/irritation?\"\n\nAs I have explained (I hope), that change is impossible, and only the opposite\nis possible. You DO NOT start with 「わたし」 with your baby in the first place.\n\n> \"Is it possible for the person convey a stand-offish or confrontational\n> nuance by using a different self-address term from the one typically used by\n> that person?\"\n\nIn a mother-to-child relationship, I hope I have explained the basics above.\nIt is the same with a father-to-child relationship. The key is the **_pseudo-\nto-real pronoun switch_**.\n\nIn other relationships, switches do occur as well. ぼく to おれ, ぼく to わたし, etc.\n\nI need to mention the 先生 to おれ switch, too, before I forget because that would\nbe unique to Japanese as well. In elementary and junior high schools, teachers\ncommonly refer to themselves as 「[先生]{せんせい}」 instead of using a pronoun. When\nthey get very angry, they often switch to おれ (and わたし in the case of female\nteachers).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-02-13T03:01:13.717",
"id": "31117",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T16:02:25.297",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T16:02:25.297",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "29705",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29705 | 31117 | 31117 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was watching a video of a Japanese comedy show and at one point one of the\ncomedians accidentally spilled a hot food on his superior. After that, his\npeers referred to him as \"Tanaka-han\" a couple of times. I figure it sounds\nlike something mocking, but what does that mean, exactly?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T17:16:31.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29712",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T09:31:18.063",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-07T04:59:32.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11893",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kansai-ben"
],
"title": "What does it mean when someone says -han after a person's name?",
"view_count": 3151
} | [
{
"body": "It’s probably the comedians using [Kansai-ben for\nさん](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/180737/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%AF%E3%82%93/)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T02:49:18.723",
"id": "29719",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T02:49:18.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11894",
"parent_id": "29712",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "はん is a name-suffix used almost exclusively by people from Osaka/Kyoto.\n\nThe level of politeness はん has depends on the speaker. Manzai comedians,\ngeisha, or stereotyped heavy Kansai-/Kyoto-ben speakers in fiction may use はん\neverywhere, even when they're being very polite (e.g. お客はん, 社長はん). But I\nbelieve most real Kansai-ben speakers consider it as a colloquial and less\npolite version of さん, and use it sparingly.\n\nEither way, it doesn't have any derogatory or mocking nuance. I guess you\nheard Tanaka-han simply because some people tend to speak in dialect when\nthey're excited or want to make someone laugh.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T09:06:44.093",
"id": "29721",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T09:31:18.063",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-07T09:31:18.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29712",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 29712 | null | 29721 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29733",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that with verbs it means: To give the impression of\n\nBut what about it when it follows a noun?\n\n> 「いいか、下手にメニューにカレーとかいれてみろ。 あの人がやってきてメニューを食い尽し、デザート **とばかりに**\n> これまたケーキ類も全滅させて食い逃げするに決まってるだろ。 そうなったらさ、俺たち全員病院送りじゃないか」\n>\n> Listen, try and add curry or something else in the menù. That person will\n> come and eat it all, dessert and all she will consume all the cakes and\n> certainly run away. If that were to happen, wouldn't we end up in the\n> hospital?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T17:17:12.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29713",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T18:39:40.540",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words"
],
"title": "Noun+とばかりに mean?",
"view_count": 203
} | [
{
"body": "It doesn't really matter whether it follows a verb, noun, utterance, or idiom.\nThere is no direct equivalent in English, so you'll have to be creative when\ntrying to write a natural translation.\n\n“As if to say…” or “As though it is…” is close, but not exactly. I recommend\nyou read through many usage examples and absorb the meaning from their\ncontexts, rather than their translations.\n\n * 雨がやんだので、チャンス **とばかりに** 外に出た\n * 花嫁修業 **とばかりに** 料理教室に通った\n * 難しい本を読み切ったので、お祝い **とばかりに** シャンパンを買って帰った etc.\n\nRead also: [What exactly does とばかりに\nmean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5395/what-exactly-\ndoes-%e3%81%a8%e3%81%b0%e3%81%8b%e3%82%8a%e3%81%ab-mean \"grammar - What\nexactly does とばかりに mean? - Japanese Language Stack Exchange\")",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T18:39:40.540",
"id": "29733",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T18:39:40.540",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29713 | 29733 | 29733 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29716",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Note the right component of the kanjis 褐, 喝, 謁 and 渇. It doesn't exist as a\nseparate Chinese character, at least I couldn't find it. Those who have used\nHeisig will know that he refers to this component as 'siesta'.\n\nIt's not 曷, but it's close.\n\nNow, when I look these kanjis up on Wiktionary, it gets complicated. Take 褐\nfor example. There are two forms of the kanji given, which look different on\nscreen, one is [褐](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%A4%90#Kanji) and the\n[other](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%A4%90#Hanzi) has 曷 as the right\ncomponent, but when I copy and paste the latter, it looks exactly the same as\n褐.\n\nSo I am confused now. Are there indeed two forms of these kanjis? How can the\nforms look different on screen but not when copied? And does the right\ncomponent of 褐 exist as a separate Chinese character?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T21:09:50.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29715",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-04T13:02:45.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "The component 曷 and the kanjis 褐, 喝, 謁, 渇",
"view_count": 478
} | [
{
"body": "You're experiencing what happens on the internet due to han unification, and\nreally bad handling of fonts if your browser language isn't set as one of\nJapanese, Chinese, or Korean.\n\nThese are all actually the exact same character, but browsers and webpages\neach change how it looks depending on if they think it's simplified Chinese,\ntraditional Chinese, or shinjitai (jpn).\n\nUnder shinjitai, it's represented differently, despite being the same in\ntraditional and simplified. Below is a comparison, using the respective \"lang\"\nattribute for each:\n\n> * # 繁 (traditional Chinese): {{zh-TW:褐}}, using 亾\n>\n> * # 簡 (simplified Chinese): {{zh-CN:褐}}, using 亾\n>\n> * # 新 (shinjitai): {{ja-JP:褐}}, using 匕\n>\n>\n\nNote: The above comparison might not display correctly if you don't have fonts\nfor the respective languages installed on your computer.\n\nBecause of Chinese, these different forms of the same character all have one\ncodepoint, and are just seen as variant forms of one character (which they\ntechnically are). Because of that, though, unless a page _tells_ a browser to\nrepresent it one way, or your browser consistently does so on its own (i.e.\nyou set your language to one of chinese character forms, jpn, or kor),\nconfusion arises.\n\n* * *\n\nBelow are some images comparing the complete form of the character 喝, in the\nevent you don't have the appropriate fonts installed:\n\n> * zho (simplified, traditional), kor, vie: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/exbSn.png)\n> * jpn: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/r2i14.png)\n>",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T21:34:16.583",
"id": "29716",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-04T13:02:45.520",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-04T13:02:45.520",
"last_editor_user_id": "796",
"owner_user_id": "9185",
"parent_id": "29715",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 29715 | 29716 | 29716 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29872",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the right way to address the bartender? Or the person preparing sushi?\n\nOn a recent visit I heard マスター used to address a bartender, and I already know\nthat 大将 is one way to address the sushi chef.\n\nI have two questions about both the form of address for a bartender and for\nthe sushi chef: firstly, are there any other forms I can use in each case?\nSecondly, what is the level of formality and familiarity implied by using マスター\nand 大将?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T22:54:57.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29717",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-15T13:59:23.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 17,
"tags": [
"politeness"
],
"title": "Correct form of address for a bartender, or itamae",
"view_count": 3391
} | [
{
"body": "This question is more difficult than you might think, because everyone knows\nthe \"correct\" answer, but few have actually used it in real life :-)\n\nWell, the \"right\" answer would be マスター for addressing a bartender and 大将 for\naddressing a head sushi chef. Both マスター and 大将 imply that they're the highest\nranked people (ie, shop owners), as you might have already guessed.\n\nHowever, these words are almost never heard in common sushi-go-round\nrestaurants or _izakaya_ chains, which I've gotten used to.\n\nマスター/大将 are heard mainly in nonchain, orthodox (and often expensive) bars and\nsushi restaurants. I think they sound not only formal but also friendly. If\nyou are lucky enough to become a 常連 of one of such shops, feel free to address\nthem using マスター or 大将.\n\nPersonally, I've been to such bars/restaurants several times in my life\n(usually accompanying someone elder than me). And I have always gotten away\nwith just cowardly saying すみません or something like that -- feeling that a one-\nshot, [青二才](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E9%9D%92%E4%BA%8C%E6%89%8D&ref=sa)\ncustomer like me was not the suitable person to say マスター or 大将 confidently.\nPeople who have a lot of experience of going to such shops may use マスター/大将 on\nthe first visit, but I'm not very sure.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-15T13:59:23.507",
"id": "29872",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-15T13:59:23.507",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "29717",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29717 | 29872 | 29872 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29722",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this sentence (下町ロケット, p.239):\n\n> 「どうだ、そろそろウチに戻ってこないか」 \n> そんなことをいいはじめたのは、六十五歳を過ぎ、体力的な衰えを **感じはじめただろう頃だ** 。\n\nMeaning-wise, it seems hard to imagine it means anything other than\n感じはじめた頃だろう. However, I wonder, is there is a slight difference in nuance, or\nsomething else that would have made the author choose this rare (at least I\ndon't think I've seen it before) usage of だろう?\n\n* * *\n\n**和訳**\n\nこの文章に出くわしました：（下町ロケットp.239）\n\n> 「どうだ、そろそろウチに戻ってこないか」 \n> そんなことをいいはじめたのは、六十五歳を過ぎ、体力的な衰えを **感じはじめただろう頃だ** 。\n\n意味的には、「感じはじめた頃だろう」と同じだと思っていますが、これほど珍しい（少なくとも私は見たことのない）「だろう」の使い方をする理由（ニュアンスの違いなど）はありますか。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-06T23:03:21.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29718",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T09:08:38.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"relative-clauses",
"copula"
],
"title": "Attributive だろう",
"view_count": 420
} | [
{
"body": "I think there is a slight difference in what the uncertainty is about:\n\n> 1. … 六十五歳を過ぎ、<unsure>体力的な衰えを感じはじめた</unsure> **だろう** 頃だ。\n> 2. … <unsure>六十五歳を過ぎ、体力的な衰えを感じはじめた頃</unsure> **だろう** 。\n>\n\nIn #1, the uncertainty is less about the actual time frame, and more about\nwhat their physical condition had been. In #2, it seems that the uncertainty\nis mainly about the time frame.\n\nLikewise, in the sentences below, #1 is unsure whether the children were\nhungry, while #2 is unsure whether these children had it worst:\n\n> 1. いちばん大変だったのは、お腹が空いていた **であろう** 子供たちだ。\n> 2. いちばん大変だったのは、お腹が空いていた子供たち **であろう** 。\n>\n\n* * *\n\nI did not know that this use of `だろう` is technically incorrect and should be\n`であろう` instead (as brought up by xeta217 in the comments). I could also find\n[one page](http://www2.dokkyo.ac.jp/~japan/japanese/sub1/sub1-8.htm) online\nthat agrees with this rule. However, there are probably\n[many](https://goo.gl/dQ2dg1) [other](https://goo.gl/HvYzDd)\n[books](https://goo.gl/Sd5096) that use phrases like だろう頃に, so it may be that\nthis rule is not widely known, or debatable.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T09:08:38.990",
"id": "29722",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T09:08:38.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29718",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 29718 | 29722 | 29722 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29738",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "A recurring problem I have in Japanese dialogue is when I can't quite hear\nwhat someone said, attempt to ask them something to the effect of \"excuse me?\"\nor \"what was that?\" only for them to rephrase it (most likely because they\nthink I don't know the word).\n\nIn some cases, they might even try to say it in English, and worst cases,\ngrunt and use sign language.\n\nThis might not be completely evident if all your dialogue is done over the\nphone, (or if you don't look like someone who might not understand).\n\n**What are some efficient, unambiguous ways of asking someone _what_ they\nsaid?**\n\nI'm mostly interested in an _unambiguous_ way to phrase it, but I would prefer\nto simultaneously be able to be polite.\n\n* * *\n\n * \"え？\" and \"ん？\" don't quite cut it.\n * Replying \"赤い何ですか？\" might work if you heard enough, but what if you didn't hear that much?\n * \"「」って何？\" is not relevant, because then you heard enough to ask a specific question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T09:51:16.077",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29723",
"last_activity_date": "2016-03-04T01:19:49.373",
"last_edit_date": "2016-03-04T01:19:49.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "11830",
"owner_user_id": "11830",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "How to ask someone to repeat what they said",
"view_count": 2086
} | [
{
"body": "I would opt for the phrase もう一度ゆっくり言ってください。\n\nもう一度 once more \nゆっくり slowly \n言ってください please say it\n\nIf speed is not an issue in your not understanding the speaker, もう一度言ってください\nshould be sufficient. If you're still finding that the speaker is rephrasing,\nadding 同じことを between もう一度 and 言って will really drive that point home.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T21:56:28.370",
"id": "29738",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-07T21:56:28.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11274",
"parent_id": "29723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "[You may find these translations from DMM英会話ブログ\nuseful.](http://eikaiwa.dmm.com/blog/english_tips/kirikaeshi-phrase/) This is\non a site for Japanese learners of English, and includes:\n\n> * すみません、何と言いましたか？\n> * なんて言いましたか？\n> * ゆっくり／大きな声で話してもらえますか？\n> * もう一度言ってもらえますか？\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-08T00:27:36.180",
"id": "29742",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-08T00:31:08.697",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-08T00:31:08.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "5060",
"owner_user_id": "5060",
"parent_id": "29723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 29723 | 29738 | 29738 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "29751",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How would you say \"pour your heart out\" in Japanese? Is there a phrase for\nthis?\n\nAs in \"I poured my heart and soul out to you\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T10:12:50.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29724",
"last_activity_date": "2016-02-07T16:25:04.403",
"last_edit_date": "2016-02-07T16:25:04.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11108",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "\"Pour your heart out\" in Japanese",
"view_count": 469
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not sure there is an exact match, but these come close:\n\n * ありのままの自分を見せる \n_show my true, bare self_\n\n * 自分をさらけ出す \n_lay myself bare_\n\n * 気持ちを包み隠さず話す \n_confess my true feelings_\n\nI hesitate to use the word 心, especially if you plan on saying this to someone\nin real life. But if you don't mind sounding like a maudlin love song, you can\nreplace the `自分` or `気持ち` in the above phrases with `心`.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-08T09:09:32.937",
"id": "29751",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-08T09:09:32.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "888",
"parent_id": "29724",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 29724 | 29751 | 29751 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm attempting to read my first light novel and am unsure about whether I am\nmisunderstanding the function completely, or if it is merely a literary usage.\nHere is an example:\n\n> 不機嫌な顔でまたも逆に **問われ** ロレンスはたじろいでしまうが、ロレンスにとってホロが人であるかないかは実に重要な問題なのだ。\n\nWhy is the stem used, and not 問われ(た/る、など)\n\n教えてくれてありがとうございます",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-07T12:33:41.487",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "29725",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-08T16:26:17.127",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-07T18:41:56.193",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11898",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations",
"renyōkei"
],
"title": "連用形 used instead of regular 連体形 directly modifying nouns",
"view_count": 399
} | [
{
"body": "The 問われ is not modifying the ロレンス.\n\n連用形 of 用言 can be used to connect clauses or sentences like て形. Here the 連用形\n「問われ」 is connecting two clauses/sentences: 「(ロレンスは)不機嫌な顔でまたも逆に問われ(る)」 and\n「ロレンスはたじろいでしまう」.\n\nYou can replace the 連用形 「問われ」 with the て形 「問われ **て** 」 without changing the\nmeaning:\n\n> 不機嫌な顔でまたも逆に問われロレンスはたじろいでしまうが・・・ \n> ≒ 不機嫌な顔でまたも逆に問われ **て** (、)ロレンスはたじろいでしまうが・・・\n\nIn this form, using 連用形 sounds more formal and literary than て形. You will see\nて形 more in casual speech and 連用形 more in formal speech and the written style.\n\nExamples:\n\n> よく **遊び** 、よく寝る (連用形) \n> ≒よく遊んで、よく寝る (て形)\n>\n> **美しく** 機能的な生活用品 (連用形) \n> ≒美しくて機能的な生活用品 (て形)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2015-12-08T02:24:38.590",
"id": "29743",
"last_activity_date": "2015-12-08T16:26:17.127",
"last_edit_date": "2015-12-08T16:26:17.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "29725",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 29725 | null | 29743 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.