INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
Difference between ๆๅฟ๏ฝใใ๏ฝ and ๅฟใ๏ฝใใใใใ๏ฝ (will)
I learnt both {} and {}, but am always confusing the two of them.
Can someone highlight the differences between those 2 words (and other variants if any) ? | > {}
It's just the **will** or **desire** of doing anything. **** {}
* {}
> {}
Including the meaning of {}, it's the **determination** or **resolution** to carry out a higher, long term goal or objective. It's not just the will, but the **ambition** , **aspiration** and **resolve** to do something.
* {}{}{}
* {}{}{}{}
{} is mostly used in the written language, as opposed to , not uncommon in spoken conversation at all.
A variant could be {} used in business contexts to mean intention or . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words, nuances"
} |
ใฉใฎ object ใ = "whichever"?
I think in the example below, means "whichever dungeon". The advice applies to any dungeon in the game. Can somebody confirm this for me please?
> ****
I imagine this is a standard pattern but I can't say I have seen it a lot in my experiences of Japanese. | โAโ means that the sentence applies to every A. Thus, your interpretation is correct. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What is the difference between ่ณขใ{ใใใใ} and ๅฉๅฃ{ใใใ}?
What is the difference between {} and {}?
For exemple, sentence 1 and sentence 2 have the same meaning?
1.
2.
Kotobank.jp explains {} through {} (reference) and {} through {} (reference), but is there any subtile difference between those two terms?
Thank you. | I see almost no difference between the two. I googled and found a handful of articles and questions about this topic, written by native Japanese people. But none of the explanations was convincing enough, at least to me.
Both tend to refer to the ability of solving practical problems, not just the ability to memorize something and get high marks on written tests. Both are definitely positive words, and are rarely used sarcastically.
(Derivative words such as , have different meanings, of course)
Aside from semantics, I feel is used a little bit more often, especially when it modifies inanimate nouns (, , etc). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, words, usage"
} |
Comparing ใจใใใใจใ and ใใใ
> (/)
Both and can represent an 'externally induced' opinion/conclusion.
How do we identify the context to choose one over the other then? | There are two main differences:
1. conveys more certainty in the information than does.
2. indicates that the information was heard from a public source, while indicates that it was heard from a private source (e.g., your friends or family). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
English for ไผๅฟ as a stat in an online game
Simple question, Google Translate and rikaikun translate as "Satisfaction" or "Congeniality", although if it is in an online game where it is a stat attribute, what do you think would be the best official translation?
We still do not know the mechanics of this in the game since it is fairly new. | In action or role playing games, means /critical hit, which happens randomly and deals more damage than usual. If it appears in stats (like ` 15`), it must be short for ( = chance, rate).
Unlike "critical", is always used for good damages inflicted on enemies by allies.
However, , or more specifically , is strongly associated with _Dragon Quest_ franchise, so other games use it less frequently. The safer replacement is . ("Critical damage" inflicted by enemies is called in _Dragon Quest_ ).
Since _Dragon Quest_ is very popular in Japan, both and are frequently and jokingly used in daily conversations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "word choice, video games"
} |
Is ใใใ and ใใใใใใ the same?
I saw those words in the textbook Marugoto A1. There is no explanation, just some examples of those stores ().
The ending suggest that is a person, maybe the person that cooks that dish. | They are exactly same. Appending after a store is common. The latter is a more polite form. However, the latter is not used in formal writing. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "suffixes, food"
} |
This text appears to be labeling V-ใใปV-ใใใปAdj-ใชใใปN-ใซ as present, V-ใใฆใปV-ใใชใใงใปAdj-ใชใใฆใปN-ใง as past. Why?
I found a table at this page that seems to be labeling VVAdjN as present tense, and VVAdjN as past tense. Please teach me about this distinction in the above words. | They seem to be attempting to draw a distinction between _sequential coordination_ forms and _simultaneous coordination_ forms.
are (theoretically) _simultaneous_ coordination. The state/action they describe is true/occurring _while_ whatever next thing is true/occurring:
>
>
> He read a book and watched television (at the same time).
are (theoretically) _sequential_ coordination. The state/action they describe is true/occurring _before_ whatever next thing is true/occurring:
>
>
> He read a book and (then) watched television.
In modern Japanese the distinction mostly isn't bothered with, though, and instead the differences work out something like this:
is literary () / is colloquial ()
(/) is 'without doing' / is 'instead of doing'
is literary / is colloquial
X isn't really used as 'is X, and' in modern Japanese / X is
(though correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not as sure on the last two) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Expressing subject vs target
Are these translations correct?
1. "As per the survey conducted **on the students**..."
> **[]{}[]{}** []{}โฆโฆ
(students are the topic of the research)
2. "As per the survey conducted **among the students**..."
> **[]{}** []{}โฆโฆ
(students are the target population for the research; the topic could be anything)
What would be the recommended way to state the following?
3. "As per the survey conducted on alcohol among the students..."
( _alcohol_ is the topic while _students_ is the target population) | 1. On the students
The researcher is NOT a student,(for example, the researcher is a teacher, scientist and so on) isn't he?
In this case, "" is natural Japanese translation, you already said .
In addition, "","" are natural.
2. Among the students
The researcher may be that a student, that others.
In this case, "" is natural Japanese.
I think that an expression like "" is similar to "" in Japanese. It is because that "A" infers that the speaker is not A.
3. "As per the survey conducted on alcohol among the students"
The topic is alcohol. The target is students.(The target is not drinking students.)
In this case, "" is natural translation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Translation to Japanese: "The test will determine which university I will go to."
How do you say
> "The test will determine which university I will go to."
in Japanese? I only can figure out the first part of it, which is โฆ
Can anyone here help me complete it? | A word-by-word translation would be:
>
An active voice sentence with an abstract or lifeless noun as a subject () sounds unnatural. A better translation is:
>
If you want to clarify โIโ:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, expressions"
} |
What happens if ใชใฎ is used, but not at the end of a sentence?
> ****
What does it mean when is used in a sentence like the one above? The that comes after it is really throwing me off.
I came across a similar question on here but all the examples and explanations relate to being used as a way to _end a sentence_. What confuses me the most is in the sentence I came across isn't being used to end it. Should I just apply the answers provided in the link I found to this sentence or is there something more to it?
Edit: I was asked to provide more context to the sentence above, so here's the whole sentence:
> , | It's not but adj- +
You might remember this construct from your (very) early Japanese lessons:
>
>
> _Please give me the red **one**._
This is the same, except it's with a 'na-adjective'.
> []{}
>
> _Please give me an easy one._
Hence, means _'I found a suitable one.'_
'In a place twenty minutes' walk away from the university, I found a suitable one.' We need more context to know what 'one' refers to here. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Can [้ขๅ]{ใใใฉใ} be used as "boring"?
I've just heard many times []{} in anime, in translation is not troublesome but boring. Is it usual? Which is more appropriate?
Example: | The primary meaning of / is "bothersome", "time-consuming", or "annoying". The phrase "boring job" usually corresponds to , or .
So I basically agree that translating as "boring" is not very literal. But there are times when translators intentionally avoid literal translations for various reasons. I can't say whether "boring" was inappropriate or not without actually seeing that anime. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, idioms, word usage"
} |
When to use ๏ผธใฏ๏ผนใใ vs ๏ผธใจ๏ผนใจใฉใกใใโฆโฆ๏ผ
If I wanted to ask, `Which is faster the red car or the blue car?` I could phrase it as:
>
or
>
But when would I use 1 (wa...yori) instead of 2 (to...to dochira ga?) or vice-versa? Can I use either form interchangeably or can I only use one of them certain situations? | >
> = Is the red car faster than the blue car?
The topic of the sentence is the red car. You are more interested in the red car, or you are expecting the red car is faster.
>
> = Which is faster, the red car or the blue car?
You are treating the two cars equally. There is no expectation about which one is faster in this sentence.
Whether you can use them interchangeably depends on the context. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice, phrase requests, comparative constructions"
} |
Are ใฐใฉใน and ใฌใฉใน alternative spellings of the same word?
As in the title: Are and alternative spellings of the same word?
I'm going through a 2 prep book for vocabulary and it has
= wine glass
but
= glass (for drinking)
and
= window glass
Are and the same or do I have to be careful when to use which? | While people will likely understand you if you mix them up, it's better to use proper one:
`` = glass (material)
* (glass blowing)
* (glass plate)
`` = a glass (for drinking)
* (tumbler glass)
* (wine glass), ([drink] a glass of wine)
* (cocktail glass)
* (mixing glass)
`~` = some other things made from glass, or have "glass" in the English name:
* (sunglasses), (opera glasses)
* (stained glass)
* (hourglass) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "word choice, spelling"
} |
When writing by hand, can kana be half-width and kanji be full-width?
Simply I find when I'm writing I can only make kanji so small before they become sloppy, but I can write kana nice and small. Is it allowed to write half-width Katakana/Hiragana alongside regular width Kanji?
If you can how would this work horizontally and vertically? If not, what's the point of half-width? | This probably varies from person to person, at least a little bit, but **generally each character should be approximately the same size as any others (i.e. full-width)**. If you don't, especially with katakana (which are formed from pieces of kanji), you can end up with situations where **you cannot tell whether something is kana or kanji**. For example
> * vs
> * vs
> * and probably many others that don't come to mind immediately.
>
I'm not entirely sure what the general use of half-width kana is; the only places I have ever seen it used is in places that are never mixed with kanji, such as the name input for a bank transfer at an ATM (my name is also recorded in half-width katakana in my bank book). Many websites also explicitly require you to input the reading of your name in full-width kana, as well.
I would say that the general rule of **always use full-width unless explicitly told otherwise** is probably safe. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "orthography, kana, handwriting"
} |
Difference between ็ตถๅซ๏ฝใใฃใใใ๏ฝใใ and ๆ้ณด๏ฝใฉใช๏ฝใ (to shout)
I've learnt 2 verbs, (to shout, to scream, to exclaim) and (to shout; to yell)
They seems to have the same meaning, can someone explain the context in which to use one and the other?
If you know other variants (for example ), please feel free to compare them as well, thank you | can be used with anything; you are scared, sad, surprised, angry (possibly less common with angry), whereas always means you are angry. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words, nuances"
} |
Difference between ็ถญๆ๏ฝใใ๏ฝใใ and ไฟ๏ฝใใ๏ฝใค (to maintain)
I've learnt two verbs which seem to mean the same thing, and I keep confusing them: (to maintain; to preserve; to improve) and (to preserve; to maintain; to support)
Can someone highlight the differences of usage for those 2 words ?
It would be great if other variants could also be described against those words, for example etc.
Thank you | For the nuance I think is "to hold on to X, or to withhold the X". It is easy to see that if you fail in doing so, the situation will completely change.
> * (to mantain/keep one's sanity, possibly in the face of a situation which might make you literally insane)
> * (to keep your calm)
> * refers to making effort to keep the peace.
>
X means, with some efforts and maneuvering, you are maintaining the current situation, with emphasis on the maintaining.
is also used with physical buildings, etc. referring to upkeep/maintaining the place.
> * (I) maintain this shrine.
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words, nuances, wago and kango"
} |
Difference between ้ ๏ฝใใ๏ฝใ and ็ง๏ฝใฒ๏ฝใใ (to hide)
Can someone explain the differences between (to hide; to conceal) and (to hide; to keep to oneself) ? These definitions look too similar for me, I'm not sure in which context to use one or the other.
If you know other variants, please feel free to also compare them, thank you. | The examples in my J-E dictionary only use to hide something "within". IE, something intangible. The spirit within... etc. They actually use it for something like treasure, but again, this is on a far grander scale, and aren't necessarily related to something physical. You'll also not hear of someone using it in the every day sense, as with , which is something tangible. Car keys, remote control, or even another person.
My J-J dictionary (Daijirin) does say: But the examples, once again, are far more complex than what you would see with
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
>
Hope that helps. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, words, nuances"
} |
Why is ๏ฝใจใฟใใ used here?
I'm reading a short story called . This girl was crying on the train to work, so another passenger (the below) invited her for a coffee.
> ****
I've not encountered before, but even after looking up the meaning (another variant of "seems, looks like", I think), I'm still not sure what meaning it brings to this sentence.
Is related to ? | Yes, this + (or ) is another variant of ("it seems", "it looks like"). It's a literary expression, so we don't usually use it in conversations.
is "It seems he (=) heard I had said ", where "" here is "". He said "", because he was listening to the phone call (of "I") and knew "I" was going to take the day off that day. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
} |
็งใฏ็ฑณๅฝไบบใงใ vs ็งใฏใขใกใชใซไบบใงใ
They both mean `I am an American` but which is preferable in everyday speech and in writing, and why? Is the former more formal than the latter? | Today people never say `` in everyday speech and even in written form most people express American as ``.
The obvious exception is on a newspaper. Writers there still express it as ``, for possibly two reasons:
1. `` is shorter than ``.
2. Kanji is more suited than Katakana to vertical writing, which is still used in newspapers.
I also want to note that this tends to be applied to ``/`` as well. Also, Kanji is often used to express each country (e.g. ``, ``, or `` to express ``, ``, or ``) even on the web news just because those are shorter. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "words"
} |
Difference between ่ฉฆ้จ{ใใใ} and ใในใ
Both can be test, or they have a different meaning/usage?
"{}{}." | Both basically share the same meaning, and are interchangeable in most cases. For example, there is no difference between and .
But there are set phrases where only one of them is used.
* entrance exam ((*) is unusual)
* test-driven development ((*) is unusual)
And I think sounds a bit more formal and serious. Critical tests/exams tend to be called , whereas casual tests or tests you do every day tend to be called . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, usage"
} |
How to order pizza or dinner on the phone
When you call say a pizza delivery service they pick up the phone with something like "Tanaka's pizza delivery service, XYZ branch, this is Sato speaking". (I'm sorry, I'd reproduce it in Japanese but it was so fast that I didn't really understand it).
What do I say in response to that? In England I'd say, "Hi, I'd like to order a pizza". What would be better for me, in Japanese, something more generic like, "Hi, I'd like to place an order". But do Japanese people really say this when they order food?
I'm pretty sure that ""is not what Japanese people say when they call a restaurant. What's natural? | Greetings like sounds unnecessary. Some people may begin with , though I don't think it necessary either. I would say , just like you in English! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words"
} |
How to place ใใใพใใ with the ใใใงใ pattern, and the meaning of the resulting sentence
There is a question in Minna no Nihongo, where I need to fit in with the pattern, such that the sentence makes sense.
_________
How shall I fit it in, and what meaning will it give to the sentence?
Thanks. | Change into the plain form, , to be followed by :
> []{}[]{}
> You're late. What happened?
> (Lit. [You] were late. Did anything happen?) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
} |
Have I placed "itsu" correctly in the sentence?
> ****
Is placing "itsunandesuka" correct when I'm trying to make a sentence which means "When is today's party" while using the grammar pattern "ndesuka"? | The position of is correct and there's nothing wrong with your sentence, but it's better to use {} to ask for _when_ in this case.
> {}{}
The nuance of using is that the topic of the party has already being introduced as opposed to
> {}{}
Some people could _also_ argue that the first sentence is slightly more friendly.
The word is appropriate for any kind of situation and doesn't change depending on **who is** speaking or **who you are** speaking to. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
I don't understand the meaning and "naran" in this sentence ๆฉใๆฅๆๆฅใซใชใใใใช
I don't understand the meaning of in this sentence:
> ****
Does come from ? Or come from ? How it's conjugated? What's that in ...? | The word is **nar-an** , a negated form of the verb ****. The standard negation of the verb may be known to you as ****. The utterance you ask about can be rephrased as . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, verbs, conjugations"
} |
How to parse ๏ฝใชใใใฃใฆ?
I've been running into verbs such as recently. I found these sentences using a sample sentence search and it seems to be a stronger form of
> **** You don't have to stand over me.
>
> **** You don't have to use such a harsh tone with me.
Where can I find this in a dictionary? It doesn't seem to be []{}, nor the in | This is the same as (โeven if, even though) in . The difference is that (te-form of ) is inserted between the main verb (=) and . (And of course is in its nai-form before )
> * Even if you don't say it, (I/he) can understand.
> * Even if you say it, (I/he) can't understand.
>
The literal translation of would be "Even if you are not seeing, (it's) okay." The opposite is , which is the contracted form of .
And the negated version of is .
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 23,
"question_score": 15,
"tags": "verbs, auxiliaries"
} |
Difference between ๅๅพฉใใใใตใใ, ไฟฎๅพฉใใใ
ใใตใใ, ๅพฉๆงใใตใฃใใ
ใใ and ๅพฉ่ใใตใฃใใใ
Here is the sentence:
> {}{}{}{}{} `` {}
This sentence fragment is taken from JLPT1 test book. And there you have to pick one correct answer from 4 words to fill in the blank:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The correct answer is , which means "repair", "restoration".
But the meanings of the other three are almost the same. What I want to know is the differences between these words and when each should be used? | is a general word for recovery, though it's often used for economics, healing from injuries / diseases, and the weather getting better:
> []{}[]{}
> []{}
> []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}
is used mostly for artifact restorations (like in the question) and relationships:
> []{}[]{}
and has been used frequently after the earthquake / tsunami / Fukushima Accident in 2011. In this context, is used for recovery of lifelines and roads. is used in far more long-term sense, which is, resettlement of evacuated people and rebuilding local communities that are lost in the disaster (try search Google Images with ).
To add one more word to them, []{} is for repairing cars, electrical products, etc.
* * *
One more point. when used as -verbs, and are intransitive (used in the form of ), whereas and are transitive (used as ). may be used in both ways. // can be used transitively in the form of . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "usage, meaning, jlpt"
} |
"To the East/West/North/South are distinct [feature-rich] areas that fill the land"
Could I check my understanding of the last part of this sentence please? For those who don't play games, Hyrule is a fictional place in the Legend of Zelda videogames (this is from a guidebook I am translating).
I think I have the meaning, but the words look strange to me. "there are features area being spread out Hyrule". I'd like some clarification as to whether some particles have been dropped here, or if I am misunderstanding this part of the sentence.
> Forests, plaines, canyons, lakes... Hyrule Castle and centrally the castle town, to the East/West/North/South are distinct [feature-rich] areas that fill Hyrule | Think of it as "in all directions of the compass". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
Difference between ่ถ
ใใใใใใใ and ่ถ
ใใใใใ๏ผ
(6:25pm in Russia)
So, I just got confused by these two words ( and ). Can someone explain them to me? Do they have the same meaning, or am I wrong? | You are right in that both verbs have roughly the same meaning. Here are the differences I could find with my (limited) knowledge of Japanese:
can be used when something exceeds the norm, or is out of the ordinary.
can be used for "moving home" (, whereas the above cannot ( ~~~~ ).
Another example is that you cannot say here would be correct. I believe is less common than , in the cases where you could use either. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
difference between ่จ็ปใ็ซใฆใ and ่จ็ปใใใ๏ผ
Is there any difference between and ? In _Sou Matome N3_ , the first one appears as " _to make plans_ ", as for the second one (being a _suru verb_ ), I assume that it can also be associated with _to make plans_. | I think there is almost no difference in their meanings, and the two phrases are almost always interchangeable. I said almost because I can not think of even a single counter example in a few minutes as a native speaker.
By the way, you can also use a verb, '', without '' in a similar way. For example,
*
*
are similar to
*
The first two sentences are not completely the same as the last one. The last sentence sounds to stress more that the decision is made to go to a trip compared to the first two, which sounds to have more stress on deciding on the details during the trip. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice, words, usage"
} |
Same kanji compound, with different readings, and meanings depend on the reading? (heteronyms)
In the thread titled is "" a heteronym?, the accepted answer explains that there are some because of "pitch accent". However, in Japanese, there are more than one way to think about heteronyms.
Aren't there heteronyms with these specifications:
1. one kanji compound (with possible okurigana).
2. two possible ways to _write_ it in hiragana (to eliminate the "pitch inflection" variable).
3. two definitions, and the definitions depend on the hiragana writings.
example:
::::newspaper.
::::something heard for the first time. <\--- imaginary word
What are a few of such words?
**EDIT** : This question is answered in the "comment" section. So, mark this as answered. | There are a number of words like this. The most obvious one that comes to mind is , which can be read (polite "person") or ("alternative", perhaps). Another example is , which can be read ("a lush mountain") or ("a lush mountain" OR [metaphorically] "where one dies"). Also , which can be read ("one's heart" or something like that) or ("lover's suicide"). , which can be ("physical proximity" or something) or (non-literally, "a side"). I think there are a lot of words like this.
If you restrict to just words with different readings, is one example: it can be read (which cannot mean "to be hungry") or (which _can_ mean that, as in [though I think you usually wouldn't use the kanji there]). You also have examples where one of the readings is "proper", like , which can be read ("whereabouts") or (a proper noun: a particular city in Ibaraki). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "homophonic kanji"
} |
Most correct "noun suffix" for "living in X" or "resident of X"?
Not sure if that is the best title, but I wasn't sure the best way to word it. We all know you can say "(originally) (comes) from X" as simply `X`.
> * โ I'm from New York
> * โ Mr. Hirata from Kagoshima
>
So I'm looking for something analogous to this to say "living in X" or "resident of X". I was thinking possibly `X`, `X[]{}`, or `X[]{}`.
> * โ I'm living in Osaka
> * []{} โ Japanese living in Shanghai
>
Are any of those correct/acceptable/used to convey this meaning? Possibly some other noun I haven't listed? Note that I'm looking for a "noun suffix" of the form `<place> + <suffix>`, not complete clauses/sentences like
> * ****
> * ****
> | `X` is the closest answer for your question. This can be used like `` and ``.
Also `X` is acceptable. The difference between them is where the subject is living, which here means X.
X in `X` are like country, province, city or village.
X in `X` are like house, apartment. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "suffixes, nouns"
} |
ใฏใ and ใใ or just ใใ?
Textbook says is for stuff you wear below your waist () and for stuff you wear above your waist (T-). But checking for on www.tangorin.com I find defined as **to wear (in modern Japanese, from the shoulders down); to put on**. Does this mean I can just discard and use for everything shoulders down? | The difference has to do with _how the clothing is put on_.
[]{} is for clothing that's _hung from your shoulders_ , such as a shirt or jacket. It's also used for whole-body outfits, or any combination of clothes that includes something worn this way (eg T, even though only T is valid with ).
[]{} is for clothing that's _pulled up from below_ , such as pants or shoes. (Don't mix this up with , which is a totally different verb.)
[]{} is for clothing that's _placed on top of your head_ , such as a hat.
is for small accessories like rings and earrings, that are more _attached_ than placed or hung.
Sometimes more than one is valid - masks, for example, seem to fall inbetween and , and so you can use either one.
(thanks to Darius Jahandarie for some extra info) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Should I start with Hiragana, Katakana or Kanji?
I want to start learning to read Japanese (I already know romaji) and I was wondering which writing system would be better to start with. Or should I start all at the same time? | Usually start by hiragana, then katakana. With this you can learn kanji (reading on'yomi form {}, kun'yomi form {}).
When you get a kanji dictionary you can notice **different ways** to read the same kanji:
* on'yomi form {} usually with reading in katakana
* kun'yomi form {} usually with reading in hiragana
Here have an example of '' kanji at wiktionary: <
Kun'yomi is 'i-ku' (used as verb)
On'yomi (in website is Kan'on) is 'kou' (found in airplane word: {} hi-kou-ki) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji, katakana, learning, hiragana"
} |
Differentiating honorific passive and potential conjugations of ๅบใ
Given the following sentence structure, I am wondering how one differentiates the usage of in the following.
>
The usage of the partial and the suggests a honorific passive conjugation _Will you attend tomorrow's party?_ , but by the same token, I suppose it could be the potential _Are you able to attend tomorrow's party?_
Also, how would this change if it was simply:
> | This probably isn't the answer you were looking for, but: it has to be differentiated using context (via. the subject of the sentence, as well as circumstance).
While this is probably pretty obvious, to break it out a little:
* If you say to your coworker , it is pretty unambiguously the potential.
* If you say to your teacher, it is ambiguous.
This type of ambiguity is quite often resolved by context though (as one might expect):
>
>
>
>
>
A point here is that, in the cases it is ambiguous, it is often not ambiguous in a way that particularly matters:
* "No I can't" logically implies "no I won't"
* "Yes I will" logically implies "yes I can"
* "Yes I can" usually suggests "yes I will" unless specifically stated otherwise
* "No I won't" is probably the hardest response to deal with if you were asking about capability, and in this case you would probably just ask for clarification. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, verbs, conjugations"
} |
ใใ versus ใใชใใงใ(and maybe also in the case of adjectives, ใใชใใฆ๏ผ
Consider the following example sentence (taken from an exercise sheet):
>
Now consider this sentence I made:
>
What is the difference? | There are several ways of saying the same thing:
> **** - literary or stiff expression
> **** - casual / conversational.
> **** - using explicit "because".
I think is used mostly for: โ negative imperative: "" (milder than ) โก in the form of and : "" โข before various verbs: "". In cases โก and โข, can be substituted with .
Based on these, **** and **** are both understandable but sound slightly clumsy or unnatural, perhaps because is not a verb. With a verb instead, and are both fairly correct (except that is rather a literary expression). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words"
} |
ๆฅ{ใใ
ใ}ใซ vs.ใใใซ โ usage in context
In N3 (page 28), I found the following exercise:
> {}{}{}( )
>
> 1\. 2. 3. 4.
I have to fill in with the correct word. I think it's either 1 or 3, but I don't know the difference between those two. I think that to some extent both and can be understood as _immediately_.
In this context, which is the most appropriate word and why? | `` is like `suddenly` I think, this word includes the meanings of _without notice_ or _unexpected_.
`` is immediately, as you mentioned.
The context describes the baby's general habit, so must be _expected_ things. the answer is 3.``. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words, usage"
} |
Difference between ใใฃใจ and ใใคใ
The other day when I was having a brief conversation in Japanese I meant to say "I have always been living here" so I said (the name of my home province) The Japanese person I was speaking with however said this was incorrect, and told me the more appropriate word to use in this situation was such that the sentence would be (the name of my home province).
From my interpretation both of these words mean always, however there are clearly some nuances that I'm misunderstanding. If someone could clarify the meanings of these two words and why is more appropriate here and what kind of situations I would use vs I would be very appreciative.
Thanks! | Quick answer:
- sustained over long period of time
- every time, all the time, etc.
Examples:
> (I've lived in Tokyo for a long time.)
>
> (I always stay at the Imperial Hotel when I have a business trip to Tokyo.)
Hope that helps! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, words, word requests"
} |
When does it make sense to use ใใใงใชใใใ๏ผ
, which isn't particularly common as a sentence-ender, does occasionally get used.
I get the feeling it is pretty curt; I often see it with or or , etc.
However, I don't have a good understanding of when it makes sense to choose it over . Is it when you're trying to be more declarative/emotionless as opposed to emphatic/opinionated? | Basically it's a matter of grammar rather than nuance.
As you may know, in is (semantically almost bleached out but still functioning) topic marker in the theme-rheme structure of Japanese. In other words, it delimits theme and rheme parts of a clause. And one clause may only contain up to one theme and rheme respectively.
Then, what happens if you use two at once in a sentence?
>
You may feel a sense of dissonance because:
* [ [ ] ]
* [ [ ] ]
It has two possible breakdowns so you can't decide which is the main theme of the sentence.
(Note that some people don't feel anything wrong because they conceive to be a monolithic chunk.)
Thus carefully written sentences often omit the in in order to avoid confusing readers by any chance.
* ****
* ****
Of course, in the colloquial language, has taken over them so that the difference between and is neutralized. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "nuances"
} |
Understanding a phrase - ๅฟ
ใใใใชใใใฐใชใใชใใใจใใใพใจใใฆใฟใ
I am trying to understand what looks like an expression, but seems too verbose. And I'm confused by the use of . To put it into context, the title of this page in my guide book is (Understanding the strategy chart at a glance).
>
>
> In order to continue the adventure, if you definitely do the thing you have to do altogether try (???)
This is from
> - do what one needs to do;
>
> and
>
> โ in one go; all at once; altogether
The final part dsoesn't seem to make sense. It's as if is not needed. | Because translating a whole sentence is prohibited here (in what I understand), instead I will leave some fragments of words below. So, please try putting them together into a sentence.
> = try to / start by ing
> = to summarize
> = things
> = have to / must
> = to do (almost equivalent to )
> []{} = invariably / without question | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, set phrases"
} |
Is ใใฉใใซใใใฎใใใใใใงใใใ a correct way to ask for directions?
I visit an office and enquire where (floor, desk, etc) I should go -
>
Would this be an incorrect expression? If so, what is the mistake?
What would be a better way to ask the same? | Even though I think your Japanese sentence has been rewritten by someone IIRC, it is actually much better and, more importantly, more natural than the other answerers have made it seem like.
We do actually say something close to that when we do not know where to go at all in a place like City Hall or any larger place with many sections, rooms, staff members, etc. In other words, when we do not know the exact name of the section or the name of the person in charge of the function for which you have visited.
We say:
>
To make it even better, state what you need to do first as in:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, questions"
} |
Is ๅทใใใ positive/negative/neutral?
From my Japanese reading, I've learned the word , but only in a negative context, connoting that the window-shopper is wasting the salesperson's time. Might it also be used in a positive way? For example, if a shop assistant offers me help, can I decline by saying, (or maybe ; IDK which is better), or does it sound like I'm winding them up? If a friend asks me what I did in town, is a reasonable answer, or is it tantamount to saying "I went and pulled faces at all the shopkeepers"? | is basically negative, and saying "()" to a shop staff is rude. In reverse, if a staff said "" to you, he must be strongly irritated.
Saying "" to your friend can be acceptable depending on the situation, though. Some shops have signs like "" so that people can enter the shop freely. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "nuances"
} |
Using ็ก็ to empathise
`` seems to be a part of some standard phrases whenever I would wish to empathise with a person who in unwell or in distress.
Could someone help with examples of such phrases, and the context where it is appropriate to use. | I'm guessing the phrase you're referring to is and its variants. For example, you'd say this when you make a request of someone and realize that it might be a large undertaking or inconvenience, and you want to express that the person you are asking doesn't need to go to such troubles for your sake. More generally, you would use this phrase when you express hope that someone should not overexert themselves, like when they are sick or under some sort of physical or mental distress. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "set phrases"
} |
ใๅใฎๅฃฐใ่ใใใชใใฆใ้ขใใใจไฟกใใใใ
For a research project in artificial intelligence, I investigated parsing Japanese. There was major problems with ambiguity in the mentioned type of sentence; in most cases the ambiguity is obvious to resolve, but I kinda need the opinion of a native speaker in this case.
My theory is that the is enough to disambiguate between:
>
>
> I believe that I would be able to [meet you without hearing your voice]. (Perhaps meet while bound and gagged in a prison?)
and
>
>
> Even without hearing your voice, I believe that I am able to meet you. (not hearing goes with believe, not meet)
Or maybe both sentences are wrong...they feel awkward to me :/
Am I correct in assuming the comma is crucial there? | These two examples sound kind of weird, so let me add a particle to make them sound natural and understandable.
> A.
> B.
Now the two meanings:
> 1. (I believe) **I can meet you without hearing your voice**.
>
> 2. **I believe without hearing your voice** (that I can meet you).
>
I think in most cases B means 2. But I can't say for sure that B never means 1. Punctuation is sometimes arbitrary.
As for A, it seems completely ambiguous to me. In fact, I find this sentence somewhat hard to understand.
In order to make it mean 1, inserting a comma like may also be possible. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Explaining phrase ใๅฎขๆงๅไฝใใใใ.ใใพ.ใใ.ใใ
The expression `` means _dear customer_. The first part, ``, means _customer_ , or _guest_. That is easy to understand for me. But the meaning and usage of second part, `` is not very clear to me. | _Literally_ , is a respectful way to say "each" or "all". So "All customers" might be a more literal translation.
_Practically_ , is often used as a suffix in formal headings to convey the meaning of "Dear ..." or "Attention all ...". These kinds of headings are often highly stylized and fixed, so don't let it concern you if the translation doesn't work on a literal level. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage, meaning"
} |
Expressing ~no option but
`//` \- are these forms inter-changeable
`(//)`\- are all the forms correct? | Yes, all of the forms are correct and interchangeable for meaning.
Other possible forms include and or .
Colloquially and informally, you can also use though it is heard mostly in Kanto -- , etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Expressing similarity
Below are the 2 forms of similarity expressed for (V) ~nai and (N). Do I summarize these forms correctly?
Self-deduction:
(negative verb)
(noun)
hearsay:
(negative verb)
(noun) | Hearsay seems correct, but for self deduction with and adjectives you have to remove the trailing and add
Here is a chart showing the comparison between the two (taken from Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar)
!Comparison of -souda forms
While it doesn't directly include it in the chart, the negative forms are implicitly included under the -adjectives. That goes for both and . The exception to this is , which has to be conjugated from the form instead - .
As can be seen from the chart, you were correct to assume you can't use after nouns. However, i believe conveys the feeling that even though they look like a you already know they not. You might use or to say something is probably something else.
(She is probably a princess)
Or could use the form.
(She appears to be a princess)
References:
1. Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar
2. Guide to Japanese - Similarity of Hearsay | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Meaning of ~ใจ่จใใใใฐใใใพใงใ ใใโฆ
>
To me it sounds similar to:
>
* If it is completely different and I totally misunderstand the meaning of ~โฆ, how would you translate it?
* If it is similar but different, what is the difference? In what situations would you use A but not B, and in what cases would you use B but not A? | There is a meaning of that you appear to be unfamiliar with, judging from your paraphrase.
, in this context, means " **(that is) the end of the story** " and for this meaning, it is very often paired with hypothetical forms such as /,/, , etc.
{}{}
My casual translation of would be something like:
> Even though it would be the end of the story if you said it was just a matter of taste, I just can't seem to like the interior design of this store.
The nuance is that the speaker knows that it is not him who has the final say on the matter but he wants to state his opinion anyway.
Your paraphrase , however, means something quite different from the original. It means:
"Even if I were told that it was a matter of taste, I just couldn't like the interior design of this store."
This sounds as if the speaker still had some control over the matter. It sounds like he was complaining and sounds pretty assertive if not aggresive. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "meaning, expressions"
} |
Meaning of ใฆใฏใชใใชใ
I understand that `` means 'must not/should not'.
However,I cannot make any sense out of the above sentence that I read in a book.
Would appreciate if someone could assist with the meaning. | Quite simply,
> = "You must not ~~."
>
> = "You must ~~."
means:
"One must make a/the presentation based on correct information." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Why is China ใกใ
ใใใ while Korea is ใใใใ? Why the difference between ใ and ใ?
If my textbook didn't get it wrong, then China is while Korea is . I checked the dictionary and is certainly written as . So why is it in China's case? | First, it's a phenomenon called rendaku voicing, in case you don't know.
Still, it remains as a tough question why China is read as , which has been asked in a Japanese forum too. The only sure thing is, []{} ("China") is an exception among other country names ([]{}, []{}, []{} or even []{}).
Possible explanations are:
* is considered as one solid word as a whole, while other countries are seen as compounds of (Korean) + (nation), (British) + (nation) etc. Sino-Japanese compounds are less likely to rendaku.
* Maybe analogy to that of in Japan.
* Exception is exception, like you can't tell why Germans call some countries like _Turkey_ with an article ("die Tรผrkei"), or Polish say that they are _in Ukraine_ as if it's not a country ("na Ukrainie").
* [ **EDIT** ] I came up with another one: Most country names could be also analyzed into "State X" that is appositive, but is adnominal: "the middle country". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
} |
How to tell the difference between ๅ
๏ฝใใ๏ฝ and ๅ
๏ฝใใ๏ฝ?
Someone on a Japanese learners' forum I frequent posted a question asking someone to help him translate the following:
>
I translated the bit as , but another commenter (who I think has more expertise) translated it as . We both ended up with similar meanings (I suggested "into the future" whereas he simply said "forward").
But my question is, given that both and have similar meanings, how can I tell whether I'm supposed to read it as or ? Are both acceptable? | in your example is definitely read as .
There are two reasons we couldn't pronounce it .
1. []{} is almost obsolete as an independent word, merely remains inside a few compounds (ex. []{} "the other day, in advance", []{} "being the player that moves first, forstallment").
2. []{} only has a meaning as "beforehand", but not "future" or "forward".
By the way, could have two interpretations, "to go ahead (towards something comes next)" if you take as an object, or "to go ahead first", as an adverb. I guess the first one should fit the case.
cf. the Japanese-Japanese dictionary entry for [[]{}]( and [[]{}]( | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "readings"
} |
What is the difference between ่ช{ใใ}ใ and ่ฉฑ{ใฏใช}ใ?
What is the difference between {} and {}?
I know that I can say #1, but it's correct to say #2? If it's ok, sentence 1 and 2 have the same meaning?
> 1.{}{}{}
>
> 2.{}{}{} | > _I speak Japanese._
>
> _I talk about Japanese._
Since has no special meaning associated with languages, it only means that you are talking what you know or how you feel about Japanese. It's quite popular in Japan to give the title to books that celebrities reveal something or specialists express their thoughts.
Though I translated into "speak Japanese", the verb doesn't have "be able to speak" sense, so every time you have to explicitly use potential form when you question about ability.
> _Do you speak Japanese?_
compared to:
> _Are you going to speak Japanese?_
A Japanese thesaurus has a neat summary including the difference of and :
| ...loudly | ...a perceptive comment | ... English | ... one's past | ...oh! (a yell of surprise)
---|---|---|---|---|---
| | | ร | ร |
| | | | | ร
| | | ร | | ร
| | | | | ร
| | | ร | ร | ร | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "words, usage"
} |
Interpreting ใใใฆใใใ ใใพใ
> Speaker 1: {}{}{}
> Speaker 2:
Please help understand this conversation - especially the construct. What would this translate into English as? | ## The form
The sentence, ``, is a typical example of use of {} (humble language).
## Translation
Let's make the Speaker2's sentence a normal form. (Earlier step is politer.)
Step 1. ``
Step 2. ``
Step 3. ``
Step 4. ``
So, these sentences can be translated like:
> Speaker1: You can go for a meal earlier than me.
>
> Speaker2 (Literal): Well, I do so.
>
> Speaker2 (Free): Well, I go.
Speaker1 allows Speaker2 to go for a meal earlier than Speaker1.
Then, Speaker2 responds to him.
(The translation on the meriororen's comment is not correct because Speaker2 has already been permitted to go when s/he responds.)
## Reference: Kenjogo
Humble language, {}, is used when you talk to someone higher ranking than you.
Here is a great explanation: Business Japanese โ Keigo II โ Kenjougo Japanese Talk Online | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, politeness, causation, giving and receiving"
} |
What is this kanji?็+้
So I came across a kanji I can't seem to find in any online dictionary. It's basically the following two characters stuck together (I'm reading a physical book, so can't copy paste it), and is followed by . After trawling through jisho, the closest I've found is , which would make sense in context, but definitely isn't the same. | Your guess seems to be right. is considered to be an (variant form) for . There is no difference in meaning. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji"
} |
ใ ใ่ถณใ ใฃใ == useless leg?
When I look up the phrase , I see it translated as "It was a Wild goose chase." I found this bizarre, since it seems like it would mean "It was a useless foot/leg." is this some sort of figure of speech that means the same or something similar to "wild goose chase" or am I missing something? Thanks for any help. | I believe []{} is derived from []{}[]{} ("move one's feet in vain"), which is one of a series of counterintuitive idioms Japanese vocabulary has.
* **[]{}[]{}** "little stomach get empty"
actually describing "be a little hungry" (cf. []{}[]{} "be hungry")
* **[]{}[]{}** "blow on a big conch"
actually, "blow on a conch loudly" or "tell a tall story" (cf. []{} "talk big")
eventually []{} itself stands for "tall story".
* **[]{}[]{}** "push a side cart"
actually, "push cart from the side" or "ram through"
eventually []{}, "unreasonable demand".
* **[]{}[]{}[]{}** "be pulled by the rear hair"
actually, "be pulled by the hair from behind" or "too sorry to leave"
* **[]{}[]{}** "break a useless bone"
actually, "break a bone in vain" or "make vain efforts" (cf. []{}[]{} "make efforts")
eventually []{}, "vain efforts". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji, set phrases, idioms, past"
} |
Reading ไนๅไน as "tsukumo"
Why can be read as "tsukumo"? I don't understand how those kanji could be read that way. | I looked up in my etymology dictionary ('s ) :)
The answer goes like this:
1. was originally a name of a kind of plant (modern standard name: ; English name is _softstem bulrush_ or _great bulrush_ according to Wikipedia).
2. A compound word < + "disheveled white hair (especially of old women)" was coined, because of its resemblance to the plant. This word is seen in from the 10th century.
3. The kanji came with the word. This kanji was actually kind of a word-played ateji intending to mean "white hair". Its logic was like a riddle and went like this: **white = = ( without ) = 100 - 1 = 99 = **.
4. Afterwards []{} became to be used without in some other words (mainly proper nouns), like "Tsukumo Bay" in Ishikawa pref., or several rare family names like , []{}.
So, how amusing. In modern Japanese, []{} means "the celebration of 99th birthday", and it must be under the same logic (in the reverse way). But few people know why reads , I guess. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "etymology, readings"
} |
Atypical use of ~ใใใพใ
I came across the following sentence:
> ,
Please help understand the `~` form here.
What would be the translation of this? | An expression like "" or " (this expression is a little archaic)" are called "" in Japanese.
Usually, "" is translated into "Subject make/have/get Object Verb~"
For example. Translation " ," into Japanese like this.
> I apologize for being late and having you waiting. I'm making the person in charge fixing | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Are programming languages referred to by their English names or do they have Japanese names?
What is the correct way to talk about coding languages in Japanese? Should the original English name be preserved in the following context?
> Python2014
>
> Top Python Coder Japan 2014 | You don't have to katakana-ize the names of programming languages or softwares. Here is an article about popular programming languages, written in Japanese.
And this may be off-topic, but the word (coder) is often considered lower than (programmer) at least in Japanese. implies a lower-grade, inexperienced person who only writes programming codes as he is told, but is not involved in architecture design. (I think this is the general tendency in Japanese, but it varies from company to company)
So perhaps you may want to translate this "coder" as more generic (or ), if you want it to sound more respectable.
> Python 2014 | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
What's the kanji for "appointed location"
Can't seem to remember.
Kind of like how means "appointed day," I'm pretty sure I've seen a kanji for something like but I can't find one. I've found but I don't know if it has the same implication as . | I found the "" entry in , which says this word means "this place". But I cannot find the "" entry in . The word "" is rarely used, so may omit this word.
Since "" has a same pronunciation as "", which means "at first" or "at the beginning", and a use of "" is more frequent than a use of "", "" used in talks may be confusing.
When I want to say something meaning "a place where the specified event will be held", I use a word "". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words"
} |
Usage of the phrase/word ใงใใฎใง
Why are there no dictionary entries for ? I've searched JED, Tagaini Jisho, and Rikaichan. It seems to have an equivalent meaning with but I'm not exactly sure. However I've heard it being used by my Japanese president, my Japanese teacher, and others. | Looks like you're interested in at the beginning of a sentence?
Then yes, that is a polite version of conjunctive , meaning "Therefore", "So", etc. The casual equivalent is .
However there is a controversy as to whether / at the beginning of a sentence is correct. It seems most Japanese dictionaries do not explain this kind of /. Announcers at TV Asahi state that is incorrect at the beginning of a sentence but is polite and acceptable.
I personally feel / should be avoided in written documents. But they are common and natural in spoken language. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "dictionary"
} |
When does one use ใใใใใพใใ versus ใใใใพใใ?
I know that when giving something, you can say **** \- there's only one word for when giving. But when receiving something, it's either or .
It's my understanding that, when the subject is myself, we use , and when the subject is the other person, it's . Is this correct, and are there other considerations that I should be aware of? | Your recognition is totally right. Here are some examples and differences.
##
> **{}** {}{} (I got an umbrella from my father.)
You can see that the subject is ` (I)` and `` can be applied for this case. This sentence _can_ imply that the person `` asked his father to give an umbrella for him/her in several cases.
##
> **{}** {}{} (My father gave me an umbrella.)
The subject is `{}` and `` should be appropriate for this case.
## Feeling
Both sentences can imply that either `` asked him to give umbrella or the father gave him/her an umbrella voluntarily.
In my opinion the second sentence can be associated with _voluntariness_ more than first one. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, giving and receiving"
} |
How do you refer to items in a list?
Given a list of things...
1. dog
2. cat
3. fish
How would you say...
1. _the second item in the list_ : ?
2. _all three of them_ : ?
3. _two of them_ (not regarding the position in the list): or ?
Is this pattern correct? | You are almost there. ~{}3~ sounds definitely off, but 3{} is fine.
## The first, the second, the third...
* {}{}{} _Slightly_ more formal tone.
* 1{}2{}3{} _Slightly_ more casual tone, perhaps used more often between people of equal / similar status.
## All 3 of them, all of them
* 3
*
* 3
*
### If there were 2 items
* 2
* {}
> **Note:** In this case you wouldn't say or
## Two of them
* 2
* 2
* * *
## How do you say 123...?
* 1 โ
* 2 โ
* 3 โ ****
* 4 โ ****
* 5 โ
* 6 โ ****
* 7 โ
* 8 โ ****
* 9 โ
* 10 โ ****
### What about 10?
The old pronunciation is to all intents and purposes never used in spoken conversation. For numbers after 10 you would resort to ...
*
*
* | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "numbers, counters"
} |
Direct object or directional ใ
> .
Translation: After graduation my brother wandered from job to job.
Here, are both 's ( **** and **** ) used in the direct object sense or in the directional "leaving" sense? For the latter: my brother graduated _from_ his school; he wandered _from_ job to job. | ###
Japanese takes institutions as **direct object** , unlike English _graduate from_. I remember how my English teacher was telling us not to say something like "graduate high school".
###
Your translation is correct, but corresponds to "from ... to ..." in your sentence. Most Japanese movement verbs take **locations where they take place** with . I guess most of the native speakers couldn't tell the usage from the direct object one. A dictionary says:
> โฆโโโ
> Indicates location where the action pass through, used with a verb of motion; through/via ...; "go _on_ the mountain road", "run _in_ a hall", "go across the mountain"
P.S.
Maybe it's more understandable to assume all these verbs have invisible English prepositions built in, like "to go-on", "to run-in", "to wander-around" etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particles"
} |
"Year of the X" - is there an idiom?
So, if we were talking about "this is the Year of the Dog", I think the correct rendering of that in Japanese would be , with the reading . But does that extend outside of the astrological sense?
For example, if TIME magazine declared that "this was the Year of the Selfie", would that seem naturally phrased as ? Would it be better to render it as ? Is there some third, more idiomatic way, to phrase the sentiment "the year when X was prominent"? | The idiomatic way of saying "This was the year of " is " **** ". Dropping "" sounds very weird.
And if this _Selfie_ refers to a self-portrait, is more natural.
> 2013 "The Year of The Selfie" (< | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "idioms, time"
} |
What is wrong in "ๆฃฎ็ฐใใใฏๆฐ้็บใฎ่ฌใใใฃใฆ็
ๆฐใๅ
ๆใใ"?
> OK
>
> **** OK
> **** KO
My textbook* says the third sentence is not OK, but I don't understand why, as it seems to respect the usage rules explained in the same textbook.
Can someone enlighten me?
*:N1 | couldn't be used with the tools which directly takes effect, but with **methods** or something helps achieve purpose **where the linkage is perceived abstractly**.
Your third example,
>
means _the new medicine cured his/her disease_ , thus unacceptable. In contrast,
>
only mentions how his/her state of mind helped when Morita overcame the disease. (At least, the effort couldn't attack pathogens, according to modern understanding.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, usage, jlpt"
} |
Categorizing kanji variants - is there a "proper" form?
Here are kanji variants:
* (as an image: !enter image description here)
*
In case it does not display correctly for you, the first _kanji_ is unicode U+FA45.
Is `` considered a variant of the much more common ``? Or, are `` and `` just considered mutual variants of each other?
More broadly, do you say that the most frequently used version of a _kanji_ with a variant is "the" kanji? And that the kanji that is much less frequently used is the variant?
Also: What about rare cases such as `` and ``, both of which are very frequently used? | The Japanese Ministry of Education has published a list of kanji. I think this is the official document: <
The "proper" form is whatever form is in that document. So the answer is basically that the government determines the "proper" form. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji"
} |
ใญใ in the Kansai dialect
I've heard the ending a lot in {} but I'm still struggling to find when it's used. Can you use it with all kinds and conjugations of verbs? I've heard over and over, but if I try to use with e.g. I can't make it sound right in my head. And what is the standard Japanese equivalent of If it is, then what's the difference between and | > Can you use it with all kinds and conjugations of verbs?
Yes, I think so.
(verb+/)
โ ()/()
โ
โ ()/()
โ
โ ()/()
โ
(negative)
โ ()/()
โ
โ ()/()
โ
(i-adjective+/)
โ ()/()
โ
(noun+/na-adjective+/)
/ โ ()/()
/ โ /
โ ()/()
โ / | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "dialects, kansai ben"
} |
What type of romanization is "Hatchลbori"?
I found somewhere on the internet that the romanization of {} is written as "Hatchลbori".
1. Given that scheme, how could you write ""?
2. Given that scheme, how could you write ""?
3. What is the name of that romanization scheme? | This is an example of Hepburn romanization, which attempts to represent Japanese according to how it is pronounced. With geminated , it's standard to use tch instead of a double c, so instead of "maccha" you would write "matcha" for . Similarly, long vowels use a macron (bar) instead of doubling, so "Hatchลbori" instead of "Hatchoobori."
{} is "shuppatsu." (not a word) would be "shupatsu." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "rลmaji"
} |
How to find words you cant find in a dictionary? Help with translating Dragon Ball
I have been learning japanese for 6 months now and thought that I would have a stab at buying a Japanese comic book to try and read/ translate but I'm struggling! There are many different words that are included in the comic that do not appear in the dictionary or in my Google searches. One example is:
- grandfather
These last two words I have no idea about. I've spent my entire lunch break on just these two. Any help on what they mean and how to better look up words like this?
Thanks | Have a look at the resources : Resources for learning Japanese a number of online dictionaries are listed.
If you look for example at Jisho, both your examples are listed. I have seen some people dislike Edict-based dictionaries so please keep an open mind and try other things.
* `{}`
* Grandfather (may be used after name as honorific).Familiar language, See also {}, usu.
* Male senior-citizen (may be used after name as honorific).usu.
* `` Noun
* (animal) feed; fodder.
* Bait; lure; enticement.
* `{}`
* Kuru verb - special class,To fetch; to go and get. Other form
For the last one, the confusion arose from the fact that you mistook `` (small used for doubling consonants) for ``. I honestly think that reading anything after only 6 months of Japanese will be really hard, but good luck and I hope this helps ! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, manga"
} |
meaning of ใฎใใฟใณใฎใใฟใณ with reference
I tried to add a definition for to JDIC using references on the Internet.
They're slow to add it (or reject it) which is highly unusual. I'm guessing the provided references are not authoritative enough.
Would anybody have any good double checked references for this ?
the current definition I have is :
* () to obliterate, to destroy completely, to inflict tremendous pain | I don't have any authoritative reference for now, but I think the definition you provided has room for improvement.
///etc is a mimetic word which describes the status of someone severely beat up by a fight. More common synonyms are "" and "". These can also be metaphorically used for one-sided arguments/debates/games. I have not seen used for inanimate objects (e.g. ).
And usually means to knock someone down, maybe until he loses consciousness, but does not imply complete destruction or death. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "definitions"
} |
Could you repeat that please?
I recently was on the phone with a Japanese customer service representative and I couldn't quite understand what she had said. I wanted her to repeat what she had said so I said something along the lines of 'again please' or 'one more time please'. What I really wanted to say was 'could you repeat that please'.
How do I say the latter in Japanese? | is what I was looking for. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "phrases, english to japanese"
} |
How do you decide the alias of the radical for kanjis such as "ๅญ" and "ๆง"?
I recently came across a document that says the radical of "" is "". And I think that is wrong. Any "_" must be in the left region of a kanji (or is that just a guideline?).
The aliases for "" are listed as: []. Which of these statements is correct?:
* ""{}
* ""
* ""
* ""
Just like with "", there are lots of radicals that can be placed in different regions. So how do you decide the proper radical alias to use for each kanji? For example, the radical of "" is definitely "". But, should the radical of "" also be called ""?
**CLARIFICATION**
I am not asking how to identify the radical of a kanji. Rather, I want to know how to decide the name of the kanji radical aliases.
= ( + )
"" is perfectly placed. A radical alias with a "" suffix goes on top.
"" seems wrong because a radical alias with a "" suffix goes in the left region.
= ( + **?** )
I'm thinking those suffixes are just guidelines. | Words like and are not arbitrary suffixes. So the list of names you're seeing are not "aliases" we can use whenever. See: < that explains in Japanese where each name type goes. It's also done a little better on the page.
Here's my rough translation of that with some slight amending:
Placed on the left part.
Placed on the right part.
At the top.
On the bottom
Makes a box around it e.g.,
hangs around the top , etc.
left and bottom (the parts that are left and bottom)
Thus a on the bottom should not be called nor a on the right . In general, the first name on the list of words for that bushu is the one you should use unless its occupying a specific position that has a name.
What I do (as a non-native speaker) and what I hear other people do is things like (without really caring which is the actual radical on the character):
or .
=
For instance, is "". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "radicals"
} |
What does ใใใใ mean?
Right now, I'm reading the Japanese translation of Catcher in the Rye.
This sentence has been puzzling me:
I know that the author is saying that his brother owns a Jaguar, but I'm not sure what means exactly.
So my question is: How is used and when is it used? | This is a colloquial contraction of , from . Holden thinks that his brother is a big phony because he has a Jaguar, and he's expressing his negative attitude toward that with . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
} |
Meaning of ๅ
ฅใ in ๅธฏใๅ
ฅใ
From JapanesePod101:
>
> The fourteen ball has a green stripe.
I'm not sure how and why is being used here. There doesn't seem to be any clear fit amongst the dictionary meanings of . I usually understand as `to enter/to be inside (intransitive)`, so the stripe instead of the ball being the subject of seems a bit weird - shouldn't the ball be "inside" the stripe? | According to a , โ ()โ also means that something exists on something else. Thus, your example means that a green stripe is on the ball.
The dictionary provides another example: โโ (a letter with your name on it). In my experience, this meaning of โโ is used only when something is written or drawn.
A related example is โโ, which is listed as another meaning in the dictionary. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
} |
ๅ่ฉใฎไฟฎ้ฃพใจใ๏ฝใใใปใ๏ฝใใฉใใใใซใคใใฆใฎ่ณชๅ
> ****
> ****
> **** " **You** know what you are doing."
>
> **** " **I** know what you are doing."
| >
``
>
* > **** ****
> "You know what (you/I/he/she/X) is doing."
> " _You_ know what (you/I/he/she/X) is doing (but someone else doesn't)."
* > **** ****
> "(You/I/he/she/X) knows what _you_ are doing (but not someone else.)"
* > **** ****
> " _You_ are the one who knows what (you/I/he/she/X) is doing."
* > **** ****
> "(You/I/he/she/X) knows what you are doing."
> "(You/I/he/she/X) knows what _you_ are doing."
| stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
โใงใใใใใใๅถๅบฆใ โ Help with one line from manga translation
>
As in the title, could you help with the translation to English of this one sentence? If you want the context, here
I've got an English version here too, but it doesn't make any sense(at least to me). | First of all, it's not And it's slang (or contraction?) for which means "But that's a good system". [Might have some contextual variances].
I'd also recommend asking questions in a different way. Straight up translations aren't allowed here. If you can dissect the sentence a bit (and maybe offer an attempt) it's more likely to not get flagged. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, manga"
} |
The modification target of ๅฟใฟๅซใใใ
The sentence is taken from a fantasy visual novel.
>
It's a bit unclear for me which clause is modified by the word Does it mean: "The abhorred/detested **enemy** of the word" or "The abhorred/detested **world's** enemy"?
**Edit 1** : Full sentence provided | modifies (). The first half of the sentence says and conflict with each other in 'this world', and this "" is detested by both and . Interpreting this part as "detested world" is grammatically possible, but it doesn't match the context. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "relative clauses"
} |
How to convert verbs from polite form to dictionary form?
Does anyone have a good rule for converting to dictionary (u)form from masu form regarding the different verb groups? Most websites start with dictionary and go to masu but I learned starting with masu. | As you may know, Japanese verbs are either godan (five step) or ichidan (one step) verbs.
Godan Verbs:
remove the masu e.g. ikimasu -> iki
then change the final syllable to a 'u' sound, e.g. iki -> iku
other examples: iimasu -> ii -> iu
nomimasu -> nomi -> nomu
Ichidan verbs:
remove the masu
then add 'ru', e.g. tabemasu -> tabe -> taberu
The trick of course is knowing what sort of verb is it. Generally, verbs whose final stem syllable (before masu) is an 'e' sound are ichidan (tabemasu, akemasu). Howeverm, there others (dekimasu, karimasu). So, you will have to learn it for each verb. However, it's quite easy to form the dictionary form. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "verbs, conjugations, politeness"
} |
ไฝใ means 'Nothing' instead of 'What also'
I recently learnt that means 'nothing' (e.g. means 'Nothing scares (me).').
But how do I say 'What else'? (e.g. 'What else goes well with this dress?' or 'What else never dies?) | I would go with "" 'What also goes well with this dress?'โ **** 'What also never dies?โ **** As mentioned in a comment above, this is more of a "what else" as opposed to a "what also." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, words"
} |
How to understand the meaning of ๆ{ใใจ}ใใ
I know that from adjective we can make adjectival noun like: {} -> - means _high_ and _hight_. But how to understand/translate the word ? I heard it in one of _C-ute_ songs. | I think I've figured out what you are asking about. Mental adjective + can refer to _**one's feeling**_ as well as _quality_ invokes the emotion. I'm not sure I'm able to tell their difference using English words, but you can paraphrase it with when it means the feeling. Maybe what you encountered was this kind of usage, where in this case = โ โ "earnest love for you". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
} |
confusion with location words
I'm learning from the "Japanese from zero" course (currently book 2). It translates the following sentence:
Konbini
as
There is a convenience store behind the bookstore on the left.
Firstly, am I write in thinking that konbini and are the wrong way round?
Secondly, in the English translation 'on the left' implies that the bookstore is to the left of the speaker. The Japanese sentence suggests that the 'behind' and 'left' are relative to the konbini. So I would translate this sentence as
There is a bookstore at the back left of the convenience store. Am I correct? If so how would you translate the the original sentence (There is a convenience store behind the bookstore on the left) into Japanese? Thanks | For your first question, regarding , you are correct in that their translation seems to have flipped honya and konbini.
For your second question, it's relative to the store. The particle in konbini [...] indicates where it's relative to. If you wish to say _your_ left side, or on _my_ left you would just say . means "side", and in this case your left side.
For your third question regarding the translation of "There is a convenience store behind the bookstore on the left," you could say konbini(/) which translates literally to, "As for the konbini, behind and to the left of the bookstore it exists." There's a few other ways you could say it, I personally would probably say it like this (thought you may not have learned this grammar yet) konbini The particle when used after the plain form of a verb, in this case means, "whenever" or "if", so that sentence translates to, "If you go behind the bookstore, the konbini is on you're left." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "syntax"
} |
order of words in a sentence
I am a beginner in Japanese.
I want to say "There is a car, that I want to show you."
There is a car, should be:
I want to show you: (may be? Is this right?)
I want to show you this:
but this sounds really weird to me:
What is the right way to say this?
Thank you for reading this far. Any help is appreciated :) | is correct. (want to show) is also correct, however, for the sentence you would probably want to omit and you wouldn't say either. would already imply it was you who wanted to show the car to the person you're talking with.
There are several ways one could translate "There is a car, that I want to show you." The way I would probably do it here would be () "(I) have a car that I want to show you." You're probably already familiar with sentences like {} "There is a red car", but you can also create _noun-modifying clauses_ , in this case, the noun is the car, using verbs as well, so long as the verbs are in the plain/dictionary form. Another example is something like "Who was the person who did not come yesterday?" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Is ๅๅใฎไธ a natural way of referring to "a quarter" as in "a three-month duration"?
Is a natural way of referring to "a quarter" as in "a three-month duration" (usually e.g. January-March, April-June, July-September, or October-November) in Japanese?
Japanese Stack Overflow uses on its users page to mean "quarter" in this sense, but that looks kind of strange to me. I know that means "one quarter" as in "one fourth" or "25%", but can it also be used (without any other qualifiers, like ) to mean "a three-month duration"?
Also, while we're here, what is the most natural way of referring to "a quarter" in this sense? I'm aware of ; is that the best option? | I agree that "" in the current _Users_ page of Japanese SE is weird.
is a technical term that is exclusively used in financial reports, business plans, tax calculation, etc. Generally speaking, you can't use in casual/private situations, and you have to use "141" or "3" instead:
> 141
> = 13
> ([*] -- Weird)
However can explicitly mean the year is delimited into four at the beginning of months. Only by using can people notice the current started on October 1st, and the rep count for this will end at the end of 2014. If we used "3" instead, people would interpret it as "the last 3 months", which is not the case.
So I think is the best word that describes the SE's rule, although it may look a bit stiff. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
} |
What does it mean when newspapers give furigana for ๅธธ็จ{ใใใใใ} kanji?
In these following examples, a few words are given furigana:
So, it looks like that furigana is provided when a {} kanji needs to be read. That makes sense. But, here are exceptions: . While giving furigana for straight-up kanji happens rarely, it does happen and I can't detect why.
So, what is up when an adult newspaper gives furigana for {} kanji that are not using []{} readings? What metadata is revealed when a (for a native speaker) seemingly simple to read word is given furigana? Asahi and Yomiuri are written for Japanese native adults. Why then given them an assist with reading? | Newspapers do not 100% stick to the kanji. They have their own style guidelines for kanji use, and there is such a thing as the "".
This includes:
Kanji not in the joyo treated as joyo:
>
Kanji in the joyo treated as non-joyo:
>
Additional non-joyo readings treated as joyo:
> -
Individual newspapers then have their own adjustments to this list. Asahi actually has the largest adjustments, and lists 66 joyo characters they treat as non-joyo (including the seven listed above).
This PDF contains the published in response to the new joyo list. It is quite thorough, not just a list of kanji you can/can't use. For example, for there's a warning note that it should be if referring to the plant, to be used only for proper nouns (e.g. , the reason that kanji is in the new list anyway). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "furigana"
} |
ใๅ็ใฏ่ฏใๆใๅบใซใชใใพใใใ "Pictures make for great souvenirs"?
I was going through some Japanese phrases when this came up
According to my limited Japanese knowledge, that means "Pictures become great memories." However, the translation present in the source material is "Pictures make for great souvenirs."
I looked up , but couldn't find "souvenir" as a definition. I was just wondering which of the translations are correct, since the disparity of meaning between them is too big for both to be correct. | As far as I can tell, 'Pictures become great memories' is a literal translation whereas 'Pictures make for great souvenirs' is a translation that is more contextualised (You keep pictures for the sentimental value, thus they are keepsakes/souvenirs/momentos). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, words"
} |
Should ใใฝใฆใซใ be pronounced as "so u ru" or "so: ru"?
According to the ipadic attached to Mecab, it's "so u ru".
According to the bccwj dict attached to Julius, it's "so: ru". Which one is correct? Or are they both OK? | is the pronunciation given in the NHK, but both pronunciations are in use; some speakers pronounce it instead.
From _The Sounds of Japanese_ (Vance 2008), pages 67-68:
> Katakana spellings of recent borrowings and foreign proper names with ( _u_ ) instead of (the length mark) do represent /ou/, but these are rare; _Souru_ 'Seoul' in Table 3-8 is one of very few examples (and many speakers do have the pronunciation /soHru/ rather than /souru/).37
From footnote 37:
> 37The entry in Kindaichi and Akinaga 2001 gives (implying /ou/) first but also gives (implying /oH/). NHK 1998:1015 gives only in its list of foreign place names.
Note: the /H/ symbol in phonemic transcriptions indicates a long vowel. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "pronunciation, long vowels"
} |
About a line in a TV drama which is hard to understand
In the 2nd episode of "Tokyo Love Story", from 26:55 to 27:00
<
What is the word/phrase after ? | It sounds like (or ) to me. is the Japanese term for "call waiting".
I haven't watched the full episode, but this would make sense in context if Satomi (the woman in the apron) is "putting Mikami on hold" while she gets closer to Nagao, or something to that effect.
The meaning of this idiom is pretty transparent (once you know what means), but I have no idea whether it is common - hopefully a native speaker and/or person who lives in Japan can chime in. There are about a dozen Google results for `""` and about a dozen more for `""`, for what it's worth. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "phrases, listening"
} |
I've never seen a sentence that uses ใ and ใฏ together like this before
> ****
I've checked online but I can't seem to find a proper explanation on how is being used here. Individually, I know they mean ( = question marker, = topic Marker). I've rechecked the source book ( _An Integrated Approach To Intermediate Japanese_ ) countless times to make sure it wasn't a typo either.
Is it asking a question and marking the whole thing in implied quotes using ? Like how I can say "'Are you there?', asked Bob?"
Or am I completely off in my interpretation?
Edit: It was brought to my attention that I made a mistake. Originally I had when instead it should've been . Thank you to senshin and BurakUeda for pointing that out. | Most likely the original text should be:
> ****
which means "whether it is difficult or easy" But somehow turned into a . This commonly occurs when I scan documents and convert them with OCR software. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
} |
ใใ as a prefix - clarification please
I have the following title:
>
which I think is roughly saying there is a that in advance of finishing there is a checklist (can anybody help with the literal translation?).
My question is regarding as a prefix. I assume this is - to do. And to finish or graduate. But to me seems superfluous.
What is the difference between these two?
>
>
> | (โ) โ +
is not a prefix, rather is one of a great many productive verb suffixes. Moreover, in this case using just sounds a bit strange to me (not native though).
Your final examples are the same as asking what the difference is between "be sure to check off what you've finished" vs "finished doing". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs"
} |
Correct way to say "I am a beginner in Japanese"
What is the correct way to say: "I am a beginner in Japanese".
Google Translate shows the translation is:
> ****
However, Google search shows:
> ****
has a lot more hits.
Which one of these is correct? | The right way to say it is:
>
>
> I'm a beginner of Japanese language.
However, if you use the other variant, you'll still be understood, of course. After all, you are a beginner. :)
Still, it's kind of difficult to say this. Why not say something simple, like:
>
>
> I study Japanese. I'm not skilled yet.
You'll likely be saying the first thing in any case, and the second part is what you're looking for.
Edit: as pointed out by Shizuma_Hanazono, it's better still to say:
> ****
This means you are currently studying Japanese. The form (progressive tense) is used to indicate ongoing actions. The earlier sentence I gave you is simplified, and if you're a beginner you're probably only familiar with the form. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "particles, particle ใฎ, particle ใง"
} |
If ใใฏใ marks a topic, and ใใใ marks a subject, what does ใใงใใ do in terms of nuance?
When using it means the word before it is the topic of the sentence, it also implies contrast. (e.g. means, "As for me, I am a dog" This means that I'm not a cat.)
When using it means the word before it is a subject, it is picked out of several possibilities that may also work. (e.g. means, "I am the one who is the dog" This means that I am the dog who is being looked for, or picked out of other creatures who might be dogs, depending on context)
These are the nuances of the particles that I'm aware of (Please post others, as I'd really like to learn as much about them as possible).
is shortened from , if it was theoretically natural to say and move the to the beginning of the sentence to say a noun is also another noun, (e.g. has the exact same meaning as my first example, except it is more polite and usually used in writing) what nuances would carry? | You technically can split and place a topic or something in between, but this is really very unusual (with one exception, which I'll mention in a moment). is technically possible, but is rare enough to be quite noticeable - it places a strong focus on the predicate noun ( here), which is further amplified by the rarity of the construction. You can only very rarely place a whole noun in between and , and I would avoid doing it if you're not trying to be fancy - certainly I would not expect to hear that in colloquial speech.
You can, however, quite easily topicalise the argument that's marked with , resulting in appearing in there:
> .
This construction generally is used in contrast situations, meaning that on its own, this example doesn't sound quite like a complete sentence. It makes a bit more sense in a context like this:
> .
which means something like 'I'm not a cat, but I _am_ a dog.' | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What does ๅ
ซ have to do with [ๅ
ซใคๅฝใใ]ใใใคใใใใ?
For the longest time, I had never seen _yatsuatari_ written down. I always figured it was written , which I figured would have been derived from or something.
Imagine my surprise when I discovered that it was actually written ! I found myself rather confused by the kanji here. What does "eight" have to do with "venting one's anger on other people"? | I think it means to vent the anger in the 8 compass directions. I.e. you are so angry that the effects reach every direction around you.
Consider . It refers to all sides or everywhere. I think refers to the part | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words, etymology"
} |
Polite Way of Saying "I can't...(answer the phone)" (ใใใญใ vs. ใงใใชใ)
I'd like to ask about a polite way to say "I can't (do something for you)". I'm sure the answer will depend on the context, so specifically, I'm curious about how to convey "I won't be able to answer the phone from..." over email in a business setting.
My attempt is:
11021
My specific questions are:
1. Is valid for politely giving this type of "excuse" for why you can't do something?
2. Can also be used for politely giving this type of "excuse" for why you can't do something? (e.g., "โฆ")
3. If neither of these are polite/appropriate in this case, what is a better alternative? | > 1. Is valid for politely giving this type of "excuse" for why you can't do something?
>
~~ or~~ is better. and I think, it's better not to mention about the detailed reason.
> 2. Can also be used for politely giving this type of "excuse" for why you can't do something? (e.g., "โฆ")
>
Yes.
> 3. If neither of these are polite/appropriate in this case, what is a better alternative?
>
"11021 ~~~~ " | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
} |
Is ๅฟใ๏ผใใใใใชใ๏ผ used in contemporary language?
I'm currently watching Rurouni Kenshin, and Kenshin says a lot to express his gratitude. I looked it up a little and based on this it seems like it's old Samurai language, but I wonder if people use it today with no intention to be Samurai-ish? Sort of like "I appreciate it"? | No. is one of the most famous /, but it's never used in ordinary conversations today. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "usage, expressions, archaic language"
} |
What does this mean ๅ
ๆใไฝๆฅใไผ็คพใใใใใฟใพใใใใ
I come across the following sentence:
I am confused about that this is actually asking. Is it asking:
1. How many days of holidays did the company have last month?
2. Which date did the company have holiday last month?
Please help. | means "to take (a day) off work"; if the company was having a holiday it would be . So this clearly means "How many days did you take off work last month?"
I am a BrE native speaker, so the American may well be different, if that's relevant. Oh, and I make mistakes sometimes. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
Is saying ่กใฃใฆใใพใ and ใใ ใใพ appropriate for guests?
We are asked to stay at a family friend's house for a couple of days. I was wondering, given that we're guests, what are the appropriate greetings to say when you're leaving and coming back to the house? Can one say {} and ? | The is no problem.
As for , even Japanese people hesitate whether use it or not when they're not returning to their _own_ homes. You can find many questions about using at in-laws' house, and how to respond to neighbor's are asked in Japanese forums (as well as here!). I still don't know how to greet back my landlord when she says to me each time :)
My advice is, if you don't have feeling of resistance, or the host greets you , then use . If you're disinclined to do, say instead. It'll greatly reduce the "I'm home" vibe. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "nuances, greetings"
} |
What is the difference between ใใฟใพใใ and ใใฟใพใใใงใใ?
What is the difference between and (or and )?
If it is what the suggests and is the past form and used to apologize for things done in the past, then what I don't understand is that even mistakes that I did just now is already in the past (I have already done it!). Then should be the correct one to use and should be used only when you are trying to apologize for something that you will do in the future. But that doesn't seem the way it is used. Can anyone please explain the nuance difference?
Edit: Here is the thing that is bothering me:
Anime:
> (After complementing her clothes {} about how good it feels, starts to cry)
> {}
>
So he was sorry about an incident (crying) which happened in immediate past (and he was still crying when he said that), but he didn't use . What would be the difference in meaning if he said ? Or is it totally inappropriate in this context? | What bothers you is the ambiguity of form which could indicate both _past_ and _perfect_. And the worse thing is you have no way to distinguish them in form, in this case.
What you did: ``
>
What you have done: `` (~ _present perfect_ ) or `` (~ _present_ )
>
>
Now or future: ``
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "nuances, expressions"
} |
What does ใใผ mean by itself?
In the anime "Fairy Tail", I came across the line which the translator subtitled as "By the way, I spent the 1000 jewels I saved by using my sexual appeal for this..." I was wondering what means here, since I've never seen it by itself before and I can't seem to find it anywhere. | Here, means "completely gone" or "entirely wasted", often with the nuance that the thing that is completely gone is something that you worked hard to get. offers the following definition:
>
There is also a definition in EDICT, but you have to search for or in order for it to show up, which is probably why you couldn't find it:
> (n,adj-na) (2) disappearing completely
I have mostly seen this used as **** or ****. EDICT seems to indicate that it can be used as a -adjective, but I have never seen it used that way. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, katakana"
} |
ๆใ้ฃฏใฏ vs. ๆใ้ฃฏใซ - difference between these two sentences?
I wanted to ask my language partner what he ate for breakfast. However, I was unsure whether what I said was correct despite him telling me that it's good - I would just like some verification.
I said:
>
I'm unsure whether this is "correct" as in is this how one would normally ask another person what they ate for breakfast?
The Google-translated equivalent is:
> ()
I don't like to rely heavily on Google-translated sentences to verify if what I mean/say is correct. What is the difference (if any) between these two sentences and is what I said grammatically correct? | >
This is correct. You're literally saying, "As for breakfast, what did you eat?"
>
Google is using the particle to indicate _at_ in a similar manner to that of (this weekend), however, is usually omitted for relative times. They're both grammatically correct. "At breakfast, what did you eat?" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "nuances, particle ใซ, particle ใฏ"
} |
ใ without a transitive verb?
>
I interpret this sentence's meaning as something like, "The letter ended up being seen by someone else."
From what I understand, the verb is transitive, "to see." The verb should be its passive form then, "to be seen," which should be intransitive. The particle indicates that the preceding noun is the direct object of a verb that follows it, right? So then, wouldn't make more sense?
I have a feeling this might have more to do with the verb than the particle. Does not lose its transitiveness when it is put in its passive form? If so, is able to be used without a transitive verb then?
Where did I go wrong? | This is the so-called "adversarial passive".
I give a detailed explanation of passives (including the "adversarial" ones) here:
> object marker in this {} sentence
In your case:
โ **Active Sentence** : โ
โ **Passive Sentence** : โ
That is to say, gets lifted to , and gets lifted to .
As mentioned in the other answer, when a -marked thing gets lifted to , it results in that thing ( in your case) being "affected", and in general that means "negatively affected".
If you were to lift to , like you suggested, it would be perfectly fine, but that sentence would lack the implications of
1. the letter being someone's (i.e., it would just be " **a** / **the** letter" as opposed to " **my** letter" or whoever the context suggests as the owner);
2. that someone being negatively affected by the seeing event. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle ใ, passive voice, transitivity"
} |
Usage and meanings of ๅๅ
In English, "to have enough" has several different meanings. One of them is "to be fed up": If you have an argument and want to express that you're fed up and about to walk out of the room and you can say "Enough!" or "I've had enough of this.".
Can you say
to express anger and fed-up-ness? Or does it only apply in the literal sense when you want to say you had enough to eat, etc.? | You can safely use the word to finish an argument, like this (in the ascending order of politeness):
> *
> *
> *
>
would mean something like "There was a plenty of me", which is weird.
would make sense, which sounds like "As for me, enough. (For others, let them keep arguing if they like)".
is another common set phrase for this situation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, usage, meaning"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.