question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60693",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This kanji 頭 what does it mean in this sentence?\n\n> うちには二十歳を頭に、3人の男の子がいる。\n\nI looked up the meaning of かしら and still don't understand the meaning of the\nwhole sentence. Please help translate.\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T13:28:46.340",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60691",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-05T14:41:38.730",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-05T14:41:38.730",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"kanji"
],
"title": "二十歳を[頭]{かしら}に translation",
"view_count": 177
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「うちには二十歳{はたち}を頭{かしら}に、3人の男の子がいる。」\n\n「かしら」 here means the \" ** _first one on the list_** \". In the context of the\nsiblings, it refers to the oldest child.\n\n> \"With a 20-year-old (at the top/as the oldest), we have three boys in our\n> family.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T14:08:52.980",
"id": "60693",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-05T14:08:52.980",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60691",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60691
|
60693
|
60693
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60695",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've just come across this sentence on Kanji Web Easy:\n\n> まず、体を冷たくするスプレー **を** 服を着た人形にかけました。\n\nSo many を and the second one really confuses me. How should I understand this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T13:56:29.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60692",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-18T04:22:55.203",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-18T04:22:55.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "14559",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-を",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "まず、体を冷たくするスプレーを服を着た人形にかけました。",
"view_count": 634
}
|
[
{
"body": "を is the object marker. 体を冷たくするスプレー is a noun phrase. 服を着た人形 is also a noun\nphrase. The basic structure of this sentence is AをBにかける. If you think A is\n体を冷たくするスプレー and B is 服を着た人形 , the sentence is easy to understand.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T14:27:25.453",
"id": "60694",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-05T14:38:02.473",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-05T14:38:02.473",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "60692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "First of all, to answer the unasked question, this usage of を is acceptable.\n\nIn English, as you are no doubt aware, sometimes we need a phrase to describe\nour nouns. For example:\n\n> This is an air conditioning shoe.\n\nThe extra information, though far fetched, tells us why our noun of interest\n(shoe) is special.\n\nLikewise in Japanese we have phrases that modify nouns. In this case, the\nnouns that are being modified are `スプレー` and `人形.`\n\nTo keep this answer from getting too involved, you should research noun\nmodifiers in order to understand the many ways that nouns can be modified. I\nwould recommend [this website](https://www.learn-japanese-\nadventure.com/japanese-noun-modifier.html) as a reference.\n\nHowever, from the source I attached, I want to emphasize the following about\nthese particular noun modifiers. This will be a direct quotation, except for\nthe examples, which I change to relate to this particular question.\n\n> 1)The Japanese noun modifier always comes in front of the noun you are\n> describing. In the above case, it should be in front of [スプレー(supure-) and\n> 人形 (ningyo).]\n>\n> 2)Change the sub-sentence to Plain form. That means you will need to change\n> [します (shimasu) to する (suru).]\n\nAs an appendage to the second ponit, this also applies to verbs in past tense.\nYou will change 着けました (tsukemashita) to 着けた (tsuketa).\n\n* * *\n\nWith that background, lets make sense of the sentence:\n\n> まず、体を冷たくするスプレーを服を着た人形にかけました。\n\nLets bold our noun phrases (noun + modifying phrase, and yes, there is more\nthan one).\n\n> まず、 **体を冷たくするスプレー** を **服を着た人形** にかけました。\n\nFor the time being, I'm just going to simplify it to a single noun (スプレー and\n人形).\n\n> まず、スプレーを人形にかけました。 \n> First, [I] used the spray on the doll.\n\nWhat kind of doll you ask? Lets add some of that information back...\n\n> まず、スプレーを **服を着た** 人形にかけました。 \n> First, [I] used the spray on the doll **wearing clothes**.\n\nWhat kind of spray? Lets add the last bit of information...\n\n> まず、 **体を冷たくする** スプレーを服を着た人形にかけました。 \n> First, [I] used the **body cooling** spray on the doll wearing clothes.\n\nThis was a tricky bit of parsing, but if you still are having issues with noun\nmodifiers, please take a look at the linked website. It should help you learn\nthe concepts.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T14:37:21.190",
"id": "60695",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T16:10:42.640",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "60692",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] |
60692
|
60695
|
60695
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 何してんの?\n\nThe translated meaning is \"what are you doing?\", but I am having difficulty\nunderstanding how the て form of する is referring to the present tense (I would\nhave expected している here).\n\nAlso, I am not comfortable with the \"ん\", although I have seen it appear\nbefore.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T16:06:54.287",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60697",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-28T01:45:51.477",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-05T16:08:12.813",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"colloquial-language",
"particle-の",
"contractions"
],
"title": "Can somebody give me a grammatical insight into the following very short sentence?",
"view_count": 68
}
|
[] |
60697
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60703",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 風邪を引いたから薬を早く飲まなきゃ\n\nI know that generally, `eba` contracts to `ya` \n(答えれば → 答えりゃ） \n(おけば → おきゃ）\n\nIf the original form in this sentence is 飲まな[ければ]{ll}ならない.いけない \nhow shall we choose between 飲まなきゃ and 飲まなけりゃ?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-05T23:13:52.570",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60701",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T02:06:05.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30049",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage"
],
"title": "~なけりゃ or ~なきゃ, how to know which one to use?",
"view_count": 1280
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is all about the **_degrees of formality/informality_**.\n\nThe plain fact is that 「なきゃ」 sounds more informal than 「なけりゃ」 and 「なけりゃ」 is\nmore informal than the \"dictionary form\" 「なければ」.\n\nThere are, however, no written rules regarding when to use any of those forms.\nThe unwritten \"rule\" would be that you manintain a certain level of formality\nthroughout what you say or write in one conversation or piece of writing. Just\nlike in English, you do not randomly mix multiple levels of formality.\n\nYour sentence:\n\n> 「風邪{かぜ}を引{ひ}いた **から** 薬{くすり}を早{はや}く飲{の}ま **なきゃ** 。」\n\nreads okay (if I pretend to not notice the less-than-perfect word order in\n「薬を早く」 ). 「なきゃ」 fits well because 「から」 is fairly informal as well (compared to\n「ので」) . It is all about the balance. In the order of formality, one might tend\nto say:\n\n・「カゼを引いた **ので** 、早く薬を飲ま **なければなりません** 。」\n\n・「カゼを引いた（ **ので/から** ）、早く薬を飲ま **なけりゃならない** 。」\n\n・「カゼを引いた **から** 、早く薬を飲ま **なきゃなんない** 。」 Notice the 「な **ん** ない」.\n\nIn short, if you change one word, you will usually need to change some others\nas well so the good balance of formality/informality will be kept within the\nsentence.\n\nFor the fairness sake, though, one thing that I could not go without\nmentioning is that in the real Japanese-speaking world, **「なきゃ」 is used far\nmore often than 「なけりゃ」**. It is hard to say 「なけりゃ」 - or is it just me?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T02:06:05.480",
"id": "60703",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T02:06:05.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60701",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
60701
|
60703
|
60703
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60704",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> あの手は **現代とはルールのちがうコミのない時代だから** 好手とされたのだ\n\n[(Panel this phrase comes from)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lIWK4.png)\n\n(Komi is a rule in go that exists in the modern era, but did not exist in the\nEdo period. This kid appears to be using a style of play from the Edo period.)\n\nMy attempt to translate:\n\n> That move, **since it was a time when rules were different from the modern\n> era and there was no Komi** , was considered to be the best move.\n\nAt first I thought ちがう was attached to コミ (\"different komi\") which did not\nmake sense to me; so I think it was actually attached to 時代 making it a noun\nwith two phrases attached to it, but I could be wrong about that, so\n\nParse attempt:\n\n> あの手は \"That move\" (topic)\n>\n> 現代とはルールのちがう[時代] \"[time] when rules were different from the modern era\"\n> (first noun phrase. actually this phrase confuses me, what is とは doing here)\n>\n> コミのない時代 \"Time when there was no Komi\" (second noun phrase) (I think の\n> replaces が here?)\n>\n> だから \"because it was\" (creates dependent clause)\n>\n> 好手されたのだ \"[it's the case that] it was considered the best move\" (main\n> comment)\n\nSo I guess I have two questions:\n\n * What is going on in 〜とは〜のちがう phrase and why is it arranged that way?\n\n * Is it correct to parse this as two noun phrases attached to one noun or am I on the wrong track?\n\nFake Edit: [ran のちがう through\neow.alc.co.jp](https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%AE%E9%81%95%E3%81%86) and\nrealized it's just parsable as 'different' but I am still confused about とは\nand not sure if I'm right that のちがう is attached to 時代",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T01:29:59.623",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60702",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T02:26:29.210",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "30813",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Are these two noun phrases attached to one noun? Also what is とは doing here?",
"view_count": 208
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your understanding is basically correct. There was no such a thing as komi in\nthe Edo era in the first place. So the sentence should be parsed like:\n\n> (ルールのちがう(コミのない時代))\n\nRather than:\n\n> (ルールのちがう(コミ))のない時代\n\nIn other words, it's \"the komi-less era when rules were different\" rather than\n\"the era when komi with different rules did not exist\".\n\nIf it were ルールの違うコミのあった時代, it would perhaps be parsed like\n(ルールのちがう(コミ))のあった時代, or \"the era when komi with different rules existed\". So\nthe correct parsing strategy depends on the context and your knowledge about\ngo.\n\nIn general, it's very common for two modifiers to effectively modify one noun.\nUsually there are two ways to grammatically explain it.\n\n * コミのない時代, as a long noun phrase, is modified by another relative clause (relative clauses are \"nested\", as shown above)\n * Alternatively, you can think the two relative clauses (ルールのちがう and コミのない) both independently modify 時代.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T02:26:29.210",
"id": "60704",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T02:26:29.210",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60702",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60702
|
60704
|
60704
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60707",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this question when doing some JLPT N2 practice.\n\n> （ ）にわたってこの町には観光客が大勢きた。\n>\n> a 五月\n>\n> b 五月の連休\n>\n> c 一週間\n\nI think that all three options are correct syntactically. All three are\nperiods of time, so I thought I should choose the semantically best answer -\nb. This is because the other two options are not as worth talking about. I\nmean, \"consecutive holidays\" sounds more like a topic to chat about/discuss\nthan just \"May\" or \"a week\". b also makes sense because during consecutive\nholidays, people do tend to travel a lot, so it would be natural for a town to\nhave a lot of visitors during that time.\n\nHowever, the correct answer is c and I don't see why. My book says this about\nthe use of にわたって:\n\n> 場所・時間・回数。範囲など、幅が大きいことを表す語につく。\n\nSo I should put a long period of time (幅が大きい) before にわたって. However, the\ncorrect answer is just a period of one week. And speaking of 五月の連休, I can only\nthink of Golden Week, so my answer also is a period of one week.\n\nWhy is the correct answer c and why are the other answers wrong?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T06:51:27.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60706",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T10:33:26.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"jlpt",
"time"
],
"title": "What kind of periods can I put before にわたって?",
"view_count": 225
}
|
[
{
"body": "The only corrrect (or natural-sounding) answer would be c) 一週間{いっしゅうかん}.\n\nTo use 「～～にわたって」 the way native speakers would feel most appropriate, the ~~\npart must physically be in the following structure:\n\n> 「 ** _Cardinal_** Number + Counter Word of Time period + （間{かん}）」\n\nAmong the three choices, only 「一週間」 fits that deccription.\n\n「五月{ごがつ}」 does not fit because strictly speaking, the 「五」 here is the\n**_ordinal_** number in nature (\"the fifth month\") if not in the physical\nform. You could use 「一カ月（間）」 or 「五月の一カ月（間）」 instead. 「31日間{にちかん}」 and\n「約{やく}30日間」 would also be appropriate.\n\n「五月の連休{れんきゅう}」 could not be used, either, as 「連休」 does not refer to a specific\ntime length. Besides, how many consecutive holidays there are in May (the\nGolden Week) differ from one year to the next depending on what days of the\nweek the holidays fall on.\n\nYou can safely say 「五月の連休[中]{ちゅう}に」 or simply 「ゴールデンウィーク中に」 instead without\nusing わたって.\n\n**_Exceptions:_**\n\nIt is also appropriate to use the following phrases in 「[Phrase] + わたって」\n**without using an actual number**.\n\n・「長{なが}き/長期間{ちょうきかん}にわたって」\n\n・「長い年月{ねんげつ}/月日{つきひ}にわたって」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T10:19:29.760",
"id": "60707",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T10:33:26.907",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-06T10:33:26.907",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60706",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
60706
|
60707
|
60707
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60712",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> あなたがけがをしたのではないのだから、何もそんなに泣かなくていいでしょう\n\nWhat is the difference between the first の and the second の？\n\nCurrently I understand it this way. The first one is a nomalizer, turning\nけがをした into けがをしたこと。 Is that correct? Also what about the latter one?\n\nThanks",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T11:03:21.663",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60708",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T02:03:16.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particle-の"
],
"title": "。。。したのではないのだから、。。。The different of the two の",
"view_count": 229
}
|
[
{
"body": "The difference is\n\n * あなたは けがを しなかったの*だから: because you didn't get hurt\n * あなたが けがをしたのではない のだから: because **it's not that** you ~~didn't get~~ got hurt\n\nAnd, this nominalization can't be rephrased as こと.\n\n(* It needs のだ form here because how you didn't get hurt is justification for\nsuggestion of not crying, or in general, background information for\njudgement/conjecture. **Edit;** In this case, the fact that the listener\ndidn't get hurt is a shared information that the listener himself knows well\ntoo, which is regarded as a back ground information for judgement of not being\nworth crying. It's like difference between 'since' and 'because' here. If the\nsentence was あなたがけがをしたのではないから そんなに泣かなくてもいい **の** でしょう？, it means the speaker\njudges that it's the fact that you didn't get hurt that saves you crying so\nbadly.)\n\n**Edit**\n\nNominalization means turning a clause into a noun phrase, i.e.\n\n * けがをした: you got hurt → けがをしたの: that you got hurt\n\nAnd you can treat the whole clause as a noun like the below\n\n * けがをしたのは よくない: That you got hurt is not good\n * けがをしたのを 見た: I saw that you got hurt (I saw you get hurt)\n\nWhether you can replace の with こと depends on nature of the verb and the\nposition of the nominalized clause, which is really complicated. For example,\nけがをしたことはよくない is okay while …したことを見た means a completely different thing i.e. \"I\nconsidered that you would..\".\n\n * 見ることは信じることだ: To see is to believe\n\nIf you ignore a minor problem, you can somehow rephrase it as 見るのは信じることだ. Now\nwhat if you change the predicate likewise?\n\n * 見るのは信じるのだ: ???\n\nUnfortunately, this doesn't work as was expected. Nominalization at the\nposition of the predicate of a sentence is saved for a special usage so called\nExplanatary の.\n\n * けがをしたの **だ** : It **is** that you got hurt\n\nRoughly saying, we use that form when we explain things. In addition, you can\nexpress partial negation like this.\n\n * けがをしたの **ではない** : It **is not** that you got hurt",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T16:31:33.347",
"id": "60712",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T02:03:16.593",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-08T02:03:16.593",
"last_editor_user_id": "4092",
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60708",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60708
|
60712
|
60712
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60710",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is an anime named \"はるかなレシーブ\" this season. While the [official English\nname](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harukana_Receive) is just using the Romaji\n(i.e. Harukana Receive) instead of translating the meaning, from the [Chinese\nofficial\ntranslation](https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%81%99%E7%9A%84%E6%8E%A5%E7%90%83),\nit seems that the name of the anime means \"Haruka's Receive\". As the main\ncharacter is named Ozora Haruka, I guess this translation is correct?\n\nIf that's the correct meaning, then my question will be why な instead of の is\nused to connect the 2 nouns? (i.e. why \"はるかなレシーブ\" but not \"はるかのレシーブ\"?)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T12:53:44.230",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60709",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T13:24:06.487",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18433",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-の",
"particle-な"
],
"title": "Why な instead of の is used in the anime title \"はるかなレシーブ\"?",
"view_count": 169
}
|
[
{
"body": "Why would you base your argument on the Chinese translation in the first\nplace? Translation is a translation.\n\n> 「はるかなレシーブ」= 「はる」+「かな」+「レシーブ」\n>\n> 「はるかなレシーブ」≠ 「はるか」+「な」+「レシーブ」\n\nThat is because the names of the two main characters are:\n\n大空{おおぞら} 遥{はるか}\n\nand\n\n比嘉{ひが} かなた\n\nThat is 「 **はる** か」 and 「 **かな** た」.\n\nThus, 「はるかな」= 「はる」+「かな」\n\nThere never was a reason to name the story 「はるか **の** レシーブ」.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T13:18:51.907",
"id": "60710",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T13:24:06.487",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60709",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60709
|
60710
|
60710
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60717",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to understand some basic phrases from this Japanese phrasebook:\n\n<https://wikitravel.org/en/Japanese_phrasebook>\n\nThere is a phrase:\n\nIs there a doctor who can speak English? 英語の出来る医者はいますか？\n\nWhy is the particle は used here instead of が? I thought that noun + がいますか is\nused to ask questions such as \"Is there..?\"/\"Are there..?\". Thank you!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T17:07:27.323",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60713",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T22:20:38.240",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30904",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why is は used here instead of が?",
"view_count": 204
}
|
[
{
"body": "The particle は is used here to mark the topic of the sentence. In this case\nthe topic, overall arching thing that is being talked about, of the sentence\nis a doctor (医者). This happens to be the same thing as the subject, which\ncould be marked with the particle が.\n\nI would say the reason that は is used instead of が based on the context is\nthat a doctor is common knowledge. Also we are setting the stage (overall\narching topic) that you are speaking about a doctor. Since the concept of a\ndoctor is common knowledge it does have to be \"introduced\". You could probably\nstill use が here and the meaning would not change, but if a が was used here I\nwould assume that the topic was already set to talk about doctors.\n\nTo answer the second part of your question (used to ask questions such as). In\nthis case the particle が is used when asking questions where the word that\ncomes before the が is a wh- word\n\nExample\n\n> Who ate the food?\n>\n> 誰が食べ物を食べた?\n\nYou are not sure who ate the food and in this case they, whoever this is, has\nto be introduced.\n\n* * *\n\nYour sentence broken down The portion 医者はいますか translates to\n\n> Is there a doctor that exists? -> Is there a doctor?\n\nThis is paired with the portion\n\n> 英語の出来る\n\nCreates a relative clause and adds more information to the 医者はいますか part\n\nSo the full phrase 英語の出来る医者はいますか translates to\n\n> Is there a doctor that exists who can speak English? -> Is there a doctor\n> who can speak English?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T19:21:10.137",
"id": "60717",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T22:20:38.240",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-06T22:20:38.240",
"last_editor_user_id": "30339",
"owner_user_id": "30339",
"parent_id": "60713",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60713
|
60717
|
60717
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60715",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading this\n[article](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10011556561000/k10011556561000.html)\non how Amazon allowed their speaker to be used to donate to Japan's Red Cross.\nIn the final sentence they get a quote from a Red Cross member, but I cannot\nmake sense of the word **楽しみながら** and the pairing of the word **ほしい**\n\nI know ~ながら means while doing a verb and that ほしい is to express a want or\ndesire. Also I believe ほしい can only be used to express one's own\nwants/desires. So I am not sure of my translation.\n\n> 日本赤十字社の人は「今まで寄付をしたことがない人も、 **楽しみながら** 寄付をしてほしいです」と話しています。\n>\n> My Translation: A member of Japan's Red Cross Society said \"People who could\n> not donate until now can also enjoy while wanting to donate\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T17:34:10.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60714",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T04:12:35.950",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T04:12:35.950",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30339",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax"
],
"title": "Article about Amazon Speaker being used for donations",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your assumption that ほしい can only be used to express your own desires is the\nproblem here.\n\n> Verb in て-form + ほしい = Want someone to do verb\n\nThe person you want to do the verb (if they are mentioned) is marked by に,\ne.g.\n\n> 私はゆきさんに日本語を教えてほしい。 \n> I want Yuki to teach me Japanese.\n\nYour sentence:\n\n> 今まで寄付をしたことがない人も、楽しみながら寄付をしてほしいです \n> We want even people who've never donated before to have fun making a\n> donation.\n\nNote that the people they want to do action are not marked by に here because\nthey have been promoted to the topic of the sentence (but with は replaced by\nも).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T17:49:50.770",
"id": "60715",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T17:59:09.863",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-06T17:59:09.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "60714",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60714
|
60715
|
60715
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60720",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 顔の大きさの半分 **はある**\n> であろう大きなマスク。([source](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20180801/k10011558961000.html?utm_int=news-\n> life_contents_list-items_014))\n\nI've been told that this sentence is describing the size of the mask being\nhalf the size of the face, Can't we simply say 「顔の大きさの半分であろう大きなマスク」 instead?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T19:21:07.500",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60716",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T01:12:59.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-06T19:34:18.073",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25980",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "What is the purpose of はある in this sentence?",
"view_count": 202
}
|
[
{
"body": "While you probably already know this, [であろう] is a literary/formal way of\nsaying だろう/でしょう. It should not be separated into で and あろう any more than でしょう\nshould be separated into で and しょう.\n\nLet's rephrase the quote in question:\n\n> 顔の大きさの半分はある **でしょう** 、大きなマスク。\n\nMaybe it is easier to see now how the でしょう relates to the clause\n[顔の大きさの半分はある], or 'The mask was as large as half the size of a face.'. The end\nresult (including でしょう) is a sentence more equivalent to '____ probably as\nlarge as half the size of a face.'.\n\nThe はある expression would, in English, be stated as 'there exists/existed', or\n'it is/was'.\n\nIf you search for 「はあるでしょう」or 「はあるだろう」, there are many results. On\n[Kotonoha](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/search_form) alone, there are\nover 400 combined examples. If you change the particle は to も, there are over\n1000 combined results.\n\nJust to pick one out of the results:\n\n> 「そんな経験が 誰にも 一度はある だろう。」 'That type of experience, for everyone there\n> probably exists that one time.', or more colloquially, 'Everyone has\n> probably had that type of experience.'\n\nNow, to remove the であろう expression entirely. Again, Kotonoha has over 1300\nresults for 「はある。」. Here is one:\n\n> 一度見る価値 はある。'It is worth seeing once.'\n\nFrom the above sentence and how it relates to your main question, I hope that\nyou can see that はある helps to complete (round out) a clause.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-06T21:52:37.163",
"id": "60718",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-06T21:52:37.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "60716",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -2
},
{
"body": "This type of は means \"at least\". That is, the mask covers roughly 55-70% of\nthe area of the face.\n\n * [Does は mean 'at least' in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/29438/5010)\n * [Can は be used to mean \"at least\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/33243/5010)\n\nThe sentence can be rephrased as 顔の大きさの半分はありそうな大きなマスク, 顔の大きさの半分以上あるであろう大きなマスク,\netc. But 顔の大きさの半分であろう大きなマスク does not have the same meaning.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T01:12:59.230",
"id": "60720",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T01:12:59.230",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60716",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60716
|
60720
|
60720
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60721",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "After taking some notes from various classes, I have come across some of the\nsame translations:\n\n好{す}きな音楽{おんがく}：Favorite Music\n\n好{す}きな人{ひと}：Favorite person\n\netc.\n\nWhy would one use 好{す}き instead of 大好{だいす}き or 大事{だいじ}? Are all correct, and\nits just a personal choice? (with the occasional exception of 大事{だいじ}) Thanks!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T00:32:52.787",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60719",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T03:25:59.013",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29804",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"usage"
],
"title": "Why would you use 好き to describe a favorite object?",
"view_count": 183
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are several ways to say favorite, e.g.\n好き、大好き、お気{き}に入{い}り、大{だい}のお気{き}に入{い}り, etc. Use of either of these is a\npersonal choice, but of course using a 大 would indicate a higher degree so\n大好き＞好き and 大のお気に入り＞お気に入り as in the following examples:\n\n> 好きな教科{きょうか}は理科{りか}と音楽{おんがく}です。\n>\n> My favorite subjects are science and music.\n>\n> 算数{さんすう}も好きだが、社会{しゃかい}が大好きです。\n>\n> I like arithmetic too, but social studies is my favorite.\n>\n> 高校時代{こうこうじだい}からロックが好きでした。特にGuns N' Rosesはその時の大のお気に入りのバンドでした。\n>\n> I liked rock music since high school. In particular, Guns N' Roses was my\n> most favorite band at the time.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T03:25:59.013",
"id": "60721",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T03:25:59.013",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "30554",
"parent_id": "60719",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60719
|
60721
|
60721
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60723",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "食べ物の場合は動詞「食べる」を使いますが、飲み物の場合は動詞「飲む」を使います。ところが、食べ物と飲み物をいっしょに出た場合はどの動詞を使いますか。\n\n> 例①：パンとミルクを...（食べます？／飲みます？）… \n> 例②：コーヒーとりんごを...（食べます？／飲みます？）…",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T03:28:19.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60722",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T03:42:01.667",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T03:36:09.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30907",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"usage",
"verbs",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Word select: 食べます？／飲みます？",
"view_count": 460
}
|
[
{
"body": "そういう場合は、両方の動詞を使い、「パンを食べ（て）、牛乳を飲む」、「リンゴを食べ（て）、コーヒーを飲む」と言い表すことができます。\n\nしかし、よりお勧めしたいのは、「頂{いただ}く」という謙譲語・丁寧語をこの機会に覚えておくことです。「頂くを」使えば、食べ物と飲み物のどちらにも対応できるからです。\n\n「パンと牛乳を頂く」、「リンゴとコーヒーを頂く」などと、動詞ひとつで表現できます。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T03:42:01.667",
"id": "60723",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T03:42:01.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
60722
|
60723
|
60723
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm looking for two words: a word that means an independent-minded person and\nits opposite. Not necessarily a rebel or someone who wants to stand out, but\nsomeone who is comfortable sticking with what he prefers and doesn't get\nswayed by other people.\n\nWord #1\n\nFor example, let's say someone is out with his friends and his friends decide\nto order a beer, but he doesn't order one because he doesn't drink and he is\nnot anxious about trying to fit it with everyone.\n\nWord #2\n\nAnd the opposite scenario in which someone, who doesn't drink and actually\ndoesn't like drinking, only does it when he is out with his friends because he\nwants to fit in with everyone and be accepted by them.\n\nWhat would the words be for both cases? I have found words for the first case\nthrough google translate, but I am not sure which one to use.\n\n独立した\n\n非適合主義者\n\n個人主義者\n\nCan you please provide example sentences for both the opposite words as well\nso I know how to use it?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T08:12:18.567",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60724",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T11:04:38.757",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T09:21:50.193",
"last_editor_user_id": "30908",
"owner_user_id": "30908",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"word-requests"
],
"title": "What is the word for an independent-minded person? What is the opposite of that word?",
"view_count": 362
}
|
[
{
"body": "After looking at your rather mundane example, the first phrase that came to my\nmind was 周りに流されない人. Its antonym is\n(周りに)[流されやすい人](https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E6%B5%81%E3%81%95%E3%82%8C%E3%82%84%E3%81%99%E3%81%84&ref=sa),\nwho is someone easily influenced by others.\n\n個人主義者 (\"individualist\") is not entirely wrong, but it's probably too strong in\nthis context. Not ordering a beer is not really \"individualistic\" to me.\n非適合主義者 is not an established phrase and I have almost no idea what it could\npossibly mean. 独立した人 refers to a person who is financially or psychologically\nindependent, but again, it's too strong. A person who does not order a beer\nwill not qualify as an independent person.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T11:04:38.757",
"id": "60725",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T11:04:38.757",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60724",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60724
| null |
60725
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60728",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The context for this phrase is in a list of kanji spellings (kanji with\nhiragana), thus the definitions are not provided.\n\nBreaking the phrase into its components:\n\n`表す` - to reveal, show, display\n\n`通り` - avenue, street, way\n\nTaking the second part (way) in a non-literal sense leads me to conclude the\nphrase means roughly,\n\n`the way shown` or more concisely `as shown`\n\nIs my conclusion correct?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T11:34:54.543",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60726",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T12:51:06.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26635",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji",
"phrases"
],
"title": "Meaning of the phrase 表す通り",
"view_count": 117
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes 表す通り roughly means \"as indicated\", but it's not used on its own. It has to\nbe preceded by some subject. For example:\n\n> * 彼の外見が表す通り \n> as his appearance shows / as indicated by his appearance\n> * 名前が表す通り \n> as the name suggests\n>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T12:51:06.607",
"id": "60728",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T12:51:06.607",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60726",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60726
|
60728
|
60728
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60729",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "会社員はこの計画を部署の知識として理解する。\n\nThis sentence was in a document describing a company's quality management. I\nhave seen this kind of sentence many times and the 知識として理解する part always\nthrows me off.\n\n\"understand it as knowledge\"\n\nWhat does that even mean? If it just said \"Employees must understand this\nplan\" there would be no problem, but since it says \"Employees must understand\nthis plan as the department's knowledge\" it doesn't make sense to me. If the\ngoal is to have the employees understand the plan, what is the point of adding\n\"as the department's knowledge.\" It doesn't add anything to what's being\nconveyed. At least, it looks like it doesn't **in English**.\n\nSo, in **Japanese** , what is it that is being added by saying 知識として理解する?\n\nI'm not asking for a translation but an explanation. I get the feeling an\nexplanation in Japanese would be particularly helpful, but feel free to use\neither.\n\nThis is the second sentence of a 2 sentence paragraph. The first sentence\nbeing: 経営者が会議で予算を決定し、運営方針を会社員に報告する。また、`会社員はこの計画を部署の知識として理解する。`",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T11:55:19.973",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60727",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T14:14:06.677",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T14:14:06.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "1761",
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"phrases"
],
"title": "How should I understand 「会社員はこの計画を部署の知識として理解する。」?",
"view_count": 110
}
|
[
{
"body": "In general, 知識として理解する is not an idiomatic phrase, and its actual implication\ndepends on the context. It can be used both in positive and negative ways. It\ntypically means either of the following.\n\n * [positively] to understand systematically (as opposed to learning by rote in a fragmentary manner) \n\n> 数学の公式を覚えるだけでなく、知識として理解しなさい。\n\n * [negatively] to just know something in the head (as opposed to actually experiencing/realizing)\n\n> 津波のことは知識として理解はしているが、実際に体験したことはない。\n\nOften used with contrastive-wa (知識として **は** 理解している).\n\nIn your case, however, it says 部署の知識として, and 部署の知識 seems to mean \"a must-have\npiece of knowledge for the department\". I want a little more context, but\n部署の知識として is probably adding the nuance of \"knowing it's important for the\ndepartment\" and/or \"although it's a local rule\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T13:08:25.947",
"id": "60729",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T13:58:55.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T13:58:55.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60727",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60727
|
60729
|
60729
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60731",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am just now really diving into adjectives and how they work in Japanese. It\nwas to my surprise that I heard 『楽{たの}しいそうなお祭{まつ}りね』 being used. Does the そう\nusage require な even for い adjectives?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T15:16:02.073",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60730",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T15:50:11.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29804",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"adjectives"
],
"title": "Why would you use な for そう forms of い adjectives?",
"view_count": 283
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are two things I would like to do as part of the answer to your\nquestion.\n\nFirst, you may not have been aware that there was a mistake in your sentence.\nI will address that first.\n\nYou wrote:\n\n> 楽{たの}しいそう\n\nIt should be:\n\n> 楽{たの}しそう\n\nFor the formation of the そうだ grammar is as follows:\n\n * Vmasu + そうだ\n * adj(i/na) stem + そうだ\n\nExamples:\n\n> 話しそう (verb) \n> 楽しそう (i adjective) \n> 静かそう (na adjective)\n\nSource: A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar (See below)\n\n* * *\n\nNow for the question you acked. According to [A Dictionary of Basic Japanese\nGrammar](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/4789004546) (Seiichi Makino\nand Michio Tsutsui):\n\n> そうだ is a な-type adjective; The prenominal form is そうな. Examples:\n>\n\n>> 高そうな車 \n> taka souna kuruma \n> (A car which looks espensive (= an expensive looking car))\n>>\n\n>> 雨が降りそうな空 \n> ame ga furi souna sora \n> (lit. the sky which looks like it will bring rain)\n\nSo to directly answer your question:\n\n> Does the そう usage require な even for い adjectives?\n\nThe answer is yes. Note that most of the time, you will find this formation at\nthe end of a sentence requiring it to end with だ/です. However, if you plan on\nusing this grammar as an adjective (i.e. you mean to use it to modify a noun),\nyou should treat is as a na-type adjective.\n\nNote: I included a link to the amazon listing of the book I used for my\nsource. If you plan to purchase it, look around. I have definitely seen it\nsell for less.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T15:34:38.917",
"id": "60731",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T15:50:11.690",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-07T15:50:11.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "60730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60730
|
60731
|
60731
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "It seems to me that some colors need の when describing an item, yet others\ndon't.\n\nFor example:\n\n * 黄色のくつ (Yellow shoes; has の)\n * 赤いくつ (Red shoes; no の)\n * オレンジ色のくつ (Orange shoes; has の)\n * 青いくつ (Blue shoes; no の)\n\nIt would seem the kanji for color (色) isn't always mandatory, which I would\nguess is also related.\n\nIs there some kind of distinction per color, or is it just two ways of saying\nthe same thing?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T18:21:59.390",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60733",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T18:21:59.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12360",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"nuances",
"particles"
],
"title": "Use of の in colored objects",
"view_count": 106
}
|
[] |
60733
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60735",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: a man reads some online posts after accusing another man of being a\npedofile.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lgSj9.jpg)\n\nWhat is the meaning of 小動物系? Considering the context and the fact that images\nof young girls came out when I tried to look for it on Google Images, I think\nthe meaning is not simply \"small animals system\".\n\nAlso, could you explain the meaning of 裏ＤＶＤ and \"こマ!？\"? I think that the first\nmeans \"illegal DVDs\", while te second sounds to me like \"really?!\". Is it\ncorrect? Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T18:54:42.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60734",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T19:27:43.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"slang",
"internet-slang",
"metaphor"
],
"title": "Meaning of 小動物系",
"view_count": 289
}
|
[
{
"body": "**小動物系**\n\nIn this case 系 doesn't mean _system_. Instead it refers to a certain category\nof girls. 小動物系 describes girls you could compare to small animals in terms of\ncuteness. They obviously can't be tall or overweight, but they also must\nbehave in a certain lovely manner. You can read more about this use of 系\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4572/defining-a-\nparticular-%E7%B3%BB).\n\n**裏ＤＶＤ**\n\nYou're right, these are DVDs that can't be sold in the open. Specifically, the\nterm nearly always refers to sexual videos.\n\n**こマ!?**\n\nThis is a shortening of これマジ!?, which indeed means _really?!_ \\ _are you\nserious?!_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T19:27:43.430",
"id": "60735",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-07T19:27:43.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "12271",
"parent_id": "60734",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60734
|
60735
|
60735
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60740",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "According to\n[goo](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/thsrs/8782/meaning/m0u/%E8%A8%AA%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B/),\nWe can say 「彼を訪ねる」 but not 「彼を訪れる」 and we should instead say 「彼の家を訪れる」if we\nuse the verb 訪れる. Does it have a nuance? Does it open the doors to another\ninterpretation(visiting his house instead of visiting him for example)?\n\nI know this classification is debatable, but 訪れる is JLPT 1 and 訪ねる is JLPT 4\non jisho.org, is 訪れる more formal or rare than 訪ねる?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T19:27:47.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60736",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T02:12:04.690",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25980",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 訪れる and 訪ねる?",
"view_count": 4467
}
|
[
{
"body": "Regarding frequency first, 訪れる is roughly three times more common than 訪ねる on\nBCCWJ. 訪れる is seven times more common if we limit the results to Yahoo!\nblog/chiebukuro articles, which indicates 訪ねる is even less common in\nrelatively casual written materials. I personally think you should master 訪れる\nfirst. But 訪ねる is not uncommon at all, and you may have to learn it before\nJLPT 1 level.\n\nIMHO, ～を訪れる is a neutral word usable in business settings and other everyday\nsituations. You can also say ～に訪れる. (Note that 訪ねる is not a keigo and you\noften have to use honorific いらっしゃる or humble 伺う/お邪魔する instead.)\n\nOn the other hand, when an object is a place name, I feel ～を訪ねる is a rather\nliterary and somewhat \"nostalgic\" term typically used with historical\nattractions (石川啄木ゆかりの地を訪ねる), one's hometown (母校を訪ねる), temples/shrines\n(東北の神社を訪ねる旅), etc. Using it with nearby modern facilities (e.g. 駅前のクリニックを訪ねる)\nis fine in stiff novels, but it can sound a little off in ordinary blog\narticles and such.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T01:58:30.410",
"id": "60740",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T02:09:41.560",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-08T02:09:41.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60736",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "訪ねる is informal, can be considered as just one of a set of actions, and\ncontains an implied purpose for visiting:\n\n> オバマさんが、広島を訪ね, 慰霊碑に献花した。 \n> Mr Obama visited Hiroshima and laid flowers at the Memorial (implying\n> perhaps he visited to pay his respects???).\n\nWith the informal 訪ねる, it's likely \"visiting your friend's house\" is\ncontracted to \"visiting your friend\" in everday usage as your listener expects\nfrom the verb that your friend will be at home。 If you were catching up with\nyour friend elsewhere, you would more likely state the location, use a verb\nsuch as 会う, and say something to the effect that \"you are going to 'meet' your\nfriend at a cafe\".\n\n訪れる is more polite and 訪問する more formal and are used when there is an explicit\npurpose for visiting a place:\n\n> 米国のオバマ大統領は広島を訪問した... 「核なき世界」の理想を追い求める決意を強調した。 \n> The President of the United States, Mr Obama, visited Hiroshima...\n> (explicitly) emphasizing his pursuit of the ideal of a 'nuclear-free world'.\n\n[Examples are from the 2017 News Kentei Guide]",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-12-04T01:14:20.700",
"id": "91458",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-04T02:12:04.690",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-04T02:12:04.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "48882",
"owner_user_id": "48882",
"parent_id": "60736",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60736
|
60740
|
60740
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60741",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've read that あいつ and こいつ can mean \"that person over there\" or \"this person\nover here\", respectively, and also that (at least, as far as I'm aware, for\nこいつ) they are an impolite way of referring to a person.\n\nIn manga I've seen scanlators interpret こいつ in front of another person as \"you\nbastard\" or \"you bitch\"... but also that if referring to a person that they\nare talking about as あいつ, it gets interpreted as just \"that guy\" or \"that\ngirl\".\n\nWhat scenarios would imply what when using the phrase あいつ and こいつ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-07T19:47:32.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60737",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T08:17:09.160",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30911",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"politeness"
],
"title": "What does あいつ and こいつ imply in various situations/contexts?",
"view_count": 258
}
|
[
{
"body": "あいつ/こいつ/そいつ is blunt and somewhat rough, but that does not necessarily mean\nit's insulting or derogatory. It can also work as a sign of close and frank\nrelationship with someone. Let me list some situations.\n\n * It's always rude and insulting if you used it referring to a stranger or someone higher than you.\n * If you're clearly upset, it's closer to \"that bastard\", \"darn you\", etc.\n * When you use it to refer to your close friend, it may suggest you can talk to them in an unreserved manner.\n * There is nothing wrong with a father referring to his child with あいつ, although it does sound blunter than あの子.\n * A stereotyped [tsundere](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundere) girl refers to someone she likes with あいつ all the time.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T02:58:07.407",
"id": "60741",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T08:17:09.160",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-08T08:17:09.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60737",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60737
|
60741
|
60741
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60739",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was told that in\n\n * べんきょうを します \n\nthe **べんきょう** is the direct object of the expresion and in\n\n * ~を べんきょうします\n\nthe **~** part is the direct object Is that right? but besides that, whats the\ndiference?, how must be interpreted and used?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T00:40:35.457",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60738",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T01:56:56.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18124",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "べんきょうを します / べんきょうします interpretation and use",
"view_count": 575
}
|
[
{
"body": "In べんきょうを します, べんきょう is functioning as a noun. So, the literal translation of\nthis phrase is \"do studying\", and the direct object is べんきょう. If you want to\nspecify what you're studying, you can say ~の べんきょうを します like \"do studying of\n~\".\n\nOn the other hand, in ~を べんきょうします, べんきょうします is a verb \"study\". So, the literal\ntranslation is \"study ~\", and the direct object is ~.\n\nI think there is no difference in use between the two phrases. they just mean\nthe same thing.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T01:56:56.990",
"id": "60739",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T01:56:56.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30858",
"parent_id": "60738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60738
|
60739
|
60739
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Please help me to understand how and when english-derived words are used in\nmodern Japanese? I understand that ko-hi and garasu didn't exist in Japan, so\nthere are no Japanese words for them. But I found that there exist gairaigo\nfor such words as \"knife\" and \"husband\" and many others, which obviously\nexited as phenomenons BEFORE . So, could you please explain and give examples\nfrom your experience? Which words are preferable where? Are they all\ninterchangeable, can they be used in scientific speech/text, in formal\nspeech/text?\n\nバカンス/休暇\n\nビル/建物\n\nチケット/切符\n\nファイナル/最後\n\nママ/おかあさん\n\nミルク/牛乳\n\nバッグ/鞄\n\nゼロ/零\n\nアルバイト/働き\n\nサラリーマン/社員\n\nドイツ/独国",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T12:55:29.597",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60745",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T12:55:29.597",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30916",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"loanwords"
],
"title": "what's the difference in usage between gairaigo and wago?",
"view_count": 76
}
|
[] |
60745
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60758",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was doing some JLPT N@ practice, and I got this question wrong:\n\n> 留学中は日本の言語や文学を学ぶ（ ）、自分の国のことも伝えていこうと考えている。\n>\n> a 上\n>\n> b のみならず\n>\n> c ばかりか\n\nI chose \"a\" while the correct answer is \"b\". According to my book, all three\nanswer seem correct.\n\nMy book says that (only quoting the relevant parts):\n\n> 〜上\n>\n> 前後には同じ評価の言葉が来る。\n>\n> 〜のみならず\n>\n> 「に限らず」と違って、同じレベルの他のものも同様だという場合にも使える。\n>\n> 〜ばかりか\n>\n> 〜だけでも十分なのに、さらに他のことも加わる。前の文で普通ではないことを言い、さらに後の文でも意外性を感じさせるのかのことを加える。\n\nI thought it boils down to whether the former and latter half of the sentence\nare \"at the sane level\" or not, If they are, then 上 or のみならず. If the latter\nhalf is more \"surprising\" than the first half, then ばかりか. But still, why のみならず\ninstead of 上?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T13:45:32.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60747",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T23:38:44.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "Difference between 上、のみならず、ばかりか",
"view_count": 1370
}
|
[
{
"body": "What follows 上 must be greater things in the same field. e.g.\n日本の言語や文学を学ぶ上（に）JLPT合格も目指す / 数学も学ぶ. In this regard, のみならず is versatile.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T23:38:44.907",
"id": "60758",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T23:38:44.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60747",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60747
|
60758
|
60758
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60749",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "All of these words express \"temporary\" but I can't understand the difference\nand in which contexts each are used.\n\nFor example:\n\n> **仮** の包帯 A temporary bandage\n>\n> **一時的** な住宅 A temporary residence\n>\n> **臨時** 列車 A temporary train\n\nAre they all interchangeable in these sentences? What is the difference?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T14:46:09.387",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60748",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T15:28:46.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27851",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Difference between 仮、一時的、臨時 when expressing \"temporary\"",
"view_count": 1467
}
|
[
{
"body": "* **仮の** is more like _tentative_. It describes something is to be replaced by an official/final/permanent one in the future. For example 仮のタイトル is a tentative title.\n * **臨時(の)** is an antonym of _regular_ , _periodic_ or _scheduled_. It describes something is an additional, unscheduled or \"ad-hoc\" one. \n * **一時的** is _temporary_. It describes something is not permanent.\n\nFor example, in a job hunting context:\n\n * **仮(の)採用** : You are tentatively or unofficially hired for evaluation. You may be fired if your performance turned out to be poor.\n * **臨時(の)採用** : You are hired outside the regular/scheduled recruitment process. The employment relationship will be permanent unless otherwise mentioned.\n * **一時的(な)採用** : Temporary employment. Your employment will finish after a certain period.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T15:28:46.643",
"id": "60749",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T15:28:46.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60748",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
60748
|
60749
|
60749
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60753",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> まさか、寝ぐらにしてるのか？\n\nWhat I don't know is the phrase ' **寝ぐら** '. I guessed it is a grammatical\nclause but the search came up with no optimistic result.\n\nHowever, with the search engine, I found that the Japaneses used it very often\nin forums and blogs, such as ' **寝ぐらになる** '.\n\nCan anyone tell me the meaning and the grammar behind it, thanks.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T15:37:56.263",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60750",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T07:31:22.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29550",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "About the grammar of「寝ぐらに」",
"view_count": 155
}
|
[
{
"body": "寝ぐら is a nonstandard writing form of the word [ねぐら\n(塒)](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/169871/meaning/m0u/), which means bird's\n_roost_ , and by extension, animal _den_ or _lair_ , and also in the way these\nEnglish words could describe that of human.\n\n> 寝ぐらにしてる = 塒にしている _be using as one's sleeping spot_\n\nSome Japanese words that can be decomposed into multiple units, even if they\nhave kanji as a whole, are occasionally written in combination of kanji that\nrepresent a part of the word.\n\n> 卵【たまご】：玉【たま】子【ご】\n>\n> 偏【かたよ】り：片【かた】寄【よ】り\n>\n> 邪【よこしま】：横【よこ】しま\n\nSometimes it could be helpful to search an unknown wordform in all hiragana to\nfind the word you want.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T17:59:42.130",
"id": "60753",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T07:31:22.780",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "60750",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60750
|
60753
|
60753
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "So, I thought I understood the use of the 連体形 of だ, な, after a \"な-adjective\"\nwhen used before a noun, however I'm a bit confused. On IMABI and a number of\nother sites, I've found the suggestion to use the conjugation of だ when using\na \"な-adjective\" attributively before a noun. Here is an example sentence:\n\n> 大切だった人だ。 \n> (was an important person)\n\nSo, why/when wouldn't you just use:`大切な人だった。`?\n\nHere is a [link](https://www.imabi.net/adjectivesii.htm) of one such site.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T16:46:58.127",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60751",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T16:25:21.830",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-08T23:33:12.070",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30487",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"adjectives",
"copula"
],
"title": "形容動詞 attributively before a noun: な or conjugated だ",
"view_count": 190
}
|
[
{
"body": "Great question! There is a slight difference between 大切な人だった and 大切だった人.\n\n`大切な人だった` means \"(somebody) Was an important person\" just like you would\nexpect.\n\n`大切だった人` means \"A person that was important\". Again, this is a similar\nmeaning, but you use each form in different situations. For example:\n\n> エイブラハム・リンカーンは重要な人物だった。\n>\n> Abraham Lincoln was an important person.\n\nvs\n\n> アメリカの歴史｛れきし｝において重要だったエイブラハム・リンカーンは、内乱｛ないらん｝を終｛お｝わらせた。\n>\n> Abraham Lincoln, an important figure in American history, ended the Civil\n> War.\n\nUsing a different adjective, 簡単｛かんたん｝: simple\n\n> この問題｛もんだい｝を解｛と｝くのは簡単｛かんたん｝だった。\n>\n> Solving this problem was simple.\n\nvs\n\n> 簡単｛かんたん｝だった問題｛もんだい｝からは、なにも学｛まな｝びませんでした。\n>\n> I learned nothing from the problems that were simple.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T17:08:45.623",
"id": "60752",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T08:57:03.793",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "29183",
"parent_id": "60751",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "When someone was once important to you, you can refer to it as 大切な人だった. Now\nwhat if you are asked in the moment what kind of person s/he is? Then, you say\n大切だった人だ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T23:47:03.830",
"id": "60759",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T23:47:03.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60751",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> 大切だった人だ\n\nThat would mean \"he is (even now) a person that was important\". You could say,\nfor example, that even now you appreciate how important he used to be.\n\n> 大切な人だった\n\nYou literally say that he was an important person.\n\nThe difference between them is mostly the nuance. They mean the same thing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T16:25:21.830",
"id": "60889",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T16:25:21.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30977",
"parent_id": "60751",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60751
| null |
60752
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "How is 男女比 used in this example? Just like anything else in japanese context\nmatters and in this case the male/famale ratio is 6 male and 4 female, because\nthe text is talking about females are _coming back little by little_ in some\ncontext.\n\n> 少しずつ女性が盛り返してきていますが、いま男女比はだいたい６：４くらいです。\n\nAm I mising anything? Is this complete bs?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T18:54:21.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60754",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T20:56:55.713",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-08T20:56:55.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "30786",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "Question about 男女比 order",
"view_count": 46
}
|
[] |
60754
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60756",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "朝早く起きられるようになりました。apposed to 朝早く起きられるようにしました。\n\nI understand that the first sentence is intransitive and the second is\ntransitive but I don't understand the difference in meaning\n\nFrom my understanding they both mean 'I was able to make a habit of waking up\nearly'\n\nThanks for any help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T21:01:12.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60755",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T21:20:31.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25348",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "I don't understand the difference in meaning of ようにする and ようになる in this particular sentence",
"view_count": 118
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 朝早く起きられるようになりました。 \n> I reached the point where I can wake up early in the morning.\n\ne.g. I used to be no good at getting up early, but after a few months\ndiscipline I don't have a problem anymore.\n\n> 朝早く起きられるようにしました。 \n> I made sure I can get up early in the morning.\n\ne.g I set my alarm clock for 5:00 am.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-08T21:15:15.100",
"id": "60756",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-08T21:20:31.843",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-08T21:20:31.843",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "60755",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60755
|
60756
|
60756
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60763",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In this anime-esque example, which is correct?:\n\n 1. 私はあなたが殺す\n 2. 私はあなたを殺す\n\nAnd why? Because I’ve heard it used with number • 2 • を (wo), but other verbs\nseem to always use が, for example: 「私はエミリアが好きです」 Is 好き a noun in this context?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T02:34:20.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60761",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T02:48:51.380",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-09T02:48:51.380",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "28172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"particle-が",
"particle-を",
"nouns"
],
"title": "What is the difference between が and を when using verbs?",
"view_count": 218
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both sentences are perfectly correct, but the meanings are totally different.\nLet's start with 殺す because it's a rather simple transitive verb which takes\none subject and one object. Conclusion first, those two sentences translate\nto:\n\n> 1. 私はあなたが殺す = _You_ will kill me. / It's _you_ who will kill me.\n> 2. 私はあなたを殺す = I will kill you.\n>\n\nIn both sentences, 私 is marked with は. But Sentence 1 says \"you kill me\" and\nSentence 2 says \"I kill you\". Why? Let's review the basic functions of は, が\nand を.\n\n * は is a **topic** marker. It can mark _both_ a subject and an object depending on what you want to \"focus\" in the sentence. It works **by replacing が/を**. \n * [What is the subject of this sentence? Is it the book (mentioned) or the author (who is not mentioned)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17571/5010)\n * [What's the difference between wa (は) and ga (が)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/22/5010)\n * が is a **subject** marker. It marks the subject of a verb.\n * を is an **object** marker. It marks the object of a transitive verb.\n\nThere are many exceptions, but these should be enough as a starter. In\nSentence 1, the subject is clearly あなた because it's unequivocally marked with\nが. So 私 will be interpreted as the object of 殺す. In Sentence 2, the object is\nあなた because it's unequivocally marked with を. 私 will be interpreted as the\nsubject of 殺す.\n\n* * *\n\nRegarding 私はエミリアが好きです, there is no verb in the first place because 好き is\nsomething called a na-adjective. For details, see: [私は猫が好き and\n猫は私が好き](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17857/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T02:48:31.413",
"id": "60763",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T02:48:31.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60761",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60761
|
60763
|
60763
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 俺旅芸人の一座にいたんだけどそれがあの盗賊どもに襲われちゃってさー\n\nThe て form is used at the end but not for a request. It doesn't seem to be one\nof those cases where the order of the words is simply \"inverted\" either, so\nwhat's the nuance behind the て form in this case?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T02:34:39.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60762",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-01T19:14:03.350",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-01T19:14:03.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "27104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "て form at end of phrase but not being used for requests",
"view_count": 1462
}
|
[
{
"body": "Te-form at the end of a sentence can be:\n\n 1. Request marker \n * [What does the final て in 待ってて signify?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/948/5010)\n 2. Reason marker \n * [Why is there て form at the end of the sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48946/5010)\n 3. Simple \"continuation\" marker used to indicate the current story continues \n * [What exactly is this でね construction?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11950/5010)\n\n> で is usually used to connect to phrases, but when the speaker is too excited\n> about the first part already, s/he wants to affirm it with ね\n\n * [でございまして in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/54376/5010)\n\n> For that reason, you will keep encountering \"sentences\" ending with\n> conjunctions and verbs/adjectives in the te-forms for as long as you study\n> Japanese. We call those 「言いさし表現」.\n\n * [Meaning of てさ after て form](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42650/5010)\n\nIn this case, it's 3. This te-form is used to keep the listener's attention by\nindicating this is not the end of his story and he has something more to say\nabout it.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T03:10:59.873",
"id": "60764",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-28T01:21:15.357",
"last_edit_date": "2020-09-28T01:21:15.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60762",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] |
60762
| null |
60764
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60769",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am looking for the meaning of 石松 in this context (待ってください用心棒なら この石松が) but I\ncannot find it anywhere. Also, this sentence is one that was interrupted,\nhence the abrupt \"が\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T03:46:45.523",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60765",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T13:15:49.800",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30808",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "The meaning of 石松 in 待ってください用心棒なら この石松が",
"view_count": 106
}
|
[
{
"body": "石松 is the speaker's name. He's offering his service as a 用心棒.\n\nYou said he got cut off, so the sentence could have ended something like\n\n待ってください用心棒なら この石松が **やります** or **つとめます** 。 \nOr, if he is using 敬語、 \n待ってください用心棒なら この石松が **致します**\n\nThere are hundreds of possibilties, so these are just some examples",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T12:50:38.090",
"id": "60769",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T13:15:49.800",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-09T13:15:49.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "1761",
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"parent_id": "60765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60765
|
60769
|
60769
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60784",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "踊る大捜査線\n\n踊る！さんま御殿\n\nこの２つのテレビ番組だけかもしれませんが、タイトルの最初の言葉として、また、意味的に一見つながっていないようにも思ってしまうこの「踊る」は何を表していますか？そのまま踊ることではないことは間違いなさそうです。\n\n私の推測としては、さんまの番組の場合、賑やかさを意味していると思います。しかし、踊る大捜査線の場合は違う気がします。紆余曲折を表しているかなぁと思ったけど、連想に過ぎないので、確信が持てません。\n\nこれに関しては日本語での説明をお願いできれば幸いです。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T09:22:57.153",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60766",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T03:22:11.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances"
],
"title": "番組のタイトルに「踊る」、どういう意味を表していますか？",
"view_count": 691
}
|
[
{
"body": "Not a real answer, I'm afraid, but one reason「踊る」got used in the program's\ntitle may be found in the\n[踊る!さんま御殿!!](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%B8%8A%E3%82%8B!%E3%81%95%E3%82%93%E3%81%BE%E5%BE%A1%E6%AE%BF!!)\nWikipedia page:\n\n>\n> 番組タイトル名の「踊る!」は以前、同局で放送されていた、さんまと所ジョージ司会のトークバラエティ番組『さんま・所のオシャベリの殿堂』で、さんまのしゃべる様子を所が「さんちゃんのトークは、いつも踊ってるねぇ〜」と表現したことに由来する。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T18:16:10.283",
"id": "60773",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T18:16:10.283",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "このような「踊る」の使い方は一般的なものではなく、これらの番組名以外で使われているのを見たこともありません。なので推測ですが、これらの「踊る」は様々な出来事が起こること、激しい動き、スピード感、ダイナミックさなどを表現しているのだと思います。「紆余曲折」という単語には止まったり戻ったりしているようなネガティブなイメージがあるので、ちょっと「踊る」とは意味が違うような気がします。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T02:45:54.233",
"id": "60783",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T02:54:31.920",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T02:54:31.920",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "君が代の君なんかもそうですが、この手のものの解釈をはっきりさせようというのは私は少々野暮かなと思います。\n\nしかしまぁ、大捜査線について言えば、「捜査」と「踊る」で思い浮かぶのは「踊らされる」という表現で、これは相手の謀略にはまって無駄なことをしてしまうという意味です。OPさんの考えに近いのはこれになるでしょう。\n\n「おどる」についてもう一つ知ってもらいたい意味があります。それは「（新聞の紙面に）◯◯という文字/言葉が躍る」などの表現での「あちらこちらに入り乱れ、飛び跳ねる」という意味です。※「踊る」を狭義に解釈したら意味不明なのだから漢字の違いはもはや意味ない。\n\n単に「踊る」であることに意味があるとすれば単純に「あわただしく、ワタワタしてるさま」というのがもっともらしいと思います。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T03:22:11.030",
"id": "60784",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T03:22:11.030",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60766
|
60784
|
60783
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 図体ばっかりでかくなりやがって\n\nThe person who says it is short but he's also very rude. The people he's\ntalking to just worked out, so I don't know if he meant `only their bodies\ngrew but their brain didn't`, or if it means something like `ugh you got so\nbig` (I didn't).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T11:52:57.747",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60768",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T02:39:04.257",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-09T15:31:06.637",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "29922",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "Is this phrase an insult or jealousy?",
"view_count": 210
}
|
[
{
"body": "Without any other context, I don't think you can make any inferences about it\nbeing an insult about the other person's brain, or an envious complaint about\nthe speaker not matching up. More context might make this clearer, but...\n\ntaking a quick look at weblio for 図体{ずうたい},\n\n<https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%9B%B3%E4%BD%93>\n\nIt seems to mean \"body mass\" or \"body size\" ... And the weblio entry actually\nlists as an example sentence, a very similar insult to the one in your\nquestion:\n\n> 「図体ばかり大きくて、なんの役にも立たない」\n\nThis seems like a common way to insult someone who has purposely built up\ntheir body but isn't doing anything useful with it, or getting enough results\nout of it.\n\nSo **図体ばっかりでかくなりやがって** likely is trying to imply something similar, like:\n\n\"All you've done is increased your body mass (for no reason/meaninglessly).\"\nor\n\n\"Just increasing your body size (and not improving anything else, is stupid).\"\n\nor if you want to get really loose with the translation, a more colloquial\nexpression with a similar meaning is something like:\n\n\"Bigger isn't always better, you know.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T16:35:49.480",
"id": "60771",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-09T16:35:49.480",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29347",
"parent_id": "60768",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "As I said in a comment I think looking at the [usage and meaning of\nやがる](https://www.nihongomaster.com/dictionary/entry/1172/yagaru) could help.\nIt is a suffix of the verb which indicates hatred and contempt, or disdain for\nanother's action. In case you already knew this, forgive me for pointing it\nout. Could still help others understand though.\n\nAnyway, this gives a clear indication of the speaker's feelings towards what's\nhappening. Therefore, I would say it's more of an insult than jealousy.\nObviously though, an insult could be generated by jealousy as well, but that\ndepends on the context. The bottom line is, what this guy means is: _you are\njust getting bigger physically!_ (Or more literally: _nothing else but your\nbody is getting bigger_ ). And the nuance of disdain/insult is given as I\nmentioned by the use of やがる as suffix to でかくなる.\n\n**PS.** Let me add one thing in case it's not clear. The \"insult\" here is not\nunderlined by やがる. This suffix only indicates disdain for something, not\nnecessarily an insult. See this example from the link I provided:\n\n> 昔はペチャパイだったのに、いつの間にかこんなに大きくなりやがって。 She used to be flat-chested - just when\n> did she get so large?\n\nThe insult nuance is highlighted by the combination of that with (図体)ばっかり,\nwhich, as you mentioned, means _nothing else_ but your body is getting big\n(probably implying the brain is still small). This combined with the disdain\ngiven by やがる suggests it is an insult. I mean, if there was no ばっかり, it might\nsimply be that the speaker does not like that the other guy got so big (as in\nthe example above), not necessarily insulting him for this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T01:20:45.693",
"id": "60780",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T02:39:04.257",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T02:39:04.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "29183",
"owner_user_id": "14205",
"parent_id": "60768",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60768
| null |
60780
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60785",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "「ずいぶん」と「ずいぶんと」の違いは何ですか。\n\n> 例）「まだ **ずいぶんと** 時間があります。」\n\nこの例文で「ずいぶん」も使ってもいいですか。それとも、これは正しくないですか。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T14:52:54.887",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60770",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-06T19:41:08.877",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-06T19:41:08.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "27805",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"adjectives",
"adverbs"
],
"title": "「ずいぶん」と「ずいぶんと」の違い",
"view_count": 5160
}
|
[
{
"body": "「ずいぶん」と「ずいぶん **と** 」の違いは最小限であると言ってよいでしょう。品詞的には双方とも副詞ですし、基本的な意味にも差はありません。\n\n強いて違いを探せば、「と」を付けない方がインフォーマルな響きがするという傾向はあると思います。しかし、その差が大きいかと言えば、それほどではないと思います。\n\n相対的に言って、このふたつの単語においては互換性が高いのが事実です。\n\n従って、例文の\n\n> 「まだずいぶん **と** 時間があります。」\n\nは\n\n> 「まだずいぶん時間があります。」\n\nと、「と」を省いて書き換えても、同様に文法的であり、意味にも違いはありません。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T05:04:56.133",
"id": "60785",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T05:04:56.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60770",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
60770
|
60785
|
60785
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60782",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "This construction felt very weird to me:\n\n> 大好きな彼女\n\nI saw it here: <https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3vupgr>\n\nI thought that normally, you would construct that type of sentence like this:\n\n> 彼女を大好きな\n\nIt's like the opposite structure. Why is that?\n\n**Note** : as someone mentioned, the line occurs at 2:18.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T18:06:10.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60772",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T03:55:43.867",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T03:55:43.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "29736",
"owner_user_id": "29736",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"comparative-constructions"
],
"title": "About the construction 大好きな彼女",
"view_count": 138
}
|
[
{
"body": "The translation of ‘I love her’ is not necessarily problematic, but is not a\ndirect translation. ‘The girl who I love’ or ‘Her, whom I love’, or ‘My\nbeloved’ would be closer. While 私 is simply omitted in the original, it could\nbe included to state 私の大好きな彼女.\n\nAccording to Wikipedia, in this anime, the female lead is referred to only as\n彼女 (her). The cat is in love with his owner and seems to consider ‘her’ to be\nhis ‘female partner’. Apparently, this anime anthropomorphizes the cat\nspecifically through the eyes of the creator and was made for the girl he\nloved in real life.\n\nIf ‘her’ name was known, and it was のりこ, the cat would say\n「（私の）大好きなのりこ、私は彼女の猫だ。」 instead.\n\nTo make it simpler, take the expression\n[好きな人](https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8D%E3%81%AA%E4%BA%BA),\nwhich means ‘someone who is liked’ and apply this to the expression in the\nanime.\n\nFor those of you viewing the source video, the line in question is at 2:18.\n\nSide note: In your post, you offer 彼女を大好きな as an alternative, which is not\ngrammatical. 彼女が大好きな＿＿＿ or 彼女の好きな＿＿＿ would be fine. Adding な after 好き makes\nwhatever comes before 好き an indirect object, so を (indicating direct object)\nwouldn't jive.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T02:05:55.740",
"id": "60782",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T02:17:04.303",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T02:17:04.303",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "60772",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60772
|
60782
|
60782
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60781",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading the manga (hence a more free form writing and lack of punctuation,\nI get that) and I have this passage (slashes indicate bubble breaks):\n\n> A: それじゃあ 確認 / 作戦開始は暗くなってから\n>\n> A: それまでに\n>\n> B: **私は「Robots」の材料を集めて回って ここの地下に転送**\n>\n> B: **Aがそれを準備してくれる / だったわよね？**\n\nContext: A and B will later steal a bunch of machine parts and machines to\nmake the \"Robots\" and cause ruckus with them, all in one night.\n\nSo far this is what I think this passage means, roughly.\n\n> A: In that case let’s confirm, / the operation starts after it gets dark...\n> by that time...\n>\n> B: You A will have made preparation for transfer of material for \"Robots\"\n> that I gather in the basement here, won't you?\n\nI have a problem with two things here.\n\nOne is this line\n\n> 私は「Robots」の材料を集めて回って ここの地下に転送\n>\n> Literally: Transfer to basement here of \"Robots\"'s material I (will) gather\n> by visiting several places.\n\nwhich I don't know how it works out grammatically. I'm assuming it's a\nfragment being completed by the next bit. Also I'm assuming\n私は「Robots」の材料を集めて回って ここ is some kind of preposition but I'm not sure. The\n\"V-te form ここ\" for is weird to me.\n\nThe next bit\n\n> Aがそれを準備してくれる / だったわよね？\n>\n> Literally: A (will) for that do the preparations for me / it was am I right?\n\nties into the previous one with それ referring to the transfer (this might not\nbe a term to use for transporting matter IRL, but it's a term often used for\nteleporting stuff in universe) of material.\n\nNow if it was just Aがそれを準備してくれる I'd say this means just \"A will make\npreparations for that\", meaning this will happen in future or is being done\nsince it's non-past tense. What is confusing for me is the next bit\n\n> だったわよね？\n\nsince as far as I recall だった is a past form of だ and as such tends to not be\nappended DIRECTLY on to the verbs. So I'm guessing this is probably a separate\nsentence or separated by a comma or something. But still why is it in past\nform when the action should probably happen in future? Basically what am I\nmissing here?\n\nNow that I have typed the above, I guess the last bit could be reffering to\nB's entire recounting of the plan. A sort of:\n\n> That was it wasn't it? / That's all of it right?\n\nasking for confirmation if she has the plan right.\n\n**Basically I'm asking how does the bolded line above work from grammatical\nstandpoint and am I wrong in my interpretations.**\n\nAlso sorry for being a bit more open ended in my question than I was supposed\nto be.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-09T19:25:15.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60774",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T06:48:18.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "26839",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Do I have this right? Also what \"tense\" is this",
"view_count": 154
}
|
[
{
"body": "This それじゃあ (それでは, では, じゃあ) means \"Now\", \"Okay\" or \"Well then\". See: [\"Dewa\"\nfor changing the subject](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55127/5010)\n\n> 私は「Robots」の材料を集めて回って、(材料を)ここの地下に転送(する)。\n\nLooks like you tried to take 転送 as a noun. This 転送 is a suru-verb but する has\nbeen omitted. If it were a noun, it could not be modified by an adverbial\nexpression 地下に. The sentence can be translated without any relative clause, \"I\nwill go around and gather _Robot's_ material, and transfer it to the basement\nhere.\"\n\n> Aがそれを準備してくれる。\n\nYes this それ refers to 転送. \"A (=You) will prepare for that (=the transferring\nprocess) for me.\"\n\n> だったわよね？\n\nThis is a standalone sentence that begins with だった. In casual speech a\nsentence can start with the copula だ, and it refers to what has been mentioned\nin the context. You may think そう has been omitted before だ. For example \"だね。\"\nby itself means the same thing as \"そうだね。\" or \"Yeah that's right.\" I think this\nis in past tense simply because B is referring to what was said in the past.\n\"Did I get it right?\" rather than \"Is my current understanding correct?\" B can\nalso say \"(そう)よね?\" instead here. The difference is small.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T02:03:13.040",
"id": "60781",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T06:48:18.390",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T06:48:18.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60774",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60774
|
60781
|
60781
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Whats the difference between these particles and these two sentences?\n\n 1. 国 **へ** 帰ります\n\n 2. 国 **を** 帰ります\n\nDon't they both mean \"I return to the country\"? or\n\nA. おかあさんはみせ **へ** いく。\n\nB. おかあさんはみせ **を** いく。\n\nAre those both correct ways to say \"Mom goes to the shop.\"?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T09:28:33.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60786",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T16:09:22.980",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T10:16:04.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "30930",
"owner_user_id": "30930",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-を",
"particle-へ"
],
"title": "What's the difference between particle へ and を?",
"view_count": 272
}
|
[
{
"body": "国 **を** 帰ります and おかあさんはみせ **を** いく are grammatically incorrect as you don't\nuse を for 帰る、行く{いく｝、来る{くる｝、向かう{むかう}、移動{いどう}する、引｛ひ}っ越{こ}す and other similar\nverbs that indicate movement to another location. For those verbs either へ or\nに used.\n\nTo learn about the difference between へ and に, check this link --> [When going\nsomewhere, is there any difference between e (へ) and ni\n(に)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/80/when-going-somewhere-is-\nthere-any-difference-between-e-%E3%81%B8-and-ni-%E3%81%AB)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T10:37:17.443",
"id": "60787",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T16:09:22.980",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-11T16:09:22.980",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30554",
"parent_id": "60786",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60786
| null |
60787
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60789",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Suppose I have a verb/adjective/noun, let's say 無理, and I add (な)んだ to it as\nan explanatory sentence-ending particle. What would be the difference in\nnuance between the following two conjugated constructions?\n\n 1. それは無理だったんだ。\n 2. それは無理なんだった。\n\nMore generally, what is the difference in meaning between conjugating a word\nbefore adding んだ (to any tense, such as past negative) and doing it the other\nway around? Please also provide examples where one would be more appropriate\nthan the other for each of the two cases, and consider what would happen if ん\nwere replaced by の.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T12:51:00.387",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60788",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T17:28:28.827",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T17:28:28.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "29335",
"owner_user_id": "29335",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 15,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations",
"modality",
"explanatory-の"
],
"title": "Conjugated word + んだ vs nonconjugated word + conjugated んだ",
"view_count": 414
}
|
[
{
"body": "無理だったんだ is straightforward, it's a combination of 無理だった (\"was impossible\") and\nthe explanatory-の. \"So it is that it was impossible\", \"Because it was not\npossible\", \"(I failed but) it was impossible (in the first place)\", etc.\n\n無理なんだった is usually interpreted as a combination of 無理なんだ (\"it's that it's\nimpossible\"; present tense) and [discovery-た](https://www.wasabi-\njpn.com/japanese-grammar/another-function-of-the-ta-form-discovery-and-\nrecall/). \"(Ah, I've just recalled) it is impossible (and that fact explains\nsomething)\", \"(That reminds me,) this is not possible!\" Note that this refers\nto something at present. For example, imagine you've been trying hard to open\na treasure box with a key for an hour, and suddenly remembered you had heard\nfrom someone that the box actually required two keys to open. You may say\n\"あっ、無理なんだった、鍵が2つ要るんだった!\"\n\nWhen のだった/んだった is used with an action verb, it also describes a regret,\nsomething that should have happened in the past.\n\n> * ボタンを押したんだ。 \n> (It is that) I pushed the button.\n> * ボタンを押すんだった。 \n> [regret] I should have pushed the button (but I didn't). \n> [recall] (Oh, I've just recalled) I have to push the button (to open this\n> door)!\n>",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T13:20:32.410",
"id": "60789",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T14:27:48.363",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T14:27:48.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] |
60788
|
60789
|
60789
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> example: \"どうすんだよこの空気をよぉ！？\"\n\nIs it \"What are you doing with this mood?!\"? I can't make sense of it. The\nline is from a manga.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T20:17:43.707",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60791",
"last_activity_date": "2021-11-23T23:06:25.567",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-11T16:06:04.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "29922",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"manga"
],
"title": "Meaning of どうすんだよ",
"view_count": 1395
}
|
[
{
"body": "'What to do about the air/atmosphere/mood?'. Without more context, it could be\nsomething other than mood, but your translation is mostly correct.\n\nRather than 'What are you doing with this mood', 'What will you do (What are\nyou going to do) about this mood' would be a closer fit. As @ericfromabeno\ncomments below, there is an implicit placing of responsibility on the listener\nand an urge for them to 'do something'.\n\nThis order of phrasing is very colloquial, and therefore not unusual in manga.\n\nThe use of よ and よぉ are superfluous to the actual meaning of the sentence, so\nlet's remove them and add a comma for the pause that would normally occur:\n\n> どうすんだ、この空気を！？\n\nNow, it is simply a case of using grammar to define the verb, direct object,\netc. and restructure the sentence into a more familiar order:\n\n> この空気をどうすんだ！？\n\n(どうすんだ is colloquial for どうするんですか, but I assume that you knew this).",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T20:52:41.167",
"id": "60792",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-10T23:25:54.067",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-10T23:25:54.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "27280",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "60791",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60791
| null |
60792
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Firstly, I am not a linguist and will probably use linguistic terminology\ninappropriately. よろしくお願いします。\n\n> What is the difference in meaning between verbs in the perfective aspect\n> (～た), present progressive (～ている), and past progressive (～ていた), _specifically\n> verbs that denote a **resultative** meaning?_\n>\n> Alternatively, what is the difference in meaning between 死んだ{しんだ}、死んでいる、and\n> 死んでいた, and between 来た{きた}、来ている、and 来ていた?\n\nTake the verb 死ぬ (and pretend resurrection is possible).\n\n 1. In the perfective aspect, which denotes a completed (perfected) action, 死んだ translates simply to \"[subject/topic] died, _and may or may not still be dead presently_ \", or more simply \"died\".\n 2. In the (resultative) present progressive, the deadness is still imperfectively ongoing, thus 死んでいる translates to \"[subject/topic] died, _and is still dead presently_ \", or more simply \"is dead\".\n 3. In the (resultative) past progressive, 死んでいた means \"[subject/topic] died, _and was still dead at the time in reference, though may or may not still be dead presently_ ,\" or maybe \"[subject/topic] _was_ dead, _though may or may not still be dead presently_.\" More simply \"was dead\". These attempted understandings almost sound like trying to force the perfect tense in English onto the perfective resultative past progressive meaning in Japanese. How can this error in understanding be rectified?\n\nPlease explain the semantic and pragmatic differences between the three forms\nof the above two verbs (死ぬ、来る), specifically _comparing and contrasting the\nJapanese meanings to the English meanings with linguistic/grammatical evidence\nsupporting said explanations, taking into account the communicative\nlimitations resulting from the fundamental differences in how verbs are\npositioned relatively in time between the two languages._",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-10T22:51:10.057",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60793",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T00:39:18.577",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-11T00:39:18.577",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "27915",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"conjugations",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "perfective aspect vs resultative present progressive vs resultative past progressive",
"view_count": 357
}
|
[] |
60793
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60796",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Take for instance the noun,\n\n`同棲組` which roughly means a `group living together`.\n\nDoes `同棲` _always_ have a romantic connotation, or is it possible to use it in\na non-romantic sense. For example, to describe a group of friends living\ntogether?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T02:14:54.230",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60794",
"last_activity_date": "2022-08-30T04:25:01.833",
"last_edit_date": "2022-08-30T04:25:01.833",
"last_editor_user_id": "10230",
"owner_user_id": "26635",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances",
"nouns",
"connotation"
],
"title": "Does 同棲 always have a romantic connotation?",
"view_count": 332
}
|
[
{
"body": "While the main contemporary usage is for non-married people with a romantic\naffiliation to be 'shacking up' together, this is not 100% definitive (see the\n[Wikipedia page](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E6%A3%B2)).\n\nOther words exist (一緒に住む、同居) to indicate simple cohabitation, so for all\nintents and purposes, a romantic link would be implied ([Weblio\npage](https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/cohabitation)).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T03:31:34.510",
"id": "60796",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T15:25:09.847",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-11T15:25:09.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "60794",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> Does 同棲 always have a romantic connotation, or is it possible to use it in a\n> non-romantic sense.\n\nI think it always has a romantic connotation... I've never heard it used in a\nnon-romantic sense.\n\n> 同棲組 which roughly means a group living together.\n\nI think it's used to refer to \"(the kind/group/category of) people who are\nliving with their partner / choose to live with their partner rather than\ngetting married\".\n\n> For example, to describe a group of friends living together?\n\nI don't think we use 同棲 to describe that...",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T04:30:11.870",
"id": "60812",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T05:03:34.313",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-12T05:03:34.313",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "60794",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60794
|
60796
|
60812
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60798",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was doing some JLPT N2 practice and got this question wrong:\n\n> スポーツ大会のプログラムはさておき、（ ）。\n>\n> a 日程を決めよう\n>\n> b 準備はすべて整った\n>\n> c わたしも参加したい\n\nWhen I saw option \"a\", I immediately thought that it was wrong, because I\nthought プログラム and 日程 are the same thing. I thought they both refer to \"what\nhappens at what time during the スポーツ大会\". さておき connects two _different_ topics\nof discussion, with the latter being the more important one. Therefore, I\nconcluded that \"a\" couldn't be the answer.\n\nBut \"a\" is the correct answer! I concluded that プログラム and 日程 must be different\nsomehow. After looking up images of スポーツ大会のプログラム, I found schedules that says\nwhat happens at what time, which is expected. But when I google \"スポーツ大会の日程\",\nphotos of all kinds of sports events come up, making the meaning of 日程 even\nmore mysterious.\n\nJisho says that 日程 means \"schedule; program\", which doesn't help in\nunderstanding why 日程 and プログラム are different things.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T03:45:43.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60797",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T15:39:42.980",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "18200",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"jlpt"
],
"title": "What is the difference between プログラム and 日程 in the context of a スポーツ大会?",
"view_count": 159
}
|
[
{
"body": "To me, an average Japanese speaker, 「日程{にってい}」 and 「プログラム」 are two words with\ntwo separate meanings even though I must admit that they can overlap in\nmeaning _to a small extent_. They are, however, definitely not \"synonyms\" of\neach other.\n\n「日程」 refers to an over-all (or \"rough\") time schedule of what takes place on\nwhat day at what time. **It is often used to tell only on what date(s) the\nevent in question occurs and nothing else**.\n\n「プログラム」 tends to refer to a much more **detailed** schedule of the event. It\nwould list when and where every little event within the event takes place, who\nare scheduled to participate/appear, when the breaks and meal times are and\nfor how long, etc.\n\nThis is why the sentence:\n\n> 「スポーツ大会{たいかい}のプログラムはさておき、日程を決{き}めよう。」\n\nmakes perfect sense because for any kind event, you would normally need to\ndecide on when (what date(s)) it should take place before deciding on the\nminor details of all the components of the event.\n\n「～～はさておき」 means \"setting ~~ aside\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T05:21:32.880",
"id": "60798",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T05:21:32.880",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60797",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
60797
|
60798
|
60798
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60802",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am not sure whether or not I have learnt this grammar before. I am reading a\nbook about OpenCV and found a sentence as follows.\n\n> OpenCVを効果的に用いるのに必要となるコンピュータビジョンについての一般的な背景知識もあわせて説明します。\n\nThe confusing part is the grammar\n\n```\n\n N1+に必要となる+N2\n \n```\n\nwhere\n\n```\n\n N1=OpenCVを効果的に用いるの\n \n```\n\nand\n\n```\n\n N2=コンピュータビジョンについての一般的な背景知識\n \n```\n\nI know\n\n * `N1をN2とする` that means let N1 be N2.\n * `NをNa-adjにする` or `Nをi-adj-stemくする` that means making N a condition represented by the adjective.\n\nIs it possible to say the following?\n\n> OpenCVを効果的に用いるのに必要と **する** コンピュータビジョンについての一般的な背景知識",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T07:16:17.210",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60799",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T01:19:48.713",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-12T01:19:48.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "9896",
"owner_user_id": "9896",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How to parse the following \"N1+に必要となる＋N2\"?",
"view_count": 173
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「Noun 1 + に必要{ひつよう}となる + Noun 2」\n\ncan only mean:\n\n> \"Noun **2** (which is) necessary/required for Noun **1** \"\n\nbecause「Noun 1 + に必要となる」 functions as a relative clause modifying 「Noun 2」. In\nother words, **between Noun 1 and Noun 2, the latter is the \"main\" noun of the\nwhole phrase**.\n\nThus,\n\n> 「OpenCVを効果的{こうかてき}に用{もち}いるの **に必要となる** コンピュータビジョン」\n\nmeans:\n\n> \"the computer vision (technology) necessary/required for effectively\n> utilizing OpenCV\"\n\nFor those who are wondering, the 「の」 in 「用いるの」 is a nominalizer, making it\npossible to treat the phrase 「OpenCVを効果的に用いるの」 just like a noun. That whole\nphrase is what the questioner is calling \"N1\".\n\nFinally,\n\n> Is it possible to say the following?\n>\n> OpenCVを効果的に用いるのに必要と **する** コンピュータビジョン\n\nNo, it is not possible. 「なる」 and 「する」 mean very different things; therefore,\nthey cannot be used interchangeably. I could not think of an exception.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T13:52:41.937",
"id": "60802",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T13:52:41.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60799
|
60802
|
60802
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've an instagram friend who is far older than me. One day, he figured out\nthat I lived near his house, then he commented this in my instagram post:\n\nあなたに会いたかった。\n\nWhat does that mean? Did he want me to meet him directly? Or just hoping we\ncan meet unintentionally?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T08:06:40.407",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60800",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T09:14:30.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30938",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"kanji",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "会いたかった : What does it mean?",
"view_count": 1180
}
|
[
{
"body": "If said by a native speaker,\n\n> 「あなたに会{あ}いたかった。」\n\ncould only mean:\n\n> \"I've been wanting to meet you (in person).\"\n\nwhich naturally would **_not_** include \"bumping into you someplace\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T09:14:30.407",
"id": "60801",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-11T09:14:30.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60800",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60800
| null |
60801
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60804",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "「疎{うと}まれる」の意味はわかりますが、「かえって疎まれる」と使われたら意味がわからなくなりました。 「かえって」とは何を表すのですか。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T15:29:03.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60803",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-30T10:34:45.150",
"last_edit_date": "2019-07-25T05:02:04.647",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15965",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "「かえって疎まれる」の意味について",
"view_count": 321
}
|
[
{
"body": "この「かえって」は、「逆に」、「反対に」、「予想と違って」という意味を持ちます。\n\n「却って」または「反って」と、漢字で書かれることもありますが、多くの場合はカナで書きます。\n\nですから、「かえって疎{うと}まれる」とは、「逆に嫌われる」、「予想に反して人から嫌がられる」という意味になります。\n\nまた、同じ発音の「帰って」とは意味・用法の異なる言葉ですのでご注意ください。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T15:38:38.497",
"id": "60804",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-30T10:34:45.150",
"last_edit_date": "2021-08-30T10:34:45.150",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60803",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60803
|
60804
|
60804
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "My grammar book says they both mean ‘if that’s the case...’ but it doesn’t\nclarify the differences.\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-11T21:50:50.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60806",
"last_activity_date": "2019-04-20T03:03:55.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25348",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between それでは and それなら",
"view_count": 4155
}
|
[
{
"body": "それなら implies that the speaker anticipated multiple possible answers, or didn't\nanticipate what was just said. It's fundamentally more reactive.\n\n```\n\n おなかすいたな (I'm hungry)\n それならご飯にしようか (if that's the case, let's have a lunch)\n \n```\n\nそれでは can be interchangeably used here and when used like that, it sounds a bit\nmore formal than それなら.\n\nIn addition, それでは is also used in the context where the speaker is actively\nsuggesting/driving a topic.\n\n```\n\n それでは試験を始めます (we shall begin the exam)\n \n```",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T00:56:49.070",
"id": "60931",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T00:56:49.070",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "60806",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60806
| null |
60931
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60811",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't understand why \"とは\" is being used in the following sentences:\n\n> 1)...質問があります。その質問 **とは** 、「なぜ、皆マスクをしているの？」...\n>\n> 2) 花粉症 **とは** 、植物の花粉によって起こるアレルギーです。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T01:33:13.363",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60807",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T17:59:13.803",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-12T03:44:19.920",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30946",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particles"
],
"title": "What does \"とは\" mean in these sentences?",
"view_count": 2460
}
|
[
{
"body": "the とは particles are used to mark a definition or explanation of something.\nThe structure is `<thing you are going to explain/define> とは <description>`\n\nLet's take a look at those two sentences. I've bolded the English words that\nare translated from とは\n\nSo in the first sentence the speaker says,\n\n> I have a question. That question **is** \"why is everyone wearing a mask?\".\n\nthe とは marks that the speaker is about the explain/define what his/her\nquestion is.\n\nThe second sentence is the same structure. The sentence is explaining what 花粉症\n(or hay fever) is.\n\n> Hay fever **(is/can be defined as/is explained as)** the allergy to plant\n> polen.\n\n[This site](http://learnjapanesedaily.com/japanese-grammar-\ndictionary/japanese-grammar-%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF-toha.html) does a good\njob of explaining the basic uses of とは if you want to learn a little more.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T02:34:44.580",
"id": "60811",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T17:59:13.803",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T17:59:13.803",
"last_editor_user_id": "29183",
"owner_user_id": "29183",
"parent_id": "60807",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
60807
|
60811
|
60811
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60813",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 1. 子供の頃からずっとロボットに興味 **を持って来ています** 。\n> 2. 子供の頃からずっとロボットに興味 **があります** 。\n>\n\nWhich sentence sounds more natural?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T01:45:11.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60808",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T09:23:54.960",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-12T09:23:54.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "30947",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "興味を持ってきている versus 興味がある",
"view_count": 253
}
|
[
{
"body": "Sentence 2 is better. Using both 来る (describes change over time) and いる\n(describes continuation of state) at the same time sounds odd to me. But you\ncan safely say:\n\n> * 子供の頃からずっとロボットに興味を持って来ました。\n> * 子供の頃からずっとロボットに興味を持っています。\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T09:23:33.050",
"id": "60813",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T09:23:33.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60808",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60808
|
60813
|
60813
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60810",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "To say \"Japanese language school\" in Japanese, sentences 1 and 2 can be used?\nor they have different meanings because of the use of particle 'の' (sentence\n2)?\n\n> 1. [日本語]{にほんご}[学校]{がっこう} (nihongo gakkou)\n>\n> 2. [日本語]{にほんご} **の** [学校]{がっこう} (nihongo no gakkou)\n>\n>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T02:19:18.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60809",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T03:56:41.680",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27569",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-の"
],
"title": "Does the particle 'の' change the meaning of this phrase?",
"view_count": 185
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both are correct and both have the same meaning.\n\nThe only small difference would be that 「日本語{にほんご} **の** 学校{がっこう}」 would\nlook/sound a tiny bit more informal than 「日本語学校」.\n\nThe use of 「の」 often makes the phrase more informal.\n\n「日本{にほん}の政府{せいふ}」 is more informal than 「日本政府」 though both mean \"the Japanese\ngovernment\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T02:29:55.403",
"id": "60810",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T02:29:55.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60809",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60809
|
60810
|
60810
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60816",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From\n[here](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10011570531000/k10011570531000.html):\n\n> 国土交通省によると、３つの会社は走るのに必要なガソリンの量や外に出るガスの量を調べる **検査を国が決めたルール**\n> と違うやり方で行っていました。そして、ルールどおりに検査したと記録していました。 \n> According to the land ministry, three companies were operating in a way\n> different to the rules that the nation had decided upon. The nation had\n> chosen inspections which investigate amount of gases that are emitted and\n> the amount of fuel that is needed for running. They also recorded that they\n> had made inspections in accordance with the rules.\n\nThis is my best effort at translation but I think something is not quite\nright. The part in bold is bothering me. It looks like 決める has two objects\ni.e. ルール and 検査.\n\nI parse 国が決めたルール as \"the rules chosen by the nation\". But also 検査を国が決めた as\n\"The nation has chosen an examination\". I can't join these together to make\nanything meaningful, hence why I wrote two separate sentences. Am I parsing\nthis wrongly?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T12:34:48.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60814",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T15:39:08.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-を",
"parsing",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Relative clause with both direct object and head noun as object",
"view_count": 126
}
|
[
{
"body": "検査 is the object of 行っていました. A simplified version of this sentence is:\n\n> 3つの会社は検査を行って【おこなって】いました。 \n> The three companies were conducting examinations.\n\n行っていました is modified by a long adverbial expression 国が決めたルールと違うやり方で (\"in a way\nthat is different from rules set by the government\").",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T15:39:08.233",
"id": "60816",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T15:39:08.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60814",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60814
|
60816
|
60816
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60818",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading this\n[article](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10011570501000/k10011570501000.html)\nabout a peace ceremony held in Nagasaki.\n\nThere is a sentence that uses a **と** , but I do not understand the meaning\nentirely. I believe the **と** is being used as an \"and\" but I don't know why\nor how. I have only seen **と** used as an \"and\" when its is between two nouns\nlike\n\n> 猫と犬\n>\n> Cat and dog\n\nIf I am correct is it because the **と** is between two relative clauses?\n\n> Sentence: 去年からの１年に亡くなった人 **と** 亡くなっていたことがわかった人は３５１１人です。\n>\n> My Translation: Since last year, people that have died in the year and\n> people who understood the event that were dying are 3511.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T16:15:33.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60817",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T16:55:35.950",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-12T16:55:35.950",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "30339",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Use of と in 亡くなった人と亡くなっていたことがわかった人",
"view_count": 101
}
|
[
{
"body": "Here the と is between two **noun phrases**. (The noun phrases are 亡くなった人 and\n亡くなっていたことがわかった人.) Noun phrases can behave exactly like nouns, so in 猫と犬 you\ncan replace the nouns 猫 and 犬 by more complicated noun phrases.\n\nIndeed, both noun phrases consist of a noun (in both cases 人) modified by a\nsentence ending in a verb and this structure is often translated using a\nrelative clause in English.\n\nYou only asked about the grammar of と, but let me also remark that your\ntranslation is too literal. For\n\n> 亡くなった人は5人です。\n\nI think it would be more natural to say\n\n> Five people died.\n\nrather than\n\n> People who died are five (persons).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T16:53:41.617",
"id": "60818",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-12T16:53:41.617",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "60817",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60817
|
60818
|
60818
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60829",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have recently been trying to learn how to translate 2nd and 3rd conditional\nsentences accurately into Japanese, but didn't found a clear, detailed answer.\nBy gathering different bits, it seems that 3rd conditional could be formed as\nin the following example:\n\n> If I had had money, I would have bought food. \n> もし金が有っていたら、食べ物を買っていたでしょう。\n\nIs this sentence correct? Also, if I understood correctly, the use of 〜ていた\nforms is to emphasize the fact the condition and potential result would have\ntaken place in the past. Would the sentence still have the same meaning if the\ninitial もし was not included?\n\nWhat about if the result would have been a negative action? Is the following\ncorrect?\n\n> If I had eaten, I wouldn't have been hungry. \n> 食べていたら、お腹が空いていなかったでしょう。\n\nWhat about the 2nd conditional? How would the following be translated?\n\n> If I had money, I would build a house.\n\nWould the following be correct?\n\n> 金が有っていたら、家を買うでしょう。\n\nFinally, would the translations still be correct, but less formal, by\nreplacing the final 〜でしょう by 〜だろう ?\n\nThanks a lot!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T18:47:10.537",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60820",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-16T01:20:54.103",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-12T23:32:45.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "30950",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"conditionals"
],
"title": "English 2nd and 3rd conditional in Japanese",
"view_count": 1378
}
|
[
{
"body": "Let me start with the simpler one of the two - the second conditioal\n(仮定法過去{かていほうかこ}). Not sure why you would start with the third\n(仮定法過去完了{かていほうかこかんりょう}), which is more complex.\n\nSecond Conditional:\n\n> \"If I **had** money, I **would build** a house.\"\n\nYour translation:\n\n> 「金{かね}が有{あ}っていたら、家{いえ}を買{か}うでしょう。」_\n\nwhich is kind of close but not correct. Only the last half (main clause) is\ngrammatical.\n\nIn Japanese, we never say 「有っていたら」 regardless of the meaning and/or context.\n_**That form simply does not exist**_.\n\nThe correct form is 「あったら」 or 「あれば」. The vast majority of us native speakers\nwould write this using all kana instead of using the kanji 「有」. Also correct\nwould be to use the different verb 「持{も}つ」 and say 「持っていたら」 or 「持っていれば」.\n\n(Additionally, it is far more natural-sounding to say 「お金{かね}」 than 「金」.\nLikewise, we say 「お茶」 for \"tea\" and rarely ever 「茶」.)\n\nPutting it all together, a correct and natural-sounding translation would be:\n\n> 「（もし）お金が（あったら or あれば）、家を買う（だろう or でしょう）。」\n\nUsing 「建{た}てる」 instead of 「買う」 would make it more true to your English\noriginal which uses the verb \"to build\" rather than \"to buy\".\n\nIn fact, let us form another second conditional sentence using 「持つ」 and 「建てる」.\nThat would be:\n\n> 「（もし）お金 **を** 持って（いたら or いれば）、家を建てる（だろう or でしょう）。」\n\nMoving on to the third conditional..\n\n> \"If I **had had** money, I **would have bought** food.\"\n\nAnd your TL reads:\n\n> 「もし金が有っていたら、食べ物を買っていたでしょう。」\n\nAgain, the second half is perfect. The ony mistake in the first is「有っていたら」,\nwhich makes no sense as I mentioned before. So, it looks pretty good overall.\n\nThe correct and natural-sounding sentences are:\n\n> 「もしお金を **持っていた** ら、食べ物を **買っていた** （でしょう or だろう）。」\n>\n> 「もしお金が **あったら** 、食べ物を **買っていた** （でしょう or だろう）。」\n\nWhy use 「お金があったら」 for both second and third conditionals, you wonder. That is\nsimply because the form 「お金があっていたら」 does not exist in the language.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T00:43:25.630",
"id": "60829",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T00:43:25.630",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
},
{
"body": "If I had money, I would build a house. お金があったら家を建てる［のに／けど］…。 The のに… or けど…\ncan indicate the unreal condition, “you don’t have money.”\n<https://youtu.be/_3DqKPZZ_34> 12:25\n\nお金があったら家を建てる［だろう／でしょう」can be used when talking about your future plan, “I will\nbuild a house if I have money.”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-16T01:20:54.103",
"id": "80166",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-16T01:20:54.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "40018",
"parent_id": "60820",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
60820
|
60829
|
60829
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60830",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is there any difference in meaning/nuance between Xが原因で and Xで? For example in\n\n> ８つの州で雨が原因で約８００人が亡くなりました。\n\ncan I replace 雨が原因で with just 雨で?\n\nI'm guessing they wrote it the long way because they thought 州で雨で looked\nsilly, or confusing maybe? I may be talking nonsense.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T18:48:53.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60821",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T00:53:57.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Difference between Xが原因で and Xで",
"view_count": 294
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, you can replace 雨が原因で with 雨で, and it does not make the sentence silly or\nconfusing at least in this case. No one will take で after 雨 as a place marker.\nStill, the longer version looks a little more organized, stiff or explicit to\nme. (English also has many similar pairs such as \"to survive\" vs \"in order to\nsurvive\".)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T00:53:57.200",
"id": "60830",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T00:53:57.200",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60821",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
60821
|
60830
|
60830
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60827",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found this conversation from a JLPT listening section. Here goes the\nquestion.\n\n> あなたにもっと早くしてなんて言われる覚えはないですよ。\n\nThere are 3 choices. Pick one that is the proper response.\n\n> １ すみません。失言でした。\n>\n> ２ そうですか。今度は覚えてくださいよ。\n>\n> ３ ええ、私もそのこと、忘れていました。\n\nThe site I found this test said that the correct answer is 1 without any\nexplanation. However, I am confused why the answer is number 1 not 2.\n\nI translated the first sentence as, \"I don't remember that you told me to\nhurry.\" So I thought that the proper response is \"You should remember that\nfrom now on\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T18:56:52.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60822",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-20T20:58:26.883",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-20T20:58:26.883",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30549",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"jlpt",
"conversations"
],
"title": "What's the response to あなたにもっと早くしてなんて言われる覚えはないですよ。?",
"view_count": 283
}
|
[
{
"body": "The point is how 言われる覚え is not 言われた… but 言われ **る** , in other words, it\ndoesn't mean if s/he was told or not. The verb form not being た but る means\nthat the thing has not happened yet but is going to happen or should happen.\n\nIt's not reasonable to interpret this 覚え as memory either. You probably knew\nthat the primary meaning of 覚える, which is cognate with 思う, is to feel rather\nthan to memorize, but you might want to check it again. It's synonymous to\n[心当たり](https://jisho.org/search/%E5%BF%83%E5%BD%93%E3%81%9F%E3%82%8A) here.\n\nAnyway, what it means is that the speaker doesn't find it reasonable to be\ntold so. Given that, you can judge that #2 and #3 are not a contender.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T00:11:46.903",
"id": "60827",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T00:11:46.903",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60822",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60822
|
60827
|
60827
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60828",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2NMKe.png)\n\nI'm sorry if this is too specific or unclear, if it's a bad question i can\ndelete it. I'm really unclear on how なければ is functioning here, and how と in\nthis case is functioning after 子どもたち. (also i'm not sure if 尊敬すべきこのクラスを is\nstill part of the sentence) is this a case in which \"なければならない\" is implied?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-12T22:21:56.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60826",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T00:45:02.563",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30387",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-と",
"manga",
"conditionals"
],
"title": "trouble understanding usage of なければ in this case",
"view_count": 461
}
|
[
{
"body": "You're right. The ～～なければ here is a shortened form of ～～なければならない and means\n\"have to~~\" \"should~~\". And 清らかな子供たち, それを無条件で愛する教師, and 尊敬すべきこのクラス are the\nobjects of 信じなければならない. (This is an inversion/倒置 of\n清らかな子供たちと、それを無条件で愛する教師、尊敬すべきこのクラスを、信じなければ。)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T00:38:54.623",
"id": "60828",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T00:45:02.563",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T00:45:02.563",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "60826",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60826
|
60828
|
60828
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60832",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While reading a book on grammar, I read the following:\n\n> Context: Shima and Hastushiba Electric's racing team manager Ono are\n> relaxing at a bar after a test run at the track and discussing their chances\n> of victory, when rival Solar Electric's driver Inagaki sits down.\n>\n> Inagaki: あ、小野さん、来てたんですか。 \n> Ono: や。\n>\n> Explanation: [...] _kite iru_ is literally \"has come,\" but it's usually\n> better thought of as \"is/are here\"; **it never means \"is [in the process of]\n> coming,\" which is expressed in other ways.**\n\nWhat \"other ways\" can a verb that normally describes a continuation of state\ndescribe a continuation of action? What about something like 死んでいる (\"has died\nand is still dead\") vs 死んでいるところ (\"the process of dying\")?\n\nWhat other ways?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T02:54:14.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60831",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T04:17:48.387",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T04:17:48.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "27915",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"て-form"
],
"title": "How to use 来る in the sense of \"is coming\"",
"view_count": 196
}
|
[
{
"body": "You seem to already know this, but ところ is a way to treat a change-in-state\nverb as a continuous-action verb. It's explained in detail\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3140/5010).\n\nOptions include:\n\n * 来ているところです。 (using ところ)\n * 来る途中です。 (using 途中)\n * 向かっています。 (using another verb)\n * 今来ています。 (using 今)\n * 今向かっているところです。 (you can combine them)\n\nAs shown above, what the book is saying is not entirely correct. 来ている can mean\nboth \"has come\" and \"is coming\" depending on the context. For example, it's\nvalid to say the following:\n\n> A: 小野さんがいませんが。 \n> B: 小野さんは今来ています。 Mr. Ono is coming now. \n> (Saying 今 is important)\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> 台風が来てるよ。 A typhoon is coming. (rather than \"A typhoon has come\")",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T04:02:12.523",
"id": "60832",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T04:10:46.467",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T04:10:46.467",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60831",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60831
|
60832
|
60832
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60837",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "like as an example: if i forgot the name of a song but i remembered part of\nit, so i said \"zenryoku something\" (i say something because i don't know what\ncomes after zenryoku), would 「全力」なんとか be an appropriate translation?\n\nsorry if i tagged this wrong, this is my first time asking on this forum.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T11:06:41.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60834",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T13:33:46.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30957",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"phrases"
],
"title": "would 「なんとか」 be an acceptable replacement for \"something\"?",
"view_count": 217
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, 「なんとか」 is often used as a replacement word when the actual word has\nslipped one's mind.\n\n「全力{ぜんりょく}なんとか」 is what you would say when you cannot remember the word that\nfollows the 「全力」. You can use it the exact same way you would use \"something\"\nin English.\n\nInformally and/or colloquially, some people use 「なんちゃら」 for the same purpose.\n\nYou will also hear 「なにがし」 at times almost exclusively replacing parts of\nproper nouns. 「なにがし」 is not informal.\n\nFinally, I would like to introduce the whole other usage of the replacement\n「なんとか」 that I feel would be important for Japanese-learners to be familiar\nwith. That is 「なんとか」 used for a \"replacement\" for the word that you so clearly\nremember. It is used for replacing a word in a well-known saying for\n**_euphemism_**.\n\nOriginal vs. なんとか-version.\n\n・「 **バカ** のひとつ覚{おぼ}え」⇒「 **なんとか** のひとつ覚え」 (\"One who knows little often repeats\nit\".)\n\n・「 **ブタ** に真珠{しんじゅ}」⇒「 **なんとか** に真珠」 (\"Cast not pearls before swine.\")",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T13:33:46.227",
"id": "60837",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T13:33:46.227",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60834",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60834
|
60837
|
60837
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60836",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "### Background\n\nI am currently studying Japanese grammar at a beginner's level. Yes, I am\nfamiliar with Hiragana but I have not quite learnt Katakana yet. Obviously, I\nknow Romaji and hardly much Kanji.\n\n### Problem\n\nHowever, I came across the formal and informal way of using \"suki\" (すき). I\nknow \"desu\" is required if you were to say to your boss \"I like apples\" but is\n\"da\" really necessary for informal? I mean, is it as polite if you went\nwithout it? Is it grammatically correct or right to go without it?\n\nFor example, what's the difference between りんごが好き (\"I like apples\") and and\nwith だ on the end (sentence + grammatical particle perhaps?)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T11:38:12.007",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60835",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T11:02:44.407",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T16:44:52.530",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30147",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "すき (\"suki\") vs すきだ (\"sukida\")",
"view_count": 8496
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think that sukida is more casual, whereas suki have a sense of\nlightheartedness to it. Just my personal opinion:P",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T13:01:49.990",
"id": "60836",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T13:01:49.990",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30958",
"parent_id": "60835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -3
},
{
"body": "Including sentence-final だ is a marker of **blunt-style** speech, typical of\nmales. The alternate without だ is more apt to be used in feminine/gentle\nspeech.\n\nFor more detail on this particular nuance, see this question:\n\n[Is \"da\" used often in the casual\nspeech?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/35893/is-da-used-often-\nin-the-casual-speech/35895)\n\nAnd for information about other patterns typical of blunt/gentle speech\nstyles, see this question:\n\n[What differences should I look out for between male vs female\nspeech?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/97/what-differences-\nshould-i-look-out-for-between-male-vs-female-speech)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T14:03:47.200",
"id": "60838",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T14:13:04.180",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T14:13:04.180",
"last_editor_user_id": "27987",
"owner_user_id": "27987",
"parent_id": "60835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
},
{
"body": "Well, 好き{すき} could be translated as \"something that someone likes\" (it means\n\"to like\" but it's an adjective). So if you want to say \"I like apples\" you\nmust say りんごが好{す}きです. だ is the informal version of です. If you are with your\nfriends, you should say りんごが好き{すき}だ. But sometimes people (particularly women)\nskip だ when talking in colloquial speech. So you could leave it in りんごが好き{すき}.\n\nTo summarise, 好き{すき} is an adjective, that may be alone (informal, femenine),\nwith だ (informal in general) or with です (formal).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T17:23:22.747",
"id": "60893",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T11:02:44.407",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-17T11:02:44.407",
"last_editor_user_id": "30977",
"owner_user_id": "30977",
"parent_id": "60835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60835
|
60836
|
60838
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60848",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For the word (or composition of two words): 唯一, sometimes also written as:\n唯一つ,\n\nTwo possible pronunciations come to my mind:\n\n * ゆいいつ [ _yuiitsu_ ] -onyomi\n\nand\n\n * ただ ひとつ [ _tada hitotsu_ ] -kunyomi\n\n**Which one is correct?** Does the last つ in written form make any difference?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T17:57:58.863",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60839",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T02:07:16.330",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14283",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"adverbs",
"numbers"
],
"title": "What is the correct pronunciation of 唯一",
"view_count": 182
}
|
[
{
"body": "唯一 and 唯一つ both work as a _no_ -adjective and a standalone adverb, but they\nare different.\n\n * **唯一** is one word and only read as ゆいいつ in modern Japanese. (ゆいいち is another possible reading according to [this entry](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/223584/meaning/m0u/), but I believe you can forget it)\n * **唯一つ** (with okurigana つ) is two words, ただひとつ.\n\nThey are not always interchangeable. For example you can say 唯一の生存者 (\"sole\nsurvivor\") and 唯【ただ】一人【ひとり】の生存者 but not 唯一つの生存者.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T01:48:11.323",
"id": "60848",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T02:07:16.330",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-14T02:07:16.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60839",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60839
|
60848
|
60848
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60842",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "recently I stumbled upon a sentence in Yukio Mishima's 憂国{ゆうこく} -\n\"Patriotism\". It is BTW part Japanese/English parallel text stories, so I\nbasically know what it intends to say but I simply can't wrap my mind around\nthe concepts necessary to parse the sentence. (The problem might be similar as\ndiscussed in [here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1209/does-\nthe-particle-%e3%82%92-wo-have-a-special-use-when-at-the-end-of-a-sentence)).\nOk, here it goes:\n\n>\n> しかも麗子{れいこ}は、思う{おもう}だにときめいて来る{くる}日夜{にちや}の肉{にく}の悦び{よろこび}を、快楽{かいらく}などという名{な}で呼{よ}んだことは一度{いちど}もなかった。\n\nI believe the most problematic part is this one:\n\n思うだにときめいて来る日夜の肉の悦びを \nMy closest translation (with help from the book) arrives at: even (only just)\nthinking about the frequent joys of the flesh she started throbbing.\" But I\nhave no idea what to do with the を. In my eyes this sentence would make more\nsense if turned around: 日夜の肉の悦びを思うだにときめいて来る. So:\n\nAm I right here?\n\nMaybe the particle makes the connection to the next sentence?\n\nSo the word order must be as it is?\n\nAnd the fact that no verb is used (or requied) in the following sentence\n(快楽などという名で呼んだことは一度もなかった) is because the sentence itself acts as the verb -\nkind of? \nIf so, why the comma between those 2 sentences?\n\nThanks a lot!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T18:01:46.087",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60840",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T01:35:02.253",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T01:35:02.253",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "18895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particles",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Which is the verb belonging to the particle を?",
"view_count": 210
}
|
[
{
"body": "This を is the object maker of 呼んだ. 思うだにときめいて来る日夜の肉の悦び is a noun phrase. I\ntranslated it as \"Reiko had never called the bodily joys of day and night that\nshe started throbbing only by thinking about, a word \"pleasure(快楽)\".\n\nI am not sure of my translation, so I add another explanation. If\n思うだにときめいて来る日夜の肉の悦び is A and 快楽などという名 is B, it would be translated as \"Reiko\nhad never called A B\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T19:02:52.407",
"id": "60842",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T19:02:52.407",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "60840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
60840
|
60842
|
60842
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 彼は高齢を理由に社長を辞めたよ。\n\nI found this example sentence in some core flashcards, and the translation\nsays `He gave up the company presidency due to age.` Which makes sense to me,\nbut I don't understand the purpose of the first を.\n\nIt seems to be indicating what the reason or cause for quitting is, but then\nwhy is 理由に there if を is already showing the reason?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T20:01:19.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60843",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T08:06:59.270",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-13T20:36:10.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "30941",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-に",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "What is the function of を in this sentence?",
"view_count": 264
}
|
[] |
60843
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60845",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "From\n[here](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10011571311000/k10011571311000.html):\n\n> ウイルスが入らないようにするソフトの中には、このメールのウイルスを見つけることができない **もの** もあります。 \n> There is also a **feature** where you can't find these e-mail viruses in\n> the software _whose purpose is_ to make sure that there are no virsues.\n\nI'm unsure how to deal with もの in this sentence. I'm wondering whether\n\"feature\" is a valid translation (it certainly isn't one I've seen before).\n\nOr perhaps I should treat ...ものもある more generally as \"it is also the case\nthat...\". Would that work?\n\nOn a separate subject, I was surprised to see の中に used to describe the\nrelationship between the virus and the anti-virus software. When I read this\nit sounds like the virus can't be found inside the anti-virus software rather\nthan that the anti-virus software can't find the virus. If I'd tried to write\nthis sentence I'd have written ソフトでは (with で having the \"using/by means of\"\nmeaning). Am I wrong?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T21:15:38.180",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60844",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T22:02:18.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-mono"
],
"title": "Is ものもある a grammar pattern?",
"view_count": 433
}
|
[
{
"body": "I assume the English translation you provided is of your own creation.\nRegardless, it's not quite accurate.\n\n> ウイルスが入らないようにするソフトの中には、このメールのウイルスを見つけることができないものもあります\n\nIs saying:\n\n> Among software for preventing the entry of viruses, there are some which\n> cannot find this mail virus.\n\nThe English here may sound stiff because I've gone for a very direct\ntranslation, but the point is that `もの` is referring to instance(s) of\n`ウイルスが入らないようにするソフト`.\n\n> ウイルスが入らないようにするソフトの中には\n\nIs pretty clearly `Among software for preventing the entry of viruses`, and\nthen\n\n> このメールのウイルスを見つけることができないものもあります\n\nIs, if we translate _super literally_ , something like `there are also things\nwhich cannot find this mail virus`. However, since we know we're already\ntalking about antivirus software from the previous half of the sentence, it's\nsafe to say that these things are things which happen to be antivirus\nsoftware.\n\n`もの` sees some uses like this where in English we would typically use words\nlike `those` or `some`, in this case for `there are those/some which cannot\nfind this mail virus`.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T22:02:18.710",
"id": "60845",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-13T22:02:18.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7705",
"parent_id": "60844",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60844
|
60845
|
60845
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60849",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "> 私たちは物価 **を** 注目しなかった。The price did not enter into our consideration.\n>\n> 誰も彼の見解 **に** 注目していないようだ。It seems that nobody takes any notice of his\n> opinions.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-13T22:29:24.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60846",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T01:32:04.010",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25980",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the difference between using を and に with the verb 注目する?",
"view_count": 225
}
|
[
{
"body": "～を注目する is much less common than ～に注目する (7 vs 195 instances on BCCWJ).\nSemantically, all the examples of ～を注目する on BCCWJ look completely\ninterchangeable with ～に注目する to me. I think you can stick to ～に注目する.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/p9Ek4.png)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T02:02:53.567",
"id": "60849",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T02:02:53.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60846",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "私たちは物価を注目しなかった。The price did not enter into our consideration.\n\n誰も彼の見解に注目していないようだ。It seems that nobody takes any notice of his opinions.\n\nOn one hand, the sentence above using \"を\" is detecting its change as the price\nwent down or up. And here the PRICE is a research subject that we tend to\nfocus on. And in any dictionary, \"を\"'s very first usage is like this:\n他動的意味の動詞が表す動作・作用の向けられる対象を示す。Hence using \"を\" is more appropriate.\n\nOn the other hand, “に” has the following usages:\n\n一、表時間（動作發生時的時間）(time) \n二、表歸著點（變換位置的到達點）(whereabouts) \n三、表存在場所（指人事物本身的存在場所）(exist) \n四、表指向場所 (指靜態動作的指向場所）(pointing to) \n五、表轉換結果（事物或狀態轉變的結果）(switch to another status) \n六、表對象（單向動作所指向的對象）(the thoughts about an object or an action that is about to\nbe in effect) \n七、表次數（一個期間內包含的次數）(how many times) \n八、表目的（移動動詞的目的）(goal) \none's opinion is not easily changed, so using \"に\" is much more natural.\n\nBut the overall usages of these two characters in these situations are\ninterchangeable. Minute as it is, no need to put too much energy into these.\n\nそれは私の見解です。あなたを助けることを望む。 \n以上です。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T03:55:52.257",
"id": "60850",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T01:32:04.010",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T01:32:04.010",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30958",
"parent_id": "60846",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
60846
|
60849
|
60849
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60853",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> あなたのために綺麗になりたいと願う \n> 好きな人の前では女の子でいたい ([full lyrics\n> here](http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/Azusa:%E3%81%82%E3%81%AA%E3%81%9F%E3%81%AE%E3%81%9F%E3%82%81%E3%81%AB))\n\n> For your sake, I want to become a girl that hopes to become pretty in front\n> of the person I love\n\nDoes that feel too convoluted to you, or am I parsing this wrong?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T04:28:37.857",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60851",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-18T04:20:39.413",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-18T04:20:39.413",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "22187",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"parsing",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "あなたのために綺麗になりたいと願う / 好きな人の前では女の子でいたい",
"view_count": 122
}
|
[
{
"body": "願う is not modifying anything. Parse this line simply as two sentences.\n\n> あなたのために綺麗になりたいと願う。好きな人の前では女の子でいたい。 \n> I wish to become beautiful for you. \n> In front of someone I like, I want to be a girl (i.e. to be seen as a\n> girl).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T05:06:27.970",
"id": "60853",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T05:06:27.970",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60851",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60851
|
60853
|
60853
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "日本で大学に通っている留学生です。\n\n基本的に普段友達と話す時は「から」、面接や先生へのメールなど敬語で話す時は「ので」を使っていますが、ある程度親しい目上の人（学校やバイト先の一個上の先輩など）と敬語で話す時に「ので」を使ってもおかしくないのでしょうか？\n\n「から」は「ですます」形で使うと個人的には日本語的に正しくない感じがしますし、「ので」は書き言葉のような印象で、工夫したのが「んで」（例：私はさっき昼ご飯食べてきたんで、大丈夫です。）だったのですが、「んで」は砕けすぎているのではないかと心配してきました。\n\nこのように、公式の場ではなく、親しい目上の人と話す時に、砕けすぎず、同時に丁寧すぎない（書き言葉に聞こえない）一番無難な接続表現は何でしょうか？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T04:48:23.000",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60852",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-26T05:24:33.577",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-26T05:24:33.577",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30960",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "「から」「ので」「ーんで」など",
"view_count": 1102
}
|
[
{
"body": "質問者の提示した２つの例を使って、相手によってどのように表現を使い分けるかを試してみました。\n相手は、自分の先生、一つ年上の親しい先輩、そして、親しい後輩の３通りです。\n\n結果は（１-１）から（２-３）に示すとおりですが、 \n（A）必ずしも「から」あるいは「ので」で使い分けているのでは無いようです。 \n（B）相手が目上｛めうえ｝であればあるほど、言葉[遣]{づか}いも大切ですが、それ以上に **状況説明が丁寧になる / 詳しくなる**\nように思います。逆に言うと、相手が目下｛めした｝であるほど、状況説明が省略される傾向にあります。 \n（C）相手が目上であればあるほど、自分自身の判断も断定的でなくなるように思います。逆にいうと、相手が目下｛めした｝であるほど、自分自身の判断が断定的になるように思います。\n\n（１-１） 先生！\n変な話ですが、日本に来て１年も経つのに敬語の使い方が良｛よ｝く分からないんです。実は、インターネットのあるサイトで「から」が良｛い｝いのか「ので」が良｛い｝いのか質問しました。いろいろな回答はありましたが、結局どれも納得できなかったように思います。\n多分、私の質問の仕方が下手だった **から** でしょうか。\n\n（１-２） 先輩！\n敬語の使い方が今一{いまひと}つ分からないので、インターネットのあるサイトで「から」が良｛い｝いのか「ので」が良｛い｝いのか質問したんですよ。結構いろいろな回答はありましたが、結局どれも納得できなかったですね。\n質問の仕方が下手だった **から** ですかね。\n\n（１-３）\n敬語が[今一]{いまいち}分からないんで、インターネットのあるサイトで「から」が良｛い｝いのか「ので」が良｛い｝いのか聞いたんだ。回答は結構いろいろあったんだ。でも結局[今一]｛いまいち｝ピーンと来る回答はなかったな。質問の仕方がまずかった\n**から** かな。\n\n* * *\n\n（２-１） A君！ これ食べる？ \nいいえ、結構です。さっき食堂で昼食｛ちゅうしょく｝食べてきました **ので** 。\n\n（２-２） A！ これ食べる？ \nいや、結構です。さっき昼飯｛ひるめし｝食って来た **んで** 。\n\n（２-３） 先輩！ これ食べます？ \nいや、良{い}いよ。さっき昼飯｛ひるめし｝食って来た **んだ** 。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T15:38:43.680",
"id": "60859",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T08:01:21.317",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T08:01:21.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "20624",
"parent_id": "60852",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "「ので」と「んで」の使い分けについて。一個上の先輩なら、「んで」が砕けすぎているということは全くないと思います。仕事とは関係ないカジュアルな会話であれば、ほとんどの場合は「んで」で問題ありません。職場内でも、よほど気難しい上司と話すのでない限り、たいていの人は「んで」を使っていると思います。会話で「ので」が明らかに好まれるのは、店員が客に話す時など、かなりフォーマルな敬語を使う場面に限られます。\n\n「ので」と「から」の使い分けについては、ネイティブスピーカーには非常に難しい問題です。日本人は全く考えず自然に使い分けており、個々の例を示されれば「これは自然で、これは不自然だ」と言えるのですが、その理由を論理的に説明できる人はほとんどいないと思います。少なくとも、「ですます体では『から』を使うな」というような単純な話ではありません。以下の既存の質問をご覧ください。\n\n * [What are the differences between 〜ので and 〜から?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/411/5010)\n * [When to use ～ので vs ～から](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/4715/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T12:49:54.197",
"id": "60885",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T12:49:54.197",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60852",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60852
| null |
60885
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60856",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm trying to translate my German name **Markus** to Japanese, which seems\nquite difficult.\n\nMy first approach was just to transcribe it.\n\n```\n\n Ma → ma → マ \n r → ru → ル \n ku → ku → ク \n s → su → ス\n \n```\n\ngiving **マルクス**.\n\nNow, after reading a bit, I found this blog entry: [What is my name in\nJapanese?](https://www.linguajunkie.com/japanese/whats-my-name-in-japanese)\n\nThere I found Mark which is translated as _Māku_ マーク, so my name might be like\nthis **_Mākusu_ マークス**.\n\nThen I found this [stack\nlink](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/46812/converting-names-to-\njapanese) with a link to a [website](http://apps.nolanlawson.com/japanese-\nname-converter/#?q=Markus) with a translation: The result was **_Mākasu_\nマーカス**.\n\nWell, I'm a little confused how to do it \"right\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T10:00:52.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60854",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-07T07:28:58.767",
"last_edit_date": "2019-08-07T07:28:58.767",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "30961",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"names",
"spelling"
],
"title": "Translate German name \"Markus\" to Japanese",
"view_count": 1187
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both マルクス and マーカス are common transcriptions of the name Markus or Marcus.\n\nRoughly speaking you can think of マルクス as a more German/Scandinavian-sounding\ntranscription and マーカス as a more English-sounding transcription.\n\nThe English pronunciation of Marcus is [[ˈmɑːrkəs]]. The English //r// can be\nsilent (e.g. [[ˈmɑːkəs]]) and often is transcribed as a lengthening of the\nprevious vowel marked by the 長音符 _chōonpu_ ー. The German pronunciation of\nMarkus is [ˈmaʁkʊs]. The German [[ʁ]] is never silent and often transcribed as\nル. Compare the transcriptions of the English word \"card\" カード (note the ー) and\nthe German word \"Karte\" カルテ (note the ル). Also note that the U in\nMarkus/Marcus is pronounced differently in English and in German: [[ə]] vs.\n[[ʊ]] which explains why the English transcription uses カ _ka_ whereas the\nGerman transcription uses ク _ku_.\n\nThere is no \"wrong\" way to transcribe your name, but I think マルクス would be a\nnatural choice that would also easily be understood as a transcription of the\nGerman name Markus.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T10:29:41.843",
"id": "60856",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T18:48:45.333",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-14T18:48:45.333",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "60854",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "This gets a bit pedantic on the terminology -- sorry for that. I just want to\nmake sure we're clear on what we're talking about. :)\n\nThe conversion of _Markus_ to マルクス is technically called\n[_transliteration_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transliteration) (from\n_trans-_ [ _über_ , _um_ ] + _litera_ [ _Buchstabe_ ] → [ _umschreiben_ ]),\nfocusing on the **letters** and **written forms**. If your focus is on the\n**meaning** , then you're looking at\n[_translation_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translation) (from _trans-_ [\n_über_ , _um_ ] + _lātus_ [ _getragen_ ] → [ _übertragen_ , _übersetzen_ ]).\nFor names, you'd look for a Japanese name of similar meaning.\n\nGerman _Markus_ comes from the Latin _Marcus_ , and ultimately derives from\n_Mars_ (as in, the god of war) + suffix _-cus_ , denoting \"(masculine\nadjective) having that quality\". Japanese masculine given names with somewhat-\nsimilar derivations might include:\n\n * 軍太郎 ( _Guntarō_ )\n * 軍之佐 or 軍之助 ( _Gunnosuke_ )\n * 軍夫 ( _Isao_ )\n * 軍兵 or 軍平 ( _Gunpei_ )\n\nI don't think I've personally ever heard the first two, so they might be\narchaic -- or maybe just outside my immediate experience. I've heard the third\nand fourth before; in fact, when I did a homestay in Japan decades ago, my\nhost-nephew was named Gunpei.\n\nAnyway, food for thought. Dealing with names across languages and cultures is\nalways an interesting process. Viel Glück!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T20:53:47.963",
"id": "60866",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T20:53:47.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "60854",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60854
|
60856
|
60856
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Does it mean Tch or does it have another meaning ??  Like in here.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T10:06:34.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60855",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T15:52:57.360",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-14T15:52:57.360",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "30942",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"translation",
"manga",
"anime"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of っ on its own",
"view_count": 225
}
|
[
{
"body": "In a light novel, manga or such, 「……っ！」 without any preceding kana describes\nthe speaker is speechless or breathless for a moment. Usually it expresses a\nstrong surprise, anger, confusion or any \"breathtaking\" feelings.\n\n\"Tch\" to express one's irritation is usually [ちっ or\nちぇっ](https://jisho.org/word/%E3%83%81%E3%82%A7).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T11:01:25.110",
"id": "60857",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T11:01:25.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60855",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60855
| null |
60857
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm reading a fictional book which deals with Japanese mythical/fantasy\nthemes. One chapter describes dead people being resurrected through a complex\noperation in which their bodies were reworked and the procedure was referred\nto as \"死鬼手技\" by the man who conducted it.\n\nCould someone help me understand the \"死鬼\" part? The only thing I can find is a\nChinese definition meaning \"devil\" and my guess was \"dead demons\" but what\nwould \"dead demons\" have to do with it?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T14:39:31.383",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60858",
"last_activity_date": "2020-04-07T05:01:15.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30967",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "How would one translate or understand the word 死鬼 in English?",
"view_count": 451
}
|
[
{
"body": "I did a little bit of research, and 死鬼 is not actually a word in Japanese, it\nis Chinese. If you google 死鬼とは, you get 中国語辞典 websites like [this\none](https://cjjc.weblio.jp/content/%E6%AD%BB%E9%AC%BC). It means \"dead\nperson\" (死人 or 亡き人) or \"their spirit\" (亡霊 or 幽霊).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T17:52:43.193",
"id": "60861",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T00:47:06.080",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T00:47:06.080",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "29183",
"parent_id": "60858",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60858
| null |
60861
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60875",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I like to listen to NERU's Vocaloid songs, but I realized that several of his\nsongs had two words translated the same way. Those are ガラクタ and ゴミ. I think ゴミ\ncan be used to talk about taking garbage bags out to be taken, but in the\nmeans of the word \"trash\" alone, what is the difference?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T18:35:27.947",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60864",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T06:13:20.130",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T06:13:20.130",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "29804",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between ガラクタ and ゴミ？",
"view_count": 143
}
|
[
{
"body": "Trash is generally ゴミ but ガラクタ can mean reusable/recyclable materials like\nmetal scraps, etc. like those you can see in a junkyard. Even ゴミ could be\nreusable depending on the person, but just trying to explain the general\ndifference. One man's garbage is another man's treasure, so they say.\n\np.s. I don't know who NERU is and what a Vocaloid song means.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T01:44:10.223",
"id": "60875",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T01:50:08.350",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T01:50:08.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "30554",
"owner_user_id": "30554",
"parent_id": "60864",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60864
|
60875
|
60875
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60879",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "From\n[goo](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/160081/meaning/m0u/%E9%80%94%E6%96%B9/):\n\n> １ 多くの方向。向かう方向。\n>\n> 「―を失へる敵どもを」〈太平記・一〇〉\n\nI don't understand how 多くの方向 (that I think means \"many directions\") means the\nsame thing that 向かう方向(that I think means \"direction to follow\")?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T19:27:22.840",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60865",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T06:11:50.690",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25980",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"definitions"
],
"title": "I don't understand a definition of one of the meanings of 途方?",
"view_count": 154
}
|
[
{
"body": "I guess 多く means more likely second definition in this case.\n\n> 多く：分量・数量の多いこと。 \n> 1. たくさん。「そんなに―食うな」 \n> 2. おおかた。たいてい。「この本は―学生が読む」\n\nGiven the second definition, 多くの方向 means an approximate direction.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T01:36:08.660",
"id": "60874",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T02:03:28.777",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T02:03:28.777",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22412",
"parent_id": "60865",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "First of all, in modern Japanese, 途方 is almost always used in set phrases\n(途方もない and 途方に暮れる), and it never refers to a physical direction. 太平記 was\nwritten in the 14th century. Many other monolingual dictionaries of modern\nJapanese do not even mention this usage related to physical directions. So I\nguess the author of goo辞書 thought these old definitions of 途方 (多くの方向 and\n向かう方向) are so trivial that they can be crammed into one item.\n\n(By the way, [this page about\n太平記](http://cubeaki.dip.jp/taiheiki/taiheiki/taiheiki1-10/taiheiki-10-2.html)\ntranslates this part as 途方にくれている...)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T06:11:50.690",
"id": "60879",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T06:11:50.690",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60865",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60865
|
60879
|
60879
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60870",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How would you say \"I hate change\" in Japanese? I feel like 「私は変更を憎みます」 would\njust sound like a bad google translation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T21:21:08.530",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60869",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T21:46:42.897",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-14T21:46:42.897",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "27452",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"word-choice",
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "\"I hate change\"",
"view_count": 139
}
|
[
{
"body": "For (abstract) \"change\", 変化 _henka_ seems to be the better choice.\n\nFor \"hate\" (or \"dislike\"), there are also\n\n * 嫌【いや】です\n * 嫌い【きらい】です\n * 大嫌い【だいきらい】です\n\n憎む is a \"bigger\" word, like \"despise\" or \"detest\". Since \"hate\" is quite a\nsimple word, I would go with\n\n> 変化が大嫌い（だ・です）",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T21:46:06.933",
"id": "60870",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-14T21:46:06.933",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "60869",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60869
|
60870
|
60870
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 私は帰国することに決めた\n\nThis is the original sentence, but shouldn't it be:\n\n> 私は帰国することを決めた\n\nor\n\n> 私は帰国することが決めた?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T23:18:07.767",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60871",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T17:06:37.340",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-14T23:33:04.400",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "27223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Is this sentence from anki correct?",
"view_count": 101
}
|
[] |
60871
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across these lines in [a song\n(0:59):](http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm24003601)\n\n> 十日ともに\n>\n> 投げた賽は\n>\n> 赤く色づいた\n\nAs far as I know, ともに means something like \"together with,\" but \"together with\nten days\" doesn't really make much sense.\n\nThere's also the less common meaning \"both,\" but again, \"both the 10th/ten\ndays, and the die I cast, turned red\" doesn't make much sense either.\n\nAm I misinterpreting this? What's going on here?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-14T23:45:13.480",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60872",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-14T02:01:09.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30701",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "ともに after a unit of time?",
"view_count": 131
}
|
[
{
"body": "The speaker is referring to how s/he and another person cast the die together\nover a period of 10 days. The あなたと is omitted.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T01:45:26.223",
"id": "60876",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T01:45:26.223",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30554",
"parent_id": "60872",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60872
| null |
60876
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60881",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was reading the wikia of an anime and I found this,\n\nRed Riot Unbreakable 烈怒頼雄斗安無嶺過武瑠 (レッドライオットアンブレイカブル) (Reddo Raiotto\nAnbureikaburu)\n\nThe name of a technique \"Reddo Raiotto Anbureikaburu\" based in the english\nwords \"Red Riot Unbreakable\" are written with the kanjis 烈怒頼雄斗安無嶺過武瑠. I\nthought foreign words were always written with katakana but this isnt the\ncase. When are foreign language words written into japanese using kanjis?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T03:22:24.520",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60877",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T17:41:49.533",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T17:41:49.533",
"last_editor_user_id": "9878",
"owner_user_id": "9878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"katakana",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "When are foreign language based words written with kanjis?",
"view_count": 405
}
|
[
{
"body": "That is _Ateji_. Foreign words are usually written with katakana, but\nsometimes are written with phonetic equivalent kanjis.\n\nNames of foreign countries are often written with kanjis in newspaper. For\nexample, the phonetic equivalent of アメリカ (America) is 亜米利加 (A-mei-ri-ka). When\nnewspapers are writing about America, they just take the second letter and\nwrite 米国 (米-country) or just 米 when there is no worry about confusion with\n米(rice). You can see similar expressions in the headlines of Yahoo! news\n(<https://news.yahoo.co.jp/list/?c=world>).\n\nLet's go on to the given example 烈怒頼雄斗安無嶺過武瑠. \"Red Riot Unbreakable\" is almost\nalways written with katakana. However, this is written with kanjis because\nthis looks cooler and stronger. Many of the kanjis used in this word is not\nonly phonetic equivalents but also has meanings related with strength. 烈 means\nintense, 怒 means angry, 雄 means brave, and so on. Another example is 夜露死苦\n(yoroshiku) which literally means night-dew-death-suffer but the meaning of\nよろしく is just \"Nice to meet you\".",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T04:30:36.687",
"id": "60878",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T04:39:19.630",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T04:39:19.630",
"last_editor_user_id": "30858",
"owner_user_id": "30858",
"parent_id": "60877",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "This is something that can be called a 暴走族風当て字, which is explained in this\nquestion: [Origin of 夜露死苦?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15138/5010)\n\nYou can see more examples here:\n\n * [【夜露死苦】ヤンキー漢字クイズ10連発！ 全部読めたらエリートヤンキーに認定ッ!!](https://rocketnews24.com/2017/08/02/935899/)\n * [「魔苦怒奈流怒」読めます？昭和ヤンキーは漢字で書く！](https://woman.mynavi.jp/article/141118-26/)\n * [暴走族文字変換](http://vxvxv.net/tool/conv_zok.php) (online converter, _Stack Exchange_ is 棲汰苦獲苦棲血炎慈)\n\nThey often wore coats full of difficult kanji [like\nthis](https://search.yahoo.co.jp/image/search?p=%E7%89%B9%E6%94%BB%E6%9C%8D+%E6%9A%B4%E8%B5%B0%E6%97%8F&aq=-1&oq=&ei=UTF-8).\nThis type of creative ateji is basically unique to the 暴走族/ヤンキー culture in the\nShowa era. Today, almost no young people do this seriously any more, but you\nmay still see this type of ateji in fiction. The [user of\n安無嶺過武瑠](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E5%88%87%E5%B3%B6%E9%8B%AD%E5%85%90%E9%83%8E)\nis not directly related to 暴走族, but this ateji seems to symbolize his rough\nbut mannish and upright character.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T09:43:01.970",
"id": "60881",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T12:22:55.493",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T12:22:55.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60877",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60877
|
60881
|
60881
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60882",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I feel like there should be a way to say it when talking about things not\nbeing available in certain regions.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T08:44:40.833",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60880",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-18T04:18:45.667",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-18T04:18:45.667",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30957",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Is there a way to say \"region-locked\" in Japanese?",
"view_count": 496
}
|
[
{
"body": "Do you mean the region-based restriction system of DVD/Blu-ray or online\nplatforms like Steam? If yes, _region-lock_ (system) is simply リージョンロック in\nJapanese. _Region-locked DVD_ is リージョンロックがかかったDVD or リージョンロックのかかったDVD.\nAlternatively, リージョン固定のDVD and リージョンコード付きのDVD essentially refer to the same\nthing. _Region-free_ is simply リージョンフリー(の).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T12:12:27.873",
"id": "60882",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T12:12:27.873",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60880",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60880
|
60882
|
60882
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "What does いてね mean in ‘聴いてね’?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T12:27:53.810",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60883",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-20T03:04:31.863",
"last_edit_date": "2022-01-20T03:04:31.863",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "30975",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does ‘いてね’ mean?",
"view_count": 197
}
|
[
{
"body": "You are not parsing this correctly.\n\n聴く is the base form of the verb here. We are looking at a conjugation to the\nて-form of the verb (聴いて) followed by the sentence ending particle ね.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T14:02:50.453",
"id": "60887",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T20:11:19.053",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T20:11:19.053",
"last_editor_user_id": "22352",
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "60883",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The verb of the sentence is 聴く{きく}, that means \"to listen\". The いて is the\ndesinence of the て conjugation, that is used for connecting, as a gerund, and\nas an imperative (like in this case).\n\nね is a \"gobi\" (a particle you put at the end of a sentence to give a nuance to\nit). In this case, it makes the imperative softer.\n\nSo, in this case, いてね is nothing by itself, the sentence 聴いてね{きいてね} is\nsomething like \"listen, please\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T16:57:03.970",
"id": "60890",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T16:57:03.970",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30977",
"parent_id": "60883",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60883
| null |
60890
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60886",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Based on the dictionary definitions listed on WWWJDIC (which I cannot link due\nto the design of the website), the two terms have similar definitions.\n\nI am wondering if there is any difference between the two.\n\n**Is one more technical than the other, and / or is one more formal than the\nother?**\n\n**Are there any other differences?**",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T12:45:53.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60884",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T13:22:09.523",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T12:54:30.837",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "26635",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Difference between 出産 and お産",
"view_count": 113
}
|
[
{
"body": "* お産 is almost never used in technical/academic contexts, just as お水, お米, お財布 and so on are never used in academic articles.\n * In everyday situations, whichever is fine, and they are interchangeable as long as they are used as a simple noun. It's almost a matter of personal taste. But お産 may sound a little bit politer, warmer and/or more \"humane\", whereas 出産 sounds a little bit more matter-of-factly. Some nurses may mainly use お産 when they talk with mothers and 出産 when they talk with physicians.\n * Only 出産 works as a (transitive) suru-verb. (初めての子を)出産する is fine but お産する is ungrammatical.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T13:17:02.333",
"id": "60886",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T13:22:09.523",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-15T13:22:09.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60884",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60884
|
60886
|
60886
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60892",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I don't understand the difference between these two words. In my textbook they\nappear like \"miss the stop\" (norisugosu) and \"pass my station\" (norikosu), but\nthey both sound like you don't go out the train when you should.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T16:09:25.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60888",
"last_activity_date": "2018-12-14T10:10:47.230",
"last_edit_date": "2018-12-14T10:10:47.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "25980",
"owner_user_id": "30977",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 乗り越すand 乗り過ごす?",
"view_count": 934
}
|
[
{
"body": "**乗り過ごす** (nori-sugosu): \"to miss one's stop (by mistake)\". This happens\ntypically when a passenger was sleeping. After you do this, you usually get on\nanother train going in the opposite direction.\n\n**乗り越す** (nori-kosu): This can refer to the same thing as 乗り過ごす, but usually\nrefers to something different, \"to go beyond one's stop designated by your\nticket (intentionally)\". This typically happens when you change your\ndestination after getting on a train/bus. After you do this, you usually get\noff the train near your new destination, and pay for the additional distance\nat a fare adjustment machine/office (aka\n[乗り越し精算](https://www.japanallover.com/2009/11/fare-adjustment-machines/)).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T17:20:04.760",
"id": "60892",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-15T17:20:04.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60888",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
60888
|
60892
|
60892
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60897",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking on the web for Japanese graphic design and found some pre-WWII\nmaterial. Then I saw some more recent advertisement material. Comparing the\ntwo eras, I notice a difference that was beyond the visual style. In older\nworks it seems that kanji were used more often than in their modern\ncounterpart. Whereas katakana is used more generously in modern media than\nkanji. An overwhelming amount of that katakana is gairaigo, which is almost\nentirely based off of English.\n\nFor example, \nOn [google translate](https://translate.google.com/#auto/ja/big), if one types\nthe word 'big' in the English section, two options appear to be the most\ncommon translation in the Japanese section. One is ビッグ (biggu) while the other\none is 大きい (Ōkī). Both are clearly different when written down, but are\ndefined in English as the same word. \n \nWhat is the reason for its popularity and acceptance and why aren't kanji\ncompounds formed at the same rate as directly imported terms?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-15T21:51:45.200",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60894",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T01:59:14.200",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T07:28:41.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "20044",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"katakana",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "Is there a defined cause for the recent rise in the popularity of gairaigo?",
"view_count": 412
}
|
[
{
"body": "Between the late 19th century (fall of Tokugawa shogunate) and the mid 20th\ncentury (WWII), Japanese people were rapidly learning countless new concepts\nfrom Western countries, but they were also busy coining a new _kanji_ word for\neach new concept they encountered. The new kanji words coined in this period\nare called [和製漢語](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasei-kango) (\"Japanese-coined\nChinese word\"). Examples include 空港 (\"airport\"), 映画 (\"movie\"), 自然 (\"nature\")\nand 野球 (\"baseball\"). So this is the main reason why you see less katakana\nwords in pre-WWII materials. See also: [What are the origins of the Chinese\nderived words?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/47862/5010)\n\nAside from whether it's good or bad, Japanese people have almost stopped this\nconvention of creating new kanji words. I think this is simply because people\nhave become even more \"Westernized\" and less influenced by the Chinese\nculture. This resulted in more and more katakana loanwords directly borrowed\nfrom English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T09:39:30.627",
"id": "60897",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T01:59:14.200",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-17T01:59:14.200",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60894",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60894
|
60897
|
60897
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60896",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is sentence\n\n> 「だがまあ、惚れた女を一途に見守っている男の邪魔をするのは無粋と言うものだ」\n\nwhich I rougly translated as \"However, as they say, it's rude to disturb a man\nwho is earnestly watching over loved woman\". But this translation is due to\ncontext, which suggests that it is a man who fell in love with woman, where my\nfirst attempt was that it was woman who fell in love, since 惚れた modifies 女.\n\nCan someone clarify what happens here grammar-wise?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T08:02:21.790",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60895",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T02:09:18.363",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T02:09:18.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "30982",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"relative-clauses",
"ambiguous-relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Clarification about how 惚れた should be translated",
"view_count": 428
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this context, 惚れた女 clearly means \"the woman whom he fell in love with\"\nrather than \"the woman who fell in love with someone\". The subject of 惚れる is\n男. Grammatically, this is an innate ambiguity of [Japanese relative\nclauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14541/5010), which work by\nmoving a modified noun and _removing_ the accompanying particle such as\nが/を/に/へ. You have to determine the correct meaning from the context.\n\n> * 男は女 **に** 惚れた。 \n> The man fell in love with the woman.\n> * 男が惚れた女 \n> the woman whom the man fell in love with (note that に is gone)\n> * 惚れた女 \n> the woman whom the man fell in love with (subject is omitted)\n>\n\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> * 女 **は** 誰かに惚れた。 \n> The woman fell in love with someone.\n> * 誰かに惚れた女 \n> the woman who fell in love with someone (note that は is gone)\n> * 惚れた女 \n> the woman who fell in love with someone (target is omitted)\n>\n\nLikewise, 紹介した人 can mean both \"the person who introduced someone\" and \"the\nperson whom someone introduced\" depending on the context. あげた人 can mean both\nthe giver and the receiver. Also see: [Relative Clause\nAmbiguous](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/60385/5010)\n\nAs an aside, please recheck the meaning of\n[無粋](https://jisho.org/word/%E7%84%A1%E7%B2%8B).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T08:35:18.087",
"id": "60896",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T08:41:35.337",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T08:41:35.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60895",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
60895
|
60896
|
60896
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60909",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> Equivalent question: What Japanese letters won't equal 1?\n\nFrom: [the homophonic group: a mathematical diversion\n](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/843966/) → This is an exercise from\nMichael Artin's _Algebra_ on, well, abstract algebra. In this exercise for the\nEnglish language, words are equal if they are homophones, kind of like a\nformalisation of the [joke that\nsin(x)/n=6](https://www.reddit.com/r/theydidtheshittymath/comments/7z5e61/sinxn6/).\nSo in English:\n\n * bee=be → This implies e=1 by cancellation of b and e.\n\n * buy=by → This implies u=1 by cancellation of b and y.\n\n * rase=raze → This implies s=z by cancellation of r, a and e.\n\ncanvass=canvas → This implies s=1 by cancellation of c,a,n,v,a and s. By\ncanvass=canvas and rase=raze, we have s=z=1.\n\nEventually, all 26 English letters will equal 1. Apparently, this was done for\n[French](https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.em/1062620828) and\n[Czech](http://www1.osu.cz/~zusmanovich/topics.html).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T12:41:20.867",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60903",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-16T21:07:29.370",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T16:47:27.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "10230",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"katakana",
"hiragana",
"homophonic-kanji",
"mathematics",
"homonyms"
],
"title": "What is the Japanese Homophonic Group?",
"view_count": 248
}
|
[
{
"body": "Hiragana is a phonogram, meaning each letter has a distinct sound. There are a\nfew notable exceptions like は pronounced as わ in certain contexts, but mostly\nI expect the size of homophonic groups to be quite large. If you include 漢字,\nthis gets even larger, though there are plenty of kanjis that share the same\npronunciation.\n\nThe only hiragana that I can think of that changes pronunciation is は~=わ and\nを=お",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T15:02:51.810",
"id": "60909",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-16T21:07:29.370",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-16T21:07:29.370",
"last_editor_user_id": "18772",
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "60903",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60903
|
60909
|
60909
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I used Google translate and used the following translation provided by Google\nfor 'possibly' in a letter I wrote\n\n> 可能性もある _kanōsei mo aru_\n\nLater I tried looking up the word in the dictionary, and couldn't find it. All\nI found was _kanō_ 可能, the first two kanji, then looked up the third kanji\n_sei_ 性 which means 'sex'. So that 可能性もある would translate into 'possibility of\nsex'? I've already sent the letter, without realizing. Will a Japanese person\ninterpret 可能性もある like this?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T13:14:36.287",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60904",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T14:12:09.860",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T14:12:09.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "30986",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"english-to-japanese",
"suffixes",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Is Kanōsei a word?",
"view_count": 785
}
|
[
{
"body": "Here ～性【せい】 is an ending similar to _-(i)ty_ , _-ness_ , _-cy_. For matters of\nillustration,\n\n> 可能 + 性 = 可能性 ↔ _possible_ + _-(i)ty_ = _possibility_\n>\n> 安全 + 性 = 安全性 ↔ _secure_ + _-(i)ty_ = _security_\n\nIndeed, 性 can also mean \"gender\" (although it cannot mean sexual intercourse),\nbut this is not how 性 is used in 可能性, and no \"Japanese person\" would\nmisunderstand this.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T14:09:57.470",
"id": "60906",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T14:09:57.470",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "60904",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
60904
| null |
60906
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Or perhaps even 日本語実力程度? Although that seems overkill and double emphasising.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T13:53:06.913",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60905",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T20:35:27.637",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22417",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"words"
],
"title": "Can I say 日本語程度 as an alternative for 日本語実力?",
"view_count": 127
}
|
[
{
"body": "It depends on the context, but both 日本語程度 and 日本語実力 strike me as very noun\ndense. It's much more natural to insert particles and make them a noun phrase,\nlike 日本語の程度 and 日本語の実力, unless it's used in a context that demands the noun\ndense form, like 日本語実力検定試験 or as a newspaper title.\n\n程度 can refer to the level neutrally, but it often carries the loaded meaning\nof low level/rank and lack of mastery, such as 百姓程度で生意気な \"how dare a farmer\nsay that!\" So when I hear 日本語程度 I mentally picture a sentence to follow that\nsays something about Japanese not so blah blah, for example 日本語程度では苦労しないよ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T14:52:51.610",
"id": "60908",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-16T20:35:27.637",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-16T20:35:27.637",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "60905",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60905
| null |
60908
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60918",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "So, I was in hello talk writing about how eating ramen everyday might not be\nhealthy:\n\n(I will number the sentences)\n\n> 1 - ...だから、時々ラーメンを食べたほうがいいね\n\nThen, a native speaker corrected my sentence to:\n\n> 2 - だから、たまにラーメンを食べるほうがいいね\n\n**Someone told me in the past that in order to say \"I should...\" I had to use\nthe pattern 「た+ほうがいい」 is it wrong?**\n\n@Goldbrick also helped me in the chat saying that he'd rather say something\nlike:\n\n> 3 - だからラーメンを食べるのは時どきだけにしたほうがいい\n\nor\n\n> 4 - だからラーメンは時どき食べるぐらいにしたほうがいい\n\nHe, this time used the したほうがいい pattern instead of するほうがいい. But he couldn't\nexactly explain why's that...\n\n**So when should I use するほうがいい and したほうがいい to mean should?**\n\nThanks in advance!",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T14:25:41.133",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60907",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T06:01:20.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16104",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"tense"
],
"title": "When to use するほうがいい instead of したほうがいい in order to mean \"Should do\"?",
"view_count": 1460
}
|
[
{
"body": "You were trying to say you shouldn't eat ramen too frequently, right? Then\n時々食べたほうがいい is wrong because it recommends to eat ramen to some extent than\nnothing.\n\n**Adverbs don't determine polarity of a sentence in Japanese** unlike English.\ne.g ほとんど殺した means \"killed almost everyone\", not \"almost killed\".\n\nIn addition, したほうがいい is an advice for a specific or an actual problem. た form\nrepresents that something is concrete. When you are fishing and find some\nshape, you say いる いる… then, once you confirm it as a fish, you say いた. そういうこと\nmeans things **like** that while そういったこと means things **including** that.\nThat's how they are different.\n\nIn this regard, たまに食べるほうがいい is a little better, if not enough, because it's a\ncriteria for a general problem apart from if you actually do or not.\n\n時々だけにしたほうがいい and 時々食べるくらいにしたほうがいい are fine because either part before したほうがいい\nstands for refraining from eating too much and したほうがいい recommends to carry out\nthat.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T02:20:55.320",
"id": "60918",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T02:20:55.320",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60907",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "FIrstly, するほうがいい and したほうがいい are the same basically, but strictly they are\ndifferent.\n\nWe tend to choose するほうがいい when we talk about the generic ideas. For example,\nwe can say \"身体にいいものを食べるほうがいい\" to tell a generic idea.\n\nSuppose you have a friend who eats junk foods every day and never eat\nvegetables. You are worrying about him/her. You can say \"身体にいいものを食べたほうがいい\". We\ntend to choose したほうがいい when you talk about the specific issue.\n\nSecondly, I'd like to mention your sentences, #1 and #2. ほうがいい is used when\nyou compare (A) with (B) and (A) is better.\n\nIn the case of your sentences, you compare (A) eating ramen sometimes with (B)\nnot eating ramen sometimes and say (A) is better. So, the sentences #1 and #2\nsound you encourage your friend to eat ramen.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T06:01:20.260",
"id": "60924",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T06:01:20.260",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30991",
"parent_id": "60907",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60907
|
60918
|
60918
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "Listening to [a song](https://soundcloud.com/nakano4/sizuk), I heard these\nlyrics:\n\n> はにかんだ声に透けた空はもうここにないのさ\n\nThis whole sentence is just a bit odd, but especially so because I'm not sure\nhow to handle に + 透ける. Would something like \"dissolved into\" be appropriate?\n(e.g. \"The sky, dissolved into the sound of a shy voice, isn't here anymore\")",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T19:41:20.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60911",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T03:18:55.180",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-17T00:17:20.743",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "30701",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"song-lyrics"
],
"title": "What does ○○に透けた mean in this sentence?",
"view_count": 239
}
|
[
{
"body": "That's the same structure as 雨に濡れる: to get wet (being toughed) by rain. In\nother words, that に is the same as one that denote the agent or the cause in\npassive voice. English grammar probably doesn't allow to combine it with\nintransitive verbs and you can't directly translate it.\n\nSo, it says \"The sky that (once) got transparent due to the shy voice isn't\nhere anymore\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T01:26:50.963",
"id": "60915",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T01:26:50.963",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "60911",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "AがBに透ける means \"A is vaguely visible/felt through B\". Commonly used in the form\nof AがBに透けて見える.\n\n> * 肩ひもがシャツに透けている。 \n> Shoulder straps are vaguely visible though the shirt.\n> * 穏やかな声に透けて見える悪意 \n> evil intention that can be felt through his gentle voice\n>\n\nSo the line basically says this person was somehow feeling/seeing the sky\nthrough her coy voice. This is still a highly poetic and unrealistic\nexpression, but he was even seeing God in the previous lines, after all :)\n\n**EDIT:** @user4092's interpretation (\"the sky that became transparent due to\nthe voice\") is possible, at least grammatically. But in the previous part of\nthe song, this guy was clearly seeing/feeling God between clouds. Judging from\nthe structure of the song, it's natural to think something similar is\nhappening in this part, too.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T01:32:47.740",
"id": "60916",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T02:26:49.440",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-17T02:26:49.440",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60911",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This に means \"and\" basically. We can say \"はにかんだ声 and 透けた空\" basically.\n\nWe have と which means \"and,\" but this に is different from と. In this example,\nはにかんだ声 comes first, then additionally 透けた空 comes next. In other words, に shows\na kind of direction. はにかんだ声 existed, then 透けた空 existed, too.\n\nはにかんだ声と透けた空 can be the same as 透けた空とはにかんだ声.\n\nBut, 透けた空にはにかんだ声 is different from はにかんだ声に透けた空 because はにかんだ声 is more\nimportant compared to 透けた空.\n\nThis kind of usage of に is not common, I think. I'm using the Japanese\ndictionary called 広辞苑. It enumerates many meanings of に, this usage is the\n17th explanation.\n\nWe need to take into consider that this phrase is a part of the lyrics. に is\nmuch better than と to rhyme with the previous line.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T03:18:55.180",
"id": "60920",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T03:18:55.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30991",
"parent_id": "60911",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60911
| null |
60916
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60914",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Context: Girl B was in trouble and was also causing trouble. Girl A comes in\nand over a period of time fights with girl B trying to save her from her\ntorubles and get her to stop. In the end girl A (あ) succeeds and B becomes her\nfriend, standard Anime stuff.\n\nLater B talks with A's mom (Mom A) expressing her gratitude to her for raising\nA to be someone who despite all persevered and saved her. Now Mom A is\nrecounting this to B's mom (Mom B) and she then says the following:\n\n> きっと娘{あ}は…困っている子を助けてあげたい\n>\n> そんな **気持ちはなくて**\n>\n> 友達になりたいと思った子が悲しい想いをしていたから 「まっすぐに向かっていっただけ」\n\nLiterally this would translate to as roughly:\n\n> Certainly my daughter (A) wanted to give aid to a troubled child\n>\n> Such thoughts/intentions isn't\n>\n> Because girl/child she wanted to become friends with was having sad thoughts\n> so she just went straight for it/her.\n\nWhile the first and last line fit together, the middle one feels out of place\nfor Mom A to say there. Unless that's not te-form ない (well I also kinda wonder\nwhy use that form) but something else.\n\nOne interpretation that I have is that Mom A doesn't think her daughter is\nthat high in noble goals. She thought that for her daughter things were much\nmore simple. She just saw someone she wanted to be friends with being sad and\nwent for it to fix it.\n\nSoo, what's your opinion on this one? On what そんな気持ちはなくて means in this\ncontext?\n\n* * *\n\n**Additional context as requested by Naruto.**\n\nMother A is recounting the meeting she had with B, to Mother B.\n\nMom A said: \"At that time B explained to me the story of the incident when she\nmet A (her daughter) and how A wanted to become friends with her (B) and in\norder to make it happen she (A) gave it her all\".\n\nThen we get a short flashback to that time when Mom A and B spoke and B\nsaying: \"Because A persisted, because she saved me, I exist now...Such A was\nborn by and brought up by you. I thought/felt/wanted (omou) to thank you for\nthat.\"\n\nAs for A's character she is the person who would help if she can. Later she\njoins an organization specifically to save people and like. But in this\nspecific case, the first time she ran into B she was in no position to do any\nsaving since B kinda trashed her in combat. But also A saw that she felt sad\nand decided she wanted to become her friend.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-16T20:37:45.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60912",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T12:23:57.520",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "26839",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning"
],
"title": "The meaning of そんな気持ちはなくて in this context",
"view_count": 258
}
|
[
{
"body": "きっと娘は困っている子を助けてあげたい in isolation is not a natural sentence because of [this\nrule](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/2538/5010), so you should be able\nto notice something more complicated is happening. Here, the first two lines\nform one clause, like this:\n\n> きっと娘(に)は【「困っている子を助けてあげたい」、そんな気持ち】はなくて… \n> Probably my daughter has no such feeling/intention as \"I want to help\n> someone in trouble\" (, and ...)\n\nI want some more context about A's character and how B praised her, but\nprobably the mother is saying A helped B not because it's generally a good\nthing to help people in trouble, but simply because A liked B. A may not be a\nkind of person who is willing to help _anyone_ in trouble. A may not be aware\nof the fact that she was doing something praiseworthy or \"noble\". Anyway, A\ninnocently did what she wanted to do toward someone she cares for.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T00:50:58.310",
"id": "60914",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T01:33:30.103",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-17T01:33:30.103",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60912",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60912
|
60914
|
60914
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60922",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the manga [Dead Tube](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEAD_Tube), the\npresenter of a gossip video is talking about the adultery committed by a\nfemale politician called 山岡. He says that the woman was also the winner of the\nbuzzwords contest (流行語大賞) with the phrase 「ニッポン死ね」, which I would translate as\n\"death to Japan\". Then he says:\n\n> あのフレーズは… 保育園に落ちてしまった主婦の嘆きを表現したもの。つまりその言葉の受賞式に現れた彼女は… その主婦達の代表だってこと…！\n\nWhat has the sentence 「ニッポン死ね」 to do with desperate housewives in a nursery\nschool or with adultery? [Here is the page where it comes\nfrom](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eXMAo.jpg) for more context. Note that this is\nthe first and last time that the presenter talks about this woman, so no other\ninformation is provided. Thank you for your help!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T02:56:41.173",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60919",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-15T04:25:41.953",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17797",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"manga",
"interpretation"
],
"title": "How to interpret 「ニッポン死ね」 in the following context",
"view_count": 985
}
|
[
{
"body": "This ニッポン死ね is a reference to [this anonymous post titled\n保育園落ちた日本死ね!!!](https://anond.hatelabo.jp/20160215171759), and this 山岡 is\nobviously a reference to\n[山尾志桜里](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B1%B1%E5%B0%BE%E5%BF%97%E6%A1%9C%E9%87%8C),\na former member of 民主党. Although this is an anonymous blog post full of dirty\nwords, Yamao used it to attack the current 自民党 government, and mass media\ncovered it for quite some time. She received [the buzzword-of-the-year\n2016](https://www.sankei.com/premium/news/161216/prm1612160007-n1.html) for\nthis phrase, although she is not the original author. I think many Japanese\npeople still remember it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T03:36:18.117",
"id": "60922",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-17T03:47:45.293",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-17T03:47:45.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60919",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
},
{
"body": "In the real world, a housewife who wrote ニッポン死ね on the Internet thread was\nreally really angry at the fact she, actually her child, had been rejected by\nday nurseries without reasons. But, in Japan it is very common for parents to\nfail to find a day nursery for their child(ren) because most of the day\nnurseries have many more applicants than the designated number.\n\nHere is a kind of catch 22 situation. Only the mothers who has found a day\nnursery taking care of their children can have their jobs. But, day nurseries\naccept only the children whose mothers have their own jobs.\n\nThe housewife encountered this unreasonable situation. I guess she wasn't able\nto figure out who is wrong. So, she might have got angry at whole Japan. Then\nshe wrote ニッポン死ね.\n\nJapanese doesn't have so many offensive words compared to English, I think.\nThis 死ね is one of the worst offensive words to the livings.\n\nI think the death doesn't mean very much in this case. The most important\nthing is that she used the most offensive word to all people in Japan. In\nother words, you should choose the most offensive word which you like to use\nwhen you encounter this catch 22 situation and get angry at all people and\ntheir system.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T04:36:54.160",
"id": "60923",
"last_activity_date": "2020-01-15T04:25:41.953",
"last_edit_date": "2020-01-15T04:25:41.953",
"last_editor_user_id": "17797",
"owner_user_id": "30991",
"parent_id": "60919",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60919
|
60922
|
60923
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60930",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In one of my favorite μ's songs, the title is きっと青春が聞こえる. My problem is with\nthe 青春. I think the title means something like \"I can surely hear the youth\"\nbut that sounds kind of strange. Is there something I'm missing?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-17T17:42:01.017",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60927",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T00:50:32.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29804",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "What I said the nuance of the phrase きっと青春が聞こえる？",
"view_count": 79
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yep, I agree, as a native Japanese it does sound a little off, but then, this\nis a song, so the bar is a little lower.\n\nI can only imagine that the song is set in the context in which this sounds\nOK, for example, you were a member of a brass band and every time you hear a\ntrombone, that reminds you of the youth, that kind of thing.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T00:50:32.163",
"id": "60930",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T00:50:32.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "60927",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60927
|
60930
|
60930
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "61185",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "While reading a grammar book, I read the following explanation of な\n\n> **な** **_na,_** **a masculine** **_ne_**\n>\n> Both sexes use _ne_ , but male speakers often use _na_ instead. There are\n> other uses of _na_ common to both genders, but it's mostly masculine to use\n> it as the equivalent of a rhetorical tag question that expects or solicits\n> agreement. **One important difference:** **_na_** **cannot be used directly\n> after a noun the way** **_ne_** **is used in the example**\n> **「まあ、ふきのとう。春ねえ。」** **whether as an exclamation or as a tag question/request\n> for confirmation.**\n\nWhy can't な be used directly after a common, non-な-adjective noun without\ndeclarative だ like ね? What would the meaning be if it were? For example, if a\nJapanese speaker read「まあ、ふきのとう。春なあ」how would the interpretation change?\n\nEdit: わ, ぞ, and ぜ also require the declarative だ at the end of noun-type\nsentences. Why?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T02:50:20.453",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60932",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-02T06:19:34.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-22T16:30:17.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "27915",
"owner_user_id": "27915",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 13,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-な"
],
"title": "な directly after a noun (not a な-adjective)",
"view_count": 1702
}
|
[
{
"body": "I disagree with the grammar book. Both な and ね are used regularly, but ね is\nmore common because な is harsher. I often hear な on the golf course or at\ndrinking parties when with predominantly or exclusively men:\n\n * すげえショットな！\n * ビールかハイボールしかない？ビールな。\n\nI'd translate these as close-to English swearing, like this;\n\n * Nice f***in' shot boy!\n * Beer or highball? F***, beer man.\n\nUse of ね is way more polite, so can't be used directly in place of な in the\nfirst sentence above: 「すげえショットね」sounds off-balance, because 「すげえ」and 「ね」do not\nmatch. To use ね you'd have to soften すげえ to すごい to produce 「すごいショットね」which is\nperfectly acceptable.\n\nAlthough not direct evidence for my argument, here are Google extact-phrase\nhit counts for a few different patterns:\n\n * すごいね 4,320,000 results (soft + soft = balanced) often used\n * すげえな 1,410,000 results (harsh + harsh = balanced) used less often because it is harsh\n * すげえね 21,700 results (harsh + soft = unbalanced) almost never used\n\n> (Edit)Also searched [NWJC(国語研日本語ウェブコーパス)](http://bonten.ninjal.ac.jp/)\n>\n> * すごいね 86088 results\n> * すげえな 10535 results\n> * すげえね 118 results\n>\n\n(Note that I've deliberately omitted 「すごいな」results because here な can be used\nits usual adjective sense, treating すごい as a な adjective as in 「すごいなこと」)\n\nThese Google search results do not directly relate to your question, because\nthey pertain to the adjective すごい and not to nouns, but there is no single\nnoun that I can think of that will yield a large enough hit number on Google\nsearch to make a similar comparison with nouns. Even more problematic is that\nit's impossible to filter out results for which な is used as a な adjective.\n\nMy sense is that this issue is related to usage difference between だ and です. だ\nis clearly much more informal, and male speakers use it much more often than\nfemale speakers. Similar to my な and ね argument above, だ can't be mixed with\npolite forms. For example: 「美味しゅうです」is OK, 「美味しゅうだ」is cringingly bad.\n\nSo I suspect that the grammar book suggests that な can't be used after nouns\nonly because this use is highly informal. It is easy to go astray when trying\nto use な after a noun, either through poor sentence balance, or through use\ninappropriate social contexts (i.e. it sounds informal at best, and can be\nhighly impolite, close to swearing in certain contexts).",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-29T07:19:19.090",
"id": "61182",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-02T06:19:34.310",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-02T06:19:34.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "30858",
"owner_user_id": "31105",
"parent_id": "60932",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Whether or not you need だ/です between a noun and a sentence-end particle\ndepends on the choice of the particle. **Unfortunately, you have to memorize**\nwhich requires だ/です. Anyway, each combination has its own \"feeling\", and you\nhave to read lots of Japanese text to familiarize yourself. That said, it's\ngood to know だ itself tends to have a bit masculine or blunt overtone.\n\nよ and ね work without だ, but adding だ makes it sound more masculine.\n\n * 春よ。: highly feminine\n * 春ですよ。: neutral but slightly feminine, polite\n * 春だよ。: relatively masculine or tomboyish\n * 春ね。: feminine (sounds like a mom speaking to her child)\n * 春ですね。: neutral, formal\n * 春だね。: relatively masculine (sounds like a dad speaking to his child)\n\n* * *\n\nな, わ, ぜ and ぞ require だ or です after the noun.\n\n * ×春わ。 (ungrammatical)\n * △春ですわ。: extremely feminine (sounds like a fictional noble girl)\n * 春だわ。: highly feminine\n * ×春ぜ。 (ungrammatical)\n * △春ですぜ。: highly masculine (sounds like a rough guy trying to be polite)\n * △春だぜ。: highly masculine (sounds like a heroic boy in a shonen manga)\n * ×春な。 (ungrammatical, although [Yotsuba](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yotsuba_Koiwai) uses this a lot. It also makes sense when it works like a topic particle, e.g., お前なぁ…)\n * △春ですな。: masculine (sounds like an elderly pompous butler, novelist, etc.)\n * 春だな。: masculine\n * ×春ぞ。 (ungrammatical, but rare archaic copula-like ぞ exists, e.g. 我は魔王ぞ)\n * △春ですぞ。: masculine (sounds like a comical old man)\n * 春だぞ。: masculine or tomboyish\n\n* * *\n\nさ/や/じゃ works like a copula themselves.\n\n * 春さ。: masculine or tomboyish, dialectal\n * ×春ですさ。 (ungrammatical)\n * ×春ださ。 (ungrammatical)\n * 春や。: masculine, dialectal\n * ×春ですや。 (ungrammatical)\n * ×春だや。 (ungrammatical)\n\n(× indicates ungrammatical. △ indicates the expression is part of a role\nlanguage and used only by a certain category of people in fictional works.)\n\nNa-adjectives like 元気 follow the same pattern. Explanatory-の/ん works basically\nin the same way (because の/ん is a formal noun), but some are strongly\nassociated with either one of の and ん.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-29T08:46:14.060",
"id": "61185",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-29T09:54:58.427",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-29T09:54:58.427",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "60932",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
60932
|
61185
|
61185
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60935",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm thinking of something like 失恋対象 or 失恋相手, except 1) I just made those up\noff the top of my head, and 2) on the off-chance they're real words, they\ndon't really capture the essence of \"the one that got away\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T05:03:18.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60933",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T09:46:24.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words",
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "Is there a term for \"the one that got away\"?",
"view_count": 555
}
|
[
{
"body": "The most versatile (and thus the most often-used) terms would be:\n\n> 「逃{に}がした魚{さかな}」 and 「逃げた魚」\n\nboth of which practically mean the same thing though they take different\ngrammatical forms.\n\n「魚」 in these expressions can refer to a prospective love partner, business\nopportunity, etc. It can refer to anything you once almost had.\n\n「魚」 does not need to refer to a fish unless you actualy are talking about\nfishing. People do tend to brag about the size of the fish they almost caught\nin fishing, which is why we often say the whole sentence:\n\n> 「逃がした魚は大きい。」\n\nAgain, this sentence is often used about things/people that are completely\nnon-fish-related. \" ** _The one I let go was huge_**.\"\n\nIMHO, 「失恋対象{しつれんたいしょう}」 and 「失恋相手{しつれんあいて}」 look/sound pretty stiff and\noverly-serious.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T09:46:24.110",
"id": "60935",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T09:46:24.110",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60933",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60933
|
60935
|
60935
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "好き is an adjective in Japanese but in English it would be a verb. Why does\ndoes it become an adjective instead of a verb?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T07:33:39.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60934",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T20:13:29.993",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31003",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How does “like” become an adjective?",
"view_count": 244
}
|
[
{
"body": "好き can be used as a verb, like パンが好き (I like bread,) as well as an adjective\n好きな人. Or for that matter, as a noun, 男好き.\n\n\"Why does it become an adjective instead of a verb\" is a strange question to\nme, because it implies you think it shouldn't be an adjective, but I find it\nquite natural that it takes that form, like \"favorite.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T15:30:22.593",
"id": "60943",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T15:30:22.593",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "60934",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Japanese grammar reflects their way of thinking. In English \"to like\" is an\naction that you do to a thing, but in Japanese \"be liked\" is a quality that a\nthing has. If you think it like that it's easier. The subject particle is が,\nso the thing that you like must be marked with it. The person who likes it\nmust take the particle of topic, は. For example, 私はりんごが好きです means I like\napples (or apples are liked things for me).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T20:13:29.993",
"id": "60949",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T20:13:29.993",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30977",
"parent_id": "60934",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60934
| null |
60949
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60937",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> ある海外のカジノ **事業者の幹部** から聞いた言葉です。ＲＧとは、Responsible\n> Gambling、日本語にすれば「責任あるギャンブル」となります。([source](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/web_tokushu/2018_0807.html?utm_int=tokushu-\n> new_contents_list-items_008))\n\n事業者 implies an executive position so I don't understand the role of の幹部?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T10:00:19.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60936",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T11:21:22.373",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25980",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"reading-comprehension"
],
"title": "I'm not sure how to understand \"事業者の幹部\" in this sentence",
"view_count": 68
}
|
[
{
"body": "「事業者{じぎょうしゃ}」 can mean a \"business\", \"company\", etc. as well as a\n\"businessman\". Its usage for the first meaning is actually very common in the\nreal Japanese-speaking world.\n\nThus, 「カジノ事業者の幹部{かんぶ}」 is a perfectly natural and grammatical phrase meaning\nthe \"casino company executive(s)\".\n\nIt seems you probably took the kanji 「者」 too literally.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T11:21:22.373",
"id": "60937",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T11:21:22.373",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60936",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
60936
|
60937
|
60937
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60940",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "すく or あく? What's the difference?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T13:24:02.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60939",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-19T02:05:58.000",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "30946",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"readings"
],
"title": "What's the reading of 空く?",
"view_count": 1069
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both.\n\nMany words in Japanese have multiple readings, sometimes with different\nmeaning or nuance. In this case, the meanings are rather different, but you\nhave to infer the reading from context. すく means \"to be empty\" and あく with\nthat kanji most often means \"to be available\" in terms of time or space.\n\n> お腹が空{す}いている。\n\n\"I'm hungry.\" (literally: \"My stomach is empty.\")\n\n> [何時]{いつ} 空{あ}いていますか。\n\n\"What time are you available?\"\n\nHowever: the あく reading can also mean \"to be empty\". The nuance isn't always\nclear to me as a non-native speaker, but 空{す}く often implies \"not crowded.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T13:57:24.823",
"id": "60940",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-19T02:05:58.000",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-19T02:05:58.000",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25413",
"parent_id": "60939",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
},
{
"body": "The most important difference IMHO would be that:\n\n「空{す}く」 expresses a **_relative_** kind of \"emptiness\" while\n\n「空{あ}く」 expresses an **_complete_** kind of \"emptiness\".\n\nIf a restaurant has seats available for you, you would say\n「（この）レストランは今{いま}空{す}いている。」. The restaurant may be 80% empty, may be just 30%\nso. It does not matter because your immediate concern is whether or not your\nparty of four could get a table without waiting. This is the relative kind of\nemptiness. Thus, 「このレストランは空{あ}いている。」 would make no sense to the native\nspeakers.\n\nWhat if you want to sit at one of the three tables by the window and luckily,\none of them is available right now? You would say 「好{す}きな席{せき}が空{あ}いている！」.\nNative speakers would never ever say 「好きな席が空{す}いている！」 in that situation. That\nis the complete kind of emptiness/availability of a particular table.\n\nSo, it is 「 **す** いている」 to talk about the general availability of seats in the\nwhole restaurant at a given time and it is 「 **あ** いている」 to talk about the\navailability of a specific section or table in the restaurant at a given time.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T15:06:39.547",
"id": "60942",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T15:06:39.547",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "60939",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 15
}
] |
60939
|
60940
|
60942
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60945",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Saw this 都都逸 \"彼氏と彼女の 三三九度に 坊やおなかで 高砂や\" on the TV show 笑点:\n\n<http://www.ntv.co.jp/sho-ten/02_week/090329/week_01.html>\n\nMy dictionary says 三三九度 = \"perform the ceremony of the three-times-three\nexchange of nuptial cups\", but I still do not understand the second half &\nhence the whole thing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T16:02:36.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60944",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T17:06:07.170",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4295",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"jokes"
],
"title": "「彼氏と彼女の 三三九度に 坊やおなかで 高砂や」?",
"view_count": 138
}
|
[
{
"body": "三三九度 is a ceremony performed at a wedding. 高砂や is a Japanese comic story\nrelated to a wedding. 坊やおなかで means \"their child in her womb.\"\n\nSo the sentence means \"Their child in her womb tells a Japanese comic story\n高砂や at their wedding\". That is about \"shotgun wedding\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T16:44:48.477",
"id": "60945",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T17:06:07.170",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-18T17:06:07.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "60944",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60944
|
60945
|
60945
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60947",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was just wondering how to properly ask when the last bus to somewhere is.\n\nCould you say (using Tokyo, for example)\n\n> When is the last bus to Tokyo? \n> 東京 に 終バス は 何時ですか _Tōkyō ni shū basu wa nanji desu ka?_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T18:54:41.687",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60946",
"last_activity_date": "2019-08-23T06:11:25.807",
"last_edit_date": "2019-08-23T06:11:25.807",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "31008",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"english-to-japanese",
"phrase-requests",
"questions",
"daily-life"
],
"title": "How to say \"When is the last bus to X\"",
"view_count": 229
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 東京 に 終バス は 何時ですか\n\nIn this form に is ungrammatical here, because there is no verb whose indirect\nobject に is marking. You could remedy this by saying 東京に **行く** 終バス, so that に\nis marking the location of 行く and 東京に行く modifies 終バス.\n\nHowever, for the direction of a train or bus 行き【ゆき】 is a more natural way to\nsay this, i.e. 東京 **行き**.\n\nTo modify 終バス, you should use の, giving 東京行き **の** 終バス.\n\nAlso, there are many ways of saying \"last bus of the day\"\n(最終バス、終バス、終発バス、赤バス、…).\n\nFinally, rather than asking バスは何時ですか, it is probably more natural to say\nバスは何時に出ますか \"At what time does the bus leave?\".\n\n> 東京行きの最終バスは何時に出ますか？ _Tōkyō-yuki no saishū basu wa nanji ni demasu ka?_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T19:41:53.667",
"id": "60947",
"last_activity_date": "2018-09-24T19:47:04.160",
"last_edit_date": "2018-09-24T19:47:04.160",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "60946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
60946
|
60947
|
60947
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "60951",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "As in the following sentence:\n\n> 藤岡、いろいろ、教え **てやってくれ。**\n\nI know ~てくれ is a command, but I don't understand what ~や means",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T20:04:44.587",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60948",
"last_activity_date": "2022-10-01T07:43:10.020",
"last_edit_date": "2022-10-01T07:43:10.020",
"last_editor_user_id": "30946",
"owner_user_id": "30946",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"giving-and-receiving"
],
"title": "What does ~てやってくれ mean?",
"view_count": 687
}
|
[
{
"body": "やっ comes from やる, which is conjugated to やって in the continuous verb pattern.\n\n～てやって by itself is a strong/rough way of saying 'do ______.'\n\n～てくれ is also, by itself, a strong/rough way of saying 'do _____.'\n\nWhen you double them up and say ～てやってくれ it strengthens the command (or strong\nrequest) even more, so that there is no room for misunderstanding.\n\nThis manner of speech can be seen as overly aggressive, so take care with its\nuse.\n\n@Aeon Akechi has a good point as to how it would be used vis a vis\ninstructions regarding third parties. 'Do ____ for me, くれ.' 'Teach them/tell\nthem for me, please.'.\n\nIt is not always as severe as I described above, so let context to be your\nguide.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T20:18:42.610",
"id": "60950",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-19T01:44:17.957",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-19T01:44:17.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "27280",
"parent_id": "60948",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "～てやる means 'do something (for someone of equal or lower social standing than\nyou)'; it doesn't emphasize the command. ～てくれ is a command asking them to do\nsomething for you. With both used together like this, the sentence roughly\nmeans, 'Fujioka, do me a favour and tell them all about it.' It does sound\npretty masculine because ～てやる can sound that way and ～くれ is an imperative.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T20:45:54.503",
"id": "60951",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-18T20:45:54.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9971",
"parent_id": "60948",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
60948
|
60951
|
60951
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The link is down right now for non-Japanese users, but the song [Social\nNetwork(そーしゃるねっとわーく)](http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm25327660) has these\nlyrics in it:\n\n> 好きな時に電源を入れて 誰かの文字列を覗き込む\n>\n> 星を投げ合うだけくらいが心地良い 僕のもうひとつの “部屋” 秘密の場所\n\nIt's pretty obvious what they're talking about for the most part, but \"星を投げ合う\"\nconfuses me. I do know that this song was published back when \"likes\" on\nTwitter were represented by stars, so I was thinking maybe that has something\nto do with it.\n\nDoes anybody know if likes were ever referred to as \"星,\" or am I on the wrong\ntrack?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-18T22:10:43.710",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60952",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-19T02:55:49.363",
"last_edit_date": "2018-08-18T22:40:59.547",
"last_editor_user_id": "30701",
"owner_user_id": "30701",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"meaning",
"song-lyrics",
"internet-slang"
],
"title": "\"星を投げ合う\" in the context of the Internet",
"view_count": 126
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, back in the days favorites on twitter was referred to as 星. This blog\npost -- [「いいね」のサムズアップ感をTwitterに持ち込むということ -\nうらがみらいぶらり](http://wasasula.hatenablog.com/entry/2015/11/04/235918) -- writes\nup the author's sentiments on the change to :hearts:. It reads:\n\n> だが少なくとも「ふぁぼ」と呼び、「ふぁぼれよ」ということばが通じ、星を投げ合うような文化圏は、やはり世界全体で見れば少数派には違いない。\n\n\"ふぁぼ-る\" as a verb was also commonly used when the function was called\nfavorites rather than likes, and formed a kind of culture.\n\n「いいね」, you mentioned, is a newer term introduced when Twitter took our stars\naway and started calling them \"like\"s.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-19T02:55:49.363",
"id": "60954",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-19T02:55:49.363",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4223",
"parent_id": "60952",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
60952
| null |
60954
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "62041",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Some verbs like わかる or ある take が instead of を to mark the \"direct object\"\n(because these verbs treat what in English is the direct object as a subject\nin Japanese?). For example,\n\n> サラリーマン：「課長｛かちょう｝っ、ここ **が** わかりません！」課長：「わたしもわからん。」\n\nWhy do these verbs exist? Are there any rules to determine if a verb uses が\ninstead of を in this way? What are some other examples of verbs like わかる or ある\nthat use が (besides potential form verbs)? Why can't verbs like わかる take を, or\nmore specifically, **why do verbs like わかる require having a subject to mark\nwith が instead of having a direct object to mark with を?**",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-19T02:46:16.163",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60953",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-08T08:17:40.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "27915",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-が",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "verbs using が to mark the direct object/subject",
"view_count": 501
}
|
[
{
"body": "Why do these verbs exist? \nThat is a deep, philosophical question. \nMy guess is that Japanese verbs are in general conceptually independent of\nsubjects. \nA verb usually indicates some kind of action and it doesn't matter who is\ndoing the action. \nYou can add a subject if you want, but it is not conceptually required. In\nEnglish you always have to attach a subject, even when it is not conceptually\nrequired. \n\nWhen I say: \"you always have to attach a subject\", I don't mean just \"you\", I\nmean \"anybody\". \nUnfortunately in English I cannot simply say \"always have to attach a\nsubject\", without a subject. I have to artificially add the subject \"you\",\neven though I am not referring just to you.\n\nAnother example: in English there is a problem about gender-neutral sentences. \n<http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw/grinker/LwtaGender_Neutral_Language.htm> \nThis is a problem that only exist in languages like English that require a\nsubject, no matter what. \nIn Japanese the subject is simply omitted, because many times it doesn't\nmatter who is doing the action, the action itself is the important thing.\n\nWhen I say 日本語が分かる it means \"to understand Japanese\". \nIt doesn't matter who is understanding. For the verb 分かる the only thing that\nmatters is what is being understood. \nThe sentence is complete, and the meaning is conceptually complete. \nYou can add more information if you want, but that is optional. \nYou can say 私は日本語が分かる to mean \"I understand Japanese\". \nThe term 私は was added to sentence and is pretty much redundant.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-10-07T02:50:03.273",
"id": "62012",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-07T02:50:03.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18157",
"parent_id": "60953",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "> Why do these verbs exist?\n\nTough historical/philosophical question. I'm going to leave it aside. :)\n\n> Are there any rules to determine if a verb uses が instead of を in this way?\n\nYes there are such rules.\n\nOne of the biggest separations is whether the verb is transitive (他動詞) or\nintransitive (自動詞). Using を to mark the object of an action is a major\ncharacteristic of transitive verbs. わかる and ある are both intransitive, so that\ngives you a strong hint that を is not the right choice.\n\nBeyond that, you can categorize verbs based on how they use が to mark various\npieces of complementary information (see link at end of post.) For example,\nverbs of existence, verbs of state, verbs of transformation...\n\nIn the most general scenario, you just have to memorize what particles are\nused by what verb to add some given information to it.\n\n> why do verbs like わかる require having a subject to mark with が instead of\n> having a direct object to mark with を?\n\nI basically answered this question in my last paragraph, but I want to note\nthat が arguably does not mark the subject of わかる here. For example, let's\nrevisit your example sentence:\n\n> 課長っ、ここがわかりません！\n\nIn this sentence, _who_ is the person who does not understand? It's the\nspeaker. So the speaker is the subject (or perhaps the \"topic\"), not \"ここ\". In\nthis case, \"ここ\" is the object of the verb.\n\nHere is a table you can consult for more details:\n\n<http://www.geocities.jp/niwasaburoo/07kakujosi.html#7.1>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-10-08T06:09:48.440",
"id": "62041",
"last_activity_date": "2018-10-08T08:17:40.133",
"last_edit_date": "2018-10-08T08:17:40.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "25859",
"owner_user_id": "25859",
"parent_id": "60953",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
60953
|
62041
|
62012
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "While reading a grammar book, I learned を may mark a.) a starting point of\nwhere a movement occurs, or b.) mark a location where a movement occurs.\nExamples:\n\n> a1.) 車｛くるま｝ **を** 降りました｛おりました｝。(He) got out of the car.\n>\n> b1.) 危ない｛あぶない｝なあ！歩道{ほどう｝ **を** 走る｛はしる｝なよ！(That's) dangerous! Don't ride on\n> the sidewalk!\n\nHowever, other particles serve similar functions, and I don't quite understand\nthe differences in usage. For example,\n\n> a2.) 車 **から** 降りました。\n>\n> b2.) 危ないなあ！歩道 **で** 走るなよ！\n\nWhy would someone used を in the first sentence instead of から? Why would\nsomeone use を in the second sentence instead of で? How do the meanings in\nthese individual sentences change between one choice over the other? When to\nuse を in sentences like these and when to use different particles?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2018-08-19T02:57:52.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "60955",
"last_activity_date": "2018-08-21T02:09:35.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "27915",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-を",
"particle-で",
"particle-から"
],
"title": "を usage over から and で in example sentences related to movement",
"view_count": 144
}
|
[] |
60955
| null | null |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.