question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36036",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Sometimes I want to tell expressions like:\n\n> Mrs. Honda wants to swim in the sea.\n\nAll I have in my Japanese notes is:\n\n```\n\n 私はケータイがほしいです。(Syntax used for expressing my personal desires for an object)\n 本田さんはケータイをほしがっています。(Syntax used for when a third party wants/desires an object.)\n 子どもはアイスクリームをほしがります。(Syntax used when a group of people wants something.)\n \n```\n\nAs is noticed above the ほしい(です) part becomes ほしがる. Does this apply when\ntalking about what a 3rd party person wants. either is an object or an action\nthat wants to do.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T12:10:36.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36032",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T01:15:44.033",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T01:15:44.033",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "14599",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "How can I express a \"person has a desire to do something\"?",
"view_count": 515
} | [
{
"body": "According to Senko Maynard (2009:172), the difference between ～たい and ～たがる is\ndue to a distinction made between what a person directly experiences or feels\nand information a person has only indirect access to.\n\nIn the same way, the Kurosio Dictionary of Grammar (2014:202) says ～たがる is\n\"used to express the wishes or desires of a third person\", implying the\nmeaning of \"showing signs of s.t.\". It seems like we can just tell\nsomeone/something shows signs of wanting to do something.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T15:13:09.160",
"id": "36036",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T15:13:09.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14243",
"parent_id": "36032",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36032 | 36036 | 36036 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36044",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "どうして田中が好きなんですか\n\nFrom what i understand, the sentence above doesn't have any subject, so\ndepending on the context, it can be both _Why do I like Tanaka?_ or _Why do\nyou like Tanaka?_\n\nIs this correct ?",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T14:57:34.547",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36034",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T17:01:39.660",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Vague subject of sentence",
"view_count": 581
} | [
{
"body": "(As l'électeur pointed out, the grammatical subject of 田中が好き is 田中 ([here's\nwhy](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/17876/5010)). But I'm assuming\nyou're concerned about the person who likes 田中.)\n\nどうして田中が好きなんですか can mean \"Why do **you** like Tanaka\" (second person) or \"Why\ndoes **he/she** like Tanaka\" (third person), depending on the context.\n\nBut it almost never means \"Why do **I** like Tanaka?\" (i.e., \"I know I like\nTanaka, but I wonder why I like him.\")\n\nIf \"I\" (as the first person) don't know why \"I\" like Tanaka, \"I\" have to say:\n\n> * どうして田中が好きなんだろう？\n> * どうして田中が好きなんだろうか？\n>\n\nHere, this だろう is an \"I-think / I-wonder\" marker (I don't know how to call\nthis properly).\n\n～ですか? can be used only when the speaker explicitly requests the answer,\nbelieving the listener knows the answer. Saying どうして田中が好きなんですか to yourself is\nalmost like saying \"Tell me why do I like Tanaka!\" to yourself!\n\nLikewise, どこに行くんですか? can mean \"Where will you/we/he/she/they go?\", but it\nnever means \"Where will **I** go?\". When you want to ask yourself such a\nthing, you have to say \"どこに行こう?\" using the volitional marker う/よう.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T16:50:10.593",
"id": "36043",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T16:50:10.593",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36034",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "In this case, it can be any one else, but not yourself.\n\nMaking a question sentence whose subject is the first person is highly\nrestricted, because ordinary Japanese question expects the speaker doesn't\nhave firsthand knowledge about what's asked. It'd thus sound very, very weird\nif you ask something about yourself that you ought to feel or know inside you.\nTo avoid this, you can add だろう (or polite form でしょう) to show the existence of\nintrospection.\n\n> どうして田中が好きなの？ \n> _Why [ × do I / do you / does somebody ] like Tanaka?_\n>\n> (cf. どうして田中が好きなのか _Why [ I / you / somebody ] like(s) Tanaka_ ) \n> (casual plain form + か can't form a valid wh-question, but only indirect\n> question, unless in the construction `～は + wh + か`)\n>\n> どうして田中が好きなんだろう（か）？ \n> _Why [ do I / do you / does sb. ] like Tanaka (, I wonder)?_\n>\n> どうして田中が好きなんです（か）？ \n> _Why [ × do I / do you / does sb. ] like Tanaka?_ (polite)\n>\n> どうして田中が好きなんでしょう（か）？ \n> _Why [ do I / do you / does sb. ] like Tanaka (, I wonder)?_ (polite)\n\nMaybe you've heard the questioner in TV quiz program sets problems to the\npanel using でしょう ending. It's a good example that suggests the questioner is\nasking them knowing the answer.\n\nOf course, in following cases you can dispense with だろう:\n\n> どうして田中なんか好きになっちゃったの？ _Why (at all) did I fall in love with a guy like\n> Tanaka?_ \n> (what is beyond your control or expectation)\n>\n> どうしたら健康で長生きできるのですか？ _How can I live a long, healthy life?_ \n> (what is out of your knowledge)\n>\n> ここはどこですか？私は誰ですか？ _Where am I? Who am I?_ \n> (...or you've lost it)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T16:56:39.660",
"id": "36044",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T17:01:39.660",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-20T17:01:39.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36034",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 36034 | 36044 | 36043 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36039",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 無理をしないように言ったけど。。\n\nIs it an incomplete sentence? So she want to say \"although I have told him not\nto overdo things... (he did it anyway).\n\nHere's the full story for the context...\n\n> 今日、鈴木くんに会った時、手があかくなっていておどろいた。木からおりられなくなった 子猫をたすけにいって 子猫にかまれたらしい。\n> 鈴木くんは、子猫がけがをしなくてよかったと言っていたけど、鈴木くんは優しすぎるから、とても心配だ。無理をしないように言ったけど。。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T15:14:41.183",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36037",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T04:21:53.787",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-20T21:05:37.490",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "けど in the end of sentence",
"view_count": 1435
} | [
{
"body": "# English\n\nIt is a common idiom to leave the second half B of \"A but B\" phrases empty,\nleaving the meaning implicit. This works in English in some cases as well, but\nis extremely common with most Japanese versions of \"but\".\n\nIn this case, it reads like \"(I) said not to overdo it, but ...\", or tweaked a\nlittle:\n\n> \"Even if (I) say not to overdo it, ...\".\n\nHere, the implication is that the speaker believes in the wisdom of the advice\nto \"not overdo it\", but also sees **some not-explicitly-stated reasons (at\nleast in that sentence) for why** 鈴木くん may still go against the advice. (Side\nnote, the \"he is kind\" from the previous sentence is almost certainly being\nalluded to in this case).\n\n* * *\n\n**Aside** : Japanese also often abbreviates the A part, resulting in sentences\nstarting with だけど、ですが、etc. In these cases, A becomes whatever is appropriate\nfrom prior context, likely including something from the prior sentence. It is\nactually not uncommon to see just a lone 「ですが……」. For example, one speaker\nstates a long explanation. There is a pause, then the other speaker says\n「ですが……」, and then falls silent again. This could mean something along the\nlines of \"Well, I see what you're saying, but ... (I can't completely agree\nwith your conclusion)\"\n\n# 日本語\n\n「AだがB」という表現のBを省略し、言外に含ませるのは、日本語では慣用的な言い方です。英語でもこういう使い方ができることがありますが、日本語の逆接ではきわめて一般的なことです。\n\nこの例の場合、「(I) said not to overdo it, but ...」、もしくは少し言い換えて、\n\n> \"Even if (I) say not to overdo it, ...\".\n\nとでも訳せるかと思います。\n\nここで言わんとしているのは、「話し手自身は『無理をしない』という忠告が最も賢明だと思うが、同時に鈴木くんがこの忠告に反するだろう\n**（少なくともこの文では）明言されていないもっともな理由**\nも思い当たる」ということです（ちなみに、この場合は直前の文にある「鈴木くんは優しすぎる」というのがほとんど答えのようなものですが）。\n\n* * *\n\n**余談** :\n日本語では、Aが省略されて「だけど」や「ですが」などで始まる文章も多くみられます。この場合、前の文脈（例えばすぐ前の文）にある適切な要素がAとして用いられます。さらに言えば、「ですが……」だけの文も珍しくありません。例えば、Aさんが長い説明を言い終わり、一瞬間を置いて、Bさんが「ですが……」と言って、また無言になる、という具合です。これは言うなれば「確かに言いたい事はわかりますが、……（でもその結論にはちょっと納得できない）」のような意味合いになります。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T15:38:32.387",
"id": "36039",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T04:21:53.787",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T04:21:53.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36037",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36037 | 36039 | 36039 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "How to parse たすけにいって in 子猫をたすけにいって 子猫にかまれたらしい\n\nI think I understand the overall meaning, \"It seems that he went to save the\nkitten and got bitten\" but i want to understand more about the に いって.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T15:32:16.207",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36038",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T04:58:36.553",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to parse たすけにいって",
"view_count": 816
} | [
{
"body": "Adding particle に to the i-form (also called stem, masu-form, etc.) indicates\na **purpose** for going somewhere.\n\nIn your case, the purpose for going is to _save the cat_. So, as you guessed,\n\"He went to save the kitten\" is a good translation.\n\nOther simple examples of this grammar construct:\n\n> 映画を見に行った \n> I went to see a movie\n>\n> ゲームを買いに行く \n> I'm going to buy a game\n>\n> 友達に会いに行った \n> I went to see my friends",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T15:52:45.470",
"id": "36040",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T15:52:45.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "36038",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "しに行く means \"go to do\" and this て means \"and then\".\n\n行っ is a euphonic change of 行き which is masu-form of 行く. I think your\ntranslation is good.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T16:13:53.520",
"id": "36041",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T04:58:36.553",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T04:58:36.553",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "36038",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36038 | null | 36040 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36045",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Consider the sentence: \"I am hesitating between A, B and C\". What would go\nbetween A,B,C―迷っています?\n\nAsking someone to make a choice seems more straightforward (I would say\n\"A,B,C（の中）から選んでください\".)\n\nI could also find examples for choosing between two things\n(A,Bのどちらかを選ぶことを迷っています). However, how can it be modified to work with larger\nlists (considering that どちらか is more used for two options)?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T16:46:14.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36042",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T17:23:42.057",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14024",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Expressing a doubt between multiple items in an enumeration",
"view_count": 873
} | [
{
"body": "You can use どれ if you have more than two options.\n\nFor example, A、B、Cのどれを選ぶか迷っています.\n\nIf you have two options, you can use どちら as you said.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-20T17:21:30.870",
"id": "36045",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T17:23:42.057",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-20T17:23:42.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "36042",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 36042 | 36045 | 36045 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36061",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What is doing てある in 文字を紙に書いてある? I have thought of 書いてある and 書かれている as\nbasically the same, but in 文字が紙に書かれている it is clear that 文字 is doing ている while\nit isn't clear what is doing てある in 文字を紙に書いてある.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T03:16:17.877",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36046",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T08:28:27.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the subject of a sentence like 文字を紙に書いてある?",
"view_count": 221
} | [
{
"body": "As someone commented, I think the meaning of this is clear: \"The letter are\nwritten on the paper\".\n\nThe [link](https://www.alc.co.jp/jpn/article/faq/03/131.html) pointed out by\nbroccoli forest about 〜てある mentions the following:\n\n>\n> 「～てある」は基本的には他動詞にしかつくことができません。このような「～てある」は「ページの端を折ってある」のように動詞の表す行為の結果として目的語が被る位置変化や状態変化を表します\n\nSo here we can see the difference between 〜てある and 〜ている is that the former is\nused only with transitive verbs, and the を＋〜てある form can represent a change of\nstate of position of the object which resulted from some action (that is\nrepresented by a verb).\n\nHowever, ultimately I don't think there is much difference between using が and\nを with the 〜てある form, and I think \"文字が紙に書いてある\" would have pretty much the same\nmeaning. The way I think of \"？を書いてある\" is that \"(someone) wrote ？ and it exists\nin that state\".\n\nAs for the \"subject\" of the original sentence (with を), I don't think there is\nmuch point in trying to distinguish to what is the \"subject\" and what is the\n\"object\". Whether someone \"wrote\" the letters on a paper (as an action) or\nwhether they just \"exist\", the result is the same. However, if you really\nwanted an answer, I would say this original sentence has no subject.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T22:32:23.780",
"id": "36061",
"last_activity_date": "2019-09-20T08:28:27.440",
"last_edit_date": "2019-09-20T08:28:27.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "30123",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36046",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "In 文字を紙に書いてある, the actor (subject) that performed the writing is some\nunspecified human, but that's not your question.\n\n> <http://www.geocities.jp/niwasaburoo/24asupekuto.html>\n>\n> 「テ形」に続くものの代表は「Ｖ－ている」です。これは動詞のテ形に動詞「いる」がついた形ですが、こ\n> の「いる」はふつうの存在の意味を表す「いる」とは違います。本来の「存在」という意味を失って、助動詞のような働きをしています。\n>\n> このような、「Ｖ－て」に続く「いる・ある・しまう」などを「補助動詞」と呼ぶことにします。\n>\n> . . . . . . . . . .\n>\n> 置いてある 開けてある 調べてある\n\nI think... in all these ( 書いてある, 置いてある, 開けてある, 調べてある) there is no subject (of\nthe kind you're looking for).\n\nJust as in\n\n> Marseille se trouve dans le sud de la France. ( マルセイユはフランス南部にあります. )\n>\n> Marseille is found in the south of France.\n\nthere is no \"subject\" who/which finds Marseille.\n\n* * *\n\nMy French is quite modest, but [ Marseille se trouve dans le sud de la France.\n] sounds like [Marseille finds itself in the south of France.]\n\n( anthropomorphism )\n\nBut in the Japanese ( 書いてある, 置いてある, 開けてある, 調べてある), i don't get this sense of\nsome object being anthropomorphized.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-09-02T21:27:20.767",
"id": "38915",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-02T21:35:49.563",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16344",
"parent_id": "36046",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 36046 | 36061 | 36061 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36048",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to ask confirmation regarding Japanese colors. I understand that there\nare NOUN, and I-adj version of some colors. Such as 赤＆赤い, 青＆青い, etc.\n\nBut this part below is something I cannot confirm. Some article say that it is\nokay to say both \"車は赤です\" and \"車は赤いです\", but some say that you can only say\n\"車は赤です\". Which one is correct?\n\nAlso about basic colors. It seems that green (緑) and purple (紫) don't have\ni-adj version. But how about yellow (黄色), brown (茶色), orange (橙色) & grey (灰色)?\nDo they have i-adj version? I'm pretty sure I've heard 黄色い and 茶色い, but wasn't\nsure about 橙色い and 灰色い...\n\n**Update for specific reference I read about:** \n**This sentence is copied from[Link](http://japaneseprofessor.com/blog/ask-jp-\nakai-vs-aka):**\n\n> _\"It might be possible to use 赤いです [akai desu] in simple sentences, but I\n> know that 赤です [aka desu] is always safe.\"_\n\n**And this one is copied\nfrom[Link](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/33998/using-i-\nadjective-color-words/34000#34000):**\n\n> _\"ボールはしろです. The ball is white. When using primary colors to modify a noun,\n> use the i-adjective form; otherwise, use the no-adjective form.\"_",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T06:48:36.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36047",
"last_activity_date": "2018-06-26T22:45:58.370",
"last_edit_date": "2018-06-26T22:45:58.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"colors"
],
"title": "Confirmation regarding Japanese colors i-adjective",
"view_count": 564
} | [
{
"body": "Could you be more specific about the article you talk about? In English\nobviously \"red\" could be both a noun or an adjective..wait, maybe is not so\nobvious.\n\nAnyway, according to [this](http://nihongodaybyday.blogspot.jp/2008/08/the-\nrules-of-colors.html) source, there are six colors in Japanese that are\nい-adjectives:\n\n「赤い」, ｢青い」,「白い」,「黒い」,「黄色い」, 「茶色い」.\n\nOn the other hand, colors such as 「緑」,「金」,「ピンク」,「オレンジ」and so on, are actually\n_names_ belonging to the category of so-called の-adjectives.\n\nEDIT: a related question on の-adjectives is\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2770/so-called-%E3%81%AE-\nadjectives-how-does-%E3%81%AE-really-work).\n\nMoreover, always according to the first source, you can actually remove the い\nfrom the former six adjectives. This would turn them into names/の-adjectives\nas well.\n\nTo recap, for example 赤い and 赤(の) are both adjectives, while there is no such\nthing as 緑+い for example.\n\nEdit: I am not sure why in the article he says that 車は赤です is safe, as the\nauthor does not provide any specific grammatical explanation. It might be\nrelated to い-adjective + です (there is a lot on this argument at this\n[link](http://nihongomemo.hatenablog.jp/entry/2014/08/24/120729)). I do not\nthink it has anything to do with being or not an adjective as both 赤 and 赤い\nare (since a の-adjective is nothing but a name that usually in English is\ntranslated with an adjective).",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T07:20:51.610",
"id": "36048",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T08:11:58.220",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36047",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36047 | 36048 | 36048 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36066",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> とても受動的な感じで、どんな場面でも「教えてもらう」という姿勢が精一杯だったと思います。\n\nI think that [Please teach me] is in every occasion an attitude filled with\npassivity.\n\nIs it correct?\n\nLink:<http://ameblo.jp/c-partners/entry-10009534016.html>\n\nEdit.Added link to the original sentence.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T10:06:15.577",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36049",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T04:25:26.607",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T10:58:50.143",
"last_editor_user_id": "11352",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "精一杯 usage in this sentence",
"view_count": 485
} | [
{
"body": "In the previous sentences, the author is describing that they didn't really\nsee much of a difference between 教わる and 学ぶ when they were in school (or even\nwhen they first entered the work force), and that it is likely because they\ndidn't like studying. Setting aside the 「とても受動的な感じで、」 clause for a second, the\nauthor is referring to themselves, and saying:\n\n> Taking on an attitude of \"I will learn\", no matter the situation, was quite\n> a handful for me, I think.\n\nThis \"quite a handful\" is one way of translating 精一杯 that fits the context.\nOthers that might work here is \"(was) all that I could manage\", \"(was) at the\nlimits of my ability\", \"required my best effort\", etc. **In other words, 精一杯\nmeans that it was possible, but difficult, taking \"everything\" the author\nhad** (from the author's own point of view, at that particular point of time).\n\nThe とても受動的な感じで part seems to be a stumbling point in your translation, and I'm\nnot sure either, so take the rest of this answer with a grain of salt. で is\nacting conjunctively (with the later だった, as 思う seems unlikely) to add \"in a\npassive manner/with a feeling of passivity\". It seems the author is describing\ntheir manner/attitude 姿勢 with respect to learning. From later sentences it\nappears the author felt that \"actively learning\" was too much trouble but they\nmight as well make the best of opportunities to learn when they're already\nforced to be there. So a full but somewhat loose translation might be:\n\n> Taking on an attitude of \"I will (at least) learn (in this situation)\" when\n> put in situations (where it is asked of me) was (already) quite a handful\n> for me, I think. (So learning proactively outside such passively accepted\n> situations was beyond me, at that time).\n\nI struggled to find a way to use the direct translation \"passive\", but it\nseems difficult to capture the intended \"feel\" of the sentence that way.\n\n* * *\n\n[This dictionary entry for\n精一杯](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/120966/meaning/m0u/%E7%B2%BE%E4%B8%80%E6%9D%AF/)\nsays, roughly: \"releasing all one's power; at the limits of one's power; to\nthe best of their ability\". There is both a component of \"doing one's best\",\nand also a component of it being \"just barely/almost not enough\".",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T11:46:19.953",
"id": "36050",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T12:30:19.450",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T12:30:19.450",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36049",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "精一杯 means both \"eager / doing one's best\" and \"at best / all one can do\".\n\n> 「教えてもらう」という姿勢が精一杯だった\n\n... is an ambiguous expression which can mean either:\n\n * one was so \"eagerly passive\", and did their best in order to be taught (精一杯 = \"eagerly\". \"精一杯に消極的\" is a sarcastic expression)\n * all one could do was showing the attitude of \"I will learn from you\" (精一杯 = \"the best one can do\")\n\nAt first sight, I took this phrase in the first, sarcastic sense, but after\nreading the original blog article, I realized that it is clearly used in the\nsecond sense. In the following sentence, she says she even had difficulty\nkeeping such a passive \"teach-it-for-me\" attitude.\n\nExamples:\n\n * 立っているのが精一杯だ。 = 立っているのがやっとだ。 \nAll I can do is to keep standing.\n\n * 彼は精一杯立っていた。 = He kept standing with all his might.\n * 彼は立ち上がろうと精一杯だった。 = He was doing his best trying to stand up.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T03:37:41.690",
"id": "36066",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T04:25:26.607",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T04:25:26.607",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36049",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36049 | 36066 | 36066 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36057",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "original sentence:\n\n> 私が選んだのは、Yale並みに学費の高い大学でした。\n\nI think that \"並みに\" is a **noun suffix**?\n\nA \"の\" between \"並みに\" and \"学費\" is optional:\n\n> 私が選んだのは、Yale並みに **の** 学費の高い大学でした。\n\nWhy is that original sentence grammatically correct?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T14:08:55.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36052",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T16:56:31.133",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T14:34:07.750",
"last_editor_user_id": "15778",
"owner_user_id": "15778",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-の",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "\"Yale並みに学費の高い大学\". Is \"並みに\" a suffix? \"の\" between \"並みに\" / \"学費\" is optional?",
"view_count": 104
} | [
{
"body": "並み is a noun suffix which uses の to act adjectivally and に to act adverbially.\n\nIn this case, it basically has the image of \"stand shoulder-to-shoulder with\",\ni.e. \"on the same level as\".\n\nFYI, there is another meaning 並みの～, which means completely unremarkable --\ntotally ordinary as well.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T16:39:07.303",
"id": "36057",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T16:56:31.133",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T16:56:31.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36052",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36052 | 36057 | 36057 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the full sentence.\n\n負けず嫌いで、しかも勇敢な矢吹丈 **は** 、ナイフで刺すとか拳銃で撃つといった、卑怯なリヴェンジ **は** 何も考えませんでした。\n\n 1. I guess that the first one would be the actual subject marker and the whole sentence would roughly be translated like followings:\n\n'Yabuki Joe who is brave and hate to lose did not know how to revenge the\nunfairness he got which feel as if stabbing with a knife or shooting with a\npistol.'\n\nIf I am correct in the translation as above, what is the purpose to put the\nsecond 「は」after the word 「リヴェンジ」?\n\n 2. Is it still grammatically correct if I remove all commas in the sentence? Mostly conversational bubbles found in the manga I have been reading never use it but the sentence above came from the review section written in the end of the manga.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T16:11:46.120",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36053",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T16:25:59.457",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-21T16:18:40.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "9559",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"particle-は",
"manga"
],
"title": "Questions about double particles 「は」in a same sentence and using comma",
"view_count": 83
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, the first は is the main topic, and the second is the typical\n\"contrastive\" は often found with negative predicates -- very nearly a\ncollocation of sorts. And I suppose you could remove the commas without\nchanging the meaning at all here, but it would hinder readability a great\ndeal. I imagine the manga version might use line breaks instead of commas?\n\nAs for your translation, it's almost there, but slightly off meaning-wise\nw.r.t 考える.\n\n> 負けず嫌いで、しかも勇敢な矢吹丈は、ナイフで刺すとか拳銃で撃つといった、卑怯なリベンジは何も考えませんでした。 \n> Yabuki Joe, a sore loser, and / but what's more a brave man, didn't for\n> even a moment consider getting some sort of cowardly / low payback like\n> stabbing or shooting .",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T16:25:59.457",
"id": "36055",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T16:25:59.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36053",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36053 | null | 36055 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I found many examples for ～て初めて with positive verbs, for example:\n\n * > 生まれて初めて寿司を食べた。It is the first time in my life I ate sushi.\n\n * > 病気になって初めて健康の有り難さが分かってきた。I began to know the value of health only after I was ill.\n\n# Question\n\nCan ～て初めて be used with negative verbs? Are there any examples?\n\n## Bonus question\n\nIs it correct to use ～て初めて as follows?\n\n> あの角を右へ曲がって初めて先生の家が見えます。The teacher's house will be visible only after you\n> turn right at that corner.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T16:18:16.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36054",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-18T02:56:26.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Can ～て初めて grammar be used with negative verbs?",
"view_count": 335
} | [
{
"body": "Sure, you can use it with a negative predicate no problem:\n生まれて初めておいしいケーキを見て食べたくならなかった。\n\nFor the second, in the case that you're giving someone directions or\nsomething, it doesn't sound wrong, but 初めて sounds like the first time\n**ever**. Maybe …曲がったところで、（やっと・やがて）先生の家が見えてくるはずなんです is better?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T16:33:30.040",
"id": "36056",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T16:33:30.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36054",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "While Brandon's example about Cake shows a negative verb can be used with 初めて,\nI feel that in general that is an exception. I searched online and found a few\nother examples where a negative verb was used after 初めて:\n\n> 20年目に初めてやらない年になってしまいました\n\nHere, this means that this was the first year (after 20 years) where something\nwasn't done.\n\n> 実際にいろいろ初めてやらないといけない仕事もあるので\n\nThis indicates that there is some jobs which you'll be doing for the first\ntime.\n\n> はじめてしないで寝れました\n\nThis indicates that the person was able to sleep for the first time without\ndoing something.\n\nAs you can see, in all of these cases there is some context where it makes\nsense to use a negative verb after はじめて. I can't think of any case where the\nsimple form \"初めて\" + (negative of verb) would make sense, except Brandon's\nexample with \"食べたくならなかった\". For example, this sentence seems strange to me.\n\n> 僕は初めて見ない.\n\nI think saying either of the below would be more natural.\n\n> 僕は初めてじゃない。\n>\n> 僕は初めて見るわけじゃない。\n>\n> 僕は見たことがある。\n\nRegarding the second question, I agree with what Brandon said, but here is one\nother way to express that.\n\n> あの角を右へ曲がったら先生の家が見えてきます。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T18:27:49.507",
"id": "36058",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-21T18:27:49.507",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36054",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> Question: Can ～て初めて be used with negative verbs? Are there any examples?\n\nI think you could use \"negative verb + て初めて\" (「～ないで初めて」「～なくて初めて」), as in:\n\n> 「動いて当たり前と思っていた指先が動か **ないで初めて** そのありがたみを知ったわけです。」 \n> 「その後もリバウンドし **なくて初めて** ダイエットが成功したと言えるんです。」\n\nbut I have a feeling that this is not very common. I think it'd usually sound\nmore natural to use 「～なくなって初めて」 , as in:\n\n> 「体が動か **なくなって、初めて** 健康のありがたさが分かった。」\n\n* * *\n\n> Bonus question: Is it correct to use ～て初めて as follows? \n> あの角を右へ曲がって初めて先生の家が見えます。\n\nYour sentence sounds fine to me. Compared to the normal 「あの角を右に曲がっ **たら**\n先生の家が見えます」, I think 「曲がって **初めて** ～」 and 「曲がったところで **やっと/ようやく** ～」 emphasize\nthat you can't see the house until you turn the corner... This is the same\nthing as the English \"If/When~~\" vs \"only after~~\" \"finally~~\", maybe?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-18T02:25:08.037",
"id": "41765",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-18T02:56:26.260",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-18T02:56:26.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "36054",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36054 | null | 36056 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36065",
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "I'm looking for one or more natural ways to say \"parking space\" in Japanese.\n\nHere are a few candidates I've found via search and other means, but I'd like\nto know what people in Japan actually use on a daily basis.\n\n> スペース\n>\n> 駐車スペース\n>\n> 余裕 (?)\n\nWithout knowing this word I could probably just say \"この駐車場にはとまるところがないね\", but\nI'd like to know a more specific expression for this.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T19:43:15.213",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36059",
"last_activity_date": "2019-04-04T03:49:56.063",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"daily-life"
],
"title": "Natural expression for \"Parking space\" in Japanese",
"view_count": 2120
} | [
{
"body": "From my experience here in Japan the most used phrase is 駐車場. I have not heard\nanyone use the above mentioned phrases or words.\n\nIf you wanted to express not being able to park somewhere like in your example\nsentence,\n\n> この駐車場にはとまるところがないね。\n\na more common way to say it would be\n\n> ここ空いていないね。\n\nOr inversely describe that the carpark is full by saying:\n\n> この駐車場は満{まん}車｛しゃ｝になっているよ。\n\nIf you want to stick closer to your example sentence you could just shorten\nthe sentence a bit and like l'électeur said, change the verb to とめる and\nconjugate it in the 可能形 (potential) form.\n\n> ここにはとめれない。\n\nObviously if you need to make these examples more polite just conjugate and\nadd respective polite forms where they are needed.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T02:20:01.600",
"id": "36063",
"last_activity_date": "2019-04-04T03:49:56.063",
"last_edit_date": "2019-04-04T03:49:56.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "13696",
"owner_user_id": "13696",
"parent_id": "36059",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "駐車場 is a _parking lot_ , a dedicated area for parking cars. Users are often\ncharged hourly, daily or monthly.\n\nIf you want to refer to a individual parking space in a 駐車場, or a \"space to\npark a car\" in general (such as road shoulders), you can simply say\n**（車を）駐【と】める場所**.\n\n駐 is a kanji used for this purpose (to park). There are also 車を止【と】める (to stop\na running car, eg, taxi) and 車を停【と】める (to stop a car, eg, at a red light). If\nyou're not sure, it's safe to stick to hiragana.\n\n> * この駐車場には、もう車をとめる場所がない。 ＝ この駐車場は満車だ。\n> * 駐車場がないので、他にとめる場所を探そう。\n>\n\nI think 駐車（する）スペース is equally OK, too.\n\nBy the way,\n[パーキングエリア](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%91%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AD%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B0%E3%82%A8%E3%83%AA%E3%82%A2)\nis 和製英語 and refers to rest areas / rest stops along highways.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T03:12:38.063",
"id": "36065",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T03:12:38.063",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36059",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "Closest I can think of...\n\n> **車をとめるとこ**\n```\n\n a place to park (a) car - a parking space\n \n```\n\nThis doesn't always refer to a \"space in a parking lot\", but definitely is a\nvery common way to refer to one.\n\n> 駐車場では **車をとめるとこ** がなかった。\n```\n\n \"There weren't any spaces left in the parking lot.\"\n \n```",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T05:27:58.880",
"id": "36071",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T05:27:58.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36059",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "I've also asked this question to native Japanese speakers and the answer was a\nbit ambiguous.\n\nAs far as I understand they will either use:\n\n> 空いているところ\n>\n> とまるところ\n\nI also asked how they would refer to parking stall number and they said they\nwould just use the number.\n\n> 駐車場の２１番に…",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T06:57:46.230",
"id": "36073",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T06:57:46.230",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1806",
"parent_id": "36059",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "My Japanese friend right next to me said it's 駐車スペース, but that she doesn't say\nor hear it very often.\n\nYou'd be surprised at the things for which names are well-known in English,\nbut no one around me can name in Japanese. Although she came up with this one\nin a moment, this may be one of those words. For example, I've yet to talk to\none Japanese person who knows the word for \"roadblock\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T05:54:25.240",
"id": "36167",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T05:54:25.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15798",
"parent_id": "36059",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36059 | 36065 | 36065 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've noticed that a lot of the na-adjectives I know (which admittedly is not\nthat many) seem to be of Chinese origin and a lot of i-adjectives are kunyomi.\nIs there actually anything to this, etymologically speaking, or is it just a\ncoincidence and I need to learn more adjectives?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-21T20:27:57.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36060",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-24T11:09:01.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14199",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"adjectives"
],
"title": "Adjectives, onyomi/kunyomi",
"view_count": 191
} | [
{
"body": "Actually, while it's true that い-adjectives (ク活用 and シク活用) are all (are there\nexceptions that aren't modern inventions?) native Japanese words, it's not\ntrue that な-adjectives are mostly from Chinese. There are huge classes of\nwords that that conjugate as ナリ活用 and are of Japanese origin. タリ活用, on the\nother hand, are nearly entirely words from 漢語.\n\nMost native な-adjectives follow certain self-similar patterns:\n\n * ～か：静か 遥か のどか 仄か 僅か 密か 定か\n * ～らか：麗らか 清らか 平らか 安らか\n * ～やか：円やか 軽やか 健やか\n * ～よか：膨よか 健よか\n * 新た 可笑し 大き 稀 \n\nAnd タリ活用 are mostly literary expressions like 堂々 **たる** ～然 **と** する and so on.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T00:26:47.353",
"id": "36062",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-24T11:09:01.880",
"last_edit_date": "2016-09-24T11:09:01.880",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36060",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36060 | null | 36062 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36070",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "All of them mean \"Scare\" or \"Afraid\". But I don't really get the difference\nbetween them. Could someone explain? Thanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T04:49:41.607",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36067",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-04T18:28:38.203",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T05:35:35.260",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14281",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 怯える, 恐れる, and 怖がる?",
"view_count": 2302
} | [
{
"body": "From my experience,\n\n> **怖がる** - is not a very strong word and implies that you would want to avoid\n> whatever the object of your fear is. Usually used declaratively.\n```\n\n 犬を怖がる - afraid of dogs\n ジェットコースターを怖がる - afraid of roller coasters\n \n```\n\n> **恐れる** - is a pretty strong word that implies that you feel real and true\n> discomforting fear or perhaps a deep respectful fear of something. Most\n> often heard in the negative. Sounds a bit literary perhaps.\n```\n\n 死を恐れてはならない - Do not fear death\n 恐れるな！ - Have no fear!\n 我々は恐れには負けんぞ！ - We shall not give in to fear!\n \n```\n\n> **怯える** - Is a very strong word like \"cower\". This kanji is also used in the\n> words for \"coward\"/\"cowardice\" ⇒ 卑怯者{ひきょうもの}・卑怯｛ひきょう｝\n```\n\n 敵軍の怯えを肌で感じた - felt the cowardly fear of the enemy army in (his) skin\n 将軍の前で怯えるのが当然ではないか？ - Is it not only natural to cower before the Shogun?\n \n```\n\nNotes:\n\n * The 大辞林 entry for 怖がる seems to indicate that it is a stronger word that 恐れる, but I don't usually hear it used that way.\n\n * The definitions in 大辞泉 and 新明解 don't indicate that 怖がる is stronger than 恐れる, but rather that it implies that the fear is \"shown\" - that is, \"visibly afraid\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T05:16:22.907",
"id": "36068",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T05:46:33.330",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T05:46:33.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "7055",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36067",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "おそ・れる（恐・怖・畏・懼） \n〇〇をおそれる \n\"To fear\" with nearly all the same connotations as the English word. Fear of\nthe unknown, danger, god, etc.\n\nおび・える（怯・脅） \n〇〇におびえる \n\"To feel scared / intimidated / cowed by\" such as a child being scared by a\nthunder storm or a competitor by a strong opponent.\n\nこわ・がる（恐・怖） from こわ・い \n〇〇をこわがる \n\"To act / look / seem frightened of\" i.e. a child the dark.\n\nWhen to use which? Experience will teach you that.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T05:17:29.390",
"id": "36069",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T05:17:29.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36067",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "There is a discussion exactly about this at this\n[link](http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/8561825.html).\n\nOne [example](http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/8556191.html) I have also found is\nfor example the following:\n\nA 彼は何もこわがらない。 B 彼は何も恐れない。\n\nThat is explained as follows.\n\n> こう並べると、Aは恐れることを（も）知らない肉体派、Bは「何があっても決めた道を進む」という意思の強さを感じます。\n\nSo A appears as someone who does not fear anything, while B seems to give the\nimpression of someone who, whatever happens, will follow the his way.\n\nAnother thing that comes out reading these links, is that apparently [怯える] ,\ncompared to [怖がる] , implies a stronger reaction to fear (a fear coming from\nsomething of a higher degree of severity).\n\nIt's probably also interesting to notice that actually おそれる and こわがる actually\nhave \"interchangeable\" kanji: the first one can be written both as 恐れる and 怖れる\nas well as こわがる can be written as 怖がる as well as 恐がる. I think that usually are\nwritten in the first way, but the fact that the same kanji can actually be\nused might suggest a similarity in meanings/usage.\n\nThe one that really has a different meaning and use is 怯える.\n\nAnother explanation from the links above says that while おそれる and こわがる focus\non the element that generates the fear, while おびえる focuses on the state of\nmind of the inner part that is feeling the fear. To quote the original source:\n\n> 「恐れる」「怖がる」は、その対象に重点を置いた他動詞です。 「神を恐れる」 「蛇を怖がる」 のように、恐怖の対象として神や蛇があることを表現しています。\n>\n> 「おびえる」は、恐怖を感じている内面の心理に重点を置いた自動詞です。 「狼の声に怯える」\n> のように、恐怖の対象である狼の声によって心が怯えている状態を表現しています。\n\nTo conclude, if I had to order the three purely in a manner of weakest to\nstronger fear, I would say, very roughly speaking: 恐がる ~ 怖れる < 怯える.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T05:24:26.500",
"id": "36070",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-04T18:28:38.203",
"last_edit_date": "2023-02-04T18:28:38.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "32952",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36067",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36067 | 36070 | 36068 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36075",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here are an example sentence and its translation taken from [an online\nEnglish-Japanese\ndictionary](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%84%8F%E5%91%B3%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B).\n\n```\n\n 問題の意味するところ\n the meaning of a question\n \n```\n\nI'm wondering why the example sentence attach するところ and doesn't simply say\n問題の意味.\n\nAlthough there is a grammar that `[verb] + ところ` means `is about to [verb]`,\nthat grammar can't seem to be applied at here.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T06:09:29.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36072",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T07:40:59.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14487",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What's the exact meaning of ～するところ?",
"view_count": 471
} | [
{
"body": "ところ has many meanings. This ところ means \"thing, content\".\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/158611/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93%E3%82%8D/>\n\nSo 問題の意味するところ is same as 問題の意味すること. Of course, 問題の意味 make sense but if\n問題の意味する, the word like こと or ところ is needed because 問題の意味する is a modification\nphrase so a modified word is needed like that.\n\nIt is probably \"what a question means\" in English.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T07:03:44.383",
"id": "36075",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T07:40:59.343",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T07:40:59.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "36072",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36072 | 36075 | 36075 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here is the full sentence including the word.\n\n小気味いい矢吹丈と、ボクシングだけを想う老残の丹下段平、そしてチャーミングな **仇役** 力石徹。\n\nI found that the first Kanji 「仇」is 表外漢字 and an alternative form of 「敵」. Then,\nI am curious why the writer did not use the later one which would be easier to\nread for Japanese reader.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T07:00:41.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36074",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T07:42:03.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"manga"
],
"title": "Using「仇」instead of 「敵」",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "仇 is not an alternative form of 敵 (there's a word 仇敵【きゅうてき】). And aside from\nit, not being 常用漢字 doesn't mean immediately the kanji is rarely used. Kanji\nfrequency distribution usually shows a long tail, and the rank varies\ndepending on the source collection. According to [@scriptin's\ninvestigation](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/24898/7810), 仇 is at #1951\namong novels in 青空文庫, as well as #2280 in Wikipedia JP, so you can see it's a\npretty close loser to 常用漢字 (now has 2,136 kanji).\n\nIn my personal experience, 仇 for the word かたき (\"foe; rival; who should be\navenged on\") is a fairly well understood, or perhaps more preferred way of\nwriting, partly because 敵 stands for another well known reading: てき (\"enemy;\nopponent\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T07:42:03.390",
"id": "36076",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T07:42:03.390",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36074",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36074 | null | 36076 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36114",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "（[日本語でもしてみむとて](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1318/7810)）\n\n現在遊ばれている「しりとり」は基本的に終わりの一文字をつないでやるものだと思いますが、例えば「がっこ **う**\n」なら（東京の発音ではガッコーですが）次は「う」、「こうて **い** 」（コーテー）なら「い」というルールになると思います。\n\nこれを旧かな遣いで考えると「杖（つ **ゑ** ）」は「ゑ」、「家（い **へ**\n）」は「へ」でないといけないと思います。そうだとすると子供の遊びにしてはやや難しいと思いますが、逆に言えば教育にはよかったのかもしれません（笑）。戦前はこのようにして遊んでいたのでしょうか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T08:22:40.560",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36077",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-22T09:33:57.913",
"last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"kana-usage",
"obsolete-kana"
],
"title": "戦前はどうやってしりとりをしていたのですか？",
"view_count": 437
} | [
{
"body": "You already knew that しりとり=尻取り, hip takings, am I correct? ( But let me answer\nsince I did not at all. )\n\nI found that しりとり can go back to even Heian Era, and it is related\n**[文字鎖｛もじぐさり｝](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1069883570)**\n, ( **[what is\n文字鎖｛もじぐさり｝？](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97%E9%8E%96-645520)** )\n\nIf you google by the word 文字鎖， **[a site comes\nup.](http://blog.goo.ne.jp/hanasakesake/e/eb9590719dde4741721491dd40aca57b)**.\n\nThere 武者小路実隆｛むしゃのこうじさねたか｝（1661～1738), read 源氏物語，according to the rule of\n文字鎖，whose pronunciation of the end of each verse corresponds with the\npronunciation of the head of the next verse. Like this.\n\n> げんじもじぐさり 〖尻｛しり｝取｛と｝り系｛けい｝〗\n\nApparently, you can easily guess the origin of the word, しりとり is 尻取り， which I\nguess 尻｛しり｝, hip, in turn, would mean the end of the each verse, and might be\nconnecting it.\n\nHe reads,\n\n>\n> 源氏｛げんじ｝のすぐれてやさしきは、はかなくきえし桐壺｛きりつぼ｝よ、よそにも見えし帚木｛ははきぎ｝は、われからねになく空蝉｛うつせみ｝や、やすらふみちの夕かほは、わかむらさきのいろごとに、にほふ末摘花｛つえすむはな｝の....\n\nAnd I guess the word play has been passed on until the end of the war,\n\nAccording to\n**[here](http://blog.livedoor.jp/shigechant/archives/50764538.html)** ,\nsomething like しりとり is read or said,\n\n>\n> 日本｛にほん（やまと？）｝の、乃木｛のぎ｝さんが、凱旋｛がいせん｝す、すずめ、めじろ、ロシヤ、野蛮国｛やばんこく｝、クロパトキン、金の玉｛たま｝、負けて逃げるはチャンチャン坊｛ぼう｝、棒｛ぼう｝で叩くは犬殺し、シベリア鉄道｛てつどう｝遠けれど、\n\nSo I guess, \"people\" did not use the old readings? when they play this word\nplay???\n\nThank you again for your interesting question.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T21:39:38.193",
"id": "36101",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T07:54:36.020",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T07:54:36.020",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "36077",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "I did 尻取り games when I was a child before the war--more than 70 years ago--as\nevery child did.\n\n尻取り was one of the most popular and inexpensive games played among pre-war\nchildren, because they didn't have video games or smartphones to kill time as\ntoday's children do.\n\nI and other children never paid attention to whether the ending letter of the\nword was を or お, え or ゑ, へ or え, because we were unable to tell the difference\nof the usage of these words which are pronounced same but written differently.\nWe linked the words only based on the ending sound (the last syllable) of the\npreceding word and the beginning sound (the first syllable) of the following\nword, not on the characters, when playing a 尻取り game.\n\nThere was a problem, which occurred when the ending of the precedent word was\nん, as there is no Japanese word that starts with ん. In that case, we followed\nthe previous word with うん such as 運転手、運動会, and sometimes, うんこ and うんち, as we\ndidn't know then big words like 運命、運気、運否天賦、薀蓄.\n\nBy the way, I'm curious to know whether Anglo-Americans, who don't have\nsyllabic characters as we have in あいうえお, have a similar word game to 尻取り or\nnot, and what they call it if they have one.",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T08:04:28.193",
"id": "36114",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-22T09:33:57.913",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-22T09:33:57.913",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36077",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 36077 | 36114 | 36114 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36087",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm having some trouble understanding どの顔さげて, specifically in certain context.\nI get that it means something along the lines of one should be too ashamed to\nmeet or face someone, but I saw it used in a way that threw me:\n\n> どの顔下げてドアを開ければいいのか\n\nHow should I interpret this line? Would \"should I shamelessly open the door?\"\nbe okay? Or is it to be understood another way?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T08:25:26.207",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36078",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T17:09:16.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Understanding どの顔さげて",
"view_count": 167
} | [
{
"body": "> \"I'm having some trouble understanding どの顔さげて, specifically in certain\n> context.\"\n\nI would probably feel the same way myself if I were a Japanese-learner. That\nis because 「どの顔さげて」 is a cross between an idiomatic expression and a cuss\nphrase, and it is difficult to develop a feeling for the more colorful\nexpressions in a foreign language.\n\nWith the phrase/sentence:\n\n> 「 **どの** 顔下げてドアを開ければいいの **か** 」\n\nI would suggest that you forget the word \"shamelessly\" for a second (because\nit just will not fit in even though it is still highly related in nuance).\n\nBoth in meaning and nuance, the phrase in question is very close to:\n\n> \"How dare you have the nerve to open that door?\"\n>\n> \"How the heck (am I going to / could I) open that door?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T14:51:49.607",
"id": "36087",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T17:09:16.133",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "36078",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36078 | 36087 | 36087 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36084",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Eg in definition of 根：ある数を何乗かした数に対するもとの数。\n\nIs it pronounced かず or すう?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T08:31:24.977",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36079",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-12T05:38:49.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15728",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "数 as used in math - pronounced かず or すう?",
"view_count": 332
} | [
{
"body": "In everyday conversations, it's always read as かず. But in mathematical\ncontexts, 数 on its own is usually read as **すう**. すう becomes dominant in math\nclasses after you graduate from elementary school and start saying things like\nthese.\n\n> * 負【ふ】の **数【すう】** \n> negative number\n> * 複素数【ふくそすう】とは実数【じっすう】 _a_ , _b_ と虚数【きょすう】単位【たんい】 i を用いて、 _a_ + _bi_\n> の形で表すことのできる **数【すう】** である。 \n> A complex number is a number that can be expressed in the form _a_ + _bi_ ,\n> where _a_ and _b_ are real numbers and _i_ is the imaginary unit.\n>\n\nReading these 数 as かず is not wrong at all, but it sounds less technical.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T12:11:50.013",
"id": "36084",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T13:07:07.397",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T13:07:07.397",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36079",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "[数]{すう} is 音読み and [数]{かず} is 訓読み. In general, 音読み of a single kanji itself\ndoes not mean anything while 訓読み is an understandable word. Academic terms are\noften read with 音読み.\n\nIf a professor reads the difinition to students at his lecture, he probably\nread with 音読み. If he is on a TV show and reads the definition to explain the\nconcept of root, he should read 数 with 訓読み.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-12T05:38:49.593",
"id": "36597",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-12T05:38:49.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16065",
"parent_id": "36079",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36079 | 36084 | 36084 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is the sentence.\n\n左ジャブと右ストレートのワンツーを覚えた矢吹丈は、力石徹 **を** 殴り倒すことだけ **を**\n目的に地獄の中で生き抜くのですが、改めて読んでみて、これほど面白く・感動的な物語り **は** そう滅多に **は** ないと、僕は思いました。\n\nNote: This sentence is written vertically.\n\n 1. For the second bold 「を」, I am not sure which object and verb relate to it. If the verb is「改めて」, then what is the object?\n\n 2. For the both bold 「は」, does it still have the same meaning and be grammatically correct if I remove them both?\n\n 3. For the interpunct between the word 「面白く」and 「感動的」, what is the purpose to put it in the place?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T09:46:05.533",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36081",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-22T18:41:34.640",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T10:09:33.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "9559",
"owner_user_id": "9559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"particle-を",
"manga",
"punctuation"
],
"title": "Questions about multiple particles 「は」and 「を」and interpunct in this sentence",
"view_count": 239
} | [
{
"body": "1. を in を目的に indicate a object for 目的, it is 力石徹を殴り倒すことだけ in this case.\n\n 2. I think first and second は are a topic maker and third one is emphasis. You can remove the emphasis は and first は but you had better not to remove second は.\n\n 3. I don't know the reason. I think it is no problem it is comma.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T17:46:50.537",
"id": "36092",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T17:46:50.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "36081",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "1. 〇〇を目的に（して）〇〇する. The して is often omitted. This is just a variant of the very common ＡをＢにする pattern.\n 2. You can't remove both; the basic clause is 物語りはない where は is the negative collocating version for contrast (there are many types of stories, but few such as _this_ ). The second one can be removed without changing the meaning much; it just adds a little extra emphasis.\n 3. Like WeirdlyCheezy said, it's more or less like using a \"/\" in English. That is, the story is both 面白い and/or 感動的 (perhaps the author can't himself decide which is best to use to describe his feelings?).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T17:53:20.630",
"id": "36093",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T17:53:20.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36081",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36081 | null | 36092 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36085",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Would you please tell me what あの子、あんなんだしさ means? \nand then she said あの子を理解してあげられる人なんて たぶんごく僅かだと思うのよ。。。 The person who said this\nphrase is a mother talking with her son's friend about her son.\n\nThank you in advance",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T11:44:28.887",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36083",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T15:23:22.127",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T13:57:14.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "15844",
"owner_user_id": "15844",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"spoken-language",
"phrases",
"manga"
],
"title": "What does あの子、あんなんだしさ mean?",
"view_count": 790
} | [
{
"body": "It means something like\n\n> He's always like that\n\n * あの子 (or この子 if the child is nearby) is a standard way of referring to your own child in conversation.\n * (だし)さ is displaying a mild concern (he's always playing with his food, he's always getting his clothes dirty, etc.)\n * し is actually the listing particle ～し～し, but often used by itself for emphasis in colloquial speech, implying there are many more things she (presumably as mother) is concerned about\n * あんなんだ = あんな+ん+だ, where あんな (sibling of こんな and そんな) means \"such a\"\n * ん = の is \"one\" (as in \"the red one\")",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T12:27:15.493",
"id": "36085",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T15:23:22.127",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T15:23:22.127",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "36083",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36083 | 36085 | 36085 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "How do you express in Japanese that something is generally claimed to have a\ncertain property without positioning yourself to clearly as to the veracity of\nthe claim?\n\nFor example, how would you express the following sentence in Japanese:\n\n> Reliquaries are the supposed bones of saints.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T13:43:21.440",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36086",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-04T23:15:55.370",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T13:28:58.970",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "12239",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"expressions"
],
"title": "\"Supposedly\" in Japanese",
"view_count": 535
} | [
{
"body": "I think all the comments provide good examples. In my experience though, the\nmost commonly used in this situation is also the simplest one: 言われている (or\n思われている as well, like in the first comment that I initially somehow missed).\n\nChecking on [weblio](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/supposedly) for example,\nyou can find the following example:\n\n_He's supposedly 85 years old_ : 彼は 85 歳だといわれている.\n\nNow, obviously this is just one example since as many people commented there\nare other ways to express that. However, as I said in my experience this is\nvery commonly used. After all, if you think about it, \"it is supposed that\"\nand \"it is being said that\" bear a similar, if not the same, meaning.\n\nIn this fashion your sentence could be translated as:\n\n> 聖遺物{せいいぶつ}は聖者{せいじゃ}の骨{ほね}だと言われている。\n\nEDIT: I changed the word 舎利 I originally used for reliquaries with 聖遺物 as\nsuggested by @Brandon in a comment. I agree that this is a more appropriate\nchoice in this context..supposedly. :)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T23:32:46.920",
"id": "36103",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T13:29:35.390",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T13:29:35.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36086",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "“Supposedly” can be translated in various ways depending on the context, for\nexample:\n\n> 多分, 恐らく, 想像するに, and 推測するところ.\n\n[Oxford Advanced English Learners\nDictionary](http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/reliquary?q=reliquary)\ndefines \"reliquary\" as:\n\n> a container in which a relic of a holy person is kept.\n\nKenkyusha's Readers Plus English Japanese Dictionary defines \"Reliquary\" as\n聖骨箱.\n\nIf we follow both of the above definitions, the given line would be translated\nas:\n\n> 聖骨箱は聖人（ら）の遺骨を納めていると思われる。\n\n舎利 means bones, but it's specifically applied to the bones of Buddha and\nBuddhist saints' bones.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-23T22:52:03.900",
"id": "36932",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-24T01:04:18.100",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-24T01:04:18.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36086",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "The word [supposedly] is often used in an ironic (slightly sarcastic) manner.\n\nBoth of Wiktionary's sample sentences contain this idea.\n\n> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/supposedly>\n>\n> * People from other planets have supposedly visited Earth in flying\n> saucers.\n>\n> * According to your testimony, you were supposedly at home watching TV\n> when the murder occurred.\n>\n>\n\n>\n> Synonyms == allegedly, purportedly\n\n2 of 11 sample sentences in Alc contain this idea.\n\n> <http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=supposedly>\n>\n> * supposedly egalitarian society === 建前｛たてまえ｝としての平等｛びょうどう｝主義｛しゅぎ｝の社会\n>\n> * cheat someone by charging $__ for supposedly free visits ===\n> 《イ》サイトの閲覧｛えつらん｝を無料｛むりょう｝だとして（人）をだまして＿ドルを課金｛かきん｝する\n>\n>\n\nThe latter half of Alc's definitions contain this (ironic) idea: [\n建前｛たてまえ｝上は［としては］、一応｛いちおう｝は、一般｛いっぱん｝に信じられているところでは、～といわれている ]\n\nAnother way to express this idea is [... とされている ] or [ ...ということになっている ]",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-09-04T17:46:11.140",
"id": "38949",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-04T23:15:55.370",
"last_edit_date": "2016-09-04T23:15:55.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "16344",
"parent_id": "36086",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 36086 | null | 36103 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Possibly in Japanese do not exist therm like this. Even in English it could be\nrare. Anyway, how could I translate it in Japanese? The meaning of sub-debtor\nshould be \"debtor of debtor\".\n\nLet me give the example sentence (please sorry in case if you will find it\nconfusing):\n\n\" _The pledge of receivables arising from the Respective Receivables created\nunder the Pledge Agreement shall be considered as validly existing until the\nmoment the Sub-debtor receives a notice from the Pledge on termination of such\npledge._ \"",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T14:59:34.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36088",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-01T20:22:05.783",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-22T17:41:25.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "9364",
"owner_user_id": "9364",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"business-japanese"
],
"title": "Translation of the word \"sub-debtor\"",
"view_count": 135
} | [
{
"body": "Debtor is 債務者. Principal debtor is 主たる債務者、 主債務者.\n\nIf Sub-debtor is a \"non-principal debtor\" (a debtor other than the principal\ndebtor), it could be 副債務者, 副次債務者, etc.\n\nOtherwise, perhaps something like a sub-contractor is meant, and you may have\nto make up a plausible term. (Subcontractor is 下請（事）業者、再委託先、再委託業者)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-01T20:22:05.783",
"id": "37114",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-01T20:22:05.783",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16344",
"parent_id": "36088",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36088 | null | 37114 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am having troubles figuring out what the use of the 「に」 in 「に越したことはない」 is.\n\nI searched for almost an hour on internet, but didn't find anything that could\npossibly answer my question.\n\nBecause we put it directly after the 連体形 of a verb, it must be an old use of に\nthat remains common today, but I can't find exactly what its meaning is.\n\nI thought it was the に that we use when we say something like 「私には妹がいる。」to\nmean \"There is a sister to me.\"\n\nSo, I suppose 「食べるに越したことはない。」 would mean \"there is no thing that is beyond to\n[eat].\"\n\nBut I'm not sure at all whether my guess is right or not.\n\nSomebody help me please, thanks.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T19:14:24.160",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36095",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-03T20:47:18.893",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-03T20:47:18.893",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "9539",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"連体形"
],
"title": "に越したことはない Wondering about the に",
"view_count": 299
} | [
{
"body": "I think this grammar is a remnant of classical Japanese, where nominalizer こと\nwas unnecessary and the attributive form (連体形) by itself functioned as a noun.\nYou can find this usage today mainly in proverbs:\n\n * 逃げるが勝ち = 逃げる **こと** が勝ち\n * 聞くは一時の恥、知らぬは一生の恥 = 聞く **こと** は一時の恥、知らない **こと** は一生の恥\n * 袖振り合うも他生の縁 = 袖(が)振り合う **こと** も他生の縁(だ)\n\nAs you can see, the following particle can be anything. So 食べるに越したことはない is 食べる\n**こと** に越したことはない, and means \"There is nothing that is better than eating\", or\nless literally, \"Nothing is as good as eating\".\n\n* * *\n\nHere `X + に + 越す` obviously means \"to be better than X\", \"to surpass X\".\nHowever, in modern Japanese, 越す is not used in this way, because it's a\ntransitive verb. デジタル大辞泉 treats `Xに越したことはない` as a [special idiomatic\nusage](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/79181/meaning/m0u/).\n\n> ５ （「…にこしたことはない」のように打消しの表現を伴って）…するのがいちばんよい。「早いに―・したことはない」\n\nUnfortunately, an online dictionary of old Japanese (学研古語辞典) [doesn't explain\n`Xに越す` at all](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E8%B6%8A%E3%81%99). So I don't\nknow how common `Xに越す` was in archaic Japanese. That being said, the particle\nに is still commonly used for marking something that is compared with the\nsubject. There are expressions such as \"～に匹敵する\", \"～に並ぶ\", \"～に及ぶ\", \"～に似る\", and\nso on, all of which are very common today. So I guess に in `Xに越す` can be\nunderstood along the lines of these expressions.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T22:20:10.380",
"id": "36102",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-03T12:42:24.343",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-03T12:42:24.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36095",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 36095 | null | 36102 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36100",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I'm reading Sakaguchi Ango's In the forest, under cherries in full bloom, and\nI have a question about a meaning of a word in a sentence. The story, if you\ndon't know it, is about a bandit who's afraid of cherry blossoms. He goes to\nthe forest and is terrified, feeling a cold wind and... there's also this\nthing:\n\n花の下は涯がないからだよ. - he describes his experience later. I have a hard time figuring\nout what does that mean. I know 涯 as \"horizon\", so does that mean \"there's no\nhorizon under the flowers\"? I have problems visualising what it could mean...\nThat the horizon is not visible? Or is it some supernatural thing?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T20:21:25.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36096",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T21:38:55.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10712",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "涯 in a sentence",
"view_count": 192
} | [
{
"body": "This 涯 is read as **はて** , and is a rare alternative kanji of\n[果【は】て](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/177959/meaning/m0u/) (meaning \"End\" as\nin \"World's End\")\n\nSource: [青空文庫 桜の森の満開の下\n坂口安吾](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/001095/files/42618_21410.html)\n\nAccording to [this question](http://okwave.jp/qa/q4486967.html), 広辞苑 seems to\nlist this as the possible reading of 涯.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T21:00:06.337",
"id": "36097",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T21:00:06.337",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36096",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "According to this\n[link](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1329679963)\nand this [dictionary entry](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%B6%AF-456693), it\nseems there the meaning of \"limit\" or \"end\" so maybe he is afraid of cherry\nblossoms because there's no end/limit beneath them.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T21:01:26.503",
"id": "36098",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T21:01:26.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3916",
"parent_id": "36096",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Naruto's answer is backed up by WWWJDIC's entry at\n[http://gengo.com/wwwjdic/cgi-\ndata/wwwjdic?1MMC涯](http://gengo.com/wwwjdic/cgi-data/wwwjdic?1MMC%E6%B6%AF).\n\nThe _hate_ reading is the nominalized stem of verb 果{は}てる. Shogakukan's 国語大辞典\nlists the following senses for this that look potentially relevant here:\n\n```\n\n 2 なくなる。失（う）せる。 \n To be(come) lost. To fade away. \n 3 死ぬ。 \n To die.\n \n```\n\nThere is also a note given in the entry:\n\n> **補注** 「おわる」が継続中の動作・作用の終止を原義とするのに対して、「はてる」は限定された物・期間などが、その終局に到達することを原義とする。 \n> **Note:** While _owaru_ has an underlying meaning of the termination of an\n> ongoing action, _hateru_ has an underlying meaning of a limited thing or\n> time period coming to a close.\n\nFrom this, and given the context you describe for the quote, it sounds like\nthe bandit is haunted by the ghosts of the people he's wronged, and is afraid\nof being under the cherry blossoms because that's where the ghosts don't quite\ngo away -- hence the cold wind and his terror.\n\nMore specifically to the word 涯{はて} in this sentence, I can't think of a good\nsingle-word translation that quite conveys all the meaning needed for this to\nmake sense the same way in English, but _end_ might be one good fit. For a\nmulti-word translation, 涯{はて}がない ⇒ _there's no end to things, nothing is\nfinished → old scores aren't settled_ : i.e. a more supernatural sense than\njust not being able to see the horizon.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T21:38:55.603",
"id": "36100",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-22T21:38:55.603",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "36096",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36096 | 36100 | 36097 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Are there any native Japanese here that could tell me how rude it is to speak\ninformally to Japanese people I have never met instead of using the polite\nform? I'm assuming it's more rude the older the stranger is than me?\n\nThis came up recently when I was at a conference and ran into a couple of\nJapanese guys about my age (maybe in their 30's) and they seemed to speak less\nEnglish than I was able to speak Japanese, so we mostly spoke in Japanese.\nIt's been a few years since I've studied Japanese and I've forgotten quite a\nbit, but I used to have Japanese friends in college and became more\ncomfortable using the non-polite form so that's what I seem to remember the\nbest. But I did not want to offend these guys so I found myself pausing and\nstuttering trying to quickly remember how to conjugate things politely and the\nconversation seemed pretty rough and even then I would pop out an informal\nverb here and there. If I had spoken informally I think it would have been\nmuch smoother and in my mind that would have been better for all of us.\n\nSo until I get better, wouldn't it be better to say something impolitely than\nto not say anything at all? Would strangers care that much or would they at\nleast be appreciative that you are trying to speak even if it's impolite?\n\nExamples:\n\n「どこからきた？」instead of「どこから来ましたか」\n\n「これ何？」instead of「これはなんですか」",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T21:21:59.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36099",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-23T21:50:58.423",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T14:06:36.813",
"last_editor_user_id": "4269",
"owner_user_id": "4269",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"culture",
"honorifics",
"conversations"
],
"title": "How rude is it to speak to a Japanese stranger informally instead of using the polite form?",
"view_count": 3226
} | [
{
"body": "どこからきた？ does sound rude, but things are complicated because not so rarely\npeople would talk to you in non-polite forms.\n\nAmong Japanese society, there are opportunities when you can escape from duty\nof using Standard Japanese. When you are a child, when you belong to internal\nsocieties which dialectal speech is applied to and when you speak to them, in\nother words, when it's not guaranteed that both speakers are used to Standard\nJapanese.\n\nI'm afraid that not a few people will unconsciously consider foreign people to\nfall into the same category.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T16:26:12.423",
"id": "36127",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T16:26:12.423",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "36099",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Language is about communication, first and foremost, but whereas in many\nlanguages (such as English) the focus is on getting the information in itself\nacross as smoothly as possible, other languages (such as Japanese, German or\nthe romance languages) require the encoding of social relationships along with\nthe information. Why this should be so isn't necessarily important; but it\n_is_ so.\n\nIn general, failure to include this information hovers somewhere between\n\"acceptable given that you are a foreigner\" and \"quite rude indeed\"; depending\non the level of intimacy in the conversation.\n\nIn Japanese, these social requirements are far more formal than in most\nlanguages, but because of the overall structure of the language, there exists\nan \"out\". (These two things are probably related.)\n\nThis is not a permanent solution; the permanent solution is to learn how to\nconjugate verbs. But as a stop-gap measure while you bone up on your formal\nforms, attaching です (or でございます) to the end of your sentences can help\nlubricate social interactions. While it's not by any stretch of the\nimagination the _right_ way to form appropriately formal sentences, it shows\nthat you are aware of the appropriate level of formality, even if you don't\nhave the means to express it correctly.\n\n**Edit:**\n\nWith regards to specific examples: I can't speak to 「どこから来たか？」, but in\ngeneral, direct translations will lead you astray. What verbs mean in\ndifferent tenses vary from language to language; and what sentences mean\nidiomatically vary from language to language. As an example, if someone seems\nlike they have a headache, you might be tempted to ask if their head is okay;\n「頭大丈夫か？」. Unfortunately, when translated directly, this doesn't come across so\nmuch as \"I notice that you appear to be having a headache, is there anything I\ncan do to help?\" as it comes across as \"Are you nuts?\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T21:28:02.007",
"id": "36131",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T21:43:57.597",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T21:43:57.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "519",
"owner_user_id": "519",
"parent_id": "36099",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36099 | null | 36131 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36107",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm playing a game that talks about the story of [Princess\nKaguya](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_the_Bamboo_Cutter) in the\nfollowing way. I think I got the general gist of it, but I found the second\nsentence in particular to be perplexing. I think the first から is use to say\nshe came from the moon, but I'm not sure what meaning of the second から is.\n\n> 確かにかぐや姫は月を見ては泣いていました。。。\n\nPrincess Kaguya did indeed cry when looking upon the moon.\n\n> でも、それはかぐやが月 **から** 来た **から** じゃないの。。。\n\nBut, she wasn't crying because she came(??) from the moon\n\n> 月はツクヨミの象徴で、実はかぐやは前世を懐かしんで泣いてたの。。。\n\nBecause the moon is the symbol of Tsukuyomi, Kaguya was in truth yearning for\nher previous life.\n\n> つまり彼女を迎えに来た月の住の正体はツクヨミ。。。\n\nIn other words, the moon resident who came to take her back was Tsukuyomi.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-22T23:46:53.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36104",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T02:39:56.250",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10045",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-から"
],
"title": "Two から in the same sentence",
"view_count": 184
} | [
{
"body": "My guess would be that the first is \"from\" and the second is \"since.\"\n\n```\n\n でも、それはかぐやが月から来たからじゃないの。。。\n \n However, wasn't that since she came from the moon...?\n \n```\n\nNot super confident in my answer, but that's how I would understand it if I\ndidn't think too hard.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T01:47:58.677",
"id": "36105",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T01:47:58.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45",
"parent_id": "36104",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "> でも、それはかぐやが月から来たからじゃないの。。。\n>\n> However, it was not because she had come from the moon.\n\nThe first \"から\" is simply \"from\" and the second is \"since\" or \"because\".\n\nThe tricky part here is じゃない after the 2nd から which you may not have seen.\nHere is means \"It wasn't because of ...\"\n\nThis sentence is talking about the one previous to it. And the real reason for\nthe first sentence (her crying) is described in the 3rd and 4th sentences.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T02:39:56.250",
"id": "36107",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T02:39:56.250",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36104",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36104 | 36107 | 36107 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Recently I was listing a youtube video and I found a song that blew my mind. I\ncan understand almost every word, but no matter how hard I try, I can't\nunderstand the construction: 覚えちゃうくらいの距離で. If you could, explain me the use of\nちゃう and くらい because I think the definitions I have of them are not correct. I\nreally appreciate any help you can give to me. Thank you!\n\nLyrics.\n\n> キミの体温感じてる いつも口ずさむあのメロディー \n> 覚えちゃうくらいのキョリで 同じごはん食べてても \n> どうしてこうも違うのかな 今は何考えてるの？\n>\n> この部屋にひとりは広すぎるみたい \n> ねえ早く帰ってきて My Sweet Prince\n>\n> ふたりのセカイ ふたりのミライ \n> 一生のお願いはイラナイから\n>\n> 溢れる想い 溺れそうになったら \n> わたしがそこから救い出してあげるから\n>\n> いつかおそろいで買った 色違いのクッション抱いて \n> 寝てるキミを抱きしめる ベッドははんぶんこ \n> ずっとぎゅっとくっついてたら 同じ夢まで見ちゃうかもね\n>\n> 「このままセカイが終わりませんように」 \n> 「このセカイがずっとずっと続きますように」 願うの\n>\n> 思うだけじゃ伝わらなくて 声に出さないとわからなくて \n> もどかしくて わかってほしくて 無理しちゃって ケンカもして \n> 離れてって 寂しくて 苦しくって 泣いちゃって \n> それでもずっと一緒にいたいの 好きだから\n>\n> ふたりのセカイ ふたりのミライ \n> 一生のお願いはイラナイから\n>\n> 溢れる想い 溺れそうになったら \n> わたしがそこから救い出してあげるから\n>\n> キミのこと守るから",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T02:26:12.193",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36106",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-23T03:43:13.433",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T03:19:44.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "4091",
"owner_user_id": "15855",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "Translation of 覚えちゃうくらいの距離で",
"view_count": 326
} | [
{
"body": "覚えちゃう is short form of 覚えてしまう, where 〜てしまう means something is funny,\nexaggerated, accidental, or some other type of emphasis.\n\nくらい here means \"the amount\" or \"to the extent\"\n\nUPDATE: The explanation I had here was wrong, which was pointed about by user\nnaruto. So I am re-writing it based on his suggestion which I agree with.\n\nHere 覚える simply means \"to remember\" or even \"memorize\", and the connotation is\nthat the melody referred to in the previous line is at such a distance (= so\nclose) that the person hearing it will memorize it.\n\n> 覚えちゃうくらいの距離で\n>\n> Literal: At a distance such that I remember it\n>\n> Non-literal (but more natural): So close that it sticks in my head",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T03:14:48.387",
"id": "36109",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T03:24:30.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36106",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36106 | null | 36109 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36112",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here's the full context: \nA: 鈴木さん、今日来られるっていっていた? \nB: ちょっと遅れてもよければ、だいじょうぶだって。\n\nWhat I understand roughly\n\n_A: Did Suzuki say that he can come today? \nB: He said that if it's okay to be a bit late, he can come_\n\n**But I was wondering if I misinterpret B.**\n\n遅れてもよければ, 大丈夫だ\n\n遅れても: even if it's late \nよければ: if it's okay \n大丈夫だ: It's okay/all is good\n\nA. Was Suzuki san asking permission if it's okay to be late? (asking\nquestions/permissions) \n\nB. Or is it that he said he can come but will be a bit late and he hopes that\nit's okay? (A statement)\n\n_Update: I just realised that there is no か in the end of the sentence so B is\nthe only logical explanation..._",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T04:14:51.270",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36111",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T05:24:41.977",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T05:24:41.977",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Help interpret 遅れてもよければ、大丈夫だ in a sentence",
"view_count": 420
} | [
{
"body": "> ちょっと遅れてもよければ、だいじょうぶだ\n\nI imagine something like the following having taken place before B reported to\nA:\n\n**B:** 鈴木さん、今日、仕事終わったら飲みに行けそう？ \n**鈴木:** う～ん、行くんだったらちょっと遅くなりそうな予感なんだけど… それでもよければ、はい、大丈夫です。\n\n(Addressing someone by family name sounds overly formal in English; let's\npretend his name is Bob) \n \n**B:** Hey Bob, you think you're going to be able to grab some drinks with us\nafter work today? \n**Bob:** Hmm, well if I do go, I have a feeling I'll be a bit late... but if\nthat's alright, yeah, I'm in.\n\nSo your original understanding is basically right on target. This is just a\nconjugated form of the ～してもいい pattern.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T04:33:42.717",
"id": "36112",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T04:33:42.717",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36111",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36111 | 36112 | 36112 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> お前だってもうずっと俺以外の血を望まなかった\n\nI'm basically torn between two interpretations:\n\n 1. You haven't wanted any one's blood but mine for a while now\n 2. You've never wanted any one's blood but mine",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T10:56:26.583",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36115",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-25T05:13:03.953",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T11:04:11.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "15865",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"manga"
],
"title": "Can someone please help me translate this line from a manga I'm reading?",
"view_count": 283
} | [
{
"body": "(もう)ずっと～しない / (もう)ずっと～していない means \"have not done ～ for a while.\" So this\nsentence means 1. That is, this person(?) wanted (and probably actually\nenjoyed) someone else's blood a long time ago, but it's been long since he did\nso last.\n\n> もうずっと彼に会っていない。 \n> I haven't seen him for a long time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T12:18:20.577",
"id": "36116",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T10:36:20.370",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T10:36:20.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36115",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36115 | null | 36116 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was present at a company meeting in which quite a few Japanese people\nstarted to seriously consider if the order of things prescribed in 手順書 can be\nfreely changed. Namely 手順の順番を変えるのは大丈夫か -like questions.\n\nFor me as a foreigner the 順 determines the order of things and I listened in\nconsternation. Most dictionaries define 手順 as 順序 or\n段取り[*](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%89%8B%E9%A0%86-575858). In either case\nthey sound to me like following a path in chronological / planned order.\n\nDoesn't the etymology limit the meaning here to the steps performed in a\npredetermined order? From a linguistic point of view doesn't 手順 determine the\norder of things?\n\nIf no, how shall the 順 part be interpreted?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T13:24:41.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36117",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-04T15:31:33.253",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T16:12:31.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "From a linguistic point of view - can the order of steps in 手順 be changed?",
"view_count": 177
} | [
{
"body": "I think there's a difference between \"what should be done\" and \"what the word\nimplies it is doing\". 手順 simply means a process or protocol and can be implied\nto be an ordered set of steps, in the same manner as the English terms\n\"operational manual\" or \"step-by-step guide\" would be. Now just because this\nis the meaning doesn't imply that the order is always correct or the best\norder by default. I think that's up to the opinions of whoever created/has to\ndeal with this process.",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-05T15:18:29.637",
"id": "36448",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-05T15:18:29.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3128",
"parent_id": "36117",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36117 | null | 36448 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Recently I watched this and the translator gives me something I didn't know. I\nknow that a verb + 出す means to start.....\n\n> 走り出す - To start to run \n> 逃げ出す - To start to escape \n> 登り出す - To start to climb\n\nBut what I saw is 救い出してあげる (what it's root form is 救い出す, isn't it?)\n\nSo, the question. Does 出す have a different meaning when is next to an\nadjective い/な?\n\nThanks in advance for any help you can bring me! Cheers",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T13:32:24.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36118",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T10:46:24.697",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T10:11:05.183",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15855",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "Adjective + 出す？",
"view_count": 692
} | [
{
"body": "In your example 救い is not an adjective, but rather the pre-masu form of 救う,\n\"to save\". The grammar is the normal pattern of \"pre-masu form\" + \"出す\".\n\nHowever, rather than thinking of 救い出す as meaning \"to start to save\", I think\nit's better to just think of it as a separate verb, as shown in the\n[dictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/je/38925/meaning/m0u/%E6%95%91%E3%81%84%E5%87%BA%E3%81%99/).\nBased on this dictionary definitions, it mostly means the same as 救う, except\nthat 救い出す is used more to physical save someone, where as 救う can also mean in\na metaphorical/spiritual sense (i.e. \"save from sin\").\n\nGenerally, adjectives are not used with the verb 出す to mean \"begin to ~\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T13:59:41.560",
"id": "36121",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T13:59:41.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36118",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "To add to @Locksleyu's answer, 出す in \"the continuative form of a verb (動詞の連用形)\n+ 出す\" can mean either:\n\n> ㋐ そうすることによって外や表面に現れるようにする意を表す。「しぼり―・す」「見つけ―・す」 \n> to make something reveal/appear outside or on the surface by doing the\n> action, eg 「しぼり **出す** 」(squeeze **out** ) 「見つけ **出す** 」(find **out** )\n\nor\n\n> ㋑ その動作を始める意を表す。「降り―・す」「笑い―・す」 \n> to start the action, eg 「降り出す」(start to fall/rain) 「笑い出す」(begin to laugh)\n\n(Source: [「出す」 #４（動詞の連用形に付いて） in\nデジタル大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/136563/meaning/m0u/))\n\nThe 出す in [救]{すく}い出す is used in the sense of ㋐, \"to save/help (someone)\n**out** (of somewhere / trouble / difficult situation)\", rather than \"start to\nhelp.\"\n\nHere are some more examples:\n\n> ㋐: \n> [取]{と}り出す -- take out \n> [引]{ひ}き出す -- pull out \n> [呼]{よ}び出す -- tell (someone) to come; summon \n> [助]{たす}け出す -- help (someone out of...) \n> ㋑: \n> [泣]{な}き出す -- start to cry \n> [歩]{ある}き出す -- start to walk \n> [歌]{うた}い出す -- start to sing\n\n(Some ~~出す compound verbs have both meanings, eg 逃げ出す can mean ㋐ get away\nfrom... / out of... ㋑ start running away)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T15:45:22.100",
"id": "36158",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T10:46:24.697",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T10:46:24.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "36118",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 36118 | null | 36158 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36123",
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I tried a quick search among similar questions but could not find exactly what\nI would like to know.\n\nIn Chinese, there is a huge dictionary called\n[汉语大词典](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanyu_Da_Cidian) that covers more than\n54600 characters (at least an edition printed in the '90s). Basically the\nwhole set of existing Chinese characters, or at least a close approximation.\n\nI was wondering, does something like that exist in Japanese as well? I am not\ntalking about a list of 常用漢字 or something similar. I am wondering if there\nexists a comprehensive dictionary that, whether they are common or not, covers\nall the Chinese characters that have a Japanese reading and at least\npotentially could be used in Japanese as well.\n\nI am sure the list is huge, and would be interesting to have such a reference\n(just think of all the kanji of animals, plants, and so on).\n\nEDIT: After some comments I decided to edit the title. I know that there is no\nsuch thing as a \"complete\" kanji dictionary (neither in Chinese nor Japanese)\nsince kanji are constantly evolving and new ones may be created. I was asking\njust for the \"most comprehensive\" source out there.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T13:45:36.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36119",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-12T17:02:10.823",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T02:34:12.830",
"last_editor_user_id": "14205",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"dictionary"
],
"title": "What is the most \"comprehensive\" kanji dictionary?",
"view_count": 2062
} | [
{
"body": "The English Wikipedia page on\n[kanji](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanji#Total_number_of_kanji) claims that\nthe [**Dai Kan-wa Jiten** (大漢和辞典) (Wikipedia\nlink)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai_Kan-Wa_Jiten) is \"considered to be\ncomprehensive in Japan\" and \"contains about 50,000 characters\". (Side note: It\nalso mentions an even bigger Chinese dictionary.)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T15:07:26.563",
"id": "36123",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T15:07:26.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36119",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "There is a publication in Japanese called 漢字源{かんじげん} which may have the\ninformation you're looking for.\n\nThere is also a website that seems to be based on it\n[here](http://jigen.net/kanji/20307) which has over 95,000 entries.\n\n以下はハッタリ話。。。\n\nMore to the root of your question though, since Kanji is really a _system_ of\nwriting and not just a list of characters, I think you would need software to\nproduce all possible Kanji.\n\nBecause it's a system, you can make new characters any time so long as they\nfollow the rules of the system. And even then, if someone ever makes a new 部首\nor something, it would just grow exponentially.\n\nNow, if you wanted a list of all Kanji that actually _have been used_... I\nmean dag yo, that would be so big it would **melt your face**.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T00:25:16.393",
"id": "36136",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T00:45:06.550",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T00:45:06.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "7055",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36119",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "I don't think there exist a 漢和辞典 to be called \"COMPLETE\" in Japan.\nDictionaries evolve day by day. Perhaps you know that even the editing team of\nthe Oxford English Dictionary has been adding **50 new words every day** to\nthe dictionary.\n\nWe don't need a egregiously voluminous dictionary for practical purpose, and I\ndon't think you need to be versed with the meanings and usages of more than\n54,600 characters unless you are a scholar of Chinese characters.\n\nWhen I look for the meaning of 漢語, I'm used to consult \"字源\" compiled by a\nfamous Chinese classicist and linguist, 簡野道明, and published by Hokushinkan in\n1923. It's a long-selling 漢語辞典.\n\n\"字源\" covers 10,681 basic Chinese characters and 73,369 漢語-derived idioms. The\nbook (used one) is available for ￥6,480 through Amazon.\n\nThe other recommendation, though I don't own it by myself, is \"字通\" compiled by\nDr.白河静 and published by Heibon-sha, which is also available for ￥10,800（new\none) or ￥23,657 (big size) from Amazon.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T02:57:41.683",
"id": "36142",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T08:00:17.763",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T08:00:17.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "1527",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36119",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "All info about <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_characters> I own a\nTaiwanese version of 中華字海 which is similar in character number to\n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhonghua_Zihai>\n\n(85,568)\n\nBut Morohashi Japanese Edition and its Taiwanese translation (10 volume set)\nis the most comprehensive and correct when definitions matter.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-12T17:02:10.823",
"id": "41648",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-12T17:02:10.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "19037",
"parent_id": "36119",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 36119 | 36123 | 36123 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36122",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So for what I knew the \"potential form\" of the verbs are for example:\n\n話せる for 話す, a godan verb.\n\n見られる for 見る, an ichidan verb.\n\nBut then I find this form for the ichidan verbs that seems to mean the same as\nthe potential form:\n\n見れる、食べれる... etc.\n\nSo I'm puzzled, what is the difference between these two?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T13:54:31.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36120",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T14:15:50.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15866",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "What's is the difference between these two forms?",
"view_count": 395
} | [
{
"body": "This phenomenon is called ら抜き (\"omitting ら\"). The two forms mean exactly the\nsame.\n\nGrammatically, ichidan verbs like 食べる have a potential form 食べられる instead of\n食べれる, as you already know. But in recent times, people (especially young) have\nstarted saying 食べれる anyway despite its ungrammatical status.\n\nRemoving ら only works for potential, not passive. Without ら抜き, 食べられる could\nmean either \"be able to eat\" or \"be eaten\", whereas 食べれる can only mean \"be\nable to eat\". Thus, ら抜き can actually even help to disambiguate.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T14:15:50.877",
"id": "36122",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T14:15:50.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9749",
"parent_id": "36120",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 36120 | 36122 | 36122 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36148",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "This is the context.\n\n> Yura yura to yuganda sora e \n> **Kimi no moto e tonde yuke** \n> Konna ni mo chikaku ni kanjiteru \n> Futatsu no omoi\n>\n> ゆらゆらと歪んだ空へ \n> **君の元へ飛んでゆけ** \n> こんなにも近くに感じてる \n> ふたつの想い\n\nThis is my try:\n\n> Through the warped and wobbling sky \n> **may I fly to you/if only I could fly to you** \n> I feel so close \n> the feelings of us (our feelings)\n\nI don't know how to translate this imperative (命令形). There is a second person\npronoun, \"君の\", so it can't be a simple imperative, where the speaker orders a\nsecond person to do something (fly to you/fly to yourself!). The speaker\ndoesn't order himself to do something (in this case he/she would say \"fly to\nhim/her!\"). Has it an optative meaning? \"May I fly to you! If only I could fly\nto you! Let me fly to you!\"\n\nIs, in general, 命令形 used also as optative, in Japanese?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T15:58:16.930",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36124",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T14:06:42.707",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "15867",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"song-lyrics",
"imperatives"
],
"title": "君の元へ飛んでゆけ - imperative or optative?",
"view_count": 687
} | [
{
"body": "ふたつの思い is probably the (poetically delayed) intended subject of 飛んでゆけ. I\npreviously incorrectly stated that it is being used as an imperative (please\nsee l'électeur's answer for why it is optative - I have tweaked the wording to\nfit an optative mood but maintained the position that the thoughts (as opposed\nto the singer) are what will travel towards the singer's '君').\n\nIn other words, the singer is hoping/wishing that those \"thoughts of us two\"\nwill fly to the receiver's location.\n\nSince it is a song, it is not unusual if liberties are taken with word\nordering and abbreviations. If we **consider 飛んでゆけ to be a \"quote\", ie, spoken\nto the singer's thoughts** (or rather to the singer themselves as they 'send'\nthose thoughts), **while the rest of the song** is to 君, it works. (This is\nprobably more natural than the 君 as a \"proper noun\" approach I alluded to in a\ncomment).\n\nFor example, here's a rough version where I've explicitly added what I think\nthe singer 'abbreviates' (while deleting some intervening stuff for clarity):\n\n> 君の元へ、「飛んでゆけ」（と祈って、)ふたつの思い（を送った）\n\nOr in English:\n\n> To the place where you are, \"(May you) go, fly!\", (I wish as I send you) my\n> thoughts of us\"",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T16:07:37.130",
"id": "36125",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T14:06:42.707",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T14:06:42.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "It is **_optative_** in meaning even though it grammatically takes the\nimperative form. This usage is quite common in song lyrics and other fictional\nwritings in Japanese.\n\nAt least in the Japanese-speaking mind, a person's [想]{おも}い (\"feeling(s)\",\n\"thought(s)\", etc.) has no will and it cannot fly away ([飛]{と}んでゆく) to\nsomeone; therefore, you do not order your 想い to perform actions that only\nhumans and animals can.\n\n(How this works in other languages, I have no idea and I do not claim to\nknow.)\n\nHow you \"translate\" the optative, however, is another matter altogether. It\ncould be translated just like the imperative if that made sense and/or sounded\nnatural in the target language just as long as you understand that it is\nconsidered optative in the original Japanese.\n\nOther examples of optative phrases:\n\n「[風]{かぜ}よ、[吹]{ふ}け！」,「[星]{ほし}よ、[輝]{かがや}け！」,「[雨]{あめ}よ、[降]{ふ}れ！」, etc.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T11:19:43.363",
"id": "36148",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T11:19:43.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "36124",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36124 | 36148 | 36148 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36138",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "先生が私にみんなに手伝うよう言うよう言った。\n\nThe teacher told me to help everybody \nor \nThe teacher told me to tell everyone to help.\n\nCan someone explain which one is correct and why?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T16:14:22.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36126",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T00:27:35.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "よう言うよう言う meaning",
"view_count": 696
} | [
{
"body": "The second one, **because there are two よう's and two possible speaker-listener\npairs (先生、私) and (私、みんな) where a speaker tells a listener \"something along the\nlines of\" X.**\n\nThat is, here AがBにXよう言う is roughly \"A tells B do something like X\". With three\nparties, (unless people are talking to themselves) those are the only two\npairings that make sense, which means みんなに must be one of the receivers B.\n**This then excludes the parsing where 「みんなに手伝うよう」 is a quotation-object of\n言う** (your first candidate), because we need みんなに to be the receiver of that\n言う.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T16:45:39.827",
"id": "36128",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T16:45:39.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36126",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> 「[先生]{せんせい}が[私]{わたし}にみんなに[手伝]{てつだ}うよう[言]{い}うよう言った。 」\n\nEverytime you see a verb, you need to figure out what the subject for that\nverb is. The verbs used here are: 「手伝う」,「言う」 and 「言った」. Follow me so far?\n\nNow, who does each of the three actions? (And which one of the three is the\nmain verb of the sentence?)\n\nThe main verb is easy to spot in Japanese because it _**usually**_ comes at\nthe very end of the sentence, and this sentence is no exception. The main verb\n(the verb of the sentence) is 「言った」. Who 言った something? 先生 did. Who did 先生 say\nit to? That is 「私に」= \"to me\".\n\nIf you understand what I stated in the last paragraph, you already have 70-80%\nof the sentence figured out. So, we already know that the main structure of\nthis sentence is:\n\n> \"The teacher told me (something).\"\n\nMoving on... So the teacher said something to the speaker. What did s/he say?\nThat is 「みんなに手伝うよう言う（よう）」. That is the content of the teacher's 'statement' to\nthe speaker. In other words, that is what the teacher wants the speaker to do\nbecause 「～～よう言う」 expresses a request or order.\n\nThus, the unmentioned subject for the verb 「言う」 is the speaker. The speaker is\ngoing to say something to someone. Who is that someone? It is 「みんな（に）」= \"(to)\neveryone\". And what is the speaker going to say to everyone? That is 「手伝うよう」=\n\"to hep out\". So, the action-taker of the verb 「手伝う」 is \"everyone\".\n\n> The teacher told me to help everybody\n>\n> or\n>\n> The teacher told me to tell everyone to help.\n\nThe latter, of course. The former would not explain the use of the verb 「言う」.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T00:27:35.360",
"id": "36138",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T00:27:35.360",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "36126",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 36126 | 36138 | 36138 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36132",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Occasionally, some 漢字 will have quite similar 音読み and 訓読み; such as, for\ninstance 困; with 困{コン} and 困{こま}る; or 灰 with 灰{はい} and 灰{カイ}.\n\nAre these cases exclusively coincidence, or are there situations in which\nChinese words have been fully internalised as Japanese words rather than Sino-\nJapanese loanwords? (Or even; Japanese words exported to Chinese as fully\ninternalised loanwords?)\n\n**Edit:**\n\nThanks to naruto's comment; I remembered the one I _really_ wanted to ask\nabout (it was nagging at me as I wrote the question): 死, with 死{し}ぬ and 死{シ}.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T20:12:48.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36129",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T06:00:12.103",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T06:00:12.103",
"last_editor_user_id": "519",
"owner_user_id": "519",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Similar 音・訓読み: Coincidence, or something more?",
"view_count": 155
} | [
{
"body": "Looking at the etymologies independently:\n\n### 灰\n\nThis term appears in the\n[_Man'yōshū_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man'y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB) poetry\ncompilation completed circa 759, so this is an older word. The older kana\nspelling of this was はひ, indicating an Old Japanese reading of `/papi/`.\n\nMeanwhile, the on'yomi has an older kana spelling of くわい (probably realized as\n`/kwai/`), closer to the Middle Chinese it came from, which has a\nreconstructed reading of `/xwoj/` -- think of the `/x/` as a hard **H** like\nin Scottish _loch_ , and think of the `/j/` on the end like a **Y**.\n\nThe older kun'yomi of `/papi/` doesn't overlap with the older on'yomi of\n`/kwai/` in any way that I can find, so I think the similarity between modern\non'yomi _kai_ and kun'yomi _hai_ is purely a coincidence of historical\nphonetic development.\n\n### 困\n\nThe _komaru_ reading with a sense of \"stuck, troubled\" only seems to appear\nfrom the early [Edo period](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edo_period), from\nwhat I can find. I suspect this is an extension from / alteration of ancient\nroot verb 込{こ}む \"to go into something; to put something into something else\",\nmuch like the English \"stuck\" can be interpreted as the passive participle\nform of root verb \"stick\" (as in, \"to _be_ stuck [into a bad situation]\").\n\nThe older root's sense of \"into\" doesn't overlap much with the 困 kanji's\nmeaning of \"besieged, troubled\", so I suspect this similarity is another\ncoincidence of historical semantic development.\n\n### Other cases\n\nAlthough the above two are coincidental, there _are_ cases where the kun'yomi\ndeveloped from the on'yomi. One example is 文{ふみ}, where the kun'yomi of _fumi_\napparently came from an older on'yomi of _pun_. More at [the Wiktionary\nentry](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%96%87#Japanese).\n\nIn general, sound similarities are _probably_ accidental. To find out for\nsure, you have to dig into the historical development of each term.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T21:46:38.570",
"id": "36132",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-23T23:52:59.450",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-23T23:52:59.450",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "36129",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 36129 | 36132 | 36132 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "40068",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I [recently asked a question about on- and kun-\nyomi](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/36129/similar-%E9%9F%B3-%E8%A8%93%E8%AA%AD%E3%81%BF-\ncoincidence-or-something-more) and in building the title guessed at how the\ntwo compounds involved could be contracted; landing on 「音・訓読み」.\n\nIs this indeed the correct way of abbreviating something like 「音読み・訓読み」, and\nif so, when can it be used?\n\nIf not; what construction should be used?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T20:19:13.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36130",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-17T13:07:06.077",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "519",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"compounds",
"coordination"
],
"title": "Abbreviating sets of compounds with leading characters in common",
"view_count": 146
} | [
{
"body": "Interesting question. Is this common in Jp?\n\nExamples in English :\n\n * . . . control issues in ground-, water-, and air-based robots.\n\n * nineteenth- and twentieth-century.\n\n * e.g. two-, three-, or four-fold increase.\n\n * \"investor-owned and -operated\".\n\nWhen I do net-search with 「音・訓読み」, the results include few or no hits\nindicating the meaning 「音読み・訓読み」.\n\n音・訓読み (and especially without the dot as 音訓読み) often means 重箱読み.\n\n> 中学入試の定番「重箱読み」と「湯桶読み」 - Pickup！教育のヒント - 教育の ...\n>\n> education.mag2.com/osusume/2009/01/216.html\n>\n> 重箱読み（音・訓読み）…\n\nTitle of academic paper: 現代日本語の音・訓読み分けの機構を論じ、「漢語・和語形態素の相補的分布」に及ぶ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-09-06T20:25:13.313",
"id": "39001",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-06T20:25:13.313",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16344",
"parent_id": "36130",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "In general, there is no restriction in making this kind of ad hoc portmanteau\ncompounds, as long as all original words have parallel structure. That said,\nit's more natural if the non-common parts are contrastive in meaning.\n\n> [上下水道](http://www.city.kawasaki.jp/800/cmsfiles/contents/0000035/35839/)\n> \"water(works) and sewerage\" < 上水道 + 下水道 \n>\n> [開閉会式](http://news.livedoor.com/%E3%83%AA%E3%82%AA%E4%BA%94%E8%BC%AA%E3%81%AE%E9%96%8B%E9%96%89%E4%BC%9A%E5%BC%8F/topics/keyword/37149/)\n> \"opening and closing ceremony\" < 開会式 + 閉会式 \n> [視触覚](http://www.moguravr.com/unlimited-corridor-movie/) \"visuo-haptic\" <\n> 視覚 + 触覚\n\nIt doesn't need to be exactly two components:\n\n>\n> [都道府県庁所在地](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%83%BD%E9%81%93%E5%BA%9C%E7%9C%8C%E5%BA%81%E6%89%80%E5%9C%A8%E5%9C%B0)\n> \"seat of the office of\n> [都/道/府/県](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefectures_of_Japan)\" (i.e.\n> capitol)\n\nor being the first character:\n\n> [輸出入](http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S27/S27HO299.html) \"import and export\"\n> < 輸出 + 輸入\n\nBut an interpunct (・) is required when the result spelling causes confusion\n(colliding with existing words):\n\n> [北{きた}・東{ひがし}アジア](http://researchmap.jp/jor5kvumk-45644/) \"North and East\n> Asia\" cf. 北東{ほくとう} \"northeast\" \n> [環状1・2号線](http://www.ur-\n> net.go.jp/east/order/kouzi/pdf/ur2008e_ord0324_01.pdf) \"the ring road 1/2\"\n\nIn your case, however, the word 音訓読み is already reserved for \"a type of\n2-kanji word where the former is read in 音読み and the latter in 訓読み\", so you\nshould avoid this wording (but should be understood with aid of the context).\nFortunately, as mentioned in a comment, what you mean can be conveyed by\nanother word [音訓](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/34326/meaning/m0u/).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-10-17T13:00:52.300",
"id": "40068",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-17T13:07:06.077",
"last_edit_date": "2016-10-17T13:07:06.077",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36130",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36130 | 40068 | 40068 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 何か自分が望まないことを断るという状況を、セミナーなどで様々な方に実演してもらうことがあります。その時、訓練を受けていない人は９割方、『自分の利害の説明』から始めようとしがちです。 \n>\n> 例えば、会社の利益になると思えない残業を命じられたり、法令や規則違反ギリギリの仕事を依頼されたりする場面で、ほとんどの人は『自分はそれをしたくない』とだけ言い張ったり、あるいは適当なその場しのぎの理由でごまかそうとしたりします。 \n> ところが、本当に必要なことは、それを行うと相手にどんな不利益があるのか、また相手にとってより良い代替案は何なのか、しっかりと説明することなのです。\n\nI really don't understand this passage please help.\n\nThis passage means being commanded to do overtime work which seems not to make\nprofit for the company(?), requested to do what is about to violate the rule,\nmany people will say and insist \"I won't do that\", or deceive with reason\nthat's suitable(?)(?)\n\nThe main point of the second paragraph is you don't want to do something that\nis not useful for yourself(?) -> but I don't understand what is the connection\nbetween the first and second paragraphs. Like the example in paragraph two\nexplains what sentence in paragraph one?\n\nAnd the third paragraph point is about to persuade other people to do what's\nthe same as you think without thinking about their disadvantage??\n\n**Edit.**\n\nhello thanks so much for fast reply and also correction for 『自分の利害の[説明]{せつめい}』\ni try to conclude all the paragraph but sometimes it is so hard to understand\nwhat is the core of the paragraph.\n\nand this is the whole paragraph.\n\n何か自分が望まないことを断るという状況を、セミナーなどで様々な方に実演してもらうことがあります。その時、訓練を受けていない人は９割方、『自分の利害の説明』から始めようとしがちです。\n例えば、会社の利益になると思えない残業を命じられたり、法令や規則違反ギリギリの仕事を依頼されたりする場面で、ほとんどの人は『自分はそれをしたくない』とだけ言い張ったり、あるいは適当なその場しのぎの理由でごまかそうとしたりします。\n\nところが、本当に必要なことは、それを行うと相手にどんな不利益があるのか、また相手にとってより良い代替案は何なのか、しっかりと説明することなのです。\n\nなぜなら、自分を含めて、すべての人は自分の利益中心に動きます。だからこそ、他人を動かす時には、相手の利害を説明し、相手の心に納得させなければなりません。\n\n経済学でも会社学でも、様々な人の利害を一致させ、同じ行動をとらせるようにすることは永遠の問題です。それを考え続け、システムとして何とか構築したのが、経済学では資本主義、社会学では議院内閣制です。\n\nすなわち、自分と相手の利害は、野放しの状態では基本的に全く一致しないのです。そこにうまく共通の目的や価値観、ルールなどを導入し、あるいはリーダー的な立場の人を作ることで、何とか方向性を一致させ、同じ目的を達するようにします\n\nexplanation::::\n何か自分が望まないことを断るという状況を、セミナーなどで様々な方に実演してもらうことがあります。その時、訓練を受けていない人は９割方、『自分の利害の説明』から始めようとしがちです。\n例えば、会社の利益になると思えない残業を命じられたり、法令や規則違反ギリギリの仕事を依頼されたりする場面で、ほとんどの人は『自分はそれをしたくない』とだけ言い張ったり、あるいは適当なその場しのぎの理由でごまかそうとしたりします。\nところが、本当に必要なことは、それを行うと相手にどんな不利益があるのか、また相手にとってより良い代替案は何なのか、しっかりと説明することなのです。\n\nthe first paragraph is about way to refuse request through various way such as\nin seminar where we asked to do role play to demonstrate it. at that time,\npeople who are not trained 90% start to discuss about pros and cons for\nthemselves.\n\nthe second paragraph explain further examples in situations where people are\nordered to do overtime that doesn't seem to profit the company, requested to\nperform work that is in a legal gray area, and people will likely wont do that\nor giving an excuses -> people who being ordered to do\n\npar 3- when you refuse to do smthing start to think not only for yourself but\nalso what's the impact for people the people you refuse, and also give more\nsuggestions what another good point of view for the people who giving you\ncommand\n\nなぜなら、自分を含めて、すべての人は自分の利益中心に動きます。だからこそ、他人を動かす時には、相手の利害を説明し、相手の心に納得させなければなりません。\n\npar4 : why? to make other people to think and do the same as i want, by\nthinking and explaining what are the advantages and disadvantages for other\npeople so that they will understand.\n\n経済学でも会社学でも、様々な人の利害を一致させ、同じ行動をとらせるようにすることは永遠の問題です。それを考え続け、システムとして何とか構築したのが、経済学では資本主義、社会学では議院内閣制です。\n\nits similar as politic and economic, to unite all people, and to make all\npeople have the same behaviour is impossible, for example capitalism and\nparliament gov system is system that is similar with this problem.->become one\n\nすなわち、自分と相手の利害は、野放しの状態では基本的に全く一致しないのです。そこにうまく共通の目的や価値観、ルールなどを導入し、あるいはリーダー的な立場の人を作ることで、何とか方向性を一致させ、同じ目的を達するようにします。\n\nin conclusion, the way we think is surely different to other party points of\nview and it is impossible to unite it. to reach teh goal to make it have more\ncommoness by inserting rule or people who have a leader behaviour to works on\nthe problem.\n\nis this right? have i missed some important fact? thank you in advance!",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-23T22:30:29.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36133",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T13:36:34.480",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T10:35:57.400",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15870",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"kanji",
"readings",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "Ask Japanese complicated passage",
"view_count": 253
} | [
{
"body": "[Edit: **Note** , this answer was intended to be a complete answer to the\n**initial version** of the question - however the question has undergone a\n**major edit** so this answer **only partially answers the question**.]\n\nThe **overall theme** is \"good and bad ways for people to **refuse requests\"**\n(eg from their employers).\n\nThe **connection between the first two paragraphs** is that the **first\nintroduces the theme** by describing people acting out such refusals at\nseminars, etc., and explaining the common (bad) pattern of focusing on\nthemselves, while **the second goes into more detail**.\n\nSpecifically, the **second paragraph establishes examples** of scenarios where\npeople would wish to refuse a request, and then gives examples of how people\nattempt to refuse the request. (Likely the author observed such patterns at\nsuch seminars, etc.)\n\nThe **third** explains the **better way to refuse** , which is to **focus on\nthe other party's needs** in your refusal. If you explain to the other party\nwhy complying with the request harms the other party, and propose a better\nalternative, you are more likely to be successful (the author's conclusion).\n\n* * *\n\nThe following is a **full translation** (somewhat loose, but I tried to keep\nword/clause ordering and directly translate where I could):\n\n> At various seminars, etc., many different people were asked to role play\n> situations where one is refusing to do something that they do not wish to\n> do. Of people who have not had any training (for such situations), around 90\n> percent tend to start by discussing the pros and cons towards themselves (of\n> the activity they do not wish to do).\n>\n> For example, in situations where people are ordered to do overtime that\n> doesn't seem to profit the company, requested to perform work that is in a\n> legal gray area, etc., most people will only insist that \"I personally don't\n> want to do that\" or find a makeshift excuse to get out of the request.\n>\n> However, what is really needed is to carefully explain to the other party\n> why carrying out the request would harm the other party's interests, and\n> what alternative course of action would be a good substitute from the other\n> party's point of view.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T06:38:23.587",
"id": "36145",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T13:36:34.480",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T13:36:34.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36133",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36133 | null | 36145 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36141",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I am looking for a Japanese phrase or an idiom which could be used to describe\na situation in which a person A persuades person B into doing something, not\nrequired for the person B, but beneficial to the A.\n\nLike selling a trekking map for a very well marked and safe path.\n\nI tried looking for \"to scare someone to do something\" and got literal\n脅かして～させる, which I feel is too strong (there is no direct threat). だまして\nsuggests deception (while A might only exaggerate certain aspects, not\nnecessarily lie). On the other hand 説得する does not have a negative connotation.\n\nIs there such a phrase? Or are my concerns for the above-mentioned phrases\nirrelevant?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T00:25:24.410",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36137",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T02:25:38.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"phrase-requests"
],
"title": "How to say to \"persuade into doing something\"?",
"view_count": 1473
} | [
{
"body": "An expression that comes to mind would be:\n\n> 「[説]{と}き[伏]{ふ}せる」\n\nThat is stronger than 「[説得]{せっとく}する」, but it never involves threat of any\nkind. All it involves is the art of conversation - [話術]{わじゅつ}.\n\nTogether with another verb, you can use it like:\n\n> 「～～するよう（に）説き伏せる」 or\n>\n> 「説き伏せて～～させる」\n\n「Aは、その地図を買うよう（に）Bを説き伏せた。」\n\n「Aは、Bを説き伏せてその地図を買わせた。」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T00:53:02.410",
"id": "36139",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T00:53:02.410",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "36137",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "## 強{し}いる or 押{お}し付{つ}ける perhaps?\n\n> 地図を強いられた\n>\n> 地図を押し付けられた",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T01:51:34.710",
"id": "36140",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T01:51:34.710",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36137",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I would suggest\n**[言いくるめる](http://jisho.org/search/%E8%A8%80%E3%81%84%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B)**\n, which is like 説得する/説き伏せる, but implies the action is beneficial not to the\ntarget but to the subject. It does have the negative connotation like 騙す, but\nit's not as strong/evil/illegal as 騙す.\n\nYou can also use\n[丸め込む](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E4%B8%B8%E3%82%81%E8%BE%BC%E3%82%80) and\n[口車【くちぐるま】に乗せる](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%8F%A3%E8%BB%8A&ref=sa).\n\n> * 彼をうまく言いくるめて、地図を買わせよう。\n> * 店員に言いくるめられて、3万円もする服を買わされてしまった。別に欲しくなかったのに。\n> * 彼の口車には乗るな。 Don't be cajoled by him.\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T02:08:31.540",
"id": "36141",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T02:25:38.160",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T02:25:38.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36137",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
]
| 36137 | 36141 | 36141 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36144",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 手伝って くれて 、ありがとう。おかげで早く終わったよ。\n\nI understand it roughly: \n_Thanks for giving me assistance, thanks to you, the task finished faster_\n\nBut why it is くれて not もらって? \nI thought the context was _(I am really thankful for receiving assistance from\nyou and thanks to you the task finished faster)_ \nAlso, the person who assists seems to be outsider, so therefore shouldn't もらって\nbe used instead? \n\nAnd why the くれて is in て form instead of くれた?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T03:11:38.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36143",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T08:36:06.753",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T08:36:06.753",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "くれて in this sentence",
"view_count": 142
} | [
{
"body": "The difference is the subject of the verb. The person you are talking to is\nthe subject of くれて, where you would be the subject for もらって. Because you are\nthanking the person for the help that they gave you it makes sense for them to\nbe the subject, and so くれて is used. It's comparable to the difference between\n\"you did something for me\" and \"I got you to do something.\"\n\nAs for why it's in the te-form not the past tense, the tense is expressed at\nthe end of a sentence (usually). Just like how in a sentence structure \"he\nverb-ed, verb-ed, and verb-ed\" the first two would be te-form and only the\nlast would be in the past tense, 手伝って くれて ありがとう（ございました）only puts the last part\nin the past tense as well. Essentially it's te-form because that is a standard\nway of linking verbs, past tense is not.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T04:23:58.360",
"id": "36144",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T04:23:58.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14329",
"parent_id": "36143",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36143 | 36144 | 36144 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36156",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> ……こういう時の遠坂 **には** どんなワガママもし放題なのであるが、生憎、ここはちょっとの油断で轢き飛ばされる制限速度六十キロ車道、二車線である。\n\nWhen Tohsaka is like this she does anything she wants but, sadly, this is a a\n2 lane traffic road with a limit of 60 km/h where you can be sent flying if\nyou are not careful.\n\nIs this correct?\n\nOr this に is にたいして\n\n> ……こういう時の遠坂 **にたいして**\n> どんなワガママもし放題なのであるが、生憎、ここはちょっとの油断で轢き飛ばされる制限速度六十キロ車道、二車線である。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T08:49:02.353",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36146",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T15:18:52.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Meaning of には in this sentence.",
"view_count": 284
} | [
{
"body": "に denotes the target (of your arrogant request) and は is a topic marker,\nwithout which the sentence would sound like inversion of\n\"どんなワガママもし放題なのは、こういう時の遠坂にであるが\".\n\nAs your translation, it's fine, and yes, that に is the same as に対して (though\nyou somehow have cut off は).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T15:18:52.243",
"id": "36156",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T15:18:52.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "36146",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36146 | 36156 | 36156 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36162",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why do they use sometimes small version of katakana ヵ 'ka' in a word 二ヵ国語\n(nikakokugo -bilingual)?\n\nFor me, more intuitive form could be 二か国語. Katakana characters in small forms\nother than ya, yu, yo, shi + vowels should not even exist. ;)\n\nIs there any significant reason for it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T12:45:31.447",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36149",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T19:52:00.613",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14283",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"kana-usage",
"language-reform"
],
"title": "Why small version of katakana ヵ is used in a word 二ヵ国語",
"view_count": 1261
} | [
{
"body": "### Main question: _Why do they use sometimes small version of katakana ヵ 'ka'\nin a word?_\n\nThe small ヵ here actually derives from the kanji 個 or 箇, used as the generic\ncounter for things. This was abbreviated to 个, and in turn, this became the\nregular-sized ケ or small ヶ seen in words like 一ヶ月. Since the counter in these\ncontexts is read as _ka_ , this abbreviated kanji form ヶ came to be written\nusing the alternate small katakana ヵ, probably to match the phonetics, and\npossibly to avoid potential confusion in readings with the actual katakana ケ.\n\nSo the reason would be gradual historical development. (As with most odd\nthings in languages.)\n\n### Side question: _Why do katakana characters in small forms other than ya,\nyu, yo, shi + vowels even exist?_\n\nThere's the historical development reason above, for small kana used in\nJapanese.\n\nPast there, kana are actually used for more than just Japanese -- they are\nalso used to write Ainu. Ainu has final consonants, and the small-kana\nvariants are used to indicate these. For instance, the word _sir_ in Ainu\nmeans \"place, land, country; mountain\", and this is spelled in katakana as シㇼ\nwith the small ㇼ to indicate the final `/r/` sound. [See this Wikipedia\narticle for more about small katakana used to write\nAinu](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainu_language#Special_katakana_for_the_Ainu_language).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T19:52:00.613",
"id": "36162",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T19:52:00.613",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "36149",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
]
| 36149 | 36162 | 36162 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36165",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Here is the exact line from a translation that I am reading:\n\n> 瓶を店に返して **預け金** の５セントを戻してもらいました。\n\nI just read it as **あずけがね** and continued on. Then, I decided to double check\nthe meaning in my dictionary. But it had it read as **あずけきん**. And that\nreading seemed strange.\n\nSo, this is a professional translation. So, I am pretty sure that: \n(1) **あずけがね** is the proper reading for this context. \n(2) **あずけがね** does not sound slang. \n(3) **あずけきん** is a _proper noun_ that is almost exclusively used with regard\nto apartment rentals?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T13:25:48.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36150",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T01:35:19.633",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T16:27:39.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15778",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"multiple-readings"
],
"title": "Is 預けがね a possible reading of 預け金? 預けがね vs 預けきん meanings?",
"view_count": 134
} | [
{
"body": "[預]{あず}け[金]{きん} means a security deposit for renting an apartment and [金]{きん}\nmeans money. I think you are confused with 預かり金 which is another term for 預け金.\n\nI have never heard anyone use 預けがね for 預け金, but I am not a native Japanese\nspeaker.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T15:28:41.720",
"id": "36157",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T07:39:36.080",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T07:39:36.080",
"last_editor_user_id": "12259",
"owner_user_id": "12259",
"parent_id": "36150",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "預け金 should be read あずけきん、which means a deposit, security money, or down\npayment that you can appropreate it to the future payment and settlement, or\nbe refunded by the trustee (shops, dealers, banks, etc) upon the depositor's\nrequest, or when the deal is completed.\n\nYou can use it colloquially as 銀行への預け金 instead of 銀行預金. From the trustee's\nstand, it's called 預り金(きん）.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T03:39:14.007",
"id": "36165",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T03:50:04.617",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T03:50:04.617",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36150",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Just to add some related info...\n\nThis kind of \"unusual\" mixing of on-yomi and kun-yomi happens often with\nfinance-related words.\n\n```\n\n On-yomi in katakana, kun-yomi in hiragana:\n \n```\n\n> 売掛金{うりかけキン} - accounts receivable\n>\n> 買掛金{かいかけキン} - accounts payable\n>\n> 赤伝{あかデン} - debit slip\n>\n> 黒伝{くろデン} - credit slip\n>\n> 支払う{シはらう} - expend, pay out\n>\n> 相場{ソウば} - market value\n>\n> 残高{ザンだか} - (bank account) balance",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T01:35:19.633",
"id": "36204",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T01:35:19.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36150",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36150 | 36165 | 36204 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36159",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "What's the difference between `折【お】る` and `折【お】れる`? According to my\ndictionary, they both mean `to break` or `to fold`. When would you use one\nover the other? These verbs are on the [JLPT N4 vocabulary\nlist](http://www.tanos.co.uk/jlpt/jlpt4/vocab).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T13:36:23.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36151",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-01T15:29:08.097",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T00:56:34.910",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "1346",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"jlpt",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "Difference between 折る and 折れる",
"view_count": 1315
} | [
{
"body": "折る is a transitive verb and 折れる is intransitive. Keep in mind 折れる could also\nmean the conjugated potential form of 折る.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T14:42:29.673",
"id": "36154",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T14:42:29.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9324",
"parent_id": "36151",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "This is an example of a [自他]{じ・た} pair. These pairs are an important concept\nto learn in Japanese because there are a _ton_ of them!\n[[Here]{LLLL}](http://www.mlcjapanese.co.jp/Download/ViVt.pdf)\n[[are]{LLL}](http://nihongo.monash.edu/ti_list.html)\n[[several]{LLLLLLL}](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/in-\ntransitive)\n[[resources]{LLLLLLLLL}](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese/Grammar/Transitivity)\nwith lots of examples and good explanations.\n\n* * *\n\n折る is a [他動詞]{た・どう・し} which is a transitive verb. This means an external\nagent/influence performs the action in question. You can remember this because\n他 is also read as 「ほか」, meaning \"(an)other\"; so something _other_ than the\nobject itself performs the action on the object. With transitive verbs, you'll\nhave **を** to show that the external agent performs the action **on**\nsomething. In the case of 折る you might have something like\n\n> * 花子は左腕の骨 **を** 折った → Hanako broke (the bone of) her left arm\n> * 僕は枝 **を** 踏んで折った → I stepped on the branch and broke it\n> * 手紙 **を** 折る → Fold a letter\n>\n\n* * *\n\n折れる is a [自動詞]{じ・どう・し} which is an intransitive verb. This means the action\nhappens to the thing/object itself, and the object is the focus. You can\nremember this by remembering 自 means \"itself\", like 自分. With intransitive\nverbs, since the focus is the thing itself, you'll have **は** or **が** to show\nthis focus. In case of 折れる:\n\n> * 枝 **が** 折れた → The branch (itself) broke\n> * 本が落ちて、何枚ものページ **が** 折れた → The book fell, and several pages were\n> bent/\"folded\".\n>\n\n* * *\n\nIf you want some extra confusion after you learn the basics, check out\n\n * [自～／他～ペア：逆の形 — Transitive/Intransitive pairs: opposite forms](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1306/78)\n * [Passive-transitive-verb vs. Intransitive-verb （他動詞の受け身 vs. 自動詞)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/329/78)\n * [How do 自他 triplets of related verbs work?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12837/78)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T17:01:31.983",
"id": "36159",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-01T15:29:08.097",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "78",
"parent_id": "36151",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "As other users told, 折る is a transitive verb that requires an objective such\nas 折り紙を折る － do an origami. 折れる is an intransitive verb, like 箸が折れる chopsticks\nsnap. It requires a subjective.\n\n折る、折れる aren't necessarily referring to physical objects like a branch, tree,\nbones, and a window glass. It can be used for abstract objects, for examples:\n\n> 骨を折る - make an serious effort, take care of (someone else)\n>\n> 話を折る - interrupt others' story, stop other's talking.\n\n腰を折る - block / check someone's attempt\n\n> 心が折れる - discouraged, down-hearted",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T22:58:38.453",
"id": "36163",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-31T08:33:58.257",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36151",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36151 | 36159 | 36159 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I want to tattoo the word half demon but in japanese. Do you spell it hanyo,\nhan'yo or hanyou? I saw all of them? Which one is correct?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T13:50:32.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36152",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T21:22:28.763",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-24T21:22:28.763",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15874",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"rōmaji"
],
"title": "How do you spell half demon (like Inuyasha) han'yo, hanyo or hanyou?",
"view_count": 1604
} | [
{
"body": "There are multiple systems of romanization and various conventions.\n\nOne important point relevant to this word is that 'n' (hiragana: ん) is unique\nin Japanese in that it is the only non-vowel-containing \"sound unit\", and that\ncan cause ambiguities.\n\n半妖 is spelled はんよう in hiragana, which represent ha-n-yo-u. But **if you write\njust hanyou, it could be misread as ha-nyo-u** (or in hiragana はにょう). This\ndoesn't make it 'wrong', but there is potential for confusion. (Luckily there\ndon't seem to be any common words with this spelling so a reader would\nhopefully figure out what you intended, but, in general, there is definitely\npotential for confusion when romanizing \"n\" without the apostrophe when it is\nfollowed by vowels or glides).\n\nThe apostrophe after the n is used to \"close\" it (replaces the vowel) to\neliminate the ambiguity... it is optional, but much safer.\n\nFor representing the \"reading\" of a Japanese word containing kanji, the safest\napproach is usually to directly use hiragana, eg はんよう. If you insist on using\nromaji, \"han'you\" is safer because it is unambiguous. The long \"ou\" can also\nbe written \"ō\", or reduced to just \"o\" (but the later is potentially ambiguous\nwith はんよ [ha-n-yo]).\n\nAlso note that **Japanese has many homophones** (same-sounding words). So\nthere are other words that are read はんよう, but don't have anything to do with\nhalf-demons. For example 汎用, meaning \"general purpose\". If this is for a\ntattoo, I would also **bring in the kanji spelling itself** so that no\nconfusion occurs.\n\nFinally, this is very tangential, but: if you think you might go to Japan some\nday, please think that tattoo through. Tattoos are commonly associated with\norganized crime here, and many public baths still refuse service to people\nwith visible tattoos (this is slowly changing, but, .. slowly).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T14:39:09.310",
"id": "36153",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T14:39:09.310",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36152",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36152 | null | 36153 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36161",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Recently I was reading [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/18537/what-\ndoes-%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%83%AC%E3%82%AA%E3%83%84-mean) about conversions\nlike おしゃれ->シャレオツ and I thought: \"Wow, that seems very similar to [Pig\nLatin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_Latin)!\" (where e.g. \"pig\" becomes\n\"igpay\"; the main rule is that leading consonants rotate to the back of the\nword and get an extra \"ay\" appended).\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if this is just a coincidence, but, **is there a\nhistorical connection between these two**? Whether yes or no, I'm looking for\nan evidence-based answer.\n\nSide question: does this オツ construct have a \"name\" that would facilitate\nfurther research? [EDIT: **Thanks** to **user4092** : \"it's generally called\n逆さ言葉 and slangily 業界用語, and it seems that the linguistic Jargon is\n[**倒語**](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%80%92%E8%AA%9E)\"]\n\n[Fun side note: when I was trying to find the answer, I found out that there\nis something called [babigo (バビ語)](http://mentalfloss.com/article/50242/pig-\nlatins-11-other-languages)].",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T15:16:12.113",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36155",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T10:30:14.810",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Is there a (historical) connection between this オツ construct and Pig Latin?",
"view_count": 219
} | [
{
"body": "The practice of reversing a word's syllables to create a slang term is a\ncommon one across many languages. Compare Pig Latin and these Japanese terms,\nas above, or the South American argot called\n[Lunfardo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunfardo) -- search the page for the\nword _\"vesre\"_ for a description of how slang terms were derived by reversing\nthe syllables.\n\nIn a nutshell: historical connection?\n\n * If you mean, _did the existence of Pig Latin as a spoken English code lead to the creation of these Japanese terms,_ probably -- almost certanly -- not.\n * If you mean, _is this a process of term derivation found historically,_ then definitely yes.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T19:34:45.557",
"id": "36161",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-24T19:34:45.557",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "36155",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36155 | 36161 | 36161 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 5,
"body": "I am generally familiar with the usage of こそあど words, however I wanted to\nverify which would be best to use in a store when asking you want to purchase\nsomething.\n\nI assume if you are pointing at a menu, you would use \"これください\", but if you are\npointing to something a few meters away (like something behind the counter)\nyou would use \"それください\".\n\nMy main question is whether it would be appropriate to use \"あれください\" in a\nrestaurant? I know that あれ can have a strong connotation and wanted to see if\nit is safe to use, or if I should stick to これ or それ.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-24T17:21:15.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36160",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-27T16:40:15.210",
"last_edit_date": "2016-08-25T07:19:36.917",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"kosoado"
],
"title": "これ・それ・あれ when referring to products in a store",
"view_count": 1258
} | [
{
"body": "これ、それ、あれ are demonstrative pronouns that simply indicate the object in\nassociation with its physical distance. The English counterparts to これ、それ、あれ\nare \"this (one right here)\", \"it (just there)\" and \"that (over there).\"\n\nIn both Japanese and English, you wouldn't say \"あれ下さい / Give me that\" by\npointing roast beef shown on the menubook in your hand with your forefinger.\nYou wouldn't say \"これ見せてください / Show me this\" by pointing at a pair of shoes\ndisplayed on the shelf far behind the counter.\n\nIt's simple and crystal clear. There's no room for giving you an improper\nanswer. Just watch and listen to how three-year-old children say. They\nwouldn't confuse usages of これ、それ、あれ. Nothing is complicated as you think.\nForget about \"こそあど,\" which even most Japanese don't understand. Don't\noverthink and get confused unnecessarily.\n\nIf you step into \"derivative\" uses of これ、それ、あれ, you'll be strayed. For\nexample;\n\nあいつには\"これ\"がいるんでね - He has a love.\n\n彼女はあいつの\"れこ\"(reverse of これ)だ. - She is his love.\n\n家の\"あれ\"が煩いんだ - My wife is fussy and nitpicky.\n\nあれかい？ - Do you mean that (thing, object, subject)?\n\nあれ、それ、何つーたっけか - Well, whatchamacallit.\n\nあれから3か月 － Three months after then.\n\nI can spin out endlessly. But all of these are different beasts from original\nand proper これ、それ、あれ. Forget about it.",
"comment_count": 18,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T02:32:08.707",
"id": "36164",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T00:16:53.840",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T00:16:53.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36160",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -2
},
{
"body": "これ is used for something close to the speaker. \nそれ is used for something close to the listener. \nあれ is used for something far from both the speaker and the listener. \n\nSo if you want to point to something that is far away from you and the\nlistener, you HAVE to use あれ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-10-08T18:27:11.477",
"id": "39801",
"last_activity_date": "2016-10-08T18:27:11.477",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18157",
"parent_id": "36160",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "(Basically copying comment)\n\nIt is considered that it's quite alright to use あれ for something far away from\nboth the speaker and the listener, for example...\n\nIn a restaurant when you're ordering some dish in the photo on the wall far\nfrom you and the waitress, you might say:\n\n> すいません、（あそこに貼ってある） あれ 、ひとつ（ください/お願いします/もらえますか etc.）。\n\nor when you want something that another customer is eating, you might say:\n\n> すいません、あそこのお客さんが食べてる、 あれと同じもの（お願いします/欲しいんですけど）。\n\nor in a store when you can't reach an item on a high shelf, you might say:\n\n> すいません、 あれ 、ちょっと見せてもらえますか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-11T11:19:38.840",
"id": "41626",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-11T11:19:38.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10859",
"parent_id": "36160",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Provided that:\n\n * you are referring to something exists in your range of view, not your memory\n * you are talking to the store's staff, who is not your acquaintance\n\n* * *\n\nYou can use...\n\nこれ when:\n\n * the item is in your hand, directly under the tip of your finger, or nearly no distance; or\n * you point at an item that is clearly nearer to you than to the hearer; or\n * you point at the one nearest to you while there are several options in topic\n\nそれ when:\n\n * you point at an item that can be perceived from both you and the hearer, and the distance from you and them are roughly the same or nearer to them; or\n * the item is in the hearer's hand, or they already point at it; or\n * the item is just mentioned by other than you in the range both you and the hearer could perceive\n\nあれ when:\n\n * you point at an item so far away, or in the direction requires hearer to move their eyes or body to trace what you refer to\n\nIf the item meets multiple conditions, I think either of them will work.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-27T15:31:10.667",
"id": "42039",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-27T15:31:10.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36160",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "To be honest, I've spent multiple years in Japan and never used or heard\nanyone else use あれ. But in theory, yes, you can use あれ in your suggested\ncontext, or at least I know of no reason why not.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-12-27T15:44:42.013",
"id": "42041",
"last_activity_date": "2016-12-27T16:40:15.210",
"last_edit_date": "2016-12-27T16:40:15.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "11449",
"parent_id": "36160",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
]
| 36160 | null | 42039 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am having trouble with this construction. I'm not sure if this is suppose to\nbe something similar to the noun+で(も)いい construction or maybe ので＋もいい. if it is\nthe latter, why the use of も.\n\nthe sentence I am pulling this from is: 俺は彼に一から十まで教えるんでもいいです。\n\n\"I've taught him everything from A to Z, so it's fine\"?\n\nIf someone can translate the sentence and guide me in the right direction it\nwould be greatly appreciated. Thank you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T03:57:09.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36166",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T06:39:25.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14308",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "plain form+ んでもいい",
"view_count": 120
} | [
{
"body": "This looks like the **explanatory の** （like のだ・のです・んだ・んです）. (It is used to\nmark that the information answers an actual or anticipated question, i.e.,\n\"I'm not just saying this just for fun, but to explain something\", and tends\nto have an emphatic effect).\n\nHowever, the following copula is converted to a conjunctive form で so that the\nusual でもいい form for \"it is okay/good/fine if\" can be used.\n\nSo, although I'd need to see more context to be sure, this probably means\nsomething along the lines of:\n\n> It is okay, even if I will (end up) teaching him \"from 1 to 10!\"\n\nThe speaker might be reassuring the listener that even if it is a lot of\neffort, he is willing to teach the learner in detail, or something along those\nlines. The exact nuance is hard to tell without context, since explanatory の\ninteracts heavily with the 'outer' context, but if I had to guess, maybe the\nlistener worries that the learner is a beginner, and expressed worry that the\nteacher doesn't know what he's getting himself into!\n\nNote that a past-tense \"I've (already) taught him everything\" doesn't really\nmake much sense with the でもいい portion, and 教える isn't in past-tense form, so I\nwould **rule out a past-tense translation**. If it was \"I've already taught\nhim everything so it is fine\", I would expect something using ので・から and so\nforth, like 俺は彼にもう一から十まで教えたんだから、平気だ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T06:39:25.237",
"id": "36169",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T06:39:25.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36166",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36166 | null | 36169 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36174",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm struggling to understand `手に実際穿った` part in the following passage. What\nmeaning does it have?\n\n> 拡大鏡｛かくだいきょう｝で見て初めて見えてくる文字。うっすらと浮かび上がり、所々｛ところどころ｝かすれて読めない。その文字の形状｛けいじょう｝からして\n> **手に実際穿った{じっさいほじった}ような感じ**\n> である。文字は極めて｛きわめて｝小さい。俺は掠れて｛かすれて｝解読不可能な部分を頭の中で想像補完{そうぞうほかん}し、ひとつの文章を完成させた。\n\nI tried to make a fast translation of the the sentences with the part I cannot\ngrasp, except the part itself.\n\nLetters first became visible when I looked through magnifying glass. Becoming\nfaintly visible, they are scratched here and there which makes them impossible\nto read in such places. Judging by letters shape it makes the feeling as if\n**手に実際穿った**.\n\nContext: The speaker receives a strange letter, with empty contents. When he\ntried to look for the fingerprints he seen the print of the whole hand on a\nletter paper. Now he tried to look through magnifying glass.\n\n## Update:\n\nI think now, after remembering all of the context, I more or less understood\nit. So to the speaker those small letters felt like the writer of the letter\ndrilled them in his hand and then made the hand print on a paper.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T06:28:09.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36168",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T12:48:40.903",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T11:51:43.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "3183",
"owner_user_id": "3183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Meaning of phrase 手に実際穿った",
"view_count": 129
} | [
{
"body": "[Edit: this answer was based on the original version of the question which had\nfurigana for the うがつ, rather than ほじる, form of 穿った, so is now obsolete]\n\nI'm reading it as:\n\n> \".. it felt like the letters were literally drilling into my hands.\"\n\nThat is, [穿つ](http://jisho.org/search/%E7%A9%BF%20%E3%81%86%E3%81%8C%E3%81%A4)\ncan mean to pierce/drill/bore. So 手に穿つ is \"drill into my hands\". Then we can\nadd an adverbial 実際に or just 実際 to make it \"literally/really drill into my\nhands\".\n\nThe lack of an 'adverbial に' and the adverb being so far \"inwards\" towards the\nverb can make it a little harder to parse.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T07:23:20.510",
"id": "36170",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T10:55:33.650",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T10:55:33.650",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36168",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Judging from the context you provided, I think it's read as 穿【うが】った, and means\n\"actually carved/engraved on the hand\". 穿つ means \"to drill\", but in this\ncontext I feel it's better to translate it as \"to carve/engrave\" (using\nsomething like a chisel/knife, or some similar magical device).\n\nThe speaker thought those letters were actually carved/engraved on someone's\nhand (hmm... [like this](https://www.tattoodo.com/a/2014/07/22-tasteful-palm-\ntattoos/)), and then, stamped on the paper. (i.e., they were not drawn\nseparately on the paper using a pen/brush)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T12:48:40.903",
"id": "36174",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T12:48:40.903",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36168",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36168 | 36174 | 36174 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading a page in a grammar book about the usage of なら. It says that\nS1ならS2 cannot be used if the completion or actualization of S1 brings about\nS2. For example:\n\n> 春子のアパートへ行くなら一郎がいた。\n\nI kind of understand how S2 depends on S1 happening, but it's not very\nintuitive.\n\nWould this sentence be correct? Or incorrect because of the previously\nmentioned rule?\n\n> 今度の土曜日は働かなくてはいけないなら悲しい",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T07:35:11.720",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36171",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T13:52:06.900",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T13:52:06.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Is this a correct usage of なら",
"view_count": 99
} | [
{
"body": "なら in this case means assumption, the word \"if\" in English. After なら is\nusually placed the speaker's will, order, hope, or judgment.\n\nYour second example is correct but the first one is incorrect as you said\nbecause it is odd that a fact is placed after an assumption.\n\nIf it is 春子のアパートへ行ったら、一郎がいた, it makes sense and translates to \"I went to\nHaruko's apartment, then Ichiro was there.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T08:50:01.130",
"id": "36172",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T13:40:34.963",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T13:40:34.963",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "36171",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36171 | null | 36172 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I wanted to say:\n\n> I don't use Skype. I'm so old fashioned that I don't **even** have a mobile\n> (cell) phone.\n\nThis is what I went for:\n\n> Skypeを使いません。携帯 **も** ないほどなかなか懐古的なのです。\n\nPlease correct me if any this is wrong, but the part I was most worried about\nwas **even**. What would be the difference if I had written\n\n> 携帯 **でも** ない ...\n\nor\n\n> 携帯 **だって** ない ...\n\nHow should I decide which is correct or most appropriate?\n\n**Edit** : Yuuichi Tam brings さえ to the mix as well.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T12:29:52.463",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36173",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T16:05:15.533",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T16:05:15.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-も",
"particle-でも"
],
"title": "Different ways to say even",
"view_count": 717
} | [
{
"body": "I suggest 携帯さえ持ってないほど. Another option is 携帯すら持ってないほど.\n\nAnd 携帯でもないほど doesn't make sense but 携帯もないほど and 携帯だってないほど make sense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T14:56:00.563",
"id": "36177",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T15:03:11.723",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T15:03:11.723",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "36173",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36173 | null | 36177 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36176",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is a scene with 木剣 in \"The Last Samurai\" movie where a samurai says \"かたな\n**_X_** \": <https://youtu.be/5MQC5uCPuGE?t=75>\n\nI can't understand what is the **_X_** verb ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T13:52:27.227",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36175",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T14:09:22.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15883",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"transcription"
],
"title": "\"Put down the sword\" in \"The Last Samurai\" movie",
"view_count": 1062
} | [
{
"body": "He says 刀を下ろせ (katana wo orose), which means \"lower your sword(s)\".\n\nSee [下ろす](http://jisho.org/search/%E4%B8%8B%E3%82%8D%E3%81%99).\n\nHere, the 'su' ending changing to 'se' makes the verb imperative. In other\nwords, he is giving an order, eg \"lower (it)!\"\n\nThe 'wo' (pronounced 'o') is an object marker, it comes after the noun that is\nbeing acted on. In this case, 'sword(s)'.\n\n[Thanks to chocolate for pointing out that in this context 'orosu'=lower and\n'otosu'=drop]",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T13:56:12.837",
"id": "36176",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-25T14:09:22.560",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-25T14:09:22.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36175",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 36175 | 36176 | 36176 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36184",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As far as I understand, the Chinese people called America \"美国\" (among many)\nwhich literally translates to 'beautiful country'. I understand it was\nphonetic transcription of 'America'.\n\nBut I wonder why Japanese use \"米国\" which translates to \"rice country\". I know\n'美' and '米' have the same pronunciation in Japanese.\n\nWhen did Japanese start to use '米国'? Was there any time when '美国' was used in\nJapanese? is there any reason to use the Chinese character '米' for the name?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T19:11:55.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36178",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T02:26:27.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12259",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"etymology",
"chinese"
],
"title": "Etymology of 米国 (べいこく)",
"view_count": 474
} | [
{
"body": "As stated in the thread that WeirdlyCheezy linked to, the full kanji\n\"spelling\" for America is 亜米利加. 米 is _officially_ only ベイ or マイ, but, as in\nother places it acts as a phonetic -- 迷 謎 -- it can also be read as メイ. Ok, so\nwhy not 亜国 then? Well, 亜 already referred to Asia in general, so that was out.\nOk, 米国 then. Except, 米 isn't commonly read as メイ, and if read as マイ, is\nstrongly associated with compounds that refer to rice... perhaps that's why\nthe less common reading of ベイ （米寿・米飯・米穀・米価）was chosen?\n\nAs for 美, it's really only read as ビ; the possible ミ reading is nearly only\nused in person / place names.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T02:26:27.753",
"id": "36184",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T02:26:27.753",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36178",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36178 | 36184 | 36184 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36224",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 総理大臣【そうりだいじん】はヨーロッパを訪問【ほうもん】されたくさんの国々の大統領【だいとうりょう】に会われた。\n>\n> \"The prime minister visited Europe and met the presidents of various\n> countries\".\n\nされ is as this to link the phrase right?\n\nWhy use \"を\" as if it were a normal sentence? Wouldn't it be \"で\" or \"に\" as a\nnormal passive sentence?\n\nAre Honorific/Courtesy sentences treated as if they were normal sentences even\nthough they are conjugated using the passive form in the verbs?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-25T21:56:05.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36179",
"last_activity_date": "2019-11-04T01:27:48.883",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "15866",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"syntax",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Is this sentence correct? courtesy/honorific use of the passive",
"view_count": 344
} | [
{
"body": "Yes, the sentence is perfectly correct. The auxiliary (助動詞) 「れる/られる」 has four\nmeanings: 「受け身」(passive), 「尊敬」(honorific), 「可能」(potential), and\n「自発」(spontaneous). Here in your example, it is used as honorific.\n\n> 総理大臣はヨーロッパを訪問 **され** たくさんの国々の大統領に **会われ** た。\n\nis not the passive voice, but the honorific speech (尊敬語) of:\n\n> 総理大臣はヨーロッパを訪問 **し** たくさんの国々の大統領に **会っ** た。\n\nWhich _literally_ means:\n\n> The prime minister **visited** Europe and **met** the presidents of various\n> countries.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T15:15:38.750",
"id": "36224",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T15:15:38.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "36179",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 36179 | 36224 | 36224 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36182",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As far as I understand, _nani_ and _nanda_ are roughly translated to \"what\" in\nEnglish, though they have other connotations and meanings. When do you have to\nuse one and when do you have to use the other?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T00:43:12.907",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36181",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-26T17:27:15.760",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-26T17:27:15.760",
"last_editor_user_id": "9878",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "When to use nani and when to use nanda?",
"view_count": 89567
} | [
{
"body": "\"Nani\" means \"what\"\n\nNani has a tricky pronunciation as for:\n\nIf it precedes any word that start with \"t\" \"d\" or \"n\" sound, nani becomes\n\"nan\".\n\n * kore wa nan desu ka?. What is this?\n\n * kimi wa nani wo shiteimasu ka?. what are you doing?\n\nAnd for \"nan-da\"; it is \"nani\" plus the short form of \"desu\", roughly meaning\n\"what is (text)?\".\n\nNotes for \"da\":\n\n 1. \"da\" is a plain form, so it's for non-polite situations.\n\n 2. \"da\" can never be followed by \"ka\" (interrogative particle), it is normally followed by other particles as \"yo\", \"ne\", or \"to\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T01:37:39.433",
"id": "36182",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T12:48:43.003",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T12:48:43.003",
"last_editor_user_id": "15866",
"owner_user_id": "15866",
"parent_id": "36181",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
]
| 36181 | 36182 | 36182 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36323",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I return with another nuance question!\n\nToday, I learned the kanji 老. Two of the example words were [老]{お}いる and\n[老]{ふ}ける, which my book defined both as, \"to grow old\". I searched around for\nthe differences between them with mixed results. I did find an answer on here\nthat indicated that 老ける implies becoming an old man, but beyond that, what\nexactly are the differences between the two words?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T02:11:49.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36183",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-02T02:30:06.903",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T02:54:22.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "1292",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 9,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Nuances of 老いる and 老ける",
"view_count": 1150
} | [
{
"body": "老ける strongly refers to one's appearance, like, say, after not seeing your\nfriend for a few years you notice that he has visibly aged in appearance\n(perhaps more than he ought to have). On the other hand, 老いる refers more to\nthe decline in physical ability / mental acuity with age.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T02:41:55.613",
"id": "36185",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T02:52:51.987",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T02:52:51.987",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36183",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "老いる is a little bookish way to say \"to age\". The most common phrase now to say\ngrowing old is 年を取る.\n\n老ける isn't really \"grow old\", but describing people become \"older\" than they\nreally are, that is, they've got weary, out of blood, or lost youthfulness,\noften suggesting that they had a hard time. In its participle-like forms 老けている\nor 老けた it means \"look old\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T03:25:38.127",
"id": "36186",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T03:25:38.127",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36183",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "\"老いる\" means \"get old,\" in terms of age as well as physical and mental\nconditions.\n\n老いること isn't a desirable matter. But you cannot evade it. It's a rule of\nnature. Sometimes you can get wiser as you progress in age.\n\nIn that sense, \"老いる,\" sui generis doesn't have so much negative tone as our\nMinister of Finance, Taro Aso thinks - He said recently in his public speech,\n\"I don't understand why people over 90 of age wish to live longer,\" meaning,\n\"they are done.\"\n\n\"老ける\" means you \"look old, or older than your age,\" possibly because of a\nlongtime disease, self-indulgent lifestyle, or hard life. It has a negative\ntone.\n\nWhen you hear \"彼も老けたね - He looks aged” from someone, you'd sympathize with the\nguy he mentioned. But when you're told \"君も老けたね - you look aged” in your face,\nyou'll get shocked, and kick the ass of the speaker in return.\n\nYou cannot stop 老い, but you can fend off ”老け\" by getting proper exercise, and\nstaying young at heart.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T21:28:33.687",
"id": "36323",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-02T02:30:06.903",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-02T02:30:06.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36183",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36183 | 36323 | 36186 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36238",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could you help me to understand the difference between「湿る」「濡れる」?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T07:57:36.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36187",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T02:03:31.107",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15890",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "Difference between「湿る」「濡れる」",
"view_count": 415
} | [
{
"body": "湿る is different from 濡れる. 湿る means \"damp\" or \"moisted.\" 濡れる means \"get wet /\nsoaked (with water).\"\n\nIn this rainy season, air circulating in your room would be 湿っぽい - humid and\nmoisty. You'll get wet with rain - 雨で濡れる when you walk out without carrying an\numbrella.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T01:56:13.730",
"id": "36238",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T02:03:31.107",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T02:03:31.107",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36187",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36187 | 36238 | 36238 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36192",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is the difference between ワクチン ([Wikipedia\narticle](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AF%E3%82%AF%E3%83%81%E3%83%B3))\nand 予防接種 ([Wikipedia\narticle](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%88%E9%98%B2%E6%8E%A5%E7%A8%AE))\nthat the former refers to the medication that is injected into you (a\nvaccine), whereas the latter refers to the act of injecting it into you (a\nvaccination)? Or are there other differences between the two, such as which\ncontext it'd be used in for example everyday versus technical?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T09:06:05.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36188",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T14:34:25.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "91",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Difference between ワクチン and 予防接種",
"view_count": 127
} | [
{
"body": "You're on the right track.\n\nワクチン (transcription of German _Vakzin_ ) means vaccine, the injected microbe\nspecimens.\n\n予防接種 might be better translated as \"preventive inoculation\". 接種 alone\ndescribes the act of microbe seeding, and 予防 part is optional, just for\ndisambiguation from other 接種, such as planting mushrooms on the bed. So\nstrictly speaking, the most exact translation of _vaccination_ should be\nワクチン接種, but ordinary people would imagine vaccine injection simply by 接種.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T14:34:25.910",
"id": "36192",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T14:34:25.910",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36188",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36188 | 36192 | 36192 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36190",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why \"absent from school\" is \"gakkou wo yasumu\" when yasumu is intransitive\nverb?\n\nWhy particle _wo_ is used? Why not _ni_ or _kara_ is used instead?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T12:29:34.443",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36189",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T13:24:42.390",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T13:24:42.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "15891",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why \"absent from school\" is \"gakkou wo yasumu\" when yasumu is intransitive verb?",
"view_count": 2054
} | [
{
"body": "休む{やすむ} is used as both:\n\n * an intransitive verb meaning \"to rest\", \"take a day off\" as in 庭｛にわ｝で休む｛やすむ｝\n\n * a transitive verb meaning \"to skip\", \"take a break from\", \"be absent from\" as in the case of 学校｛がっこう｝を休む｛やすむ｝\n\n休む does not have a direct counterpart (with transitive and intransitive usage)\nin English, however such verbs are quite common. For example you can use the\nverb \"to relax\" as intransitive \"I need to relax after a workout\" and\ntransitive \"please relax your arms\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T12:51:46.643",
"id": "36190",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T13:22:45.580",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T13:22:45.580",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "36189",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
]
| 36189 | 36190 | 36190 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36194",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Both mean \"after 1 year\" right? Are they the same or a bit different in usage?\nWhen do you use \"go\" and \"ato\"? Example : \"ato ichinen shitara Nihon ni iku\"\nand \"ichijikan go ni iku\". Are they interchangable?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T13:35:55.963",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36191",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-25T06:45:21.343",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T14:14:36.223",
"last_editor_user_id": "15891",
"owner_user_id": "15891",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the difference between \"ato ichinen\" and \"ichinen go\"?",
"view_count": 1911
} | [
{
"body": "They might be confusing, but:\n\n * 一年後 いちねんご _ichinen go_ -- one year after(wards); one year later\n * 一年後 いちねんあと _ichinen ato_ -- one year later; one year behind\n * 後一年 あといちねん _ato ichinen_ -- one year remaining; one year to go (until)\n\n(The word あと is written in hiragana more often than not.)\n\nSo, there are significant differences between them, though I don't deny they\ncould be used interchangeably in some situations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T14:56:35.343",
"id": "36194",
"last_activity_date": "2017-01-25T06:45:21.343",
"last_edit_date": "2017-01-25T06:45:21.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36191",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36191 | 36194 | 36194 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36753",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As far as I understand aratanaru and atarashii roughly translate to \"new\" .\nWhen each one have to be used or what are the differences?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T14:41:34.517",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36193",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-18T11:38:28.213",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T15:25:00.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "9878",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "Aratanaru and atarashii usage",
"view_count": 3641
} | [
{
"body": "Atarashii（新しい）, Aratana（新たな）and Aratanaru（新たなる）are all translated to \"new\".\nBut, 新たなる is an exaggerated version of 新たな. In general, you don't use 新たなる in\ndaily conversations.\n\nIt could be appeared in below contexts;\n\n> Last night's his live performance marked a new chapter in the history of Hip\n> Hop. 新たなる1ページを刻んだ。\n>\n> As a company slogan, \"新たなる挑戦\" as in a new challenge",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-18T11:38:28.213",
"id": "36753",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-18T11:38:28.213",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "15967",
"parent_id": "36193",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36193 | 36753 | 36753 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36196",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "wakatta and wakarimashita are used sometimes in anime. I understand one is\ninformal and the other is formal past tense. When do you have to use the\ninformal and when to use the formal tenses of the verbs? Are there a set of\nrules or is it something vague?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T16:22:24.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36195",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-25T23:02:06.570",
"last_edit_date": "2016-09-25T23:02:06.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage",
"conjugations",
"politeness",
"formality"
],
"title": "when to use formal and informal conjugations?",
"view_count": 1354
} | [
{
"body": "wakaru is the verb \"to understand\".\n\nwakatta is its past tense informal form.\n\nwakarimashita is its past tense polite or formal form.\n\nSo they both mean \"Understood\".\n\nAs a Japanese learner or foreigner in their country, you should be using\npolite forms until you make some friends and speak with them \"informally\".\n\nAlso the informal tense is used in some grammar situations, as for:\n\nThe relative clause (adjacent adjective):\n\n> 分かった質問【しつもん】. \"Understood question\"\n>\n> 結婚【けっこん】した男【おとこ】です. \"(he) is a married man\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T17:03:33.973",
"id": "36196",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-24T11:10:17.220",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "15866",
"parent_id": "36195",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Most European languages have a clear distinction between formal and informal,\nwhich usually shows up as two conjugations for \"you.\" The Japanese have\nmultiple distinctions for politeness/formality, the most obvious of which is\nthe です／ます distinction. However, it is not used in exactly the same way as the\nEuropean versions.\n\nThe explanation I was given for this in university is that です／ます conveys\nsocial distance. When you use these forms, you are being polite to the\nlistener, and not claiming them as a close acquaintance. It's a \"safe\" way of\nspeaking, because you aren't implying a right to address this person as an\nintimate or subordinate. Of course, it also conveys a certain degree of\ncoolness; it implies that you are not friends, just acquaintances.\n\nIn the case of 分かった and 分かりました, they are in the same tense (both are\n\"completed\" actions), but at different distances. 分かった is the plain form; it\nimplies that you know the listener well enough that you don't need to be\ncareful or especially polite. 分かりました is the distant form, and has the same\nliteral meaning but is socially more careful, or distant..",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-09-25T16:37:11.010",
"id": "39471",
"last_activity_date": "2016-09-25T16:37:11.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "820",
"parent_id": "36195",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36195 | 36196 | 36196 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36198",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 素晴らしいcalligraphyを素晴らしいものたらしめているのは何かについて学んだ。\n\n`I studied what makes great calligraphy to be great.`\n\nWith regard to **たらしめる** I don't understand that sentence structure. The\npresence of **を** means there must be a transitive verb in play ( **たらしめる**?).\nBut, what is **もの** doing there?\n\nBasically, with regard to sentence structure, what part of speech is \"もの\"?\nWhat does it modify or what is it modified by?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T17:22:18.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36197",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T21:36:47.250",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T21:22:58.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15778",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "たらしめる? ex: \"素晴らしいfontを素晴らしいものたらしめているのは何かについて学んだ。\"",
"view_count": 128
} | [
{
"body": "Did you check a [Japanese dictionary for\nたらしめる](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%97%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B)？\nIt comes from たり→たら+しめる.\n\nたり is one of the classical copular verbs and is analyzed as a sound change of\nと+あり; this is the same と you see in things like [呆然]{ぼうぜん} **と** する.\n\nThis is then conjugated to its 未然形 (which naturally mimics あり's): たら.\n\nTo this a classical helper verb, しむ, that functions as a type of causative\nlike させる (it has other functions too), and survives in set expressions as しめる\nin the modern language, is added.\n\n＝たらしめる≈であらせる・にする・にさせる・にしてあるようにする\n\n> 〇〇こそ、人を人たらしめるものだ \n> It is precisely 〇〇 that makes man man.\n\nAnd もの can be used to give a concrete / obvious feeling to a statement.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T18:04:16.130",
"id": "36198",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-26T21:36:47.250",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T21:36:47.250",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36197",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36197 | 36198 | 36198 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "-I only started working on Japanese last night.-\n\nI have a rather low resolution image taken from a computer game. I have\nmanaged to use handwriting detection tools to transcribe the kanji/kana to\ntext, after using a few websites it was clear that the translations weren't\nvery good, and only served to give a glimpse of the true meaning.\n\nTo that end I am asking for a little proofreading from more experienced\nJapanese speakers; First I shall post the image I used as reference (actually\n4 images I glued together), then discuss my transliterations and translations.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pATUo.png)\n\nI believe the Japanese text is...\n\n> かつて世界には \n> ほんの少しだけ魔法があって\n>\n> ほんの少しだけ魔女が住んでいました\n>\n> やがてそんな魔女の存在さえ \n> 人々は忘れ去り・・・\n>\n> ・・・そして、 現代――\n\nI'm pretty sure this is correct, I know that \"魔\" definitely is, and the rest\n99% sure, but who knows.\n\nNow for the exciting part, the translations.\n\nかつて世界には \nIn the history of the world(1) \nほんの少しだけ魔法があって \nthere has been little magic,(2)\n\nほんの少しだけ魔女が住んでいました \nand there lived only a few witches.(3)\n\nやがてそんな魔女の存在さえ人々は忘れ去り... \nSuch as it was, in the end the existence of witches was completely forgotten\nabout by everybody...(4)\n\n...そして、 現代----- \n...and now, the present day-----(5)\n\n1: The object is \"the World\" as per \"世界には\" and the subject is \"かつて\" (I think\nthat is how it would be described). A literal translation could be \"Speaking\nto (of) the world before.\" I am taking it contextually to be about the worlds\nhistory.\n\n2: ほんの少しだけ魔法があって Lit. \"Only, small quantity, magic, to exist\" Seemed pretty\nobvious here.\n\n3: In this part the object is \"魔女\" (witches) but I took \"が\" (ga) to mean that\nit was a new sentence, but felt it read better in English as an addition to\nthe previous phrase. The verb is \"住んでいました\" (sundeimashita), to live, dwell,\nexist. The remainder \"ほんの少しだけ\" all seems to be in reference to quantity so it\nseemed obvious.\n\n4: The object here is \"人々は\" Which I am reading as everybody, and the subject\nis the existence of witches as per \"魔女の存在さえ\" (Even the existence of a witch),\nwhich I am pluralising here. The verb \"は忘れ\" (to forget completely) is\nsupported by \"やがて\" (In the end, eventually) and \"そんな\" which I am taking full\nadvantage of with it's dictionary entry of \"such (about the actions of the\nlistener, or about ideas expressed or understood by the listener)\" as a\nreference to the premise set up in the first two sentences.\n\n 5. \"...そして、 現代-----\" Entering this into a decent translator or dictionary seems to pop this one right out. \"そして\" (and then/thus/now) and \"現代\" (nowadays/modern era/ modern times/present day).\n\nI used <http://www.romajidesu.com/translator>\n\nTo help me disassemble the sentences, after that I passed pretty much every\nparticiple into wiktionary/wikipedia/dictionaries.\n\nSo I gave my reasoning.\n\nDo you feel this is a good translation?\n\nDoes it captures the contextual meaning and provides a good interface to it\nvia the English language?\n\nAm I working under any false misconceptions obvious from the way I discuss the\nsubject?\n\nApologies for the rubbish formatting, I am not very good at this sort of forum\npost type formatting (or any formatting, I tend to ignore it mostly).",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T19:08:24.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36199",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T09:43:17.250",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Help with identification and translation",
"view_count": 157
} | [
{
"body": "Here's my own shot at a translation:\n\n> In the past, in (this) world, \n> Just a little bit of magic existed and, \n> Just a few witches were living. \n> In the end, even the very existence of such witches.. \n> was completely forgotten. \n> .. and thus.. The present:\n\n* * *\n\nI mostly agree with your point-by-point reasoning, and given my limited\nJapanese ability, I think your translation is **largely accurate** , up to\nsubjective questions of nuance. As per comments, it would probably be good to\nask specific follow-up questions.\n\nFor かつて, \"In the past\" might be a more \"direct\" translation than \"in the\nhistory of the world\", and seems to fit the \"deep-voiced dramatic narrator\nsetting up the story\" context a little bit better. As per kuchitsu's comment,\nyou could go one step further and use \"Once upon a time\" in a looser\ntranslation.\n\nI'm **not sure I like the \"Such as it was\"** though. I read the そんな as\nreferring to the witches, so そんな魔女 \"those witches\", or \"such witches\". Since\nwe also have さえ (which is a rather strong \"even\") and 存在, I would go with a\ntranslation that really emphasizes that \"no trace/memory\" was left in the\ngeneral populace's minds. That's why I went with \"In the end, even the very\nexistence of such witches\".\n\n* * *\n\nIt seems from your translation notes that you are a little bit confused about\n\"subject\", \"object\", \"topic\" and how these are case-marked in Japanese (which,\ngiven that you just started, is quite natural. I'm still often confused\nmyself, after four years of study, two in Japan). Japanese uses a NOUN-PHRASE\n+ CASE-MARKER pattern where case markers are post-positional particles like は\nが に を で, and act somewhat similarly to English prepositions in terms of\nlinking noun-phrases to verbs. Explaining all of these in depth is both beyond\nthe scope of this post (and beyond my own abilities), but here are some points\nspecific to your post:\n\nRegarding your **point 1** : かつて isn't really subject nor object, it is a\ntime-specifying adverb. 世界 is both a \"topic\" (marked by は) and a type of\n\"indirect object\" (marked by に). Topic-marked nouns become part of the \"recent\ncontext\", possibly for an extended period of time (for example, \"the world\" is\ntopical for the entire introduction). Multiple topics can be active at once,\nthey can be layered, contrasted, and sometimes used as implicit subjects,\nwhich is one of the reasons learning は is difficult. Most other case-marking\nparticles, including に, are often only 'in effect' for one verb (or verb\nchain), in this case 住む and the linked ある. In this case, に answers \"where\" the\nmagic/witches were (the world).\n\nRegarding your **point 3** : Note that が does NOT necessitate that it is a new\nsentence, and in fact あって is likely a conjunctive form of ある here, so reading\nthe two phrases as a \"single sentence\" works in Japanese as well. Also, we\nusually refer to が as marking the \"subject\", not \"object\". を is the typical\n\"direct object\" case marker. は marks a \"topic\" (see above), which is sometimes\nalso a subject (in which case the が is omitted), but sometimes not.\n\nRegarding your **point 4** : Here, in 人々は, 人々 is the \"topic\" (は), and it is\nalso the \"subject\" of 忘れ去り (but が is omitted because it is already marked with\nは, so we have to deduce that it is the subject in other ways). The \"object\"\nwould actually be 存在. You are correct to pluralize \"witches\" here - Japanese\nis much less explicit about \"singular vs plural\" than English, so we have to\nuse context. You might note that earlier I said that \"world\" is topical\nthroughout the whole thing. Topics can be layered like this, and 人々 as \"people\nof this world\" is a reasonable way to parse this (in other words, 人々 as a sub-\ntopic). は is very context sensitive.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T09:43:17.250",
"id": "36215",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T09:43:17.250",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36199",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36199 | null | 36215 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36201",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does 名乗る mean when used with the particle を, as in this sentence?\n\n風評は目撃者を名乗る\n\nI can only seem to find the intransitive on internet dictionaries.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T20:40:50.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36200",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T02:08:44.493",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-26T20:53:00.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "15893",
"owner_user_id": "15893",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "名乗る used as a transitive verb",
"view_count": 79
} | [
{
"body": "名乗る can be used more often than not as a transitive / reflexive verb.\n\nFor example:\n\n * 彼は弁護士を名乗る \nHe calls himself a lawyer.\n\n * 菅原と名乗る人 \na person called Sugahara\n\n * 援助者と名乗る詐欺漢 \na swindle who calls himself an aid\n\nHowever, 風評は目撃者を名乗る doesn't make sense unless it is followed by words or a\nphrase that complement the sentence.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T21:41:48.933",
"id": "36201",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T02:08:44.493",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T02:08:44.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36200",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36200 | 36201 | 36201 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why is eggplant in japanese written as 茄子 (nasubi) and not just 茄 (nasu)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T22:54:05.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36202",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T07:23:10.803",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14380",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"kanji"
],
"title": "What's the correct way to write eggplant?",
"view_count": 3229
} | [
{
"body": "## Both are Correct\n\n**茄子** can be pronounced as **\"nasu\" or \"nasubi\"** \n**茄** by itself can also be pronounced **\"nasu\" or \"nasubi\"**\n\nThere is another similar-looking word like this that you probably know, 椅子{イス}\nwhich is \"isu\", meaning \"chair\".\n\n茄・茄子 is read with kun-yomi \n椅子 is read with on-yomi\n\nIn writing, both of these words are Chinese words. In Chinese each character\nis one syllable, and sometimes it can be confusing as to where one word ends\nand another begins when you use a lot of one-syllable words.\n\nSo there are a lot of words in Chinese that add the one-syllable 「子」 at the\nend to make it clearer.\n\n * 肚子 - belly\n * 妻子 - wife\n * 房子 - room (like in a house)\n * 鼻子 - nose\n * 孩子 - child \n * 胖子 - fatty（デブ）\n\nThe native Japanese word for eggplant is なすび or なす, but they liked to write it\nin Chinese characters (ateji) so it is commonly written as 茄子, just like in\nChinese. But, 茄 is also a valid way to write eggplant in Chinese, so you can\nwrite it that way too.\n\nTo avoid confusion about the pronunciation, you may see furigana like 茄{なす},\n茄子{なす} or 茄{なすび}, 茄子{なすび} - all of these are correct.\n\nOften it is just written with kana, like なす or ナス.\n\n椅子 is a little different, even though it sounds similar. 椅子 is on-yomi because\nthe Japanese pronunciation is meant to sound close to the Chinese\npronunciation. And so the \"su\" sound in i-su, is an older reading of the\ncharacter 「子」.\n\nIn the case of 茄子 the \"su\" sound actually has nothing to do with the\n「子」kanji's on-yomi, but it sure seems like it might!\n\nI've read that the original Japanese word from the Heian period was\nnasubi（奈須比）, but the ladies in court liked to change words by adding an お at\nthe beginning and dropping the last syllable, so it would turn into o-nasu.\nThen normal people outside the court wanted to sound like the courtiers, but\nthey weren't all so fancy or ladylike so they would drop the お and a lot of\ncommon people started to say \"nasu\" instead of \"o-nasu\". I would guess that\nthis pronunciation would be reinforced by the use of 茄子 in writing.\n\nAnyway, aparantly that's also where the word for \"fart\" comes from too...\n\n> 鳴{な}らし ⇒ おなら",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T02:15:24.287",
"id": "36206",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T07:23:10.803",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T07:23:10.803",
"last_editor_user_id": "7055",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36202",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 36202 | null | 36206 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 費用の１０％の手数料を引いた金額をお返しいたします\n\nDoes this mean they will return back 90% of the money or only 10%?\n\nThe answer is they will return 90% but could you explain me how to translate\nthis sentence from Japanese to English so it will makes sense to me?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-26T23:02:45.367",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36203",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T08:35:09.377",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T00:09:29.147",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Why does this mean they'll return 90% of the money, not 10%?",
"view_count": 173
} | [
{
"body": "The answer is that they will return 90% of the amount you paid.\n\n* * *\n\nThe key is breaking the sentence into parts correctly. Given:\n\n> 費用の１０％の手数料を引いた金額をお返しいたします\n\nThe main verb in the sentence is お返しいたします. This is a polite humble\nconstruction. いたします = します in humble form (謙譲語) and the construction お返し +\nいたします construction makes it really humble. All of this means 返す if we strip\naway the layers of politeness.\n\nNow we have\n\n> 費用の１０％の手数料を引いた金額を返す\n\nthe object of 返す is ~~~金額 (marked by the を)\n\nSo\n\n> 金額を返す = we will return an amount of money\n\nBut to know what amount of money, we have to look at the verbal construction\nmodifying 金額. In Japanese, a verb can be used to modify a noun so the part in\nfront is a construction that modifies the noun.\n\nthe verb there is 引く which means to withdraw or subtract in this context.\n\n費用の１０％の手数料 = a ten percent usage fee and this is the object that has been\nsubtracted.\n\n* * *\n\nReworded into English,\n\n> \"We/I will refund you the amount you paid minus a 10% usage fee\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T01:56:22.277",
"id": "36205",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T01:56:22.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "36203",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "The clause \"費用 (expense) の１０％の手数料 (10% commission) を引いた (subtract)\" modifies\nthe noun _amount_ (金額). It works like a relative clause in English. It can\nliterally translate to\n\n> A 10% commission of the expense is subtracted from the expense.\n\nThe translation of the full sentence is\n\n> We will return you the amount after 10% commission of the expense is\n> subtracted.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T08:16:40.587",
"id": "36212",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T08:35:09.377",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T08:35:09.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "12259",
"owner_user_id": "12259",
"parent_id": "36203",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 36203 | null | 36205 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36208",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "# 日本語\n\n知り合いに道案内していた時に、\n\n> 次の信号 **で** 、左です\n\nと言ったら、\n\n> 次の信号 **を** 、左です\n\nという言い方のほうがいいと言われました。\n\n「です」は本物の動詞ではありませんし、「を」と繋がっているのは間違いではないのでしょうか。 **省略された動詞がある**\nという分析のほうがいいのですか？そして、どうして「で」はだめなのですか？\n\n# English\n\nWhile giving an acquaintance driving directions, I said:\n\n> 次の信号 **で** 、左です\n\nbut they corrected me, saying that:\n\n> 次の信号 **を** 、左です\n\nis preferable.\n\nです is not a real verb, so thinking that を links to it would be a mistake,\nwouldn't it? It seems like the view that **there is an implicit (abbreviated\nout) verb** is probably a better parsing. Is this correct? Also, why is で\nincorrect in this case?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T03:56:27.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36207",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T07:53:08.340",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-を",
"conjunctions",
"copula"
],
"title": "Why is this で wrong, and を preferable? 「信号を左です」",
"view_count": 879
} | [
{
"body": "# 日本語\n\nもうおっしゃったように\n\n> 「次の信号を左」、「前の角を右」\n\n云々は、肝要なところが抜けているだけだと存じます。 \n本来なら完全な文書では、\n\n> 次の信号を左。。。 **に曲がります** \n> 前の角を右。。。 **に曲がって** ください\n\nまで言いますが、省略してしまうのが一般的ですね。\n\n下記のように：\n\n * 「図書館の前を歩く」\n * 「空を飛ぶ」\n\n「曲がる」・「飛ぶ」・「歩く」・「走る」のような「移動性」のある動詞の対象となる語をよく「を」でマークします。\n\nそれで、 **「で」は何故だめなのかについては** 、勘で言っているだけですが、「で」を **移動動詞**\nと使うと、「で」の「手段」を指定する機能を先に考えてしまうからではないでしょうか？\n\n例えば、\n\n> 道 **を** 歩く \n> 道 **で** 歩く\n\n道では歩けるが、運河では歩けませんよね。まぁ、両方いけるんじゃない？\n\n然し！\n\n * 飛行機で空を飛ぶ\n\n手段も動作の領域も指定されていますね。これが移動動詞の特徴だと思います。移動動詞なら、場所を「を」で、手段を「で」で指定します。\n\nそれで、\n\n> 信号 **で** 曲がる\n\nとはどういう意味になるかを考えますと、ちょっと変だと分かりますね。\n\n## 「です」の役割\n\n「です」は、その「どこそこに曲がる」というところを取って代わっている気がします。運転手が「どちらへ曲がればいいでしょうか」を考えているのを前提にすると、部分的に答えたら自然と「次の信号を」・「左です」になるでしょうね。あたかも運転手が考えていることをもう既に空気で読んだかのようにですね。\n\n空気を読めずに完全に言うと\n\n> 「次に信号を曲がってください。左です。」\n\nになるかと思います。\n\n## 「次の信号で左です」の場合\n\n接続的に「で」を使うのもあり得る発言だとおもいますが、「次の信号であって、左です」という意味になるでしょうかね。トピックがその信号で、「左側です」まで言ったらあり得るかもしれませんけどね。\n\n## 「次の信号は左です」の場合\n\n「は」の使ったほうがよくあると思います。でも、単品でちょっと紛らわしく感じます。 「次の信号は左にあります」というふうに捉える可能性が高いから。\n\n# English\n\nAs you've already said, I also think that\n\n> 「次の信号を左」、「前の角を右」\n\nis just dropping the verb.\n\nIn a full sentence it would probably look like this:\n\n> 次の信号を左。。。 **に曲がります** \n> 前の角を右。。。 **に曲がって** ください\n\nBut most people wouldn't bother to say all of that, probably because the\ncontext of being in a car makes it painfully obvious :)\n\nSo in the following examples...\n\n * 「図書館の前を歩く」\n * 「空を飛ぶ」\n\n「曲がる」・「飛ぶ」・「歩く」・「走る」are part of a class of verbs that describe movement\n_through a space_ and are often referred to as「移動動詞」, or Movement Verbs.\n\nThese verbs are usually used with 「を」.\n\n**So, why would using 「で」be wrong** in the case that you mentioned in the OP? \nJust speaking from how I perceive it, when you use 「で」with an 移動動詞, you're\nspecifying the means you use to accomplish the action of movement.\n\nFor instance,\n\n> 道 **を** 歩く \n> 道 **で** 歩く\n\nBoth of these _could_ be OK...\n\n> 「道では歩けるが、運河では歩けませんよね。」\n```\n\n \"You know you can walk on a road, but not on a canal.\"\n \n```\n\nHowever! In the case of the following...\n\n> 飛行機で空を飛ぶ\n```\n\n fly in the sky with an airplane\n \n```\n\nThe location that the action of movement takes place（sky・空） _and_ the means of\naccomplishing that action（airplane・飛行機）are both specified. This is a prominent\nfeature of 移動動詞. They use **を to specify location** and **で to specify means\nof movement**.\n\nSoooo... If you think about what the following sentence would mean,\n\n> 信号 **で** 曲がる\n\nit's kind of strange, right?\n\n## The role of 「です」\n\nIn this case です is replacing the usage of 曲がる. It's as if the driver has\nalready said \"Where would you like me to turn?\" out-loud. You would \"answer\"\nin sentence fragments about what he's just \"asked\", leaving out what he's\nalready made clear, which is that \"turning\" is involved.\n\nIf you were to make the full request without assuming anything, you might\nsay...\n\n> 「次に信号を曲がってください。左です。」\n```\n\n \"Please turn at the next signal. Left.\"\n \n```\n\n## What about 「次の信号で左です」?\n\nIt is possible to use で in this way, but it may be a little confusing because\nit could easily be taken as meaning...\n\n> 「次の信号であって、左です。」\n```\n\n It's the next signal, left.\n \n```\n\nThis seems to imply that you were already talking about a particular signal\nwith the driver and you want to say that that signal is on the left side.\n\n## What about 「次の信号は左です」?\n\nI think people use は like this often. However, as an utterance just by itself\nit could be a little confusing because it could easily be taken to mean\nsomething like...\n\n> 「次の信号は左にあります。」\n```\n\n The next signal is on the left.\n \n```",
"comment_count": 14,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T05:48:14.400",
"id": "36208",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T07:53:08.340",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36207",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36207 | 36208 | 36208 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 4,
"body": "I was trying to tell a friend that in English statements such as:\n\n> I like **dogs**.\n>\n> I hate **people**.\n>\n> I love **hamburgers**.\n\nGeneral statements in English use the plural noun form.\n\n~~英語では一般的な発言は名詞の複数形を使います。~~\n\n英語では普遍的な命題は名詞の複数形を使っています。\n\nSelf edit: I apologize, I didn't originally ask a clear question.\n\nI have already explained the grammar to my friend using examples. My question\nis what would a direct translation of the sentence \"General statements in\nEnglish use the plural noun form.\" be?",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T08:13:02.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36211",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-21T03:15:24.790",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1806",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "How to say \"General Statement\"",
"view_count": 646
} | [
{
"body": "## You could explain it this way...\n\n * I like dogs = 犬が好き\n * I like Dog = ドッグ **という人** が好き・「ドッグ」 **というもの** が好き \n（例えば、「ドッグ」というブランドのビール） \n \n\n * I love hamburgers = ハンバーグが大好き\n * I love Hamburger = ハンバーガー **という人** が大好き・ハンバーガー **というもの** が大好き \n（例えば、「ハンバーガー」という名前の付いているパチンコ屋）\n\n \n\n## 以下はハッタリ話\n\nYou may also like to mention that what is most commonly referred to as the\n\"plural\" form（複数形）of nouns in English is actually the \"non-singular\"\nform（非単数形）.\n\nThis is why you have to say \"I don't have any cats\" or \"I have zero cats\"\ninstead of, \"I don't have any cat\" and \"I have zero cat\".\n\nThe form \"cat\" is _only_ used when talking about exactly one cat, in _every\nother_ case it **must** be \"cats\". I really don't know why they teach the\nsingular form first. I think this causes a great deal of confusion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T01:33:07.553",
"id": "36236",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T03:44:30.643",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Er, I guess my comments wind up being an answer\n\nYou wanted to say \"General statements in English use the plural noun form.\"\n\nYou came up with:\n\n> 英語では一般的な発言は名詞の複数形を使います。\n\nI would suggest:\n\n> 英語では普遍的な命題は名詞の複数形を使っています。\n\nI cannot guarantee this is correct, but here's why I'd suggest this:\n\n 1. \"statement\" is a word with many meanings. 発言 means an \"utterance\" and in that sense reflects a statement. In this context, statement is a technical word for philosophy that refers to how we express a proposition. E.g., \"dogs are cute.\" As such, the meaning that you're closest to sounds like a 命題 which is the Japanese word for this sort of thing in philosophy.\n\n 2. \"general\". General is a word with definitions that can't all be used interchangeable. One definition is `affecting or concerning all or most people or things` (from google). Another is \"not limited\"; another is \"inexact.\" I think what you're meaning in your sentence based on context is that we make universal claims in this way. So I'd suggest 普遍 over 一般, because I take 一般 to mean general in the sense of a \"normal\" or \"common.\"\n\n 3. I switched it to the ている for rather plain verb form because if memory serves me correctly that's going to better capture a linguistic practice whereas a 使う fits better with single instances of use.\n\nAnyway, we'll see if these suggestions are upvoted or downvoted.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T04:35:02.440",
"id": "36244",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T04:35:02.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4091",
"parent_id": "36211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I see that nobody has mentioned [ 一般的な法則 ].\n\n> <http://www003.upp.so-net.ne.jp/NAMBOKU/greek/finite_verb_detail2.html>\n>\n> (in classical Greek) . . . . .\n> また、＜一般的な法則＞を表現するときにも現在時制を使いますが、これも習慣と同様に過去から未来まで無数の認識をまとめて、一度に表現するため、時間的な幅があるように見えるだけなのです\n\n一般的な記述, 一般的な主張, 一般的な表現, ...\n\nbtw, a general statement in English is often expressed using the singular noun\n(or nouns) :\n\n * \"Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose.\"\n\n * \"A kingfisher is a kind of bird.\"\n\n * \"A graphic engine generally consists of ... \"\n\n * \"Some parents believe a boy must learn to stand up and fight like a man.\"\n\n \n\n * \"Horses are useful animals.\"\n * \"The horse is a useful animal.\"\n * \"A horse is a useful animal.\"\n\n( The last 4 examples come from :\n<http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/singular-noun-plural-noun-as-in-\ngeneral-statement.2699000/> )",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-11T19:11:34.133",
"id": "38400",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-11T20:23:05.680",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "16344",
"parent_id": "36211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "\"General\", \"generic\" as grammatical term is 総称:\n\n> 英語では総称文には複数形を使います。\n\nBut it doesn't seem a well-known term except for grammarians (unlike 過去形, 代名詞\netc).\n\nYou can instead say:\n\n> 英語ではあるもの一般を言う時には複数形を使います。 \n> 英語では何とかというもの全体を指して言う時には複数形を使います。\n\n一般的な発言 and 普遍的な命題 are likely to be confused with \"general truths\", such as\n\"the Earth is round\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-08-21T03:15:24.790",
"id": "38609",
"last_activity_date": "2016-08-21T03:15:24.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "36211",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36211 | null | 38609 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Is this correct? 家族に中で背が高い誰ですか。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T09:02:59.280",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36214",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T03:46:43.697",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T09:09:11.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "15907",
"owner_user_id": "15907",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "How do I say \"Who is the tallest in your family?\"",
"view_count": 707
} | [
{
"body": "You would use の instead of に here (linking two nouns), so 家族の中.\n\nYou also want to insert a superlative (phrase that means \"most\"/\"best\"/#1).\nOne example is 一番（目）. There are many others, like もっとも, だれより（も） (less common),\netc.\n\nSo something like:\n\n> 家族の中で一番背が高い人は誰ですか。\n\nFor some basic examples of superlatives, see [this\npage](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese/Grammar/Comparisons#Superlative).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T09:53:07.207",
"id": "36216",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T10:00:25.353",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T10:00:25.353",
"last_editor_user_id": "14598",
"owner_user_id": "14598",
"parent_id": "36214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "1. Generally speaking **に** is used to mark a place in space or time, you'll want to use **の** in **家族の中で**.\n 2. i-adjectives(形容詞) are followed immediately by a noun, therefore **高い誰ですか** which is followed by a \"question word\" is not grammatically correct.\n\nIf you want to be polite use this:\n\n> 御家族で最も背の高い方はどなたでしょうか？\n\nif not, the answer above is best.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T03:34:49.060",
"id": "36301",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T03:46:43.697",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-30T03:46:43.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "15939",
"owner_user_id": "15939",
"parent_id": "36214",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
]
| 36214 | null | 36216 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36219",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Consider the following sentence.\n\n> 人類の宇宙にかける夢はとどまるところを知らない。\n\n * 人類 mankind\n\n * 宇宙 universe\n\n * かける ?\n\n * 夢 dream\n\n * とどまるところを知らない when it stops is unknown (lit. it keeps on happening)\n\nAs there are many meaning for かける, my translation below has not been completed\nyet.\n\n> The dream of humankind かける in the universe never stops.\n\n# Question\n\nWhat does かける mean in this context?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T11:37:16.673",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36217",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T12:12:36.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does かける mean in 人類の宇宙にかける夢はとどまるところを知らない?",
"view_count": 225
} | [
{
"body": "'かける' in the sentence is '翔る' which means 'to fly high and fast'. The Kanji\n'翔' means to fly in '飛翔 ひしょう'.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T11:45:59.950",
"id": "36218",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T11:45:59.950",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12259",
"parent_id": "36217",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "It's 懸ける, that is, the dream of mankind to lean on/speculate in/venture in the\nspace.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T12:12:36.243",
"id": "36219",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T12:12:36.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "36217",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36217 | 36219 | 36218 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36223",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I am reading Kanon, I will first give the context:\n\n> 大体{だいたい｝、いつからこの家｛いえ｝の朝食｛ちょうしょく｝は和風｛わふう｝になったんだ… \n> [Generally,] Since when did we start eating Japanese food for breakfast...\n\nThe main character then narrates:\n\n> 昨日｛きのう｝までは間違いなく｛まちがいなく｝、トーストにゆで卵｛たまご｝だったはずだ \n> Until yesterday, I have unmistakable expectation that it was toast and\n> boiled eggs\n\nIf the expectation was until yesterday, should it not be 「だったはずだった」? He surely\nno longer has the expectation since he has just had his expectation\ncontradicted. My belief is either I am confused at what the copulae are\nreferring to, or 「までは」 forces the rest of sentence into the past (so the plain\ncopula is present tense... in the past... (time travel tense trouble))",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T12:26:43.080",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36220",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T17:01:05.150",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T09:26:36.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "13619",
"owner_user_id": "14607",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"copula"
],
"title": "Confusing use of plain copula （だ should be だった?）",
"view_count": 292
} | [
{
"body": "Does it make more sense to you if I reorganize your translated sentence like\nthis?\n\n> I have unmistakable expectation that **it was toast and eggs until\n> yesterday**.\n\nThe way I see it, getting something else today doesn't contradict his strong\nbelief that _before_ today it was always toast and eggs. He still has that\nbelief (not sure if \"expectation\" is an appropriate word here, I think that's\ntaking things too literally).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T14:24:42.473",
"id": "36223",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T14:24:42.473",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12271",
"parent_id": "36220",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "## 筈{はず}だ is Expressing his _Current_ Expectation\n\nIf you remove はずだ this sentence only states a fact, as if the speaker is\nexplaining _**the situation**_ :\n\n> 昨日までは間違いなく、トーストにゆで卵 **だった** 。\n```\n\n Until yesterday it was always toast and boiled eggs. \n \n```\n\nBy adding 筈{はず}だ it sounds as if the speaking is explaining _**his\nexpectation**_ :\n\n> 昨日までは間違いなく、トーストにゆで卵だった **はずだ** 。\n>\n> Until yesterday it was always _**supposed to be**_ toast and boiled eggs.\n> (so what happened?)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T01:05:33.443",
"id": "36235",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T03:36:51.607",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36220",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "「昨日までは **間違いなく** トーストにゆで卵 **だったはず** だ」 is like 「（私の記憶では）昨日までは **絶対に** トーストにゆで卵\n**だった** 」, \"I'm sure it was toast and boiled eggs / It must have been toast\nand boiled eggs until yesterday (as far as I can remember)\".\n\nCompare:\n\n> 「XX **だったはず** だ」 -- \"it **must have been** XX\" \"I **am** sure it **was** XX\" \n> vs \n> 「XXの **はずだった** 」 -- \"it should have been XX\" \"it was supposed to be XX\"\n\n* * *\n\nBy the way, the だいたい means そもそも, \"to begin with\" or \"in the first place\", not\n\"generally\". See [definition #2⃣-2 of 「だいたい」 in\nデジタル大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/133823/meaning/m0u/):\n「もとはと言えば。そもそも。『だいたい言い出したのは君だよ』」\n\n(And, as you might have already noticed, the いつから～～なったんだ here is a rhetorical\nquestion (修辞疑問文) showing the speaker's dissatisfaction or irritation, not a\ngenuine question expecting an answer.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T12:52:16.273",
"id": "36261",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T17:01:05.150",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T17:01:05.150",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "36220",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36220 | 36223 | 36261 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36222",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have seen many websites use 講座 (to teach something) but generally aren't all\n3 terms the same?\n\nCan someone give example of each usage?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T13:20:11.130",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36221",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T14:27:25.847",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T14:27:25.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "15909",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "when to use 講座/ チュートリアル / 学習用",
"view_count": 43
} | [
{
"body": "Each has very different original meaning, but in a specific context they can\nbe used to describe the same thing\n\n * 講座｛こうざ｝ a lecture, a course\n\noriginally a lecture / course you attend at school/seminar (with lecturer),\nhowever also referring to the contents (curriculum) when used for a book /\nstudy materials\n\n * チュートリアル a tutorial\n\nstraight from English \"tutorial\" with the same meaningーmaterial for self-study\n\n * 学習用 for study (like in \"material for studying\")\n\na noun 学習｛がくしゅう｝ meaning \"study, learning\" combined with 用｛よう｝ the purpose /\nuse of the preceding noun\n\nIn case of learning materials for self-study indeed you could use the above\nterms interchangeably, like \"A course in Java\", \"A Java tutorial\", \"Java for\nself-learners\", but you would never call a lecture at the university \"a\ntutorial\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T13:31:28.877",
"id": "36222",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T13:48:25.223",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11104",
"parent_id": "36221",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36221 | 36222 | 36222 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36247",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, [Jisho marks 医者 (doctor) as\nsensitive](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%8C%BB%E8%80%85), as does the flashcard\nset I've been using. I don't understand what this annotation means; \"doctor\"\ndoesn't seem like a particularly sensitive term to me, but maybe that's just a\ncultural difference.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T17:06:27.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36225",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:31:21.357",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T18:39:46.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "15875",
"owner_user_id": "15875",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"politeness",
"dictionary"
],
"title": "What does \"sensitive\" or \"sens\" mean?",
"view_count": 876
} | [
{
"body": "The formal and official term for a (medical) doctor is always 医師【いし】, and it's\nthe word that should be used in news media and such.\n\nIf you ask native Japanese speakers \"Is 医者 is less respectful than 医師?\", I\nwould expect mixed reactions. Many people would say say it's a pure colloquial\nvariant of 医師. You can safely say \"自分の息子を医者にさせたい\", \"この町にはもっと医者がいて欲しい\" and so\non.\n\nBut I agree that 医者 is more commonly used in negative sentences (eg\n\"医者になんかなるな!\", \"あの医者に誤診された\"), while 医師 sounds clearly nicer in ads (eg\n\"このサイトでは本物の医師が回答します!\"). This could be partly explained by the fact that 医師 is\nformal and 医者 is mundane, but I feel there is more than that. So...it's\n\"sensitive\", not derogatory.\n\nお医者さん is a casual, friendly yet respectful way of referring to doctors. People\nusually don't say \"息子をお医者さんにさせたい\", but saying \"この町にはもっとお医者さんがいて欲しい\" is okay.\n\nAddressing to someone directly using 医師/医者 is always rude, and it's no\ndifferent from calling your teacher 教師 instead of 先生. For addressing doctors,\nyou can always get away with using 先生 (or ～先生).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T05:31:21.357",
"id": "36247",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:31:21.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36225",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36225 | 36247 | 36247 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "'Overlook' in the sense of forgiving, or letting something slide. All the\nwords I can find that seem to be very close in meaning--\n大目に見る、不問に付す、聞き捨てにする、罷り通る--don't seem to be used in conjunction with にくい (or\nづらい), which is something I really want to use to get across that it's hard but\nnot impossible. The closest thing I can think of is 許しにくい, but it lacks the\nindirectness and slight scorn that comes with the other verbs.\n\nContext: \"His actions are getting increasingly hard to overlook.\"",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T18:49:26.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36228",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-01T05:05:55.893",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T18:58:29.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "9132",
"owner_user_id": "9132",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "How do you say \"hard to overlook\"?",
"view_count": 300
} | [
{
"body": "I agree that \"にくい\" and \"づらい\" are somehow somewhat incompatible with the\nphrases you suggested. I think the suffix \"-難い(がたい)\" fares a lot better with\nthem (大目に見難い, 不問に付し難い, 聞き捨てにし難い, 罷り通し難い).\n\nAlso there's an idiom that captures the whole \"hard to overlook\" sense, which\nis: **\"目に余る\"**. Using this expression, we may say something like:\n\n> 「最近の彼の行動は日増しに目に余るようになってきている。」 Or more tersely, 「彼の最近の行動は目に余る。」",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T21:16:08.820",
"id": "36229",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T08:05:33.840",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-30T08:05:33.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "11575",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "36228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "You could nominalize a word meaning \"overlook\" and then say that that is\n\"getting more and more difficult\" to do that.\n\nMaybe something like this:\n\n> 彼の行動を **大目に見るのは** 段々難しくなってきています\n\n * 大目に見る may have the connotation that you are have some authority over 彼.\n\n> 彼の行動を **黙って認めることは** 段々難しくなってきています\n\n * 黙って認める could imply that you have been purposefully not speaking out until now but it has been bothering you for some time.\n\n> 彼の行動を **無視するのが** 段々難しくなってきています\n\n * 無視する may imply that you have been trying to ignore his behavior for a while.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T05:38:49.277",
"id": "36248",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:38:49.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "If you wish to use the word that connotes the meaning of 難い for you to be\ndifficult to look over, you can say：\n\n「許し難【がた】い」、「度し難【がた】い」、「看過【かんか】できない」、\n「由々【ゆゆ】しく（由々しいことと）考える」、「[容赦]{ようしゃ}しない」、「（決して）容認【ようにん】できない」 and 「笑い事では済まされない ―\nIt's not a laughing matter」.\n\nWhen you say 許し難い, 許し難【がた】い would sound better than 許し難 【にく】い to carry the\ntone of seriousness and harshness.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T07:54:04.507",
"id": "36252",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-01T05:05:55.893",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-01T05:05:55.893",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36228",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36228 | null | 36229 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36246",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I have a question about the meaning of these two \"words\" [あまりこない] and [全くこない].\n\nThe complete sentence was\n\n> この美術館[あまりこない]ではなくて[全くこない].\n\nThe brackets were also in the original text.\n\nThis is from an internal monologue of a women during her job. She also\ncomplained that she had not much to do.\n\nFor the first part あまりこない, it consists of two sub parts あまり and こない. \nAs I understand, あまり means \"not much / not very\" since こない is a negative verb.\n\nFor the second part 全くこない, it consists of two sub parts 全くand こない. \n全く means some thing like \"not at all\" since こない is also negative.\n\nWhile I have a basic understanding of these words, I struggle to comprehend\ntheir meaning in the sentence. Why was the negative form of くる used twice, and\nI also do not understand why they were placed in brackets.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T22:08:47.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36230",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T15:34:51.293",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T10:24:20.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "1527",
"owner_user_id": "15913",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Meaning of [あまりこない] and [全くこない] in the following context",
"view_count": 177
} | [
{
"body": "The use of brackets here is nearly identical to the use of quotation marks in\nthis English sentence I just found on the internet:\n\n> He was one of the \"it'll never happen to me\" kind of guys.\n\nBasically these are imaginary quotes of what someone could have said about\nthat art gallery. In this case she is most likely expressing her own opinion\non the gallery this way.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T22:43:58.033",
"id": "36232",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-27T22:43:58.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12271",
"parent_id": "36230",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I think there is a く missing and it should be ではな **く** て, otherwise I would\nnot understand.\n\nIf that's the case, given the context I think that the woman is just saying\n\"It is not that (people/visitors) seldom come, (they) don't come at all!\". I\nthink you analyzed the sentence quite well after all. Here the speaker just\nwants to express a contrast between \"not coming often\" (あまりこない) and \"not\ncoming at all\" (全くこない).\n\nAnother thing. You use square brackets but I think you mean these brackets\ninstead 「」. These ones are usually quotation marks, so it might be that\nsomeone in a previous conversation mentioned that \"(people/visitor) seldom\ncome\" 「あまりこない」. Therefore, in her sentence the woman somehow wants to\nemphasize that it should have been \"do not come at all\" 「全くこない」 instead (maybe\nin a sort of sarcastic way).\n\n全く+ない expresses a very strong negation (which answers your question about why\n来ない is in negative form). You can see some explanation\n[here](http://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-\njlpt-n2-grammar-%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8F%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84-mattakunai/).\n\nJust for reference, 全く can also express a strong agreement (for example if\nsaying something like \"We have exactly the same opinion (about something)\" you\ncould say 全く同じ in this case, to express a strong emphasis).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T05:09:53.717",
"id": "36246",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:15:07.340",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T05:15:07.340",
"last_editor_user_id": "14205",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36230",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The braces are being used to indicate a quote, in this case they are not\ngenuinely quotes but something which would be said in response to someone.\n\n * あまりこない = Rarely come \n * 全くこない = Completely not come\n\nthe use of なくて ties the first part of the sentence to the second. Meaning that\nmeaning of the sentence is something like \"When it comes to this art gallery,\nit's not that people rarely come, they never come at all!\"\n\nIn Japanese it is quite common to leave the subject(that which performs the\nverb) out of the sentence, in this sentence the subjects who are not coming to\nthe art gallery are the 客(kyaku, visitor; customer) this is simply to be\ninferred by the reader.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T15:34:51.293",
"id": "36285",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T15:34:51.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15933",
"parent_id": "36230",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 36230 | 36246 | 36246 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> A: その封筒を開けると、便箋一枚の手紙と一万円札２枚が出てきた。\n\nMy translation:\n\n> A: If that envelop is opened, one sheet of letter paper and 2 sheets of 10\n> thousand yen bills 出てきた.\n\nIn my understanding, ～てきた represents\n\n * action done in the past and it continues up to the present, \"~started to, ~has begun to, etc\". For example,\n\n * 雨が降ってきた。It started to rain.\n\n * 人口が増えてきた。The population has begun to grow.\n\n * after doing the ～て action, the speaker return to the place where she/he says the sentence.\n\n * 親を連れてきた。I brought my parents here.\n\n * 弁当を買ってきた。 I bought a meal and came here with that meal.\n\nBut in the sentence A, I think the usage of ～出てきた does not make sense so ～出た\nshould be used instead.\n\n# Question\n\nWhat is the meaning of ～てきた in the sentence A?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-27T22:36:29.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36231",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:04:07.227",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-27T22:58:00.480",
"last_editor_user_id": "11192",
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of ～てきた in the following sentence?",
"view_count": 3979
} | [
{
"body": "I think that in this case it means came out of the envelope.\n\n出る ＋ 来る\n\n出て来る",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T00:18:52.767",
"id": "36233",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T00:18:52.767",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1806",
"parent_id": "36231",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "As already mentioned by itrasci、出てきた would mean \"came out\", from an already\nunderstood location and towards the subject.\n\n> その封筒を開けると、便箋一枚の手紙と一万円札２枚が出てきた。\n\n * \"When (he) opened the envelope, there was a letter written on a single sheet of stationary and two ten-thousand yen bills.\"\n\nIf you use 出た instead... I think it might sound like the things just kind of\n\"appeared\", and not necessarily from the envelope.\n\n> その封筒を開けると、便箋一枚の手紙と一万円札２枚が出た。\n\n * \"When (he) opened the envelope, a letter written on a single sheet of stationary and two ten-thousand yen bills appeared.\"\n\nBegging the question, where from?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T00:37:13.713",
"id": "36234",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:04:07.227",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T05:04:07.227",
"last_editor_user_id": "7055",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36231",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36231 | null | 36234 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36239",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What does the grammar expression ~たい次第{しだい} mean\n\nFor example:\n\n次回の集まりをお誘いいただきたい次第です。",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T01:37:49.830",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36237",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T02:35:29.787",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T02:01:29.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "1805",
"owner_user_id": "1805",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "~たい次第 expression meaning",
"view_count": 209
} | [
{
"body": "I think 次第 is being used as a formal and polite way to mention the\ncircumstances or reason for the desire expressed by\nたい.（頂きたい気持ちが湧いた、その事情のことが「次第」）\n\n> お誘いいただきたい **次第です** 。\n>\n> \" **So** I eagerly await your invitation.\"\n\nYou could also say,\n\n> お誘いいただきたい **のです** 。 \n> お誘いいただきたい **わけです** 。\n\nwith basically the same meaning, just a little less polite and formal.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T02:29:38.647",
"id": "36239",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T02:35:29.787",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36237",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36237 | 36239 | 36239 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36243",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5whxY.jpg)\n\nIt foiled 3 different online handwriting input websites. I tried looking it up\nvia radicals to no avail. The rest of the characters in this font were quite\neasy to get.\n\nAs per request, the context.\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PFSUS.jpg)\n\nI had decided on \"ざ\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T04:15:54.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36240",
"last_activity_date": "2016-11-27T17:15:16.313",
"last_edit_date": "2016-11-27T17:15:16.313",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"orthography",
"kana"
],
"title": "What is this odd character?",
"view_count": 352
} | [
{
"body": "It would be must easier if you gave more context but off of just this I would\njust guess ぞ (zo).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T04:17:13.370",
"id": "36241",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T04:17:13.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1806",
"parent_id": "36240",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Thanks for adding the context. It is indeed ぞ. The whole thing is:\n\nまほはまにゅうのまぞしょうじょ.\n\nEDIT: Looking for more context I tried to google it and it seems the title of\nsome kind of erotic anime or manga? That was kinda embarrassing since I'm at\nwork and a quite inappropriate picture came out. Lol :)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T04:24:26.673",
"id": "36243",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T04:24:26.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36240",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36240 | 36243 | 36241 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36245",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> Nihongo ha kyuu kagetsu ni benkyou shiteiru \n> = I've been studying japanese for 9 months.\n\nIf it's wrong, why? Should it be \"kyuu kagetsu go ni?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T04:23:34.060",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36242",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T05:04:19.403",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T05:04:19.403",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "15891",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "How to say \"I have been ～ for X months\"",
"view_count": 17275
} | [
{
"body": "I would rather say: 私は九ヶ月間、日本語を勉強しています。(Watashi ha kyuukagetsu kan nihongo wo\nbenkyoushiteimasu).\n\nIn this case of a continued action in time you do not need at all the particle\nに after the word indicating how much time you have been doing something. Add\ninstead 間 (kan) that indicates a span/length of time. Also, を (wo) should mark\nthe object/what is that you are studying (in this case Japanese).\n\nActually, there is a related question\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/19148/how-do-you-say-i-\nhave-been).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T04:36:27.627",
"id": "36245",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T04:36:27.627",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36242",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36242 | 36245 | 36245 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36250",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've been translating [NHK\nEasyNews](http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10010571601000/k10010571601000.html)\nand met this phrase\n\n> ２５日は、 **申し込みが始まる１時間前の午前８時半には** 、約３０人が並んでいました\n\nAlthough, I think I do understand the meaning of it\n\n> In one hour before 8:30 am, when the reservations started, ...\n\nI don't get the here at all. Should it not be reversed? As in\n\n> 何々が始まる午前8時半の一時間には\n\nI've always though of it as genitive case in my mother tongue, so I feel\npretty confused.\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T06:16:14.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36249",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T07:30:56.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5278",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"usage",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "「の」usage in「１時間前の午前８時半」",
"view_count": 321
} | [
{
"body": "> Although, I think I do understand the meaning of it\n>\n\n>> In one hour before 8:30 am, when the reservations started\n\nNo, this sentence means \"By 8:30 AM, which is an hour before the registration\nstarted, ...\".\n\nThe actual registration starts at 9:30, which is written at the end of the\narticle.\n\nHere, の is used as the apposition marker.\n\n> * 友達の田中さん my friend Tanaka \n> (compare: 田中さんの友達 a friend of Tanaka)\n> * 日本の首都の東京 Tokyo, the capital of Japan \n> (The first の is like \"of\", the second の is for apposition)\n> * 開始時間の21時に At the starting time, (which is) 21:00\n>\n\nAs you said, 午前8時半の1時間前 would mean \"An hour before 8:30 AM\" (ie. 7:30 AM).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T06:36:47.237",
"id": "36250",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T07:30:56.550",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T07:30:56.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36249",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36249 | 36250 | 36250 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36254",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In Japanese, you can often omit 私, あなた, and friends in sentences, then rely on\ncontext to get the correct subject.\n\nHowever, without these words, I have no idea how to differentiate between\nsentences that apply to me and ones that apply to others.\n\nFor example:\n\n```\n\n らいねん 日本 へ いく と 言いました\n \n```\n\nTranslates to `(He/She) said that he will go to Japan next year`, whereas:\n\n```\n\n トマト や りんご を なげた\n \n```\n\n...translates to `I threw a tomato and an apple (and some other things)`.\n\nWhat hints that the first applies to someone else? What hints that the second\napplies to me?\n\nI came across [this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/21057/10600)\nalready, however it leaves me with more questions than answers since it says\nto use a \"background context\" that I have no idea about. It also says that\nassuming an omitted context is \"I\" will usually be safe, which has not been\nthe case a good chunk of the time in my study material... It also says that\nusing \"I\" by default in the subject sometimes \"feels\" wrong, which I have no\nintuition of.\n\nI know I am missing something, but after much research, I still have no idea\nwhat.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T07:44:31.703",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36251",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T10:01:18.113",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10600",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"pronouns",
"subjects"
],
"title": "Japanese automatic subjects (Omitting pronouns)",
"view_count": 2733
} | [
{
"body": "You have to guess, based on what is most likely the intended meaning.\n\nLet's try to translate literally as much as possible and I'll try to\ndemonstrate what I mean...\n\nFor the two examples that you gave:\n\n> 日本{にほん}に行{い}ったら日本語{にほんご}を習{なら}う\n```\n\n when go to Japan / will learn Japanese\n \n```\n\n> トマトやりんごを投{な}げた\n```\n\n threw tomatoes and apples\n \n```\n\nIn English, these sentences sound incomplete. But this is exactly the way to\nspeak and write in Japanese.\n\nSo how do you make sense of something like this?\n\n> when go to Japan / will learn Japanese\n\nWell, it's very likely that this is not the first sentence in a book or\nmagazine article, and it's equally unlikely that it would be the beginning of\na conversation. So what came before? Let's imagine... ~Woo0O0oo~~~\n\n【You're in a classroom and the teacher points to you and says:】\n\n> マイケル君{くん}、日本{にほん}に行{い}きたいですか？ \n> Michael, do (you) want to go to Japan?\n```\n\n Michael, / want to go to Japan?\n \n```\n\n> はい、行きたいです。 \n> Yes, (I) want to go (to Japan)\n```\n\n yes, / want to go\n \n```\n\n> じゃ、日本に行{い}ったら何{なに}をしますか？ \n> OK. What will (you) do when (you) go to Japan?\n```\n\n OK. / when go to Japan / what will do? \n \n```\n\n> そうですね。。。日本に行ったら。。。日本語{にほんご}を習{なら}います！ \n> Well... When (I) go to Japan... (I) will learn Japanese!\n```\n\n well... / when go to Japan... / will learn Japanese!\n \n```\n\nNow, if you go back one more time and read just the grey direct-translated\nbits in a funny Japanese accent, you'll realize that the dialog is perfectly\nunderstandable within the context of a classroom conversation between student\nand teacher.\n\nIf you were to go back into the Japanese sentences and put in things like\n**watashi-wa** and **anata-wa** then everyone else in the classroom would be\nlike, \"Why do they keep making such a big deal about the fact that they're\ntalking to one another?\" It would sound strange and overly dramatic. But to\nEnglish speakers, we're used to always having those words, and without them it\nfeels strange.\n\nPlus, in English we have to make our verbs and subjects agree to make sense,\nand if there's no subject specified to begin with, well that's not easy.\nJapanese doesn't make you do this agreement, so the verbs feel OK by\nthemselves.\n\nBack to your question though, the only thing providing a subject in these\nkinds of example sentences is whatever fits the most likely circumstances of\nthe utterance. So, you have to get used to guessing at it; and the way most\npeople speak and write, you'll probably guess correctly most of the time.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T08:22:06.587",
"id": "36254",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T10:01:18.113",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T10:01:18.113",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36251",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "「来年【らいねん】日本へ行【い】くと言いました」 can mean (but is not limited to):\n\n * I said I will go to Japan next year.\n * He/she said he/she will go to Japan next year.\n * I said he/she will go to Japan next year. (ie, I told someone else that he/she will go to Japan)\n * You said you will go to Japan next year. (a bit hard to think of a context where this interpretation is suitable, but it's possible)\n\n... and so on, _depending on the context_. It's impossible to tell the correct\nsubject without the context. The same is true for トマトやりんごを投げた. You can't tell\nwho threw them without the context.\n\nIn textbooks, it's not practical to always provide a long context for each\nexample sentence, and always writing `[I/you/he/she/they/we/etc] said\n[I/you/he/she/they/we/etc] will go to Japan` is too bothersome. So you will\nfind many example sentences that use tentative subjects like _I_ , _you_ , or\n_he_ , just for the sake of brevity. Don't be confused by them; you need to\nget used to this convention.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T08:27:18.407",
"id": "36255",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T08:27:18.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36251",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
]
| 36251 | 36254 | 36255 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36257",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 落雷:雷が落ちること。 **地表物を一つの電極とした** 雷雲からの放電現象。[季]夏。\n\nI can't understand the meaning of the bold part. \nI looked up 地表物 but could find nothing.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T08:05:06.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36253",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T21:06:51.203",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T21:06:51.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "542",
"owner_user_id": "11352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Meaning of this definition of 落雷?",
"view_count": 94
} | [
{
"body": "* 地表 = the surface of the ground\n * 物 = stuff/objects\n * 地表 + 物 = objects on the surface of the ground\n * 電極 = electrodes\n\nSo the whole thing would be something like,\n\n```\n\n A phenomena of electrical discharge（放電現象）\n from a storm cloud（雷雲から）\n whereby（とした）\n an object on the surface of the ground（地表物）\n becomes（とした）\n one of the electrodes（一つの電極）\n \n```\n\nOr...\n\n> A phenomenon whereby an object on the surface of the ground becomes one of\n> the electrodes in an electrical discharge from a storm cloud.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T08:43:59.040",
"id": "36257",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T08:43:59.040",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36253",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36253 | 36257 | 36257 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36259",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Consider the following sentences:\n\n> A: 私が警察に捕まえられた。\n>\n> B: 私が警察に捕まった。\n\nBoth mean _**I was caught by the police**_.\n\n# Question\n\nWhat is the difference between 捕まえられた and 捕まった ?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T08:29:38.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36256",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T00:38:18.597",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"passive-voice",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 捕まえられた and 捕まった?",
"view_count": 896
} | [
{
"body": "Both sentences are correct and the same in meaning, but sentence B is far more\ncommon and sounds natural.\n\nFor some reason, some Japanese verbs intrinsically have passive meanings, and\nthey are used more commonly than the `transitive verb + ～れる/られる` version.\n\nSee the following question for the list of such verbs.\n\n * [Other uses of the particle に in お兄ちゃんには見つからない](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/30577/5010)\n\nThis question is also related: [ところを 見つかる, this was in a highly reputable\ndictionary](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23404/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T09:27:08.607",
"id": "36259",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T13:26:18.613",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36256",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "I agree with Takahiro's comment above and naruto's answer about 捕まった being the\nmore natural way of saying it. 捕まえられる does work as well though and I'm sure\nyou do hear it from time to time.\n\nI think this may be a case of the way that Japanese verbs work generating two\nways of saying more or less the same thing.\n\n## 「つかみ敢{あ}ふ」の転か\n\n> tsukam + a + e + ru\n\nIn the 大辞林 definition of 捕{と}らえる it mentions that the origin of that word may\nbe 取り敢{あ}ふ.\n\n捕まえる may have similar origins. The root \"tsukam\" may have been attached to the\nClassical Japanese helping verb 敢ふ which carries the idea of \"to completely do\nsomething\"（完全に．．．を成し遂げる）, sort of like the modern 「してしまう」. \nYou see it in 取{と}り敢{あ}えず and 敢{あ}えて for Modern Japanese.\n\n敢ふ is using the old kana spelling（旧仮名遣い）、 so it would be pronounced あう in\nModern Japanese.\n\nThis would produce the word 「つか **みあ** える」which would then have been\nphonetically simplified（音便）to 「捕 **ま** える」.\n\n捕まえる could then be broken down like this:\n\n> **つかm + 敢{あ} + え + る**\n\nつかむ + 敢ふ would have taken on a meaning like **すっかりつかんでしまう** 、which may have\nled to it's modern usage. So, we now have in Modern Japanese:\n\n * 掴{つか}む - transitive - to take hold of\n * 捕まる - intransitive - to be caught\n * 捕まえる - transitive - to catch\n\nSince there's a pair of verbs, one transitive and the other intransitive it\nbecomes possible to express passivity (\"be caught\") in two ways with no real\nchange in meaning.\n\n捕まった has less going on grammatically (it doesn't need to be put into the\npassive voice), so it's the more natural choice most of the time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T10:45:29.303",
"id": "36260",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T00:38:18.597",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T00:38:18.597",
"last_editor_user_id": "7055",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36256",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36256 | 36259 | 36259 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "hello guys can you help me to translate this ambiguous sentence?\n\n> これは道路の上に作られた細い溝と、その上を通るタイヤによって作られるのだが、制限速度で走らないと音楽らしい音楽に聞こえない。\n\ntranslation: it is narrow gutter which is laid on top of road,\n\nその上を通るタイヤによって作られるのだが->its made according to car tire that pass on top of\nit(?)or it is made by laying tire on to of the street(?)(?) what is the\nmeaning of によって in this sentence? \n制限速度で走らないと音楽らしい音楽に聞こえない-> you cant hear the song if your car speed exceed the\nspeed limit(?)\n\n>\n> ところが、その数はあまり増えなかった。それはメロディーロードからの音楽が騒音の元になるかもしれないという理由で、ほとんどが街中から離れたところに作られたからである。\n\nそれはメロディーロードからの音楽が騒音の元になるかもしれないという理由で->song in the melody road is noisy/it is\nmade from the noisy sound(?) \nほとんどが街中から離れたところに作られたからである。because of that most of the road were built in the\nremote place from downtown.\n\n> これらの短所を改善したり、新しいアイデアを付け足したりすれば、今のものとは違った活用方法や利用価値が見つけられるのではないだろうか。\n\nfrom this weak point, try to add new idea, so we can find new practical use of\nthis road and the value of using this road(?)",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T08:52:04.460",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36258",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T22:26:23.697",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T22:26:23.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "15896",
"owner_user_id": "15896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "japanese ambiguous sentences",
"view_count": 415
} | [
{
"body": "> これは道路の上に作られた細い溝と、その上を通るタイヤによって作られるのだが、制限速度で走らないと音楽らしい音楽に聞こえない。\n\nThis was created from the narrow gutter which lay upon the road and the tires\nwhich passed above it, but it didn't sound like music unless the car was going\nthe speed limit.\n\n>\n> ところが、その数はあまり増えなかった。それはメロディーロードからの音楽が騒音の元になるかもしれないという理由で、ほとんどが街中から離れたところに作られたからである。\n\nHowever, they had never built too many of these. This was because there was\nsome concern that the music from Melody Road might become the source of noise,\nand most of them were built away from the city.\n\n> これらの短所を改善したり、新しいアイデアを付け足したりすれば、今のものとは違った活用方法や利用価値が見つけられるのではないだろうか。\n\nIf there was a way to improve these drawbacks by the introduction of some new\nidea, then new ways to make use of these, along with some new benefits, might\nbe found.\n\n===\n\nDoes this answer your questions or do you want specific details about the\nexpressions?\n\n〜によって作られた => created using, created by means of, created as a result of",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T16:20:20.880",
"id": "36265",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T17:29:18.660",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T17:29:18.660",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36258",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36258 | null | 36265 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36270",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the following sentence, ”だったが\" is used in an unfamiliar way to me.\n\n>\n> 12世紀後半、父への反発心から獅子心王リチャード率いる十字軍遠征に参加した英国貴族ロックスリー卿の息子のロビンだったが、ムスリム軍に捕らわれ、処刑を待つ身となっていた。\n\nI've seen things like \"今回の問題なんですが\" used in the sense of \"今回の問題は\", in other\nwords to introduce a topic. Is だったが in the above sense used in the same way,\nto introduce Robin? If so, why is past tense used?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T15:38:24.853",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36262",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T02:10:24.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "Using だった to introduce a subject",
"view_count": 176
} | [
{
"body": "I feel this topic-introductory use of 「 **だった** が」 is licensed by the relative\nclause 「12世紀後半、父への反発心から獅子心王リチャード率いる十字軍遠征に参加した」 modifying the topic word(s)\n「(英国貴族ロックスリー卿の息子の)ロビン」. Here, what is being introduced is not merely a person,\n「ロビン」, which in itself lacks specific temporal reference, but a person and his\naction in the past (or \"the past of the past\"), described by the relative\nclause, namely that of having enlisted in the Crusade. (This piece of\ninformation is very important in the sentence, and as much a part of its topic\nas 「ロビン」, I think, since without having done so he wouldn't consequently have\nbeen captured by the Muslims and been awaiting execution.) Hence the 「 **だった**\nが」.\n\nHowever, perhaps despite everything I have explained so far, a plain old 「だが」\ncan replace the 「だったが」 here, and the sentence remains perfectly fine (though\npossibly with some very subtle differences in nuance.) To wit, the following\ntwo sentences are grammatical (I stripped away the parts I deemed ~~hard to\ncome up with good translation for~~ irrelevant and cumbersome):\n\n> (1) 十字軍遠征に参加したロビン **だが** 、ムスリム軍に捕らわれ、処刑を待つ身となっていた。\n>\n> (2) 十字軍遠征に参加したロビン **だったが** 、ムスリム軍に捕らわれ、処刑を待つ身となっていた。\n\nAnd I see no problem in translating them both as:\n\n> (1,2) Robin, who had enlisted in a/the crusade, had been captured by the\n> Muslims and was now awaiting execution.\n\nBut without the relative clause 「十字軍遠征に参加した」:\n\n> (3) ?ロビン **だが** 、ムスリム軍に捕らわれ、処刑を待つ身となっていた。\n>\n> (4) *ロビン **だったが** 、ムスリム軍に捕らわれ、処刑を待つ身となっていた。\n\n(3) seems marginally okay (though I would prefer 「は」 to 「だが」 here, or\nsomething like 「ロビンのことだが(×だったが)、彼は...」 but this sounds too colloquial, like\nyou are talking to someone in conversation), but (4) sounds plain wrong to me.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T21:27:56.400",
"id": "36270",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T02:10:24.630",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "11575",
"parent_id": "36262",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36262 | 36270 | 36270 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "When going over a summary of Japanese grammar I came across the following\nsentence:\n\n> 私は学生で友だちはいしゃです。\n\nHow should this be translated? It supposedly covers the construct of noun+で.\nIs it the te-form?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T16:16:58.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36264",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-20T14:40:48.390",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-20T14:39:53.543",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15920",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"nouns",
"copula"
],
"title": "How to translate the construction \"noun + で\"",
"view_count": 1081
} | [
{
"body": "”で” Here is the te-form of the coupla \"だ/です\" and means simply \"is\", but it has\nthe connotation of continuing on with the sentence, instead of ending it like\n\"だ\" would.\n\nSo \"AはBで。。。\" would mean \"A is B and...\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T16:47:18.700",
"id": "36267",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T16:47:18.700",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36264",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Both nouns( **名詞** ) and na-adjectives( **形容動詞** ) have the same continuative-\nform( **連用形** ) which is the form you use in a sentence to keep it going, and\nconsist in appending **で** to them at the end.\n\n> * [彼女]{かのじょ} は **[静]{しず}かで** **18[歳]{さい}で** [美人]{びじん}です 。\n> * She's quiet, 18 years old and a beauty.\n>\n\nIn the example above we chained a na-adjectve followed by a noun(years) – also\nchained – and finished with another adjective.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T04:24:50.070",
"id": "36302",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-20T14:40:48.390",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-20T14:40:48.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "15939",
"parent_id": "36264",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36264 | null | 36267 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36278",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "When did 役に立つ lexicalize to 役立{やくだ}つ?\n\nHas 役立つ always been a word, and a word that is used more frequently than 役に立つ?\nA quick google shows 役立つ is used 3 times more frequently.\n\nI am reading the translation of a speech. The translator always says 役立つ where\nI would say 役に立つ. Is there any connotation difference between the two? Maybe\n役立つ less formal? My feeling is that initially there could be some association\nof lexicalized words with \"slang\", but as time passes that perception goes\naway.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T20:08:11.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36268",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T23:41:18.950",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T20:31:21.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "15778",
"owner_user_id": "15778",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"connotation"
],
"title": "Is \"役立つ\" a recent lexicalization of \"役に立つ\"? Is it less formal?",
"view_count": 655
} | [
{
"body": "My copy of Shogakukan's 国語大辞典 gives a quote from 狂言記{きょうげんき} using the 役立つ\nform, dating this term to at least the late 1650s.\n\nAs to formality, a native speaker would be able to answer more\nauthoritatively, but I am not aware of any particular difference in register\nbetween 役立つ and 役に立つ, and none of my resources to hand indicate any such\ndifference.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T20:19:04.270",
"id": "36269",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-28T23:28:04.977",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-28T23:28:04.977",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "36268",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Please refer to the other answer(s) for your main question (etymology).\n\nAs for the modern usage, the difference in frequency is not that large. Here\nare the hit counts from BCCWJ.\n\n * 役に立 2302, 役に立つ 1039, 役に立っ 270, 役にたつ 94\n * 役立 3031, 役立つ 1419, 役立っ 447, 役だつ 30\n\n役に立つ and 役立つ are not always interchangeable. As a simple predicate, 役に立つ is\nthe more common expression, and saying 役立つ sounds formal/literary/stiff.\n\n> * この辞書は役に立つ。 (perfect)\n> * この辞書は役立つ。 (sounds literary/stiff)\n>\n\nBut 役立つ is preferred regardless of the formality, when another ～に precedes to\nindicate the \"type of usefulness\". According to BCCWJ, roughly 80-90% of the\ninstances of 役立つ are preceded by such ～に.\n\n> * この辞書は勉強に役立つ。 (perfect)\n> * この辞書は勉強の役に立つ。 (also perfect)\n> * [?] この辞書は勉強に役に立つ。 (weird)\n>\n\n～に + 役に立つ is allowed in expressions like\n「間接的に役に立つ」「私にとって役に立つ」「文法の勉強をするときにも役に立つ」, but the vast majority of the 役に立つ\nexamples are not preceded by に at all.\n\nSo 役立つ as a simple predicate is not as common as you might think.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T02:51:59.843",
"id": "36278",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T13:48:49.410",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T13:48:49.410",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36268",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "To me both ”役に立つ” and “役立(やくだ)つ” mean the same thing, “It helps,” or\n“helpful.”\n\nWhen I consulted how to translate “役立(やくだ)つ” into Japanese with Kenkyusha’s\n“New Japanese English Dictionary” for a reference, it simply told “See 役に立つ.”\n\nHowever, it appears to me there's a bit of difference between their usage and\nnuance. The former (役に立つ) is more often used in “predicative” form in a\nsentence than the latter (役立つ), which is rather used for “adjective” form in a\nphrase.\n\nFor instances, we say;\n\n[役に立つ]\n\n救急箱はいざという時に役に立つ – The first-aid kit is effective in emergency.\n\n彼は役に立つ人間だということが解った – I found him being an able person we can rely on.\n\nこの芝刈り機は役に立たない – This mower doesn’t work.\n\n果たして私、お役に立ちますか、どうか – I’m not sure if I am of any assistance to you or not.\n\n[役立つ]\n\n英語の勉強に役立つ本 – A book helpful in learning English.\n\n就職に役立つコネ – A connection helpful for job hunting.\n\n問題解決に役立つアドバイス – Advice that helps solving the problem.\n\n世間のために役立つ人間になれ - Be a man who is useful for the world.\n\nThough I don’t have any academic ground, I think 役立つ derived from \"役に立つ\" as\nits contraction.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T23:41:18.950",
"id": "36295",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T23:41:18.950",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36268",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36268 | 36278 | 36278 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The exercise was to translate: \"we are 6 in my family\" The answer given is:\n\"watashi no kazoku wa roku-nin kazoku desu\"\n\nI can understand the role of all words except for the second occurrence of\nkazoku. As far as I can tell the sentence is complete without it.. \"Watashi no\nkazoku\" = \"my family\" \"Wa roku-nin\" = \"has 6 people\"\n\nPerhaps I am misunderstanding the way the nin counter is used?\n\n(If anyone uses Japanese characters in the reply... I can only read hirigana)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-28T23:28:24.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36271",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T00:16:39.127",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14538",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"counters"
],
"title": "Why is kazoku/family used twice in this sentence?",
"view_count": 1680
} | [
{
"body": "The thing is translating words for words never works (at least from English to\nJapanese).\n\nHere you put _watashi no kazoku_ as your theme. The notion of theme can be\nroughly rendered here as follows: \"As for my family\". Then, you describe the\ntheme by saying: _roku-nin kazoku desu_ (it's a family with 6 persons).\n\nSo what you are saying is: \"As for my family, it is a 6-person family\". If you\nwere to remove the second _kazoku_ , you would get: \"As for my family, it is 6\npersons\" (which is understandable but no so good). On the other side, if the\ncontext was clear you could safely remove _watashi no kazoku_ and it would\nstill mean: \"There is 6 members in my family\". But without additional context,\n_watashi no kazoku wa roku-nin kazoku desu_ is perfectly fine in itself.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T00:16:39.127",
"id": "36272",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T00:16:39.127",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "36271",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 36271 | null | 36272 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36274",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The other day I saw a banner outside a convenience store. It read:\n\n> パートさん\n>\n> アルバイトさん\n>\n> 募集中\n\nI had been under the assumption that these words were more or less synonymous,\nbut seeing them both being explicitly advertised side by side on the same\nbanner makes me wonder if there's some nuance I'm missing.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T00:35:57.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36273",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T01:12:55.470",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 12,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Are パート and アルバイト different?",
"view_count": 1804
} | [
{
"body": "I got curious and made some research. I have found an article\n[here](http://matome.naver.jp/odai/2139979067101286801) that explains exactly\nthis difference.\n\nApparently, under a legal point of view, there is no real distinction between\nthe two as companies tend to treat one type or the other rather arbitrarily.\n\nThere are cases where part-timers work alongside with full-time employees, and\nothers where salaries for example are considered monthly or hourly depending\non the type of employment.\n\nHowever, a more precise distinction says that in job magazines パート is used for\nwomen only, and generally indicates married women that are not students up to\n49 years old. On the other hand, アルバイト makes no gender distinctions and\nincludes university or short-term college students working on a hourly wage\n(that are not full-time employed somewhere, are not married and up to 34 years\nold).\n\nLet me add the original reference:\n\n>\n> 求人情報誌などのアルバイトとパートの違いの定義は高校生や短大生、大学生などの学生で３４歳までの未婚者、正社員ではなく時給で働く者をアルバイトと言い、学生でも正社員でもなく４９歳までの女性既婚者をパートと分類しています。\n> アルバイトは男女とも呼ぶのに対しパートは女性のみと明確に定義されています。\n\nThe article goes on with some other insights, and saying that while this is\nthe definition in job magazines, the reality in a corporate environment is\nquite different. In fact, according to the _Labor Standard Act_ (労働基準法), there\nis no difference between full-time employee, contractor, part-timer, and\narubaito. They are all considered as laborer (労働者).\n\nIn the end then, I guess that there is somehow a \"general knowledge\" kind of\ndifference as stated above. However, this gets more subtle when you get to see\nit under a legal point of view, maybe without a real clear and distinct\ndefinition.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T01:05:26.770",
"id": "36274",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T01:12:55.470",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T01:12:55.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "14205",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "36273",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
]
| 36273 | 36274 | 36274 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36276",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is the phrase:\n\n> メーラーの設定によってクリックのみでは正しく開けない場合があります\n\nThe expressions that have me stuck are:\n\n 1. みで - I'm not sure what this expression could be... is it some kind of modifier possibly or is it some form of 見る\n\n 2. 正しく開けない - I get that this is a compound verb of sorts with the words 正しい and 開ける. I know what each of the words mean individually, but I can't figure out what word they are expressing together.\n\n 3. メーラー - I tried sounding it out and at first I thought it was 'mirror', but it isn't. I can't think of an English equivalent. Is it just a emoji?\n\nI know this forum is for inquiries in 'proficient' Japanese and that my\nquestion might be too obvious, but I didn't know where else to go to ask for\nhelp. I apologize if my post is inappropriate.\n\nP.S. My Japanese proficiency is BEGINNER.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T02:12:59.150",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36275",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-02T20:17:03.697",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-02T20:17:03.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "15927",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"words",
"verbs",
"expressions"
],
"title": "Translating「メーラーの設定によってクリックのみでは正しく開けない場合があります」",
"view_count": 485
} | [
{
"body": "1. 「みで」is not the expression your looking for. That part of the sentence should be parsed クリック **のみ** では - \"by **only** clicking\"\n\n 2. You're on the right track. By changing 正し **い** to 正し **く** it becomes an adverb, so you get 正し **く** 開けない - \"can't correct **ly** open\"\n\n 3. メーラー is probably \"mailer\", perhaps you mistook the first kana?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T02:23:22.010",
"id": "36276",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T02:50:27.720",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T02:50:27.720",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36275",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "I take your quote. ”メーラーの設定によってクリックのみでは正しく開けない場合があります” as;\n\nDepending on the setting on the part of the mail sender, there is a case that\nyou cannot open the file simply by clicking (the mouse).\n\n1.“みで” should be “のみで” meaning “only by (clicking).\n\n2.\"正しく開けない\" means “unable to open (the file) properly.\n\n 3. \"メーラー\" should be “mailer / mail sender.”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T21:21:12.477",
"id": "36289",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T21:21:12.477",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36275",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36275 | 36276 | 36276 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36280",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have been recently trying to read novels in Japanese but there are some\ncompound phrases which I have found hard to grasp.\n\n> 今のご時世、高校生の連絡先の最低ラインってガラケーじゃないんですか？\n>\n> それすらもレアメタルがどうたらで回収される世の中ではないのですか？\n\n 1. Researching the kana for the second sentence I found レアメタル to be \"rare metal\" which doesn't make sense in its context.\n 2. What does the grammatical structure beginning with どうたらで stand for?\n 3. What is the meaning of the phrase?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T03:48:45.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36279",
"last_activity_date": "2021-09-02T20:16:22.470",
"last_edit_date": "2021-09-02T20:16:22.470",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "6812",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"katakana"
],
"title": "Trouble understanding 「それすらもレアメタルがどうたらで回収される世の中ではないのですか」",
"view_count": 118
} | [
{
"body": "レアメタル is indeed \"rare metal\" (or rare earth), and どうたら/どうたらこうたら is like \"blah-\nblah\", \"such-and-such\", \"you-know-what\". It's used in place of an obvious\nand/or unimportant part. The following questions are related.\n\n * [What does うんたらかんたら mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9414/5010)\n * [The phrase うんやらかんやら?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/27445/5010)\n\nSo \"レアメタルがどうたら\" means \"rare metals are blah blah blah\" And in case you didn't\nknow, [phones contain a lot of rare metals](http://gizmodo.com/the-metals-in-\nyour-phone-arent-just-rare-theyre-irre-1477904295).\n\nThis で is a particle [with various\nmeanings](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/148951/meaning/m0u/%E3%81%A7/), but\nin this case it denotes a reason/cause or background situation.\n\n> それすらもレアメタルがどうたらで回収される世の中ではないのですか? \n> Aren't we in the times where even they (ガラケー?) are collected (or taken\n> over) saying \"rare metals are blah blah blah\"?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T04:03:25.730",
"id": "36280",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T06:32:10.290",
"last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36279",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36279 | 36280 | 36280 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have come across this a few times when reading: 悪ぃ(わりぃ).\n\nI have seen it used as an expression and as an adj. from the context it looks\nlike it carries a meaning of \"sorry\" or \"my bad\". is this a different dialect\nor shorter form of 悪い(わるい), or does it have some other significance?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T05:56:24.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36281",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T16:19:29.790",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14308",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"slang"
],
"title": "what is the meaning of 悪ぃ",
"view_count": 666
} | [
{
"body": "るい ー＞ りい is simply a linguistic transformation which occurs in the speech of\nTokyoites, when I myself hear it I imagine it to come from a young male.\n\n悪ぃ is simply another way to say 悪い and is not specific to the meaning of \"My\nbad,\" although is can just as equally take this meaning in the right\ncircumstance.\n\nFor example in the following contexts\n\n<https://twitter.com/hashtag/%E6%82%AA%E3%81%83>\n<https://twitter.com/hashtag/%E6%B0%97%E6%8C%81%E3%81%A1%E6%82%AA%E3%81%83>\n\nIt is simply being used as a linguistic variation of 悪い.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T15:41:43.987",
"id": "36286",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T16:19:29.790",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T16:19:29.790",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "15933",
"parent_id": "36281",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
]
| 36281 | null | 36286 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36284",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The book I'm reading is giving examples of how direct instructions can be\nwritten as indirect instructions using させるform. \n\nAs in: \n\n> Sensei: 作文を書きなさい。 \n> Indirect >> 先生は学生に作文を書かせました。 \n>\n\nI clearly understand the sentence above but I have problem understanding the\nsentence below:\n\n> Shachou: 鈴木課長、上村くんの世話をしてくれ。 \n> Indirect >> 社長は鈴木課長に上村くんの世話をさせました。\n\nWhy does the book get rid of the くれる verb in してくれ and use させました in the\nindirect sentence (shouldn't it be してくれさせました?)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T08:52:02.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36283",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T09:35:56.883",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T09:34:35.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "13611",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why the くれる verb is gone in the させるform?",
"view_count": 139
} | [
{
"body": "The second sentences here are not indirect instructions.\n\nThe first sentences are direct commands. The second sentences describe the\nresulting situation.\n\n> Sensei: 作文を書きなさい。\n\n * \"Write a composition!\"\n\n> Indirect >> 先生は学生に作文を書かせました。\n\n * \"The teacher made the students write a composition.\"\n\n> Shachou: 鈴木課長、上村くんの世話をして **くれ** 。\n\n * \"Suzuki-kacho, take good care of Uemura-kun **for me**!\"\n\n> Indirect >> 社長は鈴木課長に上村くんの世話をさせました。\n\n * \"The Shacho(company president) made Suzuki-kacho take good care of Uemura-kun.\"\n\nThe くれ part in the 3rd sentence is the command form of くれる, so you would be\ncommanding someone to do something for you.\n\nさせる on the other hand means to \"make\", \"force\", \"cause\", \"let\" or \"allow\"\nsomeone do something. It's not used to express an indirect command in the\ncases you mentioned.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T09:31:11.913",
"id": "36284",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T09:35:56.883",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T09:35:56.883",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36283",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 36283 | 36284 | 36284 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "I would like to ask a question about the sentence ending particle よ and when\nit is okay not to use a sentence ending particle in informal japanese. I know\nthat よ is used when the listener asks you something and you answer or when you\nwant to correct the listener's opinion but would it be okay to use in other\nsituations?\n\nFor example, if you want to tell your friend that you went to tokyo yesterday\nwithout your friend asking what you did the day before, is it better to say\n\n> 「そういえば、昨日、東京に行った」or 「そういえば、昨日、東京に行った **よ** 」?\n\nPlease tell me if there are better options. Thanks in advance!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T18:50:45.933",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36287",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-29T18:07:16.590",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-29T18:07:16.590",
"last_editor_user_id": "37097",
"owner_user_id": "8079",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"sentence-final-particles"
],
"title": "Sentence ending particle よ",
"view_count": 424
} | [
{
"body": "I think as a general rule you don't often want to use よ when answering a\nquestion unless you think your answer will surprise the person asking the\nquestion.\n\nHowever, in your example about Tokyo, you are not asking a direct question, so\nI think it's better to use よ when you speak about the (surprising) thing you\ndid. Removing よ from that sounds oddly neutral to me.\n\nよ can drastically change the meaning of certain things. For example, if\nsomeone asks if you for something you can use \"いいよ\" to agree in the sense of\n\"sure!\". However, saying simply \"いい\" (or ”けっこう\") can actually mean \"no\nthanks\". Of course each of these has a certain tone of voice that goes along\nwith them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T19:50:12.103",
"id": "36288",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T19:50:12.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"parent_id": "36287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Like in your example,\n\n> 「そういえば、昨日、東京に行った **よ** 」\n\nThis よ sounds very natural because\n\n 1. You're talking to a friend. (where よ is very unlikely to be impolite)\n 2. You're introducing new information into the conversation. \n\nIt's using よ when talking to people you don't know, or anyone socially above\nyou could easily be considered presumptive and impolite. (best to avoid よ with\nyour boss or teacher)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T22:25:17.033",
"id": "36291",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-29T22:25:17.033",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Besides the function you mentioned, it can also prompt the listener to take\nsomewhat proper action. In this context, it can imply that you want him/her to\nlisten to consequence of the story. In that sense, you can naturally use it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T13:43:57.053",
"id": "36317",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T13:43:57.053",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "36287",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
]
| 36287 | null | 36288 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This phrase has helpful but rather confusing furigana (星嶺鷹守学園{セイレイタカガミガクエン}).\n\nI'm reading it to mean \"star-ridge takagami campus\", with star ridge being the\nname of the specific campus and takagami being the place/town.\n\nIn more correct(?) English, \"Star-ridge campus of/in Takagami\".\n\nTaking 鷹守{タカガミ} literally would be \"falcon director(of the provincial\ngovernors under the ritsuryo system)\" which makes no sense.\n\nHow do Japanese people read/tell fictional place created by entertainment\nmedia?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T22:22:18.110",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36290",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-29T02:06:04.633",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-29T02:06:04.633",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": null,
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"readings",
"proper-nouns"
],
"title": "Meaning of a fictional place-name: 星嶺鷹守学園",
"view_count": 177
} | [
{
"body": "Simply, 星嶺鷹守学園 is one long proper noun. So you should translate it as \"Seirei\nTakagami Academy/School/etc\" without thinking of the etymology. You don't want\nNew York to be translated as 新ヨーク even if \"new\" definitely means 新 :-)\n\nAnd it's very difficult to analyze this phrase \"etymologically\", too. Of\ncourse it's easy to split it into kanji and explain the meaning of each kanji\n(\"star-ridge-hawk-protector\"), but basically, both 星嶺 and 鷹守 come off to me as\nsimple \"names\" to me. 鷹守 might mean something else somewhere in the history,\nbut I'm not familiar with such a job anyway.\n\nNote:\n\n * Alternatively, you may translate it even as \"Seirei Takagami Gakuen Academy\" or something like that. It's like \"Rio Grande river\", \"Mont Blanc mountains\", though.\n * \"X Campus\" is simply \"Xキャンパス\" in Japanese (eg \"○○学園(の)△△キャンパス\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T02:13:25.923",
"id": "36300",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T02:34:30.160",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-30T02:34:30.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36290",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
]
| 36290 | null | 36300 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> その映画から、事故で子供を死なせてしまった母親の悲しさが伝わってきた。\n\nfrom this sentence,\n\n> Translation: conveyed the sadness of the mothers of the children who killed\n> in accident\n\nor\n\n> conveyed the sadness of the children whom mother was killed in accident\n\nand also I don't understand why they used shieki and not shieki ukemi.\n\nBesides that also the particle を is really confusing, who is the subject and\nalso the object in this sentence 「じこでこどもをしなせてしまった」 ?\n\nCould you explain to me?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T22:51:19.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36292",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-02T20:35:16.203",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-02T02:52:41.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "903",
"owner_user_id": "15896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"causation",
"giving-and-receiving"
],
"title": "Japanese 使役｛しえき} and 使役{しえき}受身{うけみ} grammar",
"view_count": 1247
} | [
{
"body": "「子供を死なせる」 means to \"allow\", or \"cause\" the death of this child.\n\nSo 「事故で **子供を死なせてしまった** 母親」 would mean something like:\n\n> the mother who **caused** (her) child's death in an accident\n\nThe mother is the subject. The child is the object. The mother is the one who\ncauses the child's death.\n\nIf you put the 使役{しえき} of 「死ぬ」 into 受身｛うけみ｝ it would look like this:\n\n```\n\n 死なせる ⇒ 死なせられる\n \n```\n\n> 「事故で **子供を死なせられてしまった** 母親」\n\nIt's kind of hard to imagine what this would mean though. Maybe someone else\n(not the mother) would have caused the child's death? But that's probably a\nbit of a stretch.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T01:53:49.740",
"id": "36297",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-02T02:15:34.513",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-02T02:15:34.513",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36292",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "“その映画から、事故で子供を死なせてしまった母親の悲しさが伝わってきた” can be translated as;\n\nThe movie conveyed heartrending sorrow of the mother who lost her child by an\n(a traffic) accident. The sadness (sorrow) is clearly that of mother, not the\nchild.\n\nThe verbatim translation of “事故で子供を死なせてしまった母親” is “the mother who made her\nchild die / killed,” but it doesn’t mean the mother killed the child, and no\nmother under the sun \"allows\" and \"permits\" somebody to kill her child. The\naccident killed the child.\n\nIt’s better to interpret ”子供を死なせてしまった母親” as “the mother who lost her child”\nthan “the mother who made her child be killed.”\n\nThe subject in the sentence is “母親の悲しみ - the sorrow of mother,” which is\nfollowed by the verb, “伝わってきた – was conveyed.”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-07-02T10:20:49.147",
"id": "36361",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-02T20:35:16.203",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-02T20:35:16.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "12056",
"owner_user_id": "12056",
"parent_id": "36292",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
]
| 36292 | null | 36361 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36298",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "> 向こうに大きなビルが見えます。\n\nI translate it to\n\n> The big building is visible over there.\n\n# Question\n\nCan I also translate it to the following?\n\n> The big building over there is visible.\n\nIn other words, can I assume that 向こうに is a relative clause for 大きなビル?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-29T22:51:49.993",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36293",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T03:52:57.727",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-29T23:30:50.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "11192",
"owner_user_id": "11192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Can 向こうに in 向こうに大きなビルが見える also be interpreted as a relative clause?",
"view_count": 113
} | [
{
"body": "向こう is grammatically a noun, so the sentence you have can really only be\nparsed as ＡにＢがする → （向こう）に（大きなビル）が（見える）. If you want it to be parsed as in your\nsecond translation, I think you have no choice but to choose something like\n向こうにある（あの）大きなビルが見える.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T01:10:45.180",
"id": "36296",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T01:10:45.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6841",
"parent_id": "36293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It's impossible to parse it as a relative _clause_ because there is only one\nverb/adjective (ie, 見えます) in the whole sentence. As a rule, each sub- _clause_\nmust have a verb/adjective.\n\nSo the real question is: \"Which word this 向こうに modifies?\"\n\n向こう **に** can only modify a verb, and 向こう **の** modifies a noun. Both can be\ntranslated as \"over there\" in English, but you need to distinguish them in\nJapanese.\n\nSince 向こうに can only modify a verb, it modifies nothing but 見える at the end of\nthe sentence. So your first translation is the correct one.\n\nIf you say 向こう **の** 大きなビルが見えます, that is grammatically correct and this 向こうの\nmodifies ビル (\"the building over there\"). But semantically, saying \"a big\nbuilding over there\" already means the speaker and the listener can see it, so\n\"A big building over there is visible\" sounds awkward to me.\n\nFor example, 「向こうにある大きなビルは赤いです。」 is a semantically valid sentence which uses a\nrelative clause (向こうにある modifies ビル and ある is a verb).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T01:57:38.143",
"id": "36298",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T01:57:38.143",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "36293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "> 向こうに大きなビルが見えます。\n\n * \"The big building is visible over there.\"\n * \"The big building over there is visible.\"\n\nFrom my experience, there is no problem with either of these translations.\nAlthough 「向こう **にある** 大きなビルが見えます」is probably better. Here are a couple others\nwhich might be natural in context...\n\n * \"(You) can see a big building on the other side.\" \n * \"(There is) a big building (you) can see on the other side.\" \n * \"(If you go to) the other side, (you'll be) able to see a big building\"\n\nAs long as you keep the information the same, i.e.\n\n```\n\n at other side / big building / becomes visible\n \n```\n\nyou're pretty free to translate it in a lot of different ways, as long as you\ndon't contradict any information in the context.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T02:10:39.803",
"id": "36299",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T03:52:57.727",
"last_edit_date": "2016-06-30T03:52:57.727",
"last_editor_user_id": "7055",
"owner_user_id": "7055",
"parent_id": "36293",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
]
| 36293 | 36298 | 36298 |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "36304",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the below passage, I'd like to understand the meaning and nuance of the\nterm \"風吹き\".\n\n> こんど崖下の刀鍛冶に弟子入りするつもりだ。崖下に **風吹き** から入りなおすんだよ。それで、いずれは一番鎚を打つよ。\n\nDoing some online searches it seems that \"風吹き\" can mean \"wanderer\", however\nthis doesn't fit with the context, since it seems the blacksmith speaking is\ngoing to leave his current position (as a apprentice) and work under a new\nmaster who is a swordsmith.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T05:24:32.040",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "36303",
"last_activity_date": "2016-07-01T05:35:30.977",
"last_edit_date": "2016-07-01T05:35:30.977",
"last_editor_user_id": "11825",
"owner_user_id": "11825",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"fantasy"
],
"title": "Usage of the term 風吹き",
"view_count": 70
} | [
{
"body": "This is just guessing:\n\nAs the man is going to leave his current position and work under a new master\nas an apprentice, he is going to learn swordsmith from the very beginning,\nwhich is \"blowing the wind (for the stove)\" (風吹き)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0",
"creation_date": "2016-06-30T05:41:46.470",
"id": "36304",
"last_activity_date": "2016-06-30T05:41:46.470",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "903",
"parent_id": "36303",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
]
| 36303 | 36304 | 36304 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.