question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33548",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Can you \"adapt\" the phrase 楽しい時を過ごしてください (\"Have fun\" or \"Enjoy your time\") to\nrefer to a specific situation? I.e. if I want to say \"enjoy your time in\nHokkaido\" or \"enjoy your time with your friend [who is visiting]\" or ...\n\nIf yes, how would I go about it?\n\n * 北海道、楽しい時を過ごしてください。\n * 北海道で、楽しい時を過ごしてください。\n * something else?\n\n * (ご)家族と、楽しい時を過ごしてください。\n\n * something else?\n\nIf none of these work, do you have other suggestions for wishing people a nice\ntime, but being a bit more specific about it? The level of politeness I need\nright now is somewhat formal (equivalent to a friend's parent) but I'd love to\nlearn about any more casual options, too.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T11:03:17.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33546",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T11:23:12.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14159",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "Adapting 楽しい時を過ごしてください",
"view_count": 194
} | [
{
"body": "I feel 楽しい時を過ごしてください is a bit hard. I think 楽しんできてください is more common than it.\n\nFor example, 北海道を(で)、楽しんできてください, 家族と楽しんできてください。\n\nCasual options are 楽しんできて、楽しんできなよ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T11:23:12.520",
"id": "33548",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T11:23:12.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33546",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33546 | 33548 | 33548 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33553",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading up on the use of conditionals と, ば, たら and なら. One part of [the\nsource](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/thsrs/17223/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89)\ntalks about one type of conditional clause, but I am not sure of its meaning.\n\nHere's what the source says, and my attempt at translation:\n\n> 仮定条件(前件が仮に成立した場合、その前件を条件 **として** 後件が成立することを表わす)\n>\n> Assumptive conditional clauses (the first half of the sentence (conditional\n> clause) is based on an assumption; expresses the first half as a requirement\n> for the establishment of the other half)\n\nThe word として is confusing me. [There have been other questions about\nとして](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14719/meaning-\nof-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6-in-this-sentence), but reading the sentence\nabove with an \"as\" or a \"by way of\" does not make sense to me. Easy sentences\nare okay, like:\n\n> 彼は医者 **として** 有名だ。He is famous as a doctor.\n>\n> (医者 **として** 有名 = Famous as doctor)\n\nHowever, how do I parse this more complicated sentence?\n\n> {[その前件を 条件 **として** 後件が] 成立すること} を 表わす\n>\n> 条件 **として** 後件 = The latter as the requirement?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T11:12:35.537",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33547",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T09:52:36.417",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"parsing",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "Use of として in sentence about conditionals",
"view_count": 276
} | [
{
"body": "For example, the sentence \"If I were a doctor, I would cure his sickness.\"\n\n\"If I were a doctor\" is a hypothesis(前件), \"I would cure his sickness\" is a\nconsequent(後件).\n\nその前件を条件として、後件が成立する means \" The hypothesis (come into effect) as a\ncondition(条件), and the consequent come into effect.\"",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T16:37:48.510",
"id": "33553",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T18:42:56.723",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-13T18:42:56.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33547",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33547 | 33553 | 33553 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33552",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Facebook has issued me the following alert:\n\n> Aさんが、Bさんがあなたとシェアした写真について「いいね！」と言っています\n\nI think this is a translation of \"A likes the photo that B shared with you.\"\n\nIs it obvious what's being said? Why couldn't it be read as both A and B\nliking the photo?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T15:45:53.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33551",
"last_activity_date": "2017-03-20T02:14:58.967",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T20:23:49.980",
"last_editor_user_id": "11185",
"owner_user_id": "583",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"particle-が",
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "Is Facebook's use of double が grammatically unambiguous?",
"view_count": 273
} | [
{
"body": "Actually, this kind of \"double が\" situation happens all the time. Sometimes\nthere's just no elegant way around it. In this case, Aさんは doesn't feel exactly\nright because these notifications appear out of the blue with no surrounding\ncontext. In cases where brand new information is coming in, が usually feels\nbetter in introducing it. Imagine it sort of like an announcement of a radar\ncontact: \"Sir! A meteor has been detected on the starboard side!\" This would\ndefinitely be が. The Facebook notification is very similar in feeling.\n\nI admit that I too feel a tinge of worry when I'm forced to use this sort of\nconstruction, but I've never seen a native speaker have any trouble\nunderstanding these.\n\n**Edit** : Sorry, I didn't answer your actual question:\n\n> Why couldn't it be read as both A and B liking the photo?\n\nIf both people liked the photo, the sentence would be more explicit about\nthat. It would look something more like:\n\nAさんもBさんも、Bさんがあなたとシェアした写真について「いいね！」と言っています。\n\nOn the other hand, if only B liked the photo that B himself shared, it would\nlike be simply:\n\nBさんが、あなたとシェアした写真について「いいね！」と言っています。\n\nThe fact that two parties are mentioned makes the reader expect that one of\nthem lives in a relative clause. So it is natural to expect that A is the main\nsubject of the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T16:25:04.317",
"id": "33552",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T16:52:20.350",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-13T16:52:20.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "9959",
"owner_user_id": "9959",
"parent_id": "33551",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "It is quite obvious. It's a bit awkward, but I'm not sure I'd call it a 'train\nwreck'; there's not really a better way to say exactly that.\n\nThere's really no ambiguity - *XがYが cannot be read as 'X (subject) and Y (also\nsubject)' because you would say that in some other way, likely either XとYが or\nsometimes (in more formal speech) X、Yが. Two case-marked nouns sound like two\nnouns with separate roles - if there's only one role, there'll only be one\ncase marker.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T21:27:26.927",
"id": "33556",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T21:27:26.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "33551",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33551 | 33552 | 33552 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33559",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "`め` after a counter implies _some sort of ordering_ , right?\n\nSay that you are shopping for a cat.\n\n**scenario #1** \nYou look into a room with 5 cats in it. Does saying `五匹めが好きです。` mean anything? \nIn that context, saying `I like the fifth one.` sounds ridiculous.\n\n**scenario #2** \nYou look into a room with 5 cats in it. Then you have a dialogue:\n\n> A-さん: 黒くって小さいのが好きですか。 \n> B-さん: そうですね。私の好みよく知っているよね。五匹めが好きです。\n\nCould that mean that \"B\" likes the smallest black cat? The _ordering_ is\nimplied to be size? \n`I like the fifth one.` does not make sense. \n`I like the fifth **smallest** one.` makes sense. \n`五匹めが好きです。` only makes sense when you use context to imply in _size_ as the\nordering criteria.\n\n**scenario #3** \nYou are, one by one, shown 5 cats. Then you say `五匹めが好きです`。 And that means\nthat you like the 5th cat that was shown to you? Showing the cats sequentially\ntees-up time as the criteria. There is no need to establish context.\n\n**scenario #4** \nYou are, one by one, shown 5 cats. Then you have a dialogue:\n\n> A-さん: 黒くって小さいのが好きですか。 \n> B-さん: そうですね。私の好みよく知っているよね。五匹めが好きです。\n\nNow, we have 2 possible ordering criteria. Since size is explicitly\nestablished as the immediate context, implied \"size ordering\" supercedes the\ndefault \"time ordering\"?",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T17:51:15.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33554",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-14T04:42:34.983",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-14T04:42:34.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12506",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"counters",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "\"め\" in \"五匹め\" implies some sort of \"ordering\"? Where it makes sense, the default is \"time\"?",
"view_count": 198
} | [
{
"body": "Among these scenarios, 5匹目が好きです makes sense only in Scenario 3. 5匹目が好きです never\nmeans \"the fifth _smallest_ cat\" in any of these situations.\n\n\"The fifth smallest cat\" is translated as 5番目に小さな猫 in Japanese (general rule\nis found [here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13009/5010)). If you say\n5番目に小さな猫が好きです, it's at least a valid and understandable Japanese sentence. Of\ncourse, a normal person will never say such a thing when there are exactly\nfive cats in the room. They simply say 1番大きな猫 (\"the largest cat\")!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T23:00:57.803",
"id": "33559",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T23:00:57.803",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33554",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33554 | 33559 | 33559 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33557",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As a total beginner I noticed that sometimes simple sentences end with ます and\nsometimes with です. What is the difference?\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T21:16:39.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33555",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-04T10:07:15.723",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-16T11:02:56.920",
"last_editor_user_id": "19357",
"owner_user_id": "14165",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"usage",
"verbs",
"copula"
],
"title": "Difference between ます and です",
"view_count": 6819
} | [
{
"body": "Another beginner answering here.\n\nます is a (polite) verb ending. The verb to eat (食べる) for example can be\nconjugated to 食べ _ます_ , which can be used in polite speech.\n\nです is a state of being, also to be used in polite conversations and can be\nroughly translated as a conjugated \"to be\". Example: 私はドイツ人 _です_ (I'm German)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T21:37:59.363",
"id": "33557",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-13T21:37:59.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11369",
"parent_id": "33555",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "です is the polite form of is/am/are/be. It can also come after adjectives to\nmake a sentence polite. ます is an ending attached to verbs, and functions to\nmake the sentence polite.\n\n> これは猫です。 \n> This is a cat. \n> 今日は暑いです。 \n> Today is hot. \n> ケーキを食べます。 \n> I eat cake.\n\nNote that in the second example although the translation contains the word\n**is** this is contained in the adjective 暑い = \"be hot\". です does not mean\n**is** when it comes after an adjective, it just makes the sentence polite.\n\nIn the third example the verb 食べる (dictionary/plain form) becomes 食べます to make\nit polite.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-13T21:48:17.163",
"id": "33558",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-04T10:07:15.723",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-04T10:07:15.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "33555",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 33555 | 33557 | 33558 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I was looking at one of the example sentences in a kanji learning app I use,\nand the particle choice struck me as strange. In the sentence \"青空を背景に木々を描く。\",\nI can't understand why を is used after 青空. Assuming the phrase could be\ntranslated as 'the background of the blue sky' (as the app's provided\ntranslation suggested) why is を used instead of の? 木々 is the direct object, 青空\nis neither 'a point of departure' nor 'the route of motion' (as described\nhere: <https://nihongoichiban.com/home/japanese-grammar-particles/>), so is\nthis a typo or just an unfamiliar usage of the particle?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-14T03:16:56.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33562",
"last_activity_date": "2022-02-19T15:47:52.287",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10099",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-の",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Why is を used instead of の?",
"view_count": 120
} | []
| 33562 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33564",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm using a new textbook, 中級を学ぼう- the blue cover, not the orange. And the\ngrammar point is using という at the end of the sentence. It means the same as\nそうだ・らしい。The explanation says that it is frequently used in writing, so my\nquestion is why would I use this grammar point? Especially when I can use である。\n\nExample sentence: 今年の冬は記録的な暖冬だという。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-14T03:23:45.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33563",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-14T04:27:21.093",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-14T03:48:28.417",
"last_editor_user_id": "5129",
"owner_user_id": "5129",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "what is the difference between である ＆ という",
"view_count": 419
} | [
{
"body": "The simple (possibly oversimplified) answer to this is:\n\n * Xである is from the copula だ・です, and it roughly translates to \"(something) is X\", and it states it in an authoritative tone. I think it isn't commonly used in speech, or necessarily in writing either, outside of say academic papers/textbooks etc. The という at the end of a sentence has a completely different function, and it tends to be used in formal contexts to indicate [hearsay](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/hearsay).\n\n * Don't confuse this with XというY/XであるY however! XであるY and XというY roughly mean \"Y which is X\", although the latter can also be \"Y which is called X\". XであるY has a literary/formal/authoratative tone, and I don't hear it much in conversation, unlike という (or colloquial variants of という such as って).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-14T03:48:08.580",
"id": "33564",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-14T03:48:08.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "796",
"parent_id": "33563",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "At the end of a sentence, you can see という as “is said to be” whereas である makes\na more definitive statement.\n\n> 1. 今年の冬は記録的な暖冬だという。 This winter is said to be the most warm we ever had.\n> (record winter in terms of warmness)\n>\n> 2. 今年の冬は記録的な暖冬である。 This winter is the warmest we ever had.\n>\n>\n\nIn the 1. you can see that the statement is not definitive whereas in 2. it\nis. という is often found in newspapers and it is quite similar to そうだ as you\npointed out.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-14T03:49:57.963",
"id": "33565",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-14T04:27:21.093",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "33563",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33563 | 33564 | 33564 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33574",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Where does that come from? Was \"to be attached\" the only original meaning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T00:32:47.387",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33573",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T01:33:25.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4168",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"expressions"
],
"title": "What is the origin of 付いてる meaning \"to be lucky\"?",
"view_count": 243
} | [
{
"body": "Many people have wondered why, but I failed to find the authoritative\nexplanation for this. At least デジタル大辞泉 says nothing more than that ツキ means\nluck. (By the way, this kind of 付き is usually written either in hiragana or\nkatakana, perhaps because even native speakers don't know why the kanji 付 is\nassociated with this word.)\n\nAnyway, つく (憑く) sometimes means \"(for a devil/ghost) to possess\", \"to haunt\",\netc. The most popular explanation seems to be that 付いている is from something\nlike \"Fortune is with me\" or \"God of fortune is being with me\".\n\nActually, 何かが憑いている or 憑かれている is something you can say if you feel you're very\nunlucky.\n\n * [付き、ツキとは何か](http://www.fleapedia.com/%E4%BA%94%E5%8D%81%E9%9F%B3%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%83%87%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9/%E3%81%A4/%E4%BB%98%E3%81%8D-%E3%83%84%E3%82%AD%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF%E4%BD%95%E3%81%8B/)\n * [運がいいときに「ツイてる」といいますけど、「ツイてる」の語源ってなんですか？](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1460140249)\n * [「ツキを呼び込む」のツキを漢字にすると どう書きますか？ また 語源はなんでしょうか？](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1387642863)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T01:33:25.870",
"id": "33574",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T01:33:25.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33573",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33573 | 33574 | 33574 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33588",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I want to explain the difference between the English linguistic terms \"fluent\"\nand \"native speaker\". I could do this in English, but I'd also like to know if\nit's possible to do so in Japanese. To be fair, I think it's not just native\nspeakers of Japanese who blur the lines between the two. (Related posts: [The\nWorkplace](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/62770/should-a-\nnative-speaker-fluency-level-be-used-only-by-real-native-speakers), and\nEnglish Language & Usage\n[1](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/87034/difference-between-full-\nprofessional-proficiency-and-native-or-bilingual-prof)\n[2](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/14582/meaning-of-native-\nspeaker-of-english?lq=1))\n\nIs there a pair of terms in Japanese that correspond to the difference between\nthe two English terms, which are likely to be understood by the average\nEnglish learner or teacher?\n\nIn case context matters, I'm talking about English, rather than other\nlanguages.\n\nPost where I asked for how to express \"native speaker\" by itself in Japanese:\n[Difference between 母語話者 and\nネイティブスピーカー](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/23202/difference-\nbetween-%E6%AF%8D%E8%AA%9E%E8%A9%B1%E8%80%85-and-%E3%83%8D%E3%82%A4%E3%83%86%E3%82%A3%E3%83%96%E3%82%B9%E3%83%94%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AB%E3%83%BC)",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T03:16:22.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33575",
"last_activity_date": "2019-03-05T21:36:29.217",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:48:50.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"translation",
"terminology",
"linguistics"
],
"title": "Expressing difference between \"fluent\" and \"native speaker\" in Japanese",
"view_count": 7685
} | [
{
"body": "I think you have a couple choices.\n\nFor \"fluent\":\n\n * ペラペラ。 This is a slightly colloquial word (due to being an onomatopoeia sounding like quick speech), which can mean \"fluent\", both in the sense of (a) speaking uninterruptedly, and by extension, (b) being skilled in the language. This might be the most common word you hear when describing someone as \"fluent\" in everyday conversation.\n * 流暢。 This is a formal word which means \"flowing\"/\"fluent\". Again, this can have the sense of (a) beautiful, uninterrupted speech, and by extension, (b) being skilled in the language.\n * ネイティブレベル。 The problem with the previous two terms is that they are applied to all sorts of different skill levels. The minimum to apply the term is that the person can speak uninterruptedly, I think, but of course language skill goes far beyond that. So, if you want to be more specific, you can say ネイティブレベル (\"native level\"). It is perhaps slightly informal (due to \"レベル\" being slightly informal).\n\nFor \"native\":\n\n * ネイティブ。 As mentioned in the other answer, this is probably the most common term for \"native speaker\". (ネイティブスピーカー is also used, but not as much, probably just due to being longer.)\n * 母語話者。 A rather formal and technical term for native speaker.\n\nHere are some example usages in case it helps you get a feel for how to use\nthe different words:\n\n> 「彼は、英語のネイティブじゃないけど、もうネイティブレベルだから、とてもいい先生になると思うよ。」\n>\n> 「英語が母国語ではないが、非常に流暢な英語が話せる、いわゆる母語話者に匹敵する人が最近増えています。」",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T19:09:24.693",
"id": "33588",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T19:30:07.220",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-15T19:30:07.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "33575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "‘Fluent’ is translated as 流暢な and 淀みない as adjectives, 流暢に、淀みなく as adverbs, and\nペラペラ and すらすら as onomatopoeias, like 彼は英語をペラペラ(流暢に)話す。\n\nThe word ‘native speaker’ passes as “ネイティヴ・スピーカー” in Japanese own\npronunciation. It can be rephrased as ”外(国)人並み,” which is a very popular\nphrase.\n\nMost Japanese would roll their eyes if they hear \"ボゴワシャ,\" unless you show it\nby writing it (母語話者), down on paper. Even shown in writing, I bet more than\ntwo-thirds of people wouldn’t understand it. To me, it's crude and ugly as a\nJapanese word.\n\n“ネイティヴ・スピーカー” is a new word that came into currency in just last one or two\ndecades, but is quite prevalent now among people except the elderly, say over\n60s.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T21:24:09.497",
"id": "33589",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T07:50:03.460",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-16T07:50:03.460",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "In addition to the other suggestions, one word I've seen a bunch is ネイティブ並み,\nparticular in academic environments. It's used to indicated as fluent as a\nnative.\n\nHere's an example from a job ad for a university:\n\n> ネイティブまたは **ネイティブ並み** の英語力があること\n\nAnd here's an example from a post about going to university in America:\n\n>\n> 近年では、米国支社に勤務する父親に同道し、米国の高校を経て米国の大学に進学する者、あるいは米国の大学が入学し易いことに目をつけ、高校2年生ぐらいで米国の高校に留学し、1、2年で\n> **ネイティブ並み** の英語を習得し、SATを受験して、程ほどの大学に進学する者も少なくない。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2019-03-05T21:36:29.217",
"id": "65859",
"last_activity_date": "2019-03-05T21:36:29.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"parent_id": "33575",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 33575 | 33588 | 33588 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33580",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm learning Japanese, but I'm a beginner, and I need to understand why this\nkanji is a compound of the kanji for \"horse\" and \"deer\":\n\n> 馬鹿 = idiot\n>\n> 馬 = horse\n>\n> 鹿 = deer\n\nWhy?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T03:37:55.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33577",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T23:01:16.717",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-15T06:53:52.760",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11245",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"ateji"
],
"title": "Why is the kanji of idiot written with the kanji for \"horse\" and \"deer\" together?",
"view_count": 2038
} | [
{
"body": "馬鹿 is an ateji, which means either _the readings of the individual kanji do\nnot match the reading of the word_ , or _the meanings of the individual kanji\ndo not match the meaning of the word_. In this case, it's the latter - why\nwould an idiot be described as a horse and/or a deer?\n\nAs for why these particular kanji were chosen to represent ばか, the etymology\nis unclear. See this webpage for several theories.\n<https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/baka-meaning/>\n\nIn this case, the individual kanji meanings were forgone. Other ateji include\n時計{とけい} (readings forgone), 真面目{まじめ} (readings forgone), 七夕{たなばた} (readings\nforgone), 寿司{すし} (meanings forgone), etc.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T04:09:10.397",
"id": "33580",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T04:09:10.397",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"parent_id": "33577",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "馬鹿 is also written as 莫迦. Based on 岩波書店’s 広辞苑, it was originally a Buddhist\nterminology derived from Sanskrit, either “moka –phonetically transcribed as\n慕何 in Kanji” meaning ‘stupidity,’ or “mahaliaka – phonetically transcribed as\n魔訶羅 meaning ‘ignorance’ - the source: 文明節用集 – Bunmei Glossary published in\n文明6年(1474 ).\n\nThe letter of 馬 is read and vocalized as “ba,” and 鹿 is read and vocalized as\n“ka” both in 音読み. So its combination is バカ - baka.\n\nBoth 馬鹿 and 莫迦 are arbitrary adoption to 慕何 or 魔訶羅, which might have taken\nplace before 15 century. Horse and deer have nothing to do with what 馬鹿 really\nmeans",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T21:50:02.060",
"id": "33600",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T23:01:16.717",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-16T23:01:16.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33577",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33577 | 33580 | 33580 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33579",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In English, you often see people who write certain letters or numbers with an\nextra stroke to differentiate them from similar characters, for example people\nwill write a [z with a horizontal\nstroke](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Latin_alphabet_Z_with_stroke.svg)\nto differentiate between \"z\" and \"2\". Similarly 7 is sometimes written with a\nhorizontal line through it to differentate it from the number 1. There is also\nthe [slashed zero / dotted zero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashed_zero)\nto cleanly differentiate 0 (`0`) from O (`O`).\n\nI often have a lot of trouble clearly writing certain pairs in a cleanly\ndistinguished way, for example, シ and ツ, ソ and ン, and to a much lesser extent\nthe pairs ユ and コ and サ and せ. Is there a standard variant form for these\ncharacters, or do you just annotate it with its counterpart from the other\nkana when you want to be absolutely clear about it, like [シ]{し}?\n\nThere is a [related\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2990/distinguishing-\ncertain-characters-in-handwriting-and-print-similar-looking-kana) about\ndistinguishing certain kanji from similar-looking kana, but that is not a\nproblem I've really had.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T03:48:04.333",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33578",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T04:01:04.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12091",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"kana"
],
"title": "Is there a standard way to clearly differentiate similar handwritten (kana) characters?",
"view_count": 595
} | [
{
"body": "This is one of the reasons why stroke order can be important. When looking at\nhandwritten characters, you can get a sense for what each one is even if it's\nrelatively illegible by looking at the direction and order of the strokes.\n\nCharacters like シ and ツ can be written by hand in a way that very clearly\nindicates which it is: write シ with clearly horizontal strokes aligned along\nthe left edge and ツ with clearly vertical strokes aligned along the top edge.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wQHEv.png)\n\nYou can follow a similar convention with ソ and ン.\n\nユ and コ should be clearly distinguishable. In ユ the stroke goes to the middle\nand the second along the bottom. In コ the first stroke goes well to the right\nand the second not only meets the first at its rightmost edge but also does so\nslightly above the bottom of the first stroke.\n\nWith せ and サ this is just a matter of remembering which is which. You wouldn't\nreally confuse them in normal use since one is hiragana and the other\nkatakana.\n\nAnd finally, all confusion should be solved by context. If a word you're\nlooking at only works with one possibility, that's probably what it is.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T04:01:04.590",
"id": "33579",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T04:01:04.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"parent_id": "33578",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33578 | 33579 | 33579 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33585",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "# 日本語\n\n「◯◯パーセント」と「◯割◯分」は両方とも「◯◯％」を意味しますが、どちらを使うのが自然ですか。「◯割◯分」という表現を使いたいのですが、使う前にその言い方が九分九厘使わないものではないことを確かめた方がいいと思ったので、質問します。\n\n# English\n\nBoth ◯◯パーセント and ◯割◯分 can mean ◯◯％. Which is the natural choice? I wanted to\nuse ◯割◯分 but I wanted to be sure that it is not an expression that is not used\nanymore so I prefer to ask before using it.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T12:05:33.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33582",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T07:02:27.853",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "When talking about percents can I use ◯◯パーセント as well as ◯割◯分?",
"view_count": 515
} | [
{
"body": "〇割 is commonly used. For example, この服を定価の一割安くします(I take ten percent off the\nprice of this piece of clothing.), 私の学校の二割の生徒は、英語が話せる(Twenty percent of the\nstudents in my school can speak English).\n\nHowever, I think 〇分 which means percent isn't very common. For example, we\ndon't say now \"Five percent of the students in my school are Japanese\" like\n私の学校の五分の生徒は日本人だ.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T13:05:24.270",
"id": "33583",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T07:02:27.853",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-16T07:02:27.853",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33582",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "If you only need one digit precision, for example 4割 is equally common to\n40パーセント. In hasty conversations, パーセント is often shortened to パー (eg. 40パー).\n\nIf you need two digits precision, 4割5分 is no longer common today, and 45パーセント\nis the normal choice.\n\nToday, ○割○分(○厘) is used only in the following cases:\n\n * in a fixed expression 九割九分 (=almost certainly/always)\n * in baseball contexts to describe batting average of players (eg., \".321\" is \"3割2分1厘\")\n * rarely in financial contexts to show interest rates",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T15:30:55.040",
"id": "33585",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T15:30:55.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33582",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33582 | 33585 | 33585 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm learning how to write hiragana, katakana and kanji.\n\nWhat is the name of paper that has little squares to write the Japanese\ncharacters?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T15:30:25.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33584",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-05T20:48:05.560",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-05T20:48:05.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11245",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"word-requests",
"genkōyōshi"
],
"title": "What is the name of paper to train how to write kanji?",
"view_count": 2984
} | [
{
"body": "This kind of paper is called\n[原稿用紙](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8E%9F%E7%A8%BF%E7%94%A8%E7%B4%99),\nused in composition class or by professional writers, but for practical\nwriting rather than training (generally too small for training).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4V3f2.jpg)\n\nThe format below is dedicated to kanji training (but also good for kana).\nWhile it doesn't have fixed name, notebooks that bind these sheets are sold in\nthe name of\n[漢字練習帳](https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E7%B7%B4%E7%BF%92%E5%B8%B3&tbm=isch).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CxLj9.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-09-20T06:49:59.877",
"id": "39341",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-20T06:49:59.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33584",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33584 | null | 39341 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33587",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 「そんな顔をするな。これで何かあったら、さすがに寝覚めが悪いだろう？\n> それにワシはお前が嬢ちゃんくらいのひよっこの頃から面倒見てるんだからな。恩人の頼みは聞くもんだ」\n>\n> 「連れ戻してきたら、ご馳走するぞ。今朝いい肉が入ってな」\n>\n> 「ったく、銀貨５枚と **どちらが割に合うんだかな** 」\n>\n> 他の探索者は面倒ごとに関わるまいと散会している。断れる雰囲気ではなさそうだ。\n\nMy question is about the meaning of 「ったく、銀貨５枚と **どちらが割に合うんだかな** 」.\n\nContext: A young boy came to the adventurers guild with a request but only had\nseveral silver coins(edit: if you read on much further you find out it was 5\nsilver coins). The guild master told the boy that he wouldn't send his members\nfor such a small reward.\n\nBefore the young boy leaves an aspiring members of the guild accepts his\nrequest. The guild master (worried about the potential impact on the guild if\nthe member dies, or is found out as this member has not yet received their\nlicense). He then tells someone else to go and save her, and the above\nconversation begins.\n\n割に合う from what I understand (in this context) means \"to be worth it\". However,\nI don't quite follow what is meant in the excerpt above. Can anyone help?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T18:14:41.380",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33586",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T07:19:44.620",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "The meaning of どちらが割に合うんだかな",
"view_count": 254
} | [
{
"body": "To use your words. I think it is something like \"I wonder what is/would be\nmore worth it, those 5 silver coins that boy offered, or this 'free' meal I\nwill receive. Clearly dissatisfied with the the reward he will receive, which\nis presumably, worth less and the request will be more troublesome if he has\nto look after this other person as well.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-15T18:48:54.180",
"id": "33587",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-15T18:48:54.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14180",
"parent_id": "33586",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Regarding your quote,「ったく、銀貨５枚とどちらが割に合うんだかな」, \"ったく\" doesn't make sense in\nJapanese. Is it \"全く\"？ Something is missing.\n\n\"どちらが割に合うんだかな\" means \"Which would be worth more?\" or \"Which is more\nadvantageous (profitable)?\"\n\nA more common way of saying this is \"どちらが割に合うのかな\" or \"どちらが割に合うの（ん）だか.\" I think\n\"な\" at the tail is used for the purpose of emphasis or self-affirmation. It's\na colloquial turn of phrase, but it's very, very rare to hear such an\nexpression - 割に合うんだかな.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T00:22:28.640",
"id": "33590",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T07:19:44.620",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-16T07:19:44.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33586",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33586 | 33587 | 33587 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This is the first time I've failed to find a word in both dictionaries and\nGoogle search: the only hit Google finds is the\n[article](http://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/32514/1/yamamoto.pdf)\nwhere this quote appears:\n\n> 「本間さんは頭脳頗る明晰、今後優良の成績で卒業される事となつた、卒業論文は『粉病菌科の分生胞子に就て』と言ふのでウドン粉病胞子の **ピプロシン体**\n> と称する貯蔵物質の化学的成分に関する学術的研究でなか〳〵立派なものだ」\n\nI looked at the Japanese Wikipedia pages on\n[うどんこ病](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%86%E3%81%A9%E3%82%93%E3%81%93%E7%97%85)\nand [分生子](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%88%86%E7%94%9F%E5%AD%90) but I\ncould not find any clues. I know that a 分生胞子 (conidium) can be [\"pip-\nshaped.\"](https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=S7I8AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=life%20cycle%20of%20fungi%20pip&source=bl&ots=Th5FZXIjSQ&sig=uW-\nLc4qnVVZsg1UE1hGxEFIIutQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8me2R5pLMAhUBY6YKHT7GDxgQ6AEINjAE#v=onepage&q=pip-\nshaped&f=false) Could that have any relation to 「ピプロシン」?\n\nMy translation of this sentence so far is:\n\n> Honma has an extremely lucid mind and is graduating with high grades; her\n> graduation thesis on _Conidium of Powdery Mildew_ is admirable academic\n> research referring to ピプロシン体 as the chemical building blocks of storage\n> material.\n\nThank you for any help you can provide!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T09:14:18.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33591",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-17T06:38:50.570",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T03:36:05.060",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "4547",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"etymology",
"definitions",
"jargon"
],
"title": "What is 「ピプロシン体」？",
"view_count": 288
} | [
{
"body": "Atually, snailboat is correct.\n\nAfter all searching of jargons or whatnot, **[I came across this\nthesis.](http://www.tokyo-\naff.or.jp/center/event/koenyoshi_20no10_12.pdf#search='%E3%81%86%E3%81%A9%E3%82%93%E3%81%93%E7%97%85%E8%83%9E%E5%AD%90+%E8%8F%8C+%E3%83%95%E3%82%A3%E3%83%96%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B7%E3%83%B3')**\n\nIt says, I am sorr to say I can not translate the sentence since it is too\ntechinical for me,\n\n> OR 菌は， 植物体の表面に分生子を連鎖上に形成します。従来のうどんこ病菌 とは分生子や発芽管の形状， **フィブロシン体**\n> という器官を欠く点が異なります （ 図１)。\n\n**[And this site also\nsays,](https://www.naro.affrc.go.jp/flower/kakibyo/plant_search/ka/cosmos/post_63.html)**\n\n> 病原菌は **フィブロシン体** を有する。表生菌糸上に分生子柄を直立し,分生子を鎖生する\n\nI am afraid it is too far over my capability to translate this sentene due to\nthe lack of my knowledge in this field of study.\n\nBut it looks like the above says some kind of a vacteria has some stuff so\ncalled **_フィブロシン体_** which would probaly cause **[the Powdery\nmildew](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powdery_mildew)** on plants.\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T06:33:33.300",
"id": "33617",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T06:33:33.300",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33591",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33591 | null | 33617 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What difference does it add when you write the で particle after words like それ\nand これ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T11:04:15.033",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33592",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-18T09:42:21.767",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "What difference does it add when you write それで or これで instead of それは/それが and これが/これは?",
"view_count": 725
} | [
{
"body": "これで can generally be translated as \"with this\". It's used to indicate the\nresult or conclusion following some action or happening. For example:\n\n> [今日]{きょう}の[活動]{かつどう}は、 **これで** お[開]{ひら}き。\n>\n> **With this** , today's activities come to a close.\n\nYou can find more of these examples on [Jisho's sentence\nsearch](http://jisho.org/search/%22%E3%81%93%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A7%22%20%23sentences).\n\nFor これは and これが, you need to look up the differences between は and が, which is\na complex topic (but it's been answered many times before). Generally, they\nmean \"this is\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T06:37:56.273",
"id": "33669",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T06:37:56.273",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3785",
"parent_id": "33592",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33592 | null | 33669 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Some sharks are seemingly named after birds:\n\n * great white shark: _hoojirozame_ 頬白鮫 from _hoojiro_ (meadow bunting)\n\n * sandbar shark: _mejirozame_ 目白鮫 from _mejiro_ (white-eye)\n\n * blue shark: _yoshikirizame_ 葦切鮫 from _yoshikiri_ (reed warbler)\n\nMaybe a great white does have white cheeks, but I'm not sure if a sandbar\nshark really has white eyes, and I see no connection between blue sharks and\nreed. Is this just a coincidence?\n\nOn another note, the triplewart footballfish (箕作柄長提灯鮟鱇 _mitsukuri enaga\nchouchin ankou_ ) seems to be named after the long-tailed tit ( _enaga_ )\nwhich is equally baffling.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T11:15:49.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33593",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T21:57:32.050",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-16T13:17:31.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10168",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"animals"
],
"title": "Why are some sharks named after birds?",
"view_count": 225
} | [
{
"body": "It's an interesting question, but as far as I googled, I was not able to track\nany evidence that links sharks with the birds' (names).\n\nFor examples, popular \"exceptions\" from yours are . . . **[甚平鮫,\nJinbeizame,](http://gogen-allguide.com/si/jinbeizame.html)** in English, whale\nsharks was named after because of their body appearances and patterns look\nlike that of 甚平，a Japanese haori, and another popular exceptions are\n小判鮫，kobanzame, in English, suckishes, are named because their **[rays look\nlike that of 小判 (old minted gold\n)](http://www.aqua.stardust31.com/suzuki/kobanzame-ka/kobanzame.shtml)**\n\n**[Kotobank says the following about\n目白鮫:](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%83%A1%E3%82%B8%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B6%E3%83%A1\\(%E7%9B%AE%E7%99%BD%E9%AE%AB\\)-1210887)**\n\n> 眼が白っぽい瞬膜（しゆんまく）におおわれることに由来した名称。\n\nTranslated:\n\n> Their eyes are covered by the white nictitating membrane,\n\n**[Then when I went to Wiki about what a \"nictitating membrane\"\nis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nictitating_membrane)** ,\n\nI found out that sharks and birds commonly have full nictitating membranes . .\n.\n\nAs the Wiki page says,\n\n> Some reptiles, birds, and sharks have full nictitating membranes;\n\nSo that I think some of sharks have this kind of \"full nictitating membrane\"\nlike birds, and I thought that is the reason why, I guess.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T21:42:45.923",
"id": "33599",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T21:57:32.050",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-16T21:57:32.050",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33593",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33593 | null | 33599 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33595",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 実力差は明確だった。 \n> ライダーの速度は攻めれば攻めるほど減速していく。 \n> 目にも止まらぬ高速移動と連続攻撃。 \n> **セイバーによって傷つけられた体を癒す自然治癒。** \n> 後の事など考えない。 \n> 全ての燃料を燃やして畳み掛けなければセイバーを抑えきれない。\n\nThe fantranslation says:\n\n> Natural healing that regenerates the wounds Saber sustains.\n\nBut isn't Saber the one who hurts Rider and Rider the one whose body is being\nregenerated?\n\nCan someone explain?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T12:05:41.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33594",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T01:17:26.000",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T01:17:26.000",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice",
"によって-passives"
],
"title": "によって and passive question",
"view_count": 424
} | [
{
"body": "The fan translation is not correct and your intuition is. The passive\nindicates the \"agent\" of the action by ～に（よって） (whether よって is added or not is\na different topic). So what it should really be is\n\n> Natural healing that heals (Rider's) body who was injured **by** Saber.\n\nSo the lesson is don't always trust fan translations.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T16:08:46.653",
"id": "33595",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T16:08:46.653",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "33594",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33594 | 33595 | 33595 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 少し前まで潜り屋と揶揄されていた探索者達は独自の **ブームメント** を巻き起こしているのである。\n\nMy question is to help me understand what 「ブームメント」 and「ムーブメント」 mean in\nJapanese using the example above. ブームメント gives the impression of something\nmuch stronger than ムーブメント, but I don't understand what it means in the above.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T19:09:11.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33596",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T03:15:58.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "What is the difference between「ブームメント」 and「ムーブメント」and do they share the same connotation as \"movement\" in English?",
"view_count": 452
} | [
{
"body": "I believe ブームメント is simply a typo. Some people seem to have mixed ブーム (boom)\nwith ムーブメント (movement) and came up with ブームメント.\n\nWatch this video, where one _idol_ accidentally said ブームメント, and was corrected\nby others at once.\n\n<https://youtu.be/Hl8V6vtdYIc?t=35s>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T19:18:14.327",
"id": "33597",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-16T19:18:14.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33596",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I think ブームメント can be either a simple malapromism, or an intended neology\ncombining \"boom\" and \"ment\" of \"movement.\" It may mean a sensational boom, but\nI'm not sure. The word, ブームメント isn't a standard Japanese word anyway.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T00:27:48.127",
"id": "33603",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T03:15:58.040",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T03:15:58.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33596",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33596 | null | 33597 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is the difference between ガスコンロ and ガスレンジ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T21:21:44.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33598",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T10:03:30.497",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T10:03:30.497",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10066",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"food"
],
"title": "What is the difference between ガスコンロ and ガスレンジ?",
"view_count": 1649
} | [
{
"body": "ガスコンロ is a gas burner for cooking which is set on the kitchen unit. ガスレンジ is a\ncooker using gas as the heat source that comes with a box with a door on the\nfront, in which food is cooked or heated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T00:16:38.223",
"id": "33602",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T07:07:40.097",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T07:07:40.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33598",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "First I must say that the definition of Japanese word レンジ is a bit confused.\nIn everyday speech, it's understood as an oven-like cooking device, or more\npractically, by nine out of ten chances it'd mean 電子レンジ \"microwave oven\". (As\nan aside, オーブン means _non-electrical_ oven as opposed to this.) But it also\nhas the same meaning as the English \"range\", that is a synonym of \"cooking\nstove\".\n\n> **Range** \n> **2** : a cooking stove that has an oven and a flat top with burners or\n> heating elements ([Merriam-Webster](http://www.merriam-\n> webster.com/dictionary/range))\n>\n> **レンジ** \n> **１** こんろと天火を備えた加熱調理器具。ガスレンジなど。「―フード」\n> ([デジタル大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/235255/meaning/m0u/)) \n> _(A heating device for cooking that equipped with burners and oven.)_\n\nThe second definition still survives, mostly in device makers' catalogs, thus\nshould never be forgotten.\n\nOn the other hand, コンロ (it has kanji, 焜炉) which is also a synonym of \"cooking\nstove\" nowadays, originally referred to those cooking furnaces on top of which\nyou can put materials. In modern sense, you can say the cooktop with burners\nis コンロ, or each of the burner pit is, or the whole stove unit that has cooktop\nis.\n\nThus, a standard Japanese kitchen stove as in below can be called both コンロ and\nレンジ: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pYPIs.jpg)\n\nbut, a stove like in the next image is コンロ, and not likely to be called レンジ:\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dFKhX.jpg)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T03:01:58.997",
"id": "33607",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T03:01:58.997",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33598",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33598 | null | 33607 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33604",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why is a に particle following a na-adjective in the following sentence? I know\nthat the particle has several uses, e.g. direction and location of existence,\nbut I don't know the reason why it is being used in this case.\n\n> 花が綺麗 **に** 咲いています。\n>\n> The flower is blooming beautifully.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-16T23:49:07.103",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33601",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T02:02:46.253",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"na-adjectives"
],
"title": "na-adjective + に particle?",
"view_count": 6276
} | [
{
"body": "## Short answer\n\nHere, 「綺麗 **に** 」 is like English _beautiful **ly_**. You use に for the same\nreason you use _-ly_ in English.\n\n## Long answer\n\nI wouldn't call に a 'particle' here. What it is depends on which analysis\nyou're using:\n\n 1. In the traditional Japanese grammar learned by students in Japanese schools (学校文法), _na_ -adjectives are called 形容動詞, and they're taught that 形容動詞 inflect depending on how they're used:\n\n * 綺麗 **に** ← This is an **adverbial** ending, similar to English _-ly_. It links the adjective to a following 用言 (an independent inflecting word such as a verb or adjective; basically, a word that can function as a predicator).\n\n> 綺麗 **に** 咲く\n\n * 綺麗 **な** ← This is an **adnominal** ending. It links the adjective to a following 体言 (an independent non-inflecting word such as a noun).\n\n> 綺麗 **な** 花\n\n * 綺麗 **だ** ← This is a **conclusive** ending. It comes at the end of a clause.\n\n> その花は綺麗 **だ**\n\nIn your example, 綺麗 **に** is connecting to the following predicate 咲いています. The\nword 咲く is a 用言, and the に inflectional ending is used to show a relationship\nto a following 用言, so it's the right choice.\n\nThis isn't a complete list of how _na_ -adjectives can be used, by the way.\nYou should be able to find more discussion in your textbook.\n\n 2. Many modern grammars, including many of the grammars taught to second language learners, treat _na_ -adjectives instead as a special kind of noun (a \"nominal adjective\" or an \"adjectival noun\"). In this kind of analysis, に is a form of the copula だ, the same だ you find with nouns. The main difference between the two uses of だ is that with nouns, in most cases の is used rather than な.\n\nIn this analysis, に is considered a separate word rather than an inflectional\nending. It still isn't usually considered a 'particle', though. Why not?\nBecause a particle is a function word that doesn't inflect, and だ changes\nform.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T00:30:06.203",
"id": "33604",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T02:02:46.253",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T02:02:46.253",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33601",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
]
| 33601 | 33604 | 33604 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33606",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[This page](http://www.shiro.jp.net/2013/10/tono-deno-kakrano-madenoeno-\nlearning.html) explains that a noun with と, で, から, まで that modifies another\nnoun must have の attached to them as in:\n\n> 日本 **での** 研究はいかがでしたか。\n\nBut it lists this example\n\n> 大学院 **で** 医学の研究をするつもりです。\n\nBoth with で. What is the difference between them? Are there other rules about\nの and と, で, から, まで, etc.?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T00:45:46.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33605",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T02:21:48.477",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-30T02:11:58.777",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "9357",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"particles",
"syntax",
"particle-の",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "using の with と,で, から, まで",
"view_count": 1525
} | [
{
"body": "The difference is that での shows the relationship to a following noun, just as\nthe page says. 日本での研究 forms a single noun phrase (\"research in Japan\"), and\nthis noun phrase as a whole is marked as a topic with は.\n\nIn the other example, 大学院で isn't part of a noun phrase. Instead, it modifies\nthe following predicate, （医学の研究を）する (\"do medical research\").\n\nSo it's just as the web page says. If you see ～での, you should be figuring out\nwhat noun it links to (研究), and if you see ～で, you should be figuring out what\nverb (or other predicate) it links to (する).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T01:02:19.187",
"id": "33606",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T01:02:19.187",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33605",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "In English, \"in ～\", \"from ～\" and so on modifies something both adverbially and\nadjectivally. In Japanese, you have to distinguish. Since more and more\nquestions are being marked as a duplicate of this one, I'll add some examples\nto illustrate when you need の with と/で/から/まで.\n\n * 昨日彼と話した。 \nI talked with him yesterday.\n\n * 彼との話し合いは昨日行われた。 \nThe meeting with him was held yesterday.\n\n * 日本で生活している。 \nI live in Japan.\n\n * 日本での生活は楽しい。 \nLife in Japan is fun.\n\n * カナダから手紙が来た。 \nA letter came from Canada.\n\n * カナダからの手紙を読んだ。 \nI read a letter from Canada.\n\n * 朝まで待ちます。 \nI'll wait until the morning.\n\n * 朝までの時間を過ごす場所を探そう。 \nLet's find a place to spend the time until the morning.\n\nAnd more complicated examples:\n\n * 先生から手紙を読めと言われた。 \nI was told by my teacher to read the letter (from someone else). \n(先生から modifies 言われた.)\n\n * 先生からの手紙を読めと言われた。 \nI was told (by someone else) to read the letter from my teacher. \n(先生からの modifies 手紙.)\n\n * 神戸で大阪から東京への切符を買った。 \nI bought in Kobe a ticket from Osaka to Tokyo. \n(～から～へ and ～から～まで is a set phrase and only one の is necessary)\n\n * 彼とのインドへの旅行は楽しかった。 \nThe trip to India with him was fun. \n(Two の are necessary)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-29T05:47:46.903",
"id": "61177",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-30T02:21:48.477",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-30T02:21:48.477",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33605",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33605 | 33606 | 33606 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33619",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Is there a difference between 興味を持っている and 興味がある? With physical objects I\nunderstand how the latter is more passive, but what about for abstract nouns\nlike 興味? For example in the sentence\n\n> 片岡さんは、外国語に **興味を持っている** から、フランス語でも中国語でも、すぐ覚えてしまう。\n\nIs there any difference if I instead say\n\n> 片岡さんは、外国語に **興味がある** から、フランス語でも中国語でも、すぐ覚えてしまう。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T09:44:46.687",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33618",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T14:05:07.203",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T12:17:55.197",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11479",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"possession"
],
"title": "興味を持っている vs 興味がある",
"view_count": 2142
} | [
{
"body": "興味を持っている is equivalent to \"have an interest in sth.\" 興味がある is eqivalent to \"be\ninterested in sth.\" Both are saying the same thing.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T11:00:16.543",
"id": "33619",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T11:00:16.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33618",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "It's just my opinion, \nI guess that a subject is different among those two sentences.\n\nFor example:\n\n> 私は[疑問]{ぎもん}を持っている \n> I have a question.\n>\n> 私は疑問がある \n> →私(に)は疑問がある \n> There is a question in my mind\n\nThe latter is a little bit more natural as spoken language in Japan than the\nformer, but I think those are completely same. I feel many of the former are\nexpressions from the literal translation.\n\n> 私には[良]{よ}い[案]{あん}がある \n> →I have a good idea. \n> →私は良い案を持っている",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T11:06:29.123",
"id": "33620",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T14:05:07.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "13598",
"parent_id": "33618",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33618 | 33619 | 33619 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33622",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As the title say, I want to express the idea of an character overshadowing the\nmain character in a story. The only thing that I was able to found in the\ndictionary was 霞む, but this seems to be more on the sense of \"cast a shadow\nover\" when what I'm looking for is \"much more prominent or important than\".\nWhat could I use in this case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T11:59:03.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33621",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T01:04:18.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3770",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "to overshadow in japanese",
"view_count": 229
} | [
{
"body": "霞む has that sense, though relationship is reverse. In short, 主役{しゅやく}が霞む{かすむ}\nmeans that the main character is overshadowed by another character.\n\nIf you want the subject to be the one who overshadows, you can say ◯◯が\n主役を食う{くう} or use counterparts of to surpass or to\noverwhelm（凌駕{りょうが}する・圧倒{あっとう}する）. (You should be careful that aspect of these\nverbs is ている form when it's needed)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T13:37:16.923",
"id": "33622",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T01:04:18.720",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T01:04:18.720",
"last_editor_user_id": "10045",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "33621",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33621 | 33622 | 33622 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> ここは、おすしがぜんぶ百円なの？\n\nI've read somewhat a lot on \"na no\" and just came to the conclusion that is\nsomething used to end a sentence similar to desu, but used mainly with\nfemales. So I was just wondering if this was the case in my sentence. Also the\n\"お\" written before \"sushi\" is just a honorific prefix right? Or does it\nmeaning something else / have another use in the sentence?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T14:56:40.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33623",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-20T10:31:23.940",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T21:49:31.747",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14198",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "What does the ”なの” in this sentence mean?",
"view_count": 2448
} | [
{
"body": "なの means what you say. This なの is used as question. なの can be used as both\naffirmative and question sentence.\n\nお is a polite prefix. For example, お家、お店、お弁当. In addition ご is also a polite\nprefix like ご飯、ご家族.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T15:52:47.747",
"id": "33625",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T15:52:47.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Very literally speaking, なの consists of a nominal adjective marker な and a\nnominalizer particle の. This sounds like a roundabout way to say 'is/ is\nsomething like', which makes it understandable that it is mainly used by\nfemales. When used in a question, the か is sometimes omitted.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T20:33:53.270",
"id": "33665",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T20:33:53.270",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11489",
"parent_id": "33623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "That なの or any other のだ forms indicate that information that's accompanied\nwith it is one to complement existing context. (In sentences of statement, it\nfunctions as explanation of background for a preceding topic.)\n\nIn your example, it's probably used in a situation where you reconfirm it\nafter your opponent said that all the sushi there are 100 yen, or so. That's\nwhy she is using an interrogative sentence with a のだ form.\n\nEdit: For some reason, emphasizing なの is often considered a feminine factor in\nfiction but in reality it's equally used regardless of gender and even when\nmen use it, it doesn't sound girly. Old textbooks might still teach that bias.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T09:15:44.590",
"id": "33672",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T09:41:41.230",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T09:41:41.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "33623",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33623 | null | 33672 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33631",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 独特の臭いだな。鼻の奥まで染みこんで **くる** ぞ。\n>\n> 穴から水が溢れて **くる**\n>\n> 水槽に手を入れると舐め回して **くる** 人なつっこいホトケドジョウ\n\nてくる is something I've never really seen a clear and comprehensive explanation\nof the different uses and what they mean. They all just focus on the\ndifference between the meanings and not going into depth about them.\n\nTaking <http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/64270/meaning/m1u/%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B/>\ndefinitions\n\n1) 少しずつ移行したり、程度が進んだりして、しだいにその状態になる \nIndicates gradual change \ne.g. 最近太ってきた\n\n2) ある動作・状態が前から続いている \nA certain action or situation has continued from the past \ne.g. 俺はこの国を守ってきた\n\n3) ある動作をしてもとに戻る。…しに行って帰る \nTo do something and return \ne.g. ちょっとビール買ってくる\n\n4) ある動作・状態をそのまま続けながら、こちらへ近づく \nTo describe a motion coming towards the speaker. \ne.g. 先生が歩いてくる\n\nIn the examples above what 'meaning' does くる represent?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T15:52:29.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33624",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T20:41:28.777",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T16:37:03.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"て-form"
],
"title": "Meaning of くる in 鼻の奥まで染みこんでくる",
"view_count": 268
} | [
{
"body": "Please read this question first: [Difference between -ていく and\n-てくる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/676/5010)\n\nParticularly, Flaw's answer there is the most relevant. Your example sentences\nall correspond to the definition **「4) こちらへ近づく」** , but note that this 近づく\ndoes not always refer to the _physical_ movement of something. Very\nfrequently, this くる is used when something is moving toward the speaker\n_psychologically_.\n\nIn your examples, we can probably say the 臭い and the 水 are actually coming to\nthe speaker physically, but the more important implication is \"the 臭い/水 is\ngoing to involve me.\" In the ホトケドジョウ's example, its physical movement is not\nnecessarily important, but \"the ホトケドジョウ is going to interact with me\" is the\nimportant nuance of that くる.\n\nTo take another example, 友達が私に話しかけて来た is a common expression, and this can be\nused even when the friend had been next to the speaker for an hour. On the\nother hand, 友達が私に話しかけた would usually sound unnatural because it sounds as if\nthe speaker were impersonally describing someone else's affairs.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T20:41:28.777",
"id": "33631",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T20:41:28.777",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33624",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33624 | 33631 | 33631 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "ようやくきたかって感じでした\n\nI'm assuming ようやく is 踊躍 and きた is from 来る but I'm not really sure what the\nmeaning of the sentence is.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T15:55:23.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33626",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T17:50:23.313",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Can someone please help me understand the structure of this sentence?",
"view_count": 133
} | [
{
"body": "* ようやく: not 踊躍 but [漸く](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%BC%B8%E3%81%8F), meaning \"at last\", \"finally\". It's usually written in hiragana since it's an adverb.\n * 来た: \"came\"\n * か: a surprise marker rather than a question marker in this case. (eg そうか! = \"Oh, I got it!\", お前か! = \"Oh, it's you!\")\n * ～って感じでした = ～という感じでした: \"It was like ～\", \"I kinda thought/felt ～\". ～という感じ is often used to make the sentence milder and less affirmative.\n\nThe whole sentence roughly means \"I kinda thought 'Finally you came!' \"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T16:49:25.487",
"id": "33627",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T17:50:23.313",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T17:50:23.313",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33626",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33626 | null | 33627 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33629",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This sentence is confusing me a bit, particularly the bold part:\n\n> 国際社会に通用する **人材を作り上げる** ことに繋がるってわけなんだよ！\n\nJisho.org has the definition of 人材 as:\n\n> capable person; talented person; human resources; personnel\n\nAnd the definition of 作り上げる as\n\n> to make up; to fabricate; to build up; to complete; to construct\n\nSo putting two and two together it seems like we're talking about \"building a\ntalented person\" which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Could it be that 人材\ncan also just mean \"talent\" or \"ability\"? Or could it be that \"xを作り上げる\" can\nmean \"to make into x\"?\n\nExtended context:\n\n> A: 「ゲームをはじめ、日本のサブカルチャーは今や世界に轟いているのだ」\n>\n> B: 「うむ、それで？」\n>\n> C: 「だからゲームをやりまくるってのは...」\n>\n> A: 「国際社会に通用する **人材を作り上げる** ことに繋がるってわけなんだよ！」\n>\n> B: 「どーいう理屈だ...」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T17:15:38.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33628",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T07:07:42.630",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T23:29:55.907",
"last_editor_user_id": "10407",
"owner_user_id": "10407",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words"
],
"title": "Meaning of 人材を作り上げる",
"view_count": 223
} | [
{
"body": "人材 usually means \"human resources\" because the kanji 材 means \"resource\" or\n\"material.\" While a good 人材 is always a precious thing, I doubt 人材 itself\nnecessarily means \"talented.\" For example, a boss may say 彼は素晴らしい人材だ referring\nto his person and it means something like \"He's a capable/talented person\".\nBut 彼は人材だ wouldn't make much sense.\n\nAnd 作り上げる here is \"to develop/foster\".\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT** : I'm sorry, I noticed a monolingual dictionary defines 人材 as \"a\ntalented and/or capable person\". [デジタル大辞泉\nsays](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/114233/meaning/m0u/%E4%BA%BA%E6%9D%90/):\n\n> 才能があり、役に立つ人。有能な人物。人才。「―を求める」「―不足」\n\nOn the other hand, ALC (online J-E/E-J dictionary) says 人材 is \"human\nresource\", \"manpower\", \"workforce\", etc. They're very different, but I feel\nALC's translations are closer to the modern usage of this word.\n\nI strongly think that 君は人材だ never means \"You are a talented/capable person.\"\nIt does not make much sense, but it sounds even derogatory to my ears, because\nit's like saying \"You are a resource.\" 君は会社の貴重な人材だ is okay as long as someone\nhigher says this to his employee.\n\n人材 in 人材を作り上げる is \"someone who has gained some skill through training, and can\nbe counted as an independent worker of a company\", or simply \"a dependable\nbusinessperson\". But keep in mind that this is a word mainly used in the\ncontext of company management, from the viewpoint of the managers.\n\n人材派遣会社 means \"temporary staffing/employment agency\", and people dispatched by\nsuch firms are not necessarily talented specialists. In this case, 人材 just\nmeans _manpower_ , _workforce_.\n\nFinally, your example essentially is a joke. 国際社会に通用する人材を作り上げる/育成する (=\"to\ndevelop world-class businesspersons\") is a kind of phrase said tons of times\nby presidents of global companies and universities. But it's not a phrase\nyoung people may say seriously in conversations. Associating games with such a\n\"sophisticated\" phrase is the funny part of his line.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T18:28:59.140",
"id": "33629",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T07:07:42.630",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T07:07:42.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33628",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "\"Building a talented person\" may not be the most natural English, but it still\nmakes a lot of sense. What is it that you find hardly-sensical about it, given\nthat you seem to be okay with \"building (a) talent/ability\"? Is it because you\nthink \"build\" shouldn't be applied to living, sentient beings like humans?\n\nI think the meaning of 人材, in this case, is much akin to that of the word\n\"talent\", as in \"talented people collectively\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T00:19:38.517",
"id": "33636",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T00:19:38.517",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "33628",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 33628 | 33629 | 33629 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33633",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Please look at the 2nd kanji in the 熟語 that starts with 陰: \n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bAD1n.jpg)\n\nThat 熟語 means \" _grimly_ \" and looks like a 形容動詞. Example usage:\n\n> 「もう一度、JLPT不合格です」家庭教師は陰＿にいった。\n\nUsing _New Nelson_ I looked under `陰` and did not find that 熟語.\n\n 1. What is that kanji (音、訓、画数、部首)?\n 2. I'm using a Mac. How can I input that character into a document? I'd be happy to cut/paste from a web page.\n 3. Why would a translator use such a crazy 熟語 to express the feeling of \" _grimly_ \"? For me, a non-native, I look at that 熟語 and actually feel \"grim\" because it reminds me that kanji are a never ending nightmare for me. But, what about native speakers?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T20:38:49.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33630",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T06:40:21.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12506",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji"
],
"title": "what is this kanji? why is it used?",
"view_count": 2071
} | [
{
"body": "It's 鬱, which is read as うつ. See [this entry from\nWiktionary](https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%AC%B1) for details.\n\nIMEs can easily convert うつ into 鬱, but don't worry, I don't remember how to\nwrite this kanji by hand. Although it's a 常用漢字 since 2010, it's too\ncomplicated :-) I believe many native speakers are like me.\n\nActually, this character is famous as an example of insanely complicated\nkanji. 厚切りジェイソン, a foreign comedian, [often uses this kanji in his\nbits](https://youtu.be/frFUdx_PMgA?t=3m54s).\n\nYour third question is a bit hard to answer because there is not enough\ncontext, but I personally think 陰鬱 is not uncommon at least in novels.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T21:02:11.277",
"id": "33632",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T21:02:11.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "This kanji is 「うつ」, and it should appear in the kanji conversion list on Mac\nwhen you enter these kana. One of the most common words it appears in is\n[鬱病]{うつ・びょう}, which is the word for \"depression\". Another is [憂鬱]{ゆう・うつ} which\nalso means \"depression\", \"gloom\", or \"melancholy\". The former is (I believe)\nthe medical term for depression, while the latter is more subjective. Other\nthan that, I'm not too sure on any other nuances between them.\n\nThe word in question is [陰鬱]{いん・うつ}, and the sentence would be something like:\n\n> \"Once again I've failed the JLPT\", the (home) tutor stated grimly.\n\nYou can get the sense of sadness and disappointment of the person by the use\nof this word; especially since they mentioned that they failed **again**.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T21:05:21.837",
"id": "33633",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T21:05:21.837",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "33630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "# 鬱\n\nis a rarely used kanji due to its complexity (I think this is the most\ncomplicated kanji in the jouyou list?), and it stands for depression,\nmelancholia. Some words using it include:\n\n * 鬱病 (うつびょう) clinical depression\n * 陰鬱 (いんうつ) gloom, melancholy\n * 憂鬱 (ゆううつ) dejection, gloom, depression\n\nMost of the time when you see this kanji it will be read with the on-yomi ウツ\nbut jisho also gives the kun-yomi readings of うっする、ふさぐ、しげる which do not seem\nto be normally used.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-17T21:08:57.767",
"id": "33634",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T06:40:21.750",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11589",
"parent_id": "33630",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33630 | 33633 | 33633 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33637",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm confused about the use of the wo/o particle. I've read many times that is\nused to indicate direct objects, but in phrases like this there is a direct\nobject and there isn't a particle wo to indicate it.\n\n```\n\n Watashi wa Hana desu.\n \n```\n\nAt least in Spanish (not sure in English) \"Hana\" would be considered the\ndirect object. It is wo omitted in certain phrases or the meaning of \"direct\nobject\" is not exactly the same as in other languages or how it is?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T00:14:08.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33635",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T06:15:19.367",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T06:15:19.367",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"particle-を",
"copula"
],
"title": "If the particle wo is used to indicate direct object why isn't it used in some sentences where there are direct objects?",
"view_count": 714
} | [
{
"body": "Not all complements are direct objects.\n\n* * *\n\nLet's look at each language, one by one:\n\n * ## English\n\n> I **am** _Hana_.\n\n_Be_ is an intransitive copular verb, here in its form _am_. It takes _Hana_\nas a copular complement, but that complement is not a direct object. Instead,\nit's what is traditionally known as a \"subject complement\", sometimes called a\n\"predicative complement\" in modern grammar.\n\nWhy? Because the grammar differs from that of a direct object. You can have an\nadjective as a copular complement, but not as direct objects.\n\n * ## Spanish\n\n> (Yo) **soy** _Hana_.\n\n_Ser_ is a copular verb, not a transitive verb, here in its form _soy_. It\ntakes _Hana_ as a copular complement, but that complement is not a direct\nobject. Almost all uses of Spanish verbs can be considered transitive or\nintransitive, but in this use _ser_ is usually put in a separate, very small\ngroup of copular verbs with their own special grammar.\n\nWhy? How does a copular complement differ from a direct object in Spanish?\nWell, try putting a pronoun in that position. Object pronouns take accusative\ncase, but as copular complements, pronouns take nominative case instead. So\ncopular complements can't be considered a kind of object.\n\n * ## Japanese\n\n> (Watashi wa) _Hana_ **desu**.\n\n_Desu_ is a copular auxiliary, but not a verb. In this use, it directly\nfollows its copular complement, _Hana_ , without any particle in between. This\ncomplement is not a direct object. As you've noticed, _Hana_ cannot be marked\nby _o_ here, which is some of the best evidence we have that it's not a direct\nobject.\n\nYou'll learn later that sometimes _o_ marks things other than direct objects,\nbut direct objects can pretty much always be marked by _o_. This is an\n\"accusative case particle\", the equivalent of using the object form of a\npronoun in Spanish.\n\nAs you can see, the grammatical details in each language differ, but _Hana_\nisn't a direct object in any of them.\n\n* * *\n\nNote: I've transcribed を as _o_ here, but it's the same thing you wrote as\n_wo_.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T01:13:05.103",
"id": "33637",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T01:13:05.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33635",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 33635 | 33637 | 33637 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33639",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am aware of the word for organizing a cabinet, organizing a room, but what\nis the word when one wants to say that a person organized an event, as in a\nperson arranging an event or a gathering?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T01:22:44.493",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33638",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T06:23:03.237",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T05:09:53.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "7923",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"translation",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "How do I say organize in Japanese as in organize an event?",
"view_count": 6064
} | [
{
"body": "企画する would be a good one I think.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T04:06:07.027",
"id": "33639",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T06:23:03.237",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T06:23:03.237",
"last_editor_user_id": "7923",
"owner_user_id": "14203",
"parent_id": "33638",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This is an interesting question for me as I came across the same problem\nseveral times in the past (that is, realized that in several occasion I was\nnot sure how to properly translate \"organize\" referred to an event).\n\nAfter some research and asking around a little bit, probably for the specific\ncase of an \"event\" I learned that the best match would be 計画{けいかく}する。\n\nTo make sure I remembered correctly I run simple google search for\n\"イベントを計画する\". It returned 50.100 results, which makes that likely (very\nempirically speaking) to be a correct expression.\n\nI also checked ib weblio for sample sentences for\n[organize](http://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/Organize) and indeed there\nis one example using 計画する just to refer to a generic event.\n\nIn general, however, it is interesting to see how a general word such as\n\"organize\" in English might not have a single translation. Rather, the choice\nfor a correct word to translate \"organize\" seems to depend very much on what\nis that you have to organize.\n\nA few example are 整理{せいり}する (quite general, for data, questions, thoughts\netc), 組織{そしき}する (generally related to political things, like parties, agencies\netc), as well as a simple 準備{じゅんび}する that is very widely used as well (after\nall \"prepare\" and \"organize\" have quite a similar meaning).\n\nEdit: In particular, since I noticed that you also mentioned a \"gathering\", in\nthat case also 催{もよお}す and 主催{しゅさい}する are widely used.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T04:56:30.270",
"id": "33641",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T05:14:50.820",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T05:14:50.820",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "33638",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33638 | 33639 | 33641 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "38629",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This proverb is attributed to an unknown Japanese author\n(<http://thinkexist.com/quotation/none_of_us_are_as_smart_as_all_of/160488.html>).\nHowever I could not find any mention of its actual origin.\n\nWould anybody here be able to translate the sentence or its spirit? I would\nlike to use it for a presentation at work.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T09:13:03.213",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33642",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-22T05:04:48.647",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-22T05:04:48.647",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "664",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"usage",
"proverbs"
],
"title": "none of us is as smart as all of us",
"view_count": 1441
} | [
{
"body": "I think 三人寄れば文殊の知恵 (lit. \"If three people gather, the wisdom of\n[Monju](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manjushri) (is achieved)\") is the\nclosest proverb in Japanese.\n\nI'm not aware of any Japanese set phrase that can literally translate to \"None\nof us are as smart as all of us\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-22T00:34:08.900",
"id": "38629",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-22T00:34:08.900",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33642 | 38629 | 38629 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33650",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Uncle is blocking the doorway and waving his hand. He says:\n\n> 「わしゃ松阪牛のステーキなんて、とてもとても、おかあさん、気ィ使わなくて **いいから** 、そんな、わしのために買い物に行かなくて **いいから**\n> 、松阪牛なんて **いいから** 、ステーキなんて **いいから** 。」\n\nI'm really struggling to understand this sentence. \n1. Is わしゃ a contraction of わしは? \n2. I thought なんて was an emphatic version of は but that would mean I had two topic markers in わしゃ松阪牛のステーキなんて, neither of which seems to be contrastive. \n3. Is 気ィ使う the same as 気を使う? \n4. Is ていい the same as てもいい? \n\nSo with these assumptions I get:\n\n> I a thing like Matsusaka steak very very mother don't need to fuss about so,\n> such a, for my sake there's no need to go shopping so, a thing like\n> Matsusaka steak is good so, a thing like steak is good so,\n\nWhich is utter nonsense. Please help me untangle this sentence.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T20:01:32.223",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33645",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T00:11:40.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"contractions",
"ellipsis"
],
"title": "Meaning of ...ていいから and other puzzles",
"view_count": 1072
} | [
{
"body": "Translating loosely:\n\n> Matsusaka steak for me? Dear, don't bother about me. Don't bother shopping\n> for me. Don't bother with Matsusaka beef.\n\nおかあさん literally means mother, but oftentimes you'll hear husbands (especially\nolder ones) calling their wives おかあさん.\n\nTo answer your questions:\n\n 1. Yes\n 2. 私はステーキなんていいから means something like \"I don't need things **such as** steak\". The speaker is emphasizing that steak is too good of a thing for him. The なんて adds emphasis that the steak is something fancy and いいから means something like \"You don't need to\". If I said 買わなくていいから, this would mean \"You don't need to buy it\".\n 3. Yes \n 4. Yes",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T00:11:40.580",
"id": "33650",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T00:11:40.580",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14208",
"parent_id": "33645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33645 | 33650 | 33650 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33651",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have a question about the grammar (assuming it is grammatical and not\nfigurative) in the following line from the song ときめきポポロン from the anime\nご注文はうさぎですか？.\n\n> つまんないないんだよ\n\nI think the meaning is pretty clear (we won't be bored) but I'm curious about\nthe seemingly extra ない. Would つまらないんだよ have the exact same meaning? Is it\ncommon to add ない to いadjectives for emphasis?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T20:56:32.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33646",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T03:50:37.213",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T21:39:56.443",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"song-lyrics",
"i-adjectives"
],
"title": "Help parsing つまんないないんだよ",
"view_count": 377
} | [
{
"body": "Actually, what \"つまんないないんだよ\" means is not clear, mainly because... it's\nungrammatical. If you want to put \"つまんない(boring)\" into a negative by adding\nない, the correct way is to inflect the first \"ない\", um, accordingly, so that you\nget \"つまんな **く** ない(not boring)\".\n\nAssuming this goof is all intentional, which it most likely is, just the\nsongwriter playing around with words, then what do they intend it to mean?\n\nI think it's either that they really meant negative, but chose to ignore the\nrules, because they can (well it's a song), or that they put the extra ない\nwithout adding any semantic value, just for the hell of it (well it's an anime\nsong).\n\nSo which one is it? -- I really don't know. In cases like this, looking at the\ncontext will surely help? So here it is:\n\n> ハートもふもふ 暖かい気持ちおすそわけしたい つまんないないよ あれこれそれもしよう\n\n... which leaves me even more mystified.\n\nThis is as close to the bottom of the question as I could get. Sorry for the\nindefinite answer. My initial gut feeling said it was \"for the hell of it\", if\nit's any redemption.\n\n==EDIT==\n\nAfter turning the quote over in my mind a little more, and actually watching\nthe video for the song, I'm much more inclined to think the \"つまんないない\" is just\na \"つまんない\" with double ない, the extra one added for artistic reason, not\nnegation. So \"つまんないないよ あれこれそれもしよう\", I think, is saying \"It's so boring! (So)\nlet's do this and that and such and such!\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T22:55:36.550",
"id": "33649",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T00:19:10.280",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T00:19:10.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "33646",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "ない can be repeated many times for emphasis (ie. ないないないない… ≒ No, no, no, no,\nno...) even in ordinary conversations, and it just means **\"absolutely\nno/impossible\"** regardless of whether the number is even or odd.\n\nつまんないない is certainly ungrammatical in everyday writings, but since it's a\nsong, I think this just means つまんない (boring), emphasized in a peculiar way\nonly found in lyrics.\n\nWith [this full-text lyrics search service](http://www.uta-net.com/) I could\neasily find similar examples of repeated ない:\n\n * [Crazy Dancer](http://www.uta-net.com/song/203374/) by 夜の本気ダンス\n\n> **足りないないない** 夜明かしでも \n> **せつないないない** ごまかしてんだ\n\n([video](https://youtu.be/XnkPpSKv20c?t=1m7s))\n\n * [オールカテゴライズ](http://www.uta-net.com/song/197232/) by 焚吐\n\n> 絶望感に苛まれても この手で救い **たいたいたい** だから \n> (snip) \n> そんな世界を想像したけど だめだめ **ありえないないない** だけど\n\n([video](https://youtu.be/YQleDJAZtZo?t=58s) for the たいたいたい part)\n\n * [Start it right away](http://www.uta-net.com/song/129264/) by ヒャダイン\n\n> **全く関係ないないないないない** とか 言い散らかして\n\n([video](https://youtu.be/K8lBBV9ISDw?t=2m))\n\nWell, there are only two ない's in ときめきポポロン, but [after actually listening to\nthe song](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk9pucVX2nk), I think it's safe to\nsay this (つまん)ないない is used in the same way as the above.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T03:20:14.160",
"id": "33651",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T03:50:37.213",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T03:50:37.213",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33646",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33646 | 33651 | 33651 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33652",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I could meet the phrase ものとする in some documents, agreements. I understand, the\nsentences with ものとする as a whole one, but I don't know anything about this very\nphrase. Which meaning does it exactly add to the sentence and in which\nsituation I could use it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-18T22:06:56.233",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33648",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T12:23:26.520",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9364",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "Meaning and usage of ものとする",
"view_count": 1737
} | [
{
"body": "...ものとする is a legal turn of phrase you frequently find in legal documents,\nbusiness contracts and legal agreements in such a way:\n\n> * 本契約書は日本の法律に準拠し、日本の法律に従って解釈され、強制される **ものとする** \n> ー This agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in\n> accordance with the law of Japan.\n>\n> * 住所変更の通知は、その到達によって効力が発生する **ものとする** \n> ー Notice of a change of address shall be effective only upon receipt of\n> concerned parties.\n>\n> * 売主及び買い主は、それが本契約によって企図されている取引に関連して負担したすべての料金及び費用を支払う **ものとする** \n> ー The Purchaser and the Seller will respectively pay all fees and expenses\n> incurred by them in connection with the transaction contemplated hereunder.\n>\n> * 会社と代理店の両者は定期的に契約品の販売を促進するために、相互に情報及び市場報告を提供する **ものとする** \n> ー Both Company and Distributor shall periodically furnish information and\n> market report each other to promote the sale of product.\n>\n>\n\n\"ものとする\" can be interpreted as \"It is agreed upon\" or \"It is stipulated,\" but\nthere's no problem if you dispense with it in a clause, and as you see, it\nwill not make any difference on the purport of text.\n\nPersonally I don't like this redundant expression, which is simply an\nantiquated and superficial legal cliche, but lamentably it's still being used\nubiquitously in legal documents.This is nothing more than a tool for lawyers\nto charge their clients an extra and exorbitant fee for cosmeticizing their\nclumsy legal documents with patina.\n\nA reminder: There are other usages resembling \"ものとする.\" That is ものに(or と)する,\nwhich is irrelevant to legal statements, and used to mean:\n\n(1) _to make sth one's own possession_ , e.g.\n\n> 彼は社長の地位を物（もの）にした - meaning \"He won the position of president.\" \n>\n\n(2) _to take a good command of sth_ , e.g.\n\n> 彼は英語を物（もの）にした - meaning \"He mastered English language.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T05:27:15.613",
"id": "33652",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T12:23:26.520",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T12:23:26.520",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33648",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 33648 | 33652 | 33652 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33654",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not sure what 上 means in this sentence. I know that 上 means `above` or\n`on`, but I think the meaning here is different because it does not mention\nanything above or on the sushi.\n\n> 僕はいつもここでは握り寿司の **上** を頼むんだ。\n\nDoes it mean:\n\n> I always ask for the top hand-rolled sushi here.\n\ni.e. best hand-rolled sushi?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T06:06:27.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33653",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T06:45:44.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "What's the meaning of 上 in this sentence?",
"view_count": 1522
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, 上 in a restaurant menu is read じょう, and it means \"deluxe\", \"premium\" or\n\"high grade\". But 上 is often not the highest ranked menu, because restaurants\ncommonly offer 特上 menus, too.\n\n> 特上【とくじょう】 (lit. super deluxe) ＞ 上【じょう】 (lit. deluxe) ＞ 並【なみ】 (lit. normal)\n\nSo practically, 上 is often considered as \"middle grade\".\n\nAnother traditional way to express the rank of food is 松【まつ】 ＞ 竹【たけ】 ＞ 梅【うめ】,\nwhich are frequently used in _bento_ shops, _sushi_ restaurants and _unagi_\nrestaurants.\n\nReference:\n\n * [松竹梅のランクの意味](http://xn--p9jbr9b1a6d5316g.com/archives/401.html)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T06:27:14.400",
"id": "33654",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T06:45:44.500",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T06:45:44.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33653",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 33653 | 33654 | 33654 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33986",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "こんにちは! I'm new to this site and Japanese language. I haven't learnt the entire\nHiragana alphabet yet and don't know any Katakana. I'm trying my best to stay\naway from Romaji, so please be aware that I am working at a very basic level!\n\nI want to be able to understand the structure of sentences, first and\nforemost. I have been told that Japanese sentences are structured using SOV.\n\n**Is this sentence correct?** If so, could it be improved? If not, where did I\ngo wrong?\n\n> わたし は にほんご へた\n\nAs far as I know, it translates to '[Subject] - I am / [Object] - Japanese /\n[Verb] - bad at'\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T08:19:39.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33655",
"last_activity_date": "2017-05-08T17:39:36.820",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T08:20:39.717",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14211",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "Is this sentence structured correctly?",
"view_count": 512
} | [
{
"body": "> 私{わたし}は日本語{にほんご}下手{へた} -> × (incorrect)\n>\n> 私{わたし}の日本語{にほんご}は下手{へた}です -> ○ (correct)\n\n私{わたし}の = My \n日本語{にほんご} = Japanese \nは下手{へた}です = is bad/clumsy\n\nSome examples with simple sentences:\n\n> This apple is red = このりんごは赤い{あかい}です\n>\n> Your dog is cute = あなたの犬{いぬ}はかわいい\n>\n> I will go to eat with my friends in Shibuya = 私は渋谷{しぶや}に友達{ともだち}と食{た}べにいきます\n\nI hope it could help.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T09:24:45.303",
"id": "33656",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T16:28:58.987",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "12055",
"parent_id": "33655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I'm going to put this here, for posterity:\n\nLiterally speaking you would want to say\n\n> \"私の日本語は下手です\" (わたし の にほんご は へた です)\n\nso you're incredibly close, but missing out the 'connectives' :L\n\nBut in my opinion you could get away with it, especially with what you're\ntrying to say :P \n(It could me interpreted as \"I am a poor Japanese\" but you should be fine).\n\n> わたし は にほんご へた。 \n> わたし の にほんご は へた です。\n\nI'm not sure if you want me to explain why but I'll do so just in case: \n\n> わたし は = I am/As for me \n> わたし の = My/Mine\n\nYou'll have to say \"My Japanese...\" instead of \"I am poor...\" (I'm not sure\nwhy D: ) \n\n> が = As/Is/But/Are (Basically any new information).\n\nYou're basically saying \"My Japanese [NEW INFORMATION] poor.\" (I kinda love it\nbecause it's just one word for just about all the connectives).\n\n> です = It is/is/are (What a glorious anime phrase; it's really just\n> formal/polite, but I think in this case you probably ought to say it).\n\nIt's really just \"My Japanese is poor, it is.\" Though I don't really know how\nto put it into an English example, (you probably know) it always goes at the\nend of a sentence.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T05:06:36.007",
"id": "33668",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T16:26:46.380",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T16:26:46.380",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14211",
"parent_id": "33655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> わたし は にほんご へた\n\nis absolutely correct, so you shouldn't be surprised if you hear it.\n\nBut it's colloquial and informal, so you should only expect it in speech and\nvery informal writing. You could consider it a colloquial version of\n\n> わたし は にほんご が へた だ\n\nDropping が is very common in speech in matrix clauses (e.g. outside of\nrelative clauses and subclauses). Dropping だ (copula) in matrix clauses is\nalso common, mostly in colloquial female speech. If you're a beginner, I\nrecommend learning the versions without particle-dropping first.\n\nHere, にほんご is actually not the object, but the subject. The literal\ntranslation would be \"As for me, (my) Japanese is bad\". This construction is\nextremely common in Japanese, at least as common as わたし の にほんご は へた だ.\n\nIn the above, you could replace だ (the non-polite copula) with です (the polite\ncopula).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T05:09:17.263",
"id": "33688",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T05:09:17.263",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1073",
"parent_id": "33655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Regarding the comments on your posted answer:\n\nI think @sombrero's examples may be confusing you because he uses です in two\ndifferent ways. Let's start simply:\n\n> これは犬{いぬ}です \n> As for this, dog is \n> This is a dog\n\nIn this sentence です is indispensible. It means 'is'. Dog is a noun. Whenever\nwe want to say something is a noun we use です.\n\n> 私の日本語は下手です \n> As for my Japanese, poor is \n> My Japanese is poor\n\nAgain です is indispensible. In English 'poor' is an adjective. However, in\nJapanese it is something called a na-adjective which behaves a little\ndifferently. When a na-adjective is not directly modifying a noun (e.g. hetana\nhito, unskillful person) it behaves like a noun. Hence we have the 'something\nis noun' structure again and we must use です to mean 'is'.\n\nNow let's take one of @sombrero's examples.\n\n> This apple is red = このりんごは赤{あか}いです\n\nRed is an adjective in English. In Japanese 赤い is something called an\ni-adjective. Unlike English these adjectives have the word 'is' built in to\nthem. So\n\n> このりんごは赤{あか}い\n\nis a complete perfectly grammatical sentence which contains the meaning 'is'.\n\nSo why did @sombrero add a です to the end? It's because です has another meaning.\nIt can be put after an i-adjective to make the sentence polite. In this usage\nです cannot be translated. It just changes the tone of the sentence without\nadding extra words/meaning. Without です the sentence is correct but informal.\n\nRegarding @dainichi's answer, it seems that the Japanese love to miss out as\nmany words/particles as they can. It is good to know this for comprehension\nbut at this stage in your studies you should not be doing this. Only start to\ndrop words/particles when you have a firm understanding of the grammar and\nhave become familiar with the contexts in which natives drop them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-07T09:23:25.117",
"id": "33986",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-07T09:34:52.910",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-07T09:34:52.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "33655",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33655 | 33986 | 33688 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33658",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> それだって、実際に選んでみない **ことにはわからない** のだ。\n\nI often see something like 私にわからない meaning \"I don't understand\", but what does\nit mean when the particle に attaches to こと?\n\nFrom the context I think what this sentences means is \"Nevertheless, I must\ntry to make a choice\". So I'm thinking **ことにはわからない** means something like \"it\nis not possible\" but I don't see that supported in any of the dictionaries\nwhere I checked the definitions of わかる.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T12:51:46.493",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33657",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T13:30:06.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10407",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Meaning of ことにはわからない",
"view_count": 408
} | [
{
"body": "`(A) + ないことには + (B) + ない` is a fixed construction meaning \"not (B) if not (A)\"\nor \"not (B) without/unless (A)\".\n\n> 実際に選んでみないことにはわからないのだ。 \n> I don't understand it unless I actually choose it.\n\n[JGram has many examples of this\npattern.](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=naikotoniha) (Note: This\npage contains some examples not related to this pattern. Ignore examples #259\nand #5258 for now.)\n\nThis ～ないことには is interchangeable with ～ないと/～なければ, but it sounds slightly\nstiffer, I think. And ～ないことには is almost always followed by another negative\nexpression.\n\n> * 宿題をしないと怒られる。: OK\n> * 宿題をしなければ怒られる。: OK\n> * 宿題をしないことには怒られる。: awkward\n> * 宿題をしないことには眠れない。: OK\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T13:14:23.793",
"id": "33658",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T13:30:06.620",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T13:30:06.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33657",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33657 | 33658 | 33658 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33662",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have two questions concerning the first clause in the following sentence:\n\n> ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３の避難所で聞くと、多くの避難所で食べ物が足りないと言っていました。\n>\n> When the NHK asked at 73 of the shelters in Kumamoto-shi, they (the\n> sheltered people) said that there isn't enough food or water at many\n> shelters.\n\nThe first question is regarding で. In this case, で indicates where the action\noccurred, right? That is, as opposed to \"whom/what was asked\" or \"about what\nwas asked\". If so, how could the clause be changed to indicate the NHK\nspecifically asked people in the shelter (避難に perhaps) or about people in the\nshelter (避難のことを maybe)?\n\nSecond, why does ７３の避難所 not require a counter?\n\nThe full context and link to the article is below.\n\n>\n> 熊本県では大きな地震が続いていて、１８日の午後１時半には約９万４０００人が６３２の避難所（＝逃げてきた人が集まる場所）に避難していました。ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３の避難所で聞くと、多くの避難所で食べ物が足りないと言っていました。みんなに食べ物を渡すため、食事を１日に２回だけにしている所もあります。\n\n<http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10010487241000/k10010487241000.html>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T14:02:11.593",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33659",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T15:47:26.670",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"counters",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "で and counters in NHK article",
"view_count": 167
} | [
{
"body": "1. You filled in \"they\" in the latter part of the sentence even there is no such word in the original, right? Then naturally you can add an implicit object in the first part, too.\n\n> When NHK asked **them** at 73 shelters that are mainly located in Kumamoto,\n> they said...\n\nOr if you're uncomfortable with the translation, you can reword it as:\n\n> As NHK had interviews at 73 shelters that are mainly located in Kumamoto, we\n> were told at many shelters that they are short of food.\n\nThat's how it goes when the Japanese language omits pronouns.\n\n 2. Good point. We have some situations that don't need counters:\n\n * buildings, facilities or geographic locations don't need them\n * abstract units don't need them, in many cases they are counters by themselves \ncf.\n\n> 30頭の動物 _30 (heads of) animals_ \n> 30の動物 _30 animal species_\n\n * counting numerical items rather than real objects doesn't need them (not applied to animate things)\n * using ratio, percentage etc. rather than numbers never has them\n\nIn this case, you can use a counter as well. 箇所（ヶ所・カ所） would be suitable.\n\n> ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３ **箇所** の避難所で聞くと、…\n\n**PS** There's a famous novel titled\n『[二十四の瞳](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E5%8D%81%E5%9B%9B%E3%81%AE%E7%9E%B3)』,\nlacking any counter, makes it terse and poetic.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T15:35:35.290",
"id": "33662",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T15:47:26.670",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T15:47:26.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33659",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33659 | 33662 | 33662 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> まず癪に障るのは、同じ人間とは思えぬその鋼のごとき肉体であった。目方はおよそ喜惣次の倍はあろうか。「おお、 **寒ぶ寒ぶ**\n> 」と胴間声を張り上げながら湯舟に躍りこめば、湯の半分くらいが溢れ出る騒ぎであった。\n\nGoogle/dictionary search gave me nothing... Is it same as e.g.\n[here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4sowzielCs)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T15:18:14.717",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33661",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T09:48:40.900",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-19T20:10:24.550",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"dialects",
"i-adjectives"
],
"title": "What is 寒ぶ寒ぶ? (in following sentence)",
"view_count": 156
} | [
{
"body": "It's 「おお、さぶさぶ」, which is semantically the same as 「おお、寒い、寒い」.\n\n * [さぶい](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/89048/meaning/m0u/) is a dialectal variation of さむい. 寒【さ】ぶい is not the standard kun-yomi of this kanji, but some people use it.\n * い after さぶ is omitted here [because it's an exclamation](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21418/5010).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-19T15:41:22.570",
"id": "33663",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T15:41:22.570",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33661",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "I'm from Ohita, Kyushu. In Ohita, we exclaim \"オー、[寒]{さ}ぶ、[寒]{さ}ぶ\" instead of\n\"[寒々]{さむさむ},\" when we go out of door, are blown with chilly wind, or get into\nthe bathroom in winter time.\n\nI don't know about other areas, but「おお、寒ぶ寒ぶ」is quite a common saying in Kyushu\narea.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T01:12:24.000",
"id": "33666",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T09:48:40.900",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T09:48:40.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33661",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33661 | null | 33663 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33682",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I understand (correct me if I'm wrong) that _da_ is a short casual form of\n_desu_. But what does it mean in this phrase? or why it is used?\n\n> _Tabeta bakari da._",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T14:01:41.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33678",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-04T16:17:59.997",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-04T16:17:59.997",
"last_editor_user_id": "9878",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"copula",
"particle-ばかり"
],
"title": "What does \"da\" mean in \"tabeta bakari da\"?",
"view_count": 8361
} | [
{
"body": "ばかり【bakari】 is a 副助詞 (adverbial particle), which is derived from the 連用形\n(-masu stem) of the verb はかる. But the particle (and 連用形 in general) behaves\nmuch like a noun. (Join to other noun-like words with の, make into a predicate\nby adding だ, etc.)\n\nNow you essentially have a noun phrase 食べたばかり. To make a sentence out of this,\nyou have to add だ・です (or だった・でした in the past tense).\n\nThis is the same as in\n\n> 本だ。 \n> _hon da._ \n> [This] is [a] book.",
"comment_count": 15,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T14:20:02.433",
"id": "33679",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-20T14:27:24.567",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T14:27:24.567",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "33678",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "> 1. [食]{た}べたばかりだ。(Tabeta bakari da) \n> I have just eaten.\n>\n> 2. 食べたばかりなの？(Tabeta bakari nano?) \n> Have you just eaten?\n>\n> 3. 食べたばかりではない。(Tabeta bakari dewa nai) \n> I have not just eaten.\n>\n>\n\nThere is a writing style named 論文調 that is for an essay in Japanese, and the\nend of sentence is 'da/dearu' meaning the assertion. It seems that any\nexamples of the language textbooks use this style usually. That is a\nmechanical style at the opposite end of the polite style of expressions such a\nhonorific language, and it is a kind of literary style.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T16:01:31.933",
"id": "33682",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-14T14:00:48.567",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "13598",
"parent_id": "33678",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "As you said, “だ” is a colloquial form of “です,” a predicate meaning “is, am,”\nand \"食べたばかりだ” means “I’ve finished meal just now.”\n\n“だ” here functions as I am in the state of having finished meal just now.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T01:19:50.193",
"id": "33714",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T01:19:50.193",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33678",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33678 | 33682 | 33679 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33684",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How do I say something like, \"As I am growing older, I think more and more\nabout the past.\"?\n\nEspecially the \"as I am...\" part, which has the meaning of \"while\" but over an\nextended period of time.\n\nedit:\n\nI am aware of ながら but don't know if it would be valid for me to say\n\n成長しながら、もっともっと子供の時を考える。\n\n(As I am growing older, I think more and more about my childhood.)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T17:40:57.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33683",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T03:57:24.610",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-20T18:36:38.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "14033",
"owner_user_id": "14033",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "How to say \"as I am doing...\"?",
"view_count": 768
} | [
{
"body": "How about 成長するにつれて or 成長すればするほど? And you can say 大人になる or 年を取る instead of\n成長する.\n\nIn addition, 子供の頃,昔のこと are more natural.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-20T20:12:28.767",
"id": "33684",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T03:57:24.610",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T03:57:24.610",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33683",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33683 | 33684 | 33684 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33686",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there any difference between 汗をかく and 発汗する? Are there any subtle nuances\nbetween the two or is one more common than the other? I've checked WWWJDIC and\nI can't find any way to distinguish between the two.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T02:38:00.470",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33685",
"last_activity_date": "2018-05-04T23:02:45.330",
"last_edit_date": "2018-05-04T23:02:45.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "1292",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"words",
"wago-and-kango"
],
"title": "汗をかくvs 発汗する - is there a difference?",
"view_count": 365
} | [
{
"body": "The Sino-Japanese 発汗{はっかん}する 'perspire' sounds more like a formal, technical\nterm, like you might find in a medical context. It isn't particularly common\nin normal speech. Imagine saying this in English:\n\n> Man, I just ran five miles! I **perspired** so much!\n\nSounds pretty silly, right? The first sentence sounds like casual English, but\nthen I use the Latinate _perspire_ in my next sentence, and it seems really\nout of place. It sounds too formal or technical for casual speech, like\nsomething out of a medical textbook.\n\nSomething like this would be more natural:\n\n> Man, I just ran five miles! I really worked up a **sweat**!\n\nSimilarly, 発汗{はっかん} 'perspiration' just isn't the basic term for 'sweat' in\nJapanese. If you just want to talk about sweat in normal speech, the native\nJapanese 汗 'sweat' is much more common, and 汗をかく is a simple and common phrase\nmeaning 'to sweat'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T03:01:00.457",
"id": "33686",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T03:17:03.800",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T03:17:03.800",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33685",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33685 | 33686 | 33686 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33689",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In Chinese, characters with a single dot on top stay separated from the rest\nof the character. (Eg. [Chinese\n宝](http://www.visualmandarin.com/tools/chinese-stroke-order/22668))\n\nIn kanji, this is frequently not the case - virtually all 宀 characters I see\nhave dots stuck to the 冖 part (宝, 字, etc.). On the other hand, there are a few\nkanji I've seen that don't involve 宀 and so the dots are separated: eg. 主.\n\nDo **all 宀 kanji** have the dots stuck to the top? Perhaps there are kanji\nwith both 丶 and 冖 but the two don't form a connected 宀. Do **all other single\ndot kanji** have the dots separated (like 主)?\n\n_Edit._ Just found that the dots are stuck in kanji with 广 radicals. Would\nstill like to know when the dots are stuck and when they are not stuck. Is\nthere a rule?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T03:55:10.063",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33687",
"last_activity_date": "2019-03-06T06:40:36.180",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T07:32:36.757",
"last_editor_user_id": "11849",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"orthography",
"radicals"
],
"title": "How often do single dots stick to the top of kanji?",
"view_count": 1522
} | [
{
"body": "Japanese elementary school children are generally taught to write kanji like\nthis ([教科書体](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/18782/5010)):\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VmdCK.png)\n\nI don't know how these are different from how Chinese kids are taught to write\nthese characters.\n\nHowever, this largely depends on the font, and adults actually handwrite these\ndots in many ways according to their preference. Practically, there is no\nstrict rule here, and whether or not the dot touches the bar below is not very\nimportant. That said, I feel the dot in `宀` written by young people are\nusually connected to the `冖` part.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nFImH.png)\n\nThese samples are from [モリサワ](http://www.morisawa.co.jp/fonts/specimen/), one\nof the largest domestic font developers in Japan.\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT:** 文化審議会国語分科会 published 常用漢字表の字体・字形に関する指針（報告）（案）, which can be\ndownloaded here.\n\n<http://www.bunka.go.jp/seisaku/kokugo_nihongo/kokugo_shisaku/joyokanjihyo_sakuin/index.html>\n(see the PDF file)\n\nAlthough this article caused some controversy, it extensively discusses\ntypical differences between 明朝体 (≒common \"serif\" font) versus handwritten\nkanji, and the wide range of variations of handwritten kanji. Specifically,\nthis article says \"dots\" in 安, 言, etc. are written by hand in many ways, and\nthe subtle variations don't matter. (well, at least in the everyday life of\nadults)\n\n> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9eitt.png)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T05:09:24.630",
"id": "33689",
"last_activity_date": "2019-03-06T06:40:36.180",
"last_edit_date": "2019-03-06T06:40:36.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33687",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
]
| 33687 | 33689 | 33689 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have trouble translating the next:\n\nよしおさんの車は赤と白です。\n\nWhat is the correct translation to the sentence?\n\n 1. Yoshio-san's car is red and white\n 2. Yoshio-san's cars are (one) red and (the other) white",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T05:29:51.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33690",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T09:20:19.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"nouns",
"colors"
],
"title": "Help with grammar number",
"view_count": 119
} | [
{
"body": "Depending on the context and circumstances, it could actually mean EITHER\n\nJust by itself, one could say it means \"Yoshio-san's car is red and white\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T06:15:11.220",
"id": "33691",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T06:15:11.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14020",
"parent_id": "33690",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I think-\n\n**★Yoshio-san's car is red and white.**\n\nis most correct translation. The second translation,\n\n**★Yoshio-san's cars are (one) red and (the other) white**\n\njust make CARS as plural, but the sense is not changed as Yoshio-san has 2\ncars out of which one in red and other is white.\n\nIt can mean that \" **All the cars Yoshio-san has are red and white** \".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T08:41:12.737",
"id": "33695",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T08:41:12.737",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11330",
"parent_id": "33690",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33690 | null | 33691 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33693",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Which of these is a more appropriate/polite way of asking how much something\ncosts without specifying the object? (I'm working at a very low level, so\nplease be straightforward - no kanji, please explain with as much as English\nas possible! xD)\n\nいくら\n\n**OR**\n\nいかばかり\n\nOr something else?\n\nAdditionally, why is it that the か is dropped when asking these questions? Do\nthe phrases mean the same WITH か ?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T07:29:50.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33692",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T09:24:38.303",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14211",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Asking 'how much'?",
"view_count": 1471
} | [
{
"body": "If you are using it during conversation and the other person can identify\nwhich object you are referring, you can use:\n\n> いくらですか。\n\nIf you want to make it more respectful or more formal, you can ask:\n\n> おいくらですか。\n\nIf you are talking on phone, or there are so many things you can talk about,\nit will be confusing for that person what exactly you re asking about. In that\ncase, you can use:\n\n> この`<object>`はいくらですか。\n\n..............................................................\n\nOut of the very basic greetings:\n\n * O-genki desuka : お元気{げんき}ですか\n * O-kage sama de genki desu : おかげさまで元気{げんき}です\n * O-yasumi nasai : おやすみなさい\n * O-namae wa nan desuka : お名前{なまえ}は何ですか\n * O-tanjyoubi omedetou gozaimasu : お誕生日{たんじょうび}おめでとうございます。\n\nAll these greetings are used to greet another person, and thus the respect\nword, O is added in all these sentences.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T08:02:51.177",
"id": "33693",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T09:24:38.303",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T09:24:38.303",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11330",
"parent_id": "33692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33692 | 33693 | 33693 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33701",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider the following two sentences.\n\nA: 僕は左と右が区別できない。\n\nB: 僕は左と右を区別することができない。\n\nI often see B but just know A now.\n\nHow can A be possible? What kind of grammar is A?\n\n* * *\n\nThe following sentence (from the [Tanaka\nCorpus](http://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Tanaka_Corpus)) inspired me to ask\nthis question:\n\n> その[坊や]{ぼうや}はツバメとスズメが[区別]{くべつ}できない。 \n> The boy can't tell a swallow from a sparrow.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T15:24:50.913",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33698",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T16:53:42.587",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-22T16:53:42.587",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "What is N+できる grammar?",
"view_count": 1499
} | [
{
"body": "Both are correct. できる means exactly the same thing as することができる. You can treat\nit as a special potential form of する.\n\nSo it's not that できる is being attached to a noun, it's that it is taking the\nplace of する in a する verb.\n\nHere are a couple more examples:\n\n```\n\n この部屋はうるさくて勉強できない。（勉強することができない）\n \n 明日の予約が確認できた。（予約を確認することができた）\n \n```\n\nNote that it's most common to mark the thing that you can do with が rather\nthan を because, like potential forms in general, できる really means that such-\nand-such \"is doable.\" You'll see を sometimes but you can consider が the the\ntraditionally correct way to phrase it.\n\nHope that helps!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T15:55:45.963",
"id": "33701",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T16:16:11.123",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-22T16:16:11.123",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9959",
"parent_id": "33698",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33698 | 33701 | 33701 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33706",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So, one of the example sentences for ため that I see in the learning software I\nuse is:\n\n> 彼女はダイエットのために泳いでいる。\n\nWhich basically means, \"She swims in order to lose weight.\"\n\nBut what if you wanted to say, \"She swims in order to lose weight, and for\nfun?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T15:35:41.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33699",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T18:45:24.230",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T18:45:24.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "11176",
"owner_user_id": "14229",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"reason"
],
"title": "How to list multiple purposes for an action?",
"view_count": 210
} | [
{
"body": "You can use \"と\" like ダイエットと楽しみのために.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T15:51:23.763",
"id": "33700",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T15:51:23.763",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33699",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "There's a common way of speaking to tell somebody does something with multiple\npurposes.\n\n> 彼女はダイエット **と** 趣味 **を兼【か】ねて** 水泳をしている。\n\n**[兼ねる](http://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%8B%E3%81%AD%E3%82%8B)**\n\n> Ichidan verb, Transitive verb \n> 2. to serve two or more functions or roles simultaneously; to contain (or\n> combine) two or more features",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T18:42:50.290",
"id": "33706",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T18:42:50.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33699",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33699 | 33706 | 33706 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "午前0-12 goes from 00:00 to 12:00 in 24h time. Do minutes affect 午前 / 午後? Is\n12:30 in 24h time still 午前１２時３０分 or does it change to 午後 thanks to the minutes\ngoing over?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T16:34:45.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33702",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T03:15:43.643",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T16:49:44.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1340",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"time"
],
"title": "Do 午前 / 午後 change depending on minutes",
"view_count": 876
} | [
{
"body": "The most _technically correct_ answer would be... both 午前１２時３０分 and 午後１２時３０分\nare nonexistent. Because if you apply 12-hour notation rigidly, the time range\nonly varies from 0:00 to 12:00 (whether the end is included or not is still\ndebatable). Hence the value `12:30 a.m/p.m` are simply not allowed.\n\nThat said, in daily life we could understand it by considering whether the\ntime belongs to morning (= before noon) or afternoon. In this sense, 12:30 in\n24-hour notation would be 午後１２時３０分, if you have to use the number 12:30.\n\n* * *\n\nAs I see from your comment, your concern is related to the controversy about\nwhether noon/midnight should have AM or PM. Basically [it depends on\ndefinition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12-hour_clock#Confusion_at_noon_and_midnight),\nbut at any rate, the ambiguity only involves the very moment 12:00 AM/PM. If\nthe time should go past noon or midnight by a single tick, it'll automatically\nfall under either AM or PM.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T18:15:42.540",
"id": "33704",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T19:43:58.967",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T19:43:58.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "**Legal Answer** : 12:00 in 24h can be _only_ written as 午前12時, ~~and\ntherefore 12:30 in 24h _might_ be 午前12時30分~~, because [it's defined\nso](http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/M05/M05SE337.html) by an ancient Japanese\nlaw (in 1872), which somehow seems to be still in effect. There is no such\nthing as officially-defined 午後0時. ( **EDIT** : As @broccoriforest says,\nperhaps the more accurate way to describe this situation is: \"Time notation\nbetween 12:00 and 13:00 has never been officially defined in the history of\nJapan\"...)\n\n**Practical Answer** : Forget the legal answer. 午前12時 itself is a confusing\nexpression which should be avoided in most cases. Never say, for example,\n午前12時30分 because it's very, very confusing. Let's not try to figure out its\nmeaning seriously. Instead, always use 午前0時 (midnight) or 午後0時 (noon) which\nare unambiguous and used widely on TV, digital clocks, etc., and it I think is\nconsistent with the common English clock system. 12:30 in 24h should be\nwritten as **午後0時30分** , or 12時30分 without 午前 or 午後.\n\nSources:\n\n * [午前１２時？ 午後０時？](http://jjy.nict.go.jp/QandA/FAQ/12am-or-0pm-J.html) by National Institute of Information and Communications Technology\n * [正午は午前12時？それとも、午後12時？](http://www.nao.ac.jp/faq/a0401.html) by National Astronomical Observatory of Japan\n * [真夜中と正午の時刻表現](https://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E5%8D%88%E5%89%8D%E3%81%A8%E5%8D%88%E5%BE%8C&oldid=44423281#.E7.9C.9F.E5.A4.9C.E4.B8.AD.E3.81.A8.E6.AD.A3.E5.8D.88.E3.81.AE.E6.99.82.E5.88.BB.E8.A1.A8.E7.8F.BE)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T18:33:29.427",
"id": "33705",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-21T19:06:20.453",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T19:06:20.453",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "In normal spoken japanese people often refer to 朝の１０時半 or 夜の２時, or something\nalong that vein. (or just 今朝、or ２時から) 午後 or 午前 is quite formal but commonly\nheard in news broadcasts.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T03:15:43.643",
"id": "33740",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T03:15:43.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14241",
"parent_id": "33702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 33702 | null | 33704 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33744",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Adjectives describe a noun which is marked by が.\n\n> 僕は料理が得意。\n\nCould it be rewritten as\n\n> 僕には料理が得意。\n\nOr is it wrong?\n\nRegarding adjectives, a sentence like this would be correct:\n\n> 僕にはペンが必要です。\n\nWould a sentence like the following one be correct?\n\n> 僕がペンを必要する。\n\n(I think I should say 必要にする, but I am not sure.)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T20:00:29.320",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33707",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-24T14:49:03.053",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-22T00:22:13.340",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に",
"particle-は",
"adjectives",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "Adjectives and particles が に",
"view_count": 302
} | [
{
"body": "> 僕には料理が得意\n\nwhen you say like this, it will give the impression that someone else you are\ngoing to talk about is not good at cook.\n\nIt's same like this,\n\n> 僕 **には** できません I can't do it (but someone can do it)\n\n僕がペンを大切にする can be translated as I care about the pen.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T00:40:49.150",
"id": "33712",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T00:40:49.150",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14137",
"parent_id": "33707",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> 僕には料理が得意。\n\nis simply ungrammatical.\n\n> 僕にはペンが必要です。\n\nis grammatical only because 必要だ can take two arguments (AがBに) as **word-\nspecific** feature, not that it's a universal grammar for adjectives. It's\nlike the English word [_worth_ can have an object but most other adjectives\ncan't](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/447990/similar-adjectives-\nto-worth).\n\nOther adjectives that take に include ふさわしい (あなたが隊長にふさわしい) and 夢中だ (僕は君に夢中だ)\netc., but basically you have to learn one by one.\n\nAnd as already pointed out in comments above:\n\n> × 僕がペンを必要する。 \n> 僕がペンを必要にする。 → _I make the pens necessary._ \n> 僕がペンを必要とする。 → _I necessitate a pen._\n\nna-adjective + `にする` results in a verb \"make ... _adjective_ \" and `とする`\n\"regard ... _adjective_ \".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T07:23:03.577",
"id": "33744",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-24T14:49:03.053",
"last_edit_date": "2020-04-24T14:49:03.053",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33707",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33707 | 33744 | 33744 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33711",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 遠坂がマスターとして行動しているのなら、俺もあいつに恥じない成果を出さないと。 \n> If Tohsaka is acting as a master, i have to get results which will not make\n> her feel ashamed.\n>\n> 人に恥じることはなにもない。 \n> People do not feel ashamed for anything.\n\n恥じる: To feel ashamed. \n僕が恥じる: I feel ashamed. \n僕に恥じる: To feel ashamed towards me.\n\nIs it correct?\n\nI always have troubles understanding when に means \"In\" and when it means\n\"Towards\";\"Regarding\";\"Against\".\n\nBy In I mean: \nThere is something to feel ashamed in laughing at people.\n\nAnd towards: \nI feel ashamed about that towards her. \n(In my mind this feels something like に対して, but I do not know if it's correct\nor not. If not please tell me)\n\nIs it there a way to understand this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T20:22:47.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33708",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T06:28:36.310",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-21T23:36:35.620",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "に恥じる (Clarification on に)",
"view_count": 861
} | [
{
"body": "\"...に（を）恥じる\" is opposite to \"...を誇る - to be proud of.\" So it is all right to\ntranslate it as \"to feel ashamed of sth.\" You can also rephrase it with \"feel\nsorry (for)\" and \"feel embarrassed about, with sth).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T20:52:55.140",
"id": "33709",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T06:28:36.310",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T06:28:36.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33708",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "First, there's one use of 「恥じる」 you may have not been acquainted with.\n\nFrom 広辞苑 under 「恥じる」:\n\n> ③(多く、否定を伴う) **ひけをとる。劣る。** 【(often accompanied by a negative) **compare\n> unfavorably with; to be inferior** 】\n\nAs hinted at in the dictionary, in this use the word often appears in the\nconstruction 「(~に)恥じない」, which means: \"be not inferior to; i.e. **be\ncomparable with** , **be as good as** , or **measure up to**\nsomeone/something\". Thus:\n\n> 「あいつに恥じない成果」 = \"results that are as good as hers/his\"\n\nbut\n\n> 「人に恥じることはなにもない。」= \"There's nothing to be ashamed of (towards people).\"\n\nNotice in the latter it's 「に恥じる」, not 「に恥じない」, so that should be a good\nindicator that it's not used in the sense I mentioned above.\n\n* * *\n\nAs for your questions:\n\n> 恥じる: To feel ashamed. \n> 僕が恥じる:I feel ashamed. \n> 僕に恥じる:To feel ashamed towards me.\n>\n> Is it correct?\n\nCorrect.\n\n> Is it there a way to understand this?\n\nI have nothing definitive or even terribly pertinent to say about this, but to\ntake your examples:\n\n> There is something to feel ashamed in laughing at people. → 人を笑うということ **には**\n> 、どこか恥じるべきところがある。(私なりの訳)\n\nIn this particular sentence I feel more comfortable with 「には」 instead of just\n「に」, but using 「に」 would be perfectly grammatical and understandable. Personal\npreference, maybe.\n\n> I feel ashamed about that towards her. → そのことについて、私は彼女 **に** 恥じています。(私なりの訳)\n\nIn the \"towards\" or \"against\" sense, more often than not 「に」 can be replaced\nwith 「に対して」without changing the meaning. Here, 「私は彼女 **に対して** 恥じています」 would be\nas acceptable and understandable.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T23:55:33.677",
"id": "33711",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T00:43:48.607",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-22T00:43:48.607",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "33708",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33708 | 33711 | 33711 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I know that there are a lot of expressions that have similar meaning in\nJapanese. In JLPT N3 grammar, there's だけでなく that means 'not only...but\nalso...'. And lately, I found the expression にとどまらず in JLPT N1 grammar list\nthat has the exact meaning as だけでなく. The only difference that I know is that\nだけでなく can be attached to Noun, Verb, and Adjective. Meanwhile にとどまらず can only\nbe attached to Noun and Verb. But, I want to know if there are other\ndifferences regarding their meaning and usage. Thank you",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-21T23:38:00.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33710",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T05:24:13.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14231",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"meaning",
"usage",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "だけでなく and にとどまらず",
"view_count": 945
} | [
{
"body": "They have different meanings. Because they mean different things, you can't\nfreely replace one by the other.\n\n 1. 「とどまらず」is a negation of 「とどまる」, and 「のみならず」 is a negation of 「のみなり」. Here, the 「とどまる」 is a verb, the 「のみ」 is an adverbial particle, and the 「なり」 is an auxiliary verb of determination.\n\nHaving said that, the meanings the two words have are:\n\n> (1) 「とどまらない」＝\"it does not end there\"\n\nMeaning that there is a suggestion of on-going continuousness.\n\n> (2) 「のみならず」＝\"not limited to\"\n\nMeaning something is not limited to something, suggesting the infinite\npossibility.\n\nBecause the two are common in terms of not having temporal discontinuation in\n\"continuousness\" and \"infinite possibility\", they tend to be similar. \nHowever, the difference between the two is that while the word 「とどまらない」\nsuggests \"ongoing\", the word 「のみならず」 suggests a state. The former is used in\ndynamic situations, and the latter is used in undynamic situations.\n\n 2. Replacement \n\n> (1) 「彼は学問にとどまらず、芸術の才能がある。」（Ｘ） \n> 「彼は学問 **のみならず** 、芸術の才能がある。」（✓）\n\nSince 「才能がある(\"having a talent\") indicates a state, 「とどまらず」 which expresses\n\"ongoing-ness\" is unsuitable.\n\n> (2) 「彼の活動範囲はAにとどまらず、Bにまで及ぶ」（✓） \n> 「彼の活動範囲はAのみならず、Bにまで及ぶ」（✓）\n\nIf you interpret this as something \"dynamic\" as is \"the scope of action is\nexpanded to ...\", you can use the word 「とどまらず」, and if you interpret this as a\n\"state\" as in \"the scope of action throughout ...\", you can also use the word\n「のみならず」.\n\n> (3) 「彼は成功にとどまらず、社会貢献に尽力した」（✓） \n> 「彼は成功のみならず、社会貢献に尽力した」（✓）\n\nThe first one has two verbs 「（成功に）とどまらず」 and 「（社会貢献に）尽力した」, but the second one\nhas only one verb 「（社会貢献に）尽力した」, so the word 「成功」 has no choice but to also\ndepend on the verb 「尽力した」. \nThe sentence ends up meaning \"became committed to both success and social\ncontribution,\" and it does not render the nuance of \"couldn't be content with\nthe success and made a contribution to the society.\" This is because of the\n「のみ」 being an adverbial particle on which a noun depends.",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T01:50:33.947",
"id": "33716",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T05:17:41.503",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T05:17:41.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "14212",
"owner_user_id": "14212",
"parent_id": "33710",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33710 | null | 33716 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to understand the use of というのは in the second sentence below. Is it\na way to refer to the 職業 in the first sentence? I find in some places that\nというのは can mean \"the reason I'm saying this is...\" Is that the meaning\nexpressed in this example? For example, people are given a blue card (because)\nthey have a useful profession?\n\n> その場面というのはどういった場面かというと、 \n> ナチスの兵士がですね、ユダヤ人を職業別で分けていきます。 \n> 役に立つと見なされた職業というのはブルーカード、 \n> 役に立たないと見なされた職業というのは即ゲットー行きです。\n\nTranslation from subtitles: \"The scene I'm talking about is the one with the\nNazi soldiers separating Jewish people by profession. They give a blue card to\npeople who are considered with an useful job. People who are considered with\nan unuseful job are sent to the ghetto immediately.\"\n\nSource: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xs-XWk_oQA> 0:55",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T01:44:50.493",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33715",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T07:27:00.020",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-22T01:50:09.973",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11732",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Why is というのは used (both times) in this sentence?",
"view_count": 3223
} | [
{
"body": "I believe that in this case というのは simply is used with the general purpose of\ndefining something (in this case useful and non-useful jobs).\n\nSo I think that the two というのは in the second sentence just refer to the\nrespective 職業 before them rather than the people. Maybe in this case, just for\nthe sake of comprehension, would make sense to translate というのは with\n\"correspond to\"? In this way it becomes \"Jobs considered useful _correspond\nto_ a blue card, jobs considered non-useful _correspond to_ going straight to\nthe ghetto\".\n\nThis is just my interpretation, I would not swear is 100% correct. Hope it\nhelps at least to see it from a different angle.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T05:14:55.047",
"id": "33717",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T05:14:55.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "33715",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "というのは is a fixed phrase.\n\n * と: the quotative particle which is used with いう\n * いう: \"say\"\n * の: the nominalizer (turns a verb into a noun)\n * は: the topic marker\n\nSo literally, ○○というのは is something like \"saying ○○ is ...\"\n\nというのは can be used in two ways.\n\n 1. というのは used alone at the beginning of a sentence is a conjunctional phrase, which means \"I mean\", \"That is to say\", \"I'm saying this because\", etc. In this case, と refers to what the speaker said in the previous sentence.\n 2. ○○というのは is a fixed pattern used when the speaker wants to explain the characteristics of something, or to define something. You can think of it as a special emphatic topic marker. It's often interchangeable with [○○とは](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/19310/5010), which is another important particle combination used to give a definition. \n\n> 人生というのは長い旅だ。 ≒ 人生とは長い旅だ。 ≒ Life is a long journey.\n\nIn your example,\nその場面というのは[どういった](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/33536/5010)場面か is\nbasically the same as その場面はどういった場面か. And it forms a noun phrase ([embedded\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/13038/5010)) which means \"What\nkind of scene that scene is\".\n\n> その場面というのはどういった場面かというと、 \n> ≒ 「その場面はどういった場面か」というと、 \n> ≒ (lit.) When I say \"what kind of scene that scene is\", ... \n> ≒ To explain that scene in details, ... / The scene I'm talking about is\n> ...\n\n(と)いうと after the embedded question here is another very common pattern which\nroughly means \"To tell/say ...\", \"Speaking of...\", etc.\n\n> * 本当のことを言うと、… To tell the truth, ...\n> * なぜかと言うと、… To explain why, ... / The reason why is ...\n> * 率直に言うと、… Frankly speaking, ... / To be honest, ...\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T06:59:33.117",
"id": "33718",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T07:27:00.020",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33715",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33715 | null | 33718 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33720",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently learned how to use ～たい to say things that I want to do; for\nexample:\n\n> えいが を みたい です。\n>\n> I want to see a movie.\n\nAnd I learned how to use ～たりする to say examples of things that I did, do, or\nwill do:\n\n> きのう、にほんご を べんきょう したり、本 を よんだり しました。\n>\n> Yesterday, I did things like study Japanese, read a book, etc.\n\nI am wondering how I would use these two constructions in order to say\nsomething like \"I want to do things like watch a movie, study Japanese, read a\nbook, etc.\" Is it possible to combine ～たい and ～たりする to make such a sentence,\nand if so, how?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T07:06:36.713",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33719",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T07:22:09.980",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "12495",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How do you use ～たりする with ～たい to say things that you want to do?",
"view_count": 1733
} | [
{
"body": "I don't really trust myself with my Japanese grammar skills so you might want\nto get a second opinion on this, but this is how I would translate \"I want to\ndo things like watch a movie, study Japanese, read a book, etc.\" into\nJapanese:\n\n私は映画を見たり、日本語を勉強したり、本を読んだり **したい** です。\n\nSo starting with the usual X～たり、Y～たりします pattern the only thing that needs to\nchange if you want to say \"I want to do X, Y, etc.\" is the します at the end\nwhich becomes したい（です）.\n\nI hope I make sense, I'm not very good at explaining stuff.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T07:22:09.980",
"id": "33720",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T07:22:09.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12084",
"parent_id": "33719",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33719 | 33720 | 33720 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「 **竜の歯を依り代とした人型** はコルキス王の魔術と聞く。 その娘、王女メディアは稀代の魔女と謳われたそうだが？」\n\nDoes this mean:\n\n> The human form who made the dragon tooth as a vessel\n\nor\n\n> A human form which was a dragon tooth made vessel.\n\nHow does にする・とする work before a name?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T08:01:53.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33722",
"last_activity_date": "2021-01-19T19:39:01.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "とする・にする before a noun",
"view_count": 1191
} | [
{
"body": "`A を B に／とする` means either _make A into B_ or _have A as B_. Whether the\nchange of state is involved or not (i.e. _A_ is \"made\" into _B_ or originally\nso) is unspecified and always left ambiguous, so you can only choose the right\nside from context.\n\n> 人型 that made a dragon tooth into the (spirit) vessel \n> _or_ \n> 人型 using a dragon tooth as the (spirit) vessel\n\n(I don't have any idea what 人型 stands for, though...)\n\nThis type of ambiguity is parallel to that of English passive construction.\n\n> _The project is finally completed._ → changes from \"WIP\" to \"done\". \n> _The project is already completed._ → keeps the \"done\" state.\n\nIf you dig a little deeper, using the particle に or と makes some difference in\nnuance. According to [this\npage](https://web.archive.org/web/20170910033102/http://www.alc.co.jp/jpn/article/faq/03/85.html),\nと suggests the result is authentic, finalized, or established, whereas に\ncomparatively ad-hoc, questionable, or figurative.\n\nThere are some idioms exclusively allow either of them.\n\n> ○\n> [身を粉にする](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/edc/5000273001/meaning/m0u/%E8%BA%AB%E3%82%92%E7%B2%89%E3%81%AB%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B/) \n> × 身を粉とする",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-10-17T11:06:03.260",
"id": "40067",
"last_activity_date": "2021-01-19T19:39:01.697",
"last_edit_date": "2021-01-19T19:39:01.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33722 | null | 40067 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33724",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In English, I just read it \"one hundred degrees Celsius\". \nIn Japanese, I don't know how to read it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T08:52:04.773",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33723",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-09T11:03:07.323",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-09T11:03:07.323",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 14,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"numbers",
"symbols"
],
"title": "How do I read 100°C in Japanese?",
"view_count": 23704
} | [
{
"body": "It is in a slightly different order in Japanese.\n\nFirst comes Celsius, then the amount, and degrees at the end.\n\nThis would be one hundred degrees Celsius written out:\n\n> 摂氏{せっし}100度{ど}\n\nFahrenheit for example would be similar\n\n> 華氏{かし}100度{ど}\n\nMost of the time saying Celsius is redundant though. If someone asks you what\nis the temperature, you can just say 26 degrees.\n\n> 気温{きおん}は何度{なんど}？\n>\n> 今{いま}、26度{ど}。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T09:10:23.843",
"id": "33724",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T09:45:29.543",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10083",
"parent_id": "33723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 22
},
{
"body": "The reading depends on the situation. In a scientific or technical environment\nChris's answer is 100% correct.\n\nHowever, in conversational non-technical situations it is read differently.\n\nWhen speaking with someone you can say\n\n```\n\n [度シー]{どしー}\n \n```\n\nfor Celsius. However, in Japan the standard for expressing temperature is\nmetric, so there is no need to clarify that you are using the metric system.\nSaying the number and [度]{ど} will suffice.\n\nThis can be proven a number of different ways.\n\nFirst, if you have a Japanese IME on your computer or device and you\nunderstand how to convert characters you can simply type in どしー into your\ndevice and press the conversion button. You'll see that the IME will bring up\n℃ as a conversion option (depending on the IME in use).\n\nIf you would like to refer to Fahrenheit in a conversational or casual\nsituation you can say\n\n```\n\n [度エフ]{どえふ}\n \n```\n\nHere is a link [to a question on Yahoo Japan's Knowledege\nBag](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1453509879)\nwhere a Japanese person is asking how to read ℃ and °F. The quote on reading\nCelsius and Fahrenheit is listed and very roughly translated below.\n\n[当然]{とうぜん}、[℃]{せっしど}も「[度]{ど}シー」というのと[同様]{どうよう}[°F]{かしど}も「[度]{ど}エフ」と[読]{よ}めば、[紛]{まぎ}らわしくありません \nJust as Celsius can be read as degrees C, reading Fahrenheit as degrees F will\nnaturally reduce ambiguity [between the two temperature systems].\n\nOn a side note, typing どえふ into your IME and converting it does not yield the\nsame result. From what I have seen, it doesn't look like °F has a unicode or\nUTF-8 character. It is for this reason that if you highlight °F with your\nmouse you will highlight two characters, but if you highlight ℃ with your\nmouse you will only see one character highlighted.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T14:57:34.643",
"id": "33726",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T14:57:34.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3972",
"parent_id": "33723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "We say usually only 度 like 100度 because only Celsius is commonly used in\nJapan, so we don't need to say 摂氏.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T15:36:30.650",
"id": "33728",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T15:36:30.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33723",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33723 | 33724 | 33724 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33729",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If saying 同{おな}い年{どし} in daily conversation is just something you'd say\nwithout thinking twice, _then I have no further questions._\n\nBut, doesn't saying 同い年 sound sort of stand-offish. Saying 同い年 is a hint to\nthe listener that he is misunderstanding our level of friendship.\n\nMy asking question to Empress Michiko at お茶会\n\n> (私): \"その二人子、同い年ですか。\n\nThis is normal usage.\n\nMy sister-in-law asking me a question at お寿司屋さん\n\n> (義理姉さん response #1): \"その二人子、年齢が一緒ですか。 \n> (義理姉さん response #2): \"その二人子、同い年ですか。\n\nI'd expect response #1. \nHearing #2, I'd be like that was completely uncalled for. What is her problem?\nIf she wants to keep her distance, then so be it.\n\n_BTW_ : \n同い年 **is** considered 当て字, right? I've never seen a word made 当て字 by its 送りがな.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T15:21:39.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33727",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T16:00:34.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12506",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"ateji"
],
"title": "Nuance of saying \"同い年\"? And, it is 当て字?",
"view_count": 171
} | [
{
"body": "同い年 is the sound change of 同じ年(same age). And 同い年 is often used as 同じ学年(same\ngrade in school).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T15:55:12.007",
"id": "33729",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T16:00:34.800",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-22T16:00:34.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33727",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33727 | 33729 | 33729 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33742",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Eg. 厄介、欲求、直径、即興、却下、借金、引っ越す、北海道、積極、薬局\n\nWouldn't っ normally require the first onyomi to have a tsu ending?\n\nWhy doesn't it happen in certain words like 加湿器?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T19:32:30.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33730",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T06:06:43.097",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T06:06:43.097",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4735",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"readings",
"gemination",
"onyomi"
],
"title": "In compound words what is it called when two Ks assimilate into a っ?",
"view_count": 423
} | [
{
"body": "The name of this phenomenon is called \"gemination,\" and it is a specific case\nof a larger phenomenon that happens in many languages called \"sandhi\" (after\nsome research, there appears to be a Japanese term for this as well, known as\n連{れん}音{おん}).\n\nAs for why it doesn't happen in 加湿器, I actually am not 100% sure myself, but I\nwould guess it's because Japanese usually resists these kinds of changes when\nlooking at the second pair when more than 2 things are being combined. At\nleast that's the case for rendaku, but maybe someone could shed some more\nlight on this?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T22:11:40.030",
"id": "33733",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-22T22:11:40.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9596",
"parent_id": "33730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I think in general this happens to ease pronunciation, so a word isn't too\nhard to pronounce then generally it doesn't have to change. I think I've heard\nof variations based on modern / past or dialect.\n\nThis for example doesn't even have to a 'k' sound or a 'big つ' initially, even\nwords like 暖かい (あたたかい) are very commonly pronounced (あったかい), ta-ta-ka is\nnaturally simplified to っ-ta-ka",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T03:05:17.747",
"id": "33738",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T03:05:17.747",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14241",
"parent_id": "33730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> _Wouldn't っ normally require the first onyomi to have a tsu ending?_\n\nNo. This small っ is unrelated to big つ in most cases. This letter is used as\n_gemination_ ([促音【そくおん】](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokuon)) _marker_ that\nyou should double the _next_ consonant*1.\n\nOne source of geminate consonants is kanji that had final consonant\naccommodated to Japanese pronunciation*2 e.g. 合 _kap_ + 戦 _sen_ → 合戦 _ka\n**ss** en_, 鉄 _tet_ + 器 _ki_ → 鉄器 _te **kk** i_ etc. Another is reduction of\nsound in some conjugation forms e.g. 勝ちて _ka **ti** te_ → 勝って _ka **t** te_,\nありたり _a **ri** tari_ → あった _a **t** ta_ etc. In the latter case, typical\nexamples are followed by _t_ , and that's why つ (Classical pronunciation _tu_\n) was chosen as symbol of gemination.\n\nUntil WWII, both the gemination sign and syllable _tsu_ were just being\nwritten in big つ, which made a handful of confusion such as カミツレ (\"chamomile\";\nmisreading of カミッレ (Dutch _Kamille_ )) or カムチャッカ (Kamchatka; misreading of\nカムチャツカ). In post-war orthography, we can safely distinguish ordinary つ and\ngeminate っ.\n\n> _Why doesn't it happen in certain words like 加湿器?_\n\nBecause, \"natural\" assimilation of consonants hardly happens based on today's\npronunciation. Kanji that originally had final consonant have turned into open\nsyllable (塔 _ta **p**_ → _to **u**_ , 鉄 _te **t**_ → _te **tsu**_ , 悪 _a\n**k**_ → _a **ku**_ etc.) thus there aren't any more chances two consonants\ncome together. The gemination becomes more like conventional rule when you put\ntwo or more kanji to make a word. In this case, 加湿 is already a word, so no\ngemination happens between 加湿 and 器.\n\nThat said, the phenomenon is still productive between kanji that have final\n`-ku` and initial `k-`*3. Famous examples include 洗濯機 (せんたっき < せんたくき), 水族館\n(すいぞっかん < すいぞくかん). Theoretically kanji that end with `-tsu` could trigger the\nsame effect, but the problem is we don't have many words start with `ts-`\n(豪雪地帯【ごうせつちたい】 _might_ be pronounced like ごうせっちたい).\n\nFurther reading: [第7期 (1964-1965)\n国語審議会：発音のゆれについて（部会報告）](http://kokugo.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kakuki/07/tosin03/)\n\n* * *\n\n*1: Sometimes it doesn't have a consonant following it in modern usage. In this case it represents a [glottal stop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glottal_stop).\n\n*2: Incidentally, [Italians did the same thing](https://damyanlissitchkov.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/how-latin-became-italian/): Latin octo ‘eight’ > otto, Latin maximus ‘greatest’ > massimo etc.\n\n*3: The reason is usually attributed to so-called [\"vowel devoicing\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1095/7810) that virtually eliminate the vowel under certain conditions, cf. すこし > [skosh](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/skosh).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T06:04:15.280",
"id": "33742",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T07:50:15.300",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33730 | 33742 | 33742 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33732",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading the article linked and included below and came across the\nfollowing sentence\n\n> ＮＨＫが調べると、病院で「エコノミークラス症候群」だ **とわかった** 人がこの女性以外に１９人いました。\n\nCould someone please explain the grammar and/or **meaning of とわかった**?\n\nAs for my thoughts, I assume that the sentence is trying to convey (without\nregard to how it flows in English)\n\n> When the NHK looked into it, there were 19 people not including the woman\n> (mentioned previously) who were afflicted with Economy Class Syndrome.\n\nI originally thought とわかった was と分かった and for some reason beyond my current\nunderstanding, と was used instead of か making the sentence mean \"...people who\nknow what Economy Class Syndrome is\". I discounted this as possible since it\ndidn't seem relevant to the context and I think that such a meaning requires\n知る anyway.\n\nAlso, as I wrote my translation, I began wondering **why で was used with 病院**\nif it is indicating a location of state rather than a location of action.\nPerhaps my translation is off.\n\nAny help is appreciated.\n\n<http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10010488191000/k10010488191000.html>\n\n> 地震が続いている熊本県で１８日、車の中に泊まっていた５１歳の女性が病院で亡くなりました。この女性は「エコノミークラス症候群」になっていました。\n>\n>\n> 車の中など狭い場所で長い時間体を動かさないと、足の血が流れにくくなって血の塊ができます。その塊が肺の血管に詰まると亡くなることもあります。これを「エコノミークラス症候群」と呼んでいます。\n>\n>\n> ＮＨＫが調べると、病院で「エコノミークラス症候群」だとわかった人がこの女性以外に１９人いました。この人たちは車の中にずっといて胸が痛くなったりしたと言っています。この中の２人は重体です。\n> ...",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T20:36:21.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33731",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T07:04:04.287",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3296",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Help understanding とわかった",
"view_count": 995
} | [
{
"body": "`I originally thought とわかった was と分かった`\n\nIt is, but it might better help to translate it as `identified` here, rather\nthan `understood`. That sentence means:\n\n> The people whom they identified at the hospital as (having) \"Economy Class\n> Syndrome\" numbered 19 besides/in addition to this woman.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-22T20:46:27.603",
"id": "33732",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T07:04:04.287",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T07:04:04.287",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "33731",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33731 | 33732 | 33732 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was playing my Japanese version of animal crossing new leaf and when I\ncaught a Killifish the dialog said:\n\n> メダカを 釣{つ}り上{あ}げた！ まだ小学生{しょうがくせい}だな\n\nI get the gist of what it says but I think it's some sort of joke as is the\ncustom when you catch something in the English games. Would anyone be able to\nexplain this joke (if it is one)?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T00:45:30.057",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33734",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T07:56:58.603",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-23T07:56:58.603",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "14239",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"puns",
"jokes"
],
"title": "Help with a Japanese joke: the link between メダカ and 小学生",
"view_count": 378
} | [
{
"body": "I think it's a reference to a famous children's song めだかの学校, where a school of\nめだか is...er, a school of めだか.\n\n短い答えでごめんなさい。",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T01:12:45.007",
"id": "33736",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T01:12:45.007",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33734",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "This is an interesting question to me.\n\nI actually hadn't known about what this exactly means until you asked.\n\nNow, [kindly take a look at this\npage.](http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/10262642/)\n\nThe page says, ( though they are almost at the extinction level )\n\n>\n> メダカは、体長4cmほどの日本で最も小さな淡水魚と言われ、かつては田んぼや小川、池などで普通に見かける親しみがある魚だったのですが、環境の変化によって生息数が激減してしまいました。\n\nTranslation\n\n> メダカ is a freshwater fish as small as 4cm and considered to be the smallest\n> fish among them in Japan. In past times, they were found so often in rice\n> fileds and creesk, ponds and were familiar to ordinary Japanese but the\n> change of the environment reduced their numbers largely.\n\nSo, even though I have never heard personally the \"joke\" in your question for\nmy long wasting lifetime, haha, but I think the implication of the sentence is\nreferring to \"small kid\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T06:06:12.670",
"id": "33743",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T06:06:12.670",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33734",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33734 | null | 33736 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33745",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In this grammatical construction:\n\n> X (doer)-は/が + Y (place)-で\\に + Z (causer)-に + W (direct object)-を +\n> Causative-Passive Verb (transitive verb)\n\nWhat particles are used if the following relative clause is formed\n(hypothetically)?\n\n> Causer-( ) + Direct Object-( ) + Doer-( ) + Causative-Passive Verb + Place\n\nI think that the most normal and understandable construction would be a\ncausative-passive verb modifying the doer, but given this answer [passive verb\nmodifying a\nnoun](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/29035/%E3%81%8C-and-\npassive-verb-referring-to-modified-noun)... I wonder the arrangement of the\nsentence with this verb conjugation.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T00:50:38.920",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33735",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T15:14:34.983",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "13859",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles",
"syntax",
"passive-voice",
"relative-clauses",
"causation"
],
"title": "relative clause with Causative-Passive Verb",
"view_count": 348
} | [
{
"body": "I'm not sure if I fully understand the question, if you provide an example in\nEnglish I could translate it.\n\nGenerally there are two main constructions, passive and non-passive. Normal is\n田中さんは石を落とした (Tanaka dropped a rock), passive is 田中さんに石が落とされた。(the rock was\ndropped by Tanaka) This should not be confused with transitive or intransitive\nverbs, which basically just say if \"someone caused the action\" or \"the action\nhappened\". (e.g. 落とす I drop a rock, 落ちる a rock falls)\n\n> 犯人にお金が盗まれたところ \n> by the thief, the money that was stolen, the place where\n>\n> the place where the money was stolen by the thief.\n\n\n\n> 犯人がお金を盗んだところ \n> the money, that the thief stole, the place where\n>\n> the place where the thief stole the money.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T02:54:27.837",
"id": "33737",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T03:19:54.280",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-23T03:19:54.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "14241",
"parent_id": "33735",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> X (doer)-は/が + Y (place)-で\\に + Z (causer)-に + W (direct object)-を +\n> Causative-Passive Verb (transitive verb)\n\nI am not 100% sure but if you mean something like:\n\n> * 山田さん **は** その教室 **で** 佐藤先生 **に** 宿題 **を** させられた。 \n> (Yamada-san was made to do her homework by Sato-sensei in that classroom.)\n> * 太郎君 **は** カラオケボックス **で** 次郎君 **に** 演歌 **を** 歌わされた。 \n> (Taro-kun was made to sing Enka by Jiro-kun at a karaoke bar.)\n> * 僕 **は** その店 **で** 彼女 **に** バッグ **を** 買わされた。 \n> (I was made to buy a bag by/for her/my gf at that store.)\n>\n\nThen you can turn them into a relative clause this way:\n\n> Causer-( ) + Direct Object-( ) + Doer-( ) + Causative-Passive Verb + Place\n\n(Normal word order would be \"Doerが + Causerに + Objectを + Causative-passive\nverb + Place\")\n\n-->\n\n> * 山田さん **が** 佐藤先生 **に** 宿題 **を** させられた教室 \n> (a classroom where Yamada-san was made to do her homework by Sato-sensei)\n> * 太郎君 **が** 次郎君 **に** 演歌 **を** 歌わされたカラオケボックス \n> (a karaoke bar where Taro-kun was made to sing Enka by Jiro-kun)\n> * 僕 **が** 彼女 **に** バッグ **を** 買わされた店 \n> (a store where I was made to buy a bag by/for her/my gf)\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T07:30:56.003",
"id": "33745",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T15:14:34.983",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-23T15:14:34.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33735",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33735 | 33745 | 33745 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33748",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "In my limited exposure to 尊敬語【そんけいご】 and 謙譲語【けんじょうご】, I feel like I've only\nreally seen them used in their normal -ます forms and never in て form or\nconjugated such as a -たい form. Are honorific and humble verbs not typically\nused in conjugated forms like these? If I wanted to write a more extended\nsentence, would it be better to use normal verbs up until the end and finish\nwith a 尊敬語【そんけいご】 or 謙譲語【けんじょうご】 verb?\n\nEDIT: To be a little more clear about what I mean, could you do the following?\n\n> Ex. To say \"I called X and went home.\" - Xさんに連絡いたして、お帰りしました。 \n> or \n> Ex. To say \"I wanted to greet you.\" - 挨拶を致したかったです。\n\nAre these valid sentences or is that not how 尊敬語【そんけいご】 and 謙譲語【けんじょうご】 are\nused?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T05:06:57.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33741",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-04T04:11:48.550",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-23T06:42:58.450",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "10795",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"politeness",
"honorifics"
],
"title": "て-form and other conjugations of 謙譲語",
"view_count": 652
} | [
{
"body": "I am sorry to say, I am not able yet to grasp your intention basically, but\nwhat I can point out is....\n\n> Ex. To say \"I called X and went home.\" - Xさんに連絡いたして、お帰りしました。\n\nsounds very strange, because\n\n1 I am not sure if you are trying to \"report\" you action to \"someone else\nother than you\". Plus, since your action, going home is described as \"お帰りしました”\n, here you don't have to put お，which is called\n**[美化語](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E7%BE%8E%E5%8C%96%E8%AA%9E)** , so that\nyou are \"beautiying\" \"your own action\", thus your いたす + お are contained in the\nsame sentence which sounds very awkward to me ( especially about お )\n\n> To say \"I wanted to greet you.\" - 挨拶を致したかったです。\n\nAlso sounds srange since in this case in this case, one of the probability is\nyou are dropping 御（ご） or simply ご，without this the word 挨拶 sounds a bit\n\"abrupt\" to me if you are tring to say someone upper than you.\n\nAnd had it been added with ご，then you would not have needed to say \"致す” since\nby adding ご，which is also the same above 美化語，then your sentence will have some\nkind of double politeness, which is redundant, to me.\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T10:02:51.513",
"id": "33747",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T10:02:51.513",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I think 尊敬語 and 謙譲語 can be used in the て form and たい form.\n\nTo say \"I called X and went home\" in 謙譲語, I think you could probably say\nlike...\n\n> * Xさんにご連絡申し上げ **て** 、帰らせていただきました。\n> * Xさんに連絡させていただい **て** (orさせていただき)、帰宅いたしました。/ 失礼いたしました。 \n> etc...\n>\n\nFor \"I wanted to greet you\" in 謙譲語, I think you could say like...\n\n> * ご挨拶申し上げ **たかった** です。\n> * ご挨拶させていただき **たかった** です。 \n> etc...\n>\n\nOther examples off the top of my head...\n\n> * 来てくださっ **て** 、ありがとうございます。\n> * ご覧になり **たい** 場合は、遠慮なくお申し出ください。\n> * 是非一度、お目にかかっ **て** お話を伺い **たい** (orお伺いし **たい** )と思っております。\n>",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T10:05:57.380",
"id": "33748",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-04T04:11:48.550",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-04T04:11:48.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> Xさんにご[連絡]{れんらく}の[上]{うえ}で[帰宅]{きたく}[致]{いた}しました。\n\nI think that \"and\" shows the reason why you went home. \nExactly, the way of ～して is a obscure conjunction.\n\nIn the case of ～したい: \n\n> ご挨拶したかったです。 \n> →ご挨拶できず申し訳ありません。\n\nI feel that is a speaker's own desire. \n\nIn the case of objective expression：\n\n> ご挨拶したく思いました。\n\nThose are not altogether false, but I think those are not quite suitable. I\nunderstand this question partially.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T12:27:05.463",
"id": "33750",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T06:54:06.770",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-24T06:54:06.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "13598",
"owner_user_id": "13598",
"parent_id": "33741",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33741 | 33748 | 33748 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How is the English verb\n[shirtfront](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/shirtfront),\nwhich has a sporting meaning of deliberately colliding into an opponent's\nchest, knocking them into the ground, and a vague political meaning of\nconfronting another person associated with then Australian Prime Minister Tony\nAbbott claiming he would confront Vladimir Putin, translated into Japanese?\n\nIs it left in romaji, translated into the katakana シャツフロント, some other option,\nor did the concept being described fail to enter the Japanese language?\n\nThe Japanese edition of Wiktionary [doesn't have a\nmatch](https://ja.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E7%89%B9%E5%88%A5:%E6%A4%9C%E7%B4%A2&profile=default&fulltext=Search&search=shirt%20front&searchToken=cffmp94of1bwwl4fj919mxidy),\nnor did [weblio](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/shirt+front) (apart from\nquoting the English Wiktionary), nor did jisho.org.\n\n\"シャツフロント\" \"トニー・アボット\" got only two google hits, while \"shirtfront\" \"トニー・アボット\"\nor \"shirt front\" \"トニー・アボット\" got slightly more hits, but not many.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T09:45:57.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33746",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T03:28:38.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Japanese for shirtfronting",
"view_count": 236
} | [
{
"body": "We don't have a Japanese counterpart to shirtfront as a verb, perhaps because\nJapanese didn't wear a western-style shirt until Meiji era. Our ancestors wore\n襦袢 【じゅばん】 (juban).\n\nInstead we have:\n\n 1. 胸倉【むなぐら】を掴【つか】む meaning \"to grasp sb. by the chest.\"\n\n 2. 頭突【づつ】きを食【く】らわす meaning \"to strike sb. (possibly on the chest) with one's head.\" When you strike sb. with your head, it should be on the other's chest. You can't lower your head so low to hit your enemy's stomach.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T12:23:28.297",
"id": "33749",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T03:28:38.443",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T03:28:38.443",
"last_editor_user_id": "1527",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33746",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33746 | null | 33749 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Would both of these sentences be correct? Do they both have the same meaning?\n\n> たくやの後ろに **彰が** 座っています。Akira is sitting behind Takuya.\n>\n> **彰は** たくやの後ろに座っています。Akira is sitting behind Takuya.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T22:42:03.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33753",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T01:35:54.043",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14245",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"syntax",
"particle-は",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "Would both of these sentences be correct?",
"view_count": 106
} | [
{
"body": "They are both natural-sounding Japanese sentences, given the right context, so\nthey are both 'correct'. Whether or not they have the same meaning depends on\nhow you define 'meaning'. Do they describe the same state? Yes. Are they\ninterchangeable for each other? Very much no.\n\nThe difference regards how the information is presented - which part is\ninformation the listener already knows, and which part is the information the\nsentence is meant to convey. The difference is marked partly by word order (a\nthing I'm pretty sure all natural languages do) and partly by Japanese's role-\nmarking particles*.\n\nFirst, let's break the sentence up into subparts:\n\n> [たくや] (の後ろに)\n>\n> [彰]\n>\n> [座っています]\n\nYour first sentence orders them like this:\n\n> **[たくや]** の後ろに **[彰]** _が_ [座っています]\n\nIn this sentence, 彰 is placed second, and additionally marked with が - both of\nwhich indicate that it is the _focus_ of the sentence†. This means that 彰 is\nbeing presented as new information - we haven't been talking about him before.\nたくや is placed first, suggesting he's the _topic_ - he's been mentioned\nalready. (He's not marked for topic with は, probably because that would sound\nmore like contrastive topic, where we've talked about what's behind someone\nelse and now we're talking about what's behind たくや.)\n\nThis sentence sounds like it could be introducing 彰 as a new subject for\ndiscussion (you could imagine this being the introduction sentence for a new\ncharacter in a book - we've mentioned his friend たくや, now we're focusing on\nhim himself). Alternatively, it could be the next entry in a list of people\nsitting in rows - behind someone is たくや, and behind たくや is 彰.\n\nYour second sentence gives the opposite ordering:\n\n> **[彰]** _は_ **[たくや]** の後ろに [座っています]\n\nIn this case, 彰 comes first, and is marked with は, indicating that he's the\ntopic - we've been talking about him already. たくや (or I suppose the space\nbehind him) is now the focus - the new information. We know _who_ 彰 is; what\nwe want to know is _where_ he is.\n\nMy immediate interpretation of this sentence makes it sound like the answer to\na question - 「彰はどこですか？」「たくやの後ろに座っています」. You could strengthen this sense of\nresponse by replacing は with なら, making it more like 'if it's 彰 you're looking\nfor, he's behind たくや.' It could also be the 'contrastive' focus mentioned\nabove (this guy is here, and 彰 is behind たくや), or it could be setting a new\nscene with characters we already know (imagine the first paragraph of a new\nchapter - '...We're all gathered around to listen. 彰 is behind たくや...').\n\nSo as much as these two sentences do describe the same physical reality, the\ncontexts you'd use them in are really quite different.\n\n_(*They're probably clitics, not particles, but that doesn't matter here_ )\n\n_(†Technically it's not so much that が marks focus, it's more like leaving a\nmain clause subject unmarked for topic implicitly marks it for focus. There\ndoesn't seem to be a way to just leave a subject unmarked for topic/focus\nstatus unless topic and focus are both explicitly assigned to other things.)_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-23T23:28:52.273",
"id": "33755",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-23T23:37:12.210",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "3639",
"parent_id": "33753",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33753 | null | 33755 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been trying to learn when to use 〜ということ or just 〜こと, for example:\n\n> 彼が金を貸してくれた{ということ/ こと}は私は彼に信用されている{ということ/こと}だ。 (The fact that he lent me\n> money means that I am trusted by him.)\n\nWith the above example what combinations of ということは/ことは and ということだ/ことだ are\npossible? Also how about in general?\n\n> (e.g. 彼が金を貸してくれたということ は私は彼に信用されていることだ。,\n>\n> 彼が金を貸してくれたことは私は彼に信用されているということだ。etc.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T02:38:23.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33759",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-18T22:27:22.523",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-18T22:27:22.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "12084",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "〜ということ and just 〜こと",
"view_count": 2398
} | [
{
"body": "In expressing:\n\n> \"A means/implies B (after all, in essence, etc.)\",\n\nit is only very common, grammatical and natural to use 「ということ」 **_back-to-\nback_** among us native speakers. (If it is taught otherwise in Japanese as a\nforeign language, that is too bad.)\n\n> 「(Mini-Sentence A) ということ **は** (Mini-Sentence B) ということ **だ / である** 。」\n\nApplying this to your example sentence, you will have:\n\n> 「彼が金を貸してくれた **ということ** は、私は彼に信用されている **ということ** だ。」\n\nReplace either one of the two ということ's with just こと and the sentence will not\nsound nearly as natural or correct.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-09T15:18:22.000",
"id": "34042",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-09T15:18:22.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "33759",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 33759 | null | 34042 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33783",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 電話のベルが聞こえたとき、無視しようかと **も** 思った。 \n> When I heard the phone's bell I wondered if I should ignore it.\n\nWe have 無視する = \"to ignore\", \n無視しようか = \"will I ignore it?\" \n無視しようかと思った = \"I thought 'will I ignore it'\".\n\nI can't figure out what も is doing. Is it adding a sense of 'even'? As in 'I\neven thought that I should ignore it'?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T09:54:03.883",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33764",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T18:03:38.860",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-24T14:55:07.687",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と",
"particle-も",
"volitional-form",
"particle-か"
],
"title": "Use of も after quote particle",
"view_count": 177
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, it is the も meaning \"also/even.\"\n\nThis も after quotative と is fairly common, and while it could certainly be the\nemphatic \"even\" sense (the larger context would help make it clear if we\nshould be surprised by the writer considering ignoring the call), it also\ncommonly means a simple \"also.\" In that sense, it would mean that the writer\nthought of several things, of which \"Maybe I'll ignore it\" was one.\n\nHere (again, with zero context), I get the sense of a fleeting thought that\ncrossed the mind before the speaker decided to pick up the phone after all.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T18:03:38.860",
"id": "33783",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T18:03:38.860",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9959",
"parent_id": "33764",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33764 | 33783 | 33783 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33769",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 「質問に答えていない。 \n> 私は、人を殺すのが楽しいのかと訊いたのです」 \n> サーヴァントを睨む。 \n> 歪な短刀を持った影は、 \n> 「 **とりわけ何も。第一、殺しちゃ楽しめねえだろ、色々** 」 \n> ひひ、と。 \n> 愉しみを共有したがるよう、下卑た笑いを私に向けた。\n\nWhat does that last sentence mean? \nI think he is saying something like:\n\n> Not particularly. For once, you can't have fun killing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T11:41:17.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33765",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T16:00:39.353",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-24T16:00:39.353",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Trouble understanding sentence",
"view_count": 159
} | [
{
"body": "第一 means \"besides all that\", 'first of all\"\n\n殺しちゃ is the change of 殺しては and it means \"if I kill (persons)\" in this\nsentence.\n\n楽しめねぇだろ is the change of 楽しめないだろ and it means \"I can't have fun\"\n\nHe says that \"Not particularly. First of all, if I kill persons, I can't have\nfun in various ways.\" in the last sentence.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T13:41:46.657",
"id": "33767",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T13:41:46.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "第一 (≂ そもそも) means \"to begin with\", or \"in the first place\".\n\n殺しちゃ(=殺したら)楽しめねえだろ (≂ 殺してしまったら、楽しめないだろう) means \"Once you have killed (people),\nyou can't have fun (with them anymore)\".\n\nSo he's saying he does not particularly enjoy killing people, and that he\ncan't have fun anymore if he has killed them... (implying he enjoys doing\n_various_ things to them before killing...)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T13:45:55.193",
"id": "33769",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T14:23:30.723",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-24T14:23:30.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33765 | 33769 | 33769 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33891",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was speaking with a friend of mine and said I learnt Japanese using some\ndictionaries and websites. But I forgot to mention that I also use grammar\nbooks, so I said:\n\n```\n\n 忘れてた！日本語の文法書たくさんよんでいますね。\n I forgot! I read many Japanese grammar books.\n \n```\n\nShe then corrected me saying it should be 見忘れました instead, hinting that with\n忘れてた (or 忘れました） you can't drop what was forgotten (i.e. it needs to be\nexplicitly said e.g.\n\n```\n\n 〜を忘れてた\n I forgot .\n \n```\n\nDoes the 見 at the start of the verb make the transitive verb (requiring an\nobject) into an intransitive verb (not requiring an object)?\n\nThe dictionary definitions I have don't show much difference:\n\n> 見忘れる【みわすれる】 v1,vt + (1) to forget/to fail to recognize/to fail to\n> recognise/EntL1641770X\n>\n> 忘れる【わすれる】 v1,vt Pop + (1) to forget/to leave carelessly/to be forgetful\n> of/to forget about/to forget (an article)\n\nPossibly related: <https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/15118/10888>\n\nEDIT: Full conversation below (please ignore spelling mistake of 見忘れました as\nみわせれりました\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QRcja.png)\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/64st8.png)",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T13:15:57.040",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33766",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-01T13:00:53.157",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10888",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Difference between 見忘れる and 忘れる",
"view_count": 397
} | [
{
"body": "I think the reason they corrected you to say 見忘れました was that you typed\nみわせれりました which looked/sounded like みわすれました; as I said in the comment, 見忘れました(I\nforgot to see) wouldn't make sense there.\n\nAnd they said 「忘れました→何を忘れたかわからない。見忘れました→」(by which I think they meant to say:\n\"If you just said 忘れました, I wouldn't know what you forgot. So I recommend you\nsay 見忘れました\"), and 「忘れてた→what? \"I forgot~~\" = ～を忘れてた」(by which I think they\nmeant: \"If you just said 忘れてた, I'd want to ask 'What did you forget?' so I\nrecommend you say like XXを忘れてた(I forgot + [an object])\")...\n\nBut, in real life, we often use the phrase 「あっ、忘れた！/ 忘れました！/ 忘れちゃった！etc.」(I\nforgot!) or 「あっ、忘れてた！/ 忘れてました！」(I had forgotten! / Now I remembered!) without\nexplicitly mentioning _what_ you forgot or forgot to do, so...\n\nAfter reading your whole conversation, I think you could have said:\n\n> * 忘れました！ / 忘れてました！ 日本語の文法書 **も** たくさん読んでいますよ。 \n> (Lit: I forgot! / I had forgotten! I read a lot of Japanese grammar books,\n> too.)\n> * 言い忘れました！ / 言い忘れてました！ 日本語の文法書 **も** たくさん読んでいますよ。 \n> (Lit: I forgot to say! / I had forgotten to say! I read a lot of Japanese\n> grammar books, too.)\n>\n\netc. in your situation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-01T09:26:44.413",
"id": "33891",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-01T13:00:53.157",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-01T13:00:53.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33766 | 33891 | 33891 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36108",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading a little book called 『ひらがな物語』 and came across this passage on\npage 119:\n\n> 大臣といえば明治初期の文部大臣森有礼が \n> 「めんどうだから、いっそのこと、小学校教育は英語にしようか」 \n> と、おおまじめで、いい出したこともあった。もし森文部大臣の発言が通っておれば今頃、 \n> パパ ママ マイホーム \n> **と、小学生が黄色い声を、張りあげていたかも知れない**\n> 。しかし森発言は、エール大学のホイットニイ教授のアドバイスで中止された。一国の文化を、外国語で継承するとは、不見識も甚だしい。それも東洋の文化を、東洋の文字でならともかく、東洋の文化を西洋の文字では、話にもならないという次第である。\n\nI wondered why their voices would be 'yellow', which doesn't seem to make much\nsense literally. I looked up `黄色い` in 広辞苑 and found this definition:\n\n> ②（声が）かん高い。主に、女性や子供の声につけていう。\n\nThat seems to explain the meaning of the phrase, although I'm still curious\nwhy `黄色い` 'yellow' would be used to describe the high-pitched voices of women\nand children.\n\nIs there an explanation for why `黄色い` has this meaning? Is it some sort of\nfigure of speech? Or is the reason behind the expression unknown?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T13:42:54.393",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33768",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T09:29:30.137",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-24T13:53:22.297",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"colors"
],
"title": "Why are the high-pitched voices of children 'yellow'?",
"view_count": 1381
} | [
{
"body": "As I grew up and lived with Japanese culture, I accepted the description\n\"yellow voice\" without question. So now I've looked up why the high voices of\nwomen or children are called yellow (黄色い声). If it was described as black\nvoice, blue voice or brown voice I would be confused. Maybe red voice would be\nOK, but to me yellow voice is better. Anyway, I looked it up.\n\nIn ancient China, Buddhist chanting had melody. They described the tones of\nsounds with colours. The highest tone was yellow.\n\n『「言葉のルーツ」おもしろ雑学(エンサイクロネット著)ＰＨＰ文庫』の「黄色い声」の項目163頁 (Roots of Words, interesting\nknowledge by Encyclonet PHP inc. p.163)\n<http://homepage2.nifty.com/osiete/s661.htm>\n\nDoes this enlighten you on why their voices are yellow?\n\nWhen the first women won seats in a parliament after WWII, Japanese newspapers\nwrote, ”With the yellow voice, the female parliament member ----\"\n(黄色い声を張り上げて、女性議員は、。。。).\n\nWhen I learned this, I was very proud as a woman. Now no one would say \"A\nfemale member spoke with a yellow voice.\"\n\nWhen I hear \"A woman with a yellow voice\", I imagine a woman who works hard.\n(頑張る女性。)\n\nSome say that the yellow voices of children are cute.\n\nHowever, others say that the colour yellow symbolizes unease and stress;\ntherefore, a yellow voice is uneasy or stressed.\n\nIf you do not like women and children, I guess that you get stress from a\nyellow voice. How you feel about words depends on your experience with the\nwords.\n\nNote: \nI could not find the English spelling for \"エンサイクロネット\", so I made something up\nfrom the sound.\n\n「言葉のルーツ」おもしろ雑学 -> I could not find the proper English name; therefore, I\ntranslated it into English.\n\nI read or heard on T.V. news about a woman with a yellow voice, though I do\nnot remember exactly which news program and date. I think that Fusae Ichikawa\nwas interviewed. I don't quite recall.\n\nThere are also many articles about yellow voices. Among those articles, I\nthought that this was the most suitable. じゃあね。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T02:48:35.730",
"id": "36108",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T09:29:30.137",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T09:29:30.137",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15686",
"parent_id": "33768",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33768 | 36108 | 36108 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here are two sentences containing the し particle:\n\n> このアパートは綺麗だし、安い。 \n> This apartment is clean and what's more it's inexpensive.\n>\n> 今日はお客さんも来るし、夕食も作らなくてはいけないし、エアロビクスにいけません。 \n> I've got visitors today and I have to cook dinner so I can't go to\n> aerobics.\n\n(Not sure if there are other types of し sentences but this is two that I know\nof.)\n\nI feel that these two sentences aren't translated in the same way. For\ninstance if I were to translate the first sentence like the second sentence\nwas it would become \"This apartment is clean so it's cheap\". Of course this\ndoesn't even make sense, but do you see what I mean?\n\nThis brings me to the question I'm hoping someone can answer for me:\n\nHow do you know which way し sentences should be translated? Is there any way\nto know how a sentence with し will be translated without trying both ways and\nseeing which makes sense?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T22:35:23.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33772",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T06:20:03.570",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T06:20:03.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12084",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particles"
],
"title": "Translating sentences containing し",
"view_count": 202
} | [
{
"body": "Think about it in terms of context.\n\nIf you are in a space without any language, what are the traits and qualities\nyou want to convey?\n\nRead the Japanese and try and emulate the context, then from the context go to\nEnglish.\n\nTrying to find one-to-one corollaries is interesting and good for word-by-word\ntranslating, but for conveying meaning correctly, we must strive for a common\ncultural context from which to express our human situation in words.\n\nし can be translated many ways. In general, it's like a comma for situational\nlists. し is very poetic in this way -- it can string together many related\nevents to depict a scene.\n\nIn English, however, there is no true _し_ in the same way for flexibility and\nversatility of use in one letter, character, word, or term. So we must make\nsome compromises:\n\nし can be rendered as\n\n * _additionally,_\n * _what's more_ (like above)\n * _on top of that,_\n * _and_\n * but that's not all,\n * this and also this\n\nYou'll have to consider the tone of a message before translating し, as that\nwill largely impact which direction is chosen for contextual-transposition\nthat is culturally aware.\n\nHappy translating!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-24T23:46:24.407",
"id": "33773",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T23:46:24.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9542",
"parent_id": "33772",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33772 | null | 33773 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 私は困っている。\n\nI've seen the sentence translated as \"I am in trouble\", however depending on\nthe context is it possible that it also could mean \"I am troubled\" or \"I am\nworried\"?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T06:03:05.293",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33775",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-23T06:26:57.990",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T06:33:00.790",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12460",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "困っている usage / different meanings depending on context?",
"view_count": 198
} | [
{
"body": "困る / 困っている / 困った can be translated in many ways:\n\nI am in trouble / difficulty; I am having a hard time; I am (being) troubled /\nstuck / annoyed / bothered / distressed / embarrassed / perplexed / at a loss\n/ in need / in inconvenience, etc...\n\nSo yes, I think it is possible that it also could mean \"I am troubled\" \"I am\nworried\", depending on the context, although we more commonly say\n(～が)[心配]{しんぱい}だ / (～を)心配している to mean \"I am worried / anxious / concerned\n(about...)\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-24T05:38:19.213",
"id": "38671",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-24T06:09:28.027",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-24T06:09:28.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33775",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33775 | null | 38671 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33787",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am very weak in determining the scope of subject when reading Japanese\nsentences. For example, when reading the following passage,\n\n>\n> 娘が「これ、借りて良い」と、兄に許可を求めている。同じような体つきのふたりは、共有している物がたくさんあるそうだ。私は、男女の区別を教えられ、男物、女物が別の時代に育った。\n\n 1. how can I know that 兄 in 【娘が「これ、借りて良い」と、兄に許可を求めている。】 refers to 娘's elder brother rather than 筆者's elder brother?\n 2. if 兄 must refer to 娘's elder brother, why did 筆者 not write【娘が「これ、借りて良い」と、 **娘のお兄さん** に許可を求めている。】? お兄さん is used here because 娘 becomes a third person from 筆者's point of view.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T10:23:19.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33776",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T05:42:59.827",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T10:34:42.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"scope"
],
"title": "How to determine the scope of subject?",
"view_count": 227
} | [
{
"body": "I think 兄 is 娘's elder brother.\n\n1.It is hard to think that 娘 seek to borrow something like clothes of this\nwriter's elder brother, who is an uncle for 娘、because this writer said\n同じような体つきのふたり(same frame).\n\n2.I think the reason is because this context indicate it. And if 兄 is this\nwriter's elder brother, I think this writer write 私の兄.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T11:08:46.637",
"id": "33777",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T11:08:46.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33776",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 1. how can I know that 兄 in 【娘が「これ、借りて良い」と、兄に許可を求めている。】refers to 娘's elder\n> brother rather than 筆者's elder brother?\n>\n\nIn the first sentence the only subject is 娘 -- marked by が. Ergo, the one who\nreceives permission to borrow from \"brother\" must be the daughter. And with\nthat referent being set, then without a lot of other context, it's hard to\nmake the brother anyone other than her own brother.\n\n> 2. if 兄 must refer to 娘's elder brother, why did 筆者 not\n> write【娘が「これ、借りて良い」と、娘のお兄さんに許可を求めている。】? お兄さん is used here because 娘 becomes a\n> third person from 筆者's point of view.\n>\n\nMy sense as a non-native speaker is that on the simplest level without\ncontext, お兄さん and 兄 could both be used (with some other modifications for the\nsentence). But here 兄 should be strongly preferred.\n\nFirst, one way of making it お兄さん would be to write from the daughter's\nperspective assuming she would refer to her brother as お兄さん _rather than_\nwriting about the situation from the author's own perspective. The rest of the\nparagraph is not written that way but rather from the author's perspective\nabout his children.\n\nE.g.\n\n> 娘が「ねね、お兄さん、これ、借りて良い」と、兄に許可を求めている。】\n\nwould be find here because that would make sense for _her_ to say.\n\nSecond, the writing style here is appropriate for a Japanese essay or academic\nformat. In such a context, there's no reason to use polite forms like お兄さん.\nInstead, the relations are stated simply. To give an example, 神様 is just\nwritten 神 in most academic writing.\n\nThird, assuming the author is writing from his own experience, there's also a\nthird reason. If this is the author's own family, then they are closer to the\nauthor than the audience. And you don't use honorifics about people who are\ncloser to you than your audience.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T22:20:02.967",
"id": "33787",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T05:42:59.827",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-26T05:42:59.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "33776",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33776 | 33787 | 33787 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33780",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand the meaning of something such as 食べたつもりで寝る。My idea of this is \"I\ngo to sleep convinced that I've eaten\". Or along those lines.\n\nIn the book I'm using, the following, similar phrase has been used but I can't\nmake heads nor tails of it:\n\n> 優しく言ったつもりでも「～しなさい」と聞こえ、「～しなさい」と言っても優しさが伝わる。\n\nWhat role does the も play here? My best understanding is: \"[~shinasai] was\nsaid kindly (at least the speaker was convinced this to be the case)\", and\nthen even though he used [~shinasai], it was relayed as a kind message. I\nunderstand that to be the meaning of 言っても, but confused with the reason behind\nusing 言ったつもりでも over 言ったつもりで. Any help is appreciated :) .",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T12:16:33.003",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33778",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T07:53:53.250",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T17:52:36.717",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14258",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"imperatives"
],
"title": "Meaning of 〜たつもりでも〜ても～。",
"view_count": 597
} | [
{
"body": "You can see it as two sentences: \"優しく言ったつもりでも「～しなさい」と聞こえ(る)\" and\n\"「～しなさい」と言っても優しさが伝わる。\"\n\n「優しく言ったつもりでも」 \n--> Even though you meant to say (or ask) something gently/mildly,\n\n「『～しなさい』と聞こえ、」 \n--> it can sound as \"しなさい\", i.e. it can sound as a command (rather than a\nrequest) (just as in the example of the train announcement), whereas...\n\n「『～しなさい』と言っても」 \n--> even though you (literally) say \"しなさい\",\n\n「優しさが伝わる。」 \n--> your kindness can be felt; it can sound as a mild request (rather than a\ncommand) (just as in the example of the mothers saying しなさい to their kids).\n\nThe も in ～つもりで **も** means \"even though\" or \"even when\".",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T17:31:10.793",
"id": "33780",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T07:53:53.250",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-26T07:53:53.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33778",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33778 | 33780 | 33780 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33782",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I want to tell someone that they \"looked cool\" today. \nNormally I would write: **\"今日OOさんはかっこよかった！\"** \nBut I don't want to mean just that they are cool more specifically I mean\ntheir outfit and styling. \nWould **\"今日OOさんはかっこいい見えました！\"** work better for this feeling?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T17:31:22.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33781",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T16:09:51.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14259",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"translation"
],
"title": "Saying someone \"looked cool\"?",
"view_count": 2308
} | [
{
"body": "I think the issue here is that you are explicitly trying to map the English\nword \"look(ed)\" into a Japanese verb, when you don't really need to. Learn to\nthink in Japanese, don't (always) try to translate your thoughts from English.\n\nSo instead of trying to find a verb, you can just say that their\nclothes/style/whatever **were** cool.\n\n> * 今日〇〇さんの(服・髪型)はかっこよかった！\n> * 今日の(ファッション・スタイル)すごいよかったね！\n> * 今日はめっちゃ(スマートな・おしゃれな)服だったね！\n>\n\nIf you really want to use 見える, the correct grammar would be かっこよく見えた. But to\nme 1) that feels like something you just wouldn't say to someone, and 2) かっこいい\nand 見える are like different levels of familiarity, so I don't know that they'd\nbe used together, even if talking _about_ the person to someone else.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T17:48:35.530",
"id": "33782",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T18:11:31.627",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-25T18:11:31.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "33781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Here is a reference going in the opposite direction J->E, about how to\ntranslating すてきなかっこう（素敵な格好）(suteki na kakkou) as \"Nice look!/I like your\noutfit!\" <http://news.mynavi.jp/news/2013/06/13/123/>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T18:37:44.743",
"id": "33784",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-25T18:37:44.743",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14250",
"parent_id": "33781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I think いい格好してました would do the trick.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T16:09:51.723",
"id": "33809",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T16:09:51.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7477",
"parent_id": "33781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 33781 | 33782 | 33782 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33792",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「やん、宇奈月ちゃんったら。彼氏くんの方が攻め攻めかと思ってたら、しっかり **包容力見せてる** じゃん」\n>\n> 「なんだかんだで、年下の男の子に好きにさせてあげてるって感じだったよね」\n\nContext: A girl was talking to her boyfriend and these two girls were\nlistening in on their conversation. After she came back inside they started\ntalking to her.\n\nIn the above I'm a bit lost as to what 包容力見せてる means and who is the one doing\nit. Is it referring to her boyfriend or her?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T20:40:34.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33785",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T05:38:04.647",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9219",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "What is meant by 包容力見せてる here?",
"view_count": 184
} | [
{
"body": "It's the girl who is showing her 包容力 (to her boyfriend).\n\n彼氏くんの方が攻め攻め implies the boyfriend was aggressive and taking initiative, and\nthe girl was acting rather passively. But in reality, the girl was not that\npassive, but was intentionally letting him do as he likes (with her \"broad-\nmindedness\" ≒ 包容力).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T05:02:20.157",
"id": "33792",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T05:02:20.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33785",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33785 | 33792 | 33792 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 「もうみーくん、またそういうこと言って」\n>\n> 「駄目ですか？」\n>\n> 「ううん、それも嬉しい、ドキドキする」\n>\n> 「そこまでなんだって、思っちゃうもん…… **やっぱり** 」\n\nI'm a bit confused as to what this やっぱり is doing in the sentence above.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-25T21:16:09.700",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33786",
"last_activity_date": "2017-03-11T03:23:42.193",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14262",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"spoken-language",
"word-order"
],
"title": "What does やっぱり mean in [そこまでなんだって、思っちゃうもん……やっぱり]",
"view_count": 1909
} | [
{
"body": "やっぱり is frequently used when someone is uncertain about what to do or how to\nfeel about something. For example:\n\n> イギリスに行こうかな。。。いや、やっぱり日本に行く！\n>\n> Maybe I should go to England. No, actually I'll go to Japan!\n\nRegarding your dialog, without the full context and knowing what they are\ntalking about, it is hard to say for certain, but here I get the feeling that\nthe person saying \"やっぱり\" was sort of indecisive about something and now has\ndecided a bit more firmly. Or possibly they just thought about something for a\nsecond or two before deciding their stance on it. I think colloquial use of\n\"actually\" contains some of this feeling.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-13T12:13:51.940",
"id": "34106",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-13T12:13:51.940",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "33786",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "やっぱり has several meanings, such as:\n\n> * **やっぱり** 、思った通りだ。 -- It is so, _just as I thought/expected/suspected_.\n> -> That's exactly what I thought. / I knew it.\n> * **やっぱり** 、こっちにします。 -- _On second thought_ , / _I changed my mind_ , I'll\n> pick this one.\n> * それでも / なんだかんだ言っても、 **やっぱり** 嬉しいです。 -- But I'm happy, _nonetheless / all\n> the same / after all_.\n>\n\nHere in your sentence, I think it's used as the 3rd meaning, \"nonetheless,\nafter all, all the same\".\n\n> そこまでなんだって思っちゃうもん…やっぱり。 \n> Because it makes me realize you think of me so much... after all /\n> nonetheless.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-16T10:02:21.167",
"id": "34166",
"last_activity_date": "2017-03-11T03:23:42.193",
"last_edit_date": "2017-03-11T03:23:42.193",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33786",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33786 | null | 34166 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "What is the meaning of ド in this sentence?\n\n> 抜け駆けかド畜生\n\nContex: some guys take the lead and the character don't realize it.\n\nIt used the same way as [this\nド](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2267/what-are-the-origins-\nof-%E3%83%89-when-used-as-emphasis-and-is-it-always-negative) and modifies 畜生?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T02:11:09.763",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33788",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T02:11:09.763",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "13859",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of ド in this sentence?",
"view_count": 48
} | []
| 33788 | null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Actually, I cannot find the definition of 抜け切る in general sources but some of\nthem suggest the word 抜ける instead.\n\nHere is the sentence where I came across the word in a manga.\n\n> そいでもって くりかえすけどな...\n>\n> なんとしても 脱走をやりとげにゃああかん **でえ** **ぬけきらん** と思うたときは...\n>\n> 死ぬるかくごくらい しとくんや\n\n**Extra question** Does the 「でえ」in the sentence above function as particle 「で」\nto indicate means of action which is to escape from a place in this case?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T02:39:59.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33789",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T06:19:55.573",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"manga"
],
"title": "Is there any difference in meaning between 「抜け切る」 and 「抜ける」?",
"view_count": 434
} | [
{
"body": "切る in this context is like _up_ in _eat up_ (as opposed to _eat_ ) or _out_ in\n_sell out_ (as opposed to _sell_ ), which adds the meaning of\n_thoroughly/completely_ to the original verb.\n\n> * 飲みきる to drink up\n> * 疲れきる to be exhausted\n> * 最後までやり切る to push on to the end\n>\n\nSo this ぬけきらん means \"cannot go through it (e.g., a tunnel) completely\".\n\nでえ/で is not the place marker, but yet another sentence-ending particle like ね,\nよ, わ, and な. It's used mainly by \"tough\" guys, but in some dialects also by\nwomen.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T04:42:52.730",
"id": "33791",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T04:42:52.730",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33789",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33789 | null | 33791 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 「これからね。パパと映画を観にいくの！そのあとね、カフェでフルーツパフェ食べるんだよ！」\n>\n> 言ったあぁ〜。言ってしまったぁ〜。\n>\n> 「そうか〜。それはよかったね〜」\n>\n> その子のお父さんがそう言いました。\n>\n> 「◯◯ちゃんは、どこに行ってたの？」\n>\n> 音ちゃんが聞いています。全然空気を読んでない。\n>\n> 「お腹まだ治らないから病院に行ってきたんだよ」\n>\n> また、お父さんが答えました。\n>\n> その瞬間、音ちゃんはハッとした表情をして、わたしのほうを見たのです。\n>\n> 「じゃあ、さようなら〜」\n>\n> そう言って、音ちゃんは走ってわたしのところに戻ってきました。\n>\n> わたし「わかった？」\n>\n> 音「うん…」\n>\n> わたし「あれはよくなかったね。急性胃腸炎で休んでいること忘れてたの？」\n>\n> 音「うん。忘れてた」\n>\n> わたし「 **そういうことだよ** 。音ちゃん。自慢しちゃダメだって意味、わかった？」\n>\n> 音「うん。反省した。自分がイヤになっちゃう。もう自慢しない」\n\n* * *\n\n> 「押し倒されちゃって、脱がされちゃって……求められちゃった」 「 **そういうことだよ** 。ずっと俺の腕を挟んでくれちゃってたんだから……」\n\nIn the two parts above I am lost as to what そういうこと means and is doing.\n\nFrom the internet the meanings of そういうこと that I can find are:\n\n> 前述の発言全体を指す表現。「そういう事は早く言え」などのように用いられる\n>\n> 前述の発言内容を全面的に肯定する意味合いでも用いられる。この場合は感動詞的な機能を持つ。\n\nThe first meaning doesn't seem like it matches up with the usages above.\nHowever, the second meaning doesn't really make sense to me in context. Is\nthere another usage for そういうこと that I am missing or can someone explain the\nusage more clearly?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T07:00:20.723",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33794",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T18:12:41.673",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14262",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "What does そういうことだよ mean here?",
"view_count": 1620
} | [
{
"body": "そういうこと in the first dialog corresponds to the second meaning:\n「前述の発言内容を全面的に肯定する」. This そういうこと refers to the \"lesson\" which 音ちゃん just\nrealized (自慢しちゃダメ). This kind of そういうこと can be translated as \"Now you\nunderstand it\", \"Yeah, that's what I mean\", etc.\n\n(Strictly speaking, in this case, 音ちゃん had not explicitly said something like\n自慢しちゃダメだった when he said そういうことだよ, so there was no 発言 which そういうこと directly\nrefers to. But he knew she learned the important lesson from her facial\nexpression, so he said そういうことだよ.)\n\nI can't tell what そういうこと specifically means in the second dialog. It needs\nmore context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T15:32:07.780",
"id": "33808",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T15:32:07.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33794",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33794 | null | 33808 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "34413",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I think 優しげ is a な adjective. Whereas 優しい is an い adjective. When I look up\ntheir meanings, their English translation is essentially kind/gentle, and they\nseem to be both adjectives modifying something in a clause. Is there a usage\ndifference between them?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T07:03:35.830",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33795",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-27T18:24:15.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9587",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage"
],
"title": "Is there a functional difference between 優しげ vs 優しい?",
"view_count": 564
} | [
{
"body": "I would say 優しげ means \"seemingly kind/gentle\" and 優しい means \"kind/gentle\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T02:37:55.953",
"id": "33818",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T02:37:55.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14212",
"parent_id": "33795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "げ is a suffix to adjective to mean \"like\" as in \"優しげ”、”悲しげ”、\"喜ばしげ,\"\n\"勇ましげ”、”得意気.” It's originally used to connote \"a tint\" of something.\n\nAdjective + げ can be used as an adjective like, \"優しげな表情 - affectionate\nexpression”, ”悲しげな声 - sorrowful tone”, \"喜ばしげな態度 - joyful manner,\" \"勇ましげな顔 -\nvaliant look”, ”得意気な顔 - triumphant face,” as well as a verb, \"優しげに撫でる - stroke\nlovingly,\" ”悲しげに弾く - play sorrowfully”, \"喜ばしげに話す - talk joyfully,\" \"勇ましげに歩く -\nmarch bravely”, ”得意気に話す - speak proudly.”\n\nThe difference between \"優しい言葉\" and \"優しげな言葉\" is subtle. \"優しい言葉\" is plain gentle\n/ kind words, while \"優しげな言葉\" is \"words that are felt gentle / kind,\" keeping a\nsort of reservation. However both are saying the same thing.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-27T07:53:23.793",
"id": "34413",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-27T18:24:15.843",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-27T18:24:15.843",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33795 | 34413 | 34413 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33806",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "「帰る **なら** 、窓を閉めなさい！」\n\nI recently asked my teacher about なら being used in this command sentence, and\nshe said while it was acceptable, it had a different meaning compared to 「帰っ\n**たら** 、窓を閉めなさい！」\n\nWhile the **たら** sentence seems to imply closing the window **after** getting\nhome, the **なら** sentence implies the reverse: closing the window **before**\ngoing home (from the office, perhaps).\n\nI asked, 「いつも 逆のニュアンス ですか。」 and based on her reply I figured yes, なら always\nimplies the second half of the sentence occurring before the conditional\nclause. (Perhaps either of us misheard or misinterpreted the other person.)\n\nLooking at some of the answers on this website and some example sentences, I\ncan see that this isn't always the case: なら can be used to mean \"If _that's_\nwhat you're talking about...\" or similar.\n\n> [Example 1](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/30223/different-\n> nuances-in-meaning-for-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89-sentences)\n>\n> テープレコーダーを買う **なら** テープをくれるはずです。\n>\n> (1) If [you] (are going to) buy a tape recorder, [I] expect [them] to give\n> [you] tapes. (Statement of expected outcome. Here I would interpret the\n> tapes to come with the recorder.)\n>\n> [Example 2](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/393/differences-\n> among-%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89-%E3%82%93%E3%81%A0%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89-%E3%81%88%E3%81%B0-etc)\n>\n> A: スーパーに行ってくるよ。 I'm going to the supermarket.\n>\n> B: スーパーに行くの **なら** 、しょうゆを買ってきて。 If you're going to the supermarket, bring\n> back some soy sauce.\n\nAm I analysing the sentences above wrongly? When does なら have the 「逆」nuance?\nWhen does it simply mean \"If _that's_ what you're talking about...\"?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T07:05:07.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33796",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-29T07:18:26.373",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11849",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "\"Reversal\" nuance of なら",
"view_count": 441
} | [
{
"body": "The most concise explanation would be:\n\n * `A なら B` means \"if there is an _A_ , there is a _B_ \"\n * `A たら B` means \"if _A_ is completed, _B_ happens\"\n\nなら doesn't really care about the time order. _B_ could take place before,\nwhile, after doing _A_ , or all time during _A_. It just tells \"an _A_ must be\naccompanied by a _B_ \". In linguistic jargon, なら makes aoristic condition.\n\n> 帰るなら、窓を閉めなさい\n\nThe reason why the sentence usually means \"close window before you go home\" is\nbecause a verb's plain (= non-past) form usually denotes inceptive, e.g. \"get\nto do\", \"about to do\", \"be going to do\".\n\nCompared to it, たら is easier to explain in English. It says _B_ happens when\n_A_ takes effect, accomplishes, is observed true, or if it's something that\ntakes some time when it ends... in other words, when _A_ is perfect. In most\ncases you can safely translate it as \" _B_ after _A_ \".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T15:08:28.623",
"id": "33806",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-29T07:18:26.373",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-29T07:18:26.373",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "33796",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
]
| 33796 | 33806 | 33806 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33853",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When translating some juridical text, I meet words, that are written in\ncapitalized letters, or at least only first letter is capitalized. Should I\ntransmit it somehow into Japanese, when translating? How about japanese\njuridical documents? For example:\n\n> \" **WITNESS WHEREOF** , the parties hereto have caused this **Agreement** to\n> be signed ... \"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T07:43:54.713",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33798",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-26T20:09:04.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9364",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"translation",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "Capitalized letters in juridical documents - into Japanese",
"view_count": 303
} | [
{
"body": "We often see the first or all letters being capitalized in western legal\ndocuments and agreement forms, or in the case of characterizing or emphasizing\nthe subject in a statement in journalism.\n\nThe example, \"WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement\nto be signed\" you suggested looks very odd, if it's done in an official\nJapanese language document.\n\nWe don't do that in legal or official documents written in Japanese because we\ndon't have capital letters. If you want to emphasize a particular word or\nphrase you can show it with a bracket - 「」. But it's uncommon to do so in\nJapanese language legal forms, and you don't need to venture to do it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T22:45:29.940",
"id": "33853",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-26T20:09:04.243",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-26T20:09:04.243",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33798",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 33798 | 33853 | 33853 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33800",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I think they have a same meaning: find or search. Could you help me to show\nthe differences between them ? In the detail cases ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T08:12:21.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33799",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T10:25:04.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 見つける and 探す",
"view_count": 2598
} | [
{
"body": "(～を)見つける means \"to find ~~\".\n\n(～を)探す means \"to look for ~~\".\n\ne.g.\n\n> **探した** けれど、ミーちゃんを **見つける** ことはできませんでした。 \n> We looked for Mii-chan, but we couldn't find her.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T10:25:04.533",
"id": "33800",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T10:25:04.533",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
]
| 33799 | 33800 | 33800 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "In response to the question 「もう昼ご飯を食べましたか。」how do the following replies differ\nin meaning?\n\n> いいえ、まだ食べていません。 \n> いいえ、まだ食べません。\n\nI tried to understand the differences through this website where it's written\nentirely in Japanese. <http://www.alc.co.jp/jpn/article/soudan/028.html>\nUnfortunately I don't understand much of what they're saying and so I've\nturned to you guys for help :)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T10:51:46.023",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33802",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-09T17:04:13.810",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-29T07:43:31.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "14266",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"aspect"
],
"title": "まだ with verb ending ～ません and ～ていません",
"view_count": 7643
} | [
{
"body": "From what I understand (which may or may not be correct), the nuance is on the\nimplied intent.\n\n→ まだ食べません would be \"I'm not eating yet\". There is some implicit meaning that\nyou are going to eat next, or very soon. Emphasis is put on the action.\n\n→ まだ食べていません would be \"I haven't eaten\". In that case, the emphasis is put on\nthe fact that you have not eaten, but you don't have any information regarding\nwhether you are going to eat or not, or even if you want to.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T11:31:24.007",
"id": "33803",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T11:31:24.007",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14257",
"parent_id": "33802",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Apparently the meaning of \"まだ…～ない(ません)\" differs depending on the type of a\nverb.\n\ntransitive verbs or intransitive verbs (unergative)：\n\n☆～ていません\n\n```\n\n もうご飯を食べましたか。\n Have you eaten yet?\n いいえ、まだ食べていません。\n No, I haven't eaten yet.\n \n```\n\n☆～ません\n\n```\n\n 今からご飯を食べますか。\n Are you going to eat now?\n いいえ、まだ食べません。\n No, I'm not going to eat yet.\n \n```\n\nintransitive verbs (unaccusative)：\n\n☆～ていません／～ません\n\n```\n\n もう桜は咲きましたか。\n Have the cherry blossoms bloomed yet?\n いいえ、まだ咲いていません。\n いいえ、まだ咲きません。\n No, the cherry blossoms haven't bloomed yet.\n \n```\n\nI believe that the answer to the question of \"もう...～ましたか\" is usually\n\"まだ..～ていません\" in Japanese daily conversation.\n\nあなたは、もうご飯を食べましたか？それともまだ食べていませんか？ \n→私はまだ食べていません。 \nあなたは、もうご飯を食べましたか？それともまだ食べませんか？ \n→ungrammatical sentence\n\nAnd as an exception, there is a case that the answer of \"まだ..～ません\" is\npossible. I said things that I researched about that as above.\n[link](http://ir.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/11094/6499/1/JLC_38_129.pdf) \nThough, I think that an conversation of the website in the question is not\napplicable to this case. That sounds strange for me.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T14:36:57.170",
"id": "33832",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-29T13:40:25.923",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-29T13:40:25.923",
"last_editor_user_id": "13598",
"owner_user_id": "13598",
"parent_id": "33802",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "alc.co.jp seems to be a very nice website that I just bookmarked. There are a\nlot of kanjis but they are using simple Japanese.\n\nいいえ、まだ食べていません。Emphasis is put on the current state (of the conversation). Well\nat least this is what they want to say by 現在の状態.\n\nいいえ、まだ食べません。Emphasis is put on the fact that whether the action is over or\nnot, has been accomplished/realized or not.\n\nOn the first part they are saying that for this question:\n\n> きのう家にいましたか?\n>\n> いいえ、いませんでした。\n\nThey say that this answer is correct if the answer is talking about a certain\ntime in the past. For example you could use it to say: I wasn’t there at 7pm:\n7時にはいませんでした。\n\nHowever since the hidden meaning of this question is «You were not back home\nYET yesterday». You cannot use いませんでした and have to say いいえ、まだ(帰って)いませんでした。\n\nWhen asking this question:\n\n> もう読みましたか? _Have you read it yet?_\n>\n> まだ読みません、後で読みます。 \n> まだ読みません、これから読みます。\n>\n> まだ読んでいません、後で読みます。 \n> まだ読んでいません、これから読みます。\n\nAll those answers are correct and adapted to the situation. But what’s the\ndifference then ? Well here the difference is whether you want to continue\ntalking about the fact you read your book or not. \nYou could say for example: まだ読んでいないので、ニュースを知らない。 \nIf you say まだ食べていません, your friend could answer じゃ、おなかがすいたでしょう。\n\nThis is a summary of what this article is saying which is true however is that\nreally helping your understanding? I don’t think so. Here is my version: \nWhen you are talking in Japanese you are always saying things implicitly, but\nJapanese know that so they won’t talk about those implicit meanings.\n\nIf your friend asks you もう昼ご飯を食べましたか and you answer まだ食べません, that might be\ncorrect grammatically but that’s rude. \nIt’s like: _Have you already eaten lunch? yo I don’t eat yet_ in a polite way\n(まだ食べません). \nHowever if your question is もう昼ご飯を食べる時間ですか? (Is it already time to eat lunch?)\nyou may answer まだ食べません (We don’t eat yet). \nThe important detail to me is the difference between まだ食べていません and まだ食べません\nwhich is 食べていない and 食べない.\n\n食べていない is the negative from of 食べてる. 食べてる means « the fact of being eating »\nat the moment which means _I am eating right now_. Well that’s the contrary ?\n« the fact of not being eating right now » (I’m not eating right now). If you\nadd まだ you are basically adding « not yet » to the sentence, _negative +\nnegative = positive_ so まだ食べてない means _I haven’t eaten yet_. (I haven’t\nrealized the action of « being eating » yet which means _I haven’t eaten yet_\n). This form is like present continuous in English. \n食べる may be used to talk about the present and true facts. For example: It’s a\nfact that it’s not the time to eat right now. \nSo if you have already eaten you would answer もう食べた because that fact is over\nand not もう食べてた. \nIf you ask 11時にもう食べてた? (Were you already eating at 11am?) you have to answer\nもう食べてた because the fact was not over at 11am, it was still happening.\n\nIf you understand the true meanings and differences of 食べる, 食べてる, 食べない, 食べてない,\npicking one of those will be obvious.\n\nThis is all about context. If a girl asks you at 12am もう昼ご飯を食べましたか? and you\nanswer まだ食べません. This is about the present and/or true facts: right now I\ndon’t/won’t eat, it’s a fact I don’t/won’t eat now. She might think for\nexample you don’t want to eat it / you don’t want to eat with her / you can’t\neat right now. \nHowever if you answer まだ食べてない there is no misunderstanding possible, you open\nthe door for her to ask you out for lunch.\n\nAbout the examples in the article :\n\n> A : いいえ、読みませんでした。: _I didn’t read it._\n>\n> B : いいえ、まだ読みません。: « _I don’t read it yet_ » (which doesn’t really mean\n> anything). Again this is about present or true facts. _Right now I don’t\n> read this book_ , _I won’t read this book for some reasons_ so maybe you\n> don’t like this book and you don’t want to read it.\n>\n> C : いいえ、まだ読んでいません。: _I didn’t read_ , but you imply that you are planning to\n> read it, so it means you want/have interest to read this book.\n\nHere answer B is fine because you are talking about a book, you are not\nanswering to a person, you can’t be rude to a book.\n\nSo I think you should definitively answer いいえ、まだ食べていません。whether you continue\nyour sentence or not, that's what people use 99,99% of time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T23:59:40.857",
"id": "33854",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-08T07:20:06.727",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-08T07:20:06.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7061",
"parent_id": "33802",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "まだ食べていない means \"I haven't eaten it yet\".\n\nまだ食べない means \"I won't eat it for the time being\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-09T17:04:13.810",
"id": "34046",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-09T17:04:13.810",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "33802",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33802 | null | 34046 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33805",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "ごみわべつのふくろにいれます(Gomi wa betsu no fukuro ni iremasu)\n\nべつのふくろにごみおいれます (Betsu no fukuro ni gomi o iremasu)\n\nごみおべつのふくろにいれます(Gomi o betsu no fukuro ni iremasu)\n\nWhich if not all, is appropriate?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T13:57:46.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33804",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T18:10:46.833",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-26T15:09:01.600",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14267",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "Using お or わ (wa or o)",
"view_count": 3269
} | [
{
"body": "All of these sentences are grammatically almost correct, but you should use を\ninstead of お for the particle _o_ , and you should use は instead of わ for the\nparticle _wa_.\n\nHere are the corrected sentences:\n\n> 1. ごみはべつのふくろにいれます。\n> 2. べつのふくろにごみをいれます。\n> 3. ごみをべつのふくろにいれます。\n>\n\nSentence 1 uses the topic marker _wa_ instead of _o_ , and the sentence sounds\nlike you're describing some general things about garbage. The sentence can be\ntypically used when you're explaining to someone how to separate waste in your\ntown. \"I/You/etc (always have to) put garbage into a different bag.\"\n\nSentences 2 and 3 are almost the same, but what comes first tends to be\nfocused more strongly. Typically, these sentences can be used when you are\ndescribing what you have to do now: \"I (will / am expected to) put (this)\ngarbage into a different bag (now).\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T15:01:47.570",
"id": "33805",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T17:53:09.870",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-26T17:53:09.870",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33804",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Good points from naruto. I'll try to add some thoughts on why using topic-\nmarker 'wa' is even possible.\n\n'Wo' marks the direct object in the sentence. So the most vanilla way of\nsaying \"I put the garbage in a different bag\" is:\n\n```\n\n ごみをべつのふくろにいれます。\n \n```\n\nThis is the no-frills, plain-Jane version of this sentence.\n\nTo go to the next step, we need to review that Japanese has the really cool\nproperty of not requiring objects to be explicitly present if they are already\nunderstood. So the sentence\n\n```\n\n べつのふくろにいれます。\n \n```\n\nis also totally correct, and means \"I put **it** in a different bag.\" Notice\nthat in the English, we have demoted our direct object to the placeholder word\n\"it.\" It's still there, but just barely. In English, we have to keep a\nplaceholder because word order is very important. However, in Japanese, the\ndirect object can simply be eliminated.\n\nThe particle 'wa' marks a topic, and that topic is really kind of off in its\nown world. It doesn't really directly contribute to the subject-object-verb\nmain structure of the sentence. It merely offers a topic for consideration.\n\nSo we can understand the 'wa' sentence to work more like this:\n\n```\n\n ごみは・・・べつのふくろにいれます。\n \n```\n\nStructurally, you can understand this as being extremely similar to the\nEnglish \"Now when it comes to the garbage...I put it in a different bag.\"\n\nNotice that the direct object of this English sentence is actually still the\nplaceholder word \"it,\" **not** \"garbage.\" What did we put in the bag? **It.**\nWe put it. What's it? Well, the speaker took pains to direct our attention to\nthe topic of garbage, so that's what it must be.\n\nThis is precisely what is happening in the Japanese.\n\nWhy would a person structure the sentence this way when you could just\nexplicitly mark the object with 'wo'? As naruto points out, this is a pattern\nused for certain kinds of explaining. You can kind of feel something similar\nin our English examples. If you say, \"Now when it comes to the garbage, I put\nit in a different bag,\" it sounds like you're explaining some kind of general\nprincipal, or perhaps you're trying to draw a distinction from some other\nbagged items. (\"The compost, I put here, but as for the garbage, I put it\nhere.\") At any rate, something special is going on, something that that the\nspeaker wants to draw our attention to in a way that is different from a plain\nvanilla \"I put the garbage in a different bag.\"\n\nHope that helps!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T18:10:46.833",
"id": "33811",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-26T18:10:46.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9959",
"parent_id": "33804",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33804 | 33805 | 33805 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33810",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have found this sentence in Odin Sphere. I guess it's kind of old fashion\nfor a strong interdiction. I first thought it came from the negative form of\nである but it doesn't seem to be replaceable by ではない.\n\nDoes anyone know the origin of this form?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T15:26:39.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33807",
"last_activity_date": "2022-02-02T23:56:03.863",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-26T17:05:44.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11349",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"dialects",
"imperatives",
"role-language"
],
"title": "何も言うでない ! meaning and origin",
"view_count": 508
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, ～するでない is an old-fashioned and pompous way of saying \"Don't do ～!\".\n\nIn modern Japanese, this is a kind of 役割語 (stereotyped role words) which is\ntypically used by nobles and/or old people in manga and samurai dramas. This\nseems to have been used a lot more 100 years ago or so, because I can find\nmany similar expressions (eg. 泣くでない, 穢すでない, 淋しがるでない) in 青空文庫.\n\nAs for the etymology, unfortunately I could not find a good article which\nexplains this. One answer in [this chiebukuro\nquestion](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q14142846289)\nsays:\n\n> 原型となったのは江戸時代の上方語です。\n\nSo it seems to have originated from somewhere in the Kansai region in the Edo\nperiod.\n\nIn this question (note 1) two people say it's 江戸時代の武士の言葉, but I don't know\nwhether real samurai in the Edo period actually spoke in this way.\n\nNote 1: expired link removed, 02/02/2022",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T16:14:49.780",
"id": "33810",
"last_activity_date": "2022-02-02T23:56:03.863",
"last_edit_date": "2022-02-02T23:56:03.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 33807 | 33810 | 33810 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If I wanted to list my hobbies, I'm not sure if it'd be better to use...\n\n> 趣味は書くことも、素敵なノートと文房具を集めることも、テレビゲームをすることもです。 My hobby is writing, collecting\n> lovely notebooks and stationery, and playing (doing) video games.\n>\n> 趣味は書いて、素敵なノートと文房具を集めて、テレビゲームをすることもです。 My hobby is writing, collecting lovely\n> notebooks and stationery, and playing (doing) video games.\n\nI feel like it's the first one but I'm not sure because you can use \"て\" form\nto list things and \"こと\" to make things nouns so I need help.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-26T22:13:52.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33812",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T05:02:12.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14273",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nominalization"
],
"title": "Should I use \"Te-\" form or \"Koto mo\" for this?",
"view_count": 922
} | [
{
"body": "To me, both sound a bit clumsy. I would say this like this:\n\n * 趣味は書くこと **と** 、素敵なノート **や** 文房具を集めること **と** 、テレビゲームをすることです。\n * 趣味は書くこと **や** 、素敵なノート **と** 文房具を集めること **や** 、テレビゲームをすることです。\n\nYou can simply list two or more things (\"A, B and C\") using や or と. See other\nquestions for the difference between the two, although the nuance would be\nsmall in this case:\n\n * [Difference between と and や～など](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17376/5010)\n * [Difference between と・や and も for lists？](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14979/5010)\n\nIf you used も here, the feeling of \"also\" would be emphasized (\"not only A,\nbut also B, and also C\"), which I think is unnecessary.\n\nIf you used て here, the feeling of \"and then\" would be emphasized (\"A, and\nthen B, and then C\"), which is not unnecessary, because these things are not\nrelevant with one another. And \"～て、～て、～も\" is not grammatical. You have to drop\nthe last も.\n\nYou can say, for example 「趣味は食べて寝ることです」「趣味は毎朝早く起きてランニングをすることです」, because the\ntwo actions are temporally connected.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T01:28:57.297",
"id": "33814",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T05:02:12.403",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33812",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33812 | null | 33814 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33816",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this phrase in a story book:\n\n> エスカレーターを乗りつぐ\n\nIt puzzled me because I thought 乗りつぐ meant 'to connect with (flight/train\netc)'. Is this the normal way to talk about getting on/riding an escalator? If\nnot, what nuance does it convey and what would be a more typical verb to use?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T00:45:21.190",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33813",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T01:42:26.653",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "How to ride an escalator",
"view_count": 598
} | [
{
"body": "People usually say エスカレーターに乗る, エスカレーターで8階まで上がる, etc.\n\nエスカレーターを乗り継ぐ is not common, but it would be accepted if one wants to\nexplicitly say (for whatever reason) riding several escalators in succession.\n\n> エスカレーターを乗り継いで1階から8階まで上がる \n> (cf. 電車を乗り継いで東京から九州まで行く)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T01:42:26.653",
"id": "33816",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T01:42:26.653",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33813",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33813 | 33816 | 33816 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33817",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that 「の」 can be used to indicate possession or to change a noun\nto a modifier for another noun. But neither of those seems to be the case\nhere.\n\nWhat usage of 「の」 is being used here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T01:37:04.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33815",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T04:58:11.180",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T04:58:11.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14033",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-の"
],
"title": "How is 「の」 used in 終わりのない?",
"view_count": 188
} | [
{
"body": "終わりのない is not a complete sentence. This phrase can be used as a _relative\nclause_ which modifies another noun.\n\n> * 終わりのない話 a story which has no end; a never-ending story\n> * 終わりがない話 a story which has no end; a never-ending story\n>\n\nAs you can see, this type of の is a subject marker (just like が) which can be\nused only in relative clauses.\n\nSee: [How does the の work in\n「日本人の知らない日本語」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12825/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T01:48:08.643",
"id": "33817",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T01:53:42.447",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33815",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33815 | 33817 | 33817 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "from what I know, does it mean \"starts from all of a sudden\"? I thought the\nsentence could be separated as いきなり+ はじめん+といてよ？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T03:03:35.963",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33819",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T06:54:18.987",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T05:54:45.923",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14278",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"dialects",
"kansai-ben"
],
"title": "What does いきなりはじめんといてよ mean",
"view_count": 408
} | [
{
"body": "In Kansai we say 「～～んといて（よ）」 to mean 「～～しないで（よ）」, \"(Please) Don't do~~.\"\n\nSo いきなりはじめんといてよ means いきなりはじめないでよ, \"Don't start all of a sudden.\" or \"Don't\nstart so abruptly\".\n\nI would parse it as:「いきなり(suddenly) + はじめ(verb 始める) + ん(negative auxiliary\nverb) + と(conjunctive particle) + いて(subsidiary verb いる -- (maybe the といて is\nderived from て+おいて?)) + よ(sentence ending particle)」.\n\nOther examples:\n\n> 行かんといてよ。 Don't go. \n> しゃべらんといてよ。 Don't talk. \n> 触らんといてよ。 Don't touch (it/me/etc.). \n> 近寄らんといて。 Don't come close (to me/someone/something).",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T04:23:20.250",
"id": "33821",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T06:54:18.987",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T06:54:18.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "33819",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 33819 | null | 33821 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33822",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Please look at the profile for any of these interpreters: \n<http://www.hicareer.jp/inter/> \nIn the _プロフィール_ section, underneath the photos, their names are written, and \"\n**さん** \" is added to the end of each name.\n\nI don't get it. Isn't there a _feeling_ that\n[www.hicareer.jp](http://www.hicareer.jp/) and each interpreter have a\nconnection? _HiCareer_ is representing them; _HiCareer_ is offering up their\nservices (clearly the interpreters have consented to his arrangement).\n\n 1. Would using no suffix, or `氏`, also have been ok (instead of `さん`)? How might it change the nuance? \n 2. More generally, does _writing_ `さん` and _saying_ `さん` have a different feeling / meaning? Saying `さん` makes it feel more personal?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T03:44:51.837",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33820",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T05:52:44.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12506",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"honorifics"
],
"title": "Why is \"さん\" used as a suffix for these people's CVs / profiles?",
"view_count": 175
} | [
{
"body": "These translators are probably freelancers who are not directly employed by\nthis company. They do _not_ represent this company because they are just\nguests who were invited to write an article to this site.\n\nMoreover, this site is targeted at professional translators and people who\nwant to be translators. (That's why there are even articles about income tax\ncalculation.) The primary purpose of this site seems to be recruiting\nprofessional translators who can work with the company. Translators are\ntreated as customers rather than workers in this site, so paying respect to\nthem by adding さん to their names is a good idea.\n\nAdding 氏 instead of さん would be OK, although it may look a bit less friendly.\n\nOn the other hand, this company has [a separate business site for translation\nservices](http://www.ten-nine.co.jp/), where adding さん to the names of\ntranslators is inappropriate.\n\n**EDIT:** Wow, [this page is introducing translators using 様](http://www.ten-\nnine.co.jp/translation/translation-more-faces.html), which is surprising to\nme, considering the fact that this page is intended to be read by those who\nneed their services. So it seems to me that this company is very proud of\nthese translators :-)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T04:45:21.893",
"id": "33822",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T05:52:44.453",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T05:52:44.453",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 33820 | 33822 | 33822 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33838",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Out of the three lectures ね is the easiest to predict for me because it is\nalways related to a price as in 値が張る (which is the only place where I would\nread it ね when alone), this lecture can also be found in 値段 (the more casual\nword for 価格 (it may be worth noting that the 訓読み of 価 is あたい)), 高値 or 安値.\n\nThings are a little unclear when 値 as the meaning of _value_. Technically, it\nshould be read as あたい since it is its 訓読み, nevertheless I have heard Xに値｛ち｝を取る\nin a probability course and in some other settings I have heard 値 read as ち\nwhen isolated.\n\nSo I am wondering, how to read 値 when alone, how can I choose between ち and\nあたい?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T07:08:09.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33823",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T03:50:50.323",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T07:22:38.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "How is 値 (あたい・ち・ね) read and when?",
"view_count": 457
} | [
{
"body": "The on-yomi of this kanji, ち, is not used alone; it only appears in compounds\nsuch as 中央値【ちゅうおうち】 (median), 平均値【へいきんち】 (mean), 最頻値【さいひんち】 (mode), 真偽値【しんぎち】\n(boolean value).\n\nIf you just want to say _value_ (of something) in\nmathematical/statistical/programming contexts, this kanji is always read as\nあたい.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T03:50:50.323",
"id": "33838",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T03:50:50.323",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33823",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33823 | 33838 | 33838 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to say:\n\n> Now may be the third or fourth time since I started making this cuisine.\n\nAnd my attempt is as follows:\n\n> 今はこの料理を作るのを始めて、三、四回目かもしれない。\n\n# Bonus examples\n\nMore examples might help me understand the grammar in question.\n\n * It is the 3rd time since I started visiting your house.\n * Tomorrow will be my 3rd visit since I started visiting this museum 5 years ago.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T09:41:46.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33825",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T11:49:09.210",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T10:34:37.967",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to say \"the third time since I started making...\"",
"view_count": 727
} | [
{
"body": "I'll give this one a shot.\n\n```\n\n この料理を作ってもう３・４回目になるだろうな。\n \n```\n\nI think the main thing that is awkward about your translation is the\n\"作るのをはじめて” part, which I don't think is correct grammar. I think you could\nreplace 作って in my translation with 作りはじめて, but I don't think it's required.\n\nCommonly the \"-te\" form is also used to show how much time has elapsed since\ndoing something, for example:\n\n```\n\n この会社に入社して１年ぐらい経ちます。 \n It's been about a year since I joined this company.\n \n```\n\nEdit: I remembered one other pattern for the original sentence in question:\n\n```\n\n この料理を作るのは、これで３・４回目になるだろうな。\n \n```\n\nI think this is a little more literally close to the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T11:49:09.210",
"id": "33827",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T11:49:09.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "33825",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33825 | null | 33827 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I want to say \"Brother will understand it,\" so should I use:\n\n> あに は それ を りかい します。\n\nOr\n\n> あに は それ を わかります。\n\nWhat other parameters am I missing? \nIs the first one preferred more and if so, why?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T11:06:09.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33826",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-29T04:24:51.593",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T06:40:19.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14267",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "りかい します Or わかります",
"view_count": 279
} | [
{
"body": "Is this something that brother would understand, but probably not another\nperson? If so, I would use this expression:\n\n> [兄]{あに}なら[分]{わ}かると[思]{おも}います。\n\nThe particle ”を” is not commonly used with the verb 分かる (though it is in rare\ncases), \"が\" is usually more appropriate. However, it is best to omit \"それが\"\nsince it is implied.\n\nAlso, without the \"と思います\" part (or \"と思う\"), it feels very definitive to me,\nlike you are 100% sure. I think it's safer to add the \"I think\" part.\n\nFinally, \"[理解]{りかい}する\" is a verb that isn't used that often in daily\nconversation, though it means something similar to わかる. I have heard it most\nused in the expression \"理解できない！\" which is when someone is complaining \"I can't\neven comprehend what so-and-so is doing\", though there are other uses as well.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T12:12:43.467",
"id": "33828",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T06:43:17.100",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T06:43:17.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "33826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "If you did something bad, let's say had an accident with your brother's car\nyou would say:\n\n> 兄{あに}なら理解{りかい}してくれる \n> or 理解{りかい}してくれるつもりだ\n\nThis is what 理解 is used for.\n\n理解できない！ would mean \"He can't understand\" (why that accident happens, why all\nthat happened).\n\nA second meaning is \"I can't believe it\" in a stronger tone than \"信じれない\".\n\nSo depending on what is the \"it\" in your question the answer will be\ndifferent.\n\n理解{りかい} implies that you have to think, to understand something like why you\nacted badly, a complicated speech/mathematics, or a complex situation.\n\nわかる means to know something like the height of Fuji-san, the date of en event,\netc.\n\nBoth are used for different things.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-29T01:00:16.827",
"id": "33856",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-29T04:24:51.593",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-29T04:24:51.593",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7061",
"parent_id": "33826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 33826 | null | 33828 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33834",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to understand what the nuances of the term 代理店 as it is used in\nbusiness communications. For example, if a 卸会社 tells a 販売店 their products are\navailable for resale, however they are not looking for a 代理店, what is the\ndifference between those two types of business relationships?\n\nMost dictionaries I've seen translate 代理店 as \"agency\", but that term doesn't\nseem to fit regarding product distribution.\n\nIs being a 代理店 for a company's products something like \"an authorized dealer\"?\nDoes it typically imply an exclusive contract, so that other companies cannot\ncompete selling the same products?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T13:03:22.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33829",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-03T20:46:38.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "The finer points of the word 代理店",
"view_count": 224
} | [
{
"body": "代理店(agent) is that, sellers entrust 代理店 to sell their products, 代理店 sell them\nto customers. The agreement of sale is contracted between sellers and\ncustomers and 代理店 only broker them.\n\n販売店(distributor) is that, sellers sell their products to 販売店, 販売店 sell them to\ncustomers. The agreement of sale is contracted between sellers and 販売店, also\nbetween 販売店 and customers.\n\nIt may help you. <http://www.english-agreement.com/article/14847232.html>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T18:45:46.083",
"id": "33834",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-27T22:25:46.557",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-27T22:25:46.557",
"last_editor_user_id": "14285",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "33829",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "When you say 代理店, there are many types of 代理店, for example, 販売代理店 meaning\nsales distributor, 取次（とりつぎ）代理店 - agent, jobber, 生命 / 海上火災保険代理店 – life\ninsurance / fire & marine Insurance agency / agent, and notably 広告代理店, ad\nagency known by \"Mad Men.\"\n\nEven Dentsu, the world's largest ad agency that handles more than ￥4,642\nbillion (US$43.6 billion) ad expenditures a year (2015), dictates, and\nvirtually monopolizes whole the Olympic Games-related business in Japan is\nsimply calld a 代理店 in ad world, because their business is essentialily a\nbroker of time and space between mass media and advertisers.\n\n代理店 is also called as 取次（とりつぎ）店 and 中継（なかつぎ）店.\n\nWe even call a wholesaler as 一次卸代理店 (primary wholeseller) or 二次卸代理店 (secondary\nwholeseller). When you say 販売代理店, it can be a retailer who sells the products\nof a particular maker. So the scope of the functions and meaning of 代理店 are\nvery broad.\n\n“Authorized dealer” can be translated as 特約販売代理店. Electric /electronic\nproducts makers such as Toshiba, Hitachi, Mitsubishi and Sharp used to\norganize their sales channels under the umbrella of this name until a couple\nof decades ago, but this system is almost extinct today along with the rise of\nlarge scale electric / electronic products distributors like Big Camera,\nYamada-Denki, and Yodobashi Camera.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-05-02T23:25:18.027",
"id": "33908",
"last_activity_date": "2016-05-03T20:46:38.333",
"last_edit_date": "2016-05-03T20:46:38.333",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "33829",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33829 | 33834 | 33834 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33837",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What's the difference between those words for drugs/narcotics: やく(薬),\naccording to tangorin.com and jisho.org is a slang word If you type narcotics\ninto Jisho.org it suggests ドラッグ, and there is also an option of まやく (麻薬). If I\nwanted to talk to my teacher about drugs, which form would be the most\nappropriate? What about a discussion between colleagues? For example, \"I don't\nthink all drugs are evil\" or, jokingly, \"If you want to be constantly happy\njust take drugs all the time\"",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T13:09:51.397",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33830",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T04:28:19.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11958",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Words for narcotics",
"view_count": 3505
} | [
{
"body": "Basically, narcotics can be translated as 麻薬, which at least includes opioids\nlike morphine and cocaine, but does not usually include\n[覚醒剤](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A6%9A%E9%86%92%E5%89%A4) like\namphetamine or so-called 合法ドラッグ ([legal\ndrugs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_intoxicant)). If you need to use\nthese terms strictly and professionally, you'll have to read serious review\narticles carefully, since it's \"officially defined\" in different ways by\nvarious organizations and laws.\n\nIf you don't need to be an expert, these are the common options which should\nsatisfy most people:\n\n * ドラッグ: It's a generic term for any kind of high-risk chemical agents (except tobacco and alcohol) which is used to make people \"high.\" It can safely be used in formal discussions with your teacher. This word almost always refers to the high-risk intoxicants. Probably the sole exception to this is ドラッグストア, which is pretty much like English drugstores.\n * 薬物【やくぶつ】: Almost the same as ドラッグ, but preferred in legal or academic contexts. For example, 薬物中毒 (\"drug intoxication\"), 薬物の乱用 (\"drug abuse\"), etc.\n * 麻薬: It I think is the primary translation of _narcotics_. Most people vaguely know that 麻薬 is a certain subset of ドラッグ, but I think very few can explain the difference well. Therefore 麻薬 is used to refer to any intoxicating drugs in general.\n * 薬【くすり】: It usually refers to the medications available in clinics and legal drugstores, but as a slang term, it can (euphemistically?) also refer to illegal/high-risk \"drugs\", depending on the context. In slangy conversations I feel 薬 is more common than the stiff-sounding ドラッグ/麻薬/薬物. やく/ヤク is probably jargon actually used by some underground folks, but I believe most people have heard it only in yakuza films, police dramas and such.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T02:03:55.417",
"id": "33837",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T04:28:19.157",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T04:28:19.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "33830",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33830 | 33837 | 33837 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33836",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "は means the main focus is the thing after it.\n\nが means the main focus is the thing before it.\n\n 1. それは何ですか\n\n 2. 何がそれですか\n\nThis is my understanding about one of their many differences. I wonder if this\ndifference is gone when it comes to the subject of a clause. These both mean\n\"I don't know what it is,\" right?\n\n> 私はそれが何かわからない\n\n> 私は何がそれかわからない\n\n[More examples](http://ameblo.jp/cc-no-blog/entry-11132742841.html):\n\n> お兄さんがいつ戻っているかあなたは知っている？ \n> Do you know when your brother will come back?\n\n> 私はだれが窓を割ったのか知っている。 \n> I know who broke the window.\n\nが is used in these examples. Should I always use が in a clause, or I can use\n\"は\" also?\n\n(Since I have definitely seen は being used in a clause, I would like to know\nif that is just spoken Japanese or something. Is it appropriate to use it like\nthat in formal writing?)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-27T13:37:57.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33831",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-27T06:40:46.583",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-27T06:40:46.583",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "7610",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-は",
"particle-が",
"は-and-が"
],
"title": "In a clause, which is correct, が or は？",
"view_count": 276
} | [
{
"body": "First, I'd like to correct the themes.\n\nは means the main focus is the thing after it.\n\nが or other case particles put in a prominent position **in the main clause of\na sentence** mean the main focus is the thing before it.\n\nIn other words, this feature is lost in sub clauses. So, as you say,\n何がそれかわからない and それが何かわからない are the same, though the former sounds somehow more\nemphatic. (In other words, が can't simply stand for the subject in a sentence\nof statement.)\n\nAs for your latter question,\n\n 1. お兄さんがいつ戻っているかあなたは知っている？\n\nEven if you change お兄さんが to お兄さんは, it still makes sense and is natural whether\nthe likes of it appear in writings or conversation though it becomes obscure\nif the お兄さんは is a part in the sub clause or apart from it and sentences may be\ndisproportional depending on how you compose them.\n\n 2. 私はだれが窓を割ったのか知っている。\n\nYou can also say 私は窓は誰が割ったのか知っている, though the same problem of 窓は's obscurity\narises again.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T00:54:35.653",
"id": "33836",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T00:54:35.653",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "33831",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 33831 | 33836 | 33836 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My understanding of phrase-level Japanese pitch accent is that each \"unit\"\ninitially has low pitch, followed by high pitch (LH), then a drop after the\naccented syllable, if there is one. As such, apart from a \"reset\" of the\npitch, there can never be another LH contour after the initial LH, since an\naccent can only either cause an HL contour, or maintain an existing LL\npattern.\n\nBut for larger units -- different types of phrases, or multiple phrases, what\ndoes a \"unit\" correspond to? When should pitch accent be 'reset'?\n\nAlso, what happens with single-syllable accented words like 蚊? Does 蚊は have\naccent LL, with the rest of the phrase in L as well?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T05:44:43.950",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33839",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T13:24:04.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "816",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"pitch-accent"
],
"title": "When does pitch accent reset?",
"view_count": 966
} | [
{
"body": "For words which are called 'accentless' (ex: 端) which end on a high pitch,\nthat pitch is continued to the following word (including particles). That\npitch can be continued across several words depending on whether the words in\nthe middle have accents or not.\n\nExamples:\n\n```\n\n 行った・こと・ある\n L H ・H H ・H L\n \n そんな・気・が・する\n L H ・H・H・ H L\n \n```\n\nHere, \"行った\" and \"気” are both accentless.\n\nIn both cases, the last word (ある and する) have HL accent pattern (to begin\nwith), so the accent of the phrase drops there.\n\nAnother place where accent carries over is in compound words, for example:\n\n```\n\n あお・じゃしん （青写真）\n L H ・H L L\n \n```\n\nNormally, あお is (HL) and しゃしん is (LHH), but in a compound word you can see the\naccent stays high across their boundary.\n\n[Here](http://selftaughtjapanese.com/2015/01/13/japanese-intonation-changes-\nin-two-word-compounds/) is an article I wrote some time back about this with\nsome more details.\n\nFor your last question, according to [this\ndictionary](http://accent.u-biq.org/ka.html), 蚊 is accentless so it's accent\nwould carry onto the next word(s) until there is a drop in accent.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T13:11:39.070",
"id": "33845",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T13:24:04.990",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T13:24:04.990",
"last_editor_user_id": "11825",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "33839",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 33839 | null | 33845 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "33841",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the trailer for Fault Milestone One, one character asks another,\nわたし達．．．帰れるよね．．．？\n\nThe translation provided of 'Will we... be able to go back...?' seems straight\nforward enough, but the use of よ here confuses me. I'm familiar with よ to add\nemphasis or certainty, or to soften insisting, commanding, or warning\nstatements, but none of these seem to apply here. In fact, the sentence seems\nvery timid and hesitant - hardly a situation where emphasis is needed.\n\nWhy would the writers have chosen to use よ here? What does the よ add to this\nsentence? I know that よね can be used to ask for confirmation; would this\nsentence be better translated as \"We will be able to return... won't we?\" to\nencapsulate the nuance of the particles?\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nhG3y.jpg)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T07:20:08.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33840",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T09:44:50.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10099",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"particles",
"sentence-final-particles",
"particle-よ"
],
"title": "How can よ be used as part of a question?",
"view_count": 193
} | [
{
"body": "The way I have come to understand よ and ね, is that they mark ownership over a\npiece of information being used in conversation. よ marks a piece of\ninformation as being the speaker's, while ね marks it as being someone else's.\nThis is known as epistemics within conversation analysis.\n\nFor instance, if we look at the phrase \"お兄さんは歯医者だよね?\", the speaker expresses\nthat he is rather sure this is the case, but since that piece of information\n(i.e. that the recipient's brother is a dentist) is not 'his', he couldn't\njust come out and say \"お兄さんは歯医者だよ\", as this would be considered rude\n(depending on context, of course).\n\nIn my understanding of the phrase 帰れるよね, the speaker expresses a certainty\nthat has come into question. Up until that point, the speaker must have\nbelieved that they were able to return, but is no longer sure, and thus seeks\nanother authority on the matter, marked with ね. Therefore, I agree with your\ntranslation as \"We will be able to return... won't we?\", as it expresses the\nsame certainty in \"We will be able to return\", with a question tagged onto it.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T09:44:50.510",
"id": "33841",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T09:44:50.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14287",
"parent_id": "33840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 33840 | 33841 | 33841 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I understand forming the past tense like 'I have not been' but I'm unsure as\nto how to phrase this as it is something that was true but now is not. If that\nmakes sense. It's the 'had' part that's confusing me. If anyone could clear\nthis up I would be very grateful. Thanks.\n\nEdit: my attempt, as I understand past perfect does not exist in Japanese I\ntried to do something that would be in English (roughly) 'before last year, I\nhave not gone to America'.\n\n> Mae ni kyonen watashi wa Amerika ni ikimasen deshita. \n> まえ に 去年 私は アメリカ に いきませんでした。\n\nHowever I don't really know if this is correct (and if I'm missing a particle\nafter kyonen?)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T10:33:12.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "33842",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T20:39:46.110",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T12:28:48.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14288",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"past"
],
"title": "How to say 'I had never been before'",
"view_count": 4771
} | [
{
"body": "> I had never been to America before last year. \n> 去年まで私はアメリカに行ったことがありませんでした。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T11:25:00.087",
"id": "33844",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T12:29:17.030",
"last_edit_date": "2016-04-28T12:29:17.030",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "3227",
"parent_id": "33842",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "To elaborate on @zang ming jie's answer, a verb in past tense plus ことがある means\n\"to have experienced doing the verb\". So\n\n> アメリカに行ったことがある \n> I have been to America \n> アメリカに行ったことがない \n> I have never been to America \n> アメリカに行ったことがなかった \n> I had never been to America",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-04-28T20:39:46.110",
"id": "33851",
"last_activity_date": "2016-04-28T20:39:46.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "33842",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 33842 | null | 33844 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.